it’s them commies, you know…
this just in…
GLOBAL WARMING IS A LEFTIST PLOT TO KILL THE BABY JESUS!
ok, seriously… who are these people and why the hell are they allowed to speak for christiandom? what the hell is wrong with the church in america that we allow these morons to be our mouthpieces? Lord, help me… they might as well be screaming about the commies, hippies, and the boogyman. WHO THE HELL ARE THESE PEOPLE?!
here’s the thing… even i was somewhat skeptical about global warming a few years back because, yes, the world has gone through warming and cooling phases in it’s long long history without the intervention of mankind. but, as the years have gone by, more and more scientific evidence has pointed to the fact that global warming is real and it is our fault. we screwed up. the blame lies with mankind. it’s fairly obvious, if you are a rational person with a scientific mind, that global warming is not a farce, but a fact. so claiming - nay, screaming – otherwise doesn’t change the fact and, in fact, just brands you as a non-thinker and a moron.
and if you want to get into a theological thing, did God not make us stewards of this world in genesis at the beginning of things? and… if we’re screwing it all up (again, mankind has a talent for screwing up God’s gifts, don’t we?) isn’t it our responsibility to friggin’ fix it?
the article says that these “evangelical leaders” are claiming that the global warming issue is being used to purposefully divert attention ”away from the great moral issues of our time, notably the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children.” with the exception of the “sanctity of human life” the rest of that stuff is not for politics, it’s for parenting and mentoring! these are not issues for congress, they are issues for families.
this is going to sound harsh, and i apologise if it offends, but sometimes i honestly and without malice wish that these people would just go ahead and die. that way they’d get to be with God and they wouldn’t be here screwing everything up, discrediting His church, and getting in the way of His work. that’s honestly how i feel. james dobson, i’m talking about you. get out of politics and into the community, helping the needy, feeding the hungry, and healing the damaged. that’s where christians belong… in humanitarian endevours, serving mankind. not on a soap-box on capitol hill telling people to live their lives according to a set of beliefs that they don’t hold to. that’s not the way it’s supposed to be done. ramming christianity down someone’s throat will not serve Christ.
and don’t cry “commie!” when something bigger than you gets the attention.
March 15, 2007 at 12:25 pm
[...] The blogger at it’s all ashes in the end remarks on a CNN article about global warming causing…: [E]ven i was somewhat skeptical about global warming a few years back because, yes, the world has gone through warming and cooling phases in it’s long long history without the intervention of mankind. but, as the years have gone by, more and more scientific evidence has pointed to the fact that global warming is real and it is our fault. we screwed up. the blame lies with mankind. it’s fairly obvious, if you are a rational person with a scientific mind, that global warming is not a farce, but a fact. so claiming – nay, screaming – otherwise doesn’t change the fact and, in fact, just brands you as a non-thinker and a moron. … this is going to sound harsh, and i apologise if it offends, but sometimes i honestly and without malice wish that these people would just go ahead and die. that way they’d get to be with God and they wouldn’t be here screwing everything up, discrediting His church, and getting in the way of His work. that’s honestly how i feel. james dobson, i’m talking about you. get out of politics and into the community, helping the needy, feeding the hungry, and healing the damaged. that’s where christians belong… Spread It Around: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
March 15, 2007 at 1:29 pm
“sometimes i honestly and without malice wish that these people would just go ahead and die.”
You sound like a supporter of the eugenics movement. I would highly recommend that you read this essay from Michael Chrichton excerpted from State of Fear-”Why Politicized Science is Dangerous”
http://www.crichton-official.com/fear/
an excerpt- “The past history of human belief is a cautionary tale. We have killed thousands of our fellow human beings because we believed they had signed a contract with the devil, and had become witches. We still kill more than a thousand people each year for witchcraft. In my view, there is only one hope for humankind to emerge from what Carl Sagan called “the demon-haunted world” of our past. That hope is science.
But as Alston Chase put it, “when the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power.”
That is the danger we now face. And this is why the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination, with a bad history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what we present to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest.
“
March 15, 2007 at 1:32 pm
i’m only gonna post one response i promise… not gonna clog up this post with endless rebuttles to comments…
something i found interesting about exactly how polarized we are as a society. me and you have our differences in opinion and view the world in very differnt ways. however, deep down, in principle there is much more in common than different.
i don’t disagree, in principle, with anything that you just said. but i find it very interesting how political and ideological differences have shaped the way we read and understood the article.
The entire article was about a rift caused by one group of evangelicals telling another group of evangelicals to lay off the global warming soap-box.
here’s some quotes from the evil/hateful/moronic/biggoted/whatever else evangelical christian rightists pigs:
- “to harm this world by environmental degradation is an offense against God.”
- [our] organization “lacks the expertise to settle the controversy.”
- “The issue should be addressed scientifically and not theologically,”
- in pursuing the war on terror, the United States had crossed “boundaries of what is legally and morally permissible.”
- “It ought to be God’s agenda, not the Republican Party’s agenda, that drives us.”
- “We’re actually tired of being represented by people with a very narrow focus”
do you disagree with any of that? i find it interesting how these are the comments that caught my eye, while the one that caught your eye was:
- “global warming was part of a leftist agenda that threatened evangelical unity.”
btw, kudos for stirring up trouble on other sites!!!
March 15, 2007 at 1:40 pm
well, i do what i can…
i’m not a supporter of eugenics, tman, because it think that they, like those they oppose, go to extremes that are unwise. despite how things may appear, i actually do believe that the middle road is often the correct one.
cole, i don’t disagree with most of those statements, that’s why i didn’t talk about them… they weren’t what pissed me off. what pisses me off is this whole concept of political evangelicals. and the image that christians are incapable of embracing science. evolution, global warming, a round earth, a helio-centric solar system, microorganisms… how often has the church screamed that science is evil when it’s been describing the power of God’s creation? it’s getting old already. stop it. that’s all i’m saying. it’s just getting in the way of the improtant stuff…
March 15, 2007 at 2:03 pm
“i’m not a supporter of eugenics, tman”
I don’t think you are, but I think that the statement “sometimes i honestly and without malice wish that these people would just go ahead and die.” doesn’t help your case.
The reason I brought up eugenics in the context of your post would be better explained if you read the Chrichton link I gave you above. If you want to. Or have nothing better to do. Or want to spite me.
Or you know, don’t.
March 15, 2007 at 2:31 pm
hahaha! man, that little sentence is really getting on people’s nerves today! yeah, it was a bit inflamatory… i have a tendency to do that…
i get where you are going with the eugenics jab (i did read the link after all!) and i agree, pseudo-science is dangerous and seductive and that’s why i was a huge skeptic of global warming until recently. but i’ve been following the studies and whatnot and balancing their arguments and evidence against eachother, and i’m afraid that it seems like global warming is real and it’s our fault. note i say SEEMS since it’s not been proven decisively and i’m not a climate scientist.
i’m aware of mr. chrichton’s position on the matter, too… and i enjoy his writing both fiction and non. but he is a very pursuasive writer and i take everything he says with a grain of salt or two because his intent is to pursuade you with sensational words and concepts like “eugenics” and “pseudo-science” and “racism” which, though terrible, are not applicable to the current discussion. they sure do make great buzz words, though, don’t they?
i do agree though, that frank, honest, and open discussion about global warming seems to have been supressed… but i would say that the cat is out of the bag, the gloves are off, and all those wonderfully disgusting and trite cliches that are other ways of saying that supression isn’t really possible at this point since it’s become a global concern.
March 15, 2007 at 3:40 pm
I will be the first to claim ignorance on the subject, but I have long wondered if we’re asking the wrong questions.
Instead of trying to explain who caused it (or is causing it), it seems that we should be trying to find real ways to combat the situation. Buying “carbon credits” seems pretty silly to me, it is unrealistic to think that (on a GLOBAL scale) we are going to significantly reduce industrial polution soon enough (yes, I realize that people don’t like to hear that, but it’s reality).
Let’s take both arguments:
1:) The earth has always gone through times of extreme heating and cooling, it’s all part of a natural cycle.
Ok, fine. What the crap are we gonna do when the earth naturally heats and polar ice caps melt and there’s massive flooding, death, and general caous for all? And folks die bacause crops won’t grow and the livestock die… In this case, stopping it is irrevelant… it’s going to happen. How do we deal with it?
