Posts by BurnTheShips

139

The Catholic Perspective

by sabastious in

in another thread, bts quoted this catholic doctrinal paraphrasing of adam and eve:.

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt1art1p7.shtml#390.

god created man in his image and established him in his friendship.

BurnTheShips

No rush, Seabass. This isn't an attempt to proselytize or bash you on my part.

BTS

221

http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestid=6b69327903d3d481&clickeditemrank=1&userquery=sunspot+activity+for+2008+iceage&clickeditemurn=http%3a%2f%2fglobalwarminghoax.wordpress.com%2f2008%2f04%2f23%2fsunspots-and-a-possible-new-ice-age-updated%2f&title=%3cb%3esunspots%3c%2fb%3e+and+a+possible+new+%3cb%3eice+age%3c%2fb%3e+%28updated%29+%c2%ab+the+global+warming+%3cb%3e...%3c%2fb%3e&moduleid=matchingsites.jsp.m&clickeditempageranking=1&clickeditempage=1&clickeditemdescription=webresults.

i hope this link works but there has been virtually no sunspot activity since the beginning of this year and the suns magnetic field is down 60%.. if this link does not work, you might like to try googling: sunspot activity 2008 iceage.. the last time this happened we moved into a little ice age which lasted from 1100 to 1800.. global warming lies may well have met their match with reality.. so how will they tax us for the 'ice age?

do we get our tax back that we paid because of 'global warming'.. is this why they have made fuel so expensive....because they know what is coming and they want to make a killing?.

BurnTheShips

In other words, stomatal index data may not be the able to measure the atmospheric concentration as precisely as its proponents would like.

I'll link this chart again, Besty. Please notice how well Kouwenberg's stomatal data maps to directly observed atmospheric CO2 levels. I'll make it easy for you: all the way to the right, and MLO refers to the directly measured CO2 at Mauna Loa.

BTS

221

The new Ice Age Cometh!

by Gill in

jw
friends

http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestid=6b69327903d3d481&clickeditemrank=1&userquery=sunspot+activity+for+2008+iceage&clickeditemurn=http%3a%2f%2fglobalwarminghoax.wordpress.com%2f2008%2f04%2f23%2fsunspots-and-a-possible-new-ice-age-updated%2f&title=%3cb%3esunspots%3c%2fb%3e+and+a+possible+new+%3cb%3eice+age%3c%2fb%3e+%28updated%29+%c2%ab+the+global+warming+%3cb%3e...%3c%2fb%3e&moduleid=matchingsites.jsp.m&clickeditempageranking=1&clickeditempage=1&clickeditemdescription=webresults.

i hope this link works but there has been virtually no sunspot activity since the beginning of this year and the suns magnetic field is down 60%.. if this link does not work, you might like to try googling: sunspot activity 2008 iceage.. the last time this happened we moved into a little ice age which lasted from 1100 to 1800.. global warming lies may well have met their match with reality.. so how will they tax us for the 'ice age?

do we get our tax back that we paid because of 'global warming'.. is this why they have made fuel so expensive....because they know what is coming and they want to make a killing?.

BurnTheShips

From his blog I gather he is an oil industry geologist with a certain point of view.

By the way... Wagner, Van Hoof, Kouwenberg and the other botanists publishing papers on plant stomata & atmospheric CO2 are generally not "skeptics." They are looking for a pre-industrial coupling of CO2 & temperature. They aren't trying to debunk AGW.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/plant-stomata-co2-levels.htm

Ice cores are a direct measure, so your question about which is the better proxy doesn't make sense.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/plant-stomata-co2-levels.htm

The Antarctic ice cores are not "direct measurements" of global atmospheric CO2. They are direct measurements of gas that filtered into snow and were eventually trapped in ice. They are an indication of what the atmospheric CO2 was in the air, near the ground over Antarctica.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/plant-stomata-co2-levels.htm

Stomatal density is an indirect measure. Experiments on stomata density showed that "the stomatal response to increasing atmospheric CO2 was identical to that induced by removing water from the plant roots" (here). In other words, stomatal index data may not be the able to measure the atmospheric concentration as precisely as its proponents would like.

