A good example of misunderstandings of climate science


#1

Here is an example of someone questioning climate data and the very easy examples of the misrepresentations.

Anyone care to watch and refute the narrator?


#2

I can’t address the studies, but there are two problems I see with the climate change narrative.

First, all of the discussion about sea level and CO2 levels in eons-gone-by ignore the worldwide flood that happened about 5000 years ago. The record in scripture isn’t alone. Written human history seems to start about 5000 years ago in addition to ancient histories in many cultures and physical evidence on earth. But if climate studies ignore it, how can they have any hope of being accurate?

Second, isn’t it extremely odd that the belief in climate change seems to line up along a political boundary? The fact that there is any political correlation at all is surprising and indicates there’s more than climate driving it.

But the specific correlation we observe is especially troubling. Republicans generally have greater respect for private property than Democrats and give more to charities than Democrats. So why would it be the Republicans that are less concerned about predictions of the coming destruction of private property and loss of life? President Trump owns valuable property in Manhattan. Why wouldn’t he be concerned about sea-level rise? What’s his motive? Stupid people claim he’s stupid, but clearly he’s not.

This correlation begins to make more sense when you realize that proposed solutions all entail reducing prosperity, restricting freedom and imposing more government control on private property. These solution line up very well with the fascist/progressive/Democrat desire for central control of our lives.

Also, it seems like there’s an inordinate amount of government money being poured into the study of climate change. God help the scientist that doesn’t find what he’s being paid to find.

These two factors cause me to be very skeptical about climate change.

One side note: I was pleased to see this video admits that solar luminosity is increasing. Climate change advocates totally dismiss this has any relevance to the issue, but it’s nice that it’s at least acknowledged here.


#3

A flood yes, but not a worldwide one. Specifically, a flood that occurred in the area of Shuruppak at about 2900 BC, incorporating the Karun, Tigris, and Euphrates rivers, which spread into several surrounding cities, basically covering all of ancient Sumeria (so not a small flood either. [image])

It’s this event that seems to be the basis for several flood narratives out of the Mesopotamian area.

There’s even evidence to suggest that the Jews included the Flood story in the Bible, due to foreign influence from other traditions. Perhaps not by choice.


#4

Does anyone else find it passingly strange that ALL fossils of extinct animals and plants are found in SEDIMENTARY rock which ONLY results from water?


#5

Not at all, that’s what you’d expect. First, the term “sedimentary” gives us a clue. The root word being sedentary (inactive for long periods), Other kinds of rock are formed under harsher conditions (igneous rock) and metamorphic rock, well, again, the word itself gives us a clue. Metamorphic as in “changes” over long periods, not good for fossilization of millions of years.

Lastly, since the earth is about 2/3 water it’s not surprising that most fossils form in water.


#6

I guess no one wants to address the vid?


#7

Dave, Floods leave their own geological evidence. It’s called a Flood Stratum.

There is none for a worldwide flood. There are several for “Outburst floods” at various times, most of them from a collapse of glacial lakes.

Just put yourself in the shoes of an ancient Sumerian, and realize, since basically all of Sumeria was put under water, to them, it looked like the whole world was flooded.

The Sumerian flood may have been caused by a meteor, if that interests you.


#8

And not only those rivers but also the Nile, the Danube, the Amazon, the Mississippi, the Yellow and the Kwai. I think 2900 BC is roughly the right time frame for the worldwide flood. They were all deluged.

The problem with the worldwide flood is that there were only eight witnesses. Everyone else on earth died. The only records of it are what those eight wrote. But we don’t even know what language the spoke or script they read and wrote. We just notice the sudden start of civilization in Sumeria about that time too.

Here’s another interesting thing that suggests the flood wiped everyone out. There’s an ancient Indian document called the MahabHarata that tells of a war that killed a huge number of soldiers, maybe four million. How could a war like that go otherwise undocumented? How could there be that many soldiers available to fight? I think it was fought before the flood. This would perhaps explain Genesis 6:

5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.

Recently I read that a couple of independent parties analyzed that astronomical events mentioned in the text and pegged it at 3076 or 3067 BC. That means the flood had to have been after that. No doubt many histories were carried on the ark, including the source material for the Mahabharata.


#9

Where’s the evidence for that?

The Egyptians kept a consistent written record that goes back to 3100 B.C.

No where do they write of such a flood in the Nile.

The Liangzhu culture was around from 3400 BC to 2250 BC in China.

We also have consistent habitation of North America by people who crossed the land bridge 10,000 years ago. There was no “upsurge” of migration of people closer to the Middle East to North America. DNA haplogroups would show that.