This question reminds me of a piece of history....
It is my understanding that during WWII the Nazis used a very complex coding machine to encode all of their messages. By adjusting it periodically, the encryption would change, such that it made it well-nigh impossible to decrypt. A special Allied task force, aided by a German defector who had helped create the machine, were able to stage an "accident" with a shipment of one of these machines, at the scene of which they traded a new, but randomly adjusted machine, with one of the correctly set machines in the shipment. The Germans inspected the crash site, but finding no machine missing, did not become suspicious.
From that point on, this secret operation of Allied troops had access to the Nazi communications. They would send out intelligence to the Allied commanders as to where the Nazis would be and what they were intending to do. However, they could not risk the loss of this capability, and were unable to answer questions as to the source of this information. Those captains which believed it, succeeded. Some did not accept the information, and did not heed the warnings. At one point, a small, historic town was to be bombed at a specific hour during the night. The Allied task force recognized that this might be a test, just to see if any resistance sprang up from such an illogical quadrant. The Nazis were suspicious by the seeming loss of their element of surprise, and had set up this test case. The Allies had to remain silent, and let that town be pummeled without a warning. This preserved their opportunity to eavesdrop on all of the Nazi communications. There were many commanders who insisted on knowing the source of the intelligence given them before they would follow it. That source could not be safely revealed, and was not. But those who accepted the information without questioning it were always much better prepared on the battlefield.
I have an authoritative source for this, but you would not likely accept it. When it happens, all will know, including yourself--but that's a bit over a thousand years future still.
By Martin Helmke1, Daniel Bochicchio2, Jeffrey Leberfinger3, Gregory Schultz4 1Department of Earth and Space Sciences, West Chester University of Pennsylvania 2Groundwater and Environmental Services, Inc. […]
fasttimesonline.co
Many years ago, before the young punks ruined it, we used to ride the quads out to graffiti a few times a year.
I have an authoritative source for this, but you would not likely accept it. When it happens, all will know, including yourself--but that's a bit over a thousand years future still.
What I would accept is unknown to you.
We discuss weather patterns and climatic impacts of human activities and demand evidence, logic, data.
I see no reason to lower the bar for other authoritative sources.
What I would accept is unknown to you.
We discuss weather patterns and climatic impacts of human activities and demand evidence, logic, data.
I see no reason to lower the bar for other authoritative sources.
Well, many don't believe in prophets. Perhaps you are the exception. However, the prophet who predicted this also foretold the 9/11 fires in New York City and the Hollywood/Los Angeles fires that are in progress right now. These things were foretold well ahead of time, as this prophet also predicted the San Francisco earthquake which happened in about 1906. True prophecies ultimately trace their source to God. I believe God is an authoritative source of information.
but which one becomes the question.
I do enjoy fiction, and much of it can provide insight into the human condition.
I reject the idea the future is already known - since to be known would require accepting that all decisions and life itself has no meaning - since already set and unchangeable.
Certainly you and everyone are entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. So am I.
but which one becomes the question.
I do enjoy fiction, and much of it can provide insight into the human condition.
I reject the idea the future is already known - since to be known would require accepting that all decisions and life itself has no meaning - since already set and unchangeable.
Certainly you and everyone are entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. So am I.
People make plans, but only God knows the future with accuracy. In fact, He bases His authority and honor on the ability to know the future, declaring that no one else does. We are all fortunate that God is our loving creator and grants us perfect freedom of choice regarding what we shall believe. He desires that we should be happy, and none could be happy without this freedom.
boom - just blew up the first statement since both can not be true at the same time.
What set the universe into motion is certainly beyond my feable mind to "know" or even imagine, perhaps "un-knowable".
But accepting a prime creator set this thing in motion and assuming this is no small task, it is illogical to me that it is all pre-ordained and no decisions can actually take place since otherwise the future could be variable. No, a creator with the skill to set the universe in motion would be patient and just watch to see what the creation did, not meddle in it and poke around breaking the laws of physics they worked so hard to set carefully into place in the first place.
yeah says the guy that works 2,000 metres below grade in solid granite - hey not going to be safe when you eventually have to come up for supplies!
And don't give "anyone" any ideas!
boom - just blew up the first statement since both can not be true at the same time.
What set the universe into motion is certainly beyond my feable mind to "know" or even imagine, perhaps "un-knowable".
But accepting a prime creator set this thing in motion and assuming this is no small task, it is illogical to me that it is all pre-ordained and no decisions can actually take place since otherwise the future could be variable. No, a creator with the skill to set the universe in motion would be patient and just watch to see what the creation did, not meddle in it and poke around breaking the laws of physics they worked so hard to set carefully into place in the first place.
Let's assume you are a father and you know your children very well. One day, you leave one of those children home alone. You know the child is going to empty the cookie jar, even though you warned him not to. When you get home, you are not surprised to find it so. Did you "pre-ordain" that your child would eat those cookies? Of course not.
God knows us better than parents know their children. God says in His Word that even the hairs of our head are numbered. He knows us better than we know ourselves! It is only because His infinite knowledge and wisdom so far surpasses our comprehension that to us it appears it must be "pre-ordained." It isn't. God grants liberty of choice to all.
Im an atheist
But I respect a man of conviction who actually walks the talk…
Nothing you have said bothers me
Some people go say things I am not comfortable with
But you speak plainly about following scripture
Let's assume you are a father and you know your children very well. One day, you leave one of those children home alone. You know the child is going to empty the cookie jar, even though you warned him not to. When you get home, you are not surprised to find it so. Did you "pre-ordain" that your child would eat those cookies? Of course not.
God knows us better than parents know their children. God says in His Word that even the hairs of our head are numbered. He knows us better than we know ourselves! It is only because His infinite knowledge and wisdom so far surpasses our comprehension that to us it appears it must be "pre-ordained." It isn't. God grants liberty of choice to all.
200 Billion-Trillion stars, plus planets, astroids, meteors, atomic dust, all with billions of years of history, calamity but our imaginary friend knows everything about everything at every moment, and in detail to the ends of time.
Believe what you wish.
200 Billion-Trillion stars, plus planets, astroids, meteors, atomic dust, all with billions of years of history, calamity but our imaginary friend knows everything about everything at every moment, and in detail to the ends of time.
Believe what you wish.
There is clear evidence of the heat trapping effects of atmospheric gases.
Look at the other planets for additional evidence - Mars without much atmosphere, and Venus - which is hotter than Mercury - do to it's gaseous atmosphere.
Way too much going on to draw a CO2 line to that conclusion per se. CO2 is a gas, but there have been a number of debates about the heat retention effect, a lot goes on. Chlorofluorocarbons supposedly drilled an unrecoverable hole in the ozone layer at the poles. Seems the layer is now heavier than it was before we drilled the hole that was destroying the planet. Increased temperatures allow the air to absorb more water which tends to have a reflective affect on solar radiation, and we can go on, and on, and on... You just can't statically model planet earth and conclude anything. Arrogance.
Bottom line is CO2 grows plants. We need plants to eat and survive. If the earth does get warmer populations will adapt, as it is easier to adapt to more warmth than cold. If you took the earth and wiped out every human being on the planet, it's not going to make much difference long or short term to the weather. Thinking we can somehow get the entire planet to stop producing CO2 is stupid, and anyone trying to sell it to you is an arrogant fool. The actual weather in my lifetime has not changed that much across the country, nor is there any indication that man has made any significant impact on the weather over the last 2000 years. Sol and Gaea tend to do what they want, in spite of our desires.
Well, many don't believe in prophets. Perhaps you are the exception. However, the prophet who predicted this also foretold the 9/11 fires in New York City and the Hollywood/Los Angeles fires that are in progress right now. These things were foretold well ahead of time, as this prophet also predicted the San Francisco earthquake which happened in about 1906. True prophecies ultimately trace their source to God. I believe God is an authoritative source of information.
200 Billion-Trillion stars, plus planets, astroids, meteors, atomic dust, all with billions of years of history, calamity but our imaginary friend knows everything about everything at every moment, and in detail to the ends of time.
Believe what you wish.
... and that is why mankind will never be able to prove, nor disprove the existence of God. Everything we do, and everything we know, has boundaries. We are completely incapable of comprehending omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence.
like you just did.
