Posted on 02/19/2007 6:04:07 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o
Global warming doomsdayers were out and about in a big way recently, but the rain came in Central Queensland and then here in Sydney. January also was unusually cool.
We have been subjected to a lot of nonsense ...
(Excerpt) Read more at sydney.catholic.org.au ...
BTW, those of us who have been Cardinal-watching for awhile think Georger Pell is an outstanding Cardinal. Google his name and you'll get an eyeful.
John Edward's bloggers aren't going to like this.
Oh, no! Algore's head has grown so big that it's now blocking the sun from Australia, too!
Ping time
Al Gore needs a brain transplant!
That's his head on top of a size 52 long sportscoat.
I agree with Cardinal Pell's article.
At first I wondered why a Catholic official was writting about global warming. Apparently he was responding to a local article: "A local newspaper editorial’s complaint about the doomsdayers’ religious enthusiasm is unfair to mainstream Christianity. Christians don’t go against reason although we sometimes go beyond it in faith to embrace probabilities. What we were seeing from the doomsdayers was an induced dose of mild hysteria, semi-religious if you like, but dangerously close to superstition."
So let's turn this around. If there were conclusive evidence that warming (or cooling for that matter) would provide massive benefits to mankind what steps could we take to make it happen? The answer is none - we can no more affect or control our climate than we can the number of stars are in the heavens. One would think that Christian leaders would be hammering this point home.
I love it. Here's more: :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Pell
Pell aroused criticism from Greens' Senator Christine Milne with the following comment in his 2006 Legatus Summit speech:
"Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions."
bttt
"In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions."
This guys officially gets my stamp of approval! :)
PREACH IT, Your Eminence!
Yep! He's definately not one of the chicken-little "Castrati" that comprise so much of the male population today.
And, let the chips fall where they may. bttt
Anecdotal evidence does not contradict statistical evidence. If people want to debate global warming, fine. But I highly recommend they stop doing so with fallacious arguments (implied or even overtly stated).
In fact I also recommend not debating global warming philosophically (or based on religion as many like to do). Whether you think humans can philosophically affect the environment has nothing to do with a scientific debate. For a scientific debate you need to debate the methods, procedures, calibrations, etc.
I strongly and totally agree with you on that. I do think, though, that Pell's opening lines were just intended to be topical attention-grabbers; they don't carry the thrust of his argument.
Like most of us here at FR, Pell is not a climatologist and thus his opinions on that score don't carry any more weight than anybody else's. I think what he's worried about, though, is that some Climate Change advocates are crossing the line and trying to make it sound as if their hypothesis is settled fact, and implicates us all in a course of action which is morally obligatory.
As Pell notes:
"An overseas magazine called for Nuremberg-style trials for global warming skeptics while a U.S.A. television correspondent compared skeptics to “holocaust deniers”."
Those are actions which directly assume moral depravity on the part of skeptics; and Pell (within his competence, now, as a moral teacher) retorts that there can be no moral obligation if the facts of the matter are still inconclusive.
I wish he had said it more clearly and succinctly, but I think that was his point.
Ping
Personally I like Global Warming- I'm not a good cold person! ;0)
And that would be the middle of SUMMER down under.
Seems like the whole world is cold these days, must be global warming.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.