|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 329
CEG\'er
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 329 |
Kind of different spin on this discussion. Though the main points have been touched on here, I appreciate the way he sums things up so I wanted to share. Here's a link but I copied it anyway. And don't worry, its not as long as the Tribes thing. Acts of God or sins of humanity? by Wes Granberg-Michaelson From a vacation cottage Karin and I watched on TV as the desolation unfolded in New Orleans and the Gulf coast. Through that agonizing week we sat helpless with millions, while the world's most technologically powerful nation could not provide food, water, and rescue to fellow citizens whose desperate faces filled our screen and haunted our consciences. Commentators described Hurricane Katrina as a "natural disaster," or at times as an "act of God," like language used in some insurance policies describing events beyond human control. It means no one is liable. Except, of course, God. And that's what troubles me. How can a God of love, Creator of all that is, be responsible for such terrible, destructive disasters? But as I listened, reflected, and prayed during that week, another question emerged. Just how "natural" was this disaster? Consider this, for instance. When Katrina left the Florida coast, it was classified as a "tropical storm" - not even a hurricane. It picked up tremendous power as it passed through the Gulf of Mexico, in part, experts think, because the waters of the Gulf were two degrees warmer than normal. So by the time it reached New Orleans, it was a category four hurricane. Years before becoming general secretary of the Reformed Church in America, I led a group studying global warming and the responsibility of the churches for preserving the environment when I served as director of Church and Society for the World Council of Churches. Even then (1990), a clear global scientific consensus warned that global warming due to human causes - especially the accelerated use of fossil fuels - was causing disruptive climate changes. And I clearly remember listening to scientists say that one effect could be that storms such as hurricanes would increase in their intensity and destructive effects because of warmer waters and changing sea levels. So a part of Katrina's fury was not completely "natural." And there's more. New Orleans was built between the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico, with much of the city below sea level. Its vulnerability to flooding from hurricanes was partly protected by the wetlands between the city and the Gulf. These act like a "speed bump," absorbing and lowering some of a hurricane's force. But they've been disappearing, making way for shopping malls, condos, and roads, so 25 square miles are lost each year - an area the size of Manhattan. And the city has kept moving closer to the Gulf. Moreover, the levees and dams constructed to protect the city and "control" the Mississippi deprive the wetlands from the sediments and nutrients that naturally would replenish its life. There's a lot "unnatural" about this "act of God." And then, consider the victims. Those who have suffered the most are the poorest, and most of them are black. Twenty-seven percent of New Orleans residents lived below the poverty line, and many of those simply had no cars, or no money, and no way to leave. That also isn't "natural." The poverty rate, and the gap between rich and poor, continues to increase in this nation, and that is a national disgrace. More to our point, that's a sin, condemned by literally hundreds of verses of scripture. Those most vulnerable to Katrina have been kept on society's margins by persistent economic injustice and racism. I celebrate the tides of compassion flowing in the wake of Katrina. Organizations such as Church World Service and the Salvation Army bear the compassion of Christ to the desolate, homeless, and hopeless. And I still don't fully understand why, in the providence of a loving and all-powerful God of creation, things like hurricanes and earthquakes happen. But I do know this. When I see the devastating effects of Katrina, I don't simply regard these as an inexplicable "act of God." I also focus on the sins of humanity. We've disobeyed God's clear biblical instructions to preserve the integrity of God's good creation, and to overcome the scourge of poverty. In the aftermath of Katrina, we desperately need not only compassion, but also repentance.
1998.5 SVT
I'm working on it.
WTB 2.0L Contique.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,854
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,854 |
1999 Silver Frost SVT
#609 of 2760
Quaife, lightened SVT Flywheel, SPEC stage II clutch, removed resonator, k&n drop in - various other goodies too.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,290
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,290 |
Eliminating poverty and taking care of the environment are worthwhile pursuits. No harm pointing out the Bible tells us to do so.
E0 #36
'95 Ranger
'82 Honda CX500
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,475
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,475 |
Really the people who built and developed New Orleans in a swamp, diverted water flow to the wetlands, ignored warnings of possible disaster, and failed to build strong enough levees, have brought this upon themselves. Its sad to see so many people suffer and die because of it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 217
CEG\'er
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 217 |
To original poster - excellent quote of the article. It certainly gave me a lot of food for thought. I especially liked his logic and the way his thoughts were expressed.
