IS CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSING SEA LEVELS TO RISE AT ALARMING RATES?

Posted on by

Examining over 200 tide gauge stations worldwide, researchers have found no global acceleration in sea level rise, contrary to wild predictions by climate alarmists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

For decades, the public has been warned that human-driven climate change is causing sea levels to surge at alarming rates, threatening to swallow coastal cities by the end of the century. But a landmark new peer-reviewed study has found no evidence that sea level rise is accelerating worldwide.

sea level rise

Published in the Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, the paper by Dutch engineer Hessel Voortman and researcher Rob de Vos analysed hundreds of tide gauge records. Their conclusion is stark: “Our analysis of more than 200 tide gauge stations around the world shows that there is no global acceleration of sea level rise”.

A First-of-Its-Kind Global Analysis

Unlike previous studies that relied heavily on climate models, Voortman and de Vos used observed data from tide stations stretching back at least 60 years. They found that the mean rate of sea level rise remains steady at around 1.5 mm per year — about 15 cm per century — similar to rates observed in the 20th century.

“The average rate of sea level rise in 2020 is around 1.5 mm per year,” Voortman explained. “This is significantly lower than the 3 to 4 mm per year often reported by climate scientists in scientific literature and the media.”

Their analysis showed that claims of acceleration are confined to a handful of isolated sites, typically explained by local conditions such as earthquakes, groundwater extraction or sediment shifts. “This pattern is inconsistent with sea level acceleration driven by global phenomena,” the authors wrote.

Models v Reality

One of the study’s most significant findings is the gap between observed sea level data and projections from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The IPCC’s 2021 report projected much higher rates of sea level rise, yet Voortman and de Vos found that “on average, the rate of rise projected by the IPCC is biased upward with approximately 2 mm per year in comparison with the observed rate”.

In other words, widely circulated claims of seas rising by three to ten feet this century are not supported by measured data. Instead, the study suggests that sea levels could rise by only six inches — about the same increase seen in the previous century.

“The graph shows the majority of locations to be above the blue line,” the authors noted of their comparison chart. “This indicates that the rate of sea level rise in the projections is too high compared to the empirical rate”.

Local Factors, Not Global Warming

Where acceleration was detected, it was almost always linked to localised factors rather than a global climate signal. For example, at Ayukawa in Japan, the 2011 Tohoku earthquake caused the land to drop suddenly by more than 80 cm, leading to a sharp spike in recorded sea levels.

In Bangkok and Mumbai, excessive groundwater extraction and rapid urban development explained unusual patterns of rise.

Voortman stressed that such anomalies should not be confused with evidence of global acceleration. “Nine stations did show an acceleration,” he explained. “But these stations are mostly located near stations that show no acceleration in sea level rise, making it unlikely that a global phenomenon such as global warming caused by CO2 is the underlying cause.”

A Stark Contrast with Media Warnings

These findings stand in sharp contrast with decades of dire headlines.

In 2019, New York Times columnist David Wallace-Wells warned, “We will see at least four feet of sea level rise and possibly ten by the end of the century.” That same year, The Atlantic declared, “The oceans we know won’t survive climate change.” The lattercited Princeton scientist Michael Oppenheimer, who predicted that sea levels would rise by more than 2 feet 9 inches by 2100.

Voortman was blunt about the failure to test projections against reality: “It is crazy that it had not been done,” he said, describing his review of whether any global study had actually compared projections with observations. “There were none.”

His work began with a 2023 paper focused on the Dutch coast, where he found no acceleration despite repeated warnings. That led to this global analysis with de Vos, revealing the same result worldwide.

De Vos, in an article reflecting on the research, criticised what he called the “IPCC narrative” around sea level rise. “One of the ‘crown jewels’ of the IPCC narrative is rising sea levels,” he wrote. “But our analysis shows that acceleration is not statistically demonstrable at almost all stations.”

The study is already being described by some commentators as a monumental embarrassment. Michael Shellenberger, a prominent climate analyst, called it “a massive scientific scandal” for showing that widely repeated claims of acceleration were unsupported by observational data.

