--A Realistic Look at Global Warming

--By: Vernon R. Cupps, Ph.D., and Jake Hebert, Ph.D.*
-From ICR.org / (LINK AT BOTTOM~)


Since the late 1980s, global warming has been hotly debated, with many arguing that Earth is undergoing potentially catastrophic man-made climate change. Is Earth getting warmer? Is such warming, if real, dangerous? And is it caused by human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2)? Or, to put it another way, is catastrophic anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (abbreviated as CAGW) real?

There has been a warming trend for much of the 20th century. In fact, ICR scientist Larry Vardiman did his own independent analysis of three different datasets and concluded that warming had probably occurred for at least the last 30 to 50 years.

But past warming is no indication that such warming will necessarily continue. In fact, there has been an apparent pause in this warming trend for the last 18 years. Nor does a warming trend automatically prove that human activity is responsible.

A recent article in Eos, however, attempted to establish as fact that human activities drive global warming. The author, Dr. Shaun Lovejoy, did this by supposedly disproving the only alternative—that observed warming is due to natural causes. He calls those who support this alternative hypothesis “denialists” because they supposedly deny the obvious facts of science.

Lovejoy attempts to show that increased amounts of atmospheric carbon dioxide are responsible for an increase in global temperatures of about 1° Celsius over the last 125 years. He does this by making a plot of change in global temperature against a “stand in” or “proxy” for radiative forcing due to atmospheric CO2 (Figure 1). Radiative forcing is an indication of a gas’s ability to affect the earth’s climate. (See the sidebar for a more detailed discussion.) Lovejoy argues that there is only a one-in-three-million chance that natural causes could produce this temperature rise, although he later acknowledges that a more realistic estimate is one in a thousand.

--**A History Lesson

But are long-lasting changes in climate really that unlikely? Abundant historical evidence shows that significant, long-term climate fluctuations lasting hundreds of years have taken place. These fluctuations occurred long before human CO2 contributions became significant. Even scientists who believe that humans are causing global warming acknowledge that human contributions to atmospheric CO2 were practically negligible until the early- to mid-1900s.

Yet there have been two significant changes in climate within the last thousand years—the Medieval Warm Period (roughly 950–1250 A. D.) and the Little Ice Age (roughly 1300–1850 A. D.). Because these changes in climate occurred before humans could have caused them, the mere existence of these two periods is a real problem for any attempt to dismiss the possibility of natural changes in climate. For this reason, some who believe in CAGW have attempted to minimize the significance of these past climate fluctuations, despite abundant historical evidence for their reality.

For instance, one of the best-known images in the global warming debate is the “hockey stick” graph of Penn State University climatologist Michael Mann, so-called because it resembles a hockey stick turned on its side with the blade pointing up. The hockey stick has been used to argue that the late 20th century was characterized by unprecedented warming, since Mann’s statistical analysis significantly “cooled” the Medieval Warm period. However, Mann’s work has been widely criticized, and a more conventional analysis indicates that 20th-century warming is not unprecedented (Figure 2).

The Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age raise an obvious question about Lovejoy’s reasoning. If not one but two significant long-term changes in climate have occurred within the last thousand years, before humans could have influenced climate to any significant degree, then perhaps such naturally occurring changes in climate are not nearly as unlikely as Lovejoy claims!

Moreover, Lovejoy seems to be underestimating the probability of natural changes in climate. His argument assumes that temperatures from hundreds of years ago can be known accurately to within just one-tenth of a degree Celsius (0.1°C).3 But these temperatures were not measured with thermometers—not even crude thermometers. Rather, they were estimated from things like tree rings, boreholes, ice cores, etc. Because these are indirect estimates of temperatures, the true uncertainty is almost surely a lot more than Lovejoy’s optimistic estimate of 0.1°C. Using the same reasoning he used, but with larger estimates for these temperature uncertainties, would imply that significant natural changes in climate are much more probable than he asserts.

An interesting side note is that many evolutionists absolutely dismiss out of hand the possibility that any observed global warming could be due primarily to natural causes. For instance, the National Center for Science Education has made advocacy of a belief in man-made global warming a priority.10 Yet even by Lovejoy’s own calculations, the lowest probability he can estimate against recent warming being the result of natural causes is one in three million (1 in 3×106). Compare this to a probability of 1 in 1×10106 that the simple protein insulin can form by pure chance.11 Yet evolutionists claim that the insulin protein did somehow form by chance, even though such an event is much less likely (by their own reasoning) than long-term natural climate variation, which many of them confidently dismiss as an impossibility. Why? Could it have something to do with their worldview?

