Hmmm … which one of our friends is from Texas Tech?
Hot climate scientists are melting the Arctic and burning up Texas.
Must be a CO2 cloud over the Lone Star state…
Clear proof of the super powers of warming scientists.
The gaze of Dr. Stroeve melts ice, while that of Dr.Hayhoe disperses clouds.
It’s true Julienne looks great.
Why are people like her always on PBS? Most people don’t watch PBS. It has very low ratings. And global warming believers always end up on PBS. Why? Because PBS is part of the left wing paradigm. It clearly is not part of the mainstream of America. (It’s snooty too)
So, what’s everyone doing for O’bummers b’day?
I’m maxing out my credit cards and blaming everyone else for being irresponsible……….
A very apt celebration! Very nice!
I’ll be wondering if that’s his real b’day. He got it mixed up himself. I’m just sayin.
The caption under her picture, it more depressing than anything I’ve read from her.
First of all, Christianity is the parent of modern (dare I say “real”?) science. It was man’s desire to understand the workings of God that set about this thing called modern science. Indeed, the patriarch of modern science was Isaac Newton. He was a prolific hymnist. A more modern patriarch of science, Max Plank wrote that both religion and science require a belief in God! Indeed, the more detailed hypothesis of our origins, “The big bang theory” was first proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Roman Catholic priest.
Now, it has long been known that godless people known as atheists have hi-jacked the word and name of science to twist and pervert its meaning to something opposite as the origin. Much like the word “liberal” has been hi-jacked in political theory. I used to describe my self as a liberal in terms of individual rights and freedoms. Today this would be viewed as an oxymoron.
Now, all Christians have different levels of understanding of the workings of God and applying the word of God today. So, it isn’t a criticism to point out things that compel us to know, as Christians, the CAGW hypothesis is wrong, it is a gentle guidance toward a more perfect understanding and the teachings tell us this is necessary for us all. Matthew 7 tells us all we need to know regarding the CAGW hypothesis. If Miss Hayhoe sees herself surrounded by and considering to the ideas of godless people, then one should recall Christ’s question, “Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?” Bad trees will not bear good fruit!
Katherine, I would encourage you to seek the answers from a different perspective. The dichotomous balance you are seeking is impossible to maintain. It is by personal experience and failure that I’ve come to know this.
There is much more to state about this subject, but I fear I’ve already gone well beyond the normal purview of this blog. So, I’ll close with this, when considering this question, consider the proposed solutions to the CAGW hysteria. Are the proposed solutions good or bad? Well, I can tell you Texas has an almost unique experience with wind power. How close to disaster did they come last winter because of their reliance upon wind energy? To how many was it a real disaster and not some mild hardship? I say almost unique because this has occurred throughout the world in the rare areas where alternative energy has been embraced. Also consider the attempts to keep modernization away from the third world nations? Is this good or bad? Are we to doom these people to a life of hardship, hunger and disease because of circumstance of birth? And what of the poor in this nation? Are we going to continue to price fuel and food beyond their reach? These are the fruits of CAGW. Now, you decide if CAGW is a tree of God or a tree of mammon. Are we picking grapes from a thornbush? By their fruits, they are known.
Katherine, I know it would be easy to be taken aback and insulted by my comment. It isn’t intended to be. Please don’t be offended by the remarks but please attempt to understand them. Also, as stated earlier, this is outside the realm of what is typically discussed here, so I don’t know how well received it would be. So, if you wish to further the conversation, but are uncomfortable with it here, just click on the link in my name and drop me a note on my blog, it won’t be posted right away because comments from first time commentators must be met with approval before being posted.
Well said James! Don’t forget Gregor Mendel … a monk and the father of genetics.
maybe you though Katherine was thinking in the first place.
No Christian worth their salt would believe that Christianity is incompatible with science. Heck, Christian orders founded most all of the great universities back when the were great.
Katharine is the founder of ATMOS research which prepare climate projections One such project looked at climate change in the Rockies. One of it’s conclusion was :-
In general, the Rockies will likely see higher
temperatures in both winter and summer, variable changes in precipitation
across the region, and more precipitation falling as rain
rather than snow.
Perhaps she ought to offer a refund.
Click to access Climate%20Change,%20updated%2005-01-05.pdf
Apparently Katharine is the sole owner of Atmos Research whose sales are at an estimated $100,000pa. Not insignificant if you can persuade organisations they need to plan ahead for Climate Change.
The Rockies study above forecasts ahead to 2085 so there is no chance she will have to hand money back anytime soon.
Katherine seems like a well meaning person. And that’s where part of the error in “climate change” comes in. It seems like the good thing to do to think pollution is damaging the entire world because we see the effects in the immediate area it is produced. But that shows a lack of thought. It shows one hasn’t taken the time to think about how immense the earth is and how miniscule the amount of pollution is. It might look like the whole earth is polluted when you are standing in Los Angeles and seeing brown tinted air everywhere you look. But travel just one mile from the edge of the Los Angeles environ and there is clean air with no brown tint. How small is Los Angeles compared to the entire earth? Can you see it at this link?
To begin to get an idea of how small Los Angeles, and any other big city, is, drive across America, or any other large nation, and see just how much of it is countryside with forests and fields, having no houses, buildings, or people. You would have to put all the large cities of the earth together in one place, as a single unit, for them to finally be visible from space as a very small dot.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 1,972 other followers
Sign me up!