|
Newsletter (April 30, 2010)
Above the FoldWithout doubt, one of the greatest threats to society and the church today is the multifaceted environmentalist movement:
- Environmentalism has become a new religion.
- Environmentalism’s policies are devastating to the world’s poor.
- Environmentalism threatens the sanctity of life.
- Environmentalism is targeting our youth.
- Environmentalism’s vision is global.
The Cornwall Alliance is excited to announce a conference next week in the Washington, D.C. area. Attend Resisting the Green Dragon and learn from top experts (including Peter Jones, Charmain Yoest, Vishal Mangalwadi, Becky Norton Dunlop, and Steven Hayward) the challenges, pitfalls, and opportunities presented by modern environmentalism.
Resisting the Green Dragon takes its cue from James 4:7, "Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you." Find out how the Bible powerfully confronts environmental fears and how – in God’s wise design – people and nature can thrive together.
On Friday and Saturday, May 7th and 8th, the first nine sessions of a twelve-part video series will be filmed before a live audience at Immanuel Bible Church in Springfield, VA. Click here to watch the video trailer, and find out how you can attend for free!
In This Issue
Featured- How a Climate Change Treaty Threatens You, Your Nation, and Your Church
- Networks Hide the Decline in Credibility of Climate Change Science
Debate- Earth Day Blues
- Meager Harvest: Review of The Green Bible
- Climate Debate Gets Ugly as World Moves to Curb CO2
Science- Faith of Our Grandfathers
- Winter in Siberia May Be Coldest on Record
- Public Skepticism Prompts Science Museum to Rename Climate Exhibition
Economics- A Gasoline-Fueled Earth Day
- Book: Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future
Upcoming Events
Briefly Noted
Meet the Critics: John R. Christy, Ph.D.
Landmark Documents from the Cornwall Alliance
FeaturedLecture by E. Calvin Beisner
National Spokesman, Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation
Family Research Council, April 22, 2010
Read the rest.
Related item:
Christian Theologian on Earth Day: ‘Climate Change Is the Totalitarian’s Dream Come True’
by Penny Starr
Senior Staff Writer, CNSNews
April 22, 2010Back to top by Julia A. Seymour
Assistant Editor and Analyst, Business & Media Institute
April 21, 2010
. . . . The Media Research Center’s Business & Media Institute examined every network report containing the terms “global warming” or “climate change” on morning and evening newscasts between Nov. 20, 2009 (the day the ClimateGate scandal broke) and April 1, 2010. These were some of BMI’s findings:
- Broadcasts Silent about Scandal, Then Defend Alarmist Science: It took ABC, CBS and NBC 14 days to even mention the ClimateGate e-mail controversy. When they couldn’t get away with it any longer they downplayed its threat to the credibility of the global warming movement. CBS’s Wyatt Andrews defended alarmists against accusations of “fraud” and “deception” saying “if that’s true, it’s a fraud adopted by most of the world’s leading scientists...”
- Networks Bury Climate Science Revelations with Avalanche of Warming Stories: The networks aired more than six times as many global warming alarmism reports than they did stories mentioning any of the problems with climate science research (86 to 13). ABC and NBC both aired stories about Arctic photographers that indicated their pictures were proof of global warming, even though they were not part of any scientific analysis.
- Media ‘Disappointed’ by Lack of Results in Copenhagen: There has been no media attempt at objectivity: all three networks supported the purpose of the Copenhagen climate conference. CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson said, “Few would argue with the U.S. having a presence [there].” But by the end of the conference some reporters fretted about the lack of a binding agreement. NBC’s Lester Holt said the conference “fell far short of what many hoped for.” ABC’s Charles Gibson said the non-binding nature of the agreement makes “you wonder if this really is worth the paper it’s printed on.”
- NBC the Worst: Seventy-five percent of stories on NBC (42 out of 56) promoted the global warming movement’s perspective, compared to 48 percent on CBS (16 out of 33). During the Copenhagen summit, NBC described left-wing protests (demanding more action be taken to prevent climate change) in flattering terms, despite hundreds of arrests. “The protest has a bit of a feel of a street fair,” NBC’s Anne Thompson cheerfully claimed.
