Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread: Dalai Lama Endorses Global Climate Strike

  1. #1

    Dalai Lama Endorses Global Climate Strike

    From the Buddhist Door website: "Dalai Lama Endorses Global Climate Strike"

    https://www.buddhistdoor.net/news/da...climate-strike

    Any comments about the article?

    .

  2. #2
    Forums Member justusryans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Buckingham, Virginia
    Posts
    378
    Well, I’m glad more people are taking climate change more seriously. Here in North America we have one political party who chose not to believe in it, because it’s not in their best interests. I’m glad that’s changing, although very slowly.
    I am very happy to see the younger generation starting to organize. This will be a very critical issue for them.
    I hope for the best.


    Mike

  3. #3
    Forums Member Olderon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Posts
    391
    Honestly, I see little point based upon past experience even discussing this topic online as ignorance on the parts of most humans with regard to the complexity of all facets of this issue is startling.

    I am happy that HHDL and The Roman Catholic Pope Francis are both encouraging the next few generations to get engaged and to pay attention to what has been and is being learned. Hopefully this will encourage participation and study of "The Science of Earth's Climate and Ecology" including the effects brought to force by anthropogenic contributions, but not ignoring all the other natural environmental and ecological inputs and outputs contributing to all natural cycles known, and those still yet to be discovered.

    I would encourage anyone on this board, who wishes to learn and contribute to this worthy effort and become aware through earnest study of natural and human contributions having even the most minor effects beneficially and there upon and there after to stay current with existing studies and data and be willing to compassionately and without all forms of impatience or derision to share what they learn with the vast seas of the ignorant and deluded rather than debate and demonstrate in any manner which causes harm in the same spirit and intention of what Christ was reported to speak upon the cross during the process of his execution.: "Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do!"

    IMHO, A good place to begin if interested is here:

    https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/fe...ming/page2.php
    Last edited by Olderon; 28 Sep 19 at 22:47.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by justusryans

    Well, I’m glad more people are taking climate change more seriously
    Hi Mike,

    Earlier this month, thousands of people in cities across the UK protested about climate change.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49767327


    Various religious faith based climate change groups also joined in:

    https://religionmediacentre.org.uk/n...limate-strike/





  5. #5
    Forums Member justusryans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Buckingham, Virginia
    Posts
    378
    Aloka, Thanks for the links’s. I was so glad to see them!



    Mike

  6. #6
    Forums Member Olderon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Posts
    391
    Since my brother-in-law is a physicist specializing in piezoelectrics, and also a climate change / global warming "skeptic" we often discuss those issues from time to time. Here was his latest response for which I asked permission to share here:

    Peter Madaffari <plmadaff@hotmail.com>
    Sat 10/5/2019 13:05
    Ron,



    I think in my 4th paragraph for my first response to your email I said the following:

    It is not very difficult or very useful to come up with a theory (that) meets past data. You just need enough variables and a multivariate linear regression to give coefficients to each variable. The test of the theory is: does it predict the future and if so how well? From what I have seen of current theories is they don’t seem to make very accurate predictions. By that I mean the predictions predict changes that are twice or more greater than the actual result. In fact, they are all to the high side, which by probability should not occur, unless there was some bias in formulating the theory. To me, the consensus opinion appears to be based on an incomplete theory. As a physicist and engineer, I am well aware of consensus opinions that were only proven wrong or at best incomplete when the then current leading scientists died out and a new generation took over.



    At that time I did not post a link then to data supported that claim. Here is one such link:



    On Models vs Actual Measurements

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-8N...L&index=7&t=8s



    Here is also a link to some facts about the 97% consensus that is supposed to exist from the early 2000’s:



    On Consensus

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZq6...L&index=6&t=0s



    Here is the final link. It is a discussion on CO2 with Freeman Dyson. There is a whole Star Trek the Next Generation episode based on his idea of the Dyson Sphere:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQHh...index=2&t=235s



    Hope you find them interesting.



    Best regards,

    Pete

    From: Ronald J. Chiodi <rjchiodi@hotmail.com>
    Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 2:19 PM
    To: Peter Madaffari <plmadaff@hotmail.com>
    Subject: Re: HHDL and Francis Too! re. Global Warming and/or Climate Change



    Hi, Pete.



    Thanks for the "very" thoughtful response. Fission and fusion are often overlooked by the "carbon-free" community, but fission is the driving process for the radiation which drives all photovoltaic processes here on Earth.



    With your permission, I would like to share your summary and observations with my Buddhist Climate Change Activists. It will give them other focus for their meditations regarding the topic.



