Global warming and the end

Status
Not open for further replies.

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Many Christians who bother to read about the actual science of climate change (and don't just get their science from politically distorted opinions on Fox News) sometimes wonder how it all fits into the 'End times' or Last Days? I have a theologian friend who is doing this very subject as their Phd. He concludes that there is a place for mourning the wholesale destruction of God's world that God made and cares about. He thinks that the church has a large role to play in leading a movement towards caring about and solving climate change. Sure a lot of this could just be selfish self-preservation. I don't want to live in a world striving through fresh water wars and climate disrupted famines. I don't want to see more species going extinct, as I like animals. But I should probably care more than I do just from selfish reasons. I should care because God, my Father in Heaven, made this world. He fashioned it out of billions of years of evolution, and then had the early Hebrews write a poem about how orderly it all is. He woke up the first humans and gave them sentience. He gave us some means of living forever, but then we turned our back on him and we died. He gave us a nice climate to have civilisation evolve in, but then we trashed that too. As Christians, we should care about this stuff, and try to honour God in these Last Days with our lives, our money, our relationships, and our energy sources... and the letters we write to government about cleaning those energy sources up.

And we should be careful we're not conned by the greed of fossil fuel corporations.
A new report shows that an anonymous group of industry billionaires has secretly poured more than $100 million into anti-environmental[bless and do not curse]front groups. Weeks before Election Day, Chevron gave the largest corporate Super PAC contribution of the post[bless and do not curse]-Citizens United era, making sure that Congress stayed in the hands of climate deniers.
The Fossil Fuel Resistance | Politics News | Rolling Stone
A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money!
 

Codger

Regular Member
Oct 23, 2003
1,066
144
82
N. E. Ohio
✟1,926.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Many Christians who bother to read about the actual science of climate change (and don't just get their science from politically distorted opinions on Fox News) sometimes wonder how it all fits into the 'End times' or Last Days? I have a theologian friend who is doing this very subject as their Phd. He concludes that there is a place for mourning the wholesale destruction of God's world that God made and cares about. He thinks that the church has a large role to play in leading a movement towards caring about and solving climate change. Sure a lot of this could just be selfish self-preservation. I don't want to live in a world striving through fresh water wars and climate disrupted famines. I don't want to see more species going extinct, as I like animals. But I should probably care more than I do just from selfish reasons. I should care because God, my Father in Heaven, made this world. He fashioned it out of billions of years of evolution, and then had the early Hebrews write a poem about how orderly it all is. He woke up the first humans and gave them sentience. He gave us some means of living forever, but then we turned our back on him and we died. He gave us a nice climate to have civilisation evolve in, but then we trashed that too. As Christians, we should care about this stuff, and try to honour God in these Last Days with our lives, our money, our relationships, and our energy sources... and the letters we write to government about cleaning those energy sources up.

And we should be careful we're not conned by the greed of fossil fuel corporations.


A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money!


I don't think that I could express my views better than this article by Dr. Sowell of Stanford University. He had this movement pegged back in 2007.

"Britain's Channel 4 has produced a devastating documentary titled "The Great Global Warming Swindle." It has apparently not been broadcast by any of the networks in the United States. But, fortunately, it is available on the Internet.

Distinguished scientists specializing in climate and climate-related fields talk in plain English and present readily understood graphs showing what a crock the current global warming hysteria is.

These include scientists from MIT and top-tier universities in a number of countries. Some of these are scientists whose names were paraded on some of the global warming publications that are being promoted in the media -- but who state plainly that they neither wrote those publications nor approved them. One scientist threatened to sue unless his name was removed.

While the public has been led to believe that "all" the leading scientists buy the global warming hysteria and the political agenda that goes with it, in fact the official reports from the United Nations or the National Academy of Sciences are written by bureaucrats -- and then garnished with the names of leading scientists who were "consulted," but whose contrary conclusions have been ignored.


There is no question that the globe is warming but it has warmed and cooled before, and is not as warm today as it was some centuries ago, before there were any automobiles and before there was as much burning of fossil fuels as today. None of the dire things predicted today happened then.

The British documentary goes into some of the many factors that have caused the earth to warm and cool for centuries, including changes in activities on the sun, 93 million miles away and wholly beyond the jurisdiction of the Kyoto treaty. According to these climate scientists, human activities have very little effect on the climate, compared to many other factors, from volcanoes to clouds.

These climate scientists likewise debunk the mathematical models that have been used to hype global warming hysteria, even though hard evidence stretching back over centuries contradicts these models.
What is even scarier than seeing how easily the public, the media, and the politicians have been manipulated and stampeded, is discovering how much effort has been put into silencing scientists who dare to say that the emperor has no clothes.

Academics who jump on the global warming bandwagon are far more likely to get big research grants than those who express doubts -- and research is the lifeblood of an academic career at leading universities.
Environmental movements around the world are committed to global warming hysteria and nowhere more so than on college and university campuses, where they can harass those who say otherwise. One of the scientists interviewed on the British documentary reported getting death threats.

In politics, even conservative Republicans seem to have taken the view that, if you can't lick 'em, join 'em. So have big corporations, which have joined the stampede.