- CBS the Best: In addition to the lowest percentage of alarmist reports, CBS was also the only one of the three networks to mention climate science errors beyond ClimateGate. On Feb. 4, 2010, the “Evening News” reported the incorrect Himalayan glacier prediction as well as problems with Chinese weather station data.
To improve coverage, BMI recommends:
- Don’t Ignore Problems with Alarmists’ Data: All three networks avoided reporting on ClimateGate for 13 days; it wasn’t until the 14th day that NBC finally broke the silence. If the cover-up and potential manipulation had been done by scientists arguing against the threat of climate change, would the networks have ignored such a scandal?
- Report Both Sides of Climate Science Debate, Don’t Advocate One Side: Reporters have a professional responsibility to remain objective and avoid inserting their own opinions into stories. Many network reporters have sorely missed that mark when it comes to reporting on global warming and climate change.
- Be Skeptical of Scientists and Politicians Pushing Threat of Warming, Not Just ‘Naysayers:’ Journalists should always look for ulterior motives, possible biases and sources of funding on the part of their subjects rather than taking their word for it. A healthy dose of skepticism especially toward the politicians and scientific alarmists would have resulted in much better reporting on climate change.
- Find Other Scientific Viewpoints: There are many scientists who are not part of the global warming consensus. The media often unfairly lump them into one group with labels like “skeptic,” “denier” and “naysayer.” This is an injustice given the widely divergent views in the scientific community. Network reporters should reach out to such scientists and hear what they have to say instead of dismissing and disparaging them. They could begin by attending the 4th International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago May 16-18.
Read the rest and read the full study.Back to top Debateby Steven F. Hayward
F. K. Weyerhauser Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
April 23, 2010
Environmentalists are used to wallowing in misery--in fact, it makes them happy--but the 40th anniversary of Earth Day this week should offer up an extra helping of woe, for the movement has lost its mojo. Opinion surveys show not only that public belief in and concern for global warming is plummeting, but that environmentalism in general is falling out of favor. They have no one to blame but themselves.
The first Earth Day in 1970 was a sensation, amounting to a coming out party for a major new social and political force, and for the next decade the environmental movement became arguably the most rapidly successful social movement in U.S. history, with a string of landmark national statutes passed in quick succession with large bipartisan majorities, such as the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and culminating in the Superfund toxic cleanup act in 1980. But the field has been stagnant ever since, with environmental issues becoming highly polarized on ideological lines resulting in a complete stalemate on new legislative policy initiatives (though environmentalists are still thriving in the courtroom and in the bureaucracy).
In 1990, according to an ABC News/Gallup survey series, 75 percent of Americans said they considered themselves to be environmentalists, with only 24 percent saying they did not. The numbers have been slowly reversing over the last decade. As of 2008 (the most recent year the question was asked), only 41 percent of Americans identified themselves as environmentalists, with 58 percent now saying they do not. And Gallup's annual environmental survey also finds the public now favors economic growth over environmental protection by a 53-38 margin. For most of the last 25 years, even during previous recessions, the public favored the environment over the economy by as much as a two-to-one margin. In 1991, the beginning of a recession, the margin was 71-20 in favor of environmental protection over the economy. Surveys also show surging support for nuclear power and expanded oil and gas production in the U.S. No wonder the 40th anniversary of Earth Day is passing quietly this year. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top Review by Telford Work
Associate Professor of Theology, Westmont College
Christianity Today, February 18, 2009
Environmental crisis is a cliché whose connotations of divine judgment we no longer notice. But the term is apt for what is happening to the earth today. Habitats are disappearing and species going extinct at unprecedented rates. Artificial chemicals in ecosystems worldwide are lowering sperm counts and upsetting the gender balance of newborn vertebrates, including humans. The situation is grave even if we table the contested issue of global warming. Pioneering evolutionary biologist E. O. Wilson even set aside his longstanding differences with fundamentalists over human origins to pen The Creation, a plea for conservative Christians to embrace their responsibilities as stewards of God's earth. Ironically, Wilson is preaching to the choir: a recent study by the Barna Group found that nine in ten American evangelicals would like Christians to care more actively for creation. We are turning green.
