Global Warming - Believers Skeptical (America, church, bible, quote)

[SeekerSA]

Something I have come to notice is that there is a pattern to the mainstream evangelical beliefs and certain scientific observations.

20 years ago, I listened to an evangelist that had a go at global warming and the suave dismissal that this was all going to be fixed when Jesus returned, that there will be JUST enough oil to last the human race until Jesus returns etc.

Now I am wondering why there is such a vehement opposition to caring for the planet seeing we are supposed to be it's stewards.

Our friend Campbell34 offered up a site disputing Ice core dating and the article itself cites Zbigniew Jaworowski extensively, a real scientist yet he is on the skeptics bench on global warming but publishes in a non-peer reviewed 21st Century Science and Technology periodical.

Anyone else know more than the Wiki link of this guy?

Why is looking after our planet dismissed by believers as unnecessary?

If the second coming is at the doorstep which it has been for the last 80 years, surely there should be plans for future generations to also enjoy this planet?

If evangelicals really believe this nonsense, why still get married and have kids with the potential that they might grow up unbelievers?

[kdbrich]

I believe the earth is, or was warming. There are actually recent studies in the last few years that would lead one to conclude that it is cooling.

I believe it's the epitome of arrogance to suggest that we have the ability to reverse what is normal, cyclical change.

Yes--we should stop polluting, and yes--we need to care for the environment, and the animals in it. As a lot of evangelicals are also hunters, it's true that we tend to care quite a bit about the envinronment--it's in our best interest if we make sure there are tasty animals thriving.

[SeekerSA]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

I believe the earth is, or was warming. There are actually recent studies in the last few years that would lead one to conclude that it is cooling.

I believe it's the epitome of arrogance to suggest that we have the ability to reverse what is normal, cyclical change.

How do you know it is only cyclic? How do you know that we cannot reverse it? Less deforestation would help in converting CO2 to O2 which we need to survive. It is more than just greenhouse gases.

The USA consumes 25% of the world's oil and you only make up 5% of the world population. (2006 stats)

Yes--we should stop polluting, and yes--we need to care for the environment, and the animals in it. As a lot of evangelicals are also hunters, it's true that we tend to care quite a bit about the environment--it's in our best interest if we make sure there are tasty animals thriving.

Well hunting where there are policies in place to breed animals for this like we do here is OK. Just do not try it in a national reserve, that gets you 20 years in prison.

[MontanaGuy]

I have sensed this same attitude among mainly religious conservative Republicans and many of them are quite vocal about it. I think it's largely an American phenomenon and there is a distinct distrust of science in general. I really can't understand it because there are detailed and accurate records of the temperature for any city that goes back to the 1800's and all you have to do is look it up and see for yourself.
I also have the feeling in America that there's a cultural factor involved as well. Many people who live in smaller communities, are religious and sometimes less educated than people who live in big cities seem to feel as though the less religious big city people look down on them and they resent it. I've talked to people in small towns in Montana who I know personally and when the subject of global warming comes up they seem to view it as some kind of conspiracy. My StepFather is one of them. He's very religious and conservative and even though he's a pretty bright guy he actually gets mad because he thinks the whole thing is some kind of corporate scheme to make more money. I also agree that their religious views are playing a part in all of this because they expect the end of the world scenario is coming soon so they're looking at everything from a very different perspective.

[kdbrich]

Originally Posted by SeekerSA

How do you know it is only cyclic? How do you know that we cannot reverse it? Less deforestation would help in converting CO2 to O2 which we need to survive. It is more than just greenhouse gases.

I agree. Selective logging, while planting new is important. We need to preserve our forests. We've got a lot of forest land in the US right now.

The USA consumes 25% of the world's oil and you only make up 5% of the world population. (2006 stats)

For national security, I believe it would be good to reduce that. It just simply takes oil to run our military machines. We need to tap into our own reserves more, too.

Well hunting where there are policies in place to breed animals for this like we do here is OK. Just do not try it in a national reserve, that gets you 20 years in prison.

Yes, I imagine it would. My point though is that guys who like to hunt/fish have a vested interest in making sure the land/rivers/streams are clean.

[SeekerSA]

This same evangelist dismissed the ozone holes. He merely attributed it to the seasonal wobble of the globe exposing less of the atmosphere to UV bombardment. Turns out that is not true.

Ozone layer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The ozone layer can be depleted by free radical catalysts, including nitric oxide (NO), hydroxyl (OH), atomic chlorine (Cl), and atomic bromine (Br). While there are natural sources for all of these species, the concentrations of chlorine and bromine have increased markedly in recent years due to the release of large quantities of manmade organohalogen compounds, especially chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and bromofluorocarbons.[3] These highly stable compounds are capable of surviving the rise to the stratosphere, where Cl and Br radicals are liberated by the action of ultraviolet light. Each radical is then free to initiate and catalyze a chain reaction capable of breaking down over 100,000 ozone molecules. The breakdown of ozone in the stratosphere results in the ozone molecules being unable to absorb ultraviolet radiation. Consequently, unabsorbed and dangerous ultraviolet-B radiation is able to reach the Earth’s surface. Ozone levels, over the northern hemisphere, have been dropping by 4% per decade. Over approximately 5% of the Earth's surface, around the north and south poles, much larger (but seasonal) declines have been seen; these are the ozone holes.

