Why worry about global warming? (2)

[Chalnoth]

So if we make 4500 dollars a year or whatever we are 'rich' now? Consider greenhouse gas "sin gas"!! The idea that one can punish sinners and tax sin to death is foolish. Man cannot save himself. How did global warming advocates, or recycling save the tens of thousands of kids and women killed in Iraq? Hiroshima? Anywhere at all!?

Come on now, let's get honest.

China is hardly homogeneous. And by the way, I said "becoming", not "are". China's per-capita GDP has been exploding in recent decades, currently more than 12 times what it was just 20 years ago.

 

[dad]

China is hardly homogeneous. And by the way, I said "becoming", not "are". China's per-capita GDP has been exploding in recent decades, currently more than 12 times what it was just 20 years ago.

So then, by 'becoming rich' you actually meant dirt poor relatively. OK. So is it OK then to overtake the other countries in a carbon footprint? What should we do....close all the factories and starve them? Make em walk to work? Charge em a month's wage to get rid of their recycle stuff...etc etc? Keep us posted on the loving way for man to save himself now. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Chalnoth]

So then, by 'becoming rich' you actually meant dirt poor relatively. OK. So is it OK then to overtake the other countries in a carbon footprint? What should we do....close all the factories and starve them? Make em walk to work? Charge em a month's wage to get rid of their recycle stuff...etc etc? Keep us posted on the loving way for man to save himself now. Inquiring minds want to know.

Okay? No. But it's reality. China has a much larger population. But no, China is not "dirt poor" by comparison. China has a lot of dirt-poor. But it also has a lot of middle class who are living in big cities.

 

[Wendy Cherrett]

I think getting the gospel out to the whole world should be our focus. Christians, beit regular people, business owners, politicians, etc. should take care of the place God gave us to live, but it is more of a side effect, and our goal should be on salvation/repentance.

I recycle, and do my part environmentally, but we have bigger battles to fight in my opinion.

 

[dad]

Okay? No. But it's reality. China has a much larger population. But no, China is not "dirt poor" by comparison. China has a lot of dirt-poor. But it also has a lot of middle class who are living in big cities.

So then we have a responsibility that is put on the shoulders of some, but not all? Should one country that is a top polluter be less responsible? Who sets your eco standards?

Would being a good recycler mean that billions will not die from womd? Look, I am not convinced that yours is the way of total salvation for man, sorry.

 

[dad]

I think getting the gospel out to the whole world should be our focus. Christians, beit regular people, business owners, politicians, etc. should take care of the place God gave us to live, but it is more of a side effect, and our goal should be on salvation/repentance.

I recycle, and do my part environmentally, but we have bigger battles to fight in my opinion.

Taking care of a place sounds good. I sometimes wonder what that really means.

 

[Chalnoth]

So then we have a responsibility that is put on the shoulders of some, but not all?

Huh? Why would you think that?

The fact is simply that we can only control our actions, and influence others' actions through various diplomatic means. Every nation needs to reign in carbon emissions.

Would being a good recycler mean that billions will not die from womd? Look, I am not convinced that yours is the way of total salvation for man, sorry.

Huh? What in the world does one have to do with the other? Obviously we want to both recycle and not engage in large-scale warfare.

 

[dad]

Huh? Why would you think that?

The fact is simply that we can only control our actions, and influence others' actions through various diplomatic means. Every nation needs to reign in carbon emissions.

Well everyone needs to do a lot of things, so? Does that mean they do? If some country was to straitjacket it's citizens to strict eco rules, at the cost, of say, a quarter of their wealth when most other nations did not, would it do any good? Of course some could say, well it did the world some good..

But some might even say that having most men die would do a lot of eco good as well! No thanks. Carbon problems and pollution are sin caused. Jesus came to save us from death and sin. One must address the real cause, not put on some hypocritical, expensive, unequal punishment on selected few sinners.

Huh? What in the world does one have to do with the other? Obviously we want to both recycle and not engage in large-scale warfare.

Sin is the common denominator. Pollution and war....

 

[Chalnoth]

Well everyone needs to do a lot of things, so? Does that mean they do? If some country was to straitjacket it's citizens to strict eco rules, at the cost, of say, a quarter of their wealth when most other nations did not, would it do any good? Of course some could say, well it did the world some good..

