Global Warming - Creationist View

[keyarch]

Global Warming: A Creationist Perspective.​

With all of the hype in the news media about Global Warming, I thought I would bring up the topic here to see what others thought.

This is my view of what’s going on with the global climate based on my faith in what scripture tells us and some general revelation.

1. We know that the earth has experienced some drastic climate changes in the past. For example: the ice age. This includes a glacial cover over a good part of North America.
2. Most of us creationist believe in the Biblical account of the Global Flood of Noah’s time.
3. There is some evidence that the sea level was some 400 feet lower in the past than today at some time.
4. I have heard that there were once tropical plants in the polar region.

So why should we think that the earth is so stable? The ice is melting, but isn’t that a sign that the earth is returning to the state it was in before the ice age?

The news media is reporting: 'Global warming is here and humans are "very likely" the blame, an international group of scientists meeting in Paris, France, announced Friday”.

Did those “scientist” ever consider the following model?:

First there was a global flood with warm oceans that changed the whole global climate for hundreds of years after the water receded facilitating an ice age and a higher sea level.
The glaciers from that ice age have been continually receding from that time, and only seemed stable from our limited perspective of history. The current melting may be accelerating, but the melting process can be exponential when it reaches a certain point (less ice – warmer climate – ice melts faster).

Can those “scientist” ever put their “naturalism” bias aside and even consider anything other than “human” intervention as the cause?

I happen to believe that rising oceans will be the least of our worries in the times to come. I don’t think it’s wise to develop properties that are so close to sea level or the shore in the first place. All it takes is a good earthquake and a minor Tsunami and it’s all over.

We are lucky that the earth is as habitable as it is. It could be much worse. This is only a temporary place for us anyway, and we should focus on heavenly things and not dwell on how to control the climate. Nothing we do will keep the ice from melting! I don’t care if we eliminated all the gases (including our own) that go into the atmosphere, it wouldn’t change anything! Sure we should be good stewards of the earth, but we have to live and populate the earth as God has told us. With more population, it’s inevitable that there will be byproducts and we shouldn’t feel guilty about that. Could it be that President Bush (as a Christian) also has this creationist view of Global Warming, and be the reason he hasn’t taken the same course as would Al Gore?

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

AIG recently had 2 good articles in their magazines. You can read the layman version here or the techinical version here.

 

[keyarch]

AIG recently had 2 good articles in their magazines. You can read the layman version here or the techinical version here.

Thanks, those are pretty good articles.
So all we need is a couple volcanoes spewing dark ash for awhile to block out the sun, and everyone will be crying about how cold its getting and how no crops will grow. We'll be wondering why we didn't make it warmer when we had the chance.

 

[FallingWaters]

Global Warming: A Creationist Perspective.​

With all of the hype in the news media about Global Warming, I thought I would bring up the topic here to see what others thought.

This is my view of what’s going on with the global climate based on my faith in what scripture tells us and some general revelation.

1. We know that the earth has experienced some drastic climate changes in the past. For example: the ice age. This includes a glacial cover over a good part of North America.
2. Most of us creationist believe in the Biblical account of the Global Flood of Noah’s time.
3. There is some evidence that the sea level was some 400 feet lower in the past than today at some time.
4. I have heard that there were once tropical plants in the polar region.

So why should we think that the earth is so stable? The ice is melting, but isn’t that a sign that the earth is returning to the state it was in before the ice age?

The news media is reporting: 'Global warming is here and humans are "very likely" the blame, an international group of scientists meeting in Paris, France, announced Friday”.

Did those “scientist” ever consider the following model?:

First there was a global flood with warm oceans that changed the whole global climate for hundreds of years after the water receded facilitating an ice age and a higher sea level.
The glaciers from that ice age have been continually receding from that time, and only seemed stable from our limited perspective of history. The current melting may be accelerating, but the melting process can be exponential when it reaches a certain point (less ice – warmer climate – ice melts faster).

Can those “scientist” ever put their “naturalism” bias aside and even consider anything other than “human” intervention as the cause?

I happen to believe that rising oceans will be the least of our worries in the times to come. I don’t think it’s wise to develop properties that are so close to sea level or the shore in the first place. All it takes is a good earthquake and a minor Tsunami and it’s all over.

We are lucky that the earth is as habitable as it is. It could be much worse. This is only a temporary place for us anyway, and we should focus on heavenly things and not dwell on how to control the climate. Nothing we do will keep the ice from melting! I don’t care if we eliminated all the gases (including our own) that go into the atmosphere, it wouldn’t change anything! Sure we should be good stewards of the earth, but we have to live and populate the earth as God has told us. With more population, it’s inevitable that there will be byproducts and we shouldn’t feel guilty about that. Could it be that President Bush (as a Christian) also has this creationist view of Global Warming, and be the reason he hasn’t taken the same course as would Al Gore?

