meteorologists: those godless liberal heathens

meteorologists: those godless liberal heathens October 28, 2013

I shouldn’t have to say this, but experience suggests I provide the following disclaimer:

The following makes a serious point through the use of humor, specifically, it exposes the absurdity of an argument–a literalistic reading of the creation story in Genesis–by applying its logic and premises to an analogous issue covered in Scripture–weather.

If you do not see the humor in this, good enough, but do not assume others should join in you adopting your humorless disposition. If, however, you dispute the point being made, you are free–as far away from here as possible–to make your case for where snow comes from. 

Recently Heather Goodman posted on her blog All Things Are Yours her courageous observations of how meteorologists daily launch an insidious attack upon the Word of God by claiming that “snow and hail are some sort of natural phenomenon, and that the snow and hail are formed SPONTANEOUSLY, during a storm – not stored up for the day of trouble, as the Bible clearly says.”

Goodman offers both incontrovertible biblical proof of where snow and hail actually come from as well damning proof of the godlessness parade of misinformation to which the innocent and gullible are subject on a daily–nay, 24/7 (damn you Weather Channel)–basis.

Friends, do not be deceived  The very truth of the Christian faith is at stake. As foolish as we may look in resisting the so-called “scientific consensus,” we are bound by Scripture, which does not err, since it is God’s Word. We are not free to “pick and choose” what parts of Scripture we agree with. Better to be mocked by man than disobey God.


"I think you're arguing with what I'm not saying. I'm not saying there are no ..."

the best defense of the Christian ..."
"Don't you have one? Or do you just want to read it twice?"

we have lift off…my new website ..."
"Ooh yes. Free copy of 'Inspiration and Incarnation'?"

we have lift off…my new website ..."
"My first comment. You should get a prize or something."

we have lift off…my new website ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Thanks for today’s humorous expose of the attack on the Bible by the weatherman as well as the link to Goodman’s post. Let me add her biblical reference; it packs a punch!

    Job 38:

    22“Have you entered the storehouses of the snow,
    or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,
    23 which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
    for the day of battle and war? (ESV)

  • I strongly doubt that those people prefering to believe in secular science than in the INERRANT word of God are truly saved.

    God has set up a straight path for our salvation: believing in everything which flowed out of His mouth.
    If you begin to pick and choose which parts of Scripture you believe in, you have absolutely no grounds for believing that Christ paid the price of your offense.
    And thus you will spend the whole eternity in the realm of darkness unless you repent and confess the foolishness of man’s wisdom.
    May the Lord enlighten you about the evil powers who are responsible for every thunder storm which has afflicted our earth.

    • I can’t tell, Lothar. Are you being facetious?

      • Yes, he is.

      • Lars

        My money is on Facetious (yep, that’s a capital F!).

      • I hope that a look at my godly link will answer your question…

        2013/10/28 Disqus

  • unkleE

    But wait, it’s worse! Those same meteorologists are the source of the nasty green climate change plot!!

  • dangjin

    just because you do not understand what God is saying doesn’t mean he is wrong and the secular scientist correct.

    • Lars

      And vice versa because, really, does anyone truly understand ‘vorticity’?

    • Klasie Kraalogies

      Just because you don’t understand Pete’s sarcasm, doesn’t mean he is wrong and you are right.

      • I’m wondering if danglin was being satirical as well? Man this satire thing can be so difficult. Poe’s law bites in both directions.

        • Klasie Kraalogies

          Judging from previous comments here, he is actually believes exactly what he said, namely that science has it all wrong and that the Bible is some sort of svience textbook.

    • I’m voting this up, because I think secular folks can know things that Christians don’t, and if Christians are arrogant (contra God’s repeated commands to be humble), they will refuse to listen to said secular folks—and God will judge Christians for this.

      Likewise, Christians can know things that secular folks refuse to acknowledge, like the importance of voluntary self-sacrifice. Secular folks tend not to want to admit how much self-sacrifice is required to undo the wrongs they themselves have done. (Note that we Christians are pretty good at screwing things up too; a big question for us is whether or not we’ll join Nehemiah in his prayer, repenting for both his sins and others’ sins.)

  • Lars

    This is great! Thank you both for making my unseasonably cold Monday morning!

  • Mick Pope

    Speaking as a Christian meteorologist I find myself very conflicted. Believing in the inerrant word of God, I have to tell people LIES when I teach meteorology, because they can’t handle the truth.

  • Mike F

    Geez the nerve of those meteorologists. Another thing that just boils my blood, when those godless scientists say when people die they stay dead and their bodies rot… gosh the arrogance!

  • AHH

    Don’t forget the “windows of the Heavens” that let in the rain — the godless meteorologists say they don’t exist but Noah (and others of us whose faith is based solely on the Word of God) know better!

  • Susan_G1

    I saw some of those storehouses from a plane over the Alps. They were brilliantly disguised as clouds. The wise will see this immediately as proof for the literal interpretation of scripture. (They looked like the picture at the top of this post, but more squarish.)

  • Richard Anderson

    Hi Peter, and greetings one and all.

    Sorry, I must be missing something here, so forgive me if I haven’t quite picked up on the humour…

    But a brief look through the comments of said offending blogpost should show that Heather Goodman was in fact, as we say down here, taking the piss…

    Admittedly, I (and many of those commenting on her post), had to scroll through to the end to be aware that this was in fact, satirical, but just so we don’t get carried away with all the mockery…

    First time poster, long time reader of your blog, Peter. Love your work, but I do hope you weren’t using this to humiliate the poor woman…

    • Richard Anderson

      And of course, a closer look at your own post shows that perhaps I didn’t get it after all…

      ; )

      • peteenns

        No problem, Richard. I appreciate your concern. To be 100% clear, I was definitely not mocking Heather Goodman but feeding off of her humor. If I were mocking her–which would be quite wrong–you would be right to call me out on it!

        • Richard Anderson

          And thanks for your reply Pete…I know you can be a bit cynical, but you’re certainly not a mocker

      • Lars

        Actually, you were just unlucky. If we’ve learned nothing else on this blog, it’s that the fine line between satire and contextualism is quite blurry. (I have to admit that I’ve often wondered if Job could be read as satire…)

        • Richard Anderson

          Job ISN’T SATIRE????
          You telling me that Job is historical!!!
          ; )