Apocalyptic Predictions About the Environment

[smac97]

I am concerned about the environment, as I think we all should be.  Consider these comments from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism (emphases added) :

null

Quote

President Brigham Young taught: "The whole object of the creation of this world is to exalt the intelligences that are placed upon it, that they may live, endure, and increase for ever and ever. We are not here to quarrel and contend about the things of this world, but we are here to subdue and beautify it" (JD 7:290). Viewing themselves as tenants upon the earth, Latter-day Saints regard its resources as a sacred trust from God for the use of all while upon the earth: "I, the Lord make every man accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings, which I have made and prepared for my creatures" (D&C 104:13). The earth was created by Christ for specific purposes: "We will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; and we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them" (Abr. 3:24-25). President Brigham Young taught that the dominion God gives human beings is designed to test them, enabling them to show to themselves, to their fellow beings, and to God just how they would act if entrusted with God's power (Nibley, 1978, p. 90; see Purpose of Earth Life: LDS Perspective). Brigham Young supervised the relocation of the Church to the American West, which in the late 1840s was sparsely inhabited. His strong commitment to preservation of the environment and wise use of all natural resources influenced early Church colonizing efforts. Such prudence and wisdom in the use of land, water, air, and living things are still encouraged throughout the Church. In modern days of widespread concern for preserving the fragile relationships between the earth and its biosphere, Brigham Young's counsel remains vital: There is a great work for the Saints to do. Progress, and improve upon, and make beautiful everything around you. Cultivate the earth and cultivate your minds. Build cities, adorn your habitations, make gardens, orchards, and vineyards, and render the earth so pleasant that when you look upon your labours you may do so with pleasure, and that angels may delight to come and visit your beautiful locations [JD 8:83].

I am also concerned about "climate alarmism" and its attendant apocalyptic predictions, and the effect this is having on society.  See, e.g., here (an article in Forbes in November 2019) :

Quote

Environmental journalists and advocates have in recent weeks made a number of apocalyptic predictions about the impact of climate change. Bill McKibben suggested climate-driven fires in Australia had made koalas “functionally extinct.” Extinction Rebellion said “Billions will die” and “Life on Earth is dying.” Vice claimed the “collapse of civilization may have already begun.” 

Few have underscored the threat more than student climate activist Greta Thunberg and Green New Deal sponsor Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The latter said, “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change.” Says Thunberg in her new book, “Around 2030 we will be in a position to set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control that will lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.” 

Sometimes, scientists themselves make apocalyptic claims. “It’s difficult to see how we could accommodate a billion people or even half of that,” if Earth warms four degrees, said one earlier this year. “The potential for multi-breadbasket failure is increasing,” said another. If sea levels rise as much as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts, another scientist said, “It will be an unmanageable problem.” 

And here (an article on Medium.com) :

Quote

Al Gore has made huge profits promoting the global warming crisis. His famous movie, An Inconvenient Truth, generated 49.8 million dollars at the box office while costing 1 million. He is worth over 300 million and won a Nobel Prize for his work on global warming.

The movie caused a generation of children to fear for their future of the planet. Schools indoctrinate them with endless global warming and environmental emergency propaganda during their education. His movie showed apocalyptic predictions of rising seas, flooded coastal cities, dying polar bears and decreasing food supply. Most of those predictions were wrong or misleading.

And here ("4 Catastrophic Climate Predictions That Never Came True") :

Quote

Global Cooling

The Prediction: Top climate specialists and environmental activists predicted that “global cooling trends” observed between WWII and 1970 would result in a world “eleven degrees colder in the year 2000 ... about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” Bitter winters and floods from “delayed typhoons” would trigger massive drops in food production, followed by widespread famine.

The Prophecies:

• Newsweek Magazine’s "The Cooling World" Peter Gwynne April 28, 1975 
• Time Magazine’s “A New Ice Age?” April 28, 1974
• BBC’s Nigel Calder International Wildlife magazine, 1975
• Betty Friedan in Harper’s magazine, 1958
• University of California at Davis professor Kenneth Watt, Earth Day 1974

What Actually Happened: Global cooling trends didn’t continue unabated, and temperatures stabilized. Within a few years, the same alarmists were predicting a life-threatening rise in temperatures, presaging many of the same dire effects on plant and animal life. Those new predictions were continually revised as their “near certainty” collided with the truth year after year, but prophets seem unchastened by their abysmal historical accuracy. Newsweek issued a correction to the 1975 article in 2006.

The Great Die-Off

The Prediction: More women having babies in the developing world was expected to exceed the “carrying capacity” of the earth, experts were certain. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supply we make,” Ehrlich said. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years [1970-1980].” Ehrlich predicted that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.” This would lead to “an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity.”

The Prophecies:

• Paul Erlich, The Progressive, Earth Day 1970
• The Population Bomb, 1968 Bestseller

What Actually Happened: Motivated by the urgent call for population control and fears of famine, India and China performed millions of forced abortions and sterilizations. But the number of people at risk of starvation dropped from 25 percent to 10 percent globally as genetically modified seeds and advances in irrigation improved crop yields. Far from the Great Die-Off, the global population nearly doubled while agricultural capacity soared and rates of starvation plummeted. Ehrlich’s star has continued to rise, though his signature predictions were nonsense, and now holds an endowed chair in Population Studies at Stanford. The millions scapegoated by his fear-mongering have not fared as well.

 

Pollution Particle Clouds

The Prediction: Ecologists and environmentalists claimed that the buildup of nitrogen, dust, fumes, and other forms of pollution would make the air unbreathable by the mid-1980s. They predicted all urban dwellers would have to don gas masks to survive, that particle clouds would block the majority of sunlight from reaching earth, and that farm yields would drop as dust blotted out the sun.

The Prophecies:

• Ecologist Kenneth Watt
• Life Magazine, 1970
• Newsweek Magazine, 1970
• Science News, C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization, 1975

What Actually Happened: When these doomsayers were pronouncing the imminent death of our atmosphere, the rate of air pollution had already been falling for most of the world, usually in the absence of dedicated policy changes. Developments like air filtration, as well as an overall decline in household pollutants (like the smoke from cooking with coal or wood) greatly reduced the health risks of the particles that remained. Increased adoption of fossil fuels and electricity grids, rather than traditional stoves, accelerated the improvements.

75 Percent of Species Will Go Extinct

The Prediction: Alleged experts in biology and zoology predicted that of all species of animals alive in 1970, at least 75 percent would be extinct by 1995. They blamed human activities like hunting and farming for shrinking wild habitats and cited pollution and climate change as key drivers of the new extinctions. Paul Ehrlich claimed “[By 1985] all important animal life in the sea will be extinct."

The Prophecies:

• Sen. Gaylord Nelson, Look Magazine
• Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute
• The Sinking Ark 1979, Oxford biologist Norman Myers

What Actually Happened: You may have noticed that earth has not lost three-quarters of its 8.7 million species, and indeed total biomass continues to grow. 99 percent of all species that have ever existed are already extinct, and natural rates of extinction predict we might lose anywhere from 200 to 2,000 species per year without any human intervention. Since 2000, we’ve identified fewer than 20.

The language surrounding these various environmental disasters sounds much like Wednesday night’s town hall, and yet each thesis has faded from public consciousness, and the fear-mongers faced no accountability for their misplaced alarmism. Before we make unprecedented sacrifices to fight a climate phantom, let’s review the credibility of claims that the end is near—but really, this time.

And this Walter Williams opinion piece from October 2019:

Quote

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has published a new paper, “Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions.” Keep in mind that many of the grossly wrong environmentalist predictions were made by respected scientists and government officials. My question for you is: If you were around at the time, how many government restrictions and taxes would you have urged to avoid the predicted calamity?

As reported in The New York Times (August 1969), Stanford University biologist Dr. Paul Erhlich warned: “The trouble with almost all environmental problems is that by the time we have enough evidence to convince people, you’re dead. We must realize that unless we’re extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”

In 2000, Dr. David Viner, a senior research scientist at University of East Anglia’s climate research unit, predicted that in a few years winter snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” In 2004, the Pentagon warned President George W. Bush that major European cities would be beneath rising seas. Britain will be plunged into a Siberian climate by 2020. A U.S. Department of Energy study led by the U.S. Navy predicted the Arctic Ocean would experience an ice-free summer by 2016.

