Global warming trend now in 6th year of "hiatus"

[NeuroTypical]

'Stadium waves' could explain lull in global warming

One of the most controversial issues emerging from the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) is the failure of global climate models to predict a hiatus in warming of global surface temperatures since 1998.

In other news:

* Climate-change scientists gather together to create a set of scriptures intended to cannonize doctrinal views on the second coming of global warming. The prayer wasn't offered by Freeman Dyson.

* Three members of the IPCC sustained minor injuries sustained from falling off their roofs while "awaiting the reemerging glacial retreat". They were treated on-scene by EMS personnel and released.

* The "Million polar bear march" on Washington draws more reporters than actual protesters. But the three guys who did show up seemed very upset about something.

* We're now in our 6th year of hiatus from Sonny Bono and Roddy McDowall. And our 5th year of hiatus from U.S. presidents named Bush.

I'm sorry. I'm trying to find a way to be serious here, but the giggles just keep slipping through.

[Full disclosure - nothing between the quote and this disclosure is actually true.]

Edited October 10, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[Guest]

[Full disclosure - nothing between the quote and this disclosure is actually true.]

False. We haven't had a US President named Bush in the past 5 years, that much is true.

[NeuroTypical]

I was thinking use of the word "hiatus" would make the statement untrue, but I suppose we can always elect a third Bush...

[applepansy]

LOL

I watched a show on PBS last night bout the flooding in NY and NJ that happened when Sandy hit the east coast. It was interesting to watch what they have done to make sure water damage can't happen again. But... I had to shake my head and laugh at the global warming claims. It was entertaining.

[Traveler]

'Stadium waves' could explain lull in global warming

In other news:

* Climate-change scientists gather together to create a set of scriptures intended to cannonize doctrinal views on the second coming of global warming. The prayer wasn't offered by Freeman Dyson.

* Three members of the IPCC sustained minor injuries sustained from falling off their roofs while "awaiting the reemerging glacial retreat". They were treated on-scene by EMS personnel and released.

* The "Million polar bear march" on Washington draws more reporters than actual protesters. But the three guys who did show up seemed very upset about something.

* We're now in our 6th year of hiatus from Sonny Bono and Roddy McDowall. And our 5th year of hiatus from U.S. presidents named Bush.

I'm sorry. I'm trying to find a way to be serious here, but the giggles just keep slipping through.

[Full disclosure - nothing between the quote and this disclosure is actually true.]

The problem with things that are not true - no matter how much rhetoric is involved in shoring it up it will eventually fall apart.

The Traveler

[raven2]

It’s a shame that people have become so focused on the Global Warming/Global Climate debate and the politics behind both sides (which I am sure Satan just loves and supports). It masks a much more needed conversation. We know as members of the lds church that we have a responsibility to take care of what we have been given by Heavenly Father. Polluting the waters of the earth to the point that many of our brother and sisters don't have clean water to drink or clean air to breath, etc. (both issues cause mass illness and death across the earth each year) is a serious issue. So much of these problems come from our lack of caring for what we have been given and having our hearts set upon the things of the world. I also don't believe Father in Heaven is pleased with the extinction of many of his creations, that are cause by his children.

Maybe it would be better if we focused on our responsibilities to our brothers and sisters and to Heavenly Father’s creations and less on politics (left/right). If we did we would see that we need to be more mindful of maintaining the earth we and future generations inhabit.

Edited October 15, 2013 by raven2

[NeuroTypical]

I also don't believe Father in Heaven is pleased with the extinction of many of his creations, that are cause by his children.

I understand your overall point about wise stewardship, but this comment makes no sense to me. He's mad at us for the small handful of extinctions we've had a hand in, but He's ok with the millions of other species that have gone extinct across time without any human involvement whatsoever?

From what I can tell, the number of species on earth ebb and flow naturally across time. New life and final death are dealt out constantly by the rules which govern this earth.

