A Question I Was Asked:



Why Do So Many Still Cling to "Global Warming"?






The Question:

Despite all the evidence which has now emerged, can you really believe that many world leaders still support this Global Warming stuff and that they are going to impose huge new taxes to "save the planet." Many of these financial penalties will hit ordinary people very hard at a time of recession. What can be going on?


UK Apologetics Reply:

Yes, I take your point. Look, I have never been a conspiracy theorist but there are obviously things going on here which the public are not being told. I used to laugh when these conspiracy people would talk about things being decided 'behind closed and locked doors,' but it is now getting pretty hard to laugh.

For sure, there is an unacknowledged agenda here. It is not too difficult for any good researcher or reasonably well-educated person to learn that global warming - as a result of "greenhouse gases" - and such like - is only a "threat to mankind" in some sort of 'Alice in Wonderland' surrealistic existence, but in the world of firmly evidenced and established science it is a 'non-runner.' The amazing thing is that even after the terrible revelations of how some of these people have cooked the true figures using plain exaggeration and distortion, even purposely leaving the warm medieval period out of their graphs, many world leaders are still accepting the leftist/pseudo-environmentalist rhetoric!

Eventually one just has to accept that there is another agenda here. What is it? One cannot be sure, but theories obviously abound.

Of course, this is not the first unscientific and deluded idea which has been popularly claimed as "scientific." 'The Theory of Evolution' is accepted as the paradigm of our human history in many countries. It is, of course, amazingly unscientific. What is called 'Evolution,' of course, has to be divided into two groups:

a. Micro-evolution. Variations in kinds, selective breeding, the survival of the fittest etc., all of that is plainly correct and scientific - Genesis allows for it; it presents no problem to the Christian. This, of course, is not really 'evolution' - as such - at all, but 'scientism' has craftily included it in the mix as a sort of smokescreen. I don't think there were many cats in the ark but the first cats - whether large or small - already contained the genetic information for the branching out into many cat forms, yet they all remain cats! School study books often call such things "evolution in action," yes, but only micro-evolution - there are strict limits and a modern cat will behave pretty much the same as the ones that Adam saw! Although the first ones were probably vegetarian. But a cat remains a cat; personally, I really love cats but I don't know of a certain one who has gone to university! Also, human intelligence is nothing to do with evolution but everything to do with Adam being formed in God's image.

b. Macro-evolution. This is the grand philosophical theory, it takes us into the world of Alice in Wonderland, Planet of the Apes and 'there are purple men living on clouds' theory. According to this, we are all descended not only from apes, but - if one goes back far enough - from various 'slime soups' which "emerged" many millions of years ago. Of course, not a single shred of evidence can be produced to back up this plain hokum, yet it is considered "educated" to believe it. Is that not amazing? Micro-evolution (which is good science) tells us that none of this can possibly be correct since kinds cannot be successfully broken, but should that happen, sterility will follow. Mutations are called upon to explain how one can get from 'primitive slime soups' to an intelligent and reasoning man or woman, even when it is known that mutations are something like 92% deleterious. The whole thing is bad science but this is now the preferred paradigm of human origins which our children are being taught religiously.
Ignorance might cause one to think, okay, it makes no sense, but the fossil record (now huge, unlike in the days of Darwin), forces us to accept the theory, but - here too - the theory continues to be unsubstantiated. One might think that - by now - there would be millions of fossils (and there are) showing the stages of evolution in undeniable detail, of course, they show no such thing. All one finds is the 'Cambrian Explosion' in which all of life arrives at the same time but in which macro-evolution (including a gradual improvement and development of earlier basic and primitive life forms to more recent 'higher forms' is not evidenced). All one gets are variations within a kind.

Okay, I have got off the subject a little, but - the point is - sometimes this world accepts what might be called 'the authorized scientific view' even if that view is more philosophy than science and, in fact, evidential and substantive science opposes that view. But, in my view, there is evil intent in the theory of evolution (it teaches that there is no world of the supernatural and, therefore, God does not exist), and I believe there is evil intent in this 'Global Warming' nonsense; an attempt is being made to control our thinking for some unrevealed, and possibly actively hidden, purpose. Just two days ago the UN issued yet another warning about so-called "global warming" - apparently in complete ignorance of the recent exceptionally cold winters in the northern hemisphere. Also: how come that an organisation - the UN - supposedly set up to ensure world peace, is so keen on promoting such matters as abortion and the warming hysteria? For sure, there is an unspoken agenda here and it becomes harder by the day to laugh at the conspiracy theorists!

The conscientious Christian must be vigilant.
Robin A. Brace. April 2nd 2011.


UK APOLOGETICS HOME