This only enables the green crusaders to declare at every opportunity that "everybody" believes the global warming scenario, except for a scattered few "deniers" who are likened to Holocaust deniers.

The difference is that we have the hardest and most painful evidence that there was a Holocaust. But, for the global warming scenario that is causing such hysteria, we have only a movie made by a politician and mathematical models whose results change drastically when you change a few of the arbitrarily selected variables.

No one denies that temperatures are about a degree warmer than they were a century ago. What the climate scientists in the British documentary deny is that you can mindlessly extrapolate that, or that we are headed for a climate catastrophe if we don't take drastic steps that could cause an economic catastrophe.

"Global warming" is just the latest in a long line of hysterical crusades to which we seem to be increasingly susceptible."

 
Upvote 0

Handmaid for Jesus

You can't steal my joy
Supporter
Dec 19, 2010
25,582
32,974
enroute
✟1,395,814.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
The climate IS changing. I have lived under the sun many, many years, and from experience I know the climate is changing. I don't need a scientist to tell me. When I was little, it was cold in October in our area. Now it does not even get chilly until after Thanksgiving, and does not get cold until around January.Storms are worse, and the hail that falls is baseball and softball sized weighing up to a half pound. That is change.
 
Upvote 0

Marantha

Newbie
Feb 3, 2013
429
11
✟15,647.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Eclipse (the literal meaning of an eclipse is to BLOCK light) says NO! Don't look at the evidence! Don't look at REPUTABLE men with nothing to hide and nothing to gain!

Trust me! Trust me because I insult, mock, attack, and attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees!



No thanks sir. I will trust the reputable men who are trying to help my fellow man, and my Brothers and Sisters in Christ know the truth. One thing you say is correct.....and that is huge corporations are making a LOT of pollution.

This is the WHOLE story exposed in 2 minutes by the former FBI Chief of Los Angeles. A man who had a top-secret security clearance, integrity, and a lot of responsibility. He risked it all, AND PAID FOR IT WITH HIS LIFE, to let others know the truth.

Here is what HE SAID; not what Marantha says, but what HE SAID about this matter.

Former FBI Chief Ted Gunderson Says Chemtrail Death Dumps Must Be Stopped - YouTube


It only takes 2 minutes to watch it Brothers and Sisters. Know the truth.

Here is one more by CREDIBLE RESEARCHERS that will show you the rest of the story.

WHY In The World Are They Spraying? - YouTube

The truth shall set you free..... says God.


All Glory Be to Christ
Marantha
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
When I was young the earth was heading for a new ice age. It was imminent, it was irreversible, it was catastrophic, and it was all our fault.

We were heading for a population bomb, which was going to result in massive starvation and the loss of much of the life on the planet. It was imminent, it was irreversible, it was catastrophic, and it was all our fault.

We were heading for a silent spring where all the birds would be dead; killed by the horrible pesticide DDT. It was imminent, it was irreversible, it was catastrophic, and it was all our fault. Concerned citizens banned the production of DDT, resulting in the death of millions due to malaria.

The hole in the ozone layer was growing. It was going to be completely destroyed because we used anti-perspirant. The result would be extreme temperatures which would fry the earth. It was imminent, it was irreversible, it was catastrophic, and it was all our fault.

Then it was gobal warming. The catalytic convertors in our cars, which we installed to convert carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide were going to kill us because now the carbon dioxide was creating a greenhouse effect. For 10 years the planet warmed, and then it began to cool. Ice caps continued to grow in some places and melt in others. The population of the polar bears doubled, causing them to be nearly extinct. The damage done to the planet cause by us simply being Americans is going to destroy us all. It is imminent, it is irreversible, it is catastrophic, and it is all our fault.

The "scientists" pushing the "climate change" agenda have been caught collaborating to doctor the evidence, and yet people still put credence in their findings because the results fit with their political agenda. Climate change is not science, it's a political campaign put forth by the same anti-capitalist liberal extremists who have been telling us that we're destroying the world since the locomotives stretched across the great plains. You are free to worry and cry about man destroying the planet to your heart's content. Man doesn't have that authority. Using the natural resources that God gave us will not destroy the natural planet that God gave us.

This world will end when He decides. We must be good stewards of our world and try to keep it clean and healthy. That doesn't mean we have to subject our sanity to the claims of proven liars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Codger
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married


I don't think that I could express my views better than this article by Dr. Sowell of Stanford University. He had this movement pegged back in 2007.

"Britain's Channel 4 has produced a devastating documentary titled "The Great Global Warming Swindle." It has apparently not been broadcast by any of the networks in the United States. But, fortunately, it is available on the Internet.

Distinguished scientists specializing in climate and climate-related fields talk in plain English and present readily understood graphs showing what a crock the current global warming hysteria is.[/quote]

Hi Codger,
I watched the 'Great Global Warming Swindle' and did a double take. For a while, I really thought our world had been taken for a ride on this 'terrible hoax'. Then I spent months investigating the claims. Every single one of them is a carefully cherry-picked half truth misrepresenting what the science says or it is worse, an outright LIE! If you believe this movie, you've been had by the worst anti-science propaganda the net has to offer. It's up there with believing in Aliens at area 51 or the moon landing being faked!