For many Australians, the constant drumbeat of catastrophic climate warnings has been a source of fear, particularly for young people. The latest study raises important questions: if sea level rise is steady but not accelerating, how should Christians respond to narratives of crisis and alarm?

As believers, we are called to be people of truth. Scripture reminds us that God “did not give us a spirit of fear, but of power, love and self-discipline” (2 Timothy 1:7). While creation care remains vital, Christians can resist being swept along by exaggerated or misleading claims that foster anxiety rather than stewardship.

Voortman and de Vos’s research offers a rare moment of clarity in the climate debate. Their careful analysis of real-world data shows that global acceleration in sea level rise is simply not occurring. Instead, the seas are rising at the same modest pace as the last century, shaped more by local geology and human activity than by sweeping climate forces.

For policymakers, engineers, and families alike, the message is clear: do not build decisions on fear or exaggeration, but on truth grounded in evidence. The truth revealed in God’s Word. We know how the story of this fallen world plays out. Satan’s rule over this world is coming to an end. Next on God’s agenda for this fallen world is Jesus Millennial reign (http://www.millennialkingdom.net). In order to fulfill the covenant promises made to Abraham, David and the new covenant Israel’s Messiah, Jesus must rule the nations of the world. We have had 6,000 years of Satan’s rule now we will have 1000 years of Jesus rule before God destroys this cosmos and He creates a new Heaven and new Earth where only righteousness dwells.

“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God.” Revelation 21:1-3

BEAR TOOTH MOUNTAIN REVEALS A HISTORY LESSON

Posted on by

My original heading was “GLOBAL WARMING MUCH GREATER THAN TODAY OCCURRED 1000 AD” but LinkedIn would not accept it. Global warming is a no-go zone for negative stories.

A snow patch on the top of the Bear tooth Mountains of north central Wyoming, USA, has been melting because of a warming climate. Consequently, 30 fallen white bark pine trees became exposed, 180 m (600 ft) above the current tree line. The trees were tall-standing in form and not the scruffy sort usually found near the tree line. This indicates that the tree line was once even higher than 180 m above today’s.

Picture of Bear Tooth Mountain, Montana

Since a higher altitude means colder temperatures, the higher tree line suggested by the exposed trees means that the climate must have been warmer in the past, when these trees were growing.

Since the post-Flood Ice Age ended some 4,000 years ago, there have been several warm periods. The most recent one is known as the Medieval Warm Period, a 300-year period around AD 1000. Since the snow patch is melting now, the exhumed forest suggests that the world has experienced global warming in the past, which is significantly greater than what is being experienced now.

This report shows why it is so important to have a Biblical worldview, which presents the true history of this world. The world only has a 4 billion-year history because it denies the Bible’s worldwide flood of Noah’s day that buried all living things and the abundant pre-flood forests and vegetation (source of fossils and fossil fuels).

Pederson, G.T. et al., Dynamic treeline and cryosphere response to pronounced mid-Holocene climatic variability in the US Rocky Mountains, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 122(2): e242162121, 2025.

A BIBLICAL AND SCIENTIFIC VIEW OF CLIMATE CHANGE

Posted on by

The biblical and scientific evidence show that human-generated CO2 will produce some warming, but there is no climate emergency.

SUMMARY

  1. The politicization of climate science has led to corruption of the science.
  2. Over the last 100 years or so, the CO2 level has been increasing. However, the temperatures over that time have not been consistent with the hypothesis that human-generated CO2 is the prime cause of temperature increases.
  3. The science is not ‘settled’, or there would be one model, not over a hundred, that attempts to predict the global temperature. Furthermore, the official climate models that have predicted up to 4.5°C of global warming with a doubling of the CO2 have failed all five tests applied to them. They should be rejected.
  4. Because positive feedback does not operate, the warming from a doubling of the CO2 is likely to be less than 1°C, which would be beneficial to life on earth. Indeed, this is less than the 1.5°C of warming that the draconian policies formulated to limit CO2 production were set to achieve, based on the failed models.
  5. The impact of global warming on various natural disasters has been hyped and is not supported by the evidence.
  6. There is no climate emergency.
  7. The economic impact of radical policies to limit CO2 will most seriously hurt the poorest people.
  8. Because humans are intelligent and industrious, we can apply our God-given abilities to solve many (real) environmental issues, especially if we are guided by a Christian worldview.

The idea of dangerous climate change due to burning fossil fuels is unfounded in sound science, and divorced from biblical history.

As part of good stewardship, Christians should be at the forefront of a decision-making process that balances the needs of all the stakeholders, both in terms of economic development and in minimising negative impacts on the environment. A Bible-based approach to government, the environment, and justice will result in human flourishing, as it has in every country that has been strongly influenced by the Bible’s teaching.

Clearly, there can hardly be a Christian approach without Christ. Christians need to be pro-active in working to see others come to faith in Christ. In doing that we will also be once again laying the foundations for human flourishing, but also the flourishing of the planet because man is needed to look after it; that’s the way God designed it to be. Indeed, Hosea 2:18–23 connects the health of the land to the spiritual health of the people.

There is a sickness in many once-Christian countries, and it began with the undermining of the Bible as the Word of God from the beginning. When we see the Lord Jesus Christ once again honoured as Creator and Saviour of the world, we will see health return to our nations. As Biblical end times prophecies are already playing out in our day, Jesus’s return to set up His Millennial Kingdom is not too far off.

Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. (1 Peter 5:8)

This report summarises an in-depth report by Creation Ministries International (CMI) by the same name on http://www.creation.com

DO WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE OR GLOBAL WARMING?

Posted on by

To those who believe that the heavens and the earth were designed and created by God, there is ample reason to expect that the earth’s temperature will remain in a range to support life. In fact, God gave us that promise after He had judged the world with the flood of Noah’s day.

“While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and Summer, and day and night
shall not cease.” Genesis 8:22

Within this worldview, it makes perfect sense that the earth would have a temperature control system just like our bodies do since God designed them both.

Carbon Dioxide, CO2,  is very important to life on Earth. Plants grow using an incredibly complicated and brilliantly designed process called photosynthesis where about 50 enzymes and 100 cofactors work together to take CO2, water, and sunlight and convert them into sugars and oxygen. When plants are starved for CO2, photosynthesis does not work well. A “floor” of 180 ppm CO2 is the level at which plant growth becomes very difficult. If CO2 were to go below 180 ppm for any significant period, plant life would be in significant jeopardy. Without plant life on Earth, there would be no human life. Is it an accident that the CO2 concentration stayed in a range that allowed plants to survive, or was it by design?

A quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25. The increased level of CO2 in the atmosphere increases the growth of plants. If you feel the need to worry about something, it makes more sense to worry about low levels of CO2 rather than high levels. As you can see, higher levels of CO2 are desirable for plants. As of January 8, 2015, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was 399.98 ppm. The growth rate for plants increases from 5–50% when CO2 levels are higher than current levels. The maximum growth rates for most plants occur when CO2 levels are in the range of 1,000 to 1,200 ppm. For humans, the negative effects of high CO2 don’t begin until about 5,000–10,000 ppm. When thinking about the consequences of higher levels of CO2, it is also important to remember that the greenhouse gas effect for CO2 diminishes at higher levels. The direct effect of the CO2 concentration is approximately logarithmic, which means that going from 200 to 400 ppm CO2 has about the same effect as going from 400 to 800 ppm. When pondering what we think the CO2 level should be, we should consider all the relevant issues (many of which are not mentioned here), including our ability to feed everyone on the planet.

The climate of the earth is incredibly complicated and currently not well understood. This is obvious when you look at the lack of success of the many different climate models. Currently, the models do not even match up well with the past temperatures, much less predict future temperatures.

Though it is relatively easy to estimate the amount of heat that greenhouse gases absorb and emit back toward the earth (climatologists call this “forcing”), it is much more difficult to determine how the planet will adjust to the additional heat (climatologists call this “feedback”). Essentially all the current climate models have overestimated the global temperature in the past and future. Many climatologists believe that there are stronger positive feedbacks within the climate than negative feedbacks. In other words, they believe that the climate amplifies warming caused by greenhouse gases rather than moderating it. If that were true, why hasn’t the global temperature already gone out of control? Negative feedback systems, like the thermostat in your house, are known to lead to stability; whereas positive feedback systems often lead to instability, like the deafening audio feedback when a speaker and a microphone are put too close together. It seems more likely that our climate is dominated by negative feedback since Earth’s temperature has been amazingly stable for at least 2,000 years with only a 1.3°F change.

Climatologists seem obsessed with understanding the effect of greenhouse gases and aerosols caused by man. But these have a minor effect relative to the major “natural” effects of clouds, water vapor, and “natural” CO2. Gaining a better understanding of these natural effects will allow climatologists to begin to make better models. Unfortunately, we would not be able to make highly predictive models now even if we understood clouds because there is not enough computing power available to do the calculations at the resolution necessary to accurately predict individual clouds.

Conclusion

It seems that politicians and the media have always been concerned about the climate. In the late 1970s, there was concern about global cooling. The temperature had declined for about 30 years, and many were convinced that we were headed for the next ice age. Almost immediately, the temperature started to rise and continued to rise until about the year 2000. Early in the new century, politicians were clamoring that the rise in global temperature was getting out of control and were blaming humankind for causing it. At the height of the concern about warming, it started to become obvious that the temperature increase had paused, and little change has been noticed for about the last 15 years. In the absence of a short-term warming or cooling trend about which to panic, politicians have turned to saying that weather patterns are much more extreme than in the past. Again, there is no convincing evidence to support this new claim when considering the longer-term perspective. Even the latest IPCC report significantly contradicts this view.13

The data are clear. The global temperature has been rising since the Little Ice Age. But today’s temperature is not unprecedented. Based on the best information we have, it is in the neighborhood of the temperature during the Medieval Warm Period, about 1,000 years ago. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and, therefore, is a factor in determining the global temperature. However, the concentration of CO2 in the air and global temperature do not correlate well over the long term, indicating that CO2 is not the dominant cause of today’s rising global temperature. The globe is warming, but it’s not your fault. Carbon dioxide is critical to plant life and must remain above about 180 ppm to sustain our only source of food. It is important that we investigate these issues and carefully examine the data so that we can prepare for the future, even if we find we are unable to significantly change the global temperature.

What is your worldview? Do you trust that God brilliantly designed and created everything and trust that He has your best interests at heart, or will you always be worried that the planet is on the verge of going out of control? As you ponder that, think of these things:

  1. A nuclear reaction in the sun’s core provides us exactly the right amount of heat, and the sun’s surface is the right temperature to provide us the visible light we need.
  2. Water, CO2, and methane from natural sources cause a greenhouse effect that is estimated to raise Earth’s temperature by about 59°F degrees. Otherwise, Earth would be frozen.
  3. Plant life and animal life are totally dependent on each other. Plants grow by consuming carbon dioxide and releasing oxygen. Animals grow by consuming oxygen and releasing carbon dioxide.
  4. The oceans are a tremendous stabilizing force for Earth’s temperature, and they contain a large reservoir of CO2.
  5. The hydrological cycle of evaporation and rain provides a mechanism for transferring heat around the earth and provides fresh water to plants and animals.
  6. Clouds help control the earth’s temperature by reflecting some of the sun’s radiation into space and by absorbing some of the heat radiated from the earth.

It’s all a part of a grand design. Evidence of God’s provision is everywhere.

“For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, so that they are without excuse” Romans 1:20

Taken from a great article by Dr Alan White, The globe is warming, but it’s not your fault. Dr. Alan White earned his BS in Chemistry from the University of Tennessee and his PhD in Organic Chemistry from Harvard University in 1981.

GOVERNMENTS DIVORCED FROM REALITY WITH NET ZERO

Posted on by

Taken from an article in the Weekend Australian Saturday, February 4th, 2023: “Emission impossible: net zero carbon reduction goal is a quest for space cadets” by Foreign Correspondent Greg Sheridan. It is a courageous article that will upset State and Federal governments big time.

Net zero, to use the first great climate change metaphor, hasn’t got a snowflake’s chance in hell. It’s a fraudulent concept. It’s not real. It requires a heroic leap of faith and magical thinking. It cannot exist in the physical universe.

Yet it’s the center of Australian national policy. All our state governments are signed up for it. Net zero pledges of one kind or another – albeit often over time­frames that recall a Star Trek voyage more than a policy commitment – cover, notionally, two-thirds of the global economy.

Greg quotes the following eminently qualified academics to support his case which only makes it even more bizarre that our governments have signed up to Net zero. I show below that our own CSRIO has published on the benefits of CO2 “having boosted green foliage across the world’s arid regions over the last 30 years”.

“In all this stuff, we live by lying now. We tell ourselves lies and we know we’re lying to ourselves.” – Senator Matt Canavan, former minister for resources

“We instead continue to participate in the fantasy of net zero.” – Academics James Dyke, Robert Watson, and Wolfgang Knorr in Concept of Net Zero is a Dangerous Trap

“I am scared almost more by the consequences of net zero, than by those of climate warming.” – Wolfgang Knorr

“Complete decarbonization of the global economy by 2050 is conceivable only at the cost of unthinkable economic retreat, or as a result of extraordinarily rapid transformations relying on near-miraculous technical advances.” – Vaclav Smil, How the World Actually Works

We can reduce greenhouse gases a lot. But policy should be based on reality. There is no sign of reductions on a huge scale. Before we get to the technical, let’s examine the geopolitical, which is almost always ignored in climate hot gospelling. According to the Climate Action Tracker website, the top 12 national emitters in order are China, the US, India, Russia, Japan, Iran, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, South Korea, Canada, and Brazil.

China alone emits 30 percent of global greenhouse gases, a third more than the US and the EU combined. China, India, and Russia emit more than twice the US and EU combined. China, India, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, and Brazil emit half of the world’s greenhouse gases. Not one of them is a Western nation. Not one is gripped by climate politics remotely like the dynamics that dominate Europe, Australia, and North America.

As well as the case made by Greg Sheridan above, the other important consideration is the benefits of more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Did you know more CO2 in the atmosphere causes plants to grow faster, causing global greening? The fact that CO2 spurs plant growth is well established, and it is also why greenhouses pump a lot of carbon dioxide into nurseries to make plants grow faster and stronger.

According to a recent post by Patrick Michaels, a Ph.D. in ecological climatology, on the blog, Climate Etc.

“Factorial simulations with multiple global ecosystem models suggest that CO2 fertilization effects explain 70% of the observed greening trend, followed by nitrogen deposition (9%), climate change (8%), and land cover change (LCC) (4%). CO2 fertilization effects explain most of the greening trends in the tropics, whereas climate change resulted in the greening of the high latitudes and the Tibetan Plateau.

In other words, 78 [70 + 8] percent of observed planetary greening is caused by carbon dioxide and its effect on climate.

We have repeatedly demonstrated (within here, for example) that about half of a degree (C) of observed planetary warming is ascribable to anthropogenerated changes in the atmosphere. The main result appears to be a planet that is becoming so much greener that it is readily apparent from space.”

Greenhouse gas theory is well established, and human emissions have some impact on global temperatures, but the exact amount of warming CO2 causes is a matter of a large amount of uncertainty. It’s important to keep in mind that CO2 is currently increasing the production of crops through increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide.

Increased levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) have helped boost green foliage across the world’s arid regions over the past 30 years through a process called CO2 fertilisation, according to CSIRO research.

In findings based on satellite observations, CSIRO, in collaboration with the Australian National University (ANU), found that this CO2 fertilisation correlated with an 11 percent increase in foliage cover from 1982-2010 across parts of the arid areas studied in Australia, North America, the Middle East and Africa, according to CSIRO research scientist, Dr Randall Donohue.

“In Australia, our native vegetation is superbly adapted to surviving in arid environments and it consequently uses water very efficiently,” Dr Donohue said. “Australian vegetation seems quite sensitive to CO2 fertilisation.

This, along with the vast extents of arid landscapes, means Australia featured prominently in our results.”

“While a CO2 effect on foliage response has long been speculated, until now it has been difficult to demonstrate,” according to Dr Donohue.

“Our work was able to tease out the CO2 fertilisation effect by using mathematical modelling together with satellite data adjusted to take out the observed effects of other influences such as precipitation, air temperature, the amount of light, and land-use changes.”

The fertilization effect occurs when elevated CO2 enables a leaf during photosynthesis, the process by which green plants convert sunlight into sugar, to extract more carbon from the air or lose less water to the air, or both.

If elevated CO2 causes the water use of individual leaves to drop, plants in arid environments will respond by increasing their total number of leaves. These changes in leaf cover can be detected by satellite, particularly in deserts and savannas where the cover is less complete than in wet locations, according to Dr. Donohue.

“On the face of it, elevated CO2 boosting the foliage in dry country is good news and could assist forestry and agriculture in such areas; however there will be secondary effects that are likely to influence water availability, the carbon cycle, fire regimes and biodiversity, for example,” Dr. Donohue said.

“Ongoing research is required if we are to fully comprehend the potential extent and severity of such secondary effects.”

This study was published in the US Geophysical Research Letters journal and was funded by CSIRO’s Sustainable Agriculture Flagship, Water for a Healthy Country Flagship, the Australian Research Council, and Land & Water Australia.

Governments seem to be divorced from reality as Matt Canavan stated, “In all this stuff, we live by lying now. We tell ourselves lies and we know we’re lying to ourselves.” – Senator Matt Canavan, former Minister for Resources.

Even more devastating they are divorced from and in opposition to their Creator. Jesus prophesied that this would be the condition the world will be in prior to His second coming. It will be like the days of Noah when lawlessness was rampant and God poured out His wrath upon the world killing all but eight people. We are fast approaching the time when God will pour out His wrath a second time with the Trumpet and Bowl judgments.

“For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.” Matthew 24:38-39

The world cannot say that God has not warned them about the coming Trumpet and Bowl judgments. Incredible detail is given.

The first angel blew his trumpet, and there followed hail and fire, mixed with blood, and these were thrown upon the earth. And a third of the earth was burned up, and a third of the trees were burned up, and all green grass was burned up.
The second angel blew his trumpet, and something like a great mountain, burning with fire, was thrown into the sea, and a third of the sea became blood. A third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.
The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. The name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters became wormwood, and many people died from the water because it had been made bitter.
The fourth angel blew his trumpet, and a third of the sun was struck, and a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of their light might be darkened, and a third of the day might be kept from shining, and likewise a third of the night.
Then I looked, and I heard an eagle crying with a loud voice as it flew directly overhead, “Woe, woe, woe to those who dwell on the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!”
​ And the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit. He opened the shaft of the bottomless pit, and from the shaft rose smoke like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke from the shaft. Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth, and they were given power like the power of scorpions of the earth. They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any green plant or any tree, but only those people who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads. They were allowed to torment them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it stings someone. And in those days people will seek death and will not find it. They will long to die, but death will flee from them.
In appearance the locusts were like horses prepared for battle: on their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces, their hair like women’s hair, and their teeth like lions’ teeth; they had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. They have tails and stings like scorpions, and their power to hurt people for five months is in their tails. They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit. His name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon.
The first woe has passed; behold, two woes are still to come.
Then the sixth angel blew his trumpet, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar before God, saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour, the day, the month, and the year, were released to kill a third of mankind. The number of mounted troops was twice ten thousand times ten thousand; I heard their number. And this is how I saw the horses in my vision and those who rode them: they wore breastplates the color of fire and of sapphire and of sulfur, and the heads of the horses were like lions’ heads, and fire and smoke and sulfur came out of their mouths. By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed, by the fire and smoke and sulfur coming out of their mouths. For the power of the horses is in their mouths and in their tails, for their tails are like serpents with heads, and by means of them they wound.
The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands nor give up worshiping demons and idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk, nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.” Revelation 8:6-13, 9:1-21

Check out the Bowl judgments they are even worse Revelation 16:1-21, with the entire topography of the earth changed prior to Jesus setting up His Millennial Kingdom after defeating the Antichrist at the battle of Armageddon.

Do you need to get right with God to ensure you do not experience the coming wrath of God? If so get on your knees and repent of ignoring God and His wonderful offer of salvation through Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on your behalf. Find a born-again Christian near where you live and get baptized. If you need help in connecting with a Christian in your area send me an email – ron.careshare@gmail.com.

HUMAN PRODUCED GLOBAL WARMING

Posted on by

Part 1 of an important article by Don Batten and the CMI team entitled Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Go to http://www.creation.com to see the entire article.

Several important facts and concerns about this debate:

CO2 is ‘plant food’: Planet Earth’s plants would benefit from more of it, not less. Indeed, the increase in CO2 is now responsible for 30% of the world’s biomass production (food and fibre) over the last century, as documented in a paper in Nature in 2017.81 This is food for people and animals. And with more CO2 in the air, plants have to spend less time with their leaf pores (stomata) open. Thus they lose less water during the day and can survive on less water.82 Deserts are greening, largely because of the extra CO2. With the pre-Flood Earth having up to 15 times the CO2 that we have now, plant productivity would have been amazing. That is where fossil fuels came from, as the vegetation of the pre-Flood world was buried during the Flood and then converted into coal and oil. The draw-down in atmospheric CO2, with the burial of much carbon in the ground and the re-vegetation of the earth after the Flood, has resulted in the CO2 ‘drought’ that we are now in. This has been hampering plant productivity and the carrying capacity of planet Earth (at levels from 50–170 ppm, depending on the species, plants die)

Green House Gases (GHGs) are essential for life: Without them, the average temperature would be ~33°C lower; in other words, we would be well and truly frozen!27 Nearly all of this GHG effect is due to water vapour, and only about 3.3°C is due to CO2. The atmosphere is mostly nitrogen and oxygen, which have no greenhouse effect. Many discussions of climate change have excluded the effects of water vapour, which should respond dynamically to changes in temperature. Yet, since water has a much greater greenhouse effect, the exclusion of water from the debate is inexcusable. Other significant GHGs include methane, nitrous oxide, and chloro-fluorocarbons (CFCs), which were popular refrigerants in the past that have been removed from the equation.

Source of human global warming: If the concern was truly about saving the planet from global warming due to human-generated CO2, then the greatest sources of CO2 should be the main target for the action? Then why, when China is the world’s largest CO2 producer, is no one protesting outside Chinese embassies? Australia (for example) contributes just 1.2% of the world’s emissions, and yet is a target for activism. Yet if its emissions disappeared completely (with Australia reduced to a pre-industrial age), it would not make a detectable difference in world CO2 levels. China had nearly a thousand gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired electricity generation as of 2018, compared to 36 GW for Australia. Moreover, neither China nor India have any target to reduce their total CO2 emissions under the Paris Accord. Hundreds of new coal-fired power stations are planned for China, India, and other places. Where are the protests about China and India ‘destroying the planet’? The moral imperative should surely be to go after the biggest contributors first.

Fake News: In 1989 the UN said, “Entire nations will be wiped out by the year 2000 if sea level rises are not stopped.” Did this happen? No! Tuvalu, a Pacific Ocean nation of island atolls, is a favourite poster child for this claim. However, Tuvalu has increased 3% in land area over the last 40 years.

