Wasn’t there talk of food shortages and mass famine due to growing populations in the 70s? Then chemistry entered the chat.
Hand pollination will become more prevalent or some other scientific advancement will help in this area.
And are these poisoned rivers not capable of being cleaned by water treatment plants? A quarter of the world already doesn’t have access to clean drinking water.
Personally, I would think the next ice age should be the biggest concern for humanity.
I commend your hope in science and human ingenuity, however, the reality is that there are food shortages and mass famines happening right now (source). By all accounts, things are set to get worse for most of the world, not better.
I agree, the solution seems obvious, so easy, doesn’t it? And yet, in the UK a large proportion of water pollution is a result of sewage and wastewater plants pumping raw sewage into rivers and oceans. 770,000 times between 2020-2021 alone. Despite reports of profit losses, UK water companies paid almost £1 million in dividends to shareholders and a combined £16 million to their CEOs (March 22) (source). From where I’m sitting, it seems pretty clear what their priorities are and it isn’t cleaning poisoned rivers. Not to mention that cleaning the rivers will not restore the habitats or organisms lost as a result of the pollution in the first place.
Who is causing those? The Government and Bill Gates are. If the ones who could solve the problem are helping to cause it, why should you lose sleep over it? You can’t do anything about it.
But I believe this is just another con. They want you freaking out. Just like with everything else. Covid and the “woke” movement. There’s a nefarious club causing all these “issues” and there’s even more money behind them. It’s not something any Christian should involve themselves in.
And the Wikipedia article leads with:
“The worsening crises in distinct parts of the world were caused by compounding geopolitical and economic crisis. The crises followed food security and economic crises during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
So what is the solution?
I see a parallel to groups calling for racial justice, and yet these groups are unable to acknowledge that not all racial disparities are caused by racial injustice.
To admit the nuance of this variable into their activist equation, seems to dull the zeal of the moment.
That should be a slow enough change (10s of thousands of years) as to not be a huge problem, compared to the same level of change in a few hundred years, which is what we’re on track for now. Would it reduce population? Probably yes. Would it reduce population faster than it is thought that it will due to declining birthrates? I’m not sure, but I wouldn’t be surprised if human population declined enough by then to not cause any noticeable crash that could unambiguously be tied to the shift in climate.
The hope is born out of past observations. But yes, true on all accounts but I am not convinced individual events tie into man-made warming. Not to mention droughts in one area might mean more fertile crops and better nutrition in another. But yes, there are lots of people going hungry in the world today and lots of people without access to clean drinking water (25%?). But people have had to deal with drought, famine, diseases and massively changing climate for the last million years. Changes that dwarf anything even the most staunch climate alarmist might worry about today. The geologists tell me my area was covered in an ice sheet a mile thick during the last ice age. I’ll see that 2 degrees of global warming and raise it a mile thick sheet of ice.
My understanding is also that the earth can provide enough of everything. There is enough food and water for everyone on the planet. Geopolitical boundaries and unequal wealth distribution are the significant problem. Greed and a lack of compassion are the problem, not fossil fuels. People dealing with climate change in the past were isolated and local and had no clue what was going on. We live in a global world where movement across it is easy but people love money and we like to horde wealth and worry about our future. We certainly don’t Being more Christlike is the solution to climate change and many of us certainly don’t live us to Matthew 6:25-30 very well.
I remember when he had that bailout in USE and all the CEOS gave themselves multi-million dollar raises. That is when I despaired and decided the government is complete trash and beyond all repair. In the end, greed and money is the problem, not fossil fuels. Many are profiting off of climate alarmism as well.
Vinnie
Time frame slower but the results much more catastrophic than 2 degree warming. And I would recommend people stop buying houses on the coastline. Plenty of time to deal with that. People will need to slowly move/migrate. Fossil fuels aren’t stopping and we have no business restricting poor countries from using cheap energy to give their citizens a better quality of life.
People have been dealing with storms, natural disasters and droughts for millions of years. This is nothing new under the sun. Expecting ocean levels or climate to remain the same forever is folly. Year to year massive droughts happen and have always happened. We certainly don’t want to increase them if we can help it.