These include scientists from MIT and top-tier universities in a number of countries.
Incorrect: some of the scientists commenting are not who they say they are, such as Tim Ball. Others are part of the 3% of climate scientists who disagree, who are either known to be cantankerous old codgers who's peer reviewed work as been debunked as irrelevant, or one in particular is a literal 7 day creationist ideologically unable to believe in an old earth and 'normal' scientific realities and data.

Some of these are scientists whose names were paraded on some of the global warming publications that are being promoted in the media -- but who state plainly that they neither wrote those publications nor approved them. One scientist threatened to sue unless his name was removed.

Exactly! The Denialists misquoted the peer-reviewed oceanographer! This is a perfect example of how Denialist's grab out-of-context sound bytes and then distort them to pervert and twist the truth. It's revolting behaviour!

Carl Wunsch Carl Wunsch, professor of Physical Oceanography at MIT, is featured in the Channel 4 version of the programme. Afterwards he said that he was "completely misrepresented" in the film and had been "totally misled" when he agreed to be interviewed.[7][30] He called the film "grossly distorted" and "as close to pure propaganda as anything since World War Two",[31] and he lodged a complaint with Ofcom. He particularly objected to how his interview material was used:
In the part of The Great Climate Change Swindle where I am describing the fact that the ocean tends to expel carbon dioxide where it is warm, and to absorb it where it is cold, my intent was to explain that warming the ocean could be dangerous—because it is such a gigantic reservoir of carbon. By its placement in the film, it appears that I am saying that since carbon dioxide exists in the ocean in such large quantities, human influence must not be very important—diametrically opposite to the point I was making—which is that global warming is both real and threatening.[7]
The Great Global Warming Swindle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



While the public has been led to believe that "all" the leading scientists buy the global warming hysteria and the political agenda that goes with it, in fact the official reports from the United Nations or the National Academy of Sciences are written by bureaucrats -- and then garnished with the names of leading scientists who were "consulted," but whose contrary conclusions have been ignored.
Evidence? The peer-reviewed nature of science tends to mean the 'truth will out'.
Is there a scientific consensus on global warming?

Also, any physics lab in any university in any country can confirm or deny the basic science behind Co2. How powerful it is at trapping heat is a simple physics test like checking the boiling point of water! Do you really think the IPCC is an all-powerful institute that can hide the basic laws of physics? If you really want to disprove global warming, disprove the Radiative Forcing Equation below, which basically counts:-
1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png




There is no question that the globe is warming but it has warmed and cooled before, and is not as warm today as it was some centuries ago,
Incorrect. This is one of the more outrageous lies from Martin Durkin! The so called 'Medieval Warm Period' was no where near as warm as today.
What does past climate change tell us about global warming?

Also, the ancient prehistory of previously warmer dinosaur ages might come as a shock to uninformed newcomers to climate science, but climatologists are all over it. They know all about it. Denialists love to rave about it as if this is some great secret, but talk with any climatologist long enough and they'll explain the variety of really, really, really long term natural forcings that were at work there, that are roughly understood, but that are simply not at work now.i
before there were any automobiles and before there was as much burning of fossil fuels as today. None of the dire things predicted today happened then.
That's because:-

  • the MWP was no where near as hot as it is today,
  • there were not 7 billion people on the planet but the global population was only back in the hundreds of millions
  • human beings had not used up so much fresh water that half the world's rivers no longer actually reach the oceans, and our civilisation back then had plenty of natural resources and new land and new fresh water supplies to discover. Today's all used up.
The British documentary goes into some of the many factors that have caused the earth to warm and cool for centuries, including changes in activities on the sun, 93 million miles away and wholly beyond the jurisdiction of the Kyoto treaty.
All lies. This is one of the areas that is WAY out there, like believing in Aliens at Area 51. The sun's activity has been stable, even quiet (cooler), while the earth has been getting warmer over the last few decades.

According to these climate scientists, human activities have very little effect on the climate,
Unfounded lies

compared to many other factors, from volcanoes to clouds.
Volcanoes produce 1% of the carbon dioxide of humans.
Clouds are an interesting potential feedback, with some degree of uncertainty about how they are going to respond to the scientifically measurable rise in temperatures that we KNOW Co2 is causing. But the latest science indicates that clouds could actually help cook the planet!

http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/Cloud_Feedback_500.jpg

What is the net feedback from clouds?

These climate scientists likewise debunk the mathematical models that have been used to hype global warming hysteria,
Evidence?
even though hard evidence stretching back over centuries contradicts these models.
Evidence?
What is even scarier than seeing how easily the public, the media, and the politicians have been manipulated and stampeded, is discovering how much effort has been put into silencing scientists who dare to say that the emperor has no clothes.
Evidence? Or are you just referring to disgruntled contrarians that cannot publish lies in peer-reviewed papers?

Academics who jump on the global warming bandwagon are far more likely to get big research grants than those who express doubts
I think you got that the wrong way around. 'Academics' who are Denialists are actually far more likely to be receiving some of the hundreds of millions of dollars being pumped into Denialism by Exxon.

