blackbird

Why not? God created man and man developed the industrial age. You think God did not know man would have the industrial age. Why has it suddenly become wrong for man to use a natural resource such as oil or gas from the earth? Oil and gas has made life possible on earth for billions of people and made mankind prosperous and advanced civilization. Why would you oppose that?

That doesn't mean the Bible is wrong. It simply means someone at that time several thousand years ago called them birds. It proves nothing about the accuracy of the Bible. If anything it proves the Bible records it the way it was. Not everyone had perfect knowledge about the biology of birds and bats.

The Bible states that God created everything in six literal days. That is the only interpretation that makes sense. If you want to try to compare the Bible to what the majority of scientists say, you are making a fatal mistake because most of them do not believe the Bible. Yet they have no rational explanation for where the universe and life came from. But yet you want to take them as absolute truth? Why would you do that. As I said, they do not have the answers about some things. You either believe in a God that revealed himself to mankind in the creation and written revelation or you don't. Bats fly around like birds, so it is understandable why some people thousands of years ago would give them the term birds which could have been applied to anything that flies.

Unfortunately some of what is called science is not really science at all. The theory of evolution, which has been debunked by some scientists, is still believed by many people as fact and is taught in schools as scientific fact. There is nothing further from the truth. Evolution has been exposed as a fraud. There are no transitional fossils to show the transition between different species. The claim that humans evolved from the slime in a pond or even from apes or monkeys has been shown to be false. So more science is not necessarily going to bring mankind the truth. There are some things that science simply can not explain or prove. One of them is the theory of evolution and the other is the so-called man-made climate change. They cannot be proven. It is all speculation. Everyone who claims man-made climate change is a fact are no different than the people that claim evolution is a fact. They are believing that purely on speculation, not scientific fact. It is a cult or religion to them.

No, we are not the cause. It is all natural.

False. The ocean is not the source of heating. You again demonstrate your lack of knowledge. Nobody would agree with that claim. Heat requires a source of energy. The ocean is basically just a body of H2O. It does not produce energy and therefore does not produce heat. It absorbs radiation from the sun which heats the ocean and releases it into the atmosphere or earth. The main source of heat is the solar radiation mainly from the sun and some from radiation from space. But that has nothing at all to do with the article I posted which shows the NOAA fudges the statistics on temperature change.

If you're trying to defend the left or Socialism, you are on the losing side. Leftism or Socialism is evil and devilish. It is built of on the idea of taking from those that have something and giving to those who don't. It is built on Marxism or Communism. The idea that the state knows better and can redistribute the wealth is at the core of Socialism. That's what makes it evil. It is STEALING from those that have to give to others or spread around. Theft is a very basic commandment in the Bible that is condemned and forbidden. So, there will be no vindication of leftists or Socialists (or liberals with the same ideology). They are nothing more than thieves

The article I quoted is specifically about the NOAA giving misleading data. The article is not about rising ocean temperatures. You bring up something that is not directly related to the article and claim it should have been mentioned. Phony argument. Again, you are way over your head.

There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

You claim the article ignores it, but nothing in what you mentioned supports the idea of climate change caused by man. The article does not deny climate change exists. How does rising ocean temperatures point to man as the cause? You are out of your league.

Nobody is ignoring it. Pointless to discuss those things because they do not point to man as being the cause.

Man-made climate change is just a big fraud. Funny how many people will believe almost anything. It is the same kind of thing as the Loch Ness monster. Many people believe in that. At one time many people believed the earth was flat too. Even today many worship Mother Earth as if it is some kind of god. Just look at how many people believe transgenderism is a natural occurrence. If you think humans are not gullible, think again. Many people are gullible about many things, including man-made climate change.

" What do we mean by fraudulent? How about this: NOAA has made repeated "adjustments" to its data, for the presumed scientific reason of making the data sets more accurate. Nothing wrong with that. Except, all their changes point to one thing — lowering previously measured temperatures to show cooler weather in the past, and raising more recent temperatures to show warming in the recent present. This creates a data illusion of ever-rising temperatures to match the increase in CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere since the mid-1800s, which global warming advocates say is a cause-and-effect relationship. The more CO2, the more warming. But the actual measured temperature record shows something different: There have been hot years and hot decades since the turn of the last century, and colder years and colder decades. But the overall measured temperature shows no clear trend over the last century, at least not one that suggests runaway warming. That is, until the NOAA's statisticians "adjust" the data. Using complex statistical models, they change the data to reflect not reality, but their underlying theories of global warming. " The Stunning Statistical Fraud Behind The Global Warming Scare | Investor's Business Daily (investors.com)

You have swallowed the great climate change nonsense, hook, line, and sinker. Man is not the cause of climate change and man can not control it.

Kids should learn to respect their parents and authorities, not oppose it. It appears for some of them, the opposite is the case. Going to court over climate change is absurd and nonsensical. They should be concentrating on learning and how to be a responsible citizen in the world, not a rebel and anarchist. The last thing the country needs is more young people trained to be protesters and anarchists.

How is opposing liberal ideology or opposing Trudeau online the same as selling snake oil? Time to admit you are a real liberal.

I think Jordon Peterson's appearance on social media with Pierre Poilievre in a six minute video highlighting Justin Trudeau's lack of meritocracy or educational qualifications to be PM was probably enough to have the liberal elite go after Peterson. Pointing out the only reason Trudeau got elected and continues to have a 33% core support is because of his father's name, his looks, a bit of charisma and identifying with a certain liberal-progressive crowd (such as marching in pride parades carrying a rainbow flag) would be enough to annoy liberal supporters and organizations that lean that way. This is an example of the kind of thing that would cause any liberal to try to deny Peterson his freedom of speech. Being together with Pierre Poilievre to comment on Trudeau would be enough to cause any liberal-oriented organization to try to silence Peterson. Perhaps this was the political stance Peterson has held for a long time even though this particular video is more recent. That would make him a target. What Jordan Peterson JUST DID With Justin Trudeau Changes EVERYTHING! | Watch (msn.com)

Beware of psychology in general. The Freudian cult has been exposed and now the Jung cult. What is left for psychologists to hang onto? "Ivan Tyrrell: In recent decades a tremendous amount of good work has been done exploring the damage Freudian beliefs did to psychotherapy, recently most notably by Richard Webster in Why Freud was Wrong, so I am most intrigued about your work on the Jung cult. Freud's one great service to the modern world was to publicise the ancient idea that we are driven much of the time by unconscious forces of which we are little aware. But in almost all other respects the crazy ideas he manufactured and promoted did great harm – and still are doing. Can the same be said for Jung? Richard Noll: I think so. And my book, The Jung Cult, documents why." The mysterious Jung: his cult, the lies he told, and the occult | www.hgi.org.uk

So are you saying that the Psychological Association of Ontario is like a religious institution and therefore must not speak anything contrary to their belief? If so, I would tend to agree with you. The association is acting like a top-down control religious institution or more like a cult.

Psychology's Credibility Crisis | Discover Magazine I see the Jehovah's Witnesses standing on street corners. I could call into question their beliefs just as well as psychologist's claims. But what does all that have to do with Jordan Peterson's comments on social media? Probably little to nothing. He is not even teaching as a professor in university. So why are they going after him?

Psychology's Credibility Crisis: the Bad, the Good and the Ugly - Scientific American

No. Seems he is a bit of a rebel to the psychology association and is talking outside the box or outside the defined boundaries of psychology's ideologies. Apparently if you belong to the psychology association, you are not permitted to speak outside of their defined political or ideological box. He is retired and speaking on his own so that is another reason the association is overstepping it's bounds.

Sadly the so-called professionals in the psychology field are built on the invented ideologies of Sigmund Freud. Most people know little to nothing about this field. They just assume it is all rational and true. "Freudian psychology is based on the work of Austrian neurologist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). He is considered the father of psychoanalysis and is largely credited with establishing the field of talk therapy. Today, psychoanalytic and psychodynamic approaches to therapy are the modalities that draw most heavily on Freudian principles. Freud also developed influential theories about subjects such as the unconscious mind, the sources of psychopathology, the significance of dreams." Freudian Psychology | Psychology Today United Kingdom The field of psychology is a confused mess, which one should avoid like the plague. The psychology of transgender (apa.org)

Peterson is professional, but his views are traditional and straight. He opposes the liberal progressives trying to change society. So-called professional psychologists and their associations appear to be on the side of progressives and the destruction of traditional values and society. Not everyone believes there are more than two sexes, male and female.

Best thing he could do now is resign from the College of Psychologists Association of Ontario. They have proven they are not something that should be supported. They obviously only permit group think of their members. Anyone who steps outside that box is anathemized and needs to be re-educated, much like in China's education camps for Uighurs.