To put it another way, exactly who is God displeased with? Me? I didn't do anything to make anything go extinct. His children in general? I'm too big on "man will be punished for his own sins" to go there. Individuals who knowingly and willfully end a species? I'm not sure if any such individual exists.

[raven2]

I understand your overall point about wise stewardship, but this comment makes no sense to me. He's mad at us for the small handful of extinctions we've had a hand in, but He's ok with the millions of other species that have gone extinct across time without any human involvement whatsoever?

From what I can tell, the number of species on earth ebb and flow naturally across time. New life and final death are dealt out constantly by the rules which govern this earth.

To put it another way, exactly who is God displeased with? Me? I didn't do anything to make anything go extinct. His children in general? I'm too big on "man will be punished for his own sins" to go there. Individuals who knowingly and willfully end a species? I'm not sure if any such individual exists.

I didn't say he was mad, I said displeased and I said nothing of sin. I also totally agree that "...number of species on earth ebb and flow naturally across time." But, their are species that have become extinct in 'modern time' that was because of humanities lack of caring for the earth.

I do believe we individually have responsibilites to do what we can in our sphere of influence. There are many things in our sphere of influence we can do (without becoming extreme in our efforts) that can show are desire too take better care of what we have been given) and show charity towards our fellow brothers and sisters.

My main point was, just jumping on the Global Climate change bash wagon or going extreme in the other direction as well, is probably not a productive approach that helps us take responsibility for our 'sphere of influence'. Nor does it help improve the availability of clear water or air for you, me or the next generation.

[Guest]

Unfortunately, people in general can't seem to learn to leave a harmless snake alone instead of having this irrational need to bash its head in... But, other than that a majority of Americans - including those in the anti-global-warming crowd are fairly good at stewardship. It's the other developing countries that are more of a worry.

[NeuroTypical]

There are many things in our sphere of influence we can do that can show are desire too take better care of what we have been given

Could you clarify what this means?

I'm supposed to do something to show a desire to do something?

I know it sounds odd when I put it that way, but in all truth, I see exactly that notion behind so much of the recycling efforts, awareness campaigns, legislation advocacy, and child education efforts. Not trying to actually do or fix something, just trying to get people to look or act concerned.

Unfortunately, people in general can't seem to learn to leave a harmless snake alone instead of having this irrational need to bash its head in...

For the record, I live out with the coyotes. I crossed paths with one while walking to my mail box. He was trying to go somewhere in a straight line, and I was obviously directly in his way. He nervously skittered around me in a perfect semi-circle, at some distance he thought was appropriate, and then continued on his way without looking back. I got the mail and returned home.

I'm often tempted to take a situation and pull some vast eternal wisdom from it. I'm not sure exactly which wisdom should be pulled from this encounter, but I feel like something ought to be pulled.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[raven2]

Unfortunately, people in general can't seem to learn to leave a harmless snake alone instead of having this irrational need to bash its head in... But, other than that a majority of Americans - including those in the anti-global-warming crowd are fairly good at stewardship. It's the other developing countries that are more of a worry.

[raven2]

Could you clarify what this means?

I'm supposed to do something to show a desire to do something?

I know it sounds odd when I put it that way, but in all truth, I see exactly that notion behind so much of the recycling efforts, awareness campaigns, legislation advocacy, and child education efforts. Not trying to actually do or fix something, just trying to get people to look or act concerned.

Are you saying that things like recycling efforts have no impact or would not be a way to 'impact your sphere of influence'?

[NeuroTypical]

No. I'm saying that "much of" recycling efforts have no impact, and are not a way to impact my sphere of influence. The "much" I'm referring to, is the stuff where people place an importance on just showing a desire to do something. We toss a bottle in the blue bin and think we're doing our part, yet we remain consumers who increase consumption overall. But the bottle went in the blue bin, so we're impacting our sphere of influence.

Again, please clarify why you think it's important to do something to show a desire to do something.

