Do you believe in global warming?

[AllSeasons]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

 

[Trishie]

An opinion or a viewpoint does not really say much about a person except that their ideas are formed from certain influences and opinions, and even some fear that the opposite opinion is too threatening to consider. There are strong defenders of either viewpoint.

If that person is not open to exploration of the opinion, then that might indicate some fear or a desire not to step out of a comfort zone…or it can indicate they are stubborn and attached to their own viewpoints if they are not open to exploring the possibilities.

Global warming is a fearful subject as it brings uncertainties about the future with possibilities that may seriously impact on many people, if not all humankind. It isn’t surprising that some would wish to avoid the question or to remain closed to the possibilities.

It is possible that human activity is hastening global warming.
It is possible that a warming cycle was already likely
And while there are nay-sayers, there is empirical evidence that it is occurring.
In my own country, and in the Antarctic that shares my part of the world, there are indications…but God alone knows the future. In God we trust.

 

[EasterJoy]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 1. They can measure the average temperature of the earth, and it is warming up.
   2. It depends on what you mean by “Are humans responsible”? That can mean that you think humankind could (or could not) have had architecture, transportation, and agriculture without the earth warming up, you could mean that you do or don’t think the warming trend can be affected by small incremental changes in behavior (that is, without going back to hunting and gathering), or you could mean that you can’t have any idea whether clearing forests, paving a certain fraction of that, burning millions of barrels of fossil fuel, and raising things such as rice and cattle had any contribution to that.
   IOW, “responsible” is not the same as “culpable”. The earth didn’t used to have an oxygen atmosphere, then photosynthetic organisms came along and radically changed the earth’s atmosphere. Photosynthesis was responsible. Not culpable, but responsible. It can be argued that the earth had warm and cold phases before hominids did much of anything that the other animals didn’t do, but I think it is pretty hard to argue that the earth wouldn’t be somewhat cooler if humans weren’t one of the animals living on it. Conjecture about whether or not humankind has choices that are going to make a big difference are something else again.
   1. It probably says more about their science background than anything else.
   2. Can you live with someone who doesn’t, can’t or won’t understand some particular topic in the same way that you do? Of course you can. Can you be happily married to someone who stubbornly holds some objectively wrong-headed ideas? Of course you can. But you have to decide to tolerate that.

 

[PaulinVA]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?

The overall temperature for the past twelve years is steady. It was predicted to be rising, but it is not.

If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?

I think there are natural rhythms to temperature over time. I think that burning fossil fuels might have an effect on the planet. It’s only been 150 years since the industrial revolution began. It’s too soon to tell.

What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?

Sorry, I misread the question at first. I think it might reveal their political leanings or their science background.

What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?

Absolutely nothing. Well, maybe that they have a brain and can think.

 

[EasterJoy]

The overall temperature for the past twelve years is steady. It was predicted to be rising, but it is not.
I think there are natural rhythms to temperature over time. I think that burning fossil fuels might have an effect on the planet. It’s only been 150 years since the industrial revolution began. It’s too soon to tell.

Sorry, I misread the question at first. I think it might reveal their political leanings or their science background. Absolutely nothing. Well, maybe that they have a brain and can think.

Well, that’s the thing, yes. If someone could prove that burning fossil fuels isn’t making the planet hotter, or could prove that it did make the planet hotter but the glaciers and polar ice sheets aren’t coming back whatever we do, would that mean that it is OK to be profligate about burning what we have to burn? It’s an enormous topic to think about, it really is.

But back to thread topic–two people who have opposite passionate views on this or any other topic might be happier with each other than with people who simply do not care. Much has been made of James Carville being married to Mary Matalin, but it really isn’t rare to find someone who is happier with someone with an opposing opinion, but who really cares, than to be married to someone with no opinion and no passion about the subject at all. Sometimes, people who like to argue are happy to find another person who likes to argue, who does so capably, and doesn’t take it hard when you debate like you mean it.

 

[meltzerboy]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 
   I do believe that global warming is occurring, based on the empirical evidence that most scientists who specialize in this domain agree with. Humans are partly responsible for the acceleration of this phenomenon but probably not totally so. Whether or not a person believes that global warming is taking place depends to some degree on their trust in scientists (and science), if they are not themselves experts in the field, as well as other motivations they may have, including political, religious, ethical, emotional, and so on. In a romantic relationship, it helps if two people see the world somewhat in similar ways, as psychologists have found. IOW, opposites generally do NOT attract and birds of a feather flock together. Nonetheless, this depends somewhat on one’s own tolerance for disagreement regarding specific issues. A successful caring and loving relationship depends on several factors in addition to one’s worldview on topics such as this.

