Lets see Rome and Copenhagen comment on this one

[sidbrown]

If you are asking my opinion I say no.

It probably will involve behavioral changes for most of us.

In other words, if the problem is littering (for example), the solution is not to get rid of people, the solution is to stop littering. Excessive CO2 emissions are basically litter.

We have seen this idea of population control before. It is nothing new. Usually it is coupled with hate in some way, like when foreign families move into the area, it’s usually “there are too many of them”.

I think that the people who advocate population control are generally manifesting a type of selfishness. Sure, they seem enlightened, they know all about ozone layers, migratory birds, nutrition and wellness. And they know that if we share this planet with billions of additional people there will be scarcity and (God forbid!) sacrifice. So they want the rest of the world to stop making babies. After all, they have to put junior through med school and make payments on the new SUV.

If we as a community are battling against resource scarcity and climate degradation, it’s easy to think someone else needs to take it on the chin. In fact, we all do, the hole isn’t only on your side of the boat, no matter where the hole is, we all have to bail.

What you say is true.
In my comment, I was only asking the question as to whether or not the skeptics or the advocates of global warming could have an hidden agenda. My guess is that there are hidden agendas on both sides, but that this does not impact on the undeniable scientific fact of global warming.

 

[spn82756]

What you say is true.
In my comment, I was only asking the question as to whether or not the skeptics or the advocates of global warming could have an hidden agenda. My guess is that there are hidden agendas on both sides, but that this does not impact on the undeniable scientific fact of global warming.

According to sidbrown…not most scientists.

 

[Hesychios]

… I was only asking the question as to whether or not the skeptics or the advocates of global warming could have an hidden agenda…

I think the only way to determine that is to look for a money trail. “Follow the money”.

If those who are arguing that climate change is a reality we need to see who can materially benefit by such a thing. Scaremongering does work, we know. If a people can be animated about a perceived threat you can sell them something.

Whip up a frenzy about an “enemy at the gates” and you can sell weapons. Scare people about a rampaging disease and you can sell medicines and vaccines.

Is there a difference between industry “rising to the occasion” and “profiteering”? It would be interesting to see the gainers and the losers if global climate change is true.

I happen to reside in China for the moment, and this place has some very interesting climate challenges of it’s own. North China has been drying out for thousands of years, to the point that the north China plain (the “cradle” of Chinese civilization) is no longer the lush garden it once was and may become a desert.

This country has initiated a massive water diversion project, which will move enormous quantities many kilometers to the north. The cost is estimated at $62 billion USD and will take forty years to complete. Since this is public money, they are not making this commitment lightly, they are going ahead with it now because they see the trend and know they will need it. The glaciers in Tibet are disappearing and they have to plan to rely on rainwater from the south.

They cannot count on rainfall in the south to increase, or even to remain constant. Right now they can only assume that the whole nation will share whatever is actually available in 2050AD.

This nation will also, as a separate issue, have to face the relocation of perhaps as many as 100 million people if the sea does actually rise the feared 7 meters or more. It would be quite a calamity, and they are taking this threat seriously.

Will people profit from this disaster? Undoubtedly there will be contractors who stand to make a good buck if the problems are not averted, but the governments’ efforts are directed toward avoiding spending this money as much as possible.

As far as global climate change is concerned, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

 

[sidbrown]

I happen to reside in China for the moment, and this place has some very interesting climate challenges of it’s own. .

That is interesting by itself, although perhaps it is off topic. Do you have a blog or a thread where you relate some of your experiences in China, whether they have to do with climate change or not? Have you learned the Mandarin language?
xiexie
zaijian.

 

[Hesychios]

That is interesting by itself, although perhaps it is off topic. Do you have a blog or a thread where you relate some of your experiences in China, whether they have to do with climate change or not? Have you learned the Mandarin language?
xiexie
zaijian.

My language skills are still rather rudimentary, and most sites like Facebook and such are blocked. I cannot even get Youtube.

So I had considered doing something, but for the present no.

