I think most Mormons have been pretty dismissive of the scientific evidence for global climate change. It doesn't fit with their perception of Nature or of Man's role in it, and long-term change can be so slow and gradual that the average person has been able to brush it off.

The record breaking weather of the last year, the prolonged drought, the failure of food crops, and the expanding ranges of hurricanes and tornadoes may make continued denial of climate change hard for all but the most obstinate.

If Mormons have to concede that they were wrong about climate change, might it make them ask about what else might be wrong with their understanding of the world? Or at least ask why their Prophets, Seers, and Revelators didn’t clue them in on the greatest environmental shift since the end of the last Ice Age? After all, Noah got fair warning.

Why should mormons change their minds because of facts? If they still believe the church is true, then facts don't matter.

The most damning evidence against the church is academic in nature, which is abstract and easier for many people to discount or explain away. Bad personal experiences that lead to apostacy are blamed on the victim. In contrast, weather is there, impartial and in your face, directly and individually experienced, and cannot be explained away as having an inherent anti-mormon agenda.

contributed to man.

your man made climate changers are similar to tbm s.

its a religion with little fact to back it up.

there's your answer right there. There's overwhelming evidence for it yet here's your denier. There still exists an academic component to seeing the role of human activity in CC.

A TBM could get weather in his face and even use it to prove biblical prophecies true.

There used to be a speech posted online, from a fireside, by a GA. I just can't find it these days, so this report is useless as I have no reference to back it up.

The GA warned the listeners not to be concerned about environmental issues (this was pre-climate-change concerns) because the world was very soon to be "renewed" and returned to its paradisical glory. The young people were told that worrying about the earth was foolish - the real concern was building up the kingdom.

If anyone knows of, or comes across such a speech from a fireside, I would appreciate a link. I remember being impressed with how bad the advice was when I came across it while looking for something else, but I just can't find it again.

Never underestimate the mormon ability to compartmentalize.

Even if they did concede the climate change point, I don't think this would cause a domino effect of doubt.

Notice how the name morphed from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change"? Now, any percieved extreme weather can be blamed on man.

"Climate change" is a more accurate term because the models predicting the changes brought about by increased CO2 show some areas, such as northern Europe, will have much colder weather.

I don't understand the reluctance to accept human activity as a factor modifying the world's weather. The link to consumption of fossil fuels and global increases in CO2 is pretty clear. The ban on air traffic after 9/11 proved a direct and immediate change on weather. Accepting human activity as a world changing force seems to be the catch for most evangelical Christians and Mormons. Ironic, because they believe that human behavior certainly modifies the eternal, universal, spiritual world.

The great thing about the change, as I pointed out, is that it is in-your-face real. People can raise all manner of distracting points to say this isn't the case (a la BOM apologists), but as weather records fall again and again, dearly held beliefs are going to be reconsidered.

Nobody "changed" the term from GW to CC. Those things are different and exist independently. GW is to CC what HIV is to AIDS. Nobody "changed" the term from HIV to AIDS.

Please try to not do name calling. It is analogous to a TBM calling me a "Korihor" instead of discussing something.

What do you think of the name change I mentioned? Ad hominem in your reply is not useful.

Here's some data from the NSIDC, taken today:

Sea Ice Trend, 1979-2008
Arctic: Decrease of 4.1% (~500,000 km2; 193,000 mi2) per decade
Antarctic: Increase of 0.9% (~100,000 km2; 42,000 mi2) per decade

We all know artic sea ice is in a declining trend. Did you know antarctic sea ice is in an increasing trend? See how "global warming" isn't useful but "global climate change" is?

Try to stick to the topic.

hk112358 Wrote:
----------------------------------------------------
> Did you know antarctic sea ice is in an increasing
> trend?

AND according to the NSIDC source cited even though it is, it still supports the idea of global warming because to compare Arctic and Antarctic ice equally is an apples to oranges comparison because ...

