Creationist Wisdom #482: Bible & Climate Change

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Meridian Star of Meridian, Mississippi. The letter is titled Signposts on the road to Armageddon, and there appears to be a comments section at the end, but there aren’t any comments at the moment.

We don’t embarrass letter-writers by using their full names unless they’re politicians, preachers, or other public figures. This one is described as a bible class teacher on a local radio station — WMER, 1390 on your dial, which calls itself “Solid Gospel 1390.” That makes him prominent enough for us to use his full name, N. Brad Carter. This website says that he (or maybe his son, with “Jr.” after his name) owns that radio station. We’ll give you a few excerpts from his letter, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

In Genesis 1:1 it is written that ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.’ As the creator and designer of the world why would God lose control or give the control of the weather and environment to man?

Good question, Brad! However, we must interrupt to mention that his letter is mostly about global warming, which is not something your Curmudgeon knows very well. Nevertheless, we feel entirely competent to handle Brad’s letter, and as we proceed you’ll see why:

Creation science is more plausible than evolution science. There are four scientific conditions in evolution that have never been proven. No fossil remains have ever been found that demonstrate the jump between phylum, between classification and between gender. Thus, the idea is impossible. In fact, if the theory is classified as scientific, it must be repeatable.

You gotta admit, dear reader — that paragraph is pure gold! Read it again. Savor it. You will never see another like it. Okay, let’s proceed:

Scientist that specialize in the realm of weather and the environment, gathered in New York City for the United Nations Climate Summit a few days ago. President Obama was invited to address the plenary session to promote changes that will save the world. If this summit was complete in all areas (plenary) there would be little to discuss. The results of their endeavor will accomplish nothing when God says that man will be scorched by the sun during the tribulation period. [Bible quotes omitted.]

Brad is right. All those climate conferences seem to leave the bible out of their discussions. He continues:

The world says today, we can change the environment and God has nothing to do with it. However, God says [Bible quotes omitted]. Charles Dudley Warner, a friend of Mark Twain, was quoted with his statement, “everybody talked about the weather, nobody seemed to do anything about it.” If we could do anything about the weather or the environment we would act.

Show me a political campaign promise that stopped Hurricane Katrina, or Sandy or others. What human response will be able to stop the earthquakes that create Tsunamis? Man has not been able to stop volcanic eruption like the Japanese volcano last month, or Mount St. Helens or even Mount Pinatubo which I visited in 1992-93 to provide architectural engineering and missionary assistance. When volcanos erupt or when the natural aging process of the earth continues there is a cooling process as it always has been.

He’s right again. Politicians can’t stop hurricanes and earthquakes. Here’s more:

God has indeed established certain laws and principles that govern nature, but he remains sovereign over these laws and they do not change. Barack Obama and Al Gore think that man is causing the world to continually warm? The scientific fact is that the earth continues to die and the temperature of the earth has continually cooled.

Egad, the earth is dying! Moving along:

The laws of thermodynamics state that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The Second Law states that when we extract energy by heat from a high-temperature energy source and then convert it into work, at least some of the energy must be lost in the form of heat and that heat will cool.

Well, yeah, he’s got a point there. Another excerpt:

Historically, God controlled the weather using it to direct people and nations. The Earth was destroyed by the flood where people and animals were killed. [Bible quotes omitted.]

Yes, if there’s one thing to be learned from the tale of the Flood, it’s that we can’t control the climate. And now we come to the end:

Man will fix the ozone layer! I don’t think so. Man will fix the CO2 level! I don’t think so. Global warming will continue to be controlled by God. [Bible quotes omitted.]

We don’t know about you, dear reader, but Brad has convinced the Curmudgeon.

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

28 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #482: Bible & Climate Change

  1. That one’s truly a classic. Thank goodness it’s too early in the day to be playing the Drinking Game.

  2. why would God lose control or give the control of the weather and environment to man?
    The same question was raised in the 18th century when it began to be understood that there were extinctions. How could God allow that?
    No fossil remains have ever been found that demonstrate the jump between phylum, between classification and between gender.
    1. There is more evidence than then the fossil record.
    1a. I’m liberal enough to yet you say that common descent is only within phyla – how about that there is fossil evidence within just vertebrates: fish to land, reptiles to mammals, reptiles to birds, etc. Are you OK with that?
    2. Change in sex is observed to happen in living, adult animals (“sequential hermaphroditism”) — see the Wikipedia article on “sex change”. We don’t need fossils. Indeed, how could a fossil change sex? (And I am resisting the urge to comment on gender.)

  3. SC: “You gotta admit, dear reader — that paragraph is pure gold! Read it again. Savor it. You will never see another like it.”

    The wording is unique (phylum (phyla?), classification (?) and gender (!)), but in a way every anti-evolution rant is like it. If anything, his other quote is even more unique among science-deniers:

    As the creator and designer of the world why would God lose control or give the control of the weather and environment to man?

