loading

Why Global Warming DOES NOT WORK

You probably drive an environmentally friendly car, recycle, and maybe even attempted to stop someone else's bad emissions!

But do you really have any control over nature, will anyone, or everyone for that matter really change the weather of this enormous world that we live in?

If you think about how big the earth is and how puny we and our carbon emissions are then you will see how impossible it is for us to do anything about anything in regards to the weather.

Well, if I am not responsible for the weather then why do all the scientists, the politicians, and the media tell me the opposite?
The reason so many people support Global Warming is because of its popularity. It is popular to believe that those bad republicans and those bad SUV drivers and the bad people out there are causing world catastrophe and we are all going to die by 2050 because they refuse to save the environment.

What makes Global Warming Popular?

Global warming is highly supported and publicized in the media because of its draw.
Would you buy a paper or watch a show telling you that there is no problem with the world, showing everything as good as ever with no signs of changing?
You wouldn't buy that paper and the company would go out of business. The truth is that news companies thrive on BAD news and love all of those end-of-the-world scientists.

The politicians have a similar motivation. They present the world with a problem and then they present their perfect solution to imminent disaster. If you believe the paper and you think that you will die without the politicians perfect plan then you vote for him and he becomes the popular candidate. Would you vote for a candidate who said they believed in the destruction of Global Warming but had no intention of doing anything about it?

The majority of scientists only support Global Warming because it is popular with the media and the politicians. The Scientists will get the support of everyone if they teach what is popular, they may get grants from the government for promoting Global Warming that they would otherwise not have received. In science you can get money, fame, and power for your Global Warming beliefs, not to mention being part of the "IN CROWD".

You see! The real reason for the GLOBAL WARMING MOVEMENT is to sell a few papers, to get a politician into office, and to give people the false feeling that they are doing some good for humanity.

Now that we see how it started, let's discus the facts of Global Warming or maybe even Global Cooling.

Please: if you agree with me then send this instructable to someone who believes Global Warming and let them know the facts.

Because my ideas are so unpopular I will probably be hated and I my instructable may be kicked out,
but if you agree with me and the true science then please post your support and all your anti-global warming content.
If not, post your own ideas so that they can be debated.

When I talk about some of the groups, I sometimes am referring to the extreme cases or limited cases. I have no intention of being insulting or offensive anyone. Since these groups greatly very, I wish that you would simply post up with anything that you see as offensive.
Keep your comments constructive and I will try to keep my comments constructive.

So you made it to the end of the first page: But I'll bet that you will shut down this instructable before the end, because you don't want to hear the truth or even the opposing side's case. If you hear this then you may start to question your own beliefs and then your own popularity goes right down the drain. If you care to hear something that is not popular BUT IS THE TRUTH then keep on reading.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Warning: This article contains content that is !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Politically Incorrect, Politically Unpopular, Factual, Accurate
Viewer discretion advised

IS GLOBAL WARMING BAD!

Global Warming is always supposed to be BAD and therefore we need to stop it.

But is Global Warming really bad?

I tend to think the opposite.
In fact I wish Global Warming was occurring, because it would mean that the whole earth would turn into a perfect paradise with mild warm California type weather.

Right now you are thinking "WOW thats crazy! Everyone knows that Global Warming is not responsible for anything good, especially a lush paradise. "

What you hear from your local environmentalist is this.
"The carbon emissions from your vehicles and the factories are creating an insulating layer similar to a greenhouse's glass roof. The radiation comes in but it can't go back out."

Remember a few years back when everyone was worried about the ozone layer. The theory went that CFC's were breaking down ozone in the upper atmosphere and as the ozone breaks down the atmosphere escapes into space. The thinning atmosphere causes a temporary cooling which then leads to Global Warming as the UV rays get through to the earth. Sound familiar? They are using the same rhetoric to justify this new unscientific theory (At that time they said there was a hole over the south pole caused by Right Guard Deodorant. So Right Guard and everything else is propelled by propane now instead of freon. It turns out the hole was caused by the extreme cold and had always been there).

Now for the part that they leave out!

Sure, if the ozone was depleted or if we ended up with enough greenhouse gases this would happen! ( by the way, water vapor is a greenhouse gas).
BUT!
This wouldn't be a problem because

1.) As the UV rays enter the earth the temperature goes up.
2.) As the temperature rises the ice caps begin to melt in the north and south poles and it would appear that the ocean level was going to increase and that we were all going to drown.
3.) But as the caps melt the ocean still evaporates.

Now for the part that you probably don't know

4.) Water evaporates faster than the ice caps melt (Rate of Ablation {glaciers melting} is slower than the rate of evaporation.)
5.) The evaporated water turns into clouds
6.) The cloud layer blocks the UV rays and acts like a green house, distributing the heat evenly all over the earth.

Will the Greenhouse Effect cause the heat of the sun to be trapped in the earth resulting in an ever increasing heat effect where we all get cooked?
NO! Absolutely Not!
If you have ever seen a greenhouse or a terrarium you know that the temperature is not going up and up continuously in a never ending cycle! The truth is that the heat will reach an equilibrium point that is not dramatically higher than the earth's average temperature's now.
The humidity will increase along with the fog which will be much more conducive to plant growth all over the world. It will actually help the environment (Yes, us Global Warming skeptics do like trees, too).

