How great are Your works, O Lord, Your designs are very deep;
The brute does not know nor does the fool understand this. (Psalm 92)
Whereas the Jewish tradition teaches that “the seal of the Holy Blessed One, is truth.” (BT Yoma 69b) and has long supported a worldview that sees the human study of creation as a path to the better understanding of how God acts in the world as in Maimonides’ assertion that what we would call scientific knowledge is the fulfillment of the commandments to love and fear God (Mishneh Torah, Yesodei Ha-Torah 2:2), and
Whereas in the last 150 years, many Jewish scientists significantly contributed to the rapid growth of scientific knowledge and beneficial technology allowing humanity to solve many problems and to aid governments in the development of scientifically valid policies and regulations especially in the areas of health and safety, and environmental protection, and
Whereas in the last decade, there have been unprecedented attacks on science-based policies which have led to a general decrease in the understanding and knowledge of legitimate science and scientists also have also been publicly attacked and their integrity has been questioned, and
Whereas this has been especially true when it comes to developing a science-based response to climate change, one of the greatest challenges to face humanity, and
Whereas the scientific evidence for human-caused climate change has been developed and verified over more than thirty years, yet there are still those who do not accept the findings of climate science, and
Whereas climate change is already causing major disruptions in Earth’s climate systems and disproportionately harms poorer communities and countries, we consider climate change to be primarily a moral challenge and
Whereas it is now necessary “to protect the rights of scientists to pursue and communicate their inquiries unimpeded, expand the placement of scientists throughout the government, build public policies upon scientific evidence and support broad educational efforts to expand public understanding of the scientific process.” (Statement by the American Academy for the Advancement of Science), and
Whereas since 1991 the Rabbinical Assembly has articulated the Jewish responsibility to address global climate change and work towards an environmentally responsible energy policy on a personal, communal, and national level with 15 resolutions,
Whereas the vast majority of scientific and medical research are funded by the United States government and federally-funded researches assures research is undertaken independently and to the highest academic standards without the influence of vested interests,
Therefore be it resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly support efforts to increase understanding of climate change and funding for continued research and enforcement, and
Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly urge federal officials, including elected officials, to restore full funding for scientific and medical research in the federal budget, and
Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly affirm our previous resolutions on climate change, and
Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly affirm our support for the scientific community, and
Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly affirm our support for global action and most specifically the 2015 Paris Accord of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and
Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly call upon all governments to continue to utilize only science-based evidence for environmental and energy policies, and
Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly affirm the need for a strong Environmental Protection Agency to vigorously enforce the environmental laws of the United States, as well asking all governments to enact and enforce appropriate legislation to safeguard the climate.
Comments
"deny funding"
Submitted by jlm548 on Wed, 03/01/2017 - 15:40
I am not certain we oppose every denial of funding for research or enforcement in our "Science" resolution. I suggest it be rephrase or removed.
"Federal government"
Submitted by adcutler on Thu, 03/02/2017 - 09:07
A polite reminder that the RA is an international body. Resolutions that are about American issues should be clearly noted as such (and perhaps should only be open to voting by American rabbis). Unclarified references to the "Federal government" are unhelpful as the United States is not the only country with a federated system.
US-resolutions are fine, but should be recognizable as such.
Submitted by gse018 on Thu, 03/09/2017 - 03:15
In reply to "Federal government" by adcutler
I think it is fine for the RA to issue statements which are US-specific, since this is where the majority of our colleagues are. But I agree with Adam that language must be clear, that they refer to the US.
Condescending
Submitted by adb860 on Fri, 03/03/2017 - 11:48
There are no doubt scientists who don't agree with the IPCC and base their finding on their academic understanding on the issue and to disparage anyone who disagrees with this issue as doing so ” for reasons of ideology, ignorance or vested interest" is unrabbinic and condescending. I especially like how you slipped in Al Gore's movie "inconvient truth" in the same sentence.
Aren't we in this resolution also trying to surpess opposite academic views while saying that the other side shouldn't be surpressed?
You are also implying from Psalm 92 that anyone who doesn't agree with you is a "brute" or a "fool". That's real rabbinic! I thought religion was supposed to unite and not divide.
Furthermore when did we (the RA) become judge, jury and executioner of ones motives and morals?
We are also now the "ultra-government" telling the government who they should hire?
***I could go on but I won't, as I think my point has been made.
In the end, while I personally don't deny climate change I find this resolution to be arrogant and insulting. If it remains written this way it will be in my mind an embarrasment for a group of rabbis.
Title
Submitted by htilman on Tue, 03/07/2017 - 11:56
The use of the term "science-based" seems to be a buzzword for climate change. Why not call this resolution what it is - a resolution that is concerned about the climate change effecting our planet and in support of policies that will address those concerns. The text and concept are all great, so why not be specific about what this is about instead of relying on PC buzzwords. The idea that we have to issue a resolution "in support of science" sounds like we're still living in the times of Galileo. A resolution concerned about the changing climate reads very differently.
Ignorance? Really?
Submitted by lavinsky on Tue, 03/07/2017 - 18:20
One can certainly make a case for climate change and "support of science" without making offensive statements about those who disagree.
The resolution contains the following words "yet there are still those who refuse to accept this “inconvenient truth” for reasons of ideology, ignorance or vested interest...."
Is the resolution any stronger with this or is it just meant to demean those who may be skeptical of climate change "science"? Data has definitely been adjusted to suit the agenda of climate change billionaires like Al Gore (Mr. Inconvenient Truth) who fly their private jets and create a more significant carbon footprint than everyone in the R.A. combined.
I recommend removing the offending line. I'm with Andrew Bloom and think that the resolution is condescending the way it is.
I am also skeptical of jumping on the PC "settled science" bandwagon. How many times has "settled science" been debunked? While the resolution doesn't use that phrase, I think that it is inherently part of this resolution as it demeans anyone who doesn't buy in to those who subscribe to climate change as some kind of corrupt or ignorant fool.
science
Submitted by spress on Tue, 03/07/2017 - 18:57
I agree with Arthur on his change. and andrew Bloom
Various
Submitted by rabjeff on Wed, 03/08/2017 - 00:02
I would support modification of the language in the paragraph Arthur objects to.
Responding to Howard, the clear context here is various moves by the US Administration to remove scientific information from websites, limit publication of work by governmentally employed scientists, and otherwise limit scientific inquiry and publication for ideological purposes.
Jeffrey,
Submitted by htilman on Wed, 03/08/2017 - 16:07
In reply to Various by rabjeff
Jeffrey,
While I agree the context is clear, the text itself of the resolution is focused squarely on Climate Change, so let's just call it what it is. A resolution concerning climate change. It's just a pet peeve of mine when I hear people say things like "I beleive in science," or "I support science." As others have said, the great things about science is that it's true whether or not you beleive/support it.