Mountanman,Doing nothing is simply a choice like any other. It has
costs and benefits.Is doing nothing the best thing? It is the easy,
short-term answer. In a gospel context, the easy, short-term answer is rarely
the correct one.Will attacking climate change destroy the economy?
Unlikely. We will have to attack over the long- term. Will it bring untold
suffering? Again, unlikely with the long-term attack.Will doing
nothing destroy the economy or bring about suffering? In the short-run, not at
all. But over the long-term it will likely be very tough. I believe our
grandchildren will be quite upset with us.The prophets do not speak
about a host of critical political issues. This is just one of many.
The comments on global warming are so varied it is hard to know what to
conclude. One global warming scientist said in 2008 that the arctic ice would
melt to the point there would be water at the north pole during summer. Today
we have over 5 million square miles of ice pack. January was the coldest month
in the Salt Lake Valley since the 1940's or over 70 years. I do believe if
we could do it natural gas in vehicles cars and trucks could reduce the
pollution dramatically. We have the fuel, it is cheap and very clean. We need
more stations, tanks that hold more fuel, a reasonable cost for conversion to
natural gas for vehicles and trucks and assembly lines in Detroit to do it.
@ Twin lights and one old man: Doing nothing is much better than doing the wrong
thing or doing things that will not make the slightest difference in the end! To
do the wrong things would be to destroy the economy and bring economic suffering
to millions of people for no benefit. I trust God whose planet this is. He is
the greatest scientist in the universe and has said nothing about man made
global warming to His prophets. He controls the climate, not us!
Uh, higv old friend, you say: "We can't change the climate why let it
control us?"May I point out that climate DOES control us?Where do most humans live? Not at the north or south pole.When you buy a house or car, do you buy one without air conditioning -- or do
you let climate control your choice?In fact, there is very good
evidence that the recent storm WAS in part, at least, due to climate change
producing unusual extremes of weather.Your note here is an excellent
example of the kind of flawed thinking that too often is found in the minds of
climate deniers. Rather than simply closing your mind, why not make a sincere
effort to learn more?
A good letter that catches well the complexity of the dilemma we face.Let's make an effort to find good solutions. It CAN be done. It MUST be
Higv,We can’t change the climate? We have been changing our
environment on a limited scale throughout human history. We drain a swamp,
reroute a river, dam a river, pollute a lake. As we have more people and more
technology, our ability to change our environment also changes.I
recall when we could not pollute the rivers enough to make a difference. Then
they started to burn. Apparently, we were wrong. Then the oceans were too big
to pollute. Again, we were wrong. Now we say we cannot pollute the sky enough
to make a difference. We are wrong.As to control - who do you think
really has the money and desire to control the outcome of this debate? If you
think the answer is Al Gore try comparing his balance sheet to just one of the
top 5 oil companies.Mountanman,Yes science is always
changing. But it is the best source of information we have at our disposal.
What else are we to rely on? We must make the best decisions we can with the
information we have. Science is that information. Remember, doing nothing IS a
decision and it is not a decision without cost.
All science is fleeting and incomplete. Everything we think we know about the
climate or anything else will eventually be proven to be wrong or at least very
incomplete. As our grandparent's science is to us so will our science be to
The technology/science is way over my head. There have been thorium fueled
reactors for decades ( many years ). There are numerous reasons why thorium
fueled reactors have not yet become the nuclear energy choice in the present
world. Perhaps they never will.Genuine "eco-nuts" are not
likely to change. But no energy production system exists that does not have
William Gronberg,Yes Really. Here's one:(google
thorium reactor)"Thorium is thought by some to be important to developing a
new generation of clean and safe nuclear power. According to one scientific
journal considering its overall potential, thorium-based power "can mean a
1000+ year solution or a quality low-carbon bridge to truly sustainable energy
sources solving a huge portion of mankind’s negative environmental
impact."If we're going to have a "moon shot" type
push for energy, this is a much more realistic alternative fuel.
"...to one of the various forms of clean nuclear energy." Really??Please sir or ma'am, there are actually more than ONE form of
nuclear energy available now or say in the next 20 years??I am only
aware of controlled nuclear fission being used to create heat. That heat
normally changes water to steam that is used to turn a generator."Clean" is another dubious issue.
We can't change the climate why let it control us? Didn't hurricanes
happen before the Industrial revolution volcanic eruptions? Did global warming
cause an iceberg that sunk the Titanic? Climate change is a ploy to control us.
Major cold fronts, That storm on the northeast did Climate change cause it or
was it an act that has happened for Millenia on earth? Since people don't
get the weather right the next day how can they get it right the next century?
All climate change does is hurt prosperity and control since there is no climate
"Let's make the same strong effort for the climate now. Our
children's lives depend on it."Quality of life for your
children and the rest of the children in the world, depends much more on a
continuous supply of affordable energy, than they do throwing away resources on
wind and solar, in a ludicrous attempt to lower the temperature by the .8 degree
centigrade that it has risen over the last 100 years. We will eventually, when
eco-nuts stop opposing it, convert, gradually, to one of the various forms of
clean nuclear energy.