Saturday, August 9, 2008
The bible
The bible, scripture and GOD have NOTHING I repeat NOTHING to do with global warming so stop quoting scripture you don't truly understand.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Ricahrd Whites intelligence
Straight quote "So you are actually that uneducatingly egotistical to go against 31,000 TRUE Sceintists who signed the Petitions against the fallacy of Global Warming Climate Change poopaganda??? "
"uneducatingly" I don't think this is a word at least I can't find it in the dictionary. Anyway in the US in 2006 there were 22,630,000 scientist and engineers according to the National Science Foundation. So that leaves 22,599,000 who have not signed this petition. It seems to me that you Richard only read one side of the argument and not all sides.
"uneducatingly" I don't think this is a word at least I can't find it in the dictionary. Anyway in the US in 2006 there were 22,630,000 scientist and engineers according to the National Science Foundation. So that leaves 22,599,000 who have not signed this petition. It seems to me that you Richard only read one side of the argument and not all sides.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Global Warming
FICTION: Even if the Earth is warming, we can’t be sure how much, if any, of the warming is caused by human activities.
FACT: There is international scientific consensus that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to human activities, not natural causes. Over millions of years, animals and plants lived, died and were compressed to form huge deposits of oil, gas and coal. In little more than 300 years, however, we have burned a large amount of this storehouse of carbon to supply energy.
Today, the by-products of fossil fuel use – billions of tons of carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide), methane, and other greenhouse gases – form a blanket around the Earth, trapping heat from the sun, unnaturally raising temperatures on the ground, and steadily changing our climate.
The impacts associated with this deceptively small change in temperature are evident in all corners of the globe. There is heavier rainfall in some areas, and droughts in others. Glaciers are melting, Spring is arriving earlier, oceans are warming, and coral reefs are dying.
FICTION: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts an increase in the global average temperature of only 1.4°C to 5.8°C over the coming century.This small change, less than the current daily temperature range for most major cities, is hardly cause for concern.
FACT: Global average temperature is calculated from temperature readings around the Earth. While temperature does vary considerably at a daily level in any one place, global average temperature is remarkably constant. According to analyses of ice cores, tree rings, pollen and other “climate proxies,” the average temperature of the Northern Hemisphere had varied up or down by only a few tenths of a degree Celsius between 1000 AD and about 1900, when a rapid warming began.
A global average temperature change ranging from 1.4°C to 5.8°C would translate into climate-related impacts that are much larger and faster than any that have occurred during the 10 000-year history of civilization.
From scientific analyses of past ages, we know that even small global average temperature changes can lead to large climate shifts. For example, the average global temperature difference between the end of the last ice age (when much of the Northern Hemisphere was buried under thousands of feet of ice) and today’s interglacial climate is only about 5°C .
FICTION: Warming cannot be due to greenhouse gases, since changes in temperature and changes in greenhouse gas emissions over the past century did not occur simultaneously.
FACT: The slow heating of the oceans creates a significant time lag between when carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere and when changes in temperature occur.
This is one of the main reasons why we don’t see changes in temperature at the same time as changes in greenhouse gas emissions. You can see the same process occur in miniature when you heat up a pot of water on the stove: there is a time lag between the time you turn on the flame and when the water starts to boil.
In addition, there are many other factors that affect year-to-year variation in the Earth’s temperature. For example, volcanic eruptions, El Ni?o, and small changes in the output of the sun can all affect the global climate on a yearly basis.Therefore, you would not expect the build-up of greenhouse gases to exactly match trends in global climate. Still, scientific evidence points clearly to anthropogenic (or human-made) greenhouse gases as the main culprit for climate change.
FICTION: Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere fairly quickly, so if global warming turns out to be a problem, we can wait to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions until after we start to see the impacts of warming.
FACT: Carbon dioxide, a gas created by the burning of fossil fuels (like gasoline and coal), is the most important human-made greenhouse gas.Carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use is produced in huge quantities and can persist in our atmosphere for as long as 200 years.
This means that if emissions of carbon dioxide were halted today, it would take centuries for the amount of carbon dioxide now in the atmosphere to come down to what it was in pre-industrial times. Thus we need to act now if we want to avoid the increasingly dangerous consequences of climate change in the future.
FICTION: Human activities contribute only a small fraction of carbon dioxide emissions, an amount too small to have a significant effect on climate, particularly since the oceans absorb most of the extra carbon dioxide emissions.
FACT: Before human activities began to dramatically increase carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, the amount of carbon dioxide emitted from natural sources closely matched the amount that was stored or absorbed through natural processes.For example, as forests grow, they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis; this carbon is then sequestered in wood, leaves, roots and soil. Some carbon is later released back to the atmosphere when leaves, roots and wood die and decay.
Carbon dioxide also cycles through the oceanPlankton living at the ocean’s surface absorb carbon dioxide through photosynthesis. The plankton and animals that eat the plankton then die and fall to the bottom of the ocean. As they decay, carbon dioxide is released into the water and returns to the surface via ocean currents. As a result of these natural cycles, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air had changed very little for 10,000 years. But that balance has been upset by man.
Since the Industrial Revolution, the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil has put about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than is naturally removed by the oceans and forests. This has resulted in carbon dioxide levels building up in the atmosphere.
Today, carbon dioxide levels are 30% higher than pre-industrial levels, higher than they have been in the last 420,000 years and are probably at the highest levels in the past 20 million years. Studies of the Earth’s climate history have shown that even small, natural changes in carbon dioxide levels were generally accompanied by significant shifts in the global average temperature.
We have already experienced a 1°F increase in global temperature in the past century, and we can expect significant warming in the next century if we fail to act to decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
FICTION: The Earth has warmed rapidly in the past without dire consequences, so society and ecosystems can adapt readily to any foreseeable warming.
FACT: The Earth experienced rapid warming in some places at the end of the last glacial period, but for the last 10,000 years our global climate has been relatively stable. During this period, as agriculture and civilization developed, the world’s population has grown tremendously. Now, many heavily populated areas, such as urban centers in low-lying coastal zones, are highly vulnerable to climate shifts.
In addition, many ecosystems and species that are already threatened by existing pressures (such as pollution, habitat conversion and degradation) may be further pressured to the point of extinction by a changing climate.
FICTION: The buildup of carbon dioxide will lead to a “greening” of the Earth because plants can utilize the extra carbon dioxide to speed their growth.
FACT: Carbon dioxide has been shown to act as a fertilizer for some plant species under some conditions. In addition, a longer growing season (due to warmer temperatures) could increase productivity in some regions.
However, there is also evidence that plants can acclimatize to higher carbon dioxide levels – that means plants may grow faster for only a short time before returning to previous levels of growth.
Another problem is that many of the studies in which plant growth increased due to carbon dioxide fertilization were done in greenhouses where other nutrients, which plants need to survive, were adequately supplied.
In nature, plant nutrients like nitrogen as well as water are often in short supply. Thus, even if plants have extra carbon dioxide available, their growth might be limited by a lack of water and nutrients. Finally, climate change itself could lead to decreased plant growth in many areas because of increased drought, flooding and heat waves.
Whatever benefit carbon dioxide fertilization may bring, it is unlikely to be anywhere near enough to counteract the adverse impacts of a rapidly changing climate.
FICTION: If Earth has warmed since pre-industrial times, it is because the intensity of the sun has increased.
FACT: The sun’s intensity does vary. In the late 1970’s, sophisticated technology was developed that can directly measure the sun’s intensity. Measurements from these instruments show that in the past 20 years the sun’s variations have been very small.
Indirect measures of changes in sun’s intensity since the beginning of the industrial revolution in 1750 show that variations in the sun’s intensity do not account for all the warming that occurred in the 20th century and that the majority of the warming was caused by an increase in human-made greenhouse gas emissions.
FICTION: It is hard enough to predict the weather a few days in advance. How can we have any confidence in projections of climate a hundred years from now?
FACT: Climate and weather are different. Weather refers to temperatures, precipitation and storms on a given day at a particular place. Climate reflects a long-term average, sometimes over a very large area, such as a continent or even the entire Earth.
Averages over large areas and periods of time are easier to estimate than the specific characteristics of weather.For example, although it is notoriously difficult to predict if it will rain or the exact temperature of any particular day at a specific location, we can predict with relative certainty that on average, in the Northeastern United States, it will be colder in December than in July.
In addition, climate models are now sophisticated enough to be able to recreate past climates, including climate change over the last hundred years. This adds to our confidence that projections of future climates are accurate.
Finally, when we report climate projections, we use a range of results from climate models that represent the boundaries of our projections (what’s the least global average temperature could change to what’s the most global average temperature could change) and our degree of certainty of the projections.
FICTION: The science of global climate change cannot tell us the amount by which man-made emissions of greenhouse gases should be reduced in order to slow global warming.
FACT: The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change states that emissions of greenhouse gases should be reduced to avoid “dangerous interference with the climate system.” Scientists have subsequently attempted to define what constitutes “dangerous interference.”One study (O’Neill and Oppenheimer, 2002) supplies three criteria that could be used:
1) risk to threatened ecosystems such as coral reefs
2) large-scale disruptions caused by changes in the climate system, such as sea-level rise caused by the break-up of the Antarctic Ice Sheet and
3) large-scale disruptions of the climate system itself, such as the shutdown of the thermohaline circulation of the Atlantic Ocean (the Gulf stream), which would result in a severe drop in temperature to Europe.
This study projects that if C02 concentrations are capped at 450 parts per million (ppm), major disruptions to climate systems may be avoided, although some damage (such as that to coral reefs) may be unavoidable.
Current estimates of atmospheric CO2 concentrations likely to be reached without aggressive action to limit greenhouse gas emissions are far higher – from 550 ppm to as much as 1000 ppm in the next hundred years.
FICTION: Because of the uncertainty of climate models, it is extremely difficult to predict exactly what regional impacts will result from global climate change.
FACT: According to the IPCC, certain climate trends are highly likely to occur if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate or increase: sea level will rise; droughts will increase in some areas, flooding in others; temperatures will rise, leading to heat waves becoming more common and glaciers likely to melt at a more rapid rate.
Regional impacts are very likely to occur, but exactly when and what they will be is harder to predict.
This is because:
1) regional climate models are more computer intensive than global climate models – they take longer to run and are more difficult to calibrate, and
2) many non-climate factors contribute to impacts at regional levels. For example, the risk of mosquito-borne illnesses like Dengue fever and malaria may rise due to increased temperatures, but the actual likelihood of infection will depend greatly on the effectiveness of public health measures in place.
by Biophile Staff
FACT: There is international scientific consensus that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to human activities, not natural causes. Over millions of years, animals and plants lived, died and were compressed to form huge deposits of oil, gas and coal. In little more than 300 years, however, we have burned a large amount of this storehouse of carbon to supply energy.
