blackbird

Canada's health care system is failing, not funded properly, the military is short thousands of soldiers and short many navy ships and aircraft that cost billions of dollars and Trudeau is giving our money away to the third world. Trudeau pledges cash for infrastructure and making vaccines in developing countries (msn.com)

Solar Output The main source of Earth’s heat is the Sun, so even small variations in solar output can have an impact on the climate. Researchers monitor these changes by observing sunspots and (more recently) satellite measurements. When there is an increase in sunspots, solar output also increases. Scientists at the University of Washington have determined that at the peak of the 11-year solar cycle, increased solar output causes a sudden warming of the atmosphere of 0.16 °C. Orbital Changes Changes in the Earth’s orbit mean that the distance between the Earth and Sun varies over a long period of time, causing frequent variations in the total amount of solar energy reaching our planet. These variations affect terrestrial climate change and the characteristic frequencies are known as Milankovitch cycles. unquote 3 Main Natural Causes of Climate Change | Greentumble The fact is you believe man can control the climate, but the reality is it is very doubtful because in order to stop emitting CO2, man would have to destroy almost everything to try to stop releasing CO2. The energy industries like oil and gas, the coal mining, driving motor vehicles, shipping goods on the ocean and flying aircraft. Manufacturing would have to stop using oil and most things use oil to be produced. The agriculture industry uses machinery that requires oil. Where would our food come from and how would it be shipped. Life on the planet is built on and depends on the existing energy industry for oil/gas. Mankind would die if it disappeared. It's not going to happen. Taking money from working people in the west to give to the third world is not going to stop climate change either. It will only hurt hundreds of millions of people.

“Green” energy projects are heavily subsidized by taxpayers." "Green" energy projects are heavily subsidized by taxpayers. - Canadian Energy News Network

"10 Failed Global Warming Predictions That You Need To Know About" " The 2008 study produced what the U.K. Telegraph very charitably called “a radical set of ‘possible futures,'” among them that the first climate refugees would begin flooding our planet’s icy, southernmost when temperatures made everywhere else too hot to live. “Refugees are expected to move to Antarctica because of the rising temperatures that will see the population of the continent increase to 3.5 million people by 2040,” the Telegraph reported. “As the world fails to act on climate change, researchers predict that global trade will collapse as oil prices break through $400 a barrel and electrical appliances will get automatically turned off when households exceed energy quotas.” 10 Failed Global Warming Predictions That You Need To Know About (westernjournal.com)

What is done in a laboratory is not proof of anything that happens in the atmosphere. The atmosphere is too large encompassing millions of cubic kilometres and the causes of temperature change are very complex. The radiation from the sun changes on solar cycles. There is radiation from space that hits the atmosphere. There is water vapour that is also a GHG and is a large part of the atmosphere. There is ocean temperatures and water movement, cloud cover, volcanic activity to name a few. It cannot be replicated in a laboratory. I'm sure if you enclose something in a large test tube with CO2 gas it is going to trap or effect the temperature at the bottom of the container. But that does not represent the atmosphere which is very large and complex, affected by many factors. There are many factors that likely affect the temperature in the real world. It cannot be replicated in a test tube. Ask any scientist.

You assume Canada is liabile without any proof and want Canadians to pay billions of dollars for something that is completely unproven. And you think that is responsible moral behavior. That does not fit or meet the standard for legal liability. If you were in a court of law you would have to have solid proof not speculation and theory to establish legal liability. I think you need to study the legal meaning of liability.

Total CO2 in the atmosphere is very small because it is a trace gas to begin with. 97% of this trace gas called CO2 in the atmosphere is natural. Man only contributes 3% and out of the total CO2. That means man contributes next to nothing. The atmosphere is also full of water vapour which is also a GHG and effects the climate. How do you know it is man's tiny contribution that is a cause of climate change? You have not explained anything. The fact is you don't know and are just assuming man is the cause. You are like little Greta assuming the worst about mankind and anyone who has any resources or savings like Canada. Canada's contribution has been likened to throwing a medium size Tim Horton's coffee cup into an Olympic size swimming pool of CO2. It is nothing. You really think punishing Canadians will make any difference?

This is the problem with Marxists and Communists. They think they have a right to everyone else's money and savings. That is what this is all about. We have a leader that is extorting our hard-earned savings and giving it away to the Marxist third world and destroying our energy industry at the same time.

What facts? Give us one proof that man is the cause of climate change. Not speculation or theory by leftists and environmental radicals such as yourself, but give us the proof. If you don't have any proof, you should withdraw and admit it. Be honest. We know you don't believe in the Bible but try to be honest and show us the proof of why you are pushing something that is costing Canadians billions of dollars.

It depends whether you are one of the suckers that believe in man-made climate change, which you are. You would give Canadians hard-earned money away to the rest of the world to fight against the climate. Maybe write your own cheques and leave the rest of us alone.

We should really quit the climate change conferences. The third world is demanding billions of dollars compensation from the western developed nations such as Canada because they blame us for the climate. Canada is falling for it, admitting it's our fault, and committing hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to the third world to fight or compensate for climate change. These climate change conferences are nothing but a scam of the west and an arm of the U.N. We should withdraw from the Marxist U.N. and save Canadians from this extortion.

Nonsense. I think if you do a search on a certain story in the Bible such as this story about Abraham and his son Isaac, you will find most websites will tell you basically the same understanding of it.

This preborn baby’s mutilated body shows how violent second-trimester abortions are (6 months). This abortion provider describes how he does it.

Why Did God Ask Abraham to Sacrifice Isaac? If you really want to know the answer to this question, you need to read this article. Why did God ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? | BibleProject™

This website explains the story about Abraham and his son. It would make more sense to actually read about this story and understand it and not just use a piece of it to throw out a false sound bite. "In faith, Abraham took his son Isaac and was ready to offer him up as a sacrifice, trusting that God could indeed raise him up again and fulfill His promises to Abraham to bless all nations through the Seed of Abraham and Isaac (cf. Genesis 22:18). And, in a figure, Abraham received his son back again alive from the dead. So also Christ Jesus, who suffered and died the just punishment for the sins of the world, was raised up again on the third day. As the Bible tells us, Jesus Christ "was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification" (Romans 4:25). His resurrection is proof that God accepted His sacrifice as full payment for the sins of the world, and through faith in Jesus we are justified and counted righteous and acceptable in God's eyes. Because Jesus died for our sins, in our stead, and rose again, we who trust in Him have the assurance that our sins are paid for in full and forgiven and that we too will be raised up on the last day to life eternal!" Why did God ask Abraham to sacrifice his son? (nwaonline.com)

No, I am not an anti-vaxxer. I am pro vaccination. You picked the wrong topic to throw at me. I am pro genuine science. . You don't know what I believe, but make wild assumptions.

No I don't know everything God thinks. I do however have the inspired Bible that has his words and thoughts in it. Most people in the world are following Satan. If one mocks God or his word, that puts him in the category of those who are following Satan. But I realize it may not be productive to go down that road and may be my mistake to mention it even though it may be a fact. I know non-believers and opponents of God will use anything possible to throw at a believer and try to smear him and discredit him, which is what you are doing. That is why Satan is also called "the accuser of the brethern" in the Bible. It would be more useful to discuss who God is and why one should believe in him and his word. That would be useful and productive. However here is a little information about Satan: "In addition to being a tempter, Satan is also “the accuser of our brothers” (Revelation 12:10, ESV). He enjoys listing the many sins of believers, but the Lord Jesus, our Advocate, defeats the accusations because He has paid the price for our sins (1 John 2:1–2). Christians can be confident of their salvation because Jesus has done the work for us through His death and resurrection (Ephesians 2:8–9). Satan is described as the “god of this age” (2 Corinthians 4:4) and has dominion over the world and its system (John 12:31; 1 John 5:19), but his authority will not last forever. During the tribulation, the devil will deceive the masses and raise up for himself the Antichrist, who will rule for seven years (Revelation 13:5–8). Since Satan has always wanted people to worship him as God, this will be a part of his deception as well, since many will worship Satan at that time (Revelation 13:4). He will also attempt to destroy the remnant of Israel but will not be successful (Revelation 12:13–16). At the end of the tribulation, Jesus will return, destroy the Antichrist and false prophet, and imprison Satan for 1,000 years (Revelation 19:19–20; 20:1–3). After that time, Satan will be released and will lead one last rebellion (Revelation 20:7–9); then Satan will finally be thrown into the lake of fire, forever to be tormented for his rebellion and works of evil (Revelation 20:10). The dominion of Satan over the world may seem unassailable, but the devil cannot withstand the power of our Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. FOR FURTHER STUDY God’s Devil: The Incredible Story of How Satan’s Rebellion Serves God’s Purposes by Erwin Lutzer" Who is Satan in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org As for your comment about Abraham and his son, I don't think you understand that story. You can easily find the explanation about that by doing a little search on Google or any search engine.

