The Student Room Group

America: "God won't save us from climate catastrophe"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/08/sheldon-whitehouse-god-climate_n_3241330.html

I'm sure they'll be some Biblical justification for climate catastrophes. Like it's God's plan to destroy his own creation?
Reply 1
God won't, and neither will spending billions of taxpayers' money on questionable 'green' initiatives.
Original post by tc92
God won't, and neither will spending billions of taxpayers' money on questionable 'green' initiatives.


Well that in itself is debatable, but I think once we hit the tipping point where it's impossible to avoid climate change we should pump that money ASAP into pre-empting it's effects and preparing for it.

As for your point about green initiatives, like it or not we'll have to eventually ditch our dependency on fossil fuels, so it's best to invest in it now to make the inevitable switch over as painless as possible. Sure wind, wave, solar etc might not be great alternatives on their own, but taken together and used alongside Nuclear (though even that is arguably best used only as a stop-gap due to the waste it produces), and perhaps if we ever crack it, fusion (though that's a long way off), we could perhaps keep our current extravagant life-style and minimise the cost.
Tis just another reason why religion is bad. Here we get two views of God's Loony adherents, God clears up our mess/He don't do housework. It will be left to the scientific thinkers to try to save the planet, but without the Yanks on board, it will be an impossible task. Then we have to contend with the rest of humanity, like the Chinese, who soon will be the biggest economic power and are probably the worlds biggest environmental damagers. One day the armageddonists will be right. The end of the world will be nigh.
Reply 4
Original post by TheHistoryStudent
Well that in itself is debatable, but I think once we hit the tipping point where it's impossible to avoid climate change we should pump that money ASAP into pre-empting it's effects and preparing for it.

As for your point about green initiatives, like it or not we'll have to eventually ditch our dependency on fossil fuels, so it's best to invest in it now to make the inevitable switch over as painless as possible. Sure wind, wave, solar etc might not be great alternatives on their own, but taken together and used alongside Nuclear (though even that is arguably best used only as a stop-gap due to the waste it produces), and perhaps if we ever crack it, fusion (though that's a long way off), we could perhaps keep our current extravagant life-style and minimise the cost.


Climates always change. They always have done, and always will do. The evidence that man is directly influencing it, and that man can directly do something about it, is still an area of dispute among scientists.

Wind, wave and solar may be worth investing in. But it shouldn't be incredibly high taxes on other fuels, and the 'biofuel' experiment of converting maize from food to fuel has only lead to food prices skyrocketing across the world. The effect of all these green initiatives is yet more financial burden on hard-pressed people at a time when money is particular. The government should give people a break and take taxes off them when times are tough to help people get by, not placing all their faith in fairly questionable ideologies.
Original post by tc92
Climates always change. They always have done, and always will do. The evidence that man is directly influencing it, and that man can directly do something about it, is still an area of dispute among scientists.

Wind, wave and solar may be worth investing in. But it shouldn't be incredibly high taxes on other fuels, and the 'biofuel' experiment of converting maize from food to fuel has only lead to food prices skyrocketing across the world. The effect of all these green initiatives is yet more financial burden on hard-pressed people at a time when money is particular. The government should give people a break and take taxes off them when times are tough to help people get by, not placing all their faith in fairly questionable ideologies.


Climate change has happened before, yes. However the evidence is supporting climate change that is happening in a very short time period, which suggests, to any person with half a brain cell, that it is caused by MAN.
Reply 6
Original post by nimrodstower
Climate change has happened before, yes. However the evidence is supporting climate change that is happening in a very short time period, which suggests, to any person with half a brain cell, that it is caused by MAN.


But if you look at it on a long-term scale, the current trends can be seen as part of yet another cycle of ups and downs.
Maybe the next great flood will be a big boiling to death.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by tc92
But if you look at it on a long-term scale, the current trends can be seen as part of yet another cycle of ups and downs.


Have you actually read any of the literature or have you been watching pop science documentaries?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by tc92
Climates always change. They always have done, and always will do. The evidence that man is directly influencing it, and that man can directly do something about it, is still an area of dispute among scientists.

Wind, wave and solar may be worth investing in. But it shouldn't be incredibly high taxes on other fuels, and the 'biofuel' experiment of converting maize from food to fuel has only lead to food prices skyrocketing across the world. The effect of all these green initiatives is yet more financial burden on hard-pressed people at a time when money is particular. The government should give people a break and take taxes off them when times are tough to help people get by, not placing all their faith in fairly questionable ideologies.


I'd be curious to understand how a 95-98% consensus of climate scientists in addition to the agreement of the national scientific bodies of practically all western countries can be defined as "disputed".
Save us Jebus.
If god did exist I'm sure he'd obliterate America ASAP.
No, infact 'God' hasn't saved anyone from anything, ever.
Original post by tc92
Climates always change. They always have done, and always will do. The evidence that man is directly influencing it, and that man can directly do something about it, is still an area of dispute among scientists.

That is simply not true. Only a literal handful - very probably the number is in single figures - of published climatologists disagree with the overwhelming consensus on climate change. People like Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer (the latter of which is a sell-out and a fraud, in any case) are vastly outnumbered by those who disagree with them. It is simply not true to say that anthropogenic global warming is a matter of serious dispute.

Yes, the climate changes naturally. Yes, it has done, for a variety of different reasons, throughout Earth's history. This warming, however, is not natural, as has been confirmed by many different lines of inquiry.

Original post by tc92
But if you look at it on a long-term scale, the current trends can be seen as part of yet another cycle of ups and downs.

Not true. Climate modelling shows that we should have been experiencing a very slight cooling trend since the middle of the twentieth century, as demonstrated in this paper (which I can't link to enough in these debates). If we look at the "long-term scale", as you suggest, then we should be at the start of a gradual and discontinuous decline in temperatures as the Milankovitch Cycles force the climate to descend into another ice age - don't make the mistake of thinking that we're still coming out of the last.
(edited 10 years ago)

Quick Reply