Climate Change Alarmists Are Cult-like

November 30, 2012 By 2 Comments
GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS BELIEVE MAN CONTROLS CLIMATE CHANGE, NOT GOD.

GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS BELIEVE MAN CONTROLS CLIMATE CHANGE, NOT GOD.

I was in Kyoto, Japan in 1997 for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

It was there that I first observed for myself the almost religious fervor of those who subscribe to the global warming orthodoxy; who accept, as an article of faith, that Earth’s 6.9 billion human inhabitants are dangerously overheating the planet.

The Kyoto summit wasn’t about drafting an international treaty based on science. It was about promoting theology based on radical environmentalism.

So it continues to this very week with a new study, published in the journal “Science,” reported uncritically in the mainstream media, warning that the polar ice in both Antarctica and Greenland is currently melting several time faster than in the 1990s.

We need to worry about that melt off, the MSM tell us, because it is raising sea levels by as much as 2 millimeters a year.

“And while a 0.4 percent inch rise sea levels over 20 years doesn’t sound like much,” NBC News journo Miguel Llanos reported, “many experts fear that further warming will accelerate the polar melt.”

Indeed, he warned, hysterically so, the ice sheets could “raise sea levels by more than 200 feet.” That is, “if they completely melted over centuries.”

And while Llanos acknowledged that such a scenario is “not likely,” he nevertheless informed us that “even a tenth of that would have catastrophic impacts on coastal areas.”

What the NBC journo buried in his news report is that a “few” studies “said that overall polar ice was growing, and thus countering sea level rise.”

He really didn’t want to give those studies more than a token mention because they do not comport with climate change orthodoxy. Because they contradict global warming prophecy that polar melt will lead to a catastrophic rise in sea level that will swamp coastal areas like nothing seen since Noah’s flood.

And woe to those of us who dare to challenge the accepted wisdom on climate change.

Who have the temerity to suggest that, while there very well has been some planetary warming in recent decades, that climate change is most likely natural, rather than anthropogenic (I picked up that term in Kyoto).

Who proclaim that the Earth is the Lord’s. And that He continues to control its climate. Not man.

To express such thoughts is to invite attack by climate change cultists who countenance no opposition to their radical environmentalist theology.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Have Darwinists Finally Found The Missing Link?

October 28, 2012 By 8 Comments

THE FOSSILIZED REMAINS OF ‘LUCY’S BABY’ ARE ENTIRELY THOSE OF A MONKEY.

They never stop – the God-deniers who worship at the altar of evolution. Who pay homage to their high priest, Charles Darwin. Who continue to place their faith in theories they contend to be indisputable science.

The latest example is a new fossil study, published in the journal Science, co-authored by David Green, an anatomy professor at Midwestern University in Illinois, and Zeresenay Alemseged, chair of the anthropology department at the California Academy of Sciences.

The study claims that the 3.3 million-year-old remains of a baby monkey, discovered in Ethiopia, somehow confirm that our early human ancestors swung from trees before evolving into the ground-dwellers we are today.

The fossil, a member of the species Australopithecus afarensis, has been nicknamed “Lucy’s Baby.”

It’s a reference to a 3.2 million-year-old fossilized ape, “Lucy,” which was previously discovered in Ethiopia, and which evolutionists claimed for a time to be the proverbial “missing link” between simians and homo sapiens.

The science media is now reporting a supposed link between Lucy’s so-called Baby, which National Geographic refers to as a “toddler,” and human beings as if it’s Gospel truth; as if it’s proof positive that the Bible’s creation story is a fiction.

But not every scientist who sings from the Darwinist hymnal endorses the notion, advanced by Green and Alemseged, that human beings are made not in God’s image, but are evolved from Lucy’s Baby.

The fossil just “doesn’t seem human like,” Carol Ward, a University of Missouri paleoanthropologist, told NatGeo News.

“I don’t think it’s the smoking piece of information that says those guys were climbing trees,” added Scott Simpson, a CaseWestern ReserveUniversity paleoanthropologist.

Ward and Hayes did not express doubts about Lucy’s Baby because they renounce  Darwinism.

It’s because they don’t want to risk their scientific reputations by giving their imprimatur to the wild claim that a few ancient bones unearthed in Africa prove beyond a reasonable doubt that humans descended from arboreal monkeys.

Indeed, Alemseged and his colleagues at the Cali Academy of Sciences compared the fossilized remains of Lucy’s Baby with those of living apes, humans and other supposed early human species.

According to NatGeo News, they found that the sockets of the fossil’s shoulder joints point upward, as they do in apes; that the boney ridge that runs along the fossil’s shoulder blades is set at a similar angle as in chimpanzees; that the fossil’s scapula, long and curved fingers, and short clavicle are all gorilla-like.

Well, I’m no anatomy professor, no anthropologist, no paleoanthropologist. But, it seems to me that, if the fossilized remains of Lucy’s Baby look exactly like those of a monkey, it must have been a monkey.

And no matter how much Green and Alemseged want Lucy’s Baby to be the missing link, to prove that man transmogrified from monkey, it’s just more false advertising by scientists who believe in Darwin, rather than God.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Does Einstein’s ‘God Letter’ Prove He Was Godless?

October 7, 2012 By 1 Comment

THE RENOWNED PHYSICIST’S SO-CALLED ‘GOD LETTER’ WILL BE AUCTIONED OFF ON EBAY.

A handwritten letter by Albert Einstein goes on auction tomorrow on eBay. The online auction site has set the opening bid at a staggering $3 million. That’s more than seven times as much as the letter fetched just four years ago.

“This is the most historic and significant piece we have listed on eBay,” said Eric Gazin, president of Auction Cause, the Los Angles-based agency consigned to sell Einstein’s two-pager.

So what makes this particular letter by the 20th century’s most renowned physicist so much more valuable than any other missive he hand wrote?

Did he scribble his famous formula E =mc2?

No, it’s because Einstein offered his thoughts on God and religion.

“The word God is for me,” wrote Einstein, in a 1954 letter to Jewish philosopher Eric Gutkind, “nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends.”

No doubt the atheist community will seize upon that declaration as prima facie evidence that Einstein was one of them. And that, like the eminent scientist, they are on the side of “reason” rather than “religion.”

But the Bible foresaw this age in which we live, when the godless among us would attribute their disbelief in God and His Word to science and reason:

“It is written: ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.’ Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?”

Einstein was, indeed, as Gazin attested, “one of the most brilliant minds to ever live.” But he was not omniscient. He was not infallible.

Moreover, it is not the human mind – however brilliant – but the Spirit within us that informs that God is not merely an expression or product of our human weakness; that His Word is not merely a collection of primitive legends.

Notwithstanding some of thoughts Einstein’s expressed in his so-called “God Letter,” as the letter’s auctioneers have dubbed it, it appears the Holy Spirit had at least some influence on the genius who gave us the theory of relativity.

For the celebrated physicist did not deny the existence of God. He simply did not believe, he wrote, “in a personal God.” He shared the view of so-called Deists that God created the world before stepping aside and leaving humanity to its own devices.

Even more interesting, while Einstein’s “God Letter” does not mention Jesus, it is clear from previous public statements he made that he thought Christ no ordinary man.

In a 1929 interview with the old Saturday Evening Post, the physicist confided, “I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene.”

Moreover, he said, “No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”

Einstein’s words quite unintentionally proved the Scriptures prophetic: That “every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , , , ,

‘Science Guy’ Bill Nye Blasts Evolution ‘Deniers’

August 28, 2012 By 6 Comments

NYE ASSERTS THAT THOSE WHO BELIEVE THAT GOD CREATED MAN AND WOMAN ARE SCIENTIFIC ‘ILLITERATES.’

Bill Nye used to be “The Science Guy” on PBS. Now he’s just a godless hater.

The former host of the “educational” TV show targeted to preteens, which aired from 1993 to 1998, said this week that those of us who believe that God created man and woman are idiots. And that we ought not pass along that belief to our children.

“I say to the grownups,” Nye condescended, “if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, your world that’s inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that’s fine. But don’t make your kids do it.”

Because, said Nye, who places his faith in Darwin, rather than God, “We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future.”

As I considered Nye’s remarks, I wondered if he passed along his thoughts on evolution to Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Orange County, California, who presided over The Science Guy’s quicky marriage back in 2006 (which lasted a mere seven weeks before ending in a decidedly weird, decidedly ugly breakup).

What does it say about Nye’s integrity that he stood before a pastor who absolutely believes the creation story set forth in the Book of Genesis; that he exchanged marriage vows with his seven-week bride before a God in Whom he doesn’t believe?

Yet, he presumes to tell the rest of us what we should teach our children.

And while Nye may be scientifically “literate,” notwithstanding that he has no formal scientific education, he is not nearly as infallible as he makes himself out to be.

Just last year, in fact, The Science Guy demonstrated his scientific shortcomings when he appeared on CNN to discuss damage sustained by a Japanese nuclear plants in the wake of a devastating earthquake and tsunami.

Nye stated, incorrectly, that cesium is used to “slow and control” the nuclear reaction. But as any nuclear scientist would tell him, cesium is a nuclear fission product, not a control rod material.

Nye also stated, incorrectly, that the nuclear reactor involved in the Three Mile Island accident was still online. 

And The Science Guy erred in telling CNN viewers that use of boron to slow the nuclear reaction is uncommon, when, in fact, boron-10 is commonly used in control rods and is circulated in the coolant of most, if not all, reactors in this country.

Now, the average CNN viewer could not be expected to know these things. But Nye, the so-called Science Guy, should have known better. Especially if he was going to discuss the subject on national TV.

It obviously doesn’t occur to Nye that, if he was dead wrong on nuclear energy, he could be just as wrong on evolution.

Otherwise the former Science Guy wouldn’t be so contemptuous of those of who are not scientific illiterates; who simply find less believable the science-fiction that ape transmogrified into man, than the Bible’s explanation that all-powerful God created man.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , , , ,

Darwinists Wrong Again on Human Evolution

August 16, 2012 By 15 Comments

DARWINISTS SUGGESTED THAT OTA BENGA WAS ‘MISSING LINK’ BETWEEN APES AND HUMANS.

Paging Nicholas Wade. He’s the New York Times science writer who worships at the altar of Darwinism.

Two years ago, he reported that biologists, led by Svante Paabo of Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, had determined that Neanderthals mated with modern humans.

That “scientific” finding provided a convenient explanation for what happened to humanity’s supposed ancestor: We interbred with them until they disappeared.

Now comes a new study, reported this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that the finding reported by Wade were wrong. There was no mating, no “hybridization,” between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens (us).

The study’s authors, Andrea Manica and Anders Eriksson, scientists with the Evolutionary Ecology Group at Britain’s Cambridge University, say that modern humans have no Neanderthal DNA.

Whatever DNA modern humans and Neanderthals share in common came not from interbreeding, the scientists concluded, but from a common, unknown ancestor (a chimpanzee, maybe?).

That  is a stunning scientific turnabout in the prevailing wisdom about human evolution. Yet Wade has yet to weigh in on what it all means.

Are we never to know what happened to Neanderthals? Shall we never discover the “missing link,” proving that man evolved from monkey?

Could the proponents of “intelligent design” actually be right, that man did not begin existence as a simple, one-cell organism in this planet’s primordial ooze, but as the fully-formed creation of Almighty God?

Of course, Wade is not going to concede anything to those of us who dare to question his god, Darwin.

He sneers, “To many biologists and others” – meaning enlightened journalists like Wade himself – “it is a source of amazement and embarrassment that many Americans repudiate Darwin’s theory and that some even espouse counter-theories like creationism or intelligent design.”

