Intelligent Design

Posted Without Comment

Spread the love

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

AP story published in the Washington Post on  November 2, 1922

37 Replies to “Posted Without Comment

  1. 1
    asauber says:

    Bill Nye could not be reached for comment.

    Andrew

  2. 2
    tribune7 says:

    If global warming destroys the world blame Jane Fonda and Bruce Springsteen.

  3. 3
    Mung says:

    And now for the good news. Killing of baby seals in the region is at an historical low.

  4. 4
  5. 5
    Seqenenre says:

    What were the reports on November 2, 1923; November 2, 1924 and November 2, 1925?

  6. 6
    News says:

    Fact checked by Snopes as true.

  7. 7
    EricMH says:

    Well, that’s because we had global cooling in the 60s. But this time global warming is no joke.

  8. 8
    goodusername says:

    Seqenenre,

    What were the reports on November 2, 1923; November 2, 1924 and November 2, 1925?

    Or for places other than Spitzbergen.

  9. 9
    Barry Arrington says:

    Eric,

    “But this time global warming is no joke.”

    Everyone told me it was not joke in the late 90s before it took a 20-year vacay and utterly disproved 95% of the computer models from that time.

    This time there really is a wolf? Do tell.

    No amount of evidence will dissuade a religious zealot. And make no mistake, climate alarmism is fundamentally a religious movement.

  10. 10
    J-Mac says:

    Does anybody here know or can guess what the climate was like, or could have been like, before the Noah’s flood?

  11. 11
    EricMH says:

    Sorry, sarcasm doesn’t translate well online.

    Maybe next time it’ll be no joke.

  12. 12
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    J-Mac @ 10,

    Does anybody know or can guess what the climate was like, or could have been like, before the Noah’s flood?

    Well, there are the fossils of tropical coral found near the North Pole, indicating a vastly different climate or a vastly different arrangement of lands, or both.

    There is also this more-than-fifty-year-old analysis of that very issue of pre-flood climate and the changes that ensued, by Henry Morris and John Whitcomb:

    https://www.christianbook.com/genesis-biblical-scientific-implications-anniversary-edition/john-whitcomb/9781596383951/pd/383951

    John Whitcomb taught a class on Genesis chapters 1-11 in which I was a student. It was fascinating. He was a man of intelligence, scholarship and integrity.

  13. 13
    J-Mac says:

    @ Dean_from_Ohio
    Thanks!

    Without looking at your link, would you say that the earth’s overall climate was warmer than it is now? I mean you suggest there was no ice in north pole…so where was the water that forms the ice now?

  14. 14
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    Whitcomb and Morris suggested (I’m recalling via memory) that the earth had a thick, spherical, transparent zone of water vapor in the atmosphere that moderated the conditions for human life all over the earth, and that a vast subterranean hydraulic system of water channels under the surface of the earth was part of that optimal arrangement of water and heat distribution. The flood destroyed both, and the ice ages were a short transient response to the new conditions. If you look at the ocean basins now, they do look like the facial bones of a guy on the wrong end of a set of brass knuckles. What did those sinuses look like before the beatdown?

  15. 15
    timothya says:

    From Dean:

    “Whitcomb and Morris suggested (I’m recalling via memory) that the earth had a thick, spherical, transparent zone of water vapor in the atmosphere that moderated the conditions for human life all over the earth, and that a vast subterranean hydraulic system of water channels under the surface of the earth was part of that optimal arrangement of water and heat distribution. The flood destroyed both, and the ice ages were a short transient response to the new conditions. If you look at the ocean basins now, they do look like the facial bones of a guy on the wrong end of a set of brass knuckles. What did those sinuses look like before the beatdown?”

