Climate Change - An Update.

Technology, computers, sciences, mysteries and phenomena of all kinds, etc., etc. all here at The Loresraat!!

Moderator: Vraith

User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10621
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time

Post by Vraith »

Orlion wrote: Really? To tell you the truth, I would never get my information from that site... it's pretty much a step above 4chan. How should one get their information? Why, from their local library of course :P

Kids and their internets... :x
Oh, it's not that bad...you just have to be selective, like everywhere else, and play "follow the source." [[at least at the science part, which is the only part I've looked at...is reddit the people who misidentified terrorists after Boston and spread them all over the web and news??]]
It's got a lot of crap...but there are places with a lot more crap and far fewer paths/links to non-crap to follow.
I mean, keep in mind this is the thread that has a link to the Daily Caller for science news in it...an article for which the headline is the opposite of what the science actually said.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

I'm Murrin wrote:As amusing as you may find it to portray the outcome of global warming as just people wearing shorts and there being a little less space, the reality is that the overall increase in temperatures is likely going to cause increased incidences of major drought and significant food shortages. We're already in a position where it's not certain we produce enough food to support our growing population, and when fresh water supplies are depleted, desertification is accelerated, and lower land areas are underwater those are going to become pressing concerns.
Do you know how much food gets wasted in the United States on an annual basis? About 30% to 40%, according to the United States Government.
Food waste in the United States is estimated at roughly between 30 to 40 percent of the food supply. In 2010, an estimated 133 billion pounds of food from U.S. retail food stores, restaurants, and homes never made it into people's stomachs. The amount of uneaten food in homes and restaurants was valued at almost $390 per U.S. consumer in 2008, more than an average month's worth of food expenditures.
I don't know about other countries but I suspect the food waste ratio is lower. That being said, don't try to tell people that we barely produce enough food at this point in time because that is simply untrue--we produce enough to waste a third of it despite having lots of people who suffer from hunger or, a new term I heard recently, food insecurity (the state in which you do not know how you are going to come up with your next meal). If other places in the world where malnutrition is rampant--and has been for decades--would get their shit together and overthrow governments which are a mixture of warlords and criminal organizations then maybe they could get some irrigation and vertical farming projects put together and begin producing more food for themselves.

Droughts have always happened so droughts in the future are to be expected. Why worry about that? It isn't like we can run out of water--the oceans contain 1.3 billion km^3 of water; even if we can tap into only the top 2% of that that still means...hang on...2.6x10^22 L of water. Sure, that is salt water, so consider the fresh water locked in the ice of Antarctica. Volume of ice: 26.5x10^6 km^3 --> 26.5x10^21 L. Again, if we are able to tap into only 2% of that then we have 5.3x10^20 L, or 7.067x10^10 L for every human being on the planet (accounting for 7.5 billion humans). That is a *lot* of water.
"But Hashi", someone might counter, "drought means the land needs water and not people directly". Quite right. This pdf demonstrates a reasonable formula to determine how much water is needed to irrigate a hectare based on soil composition; I admit that I am unfamiliar with this Ritso Society but I am certain I could find other sources. Anyway, in their example they arrive at a result of 6.75x10^6 L/hectare, which reduces to the more manageable 675 L/m^2, which seems like a lot but the goal is to allow the water to soak deep enough into the ground to have a positive effect. The general rule of thumb is "one acre per person" when figuring out how much land it takes to grow enough food to feed one person (we are sticking with metric here so 1 acre = 4047 m^2) so that much land would take 2.73x10^6 L of water per person, far less than the 7.067x10^10 L per person I mentioned earlier.

Conclusion: even if we tap into only 2% of the fresh water on the planet there is more than enough water for drinking and irrigating arable land to counteract any drought the future might bring, preventing mass starvation. Notice that this is only the fresh water; if we account for salt water and a modicum of desalination then the available water is much more plentiful. Since the rate at which water leaves the planet is so small that we may discount it completely, we will never run out of water for drinking or irrigating land, even if the population reaches 10 billion.

Will that amount of effort be easy? No, but then nothing worth doing ever is.

Why do so many climate change people see only negative outcomes in the future? Why are their predictions always doom and gloom? What if they are wrong and the end results wind up being beneficial somehow? How do they *know* that only bad things are likely to happen? Why is their glass always half empty?