We don't see those jumps in the plant stomata data either over the last 50 years. The stomatal response is consistent with a steady increase in atmospheric CO2 over the last 60 years...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/plant-stomata-co2-levels.htm

BTS

221

The new Ice Age Cometh!

by Gill in

jw
friends

http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestid=6b69327903d3d481&clickeditemrank=1&userquery=sunspot+activity+for+2008+iceage&clickeditemurn=http%3a%2f%2fglobalwarminghoax.wordpress.com%2f2008%2f04%2f23%2fsunspots-and-a-possible-new-ice-age-updated%2f&title=%3cb%3esunspots%3c%2fb%3e+and+a+possible+new+%3cb%3eice+age%3c%2fb%3e+%28updated%29+%c2%ab+the+global+warming+%3cb%3e...%3c%2fb%3e&moduleid=matchingsites.jsp.m&clickeditempageranking=1&clickeditempage=1&clickeditemdescription=webresults.

i hope this link works but there has been virtually no sunspot activity since the beginning of this year and the suns magnetic field is down 60%.. if this link does not work, you might like to try googling: sunspot activity 2008 iceage.. the last time this happened we moved into a little ice age which lasted from 1100 to 1800.. global warming lies may well have met their match with reality.. so how will they tax us for the 'ice age?

do we get our tax back that we paid because of 'global warming'.. is this why they have made fuel so expensive....because they know what is coming and they want to make a killing?.

BurnTheShips

I see you have edited your post, Besty, and asserted conflict of interest. Above are some references. One wonders why such assertions are valid on the one hand, but not on the other (as if oil stains judgement).

221

The new Ice Age Cometh!

by Gill in

jw
friends

http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestid=6b69327903d3d481&clickeditemrank=1&userquery=sunspot+activity+for+2008+iceage&clickeditemurn=http%3a%2f%2fglobalwarminghoax.wordpress.com%2f2008%2f04%2f23%2fsunspots-and-a-possible-new-ice-age-updated%2f&title=%3cb%3esunspots%3c%2fb%3e+and+a+possible+new+%3cb%3eice+age%3c%2fb%3e+%28updated%29+%c2%ab+the+global+warming+%3cb%3e...%3c%2fb%3e&moduleid=matchingsites.jsp.m&clickeditempageranking=1&clickeditempage=1&clickeditemdescription=webresults.

i hope this link works but there has been virtually no sunspot activity since the beginning of this year and the suns magnetic field is down 60%.. if this link does not work, you might like to try googling: sunspot activity 2008 iceage.. the last time this happened we moved into a little ice age which lasted from 1100 to 1800.. global warming lies may well have met their match with reality.. so how will they tax us for the 'ice age?

do we get our tax back that we paid because of 'global warming'.. is this why they have made fuel so expensive....because they know what is coming and they want to make a killing?.

BurnTheShips

Send me a link to the original published paper by the blogger David Middleton and we can go from there.

I see. Are you saying the data in the chart is false The blogger post is references the following published papers among others:

Rapid atmospheric CO 2 changes associated with the 8,200-years-B.P. cooling event

It thus may be concluded that leaf-based CO 2 data support a much more dynamic evolution of the Holocene CO 2 regime than previously thought. In effect, there seems to be every indication that the occurrence of Holocene CO 2 fluctuations is more consistent with current observations and models of past global temperature changes than the common notion of a relatively stable CO 2 regime until the onset of the Industrial Revolution.

http://www.pnas.org/content/99/19/12011

Another that shows more rapid and wider fluctiations:

Atmospheric CO 2 fluctuations during the last millennium reconstructed by stomatal frequency analysis of Tsuga heterophylla needles