In May 2014, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius declared during a joint appearance with Secretary of State John Kerry that “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Peter Gunter, professor at North Texas State University, predicted in the spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness: “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions. … By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

Ecologist Kenneth Watt’s 1970 prediction was, “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000.” He added, “This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

There were grossly wild predictions well before the first Earth Day, too. In 1939, the U.S. Department of the Interior predicted that American oil supplies would last for only another 13 years. In 1949, the secretary of the interior said the end of U.S. oil supplies was in sight. Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous energy claims, in 1974, the U.S. Geological Survey said that the U.S. had only a 10-year supply of natural gas. However, the U.S. Energy Information Administration estimated that as of Jan. 1, 2017, there were about 2,459 trillion cubic feet of dry natural gas in the United States. That’s enough to last us for nearly a century. The United States is the largest producer of natural gas worldwide.

Today’s wild predictions about climate doom are likely to be just as true as yesteryear’s. The major difference is today’s Americans are far more gullible and more likely to spend trillions fighting global warming. And the only result is that we’ll be much poorer and less free.

A few thoughts:

1. Environmental alarmism has become hugely politicized, with tendrils reaching into almost every area of governmental policy, social consciousness and so on.

2. Environmental alarmism seems to be, for many, a sort of quasi-religion.  

3. Environmental alarmism seems to have some serious strains of misanthropy within it.  I've previously commented on this here:

Quote

There is, I think, a deeply-entrenched stain of profound misanthropy in the minds of many self-styled "environmentalists."  Hatred of humans.  Hatred of unborn humans.  Self-loathing.  Encouraging others to self-loath.  See, e.g., the following:

Environmentalism's Deep Misanthropy

Environmentalists against humans: Green is the Color of Misanthropy

Radical Environmentalism Hides Hatred for Humanity

Anti-Humanism Subverts Environmental Movement

There are some facets of what passes for "environmentalism" that are downright toxic.
...
I think we can acknowledge the errors of man, even the serious ones, and also work on improving how we treat the environment, without resorting to publicly advocating suicide, abortion, infanticide, and even hoping for wholesale genocide.  All "for the planet."
...
I think environmentalism often comes across as repellant because of its advocates' hypocrisy and virtue-signalling (I'm lookin' at you, Leo DiCaprio and Al Gore), their either-you-agree-with-me-or-you-hate-the-environment attitude, their misanthropy, and their creepy quasi-religious overtones.

Environmentalism, in its present form, comes with way, way too many strings attached.

4. The Church has a clear and sensible, but comparatively measured (as compared to the alarmist stuff noted above) perspective on environmentalism: Environmental Stewardship and Conservation

5. Notwithstanding the foregoing, I would like to open a discussion about environmentalism in the life of a Latter-day Saint.  Here are a few questions to get the ball rolling:

• A. What role should it play?  How big is that role? 
• B. Should we be concerned about dire predictions (so many, as noted above, having failed to materialize)?
• C. The leaders of the Church have, it seems, not really weighed in on the doom-and-gloom predictions noted above.  Does this affect your perspective on those predictions?  Why or why not?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

I believe in climate change, and the weird weather is because of that. I believe the church believes in it as they are doing more a green build on their structures. Also, it's in the church's favor to keep the world from burning up and who knows what so that the missionary work can be done in every part of the world. 

Edited January 3, 2021 by Tacenda

[Duncan]

President Ballard touched on this years ago, 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1992/10/the-joy-of-hope-fulfilled?lang=eng

 

[JLHPROF]

59 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I would like to open a discussion about environmentalism in the life of a Latter-day Saint.  Here are a few questions to get the ball rolling:

• A. What role should it play?  How big is that role? 
• B. Should we be concerned about dire predictions (so many, as noted above, having failed to materialize)?
• C. The leaders of the Church have, it seems, not really weighed in on the doom-and-gloom predictions noted above.  Does this affect your perspective on those predictions?  Why or why not?