At this point a lot of benefits occur.
1.) A comfortable warm climate all over the earth
2.) A dramatically increased lifespan for humans because of the lack of UV radiation.
3.) The weather will stay more stable
4.) The heat of the earth will not dissipate as fast, so nights won't cool down as dramatically
5.) The Ocean levels decrease making more land available.
6.) Fewer Hurricanes ( take a look at this study :Global Warming Causes Less Hurricanes)
Be careful about what is fact and what is speculation: click on this regarding Polar Bears Polar Bears

Disadvantages:
1.) Fewer ski slopes

Sounds completely different from what you have been told before, doesn't it?

You may have heard that the water level has risen a few inches in the past couple of years (NOT TRUE AT ALL- A BUNCH OF MEDIA BALONEY)
But, the temperatures have not been increasing. In fact they have been dropping for the last 7 years.
Does this make any sense?

Ask some eco nut about what happens to water when the temperature goes up.
Tell them to prove me wrong.

Don't stop now: there is more fun ahead!

Pretty controversial stuff right? You Bet!
But just you wait, the fun's just getting started!
What, you're leaving?
Coward!
Sissy!
Told you that the truth would make you leave!

Carbon Emissions!

Yes, we do give off gases that could cause the greenhouse effect.
But, are we giving off enough to actually change anything or are we just encountering a natural cycle in which the temperature is just a few points of a degree higher?

Are we the only ones giving off these terrible green house gases?

No! Actually, there are plenty of natural forms of green house emissions that we are not in any way responsible for.
Water vapor for one, contributes greatly in terms of percentage to the greenhouse effect .

Water doesn't seem bad so that can be ignored!
Right?
OF COURSE NOT!
Everything has to be considered, because everything is important.
When stuff like this is ignored the studies are all thrown off significantly!

Some other forms of natural greenhouse gases come from volcano's and certain animals.

Three volcanic eruptions give off more green house gases then all the coal factories did throughout the entire industrial revolution.
This figure kind of blows away any of our puny attempts at controlling our temperature

Studies of all sorts that try to prove some aspect of Global Warming have been under pressure to produce pro-Global Warming results, and therefore can not be trusted 100%.
You do not get funded if you are trying to prove Global Warming is a myth.
You do not get fame or future jobs if your hypothesis turns out to be false.
It is very easy to come up with figures, make your study produce figures, believe figures that may not be true, or use figures that have no scientific basis.
No research is 100% accurate.

I don't think that anyone put a big jar over a volcano and measured the quantity of greenhouse gases directly. I tend to believe the research of someone who had no pro-Global Warming Bias to start with.
A study that sets out to prove Global Warming WILL in the prover's eyes and in the eyes of the scientific community succeed even before it starts.

Example: The temperature rose 1 degree in 1 year; so, at THAT RATE we would all die in 30 years.
Now you are told it this way:

According to the experts, the temperature of the earth may be rising at a rate so fast that human life will be impossible within 30 years.

That study does not prove anything, but it convinces a whole bunch of people that they have a reason to fear and thus a reason to join in with the Global Warming Group.

Cows and other big animals give off methane in great quantities. One Moose Creates More Greenhouse Gas Annually Than 8077miles (13,000 km) of Car Travel
I know that there are more cars than moose but are there more cars then all methane producing animals?
And by the way, do cars really affect the temperatures at all? Look at the chart below showing the temperatures during the past hundred years.

If you know your history then you know that 1941 is when World War II started.
At that time, the temperature "dramatically" dropped. Does this explain Global Warming?
Sounds more like an ice age than Global Warming.

What if you think about it this way:
The scientists realize that the temperatures are dropping too rapidly because of a lack of emissions to keep the temperature up so they begin to evoke new smog laws, requiring everyone to do their share to warm up the planet; they require at least a minimum amount of pollution for all companies, and they still predict a dismal frozen end of all civilization.

Now, are we and volcano's and cows really causing enough emissions to cause a dramatic change in the weather all of a sudden? For all the years that this earth has existed and all the years that cows and volcano's have been around, the earth has been perfectly fine.
Even if volcano's give out less then 1% of the gases that cause global warming now, after so many years of no cars or factories wouldn't the greenhouse effect been achieved anyway?
So if volcano's give off any greenhouse gases then the billion year evolution is refuted.
But if that's wrong then the billion year evolution is still refuted. The truth is that we have not been around that long and that volcano's have always been giving off greenhouse gas. (Evolution being false should not surprise anyone since it is the same people who teach and promote both, and for the same reasons) because the atmosphere is so vast the puny "emissions" do relatively nothing.

But what is this dramatic rise I see on the graph?

The natural cycle of the earth involves temperature rise and decline and it just so happens that we are at a time of Sun Spot Max.

I can't stay and listen to this!
I begin to forget what I believe as it gets jumbled up with a whole bunch of facts?
I don't ask that you believe everything that I wrote, all that I ask is that you read it to see my reasons for believing what I do.

Sun Spot Max!

The concept is simple!
Sun Spot Maxima cause increased radiation, increased radiation causes increased temperature, increased temperature causes increased cloud cover, increased cloud cover causes the paradise greenhouse effect until the sun's radiation decreases. At this point the cloud cover stays intact until it all falls again as rain.
Sound too simple to be true!
Remember Y2K? Remember the big build up and all the tension for NOTHING?
Remember the "EXPERTS"?
I doubt that they are still considered experts.

