Vatican envoy: 'no further room for denial' on climate change [CC]

[LeafByNiggle]

Mitigating climate change … it makes people like Al Gore and others very rich, which shoots holes in your reasoning.

Al Gore is going to be very rich whether you mitigate climate change or not, so I would not base my decisions on whether Al Gore is rich.

 

[Ender]

I’m so glad the Church is going strong on this mother-of-all-life issues. Good for the Catholic Church!

Having acquitted herself somewhat less than ideally with respect to Galileo one would have expected the church to be more circumspect about entering another scientific debate. What is often not recognized is that the church was initially on rather solid ground with respect to Galileo, insisting only that he not teach his theory as fact since it could not at that time be proven. If they took that stance today it would keep them from taking sides on the question of AGW, since that theory not only hasn’t been proven but many of the assertions supporting it are at the level of conjecture rather than theory. One can only hope she avoids inflicting another massive - and totally avoidable - self inflicted wound.

It is simply wrong to kill innocent people whether thru climate change or any other means.

The words of a true believer.

Ender

 

[Eddie_Mac]

Al Gore is going to be very rich whether you mitigate climate change or not, so I would not base my decisions on whether Al Gore is rich.

I just turned my AC down another couple degrees. A little muggy in the house. My power is coal generated.

 

[Micosil]

Good! I’m so glad the Church is going strong on this mother-of-all-life issues. Good for the Catholic Church! It is simply wrong to kill innocent people whether thru climate change or any other means.

Those who are afraid their piggy banks will be squeezed, 1st of all, life trumps money (which is just something that facilitates exchanges). The biological-ecological system is fundamental to life; the economy is contingent and instrumental. We need food more than grocery stores, tho grocery stores facilitate getting that food we need.

2nd, if ye seek first the kingdom of God and its righteousness all things will be given unto you; that is, strangely enough mitigating climate change saves money and improves one’s well being. Halleluia! Thanks be to God, who grants us what we need.

And we need a life-hospitable climate, healthy air and water, and food. We do not need people denying that we are harming these things by various actions and words. We can most certainly do without that!

Thanks be to God for this wonderful, beautiful Church, that guides us to what we really need…ultimately our heavenly home with our so very gracious God.

 

[KSU]

Good! I’m so glad the Church is going strong on this mother-of-all-life issues. Good for the Catholic Church! It is simply wrong to kill innocent people whether thru climate change or any other means.

Hey, old friend, I see you’re still buying the wrapping and ignoring the contents, even after all the exposed falsification of models and data, and the embarrassingly wrong predictions of doom.

First, the Church will never, ever agree with you that climate change is the “mother-of-all-life issues.” But you already know that.

Second, the “Church” has not defined climate change, scientifically speaking. Non-ideological science (true science) is a jealously-guarded child of the Church, beginning, I think, with Copernicus. (His advancement of the heliocentric model was accomplished under the auspices of the Catholic Church. Have smelling salts handy when you tell that to the brainwashed masses. Ender #202 got it right). On the other hand, climate change, whatever it means, is the child of ideology.

Third, there is not much new here; respect and protection of “God’s jewelry box”, as some of the Sisters who taught me called nature, has always been a Church teaching.

 

[estesbob]

I just turned my AC down another couple degrees. A little muggy in the house. My power is coal generated.

Ill do my part also. Instead of driving my SUV to church tonight I’ll drive my Dodge ram 3500 diesel

 

[DaveBj]

Ill do my part also. Instead of driving my SUV to church tonight I’ll drive my Dodge ram 3500 diesel

I would ride my bicycle to Mass tomorrow morning, but I’m afraid of being criticized for all the CO2 that I would be emitting in all my hard breathing

 

[Darryl1958]

I would ride my bicycle to Mass tomorrow morning, but I’m afraid of being criticized for all the CO2 that I would be emitting in all my hard breathing

Composting is a big CO₂ producer too. Does that make environmentalists sinners on that account?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Composting is a big CO₂ producer too. Does that make environmentalists sinners on that account?

Actually, composting is not a net producer of CO2. The stuff that you compost is going to decay into CO2 whether you incorporate it into compost or not. So the only question is whether you want to benefit from that activity that is going to happen anyway. Also, the stuff that you compost is part of the on-going carbon cycle - CO2 taken from the atmosphere by plants, and returned to the atmosphere when those plants decay or some animal uses them. The only way to change balance of CO2 is to add some carbon to the carbon cycle that has not participated in the carbon cycle for eons - like fossil fuels.

 

[triumphguy]

I would ride my bicycle to Mass tomorrow morning, but I’m afraid of being criticized for all the CO2 that I would be emitting in all my hard breathing

I’m quite sure it wouldn’t be as much as driving a car.

Never mind all the other by-products of the oil industry.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

And what is your solution to this “problem”

Your use of quotations proves you don’t take said problem seriously, but I’ll answer anyway.

I will listen to the Church and what they are saying about climate change, that’s what I’ll do. Beyond that, I’m not sure yet. Perhaps in college I’ll study environmental and marine science. People are expecting my generation to step up and do something about the problem at hand, so I’m going to try my best

 

[lynnvinc]

Mitigating climate change under the currently accepted proposals of the man made global warning accepters does not save money, and it makes people like Al Gore and others very rich, which shoots holes in your reasoning.