Another story: My wife has been big on 'upcycling' with the kids in recent years. Do you know how many plastic grocery bags you need to melt down, in order to fill the space of a single cube on an ice cube tray? Somewhere between 5 and 10. They were going to mold their own toys - but they figured it would take about a years worth of shopping to gather enough grocery bags.

How much sphere of influence-impacting do you think you're doing, by recycling grocery bags?

Edited October 15, 2013 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[raven2]

Again, please clarify why you think it's important to do something to show a desire to do something.

How much sphere of influence-impacting do you think you're doing, by recycling grocery bags?

James 2:17 - "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone."

I guess I think its important to have more than a desire in life, but to take action on things that you have stewardship for.

What about, recycling multiple items, turning off the light when you leave a room, controling water usage, etc. They do add up and are all within your 'sphere of influence'. But you probably first need to believe their is a need or a problem, before you would take action.

Which goes back to my original point. Focusing on weather or not there is Global Climate Changes and debating it misses the real need and point.

Edited October 16, 2013 by raven2

[Traveler]

Are you saying that things like recycling efforts have no impact or would not be a way to 'impact your sphere of influence'?

I am not sure where this comment is going. Every organism has an "impact on it sphere of influence" - otherwise there would or should not be concern over any extinctions.

The problem is a type of impact that human have on their environment that is harmful to humans and will lead to human extinction. This type of impact is known as unsustainable. I would submit that from strictly a scientific view point:

1. That in caring for various genetic disorders and allowing the gene pool to be weakened could have a greater impact on human survival than not recycling.

2. Misuse, overuse or even continued use of drugs in health treatment could weaken the gene pool and have an impact on human survival. Bringing into question humanitarian efforts to assist the sick (and other human health issues with drug use) on a global scale.

3. By encouraging what is called "diversity" and not allowing distinct localized genetic evolution could eventually lead to a more homogenous population leaving humans less diverse and more probable to become extinct in the long run or big picture.

What I am trying to point out - it is very easy to say that just by existing there is hardly a human trait that if not kept in some kind of balance is not a threat to human survival. What many do not consider is that a balance may at times seem cruel and inhuman to certain parts of our human family. And efforts to help could be our greatest downfall.

One of the "things" I am most bothered by in life is the problem of when to step in and try to help or change things that others are doing and when to allow others the freedom to fail and remove themselves from further contribution.

The Traveler

Edited October 18, 2013 by Traveler

[mordorbund]

To put it another way, exactly who is God displeased with? Me? I didn't do anything to make anything go extinct. His children in general? I'm too big on "man will be punished for his own sins" to go there. Individuals who knowingly and willfully end a species? I'm not sure if any such individual exists.

I have a tangent on this. I don't think my thoughts necessarily moves the points you guys are making given the context. I just thought I'd share that just as there's a sphere for the "man will be punished for his own sins", there's also a sphere for the stain of cultural sins.

Old Israel would offer sacrifices to atone for personal sins and uncleanness, and they would also offer sacrifice to atone for national sins as well (this is noted by Edersheim, and I've confirmed it with some Jewish scholars (or hobbyists perhaps) on this board). Take a moment to think of what a national sin might be and who would be accountable for it.

I think a lot of the accountability falls on the policy-makers of the culture. In ancient Israel, that would be the king and his advisors, and the priests, and the prophets (next time you read the Old Testament, make a note of when the prophet is writing for a general distribution, versus when his words are intended for a royal audience). In our modern nation, a lot can be laid at the feet of the 3 branches of government, but because we are a representative democracy we have to acknowledge our own culpability in endorsing and transmitting toxic values. The best example I have seen of this was President Faust's prayer from the National Day of Prayer and Remembrance (9/14/2001), where he acknowledged before the Lord (I'm working from memory here) that we as a nation have not been faithful in honoring the God of this land (and he gets specific in our failings), but prays for mercy nonetheless.