If you want to follow Satan, that is your choice but don't say nobody warned you.

According to your beliefs mankind is here by some kind of cosmic accident. If you go by that thinking there is no purpose to life. There is something terribly wrong with that belief.

Why is there suffering in the world? – Bridge to the Bible Perhaps you could do some studying. There is lots to learn. The universe and man were not created to be just a cosmic blob or accident. There is a God who cares about mankind.

As I have already said, I agree with genuine science, but not pseudo science. God does not "let children suffer". That is a completely erroneous understanding of who God is as I explained. God is perfection and does no evil. It is Satan and man following Satan that does evil. Satan is a real person or being and his fall is described in the Bible. People in the world are either following Satan or following the God of the Bible. There are only two choices.

Is everything that goes against your idea really "tripe"? If you had an inkling of who God is or what the Bible teaches about God you would know he does not do evil or condone evil. God is perfection which you should have been taught in your seminary training. That what the word holy means. It means perfection and without sin. That is what God is by nature.

You just confirmed how evil and corrupt the system is. The Charter is not protecting all people, but you somehow try to justify it.

Your comment seems to indicate you have read nothing about this subject. Since this is an important subject, it would seem that someone who really want to know the truth, would make an effort to read some articles. Since the world is a corrupt, evil place and children and all ages do suffer, one would think you would want to know the reason(s) why. This is one perspective: "Why does God let children suffer? Answered by Bible Q · 8 April 2012 · 0 Comments Thank you for your question. The problem of suffering is perhaps one of the most difficult questions that a Christian has to face, as it cuts to the core of our understanding of God and His purpose. Whilst some skeptics use it as an argument for atheism, I do not think this argument has the power to undermine the strong arguments for God’s existence. It does, however, warn us against naive understandings of God. Before I begin to attempt an answer to this question it is important to distinguish two separate ways one might approach this problem. One is the intellectual perspective, i.e. how is suffering consistent with the existence of a loving God? The other is the emotional response to some particular instance of suffering. This second perspective is not one I can answer here, indeed it would be patronising to do so. Whilst an intellectual understanding of suffering might help someone put their personal suffering in a larger philosophical context, it will not remove their suffering or restore someone they’ve lost. Here I will only attempt to give some reflections on the intellectual problem of suffering. The focus on child suffering is significant. One might ask why there is any suffering, whether experienced by a child or by an adult. I suspect there are two reasons why people often focus on the suffering of children. Firstly, it does seem unfair that some live to eighty or ninety in relative comfort, whilst some children die very young. We might feel, if not okay, at least less bad about someone dying at eighty or ninety. But if a child dies there is so much that they haven’t yet experienced or enjoyed – this seems terribly unfair. Secondly, we generally regard children as innocents. Even childish naughtiness is dwarfed by all the awful things adults get up to. So again, it seems unjust that innocents should suffer. The focus on child suffering takes us to the very heart of the general problem of suffering. We might accept some suffering that does us good in the long run (like going to the dentist); we might accept suffering that befalls wicked people (like criminal punishment); we might accept some suffering, as long as it is balanced out by a lot more joy. But we find it hard to accept suffering that seems pointless and random. If a child dies in an accident or has some horrible disease, there seems no rhyme or reason to that. How can a loving God allow that? The first thing to consider is that we do not know all the purposes of God. We cannot know them because His thoughts are not our thoughts, and His ways are not our ways. We cannot know therefore that any particular instance of suffering is pointless. It is important not to misunderstand this idea. If a child dies it is glib, patronising and even hurtful to say “well, God moves in mysterious ways”. And one might justly ask “what way justifies the death of this child?”