But what about those graphs?

The Temperature has been increasing since the 1730's when the "Little Ice Age" in Europe came to an end. This trend started before the industrial revolution and has continued steady since then. The use of the hundred year time frame is inaccurate and used only to prove some correlation between the Industrial Revolution and Global Warming. The trend started before the industrialization and is more accurately indicative of the earth entering a natural warming trend. The recent short spike in temperature correlates to the sun spot max in 2001.
This is the spike that people began to get worried about.
But after 2001according to the IPCC (UN agency) the temperatures have leveled off and actually dropped. The IPCC were the people that started the global warming scare in the first place. Now you will notice that they don't even use the term Global Warming, but in fact they use the term climate change because there data can not back up Global Warming.

Yes there is a trend but what caused people to get hysterical a few years back was just the sun spot max.

Is it just coincidence that "Global Warming" happens at precisely the same time that Sun spot maximum occurs?

Don't quit now, just a little longer and you can accurately say that you know why I believe as I do.

NEGATIVE RESULTS OF THE "GLOBAL WARMING MOVEMENT"

So why should we bother about it?
If it makes them happy to think that they are saving the planet then why not let them continue?

High gasoline prices are a result of environmentalism.
What??!!! That can't be!
Well, read on.

Gasoline is not high because of the Arabs in the middle east, it is not high because of the war, and it isn't even the president's fault.

We have massive amounts of oil in the United States.

We do?

Yes! But because of decisions by the government in favor of the environmentalists we have not been allowed to drill in Alaska or the gulf of Mexico.
Because of this it is required that we get our oil overseas at over $100 a barrel.

But that is not the only problem.
Since 1976 there have been no new refineries in the United States
and oil has to be refined to work in cars.
Since the refineries can only produce so much gas, there is a shortage,
and the shortage drives up prices.

The high prices mean that less gas is used and therefore less "Global Warming" gases escape. So they (the eco nuts) are not in any hurry to let gas drop down to ONE DOLLAR a gallon so long as Global Warming is still a threat in their minds.

Because of these strict "Global Warming" laws many industries have problems that directly affect us and the world economy.

Because of this, many industries move to other countries where their pollution is legal. As the businesses leave the prices increase and the money goes out of the country.

There are many economical problems with the continuance of the Global Warming Movement,
many of which are not going to be discovered until it is to late.
If you know of more negative effects of the Global Warming Movement then please tell everyone and post it here.

The people don't deserve to be kept ignorant of any facts, so please tell all you know.

You can't say that about all those people who are just trying to see to a better world!
Actually I can. I have to suffer the high gas prices same as anyone!
Don't feel too bad, just keep reading

THIS SECTION IS ABOUT MY PERSONAL BELIEFS AND TO SOME IS CONSIDERED NOT RELEVANT TO THE GLOBAL WARMING DISCUSSION. IN MY OPINION THIS IS A LEGIT REASON FOR MY DISBELIEF IN GLOBAL WARMING BUT I AM CONSIDERING THIS SOMETHING EXTRA SINCE IT REALLY SHOULD BE WRITTEN UNDER A DIFFERENT TOPIC.
PLEASE READ IT IF YOU ARE INTERESTED OR IF YOU WISH TO DEBATE.
IF YOU DO READ IT REMEMBER THAT IT WAS YOUR OWN CHOICE AND THAT YOU SHOULD NOT POST SPITEFUL AND PURELY HATEFUL COMMENTS. KEEP YOUR COMMENTS CONSTRUCTIVE. THANKS.

OTHER REASONS!

Since the billion year evolution theory is not true because of what we understand about volcanic eruptions, we must assume that something else has occurred.
If you have read the book of Revelation or Isaiah in the Bible then you would begin to see the situation prophesied beginning to unfold. The world is actually approaching a paradise-like state.
That sound crazy?
Well, just wait and see!
Someone will be proved wrong in the end!

Ever wonder how come there are no transition species between the perfect species of the past and today?
There are no half completed species that barely can survive.

Each one is completely unique and amazingly coordinated for something that came together by chance, it is almost like it was intentionally designed.

Ever asked a scientist where "stuff" came from?

I don't mean people and animals.
I mean the very existence of anything and everything!
Matter!
The very particles, the energy, and also the infinite nothingness of the universe.
Were they always there?
Or did they have a beginning?
In our world and our realm of understanding doesn't everything have to have a beginning?
Can you think of anything that just was?

The only alternative is that there is something outside of our universe, our dimensions, our time and our global warming controversies, In which time is not existent.

So yes, three space dimension's and a time dimension are a creation.

At this point most of you who have made it this far are going to shut this page down because you are afraid of the truth, you are afraid that this could affect your popularity, because you are afraid that there might be more to this life than you realize. You might think that scientists know whats happening, they know all the facts and they know all about everything.
But do they?
Were they not once just like everyone else in terms of their knowledge until they were taught something that they took to be truth?
Have not some students of some schools in the past accepted something that was later proved to be wrong?
Are we just to assume that everything taught in school is 100% accurate, or are we actually supposed to seek the truth?
Seeking the truth is not very popular because it often entails leaving the zone of popularity and entering the zone of the outsider.

All that I can say is that time will tell.

In time we will all know the truth.

If I am wrong I will know it! If you are wrong THEN YOU WILL KNOW IT.

For more information look at this movie Creation in symphony: THE MODEL by Dr Carl Baugh
http://www.creationevidence.org

For you free thinkers and truth seekers make sure you see the movie: EXPELLED

Thanks For Reading

You made it.
GOOD!
Then perhaps you are seeking truth after all. Maybe you are truly wanting to know what is truth.
Maybe you didn't find what you were looking for in this article. Maybe you need something better than my facts. All that I ask is that you constantly seek the truth.

Picture of Why Global Warming DOES NOT WORK
hawaii-sunset-beach.gif
sonnenuntergang-hawaii_jpg.jpg
ssn_predict_oct99.gif
Gasoline.jpg
m87_gendler_c42.jpg
sort by: active | newest | oldest
1-10 of 286Next »
You don't even know when World War Two started, the lack of knowledge of such a historic date casts a poor light on the rest of your suppositions, especially when you fail to take into account the value of the dollar, the thermodynamic effect of increasing atmospheric moisture and your digression into creationism. This is twaddle!
kentjoe (author)  Tool Using Animal8 years ago
The war in Europe started in September 1939 before it was a world war. I live in America and we entered the war on December 8th, 1941, after the attack on pearl harbor on December 7th. And how would my not knowing dates of history affect anything. It is kind of changing the subject. You are very correct about the value of the dollar, The value of the dollar is worth less then 10% of what it was in the 50s and 60s. SO if the cost of one gallon of gas was 20 cents then it would be worth over $2.50 a gallon. Makes perfect sense! But why should we not accept lower gas prices. Other economic factors also affect how much we earn and can pay for gas. My "digression into creationism" is important in understanding my view on GW. There is a huge difference in a billion years and 10,000 years and knowing what is true will definitely affect your understanding of the weather. Everyone just assumes that evolution occurred so therefore all of our studies and computer models have evolution factored in. And until you tell me where "Matter" came from I will not believe in anything but creation. I will do more research on the thermodynamic effect of increasing atmospheric moisture, but it seems to me that this is not sufficient proof that my theories are wrong. Thanks for commenting
> And until you tell me where "Matter" came from I will not believe in anything but creation. . I don't understand. You can believe a God that has no creation (see, eg, Rev 1:8 and 22:13), but not Matter that "just is." How does that work?
(lol ! Please, let me speed up the debate a little )

> You can believe a God that has no creation (see, eg, Rev 1:8 and 22:13), but not Matter that "just is." How does that work?

A : Believing in matter that "just is" is as much paradoxical than believing in a deity that has no creation.

B : However the advantage of matter over deities, is that we can touch and feel it : we have the proof it exists.

A : It's not because God never talked to you that God does not exist.

B : Anyway, if a deity talked to you, how could you be sure it's not just in your head ? How could you be sure you're not mentally hill ?

A : How could YOU be sure I'm not a figment of your imagination ? Maybe you're arguing alone ? Maybe I don't exist ?

B : I can see you. I can hear you. I can feel you. You're matter. You exists.

A : Maybe I've seen God. Maybe I've heard God. Maybe I've felt God. In what would it be different ?

B : Have you actually seen with your eyes, heard it with your ears and "felt" it with your hands ?

A : ... It does not work like that. God is not made of matter.

B : If your God created the universe, why couldn't (s)he show up and tell us he exists ? Why don't he help us to make the world better ? So many wars, so many diseases, so many injustices blablabla ...

A : He did : He came on Earth and talked to Mose blablabla ... He sent us his son on Earth in sacrifice blablabla to save the world blablabla and to show us the good example to follow ... If you follow the good example, you'll improve the world blablabla ... God left us free of our choices : We are responsible of our acts. You can choose to follow our Lord blablabla or GOTO hell or GOSUB purgatory.

B : Why did he created us then ? Why did he created sadness, pain and violence ? blablabala

A : happiness would have no sense without sadness, blablabla ...

B : He could just have not created us ! ... Is your god a sadistic ? Are you sure your god is not the evil ?

A : God is love blablabla ... he sent us his son in sacrifice to save us blablabla (more biblical blabla)

B : There are no evidences it actually happened ! It's just an old book, an old story ! There are plenty other myths and legends. What does tell you that you're not wrong ? Why this god and not the Roman's deities or the Egyptian deities ? Would you believe in the same deity if you were born in an other culture ? Would the "truth" be the same to you ?

A : ........ continue here ........
kentjoe (author)  chooseausername8 years ago
I am loving the debate. A. Let me start by saying that a huge amount of faith is required for both positions. And since there really are only two possibilities that we know of at present then every person has to pick one or the other. I have no physical proof of my God and you have no physical proof of anything before the 4 billion year evolution. But what is harder to believe in? "Everything came from nothing and then by some 1 in a million chance just happened to turn into something alive which in turn evolved (More like it jumped from one perfect species to another because of the lack of transition species) until it had produced a superhuman (By the way this amazing process would itself seem to have some sort of organizer to design things to evolve in this way). Or the other option is this "a God who doesn't live in a physical realm (as we know it) but a realm without time, a realm that can't understand beginnings and ends, a realm that has its natural laws to govern it in a different way then our world, a realm that is beyond our own human ability to reason. This God spoke everything into existence based on the law of the word in Gods kingdom. Everything was perfectly made and perfectly whole from the beginning which explains why there are no transition species." We really can only try to explain our own universe because that is all that we can understand. I can't get into God's realm right now and find out everything I don't know. All that I can debate with you is whether or not something outside of our universe was involved. Now having said that I have actually talked with people who were dead for a short time before being revived. One of such people was dead for several minutes and when she died she went to a place that was beautiful and perfect, She remembered a sense of timelessness something that she couldn't understand again when brought back (She remembers having understood it then). She was so peaceful and happy she didn't ever what to leave. She met a group of people who asked her "do you want to come with us and see Jesus" I cant remember exactly but I think that at that time she was revived and she came back. The same thing happened to someone else I know but he met his father while he was there and he didn't come back for 20 minutes. There are also stories of people who had very different things happen to them (Horrors that were also beyond our knowledge to understand). I didn't mean to go off on a tangent but it is kind of a first hand witness you might say, a slight glimmer of proof. B. Of course "matter" exists, I am not denying that, what I am debating is where "matter" came from. True we can't touch and feel a deity but we can't feel evolution, or any belief on how matter came about. I don't see how my argument is less solid then your argument. The only difference is that my belief accounts for the beginning of matter and 3d space while yours doesn't. God is something that is above our complete understanding (he wouldn't be God if he wasn't). He never was created, but always just was. The closest thing that we can understand is that God just is. A. and B. I am somewhat confused with A but I think I know what you are getting at. There are mentally ill people who hear voices. And I myself have never heard any voice from God saying anything. What do voices prove? It could be a prank by some friends or just the wind. However a voice from God has a purpose. My dad was driving on the freeway several years ago behind a flatbed loaded with gear. All of a sudden he heard a voice saying "MOVE OUT OF THIS LANE NOW"! So he did. And at that very instant all of the contents of the flatbed truck were jarred loose and flew off the back of the truck to where my dads car had just been. That voice saved his life. Is he mentally ill just because he heard a voice. You can't be sure until you see what was in your head having a relevance. A. I used to think about that. How do I know that I am not just a brain that someone is messing around with on a supercomputer, or perhaps a single being in a virtual reality. How do I know that I am seeing the same colors as you. Maybe my red is your blue. But don't people seem pretty similar. Everyone seeing colors different would be more in line with a random process that creation. For that matter how do you know that you are not just a brain that has evolved so much that you are just imagining all of this world up. But even with one of these cases there still had to be a way of getting here in the first place. Whether God or evolution we would have to come from somewhere. A. God is not made out of matter in our terms so we can't try to understand Him in our terms. His realm isn't something that we can touch and we are not something that those of His realm can really touch. I will not be able to provide you with physical proof of God. Remember this: If sometime during your lifetime a vast number of people just disappear without a trace off the face of the earth no proof will be provided that they left to heaven but remember that I told you it would happen. You are now thinking that I am totally insane, but wait 20-25 years and then come back to what I said and maybe you will believe without actual physical proof. I have seen people instantly healed (pulled out of wheelchairs, healed of fatal diseases.......). I have felt the power of God, and I have heard the praise of Gods actions. But I have not seen physical proof like an angel being sent down to be put on display. I have to go someplace for memorial day But I WILL answer the rest of your questions in more detail This will take a long time to explain and will involve the entire Bible. but I will try to give you a brief explanation until I have time to go into more detail (This May be a few days). Basically Adam and Eve were given this universe, they were tempted by the devil (He had rebelled against God beforehand), they in turn were tricked into giving the world over to Satan because God had given them freedom of choice, At that point God had to obey the rules that He Himself had set up, so he formulated a plan to save mankind using his own Rules. But if God knows everything past present and future that why did he make mankind at all? It has to do with a bigger plan to eradicate sin from any existence in any realm anywhere. Got to go now but come back in a few day and I will write more. Thanks for your comments
I did not thought you were going to reply point by point. Instead of designing it as "virtual debate" between a Player A and a Player B, I should better have selected a list with numbers ... That would have made your task simpler.

Well, I perfectly agree that our scientists still have not provided any relevant theories about what's at the origin of the matter. And I personally believe they will never do, simply because it's impossible.

Because of this lack of explanations, I perfectly understand that many people simplify the problem to : This is the proof that God created everything, God exists in an other realm that ours, he is not a 3D + "unidirectional time" God, and because we are 3D + "unidirectional time" creatures, we can't understand God, etc ....

And that, then : God exists because I've seen "miracles" ; I know peoples who died and came back to life, and they told me they've seen a wonderful place (paradise) and almost talked to Jesus ; I've heard stories of peoples who almost died and went to a horrible place (hell) ; I know peoples who "heard a voice" that saved their life ; etc. ; those are the poof that I'm not wrong ...

However, remains some problems to me :

1) - Why the holly bible ? Why not an other holly book ? why not the Popol Vuh for instance ? Why not Australian aboriginal beliefs ?

2) - Miracles : couldn't they be fake miracles ? That would not be the first fake miracle organized to revive the faith or to make money ...

3) - About Near Death Experience : Everyone gives his/her own interpretation according to his/her belief. I could give you mine, scientist could give you their, and the scientist one is solid : delirium caused by drugs, pain and brain.
Also, how could we be sure a NDE is really like "dying for real" ?

I had a friend of mine whose Grandma experienced a NDE. She said she was seeing a sky and a giant bird flying over her who was unable to move. How would you interpret this ? Hell ? Paradise ? Purgatory ? Not a real NDE ? Something else ?

