Global Warming

[2dimes]

I haven't seen a polar bear in years.

[Dukasaur]

Bottom line: this topic has been discussed LOTS before today and has been largely ignored in the past several months by most of us who read and post in this Forum.

There's very little left to say. Anyone who wants to have an honest look at the data knows that the earth is warming, and dangerously fast.

Those who live in denial aren't going to change their minds.

But even among those who understand global warming, there are very few who have faced up to the full magnitude of what is to come. We've only seen the tip of the iceberg so far -- a few extra hurricanes, a few more forest fires, a few extra floods. They've mostly been in places where hurricanes or forest fires or floods are already common, so people have been able to say to themselves "it's only slightly worse than a normal hurricane season" or "it's only slightly worse than a normal fire season" or "it's only slightly worse than a normal flood season". I don't think people fathom just how bad it's going to get, and I have little interest in being the Cassandra that tells them so.

[jusplay4fun]

I have been discussing two topics in recent weeks with people in real life. COVID and the vaccines for it is one; I also have recently included global warming in some of that discussion. Here is why.

Tribalism is, essentially, allegiance to a group of people. That tribe has a set of shared values and interests. Polarization is another word having the same general meaning. This country, the USA, is now for many issues in two separate camps or tribes. If you are a member of one such tribe, according to rules of the tribe, YOU MUST BELIEVE the following:

1) Man-made global warming is false, is not caused by man (sun cycles is the latest false explanation), and is not a huge problem or even a real concern.

2) COVD was a virus released by the Chinese Communists to wreck havoc on the world and the USA in particular.

3) The COVID vaccines are unsafe and are part of a vast left wing conspiracy to control the lives of Americans.

4) Wearing masks does nothing to stop the spread of COVID.

5) Trump really won the election in 2020 and LOST THAT ELECTION ONLY because of (UNPROVEN) allegations of WIDESPREAD AND SYSTEMATIC CHEATING AND FRAUD.

SOME members of this tribe INSIST THAT in order to be a member of "Our Tribe" that you must believe all these things or you are NOT REALLY a member of our Tribe.

NOTE that nearly all of these "beliefs" are false or at best, a misrepresentation of the facts.

Of course, members of the other tribe do not believe any of this AND BECAUSE THEY ARE members of the other tribe, never bother to look at the facts and never really examine the issues beyond "My tribe believes in this so it must be true.' They too parrot the party line.

Dialogue in this country involving tribal core beliefs never go beyond yelling. When yelling occurs, no on really listens and no one tries to have a dialogue, a conversation. I lament this lack of civil discourse, this polarization, this lack of unity.

Here is one clear example of how polarization and tribalism are simply bad. What if people objected to the polio vaccine with the same fervor and animosity? We would still have many suffering from polio.

Let me provide one more clear example. In a conversation with a registered nurse whom I have know for many years, she says that even some of her own relatives believe that former President Trump did not get the COVID vaccine and that they should not get the vaccine. A few days later, after that conversation, Trump goes to Alabama for a speech and tells the audience of HIS FOLLOWERS, HIS "Tribesmen and Tribeswomen" to get the COVID vaccine. What is the reaction of many in that audience? They BOO him. Trumps response? Essentially he says that "I respect your personal freedom".....BUT...."GET the Vaccine." (You can hear Trump's exact words in the link below.) That is followed by fewer boos but obvious disagreement. Such is Tribal Politics in the age of Polarization. (I cited this elsewhere in another thread in this Forum, btw.)

[Deanos75]

Hi

Interesting thread. It seems to me that when it comes to world environment, the people of the world are so concerned with treating symptoms and not actually addressing the REAL problem.

Climate change (excessive Co2)
Deforestation
Devastation of our oceans (fishing)
Pollution in all forms
Famines (caused by the need to farm marginal land simply because we need SO MUCH food for the planet)

We spend billions of hours, dollars and effort and no-one is prepared to address the actual problem...it all sheets back to one issue....over-population of our planet....8 billion+ people folks.

Just 100 years ago it was more like 2 Billion. Its a population explosion the planet cannot handle.

The biggest irony is COVID comes along and what do we do...spend trillions more reducing death rates to ensure the population remains overpopulated. We work very hard to make our problem worse.

Now im not saying i would not do the same...all lives are valuable. But it is so ironic is it not?

