A
Al_Masetti
Guest
Actually, you have stated it pretty accurately, in my opinion.
Mr. Gore referred to it as “a moral issue”.
- Status
Mr. Gore referred to it as “a moral issue”.
C
cgirl4ever
Guest
oh okay. thanks
E
Evan
Guest
Do you remember 30 years ago.
The big fear was the coming ice age. How are we going to stop it?
By late 70’s the temperatures seem to have moved from their downward trend to an upward trend. So now we have to fear global warming.
I just read that in some of the retreating glaciers they found an old hunting equipment from 1500’s. Indicating that the glaciers have retreated to the size they were 500 years ago. The historic evidence shows a gradual change in global temperatures with a 150 year cycle.
I would like to cite the article but it is not available online till next month. It is titled “The Politics of Global Warming” by Thomas Sieger Derr in First Things (www.firstthings.com)
The greenhouse gas in greatest quantity is Water, 2nd is CO2. But water makes up 97% of the atmospheric greenhouse gasses. By trying to control CO2 we are only impacting, at most, 3%. So to prevent global warming I recommend that we all stop watering our lawns, use drip irrigation to grow crops, and cover the oceans with large oil slicks (that prevents evaporation). This would impact the 97% of greenhouse gasses!
Good Luck with that.
The big fear was the coming ice age. How are we going to stop it?
By late 70’s the temperatures seem to have moved from their downward trend to an upward trend. So now we have to fear global warming.
I just read that in some of the retreating glaciers they found an old hunting equipment from 1500’s. Indicating that the glaciers have retreated to the size they were 500 years ago. The historic evidence shows a gradual change in global temperatures with a 150 year cycle.
I would like to cite the article but it is not available online till next month. It is titled “The Politics of Global Warming” by Thomas Sieger Derr in First Things (www.firstthings.com)
The greenhouse gas in greatest quantity is Water, 2nd is CO2. But water makes up 97% of the atmospheric greenhouse gasses. By trying to control CO2 we are only impacting, at most, 3%. So to prevent global warming I recommend that we all stop watering our lawns, use drip irrigation to grow crops, and cover the oceans with large oil slicks (that prevents evaporation). This would impact the 97% of greenhouse gasses!
Good Luck with that.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
And if that plunges us into Global Cooling, we implement the great strategy of the 1970s – have the Air Force spread lamp black over the polar ice caps.
S
Spirithound
Guest
Nah…we can just set the oil slicks on fire. That’ll heat things up!!And if that plunges us into Global Cooling, we implement the great strategy of the 1970s – have the Air Force spread lamp black over the polar ice caps.
E
Eddy
Guest
Quoting directly, for a second time, from a post I made in May:
'I am convinced, as I said on a similar thread 3-4 months ago, with very similar arguments being put forward, that global warming is happening. And that we have a moral imperative to change our lifestyles accordingly.
I am also convinced that many people here do not believe that, and so I’m not trying to start that argument.
HOWEVER
There do seem to be plenty of good reasons to adopt a more environmentally responsible lifestyle, even if you are not convinced by global warming:
Can anyone honestly say that, even if global warming is propaganda, decreasing our dependency on cars and fossil fuels isn’t at least a good aspiration?’
I think there is a tendency in all of us to be most opposed to the sins we are not guilty of and least opposed to the ones which are most rampant in our lives. Adopting an environmentally friendly (and a fair trade approach, which I also advocate) lifestyle involves dramatic changes to our lifestyle, and as such is harder to do than something that influences us at a theoretical level.
As I’ve said before, if you drink non-fairtrade coffee at your pro-life meeting, and drive your suburban (not rural) SUV home, then there’s a certain inconsistency at work.
'I am convinced, as I said on a similar thread 3-4 months ago, with very similar arguments being put forward, that global warming is happening. And that we have a moral imperative to change our lifestyles accordingly.
I am also convinced that many people here do not believe that, and so I’m not trying to start that argument.
HOWEVER
There do seem to be plenty of good reasons to adopt a more environmentally responsible lifestyle, even if you are not convinced by global warming:
- The world’s resources are limited. We are consuming them at a faster rate. The waste that we produce is filling more and more landfills. We save green land from becoming landfill if we reduce the waste we produce. We also make ourselves less dependent on limited resources when we use those resources wisely.
- The increased dependency on cars creates many problems. While not knocking SUV for rural dwellers (my uncle, a farmer, has one, with barbed wire and bailing twine in the back!) far too many urban and suburban dwellers drive them, and far too many urban and suburban dwellers are dependent on cars in the first place:
- increased pedestrians and public transport use makes city streets safer - the best way to beat urban crime is to get people using urban space.
