by: Lisa J. Lehr
What the Bible says that could be applied to global warming.
The book of Romans contains a wealth of wisdom for the Creation scientist and anyone else wanting to learn something about the natural world. Chapter 1 is a good starting place, as it explains how nature (Creation) so clearly reveals God that to deny His existence is insane.
In chapter 8, we read that “creation groans.” The earth, and everything on it, is in a state of decay. Think about it. Everything gets older, and there is no reversal of that process. Rocks are broken into smaller rocks, which become pebbles, and eventually sand. No one but God can create a monolith like Half Dome.
In context, Scripture is telling us that in this earthly existence, life is about death. Our hope is in eternal life.
How global warming supports a young earth theory
Given the accelerating speed at which changes have been observed, it is logical to conclude that the earth is merely a few thousand rather than millions of years old.
Consider this model. Most creationists estimate, using Old Testament genealogy, that the earth is approximately 6000 to 10,000 years old. Let’s choose a middle figure of 8,000 years.
The life expectancy of a person is currently somewhere in the seventies. Let’s round it to 80. That means a person now 80 years old has lived—according to young earth theory—roughly one percent of the earth’s life. One percent is a small, but significant, portion.
In contrast, if the earth is, say, 80 million years old, a person’s life is one ten-thousandth of one percent of the earth’s life. If the earth is older than that…well, do the math. According to that model, it is mathematically immensely less likely that significant change could have occurred within our lifetimes. Stated another way, the longer the earth has been here, the less probable it is that measurable warming could have occurred all within the last century or two.
Global warming proponents will say that virtually all global warming has happened since the Industrial Revolution. Indeed, the United States, for example, has less than five percent of the world’s population while producing over 25% of carbon emissions. If, in fact, most global warming has occurred in the last one or two centuries, it would explain its measurable increase within our lifetimes.
But, as we have seen, global warming will occur with or without humans and their machines. If plants and animals have been here for millions of years, living, dying, and decaying, and if intelligent life has been around for a few million years, using wood and peat for heat and cooking… the math just doesn’t work.
It’s also important to remember that accurate meteorological records are a fairly modern development as well. In other words, it would be very difficult to compare recent weather changes with long-term patterns—over hundreds of years, not to mention thousands or millions.
Why is it so important to know the truth about global warming?
Global warming proponents call for a replacement of fossil fuels with biomass, windpower, and other renewable resources.
Proposed government policies to limit CO2 emissions would cause real, severe, and worldwide economic damage. Anything that inhibits energy supply reduces economic activity. Proposed taxes on fossil fuels would raise product prices, drive companies out of business, and eliminate jobs. Some industries would be forced to move from the United States and other industrialized nations to other places where emission constraints did not exist or were not enforced. (Could this, in turn, increase CO2 emissions?)
Such global economic disruption would be devastating to developing countries, where people now close to starvation would, simply, starve.
What should we do about it?
Assuming global warming is real, it is not necessarily a bad thing.
Studies involving such plants as beneficial soil fungi, soybeans, wheat, scrub oak, and trees have shown that elevated CO2 concentrations have positive ecological ramifications like nutrient and water use efficiency. More efficient agriculture would benefit everyone in a rapidly expanding global population—especially those in developing countries. Wild and domestic animals will benefit as well.
Certainly, it is always best to be as environmentally responsible—using as few resources and generating as little waste—as possible. Beyond that, it is unlikely that any human activity is significantly contributing to global warming. By far the most environmentally and socially responsible course of action is to explore and exploit the positive results of global warming while supporting developing countries in their goal of becoming economically independent.
This study makes me wonder a number of things: How did the global warming scare get started? Why would people in power want us to believe in it? Why do scientists go along with it, when they must know better? It kind of brings to mind George Orwell’s 1984….
About The Author
Lisa J. Lehr is a freelance writer with a specialty in business and marketing communications. She holds a biology degree and has worked in a variety of fields, including the pharmaceutical industry and teaching, and has a particular interest in science as well as conservative social issues. She is also a graduate of American Writers and Artists Institute (AWAI), America’s leading course on copywriting. Contact Lisa J. Lehr Copywriting www.ljlcopywriting.com, Lisa@ljlcopywriting.com for help with your business writing needs.
This article ©Lisa J. Lehr 2005.
No comments:
Post a Comment