Watch This, Global Climate Change Content

[John R]

There are a couple of posters here who argue that nothing is happening to the environment(heating or cooling) that is cause for concern. I disagree. Check out this video and make your own conclusion.

[DD]

Wow. Thanks.

[TooFarTampa]

Thanks John R. I had not seem this before! (I am afraid that once I start wandering around YouTube, I will never be heard from again.)

I went to the main page of the video and found this link to his updated version, which (along with his other companion videos) he says answers the criticisms of the first, simpler version.

[SWGB]

I saw this a while back. My feelings on convincing people that climate change is real is futile if they are religious. The reasoning there is that if they are religious and wrong I won't have to spend eternity with them.

Interpret as you wish.

[hnooe]

I saw this a while back. My feelings on convincing people that climate change is real is futile if they are religious. The reasoning there is that if they are religious and wrong I won't have to spend eternity with them.

Interpret as you wish.

I am trying to interpret that.... Are you tying to say those who ignore climate change (man made) will all be going to Hell?

[CampCreekLou]

Notice how he completely under-emphasizes the (GCC is) False and (Take) Action category. What if we are really about to see Global Cooling, and we completely exacerbate the global calamity?

Notice how he completely exaggerates the True and No Action category? What if we humans adapts just fine, enjoying the warmer weather?

Notice how he leaves out the Global Depresssion out of the True and Action category? That should still happen.

Not impressed. But then again, I'm religious.

[InletBchDweller]

JR, thanks for posting
Here are my 2 cents on the matter,
everyone has their own beliefs which makes this world unique

I watched the video all the way...I was not impressed either. Please, dont "get in my face" - what was up with that??? I dont mind people voicing their opinion but getting their face all up in the camera???

I was raised "in the church" as some would say. I believe that what is going to happen to this world we live in is going to happen and there is not anything that we can do about it. slowing down the final outcome? maybe.

I was raised that God one day would destroy the world by fire and if that is correct then I guess global warning is right in line with the teachings that I was taught. I enjoy life to the fullest, live the best I can and I am secure with my faith that if something might happen while I am still here on Earth I would be ok. I love this world I live on and when I am gone/or it is gone I know that where I will be will be even better.

[Fishfood]

Notice how he completely under-emphasizes the (GCC is) False and (Take) Action category. What if we are really about to see Global Cooling, and we completely exacerbate the global calamity?

Notice how he completely exaggerates the True and No Action category? What if we humans adapts just fine, enjoying the warmer weather?

Notice how he leaves out the Global Depresssion out of the True and Action category? That should still happen.

Not impressed. But then again, I'm religious.

I agree. I'm not impressed either and I'm not religious. His bias shows in his argument.

[SWGB]

I am trying to interpret that.... Are you tying to say those who ignore climate change (man made) will all be going to Hell?

Okay, that came out wrong. It seems that convincing some people that there is global climate change and that we can make a difference in it is futile as they always point to religion and say that god has a plan. This is actaully based on a discussion I had with someone at work.

There point was that no matter what we do the world is going to end soon and why bother. They actually told me they didn't care about recycling, reducing carbon emissions, etc.

My point was that saying "god has a plan" and not trying to make a change is a little lazy in my opinion. I honestly could not get this person to understand that if that were the case why not apply it to so many other problems in life; starvation, disease, war, etc.

Does this need more clarification?

[reddsings]

What if gods plan is to make the earth warmer. hehe

Seems to me to take a snapshot of 200 years of data and apply that to say the minimal change is (a) perminent (b) completely man made is just plane nuts.

We were all taught the continents used to be joined in one large land mass, creating mountain ranges and moving south america from Africa along with kicking Australia out on its own

These shifts still continue today, example, Tsunamis

Volcanoes emit giant loads of emissions but are somehow exempt from measurement.

finally, what to plants "inhale"
C02
Exhale O2

We just need more plants LOL

We all want cleaner air, water etc, and should strive for it
The bigger crime here is the amount of trash man puts into and around anywhere he lives.
Thats more toxic and affects mother nature in way more ways than an suv

Lets teach not to throw away the ciggy butts and natural light cans into the street too

[InletBchDweller]

Okay, that came out wrong. It seems that convincing some people that there is global climate change and that we can make a difference in it is futile as they always point to religion and say that god has a plan. This is actaully based on a discussion I had with someone at work.

There point was that no matter what we do the world is going to end soon and why bother. They actually told me they didn't care about recycling, reducing carbon emissions, etc.

My point was that saying "god has a plan" and not trying to make a change is a little lazy in my opinion. I honestly could not get this person to understand that if that were the case why not apply it to so many other problems in life; starvation, disease, war, etc.

Does this need more clarification?

SWGB, I know you meant no harm. It is hard to get your thoughts out and perceived the way you want them on this and any board....

I am one of the people that you describe in the first paragraph above. I was raised a certain way, I have questioned many things but it is etched in my brain and that is the way I believe and think. I "put myself in Gods hand's" as they say and run with it. Just like the tragedy I went through a year ago. People say, "you are doing so well" "how did you not fall apart?" I believe that the Lord guided me and held my hand (and is still holding it) the whole way. For someone who does not have the same faith as I, I understand how it could be hard to grasp.

I dont recycle and I probably should. I would not do it b/c of climate change but b/c of the loads of garbage. I try not to cut a tree unless it is necessary, I reuse plastic bottles, etc but I just dont see the point in not driving the car I want is going to help climate change.

THe world ending soon? who knows? heck my life could be over in 5 minutes. I dont think I am lazy, I just dont feel that altering things in my life for "global climate change" is that important. But kudos to those that do for it is what they feel is right...

[Teresa]

JR, thanks for posting
Here are my 2 cents on the matter,
everyone has their own beliefs which makes this world unique

I watched the video all the way...I was not impressed either. Please, dont "get in my face" - what was up with that??? I dont mind people voicing their opinion but getting their face all up in the camera???

I was raised "in the church" as some would say. I believe that what is going to happen to this world we live in is going to happen and there is not anything that we can do about it. slowing down the final outcome? maybe.

I was raised that God one day would destroy the world by fire and if that is correct then I guess global warning is right in line with the teachings that I was taught. I enjoy life to the fullest, live the best I can and I am secure with my faith that if something might happen while I am still here on Earth I would be ok. I love this world I live on and when I am gone/or it is gone I know that where I will be will be even better.

oh, ibd, there are just so many things I want to say here. but I'll keep it to this: many of us were also raised "a certain way", and even in a church. including myself. I think the way I was raised helped me understand that the earth is a precious gift - we should be grateful for its indescribable beauty, not to mention its role in sustaining life. all life.

and I have a few thoughts about earth and God too... (someone mentioned being religious, as if people who go to church aren't interested in caring for earth? I can't believe that. I may not be very religious, or go to church much, but that does not mean that I was not brought up "a certain way", and that I am not a believer. and I know many religious people and groups, including my own church, who feel strongly about respect for life - which means respect for earth and all its inhabitants.)

I believe we (society, mankind, nations) have done many things during our stewardship of earth to degrade her. and its up to us as a much more advanced (technologically and awareness of our impact) civilization to use our science and resources to restore what we can, correct our ways, and protect earth and ourselves. protect earth and life - now and in the far far away future.

If you want to talk God - then surely He expects us to love his creation and stop the degradation. especially since we are now coming to understand our own actions against creation. (I don't know anything about end of world stuff - it was never part of my upbringing - but I don't think that would have changed anything about our beliefs about the great mother earth).

so that's just my feeling. I think it matters greatly what we do here. the more we learn, the better.

its time to stop consuming earth, and start giving our time and resources to caring for her.

this thread touches so many different aspects of our society, from wealth and materialism, to the values we've passed on to our children, from individual consumerism to massive consumption, to world population, GARBAGE, fuel, you name it.

btw, recycling is one of the really easy ways we as individuals can help. if only to reduce garbage and landfills. it may be a small thing, but it is a thing.

[Teresa]

ps. I'm not saying the video johnr posted was "all that". he obviously needs to utilize better presentation skills, etc. perhaps they can hire someone cuter, like Johnny Depp - then we'll all sit up and pay attention, won't we?

[Teresa]

interesting npr show/story about how even small villages are starting to understand their role in preserving earth...

Many Catholics in the Philippines, who make up more than 80 percent of the population, believe that God is responsible for natural phenomena. But it's a sentiment the church is trying to change — and not just in the Philippines.
The Vatican has become very interested in climate change. This year, Pope Benedict XVI hosted a conference on global warming. And he has announced plans to preserve forests, install solar cells, and make Vatican City a carbon-neutral state.
The Vatican considers global warming a pressing issue — in part because there is evidence that man is contributing to the problem, and in part because the effects will be felt most intensely by the poor.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=15222134

and, a man before his time...
St. Francis is the patron saint of ecology. He truly saw himself as a simple servant and steward of creation—little brother to the birds and the fish and the lowly ivy. St. Francis reminds us that we are a part of our environment and are called to love and protect it.

[hanuman]

Tootsie, thanks for making that point about the vatican taking action, there are also multiple Christian organizations forming to address climate change.

If anyone would like additional information regarding peak oil, human influence on the earths climate, and some practical solutions to enhance your everyday sustainable lifestyle (or get started), check this out:

SWELL
South Walton Environmental & Low-impact Living

Sunday, January 27, 2008, 5 pm

Seaside Repertory Theater
Meeting Hall Theatre in downtown Seaside, Florida

Arix Zalace will follow the film Crude Awakening, with a presentation
focusing on what we as individuals can do to transition and prepare
for climate change and peak oil. The evening will conclude with an
open discussion on both the movie and the presentation.

This is a free event and some food and drink will be available.

If you find yourself interested in the following things, join us:

• Sustainable land use and construction practices
• Harmonious living between human and natural communities
• ! Creation and preservation of beauty
• Socially and environmentally conscious action
• Fascinating conversation
• Excellent food and drink

We will have the S.W.E.L.L. meeting once a month at different locations in South Walton
to appreciate each others’ company and provide a place for conversation
about creating an abundant future.

If you would like to be included on our list, send an email to: chandra@cfhdesignstudio.com
Also, check out our blog at: http://sustainingsowal.wordpress.com/
Please consider the environment before printing the attached flier.

Hope to see you there.

• Susan Horn • Chandra Hartman

c h a n d r a f. h a r t m a n

residential + environmental
restorative design

member FGBC

cfhdesignstudio
56 e. georgie st.
santa rosa beach
florida, 32459

850.534.4488 (p + f)

www.cfhdesignstudio.com

[InletBchDweller]

oh, ibd, there are just so many things I want to say here. but I'll keep it to this: many of us were also raised "a certain way", and even in a church. including myself. I think the way I was raised helped me understand that the earth is a precious gift - we should be grateful for its indescribable beauty, not to mention its role in sustaining life. all life.

and I have a few thoughts about earth and God too... (someone mentioned being religious, as if people who go to church aren't interested in caring for earth? I can't believe that. I may not be very religious, or go to church much, but that does not mean that I was not brought up "a certain way", and that I am not a believer. and I know many religious people and groups, including my own church, who feel strongly about respect for life - which means respect for earth and all its inhabitants.)

I believe we (society, mankind, nations) have done many things during our stewardship of earth to degrade her. and its up to us as a much more advanced (technologically and awareness of our impact) civilization to use our science and resources to restore what we can, correct our ways, and protect earth and ourselves. protect earth and life - now and in the far far away future.

If you want to talk God - then surely He expects us to love his creation and stop the degradation. especially since we are now coming to understand our own actions against creation. (I don't know anything about end of world stuff - it was never part of my upbringing - but I don't think that would have changed anything about our beliefs about the great mother earth).

so that's just my feeling. I think it matters greatly what we do here. the more we learn, the better.

its time to stop consuming earth, and start giving our time and resources to caring for her.

this thread touches so many different aspects of our society, from wealth and materialism, to the values we've passed on to our children, from individual consumerism to massive consumption, to world population, GARBAGE, fuel, you name it.

btw, recycling is one of the really easy ways we as individuals can help. if only to reduce garbage and landfills. it may be a small thing, but it is a thing.

hey gull, are we having deep thougths or what lately?? (I havent even had a drink)

I actually agree with most of the things you said here - so since it seems (to me)to be getting to the point of beating a dead horse I will stop here. I luv ya and respect your opinion....

Um, yes, Johnny Depp, would be nice....especially if he was dressed as Capt Jack..

[Teresa]

hey gull, are we having deep thougths or what lately?? (I havent even had a drink)

I actually agree with most of the things you said here - so since it seems (to me)to be getting to the point of beating a dead horse I will stop here. I luv ya and respect your opinion....

Um, yes, Johnny Depp, would be nice....especially if he was dressed as Capt Jack..

you don't have to agree with me, ibd. we all come from different places. just sharing mine. I think any discussion on our planet is important and could not kill a horse no matter how much is said. it has really become the issue among so many groups. without our planet, no other issue will matter.

interesting how many religious groups, including some conservative christians, are jumping on the global warming wagon. people do change their thinking when faced with more and more evidence that maybe we really are seriously degrading earth, and maybe we should take responsibility for our actions. one article I saw about an evangelical group mentioned a program they had about energy conservation, and one of their questions was... "what would Jesus drive?". I like it.

I'm forced to think about this stuff with my boys always watching some science stuff on tv with me forced to sit through such, plus I'm addicted to NPR - and all their fascinating topics and shows, not to mention several friends around here always talking about earth and politics and other crap... nothing new there. I'm just not always willing to take the time to write my thoughts, search for that great article I read last week for reference, and post my "deep thoughts" and take the risk of looking like an ass. guess i'm feeling a little brave. maybe I'm totally hormonal.. maybe I need to stfu and start going to Sally's Backside in the evenings.

oh, just had a thought (caution!)... okay, we had all that big discussion on the evolution/school thread. and there seem to be certain groups who would rather accept Int. Design, over evolution, which is an argument for God's existence. Fine, wonderful, its all good. but, why are many of these same folks not willing to go all out to take care of God's creation? just an observation, and a philosophical question - no one needs to respond to this, unless you have a good answer (and I am not inviting any butthead answers). and i don't think the end of time thing is a good enough answer either.

[scooterbug44]

IMO destroying the planet because "God has a plan" is like not cleaning your house because the "developer has a plan".

You can believe it all you want, but at the end of the day you'll still be sitting in filth.

[Bob]

I saw this a while back. My feelings on convincing people that climate change is real is futile if they are religious. The reasoning there is that if they are religious and wrong I won't have to spend eternity with them.

Interpret as you wish.

I'm hoping we are all wrong....

[Little Fish]

Global warming is an interesting topic of discussion for me. Some folks get really "heated" when they defend their position that global warming exists, but I doubt that many have any clue of the facts. Further, it is amazing to me that Al Gore is now a leading expert on Climatology... how did that happen?

I recall back at Georgia Tech in the early 90's, global warming was a topic of discussion. This is not a new subject, so why all the renewed interest? I recall one of my professors teaching that global warming was a joke. In fact, we all seem to forget that in the 70's, global cooling was the greatest threat to our planet. Why do we allow ourselves to be manipulated by politicians and fear-mongers?

Carbon Dioxide accounts for less than 3/10's of one percent of the gases in the atmosphere. The most liberal of experts claim that humans cause roughly 20% of that amount. Why would the earth be so fragile that such a minute amount of CO2 would be cause for alarm? It is clear to me that the sun is the major cause of warming and cooling, not CO2. Evidently, folks don't understand this fact.

As far as the religious arguments against global warming... no one needs to go there when you have concrete facts that discount the argument. Religious leaders have adamantly supported "truths" that turned out to be false in time. Remember the belief by the early Christian Church that the Earth was the center of the universe, Heaven above, Hell beneath? The Sun rotated around the Earth? When Galileo pointed his telescope toward the Heavens, he saw something that brought him directly into conflict with the Church. In fact, it is very possible that the Pope at that time had his eyes put out...

My bet is that global warming as an issue will die in the next ten years. The problem is, another issue will take its place...

Little Fish

[Teresa]

Global warming is an interesting topic of discussion for me. Some folks get really "heated" when they defend their position that global warming exists, but I doubt that many have any clue of the facts. Further, it is amazing to me that Al Gore is now a leading expert on Climatology... how did that happen?

I recall back at Georgia Tech in the early 90's, global warming was a topic of discussion. This is not a new subject, so why all the renewed interest? I recall one of my professors teaching that global warming was a joke. In fact, we all seem to forget that in the 70's, global cooling was the greatest threat to our planet. Why do we allow ourselves to be manipulated by politicians and fear-mongers?

Carbon Dioxide accounts for less than 3/10's of one percent of the gases in the atmosphere. The most liberal of experts claim that humans cause roughly 20% of that amount. Why would the earth be so fragile that such a minute amount of CO2 would be cause for alarm? It is clear to me that the sun is the major cause of warming and cooling, not CO2. Evidently, folks don't understand this fact.

As far as the religious arguments against global warming... no one needs to go there when you have concrete facts that discount the argument. Religious leaders have adamantly supported "truths" that turned out to be false in time. Remember the belief by the early Christian Church that the Earth was the center of the universe, Heaven above, Hell beneath? The Sun rotated around the Earth? When Galileo pointed his telescope toward the Heavens, he saw something that brought him directly into conflict with the Church. In fact, it is very possible that the Pope at that time had his eyes put out...

My bet is that global warming as an issue will die in the next ten years. The problem is, another issue will take its place...

Little Fish

Thank goodness world leaders, including the pope-meister, have come to embrace science and its significance to mankind's understanding and even continued existence. people do learn from their mistakes from one century to the next, ya know. and this is what the "sudden" interest in climate and global warming is all about (we've heard about global warming for years now. leaders and people are just starting to listen). our industrial civilization has weilded widespread and potentially permanent damage to our environment, and continue to do so each and every second of the day. do people just not get that? come on, its right in front of your closed eyes!open them for once and for all, it is really not very difficult.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

November 1, 1992
Vatican Science Panel Told By Pope: Galileo Was Right
Moving formally to rectify a wrong, Pope John Paul II acknowledged in a speech today that the Roman Catholic Church had erred in condemning Galileo 359 years ago for asserting that the Earth revolves around the Sun.

The address by the Pope before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences closed a 13-year investigation into the Church's condemnation of Galileo in 1633, one of history's most notorious conflicts between faith and science. Galileo was forced to recant his scientific findings to avoid being burned at the stake and spent the remaining eight years of his life under house arrest.

John Paul said the theologians who condemned Galileo did not recognize the formal distinction between the Bible and its interpretation.

"This led them unduly to transpose into the realm of the doctrine of the faith, a question which in fact pertained to scientific investigation.

Though the Pope acknowledged that the Church had done Galileo a wrong, he said the 17th-century theologians were working with the knowledge available to them at the time.

[30A Skunkape]

Before anyone comes to the conclusion that the Pope has hopped on the global catastrophe bandwagon, please read this. He is 100% correct on the issue. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...=1811&ito=1490

[John R]

[Teresa]

Before anyone comes to the conclusion that the Pope has hopped on the global catastrophe bandwagon, please read this. He is 100% correct on the issue. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...=1811&ito=1490

I knew you would pull this out of your hat at some point. the title of this article is so misleading. The Pope condemns the climate change prophets of doom (give me a break).

the pope, in his infinite (and well-informed) wisdom, is 100% correct in his statements. but he does not refute global warming. he wisely advises world leaders that we need to proceed carefully and as a world community, with a reasonable plan, etc. (he knows he's asking the impossible with some world leaders - including current US administration)...


excerpt from Pope Ben's World Peace Day comments, last year:

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.