Today, the by-products of fossil fuel use – billions of tons of carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide), methane, and other greenhouse gases – form a blanket around the Earth, trapping heat from the sun, unnaturally raising temperatures on the ground, and steadily changing our climate.
The impacts associated with this deceptively small change in temperature are evident in all corners of the globe. There is heavier rainfall in some areas, and droughts in others. Glaciers are melting, Spring is arriving earlier, oceans are warming, and coral reefs are dying.
FICTION: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts an increase in the global average temperature of only 1.4°C to 5.8°C over the coming century.This small change, less than the current daily temperature range for most major cities, is hardly cause for concern.
FACT: Global average temperature is calculated from temperature readings around the Earth. While temperature does vary considerably at a daily level in any one place, global average temperature is remarkably constant. According to analyses of ice cores, tree rings, pollen and other “climate proxies,” the average temperature of the Northern Hemisphere had varied up or down by only a few tenths of a degree Celsius between 1000 AD and about 1900, when a rapid warming began.
A global average temperature change ranging from 1.4°C to 5.8°C would translate into climate-related impacts that are much larger and faster than any that have occurred during the 10 000-year history of civilization.
From scientific analyses of past ages, we know that even small global average temperature changes can lead to large climate shifts. For example, the average global temperature difference between the end of the last ice age (when much of the Northern Hemisphere was buried under thousands of feet of ice) and today’s interglacial climate is only about 5°C .
FICTION: Warming cannot be due to greenhouse gases, since changes in temperature and changes in greenhouse gas emissions over the past century did not occur simultaneously.
FACT: The slow heating of the oceans creates a significant time lag between when carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere and when changes in temperature occur.
This is one of the main reasons why we don’t see changes in temperature at the same time as changes in greenhouse gas emissions. You can see the same process occur in miniature when you heat up a pot of water on the stove: there is a time lag between the time you turn on the flame and when the water starts to boil.
In addition, there are many other factors that affect year-to-year variation in the Earth’s temperature. For example, volcanic eruptions, El Ni?o, and small changes in the output of the sun can all affect the global climate on a yearly basis.Therefore, you would not expect the build-up of greenhouse gases to exactly match trends in global climate. Still, scientific evidence points clearly to anthropogenic (or human-made) greenhouse gases as the main culprit for climate change.
FICTION: Carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere fairly quickly, so if global warming turns out to be a problem, we can wait to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions until after we start to see the impacts of warming.
FACT: Carbon dioxide, a gas created by the burning of fossil fuels (like gasoline and coal), is the most important human-made greenhouse gas.Carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use is produced in huge quantities and can persist in our atmosphere for as long as 200 years.
This means that if emissions of carbon dioxide were halted today, it would take centuries for the amount of carbon dioxide now in the atmosphere to come down to what it was in pre-industrial times. Thus we need to act now if we want to avoid the increasingly dangerous consequences of climate change in the future.
FICTION: Human activities contribute only a small fraction of carbon dioxide emissions, an amount too small to have a significant effect on climate, particularly since the oceans absorb most of the extra carbon dioxide emissions.
FACT: Before human activities began to dramatically increase carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, the amount of carbon dioxide emitted from natural sources closely matched the amount that was stored or absorbed through natural processes.For example, as forests grow, they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis; this carbon is then sequestered in wood, leaves, roots and soil. Some carbon is later released back to the atmosphere when leaves, roots and wood die and decay.
Carbon dioxide also cycles through the oceanPlankton living at the ocean’s surface absorb carbon dioxide through photosynthesis. The plankton and animals that eat the plankton then die and fall to the bottom of the ocean. As they decay, carbon dioxide is released into the water and returns to the surface via ocean currents. As a result of these natural cycles, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air had changed very little for 10,000 years. But that balance has been upset by man.
Since the Industrial Revolution, the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil has put about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than is naturally removed by the oceans and forests. This has resulted in carbon dioxide levels building up in the atmosphere.
Today, carbon dioxide levels are 30% higher than pre-industrial levels, higher than they have been in the last 420,000 years and are probably at the highest levels in the past 20 million years. Studies of the Earth’s climate history have shown that even small, natural changes in carbon dioxide levels were generally accompanied by significant shifts in the global average temperature.
We have already experienced a 1°F increase in global temperature in the past century, and we can expect significant warming in the next century if we fail to act to decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
FICTION: The Earth has warmed rapidly in the past without dire consequences, so society and ecosystems can adapt readily to any foreseeable warming.
FACT: The Earth experienced rapid warming in some places at the end of the last glacial period, but for the last 10,000 years our global climate has been relatively stable. During this period, as agriculture and civilization developed, the world’s population has grown tremendously. Now, many heavily populated areas, such as urban centers in low-lying coastal zones, are highly vulnerable to climate shifts.
In addition, many ecosystems and species that are already threatened by existing pressures (such as pollution, habitat conversion and degradation) may be further pressured to the point of extinction by a changing climate.
FICTION: The buildup of carbon dioxide will lead to a “greening” of the Earth because plants can utilize the extra carbon dioxide to speed their growth.
FACT: Carbon dioxide has been shown to act as a fertilizer for some plant species under some conditions. In addition, a longer growing season (due to warmer temperatures) could increase productivity in some regions.
However, there is also evidence that plants can acclimatize to higher carbon dioxide levels – that means plants may grow faster for only a short time before returning to previous levels of growth.