Lovejoy quickly dismisses other factors that can affect climate, such as changes in solar activity. But mounting evidence shows that the sun can indeed subtly influence weather and climate by affecting the number of cosmic rays (energetic protons) entering the atmosphere. In fact, the Ph.D. work of one of this article’s authors found additional evidence for this possibility. Also, increases in temperature can actually cause an increase in atmospheric CO2 via releases from the oceans. A well-known rule in chemistry called Henry’s law states that the amount of gas that can be dissolved in a liquid decreases with increasing temperature at constant pressure. This is the reason a can of soda goes flat as it warms. Indeed, some datasets show atmospheric CO2 increasing after temperature goes up. So, are temperatures, particularly ocean temperatures, causing an increase in atmospheric CO2, or are warmer temperatures the result of increased atmospheric CO2, or is it some of both?

Another problem with the argument that human-produced carbon dioxide could lead to climate catastrophe is that this argument implicitly assumes that the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide in the pre-industrial era was consistently much lower, about 270 parts per million (ppm), than today’s value of about 400 ppm. It also assumes that today’s value is truly abnormal.

Systematic measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide have been made at Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii since 1959, and these measurements do indeed show an increase in CO2 from about 310 ppm to today’s value of 400 ppm.14 However, scientists also made thousands of measurements of atmospheric CO2 between 1812 and 1958. Although not as precise as the modern Mauna Loa readings, many of these older measurements are estimated to have been accurate to within 3% of the true values and were good enough to show a seasonal cycle that is also apparent in the Mauna Loa measurements. These suggest high values of atmospheric carbon dioxide around the years 1825, 1857, and 1942, with the 1942 value comparable to today’s value of 400 ppm.15

Specialists are aware of these data but generally dismiss them in favor of estimates of atmospheric CO2 inferred from ice cores. However, gases tend to escape from the cores after their removal from the surrounding ice, which implies that such estimates will tend to be lower than the true values. Even so, there is evidence from a shallow Antarctic ice core that amounts of CO2 may have been as high as 328 ppm within the last hundred years or so.16 But recent jumps in the amount of atmospheric CO2, both before and during the industrial period, suggest that atmospheric CO2 can vary due to natural causes, not just human influences. We have already mentioned one possible source for such variation—warming oceans, which would release more CO2 into the atmosphere.

The Climate Change Model Problem

Finally, much of the alarmism surrounding this issue results from climate computer models that predict considerably higher temperatures in the coming decades as a result of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Obviously, the particulars of different models will vary, but a general overview is presented in the sidebar. However, in the past these climate models have consistently overestimated the amount of future warming, as shown in Figure 3.17 If one looks at these climate change model predictions for the temperature anomaly from the present to 2050, they vary from 0 to 2.5°C, a significant disparity between models. The observational data are very near 0 for the temperature anomaly.

Clearly, there are major disagreements between different models about any significant global warming. But the data accumulated thus far seem to support the models (hypotheses) predicting global warming of no more than 0.5°C through 2050.

It should also be remembered that carbon dioxide was part of God’s “very good” creation (Genesis 1:31). Plants “breathe” carbon dioxide, and there is evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing more plants to grow, even in dry areas.18 There are also indications that the pre-Flood world may have had more atmospheric carbon dioxide than we do at present, and this increased CO2 may have contributed to a much more temperate pre-Flood climate.19 So even if CO2 is warming the planet today, Christians have no reason to panic over this issue.

So many variables affect Earth’s climate that it’s difficult to see how a computer model can accurately predict future changes, especially given our present imperfect understanding. Earth’s atmosphere is subject to numerous intricate interactions, and we still don’t have a firm understanding of its overall long-term sensitivity. If we want a realistic assessment of climate change, we need to 1) do our homework and learn from history, 2) continue to study the data with great diligence, and 3) refrain from jumping to conclusions based on skewed climate models and short-sighted assumptions.