4) What's the place of dinosaurs in creationism ?

5) What's the place of "random mutations" ?
Haven't we got a "featherless chicken" who "appeared" all of sudden about 50 years ago ? Couldn't it be how species evolved ?

6) What's the place of Neanderthal, Australopithecus, etc ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_primate_and_hominin_fossils

7) - If I tell you that God talked to me, that (s)he shown me the "truth", and that (s)he did not created the universe, that (s)he created nothing : everything was already there ; (s)he does not remember when (s)he "appeared", (s)he does not know why (s)he exists, neither why "we" exists, and that the best thing (s)he found to do to occupy his/her existence is to "play" with us, to "study" us and to "judge" us, again and again ... Will you believe me ? If not : why ? Because I'm alone ? Because I can't prove it ?
kentjoe (author)  chooseausername8 years ago
I want to answer a few of your questions briefly now but the longer ones I will have to try and answer later when I have more time (weekend).

1.) Once you believe that we had to have come from somewhere and that there must be something bigger/smarter/God out there to have made matter, then you just have to eliminate the religions that don't make sense. I will elaborate later on.

2.) I admit that there are "faked" miracles. But when the miracles are performed by a family member (Yes, I am a pastors son) then you are more likely to believe that they are real. And besides miracles tend to happen when the congregation is already full of faith and when the church is doing well, not when the church needs reviving. You probably will not have this kind of affirmation so at sometime it would require trust or faith.

3.) I don't know if NDE is like "dying for sure" but at some point there must be an end to the NDE and a beginning of the DE (death experience). I have seen a video made about an African man who was killed in a car crash (doctor signed the death certificate), he was embalmed, and was waiting to be buried. A short time later his wife was attending a Reinhard Bonnke crusade, and he had her bring the body into a room where he and others prayed for close to 6 hours, he began breathing and eventually got up. For the rest of the story please read this article:
http://www.cbn.com/700club/features/bonnke_raisedpastor.aspx

But he describes Heaven and Hell after having a DE.

in Luke 16 the rich man lifted up his eyes in torment and said, 'I have a number of brothers. Let me go back and warn them.' Father Abraham said, 'No, they have Moses and the prophets. If they won't believe them, they will not believe the one who rose from the dead.
This seems to be amazingly true even today. Most people think that it is a trick and refuse to believe the word of the dead man.

This is how he described hell:
BONNKE: He said he saw no fire but he said he saw these people cannibalizing themselves. Every time they had done it, the flesh seemed to jump back to the same places and then the torment started again. He said it was so horrible. He came back and said, 'Heaven is real. Hell is real. Become serious with God. You need to be saved by the blood of Jesus Christ and live a holy life.
Think about death if you are right: We both die and then we both become nonexistent or something similar and no-one is worse off then anyone else.
Now think about death if I am right: I go to a place of eternal joy, peace and happiness. But you (assuming that you are not a Christian) would go to the place that this man described.

Is the risk worth it?

Are you willing to risk an eternity of that kind of pain for what our scientists tells us is impossible?
I am not!
I don't mean to preach "gloom and doom" that is for the environmentalists, but you have to understand where I am coming from.

4.) Whatever dinosaurs existed where created along with everything else. And I do believe that some sorts of "Big Lizards" existed. There is even documentation of a dragon like beast in the Bible.

5.) I believe that random mutations do happen! and that the featherless chicken was just a random mutation. But does random mutation = evolution? I believe in de-evolution! Basically, things mutate (deform really) into less complex or less capable beings. They would die off or maybe possibly survive long enough to leave some weird fossil behind. Only the animals that were designed to survive actually do. Wouldn't all of the bad mutations have some effect on evolution? Even if an animal evolved into a more complex creature by a 1 in a billion chance would it really change anything. Creatures devolve into the mutation that are less complex.
When you put the parts of a watch in a plastic bag and shake for 4 billion years what do you get?
A bag of dust. Not an i-pod, or even a functional watch.

Now it is time for my short answers

6.) I kind of answered this one before. There are slight variations of creatures from de-evolution that die and leave fossils. There would be a lot of fossils to find after 4 billion years of different types of creatures roaming the earth.
Wouldn't there?
Evolution is yet to produce a super-human, but everyone is different. Some small, some tall. These are slight variations to produce slightly different fossil.

7.) This is how the Mormon religion was created! I would believe that you saw what you said, but I would believe that the devil or a demon was the one who showed it to you. Remember Lucifer was the angel of light before he fell.
I don't believe that God actually judges us, (many people have a misconception of what Christians believe) we were already from the moment Adam and Eve sinned destined as followers of the Devil to follow the fate of the devil. God then starts his plan to save mankind. This plan does not require works or righteousness. All that is required is that you believe in your heart that Jesus died to save you from the Devils fate by tricking the Devil into killing someone without sin which breaks his hold on the earth. By doing this you are following Jesus and have abandoned the Devil forever. You can not loose you're salvation by any means once acquired.
Gods overall plan was to remove the evil of the devil by making him violate one of the eternal laws. God could not violate his own law so he had to trick the Devil into it.
This is the short answer but I am sure that I or someone else could elaborate on this if they had the time.