Now, the case could be made that it would be just as easy to reduce emissions now and that assessment would not be inaccurate. That being said, the main thrust of climate change people appears to be against the United States and that is simply because we still have the most money and the easiest set of politicians to sway. I still never see people trying to lobby the Chinese government to clean up its act or reduce its emissions--where are the picketers and lobbyists in Beijing, hm?
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
I'm Murrin
Are you?
Posts: 15840
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:09 pm
Location: North East, UK
Contact:

Post by I'm Murrin »

It's not about doom and gloom. It's about being prepared for the worst case scenario, instead of just assuming everything will work out fine.
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

The only thing I ever assume is that people in large groups will act irrationally out of fear or anger.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
I'm Murrin
Are you?
Posts: 15840
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:09 pm
Location: North East, UK
Contact:

Post by I'm Murrin »

Also often from stubborn resistance to change, too. Hard to tell which is appropriate when, though, I admit.
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

The magnetic North Pole appears to be accelerating in its wandering, according to this article linked from AJA; a more direct link to the source may be found here, at the European Space Agency's site.

Why am I putting this here? Allow me to quote one little paragraph from the story:

Over the past two centuries, Earth's magnetic field has weakened by 15 percent, according to scientists. Risks of a weak magnetic field include more deaths from cancer due to increased radiation, electric grid collapse from severe solar storms, climate change, and temporary ozone holes.
Aren't humans typically cited as the only cause of global warming? When did the Industrial Revolution take place, 1760 - 1840 and then again from 1870 to about 1900? Two centuries ago would be...hrm....1814 (the very year Napoleon was exiled to Elba, giving rise to the classic palindrome "Able was I ere I saw Elba"...but I digress.

Are we also responsible for the declining magnetic field, as well? If not, then would the conclusion be that natural phenomena have cycles which are independent of human activity? If this is the case, then couldn't the climate also be a natural cycle which is independent of human activity?

Are we absolutely certain, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that human beings are the only cause?
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
I'm Murrin
Are you?
Posts: 15840
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:09 pm
Location: North East, UK
Contact:

Post by I'm Murrin »

When has anyone ever said humans were the "only" cause? To assert that such an argument has been made is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Humans are not the only cause of climate change. Human activity is, however, a significant contributor to climate change, to the point where if it were not for human activity the world would not be increasing in temperature anywhere near as rapidly. And yes, the most significant rise has been during the last 200 years, with evidence strongly supporting the hypothesis that human industrial activity is largely reponsible.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61642
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Agreed Murrin.

--A
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

The vast majority of climate-related articles which get published or air on media outlets point out only human activity as the primary cause, typically ignoring or dismissing any other potential source. In fact, the post which started this thread cited a science authority no less than Dr. Tyson himself who was placing the blame almost entirely upon human activity. Also, check out Democracy Now!'s "topic" page about climate change--the tone of the articles is pretty one-sided because you won't find anything in there about the magnetic fields, multi-decadanal cycles, or solar activity. No sir, it is all out fault and we have been bad little boys and girls and we ought to be ashamed of ourselves.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
I'm Murrin
Are you?
Posts: 15840
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 1:09 pm
Location: North East, UK
Contact:

Post by I'm Murrin »

Focusing on the one most significant factor and the one that we actually can influence is not a denial that other factors exist. The fact that other things can affect the earth's climate is pretty irrelevant in the face of the known effects that human activity is having upon it which are much greater than we would expect naturally.
User avatar
rdhopeca
The Master
Posts: 2785
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:13 pm
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Contact:

Post by rdhopeca »

I think everyone interested in this topic should watch this video about potential climate control scenarios. Very interesting.

www.upworthy.com/mother-nature-figured- ... her?c=ufb1
Rob

"Progress is made. Be warned."
User avatar
Ananda
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 2453
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 3:23 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by Ananda »

An interesting article about geo-engineering to reduce rising temperatures.
www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30197085
Monsters, they eat
Your kind of meat
And they're moving as far as they can
And as fast as they can
User avatar
Cord Hurn
Servant of the Band
Posts: 7618
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:08 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona, USA
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Cord Hurn »

I'm Murrin wrote:When has anyone ever said humans were the "only" cause? To assert that such an argument has been made is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Humans are not the only cause of climate change. Human activity is, however, a significant contributor to climate change, to the point where if it were not for human activity the world would not be increasing in temperature anywhere near as rapidly. And yes, the most significant rise has been during the last 200 years, with evidence strongly supporting the hypothesis that human industrial activity is largely reponsible.
That's pretty much the way I see it. Humans have not caused all the Co2 rise, Co2 isn't the only factor affecting climate, and not all consequences of climate change are bad. Nevertheless, it seems wise to take some steps to reduce our use of fossil fuels and use birth control to curb our rising population numbers.
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

I'm Murrin wrote:Focusing on the one most significant factor and the one that we actually can influence is not a denial that other factors exist.
Forest fires can start naturally. But we should still strive to prevent starting forest fires caused by human activities.

Species extinctions can occur naturally. But we should still strive to not cause extinctions due to human activities.

Seems like all the same thing to me.
.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61642
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Makes sense to me.

--A
User avatar
Wosbald
A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Climate Change - An Update.

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+

“Laudate Deum”: the Pope’s cry for a response to the climate crisis [Summary]
Image

Image
Land devastated by drought. (Source: Vatican News)

Pope Francis has published an Apostolic Exhortation building on his 2015 encyclical. We’re not reacting enough, he says, we’re close to breaking point. He criticises climate change deniers, saying that the human origin of global warming is now beyond doubt. And he describes how care for our common home flows from the Christian faith.

Vatican News —Laudate Deum (‘Praise God’) is the title of this letter. For when human beings claim to take God’s place, they become their own worst enemies.”

That’s how Pope Francis ends his new Apostolic Exhortation, published on the 4th October, the Feast of St Francis of Assisi.

It’s a text in continuity with his 2015 encyclical Laudato Si’, which is broader in scope. In six chapters and 73 paragraphs, the Successor of Peter tries to clarify and bring to completion that previous text on integral ecology, while at the same time sounding an alarm, and a call for co-responsibility, in the face of the climate emergency.

In particular, the Exhortation looks ahead to COP28, which will be held in Dubai between the end of November and beginning of December.

The Holy Father writes: “With the passage of time, I have realized that our responses have not been adequate, while the world in which we live is collapsing and may be nearing the breaking point. In addition to this possibility, it is indubitable that the impact of climate change will increasingly prejudice the lives and families of many persons” (§2).

It’s “one of the principal challenges facing society and the global community” and “the effects of climate change are borne by the most vulnerable people, whether at home or around the world” (§3).

〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰

WATCH: Laudate Deum [YouTube: 1 min]

Image

Pope Francis releases Laudate Deum, his new Apostolic Exhortation on climate change and care for our common home.

〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰

Signs of climate change increasingly evident

The first chapter is dedicated to the global climate crisis.

“Despite all attempts to deny, conceal, gloss over or relativize the issue, the signs of climate change are here and increasingly evident,” says the Pope.

(click for more)
Spoiler
[…]

Not the fault of the poor

“In an attempt to simplify reality,” Pope Francis writes, “there are those who would place responsibility on the poor, since they have many children, and even attempt to resolve the problem by mutilating women in less developed countries.”

“As usual, it would seem that everything is the fault of the poor. Yet the reality is that a low, richer percentage of the planet contaminates more than the poorest 50% of the total world population, and that per capita emissions of the richer countries are much greater than those of the poorer ones.”

“How can we forget that Africa, home to more than half of the world’s poorest people, is responsible for a minimal portion of historic emissions?” (§9).

The Pope also challenges of those who say efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels “will lead to a reduction in the number of jobs.”

[…]

Indubitable human origins

“It is no longer possible to doubt the human — ‘anthropic’ — origin of climate change,” the Pope says.

“The concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere … was stable until the nineteenth century … In the past fifty years, this increase has accelerated significantly” (§11).

At the same time, global temperature “has risen at an unprecedented speed, greater than any time over the past two thousand years. In this period, the trend was a warming of 0.15° C per decade, double that of the last 150 years … At this rate, it is possible that in just ten years we will reach the recommended maximum global ceiling of 1.5° C” (§12).

This has resulted in acidification of the seas and the melting of glaciers.

“It is not possible to conceal” the correlation between these events and the growth of greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, the Holy Father bitterly observes, “the climate crisis is not exactly a matter that interests the great economic powers, whose concern is with the greatest profit possible at minimal cost and in the shortest amount of time” (§13).

Barely in time to avoid more terrible damage

“I feel obliged,” continues Pope Francis, “to make these clarifications, which may appear obvious, because of certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church.”

[…]

The technocratic paradigm: the idea of a human being without limits

In the second chapter, the Pope speaks of the technocratic paradigm which consists in thinking that “reality, goodness and truth automatically flow from technological and economic power as such” (§20) and “monstrously feeds upon itself” (§21), taking its inspiration from the idea of a human being without limitations.