    Won't act until permission is given. This will prevent them from conducting "Planet Preservation" demonstrations on your front lawn. ( just kidding! )



    HHDL is "not" a religious activist when it comes to climate change. Can't say the same for Pope Francis. HHDL advised long ago that if Science finds that common sense needs to be changed, we should all be willing to do so in the name of scientific factual discovery. That has been the way of Buddhism since it was discovered that knives were sharp and that boiling pots are hot.



    Ron

  7. #7
    Technical Administrator woodscooter's Avatar
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    1,656
    It's interesting to hear from a climate change / global warming "skeptic", as most of the opinions I get are from "believers".

    I looked at the links provided by Mr Madaffari in the quoted correspondence, and most of all I was saddened to see how, in the USA, the question of climate change has been reframed into a political issue.

    As I understand it, Democrats are accused by Republicans of falsely claiming that the world is warming up as a result of human activity. Republicans promote the freedom to allow markets and economics to determine human activity.

    Once an issue separates into two polarised and opposing camps, negotiation becomes futile, progress towards a consensus becomes blocked. In the UK we have a recent example of that in the disagreement over leaving the European Union.

    Now that polarisation has split the question of climate change into two groups, the skeptics only read material that confirms their view, and the believers only read material that confirms their view.

    That's why I find it interesting to hear from a skeptic. I've got no answers and I can't draw any conclusions. I'm just going to make brief comments on two of the speeches from the links provided by Mr Madaffari.

    Models vs Actual Measurements deals with tropospheric temperature measurements. Temperatures are rising but only at half the rate predicted by an average of 102 different climate models. The rate of temperature rise is 0.13 degC per decade. The speaker discards the models for their inaccuracy, and by implication discards the message that world temperatures are rising. He also discards surface temperature as difficult to measure. In fact figures for surface temperatures are readily available and they also show a steady or accelerating increase.

    On Consensus, I would only make the point that science is based on observation and measurement of repeatable results. Theories are only proved when a predicted result is confirmed by observation and measurement. Until a theory is proved, there always has been discussion and debate. That's how science makes progress. The fact that there is not a universal consensus does not mean climate change science is discredited.

    The fact is that the world is getting steadily hotter. Polar ice is melting in the summer faster than it freezes in the winter. There will be permanent and far-reaching effects resulting from the change in our climate. For the sake of future generations, we have to wake up to the situation. It's far too important to be kicked about like a political football.

  8. #8
    Global Moderator Esho's Avatar
    Location
    Under the Bodhi Tree
    Posts
    4,748
    I agree with Woodscooter. There are facts and one of them is the global warming. The effects of this are putting humankind in risk, ecosystems in risk and we are facing a massive extinction if we do not do something.

  9. #9
    Forums Member Olderon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.
    Posts
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by Esho View Post
    There are facts and one of them is the global warming.
    As stated previously, there is little point in debating the point, because "believers" do not listen or study "the facts", they just believe. Anthropogenic sources are at best contributions to Global Warming, but there are many, many more natural causes, which have yet to be quantified and modeled as P. Madaffari pointed out. For example the contribution of water vapor due to Earth's global water cycle. Water vapor is rarely mentioned, mostly CO2, and recently methane due to melting of methane clathrate from the ocean's bottom and the melting tundra.

    Recently active volcanoes have been discovered adding not only to methane clathrate melting, but accelerating the melting of glaciers in the Arctic and Antarctic.

    Also, there are accession and recessions of our solar system within our galaxy, which increases and decreases both ionizing and non-ionizing radiation from surrounding stars and other celestial bodies.

    In fact there are so many as yet poorly understood natural sources, that they provide physicists with enough to study for 100s of generations. Nothing new, But believers don't care to inquire, because I think it hurts their heads.

    Ron

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Olderon
    As stated previously, there is little point in debating the point, because "believers" do not listen or study "the facts", they just believe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Olderon
    ...believers don't care to inquire, because I think it hurts their heads.
    Please keep the conversation free from negative remarks about people who are seriously concerned about climate change, Ron,.....and by implication, members of this forum, such as myself and others posting in this topic. It's completely unnecessary and lowers the tone of a discussion. (See Code of Conduct).

    Moving on, here are some links for our members to browse in connection with climate change:

    https://climate.nasa.gov/

    https://www.wired.co.uk/article/clim...nge-facts-2019

    https://www.ciwf.org.uk/factory-farm...0Ai03pm2W5EHVE


    https://royalsociety.org/topics-poli...BoCPCIQAvD_BwE

    https://eia-international.org/climat...RoCaIUQAvD_BwE

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p076w7g5



Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Los Angeles Mexico City London Colombo Kuala Lumpur Sydney
Sat, 8:26 AM Sat, 10:26 AM Sat, 4:26 PM Sat, 8:56 PM Sat, 11:26 PM Sun, 1:26 AM