In 2007, Dr Tim Flannery, an evolutionary mammologist who headed up the Australian government’s climate change unit, predicted that even the rain that would fall would not be enough to fill reservoirs. Largely based on such dire predictions, desalination plants were built in three Australian states, at great expense; two have never been used. Australia has had major floods since then. Such expensive mistakes make it harder for governments to invest in major new projects if a real need arises. Flannery also said in 2008, “Just imagine yourself in a world five years from now [2013], when there is no more ice over the Arctic.” Similarly, in 2008 Al Gore said that the polar ice would be gone by the summer of 2014. They were echoing the common view of ‘mainstream’ climate scientists (e.g. James Hansen, Peter Wadhams, and others, widely reported in media outlets). The Arctic sea ice area measured each September (the end of summer, its lowest extent of the year) declined from about 7.5 million km₂ in 1980 to about 4–5.5 million km₂ from 2010–2020 (NSIDC/NASA)—which is still a lot of ice, so the predictions of no ice were seriously out of touch with reality. Please note that fluctuations in the amount of Arctic ice are expected. Besides short-term variation, there could be long-term trends as well. Also, this cannot be divorced from a discussion of the Ice Age caused by the Genesis Flood.

Failed Predictions: The most relevant failed predictions of the climate alarmists are those regarding rising global temperature, from the climate models.

The planet has warmed by about 0.8°C since 188024 and half of this warming occurred before there was any significant change in the CO225(that is, this part of the warming could not be due to human activity).

Atmospheric CO2 has increased since 1860 from about 285 ppm (parts-per-million; 0.029%) to 410 ppm (0.041%) in 2020. The rate of rise is about 2 ppm per year, or about a 50% rise over 160 years. It is important to realise the human contribution to CO2 emissions through the burning of fossil fuels is less than 5% of the total global carbon budget. Other sources include changes in land use (e.g. deforestation), volcanoes, the weathering of rocks, the release of carbon dioxide from the oceans (any warming of the oceans results in CO2 being less soluble and therefore it is released into the atmosphere), the breakdown of organic remains (dead wood in forests), etc.

More Fake News: The claim that 97% of scientists agree that human-generated CO2 will cause catastrophic warming to planet earth is fake news. When the raw data are examined, according to the authors’ own ratings, only 64 of the nearly 12,000 papers actually claimed that most of the warming is caused by human activity. In a follow-up analysis of the same papers, other researchers found that only 41 of those 64 papers endorsed the position that most of global warming was man-made.31 Taking into consideration that ⅔ of the papers expressed no view, that amounts to less than 1% of the papers that expressed a view. How did the authors get their 97%? They amalgamated all views that human-generated greenhouse gases are causing some warming. This is a trivial finding. In the USA, the Global Warming Petition Project has garnered the signatures of some 31,500 scientists resident in the USA alone, including over 9,000 with PhDs, who dispute the claim that CO2 will cause serious problems.29 This alone casts serious doubt on the 97% figure.

In 2016 alone, over 500 papers were published in peer-reviewed science journals that seriously questioned the supposed ‘consensus’ on climate change.33

Some high-profile scientists who dispute the alarmism include:

  1. Lennart O. Bengtsson, who was Director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, Germany.
  2. John R. Christy, Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.
  3. Roy Spencer, University of Alabama in Huntsville, and NASA. He and Dr John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites.35
  4. Judith A. Curry, who due to the “craziness” of the politicization of climate science, in 2017 took early retirement from her position as Professor in the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, USA, a position she had held for 15 years.
  5. Richard S. Lindzen, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT, contributed to the IPCC’s 1995 and 2001 reports but became skeptical of the alarmist climate model projections.
  6. Nir J. Shaviv, Professor and Chair of the Racah Institute of Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

There are many others. In September 2019, a global network of 500 prominent climate scientists and professionals stated that there is no ‘climate emergency’. They invited the UN to organize with them a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020.36