What do you think of climate change?

[LeafByNiggle]

AGW is a theory, not a reality.

Scientifically speaking, there is no difference.

 

[phaster]

Ender:

The church should not take positions on matters of science.

what the Church is doing is recognizing other scientific authorities, and applying moral teachings to those realities

Both science and Catholicism deal with seeking the Truth, so even though they approach things from different angles, they should result in the same conclusion on matters of what the evidence is showing.

sadly Americans do not know much about basic global warming science

www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/tops.12187

AND all too often people think they smarter than they actually are!

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

this is because

given lots of “noise” and very little “signal” those w/ out rigorous formal training in a “hard” science and the scientific method are very susceptible to “confirmation bias”

…then there is another related problem,… an ‘illusion of confidence’ which is called the ‘Dunning-Kruger effect’

the issue is compounded by active resistance

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

to the well understood basic science,…

www.TinyURL.com/HowBigIsTheEarth

given “global dimming” (which was known 20 years ago and indicates mankind does indeed have the ability to directly influence the global climate), “decreasing pH levels in the oceans” (which is another clear signal that indicates mankind does indeed have the ability to directly influence the environment), the 2015 Berkeley lab paper on the observation of CO2 increasing greenhouse effect at the earth’s surface, the ever increasing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere (i.e. the keeling curve) and known physical properties of the CO2 molecule,… is just part of the overwhelming scientific evidence that basically tells mankind that we,… “human beings are now carrying out a large scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future.”

since the OP I’ve been

“hopeful” that by repeatedly pointing out the basic science, eventually it is going to make some headway decreasing the knowledge gap between the concerns of what hard science scientists have come to understand AND what the non-science trained public (at large) thinks it knows

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

bottom line, because the basic science of CO2 and CC (like the idea of gravitation) is immutable,… deniers can ignore climate change, but climate change will not ignore deniers

so given the unvarnished truth,… don’t understand why all catholics don’t

agree w/ the pope and his idea of ecological sins

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

 

[HarryStotle]

 

[Ender]

sadly Americans do not know much about basic global warming science

So says the person who posts cartoons to support his position, which effectively demonstrates the difference between asserting something and providing an argument to support his claims.

 

[phaster]

says the person who posts cartoons to support his position

so cartoons to make a point is something you disapprove of?

huh,…

then I am guessing you would disapprove of WattsUpWithThat, which uses cartoons (to push climate denialism)

‘All you need to know about Climate Change… in cartoons’

Anthony Watts / November 19, 2019

‘All you need to know about Climate Change… in cartoons’ celebrates 10 years of cartooning since the Climategate story broke. It covers climate science and scientists, uncertainty, weather, energy, politics, the Green Blob, the BBC, climate heroes, the environment, renewables, fracking and the future. And it still manages to be a mercifully short and easy to read book with, of course, loads of cartoons!

It is the ideal Christmas present to encourage any sceptic and to challenge alarmists everywhere, while entertaining everyone in between.

‘All you need to know about Climate Change… in cartoons’ – Watts Up With That?

Overall, we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on the promotion of consistent human influenced climate denialism propaganda.

Watts Up with That - Media Bias/Fact Check

99.999% sure if an unbiased third party looked at the text (in this thread offered as proof) about denial of climate change, they would find thoughts more akin to the nonsensical ramblings of homer simpson rather than the elegant physics of einstein

given this is a catholic forum, perhaps it was divine intervention that ultimately caused the use of apropos images (cartoons in this case) to point out the simple truth that people all too often over estimate their god given talents AND that professional climate skeptics are essentially selling an idea akin to a useless (or perhaps harmful) product like snake oil

as for the last image in the post (the cartoon of the pope),…

What do you think of climate change? Social Justice

what the Church is doing is recognizing other scientific authorities, and applying moral teachings to those realities sadly Americans do not know much about basic global warming science AND all too often people think they smarter than they actually are! (This uploaded content is no longer available. this is because the issue is compounded by active resistance (This uploaded content is no longer available. to the well understood basic science,… www.TinyURL.com/HowBigIsTheEarth si…

perhaps it is a divine sign (after all it is a post on CAF) that shows the pope is offering a moral truth alternative to the liberal/conservative dichotomy AND hypocrisy associated w/ the bitter partisan politics of climate change

“Hypocritical behavior comes from the great liar, the devil,” who is a huge hypocrite himself, the pope said, and he makes those like him on earth his “heirs.”

