�Alarming� Study Claiming Global Warming Heating Up Oceans Based on Math Error

[Cow Poke]

That's the spirit. But, why not let the experts "win you over"? They have no doubt about climate change. "Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position".

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

How bout finding that missing cite I requested, eh?

[Cow Poke]

How bout finding that missing cite I requested, eh?

Never mind, Tass - I did your homework for you....

Republican Congressman Says God Will 'Take Care Of' Climate Change

And my assessment of what he said stands.


ETA: It appears, however, that his already asinine remarks were "added to" to make them even nuttier.

ETA: Wow, it's worse than I thought --- the MAJORITY of the "quote" is Tassman-like Drama Queen editorilization by Hanley!

[Cow Poke]

Ah, I see what you did!!! Shame, shame, shame, Tass!

First, you prefaced the quote with your own goofy dishonest introduction....

We all know why it is that Evangelicals oppose the acknowledgement of climate change. Because of your belief that God will save us

Then you dishonestly quoted the whole paragraph which included the "editorial" of Steve Hanley....

That gives the appearance that Walberg actually said everything you quoted.

HOWEVER..... What Walberg actually said was only ONE SENTENCE!!!!

Here's what Walberg actually said....

(This first part is Hanley's intro...)



And here is the actual quote...

End of quote. Hanley then adds his own Tassman-like Drama Queen editorial, including the part you bolded...

.

Again, what did Walberg ACTUALLY say, minus the dishonest hype?

Shameful, Tass. That's WAY different than what you dishonestly portrayed.

[Cow Poke]

So here's a bit more on what Walberg actually said, and the context in which he said it, according to USA Today (minus the yellow journalism):

GOP congressman on climate change: God will 'take care of it' if it's real



That's NOWHERE NEAR the Tassmarized nonsense....

[Tassman]

So here's a bit more on what Walberg actually said, and the context in which he said it, according to USA Today (minus the yellow journalism):

GOP congressman on climate change: God will 'take care of it' if it's real



That's NOWHERE NEAR the Tassmarized nonsense....

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/go...rol-2017-06-01

This says it all.

Last year, there was even an attempt by some leaders to talk up the need for "creation care", but to dampen concern for global warming. The "We Get It!" campaign's declaration is something to behold:

God created everything. He made us in His own image, and commanded us to be fruitful and multiply and watch over His creation. Although separated from God by our sin, we are lovingly restored through Jesus Christ, and take responsibility for being good stewards. Our stewardship of creation must be based on Biblical principles and factual evidence. We face important environmental challenges, but must be cautious of claims that our planet is in peril from speculative dangers like man-made global warming. With billions suffering in poverty, environmental policies must not further oppress the world's poor by denying them basic needs. Instead, we must help people fulfill their God-given potential as producers and stewards. We will follow our Lord Jesus Christ and honor God as we use and share the principles of His Word to care for the poor and tend His creation.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hange-religion

This under the headline: "Just what is it with evangelical Christians and global warming?"

[Cow Poke]

Get a grip, CP you're hysterical.

Actually, I was quite calm as I sat and debunked your incredibly dishonest Drama Queenery, Tass. But I can understand why a Drama Queen would react with "you're hysterical" when his false claims are exposed as pure bull pucky.

Yes, and that's a FAR CRY from the dishonest paragraph you posted, and bolded the nuttiest part, which he never said....

This is yet another classic example of why you simply can't be trusted - You post dishonest tripe, I expose it for what it is, and your Drama Queen response is "you're hysterical".

[Tassman]

Actually, I was quite calm as I sat and debunked your incredibly dishonest Drama Queenery, Tass. But I can understand why a Drama Queen would react with "you're hysterical" when his false claims are exposed as pure bull pucky.

Love your debating style CP.

You debunked nothing except yourself as a serious contributor to the discussion of global warming.

Yes, and that's a FAR CRY from the dishonest paragraph you posted, and bolded the nuttiest part, which he never said....

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hange-religionhttps://religionnews.com/2017/06/09/...lobal-warming/

This is yet another classic example of why you simply can't be trusted - You post dishonest tripe, I expose it for what it is, and your Drama Queen response is "you're hysterical".

Yada, yada, yada.

[Cow Poke]

Love your debating style CP.

Because I debunked your goofy dishonest rant in detail here? Thanks.

You debunked nothing ...

That's quite obviously not true.

You found a fellow anti-Christian bigot who is ALMOST as unscrupulous as you are and used his out of context quote to support your hateful bigotry.

[Starlight]

First of all, thanks for the thoughtful response. You took time to give a serious response, so I took the time to read it.

Thanks for being serious for a moment. I think this is a serious issue and needs serious action to address.

What I usually find is really aggressive nasty attacks like Tassman makes (while claiming he's 'discussing') that just makes you want to recoil.

I think TWeb fosters quite an adversarial climate.

If you are serious about discussing this, I'll be happy to tell you my actual position on this

Great! Please tell me about your views.

[Cow Poke]

Thanks for being serious for a moment. I think this is a serious issue and needs serious action to address.

I think TWeb fosters quite an adversarial climate.

Great! Please tell me about your views.

Assuming you're being serious (as you are assuming I am) it's really pretty simple.

Everybody seems to have a cause. Mine has to do with Eternity.

While I believe, as I said, I am to be a responsible steward of the Earth, and my preaching reflects that, global warming is simply not my "cause".

You have made me realize something, though.... and I'm serious about this... just because there are people like Tassman who try to turn everything into an anti-Christian crusade does not mean he is typical. His kind of Drama Queenery repulses me, so I push back, and the perception is that the "push back" is against climate science, when it's not at all.

Just like, when there are people out there perverting the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and I speak against them, I think it would be wise for the "preachers" of climate change to denounce those who are not "helping the message".

For example, when Tassman tries to hijack a thread and turn it into his own personal vendetta against Christianity - like this....

The fact is that this thread was NOT about US Evangelicals who reject global warming - it is his own personal anti-Christian crusade that causes him to derail a thread like that.

If you really cared about getting the message about climate crisis out there, it seems to me it would be really helpful to reach out to your fellow apologists and let them know they're not really helping the situation.

You and I have a history, Star - but I have defended you more than a few times, because I know that you CAN be a reasonable person when we're not at war.


And, Tassman - as thread starter I am notifying you to either stay on topic -- which is NOT about your crusade against US Evangelicals -- or leave the thread.

[Cow Poke]

Just so you don't miss it, let me say it again. The topic of the thread is NOT your campaign against US evangelicals - that was your own derail. Feel free to start your own thread on that if you wish.

But, either stay on topic or leave the thread.

[Starlight]

Everybody seems to have a cause. Mine has to do with Eternity.

For many people "policies to address the threat of climate change" are simply one of many political policies they favor. It doesn't need to be their/your Cause, simply something they support.

Just like, when there are people out there perverting the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and I speak against them, I think it would be wise for the "preachers" of climate change to denounce those who are not "helping the message".

I don't share your views of Tassman I'm afraid.

Tassman correctly observes that a lot of US evangelicals oppose government action to address the threat of climate change. He also correctly observes that some of them express the view that because God is in control, humans don't need to worry about climate change and/or don't have the ability to cause it in the first place.

I think that view is theologically naive on the part of the evangelicals expressing it, and is a bit like a person in 1900 saying "A World War could never happen because God wouldn't let it". Bad things can and do happen. And their assumption that God will act to prevent it, therefore we ought not to, is unwarranted.

The fact is that this thread was NOT about US Evangelicals who reject global warming

Multiple US Evangelicals on this forum reject global warming and have participated in this thread. You, the thread-starter, are a US Evangelical who seems fairly luke warm on the subject and the OP sided with the global warming skeptics. Tassman's not really reading his own biases into it much to detect US Evangelical opposition to the idea of global warming in this thread.

