Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:02 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 912
Quote:
This reference is amazing. it is all about pressure and density. What are the laws of physics here? Is global warming of the air (gases) contributing to the pressure of continental masses? It seems unlikely. It looks to me as though land masses are continuously sliding down into the sea.

(668.9) 58:5.7 The weight of the oceans is also a factor in the increase of pressure on the sea beds. The lower but comparatively heavier ocean beds, plus the weight of the overlying water, approximate the weight of the higher but much lighter continents. But all continents tend to creep into the oceans. The continental pressure at ocean-bottom levels is about 20,000 pounds to the square inch. That is, this would be the pressure of a continental mass standing 15,000 feet above the ocean floor. The ocean-floor water pressure is only about 5,000 pounds to the square inch. These differential pressures tend to cause the continents to slide toward the ocean beds.



the tendency of continents to creep into the oceans doesn't have anything to do with the topic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 636
Makalu wrote:
the tendency of continents to creep into the oceans doesn't have anything to do with the topic


If it appears that oceans are rising onto land but in fact it is actually land falling into oceans, then it has everything to do with the topic. It's all about the perspective.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 892
katroofjebus wrote:
Makalu wrote:
the tendency of continents to creep into the oceans doesn't have anything to do with the topic


If it appears that oceans are rising onto land but in fact it is actually land falling into oceans, then it has everything to do with the topic. It's all about the perspective.


Kat, your attempts to build a case for climate change being a natural phenomenon is unnecessary. I think most climate change scientists agree that *both* are responsible. Natural climate change is *accelerated* and *exacerbated* and *on steroids* because of the industrial age/ human actions. These human actions were not borne of ill intent toward the environment. These actions were entirely rationalized and justifiable in terms of growth of economies and opportunities for people. The thing is, our eyes have been opened, as a civilization, to the potential disastrous (while inadvertent) results of these economic choices. Therefore, we need to act to reduce those harmful outcomes.

In other words, to be good stewards. When we know better, we do better. We were ignorant of these potential problems when we created them, but ignorance is no longer an excuse.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 912
katroofjebus wrote:
Makalu wrote:
the tendency of continents to creep into the oceans doesn't have anything to do with the topic


If it appears that oceans are rising onto land but in fact it is actually land falling into oceans, then it has everything to do with the topic. It's all about the perspective.


well this wouldn't be the process you want then...look for the bit in the papers about the 100,000 year subsidence cycle. It's very hard to tell ocean rising from land subsiding in the geologic record but today we have the geostationary gps satellites to measure with/from. btw the physics and papers says that cycle and tectonic activity in general will tend towards stabilization.

also we aren't seeing continental wide changes in sea level...it's localized. and regardless when we know ice caps and glaciers have melted we know that causes a rise in sea water.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3560
In support of Kat's point and perspective (or such is my intention), it should be noted that I also believe, as many others do, that the planet is a system that is interdependent and inter-responsive and its a system that seeks equilibriums and seeks norms and medians or the pendulum's bottom center. All momentum to either side of equilibrium triggers counter effects which help regain equilibrium. The extremes of the pendulum's swing are the deviations from the norm that establish the average and median and norm.

I think material worlds in time and space, especially inhabited ones perhaps, slowly reduce the extremes and the range of these measurable degrees of difference and change from the norm and average and the rate of change itself may also and similarly stabilize over time. I'm sure I remember the UB clearly saying that the material universes of time are thusly stabilizing and each solar system and each planet of each solar system likewise experiences a stabilization over time.

That's why I say the planetary environment and the planet itself is 'like' an organism. I understand, thank you Stephen, that it is not a living, breathing, mindful organism. But it is created and managed intelligently to have built in equilibrium seeking relationships and we know ALL of EVERYTHING is intelligently managed and ruled and can be manipulated by its creators using the laws of its creation as the tools of evolutionary development and progress and stablization.

I too have read in modern science this idea/theory/fact that the ocean floors respond to the weight of the ocean waters and that a foot of rise in ocean levels lead to a responding lowering of the ocean floors to compensate for the additional weight and pressure. We know that ocean levels rise AND fall. We know that such changes take long time frames....or sudden submerges (I find the submergence phenomena particularly interesting considering Kat's posts on that topic - consider the Garden).

The atmosphere has many similar compensatory responses. And on a smaller scale, consider that clear cutting rain forest to grow pasture for livestock not only feeds the population but grass consumes more co2 than trees and makes more oxygen....so deforestation is not, automatically, destroying oxygenation or adding to carbon levels. But what about the desertification of the Sahara? What was its effect? Profound I think and far, far away, like the Steppes aridity may have resulted from the African event.

This is why we must be careful...and scientific....in our own responses and cures for what we believe ails the planet. Unintended consequences and planetary reactions to ALL inputs and influences are very real and potentially painful and dangerous.

Perhaps we should simply learn to stop poisoning the planet's air and water and leave Mother Earth to her own devices??!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 636
It is written that nature is disfigured in part by misthinking creatures. It's easy to identify the misthinking that occurred in the past, but not as easy in the present. Before diving wholeheartedly into a remedy for what appears to be a looming man-made or man-contributed natural disaster, it's vital to recognize that it is possible to also be a form of "misthinking". Only time will tell, but one must be willing to accept the possibility. The road to hell is paved by good intentions, as they say. Wisdom is paramount and knowledge of facts are contributory to wisdom. Appeal to the emotions often awakens the mind to find wisdom, but not always. Acting on emotion alone we know can be perilous. As Jesus once said to his apostles: “May your wisdom equal your zeal and your courage atone for your ignorance.” We do not know our own ignorance but we should have the courage to face the fact that it exists.

If climate change is dependent upon just three factors, then mankind should strive to know all the facts it can possibly know about those three factors. The local conditions which contribute to air quality and weather phenomenon are much easier to comprehend and therefore much more conducive to human control. It took us a while to understand what caused the massive dust storms in the midwest last century and the misthinking of that era was corrected because it was, for the most part, a local phenomenon. It took a century for London to realize that coal fires were the cause of poor local conditions before they corrected that misthinking. What's to say that misthinking people today in their zealous attempt to decrease the entire planet's temperature aren't actually contributing to new local problems that won't become evident for decades? I don't think that possibility should be ignored. There's just too much we don't now and computer algorithms cannot provide a guaranteed cause or solution to those things we do not yet fully understand.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 892
I would love to hear from Kat about the harmful impacts of misthinking (if such it may be, which I agree, is always a possibility) of a society that chooses to do all or some of the following.

    driving a low emission vehicle
    reduce single-use plastics
    reduce energy consumption in the home
    grow a vegetable garden
    plant trees
    encourage your region or community to make a gradual transition from coal to renewable energy and help the regional workforce train for these cleaner energy industries.

These are all positive, healthy steps that many environmentalists advocate and have good impacts whether or not climate change was occurring.

Some of the things that are being considered by some of our US politicians are more drastic and may, indeed, create harmful imapcts down the road, I don't know. But, again, it is very unlikely those radical ideas will ever gain public buy-in. It may be that some politicians are deliberately being over the top because they know it will generate press coverage (there's no such thing as bad press) and thereby gain the public's attention since the public tends to be more interested in other things.

Kat, would you prefer we ignore the severe weather events and air pollution we are seeing, out of fear of making a mistake?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 4:14 pm +0000
Posts: 210
Location: Left Coast
My opinion remains skeptical.
The scientific community of today tends to be very secular and there are always individuals what want fame and name more than to serve the community. Beyond secular they tend to be politicized. I believe there is scientific data out there that is good but I question much of it.
The politicians that take this questionable data and run with it to the point of fanaticism are not trying to solve environmental issues, to the contrary its all about power and wealth. Ever wonder why so many of them become multi millionaires in a very short time on salaries of a few hundred thousand while doing public service?
Then there is the propaganda wing of the political party that promotes environmentalism as the most urgent problem ever faced by mankind.
What comes out of their news medias is mostly opinion, fake news, promotes those hungry for power. Finding the truth is a challenge.
Then there is hollywood and what comes out of there, the environment related movies and videos I see have their design and intent based on the original propaganda movie "Hitlers Titanic".
If you watch that film you would believe that British engineers were half witted country bumpkins and they were the cream of the British crop of citizenry, all others being much less.
As for the heroin thing, I believe it should be treated like we treat an Ebola outbreak - both suppliers and users.
As for environmental stewardship, I work on it every day and for me, that is about as good as it will get until I feel that local, state and national leaders have a plan that is believable.
Also, is there really such thing as renewable energy?
Is electric really the answer to all pollution problems?
I think if you track the energy requirements for getting a Tesla on the road it would stack up with my Vette.
Also, all of the vast arrays of solar and wind energy collection devices tend to remove vital energy from the atmosphere, its entirely possible this contributes more to climate change than carbon - which by the way is plant food.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3560
Disregarding some of the more radical elements found there, I also think the "Green" movement has lots of good social and environmental impacts! And many of those elements Agon lists are enhanced and supported by micro-farming and farmer's markets and farm to table grocers and restaurants.

Those who wish to return to coal (yeah, I know, hard to believe!) are being punished now, finally, by market realities. Renewables drive employment growth and profitability. Mistakes lead to change. Consider Three Mile and Chernobyl. I cannot believe we once thought nuclear power plants were the smartest way to boil water we could come up with. Even dirty coal is a better source of hot water!

We've made many adjustments since that first Earth Day. Some by legislation and regulation and some by economics and free market profit solutions. Any good idea that makes someone a profit is a quick switch. But regulations which lead to higher costs, even for a little while, are fought tooth and nail.

I agree Agon, that perhaps the very best solution is a more rational and minimalist consumerism where quality and sustainability replaces cheap and disposable hording of crap that fills landfills and oceans with poison and garbage!

Pollution is stupid even if not environmentally dangerous. It's just wrong. And unnecessary. Ego and excess are materialism's source and support.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3560
no sophist - to your point. A "green" activist compared the carbon footprint of the manufacturing of a Tesla compared to keeping a low-mileage hoopty on the road. The gas burner had the smaller footprint over a long period of time. Cuba has probably had the smallest per capita vehicle carbon output in the world since 1960. No new cars! Think of all the plastics in today's cars!

This is complex stuff. Oversimplification is for the foolish and gullible!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 892
no sophist wrote:
...
As for environmental stewardship, I work on it every day and for me, that is about as good as it will get until I feel that local, state and national leaders have a plan that is believable. ...


I agree. Although I would say 'effective and practical' rather than believable.

no sophist wrote:
Is electric really the answer to all pollution problems?


nosophist, you're smarter than that. You know, given the complexity of our planet's climate in the context of our planet's troubled humanity, there is rarely "THE ANSWER" to "ALL" of any challenge we face. Please, try not to overstate your arguments to the point of sophistry.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 4:14 pm +0000
Posts: 210
Location: Left Coast
fanofVan wrote:
Disregarding some of the more radical elements found there, I also think the "Green" movement has lots of good social and environmental impacts! And many of those elements Agon lists are enhanced and supported by micro-farming and farmer's markets and farm to table grocers and restaurants.

Those who wish to return to coal (yeah, I know, hard to believe!) are being punished now, finally, by market realities. Renewables drive employment growth and profitability. Mistakes lead to change. Consider Three Mile and Chernobyl. I cannot believe we once thought nuclear power plants were the smartest way to boil water we could come up with. Even dirty coal is a better source of hot water!

We've made many adjustments since that first Earth Day. Some by legislation and regulation and some by economics and free market profit solutions. Any good idea that makes someone a profit is a quick switch. But regulations which lead to higher costs, even for a little while, are fought tooth and nail.

I agree Agon, that perhaps the very best solution is a more rational and minimalist consumerism where quality and sustainability replaces cheap and disposable hording of crap that fills landfills and oceans with poison and garbage!

Pollution is stupid even if not environmentally dangerous. It's just wrong. And unnecessary. Ego and excess are materialism's source and support.


Yeah, boiling water with nuclear reactions - always gets a good laugh.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 912
katroofjebus wrote:
What's to say that misthinking people today in their zealous attempt to decrease the entire planet's temperature aren't actually contributing to new local problems that won't become evident for decades? I don't think that possibility should be ignored. There's just too much we don't now and computer algorithms cannot provide a guaranteed cause or solution to those things we do not yet fully understand.


we can't decrease temps at this point, but we can try to keep them from rising beyond critical life-changing levels.

or we can tell the patient with the fever that it doesn't matter if we put another blanket on her because nature already did it too and feign ignorance


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 912
Quote:
My opinion remains skeptical.
The scientific community of today tends to be very secular


other than the fact that polls show the majority of scientists believe in God or a higher power what does being secular have to do with the quality of the science? spirituality has to do with the scientist not science.

