Climate Change Is Extremely Political And Agenda Serving, Unfortunately It Is Also True

[ChristB4us]

35 minutes ago, George said:

Probably not a place for this ... but you are ignoring simple timelines of Scripture.  Read Acts 2 then Acts 4.

Act 2:2  Suddenly a sound like a mighty rushing wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 

Act 2:3  They saw tongues like flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 

Act 2:4  And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 

And then just a few chapters later ...

Act 4:23  On their release, Peter and John returned to their own people and reported everything that the chief priests and elders had said to them. 

Act 4:31  After they had prayed, their meeting place was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly. 

Would you do me a favor and read one of the Baptist preachers on the Power of God whose fruit remains today?  DL Moody's book on "Secret Power" or R.A. Torrey's book, "The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit" or John R. Rice's Book, "The Power of Pentecost".  

By the way, in case you had not noticed, there is a reference that I would think you would have applied to this belief you have that a believer can be filled with the Holy Ghost again after salvation and even though it is found here below, it is not for that testimony but about how Peter was speaking as by the Holy Ghost.

Acts 4:7 And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this? 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,

The question in verse 7 is answered by Luke telling how Peter was answering.

This happened for explaining how Paul spoke.

Acts 13:8 But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith. 9 Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him. 10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? 11 And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.

Then this happened again to testify how these disciples were able to have joy after being kicked out of the city like that after seeing the Lord do wondrous things.

Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. 49 And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region. 50 But the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts. 51 But they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium. 52 And the disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost.

All of this testify as they are not doing this by the religious flesh or speaking as if they were in authority but as filled with the Holy Ghost in doing this. 

If we have to seek a filling of the Spirit to speak every time for the Lord, ....or to recover from being kicked out, it would go contrary to His words below.

Matthew 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. 20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

So no seeking nor a filling of the Holy Spirit is required when we are to speak and rejoice by faith which is the fruit of the Spirit as filled with the Holy Ghost always.  There is no prepping and no praying to be able to speak & serve, for we are always filled with the Holy Ghost since salvation.

[The Barbarian]

Decades ago, Dr. Hanson of NASA made a prediction as to climate using only carbon dioxide emissions as a guide.    He presented three scenarios, depending on what, if anything we did to control it.    His prediction was remarkably accurate.

So it's mostly carbon emissions.

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

(Extraneous stuff about spontaneous generation, John Kerry, gender, woke education, and whatnot)

Let's get back to the subject, now...

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Money is being made for climate control

Actually, the effects of climate change are costing us money.   Would you like me to show you again?

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

So if that scientific report is true, why are the ones pushing it are not really serious about it? 

They apparently are very serious.   Even Exxon, years ago, started planning to deal with it at the same time they were denying it.   Their own scientists told them the truth that it was coming, and they made plans to deal with it.   Should I show you that, again?

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

I say that the cause of global warming is not carbon emission but God.

Comes down to evidence.   And as you learned, several scientists accurately predicted the warming trend based only on carbon emissions.

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

What purpose does Satan has for making people believe there are other causes for global warming? 

He would like us to blame God for our shortcomings.   That's been the case forever.    Don't fall for it.

Let me know which of those thing you'd like to see again.

 

[The Barbarian]

2 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Probably because they have all got that mindset like Thanos in the MCU movies of Avengers that they are doing a world a favor by reducing the WORLD'S POPULATION.

So the former governor of New York and Ron DeSantis were trying to kill us off?    I think they just botched the job of protecting us, as Trump did.

Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

 

Edited June 14, 2023 by The Barbarian

[The Barbarian]

 

You might be really upset to learn that the Human Genome Project discovered that there are no biological human races.    There is more genetic variation within and "race" you might define, than between those "races."    Race is a cultural construct.

Would you like to learn about that?

2 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Seeing how there are any different line of thinking these days even when it comes to applying scriptures out of context for false teachings

“The descendants of Ham were marked especially for secular service to mankind. … The prophecy is worldwide in scope and, since Shem and Japheth are covered, all Ham’s descendants must be also. These include all nations which are neither Semitic nor Japhetic. Thus, all of the earth’s ‘colored’ races—yellow, red, brown, and black; essentially the Afro-Asian group of peoples, including the American Indians—are possibly Hamitic in origin and included within the scope of the Canaanitic prophecy

...

Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they were eventually displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.”

