You are hereClimatology: Futurist Fundamentalism’s New Hydra Head

Climatology: Futurist Fundamentalism’s New Hydra Head

  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 842.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 745.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_boolean_operator::value_validate() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::value_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter_boolean_operator.inc on line 149.

By SuperSoulFighter - Posted on 17 January 2007

by John McPherson
When we think of "futurism", we naturally find ourselves referring to the theological/doctrinal perspective involving the supposedly future "Second Coming of Christ", the "end times"/Apocalypse scenarios forecasted by prophecy hacks on TV, and all other nonsense of that nature. But futurism is much more diverse, in reality. It is an all-encompassing philosophical perspective that affects every one of us, every day, at every level of society.When we think of "futurism", we naturally find ourselves referring to the theological/doctrinal perspective involving the supposedly future "Second Coming of Christ", the "end times"/Apocalypse scenarios forecasted by prophecy hacks on TV, and all other nonsense of that nature. But futurism is much more diverse, in reality. It is an all-encompassing philosophical perspective that affects every one of us, every day, at every level of society.
As we are all aware, our global climate appears to be in a state of flux and instability. Some sort of cyclical change is occurring. The futurist climatologists would have us believe that mankind’s pollution and overpopulation of the planet are the primary contributing factors in this area. The tragically comic element in this is that man was not responsible for bringing ANY of our ecosystems into being, nor do we sustain them at the planetary level. Yet all of a sudden, we are somehow responsible for potentially jeopardizing all life on this planet and it all hangs in the balance - our pollutants and our means of controlling and reducing them being the ultimate measure of our projected survival as a race. It’s ludicrous on the very face of it! And yet, the high priests of this new, pseudo-scientific fundamentalism - David Suzuki and Al Gore (that pre-eminent scientific “authority”, author of “An Inconvenient Truth”) being the most visible – assure us that our unavoidable reality involves battling climate change globally through drastically increasing our pollution contols industrially, commercially and personally. WE are causing the “global warming” effect by releasing unprecendented levels of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The thinking here is remarkably similar to that of the Christian fundamenalist futurists who start with a presupposition and then “proof-text” their way into a hermeneutically-distorted and mangled pespective on Bible prophecy.


As an example of the absence of true, empirical science in global warming futurism’s agenda, please consider the following. I receive a newsletter from
www.environmentaldefense.org from time to time, and at their affiliate site,
www.fightglobalwarming.com , they have the following tidbits on their “Myths and Facts” link:


MYTH
Global warming is just part of one of the earth's natural cycles.
FACT
The global warming we are experiencing is not natural.


People are causing it by burning fossil fuels and cutting down forests. Scientists have shown that these activities are pumping far more carbon dioxide (C02) into the atmosphere than was ever released in hundreds of thousands of years. This buildup of CO2 is the biggest cause of global warming. (IPCC 2001) Since 1895, scientists have known that CO2 and other greenhouse gases trap heat and warm the earth. As the warming has intensified over the past three decades, scientific scrutiny has increased along with it. Scientists have considered and ruled out other natural explanations such as sunlight, volcanic eruptions and cosmic rays. (IPCC 2001)
Though natural amounts of CO2 vary from 180 to 300 parts per million (ppm), today's CO2 levels are around 380 ppm. That's 25% more than the highest natural levels, looking back 650,000 years. Increased CO2 levels have corresponded with higher average temperatures throughout that long record. (Boden, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center)


As you can imagine, not only did I do a “double take” when I read the ludicrous claims that CDIAC has accurate, empirically verifiable climate data detailing CO2 levels in the atmosphere over the last 650,000 years – I actually gagged. What a joke. How can these people possibly expect anyone to take their claims seriously?


The “Inconvenient Truth” for Al Gore, is that man’s impact on the global climate is minimal at best. Certainly, reducing our greenhouse gas emissions might help reduce the drastic levels of change occurring, but this IS a part of the planet’s natural cycle. And out here on the West Coast of BC, Canada – our winter is anything BUT unusually warm. We’re having the coldest, snowiest, iciest winter in ten years out here. In fact, we haven’t had a winter like this (if you include November’s massive rains that wiped out local roads and power repeatedly) for thirty years. The global warming pundits need to come out here and explain themselves as they fight to navigate our icy roads and avoid the 25-foot snowbanks. The ice storms south of us and the blast of winter weather on the East Coast of Canada should really raise some eyebrows among those whose critical thinking capacities aren’t dulled by mass media pulp fiction.


The "sad plight" of the "dying polar bears" - those beautiful creatures of the north - also gave me a chuckle. The overpopulation of those bears has put man on the menu up there for many years, and the people in Flin Flon and Churchill, Manitoba are breathing a little easier when they hear that the bear populations might be reduced through the loss of the ice pack. They are also aware, however, of how adaptable these animals are and how they hunt both on LAND and off of the ice. It is highly unlikely that the loss of the ice pack will mean the disappearance of the polar bear completely. It might mean, however, in the short term, that residents of northern Manitoba and Nunavut will have fewer worries when considering strolling around their communities freely and safely.


For Full Preterists, of course, the apocalyptic doom-and-gloom projections so popular among sensationalist futurists are demonstrably false and baseless when considered in the light of Biblical truth. Texts such as Psalm 104:5, “5 You [God] who laid the foundations of the earth, So that it should not be moved forever” ; Gen. 8:21,22, “21 And the Lord smelled a soothing aroma. Then the Lord said in His heart, "I will never again curse the ground for man's sake, although the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done. 22 "While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, Cold and heat, Winter and summer, And day and night Shall not cease." ; and Eccl. 1:4, “4 One generation passes away, and another generation comes; But the earth abides forever” readily spring to mind. When considered in conjunction with each other and the immediate contexts involved, it is apparent that not only is the planet and its day/night and seasonal cycles eternal, but that mankind’s existence on it is likewise established forever. The Creator has declared this to be the eternal reality for this planet and our physical realm, thereby nullifying all pessimistic futurist projections and prognistications.


We have a wonderfully optimistic view of the future to share with those around us. The more exposure we gain in the media (and online) for Preterism’s positive perspective on this planet’s ecosystems, environment and climate in terms of their continued, divine maintenance and sustenance, the better for human civilization as a whole.


John McPherson
Gold River, BC

Ed's picture

Yes, and it was only about 30 years ago that these same liberals were saying that we were facing the "next ice age" due to global cooling.

The media reported with glee right after the first of the year that 2006 was the warmest year on record. Of course, that' due to the fact that December (at least up here in Michigan) had NO SNOW.

But, just to prove that God has a sense of humor, He sent these storms right after the news reports. Ice storms, record lows, several feet of snow, etc., etc.

But this brings up another point: why are Americans so stupid? Is it just because of public education? I mean, any reasoning person would watch Al's movie and laugh his ass off from the silliness. Once the storms hit, the argument should be over. Al's a propagandist, nothing more. But America still rents the video (our video store was out of copies, about 8 on the shelf, all gone). Who rents this stuff?

Could it be a bunch of college students, getting data for their next paper? Or maybe those same college students (Young Republicans) getting drunk or stoned and getting a belly laugh while watching Al trying to be a serious advocate of anything.

CO2 nourishes plants, which in turn give us Oxygen. The by-product of burning hydrocarbons is hydrocarbons, which after cooling, fall to the ground, fertilizing it. Therefore, all the fossil fuel we burn results in one basic thing: a fertilized and CO2 rich plant. So, get ready all you vegans out there, the huge crops are coming in.

I would also encourage those vegans to save our planet by eating as much beef as possible, since their farts are causing global warming. Might help.

One more point for you John, in reference to the theological futurists: Rick Warren, Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis, et al are all believers in global warming. But the rub is that some pretty prominent Preterists are claiming that global warming is true too. What's their excuse?

ed

ed

Papa is especially fond of us

SuperSoulFighter's picture

Hi, Ed! Thanks for the great response!

Yes, I think I remember the forecasts about the impending "ice age". And out West here, we did notice with interest (and some envy) that back East you folks had no winter at all till late December. We, on the other hand, got hit hard in early November and haven't looked back since. It's been a wild one here. No evidence of "global warming" whatsoever.

But, just to prove that God has a sense of humor, He sent these storms right after the news reports. Ice storms, record lows, several feet of snow, etc., etc.

Yep, the timing on that winter weather was perfect! Climatologists and meteorologists sure end up looking silly when they're busy gloating over what seems to be very clear evidence supporting their theories, only to have them smashed by winter's full force.

But this brings up another point: why are Americans so stupid? Is it just because of public education? I mean, any reasoning person would watch Al's movie and laugh his ass off from the silliness. Once the storms hit, the argument should be over. Al's a propagandist, nothing more. But America still rents the video (our video store was out of copies, about 8 on the shelf, all gone). Who rents this stuff?

I agree 100% Ed. Al's a propagandist alright. That's really all he is. The big question is...WHO is paying his tab? Who's financially supporting his cause and promotional efforts? And yes....WHO is renting his stuff and buying his wares? I think the indoctrination of the public at large via the mass media and educational institutions has been unfortunately rather effective in many cases.

CO2 nourishes plants, which in turn give us Oxygen. The by-product of burning hydrocarbons is hydrocarbons, which after cooling, fall to the ground, fertilizing it. Therefore, all the fossil fuel we burn results in one basic thing: a fertilized and CO2 rich plant. So, get ready all you vegans out there, the huge crops are coming in.

I think you're right on these points also, Ed! This reminded me, too, of the quiet failure to acknowledge the absence of any massive, enduring environmental impact from the massive oil spills that occurred many years back - the Exxon Valdez being the most recent and closest to home. No word from the environmentalists on why the ecosystems recovered so quickly and well. Hmmmm....rather instructive for the rest of us, I'd say.

I would also encourage those vegans to save our planet by eating as much beef as possible, since their farts are causing global warming. Might help.

LOL. Hilarious, Ed! Thanks for the great laugh!

One more point for you John, in reference to the theological futurists: Rick Warren, Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis, et al are all believers in global warming. But the rub is that some pretty prominent Preterists are claiming that global warming is true too. What's their excuse?

Yeah, that concerns me too, Ed. Futurist Christians obviously have a close affinity to anything suggestive apocalyptic global change, but Preterists shouldn't be buying into that nonsense. We have a much more accurate, clearly rational, logical and well-supported foundation (both Scripturally and scientifically) for our optimistic views. I, personally, would have a terrible time reconciling Full Preterism with global warming environmental activism. But I'd be interested to hear from those Preterists who think there's some sort of potential correlation.

JM

DavidF's picture

Thanks for the laughs Ed. You're funny. It's still very frosty up here in NW Wisc. and I must admit that beef just doesn't do it: a big pot of beans is the only thing that works in this ecosystem!

Islamaphobe's picture

This is an interesting post, John, one that I can handily "warm up" to. Although I was an economist by profession, I had a lot of training in geography, including physical geography and earth science. I also taught natural resource economics and environmental economics for about a half dozen years. I am aghast at the lack of respect for and understanding of genuine evidence that exists among the global warming advocates. There is nothing new about long-term swings in earth's temperature, of course. What is new is the determination of so many whom I identify as "liberals" to ascribe the probable modest rise in Earth's average temperature to man-made carbon dioxide (and lately to the "production" of methane by domesticated cattle). To my mind, this is a rather different variety of "futurism" from that evinced by so many religious conservatives who love to think that the world is going to hell and will have to be rescued by divine intervention of the apocalyptic variety. This futurism of liberals is, I think, a kind of religion substitute that is related to a weakening of Christian belief and disillusionment with the promises of earthly utopia by Marxism and other varieties of socialism. Can it be that the ability of humankind to apply reason to human existence owes a great deal to the Christian faith? I think so.