You can make your wind farms, increase aquaculture, start recycling and ban plastics of all shapes and sizes. Oh and before you know it its 10 billion, then 15...it will not solve anything. Its population folks!

Cheers

Dean

[HitRed]

My greatest creation the human race. I create life to be cherished and protected with love that comes from my Father.

- Jesus

[jusplay4fun]

Hi

Interesting thread. It seems to me that when it comes to world environment, the people of the world are so concerned with treating symptoms and not actually addressing the REAL problem.

Climate change (excessive Co2)
Deforestation
Devastation of our oceans (fishing)
Pollution in all forms
Famines (caused by the need to farm marginal land simply because we need SO MUCH food for the planet)

We spend billions of hours, dollars and effort and no-one is prepared to address the actual problem...it all sheets back to one issue....over-population of our planet....8 billion+ people folks.

Just 100 years ago it was more like 2 Billion. Its a population explosion the planet cannot handle.

The biggest irony is COVID comes along and what do we do...spend trillions more reducing death rates to ensure the population remains overpopulated. We work very hard to make our problem worse.

Now im not saying i would not do the same...all lives are valuable. But it is so ironic is it not?

You can make your wind farms, increase aquaculture, start recycling and ban plastics of all shapes and sizes. Oh and before you know it its 10 billion, then 15...it will not solve anything. Its population folks!

Cheers

Dean

I agree at some point we humans will reach the carrying capacity for our Planet. Where is that limit? Science and Technology keep pushing that UP.

Should we deny vaccines, food, medical treatment, and other resources to the poor in India, Africa, Afghanistan? (pick your favorite or least favorite countries or regions or continent here).

Denial of any and ALL those resources will keep the population under "some" control and many poor will die. Who gets to make THAT decision (or that string of decisions) resulting in millions of deaths? Many born into poverty in the world DIED due to lack of clean water. What a miserable way to die, as if there is a GOOD way to die. BUT that kind of death is preventable. Pedialyte and Gator-Ade can prevent many infant deaths due to dehydration due to bad water and the resulting diarrhea. So does CLEAN drinking water.

What you are arguing Deanos, is the Malthusian idea of "too many mouths to feed" will result in death of many. Malthus, who started the "DISMAL Science" of Economics made such predictions. He said (in the late 1700's, as I recall) that food will only increase arithmetically while population grows geometrically and thus a food shortage will limit population. Did that occur? NO, not in the time after he wrote. Why? Simply put, farming became more efficient. Fertilizers and good breeding (The "Green Revolution") and better soil and resource management allowed fewer farmers to grow crops and animals more efficiently so that most of us no longer live as subsistence farmers, especially in the developed countries. I think that stats are close to 3 US farmers (or fewer) per 100 in the US grows enough food to feed ALL of the USA and much of the rest of the world, TOO. Those huge John Deere tractors and combines and farmers really are THAT efficient.

Who Is Thomas Malthus?
Thomas Robert Malthus was a famous 18th-century British economist known for the population growth philosophies outlined in his 1798 book "An Essay on the Principle of Population." In it, Malthus theorized that populations would continue expanding until growth is stopped or reversed by disease, famine, war, or calamity. He is also known for developing an exponential formula used to forecast population growth, which is currently known as the Malthusian growth model.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
Thomas Malthus was an 18th-century British philosopher and economist noted for the Malthusian growth model, an exponential formula used to project population growth.
The theory states that food production will not be able to keep up with growth in the human population, resulting in disease, famine, war, and calamity.
A noted statistician and proponent of political economy, Malthus founded the Statistical Society of London.

Understanding the Ideas of Thomas Malthus
In the 18th and early 19th centuries, philosophers broadly believed that humanity would continue growing and tilting toward utopianism. Malthus countered this belief, arguing that segments of the general population have always been invariably poor and miserable, which effectively slowed population growth.

After observing conditions in England in the early 1800s, Malthus penned "An Inquiry into the Nature and Progress of Rent" (1815) and "Principles of Political Economy" (1820), in which he argued that the available farmland was insufficient to feed the increasing world population. Malthus specifically stated that the human population increases geometrically, while food production increases arithmetically. Under this paradigm, humans would eventually be unable to produce enough food to sustain themselves.

