God will save us from climate change

[Shwa]

No way! Really??

God will save us from climate change: U.S. Representative

U.S. Representative John Shimkus, possible future chairman of the Congressional committee that deals with energy and its attendant environmental concerns, believes that climate change should not concern us since God has already promised not to destroy the Earth.

Shimkus, an evangelical Christian and a Republican member of the House from Illinois, on Tuesday signalled his desire to become chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Well it's a damned good thing this Republican got in, now isn't it? Good thing it wasn't some crazy person.

[daniel]

John Shimkus should recognize that God had put David Suzuki, Al Gore and other Climate Scientists to do the analysis and their work. He should remember that when Noah built the Ark under God's direction, the deniers ridiculed him.

[nicky10013]

No way! Really??

God will save us from climate change: U.S. Representative

Well it's a damned good thing this Republican got in, now isn't it? Good thing it wasn't some crazy person.

Damnit, you beat me to it. Though, I guess it's a step in the right direction. At least he acknowledges the problem exists in the first place. Half points.

[Shwa]

Damnit, you beat me to it. Though, I guess it's a step in the right direction. At least he acknowledges the problem exists in the first place. Half points.

I am not sure I am diggin the logic though:

Climate problems exist. God will take of it. No problem.

[ToadBrother]

I am not sure I am diggin the logic though:

Climate problems exist. God will take of it. No problem.

But that is a strain of thinking in certain streams of Christianity; a sort of Apocalyptic thinking; fill the world with sh*t and let God sort it out. A number of philosophers and scholars have noticed this sort of religious pessimism in the Abrahamic religions, in particular in Christianity and Islam. I'm not sure it's that huge in Catholicism and Orthodoxy mainly because they view salvation more as an active element between Savior and Saved, meaning that what you do in the Here And Now will effect what happens in the Great Afterwards.

Edited November 10, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Michael Hardner]

John Shimkus should recognize that God had put David Suzuki, Al Gore and other Climate Scientists to do the analysis and their work. He should remember that when Noah built the Ark under God's direction, the deniers ridiculed him.

Al Gore and other Climate Scientists ?!? God DOES have a sense of humour then.

[eyeball]

God will take of it. No problem.

But that is a strain of thinking in certain streams of Christianity; a sort of Apocalyptic thinking; fill the world with sh*t and let God sort it out.

It's also a strain of thinking that is integral to our system of governance; a sort of naive thinking; fill politics with corruption and let God sort it out.

That is after all why we compel politicians to swear to be honest on a stack of bibles isn't it?

[waldo]

He should remember that when Noah built the Ark under God's direction, the deniers ridiculed him.

scholarly review of the Flying Spaghetti Monster scripture seems to interpret the ridicule as a certainty that the 'ark' would float over the edge, into the abyss. Apparently, it was the beginning of the end for denying flat-earthers! We can learn much from FSM!

[waldo]

But that is a strain of thinking in certain streams of Christianity; a sort of Apocalyptic thinking; fill the world with sh*t and let God sort it out. A number of philosophers and scholars have noticed this sort of religious pessimism in the Abrahamic religions, in particular in Christianity and Islam. I'm not sure it's that huge in Catholicism and Orthodoxy mainly because they view salvation more as an active element between Savior and Saved, meaning that what you do in the Here And Now will effect what happens in the Great Afterwards.

although that 'Apocalyptic thinking' and the described position of evangelical, U.S. Republican member of the House, Shimkus... doesn't line up with the expressed position statement of American evangelical Christian leaders; specifically:

The Evangelical Climate Initiative - Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action

Over the last several years many of us have engaged in study, reflection, and prayer related to the issue of climate change (often called “global warming”). For most of us, until recently this has not been treated as a pressing issue or major priority. Indeed, many of us have required considerable convincing before becoming persuaded that climate change is a real problem and that it ought to matter to us as Christians. But now we have seen and heard enough to offer the following moral argument related to the matter of human-induced climate change. We commend the four simple but urgent claims offered in this document to all who will listen, beginning with our brothers and sisters in the Christian community, and urge all to take the appropriate actions that follow from them.

