Putting Catholic faith into action on climate change

[JimG]

France did decide to invest in nuclear power for electric generating plants. It’s not as cheap a coal or gas, but it’s a heck of a lot less expensive than cap & trade. Why ruin the economy for no good reason, when we could spend far less by concentrating on nuclear energy. Or even clean coal fired plants or gas fired plants. We seem to be poised to throw away our abundant natural resources.

 

[Fitz]

‘Climate change’ may or may not be real, and if it is, it is beyond our scope to change it.

MAN-MADE ‘climate change,’ however, is pure junk science, and invented so Al Gore would have something to do with himself.

It is a false means for the government to gain control over the innocent actions of its citizens.

I agree! As a Catholic I want the truth to come out.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

Wishing you blessings and rewards for all your labors even though you may never see the end result know that your efforts are not unnoticed by the Master Builder - and NOW your prayers continue to water the seeds!

Peace

Thank you, too, Elise, for the comforting poem by a very dear and holy saint, and for all of your encouragement. Pax Christi.

…and blessings on your work for the Kingdom!:angel1:
Gabriella

 

[human_being]

I live in the Sonoran desert just outside of Tucson, Az.

There are two things I have observed over the 32 years I have lived here;

First,

For the entire 32 years, university researchers and for profit companies have been attempting to produce affordable solar energy, unsuccessfully. What if it simply isn’t possible to harness the sun’s energy in a manner that all or most citizens can afford? Or, what if God hasn’t given us the person or persons with the knowledge of affordable alternative energy and that there is enough oil and coal to tide us over until that knowledge becomes available?. Doesn’t anyone think it is wasteful not to use the oil and coal and natural gas we have under our soil? God gave us Henry Ford and vast amounts of crude oil and refining technology, should we not use those God given resources right up to the point of it no longer being affordable to the masses? If there is 20 or 30 years worth of crude oil to be mined from our soil, why leave it in the ground. If you are going to use man made global warming as the reason, you need convince most of the scientists this isn’t a theory but exacting science. It is my understanding that literally thousands of accredited scientists do not agree that global warming is man made or that our use of these fossil fuels contributes to global warming. Before we leap into the unknown world of alternative energy and leave to waste resources we know we have and know to be affordable, lets come up with and make public knowledge, science that is irrefutable amongst the scientists who professionally study such things.

Secondly,

Over the past 32 years the seasons have varied dramatically. I’m in construction and have worked outdoors for most of these years and the last 3 or 4 have been merciful compared to some of the summers in the 70’s and 80’s. The winters have been colder lately and we have had snow here in Vail,Az. ( elev. 3,200 ft ) the past three years. If the measuring devices were to be placed on my property, global cooling would be the conclusion one might come to. Actually, the placement of the measuring devices is critical to the results and those actual placements should be public knowledge. If those placements are unreasonable, new , more reasonable placements should be made and those results revisited periodically, for a more accurate picture of what is actually occurring.

I’m not interested in what politicians think, red or blue. I just want accurate. public information from all the professional scientists so that I may study their reasoning and decide for myself how best to steward God’s gifts.

May the peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

I agree with using our own oil.avoid the muslims dictating our economy. And researching alternatives to oil.

 

[4elise]

I agree! As a Catholic I want the truth to come out.

What if the truth is that climate change is real, and there are things we are doing that are making it worse? Would you want that truth to come out too?

 

[4elise]

Thank you, too, Elise, for the comforting poem by a very dear and holy saint, and for all of your encouragement. Pax Christi.

…and blessings on your work for the Kingdom!:angel1:
Gabriella

In the efforts to stand up for what is right - we stand on the shoulders of giants! (like you! )

As Catholics I believe we have been given such a precious gift in the teaching of the Church on ways to live our faith - we must speak out, act, and stand for those who can not do so themselves!!!

 

[Calliso]

People have been talking alot about that so called
“suppressed” report here. So I thought I would post on that.

First here is a post from realclimate realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes/langswitch_lang/ho That helps point just how rediculous this report is.

and this one from DeepClimate deepclimate.org/2009/06/30/suppressed-carlin-report-based-on-pat-michaels-attack-on-epa/ Which shows how Carlin apparently commited plagarism.

