Election over, administration unleashes new rules

[livingwordunity]

Not sure what you have posted, but to give an example of what I mean, my experience here is that most CAF posters who express their views about climate change are denialists

Why did it change from being called “global warming” to “climate change”?

But I don’t see CAF denialism as a Catholic thing, so much as an American thing

The Church doesn’t issue dogmas on opinions of science. And you do realize that scientists aren’t always right, don’t you?

 

[ringil]

Not sure what you have posted, but to give an example of what I mean, my experience here is that most CAF posters who express their views about climate change are denialists, expressing all sorts of cooked-up conspiracy theories, using “algore” as an ugly epithet, and some have been quite rude and crude with me as well, while only a tiny few here at CAF accept climate science. This goes against findings that the vast majority of Catholics in America (68%) accept that climate change is happening and is caused by humans (as opposed to only 62% if non-Catholics accepting it).

The denialism of climate change here at CAF goes against what JPII and BXVI have being saying for over 20 years, and goes against what amounts to a common appeal to morality that any religion would dictate. But I don’t see CAF denialism as a Catholic thing, so much as an American thing, with our refusal to accept responsibility for the harms we inflict, since our Enlightenment-based (anti-Catholic) ideology speaks only of rights, rights, rights, and not duties or responsiblities. In such a culture the rights of the weak and poor are overshadowed by the rights of the rich and strong, and our duties and responsibilities not to harm others (and even to help them) are pretty much non-salient. America follows a rights-based code of ethics (arising out of 18 c. Enlightenment, anti-Church philosophy), while the Church traditionally has followed more of a duty-based code of ethics (it’s the 10 Commandments, not the 10 Rights). Rights are included in such a code, but they are the other side of the duties coin (people have rights, because others have duties and vice versa) – they go together, because people are social beings who form and are enmeshed in society, and not just a bunch of rugged, autonomous individuals struggling to be free of and overthrow “new rules unleased by the administration,” as the OP puts it, or exempt from the laws of nature or from truth or Truth.

There could be a lot of good Catholics here at CAF who accept the science of climate change and are working in their daily lives to mitigate it, but do not like to engage with the denialists here. Maybe these meek people who shy away from militant denialists are in the majority. So I could be wrong.

Yes, CAF does not accurately reflect the scope of American Catholicism, including faithful Mass-going Catholics. I have never personally met Catholics who present themselves the way many of the more vociferous around here do,

It’s an odd place. I find myself addicted to it- I think just to get that Oh my God- did they really just write that?!? sort of thing.

 

[livingwordunity]

Yes, CAF does not accurately reflect the scope of American Catholicism, including faithful Mass-going Catholics. I have never personally met Catholics who present themselves the way many of the more vociferous around here do,

It’s an odd place. I find myself addicted to it- I think just to get that Oh my God- did they really just write that?!? sort of thing.

lynnvinc is upset with CAF posters who don’t buy into global warming which for some mysterious reason has been renamed “climate change”.

 

[George_Stegmeir]

lynvic better get used to the fact that historically, the earth goes through both chilling and warming cycles spanning many many years.
For instance, at the time of the ancient Egyptians through the time of the Roman Empire, what is now the Northern part of the Sahara was verdant to the extent that Egypt was the major supplier of wheat to Rome, and Carthage (which is in what is now Libya) was not only verdant but was a major world power that threatened Rome.
In more modern times, Until the 1700’s, England was a major producer of wine, and wine was the preferred drink of the masses. Then, in the 1790’s Europe was hit with a severe weather change, in which it became colder. This lasted until around 1815, but England never warmed up enough to grow enough grapes to make wine a commercial venture.
Currently, it has been noted by many responsible scientists that the “Global Warming” thing was an elaborate academic hoax,in which documents and “scientific studies” were falsified. The object of all of this was for the professors concerned to get lucerative study grants.
All the while, the mass media sensualized “global warming” in order to sell newspapers and TV advertising.
This has also been politicised by many corrupt third-world countries in an attempt to extort money from the US and Common Market countries.
The funny thing is these third world countries don’t even try to go after the worst of the atmospheric pollutors: Russia and China!!!
And by the way, the so-called experts tried to frighten us by stating that if the Greenland ice cap melted it would flood both American and UK seaports, wiping out such resorts as Miami Beach, etc. Well, the ice is gone in Greenland and Greenland is very much like it was when it was settled by the Vikings around 1100 AD. And apart from some hurricanes, there is no flooding!
However, I guess you can’t argue with “true believers”.

