User Tag List

Page 21 of 32 FirstFirst ... 111819202122232431 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 315 of 468

Thread: What if climate change is real and human caused--what should Christians do about it?

  1. #301
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    10,253
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 3,400 Times in 2,305 Posts

    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Barbarian observes:
    Warmer conditions at the poles should increase precipitation. Which is what the models predicted. However, the concern in Antarctica, is not more snow there.

    Larsen C Crack Is in Its Final Stages; Will Produce One of World's Largest Icebergs Ever Recorded
    A chunk of Antarctic ice the size of Delaware will soon break off and drift away to melt. Fortunately, an ice shelf is essentially a big tethered iceberg, so this won't markedly affect sea levels right away. However, when the ice shelves finally go away, the continental ice that will then melt is going to raise sea levels, much as the melting Greenland icecap is doing.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14730

    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    You deniers need to get your stories straight.

    Are the ice shelves diminishing, or not?

    Stipe, you aren't really that ignorant, are you? Seriously, Stipe?

    You come on like you know what you're talking about, and then we get something like this?

    O.K. Snowfall, in the interior of Antarctica is relatively uncommon. It's cold enough that the relative humidity is quite low.

    Despite its thick ice, Antarctica is classified as a desert because so little moisture falls from the sky. The inner regions of the continent receive an average of 2 inches (50 millimeters) of precipitation — primarily in the form of snow — each year. More rain falls in the Sahara desert.
    https://www.livescience.com/21677-antarctica-facts.html

    So rising temperatures in the interior mean... yep. More snow. However, the effect of rising temperatures on the ice shelves. (which are on the edge of the continent, Stipe, hence "shelves") Is to weaken them. Large chunks break off and melt. The next one will be a little bigger than Maryland.

    And if you deem yourself informed enough to be telling people about climate, no one should have to tell you things like this, Stipe.

  2. #302
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    10,253
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 3,400 Times in 2,305 Posts

    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    As for the taxing, that gets a big NO from me.
    That's like saying you're driving your car a lot more miles, but you don't want to spend money having the brakes tended to more often.

    There's no argument as to whether or not we can cause global effects from the amount of carbon we're dumping into the air. Fact is, we're doing it.

    The only question is whether or not we'll do something about it, or let nature fix it for us.

    You won't like nature's solution.

  3. #303
    Over 1000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,041
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 156 Times in 132 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    68473
    Quote Originally Posted by User Name View Post
    It's called carbon dioxide. If we can alter the amount of CO2 (and other greenhouse gasses) in the atmosphere, we can alter the climate.
    The idea that man is trying to alter the climate globally, is a lot scarier to me than the idea that man is accidentally doing so.

  4. #304
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    10,253
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 3,400 Times in 2,305 Posts

    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Wick Stick View Post
    The idea that man is trying to alter the climate globally, is a lot scarier to me than the idea that man is accidentally doing so.
    The idea of cleaning your house is scarier than messing it up? How so?

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    User Name (January 16th, 2018)

  6. #305
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Barbarian observes:
    Warmer conditions at the poles should increase precipitation. Which is what the models predicted. However, the concern in Antarctica, is not more snow there.

    Larsen C Crack Is in Its Final Stages; Will Produce One of World's Largest Icebergs Ever Recorded
    A chunk of Antarctic ice the size of Delaware will soon break off and drift away to melt. Fortunately, an ice shelf is essentially a big tethered iceberg, so this won't markedly affect sea levels right away. However, when the ice shelves finally go away, the continental ice that will then melt is going to raise sea levels, much as the melting Greenland icecap is doing.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14730




    Stipe, you aren't really that ignorant, are you? Seriously, Stipe?

    You come on like you know what you're talking about, and then we get something like this?

    O.K. Snowfall, in the interior of Antarctica is relatively uncommon. It's cold enough that the relative humidity is quite low.

    Despite its thick ice, Antarctica is classified as a desert because so little moisture falls from the sky. The inner regions of the continent receive an average of 2 inches (50 millimeters) of precipitation — primarily in the form of snow — each year. More rain falls in the Sahara desert.
    https://www.livescience.com/21677-antarctica-facts.html

    So rising temperatures in the interior mean... yep. More snow. However, the effect of rising temperatures on the ice shelves. (which are on the edge of the continent, Stipe, hence "shelves") Is to weaken them. Large chunks break off and melt. The next one will be a little bigger than Maryland.

    And if you deem yourself informed enough to be telling people about climate, no one should have to tell you things like this, Stipe.
    The ice shelves don't start on the edge, do they? Maybe the higher snowfall was needed in the past to build the ice shelves to what they are now. And maybe that means, with higher moisture levels due to warmer climate, that the snow will allow for a rebound in the shelves, despite the large chunks breaking off at present.

    I'm not convinced that a thawing antarctica is necessarily a bad thing, despite the need for some evasive action for those close to coasts.

  7. #306
    Over 1000 post club
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,041
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 156 Times in 132 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    68473
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    The idea of cleaning your house is scarier than messing it up? How so?
    You must have a lot more faith in humanity than me. From where I stand, man's ability to screw stuff up greatly exceeds his ability to fix things up.

    A more apt metaphor would be hiring a gorilla to fix your heat pump. Probably a bad idea.

  8. #307
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post
    As a Christian, I already have the story of the most horrific time that will ever be in human history (Matt 24:21), and everything is going to turn out A-OK for planet Earth.

    I don't think man can do anything to destroy the planet anymore than I think anything man did in the days of Noah caused a natural reaction of the world being flooded.
    To me, scripture seems to make it clear that when the wrath comes, the entire world is going to KNOW it is GOD doing it.
    That implies that it cannot be something that could be racked-up to some natural occurrence that man causes.

    As for the taxing, that gets a big NO from me.

    Some people around here think Matt 24:21 was already delayed because of people's activities. Might it be delayed again?

    After all, even if Noah's flood wasn't a "natural" reaction to man's violence, by which I think you mean it was a "supernatural" reaction, wouldn't less violence or even repentance have actually postponed or eliminated the supernatural threat?

    And what if climate change (assuming it's a fact) is a supernatural reaction to man's general rejection of Christ, and something that is leading up to the wrath God promised. Does Jeremiah 18:8 apply here?

  9. #308
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by Tambora View Post

    As for the taxing, that gets a big NO from me.

    And, by the way, I agree on the taxing thing. Not that I don't see the need for proper taxes and government functions, but I doubt the funds will be used appropriately--I'm not that trusting of human nature, especially of how it gets further warped in politics.

    Is it possible to make the argument that the taxes are a way we don't love our neighbor?

  10. #309
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by Wick Stick View Post
    You must have a lot more faith in humanity than me. From where I stand, man's ability to screw stuff up greatly exceeds his ability to fix things up.

    A more apt metaphor would be hiring a gorilla to fix your heat pump. Probably a bad idea.
    Oh, he'll fix it all right!

  11. #310
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    10,253
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 3,400 Times in 2,305 Posts

    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Wick Stick View Post
    You must have a lot more faith in humanity than me. From where I stand, man's ability to screw stuff up greatly exceeds his ability to fix things up.
    Which is precisely why we should stop messing with it.

    A more apt metaphor would be hiring a gorilla to fix your heat pump.
    That's what we're doing now. Climatologists are suggesting that you stop giving the gorilla bigger hammers.

  12. #311
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Maybe we need a water vapor tax, too.

    From the American Chemical Society https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...-the-co2.html:

    It’s Water Vapor, Not the CO2

    Remark: “The Earth has certainly been warming since we have added so much CO2 to the atmosphere from fossil fuel burning.”
    Reply: “Forget the CO2. Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It controls the Earth’s temperature.”

    It’s true that water vapor is the largest contributor to the Earth’s greenhouse effect. On average, it probably accounts for about 60% of the warming effect. However, water vapor does not control the Earth’s temperature, but is instead controlled by the temperature. This is because the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere limits the maximum amount of water vapor the atmosphere can contain. If a volume of air contains its maximum amount of water vapor and the temperature is decreased, some of the water vapor will condense to form liquid water. This is why clouds form as warm air containing water vapor rises and cools at higher altitudes where the water condenses to the tiny droplets that make up clouds.

    The greenhouse effect that has maintained the Earth’s temperature at a level warm enough for human civilization to develop over the past several millennia is controlled by non-condensable gases, mainly carbon dioxide, CO2, with smaller contributions from methane, CH4, nitrous oxide, N2O, and ozone, O3. Since the middle of the 20th century, small amounts of man-made gases, mostly chlorine- and fluorine-containing solvents and refrigerants, have been added to the mix. Because these gases are not condensable at atmospheric temperatures and pressures, the atmosphere can pack in much more of these gases . Thus, CO2 (as well as CH4, N2O, and O3) has been building up in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution when we began burning large amounts of fossil fuel.