Another problem is that many of the studies in which plant growth increased due to carbon dioxide fertilization were done in greenhouses where other nutrients, which plants need to survive, were adequately supplied.
In nature, plant nutrients like nitrogen as well as water are often in short supply. Thus, even if plants have extra carbon dioxide available, their growth might be limited by a lack of water and nutrients. Finally, climate change itself could lead to decreased plant growth in many areas because of increased drought, flooding and heat waves.
Whatever benefit carbon dioxide fertilization may bring, it is unlikely to be anywhere near enough to counteract the adverse impacts of a rapidly changing climate.
FICTION: If Earth has warmed since pre-industrial times, it is because the intensity of the sun has increased.
FACT: The sun’s intensity does vary. In the late 1970’s, sophisticated technology was developed that can directly measure the sun’s intensity. Measurements from these instruments show that in the past 20 years the sun’s variations have been very small.
Indirect measures of changes in sun’s intensity since the beginning of the industrial revolution in 1750 show that variations in the sun’s intensity do not account for all the warming that occurred in the 20th century and that the majority of the warming was caused by an increase in human-made greenhouse gas emissions.
FICTION: It is hard enough to predict the weather a few days in advance. How can we have any confidence in projections of climate a hundred years from now?
FACT: Climate and weather are different. Weather refers to temperatures, precipitation and storms on a given day at a particular place. Climate reflects a long-term average, sometimes over a very large area, such as a continent or even the entire Earth.
Averages over large areas and periods of time are easier to estimate than the specific characteristics of weather.For example, although it is notoriously difficult to predict if it will rain or the exact temperature of any particular day at a specific location, we can predict with relative certainty that on average, in the Northeastern United States, it will be colder in December than in July.
In addition, climate models are now sophisticated enough to be able to recreate past climates, including climate change over the last hundred years. This adds to our confidence that projections of future climates are accurate.
Finally, when we report climate projections, we use a range of results from climate models that represent the boundaries of our projections (what’s the least global average temperature could change to what’s the most global average temperature could change) and our degree of certainty of the projections.
FICTION: The science of global climate change cannot tell us the amount by which man-made emissions of greenhouse gases should be reduced in order to slow global warming.
FACT: The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change states that emissions of greenhouse gases should be reduced to avoid “dangerous interference with the climate system.” Scientists have subsequently attempted to define what constitutes “dangerous interference.”One study (O’Neill and Oppenheimer, 2002) supplies three criteria that could be used:
1) risk to threatened ecosystems such as coral reefs
2) large-scale disruptions caused by changes in the climate system, such as sea-level rise caused by the break-up of the Antarctic Ice Sheet and
3) large-scale disruptions of the climate system itself, such as the shutdown of the thermohaline circulation of the Atlantic Ocean (the Gulf stream), which would result in a severe drop in temperature to Europe.
This study projects that if C02 concentrations are capped at 450 parts per million (ppm), major disruptions to climate systems may be avoided, although some damage (such as that to coral reefs) may be unavoidable.
Current estimates of atmospheric CO2 concentrations likely to be reached without aggressive action to limit greenhouse gas emissions are far higher – from 550 ppm to as much as 1000 ppm in the next hundred years.
FICTION: Because of the uncertainty of climate models, it is extremely difficult to predict exactly what regional impacts will result from global climate change.
FACT: According to the IPCC, certain climate trends are highly likely to occur if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate or increase: sea level will rise; droughts will increase in some areas, flooding in others; temperatures will rise, leading to heat waves becoming more common and glaciers likely to melt at a more rapid rate.
Regional impacts are very likely to occur, but exactly when and what they will be is harder to predict.
This is because:
1) regional climate models are more computer intensive than global climate models – they take longer to run and are more difficult to calibrate, and
2) many non-climate factors contribute to impacts at regional levels. For example, the risk of mosquito-borne illnesses like Dengue fever and malaria may rise due to increased temperatures, but the actual likelihood of infection will depend greatly on the effectiveness of public health measures in place.
by Biophile Staff
Richard White
Richard White Of lions roar repot is a complete moron he has no factual evidence to support his stupid beliefs that humans have no effect on the environment. All he can do is quote the bible and say GOD will make it all better what a crock. I have tried to post on his blog and he will not post my comments because he fears others views and actual facts. He seems to think that if its not in the bible its not true. He also believes that no one (the catholic church, Kings) has had a hand in what you read today. Then why are their books "gospels" missing as well as many mis-translations in the final product if it is 100% GODs word shouldn't it all be there and be translated correctly. Can you explain this mister Richaed White?
King James version bible
The Story of King James
For the last three centuries Protestants have fancied
themselves the heirs of the Reformation, the
Puritans, the Calvinists, and the Pilgrims who landed
at Plymouth Rock. This assumption is one of history's
greatest ironies. Today, Protestants laboring under
that assumption use the King James Bible. Most of
the new Bibles such as the Revised Standard Version
are simply updates of the King James.
The irony is that none of the groups named in the
preceding paragraph used a King James Bible nor
would they have used it if it had been given to them
free. The Bible in use by those groups, until it went
out of print in 1644, was the Geneva Bible. The first
Geneva Bible, both Old and New Testaments, was
first published in English in 1560 in what is now
Geneva, Switzerland. William Shakespeare, John
Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on
Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that
era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.
Until he had his own version named after him, so did
King James I of England. James I later tried to
disclaim any knowledge of the Geneva Bible, though
he quoted the Geneva Bible in his own writings. As a
Professor Eadie reported it:
"...his virtual disclaimer of all knowledge up to a late
period of the Genevan notes and version was simply
a bold, unblushing falsehood, a clumsy attempt to
sever himself and his earlier Scottish beliefs and
usages that he might win favor with his English
churchmen."
