|
Newsletter (July 23, 2010)
Above the FoldA Biblical Response to One of the Greatest Deceptions of Our Day
Project Update:
In the next two weeks, by the grace of God, video production of introductions and comments by David Barton (Wallbuilders), Chuck Colson, Bryan Fischer (American Family Association), Harry Jackson (High Impact Leadership Coalition), Richard Land (Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission), Miles McPherson (The Rock Church, San Diego), Tom Minnery (Focus on the Family), David Noebel (Summit Ministries), Tony Perkins (Family Research Council), and Wendy Wright will be done. They join the nine scholars who gave the twelve lectures in the www.ResistingtheGreenDragon.com series.
Without doubt one of the greatest threats to society and the church today is the multifaceted environmentalist movement. Now, this ground-breaking book and 12-week video series will help churches, Sunday schools, families, students, and small groups learn how the Bible powerfully confronts environmental fears and how—in God’s wise design—people and nature can thrive together.
Click here to register for regular email updates as more names and resources are announced in the coming weeks.
Resisting the Green Dragon takes its cue from James 4:7, “Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.” Click here to take advantage of pre-publication discount for these outstanding learning tools!In This Issue
Featured- Does the Latest Climategate Investigation Exonerate the Scientists Involved?
Science & Ecology- Book: 'Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk'
Economics & Energy- A Free Market Energy Vision
- Rebel! Dare to Be Optimistic
- Moratorium on Offshore Deepwater Oil Drilling Wrong Move
- Enviro Jobs Are Fake-O Jobs
- Happy World Population Day: Some Environmentalists Halfway Get It
Religion & Ethics- For Goodness Sake: Sustainability Ponders Ethics
- Ecology, the New Opium of the People
Politics & Debate- Democrats Revive Global Warming Legislation
Briefly Noted
Meet the Critics: Indur M. Goklany, Ph.D.
Landmark Documents from the Cornwall Alliance
Featuredby Mary L. G. Theroux
Senior Vice President, Independent Institute; Managing Director, Lightning Ventures, L.P.; Vice President, C.S. Lewis Society of California; Board Member, San Francisco Advisory Boards of the Salvation Army
July 16, 2010
. . . As background for those who might have forgotten who the players are, last November, an unknown party known only as “FOI” (Freedom of Information) posted to a website thousands of emails and other documents among key scientists, all champions of anthropogenic global warming and involved in the UN panel creating its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report. The key players involved were Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU), Keith Briffa, a climatologist at CRU and IPCC author, and Michael Mann (of “Hockey Stick” infamy) at Penn State University. Phil Jones stepped aside as director at CRU pending the investigation’s findings, and is now set to return, though with a slightly different title.
The most serious evidence the hacked emails had revealed was of Keith Briffa colluding with a colleague of Mann’s to change the published IPCC assessment of the Hockey Stick dispute from that which had been sent to external reviewers to one that favored Mann and his colleagues, creators of the Hockey Stick—rather a direct contradiction of the fabled “peer review” process. These were the email exchanges about the IPCC report (AR4) that Phil Jones exhorted all to delete (see #2, below).
Other of the more damning emails involved are also outlined below.
As extremely well documented in Steve McIntyre’s Climate Audit blog, the investigation, headed up by Sir Muir Russell, only interviewed representatives of the CRU itself—hardly a balanced investigation—and Russell himself did not even attend the interviews of Jones, Briffa and other key players (“Muir Russell Skipped Jones Interviews“).
Further, although the panel had been directly tasked to:
Examine the hacked e-mail exchanges, other relevant e-mail exchanges and any other information held at CRU to determine whether there is any evidence of the manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice and may therefore call into question any of the research outcomes. The investigative panel did not review the vast majority of the emails. (“The Botched Examination of the Back-Up Server“)
It thus appears that this latest investigation hardly warrants the name, and the charges remain largely unanswered: . . .
Read the rest.
Related items:
Carrington: 'Climategate' Debate: Less Meltdown, More Well-Mannered Argument
Pearce: Climategate: No Whitewash, but CRU Scientists Are Far from Squeaky Clean
Emanuel: 'Climategate': A Different Perspective
From Steve McIntyre's Climate Audit:
Blatant Misrepresentation by Muir Russell Panel
Inquiry Disinformation About CRUTEM
Trevor Davies at the Guardian Panel
Report from the Climategate Guardian Debate
Bob Denton: 'The Panel Resiled from its Remit by Intent'
Muir Russell Skipped Jones’ Interviews
The Botched Examination of the Back-Up Server
The 'Disputed' Reconstruction
You Can't Be Serious!
