Evidence for God from Science

Gman wrote:

I'm with you, G.

Thanks FFC...

There is a left leaning political faction that ties their ideology to this issue and seeks to catastrophize the situation and scare people. These are the people who point to hurricanes like Katrina and try to convince people that they are the direct result of you not changing the catalytic converter on your car.

Bart, I would agree with you and most of what you said (thank you..), but how else can we get the point across? I don't necessarily call it a scare tactic, but I think we should be more aware (or concerned) about how we are addressing these CO2 levels. I agree this website... We do NOT have all the evidence in yet since our only real data goes back perhaps a few hundred years or so. To compond the issue, it's true, the earth naturally gets hotter and cooler thoughtout the thousands of years it's been around... However, this is the first time we've introduced our industrialized processses into this world. We really do not know how it effects the rest of the world as a whole. I think we can agree that what we are doing with the CO2 levels, componds the issue greatly. And that is what we should be controlling.. Maybe not chasing down polluters with shotguns, but making people more aware of it. And I think the government can be a vehicle for that, or any other group that wishes to get involved so that the government doesn't have to, (like this website).

As far as Katrina, well ok, maybe there is no real evidence that global warming is a direct cause of that. However, there is some evidence that the intensity of the hurricane's strength has been pronounced since our study of CO2 levels... And if the temperature goes up by even one degree, that is enough to make it that much stronger. And if anything can be done to lessen those factors, then I think we should be for that as well.
Again, we might not be able to completely stop it, by we can perhaps control it or lessen it's punch...

G -

GMan,

What? You think that just because I can see what I don't like that I can come up with a solution!

I think we are responding to the situation. Too fast for some and too slow for others.

I also think we have a media that likes to blare headlines and scare tactics sell and create their own news cycles.

The difference between the political right and the political left in terms of addressing the issues is not as divided as it is portrayed. Democrats by and large are not tree-hugging, capitalism hating, single issue people who want to protect snail-darters while all progress is halted. Republicans by and large are not corporate polluters who are willing to soil their own nest as long as it puts money in their pockets.

We all can see that there is a problem and that we are going to need to come up with a solution.

Emissions on a per capita basis have been declining in the west. The problem is that population is increasing and emissions are still going up. Further, the percentage of the world population that now has potentital access to services, utilities and the automobile is increasing almost exponentially.

Conservation and emission controls needed? You bet. But also new technology, international cooperation and a willingness to face the issue.

Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, we often don't take heed of this until there is a personal reason to do so.

For us in the West, what will it take to drive us from our cars to public transportation? It appears that it will take increased energy costs. Those are coming. I honestly think we haven't seen anything yet.

There seems to be an attitude that cheap energy is our birthright in the US. Our government hears us loud and clear and they respond to it. If they don't we vote them out.

The problem we are facing in the US now is not that the government is causing or not causing energy costs to raise. We are in a global market and China and India, are rousing like sleeping giants and not only keeping for their own use their own oil and petroleum output (they used to be net exporters) but they are now entering the world market and competing directly against the US and Europe for the surplus of other nations.

International competion will in many ways modify behavior that I think others are seeking to try and effect by the use of appeals to catastrophe and altruism.

The problem with magnifying the problem beyond what the data supports is that over time you introduce cynacism into the mix and you have to keep upping the ante until finally, you yell "Wolf!" and nobody listens or cares.

I think there will be some strong responses and developments in this arena soon. It will probably be tied more to human response to the raise in the cost of energy than it will be to a sense of environmentalism. The point is that it is happening and will happen more as the cost goes up and it undoubtedly will.

That's my opinion anyway.

The problem with magnifying the problem beyond what the data supports is that over time you introduce cynacism into the mix and you have to keep upping the ante until finally, you yell "Wolf!" and nobody listens or cares.

Thanks Bart, I got ya... I know that cynasim is probably not the best way to handle it, but do you think we've yelled "wolf" too soon already? I mean, I think we've acknowledged a problem here, how else are we going to get the message across if everyone thinks it's just leftist rhetoric? That's a pretty big wall to scale unless you can persuade an ulta conservative that the problem is real... That is why I think if you can expose the money trail as well, perhaps one could probably find the heart of the problem. As harsh as that may sound...