 

[lynnvinc]

Sad to say, that makes sense from what I’ve read here…

Anyway, I can assure you that the people here do not resemble the people at my parish church, who are pretty much like regular people, but striving to be good Catholics.

Maybe you could go out and meet some Catholics face-to-face in the UK and let me know how they are. I’m thinking you’ll be pleasantly surprise.

Or better yet, go to some monastery and meet the brothers and get a stronger feel of how Catholics are. Here is one of my favorite videos – it gives a very different view: youtube.com/watch?v=CZZFO9F8FWU

 

[lynnvinc]

Why did it change from being called “global warming” to “climate change”?

Because they can’t think up a bad enough name for it to match its catastrophic harms. “Warming” sounds nice and cozy. “Greenhouse effect” sounds nice – pretty orchids in greenhouses.

“Climate change” is perhaps more accurate in that it gives the situation a broader scope, since the warming will be entailing many dire consequences and effects – droughts, floods, sea rise, disease spread, crop loss, stronger storms, etc. “Warming” just doesn’t capture that.

And it could even entail some regional cold snaps, as when it causes more strongly negative arctic oscillations to bring killing frosts down to Northern Mexico to kill $1billion worth of their winter crops (which happened a few years ago, and also killed out our home veggie garden as well – you have to understand it is too hot here to grow things in the summer).

The Church doesn’t issue dogmas on opinions of science. And you do realize that scientists aren’t always right, don’t you?

The Church says, “Thou shalt not kill,” and when we kill people through climate change or some new poison that violates that commandment.

It is important to take a humble view and give some respect to what the scientists say (the real climate scientists, not Exxon/Koch/Scaife-funded fake-scientists), give them the benefit of the doubt and take the prudent course of mitigating what they say is amounting to a very serious problem for now and even much worse for many generations to come, and perhaps even annihilate all life on earth. Plus mitigation of CC can save us money without lowering productivity or living standards, and help mitigate a host of other problems, such as (just to name one) reducing miscarriages and birth defects by driving ICE cars less or more efficiently thereby reducing local pollution. There really is no reason why people should refuse to mitigate this problem, even if they are not totally convinced it is real.

God is Truth, and science is provisional truth, subject to change with better and more evidence and better theories, and we should give some consideration and respect to it, not dismiss it out of hand.

 

[estesbob]

lynnvinc is upset with CAF posters who don’t buy into global warming which for some mysterious reason has been renamed “climate change”.

Like any other marketing campaign they had to rebrand it when the “warming” didnt match their models. Catholics are not required to accept any theory on the climate . Some have tried to take two comments from Popes about their opinion on the climate and morph that into a catholic theology where driving a Prius brings one more grace than receiving communion and people are judged soley on how Much they mitigate their carbon footprint

 

[Carlan]

It just seems to me that many Catholics here on these political forums look at much of the things discussed here from just that, their political head set rather than a Catholic and a common sense outlook. peace, Carlan

 

[estesbob]

It just seems to me that many Catholics here on these political forums look at much of the things discussed here from just that, their political head set rather than a Catholic and a common sense outlook. peace, Carlan

Which is why over half of them voted for Obama

 

[mary_bobo]

lynvic better get used to the fact that historically, the earth goes through both chilling and warming cycles spanning many many years.
For instance, at the time of the ancient Egyptians through the time of the Roman Empire, what is now the Northern part of the Sahara was verdant to the extent that Egypt was the major supplier of wheat to Rome, and Carthage (which is in what is now Libya) was not only verdant but was a major world power that threatened Rome.
In more modern times, Until the 1700’s, England was a major producer of wine, and wine was the preferred drink of the masses. Then, in the 1790’s Europe was hit with a severe weather change, in which it became colder. This lasted until around 1815, but England never warmed up enough to grow enough grapes to make wine a commercial venture.
Currently, it has been noted by many responsible scientists that the “Global Warming” thing was an elaborate academic hoax,in which documents and “scientific studies” were falsified. The object of all of this was for the professors concerned to get lucerative study grants.
All the while, the mass media sensualized “global warming” in order to sell newspapers and TV advertising.
This has also been politicised by many corrupt third-world countries in an attempt to extort money from the US and Common Market countries.
The funny thing is these third world countries don’t even try to go after the worst of the atmospheric pollutors: Russia and China!!!
And by the way, the so-called experts tried to frighten us by stating that if the Greenland ice cap melted it would flood both American and UK seaports, wiping out such resorts as Miami Beach, etc. Well, the ice is gone in Greenland and Greenland is very much like it was when it was settled by the Vikings around 1100 AD. And apart from some hurricanes, there is no flooding!
However, I guess you can’t argue with “true believers”.

