Category Archives: identify public information and biases

Global Warming

Prologue
Imagine if the United Nations gets its way and a CO2 emissions tax is imposed on the world. You should be reminded that when the US congress first created the income tax, they promised that only the top 2% of income-earners would ever be taxed. What a lot of hot air that was. It wound up that virtually every wage earner is being taxed.
Then remember too that your breath creates CO2 emissions. Do you really think that an oppressive One World Government would not use that knowledge as a means of enforcing its subjection of the human race?
When you control all the important newspapers, TV broadcasting stations and most radio stations, you can get away with outright lies. Furthermore, when you have enough money to buy ‘scientific proof’; you can easily twist the truth.

Discussion
A Washington Post headline announces "It’s official, 2014 was the hottest year in recorded history". To a casual observer of headlines, this might appear rather convincing, perhaps even ominous. Let’s look a bit deeper. Does recorded history refer to 5000 years or to 135 years (from 1885), when temperature data was being gathered? How much hotter has 2014 been? According to NASA, this rise in temperature is .02 degrees C higher, with a margin of error .1 degrees C. This margin of error is 5 times greater than the temperature increase. Actually, since 1988, global temperatures have remained about the same; they hit a plateau about 17 years ago. This is despite the surge in greenhouse gas emissions in places like China and India. The Berkeley Earth Temperature Project admitted that Earth’s temperatures changed very little the past decade.
Another helpful aspect to look into is how the data is gathered; is it a reliable method for true conclusions. Weather stations are now placed in more urban areas than when they were originally placed, due to the spreading out of urban centers. This makes for something called the Urban heat island affect. There is, as might be expected, higher temperatures in urban areas. So temperatures are adjusted. This can be done more with a guessing method. Accuracy of the results is questionable. A far more accurate and available way to gather the temperature data is by using satellites. Harder to reach areas can be more easily accessed with satellites. Satellites overall don’t show global warming. John Christy, from the Earth Science Center of the University of Alabama, claims temperature changes since 2001 are statistically insignificant.
Another interesting find is regarding Antarctica’s ice level. Its ice shows the highest amount levels in 2014. Almost 90% of the world’s ice mass is in Antarctica.
Global warming proponents rely heavily on computer models to support their assertions. Computers only respond to the data programmed into them. They are limited by the accuracy of the data, the completeness of the data and the manner in which they are programmed to analyze the given data.
It is important to be sure that one is discerning insofar as the basis for sweeping assertions like global warming.
Noel Brown of the United Nations Environmental Program previously claimed that entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth if global warming isn’t stopped by 2000, by rising sea levels. What a lot of baloney that was!
President Obama, in his second inaugural address, claimed that climate change is the greatest threat the world faces. More baloney!
Proponents of global warming warn of forest fires, crippling droughts and major storms. In reality, forest fire incidents have gone down, crippling droughts have remained about the same the last 60 years and hurricanes and tornadoes have been going down in frequency and intensity. I think it is important to recognize two very potentially destructive weapons operating through big agencies and voices, and to respond with true discernment. Fear and control are these big weapons. Deception can be closely intertwined. A big international agency, The United Nations, has an agency called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They have scheduled a conference in Paris for Nov. 30-Dec. 11. Another big voice in our present world is Pope Frances. He says global warming is real and although he isn’t sure it is all due to man-made causes, supports this as a major reason. His Papal Encyclical, a 50-60 page document, if issued, is to state that the fight against global warming is a moral imperative. Think of all the people that have been and/or are currently influenced by the papacy.
If two big voices in our world are coming together to fight what they deem a major threat, what ways may people be impacted throughout this world? Could mobility be affected with limited access to transportation and fuel? Would it affect the food sources and types of food available? Would family freedoms like number of children be impacted?
I believe an even bigger question is this: is global warming even a viable threat to mankind? Does the true evidence even merit serious consideration of it as a danger? Does it actually mask must more important, timely needs of our world which really do need to be recognized and addressed?
For those readers who like myself, believe the Bible is True, trustworthy and given by God, I encourage you to read such Scriptures as Genesis 8:21,22; Genesis 9:8-13; Jeremiah 33:25,26; and 2 Timothy 3:13. I also was very encouraged by Hal Lindsay"s report of February 27, 2015.
Linda Merriam Denny, editor

Global Warming Summary

Linda’s article proves beyond a doubt that there is no such thing as global warming or significant melting of the Antarctica ice cap. The next time you hear those words from the One-World-Govt.-Owned news media, remember this article.