Bottom line is, upsetting a balanced system with abrupt changes to atmopheric chemistry in an uncontrolled manour will result in a new equilibrium we have no way to predict. Rapid changes to ecosystems will have dramatic unpredictable impacts on all species, not just the plants, but pests, animal behaviour, migrations, etc etc etc.
The arragance is to take the position that the abrupt changes will magically have postitive outcomes.
Chlorofluorocarbons supposedly drilled an unrecoverable hole in the ozone layer at the poles. Seems the layer is now heavier than it was before we drilled the hole that was destroying the planet
not correct - the ozone layer has made some recovery since the Montreal Protocol, however the 'complete recovery to 1980's levels' remains in the futrure - likely decades.
The interesting point about CFC's is that a global effort to avert continued damage has reversed the path we were on before that effort. Showing humanity can change directions it just takes a willingness to do so.
and based on the long cycle glacial periods that would likely have been the case - except humanity interrupted those long cycles, by releasing gigatones of sequestered carbon (from deep geological deposits) into the atmosphere, where it interacts with solar radiation and changes the heat retained by the earth instead of lost.
So who was releasing those gigatons of carbon back into the atmosphere when CO2 levels were even higher than they are today? And if it is a closed-loop, self-sustaining event like you claim, what happened to cause them to fall back to lower levels? The fallacy of this whole stupid climate change model is that "experts" say the higher CO2 caused the heat rise. How about heat rise caused desert growth and less than optimal plant life conditions all across the planet, and therefore fewer plants were around to remove the CO2, which caused the higher levels of CO2? One of the most basic of all scientific principles is being ignored by the climate change "experts": correlation does not imply causation.
it is, and thus another self-reinforcing loop, as additional GHG raise the global temperatures, more watervapor is created and increases the heating effect - leading to even more evaporation in an ever increasing self-reinforcing mechanism humanity will not be able to control.
Loss of moisture increases risks to crops and forested lands -ever larger wildfires and greater reinforcing of the effects that created the moisture loss from land in the first place.
How does more water vapor = loss of moisture? The VAST majority of the water vapor in our atmosphere comes from the oceans. Nature's very own, 100% natural, de-salinization system is responsible for almost 90% of the water vapor in the atmosphere. If there is more water vapor, there will be more condensation - and thus more rain. The air can hold only so much vapor before it condenses and falls back to the ground.
Stop reading alarmist propaganda and use your obviously very functional brain to think for yourself. For anyone to suggest that climate change is a definite "thing" that the "scientific community" all agrees upon is ludicrous. Because of the availability of mass media (social networking via the Internet), "group think" has been enabled on a scale like never before. Unfortunately, millions of people re-enforce blatantly wrong suppositions together, which results in real scientists with differing results and opinions being silenced or shouted down.
Social media and Google searches have enabled many people without proper education and training to spout "facts" that their social media peers agree with - all without any supporting research, documentation, etc. There are far too many "Google University" graduates on Facebook, X, etc. Tie in funding for research that is tenuous and based on matching popular beliefs and the silencing of competent experts only gets worse.
For a great example, do a little reading on Dr. James Tour. He is one of the top chemists on the planet. His credentials are amazing, as is his life's body of work. Read his bio - he is obviously a genuine expert in several types of chemistry and nanotechnology:
"James M. Tour, a synthetic organic chemist, received his Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry from Syracuse University, his Ph.D. in synthetic organic and organometallic chemistry from Purdue University, and postdoctoral training in synthetic organic chemistry at the University of Wisconsin and Stanford University. After spending 11 years on the faculty of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of South Carolina, he joined the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology at Rice University in 1999 where he is presently the T. T. and W. F. Chao Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Materials Science and NanoEngineering.
Dr. Tour has 750 research publications, over 130 granted patents and over 100 pending patents. In 2021, he won the Oesper Award from the American Chemical Society which is awarded to “outstanding chemists for lifetime significant accomplishments in the field of chemistry with long-lasting impact on the chemical sciences.” In 2020, he became a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry and in the same year was awarded the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Centenary Prize for innovations in materials chemistry with applications in medicine and nanotechnology. He was inducted into the National Academy of Inventors in 2015.