Well, too bad y’all done know about all the savings to be had, or lucky for you to be so rich you can be profligate and prodigal…at least lucky for you in this life. Not so sure about the next.

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. And not complain about all the $$$$ we’re saving by doing so. Praise be the Holy Trinity!

 

[lynnvinc]

…First, the Church will never, ever agree with you that climate change is the “mother-of-all-life issues.” …

Only the part of the Church that truly understands the issue of CC will understand that CC is the mother-of-all-life issues, since it kills all types of people, young and old, and on into the distant future.

This is not to downplay the seriousness of abortion/miscarriage, whether caused by the mother or others emitting pollution. However, the idea of ending abortion by killing everyone – which no doubt would be quite effective in ending this sin – is not my idea of a felicitous solution.

 

[lynnvinc]

I’m quite sure it wouldn’t be as much as driving a car.

Never mind all the other by-products of the oil industry.

Not to mention they’re going to be fracking under my house and a large residential area of my city, including under 2 elementary schools. Considering that such a process can cause all sorts of harms, including driving the cost of city water up way high when it has to filter out the toxins, including trihalomethanes (which caused an elementary school in a nearby town to shut down for a few months bec it couldn’t afford the higher rate), there is just no moral argument for continuing on our profligate fossil fuel dependent lifestyles.

I don’t have stomach for CC denialist arguments anymore.

 

[estesbob]

Your use of quotations proves you don’t take said problem seriously, but I’ll answer anyway.

I will listen to the Church and what they are saying about climate change, that’s what I’ll do. Beyond that, I’m not sure yet. Perhaps in college I’ll study environmental and marine science. People are expecting my generation to step up and do something about the problem at hand, so I’m going to try my best

Good choice for a major. A lot better than majoring in gender studies and then complaining that you are a 100,000 in debt and can’t find a job

I listen to the church also. And throughout my life the Church always taught that we need to care for the environment. But caring for the environment and buying into the idea that we need to impose massive tax and regulation schemes to mitigate AGW are two entirely separate issues.

By the way you don’t have to wait until you graduate from college to do something about the real problem at hand. Volunteer at CPC or a food kitchen. Do whatever you can to help the poor and needy. My years as a counselor at CPC are some of the most rewarding in my life.

 

[Theo520]

Not to mention they’re going to be fracking under my house and a large residential area of my city, including under 2 elementary schools. Considering that such a process can cause all sorts of harms, including driving the cost of city water up way high when it has to filter out the toxins, including trihalomethanes (which caused an elementary school in a nearby town to shut down for a few months bec it couldn’t afford the higher rate), there is just no moral argument for continuing on our profligate fossil fuel dependent lifestyles.

I don’t have stomach for CC denialist arguments anymore.

I’ve really missed our climate debbie downer, for whom everything portends the end of civilization as we know it.

I’ve noticed that ‘warmists’ have been unable to respond on fact to skeptics, and that is why they claim the stomach flu.

 

[Hope_Philomena]

Good choice for a major. A lot better than majoring in gender studies and then complaining that you are a 100,000 in debt and can’t find a job

I listen to the church also. And throughout my life the Church always taught that we need to care for the environment. But caring for the environment and buying into the idea that we need to impose massive tax and regulation schemes to mitigate AGW are two entirely separate issues.

By the way you don’t have to wait until you graduate from college to do something about the real problem at hand. Volunteer at CPC or a food kitchen. Do whatever you can to help the poor and needy. My years as a counselor at CPC are some of the most rewarding in my life.

Thank you for the advice

 

[lynnvinc]

I’ve really missed our climate debbie downer, for whom everything portends the end of civilization as we know it.

I’ve noticed that ‘warmists’ have been unable to respond on fact to skeptics, and that is why they claim the stomach flu.

We don’t have to respond to skeptics – the whole of climate science is there for one to refer to … IF one is interested in learning the facts. One could start with the IPCC materials, or skim thru top tier peer-review science journals. That is IF one really wants to learn about climate change.

Over the years here at CAF I’ve actually answered all the skeptical arguments, so there really isn’t any reason at all to continually be answering them again and again and again.

I even answered the one about the Eocene Optimum (which I think was one of the more interesting skeptical arguments).

If you want to know the facts about climate change, read the top tier science journals. It’s hard work, but very rewarding.

Also there are some pretty good platforms that debunk all of the skeptical arguments (except the Eocene Optimum one), such as skepticalscience.com/, which has rebuttals at basic, intermediate, and advanced levels (if you find the science journals too stiff of reading).

 

[Theo520]

We don’t have to respond to skeptics – the whole of climate science is there for one to refer to … .

The truth self evident in this chart best articulates why warmist avoid responding to skeptics
(Hint - the models have failed the scientific method)

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

 

[lynnvinc]

We don’t have to respond to skeptics – the whole of climate science is there for one to refer to …

Wow, speaking of the dev-oil, I just came across this to help people understand the lies and deceit perpetrated by the CC denialist industry and better address them when they rear their ugly heads: a MOOC university course on “the Science of Climate Science Denial” – for a description see realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/04/an-online-university-course-on-the-science-of-climate-science-denial/ .

From that site:



The image forgot to include the ole logical fallacy of “phantasmal and trumped up policy implications determine the science” (rather than science being the basis for policy responses).

You can enroll in the MOOC at edx.org/understanding-climate-denial . It started end of April, but maybe they’ll be offering it again.