It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by SirMike
This latest release simply confirms that nothing has changed. The e-mails go to show that what ever is causing climate change the entire issue is being manipulated by bought off so called professionals and used for political gain. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this. The very people who claim they care so much about the plants and the animals .Are the very same people who profit the most money while destroying everything and anything that gets in the way of their turning a profit.
Originally posted by spyder550
We have 5 years before the point of no return -- because of deniers and general malaise nothing will change. I'm really glad I'm old. I'll be dead within 15 years.
Google Video Link |
Although I agree that GHGs are important in the 19th/20th century (especially
since the 1970s), if the weighting of solar forcing was stronger in the models,
surely this would diminish the significance of GHGs.
[...] it seems to me that by weighting the solar irradiance more strongly in the
models, then much of the 19th to mid 20th century warming can be explained from
the sun alone.
Although I agree that GHGs are important in the 19th/20th century (especially
since the 1970s)
if the weighting of solar forcing was stronger in the models,
surely this would diminish the significance of GHGs.
[...] it seems to me that by weighting the solar irradiance more strongly in the
models, then much of the 19th to mid 20th century warming can be explained from
the sun alone.
Climate model simulations that consider only natural solar variability and volcanic aerosols since 1750—omitting observed increases in greenhouse gases—are able to fit the observations of global temperatures only up until about 1950. After that point, the decadal trend in global surface warming cannot be explained without including the contribution of the greenhouse gases added by humans.
CEI has learned of a UN plan recently put in place to hide official correspondence on non-governmental accounts, which correspondence a federal inspector general has already confirmed are subject to FOIA. This ‘cloud’ serves as a dead-drop of sorts for discussions by U.S. government employees over the next report being produced by the scandal-plagued IPCC, which is funded with millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. rankexploits.com...
Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by mc_squared
You are wasting your time. Most of the people here do not understand how to read scientific literature, nor will they take the time to read every e-mail in it's context. I used to be like them too and one day i read it for myself and figured out I was wrong. The need to believe always trumps the need to know.
the oil funded denial movement becomes one of the most blatantly obvious conspiracies ever exposed.
In an article titled, "Analysing the ‘900 papers supporting climate scepticism’: 9 out of top 10 authors linked to ExxonMobil" from the environmental activist website The Carbon Brief, former Greenpeace "researcher" Christian Hunt failed to do basic research.
He made no attempt to contact the scientists he unjustly attacked and instead used biased and corrupt websites like DeSmogBlog to smear them as "linked to" [funded by] ExxonMobil. To get to the truth, I emailed the scientists mentioned in the article the following questions;..................................................www.populartechnology.net...
Producers: Inc. Western Fuels Association