Focus on the Family Takes on Live Earth
In Tuesday’s Citizenlink email from Focus on the Family, Dobson & Co. distributed a new video apparently produced in response to the Global Warming focused Live Earth events last weekend.
The video is full of the usual climate change skeptic talking points — and even has a nod to intelligent design at the end. This is by no means the first time we’ve seen the religious right’s or even James Dobson’s deep refusal to acknowledge our need to deal with climate change, but it is always fascinating to see just how intensely they fight this reality.
You can view the (painful) video here. FYI, Focus on the Family takes a stab at being funny. Viewer discretion is advised.
You know, it really is an individual experience, but I have talked to a few fundamentalists about global warming. What I got was what was alarming. It wasn’t denial that global warming is occurring, it was the response, “This is why it is so important to get right with God, now.”
This is a horrific example of how the Bush Administration as manipulated the RR for their own twisted and greedy purpose. Does it bother these folks used in this way? No. Their “leaders” are giddy about being able to manipulate their flock by assuring them this is “just as the Bible says. The “end times” are near.”
The “religious left” will not sit quietly for this. Grab some popcorn.
Dobson has a PhD in psycology but butchers some of the main tenets of main stream psycology (spanking kids- changing sexual orientation, etc.) so nobody would imagine that he would have a clue as to the science of the environment.
“Universe Today” has a new link-story re how the sun’s energy has lowered over the past 20 years yet global warming has increased during same time span: another indicia it’s human action , not natural actions changinmg the climate.
I’ll post link from my office later.
Not a shred of data, totally values based and bigoted. This amounts to pablum for individuals with NO critical thinking capabilities who put all their mental effort into letting faith based organizations do all possible thinking for them.
The individual that this drivel would appeal to may be found in communities where their church is the hub of their meager existence.
If anyone is interested in reading a really good book that addresses the cycles of weather our planet experiences, try “The Coming Global Storm.” When I saw the movie “The Day After Tomorrow” I noticed at the end of the credits, “The Coming Global Storm” was mentioned as being the inspiration or basis or the movie. Of course the movie, being a Hollywood creation, had plenty of extra drama, so don’t go by that. Read the book and see what two scientists have posited regarding how climate change occurs and how rapidly it can occur.
For instance, complete Mastadons have been found in the Artic with the food they were chewing still in their mouths. They had been frozen solid instantly, thousands of years ago by a super-storm that changed the global climate extremely rapidly.
What naysayers do, is take the fact that there are cycles that have occurred (and will continue to occur) and used that FACT to say Gore, et al are a bunch of political looney alarmists. What they don’t consider, however, is the FACT the we (as a global communit) are exacerbating the change by dumping billions of tons of extra CO2 into the atmosphere, among other things.
Check it out, it’s a fascinating read.
Here’s an article from yesterday’s UNIVERSE TODAY site that presents data(evidence) from which it may reasonably be inferred that human activity is contributing to global warming—since the sun nor cosmic rays are causing the warming!
“July 11th, 2007
The Sun Isn’t Responsible for Climate Change
The Sun. Image credit: SOHO
Click to enlarge
‘I recently wrote an article for Wired Science about how there doesn’t appear to be a link between cosmic rays and global warming. Now another argument against human-created global warming has fallen to the wayside: increasing temperatures from the Sun.
It turns out energy output from the Sun has actually been decreasing over the last two decades. And during this period, temperatures across the planet have been steadily rising.
The research was published in the Royal Society’s journal Proceedings A, entitled Recent oppositely directed trends in solar
climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature. The report covers not only trends in solar output, but also deals with decreasing trends in cosmic rays as well.
The Sun varies on an 11-year cycle between periods of high and low activity. But above this, there’s a longer term trend. For most of the 20th century, output from the Sun was slowly and steadily rising. But in 1985, that trend reversed, with solar output slowly declining. Global temperatures here on Earth continued climbing, unaffected.
If it’s not the Sun, and it’s not cosmic rays, what’s left? Oh right… humans.
Original Source: Royal Society journal Proceedings A
Filed under: Solar Astronomy, Environment “
Further to YAHWEH’S post, this is very interesting.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_trans.shtml
“But perhaps the most alarming aspect of global dimming is that it may have led scientists to underestimate the true power of the greenhouse effect. They know how much extra energy is being trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere by the extra carbon dioxide (CO2) we have placed there. What has been surprising is that this extra energy has so far resulted in a temperature rise of just 0.6°C.
This has led many scientists to conclude that the present-day climate is less sensitive to the effects of carbon dioxide than it was, say, during the ice age, when a similar rise in CO2 led to a temperature rise of 6°C. But it now appears the warming from greenhouse gases has been offset by a strong cooling effect from dimming - in effect two of our pollutants have been cancelling each other out. This means that the climate may in fact be more sensitive to the greenhouse effect than thought.