-- and research is the lifeblood of an academic career at leading universities.
And if there was ANY doubt that Co2 does what any lab in the world can demonstrate it does, ANY physics lab in the world would disprove it and make a name for themselves! You're pushing a Denialist Conspiracy theory bigger than any conspiracy on the net. It's bigger than Area 51 or the Moon Landing was faked, because EVERY SINGLE LAB ON THE PLANET WOULD HAVE TO BE IN ON IT! Why don't you just think about what you are claiming, and have a nice hot mug of milk, and then come back to us about your conspiracy theory?
Have a read of this, and think about how any one of these institutes could make a name for themselves by disproving what Co2 does in a lab. Here is a list of every single National Academy of Science on the planet, and every scientific body. Please point to the Scientific Body that disagrees with global warming?
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Any. Single. One. Of. Them. Could. Disprove. Global. Warming. Got it?

But they haven't. Why?
A/ Because they're all dishonest greedy conspirators jumping on the bandwagon, every single one of them across the planet, even the Christian climatologists, or:

B/ Because Co2 really DOES do what they can demonstrate it to do in the lab.

Environmental movements around the world are committed to global warming hysteria and nowhere more so than on college and university campuses, where they can harass those who say otherwise.
Yeah, it's all a conspiracy. And the Moon Landing was faked as well.

One of the scientists interviewed on the British documentary reported getting death threats.
And you've never heard of climatologists getting the same from Denialists? Never? You've never heard of CHRISTIANS accusing them unfairly, without evidence, of ALL BEING IN ON THE LARGEST CONSPIRACY IN HUMAN HISTORY?

In politics, even conservative Republicans seem to have taken the view that, if you can't lick 'em, join 'em. So have big corporations, which have joined the stampede.
Rubbish! Republican denialists like the TEA party are a blight against the truth and need to join the rest of the human race's accumulated knowledge.


No one denies that temperatures are about a degree warmer than they were a century ago. What the climate scientists in the British documentary deny is that you can mindlessly extrapolate that,
Please show where the entire scientific community has been mindless in analysing the basic Radiative Forcing Equation.

1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png


Or have Denialist Republicans just mindlessly accepted a bunch of myths instead?
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
When I was young the earth was heading for a new ice age. It was imminent, it was irreversible, it was catastrophic, and it was all our fault.


Wrong on all counts. The majority of climate publications were actually saying the world could get warmer, so much so that Bell Telephone Science hour published this alarming piece!!!!
Climate Change 1958: The Bell Telephone Science Hour - YouTube

What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

You'll find that it was a growing awareness of global dimming, dust in the upper atmosphere, that led some to believe an ice age was coming. The peer reviewed process has since found Co2's interaction to be more powerful, but we keep global dimming on the back burner as a possible emergency solution (with side effects). See my signature!

We were heading for a population bomb, which was going to result in massive starvation and the loss of much of the life on the planet. It was imminent, it was irreversible, it was catastrophic, and it was all our fault.
Different subject, and Paul Ehrlich did make some predictions that were way off. However, a billion people go to bed hungry every single night. (I think we have the technology to solve all the world's problems but do we have the willpower when we can't even agree on the basic physics of Co2?)
We were heading for a silent spring where all the birds would be dead;
The book Silent Spring saved you from that world.
resulting in the death of millions due to malaria.
Statistics? And resulting peer-reviewed statistics if the ecosystem had collapsed, and what deaths there might have been from overusing DDT near farms and humans?

The hole in the ozone layer was growing.
This was true, but due to the fact that the world took strong action we only JUST saved ourselves from this one. There was another chemical being proposed as a propellant which would have been far, far worse than CFC's, and the collapse of the biosphere would have been guaranteed if that had gone into production. It was only by sheer luck of the marketplace we didn't choose to fire off that bomb!
Ozone depletion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Then it was gobal warming. The catalytic convertors in our cars, which we installed to convert carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide were going to kill us because now the carbon dioxide was creating a greenhouse effect. For 10 years the planet warmed, and then it began to cool.
False, the last 15 years have all been in the hottest on record.

Ice caps continued to grow in some places and melt in others.
They're overwhelmingly melting in most places. There are only a few places in Antarctica that are taking on more snow because of an understood effect of the extra energy trapped in the atmosphere tightening up the Antarctic vortex storm. This means, in effect, that the storm doesn't stretch out over southern Australia, and us Aussies get more droughts in South Australia. That rain falls as extra snow on PART of Antarctica. It's just like an ice figure skater pulling their arms in to circle faster. As the storm speeds up, it traps the snow over PARTS of Antarctica. But the rest is warming with the warming oceans.

The population of the polar bears doubled, causing them to be nearly extinct.
? Evidence...?


The damage done to the planet cause by us simply being Americans is going to destroy us all. It is imminent, it is irreversible, it is catastrophic, and it is all our fault.
Well, you did emit most of the Co2. But other countries are also getting in on the game, namely China.
The "scientists" pushing the "climate change" agenda have been caught collaborating to doctor the evidence,
Fail! Parliamentary investigations and the peer-reviewed process totally squashed the silly allegations of 'Climate gate'. That's now out there with the Moon Landing being faked, Aliens at Area 51, and Elvis being an alien working with the M.I.B.

and yet people still put credence in their findings because the results fit with their political agenda.
You got that the wrong way around. Market fundamentalists that hate any form of government regulation put credence in their Denialist findings because the results fit with their political agenda. There, that's better.