This theory was criticized by economists and ultimately disproved. Even as the human population continues to increase, technological developments and migration have ensured that the percentage of people living below the poverty line continues to decline. In addition, global interconnectedness stimulates the flow of aid from food-rich nations to developing regions.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/thomas-malthus.asp

I know I typed much of this somewhere in another thread; perhaps I will look later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution

[quote]The Green Revolution, or the Third Agricultural Revolution, is the set of research technology transfer initiatives occurring between 1950 and the late 1960s, that increased agricultural production in parts of the world, beginning most markedly in the late 1960s.[1] The initiatives resulted in the adoption of new technologies, including high-yielding varieties (HYVs) of cereals, especially dwarf wheat and rice. It was associated with chemical fertilizers, agrochemicals, and controlled water-supply (usually involving irrigation) and newer methods of cultivation, including mechanization. All of these together were seen as a 'package of practices' to supersede 'traditional' technology and to be adopted as a whole.[2] The key elements of the revolution include: 1) Use of the latest technological and capital inputs, 2) adoption of modern scientific methods of farming, 3) use of high yielding varieties of seeds, 4) proper use of chemical fertilizers, 5) consolidation of land holdings, 6) Use of various mechanical machineries. Both the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation were heavily involved in its initial development in Mexico.[3][4] One key leader was agricultural scientist Norman Borlaug, the "Father of the Green Revolution", who received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. He is credited with saving over a billion people from starvation. The basic approach was the development of high-yielding varieties of cereal grains, expansion of irrigation infrastructure, modernization of management techniques, distribution of hybridized seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and pesticides to farmers. As the development of new cereal varieties through selective breeding reached their limits, some agricultural scientists turned to the creation of new strains that did not exist in nature, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), a phenomenon sometimes called the Gene Revolution.[5]

Studies show that the Green Revolution contributed to widespread eradication of poverty, averted hunger for millions, raised incomes, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, reduced land use for agriculture, and contributed to declines in infant mortality.[/quote]

[jusplay4fun]

Please see my comments here on Malthus; others had good insights, too, in this thread.

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=235686&p=5207576&hilit=Malthus#p5207576

Re: One year ago, March 2020
Postby jusplay4fun on Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:18 pm

To keep this relatively simple, (i.e., without me doing LOTS of research to document and validate my recollection):

Malthus, an British economist, predicted widespread famine and disease would keep populations low. That did not occur. Why?

1) better medicine and health care; fewer deaths, especially of children.

2) better food production, especially by use of machinery and fertilizers, especially chemical fertilizers.

As someone with a bit knowledgeable of Chemistry, let me assert that the ability to take nitrogen out of the atmosphere and convert to ammonia and other forms of nitrogen accessible to most green plants is the key advancement. I think the Haber process converts H2 and N2 into NH3 as the starting point for this chemical process. I know that this reaction is studied extensively as a chemical reaction, especially as a Reaction Rate and Equilibrium case study. (The conditions to shift the Equilibrium to the ammonia, NH3, side is something studied in intro Chem courses; see Le Chatelier's Principle; also, read about the Haber chemical reaction if you want the in-depth Chemistry.)
Also see:
https://www.ias.ac.in/public/Volumes/reso/016/12/1159-1167.pdf

As far as medical care, one of the most important things that has kept babies alive is to provide CLEAN drinking water. This began in the USA in New Jersey around 1905-1910; the exact year escapes me. A similar effort was going on in Britain about the same time. Use of chlorine bleach (in the form of hypochlorite) to treat drinking water (and kill harmful bacteria) cut the death rate of babies by some 90% within one year of the start of use of this water treatment, again based on my memory of reading on this topic. I may have a few facts and # off, but the narrative is essentially valid.

Later there has been the GREEN Revolution of the 1970s with better seeds. Rice I think was key crop improved at that time. Now we have GMO seeds (that is a bit controversial, I know).

Of course, better sanitation and simple things like doctors washing their hands made a huge difference in cutting death rates. Use of anti-biotics came along later.

I know that the population of the world over is growing. The Population increase in the developed world has essentially stopped (or slowed significantly). China had its ONE CHILD only policy now for some time (since the 1960s or so; not sure??) and that is having a huge impact there. And Russia had a decrease in life expectancy awhile back; I have not looked at those stats in a while. Africa and India, to me, are the key areas to look at. China is beginning relax its One Child policy, and with so many Chinese, that can have a HUGE impact.

