I am sure you will like listening to the sermon from Dan Backens. From the Hatfield Christian Church. 01.03.2020
Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Gen 6:4 There were giants (Nephilim) in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they had children with them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
(Note that between Gen. 6:4 and 6:5 there could be a gap of many years)
I have always been puzzled by that verse in the Bible, Genesis 6:2. Who were the ‘Sons of God’? And where did they come from? Apparently, they were big people, not only in stature, but also great in the knowledge of agriculture, sciences and craftmanship. They and their offspring were regarded as heroes and men of renown. (see Gen. 6:4; most bible translations translate Nephilim as: Giants)
I think I found the answer to this question recently, on reading the book “Magicians of the Gods” by Graham Hancock. At some stage Graham references the book of Enoch. Enoch was the great-great grandfather of Noah. This is one of the non-canonical bible books, but it is still looked at by many scholars who are interested to learn more about biblical and ancient times. Enoch mentions the “Watchers” and that there is the need to “heal the earth which the angels have corrupted” … “ that all the children may not perish through all the secret things which the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons.” The Watchers were apparently looked upon as angels (Sons of God?), because of their special knowledge and craftmanships – …..
Although Enoch writes of his visions, it becomes clear on reading the various passages and interactions that the “Watchers” are real physical beings. Enoch clearly distinguishes between a group of good and bad Watchers. We are told about the nature of ‘secret things’ that they taught mankind:
“And Azazel taught men to make swords and knives, and shields and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth, and the art of working them, and bracelets and ornaments and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones and the colouring of tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments and root-cuttings, Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraquijal taught astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezequeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araquiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon…..”
From all of Enoch’s writings it follows that a group of good and ‘bad’ angels (Sons of God…) had come to ‘earth’, specifically Mount Hermon (Lebanon) – transferred important technology, mated with ‘human’ females and produced an offspring who were in some way gigantic but also great in many other ways. (Gen. 6:4). Enoch exaggerates the height of the Watchers, or perhaps refers to a different type of measurement when evaluating their height. Anyhow, the “Watchers” apparently had a different appearance and they and their offspring were regarded as giants. Maybe they were at least as big as Goliath, the giant who taunted David and the God of Israel, who was reportedly around 3 meters in length? We also remember that when the Israelites came from Egypt and arrived in Canaan for the first time, the spies that had been sent ahead, were astonished by the size of its inhabitants (Again the word Nephilim is used, here, Numbers 13). Therefore, is it not logical to assume that the presence of giants in the past is just as possible and probable as the existence of pigmies today?
Now, my question was: where had these Watchers/angels/Sons of God/Giants come from? It looks to me as if the situation described by Enoch is not much different as what happened in the 16th and 17th century, when seafarers from the developed nations arrived in ships at places on earth where many people were still living in very primitive circumstances. To get food and survive they had to engage with these hunter-gatherers. In many cases, these people regarded their invaders as “Gods”, remember?
Anyhow, it now appears that even before the time of Enoch, there were people that had already attained a superior level of knowledge and civilization. Stonehenge is an example of this, but there are remnants of certain other buildings, specifically in Egypt, Lebanon, Peru, Turkey & others that have megaliths that were erected that are so big and heavy that even now scientists and builders do not know how it was done. How about putting an 800-ton megalith in its right place (Baalbek, Lebanon), next to another one, so close, that you cannot get a knife in between? Also, we can see that in some of these places (e.g. Giza, Baalbek) subsequent re-work by later generations was inferior to the original building that must have been there long before.
We are reminded of the fact that in tales of many peoples from all over the world, there are stories of (a) big flood(s) that affected the whole of the earth. Many contain stories of miraculous escapes from these floods by a small number of people – by many accounts not only Noah – who lived to tell the story.
I refer to the graph above where scientists analysed the ice cores in central Greenland. It gives an impression of the temperature there and on earth in general (note that the zero point is ca. 1950; apparently younger ice does not work for the analysis). Of interest is the Younger Dryas cooling. It appears from various analyses of sites on earth that the dates of the Younger Dryas period coincide with incidents where earth was hit by a comet, and subsequent remnants thereof, which, indeed, would have triggered enormous floods. The result would have been instant and severe cooling on earth of which there is ample evidence. For, example, they analysed the flesh of the mammoths that had been caught in the ice for 12000 years and found that the flesh had frozen instantly. The cold and ice had come so quickly for the animal that there had been no way to even try and escape.
The graph also indicates that there were at least two major impacts, triggering the Younger Dryas, namely the one at around 12800 BP and the one at just before 11600 BP. Let us assume that the youngest impact triggered Noah’s flood. Could it be that the first impact wiped out that mysterious place called Atlantis, where people already knew how to build with stone, how to make light, how to plant food, build ships and knew about the positions of the stars and how to navigate the world?
Could the people who survived this first impact not have been “the Sons of God”? Let me know what you think!
I am getting more and more concerned about the speeches from – and attention given to – Greta Thunberg, the young climate activist. Most recently she was made ‘Person of the Year’ by Time Magazine and it seems she and her ‘Extinction Rebellion’ group is getting more and more financial support from the world’s richest people, e.g. see here:
I have looked at some of her speeches – and it seems they are mostly the same. But, at the end, there is always a clear veiled threat…..like this one at COP 24:
“We have not come here to beg world leaders to care. You have ignored us in the past and you will ignore us again. We have run out of excuses and we are running out of time. We have come here to let you know that change is coming whether you like it or not. The real power belongs to the people.”
Here is the last section of her speech at the UN meeting in New York (23/09/2019):
“How dare you pretend that this can be solved with just ‘business as usual’ and some technical solutions? With today’s emissions levels, that remaining CO2 budget will be entirely gone within less than 8 1/2 years.
“There will not be any solutions or plans presented in line with these figures here today, because these numbers are too uncomfortable. And you are still not mature enough to tell it like it is. You are failing us. But the young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us, I say: We will never forgive you. “We will not let you get away with this. Right here, right now is where we draw the line. The world is waking up. And change is coming, whether you like it or not.”
You see what I mean? Unfortunately, as far as the science is concerned, clearly, Greta is being trained to say what ‘they’ , – whoever ‘they’ may be – want her to say, and she obviously has absolutely no idea of the intricacies involved in climate science. Long ago, I studied the reports from the IPPC [The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], especially those from 2004 and 2007. I found the science showing that carbon dioxide (CO2) is making the earth warmer not supported by convincing evidence. It was still the same science as proposed by Tyndall and Svante Arrhenius, ca. 100 years ago. They both performed closed box experiments to show that an increase in CO2 causes warming. However, by looking at a closed box, on earth, you are simply not seeing the whole picture. Let me try to show you what I think is wrong with the theory of manmade warming (AGW), allegedly caused by CO2.
People who have studied chemistry, know that to make a standard solution you need neutral water, free of any dissolved carbonates. Hence, the first instruction is to boil the de-ionized or distilled water for 10 minutes. The reaction can be summarized as follows:
HCO3- + heat = > CO2 (g) + OH- (1)
Understand that there is a lot of CO2 dissolved in the oceans plus thousands of gigatons of carbonates and bicarbonates as well, due to earlier and on-going volcanic emissions. In fact, according to Ian Plimer, the volcanic eruption in Iceland not so long ago, emitted in 4 days as much carbonates as was ‘saved’ by all our own attempts at reductions in emissions.
When the UV and IR from the sun strikes on top of the ocean’s surface, not only water vapor is formed (H2O g), but also CO2 (g) as per the reaction (1). Hence, we get clouds and rain and the CO2 is getting into our atmosphere. All of this is responsible for life! Remember that everything we eat and drink depends on rain and the sugars formed during photo-synthesis of which CO2 is the principal ingredient.