“Never has humanity had such power over itself,” the Holy Father continues, “yet nothing ensures that it will be used wisely, particularly when we consider how it is currently being used … It is extremely risky for a small part of humanity to have it” (§23).

[…]

The ethical decadence of power: marketing and fake news

[…]

“The ethical decadence of real power is disguised thanks to marketing and false information, useful tools in the hands of those with greater resources to employ them to shape public opinion.”

Through these mechanisms, people in areas where polluting projects are to be implemented are deceived, convinced that economic and employment opportunities will be generated, but “they are not clearly told that the project will result in … a desolate and less habitable landscape” (§29) and a clear decline in quality of life.

“The mentality of maximum gain at minimal cost, disguised in terms of reasonableness, progress and illusory promises, makes impossible any sincere concern for our common home and any real preoccupation about assisting the poor and the needy discarded by our society … astounded and excited by the promises of any number of false prophets, the poor themselves at times fall prey to the illusion of a world that is not being built for them” (§31).

[…]

Weak international politics

In the next chapter of the Exhortation, the pope addresses the weakness of international politics, insisting on the need to foster “multilateral agreements between States” (§34).

He explains that “when we talk about the possibility of some form of world authority regulated by law, we need not necessarily think of a personal authority” but of “more effective world organizations, equipped with the power to provide for the global common good, the elimination of hunger and poverty and the sure defence of fundamental human rights”.

These, he says, “must be endowed with real authority, in such a way as to provide for the attainment of certain essential goals” (§35).

Pope Francis deplores that “global crises are being squandered when they could be the occasions to bring about beneficial changes. This is what happened in the 2007–2008 financial crisis and again in the Covid-19 crisis”, which led to “greater individualism, less integration and increased freedom for the truly powerful, who always find a way to escape unscathed” (§36).

“More than saving the old multilateralism, it appears that the current challenge is to reconfigure and recreate it, taking into account the new world situation” (§37), recognising that many civil society aggregations and organizations help compensate for the weaknesses of the international community. The Pope cites the Ottawa process on landmines, which, he says, shows how civil society creates efficient dynamics that the UN does not achieve.

[…]

Useless institutions that preserve the strongest

What Pope Francis is proposing is a “multilateralism ‘from below’ and not simply one determined by the elites of power … It is to be hoped that this will happen with respect to the climate crisis. For this reason, I reiterate that “unless citizens control political power — national, regional and municipal — it will not be possible to control damage to the environment” (§38).

After reaffirming the primacy of the human person, Pope Francis explains — speaking of the defense of human dignity in all circumstances — that “It is not a matter of replacing politics, but of recognizing that the emerging forces are becoming increasingly relevant”.

[…]

“All this presupposes the development of a new procedure for decision-making”; what is required are “spaces for conversation, consultation, arbitration, conflict resolution and supervision, and, in the end, a sort of increased “democratization” in the global context, so that the various situations can be expressed and included. It is no longer helpful for us to support institutions in order to preserve the rights of the more powerful without caring for those of all” (§43).

Climate conferences

[…]

What to expect from the Dubai COP?

[…]

No more ridiculing of environmental questions

Pope Francis asks us to put an end to “the irresponsible derision that would present this issue as something purely ecological, “green”, romantic, frequently subject to ridicule by economic interests.”

“Let us finally admit that it is a human and social problem on any number of levels. For this reason, it calls for involvement on the part of all.”

On the subject of protests by groups “negatively portrayed as radicalized”, Pope Francis affirms that “in reality they are filling a space left empty by society as a whole, which ought to exercise a healthy “pressure”, since every family ought to realize that the future of their children is at stake” (§58).

“May those taking part in the Conference be strategists capable of considering the common good and the future of their children, more than the short-term interests of certain countries or businesses. In this way, may they demonstrate the nobility of politics and not its shame. To the powerful, I can only repeat this question: “What would induce anyone, at this stage, to hold on to power, only to be remembered for their inability to take action when it was urgent and necessary to do so?” (§60).

A commitment that flows from the Christian faith

Finally, the Pope reminds his readers that the motivations for this commitment flow from the Christian faith, encouraging “my brothers and sisters of other religions to do the same” (§61).

“The Judaeo–Christian vision of the cosmos defends the unique and central value of the human being amid the marvellous concert of all God’s creatures,” but “as part of the universe, all of us are linked by unseen bonds and together form a kind of universal family, a sublime communion which fills us with a sacred, affectionate and humble respect” (§67).