A. The Saints should be the best stewards of the blessings God has provided. Creating surplus by multiplying and replenishing and caring for the earth should be exemplified by Saints.

B. Yes we should be concerned since we believe in prophets and that includes the unpleasant prophecies (I'll never live in Albany, Boston, or New York).  We do believe these are the last days right?

But we shouldn't be bunker hiding prepped expecting calamity around every corner.

C. I believe that God will do nothing without revealing it to the prophets, but I also believe he's provided plenty of warning in previous revelations that should not be ignored.  Their relative silence tells me we have some time remaining.  But not sufficient to ignore previous prophetic warnings.

[Kenngo1969]

 

[rpn]

I think members have an obligation to reduce, reuse, recycle as much as they can as part of their personal discipleship.

I think we should plant gardens and buy locally to the extent we can.  I have a hard time thinking I'll be able to justify at judgment only wearing jeans (and anything other than underwear and stuff that is actually dirty) once before washing them.  I think that we should support using clean energy at home and around the world (not to do away with fossil fuels --- God did create them for a reason, but to bring new non-polluting and cost efficient energy online) including encouraging the third world to transition to clean energy rather than to fossil fuels to the full extent they can.

But I do not believe that our world will be destroyed by climate change (unless that is the burning referred to at the end of times and, if it were, we're told that  paying tithing is enough to escape it.)   Theologically, it doesn't seem possible that God didn't plan for human stupidity and create a world that can survive it (though maybe not as pleasantly as it could have been survived without that stupidity.   And why would there be so much fossil fuel in our world if we were not meant to use it to improve our lives.

I believe in doing environmentally sound things.   I'm thinking I'll be replacing my cotton clothes in the not too distance future with hemp clothes which can be grown with a lot less water, and last longer.   I plan to get hybrid for next auto.  I would like to build my next home with concrete and straw.     But I trust that this world was created in a way that makes it possible for it to fulfill it's own measure of creation, and allow it to be restored eventually to it paradisiacal glory.   After all, God knew when He did it exactly how many people would be living on the earth and the conditions of those lives.   It's not like it is possible for mortals to thwart utterly the entire plan of God.

Edited January 3, 2021 by rpn

[Bob Crockett]

As I have said before, I think that climate alarmism is a means to put down and burden the economies of emerging nations and is race-based.  I am not the only person to make this observation.  

My comments have nothing to do with the merits.  

[rchorse]

My biggest concern with climate change is that the shifting availability of resources, primarily water, will lead to war. I think alarmism over the climate, as well as denial of human impact on the climate, both contribute to the likelihood of war.

That said, I think God expects us to be good stewards over the earth and do all we can to protect it. We should research and find ways to minimize our impact personally nationally, and globally.

The issues of climate and shifting resources can be solved if people work together. Politicians on both sides seem to care more about using the climate as a way to grow their power than making any real progress. I think Latter-day Saints can help most by trying to increase the level of discourse, kindness, and cooperation in our respective nations. Sadly cooperation is now seen as weakness, at least in American politics.

Edited January 4, 2021 by rchorse

[Glenn101]

4 hours ago, rpn said:

I think we should plant gardens and buy locally to the extent we can.  I have a hard time thinking I'll be able to justify at judgment only wearing jeans (and anything other than underwear and stuff that is actually dirty) once before washing them.  I think that we should support using clean energy at home and around the world (not to do away with fossil fuels --- God did create them for a reason, but to bring new non-polluting and cost efficient energy online) including encouraging the third world to transition to clean energy rather than to fossil fuels to the full extent they can.

The problem is that it takes a lot of fossil fuel or atomic energy to produce the materials used for so-called green energy, and to store it when the source (wind or sun) is unavailable. Hopefully technology will eventually level out the cost and pay back times. And, hopefully, technology will continue to make fossil fuels cleaner also. They have come a long way.

I dislike alarmism by self-styled prophets in just about any venue. People like Greta Thunberg and Alexander Ocasio-Cortez are so often well-intentioned people used by cynical people with a profit motive to further their agenda to make money.

I think everyone that I have seen post is in agreement that we should be good stewards of the world in which we live. We may not always agree on just what we should or should not do though.

