So today I was reading from my home-towns newspaper and I stumbled upon an opinion article that was quite interesting. In the article the author stated that no one need worry about global warming because it is all in Gods plan. He then stated that global warming along with evolution where junk science that are made up by atheists to un-christianize the world. I would like some opinions on this from some christians.. do you believe this at all? and if so, why?

Well, I’m not christian, and this is one of two and only two real problems that I have with modern christianity; denial of global warming and enviornmental issues, (why bother with it when revealations is coming?) and evangelism.

I totaly agree! Although my list is longer then two.. but that’s another topic.

There are other small things on my list too, but they’re more to do with the types of people that usually believe in the stuff, as opposed to with the religion itself.

Well, i am still hoping that a christian would come and give their side of the story…

As am I… I’m really curious.

Also, I’m concerned about global warming and the enviornment, myself, so I can tell you right now that my goal isn’t to “un-christianize” the world, but to save it… Of course, if christianity is to blame, then I guess I would try to un-christionize the world…

haha, I really don’t care if someone wants to be a part of a religion, as long as the religion has no ill side effects.. like war, genocide, torture, violating civil-rights, etc..

So.. i guess i do care.

Religion has a tendancy to close a persons eyes to the rest of the world that doesn’t believe the same.. I think apathy about global warming is a great example of just that.

“I really don’t care if someone wants to be a part of a religion, as long as the religion has no ill side effects..”

Agreed.

“Religion has a tendancy to close a persons eyes to the rest of the world that doesn’t believe the same..”

Not always, but sometimes, yes. I think that’s one of those things that may have more to do with the type of people that tend to believe them than with the relegion itself.

“I think apathy about global warming is a great example of just that.”

Yes, but I think that one does have to do with the religion itself. (Revealations.)

I guess i can understand what you are meaning about the type of person. Some people are just born finatics. Everything they believe they believe fanatically. However i still think that some people become that way through the influence of their religion.

Yeah, you might be right.

A psychiatrist told me that some people just have a fanatical personality…They will do SOMETHING to excess…

Yes, and those are sometimes the people that end up at the head of a church, I’m sad to say.

Or leaders of countries..

That too.

No names…GB…

We humans just need to throw in the towel and stop trying to run the planet.

As someone once said: “In the long run we are all dead.”

Civilizations have come and gone on this planet, sure, we have a higher material culture than anything ever seen before, but what makes us so special?

If global warming does not pull the rug out from under society, something else will, eventually. Asteroid… volcanic/seismic activity… NATURAL climate fluctuations.

I tend to look on global warming as more of a symptom then as a problem in and of itself- the main problem is that there are just too freakin’ many of us humans. It is a basic tenant of biology that when an animal population has no predator it expands until its resource base is depleted and then a huge die-off happens.

One way or another humanity is more than likely headed for a die-off where hundreds of millions and maybe billions will end up dead.

You have to admire human vanity and self-importance, though. We are still convinced that we can control the planet and bend it to our will… and there will be flowers and puppies and joy.

“We humans just need to throw in the towel and stop trying to run the planet.”

Wise words.

“As someone once said: ‘In the long run we are all dead.’”

Lol! I know I shouldn’t laugh, but that’s just so freakin’ true! X3

“what makes us so special?”

Well, as far as we know, we are the most intelligent species on our planet…

Many people think that that gives us the right to run it, but I think rather the opposite is true; because we are so intelligent, we can help earth in ways that others (animals) can’t.

So in a sense, we aren’t given the planet on a silver platter, we’re responsible for the planet. There’s a very imporant difference.

“If global warming does not pull the rug out from under society, something else will, eventually. Asteroid… volcanic/seismic activity… NATURAL climate fluctuations.”

Indeed. But until that happens, we may as well do the best we can.

“I tend to look on global warming as more of a symptom then as a problem in and of itself- the main problem is that there are just too freakin’ many of us humans.”

Agreed.

“It is a basic tenant of biology that when an animal population has no predator it expands until its resource base is depleted and then a huge die-off happens.”

The problem is, we going to pull the entire planet under with us.

“One way or another humanity is more than likely headed for a die-off where hundreds of millions and maybe billions will end up dead.”

True. Sad, but true. If people would just not have so many kids, maybe we could avoid it, but it doesn’t look like that’s gonna’ happen. Not until it’s too late.

“You have to admire human vanity and self-importance, though.”

Agreed here as well.

“We are still convinced that we can control the planet and bend it to our will… and there will be flowers and puppies and joy.”

I get the feeling that it will end up more along the lines of dirty metropolises and polution and nukes. Lol. (Knows that he really shouldn’t be laughing…)

“We humans just need to throw in the towel and stop trying to run the planet.”

What? No No No No No!.. No

Bad idea! We have the ability to change the world and the environment for the good! We have already proven that humans can make things bad, i think we are at a point now where we can try to reverse the damage we have caused before it is irreversible.

That is exactly the type of attitude I was talking about in the beginning of this thread. The “who cares… the end is near” or the “who cares.. it’s not my problem” or the “who cares… it’s all in gods plan” or the “who cares.. etc.. etc..” Isn’t Apathy a sin?