At the poles and there where it gets very cold, the reaction in the water of the oceans reverses, and CO2 dissolves back into the water. The summary of this reaction is as follows:
CO2 (g) + 2H2O (l) + cold = > HCO3- + H3O+ (2)
Now, imagine earth as a big vessel with liquid on the bottom and gasses on top. I am not showing all the reactions that take place in the seawater, but clearly, as per Henry’s Law, [that is not me!], all the dissolved CO2 and all the bi-carbonates and carbonates in the water of the oceans are at an equilibrium with the amount of CO2 in the air. The net reaction that I propose for that, is here:
CO2 (l, in the oceans) + Heat => <= CO2 (g, in the atmosphere ) + Cold (3)
What it means is that the more heat goes into the oceans, the more CO2 comes gassing out into the atmosphere. If the solubility of CO2, & the atmospheric pressure and the pH of the water stays unchanged, then it follows that there must be a correlation between heat and CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
As it happens, due to the extra heat coming from the sun and /or the inside of earth [who says that the cooling of earth over time, is an absolute straight line?], we have indeed seen that the temperatuur of the oceans is going up:
We only have good reliable data on CO2 in the atmosphere since about ca. 1964, and indeed, as expected, as per Henry’s Law, we note that CO2 in the atmosphere went up from about 0.03% to 0.04%, see here:
You understand what I am saying? Simply put, the IPCC has put the cart before the horse…The correlation is in reverse. More heat into the oceans causes more CO2 in the atmosphere… It is a natural relationship. They never ever proved that more CO2 in the air causes more heat on earth.
Now, I know that there are those who have said that not all of the increase observed in CO2 in the atmosphere is due to the natural balance, e.g. ‘Henry’s Law’ . They developed some signature test to prove that a substantial portion of the observed 0.01% increase since 1960 is man made. To this I say: Fine. Let it be so. Even if this is true, it does not change anything. All it means is that maybe we are running a little ahead of schedule on the eventual balance that will set in again as soon as the oceans get cooler……What could possibly be wrong with that… There is no real change in the natural laws that govern the CO2 content of the atmosphere and the weather?
But true enough, the other relevant question here is: does more CO2 in the air indeed also cause more warmth, due to a greenhouse effect?
Unfortunately, what Tyndall and Arrhenius could not see [from a closed box experiment] is that both CO2 and H2O not only have extinction in the part of the spectrum where earth emits, but they also have extinctions in the part of the spectrum where the sun emits. To see the proof of this, carefully look at this report here: http://astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/disksite/library/turnbull06a.pdf
Look at Fig. 6 (bottom), e.g. the green line (CO2) and the blue line (H2O). Clearly you can see that IR radiation from the sun is deflected off from earth by the CO2 and H2O. So, radiation bounced on CO2 and caused it to go back to the sun [space]….Note that the radiation (i.e. the peaks between 1 and 2 um) went from the sun => earth (CO2) => moon (i.e. space) => earth.
That raises the question: what is more: the amount of heat deflected off from earth by the CO2 due to extinctions of the CO2 in the spectrum of the sun 0-5 um [5500K)], namely those in the UV, and those between 1-2 um and 4-5um, or the amount of heat trapped on earth due to the extinction of CO2 in the 14-15 um region of earth’s spectrum[210K]?
Sadly, there is no report on this…at least none that I could find. Nobody has investigated this problem and made an exact balance sheet of all the plusses and minuses in the correct SI dimensions of how much heat is deflected off from earth and how much heat is trapped by the CO2 on earth.
I have done some calculations by myself, which you can see here
This all brought me to finding that the warming caused by the increase in CO2 is negligible. That corresponds with my analysis of all daily data of 54 weather stations around the world over the past 40 years . Namely, if AGW were true, due to more CO2, would you not expect that the rate of warming would be the same, more or less, everywhere on the world? Clearly, I find this not being the case.
Now back to Greta. She and her leaders are misguided at best or otherwise willfully engaged in misleading the public. Obviously, she might get more and more support, as in time to come natural climate change will definitely take its toll:
Surely, this will get more and more people, not having faith in God, nor in the hand of God on climate, to ‘accept’ AGW, and be further exploited on their feelings of guilt. Eventually, that might give her and her friends the absolute power that they are after.
Do you trust her? Let us look at what a girl of similar age as Greta said more than 2000 years ago:
“And Mary said: My soul glorifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on, all generations will call me blessed……His mercy extends to those who fear him, from generation to generation….He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted the humble (Luke 1:46-52).
I wish you a very blessed Easter season.
Wow. It is that time of the year already. Does not time seem to go quicker, as you get older?
Anyway, it means that it is time for my favorite Christmas carol. What do you think?
Let me know which is your favorite carol?
Please be careful on the road and have yourselves a peaceful festive season ahead.
Whenever you feel a bit depressed or facing some challenges, put this song in your mind!
It will remind you that you are never alone and that anything is possible if you realize that He is always there with you and ready to help…..
It has a very simple tune and you will easily remember the words:
He can do Anything!!!