Greater Threat to Humanity: Abortion or Global Warming

[FightingFat]

**Climatic changes seen around the world are “very likely” to have a human cause, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will conclude. **

By “very likely”, the IPCC means greater than 90% probability.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6321351.stm

 

[bongperocho]

I was recently faced with this thought as I argued with my friend over why I think abortion is worse than the current situation we are in concerning global warming. For this very reason, she is justifying voting for a democrat whose platform will be to fight global warming. Could anybody help me with an arguement?

Thanks

Phil

abortion is a spiritual cancer,global warming is manmade cancer:thumbsup:

 

[Al_Masetti]

That is true but I do not have a lot of confidence that solar output is the reason for the 1 1/2 degree increase over the last century.

When I scanned your web site, my eye did catch your item about the 12 & 15 year cycles, or sub cycles. This is interesting because a colleague at NASA who is responsible for solar activity analyses has talked to me about the two sub cycles. I cannot remember if he was also talking about 12 & 15 years.

People who are interested in the effect that solar activity has on weather should check out this paper:

web.utk.edu/~grissino/downloads/burckle%20grissino%202003.pdf

The gist is that during the Maunder Minimum, which non-specialists should recall is the time when there were very few sunspots, 1645 to 1715:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

the resulting mini-ice age caused certain trees to grow wood that was very dense. This wood happened to be used to make violins by people such as Antonio Stradivari in the late 17th century. There is speculation as to whether this dense wood was part of the secret in the violins excellent voice.

I’ll send you an email when I find out if the sub cycles that my colleague talks about are the same ones that you discuss.

Clearly the sunspot activity affects the weather on the Earth. Scientific evidence appears to support the greenhouse effect as a major cause of global warming and it would go out of control if CO2 emissions are not controlled.

• Kathie :bowdown:

Maybe you could help me out here.

Six of your paragraphs acknowledge that the sun has been responsible for extreme climate changes in the past.

Then then your last paragraph (normally a conclusion, as in “therefore”), contradicts the thrust of the data and information in the body of your text.

So … what is the scientific evidence that appears to contradict all the interesting work you summarized in the body of your essay?

 

[harinkj]

abortion is a spiritual cancer,global warming is manmade cancer:thumbsup:

Define your terms. I am sure you don’t mean abortions are not man made.

• Kathie :bowdown:

 

[Al_Masetti]

I saw a couple of graphs that showed the earth’s temperture and sunspot activity.

solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/varsun.html

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/images/solactivity.jpg

In any case, as to the question at hand, anyone with a moral compass can see the difference between slaughterin innocent children and the temperature rising a few degrees.

I like this graph that you found.

It’s the second time I have seen it. It should get more publicity.

Lassen (one of the developers of the graph) found a radical change in cycle length since 1880 - a decline from 12 years to 10 in 1940, then back up to 11 years in 1970 and now down to 10 years.

The graph of Lassen’s variations in solar cycle matches up precisely with “global warming” … check it out. As the average time between energy peaks (of the solar cycle) is reduced, the total energy absorbed by the Earth’s atmosphere increases - that’s arithmetic. Because more time (of the total amount of time between peaks) is “spent” at the higher energy levels of the peak energy emissions.

The enormous concentrations of solar energy at the two poles due to the magnetic “funnels” probably account for the aurora borealis and the seasonal ozone thinning (albeit with many anomalies and “weak spots” around the world) - the thinnest being at the equator and the thickest part at the poles - leading one inexorably to natural solar causes for the “ozone hole”. These huge natural fluctuations (much greater than 5%) have been going on for thousands / millions of geological record years … untouched by human hands.

 

[Eddy]

I had heard of the difference in views on global warming between Europe and the U.S. but this is the first time I’ve seen in it action. I had no idea there were so many deniers of the phenomenon.

12 years ago, when I started university, I was lectured by a senior European meterologist. He said ‘here’s the evidence for global warming’ and 30 minutes later said ‘this is why it might not be true’.

3 years later, the same lecturer approached the same class and said ‘I was wrong. This IS global warming’. I’ve worked alongside senior meterologists for years, and every one of them says global warming is a reality. I’ve known PhD students who’ve shown, in recent years, just what’s happening to icecaps and how storminess records have become chaotic in the last 10 years. What is more, the indicators are becoming more and more extreme. The trends have been going on for too long to explain away as simply cyclical. The meterologists I know have all changed to driving smaller cars, using public transport, recycling and being energy conscious.