Climate change is not science,
Show me some science that shows it's not science, or stop the political blathering.

it's a political campaign put forth by the same anti-capitalist liberal extremists who have been telling us that we're destroying the world
Incorrect, as it is a different group of scientists studying a different threat. Previous threats were dealt with as they arose.


since the locomotives stretched across the great plains. You are free to worry and cry about man destroying the planet to your heart's content. Man doesn't have that authority. Using the natural resources that God gave us will not destroy the natural planet that God gave us.
Question for you (in the middle of your political tirade). Did man bite the apple? Would earthquakes or global warming or tornadoes or tsunamis have hurt us before the fall? What about after? Did we sin? Did we place the world subject to disease and disaster and death? The destruction of this world and our relationship with God was so profound that God let his only Son be murdered to save us and restore us to relationship with Him, and in the next world a restored relationship with that world. If our sin against God placed us subject to disease and death and disaster, why can't global warming just be another one of those disasters?


This world will end when He decides.
Dude, I'm not talking about the planet ending. It will go on nicely even if we destroy our civilisation (just as the Romans destroyed theirs through war and mismanaging local environments). Humanity will survive, even if a majority of us starve to death. (A quarter of Europeans died in the black plague). I don't see anything in the bible, or in the history of the church, that guarantees our civilisation success and prosperity.

We must be good stewards of our world and try to keep it clean and healthy. That doesn't mean we have to subject our sanity to the claims of proven liars.
Again with the groundless character attacks, but I have documented evidence that it is the Denialist who are taking dirty money from fossil fuel companies: and using it to tell verifiable, scientific untruths. They lie. There's billions of dollars at stake, so they lie and lie and lie. And you believe them!
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Eclipse (the literal meaning of an eclipse is to BLOCK light) says NO! Don't look at the evidence! Don't look at REPUTABLE men with nothing to hide and nothing to gain!

Trust me! Trust me because I insult, mock, attack, and attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees!
Marantha

Who insulted me and called me a scoffer (and is now back in the game of bagging out my Avatar) because I wouldn't believe the HOLY SPIRIT inspired videos about Israel collapsing in natural disaster on March 22nd?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Eclipse (the literal meaning of an eclipse is to BLOCK light) says NO! Don't look at the evidence! Don't look at REPUTABLE men with nothing to hide and nothing to gain!

Trust me! Trust me because I insult, mock, attack, and attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees!
Marantha

Who insulted me and called me a scoffer (and is now back in the game of bagging out my Avatar) because I wouldn't believe the HOLY SPIRIT inspired videos about Israel collapsing in natural disaster in March? We know false prophets because the things they rave about don't actually happen. This world is actually warming, there is no actual evidence for the silliest conspiracy theory on the net, 'chemtrails', and you've been pushing false anxiety about falsely predicted abominations and falsely predicted antichrists and now falsely alarming 'chemtrails'? Why should anyone believe anything you say here ever again?

On the other hand, global warming is a real problem, with real solutions. We can fix this. We have to. Fossil fuels will run out one day anyway. The sooner we start adjusting to life without them, the better for pollution in our cities, national security not buying oil from people who don't like westerners very much, local energy security and local job security, and the overall health of our citizens: and that's putting ASIDE all the concerns about global warming for the moment!
 
Upvote 0

Interplanner

Newbie
Aug 5, 2012
11,882
113
near Olympic National Park
✟12,847.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
To eclipse
I see you've chosen not to respond to the NOAA announcement this week.

Bjorn Llundberg was on Fox recently and PO'd a lot of people by explaining how some 80% of the carbon footprint of all cars in the factory production, including green cars. Green cars make something like a 24% reduction on the 20% that can be affected by usage. You do the math. This is what we deal with everyday from "scientists" in America. They don't know how to communicate. They say similar things like "guns killed x number of people." And the US public just nods away like Obama-bobble-heads.

I just noticed your remark that the last 15 years was the hottest on record. The Russian maps of passages through the Arctic waters (not ice) date from the 1800s, acc. to the US Naval journal. How is that?

And that the sun has been cooling. Hmm, then why the rise in temp on Mars? In fact, is that what stars do as they age before they nova?

I thought about your assertion last month that for every 1 cold record there are 9 hot records. Sorry, all too easy to manipulate things. If its really hot in Bakersfield CA, a gov't "official" could easily go to the neighboring towns and get 9 more hot readings, and there you'd have your "record." They do things like that in CA. Just like their fiscal condition!

--Inter
 
  • Agree
Reactions: smittymatt
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
The truly documented evidence is the e-mails leaked from the climate unit at the University of East Anglia in England, where the "scientists" were caught looking for a way to hide the fact that the globe was actually cooling, rather than warming. Their Dr. Phil Jones wrote to a colleague, "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd [sic] from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

These same e-mails also revealed them conspiring to keep any reports that contradicted their "findings" from receiving peer review, saying, "I think we have to stop considering Climate Research as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?"

The vast majority of the thousands" of "scientists" that signed on to global warming were not expert in any field even related to climate or weather. But well over thirty thousand scientists who are indeed experts in fields related to climate science have signed a petition which includes the following statement:

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

The signers of this statement include 3,805 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment; 5,812 scientists trained in the fundamental physical and molecular properties of gases, liquids, and solids, which are essential to understanding the physical properties of the atmosphere and Earth; 4,822 scientists trained in the molecular interactions and behaviors of the substances of which the atmosphere and Earth are composed; 3,046 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of human beings on the Earth; and 10,102 scientists trained primarily in the many engineering specialties required to maintain modern civilization and the prosperity required for all human actions, including environmental programs. The signers also include 935 scientists trained in computer and mathematical methods. Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis rests entirely upon mathematical computer projections and not upon experimental observations, these sciences are especially important in evaluating this hypothesis.

The group gathering these signatures will not accept any signature which is not accompanied by documented proof that the signer indeed has the education he claims to have. And it checks the documentation before accepting the signatures.

The list of signers includes 9,029 people with PhD degrees; 7,157 with MS degrees; 2,586 with MD or DVM degrees; and 12,715 with BS or equivalent academic degrees.

The evidence that the globe is warming has been obtained by falsifying the evidence. This has been made to appear to be a fact by a sharp reduction of weather stations by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in cooler locations around the world since 1990. But the reports from these places were not removed from the "averages" obtained in previous years. It was just reported that the averages are now warmer. To see what they did graphically, follow this link: link to the WMV file.

As to a denial that it was warmer in medieval times that it is now, explain how they grew olives in Germany in medieval times, as travelogues from the period reveal.

As to the claim that the earth is warmer now that it ever was, this is pure hogwash, as can be easily proved almost anywhere. For there is not a spot anywhere on earth where there are no fossils of tropical plants.

But we have even more dramatic proof that that available. For many libraries and used book stores have copies of a book titled "Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings," by one Theadore Hapgood.

This book contains photocopies of many ancient maps drawn in medieval times. These are not strange conjectures, but actual photographs obtained from the museums where the ancient maps are displayed. Most of the maps are highly inaccurate, but a few are markedly different, for they are startlingly accurate.

One, drawn in the early 1600's accurately shows the entire coastline of North and South America. You can clearly recognize Newfoundland, Cape Cod, Long Island, Cape Hatteras, Florida, the Yucatan Peninsula, the Isthmus of Panama, Cape Horn, Lower California, San Fransisco Bay, and the Alaska Peninsula.

The notable thing about this map is that it also accurately shows the entire coastline of Antarctica, and it shows it with rivers and mountains. This continent is now covered by a mile of ice. We only know where the coastline is from soundings through the ice. But someone, long before such equipment was available, accurately drew it. And that someone showed it with rivers!

This is conclusive proof of the falsehood of the claim that the earth is now warmer that it has even been.

And all of this has zero bearing on eschatology, except to show the gullibility of modern men, who imagine that they are too wise to believe all those fairy tales in the Bible.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
To eclipse
I see you've chosen not to respond to the NOAA announcement this week.
And I see, despite all our PMing about this and my asking you about 10 times now, that you still have not answered this basic question. What don't you like about the basic physics of the science?

If you really want to disprove global warming, disprove the Radiative Forcing Equation below, which basically counts:-
1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png





Bjorn Llundberg was on Fox recently
There's your first 2 problems!
1. Bjorn.
2. Fox.

and PO'd a lot of people by explaining how some 80% of the carbon footprint of all cars in the factory production, including green cars. Green cars make something like a 24% reduction on the 20% that can be affected by usage. You do the math.
I already answered this in our private conversations.
1. Maybe a quarter of a car's emissions are in the manufacturing process of the car. This is whether the car is green or conventional.

Studies appear to show that between fifteen and twenty-two percent of all the energy ever consumed by a vehicle is used in its manufacture;
Worldchanging | Evaluation + Tools + Best Practices: My Other Car is a Bright Green City

2. This can be changed as the energy from mining and smelting and manufacturing starts to come from nuclear power and electric arc work.

3. But the majority of the power for charging green electric vehicles is already there on the grid, as most can be charged with electricity (and carbon) that is otherwise wasted... something like 80% of American driving could be done on TODAY'S GRID! Bjorn didn't mention that fact did he?


This is what we deal with everyday from "scientists" in America. They don't know how to communicate. They say similar things like "guns killed x number of people." And the US public just nods away like Obama-bobble-heads.
That's not a reflection on the scientists but the Republicans that listen to them!

I just noticed your remark that the last 15 years was the hottest on record. The Russian maps of passages through the Arctic waters (not ice) date from the 1800s, acc. to the US Naval journal. How is that?
Evidence for your claims please?

And that the sun has been cooling. Hmm, then why the rise in temp on Mars?
Evidence for your claims please?


In fact, is that what stars do as they age before they nova?
Yes, the sun is 2% hotter now than it was in dinosaur times, which is even MORE reason NOT to go back to Co2 levels the earth had back then.