As I've stated before, I'm not a leftist, but I can surely read charts and understand we've got a potential problem here... And we as Christians, I believe, should be held accountable to a HIGHER standard when is comes to how we've stewarded God's earth which has been given to us as a LOAN from God. How would you feel if you loaned someone your car to find out that they had smashed it into a wall the previous day? So not only should we be aware of how are actions are effecting this earth and all the people, but also how it is effecting our relationship (and ultimate judgement) with God too...

Just my two cents,

G -

Gman wrote:

The problem with magnifying the problem beyond what the data supports is that over time you introduce cynacism into the mix and you have to keep upping the ante until finally, you yell "Wolf!" and nobody listens or cares.

Thanks Bart, I got ya... I know that cynasim is probably not the best way to handle it, but do you think we've yelled "wolf" too soon already? I mean, I think we've acknowledged a problem here, how else are we going to get the message across if everyone thinks it's just leftist rhetoric? That's a pretty big wall to scale unless you can persuade an ulta conservative that the problem is real... That is why I think if you can expose the money trail as well, perhaps one could probably find the heart of the problem. As harsh as that may sound...

As I've stated before, I'm not a leftist, but I can surely read charts and understand we've got a potential problem here... And we as Christians, I believe, should be held accountable to a HIGHER standard when is comes to how we've stewarded God's earth which has been given to us as a LOAN from God. How would you feel if you loaned someone your car to find out that they had smashed it into a wall the previous day? So not only should we be aware of how are actions are effecting this earth and all the people, but also how it is effecting our relationship (and ultimate judgement) with God too...

Just my two cents,

G -

Well .... If it's any consolation, I used to be a hard right guy who didn't give this any credence before. I agree with you on the stewardship issues.

It's good to see that you have taken the initiative here Bart. So if we can clone you, maybe we will have a safer place...

G -

For the record, G, "ultra conservatives" like myself (or "hard right," as it was otherwise put), don't deny that temperatures are getting warmer. What we argue is that people's activities have nothing to do with it. Leftists, and those who agree with them, like to point primarily to CO2 increases and say that is the reason that temperatures go up. Two problems here:

1 - Do you realize that only a few years ago, CO2 increases were supposed to make the world colder? The theory was that it would reflect the Sun's heat away from the planet :p

2 - Do you realize that if you trace the temperature and CO2 varations back, then what you actually find is that CO2 increases are a result of global warming, and not vice versa? Why? Because the ocean is the largest holder of CO2, and when it gets warmer, it can hold less CO2, and thus there is more of it in the air. Besides that, it is no where near a univeral belief that man's activities are increasing the effects of global warming. And if you look, a good portion who insist they are, are either anti-American (Chinese, third world, etc.) who want to hurt America's economy with things like the Kyoto Treaty, or they are govn't funded. Not all, mind you, but a good portion . . .

In other words, it seems very possible, if not probable, that those with a reason (agenda) to find that human activity affects global warming will, while indepedant researchers have no such bias.

With all that, my beef is against the leftist rhetoric that are using a simple issue as a weapon to push their socialistic and "green" agendas. This movie is a great example of that.

Jac, ok, I'm going to try to do this without being too cynical.. God help me.

What we argue is that people's activities have nothing to do with it. Leftists, and those who agree with them, like to point primarily to CO2 increases and say that is the reason that temperatures go up

As stated by our leftist writer Rich Deem (sorry)... "The scientific data is clear that global temperatures are rising. Although the amount of increase is probably within the range of natural variability for the last thousand years, the rate of increase is faster than at any other time during that period. Some of the increase may be due to a natural warming trend, although most of the increase is probably due to human influence."

1 - Do you realize that only a few years ago, CO2 increases were supposed to make the world colder? The theory was that it would reflect the Sun's heat away from the planet

Do you realize that most real scientists would not agree with this claim? If that were true then why is the world getting hotter as shown with the data we currently have now? Are you willing to take a chance with your theory on God's planet? As for me, I don't claim to have all the answers but I'm not willing to take that chance... It maybe correct (as I have stated before) to say that the CO2 measurements cannot prove that global warming is already occurring. On the other hand, they cannot prove that it is not occurring either. The world may have warmed about 1 degree F, sea level has risen a little, and all over the world, and glaciers are retreating. This combined with the scientific certainty that the greenhouse gases do trap heat (as proved in lab) and that the greenhouse gases are increasing in the atmosphere (from human sources) and not reflecting it back to space. If anything was reflecting light or heat back into space it was the polar ice caps but now they are going away as well.

