1Vlh8KEeeiY

0:54Ah, how's that? All right. So let me quickly say this: that what we're going to talk about tonight is the ice age, just in case you're wondering, so we don't have any false advertising. And what I want to do is tie that in to a biblical way of thinking about our world around us currently, current events, and tell you this: that the way that you think about what is going on in terms of the world around you. us, not just sociologically and politically and philosophically, but also physically, matters. Okay? And I'm going to try to circle back around and let you know, kind of wrap this up at the end with a charge for you guys to think biblically. Okay?

1:51That's kind of the underlying. I'm going to tell you my goal first, and then I'm going to see if I can lead you there, okay, through this talk on the ice age. I also want to be quick to tell you that I'm going to be teaching from a young earth creationist point of view. I'm a geologist by training. And when I graduated from AM with both an undergraduate, thank you, and a graduate degree in geology, I never drank the evolution Kool-Aid.

2:26So I went in. My parents sent me to a place called the Summit in Manitou Springs. How many of you have heard of the Summit? Summit Ministries? Yeah. It gave me a great foundation for a biblical worldview. And one of the things they did for me is they gave me some material from a place called ICR, Institute of Creation Research. By the way, at that time they were in El Cajon, California. They have since moved to Dallas. And they've built a really nice museum. It's called the Center for Discovery, earth discovery, I think it's the name of it. But if you have a chance, go. It is a quality experience. And as part of that, they gave me a good foundation on rejecting evolution as basically it's a fairy tale for adults, is kind of the way the conclusion I've come to. But when I graduated from AM, I was an old earth geologist. So when I looked around the world around me, I had these glasses on that my professors had given me as an interpretive framework. And so I looked at the earth as being immensely old. And what I did then is I tried to fit what I was reading in the Bible into that framework.

3:45That's not a salvation issue. You can be an old earth geologist and be saved. You'll just find out later on that you were wrong. But I say that somewhat facetiously. So old earth, young earth theistic evolutionist, if we can agree that Jesus was God and man, and that he came to this earth, took on human form, not grasping his divinity, but putting that aside to live a perfect life, leading him to the cross, to die a substitutionary death. Atonement in our place, and you believe in that, and that he rose again the third day, then you are saved. That's what it takes, right, to repent, to turn 180 degrees and see him as the Messiah. And so, that is not what we're going to talk about tonight. We're going to take that as for granted, that everyone in here has done that, has placed their belief and trust in Jesus Christ. And so, we're now going to move into the realm of what are we to do with that concept in terms of following the marching orders that Jesus has given us Himself, in that we are to make disciples and teach them to obey Him of all the nations, right? And so, making disciples, by the way, is training people how to think biblically. And so, when we talk about the ice age, we just start here, okay?

5:36And that is with the issue of climate change. Has anybody heard about climate change yet? All right, do you understand that this is a big deal? This is what's driving the progressive part of the United States right now, and it's fear that if we don't. Do something soon that we will basically annihilate ourselves. And it doesn't take very long for you to start Googling climate change for you to figure out there's a lot of people who are very, very afraid of the climate changing.

6:26Now, is this a new phenomenon? Not really. For those of you, and this is dating myself, I grew up in elementary school being told that there was a coming ice age. Does anybody remember that? Global cooling was the big thing. And then, John, you're my age. Yeah. Yeah, thank you. And then later on, when I got out of high school and started at A ⁇ M, it was global warming, which was kind of confusing. So was it cooling or is it warming? So they finally figured it out. They just call it change. So it covers both. Okay? And, okay, so here we're going to get a little scientific, okay?

7:22The issue is not whether putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere changes. The climate of the earth. The issue is how much and for how long. And so the battle in the scientific realm is actually over something called the equilibrium climate sensitivity. Okay? And so here is our government at work for you. This is off the NOAA website. And you can see there that, now this is a technical paper, okay? So bear with me. I notice that the front rows are empty, so I can't splash on you guys. Everybody in the back, I'm going to try to keep you awake, okay? This is not a good way of keeping you awake to give you a scientific paper to read on the screen. But stay with me here. Projections of severity of anthropogenic climate change. Okay, so right there, we've got to do a little bit of translation, okay? So projection means that they're trying to figure out what's going to happen. Okay? How do people, by the way, how do scientists do they have a crystal ball?

8:35Do they just guess? How do they do this stuff? How do they make predictions for the future? This is the interactive part. Somebody said it. Models. Yeah, they're mathematical models. Okay? By the way, mathematics is the language of creation. It's pretty cool. And I didn't like math at first. In fact, I was horrible at math until I figured out, oh, math actually means something in describing the world around us. And so scientists build these models, and what they're trying to project is the severity. What does that mean?

9:16Put that in English. How bad it's going to get, okay? So what they're trying to do is use mathematical models to figure out how bad it's going to get and what's going to get bad. Anthropogenic, that's a, wow. The word anthro means man, like anthropology, okay? And genic means to have been made. So that's just a simple way of saying man-made. Okay? Just science speak. All right? So what they're trying to do is build a model that projects how bad man-made climate change will get. And the models are strongly dependent. That means that they're really sensitive to a parameter called climate sensitivity. And there's two different types. There's the transient type, which doesn't mean it's homeless. It just means that it's short in time.

