Evidence for God from Science

Global warming has been in the headlines lately and i have a question. Why is global warming being pinned on people and cars, power plants etc. When global warming trigures an ice age. If thats the case weve already had several ice ages. so couldnt global warming just be a cycle. Cus honestly unless a trex was driving around in a himmer wouldnt an ice age just be a earth cycle?

Everything on our planet is cyclical. Scientists have recently changed their jargon from "global warming" to "climate change".

Well, of course the climate changes. It's always changing. That's the NATURE of climate -.-

However, I definitely don't negate the fact we are negatively impacting our resources. Do we have enough history to go on to estimate what might happen if we don't begin more sustainable measures? No, I don't believe so. Honestly, the answers are a little too simple, and it's tied to the issues of other global injustices (poverty etc). Western culture is a consumerist culture and we hold the majority of the world's income, but for what? To buy things we don't really need, just to "keep up with the Jones'?". The waste we produce, the fuel we burn, the excess amounts of food we produce and consume (and then throw out when people are starving in our own towns) are the real problems. If we took care of these issues, we would see benefit to our air quality, water tables, soil conditions, etc simply because we PRODUCE LESS.

Since we can't see our culture really shifting to this mentality, the best we can do is come up with sustainable measures to handle the resources we have.

Source: Me. I work in the environmental field

GW is attributed to an increase in carbon. Car emisions and coal plant emissions even if low pollutting put out tons of carbon. The earth has a carbon cycle. http://www.carboncycle.biz/images/carbon-cycle.gif
The output of carbon by man is miniscule when compared with how much the ocean puts out. But that really isn't the issue. It is the balance. If man is putting enoung into the atmosphere to shift the balance, then that is where they say the warming is occuring.

A lot of people, including myself, confused air quality with GW. When carbon is burned it puts CO2 into the atmosphere. CO2 is natural, and invisible. The coal plants put out a lot of particulate matter, which is what we see as polution. Scrubbers costing billions have been put in place, which reduce the particulates, but they do nothing about the CO2. Same goes for a autos. You can clean up the sulfur content in fuel, but you can't do anything about carbon. When fuel is burned, the CO2 is released.

40% of scientist that agree with global warming are social scientist that know nothing about nature.

My father strongly disagrees with man made global warming and has a masters in environmental science. His best way to tell if a person actually knows what they are talking about is to ask them about what gasses makes up our atmosphere. Most people can name 3 and have no clue how carbon actually effects the atmosphere. They just jump on the GW bandwagon because they can "get at the machine mann".

Believe me, this whole GW thing has people with hidden agendas on ALL sides of it (including believers, skeptics, those that don't care). People who want power, money, control, and whatever else - GW politics is a convenient vehicle to leverage whatever their ends might be.

But let's just say that Al Gore is actually correct (and I don't think he is) - given the immense global financial, resources and human pressures that are urgently pressing the planet for survival TODAY, for the world's governments to collectively and effectively face such a long-term threat is highly unlikely, as they're all hyper focused on what is facing them in the present. And even if we could cut even near the amount of emissions and make the changes supposedly necessary to combat GW, it would not be sufficient to make any significant difference in its advance. Plus, the accelerating population of earth will quickly eclipse all we MIGHT be able to do, EVEN WITH today's global population. And as so much hype and so many lies have been made by the GW proponents, that even IF GW is man-induced, we'll never address it in time, due to the widespread cynicism caused by the data manipulation and lies of its scientific proponents.

But should we conserve our earth, utilize cleaner technologies and industry practices wherever possible? Absolutely!No one can deny that we've done tremendous damage to our air, soil and water. Chemicals, antibiotics, waste products are everywhere. As Christians, we should take care as we can, as seems prudent, and as is financially feasible (not talking about nonsense like cap and trade). But should we go off screaming into the night, "the sky is falling and the planet is warming?" No! We need to realize that God is in absolute control of earth's destiny. It will end precisely as and exactly when He so desires. He will protect those whom are His along the way. GW is probably one of earth's lesser threats, as there are many potential entities that might well attempt to destroy much of the planet in an effort to control it (long before we can melt it)...IF they ever got the means. But to think that our ancient planet's cycles of hot and cold can be controlled or caused by man is mere speculation.

Do I think that mankind has doomed every living thing to extinction or any other wild claim? No. I do think that some conservative Christians have reacted to more liberal "earth friendly" parties when conservation and being good stewards are things that most Christians would agree that we should do. But instead it comes across like more conservatives are "anti-environment" or something like that.

But I don't for a minute think the global warming alarmists are actually correct, no. If they could make it less political or extreme instead of a talking point to advance an agenda, then I and others could take it more seriously. And I can guarantee you that most of the chicken littles out there (with a little bit of that witch from the Wizard of Oz thrown in, "The sky is melting! The sky is melting!) don't worry about it nearly as much as they pretend to either. If they did there would be panics, rioting, etc... they take it no more seriously than the 2012 end of the world thing.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/a ... e-uea-cru/

It's a long read and this is just part of it:

Here’s my problem with all of this, Dr. Jones. You tried out a variety of claimed reasons for not responding to a request for your data. None of them were even remotely true. They were all intended to hide the fact that you didn’t know where the data was. Dave clearly spelled out the problem: “we don’t know which data belongs to which stations, right?”

You claimed that the data was out there on the web somewhere. You claimed you couldn’t send any of it because of restrictions on a few datasets. You claimed it came from GHCN, then you said from NCAR, but you couldn’t say exactly where.

You gave lots and lots of explanations to me, everything except the truth—that your records were in such disarray that you could not fulfill my request. It is clear now from the Climategate emails that some records were there, some were missing, the lists were not up to date, there was orphan data, some stations had multiple sets of data, some data was only identified by folder not by filename, you didn’t know which data might have been covered by confidentiality agreements, and the provenance of some datasets could not be established. The unfortunate reality was that you simply couldn’t do what I asked.

Rather than just saying that, however, you came up with a host of totally bogus reasons why you could not give me the data. Those were lies, Phil. You and David Palmer flat-out lied to my face about why you couldn’t send me the data.

Now, I’ve come to accept that you lied to me. Here’s what I think. I think you are a scientist, and a reasonably good one, who was hard squeezed by two things—the Peter Principle, and Noble Cause Corruption. When you began your scientific career, your sloppy record keeping didn’t matter much. And you didn’t want to be the record keeper in any case, you wanted to do the science instead, but you kept getting promoted and you ended up curating a big messy dataset. Then things changed, and now, climate decisions involving billions of dollars are being made based in part on your data. Disarray in your files didn’t make a lot of difference when your work was of interest only to specialists. But now it matters greatly, money and people’s lives are at stake, and unfortunately you were a better scientist than you were a data manager.

So when my FOI request came along, you were caught. You were legally required to produce data you couldn’t locate. Rather than tell the truth and say “I can’t find it”, you chose to lie. Hey, it was only a small lie, and it was for the Noble Cause of saving the world from Thermageddon. So you had David tell me the data was available on the web. You knew that was a lie. David, apparently, didn’t realize it was a lie, at least at first. You hoped your Noble Lie would satisfy me, that I would get discouraged, and you could move on.

But I asked again, and when I called you on that first answer, you thought up another Noble Lie. And when that one didn’t work, you invented another Noble Lie.

OK, so you are a serial liar. Like I said, I’ve made my peace with that. It used to rankle me, but not any more. I just accepted that you can’t be trusted and I moved on. I do have compassion for you, Dr. Jones. None of you guys set out to do the ugly things you ended up doing. You all got caught by Noble Cause Corruption, by the vision of being smarter than everyone else and of being the only people standing between us and global destruction. It’s heady, treacherous stuff.

I have been a victim of that same self-delusion myself. I understand the sweet seduction that arises from the conviction that your mission is of vital, crucial importance to the whole planet. However, I quit that kind of nonsense around the time the sixties wound down … but again I digress. I have compassion for your position, and I was, although not satisfied, at least at ease with the outcome.

So if I made my peace with you, why am I writing this letter now?

I’m writing because in response to the new Climategate 2.0 email release, over at the UEA website, you have a new post in which you are up to your old tricks, trying to peanut-butter up the cracks in your stories.

The deceit and ineptness never cease to amaze. . .

Good to see Watts Up With That? still producing the goods.

Didn’t anyone think it’s the nature way to revenge? We won’t experience this kind of phenomena if only we take good care of our environment. Modern technology has a big effect too; those things people are using that contain chemicals are one factor. Human ask for more, looks for more without noticing that the natural gift we received from God was fading. Such occurrence won’t stop until we learn how to value the creation given to us.