The irony goes further. King James did not
encourage a translation of the Bible in order to
enlighten the common people: his sole intent was to
deny them the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible.
The marginal notes of the Geneva version were what
made it so popular with the common people.
The King James Bible was, and is for all practical
purposes, a government publication. There were
several reasons for the King James Bible being a
government publication. First, King James I of
England was a devout believer in the "divine right of
kings," a philosophy ingrained in him by his mother,
Mary Stuart. Mary Stuart may have been having an
affair with her Italian secretary, David Rizzio, at the
time she conceived James. There is a better than
even chance that James was the product of adultery.
Apparently, enough evidence of such conduct on the
part of Mary Stuart and David Rizzio existed to cause
various Scot nobles, including Mary's own husband,
King Henry, to drag David Rizzio from Mary's supper
table and execute him. The Scot nobles hacked and
slashed at the screaming Rizzio with knives and
swords, and then threw him off a balcony to the
courtyard below where he landed with a sickening
smack. In the phrase of that day, he had been
scotched.
Mary did have affairs with other men, such as the
Earl of Bothwell. She later tried to execute her
husband in a gunpowder explosion that shook all of
Edinburgh. King Henry survived the explosion only to
be suffocated later that same night. The murderers
were never discovered. Mary was eventually
beheaded at the order of her cousin, Elizabeth I of
England.
To such individuals as James and his mother, Mary,
the "divine right of kings" meant that since a king's
power came from God, the king then had to answer
to no one but God. This lack of responsibility
extended to evil kings. The reasoning was that if a
king was evil, that was a punishment sent from God.
The citizens should then suffer in silence. If a king
was good, that was a blessing sent from God.
This is why the Geneva Bible annoyed King James I.
The Geneva Bible had marginal notes that simply
didn't conform to that point of view. Those marginal
notes had been, to a great extent, placed in the
Geneva Bible by the leaders of the Reformation,
including John Knox and John Calvin. Knox and
Calvin could not and cannot be dismissed lightly or
their opinions passed off to the public as the mere
ditherings of dissidents.
First, notes such as, "When tyrants cannot prevail by
craft they burst forth into open rage" (Note i, Exodus
1:22) really bothered King James.
Second, religion in James' time was not what it is
today. In that era religion was controlled by the
government. If someone lived in Spain at the time,
he had three religious
"choices:"
1. Roman Catholicism
2. Silence
3. The Inquisition
The third "option" was reserved for "heretics," or
people who didn't think the way the government
wanted them to. To governments of that era heresy
and treason were synonymous.
England wasn't much different. From the time of
Henry VIII on, an Englishman had three choices:
1. The Anglican Church
2. Silence
3. The rack, burning at the stake, being drawn and
quartered, or some other form of persuasion.
The hapless individuals who fell into the hands of the
government for holding religious opinions of their
own were simply punished according to the royal
whim.
Henry VIII, once he had appointed himself head of
all the English churches, kept the Roman Catholic
system of bishops, deacons and the like for a very
good reason. That system allowed him a "chain of
command" necessary for any bureaucracy to
function. This system passed intact to his heirs.
This system became a little confusing for English
citizens when Bloody Mary ascended to the throne.
Mary wanted everyone to switch back to Roman
Catholicism. Those who proved intransigent and
wanted to remain Protestant she burned at the stake
- about 300 people in all. She intended to burn a lot
more, but the rest of her intended victims escaped
by leaving the country. A tremendous number of
those intended victims settled in Geneva. Religious
refugees from other countries in Western Europe,
including the French theologian Jean Chauvin, better
known as John Calvin, also settled there.
Mary died and was succeeded in the throne by her
Protestant cousin, Elizabeth. The Anglican
bureaucracy returned, less a few notables such as
Archbishop Cranmer and Hugh Latimer (both having
been burned at the stake by Bloody Mary). In
Scotland, John Knox led the Reformation. The
Reformation prospered in Geneva. Many of those who
had fled Bloody Mary started a congregation there.
Their greatest effort and contribution to the
Reformation was the first Geneva Bible.
More marginal notes were added to later editions. By
the end of the 16th century, the Geneva Bible had
about all the marginal notes there was space
available to put them in.
Geneva was an anomaly in 16th century Europe. In
the days of absolute despotism and constant warfare,
Geneva achieved her independence primarily by
constant negotiation, playing off one stronger power
against another. While other governments allowed
lawyers to drag out cases and took months and years
to get rid of corrupt officials, the City of Geneva
dispatched most civil and criminal cases within a
month and threw corrupt officials into jail the day
after they were found out. The academy that John
Calvin founded there in 1559 later became the
University of Geneva. Religious wars wracked
Europe. The Spanish fought to restore Roman
Catholicism to Western Europe. The Dutch fought for
the Reformation and religious freedom. England, a
small country with only 4-1/2 million people,
managed to stay aloof because of the natural
advantage of the English Channel.
The Dutch declared religious freedom for everybody.
Amsterdam became an open city. English Puritans
arrived by the boatload. The 1599 Edition of the
Geneva Bible was printed in Amsterdam and London
in large quantities until well into the 17th century.
King James, before he became James I of England,
made it plain that he had no use for the "Dutch
rebels" who had rebelled against their Spanish King.
Another irony left to us from the 16th century is that
the freedom of religion and freedom of the press did
not originate in England, as many people commonly
assume today. Those freedoms were first given to
Protestants by the Dutch, as the records of that era
plainly show. England today does not have freedom
of the press the way we understand it. (There are
things in England such as the Official Secrets Act
that often land journalists in jail.)
England was relatively peaceful in the time of
Elizabeth I. There was the problem of the Spanish
Armada, but that was brief. Elizabeth later became
known as "Good Queen Bess," not because she was
so good, but because her successor was so bad.
Elizabeth died in 1603 and her cousin, James Stuart,
son of Mary Stuart, who up until that time had been
King James VI of Scotland ascended the throne and
became known as King James I of England. James
ascended the throne of England with the "divine
right of kings" firmly embedded in his mind.
Unfortunately, that wasn't his only mental problem.
King James I, among his many other faults,
preferred young boys to adult women. He was a
flaming homosexual. His activities in that regard
have been recorded in numerous books and public
records; so much so, that there is no room for
debate on the subject. The King was queer.
The very people who use the King James Bible today
would be the first ones to throw such a deviant out
of the congregations.
The depravity of King James I didn't end with
sodomy. James enjoyed killing animals. He called it
"hunting." Once he killed an animal, he would
literally roll about in its blood. Some believe that he
practiced bestiality while the animal lay dying.
James was a sadist as well as a sodomite: he enjoyed
torturing people. While King of Scotland in 1591, he
personally supervised the torture of poor wretches
caught up in the witchcraft trials of Scotland. James
would even suggest new tortures to the examiners.
One "witch," Barbara Napier, was acquitted. That
event so angered James that he wrote personally to
the court on May 10, 1551, ordering a sentence of
death, and had the jury called into custody. To make
sure they understood their particular offense, the
King himself presided at a new hearing - and was
gracious enough to release them without punishment
when they reversed their verdict.
History has it that James was also a great coward.
On January 7, 1591, the king was in Edinburgh and
emerged from the toll booth. A retinue followed that
included the Duke of Lennox and Lord Hume. They
fell into an argument with the laird of Logie and
pulled their swords. James looked behind, saw the
steel flashing, and fled into the nearest refuge which
turned out to be a skinner's booth. There to his
shame, he "fouled his breeches in fear."
In short, King James I was the kind of despicable
creature honorable men loathed, Christians would
not associate with, and the Bible itself orders to be
put to death (Leviticus 20:13). Knowing what King
James was we can easily discern his motives.
James ascended the English throne in 1603. He
wasted no time in ordering a new edition of the Bible
in order to deny the common people the marginal
notes they so valued in the Geneva Bible. That
James I wasn't going to have any marginal notes to
annoy him and lead English citizens away from what
he wanted them to think is a matter of public record.
In an account corrected with his own hand dated
February 10, 1604, he ordained:
That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as
consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and
Greek, and this to be set out and printed without
any marginal notes, and only to be used in all
churches of England in time of divine service. James
then set up rules that made it impossible for anyone
involved in the project to make an honest
translation, some of which follow:
1. The ordinary Bible read in the church, commonly
called the Bishop's Bible to be followed and as little
altered as the truth of the original will permit.
2. Or, since the common people preferred the
Geneva Bible to the existing government publication,
let's see if we can slip a superseding government
publication onto their bookshelves, altered as little as
possible.
3. The old Ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz. the
word "church" not to be translated "congregation,"
etc.
4. That is, if a word should be translated a certain
way, let's deliberately mistranslate it to make the
people think God still belongs to the Anglican Church
- exclusively.
5. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for
the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which
cannot without some circumlocution, so briefly and
fitly be expressed in the text.
*** You can find more info at Otto Scott's "James I:
The Fool As King" (Ross House: 1976), pp. 108, 111,
120, 194, 200, 224, 311, 353, 382; King James-VI
of Scotland/I of England by Antonia Fraser (Alfred A.
Knopf, New York 1975)pp. 36, 37, 38; King James VI
and I by David Harris Willson, pp.36, 99; James I by
his Contemporaries by Robert Ashton, p114; and A
History of England by Samuel Rawson Gardiner, Vol.
4, p.112. Check also A LITERARY HISTORY OF THE
BIBLE by Geddes MacGregor who has devoted a
whole chapter entitled "QUEEN" JAMES.
The Mammoth Book of Private Lives by Jon E. Lewis,
pp. 62,65,66
James White also makes mention of it in his book,
THE KING JAMES ONLY CONTROVERSY.
See also King James and the History of
Homosexuality by Michael B. Young
and King James and Letters of Homoerotic Desire by
David Moore Bergeron.
For those people who feel that the above is a result
of the attack on King James by the 17th century
tobacco industry are ignorant of the fact that his
behavior and personal life were quite well known to
his contemporaries. "He disdained women and
fawned unconscionably on his favorite men."
ENCYCLOPEDIA AMERICANA-pp. 674,675
"And shall I then like bird or beast forget
From Jordan Maxwell site
For the last three centuries Protestants have fancied
themselves the heirs of the Reformation, the
Puritans, the Calvinists, and the Pilgrims who landed
at Plymouth Rock. This assumption is one of history's
greatest ironies. Today, Protestants laboring under
that assumption use the King James Bible. Most of
the new Bibles such as the Revised Standard Version
are simply updates of the King James.
The irony is that none of the groups named in the
preceding paragraph used a King James Bible nor
would they have used it if it had been given to them
free. The Bible in use by those groups, until it went
out of print in 1644, was the Geneva Bible. The first
Geneva Bible, both Old and New Testaments, was
first published in English in 1560 in what is now
Geneva, Switzerland. William Shakespeare, John
Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on
Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that
era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.
Until he had his own version named after him, so did
King James I of England. James I later tried to
disclaim any knowledge of the Geneva Bible, though
he quoted the Geneva Bible in his own writings. As a
Professor Eadie reported it:
"...his virtual disclaimer of all knowledge up to a late
period of the Genevan notes and version was simply
a bold, unblushing falsehood, a clumsy attempt to
sever himself and his earlier Scottish beliefs and
usages that he might win favor with his English
churchmen."
The irony goes further. King James did not
encourage a translation of the Bible in order to
enlighten the common people: his sole intent was to
deny them the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible.
The marginal notes of the Geneva version were what
made it so popular with the common people.
The King James Bible was, and is for all practical
purposes, a government publication. There were
several reasons for the King James Bible being a
government publication. First, King James I of
England was a devout believer in the "divine right of
kings," a philosophy ingrained in him by his mother,
Mary Stuart. Mary Stuart may have been having an
affair with her Italian secretary, David Rizzio, at the
time she conceived James. There is a better than
even chance that James was the product of adultery.
Apparently, enough evidence of such conduct on the
part of Mary Stuart and David Rizzio existed to cause
various Scot nobles, including Mary's own husband,
King Henry, to drag David Rizzio from Mary's supper
table and execute him. The Scot nobles hacked and
slashed at the screaming Rizzio with knives and
swords, and then threw him off a balcony to the
courtyard below where he landed with a sickening
smack. In the phrase of that day, he had been
scotched.
Mary did have affairs with other men, such as the
Earl of Bothwell. She later tried to execute her
husband in a gunpowder explosion that shook all of
Edinburgh. King Henry survived the explosion only to
be suffocated later that same night. The murderers
were never discovered. Mary was eventually
beheaded at the order of her cousin, Elizabeth I of
England.
To such individuals as James and his mother, Mary,
the "divine right of kings" meant that since a king's
power came from God, the king then had to answer
to no one but God. This lack of responsibility
extended to evil kings. The reasoning was that if a
king was evil, that was a punishment sent from God.
The citizens should then suffer in silence. If a king
was good, that was a blessing sent from God.
This is why the Geneva Bible annoyed King James I.
The Geneva Bible had marginal notes that simply
didn't conform to that point of view. Those marginal
notes had been, to a great extent, placed in the
Geneva Bible by the leaders of the Reformation,
including John Knox and John Calvin. Knox and
Calvin could not and cannot be dismissed lightly or
their opinions passed off to the public as the mere
ditherings of dissidents.
First, notes such as, "When tyrants cannot prevail by
craft they burst forth into open rage" (Note i, Exodus
1:22) really bothered King James.
Second, religion in James' time was not what it is
today. In that era religion was controlled by the
government. If someone lived in Spain at the time,
he had three religious
"choices:"
1. Roman Catholicism
2. Silence
3. The Inquisition
The third "option" was reserved for "heretics," or
people who didn't think the way the government
wanted them to. To governments of that era heresy
and treason were synonymous.
England wasn't much different. From the time of
Henry VIII on, an Englishman had three choices:
1. The Anglican Church
2. Silence
3. The rack, burning at the stake, being drawn and
quartered, or some other form of persuasion.
The hapless individuals who fell into the hands of the
government for holding religious opinions of their
own were simply punished according to the royal
whim.
Henry VIII, once he had appointed himself head of
all the English churches, kept the Roman Catholic
system of bishops, deacons and the like for a very
good reason. That system allowed him a "chain of
command" necessary for any bureaucracy to
function. This system passed intact to his heirs.
This system became a little confusing for English
citizens when Bloody Mary ascended to the throne.
Mary wanted everyone to switch back to Roman
Catholicism. Those who proved intransigent and
wanted to remain Protestant she burned at the stake
- about 300 people in all. She intended to burn a lot
more, but the rest of her intended victims escaped
by leaving the country. A tremendous number of
those intended victims settled in Geneva. Religious
refugees from other countries in Western Europe,
including the French theologian Jean Chauvin, better
known as John Calvin, also settled there.
Mary died and was succeeded in the throne by her
Protestant cousin, Elizabeth. The Anglican
bureaucracy returned, less a few notables such as
Archbishop Cranmer and Hugh Latimer (both having
been burned at the stake by Bloody Mary). In
Scotland, John Knox led the Reformation. The
Reformation prospered in Geneva. Many of those who
had fled Bloody Mary started a congregation there.
Their greatest effort and contribution to the
Reformation was the first Geneva Bible.
More marginal notes were added to later editions. By
the end of the 16th century, the Geneva Bible had
about all the marginal notes there was space
available to put them in.
Geneva was an anomaly in 16th century Europe. In
the days of absolute despotism and constant warfare,
Geneva achieved her independence primarily by
constant negotiation, playing off one stronger power
against another. While other governments allowed
lawyers to drag out cases and took months and years
to get rid of corrupt officials, the City of Geneva
dispatched most civil and criminal cases within a
month and threw corrupt officials into jail the day
after they were found out. The academy that John
Calvin founded there in 1559 later became the
University of Geneva. Religious wars wracked
Europe. The Spanish fought to restore Roman
Catholicism to Western Europe. The Dutch fought for
the Reformation and religious freedom. England, a
small country with only 4-1/2 million people,
managed to stay aloof because of the natural
advantage of the English Channel.
The Dutch declared religious freedom for everybody.
Amsterdam became an open city. English Puritans
arrived by the boatload. The 1599 Edition of the
Geneva Bible was printed in Amsterdam and London
in large quantities until well into the 17th century.
King James, before he became James I of England,
made it plain that he had no use for the "Dutch
rebels" who had rebelled against their Spanish King.
Another irony left to us from the 16th century is that
the freedom of religion and freedom of the press did
not originate in England, as many people commonly
assume today. Those freedoms were first given to
Protestants by the Dutch, as the records of that era
plainly show. England today does not have freedom
of the press the way we understand it. (There are
things in England such as the Official Secrets Act
that often land journalists in jail.)
England was relatively peaceful in the time of
Elizabeth I. There was the problem of the Spanish
Armada, but that was brief. Elizabeth later became
known as "Good Queen Bess," not because she was
so good, but because her successor was so bad.
Elizabeth died in 1603 and her cousin, James Stuart,
son of Mary Stuart, who up until that time had been
King James VI of Scotland ascended the throne and
became known as King James I of England. James
ascended the throne of England with the "divine
right of kings" firmly embedded in his mind.
Unfortunately, that wasn't his only mental problem.
King James I, among his many other faults,
preferred young boys to adult women. He was a
flaming homosexual. His activities in that regard
have been recorded in numerous books and public
records; so much so, that there is no room for
debate on the subject. The King was queer.
The very people who use the King James Bible today
would be the first ones to throw such a deviant out
of the congregations.
The depravity of King James I didn't end with
sodomy. James enjoyed killing animals. He called it
"hunting." Once he killed an animal, he would
literally roll about in its blood. Some believe that he
practiced bestiality while the animal lay dying.
James was a sadist as well as a sodomite: he enjoyed
torturing people. While King of Scotland in 1591, he
personally supervised the torture of poor wretches
caught up in the witchcraft trials of Scotland. James
would even suggest new tortures to the examiners.
One "witch," Barbara Napier, was acquitted. That
event so angered James that he wrote personally to
the court on May 10, 1551, ordering a sentence of
death, and had the jury called into custody. To make
sure they understood their particular offense, the
King himself presided at a new hearing - and was
gracious enough to release them without punishment
when they reversed their verdict.
History has it that James was also a great coward.
On January 7, 1591, the king was in Edinburgh and
emerged from the toll booth. A retinue followed that
included the Duke of Lennox and Lord Hume. They
fell into an argument with the laird of Logie and
pulled their swords. James looked behind, saw the
steel flashing, and fled into the nearest refuge which
turned out to be a skinner's booth. There to his
shame, he "fouled his breeches in fear."
In short, King James I was the kind of despicable
creature honorable men loathed, Christians would
not associate with, and the Bible itself orders to be
put to death (Leviticus 20:13). Knowing what King
James was we can easily discern his motives.
James ascended the English throne in 1603. He
wasted no time in ordering a new edition of the Bible
in order to deny the common people the marginal
notes they so valued in the Geneva Bible. That
James I wasn't going to have any marginal notes to
annoy him and lead English citizens away from what
he wanted them to think is a matter of public record.
In an account corrected with his own hand dated
February 10, 1604, he ordained:
That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as
consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and
Greek, and this to be set out and printed without
any marginal notes, and only to be used in all
churches of England in time of divine service. James
then set up rules that made it impossible for anyone
involved in the project to make an honest
translation, some of which follow:
1. The ordinary Bible read in the church, commonly
called the Bishop's Bible to be followed and as little
altered as the truth of the original will permit.
2. Or, since the common people preferred the
Geneva Bible to the existing government publication,
let's see if we can slip a superseding government
publication onto their bookshelves, altered as little as
possible.
3. The old Ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz. the
word "church" not to be translated "congregation,"
etc.
4. That is, if a word should be translated a certain
way, let's deliberately mistranslate it to make the
people think God still belongs to the Anglican Church
- exclusively.
5. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for
the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which
cannot without some circumlocution, so briefly and
fitly be expressed in the text.
*** You can find more info at Otto Scott's "James I:
The Fool As King" (Ross House: 1976), pp. 108, 111,
120, 194, 200, 224, 311, 353, 382; King James-VI
of Scotland/I of England by Antonia Fraser (Alfred A.
Knopf, New York 1975)pp. 36, 37, 38; King James VI
and I by David Harris Willson, pp.36, 99; James I by
his Contemporaries by Robert Ashton, p114; and A
History of England by Samuel Rawson Gardiner, Vol.
4, p.112. Check also A LITERARY HISTORY OF THE
BIBLE by Geddes MacGregor who has devoted a
whole chapter entitled "QUEEN" JAMES.
The Mammoth Book of Private Lives by Jon E. Lewis,
pp. 62,65,66
James White also makes mention of it in his book,
THE KING JAMES ONLY CONTROVERSY.
See also King James and the History of
Homosexuality by Michael B. Young
and King James and Letters of Homoerotic Desire by
David Moore Bergeron.
For those people who feel that the above is a result
of the attack on King James by the 17th century
tobacco industry are ignorant of the fact that his
behavior and personal life were quite well known to
his contemporaries. "He disdained women and
fawned unconscionably on his favorite men."
ENCYCLOPEDIA AMERICANA-pp. 674,675
"And shall I then like bird or beast forget
From Jordan Maxwell site
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)