The Patriot Opinion

A modern day Liberty Tree under which an American Patriot makes a passionate attempt to reignite the smouldering coals of freedom in the hearts of his countrymen. "It does not take a majority to prevail, but an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams

Saturday, June 03, 2006

"An Inconvenient Truth"?

There’s been plenty of buzz going around recently about AlGore’s new film, “An Inconvenient Truth”, with many of the “critics” raving that it’s the greatest film ever, or something like that.

The reason they say this, of course, is that they like the message: “human activity is destroying the earth and we need government to step in and save the day.”

While it is true that government involvement stifles human productivity, the myth of so-called “global warming” is nothing more than an attempt to scare the population into giving more power to the “elite”.

By the way, I want to make it clear that I have not seen and do not plan to see this latest piece of propaganda. I’m talking about the issue as a whole here, and not AlGore’s movie specifically.

Isn’t it interesting, by the way, that the group whining today about “global warming” today and warning of impending doom is the same bunch screaming about “global cooling” thirty-some years ago?

Ah, yes, we were supposed to be in an “ice age” by the year 2000. Right! The only “ice age” in sight in Y2K was the movie! (Released two years later, in 2002)

What supposedly caused global cooling? Human activity. What supposedly causes global warming? Human activity.

What’s the bottom line? Say anything to scare the living daylights out of people so that they’ll bow to a rule of the “elite”.

Guess what? Some Russian “expert” is now claiming that global cooling will start again sometime around 2012!

Say, has anyone caught on that this might be—oh, I don’t know—a NATURALLY OCCURING CYCLE or something?

By the way, does anyone else notice the irony in complaints of warm weather? I live in Michigan. Our economy is currently the reason that people are moving out, but in a normal year, with a competent state government, (and therefore a decent economy) our largest population losses probably come from people fleeing to warmer weather in the South. (If only for the Winter) We could stand a few more degrees up here!

Could warmer temperatures ever be disastrous? Sure—once we escalate by 100 degrees or so in a couple years. See that happening? No!

By the way, scientists just recently “discovered” that the earth’s arctic regions used to be subtropical! Of course, if you’ve read your Bible recently, you already knew that!

(Note: these “scientists” claim that this was an absurd and nonexistent 55 million years ago—if the earth and sun existed 45 million years ago, their surfaces would be touching. Subtropical? Whatever!)

The point is, we’re fine now aren’t we? Life did not cease to exist because the polar ice caps were missing! (Actually, at that time they had never been there, but you get the point!)

Want to hear something really loony? “Scientists” are also claiming that global warming can actually cause global cooling!

So what it all boils down to is this: the real “Inconvenient Truth” is only inconvenient to people who gain power by scaring their fellow man into subservience.

By the way, in case you want to join me in ridiculing the absurdity of the “global warming” panic, drop by my store and check out my global warming T-shirts.

Whatever you do, don’t let anyone scare you out of your freedom. Believe me, there are a lot of people trying!

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey David,

Good logic here about those that use fear to extend their power, huh maybe we should call them terrorists. I would however be careful throwing in the "young earth creationist" comments because #1 they are not necessary to make your arguement and #2 I believe that CS will soon be totally debunked and Christians will once again hold the high ground in the Creation / Evolution debate. CS IS the reason we are not that ground now in especially in the scientific world. God indeed did create the world and everything in it but when we force our western enlightenment thinking on the Biblical text we do great harm to our understanding. See "Beyond Ceation Science" by Timothy Martin. http://www.truthinliving.org/Beyond%20CS1.htm

Blessings,

Steven J. Wagner
Whitehall, Montana

Sunday, September 03, 2006 11:37:00 AM  
Blogger David B. Thompson said...

Steve,

Thanks for your post! I apologize about the length of time it’s taken me to clear it; I’m doing a lot of catch-up work at the moment and I’m hoping to get back on a realtime schedule soon!

You're correct about the YEC comment not being necessary to my point; I threw it in to clarify that I do not endorse all of the statements made by the "scientists" in any of the articles dealing with the "discovery" in the arctic.

As to your comments about Creation Science, this isn't the place for that discussion, but I will say this much: Science--true science that is--never contradicts Scripture. The Bible is pretty clear about the worldwide flood and the length of Creation. The only reason for evolutionary claims that the earth is millions of years old is to provide a framework for an explanation of origins without acknowledging God as Creator. There is no scientific evidence of such age. There is, in fact, much evidence to the contrary.

