Man, God, & the Climate Change Debate

By Dennis Dinger

This book discusses the current climate change hysteria from a perspective which includes God. God controls the weather and the climate on earth, so He cannot be ignored. But that is what the alarmists are doing. They are ignoring God.
The current climate hysteria demands that mankind do something immediately, with urgency, cost being no object, to combat rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. The current administration appears to be scared to death that a climate catastrophe is actually on the horizon, so it is acting with urgency to eliminate the use of all fossil fuels. The steps the administration is taking may destroy the fossil fuels industries, the American economy, and the American way of life, without doing anything to affect global warming.
Since God is in control of weather and climate, the climate alarmists should be trying to get out of God’s way, trust He knows what He’s doing, and allow Him to handle it. Instead, they are fighting God for control of the weather and climate on earth. That is a war mankind will surely lose.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Dec 3, 2022
• ISBN: 9781387453382

Book preview

to all concerned peoples of this world,

and especially, to all Americans

Preface

As an interested party to the climate change debate, I have been wanting to write this book for several years.  Now seems to be the perfect time to do so.

I taught industrial fuels and combustion classes to ceramic engineers for years.  Most ceramics kilns are fired using natural gas or fuel oil.  Only a few kilns industry-wide are heated with coal.  Many test furnaces and kilns are heated by electricity.  We taught engineers how to adjust the fuel/air ratios of burners in production kilns, control internal kiln atmospheres, and monitor flue gas compositions.

With this background, I have been following the climate change debate for a long time.

Even though most research papers are published in the technical journals, climate change has burst forth onto the mainstream propaganda media (MSPM.)  For this reason, pertinent supporting research should also be covered in the MSPM.  But that does not appear to be happening.

Announcements of the latest predicted climate catastrophes in the MSPM are coming from big name climate alarmists.  It is not always clear which climate model they used as their source.  One really has to search hard to find any supporting research papers or evidence to back up their alarmist claims.  It’s almost like the researchers and the media don’t want anyone to see their detailed research results.

In any case, according to the big boys in this field, the science of climate change is settled.  No one wants to reopen and discuss any of these settled topics.  In their minds, no further discussion is necessary.  All we hear is, Trust us, we know what we’re doing.

Well, I’m sorry, but I don’t trust the high-profile alarmists who have the loudest voices on this subject.  I surely do not trust our alarmist President Biden’s pronouncements, his solutions to the climate change crisis, nor any of his designated spokesmen.  Yet they are the ones whom the MSPM seeks out and covers.

Because Biden is implementing immediate, urgent, cost-is-no-object programs (which, by the way, are ruining our economy) to fix our global warming problems, we need to have this climate change discussion which has eluded the American people for years.

This book is my effort to resurrect the discussion and to try to make sure that all necessary voices get seats at the table when this discussion finally takes place.

The most important person not represented in this discussion is God.  By their refusal to even mention God, the mainstream is suggesting that He knows nothing about science, engineering, climate, nor weather.  So His words are not welcomed to the discussion.

It just happens, however, that God controls the weather and the climate, which puts the alarmists’ and President Biden’s efforts to combat global warming in direct conflict with God.

If no one else is willing to bring God into this discussion, I will.  He needs to be consulted, represented at the table, and heard.

So let this be my contribution to the coming climate change debate.

Dennis R. Dinger,

10 November 2022

Part I    Who Should Be Included in Climate Change Discussions?

1  Introduction

In woke, progressive America of 2022, climate change causes many to fear for the future safety of humanity.

In 2019, one outspoken climate alarmist announced that society had only 12 years remaining before it will be destroyed by a climate disaster.  No data nor proof was presented.  Only the prediction.

Many Americans are freaking out over that still today with concerns for the future — for the future of their families and children, for the future of America, and for the future of humanity.

Based on that prediction and their trust in bogus science, the current administration is urgently forcing expensive, dangerous, corrective actions on the American people and on the American economy.  Cost is no object.  If necessary, they will bankrupt the American people and destroy the American economy.  Whatever it takes!  They think the dangerous consequences of the threatened catastrophe are so dire, they must take urgent steps and do something — anything — NOW!

Many others, however, think this manmade global warming crisis is baloney invented by extremists who are using the predicted catastrophe to rattle and coerce the American people into empowering them to take charge.

Those who do not believe the dire predictions are called climate deniers.  Deniers claim that there are no climate catastrophes coming and that the predicted catastrophes are gigantic ruses.  Deniers believe that global warming and rising atmospheric CO2 contents are good for both earth and its inhabitants.

To whom, then, should we be listening when it comes to climate change and society’s future?  That is, which of the several factions who regularly weigh in on climate change should we believe?  Are there others we should be questioning who are not currently represented in this discussion?

We can listen to and support any of several parties:  climate alarmists, the current administration, self-seeking politicians, self-proclaimed power-hungry intellectual elites, climate scientists, climate modellers, Big Tech, Big Oil, United Nations committees, etc.  But with such an important subject as this, God should have a voice in the debate — and He does not.

God???  . . . to suggest that God should have a role in the climate change debate is to suggest that this is a religious debate — which is preposterous!  Right?  A lot of people are certain that God has no place in this nor any other 21st Century discussion.  Religion is a matter of faith, not science.  . . . and for that reason, they think God should never be represented in scientific debates.  Period!

That is the enlightened 21st Century speaking!  What do we need God for?

But God should be a party in this debate.  Why?  We should not ignore God regarding the weather.  After all, dangerous hurricanes and tornados, over which mankind has NO control, are legally described as acts of God.

The definition appears on the web:  An Act of God is the legal term used to denote events occurring outside of human control. ¹

Many blame manmade (anthropogenic) changes for causing more and stronger hurricanes and tornados, and all global warming problems.  That is, many believe bad storms are global warming’s fault — and therefore, mankind’s fault.  Nearly everything these days is, and can be, blamed on global warming.

They tell us that last winter’s blizzard and this summer’s hurricane both resulted from global warming.  Some meteorologists disagree.²

Today, to alarmists, progressives, the woke crowd, and the media, practically everything results from global warming.  A man yells at his wife:  global warming.  Thieves loot a pharmacy in San Francisco:  global warming.  President Biden confuses his wife with his sister:  global warming.  A tropical storm hits South Florida:  global warming.  Etc.

The linkages are not always obvious, but in a roundabout way, everything can be blamed on global warming.  When confused, ask a woke friend and they will explain the linkage to you.  When you cannot think of something or someone to blame for any unexplainable event, just blame it on Global warming!

Meteorologists can identify hurricanes, monitor their intensities, track them, and predict their paths — but to date, there’s nothing they can do to reduce their strengths nor prevent catastrophic hurricanes from making landfall on our population centers.  Meteorologists can warn populations in their paths to batten down the hatches, take appropriate precautions, seek shelter, and/or evacuate — but they cannot do anything to dissipate nor steer the storms.

In contrast to all they can monitor and predict for hurricanes, meteorologists cannot predict the same for tornados.  They can warn people in the paths of violent thunderstorms when the storm might produce violent tornados.  Using Doppler radar, they can try to identify circulating cells in the storms which might produce tornados.  When a meteorologist has a confirmed eye-witness report that a tornado is on the ground at a certain location, then they will immediately warn people in its path.  Most tornados, however, are only identified after the fact by examination of the destruction left in their wakes.

Meteorology has improved tremendously over the years, but it is still a guessing game with regard to tornados.  Meteorologists do better at predicting the tracks of hurricanes, but even then, nothing is certain.  They may show 20 projected tracks on a spaghetti graphic, but those predicted tracks (from different computer models) can lead every which way.  They don’t know where a hurricane will go with total certainty — so they show the tracks predicted by as many models as they can.  Viewers can then see the predictions, and they can decide for themselves.