"It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances.
"If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

"Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken."
Efforts to protect the environment should seek "agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances", the Pope said. He added that to further the cause of world peace it was sensible for nations to "choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions" in how to cooperate responsibly on conserving the planet.


brilliant! I wish Benadict was running for President.

[Little Fish]

Tootsie:

I didn't suggest that people don't change; rather, that they do change when proven wrong. Change rarely comes overnight so why allow oneself to get caught up in theories which will be replaced in time. Your post regarding John Paul is really no surprise to me... it took the Church 360 years to acknowledge they were wrong. How many other "truths" are wrong? If The Holy See can get something wrong, surely Al Gore et al. can get something wrong.

If you are interested in learning about the speed and nature of scientific progress, I recommend you read the book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn. When you're done, please come back and tell us whether you still feel fired up about Global Warming... or any other theory for that matter.

Little Fish

[John R]

If you are interested in learning about the speed and nature of scientific progress, I recommend you read the book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn. When you're done, please come back and tell us whether you still feel fired up about Global Warming... or any other theory for that matter.

Little Fish

is it ok if one is concerned and active about a cause without reading the referenced book?

[Little Fish]

John R:

"is it ok if one is concerned and active about a cause without reading the referenced book?"

Thanks for making me smile.

Little Fish

[Teresa]

Tootsie:

I didn't suggest that people don't change; rather, that they do change when proven wrong. Change rarely comes overnight so why allow oneself to get caught up in theories which will be replaced in time. Your post regarding John Paul is really no surprise to me... it took the Church 360 years to acknowledge they were wrong. How many other "truths" are wrong? If The Holy See can get something wrong, surely Al Gore et al. can get something wrong.

If you are interested in learning about the speed and nature of scientific progress, I recommend you read the book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas Kuhn. When you're done, please come back and tell us whether you still feel fired up about Global Warming... or any other theory for that matter.

Little Fish

I appreciate your thoughts on this little fish. 360 years it took for the church to "officially" make a statement on galileo. that's about average in the ancient, slow moving catholic church! nothing new there. (I'm sure you realize that this change in church view on science took place hundreds of years ago, just never got around to making an official statement about this. gee, I wish other big organizations were not afraid of saying "we were wrong.").

I am not really interested in reading about the speed and nature of scientific progress. I leave it to all of you who enjoy science. But, I do understand that scientific progress takes forever and a day. its an extraordinary endeavor. As long as they continue their work, I'm happy. Scientists must not be swayed by politics or religion. They will find the right answer. But, environmentalists aren't always willing to wait 300 years for the final answer. sometimes you really must make a leap of faith based on the evidence before you and make your best guess, before its too late for action. as you must know.

It's not an easy issue, and my guess it never shall be. should we just sit on it for a while? nah.

[John R]

The Holy See can appear quite contrary:

http://www.planktos.com/Newsroom/Vat...eignState.html



San Francisco -- July 12, 2007 -- By agreement with the Vatican, Planktos/KlimaFa is now pleased and honored to announce that the Vatican plans to become the world's first entirely carbon neutral sovereign state, and it has accepted KlimaFa ecorestoration offsets to achieve this historic goal. In a brief ceremony on July 5th the Vatican declared that it had gratefully accepted KlimaFa's offer to create a new Vatican Climate Forest in Europe that will initially offset all of the Vatican City State's CO2 emissions for this year.

His Most Reverend Eminence Cardinal Paul Poupard presided at the event and stated, “As President of the Pontifical Council of Culture; I am honored to receive this donation from the leaders of Planktos-Klimafa. This donation means an entire section of a national park in central Europe will be reforested. In this way, the Vatican will do its small part in contributing to the elimination of polluting emissions from CO2 which is threatening the survival of this planet.



"As the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, had recently stated, the international community needs to respect and encourage a ‘Green Culture,’ characterized by ethical values. The Book of Genesis tells us of a beginning in which God placed man as guardian over the earth to make it fruitful. When man forgets that he is a faithful servant of this earth, it becomes a desert that threatens the survival of all creation…"

Pope Benedict XVI's inspiring guidance strongly reinforces an increasing Vatican environmental concern articulated by Pope John Paul II in his 2001 Blueprint for the New Millennium, "How can we remain indifferent to the prospect of an ecological crisis which is making vast areas of our planet uninhabitable and hostile to humanity?" Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino, head of the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace, reaffirmed this warning at Vatican Conference on Climate Change and Development this April, "For environment ... read Creation… Man must cultivate and safeguard God's Creation."

According to Planktos CEO and KlimaFa Managing Director, Russ George, "the Holy See's increasingly creative environmental leadership is both insightful and profound. Not only is the Vatican steadily reducing its carbon footprint with energy efficiency and solar power, its choice of new mixed growth forests to offset the balance of its emissions shows a deep commitment to planetary stewardship as well. It eloquently makes the point that ecorestoration is a fitting climate change solution for a culture of life."

Dr. David Gazdag, KlimaFa's Managing Director in Budapest, added, "We believe this Climate Forest initiative clearly reflects the Vatican's deep commitment to both environmental healing and the welfare of the poor. Besides their local ecological and global climatic benefits, these projects offer many rewarding new eco-forestry jobs to struggling rural communities and increasing eco-tourism employment opportunities as these beautiful woodlands mature."