And if the extreme weather events of recent years continue (this year, with El Nino is expected to be particularly bad), it is the poor, who don’t have contents insurance, or cars to drive them to safety, who will suffer more. God has harsh words for those who cause suffering to the poor.

I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but I do think Christians who don’t behave in an environmentally responsible way are not just guilty of a sin of ommission. They are CHOOSING to pollute the earth God gave us, knowing full well that it is hurting the lives of their brothers and sisters across the globe.

I also think that the fact that a child dies every three seconds because of poverty is a fact that sometimes seems to escape pro-life campaigners. If I’m pro-life (which I am), I’ve a responsibility to seek to protect ALL life, not just the unborn. So let’s campaign for fairer and freer trade. I got into trouble once for saying that if you drink non-fairtrade coffee at the pro-life meeting, and print your materials on non-recycled paper, then your values aren’t consistent. I stand by that.

 

[WenckebachCath]

In my opinion, these are such completely different things you cannot compare them.

Abortion is a great moral wrong which not only is a grievious individual sin by those who participate in it, but it affects the moral fabric of the community at large in a very negative way. However, abortion is in no way a threat to the physical survival of humanity.

Global warming is, in fact, a result or evidence of collective greed and over-consumption, if the current scientic evidence is indeed correct. If left unchecked it has the potential to drastically threaten the very existence of humanity. As far as individual sin, I am not commiting a sin by driving my SUV excessively. Yet my actions, along with those of millions of other humans, has a negative impact on the physical enviornment of this planet.

Abortion is something that can eliminated by both changing the law and by changing individual choices. Eliminating over-consumption of fossil fuels to avert a worldwide catastrophe will probably require international co-operation by governments worldwide.

 

[Al_Masetti]

I had heard of the difference in views on global warming between Europe and the U.S. but this is the first time I’ve seen in it action. I had no idea there were so many deniers of the phenomenon.

12 years ago, when I started university, I was lectured by a senior European meterologist. He said ‘here’s the evidence for global warming’ and 30 minutes later said ‘this is why it might not be true’.

3 years later, the same lecturer approached the same class and said ‘I was wrong. This IS global warming’. I’ve worked alongside senior meterologists for years, and every one of them says global warming is a reality. I’ve known PhD students who’ve shown, in recent years, just what’s happening to icecaps and how storminess records have become chaotic in the last 10 years. What is more, the indicators are becoming more and more extreme. The trends have been going on for too long to explain away as simply cyclical. The meterologists I know have all changed to driving smaller cars, using public transport, recycling and being energy conscious.

And if the extreme weather events of recent years continue (this year, with El Nino is expected to be particularly bad), it is the poor, who don’t have contents insurance, or cars to drive them to safety, who will suffer more. God has harsh words for those who cause suffering to the poor.

I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but I do think Christians who don’t behave in an environmentally responsible way are not just guilty of a sin of ommission. They are CHOOSING to pollute the earth God gave us, knowing full well that it is hurting the lives of their brothers and sisters across the globe.

I also think that the fact that a child dies every three seconds because of poverty is a fact that sometimes seems to escape pro-life campaigners. If I’m pro-life (which I am), I’ve a responsibility to seek to protect ALL life, not just the unborn. So let’s campaign for fairer and freer trade. I got into trouble once for saying that if you drink non-fairtrade coffee at the pro-life meeting, and print your materials on non-recycled paper, then your values aren’t consistent. I stand by that.

In regard to scientific issues, computer models and consensus really have no place. Experts can say everything they want to about the lack of naturally-occurring organo-halogens, or the non-existence of diseases being caused by germs. But what is needed is evidence.

So, I would ask you to visit a thread where I posted a huge number of arguments against the theory of man-made (anthropogenic) global warming:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=129333

Start with thread #20 and then go to thread # 15 and read up to #19.

Even better, copy them onto a new word processing document on your own computer, splice them together, and then review them with a view toward further research on Google.

It’s distressing to me that there is a lack of actual evidence backing up the computer models.

On the radio news this morning, the news readers were in a state of hysteria. There is no reason for hysteria.

Just review the arguments; it will only take a few minutes to read through them.

Also visit www.sepp.org and read the TWTW newsletter.

 

[estesbob]

I was recently faced with this thought as I argued with my friend over why I think abortion is worse than the current situation we are in concerning global warming. For this very reason, she is justifying voting for a democrat whose platform will be to fight global warming. Could anybody help me with an arguement?

Thanks

Phil

Just the latest rationalization for supporting those who kill our children. The Church Emphatically states that no issue or combination of issues trumps abortion.