Claim 1: Human-Induced Climate Change is Real

Claim 2: The Consequences of Climate Change Will Be Significant, and Will Hit the Poor the Hardest

Claim 3: Christian Moral Convictions Demand Our Response to the Climate Change Problem

Claim 4: The need to act now is urgent. Governments, businesses, churches, and individuals all have a role to play in addressing climate change -- starting now

Finally, while we must reduce our global warming pollution to help mitigate the impacts of climate change, as a society and as individuals we must also help the poor adapt to the significant harm that global warming will cause.

Conclusion

We the undersigned pledge to act on the basis of the claims made in this document. We will not only teach the truths communicated here but also seek ways to implement the actions that follow from them. In the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, we urge all who read this declaration to join us in this effort.

Edited November 10, 2010 by waldo

[TimG]

Well it's a damned good thing this Republican got in, now isn't it? Good thing it wasn't some crazy person.

I see no difference between this guy and Al Gore or any other CAWG doom peddler. Both are religious fanatics. However, this guy deserves some credit for acknowledging his views are purely based on religious belief system. Al Gore and other CAGW doom peddlers insist on pretending that their views have some connection to rational thought. Edited November 10, 2010 by TimG

[GostHacked]

although that 'Apocalyptic thinking' and the described position of evangelical, U.S. Republican member of the House, Shimkus... doesn't line up with the expressed position statement of American evangelical Christian leaders; specifically:

The Evangelical Climate Initiative - Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action

I don't quite understand what God has to do with any of this. Also the article you quoted, also quotes the bible as some kind of evidence. As in the other thread, politics and priests need not get involved in the scientific process. Essentially you can write off that article as any kind of evidence to support the concept of AGW.

Start saving yourself, because god has not and won't help.

[Shwa]

I see no difference between this guy and Al Gore or any other CAWG doom peddler. Both are religious fanatics. However, this guy deserves some credit for acknowledging his views are purely based on religious belief system. Al Gore and other CAGW doom peddlers insist on pretending that their views have some connection to rational thought.

Well Tim, a post like this could be seen as a win-win for both you and Shimkus right?

[ToadBrother]

I see no difference between this guy and Al Gore or any other CAWG doom peddler. Both are religious fanatics. However, this guy deserves some credit for acknowledging his views are purely based on religious belief system. Al Gore and other CAGW doom peddlers insist on pretending that their views have some connection to rational thought.

Fortunately, we have actual scientists to sort it out, and they rule decidedly on climate change. But we've been through this before.

[Shady]

John Shimkus should recognize that God had put David Suzuki, Al Gore and other Climate Scientists to do the analysis and their work.

Since when is Al Gore a climate scientist?

[eyeball]

Fortunately, we have actual scientists to sort it out, and they rule decidedly on climate change. But we've been through this before.

Except that scientists are not the rulers who are deciding on climate change.

Given the recognition of God's supremacy in our constitutions I expect characters like this Shmuck fellow will dominate the deciding classes for some time to come.

[Michael Hardner]

Since when is Al Gore a climate scientist?

Many anti-GW folks quote him as though he was one. There are mistakes in his movie that are on the same scale as mistakes in the sciency-type blogs that are quoted on here. As such, I don't quote him or those blogs. The science itself provides the best insight on GW.

As for the impacts, or the policy changes - I would be interested if anybody could suggest a good sourc for those discussions.

[TimG]

Fortunately, we have actual scientists to sort it out, and they rule decidedly on climate change. But we've been through this before.

Ah - but actual science is irrelevent here. We are talking about what to do about the science. In this example, we have Shimkus saying that we should do nothing - he did not say climate change was not occurring. On the other hand we have Gore saying we need to make deep sacrifices and reorganize the foundations of society.

Both are opinions based on their religious/philosophical views. Neither is more legimate than the other.

Edited November 10, 2010 by TimG

[ToadBrother]

Ah - but actual science is irrelevent here. We are talking about what to do about the science. In this example, we have Shimkus saying that we should do nothing - he did not say climate change was not occurring. On the other hand we have Gore saying we need to make deep sacrifices and reorganize the foundations of society.

Both are opinions based on their religious/philosophical views. Neither is more legimate than the other.

Ah yes, the all "opinions are equal" line. Climate change deniers, like Creationists, frequently dip into epistemological nihilism.

At any rate, is there some reason you think I care about Al Gore? I don't. The guy's a rich hypocrite who has found a new schtick. I would no more use him as a reference or source of information than I would any science journalist. What he says is irrelevant to the core discussion.

[GostHacked]

Since when is Al Gore a climate scientist?