I for one side with the camp that believe things don't happen out of random. It's because we don't see the whole picture, and just a small part of picture, that makes events seem random, or 'act of God' to us.
To quote a phrase from a movie, '..cause and effect is the only thing that is truly universal..' Katrina is the effect, we are the cause. Whether it's our accelerated use of fossil fuel. Or negligence in property development. Or greed driven business practice. Or immoral/irresponsible life style.., It is our doing that is the cause of tragic events around us.
Thanks again for sharing the article. It has been enlightening.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,117 |
Global warming is BS.
In the 70s, there were similar "scientific studies" that fortold of global cooling & an impending ice age. I can remember being told in school about the glacier 1 mile deep that would devastate my home state of Maine & possibly reach as far south as New York City.
Despite the data that indicate lakes in the NE are freezing ealier & staying frozen longer (a total of about 4 extra weeks of frozen lakes in the last 40 years), the global warming "experts" still sing their song.
**SIGH**
Look back 40 years & you'll see the trend in hurricanes has been relatively quiet for the Atlantic coast. The previous 40 years will show a much higher number of storms on average, & much stronger storms... Kinda like a PATTERN.
Just wait, and mark my words, people will be cying about all the rain in California over the next decades, but guess what... The rings of trees in the region show that the last 80 years of mild weather in California has been a horrid abberation. To get to a more 'typical' weather pattern as witnessed by the rings of ancient trees, the annual rainfall will greatly increase. That means landslides & flooding & other natural events. Get used to it.
Must be that jumbly-wumbly thing happening again.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,676
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,676 |
There is hardly anyone in the Scientific community that does not believe Global Warming is real. The whole point of Global Warming is that on average the temperature will rise a few degrees. One day you might have the coldest day of ever recorded but those days before less likely and this might only one day of a year that is a degree warmer than the previous. If you are still confused or refuse to believe that our consumption is not affecting the world then look here and they answer any more of your questions.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 678
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 678 |
Originally posted by TourDeForce: Global warming is BS.
I agree. Once those "scientists" got many of us to believe that the world was round, they thought that we'd believe anything.
Next thing you know, some crackpot "scientist" is going to try to convince us that earth is not the center of the universe.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 735
Veteran CEG\'er
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 735 |
Originally posted by TourDeForce: Global warming is BS.
Look back 40 years & you'll see the trend in hurricanes has been relatively quiet for the Atlantic coast. The previous 40 years will show a much higher number of storms on average, & much stronger storms... Kinda like a PATTERN.
Exactly right....Just remember hurricane Camille in 1969. IIRC, the water in the Gulf was a bit warmer than it is now. Hmmmmmm, no talk of "global warming" in the sixties! The weather now is just as TourDeForce said, part of a pattern. I too believe "global warming" is BS....to wit:
In the Seattle Times,
The global warming myth and its selfish defenders by John A. Baden, Ph.D. and Tim O�Brien
THE global warming debate, like many environmental issues, is scientifically complex and highly emotional. Its complexity hinders informed debate and its emotionalism makes consensus elusive. Part of the problem is that climatology (the discipline dealing most directly with global climate issues) is a young and inexact science. But much of the problem can be traced to special interest's manipulation of the political process.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, many fundamental questions about global warming remain unanswered. Two crucial questions are: 1) Is significant human-induced global warming actually occurring? 2) If it is occurring, will the net effects be beneficial or harmful? In neither case is the answer an unambiguous "yes."
First, significant global warming may not be occurring. Certainly, the historical relationship between CO and temperature changes is ambiguous. Although levels of atmospheric CO have risen nearly 40 percent since the turn of the century, data from within the United States indicates no statistically significant increase in mean annual temperatures. In fact, between 1920 and 1987, there was a slight cooling trend.
Data also indicates that the rise in hemispheric temperature has been significantly less than expected given the increase in CO. And the region most likely to see temperature increases, the Arctic, has actually cooled since about l940.