    Does the Intelligent Design community support the argument that there was a worldwide flood approximately 6000 years ago? It seems that Bill Dembski does believe so (from Wikipedia):

    “While serving as a professor at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dembski wrote The End of Christianity, which argued that a Christian can reconcile an old Earth creationist view with a literal reading of Adam and Eve in the Bible by accepting the scientific consensus of a 4.5 billion year of Earth. He further argued that Noah’s flood likely was a phenomenon limited to the Middle East. This caused controversy and Dembski’s reading of the Bible was criticized by Tom Nettles, a young Earth creationist, in The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, Southern Seminary’s official theological journal. In 2010, the dean of Southwestern’s School of Theology, David Allen, “released a White Paper through the seminary’s Center for Theological Research defending Dembski as within the bounds of orthodoxy and critiquing Nettles for misunderstanding the book. The paper included Dembski’s statement admitting error regarding Noah’s flood.” Southwestern Seminary president Paige Patterson, a young Earth creationist, “said that when Dembski’s questionable statements came to light, he convened a meeting with Dembski and several high-ranking administrators at the seminary. At that meeting, Dembski was quick to admit that he was wrong about the flood. “‘Had I had any inkling that Dr. Dembski was actually denying the absolute trustworthiness of the Bible, then that would have, of course, ended his relationship with the school,’ he said.””

    All science so far.

  16. 16
    critical rationalist says:

    Summary from the History of climate change science article at Wikipedia.

    The history of the scientific discovery of climate change began in the early 19th century when ice ages and other natural changes in paleoclimate were first suspected and the natural greenhouse effect first identified. In the late 19th century, scientists first argued that human emissions of greenhouse gases could change the climate. Many other theories of climate change were advanced, involving forces from volcanism to solar variation. In the 1960s, the warming effect of carbon dioxide gas became increasingly convincing. Some scientists also pointed out that human activities that generated atmospheric aerosols (e.g., “pollution”) could have cooling effects as well. During the 1970s, scientific opinion increasingly favored the warming viewpoint. By the 1990s, as a result of improving fidelity of computer models and observational work confirming the Milankovitch theory of the ice ages, a consensus position formed: greenhouse gases were deeply involved in most climate changes and human caused emissions were bringing discernible global warming. Since the 1990s, scientific research on climate change has included multiple disciplines and has expanded. Research has expanded our understanding of causal relations, links with historic data and ability to model climate change numerically. Research during this period has been summarized in the Assessment Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

  17. 17
    News says:

    timothya at 16, you could do better than to use Wikipedia as a source. Dembski left Southwestern, as is generally known, because he did not accept the doctrine of a worldwide flood.

    Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia, agrees that it does not follow its own neutrality policy

    One outcome is that it is often just plain factually wrong about subjects for which the Wikipedian trolls aim only at detraction and facts are irrelevant.

    How Wikipedia can turn fiction into fact (Sourced enough times, the fiction becomes “troo”)

    Wikipedia: The world of heavily edited unfacts

    Wikiedia as astroturf

    Wikipedia’s declining stats

    Wikipedia hacked by elite sources now (The main problem is that the people who use Wikipedia do not care whether it is false or true. “Wikipedia is my library” is the new diagnostic for irresponsible laziness.)

    and

    Mathematician complains Wikipedia is promoting “pseudo-science” of multiverse (Then there were the minor revelations that core articles “don’t earn even Wikipedia’s own middle-ranking quality scores” and that some “editors” are paid by outside sources.)

    It is good to think someone who was once involved cares.

  18. 18
    asauber says:

    critical rationalist.

    Posting summaries from wikipedia as if they proved something indicates you need a name change to Uncritical Regurgitator.

    Andrew

  19. 19
    Florabama says:

    timothya @ 15 “Does the Intelligent Design community support the argument that there was a worldwide flood approximately 6000 years ago?”

    From my reading, and I would be the first to say that I am just an interested layman, I would say that Intelligent Design, by definition, does not take positions on biblical doctrine. Very simply, Intelligent Design looks at science first and takes positions based on what the science says. Undeniable Molecular machines, DNA/RNA as a computer code, the DNA/Protein enigma (which came first — the chicken or the egg) the statistical impossibility that life created itself, the fine tuning of the universe for life, the inability after 150 years to identify a mechanism that can meet the claims of Darwinian evolution, etc. etc., all point to a designing intelligence.

    Who the designer is, what is man’s relationship and or obligation if any, to him/her/it, is there special revelation in the form of scripture, all are metaphysical/philosophical/religious questions that transcend the bounds of science and as such are outside of the purview of I.D.

