Global Warning/Climate Change

Things that are not part of politics happening presently and how we approach or address it as Anabaptists.
User avatar
JimFoxvog
Posts: 2891
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:56 pm
Location: Northern Illinois
Affiliation: MCUSA

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by JimFoxvog »

Sudsy wrote:Wow ! 649 posts. I wonder what the runner-up thread post count is ? Should be a post count sorting option.

Curious if anyone has changed their mind yet from their view before this thread began ? Any converts ?
I've at least gained a bit more respect for the other opinion.
0 x
RZehr
Posts: 7024
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:42 am
Affiliation: Cons. Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by RZehr »

Bootstrap wrote:
RZehr wrote:Boot, how do you explain the long ago swings in temperature?
Explain what? If you ask me a more specific question, I think I can find you a summary of what mainstream scientists say about it.
I mean this kind of stuff:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-nort ... -tropical/
And:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... 2-research
As a believer in a young earth, it’s hard for me to be too concerned about the consequences of manmade global warming considering these articles. Meaning if the earth was this different in the last 4000 years, then we probably will be okay with a rise in temperature.
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14438
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

RZehr wrote:I mean this kind of stuff:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-nort ... -tropical/
And:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.thegua ... 2-research
As a believer in a young earth, it’s hard for me to be too concerned about the consequences of manmade global warming considering these articles. Meaning if the earth was this different in the last 4000 years, then we probably will be okay with a rise in temperature.
Depends what you mean by "okay". Many of our current cities would be lost along with significant amounts of coastline and some island nations, if scientists are right. That's the kind of thing we call a natural disaster when it happens today. We would move to other places, build new cities, etc., but that's disruptive and expensive. As Lester points out, Canada might well benefit.

Some change will happen naturally, and we have to adapt to that. That change is slower, giving us more time to adapt. But scientists are telling us that we are causing our own problems here, on a shorter timeline. I don't know how old the earth is, and I'm not convinced that scientists know how everything came to be. But I think they know a lot about the current climate and what we can measure now.

To me, this is a lot like the federal deficit. It's invisible, but it has consequences. We can choose to clean up after ourselves now, or we can leave the problem for future generations. The longer we let it slide, the more expensive it is to fix.

If you make a mess, clean it up. It's a good principle to live by.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14438
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

I'd like to backtrack a little to look at an exchange that went badly, perhaps starting here.
Bootstrap wrote:
Robert wrote:It is funny that as soon as a warm spell hits, they blame climate change, but when cold spells hit, they claim it is just a variance and no indication that climate change is not happening.
Who is "they"? Certainly not scientists, who know the difference between local regional weather and global climate changes. For another look at weather in one region, here are the January 2018 temperatures for the South Pole with comparison to historical averages.

You have to look at weather everywhere and average it out over a year to see this year's average global temperature. You have to look at that over a period of time to see global warming trends.
I thought that Robert was implying that "they" do not know the difference between weather and climate change, or perhaps implying that there was no real difference and "they" keep changing their position depending on the current weather. I don't know who he meant by "they" - scientists? people like me on MN? So I asked who "they" are, and explained my understanding of the relationship between local weather and global average temperature. Robert's response:
Robert wrote:I am so glad you told me this because I am just too stupid to know it.
I don't think that Robert is stupid, and I don't think I said or implied that. I apologize if it came across this way, it's not what was going on in my head.

I did think Robert was implying that "they" don't know this or that "they" are stupid. And I wasn't quite sure if Robert is making a clear distinction between local regional weather and climate change or not - he seemed to be implying that the cold weather meant we should not take climate change seriously. Regardless, if we are going to discuss this issue, I would like to focus on the issues and arguments made, not on the people.

To me, a great deal of this thread seems to be picking a fight with "them", implying that "they" don't know what they are talking about. And if I don't agree, then I become part of "them". I'm not sure who "they" are - scientists? educated people? anyone who agrees with the mainstream scientific position on global warming?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Sudsy
Posts: 5854
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Sudsy »

The men I have contact with outside of church mainly scoff at the thought of global warming and when it gets colder than the historical average (reflected on internet weather updates) ore even last year, they laugh at what scientists are saying. I think many men scoff at lawyers, politicians, religions and scientists and those who appear to be 'in the know' when things don't appear or are not what these 'intellectuals' think. When climate change does come up in a conversation, in my experience, men don't see any real threat.

Some I have talked to do not see us changing our ways of life here in Canada in a way that costs millions of dollars on something that may right itself if it is a problem. Especially when our contribution to the over all problem is so little and others who contribute so much more are not really willing to allow life changes to impact them negatively to solve this issue. In our church group I haven't yet heard the subject raised at all.

Others may have a totally different experience than mine. Most of these men seem to treat the deficit similar and that issue I would think has more clarity to it's threat as not many disagree that it is a growing issue. Probably because it is an issue experienced in our home budgeting.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8520
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Robert »

Bootstrap wrote:So I asked who "they" are, and explained my understanding of the relationship between local weather and global average temperature.
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... 640#p24694
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14438
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

Robert wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:So I asked who "they" are, and explained my understanding of the relationship between local weather and global average temperature.
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... 640#p24694
OK. Does "they" refer to Al Gore and "Dr. Michael McMann"?

From the Twitter feed, I cannot tell what Dr. Michael McMann said about this, can you summarize? I don't see any indication here that Gore doesn't understand the difference, what am I missing?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
GaryK
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: Georgia
Affiliation: Unaffiliated

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by GaryK »

Bootstrap wrote: To me, a great deal of this thread seems to be picking a fight with "them", implying that "they" don't know what they are talking about. And if I don't agree, then I become part of "them". I'm not sure who "they" are - scientists? educated people? anyone who agrees with the mainstream scientific position on global warming?
If this is your main concern then why not stick with the "picking a fight" concern rather than posting so many charts and graphs and push-backs that make it quite clear which side you are on? Are you implying that you are not a part of the "them" Robert is talking about? The defensiveness of your posts seems to suggest you are. It seems to me that it is quite clear that Robert isn't going to stop posting his stuff. Perhaps you should start another thread promoting your view on this matter rather than feeling it your duty to always correct what he posts.
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14438
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by Bootstrap »

GaryK wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:To me, a great deal of this thread seems to be picking a fight with "them", implying that "they" don't know what they are talking about. And if I don't agree, then I become part of "them". I'm not sure who "they" are - scientists? educated people? anyone who agrees with the mainstream scientific position on global warming?
If this is your main concern then why not stick with the "picking a fight" concern rather than posting so many charts and graphs and push-backs that make it quite clear which side you are on? Are you implying that you are not a part of the "them" Robert is talking about? The defensiveness of your posts seems to suggest you are. It seems to me that it is quite clear that Robert isn't going to stop posting his stuff. Perhaps you should start another thread promoting your view on this matter rather than feeling it your duty to always correct what he posts.
Clearly, I do believe that the mainstream scientific community knows what they are talking about. And this thread often seems to be saying there's something wrong with people like me who believe that. At times, it also implies that no real scientist believes what you read in every single mainstream scientific publication related to the topic or in the declarations of every related scientific association, or that scientists don't know very basic things that they clearly do know. I don't think that's true or fair.

Why the charts and graphs? Because these are questions about data. At least, they are if we take the questions seriously. If the topic is worth discussing, then it is worth taking the time to understand why scientists say what they do. And I do object to treating this as a fight about "us" versus "them". This isn't the kind of thing we should divide over in the Kingdom. And to me, this kind of thread makes people who trust mainstream science feel very uncomfortable here, sometimes even targeted. Or maybe I'm the only person who has felt that way, I'm not sure.

But sometimes it feels like people are angry that I express my views on a topic they insist should never die. I don't start threads to promote my views on this kind of thing.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
GaryK
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: Georgia
Affiliation: Unaffiliated

Re: Global Warning/Climate Change

Post by GaryK »

Bootstrap wrote:
GaryK wrote:
Bootstrap wrote:To me, a great deal of this thread seems to be picking a fight with "them", implying that "they" don't know what they are talking about. And if I don't agree, then I become part of "them". I'm not sure who "they" are - scientists? educated people? anyone who agrees with the mainstream scientific position on global warming?
If this is your main concern then why not stick with the "picking a fight" concern rather than posting so many charts and graphs and push-backs that make it quite clear which side you are on? Are you implying that you are not a part of the "them" Robert is talking about? The defensiveness of your posts seems to suggest you are. It seems to me that it is quite clear that Robert isn't going to stop posting his stuff. Perhaps you should start another thread promoting your view on this matter rather than feeling it your duty to always correct what he posts.
Clearly, I do believe that the mainstream scientific community knows what they are talking about. And this thread often seems to be saying there's something wrong with people like me who believe that. At times, it also implies that no real scientist believes what you read in every single mainstream scientific publication related to the topic or in the declarations of every related scientific association, or that scientists don't know very basic things that they clearly do know.

Why the charts and graphs? Because these are questions about data. At least, they are if we take the questions seriously. If the topic is worth discussing, then it is worth taking the time to understand why scientists say what they do. And I do object to treating this as a fight about "us" versus "them". This isn't the kind of thing we should divide over in the Kingdom. And to me, this kind of thread makes people who trust mainstream science feel very uncomfortable here, sometimes even targeted. Or maybe I'm the only person who has felt that way, I'm not sure.
But have you considered that it could be perceived that much of what you post seems to be saying there's something wrong with people like those who don't agree with the mainstream scientific community?

I found it interesting that you choose not to agree with the mainstream scientific community on the issue of human origins. Why the picking and choosing?
0 x
Post Reply