Global Warming

[HisDaughter]

Revelation 8:1

And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.

For further study - Revelation 8:1-13

As we come to another chapter in the book of Revelation, we move into the second set of seven judgments, the seven "trumpet judgments". Actually the last of the seven "seal judgments" is found also in chapter 8, verse 1.

The seven "trumpet judgments" come out of the last "seal judgment" as is the case with the seven "vial judgments" coming out of the last, seventh, "trumpet judgment".

Notice that the seventh "seal judgment" is "silence in heaven about the space of half an hour", verse 1. The reason for the "silence", I believe, is because the "great cloud of witnesses", Hebrews 12:1, is "awestruck" by the six previous "seal judgments" and the seven "trumpet judgments" to follow.

I would like for you to notice what has been termed "ecological judgment" will be released on the earth in these first four "trumpet judgments". The fact is, we hear alot about "global warming" and "climate change" in the media these days.

I believe "global warming" is impossible because Jesus Christ created the heavens, the earth and all that is in them, Colossians 1:16, and He holds it all together, Colossians 1:17.

God is in charge and nothing can happen to this "earth" unless He allows it to. No act of man can overrule God's plan. However, as our text tells us, there will be "ecological judgments" upon the earth during the time of the seven year Tribulation Period in the future.

The first "trumpet judgment" is a third part of the trees and all the grass on earth burning up. "Trumpet" number two is a third of the sea turning to blood, one-third of the fish in the sea dying and one-third of the ships upon the seas being destroyed.

Next, the third "trumpet" judgment, is one-third of the rivers, ponds, lakes and fountains of water becoming bitter, so much so that many on the earth will die from drinking this water. The judgments now shift to the heavens, the sun, moon and stars lose one-third of their light and their is more darkness than usual upon the earth, which is the fourth "trumpet" judgment.

Verse 13 reveals that from here, continuing into the Tribulation Period, it gets worse. The three "woes" are to follow. which are the last three "trumpet judgments". We'll look at the "woes" in another devotional reading.

We all must make it a point to give out the gospel to lost people every day. The Rapture could happen, today.

Good stuff!  Thanks PR!

[HisDaughter]

The Bible and 'global warming'

I can certainly understand why neo-pagans like Al Gore believe, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, man-made, catastrophic global warming is the gravest threat to the planet.

What I can't understand is why people who claim to believe in the Bible as the inerrant, inspired Word of God do so.

Even more difficult to comprehend is why some evangelical Christians are caught up in the notion that government and international action are the proper methods to fight this phantom threat.

First of all, in Genesis 8:22, we're told of a promise by God never to use global floodwaters again as a means of destroying life on Earth. In that promise, the Bible explicitly states: "While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."

In other words, no more cataclysmic floods – the result Al Gore promises in the near future as a consequence of global warming. Just as importantly, there is another promise there that cold and heat shall not cease.

What does that mean?

It means God controls the world's temperature, not man. God controls the climate, not man. God controls the earth's "eco-system," not man. God controls our environment, not man.

It is so presumptuous and haughty of believers and non-believers alike to think man is in control of the destiny of the planet God created for us.

If it were so, would he not have warned us? With all of the prophecies in the Bible, should we not expect to be told that such matters are actually in our hands? Why would we be told exactly the opposite throughout scripture?

It's not that the Bible tells us there are no consequences for our actions on the planet. In fact, it quite explicitly does. But it is not the production of carbon dioxide that God finds offensive. It is the commission of sin. Nowhere in the Bible does God ever suggest that producing CO2 is sinful.

Keep in mind, it is not a pollutant. It is a naturally occurring gas – just like oxygen. God created CO2, not man. And nature's God still produces a lot more of it than does man.

In Isaiah 49, in a passage evangelicals believe represent the words of Jesus Himself, there is another promise – that those who follow Him would never perish from the heat of the sun.

"They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor the sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them," it says in Isaiah 49:10.

If cataclysmic global warming represented a real threat to believers, would God have made such a promise through Isaiah?

That is not to say heat will never be used as a means of judgment. In fact, it will be according to the Bible.

We are told in:

Rev 16:8  And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
Rev 16:9  And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.


What this means is that scorching heat will be used as a judgment against non-believers, and, most importantly, that God and God alone has the power over such calamities.

Yes, there will come a time when the Earth is destroyed – and intense heat will be the mechanism God employs. But we are not talking about a rise of a few degrees over centuries. We're talking about heat so severe it melts the very elements that comprise the Earth.

That comes in a day that sounds very much like the time in which we live. It is described in 2 Peter 3:

      3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

      4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

      5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

      6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

      7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

      8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

      9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

      10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

      11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

      12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

      13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

      14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

Are today's evangelicals who agree with the worldly that the greatest threat to mankind is represented in catastrophic, man-made global warming without spot and blameless?

It is sheer folly and ego for man to believe he controls the destiny of God's creation. But it is even more disgraceful when those who claim to believe His Word preach a false gospel of global warming that directly contradicts the entire body of scripture.

Amen and  Hurray!  You go Pastor Roger!   

[Soldier4Christ]

Obesity contributes to global warming: study

Obesity contributes to global warming, too.

Obese and overweight people require more fuel to transport them and the food they eat, and the problem will worsen as the population literally swells in size, a team at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine says.

This adds to food shortages and higher energy prices, the school's researchers Phil Edwards and Ian Roberts wrote in the journal Lancet on Friday.

"We are all becoming heavier and it is a global responsibility," Edwards said in a telephone interview. "Obesity is a key part of the big picture."

Here we go again. I can see another tax being implemented based on BMI or possibly legal prosecution.  

At least 400 million adults worldwide are obese. The World Health Organization (WHO) projects by 2015, 2.3 billion adults will be overweight and more than 700 million will be obese.

In their model, the researchers pegged 40 percent of the global population as obese with a body mass index of near 30. Many nations are fast approaching or have surpassed this level, Edwards said.

BMI is a calculation of height to weight, and the normal range is usually considered to be 18 to 25, with more than 25 considered overweight and above 30 obese.

The researchers found that obese people require 1,680 daily calories to sustain normal energy and another 1,280 calories to maintain daily activities, 18 percent more than someone with a stable BMI.

Because thinner people eat less and are more likely to walk than rely on cars, a slimmer population would lower demand for fuel for transportation and for agriculture, Edwards said.

This is also important because 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions stem from agriculture, he added.

Maybe we better put an end to agriculture then. 

The next step is quantifying how much a heavier population is contributing to climate change, higher fuel prices and food shortages, he added.

"Promotion of a normal distribution of BMI would reduce the global demand for, and thus the price of, food," Edwards and Roberts wrote.

NOTE: Body Mass Indices are not accurate to begin with. They do not take into account lean muscle mass or varied body shapes. If a person has a larger amount of lean muscle, such as some athletes or heavy work laborers, it throws the BMI way off. Certain populations have different height to weight variances that are not taken into consideration for BMI's. This is seen in populations where they are short but their body build is very stocky yet lean in fat compared to those that are tall and yet of thin body build.

This global warming garbage to promote different agendas is getting less intellectual by the day.

[HisDaughter]

Just when I think that I've heard everything, I find out that I'm wrong.  Pretty soon they will find that turning the pages of our Bibles causes Global Warming and we will be asked to quit it. 
I think that those that are trying to use their dead brain cells to come up with this junk, are wasting too much valuable energy and maybe we should harness some that and put it use elsewhere.  Maybe light our homes or something?  I don't know.

[Soldier4Christ]

I'm wondering how much energy they used at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and how much they got paid to do this research.

[Soldier4Christ]

31,000 scientists reject
'global warming' agenda
'Mr. Gore's movie has claims
no informed expert endorses'

More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate.

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

The Petition Project actually was launched nearly 10 years ago, when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.

But now, a new effort has been conducted because of an "escalation of the claims of 'consensus,' release of the movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' by Mr. Al Gore, and related events," according to officials with the project.

"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," said project spokesman and founder Art Robinson.

WND submitted a request to Gore's office for comment but did not get a response.

Robinson said the dire warnings about "global warming" have gone far beyond semantics or scientific discussion now to the point they are actually endangering people.

"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," he said.

In just the past few weeks, there have been various allegations that both shark attacks and typhoons have been sparked by "global warming."

The late Professor Frederick Seitz, the past president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and winner of the National Medal of Science, wrote in a letter promoting the petition, "The United States is very close to adopting an international agreement that would ration the use of energy and of technologies that depend upon coal, oil, and natural gas and some other organic compounds."

"This treaty is, in our opinion, based upon flawed ideas. Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful," he wrote.

Accompanying the letter sent to scientists was a 12-page summary and review of research on "global warming," officials said.

"The proposed agreement would have very negative effects upon the technology of nations throughout the world, especially those that are currently attempting to lift from poverty and provide opportunities to the over 4 billion people in technologically underdeveloped countries," Seitz wrote.

Robinson said the project targets scientists because, "It is especially important for America to hear from its citizens who have the training necessary to evaluate the relevant data and offer sound advice."

He said the "global warming agreement," written in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, and other plans "would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."

"Yet," he said, "the United Nations and other vocal political interests say the U.S. must enact new laws that will sharply reduce domestic energy production and raise energy prices even higher.

"The inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness include the right of access to life-giving and life-enhancing technology. This is especially true of access to the most basic of all technologies: energy. These human rights have been extensively and wrongly abridged," he continued. "During the past two generations in the U.S., a system of high taxation, extensive regulation, and ubiquitous litigation has arisen that prevents the accumulation of sufficient capital and the exercise of sufficient freedom to build and preserve needed modern technology.

"These unfavorable political trends have severely damaged our energy production, where lack of industrial progress has left our country dependent upon foreign sources for 30 percent of the energy required to maintain our current level of prosperity," he said. "Moreover, the transfer of other U.S. industries abroad as a result of these same trends has left U.S. citizens with too few goods and services to trade for the energy that they do not produce. A huge and unsustainable trade deficit and rapidly rising energy prices have been the result.

"The necessary hydrocarbon and nuclear energy production technologies have been available to U.S. engineers for many decades. We can develop these resources without harm to people or the environment. There is absolutely no technical, resource, or environmental reason for the U.S. to be a net importer of energy. The U.S. should, in fact, be a net exporter of energy," he said.

He told WND he believes the issue has nothing to do with energy itself, but everything to do with power, control and money, which the United Nations is seeking. He accused the U.N. of violating human rights in its campaign to ban much energy research, exploration and development.

"In order to alleviate the current energy emergency and prevent future emergencies, we need to remove the governmental restrictions that have caused this problem. Fundamental human rights require that U.S. citizens and their industries be free to produce and use the low cost, abundant energy that they need. As the 31,000 signatories of this petition emphasize, environmental science supports this freedom," he said.

The Petition Project website today said there are 31,072 scientists who have signed up, and Robinson said more names continue to come in.

In terms of Ph.D. scientists alone, it already has 15 times more scientists than are seriously involved in the U.N.'s campaign to "vilify hydrocarbons," officials told WND.

"The very large number of petition signers demonstrates that, if there is a consensus among American scientists, it is in opposition to the human-caused global warming hypothesis rather than in favor of it," the organization noted.

The project was set up by a team of physicists and physical chemists who do research at several American institutions and collects signatures when donations provide the resources to mail out more letters.

"In a group of more than 30,000 people, there are many individuals with names similar or identical to other signatories, or to non-signatories – real or fictional. Opponents of the petition project sometimes use this statistical fact in efforts to discredit the project. For examples, Perry Mason and Michael Fox are scientists who have signed the petition – who happen also to have names identical to fictional or real non-scientists," the website said.

The petition is needed, supporters said, simply because Gore and others "have claimed that the 'science is settled' – that an overwhelming 'consensus' of scientists agrees with the hypothesis of human-caused global warming, with only a handful of skeptical scientists in disagreement."

The list of scientists includes 9,021 Ph.D.s, 6,961 at the master's level, 2,240 medical doctors and 12,850 carrying a bachelor of science or equivalent academic degree.

The Petition Project's website includes both a list of scientists by name as well as a list of scientists by state.

[nChrist]

It will be interesting to see if WISDOM wins over GREED! I'm not holding my breath. I'll have to mention that the GREED side involves absolute LUNACY and a massive PLAY FOR POWER! I'll go ahead and say it: the stakes may be so high that the people will be run over to get there. It's much more than just 36 billion American tax dollars at stake.

I honestly think that the only hope to stop it now would involve the PEOPLE standing up with the SCIENTISTS and DEMANDING that this LUNACY BE ENDED! By the way, that won't fit into the already made PLANS of EMERGING POWER CONGLOMERATES! This could easily be one of the vehicles used to establish a ONE WORLD ORDER, or it just might be the MAIN VEHICLE. This is just applying some common sense about what's really happening under our noses. We're watching it happen, and it isn't some kind of wild conspiracy theory.

[HisDaughter]

More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate.

At least someone is taking an "action" by signing a petition.  This a good sign to me.  Whatever the out come, someone has decided to DO something at least.

[Soldier4Christ]

9,000 Ph.D.s 'entitled to their opinion'
Presidential spokeswoman declines comment on global warming petition

The spokeswoman for President Bush says the thousands of scientists from across the United States that reject the theory of "global warming" about human-caused greenhouse gases posing a major threat to future life can have their "opinion."

But no further comment came from Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, when asked about the issue by Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House.

At today's White House news briefing, he asked, "WorldNetDaily reports that more than 31,000 U.S. scientists, including 9,000 Ph.D.s, now [have] signed a petition rejecting global warming, the assumption that human production of greenhouse gases is damaging the Earth's climate. My question: What is the White House reaction to these 31,000 U.S. scientists?"

"I would say that everyone is entitled to their opinion," Perino responded. "What's your next question?"

"That's all?" Kinsolving asked.

"That's all I'm going to say," she said.

As WND has reported, more than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate.

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

The Petition Project actually was launched nearly 10 years ago, when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.

But now, a new effort has been conducted because of an "escalation of the claims of 'consensus,' release of the movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' by Mr. Al Gore, and related events," according to officials with the project.

"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," said project spokesman and founder Art Robinson.

WND submitted a request to Gore's office for comment but did not get a response.

Bush hasn't been a significant promoter of any "global warming" antidote promoted by the United Nations, among others, to set vast new rules for the release of such greenhouse gases.

However, just weeks ago he laid out his global warming policy that seeks to stop the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, officials said, disappointing the faithful who claimed his plan fell far short of what they want done to reverse "global warming."

Robinson said the dire warnings about "global warming" have gone far beyond semantics or scientific discussion now to the point they are actually endangering people.

"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," he said.

The campaign condemns the "global warming agreement," written in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, as potentially harmful to the environment itself.

"The inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness include the right of access to life-giving and life-enhancing technology. This is especially true of access to the most basic of all technologies: energy. These human rights have been extensively and wrongly abridged," Robinson said. "During the past two generations in the U.S., a system of high taxation, extensive regulation, and ubiquitous litigation has arisen that prevents the accumulation of sufficient capital and the exercise of sufficient freedom to build and preserve needed modern technology."

He said unfavorable energy plans damage the U.S. energy production, increase dependence of foreign oil and actually have nothing to do with energy itself, but everything to do with power, control and money, which the United Nations is seeking. He accused the U.N. of violating human rights in its campaign to ban much energy research, exploration and development.

In a second question, Kinsolving asked, "As you know, the California Supreme Court, by a one vote majority, has legalized same-sex marriage. And my question: Does the White House believe that there is any more legal and moral right for same-sex marriage than for marriages that are polygamous? And if so, why?"

"I'm just going to decline to comment. That's a – the subject that you're talking about, in terms of the court case, is still in litigation, and the president believes in the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman," Perino said.

[HisDaughter]

I would comment on this but right now I'm looking for something sharp to poke in my eye.

[HisDaughter]

Amazing that we haven't heard anything from "Al-the-earth's-pal", since his movie.  I wonder, did he know how his movie of comedy would snow ball like it has?  That's why is been under the wire ever since?  Or have I just missed something from him since I haven't had T.V. in couple of months?

[Soldier4Christ]

He's been doing a lot of small lectures here and there at colleges trying to convince the students that he's right, mostly with those that already believe him.

[nChrist]

He's been doing a lot of small lectures here and there at colleges trying to convince the students that he's right, mostly with those that already believe him.

Al Gore and his band of thieves have a considerable investment for advertising and education so that they can SWINDLE the world. I, for one, would love to see them lose every penny and go to prison for FRAUD. YES - they are taking money under false pretenses. If their con game goes much further, most of the first victims will be poor people and poor countries. Their CON GAME will accomplish NOTHING but stealing money for already rich people. Huge numbers of people will suffer in this CON GAME in the form of hunger, loss of medical care, and much worse. The longer their CON GAME continues, the worse the suffering will be. It will take some time for the negative effects to mount up. Some of the negative effects can be reversed if we are able to STOP this CON GAME soon enough. It should be obvious that each individual person and family has different financial circumstances. Some are capable of paying more and longer without suffering major effects, but many families were barely surviving before Al Gore and his band of thieves went to work. SO, all it takes is a small THEFT to cause SUFFERING for many people. At this point, I don't think that anyone knows how many prices are effected by this CON GAME. Could we guess that the CON GAME probably effects the costs of transportation? YES! If so, this involves the ability to get to work and is the work of many people. The costs of transportation obviously involves the costs of every necessity that people must buy - JUST TO SURVIVE. MANY PEOPLE ARE ALREADY SUFFERING!

[HisDaughter]

[nChrist]

           ROFL!

Great Graphics! - Consider them snagged. I don't have any good ones on this issue, so I'll try to give you something else for a laugh.