“This is not a product of our own will; its origin lies elsewhere, in the depths of our being, since God has joined us so closely to the world around us” (§68).

[…]

The Holy Father ends his Exhortation with a reminder that “emissions per individual in the United States are about two times greater than those of individuals living in China, and about seven times greater than the average of the poorest countries.”

He goes on to affirm that “a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model would have a significant long-term impact. As a result, along with indispensable political decisions, we would be making progress along the way to genuine care for one another” (§72).


Image
User avatar
Wosbald
A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Climate Change - An Update.

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+

In message to COP-28, ailing pope calls environmental degradation ‘structural sin’
Image

Image
Vatican Secretary of State Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin speaks at the COP28 United Nations climate summit in Dubai on Dec. 2, 2023. (Credit: COP28 Dubai/Screenshot)

ROME — Despite cancelling a planned trip to the COP28 United Nations climate summit due to health concerns, Pope Francis sent a message to the event Saturday lamenting the lack of progress in fighting climate change, repeating appeals for multilateralism, and calling the world to action.

In a prepared speech read aloud by the Vatican’s Secretary of State, Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Pope Francis said “the destruction of the environment is an offense against God, a sin that is not only personal but also structural.”

It is a sin, he said, “that greatly endangers all human beings, especially the most vulnerable in our midst and threatens to unleash a conflict between generations.”

“Are we working for a culture of life or a culture of death? To all of you I make this heartfelt appeal: Let us choose life! Let us choose the future!” he said.

Pope Francis was scheduled to make a Dec. 1–3 visit to Dubai to address the COP28 summit and was expected to hold over 30 bilateral meetings with various heads of state and representatives of various organizations.

(click for more)
Spoiler
[…]

Parolin traveled to COP28 in his place, where he pronounced the pope’s speech faulting human activity for the greenhouse gas emissions which scientists say is causing global warming, and condemned an obsessive drive for production he said has caused “an inordinate greed that has made the environment the object of unbridled exploitation.”

“The climate, run amok, is crying out to us to halt this illusion of omnipotence,” the pope said in his speech, saying world leaders must be humble in recognizing limits.

Several things stand in the way of this recognition, such as widespread divisions, he said, saying that “a world completely connected, like ours today, should not be un-connected by those who govern it.”

It should not be the case that international negotiations “cannot make significant progress due to positions taken by countries which place their national interests above the global common good,” he said, condemning nations that choose to protect income and business interests over people while shifting blame onto others.

To this end, Pope Francis condemned what he said were attempts “to shift the blame onto the poor and high birth rates,” saying these are “falsities that must be firmly dispelled.”

The poor cannot be responsible when they are responsible for just 10 percent of toxic emissions, while the gap between “the opulent few and the masses of the poor has never been so abysmal,” he said, calling the poor the real victims.

Francis also hit back against advocates of population control who fault high birth rates for climate woes, saying, “Births are not a problem, but a resource.”

“They are not opposed to life, but for life, whereas certain ideological and utilitarian models now being imposed with a velvet glove on families and peoples constitute real forms of colonization,” he said.

Pope Francis also said poorer nations should be forgiven their economic debt, as wealthier nations owe them what he said was “a deeply troubling ‘ecological debt.’ ”

“It would only be fair to find suitable means of remitting the financial debts that burden different peoples, not least in light of the ecological debt that they are owed,” he said.

As he has in the past, the pope advocated for multilateralism as a strategy for moving forward, saying, “Our world has become so multipolar and at the same time so complex that a different framework for effective cooperation is required.”

“It is disturbing that global warming has been accompanied by a general cooling of multilateralism, a growing lack of trust within the international community,” he said, saying, “It is essential to rebuild trust, which is the foundation of multilateralism.”

Speaking of the need end global conflicts, Pope Francis said care of creation and the pursuit of peace go hand in hand, and lamented the vast amount of human energy being wasted “on the numerous wars presently in course, such as those in Israel and Palestine, in Ukraine and in many parts of the world.”

These conflicts will not solve problems, but will increase them, he said, lamenting the many resources “being squandered on weaponry that destroys lives and devastates our common home.”

[…]

“Let us emerge from the narrowness of self-interest and nationalism; these are approaches belonging to the past. Let us join in embracing an alternative vision” that will bring about ecological conversion, he said, and pledged the Catholic Church’s commitment and support through education and the promotion of sustainable lifestyles.

[…]


Image
Post Reply

Return to “The Loresraat”