Liberal Hollywood actors and global-warming scientists want us to believe that “Nature” is also a liberal. But their argument is unsound….

Like the rains falling from the recent hurricane clouds, so is the constant dripping of judgment from the mouths of the global warming faithful. Their fervor has become so unrestrained by reason in the wake of the recent hurricanes, that they are now calling for punishment for anyone who denies global warming.

The Washington Times reported:

“Climate change denial should be a crime,” declared the Sept. 1 headline in the Outline. Mark Hertsgaard argued in a Sept. 7 article in the Nation, titled “Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us,” that “murder is murder” and “we should punish it as such.”

The suggestion that those who run afoul of the climate change consensus, in particular government officials, should face charges comes with temperatures flaring over the link between hurricanes and greenhouse gas emissions.

“In the wake of Harvey, it’s time to treat science denial as gross negligence — and hold those who do the denying accountable,” said the subhead in the Outline article, written by Brian Merchant.

The “climate change” (the climate is always changing) liberal extremists want to punish people who disagree with their shoddy scientific conjecture. They are oblivious to how incoherent their belief system is.

THE LIBERAL WORLDVIEW

First, liberals believe there is no God. Instead of God’s act of creation (in six days), they believe in the instantaneous Big Bang bringing into existence all time, space, and matter. The galaxies evolved slowly, over billions of years, forming planets. On Earth, evolution sculpted human beings out of cosmic slime.

Humans, being the first, or only apparent, creatures capable of rational thought and discourse, have now by default risen to the top of the food chain. We are the crown of creation, thanks to the random forces of impersonal, unguided Evolution.

The only law of the universe is the law of constant change. Truth itself is constantly evolving with the times and condition of cultures. The only fixed rule of law that exists in the universe comes from the currently ruling city of man, unified together in collective government. Using science (and tax money), we interpret the laws of nature in order to take control over the forces of evolution and prevent it from bringing down the walls of evolving chaos onto our heads the way it has millions of extinct species (and cultures).

Liberals have discounted the superstitious. Since they do not believe in God, who is a spirit, they do not believe in magic, angels, demons, or the spiritual, just matter. They do not believe in souls. Therefore, they do not believe in hell. Or heaven.

Instead, they only believe in extending the domain of mankind into the limited, but very long, future. They believe in the ability of politics, power, and the importance of the voting process. They believe in the healing power of government to deliver mankind from its misery.

The voice of the people is the state, and the unelected, appointed scientific elite must direct the state’s vocal chords to speak on the people’s behalf. The elite must hold the people together so that they can work to fund the State’s activities, which are in the best interests of all men, we are assured.

This process will continue until the heat death of the universe sucks all life out of everything. Or else, after growing so cold as to give the appearance of no remaining heat, an ember will remain to spark new life after the universe collapses back in on itself and explodes into another Big Bang.

In other words, there is no meaning in the universe except for that which mankind gives it. Mankind is the source of meaning.

The universe may kill us. But there will certainly be no transcendent God overseeing it all to bring eternal judgment.

INTERNAL CONFLICTS

What they are asking us to believe is this: humans devised a set of rules that we call math. It’s just a game that works inside our minds. But for some reason, nature also behaves according to these rules a lot of the time.

Now, how incredible is that? Why should nature conform to rules we invent in our minds? They don’t believe there’s a God common to nature and mankind who created both, who could have designed it all this way.

Christians are justified in believing that God gave our minds the ability to interpret and understand his creation in order to take dominion over it, as he commanded us to do. But liberals have no such justification for linking human thought patterns to the natural order.

They may attempt to use evolution as the common link between the human brain and the order of nature, but evolution is random. Nature is random. And if it’s not, then in what do we place our faith to adequately justify that belief?

They don’t believe in faith. They say science proves the link exists. But that’s circular. For science to work, there must be a link between our math and the order of nature. Science can’t justify that link, which is the basis of science, without throwing a red flag for a logic violation.

So now, in spite of these logical problems, the liberals say “Nature” is bringing judgment upon certain groups of people because they have supposedly violated the scientific truths uncovered by a small, Ph.D.-holding few. The proof of this, they claim, is the increasing hurricane activity.

But is hurricane activity actually increasing? The science says no.