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

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
Everybody now knows that the biggest threat to life on earth is being drilled by a meteor. Until we address this possibility, which scientists say is bound to happen some time, I have zero energy for addressing climate change. :idunno: Once we have an answer to the meteor threat, which is real, scientists say, then let's concern ourselves with climate change.

Interesting. If I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying, it seems that, while "science" is telling us we are in danger from something they call "climate change", it is also telling us we are in inevitable danger from destruction caused by a meteor. So, we're being targeted for assault by a right-handed robber wielding a loaded gun in his right hand, and a knife in his left hand, and "science" is telling us we need to be far more concerned about the knife in his left hand than we are about the gun in his right hand.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Interesting. If I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying, it seems that, while "science" is telling us we are in danger from something they call "climate change", it is also telling us we are in inevitable danger from destruction caused by a meteor. So, we're being targeted for assault by a right-handed robber wielding a loaded gun in his right hand, and a knife in his left hand, and "science" is telling us we need to be far more concerned about the knife in his left hand than we are about the gun in his right hand.
:chuckle:

Those gradually rising oceans are going to kill us all.
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
Interesting. If I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying, it seems that, while "science" is telling us we are in danger from something they call "climate change", it is also telling us we are in inevitable danger from destruction caused by a meteor. So, we're being targeted for assault by a right-handed robber wielding a loaded gun in his right hand, and a knife in his left hand, and "science" is telling us we need to be far more concerned about the knife in his left hand than we are about the gun in his right hand.
'Xcept there's no knife.
 

Derf

Well-known member
'Xcept there's no knife.

Well, for the purpose of this discussion, based on the OP, there's something in his hand, and it's real, but it might not actually be a knife. It might be a banana.

If the rest of your scenario is accurate, there is certainly much more to be feared from the gun, but the gun isn't necessarily pointed at us right now. When it swings around to point at us, it might take our attention away from the knife/banana.

It seems, then, the most important thing, in your scenario, is to forget the gun for a moment, and find out what is that thing in the other hand.

But the one part of your scenario that doesn't seem to fit is the man! Who is the man, and why is he holding a gun in our presence, not to mention the knife/banana. Figuring out who he is might give us the answers to what we need to do about it. Is he benevolent to us? Is he malicious? What's his plan? Has he told us his plan?
 

Derf

Well-known member
It's kind of like "Should I put a meteorite shield over my house, or install a security system?"

Maybe one of these for global warming, at least if you're in a coastal city:

717301121302.jpg


  • $12.48
  • Detects as little as 1/32 in. of water to offer an effective early warning system
  • Solid-state circuitry is extremely sensitive and reliable
  • Loud 110dB alarm can be heard throughout the house
Available at Lowes
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
Well, for the purpose of this discussion, based on the OP, there's something in his hand, and it's real, but it might not actually be a knife. It might be a banana.
It's a banana then.
If the rest of your scenario is accurate, there is certainly much more to be feared from the gun, but the gun isn't necessarily pointed at us right now. When it swings around to point at us, it might take our attention away from the knife/banana.
It's pointed at us right now.
It seems, then, the most important thing, in your scenario, is to forget the gun for a moment, and find out what is that thing in the other hand.
Nope it's a banana. And the gun Is pointed right at us, and we Don't know when it's going to shoot us, but it Will shoot us. Ask Science---they'll tell you.
But the one part of your scenario that doesn't seem to fit is the man! Who is the man, and why is he holding a gun in our presence, not to mention the knife/banana. Figuring out who he is might give us the answers to what we need to do about it. Is he benevolent to us? Is he malicious? What's his plan? Has he told us his plan?
It wasn’t my scenario.

The earth is a giant near-sphere of rock covered in soil and in sea water, with a fully enveloping atmosphere of air, that orbits a star. It is perfect for life, maybe especially for human life, right now, as it already is. In order to properly love creation and humanity (re: your OP), we must ensure to the best of our ability that this great rock the earth continues to sustain life, and most importantly, human life.

Science tells us that the last time that a real substantial meteor shot into the ground, that the then rulers of the world, the dinosaurs, were all extincted. How do we, the current rulers of the world, escape that same fate?