 

[chimo]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 
   I don’t think it is as bad as they are predicting. Since God put this oil and gas in the ground in the first place I do not think He would have put it there if we were going to destroy the planet because of it. I believe this warming is our use of these fossil fuels and we may have bit more than we can chew and sooner or later we will need other alternate uses to help us. I do not believe in these sciencitists who gives us these incredible terrible scenerios for God was the one who gave us the means to use what He put in the ground for us. What we need to do is to manage our resources better. Anyway in another 60 to 70 years we will probably will run out of oil so it is good that newer resources be developed. I have one question to these learned men of science that is giving us too much fears. If the planet is warming up that will mean that the north and south poles ice caps might melt but that does not necesssary mean the oceans will rise. Why? Because with all this warmer weather why don’t they insist of the rivers and oceans drying up! Is not that what happens in warmer temperatures.
   
   In California for instance there was a famine in one year when the temperatures were awfully high all year. Did the rivers and oceans go up? No! They all dried down to alarming levels. Maybe when temparatures go up in our Planet God put those ice caps there so that if when the oceans and rivers begin to dry up these melted ice caps will do their work to fill in the gap.God knows what we will be doing to that oil in the ground and He would not have to put in there if He knew we will destroy this planet. Let us not panic whenever someone says this or that. If we need to be more responsible to what this pollution does from our misuse of resources than let us do something here. We just need to manage it better. Everything tends to iron in itself sooner or later.

 

[CB_Catholic]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 
   No.
   No.
   Nothing.
   Nothing.
   
   Is this some kind of a joke? Why would a belief/non-belief in global warming have anything to do with the “kind” of person someone is? I never heard of judging a person on their belief on global warming (Al Gore excepted )

 

[JackieMom]

I’m a GW agnostic. I don’t know if it exists, and I’m not sure anyone can know for certain. What I do know is that while I think we should be good stewards of the planet, I do mot fear global warming.

I think the eco fanatics are a bit odd, and their focus on this issue is a little annoying, but whatever.

I don’t even know what my husband thinks about it. Either way, I don’t care. I don’t think most people think about it often.

 

[grasscutter]

I believe in climate change. And I believe that one of the causes of it is human action.

 

[broncosfan25]

I have one question to these learned men of science that is giving us too much fears. If the planet is warming up that will mean that the north and south poles ice caps might melt but that does not necesssary mean the oceans will rise. Why? Because with all this warmer weather why don’t they insist of the rivers and oceans drying up! Is not that what happens in warmer temperatures.

I’m not sure I qualify as a “learned man of science” but I am working on a physics degree and have some experience with atmospheric research. For now, let’s ignore the fact that all the rivers and lakes in the world only account for 0.3 % of the Earth’s water, as well as the fact that if global warming caused all of these to dry up, we would have a much bigger problem on our hands than a sea level rise.

A warmer climate means more evaporation, yes. This can mean falling water levels for rivers and other bodies of water in one locale. But what evaporates in one place must precipitate in some other place - the water doesn’t just disappear. Global warming is likely to affect global precipitation patterns, making some regions wetter and others dryer, but there is no reason to believe that changing weather patterns alone would have any meaningful effect on the sea level. On the other hand, the melting of ice caps and glaciers releases new water into the water cycle. As the reservoir for 97% of the planet’s water, it is natural to think that the oceans would consequently rise. This is also backed up by geological records - during warmer periods in the Earth’s history, the oceans were higher than during cooler periods.

 

[edwest2]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 1. There is evidence that different parts of the world are getting warmer while other parts are not. I think this is a natural, cyclic process.
   2. Humans have a small role to play in global warming. Off the shelf technology exists that would mitigate tons of emissions but industry won’t install them because it would affect profits.
   3. Personal judgements are not relevant. Data, not belief, is/should be the driver.
   Ed

 

[Mary_Ellen]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 1. Yes, the world has been warming since the last ice age. There are long and short cycles of cooling and warming of the earth. As for recent warming it’s hard to tell as a large number of the ocean sampling spots have been removed from the measurements that had been taken over the years. I’m suspicious of the real reasons for their removal. (yes, I’m a bit of a conspiracy freak)
   2. I don’t believe it can be proven one way or another. Remember, just a few decades ago we were being warned that we were well on our way to the next ice age.
   3&4. I think it says more about the person as to how they’ve come to their conclusion than just the conclusion itself.