So in other words this report is pretty much full of junk.

 

[aspawloski4th]

What if the truth is that climate change is real, and there are things we are doing that are making it worse? Would you want that truth to come out too?

No , the truth is mankind can’t do anything about it. The idea of global warming is based on CO2 in the atmosphere put there by man. Well I’m here to inform you the percentage of out atmosphere that is CO2 is only a fraction of a percent. Thats enough to affect anything climate wise.

 

[JimG]

What if the truth is that climate change is real, and there are things we are doing that are making it worse? Would you want that truth to come out too?

I for one, would want to know the truth of the matter.

But I pose another question: What if the truth is that the global economy teeters on the edge of collapse, and there are things that we are doing in the name of reversing climate change which will topple it over, making poverty and misery more widespread?

 

[jmtowle]

This is all just maddening!!!

I just googled ( scientists who reject man made global warming ) and visited the site " The Comprehensive Link List Disproving Man Made Global Warming ". The last of about 40 links, contains a list of 31,478 scientists, 9,029 of which have PHDs, all of them signed this petition rejecting the man made global warming theory.

One may find other sites that counters all of these other links ( or not ) but you can not ignore 31,478 signatures of dissenting scientists.

Clearly, there is no consensus and this petition is tangible proof, provided the list isn’t a scam.

Just how in the world is a lay person supposed to know the morally correct course of action to support?

One thing that has me EXTREMELY suspect is the need to RUSH everything through.
We had to RUSH billions of dollars for bailouts, we needed to RUSH decisions to support and fund abortions around the world and now we need to RUSH through legislation to TAX
carbon emissions. Am I to believe that if we don’t take action in the next few months, we are doomed?

How about we allow the science community to go before Congress, each opposing side, and in front of the cameras, tell America their side of the story and allow truly informed, public opinion to weigh in.

At this point in time I do not trust ANY politician and I don’t want emergency lawmaking when it is not required. 911 called for emergency action, scientific theory that is far from being a consensus does not. Lets take some time and get this right, let all the information come forward, real transparency.

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

 

[4elise]

I for one, would want to know the truth of the matter.

But I pose another question: What if the truth is that the global economy teeters on the edge of collapse, and there are things that we are doing in the name of reversing climate change which will topple it over, making poverty and misery more widespread?

And I agree this is where the discussion belongs - not in denying the science - but in finding the right ways to address the issues and take actions (or not take actions) both personal and as countries that will make the right difference -

 

[4elise]

Just how in the world is a lay person supposed to know the morally correct course of action to support?

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

And this is why I really appreciate that the Church has given some direction -
For me I believe that I can take personal action - and follow the lead of the groups that are part of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change catholicsandclimatechange.org/ from the original post …

And why I keep saying this is a gift to us, leadership that many leaders in our Church have added their support to.

I want Catholics to have a voice in this important discussion - not burying our heads in the sand.

 

[mpi]

The bishops have it in writing on their web page which 4Elise has links to at the beginning of this thread. The Pope has talked about several times. One example is at the last World Youth day in Australia. You can get on the Vatican web site and find documents. All this is very current. Saying that do you believe that the Pope and Bishops are wrong?

The Pope and Bishops have mentioned “concern” about “climate change”. Where exactly did they advocate for the legislation that was passed in the House yesterday?

Simple minds are pleased when something/anything is done about a “problem”. Sophisticated minds actually care about the consequences (including the unintended ones) of any proposal to “fix” a “problem”.

 

[mpi]

This is all just maddening!!!

I just googled ( scientists who reject man made global warming ) and visited the site " The Comprehensive Link List Disproving Man Made Global Warming ". The last of about 40 links, contains a list of 31,478 scientists, 9,029 of which have PHDs, all of them signed this petition rejecting the man made global warming theory.

One may find other sites that counters all of these other links ( or not ) but you can not ignore 31,478 signatures of dissenting scientists.

Clearly, there is no consensus and this petition is tangible proof, provided the list isn’t a scam.

Just how in the world is a lay person supposed to know the morally correct course of action to support?

