THE COALITION STAKES ITS CLAIM ON AFFORDABLE ENERGY

Posted on by

The claims supporting the global climate reset have persistently lacked predictive validity, a necessary pre­condition in the physical sciences. Rarely has the modelling convinced; and the scare campaigns, such as the nonsense from media creation Greta Thunberg, are just public relations pantomime. It is increasingly obvious that the routine threats that “time is running out” are just cynical scare mongering.

Previously the fact that it was blatant deception did not matter because the climate proponents enjoyed the support of the financial institutions and governments, which meant reasonable debate was suppressed. They are losing that support.

Financial fads usually disappear with great speed as the money moves elsewhere. It will be slower with governments. They are deeply ideolo­gically committed to net zero with a vast array of government regulations and funding for renewables, green government bureaucracies, local and global environmental organisations and agencies.  They will not reverse this easily.

Sadly, cheap and stable energy is essential for any economy to survive, particularly for industry. now that robotics and AI are essential components. Moreover, Australia has heaps of natural gas, oil and coal. We should have the cheapest energy for our industry and peope of any country in the world. AI Data Centres and robotics require lots of energy that is consistent not like wind and solar. Who can predict when the wind will blow, and the sun shines only during the daytime with no heavy cloud cover. With robotics and AI Amazon warehouses operate 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

In the end, it is always about the money, and I believe the financial sentiment is turning. The markets are realising that the massive investment returns in renewables will never materialise. Moreover, wind turbines and the transmission infrastructure needed are an eyesore.

Undoing the economic damage will take time, but eventually reality will even filter down to Australian policymakers. But don’t expect any among them to take responsibility for their delusions and errors.

After six months of vacillating over whether or not they should simply ape the government’s energy policies, the Coalition has come up with an alternative. Instead of destroying the Australian economy in pursuit of Net Zero, hopefully they’re going to prioritise providing Australians with affordable power. Whether they have the people to formulate the right strategy and communicate it to the public is debatable.

Fortunately, Jesus Millennial Kingdom is not too far distant. Biblical end times prophecies are playing out now and we may be in the last seven years of Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy. For Christians this is wonderful as we know God will rapture us to heaven before He pours out His wrath on an unrepentant world with the Trumpet (Revelation 8) and Bowl judgements (Revelation 16). Following the Trumpet and Bowl judgements Jesus and the glorified Saints return to rescue Israel at the battle of Armageddon. Jesus and the Saints will rule the world for 1,000 years so that God fulfils the covenant He made with Abraham and confirmed with Isaac, Jacob and David that Israel’s Messiah, Jesus will rule the nations of the world from a magnificent new Jerusalem. During the time God pours out His wrath upon the earth He reconstructs the geomorphology of the world so that Jerusalem is on the highest mountain in the world.

“The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nation’s fell, and God remembered Babylon the great, to make her drain the cup of the wine of the fury of his wrath. And every island fled away, and no mountains were to be found.“ Revelation 16:19-20

The millennial Jerusalem sits on the highest plateau and has two rivers flowing out of its east and west sides. The mountain’s great height emphasizes Jerusalem as the centre of world authority, for all the nations will flow to it. A totally new construct. The millennial Jerusalem is nine times larger than the current city. All the land of Israel round about Jerusalem, which was encompassed with mountains, but now these mountains shall become a plain.

For more on Jesus coming Millennial Kingdom go to http://www.millennialkingdom.net.

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

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

GERMANY FAILED TO ACHIEVE CLEAN ENERGY TRANSITION WITHOUT NUCLEAR

Posted on by

Germany was already reducing its greenhouse gas emissions before 2011, so it came as a surprise when Merkel announced that her government would “end the use of emissions-free nuclear energy and reach the age of renewable energy as fast as possible.” The Energiewende’s goal of reducing emissions 80 to 95 percent by 2050 was ambitious, but it was the prospect of achieving this goal without nuclear energy that truly turned heads. By shuttering nuclear plants and scaling wind and solar, Merkel made a poor bet that a green economy could run on wind and sunshine alone. 

After a swath of decrees and guidelines, as well as tens of billions of euros in subsidies for, and investment in, renewable projects, Merkel boasted about creating hundreds of thousands of green-collar jobs. Many Germans embraced this vision for the future, taking pride in their nation’s turn toward an economy powered by nature. Yet it quickly became apparent that while the Energiewende plan offered vision, it lacked sound strategy. 

Bureaucracy slowed the construction of necessary infrastructure for storing and transporting new renewable forms of energy. And suddenly Dunkelflaute—a term used to describe periods of low energy production when the sun failed to shine or the wind didn’t blow—entered the German vernacular. By 2019, the Federal Court of Auditors declared that the 160 billion euros ($180 billion) spent over the last five years were “in extreme disproportion to the results.”

By the tenth anniversary of the Energiewende, the scope of the project’s failure became clear. The year before, German leaders had celebrated renewables reaching 46.2 percent of national electricity consumption due to favorable weather conditions and lower demand. But in 2021, this trend reversed. During the COVID economic bounce back, energy demand exploded while wind power production decreased by 25 percent—leaving coal and natural gas generation to fill in the gaps. 

German households have the highest electricity prices in the world, but many Germans are still committed to their utopian vision. Last fall, voters pushed out Merkel’s center-right Christian Democrats in favor of a coalition led by the center-left Social Democrats. This wasn’t a refutation of the Energiewende though, since it appears that Chancellor Olaf Scholz will double down as he has expressed interest in being known as the “climate chancellor” and supports policies including an EU-wide carbon price.

The Energiewende has consequences beyond German borders too. The country can’t meet its energy needs with domestic wind, solar, and coal production. So Germans are eagerly awaiting the completion of Nord Stream 2, a pipeline that will deliver natural gas from Russia. It will pump fossil fuel into Germany while lining the pockets of Russian oligarchs with cash. Those excommunicated nuclear plants would have provided emissions-free energy without any reliance on Russia. 

Meanwhile in Brussels, Germany’s new Economy and Climate Protection Minister Robert Habeck wants to force the Energiewende plan on the rest of Europe. He recently rejected the European Commission’s plan to label nuclear energy “green,” saying the move “waters down the good label for sustainability.” As long as Germany is miscategorized as the global climate leader, other nations will follow its mindless model including Australia.

The European Union’s REPowerEU Plan, initiated in May 2022, has put nuclear energy at the forefront of its strategy to secure energy and achieve climate goals. France continues investing heavily in nuclear power, whereas Germany has moved away from it.

Rolls-Royce SMR Ltd

The Small Modular Reactor (SMR) business is one of the ways that Rolls-Royce is helping to ensure the UK continues to develop innovative ways to tackle the global threat of climate change.

With the Rolls-Royce SMR technology, we have developed a clean energy solution that can deliver cost-competitive and scalable net zero power for multiple applications – from grid and industrial electricity production to hydrogen and synthetic fuel manufacturing.

The need for clean energy has created a global demand for our SMR as countries look for ways to provide reliable ways to achieve net zero. Our SMR has been designed in direct response to that enormous global challenge and our ambitions are set to match that global market as we build a world-class global product.

IS THE NUCLEAR VERSUS RENEWABLES A “MAY THE BEST MAN WIN” RACE?

Posted on by

This article is taken from the article “Peter Dutton’s nuclear policy gives renewables investors a shock” in The Australian Monday 24th June 2024.

If renewable energy was the cheapest electricity source and nuclear the most expensive, the green energy barons would have nothing to fear from a nuclear competitor. Yet the market reaction to Dutton’s intervention proved investors don’t buy the government’s spin. They know that in a competitive market, nuclear generation will eat renewables’ lunch, just as coal once did before wind and solar were showered with subsidies and the market rules were altered in renewables’ favour.

(AUSTRALIA OUT) An aerial of the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor site on 14 November 2005. SMH NEWS Picture by ROBERT PEARCE. (Photo by Fairfax Media via Getty Images/Fairfax Media via Getty Images via Getty Images)

However, the Clean Energy Investor Group is hardly a disinterested observer. It is the peak body for major renewable investors, including Macquarie, Blackrock, Neoen, and Tilt Energy. Together, they own 76 clean energy assets worth $38bn. The present value of those assets is now hostage to the electoral fortunes of Anthony Albanese (current Prime Minister), which is why cashed-up renewable energy investors are accumulating a war chest of hundreds of millions of dollars to keep Labor in power.

The influence of this powerful, crony-capitalist enterprise is one reason Dutton has only an outside chance of turning nuclear into an election-winning issue. However, polling on public support for nuclear has been trending Dutton’s way, and the evidence from around the world is stacked in his favour. Bearing in mind, Australia already has a Nuclear Reactor. The High Flux Reactor was Australia’s first nuclear reactor. It was built at the Australian Atomic Energy Commission Research Establishment at Lucas Heights, Sydney. The reactor was in operation between 1958 and 2007 without incident, when it was superseded by the Open-pool Australian lightwater reactor, also at Lucas Heights and it is still in operation today.

However, the history of bad ideas shows them to be most potent when entrepreneurs discover ways of making a buck out of them. The influence of the cashed-up renewable energy sector in global politics and cultural institutions has made the net-zero narrative all but impossible to dislodge.

Protecting the present value of trillions of dollars of global capital rests on maintaining the fiction that wind and solar power, backed up by numberless batteries yet to be built and pumped hydro yet to be installed, is the key to rescuing the planet. Trillions of dollars of capital have been misallocated to this purpose thanks to perverse incentives provided by politicians whose most pressing concern is not to save the planet but to survive the next election.

Australia is not the only country caught up in the exuberance of the 2019 Paris climate conference and promised more than it could possibly achieve. It is hard to find a single Western economy remotely on track to meet 2030 commitments, let alone the big one in 2050. I will shortly put up a post entitled “Germany Failed to Achieve Clean Energy Transition Without Nuclear”

In a report published last month by the Fraser Institute, Czech-Canadian scientist Vaclav Smil outlined the task ahead. More than 4 terawatts of electricity-generating capacity must be replaced, and almost 1.5 billion gasoline and diesel vehicle engines must be converted to electricity. Almost all the world’s agricultural and crop-processing machinery must be replaced, including 50 million tractors and more than 100 million irrigation pumps. New heat sources must be developed to smelt iron, manufacture cement and glass, process chemicals and preserve food. More than half a billion domestic, industrial, and institutional gas furnaces must be abandoned. Novel forms of motive power must be found for 120,000 merchant vessels, and we’ll need to develop a carbon-free way of keeping 25,000 jetliners in the air. Not to mention, the AI revolution is gobbling up power. AI, the Cloud, and decentralized currencies like Bitcoin require enormous energy at a time when the world is trying to transition to solar and wind which are totally unpredictable power sources.

For Vaclav Smil, the most disturbing thing about the net-zero fallacy is what it tells us about the economic, numerical, and scientific illiteracy of a generation that is, on paper, the most educated in history. As Smil told American author Robert Bryce in an email exchange, we live in a fully post-factual world.

The net-zero fallacy has taken root “because the soil is receptive: utterly brainless mass of mobile-bound individuals devoid of any historical perspective and any kindergarten commonsense understanding”.

The cartoonish reaction to Dutton’s nuclear announcement last week was evidence of Vaclav Smil’s point. If there is a solid argument against legalising nuclear power in Australia, Chris Bowen failed to produce it. Bearing in mind we have had a nuclear power plant operating safely in Sydney for decades. Until he does, Dutton can safely regard the debate as won.

Yet politicians are not rewarded for winning fact-based arguments. They are rewarded by winning elections. As Thomas Sowell points out, one of the differences between economics and politics is that politicians are not forced to pay attention to long-term consequences.

“An elected official whose policies keep the public happy up through election day stands a good chance of being voted another term in office, even if those policies will have ruinous consequences in later years,” Sowell wrote in Basic Economics.

Yet the test of Dutton’s policy is whether it will increase competition in the market, offering a credible alternative to the untrodden renewable-only path on which we are embarked.

The squeals from the renewable energy establishment last week suggest he is on the right track.

Nick Cater is a senior fellow at the Menzies Research Centre, a visiting fellow at the Danube Institute, and a columnist with The Australian. He is a former editor of The Weekend Australian and a former deputy editor of The Sunday Telegraph. He is the author of The Lucky Culture published by Harper Collins.

We are living in the Biblical prophesied end-times world: God and His laws have been jettisoned, many churches have compromised with the world on homosexuality, gay marriage, and even transgenderism. Government debt is not sustainable so people’s confidence in politicians is at an all-time low, anarchy is next as energy supplies fail. Other, prophesied end times signs such as earthquakes, pestilences, and famine are already evident. The fact that the major Biblical end-times prophecy was already fulfilled over 70 years ago: the re-establishment of Israel as a nation, should give every Christian confidence that Jesus’ prophesied return to Earth is near.

ELON MUSK SPEAKING GOOD SENSE

Posted on by

I was surprised positively by Elon’s views on birthrate, wokeness, climate change, and even AI. Sadly, he is an evolutionist, and the fact he does not fear God is a major problem. Nevertheless, I think there is much wisdom in this video hence its inclusion on my site.

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.

FANATICS AT COP28 – THE U.N. CLIMATE CHANGE SUMMIT

Posted on by
Like the Inquisition of Galileo (zero tolerance for dissent), climate science now follows this same Inquisition approach… and the tactics have been very much on display during the 28th annual UN Climate Change Summit, known as COP28, which is currently taking place in the UAE. Everything about this event is a complete joke; even on the COP28 website they have a fancy video filled with global celebrities whose theme is “No more waiting. It’s time to take action“. Hang on a sec. What exactly was the purpose of the previous 27 annual climate summits if there hasn’t been any action yet? Apparently, COPs 1-27 were complete failures in which absolutely nothing has ever been accomplished. But now it’s up to COP28 to finally get something done? This is hilarious given that most of the big shots who are attending COP28 are the same virtuous hypocrites who have flown in on their private jets year after year to all the previous summits. I guess they’re finally serious about doing something this time. One widely publicized exchange over the weekend was the “She Changes” panel… because feminism and gender identity politics has soooo much to do with climate change. The science is clear. So, this panel was basically the former President of Ireland, Mary Robinson, trying to demonstrate her virtue and genius by berating the CEO of Abu Dhabi’s national oil company. But the CEO wasn’t having any of it, at one point saying, “Stop pointing fingers. Show me solutions. Show me what you can do. Show me your own contributions,” and blasted her for creating even more divisions in an already polarized world. Then he committed the ultimate heresy and said that completely eliminating fossil fuels in the near future would “take the world back into caves” and that “no science out there . . . says that the phase-out of fossil fuel” will achieve the UN’s global temperature goals. The reaction was almost pandemonium as virtuous hypocrites around the world immediately voiced their opposition to the CEO’s dangerous wrongthink.
“The science is clear,” said UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who added that we must “stop burning fossil fuels– not reduce, not abate. Phase out.”
“The science is absolutely clear,” said Bill Hare, the chief executive of a government-funded climate non-profit. Completely eliminating fossil fuels “will enhance the lives of all humanity.”
“The science of climate change has been clear for decades”, said Professor Frederike Otto, listed as one of Time’s “100 most influential people in the world”.There’s that magical phrase again: the science is clear.
Now, I’m not attacking climate science or those who dedicate their lives to it; there’s plenty of solid data out there. Plus, I love clean air and water as much as anyone, and I do my best to conserve resources and be greener. I’m also rational about it, which is why I’m so much in favor of nuclear power. But there is a certain arrogance to saying “the science is clear” without acknowledging any uncertainty, or that many of their end-of-the-world predictions haven’t come to pass. There’s nothing wrong with being wrong. Science is a process of continuous growth, examination, and discovery. But to say “the science is clear” is to say that today’s conclusions are fully settled and will never change. If we’re intellectually honest, there are very few things we can say this about. Yet these people insist that “the science is clear” about eliminating fossil fuels. We MUST keep global warming below 1.5C, and the ONLY way to do that is to completely eliminate, i.e. “phase out” oil. No discussion about costs and benefits is allowed. Their view is the only view. The science is clear. It doesn’t help that they make a joke of themselves by having their virtuous hypocrite climate bosses fly in on private jets. And they insist on mixing in gender identity politics. In fact, at COP28 this year, there’s an entire theme on the agenda for “Gender and Inclusion”. The science is clear. But even if we accept the absolute certainty of their conclusions, there’s the matter of implementing their ideas. They demand, for example, that all energy be green. That means (in their definition) solar panels and wind power. Yet shifting to 100% green energy will require many critical resources (like copper and various other minerals) that the world simply cannot produce. And even if the production capacity existed, these same people insist on shutting down the world’s mines– because they’re bad for the environment. They don’t think realistically about implementation or costs versus benefits; they live in a theoretical dream world where TeraWatts of green power will simply fall from the sky. It’s bizarre that such unrealistic fanatics have so much influence in dictating global policy. And this is one of the reasons I’m so vocal about investing in real assets, in part to benefit from their irrationality. If the climate fanatics want to shut down mines, yet simultaneously create skyrocketing demand for copper from solar panel production, then it seems pretty likely that copper prices could soar. If they want to completely phase out fossil fuel production, that probably means oil prices will rise. If they want to require every business to become “net zero” and buy carbon credits, it probably means that the price of carbon credits will eventually be much higher. And if reason ever prevails– which it eventually does– and nuclear power is finally recognized as a viable solution– which it is already starting to be– then demand for uranium will go through the roof. But given uranium’s meager production and almost entirely drawn-down stockpiles, this also suggests that the price of uranium could one day go nuclear.I won’t say the science is clear… because it seldom is. But in a world run by fanatics, these sorts of ideas certainly make sense to consider.
Another great post by Simon Black, Founder of Sovereign Man Investment Advisory Service
The reality is that a world that has rejected its Creator is headed for God’s judgement. God has told us in advance what will unfold in the years before Jesus returns to bring righteous rule to the Earth with His Millennial Kingdom. God has unfinished business with the nation He established for His purposes. At the outset, God’s covenants with Abraham and David promised that a future Messiah would rule Israel and the nations. The new covenant given to Jeremiah, confirmed by Isaiah and repeated in Hebrews makes it clear God will have his nation, Israel rule the nations with a rod rod iron.

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke… For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” Jeremiah 31:31-33

“And as for me, this is my covenant with them,” says the Lord: “My Spirit that is upon you, and my words that I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouth of your offspring, or out of the mouth of your children’s offspring,” says the Lord, “from this time forth and forevermore.” Isaiah 59:21

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his neighbour and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.” Hebrews 8:8-12

JESUS AND THE SAINTS WILL RULE AND REIGN WITH A ROD OF IRON IN THE MILLENNIUM

“The one who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received authority from my Father.” Revelation 2:26-27

She (Israel) gave birth to a male child (Jesus), one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which she is to be nourished for 1,260 days.” Revelation 12:5-6

“From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.” Revelation 19:15-16

Go to http://www.millennialkingdom.net for more information on what is next on God’s agenda for planet Earth.

WHERE IS ALL THIS INSANITY HEADED?

Posted on by

This article in Sovereign Man by the Founder is worth reading, for me, it just confirms the Biblical end-times prophecy of a one-world government will be fulfilled.

In a world full of unimaginable absurdity, we spend a lot of time thinking about the future… and where all of this insanity leads.