If so, then this is bad news, according to Dr Peter Cox, one of the world’s leading climate modellers. As things stand, CO2 levels are projected to rise strongly over coming decades, whereas there are encouraging signs that particle pollution is at last being brought under control. “We’re going to be in a situation, unless we act, where the cooling pollutant is dropping off while the warming pollutant is going up. That means we’ll get reduced cooling and increased heating at the same time and that’s a problem for us,” says Cox.
Even the most pessimistic forecasts of global warming may now have to be drastically revised upwards. That means a temperature rise of 10°C by 2100 could be on the cards, giving the UK a climate like that of North Africa, and rendering many parts of the world uninhabitable. That is unless we act urgently to curb our emissions of greenhouse gases.”
Science & Nature - Horizons - BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dimming_prog_summary.shtml
“apparently produced in response to the Global Warming focused Live Earth events last weekend” Clack
Thank you for telling me about…
http://www.citizenlink.org/
July 12th, 2007 at 10:22 am
dale Says:
Dobson has a PhD in psycology but butchers some of the main tenets of main stream psycology (spanking kids- changing sexual orientation, etc.) so nobody would imagine that he would have a clue as to the science of the environment.
Really, what is Dr. Dobson’s view on spanking kids?
What is the Average temperature of the Earth?
bill Says:
“What is the Average temperature of the Earth?”
20 points higher—than YOUR IQ!!
I don’t care who you are…I don’t care where your from THAT”S FUNNY!!!!
ad hominenly FUNNY!!!!
UNCOMMONLY FUNNY!!!!
No, no it’s: “I don’t care who yar, that thar’s funny.”
you’re right Alba I typographically MANGLED the idiomatic accent!
Get er done - right!
git er dun
YAHWEH, you’re right. I typographically MANGLED the idiomatic accent!
Hee hee. Sorry.
Does anyone know, What is the Average temperature of the Earth?
google knows ALL
20 points above….
Sorry. YAHWEH, I posted this on the other thread by mistake.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Albatross Says:
NASA has this one minus the “double whammy jargon.”
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2007/aerosol_dimming.html
I ask your opinion because of the information itself. The NASA article speaks of the effects of aerosol, but I had been taught that aerosol was actually a contributor to the “warming” where I am understanding it now to be thought that it is a “double whammy effect” with chilling and warming occurring simultaneously.
Re: \”Not a shred of data, totally values based and bigoted.\”
Umm, actually, the points he makes in the video are valid and science-based. (Not that it matters to the people who post on this forum.)
His estimation of sea level change is what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came up with. It\’s a highlypolitically driven group that is on the forefront of global warming alarmism. From this year\’s IPCC report: \”Sea levels will probably rise by 18 to 59 cm (7.08 to 23.22 in)\” That\’s basically Ken-and Barbie-swamping levels, not the two-stories-deep levels in the cute but deceptive Live Earth film or the 20 foot levels Al Gore claims.
The reference to temperature changes from the Middle Ages to the Little Ice Age to now is also easily verifiable. Check out http://www.giss.nasa.gov/
So basically, it\’s a lazy and false argument to brush his statements off as \”values-based and bigoted.\” They\’re sicience-based and verifiable.
EB says,
Re: \”Not a shred of data, totally values based and bigoted.\”
I will have to disagree. The data was spoken to and yes some of the data does support some of the statements. However, the totality of the argument is absurd. Yes we all know that trends iin climate change have existed for as long as man recorded and millions of yaers before that. (For the sake of a bounded argument to keep an even baseline; 6000 years ago when the planet was formed per creationism.)
We can also prove that mans existence and continual growth is creating change to the atmosphere that has and will have a growing effect over time. The scientific world is convinced and I too can undertand the logic and the evidence that supports the atmospheric impact.
Now if you want an exact date as to when the tipping point will occur then you are very naive. In fact it likely may not happen in your life time. I will however bet on the fact that our planet will become a more hostile environment over time as evidence suggests. Even if it were not man contributing to the potential change we have the capability to act responsibly and try to do something about sustaining a future for the next generations. When the lungs of the planet (the Amazon Basin) are gone it willl be too late.
The mainstream religious right is catching on to this as well and does recognize that climate change is being effected by man.
As far as being intellectually lazy, perhaps you are right. II am just tired of stating to reactionary types as yourself that the data exists and this is our time to do something positive for future generations.
This is indesputable and if you would like I could send you to sites that offer the detail. THe public diservice message aired on FOTF basically nullified any concern, spoke down at progressive causes with no evidence and made a blatant appeal to emotional and bigoted values.