So, there are many factors to consider. Yes, the earth PERHAPS is getting near its limit to sustain human population. The next huge limiting factor may soon be CLEAN water to drink and irrigate crops. The shrinking glaciers in the Himalayas may drastically cut fresh clean water to India and Pakistan. The Sahara Desert is spreading south and will limit crops and livestock in Central Africa. Those are most of the trends that I know about, based on what I read from several and varied sources. A this point, I will not raise the specter of the possible impacts of Global Warming on many of these interconnected issues, beyond this cursory statement.

I did research this portion, now that I essentially finished this essay:

In 1798 Thomas Robert Malthus famously predicted that short-term gains in living standards would inevitably be undermined as human population growth outstripped food production, and thereby drive living standards back toward subsistence. We were, he argued, condemned by the tendency of population to grow geometrically while food production would increase only arithmetically.

[url]https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-malthus-predicted-1798-food-shortages/#:~:text=In%201798%20Thomas%20Robert%20Malthus,living%20standards%20back%20toward%20subsistence.
[/url]

[jusplay4fun]

I said, earlier THIS year:

Certainly Malthus and his contemporaries had no idea that The PILL, the Haber Process, machinery, and better seeds (and much higher yields of crops) would radically change things, causing his projection of arithmetic growth of agricultural production to be fundamentally wrong. Birth Control Pills obviously change the population growth rates and thus render his projection of population growth to be fundamentally flawed.

Malthus' projection is why economics is often called (then) the DISMAL Science.

We may be approaching the upper limit of the total number of humans that this planet can support, but the Goalposts are NOT FIXED. Sciences (as well as technology and medicine) change the ability of human to cope with and handle the challenges of the future.

What is that LIMIT and when do we get there? Stayed tuned to find out. I had some more information on that matter at that other Forum Thread.

[Maxleod]

I agree at some point we humans will reach the carrying capacity for our Planet. Where is that limit? Science and Technology keep pushing that UP.

We've already gone too far.

https://www.theworldcounts.com/challenges/planet-earth/state-of-the-planet/overuse-of-resources-on-earth/story

The Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago and modern humans have existed for about 315,000 years. According to a study by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), more than a third of Earth’s natural resources have been destroyed by humans in just thirty years.

[Dukasaur]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/09/earths-tipping-points-closer-current-climate-plans-wont-work-global-heating

Earth’s tipping points could be closer than we think. Our current plans won’t work
George Monbiot


If there’s one thing we know about climate breakdown, it’s that it will not be linear, smooth or gradual. Just as one continental plate might push beneath another in sudden fits and starts, causing periodic earthquakes and tsunamis, our atmospheric systems will absorb the stress for a while, then suddenly shift. Yet, everywhere, the programmes designed to avert it are linear, smooth and gradual.

Current plans to avoid catastrophe would work in a simple system like a washbasin, in which you can close the tap until the inflow is less than the outflow. But they are less likely to work in complex systems, such as the atmosphere, oceans and biosphere. Complex systems seek equilibrium. When they are pushed too far out of one equilibrium state, they can flip suddenly into another. A common property of complex systems is that it’s much easier to push them past a tipping point than to push them back. Once a transition has happened, it cannot realistically be reversed.

The old assumption that the Earth’s tipping points are a long way off is beginning to look unsafe. A recent paper warns that the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation – the system that distributes heat around the world and drives the Gulf Stream – may now be “close to a critical transition”. This circulation has flipped between “on” and “off” states several times in prehistory, plunging northern Europe and eastern North America into unbearable cold, heating the tropics, disrupting monsoons.

Other systems could also be approaching their thresholds: the West and East Antarctic ice sheets, the Amazon rainforest, and the Arctic tundra and boreal forests, which are rapidly losing the carbon they store, driving a spiral of further heating. Earth systems don’t stay in their boxes. If one flips into a different state, it could trigger the flipping of others. Sudden changes of state might be possible with just 1.5C or 2C of global heating.

A common sign that complex systems are approaching tipping points is rising volatility: they start to flicker. The extreme weather in 2021 – the heat domes, droughts, fires, floods and cyclones – is, frankly, terrifying. If Earth systems tip as a result of global heating, there will be little difference between taking inadequate action and taking no action at all. A miss is as good as a mile.

