I don't know what this was meant to contribute.
The phrase "false prophet" has 0 meaning when talking about science, you know that right?
Well, given that you quoted Lindzen, I'm telling you, it's definitely not all the information you need.
It went to your point of how some models are better than others.
It has great meaning to people who are not unaware of history and God. (and failed predictions made in the name of science)
All I need is for a false prophet to be right or wrong.
Why not point to all the predictions physics got right? When a track record of prophesy is very hit and miss why would I focus on some they seem to have gotten right? Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
It has great meaning to me as well....in a spiritual context. In the context of the discussion of science, it's not much of a term. It sounds more like a Christian trying to convince other christians of some inherent gravitas in their position that is fundamentally weak.
Lol. Sounds pretty solid.
Look. Let's be honest. You have BARELY a passing knowledge of all the predictions that been made about climate change. Not only that, there was all of about 5 climate scientists (and physicists) who thought that the big cold was coming. The scientific community AS A WHOLE, never really gave it much creedence. In fact, all of the mentions of this hiccup 50 years later ONLY happens because it got onto the cover of time....
Or warning them of an exposed con job
What we need is a passing knowledge that some were false. The rest doesn't matter
So more false prophesy. OK. Whether to so called community as a whole accepts some or not is not the issue.
Did it tell of what the future would be like?
Name any that did not claim they were based on science?
The reason I can't win this argument is not because you are correct but because anything I say can just be met with "con job/ false prophet" without any actual thought or reasoning being employed.
I can agree with that much
I am correct, many false predictions were made.
You can call it good science or honest series of mistakes or whatever you choose.
I employ thought and reason. I also employ the bible and it frowns on false prophets.
In an effort to get thr dig in, sadly you snapped but a sentence fragment that really didn't make sense as it stood so im not sure what you're agreeing with.
To you, what is the difference between "false" and "incorrect" if there is one?
Well if I ingest scientific information in a news article that is shocking, I look at the paper (which a good publication would include a link to) and see if it's being represented the right way.
Of all your claims this is the one I take the most umbrage with.
Yes, when it comes to prophesy. False means it didn't come true. The synonym would be lie probably rather than incorrect
No models needed. God told us the actual future.
Nothing shocking about science claims these days on climate. Totally expected that they fit the agenda.
No. It is true. If claims about the future are made in the name of science, then we are justified to not believe them anymore.
Too you. I disagree.
And you think Scientists LIE to support climate change and NOT that oil&gas concerns have been lying to the public for DECADES that it exists?
Really? What did God tell us about the ozone layer? Did God mention anything about the subarctic convection currents???
Just goes to show how little you know on the topic.
No. Youre not. That is absolute intellectual laziness (which....may fit with your agenda I guess).
You don't know what "reasoning" is, do you? Being rational and logical is NOT an opinion with which you can disagree.
I think the OP pointed out that more than scientists with opposing prophesies are involved. Each probably (hopefully) thinks they are correct.
He told us about what will happen in the air in the future as well as what will happen on earth. Remember the prayer of Jesus was not 'protect us from the ozone problems' but, rather, let it be on earth 'as it is in heaven'. We know nations will still exist, farming will be fantastic, and people will live longer and be healthier right here on earth. THAT is the future. All the filth and dangerous things science helped mankind to get will be swept away and cleaned up.
Yes, there will be none! No more oceans on earth one day in the future! Oh, and in those oceans, before that we will see every Island move away from it's current location. We will also see the oceans poisoned and turned into what is best described as blood. You convection current fears are less than a joke.
Believing prophesy from the Almighty is not lazy but brave. Getting buffeted around by every cunning sleight of hand and false prophesy of men and wind of doctrine is lazy.
Reason is not restrained to your choice of beliefs or opinions.
Most people have drunk the cool aid, and accepted what the Puppet Masters preach."April 1970, Erlich in Mademoiselle: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
Erlich was not alone. In the early 1970s, a host of voices supported his beliefs.
Harvard biologist and Nobel Prize winner George Wald, speaking at the University of Rhode Island in November 1970: “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
-- in July 2009, then-Prince Charles chimed in, asserting the planet had 96 months to avoid decimation: “…irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it."
Doomsday Addiction: Celebrating 50 years of Failed Climate Predictions
Politicians, scientists, and celebs assure us the apocalypse is tomorrow, and if not, the day after will do. Buckle up for a look at 50 years of cataclysmic predictions.www.agweb.com
Knowing the religion of climate change is full of false prophets helps us to remember the actual future prophesied in the bible. Since the false prophets of climate change claim science for their false prophesies, that tells us something important as well.
Yes climate will be affected by the nuclear bombs and other machinations of wicked men and most of the population will die because of this same wickedness as well as the judgments of God. Meanwhile when they steal our jobs and wealth in the name of the climate we can know that it is a deception.
I also note that the same people that push climate panic like leaders in Canada and the US support war in Israel and Ukraine. They are not out for the good of mankind.
People should worry about waters being turned to blood more than a rise in the ocean level. They should be concerned that a third of all ships in the oceans will be destroyed. They should be concerned that the fish in the seas will die. They should be concerned that the sun is going out, and before that will be dark a third of the day. Those are real future happenings we read in the bible. The chicken little sky is falling climate prophesies are a Satanic red herring
It's interesting how, if you consider Revelations to be an allegory, there SURE is a lot of symbolism that is not too crazy to draw comparisons to today's world.
You literally don't know that. That could EASILY be an allegory.
It's strange to me that you think that people should be worried about all the fish dying in the sea because God suddenly kills them.
I suppose if we considered Scripture a fairy tale, we could see it as supporting Little Red Riding Hood.
Why should we worry about the proven false predictions of prophets of today speaking in the name of science?
And when they start to happen we will know the show is on and how long it lasts.
Not sure what that means. What will not happen exactly and how do you know?
We do know most prophesy in the bible is already history. We do know Jesus said it would all come to pass. Disbelieving it by labeling it an allegory has no currency.
Better than worrying about drowning from rising sea levels or some other aspects of the science spawned climate change farcical predictions. The bible, unlike climate prophesies has not be proven wrong repeatedly!
How it will happen we don't know, and there is no reason to assign a natural reason to it! Especially when it is natural reasons that involve a long time.
Easy to dismiss as more false projecting. How much time is involved for the oceans to heat up (in your imagined scheme of climate change) so that all fish die?
Look man, most people can't handle the truth. The cold hard facts, don't give folks the warm fuzzy feeling they're looking for. I'm not here to make anyone uncomfortable
Revelations need not be understood on the same basis as Matthew.
Listen man. I can't make you pay attention to what's happening or read things so...
Or by failed climate predictions/religion
I don't need to ask you what is happening
No. Nothing similar. The oceans turning to blood and killing all the fish and sun going dark and etc are not the same as climate models.
If you must worry about anything, might as well make it something real
Overruled by the future spoken about in the bible. All your models are trash.
The oceans do not turn to blood over hundreds of years or even decades. It all happens in the space of a relatively few years. No connection to climate prophesies.
