The global warning of Wheaton and Calvin biologists...

Here's a letter to Congress signed by a bunch of Evangelical academics who are on the global warning bandwagon and tell us the salvation of Gaia is at stake. Starting with the overpopulation mania of the seventies, I've noted Calamity Jane fads and Christian author fads have about the same half-life—ten years.

Some time ago in Madison, Wisconsin, I used to protest the genocide of over a billion infants with one of the guys who signed this letter, but now he's climbed a couple socioeconomic brackets and is protesting anthropogenic global warming. It might help to explain his new commitments that he's since moved from Madison to Wheaton where he teaches biology.

Which brings me to a couple observations. First, note how many of the signatories are from Wheaton and Calvin where profs live in mortal dread of appearing insufficiently progressive. They should get out more. 

Second, note that only five (2.6%) of these guys have the terminal degree in Atmospheric Science, Climatology, or Meteorology... Which is to say listening to their global warning is like listening to Justin Bieber, Johnny Depp, or Kim Kardashian talk about concussions in the NFL.

Finally, note the letter is served on the web site of Jim Wallis who, while claiming to be a Christian, receives funding from that evil rich man George Soros. Birds of a feather.

Tim Bayly

Tim serves Clearnote Church, Bloomington, Indiana. He and Mary Lee have five children and fifteen grandchildren.


I haven't seen so many Dr.'s in one place since the bird-flu scare!

That list points to the hidden deception of the word "and."

As I was reading the backgrounds, I was disappointed to see 29 chemists among the lists.  Here's why:  as an analytical chemist with a terminal degree, I learned about error in measurements.   I was also taught that to be sure the error in measurement is not interfering with any perceived trend, I want the error to be one tenth (0.1) of the magnitude of the trend.  To illustrate the error in measurement: if I say the temperature is 68 degrees F, all you can say with certainty is that I measured a temperature between 67.5 and 68.5.  (and that I am addressing this comment to non-scientists since I used Fahrenheit.)  The historical data for temperature was generally measured to the nearest degree while the observed trend is on the order of 0.1 degrees (C, I believe, which is about 0.2 degrees F).  Weather stations are now being equipped with thermocouples capable of measuring to the nearest 0.01 degree for that reason, but the historical data simply is not precise enough to see the claimed trend.  This simple error is something of which any physical scientist (physicist, chemist, climatologist, atmospheric scientist, anyone whose work involves precise measurements) should be well aware.

That error is even more fundamental than the other concerns that can be raised:  the increasing paving around the weather stations, increasing cloud cover (September 11 and 12, 2001 were the only days in recent North American history without airplane contrails.), and the simple fact the plants LIKE carbon dioxide.  Really surprised the biologists missed that one!

In the late 80's I took a road trip to investigate colleges.  After talking with the faculty in the biology departments I had to cross Calvin and Wheaton off my list.  They had turned to Theistic Evolution.  I ended up going to a secular Ivy League school where at least I knew the teachers espoused beliefs antithetical to Christianity and were not pretending otherwise.

This letter begins with several whoppers.

Para 1) "Evangelical scientists" should read "Christian Science", because that is precisely what it means. Mary Baker Eddy was not just canny, she was prophetic. More importantly, as a *real* atmospheric scientist and former baptist missionary, John Christy, the state of Alabama climatologist, has reported to Congress, the climate alarmists will hurt the poor far far more than climate warming, because their principle challenge in life is finding energy sources--charcoal, wood, coal, gas. In fact, climate warming will be good for the poor, because it produces bigger crops from the CO2 fertilizer which are simultaneously more resistant to drought. So the mantra that climate warming is bad for the poor is a lie, a pernicious, nasty, in-your-face lie repeated by wealthy 2nd-world denizens who haven't a clue how warmist policies are distorting the 3rd world economy.

Para 2) The year 2012 was NOT the hottest year in USA by a long shot. 1935 I believe holds that record. Oh sure, if you let Jim Hansen eliminate all the cold thermometer records, and re-jigger the airport thermometers placed next to jet exhausts, he will try to convince you that 2012 was the hottest. But as even British rag "Economist" reported, the world has not warmed since 1998. Yup, 15 years of cooling. Nor was it a remarkable year for droughts or superstorms--we are in a hurricane lull since 2005, if anyone in Wheaton was paying attention. Likewise the drought so ballyhooed in the press, made it to about the 25th or so driest year in the century. In other words, the "bad weather" they dread so much is merely bad from the perspective of the NYT and Manhattan. So maybe that adjective "evangelical" should be changed "gullible" instead.

Para 3) I could go for a long time about how dangerous and bad for the world are all the "cures" being promoted by the alarmists. But my basic complaint is that evangelicals have only one thing in common--the "evangel" in the word. And I'm sorry, climate isn't the sort of thing you can take to heaven. So since when did "evangelical" mean "green gospel"?

Para 4) It's all I can do to avoid hooting and howling in disbelief. "reduce carbon emissions and protect our environment, thereby strengthening the long-term outlook for our economy"  Yeah, like Spain and Germany's economy was soooo strengthened by their reduction in carbon emissions, that Spain has 26% unemployment, and Germany is cancelling its solar-panel subsidies in 2018. Where do these guys get their information from? And they are teaching our kids? Yeesh, I'd rather send my kids to state schools that ignoramus places like these evangelical schools.

Joel, three cheeers for your comment. Better to go to a secular university than a "Christian" college where secular beliefs are taught under the mask of new school piety.

But better sstill to go to a truly Christian college with truly Christian professors and truly Christian piety. 

There's a useful way to address this. If anyone has the time, I'll help. Some professors will sign every petition that comes their way, without reading it, so these thigns don't mean too much. But what someone should do is send round a petition exactly the same in form—same number of paragraphs, etc.—but against gay marriage and see which of these same people will sign. Then publicize who signs and who doesn't. 

       The 60% who are bio professors are an especially good group for this. 

If you are interested in the facebook group, please join:  Natural Global Climate Cycles   (emphasis on the word "natural").

"but now he's climbed a couple socioeconomic brackets and is protesting anthropogenic global warming"

I'm highly skepitical of glaobal warming but isn't sort of impugning his motives to suggest that he may be signing this protest because he's making more money?

Isn't the issue of global warming unlike abortion an issue in which Christians can disagree?

>>Isn't the issue of global warming unlike abortion an issue in which Christians can disagree?

Sure, it's debatable—no question. And yes, he's a brother in Christ for whom I have affection. But Wheaton leaves few—very few—people better, and no one the same. Like Supreme Court justices, Wheaton students, profs, and administrators "grow" (which is to say, decay).

Jumping on the global warning bandwagon with a bunch of other Ph.D.s is decay. It is a bandwagon, after all, and standing on the side of all the politically correct people gets you goodies that those opposing the bandwagon don't get, especially at Calvin and Wheaton.

If a Christian speaks out publicly in the name of God claiming the side of the angels and his prophetic words are straight off the oped pages of the New York Times, ninety-nine times out of a hundred I trust the man less.

As for his pay, I'm guessing he earns less at Wheaton than he did in Madison. This is why I used the term "socioeconomic." I was referring to class and status—not simple pay.


Add new comment