Thanks for sharing that.

I've come to the conclusion that
if you don't like what the authorities are saying,
just wait 20 years and it will change!

When I was a kid - 30 years ago -
I remember the fear-mongers telling us that
we were headed for another Ice Age!
Everyone was worried.
Just another trick to get grant money.

We "they" right then,
or are "they" right now?
I'm tired of them crying "Wolf!"

I agree with you, if their world-view and presuppositions are wrong, then how can their conclusions possibly be correct?!

 

[FallingWaters]

AIG recently had 2 good articles in their magazines. You can read the layman version here or the techinical version here.

Here is a quote I liked from the "technical" article:

"From about 1400 to 1880, the Little Ice Age occurred, in which practically all the glaciers in the world advanced, whereas now they are receding. At times people could ice skate on the Thames River in London, whereas that is unthinkable today. The Little Ice Age was likely caused by the combination of slightly less energy from the sun and more volcanism, both of which allow the surface of the earth to cool. There were periods during the Little Ice Age in which the sun exhibited few sunspots. Few sunspots cause a cooler solar temperature and less solar radiation because the stronger compensating effect of solar faculae is also reduced. Before the Little Ice Age, there was the Medieval Warm Period. So natural fluctuations in the past have been significant."

This is the hype I remember from when I was a kid:

"Further evidence that natural fluctuations are significant is that during the early and mid-1970s, a cooling trend increased the amount of sea ice. This happened at a time when the buildup of carbon dioxide should have caused global warming. It initiated the idea that the ice age was around the corner..."

It was an excellent article,
and not TOO technical for ME to understand.

 

[FallingWaters]

I found myself wondering how global temperatures have affected clothing styles over the years.

I wonder if I could get a $500,000 grant to study it?

 

[Floodnut]

It is about 5 below zero here. The Lake is frozen over, and about 5 of the Last TEN years it DID NOT Freeze over. Please Pray that God will send some good global warming!

 

[keyarch]

It is about 5 below zero here. The Lake is frozen over, and about 5 of the Last TEN years it DID NOT Freeze over. Please Pray that God will send some good global warming!

Just in the news today. This seems like the wrong time of year to get sympathy about Global Warming. The earth was warm, then came the ice age, then its getting warm again - all in spite of man.

Story Highlights:

• NEW: Cold temps keep 90,000 children home in Milwaukee
• NEW: Cold wave blamed for at least seven deaths
• Temperature drops to 42 below in northern Minnesota
• Amtrak shuts down train service in parts of Illinois, New York

 

[FallingWaters]

It is about 5 below zero here. The Lake is frozen over, and about 5 of the Last TEN years it DID NOT Freeze over. Please Pray that God will send some good global warming!

Our wind chill factor was down around ten below zero this morning, but it's warmed up quite a bit.
It's 19 degrees now.

Global warming does sorta sound good right about now.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I think the politicisation of Global warming is the biggest threat life on Earth has ever faced.

I'm a right winger... pretty extreme in some facets of my politics actually, but when i see my fellows on the right burying their heads in the sand about this issue, it makes me want to scream. What it makes me want to do even more is drag them here to Australia and force them to see the dustbowls that used to be farms, and the sand pits that used to be dams, after our 5 YEARS of drought, the longest on record... and they can enjoy our current temperatures, which are recording new all time highs, and all time highest averages on a daily basis

 

[EnemyPartyII]

When we first got really nice data from ice cores, it became apparent that the Earth has been going through a cycle and that it's overdue for a cold phase. The immediate conclusion was that we can expect an ice age in the near future. Of course, it took just a couple years for the scientists to realize that the reason we're "overdue" in the cycle is because we've been strongly affecting the environment since the beginning of agriculture and even more in the industrial revolution.

Of course at that point, the media had already hyped up the initial findings and the public (who never bother to check their sources) ended up thinking that scientists are just guessing. This of course was all helped along by the great oil propaganda machine that's still in full force today offering $10,000 to scientists to publicly question the concensus of global warming.

 

[Gwenyfur]

The Creation sub forum is for creationist fellowship only...
Any debating or topical discussions by non creationists need to be done in a new thread in OT.

 

[FallingWaters]

I am really quite irritated.
I just found out this week that the public school
showed my 13 year old son the "Inconvenient Truth" movie,
and now he's all brainwashed!

He's arguing with me and saying it's based on facts!