The new Vatican Climate Forest will be created in Hungary's Bükk National Park under the auspices of the KlimaFa Climate Parks program. Its dimensions will be determined by the Vatican’s 2007 energy usage and the success of its current emission reduction efforts. KlimaFa has received EU JI Track 1 approval to plant thousands of hectares of new native species, mixed growth forests under the permanent protection of European national park systems. Its initial projects are being conducted in collaboration with Hungary's government, Academy of Sciences and National Parks Directorate.

Planktos/KlimaFa has further committed to work with the Vatican and the Pontifical Council of Culture to develop methods to calculate the CO2 emissions of individual Catholic churches and offer ecorestoration options to turn their carbon footprints green.

[30A Skunkape]

Tootsie, you seriously don't think there are global climate change doomsday prophets out there?

[Teresa]

contrary, JohnR? I think not. this dude has a massive brain and is progressive in many ways. apparently, he was the man behind many of John Paul II's research and writings.. though JP did have his own brilliance.

"As the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, had recently stated, the international community needs to respect and encourage a ‘Green Culture,’ characterized by ethical values. The Book of Genesis tells us of a beginning in which God placed man as guardian over the earth to make it fruitful. When man forgets that he is a faithful servant of this earth, it becomes a desert that threatens the survival of all creation…"

these papal dudes have been saying such for decades.

[Teresa]

Tootsie, you seriously don't think there are global climate change doomsday prophets out there?

of course they are out there - but not sure why this particular wording was used. Pope Ben never said we should not take global warming seriously. he never even talked about doomsday prophets. this article is radically different from what he actually said.

don't know what The Daily Mail was trying to spin, but these were his actual words:

Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow. It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances.

If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken.

[30A Skunkape]

of course they are out there - but not sure why this particular wording was used. Pope Ben never said we should not take global warming seriously. he never even talked about doomsday prophets. this article is radically different from what he actually said.

don't know what The Daily Mail was trying to spin, but these were his actual words:

Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow. It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances.

If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken.

OK, point taken that The Mail may have enhanced the words, but I think that his language "assessments...be carried out prudently...uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions" is pope-speak for "beware of apocalyptic soothsayers in green sandwich boards".

[Teresa]

OK, point taken that The Mail may have enhanced the words, but I think that his language "assessments...be carried out prudently...uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions" is pope-speak for "beware of apocalyptic soothsayers in green sandwich boards".

okay. agreed. he is definitely saying proceed with caution. and make joint decisions. I can buy that. but, can america? we're like children who can never accept that anything bad can happen to us... consequences don't apply here.. I like all my toys and I want more.. whatever happens in asia or africa has nothing to do with me.. they are all going to hail anyway..

Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken

[SWGB]

I like the Popes idea of making the Vatican carbon nuetral, but is there a way to make something carbon negative. In otherwords not contributing to carbon pollution and possibly removing some in the process?

[Jdarg]

Why is it so hard to recycle, even a little bit? Keep a few bins in the garage, outside, wherever, and sort them once a week. There are recycle trailers all over the place. This is such an easy thing to do to at least help with taking care of the planet- my family does not have an option. We just do it, because it is the right thing to do. How does one exist in today's world and not be at least a little concerned or at least curious about the information coming out about global warming? Or the amount of trash we are generating and where it is going?

I was raised in a church-attending, politically conservative household. Taking care of our planet was NOT considered a "lefty" ideal. It was considered a Christian ideal. We learned in Sunday school that God gave us this planet and we should take care of it. Everyone in our town recycled as soon as they could find places to take glass bottles, newspapers, etc. Our classrooms had recycling bins. Now, my family is not totally green, but we are evolving and working on it! We have gas eating cars, we generate too much garbage, we don't recycle enough- but we recognize this and are working on it.

Thankfully a whole generation of children are becoming more aware and at least will consider taking care of their "house". Change for the better is always a good thing.

[Teresa]

jdarg and all - remember the Keep America Beautiful (litter, pollution) campaigns and PSAs in the 70's?

we thought we were such saints by NOT throwing bags of trash out of the car.. a national past time before then. it was a start..

[Jdarg]

jdarg and all - remember the Keep America Beautiful (litter, pollution) campaigns and PSAs in the 70's?

we thought we were such saints by NOT throwing bags of trash out of the car.. a national past time before then. it was a start..

Once it was patriotic to keep America beautiful. Now it is political.

[30A Skunkape]

Once it was patriotic to keep America beautiful. Now it is political.

OK, just for fun, what political group endorses the fuglification of the planet? And Tootsie, if there is another country that pours more aid into Africa and Asia, I would like to know who that would be.

[Teresa]

OK, just for fun, what political group endorses the fuglification of the planet? And Tootsie, if there is another country that pours more aid into Africa and Asia, I would like to know who that would be.

skunky - sorry - I wasn't talking about aid. I was talking about americans (individually) and thinking only of themselves, as small children tend to do (egocentric).