“How,” he asks, “can such willful ignorance thrive in today’s seas of knowledge?”             

Wade’s attack on evolution doubters, like yours truly, is nothing new for the New York Times.

All the way back in 1906, the “Gray Lady,” as the Times is affectionately known in some quarters, published an editorial supporting a decision by the Bronx Zoo to put an African pygmy named Ota Benga on display in its Monkey House – a putative live exhibit of human evolution..

“We do not quite understand all the emotion which others are expressing in the matter,” the Times harrumphed. “It is absurd to make moan over the imagined humiliation and degradation Benga is suffering. The pygmies … are very low in the human scale.”

The Times was wrong on human evolution then. And its pro-Darwin reporting is no less wrong today.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Study Claims People of Faith Are Stingy

May 2, 2012 By 8 Comments

BELIEVERS LACK COMPASSION, BERKELEY’S  SASLOW FOUND.

Hardly a week passes, it seems, without yet another “scientific” study disparaging people of faith.

This week’s study, ginned up by researchers at the University of California at Berkeley, dubiously concludes that the “highly religious” are less compassionate toward the needful than non-believers.

Published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, the study defines “compassion” as an emotion felt when people see the sufferings of others which then motivates them to help, often at personal risk or cost.

The study’s lead author, Laura Saslow, says she was inspired by an atheist friend who told her he donated to earthquake recovery efforts in Haiti after watching a video of a woman being rescued from the rubble.

“I was interested to find,” she said, “that this experience – an atheist being strongly influenced by his emotions to show generosity to strangers – was replicated in three large, systematic studies.”

Well, I have no doubt there are some non-believers, like Saslow’s atheist boy pal, who are so moved with compassion after watching videos of victims of earthquakes, tsunamis and other natural disasters, that they donate to recovery efforts.

But it is absurd for Saslow to suggest that people of faith, particularly the highly religious, are not similarly moved, if not more so.

To make such a claim, the Cal Berkeley researchers relied on three highly-questionable analyses.

In the first, they looked at data from a 2004 national survey of roughly 1,300 adults. They determined that those who agreed with such statements as “when I see someone being taken advantage of, I feel kind of protective of them” were more inclined to show generosity.

And extrapolating from the survey results, they figured that non-believers were likelier to be charitable in such ways as giving money or food to a homeless person than people of faith.

In the second analysis, 101 adults watched one of two videos. One was neutral. The other was heartrending, showing portraits of impoverished children. Next, the participants were each given a hypothetical $10 and directed to give any of it to a stranger.

Wouldn’t you know it? The least religious gave the most of their money.

The third of the “systematic” analyses on which Saslow’s based her putative scientific findings involved more than 200 college students who were asked to report how compassionate they felt at the moment. Then they played a game in which they were given hypothetical money to share – or not – with a stranger.

In one round, they were told that another person playing the game had given a portion of their money to them, which had since doubled in amount. They were free to reward them by giving back some of the money.

Once again, those who were deemed least-religious proved most generous.

Of course, there is a much better way than abstract surveys or videos or games to get a true-to-life measure of how compassionate the faith community is toward the needful – just examine the list of America’s largest charities.

Indeed, of the ten largest charities serving the least among us – the poor, the hungry, the sick, the homeless – nine of those were founded by people of faith. That includes such well-known charities as United Way, the American Red Cross, Goodwill Industries and Habitat for Humanity.

As to Haiti relief, which prompted Saslow to concoct her highly suspect study, faith-based charities made up three-quarters of the list of those receiving top ratings by CharityWatch, the respected watchdog organization, for their work on the ground in the earthquake-ravaged island nation to ease the suffering of its people .

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , ,

‘Scientific’ Study Says People of Faith Are Stupid

April 28, 2012 By 9 Comments

ANALYTICAL IMAGES PROMOTE RELIGIOUS DISBELIEF, RESEARCHERS CLAIM.

In a study published yesterday in the journal Science, researchers from Canada’s University of British Columbia posit that people who believe in God are not analytical thinkers.

