Why I’m a Climate Change Skeptic

The question of whether or not human beings are changing the climate is a critical issue in today’s world. If it is indeed true, then steps must be taken to reduce human impact on climate. If is not true, but is a hoax being perpetrated for political gain, then it needs to be refuted and put behind us.

ClimateChangePersonally, I am highly skeptical that human activity is significantly changing the climate, because I can’t find any actual evidence to support the theory. What I find is a lot of spin. I see claims without any supporting evidence. I see politicians appealing to global warming as the cause for the rise of ISIS. I see laws being enacted to reduce our “carbon footprint” without any evidence to support the need to do so. I see pseudo-science being sold as fact to support political ideology. What I can’t seem to find is actual observational evidence that man-made global warming actually exists.

In order to establish that man-made global warming is fact, two questions must be answered: Is the climate changing? And if so, is humanity responsible?

Is the climate changing? Yes, the climate is changing, but, that’s what climate does. There have been warming and cooling trends throughout recorded history, as well as evidence that climate has always changed. The question is, is there any statistically significant difference between recent changes in climate and changes that have occurred in the past? From what I have been able to find, there is no credible evidence that the climate changes today are any greater than climate changes in the past; in fact, from what I can tell, recent changes have been very minor when compared to historical data.

polarbearAre humans responsible for the changes we see? Again, I can’t seem to find any actual evidence supporting the claim that human activity significantly changes climate. There is evidence that carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere is slightly higher today than it was in the recent past. What’s missing is direct evidence showing that this slight rise is due to human activity rather than natural causes, and that this rise has had any effect on climate. The evidence I find is that water vapor is the greenhouse gas most responsible for climate variation, not carbon dioxide, and that variations in solar intensity account for the majority of changes in climate.

Here’s a challenge to those who believe man-made climate change is real:

  1. Show me the evidence that recent changes in climate show a statistically significant difference from historical data.
  2. Show me the evidence that humans are responsible for these changes, ruling out all natural causes.

Don’t show me scientific opinions, political spin, or pictures of polar bears. Show me the empirical evidence. Don’t show me biased interpretations of the evidence, and don’t show me polls telling me what people believe. Show me the actual facts.

The Logical Fallacy of Requiring Material Evidence to Prove God’s Existence

The following graphic, which I saw on Facebook, sums up the argument I consistently hear from materialistic atheists in their arguments against God.

For many, this seems like a rational requirement. If something is true, there should be scientific evidence to prove it.

However, such a “rule” is actually nonsense. There are logical fallacies involved in requiring the use of the scientific method to prove the existence of God.

Fallacy #1 – It’s totally arbitrary

The first fallacy of requiring empirical scientific evidence to prove God’s existence is that such a requirement is total arbitrary.

When an atheist demands physical evidence for the existence of God, my first response is, “Why? Why is scientific evidence the only acceptable evidence?”

The usual response is, “Because the only way we can know anything is through physical evidence.”

And again, my response is, “Why?” And I usually get a confused stare, like I’m crazy for even asking such a question.

The point is, there is absolutely no logical reason why such a rule should exist – except for the worldview of the materialistic atheist. The materialistic atheist believes that the material world of matter and energy is all that exists. The thought that anything else could exist is absurd to them. However, material atheism is itself completely arbitrary.

Fallacy #2 – Category Error

A category error is “a type of informal fallacy where things that belong to one grouping are mistakenly placed in another,” or where “a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property.” If someone says, “My coffee is a Republican,” they are committing a category error – coffee cannot be a Republican. Only people can be Republicans. Coffee does not belong to the category of things capable of being a Republican.

The Biblical God is not a material Being. He is not part of the natural universe. By definition, God is supernatural (super- “Above; over;” natural “Present in or produced by nature”). God is in an entirely different category than the natural universe. When one demands physical evidence for the existence of a non-physical Being, they are committing a category error fallacy. It would be like demanding DNA evidence for the existence of black holes, or asking for a test tube full of consciousness, or trying to put time in a bottle.

Fallacy #3 – It’s self-refuting

What do I mean by saying this rule is self-refuting? Basically, this rule, when applied to itself, contradicts itself.

First, the rule requires “empirical results of repeatable experimentation.” There is no way to conduct a repeatable experiment to empirically test whether “empirical results of repeatable experimentation” are required to argue for the supernatural. One cannot use the rule to test the validity of the rule.

Second, the rule requires “cogent, non-fallacious argumentation.” Yet, as I’ve already demonstrated, the rule itself is fallacious.

Fallacy #4 – Even when the rule is met, material atheists ignore the evidence

This fallacy isn’t with the rule itself, per se, but with the way atheists handle the scientific evidence that does support God’s existence.

There is a tremendous amount of “empirical results of repeatable experimentation” and much “cogent, non-fallacious argumentation” that supports the existence of God. The sheer volume of such evidence makes it impossible to present these evidences in this brief blog. A simple Google search will bring up tens of thousands of articles, peer-reviewed papers, and Websites that present the scientific arguments for God. My point is, when confronted with these evidences, the materialistic atheist will reject it anyway. Why? Because to acknowledge the validity of scientific evidence for the existence of God would completely shatter the material atheist’s entire worldview. They would be forced to face the fact that they are wrong. In other words, the material atheist cannot objectively examine scientific evidence that is presented; they must deny it, not because it isn’t scientific, but because it leads to conclusions they don’t want to acknowledge. Romans 1:18 states, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.” Those that reject God must suppress, or hide, the truth. Romans 1 continues:

19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

Those who reject God ultimately do so, not because of a lack of evidence, but because they foolishly refuse to submit to His authority over their lives. The issue is not evidence; the issue is rebellion.

Christians need to continue to present the Gospel to non-Christians, including materialistic atheists. We must continually pray for the lost, be prepared to present cogent arguments when needed, and rely on the Holy Spirit to us to reach the lost. We must not be swayed by the fallacious arguments used to deny God, but must stand on the truth of God’s Word as the foundation of our beliefs.

Grabbed this off Facebook a couple of minutes after I posted this blog. It seemed to fit.

Random stuff from Facebook and emails, Part 5

Random pictures I either
found on Facebook
or had emailed to me.

Part 5:  Science and Math

Because these pictures all came off Facebook or emails, I’m not sure where most of this stuff originated, so if anyone knows, post a comment, and I’ll credit the source and link to it.

Click on a photo to see a larger version: