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no longer fashionable but it has been replaced by pillory in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: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23618607-27703,00.html
Brian Mafie: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23655529-27703,00.html
Michael Duffy:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/michael-duffy/new-climate-figures-would-make-a-great-debatethem/2008/05/02/1209235149840.html?page=fullpa
ge#contentSwap1 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."
BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7399661.stm
Catholic News Service:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0802629.htm
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
|
