C
Calliso
Guest
I agree these conspiracy theory claims that the skeptics relie on so much are outrageous.
- Status
4
4elise
Guest
.
Sure… cleaner in many places in the US… we are not alone in the world however.
This is not a simple ‘group of Catholics’ ---- these are the partners in this group:
from: catholicsandclimatechange.org/partners.html
Partners:
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
* Social Development and World Peace/Environmental Justice Program
* Catholic Campaign for Human Development
* Migration and Refugee Services of the USCCB
* Catholic Relief Services
* National Council of Catholic Women
* Catholic Health Association of the United States
* Catholic Charities USA
* National Catholic Rural Life Conference
* Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities
* Franciscan Action Network
* Carmelite NGO
* Leadership Conference of Women Religious
* Conference of Major Superiors of Men
* Catholic Health Association
* Catholic Relief Services
* Catholic Charities USA
* National Catholic Rural Life Conference
* Carmelite NGO
**To Ender **— sure you can start another group and call it perhaps ‘Catholics against efforts to address MMCC’ - and see which leaders in the church will be willing to partner with that — perhaps the morality exists as we have discussed IN THE ACTION
Peace
E
Eric_Hilbert
Guest
Hi folks.
We’re way over the 1000 post limit. So, make your final remarks because I will probably lock this up when I get back tonight.
We’re way over the 1000 post limit. So, make your final remarks because I will probably lock this up when I get back tonight.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
The link to USCCB was a statement on immigration. Just because the site says USCCB is a “partner” doesn’t make it so..
Sure… cleaner in many places in the US… we are not alone in the world however.
This is not a simple ‘group of Catholics’ ---- these are the partners in this group:
from: catholicsandclimatechange.org/partners.html
Partners:
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
* Social Development and World Peace/Environmental Justice Program
* Catholic Campaign for Human Development
* Migration and Refugee Services of the USCCB
* Catholic Relief Services
* National Council of Catholic Women
* Catholic Health Association of the United States
* Catholic Charities USA
* National Catholic Rural Life Conference
* Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities
* Franciscan Action Network
* Carmelite NGO
* Leadership Conference of Women Religious
* Conference of Major Superiors of Men
* Catholic Health Association
* Catholic Relief Services
* Catholic Charities USA
* National Catholic Rural Life Conference
* Carmelite NGO
As for the rest, they are not doctrinal bodies. We are allowed to disagree with some of their statements and remain Catholics in good standing.
Is Notre Dame part of the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities? What about Georgetown?
USCCB has given money to ACORN. Are we supposed to agree that the money was well spent? Are we allowed to disagree on that and remain Catholics in good standing?
From the site
**PartnersResources
“This kind of serious discussion …* is not intended to settle these questions, but rather to lift them up and focus them so we can make wise and necessary choices*.”
—Bishop Thomas Wenski, Diocese of Orlando**
I think the wise and necessary choice is not to ram something down our throats, particularly because it will disproportionately hurt the poor.
I believe I am a Catholic in good standing. I attend daily mass, volunteer at a homeless women’s shelter, donate money, study the Bible, etc. I recycle, I compost. I grow my own vegetables. I live in the city very close to my job, so I don’t have to commute and pollute. My company hires people who are otherwise unemployable, no high school diploma, many functionally illiterate. We provide a comfortable work environment for them. If gasoline prices went up, they would be without a job. It would be nice if we had better public transportation, but our city is so spread out, it’s hardly possible. A lot of people who live in the far suburbs consistently vote down public transportation funding. They don’t want to make it easy for the big bad city people to come to their comfortable suburbs and work. They drive their SUV’s 20 miles each way to commute to work.
I resent your implication that people who disagree with you are somehow not good Catholics, or uncaring about our planet and the poor.
E
Ender
Guest
It would in fact appear that ACORN is more closely associated with the USCCB than Catholic Coalition on Climate Change since the former actually received funds. Your comment makes the obvious point that a vague “association” with the USCCB is not an impressive credential.
I think your resentment is justified but it should be clear that the Church makes no such implication.
Ender
W
WinterWH
Guest
The issue of carbon isotopes in carbon dioxide seems to be a bogus issue.
Carbon 13 and 14 are much heavier than the “standard” Carbon 12. So they should sink faster and be absorbed into the ocean and into the soil and be gone.