One thing that has me EXTREMELY suspect is the need to RUSH everything through.
We had to RUSH billions of dollars for bailouts, we needed to RUSH decisions to support and fund abortions around the world and now we need to RUSH through legislation to TAX
carbon emissions. Am I to believe that if we don’t take action in the next few months, we are doomed?

How about we allow the science community to go before Congress, each opposing side, and in front of the cameras, tell America their side of the story and allow truly informed, public opinion to weigh in.

At this point in time I do not trust ANY politician and I don’t want emergency lawmaking when it is not required. 911 called for emergency action, scientific theory that is far from being a consensus does not. Lets take some time and get this right, let all the information come forward, real transparency.

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

Your skepticism is a good thing. Envirosocialist “Trojan horses” are trying to say that any wealth redistribution legislation is good as long as it framed with the rhetoric that it will help with climate change. There are Catholics who lie and say that specific climate legislation/acts/bills are supported by the Vatican. These people are lying liars.

 

[4elise]

The Pope and Bishops have mentioned “concern” about “climate change”. Where exactly did they advocate for the legislation that was passed in the House yesterday?

Simple minds are pleased when something/anything is done about a “problem”. Sophisticated minds actually care about the consequences (including the unintended ones) of any proposal to “fix” a “problem”.

usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-150.shtml

I hope this is helpful
At the risk of being simple - (actually I thought this was a good thing Matthew 18:2-4), the OP is about what the leadership of the Church is pointing to - I don’t believe anywhere anyone there or on this thread suggested that they (or we for that matter) did or should advocate for the legislation that was passed in the House yesterday

This is what the action alert said we were being asked to do:

How You Can Respond

Urge your Representative to support a clear priority for the poor and vulnerable in climate change legislation and adequate funding for international and domestic needs:

• International Provisions: At least 7% of the value of the carbon credits, approximately $7 billion, be dedicated to international adaptation to help people living in poverty in the most vulnerable developing countries adapt to climate change

• Domestic Provisions: Ensure that funding provided to domestic consumers makes the needs of low-income people a clear priority by including a progressive formula and a comprehensive system so that those most in need are protected from and not harmed by any potential rise in energy prices

Noting:
The Catholic Church brings a distinct perspective to the debate about climate
change by lifting up the moral dimensions of this issue and the needs of the
most vulnerable among us. The USCCB is focusing on particular parts of the
climate change issue. Our efforts promote prudent action to address the growing
impact of global climate change and pursue the common good in a very
polarized debate. The bishops’ primary concern is to place the needs of the poor
and vulnerable at the center of climate legislation. Poor people cannot be made
to bear an undue burden of the impacts of climate change or the global
adjustments needed to address it.

People living in poverty—both at home and abroad—contribute least to climate
change but they are likely to suffer its worst consequences with few resources to
adapt and respond. The impacts of climate change - including increased
temperatures, rising sea levels, and changes in rainfall that contribute to more
frequent and severe floods and droughts - are making the lives of the world’s
poorest even more precarious. Urgent action that both addresses the growing
impact of climate change and acts to protect the poor and vulnerable is needed.
To learn about Catholic teaching on climate change in more detail read the June
2001 statement by the United States Catholic Bishops, Global Climate Change: A
Plea for Dialogue, Prudence and the Common Good.

So… to put it simply - to speak and act for the poor - acting with prudence and for the Common Good

 

[4elise]

Your skepticism is a good thing. Envirosocialist “Trojan horses” are trying to say that any wealth redistribution legislation is good as long as it framed with the rhetoric that it will help with climate change. There are Catholics who lie and say that specific climate legislation/acts/bills are supported by the Vatican. These people are lying liars.

I agree that skepticism is good - I’m skeptical about the economic motivation of many climate change deniers as well.

And I certainly hope that you wouldn’'t be calling anyone on this tread ‘lying liars’ (double negative?) —

I have not seen anything on this thread saying that any legislation/acts/bills are supported by the Church. In fact - my (just previous post) clarified exactly what was suggested in contacting representatives - to ensure that any action keep the needs of the poor at the heart:heart:

 

[Al_Masetti]

This is all just maddening!!!

I just googled ( scientists who reject man made global warming ) and visited the site " The Comprehensive Link List Disproving Man Made Global Warming ". The last of about 40 links, contains a list of 31,478 scientists, 9,029 of which have PHDs, all of them signed this petition rejecting the man made global warming theory.

One may find other sites that counters all of these other links ( or not ) but you can not ignore 31,478 signatures of dissenting scientists.

Clearly, there is no consensus and this petition is tangible proof, provided the list isn’t a scam.

Just how in the world is a lay person supposed to know the morally correct course of action to support?

One thing that has me EXTREMELY suspect is the need to RUSH everything through.
We had to RUSH billions of dollars for bailouts, we needed to RUSH decisions to support and fund abortions around the world and now we need to RUSH through legislation to TAX
carbon emissions. Am I to believe that if we don’t take action in the next few months, we are doomed?

How about we allow the science community to go before Congress, each opposing side, and in front of the cameras, tell America their side of the story and allow truly informed, public opinion to weigh in.

At this point in time I do not trust ANY politician and I don’t want emergency lawmaking when it is not required. 911 called for emergency action, scientific theory that is far from being a consensus does not. Lets take some time and get this right, let all the information come forward, real transparency.

May the Peace of Christ be with us all, always

JT

Keep this in mind when considering the rush to action: for about 20 years, advocates of immediate action have been stating [you can find the quotes; they’re out there] that in ten years we will reach the tipping point [which is like a “slippery slope” (whatever that means)] … meaning that after ten years it will be impossible for the planet Earth to recover.

Well, that tipping point was reached ten years ago and nothing happened. The sky did not fall.

But in every interview, they keep saying ten years, ten years. There was a famous Gore speech 16 years ago … ten years. And, nothing adverse happened.

The point is that the science is not settled … or maybe it is settled, in the opposite direction … that the Earth is doing just fine and turning control over to Gore and his friends [and their redistributionist / central control ideas] is not going to do anything productive.

All of the “sky is falling” scenarios are based on squishy computer models … and misinterpretation of those squishy computer models … they provide several different scenarios and the media and Gore are taking the worst worst least likely of several computerized outcomes and presenting it as the mostly likely situation.

AND THEN, we find that the temperature and climate data that goes INTO the model(s) has been “rigged” … meaning that the data is badly collected … it is up to five degrees warmer than the actual temperature … visit www.surfacestations.org … so that the models, as bad as they are … produce results that are as much as five degrees higher than the results should be.

Well, they say, any results are better than no results.

What it comes down to is pure outright spinning … and since they are using (or misusing) DELIBERATELY contrived results and they know the results are not accurate … by a huge amount … well, we can call it a lie.

The advocates of man-made global warming / climate change know the model(s) show a one degree increase in temp over one hundred 100 ] years. But the (name removed by moderator)ut data is too high by anywhere from one degree to five degrees, depending on the location of the station … so that the actual results, if corrected for the inflated temp data … would probably show that the earth will cool by several degrees.

[The reason that the (name removed by moderator)ut data is too high is that in many cases … about 85% of the data collection locations … the sensors are surrounded by concrete pavement that reflect heat and bake the instruments or they are close to buildings that radiate heat … or they are near heat sources such as air conditioning cooling towers and condensers that kick out heat. Often the sensors are at airports where the data is essential for pilots to calculate their take-off airspeeds and allowable weights … but are not indicative of the average regional temperatures. So the modelers are using the data that is available, but it is not good data for climate modeling purposes.]

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I for one, would want to know the truth of the matter.

But I pose another question: What if the truth is that the global economy teeters on the edge of collapse, and there are things that we are doing in the name of reversing climate change which will topple it over, making poverty and misery more widespread?

There really isn’t that much ‘what if’ about it—and you don’t need to go back to the begining of time to know it, only the 1970s.

That may be one reason that both ancient and recent history is being rewritten as we speak.

 

[Brendan]

• and why I really count on the leadership that I see coming from the Church in the form of the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change.

And why I really look toward the leadership I see coming from the Church in the form of the Acton Institute

 

[Al_Masetti]

There are tons of these “ten years to tipping point” quotes.

I just spent a few seconds and started find all sorts of references.

skepticsglobalwarming.com/global-warming-myth/environmentalists/42-years-tipping-point/

It may be “fun” to find all these calls for panic.