Institute for Creationist Research co-founder Henry Morris, The Beginning of the World  1997

And it is true that young Earth creationism has "evolved" from what it was in the 1990s.   I am aware that many creationists today are not racists, having rejected this basic belief of YE creationism.

2 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Do you acknowledge Darwin's second book being on human descent?

The one in which he infuriated racists by stating that if you brought "savages" to England, in a few generations, they'd be just like Englishmen?    Yep.   The one in which he expressed admiration for a "negro" who taught him a great number of things about nature?   The one in which he declared slavery an abomination?    Yes.  That one.

Does seem a little weird that God would send all those earthquakes to a world at peace, and then slow them to a small number after the world entered a great war.  Seems exactly the opposite of what a just God would do, doesn't it?

2 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Well in light of the falling away from the faith per that Welch Revival 1904-1905 and that Azusa Street Revival 1906-1909 around that time, like all revivals ( which was really apostasy ) it falls away. 

Doesn't sound very convincing to me. 

 

[The Barbarian]

3 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

How about an updated result since this was "By Amanda Montañez, Tanya Lewis on June 7, 2022" of last year.

Look at the result later on at November 20, 2022.

Why Do Vaccinated People Represent Most COVID-19 Deaths Right Now?

They do approach the question why in that article.

Yep.   From your link:

During the early rollout of vaccines, vaccinated people represented a small share of total deaths, but experts warned that the share would likely rise simply because vaccinated people were representing a growing share of the population. In other words, if 100% of people in the U.S. were vaccinated, vaccinated people would represent 100% of COVID-19 deaths. Similarly, as the share of the population with a booster rose somewhat during 2022, the share of deaths among boosted people also rose. COVID-19 vaccines are very effective at preventing severe illness and death, but they are not perfect, so deaths among vaccinated people will still occur.

Indeed, vaccinated people now make up the majority of the population – 79% of adults have completed at least the primary series – and the latest CDC data show that vaccinated people also now represent the majority of COVID-19 deaths. There are many more vaccinated people than there are unvaccinated people, and vaccinated and boosted people are, on average, older and more likely to have underlying health conditions that put them at risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. That’s why, when CDC adjusts for some of these factors (age and population size), we still see that unvaccinated people are at much greater risk of death and other severe outcomes than people the same age who have stayed up-to-date on boosters.

For example, if the vaccine had no effect at all on survival, and 79% of Americans were vaccinated, we'd expect to see 79% of the deaths to be vaccinated people.

But your source says that only 36% of the deaths are fully vaccinated people, while 42% are unvaccinated people.   We would expect that only 21% would be unvaccinated people.   This study says that avoiding the vaccination doubles your chances of dying from COVID-19 infection.

[The Barbarian]

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Georgia Guidestones

Just think of it as a footnote to better understanding my references to it in our discussion.

In today's right-wing cancel culture, it's not surprising that some fool would attack anyone expressing an opinion that offended him.    It's the age of the snowflake.

 

[The Barbarian]

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

That would be better.

I would have to wonder why that scientist in the 1800's would even consider the idea other than just by living in the city, but to consider it as affecting global temperatures seems a bit of a stretch for him to go there.

Fourier, a French mathematician and physicist who spent his career pondering the mechanics and equations governing heat transfer. He was intrigued by a puzzle: Why was the Earth as warm as it was? When he estimated how much energy from the sun hit our planet, he figured the Earth ought to be colder than it is.

The answer, he proposed, must be the atmosphere: It was somehow preventing heat from escaping. In an 1824 paper, he hypothesized that gases in the atmosphere must create barriers that acted to trap heat. Fourier didn’t yet know what molecular mechanisms were trapping the heat. But in an 1837 paper for The American Journal of Science and Arts, he surmised that over a long period of time, the amount of heat held in by the atmosphere could change — altered by both the Earth’s natural evolution and human activity. “The establishment and progress of human society, and the action of natural powers, may, in extensive regions, produce remarkable changes in the state of the surface, the distribution of the waters, and the great movements of the air,” he predicted. “Such effects, in the course of some centuries, must produce variations in the mean temperature for such places.”

...

The answer began to emerge in 1856, when the results of a remarkable experiment were unveiled. Eunice Newton Foote, an amateur scientist and prominent suffragette, for the first time tested the heat-trapping abilities of different gases. She took several glass cylinders, put a thermometer in the bottom, and then filled them with gas combinations ranging from very thin air to thicker air, humid air, and air with “carbonic acid,” or what we now call CO2. Foote placed the cylinders in the sun to heat up, then in the shade to cool down. When she observed how the temperatures changed, she found that the cylinder with CO2 and water vapor became hotter than regular air, and retained its heat longer in the shade. In other words, wet air and CO2 were heat-trapping gases.