Glenn

[carbon dioxide]

For a long time I dismissed climate change.  However as I have thought about things and last days events, I believe that climate change does plays a role in the last days events up to the second coming.  Wars, famine, floods, seas destroying cities, and on and on can be explained in a significant way by the earth climate being changed.   So I do believe climate change is consistent with last days events.   I am not freaking out or too scared.  It is all a part of what has to happen.  Not going to be fun but as the years pass but it means things are getting closer and closer.

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

For a long time I dismissed climate change.  However as I have thought about things and last days events, I believe that climate change does plays a role in the last days events up to the second coming.  Wars, famine, floods, seas destroying cities, and on and on can be explained in a significant way by the earth climate being changed.   So I do believe climate change is consistent with last days events.   I am not freaking out or too scared.  It is all a part of what has to happen.  Not going to be fun but as the years pass but it means things are getting closer and closer.

Do you think we should try to correct climate change or do you believe we should let it go and accept the end of the world?

[carbon dioxide]

6 hours ago, rpn said:

I think members have an obligation to reduce, reuse, recycle as much as they can as part of their personal discipleship.

I think we should plant gardens and buy locally to the extent we can.  I have a hard time thinking I'll be able to justify at judgment only wearing jeans (and anything other than underwear and stuff that is actually dirty) once before washing them.  I think that we should support using clean energy at home and around the world (not to do away with fossil fuels --- God did create them for a reason, but to bring new non-polluting and cost efficient energy online) including encouraging the third world to transition to clean energy rather than to fossil fuels to the full extent they can.

But I do not believe that our world will be destroyed by climate change (unless that is the burning referred to at the end of times and, if it were, we're told that  paying tithing is enough to escape it.)   Theologically, it doesn't seem possible that God didn't plan for human stupidity and create a world that can survive it (though maybe not as pleasantly as it could have been survived without that stupidity.   And why would there be so much fossil fuel in our world if we were not meant to use it to improve our lives.

I believe in doing environmentally sound things.   I'm thinking I'll be replacing my cotton clothes in the not too distance future with hemp clothes which can be grown with a lot less water, and last longer.   I plan to get hybrid for next auto.  I would like to build my next home with concrete and straw.     But I trust that this world was created in a way that makes it possible for it to fulfill it's own measure of creation, and allow it to be restored eventually to it paradisiacal glory.   After all, God knew when He did it exactly how many people would be living on the earth and the conditions of those lives.   It's not like it is possible for mortals to thwart utterly the entire plan of God.

We can screw this earth up pretty bad.  God will not prevent us from doing that.  Not really stressing about the climate.  Everything that is suppose to happen is going to happen.  Even if we stopped all emissions tomorrow, enough CO2 is in the air to keep melting the poles.  The permafrost will continue to melt and release more methane and CO2.  Really our church is the church of climate change.  We believe when Christ comes, the earth will return to a Terrestrial state.  The earth will eventually receive its celestial glory which is the ultimate climate change one can think of. 

Edited January 4, 2021 by carbon dioxide

[JustAnAustralian]

Predictions come and go, and so far we have survived all of them. If Prince Charles is correct, we have less than a month (18 months from July 2019) to sort out our mess https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48964736 but luckily for us a 1971 prediction we'll start going into an ice age by July ( https://web.archive.org/web/20180409221221/http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost_historical/doc/148085303.html?FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=html+,+&author=By+Victor+Cohn||||||Washington+Post+Staff+Writer&pub=The+Washington+Post,+Times+Herald++(1959-1973)&desc=U.S.+Scientist+Sees+New+Ice+Age+Coming&pqatl=top_retrieves ) so we only have 6 months of hot weather to worry about 

 

Climate change as a concept, is not a bad thing, and predates civilisation. We've been in and out of ice ages, and animals have survived warmer periods than we have now.

The problem is climate change which is rapid enough to prevent adaptation of plant and animal species (including us).

 

We should be doing what we can to limit the way we negatively affect the environment (much like how most people no longer think it's appropriate to hunt rhinos).

 

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

Environmental alarmism has become hugely politicized, with tendrils reaching into almost every area of governmental policy, social consciousness and so on.