[Jdarg]

skunky - sorry - I wasn't talking about aid. I was talking about americans (individually) and thinking only of themselves, as small children tend to do (egocentric).

Yes, thank you. That is what I meant.

[John R]

OK, just for fun, what political group endorses the fuglification of the planet? And Tootsie, if there is another country that pours more aid into Africa and Asia, I would like to know who that would be.

Just for fun:

there's a party that's advocated drilling closer to the coast of fla, selling off the national forests a piece at a time, drilling in ANWR, etc, etc. I'm pretty sure it's not the dems, libertarians, or the greens.

this looks like a pretty fugly list to me:

Park Service spending millions more on Yellowstone snowmobiling study (08/10/05)
Bush administration forges ahead with plans to privatize public agencies (05/10/05)
More pollution at national parks promised by Bush drilling juggernaut (01/28/05)
Park Service accused of bending drilling rules for Texas oil company (11/15/04)
Advisory board faults Park Service science (10/28/04)
Snowmobiles revving up for Yellowstone again (10/15/04)
Park Service issues new snowmobile plan for Yellowstone (08/19/04)
Bush administration rejects another new park (06/01/04)
Budget cuts hurting national parks, reports watchdog group (05/28/04)
Park Service seeks delay in Yellowstone snowmobile decision (05/28/04)
EPA air experts accuse Bush administration of altering science (04/29/04)
New "quieter" snowmobiles damage employee hearing in Yellowstone (04/20/04)
Yellowstone bison slaughtered to please ranchers (03/31/04)
BLM reconsiders energy development at Dinosaur Monument (03/25/04)
Budget cuts crippling national park system (03/16/04)
Snowmobiles return to Yellowstone . . . for now (03/10/04)
Bison slaughter continues at Yellowstone (03/04/04)
More drilling slated for Padre Island (02/27/04)
EPA lets power plants pollute Theodore Roosevelt National Park (02/13/04)
To snowmobile or not to snowmobile? That (still) is the question (02/10/04)
Park Service says 'Let 'em snowmobile' in Yellowstone (12/11/03)
Park Service workers speak out against Bush policies (11/13/03)
Park Service spending less than promised (08/21/03)
President making empty promises on parks funding, critics say (08/15/03)
Criticism forces NPS not to raid Mount Rainier repair funds (07/24/03)
Bush pushing to privatize park service (07/15/03)
EPA concerned about Yellowstone snowmobiles (06/21/03)
Park Service opens Maryland seashore to Jet Skis (05/30/03)
National security, privatization put chokehold on funding for parks (05/18/03)
Park Service pushes for personal watercraft on Lake Powell (05/13/03)
Bush administration attacks world heritage status of Yellowstone (04/07/03)
Bush administration looking to privatize park service jobs (04/04/03)
Bush administration giving away federal water rights in national park (04/03/03)
National Park Service officially adopts snowmobile plan (03/25/03)
National Park Service sends Yellowstone bison to slaughter (03/04/03)
National Park Service overturns ban on snowmobiles in national parks (02/20/03)
Bush snowmobile decision defies logic, not to mention scientific findings (01/30/03)
Interior Department may privatize National Park Service (01/27/03)
Despite scientific concerns, Interior Department approves power plant near Yellowstone (01/10/03)
Bush administration paves way for new roads in parks, wilderness (01/06/03)
Bush administration opens national park to drilling (11/22/02)
Bush administration reverses snowmobile ban for national parks (11/12/02)
Bush officials intervened to silence objections to coal plant near Mammoth Cave National Park (11/09/02)
Bush approves bill to enlarge California recreation area (10/09/02)
Yosemite park official resigns in protest (10/03/02)
National Park Service removes controversial ranger (09/17/02)
EPA backs off issuing strong antipollution standards for off-road vehicles (09/13/02)
Park Service temporarily bans personal watercraft on Nevada lakes (09/06/02)
Interior Department allows more air pollution at national park (08/22/02)
Corps of Engineers' plan threatens to pollute Florida Everglades (05/03/02)
Snowmobile ban dealt another blow (02/19/02)
Park snowmobile phase-out delayed (02/05/02)
Snowmobile ban unlikely to be implemented in Yellowstone and Grand Teton (12/10/01)
Voyageurs National Park reopening areas to snowmobiles (11/29/01)
Bush administration shutting down Everglades restoration office (11/06/01)
Bush pledges improvements to maintenance of national parks (05/31/01)
EPA moves ahead with Clinton-era rule that will reduce haze over wildlands (05/29/01)
Yellowstone snowmobile ban goes into effect, but perhaps not for long (04/23/01)

ymmv

[John R]

I just read that we can help reduce the chance hurricanes even more by riding around with heat on and the windows open. I'm going to use my $56 check from the most thought out amendment 1, to fuel my vehicle to help the cause.

[30A Skunkape]

Just for fun:

there's a party that's advocated drilling closer to the coast of fla, selling off the national forests a piece at a time, drilling in ANWR, etc, etc. I'm pretty sure it's not the dems, libertarians, or the greens.

this looks like a pretty fugly list to me:

Park Service spending millions more on Yellowstone snowmobiling study (08/10/05)
Bush administration forges ahead with plans to privatize public agencies (05/10/05)
More pollution at national parks promised by Bush drilling juggernaut (01/28/05)
Park Service accused of bending drilling rules for Texas oil company (11/15/04)
Advisory board faults Park Service science (10/28/04)
Snowmobiles revving up for Yellowstone again (10/15/04)
Park Service issues new snowmobile plan for Yellowstone (08/19/04)
Bush administration rejects another new park (06/01/04)
Budget cuts hurting national parks, reports watchdog group (05/28/04)
Park Service seeks delay in Yellowstone snowmobile decision (05/28/04)
EPA air experts accuse Bush administration of altering science (04/29/04)
New "quieter" snowmobiles damage employee hearing in Yellowstone (04/20/04)
Yellowstone bison slaughtered to please ranchers (03/31/04)
BLM reconsiders energy development at Dinosaur Monument (03/25/04)
Budget cuts crippling national park system (03/16/04)
Snowmobiles return to Yellowstone . . . for now (03/10/04)
Bison slaughter continues at Yellowstone (03/04/04)
More drilling slated for Padre Island (02/27/04)
EPA lets power plants pollute Theodore Roosevelt National Park (02/13/04)
To snowmobile or not to snowmobile? That (still) is the question (02/10/04)
Park Service says 'Let 'em snowmobile' in Yellowstone (12/11/03)
Park Service workers speak out against Bush policies (11/13/03)
Park Service spending less than promised (08/21/03)
President making empty promises on parks funding, critics say (08/15/03)
Criticism forces NPS not to raid Mount Rainier repair funds (07/24/03)
Bush pushing to privatize park service (07/15/03)
EPA concerned about Yellowstone snowmobiles (06/21/03)
Park Service opens Maryland seashore to Jet Skis (05/30/03)
National security, privatization put chokehold on funding for parks (05/18/03)
Park Service pushes for personal watercraft on Lake Powell (05/13/03)
Bush administration attacks world heritage status of Yellowstone (04/07/03)
Bush administration looking to privatize park service jobs (04/04/03)
Bush administration giving away federal water rights in national park (04/03/03)
National Park Service officially adopts snowmobile plan (03/25/03)
National Park Service sends Yellowstone bison to slaughter (03/04/03)
National Park Service overturns ban on snowmobiles in national parks (02/20/03)
Bush snowmobile decision defies logic, not to mention scientific findings (01/30/03)
Interior Department may privatize National Park Service (01/27/03)
Despite scientific concerns, Interior Department approves power plant near Yellowstone (01/10/03)
Bush administration paves way for new roads in parks, wilderness (01/06/03)
Bush administration opens national park to drilling (11/22/02)
Bush administration reverses snowmobile ban for national parks (11/12/02)
Bush officials intervened to silence objections to coal plant near Mammoth Cave National Park (11/09/02)
Bush approves bill to enlarge California recreation area (10/09/02)
Yosemite park official resigns in protest (10/03/02)
National Park Service removes controversial ranger (09/17/02)
EPA backs off issuing strong antipollution standards for off-road vehicles (09/13/02)
Park Service temporarily bans personal watercraft on Nevada lakes (09/06/02)
Interior Department allows more air pollution at national park (08/22/02)
Corps of Engineers' plan threatens to pollute Florida Everglades (05/03/02)
Snowmobile ban dealt another blow (02/19/02)
Park snowmobile phase-out delayed (02/05/02)
Snowmobile ban unlikely to be implemented in Yellowstone and Grand Teton (12/10/01)
Voyageurs National Park reopening areas to snowmobiles (11/29/01)
Bush administration shutting down Everglades restoration office (11/06/01)
Bush pledges improvements to maintenance of national parks (05/31/01)
EPA moves ahead with Clinton-era rule that will reduce haze over wildlands (05/29/01)
Yellowstone snowmobile ban goes into effect, but perhaps not for long (04/23/01)

ymmv

Bush does not=a party. And our good old evil polluting country is still way cleaner than any other that produces so much stuff.

[John R]

no W is too stupid, it's the $$ that's driving him. And, I don't think the parks service is taking it upon themselves to make all these moves.

regarding our garbage. of course it's cleaner here, we ship our most hazardous stuff elsewhere.

remember, just for fun... it sure is fun calling W stupid though.

[Jdarg]

Bush does not=a party. And our good old evil polluting country is still way cleaner than any other that produces so much stuff.

I love that you posted this on my computer and John R was sitting 5 feet away.

Oh Skunky, I'm gonna have to lock my dam keyboard.

[Teresa]

no W is too stupid, it's the $$ that's driving him. And, I don't think the parks service is taking it upon themselves to make all these moves.

regarding our garbage. of course it's cleaner here, we ship our most hazardous stuff elsewhere.

remember, just for fun... it sure is fun calling W stupid though.

you are entirely too kind JohnR. seriously. I like moron better. where is that sticker? I love it.

[John R]