“Future Headline Friday”

It is our satirical take on where the world is going if it remains on its current path. While our satire may be humorous and exaggerated, rest assured that everything we write is based on actual events, news stories, personalities, and pending legislation.

December 1, 2028: United Nations COP33 Climate Conference Urges Americans to Stop Eating

As world leaders gather for the 33rd COP Climate Summit, the theme of this year’s event is “Just Stop Eating”.

“Farming, especially the production of meat animals, is contributing to the warming of the globe at an unprecedented rate,” said Secretary-General of the United Nations Justin Trudeau as he opened the conference. “And to tackle the root cause, we have to tackle demand— that is, people eating food.”

“This is a matter of public health. And as we learned from successfully combating Covid-19 with lockdowns and other restrictions, public health issues need the heavy hand of government to be solved.”

“Anything based on science can be justified as a public health mandate,” Trudeau said. “The scientific health benefits of fasting and calorie restriction are clear. And therefore these could, and should, be mandated on the American public.”

Trudeau also said that they are working with the Pope to get Catholics back to fasting from meat on Fridays and Lent but also at the next COP33 Climate Conference, we will host spiritual guru Charlotte Tan who promotes the practice of sun gazing to replace meals. “When you commune with nature, you realize the abundance around you. Gazing at the setting or rising sun can provide enough nutrients to your body to replace about half of your calories.”

Tan says that her “Nature’s Bounty” walks have also been popular among spiritually in-touch Americans. “What we do is take a quick walk around a yard or a city block and find all the unused food resources just there for the taking. By eating edible weeds like dandelion or chickweed, people can save money, which gives them more time for meditation and activism.” “But we don’t stop there,” Charlotte Tan continued, “Crickets, grubs, maggots— these might seem disgusting at first glance. But enlightened people realize these are just parts of nature. They are wholesome, fulfilling, and rich in high-calorie lean protein. And best of all, they don’t add to a human’s carbon footprint. In fact, by eating them, we reduce it.” Tan said that scorpions were especially popular food last year at her tent at Burning Man.

“In the past, we have focused on data and logic to try to convince people to eat bugs,” Secretary-General Trudeau said before the conference’s first night meal of filet mignon. “This approach tackles the emotional side. Tapping into the spiritual awakening happening around the world is a great way to advance our collective mission.” “We’re in this together,” he added, chewing his steak.

Simon Black is in fact James Hickman a very successful businessman with the well-read Investment Newsletter, Sovereign Man.

THE NEW RELIGIONS OF OUR DAY

Posted on by

The new One World WOKE Religion of LGBTQ and Climate Change is quickly replacing Christianity as the world’s top religion – and it is state-sponsored and media sponsored. Why are these a religion and why do governments and media support them? Watch the Nelson Walters video below for the answers.

The speed with which the Gen Z generation is embracing the LGBTQ agenda is frightening. It is now being reported at 40% and is a sure sign we are in the last days. It is like Climate Change activism, it has become a woke religion.

Biblical end times prophecies are fast unfolding in our days. The move to a one-world government and the emergence of the Antichrist is now not far off. Keep your eyes on the middle east and Israel. It is where all the future action unfolds.

In a DRAMATIC sign of how pagan the USA beliefs have become, a statue of the Harlot, based on a Sumerian goddess and the Baphomet, was raised to a place of dominion over the New York Supreme Court Building.

The placement of this piece, “both physically and symbolically elevates the female figure, putting her on a level plane with the traditionally patriarchal embodiments of justice and power.” It is titled NOW because artist Shahzia Sikande wanted to express that “now” is the time when female rights and voices need to be acknowledged, especially amid the overturning of women’s reproductive rights.

It is next to a statue of Moses, it symbolically says pagan sex practices have superior legal footing to the 10 Commandments in the state. Watch the Nelson Walters video following this one to learn all of the meaning behind the incredible symbolism in this statue and the implications for the future of New York and the USA