Is Pope Francis right on climate change?

[sps49]

Feel free to try and discredit me but I don’t portray myself to know it all, though I do believe I have a great deal of common sense and I’m not unintelligent.

Please.

 

[Karen107]

As I mentioned before, when you consider the definition of “overwhelming” it is a bit contradictory that AGW requires consensus messaging. Had it been “overwhelming,” there would have been essentially no disagreement due to, well, the “overwhelming” nature of it. I have stated before, the attribution argument is still very much in play, so we really do not know with any certainty what parts natural variation and the effects of man are on the climate. There are of course claims that man is negatively affecting the climate, but those claims are uncertain at best, and not too plausible.

.

I disagree with that. There is overwhelming data showing that man’s actions have caused an environmental impact which have brought a consensus between scientists. The fact that you are not part of the consensus doesn’t make them wrong or you right, it makes you have an opinion that doesn’t agree with most.

 

[sps49]

Well I do believe that there is a big self interest factor in convincing the public saying there isn’t a big problem when there is. I see the same arguments (which I do not submit to) that are coming from the far right and I know there are Catholics who are far right who never think that anyone can agree with something that our present leftist government is saying. Now I’ve listened to Fox TV and know that they are far right/conservative and I don’t agree with many things they say. I’ve heard the arguments on here being repeated. For example which I have heard here: That we are motivated into our beliefs in order to do something for the animals which are becoming extinct. This is not about saving the animals, this is about saving us, That’s not saying I’m leftist, but I do believe that’s why people are saying those who believe in MMGW are motivated by politics, because THEY are motivated by politics and the self interest groups have influenced them in some way. This country has become so divided that the truth is being lost. I’m motivated by neither politics or big business. I am motivated by the truth.

You are confusing me for someone else you are in dialog with. Again, the only way that argument works (evil big business, greed, money, power, etc.) is if catastrophic AGW is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, which it has not.

 

[sps49]

So are you saying fracking isn’t a dangerous practice? What do you base your premise on?

Here’s another article on it.

cleanwateraction.org/page/fracking-dangers

We have an beautiful nature area called Starved Rock that has some of the most unique rock formations which is very close to an area where they’ve been fracking the soil and leaving huge craters. This is not far from Chicago so it’s a place where people go to get away from the rat race and be with nature. The company who is doing this fracking has bought up farmlands and there are only a few houses left sort of like an island so they have to move too. What is the price for all this? We don’t have very many places like this in Illinois and what they are doing will forever scar the little remaining places we have making them unfit for people to live.

Read this article.

articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-06-08/business/ct-sand-mine-fight-0608-biz-20140608_1_sand-mine-lasalle-county-starved-rock-state-park

I am saying that the evidence so far indicates that the likelihood that it is not as bad as your activist websites claim is reasonable.

 

[Karen107]

Since I have not claimed to be prescient, omnipotent or otherwise all-knowing, I would say that the reasonable answer is that I am not at this time convinced. Your conclusion is not what I would characterize it to be. Since I am not at this time convinced, there is an opening where at some time in the future when the evidence is clear, the uncertainties are lower, the science is objective and repeatable vs subjective and speculative, I could see a case where the evidence is convincing. But that has nothing to do with the scientists being “right,” since I’ve already explained to you that it doesn’t work this way.

Education doesn’t necessarily equate into wisdom or intelligence… I believe intelligence is something native to a person… A person can be naturally bright and not ever have the opportunity to get an advance degree but still can do wonders in their career choices and life.

 

[Karen107]

You are confusing me for someone else you are in dialog with. Again, the only way that argument works (evil big business, greed, money, power, etc.) is if catastrophic AGW is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, which it has not.

So you take the retroactive approach instead of the proactive approach?. Listen, it doesn’t hurt to take these steps anyway to go towards sustainable living and being more ‘one with the earth’…I believe that’s what God would smile upon. But it does mean sacrificing some of our comforts for a new more natural way of living.

 

[Ender]

I do believe that’s why people are saying those who believe in MMGW are motivated by politics, because THEY are motivated by politics and the self interest groups have influenced them in some way. This country has become so divided that the truth is being lost. I’m motivated by neither politics or big business. I am motivated by the truth.

If you are motivated solely by the truth then recognize that any discussion of what motivates another person is utterly irrelevant. The worst thing about questioning someone else’s motivation is not that it is uncharitable and a violation of the prohibition against rash judgment, but that it is so completely meaningless.

Statements about global warming are either accurate or inaccurate, and the reasons people make those statements have no effect whatever on their validity. Even if you could prove that opponents of AGW are all selfish, greedy, swine who care about nothing but themselves, it would not change in the least the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of their claims about AGW.

If you are concerned about the truth then don’t ever discuss motivation.

Ende

 

[sps49]

I disagree with that. There is overwhelming data showing that man’s actions have caused an environmental impact which have brought a consensus between scientists. The fact that you are not part of the consensus doesn’t make them wrong or you right, it makes you have an opinion that doesn’t agree with most.

You are free to disagree, but then I return to the meaning of the word “overwhelming.” If it were overwhelming, then there would be no reasonable disagreement, and yet there is. There is good evidence that CO2 has increased, but not that it is causing damage to the climate. The claims are based on model projections which are not repeatable, and require subjective interpretation. I await a more objective analysis, which in time will occur, but it has not yet done so.

 

[sps49]

Education doesn’t necessarily equate into wisdom or intelligence… I believe intelligence is something native to a person… A person can be naturally bright and not ever have the opportunity to get an advance degree but still can do wonders in their career choices and life.

Did I say it did? No? Ok then.

 

[Karen107]

Saying that the technology/instrumentation is better is not the same thing as saying the science is “right” about it. The planetary climate system is a difficult, if not impossible at this time, physical system to simulate. Advancements have been made, but the learning curve is steep with problems like this, where almost no closed form analytical solutions exist. Much work still needs to be done. It is not a poor reflection on science that it has not yet “solved” this, just that it is a difficult problem. It is a poor reflection on science when unsubstantiated claims are made for political purposes.

Your expectations of what constitutes “stagnancy” may need revision; some problems take a very long time, and progress may seem stagnant, but it is always incremental. Your characterization of my comment to mean “stagnant” are unfounded and reactionary.

Actually I believe I have more confidence in our climate scientists than you do. I also believe that people are largely discrediting the scientists around the globe as not knowing anything when in fact their science has grown much faster than ours. They focus greatly on educating their children because that’s how they will improve their future. We’re actually behind the eight ball when we think about that. It’s becoming very difficult to send a kid through college here when in Europe and in the east they’re all about education. It’s a no brainer for them.

 

[sps49]

So you take the retroactive approach instead of the proactive approach?. Listen, it doesn’t hurt to take these steps anyway to go towards sustainable living and being more ‘one with the earth’…I believe that’s what God would smile upon. But it does mean sacrificing some of our comforts for a new more natural way of living.

Ahh, it always ends with “it’s a good idea anyway.” Feel free to live in a manner that suits your proclivities, but don’t assume that it address the climate change question.

 

[sps49]

Actually I believe I have more confidence in our climate scientists than you do. I also believe that people are largely discrediting the scientists around the globe as not knowing anything when in fact their science has grown much faster than ours. They focus greatly on educating their children because that’s how they will improve their future. We’re actually behind the eight ball when we think about that. It’s becoming very difficult to send a kid through college here when in Europe and in the east they’re all about education. It’s a no brainer for them.

You again mis characterize my statement to fit your dualism narrative. It has nothing to do with my “confidence” with scientists, climate or otherwise. The question is about climate science, not education, or where the scientists live. The answers come when they come, without regard for cheer-leading.

 

[Karen107]

Did I say it did? No? Ok then.

Yes. I was talking about intelligence, to which you talked about my education.

I see you are still employing dualism to reinforce your belief argument. My disagreeing with your beliefs does not say you are uneducated, it says I disagree with you. That is a reasonable approach, as opposed to my saying you are wrong and uneducated, which would be an unreasonable approach. In truth, the only person who can effectively say anything about your education is yourself, because only you have the ability to make a change in it, should you find a reason to.

A person doesn’t have to equate intelligence with education. I will say something a bit more about this. I believe a gift of the Holy Spirit is wisdom and knowledge, courage, reverence, counsel, understanding and awe. To see things as God sees things. And I do believe I often see things as God sees things and He wouldn’t like to see what we’ve done to His creation. To not act on this will be the destruction of our physical world as the sin of man caused the destruction of our spiritual world on earth. I believe Our Pope has these same gifts which has caused Him to speak out on climate change in order to secure our world and help the poor on it who are the first ones to be affected by climate change.

 

[sps49]

Yes. I was talking about intelligence, to which you talked about my education.

Do you remember what I said?

A person doesn’t have to equate intelligence with education. I will say something a bit more about this. I believe a gift of the Holy Spirit is wisdom and knowledge, courage, reverence, counsel, understanding and awe. To see things as God sees things. And I do believe I often see things as God sees things and He wouldn’t like to see what we’ve done to His creation. To not act on this will be the destruction of our physical world as the sin of man caused the destruction of our spiritual world on earth. I believe Our Pope has these same gifts which has caused Him to speak out on climate change in order to secure our world and help the poor on it who are the first ones to be affected by climate change.

Since you are bringing in personal revelation, which none of the rest of us are required to believe, I’ll share mine with you. I believe that the Holy Spirit has given me the gifts I have to discern matters in the physical sciences and engineering. These gifts tell me a different story than your gifts tell you; I wonder what that means?

 

[Karen107]

I

If you are concerned about the truth then don’t ever discuss motivation.

