World Vision is at the Copenhagen climate change talks because this is no longer an environmental crisis alone, but a deepening humanitarian crisis. Climate change is already affecting lives and livelihoods in the countries where we work, as described in graphic ways by so many in our national offices. It amplifies a number of humanitarian disasters that we are called on to respond to. Equally, it amplifies key issues of our development efforts by intensifying malaria, diarrhea, compromised water sources, and sustainable futures for many of the communities where we work.
These leading figures in humanitarian relief — John Holmes, Josette Sheeran, and Eric Laroche — spoke passionately today about the challenge.
The chasm between developed and developing countries at this conference with four days to run has tragically widened. The UN Secretary-General, Ban-Ki Moon, in urging a resolution spoke of avoiding 2 degrees warming. This was immediately denounced by more than 100 developing nations, who said 1.5 degrees warming is all they can tolerate because of their vulnerability.
The West, with historical responsibility for the greatest greenhouse gases in the current warming impacts, has not yet tabled GHG cuts that would result in containing rising temperatures to even 2 degrees. This gulf must be bridged.
I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)
I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)
I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)
I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)
I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)
BuckeyeDon
Thanks, Sam. Believe me, I hope I'm wrong.
SamHamilton
I think you're right Don.
squeaky
You're not really answering my question. And even if there are few places where the temp hovers, even one degree C of T rise would mean a longer melting season.
Odd thing about glaciers is that there were glaciers on Mt. St. Helens before the 1980 eruption. They had been growing since the last eruption in the 1800's. Strange that they would form when it is impossible.
Whereas blasting was used, it likely wasn't used often as it would exacerbate the possibility of collapse as well as explosion of gases that had accumulated.
Mining of any sort, especially underground, is incredibly dangerous, and any use of children in that process whether it be mining the seam or just carrying buckets was very dangerous. Even if they were just sitting, the hazard from the coal dust alone was enough to be life-threatening.
WaveTossed
Here is a very different and interesting prospective from three marginalized Dalit ("untouchable") women from India. They were enrolled in the conference but burned their badges in protest because they asserted that the voices of the poor and marginalized were not being heard.
So children only had to labor in small spaces underground for a hundred years or so until dynamite took over. Of course, there was a downside; dynamite also led to considerably more destructive weaponry. It was Alfred Nobel's guilt over this that led him to institute the Nobel Peace Prize. He was one capitalist who apparently wasn't particularly proud of what he had brought about.
fundamentalist
Squeaky, There are few places where the temp "hovers" around freezing. Most places on the planet have winter and summer. Even the poles. During winter, temps retreat far below freezing. In the summers they warm up enough for some ice to melt. Since the end of the last ice age, more ice has melted in the summer than reforms in the winter. The real question is what role does industrialization play in that? Apparently, the science demonstrates it is quite small.
Years ago I read a Canadian climatologist who wrote a book on how glaciers form and he wrote that glacial formation requires a very specific type of weather. Normal weather, what we have experienced for thousands of years, won't do it. More snow melts in the summer than forms in the winter. That's largely because the air in winter is too cold to hold enough moisture. Glacial formation requires warm oceans and heavy cloud cover for many years. The warm oceans pump moisture into the atmosphere. Cloud cover reduces the extremes of summer and winter. The summer heat doesn't melt as much snow and the winter air is warm enough to hold lots of moisture but cold enough to snow. And that climate must persist for hundreds of years. The normal summers and winters we have experienced since the last ice age make it impossible for glaciers to form. Much the same could be said of the North and South Poles.
fundamentalist
squeaky, I was thinking about your example of using children in coal mines to work small veins when it occurred to me that the invention of dynamite made that unecessary. Dynamite is just one of many examples where innovation helped reduce the need for child labor.
Big Brother, where art thou? That George Orwell and his pesky prophetic eye to the future. Small wonder privacy issues are gaining more and more importance.
Did you hear about that journalist who tried to "disappear" for a story for the magazine he worked for (can't remember his name or the mag--I think it was a tech mag. I heard the story on NPR). He challenged readers to find him via the electronic trail he left, even though he changed all the info about himself. There was a cash prize. Pretty tough to disappear in this day and age.
BuckeyeDon
I've seen that sentiment in comments on this blog. Go to some of the earlier postings on this topic and you might run across it.
The issue is trust of science and scientists. After all, if they're all godless atheists, how can believers trust them? And since they promote godless evolution--which can't be true because the Bible says the earth was created in six days and all life forms were created by divine fiat--how can believers trust that scientists are telling the truth about climate matters?
And yes, like Squeaky, I was once a creationist, though I had my doubts about a literal six days or a very young earth.
squeaky
Experience, John. Experience. As a scientist, I have seen the attacks on science by some Fundamentalist Christian groups. And I used to be a young earth creationists, so I know of what I speak.
"Many Christians automatically disregard climate science and other science because they don't believe in evolution or that the Earth is older than 6000 years."
How did you come to that conclusion?
Anothernonymous
You're reading a teleological purpose into evolution that is totally foreign to the process. Evolution responds to what is, not what is meant to be. That's why, contrary to what is often asserted, it has no theological implications.
Our theological obligation is to care for God's creation. From a Biblical perspective, that creation culminated in humanity, so preserving humanity's role in it is clearly central to God's purpose.
NC77
We are getting off the subject here. But I heard on CNBC business news (Squawk Box) that some companies are now checking out potential employees blogs and blog comments for consideration if the person fits in the corporate culture. Credit checks are also becoming the norm for employment background checks. The times are a changing.
squeaky
Ahhh. I see. That explains things.
By the way, someone long ago told me the option to reply through e-mail was not great because it somehow gave out more personal info than you might want to give out (such as your e-mail address). I don't know if that is true, or if it is still true. Might be something to be aware of.
SamHamilton
Yes, I am. It's a good exception.
NC77
Yes. Sorry I thought the tool automatically placed the reply in the right place by using the link in the email. My stupid.
NC77
Then why try to stop what is meant to be? Or is it now our obligation to stop the evolutionary process?
