Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A fourteen year drought in the American Southwest has Lake Mead dangerously low and the Colorado River drying up.  http://news.yahoo.com/video/western-u-drought-puts-big-003946346-cbs.html .

 .

As sometimesaint pointed out on another thread (http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/62702-weather-end-times/):

Extreme events are increasing and more likely to occur with more heat in the air/water.

http://www.ncdc.noaa...ate-perspective

 

I don't know about Elijah and the climate. But this winter has been the warmest on record in Alaska. The phenomenon of Global Warming is causing the Arctic Oscillation that is freezing much of the north eastern US.

 

Should we respond by denial, or is it time to get real?

Link to comment

The time for prevention is past. We do not have the ability to prevent it now. Mitigating it a bit might help some. Right now we need to prepare.

 

How? I really don't know. I'm more worried about the effects triggering food shortages and messing up the food chain rather then the temperature going up a degree or two. The only way to undo the effects currently available is priesthood power and I doubt God will let us use it to do so unless we really clean up our acts.

Link to comment

A fourteen year drought in the American Southwest has Lake Mead dangerously low and the Colorado River drying up.  http://news.yahoo.com/video/western-u-drought-puts-big-003946346-cbs.html .

 .

As sometimesaint pointed out on another thread (http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/62702-weather-end-times/):

Extreme events are increasing and more likely to occur with more heat in the air/water.

http://www.ncdc.noaa...ate-perspective

 

I don't know about Elijah and the climate. But this winter has been the warmest on record in Alaska. The phenomenon of Global Warming is causing the Arctic Oscillation that is freezing much of the north eastern US.

 

Should we respond by denial, or is it time to get real?

Oh, please. You cannot show any connection to global warming. If anything it's the sins of man wroughting the wrath of God. And I'm not talikng about being bad stewarts over our resources. Good grief.

Link to comment

Oh geez....not this crap again. Man made global warming is a myth. I am sorry but it is. This is not the board to get into it, so I won't. A few scientists (but mostly politicians and enterprising minds) have done everything they can to convince society there is consensus. In reality there is none. I have done the research on this. With that, I bow out of the thread because I have found there is no reasonable discussion on this. 

Link to comment

Oh, please. You cannot show any connection to global warming. If anything it's the sins of man wroughting the wrath of God. And I'm not talikng about being bad stewarts over our resources. Good grief.

Please?  O.K., Thank you.

What hath God wrought, and all that.

But what does the Stewart clan have to do with it.  Hey, were they in cahoots with Robert the Bruce, or with William Wallace ("Braveheart")?

Link to comment

Please? O.K., Thank you.

What hath God wrought, and all that.

But what does the Stewart clan have to do with it. Hey, were they in cahoots with Robert the Bruce, or with William Wallace ("Braveheart")?

You know what I meant. To fear the gas you and I produce in order to stay alive is stupid and it's disheartening for someone of your intelligence to believe it's gonna kill us all. And I was only offering a possible suggestion alternative to your anthropomorphic global warming creed in that God is unleashing the true kraken upon us mortal men. But when God does so it has everything to do with mam not obeying His commandments and nothing to do with building smoke stacks and driving SUV's.

Good grief

Link to comment

Oh, please. You cannot show any connection to global warming. If anything it's the sins of man wroughting the wrath of God. And I'm not talikng about being bad stewarts over our resources. Good grief.

The scriptures say before the Second Coming the whole world will be in commotion. These commotions wii be in response to the cold reception (pun intended) of the world's people to the message of the Restored Gospel, and for this reason the Lord is going to send forth great convulsions of nature. The Prophet Joseph Smith called these chastening meteorological and seismic forces "the sermon of nature." One imagines that when this time of great tribulation comes the spiritually blind will be placing the blame for these cataclysms of nature on all sorts of things except for the right thing -- their own wickedness and refusal to repent.

Link to comment

Oh geez....not this crap again. Man made global warming is a myth. I am sorry but it is. This is not the board to get into it, so I won't. A few scientists (but mostly politicians and enterprising minds) have done everything they can to convince society there is consensus. In reality there is none. I have done the research on this. With that, I bow out of the thread because I have found there is no reasonable discussion on this. 

 

97% of peer-reviewed climate papers disagree with you.

Link to comment

The scriptures say before the Second Coming the whole world will be in commotion. These commotions wii be in response to the cold reception (pun intended) of the world's people to the message of the Restored Gospel, and for this reason the Lord is going to send forth great convulsions of nature. The Prophet Joseph Smith called these chastening meteorological and seismic forces "the sermon of nature." One imagines that when this time of great tribulation comes the spiritually blind will be placing the blame for these cataclysms of nature on all sorts of things except for the right thing -- their own wickedness and refusal to repent.

 

You don't find it a bit presumptuous to blame cataclysms of nature on solely humankind's wickedness and refusal to repent?  

 

And FWIW, I live in Colorado, where we had severe flooding this past September in various places throughout Northern Colorado, with the City of Boulder being one of the hardest hit.  I was fortunate enough to not be affected by any of it, but I don't believe it's because I'm inherently more righteous than the people living in the places where the floods happened.  There are good, solid members of the Church who had parts of, or all of, their property and possessions destroyed.  It could have easily just as well happened to me.  

 

The focus should be on helping these people to rebuild their lives and livelihoods, and not placing any blame because they were supposedly not righteous enough.  The same goes for all natural disasters.  

Link to comment

The time for prevention is past. We do not have the ability to prevent it now. Mitigating it a bit might help some. Right now we need to prepare.

 

How? I really don't know. I'm more worried about the effects triggering food shortages and messing up the food chain rather then the temperature going up a degree or two. The only way to undo the effects currently available is priesthood power and I doubt God will let us use it to do so unless we really clean up our acts.

 

I am more worried about the economic tsunami headed our way.

Link to comment

I posted credible sources that reflect the mainstream, majority scientific consensus.  So your argument is really with them - not with me.  

Have you ever considered that the mainstream consensus is bought and paid for?  As much as we'd like to believe otherwise, "science" is not free from bias.

Link to comment

I belong to the R party (but I am moderate R), but still I have, ever since I started hearing about it, accepted that climate change is man-caused, i.e., that it is caused by our annual dumping of quadrillions of metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere. And because I accepted this from the first I have been at a loss to understand the resistance of religious conservatives to this idea (since I am myself a religious conservative). They say it is because the climate scientists (this so-called "consensus") have been bought and paid for; but you could say the same thing about, say, the Koch Bros. and the group they spend millions on every year. No, it is something deeper. An Evangelical guy I once worked with explained to me that it had to do with the presumption of Man thinking that he can change the weather.


 


"God is in control," he said to me, "not man."


 


"But man, through his sin--and certainly polluting our planet is a sin--can't man, through his sin, affect weather patterns?" I asked. (At this my friend simply turned from me and walked away.)


 


So anyway, here is my question to the doubters on this thread: Why the resistance? Where does it spring from? If 80% is consensus, and the consensus among working climate scientists on this question is 97-99%, what do you call that? Have these guys really all been bought? Has the "liberal media" really succeeded in bamboozling all of us?


 


Even Charles Krauthammer, perhaps the most respected conservative columnist writing today (i.e., respected by his compadres across the ideological divide) says that, while he is agnostic on the question of global warming, "Dumping quadrillions of metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere cannot be a good thing." (Not a verbatim quote.)


 


So, to repeat my question, why the resistance to the idea that dumping humongous quantities of pollution––heat––into the atmosphere is going to adversely affect the weather and cause warming? Why this resistance among religious conservatives? Where does it spring from? In short, what are the philosophical components of this resistance?


Link to comment

For fun I wondered about the increase in extreme events and searched Earthquake history on the USGS and Hurricane history on NOAA. The stats are , like all stats , highly interpretable , but they really don't show what some might wish they showed.

 

We have four seasons here in California. Fire, Flood, Earthquake, and Drought. Only one of these things is unrelated to weather.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Similar Content

    • By Anijen
      In reading some of the posts involving crimes [sexual assault], allegations, [Kavanaugh, President Russel Topic], or even controversial subjects such as Climate Change, Book of Mormon Geography, etc.. I have thought to myself there are a lot of faith based concepts juxtaposed up to scientific method and actual evidence. I'd like to discuss both and how it might affect our concept of that topic and what we take away.
      Personal belief systems can take root at a very early age, sometimes as a part of our cultural or ethnic identity. As a result, they are almost impossible to remove without eroding the soil of substance that gives one both a sense of identity and purpose. However, also true, as a consequence, most will not surrender a deeply held personal belief for fear it could lead to their spiritual loss or death. There is nothing wrong with personal beliefs. I, for one, am deeply faithful and active in church. Each person finds meaning and purpose in their own way and that is how it should be. There is a difference between faith and scientific method and reason. Personal faith is not a problem unless it gets in the way of objective forensic investigation and examination.
      For example; using faith based reasoning (let's say using the Bible to prove a point), the premise of an argument and the conclusion are a matter of personal belief and subsequently often considered above criticism. Those who question the premises of such beliefs, religious and otherwise dogmatic, are labeled heretics or worse. I have been called an apostate for not subscribing to a heartland theory, a racist for objecting to a safe-place policy, a climate denier for even questioning global warming (which I know there is climate change, my interests is, is it really all just man made?), a racist and a bigot for disagreeing about kneeling as a protest, a chauvinist pig for thinking men and woman are different and we should use the appropriate public bathrooms.  
      In faith and personal belief, there is little room for critical thinking and no place for doubt. As a consequence, the nature of faith runs contrary to knowledge building. My faith tells me men and women are both children of God and are different from each other, science also tells me there is a biological difference too. We still have debates to how we should act and even appropriate ways to speak. For example is refusing to bake a cake with a message one does not believe in compelling speech?
      Questions, questions, questions... When is testify via faith and testify via science appropriate and acceptable and when is it not?
    • By BCSpace
      Seems to me that one should establish water rights and resources before one builds.
    • By MormonFreeThinker
      Elder Oaks worries about "global warming, wars and rumors of wars, drought" and said "But as serious as all this is"

      Full Context

      "Every day we are assaulted with big worries: global warming, wars and rumors of wars, drought, a possible pandemic of some infectious disease, and a possible recession. Seacoast cities are worrying about the rising level of the ocean, which will bring ocean tides to their doorsteps or over the thresholds. But as serious as all this is, I worry more about the rising tide of evil in the world around us"

       

      Not politics, just sharing what a General Authority said. 

×
×
  • Create New...