We're spiritual about the Earth, but unsure about global warming


Hispanic Catholics are far more concerned about climate change than white Catholics

Most Americans say they feel a deep connection to the wider world.

But all that spiritual stargazing makes no difference in views about the facts of climate change and global warming, a new survey finds.

Just 5 percent of Americans thought climate change was the most important issue in the US today. And religion was a major dividing point on how much — or how little — they think it’s a matter of concern, according to a new survey by the Public Religion Research Institute.

“We asked about spiritual measures such as being in awe of the universe, and you might think it would correlate with views about the universe. But, in fact, they have very little relationship,” said Robert Jones, CEO of PRRI, which conducted the survey on US adults’ attitudes toward climate change, environmental policy, and science.

The survey found:

70 percent of Americans said they “experience a connection to all life” every day or most days.
69 percent said they “feel deep inner peace or harmony.”
64 percent “feel a deep connection with nature and the Earth.”
53 percent “feel a deep sense of wonder about the universe.”



I’m waiting for a personal revelation from Eywa :rolleyes:


I understand that John Gruber also worked on selling the Global Warming scam as well as Obamacare.


it’s because we know who is in charge, and we trust Him.



That hadn’t occurred to me, but now that you mention it, it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest.



To some extent I can accept the departmentalization associated with climate change

What I dont get is how one can feel spiritual with the earth and not really care that 22,000 of god’ supposed creatures are on the verge of extinction


Nature spirituality assumes that biological nature is eternal (or cyclical/everlasting).

As such, the idea that nature could change unidirectionally (IE, global warming) is diametrically opposed to nature spirituality.



Why does that shock you?
When people murder 50,000,000 innocents why would they care about 22,000 species?


All of us should “give a hoot and not pollute” but the Greenies carry it too far and to the level of an alternative religion. We see the development of a “Climate Cult” that goes beyond even the obvious paradigm of “Green is the new Red” to Idolatry, from worship of Deo to Gaia, from the Divine to the mundane, from Spirit to mere flesh, from Good to evil, and ultimately from Life to death. It is myopic to condemn the use of fossil fuels and denigrate the Industrial Revolution. Philosophically, we can look at our use of fossil fuels as historically necessary to modern human development, in terms of population growth and the quality of life. Many Greenies also oppose nuclear energy which s indispensable to future human development until the God-given intelligence with which we were created devises something better. Fossil fuels do produce particulate pollution but so do forest fires and volcanos. Kilauea, on the eastern side of Mauna Loa, has been in a state of eruption since 1983 but people still flock undeterred to that island paradise.


climate change theory is too complicated for most individuals to understand. it’s best to listen to the opinions of the church. same with things like evolution and such. we are to be good stewards of God’s creation. how each goes about that is up to their conscience and ability.


You sound like a big Gruber fan:

  • We (intellectuals) know what’s best for you, so just shut it and do as your told
  • Ignore our lies, they are for your own good




well, i don’t know who gruber is, but if you’re not interested in the teaching of the church, maybe it’s time to start your own religion.:wink:


Ironically, regarding GW a relationship showing the historical temperature record and CO2 levels shows that we are overdue for a projected glacial period and as such the only logical conclusion that we have not slipped into a glacial period would be because CO2 levels have prevented it.

For those not versed in this area of science a glacial age would be much more devastating.

It would seem God always has the final Word.



Google “Jonathan Gruber” and “ACA.” Like it or not, the use of Jonathan’s last name will be in the foreseeable future antithetical with “truth in advertising.” I am less connected to the media than most of my friends, but it still managed to leak into my attention sphere.

The “teaching of the church” as you put it, is somewhat broader than a single topic, so making an absolute statement about a persons faith in this regard is nonsensical and demeaning to your good self. There is much room for debate of the theory of AGW, especially with the attribution argument, and modeling efficacy upon which the bulk of the debate is based.


Yeah, “gruberize” got 522 hits on Google; “gruberization” got over 12,000. There has been a lot of gruberization going on in the pro-AGW arguments for years; we just didn’t have a term for it.


if you go to my original post #10, i think you’ll see i was spot on. i’m really not interested in googling john gruber, and don’t have any interest in his take on the subject.:slight_smile:


Unless this is MacGruber from SNL, I’m not even sure why he matters.:):slight_smile:



well said.:wink:


Both of your posts discouraged debate, the second added a smattering of judgement about one’s faith. So no, not so much spot on to anything except disdain for questioning and debating. While it is true that it can be a complicated subject (climate behavior), it is politicized and as such fair game all the more. You are of course invited to take your own advice, by remaining silent and secure in your own position. In fact, you may be the best recipient of such advice.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.