English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-17 03:34:14 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

7 answers

The climate of the world is changing. Nobody now doubts it. Whether it is the unusual number of hurricanes of unheard violence sweeping off the Gulf of Mexico into the southern United States, or the cooling of currents from the Gulf Stream which could one day freeze north-western Europe, or floods or droughts in so many parts of the world, climate change is here. However, there are two questions which remain in doubt. The first is how fast the climate is changing. The second is the extent to which manmade pollution is the cause of these changes.

Perhaps no scientist knows the answer to the first question and opinions differ. As regards the second question, the answer is obscured by human politics. Those on the right wing claim that manmade pollution, the burning of fossil fuels, is only one of the reasons for what they see as a cyclical climate change. Those on the left, however, claim that manmade pollution is wholly to blame for it.

It is not for us to talk politics. Nevertheless, one fact remains. To some extent, lesser or greater, according to political preferences, human sin and greed are destroying the planet. It matters not if the source of the problem is deforestation, as in Romania or the Ukraine, the Amazon or Indonesia, so causing flooding, or industrial pollution in resource-hungry Western Europe, North America, China and India, the fact is that none of this change is inevitable. Human beings could choose to live differently. There is no reason to despair at the melting of ice-caps, the rising of sea-levels, the warming of the oceans, recurrent flooding and droughts. Repentance is always possible, even at the last minute, for those who are prepared to confess their sin. However, repentance is impossible, if man is so stony-hearted that he refuses to admit his own responsibility and make the necessary sacrifices, hypocritically blaming everything on someone else somewhere else.

In the atheistic philosophies and theories of the Western world, the nineteenth century became that of the death of God, Deicide. In the World Wars and concentration camps of the Westernized world, the twentieth century became that of the death of man, Genocide. Unless there is repentance, in its environmental pollution, the twenty-first century promises to become that of the apocalyptic death of God’s Creation, the death of the Planet: Cosmocide.

2007-03-17 04:00:09 · answer #1 · answered by sundari l 2 · 0 2

Cosmocide is literally the death of the cosmos.

cos·mos [kóz mòss, kózməss]
(plural cos·mos·es)
n
1. philosophy cosmology whole universe: the universe thought of as an ordered and integrated whole
2. ordered system: an ordered system or harmonious whole


[13th century. From Greek kosmos “order, universe, ornament” (source also of English microcosm).]
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

2007-03-17 06:41:29 · answer #2 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0 0

Since the development of cosmonautics, cosmos is usually understood to mean the small part of the universe adjacent to but not comprising the earth . so cosmocide indicates the pollution we are creating which affects the part of cosmos around us .

2007-03-17 04:00:46 · answer #3 · answered by subra 6 · 0 1

The apocalyptic death of God’s (or whatever made Earth)creation, the death of the Planet ... simply said.

2007-03-17 03:42:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Bad Religious Word. :) Stay away from those brainwashing, old tablets :)

2007-03-17 05:20:50 · answer #5 · answered by sulla1111 2 · 0 1

My guess is it's the destruction of the universe.

2007-03-17 03:37:13 · answer #6 · answered by blue_cow27 4 · 0 0

Kramer making racist jokes

2007-03-17 03:36:43 · answer #7 · answered by Samantha 6 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers