I remember the 1970's predictions of global cooling and a new ice age. The main reason I recall it is that I was lying on Portmarnock beach in unusually scorching weather and thinking to myself "if this is global cooling, bring it on". I got sun stroke, my skin blistered like red bubble wrap and it took me a week to recover. That's why I remember it so well.
But they can't control us believing in the sin angle. Our new moniker is "Climate emergency". But of course all the politicians and elites have to jet to have emergency "meetings" and take luxury vacations in 5 star hotels and then proceed to tell the 97% how they should live. My favorite is the high ranking Caucasian men telling 3rd world countries, Africa especially, that the world has to come up with birth plan (aka abortion and contraception) for Africa because they are having just too many kiddos. Blah, blah, blah. How about this, as soon as the elitists give up their mansions, air conditioning and jet setting, I will give up mine To paraphrase a 1970's article referring to the coming ice age......."How will we survive???" Fake news!!!
FACT Glaciers in Greenland were melting even faster in the 1930s than they are today, (Jason Box, associate professor of geography and researcher at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State). https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120529144339.htm
Global warming and global cooling are nothing to worry about as there is a natural rhythm to these cycles! The medieval warm period was much preferable to the Little Ice Age.
A lot of the climate alarmists like to forget about that little chart. In fact, it's all but disappeared, poof, from the info they put together. Looks like maybe Jesus lived in a "warm period".
I was just going to suggest that Bonnie Prince Charlie in all his worry about climate warming could go ask mama and all the rest of the royal crew to give up say half of their royal mansions and castles and live simply, just to let others simply live.
It is Not funny! It is the well known arrogance. And it is the well established trend in this forum to attack personally, when arguments lack. I already said I am catholic. And I follow the popes. You guys don't. Let now hear, how many of you would approve what I just posted above as multiple documents, encyclical and others, by St John Paul II and pope emeritus Benedict on the topic of climate and preservation of nature? I know you would deny everything pope Francis have said, as if he is the antichrist. Only he doesn't say anything different on climate than his predecessors. Of course the climate science developed since then, and now we know we have only 1 full year to react. That's why I quote prince Charles, because he said it crystal clear, based on scientists. The British Crown wouldn't compromise itself with lies, because it thinks of the future of its citizens, unlike other major countries. In your pride and self-confidence, you just don't get it, really. As of the climate data, I already posted such in the thread below and I don't see the reason why should I repeat things already said, if they fall on deaf ears, or why should I defend sources such as NASA. If you prefer not to accept it, well it is your choice. You always know better. Even better than the pope. http://motheofgod.com/threads/its-an-honor-if-americans-attack-me.13857/page-4 2018 fourth warmest year in continued warming trend, according to NASA, NOAA https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2841/...ntinued-warming-trend-according-to-nasa-noaa/ https://www.climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/the-10-hottest-global-years-on-record
Climate change is not a teaching of the Catholic Church!! Show me the proof. Just because a Pope shares a personal opinion on something doesn't make it church teaching! Any Catholic knows that!
18 spectacularly wrong predictions made around the time of first Earth Day in 1970, expect more this year (Monday, April 22) is Earth Day 2019 and time for my annual Earth Day post on spectacularly wrong predictions around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970….. In the May 2000 issue of Reason Magazine, award-winning science correspondent Ronald Bailey wrote an excellent article titled “Earth Day, Then and Now: The planet’s future has never looked better. Here’s why” to provide some historical perspective on the 30th anniversary of Earth Day. In that article, Bailey noted that around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970, and in the years following, there was a “torrent of apocalyptic predictions” and many of those predictions were featured in his Reason article. Well, it’s now the 49th anniversary of Earth Day, and a good time to ask the question again that Bailey asked 19 years ago: How accurate were the predictions made around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970? The answer: “The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong,” according to Bailey. Here are 18 examples of the spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970 when the “green holy day” (aka Earth Day) started: 1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” 2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment. 3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” 4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” 5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” 6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.” 7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness. 8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” 9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” 10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” 11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate. 12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in 1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles. 13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. (Note: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.8 years). 14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.'” 15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990. 16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look that, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” 17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so, it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.” 18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” PROOF THAT THEY HAVE GOT IT WRONG BEFORE
Hottest years on record! Accurate records don't go back very far so this only proves that we have had a few warm years recently -- nothing to worry about. We have been there before in the Medieval warming period and our ancestors survived!
You have not proven that climate change is Church teaching because it is not. The Pope can express a private opinion on climate change but this does not make it magisterial teaching. In fact a Pope can err when not teaching about faith and morals.
Who said we don't follow the popes on this forum? And who said we aren't doing everything in our power to save the environment? Is Prince Charles? We're just saying it's hypocritical of him and other jet setters, while they live in their multi million dollar mansions and fly around in their jets and want to decrease us, the regular population, so they can go on living their lavish lifestyles, while we are barely living day to day to support our families. Saying You guys don't follow the popes is saying we are excommunicated and that is plain calumny.
Yes I am. Second time answer in this thread. And I am not obliged to answer every single post. Neither you are Inquisitor
This thread shows that SOME POSTERS disregard the teaching of the popes on the Ecology and Climate. It is a matter of fact. Whether you are in schism, I cannot judge. The pope already warned of a coming schism.
Protection of creation, including of climate, is a teaching of the Catholic Church since at least John Paul II (don't know about Paul VI). Climate change reality and its protection is a teaching of the Catholic Church under His Holiness pope Francis. I would kindly ask the respected posters, to please STOP any personal attacks, asking further questions that I do not have to answer, and so on. I already answered enough questions as of whether I am catholic. This is not a judicial body but a forum that everyone reads with the purpose of better arguing someone's position and not for the purpose of personal attack. Let me say, that after such a heated discussion I have to spend hours, sometimes days, to find my balance again. (therefore I want to delete this profile one way or another, I cannot afford to continue that any longer for my own good). If my opponents have arguments related to the discussion, let present them in an intelligent manner corresponding to the public character of discussion that shows the face of the traditional Church members online, i.e. to the world. Everything short of it only deteriorates that image. Including of the message those people carry in relation to apparitions etc. If they have arguments with the popes' lengthy documents that I already posted, please let address them directly and quoting exactly what they agree or disagree, and why. I already did my work to find those documents and to post them here. And with it, I think I have done everything why I am here.
Here is the exact text of the Washington Post article November 1922 - so it is not fake news!! Glacial melt is nothing new. The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds
