This ministry needs your financial support! Donate now!

Click Here to Read my Blog | My ChristianPost Blog Entries

Sign up for Apologetics Newsletter

Anthony's Faith Statement.

Discussion Forum

Anthony in the media

Video Ministry
(And on Youtube...)

A brief Introduction:

While studying to be a pastor in college I abandoned my faith. In fact, I abandoned everything I thought I believed and rebuilt.

To my own surprise at the time, I found that Christianity was much stronger than I had thought. As I rebuilt my belief system, I realized that there needed to be people out there responding to the questions people have. I had them myself. So, while not continuing on to be a pastor, I have focused on educating people about what Christianity is all about and responding to the various charges and accusations made against it.

There are some obvious challenges to being successful in that capacity, but a big part of it consists not in arguing with atheists and skeptics, but rather in providing Christians with accurate information in the first place to prevent them from leaving the faith in the first place.

Questioning is a very normal and natural part of growing up, and I am convinced that it is not wrong to ask questions of God at any age. God doesn't strike people down. On the other hand, if people are going to reject Christianity, it is my aim to at least make sure they reject the real Christianity and not a false view of it. Also, much heartache can be avoided by educating Christians properly to begin with. My experience has helped me... but it was unnecessary.

Paul said that some plant, some water, and others reap the increase. My job is to go out into the land and move rocks- or break them if necessary- till the land, and struggle through knee deep fertilizer... all in the effort to allow those who come later to plant, water, and reap the harvest. I look forward to the prospects of either serving you as someone who needs to haul rocks out of the field, or as someone who can look at the field, detect problems, and help farmers more effectively plant, water, and reap.

This ministry needs your financial support! Donate now!

Global Warming Proponents are like… Creationists? Really?

Posted by Anthony on November 29, 2008

I was reading this news article from the Sydney Morning Herald entitled “Beware the Church of Climate Alarm” and found myself inspired to blog on it when I read from page two of the article:

Plimer says creationists and climate alarmists are quite similar in that “we’re dealing with dogma and people who, when challenged, become quite vicious and irrational”.

Human-caused climate change is being “promoted with religious zeal … there are fundamentalist organisations which will do anything to silence critics. They have their holy books, their prophet [is] Al Gore. And they are promoting a story which is frightening us witless [using] guilt [and urging] penance.”

I don’t know who this Plimer guy is so can’t speak to the man’s experience dealing with creationists who, ‘when challenged, become vicious and irrational.’ I have yet to meet a vicious creationist and of course, ‘irrational’ is in the eye of the beholder to some degree- if the litmus test for rationality is one’s view on evolutionary theory then that amounts to nothing more than circular reasoning ie, that is what is irrational.

Ironically, Plimer sees similarities between global warming proponents and creationists, when he really should see similarities between global warming proponents and evolutionists. The creationist example is wholly inapt even on his own terms- by his view, creationism is based on ‘holy books’ but global warming, we are told, is backed by hard, irrefutable science. In other words, ‘global warming’ is being defended by his own ilk, not by fruity creationists.

And I would be willing to say that global warming probably is backed by ‘hard, irrefutable science’ … when by ‘science’ we mean the bastardized and philosophically driven ‘methodology’ that passes as science today in contrast to true science which actually relies on empirical demonstration.

In short, Plimer is merely seeing in climatology the same kind of ‘science’ at work in evolutionary theory. This then is the irony: even the self-professed skeptics aren’t skeptical of everything.

Moreover, isn’t there some kind of moral to be drawn here? In so many cases evolution is advanced on the grounds that ‘so many scientists believe it’ and this is identical to the case often made for global warming: ‘How can so many scientists be wrong?’ And yet according to Plimer, they are wrong. Surely if so many scientists can be wrong regarding global warming, perhaps they might be wrong about evolutionary theory? Read the rest of the entry… »