“Hypocrisy is the language of the devil; it is the language of evil that enters our heart and is sown by the devil. You can’t live with hypocritical people, but they exist,” the pope said.

Hypocrisy, the pope said, is common “in the battle for power, for example, (with) envy, jealousies that make you appear to be one way and inside there is poison for killing because hypocrisy always kills, sooner or later, it kills.”

www.cruxnow.com/cns/2019/10/jesus-does-not-tolerate-hypocrisy-pope-says/

…as they say, god works in mysterious ways

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

 

[Tolle_Lege]

It’s clear that Pope Francis does not take climate change as seriously as he claims, with all of his warnings and condemnations about nuclear power. If you want to avoid burning any fossil fuels and retain a massive, reliable, base power source, nuclear is the only option besides, to a degree, hydro.

 

[Ender]

so cartoons to make a point is something you disapprove of?

What I disapprove of are unsubstantiated and disparaging assertions about those who disagree with you. On the other hand, it is what one has come to expect from the crowd pushing AGW.

 

[phaster]

It’s clear that Pope Francis does not take climate change as seriously as he claims, with all of his warnings and condemnations about nuclear power. If you want to avoid burning any fossil fuels and retain a massive, reliable, base power source, nuclear is the only option besides, to a degree, hydro.

WRT condemnations about nuclear power,… seems pope francis is thinking specifically about weapons

Pope Francis at Nagasaki and Hiroshima makes impassioned plea for peace and nuclear disarmament

From Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the only two cities in the world to be destroyed by atomic bombs, Pope Francis made an impassioned appeal for the total elimination of nuclear arms. “The use of atomic energy for purposes of war is immoral, just as the possession of atomic weapons is immoral,” he said. “We will be judged on this.”

www.americamagazine.org/faith/2019/11/24/pope-francis-nagasaki-and-hiroshima-makes-impassioned-plea-peace-and-nuclear

WRT energy production,… agree we need it!!!

What do you think of climate change? Social Justice

I agree with you but it’s going to be a long slow slog to get Americans to agree with it. Our early nuclear plants are not an example of the technology available today. We’ve learned much and can really build safe effective plants and handle the waste in a completely safe manner. The current new movie Chernobyl just sets us back even further. I also think we need to continue to promote wind and solar power. We need multiple solutions to our energy thirst and should not neglect any one of t…

BUT as they say,… the devil is in the details

For well over a decade, Bill Gates has funded TerraPower, a startup seeking to design, build, and commercialize a revolutionary nuclear reactor. Their traveling-wave reactor design uses depleted uranium to operate, rather than uranium-235 like in current reactors, and is built so that if left unattended, it will slowly shut down, making a catastrophic meltdown a near impossibility. Optimistic estimates from the company suggest that current American stockpiles of spent nuclear fuel could be used in traveling-wave reactors to electrify the entire country for hundreds of years, and for far cheaper than current nuclear plants. This is carbon-free, baseload electricity that could easily provide the foundation for a next-generation, renewable-focused energy grid.

In partnership with the state-owned China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), TerraPower was preparing to break ground on a prototype 600 MegaWatt reactor in Fujian province, but then political disaster struck. Late in 2018, Department of Energy policy changes stemming from the U.S. - China trade war forced TerraPower to end its agreement with the CNNC, leaving their potentially game-changing reactor without a home.