    If there had been no increase in the amounts of non-condensable greenhouse gases, the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere would not have changed with all other variables remaining the same. The addition of the non-condensable gases causes the temperature to increase and this leads to an increase in water vapor that further increases the temperature. This is an example of a positive feedback effect. The warming due to increasing non-condensable gases causes more water vapor to enter the atmosphere, which adds to the effect of the non-condensables.

    There is also a possibility that adding more water vapor to the atmosphere could produce a negative feedback effect. This could happen if more water vapor leads to more cloud formation. Clouds reflect sunlight and reduce the amount of energy that reaches the Earth’s surface to warm it. If the amount of solar warming decreases, then the temperature of the Earth would decrease. In that case, the effect of adding more water vapor would be cooling rather than warming. But cloud cover does mean more condensed water in the atmosphere, making for a stronger greenhouse effect than non-condensed water vapor alone – it is warmer on a cloudy winter day than on a clear one. Thus the possible positive and negative feedbacks associated with increased water vapor and cloud formation can cancel one another out and complicate matters. The actual balance between them is an active area of climate science research.


  13. #312
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    10,253
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 3,400 Times in 2,305 Posts

    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    The ice shelves don't start on the edge, do they?
    Have to. It's the nature of shelves. The ice extends off the edge of the continent and forms shelves out into the ocean.

    Maybe the higher snowfall was needed in the past to build the ice shelves to what they are now.
    No, just as the very low precipitation in Antarctica, over millions of years, accumulated into deep ice caps, the slow movement of glaciers down the coastline eventually extended sheets of ice out into the sea around the continent.

    And maybe that means, with higher moisture levels due to warmer climate, that the snow will allow for a rebound in the shelves, despite the large chunks breaking off at present.
    It's warming that's breaking up the shelves. In warmer climates, the glaciers just reach the sea, and huge chunks of ice break off and fall into the sea to float away.

    I'm not convinced that a thawing antarctica is necessarily a bad thing, despite the need for some evasive action for those close to coasts.
    The main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90 percent of the world's ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet).
    https://science.howstuffworks.com/en...uestion473.htm

    So if maybe 1/10 of it melted, we'd see about a 20 foot rise in seas. Kiss off many of the world's coastal cities if that happens.

    Look here for more conservative estimates of melting:
    https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slr

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    gcthomas (January 17th, 2018)

  15. #313
    Over 2000 post club way 2 go's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,245
    Thanks
    2,192
    Thanked 1,482 Times in 834 Posts

    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    420610
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post
    Let's take the fossil fuel reduction as a starter. The website I referenced stated that a carbon tax is one way to reduce the use of fossil fuels. This would work in two ways, supposedly: 1. Make it cheaper to emit less carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases, and 2. Provide funds for someone to use to find other ways to curb emissions.

    For my #1 above, is there anything immoral about levying a tax such as this?
    It would be stealing

    Lev_19:11 “You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to way 2 go For Your Post:

    Tambora (January 17th, 2018)

  17. #314
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by way 2 go View Post
    It would be stealing

    Lev_19:11 “You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another.
    Is all taxing stealing? Was Joseph stealing when he took 20% of the produce of the Egyptians for seven years? How does one decide which taxes are moral and which are stealing?

  18. #315
    Over 2000 post club Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,101
    Thanks
    528
    Thanked 924 Times in 634 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    246941
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Have to. It's the nature of shelves. The ice extends off the edge of the continent and forms shelves out into the ocean.



    No, just as the very low precipitation in Antarctica, over millions of years, accumulated into deep ice caps, the slow movement of glaciers down the coastline eventually extended sheets of ice out into the sea around the continent.



    It's warming that's breaking up the shelves. In warmer climates, the glaciers just reach the sea, and huge chunks of ice break off and fall into the sea to float away.



    The main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90 percent of the world's ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters (200 feet).
    https://science.howstuffworks.com/en...uestion473.htm

    So if maybe 1/10 of it melted, we'd see about a 20 foot rise in seas. Kiss off many of the world's coastal cities if that happens.

    Look here for more conservative estimates of melting:
    https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slr
    Does that include the expanded area of the ocean as it rises, or is that number just the extra height assuming the exact same size ocean? Is there not a tradeoff, where the more southern and northern latitudes become more habitable? Have not peoples always had to deal with changing coastlines, just some more quickly than others? Holland is a good example. What if we decided to put the money, assuming we had such, into relocating people instead of just wringing our hands hoping it won't get too bad?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us