So the target that much of the world is now adopting for climate action – net zero by 2050 – begins to look neither rational nor safe. It’s true that our only hope of avoiding catastrophic climate breakdown is some variety of net zero. What this means is that greenhouse gases are reduced through a combination of decarbonising the economy and drawing down carbon dioxide that’s already in the atmosphere. It’s too late to hit the temperature targets in the Paris agreement without doing both. But there are two issues: speed and integrity. Many of the promises seem designed to be broken.

At its worst, net zero by 2050 is a device for shunting responsibility across both time and space. Those in power today seek to pass their liabilities to those in power tomorrow. Every industry seeks to pass the buck to another industry. Who is this magical someone else who will suck up their greenhouse gases?

[jusplay4fun]

There is recognition in some Christian circles of the environmental impact of Humans and their impact on the environment. I will quote relevant portions here:

https://www.baylor.edu/ifl/christianreflection/CreationarticleButkus.pdf
(2002 article)

The earth and its natural systems are in serious jeopardy.
Ecologists and other environmental scientists indicate that the earth’s ecosphere, the parts of it where creatures can live, is at risk from:
! The reality of global warming and the very real specter of global climate change and its consequences for disrupting natural and social
systems;
! Continued deterioration of stratospheric ozone and its resulting impact on human and planetary health;
! Deforestation, particularly of tropical rain forests, and the consequential collapse of biodiversity;
! Pollution of earth’s systems (land, water, and air) through the creation of toxic, nuclear, and hazardous waste with the resulting
accumulation of these in living organisms;
! Burgeoning human population growth, currently at 6.2 billion and
possibly headed toward a cap of around 10 billion by 2050;
! Continuing depletion of natural resources through over-harvesting
and over-consumption;


The environmental crisis is self-evident to anyone who is willing to
engage the overwhelming scientific evidence. But what should we as
Christians make of this scenario? Environmental degradation resulting
from our activities is one of the major “signs of the times” (Matthew 16:3)
that requires Christians to take stock and respond. Further, this crisis,
which from a scientific view is a crisis of nature, is an opportunity for us
whose lives are shaped by biblical faith to rediscover nature as creation.
1

THE STEWARDSHIP OF CREATION IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
Our notion of stewardship comes from biblical creation theology, distributed throughout the Bible but most visible in Genesis, the Psalms, and
the Wisdom literature of ancient Israel. This body of theology, as it receives renewed attention by biblical scholars, has important implications
in our attempt to interpret and respond to the environmental crisis. “The
recovery of creation as the horizon of biblical theology encourages us to
contribute to the resolution of the ecological crisis,” writes Old Testament
scholar Walter Brueggemann. “New investigations in creation faith and
its complement, wisdom theology, suggest that the environment is to be
understood as a delicate, fragile system of interrelated parts that is maintained and enhanced by the recognition of limits and givens and by the
judicious exercise of choices.”4

Here are the salient features of biblical creation theology:
! The entire created order has its origins in the sovereign, creative and
sustaining power of God.

Within the terrain of this theology, stewardship points to the purpose and
role of humanity in creation. A beautiful example of this is in Psalm 8, a
hymn of praise that links God’s self-disclosure in creation with our vocation. Why do human beings exist, and what is our role? The psalmist
answers by appealing to the royal model of stewardship (8:5-8).
The Bible contains twenty-six explicit references to the steward or
stewardship. In the Old Testament the term is used in a technical fashion
to denote a specific office or a vocation in society. According to Douglas
Hall, “the steward is one who has been given the responsibility for the
management and service of something belonging to another, and his office
presupposes a particular kind of trust on the part of the owner or master.”5
The term became linked with Israel’s king, who ruled the chosen people as
God’s steward and so was accountable to God. This royal interpretation of
stewardship helps us to understand the first chapter of Genesis.

The biblical text that most shapes—and perhaps clouds—our interpretation of stewardship is the controversial and widely misunderstood Genesis
1:26-28. This passage, part of the account of creation that scholars attribute
to Israel’s priests, must be read against the backdrop of ancient Israel’s attitude toward kingship. It says that humans, created in the image (selem)
and likeness (demut) of God, are to subdue (kabash) and have dominion (radah) over the earth.

[riskllama]

and their solution is what? pray harder???