 

[latin_rite]

THERE IS NO EVIROMENT PROBLEM.

The world has never been in better shape.

I’m sorry… but that made me laugh…You can’t be serious… Are you trolling?

 

[RobbyS]

Well. where is the list of 30,000 scientists who are global warming skeptics? Where is the resume of their papers? If you have the list, why not show it to us instead of engaging in hysterical personal attacks? The fact is that the Senate Minority Report on Global Warming was generated by a Senator who believes global warming to be a hoax. In this report there are listed 687 “dissenting scientists” who argue agaimst global warming. However, on further investigation, of the 687 dissenting scinetists listed there, only about 20 percent have ever published peer reviewed climate research. that means 138 dissenting scientists. So although it is claimed here that there are 30,000 dissenting scientists, the actual number appears to be much less, something like 140.

The evidence most persuasive to me is the cycles of cooling and warming over the past one thousand years. During the early part of the Middle Ages there was a long period of warming that caused a great increase in food production in Europe and expansion into the Baltic region. At the same time, California was baking, so that there was no snow pack on the tops of the tallest peaks. Then came “the little ice age” which lasted intil the 17th-18th Century when we entered the present period of warming.

 

[jimmy]

Whether you accept global warming or not is irrelevant. The fact remains that the world is the creation of God and it is a sacrament of His presence. It is not there for the sake of exploitation.

 

[Hesychios]

I’m sorry… but that made me laugh…

I got a little chuckle out of it too.

 

[Hesychios]

Whether you accept global warming or not is irrelevant. The fact remains that the world is the creation of God and it is a sacrament of His presence. It is not there for the sake of exploitation.

I agree.

Disputing the argument over climate degradation is no license to abuse the planet. We would have to be better stewards regardless.

We come in naked, and leave with empty pockets, everything we have today will be given. We might as well accept that we really only hold these things in trust.

They are God’s, and are intended for those people who are to follow us ad infinitum. So then, especially if we are really believing Christians we need to be much more responsible in our actions and decisions than we have up to this point.

These things are not ours.

 

[latin_rite]

I don’t know how anyone can honestly say the worlds enviroment isn’t in trouble. Or that the worlds enviroment hasn’t been in better shape. You have acid rain in many parts of the of the world. Which means you can’t drink the water that falls out of the sky. The forest are being cut down. Land being swallowed up to make way for new houses. The oceans are so polluted that eating fish (what ones are left) can be dangerous. One case a doctor was on tv talking about what foods pregnant women should eat. He said he told one couple. who were professional athletes. To eat plenty of oily fish. Like tuna etc. Which they did. Over a course of a few years the woman suffered at least 4 misscarriages. He couldn’t work out why until,. He studied what she was eating. And per his advice she was eating plenty of oily fish. When he tested the fish from the market which she brought the fish from, they were found to have high levels of mercury. She cut the fish out of her diet and within a few years they had a healthy baby boy. The sharks are being killed for Their fins. They are cut off and the shark thrown back into the water still alive. What a lot of people don’t understand is the important role that sharks play in keeping the oceans clean. One scienctist said with out sharks. The oceans will be a rotting cess pool. Turtles are dying because of the rubbish. They eat plastic bags mistaking them for jellyfish. The list goes on. Then you have tigers who are being hunted into excintion. along with lions, rhinos etc. I know the world will go on without them. But what a boring world it would be.without them
p.s I suffer from Selachophobia Which is basicly a fear of sharks. Which is so bad at times i find it very hard to go into the water. And i won’t even set foot on a beach where a shark alert has been sounded. But even so its nice in a way to know that they are out there.

 

[Ella]

Interesting questions. We have an authority in our beautiful city of Perth call the waters and river commision. They do a very good job of keeping an eye on our water ways. The only realproblem that seems to come up is algi blooms in the summer time but the heavy winter rains always seem to solve that problem. Our beautiful Swan River as it is named is the oldest river in the world(Australia is a very old Land with no Volcanoes the last one run out of puff millions of years ago) its currently in very good shape but over alarmist greenies would probably try and tell you different.

There lives in our city a very well know scientist and former Green activist named Joanne Nova she like me use to believe all the alarmist nonsense coming from the left. But, as you do once you get a grip on reality you no longer take any notice of the over exagerated arrogance.

Check out joannenova.com.au/ you might learn something.

I asked because I personally have done what I suggested you do - worked with local conservancy groups cleaning up trash and monitoring water quality. Perhaps in your country, things are not as polluted as in mine. Being in the field is the only way to accurately assess what the condition of the environment is in your area.
The Clean Water Act was instituted by Republicans, Richard Nixon to be exact, and is something for Conservatives in this country to be very proud of. Yet it is violated all of the time, and the staff policing violations of it are understaffed and underfunded.

nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html?_r=1

This is the sort of thing that we must deal with in the U.S. I don’t know if such things happen in Australia.
wvgazette.com/News/Business/200912190281

And this is an example of the kind of group I suggested, and still suggest, you help to get a first-hand view of the condition of the environment. Groups like this always need more volunteers to help clean up things…
livinglandsandwaters.org/

As far as I know, Yes, Mary can bless.
the Schoenstatt movement is all over the world and in various locations in the United States. Check them out on the net. Pay them a visit you’ll have your question answered theologically I’m sure.

Thanks.

 

[JRPO]

I asked because I personally have done what I suggested you do - worked with local conservancy groups cleaning up trash and monitoring water quality. Perhaps in your country, things are not as polluted as in mine. Being in the field is the only way to accurately assess what the condition of the environment is in your area.
The Clean Water Act was instituted by Republicans, Richard Nixon to be exact, and is something for Conservatives in this country to be very proud of. Yet it is violated all of the time, and the staff policing violations of it are understaffed and underfunded.

nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html?_r=1

This is the sort of thing that we must deal with in the U.S. I don’t know if such things happen in Australia.
wvgazette.com/News/Business/200912190281

And this is an example of the kind of group I suggested, and still suggest, you help to get a first-hand view of the condition of the environment. Groups like this always need more volunteers to help clean up things…
livinglandsandwaters.org/

Ella… Bless your heart. There are practical solutions to these situations no need to be alarmist.

CFACT (Commitee For A Constructive Tomorrow)

Check out their web site cfact.org/

“Propaganda” Warrior exposed
Skeptics are growing in number and becoming more confident. Yesterday, CFACT unfurled a banner on the Rainbow Warrior in Copenhagen.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=694&pictureid=4995

 

[latin_rite]

I went to the c fact site. Could only handle two articles before my agenda radar went off.
The two stories i read was. How cfact Got rid of Malcom Turnbul. Which is like saying that a butterfly fart in the amazon caused hurricane katrina. And the other one was how Climate change is bad and all lies because some communist and socialist were protesting about it. Cfact is no different than al gore. Gore makes millions pushing his little agenda. Cfact makes millions pushing theirs. (cfact is funded by exxon). You know what i would really like? I would like all the global warmist like al gore and all the anti global warmist like cfact/exxon to stfu. And stop treating the public like brain dead sheep. And just have facts published by unbias news resources. But that will never happen. Cause there isn’t as much money to be made doing that.

 

[Ella]

Ella;6106829:

I asked because I personally have done what I suggested you do - worked with local conservancy groups cleaning up trash and monitoring water quality. Perhaps in your country, things are not as polluted as in mine. Being in the field is the only way to accurately assess what the condition of the environment is in your area.
The Clean Water Act was instituted by Republicans, Richard Nixon to be exact, and is something for Conservatives in this country to be very proud of. Yet it is violated all of the time, and the staff policing violations of it are understaffed and underfunded.

nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html?_r=1

This is the sort of thing that we must deal with in the U.S. I don’t know if such things happen in Australia.
wvgazette.com/News/Business/200912190281

And this is an example of the kind of group I suggested, and still suggest, you help to get a first-hand view of the condition of the environment. Groups like this always need more volunteers to help clean up things…
livinglandsandwaters.org/

Ella… Bless your heart. There are practical solutions to these situations no need to be alarmist.