Furthermore, the climate models used to predict warming depend on numerous unknowns. For example, we do not know how changes in cloud cover will affect global temperatures. Although the models agree that a warmer earth is likely to be a cloudier earth, it is unknown whether more clouds will cool the planet by reflecting sunlight or warm the planet by trapping re-radiated heat before it escapes into space. The net effect is unclear. Neither do the models explain the impact of temperature changes on polar ice and snow. A warmer climate may increase precipitation and produce more ice and snow in colder areas. This would increase the earth's albedo and cool the planet.
The empirical and theoretical uncertainties surrounding global warming counsel caution before making policy. Scientists are certainly being cautious; a Feb. 13, 1992 Gallup poll shows that most climate scientists doubt there has been any significant human-caused global warming to date.
But even if global warming does occur, it is unlikely to be a catastrophe. Robert Balling, director of the Office of Climatology at Arizona State University, and Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T., conclude that doubling atmospheric CO is likely to produce an average global temperature increase of approximately 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit. This, increase is likely to be most significant at night, at high latitudes, and during the winter. It will not melt polar ice caps nor raise sea levels more than a few inches. There will not be super-hurricanes and there will not be endless summers of blazing temperatures.
In fact, there are many benefits associated with increased atmospheric CO. Doubling CO levels will favor bigger plants and may increase average crop yields by an estimated 33 percent. More atmospheric CO allows plants to grow using less water by reducing evapotranspiration - water evaporating after it is released from plants' pores. Precipitation and soil moisture may rise, and droughts may become less frequent.
Amidst the uncertainties, one thing is certain: Some groups benefit if the public believes global warming is a genuine crisis that can only be stopped with massive political mobilization. Irresponsible efforts by these groups fuel fears of widespread drought and crop failures, of super powerful hurricanes, of oceans engulfing coastal cities, and of blazing summer temperatures. How do they gain by hyping global warming?
For environmental groups, global warming is the ultimate issue. It affects everyone, it is dramatic and thus captures the public's attention, and it can only be solved by mobilizing government to impose regulations and develop programs. For those environmentalists hostile toward industrial civilization, global warming provides a rationale to impose their version of ecotopia. The threat of global warming gives license to those who seek to profit from crises.
Insurance companies may also gain from government efforts to control global warming. Insurers are motivated more by profits than ideology. If global warming causes increased hurricane damage or floods, they may lose immense amounts of money. Massive carbon taxes or regulation may halt warming and their losses. Since they as taxpayers will pay only a trivial portion of any regulatory bill, it is reasonable for them to seek such measures. If global warming never manifests, they lose little, but society loses a lot.
When making decisions and facing uncertainty, responsible people evaluate the most likely costs and benefits of alternative strategies. Given our current understanding, the changes wrought by global warming may well bring small costs or perhaps benefits. Massive prevention programs will surely be expensive, they will slow economic progress worldwide. Moreover, delaying action for a few years, while our understanding of climate change improves, is likely to lead to more prudent policies. If substantial warming is going to occur, a few years delay will make very little difference.
The global warming debate is far from settled. In deciding what to do, we should consider both the merits of the arguments and the possibility that they are being manipulated for hidden agendas. If we do not, we are likely to be stampeded into public policies with huge immediate costs and few if any benefits.
'99 Sport TropicGreen,Duratec, SVT exhaust, Brembo rotors, Ceramic pads, K&N filters(oil & air), Alpine CDM7874, Polk DB570 speakers front and rear. Fog light mod. 50% Formula One tint.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 329
CEG\'er
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 329 |
Global warming or not, the overall message of the article is sound. Though I tend to agree with the scientific evidence that supports global warming, I'm still somewhat on the fence about that. I might be convinced after a few more C5 Hurricanes and maybe a runaway polar ice cap or two.
Two other points though.
1. It does seem certain that clearing out the wetlands and building levees to make way for urban development contributed significantly to the impact Katrina had on the region. Not to mention the fact that this development took place below sea level!
2. Most of the hardest hit victims were poor people.
OK so what? Well, this is where the Bible comes in, if you believe in the Bible that is. It says that we are supposed to, among other things, care for the poor and be good stewards of the Earth (whether global warming is true or not). And it seems obvious that we as a people, government, or whatever haven't done enough to protect what God has asked us to. And if you don't believe in the Bible it should still be obvious that many people on many levels really screwed some things up.
1998.5 SVT
I'm working on it.
WTB 2.0L Contique.
|
|
|
|
|