The Pope is a climate change covid-19 alarmist

Around a month or 2 ago I mentioned on Faceback to my Brother-in-Law that pretty soon someone would tell us the Covid-19 Chinese virus was the result of Global Climate Change. Surprisingly it took until now for my prediction to come true. And true in a big way as It was the Pope himself that put forth that idea. As MSN reported:

In an email interview published Wednesday in The Tablet and Commonwealth magazines, the pontiff said the outbreak offered an opportunity to slow down the rate of production and consumption and to learn to understand and contemplate the natural world.
"We did not respond to the partial catastrophes. Who now speaks of the fires in Australia, or remembers that 18 months ago a boat could cross the North Pole because the glaciers had all melted? Who speaks now of the floods?" the Pope said.
"I don't know if these are the revenge of nature, but they are certainly nature's responses," he added.

The Pope seems to also think the Glaciers of the North Pole have melted. They have not though we do find that predicted to occur in 2040

Climate Change Could Allow Ships to Cross the North Pole by 2040

"Melting sea ice will open up shipping lanes across the Arctic, potentially making the Northwest Passage and North Pole navigable during summer"

Or by 2050 According to the Guardian. "

Ships to sail directly over the north pole by 2050, scientists say

As with most Climate Change Alarmists, the Pope does not work with facts!

Adventist Today Strikes out again

  Adventist Today once again enters the world of pseudo science with their article Hermetically Sealed: Conspiracy Theories and Special Knowledge. Sadly this article is written by David Geelan an Associate Professor of Science Education at Griffith University on the Gold Coast, Australia. I say sadly because in the Big Ag section it is completely wrong. But it does not start out that well either!

 

After the article’s introduction about conspiracy theories, the article states under the bold header the following:

 

         “Climate and Chemtrails

Loren Seibold’s recent piece in Adventist Today on how Adventists talk about climate change, and my own piece about the evidence and the responses to climate change, along with the ensuing discussions of both, have probably sufficiently explored the ground around that issue, so I’ll leave it for the moment. It’s a crucial issue on which a concerted and well-funded campaign of misinformation has been dismayingly successful, but it shares many commonalities with the issues discussed below. The notion that climate change is a conspiracy by globalists, socialists or the Pope is one example.”

The purpose of saying Climate is simply to equate so called Climate Change Deniers with the conspiracy theory of Chemtrails. The only reference in the section to climate is a couple of Adventist Today articles (I did not read Geelans other article as after reading this one I am not too impressed with his science abilities). The one by Loren Seibold gives no evidence for climate change other than:

         “To be a climate change denier, you have to be as conspiratorial about a minority scientific                   opinion…”

Shades of the often times used statement that 97 percent of scientists agree with man-made global warming/ climate change. As the very good Forbes article begins:

“If you've ever expressed the least bit of skepticism about environmentalist calls for making the vast majority of fossil fuel use illegal, you've probably heard the smug response: “97% of climate scientists agree with climate change” — which always carries the implication: Who are you to challenge them?The answer is: you are a thinking, independent individual--and you don’t go by polls, let alone second-hand accounts of polls; you go by facts, logic and explanation.Here are two questions to ask anyone who pulls the 97% trick.”

What often happens today as with Loren Seibold’s article is the elusive scientists say, the scientific consensus that you conspiracy nuts go against with the other minority of scientists. When it became know that the 97% figure was a fiction it moved to the consensus of science, even though science does not really work with consensus, they try to deal with facts. Interestingly if the Climate Change Alarmists really cared about science they would say go for it disprove our theories! Because that is how science works, gather the data make a hypothesis and then try to test with experiments the hypothesis This is called the scientific method which does not seem at all to require consensus.. So the actual science part becomes the conspiracy theory part to the Climate Change Alarmists.

It is rather peculiar that the so called Climate Change Deniers don’t have to keep changing their story while the Climate Change Alarmists continually change theirs. Remember those sad video’s of Polar Bears who were starving a few years ago. Not true, Polar bears are greatly increasing in numbers. What about Al Gore’s famous use of Mann’s so called hockey stick graph. And the climategate emails as one Forbes article states:

         “The new emails also reveal the scientists’ attempts to politicize the debate and                    advance predetermined outcomes.”