Will it rain tomorrow? That remains difficult for meteorologists to predict.  It was supposed to rain here all last weekend — Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.  It finally rained on Sunday.  It wasn’t supposed to rain today, but a thunderstorm just soaked everything for five minutes as it passed over.  Meteorologists do great with their sophisticated instruments and computers.  But even with the help of their computerized instruments, weather forecasting is still a guessing game.

Today’s meteorologists are quite good!  They do a great job!  But there is little certainty in their prognostications.  And the public does not hold it against them when their forecasts are not quite correct.

Who Controls Weather and Climate?

This brings us to this next set of questions:  Who really understands the weather and the climate?  . . .  and who, if anyone, controls the weather and the climate?

If we can answer these questions, we will know to whom we should be paying attention, and who (if anyone) can manipulate, moderate, and control future climate and weather events.

At first glance, climate, climate change, and weather are not religious subjects.  So God can be dismissed from this discussion.  Right?

The last thing anyone, who admits to even the slightest knowledge about the climate, will do is make reference to God.  21st Century society labels such persons kooks, and if possible, it cancels them.  That certainly disqualifies them from participation in climate change discussions.

But God controls the weather and the climate.  He demonstrates that frequently throughout the Bible. He also claims in the Bible that He does.  If God is in control of weather and climate, mankind’s efforts to alter earth’s atmosphere to meet their own climate goals are not only in direct opposition to God’s controls, they are skirmishes in a war with God.

The elites in our society want everyone to believe that all advancements mankind has made to improve our way of life are the direct causes of global warming.  That is, mankind has been causing the problem ever since the start of the industrial revolution.  Because mankind caused the problems, the elites believe mankind needs to fix the problems.

By making such claims, the elites are saying, We know what’s best for our lives and for our planet!  They haven’t actually spoken this in so many words, but their actions declare that this represents their thoughts and intentions.

Their actions show that they have declared war against God.  On behalf of all mankind, the elites are taking steps which indicate they believe the following:

It wouldn’t be the first time mankind thought they were superior to God.

If Not God, Who Then?

If God is not in control of earth’s climate and weather, then who is?  . . . and to whom should we listen?  Government?  Scientists?  Politicians?  Climate modellers?  Climate alarmists?  Big Tech?  Big Oil?  United Nations committees?  The Media?

We need to examine these questions because society is currently being led by people from all of these groups.  Those who best understand climate and weather, however, seem to have the least say in the matter.  And those who appear to have no understanding at all about climate phenomena have taken control.

Supreme Court Justices

The US Supreme Court (lawyers all) recently declared carbon dioxide, CO2, to be a pollutant gas.  That ruling gave the US Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant.  Which of the five jurists who made that ridiculous decision was a scientist?  Which of them had the foggiest idea what he/she was talking about in regards to climate science?

The President and His Acolytes

The current US Energy Secretary who was appointed to office by President Biden, cannot speak practically on the subject of climate  change.  When  asked  how  she  planned  to  increase domestic oil production to reduce fuel prices, she laughed.  That was her response:  she laughed! ³

That should have been an easy question to answer.  What was her problem?  Her problem is that her boss doesn’t want to increase domestic oil production — contrary to what the American people want.  He wants to shut down the oil industry.  He’s fine with more oil production — as long as it comes from foreign sources.  So even if the Secretary had a good answer to that question, she did not dare use it.

Political appointees frequently have no experience in the arenas over which they are given control.  Their resumes may look good, but when in the job, they demonstrate their incompetence.  This is especially true of all appointees in the current Biden administration.  Most of them have little to no managerial experience at all.  Most of them have no practical industrial or business experience either.  Most of them have demonstrated that they lack common sense.  And on the rare occasion when their qualifications are impeccable, they are hampered by their boss’ opinion.

For this administration, appointees only need one qualification: they must be good, faithful Democrat politicians.

The EPA

Then there are the automobile fuel efficiency (Corporate Average Fuel Economy, CAFE) standards.  Who in the government understands the technical ramifications of these standards well enough to place stricter and more stringent restrictions on future automobile mileage standards?  Is a typical politician/lawyer/congressman/senator able to knowledgeably speak and lead on that scientific topic?  . . . or are such decisions delegated to unelected appointees and permanent staff in the Washington bureaucracy (that is, in the deep state)?  Do those setting the values really understand the scientific principles behind the new standards?

There are lots of examples like this where governmental lawyers make technical decisions which sound good, but are contrary to science.

Climate Change Modellers

Are today’s climate models sufficiently accurate to predict conditions 100 years from now?  Today’s models cannot even accurately predict the current climate.  If existing climate models, using last century’s data, cannot accurately predict current conditions, why should we think they can use today’s data to accurately predict catastrophes which will happen 12 years from now?  . . . or 100 years from now?  We should not pay any attention to their results.

Climate Alarmists

Alarmists have been predicting imminent catastrophes for years.  Current and retired politicians are among the most vociferous of the current crop of climate alarmists.  How many of their predicted calamities actually happened?  How many dates of predicted world-altering events came and went without incident or fanfare?  To date, no predicted catastrophe has come to pass.

Is the science of climate change really settled like we are told?  The climate alarmists insist it is settled.  . . . and climate alarmists all have loud voices.  So our complicit media runs with their words and leads the populace to believe that all of this nonsense is fact:  the earth is in grave danger due to mankind’s actions!  Many gullible citizens believe it.

The Media

Why does anyone believe the media?  . . . because when anything (especially nonsense) is repeated over and over again, 24/7/365, ad infinitum, without including any opposing views, audiences eventually begin to believe that the oft-repeated news is truth.  This is what passes for news today in the mainstream propaganda media.  As President Trump called it, it is "fake news.

Politically correct answers carry great weight in the media.  Contrary voices (if they are ever allowed out in the open) do not.  Lately, contrary opinions (even when true) are not allowed to see the light of day.

We can go on and on with different categories of people, committees, and groups, to whom we should not pay attention, and to whom we should not listen.  And we will consider them — throughout this book.

In the next chapters, we will consider who really knows anything about these subjects, to whom John Q. Public should be paying attention, and why God should be an important and necessary participant in this discussion.

2 Is the Climate Science Settled?

The short answer to the question, Is the climate science ‘settled’?  is:  No.

Many of today’s scientists question the need to make any drastic changes at all to our economic way of life to satisfy the climate alarmists’ demands.  Why?  . . . because they do not believe mankind’s activities are causing a climate catastrophe which will end the world.

The system, however, is stacked against those who disagree with the climate alarmists.  Catastrophes may come, but they will not be caused by the industrial age’s emissions of CO2.  In fact, many claim that rising CO2 levels and rising temperatures are good for the earth.  I agree with that assessment.

The media, the peer review system (which approves the publishing of research in journals, and evaluates research grant proposals), and the establishment all favor the politically correct attitudes about climate change.  Many reviewers’ personal positions line up with the goals of the climate alarmists.  As a result, scientists who disagree with the alarmists are generally not approved to publish, not approved for new research funding, and not appointed to advisory and peer-review panels.  The whole system is slanted towards the alarmists’ point-of-view.

In many cases, peer review boards are Old Boys’ Clubs.  Entry into them requires approval by the board, and an invitation to join.  This keeps the naysayers out, effectively silences the opposition, and insures that the party line prevails.

A Great Scientific Point-of-View

Having tried to follow the climate change/global warming non-debate in the media for years, I recently came across one of the best, most illuminating explanations of current scientific thinking on the subject.  It was written by Dr. S. Fred Singer.⁴  The late Dr. Singer was a well-known author and authority on energy and environmental issues.

Here are some of his salient points.

Scientific Consensus

Singer explained that in 1988, the United Nations created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).