It video was nothing more than a political ad that relies on ones stupidity and unyielding faith to assume rsponsibility for his/hers life without the churches approval.
Actually, EB, maybe you should point out what specific articles you’re referencing. The first one says:
Research Finds That Earth’s Climate is Approaching ‘Dangerous’ Point
May 30, 2007
NASA and Columbia University Earth Institute research finds that human-made greenhouse gases have brought the Earth’s climate close to critical tipping points, with potentially dangerous consequences for the planet…
Go back to the site for more.
37.3C degrees
Global warming
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Global average air temperature near the Earth’s surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the past century.
Rose (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) or in other woods from 1°F to about 1.65°F
Rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C or in other woods from .56°C to .92°C
1.65 degrees increase in global temterature is a massive amount of energy.
You don’t understand physics and you are a liar.
You are “quote mining.” You take quotes that seem to support your illogical position. As in this quote, your ignorance allows you think a 1.6 degree rise is nothing, but it is massive and that is why the ice caps are melting and we are seeing prolonged droughts.
You idiots can stick your head in the sand or be responsible and investigate this.
Dale : you are correct!
it takes MASSIVE MASSIVE MASSIVE amounts of energy to cause a global increase in temperature of 1 degree!!!
The questions scientists are addressing is “what’s that energy source?”
Most reputable scientists , including those at NASA, GISS, the PENTAGON, have concluded that human activities are a MAJOR FACTOR, along with volcanoes, animal methane, etc. But the HUMAN element has been the most dominant for the past 100 years.
I have read (of course I’ll be accused of being alarmist) that by 2080, we can expect temperatures to be 10 degrees higher than today.
I also read that in order to reach those who prefer to keep their heads in the sand (which there will be plenty of if we don’t work on this!), we should use the tactic that GWB told scientists to use - talk on their terms. It isn’t warming, it is climate change. GW’s minimizing technique worked for some.
This is crazy that they sit and say it’s only a mere 1.6 degree rise.
Here is an example I posted on another thread for those that do not understand the conept of “total heat.”
“Take a bathtub full of water which is about 60 gallons X 8.333 Lbs/ gallon = 500 lbs. to raise the temperature of that water (no matter what the original temperature is) by 2 degrees it will take 1000 BTUs. As a point of reference, 1000 BTUs equals exactly the amount of BTUs in a cubic foot of natural gas. That is a copious amount of energy, real and quantified.
Now, take the temperature of the oceans and increase them by even one tenth of one degree and that is one massive amount of energy in the form of heat stored in the water.
It is the teperature rise, X (times) the volume of water or atmosphere that represents the total heat in the system.
To say that the teperature rise is 2 degrees is like saying the size of a room is 24 feet. It tells you nothing about the actual amount.
When people do this, it is called “Quote Mining.”
One can take a quote from any article about anything and apply it to thei illogical premise. It is one of the favorite tactics of the creationists and they do it All The Time.
EB Says on July 12th, 2007 at 4:52 pm: “Re: \”Not a shred of data, totally values based and bigoted.\”
“Umm, actually, the points he makes in the video are valid and science-based. (Not that it matters to the people who post on this forum.)”
Care to specify which points you’re referring to, EB?
Carbon conscious consumer–ways to reduce carbon emissions can be found on this site:
www.newdream.org
Help Care2 save rainforest, marine wetlands, or american prairie in their race for the rainforest
http://rainforest.care2.com/i?p=271652057
Help Care2 in their race to stop global warming by clicking to offset a pound of carbon.
http://stopglobalwarming.care2.com/i?p=970396449
I clicked, Carla. I don’t know how much help it truly is…but when the Cancer Society offers these I do it then, too. I have forwarded the link to friends, family, and associates as well. Thanks.
All I did was publish the FACTS, I offered NO opinion.
dale, why did you get angry over the facts.
Global warming
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Global average air temperature near the Earth’s surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the past century.
Rose (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) or in other words from 1°F to about 1.65°F
Rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C or in other words from .56°C to .92°C
When people do this, it is called “Running when nobody’s chasing you.”
It is used when your afraid someone is going to discover the truth that you are being deceitful and is often applied to support an illogical argument
It is one of the favorite tactics of dale and he does it All The Time.
Remember dalebird if you stop lying and calling names I don’t have a reason to correct you
Name-calling: verbal abuse, especially as a substitute for reasoned argument in a dispute.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdZeoSdw6cU
Don’t forget dalebird if you stop lying and calling names I don’t have a reason to correct you
Name-calling: verbal abuse, especially as a substitute for reasoned argument in a dispute.