 

[JRKH]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 1. Yes
   2. No - not in the sense that it is commonly used. human activity obviously plays a part, but the earth has been warming and cooling periodically all by itself for many thousands, if not millions, of years.
   3. Depends on the person
   4. I have no idea what significance this question has.
   Peace
   James

 

[MidnightSun12]

I honestly don’t know whether it is warming or not. I do know, however, that there are some really nasty groups behind the global warming movement and population control via abortion and contraception is a very real aspect of the politics and science of this movement:

"We’re too many people; that’s why we have global warming…on a voluntary basis, everybody in the world’s got to pledge to themselves that one child is it."

• Ted Turner (Chairman of UN Foundation Board of Directors)

A quote from the United Nations Population Fund:

"The importance of the speed and magnitude of recent population growth in boosting future greenhouse-gas emissions is well recognized among scientists, including the authors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s reports."

This is a serious problem for any faithful Catholic who supports climate change. The views expressed above are simply not compatible with a sound Catholic faith that clearly tells us that every human being is a blessing, not a plague. I also doubt that it is morally possible for a Catholic to support many climate change charities or politicians since their support for contraception and abortion are almost unequivical.

I guess if I was dating somebody who was pro-climate change, it would give me cause for concern. I would definitely want to know a lot more about their views on the Church’s pro-life teachings and whether they strive to put God first in their life or if they are willing to commit mortal sin by voting for pro-death politicians to politically support their views on climate change.

 

[chimo]

I’m not sure I qualify as a “learned man of science” but I am working on a physics degree and have some experience with atmospheric research. For now, let’s ignore the fact that all the rivers and lakes in the world only account for 0.3 % of the Earth’s water, as well as the fact that if global warming caused all of these to dry up, we would have a much bigger problem on our hands than a sea level rise.

A warmer climate means more evaporation, yes. This can mean falling water levels for rivers and other bodies of water in one locale. But what evaporates in one place must precipitate in some other place - the water doesn’t just disappear. Global warming is likely to affect global precipitation patterns, making some regions wetter and others dryer, but there is no reason to believe that changing weather patterns alone would have any meaningful effect on the sea level. On the other hand, the melting of ice caps and glaciers releases new water into the water cycle. As the reservoir for 97% of the planet’s water, it is natural to think that the oceans would consequently rise. This is also backed up by geological records - during warmer periods in the Earth’s history, the oceans were higher than during cooler periods.

interesting! Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut. When I was mentioning learned men I was referring basically to men who have no faith at all. These men who do not put any faith into the equation may give us unnecessary fears. I believe in faith so I question about the misuse of these resources to a point when it might draw in unnecessary fears. My point in my post was this. God knowing that we need this oil probably put in enough that will not do the work by which these sciencitists declare. I am not a scienctist in this field but I am a man of faith who believes that God did put resources into our earth for our use and welfare. I just don’t think God will allow this go too far so He only if one can say put so much oil in the ground.

I understand that water cannot disappear and that is a very good point. I also know a bit about weather but my concern here was only to point out a God who is also concern for us. I am not convinced of what they say about our future I mean some of these men and women are saying and I am certain other resources can replace these ones which have given to us major concerns in the warming sense and in a pollution sense. I sense all of this will be ironed out when these oil resources run out. It is the price we pay for the size of the population we have now on our planet. But would it not be more wonderful if people will find people as the best resources available then let us say the resources themselves. Hopefully the Church can do her part to remind peoples of this high regard God has for every person on the planet.

I often feel that the ice caps tend to warm up naturally once in awhile anyway. I don’t know if that is true. There seems to be seasons of very cold winters than all of a sudden very warm winters. I cannot explain it but I believe this occurances may be the result of natural forces working on us and of course unnatural forces. I believe it is the unnatural forces that can be a concern for all of us but I often believe God will not let it go too far even of our misuse of some of these resources are present.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Here is something on ice caps:
examiner.com/article/ice-records-the-arctic-and-antarctic

And then there is stuff like the “Climategate” etc that makes you wonder.

I think there is a variety of strong opinions on the matter, and I think it is being used to push political agendas. I do believe we have the responsibility to be good stewards of the Earth, but I strongly oppose any movement that puts the Earth above humans.

 

[JRKH]

I honestly don’t know whether it is warming or not. I do know, however, that there are some really nasty groups behind the global warming movement and population control via abortion and contraception is a very real aspect of the politics and science of this movement:

"We’re too many people; that’s why we have global warming…on a voluntary basis, everybody in the world’s got to pledge to themselves that one child is it."

• Ted Turner (Chairman of UN Foundation Board of Directors)

A quote from the United Nations Population Fund:

"The importance of the speed and magnitude of recent population growth in boosting future greenhouse-gas emissions is well recognized among scientists, including the authors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s reports."

This is a serious problem for any faithful Catholic who supports climate change. The views expressed above are simply not compatible with a sound Catholic faith that clearly tells us that every human being is a blessing, not a plague. I also doubt that it is morally possible for a Catholic to support many climate change charities or politicians since their support for contraception and abortion are almost unequivical.

I guess if I was dating somebody who was pro-climate change, it would give me cause for concern. I would definitely want to know a lot more about their views on the Church’s pro-life teachings and whether they strive to put God first in their life or if they are willing to commit mortal sin by voting for pro-death politicians to politically support their views on climate change.

Interesting post…But I am a person who believes in “Global Warming” and also believes in the Church’s pro-life teachings. I don’t see that there is any conflict between the two things.

The people and groups that you quote above, are positing a certain specific cause for the observed effect. One can certainly register the effect (the world is gradually getting warmer) and yet deny the validity of some proposed causation / solution.

Personally it is my view that the warmup is due largely to natural causes such as a “wobble” in the rotation of the earth. Like a top that spins very straight but then begins to wobble a bit as it slows down. This idea is not a new one and is supported by the cyclic aspect of the ice ages over time.
Human activity may have some effect and it is good that we examine this. But “population control” (at least by artificial means) is not as important as reducing our overall “carbon footprint”.

One last general comment on the idea of sea level rise.
Even in “worse case” scenarios this is going to occur rather gradually over many decades. Many of the places most at threat would have time to build up retaining walls and such as needed. Heck…look at New Orleans. It’s already below sea level…The sensible “long term” thing to do after Katrina would have been to abandon the site and rebuild on higher ground.
But nope…they rebuilt the levees and moved right back in.

Of course If certain areas DO ultimately become untenable…new cities will be built on more stable ground…This is just the nature of the earth - and economics.

Peace
James

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I suppose this is really a four-part question.

1. 
   *]Do you believe that the world is becoming warmer?
   *]If so, do you believe that humans are responsible for global warming?
   *]What does it say about a person if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   *]What does it say about a romantic partner if he/she does or does not believe in global warming?
   
   Thank you in advance.

1. 1. The data is not reliable. If there is warming, it is very slight and pretty meaningless.
   2. No. Absolutely not.
   3. Nothing. Oh, wait, it says that you can still think for yourself.
   4. Nothing. It might mean that he/she accepts what the media says without thinking/researching, so that would not be a good thing.

 

[EasterJoy]

I don’t think it is as bad as they are predicting. Since God put this oil and gas in the ground in the first place I do not think He would have put it there if we were going to destroy the planet because of it.

Compare and contrast with the decision to create the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?

I believe this warming is our use of these fossil fuels and we may have bit more than we can chew and sooner or later we will need other alternate uses to help us. I do not believe in these sciencitists who gives us these incredible terrible scenerios for God was the one who gave us the means to use what He put in the ground for us. What we need to do is to manage our resources better. Anyway in another 60 to 70 years we will probably will run out of oil so it is good that newer resources be developed. I have one question to these learned men of science that is giving us too much fears. If the planet is warming up that will mean that the north and south poles ice caps might melt but that does not necesssary mean the oceans will rise. Why? Because with all this warmer weather why don’t they insist of the rivers and oceans drying up! Is not that what happens in warmer temperatures.

In California for instance there was a famine in one year when the temperatures were awfully high all year. Did the rivers and oceans go up? No! They all dried down to alarming levels. Maybe when temparatures go up in our Planet God put those ice caps there so that if when the oceans and rivers begin to dry up these melted ice caps will do their work to fill in the gap.God knows what we will be doing to that oil in the ground and He would not have to put in there if He knew we will destroy this planet. Let us not panic whenever someone says this or that. If we need to be more responsible to what this pollution does from our misuse of resources than let us do something here. We just need to manage it better. Everything tends to iron in itself sooner or later.

Be very careful, because you’re getting perilously close to a presumption theology…that is, nothing we do can make that much difference, because God doesn’t let our free will have truly catastrophic effects.

After all, what would have kept Judas from thinking like that? If what he did was something in God’s plan, was it OK, or was it as Our Lord put it? “For the Son of Man indeed goes, as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been born.” Mark 14:21

This is the question that does not get asked often enough. We shouldn’t ask “Can we get away with what we’re doing?” We should be asking “Are we being obedient in the way we are ‘having dominion over’ the earth?”