Yes there are lots of poor people in the world that can’t just relocate but they are still going to be poor even if we all switch to electric vehicles. That isn’t solving the real problem that plagues our planet. I am not interested in climate change alarmism that just wants to maintain the status quo. Many people suffering through droughts and starvation right now are very much help-able.
And for what its worth, I am typing this on an apple device that was probable made in a Chinese sweatshop.
Vinnie
This dark night thesis is nonsense. Take a look at the link below to a NASA study showing the earth is greening!! The earth is in better shape than ever. Fewer people hunger; in spite of the Chinese virus, longevity is improving. In spite of Ukraine, deaths by conflict are low. There is no climate crisis. The warming planet…it has warmed by a degree C or so in the last 200 years following a drop of well over a degree during the “little ice age”. The CO2 leads to increased food production…greening. Our God has provided us with the intellect and curiosity to make life better for all, even if it does not go exactly in a straight line.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/greening-of-the-earth-mitigates-surface-warming
Admittedly, caring can be a lot of trouble, entailing worry and disappointment. But indifference has its own affects which impinge on happiness just as much. I used to say happiness isn’t something I will pursue at any cost. That’s fine too but I’d be a fool not to recognize it as a canary in the mine I should pay attention to.
It is good that there are positive trends that give hope. Some trends in the statistics about human populations show that humans can improve the global situation if there is will to do it.
At the same time, it is not true to say that the earth is in better shape than ever. The page about the greening you mentioned writes: “The vegetation cooling effect is large from the energy dissipation perspective, but only about 10%-20% compared to the pace of global warming.”.
We are losing a large proportion, possibly most, of coral reefs that are important areas for the production of fish. That leads to less fish available for humans, in addition to the likely thousands of species that will disappear. The reason is increased ocean temperatures and acidification caused by increased CO2 in the atmosphere. Overfishing of populations of large fish makes the situation worse.
Greening is a significant trend in arctic areas as the length of growing seasons increases. These areas are mostly not suitable for agriculture, so the effect is mainly two-fold: species adapted to arctic conditions suffer and disappear, and the areas covered by bushy vegetation suck more sunshine, leading to higher temperatures. Arctic areas will likely warm >4 degrees C in the near future (already warmed >2 degrees C). This is a very conservative estimate, the actual temperature rise may be 6-8 degrees C in the arctic areas.
Local small glaciers have already been doomed, it is just a matter of time they disappear. That matters because large areas are dependent on the melting water running from these glaciers. Large areas in Eurasia will suffer from a lack of water originating from the glaciers. In addition to harming agriculture and availability of drinking water, lack of water will be seen as drying rivers that have been important shipping routes and sources of fish.
Some areas suffer more than others.
Mediterranean areas, California and many more areas will experience even worse droughts than they experience now. It matters, even if you would not like californians.
Sea surface and atmosphere have more heat, which leads to more devastating storms and hurricanes. The amount of water raining may stay the same but it comes down in fewer days. When it rains, there will come down so much water that soil cannot suck it. Lots of water but groundwater reserves do not increase much. This leads to sudden flooding associated with long droughts and lack of groundwater.
These are just few examples of our near future. The consequences will not be bad only for the other animals, humans will suffer. We can mitigate the damage by spending trillions to infrastructure and aid but a more permanent solution demands actions that slows down the climate change. Those suffering are not only living in distant countries. If you have children or young relatives, they will also suffer. How much, that will depend on where they live and how much we can slow down the climate change.
As I wrote, there are also positive trends and humans can affect the trends if there is will. So, there is still much hope but the time is running.
Unfortunately, many Christians just shut their eyes and continue business-as-usual. Maybe they hope to die before the situation is too bad, or calculate that Jesus needs to return before the consequences of environmental changes become too catastrophic. I hope that Jesus returns soon but so have hoped all generations of believers during the last 2000 years. We cannot tell when Jesus returns and there is no justification for the belief that Jesus must return because we have soiled our home.
We are likely facing an increasing amount of crises related to lack of water and possibilities to get sufficient crops because of droughts. Such problems lead to migrations and unrest, which will lead to conflicts and war.
One region that will face problems because of climate change is China. If that leads to serious unrest within China, there is a possibility that the leaders rather face an external than internal threat. As is well known, nothing unites people within a country better than a war against an external threat. If there are unrest within China because of the consequences of climate change, getting rid of a few hundred thousand citizens could be calculated as a benefit.
If there would be a war, against which enemy would it be? It is unlikely that China would attack to Russia. There are conflicts at the border of India but India has even more people to waste, so not a very good alternative. That leaves Taiwan as the most probable candidate. Chinese think of Taiwan as a rebellious region that is an insult to the continental China only because it exists. There have been officially told promises that Taiwan will be joined to continental China within the near future, either peacefully or through a war.
That is a scary scenario, especially if USA and allies keep their promises to protect the freedom of Taiwan. Fights at Taiwan would lead to a major war between China and the alliance led by USA. China would have the advantage that it can easily waste a few hundred thousands of soldiers. Even if the other side would loose less soldiers, the casualties on both sides would be measured in hundreds of thousands of soldiers, dead or seriously wounded.
As can be seen from the above scenario, climate change could lead to very serious indirect consequences. I really hope that climate change do not create such unrest in China that would spark a war. That would lead to an even darker night.
That’s about 60% of the world’s population. Where do you think we should go and who will pay for it? Can you imagine the issues with this? What are naval/submarine bases to do? Somebody else here has suggested that coastal cities should simply move. But I don’t think he was aware of how big coastal cities are or their importance in all kinds of things
We haven’t been around for millions of years. And because we have dealt with natural disasters in the past, that gives us incentive to avoid them in the future, as much as possible.
Has anybody said that?
Bingo!
Inland would be my best guess on where you should go. And this sounds like more alarmism. A quick search reveals this whether accurate or not::
“Presently about 40% of the world’s population lives within 100 kilometers of the coast.”
And of that 40%, I doubt a projected one foot rise in sea level over the next 30 years is going to drown them or even force most of them to move. 100 feet of shoreline (assuming 1 foot vertical) isn’t ending the world here.
“ With a sea level rise of 3 feet, locations forecast to house 4.2 million people would be at risk of inundation while a doubling of the rise would bring the number to 13.1 million.”
80 years for 4 million homes to relocate? What is the national emergency here? That’s 3 generations away.
If the ocean is in fact going to rise a few feet in the next 30-80 years and this means you have to move there is no choice in the matter. Adapt, change and survive. Isn’t that how life managed for billions of years?
Personally, I have no interest in giving up the comforts of fossil fuels on the pretense that some alarmists kids living on the ocean will have to relocate within the next 50 years.
And I don’t know who is going to pay for it. Who is footing the bill for all this climate alarmism nonsense now? If anyone wants to pay for me to relocate to the shore, I’ll take the risk. Put me as close to the beach as possible.
Maybe not anatomically modern humans. And possibly a 12 Inch rise in three decades does not fit my idea of a disaster like a hurricane, flood, a wildfire, tornado, earthquake, landslide, volcanic eruption, tsunami, etc, are natural disasters. Imagine if You saw a volcano erupting and a pyroclastic flow was heading your way and you had 50 years to get out of the way. I’d be grateful for the forewarning and plan accordingly.
Vinnie
Brilliant Vinnie, but I checked and found there are people already living inland!!! And they don’t want to make room for us. Might this mean trouble?
But a quick noodle on the web doesn’t negate the overwhelming consensus of atmospheric scientists.
It’s always nice to appeal to authority when they say what you want to hear and disagree with them when they don’t. I’ve come to learn people are experts at that. The well-funded consensus supports human induced warming. I don’t believe “climate alarmists” make up the overwhelming consensus of atmospheric scientists.
Didn’t you just claim 60% of people live near the coast? Now there is no room inland?
