Back in the 1970s before people were screaming about global warming, scientists were warning us that the next ice age may be just around the corner. The big freeze scare was eventually pushed aside by the great man-made global warming hoax. Now a new study has been released that global warming may be just the Earth’s warning that a new Ice Age is near.
In the Earth’s history thus far, there have been periods where glaciers covered much of Europe, each lasting about 100,000 years. These are separated by warmer interglacial periods lasting around 10,000 years. We are currently at the end of an interglacial era called the Holocene.
Researchers took a look at what happened to the climate just before the last major glacier period, around 115,000 years ago and they found that there was a period of extreme climate fluctuations. They suggest that the period of global warming that plateaued fifteen years ago may just be one of those pre-glacier heat waves.
In Central and Eastern Europe, the slow transition from the Eemian Interglacial to the Weichselian Glacial was marked by a growing instability in vegetation trends with possibly at least two warming events. This is the finding of German and Russian climate researchers who have evaluated geochemical and pollen analyses of lake sediments in Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg and Russia. Writing in Quaternary International, scientists from the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), the Saxon Academy of Sciences (SAW) in Leipzig and the Russian Academy of Sciences say that a short warming event at the very end of the last interglacial period marked the final transition to the ice age.
The Eemian Interglacial was the last interglacial epoch before the current one, the Holocene. It began around 126,000 years ago, ended around 115,000 years ago and is named after the river Eem in the Netherlands. The followed Weichselian Glacial ended around 15,000 years ago is the most recent glacial epoch named after the Polish river Weichsel. At its peak around 21,000 years ago, the glaciers stretched as far as the south of Berlin (Brandenburg Stadium).
The results show a relatively stable climate over most of the time, but with instabilities at the beginning and end of the Eemian Interglacial. “The observed instability with the proven occurrence of short warming events during the transition from the last interglacial to the last glacial epoch could be, when viewed carefully, a general, naturally occurring characteristic of such transition phases,” concludes Dr Tatjana Boettger of the UFZ, who analysed the sediment profiles at the UFZ’s isotope laboratory in Halle. “Detailed studies of these phenomena are important for understanding the current controversial discussed climate trend so that we can assess the human contribution to climate change with more certainty,” explains Dr Frank W. Junge of the SAW.
The scientists got their results by examining ancient lake sediments exposed by modern open-cast mining in Russia and Germany. They believe that the end of the Eemian interglacial epoch saw “possibly at least two” warming events, according to a statement issued by the UFZ.
“The observed instability with the proven occurrence of short warming events during the transition from the last interglacial to the last glacial epoch could be, when viewed carefully, a general, naturally occurring characteristic of such transition phases,” concludes UFZ boffin Dr Tatjana Boettger.
The scientists got their results by examining ancient lake sediments exposed by modern open-cast mining in Russia and Germany. They believe that the end of the Eemian interglacial epoch saw “possibly at least two” warming events, according to a statement issued by the UFZ.
“The observed instability with the proven occurrence of short warming events during the transition from the last interglacial to the last glacial epoch could be, when viewed carefully, a general, naturally occurring characteristic of such transition phases,” concludes UFZ boffin Dr Tatjana Boettger.
Boettger and her fellow researchers say that the Eemian ice-free period wound up with sudden – in these terms – warming spells and serious changes in vegetation. Then the glaciers surged south, at their high tide 21,000 years ago reaching as far as Berlin.
….”Detailed studies of these phenomena are important for understanding the current controversial discussed climate trend so that we can assess the human contribution to climate change with more certainty,” comments Dr Frank W Junge of the Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Saxon Academy of Sciences, SAW) in Leipzig.
If the there is a sudden Ice Age I cant wait to see Al Gore’s reaction.

Jeff Dunetz also writes for his Blog, The Lid
In Central and Eastern Europe, the slow transition from the Eemian Interglacial to the Weichselian Glacial was marked by a growing instability in vegetation trends with possibly at least two warming events. This is the finding of German and Russian climate researchers who have evaluated geochemical and pollen analyses of lake sediments in Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg and Russia. Writing in Quaternary International, scientists from the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), the Saxon Academy of Sciences (SAW) in Leipzig and the Russian Academy of Sciences say that a short warming event at the very end of the last interglacial period marked the final transition to the ice age.
Neil Stevens
Steve Maley
They should have stuck to the ice age
SG_Lominac (Diary) Thursday, March 4th at 11:54AM EST (link)They would have been right….eventually.
From the movie “Hard Times”
Jill Ireland: “What does it feel like to knock somebody down?”
Charles Bronson: “It makes me feel a hell of a lot better than it does him.”
In microclimate terms, it certainly works that way.
Achance (Diary) Thursday, March 4th at 12:42PM EST (link)Warm periods in the high latitudes cause more water vapor in the atmosphere which come back out in winter as snow and even year round at very high altitudes. As the snow builds up it reflects more and more solar energy back which causes cooling. We had several years of unusually warm and dry springs and summers, so much so that there were mountain tops with no snow cover for the first time in living memory. I’d been flying back and forth from Juneau to Anchorage since the ’70s and I had never seen the tops of the Chilkats, the mountains on the approach to Juneau, without snow cover until the early ’00s. Then we had a couple of very rainy and cool summers and cold, snowy winters and the snow cover began to build back up, so much so that the snow on the mountains on either side of the Mendenhall Glacier didn’t completely melt last summer for the first time in the 23 years that I’ve lived in this house. This year we’ve had a very mild winter and there is no snow in my yard right now, but we’ve had a lot of rain and it looks as if we’ve had very heavy snow up on the mountains, so we’ll see what the snowpack does this summer.
In Vino Veritas
and then, global cooling will cause a drought? Their bottom line seems to mean that
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 10:20AM EST (link)humans are bad for the planet…
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
Has anyone ever asked the planet what it likes? And did it ever answer? - nt
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 10:21AM EST (link)Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
Gaia says she wants more styrofoam
Raven (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 10:55AM EST (link)We’re here to make styrofoam so it can be incorporated into the next dominant lifeform and we aren’t doing our job well enough.
