If there was ever a good reason to be skeptical, it is surely when catholic bishops and government scientists start preaching from the same poster!
Following is the announcement from the catholic climate change conference:
Catholic leaders warn of 'environmental refugees' scenario
A statement issued yesterday following the weekend's national climate change conference, calls for ecological conversion, warning that global warming could create a new wave of dispossessed people.
The warning followed a Position Paper launched by the Catholic Bishops Committee for Justice Development Ecology and Peace, which urged all Australians to cooperate in open dialogue and face the radical changes required to tackle global climate change.
Catholic Earthcare Australia was set up in 2003 by the Australian Bishops' Conference and is chaired by Bishop Christopher Toohey.
In the keynote address before more than 300 delegates, Bishop Toohey said that human induced accelerated climate change "raises serious moral and spiritual questions, not just for Catholics but for all Australian citizens and leaders, and calls for change in our way of life.
"Scientific research has concluded that humans have caused rapid global climate change by contributing to ever higher concentrations of greenhouse gases, 80 per cent of which comes from the burning of fossil fuels.
"This build up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is gradually increasing world temperatures that will lead to higher sea levels as icepacks and glaciers melt. We are also seeing the occurrence of more violent weather events, widespread droughts in some areas and lower food production in others," Bishop Toohey said.
"If we act now the changes can be slowed and harm can still be minimised."
Conference organizer and Executive Officer of CEA, Colin Brown, drew attention to United Nations figures released during the conference that revealed a blowout in Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.
"These alarming figures, released ahead of the international climate change conference in Montreal later this month showed that Australia's emissions have increased by a massive 23 per cent in the past 13 years," he said. "They expose a decade of lost opportunity in Australia in which things are getting worse, not better."
All speakers in a packed two-day program that combined theologians of many faiths with scientists warned of the need for urgent and immediate action. (end of quote)
I have enjoyed comments by all other contributors.
My view as a Christian is that I am called to be a good steward of what I beleive are God given gifts of earth sea and sky.
Anything that affects these in an adverse way is to be avoided, e.g. oil slicks on the sea killing innocent bird life. Whilst irrefutible evidence for pollution may be absent in some cases the notion that I (we) can continue to emit waste of any kind in ever greater amounts across our little globe and even smaller atmosphere could in my opinion be at the very least be untidy and at worst criminally negligent. Whether global warming is taking place or not I would like to propose we set ourselves policies of total recycling of waste and an emission free society. This I beleive is part of being a good steward, and although perhaps scientifically challenging could reap immense benefits for us now and our future children. You will I am sure note that I have used the words opinion and belief and have little in the way of references to facts or authorities although I would warn that in many instances scientific theories and political statements can be miseading and even prone to error. Prayer, common sense and the good steward attitude may be in this case our only compass for deciding where we go from here. Could we really lose by cleaning up our mess? Do we need a disaster or irrefutible evidence before we do the right thing? Finally with regard to how much influence one person can have, I live in Scotland not Australia, and there are many more Christians - Catholics around the world we can make a diifernce but even if that were not so personal responsibility and an account of our stewardship before God will be required. What account of your actions would you like to present?
Paul - I can but have a look through recent posts this blog in climate change archive on all these issues heat islands, glaciers, satellite warming - we've been through them often more than once. Warming inland - BoM site on climate trends - also posted recently. And a lot on realclimate. But if you look my posts this blog you'll find most.
If you can't find them tell me. You will find an overpowering body of evidence that something is happening (warming) but we have only one hypothesis that stands up to what it is - CO2.
And it ain't solar - more has been posted on this. And it ain't orbital - so what is it then ??
"Sea levels are rising as for IPCC" was Greenhouse 2005 conf this month Melbourne pers. comm. from a friend. (as was there's 300ppm extra CO2 in permafrost, boreal conifer forests across Russia and North America at CO2 sink limit and potential Amazon deforestation).
Phil - Do you have the references?
Paul - well it's quite easy - basic even.
On heat islands - two published studies that show heat islands are not an issue. Oceans warming too - where's the heat islands there. Satellite data that shows warming. Sea level rise as the IPCC projects. All sorts of biological processes happening earlier (flowering & mating). Temperature trends in Australia that show greater warming in inland areas. Great majority of glaciers melting.
P.S. I've decided on the basis of skepticism that GM plants are very dangerous. They're causing the enrty of unknown protein sequences into our food supply and giving us all cancer. I mean certain cancer clusters are up in frequency. Seemed to happen when all this GM stuff started. That's what's causing it.
http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=00022BBF-C300-1353-830083414B7FFE9F
If both positive and negative results are interpreted as supporting a theory, how can we test its validity? Skepticism is the default position because the burden of proof is on the believer, not the skeptic.