Thanks for commenting
Unfortunately, we're almost back to :

> A : God is love blablabla ... he sent us his son in sacrifice to save us blablabla (more biblical blabla)

> 1.) Once you believe that we had to have come from somewhere and that there must be something bigger/smarter/God out there to have made matter, then you just have to eliminate the religions that don't make sense. I will elaborate later on.

Here are few questions you could reply quickly just with a yes or a no :
a) Have you studied all other religions ?
b) Have you read the Popol Vuh ?
c) Does your version of the bible includes Enoch's book ?
d) If you were born in Arabia, in a Muslin family, and if your father was an imam instead of a pastor, wouldn't you consider the truth is in the Koran ?
e) As your Holly Bible has been badly translated many times from different ancient languages (hebrew, greek, latin), are you sure that the way you read it is correct ?

> 2.) I admit that there are "faked" miracles. But when the miracles are performed by a family member (Yes, I am a pastors son) then you are more likely to believe that they are real. And besides miracles tend to happen when the congregation is already full of faith and when the church is doing well, not when the church needs reviving. You probably will not have this kind of affirmation so at sometime it would require trust or faith.

When and if a miracle happen, it should be possible to prove to the world it's not a fake one. Most miracles are related to health and handicaps. If a blind can see, a mute can talk, or a handicapped can walk, then, atheist doctors and atheist scientists could easily verify that "something unexplainable" has happened.
Wouldn't it be the best way to show to the world the "light" ?

About 3) and NDE and the link you provided :

I've seen many video too, and I have read many testimony and interview.
However, I've never seen anything "official" and scientifically verified.

Unlike what a lot of dogmatic (religious or atheists or agnostic, etc) persons seems to think, Science is not the enemy of God or of "miracles". Science is just a method to think and analyse facts in a neutral way. Science is an intellectual tool that help us to avoid traps.
If it's possible to prove that miracles happen, or that God exists, or that there is something after death, or that there is reincarnation, Science WILL demonstrate it, and there will be no more doubt about that, as long as Science remains a neutral intellectual methodology.

Science allows and encourage doubts and open-mindedness, while religions encourage "faith" (blindness) and close-mindedness.

If I say it in your language :
- if the Devil traps you in a fake religion, you'll have no chances to escape him, because "faith" is involved, "faith" does not allow doubt, and religions generally don't change.
- on the other hand, if the Devil tries to trap you with Science, it's only "temporary", because Science allows doubt, Science is in perpetual evolution, every scientist have the right to disagree with others as long as they have some solid evidences (non based of faith) that they are not wrong.

Science is a perpetual quest for truths. It's based on evidences, facts and neutrality, while religion is a biased bet based on blind faith and fears to be wrong.

(However, I admit that some scientists are very close-minded, and that their works are biased by dogma (religious or not)).

> Think about death if you are right: We both die and then we both become nonexistent or something similar and no-one is worse off then anyone else. Now think about death if I am right: I go to a place of eternal joy, peace and happiness. But you (assuming that you are not a Christian) would go to the place that this man described.
Is the risk worth it?

Unfortunately, you don't know what I believe in.
Things are not all black or all white. Maybe those two point-of-view that you described are both wrong ?

If I apply your religious reasoning to GW :
- Maybe the Global Warming is real, and maybe we are accelerating it ? If non-believers are right, human impact is negligible, and that we reduce pollution or not has no importance. On the other hand, if environmentalists (and most scientists from everywhere around the world) are right, by reducing pollution, we still have a chance to reduce the GW and its negative effects over weather ... and we could save (or at least postpone the end of) many lives and species.

Is the risk worth it ?

About 5) and 6) : Random mutations and evolution :

Do you know what happened with Monsanto's genetically modified corn ? (it's a corn they modified, and which produces an insecticide to kill a larva that destroy the fields)

Every weak larvae died, and the most resistant survived.
The most resistant reproduced, giving birth to a new generation of resistant larva.

Monsanto's genetically-modified-corn killed diversity and created a more resistant "variety" of larva, all sharing the same characteristics.

This is also what happens with virus and bacteria : if a medicine don't kill them all, the most resistant will reproduce, and will give birth to a new "variety" that will all share the same characteristics.

And this is also what happens in the nature since the beginning : what is unable to survive vanish, and what survive reproduce together and share the characteristics that helped them to survive.

This is : natural selection.
This is : natural evolution.

Now, if you add to that mechanism random mutations, it's possible to see "new features" appearing in a variety. If the "mutant" can survive and reproduce with the others of its variety, its "mutation" will be slowly mixed in the gen pool. Or this will be a plus for its species, or it will not and its species may vanish. If the mutant can't reproduce or survive, it will die alone ...

All of that slowly happens since billions of years.
When the changes between generations are too small to be noticed, it's hard to call them "different species". However, after several thousands years of slows modifications, it's possible to see the differences, and we can talk about "different species" or "evolutions".

It's like comparing two pictures of you :
- compare your today picture with a yesterday one, and you'll see no difference.
- compare your today picture with a picture when you were 6 years old, and you'll be able to see how you evolved.

Also, there is no such thing than "de-evolution". Time is unidirectional : it does not go reverse.
Species are in perpetual evolution through time, and "degeneration" may be part of their evolution.
Degeneration is not "de-evolution".

> 7.) This is how the Mormon religion was created! I would believe that you saw what you said, but I would believe that the devil or a demon was the one who showed it to you. ...