. The point is not that we should just accept suffering and not ask questions, but we do need consider that just because something appears pointless to us now does not mean that it is pointless in the grand purpose of God. The second thing to consider is in what way do we expect God to prevent child suffering, particularly if we are inclined to accept some adult suffering. If a falling rock hits an adult they will die. If a falling rock hits a child they will die. Do we expect children to be immune to accident and disease until, say, their 18th birthday? How could you arrange such a world, and make the laws of nature behave in such a strange way? Could gravity not act on loose rocks above children? Or would children somehow be so much stronger than adults that they could withstand falling rocks? I do not mean these remarks to be flippant. I am simply asking the question: Is it possible to conceive of a world where adults suffering but children do not? Now you might say, “I accept that the laws of nature mean that falling rocks will kill anybody unfortunate enough to be in their path but God could still intervene if he wanted to”. This is true, but let us understand what this entails. If we think that God should intervene to prevent the deaths of children then we commit to the view that every time a rock falls it will fall to the ground, except when there is a child in the way. In these cases, God would intervene to move the rock. (God would also have to intervene in lots of other cases too). Let us consider the implications of that. Firstly, the laws of nature would no longer be active, at least not in any consistent way. The law of gravity, for instance, would be a universal natural law except when it entailed the death of a child then it would fail. But not just the law of gravity – all the laws of nature would have to bend to prevent child suffering. So science, which depends on the regularity of natural laws, would no longer work and everything mankind has discovered by science would not have been discovered. Also these crazy laws might have unintended consequences. An avalanche headed towards a single child would automatically be diverted into some other course, perhaps into an adult (or even a village full of adults). Similarly, human free will would have to be overridden when it entailed human suffering. I might think that I want to drive at speed, or to ignore safety warnings, or to pollute the planet with green house gases. However, I would automatically be prevented from doing these things because it would entail human suffering. Worse than this, if a butterfly flapping its wings can cause hurricanes on the other side of the world then all my actions, however minor, would have to be minutely controlled by God otherwise I might unintentionally contribute to child suffering. My point is that to prevent all child-suffering would require that the laws of nature no longer function and that human free-will should no longer be operative. (Now, this does not mean that God can never intervene, simply that when God intervenes there will be consequences and so He cannot intervene all the time). The final consequence of God intervening to prevent all child suffering would be that His existence would never be in doubt. If anyone said “I don’t believe in God” then all that would be required would be for me to put a child in danger and watch as the child is miraculously saved. Now if God wants to His existence to be less than obvious, that is, if He wants people to come to Him through faith and love not through compulsion, then He cannot act in this way. His interventions have to be less regular to allow people to deny His existence, if they choose to. There is one last point. We have seen that if we want to preserve the laws of nature and free-will then child suffering cannot be universally prevented. But this is only true if suffering exists at all. So one might ask: Why did God create a world in which suffering exists? Why not create a safe world without falling rocks, or horrible diseases, or nasty people? But that world you are describing is the Kingdom of God and if the world were already like that there would be no need for the Kingdom of God to come. But the Kingdom hasn’t yet come and we are reminded by the suffering around us that we need the Kingdom, when there will be no suffering. That Kingdom cannot exist whilst there are still people who are intent on doing wicked things. The Bible says that God subjected the world to futility (Rom 8:20) whilst there is wickedness on the earth. But there will come a day when God will judge the wicked and create “a new heavens and a new earth” for the righteous." Bible Q | Why does God let children suffer?

Yes, abortion is genocide. The unborn are people too and under the Charter Section 7 that you referred to, the unborn should be protected. Their life is just as sacred as other people who are already outside the womb. Unfortunately, human life is not respected in the government or legal system for all people. Human life begins before birth. This is biblical as well as historical. Our system is evil and corrupt. Using "capacity" is just an excuse for a major failure in the health care system. Ask anyone or any politician and they will tell you the health care system is failing. Putting thousands of people on waiting list is not treating everyone equally. It is discrimination against people with serious medical problems such as cancer or heart conditions, etc. Liberal and Socialist governments promised public health care for everyone, but failed to deliver. They did not put enough resources into it long ago and it is failing. Their solution is to discriminate against certain classes or age groups of people.