It is true that we cannot blame every problem on climate change. Humans have also caused many other problems and we need to keep the facts in mind to focus on the real causes of a problem.
There have been very much research going on related to climate, paleontology and geology. What kind of research is still missing?
Long-term changes in climate are something we can study and discuss without hurry because there is no risk of a new iceage during our lifetime, assuming that the planet does not jump out of its’ current orbit or that we will explode all nuclear weapons to fill the atmosphere with dust. If we explode all nuclear weapons, we have also other problems to face.
Climate changes, that is nothing new in the history of earth. The problem we are facing is that climate change is happening very fast and according to facts, is mainly caused by human actions. We have the ability to reduce suffering, economic losses and an extremely high rate of extinctions caused by the very rapid climate change and other environmental problems because we are causing the problems. It is just a matter of will. Do we accept the facts revealed by research and act, or do we claim that they are just part of a global conspiracy and >99% of the scientists participate in this conspiracy?
I admit that a crash with a huge space rock would be an even worse scenario than the current climate change. I hope we do not experience that.
Amen. But what does it mean? I do not believe we can live however we want and then accuse God when life does not feel abundant. If you hit your head repeatedly against a trunk, your head hurts and it is your own fault. If you like hitting your head against a trunk so that it hurts, then maybe it would be time to ask help, counseling or medical help?
[please note: I do not say that you need counseling or medical help, I wrote this because I have met people who liked to hurt themselves, so it is a realistic possibility that someone behaves in a destructive manner because of mental problems. Christians are not free of mental problems, so this includes also Christians]
The viewpoint you bring here and on other topics is highly appreciated. I would also add that it is better to press forward technologically with common sense stewardship of the environment, rather than trying to go back 500 years or something like that. While I’m not totally informed about this, I like what I saw Bill Gates trying to do with clean energy.
I love all kinds of meat, but not every day, and I usually only eat once or twice per day.
I’m all for being good stewards of the earth but the emotional blackmail of climate alarmists is nauseating to me. Yes, our CO2 emissions are likely warming the globe. The consensus agrees. There is less agreement on the specifics of what will happen after that. 97% of abstracts in papers that specifically address this issue (many papers do not) think humans are adding to the warming. Though in what confidence? Do they all think its incontrovertible or do some think its more probable than not? Do they all think we can stop it? Do they all think its economically worthwhile to stop it? Is it economically smarter to just let it go for 50 years as some have argued? Since CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that science has been known for a long time it is not a shocker that increased CO2 leads to warming. But these time scales are also small and the claim that “we don’t know of anything else” that could have led to the observed warming only means just that. That we don’t know of anything else, not that there can’t be.
But we have a lot of problems on the planet facing us today and a gospel in sore need of preaching. Fossil fuels have brought tremendous comfort, technological advances and eliminated a ton of suffering from the world. As I said before, they helped end slavery (economic necessity trumps or dictates morality it seems). And science (at least truth) ultimately doesn’t work by polling. Some people can’t even conceive or entertain how a consensus could be wrong (unless they already disagree with it). But they have been very wrong in the past and there is a handful of extremely or equally well credentialed experts who disagree with the consensus. When “One Hundred Authors Against Einstein” was published against relativity in 1931 he asked why they needed 100 scientists when just one fact was needed. I don’t deny the warming consensus but I am skeptical of the alarmism. There is also a lot of money and government is involved (pumping in many billions of dollars of tax money) in this as well and a lot of the world that will never comply with any of the regulations even if they are all shown to be necessary at preventing a future crisis.
If climate alarmism is real, adaptation is the answer. Right now we are trying to take steps to stop things generations from now. There is a lot of uncertainty in these models, however. And unless we want to go to war with countries who don’t refuse their citizens the simple pleasures and economic growth fossil fuels would provide for them. Access to cheap energy has provided immeasurable benefits to the world. And doesn’t China pump out 30% of the CO2 yearly?
Context Crossref Comment Greek
Verse (Click for Chapter)
New International Version
“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
Vinnie
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.