1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Nhofe Says Nas Report Reaffirms ‘hockey Stick’ Is Broken

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by 2 Timothy2:1-4, Feb 1, 2007.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 2
  1. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    1
    What does scripture have to do with you falsely accusing me of calling God a liar?

    As I said, you declined to substantiate the accusation, and that's all that's needed. Enjoy your bunny trail.
     
    #21 The Galatian, Feb 5, 2007
  2. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wow, I ask you for scripture to support your position, and you get all snappy.

    Would you like me to post scripture to support my stance ? I will if you ask.
     
    #22 Bro. Curtis, Feb 6, 2007
  3. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    God hasn't given us anything. It is all his even now. If we want to be good stewards of what he has put in our care then we shouldnt be running around like chicken little crying out the sky is falling. In the 70,s it was the ice age is coming and we were all doomed then. Science and consencus are as unreliable as the computer models they put their trust in.

    I don't trust it because of the known fact that climate changes naturally. It is a fact that the earth has gotten hotter and cooler over al its years. According to the scientist shown by NBC, who was sounding the clarion call of certain doom, the earth has had 8 ice ages. The two are contradictory.

    So we have scientists who are at heart environmentalists working to stop mans unfortunate intrusion on the wild. Not just because it is harmful but because in their mind harmful or not it is morrally wrong.

    This also fits in with the socialist agenda. Which makes this whole thing political. There isnt anyone involved in this mess that doesnt have a bias other than the saftey of the world. There are no pure hearts in any of this.

    As far as the posts I made, each one has its different focus. If by making those posts I have broken some posting rules then I would like to hear from the mods. If I have not broken any posting rules then maybe you can find another way to express your displeasure with views other than your own being posted.
     
    #23 2 Timothy2:1-4, Feb 7, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 7, 2007
  4. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, that's just a story they told you, based on an article in a popular magazine. If you look in the literature, it never happened. By the late 60s, guys like Erlich were predicting problems with greenhouse gases warming the atmosphere.

    Even by the early 1970s, there was concern in the climatological community about carbon dioxide's effects,[3] and it was known that both natural and man-made effects caused variations in global climate...

    1970 SCEP report
    The 1970 "Study of Critical Environmental Problems"[14] reported the possibility of warming from increased carbon dioxide, but no concerns about cooling, setting a lower bound on the beginning of interest in "global cooling".

    The term "global cooling" did not become attached to concerns about an impending glacial period until after the term "global warming" was popularized. In the 1970s the compilation of records to produce hemispheric, or global, temperature records had just begun.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

    Regrettably, the popular press often gets it wrong, and this does mislead people.

    Science (and consensus is the way science works) has been spectacularly successful in expanding our knowledge of the world. Climatology is still far from an exact science, but that gives the deniers little comfort; existing models have seriously underestimated the effects of warming on icecaps, with consequences yet to be determined. The models turned out to be too conservative.

    I was once skeptical myself, but the data are now too compelling to deny.
     
    #24 The Galatian, Feb 7, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 2
Loading...