It was about the same time he created the Internet.

[waldo]

But that is a strain of thinking in certain streams of Christianity; a sort of Apocalyptic thinking; fill the world with sh*t and let God sort it out. A number of philosophers and scholars have noticed this sort of religious pessimism in the Abrahamic religions, in particular in Christianity and Islam. I'm not sure it's that huge in Catholicism and Orthodoxy mainly because they view salvation more as an active element between Savior and Saved, meaning that what you do in the Here And Now will effect what happens in the Great Afterwards.

although that 'Apocalyptic thinking' and the described position of evangelical, U.S. Republican member of the House, Shimkus... doesn't line up with the expressed position statement of American evangelical Christian leaders; specifically:

The Evangelical Climate Initiative - Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action

Over the last several years many of us have engaged in study, reflection, and prayer related to the issue of climate change (often called “global warming”). For most of us, until recently this has not been treated as a pressing issue or major priority. Indeed, many of us have required considerable convincing before becoming persuaded that climate change is a real problem and that it ought to matter to us as Christians. But now we have seen and heard enough to offer the following moral argument related to the matter of human-induced climate change. We commend the four simple but urgent claims offered in this document to all who will listen, beginning with our brothers and sisters in the Christian community, and urge all to take the appropriate actions that follow from them.

Claim 1: Human-Induced Climate Change is Real

Claim 2: The Consequences of Climate Change Will Be Significant, and Will Hit the Poor the Hardest

Claim 3: Christian Moral Convictions Demand Our Response to the Climate Change Problem

Claim 4: The need to act now is urgent. Governments, businesses, churches, and individuals all have a role to play in addressing climate change -- starting now

Finally, while we must reduce our global warming pollution to help mitigate the impacts of climate change, as a society and as individuals we must also help the poor adapt to the significant harm that global warming will cause.

Conclusion

We the undersigned pledge to act on the basis of the claims made in this document. We will not only teach the truths communicated here but also seek ways to implement the actions that follow from them. In the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, we urge all who read this declaration to join us in this effort.

I don't quite understand what God has to do with any of this. Also the article you quoted, also quotes the bible as some kind of evidence. As in the other thread, politics and priests need not get involved in the scientific process. Essentially you can write off that article as any kind of evidence to support the concept of AGW.

obviously, the, 'what 'God' has to do with any of this', is how positions are being influenced by religious belief. Referencing the article was principally to outline the competing aspects within the Republican member Shimkus' own acknowledged evangelical influence; i.e., his position contradicts the advocacy of his own faiths spiritual leaders.

the position statements bible cited references would appear germane in the context they are applied by the spiritual leaders; i.e., to the positional claim that 'Christian Moral Convictions Demand Our Response to the Climate Change Problem'.

the position statements other cited references are equally germane in the context they are applied; i.e., to the positional claim that 'Human-Induced Climate Change is Real'... where the statement cites references to such organizations as, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the G8 Joint Science Academies Statement, the American Geophysical Union, etc.

[waldo]

At any rate, is there some reason you think I care about Al Gore? I don't.

oh noooooosssssss! Don't shoot down their bogeyman!

[TimG]

Ah yes, the all "opinions are equal" line.

No I said these two guy's opinions were equal. I happen to mostly agree with Shimkus but that is because I have looked at practical realities of reducing carbon emissions and concluded it is a waste of money and resources given the uncertainties regarding the effects of climate change.

I picked Al Gore because he is a politician, like Shimkus, who is a driven by a religious ideology. I responded to you because you focused on "Abrahamic" religions as a source of religious pessimism. I wanted to point out that eco-evangelicals like Gore who constantly preach about the end of the world are just as bad - if not worse than "Abrahamic" religions when it comes to religious pessimism.

[waldo]

No way! Really??

God will save us from climate change: U.S. Representative

Well it's a damned good thing this Republican got in, now isn't it? Good thing it wasn't some crazy person.

Shimkus... at that meeting of the U.S. House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment: "there is a theological debate that this is a carbon starved planet - not too much carbon"!

[Oleg Bach]

From what I understand about devine intervension, God is not interested in saving those that do not want to be saved.

[waldo]

Rep. John Shimkus: Capping C02 emissions will steal "plant food" ... with, again, the favoured Republican go-to to provide testimony at Congressional hearings - the bombastic charlatan extraordinaire - "Lawd Monckton":