Google CEO Declare: Questioning Global Warming Claims is 'Criminal'

You just described the bulk of the problems I have with most of EE's posts.

 

God rebuke you; but thank you for the blessing.

Matthew 5:11-12 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition; e-sword.com edition):
Blessed shall ye be when men reuile you, and persecute you, & say all maner of euill against you for my sake, falsely.
Mat 5:12 Reioyce and be glad, for great is your reward in heauen: for so persecuted they the Prophets which were before you.

 

I don't suppose there's any chance of Ed making sense on this thread...

Of course, we're talking about manmade global warming, which doesn't make sense to begin with...

But these yahoos (note the clever internet pun...yahoo....google...(insert rim shot)) wishing to supress free expression, on the other hand, makes perfect sense.

Rational folks armed with the truth are toxic to their cause, and it messes up their worldview (weird as it is)

 

Rbell: // Rational folks armed with the truth are toxic to their cause, and it messes up their worldview (weird as it is) \\

Interesting, I have a Biblical World view. If it is 'weird' then:

A. you do NOT have a Biblical World View
or
B. you have a 'weird' World View

Irrational folks armed with lies are toxic to 'their cause',
whoever 'they' are -- probably subscribers to some konspiracy theory?

They're their own worse enemy there

I am a pre-tribulation rapturist, pre-millennial Second Advent of Messiah Jesus and it will happen after the date of this post if not on ilt. I really am not going to be around (either i'll die or get raptured before 2030) around very much longer. But 2030 is going to BE TO LATE to keep PEOPLE from ruining the earth (the WORLD is speeding up toward going to HELL, the earth is geography, geology, climate). Yes, people are ruining their own enviornoment -- this is a fact, not an opinion)

Rev 11:16-18 (KJV1769ish type edition, e-sword.com):
And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,
Rev 11:17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.
Rev 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

I go by what the Bible says, people have capability to destroy the earth AND the people are destroying the earth right now burning up fossil fuels that it took GOD 800 Million Years to bake. And we are going to use 90% of all the fossil fuels from 1950 to 2050? Makes no sense, God is going to destroy those who destroy the earth. Yes, I'd pretend it is not logical, Ed cannot write, or something. The Truth is to pitiful to abide.

While I'm up in Heaven getting my reward (if any) where you gonna be according to your eschatology? Please don't get caught in the group that gets destroyed for destroying the earth. Thank you.

 

Ed, if you drive a car, heat your home, mow your lawn, buy items packaged in plastic... how are you any different than those who are destroying the earth by doing the same thing - other than you know that you are doing wrong by your beliefs?

 

So, a cornerstone of your world view is manmade global warming? That's a mighty interesting concept to make a key part of your basic philosophy. Oh well, to each his own. Nice job, BTW, of questioning my faith. Of course it's classless to do so, but you were clever in how you did it. Still, though--bad form.

Congratulations on having a well-thought out position.

I rescind my previous statement.

Of course man pollutes. But manmade global destruction--the line we've been fed? Sorry, but you don't have facts to back that up. There are areas of pollution...there are incidents of manmade destruction...there are entities that are irresponsible. To deny those is silly...
But ratchet it up about three notches, and you have abjectly stupid:

You know, having a debate would be so much easier if you would make some sense.

The one part I did catch was the line where you accuse me of lying. Interesting. I remember a time when Ed Edwards used to be willing to engage in debate worthy of mature adults, and not resort to grenade-throwing. Not sure what happened, but it's unfortunate you feel the need to respond in such a manner. Does little to enhance your argument, either.

Of course, if we want to discuss "lies" and "global warming," perhaps researching the "hockey stick" temperature hoax; the hundreds (possibly thousands?) of emails from "scientists" that reveal the cover up; the flawed methodology of data collecting (such as temperature recording in urban areas, then comparing that data to rural temp records from earlier years); the exposing of the corruption and agenda of the IPCC; the abject hypocrisy of buffoons such as Algore; the refusal of officials at NOAA and National Climate Data Center (NCDC) to turn over key data to independent investigators; the actual running of said organizations (particularly the NCDC) by individuals who were completely devoid of any scientific, meterological, or climatological backgrounds; and refusal to engage in debate some of the brightest minds in the world who have begun to question what is so obviously a shake-down, a scam, and a naked power-grab.

Conspiracy? Oh, please. The biggest challenge I have in responding is choosing which argument to knock down--there's so many debunked arguments--so much outright corruption in this scam.

OK, Several issues here...First: You're going to choose a very literal interpretation of Revelation 11, but then not so in Genesis (800 million years?). Come on man, you gotta pick one.

Second: If I wanted to define "eisegesis," this is the example I would use. You waltzed into this passage with a made-up mind about global warming, "climate change," or whatever the heck they're calling it this week. And you applied your pre-conceptions to the passage. This passage isn't about the reserves of fossil fuels left--and it's a dishonest use of Scriptures for you to try to make it so.

Third: pssst...you don't really have any way to back up your 90% claim. Just thought you should know. Forgive the cryptic sound, but you don't know what you don't know, so your stats are meaningless. We don't know where all of the fossil fuels are...so how can we say, "they're 90% gone?" Yet another example of MMGW foolishness.

Fourth, and most significantly: God's judgment of man is not based upon the quality of man's ecological behavior. There's some very basic theology here that must not be perverted. Failure to recycle is not the unpardonable sin.

Like I said earlier--I remember an Ed Edwards that used to post here that didn't question people's salvation, and refrained from such classless and immature statements. If you see him, tell him he's missed at the BB.

I'll make this statement, and likely watch it be ignored: I'm not advocating being an irresponsible steward of creation. I've given of my time, abilities, and even money to help make the earth a better place than I found it. But I don't feel the need to make stuff up, either. And I absolutely refuse to play a part in the power grab that promotes half-truths (or less), ruins economies, and emboldens despotic individuals drunk on power (I don't care if the kool-aid's green or not--even ecologically sound power can corrupt!)

And while you're at it, maybe a refresher in basic theology would be in order.