To be sure, God has appointed man to be custodian of His Earth. We should be good stewards of what He has given us, but we enter dangerous territory if we presume to be able to control and shape to our will what God has made. The law of unanticipated consequences inevitably intervenes.<https://www.icr.org/article/realistic-look-at-global-warming/>

--IS CREATION "VERY GOOD" in the Face of Climate Change?
--(Article From Answers in Genesis/ Ken Ham)

Can we call creation “very good” in the face of climate change? That’s the question posed by “eco-theologian” and Presbyterian minister Dr. Neddy Astudillo in a recent article. She describes the alleged challenges our world will face—food shortages, wildfires, heat waves, coastal flooding, and poverty—if climate change continues and then writes, “this impending reality challenges my understanding of creation as good.” But does she have the correct view of what “very good” means in the first place?

Dr. Astudillo whole-heartedly believes climate change is caused by humans and that it will be devastating to life on earth. Now, climate change is real. We can observe that climates change. But much of climate change science is driven by an erroneous interpretation of the past. You see, if you approach the evidence with an evolutionary worldview and the idea that climates have remained relatively stable since the last ice age 12,000 years ago, you will interpret the small changes in our climate today as a result of modern human activity and be much more likely to extrapolate these into huge changes for the environment.

But believers must start with the history in God’s Word. And that history tells us something very different. And Dr. Astrudillo would do well to pay heed to that history. She writes, “If human presence in this land led the Genesis writer to declare God’s creation as ‘very good,’ how can I hold the findings of this report alongside my statement of faith in humanity?”

First of all, it wasn’t only human presence that made God’s creation “very good” (although humans, uniquely made in his image, are the pinnacle of his creation and it was only after the 6th day when land animals and then man were made, that God called all of creation very good). Genesis 1:31 (the sixth day) tells us God saw everything he had made, and it was very good (throughout Genesis 1, at the end of each day, with the exception of day 2, God looks at what he has made and declares it good). All of God’s completed creation was very good in the beginning.

When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, creation was broken.

**But all of that changed with sin (something Dr. Astrudillo never mentions). When Adam and Eve rebelled against God, creation was broken. It was no longer very good—and that includes the climate! As Romans describes, the creation today groans because of sin—it’s a fallen creation. Then the global flood of Noah’s day (about 4,300 years ago) radically changed the climate, resulting in a post-flood ice age shortly thereafter. Earth has been slowly settling down since this catastrophic event. So, from a biblical perspective, small changes in the climate are not alarming and not necessarily directly caused by man’s activities. And such changes have been going on ever since the flood.

Dr. Astrudillo appears to be claiming that God’s creation is no longer “very good” because of recent human-caused climate change. But, the truth is, God’s creation—including the climate—is no longer “very good” because of man’s sin 6000 years ago. It’s our sin that is responsible for creation’s brokenness.

While we should certainly strive to protect our planet and care for it, we as believers can look forward to a day when we will have a new heavens and new earth that will not be affected by sin. What a glorious day that will be!

--CLOUD Experiment Supports Global Warming / ICR -

--Climate scientists have misinterpreted earth history by rejecting the Biblical revelation of a global flood only a few thousand years ago that provides an explanation for the Ice Age and past climate change. Instead, they believe the Ice Age was caused by minor fluctuations in solar heating over millions of years. Consequently, they believe a minor change in global heating introduced by even small amounts of gases or particulates in the atmosphere could cause the earth to reach a “tipping point” and lead to a “runaway greenhouse” or to enter another ice age.

From a creationist perspective, if the Ice Age was a consequence of the catastrophic processes of the Genesis Flood, then earth’s climate system would not be sensitive to minor influences. The climate appears to be a highly stable system and exhibits oscillations around an equilibrium level rather than being susceptible to transitions to new states. The earth-sun system does oscillate over short periods of time, as evidenced by minor heating and cooling and by the variation in the number of sunspots. But, these fluctuations do not destabilize the climate. So, the introduction of minor changes in gases or particulates in the atmosphere should not cause major changes but rather minor departures from an equilibrium state.

The primary cause of the conflict in the global warming debate is not the observation that carbon dioxide has increased in the atmosphere or that a small amount of warming has occurred, but that the Bible has been rejected as a source of important revelation about earth history. Scripture assures us that “while the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease” (Genesis 8:22).
--LINK/ <https://www.icr.org/article/cloud-experiment-supports-global-warming>
-----------

--THE CHIEF-FORECASTERS MISTAKE ~~

-"Let the one who has my word speak it faithfully."
---(Jeremiah 23:28)--

~~AT NOON ON September 21, 1938, a young meteorologist warned the U. S. Weather Bureau of two fronts forcing a hurricane northward New England. But the chief of forecasting scoffed at Charles Pierce's prediction. Surely a tropical storm wouldn't strike so far north.

Two hours later, the 1938 New England Hurricane made landfall on Long Island. By 4:00 p.m. it had reached New England, tossing ships onto land as homes crumbled into the sea. More than six hundred people died. Had the victims received Pierce's warning--based on solid data and his detailed maps--they likely would have survived.

The concept of knowing whose word to heed has precedent in Scripture. In Jeremiah's day, God warned His people against false prophets. "Do not listen [to them]" He said. "They fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the LORD" (Jeremiah 23:16). God said of them, "If they had stood in my council, they would have proclaimed my words to my people" (v.22).

"False prophets" are still with us. "Experts" dispense advice while ignoring God altogether or twisting His words to suit their purposes. But through His Word and Spirit, God has given us what we need to begin to discern the false from the true. As we gauge everything by the truth of His Word, our own words and lives will increasingly reflect that truth to others.~~

--"LORD G-D, so many claim to speak for You these days. Help us learn what You really have to say. Make us sensitive to Your Spirit, not the spirit of this world. Thank You, our Lord, Rock and Redeemer. In Jesus Name. amen~
--ODB/TG~

~~~'DIVINELY ALIGNED' / JEHOVAH GOD IS IN CONTROL OF THE WEATHER ~~ AND ALL EARTH / HEAVENS~

~~"Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!
---[Romans 11:33]--

--[PLEASE READ/ ROMANS 11:33–36]

--I was deeply troubled and woke in the night to pace the floor and pray. Frankly, my attitude was not one of prayerful submission to God, but one of questioning and anger. Finding no release, I sat and stared out a large window at the night sky. I was unexpectedly drawn to focus on Orion’s Belt—those three perfectly arranged stars often visible on clear nights. I knew just enough about astronomy to understand that those three stars were hundreds of light years apart.

I realized the closer I could be to those stars, the less they would appear to be aligned. Yet from my distant perspective, they looked carefully configured in the heavens. At that moment, I realized I was too close to my life to see what God sees. In His big picture, everything is in perfect alignment.

The apostle Paul, as he completes a summary of the ultimate purposes of God, breaks into a hymn of praise (Romans 11:33-36). His words lift our gaze to our sovereign God, whose ways are beyond our limited ability to understand or trace (v. 33). Yet the One who holds all things together in the heavens and on earth is intimately and lovingly involved with every detail of our lives (Matthew 6:25-34; Colossians 1:16).

Even when things seem confusing, God’s divine plans are unfolding for our good and for God’s honor and glory.

~"LORD G-D, remind us that Your purposes and plans for our lives are beyond our understanding, and help us rest in You. We trust, Lord, that You are in total control.~amen"
---ODB/EM

----QUESTION// DOES SCRIPTURE SAY ANYTHING ABOUT CLIMATE?
---[Creation Question and Answers // Brian Thomas, PH.D ~ [Acts and Facts // JUNE 2020]

--Climate change conversations squeeze their way into so many different topics, yet climate research is rife with confusion. Which scientists are right—those who say manmade pollution and greenhouse gases cause most global warming, or those who say these may only play a minor role? Even expert opinions vary to extremes. In contrast, Genesis makes confident statements about Earth’s climate. ~

The 2009 Climategate fiasco illustrates the confusion inside climate research.1 Extracted emails exposed how certain climate researchers suppressed the work of scientists who disagreed with them. An embarrassing placard at Glacier National Park in Montana also shows confusion. The old sign said human activity warms the world enough to melt glaciers. It stated, “Computer models indicate the glaciers will all be gone by the year 2020.” But the glaciers in the park remain today—so park officials changed the sign.2 Whether through scientific suppression or waffling words, climate science seems to shift like the daily weather forecast.

In contrast, the Word of God stands forever.3 For example, Genesis lists three big famines that fit Ice Age climate shifts. Noah’s Flood warmed oceans and powered volcanoes that caused Earth’s Ice Age.4 Centuries later, oceans cooled, volcanoes calmed, and ice sheets melted. As the Ice Age faded, the Middle East transitioned from lush to arid.5 Abram traveled across today’s Iraq to Egypt across a “well watered” land that stands dry today.6 After he arrived in Canaan, Genesis 12:10 says, “Abram went down to Egypt to dwell there, for the famine was severe in the land.” Crops won’t grow without rain. He headed to Egypt since ancient Egyptians relied more on the Nile River when rains failed to fall on their fields.

Scripture records the next major drought during Isaac’s time, saying, “There was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham.”7 Later, the Lord used Joseph as top leader in Egypt to save many people through a third drought recorded in Genesis.8 Seven years without rain certainly counts as climate change! That extreme weather had nothing to do with industrial pollution. Scripture’s history and clues on the ground together show that today’s dry Middle East had a wet past.

