Is Pope Francis right on climate change?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ferdgoodfellow
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ferdgoodfellow said:
That “climate change is real” is not disputed. No one on the skeptical side believes that climate is static. Nor is there any real dispute whether mankind’s activities affect the climate. The issues are 1) whether human CO2 emissions are causing dangerous global warming, and 2) whether we should adopt policies to drastically cut our CO2 emissions by means X, Y and Z.

I think the scientific consensus on No. 1 (the global warming hypothesis) is vastly overstated by the cheerleaders for the global warming movement and by the climate science establishment. That the Holy Father is naive in trusting the so-called consensus can be demonstrated by even a cursory examination of the history of climate science.
Click to expand...
Well there’s a start on the skeptical side. I agree the scientific consensus is very overstated, but that’s what happens in science once something becomes more real with evidence there is a huge consensus on the matter.

I’m sure The Holy Father (a former chemical technician) and his Pontifical Academy of Science which includes many Nobel prize winners along with the Jesuit run observatory have a much better understanding about climate change than Rick Santorum or any other major GOP politician that denies climate change while also claiming to not be scientists.
 
ferdgoodfellow said:
Hi Karen,
The consensus put forth by the climate science establishment is that the worst effects are far off into the future. So there is a respectable point view–most articulately put forth by Bjorn Lomborg–that we should allocate scarce resources to mitigating present problems rather than to prevention of problems that might not materialize. For example, we know that hundreds of millions of people die from starvation and lack of potable water now. Shouldn’t we try and do something about that and certainly save lives now rather than, say, on costly windmills which may not do any good down the road.

ferd
Click to expand...
Hi Ferd,
We all hear every year about horrible storms every year. This year there was a deadly Tornado in my diocese and every year we hear of deaths in Illinois from Tornadoes. Global warming is affecting our climate and we do need to take steps to slow down it’s effects. I’m sure we have all heard of what we can do to slow down climate change. Here’s a list published by the US EPA on what we can do and I consider this to be the short list.

epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/

This is something that we all can do and we all must do if there is any hope to make a change. No longer should we think of our future as a place where there are robots and futuristic things but we must think in terms of how we can have sustainable living in a way that doesn’t affect the health of our future generations. We’ve done so much damage since the industrial age began now we need to get smart about it with respect to our environment.

In my town we’re already receiving a portion of our power from wind energy. As science advances that portion may rise and to areas that aren’t receiving any wind energy. Wind is free and there isn’t the problem of what to do with tons of nuclear waste in our future. We need to act in this country and in third world countries. As you said they are starving now at a rapid rate. Our Church is a global Church and is concerned for the least of these which is why the Pope is making a plea for the poor. If we don’t do something to teach and help begin sustainable living to them and us, we’re only putting off the problem. Golly I sound as if I’m writing a essay on this but I am passionate about it, We all need to cooperate in this and the Pope is doing the right thing in bringing this to the attention of the world. I am so happy he is! I’ve received his book (the encyclical) ordered through the USCCB and read some of it and it’s quite good! Kudos to the Holy Father!! Praise be to God!
 
Karen107 said:
Because the rainforests are disappearing and not replenished and places that used to be sustainable areas for animals and humans have now become dry dustbowls with little replenishment of fresh water and lack of vegetation. And what little supplies of water that is available is often toxic from human or animal waste or chemicals. The poor don’t have access to modern filtration systems so they need help and education on how to obtain clean water sent out to them at a reasonable cost or there are heavy impacts on the city or many dead, children being the most vulnerable.
Click to expand...
rainforests are not disappearing because of climate change. they are being destroyed by development. it seems like a lot of money spent on glibal warming could have gone to help create clean water resources for those who don’t have it and to create better sanitation.
 
7_Sorrows said:
rainforests are not disappearing because of climate change. they are being destroyed by development. it seems like a lot of money spent on glibal warming could have gone to help create clean water resources for those who don’t have it and to create better sanitation.
Click to expand...
Hi Sorrows. The problem is that deforestation and development are contributing to climate change and climate change causes drought conditions due to increase temperature and lack of rain. So the problem is compounded and causing rapid change in terrain. Remember that trees soak up CO2 we breathe and create and emit oxygen. Well with no trees the CO2 is not being soaked up so it remains in the atmosphere contributing to greenhouse gas effect with increased hot and dry conditions.

climateandweather.net/global-warming/deforestation.html

From the link: Deforestation is an important factor in global climate change. Climate change is because of a build up of carbon dioxide in out atmosphere and if we carry on cutting down the main tool we have to diminish this CO2 build up, we can expect the climate of our planet to change dramatically over the next decades.

