So last Nov 30 2019 I posted a brief article on
Adventist Today and Global Warming. I questioned would they print an article going against the current political views of Adventist Today, Progressive Democrat. Today we have a good answer as their own Loren Seibold writes an article supporting manmade global warming. So the answer is; No they will not print anything against their political beliefs.
He writes:
“It isn’t happening.” This response hardly needs an explanation if you live in the United States, where denial of human-caused climate change is a journalistic industry. There’s no point in my offering another rebuttal: I will just say that though there have been times in history when the conventional wisdom has been wrong, the preponderance of evidence from reputable sources argues it isn’t wrong this time. To be a climate change denier, you have to be as conspiratorial about a minority scientific opinion as Adventists are about believing that the pope is about to persecute us—and indeed, some say the two are related.
Clearly, he has no need to deal with the numerous facts that man-made Global Warming skeptics use. They are of course as any good political progressive would say "climate change denier[[s]". Of course, no one denies climate change, clearly, we are not in the ice age or in the medieval warm period. We actually use those things in our analysis of climate. But as with all propagandists changing the language is crucial to their so-called debate. So global warming became climate change. It was once global warming denier and now it is climate change denier (I will note here that they are not the same in meaning, global warming is the more restrictive term just dealing with global temperature, climate change deals with all the other integrated parts of climate like weather patterns precipitation, etc. But in the past Global Warming was the term the alarmists used). But if you disagree with the political left's view of climate change then you disagree with science, even though there is precious little science that they use and a whole lot of computer climate models. But as he says it is the reputable stuff and it is not wrong. Good job in proving your point there Loren!
He also tells us that there is a journalistic industry that denies human-caused climate change. Now that is interesting a whole industry that has no facts or science or reputable information. Well maybe, in fact, there are facts and science and the industry puts it forward but Adventist Today must conform to their political views and so, all of that is of no consequence. You are just a conspiracy person. Even though there may well be a conspiracy going on as Greta Thunberg the teenage poster child for climate change says:
"That action must be powerful and wide-ranging. After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it. We need to dismantle them all. Our political leaders can no longer shirk their responsibilities."
Now you can see why Adventist Today must follow the political ideology they have accepted. Why this is not really even about climate change it is about establishing a socialist utopia here on earth. Adventist Today has forgotten about the Kingdom of God and is trying for a kingdom on earth, eventually I predict it will be a kingdom without God, but the Adventist Today folks don't go that far yet. However, socialism ultimately will deny God. This is why a nation founded upon God-given rights will always be attacked by the socialist agenda. The two simply cannot coexist.
This is all about the same thing as the so-called
Green New Deal that progressives have embraced.
You will see more about this as well as the support of political Progressive democrats in the future at Adventist Today no doubt.
It is honestly a silly proposition that
C02; the molecule we breath out and plants take in and a very small part of the so-called
Greenhouse gases (water being the largest), the thing we generate in greenhouses to make the plants grow larger and faster is really going to
end life on the planet is amazingly stupid. The idea that the present climate is the ideal climate for the earth is equally foolish. And the biggest problem with global warming is the very imprecise science of
computer modeling.
You will notice if you click on the link above for C02 that I don't use the Scientific American article on C02 which is somewhat the same but instead of remaining with the science they also resort to using unknown fears to mitigate what are facts. For example, they say after acknowledging the benefits of C02:
" climate change itself. Its negative consequences—such as drought and heat stress—would likely overwhelm any direct benefits that rising CO2 might offer plant life." https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ask-the-experts-does-rising-co2-benefit-plants1/
The problem with this line of thinking is that it looks at exceptions. In vast quantities of land, a rise in temperature may be helpful for plant growth. But since they don't have the science they go back to their computer models and man-made predictions, because the model is only as good as the data given for the calculations. After all, man-made Global warming or Climate Change is all about scaring people into giving over their rights to the government.
And don't get me started on why Political Progressives think the government will solve anything! Talk about foolishness!