So at least the Adventist Today article with its attempt to tie climage change denial to chemtrails is working within the climategate method of disinformation.

Now to the main reason I decided to bring up this Adventist Today article. I have used bold type to point out the completely wrong section about GMO seeds:

         “Big Ag and GMOs

The same applies to genetically modified organisms, particularly plants used in food crops. While the genetic modifications themselves are shown to be benign in terms of human health effects, there are real issues. One is that the corporations that make the seeds want to earn higher profits. One way to do this is to engineer the plants so that the seeds they bear are infertile. Instead of saving some seed from last year’s crop to plant next year’s crop, poor farmers must buy seed anew each year. Another is that plants can be genetically modified, for example, to be tolerant to RoundUp (glyphosate) pesticides, but this can mean excessive application of pesticides to fields, with attendant risks to both farm workers and consumers.”

First I can agree with him that the corporation is trying to earn higher profits. That is pretty much the way all business works. Sadly and this is really bad for someone that is supposedly involved with science education he says that the seeds are infertile. Here is a good quote from NPR on this myth from their article Top Five Myths Of Genetically Modified Seeds, Busted

:

         “Myth 1: Seeds from GMOs are sterile.

No, they'll germinate and grow just like any other plant. This idea presumably has its roots in a real genetic modification (dubbed the Terminator Gene by anti-biotech activists) that can make a plant produce sterile seeds. Monsanto owns the patent on this technique, but has promised not to use it.Now, biotech companies — and Monsanto in particular — do seem to wish that this idea were true. They do their best to keep farmers from replanting the offspring from GMOs. But they do this because, in fact, those seeds will multiply.”

It seems that this professor of science education accepted this myth because he heard it from anti biotech people. I suppose I could just say it was part of a conspiracy theory but I rather think like most of the Climate Change Alarmists it is more to do with hearing some so called authority say it and just accepting it as truth without bothering to do some investigation into the subject.

While the whole idea is wrong and untrue it is true that if it was hybrid seed, it would not breed true and should not be used in the next years planting. The seed manufacturers do require those buying their patented seeds to sign a contract where they do not plant the seeds from the crops harvested seeds, example Roundup Ready crop seeds. If you are interested in knowing the reasons why this is done there is a good article from a farmer called What’s in a Monsanto Contract?

Since there are hybrid and non hybrid seeds used depending on the crop most commonly corn and soybeans I will let the author of the above article explain as he does well. The Adventist Today article continues with an assumption of the excessive use of herbicides which may also not be true. However there does appear to be some Roundup resistant weeds called superweeds which could need more herbicides. There are simply too many factors to make the statement that Geelan makes however.

I read through the comments section on Facebook for the Adventist Today article. They mostly seem to love it and no one pointed out the problems with it. One person said that the people who really need to read the article won’t because it is on Adventist Today. That is probably true as Adventist Today has become so one sided and fact challenged that I am quite sure a lot of people don’t bother with it or the Spectrum website anymore. Which is rather sad but I don’t see either website changing from their political progressivism and neither seems to like to hear that their articles have problems either.

 

 

Adventist Today Proves my point

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!

Atoday and Global Warming

Adventist Today posted another leftist article. Once again following the party line of acceptance of Global Warming. Which of course is termed Climate Change to hide the fact that Global Warming and cooling is not really something new or different for the earth. But instead of dealing with the article I was intrigued by the challenge that was given in the comments section on Facebook. Here are the two posts I am referring to:

Stewart Pepper I don't believe global warming due to CO2 is possible for a very different set of reasons than is postulated here. I do believe the driver of what I genuinely believe to be a hoax is a move to one world government. Having said that, I am NOT a fan of Stephen Bohr. I'd like to write my own article as to why I don't believe.

7

• 7h

• 

  Top Fan

  David Geelan I can't speak for the editors of the page, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they'd be willing to publish a well-written piece with a different view, and I for one would be delighted if you wrote it and they shared it.

So here is my wager. AToday will not publish an article of a different view because they have no interest in different views. They have sold their souls to the Progressive Political world of the Democrats and that is why they never post anything other than Progressive Political material with an Adventist tilt. Though admittedly sometimes the Adventist part is hard to determine.