I would disagree with your statements about the ground that we hold in the Creation/Evolution debate. We are being legislated (and litigated) against right and left to be sure, but the ground we hold in this debate is certainly the higher since we have the actual evidence on our side—something we would not have in nearly so great a quantity if we were to abandon the idea of a young earth.

You may want to reconsider what you call "the scientific world". Mankind has been trying to find excuses to ignore God and His law since shortly after Creation, and the modern "scientific community" is replete with men who are committed to doing so with "science", even if they have to throw out large portions of evidence to do so.

I will try to read your recommended resource (in the cracks of time) and will consider the author’s arguments, but if he attempts to discount the validity of the Word of God he won’t stand much of a chance to convince me of anything in the debate.

I’m assuming in my reply here that your qualm is with the entire idea of a six day creation and a relatively young earth. If I’m mistaken, please let me know.

Thanks again for your post!

God bless!

Monday, September 11, 2006 9:09:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey David, just looked at your Blog for first time. Great stuff man, I hope many people would read this stuff. Oh they sure do want to scare us don't they. The same can be found in the NAIS example, gun control, and a recent ban on interstate commerce of live fish. It's all an attempt to manipulate through false fears.

Thanks alot this is great David,

Your fellow patriot,
John B. Sauve

Friday, November 10, 2006 6:31:00 PM  
Blogger Scottie Moser said...

"Say anything to scare the living daylights out of people so that they’ll bow to a rule of the “elite”."

Hmm ... seems scare tactics are at work everywhere.

"Buy this brand of sunblock because it is more effective at preventing skin cancer!" Hmm ... did they even have problems with skin cancer back before sunblock was invented?

"Eat this cereal for breakfast and it might reduce your risk of heart disease!" Yeah ... read the fine print, and it turns out you eat this cereal as a part of a healthy diet along with exercise, and you're statistically less likely to contract heart disease. Okay, fine ... what if I choose a different brand of healthy cereal?

Fear sells.

— Scottie

Sunday, June 10, 2007 5:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

-- What’s the bottom line? Say anything to scare the living daylights out of people so that they’ll bow to a rule of the “elite”.

That sounds familiar... kind of like "fight terrorism there so we don't have to fight it here."

Look, everyone's got their opinion. But please don't set up a blog and decide that you'll give your opinion about topics in which you aren't fully educated/aware. What's the point? Please don't make a decision based on the information you've heard when you are only open to hearing/reading ideas that agree with your existing view. Look beyond your neighborhood, your city, even your country. If you're going to take a stand, take an educated stand. Read e-v-e-r-y-thing, check all "facts" and "statistics." And then, make some popcorn and sit down for an hour and a half. Watch the movie (An Inconvenient Truth).

Then write. Now that would be an informed opinion -- one that people might truly respect.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 10:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

-- Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

nice.
makes for some mighty interesting dialog on your blog when everyone published just agrees with you.
s.
a.
d.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007 11:02:00 PM  
Blogger David B. Thompson said...

As you can see, Anonymous, (is there a reason you won't use your name?) I don't filter comments based on whether they agree with me or not. If you'd care to browse the rest of my blog you'd notice that yours isn't the first critical post I've approved! I'm not afraid of dissenting viewpoints!

I've enabled comment moderation strictly to exclude foul language and crudity from this blog. I appreciate your clean language and also your attention to proper spelling and punctuation. Too few people online today care much for either.

On to your original comment.

You focus on attacking me with a series of false accusations but don't bother offering an argument against what I've actually said.

In reality, you have no idea how well educated I am or what evidence I have or have not considered.

Sadly, time and space prohibit an exhaustive explanation of every detail in the climate change debate. My point in this article was to highlight the driving ideology behind claims of "man-made climate change", and instill in my readers a healthy suspicion of these claims.

By the way, you referenced the current Republican Party mantra of "fight terrorism there so we don't have to fight it here."

You said that it sounded like a scare tactic along the order of the ones that I constantly renounce.

You're right; it is a scare tactic. The idea behind it is dangerous and when followed to its logical conclusion leads to a military police force patrolling every square inch of this globe--hardly an acceptable solution to a freedom advocate like myself!

Sorry if I stole your thunder on this, your only factually and logically supported point!

God bless!

David B. Thompson

Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:27:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home