That’s a disingenuous way of saying people of faith are stupid.

“Religious belief is intuitive,” explained Ara Norenzayan, co-author of the study, “and analytical thinking can undermine intuitive thinking. So when people are encouraged to think analytically, it can block intuitive thinking.”

In other words, when religious people analyze their beliefs, they become less devout.  They go from stupid to smart, like Norenzayan and fellow co-author Will Gervais.

So how did the researchers test their hypothesis?

They recruited 650 or so Canucks and Yanks to participate in their study. They showed some participants images of artwork that supposedly encouraged analytical thinking – like Rodin’s statue, “The Thinker.” Other participants were shown images that did not encourage such thinking.

After viewing the images, researchers measured participants’ religious beliefs through a series of questions. The participants who viewed the images promoting analytical thinking were more likely to experience a decrease in religious belief, the researchers claimed.

And that supposedly included devout believers.

“There’s much more instability to religious belief than we recognize,” said Norenzayan. Apparently so, if a person of faith can look at a few pictures and suddenly lose his or her religion.

As it turns out, there was less to the miraculous de-conversions than the researchers claimed in their study.

Their experiment didn’t really turn devout believers into total atheists, Norenzayan fessed up. Yet, he maintained, if people routinely thought analytically, like scientific researchers do, there would be fewer people of faith.

The study by Norenzayan and Gervais is nothing more than junk science.

It is an insult to people of faith who are well-educated; who arrived at their religious beliefs by analytical thinking.

And it reflects poorly on the judgment of editors at the journal Science.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , , ,

Scientific Fraud and Evolution

April 19, 2012 By Leave a Comment

'PILTDOWN MAN' MAY BE THE BIGGEST SCIENTIFIC HOAX IN HSTORY.

The scientific community is atwitter about recent reports documenting the sharp rise in retractions of articles published in scientific journals.

To wit, The New York Times published a chart this week showing that such retractions have increased from a mere three instances in 2000 to a whopping 180 in 2009.

The chart indicated that 235 of the articles retracted over that ten-year span were attributable to “scientific mistake.” Another 196 were attributable to “fraud or fabrication.” And the remaining 311 to “other.”

That brings to mind what arguably is history’s most glaring example of scientific mistake, fraud and fabrication all rolled into one:

Evolution.

Indeed, in a new study, published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers suggest they have found fresh evidence of the purported evolutionary link between apes and humans in nests built by orangutans inIndonesia.

“They are almost as complex as a man-made shelter you might make,” A. Roland Ennos, a researcher atBritain’sUniversityofManchester, told LiveScience, the science news website.

I’m not insinuating that Ennos and his colleagues fabricated their findings. I’m not accusing them of secretly tricking out the orangutans’ nest to make it look like a man-made crib.

I’m saying that they are so invested in the doctrine of evolution, they have twisted their putative “scientific” findings to fit that dubious doctrine.

Such pro-evolution scientific bias is not new. It’s been going on since Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species more than 150 years ago.

As it happens, this year marks the 100th anniversary of what many consider the greatest scientific hoax in history – the unveiling of the so-called “Piltdown Man,” the reputed fossilized skull of the “missing link” between apes and humans.

In 1953, four decades after its discovery, Piltdown Man was finally exposed as a forgery. The supposed fossil had been created by combining the lower jawbone of an orangutan with the skull of a modern, fully-developed human being.

Darwin’s disciples continue today to play fast and loose with science to make the case that God did not create man; that man evolved from ape.

The may not be as brazen as the Darwinist who manufactured Piltdown Man. But they are no less dishonest.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , ,

Advocacy of ‘Intelligent Design’ Gets Scientist Fired

March 14, 2012 By 5 Comments

DAVID COPPEDGE WORKED FOR NASA'S JOINT PROPULSION LABORATORY FOR 15 YEARS.

David Coppedge spent 15 years working for NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. He was wrongly terminated, he said yesterday, during opening arguments in his civil suit against JPL, not because of the quality of his work, but for expressing his views on “intelligent design.”

JPL spokeswoman Veronica McGregor insists that Coppedge’s suit “is completely without merit.” The lab, which is operated by California Technical Institute under contract with NASA, maintains that its former veteran systems administrator was among 246 employees laid off as part of a downsizing plan.

JPL’s defense seems plausible: Coppedge, who worked on the lab’s ambitious Cassini program, the largest interplanetary mission ever launched, was not singled out for termination. He was but one of 246 unfortunates let go in a cost-cutting measure.

But JPL did not leave it at that. Administrators claim that Coppedge created a “hostile workplace” by expressing his views on intelligent design – the belief, whuch happens to be shared by more than three-quarters of Americans, that God created the universe and life as we know it.

As JPL’s HR department apparently saw it, Coppedge was no different than an employee guilty of sexually harassing a coworker, or uttering a racial slur or threatening workplace violence.

What really got Coppedge in hot water with his supervisor was his distribution of a couple DVD documentaries, “Unlocking the Mystery of Life” and “The Privileged Planet,” which present biological and cosmological arguments for intelligent design.

The supervisor told Coppedge that his co-workers felt coerced to watch the DVDs and harassed by his Christian views. The supervisor threatened the scientist with termination if he continued to “(push) his religion.”

Of course, if Coppedge had distributed a couple DVD documentaries on evolution – whose adherents hold fast to the faith that mankind descended from apekind – his coworkers wouldn’t have felt coerced, wouldn’t have felt harassed.

He’d probably still have his job at JPL.

Filed Under: Science Tagged With: , , ,

‘The Jesus Discovery’ is a Work of Contempt

March 2, 2012 By Leave a Comment

JACOBOVICI AND TABOR PROMOTE THEIR CONTROVERSIAL NEW BOOK.

James Tabor and Simcha Jacobovici are lucky that Christians are more forgiving than fundamentalist Muslims. Otherwise, the archaeologist and the documentary filmmaker would be running for their very lives.

Remember when Salman Rushdie published his fourth novel, “The Satanic Verses”? Muslims were offended. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, actually issued a  fatwa against Rushdie, calling for his death. The novelist went into years of hiding.

The so-called “Jesus Discovery,” a project by Tabor and Jacobovici, that includes a book and film, is, in many respects, more grossly insulting to Christians than “The Satanic Verses” was to Muslims.

Rushdie didn’t pretend that his book was anything other than fiction. Tabor and Jacobovici, on the other hand, insist that they truly have found the 1st-century tomb of Jesus and his family inJerusalem.

And they did not stop at that controversial claim.

They also maintain that ossuaries – caskets – inside the tomb not only contain the bones of Christ’s family members, but those of Jesus Himself. And, to add insult to offense, purport that writing on the outside of the tomb indicates that Jesus had a wife and kids.

Of course, the wild claims by Tabor and Jacobovici are completely contrary to the gospel. But even members of the scientific community, who are not Christian, criticize the pair for their shoddy, unscientific methods; for their leap to unproven, sensationalized conclusions.

More than 30 years before Tabor and Jacobovici made their putative “Jesus Discovery,” Amos Kloner was the very first archaeologist to examine the site. “It’s an ordinary middle-classJerusalemburial cave,”he told MSNBC. “The names on the casket are the most common names found among Jews at that time.”

Kloner said that Tabor and Jacobovici are making false archaeological claims to pimp their new book, which was released this week. “They just want to get money for it,” he told MSNBC.

Christian ought not threaten violence against Tabor and Jacobovici, as Muslims did against Rushdie. But they also ought not let the attack upon their faith go unchallenged.

They should e-blast their indignation both to Simon & Schuster, publisher of “The Jesus Discovery,” and the Discovery Channel, which plans to air a documentary based on the inflammatory work of comtempt.

Filed Under: BOOKS, Science Tagged With: , , , ,
« Older Posts
%d bloggers like this: