Scientists Should Test and not Assume

There are some things we know because we know them. You know? That is, we have some things we presuppose without verification. When we discover that we had something wrong, we are often surprised. Since this is human nature, it happens in science as well.

Dr Sherry Mayo operating the XuM ultra-high resolution X-ray microscope Photo by Mark Fergus for CSIRO (CC BY 3.0) (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents; this is a picture of a scientist doing science stuff)

If you study on it, things that are taken for granted and "conventional wisdom" can be overturned with a bit of research or testing. Sometimes that startles us reg'lar people, and I reckon it does the same for scientists.

One example is that because of their presuppositions of deep time and evolution, carbon-14 dating of coal, diamonds and other items was slow in happening because they "knew" there would be no carbon in them. There was carbon in them after all, and those of us who support recent creation were vindicated.

Scientists "know" that plastic bags are bad for the environment and allegedly contribute to global warming/climate change. Paper and cloth? Not so much. Someone got the notion to test those ideas, and the results were not as expected. Also, we are told that cattle (including their farms) contribute to global warming. Although people should follow the money because of a possible conflict of interest, some researchers found that if dairy cows were removed, the environmental impact would be small but other significant problems would result.

You can read about these and some other interesting items by following the link to "Science Findings Can Be Counter-Intuitive".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Climate Change Factors Part 2

In "Climate Change Factors Part 1", we saw that people were on the prod, blaming humans for global warming or "anthropogenic climate change". But the whole thing is not "settled science" because there are many factors that still need to be considered. Today, we have a severe case of one thing leading to another, beginning with the sun.

Sunspots image credit: SOHO, the EIT Consortium, and the MDI Team, but I found it here
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)

That bright hot thing in the sky up there, thataway —

"Don't be looking right at it, ya idjit! It'll wreck your eyes!"

Oh, I know not to look at the sun without proper eye protection. Anyway, the greater light that God made to rule the day (Gen. 1:16) is obviously a major component in global warming. It does warm this globe and others. What happens from there is a complicated sequence of events that is being considered. Sunspots are less active now, and we're approaching the same kind of condition that was seen at the coldest point of the Little Ice Age.

Sure, we had some global warming, but now we may have some cooling. While models come and go (and we get a mite irritated at hearing about various models), they are often necessary to explain observed data. The sun is a big part of magnetic fields, electricity, cosmic rays, weather and climate. We have a pair of articles to consider that have a great deal of science and math — and they link to in-depth articles for those who are inclined to dig deeper.

Sunspots are relatively cool blotches on the sun’s surface. The number of sunspots is an indicator of how active the sun is. It has the most sunspots when it’s most active—at solar maximum—and has a slightly higher total energy output during that time. Likewise, the sun has the fewest sunspots at solar minimum. The number of sunspots varies over an 11-year solar cycle. Could there be a connection between sunspot cycles and Earth’s weather and climate? If so, is this relevant to the global warming debate?

To read the rest, click on "Cosmic Rays, Sunspots, and Climate Change, Part 1". The next part will be right here waiting for you. Like so:

One layer in Earth’s atmosphere, the ionosphere, is a very good conductor of electricity. Earth’s surface is also a good conductor. Thunderstorms in the low latitudes act as “batteries” that continuously deposit positive electrical charge on the ionosphere. Because of this charge, there is a large potential difference, or voltage, between the ionosphere and Earth’s surface. This voltage is about 250,000 volts, although it can be higher or lower depending on the number of thunderstorms going on at any given time.

You can read all of that one by clicking on "Cosmic Rays, Sunspots, and Climate Change, Part 2".




Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Climate Change Factors Part 1

There is global warming. The Creator designed Earth to heat up and cool down, and he even put the sun up there on the fourth day of Creation Week to facilitate the process. There are some people who insist that we are the cause of global warming. However, there are important facts that get ignored.

Credit: PIXNIO / Tim Hill

The first facts that climate change alarmists need to realize is that it is not "settled science". It cannot be, especially since we do not have all the facts and understand all the sources of what can contribute to climate change. A big part of climate change is rooted an atheistic beliefs in deep time, and an a priori commitment to naturalism — God is not there, and therefore not in control. (Also, keep in mind that the extremists have leftist political agendas and have been known to twist the data and even lie outright to achieve their ends. It's really sad that some people have to politicize science and others of us have to point out the truth.) Supposedly, an important factor in global warming is carbon dioxide. You know, the stuff we exhale and that plants need, then they return the favor by releasing the oxygen that we need?

An overlooked contributor to carbon dioxide is mountain streams.

Recently, a new study published in Nature Communications found that mountain streams may be much larger contributors to the global carbon cycle than previously believed. The study suggests that this is a consequence of the higher turbulence levels of most mountain streams.

Lead author Åsa Horgby, of the Stream Biofilm and Ecosystem Research Laboratory at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Lausanne, Switzerland, and co-authors found that mountain streams release 184 million US tons of carbon globally each year. This is roughly the same as the total global output of CO2 from all tropical streams and their floodplains, yet mountain streams cover much less surface area.

To read the rest, go to "Massive Releases of CO2 from Mountain Streams". I hope you'll come back for the next section.

Another important factor in carbon dioxide production is from volcanic activity. Volcanoes push a great deal of it into the air, and have been doing so for a mighty long time (which has been verified by examination of the contents of rocks). There was a great deal of volcanism, climate change leading to the Ice Age, and more during the Genesis Flood, and Earth has been adjusting ever since.

Recently, a new study published in Nature Communications has suggested that pulses of massive amounts of lava can release as much CO₂ as humanity will produce for the entire 21st century. This indicates that volcanic activity, especially during the global Flood and right after, likely produced tremendous amounts of CO₂ that has far outweighed any produced by humans.

This really should be no surprise, because today’s volcanoes still produce vast amounts of CO₂ and water. However, these scientists were able to find evidence of vast quantities of ancient CO₂ still trapped in the rocks themselves.

You can read the rest of this second installment by clicking on "Massive Releases of CO2 from Volcanism Rival Humans". I'd be much obliged if you'd come back for the final featured item.

The COVID-19 pandemic has not only cost lives, but reactions to it have put many people on standby or entirely out of work. This unpleasant aspect provided an opportunity to examine a hypothesis: carbon dioxide caused by human activity should be down quite a bit. However, that would not be so easy to measure, especially with the other sources and the assumptions that human activity is directly responsible for global warming.

But CO₂ increases after warming has occurred, which it can be measured. Secularists are married up with the debunked Milakovitch Theory, which is used to claim that there are variations in the earth's rotation over long periods that affect climate and ice ages (of which only one can be demonstrated to have occurred). The claims include how sunlight changes through this affect climate change. If you study on it, this is self-refuting by their standards, because climate changes happened before humans allegedly evolved — we cannot be responsible. Go measure a volcano or mountain stream, pilgrim.

Some are pointing out that the coronavirus shutdown presents an opportunity to test a major climate change assumption. Because global industrial activity has been curtailed due to the pandemic, pollution in certain urban areas has decreased dramatically. This decrease in industrial activity should also theoretically decrease global carbon dioxide emissions. One of the main assumptions behind concern over global warming is that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide is due to human activity, not natural causes. The decrease in economic activity provides an opportunity to test that assumption.

Scientists have been measuring atmospheric carbon dioxide at Hawaii’s Mauna Loa Observatory since 1958, and they are still making those measurements even today. If human activity is indeed the cause of the observed increase in atmospheric CO₂, then there should be a small downward dip in atmospheric CO₂, resulting from the coronavirus shutdown. However, such a trend would take time to become noticeable, and other effects would need to first be taken into account.

To read the rest of this important article, and our last for today, click on "Shutdown: Chance to Test Climate Change Assumption". To keep this warm big blue marble rolling, see "Climate Change Factors Part 2". ADDENDUM 6-06-2020: The shutdown did not falsify the idea that we are responsible for increased carbon dioxide, nor did the test validate climate alarmism, as there are other factors to consider. To see the follow-up, click on "Testing a Climate Change Assumption: Update".

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

An Abundance of Dubious Models

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Models and simulations are important in many areas related to science, but they are only as good as the information that are utilized. Regular readers have seen many posts with links to articles discussing faulty models (including yesterday's "Increasing Dark Matter Desperation") using mathematics and various scenarios.

Credit: Freeimages / Sanja Gjenero

No researcher is completely unbiased and objective. They operate from their worldviews, presuppositions, and agendas. Many times, important data are ignored or even suppressed, which frequently happens with global climate change models. Michael Mann used a fraudulent "hockey stick" graph to support global warming. Indeed, environmentalists are driven by their emotions and agendas, with predictions that have failed many times over the years, often suppressing pertinent information and indulging in fake science (see "Climate Change Alarmism vs God" and "Deluded Guardians of the Planet"). Both evolutionists and environmental extremists are often guilty of tampering with data.

When dealing with the COVID-19 crisis, many models have been produced. Healthcare officials in governments around the world went into action with the data they had. Projections of extremely high death rates frightened many people, and COVID-19 is very contagious — but it is not nearly as lethal as other diseases. The survival rate is very high, but it is a long road to full recovery. The virus began in Wuhan, China, but the ChiComs gave false information that would have saved many lives. People depend on the World Health Organization for serious and accurate information, but details are coming to light that WHO may be complicit with China.

At the end of January, COVID-19 was considered no big deal, and people like New York City mayor Bill De Blasio, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, and House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Peolsi were urging people to get into crowded places in February and March. Warnings had been given but these politicians made things worse for people.

Many sources of information prompt us to question the validity of the models, but we tend to laugh off absurd studies such as flatulence spreading COVID-19 or conspiracy theories such as a link between the pandemic and 5G networks. The established guideline for social distancing is six feet (about two meters) from other people. A study that is largely ignored (and would be extremely impractical) is that 27 feet is the safe distance. Tests for the virus — at least initially — have been unreliable. These factors add to the fear and confusion. For that matter, social distancing and even self-quarantining seem to be helpful, but for people to congratulate themselves on their actions does not take into account all of the information; other factors are involved beyond personal space.

By the way, one big question for many people is why everyone is being restricted. Back in Bible times, people with contagious conditions were isolated, not everyone else. When the Apollo astronauts came back from the moon, they were quarantined for fear of space bugs or something. Why aren't we isolating the sick people instead of riding herd on the general populace?

This Coronavirus is aptly called novel, and scientists as well as the public are learning how to cope and deal with the situations. While they are learning, restraint would be in order. Health scientists like to do health scientist stuff and make projections, but they went with extreme worst-case scenarios at full gallop a mite too soon. We cannot fault them for not dealing with the economic impact and human factors, but like evolutionary scientists who see worm burrow fossils and claim to have evidence of our most ancient ancestor, they were too hasty. Projections on the death toll have been revised downward several times, and emergency field hospitals such as this one are being taken down because they are not needed.

Much of the data are skewed. If someone has the Coronavirus at death, it is different that someone who died solely because of the virus. Dr. Deborah Birx tells us that reports are "liberal", so the virus is not necessarily the cause of death, but only getting credit for the kill when there are other conditions. Accounts that medical professionals are assuming COVID-19 and putting the diagnosis code on the forms without testing the patient are surfacing. People have questions that are going unanswered right now.

Some of the cable news networks are showing a death counter almost like covering COVID-19 is a game show. In a way, it is to them because they are leftists and want the President to look bad. But experts have to do something with models and they need information to work with. Unfortunately, more information is muddying the waters retroactively because there is some suspicion that the virus had made landfall in the United States in December 2019. It is possible that people had the virus but did not even know it because they were asymptomatic. Others were sick and recovered. My wife suspects that she had the virus here in New York in January or February. Perhaps I am asymptomatic. Now, how do we get tested at this late date?

Parody of the atheist bus campaign sign (click for larger)
Original Image: Wikimedia Commons / Dan Etherington  (CC by 2.0)

Despite the panicporn, confusion, and fearmongering, God is in is still here and cares for us. I have several items for you. Some of this material will be dated rather quickly including the "video" below (other material was released after I made it), but there are things we can learn about gathering information and making models. Be aware that Plante and Stigall are news and political commentary (often with humor), not Christian ministries.

• Putting death in its context — Yes, Covid-19 is a killer but…
• Creation Virology and COVID-19 
• This audio of The Chris Plante Show has interesting material. Begin at the 5 minutes 52 seconds mark, and I hope you'll do the first hour. At least the first half hour (there's a segment after the commercial breaks). Contains political material.
• Chris Stigall's podcast often has interesting discussions of this Coronavirus as well as politics and economics. Here is a link to the latest episode to date, and you can click around for more.
• Childlike Trust: God’s Antidote for a Troubled Mind

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Deluded Guardians of the Planet

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It seems that the more people deny their Creator, the stranger things get. As we have seen, evolutionism is rooted in pantheism, and both of them saddle up and ride friendly-like with the New Age brand. (Nothing "new" there, it is just repackaged paganism.) Darwin's death cult is a big part of it.

A hero of the anti-natalist movement is suing his parents because he regrets having been born. Interesting that he claims to be close to them, and the amount of money is "symbolic", because he wants to send a message. Apparently people do not ask to be born. This telegram just came in over the singing wire, pilgrim: they never do ask. (Tell me how anyone is supposed to do that. Tarot cards and other hocus pocus, I reckon.) It is a part of the global warming movement to reduce the population, and rejects the biblical teaching that children are a gift from God. This movement should be flushed. 

While that anti-natalist stuff is just plain silly (indeed, the court didn't take none too kindly to having its time wasted), the next one is an example of a more dangerous aspect from climate activists: voluntary human extinction. At least it's not like some sidewinders who actively want to kill off people right away. Pagan pantheism is at the forefront, as are Darwinism and old earth beliefs. 

According to Les Knight, we must kill off the people to save the planet. This, too, is related to the leftist-globalist climate change cult. The global warming movement is socialist as well as pagan at its core, so it is not a surprise that Knight also detests capitalism (like Child of the Corn Greta Thunberg). In addition, some people insist that the Australian bushfire crisis is the result of anthropogenic global warming, but that is the opposite of the truth.

Note that pantheism is prominent. Earth is more important than the people on it. This is a denial of the truth, where the Creator gave us the world to care for and live on, and Earth is not a living being. Also, something we've noticed before is that they are inconsistent. These tinhorns affirm evolution, but they are inconsistent by saying that we cannot live according to evolutionary ideas. That is, we crawled up to the top of the food chain, so we should be able to do what we want. By saying something is right or wrong, they are tacitly admitting that atheism, pantheism, naturalism and all the rest do not work, and they are inadvertently standing on the biblical creationist worldview!

As Chris Plante (who was my source for the first two stories, you can hear his comments at this link) has indicated, being a leftist means never having to admit you're wrong. In this case, numerous failed predictions for the end of the world. What is their course of action when these doom and gloom predictions fail? Make excuses, ignore the failures, or best yet, make new predictions and keep going. Elton John's song title "Sorry Seems to be the Hardest Word" is often true, but apologies and admitting mistakes are pretty much nonexistent for evolutionary globalist apparatchiks.

There is no room for free speech and even free thought if these types get their way. There have been calls to punish climate change skeptics, and this has been happening for several years. Just recently, the fun folks in Deutschland are calling people who dare to think for themselves (and worse, who express themselves) as "saboteurs". They will be punished with fines and imprisonment. Can't have anyone go against "consensus science" because if you disagree with the views of totalitarians blackguards, you are a "science denier". One loathsome humbug plays God and condemns people to Hell for presenting contrary evidence to secular global warming beliefs! Oh, please.

Keep your eyes and ears open for complaints that people are publishing things that are "not true" or outright lies — these generally can be translated as, "Things we don't like, and we refuse to allow evidence contrary to our agendas". Those people want to control the narrative, and you may have noticed that they accuse others of being dishonest and intolerant, which is a distraction tactic because they are being dishonest and intolerant. See how that works? It's who they are and what they do.

While some of these things seem humorous and irrelevant at first, they actually come from a wretched worldview. Knight based part of his life on the failed Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich, and there is obviously no room for the Creator and Sustainer of life in his philosophies, or in the worldview of these naturalists. Atheism and evolutionism have been detrimental to science and society, and people are in rebellion against God, whether consciously or without realizing it. Earth is not more important than humanity or the Creator who provided it for us.  Ever notice how these people are perpetually angry? The only hope for truth and meaning is repentance and submitting to the God of Creation.

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Climate Change and Ignored Truth

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It seems like a swell notion to save the planet, and it helps people feel like they are accomplishing something. People like to feel good about themselves. Unfortunately, the depredations of two-bit tinhorns promoting anthropogenic climate change have unduly distressed many people.

Modified from an image at Clker clipart

"But climate change is settled science, Cowboy Bob!"

You might want to study on it a while. People making a claim like that are falling into the traps of climate change cultists, and if someone tries to disabuse them of that falsehood, they become hysterical like the guy that incorrectly glued himself to an airplane ¹ or the woman glued her, uh,  sweater kittens outside Goldman Sachs ². What's with leftists and glue, anyway? (One tinhorn says they are not extremists, but simply people concerned for the welfare of the planet. Uh, sure.) Climate "consensus" is ridiculous ³, and it shows the hubris of secularists and globalists pretending to fully understand the workings of the planet God gave us — and that they contrive data for their own ends.

Many "predictions" of the past have come to nothing for many years and thinking people are having serious doubts ^{4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10}. Nowadays, climate change has become a religion, a part of the culture of death ¹¹. Since it is primarily a politically leftist power grab, some people think that it is being used to establish a new world order ¹²! Indeed, the Ministry of Truth ¹³ has stated that those opposed to global climate change must be punished ¹⁴, which makes it rather difficult to have the conversation in the first place.

The extremely mouthy child that is parodied, Greta Funberg ¹⁵ — I mean, Greta Thunberg — is a pawn that is being used to manipulate the emotions of people ¹⁶. There have been accusations that criticism of Greta are misogynistic and we should ignore her Asperger syndrome. This is special pleading to let her escape responsibility for her own actions and those of her handlers; she was "well" enough to lecture the world on several occasions, after all. Misogynistic? She is not being criticized for being female, but for her demeanor and what she says — as well as hypocrisy involving her yacht. Leftists slap leather with anyone who disagrees with people who are protected under identity politics.

It has been a frequent contention of mine that people "think" with their emotions and are unskilled in the use of reason. Since antisemitism is increasing again, we see the spectre of Joseph Goebbels when people blame the Jews for global warming ^{17, 18}. Again, lack of rational thought but a prairie schooner-load of emotional appeal and manipulation. 

The pearl-clutching fear mongers are wrong, hurricanes are not increasing from climate change ^{19, 20, 21}, nor are they becoming more severe ²². This whole panic is based on evolutionary thinking and the presupposition that Earth is old ²³. Scientists have become useful idiots ²⁴ for political and atheistic agendas ²⁵. The truth is that we have a Creator who sustains the world, but materialists must believe that everything came from nothing ²⁶, so by extension, they have no hope for the future. Don't be disunderstanding me now, those of us who doubt the global warming consensus and offer evidence that the climate cult rejects are not saying that we should run roughshod and trash the planet. In fact, Christians (especially biblical creationists) believe that we are stewards of God's creation, and are accountable to him ²⁷.

With irrefutably feckless logic, someone claimed that Christians have no business objecting to the prevailing climate change views because the Bible is silent on climate change. This "logic" is irrefutable because it has no rational foundation. One of the flaws involved is the argument from silence. Well, the Bible is silent on genetics and the moons of Saturn, but we study those things anyway. Moving on.

There are serious flaws in climate change models ²⁸ which are similar to the kind of reasoning used in deep time geology and cosmology, as well as in evolutionary biology. Specifically, relevant information is ignored or suppressed, and the narrative du jour dominates the fundamentally flawed predictions and proclamations. Again, secularists reject the sustaining work and power of our loving Creator.

All-time record temperatures in Paris, fires in the Amazon, Mississippi River flooding, the Maldives underwater . . .

Everywhere we turn, we hear warnings about serious threats to life on earth. With each report, extremists demand immediate, drastic government measures to slow down climate change before it is too late.

Most stories lay the blame squarely on us humans, particularly on carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas produced by our burning coal, oil, or natural gas. In their zeal to protect the environment, however, few activists stop to question the data that supposedly links human activity to a rise in global temperature or to a rise in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events. Even fewer have taken the time to consider how proposed restrictions on fossil fuels could make life more difficult, especially for the poor.

To read the rest of this enlightening article or download the audio from my favorite reader, click on "What Scientists Ignore About Climate Change". 



Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Baseless Indignation of Atheists and Evolutionists

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

We hear, watch, and read about the increasing hysteria from leftists about anthropogenic climate change. Their tendentious, skewed, and inaccurate evidence is exceptionally myopic. This evolution-based atheistic posturing is presenting change made by humans as bad, and ignoring the fact that we have been changing our environments from the beginning.

Credit: Freeimages / Flavio Takemoto

Evolutionists act like once we commenced to evolving from an apelike ancestor, we finished and sat around doing almost nothing for a huge amount of time. That's ludicrous on the surface, and it also goes against human nature.

Let's go with atheistic thinking for a moment. Since they think that we are nothing but advanced animals, what about critters? Animals (like beavers) transform their own environments, why can't we? Also, are animals bad because they change things?

The truth is, we have been effecting the world wherever we live. Somehow, modifications are disastrous in the minds of secularists. You want changes to be made?  Yes, there are changes that must be made, but they go far deeper than our behavior. You won't like the truth. To learn more, click on "No New Human Influence Under the Sun", and I hope you come back for the next item.

As I said earlier, these climate change alarmists are myopic. Or perhaps they are conveniently forgetting that climate change has been used as a scare tactic since the 1930s. If they don't take too kindly to doing that much research, mayhaps they can go back and see the faulty predictions since 1970. But no, the latest propaganda is that we only have ten or twelve years to live unless we destroy our lives and civilization, conveniently giving money to leftist globalists, right this doggone minute. They said that before.

"But Cowboy Bob, the predictions are right this time!" 

Why? Because they fit an agenda and confirm globalist biases? They have the same fundamentally flawed reasoning and presuppositions that led to risible predictions in the past.

Whenever an atheist or evolutionist will complain that something is wrong or evil, that person is tacitly denying their naturalistic viewpoint and standing on the Christian worldview. According to them, it is wrong to reject their twisted climate change data. We are bad, so children are recruited to spread the fear and given erroneous "facts" to promote an agenda. Indeed, many people have made climate change activism into their religion, and they are quick to get on the prod when exposed to inconvenient facts. Gullibility, yes. Healthy skepticism, no.

Greta Thunberg has been dehumanized and made a pawn. The "Church" of Sweden says she is the "successor of Jesus". By the way, why is she telling off the United States and other countries that are successful on dealing with pollution and emissions? Tell it to the ChiComs and India.

In a secular worldview, why does doing what they think is wrong a problem? We are bundles of chemicals responding to our impulses; we were each born this way. For that matter, we are at the top of the evolutionary chain, so we can do whatever we please if it helps us thrive as persons.

In reality, we are God's creation and he is in control. We need to humble ourselves and repent. Also, we are not to trash the planet, but to be stewards of it.

The classic picture of the Scientist is a dispassionate person in a white lab coat looking at a test tube, then recording the data on a clipboard, which journals report in boring text. Real scientists are ordinary people with biases, passions and worldviews that color how they look at things. Quite often, they have strong feelings about what their fellow human beings should do. The word “should” implies moral standards.

Philosophers try to see if ideas comport with each other. Incongruent ideas are illogical by nature. Consider the conundrum of the evolutionary biologist (or any secular scientist, for that matter). Are their propositions consistent?
1. All things came into being without purpose or goal.
2. People should change their behavior.

There is no “should” word in the Stuff Happens Law of Darwinism. If the human race goes extinct, so be it. If the world heats up and we all die, tough luck. Stuff happens. Without a universal, timeless canon of right and wrong—a moral guide star—scientists’ opinions about what people should do have no force. They are just empty opinions that will evolve over time like everything else. Yet in spite of that foundational belief, scientists and journals frequently engage in “should-ing” everyone else. That makes no sense.

I hope you will read all of this article. To do so, click on "Moral Passion by Evolutionists Makes No Sense".




Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

The Culture of Death and the Climate Change Cult

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

This is a follow-up to some aspects if my article on education and indoctrination, "Evolutionists Stoking the Fires of Censorship Again". People are unskilled in using the most basic logical principles and "think" with their emotions. They are used by manipulators who seek to further their own agendas. This is very prominent in atheism, fish-to-fool evolution, leftist political views, and global climate change.

Credit: FreeDigialPhotos.net / ponsulak

The world is going to end! Katie, bar the door! Oh, you never opened up from the last big scare? Never mind. Alarmists have been predicting catastrophes and even the end of the world for decades, but have a perfect record of failure. In the 1970s,  alarmists were saying that a coming ice age was inevitable (for example, see the video "In Search Of... The Coming Ice Age"). That switched to global warming, spearheaded by Algore and his  discredited predictions. Now they've hedged their bets with the ambiguous "climate change", which can be blamed for many things from civil wars to my car not starting. The car not starting thing is not much of an exaggeration because climate change has been blamed for many odd things.

While scientists are having their disagreements (but agree that there is no cause for panic), more heat than light is being furnished by leftist politicians, uneducated alarmists, and globalists. Just try to put forward information or have a discussion, and you are likely to be called a "liar" and slammed with leftist propaganda. We cannot have the conversation. Their view and their interpretation of the evidence is the only one to be considered. Real science is about examining the facts, not just the material that is tortured to support a leftist ideology. Now children are being manipulated by activists in the subterfuge.

Global warming leftists have a materialistic worldview that is fueled by evolutionary thinking. Just study on it a moment. Principles of Geology by lawyer Charles Lyell was written in part to “free the science from Moses” (that is, deny God and recent creation), and also to postulate huge amounts of time. Lawyer Lyell influence Charles Darwin, who hated Christianity and popularized an ancient pagan view (evolution was not invented by Darwin) that fooled many people.

Many people have a fundamentally flawed worldview and are not taught how to think (secularists tell people what to think), unaware of suppressed evidence refuting Darwinism and the popular versions of global warming. It's not surprising they have a bleak outlooks. These people (including children now) are filled with despair, fear, anger, hatred, atheism, and lies that they think are the truth. Yes, we have hope, but it is not in the machinations of sidewinders who want power and money. We do have a Creator, he is in control, and science supports the biblical worldview.

This global climate thing is widely known and there are many sources of information. In addition to the links above, I have two more. First, I recommend a video by Dr. Alan White, "Is It Time to Panic About Climate Change?" Dr. White provides some very important information, although some tinhorns will call him a liar without even thinking about what he says. Invoking white privilege, here is an excerpt of Dr. James R. White on The Dividing Line. It's just over thirteen minutes long, and he discusses the cultic nature of global warming:




Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!