Yep. You just need to look at the number of politicians (or quasi-political organisations) featured on https://extinctionclock.org to see that.

Edited January 4, 2021 by JustAnAustralian

[The Nehor]

10 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

As I have said before, I think that climate alarmism is a means to put down and burden the economies of emerging nations and is race-based.  I am not the only person to make this observation.  

My comments have nothing to do with the merits.  

I think this is malarkey. I am not the only person to make this observation.

My comments have nothing to do with the merits.

[AtlanticMike]

I have a neighbor that believes she's an environmentalist so she buys certain clothes that are environmentally friendly, drives a hybrid, and so and so on. But everything she buys is brand new. As a "environmentalist " she drives a hybrid, but buys a new hybrid car every 2 years. That's not environmentalism, she's part of the problem. All her clothes are new, she wouldn't dare be seen in second hand clothes. She hires a company to maintain her grass, they spray to kill the weeds, that's not what environmentalist should be doing. She's 100lbs overweight, stays inside and watches the TV nonstop while consuming endless amounts of food, not what an environmentalist should be doing.

    On the other , my family drives vehicles, we never worrying about the milage or looks, we have vehicles that have over 300,000 miles on them, I rebuild the engines and transmissions myself, taught myself how to do it off you tube, man or women can do it. We buy second hand clothes without ever thinking about it, we dont care. We raise 60% of the meat we consume. We dont kill the weeds in our yard. Dont have cable TV, just YouTube and Netflix basically. We stay fit so there's less trips to the doctor. BUT!! She thinks I'm the one killing the planet🤣. Not even realizing she's a manufacturers dream, shes the one helping keep assembly plants open all around the world producing parts for her new cars, clothes, endless amounts of chicken tenders and slim Jim's. My family's life style helps reduce greenhouse gases and we dont even think about it that much. While my "environmentalist" neighbor has made environmentalism a religion, she cant even see that she's the problem.  

   We have grown to become a soft people, mentally and physically, relying on others to do everything for us. It takes alot of outside energy to live that lifestyle. We need to learn how to do for ourselves selves again. Environmentalism is becoming a world religion.

      

.

Edited January 4, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[Bob Crockett]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I think this is malarkey. I am not the only person to make this observation.

My comments have nothing to do with the merits.

 I'm glad you agree.   It is malarky.  

[bluebell]

Just read an article on how low frequency radio waves have created a protective bubble around the earth that keeps out radiation.  It was nice to read something on how we accidentally did something good to our environment.

https://www.ign.com/articles/theres-a-human-made-bubble-surrounding-earth-and-its-keeping-radiation-away?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm

[Scott Lloyd]

On 1/3/2021 at 12:06 PM, smac97 said:

I am concerned about the environment, as I think we all should be.  Consider these comments from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism (emphases added) :

null

I am also concerned about "climate alarmism" and its attendant apocalyptic predictions, and the effect this is having on society.  See, e.g., here (an article in Forbes in November 2019) :

And here (an article on Medium.com) :

And here ("4 Catastrophic Climate Predictions That Never Came True") :

And this Walter Williams opinion piece from October 2019:

A few thoughts:

1. Environmental alarmism has become hugely politicized, with tendrils reaching into almost every area of governmental policy, social consciousness and so on.

2. Environmental alarmism seems to be, for many, a sort of quasi-religion.  

3. Environmental alarmism seems to have some serious strains of misanthropy within it.  I've previously commented on this here:

4. The Church has a clear and sensible, but comparatively measured (as compared to the alarmist stuff noted above) perspective on environmentalism: Environmental Stewardship and Conservation

5. Notwithstanding the foregoing, I would like to open a discussion about environmentalism in the life of a Latter-day Saint.  Here are a few questions to get the ball rolling:

• A. What role should it play?  How big is that role? 
• B. Should we be concerned about dire predictions (so many, as noted above, having failed to materialize)?
• C. The leaders of the Church have, it seems, not really weighed in on the doom-and-gloom predictions noted above.  Does this affect your perspective on those predictions?  Why or why not?

Thanks,

-Smac

I agree with you. 
 

