When I had my annual Christmas chat with a friend in the UK, he mentioned that where he lives in South Wales the temperature has been hovering around -20 degrees C, colder than he ever remembers. Naturally, colder winters are due to global warming – that’s why it’s called global warming.
Scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming isn’t as convincing as, say, the empirical evidence that the earth isn’t flat; if it were that simple, everyone but the most obdurate contrarian would believe it.
What is in little doubt, though, is that politics plays a significant part in global warming hysteria.
From here:
The Abiding Faith Of Warm-ongers
Got that? No matter what the weather, it’s all due to warming. This isn’t science; it’s a kind of faith. Scientists go along and even stifle dissent because, frankly, hundreds of millions of dollars in research grants are at stake. But for the believers, global warming is the god that failed.
Why do we continue to listen to warmists when they’re so wrong? Maybe it’s because their real agenda has nothing to do with climate change at all. Earlier this month, attendees of a global warming summit in Cancun, Mexico, concluded, with virtually no economic or real scientific support, that by 2020 rich nations need to transfer $100 billion a year to poor nations to help them “mitigate” the adverse impacts of warming.
This is what global warming is really about — wealth redistribution by people whose beliefs are basically socialist. It has little or nothing to do with climate. If it did, we might pay more attention to Piers Corbyn, a little-known British meteorologist and astrophysicist who has a knack for correctly predicting weather changes. Indeed, as London’s Mayor Boris Johnson recently noted, “He seems to get it right about 85% of the time.”
How does he do it? Unlike the U.N. and government forecasters, Corbyn pays close attention to solar cycles that, as it turns out, correlate very closely to changes in climate. Not only are we not headed for global warming, Corbyn says, we may be entering a “mini ice age” similar to the one that took place from 1450 A.D. to 1850 A.D.
We don’t know if Corbyn’s right or not. But given his record, he deserves as much attention as the warm-mongers whose goal is not to arrive at the truth but to reorganize society in a radical way.
What’s your theory for explaining the significant retreat of Arctic sea ice in the last couple of decades? Should the Canadian government engage in long-term planning assuming there will be a considerable increase in shipping in the Arctic in the next 2-3 decades, or invest your tax dollars elsewhere based on an assumption that the ice will soon start expanding?
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Here is an interesting site regarding global warming etc.
http://energy.probeinternational.org/blog/lawrence-solomon
Also see http://accurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2010_11_01_archive.html
reporting on Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT.
This is very much an aside, and represents nothing more than hypothetical curiousity on my part, but I wonder how those who hold to both young-earth creationism and the position that alarm about recent global warming is rubbish in light of much longer trends and cycles (and I think there are many evangelicals who could be thus described), reconcile these positions? Actually, I know a bunch of people who fit this description, so maybe I should ask them.
I think Warren clings to the clicking clock and ignores the fact that God can create what would be to us a temporal anomaly. Therefore to us what might appear to be millions of years are in a blink of our Creator’s eyes. I have no problem with six days of Creation taking an extended time because I’m not relating to just my Timex.
Why did the chicken cross the mobius strip? To get to the same side
Steve, I have no problem accepting “the fact that God can create what would be to us a temporal anomaly.” Do you not think, however, that some YECs want it one way when it comes to fossil and geological evidence and another way when it comes to meteorological evidence and layers of ice in Greenland and the Antarctic?
some folks have opinions on everything. No matter what is said they usually pipe up if only to challenge what they have heard. I’m coming to believe that some don’t have any beliefs beyond not accepting anything presented to them.
So, Steve, apart from my not being convinced either that global warming is a sure thing or a hoax, what else do you think I don’t have any belief in? To give you a head start, I’ll admit that I’m not wholly convinced of the veracity of every theological detail associated with Calvinism. Is there anything you haven’t made your mind up about?
It’s ironic that you would berate a commenter on a blog that exists primarily to “challenge” what they’ve heard for challenging what they’ve heard. I guess it’s okay to challenge the things you disagree with?
Berate? I’ll admit I set a trap in the woods to see who became offended. I did not mention any names, so I can’t see how anyone could become personally offended, but it seems to have happened.
Wikipedia says (only because I’m too lazy to find a real text book) Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat toward oneself. That quote is likely to push a button or too. I just might reopen my blog to see what other buttons I can push.
Offended, no. I would be a even bigger idiot than I already am to hang around blogs like this if I was easily offended (I will admit to bemusement, though). If you happen to pass my way, I’d be happy to have coffee with you (or offer you a bed). Since the opinions I express that you disagree with are often majority opinions, I’m not feeling too persecuted either.
If you do reopen your blog, you might get at least one visitor. 😉
So what are all the things I don’t have beliefs about?
That should settle it – no blog 😆
Yeah, that clinched it, I’m staying off the bandwidth.
And being retired, I feel no guilt about blogging during working hours.
I say again, I say again, no names were mentioned.
Warning! Will Robinson, rampant paranoia off starboard bow, Danger Danger!
Despite your rampant paranoia warning, I do feel compelled to say that I’m not blogging while at work. I actually have two and a half weeks off during the Christmas/New Years period, which is obviously more than enough for boredom to set in and for me to get myself into trouble. It is a blessing though, as my wife was released from the hospital on 17 Dec following knee-replacement surgery and has required considerable assistance at home (she had the other knee done in Nov).
By the way, Steve, I hope your “retired” comment doesn’t mean you’ve given up on your theological studies and pastoral pursuits. I obviously don’t know you well enough to make any meaningful judgements, but you’ve struck me as someone who has much to offer in that regards (with the understanding that, if God has not opened a door, one should not barge ahead regardless).
Warren,
Glad to hear your wife is home.
Thank you. And if she was more aware of the time I was spending on your blog she might put me in the hospital. :-O