Is Sin Causing 'Global Warming'?

Mankind in his 'cleverness' thinks his every day physical 'mismanagement', 'misuse' and 'abuse' of the earth's resources is or are the reason(s) that our global climate is changing. In particular the burning of fossil fuels. In turn mankind has made use of nuclear power, as an alternative, and many people believe that nuclear tests, leaks and accidents at power stations are and have been a major contributory factor in the increase of cancers and tumours in the human anatomy, and most likely there is much truth in this reasoning.

Fossil fuel by-products are now universally used as weed killers, fertilizers, pesticides, medicines, cosmetics, plastics, you name it and these by-products are in there somewhere. This has resulted in what many would say is a comprehensive poisoning of our environment, including the food we put on our tables. This alleged poisoning also includes meat products fattened and reared with the use of chemicals, antibiotics and hormones.

Here in the UK, organic food is now very much in demand and its popularity is increasing at an amazing rate. People are now saying what a Frankenstein monster the science lobby has become, a monster they have helped to create and encouraged to grow since the 1960's, but now have no control over. With GM foods, the latest addition to science's nursery, things can only get worse according to those who have turned and joined the Green/Eco lobby. In the UK GM foods are literally called Frankenstein Foods by the media.

From a Christian perspective the issues are these: If mankind 'cleaned' up his act in terms of material physical pollution and general abuse of his environment would it bring an end to climate change? I don't think so. Are all these physical and material activities of mankind the cause of the problem, or just the symptoms or outward behavioural signs of another problem; the symptoms of a deeper and more serious malaise in the hearts of men and women? The real question here is this: Is the 'Global Warming' - 'Climate Change' problem, call it what you will, a Spiritual problem rather than just a physical material problem?

As a Christian and believer in an all mighty powerful God, I know that planet earth, our solar system and all the stars in the heavens are held together in perfect harmony by the Power of God - The Holy Spirit. God's Power, His Holy Spirit, controls everything and I also know that sin grieves The Holy Spirit. Furthermore, there is a limit to which God will allow His Spirit to be grieved before He takes action. Now, as if this were not important enough, there is also the permanent damage element of what rampant sin does to mankind. A level of damage caused by sin from which there is no return. How do I know this? Easy, let's go to Genesis and we will quickly find out how I know.

Genesis 6:5-6 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented (filled the Lord with sorrow) the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved (cut or carved) Him at his heart. (Brackets mine) Here we can plainly see how man's evil activities i.e. sin, affected God, grieving His Spirit and cutting Him to His heart. This meant man gave God no pleasure at all, just as a human father would gain no pleasure from watching his son go wrong and end up in prison and/or on death row!

Notice, the thoughts of the heart of these people were causing them to do only evil continually - non stop evil and nothing else - 24/7 and Genesis gives us more detail:

Genesis 6:11-12 The earth (the creation or in secular terminology - the environment) also was corrupt (in a state of ruinous decay) before God, and the earth was filled with violence (for unjust gain). 12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt;for all flesh had corrupted his way (walking a decaying ruinous vile path) upon the earth. (Brackets mine)

Here in Genesis The Lord gives us some stark parallels to our world today, with man's sinful ways being the direct cause of ruin to himself and God's creation. His sins were directly affecting his environment through grieving his Creator and the only answer The Lord had left was to rid the earth of these people, not just for punishment but for their own good. They were so far gone that they were near to the point of no return and they had more or less created undiluted Satanism on earth. The Lord had no alternative but to destroy them all.

The Lord then sends the flood and redeems Noah and his family, but the point many people miss in this story is the cataclysmic climate change that comes with the flood - don't forget, a flood caused by sin. What people have missed are the differences between the two worlds. The differences in what the pre-flood world must have been like compared to the post-flood world. Holy Scripture leaves much unanswered on this subject but what evidence it does leave is revealing if we apply that evidence correctly.

One of the first things that hit us about the pre-flood world is the great ages or life spans of the people mentioned in Scripture - some are over nine hundred years old. Now many 'clever' people have dreamt up all manner of hypotheses to explain these life spans away, including myself before I was called, but never any explanations to support them as being fact. Of course, we all know why they do this, to discredit the Holy Bible as much as they can. So let's go now to the Scriptures and see for ourselves what they do reveal about this world shattering event. Please note the flood was a global event, not localised as some would have you believe.

Genesis 9:14 And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: 15 And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh.16 And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.

Here we have evidence that the pre-flood world never had rain. It never had rain because the rainbow was now a sign in the clouds to remind mankind of God's covenant with Noah. The rainbow was a new phenomenon and Noah and his family would never have seen it before.

Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

Here we can see a mist or fog came up from the earth that watered the ground, but not rain. The rain, that part caused the flood, was the first rain to fall upon the earth, so the next question is where did all this water come from? The Bible tells us:

Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament (a sky) in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.7 And God made the firmament (the sky), and divided the waters which were under the firmament (the sky) from the waters which were above the firmament (the sky): and it was so.

Here, Holy Scripture tells us that there was water above the sky and water below the sky. Now this water barrier was a solid permanent feature above the sky that completely covered the earth and it was most likely in the upper atmosphere. We are not talking about clouds here which come and go at will and are often at ground level, this was something completely different from what we know about our atmosphere today. Noah saw clouds for the first time after the flood. The sky in pre-flood times divided the waters so they were completely separate!

OK, back to the 'puzzle' of the great ages and life spans of pre-flood people. If, as I have said, these great ages are true how did they achieve them? Again this is simple and it's all tied up in that water barrier in the upper atmosphere. It filtered out all the harmful rays of the sun which any scientist will tell you are what age us - UV and any others that may be harmful. These people lived in a near perfect environment when compared to ours. My guess is that there was no weather and no seasons. Weather and seasons only started after the flood. Are you saying the earth moved on its axis - very likely? Sheer speculation on my part but then I do not underestimate nor do I limit God in what He can do to achieve His will.

We know from the fact that the rainbow was seen for the first time by Noah and his family and that rain was a new phenomenon, so the disintegration of the water barrier was the cause of the flood, but only in part. The fact that the pre-flood world had no rain must mean they obtained water from elsewhere and of course they did - vast underground aquifer springs which in turn when they broke out, contributed to the flood. The waters that caused the flood came from two sources - above and below.

Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

Here we have evidence of the underground aquifers, here called fountains of the great deep. These aquifers were deep underground and they broke out with great force. This breaking out would have been a cataclysmic event with massive geological upheavals to the earth's crust. Geologists today puzzle and scratch their heads over these faults and anomalies as they study rocks and rock formations, never realizing they are looking at the evidence of damage caused by the great flood.

So to return to my original question: Is sin causing Global Warming or Climate Change? I would say it most definitely is. The acts man needs to clean up are not so much his polluting acts, as God can deal with them with the click of His fingers, but rather his sinful acts. The question is: Will he? Answer: Not in this age as he is incapable of doing so, but he will in the next!!

The Moral Case Against Global Warming Policies

How odd that someone would make a moral case against global warming. The trend is to promote it as a just cause. Global warming is presented as a problem that we should be doing all we can to fix or life as we know it will be no more. The so called "science" that supporters of global warming use to justify their position is anything but settled. New evidence is constantly being discovered that puts bigger and bigger holes in global warming theories--not laws, theories. The most ridiculous of these theories being that global warming--if it is indeed happening--is caused by human beings.

The objective here is not to go over the science that casts an overwhelming shadow of doubt on the accuracy of global warming theories but, it would be a waste not to share it. Not enough people are aware of this information as it is.

It is probably safe to say that there is no life on the other planets in our solar system. Most places are either too hot, too cold, or lacking an atmosphere like ours. Chances are, no aliens are driving carbon producing SUVs on our neighboring planets. It just so happens that Pluto is experiencing warming. There was a storm on Jupiter that scientists believe is due to climate change. Our closest neighbor, Mars, has been experiencing rising temperatures and as a result: melting. Either our horrible carbon footprints are so gigantic that it is affecting the entire solar system or it's the sun.

Al Gore's claim to Hollywood trophies and a Nobel Peace Prize is entirely due to An Inconvenient Truth--conveniently, it has few truths. Gore's biggest case to link human activity to global warming is the theory that carbon dioxide levels are directly responsible for increases in temperature. His graphs and animations certainly looked sharp and gave an aura of authority. However, CO2 and rising temperatures are not related in the fashion Gore suggests. He would have you think that temperatures rise as a result of increased CO2 levels. Statistically, the warmer periods in Earth's history came about 800 years before an increase in CO2; that means CO2 levels increased after temperatures increased. In other words, adjusting our "carbon emissions" may not affect global temperatures.

It would also be wise to look back at grade school science. We know that plant life thrive in high CO2 environments. The more green on earth the better. Increased plant life will lead to an increase in wildlife and the problem of starving nations could be more easily solved; the more places for agriculture, the more food we can produce.

That is some of the science and it has been known for years. Global warming fanatics have disregarded it and the public has blindly accepted their false science. Why? Because we are morally good. We want to do what is right and presenting global warming as a result of human activity puts the moral responsibility in our hands. Inconveniently for the global warming fear mongers, the war against global warming is largely immoral and chances are, human activity is not the cause of global warming.

Amongst the most immoral propositions in the war against global warming is the limit of carbon emissions from developing nations. People there do not have access to electricity, clean running water, or any of the luxuries we take for granted. Who are we in the developed world to tell these nations that they must adhere to "green" practices when we have built our lives on a carbon emitting system? It is immoral to forcibly keep people in poverty because of scientific theories. We have no right as a person or as a nation to tell any other person or nation how to live or run their own country.

The great ethanol lie is another derivative of global warming. One third of our corn crop in the United States this year will be consumed by ethanol production. Sounds like a lot except it will account for 3 percent of our total fuel usage while driving up the price of other grains and food. This reduces the amount of food we send over to those who are starving. And if you didn't already know, it takes more fuel to produce and transport ethanol than ethanol can provide. A gigantic losing strategy that only makes it harder for Americans to buy food and reduces the supply of food to the starving and needy.

This war on global warming is largely a means to steal more money from ordinary folk. The government regulations and subsidies that have sprouted from this war such as carbon taxes and subsidized initiatives like corn-based ethanol are going to make us all poorer. The carbon tax is touted as a great idea so that the evil car drivers can pay for their crimes against the planet. The income tax was also sold to us as a means to tax those evil rich people and the last I checked, the IRS robs all of us every two weeks. These taxes are merely a means for one group to steal money from another group for their own agenda. A carbon tax is not backed by scientific fact and is going to be most destructive to regular people who rely on their car to make a living.

Absolutely no legislation or government regulation as a result of global warming is going to solve the "problem" or make any of us better off. Supporting government global warming initiatives is equivalent to starving and robbing other people. The war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on anything is another way to ensure the problem will never be solved. The war on drugs has not reduced drug use but has instead put enormous amounts of people in jail for non-aggressive crimes and has created a black market where the truly bad are benefiting.

If all those who preach the gospel of global warming are really humanitarians, they would stop using government to do their bidding. The fact of the matter is that more people are going to be worse off and perhaps die due to our policies regarding an unproven scientific theory. Those who believe global warming is a crisis can act without using government force. Automakers have responded with hybrid vehicles, better gas mileage, and even all electric vehicles. No party is worse off because of these improvements and actions. That is the moral way to deal with global warming.