5 comments

  1. ““To mitigate climate change one needs to force the vast majority of humankind to continue living in abject poverty. Preventing climate change does not help the poor, it dooms them! Poverty simply kills more people than climate” (p. 199).”

    So far: but “climate”, with natural change augmented catastrophically by human short-sightedness and greed, stands to kill rich and poor alike, not just one or the other. “The poor” (that usefully amorphous, faceless, statistic) aren’t going to just sit there patiently and wait to die, either.

    I don’t believe that throwing up our hands and letting it rip is any more the answer than it is (despite the growing clamour) to the coronavirus. Nor do I believe that throwing the poor under the bus is inevitable: it’s the argument of rich people who want to carry on as they (we!) are.

    The love of selfishness, ostentation and waste have been sins since long before “climate change” was ever heard of. And the rich man probably stepped over Lazarus every time he went in or out of his front door. We need to pray for wisdom and not just kid ourselves it’s only a two way choice of “carry on regardless” or universal misery.

  2. In light of your position on abortion, out of curiosity, how do you view stem cell research?

    1. Arkenaten,
      I’m not a biologist or even a scientist of any kind but I think it is the case that there are two different kinds of stems cells. One type is taken from human embryos. Generally people who are opposed to abortion will also have moral objections to research using embryonic stem cells. But people opposed to abortion have no moral problem with the use of adult stem cells.

  3. Some of the most esoteric inhabitants of the world of religion are those who predict the end of the world. Some will be very specific and will unashamedly alter the date when the original prediction is clearly overtaken by events. One, non-religious, sub-group of the prophets of doom are a species of so-called climate scientists. Like the religious prophesisers of the end-of-the-world they will give us predictions of disaster only to be proved wrong when the time of their prediction finally comes round. Among such people we have the predictions of an ice-free North Pole. Although not a scientist, Al Gore’s words are treated by many people as the gospel truth. On December 14, 2008, former presidential candidate Al Gore predicted the North Polar Ice Cap would be completely ice free in five years.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/16/ten-years-ago-algore-predicted-the-north-polar-ice-cap-would-be-gone-inconveniently-its-still-there/
    Unfortunately for Algorists the predicted event failed to happen.
    Then there is this whopper from the UN: In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme predicted that climate change would create 50 million climate refugees by 2010.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/15/the-un-disappears-50-million-climate-refugees-then-botches-the-disappearing-attempt/
    But like the end-of-the-world prophets, the climate doomsters simply alter the date when their predictions prove to be false. So the date for 50 million climate refugees was put back to 2020.
    Well, lo and behold, 2020 has arrived. And we still don’t have 50 million climate refugees. So what will the new date be I wonder.

Leave a Reply to Arkenaten Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: