A commenter named Anto commented today at Steven Goddard’s Real Science:
When it’s a matter of faith, there’s always some way to excuse the pachyderm in the greenhouse.
Case in point: creationists – close relatives to today’s climate catastrophists.
Harry Dale Huffman replied with the following:
There is a real, physical truth behind the creationist claims, despite their religious motivation and habitual stampede towards a “First Cause” (or “God”) explanation for things. None of the earth and life sciences–not just the incompetent “climate science”–are “settled science”, despite 150 years of Darwinian dogma (the “undirected evolution” paradigm guiding all those sciences IS dogma, and fundamentally false).
There was, in fact, a deliberate “creation” event–actually, a re-formation of the existing surface of the Earth, AND a re-formation and re-orientation of the entire solar system (these links give only the simplest, definitive objective evidence of the event), which imposed a readable design enclosing a real message for man on Earth–within the last 20,000 years, as my unprecedented research has brought to light (I am a physicist, dealing only with objective evidence). We are literally in the time of Galileo again, when the “authorities” and the consensus-minded populace cannot focus upon the greater truth, and are violently opposed to recognizing it.
I offer the following in response to Harry, and I also address it to Steven.
I say that the “time of Galileo” never went away, just shifted its focus every so often. Your own arguments are packed to the brim with subjective observations, which you can’t or won’t admit are subjective. Physics itself must deal with subjective evidence, or else it is not scientific. For this reason I have yet to meet a “physicist” who is not anti-science, for they are ever denying the obvious subjectivity present in their reasoning. Granted that many if not most Creationists I’ve encountered are anti-science as well, but that in and of itself doesn’t falsify their theories, as is also the case with the physicists. Proof or disproof is not dependent on the use of a perfect method for finding the truth. If that there the case there would be no valid proofs or disproofs, because there is no perfect human being walking the Earth today.
Really the bottom line is whether one believes in the supernatural, which objectively does exist. If one denies that which is blatantly true and in one’s face, simply because one is afraid of the wider implications, then of course one’s conclusions about pretty much everything natural are going to be wide of the mark … sometimes phenomenally so. Most of us, myself included, have been guilty of this kind of denial.
But if one admits the existence of supernatural effects operating together with nature, then at once one has lost the ability to be certain that the biblical history of Creation is false. It is very, very important for people to understand this. Denial of this fact is really at the core of the modern Inquisition. And make no mistake, the Inquisition does want Creationists dead if they will not repent. Ultimately that’s where this is headed, and already some of their more strident denunciations are barely distinguishable from threats.
I think the really important thing here is to LEARN AND RECOGNIZE that the Inquisition has never been either scientific or Christian (or even Jewish), or inherently Creationist. It has been a wolf in sheep’s clothing ever since its inception. And it has now taken over the mantle of science, exactly as prophecied. Folks like you, Harry, and you as well, Steven, are unwitting accomplices, unaware of what you’re really doing. I have great respect for both of you, because I see the degree of honesty that shows through in your words. Ultimately you will probably see the full reality, and you will be targets as well, because you have such integrity that you’d rather be targets than publicly deny what has been proven to you. Please always remember that the truth about Creation is never just revealed to everyone who seeks it. Only to those who are willing to believe that it’s possible are shown the proof. And that’s totally out of the hands of us who already know. We can pray, but ultimately if it’s not God’s plan for you to know, you will not be shown! I was in Harry’s place for many years, and Steven’s for years before that. If anyone here is the very antithesis of habitual stampeding or mindless consensus-following, it is myself. I didn’t embrace my present beliefs, I fought tooth-and-nail to deny them! But because it was God’s plan for me to know, I was forced to know, against all my natural instincts! The consequence: I spent >85% of my life up until now denying that which I now know to be true. And again I can’t prove it to you because it’s subjective, and subjective things are something you have to experience yourself.
I’m sorry, but the doctrines of pure naturalism, and of uniformitarianism, are frauds. They are the true closest relatives of liberal climate catastrophism. Of course, the liberals are borrowing “liberally” from the Bible, because ultimately the intent is to impersonate Christians while fundamentally inverting the Word. I beg you not to fall for such a cheap trick. You are way, way better than that.