This saga brings up a key question: why was an American company, funded by one of America’s most wealthy and respected philanthropists, going to China to build their next-generation nuclear reactor? Why not here? The simple answer is that Americans are notoriously afraid of and unfriendly toward nuclear power.

www.realclearscience.com/blog/2019/11/26/why_arent_we_building_a_traveling_wave_reactor_in_the_us.html

Disposing of San Onofre's nuclear waste is a tricky task - Los Angeles Times

 

[Tolle_Lege]

In other recent comments, he stated he was also against nuclear power. He probably assumes that the byproducts can be used as weapons, or that they’re not safe (i.e., of the same construction and operation standards of the 1970s), but that is not true.

 

[somyasood]

this is the beautiful season of cold , mixed with Christmas Carols. hope to take best pictures and photography.

 

[Freddy]

We used to have fire warning ratings in Australia from high to very high to severe to extreme. In the last few years we have had to add another. ‘Extreme’ didn’t cover it. We now have ‘Catastrophic’ which effectively means there is no hope of controlling the fire. Leave now as there is a very high chance that deaths will occur. Sydney experienced that rating for the first time ever just two weeks ago.

NSW could see a million hectares burned so far this fire season. That is about the same as the past three fire seasons combined – and we’re at the very start of the fire season.

Droughts in northern NSW are the worst on record.

Last Tuesday, smoke pollution in the city itself (not out in the bush) was eleven times higher than the reading for ‘hazardous’.

We need coller weather and rain. But no rain is forecast and the temperatures this week across some parts of the state are expected to reach well into the 40’s (that’s north of 110 F).

This is not normal.

 

[HarryStotle]

We used to have fire warning ratings in Australia from high to very high to severe to extreme. In the last few years we have had to add another. ‘Extreme’ didn’t cover it. We now have ‘Catastrophic’ which effectively means there is no hope of controlling the fire. Leave now as there is a very high chance that deaths will occur. Sydney experienced that rating for the first time ever just two weeks ago.

NSW could see a million hectares burned so far this fire season. That is about the same as the past three fire seasons combined – and we’re at the very start of the fire season.

Droughts in northern NSW are the worst on record.

Last Tuesday, smoke pollution in the city itself (not out in the bush) was eleven times higher than the reading for ‘hazardous’.

We need coller weather and rain. But no rain is forecast and the temperatures this week across some parts of the state are expected to reach well into the 40’s (that’s north of 110 F).

This is not normal.

Actually, it has been…

…before 1910 when CO2 levels were way below (~290 ppm) where they are now and temperatures went above 120°F in the shade a number of times, even reaching 124°C at Mildura.

Trendline down if temperatures from before 1910 are retained in the dataset.

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

In case you are not paying attention, every temperature except one on the graph is above 110°F because it is a graph of the hottest temperatures on record at all Australian weather stations. Ergo 110°C is hardly an anomaly or aberration.

 

[twf]

I’m smart enough to know that I am, frankly, FAR too dull to begin to comprehend the math and other principles that demonstrate that the universe is just under 14 billion years old. I must hope that the CAFers who question this almost universally accepted science have advanced graduate degrees in astrophysics / cosmology.

 

[Freddy]

In case you are not paying attention, every temperature except one on the graph is above 110°F because it is a graph of the hottest temperatures on record at all Australian weather stations. Ergo 110°C is hardly an anomaly or aberration.

Of course it’s not an anomaly. A few high temps are par for the course. But it’s a combination of a variety of effects that are causing the problem. There’s something called the FFDI (the Forest Fire Danger Index) and it’s a fact that we are now experiencing well above average or record breaking fire conditions over most of the country.

'The director of Wollongong’s University Bradstock says it has put NSW in uncharted territory: “For the forests and woodlands in the eastern half of the state, this is unprecedented.

“Natural features in the landscape which often impede fires, like these wetter forest communities, are just burning. There is likely to be long-term ecological and other environmental consequences.”