[NeuroTypical]

That actually makes sense, and doesn't seem to be much of a tangent to me. Thanks.

[raven2]

Very timely information from the church on the subject we were discussing.

Mormon church makes new push for environmental stewardship

"The Earth and all things on it should be used responsibly to sustain the human family. However, all are stewards — not owners — over this Earth and its bounty and will be accountable before God for what they do with his creations," the main essay says. "Approaches to the environment must be prudent, realistic, balanced and consistent with the needs of the Earth and of current and future generations, rather than pursuing the immediate vindication of personal desires or avowed rights. The Earth and all life upon it are much more than items to be consumed or conserved. God intends his creations to be aesthetically pleasing to enliven the mind and spirit, and some portions are to be preserved."

Mormon church makes new push for environmental stewardship :: The Salt Lake Tribune

Edited November 27, 2013 by raven2

[NeuroTypical]

I wanted to resurrect this thread, in order to preserve in history, the new catch phrase in current media reports.

"Arctic Vortex"

Thank you.

p.s. I also learned while driving to work this morning, that polar bear populations are at record highs.

[Guest]

"Arctic Vortex" sounds like a super villain.

[Guest]

"Arctic Vortex" sounds like a super villain.

Ooooh! I got dibs on this for my band's name!

(for when I finally develop the talent to make music)

[LittleWyvern]

I wanted to resurrect this thread, in order to preserve in history, the new catch phrase in current media reports.

"Arctic Vortex"

Thank you.

New? I think I've heard it before...

[raven2]

Here is some parts of an article from the Ensign that was 'republished' in November 2013 on the Church's new webpage on the environoment and conservation that I posted above.

Earth—A Gift of Gladness

"At one time, there may have been reason to be skeptical about the idea that we are damaging the earth on a global scale. But no longer. The evidence is mounting that we are doing ourselves and our mortal home serious damage. An observatory on Mauna Loa in Hawaii far away from large industry has recorded a rate of 1.5 to 2 parts per million increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide since 1958. Similar observations were made at the South Pole. A continued increase in carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere, produced by our vast consumption of oil, coal, and other fossil fuels, appears to be responsible for a general increase in temperature worldwide. (See Sylvan H. Wittwer, “The Greenhouse Effect,” Carolina Biology 163:8.) That increase threatens possible major changes in climate around the world, potentially causing drought in some areas and greater rainfall in others."

"Another consequence of our burning large amounts of fossil fuels has been a condition called acid rain. Forests, streams, and lakes have all been seriously damaged in regions where pollutants in the atmosphere are converted into mild acids that are brought back to earth through rain and snow. As the acid accumulates, it kills both plant and animal life."

"At the same time, we are combining that indirect and largely unintended attack with a more direct attack: deforestation. As forests are cut in many parts of the earth, the effect they have on slowing global warming decreases, and the loss of animal and plant habitat increases."

"In Doctrine and Covenants 104:17, the Lord said, “For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.” [D&C 104:17] My impression on reading those words is that the Lord is an ample provider—but he did not plan that we waste the gifts he has given us. The scriptures make it clear that we have dominion over the earth, but they also make it clear what that dominion means: We are to care for our planetary home and use its resources wisely. It was never intended that we abuse it."

Earth—A Gift of Gladness - Ensign July 1991 - ensign

Edited January 8, 2014 by raven2

[raven2]

Originally Posted by Loudmouth_Mormon

"To put it another way, exactly who is God displeased with? Me? I didn't do anything to make anything go extinct. His children in general? I'm too big on "man will be punished for his own sins" to go there. Individuals who knowingly and willfully end a species? I'm not sure if any such individual exists."

Loudmouth_Mormon, if you haven't taken the time to look at the what the church, prophets and scriptures have to say on this topic, it might be worth your time. The prophets have made it very clear that you do have responsibility and will be held accountable. Like everything in life, there is a balance, but it doesn't remove accountability.