A stomatal frequency record based on buried Tsuga heterophylla needles reveals significant centennial-scale atmospheric CO 2 fluctuations during the last millennium. The record includes four CO 2 minima of 260–275 ppmv (ca. A.D. 860 and A.D. 1150, and less prominently, ca. A.D. 1600 and 1800). Alternating CO 2 maxima of 300–320 ppmv are present at A.D. 1000, A.D.1300, and ca. A.D. 1700. These CO 2 fluctuations parallel global terrestrial air temperature changes, as well as oceanic surface temperature fluctuations in the North Atlantic. The results obtained in this study corroborate the notion of a continuous coupling of the preindustrial atmospheric CO 2 regime and climate.

http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/cgi/content/full/33/1/33

Care to comment on these? There are others.

BTS

221

The new Ice Age Cometh!

by Gill in

jw
friends

http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestid=6b69327903d3d481&clickeditemrank=1&userquery=sunspot+activity+for+2008+iceage&clickeditemurn=http%3a%2f%2fglobalwarminghoax.wordpress.com%2f2008%2f04%2f23%2fsunspots-and-a-possible-new-ice-age-updated%2f&title=%3cb%3esunspots%3c%2fb%3e+and+a+possible+new+%3cb%3eice+age%3c%2fb%3e+%28updated%29+%c2%ab+the+global+warming+%3cb%3e...%3c%2fb%3e&moduleid=matchingsites.jsp.m&clickeditempageranking=1&clickeditempage=1&clickeditemdescription=webresults.

i hope this link works but there has been virtually no sunspot activity since the beginning of this year and the suns magnetic field is down 60%.. if this link does not work, you might like to try googling: sunspot activity 2008 iceage.. the last time this happened we moved into a little ice age which lasted from 1100 to 1800.. global warming lies may well have met their match with reality.. so how will they tax us for the 'ice age?

do we get our tax back that we paid because of 'global warming'.. is this why they have made fuel so expensive....because they know what is coming and they want to make a killing?.

BurnTheShips

Stomata CO2 proxy data. As you know, current levels are just over 380 PPM.

Which is the better proxy? If it is stomata, then perhaps current levels aren't that unusual after all.

BTS

221

The new Ice Age Cometh!

by Gill in

jw
friends

http://aolsearch.aol.co.uk/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestid=6b69327903d3d481&clickeditemrank=1&userquery=sunspot+activity+for+2008+iceage&clickeditemurn=http%3a%2f%2fglobalwarminghoax.wordpress.com%2f2008%2f04%2f23%2fsunspots-and-a-possible-new-ice-age-updated%2f&title=%3cb%3esunspots%3c%2fb%3e+and+a+possible+new+%3cb%3eice+age%3c%2fb%3e+%28updated%29+%c2%ab+the+global+warming+%3cb%3e...%3c%2fb%3e&moduleid=matchingsites.jsp.m&clickeditempageranking=1&clickeditempage=1&clickeditemdescription=webresults.

i hope this link works but there has been virtually no sunspot activity since the beginning of this year and the suns magnetic field is down 60%.. if this link does not work, you might like to try googling: sunspot activity 2008 iceage.. the last time this happened we moved into a little ice age which lasted from 1100 to 1800.. global warming lies may well have met their match with reality.. so how will they tax us for the 'ice age?

do we get our tax back that we paid because of 'global warming'.. is this why they have made fuel so expensive....because they know what is coming and they want to make a killing?.

BurnTheShips

Hey Besty, what is your scientific opinion on this? What are the implications regarding recent atmospheric CO2 levels?

CONCLUSIONS

Ice core data provide a low-frequency estimate of atmospheric CO2 variations of the glacial/interglacial cycles of the Pleistocene. However, the ice cores seriously underestimate the variability of interglacial CO2 levels.
GEOCARB shows that ice cores underestimate the long-term average Pleistocene CO2 level by 36ppmv.
Modern satellite data show that atmospheric CO2 levels in Antarctica are 20 to 30ppmv less than lower latitudes.
Plant stomata data show that ice cores do not resolve past decadal and century scale CO2 variations that were of comparable amplitude and frequency to the rise since 1860.

Thus it is concluded that:

CO2 levels from the Early Holocene through pre-industrial times were highly variable and not stable as the Antarctic ice cores suggest.
The carbon and climate cycles are coupled in a consistent manner from the Early Holocene to the present day.
The carbon cycle lags behind the climate cycle and thus does not drive the climate cycle.
The lag time is consistent with the hypothesis of a temperature-driven carbon cycle.
The anthropogenic contribution to the carbon cycle since 1860 is minimal and inconsequential. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/26/co2-ice-cores-vs-plant-stomata/#more-30247 BTS

139

The Catholic Perspective

by sabastious in

in another thread, bts quoted this catholic doctrinal paraphrasing of adam and eve:.

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt1art1p7.shtml#390.

god created man in his image and established him in his friendship.

BurnTheShips

I don't believe you can be a subject of another entity while at the same time being in "friendship." To me, friendship is an equality whereas Adam's relationship with God was not equal so I would not call them "in friendship".

To you, then, friendship can only be among equals. I don't think that is necessarily the case. In Christianity, God is the only noncontingent, infinite/eternal being.

We are like God, but we are not infinite, like God is

We can never be equal, because we are limited, contingent beings.

This is why friendship with God is often described in parent/child terms.

^ Free submission? That is a very loaded term. So God creates me with free will since I can "freely" choose to be in submission to him or choose independence. Then he withholds friendship, and all benefits that come with that, for notchoosing to live in submission.

God never withholds his friendship, which is love. We can choose to accept that love and dwell in it, or we can choose to reject it and dwell outside of it. It is not that God ever withholds friendship, it is that we choose acceptance or rejection. Either way, we get what we want. God will not violate our wills in these matters. A love not freely chosen is not love at all.

^ Why must we "recognize" that we are dependent on God? We either are free to do as we wish or we are not. This reminds me of a father telling his son to respect him because of the position and not his actions. I would never expect my son to respect me if my actions didn't merrit respect. But that is what you say God expects. According to your "perfect scanario" we would have just accpeted the fact that we have limits. That we will only progress as a species when God allows for it, which of course defeats the purpose of progress when it intravenously injected into us by our Creator.

We must recognize our limited natures in order to dwell in God. We are not the transcendent God. In our lives, over which we have freedom to choose, we can make our choices without consideration for what is good. Our choices are made with love to the good and true, or towards the opposite polarity, which is the absence of it.

^ Trust is not the issue here, that's a strawman.

Please explain, perhaps it would help if you read some context. Trust is an integral component in a loving relationship. We either trust in God's goodness, or we do not. If we choose not to, we can set our own limits, and deal with whatever consequences arise from these.

You, and many other people in Organized Religion, have bought into the Bible's message: that we cannot direct our own step. Your reasoning for this is that we make mistakes, that we are flawed therefore all plans we make will ultimately fail. The "Devil's" message is the exact opposite: we can direct our own step. When it comes to "who ended up being correct" history would lean towards the Devil's position... because we are still here and progressing as a species.

The message is that we can do as we choose in opposition to goodness and truth; that we can choose falsehood and evil and be just fine. From the previous cited source:

1711 Endowed with a spiritual soul, with intellect and with free will, the human person is from his very conception ordered to God and destined for eternal beatitude. He pursues his perfection in "seeking and loving what is true and good"

1713 Man is obliged to follow the moral law, which urges him "to do what is good and avoid what is evil" (cf. GS 16). This law makes itself heard in his conscience.

1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one's own responsibility. By free will one shapes one's own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.

It is WE that choose to seek and love what is true and good. The apex of goodness and truth is God.

