Is climate change consistent with Abrahamic beliefs?

[metis]

There is no man made Global Warming, the above shall happen but it is totally unwarranted as far as physical climate is concerned...

As one whom has been in science for over 50 years, the above simply is false. However, I have no interest in discussing it.

 

[17 Gen r]

Science? What science? & you are a paid buffoon.

John Bahcall was a promising young astrophysicist when he was introduced to Gödel at a small Institute dinner. He identified himself as a physicist, to which Gödel's curt response was `I don't believe in natural science.' (Incompleteness: The Proof and Paradox of Kurt Gödel)

Again:

And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass: (Leviticus 26.19)

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18988/climate-intervention-reflecting-sunlight-to-cool-earth

 

[metis]

Science? What science? & you are a paid buffoon.

I'll just let this speak for itself.

 

[dust1n]

Yes. Man made Global Warming is against the Bible. Only the heathen, chiefly Catholics (cf. http://environment.yale.edu/climate...about-global-warming-and-support-u.s.-action/), would support the opinion of man made Global Warming.

I guess I'm confused by your reference of Genesis, because climate change doesn't suggest the Earth will disappear, that no one can ever farm again, the seasons, and the fact the Earth spins creating day and night. So I don't see the contradiction.

 

[17 Gen r]

I'll just let this speak for itself.

What manner of science were you involved in? Natural science? Then the Goedel quotation wasn't out of place.

I guess I'm confused by your reference of Genesis, because climate change doesn't suggest the Earth will disappear, that no one can ever farm again, the seasons, and the fact the Earth spins creating day and night. So I don't see the contradiction.

Read again: While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.
Global Warming advocates are quite mad. You really need that albedo modification heaven of iron business, don't you?

Do yourself a favor, search query: "The Great Global Warming Swindle", a Channel 4 documentary back from 2007.

 

[metis]

What manner of science were you involved in? Natural science? Then the Goedel quotation wasn't out of place.

I have no interest in trying to have a conversation with someone whom jumps to conclusions and insults people in the process.

 

[17 Gen r]

I have no interest in trying to have a conversation with someone whom jumps to conclusions and insults people in the process.

So you want Albedo Modification, right? I think a few Talmud quotations are going to be very appropriate here.

 

[metis]

So you want Albedo Modification, right? I think a few Talmud quotations are going to be very appropriate here.

^^ignore list^^

 

[dust1n]

Read again: While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

Still lost here. I'm not aware of where anyone has stated cold was going to go away. But I guess I understand your position now. Thanks.

Global Warming advocates are quite mad. You really need that albedo modification heaven of iron business, don't you?

I don't know what you are asking.

Do yourself a favor, search query: "The Great Global Warming Swindle", a Channel 4 documentary back from 2007.

I'm asking about the scripture you quoted related to your point. I'm not interested in swindles, I'm interested if climate change conflicts with the religious literature.

 

[17 Gen r]

I don't know what you are asking.

Question: Do man made Global Warming supporters want this?: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18988/climate-intervention-reflecting-sunlight-to-cool-earth

It is of course an irony that doing just this absolutely physically unwarranted folly will indeed cause global warming: the aerosols will prevent heat from escaping earth, just like it prevents radiations from entering our atmosphere, causing a nasty buildup. (Also, forget or rather fondly cherish the memory of stars, moon or blue sky: http://op-talk.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/what-if-we-lost-the-sky/?_r=0 or http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...bbe150-ac6e-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html or http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-smog-creates-beautiful-sunsets/).

Hence:

And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass: (Leviticus 26.19)
And thy heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the earth that is under thee shall be iron. (Deuteronomy 28.23)

And

And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise. (Revelation 8.12)

For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. (Isaiah 13.10)

So that these are also literal.

 

[17 Gen r]

Want more?: http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/11/a...ea-ice-scientists-have-trouble-getting-there/

Why are you all so dumb? Here:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedh...ng-porn-associated-with-male-brain-shrinkage/

Looks like they have killed or edited it (who would have doubted it?). No problem: http://time.com/135853/porn-brain/

 

[17 Gen r]

Haven't had enough? Eat this!: http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/20/why-i-am-climate-change-skeptic

Foolish heathendom, bringing about its own demise.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

So you're saying that 99.9% of the world's scientists are all collaborating on a vast hoax for some vague and unclear political reason? How would they benefit?

99.9% of paranormal investigators believe in ghosts, and they should know they're the experts..

Actually the highest I've seen for climastrologers is 97%, which is interesting that they don't even all believe their own stuff!

 

[dust1n]

Question: Do man made Global Warming supporters want this?: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18988/climate-intervention-reflecting-sunlight-to-cool-earth

It is of course an irony that doing just this absolutely physically unwarranted folly will indeed cause global warming: the aerosols will prevent heat from escaping earth, just like it prevents radiations from entering our atmosphere, causing a nasty buildup. (Also, forget or rather fondly cherish the memory of stars, moon or blue sky: http://op-talk.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/20/what-if-we-lost-the-sky/?_r=0 or http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...bbe150-ac6e-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html or http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-smog-creates-beautiful-sunsets/).

Hence:

And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass: (Leviticus 26.19)
And thy heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the earth that is under thee shall be iron. (Deuteronomy 28.23)

And

And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise. (Revelation 8.12)

For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. (Isaiah 13.10)

So that these are also literal.

Alright, bud. Thanks.

 

[Father Heathen]

99.9% of paranormal investigators believe in ghosts, and they should know they're the experts..

Paranormal investigators aren't scientists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Therefore your comparison is garbage.

Actually the highest I've seen for climastrologers is 97%, which is interesting that they don't even all believe their own stuff!