But imagine this "man" from the scenario. Imagine he's a giant man who doesn't need air, he's armed with a giant gun that shoots mountains for bullets, and he's way high up in the sky, in orbit around the earth. The man aims the gun at a spot on the earth and fires, and instead of a rifle, that shoots a bullet 3000 feet per second, the mountain goes closer to 20000 feet per second. A jetliner travels at 35000 feet. You can see them way up there in the blue sky sometimes, depending upon where you live. The mountain will take less than a count of two to hit the ground from that height.

But forget about the actual impact for a moment. Let’s think about post-impact. Science says that we can expect ‘nuclear winter.’ Nuclear winter is when so much finely divided particulate is blasted up into the sky, that it won’t all fall out of the atmosphere back to the ground again for a long time, and in the meantime, all the debris will act like an overcast sky the whole world round, and this overcast sky will persist for, according again to Science, years.

During those years of nuclear winter, the character of plant life on the whole earth will change to suddenly advantage plants that need protection from sunlight (i.e., ‘shade-loving’ plants), and to disadvantage plants that like ‘full-sun,’ e.g., Most of our current commodity cash Crops, including a very great deal of our Food.

The entire plant world will change within a geological blink of an eye, and a very great number of plant species will probably extinct, and as a direct result, so will a great number of animals who depend upon these plants for their own food.

And again, here we are thinking about ‘climate change,’ when the climate will surely change after impact, and on a logarithmic scale from 1-10, the ‘climate change’ we're talking about here, will change the climate maybe a 1, but a meteor impact will change it 10.

And yet none of the talk about ‘climate change’ ever, ever mentions doing anything to prevent or survive a new mountain suddenly plunging into the ground somewhere.

And remember that all the ‘climate change’ talk concerns Law. We are talking about making big new Law, to deal with ‘those gradually rising oceans.’ Big Law, global Law, Law that is going to impact everybody, crossing national boundaries, and the enforcement of which will empower current police, and perhaps necessitate the creation of new police, new World police, empowered to enforce the new Big Law that’s required to ‘stem the tide’ of ‘those gradually rising oceans.’

And I reason that if that’s what we’re talking about doing, and it is, then we should address the meteor before we do a darn thing about ‘those gradually rising oceans.’
:chuckle:

Those gradually rising oceans are going to kill us all.
iow, bananas don't kill people.
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
I think that was the point. There's also no answer to global warming I mean climate change.
Oh I got the point. When you're on the Titanic you've either got a spot in a lifeboat or you don't. Either way, no sense arranging the deck chairs.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Barbarian, on the question of whether the rising seas in the next few decades or a huge meteorite due sometime in the next 7 to 20 million years is more important.

It's kind of like "Should I put a meteorite shield over my house, or install a security system?"


There's no such thing as a meteor shield.

Yes. Guess why.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Maybe one of these for global warming, at least if you're in a coastal city:

717301121302.jpg

Absent a storm surge, it will happen gradually with plenty of warning. Storm surges, however, are going to be more frequent and more devastating, unless we do a lot of relocating.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Absent a storm surge, it will happen gradually with plenty of warning. Storm surges, however, are going to be more frequent and more devastating, unless we do a lot of relocating.
Good luck getting people to give up their homes with a view.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Good luck getting people to give up their homes with a view.

That's what history has shown. People aren't very rational when it comes to their homes. So I see a lot of unhappiness in the decades to come. And it's not just the usual targets on the Gulf coast and Florida; warmer seas mean hurricanes are going to remain stronger farther and farther north along the coast.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
That's what history has shown. People aren't very rational when it comes to their homes. So I see a lot of unhappiness in the decades to come. And it's not just the usual targets on the Gulf coast and Florida; warmer seas mean hurricanes are going to remain stronger farther and farther north along the coast.

:yawn:
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
Barbarian, on the question of whether the rising seas in the next few decades or a huge meteorite due sometime in the next 7 to 20 million years is more important.

It's kind of like "Should I put a meteorite shield over my house, or install a security system?"
There's no such thing as a meteor shield.
Yes. Guess why.
Because it's a mountain? Falling out of the sky at 20000 ft/s?

NASA looks for rocks that are 0.14 km in diameter and larger---what if Mt. Everest is out there? How big would that be? It would be something like 16-20 km in diameter (figuring half of it's above ground and the rest is underground). 16-20 km vs. 0.14 km. 0.14 km was chosen because at that size apparently the devastation would be noteworthy, if it directly hits a city e.g.

