Balance of nature: human and theological implications (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, February 09, 2025, 17:20 (25 days ago) @ dhw

Balance of Nature: Theology

DAVID: he gave us life to handle. Dayenu.

dhw: An atheist might say we have life to handle. What a stroke of luck. And an agnostic might say we have life to handle, and we have no idea how we got it. If they spoke Hebrew, they might add “dayenu”. Where does that get us?

We have a gift of life. Dayenu tells us 'it is enough'. Not to question its 'reason'.

Balance of Nature: human

DAVID: Study our carbon results! We are a fine example of what to do. We should work on sanctions with other nations, no Paris Accord needed.

dhw: The purpose of the Paris Agreement was to bring all nations together to agree on and implement measures to be taken (which almost all of them did). You are absolutely right: USA should work with other nations, to ensure that the rules are not ignored. Instead, Trump has not only turned his back on other nations, but is even hell-bent on starting a trade war through sanctions that have nothing to do with the environment but are designed solely in order to serve America’s interests. A fine example to set for China and India!

DAVID: The tariff threat got results with no trade war started. Your point "which almost all of them did" is not true. It is like NATO supposed dues, never fully implemented.

dhw: The tariff war has scarcely begun. Europe is waiting in fear and trembling, and China has already announced counter-measures. My initial comment was badly phrased: I meant that nearly all of them (including China, India and USA) had agreed on the necessary measures and had signed up to implement them. I stand by my view that Trump’s withdrawal, on the grounds that America’s economic interests come first, already supports all those countries who are breaking the agreed rules. What hope is there, then, for the cooperation which you yourself have agreed is essential for a balanced approach to the known threats to our environment?

Trump's point is the USA will cooperate while not enshrined in a toothless set of papers.

DAVID: See Hossenfelder for an analysis

Her analysis confirms my own fears!

HOSSENFELDER: "It’s 2025 and the tide is turning on climate change. To me it looks like this will be the year when we’ll stop trying to prevent it from happening and instead focus on adapting to it.”

"The likely reason fossil fuel companies are abandoning climate goals is that they expect demand to increase. Many multinational companies including Gucci, Nestlé, and Easyjet, have downgraded their ambitions to reduce carbon emissions. It’s not hard to guess why: Carbon neutrality isn’t helping their business”

“ Alas, Musk has declared that “Climate change risk is real, just much slower than alarmists claim. And that is true in the sense that if you’re a billionaire it will take much longer until you feel the consequences.” (David’s bold)

"It’s only a matter of time until they’ll [net-zero plans] be abandoned and no amount of suing by climate activists is going to do anything about this."

DAVID: note the bold. I agree with Musk. What I didn't quote is the large lists of companies abandoning their carbon programs. Ignore the folks still panicky.

dhw: She accepts the reality of climate change, and her prophecy makes it horrifyingly clear that economic interests (plus AI and people’s reluctance to change their habits) will outweigh what you and I and even Musk have agreed are very real threats to our environment. I agree with you that we should ignore the panicky folks. As I keep saying, and you keep agreeing, current known dangers should be enough to make us strive towards a balanced, pragmatic approach to avert their continuation and – as she points out – the probable escalation of those dangers. Sadly, Trump epitomizes those powers which will lead to more and more damage and will help Hossenfelder’s prophecy to come true.

Yes, we drill baby drill, while our carbon contributions are falling. It is easy to proclaim, follow us.