“If you do not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Luke 22:36
lol - nt
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 11:28AM EST (link)Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
Mild?
Wing Zero (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 8:16PM EST (link)What is a “mild” winter in AK?
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
Manbearpig!! I'm Serial!!
nessa (Diary) Thursday, March 4th at 9:35PM EST (link)Global Warming causes everything, hurricanes, earthquakes, blizzards, snowstorms, rain, economic failure…. Absolutely. Everything. I’m serial!
“If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Contributor to Unified Patriots
teh twitter
rite on brothur bear!
speciallist (Diary) Thursday, March 4th at 11:34PM EST (link)This is great news!
mikerazar (Diary) Thursday, March 4th at 10:07PM EST (link)I just happen to own thousands of acres of swampland in FL. As the glaciers cover northern Georgia, the value of this land should skyrocket. As a special deal, available only to redstaters, I’m prepared to part with a few parcels of ten acres each for $999,999.
Hurry please. The best parcels are being snapped up as you read this.
Call 555-suckers before it is too late.
We have a nation to save, people.
Ice age caused by the flood
MNConservative (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 12:26AM EST (link)Climate change, impending ice age, global warming! All of this nonsense is predicated upon a belief in millions of years of earth history.
There is another view, much more consistent with the evidence, and it has historical documentation backing it up.
Approximately 3500 BC something happened in what is now the the Pacific Ocean, cracking the ocean floor. Comet impact? Not sure. The cold ocean floor started sinking into the mantle, causing a runaway process wherein the entire ocean floor was replaced. Ocean water, coming into contact with the extreme temperatures of the mantle, was instantly vaporized causing world-wide rains. The hot new ocean floor pushed the ocean water up over the continents. North and South America were ripped away from the rest of the landmass. The new ocean floor contracted as it cooled, draining the the water back from atop the continents.
After the flood the oceans were warm and the upper atmosphere was full of volcanic ash. Winter snows far outpaced the melting of the summers in the higher lattitudes, and the snowpack built up. One ice age, advancing and retreating continuously throughout the years. Gradually over hundreds of years the oceans cooled and the sky cleared, The ice age melted away and the ocean levels rose. The system re-stablized and we’ve got what we’ve got.
There is not another ice age coming. There is no “global warming” happening. Climate varies naturally, mostly due to the output of the sun.
stick with your guns nt
RoguePolitics (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 4:58PM EST (link)“So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.” George Orwell
“Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate, now what’s going to happen to us with both a House and a Senate?” Will Rogers
When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: Liberty, sir, was the primary object. Patrick Henry
http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.com
Because the Republican Party is NOT going to fix the Republican Party.
http://americanamendment.com/
Because Washington is NOT going to fix Washington.
Sources, Minnestota?
Vassar Bushmills (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 6:49AM EST (link)I think you dropped a few zeroes in the date of this cataclysmic event.
Sources
MNConservative (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 7:33AM EST (link)http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/catastrophic-plate-tectonics
http://www.globalflood.org/papers/2003ICCcpt.html
or
http://www.icr.org/article/catastrophic-plate-tectonics-flood-model/
This is a scientific model which fits the geologic evidence in ways that the “lotsa zeros” model can’t, with the extra benefit that it has historical documentation backing it up.
Many thanks.
Vassar Bushmills (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 8:12AM EST (link)I don;’t buy it, but my son, a scientist, does. I forwarded your links, just in case he doesn’t have them.
Very interesting though. I do accept catastrophic change in geology however.
Cordially
One more source
MNConservative (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 10:17AM EST (link)Sorry, coffee hadn’t kicked in yet… Here’s one more source that actually talks about the ice age.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/where-does-ice-age-fit
Just remember...
fmaidment (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 9:20PM EST (link)…that the Left will never accept an explanation that comes from a site like answersingenesis.org. When using this kind of information, the Left basically puts you in the same category as David Koresh and the Unabomber and ignores everything you say.
To convince the Left, you have to bring science that they can’t argue with without contradicting their claims; this means talking about the Roman Climate Optimum (warmer than today) and the various relatively extreme (compared to now) warmer and cooler periods since the end of the last major Ice Age (approximately 10,000-12,000 years ago according to most scientists).
This generally only works for people who are open minded, however. Which on the Left is unfortunately very few.
Follow Me on Twitter
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
– - Thomas Jefferson, to Archibald Stuart, 1791
The Left will never accept
MNConservative (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 2:40AM EST (link)any view except the “I’m a product of random chance and therefore not responsible to anyone” view. I’m not worried about what the Left thinks.
My hope is that normal God-fearing Americans will wake up to the fact that a young earth, as read in Genesis, is supported by the physical evidence. Not only is it supported, but young earth models, such as I outlined above actually explain what we see much better than the old earth models.
Answersingenesis takes the time to point out where the evolutionist presumptions about millions of years affect their interpretation of the evidence. Once you take away that presumption, their theoretical structure falls apart, revealing “global warming” for what it is, a bunch of nonsense.
'Young Earth"
Raven (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 11:01AM EST (link)As in, How young?
“If you do not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Luke 22:36
Young Earth, as in...
MNConservative (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 2:34PM EST (link)a literal reading of Genesis.
Bishop Ussher calculated the date of creation to be 4004 BC, which would imply that the earth is 6014 years old now. I’m comfortable with that figure.
I suggest to you that Genesis is actually a compilation of documents written by eye-witnesses. First, Adam as dictated by God, then Adam’s account, then Seth’s account, etc. You can see the signature of each author at the end of his document: “These are the generations of X”.
You Do realize that even the Church discounts that theory
Raven (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 5:36PM EST (link)As in “It’s so ridiculous by Any standard, scientific Or Theological that it’s sad”
Right?
