Comments on: A Call to Serve and Preserve Creation

By: lemuria

lemuria — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 04:10:29 +0000

Personally, I think action in one's personal life is far more effective than relying on a government with a proven track record of blind incompetence to take action on our behalf.

By: lemuria

lemuria — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:10:29 +0000

Personally, I think action in one's personal life is far more effective than relying on a government with a proven track record of blind incompetence to take action on our behalf.

By: wjschroeder

wjschroeder — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:17:07 +0000

So how did all that ice from the ice age melt. was it global warming to. I dont thinbk there were many of us evil CO2 belching humans around then. maybe it was the dinos farting way to much. I am being humorus and a bit cynical. the earth is cooling down. So I have heard. what caused all the issues in the last few years was the sun cycle. we DO i believe move closer to the sun now and then, only makes sense we get warmer then. Al gore is a crook and a liar. a court case even confirmed this. never mind a hypocrite. Ever noticed later you dont hear about global warming anymore. Its a con game. Also the sun has this thing called sun flares at its peak it will cause problems here on earth. And for jim wallace to say we are to SERVE the earth well thats PAGAN. and he is totally wrong and I guestion is ability to think and disern what he hears and reades. it should not take a very discerning person who cares about what he wants to project to those he speaks to to know that this idea is flattly wrong and against Gods will.

By: wjschroeder

wjschroeder — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:05:25 +0000

I agree with you. they have been saying things like this for years and years. they just change the name or dier crisis. I have heartd the temp. of the earth has gone DOWN in the last year. maybe its becasue the sun cycle is over. I always wonder why those who speak of global warming and bring up melting glaciers. Let me think, they want me to use SCIENCE, yet they cant look back a “few” years ago at the time of the ice age and realise, IT ALL MELTED, and without our help. Yet KNOW its our fault, and we should give up all our freedoms to the government to stop it. YES we should be good stewards of the earth. but FOR HEAVENS SAKE we DO NOT serve it or worship it. this is PAGAN all the way. WAKE UP, use your commen sense.

By: wbminn

wbminn — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:07:31 +0000

Mr Wallis,

I realize many are concerned with the issue of global warming and climate change, but I have to confess that I am not one of these people.

On the otherhand, I do believe that we need to be stewards of the earth that God has created. We need to take measures to preserve our land, air and water. I support the 'green' movement.

I admit that I haven't delved into global warming and climate change, but would welcome any valid information in regards to these issues.

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:35:01 +0000

Let's DO something about Congress!
This is where the legislation comes from.
Any ideas?

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:23:26 +0000

NOWHERE MAN

He's a real nowhere man,
Sitting in his Nowhere Land,
Making all his nowhere plans
for nobody.

Doesn't have a point of view,
Knows not where he's going to,
Isn't he a bit like you and me?

Nowhere Man please listen,
You don't know what you're missing,
Nowhere Man,the world is at your command!

He's as blind as he can be,
Just sees what he wants to see,
Nowhere Man can you see me at all?

Nowhere Man, don't worry,
Take your time, don't hurry,
Leave it all till somebody else
lends you a hand!

Doesn't have a point of view,
Knows not where he's going to,
Isn't he a bit like you and me?

He's a real Nowhere Man,
Sitting in his Nowhere Land,
Making all his nowhere plans
for nobody.

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:58:24 +0000

No stand = no credibility, nowhere man.

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:55:30 +0000

Trash talk from the peanut gallery!

No stand = no credibility, nowhere man.

By: justontime

justontime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:52:07 +0000

Being taken seriously here is the objective? Really? I wasn't aware that was our objective.

By: justontime

justontime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:50:14 +0000

justintime thinks calling people traitors who voted against the Waxman/Markey/Pelosi/Wallis charade is good political commentary.

It sounds Bush league to me.

By: Clean Energy and Security Act: If Everyone’s Unhappy, It Must Be a Good Compromise - Elizabeth Denlinger - God’s Politics Blog

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:57:53 +0000

[...] readers of this blog may know, Sojourners supported the House bill, despite its many problems: not enough support for vulnerable countries adapting to climate change, [...]

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:32:47 +0000

Here's an article about the recent analysis of global warming by MIT scientists, which Krugman refers to in his NYT Op Ed piece:
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/roulette-051...

Climate change odds much worse than thought
New analysis shows warming could be double previous estimates
David Chandler, MIT News Office, May 19, 2009

The most comprehensive modeling yet carried out on the likelihood of how much hotter the Earth's climate will get in this century shows that without rapid and massive action, the problem will be about twice as severe as previously estimated six years ago – and could be even worse than that.

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:12:35 +0000

This is not the Middle Ages and global warming deniers are not Galileo.
You're on the wrong side of your own metaphor, Judith.
Galileo was censored and put under house arrest, while Bruno was burned at the stake by deniers of heliocentrism (the Church authorities) -- the medieval equivalent of 21st century right wing fundamentalist global warming deniers.

The nuclear winter scenario never came true because we haven't had a nuclear war -- at least not yet we haven't.

The story about Carlin's suppressed report is a hoax.
I posted a link -- read it.

The Yale.edu article confirms justes analysis of ACESA, not yours.

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:59:02 +0000

Krugman is commenting on the politics of ACESA in the House of Representatives.
Climate scientists with credentials have already established the reality of global warming.
Keep your eye on the ball, justontime.

By: justintime

justintime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:23:08 +0000

If YOU want to be taken seriously, take your stand, justontime.
Show us your best argument.
Put up or shut up.

By: justontime

justontime — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:08:51 +0000

Paul Krugman has NO credentials in the field of climate science.
He's just a political hack with a PhD in Economics.

Krugman using Rep. Broun's statement as the counterpoint to his ideas is like a father declaring himself a genius because he beat his five year old ten times in a row at Trivial Pursuit. If a columnist wants to be taken seriously he should refute the best arguments the other side has, not the dumbest.

By: Eric77

Eric77 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:55:39 +0000

In fact, no one had read the bill before it passed. Apparently, the manager's amendment (last minute changes to the bill made by the Committee Chairmen) that was adopted in the Rules Committee the night before the bill came to the floor made numerous changes to the bill but had not actually been incorporated into the bill by the time it came to the floor. While many of the changes were probably inconsequential we don't know and neither did the Congressmen who voted on the bill.

When the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006 they promised change in the way Congress operates, just like Obama has promised change in the way the Executive Branch operates. Nothing has changed in either branch except for the policy. The operations of Congress and the White House are the same, and, in some cases, worse. Secrecy, heavy-handedness and corruption continue as if the Republicans were still in power.

Meet the new boss...

By: BuckeyeDon

BuckeyeDon — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:20:33 +0000

Thank you, Justintime, for posting this column. Krugman has fairly and honestly laid out what's really at stake here.

By: judithod

judithod — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:21:17 +0000

More sour grapes and taunts, justintime? Please recall the hostility to which Galileo and his proponents were submitted. Of course, Galileo eventually was proven correct, but for “every Galileo,” there are many scientists whose theories were proven wrong.

Is the next day’s weather prediction always accurate? That is based on computer models, just as the global warming predictions for 2100. The skeptics of global warming also use models. Which models reproduce the most accurate data, particularly since no actual observational data concerning 2100 exist? After all, that nuclear winter prediction never came true.

Back to Dr. Alan Carlin, who like Krugman is an economist, but unlike Krugman, also has a degree in physics.

Here’s the website for Dr. Alan Carlin: http://carlineconomics.googlepages.com

And here’s an article that discusses the pros and cons of Waxman-Markey, including the reduction stats on global warming: http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2163