SUPPRESS CLIMATE SCEPTICS AND CREATIONISTS, says Barry Brook, director of the Research Institute for Climate Change and Sustainability, University of Adelaide, writing in an article in The Australian, 30 April 2008. Brook claims that global warming sceptics, creationists and "intelligent designers" are "trolls" - an Internet jargon term defined by Brook as "people who
intentionally post false or controversial messages to gain attention or foment a conflicting style of debate." Brook advises people not to feed trolls by engaging them on the on their terms. He claims they can be overcome by "good science - evidence and ideasthat are repeatedly supported by observations, experiments and models - gradually emerges from the pack and moves from being hypotheses to theories, paradigms and laws." However, Brian Macfie, also writing in the Australian, 7 May 2008 comments that "throughout history dissenters, sceptics, contrarians and innovators have suffered criticism, abuse and even persecution, but it isthese people who have driven progress." Macfie comments "Today we are faced with a newer religion known as environmental activism which has insinuated itself into some aspects of science. It shares some of the intolerance to new or challenging ideas with theold. Immolation at the stake is no longer fashionable but it has been replaced by pillory in the media." He goes on to say, "Phrases such as 'the argument is over, the science is settled' are so much fatuous nonsense and should almost never be used in the scientific community. " This view is supported by Michael Duffy, writing in the Sydney Morning Herald, 3 May 2008 who points outthat according to British Met Office's Hadley Centre and America's National Climatic Data Centre global average temperatures has not risen since 2002. Duffy writes: "Hadley expresses temperature changes in terms of deviations from the 1961 to 1990 average. In 2002the rounded global temperature for land and sea was 0.46 above that average. In the next five years it was: 0.46, 0.43, 0.48, 0.42,and 0.40. The figures for the date centre are calculated slightly differently, but they too show no trend over the period inquestion." Duffy goes on to comment: "Whatever the recent figures might signify, it's disturbing that they haven't received morepublicity. If the trend had been different - if warming had accelerated, say - you can bet it would have been reported everywhere.
But because the figures since 2002 might raise doubts about the orthodoxy, there has been a great silence. Most of those involved inpublic discussion of global warming simply ignored what was happening to the temperature record. The media have continued to interpret any minor weather event as proof of global warming. Political leaders have continued to crank up the panic."Barry Brook:,25197,23618607-27703,00.html
Brian Mafie:,25197,23655529-27703,00.html
Michael Duffy:

ED. COM. The opinions expressed by these writers remind us that the current climate change debate is not about science - it isabout how those in positions of power use and miss-use science. It is interesting that Barry Brook wants the same exclusion tactics to be used against both global warming sceptics and evolution sceptics. He obviously recognises that if either group are right then a lot of people in power have a lot to lose. We agree there is a need for "good science" but that will not happen if any group is deliberately suppressed simply because they disagree with the current dominate belief. Nearly 2000 yrs ago, the apostle Paul told us to "test everything and only hold on to what is good" ( 1 Thess. 5:21). (Ref. controversy, philosophy, journalism)

VATICAN BACKS ALIENS AND EVOLUTION, according to an article in BBC News, 13 May 2008 and the Catholic News Service, 14 May 2008. Gabriel Fumes, a Catholic priest and director of the Vatican Observatory claims that God may have created intelligent beings on other planets. In an interview for the official Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, Fumes was asked about the implications of such a discovery for the Christian story of redemption. Fumes referred to the Jesus' parable of the lost sheep and commented: "We who belong to the human race could really be that lost sheep, the sinners who need a pastor. God became man in Jesus in order to save us. So if there are also other intelligent beings, it's not a given that they need redemption. They might have remained in full friendship with their creator." When asked about the Biblical account of creation Fumes commented: "The Bible is not fundamentally a work of science. It is a letter of love that God has written to his people, in a language that was used 2,000-3,000 years ago. Obviously, at that time a concept like the big bang was totally extraneous." Fumes sees no contradiction between the Bible and evolution, and said it was wrong to expect a scientific explanation from the Bible. The BBC article reports: "To strengthen its scientific credentials, the Vatican is organising a conference next year to mark the 200th anniversary of the birth of the author of the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin."
Catholic News Service:

ED.COM. What's the connection? The Papacy has long accepted evolutionist theory with a few add-ons of god-activity, so we shouldn't be surprised that they go most of the way with the evolutionist philosophy that life arose by naturalistic processes on earth - so life could be found anywhere those same conditions made it possible. Of course the Vatican will have to get a god-bit into the act as the maker/evolver of aliens. And they will have to show they accept the evolutionist concept that physical death is a natural part of the "creation" and a biological necessity for evolution to occur. In doing so they will make themselves very acceptable to the world as the leading political body they excel at being - but in so doing they will again undermine Christianity, the Biblical account and further alienate themselves from the Creator Christ in their lustful desire to be a respected religion based on human wisdom and not on Gods Revealed Word.
Those who accept God created as per Genesis - know that physical life will be only where God put it and that physical death is not a biological necessity, but a moral penalty for sinful disobedience of the Creator(see Genesis 1-3 and Romans 1-5). The Biblical record has 2 data bases that tell us physical life is only on earth. A) earth life is the only one mentioned as created in the entire universe, and b) The Biblical record is adamant that Adams sin has affected the whole creation - not just earth (see Romans 5-8). This is a legal situation which would be absolutely unjust in the eyes of a Just Creator, if physical beings on other worlds who were physically unrelated to the first man Adam, were subject to the moral penalty of physical death for a sin they had no part of. It would also make a mockery out of the fact that Jesus who is God the Creator, became a man and died on earth for Adam and his
descendants so that whosever would accept Christs death as payment for their sin would receive eternal life, and a new body, and a new heavens and earth which the Creator will make as per Revelation 21-22


© Copyright Creation Research July A.D. 2012. All rights reserved.