Debate

I’m not a Jehovah’s Witness for the same reason I’m not a global warming alarmist

In the summer, a couple of Jehovah’s Witness ladies were going door-to-door and they stopped by my house while I was out mowing. I decided to talk to them. They asked me why I was an evangelical Protestant rather than a JW. Rather than go into a lot of theology about the Trinity and the Watchtower translation, I decided to to just tell them about the false predictions their group has made.

So, let’s just quickly review that using this article from Watchman fellowship, which quotes JW publications:

Initially the organization taught the “battle of the Great Day of God Almighty” (Armageddon) would end in 1914. Every kingdom of the world would be overthrown in 1914 which was “God’s date” not for the beginning but “for the end” of the time of trouble.

“…we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of A.D. 1914” (Watchtower founder, Charles Taze Russell, The Time is at Hand, p. 99).

“…the ‘battle of the great day of God Almighty’ (Rev. 16:14), which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth’s present rulership, is already commenced” (Ibid., p. 101).

“CAN IT BE DELAYED UNTIL 1914?…our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They say that they do not see how present conditions can last so long under the strain. We see no reason for changing the figures – nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God’s dates not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble” (Watch Tower, 15 July 1894, p. 226).

Clearly, the world did not end in 1914, and it did not end at subsequent JW predictions, either, e.g. 1925, 1975.

So, as the title of the post says that I can’t be a global warming alarmist for the same reason I can’t be a Jehovah’s Witness: failed predictions.

Here’s an excellent article from Daily Signal by famous black economist Walter Williams, who explains the connection:

As reported in The New York Times (Aug. 1969) Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich warned: “The trouble with almost all environmental problems is that by the time we have enough evidence to convince people, you’re dead. We must realize that unless we’re extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”

In 2000, David Viner, a senior research scientist at University of East Anglia’s climate research unit, predicted that in a few years winter snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

In 2004, the U.S. Pentagon warned President George W. Bush that major European cities would be beneath rising seas. Britain will be plunged into a Siberian climate by 2020. In 2008, Al Gore predicted that the polar ice cap would be gone in a mere 10 years. A U.S. Department of Energy study led by the U.S. Navy predicted the Arctic Ocean would experience an ice-free summer by 2016.

In May 2014, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius declared during a joint appearance with Secretary of State John Kerry that “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Peter Gunter, professor at North Texas State University, predicted in the spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness:

Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions. … By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.

Ecologist Kenneth Watt’s 1970 prediction was, “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000.” He added, “This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

Williams concludes:

Today’s wild predictions about climate doom are likely to be just as true as yesteryear’s. The major difference is today’s Americans are far more gullible and more likely to spend trillions fighting global warming. And the only result is that we’ll be much poorer and less free.

We have known for decades that the Earth’s temperatures were much warmer during the “Medieval Warming Period”, hundreds of years ago. But some people are just having irrational fears about overpopulation, resource shortages, etc. and so they will promote nonsense to try to scare people into doing what they want. World history is full of pious-sounding attention-seeking hoaxsters who try to scare the gullible masses into giving them money and/or power. It’s not new.

7 thoughts on “I’m not a Jehovah’s Witness for the same reason I’m not a global warming alarmist”

  1. “But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble”

    So its the opposite. The trouble began in 1914 (or was it 1913) with the founding of the Federal Reserve.

    Like

    1. Right!

      And that is also roughly the time that the personal income tax was illegally foisted upon the American population.

      Like

  2. I love this article because it is both evangelistic and data driven! What a great title too!

    One thing we engineers love is data. When we see a theory falsified over and over again, or a design failing over and over again, we discard it. That’s precisely what you did, WK, with JW and climate change earth worship, both of which are religious cults.

    Don’t argue Scripture with them, because they are notorious Scripture twisters. Argue data. Brilliant approach!

    BTW, what was their response? Did they say “that was the old JW and we are the new improved version?” Or did they just shake the dust off of their feet and high tail it out of there?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. WE HAVE 12 YEARS. TWELVE YEARS. That’s what they told us in 1995. The real danger is that the environment is a concern, but it is a serious problem with a long fuse. The best source I have found says that we have fifty years of more to address this concern, but since we have heard so many cries of “Wolf! Wolf!” no one is going to listen.

    Like

    1. We had so-called “peak oil” in 1970…when we were told the world would run out of oil in 15 years. Today, we have enough proven oil reserves (in the US alone) to last another 250-400 years – and that assumes growing use and no improvements in fuel economy.

      The same goes for EVERY Malthusian environmental-commie prediction of the last century. Acid Rain, Global Cooling/Warming (ManBearPig), Rising oceans, dying polar bears, mass extinction, desertification. All of it is nonsense on stilts.

      There is literally no reason to think we have *any* kind of ecological/environmental crisis in the US. There are localized problems in China and India – mail caused by governments. But even there, the solution isn’t more Communism or more top-down control (but I repeat myself). The solution is capitalism, freedom, liberty and respect for individuals over the government.

      If you’re at all interested, go read Bjorn Lomborg’s “The Skeptical Environmentalist” or Schellenberger’s “Apocalypse Never.”

      Environmentalism is just the latest trendy way to disguise the age-old desire of feudalists and thugs and untalented sociopaths to maintain or renew their unearned privilege over the masses.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I have no doubt….I remember all these “crises” as I am a child of the 70s/80s….the only guy on Youtube that I ever paid any attention to said that we need to address pollution in the next fifty years, but his great fear is all this crying wolf would lead to people ignoring the problem (assuming there really is one) until it is too late!

        Like

  4. And the “solution” to every one of these problems is *mysteriously* the same, no matter the imaginary problem: give government more power at the expense of human liberty and agency over their own lives.

    Despite an entire century where “give government more power and control over society” has resulted in the largest genocidal atrocities in all of human history; despite a century of failed predictions; despite the stark contrast between societies that followed the top-down control model and the ones that encouraged human agency and liberty; despite incontrovertible evidence that controlled societies descend into genocidal atrocity at worst, economically stagnant repressive backwaters at best; despite the fact that “free” societies have lifted billions out of poverty in the last 50 yrs alone.

    Despite all this, the “elite” keep gaslighting everyone with ever-more fantastical “existential-level crises” and rationales for why we have to give them more power.

    At some point, people should recognize the problem that needs solving is the “elite” themselves, not the “crises” they use as beards to disguise their intentions.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s