Nobody is answering that question. Nobody’s even asking that question.
2:) Human’s are the main cause of this bout global warming. Mostly with greenhouse gas emissions from cars, industry, and general screwing things up.
Ok, damage is done, that’s it. Even if our nasty poluting selves aren’t causing global warming. We still need to stop this crap.
I also read somewhere that humans (and other animals) naturally release more greenhouse gases than all the cars, industry, and other sources of polutants combined. I don’t remember where I got that, so take it for what it’s worth.
Is it feasable to worry about what is going to happen in 100-200 years when the world’s population has trippled and we’re all breathing and pootin’ out carbon dioxide and methane at rediculous levels? How in the world do we combat that? If greenhouse gases are the major cause of global warming, we’re all eatin-breathing-pootin’ time bombs.
I don’t know… again, I claim ignorance. I honestly don’t know the cause or how to stop it. You can’t refute the data that global warming is happening. I don’t really know that anyone is arguing that humans don’t contribute at least a little.
Natural or man made, we’re all pretty much fudged if we don’t find a way to either reverse it or deal with it.
March 15, 2007 at 3:56 pm
one response, huh?
i pretty much agree though, it’s more pressing to figure out how to deal with global warming now that it’s upon us.
March 15, 2007 at 4:49 pm
That’s the thing though, we aren’t going to stop the earth from going through its normal temperature variations. We don’t have the ability to do so.
Right now Mars is going through a similar phase of recorded temperature increase. It’s due to the suns increased output. It would not take a rocket scientist to suggest that this may play a part of the warming on our planet.
What we should be worried about, and what we can do something about is global pollution. The sooner we bring third world countries in to the first world, the sooner we can get them to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of limiting pollution from man-made technologies.
Nothing anyone in the west does will amount to anything if a country like China doesn’t start attempting to curb their polluting ways. Think about it. There aren’t emission controls for vehicles like the US in China. They have horrible air conditions.
The temperature of the earth has and always will change. If not for the previous major global warming era, most of North America would still be a glacier.
For instance, there was a guy who proposed similar doomsday scenarios named Paul Ehrlich.
http://www.fumento.com/bomb.html
Among his predictions then and since:
“The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines . . . [AND] hundreds of millions of people [including Americans] are going to starve to death.” (1968)
“Smog disasters” in 1973 might kill 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles. (1969)
“I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.” (1969)
“Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion.” (1976)
Yet today: 1) Food production is well ahead of population growth and obesity now kills 300,000 Americans a year, 2) the air in New York and L.A. is cleaner than it has been in decades, 3) with two years until 2000, England’s odds are looking mighty good, and 4) there are no key minerals facing depletion. Almost all of them, along with raw materials in general, are far cheaper now relative either to the Consumer Price Index or wages.
While Paul was predicting these disasters, there was another guy who was doing something about it.
Enter one Norman Borlaug:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_2-NBwmhQ
Have a little faith in mankind folks.
March 15, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I was just talking to a friend of mine who has a bunch of friends in Florida who you want to die.
March 15, 2007 at 6:04 pm
hahaha! awesome!
March 16, 2007 at 8:48 am
a couple of points to round out this little conversation:
1) tman, i read about the mars warming thing too (because i’m a space nerd)and i find it facinating! i would agree that there’s obviously more than just humanity causing this warming trend. i’d also agree that we probably can’t stop global warming at this point. what cole was saying and what i’m saying is that, at this point, we need to make plans for dealing with the fallout of global warming… and we need to stop making it worse.
2) yeah, china and india are major polluters… but the u.s. is right there with them as one of the worlds biggest polluters with the longest history of raping the planet. so… shouldn’t the elders lead rather than sit back and point fingers?