Regulation

In 1978, the United States, Canada and Norway, enacted bans on CFC-containing aerosol sprays that are thought to damage the ozone layer. The European Community rejected an analogous proposal to do the same. In the U.S., chlorofluorocarbons continued to be used in other applications, such as refrigeration and industrial cleaning, until after the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole in 1985. After negotiation of an international treaty (the Montreal Protocol), CFC production was sharply limited beginning in 1987 and phased out completely by 1996.
On August 2, 2003, scientists announced that the depletion of the ozone layer may be slowing down due to the international ban on CFCs.[4] Three satellites and three ground stations confirmed that the upper atmosphere ozone depletion rate has slowed down significantly during the past decade. The study was organized by the American Geophysical Union. Some breakdown can be expected to continue due to CFCs used by nations which have not banned them, and due to gases which are already in the stratosphere. CFCs have very long atmospheric lifetimes, ranging from 50 to over 100 years, so the final recovery of the ozone layer is expected to require several lifetimes.

So it appears that what we do does affect the planet.

[Mr Floyd]

I hear a saying that may have come from Ben Franklin when I think of many people's (believers and nonbelievers) attitude about the environment...That is..."Penny wise and pound foolish."

There have been ongoing discussions about the ozone layer, global warming and other environmental issues. These sort of macro events that may or may not be natural earthly patterns over time. We focus on green technology and alternative energy in partial response. We talk about responsible development also.

Yes..."Penny wise and pound foolish." But what seems so often neglected is the basics of clean water and air. Clean water is as big a global issue as the warming of the planet. Oh sure. It doesn't have the same sexy apocalyptic appeal but it is, and will be, the cause of starvation, disease and death long before the caps melt, the seas rise and a new ice age begins or whatever the warming will bring.

Now, at the risk of over simplifying...In the Bible we read, or hear, that man was created in the image of God. From and Indian perspective (The wisdom of Gita) we also read about man at the top of the totem pole so-to-speak. Unfortunately, some may take this as an opportunity to take advantage or have disregard for all "lesser" forms of life. Even if we are all God's creatures.

[tongpa-nyi]

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

I have sensed this same attitude among mainly religious conservative Republicans and many of them are quite vocal about it.

Yup.

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

I think it's largely an American phenomenon and there is a distinct distrust of science in general.

Yup.

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

I really can't understand it because there are detailed and accurate records of the temperature for any city that goes back to the 1800's and all you have to do is look it up and see for yourself.

Go figure... What's going on in the minds of American "Christians"?

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

I also have the feeling in America that there's a cultural factor involved as well.

Yup.

The Tea Party is a manifestation of this unique blend of religion, Americanism, paranoia and materialism. I find it curiously odd at best, repugnant at worst. There seems to be no way to reach these people with evidence or reasoning. We can only look on in wonder and witness the ebb and flow of a phenomenon more inscrutable than the mating rituals of squid.

[balljoint_]

Originally Posted by MontanaGuy

I've talked to people in small towns in Montana who I know personally and when the subject of global warming comes up they seem to view it as some kind of conspiracy.

smart people

[Nikk]

Originally Posted by SeekerSA

Something I have come to notice is that there is a pattern to the mainstream evangelical beliefs and certain scientific observations.

20 years ago, I listened to an evangelist that had a go at global warming and the suave dismissal that this was all going to be fixed when Jesus returned, that there will be JUST enough oil to last the human race until Jesus returns etc.

Now I am wondering why there is such a vehement opposition to caring for the planet seeing we are supposed to be it's stewards.

Our friend Campbell34 offered up a site disputing Ice core dating and the article itself cites Zbigniew Jaworowski extensively, a real scientist yet he is on the skeptics bench on global warming but publishes in a non-peer reviewed 21st Century Science and Technology periodical.

Anyone else know more than the Wiki link of this guy?

Why is looking after our planet dismissed by believers as unnecessary?

If the second coming is at the doorstep which it has been for the last 80 years, surely there should be plans for future generations to also enjoy this planet?

If evangelicals really believe this nonsense, why still get married and have kids with the potential that they might grow up unbelievers?

Global Warming is no longer the PC (politically correct) term. It is now "Climate Change" because no scientist can verify that there is a warming. And in many cases a cooling. So, to scare the public they have now called it climate change, so if the average temperature goes up they are correct and if the average temperature goes down they are correct. Because this is all climate change!

To answer you question above which is not related, but you somehow weave it to be related. Christians (the people I think you are refering to as believers) will continue to have children and families and get married regardless of the political or economic conditions. This is because it is a mandate from God. Namely "to be fruitful and multiply". The correct way to be fruitful (have children) is first to marry. So, these will never cease. It is the ungodly who require men and woman to abstain. And we all know the problems that happens due to this (aka the Catholic Church who has put man's laws over God's laws and made the word of God of none effect!).

It is not for the past 80 years that Christ was to return, but the last 2000 years. But yet we will still wait, because it is imminent.