So the fight has gotten a bit personal,
because now I have to make sure my son is clear on what is fact,
and what is assumption.

Maine is already one of those states where the Environmentalists have a strong foot-hold.
Not that I entirely mind, because Maine wouldn't be as wonderful as it is, if it wasn't taken care of.
But you know what they say about too much of a good thing.

Anyway, besides those 2 articles previously linked,
if anyone has anymore rebuttals to the movie,
I would appreciate knowing what they are.

I am not good at debate, or coming up with rebuttals or arguments.

 

[Mallon]

I am really quite irritated.
I just found out this week that the public school
showed my 13 year old son the "Inconvenient Truth" movie,
and now he's all brainwashed!
...I am not good at debate, or coming up with rebuttals or arguments.

Why listen to your son or have a respectful conversation with him about global warming, rather than trying to tell him he's wrong for reasons that you don't know of? Maybe you could both learn a little.

 

[FallingWaters]

Why listen to your son or have a respectful conversation with him about global warming, rather than trying to tell him he's wrong for reasons that you don't know of? Maybe you could both learn a little.

I did not think of that because I believe global warming to be based on false assumptions.

Right now, he's trying to calculate how long before our house floats away.

Not really something I want my 13 year old worrying about.

And since we live at about 100 feet elevation,
that's obviously going to be a lot sooner for us than for others.

 

[busterdog]

I am really quite irritated.
I just found out this week that the public school
showed my 13 year old son the "Inconvenient Truth" movie,
and now he's all brainwashed!

He's arguing with me and saying it's based on facts!

So the fight has gotten a bit personal,
because now I have to make sure my son is clear on what is fact,
and what is assumption.

Maine is already one of those states where the Environmentalists have a strong foot-hold.
Not that I entirely mind, because Maine wouldn't be as wonderful as it is, if it wasn't taken care of.
But you know what they say about too much of a good thing.

Anyway, besides those 2 articles previously linked,
if anyone has anymore rebuttals to the movie,
I would appreciate knowing what they are.

I am not good at debate, or coming up with rebuttals or arguments.

Perhaps changing some of the terms of the discussion will help.

I think we can agree on several important issues. After we agree on a few points, the way in which you combine them matters little except to politicians.

1. We all have contempt for politicians. Lets get that one out of the way. Whatever was done in this classroom, I assume, in my paranoia and bias, it was full of agenda and lacked consideration for your point of view.

2. The world is in great danger. Whatever judgment or plan of the enemy is now unfolding, be it earthquakes, rising seas or fire falling from the sky, repentence is a good thing, on a national level. Whether you get on your knees based on good science or bad, it is quite clear that there are good reasons to be on your knees as the only answer to the certain trouble that is coming upon the globe.

3. Factories belching smoke are bad. Whether or not it causes global warming, when you can see clouds of pollutants crossing the Pacific, you now that human technology has a problem, en masse. There are plenty of reasons to work to change the technology and to break the monopolies that refuse to change and that can change without bankrupting industry.

4. People are greedy, selfish and should learn to live with less and clean up more. As a civil rights problem, I agree that it is hard to tell your neighbor what to do or vice versa. Without agreeing that government is the answer, some government types have seized upon the rather obvious conclusion that lots of people are pigs and need to change.

5. Humans are the cause of the pending global catastrophe. If we all repented as in Nineveh, all this would be a moot point. Is a governmental program going to solve the problem? The Book of Revelation suggests some short-term miracles by the AC and then a time of trouble like no other.

6. Personally, I think the global warming scientists have identified major problems in the ecosystem. Why is not the issue. Maybe "warming" is not even the issue. Massive glacial retreat is a big problem if you need the water that comes of it. Sea levels ARE an issue in the Maldives and other similar places. Things are out of whack one way or another. Even if it is "cyclical," well, so is the bird flu. Massive cold snaps in Europe or the midwest do not alter this reality that nature is really knocking us around.

But, our weapons of our warfare are not carnal , even for this. Without appreciation of that reality, all the rest is pretty much moot.

 

[keyarch]

6. Personally, I think the global warming scientists have identified major problems in the ecosystem. Why is not the issue. Maybe "warming" is not even the issue. Massive glacial retreat is a big problem if you need the water that comes of it. Sea levels ARE an issue in the Maldives and other similar places. Things are out of whack one way or another. Even if it is "cyclical," well, so is the bird flu. Massive cold snaps in Europe or the midwest do not alter this reality that nature is really knocking us around.

So what I got out of your great reply, is that we need to be good stewards of the earth regardless; Global Warming is probably one of many catastrophes awaiting us in the future, none of which may be within our control as fallen humans; and we should repent and pray and deal with our environment the best we can.
Again, I believe that in the history of the earth, the ice age has been an exception rather than the rule; and that our climate has been slowly returning back to a quasi normal state (although different than we know).

 

[busterdog]

So what I got out of your great reply, is that we need to be good stewards of the earth regardless; Global Warming is probably one of many catastrophes awaiting us in the future, none of which may be within our control as fallen humans; and we should repent and pray and deal with our environment the best we can.
Again, I believe that in the history of the earth, the ice age has been an exception rather than the rule; and that our climate has been slowly returning back to a quasi normal state (although different than we know).

What is normal?

A YEC view should come with the conclusion that what was normal thousands of years ago was pretty traumatic. Obviously the flood would an enormous event. Not just lots of water, but the "fountains of the deep" being broken up. The division of the continents (Pangia) would be a big deal. Astronomical events such as the long day of Joshua could have been a period of upheaval. Perhaps what is about to happen represents the end of a period of grace, geologically speaking.

 

[FallingWaters]

Perhaps changing some of the terms of the discussion will help.

I think we can agree on several important issues. After we agree on a few points, the way in which you combine them matters little except to politicians.

1. We all have contempt for politicians. Lets get that one out of the way. Whatever was done in this classroom, I assume, in my paranoia and bias, it was full of agenda and lacked consideration for your point of view.

2. The world is in great danger. Whatever judgment or plan of the enemy is now unfolding, be it earthquakes, rising seas or fire falling from the sky, repentence is a good thing, on a national level. Whether you get on your knees based on good science or bad, it is quite clear that there are good reasons to be on your knees as the only answer to the certain trouble that is coming upon the globe.

3. Factories belching smoke are bad. Whether or not it causes global warming, when you can see clouds of pollutants crossing the Pacific, you now that human technology has a problem, en masse. There are plenty of reasons to work to change the technology and to break the monopolies that refuse to change and that can change without bankrupting industry.

4. People are greedy, selfish and should learn to live with less and clean up more. As a civil rights problem, I agree that it is hard to tell your neighbor what to do or vice versa. Without agreeing that government is the answer, some government types have seized upon the rather obvious conclusion that lots of people are pigs and need to change.

5. Humans are the cause of the pending global catastrophe. If we all repented as in Nineveh, all this would be a moot point. Is a governmental program going to solve the problem? The Book of Revelation suggests some short-term miracles by the AC and then a time of trouble like no other.

6. Personally, I think the global warming scientists have identified major problems in the ecosystem. Why is not the issue. Maybe "warming" is not even the issue. Massive glacial retreat is a big problem if you need the water that comes of it. Sea levels ARE an issue in the Maldives and other similar places. Things are out of whack one way or another. Even if it is "cyclical," well, so is the bird flu. Massive cold snaps in Europe or the midwest do not alter this reality that nature is really knocking us around.

But, our weapons of our warfare are not carnal , even for this. Without appreciation of that reality, all the rest is pretty much moot.

I agree with your basic ideas.
I especially am annoyed by radical socio-political "agendas" as you referred to in point #1.

Secondly, I personally have a problem with people jumping to conclusions without enough information, and then making sweeping authoritative changes to people's lives, and then it turns out 20 years later they were wrong.

Being a YECist Christian, I am all the more paranoid about it because I have read the opinions of other YECists, that the global warming fear-mongers are basing their conclusions on faulty assumptions.

People do not come to correct conclusions after having begun badly on a false foundation.

 

[keyarch]

What is normal?

A YEC view should come with the conclusion that what was normal thousands of years ago was pretty traumatic. Obviously the flood would an enormous event. Not just lots of water, but the "fountains of the deep" being broken up. The division of the continents (Pangia) would be a big deal. Astronomical events such as the long day of Joshua could have been a period of upheaval. Perhaps what is about to happen represents the end of a period of grace, geologically speaking.

I don't think there is any merit to the "pangea" theory. God set the boarders of the continents in the beginning and except for the lower sea level and the sediment flows into the ocean those boarders haven't moved from what I can tell. All one has to do is go onto Google Earth and look at the continents and surrounding topography of the ocean floor and see that the ocean ridges and the subduction zones don't relate to what would have taken place for the "puzzle" pieces to fit together. Here's a good map of the ages of the ocean floor: http://tinyurl.com/329fbx although I would argue with their dating methods. It has all appearance of the ridges opening up along certain lines and spewing out the "younger" material. Most of the perpendicular lines (I think) have more to do with stretch marks from the bulging earth shrinking back down along with some seismic shifts.
The day of Joshua is something I need to study more.