“If you do not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Luke 22:36
I do realize that many Churches
MNConservative (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 6:22PM EST (link)have compromised with Darwin because they don’t understand that science is never settled. Show me a single point of “proof” that the earth is more than 6000 years old, and I’ll show you how the assumption of millions of years has skewed the interpretation of the evidence. Fossils don’t come out of the ground with date stamps like coins do.
And I can provide you with points of evidence which the Old Earth theory is incapable of addressing… unfossilized red blood cells found in dinosaur bones for one.
I encourage you to look into this further. I used to be sympathetic to Theistic Evolution, but after really digging into the science of it, I’ve discarded it as unnecessary and full of fatal errors.
Finally, the historical documentation backs up a Young Earth. Why discard historical documentation in THIS CASE ONLY? What archaeologist, digging amidst ruins, wouldn’t be glad to find an ancient document explaining what he sees? It is because Genesis makes us accountable to God that atheists reject it, not because any part of it has ever been proven false.
My best friend in high school
hickorystick (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 9:08PM EST (link)was intensly into catastrophism.. I listened,but didn’t believe it till I went to the U. The Geology teacher showed pictures of fossilized palm tree fronds he picked up alongside the road in Bellingham, WA. My friends version of Catastrophism was that the Earth had flipped on it’s axis; is this standard theory?
Another funny thing, there is a basalt flow along a river in Eastern Washington that has a mold of a Rhinocerous. It’s called the Blue Lake Rhino. Kinda shakes your world finding palm fronds and Rhinocerous in northern latitude states.
Young Earth Creationism is a matter of faith, not science.
Steve Maley (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 8:15PM EST (link)I respect your right to believe what you want to believe, but as someone who makes his living from applied earth science, I can tell you that there are lots of things that don’t square with a 6,000 year old earth, a single flood event and a single ice age.
The Gulf of Mexico is a giant bowl that has filled with 40,000 to 50,000 feet of sediment from the erosion of the Rocky Mountains over the last 25 million years or so. If it were from one flood event, it would be a jumbled up, undifferentiated mess. It’s not, though. The rock sequence that we see is a fairly predictable sequence that shows dozens of cycles of high sea level/low sea level. The most recent low sea level stand was a mere 12,000 years ago, barely an eyeblink in geologic terms.
The geologic scientists whose work you prefer make their living selling books and DVDs. The geologic scientists I trust drill $5,000,000 wells, betting that the conventional scientific understanding of geology is correct. In 30+ years in the oil and gas business, I have yet to meet anyone who makes a living using a Young Earth geologic model.
The blogger formerly known as ‘Vladimir’.
Slight change
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 8:23PM EST (link)Vlad
Don’t you mean a living drilling for oil, doing anything remotely scientific that makes a living using a Young Earth geological model?
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Respectfully but emphatically disagree.
MNConservative (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 9:08PM EST (link)Whether or not God loves us is a matter of faith. Interpretation of 50,000 feet of sediment is another matter entirely, whether our interpretations agree or not.
You assert that “If it were from one flood event, it would be a jumbled up, undifferentiated mess,” and you assume the stratification is due to long, uniform processes. However, in 1965 the Bijou Creek flood created stratified sand deposits up to 12 feet thick in just a few hours. In a global year-long flood, stratified sediments could become very thick indeed.
Geologic scientists are involved in operational science, which involves observation, testing, etc. I’m not sure why you imagine a Young Earth Creationist would drill in a different spot!
The explanation that is used for what you describe...
Bill S (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 9:19PM EST (link)is known as “apparent age.” An omnipotent God is quite capable of creating a universe that appears to be as old as scientists tell us, but in fact was created much more recently. When He willed the universes into existence, he could quite easily have done it in a way that makes it look like sediment had appeared over time.
He does many things to test our faith. It is quite reasonable that a young earth could be one of those things.
“It’s such a fine line between stupid, and clever.” – David St. Hubbins
Well, Bill, my reading of Genesis leads me to an Old Earth conclusion.
Steve Maley (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 11:07PM EST (link)Gen. 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
One of the pieces of evidence for an old universe is the red shift of distant stars.
I believe God gave man powers of discernment for a reason. I can’t believe He’d do that, then fill His creation with misleading clues and blind alleys.
My quarrel is with Bishop Ussher’s interpretation, not with the Bible. He determined that Creation happened, not just in 4004 B.C., but on Sunday, October 23, 4004 B.C.! Young Earth Creationists put a lot of faith in the good Archbishop’s powers of discernment, but none in their own.
The blogger formerly known as ‘Vladimir’.
Misleading clues
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 12:49AM EST (link)I have to agree, Vlad, God would not create something to mislead us.
I’m glad you brought up the distant starlight problem. This has admittedly been a difficult question for young earth creationists, but not one without a rather interesting solution.
Given a bounded expanding physical universe with the Earth approximately at the center (which the red shift indicates), time would pass more quickly toward the edges than at the center. The effect would be fairly minimal now, but in the early years of creation when the universe was much smaller it would have been more pronounced. It is possible that the stars are millions of years old, but created the same week as the Earth just 6000 years ago.
By the way, I find your tag line remarkably apropos! I think it explains why so many Christians accept evolution as fact, when the evidence just isn’t there.
You'll note...
Bill S (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 12:58AM EST (link)that my post supported no particular interpretation. I merely stated that “apparent age” is one explanation for the evidences that some cite for an old Earth.
As one who has taken semester upon semester of earth science, physics, math, physical geography, etc., I am aware of the evidences on either side. I tend to lean a bit towards a young Earth interpretation ONLY because I do have faith that God’s omnipotence makes anything possible. I do not criticize anyone else’s old or young Earth opinions. God works in different ways in each of us.
