Can a Catholic disagree about Global Warming?

[lynnvinc]

Consider EACH [mitigation] issue separately … each on its own merits and “demerits” … rather than adopting every approach and hoping for the best.

I’ve developed this “Little Way of Environmental Healing” in which we should not be afraid to do very small things, like carrying a hanky to wipe hands in public restroom, just because they might not help much, but should go ahead and do them out of love for God and His creatures (granted, it doesn’t make any worldly sense at all):

THE LITTLE WAY OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALING

We are faced with enormous environmental problems that kill people, and destroy property and wildlife. Everyone needs to help solve these.

St. Therese of the Child Jesus teaches us the Little Way of Spiritual Childhood. She felt she could not perform the big mortifications of the saints. We also feel we cannot go back to a lifestyle without cars and modern conveniences.

St. Therese, though, was determined to become a saint. She read, “Whoever does not accept the kingdom of God as a little child will not enter into it.” Following this, St. Therese in childlike simplicity offered God all of her small deeds of ordinary life, and placed all her trust in God to help her scale the cliffs of perfection and avoid temptations. This is the Little Way. “Not everyone can fast, or wear hair shirts, or spend hours in prayer,” she used to say, “but everyone can love!” One thing alone is needful: all must be done for love of God.

What is needed to solve the big environmental problems is a life of many small deeds done out of love for God. We need to offer many small prayers to help us understand the problems and find solutions, and then more prayers to carry out our actions in daily life.

We need faith that our small deeds will, with God’s grace, amount to more than a meaningless drop in the bucket, letting Jesus multiply our fish & loaves; Mother Teresa said our love makes our small deeds infinite. We need hope that we will one day be rejoicing with God in heaven, so we need not be too concerned with worldly riches, comforts, and status. We need the charity of joyfully sharing God’s bounty and beauty with others around the world and in the future by helping to save the Earth.

 

[Calliso]

Read up to
“Have no fear, the planet is getting colder at least according to some. This is more than speculation by skeptics: According to the World Meteorological Organization, global average temperature spiked in 1998 and has been in a cooling trend since then. Sure, 2008 was the 10th-warmest year on record since 1850, but if climate change is really happening, then shouldn’t 2008 have been warmer than 1998?”
then realized they know nada about climate science – no need to read further…

Actually you should read the whole thing. Cause the thing is it seems to me that the person who posted this probably only read the first part of the article. Thinking it was supporting his line of thought. But it is wise to read a whole article before jumping to conclusions.

 

[lynnvinc]

Actually you should read the whole thing. Cause the thing is it seems to me that the person who posted this probably only read the first part of the article. Thinking it was supporting his line of thought. But it is wise to read a whole article before jumping to conclusions.

You’re right. It actually debunks the skeptics’ myths (I guess I was responding to what he said the skeptics were saying). My only qualm with it now is it seems to be suggesting more a need for adaptation than mitigation, but I’m not sure. We do need both.

Here’s something I’ve saved since Oct 2008 - “There’s no evidence of human-induced financial crisis” – complete with charts that show the truth, etc. Enjoy!

 

[lynnvinc]

Funny after years of global warming alarmist 1998 as an example of a runaway warming may now tell us we can ignore it since it no longer fits into their narrative.

You keep quoting Hanson-isn’t he the guy that instigated the famous hockey stick hoax?

Runaway or climate hysteresis has not started, and we hope it never will, as happening 251 mya, during the end-Permian, wiping out 95% of life on earth.

No, Michael Mann is of hockey-stick fame, and very good and conscientious scientist. James Hansen is head of climate science at NASA, and perhaps the most respected climate scientist in the world. I recommend his book, STORMS OF MY GRANDCHILDREN, written for non-scientists. He is also a good Christian, and his wife, children, and grandchildren are Catholic.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Runaway or climate hysteresis has not started, and we hope it never will, as happening 251 mya, during the end-Permian, wiping out 95% of life on earth.

No, Michael Mann is of hockey-stick fame, and very good and conscientious scientist. James Hansen is head of climate science at NASA, and perhaps the most respected climate scientist in the world. I recommend his book, STORMS OF MY GRANDCHILDREN, written for non-scientists. He is also a good Christian, and his wife, children, and grandchildren are Catholic.

These alleged very good scientists fabricated data and their analyses. They fudged the data to make the output look the way they wanted it to look. And when questioned and challenged, instead of opening their files and records, they stonewalled.

NOT “GOOD SCIENTISTS”.

And then, we got the East Anglia emails. Climategate. A thousand emails from all over the climate “industry” over ten years … proving that they faked the data and then engaged in a conspiracy to keep the data faked and to prevent anyone from finding out the truth. When challenged, they destroyed the data.

Criminal conspiracy … they defrauded the government. Our government and the governments of all the countries that provided grants.

When you sign your tax return, it is perjury if you lie.

Well, same thing with these NOT GOOD SCIENTISTS.

Making false statements with government money is the same as perjury.

Perp walk.

Just like Bernie Madoff. Except the alleged scientists took MUCH MORE MONEY than Madoff and they deliberately upset and misguided national energy policies all over the world. [In some countries, that would be treason. In China, the penalty for treason is execution.]

Jail time.

And being personally discredited.

And all their work goes into the garbage pile as being utterly worthless.

 

[Ender]

These alleged very good scientists fabricated data and their analyses. They fudged the data to make the output look the way they wanted it to look. And when questioned and challenged, instead of opening their files and records, they stonewalled.

These points properly challenge the validity of the theory by challenging the data on which it is based. I agree with your position even though it (and most of the other comments on this thread) are not relevant to the question the OP raised as to whether Catholics can disagree about global warming. To which the obvious answer is yes: the Church has no position on the validity of scientific theories. Even bad ones.

Ender

 

[Monte_RCMS]

These points properly challenge the validity of the theory by challenging the data on which it is based. I agree with your position even though it (and most of the other comments on this thread) are not relevant to the question the OP raised as to whether Catholics can disagree about global warming. To which the obvious answer is yes: the Church has no position on the validity of scientific theories. Even bad ones.

Ender

Absolutely correct.

Yes, a Catholic can disagree about Global Warming.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

BUT, what do the Chinese really think about Global Warming?

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100050359/what-the-chinese-really-think-of-man-made-global-warming/

 

[lynnvinc]

Yes, a Catholic can disagree about Global Warming.

Yes, Catholics can disagree about AGW, but they must mitigate it, as the U.S. Bishops have suggested prudence requires. And as BXVI recently called us to do:
Man’s inhumanity to man has given rise to numerous threats to peace…Yet no less troubling are the threats arising from the neglect – if not downright misuse – of the earth and the natural goods that God has given us…Can we remain indifferent before the problems associated with such realities as climate change… attention also needs to be paid to the world-wide problem of water and to the global water cycle system, which is of prime importance for life on earth and whose stability could be seriously jeopardized by climate change” – Pope Benedict XVI, “If You Want to Cultivate Peace, Protect Creation,” 2010.

So I’d suggest starting with those measures that save you money and things that have no net cost, then as you save, you can start plowing some of those savings into things that do cost (e.g., organic foods – which may save in terms of better health).

Just for starters:

---

*REDUCE consumption & buy things that last.
*CONSERVE ENERGY:

• turn off lights not in use, insulate, etc.
• keep tires inflated; do “hypermiling”

*DRIVE LESS:

• run multiple errands
• live close to work/school (on your next house buy)
• turn off engine in drive-thrus (and order the veggie burger)
• bicycle, walk, public transportation when feasible

*ENERGY EFFICIENT items save $$ in long run:

• compact fluorescent bulbs
• Energy efficient car, hybrid-electric car; electric car or plug-in electric hybrid, when available/feasible
• Appliances with Energy Star label
• SunFrost frig, 1/10 the energy; expensive, but saves $$ in long run (also reduces spoilage): sunfrost.com

*CONSERVE WATER (requires energy to pump & heat it) and save $$hundreds/year:

• low-flow showerhead, toilet
• turn off water while brushing teeth
• don’t water lawn (grass is drought resistant), or water only in early morning or evening
• fix leaks
• Xeriscape (drought resistant plants)

*REUSE, avoid throwaways. Use:

• back side of paper (I get mine from the library recycling bin)
• reusable cups, cloth napkins, diapers
• artificial Christmas trees

*RECYCLE (saves resources & energy),
*BUY RECYCLED PRODUCTS (paper, etc.)
*EAT LOW on the FOOD CHAIN, go veggie, eat locally grown produce…
*PLANT TREES

---

Just start with a couple of these. See if you’re okay with them, then go on to do a few more, then more. Be creative and come up with your own list. In 5-10 years you should have been able to reduce your GHG emissions by 25-50%.

And, best of all, you will have also helped in mitigating other problems, like local pollution that causes miscarriages, birth defects, and illnesses, wars in foreign countries, mountain top removal for coal, oil spills, and the list goes on.

God will help. Our Lady will help. St. Joseph will help.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

None of the stuff mentioned above will do anything to save the earth. Because the earth doesn’t need saving.

Some of it is common sense.

Some of it is bogus.

Some will work for some people; some will not work.

The last thing we need is for a bunch of bureaucrats to enforce “one size fits all” policies and ram them down peoples’ throats regardless of the local circumstances and conditions.

Common sense.

Not platitudes and mistaken good intentions.

 

[lynnvinc]

Here is something recent from Hansen – columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2010/20100813_WhatGlobalWarmingLooksLike.pdf, with links to the main article.

I know I will never ever convince people who are dead set against accepting that AGW is real – whether it’s bec they have stakes in the fossil-fuel-based system or are just ideologically indisposed to pro-life issues and concerns, AGW being a very important pro-life issue in our time.

But for those who are amenable, let me explain. AGW has to do with increasing global average temperatures over a long time span of decades, and the evidence has been in at the 95% confidence level since 1995 and ever strengthening over the years since – and the theory, based on laws of physics, has been around for over 100 years. THE SCIENCE HAS LONG BEEN IN.

One single weather event, or one single warmer or cooler world average for a month or a year does not AGW make. It is the entire data set over a long time that is important (and the various data sets on this have NOT been corrupted or harmed in any way, despite what naysayers will tell you).

AGW is a very serious problem that could involve loss of tremendous amount of human life and lives of other species over the next few centuries, or even over the next 100,000 years. Or this might even be the beginning of the end (which would come millennia from now) – the end that this generation KNOWINGLY and HEARTLESSLY has helped to bring about.

God is merciful. He will forgive those who are repentant and strive to correct their ways. But I don’t think He will be so merciful to unrepentant people who stand by and deny this problem, putting forth strong effort to dissuade others from mitigating, not even willing to lift a small finger to follow the admonishments of the bishops and Holy Fathers, and take even small steps to mitigate this problem – even if it means they can save money in the process. Even if it means these measures will mitigate other problems and save lives in other ways.

We live in a truly degenerate time. Our society is based on genocide and robbery of Native Americans. Most came to this land to strike it rich. We use religion as a skirt behind which to hide our dirty deeds. That’s the only way I can understand how very very very evil we are.

I hope in God. I await heaven. Forgive me for being such a very poor and ineffective advocate for life. Lord have mercy on our souls.

 

[Ender]

I know I will never ever convince people who are dead set against accepting that AGW is real – whether it’s bec they have stakes in the fossil-fuel-based system or are just ideologically indisposed to pro-life issues and concerns, AGW being a very important pro-life issue in our time.

There is one other possibility you somewhat uncharitably omitted: We … believe … the … theory … of … AGW … is … scientifically … invalid.

AGW has to do with increasing global average temperatures over a long time span of decades, and the evidence has been in at the 95% confidence level since 1995 and ever strengthening over the years since

This is just flatly untrue. I put this on the same level as claims of alien abduction.

– and the theory, based on laws of physics, has been around for over 100 years. THE SCIENCE HAS LONG BEEN IN.

This isn’t true either and is a mishmash of concepts. The theory of greenhouse warming was first proposed a century ago; the theory of AGW is obviously much more recent and don’t confuse the science supporting the concept of greenhouse warming with the science supporting the idea that man has significantly affected the climate of the Earth by CO2 emissions.

It is the entire data set over a long time that is important (and the various data sets on this have NOT been corrupted or harmed in any way, despite what naysayers will tell you).

Actually, what even the true believers admit is that the raw data is in fact adjusted. No one uses raw data and adjustments are proper; the argument arises from disputes over whether the particular adjustments are valid. As for corrupted data, CRU couldn’t even explain their adjustments when they still had all the raw data from which it was derived. Now that they have deleted so much of their historic data there is no possibility of evaluating their adjustments.

the end that this generation KNOWINGLY and HEARTLESSLY has helped to bring about.

We … believe … the … theory … of … AGW … is … scientifically … invalid.

God is merciful. He will forgive those who are repentant and strive to correct their ways. But I don’t think He will be so merciful to unrepentant people who stand by and deny this problem, putting forth strong effort to dissuade others from mitigating, not even willing to lift a small finger to follow the admonishments of the bishops and Holy Fathers, and take even small steps to mitigate this problem – even if it means they can save money in the process. Even if it means these measures will mitigate other problems and save lives in other ways.

We … believe … the … theory … of … AGW … is … scientifically … invalid.

We live in a truly degenerate time. Our society is based on genocide and robbery of Native Americans. Most came to this land to strike it rich. We use religion as a skirt behind which to hide our dirty deeds. That’s the only way I can understand how very very very evil we are.

We … believe … the … theory … of … AGW … is … scientifically … invalid.

Ender

 

[Monte_RCMS]

THE SCIENCE HAS LONG BEEN IN.

over the next few centuries, or even over the next 100,000 years.

.

False. The science is not in, by any means. Not even close.