3) i’m sad that i have to say this, because i thought it was fairly well implied, but i’ll say it anyway… when i said that sometimes, i honestly wish certain people would just die, i was NOT saying that this is a good, nice, or appropriate thought to have. but it is an honest thought. i’m not good at being nice, never have been. but i am good at being honest so i’ll stick to that. it’s not good to wish death on someone just to get them out of your hair. it would be much nicer if i had wished… i don’t know… for them to have a revelation and leave the pressure groups and join a monastary and grow food plants for the local homeless population. but that’s just not how i think… and it’s unlikely.
i’m sorry if any of you were offended by my words. this is, however, a personal blog, not a syndicated publication, so i feel no obligation to censor myself or make myself sound p.c. or even kind. i’m neither of those things. even so, i really AM sorry if you (or folks you know, ariah)have been offended by my remarks. i would suggest not reading my blog anymore, if that is the case, because i have a tendency to think, and therefore say, things that are inflamitory.
that said, i do hope that you will all continue to contribute to the discussions and debates here and on other blogs written by people you don’t agree with… that’s how ideas get shared and how disconnects get connected.
and i make this pledge to all of you: i will never get upset by someone disagreeing with me on my blog as long as the disagreement is thoughtful, honest, and backed up. now, if you’re some drunknen redneck that just posts something like “woo! bush! all you lefties is gonna burn in hell!” or some such… all bets are off.
March 16, 2007 at 11:43 am
Mega,
what cole was saying and what i’m saying is that, at this point, we need to make plans for dealing with the fallout of global warming… and we need to stop making it worse.
There’s a few things I disagree with about that statement. The “fallout” from global warming throughout history was actually a GOOD thing. The warming period in the medieval period allowed more crops to be planted and Europe for instance experienced a growth in population. As I stated before, if not for the warming period after the last ice age, most of North America would still be a glacier. This is not to say we should heat the planet up more, but before we become doomsayers, let’s look at the facts. There is no immediate correlation between the planet warming and human catastrophe.
And as far as “making it worse” is concerned, I would again note that the US is ahead of most of the world when it comes to environmental protection. The one thing we could do that would immediately lower our use of fossil fuels would be to build more nuclear power plants. But most environmentalists oppose this. Go figure.
I would recommend this page entitled “A New Manhattan Project” which lists the details behind the fundamental points about alternative energy, and why many have unrealistic expectations about it.
http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2004/06/AnewManhattanProject.shtml
the u.s. is right there with them as one of the worlds biggest polluters with the longest history of raping the planet
Um, no. We are not “right there with them”. Go look at a picture of Mexico City sometime, or ask yourself why the people in Beijing have to wear surgical masks on certain days when they go outside. Or try this article for instance-
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/10/13/bloomberg/sxpollute.php
i’m sorry if any of you were offended by my words.
Not even a little. I have pretty thick skin, and blogs are no place for people with easily bruised egos.
Or, at least they shouldn’t be.
Again, I can’t recommend this page enough to further clarify the points about the fallacies behind much of the recent debates behind global warming and alternative energy.
http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2004/06/AnewManhattanProject.shtml
March 16, 2007 at 12:30 pm
tman… i’m gonna have to dissagree with you on one point in particular.
the u.s. IS one of the world’s top polluters. some articles, since you seem to be fond of them…
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/34400/story.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0216-12.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0305-02.htm
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/china-soon-to-become-biggest-polluter/2006/11/07/1162661685195.html
there are many many more… just google “the world’s biggest polluters” and you’ll see that the u.s. is almost universally credited for a large chunk of carbon dioxide emmissions alone.
also, we’re not coming out of an ice age, so the warming… it ain’t helping… it’s causing droughts and famine in africa, asia, australia, and elsewhere… more than usual anyway. i’m not saying it’s not balancing out, but there’s gonna have to be adjustments made, and we’re not in a position to make them at this point. and the worst hit areas are, unfortunately, the ones who can’t afford the adjstments.
oh, i like the idea of nuclear power. but i’m a sci-fi nerd, so take that for what it’s worth.
March 16, 2007 at 12:52 pm
the u.s. is almost universally credited for a large chunk of carbon dioxide emmissions alone.
CO2 isn’t necessarily pollution. It’s a naturally occuring gas. And it is a trivial amount of the total percentage of atmospheric greenhouse gasses. Man only emits 3% of the total amount of CO2 anyways. The oceans release more than we do.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
the warming… it ain’t helping… it’s causing droughts and famine in africa, asia, australia, and elsewhere…
There is no evidence for this at all. Did you know that 80% of the current trend of warming occurred before 1945? Well before we had millions of cars driving around?
Here is an audio link since you won’t read my other links..
http://www.independentconservative.com/media/medved/Medved_Avery_10_19_2006.mp3
March 16, 2007 at 1:13 pm
your assumption that i’m not reading your links simply because i don’t agree with your assertions is false and frankly a little insulting, tman. i AM reading your links, and i’m still unconvinced.
co2 realeased by mankind as a result of unnatural processes is pollution man. that’s like saying that radiocative isotopes aren’t dangerous because they are present in nature. that’s silly, man.
i’m not sure when you and i became polarized on this subject, but i just want to say that you are right, global warming is not “proven fact”… but then very little in science is… that’s the nature of the beast. and whether or not it’s a man-made phenom is even less understood. but here’s the thing… i don’t care if it DID start before world war two. the fact is, the droughts and famines are getting worse, the deserts are growing, the ice is receeding, and people are dying. the climate is changing… at least in those places. so what if it’s natural? what are we doing about it? what are we doing to help people effected by it? how do we cope with what we KNOW is happening?
March 16, 2007 at 2:15 pm
and, the entire problem is that the argument is polarized…
here are the facts that pertain to this issue:
1) there is creditable scientific evidence from both sides.
2) as a country, and globally, we must do something to curb man-made pollution.
3) we all put more stock in the evidence that supports our claims… and emphasize and tiny flaws in the logic of the opposing side.
the third point is more problematic than than all of the pollution, solar output, and al gore documentaries put together…
March 16, 2007 at 2:16 pm
I’m not trying to insult you. I apologize if you believe I am, it is not my intention.
co2 realeased by mankind as a result of unnatural processes is pollution man.
But you’re missing the point. Manmade c02 is not causing global warming. I gave you links that detail the facts behind that. Oh, and radioactive isotopes aren’t dangerous provided they aren’t in larger amounts.
(Wanna see somethin neato? Check out this link of a lady who regularly takes her bike through Chernobyl-it’s amazing- http://kiddofspeed.com/)
global warming is not “proven fact”…
Actually it is. And it happens regularly.
Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Paperback)
http://www.amazon.com/Unstoppable-Global-Warming-Every-Years/dp/0742551172
“the droughts and famines are getting worse, the deserts are growing, the ice is receeding, and people are dying”
I’m not trying to sound apathetic, but none of what you are referring to has anything to do with global warming. Some Ice Sheets are growing, some are receeding. Droughts are a common occurence, and I would argue that they are any worse than they have been in the past.
“so what if it’s natural? what are we doing about it? what are we doing to help people effected by it? how do we cope with what we KNOW is happening?”
By lifting people out of poverty-the only proven way to do that is to promote free markets and free people.
March 16, 2007 at 2:37 pm
ok, well…
free markets, free radioactive isotopes (in moderation please), and free shorts for everyone, then! enjoy the weather! sorry about your lack of rain, china… but those mad camels are kinda funny, don’t you think, australia… but if it makes you feel any better, it’s totally not your fault! it’s ALL NATURAL BABY!
March 16, 2007 at 2:46 pm
pardon the sarcasm, tman, but this argument isn’t going anywhere. stronger, brighter, and better informed minds than ours have been arguing this for decades and will be arguing it for decades more. you and i aren’t going to solve this here.
March 16, 2007 at 9:03 pm
[...] of anthropogenic Climate Change, it’s become downright necessary for some Christians to wish for the deaths of evangelical leaders who espouse any skepticism on the issue. Another fellow I just met yesterday said, in part, this is going to sound harsh, and i apologise if [...]
March 16, 2007 at 11:43 pm
Geez… would y’all please try to argue without using Google and 14 billion links? Reading that is worse than reading the deepest, darkest, most mind-boggling pages of theology (Paul Tillich comes to mind).
March 17, 2007 at 10:45 am
Woo! Bush!
March 17, 2007 at 10:47 am
Okay, sorry that last comment was just wrong.
I’m totally with you. And I’m glad you feel at liberty to share your raw feelings, I feel quite the same way at times. And I didn’t mean that earlier statement to make you feel guilty or offensive.
It really was just a connection between my friend talking about people he knows he think global warming is a scam and your feelings on those types of people. I guess I felt it was worth making the connection. I feel strongly and share your views on this stuff in a lot of ways, and I need to step back and remember at times that those people are people too.