- there has been a marked increase in asthma, particularly among children, directly linked to car fumes in urban areas (and other pollutants).
- fewer people walking and cycling has had an impact on our waistlines and our health - less car use and more walking would improve our health.
- the lack of good public transport impacts most on the most vulnerable, and those who cannot afford a car. Declining public transport increases the gap between the haves and the have nots. If more people used it, it would become more financially viable, and therefore better. Public transport can also be a real community builder and reduce social isolation, particularly for older people.
- a child hit by a SUV in a traffic accident has a much higher chance of fatality/serious injury than a child hit by a smaller car. Also, a particular problem of ‘school run’ SUVs is that it is more difficult for the driver to see smaller children. They’re safer for the kids inside the car, but much more dangerous for the kids outside the car.
- I wonder about what an increasingly ‘throw away society’ says to our children? The idea of using something until it’s done, of making most use of our resources, of not having a new everything, does not help them value other parts of life. Fixing a fridge/television/jumper rather than buying a new one helps the environment AND helps us live lives of Christian simplicity.
Can anyone honestly say that, even if global warming is propaganda, decreasing our dependency on cars and fossil fuels isn’t at least a good aspiration?’
I think there is a tendency in all of us to be most opposed to the sins we are not guilty of and least opposed to the ones which are most rampant in our lives. Adopting an environmentally friendly (and a fair trade approach, which I also advocate) lifestyle involves dramatic changes to our lifestyle, and as such is harder to do than something that influences us at a theoretical level.
As I’ve said before, if you drink non-fairtrade coffee at your pro-life meeting, and drive your suburban (not rural) SUV home, then there’s a certain inconsistency at work.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
It would be nice of the drumbeaters for Global Warming would follow your advice and set an example for the rest of us.
E
Ender
Guest
On the face of it this seems obvious, nonetheless I doubt that it is true. Take oil as the obvious example. Are we really running out of all oil or merely running out of oil accessible by current means of extraction? The most obvious indication that it is the latter is the untapped oil shale in Colorado which contains about three times as much oil as is in Saudi Arabia.
seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002463368_oilstudy01.html
Back in 1980 economist Julian Simon bet several environmentalists (Paul Ehrlich, John Harte, John Holdren) that the price of metals would go down over the next five years - which would give proof to his thesis that natural resources become more available because of more efficient processes or because some even less expensive alternative had been found. Ehrlich took the bet and even selected the five metals to be measured. All five went down in price.
We are not running out of resources. There may be many reasons to conserve but this is not one of them.
Ender
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
What strikes me as ironic is that our efforts to conserve often result in more consumption and waste. For example, we recycle glass – yet it takes more energy to recycle glass than it does to make new glass. And we certainly aren’t running out of the raw materials to make glass!!
We use plastic bags instead of paper – “save a tree” is our motto. Yet trees are renewable and bags are bio-degradeable. Plastic made from oil bags decorate our woodlands, snagged on the trees.
Those who preach conservation most loudly jet around the world, hold lavish, energy-consuming concerts, and live an energy-consuming lifestyle.
E
Ender
Guest
I do try to keep current on what’s being said on the issue of global warming because I’m interested in the science and I enjoy the controversy but the more I read the more convinced I become that the entire scenario is invented. It is not global warming that is man made it is the scare itself that man has made; what is really being damaged is not the world but technology, prosperity, and the ideas that foster them; to the environmentalists mankind is not threatened - mankind is the threat; it is not the seas that are rising, what is inexorably going up is the level of governmental intrusion into private lives and individual decisions.
I know a great many sensible, serious people who, insensibly, take the threat of global warming seriously. To those of you reading this thread if you wish to dig a little deeper into the subject don’t pick up another book on science but instead poke around and see if you can find out what environmentalists are saying. Here’s a sample …
- Jacques Chirac in praise of Kyoto: “We are creating a world government.”
- Paul Ehrlich: “Giving society cheap, abundant energy … would be like giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
- Environmental Defense Fund chief scientist Charles Wursta on the likelihood that millions would die if DDT was banned: “This is as good a way to get rid of them as any.”
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
I had a professor who did his doctoral dissertation on an experiment with rats. He had one rat that was much smarter than all the other rats, and “Einstein” kept skewing his statistics.
“Einstein” unfortunately died and was removed from the data base.
You keep saying things like that, and who knows?
You note these are people who would have no scruples about eliminating you from the data base.
E
Ender
Guest
LOL I know that’s a non-threat … but I would be proud to take it as one.“Einstein” unfortunately died and was removed from the data base.
You keep saying things like that, and who knows?
Removal from the data base … what a great euphemism.You note these are people who would have no scruples about eliminating you from the data base.
Enderstein
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain – the Great Oz has spoken.