2 - Do you realize that if you trace the temperature and CO2 varations back, then what you actually find is that CO2 increases are a result of global warming, and not vice versa? Why? Because the ocean is the largest holder of CO2, and when it gets warmer, it can hold less CO2, and thus there is more of it in the air. Besides that, it is no where near a univeral belief that man's activities are increasing the effects of global warming.

Well to the contrary do you realize that most scientists believe that humans contibute to at least 10% of the CO2 emissions found throughout the world? Certainly our pollution has to go somewhere, does one think it would vaporize into the thin air? Maybe in a David Copperfield show.. (sorry again..).

And if you look, a good portion who insist they are, are either anti-American (Chinese, third world, etc.) who want to hurt America's economy with things like the Kyoto Treaty, or they are govn't funded. Not all, mind you, but a good portion . . .

Just like the horse and buggy days, soon the combustible engines will die out and be replaced by more fuel efficient vehicles... Don't worry Jac, if the U.S. can put a man on the moon, I'm sure we can come up with more efficient ways to deal with the situation. America should be the trendsetter in this one. And if we can come out with more fuel efficient vehicles, then we will gain the respect back and perhaps regain our economy back as well. It is one of the MAIN reasons why Ford and GM are having so many problems right now.. In fact they cannot even sell some of their vehicles overseas because they don't meet the emission requirements for that particular country... Just think, if a tiny country like Japan that has almost hardly any resources, (like metals or minerals) produce enough product to become one of the worlds biggest economic leaders, then why can't we as well?

In your previous notes, it seems that you think this is a governemt conspiracy or something... Right now I think the big oil companies are becoming more scared and are willing to promote scientists that will support their rhetoric. And I think if you really follow the money trail on this one it leads to those big oil kings (notice I didn't say rich) in the middle east. And many of these oil dudes support those muslim extremists which in turn support the hatred and destruction of America and bring our economy to it's knees...

All the best,

G -

Again, I'm not arguing that the world isn't getting warmer. I am arguing that there it is FAR from proven that human activities have any significant impact on the rate of increase. Those scientists who say that it is are, for the most part, govn't funded. Independant researchers are far less likely to come to that conclusion. A good example is the paper I already referenced. CO2 is blamed, according to leftists, and since we produce so much CO2, it is our fault. That's stupid. The data, as noted, is that historically, is that there is more CO2 in the air AFTER the globe has warmed than before. Thus, increased CO2 is a RESULT of global warming, not the cause.

What is the cause, then? A hotter Sun. And it is a documented fact that the Sun is right now hotter than it has been in previous years. So, if that manages to raise our temperature 2 or so degrees, then that will have a pretty big impact. Only it isn't anything people did, is it?

Besides all this, it is pretty silly to pull the Christian-stewardship card here. We know for a fact that the globe has warmed and cooled in cycles through its history. We are in a warming cycle. Good deal. Eventually, there will be a cooling cycle. This world isn't going to burn up. It didn't before, and it won't this time.

And should America work on developing more fuel effeciency? Of course, but not because of global warming. We should because we are too dependant on the anti-American OPEC. Do you know, though, why we ARE dependant on them? Because the leftists won't let us do anything else. We produce enough soy and corn to be run on ethynol and biodiesel within five years. Brazil just did it. We can, too. But, we aren't allowed to because of the restrictions our govn't has on American farm land. We also have over 100 billion barrels of oil on the continental US, but leftists won't let us drill. We are dependant on other countries because that's the way the politicians want it. It's a power thing. It lets them use the tax code to offer the incentives they want offered, which allows them to buy votes.

Regardless of all of this, my original point is absolutely objective and absolutely true. Gore's movie is nothing but leftist propoganda. He is putting out this dire, end-of-all warning, claiming that science is in complete agreement with him. He's absolutely wrong, and he is absolutely lying. He is trying to push the leftist, socialist, green agenda, and that's what I have a problem with. I mean, hey, freedom of speech and all that. Good for him. But I won't waste my time with it. And if anyone tries to pawn the arguments off, I'm going to point out the propoganda.

Well said Jac, I agree!

Well, it was bound to happen.

I can't go as far as Jac and August on this.

There's no question that there are open gaps in the science on this and that there are elements that beg the question as to where science stops and political ideology picks up.

With that understood, I think that it is entirely possible and probable that with the changes in human technology and the output of greenhouse gases, and air pollutants that there is an environmental impact.

It is not as directly and immediately evident as, for instance, pouring phosphates directly into a river. It is there nevertheless and is often the case with something where multiple systems are interacting it is not always easy to isolate the impact of any one element.

I hope I never return to the point where I prejudge a movie or a book entirely before I know what it actually says.

I have opinions already about Al Gore and frankly my predisposition toward him based on what I know and see are such that I would approach this documentary with a fair amount of skepticism and the assumption that there are motives of political expediency intertwined within the documentary. I don't think the timing of its release within the electoral cycle is a coincidence for instance. All that said, and with that filter in place, it's still possible that there are some things to learn and that he has some legitimate points to make.

All that acknowledged, I refuse to accept that this is not an area that requires thoughtful and careful examination. Further, it is entirely consistent with Christian Stewardship to maintain an open mind and even to act responsibly in the absence of complete information but with the application of common sense.

As I've stated, I think by and large the US is seeking to be responsible and is rightly reducing per capita emissions, increasing fuel efficiency and seeking to be responsible.

The biggest environmental issue I see in this century is that countries such as China and India, which represent almost 1/2 of the world's population by themselves, as entering into their own industrial revolution of sorts and growing their own middle class which in turn is calling for the living standards and resources that we in the west take for granted. That means an incredible increase in emission based upon increased production of electricity and increased use of automobiles to name a few.

What happens there will impact us here and all around the world.

I don't think we completely understand all that that will cause yet. Rather than take a position, that because we haven't spelled out to a skeptic's satisfaction (some of whom have their own reasons and motives for not wanting to be convinced) every jot and tittle of the science, that there is no need for action, I believe it is reasonable and in keeping with Stewardship to be cautious and err on the side of environmental conservation.

Stewardship is not a card to be played occasionally. Outside of man's primary purpose which is to know and worship God, I believe God's intended role for us on this earth with relationship to the earth itself is one of stewardship. It is not a card to be played on occasion. It is the game itself.

It is in our own interest as well not to foul our own nests and to hand to the next generation a situation they can in turn manage and maintain until God chooses to consume this world with fire. We don't need to be starting that process now.

I realize that Jac and August don't necessarily disagree with many elements of what I am saying in this regard, and what we are talking about to some degree are positions that slide upon a spectrum and not necessarily absolute camps.

Color me sliding over somewhat and rejecting some of what I hear coming from those who seem to me to be arguing against personal inconvenience at all costs.

I have a lot of respect for Rich and while I don't agree with all he says (nor should anyone take that standard) I think he's put in over a year of careful thought and further I respect his training and abilities in this area and it means something to me when someone whom I respect and have an insight into his character and belief system, tells me, based upon his expertise, that there is legitimate cause for concern and evidence for real impact.

I choose to listen and try to understand what is taking place and to be proactive rather than reactive to a situation that by its nature may be too late to reverse or slow by the time the acid rain is falling in my back yard.

Bart, for me the issue is that there is no conclusive evidence for global warming brought on by humans. The current flap about it has its foundation in political agendas that come from the left.

I do agree that we need to look after the planet, no question. But we also need to be realistic about it, and spend our efforts on issues that have a more direct impact.

August wrote:Bart, for me the issue is that there is no conclusive evidence for global warming brought on by humans. The current flap about it has its foundation in political agendas that come from the left.

I do agree that we need to look after the planet, no question. But we also need to be realistic about it, and spend our efforts on issues that have a more direct impact.

I respect that opinion. It was my own not too long ago.

I'm not advocating going over the deep end. It is a cause that has been politically manipulated. How it has been used is not sufficient reason to reject what is known and how the knowledge base is developing.

I think Rich's article demonstrates there is something there and we should be addressing that something, regardless of how others are spinning the issue.

I'm not ready to crucify SUV owners and chain myself to a tree, though.

Canuckster1127 wrote:

August wrote:Bart, for me the issue is that there is no conclusive evidence for global warming brought on by humans. The current flap about it has its foundation in political agendas that come from the left.

I do agree that we need to look after the planet, no question. But we also need to be realistic about it, and spend our efforts on issues that have a more direct impact.

I respect that opinion. It was my own not too long ago.

I'm not advocating going over the deep end. It is a cause that has been politically manipulated. How it has been used is not sufficient reason to reject what is known and how the knowledge base is developing.

I think Rich's article demonstrates there is something there and we should be addressing that something, regardless of how others are spinning the issue.

I'm not ready to crucify SUV owners and chain myself to a tree, though.

Sure, but because this is such a hot button issue, it regularly comes up for discussion on some of the other forums I participate on. To date, I have not seen credible evidence presented regarding human impact on global warming. Is the planet getting warmer? Looks like it. Is it caused by humans? Doubtful. Does it have an impact on weather patterns? Conjecture.

As many articles that can be presented to support human causes of global warming, just as many can be presented that shows the opposite. That leaves me skeptical, and personally I don't buy into theories unless there is strong factual proof. The political manipulation of the issue has left me more suspicious.

I am arguing that there it is FAR from proven that human activities have any significant impact on the rate of increase.

Is the planet getting warmer? Looks like it. Is it caused by humans? Doubtful.

Jac and August, in defense of Rich Deem where is your proof of this?? Where are you getting this rhetoric? So far what you've said hasn't put a dent in my armor. Did you know that the majority of scientists whether employed by the government or private would disagree with you?

What is the cause, then? A hotter Sun. And it is a documented fact that the Sun is right now hotter than it has been in previous years. So, if that manages to raise our temperature 2 or so degrees, then that will have a pretty big impact. Only it isn't anything people did, is it?

Did you know that if you were to get the raw data that we have from the past 100 years, your theory would not stand up in any court of law...? What we really are struggling with here is when you get into the thousands of years... Now we do have some proof locked up in the polar ice caps (at least what's left of them) and other sources that can give us some history of what was going on back then, but it is not concise. This is one of the biggest problems. However, it seems very suspicious to me that if you are saying that the sun is going through one of it's 1000 year or 500 year hotter cycles that it is occurring right now when we've been finding record high CO2 levels?? Do you think that this is just a mere coincidence? Like I've said before if you want to believe that, that is up to you. I'm not willing to take that chance with God's planet. Call me a leftist communist pinko (which I'm not), but that big oil loving theory doesn't stack up in my book..

I know your next argument would be (for the hotter sun theory) is that the mars solar caps are melting. However did you know that the observed regional changes in south polar ice cover are almost certainly due to a regional climate transition, not a global phenomenon, and are demonstrably unrelated to external forcing? Please read about it more here..

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... g-on-mars/

Besides all this, it is pretty silly to pull the Christian-stewardship card here.

I don't know, God will have to decide that one.. Hope you're right...

And should America work on developing more fuel effeciency? Of course, but not because of global warming. We should because we are too dependant on the anti-American OPEC. Do you know, though, why we ARE dependant on them? Because the leftists won't let us do anything else. We produce enough soy and corn to be run on ethynol and biodiesel within five years. Brazil just did it. We can, too. But, we aren't allowed to because of the restrictions our govn't has on American farm land.

You mean our leftist Republican dominated congress? I actually never really thought of them as being leftist but maybe you have a point.. I guess... Really?

We also have over 100 billion barrels of oil on the continental US, but leftists won't let us drill.

I don't know, the last time I checked I saw a whole lot of oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico and southern California... Here is a map of the progress of the oil wells in Alaska from 68 to 2001. Hey, watch it grow...

http://www.inforain.org/maparchive/sprawl.htm

Look, as I've said before I'm not a Gore supporter. But there is something weird going on with this weather stuff. Maybe we should take a deeper look into what's going on instead of just calling it leftist rhetoric.


G -

Gman wrote:

I am arguing that there it is FAR from proven that human activities have any significant impact on the rate of increase.

Is the planet getting warmer? Looks like it. Is it caused by humans? Doubtful.

Jac and August, in defense of Rich Deem where is your proof of this?? Where are you getting this rhetoric? So far what you've said hasn't put a dent in my armor. Did you know that the majority of scientists whether employed by the government or private would disagree with you?

There are many articles like these....
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597
http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3400
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/july04/Daily ... ellamy.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/cause.htm

EDIT:

I took out the last post. A bit too sarcastic. Look, G, I don't think it's an issue. If you think it's coincidence that the earth is hotter when the Sun is hotter, good for you. Until someone proves beyond any doubt otherwise, I'm not concerned.

My original point was that Gore's movie is leftist propaganda, and it is. It is extremely one sided, and I have no interest in it.

Enough said.

God bless