    As any Christian or Jew will tell him, God gives control to His Creation all the time. It’s called free will. But as an unrepentant authoritarian, he knows how to have it both ways with free will, and ultimately take no responsibility for anything.

  4. Classic case of “if I don’t understand something, just deny it”.

    Don’t understand how man impacts climate change–just deny it.

    Don’t understand how something could be, such as how to realistically address climate change, don’t become educated on the subject, just deny it

  5. Eddie Janssen

    I think it is time again for this wonderful insight of St. Augustine:

    “It often happens that even a non-Christian knows a thing or two about the earth, the sky, the various elements of the world, about the movement and revolution of the stars and even their size and distance, about the nature of animals, shrubs, rocks, and the like, and maintains this knowledge with sure reason and experience. It is offensive and ruinous, something to be avoided at all cost, for a nonbeliever to hear a Christian talking about these things as though with Christian writings as his source, and yet so nonsensically and with such obvious error that the nonbeliever can hardly keep from laughing.
    “The trouble is not so much that the erring fellow is laughed at but that our authors are believed by outsiders to have held those same opinions and so are despised and rejected as untutored men, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil…How are they going to believe our books concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven when they think they are filled with fallacious writing about things which they know from experience or sure calculation?
    “There is no telling how much harm these rash and presumptuous people bring upon their more prudent brethren when they begin to be caught and argued down by those who are not bound by the authority of our Scriptures, and when they then try to defend their flippant, rash, and obviously erroneously statements by quoting a shower of words from those same Sacred Scriptures, even citing from memory those passages which they think support their case, ‘without understanding either what they are saying or things about which they make assertions’
    (I Tim. 1:7)” – St. Augustine in The Literal Meaning of Genesis

  6. Diogenes Lamp

    Lemme get this straight.

    Corporate executives can come to your house and damage your property. They can even defecate on your dining room table. And you’re not allowed to complain, you’re not allowed to say, “If you defecate on my dining room table, it damages my property and endangers my health”– no, you may not say that because God in the Bible says He controls the environment, therefore no man can ever damage the environment nor any public nor private property, therefore no human person can, or should be, held accountable for any damage he does– no matter what the evidence indicates, no such damage can possibly exist; no matter the evidence, no corporate executive could have damaged your property even if he defecates on your dining room table– because the Bible says so.

    Shouldn’t that make you question your initial assumption that the Bible is correct about facts and morals?

  7. There are no liars like the ‘LIARS for GAWD’.
    From the 1st sentence to the end is just one lie after another. And no I do not accept that he is ignorant and doesn’t know better. Cuz as other commentators have pointed out 20secs on Google (blessed be the true gawd) can show how much BS this dude is spreading.

  8. L.Long declares: “From the 1st sentence to the end is just one lie after another.”

    Oh yeah? Then please name a transitional gender fossil. You know — something with half a scrotum and half a uterus.

  9. Holding The Line In Florida

    Hey, we might be dumb as a box of rocks, but for the last two weeks, by thunder, we are the top of the heap in college football! Even us ex-pat Mississippians walk a little more pep in our step! That of course is our true religion! Hotty Toddy!!

  10. I think this might have been the worst Creationist rant yet.

  11. Unfortunately for N. Brad, I just read a week or two ago that scientists have determined that the ozone layer is recovering, i.e. the measures we’ve taken to stop human destruction of it have worked, and have “fixed” it.

    Oops.

  12. Our Curmudgeon challenges us to

    name a transitional gender fossil. You know — something with half a scrotum and half a uterus.

    Dr. Georgia Purdom must be a strong candidate for such a chimera–but I’m not prepared to investigate in detail.

  13. @Holding The Line In Florida
    The lower score wins in track and golf, why not in football? Let the kids hear the alternative and choose.

  14. @L.Long

    20secs on Google (blessed be the true gawd) can show how much BS this dude is spreading

    Maybe he rejects Google as the Instrument Of Satan? And perhaps you’ve identified the precise reason why he does so.

  15. Diogenes Lamp

    Oh, that’s rather insulting! I like Georgia Purdom. Not her ideas though.

  16. “The Second Law states that when we extract energy by heat from a high-temperature energy source and then convert it into work, at least some of the energy must be lost in the form of heat and that heat will cool.”

    Allowing for the peculiarities of the American dialect, the fellow is perfectly correct. However, he has omitted the next part…

    “Unless there is another big source of heat out there at an even higher temperature that scientist don’t know about.”

  17. “Then please name a transitional gender fossil.”
    I’m going to steal this one from you, dear SC.

  18. TomS responding to Holding The Line In Florida:
    “The lower score wins in track and golf, why not in football? Let the kids hear the alternative and choose.”