Carbon 14 is unstable (although it has a long half-life).
Anyway, I looked around. Will look around more while I’m on the road. We can resurrect this discussion on another thread after this one is closed tonight.
But I did find this discussion [no link because it’s a pdf file.]
Gotta run.
But read this:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is the gas of life for plants, man, and animals. All plant life is sustained by photosynthesis, where CO2 plus water plus theSun’s energy form carbohydrates plus Oxygen. Humans and animals breathein oxygen and exhale CO2.
It sounds like an intelligent design!
If atmospheric CO2 drops to the 220 ppm, plants get sick. They die at 160ppm. In a field of corn on a sunny day, unless wind currents stir up the air,all of the CO2 is consumed within one meter of the ground in 5 minutes.(Personal communication, Daryl Smika, Plant Physiologist, U.S. Dept. ofAgriculture),
In order to increase their yield, commercial greenhouse owners increase the CO2 levels to 600 - 1000 ppm. According to the Mauna Loaobservatory the present atmospheric CO2 is about 385 ppm (parts permillion.), but in times past it was as high as 2450 ppm. (Jaworoski, 1992a,1992b).
The most important greenhouse gas is water vapor.
Its mass is 54 timesgreater than CO2.
“The first 30 feet of water vapor absorbs 80% of theearth’s heat radiation. You can go outside and spit and have the effect asdoubling CO2!” (Dr. Reid Bryson, former Director of Meteorology,University of Wisconsin.)
150 years ago, the atmospheric CO2 contained 700 Gt of carbon (1 Gt = 1billion tons), and the earth contained 7000 Gt of carbon in the form of fossilfuels.
It is estimated that man has burned 1000 Gt of the original 7000 Gt.(Segalstad 1998).
For water, at normal temperature, Henry’s Law ofSolubility dictates there will be 50 parts of CO2 in solution, for one part ofgaseous CO2 above the water. Experimental measurements have shown thatthe residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 5 years.
The corruptUN politicians (without any proof) say it is 50-200 years.
Hence today, after150 years, the amount of CO2 added by man to the atmosphere is (1/50)x1000 = 20 Gt, and the increase in atmospheric CO2 is (700+20)/700 = 1.03or a 3% increase!! (Segalstad, 1998).
The UN, using junk science, andmysterious fudge-factors, said the increase is 21%.
Where is their proof?
Page 7
7
Segalstad (1998) developed an alternative method of determining how muchof the atmospheric CO2 is due to fossil fuels is by an isotopic mass balance of Carbon 12, C-12, and the heavier isotope Carbon 13, C-13.
During photosynthesis more of the C-12 is absorbed by the plant than C-13.
Ratios between C-12 and C-13 stable isotopes are commonly expressed as in permilby a so-called delta-13-C notation multiplied by 1000.
CO2 from combustion of fossil fuel have delta –13-C values of (–26 permil).
Natural CO2 has a delta-12-C value of( –7 perm). Keeling (1989) reported a 1988-measured atmospheric delta-13-C value of (–7.807permil).
Using a simpleisotopic mass balance equation of [26X +7(1-X) = 7.807] produces an Xvalue of 0.042. Hence the earth’s atmospheric CO2 is made up ofapproximately 4% CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels.
This is close to the 3% computed above by the alternate mass consumed method of Segalstad.
Revelle & Suess (1957) using Carbon-14 data computed the amount ofatmospheric CO2 derived from fossil fuel combustion was 1.2 to 1.73 %.
UN IPCC reports assumes at present, 21% of CO2 is from fossil fuelburning!Using Henry’s Law, and assuming all the remaining 6000 Gt of carbon inour fossil fuel reserves has been burned, the increase in atmospheric CO2will be {(7oo+ (7000/50)}/700 =1.2], a 20 % increase over what theatmosphere contained back in the mid nineteenth century! (Segalstad, 1998)
The corrupt UN with their junk science predicts a 170% increase.
Even burning all fossil fuels (7000 Gt of carbon) will have no meaningful effecton global climate.
CO2 in the atmosphere cannot increase more than 20%.
It cannot double!
xxxxxxx
That’s the end of the relevant piece.
I’ll post more, but it looks like NOAA’s work doesn’t fit the physics.
Carbon 13 and 14 are much heavier than the “standard” Carbon 12. So they should sink faster and be absorbed into the ocean and into the soil and be gone.