" … centuries … 100,000 years … " Utterly false.

The best IPCC computer models only go forward 100 years and project an increase [most likely case] of +1º.

One degree isn’t going to hurt anyone and will increase crop yields.

What makes it worse is that we KNOW for a fact that the raw data was reading high. As much as 5º high.

So, if you correct for the bad data, the climate / temp change is most likely to be about minus 2º, not plus one degree.

And we know from the 1000 East Anglia emails, “Climategate”, that the people there were actively working with the other people in the “industry” to fake data.

THEY SAID IT THEMSELVES.

We’re not putting words in their mouths.

And, to use words like “heartlessly” which are emotional, you are giving away the fact that your scientific arguments have collapsed.

 

[markbrumbaugh]

All the AGW people should go back to the stone age and do their part… llving with no fossil fuel based energy including all the things it provides like medical treatment, clean water, sewage treatment, the internet, TV, phones, cars, homes other than caves and lean-to’s, synthetic clothing, all plastics (including your toothbrush), paper. Try it for a few years and see how well it is working out for you and let us know. I would say by smoke signal, but I guess you’ll just have to yell.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t use the earth’s resources prudently, but taxing carbon is stupid relative to the harm and cost it will cause.

 

[estesbob]

Here is something recent from Hansen – columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2010/20100813_WhatGlobalWarmingLooksLike.pdf, with links to the main article.

I know I will never ever convince people who are dead set against accepting that AGW is real – whether it’s bec they have stakes in the fossil-fuel-based system or are just ideologically indisposed to pro-life issues and concerns, AGW being a very important pro-life issue in our time.

But for those who are amenable, let me explain. AGW has to do with increasing global average temperatures over a long time span of decades, and the evidence has been in at the 95% confidence level since 1995 and ever strengthening over the years since – and the theory, based on laws of physics, has been around for over 100 years. THE SCIENCE HAS LONG BEEN IN.

One single weather event, or one single warmer or cooler world average for a month or a year does not AGW make. It is the entire data set over a long time that is important (and the various data sets on this have NOT been corrupted or harmed in any way, despite what naysayers will tell you).

AGW is a very serious problem that could involve loss of tremendous amount of human life and lives of other species over the next few centuries, or even over the next 100,000 years. Or this might even be the beginning of the end (which would come millennia from now) – the end that this generation KNOWINGLY and HEARTLESSLY has helped to bring about.

God is merciful. He will forgive those who are repentant and strive to correct their ways. But I don’t think He will be so merciful to unrepentant people who stand by and deny this problem, putting forth strong effort to dissuade others from mitigating, not even willing to lift a small finger to follow the admonishments of the bishops and Holy Fathers, and take even small steps to mitigate this problem – even if it means they can save money in the process. Even if it means these measures will mitigate other problems and save lives in other ways.

We live in a truly degenerate time. Our society is based on genocide and robbery of Native Americans. Most came to this land to strike it rich. We use religion as a skirt behind which to hide our dirty deeds. That’s the only way I can understand how very very very evil we are.

I hope in God. I await heaven. Forgive me for being such a very poor and ineffective advocate for life. Lord have mercy on our souls.

Well this is a first! It was bad enough when I was told I was going to burn in eternal hellfire for holding hands at the Our Father but now I am told I’m going to burn for not turning the water off when I brush my teeth! It’s a dangerous world indeed that we live in

 

[Maxirad]

I know that Michael Voris is skeptical (to say the least) about global warming. Check out the following links:

youtu.be/o8ZAHQscmtw

youtu.be/qfyXVMrgrJk

I know people will be upset about how Mr. Voris feels about global warming. However, Jesse “The Body” Ventura, who is admittedly not a Catholic, has also expressed relative doubt about the concept. Check out the following link to a video on YouTube and go to seven minutes and 47 seconds into the video.

youtu.be/QRuzVbAODHw

 

[Matilda_Bennett]

This thread has been dormant for a considerable period. With rare exceptions, reviving threads after a protracted period of inactivity is discouraged because:

the issues that spurred them are often no longer "hot" or current topics, explaining why thread activity ceased originally.
posters originally involved in the discussion are sometimes no longer active on the forum and, therefore, unavailable to reply to comments added to the thread.

Our experience suggests that, when a topic merits revival, it is best accomplished by initiating a new thread that draws on recent events and can be posted to contemporaneously. This eliminates the baggage of folks being frustrated by asking and not receiving responses to issues raised in early posts (because the new poster didn’t notice that the post he was responding to was made a long time ago).

Posters are very welcome to open a new thread on the subject or any other topic, as well as to actively participate in the myriad active threads in the fora.

Thank you to all those who have participated in this discussion. This thread is now closed.