Climate Change supporters now have control of the weather reporting during major storms and will now use this power to scare people into believing their claims.
The recent Hurricanes Harvey and Irma have proven that Climate Change supporters will do anything, say anything even if it endangers human life.
I live in Jacksonville Florida where Irma hit. I have lived here for 50 years and have seen many hurricanes pass through. When they were doing the predictions they kept changing what category the storm would be when it reached Jacksonville. First prediction is that it would be a cat 4. I thought: Well that will destroy Jacksonville so if it looks like this I’m leaving.
And when they showed the path it would take right up the middle of the state my first thought was: How would a storm like this maintain it’s power after going through the whole state?
Climate change scare tactics aka lies:
1) The bands towards the middle are so tightly wound that the storm will be able to maintain it;s strength so a cat 4 is possible.
2) 10-12 hours later revised prediction it will be a cat 1.
3) 8 hours later back to being a cat 4.
4) next prediction cat 1.
5) Next prediction cat 4.
6) Last prediction when they knew where it was going to hit and that it would go up the west coast of Florida they claimed cat 1 and stuck to that.
Their cat 4 prediction was a complete lie. But because they could not make up their minds many got stranded here in Jacksonville because by the time the evacuating people from south Florida got up here they bought out all the food water and gas. Science is now only about money and agendas of the left. People used to call me anti-science because I believe in creation. But after this experience and watching them play with people’s lives. I no longer trust science when there is money to be made, or agendas to push.
How to destroy the fossil record supporting evolution:
- Atheist: Evolution is a true proven fact with mountains of empirical evidence.
- Creationist: Is the fossil record the mountain of empirical evidence you speak of?
- Atheist: Of course you moron, don’t you know anything about evolution?
- Creationist: Sure, but you don’t have to believe in evolution to understand evolution. How much of the claims made about the fossil record are actually observable?
- Atheist: All of it is observable.
- Creationist: Really? Who saw what and when did they see it and where is their Nobel Prize? Don’t you think if someone solved the biggest argument in the world would be worthy of a Nobel Prize? I do. Where is it?
- Creationist: In fact if you remove all the claims no one can observe because of time constraints. You only have 3 things left.
- Sorted and layered sediments.
- Sorted fossils.
- Supposed time eras.
Challenge: Take these 3 things and build back up the fossil record to support evolution like today, but only use observed evidence. You can’t? This is because 100% of the fossil record is based on *assuming evolution is true* and nothing else. But I would like to meet the person who saw all those claims about the fossil record, and his time machine.
Note: To make the point more clear you make the challenge about as easy as it possibly can be to push home the point that the fossil record “claims” to support evolution are 100% assumptions..
Example: Mr. Atheist. Since you cannot redo the fossil record to support evolution using only observable claims. How about I make this easy? Let’s see you come up with one observable claim about the fossil record supporting evolution that anyone saw, then prove who saw it, and when did they see it?
The reason they will not be able to do this and will act confused is that the fossil record is suppose to be a record of time. All time record that begins way before anyone alive today could observe it means all claims to have seen anything requires that person to have a time machine. Since one does not exist, no one saw a thing concerning the fossil record supporting evolution. And because Mr. Atheists has been sold a bill of goods that just seeing the fossils = observed empirical evidence as to what happened, he will act confused when you show him the actual reality of it. That not one thing claimed is observable, and it’s 100% speculation.
- Atheist: But why would science lie to us?
- Creationist: A better question would be: Why would they tell us the truth when they cannot even define the word scientifically?
- Atheist: You are an ignorant stupid uneducated moron, Go read a book on science!
- Creationist: The reason you feel the need to ridicule and mock me because you cannot address, or refute what I have posted. In fact you see the truth in it. Because if your science were so strong supporting evolution you would have been able to just mow me over with it. But because you could not, to save face you resorted to unscientific tactics to try and still make yourself look right when you are 100% wrong. So please call me some more names, and ridicule and mock me more. You only prove all of my points on how weak your science is.
- Atheist: @#$%@##^%
- Creationist: Yep that’s what I thought and everyone here can see what I see about how you cannot even defend your stance. So you have to pull out a immature tactic and start cussing. So what class did you learn all this in: Scientific ridicule, mocking, name calling and cussing 101? And was that part based on how to defend evolution even though you just got the smack down of reality?
And this means it’s basically game over for the atheist.