Tour was named among “The 50 Most Influential Scientists in the World Today” by TheBestSchools.org in 2019; listed in “The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds” by Thomson Reuters ScienceWatch.com in 2014; and recipient of the Trotter Prize in “Information, Complexity and Inference” in 2014; and was the Lady Davis Visiting Professor, Hebrew University, June, 2014. Tour was named “Scientist of the Year” by R&D Magazine, 2013.
Tour was also ranked one of the Top 10 chemists in the world over the past decade, by a Thomson Reuters citations per publication index survey, 2009; won the Distinguished Alumni Award, Purdue University, 2009 and the Houston Technology Center’s Nanotechnology Award in 2009. He won the Feynman Prize in Experimental Nanotechnology in 2008, the NASA Space Act Award in 2008 for his development of carbon nanotube reinforced elastomers and the Arthur C. Cope Scholar Award from the American Chemical Society for his achievements in organic chemistry in 2007. Tour has won several other national awards including the National Science Foundation Presidential Young Investigator Award in Polymer Chemistry and the Office of Naval Research Young Investigator Award in Polymer Chemistry.
Professor Tour has served as a visiting scholar at Harvard University, on the Chemical Reviews Editorial Advisory Board, the Governor’s Mathematics and Science Advisory Board for South Carolina, the Defense Science Study Group through the Institute for Defense Analyses, the Defense Science Board Chem/Nano Study Section, the Department of Commerce Emerging Technology and Research Advisory Committee and the MD Anderson Cancer Research Center’s Competitive Grant Renewal Board. He has been active in consulting on several national defense-related topics, in addition to numerous other professional committees and panels."
After reading his bio, would it surprise you that Dr. Tour is under constant attack via social media "experts"? You see, his life's body of work has led him to the conclusion that it is impossible for the chemistry he observes in just DNA to have spontaneously happened (abiogenesis). If you wish to read his papers that explain the technicalities, you will need a very extensive understanding of chemistry to discuss or argue his claims / beliefs. Nothing new there - that's why it is called "peer reviewed", correct?
Here's the rub - because Dr. Tour became a Christian, social media "experts" are trying to discredit his lifetime work and his obviously gigantic knowledge of chemistry, all based on their own belief system. NONE of his detractors has accepted his challenge to debate him and prove him wrong with the work he has published. Frankly, there are probably only a handful of people on the planet that understand chemistry at the level he does. But, because they are emboldened by their social media backers, these social media atheists are constantly attacking him - without the supporting research or documentation to back their own beliefs.
Dr. Tour doesn't say "God created life" as the result of his research. He simply says abiogenesis is not possible. His personal belief is in God, but he leaves the reader free to determine how life was created for themselves. He understands he can't "prove" God exists, but he can prove abiogenesis is not possible and evolution does not accurately account for the incredible diversity of life on this planet. There are a growing number of scientists who have arrived at the same conclusions as Dr. Tour. THOUSANDS of them. Understandably, they are often quite hesitant to espouse their real beliefs, due to pressures felt by funding, public ridicule / shaming, peer shaming, etc.
How ironic. Is it any less arrogant to take the position that the abrupt changes will magically have negative outcomes? What is bad for some is good for others and vice-versa. The arrogance demonstrated by climate change zealots is that we can identify what the changes will be and then control the inputs to alter the outcome. THAT is a textbook definition of arrogance.
As Blue Öyster Cult said - History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men.
Based on the evidence collected, the last 7,000 years has atomopheric CO2 levels steady at approx 280ppm, then rapid increases during the last 200 years, this well documented.
Water vapour is the moisture contained in the air - our atmosphere - and as you know, higher temperature air is capable of holding more moisture (cold winter air holds less, hot summer holds more) - the effect of warming the oceans, lakes rivers land masses leads to increased evapouration - more moisture in the air. The concerning part of this is the interaction of water vapour with infrared radiation - the potential to set up a feed-back loop where warming increases WV in the air which increases heat retention increasing evapouration.
Correct, and as it warms the air can hold more water vapour.
The evapouration of surface water is also related to the temperature of that surface - warming will increase the rate of evapouration.
The point earlier about land masses was also this effect - hotter summer days lead to more moisture loss from forests and crop lands, this can have undesireable consequences.
None of this is alarmist - it is just the reality.