While Christians should lead in protecting God’s creation, no Bible believer should buy into climate alarmism. This says that human activity can destroy the planet. What about God’s promise to Noah? After the Flood, He said, “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, and day and night shall not cease.”9 God promised farmable land, not a destroyed earth.

The Creator doesn’t make junk. He made Earth’s atmosphere strong enough to sustain the people He loves—even when some of those people fail to take care of His creation. Mankind makes mistakes. Our faults bleed into science and society. In contrast, three droughts and a Genesis promise show the certainty of our great Creator’s words. ~~
---Dr. Thomas is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research /ACTS & FACTS // JUNE 2020 ~~

--WEATHER FORECASTING / SIGNS OF THE TIME ~~

-----SIGNS OF THE TIMES~~

~~“When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?” (Matthew 16:2-3)--

This sharp rebuke by the Lord Jesus was well deserved, for His critics were challenging Him to prove His right to be heard by performing a miracle. But they had already been confronted with a tremendous body of evidence, both in their Scriptures and in the very life and teachings of Jesus (as well as in the miracles already wrought by Him) that He was their Messiah. They paid great attention to weather forecasting and other mundane matters while ignoring or rejecting the evidence that God Himself, in Christ, was in their midst.

Today we are more occupied with daily weather even than they were, with all sorts of forecasting devices in operation. There is also a growing army of doomsday forecasters, loudly concerned about overpopulation, pollution, and a host of other foreboding secular “signs of the times.”

Yet they ignore the overwhelming evidences, both in science and Scripture, that our great Creator/Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, is still in control and is coming again soon to fulfill His great purposes in creation and redemption. A mere listing of the many real signs of God’s times would take many pages.

One such sign, of course, is this very proliferation of science and technology. At “the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased” (Daniel 12:4). Another is the great following achieved by these false teachers, as multitudes “turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:4). “Hypocrites,” Jesus said, are concerned with secular trends, but spiritual discerners can recognize the true signs.

--ICR/HMM~

--HERE'S YOUR SIGN ~~

~~The Bossons Glacier in the French Alps should no longer exist, according to outdated signs at Glacier National Park in Montana. ~~

--Glacier National Park in Montana is replacing signs that predicted glaciers would be gone by 2020.
The signs, which blame human activity for global warming, were put up more than a decade ago. But changes in computer forecasting have pushed that date back indefinitely. As the park budget allows, the old signs are being replaced. The new signs still blame human activity for the melting of glaciers, but don't predict a date when they will disappear completely.

Without the Biblical perspective of an omnipotent God, we believe we must save ourselves from ecological disaster. But Genesis reveals that God is all-powerful and actively sustains his creation. God himself has promised that the earth and its climate will continue to support life until He establishes the new heavens and earth. By no means does that relieve us of our responsibility to be good stewards of this beautiful world that He has placed in our care. But it does take away the fear that leads to the hype and hysteria so often characteristic of the climate change conversation. ~~

--"Now I know that the LORD saves His anointed;
"He will answer him from His holy heaven
With the saving strength of His right hand."
"Some boast in chariots and some in horses;
But we will boast in the name of the LORD, our God." --[PSALM 20:6-7] --

--ANSWERS IN GENESIS/ Ken Ham ~
~~

--Global Warming Climate Change / Climate Change Facts:
Should we be concerned?

--Answers In Genesis / Please click on the link ~ [January 11, 2020]


<https://answersingenesis.org/enviro...ld-we-be-concerned-about-climate-change/>

--Possibilities, Probabilities, and Certainties ~~

-"If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth."
--(Mark 9:23) --

---THE POSSIBILITY that global warming will soon melt vast areas of polar ice, resulting in catastrophic flooding of coastal cities, has long been trumpeted by the news media and has created a near panic response in many people. Other threats such as the possibility of nuclear war with North Korea or the spread of the corona virus have unsettled millions.

News broadcasters seem to thrive on the fear that their predictions of possible and probably calamities instill in their audience. While some of their predictions have a degree of merit, no one knows the details of future events except God alone. So we would do well to focus on the certainties which God has revealed to us, instead of on possibilities and probabilities associated speculations of man.

We know that "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement" (Hebrews 9:27). Like all Scriptures, this is not merely a possibility or probability but an absolute certainty. What are we doing about it? Another Scripture says expressly, "If we confess our sins, [God] is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us" (1 John 1:9-10).

Here are some certainties about the final Judgment: "And they were judged every man according to their works. ... And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire" (Revelation 20:13,15). The outcome of the Judgment will be certain. Thankfully, our own choices will determine that outcome. What is your decision?

--BSW/PL~

---The Pope, The Flood, and Global Warming ~`
--[ICR/ JH/PHD] -(March 2021)~

--In a new book, Pope Francis warns that a “great flood” could result if civilization fails to stop global warming, and he draws an analogy between future sea level rise and Noah’s Flood. He writes, “The Bible says that the flood is the result of God’s wrath....It is a figure of God’s wrath, who according to the Bible has seen too many bad things and decides to obliterate humanity.” His statement that the Flood is a figure of God’s wrath—rather than a demonstration of God’s wrath that took place in real history—suggests that he thinks the Genesis Flood is a myth. In this vein, he goes on to say, “The biblical flood, according to experts, is a mythical tale....But myth is a form of knowledge....The flood is a historical tale, archaeologists say, because they found traces of a flood in their excavations.”1

The pope seems to be trying to have it both ways, deferring to secular experts who deny the historicity of Genesis while taking care not to explicitly deny the biblical account himself. However, such a delicate balancing act isn’t really possible, so it is no surprise that, when push comes to shove, the pope gives more weight to so-called experts than to the Bible.

Conservative Catholics have long been exasperated with Pope Francis for statements and actions contrary to Scripture regarding issues like abortion and homosexuality, and some have charged him with heresy.2-4 These latest comments will no doubt continue to raise concerns about his orthodoxy. Even so, the statements are an excellent opportunity to inform people (including the pope!) that the Genesis Flood was a real, historical event.

The Earth’s surface is covered by thousands of feet of water-deposited rock layers, within which are the fossilized remains of billions of plants and animals. Had these organic remains not been rapidly buried in mud, they would have decayed or been eaten by scavengers.5 Moreover, marine fossils are often found on land, and fossils of land creatures are often found in deep ocean sediments.6 Indeed, marine and land fossils are often mixed together.7 This would be difficult to explain if the sediments were deposited slowly and gradually over millions of years, but given the catastrophic, chaotic nature of the Flood, this mix of marine and land fossils makes perfect sense. And despite claims of evolutionary geologists to the contrary, there are strong geological clues that these water-deposited sediments were deposited very rapidly, consistent with a Flood scenario.8-10

Moreover, the world’s people groups have hundreds of narratives and recollections that God used a great Flood to destroy the world for its sin, except for one man’s family, who, along with representatives of the world’s land animals, survived the cataclysm in a large wooden vessel.11,12 These recollections are exactly what one would expect if the Flood really happened.

But if evidence for the Flood is so strong, why do so many deny it? The Apostle Peter gives us a clue in 2 Peter 3:3-9: in the last days, scoffers will come, walking after their own lusts (v. 3). These scoffers will deny that God created the world (v. 5), that God destroyed the world in the days of Noah (v. 6), and that the Lord Jesus Christ is one day coming back to set up His Kingdom (v. 4). Acknowledging creation and the reality of the Genesis Flood is a tacit acknowledgement that God’s future judgment is coming, so it is hardly surprising that those wishing to avoid accountability would use the pseudo-intellectual rationale that the rocks and fossils represent millions of years of evolution, rather than God’s judgment in the days of Noah.

Many today, including the pope, are worried about sea-level rise due to global warming. But the rainbow is a reminder that God has promised never again to destroy the world with a Flood. Most—if not all—global warming alarmism is tied to a denial of Genesis. There is indeed an emergency facing the world, but it isn’t climate change. It is the coming wrath of God’s judgment, which can only be avoided by repenting (turning) from one’s sins and believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. ~~