While I think a sense of conservation and protective stewardship over the earth is certainly appropriate, I’m quite put off by the baseless apocalyptic predictions and would-be despotism that attends much of today’s climate-change activism. I find it to be politically weaponized and largely an instance of group-think. 
 

I believe the recent addition to the Church handbook relative to being prudent about what sources of information we embrace and share certainly applies as much to this topic as it does to any that could be named. 
 

By the way, I have a countdown clock running on AOCs declaration that the world will end in 12 years, presumably unless her wacky “green new deal” is enacted. Currently, we have 10 years, 2 weeks and 3 days left. 

[rodheadlee]

All I have to say is Stop Littering my oceans.

[AtlanticMike]

4 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

All I have to say is Stop Littering my oceans.

100% Agree! I'm tired of surfing with aquafina bottles floating by me. People need to learn how to pack a couple waters with them before they leave home and stop buying water in plastic bottles at a convenience store. 

[pogi]

On 1/3/2021 at 12:06 PM, smac97 said:

I am concerned about the environment, as I think we all should be.  Consider these comments from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism (emphases added) :

null

I am also concerned about "climate alarmism" and its attendant apocalyptic predictions, and the effect this is having on society.  See, e.g., here (an article in Forbes in November 2019) :

And here (an article on Medium.com) :

And here ("4 Catastrophic Climate Predictions That Never Came True") :

And this Walter Williams opinion piece from October 2019:

A few thoughts:

1. Environmental alarmism has become hugely politicized, with tendrils reaching into almost every area of governmental policy, social consciousness and so on.

2. Environmental alarmism seems to be, for many, a sort of quasi-religion.  

3. Environmental alarmism seems to have some serious strains of misanthropy within it.  I've previously commented on this here:

4. The Church has a clear and sensible, but comparatively measured (as compared to the alarmist stuff noted above) perspective on environmentalism: Environmental Stewardship and Conservation

5. Notwithstanding the foregoing, I would like to open a discussion about environmentalism in the life of a Latter-day Saint.  Here are a few questions to get the ball rolling:

• A. What role should it play?  How big is that role? 
• B. Should we be concerned about dire predictions (so many, as noted above, having failed to materialize)?
• C. The leaders of the Church have, it seems, not really weighed in on the doom-and-gloom predictions noted above.  Does this affect your perspective on those predictions?  Why or why not?

Thanks,

-Smac

While environmental alarmism can be excessive and exaggerated by some,  I worry that any environmental voice of warning will be automatically grouped in with the "alarmists", while many react in the opposite extreme of environmental complacency, which our church specifically has warned against:   https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/environmental-stewardship-and-conservation?lang=eng

I have a concern that because it has become so politicized (as you state) that many will be resistant to good environmental policies simply because it is part of the political platform of the other party, which they resist and don't want to give any leverage to.

 

  

   

Edited January 4, 2021 by pogi

[AtlanticMike]

Smac97, I think the mormon lifestyle is ideal for integrating an environmental plan set up by the brethren. Most mormons I hang out with would love to do more to help the environment. Personally,  I'm tired of listening to celebrities with 5 houses, five electric bills, 5 water bills, 15 cars and a private jet try to tell me what I should do to help the environment. The Brethren could come up with a common sense approach that everyone could follow, one that wouldn't cost you an arm and a leg to follow. It's the  perfect scenario for good press for the church. They already teach modest living, store food, save money, common sense environmentalism would fit right in. If your reading this Pres. Nelson, hit me up bro, I'll get you started with some great pointers🤣.

    

[pogi]

12 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

Smac97, I think the mormon lifestyle is ideal for integrating an environmental plan set up by the brethren. Most mormons I hang out with would love to do more to help the environment. Personally,  I'm tired of listening to celebrities with 5 houses, five electric bills, 5 water bills, 15 cars and a private jet try to tell me what I should do to help the environment. The Brethren could come up with a common sense approach that everyone could follow, one that wouldn't cost you an arm and a leg to follow. It's the  perfect scenario for good press for the church. They already teach modest living, store food, save money, common sense environmentalism would fit right in. If your reading this Pres. Nelson, hit me up bro, I'll get you started with some great pointers🤣.