I thought about your assertion last month that for every 1 cold record there are 9 hot records. Sorry, all too easy to manipulate things. If its really hot in Bakersfield CA, a gov't "official" could easily go to the neighboring towns and get 9 more hot readings, and there you'd have your "record." They do things like that in CA. Just like their fiscal condition!
That's a bit dishonest, don't you think? They're not counting the number of agencies recording the record, but the actual physical event itself. And yes, the records are shifting in pretty much one direction!

Now, for the 11th time...

What don't you like about the basic physics of the science?

If you really want to disprove global warming, disprove the Radiative Forcing Equation below, which basically counts:-
1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The truly documented evidence is the e-mails leaked from the British center, where the "scientists" were caught looking for a way to hide the fact that the globe was actually cooling, rather than warming. These same e-mails also revealed then conspiring to keep any reports that contradicted their "findings" from receiving peer review.
:doh: :doh: :doh:



Spend some more time here please, before you embarrass yourself any further.
Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is Aliens at Area 51 thinking, and the Moon Landing was Hoaxed.

The vast majority of the thousands" of "scientists" that signed on to global warming were not expert in any field even related to climate or weather. But literally thousands of scientists who are indeed experts in climatology have signed a statement denying that humans are causing global warming.
Do you really believe this? Provide a link please. The various 'Declarations' have shown to be unaccountable twaddle.

To all Denialists:
When are people posting in this thread going to provide evidence for their claims, and stop just asserting internet conspiracy theory twaddle as 'fact'? Why not back your outrageous, outlandish, unbelievable claims with a little evidence for once!?
Some in some places claim that they can remember when it was much cooler. Well, I am old enough to remember when it was much hotter that it is now.
Well, if some in some places can remember.... glad you're so specific and accountable with your data there! ;) :thumbsup: ;) :doh::doh::doh:

The evidence that the globe is warming has been obtained by falsifying the evidence.
Yeah, like the boiling point of water. It's just terrible how all those labs get together and collude to deny us the truth on the basic heat retaining properties of CO2. :doh: :doh: :doh:

What don't you like about the basic physics of the science?

If you really want to disprove global warming, disprove the Radiative Forcing Equation below, which basically counts:-
1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png




Weather stations in high altitudes and in high latitudes have been systematically shut down,
A little evidence for this claim please?

along with rural weather stations as opposed to these in large cities.
A little evidence for this claim please?
But the reports from these places that are always cooler were not removed from the "averages" obtained in previous years. It was just reported that the averages are not warmer.
A little evidence for this claim please?

As to a denial that it was warmer in medieval times that it is now, explain how they grew olives in Germany in medieval times, as travelogues from the period reveal.
A little evidence for this claim please?

As to the claim that the earth is warmer now that it ever was, this is pure hogwash, as can be easily proved almost anywhere. For there is not a spot anywhere on earth where there are no fossils of tropical plants.
And given that many of these are HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of years old, on an almost completely unrecognisable planet, your argument is relevant to the climate of the last tens of thousands of years how... exactly? :doh: :doh: :doh:

PS: The climatologists now all about why the climate changed back then too. Ever hear of extreme vulcanism spewing Co2 in the dinosaur era? :doh: Yep, there's that Co2 again!

But we have even more dramatic proof that that available. For many libraries and used book stores have copies of a book titled "Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings," by one Theadore Hapgood.
Dude, have these maps been checked against scientific measurement of the regions in question and the ice been confirmed as that young?

There's so much magical thinking and conspiracy delusion in the Denial camp it's hard to know where to begin!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Dude, have these maps been checked against scientific measurement of the regions in question and the ice been confirmed as that young?

Actually, no one even imagines that this was the condition of the earth when the maps in question were drawn. They simply prove that somewhere, in an ancient library in eastern Europe, there existed an ancient copy made from a highly accurate map. and at the time of the drawing of the original from which this ancient copy was made, Antarctica was warm.

But I was not writing for your benefit. I was writing for the benefit of some who might be misled by your opinions. I knew before I posted anything here that you would not accept any evidence that disproves your theories about global warming, any more than you accept any scriptures that say exactly the opposite of your theories about what the Bible means.
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
12,294
3,675
70
Franklin, Tennessee
✟218,105.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Don't look at the evidence! Don't look at REPUTABLE men with nothing to hide and nothing to gain!
Zat mean you're going to show us yet another Youtube vid with undeniable evidence of something or the other? Those haven't been working out all that well, though, have they? The first one turned out to be arrant hogwash from end to end and the second one reads like a cheesy adventure novel with little or no actual evidence of anything at all. But never mind that, this one is the Real McCoy! Uh, yeah. I'm so sure.

I'm pretty much agnostic on the subject of man-made global warming. That global temperatures have risen since my childhood is is easily observable by anyone who's been paying attention. The question is howcome? Natural phenomena, man-made atmospheric changes, or both? I'd probably bet it's a bit of both, which still leaves the question of where the major blame lies.

I think hucksters like Al Gore (who held major equity positions in Occidental Petroleum and Peabody coal until they began to attract undue attention) ultimately cause more people to question the case for GW. I also think that End Times conspiracy buffs pitching their latest "proofs" that climate change hasn't happened will actually lend credibility to whatever position is opposite of theirs.

Trust me! Trust me because I insult, mock, attack, and attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees!
Trust you, trust you, because your predictions, gleaned from various youtube crackpots, have a 100% failure rate. Sorry hoss, but if you offered yet another undeniable truth claiming that the sun rose in the east, I'd have to get up early to make sure it still did.

No thanks sir. I will trust the reputable men who are trying to help my fellow man
Yeah, like the "reputable man" who predicted the stuff and nonsense about the Abomination of Desolation on 22 March. The reputable guy who, even though 100% of his predictions failed to materialize, we're supposed to believe got it right anyway. That's simply ridiculous.

Ted Gunderson Says Chemtrail Death Dumps Must Be Stopped - YouTube
Don't tell me, let me guess - the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Freemasons, the Burgerbuilders, ZOG, the Comintern, Neo-Nazis, Flying Saucer Driving Demons, The Roman Catholic Church, the Smith County Irregular Militia & Classical Music Appreciation Society, and Satan, have all together to make "chemtrails" in the atmosphere so as to do something or other. Well I don't know about anyone else, but that settles the issue for me. ;)

It only takes 2 minutes to watch it Brothers and Sisters. Know the truth.
Sorry, but that pitch has grown a little shopworn since 22 March.
 
Upvote 0

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Actually, no one even imagines that this was the condition of the earth when the maps in question were drawn. They simply prove that somewhere, in an ancient library in eastern Europe, there existed an ancient copy made from a highly accurate map. and at the time of the drawing of the original from which this ancient copy was made, Antarctica was warm.

But I was not writing for your benefit. I was writing for the benefit of some who might be misled by your opinions. I knew before I posted anything here that you would not accept any evidence that disproves your theories about global warming, any more than you accept any scriptures that say exactly the opposite of your theories about what the Bible means.

What do you actually think you've proved here? Your appeal to ancient maps (with 'here be dragons' pointing to the end of the world by any chance?) is charming, if a little quaint.

But... the rest of us want to understand what the science says. Not ancient maps.

What don't you like about the basic physics of the science?

If you really want to disprove global warming, disprove the Radiative Forcing Equation below, which basically counts:-
1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png


If you want to *see* the way Co2 actually traps heat, please watch the following video. It shows how candle *light* can penetrate a tube filled with Co2 but a candle's *heat* cannot. The demonstration starts at 90 seconds in but the whole video itself is well worth watching.

This Year's Model - YouTube
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
What do you actually think you've proved here? Your appeal to ancient maps (with 'here be dragons' pointing to the end of the world by any chance?) is charming, if a little quaint.

But... the rest of us want to understand what the science says. Not ancient maps.

What don't you like about the basic physics of the science?

If you really want to disprove global warming, disprove the Radiative Forcing Equation below, which basically counts:-
1. How Co2 traps heat (basic physics demonstrated in any physics lab on the entire PLANET!)
2. How much Co2 there was before the Industrial Revolution.
3. How much Co2 there is now.
4. How much extra heat is trapped.

Just find a paper that can disprove this following equation, and your work here is done.
4b0d65a3fd906060b878e08d35d0f3c9.png


If you want to *see* the way Co2 actually traps heat, please watch the following video. It shows how candle *light* can penetrate a tube filled with Co2 but a candle's *heat* cannot. The demonstration starts at 90 seconds in but the whole video itself is well worth watching.

This Year's Model - YouTube

Factor in the effect of water and all your predicted results go out the window. That is why so many scientists who are real experts in the field reject the theory in its entirety.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

eclipsenow

God cares about his creation as well as us.
Dec 17, 2010
8,230
1,701
Sydney, Australia
Visit site
✟139,901.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Factor in the effect of water and all your predicted results go out the window. That is why so many scientists who are real experts in the field reject the theory in its entirety.

To all Denialists:
When are people posting in this thread going to provide evidence for their claims, and stop just asserting internet conspiracy theory twaddle as 'fact'? Why not back your outrageous, outlandish, unbelievable claims with a little evidence for once!?

1. They're not my conclusions, but those of the entire scientific enterprise worldwide.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm

2. Water is a feedback, not a driver. Yes it is a powerful atmospheric gas but as it is constant, it is not responsible for the warming. But Co2 levels are increasing, which is what the Radiative Forcing Equation measures.

3. Your Denialist arguments are so poorly referenced, and so frequently uncited, and so utterly boring and predictable that they're trite!
EG: You got this straight from Tim Ball, a known phoney and impostor who pretends to be a climatologists but isn't. Here's the myth:


Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas
“Water vapour is the most important greenhouse gas. This is part of the difficulty with the public and the media in understanding that 95% of greenhouse gases are water vapour. The public understand it, in that if you get a fall evening or spring evening and the sky is clear the heat will escape and the temperature will drop and you get frost. If there is a cloud cover, the heat is trapped by water vapour as a greenhouse gas and the temperature stays quite warm. If you go to In Salah in southern Algeria, they recorded at one point a daytime or noon high of 52 degrees Celsius – by midnight that night it was -3.6 degree Celsius. […] That was caused because there is no, or very little, water vapour in the atmosphere and it is a demonstration of water vapour as the most important greenhouse gas.” (Tim Ball)

And here's the answer.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas.htm
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.