Re: [asa] climate change severity

At 12:12 PM 1/5/2007, Pim wrote:

>>On 1/4/07, Janice Matchett wrote:
>>@ I see you didn't get the
>>memo. http://cagle.msnbc.com/working/061213/lester.jpg ~ Janice

Still making up 'facts'?....I have demolished most of your arguments
and your so called 'experts'. And btw cow produced CO2 is .." ~ Pim

@@ "Cows do not contribute CO2 to the Earth's atmosphere." ~
Charles Carrigan 12:46 PM 1/5/2007 Re: [asa] climate change severity ~ Janice

"We Christians should be careful ...as Augustine's warnings apply
equally strongly to us citing our own ignorance or that of others." ~
Pim Fri, 5 Jan 2007 09:42

@@ You got that right.

"So we agree that it is getting warmer ....There is a lot of
supporting evidence and most scientists have accepted the facts
presented." ~ Pim to Jack - Fri, 5 Jan 2007 20:45:33 -0800

@@ They had better, OR ELSE.

"..Climatology professor John Christy is a Lead Author with the IPCC,
the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change. Unlike many other
Lead Authors he was not appointed by his government, and he considers
that this situation arose most likely because the remainder were
willing to adopt a particular viewpoint on causes of climate change
not dissimilar to the views of their political appointees. Describing
a gathering in New Zealand prior to publication of the latest IPCC
Report, he mentions how discussion at a meeting was cut short when
serious objections were raised to a pet theory of the scientist
leading the discussion. Such is the quality of open debate in IPCC
circles." .. http://www.abd.org.uk/climate_change_truths.htm

"We Christians should be careful in quoting so-called experts.." ~
Pim Fri, 5 Jan 2007 09:42:54 -0800

@@ You quote your "experts", and I quote mine.

Not based on "science", but based on your
world-view
http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html , you
quote the "experts" who either hold the same world-view as yours, or
those who are afraid to disagree them for fear of losing their
positions or advancing in their careers. (They have families to
feed). John Christy with the IPCC (see above) is one who is
intellectually honest enough to admit that "climate science" has been
politicized.

Based on my world-view, I quote environmental "experts" who believe
that all environmental policy should be based on the idea that
people are the most important resource. The inherent value of each
individual is greater than the inherent value of any other resource.
Accordingly, the foremost measure of quality of our environment is
human health, safety and well-being. A policy cannot be good for the
environment if it is bad for people. The best judge of what is or is
not desirable is the affected
individual.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050306053745/http://www.nwi.org/ACE.html

Unlike you, Charles Carrigan, et. al., I don't think people are "the problem"

"...The reason cows are a problem is not because of cows, it is
because of humans, who raise them for milk and beef. Humans, in the
last 100 years, have gone from ~2 billion in population to now over
6.5 billion, and 7 billion is only a few years away. ..Cows would
not exist anywhere close to the populations they do today if humans
did not raise them for food. ....." ~ Charles Carrigan 12:46 PM 1/5/2007

"Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is
environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice
for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at
the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is
in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional
Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.

There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with
nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a
result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our
actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy
sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called
sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the
environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that
pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe.

Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday---these
are deeply held mythic structures. ... These are issues of faith.

And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems
facts aren't necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are
all about belief. It's about whether you are going to be a sinner, or
saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of
salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of
us, or one of them.

Am I exaggerating to make a point? I am afraid not. Because we know a
lot more about the world than we did forty or fifty years ago. And
what we know now is not so supportive of certain core environmental
myths, yet the myths do not die. Let's examine some of those beliefs.

There is no Eden. There never was. What was that Eden of the
wonderful mythic past? Is it the time when infant mortality was 80%,
when four children in five died of disease before the age of five?
When one woman in six died in childbirth? When the average lifespan
was 40, as it was in America a century ago. When plagues swept across
the planet, killing millions in a stroke. Was it when millions
starved to death? Is that when it was Eden? ..." ~ Michael Crichton
"Environmentalism as
Religion" http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html

~ Janice ......."The greatest challenge facing mankind is the
challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from
propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to
mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the
disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance." ~
Michael Crichton

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Jan 6 12:17:09 2007