Um, except that isn't what would happen. The first thing to point out is that moving to a low-carbon-emission economy requires tremendous innovation and production. An economy that is actively pursuing a green-energy future, in other words, is a vibrant economy.

In the end, it may mean that the eventual cost of goods and services will be a couple percent higher than you get in a greedy economy. But I doubt it. The problem is that fossil fuel emissions have all sorts of nasty effects that cost us money in other ways. The pollution from burning oil and coal, for example, causes various health problems that we pay for in our medical insurance bills. In fact, those medical bills are so expensive that they outweigh the cost of the fuel by a factor of three.

This means that, for example, when you go to the gas station and pay $2/gallon for gas, the true cost of that gas to you is actually higher, because you end up paying he medical bills for all of the people damaged by air pollution (even if you don't get hurt yourself).

Moving off of fossil fuels, then, actually saves us money. And not a small amount. We would have a better economy, not a worse one, if we moved to a more sustainable one.

 

[RickG]

Why worry?

NASA: Climate Change May Bring Big Ecosystem Changes - NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory

 

[Red Tornado]

What do people have?
Children.
What will most likely they have?
Children.
Do we want them to deal with global warming?
No.

 

[dad]

Why worry?
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-387

I agree. The link you spammed has no reasons I can see to believe eco prophesy or to worry.

 

[dad]

Um, except that isn't what would happen. The first thing to point out is that moving to a low-carbon-emission economy requires tremendous innovation and production. An economy that is actively pursuing a green-energy future, in other words, is a vibrant economy.

So, what? You think having a wallet full of cash means that you can get to work on pipe dreams?

In the end, it may mean that the eventual cost of goods and services will be a couple percent higher than you get in a greedy economy.

Oh come on now. The eco taxes and burdens placed on the camel of ordinary people break the back of some, and threaten to kill the camel.

But I doubt it. The problem is that fossil fuel emissions have all sorts of nasty effects that cost us money in other ways. The pollution from burning oil and coal, for example,

So if the ecos killed the nuclear plants and forced many coal generating plants to come to be, who is to blame? If they stick 10% corn goo in the gas does that really save the world?...or starve it!? Man has no answers. Pretending that being green will save us is a hypocritical fools game.

causes various health problems that we pay for in our medical insurance bills.

Hey ...what doesn't cause problems? Medical? Does that mean we must pay for sex change operations and abortions?

In fact, those medical bills are so expensive that they outweigh the cost of the fuel by a factor of three.

So oil use causes medical problems? What do you propose that causes less? If Iran got nuked, and all hell broke loose there, would the world be healthier? The whole package of science under sin is under the gun here. It is found wanting.

This means that, for example, when you go to the gas station and pay $2/gallon for gas, the true cost of that gas to you is actually higher, because you end up paying he medical bills for all of the people damaged by air pollution (even if you don't get hurt yourself).

I wonder if the real cause of high fuel costs are oil induced sickness!!? Come on now.

Moving off of fossil fuels, then, actually saves us money. And not a small amount. We would have a better economy, not a worse one, if we moved to a more sustainable one.

So throwing up thousands of tons of pollution from coal burning plants to power your electric car is a good thing?

 

[Chalnoth]

Oh come on now. The eco taxes and burdens placed on the camel of ordinary people break the back of some, and threaten to kill the camel.

Prove it.

Oh, right, you can't. Because it's wrong.

 

[dad]

Prove it.

Oh, right, you can't. Because it's wrong.

How your religious eco taxes affect some people is an open question. The offensive thing to me is not a healthy respect for creation, but denying the creator, and worshiping the earth and present nature more than God.

Bottom line...some will not bow the knee to all this eco freako demonism in a green dress.

 

[Chalnoth]

How your religious eco taxes affect some people is an open question. The offensive thing to me is not a healthy respect for creation, but denying the creator, and worshiping the earth and present nature more than God.

Bottom line...some will not bow the knee to all this eco freako demonism in a green dress.

And why do you continue to try to drag this thread off-topic? This is supposed to be about global warming, not theology. If you don't think this topic is important, then why in the world are you even posting on this thread?