It is estimated that more than 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide are released to the atmosphere due to deforestation, mainly the cutting and burning of forests, every year.
,

.We are seeing the same thing occurring in California. No rain, increased temps, crops are affected and a choice has to be made, water for people or water for plants?. The warmer drier climate caused by climate change prohibits regrowth of forests, agriculture and waterways. That’s whats causing the dry arid land unfit for people to live. 🤷
 
Bradski said:
Read the question again. I answered in the affirmative. It can’t be that difficult to follow.

If you’re looking for a scientific treatise on why he is right, then use the browser of your choice and spend some of your bandwith on checking it out for yourself. And please don’t think we’ll be spending the next half a dozen posts seeing who has the best links to the best information supporting whichever position one holds. I have better things to do with my time.
Click to expand...
Then why are you here then?
 
7_Sorrows said:
I definitely believe in stewardship of God’s planet, but I don’t believe global warming is what a lot of people are making it out to be.
Click to expand...
You’re going to be sorely disappointed with CAF then when it comes to global warming. If there’s a consensus amongst the social scientists that successful child-rearing was not dependent on a two person household between the opposite sex they’d probably would support it.

As with Pope Francis and his global warming concern: I don’t agree. I believe in global warming - that it’s happening - but I don’t believe it’s due to anthropological agency.
 
Mike_Dye said:

I am posting what I wrote on another thread that explains my thoughts on this issue…​

OK so this…I have had an interest in archeology since I found my first arrowhead as a kid. Studying the peopling of the Americas one finds out about the “Clovis People”, once thought to be the first humans to spread across the country approximately 10,000-15,000 years ago. At that time the earth was in an Ice age with a ice sheet covering what is now the northern section of the United States. At that time the Clovis people hunted mega-fauna, animals that for the most part are now extinct. Another thing happened at this time. The earth started to warm and the ice started to recede. The large animals also started to disappear, if this was due to hunting from the new human predators or from the changing climate is still a question.
So my question is this…do you suppose the earths warming was due to all the thousands (perhaps hundred of thousands), of campfires from the Clovis people or due to something else? Seriously, the earths climate has been changing long before humans had any effect.
Click to expand...
Hi Mike, you’ve raised a good question but my answer is no , I don’t believe that the glacier melt of the ice age was due to man made causes and here are differences in the two warming trends. We don’t know for sure why the glacier melt happened because we lack scientific data but the melting of the glaciers was probably due to natural causes as this article suggests.

scientificamerican.com/article/what-thawed-the-last-ice-age/

For example, a slight tip of the earth which allowed for an increase in the suns warmth or a rise of CO2 gases from the oceans. However, there was time for adaptation to happen over the thousands of years it took for the glaciers to melt. The difference now is: 1) that we do know from a scientific standpoint that today’s climate change is being caused by man because it can and has been measured and analyzed by scientific methods. 2) It is changing our world at an unnatural highly accelerated rate with little time for adaption, 3) There are more people living today by the billions and many of them are living on the oceans who will be affected as the glaciers melt and the oceans continue to rise. For example, the map of the coastline of Louisiana has changed so dramatically that the state is no longer being considered the shape of a boot, and just think of super storm Sandy and how it came into NYC. 4) Additionally, people aren’t relying on the land for a living as they had anymore, they’re relying on other people for jobs or whatever they need to survive… And the world is not always kind in lending a helping hand to people who are displaced or in need.
 
adawgj said:
Well there’s a start on the skeptical side. I agree the scientific consensus is very overstated, but that’s what happens in science once something becomes more real with evidence there is a huge consensus on the matter.
Click to expand...
For me, the overstated consensus is one big red flag. It means that the safeguards that we always hope are in play in the scientific process are broken. It means the field of climate science has become highly politicized. If the people in the field had any integrity they would call out the social scientists and journalists who misrepresent them. But they don’t. On its face, the Cook et al study (the infamous 97% paper) is ridiculous. How can there be 97% consensus in an immature discipline such as climate science?

Along with Santorum, I am not a scientist either, but that doesn’t mean I can’t come to rational conclusions about the general state of the science. I might not be able to tell whether Michael Mann (of Hockey Stick infamy) did his principal components analysis correctly, but I do know that two independent panels concluded he messed up big time.

For all of us who aren’t climate scientists, the big issue is trust. Should we (and the Holy Father) trust the climate science establishment?
 
Karen107 said:
Hi Ferd,
We all hear every year about horrible storms every year. …
Click to expand...
Hi Karen,

Yes, every year there are horrible storms somewhere. That has always been true. The issue is whether they are becoming more frequent and severe. The evidence shows otherwise.