“It’s such a fine line between stupid, and clever.” – David St. Hubbins
Bill
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 1:09AM EST (link)I encourage you to spend some quality time at the Answers in Genesis website. They have researched all of this stuff in detail, pointing out where evolutionists beg the question, make unwarranted assumptions, and engage in circular reasoning. They also show how the physical evidence is interpreted based on one’s world view. The Young Earth Creation model is maturing rapidly, is coherent, and sound. And uses the historical documentation as a guide. It’s brilliant!
Bill
hickorystick (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 12:27AM EST (link)During part of my career I built houses. Most of them on steep hillsides that required a Geotechnical Engineer. My Dad would speak to him about Jesus; He (the engineer) really needed him at that time. He was an Atheist and going through a rough patch. On the next job he wanted to do something nice for my dad because he had been kind to him when he needed a friend. Inside the excavation, Where the earth had been cut away vertically so as to form a ‘section’, he pointed to a thin brown line about two feet below the ground. He explained to him thats what Geotech’s unofficially call Noah’s line. Being an honery cuss, he normally wouldn’t have told a religious guy that. Still, there were additional layers of sediment beneath it, each relating to a different geological event, with large time intervals between, that had deposited the material there. You can find tiny black particles in the silt layer. It’s trapped carbon, from trees. The God who sets an atomic element in perfect balance, has less mundane tasks to do than place tiny carbon bits in the soil. It doesn’t lessen God’s universe at all, that it’s more than 6000 years old. As a matter of fact, with the incredible order of nature, it makes God a far better story teller than Bishop Usher. The Scholastics set out to study nature to better understand the nature of God. Science, or Scientific Process, still reveals many new wonders of God’s universe. Don’t get tripped up on small details, so that you miss the big picture.
Noah's line
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 1:04AM EST (link)Noah’s flood left stratified sediment miles deep, not just a thin brown line. The flood buried trees and dinosaurs and trilobites and clams (I have one!) and every living thing… Of course some organic matter would get mixed in with the silt!
That’s a great story though.
Kudos to your Dad for sharing the love of Christ!
I agree with the sentiment of your last few lines. However, I disagree with the result. Where do you draw the line about Genesis? Was Adam a real person? How did Democrats .. er, I mean sin… enter the world? Was there death before sin? Those are important details, and have a direct impact on the coherence of theology.
Genesis
hickorystick (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:19AM EST (link)I agree with the sentiment of your last few lines. However, I disagree with the result. Where do you draw the line about Genesis? Was Adam a real person? How did Democrats .. er, I mean sin… enter the world? Was there death before sin? Those are important details, and have a direct impact on the coherence of theology.
Yes, I agree with what Genesis says. The Bible was written down in the time of Nebuchanezzar, and I think it would be reasonable they could keep an accurate verbal recitation of what occurred. The story may or may not have been allegorical, the disobedience part is certain in my mind. I think God began to reveal himself to man, in the form of religious discipline and tradition, to Abraham. The world was probably in chaos again at this time, as it was in Noah’s, and he was trying a new tact (of course he had revealed himself before on an individual basis before these times). In imparting his instructions, he was choosing a people to represent his wishes, the Israelites. Noah formed a starting point for his genealogical history. Because of the chaos, all social among men, the religion was a type of social compact.
With as much space as their was in the world, and hunting and gathering so easy, there were not permanent large gatherings. with the advent of agriculture and fixed locations, social conditions in the world changed, and laws had to be established. Up to the time of Noah, the libertine approach failed. I don’t know if I am making any sense, but I think the genealogy was kept, to provide capitol to keep the contract. I do believe men existed before the time of Noah, but I don’t know what sense of God they had, or if the one true God was willing to reveal himself to a group or tribe, just to have it fall apart. He is holy, and is retiscent to contact men directly. Again, I do think you can accept the geological record, without compromising faith. I have discussed things like this with PhD’s, who have gotten hung up on details, and allowed it to block the full enjoyment of their faith. Some things can be allowed to be mysteries. It’s also fun and a real challenge to unlock the mysteries of the Universe with science. God knows how we are, and if we were allowed to get bored, we would get in even more trouble. It’s a blessing God made the universe so complex. It gives us something to do. And there are rational rules to the hard sciences, God pity the Social Scientist.
I’d better add something political here, so God preferred Men to be Libertarians first, when that got screwed that up, and he needed rules, he made Republicans
Clovis points scuttle young earth theory
hickorystick (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 9:29PM EST (link)Check out this article on Clovis points found in Wenatchee, WA. 11,000 year old quartz Clovis points (Clovis People) were found in an orchard. Many life lessons in the article. How the best theories can be wrong. How religion and politics can interfere with science. How a minority people can be subject to the same human weaknesses as anyone (note: The Colvilles are a very patriotic tribe). The best one is the world is a marvelous place. It can really surpise you, and provide limitless adventures in science, history earth geology etc. I was taught the earth was 6000 years old too. It helps to recognize the Bible is not written as a scientific document. It is primarily a moral document and historical document. Science and archealogy has backed up almost every specific claim or reference it has made. The Bible never stated an age to the Earth. It is not necessary to the important claims and promises of the Bible to date the Earth. The world contains many marvels. It would be a shame to miss out on them, by focusing too narrowly on proving one theory somehow deemed necessary to validate the Bible.
the missing link
hickorystick (Diary) Saturday, March 6th at 11:57PM EST (link)http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/washington_state/40822
Clovis points
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 1:35AM EST (link)I’m not sure why you think Clovis points scuttle Young Earth theory. Quarts artifacts found in sediments which evolutionists believe to be 11000 years old is hardly surprising, but I would argue the sediments are not 11000 years old. How did they date the sediments? What assumptions did they use in dating the sediments? I think it is not a point of disagreement that people migrated from Asia to America.
You are correct that the Bible is not written as a scientific document. But it WAS written by eye-witnesses to the events, and as such is reliable where it touches on science. You are correct that the Bible doesn’t state an age to the earth. But it DOES claim that God created the Earth in six days. It DOES claim that Noah survived a world-wide flood with his family and a bunch of critters. And it DOES state that Jesus believed these things.
see my reply downthread
hickorystick (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:28AM EST (link)the dating was done by scientists, not evolutionists. By the way, A survey done by Berkely showed about half of all scientist in the ‘hard’ sciences are believers and regular churchgoers. I wouldn’t dismiss their work as obsessive about evolution. look below for full reply.
That doesn't make the dating correct.
tcgeol (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 5:29PM EST (link)The article didn’t say what type of dating was used, so I figure it was radiometric. Radiometric dating is an absolutely brilliant concept, but not quite gospel. Any type of dating that has a built-in “out” if the numbers are incorrect is not one that I’m going to bet my life on.
Just your typical bitter gun- and God-clinger
Even the Left admits we’re Right
Radiocarbon. 11,125 +/- 130 yrs.
hickorystick (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 9:48PM EST (link)The dating was from volcanic ash on the point. There is a war going on over these artifacts, so material can’t be removed from the point itself. The first link has Clovis points found all over the U.S., with dating and method. Note that each find will likely have different scientists in charge, and dating done at different labs. The last link has pictures of the points, quite beautiful
http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/chapter54/text-Clovis/text-Clovis.htm
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/East_Wenatchee_Clovis_Site
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Wenatchee_Clovis_Site
http://lithiccastinglab.com/cast-page/2002novemberwenatcheeclovis.htm
"Young Earth" is a dead idea
lone77star Thursday, March 25th at 3:15AM EST (link)and should not be taught in schools. It is wrong on so many levels, including the Biblical.
In Genesis, Adam is an individual man, but also all of Mankind. Look carefully at Genesis 5:2. “Their” name was Adam. Notice the pluralization. Notice that Adam was both male and female.
There has been a lot of science bashing, lately. And some scientists may be guilty of falsifying things, but that doesn’t mean throwing out all science because of a few bad hats.
When multiple disciplines come to the conclusion that Earth and the universe are very, very old, but an interpretation of the Bible implies that it’s all around 6,000 years old, then I’d say that the interpretation is suspect. Simple logic.
After years of research, I’ve discovered a timeline in Genesis that is compatible with science. The discovery also explains the outrageous longevity of the early patriarchs, why God would give such lavish protection to a murderer (Cain), and the real identity of the culprit behind Noah’s Flood.
If humanity could perpetrate all manner of wickedness after the Flood, then what was the point of the Flood? What was the wickedness addressed by the Flood? And why would God promise never again to use the Flood? The answer is obvious. The Flood handled a very specific crime that humanity has been incapable of duplicating since then. The question remains, what was the crime?
There are answers in the Bible, but we also need science to understand it all. Ignoring science with blind belief in a limiting interpretation does no good. And only the truth will set one free. Self-imposed blindness does not seek truth. And that’s okay, if one is willing to man-up and accept the mistake — to take responsibility and to leave the mistake behind. Bruised ego can only create more blindness.
There are two galaxies that rather poignantly disprove “Young Earth Creationism.” They are called “the Mice” [NGC 4676], at least if we are to believe that God is not deceitful. These two galaxies (and there are many other similar examples) are being torn apart from a near-collision. Galaxies are very, very big. It takes a very long time for them to pass one another … in fact, millions of years. It would seem logical that God would not create the aftermath of a near-collision which never occurred. To do so would seem deceitful.
Don’t pervert the intent of the Bible and pretend to shield yourself with divine righteousness. That does yourself and others no good.
There is truth in the Bible. Don’t pretend to know it all. Instead, be humble and hunger for that truth. Ask and you will receive. And don’t let the policies of this nation fall under the spell of similar blindness. We can still do good, but we need to be more self-aware, and more humble. Having half a truth can be more harmful sometimes than no truth at all, especially if we arrogantly cling to that half-truth as absolute.
Stay humble, and compassionate. Keep what truth you have and keep questioning yourself and your beliefs. It’s okay to do that, especially when you hunger for that absolute truth — the same truth that allowed Peter to walk on water, if only for a moment.
Rod Martin, Jr
www.ancientsuns.com
www.spacesoftware.net
They're called interglacial periods for a reason...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 7:23AM EST (link)The next glacial period is always pending…
Unless you happen to have first-hand knowledge regarding the onset of a warming period.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
I'm always skeptical of saying that a period of exceptional heat or exceptional cold is coming...
kyoufuu (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 10:07AM EST (link)There are too many variables in the physical system to be able to adequately say that past trends or experiences serve as a guide for the future. The MWP was exceptionally warm. If our modern day scientists lived then, they’d be crying that the planet was suffering cataclysmic warming. If they lived during the LIA, the’d be saying the world was going to freeze over completely.
The problem with forecasting is that it suffers from the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy.
“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” — James Madison
“I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
It is all a Members Only fraud perpetrated to sell more jackets
RoguePolitics (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 4:59PM EST (link)If you’re not ready for the Ice Age then doom on you.
“So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.” George Orwell
“Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate, now what’s going to happen to us with both a House and a Senate?” Will Rogers
When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: Liberty, sir, was the primary object. Patrick Henry
http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.com
Because the Republican Party is NOT going to fix the Republican Party.
http://americanamendment.com/
Because Washington is NOT going to fix Washington.
The obvious answer is: We have to burn more fossil fuels!
kyle8 (Diary) Friday, March 5th at 5:43PM EST (link)Let’s all go out and buy a Tundra or Sequoia!
“Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty”
Kyle
Lord, this is like Sunday dinner when the Preacher
Achance (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 3:38AM EST (link)came to the house! I parted company with my parents and with fundamentalist religion over dinosaurs when I was about eight years old. At eight, I could understand that the “God said it, I believe it, and that settles it” view of life was missing some things. This is why the Left hates the Right!