Carbon 14 is unstable (although it has a long half-life).
Anyway, I looked around. Will look around more while I’m on the road. We can resurrect this discussion on another thread after this one is closed tonight.
But I did find this discussion [no link because it’s a pdf file.]
Gotta run.
But read this:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is the gas of life for plants, man, and animals. All plant life is sustained by photosynthesis, where CO2 plus water plus theSun’s energy form carbohydrates plus Oxygen. Humans and animals breathein oxygen and exhale CO2.
It sounds like an intelligent design!
If atmospheric CO2 drops to the 220 ppm, plants get sick. They die at 160ppm. In a field of corn on a sunny day, unless wind currents stir up the air,all of the CO2 is consumed within one meter of the ground in 5 minutes.(Personal communication, Daryl Smika, Plant Physiologist, U.S. Dept. ofAgriculture),
In order to increase their yield, commercial greenhouse owners increase the CO2 levels to 600 - 1000 ppm. According to the Mauna Loaobservatory the present atmospheric CO2 is about 385 ppm (parts permillion.), but in times past it was as high as 2450 ppm. (Jaworoski, 1992a,1992b).
The most important greenhouse gas is water vapor.
Its mass is 54 timesgreater than CO2.
“The first 30 feet of water vapor absorbs 80% of theearth’s heat radiation. You can go outside and spit and have the effect asdoubling CO2!” (Dr. Reid Bryson, former Director of Meteorology,University of Wisconsin.)
150 years ago, the atmospheric CO2 contained 700 Gt of carbon (1 Gt = 1billion tons), and the earth contained 7000 Gt of carbon in the form of fossilfuels.
It is estimated that man has burned 1000 Gt of the original 7000 Gt.(Segalstad 1998).
For water, at normal temperature, Henry’s Law ofSolubility dictates there will be 50 parts of CO2 in solution, for one part ofgaseous CO2 above the water. Experimental measurements have shown thatthe residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 5 years.
The corruptUN politicians (without any proof) say it is 50-200 years.
Hence today, after150 years, the amount of CO2 added by man to the atmosphere is (1/50)x1000 = 20 Gt, and the increase in atmospheric CO2 is (700+20)/700 = 1.03or a 3% increase!! (Segalstad, 1998).
The UN, using junk science, andmysterious fudge-factors, said the increase is 21%.
Where is their proof?
Page 7
7
Segalstad (1998) developed an alternative method of determining how muchof the atmospheric CO2 is due to fossil fuels is by an isotopic mass balance of Carbon 12, C-12, and the heavier isotope Carbon 13, C-13.
During photosynthesis more of the C-12 is absorbed by the plant than C-13.
Ratios between C-12 and C-13 stable isotopes are commonly expressed as in permilby a so-called delta-13-C notation multiplied by 1000.
CO2 from combustion of fossil fuel have delta –13-C values of (–26 permil).
Natural CO2 has a delta-12-C value of( –7 perm). Keeling (1989) reported a 1988-measured atmospheric delta-13-C value of (–7.807permil).
Using a simpleisotopic mass balance equation of [26X +7(1-X) = 7.807] produces an Xvalue of 0.042. Hence the earth’s atmospheric CO2 is made up ofapproximately 4% CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels.
This is close to the 3% computed above by the alternate mass consumed method of Segalstad.
Revelle & Suess (1957) using Carbon-14 data computed the amount ofatmospheric CO2 derived from fossil fuel combustion was 1.2 to 1.73 %.
UN IPCC reports assumes at present, 21% of CO2 is from fossil fuelburning!Using Henry’s Law, and assuming all the remaining 6000 Gt of carbon inour fossil fuel reserves has been burned, the increase in atmospheric CO2will be {(7oo+ (7000/50)}/700 =1.2], a 20 % increase over what theatmosphere contained back in the mid nineteenth century! (Segalstad, 1998)
The corrupt UN with their junk science predicts a 170% increase.
Even burning all fossil fuels (7000 Gt of carbon) will have no meaningful effecton global climate.
CO2 in the atmosphere cannot increase more than 20%.
It cannot double!
xxxxxxx
That’s the end of the relevant piece.
I’ll post more, but it looks like NOAA’s work doesn’t fit the physics.
E
Eric_Hilbert
Guest
Thanks to all who participated in this thread.
- Status