    Not only that, but it would be the truly Christian thing to do — you know, turn the other cheek and all. Let the other team feel good about themselves. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

    One would think that with all those self-proclaimed Christians living in
    Florida, the football teams would have taken Christ’s message to heart in this manner. But noooo… they have to prove to the rest of the nation just how powerfully they can pound the opposing teams into the ground. How un-Christian! Tim Tebow should be ashamed of himself, putting all those bible verses under his eyes. 😉

    I write this while watching Sunday Night Football — remembering the Sabbath to keep it holy.

  19. Of course the scientific illiteracy and downright lies masquerading as fact would disgust anyone with a scientific education, and even me; and gawd, what I wouldn’t know would fill libraries. But as always, what fascinates me is that the theology is just as pig-ignorant. You could even argue that it is pre-eminent.

    The first actual untruth in this piece – in the form of a rhetorical question that suggests its own answer – occurs in the second sentence:

    As the creator and designer of the world why would God lose control or give the control of the weather and environment to man?

    Which implies that God didn’t give control of the weather or any aspect of the environment to man.

    But the Bible says that God told man to “subdue the Earth”, implying that He gave man the means. And the means and the free will to use them carry their own implications and their own consequences.

    Denial of this fact – that mankind has power to change the Earth, including its climate, for good or for ill – is firstly denial of the text; but also of the efficacy of free will, of human power and universal sinfulness, and hence subvertive of the doctrine of the redemption itself. This is a far more deadly thrust against Christianity than regarding the stories of Genesis as parables told to make a moral point. If they are parables, then the moral and theological truths that they teach remain; but if the stories are regarded as literal but their moral truths are denied as this writer has denied them, then the whole basis of Christian theology is subverted.

    This writer demonstrates catastrophic ignorance not only of science, but of his own religion. He literally doesn’t know what he has done. I suppose he might be comforted by Jesus’s plea to His Father, to forgive under those circumstances. But if I were as terrified of hellfire as he almost certainly is, I wouldn’t be so cavilier about relying on God’s goodwill.

  20. @Dave Luckett: You make too much sense for Dale to understand what you wrote, even if he were to read it.

  21. Justin: "I think this might have been the worst Creationist rant yet."

    So what do you consider the “best” creationist rant? 🙂

    My 2c: To me a “good” creationist rant is one like this one, convincing only to committed science-deniers, and probably causing many fence-sitters to reconsider their (pseudo)skepticism of science. The truly worst rants are the ones that spread the most misconceptions to the largest audience. Without mentioning creators or making young-earth claims that at least half of committed evolution-deniers find absurd, the ID scam subtly exploits the public’s suspicion of science and scientists, and willingness to give an unfair advantage to “underdogs.”

  22. retiredsciguy: “I write this while watching Sunday Night Football — remembering the Sabbath to keep it holy.”

    The Eagles won because I prayed for them to win. Falsify that! 😉

  23. @Dave Luckett
    If they are parables, then the moral and theological truths that they teach remain; but if the stories are regarded as literal but their moral truths are denied as this writer has denied them, then the whole basis of Christian theology is subverted.

    I noticed this with the modern geocentrists. They made the point, forcefully, that the Bible says in no uncertain terms that the Earth is fixed, and if you deny that, then deny that the Bible tells the truth. What if someone were to take them seriously, and then comes across some reason to accept that the Earth is a planet of the Sun? What are the chances that that person will also decide on a more sophisticated faith? I think that it more likely that one would decide that belief is impossible.

    And you will see this tactic used to scare people into creationism – if you “believe in Darwin”, then you will deny Christianity, and you have no basis for morality, etc. etc.. That is playing a game of chicken with you, expecting that you will not have the courage to challenge what is said. And with nothing to back up such bravado.

  24. Sorry SC & realthog but I don’t understand your reply to me??
    As this dude is basically saying creation is right and evilution is wrong, with no proof of anything. Also saying ‘NYC is in NY’ while true does not mean that the overall statement ‘NY is on Mars’ true. So he had a couple of points but the overall effect is a negative.

  25. Solid gold indeed! “No fossil remains have ever been found that demonstrate the jump between phylum, between classification and between gender.”

  26. I think he has confused “class” the next level below phylum with “classification” and gender with “genus.” If so, he has skipped over “order” and “family” in the hierarchy of classification of animals. What has he got against order or the family, I would like to know? On the other hand “genus/gender” it is just as funny either way!

  27. Very late, I know (two jobs makes it difficult to keep up), but I have to point out that the “Man would not be able to destroy anything that God made” argument of right-wing creationists and right-wing climate change deniers can be refuted in two words: “Passenger Pigeon”.

  28. That “Anonymous” is me; not sure why I was anonymized…

    [*Voice from above*] Identity restored.