“What? No No No No No!.. No

Bad idea! We have the ability to change the world and the environment for the good! We have already proven that humans can make things bad, i think we are at a point now where we can try to reverse the damage we have caused before it is irreversible.”

I think you’re misunderstanding something.

I don’t think we shouldn’t try to turn the planet in a better direction, I just think we shouldn’t try to run it.

“The “who cares… the end is near” or the “who cares.. it’s not my problem” or the “who cares… it’s all in gods plan” or the “who cares.. etc.. etc..” “

Agreed. That’s bad.

I guess i don’t see a difference. Stop trying to run the planet, to me, means to stop trying to do anything that would change the planet for good. I may be misinterpreting what you were meaning…

The difference between influencing the planet and running the planet is like the difference between a democracy and a dictatership.

I guess i can see what you are trying to say.

But by the way Nyarlathotep was putting it, it sounded like he or she thought there is no reason we should try to do anything other then let the negitive changes happen and let humans start dropping like flies.

Finix and Ny, Thomas Malthus was wrong: the human ability to expand the carrying capacity of earth has so far proved limitless. Population growth is also slowing to the point where the hypothesized 8-12 billion human carrying capacity (proposed in the 1990’s) isn’t likely to be exceeded. And if/when the rest of the world starts using modern farming techniques a la the U.S. or, better yet, Israel, we could even take most land out of cultivation and feed many times the current population.

Add to that the fact that energy needs have sustainable solutions that just aren’t economical yet, that material uses are also theoretically sustainable, and human civilization can continue to show that it can regulate itself within the natural world without becoming subject to traditional biological population vs. environment controls.

As to the original question, speaking as a scientist (but not a meteorologist, I’ll admit), the scientific evidence I’ve seen shows that we’re in a natural warming cycle. Humans may have made an impact on it, but it’s likely to be small. How we choose to adapt to climatic shifts is the question, as always.

Most alarmists seem to say that it is arrogant to believe that we can just ignore potential human impact on global warming. I think its arrogant to presume more than what science has clearly shown, and to presume that we humans can possibly control the environment enough to halt climate change and keep it in our own little arbitrary comfort levels.

Instead we’re better off making economic judgments about how best to spend our resources to adapt to changing climate conditions, and the typical alarmist focus on cutting emissions is far from the most efficient way to adapt. In fact, it will hurt us severely to take these measures even if climate shifts in the most extreme ways suggested.

Christianity tells us to be good stewards of the earth, but also that human life is sacred, and thus we must balance a concern for human life with environmental stewardship. Speaking as a biologist, with the exception of certain types of micro ecosystems, the biosphere is far more resilient on the whole than most people discussing environmental crises suggest.

“the human ability to expand the carrying capacity of earth has so far proved limitless.”

You’re saying that that’s a good thing?

“if/when the rest of the world starts using modern farming techniques a la the U.S. or, better yet, Israel, we could even take most land out of cultivation and feed many times the current population.”

Again, do we want many times the current population? Why would we want more humans? Could you imagine how large cities would have to be?

It wouldn’t be hard to imagine someone raised in a society like that never getting to see nature, because either there’ll be no nature left to see, or we’ll have boundries to keep humans from destroying it.

Remember, humans would be growing in number, but animals would probably be dying off in this scenario, so the hunter to prey ratio would probably be catastrophic unless human hunting is banned, and even then, poachers would probably be disturbingly common. (Could you imagine how high the price of exotic leather would be on the black market?)

“the scientific evidence I’ve seen shows that we’re in a natural warming cycle.”

Take care when throwing the word “natural” around. The word “natural” can be applied to almost anything.

“Most alarmists seem to say that it is arrogant to believe that we can just ignore potential human impact on global warming. I think its arrogant to presume more than what science has clearly shown.”

You have a choice between two beliefs. If you choose the first, you will either save the earth, or it will result in nothing. If you choose the second, you will either destroy the earth, or it will result in nothing.

“and to presume that we humans can possibly control the environment enough to halt climate change and keep it in our own little arbitrary comfort levels.”

It’s rarely the desire of enviornmentalists to “halt climate change and keep it in our own little arbitrary comfort levels.”

As an enviornmentalist myself, I can tell you that all I want is to stop humanity from screwing up such an important natural cycle.

Until I see absolute evidence that humanity isn’t hurting the enviornment, I will go through the trouble of ensureing that I, at least, am not.

“Instead we’re better off making economic judgments about how best to spend our resources to adapt to changing climate conditions, and the typical alarmist focus on cutting emissions is far from the most efficient way to adapt”

Far from it! Efficiency is exactly what enviornmentalism is about; Energy efficiency, renewability and the toll it takes on the envionment are the three building blocks upon which enviornmentalism is based.

You’d be surprised how consistantly that goes hand-in-hand with the future of our species. (Not to mention all forms of life on earth.)

“Christianity tells us to be good stewards of the earth, but also that human life is sacred, and thus we must balance a concern for human life with environmental stewardship.”

What about the rest of the life on earth? I think humans tend to overrate their importance, and the bible doesn’t usually help.