    Now, as far as the flood, there is a scientific case that can and has been made for a worldwide flood. I will leave it to you to decide how good the case is, but no matter where anyone comes down on a worldwide flood, the question, as I see it, is mostly irrelevant to I.D. as I.D. is looking at the design of life — not necessarily how life has been impacted by catastrophes unless the said catastrophes have somehow affected the design. Does that make sense?

  20. 20
    J-Mac says:

    The time of the flood and the age of the earth are two separate issues…

    If one removes the universe with a beginning out of the “pool of evidence” (as materialists often would like it to, because of the inconvenience of the implications of the first cause) only one method of calculating the age of the earth is left…Unfortunately, the margin of error is so great, that my wild guess is just as good as anybody’s “scientific evidence for the age of the earth”…

  21. 21
    J-Mac says:

    @Dean_from_Ohio

    That would explain why my kids have came to the conclusion that there was no real rainfalls before the flood…

  22. 22
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    J-Mac @ 20, 21

    Yes I agree that the two issues are separate, but their evidence is intertwined.

    Also, the Genesis account states the following:

    This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens. Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
    –Genesis chapter 2, verses 5-7 (New International Version 2011)

    Morris and Whitcomb were trying, apparently, to produce a workable harmonization with this passage.

  23. 23
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    timothya @ 15:

    Does the Intelligent Design community support the argument that there was a worldwide flood approximately 6000 years ago?

    If you mean a “consensus” for which borders are enforced within the community, no, but I guess you already knew that. If you mean is the idea of ID compatible with a recent worldwide flood, I say the answer is yes, but I’m only one person trained in Bible, engineering (Ph.D.), action (Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Retired) and the use of statistics to sift signals out of noise. No model of origins and geological unconformities fits all the data as we understand it. But in my judgment, ID plus a catastrophic model for the earth’s geology fits it all better than any of the competing accounts I am aware of.

    For example, the angle of sand dune surface deposition observed in the Coconino Sandstone layer in the Grand Canyon is about 20 degrees, consistent with underwater deposition, not 32 degrees as is typically found in wind deposition:
    https://answersingenesis.org/geology/grand-canyon/coconino-sandstone-most-powerful-argument-against-flood/. This is but one piece of evidence that seems to fit better in the model I’ve chosen.

    All science so far.

    All science so far what? To me, this sort of statement just sounds like whistling past the graveyard. It looks like sign of weakness and fear rather than strength and confidence.

  24. 24
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    Here’s an interactive map of the earth’s terrain. Set the display height scale to a factor higher than the default 30 and the fractures in the earth’s surface will be rather evident:

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2014/oct/03/the-most-detailed-map-of-the-ocean-floor-ever-seen

  25. 25
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    Did you ever wonder why the great coal seams of the earth don’t have peat root patterns, the way coal seams in bog areas in Britain do? If they were formed quickly in mass burial by a worldwide catastrophic flood, there wouldn’t be roots. Which is what they would have if they formed the way old-earth supporters say they did.

    Here’s an article on how the formation of that coal removed so much CO2 from the atmosphere that an ice age gripped the planet, nearly irreversibly.

    These are two more data points that seem to fit better with a catastrophic geologic history that includes a great flood, followed by nearly worldwide glaciation:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/09/claim-formation-of-coal-almost-turned-our-planet-into-a-snowball/

  26. 26
    rvb8 says:

    Dean,

    so you do believe in a world wide flood, instigated by God, as punishment for further sin, covering Everest and the Poles?

    I’ll have to go with, ‘All science so far.’

    NEWS @17,

    so where is William Dembski now? Touring/Speaking? Teaching? Where?

    I’d genuinely be interested, but I’ll warant, not at all surprised.

  27. 27
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    rvb8 @ 26,

    Mocking God and those who follow him is stage 3 of the spiritual cancer called sin. The first stage is living as if God does not exist, and the second is responding to the conviction of conscience by summoning all one’s energies to justify the (im)moral choices made in stage 1. That doesn’t quiet the conscience, so it’s on to stage 3 to try to remove the reminders of a moral standard through ridicule (Alinsky zeroed in on this, calling it man’s most potent weapon. He had a lot on his conscience, apparently). Stage 4 is, well, you can read about it at the end of the first chapter of the Apostle Paul’s letter to the church at Rome.

    As to the flood, isn’t the discipline of paleontology consumed with analyzing some of the billions and billions of dead things called fossils, laid down in water and mud, suddenly and violently, all over the world and on every continent? And who’s to say that the mountains were that high back then?

    The Apostle Peter had your number nearly 2,000 years ago, in chapter 3 of his second letter:

    English Standard Version
    The Day of the Lord Will Come

    This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

    But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.

    Stage 5 of sin is the petrifying of one’s character in sin forever, cast in eternal concrete that will never move, frozen like a fossil in the throes of regret, and locked in awful punishment forever.

    But no one has to end there. God will welcome any sinner who repents, just as he did for me and many UD readers here.

  28. 28
    ET says:

    rvb8:

    so you do believe in a world wide flood, instigated by God, as punishment for further sin, covering Everest and the Poles?

    Everest didn’t exist at the time of the flood. Read the Bible.

    I’ll have to go with, ‘All science so far.’

    And we will stay with- you don’t know what science is nor what it entails.

  29. 29
    Seqenenre says:

    ET@28:
    “Everest didn’t exist at the time of the flood. Read the Bible.”

    Where did you find that?
    My Dutch ‘Statenbijbel’ (dutch equivalent of the King James) mentions in Gensis 7:19 that all high mountains were covered with water.
    I couldn’t find anything about altitudes of any mountain.

  30. 30
    daveS says:

    Dean_from_Ohio,

    Do you have an approximate date for this global flood?

  31. 31
    ET says:

    Seqenenre- Psalms has the mountains rising and ocean basins sinking after the flood.

  32. 32
    Seqenenre says:

    You mean psalm 104?

  33. 33
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    daveS @ 30,

    In 1650, Bishop Ussher set a date assuming that Genesis is written as a narrative, and that days, years and genealogies are to be understood in their most common senses: a day is a day, a year is a year, etc. Since then, more than a hundred estimates of the timeline of Genesis have been made using the same assumptions, and their dates for key events are similar to his. Ussher’s date for the flood was 2348 B.C. The good Bishop didn’t provide any confidence intervals.

    Here’s a creationist assessment of Bishop Ussher’s work: http://www.icr.org/article/can.....e-trusted/

    Here’s an a/mat assessment of the intent of Bishop Ussher:

    I shall be defending Ussher’s chronology as an honorable effort for its time and arguing that our usual ridicule only records a lamentable small-mindedness based on mistaken use of present criteria to judge a distant and different past…. Ussher represented the best of scholarship in his time. He was part of a substantial research tradition, a large community of intellectuals working toward a common goal under an accepted methodology….

    The a/mat advocate who stated this, while disagreeing greatly with the content, was Stephen J. Gould. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology

    So what do I think? I think the flood was recent enough that soft tissue from dinosaurs is still being found (https://uncommondescent.com/evolution/is-there-some-reason-that-paleontologists-do-not-want-soft-dinosaur-tissue/), and it probably occurred no earlier than 4,000 B.C.

    Does a lot of evidence seem to falsify this? Sure. But other evidence, such as the soft tissue of dinosaurs, seems to confirm it and also seems to falsify the standard narrative of hundreds of millions of years.

    The point is, which model of origins has the better set of timeline residuals, which are the differences between predicted values and inferred actual values? I think that ID and a recent catastrophe does. I’m a young earth creationist also, but many ID supporters are not, and I can and do work well with them, and applaud their progress made against a stiff daily headwind.

  34. 34
    ET says:

    Yes, Psalms 104

  35. 35
    daveS says:

    Dean_from_Ohio,

    Thanks for the thoughtful answer.

  36. 36
    old_lurker says:

    OT – I want to thank this website and the many dedicated ID people who use it for showing me that there is a real, scientifically-sound alternative to materialistic evolution, which I once accepted. Keep up the good work! It has a greater effect than you may think.

  37. 37

    Thank you for chiming in Old Lurker.

    🙂

Leave a Reply