 

[estesbob]

Actually, I’ve read somewhere that global warming actually causes sunspots, not to mention tsunamis, and earthquakes, and…drum roll please…global cooling.

Perhaps global warming causes abortions too.

It worse than that-our callous disregard for the enviroment is causeing the ice caps on Mars to melt!

 

[ricmat]

1. I had heard of the difference in views on global warming between Europe and the U.S. but this is the first time I’ve seen in it action. I had no idea there were so many deniers of the phenomenon.
   …
2. I’ve known PhD students who’ve shown, in recent years, just what’s happening to icecaps and how storminess records have become chaotic in the last 10 years. What is more, the indicators are becoming more and more extreme. The trends have been going on for too long to explain away as simply cyclical.
   …
3. I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but I do think Christians who don’t behave in an environmentally responsible way are not just guilty of a sin of ommission. They are CHOOSING to pollute the earth God gave us, knowing full well that it is hurting the lives of their brothers and sisters across the globe.

I’ve added numbers to your paragraphs above so I can address each of them individually.

1. The data supporting global warming is tainted by political agendas. But for the sake of argument, let’s say that the data shows a clear trend towards warming. What is NOT clear is how much of the warming is due to mankind. To be honest, NOBODY knows what causes our weather to change. It changed a lot before mankind ever appeared on earth, so it would be difficult to pin this on mankind. As I asked earlier, what caused the 2 mile high glaciers to disappear 15000 years ago? That’s a LOT of global warming, and IT WASN’T MANKIND THAT CAUSED IT. And what caused the glaciers to appear in the first place. Please, tell me.
2. Weather has always been chaotic. It is the way weather works. We are seeing more and more “extreme” weather because we now have the capability of actually measuring it. The short term “cycle” may show warming. But we don’t have really accurate data going back more than a few hundred years. To claim that mankind is solely responsible for global warming is ludicrous, and arrogant to boot.

The recent panic over increasing numbers of hurricanes and hurricane strength is a good example - do you claim that we have accurate records of wind speed from hurricanes in the 1700’s? Or do we even know how many hurricanes occured at all in the 1700’s. There were no weather satellites or hurricane hunter airplanes to find them all or measure their intensities. So the answers are NO and NO. We have absolutely NO CLUE as to how many hurricanes occurred in the past, or what the intensities were.

1. Going back to the “horse and buggy” days, as one poster suggested would lead to much more misery and death than our current path. Energy use does put CO2 into the atmosphere, but energy is also used to create, amongst other things, fertilizer and medicines. And energy is used to get fertilizer and medicines from the point of manufacture to where they’re used. These are just 2 examples, but I hope you see the point.

Now, if you want to make an argument that “Yes, global warming is happening for natural reasons that we have absolutely no control over, with mankind perhaps contributing a very small percentage to it, and therefore unable to stop it” - then you could further argue that we have a responsibility to adapt to this warming such that the least harm (or most good) comes from it. That’s a reasonable argument, and I don’t disagree with it in general.

 

[Cygnus_X1]

I had heard of the difference in views on global warming between Europe and the U.S. but this is the first time I’ve seen in it action. I had no idea there were so many deniers of the phenomenon.

12 years ago, when I started university, I was lectured by a senior European meterologist. He said ‘here’s the evidence for global warming’ and 30 minutes later said ‘this is why it might not be true’.

3 years later, the same lecturer approached the same class and said ‘I was wrong. This IS global warming’. I’ve worked alongside senior meterologists for years, and every one of them says global warming is a reality. I’ve known PhD students who’ve shown, in recent years, just what’s happening to icecaps and how storminess records have become chaotic in the last 10 years. What is more, the indicators are becoming more and more extreme. The trends have been going on for too long to explain away as simply cyclical. The meterologists I know have all changed to driving smaller cars, using public transport, recycling and being energy conscious.

And if the extreme weather events of recent years continue (this year, with El Nino is expected to be particularly bad), it is the poor, who don’t have contents insurance, or cars to drive them to safety, who will suffer more. God has harsh words for those who cause suffering to the poor.

I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but I do think Christians who don’t behave in an environmentally responsible way are not just guilty of a sin of ommission. They are CHOOSING to pollute the earth God gave us, knowing full well that it is hurting the lives of their brothers and sisters across the globe.

I also think that the fact that a child dies every three seconds because of poverty is a fact that sometimes seems to escape pro-life campaigners. If I’m pro-life (which I am), I’ve a responsibility to seek to protect ALL life, not just the unborn. So let’s campaign for fairer and freer trade. I got into trouble once for saying that if you drink non-fairtrade coffee at the pro-life meeting, and print your materials on non-recycled paper, then your values aren’t consistent. I stand by that.

