Global Warming — Alarm and Reason

It seems that anyone with access to television, the Web, printed media, and even telegraph lines has hard of (and has an opinion of) global warming. In recent years, global warming has been renamed to global climate change because the dire predictions were untrue, and many scientists claimed that anthropogenic (man made) is utterly false. While there is some degree (heh!) of warming, the pause in it has also contributed to the concept's declining status.

"Old Fire Alarm" Image credit: morgueFile / gracey

If you study on it, you'll notice that evolutionists and global warming proponents have pretty much the same presuppositions. They rely on naturalism (God is not the creator and is not in control of Earth), and indulge in selective citing of limited data in order to bolster their agendas and ignore inconvenient truth. It's a good idea to saddle up and ride to a high point for a broader view.

Since the late 1980s, global warming has been hotly debated, with many arguing that Earth is undergoing potentially catastrophic man-made climate change. Is Earth getting warmer? Is such warming, if real, dangerous? And is it caused by human-produced carbon dioxide (CO₂)? Or, to put it another way, is catastrophic anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (abbreviated as CAGW) real?

There has been a warming trend for much of the 20th century. In fact, ICR scientist Larry Vardiman did his own independent analysis of three different datasets and concluded that warming had probably occurred for at least the last 30 to 50 years.

But past warming is no indication that such warming will necessarily continue. In fact, there has been an apparent pause in this warming trend for the last 18 years. Nor does a warming trend automatically prove that human activity is responsible.

To read the rest, click on "A Realistic Look at Global Warming".

Proponents of global warming use naturalistic presuppositions based on an evolutionary viewpoint. They also conveniently neglect inconvenient data and indulge in selective citing. How about a realistic view?