If you really cared about getting the message about climate crisis out there, it seems to me it would be really helpful to reach out to your fellow apologists and let them know they're not really helping the situation.

I tend to think that was the problem with Al Gore. Because he was a political figure, 50% of the US had been pre-primed to hate him and everything he said and stood for, so him taking up the issue of climate change after he left politics, instantly made half the country decide it was some sort of scam/hoax. He was the wrong person to try and popularize the threat of climate change.

[Cow Poke]

For many people "policies to address the threat of climate change" are simply one of many political policies they favor. It doesn't need to be their/your Cause, simply something they support.

And I have other causes, but climate change is not high on the list.

I don't share your views of Tassman I'm afraid.

I'm shocked. SHOCKED, I tell you!

Tassman correctly observes that a lot of US evangelicals oppose government action to address the threat of climate change. He also correctly observes that some of them express the view that because God is in control, humans don't need to worry about climate change and/or don't have the ability to cause it in the first place.

That is not my view, nor is it the view of any Christian I know. And he very deceptively made it appear that Walberg's statement was much wackier than it was. The boy has a problem with truth.

I think that view is theologically naive on the part of the evangelicals expressing it, and is a bit like a person in 1900 saying "A World War could never happen because God wouldn't let it". Bad things can and do happen. And their assumption that God will act to prevent it, therefore we ought not to, is unwarranted.

Multiple US Evangelicals on this forum reject global warming and have participated in this thread. You, the thread-starter, are a US Evangelical who seems fairly luke warm on the subject and the OP sided with the global warming skeptics.

"fairly luke warm" only in that I am personally doing the things I know I need to do, while many of the 'preachers' of climate are big fat hypocrites, just like the big fat hypocrite Evangelical preachers who distort the message. I think the biggest problem with climate is that the "preachers" haven't figured out how to "message" it -- they resort to personal attacks (like Tassman does routinely) and scare tactics, many of which are so over the top and, subsequently, proven wrong.

Tassman's not really reading his own biases into it much to detect US Evangelical opposition to the idea of global warming in this thread.

Then why can't the boy simply tell the truth, and not make stuff up or distort the truth?

I tend to think that was the problem with Al Gore. Because he was a political figure, 50% of the US had been pre-primed to hate him and everything he said and stood for, so him taking up the issue of climate change after he left politics, instantly made half the country decide it was some sort of scam/hoax. He was the wrong person to try and popularize the threat of climate change.

I don't know that Gore was "hated" so much as people thought he was a grand self-righteous buffoon, and a hypocrite.

But let's do this - let's stop talking about Tassman, particularly with regard to his routine attack on US Evangelicals, because I have asked him to stop that derail, OK? You can have the last word on Tassman, if you wish.

But I'll go a step further....

Unlike some of the clowns pretending to be experts on climate science (we have a few on Tweb) I don't pretend to understand or study the science of it.

In a way, I'm like Walberg in that I don't dispute that there's something going on with the climate, but UNLIKE Walberg, I don't take the same view as to what to do. As I said, I personally am involved - and have been all my life - in conservation, and have been taught from an early age that we are to be good stewards of the Earth.

So, here's the deal --- I have asked repeatedly, even on this forum --- tell me what the solution is, how much it's going to cost, and what we can expect the result to be. Nobody seems to be able to do that.

So, I'll take care of my corner of the world, and allow guys like you to battle it out.

[shunyadragon]

Tassman has been asked to take his anti-Christian derail somewhere else - he can start his own thread on this topic if he wishes.

All related discussion needs to go with him - this thread is not about Evangelicals as per the OP.

Simply the claimed 'math error' does not detract from the overwhelming historical and scientific basis for climate change. Errors were made and corrected, and the research remains valid

[Cow Poke]

Simply the claimed 'math error' does not detract from the overwhelming historical and scientific basis for climate change. Errors were made and corrected, and the research remains valid

Thank you for your on topic response, Shuny.