Ezra Taft Benson:

“Surely you can see the inconsistency in the individual who insists that we be good stewards and not pollute our environment, and yet who is unscrupulous in his personal life. Again, physical and spiritual laws are interrelated. Pollution of one's environment and moral impurity both rest on a life-style which partakes of a philosophy of ‘eat, drink, and be merry’ — gouge and grab now, without regard to the consequences. Both violate the spirit of stewardship for which we will stand accountable.”

“Stewardship in the Church is a very important matter. The Lord has mentioned it in the revelations. (See D&C 59; 104.) We are stewards over these earthly blessings which the Lord has provided, those of us who have this soil and this water. We have no moral latitude, it seems to me. In fact, we are morally obligated to turn this land over to those who succeed us — not drained of its fertility but improved in quality, in productivity, and in usefulness for future generations.”

Brigham Young:

"All that we possess and enjoy are the gifts of God to us, whether they be in earthly substance, physical constitution, or mental power; we are accountable to Him for the use we make of these precious gifts. ... It is not our privilege to waste the Lord's substance.”

Spencer W Kimball:

“We recommend to all people that there be no undue pollution, that the land be taken care of and kept clean to be productive and to be beautiful.”

“When I pass through the lovely countryside or fly over the vast and beautiful expanses of our globe, I compare these beauties with many of the dark and miserable practices of men, and I have the feeling that the good earth can hardly bear our presence upon it. ... The Brethren constantly cry out against that which is intolerable in the sight of the Lord: against pollution of mind, body and our surroundings.”

Edited January 8, 2014 by raven2

[NeuroTypical]

Hi Raven2!

Please understand, I'm not denying or refusing my stewardship or accountability. I'm also not denying how many humans are abusing the resources at their disposal. Finally, I'm not denying the ability of humanity to have a global impact on the environment.

I'm just poking fun of unsupportable, groupthink-y, political-agenda-driven movements in our culture. You seem to be of the mind that they spring naturally from all that stuff. I'm of the mind that plenty of other reactions can spring too, and many of them appeal to me as more fact-based, rational, and practical.

Do you remember what folks like Al Gore and the IPCC were forecasting back in 2007?

Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013' - BBC News - 12 December 2007

It was ridiculous nonsense back then, and with the latest scientific observations, it's now undeniable ridiculous nonsense. And yet, both of my kids have come home this year with school papers displaying a sad looking Polar Bear standing precariously on a small-and-shrinking iceberg. My wife and I have stopped the environmentally-minded leftist attempts to indoctrinate our kids.

As for your quoted 1991 Ensign article written by the bishop of the Wasatch Eighth Ward, Salt Lake Wasatch Stake, I can only say that much of his activist and melodramatic opinion still remains, despite plenty of good science about the durability and changeability of ecosystems. Despite the information that climate change is a naturally occurring cycle, that happens on other planets too. Despite the understanding that species arrive and go extinct quite often on this planet, and have been doing so long before humankind had any impact on things. Despite the IPCC email scandal where we learned they spun their research to force conclusions that weren't warranted, and how they quashed opposing viewpoints. Despite the emotion-fueled nonsense from the Boy Scout pining about how "nature doesn’t have much of a chance against us humans". What sensationalistic, anti-rational nonsense. It's a shame such nonsense appeared in the Ensign, and it's a shame it's been reproduced on the church's website. It does look like the author has moved on to more productive pursuits. I wonder if he's ever reflected back on his article, and if he's still of the same mind.

And finally, despite activist left attempts to silence opposing views, I will remain a vocal advocate of common sense. It's perfectly possible to be in total acceptance of your Young, Kimball, and Benson quotes, and reject totally the melodramatic nonsense coming from the enviromilitant left, or the incorrect feel-gooderism coming from their emotionally-based willing pawns.

And if you have polluted your brain with that nonsense, you should too, raven2.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Loudmouth_Mormon