    

They have done a little, but nothing terribly specific - probably by design.  Smac shared this link with a few ideas:

Quote

 

As stewards, we avoid complacency and excessive consumption, using only what is necessary (see Doctrine and Covenants 49:19–21).

We preserve resources and protect for future generations the spiritual and temporal blessings of nature.

Wasn’t the earth created with enough resources for all?
The earth is endowed with an array of natural resources that will provide for the human family if they are used as the Lord instructed—to care for the poor and the needy and not use more than is needed (see Doctrine and Covenants 104:14–18); to avoid waste (see Doctrine and Covenants 49:19–21); and not to forcibly take resources from another (see Doctrine and Covenants 59:20). The fulness of the earth is to be used with wisdom and restraint.

How can I get involved in my community to care for the earth?
Check with your local utility company, local community groups, or on the internet to find suggestions to conserve energy and to recycle. Support community recycling programs. Consider starting a community garden. Support local civic groups that promote stewardship and conservation. Be an involved citizen in government. Be informed, respect the views of others, and treat everyone with civility.

What can I do?
Learn, ponder, and pray about what you can do to be a better steward. Use the resources of the earth sparingly and reverently.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/environmental-stewardship-and-conservation?lang=eng

 

 

[CV75]

On 1/3/2021 at 2:06 PM, smac97 said:

5. Notwithstanding the foregoing, I would like to open a discussion about environmentalism in the life of a Latter-day Saint.  Here are a few questions to get the ball rolling:

• A. What role should it play?  How big is that role? 
• B. Should we be concerned about dire predictions (so many, as noted above, having failed to materialize)?
• C. The leaders of the Church have, it seems, not really weighed in on the doom-and-gloom predictions noted above.  Does this affect your perspective on those predictions?  Why or why not?

My 2 cents:

C. The Church leaders are not alarmists. They have weighed in on credible reports and prophecy, and it behoove us to heed their counsel as the Spirit guides.

B. We should be concerned to the extent the leaders have inspired us to be. Preparation, standing in holy places, and other good-faith practices alleviate fear.

A. Environmentalism in the life of a saint: BYU has an environmental science program with attendant resources we can access. Those inclined should seek learning from the best books, by study and faith, and be an example and positive influencer of others. "-ism" has to be adopted  not as an ideology but as a practical tool to best persuade all sorts of people.

[Ahab]

On 1/3/2021 at 11:06 AM, smac97 said:

I am concerned about the environment, as I think we all should be...

I am also concerned about "climate alarmism" and its attendant apocalyptic predictions, and the effect this is having on society...

A few thoughts:

1. Environmental alarmism has become hugely politicized, with tendrils reaching into almost every area of governmental policy, social consciousness and so on.

2. Environmental alarmism seems to be, for many, a sort of quasi-religion.  

3. Environmental alarmism seems to have some serious strains of misanthropy within it.  I've previously commented on this here:

4. The Church has a clear and sensible, but comparatively measured (as compared to the alarmist stuff noted above) perspective on environmentalism: Environmental Stewardship and Conservation

5. Notwithstanding the foregoing, I would like to open a discussion about environmentalism in the life of a Latter-day Saint.  Here are a few questions to get the ball rolling:

• A. What role should it play?  How big is that role? 

By "it" do you mean the environment?  If so it is where we live and what surrounds us, so it plays a very big role in where we live and what we see around us.

On 1/3/2021 at 11:06 AM, smac97 said:

• B. Should we be concerned about dire predictions (so many, as noted above, having failed to materialize)?

Well, yeah, unless we really don't care about where we live and what we see around us.  Speaking personally without trying to speak for everyone else though I will just say I care enough to try to make it nice where and around where I live.

On 1/3/2021 at 11:06 AM, smac97 said:

• C. The leaders of the Church have, it seems, not really weighed in on the doom-and-gloom predictions noted above.  Does this affect your perspective on those predictions?  Why or why not?

I think our leaders have weighed in enough to help us know some things we can do to make where we live a nice and nicer place for us to be.   In the end though we're all going to get a new earth so all pollution will eventually disappear.