Quote:
and there are always individuals what want fame and name more than to serve the community.

research has to pass peer review...poor science done for whatever reason doesnt pass the community standard

Quote:
Beyond secular they tend to be politicized.

scientists in general have never been known to be politico types...you should be able to name a number of politicized scientists then. can you?

Quote:
I believe there is scientific data out there that is good but I question much of it.


yes of course you question what you don't understand and your corporate ma$ters want to keep it that way


Quote:
The politicians that take this questionable data and run with it to the point of fanaticism are not trying to solve environmental issues, to the contrary its all about power and wealth.


perhaps the accusation is true, but the politicians that you like are clearly all about money...there's really no other reason to be anti-environment.

Quote:
Ever wonder why so many of them become multi millionaires in a very short time on salaries of a few hundred thousand while doing public service?


lobbyist primarily but i'm happy with my representative peter defazio...too bad your representation must be slime.

Quote:
Then there is the propaganda wing of the political party that promotes environmentalism as the most urgent problem ever faced by mankind.

i've not witnessed this...but it's no secret that right-wing politicos live in their own imaginary world fueled by state-run fox "news"

Quote:
What comes out of their news medias is mostly opinion, fake news, promotes those hungry for power. Finding the truth is a challenge.

yes when you followed your evil ma$ters into sophistries your search for truth ended.


Quote:
Then there is hollywood and what comes out of there, the environment related movies and videos I see have their design and intent based on the original propaganda movie "Hitlers Titanic".
If you watch that film you would believe that British engineers were half witted country bumpkins and they were the cream of the British crop of citizenry, all others being much less.


never heard of it...not really into tv at all like you politicos


Quote:
As for the heroin thing, I believe it should be treated like we treat an Ebola outbreak - both suppliers and users.
As for environmental stewardship, I work on it every day and for me, that is about as good as it will get until I feel that local, state and national leaders have a plan that is believable.


yeah we see the pro-environmental work you put in here today...disconnect much?

Quote:
Also, is there really such thing as renewable energy?


yes of course...and the first law of thermodynamics doesnt exist if you really want to get down to it. but we arent at that level of energy direction and matter manipulation yet

Quote:
Is electric really the answer to all pollution problems?


nobody said it was...plenty of ways to produce electricity pollute and some don't and not all pollution has anything at all to do with electricity or power generation or whatever you had in mind. pay attention to the real world much?

Quote:
I think if you track the energy requirements for getting a Tesla on the road it would stack up
against my Vette.


i've not the time nor interest to check into something unmeaningfull overall like this...

Quote:
Also, all of the vast arrays of solar and wind energy collection devices tend to remove vital energy from the atmosphere, its entirely possible this contributes more to climate change than carbon - which by the way is plant food.

erm no installation will have zero impact on the environment but the notion that any vital energy is unnaturally removed in the process is junk physics. and increased co2 with increased temps inhibits plant growth...greenhouse growers do it sometimes intentionally during a heat wave. the science is multi-disciplinary.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 926
Location: Nanticoke NY
Incremental changes are something that would have worked in the 1900's-1990's. The twentieth century sees incremental habits of mankind, expanded across the entire populated region of the eastern seaboard. We have the parable of the man who built his house on the sand, and I feel like western upstate new york will have to prepare for an influx of people who have become too frightened by what they have seen, over the course of the next century wondering wow if cities like Fort Lauderdale and Sandy Hook can be re-fortified.

But the educational values, competing with consumer purchase habits, in lieu of the modern economic subsidy, often go to show, that the younger generation raised by parents who feed children the single-serve lifestyle. Good planetary stewardship means that this generation born into the world, will either create the cataclysm that we started, or if good habits can lead students back to the fields, to earn salvation by the sweat of their brows, not only for themselves but for the planet. This is really an issue of personal motivation, on a worldwide scale, if people could find it in their hearts to waste no more, to find a less wasteful means of providing refreshment to pilgrims and visitors.

_________________
to the Underlaying Unity of All Life so that the Voice of Intuition may guide Us closer to Our Common Keeper


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group