I’ve noticed an interesting parallel between the global warming climate change predictions you’ve been hearing about, and the theory of evolution.

Both claim to be based on “science”, yet neither one is observable, repeatable, nor testable. They are both presented as fact in spite of this. And even though evolution is still the theory of evolution last time I checked, when you see it presented in the media, the word theory is seldom used.

If you dare question either of these ideas, you’re shouted down as an enemy of science, an enemy of “Mother Nature”, or an enemy of the State. Public (and many private) Universities, which claim to be institutions of free thought, will not countenance the presentation of evidence for creation, or evidence that contradicts evolution (and believe me, there is a massive amount).

If you question the premise that man-made pollutants are certain to cause a catastrophic warming of the entire earth that will result in widespread drought, famine, and pestilence, you’re compared to a backwards flat earth believer (seriously, this comparison was made in our local newspaper, which shall go nameless).

And if you’re actually brazen enough to suggest that evolution is untrue, and that God created the universe and all living things, then look out! You’ll be branded a religious fanatic that is ignorant of “science”, and you won’t even be allowed to present your case, at least not in the public schools, most universities, or the mass media.

Evolution or Creation?

Evolutionists are seldom, if ever willing to discuss the evidence for or against each idea. They have already made up their mind that evolution is true, despite the fact that there is no known mechanism to create all the new genetic information that would be required for evolution to be a reality. 

Natural selection won’t do it, because it merely re-shuffles the existing genetic information, rather than creating new information. And the odds against billions and billions of beneficial mutations simultaneously occurring in harmony and producing new forms and functions is so astronomical that it is mathematically impossible. (By the way, most mutations actual are detrimental and/or result in the loss of genetic information, such as albinoism, the loss of skin pigmentation). 

Evolutionist can’t even explain how life first formed. Spontaneous generation (living cells arising from non-living materials) has already been disproven (yes, the experiment and its results were observed, tested and repeated), and nothing plausible has been presented in its place. Last I heard, they were proposing that life on earth was brought here from outer space, which merely shoves the argument off to another planet. How convenient.

Evolutionists believe their theory because they want to, not because it’s scientifically valid and backed by irrefutable evidence. They have to believe it, because the alternative, an all-powerful, divine creator, is totally unacceptable to them.  

Care to make a prediction?

How accurate is your local weather forecaster? Pretty good for tomorrow’s weather, usually pretty good for 3 days out, wouldn’t you say? How about one week ahead? How about one month ahead? How about 30-50 years? That’s how far ahead the global warming advocates are claiming to be able to predict.

In case you don’t remember, it was just over 30 years ago that these same “scientists” were predicting a second ice age. Don’t believe me? Do a web search for “1974 ice age” (with or without the quotes). By now, the ice sheet should have been covering a large portion of North America, Europe, and Asia. Oops, looks like they missed it slightly.

In fact, the earth indeed has been warming . . . since about 1650 AD – centuries before factories belching CO2 and other greenhouse gases even existed. But the notion that this is a crisis and that mankind’s activities are primarily “at fault” is not a scientific consensus by any means. The earth has always gone through extended periods of warming and cooling, including the “little Ice Age” from 1450 to 1850, a period of record cold from 1940-1970, and the Medieval Warm Period.

According to Global Warming: Myths and Reality, “The most important greenhouse gas by far is water vapor, which evaporates from oceans, lakes and rivers. Water vapor accounts for up to 90% of the earth’s greenhouse effect. Atmospheric water vapor levels – like natural CO2 emissions from volcanoes and animals – rise and fall with changes in solar activity.

     To put it another way, the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is the result of changes in solar activity, not the cause of it. Climate change is natural, continuous, and caused by changes in solar emissions. Over thousands of years, the earth’s average surface temperature has varied within a narrow 4-degree temperature range. That variation causes both “warm periods,” like we are now living in, and “cold periods”

Yes, the world has real environmental problems caused by man, including pollution of the seas and destruction of rain forests. But the “global warming crisis” is largely a myth.”
http://www.isil.org/resources/fnn/2007june/global-warming-hoax.html

What’s the point?

Overcoming the built-in bias that favors these two unproven theories is difficult  to overcome. Truth-seekers don’t have massive government grants or beneficiaries to support their efforts, lack the support of the press and Hollywood, and are shut out of government-funded schools and universities.

But when you home school your children, you can teach them critical thinking skills that will help them to not blindly accept ideas without first doing their own independent research. They can learn how to think, rather than what to think.

This force-feeding of evolution/global warming to the public is just one of the more blatant examples of political correctness being passed off as truth. As a parent, you need to be constantly vigilant to any pronouncements that use the cover of “science” to give them the look of truth. Teaching your kids how to analyze the arguments for and against any idea or issue will go a long way in preventing flimsy philosophies from taking hold in their young minds.