The director of the fire centre at the University of Tasmania, David Bowman, says the unprecedented nature of the fires this spring can be seen through their intensity and geographical spread across the country, noting at time of writing there were fires in five states.’ Australia bushfires factcheck: are this year's fires unprecedented? | Bushfires | The Guardian

Even rain forests are burning. Wetlands have dried up and are burning. We’re losing forests that haven’t burned for a thousand years. We’ve been warned about this. We were told it was going to happen. This has not come as a surprise.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

In case you are not paying attention, every temperature except one on the graph is above 110°F because it is a graph of the hottest temperatures on record at all Australian weather stations. Ergo 110°C is hardly an anomaly or aberration.

Of course it’s not an anomaly. A few high temps are par for the course. But it’s a combination of a variety of effects that are causing the problem. There’s something called the FFDI (the Forest Fire Danger Index) and it’s a fact that we are now experiencing well above average or record breaking fire conditions over most of the country.

“Well above average conditions,” says absolutely nothing about climate change, which seemed to be the implication of your original point.

The temperature data shows it is within the range of normal, contrary to your claim that temperatures “north of 110°F” are NOT normal. So now you are moving to the confluence of conditions is what is not normal.

Perhaps, those are unusual, but they have happened in the past when CO2 levels were >100 ppm below what they are today. Not everything can be blamed on climate change.

And yes, there likely were times in the past when even rain forests that were untouched for centuries also burned. That often depends upon how those forests were managed. If extreme fire suppression techniques were utilized to manage fire outbreaks then the amount of fuel load permitted to build up in the forest can result in enormous and unmanageable burns. This is a major issue in California, for example.

 

[HarryStotle]

steve-b:

IOW YOU have no answers ?

You didn’t ask a question. But no, I don’t know exactly how scientists came to the 13.7 billion year estimate, but I have no reason to doubt that if I wanted to find out, I could.

As for previous ice ages and global warmings before people were even here, (according to science) it means whether we are here or not, ice ages and global warmings, will occur. IOW we don’t control it.

That previous warmings had nothing to do with man does not mean this warming has nothing to do with man.

Well if they happened without man and both warming and cooling occurred when CO2 levels were far above where they are today, we have no reason to think that a small spike in CO2 levels today will be catastrophic, just because man is involved.

That this warming appears to have something to do with man does not mean this warming will necessarily be completely unlike every other warming.

Granted, human beings do eventually mess up what we touch, but I am pretty certain God knew that in his infinite wisdom. Even contributing a few PPM of CO2 to the atmosphere will likely not upend the entire dynamic of the biosphere that has survived with and without us for some 3.5 billion years.

And since scientists don’t really know what an increase of about 120 ppm of CO2 will actually do to the atmosphere or to the planet, advocating for a virtual halt to the agricultural, commercial and industrial endeavours of human kind seems a tad overreactive.

Seems more like a wealth distribution plan than one that will have any effect at all on the climate. But, of course, that is why every wanna-be socialist is fully on board with the hysteria.

 

[EndTimes]

According to our own Department of Defense here in the States, they project that as many as two billion people will be heavily affected negatively by climate change, so aren’t they important or do we just blow them off?

Rather … Do you have blind faith IN the DoD?

_

 

[Bruce_Killian]

God repeatedly used climate often droughts to discipline the nations particularly Israel. So since bad weather is from God to discipline the nations and Satan is corrupting the peoples of the nations he knows that God will often discipline them with bad weather. Therefore Satan works to deceive the nations into thinking that they have control over the weather (other than by living righteously). When God disciplines the nations with bad weather Satan takes credit and gets more control over the nations as has been his goal since at least Babel.

 

[Metis1]

So God kills even innocent children because some people in society do wrong? Sorry, but I cannot accept that because that turns God into a pathological maniac.

 

[Metis1]

Non-sequitur