[HitRed]

My anger shows in the weather. I let my anger be known in ways humans have called other things such as climate change. They do this to push me off again and choose to ignore my warnings.

I warn, but many do not listen or take heed of my warning. The weather is a good example of my warning. Many things are happening in the weather that many ignore and call it something else to suit them.

There is more to come if people do not return to my laws and commands. The storms will worsen and become more and more dangerous.

There are mistakes made when I am taken out of the equation. Leaving God out will always mean disaster for whatever man does.

[jusplay4fun]

Try to use your brain and actually read before offering a flippant remark. I would bet that you, llama, failed to read any of the article past the first line.

There is more to Christian philosophy than prayer. There is actually some thought and reflection inherent in such essays.

And there is more to Christianity than voices in one head.

[riskllama]

got it. so, thoughts & prayers then - should work just fine...

[jusplay4fun]

got it. so, thoughts & prayers then - should work just fine...

at least they work better than flippant & trivial remarks, and shrugs, too

on second thought, they work MUCH better

[Deanos75]

Hi All,

Wow i started a conversation....

You are a passionate mob. Great to see so many Christians on here too. As soon as you talk about the value of life or being stewards of our environment out we come in force (I am a Christian too)

It was a lot too read so i only got through about half. But i appreciate the conversation.

Just for the record my musing was not suggesting we stand by and watch people die when we can prevent it - withholding medical care. You don't reduce the population by not caring for people. Its the opposite. You reduce the population by caring for people (and all that comes with actually caring - education, relief of poverty, healthcare, accomodation etc).


What I mean is...

The biggest population problem is probably actually birth rates not death rates. In the third world. 1st world birth rates are well under control (i think happy to be corrected). In my country i think almost all population increase can be put down to migration (and any residual natural increase would be easily dealt with by tech advancements so not a problem rate of increase)

Because we don't care for others in this world...they have 5+ kids as it protects them in old age. If you live in a third world country and there is no social security having many living children to care for you in old age are your social security. Children are your social security.

We reap what we sow. We dont care for others....they protect themselves by popping out kids (the insurance policy) and here we are.

Cheers

Dean

PS On a side note there is a whole argument about giving medical care and spending billions and billions annually to improve medical standards (for example cancer research) - money which essentially prolongs the lives of the wealthy with barely a trickle to the third world truly poor. While third world don't have electricity or clean drinking water or sufficient food and shelter and those billions could have solved that. That might be interpreted as 'selfish largesse' not 'caring for people'. But other than leave you with that thought to argue over i wont go there....

[mookiemcgee]

got it. so, thoughts & prayers then - should work just fine...

Yeah basically... The climate is warming because we allow homosexuals to be married, abortion is legal, and because we wouldn't let Trump have the second term he deserved. Nothing at all to do with humans destroying forest and burning fossil fuels. So all we can really do is pray... that Trump can overthrow the gov't.

[HitRed]

My power is shown in the strength and power of the weather here on earth. No one can match the strength of a storm. I the Lord create all even the storms that threaten and do damage. My force is like like no other in the universe. Come to me the one who creates such things. I am King and Lord of all the earth. Nothing compares to me in greatness or splendor. I am the Lord Almighty maker of Heaven and earth of all things glorious and wondrous. Everything is subjected under me - all control is mine.

- Jesus

[HitRed]

I control the weather and all it does to the earth. My reign as King has not ended because of man’s ignorance of the power of God and all His forms. The winds obey me and the oceans too obey me but man refuses to obey me, even with warnings that I give man still refuses to obey me. My wrath will be unleashed if man does not recognize my power and strength to bring fear to those who disobey me and flaunt their evil ways to suit themselves and their agendas that are not mine.

- Jesus

[HitRed]

I warn, but many do not listen or take heed of my warning. The weather is a good example of my warning. Many things are happening in the weather that many ignore and call it something else to suit them.

- Jesus

[mookiemcgee]

I warn, but many do not listen or take heed of my warning. Give away your gold and your guns, they will not help you enter my kingdom. Champion the preservation of the great forests I created for you and many of my other beautiful creations. Help preserve my carefully balanced ecosystem, turn away from those who claim I care about petty things like USA politics. I have created a world than can be paradise as long as you my people steward it with respect.

- Jesus

[HitRed]

God is not mocked.

- Jesus