Indeed ... it's so logical ...

Let's imagine that the Devil wants us to destroy our planet as soon as possible so we reduce our chances to improve ourselves before "the judgement day" : wouldn't his best tactical to create a new religion (or a fork of a religion) based on pseudo-scientific and biased biblical interpretations, and that would deny what almost every scientists around the world agree to say : we, humans, are accelerating climate change ; we, humans, are destroying our planet ??

If I was the devil, that's probably what I'd do ....... I'd use a religion based on love and faith, and I'd perversely corrupt it to "control" the believers ...

Isn't Creationism taught in many schools in the US ?
kentjoe (author)  chooseausername8 years ago
If we are just going about in circles in the debate then that is a legitimate reason for you to call the debate. I had no clue that there would be this much debate and it is taking me a long time to answer everyone.

Let me start by saying that my belief fits together perfectly, explaining everything important that can be comprehended be man.
No other religion is so precise and perfect.
For example if there is a God then whatever he says is good is good and whatever He says is wrong is wrong. So if a god is doing something bad like the Greek gods did then he is not a God but instead probably a demon. This holds true for the Islamic religions and all the aboriginal beliefs. Most other religions are just versions of Christianity that have been corrupted by the devil.
a.) NO
b.) NO
c.) NO
d.) Probably- but look at Africa, people are becoming Christians by the millions (Not atheists).
e.) The bible has a huge number of translation errors many of which change the meaning of an entire passage, this is why many pastors learn Greek, Latin and Hebrew languages so that they can know what is being said.

When and if a miracle happen, it should be possible to prove to the world it's not a fake one. Most miracles are related to health and handicaps. If a blind can see, a mute can talk, or a handicapped can walk, then, atheist doctors and atheist scientists could easily verify that "something unexplainable" has happened.
Wouldn't it be the best way to show to the world the "light" ?

Yes, it would be a great way! I have seen time and time again doctors being amazed by what they saw. They told there patients that there healing was unexplainable and that they had no clue what happened. But sadly they don't tell anyone because they don't believe that it was supernatural. And who would believe them if they did. All that would happen is that they would loose there creditability. When cancer just disappears over night with no explanation that should be front page news but it is ignored and kept quiet.

I've seen many video too, and I have read many testimony and interview.
However, I've never seen anything "official" and scientifically verified.

That is because no-one will verify what is thought to be impossible. There will never be anything official or scientifically verified. I have seen magicians perform and it is all just a trick, no-one will verify something that they think is just a trick.

I think that science is not the enemy of God in fact science shows all of his wonders.

Science WILL demonstrate it, and there will be no more doubt about that

I think that science already has proved Gods existence but people keep trying to shut it out. Just look at the world and think "was it evolution that gave me all this beauty and wonder without producing anything ugly or destructive"

Science allows and encourage doubts and open-mindedness, while religions encourage "faith" (blindness) and close-mindedness.

Science is great and should be used to prove and disprove GW. Religion encourages faith in God and in your own protection. God doesn't try to explain natural phenomena other than creation because we do have science and have learned about our planet. I was taught evolution in school but broke out of that box and started looking for more answers. This is why I believe that trusting in science without direct proof is close-mindedness but having faith in something in order to understand real science is not.

f I say it in your language :
- if the Devil traps you in a fake religion, you'll have no chances to escape him, because "faith" is involved, "faith" does not allow doubt, and religions generally don't change.
- on the other hand, if the Devil tries to trap you with Science, it's only "temporary", because Science allows doubt, Science is in perpetual evolution, every scientist have the right to disagree with others as long as they have some solid evidences (non based of faith) that they are not wrong.

Doubt is a good thing to have if you don't not understand something. And the according to you having doubt about evolution is scientific. Science allows and encourage doubts and open-mindedness, while religions encourage "faith" (blindness) and close-mindedness. So I do encourage everyone to have doubts about what they believe until they are somewhat convinced, but at some point everyone will have to have faith in something. Some have faith in evolution, others faith in a God. But they are both really religions. I don't think that faith and religion are against science just as evolution is not against science.

If I apply your religious reasoning to GW :
- Maybe the Global Warming is real, and maybe we are accelerating it ? If non-believers are right, human impact is negligible, and that we reduce pollution or not has no importance. On the other hand, if environmentalists (and most scientists from everywhere around the world) are right, by reducing pollution, we still have a chance to reduce the GW and its negative effects over weather ... and we could save (or at least postpone the end of) many lives and species.

Is the risk worth it ?

Yes I do think that the risk is worth it.
I thought of that!
Why not just let them think that because if there right we just won't die!
The truth is that it will cost us!
What has not been factored in is the social and economic costs to stop global warming. It would be funny if we saved to planet only to ruin our worlds economy and cause major problems that might be worse then global warming. And then what if they are wrong. We cause major world problems for nothing. We only have to get oil from others because we don't drill in America because it "MIGHT" hurts something or do some damage in the distant future. A depression may result if things are not thought through throughly .

Please don't post an answer until I finish because I will be back in a few hours. But I have more stuff for you about the rest
Thanks for posting

Christians are taught not to judge. By claiming that your religion is the most perfect, you've judged every follower of every other religion as lower than you. That does not seem very Christian to me. Christians are taught that the judging is to be left to God, so what are you going on about?
1-10 of 286Next »