Ende

I agree! So why are the extensive findings being discounted from the majority of scientists including the UN scientists (who are representatives of many scientists in many fields of science) ?

 

[Karen107]

Do you remember what I said?

Since you are bringing in personal revelation, which none of the rest of us are required to believe, I’ll share mine with you. I believe that the Holy Spirit has given me the gifts I have to discern matters in the physical sciences and engineering. These gifts tell me a different story than your gifts tell you; I wonder what that means?

Couldn’t it be possible that doubt is getting in the way of doing the right thing at the right time? I remember back in the 70s watching a commercial where a native american was standing amidst a area of litter and had a tear came from his eye… I think we can learn something from the natives who lived in a more self sustainable way not leaving footprints on the land for later generations to deal with. I believe that’s the way God intended us to live. Have you heard the expression cleanliness is next to godliness? I believe that’s true! And I agree with the Pope that we’ve made the earth a pile of filth. I also believe the time to act was yesterday and people are holding out until all their doubts are gone which may be too late. So how long will it be before people act on this? I say the doubters won’t even see the change in their lifetime so much, it will be their children who do.

 

[sps49]

Couldn’t it be possible that doubt is getting in the way of doing the right thing at the right time? I remember back in the 70s watching a commercial where a native american was standing amidst a area of litter and had a tear came from his eye… I think we can learn something from the natives who lived in a more self sustainable way not leaving footprints on the land for later generations to deal with. I believe that’s the way God intended us to live. Have you heard the expression cleanliness is next to godliness? I believe that’s true! And I agree with the Pope that we’ve made the earth a pile of filth. I also believe the time to act was yesterday and people are holding out until all their doubts are gone which may be too late. So how long will it be before people act on this? I say the doubters won’t even see the change in their lifetime so much, it will be their children who do.

Informed doubt is part of the process, every process. It is the reason that there are design reviews for experiment and apparatus, peer review, and why experiments are recreated, even though some regard it unnecessary. Doubt is the center that science orbits.

That actor was Espera Oscar de Corti, and he is not a native american. Although he did perform a service to native americans via his film career.

The earth is most certainly not a pile of filth, although Pope Francis’ comments to the contrary have been noted. The best action is informed action, especially when modifications to the primary energy system we humans use are being considered. There is not sufficient evidence to convince me that radical change is necessary to save the climate, which seems to be doing well. The science will continue.

 

[lynnvinc]

Couldn’t it be possible that doubt is getting in the way of doing the right thing at the right time? I remember back in the 70s watching a commercial where a native american was standing amidst a area of litter and had a tear came from his eye… I think we can learn something from the natives who lived in a more self sustainable way not leaving footprints on the land for later generations to deal with. I believe that’s the way God intended us to live. Have you heard the expression cleanliness is next to godliness? I believe that’s true! And I agree with the Pope that we’ve made the earth a pile of filth. I also believe the time to act was yesterday and people are holding out until all their doubts are gone which may be too late. So how long will it be before people act on this? I say the doubters won’t even see the change in their lifetime so much, it will be their children who do.

When the Pope spoke of filth piles, here are some of the images that came to my mind, from our profligate use of fossil fuels:

Typhoon Haiyan:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Canadian tar sands, before and after


Wild fires
http://i.usatoday.net/weather/_photos/2007/10/23/wildfire-topper.jpg

Superstorm Sandy


And many more such images

 

[Ender]

I agree! So why are the extensive findings being discounted from the majority of scientists including the UN scientists (who are representatives of many scientists in many fields of science)?

The claims that are disputed are those that don’t stand up well to scrutiny, and the number of those is legion. Start with the most significant assertions about the coming apocalyptic meltdown of the Earth. The models all predicted significantly more warming than we have actually seen and no scientist has a convincing explanation for the hiatus in warming. That is, even the scientists in whom you have so much confidence cannot explain what is happening, and why what they predicted is not happening. The fact of the matter is that the science is nowhere nearly as settled as you believe it to be.

One other issue that should raise eyebrows is this: if the facts so overwhelmingly support AGW, then why have some of the major players on the AGW side found it necessary (to say nothing of appropriate) to take such deceptive measures to get that message out? The whole business of the leaked East Anglia emails shows just how venal some of their actions were.

Ender

 

[Ender]

Couldn’t it be possible that doubt is getting in the way of doing the right thing at the right time? I remember back in the 70s watching a commercial where a native american was standing amidst a area of litter and had a tear came from his eye.

You are switching topics. The issue here is climate change, not conservation, recycling, or waste. We should certainly take reasonable actions to reduce our negative impacts, and a great deal has already been done in this country to address those particular concerns. But AGW is a completely different animal, and what is being recommended to “mitigate” our CO2 emissions will devastate any economy that tries it (see: Germany, Spain) and will have virtually no effect. If there is a proposal that has a worse return on investment (hugely expensive, no useful benefit) I have yet to see it.

Ender