^ Oh poor God, he got rejected by his own creations! The nerve of those humans to exercise the free will imparted upon them when created. And God got pretty mad according to the Genesis account:

Do you mean the metaphorical account, Sabastious? Because you are now treating it as literal, which I do not.

All for what? Because man preferred himself? Of course we prefer ourselves. The better we are as individuals the better we are as a collective.

False dichotomy. We do not lose our individuality. Regarding moral law, would you like to drive on roads where we "prefer ourselves" as opposed to traffic signs, speed limits, drinking laws and red lights? What kind of collective transportation system would this be? Look what happens when people "prefer themselves" to the exclusion of laws. Do you stop being an individual when you choose to follow the law on our roads? Do you start being an individual when you do not?

. I find it interesting how God created the human "parent/child" relationship. We have a child and that child is dependent on us for a time. But eventually our child becomes an adult... andequal. We put people behind bars for raising a child to be a subject, or slave. We have created a code of conduct and call them Human Rights, because many people on this planet wish to enchroach upon those rights for self interest.

But that's not how God works, according to the Genesis account. We are designed to be perpetual children, which is thepolar opposite of how EVERYTHING works in the fleshly universe.

Can you stand there and tell me that God created everything to have a child phase except the relationship he has with hisgreatest creations? What a mind f*ck! Here we are surrounded by things growing into eventual autonomous entities including our own children.

This is where the analogy of God to a father starts to break down. No human father is an infinite being. God is. We will always grow and progress. There will always be more to learn, more to develop, more to grow. In relationship to God, we are always like children.

But we don't get the satisfaction of knowing that WE found a way to keep ourselves alive with food and shelter. That WE developed technology to better ourselves, that WE created systems of Law and Government to try to keep peace?

Do we deserve no credit? Does God deserve all the credit?

Where we have sought what is good and true as human beings, there has been progress, as you note. And yes! We do share the credit!

No he does not. He deserves a LOT of credit for designing us, but HE WANTS US TO HAVE THE CREDIT for what WE create! That's what He enjoys, just as you or I love seeing our children succeed and create something from nothing.

Of course he does! Where have I indicated otherwise? Your comment is not against Catholic teaching. Catholic teaching emphasizes the cooperation of Man and God.

Original Sin is a scam, a means to control. Humans are doing the best they can with the tools allotted and Original Sin discredits all accomplishment in the past 6000 years because we are all being "disobedient" and "only concerned with ourselves."

No it does not. Our fallen natures impede us, but they do not stop us, if we choose truth and good.

Well, who else is going to make an attempt to save this planet? Should we all be like Witnesses and lie down into the fetal position and wait for Papa God to come save us all?

Papa God works with us, and we with Him. God's grace means he helps us. God works through us. In doing good, we are working with God. In doing evil, we are working against Him. To be responsible stewards of the planet and those who live on it is to do good.

You are criticizing JW teaching in these comments, not Catholic teaching. JWism teaches you to sit back and do nothing. Catholicism does not. It teaches us to work to improve the world, while teaching us that, despite setbacks, we should trust that good will triumph over evil in the end.

This isn't just Catholic, of course.

From the comments:

I'm not a Catholic, but I can see that they have done a lot of good in the world. A lot of charities, hospitals, etc. I remember when I was 19 I got stranded in Lafayette, La. broke and homeless. A Catholic group there fed me and got me a bus ticket home. Do you think the JW's would have done that for someone, especially if they were a stranger and weren't a JW? I don't think so. The JW's and others like them would rather argue doctrine all day instead of displaying the fruits of the Spirit. Organized religion has its place but it's about having faith in Jesus Christ and walking in the Spirit. Based on what I've seen, JW's deny the Holy Spirit.

Here is a holiday article I read.

http://www.boston.com/yourtown/melrose/articles/2010/12/23/a_teenagers_simple_act_elevates_all/?camp=localsearch:on:twit:rtbutton

Both of these are small things, but they are great at the same time.

BTS

26