When she wrote up her experiment for an 1856 issue of The American Journal of Science, Foote made an eerily prophetic observation: What happened inside the CO2 jar could also happen to our planet. “An atmosphere of that gas,” she noted, “would give to our earth a high temperature.”

...

Either way, between 1859 and 1860, Tyndall created some ingenious precision equipment to test gases. He crafted a long tube of glass, and heated up one end via devices ranging from a hot cube of metal to boiling water. He put various gases inside the tube, sealing them in with rock salt, and then measured how much heat could travel through the gas. Much like Foote, he found that water vapor and CO2 were remarkably powerful at trapping heat: Indeed, CO2 could trap 1,000 times as much as dry air.

The results stunned him, as he later explained in an 1861 lecture describing the results. As he noted, science hitherto had assumed that colorless gases like CO2 allowed heat to slide easily past. “Those who, like myself, have been taught to regard transparent gases as almost perfectly diathermanous (transparent to heat), will probably share the astonishment with which I witnessed the foregoing effects,” he said. In fact, the power of CO2 was so baffling that he repeated the experiment hundreds of times to make sure the results were solid. Tyndall was probably experiencing the incredulous reaction that many laypeople still feel today, as they ponder how such tiny amounts of CO2—a few hundred parts per million—could so alter the planet.

...

The final advance in climate science arrived in 1896, when the Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius created what was, in effect, the first model of climate change.

...

It was a grind. Arrhenius, as the historian Elisabeth Crawford writes, had to perform by hand “calculations estimated to have been between 10,000 and 100,000.” He spent all of 1895 hunched over his figures, and Arrhenius himself complained loudly about the “tedious” work to friends in letters, at one point miserably noting how it was “unbelievable that so trifling a matter has cost me a full year”.

When he was done, he made a striking prediction: If you doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, it would raise the world’s temperature by 5 to 6 degrees Celsius. Remarkably, that analysis holds up pretty well today, even in an age where climate analysis involves far more information and variables and are crunched by cloud supercomputers. Despite having done his work by hand, using data that even he regarded as woefully inadequate, Arrhenius reached “a conclusion that millions of dollars worth of research over the ensuing century hardly changed at all,” as Isabel Hilton wrote in 2008. The era of modern climate modeling was born.

https://daily.jstor.org/how-19th-century-scientists-predicted-global-warming/

You should read the article.   There's more there you'd probably want to know about.

 

[The Barbarian]

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Otherwise, I point out that the devil is using the evolution theory in a multiple ways and one of them is to demote the soul of that human being in the womb as a fetus, just a lump of flesh. 

That would be odd, since evolutionary theory has nothing whatever to say about the issue.    But the devil is a notorious liar; it might make sense that he's spreading that tale to unwary people.

 

[BeyondET]

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Such a place as Wuhan as SARS & Covid 19 came from there;  is enough for the U.N. to order the closing of such a facility or else.  And yet they are not doing that either.

Probably because they have all got that mindset like Thanos in the MCU movies of Avengers that they are doing a world a favor by reducing the WORLD'S POPULATION.

The U.N. doesn't have the courage to stand up to China and demand they shutdown the facility in their country.

Edited June 15, 2023 by BeyondET

[ChristB4us]

17 hours ago, George said:

Probably not a place for this ... but you are ignoring simple timelines of Scripture.  Read Acts 2 then Acts 4.

Act 2:2  Suddenly a sound like a mighty rushing wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 

Act 2:3  They saw tongues like flames of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 

Act 2:4  And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 

And then just a few chapters later ...

Act 4:23  On their release, Peter and John returned to their own people and reported everything that the chief priests and elders had said to them. 

Act 4:31  After they had prayed, their meeting place was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly. 

Would you do me a favor and read one of the Baptist preachers on the Power of God whose fruit remains today?  DL Moody's book on "Secret Power" or R.A. Torrey's book, "The Person and Work of the Holy Spirit" or John R. Rice's Book, "The Power of Pentecost".  

You can always transfer this post & my other two posts pending moderation still, and your post to another thread to discuss this together.

Buying 3 books to read it seems a bit of a long detour.  Since everything is to be proven or disproven by the scriptures, that is the route we should take.  Agreed?