 

[Tampa_Dave]

It just seems to me that many Catholics here on these political forums look at much of the things discussed here from just that, their political head set rather than a Catholic and a common sense outlook. peace, Carlan

I’m become apolitical, Carlan. America can chart it’s own course without my participation or concern. I will render unto Caesar my lawful taxes and that, my friend, will be the extent of my civic involvement. On a happy note, I wish you and your family the best of the holiday season!

 

[exoflare]

lynvic better get used to the fact that historically, the earth goes through both chilling and warming cycles spanning many many years.
For instance, at the time of the ancient Egyptians through the time of the Roman Empire, what is now the Northern part of the Sahara was verdant to the extent that Egypt was the major supplier of wheat to Rome, and Carthage (which is in what is now Libya) was not only verdant but was a major world power that threatened Rome.
In more modern times, Until the 1700’s, England was a major producer of wine, and wine was the preferred drink of the masses. Then, in the 1790’s Europe was hit with a severe weather change, in which it became colder. This lasted until around 1815, but England never warmed up enough to grow enough grapes to make wine a commercial venture.
Currently, it has been noted by many responsible scientists that the “Global Warming” thing was an elaborate academic hoax,in which documents and “scientific studies” were falsified. The object of all of this was for the professors concerned to get lucerative study grants.
All the while, the mass media sensualized “global warming” in order to sell newspapers and TV advertising.
This has also been politicised by many corrupt third-world countries in an attempt to extort money from the US and Common Market countries.
The funny thing is these third world countries don’t even try to go after the worst of the atmospheric pollutors: Russia and China!!!
And by the way, the so-called experts tried to frighten us by stating that if the Greenland ice cap melted it would flood both American and UK seaports, wiping out such resorts as Miami Beach, etc. Well, the ice is gone in Greenland and Greenland is very much like it was when it was settled by the Vikings around 1100 AD. And apart from some hurricanes, there is no flooding!
However, I guess you can’t argue with “true believers”.

The obvious answer is that the Vikings and the pre-18th-century English were “denialists” who joyrided around in their SUVs every day and left their thermostats at 72 degrees all the time. Same thing with the ancient Egyptians. You don’t know this information because Exxon/Koch and the evil evil Republicans are conspiring to suppress the true history and there’s no other possible way the climate could just get warmer like that.

Ah-doooy! No wonder she ignored your post.

 

[lynnvinc]

The obvious answer is that the Vikings and the pre-18th-century English were “denialists” who joyrided around in their SUVs every day and left their thermostats at 72 degrees all the time. Same thing with the ancient Egyptians. You don’t know this information because Exxon/Koch and the evil evil Republicans are conspiring to suppress the true history and there’s no other possible way the climate could just get warmer like that.

Ah-doooy! No wonder she ignored your post.

I ignored it bec it is a bunch of strawmen and red herrings, the usual things trotted out by denialists that have been addressed over and over again. If you want answers to these points, you can go to places like skepticalscience.com/argument.php or realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki .

Plus he forgot to mention the end-Permian great warming 251 mya when over 90% of life on earth died out and how we are now pushing the system into something like that, only much faster. Or the great warming of 55 mya, which triggered vast releases of methane from ocean hydrates & permafrost, shooting the temps way up, the way we are triggering it right now.

You people here really crush me, esp since many of you are Catholic. That really hurts me. My heart is crushed by your unwillingness to listen to the real experts, seek them out, try to do a few things to reduce your harms to life on earth, even if these will save you money without lowering your living standards. I am crushed and crying inside, as I have been for 20 years over this resistence to forsake evil and do good. But I sincerely hope you are having a Merry Christmas, and that somehow you find it in your hearts to really listen, learn, and do at least some small things to mitigate climate change.