While statistics indicate there is a warming trend, the jury is very much out on whether this is a natural cycle or a man-made phenomenon. Part of the problem is that we have no sense of history; how can we possibly know whether last year was The Hottest Year Ever? Who was around in 5822 BC to measure otherwise? God asked Job that sort of question in Job 38:4. Some people’s sense of history ended with last night’s newscast.

On PBS last night, there was a show on a volcano that may erupt in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. It puts out more CO2 emissions that the world’s automobiles in a year. And those CO2 emissions could kill 2 million people if they seep up suddenly before an eruption. How does that factor into global warming? There have been volcanoes since creation.

I think the global warming hysteria is just that, hysteria ginned up by people who subsist via grant funding (see also: embryonic stem cell research).

I respectfully disagree with your other points:

Those children that you cite aren’t dying of poverty. They’re dying of inept, socialist, kleptocratic governments that must be overthrown (Mugabe’s Zimbabwe and the chaos in the Sudan, for two). All they know or care about is keeping themselves in power. What sort of trade do they have, fair or otherwise?

Who gets to decide what is and is not “environmentally responsible?” Do you not realize how much money goes into designations like this? Is “environmental responsibility” nothing more than a transfer of wealth?

“God has harsh words for those who harm the poor”? Are you saying that if I drive an SUV, I harm the poor? That makes about as much sense as the bumper stickers I saw about 25 years ago: “When you buy a foreign car, 10 Americans lose their jobs.” Never knew I had so much impact on this planet; maybe God should come see me for advice. And what difference does it make if a few scared meteorologists drive tiny cars? Not all meteorologists feel that way:

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/07.01.25.FoulWeather-X.gif

The bottom line is this: All of this is moot if we slaughter children first and never give them a chance at life to begin with, so to me that’s most important. The rest is debatable.

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

I don’t think it’s a matter of either/or, but I do think Christians who don’t behave in an environmentally responsible way are not just guilty of a sin of ommission. They are CHOOSING to pollute the earth God gave us, knowing full well that it is hurting the lives of their brothers and sisters across the globe.

I also think that the fact that a child dies every three seconds because of poverty is a fact that sometimes seems to escape pro-life campaigners. If I’m pro-life (which I am), I’ve a responsibility to seek to protect ALL life, not just the unborn. So let’s campaign for fairer and freer trade. I got into trouble once for saying that if you drink non-fairtrade coffee at the pro-life meeting, and print your materials on non-recycled paper, then your values aren’t consistent. I stand by that.

I’m with you Eddy! Even if it were proven without a DOUBT that we have NOTHING to do with global warming - it does NOT excuse us from being environmentally conscience. I’d still recycle, compost, and do what I can. God made up stewards of the earth. How would anyone feel if they gave a house to a loved one and they just trashed it?

 

[Al_Masetti]

While statistics indicate there is a warming trend, the jury is very much out on whether this is a natural cycle or a man-made phenomenon. Part of the problem is that we have no sense of history; how can we possibly know whether last year was The Hottest Year Ever? Who was around in 5822 BC to measure otherwise? God asked Job that sort of question in Job 38:4. Some people’s sense of history ended with last night’s newscast.

On PBS last night, there was a show on a volcano that may erupt in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. It puts out more CO2 emissions that the world’s automobiles in a year. And those CO2 emissions could kill 2 million people if they seep up suddenly before an eruption. How does that factor into global warming? There have been volcanoes since creation.

I think the global warming hysteria is just that, hysteria ginned up by people who subsist via grant funding (see also: embryonic stem cell research).

I respectfully disagree with your other points:

Those children that you cite aren’t dying of poverty. They’re dying of inept, socialist, kleptocratic governments that must be overthrown (Mugabe’s Zimbabwe and the chaos in the Sudan, for two). All they know or care about is keeping themselves in power. What sort of trade do they have, fair or otherwise?

Who gets to decide what is and is not “environmentally responsible?” Do you not realize how much money goes into designations like this? Is “environmental responsibility” nothing more than a transfer of wealth?

“God has harsh words for those who harm the poor”? Are you saying that if I drive an SUV, I harm the poor? That makes about as much sense as the bumper stickers I saw about 25 years ago: “When you buy a foreign car, 10 Americans lose their jobs.” Never knew I had so much impact on this planet; maybe God should come see me for advice. And what difference does it make if a few scared meteorologists drive tiny cars? Not all meteorologists feel that way:

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/07.01.25.FoulWeather-X.gif

The bottom line is this: All of this is moot if we slaughter children first and never give them a chance at life to begin with, so to me that’s most important. The rest is debatable.

The operative word is “hysteria”.

Today we have “global warming hysteria”.

In the 1970’s, we had “DDT hysteria” which was created by Rachel Carson’s book, “Silent Spring”. Tens of millions of people died from malaria and other mosquito-borne illnesses.

AND now they have discovered that DDT can actually protect people from malaria … and that the problem with bird’s eggs was merely a lack of calcium in their diets.

Hysteria …

We could go on … maybe start a new thread listing all the forms and manifestations of hysteria.

 

[ricmat]

The operative word is “hysteria”.

Today we have “global warming hysteria”.

In the 1970’s, we had “DDT hysteria” which was created by Rachel Carson’s book, “Silent Spring”. Tens of millions of people died from malaria and other mosquito-borne illnesses.

AND now they have discovered that DDT can actually protect people from malaria … and that the problem with bird’s eggs was merely a lack of calcium in their diets.

Hysteria …

We could go on … maybe start a new thread listing all the forms and manifestations of hysteria.

The rage in the early 70’s was “The Limits to Growth”, a study by the “Club of Rome” - a number of internationally prominent scientists. I was in college at the time. Their premise was that overpopulation was going to cause a host of problems - shortages of raw materials, skyrocketing prices for food, medicine, and other essentials. We would be totally out of gasoline in a few years. We would all need oxygen masks because oxygen in the atmosphere would be gone.

I was brainwashed to the point of telling everyone that the car I bought in 1973 would be the last gasoline powered car I would ever buy, because none would be available when I was ready to buy the next one.

None of their hysterical predictions came true, in uninflated dollars, the costs of everything they were concerned with actually went down, not up, and things actually got better. But they did gain number of early adherents who to this day still need to solve their non-existent problem, and their primary method is abortion.

This should be a warning to us about fixing things when we don’t really understand the problem (or unintended consequences of our actions).

 

[Hastrman]

ricmat, you have hit the nail on the head. I wanted to say something earlier about that whole movement, but couldn’t find a way to lead into it. The “Population Bomb” (the book that inspired much of the movement) was written by an entomologist, who knew nothing about how mammal populations function, let alone human.

Maybe we should learn our lesson, and make sure we know what’s going on with the climate before we do something else that, since the UN is in charge of it, will probably (astonishingly) consist mostly of an excuse to oppress the poor.

 

[josephdavid]

I was recently faced with this thought as I argued with my friend over why I think abortion is worse than the current situation we are in concerning global warming. For this very reason, she is justifying voting for a democrat whose platform will be to fight global warming. Could anybody help me with an arguement?

Thanks

Phil

Both are important. Both affect the life of the unborn and lives of the already born.

We are given domain over God’s creations and that does not mean destroying it by our own selfish living.

 

[Eddy]

I guess I’ll choose to listen to my meterological expert friends first. This is not a new trend - it was an issue at least 15 years ago - I studied it at school.

And I think I personally need to be conscious that it’s always easier to look at the sin in others lives rather than my own. It’s easier to think badly of the sin we’re never ourselves likely to commit, and consider our own less important. I’ve had to think long and hard about what my lifestyle costs the world, and I’m having to work, day on day, at addressing that sin in my life.

Being energy conscious doesn’t cost more money. It costs me, and the environment, a lot less. And I get to meet my neighbours on the bus!

As for the comment that children don’t die of poverty. I’m sorry, but that level of ignorance of global trade patterns doesn’t even merit a response. Go read the work of Trocaire, Concern, Christian Aid, MCC (I’m sure there are U.S. equivalents, but I don’t know their names). And failing that, go and live in Tanzania for 10 years. Of course there are corrupt governments, but when it comes to trading patterns, they aren’t limited to the developing world.

 

[estesbob]

As for the comment that children don’t die of poverty. I’m sorry, but that level of ignorance of global trade patterns doesn’t even merit a response. Go read the work of Trocaire, Concern, Christian Aid, MCC (I’m sure there are U.S. equivalents, but I don’t know their names). And failing that, go and live in Tanzania for 10 years. Of course there are corrupt governments, but when it comes to trading patterns, they aren’t limited to the developing world.

What does children dying in poverty have to do with abortion?

 

[ribozyme]

Any belief system that states that one human is “better” than another human is a lot more dangerous to humanity than abortion. However, abortion can be a manifestation of the that too, as one can use abortion for eugenics.