Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 06/11/2009 4:27:14 PM PDT by neverdem
The public debate
We hear it every day. News headlines read: “Global Warming Biggest Threat of 21st Century, Experts say.” (businessweek.com. May 13th, 2009. Gardner, Amanda). News anchors provide us with a choice, either we believe the scientists that support global warming hypotheses, or we reject science as a whole. Chris Matthews, the host of MSNBC’s “Hardball” show, was interviewing Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana when they had an exchange about the issue of global warming. Mr. Matthews then took a tangent that suggested we may either believe in science or maintain a belief in God, but to have it both ways is an impossibility. He stated, "There are people that really are against science in your party who really do question not just the science behind the climate change but the science behind evolutionary fact, that we were taught - you and I - in our biology books. They don't accept the scientific method. They believe in belief itself." (NewsBusters.org. “Chris Matthews Portrays GOP as Anti-Science.” Raezler, Colleen. May 7th, 2009. From an interview on “Hardball” dated May 5th, 2009.)
Still, others would characterize the specter of global warming as a political phenomena, destined to die out just like the warnings of a little ice age died out in the 1970's. In his book “Liberty and Tyranny”, Mark Levin remarks about the false alarmism of global cooling in the 1970's and the current global warming debate. He writes, “Of course, there was no new Ice Age. The ‘almost unanimous’ opinion of weather experts about man-made global cooling was wrong. The Enviro-statist then swung in the opposite direction, insisting that it is the ‘almost unanimous’ opinion of scientists and other experts rather than cooling, the earth is actually warming, and man is the culprit once again.” (“Liberty and Tyranny...
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Sadly, equating AGW and TToE is a strawman used both left and Right.
I've got news for Mr. Matthews: Science may be the antithesis of dogmatic religion, but it isn't the antithesis of God.
It's the best case AGAINST global warming I've heard.
Actually the rejection of both is a rejection of pseudoscience.
Climate Change: An imaginary problem, invented for the purpose of justifying government control of virtually everything.
What’s TToE?
Thanks for the link!
The Theory of Evolution
Actually the rejection of both is a rejection of pseudoscience.
Scientists are supposed to be sceptical but keep an open mind. The evidence supporting the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis is slim to none. The evidence from the fossil record supporting the theory of evolution is quite substantial.
I believe in God and freedom of religion, but like alcohol and guns, don't mix science and religion. Render to Ceasar that which is Ceasar's. Render to science that which is science's. The Roman Catholic Church doesn't have a problem with that.
The Theory of Evolution
>>If you don’t accept the notions of Global Warming and Darwinism, you reject Science as a whole.<<
Thanks for making my point for me.
That strawman won’t hunt.
The "transitionals" are all interpreted as such based on an assumption of evolution. They usually find some singular feature that allegedly is kind of like the thing it was supposed to have evolved into - often teeth - and proclaim it a transitional. Then all the "transitionals" are pointed to as proof of evolution. Classic circular reasoning.
The fossil record is devoid of what Darwin expected:
"why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?"
And misquoting me makes your point? If that’s the best you can do....don’t bother me.
I wouldn't get wrapped around just evolution. The last ice age evidence from over 10,000 years ago is there. There are many other disciplines of science with evidence that this world was created long before what is mentioned in the Old Testament.
Adding insult to injury, some fundamentalists buy into the anthropogenic global warming crock, almost as if in penance for offending modernity by insisting on creationism as in the Old Testament, they buy into this global warming crock citing a passage in the Bible that we have to be good stewards. Mixing science and religion just gives you headaches.
Genesis "days" predate the creation of the Sun and Moon; they were also global phenomena; the conception of a terrestrial day as a global phenomenon is entirely artificial (based upon the man-selected location of the International Date Line).
As for the timing of the Old Testament and evolution, there is more biodiversity today than would fit on a boat the size of the ark. For the Ark story to 'work', there must have been some level of evolutionary diversification between the Flood and the present day.
The (blackballed by the UN) scientists, citing pivotal evidence on climate change published in peer-reviewed journals, have expressed their opposition to the UN's alarmist theory of anthropogenic global warming. As the debate on man-made global warming has been heating up, the UN has tried to freeze out the scientists and new evidence, summarily dismissing them with the claim "the science is settled."
James M. Taylor, senior fellow for The Heartland Institute explained, "It is not surprising the UN has completely rejected dissenting voices. They have been doing this for years. The censorship of scientists is necessary to promote their political agenda. After the science reversed on the alarmist crowd, they claimed 'the debate is over' to serve their wealth redistribution agenda."
The "global warming" scam is all about global socialism, ie., spreading Americans' money around to third-world dictators.
>>And misquoting me makes your point? If that’s the best you can do....don’t bother me.
I copied and pasted your post and it is a stand-alone thought. Lying is not a Conservative value, nor is it Christian (but then again, neither are you).
This is what I said:
“Matthews uses the same tired argument the Darwinists use:
If you don’t accept the notions of Global Warming and Darwinism, you reject Science as a whole.”
Editing a quote to fit your needs is misquoting so I’ve spent way more time with you then you warrant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.