With the release of The Green Bible (Harper One, 2008), the Scriptures are turning green too—literally. This "green-letter edition," says its publisher, "is the definitive Bible for the growing creation care movement." Its green ink highlights more than 1,000 passages chosen by The Green Bible's editorial team to demonstrate God's involvement in creation, the interdependence of its elements, its response to God, and how we are called to care for it.
The Green Bible's packaging almost parodies itself: soy-based inks, recycled paper, and a stylish, earthy cotton/linen cover made through a process in which "all air is purified before exhausting into the atmosphere and all water is purified and recycled." Surely this was a marketing necessity; the publisher could not afford the charges of hypocrisy that would follow if it printed The Green Bible the way it prints … well, its other books. But The Green Bible is not a self-parody. It's offered as a serious Bible, with introductory essays by an ecumenical mix of voices such as N. T. Wright, Desmond Tutu, Pope John Paul II, Brian McLaren, and Barbara Brown Taylor, and an epilogue with topical studies and an environmental subject index. All these resources aim to orient readers to Scripture's concern for the natural world, along with its calls for social justice and poverty relief. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by David Fogarty
Climate Change Correspondent, Reuters
April 26, 2010
. . . Scientists and conservationists say some anti-climate change lobbyists are funded by energy giants such as ExxonMobil, which has a long history of donating money to interest groups that challenge climate science.
According to a Greenpeace report released last month, ExxonMobil gave nearly $9 million (5.8 millon pounds) to entities linked to the climate denialist camp between 2005 and 2008. . . .
Another prominent climate change denialist, Christopher Monckton, who's associated with the U.S.-based Science and Public Policy Institute, told Reuters he doesn't condone the coordinated attack on climate scientists, saying that he, too, was a victim.
He said his main aim was to expose what he calls the "non-problem of global warming" and in an email interview with Reuters accused climate change scientists of being "increasingly desperate to discredit anyone who dares to point out that the Emperor has no clothes". . . .
Read the rest.Back to top ScienceBook Review by Anthony J. Sadar
Certified Consulting Meteorologist
Washington Times, April 22, 2010
In 1968, just a couple of years before the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970, Paul R. Ehrlich, in his book "The Population Bomb," predicted that if the world continued to increase its population at a high rate, there soon would be a collapse of economic and social systems. James Hansen, in his new book "Storms of My Grandchildren," warns that if the world continues to burn fossil fuels at a high rate, "there may be a threat of collapse of economic and social systems."
Mr. Ehrlich's prophecy was a total bust; Mr. Hansen's is most likely doomed to a similar fate. Both scientists seem to suffer from the same narrow focus and internal certainty that excludes too many real-world conditions and rebuffs all reasonable challenges. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by Will Stewart
Writer, Mail Online
March 24, 2010
In a new blow to the climate change lobby, Russia's top weatherman today announced that the winter now drawing to a close in Siberia may turn out to be the coldest on record.
'The winter of 2009-10 was one of the most severe in European part of Russia for more than 30 years, and in Siberia it was perhaps the record breaking coldest ever,' said Dr Alexander Frolov, head of state meteorological service Rosgidromet.
Statistics are still being analysed in detail, but it is known that in western Siberia the mean temperature was minus 23.2C, with more colder days than in previous years. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by Ben Webster
Environment Editor, Times Online
March 24, 2010
The Science Museum is revising the contents of its new climate science gallery to reflect the wave of scepticism that has engulfed the issue in recent months.
The decision by the 100-year-old London museum reveals how deeply scientific institutions have been shaken by the public’s reaction to revelations of malpractice by climate scientists.
The museum is abandoning its previous practice of trying to persuade visitors of the dangers of global warming. It is instead adopting a neutral position, acknowledging that there are legitimate doubts about the impact of man-made emissions on the climate.
Even the title of the £4 million gallery has been changed to reflect the museum’s more circumspect approach. The museum had intended to call it the Climate Change Gallery, but has decided to change this to Climate Science Gallery to avoid being accused of presuming that emissions would change the temperature. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top EconomicsWashington Times Editorial, April 22, 2010
The green movement would be a lot funnier if it didn't have access to our pocketbooks. Unfortunately, devotees of "alternative energy" have harnessed the greatest of all sources of renewable power - government taxation - to fulfill their fantasies. The results are as tragic as they are comic.
Last month, the Government Accountability Office released a report on a $300 million Department of Energy program designed to promote commercial products that boast fashionable "green" credentials. A team of GAO investigators with an uncharacteristically fine sense of humor submitted 20 bogus products to the department and walked away with Energy Star certification for 15 of them, including a gasoline-powered alarm clock. GAO deserves credit for illuminating the careless attitude that sets in when the greens start spending other people's money. After all, when it's being done in the name of the environment, liberal thinking is that there's no need to measure a policy's costs against the alleged benefits. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top Review by Trevor Butterworth
Editor, STATS.org; Columnist, Forbes
Wall Street Journal, April 27, 2010
. . . "Power Hungry" unfolds as a brutal, brilliant exploration of this profoundly deluded quest, from fingers-in-the-ears "la-la-la-ing" at the mention of nuclear power to the illusion that we are rapidly running out of oil or that we can turn to biomass for salvation: Since it takes 10,000 tons of wood to produce one megawatt of electricity, for instance, the U.S. will be chopping down forests faster than it can grow them.
Mr. Bryce also points to the link between cheap power and economic productivity and asks why we should expect much of the world to forgo the benefits of light bulbs and regular energy when we enjoy these privileges. But if "Power Hungry" sounds like a supercharged polemic, its shocks are delivered with forensic skill and narrative aplomb. . . .
Read the rest and purchase the book.Back to top Upcoming EventsThe answers to [questions regarding the science of climate change] directly impact the legislative and regulatory debates underway in the Congress and the Obama Administration. On May 14, Dr. William Happer and Dr. Roger Cohen will review key features of climate science. Dr. Happer is Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics at Princeton University, member of the National Academy of Sciences, and Chairman of the Marshall Institute. Dr. Cohen is a Fellow of the American Physical Society and retired from ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company.
Register online.Back to top The purpose of ICCC-4 is the same as it was for the first three events: to build momentum and public awareness of the global warming “realism” movement, a network of scientists, economists, policymakers, and concerned citizens who believe sound science and economics, rather than exaggeration and hype, ought to determine what actions, if any, are taken to address the problem of climate change. Speakers will include over a hundred scientists, economists, and other scholars from around the world.
Register online.Back to top Briefly NotedRubin: Environmentalism as Religion
ClimateDepot’s Morano on Mann Lawsuit: 'This Just Goes to Show You How the Mighty Have Fallen'
Brill: End-Phase of the Climate Wars?
Moon: N.C. High Schools to Replace U.S. History with Environmental IssuesBack to top Meet the CriticsMeet the Critics gives you basic information on 64 of the leading critics of dangerous manmade global warming. Today's critic:
John R. Christy, Ph.D.
Formerly an IPCC lead author and now Alabama's State Climatologist, John Christy is currently the Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science and the Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, where he and Dr. Roy Spencer oversee the NASA satellite remote sensing program, the world's only truly comprehensive system for sensing atmospheric conditions of many kinds, including temperature. Mentioned on page 135 of the Senate report, Christy says of Al Gore's message, "to come up with 20 feet is really grasping at straws, I think, but it does make a dramatic image." After a cutting interview, and his helpful lecture, What Do the Numbers Show, Dr. Christy had My Nobel Moment published by The Wall Street Journal, criticizing the political irresponsibility of proclaiming catastrophic global warming and of calling for measures detrimental to the poor.
Back to top Landmark Documents from the Cornwall Alliance
E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D., National Spokesman
Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, http://www.cornwallalliance.org/
Information in this newsletter is for scholarly and educational use only and may not be copied or reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright holders.
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