What if Everest hits a city? Or, anywhere, really? Rock's specific gravity is close enough to 2.5, and an 18 km diameter sphere is about three trillion cubic meters, and a cubic meter is 1000 liters, and so each liter weighs 2.5 kgs, so Mt. Everest must weigh on the order of 75 percent of 10,000 trillion kilograms. The kinetic energy of it traveling at 20000 ft/s must be about 14% of a trillion trillion joules of energy, and a quick conversion equates that, where one trillion joules is 239 tons of TNT, 14% of a trillion times that, so about 33 trillion tons of TNT worth of energy at impact.

A megaton is 1000000 tons, and largest nuke ever detonated was something like 50 MT. That explosion broke glass windows hundreds of miles away from the blast. If Everest hits the earth, it will be like 666,000 of those bombs all exploding in one spot all in an instant.

I've done all I can to paint the picture of what this will look like.

I don't want to arrange deck chairs on the Titanic. I don't mind figuring out how to turn them into lifeboats though. And I definitely do not give a speck of poop about bananas.

https://qz.com/1659566/nasa-nixes-hunt-for-deadly-asteroids/

Science guarantees it's going to happen. They can't say when, but they can say That. This link suggests they have only identified 1/3 of the total number of mountains way up there in outer space streaking around our neighborhood of our galaxy. They're obviously going to have a tough time with mountains that don't spend much time around us (like the 'cigar' shaped mountain, spotted in the past couple years).

I really, really don't care about climate change. But I'm not being irrational. I think that you are, and I think that everybody who thinks that the banana is worth the opportunity cost is also. The mountain will also change the climate. It will change the climate so much in the blink of an eye that whatever we do in the meantime to hopefully adjust the climate will be either nullified or accelerated so severely that it will not have mattered at all, which is why I'm drawing the parallel between this and arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

And all of the money that's going to change hands, and people who will be arrested, fined, sued, imprisoned, over climate change, not a single thing will matter once the mountain arrives, but we know that it will arrive one day, Science guarantees it. And, the same Science can't even say that we'd even have a day's warning beforehand either. We might have a century's warning, but also it could happen next week. Or anywhere in between. Or not for millions of years. Science cannot say.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
And all of the money that's going to change hands, and people who will be arrested, fined, sued, imprisoned, over climate change, not a single thing will matter once the mountain arrives, but we know that it will arrive one day, Science guarantees it. And, the same Science can't even say that we'd even have a day's warning beforehand either. We might have a century's warning, but also it could happen next week. Or anywhere in between. Or not for millions of years. Science cannot say.

It's like refusing to do anything about the fraying wiring in your house, because eventually, there will be an earthquake that destroys it all, anyway.

I'm completely good with monitoring sky and even working out the details of technology that would allow us to nudge threatening rocks into orbits that will miss Earth. But the more immediate concern is that which is likely to kill millions of people.

When will the next asteroid hit Earth?

We don’t know. But we can talk about how often on average objects of different sizes hit Earth. The good news is there is a lot more little stuff out there than big stuff.

100 tons of space stuff hits the Earth’s atmosphere every day but most of it is dust-sized particles that burn up as they cause meteors.

About 30 small asteroids a few meters in size hit Earth every year. They make spectacular fireballs in the atmosphere, and sometimes fragments make it to the surface as meteorites, but don’t cause any significant damage on the ground.

An asteroid of about 20 meters diameter like the one that exploded over Chelyabink, Russia in 2013 on average will hit once or twice a century. Its shock wave shattered windows and injured more than 1000 people.

An asteroid like the one that exploded near the Tunguska River in Siberia in 1908 impacts on average once or twice a millenium. It leveled an area of forest 50% larger than the city of Los Angeles but luckily hit an uninhabited area in Siberia. On average larger asteroids hit less frequently with increasing size, i.e., big stuff hits less often, including the extreme case:

Skipping to much, much larger sizes, an asteroid the size of the dinosaur (and 70% of the species on Earth) killer at 10 km in size hits on time scales more like 100 million years.

The more we discover and track near Earth asteroids, the closer we’ll be to answering more definitively when the next damaging asteroid will hit Earth.

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/bruce-betts/will-an-asteroid-hit-earth.html
 
Top