Pielke on Muir Russell’s Erroneous Understanding of IPCC Mission
McKitrick Preliminary ResponseBack to top Science & EcologyReview by Anthony J. Sadar
Certified Consulting Meteorologist
Washington Times, July 13, 2010
The view from the ivory tower has become increasingly obscure and gloomy of late. The great unwashed masses by this time in history should have discovered and aligned themselves with scholastic luminaries who are grounded in their individual disciplines. Instead, the hoi polloi are relying on a vast array of nonacademic sources to formulate their positions on the important scientific issues of the day.
Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk by Massimo Pigliucci, a philosophy professor at the City University of New York, presents a highly approachable review and analysis of the unfolding and advancement of both the philosophy of science and science itself. The complex relationship of the two is illuminated in such a way that anyone with even a passing interest in the topic will find himself drawn by the fascinating descriptions of the personalities and controversies that have advanced science thinking and practice through the centuries.
For instance, Mr. Pigliucci offers a wonderfully lucid discussion of the critical importance and difference between deduction and induction in scientific reasoning. More important, he provides a terrific overview of what science theory and practice entail: a combination of induction, deduction, perspective and intuition, contra superstition, mythology and postmodernism, including emphasis on constructivism (thank you), et al.
While the theoretical understanding of science is expressed rather thoroughly in "Nonsense on Stilts," the real-world (i.e., beyond the campus), modern practice is almost negated. Perhaps the negation is because the conditions that most disturb many, if not the majority, of career academicians are: real-world experience and having their opinions challenged (so much for "critical thinking" which tends to boil down to students making sure their thoughts match those of their professors). Thus, complete comprehension of complex issues is limited to a substantial degree. This limitation is most clearly visible in Mr. Pigliucci's treatment of the global-warming topic. . . .
Read the rest.
Purchase Pigliucci's Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk.Back to top Economics & Energyby Robert L. Bradley, Jr.
Founder & CEO, Institute for Energy Research; Writer, MasterResource.org; Scholar, Cato Institute & Competitive Enterprise Institute; Research Fellow, Center for Energy Economics, University of Texas in Austin; Author, Capitalism at Work: Business, Government, and Energy
July 16, 2010
Energy is the master resource. Without it, other resources could neither be produced nor consumed. Even energy requires energy: There would not be usable oil, gas, or coal without the energy to manufacture and power the requisite tools and machinery. Nor would there be wind turbines or solar panels, which are monuments to embedded fossil-fuel energy.
And just how important are fossil fuels relative to so-called renewable energies? Oil, gas, or coal generates the electricity needed to fill in for intermittent wind and solar power to ensure moment-to-moment reliability. So renewable energy, ironically, is dependent on nonrenewable energy short of prohibitively expensive battery technology assuring the flow of electricity.
As a component of all products and services, energy needs to be affordable, convenient, and reliable. To this end, public policy should respect consumer preference and allow energy producers to meet the demands of the marketplace. This requires a respect for private property rights, voluntary exchange, and the rule of law to facilitate the global exchange of energy and its innumerable subcomponents. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by John A. Baden
Chairman, Foundation for Research on Economics & the Environment; Member, Mont Pelerin Society; Member, Philadelphia Society; Co-author, Managing the Commons
July 14, 2010
Matt Ridley’s The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves captivated my attention. Ridley earned an Oxford Ph.D. in zoology and was the science editor for The Economist. His new work may be the most positive and influential book of this decade. . . .
He wants to replace the ill-founded pessimistic folklore of the upper middle class with an optimism based on history, data, and logic. He wants to counter the propensity of socially conscious, educated people to exaggerate social and environmental problems and ignore solutions not imposed by political force. . . .
To him, the human race has become a “collective problem solving machine and it solves problems by changing its ways.” The data is clear and compelling. Cumulative innovation has “doubled life span, cut child mortality by three-quarters and multiplied per capita income ninefold—world-wide—in little more than a century....”
All this has been driven by ideas interacting and reproducing. The search engine, the mobile phone, and container shipping have made ideas more promiscuous and powerful. Ridley counsels that political corruption and special interests could inhibit the progress that naturally follows. Even optimists agree. . . .
Read the rest.
Purchase Ridley's The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves.Back to top by William F. Shughart II
Senior Fellow, Taxing Choice: The Predatory Politics of Fiscal Discrimination
June 21, 2010
. . . Not only does the president's moratorium on deepwater drilling fail to stop the oil leak, it costs jobs on the offshore rigs that he has shut down; reduces the amount of crude oil available for refining into gasoline, diesel fuel and heating oil; and penalizes BP's competitors, who have been pumping oil from offshore wells responsibly for decades. Until BP's Deepwater Horizon rig exploded, no oil had been spilled as a result of offshore drilling in U.S. waters since an accident off the coast of Santa Barbara in 1969.
Without energy production from deepwater areas, a vital source of jobs and tax revenue will be lost. And if offshore rigs remain idle for long, the Gulf's economy will wither.
Yes, BP bears all responsibility for the explosion that killed 11 workers and caused staggering economic and environmental damage that is still ongoing. BP must be held accountable for its mismanagement.
Among industry insiders, the fact that an "accident" occurred at a BP offshore drilling site was no surprise. BP has a reputation for cutting corners and disregarding risk. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by John Hayward
Blogger, DocZero.org
Washington Times, July 14, 2010
. . . If Americans wanted green jobs and industries, they would pay for them. There's some interest in such things, of course. You'll probably see a Prius or two on your drive home today. It's great when people choose to make such purchases of their own free will based on valid information. . . .
As you can see from those million-dollar green jobs, the pursuit of righteous tyranny is hideously expensive. That's because it shifts control of our society to a lesser intelligence.
What do I mean by this? Consider the purchasing and investment decisions of our 300 million citizens as a widely dispersed intelligence of tremendous complexity. Resources are allocated through a vast number of individual decisions, made with impressive speed. Each citizen becomes one element of a mighty network. It is capable of intuition, as sophisticated communications enable consumers to react to trends and opportunities in a cascade of e-mail, website postings, phone calls and casual conversation. It is creative because it's not restrained by ideology or central directives. People adopt new technologies with astounding speed. With apologies to Alvin Toffler, the only "future shock" nowadays is felt by manufacturers, as the best high-tech products go from the expensive indulgences of trendy nerds to household items in a matter of months.
Obama-style command economics are a far more primitive form of intelligence. They are directed by small groups of people wearing ideological blinders. Politically unacceptable alternatives are ruled nonexistent. Command economies move with glacial speed, receiving corrective input only once every couple of years at the ballot box. They are wasteful, as vast resources are allocated to pay off valuable constituencies or absorbed by a useless political class through graft. . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by Ronald Bailey
Science Correspondent, Reason Magazine; Member, Society of Environmental Journalists and American Society for Bioethics and Humanities; Author, Liberation Biology
July 12, 2010
The environmentalist news website Grist (former tagline: "Gloom and Doom with a Sense of Humor,' now replaced with "A Beacon in the Smog") is running an article by Fred Pearce that forthrightly (and finally) admits that the population bomb is a dud:
A green myth is on the march. It wants to blame the world's overbreeding poor people for the planet's peril. It stinks. And on World Population Day, I encourage fellow environmentalists not to be seduced.
Some greens think all efforts to save the world are doomed unless we "do something" about continuing population growth. But this is nonsense. Worse, it is dangerous nonsense.
For a start, the population bomb that I remember being scared by 40 years ago as a schoolkid is being defused fast. Back then, most women round the world had five or six children. Today's women have just half as many as their mothers -- an average of 2.6. Not just in the rich world, but almost everywhere.
This is getting close to the long-term replacement level, which, allowing for girls who don't make it to adulthood, is around 2.3. Women are cutting their family sizes not because governments tell them to, but for their own good and the good of their families -- and if it helps the planet too, then so much the better.
This is a stunning change in just one generation. Why don't we hear more about it? Because it doesn't fit the doomsday agenda. . . . Read the rest.
Pearce: On World Population Day, Take Note: Population Isn't a ProblemBack to top Religion & Ethicsby Ashley Thorne
Director of Communications, National Association of Scholars
July 21, 2010
“We’re part of nature and as we destroy nature we destroy ourselves. It’s a selfish thing to want to protect nature.”
So says Yvon Chouinard, founder of the outdoor clothing company Patagonia, in a current American Express commercial. He is right; protecting nature is generally in the best interests of humankind. But two Michigan professors argue that sustainability should have an ethical dimension—by which they mean that we should protect nature because nature is inherently good, not just because it is good for humans. In other words, it should be an unselfish thing to want to protect nature.
In a new paper titled “Sustainability: Virtuous or Vulgar?” written for BioScience magazine, John A. Vucetich and Michael P. Nelson assert that “’being sustainable’ has become more-or-less synonymous with ‘being good,’” and that being good means “understanding how to balance sustainability’s three primary virtues: concern for human needs, ecosystem health, and social justice.” Indeed, sustainable has become synonymous with good. We’ve seen this concept commercialized this year with the dud TV show The Goode Family, about a family of politically correct vegan environmentalists who just want to do the right thing—whatever the current definition of that may be; and in the MasterCard ad where a young boy prompts his father to save energy, plastic bags, and water—“Helping Dad become a better man: priceless.”
But why are we all trying so hard to be better in this way? What really motivates us toward this new morality? Is it the capitalistic motive—saving money on the utilities bill? Is it the human-centered motive—guaranteeing a good life for future human generations? Or is it the nature-centered motive—saving the planet for its own sake? . . .
Read the rest.Back to top by Samuele Furfari
President, Belgian Association of Free Evangelical Churches; Professor Energy Geopolitics, l'Universite Libre de Bruxelles; Author, God, Man, and Nature
Global Conversation, July, 2010
. . . The rule of law combined with technological and economical progress is necessary to improve the environment. But some tell us that progress must be stopped in order to protect the environment. This reasoning lies at the heart of the Green movement: there are not enough resources in the world, and "we can't go on like this." . . .
But today "environmental protection" sometimes means more than taking care of nature. Behind it may lie a carefully planned strategy in place for decades to replace a Christian understanding of the relationship between man and nature with a New Age approach to nature. How sad it is, then, to observe Christians swallowing wholesale this antichristian philosophy. This is the conclusion I have come to through a close and detailed analysis of the history of the environmental movement and sustainable development strategies.
Let us stop pollution, let us improve the environment, but let us not change Christian civilization that has led to progress and prosperity for billions. Putting our hope in environmentalism is the latest innovation of the Devil to keep man from the love and grace of God. Should C.S. Lewis have written The Screwtape Letters today he would probably add "environmentalism" to the list of Satan's tricks. Planting trees is not part of the Gospel, even if man has always and rightly planted trees. God loves man much more than nature, which in the end is a God-given resource to provide life and prosperity to man, and so to bring glory to God.
Read the rest.Back to top Politics & Debateby Susan Ferrechio
Chief Congressional Correspondent, Washington Examiner
July 14, 2010
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., plans to bring a comprehensive energy and climate bill to the Senate floor by the end of the month that will include a cap on carbon emissions produced by the nation's utilities.
Reid announced his plans after huddling with President Obama about the Senate's July agenda and said he wants to introduce the bill, which has not yet been written, the week of July 26.
Reid was vague on details, but signaled he wants the bill to require the nation's electricity providers to pay a price for emitting carbon, which the EPA says will lead to global warming. . . .
Read the rest.
Related item:
Samuelsohn & Davenport: Democrats Pull Plug on Climate BillBack to top Briefly NotedDriessen: Obama's Deliberate Katrina
Crook: Climategate and the Big Green Lie
Goldstein: Killing the Green WaveBack 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:
Indur M. Goklany, Ph.D.
Indur Goklany, who represented the United States at the International Panel on Climate Change, has worked with organizations like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, and has had decades of such experience, is the author of The Improving State of the World. Mentioned on page 129 of the Senate report, Goklany has published numerous pieces on the environment, including, notably, What to Do About Climate Change, Living with Global Warming, Is a Richer-but-Warmer World Better Than Poorer-but-Colder Worlds?, How the IPCC Portrayed a Net Positive Impact of Climate Change as a Negative, The Deadliest U.S. Natural Hazard: Extreme Cold.
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.
|