For whatever reason some allow things (such as emotions, ego, religion, greed, etc.) to prevent them from being completely honest and objective when it comes to examining and testing evidence. It's called willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Paranormal investigators aren't scientists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Therefore your comparison is garbage.



For whatever reason some allow things (such as emotions, ego, religion, greed, etc.) to prevent them from being completely honest and objective when it comes to examining and testing evidence. It's called willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.

Paranormal investigators would disagree. It's a very subjective label

[science] such wholesale returns of conjecture, out of such a trifling investment of fact (Mark Twain)


But to answer the OP- The belief that bad weather is caused by humans angering nature, is one of the most ancient superstitions known to mankind. The 'solution' has always been the same - sacrifice of wealth to appease Gaia- if the weather improves the sacrifice worked. If not- more sacrifice is needed

I think Christianity went a long way to stamping out this sort of racket worldwide- but it will always exist in one form or another.

 

[Quetzal]

No.

And Noah builded an altar unto Yahweh; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And Yahweh smelled a sweet savour; and Yahweh said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. (Genesis 8.20-22)

The Great Global Warming Swindle:

Read the Bible (http://www.bibleprotector.com/), fear Yahweh, the god whose name is "I become", the inexhaustible god, who is beyond any concept, whose Son is his inexhaustible self-knowledge.

Do you believe Climate Change is a fraud? Made up?

 

[Father Heathen]

Paranormal investigators would disagree. It's a very subjective label

Whether or not they agree is irrelevant, as the scientific method is clearly defined, of which is there is nothing subjective. Evidence and data aren't matters of opinion.
Technology is the application of science, so if you disparage science what business do you have using your computer or whatever device you're accessing the web with?

But to answer the OP- The belief that bad weather is caused by humans angering nature, is one of the most ancient superstitions known to mankind. The 'solution' has always been the same - sacrifice of wealth to appease Gaia- if the weather improves the sacrifice worked. If not- more sacrifice is needed

I think Christianity went a long way to stamping out this sort of racket worldwide- but it will always exist in one form or another.

Given that this is the Abrahamic DIR, I cannot give my full opinion on this statement (I may've already been teetering on that line as it is), but I will ask who exactly is supposed to benefit or profit from this "climate change hoax", and how? A vast global conspiracy where the vast majority of the world's scientists are all risking their careers, reputations, etc. by collaborating on some convoluted hoax from which they'll receive no real benefit?
No, the most simple and realistic explanation is that reducing the sort of pollution that contributes to climate change means enacting regulations that would translate into expenses for the impacted industries, as well as loss of profits as the public transitions to alternatives. Thus they purchase and pocket politicians to look out for them and play to the intellectually dishonest, willfully ignorant, and scientifically illiterate voter base.
Those who deny climate change, evolution, the moon landing, and heliocentrism are all cut from the same cloth.

 

[arthra]

I see the impact of climate change around me.. in California where we have had a historic drought... portions of the state sinking due to drilling deeper wells...communities are finding ways to ration their water by restricting days when watering can occur... in my case we have replaced our lawn with a drought tolerant yard with few plants. We use a rain barrel to collect rain if/when it occurs.. We use bottles drinking water...restricted flow for showers.. low flush toilets...thus far our city appears to be making progress toward saving water. The West coast however has had numerous brush fires ... Solar energy is also being encouraged and you will find solar panels on many ware houses and homes..also turbines using wind power have been generating electricity in our windy pass areas. On the whole I am optimistic that we can adapt to many of the issues presented by climate change.. We have only ourselves to blame for pollution and wasting valuable resources in the past.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Whether or not they agree is irrelevant, as the scientific method is clearly defined, of which is there is nothing subjective. Evidence and data aren't matters of opinion.
Technology is the application of science, so if you disparage science what business do you have using your computer or whatever device you're accessing the web with?




Given that this is the Abrahamic DIR, I cannot give my full opinion on this statement (I may've already been teetering on that line as it is), but I will ask who exactly is supposed to benefit or profit from this "climate change hoax", and how? A vast global conspiracy where the vast majority of the world's scientists are all risking their careers, reputations, etc. by collaborating on some convoluted hoax from which they'll receive no real benefit?
No, the most simple and realistic explanation is that reducing the sort of pollution that contributes to climate change means enacting regulations that would translate into expenses for the impacted industries, as well as loss of profits as the public transitions to alternatives. Thus they purchase and pocket politicians to look out for them and play to the intellectually dishonest, willfully ignorant, and scientifically illiterate voter base.
Those who deny climate change, evolution, the moon landing, and heliocentrism are all cut from the same cloth.

As above, who has always benefited from this belief for millennia? Those accepting the sacrifices on Gaia's behalf
Which in modern times means a vast transfer of wealth and freedom from hard working private hands to grubby sticky public hands, there's no way around the conflict of interest here whether you believe in it or not.

'anthropogenic climate' can be used to justify controlling literally every aspect of peoples lives, where they can live, work, what they can by buy, freedom to travel, property rights, how you can make a living, and most importantly, how much of it you have to hand over to politicians.

But 'who we can trust' has nothing to do with science, the entire theory is a humiliation to the scientific method.

CO2 is simply not pollution, it's literally difficult to think of anything further from it

unless plants thrive on 'pollution'?
'pollution' is what makes earth green?
Most life on Earth came to be under far higher levels of atmospheric 'pollution' than today?
you exhale 'pollution'?
The vast majority of 'pollution' put into the atmosphere each year comes from natural respiration?

IF so we need a new word for things that are somehow harmful, unnatural, do not belong- because we have real problems, some of them serious and environmental, which this does nothing but distract from.