I like your biblical quotations, but I would argue that Earth is not eternal. It will last a very long time, for sure, but the day will come when our Solar System no longer exists. Let us say that Earth is functionally eternal as far as human beings are concerned.

John S. Evans

SuperSoulFighter's picture

Hi, John! Thanks for your excellent response! Obviously, your background lends considerable credence to your views in this area and I respect and greatly value your input here. Thankyou for weighing in on this!

Like you, I am also aghast (well-chosen word!) over the lack of true science supporting the claims of pop-climatologists and global warming pundits, today. The "modest rise in Earth's average temperature" is, I believe, something like one or two degrees over the last hundred years. That includes the more primitive means of measuring planetary temperatures that existed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the resultant data. One might be tempted to accuse global warming advocates of having access to some kind of "time machine" permitting them to travel back in time to various epochs, bringing back with them very specific measurements of greenhouse gas levels. Such an outlandish, absurd scenario is hardly any more outrageous than the claims they're already making.

To my mind, this is a rather different variety of "futurism" from that evinced by so many religious conservatives who love to think that the world is going to hell and will have to be rescued by divine intervention of the apocalyptic variety. This futurism of liberals is, I think, a kind of religion substitute that is related to a weakening of Christian belief and disillusionment with the promises of earthly utopia by Marxism and other varieties of socialism. Can it be that the ability of humankind to apply reason to human existence owes a great deal to the Christian faith? I think so.

I like the distinction you draw, here, between the futurist pseudo-scientists found in the global warming movement and those within mainstream, fundy Churchianity. I think you make a good point, also, concerning the possible psychological source of the popularity of radical environmentalism. I chatted with an economics major online not long ago concerning the possible "big money" behind the movement and its foremost advocates. He suggested it could be the high-tech sector quietly supporting the whole thing behind the scenes. Those involved with developing and promoting hydrogen fuel cells as a replacement for fossil fuels, for example, would have powerful financial motivations for supporting any attacks on the wide-spread, continued use of fossil fuels. I felt his suggestion had considerable potential merit. One need only track down the sources of funding to be able to determine much more accurately the true nature of the agenda behind the heavy public indoctrination currently ongoing in the media, our educational institutions and (via the prophecy hacks in the "churches" throughout the West) from the pulpits of conventional Churchianity's various denominational places of gathering and communal worship. Global warming fits like a glove, of course, with the Apocalypticism so devoutly cherished among Christian futurists.

Concerning the eternality of the Earth - you may have a point, but at present I'm still inclined to see an endless timeline of history where both the planet and mankind's existence on it are concerned. The language of the Scriptures seems quite specific concerning the existence of this realm in which we live, but I'm open to further consideration of this whole issue and the intimations of the original languages involved.

Thanks again for your good input, John!

JM

Islamaphobe's picture

Thanks for your thoughtful remarks in response to my comments. I like the point you make about radical environmentalism being driven, in part, by funding. That funding includes government money as well as "the high-tech sector quietly supporting the whole thing behind the scenes." I learned long ago that the "souls" of many academics and, even more so, college administrators, are rather easily purchased. And you are right, of course, that global warming does fit some of the acopalyptic theology indulged in by practitoners of "conventional Christianity."

I have been thinking about doing an article for this site on some aspects of the economics of wishful thinking that the Democratic victory in November has made a more serious threat to the health of the U.S. economy. That article will deal with such matters as trying to solve poverty by raising the legal minimum wage and pretending that supply side economics does not exist. Your article reminds me that global warming is, to a considerable extent, a product of the same unfortunate mindset.

JSE

SuperSoulFighter's picture

More good thoughts and comments, John! I look forward to your article detailing the societal, economic and political ramifications of "liberal Democrat" extremism. There is extremism in both camps, both Republican and Democratic, and any extremism (including Christian fundy futurism) is unbalanced and detrimental to our society.

Have you ever read "Freakonomics", John? I was intrigued, as I read that book recently, how economics involves not just an understanding of basic wealth creation and management within a specific economic framework, but it also entails a much broader understanding of the various elemental mechanics of that society and the innermost influences and sources of change. It's an extremely intriguing read!

Islamaphobe's picture

I have only read a couple of reviews about "Freakonomics," and I am sure that it is a good read. I probably would not agree with everything the author does, but I am convinced that economic principles can be applied far more rigorously than they generally have been to help us understand "the innermost influences and sources of change." Yes, there is extremism in both camps, but I personally feel that the extremism from the left is far more dangerous to society at large.

Starlight's picture

John and JM,

Interesting discussion but I tend to remain somewhat skeptical of both sides of the arguments. We are definitely in a warming trend though as we see the breakup of the polar ice and glaciers melting away. Of course we have been in this trend for a while anyway. The bottom line for me is what repercussions are we going to see from these issues. Could we inhibit that trend if we wanted to and if not what will happen on good ole mother earth. Will these warmer days bring in regional food increases in some areas, will we lose some low lying islands, all sorts of questions that good science people need to ask devoid of their political positioning.

Norm

SuperSoulFighter's picture

Hi, Norm!

Yes, I think the bigger questions need to be asked in terms of the planetary ramifications of this general warming trend. My article focussed on the active, deliberate dissemination of misinformation on the part of radical environmentalists.

Yes, I believe this is a natural cycle this planet is in, and I have heard from some credible sources that it is a 20,000 year cycle (based on some ancient texts pertinent to astronomical charts and orbital trajectories). Supposedly, we are going to be closer to the sun than we have been for the last 20 millennia, around the year 2012. Our changing proximity to the sun could be a significant contributor to the climate change we're seeing. Certainly, significant submarine geothermal activity is likewise a part of that process. Has this geothermal activity (and the recent tsunamis, etc.) been caused by underground nuke testing we're not aware of here in the West? That's one suspicion/theory of mine.

Anyway, there are tons of possibilities, and I really don't think industrial pollution has had nearly as big an impact as the environmentalists would like to pretend it has.

Islamaphobe's picture

Some good science people ARE asking the right questions devoid of political positioning, but they are not the ones getting the attention, or the "research" funds. You seem open to the proposition that global warming is man-caused and willing to consider policies based on that assumption just in case it's right. I feel that this is a dangerous position. Personally, I am confident that the proposition that global warming is man-caused is unproven, and I have certainly heard nothing from Al Gore that demonstrates anything other than a willingness to suppress honest discussion. Adopting policies to deal with a problem whose causes are not fully understood could be disastrous. Now I'll go along with the idea of trying to adopt policies designed to restrain the growth of CO2 emissions when doing so does not cause great harm to the economy, but I don't think that's what Algore & friends have in mind. By the way, don't forget that CO2 promotes plant growth, and perhaps that suggests that it makes sense to work against deforestation.

All of which reminds me to buy some Clementines tomorrow morning if the supermarkets have not priced California's "global warming" into the prices of citrus.

Starlight's picture

John,

I'm on the side of good science, and I don't really care which side of the politcal spectrum it falls on. I'm not a democrat nor do I care less about Algore's (youve been listning to Rush haven't you) thinking except to enjoy ridicuiling it. And yes I am open to the proposition that global warming could be influenced by man, but like you I'm not convinced by the envirionmentalist wacko's arguments of it's significance. But I'm also not adverse to keeping an open mind toward the subject incase I have to eat crow some day. Actually it's more like black birds as have you noticed that the birds seem to keep increasing in numbers. And speaking of the end of the world i'm wondering if all the ice caps melted if we would have another global flood. I guess that would prove whether there was enough water on the earth to cover Mt. Everest by an extra 15 to twenty feet. I'm just having some fun John but mostly I'm with you on this.

Norm

Recent comments

Poll

Should we allow Anonymous users to comment on Planet Preterist articles?
Yes absolutely
23%
No only registered users should comment
77%
What are you talking about?
0%
Total votes: 43