Is it ironic that this article is written by Dr. Susan Brooks Thislethwaite, Professor of Theology, Chicago Theological Seminary, and appears in the Huffington Post religion section? It’s certainly spew on your monitor funny
Cold as Hell: The Chilling Effect of Global Warming
Hell is normally depicted as a “lake of fire,” as in Revelation 20:10. This week in the Midwest, however, Hell is likely to look more like lakes of ice, as dangerous cold from a polar vortex, brings “wind chills [that] could hit 50, 60 or even 70 below zero.” The Great Lakes will likely freeze over and prolong an already very cold winter.
This is the chilling effect of global warming, as NASA points out: Cold Snaps Plus Global Warming Do Add Up.
This frigid weather is another example of the kind of violent and abrupt climate change that results from global warming. It’s ongoing impact falls disproportionately on where you live, certainly, but especially if you are poor.
There you go: mega-frigid cold is caused by greenhouse gases which make things warm. All “climate change” articles belong in the religion section. Well, the section on cults, anyhow.
The science of what is causing this current extreme cold is, in fact, complex, and research is ongoing.
Complex because Warmists have to invent wild rationales to encompass deciding that cold and snow are part of “climate change”. Mother Nature Network links a long video by Rutgers University’s Jennifer Francis and Weather Underground’s Jeff Masters explaining why cold frikking weather is all part of the theory of hotcoldwetdry.
But while the science of changes to the polar vortex and its relationship to global warming are complex, the Christian theology of our failure to protect the creation is not complex.
Simply put, the Christian theological argument must start with our sinful failure to take care of the creation, as God intends (Gen. 2:15). Instead, we are trashing the planet and changing its climate primarily through the fossil fuel emissions.
So, you’re a bad Christian if you drive a fossil fueled vehicle (anyone want to place a bet on whether the good Dr. Susan drives a fossil fueled vehicle and takes fossil fueled plane trips?), but, you’re not a bad Christian if you support abortion on demand, which is the primary position of most who post at the HuffPo. Driving a fossil fueled vehicle is now a “sin”.
Chris Mooney, in an article called Dear Donald Trump: Winter Does Not Disprove Global Warming, has made a valiant attempt to explain to Trump and others on the right-wing how winter and global warming interact. “Global warming is actually expected to increase ‘heavy precipitation in winter storms,’ and for the northern hemisphere, there is evidence that these storms are already more frequent and intense, according to to the draft US National Climate Assessment.”
In that article, Mooney explains (note: I’m leaving the 3rd point out, as it is about Antarctica, going more to the Ship Of Fools)
- Statements about climate trends must be based on, er, trends. Not individual events or occurrences. Weather is not climate, and anecdotes are not statistics.
- Global warming is actually expected to increase “heavy precipitation in winter storms,†and for the northern hemisphere, there is evidence that these storms are already more frequent and intense, according to the draft U.S. National Climate Assessment.
Four out of the last five Northern Hemisphere winters have been brutal, particularly in Britain, Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. This winter is shaping up to be brutal. The long term 17 year trend is for statistically insignificant warming. The 13 year trend is for no warming. But, remember, when any weather occurs Warmists run out to tell us that this is Proof!!!!!!!, proof, I tell you, of “climate change”, ie, man-caused. They even tell us the current warming pause is caused by “climate change”. Weather is climate over the long term.
This is a cult, the articles belong in the religion section of all outlets, and Warmists who use fossil fuels should be labeled as heretics for sinning.
[…] Warming by Lonely Conservative • January 6, 2014 • 0 Comments While climate alarmists are twisting logic into knots trying to blame the current deep freeze on global warming, President Obama is pressing ahead with […]
[…] climate alarmists are twisting logic into knots trying to blame the current deep freeze on global warming, President Obama is pressing ahead with […]
First, one of the most dangerous times is Sunday morning when church lets out. You had better be off the road with the cars taking off like the Indy 500. So, I can’t see church folks worrying much about fossil fuels.
Then, these people will argue that the pending ice age will be due to CO2.
No matter what it is, they will blame it on mankind’s output of GHGs. We could see snowball earth, and they’d still blame fossil fueled vehicles.