The fact that ordinary weather gets so sensationalized and blamed on climate change ought to give us pause. Who is whipping up this hysteria and why?
Our Church is a global Church and is concerned for the least of these which is why the Pope is making a plea for the poor.
Click to expand...
The Holy Father is genuinely concerned for the poor. That is why his embrace of the climate change activism is so dismaying. If the climate change agenda is fully implemented fossil fuel production will be drastically reduced. This will cause the costs of food production to skyrocket. I am not just talking about diesel and gasoline. Chemical fertilizer, which is closely related to fossil fuel production (esp. natural gas), will also go up. The net result is that world food supply will go down.

Energy policies driven by climate change concerns are also harming the world food supply and environment now. In the US we put over 40% of our corn crop into our gas tanks as ethanol. In years of scarcity, such as 1997 when commodity prices went through the roof, people will starve. And much of the deforestation that is occurring in Asia so they can produce palm oil is happening because of the climate change driven mania for “sustainable energy.”

The World Bank and other agencies actively prevent coal development in Africa, and thus deprive poor Africans of cheap electricity.

Rich Europeans buy land in 3rd world countries, displacing the natives in the process, so they can claim their carbon credits.

Alas, the baneful effects of climate change policies are upon us now and fall most heavily on the poor.
 
ferdgoodfellow said:
For me, the overstated consensus is one big red flag. It means that the safeguards that we always hope are in play in the scientific process are broken. It means the field of climate science has become highly politicized. If the people in the field had any integrity they would call out the social scientists and journalists who misrepresent them. But they don’t. On its face, the Cook et al study (the infamous 97% paper) is ridiculous. How can there be 97% consensus in an immature discipline such as climate science?

Along with Santorum, I am not a scientist either, but that doesn’t mean I can’t come to rational conclusions about the general state of the science. I might not be able to tell whether Michael Mann (of Hockey Stick infamy) did his principal components analysis correctly, but I do know that two independent panels concluded he messed up big time.

For all of us who aren’t climate scientists, the big issue is trust. Should we (and the Holy Father) trust the climate science establishment?
Click to expand...
No. I don’t think so. I don’t know if it is money and politics behind their
agenda or what it is. But I don’t trust the alarmists.
 
ferdgoodfellow said:
Hi Karen,

Yes, every year there are horrible storms somewhere. That has always been true. The issue is whether they are becoming more frequent and severe. The evidence shows otherwise.

The fact that ordinary weather gets so sensationalized and blamed on climate change ought to give us pause. Who is whipping up this hysteria and why?

The Holy Father is genuinely concerned for the poor. That is why his embrace of the climate change activism is so dismaying. If the climate change agenda is fully implemented fossil fuel production will be drastically reduced. This will cause the costs of food production to skyrocket. I am not just talking about diesel and gasoline. Chemical fertilizer, which is closely related to fossil fuel production (esp. natural gas), will also go up. The net result is that world food supply will go down.

Energy policies driven by climate change concerns are also harming the world food supply and environment now. In the US we put over 40% of our corn crop into our gas tanks as ethanol. In years of scarcity, such as 1997 when commodity prices went through the roof, people will starve. And much of the deforestation that is occurring in Asia so they can produce palm oil is happening because of the climate change driven mania for “sustainable energy.”

The World Bank and other agencies actively prevent coal development in Africa, and thus deprive poor Africans of cheap electricity.

Rich Europeans buy land in 3rd world countries, displacing the natives in the process, so they can claim their carbon credits.

Alas, the baneful effects of climate change policies are upon us now and fall most heavily on the poor.
Click to expand...
👍 Well said! I agree.
 
If Climate Change is a matter of faith and morals, then I guess the next time I cook hamburgers on my backyard grill I’d better get myself to confession lest I suffer eternal damnation. :rolleyes:
 
Lost_Sheep said:
If Climate Change is a matter of faith and morals, then I guess the next time I cook hamburgers on my backyard grill I’d better get myself to confession lest I suffer eternal damnation. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I have Asked repeatedly in these forums of those who are breathlessly proclaiming Catholics are required to believe in global warming if a Catholic doesn’t believe is an mortal or a venial sin.? I have yet to get an answer
 
estesbob said:
I have Asked repeatedly in these forums of those who are breathlessly proclaiming Catholics are required to believe in global warming if a Catholic doesn’t believe is an mortal or a venial sin.? I have yet to get an answer
Click to expand...
I hope we are not required to believe in global warming. When you get an answer, please let me know! 😉
 
Hi 7 Sorrows, Estesbob and Lost Sheep:

Re: is being a climate heretic/grilling burgers a sin?

I think the Holy Father has made it clear that his views on climate science are not binding. So no worries on that score!
 
ferdgoodfellow said:
Hi 7 Sorrows, Estesbob and Lost Sheep:

Re: is being a climate heretic/grilling burgers a sin?

I think the Holy Father has made it clear that his views on climate science are not binding. So no worries on that score!
Click to expand...
Ok. I will breathe a sigh of relief then. Thanks! 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top