I’m not a global warming denier, but maybe I should be (in my spare time):
At the heart of the problem lie the computer models which, for 25 years, have formed the basis for the IPCC’s scaremongering: they predicted runaway global warming, when the real rise in temperatures has been much more modest. So modest, indeed, that it has fallen outside the lowest parameters of the IPCC’s prediction range. The computer models, in short, are bunk.
…
This is why the latest Assessment Report is proving such a headache to the IPCC. It’s the first in its history to admit what its critics have said for years: global warming did “pause” unexpectedly in 1998 and shows no sign of resuming. And, other than an ad hoc new theory about the missing heat having been absorbed by the deep ocean, it cannot come up with a convincing explanation why.
(James Delingpole; H/T @pzarras) I’ve heard substantially the same thing – grasping for a just-so story to explain why temperature rise has been so low as compared to the expectations of global warming forecasters – from other sources.
And truth be told, when a scientific theory fails in its predictions, it’s usually time to move on.
I don’t dislike myself, I don’t have a problem with my self-image, I don’t have low self-esteem. I’m saying I have NO self-esteem, for the same reason that I have no pet unicorns. Self-esteem is a nonsensical fantasy. It’s a false Gospel. It’s a meaningless fabrication that exists only in your imagination. It’s a modern doctrine invented by the prophets of new age psychology. It’s the Good News proclaimed by the apostles of the Religion of Self. Worst of all, the pursuit of this elusive self-esteem elixir leaves everyone empty, confused, and, ironically, unhappy and hating themselves.
I’m no genius (or maybe I am a genius who thinks he’s not a genius because he has low self-esteem), but I sniffed the stench of bull crap on this “self-esteem” cult back in elementary school. I remember the first time we learned about the term. The guidance counselor handed out a work sheet and asked us to “rate” our self-esteem on a scale of 1 to 10. As a side note, it bears contemplating the geopolitical relevance of this scene: while we were sitting in class, talking about our feelings, kids in China were learning silly things like “math” and “science.” Now, years later, we’re bankrupt and they own the country. But at least we all feel pretty good about ourselves.
(Matt Walsh, Narcissism was a bad thing, until we started calling it “self-esteem.” H/T Ben Craton on Facebook) I’m on a blog diet or I’d consider subscribing to Walsh’s. It looks pretty interesting.
There is nothing wrong with Christians highlighting absurdity as long as it is not done in a nasty way. Recall that even the Prophet Elias actually not only criticized but even openly mocked the prophets of Baal during the great sacrificial show-down on Mount Carmel (right before he slaughtered them, of course — not that we recommend that approach for anyone else). Not exactly feel-good ecumenism there. So pointing out such absurdity does indeed have its place within the Christian tradition.
And of course many of the saints and even the Lord Himself have used strong language when addressing those who lead people astray. And there is some exceptionally strong language used in Orthodox liturgical services for those people. Liturgical references to Arius, for instance, actually make a point of talking about how his bowels split open while he was relieving himself, dying a pretty gruesome death.
(Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy on Facebook) Amen!
* * * * *
“The remarks made in this essay do not represent scholarly research. They are intended as topical stimulations for conversation among intelligent and informed people.” (Gerhart Niemeyer)
Tipsy Teetotaler ن 