I’m pretty pissed about this global warming thing. The temps tonight are poised to kill my ~20 year old gigantic fig tree, and has forced me to put 1500W space heaters under both of my orange (satsuma) trees.
I blame William Teach and his ilk. I know that you and your evil Koch brother friends have put gigantic fans up in Canada to blow cold air down here, just to make us stop believing that the world is warming. You probably had some help from Faux News too. Well it won’t work. I’m still a True Believer!
the Pirate, a low level Priest of the Far-Right Ignorance Cult (FRIC) typed:
“So, you’re a bad Christian if you drive a fossil fueled vehicle… … but, you’re not a bad Christian if you support abortion on demand, which is the primary position of most who post at the HuffPo. Driving a fossil fueled vehicle is now a “sinâ€.”
This is not what she said. She did not mention abortion or vehicles. She did say that Christians are obligated to care for her God’s creations, certainly a debatable point. Why didn’t you decide to discuss what she actually said rather than making stuff up? Does the Christian Bible instruct its adherents to care for the Earth?
Actually, it isn’t. The increased inclination from the sun, shorter periods facing the sun, all leads to less insolation, and thus less heating.
Go figure: climatology is hard for climatologists.
Her referenced citation did mention fossil fueled vehicles as a major source of greenhouse gases.
It certainly seems like her position is that vehicles are either against the will of God (which is the definition of sin) or contribute to a lack of stewardship which would be a sin in her eyes.
As for abortion, the church of which she is a leader believes in abortion on demand.
When a person like Thistlethwaite wants to claim some sort of authority by being the head of a church that clearly violates God’s laws, and then tries to tell people how they should live and what is within a “Christian belief,” that can and should be challenged.
I know that you don’t accept the existence of God, but for those of us who do and for those of us who follow the teachings of the Bible, we are called to discern whether a pastor / teacher / speaker is espousing that which is Godly.
If the woman wants to tell people what is Godly, then she needs to make sure she is not teaching that which contradicts God’s word.
(Even the Biblical citation she gives is off the mark, but I don’t expect you to know that.)
The bottom line is that I understand why you want to support Thistlethwaite’s position: she is teaching against God’s word and so are you.
Birds of a feather, you know.
The Pirate criticized the Pastor for things he imagined she wrote. I realize he was using hyperbole to make the same point he’s tried to make time and time and time again, but she did not mention SUVs, vehicles or abortion.
I don’t care much one way or the other what the Pastor thinks or says. Making a moral argument based on the Christian Bible is largely meaningless to me. In my opinion her essay added very little to the discussion of climate change.
Teach spent time writing on the hypocrisy of the woman, which is why you chose to attack him instead of her.
But in all fairness, her essay adds as much to the discussion as your hypocrisy, so it is all good to you in the end.
Teach wrote:
Teach probably meant to write “Dr. Jennifer”. But the point still stands as he was going off the gist of what Dr Susan wrote about. He then combined the argument with another post from another flaming liberal. Thus proving once again, that most all flaming liberals are whiny insane psychotic hypocritical nutjobs.
gumballs,
Actually The Pirate is correct in attributing the quote to the minister, Dr. Susan. Dr. Jennifer Francis is the Rutgers scientist who has published papers on polar vortices and did not make a Biblical argument for cutting CO2 emissions. The attribution was confusing, but read Dr. Thistlethwait’s original piece.
That aside, the Pirate starting connecting invisible dots implying he knew Dr. Thistlethwait’s modes of transportation, her feelings on abortion etc and that these issues are somehow relevant to global warming.
In my opinion, neither the pirate nor the preacher added any substance to the discussion on global warming. I guess his goal was to denigrate another with whom he disagrees.
Her and I reach the same conclusion on global warming: it’s real and we need to address it, but in my opinion supernatural beings are not involved. Her religious argument that man needs to clean up global warming is no more compelling than a religious argument that man is not, or can not cause global warming.
I’ll ask my original question again: Does your Bible say that humankind should look after the Earth, and can this be stretched to include the impact that global warming is having and will continue to have on humans? (I am serious and don’t know the answer. Dr. Susan made the claim and I was wondering if she had evidence.)