 

[Walcot]

lynvic better get used to the fact that historically, the earth goes through both chilling and warming cycles spanning many many years.
For instance, at the time of the ancient Egyptians through the time of the Roman Empire, what is now the Northern part of the Sahara was verdant to the extent that Egypt was the major supplier of wheat to Rome, and Carthage (which is in what is now Libya) was not only verdant but was a major world power that threatened Rome.
In more modern times, Until the 1700’s, England was a major producer of wine, and wine was the preferred drink of the masses. Then, in the 1790’s Europe was hit with a severe weather change, in which it became colder. This lasted until around 1815, but England never warmed up enough to grow enough grapes to make wine a commercial venture.
Currently, it has been noted by many responsible scientists that the “Global Warming” thing was an elaborate academic hoax,in which documents and “scientific studies” were falsified. The object of all of this was for the professors concerned to get lucerative study grants.
All the while, the mass media sensualized “global warming” in order to sell newspapers and TV advertising.
This has also been politicised by many corrupt third-world countries in an attempt to extort money from the US and Common Market countries.
The funny thing is these third world countries don’t even try to go after the worst of the atmospheric pollutors: Russia and China!!!
And by the way, the so-called experts tried to frighten us by stating that if the Greenland ice cap melted it would flood both American and UK seaports, wiping out such resorts as Miami Beach, etc. Well, the ice is gone in Greenland and Greenland is very much like it was when it was settled by the Vikings around 1100 AD. And apart from some hurricanes, there is no flooding!
However, I guess you can’t argue with “true believers”.

I hope you had a nice Christmas!
Britain was never a major producer of wine.
Grape vines may have been introduced earlier, but it’s thought the Romans were the ones who really tried to have a serious go at producing wine here. As they were used to seriously good stuff, I’m not sure what they thought of their British vintages - probably not much, as even if you take into account a possible warmer climate while they were here… as we’re an island, we get LOTS of rain, and being further north, we have a shorter growing season than that of the mediterranean. Enough sun to ripen the grapes, and mildew is and would have been a BIG problem.They might have had some success but I suspect the Romans imported most of their wine.
The drink of the masses was never wine but ale and beer produced country-wide. In fruit growing areas it was cider which is alcoholic apple juice and perry - alcoholic pear juice. This was particularly useful in low lying areas without much fast running water or in towns where water was polluted - it killed the bugs.
By the recent ‘global warming hoax’ you refer to - I take it you mean the University of East Anglia e-mails? This has all been put to bed…it was a hacking of e-mails timed to coincide with the climate talks in Copenhagen in order to do most damage. Bits and pieces of the e-mails were cut out of context, fiddled with and made to ‘prove’ that the work of these scientists was all an elaborate hoax and manmade global warming was a myth. Its all been tested and checked again and again and proved that the hoax was all done by the hackers, NOT the scientists. But as the hackers knew…chuck mud around and it sticks…hence you bring it up even now after all this time.

The ice has NOT gone in Greenland!

Melting SEA ice reveals more dark sea which absorbs the heat of the sun (ice reflects the heat) so the sea heats up quicker and more ice melts…and climate warms and then land ice melts too…see? Vicious circle. There’s a lot of ice to go into the sea yet. Here endeth the history and geography lesson…

 

[estesbob]

I ignored it bec it is a bunch of strawmen and red herrings, the usual things trotted out by denialists that have been addressed over and over again. If you want answers to these points, you can go to places like skepticalscience.com/argument.php or realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=RC_Wiki .

Plus he forgot to mention the end-Permian great warming 251 mya when over 90% of life on earth died out and how we are now pushing the system into something like that, only much faster. Or the great warming of 55 mya, which triggered vast releases of methane from ocean hydrates & permafrost, shooting the temps way up, the way we are triggering it right now.

You people here really crush me, esp since many of you are Catholic. That really hurts me. My heart is crushed by your unwillingness to listen to the real experts, seek them out, try to do a few things to reduce your harms to life on earth, even if these will save you money without lowering your living standards. I am crushed and crying inside, as I have been for 20 years over this resistence to forsake evil and do good. But I sincerely hope you are having a Merry Christmas, and that somehow you find it in your hearts to really listen, learn, and do at least some small things to mitigate climate change.

There is no “Catholic” position on climate.

What caused the warming In 55 mya?

 

[Walcot]

Why did it change from being called “global warming” to “climate change”?
The Church doesn’t issue dogmas on opinions of science. And you do realize that scientists aren’t always right, don’t you?

If you have to ask the global warming/climate change question you REALLY don’t understand the basics.
Global warming is just that - average global temp going up. Does that mean everywhere gets warmer? No. If ice melt due to warming in the arctic switches off the gulf stream (all to do with salt/fresh water stopping the current) then UK suddenly gets a climate like Alaska because the gulf stream is what brings us our mild climate. That will have knock-on effects, difficult to predict because of all the variables. Some places will get much hotter and their rains will be diverted- it already seems to be happening in some parts of the world. It’s all interconnected and complicated…(The butterfly beats it’s wing… etc etc). So, global warming affects local and therefore global climate…the climate changes all over the world. easy peasy.

 

[livingwordunity]

If you have to ask the global warming/climate change question you REALLY don’t understand the basics.
Global warming is just that - average global temp going up. Does that mean everywhere gets warmer? No. If ice melt due to warming in the arctic switches off the gulf stream (all to do with salt/fresh water stopping the current) then UK suddenly gets a climate like Alaska because the gulf stream is what brings us our mild climate. That will have knock-on effects, difficult to predict because of all the variables. It’s all interconnected and complicated…(The butterfly beats it’s wing… etc etc). So, global warming affects local and therefore global climate…the climate changes all over the world. easy peasy.

I think they changed it from “global warming” to “climate change” because the climate changes whether we cause it or not. But it’s a clever way to keep people scared and get their money without ever having to prove anything. It’s like selling people snake oil for their health.

 

[lynnvinc]

There is no “Catholic” position on climate.

There most certainly is a Catholic position on harming and killing innocent people, and on destroying God’s creation on which people depend for their survival – destroying their food base, water source, and property. This commandment is not limited to harming and killing people with knives and guns, but includes ALL the various ways in which we harm people.

While the amount of greenhouse gases that a single person contributes even over a lifetime resulting in such climate change related harms is not huge – maybe only killing one person, or together with 500 others killing one person (more if concomitant harms, such as from local pollution, are included) – the fact that the person also denies this harm and strives to dissuade others from reducing their harms may be a more serious spiritual matter.

 

[lynnvinc]

Britain was never a major producer of wine.

You are right, but the more important point is that even if they were right – because there have been great warming periods in the past – is that there are many factors that can cause climate change, and there are other causes of greenhouse gas release besides SUVs. Just because something can cause something, does not preclude other causal factors.

Climate scientists are well aware of and control for these other factors. They are well aware of paleoclimatology.

The fact that there were great warming periods in the past actually strengthens the argument that we are causing climate change today, and does not in any way disprove it.

Much of the denialists arguments – beyond blatant and more subtle lies, and other subterfuge – are simply violations of logic and reasoning.

 

[Walcot]

You are right, but the more important point is that even if they were right – because there have been great warming periods in the past – is that there are many factors that can cause climate change, and there are other causes of greenhouse gas release besides SUVs. Just because something can cause something, does not preclude other causal factors.

Climate scientists are well aware of and control for these other factors. They are well aware of paleoclimatology.

The fact that there were great warming periods in the past actually strengthens the argument that we are causing climate change today, and does not in any way disprove it.

Much of the denialists arguments – beyond blatant and more subtle lies, and other subterfuge – are simply violations of logic and reasoning.

I agree. I just don’t understand the vehement hostility that some people have about the concept that WE are causing harm to our own environment. All this conspiracy theory stuff is beyond me! Surely it is not beyond the wit of man that we should be able to live more lightly on the world, but I suppose the greed and ambition that got us originally out of caves is inevitably going to be our downfall. I am concerned that religious beliefs can make people a bit too complacent - the idea that we are special and the rest of what’s on the planet was put there JUST for us. Also, if everything focuses on the afterlife, then this life is not important. I’m glad you see care of the environment as a Christian ideal - that seems logical to me. The church could and should be a powerful force to help our poor mistreated planet!