S
StMarkEofE
Guest
That Bush, isnt there any level he wont stoop too?
S
StMarkEofE
Guest
California and scientists, now thats a fine kettle of stew.
R
RhyannaRose
Guest
For me, trying to take care of the enviroment IS spiritual. Not because I worship the earth, but because I marvel at God’s creation. I want to respect and wisely use the planet He has given us to be our home. I want to appreciate His gift and keep it beautiful and healthy for generations to come. So my goal for the next year is to change all the lightbulbs in our house to compact florescant and start using canvas shopping bags.
That being said, I do not believe global warming is 100% man made. I just think we’re not helping matters any. But with our technology we should be able to find a way to live “green” and not compromise our standard of living. Not to mention it would be great for us to be off forgien oil considering the problems we’re having with the inhabitants of the Middle East at this point in time.
And I was once a pagan, and I can verify that there are people in those groups who views humans as parasites on the earth. One of the turning points for me, along with 9/11, was when one woman on a message board said she wanted to have her reproductive system removed because a baby was nothing more then a parasite to the mother. I pray for them often, that they’ll see the light. Surely minds who can think this way are disturbed.
That being said, I do not believe global warming is 100% man made. I just think we’re not helping matters any. But with our technology we should be able to find a way to live “green” and not compromise our standard of living. Not to mention it would be great for us to be off forgien oil considering the problems we’re having with the inhabitants of the Middle East at this point in time.
And I was once a pagan, and I can verify that there are people in those groups who views humans as parasites on the earth. One of the turning points for me, along with 9/11, was when one woman on a message board said she wanted to have her reproductive system removed because a baby was nothing more then a parasite to the mother. I pray for them often, that they’ll see the light. Surely minds who can think this way are disturbed.
E
Ender
Guest
I have no problem with this sentiment so long as everyone recognizes that the battle over global warming is not between those who want to care for the environment as you do and those who are (at best) indifferent to it but between those who believe that the evidence for man’s role in global warming has been grossly overstated and those who believe (or at least claim) otherwise.
Ender
A
Al_Masetti
Guest
For sure …
But the DDP annual meeting is held in different locations each year. And the side field trips are fabulous.
Visit google and type in ddp oism for the agenda this year. Interesting speakers. And an opportunity to personally meet folks that you normally only read about.
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
vern humphrey:
Folks keep on talking about low emission cars. By far the greatest contributer to pollution are buildings! 67% globally, if I remember right.
vern humphrey:
vern humphrey:
Actually bamboo is a grass, it grows back relatively quickly, and is better than trees in most respects. We could be leaving the trees alone to clean the air, ground, and water. And just plain look purdee with their plastic bags fluttering from their branches.
Oh! My friend’s green committee screened An Inconvenient Truth the other week! Some pretty inconvenient truths he left out:
Oh well.
We’re recycling carpet now which begs the question of the silliness of manufacturing it in the first place. Eventually it still has to sit in a dump not decomposing. Meanwhile it is good for asthma and other forms of allergies and disease. Lovely. Where can I run out and buy some?
Folks keep on talking about low emission cars. By far the greatest contributer to pollution are buildings! 67% globally, if I remember right.
vern humphrey:
We are using recyclable thick woven plastic bags. I like mine.
vern humphrey:
Oh yes! I see, vern, that you have a real flair for environmental art: Bag on Tree. Tears well up on my eyes.
Actually bamboo is a grass, it grows back relatively quickly, and is better than trees in most respects. We could be leaving the trees alone to clean the air, ground, and water. And just plain look purdee with their plastic bags fluttering from their branches.
This may be true. But still what can they do without the little people? I just reckon us little people should just start doing our part. I don’t have to read a study to show me that my grandson doesn’t have a field in the back of the house to play in like I did.
Oh! My friend’s green committee screened An Inconvenient Truth the other week! Some pretty inconvenient truths he left out:
- His father is a cattle rancher yet no mention of the impact of cattle raising on the environment.
- He uses a lift to show us the population explosion but no mention of his party’s record on who lives, who dies, and who gets to make that decision: Rwanda and 45 x Rwanda.
- He talks about war but no mention of the fact that he signed that Congressional Resolution for Iraq.
Oh well.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
For some reason, the proponents of Global Warming seem to accuse everyone who doesn’t agree with them of being a slob who is plundering and destroying the environment.
Now, take one person who owns 185 acres of trees, who takes care that the stream running through his property isn’t polluted. Who gardens and hunts – thus minimizing his impact on the enviromeent.
Next, take another person who owns a huge house or two, who constantly jets around the world, who puts on energy-consuming concerts.
Which one is more “enviromentally friendly?”
- Status