It’s unfortunate that you’re responding with such a condescending tone. I’m not being alarmist. I’m saying that you should actually give a go at being in the field with people cleaning up the environment in your community, before you make broad statements about the condition of the world’s environment.

I have first hand experience with the environmental issues in my community. It ain’t pretty.

CFACT (Commitee For A Constructive Tomorrow)

Check out their web site cfact.org/

I wonder why Exxon is giving cfact so much money?

Get your hands dirty at a clean-up first and then let me know what you think of things.

 

[sidbrown]

JRPO;6107277:

I wonder why Exxon is giving cfact so much money?.

There is probably a hidden agenda somewhere.

 

[itinerant1]

"In a recently revised and re-published paper, Dr Gerlich debunks AGW and shows that the IPCC “consensus” atmospheric physics model tying CO2 to global warming is not only unverifiable, but actually violates basic laws of physics, i.e. the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics. The latest version of this momentous scientific paper appears in the March 2009 edition of the International Journal of Modern Physics.

"The central claims of Dr. Gerlich and his colleague, Dr. Ralf Tscheuschner, include, but are not limited to:

"1) The mechanism of warming in an actual greenhouse is different than the mechanism of warming in the atmosphere, therefore it is not a “greenhouse” effect and should be called something else.

“2) The climate models that predict catastrophic global warming also result in a net heat flow from atmospheric greenhouse gasses to the warmer ground, which is in violation of the second law of thermodynamics.”

Read the complete article: German Physicists Trash Global Warming “Theory”

 

[JRPO]

Get your hands dirty at a clean-up first and then let me know what you think of things.

When your home is dirty do you just get in and clean it up or do you over exaggerate condemn it and say the house is going to completely fall apart because some carless person made a mess. Like you know… cry over spilt milk, basically.
If you leave a mess people are going to get ill. Well clean it up its no big deal.

People can over exaggerate about a mess in a home. You gotta get a grip. its a mess and you clean it:shrug:

Whatever your views are about cfact or who funds them… Their just about being constructive about the mess some people make. Lets be constructive.

Sorry if I seemed condescending. I didn’t mean to be.

 

[Calliso]

"In a recently revised and re-published paper, Dr Gerlich debunks AGW and shows that the IPCC “consensus” atmospheric physics model tying CO2 to global warming is not only unverifiable, but actually violates basic laws of physics, i.e. the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics. The latest version of this momentous scientific paper appears in the March 2009 edition of the International Journal of Modern Physics.

"The central claims of Dr. Gerlich and his colleague, Dr. Ralf Tscheuschner, include, but are not limited to:

"1) The mechanism of warming in an actual greenhouse is different than the mechanism of warming in the atmosphere, therefore it is not a “greenhouse” effect and should be called something else.

“2) The climate models that predict catastrophic global warming also result in a net heat flow from atmospheric greenhouse gasses to the warmer ground, which is in violation of the second law of thermodynamics.”

Read the complete article: German Physicists Trash Global Warming “Theory”

Ooo boy this paper is a mess. rabett-run-labs.googlegroups.com/web/G%26T_rebuttal-2-6.pdf?gda=RuUy5koAAAD-V93pcJS_jZUMaXEUmyYvAn7fuEue3Amu4s_58Nd6jGP5lCq_E9H643M_Z42vuq8oRpvv96usv87eApGQGon2_e3Wg0GnqfdKOwDqUih1tA&hl=en

 

[JRPO]

Now just getting back to my original thread and the 30,000 scientists. When one person gives his point of view to a leader of a country that leader automatically then assumes that for every 1 person that has that view there are at least 1000 others that have the same view.

30,000 scientists state the facts.
Now how many more are of this view?

1000 x 30,000 = 30,000,000

well I dont even know if there is that many scientist in the world but there you are.
One would assume that the warped propaganda from the left isjust the voice of a few.