"Antarctica and the Arctic are reacting differently to climate change partly because of geographical differences. Antarctica is a continent surrounded by water, while the Arctic is an ocean surrounded by land. Wind and ocean currents around Antarctica isolate the continent from global weather patterns, keeping it cold. In contrast, the Arctic Ocean is intimately linked with the climate systems around it, making it more sensitive to changes in climate." http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/seaice.html

"Sea ice near the Antarctic Peninsula, south of the tip of South America, has recently experienced a SIGNIFICANT DECLINE. The rest of Antarctica has experienced a SMALL INCREASE in Antarctic sea ice." http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/seaice.html (emphasis via CAPs is mine)

To cite the ice measurements in isolation is, in my opinion, akin to a Mormon, to show how Joseph was only concerned with others, citing the JS quote that (paraphrasing since I don't have it handy right now) man's purpose is to be happy. However the Mormon citing that quote leaves out or ignores the 'rest of the story' about Nancy Rigdon and the rejected polygamous proposal either because the Mormon doesn't know about the rest of the story or chooses to cherry pick to support their view.

And, of course to answer the OP, that's what any TBM will do about climate change or anything else that might undermine their faith, they'll just find a statistic, measurement, or statement or two that can be interpreted to support their belief and ignore or rationalize away the rest with the knowledge that everyone, even the scientists make mistakes so that they can feel confident that their interpretation is right, even if the consensus elsewhere is different.

Good point, and I'm glad you brought this up because I have been thinking about this topic.

My father (a TBM) seems to dismiss global warming, However, he does acknowledge that the climate is changing (i.e. Earth is heating up). I assume he dismisses the idea that humans are the culprits of the climate change (and maybe they are, I don't know). And this is strange to me because he is a very intelligent person (he has civil, structural, and a mechanical engineering degrees) and is very scientific in his thinking and approach with problems in life. Yet he doesn't seem to use his critical/scientific thinking skills for climate change. From what I can gather, he has made up his mind and tries to find evidence to support his "conclusion", rather than gather data and come to a conclusion based on the available results. For example, he likes to tout a discovery to people who argue for global warming by pointing out "Then why is part of the Antarctic increasing in size and not melting?" - I don't know how accurate his statement is, but he holds onto it like it is his ace in the hole.

This is mind boggling to me because I don't know why he wants to dismiss the idea that people could potentially be a factor in climate change (I'm not advocating one way or the other on human factors for climate change - for me, the verdict is still out). I don't know if that goes against some Mormon belief or what, but I can't wrap my mind around his approach to this problem. And my limited observation of other religious Christian groups is that climate change being partially caused by humans is just a farce.

Why does this idea of humans being factors in climate change come across as so offensive to religious groups? Does this challenge their religious belief in some way? Can a true believing Christian/TBM believe in humans being factors in climate change, or would that jeopardize their standing in their church? I seriously would like to know. Is this similar to the idea that you can't be a good standing Mormon and be a Democrat?

Reasons why people may not want to accept that humans are changing the climate:

1. That makes them part of the problem. Life is hard enough for most people without having to worry about something on this scale for which they have no response or hope of fixing. Better to just deny it.

2. A big problem means big solutions which means big organizations. Americans seem determined to dismantle the laws and institutions that have been holding this large ountry together, and are not going to be keen on having to raise money (i.e. taxes),and work together, probably on an international scale (brings out the xenophobics), to fix this. Better to deny the probelm.

3. God made the world, just like it is. Science is dangerous, probably evil. Evolution doesn't happen. The world runs according to God's rules, and humans don't have that kind of power to change the climate. Deny it.

Thanks for your input. Your list made me think of a quote in a book I am reading at the moment.

"Most men would deny a hard truth than accept it." - A Game of Thrones

I guess it's true what they say, it is in the paths of least resistance that men and rivers go cr ooked. And in this case, denying a potential truth is much easier than adjusting our current way of life.

NOTE/EDIT: Apparently the word "c r o o k e d" is a banned word. Why????? That's why I left the space between the 'r' and the 'o'.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2012 12:13PM by waner.

Your data seems to be about five years out of date. That was true about five years ago ... But not anymore.

Per NOAA there was the "cool" La Nina event of the late 90s that persisted into the early 2000s, but then global Temps started climbing again with the result that "The calendar Decade of 2000-2009 Was the warmest of the last five decades."
http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/bams-sotc/2009/bams-sotc-2009-chapter2-global-climate-lo-rez.pdf. Page s28

Edited to correct link



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2012 01:18PM by Scott.T.

waner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For example, he likes to tout a discovery to people
> who argue for global warming by pointing out "Then
> why is part of the Antarctic increasing in size
> and not melting?" - I don't know how accurate his
> statement is, but he holds onto it like it is his
> ace in the hole.

See the above link and quote from the NSIDC. Long story short ... It's because Antarctica is a continent and the Arctic is an ocean.

Thanks for that. I am not one to "stir the pot", if you will, with people. If it's brought up in future conversations, I will direct them to the link you posted.

I find that interesting. But it seems most Mormons are ok with medication (which is typically made with the use of science) and don't seem to have too much a of a problem with other sciences, such as technology - they do broadcast GC on TV's across the world. I'm sure most Mormons don't have hang-ups with cars or airplanes. So why is the branch of science that deals with climate change being vilified?

Take medicine for instance. Mormons are the first to rip on modern medicine and are huge into "alternative" medicine and constantly scoff at claims made by modern science. I actually had a guy at my office try to sell me a $40 bottle of water (one of those psycho nutcase MLMs so popular here in Utah). And do you remember the wacko claims made about child innoculations and autism? Thouroughly proven false but mormons were into it in a big way.

Also, look at the church's absurd stance on evolution or their big-time bad-mouthing of the internet.

Mormon's acceptance of the little science they do accept is only when they are forced in to it.

I would also like to add, based on my observations, Mormons also seem to accept science when it is in their favor. Picking and choosing, anyone?

Climate always changes. Always had. Parts of Australia have had record cold winters as we are taxed into the stone age by misanthropic Fabian greens in order to stop global warming - I mean "climate change" as we are calling it now. Even the IPCC doesn't want us to call it warming anymore.

Some of the biggest supporters - WWF who get funding from big oil. Government klingons whose entire job depends on perpetuating the lie that we can stop natural climate variation. The IPCC, universities who block debate, the ubanks, wall street. Who pays? The poor. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and while green supporters have their heads up their asses, big business continues to dump real pollution like endocrine disruptors into the environment of the third world.

New Zealand's climate change dept are being sued for using figures where early temps were lowered to make it look like it's warming now. This fraud is happening worldwide. If warming is happening, why the need to lie consistently about it and make up bogus figures? If it's our fault, why do universities -supposed places of learning- ban open debate and certain speakers?

This us a scam almost as big as religion, in fact it become a religion. It's cult faith with good spin, media control, and a class of people on the take willing to lie and kill off the scientific method in order to keep the paychecks coming.

I tend to agree, ozpoof. There has been way too much propaganda and outright fraud in the "AGW" movement. Their models have failed, their predicted trends have not been as steep as projected.

The earth is always changing, the climate is dynamic and there are many things that science does not yet understand about the mechanisms involved. Publishing cooked data and flawed models doesn't help.

If the sun has a mild case of indigestion, we're all toast anyway...

MarkJ ( ) Something to consider in regards to Weather manipulation http://youtu.be/Y-VMfzO94M0

Thanks MarkJ for raising a real issue, something with a little more heft than another thread about getting offended by some morgbot at the grocery store.

Thanks also for providing the opportunity to expose how little 'recovery' from mormonism is sometimes found on this board of so-called recovery from mormonism. Some of the above responses are about as mormonish as you can get.

What is more mormon than dismissing the evidence that threatens somebody's precious little testimony based on willful ignorance? To pretend that what 99% of the scientists whose work everyday documents the reality of climate change is false, misguided, propaganda, suspicious is like the morgbots who come up with all kinds of crazy shit to still believe in Lamanites and dismiss DNA evidence and archeology. Why not head back to church today and start sucking down the coolaid again?

Some ex-mo "AGW" skeptics may be skeptical of bandwagon AGW propaganda, precisely because they are recovering from Moism, and will no longer blindly follow "authority" (IPCC) just because they claim authority.

And when there is evidence of cooked and spun data (IPCC), ala Joe Smith and his LDSInc. descendants, they will likely be even more skeptical.

climate change ???? Are you talking about human caused global warming ?