I’m sorry folks but I don’t see how anybody with an IQ in double digits and any sort of education can believe that the Earth was created in six days six thousand years ago. I’m not anti-religiious; I can accept most of The Bible as allegory and metaphor, but to accept the Book of Genesis as fact requires a suspension of all credulity.
You younge Earthers are welcome to it’ I’m not going to try to burn you at the stake for it, but you aren’t really going to get a lot of acceptance from people who’ve read anything other than The Bible.
In Vino Veritas
Well Achance,
Wing Zero (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 7:54PM EST (link)I’m a Christian. I do believe that God created this world. I’ve always thought the Earth was “old.” I’ve been of the belief there was an indeterminate period of time between Genesis chapter 1 and 2.
There are parts of the Bible I take literally. Did Jesus come to this world born of a virgin? Did he walk the world sinless? Did he die, and was resurrected? Yes. That part I take literally.
Then there is Revelations. Some of the things in that book sound worse than a Steven King novel. I DO think it will happen, but when I see some of the stranger imagery used, I believe the author was describing as best he could modern warfare – Tanks, Helicopters, chemical weapons, perhaps even the effects of a nuclear bomb.
Some of Jesus’ words are spoken in such a way to make a point. Matthew 5:30 for example. I don’t expect that Jesus literally meant for anyone to cut off their own hand, but if you have an item causing problems in your life… get rid of it! There is also the additional point of the culture of the times. Jesus walked the Earth 2000 years ago, in a Jewish culture under Roman occupation. Sometimes I don’t get portions of AMERICAN culture, and I’m a natural born citizen. Don’t get me started on Japan (I’ve even got a Japanese in-law.)
There are questions I can’t answer about how the world and universe was made. But that’s not central to my Faith, or my belief in Jesus.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
Just can't let that one go, Achance
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 1:27PM EST (link)“I don’t see how anybody with an IQ in double digits and any sort of education can believe that the Earth was created in six days six thousand years ago.”
Here’s how: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html
Note how devoted they are to their dating of 68 million years. They mention the YEC take, but they can’t refute it. All they do is restate their position and use negative words like “hijack”, “seized”, and “horrified”. From my perspective, it’s hilarious and sort of pathetic.
Here’s also how:
http://www.icr.org/carbon-14/
According to old earth theory, the amount of Carbon-14 in diamonds should not be detectable. But it’s there and is measurable. More evidence that natural diamonds are not millions of years old.
There are many more examples.
Don’t assume that Young Earth Creationists are of the “God said it, I believe it, and that settles it” mindset. You see that among Christians who trust the Bible to be factually correct, but don’t have the tools or access to pursue the evidence. And that’s fine for some people.
I would characterize Young Earth Creationists as more of a “God said it, I believe it, now lets go investigate and see how it happened.”
How do you feel about teaching creationism in
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 1:48PM EST (link)public schools?
Or any other theory?
SteveLA (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:02PM EST (link)redneck
The slippery slope of opening up public education to the teaching as science any faith based theory of evolution would be a whole giant economy size can O worms.
Can you teach ID and not teach any of the other faith tradition theories of creation out there without discrimination against the other faiths? How do you square the Constitutional provisions of “Establish no religion” by state endorsement of one particular faith based theory over all others? Would that not be endorsement and establishment of a singular religious based theory which directly conflicting with the Constitution?
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
ID isn't a scientific theory
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:18PM EST (link)It is a philosophical statement of origins. It makes no claims subject to dis-provability, and therefore, cannot be scientific. I have no idea why we teach origins in school at all; it would make a certain amount of sense to teach kids how evolution as a scientific theory is useful for biologists, but teaching it as an alternative theory of origins seems to spring more out of wanting to replace the Biblical tale of origins with something more palatable for secularists. I, personally, don’t see the academic or practical value in occupying school time with biology as opposed to, say, economics, political philosophy, or the hard sciences, all of which are sorely lacking in schools today.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
I'm sorry, with evolution as a theory of origins
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:20PM EST (link)not biology, which has some merit as a subject of instruction.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Maybe as part of comparative literature studies
SteveLA (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:49PM EST (link)aesthete
Maybe teaching ID, Young Earth, or any of the other faith based theory’s of origin of earth as depicted in influential works of literature would be a good thing. A class that compares the Sacred Scripture of many religions and how those scriptures as influential literature which shaped their respective civilizations would not be a terrible thing.
But that’s not the same thing as state endorsement of Young Earth, ID or other faith based theory of origin as science by teaching as such.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Why don't schools avoid teaching origins and teach observable science?
tcgeol (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 5:18PM EST (link)Neither evolution or creation are repeatable and falsifiable, so neither can be proven. Teach observable science to the children and let their parents deal with origins.
Just your typical bitter gun- and God-clinger
Even the Left admits we’re Right
Bingo, tcgeol
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 5:50PM EST (link)You’re exactly right on this one. The only way I would expand on it is that ideally I think Public Schools need to be abolished. I’m tired of education welfare and government indoctrination centers.
An answer to Redneck_hippie
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 5:57PM EST (link)I think teaching creationism in public schools is a bad idea, and it’s certainly not what I’m pursuing. I would not want to force teachers who believe in evolution to try to teach another viewpoint. Nor would I want teachers who believe in Creationism to have to teach evolution.
Personally, I think public schools need to be abolished. They are wasteful government indoctrination centers and our children are worse off for them. Private parent directed education is a much better idea, and if education welfare is absolutely required I suppose we could have vouchers.
I am all for home schooling. Sadly,
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 6:45PM EST (link)that too is under attack. Education vouchers are the best way I know to combat the indoctrination and rot in public schools.
Even I am troubled by the certainty with which
Achance (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 6:28PM EST (link)Big Bang Theory and Darwinian evolution are taught.
In Vino Veritas
Ideally, they
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 6:35PM EST (link)would be taught as theories. Pure secularism is unfortunate in that youngsters have things drllled into them that should be the top of exploration. Our NEA drones are certain that the pilgrims mass-murdered the aboriginal Americans and that driving cars is a crime against panda bears. No sense of proportion.
topic of exploration. nt
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 6:36PM EST (link)I too am troubled.
Wing Zero (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 7:25PM EST (link)But to the Libs, if there is no greater authority than the state, there is no one to be accountable to.
That’s why so many Leftist regimes in history reject the notion of God, or a god, unless they are god themselves.
Big Bang and Evolution appeal to this belief.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
5x5 MnConservative
tcgeol (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:36PM EST (link)nt
Just your typical bitter gun- and God-clinger
Even the Left admits we’re Right
Is "it" blind belief?
lone77star Thursday, March 25th at 3:40AM EST (link)MNConservative said, “I would characterize Young Earth Creationists as more of a ‘God said it, I believe it, now lets go investigate and see how it happened.’”
But what is meant by “it?” Aren’t you referring to your interpretation of what God said, rather than what God said? Interpretation and divine wisdom are not always the same thing. And with so many opposing interpretations, most of them have got to be at least partially wrong.
See my comment, above on why YEC is dead.
http://www.redstate.com/jeffdunetz/2010/03/04/new-study-says-global-warming-may-be-signal-of-impending-ice-age/#comment-230
Having a preconceived idea is not always bad, but lack of self-awareness and lack of humility in the face of an investigation all too frequently result in skewed results and more bad interpretations.
I assert that our current world views prevent us from seeing absolute truth. The more we cling to half-truths, the more difficult it is to move toward the more divine. More humility can be a good thing. Some things, like love of God, of course, are non negotiable.
Rod Martin, Jr
www.ancientsuns.com
www.spacesoftware.net
Question posed to MNconservative
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:32PM EST (link)Because this is a political site, I wanted to get his viewpoint on a political question.
On origins, I’m a rabid Darwinist to the extent that biology is part of the debate. The ultimate questions I ask of God.
Big Bang is credible IMHO as God’s answer to “Where was God on the day matter first mattered?” If God didn’t want life in the universe, it would not exist.
(reply to aesthete, SteveLA) nt
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 2:34PM EST (link)Here's the rub. Is it really science or just guessing by PHD's- now it's global cooling?
archer52 Sunday, March 7th at 3:49PM EST (link)I read the article from Jeffdunetz. Good work on his part, but I have to say a couple things about the science.
1. Do any of us believe anything they are doing or saying as accurate anymore? Honestly, when I was a kid back in the late sixties and early seventies I remember the cry of a coming “ice age.” I do and it got my attention. Now it is global warming, not check that, climate change, no check that, we were right the first time and an ice age is coming.
What??
2. How do they know. Short of a time machine or interviewing the a ten thousand year old man, how do they really know? Pollen count found in sediment? Really? Oh, this line of dirt has pollen in it and this line just above it doesn’t so the conclusion is there was an ice age. ???
Now tree rings I get. We can track the amount of rainfall and actually count tree rings to find a relationship. The key was we were there counting the rainfall, not guessing because of pollen count or the amount of trapped CO2 in a gas bubble in the ice. We assume this science is actually functional. Of course, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that bleeding patients back in the Middle Ages was also considered sound science. Just saying….
Enough. Enough already. What if another ice age comes down the pike, is Al Gore going to start begging people to START their SUV’s?? “Come on guys, rev it up a little, it is cold out here!”
It's "amazing" how often "Settled Science" that doesn't reject the null hypothesis
6eorge Jetson (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 4:18PM EST (link)finds itself subsequently debunked
Tree rings: I've cruised a lot of timber and done a lot of bores into trees.
Achance (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 7:47PM EST (link)I did it mostly on commercial timberlands all planted in rows at the same time from the same seedling stock. You’d be amazed how much difference micro-climates and water availability makes. Even though planted from the same stock and at the same time, the trees in the bottom lands were almost always bigger. The trees on the better soils were almost always bigger. The trees, all things being equal, with the best sun were always bigger. In order to base anything on tree rings, you have to know a LOT about that tree.
In Vino Veritas
Genesis 1.1 is a pretty good metaphor for the Big Bang nt
mikerazar (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 3:56PM EST (link)We have a nation to save, people.
or vice versa
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 4:59PM EST (link)the Big Bang is an expansion on Genesis 1.1, which tells me the answer to why is there something rather than nothing.
In the sense that there was nothing
MNConservative (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 5:59PM EST (link)and then there was something, yes. But starting from a single point poses very serious inflation problems.
It's not the inflation that scares me
redneck_hippie (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 6:07PM EST (link)it’s the deflation.
In no sense am I being disrepectful,
mikerazar (Diary) Tuesday, March 9th at 4:40PM EST (link)but Genesis could hardly have been written as “The Almighty created a quantum event which caused a singularity to appear in the void. He said let there be energy and the singularity expanded. He saw that it was good and caused it to expand further. He said let there be light, and the expansion cooled enough to increase the wavelengths of some photons, etc.”
I would never presume to suggest that this is an improved Genesis. I only say that there is no inconsistency. I do not believe that God has revealed all that there is to us. Perhaps He never will.
We have a nation to save, people.
The simple language of The Bible
redneck_hippie (Diary) Wednesday, March 10th at 5:03PM EST (link)contains more truth than man has been able to fathom through all these millennia. Western man in particular seems to abhor not a vacuum, but mystery. Personally it matters little how much time God took. Point is he did it.
"Point is He did it."
lone77star Thursday, March 25th at 4:00AM EST (link)Amen, to that!
Rod Martin, Jr
www.ancientsuns.com
www.spacesoftware.net
Warming leads to an Ice Age?
Wing Zero (Diary) Sunday, March 7th at 7:22PM EST (link)Wasn’t this a Denis Quaid movie?
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
The last "mini-Ice Age" was caused by global warming
lone77star Tuesday, March 9th at 6:29AM EST (link)At the end of the last major Ice Age, as glaciers were melting, a massive spill of cold, fresh water into the Atlantic Ocean placed a cap on the thermohaline cycle that regulates Earth climate. This shutdown resulted in a return to Ice Age conditions for 1300 years — a period known as the Younger Dryas.
Is global warming happening? You bet it is. And glaciers are disappearing all over the Arctic, plus weakening greatly in the Antarctic. Will this be enough to place a cap on the thermohaline cycle, again? I suppose we could wait and find out, or we could take proactive measures to prevent it.
Some of us may not like Al Gore, politically, but science is science. And human activity is affecting climate. How much exactly, we may never know, but we might just be able to do something about repairing any damage we’ve done.
Teamwork. I like it.
Rod Martin, Jr
www.ancientsuns.com
www.spacesoftware.net
the pro active policies wont do a damn thing
kyle8 (Diary) Tuesday, March 9th at 6:52AM EST (link)because they are not designed to help the climate, they are designed to make some people rich and transfer wealth from some nations to others.
furthermore, any meddling we do before we really understand what is going on might do more harm than good. I know about the younger Dryas and that was an incredibly large amount of ice melting. I do not think it is at all analogous to anything happening today.
Also, Where primitive humans involved in that climate change? No? then what makes you think that we MUST be having an effect on the climate now? I believe that any effect we might be having is negligible and certainly is associated more with things other than carbon which is still a trace gas in the atmosphere with a weak greenhouse effect.
Please don’t fall for all of the orchestrated global scaremongering.
“Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty”
Kyle
Are you certain it's happening?
Brian Hibbert (Diary) Tuesday, March 9th at 7:00AM EST (link)Really? Can you trust data that’s been manipulated, had disputing data hidden, and some of which has been utterly faked?
That’s not the scientific method I remember….
I started to go into specifics on some of the other issues with your blind acceptance of the AGW theories, but we’ve beaten those topics into the ground so often that I don’t want to start down those paths.
So to counter your bald assertion, I’ll counter with some of my own.
1. The Earth may or may not be warming, estimated 0.6 degrees +- 0.2 degrees since 1880, but much less warming approaching zero if you pick 1 decade earlier as your starting point and leaving aside numerous problems with measurements and data collections.
2. This warming is not outside previous warming that could not have been caused by humans (as humans were not present).
3. The earth tends to self regulate (see your own assertion that an initial warming may cause cooling, there are oterh mechanisms as well).
4. The proposed “fixes” for global warming do not address the stated problem and are merely a way for politicians to increase taxes and further control energy production and use.
5. You have been duped by people with a political agenda that is not necessarily in your or the public’s best interest.
Candidate for Trustee of Illinois Central College
Socialism doesn’t work. It looks nice on paper, but it’s been tried and it’s failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Take back our party!
Check out Unified Patriots
Yes, I'm certain...
lone77star Thursday, March 25th at 1:50AM EST (link)Can we trust data that’s been manipulated? Well, of course not. As you said, that’s not very scientific. But that’s not the issue I brought up. Your wrongly included argument deflects from my point. It’s an important issue on its own, but non sequitur to my post.
What proof do you have that I have “blind acceptance” of anyone’s theories? Your assertion here is without foundation. Personally, I’m skeptical of a lot of things I hear on both sides of this argument. It’s certainly a messy argument, with some falsifying evidence, dropping out data and the like. Claims and counter-claims.
But global warming is a certainty. Check out my reply on another thread:
http://www.redstate.com/vladimir/2010/02/14/bill-nye-the-science-guy-on-global-warming-and-patriotism/#comment-3195
Yes, the Earth tends to be self-regulating, but that doesn’t mean that change is impossible. The abrupt start and end to the Younger Dryas attest to the possibility of rapid change. And yes, the conditions are markedly different between now and then, but there are possible lessons from the past that may apply.
I have trouble with your item #4, logically. Certainly, we need to understand the effects of our potential “fixes” before we plow a lot of resources into them. I remember a TV ad from decades ago. The relevant tag line is, “It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.” Messing with things we don’t understand can backfire, to be sure. Your assertion about the purpose behind the fixes is highly biased and troubling logically. Not very scientific. I would think the logical fallacy is that of “non sequitur.” Certainly, some of that could be taking place. People can be selfish on both sides of this issue. But I wouldn’t state that such self-interest is the only reason for the “agendas” at stake.
And you make another assertion about me that I “have been duped by people with a political agenda that is not necessarily in your or the public’s best interest.” Wow. I’m not on either side. Duped? Perhaps, but not by the people with a political agenda. I take responsibility for my own opinions and make my own judgments of the data. On many aspects, I don’t have enough data to make an assertion. I see a lot of that in this discussion — assertions made without foundation — and again, on both sides of the argument.
Climate is changing. How much humans had to do with it is debatable, certainly, but to say that humans have no effect on the climate is laughable in the extreme. The fact remains, we “could” be responsible for major climate changes already underway. Not taking this fact seriously is seriously troubling.
If after all is said and done, humans are found to be blameless for climate change, all well and good. No harm, no foul. But if we are culpable, and did nothing about it, then what do we tell our children?
Rod Martin, Jr
www.ancientsuns.com
www.spacesoftware.net
You ask the most important question, Brian..
Vassar Bushmills (Diary) Tuesday, March 9th at 5:17PM EST (link)…and this what can we believe?
It is the Left that believes wither we 1) can believe or 2) can be made to believe anything…thus destroying all trust in all reports. After all, we are not experts ourselves.
So who do we believe, and why? You seem like the kind of person who can answer that, so enlighten us (me) with a very targeted diary: When liars abound how do we know who to believe about Science?
Cheers