From Magic City Morning Star|
The Fine Print in Climate Change Theology
By R.P. BenDedek
Aug 27, 2015 - 10:34:01 PM
I have just read an article about climate change titled "NASA sees unavoidable sea level rise ahead" that really sums up for me why I am opposed to jumping on the climate change bandwagon. It's not that I don't believe that the climate is changing, although I have no idea if it is or isn't. No, I won't jump on that bandwagon because as is obvious from the content of the article listed above, the prophets who proclaim the evils of climate change actually don't know what they are talking about, and one can see that when you forego your emotional knee-jerk and start looking at the actual text.
|I don't know what to make of all this.|
The article 'suggests' that "sea levels will rise three feet or more in the next 100 to 200 years." OK! First of all, I won't be here by then so I really don't care. Islamic terrorists may have blown us all to kingdom come before then or perhaps Political Correctness will have so weakened us as a society that our civilization will have crumbled into dust before the apocalypse dawns. Oh wait! There's more. "Much uncertainty remains in the predictions - particularly with regard to timing - because scientists do not know how fast major polar ice sheets will melt," continues the article. Say what? What do you mean they don't know? They know everything!
Well at least they know something and that is "that oceans are swelling much faster than they have in years past."
OK! So while we don't know how fast it is happening, we know it is faster now than before. And of course it must be OUR fault for which we should commit to some political slush fund and promise to do everything to stop what Mother Nature is doing. Tell that to those living on the coast who aren't allowed to build retaining walls to stop the sea from destroying their million dollar homes, because to do so would be interfering with nature.
But wait! What was that boss? Now you are telling me that "Based on a consensus of international researchers, the IPCC said global sea levels would likely rise from one to three feet by the end of the century." Didn't you just tell me it was three feet or more? Now it is one to three feet? Oh I see! "New satellite data suggests the higher end of that range is more likely."
What was that? "The world's oceans have risen an average of almost three inches (7.6 cm) since 1992, with some locations rising more than nine inches (23 cm) due to natural variation." That sounds like pretty scary stuff except that you are telling me that the ocean has risen 3 inches in 23 years. If we multiply that by five we get 15 inches in 115 years. What happened to the three feet bit? OK I know I'm not an expert and I know I don't follow the sheep of this world who believe everything they are told, and I know that I don't know what 'paleoclimate record' means cause I had to look it up to understand what they said next.
"We've seen from the paleoclimate record that sea level rise of as much as 10 feet (three metres) in a century or two is possible, if the ice sheets fall apart rapidly," said Tom Wagner, the cryosphere program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington.
Now hang on a second. Did that guy just say that this is not a new phenomenon? Did he really just say that this has happened in the past? I think he did you know, and that is why he says things like 'ice sheets are waking up' and 'a new era of rapid ice loss.'
"We're seeing evidence that the ice sheets are waking up, but we need to understand them better before we can say we're in a new era of rapid ice loss."
Paying attention to the fine print:
I do hope you forgive me for the facetious way in which the forgoing material was presented, but I think it important that people learn to pay close attention to the wording of allegedly scientific proclamations. Just the other day I read an article which said that the idea that we should all drink 8 glasses of water per day is a fallacy based upon a failure to understand what the original scientific study said. The scientists meant that liquid and solid daily intake should amount to the equivalent of 8 glasses of fluid per day. That got interpreted in the wider community as 'we must drink 8 glasses of water per day.'
There are two extremely important points listed in the article on rising sea levels. The first is that this is not an unprecedented event in the history of the world. It has happened before - long before all our industrial age man-made carbon gases. The second point is that far from the 'apocalyptic certainty' portrayed in the media, scientists are making observations, guessing, deducing and forecasting events which are totally not predictable.
Is the world's climate changing? Probably!
Is this OUR fault? Maybe!
Can we do anything about it? Hardly likely! At best we might postpone the inevitable. Global climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon that is effected by a lot more than man's industrial age. If that were not true, then this would be the first such climate change in the history of the world.
Sometimes I think that people in general are a depressed and depressing lot who simply cannot wait for the end of the world to happen. How sad!
Prominent Sydney lawyer should get a grip on herself.
by R.P. BenDedek
August 6, 2015
You can't claim to be a victim of aggression when it was you yourself who deliberately provoked the attack. Of course in PC terminology the victim may do anything AT ALL and remain innocent as long as they are the ones who come out all bloodied. Democracy is democracy or it is not. If the counter-protestors have a right to protest, why is it that they claim that Reclaim Australia does not have such a right. I suggest that the prominent lawyer grab a dictionary and look up the word incitement. Reclaim Australia in the exercise of its rights and privileges may act like a red rag to a bull, but when the bull charges, it does so by because it has been trained to do so. So who is training the PC counter protestors? Living in the People's Republic of China as I do and have done for a dozen years, I have heard many accusations made against the government of this country in relation to its 'control' of the population. I wonder how many Chinese people here would love to have the same right Australians do to protest their government's policies and I wonder how many of them would approve of the anti-democratic movement now flourishing in Australia under the politically correct banner of 'Anti-Racism.' So what is the end goal for the Counter-protestors - Australian Democracy or Chinese Communism?
The Media Myth of Australian Racism
by R.P. BenDedek
August 6, 2015
Are Australians racist or are they becoming racist because they are constantly and falsely accused in their own country of being racist. Now despite the fact that both these events were shown not to be connected to racism, the local media, determined not to let the truth stand in the way of a good story, have continued to dump false guilt onto the public and the world at large...In virtually every instance, the attacker is drunk, and the event takes place in the early hours of the morning when not too many people are around. With Indians now accounting for 70% of drivers, the percentage rate of 'Indians' being attacked is a foregone conclusion. Were they Vietnamese, Chinese, Americans, or Englishmen, the percentage of attacks on Taxi drivers would remain the same. The final note on the report as listed above, is that half of the attackers have been juveniles. This is an indictment on the way in which our kids are being raised, not an indictment of racism. But interestingly enough, no figures were provided in relation to how many 'non Indians' are attacked per month in Australia.
The Real Reason Why I Cannot Support RECLAIM Australia
by R.P. BenDedek
April 11, 2015
As an Australian I get tired of that tired old line constantly appearing in both domestic and foreign press claiming that Australia is a racist country. As the counter protestors have clearly demonstrated, the Australian people have risen up to declare that they are not racist and that they will not permit racism in Australia. In China, where I have been living and working for the past decade, there is an actual law to punish people whose words and actions are designed to destroy the social harmony of the nation. Now whilst it behooves all people in a secular democratic society to permit people to think and believe what they like, (for to do otherwise would be totalitarianism) we cannot allow minority groups to create social disharmony, division, sectarian violence and perhaps ultimately - civil war.
R.P.BenDedek (pseudonym) is the Author of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran' (www.kingscalendar.com), and a guest columnist at Magic City Morning Star News. He is also the Editor of the 'Writers Journal' at Kingscalendar.com. An Australian, he has been teaching Conversational English in China since 2003.
Writers Journal Kingscalendar
"The King's Calendar" is a chronological study of the historical books of the Bible (Kings and Chronicles), Josephus, Seder Olam Rabbah, and the (Essene) Damascus Document of The Dead Sea Scrolls
© Copyright 2002-2014 by Magic City Morning Star