10:15And then there's the equilibrium climate sensitivity, which means that our Earth is a complicated system. And if you change one parameter, there's all sorts of other things that change. And so, your mathematical model, in order for it to be accurately predictive, either needs to take some of that stuff and say that's not important, or it is important and incorporate it and try to figure out how to include it in that mathematical model. And so, it turns out that this parameter called climate sensitivity is the big thing that everyone is fighting over.

10:57Some scientists believe that the equilibrium climate sensitivity is large, which means you can do a lot of things to the earth and it's not going to change much. Okay, one of the ways that that works is if you change the heat capacity in the atmosphere, well, then you start building cloud cover. And the cloud cover is a feedback loop that prevents sunlight from getting into the earth, so you stop the heating. Okay, so it kind of pushes the earth back into equilibrium. And so, there's a battle over how much that actually impacts the earth. Right now, the side that believes that the climate equilibrium sensitivity is small, in other words, that man can actually make changes to the climate, and those can be catastrophic, that side is winning, just in case you're wondering, politically and scientifically, because they have what they claim is. Evidence that in the past that the earth has responded very catastrophically to climate-changing inputs. Okay? Does everybody follow me so far? Equilibrium, climate sensitivity. Some people think it's low, some people think it's high. The people who think that the earth is going to be damaged by anthropogenic climate-inducing changes, i.e., carbon, they're in the winning column right now because they think they have data that supports the concept that the equilibrium climate sensitivity is low. Okay? So, why do they think that?

12:54Well, because there was an ice age once. In fact, a lot of scientists think there were many, many ice ages. Five major ones and hundreds of smaller ones. So, if you've watched any animated movies, you know that there was an ice age, right? The little squirrel with the acorn thing. Okay? So, there was an ice age. And I think a lot of times when I talk to people about geology, that's in Inevitably, everyone knows there was an ice age, they just don't know where it fits in into the chronology, into the history.

13:38So, from a geological standpoint, we can tell: yes, there was an ice age. And there's good evidence of there being an ice age because when there's an ice age, there's ice sheets, and the ice sheets, glaciers, leave things behind that we can find now and say, oh, this is how far the glacier went. For example, an end moraine, a terminal moraine, is a pile of gravel, kind of in a U-shaped. It looks like kind of the end of a glacier, because guess what? It is the end of a glacier.

14:16The glacier acts like a bulldozer and it incorporates rocks, and as it melts out at the end, the rocks drop out, and it forms what's called a terminal moraine. You can find these things today, and you can say, oh, there was a glacier here once. There are other landforms, eskers, outwash plains, drumlands, kettle lakes, and striations on the bedrock. Now, here's a little geological secret. There's good evidence for A-an ice age. One. Some geologists have found striations. Grooves on rocks that they claim are ice ages that happened before the ice age that we had at the very here in the last green laser.

15:11A green laser. Ooh. Wow. Okay. That's cool. Don't let me point this at you. Train of thought. Okay. So there are other geologic events that can make things look like there was a glacier there once. Okay? And the problem is that as you go further down the rock record, those things become fainter and fainter. And so the evidence for more than one ice age geologically is very, very thin. Okay? But if you look at the geological landforms that we have present in the United States today, we can tell that the ice sheets came down into Kansas.

16:06Okay? So at one time, Kansas, the northern part of Kansas, had an ice sheet on it. It's kind of cool. How many knew that? Okay, how many know it now? Thank you. You're still awake. All right. So you can tell here, this dashed white line is kind of the furthest extent of the glaciated landform. Okay, so a lot of people, when they think of the ice age, they think back to the animated movie and they're like, oh my word, the whole globe turned to ice. There is a concept in geology where the whole globe is ice. It's called the snowball earth, and that's conjecture. Okay, there's really no evidence that is, pardon the pun, rock solid for a snowball earth back many, many, many thousands or even a billion years ago. But at the furthest extent of the glaciation that we know of today that we can solidly point to, about 30% of the earth was covered in ice. Okay? So if you take the whole globe and you cover it 30%, that's the ice age.

17:17How much ice is covering the globe today? Anybody know? Venture a guess? 10%. 10%. Very good. Ron, that's good. Yeah, 10%. So 10% of the earth is covered by ice today. It got up to 30, and that was the Great Ice Age. It supposedly started about 2.6 million years ago and ended about 11,000 years ago with different interglacial periods in there. And this is the furthest extent. So, by the way, think about that for a second. Ice sheets in Kansas, what does that mean about Texas?

18:00It was a really nice place to be. Not like this summer. Okay? Lots of rainfall and temperate climate. Kind of cool, huh? Yeah. So just because there's an ice age doesn't mean that everybody's freezing. It just means that Texans are going to have lower air conditioning bills, which is good. Okay? So, why do scientists believe that there are multiple ice ages? Because it's more than just the geological signature. They're also looking at the chemical signature of measurements that they've taken in cores, both of ice and in sediment, both deep ocean sediment and ice cores on current places like Greenland where they have ice sheets.

18:58And so the big question now that should be in your mind is: well, how do you get an ice age? How does that happen? How do you get the climate to change enough to get a 30% coverage of the globe in ice? Well, here are some requirements. By the way, the simple just make the earth colder doesn't work. Okay? That's not how it works. That's not how you get an ice age. Why not? Because, in order to get an ice age, you need snowfall. And in order to have snowfall, you need to have water in the air, right?

19:42Everybody knows that snow is actually water, right? Okay? And it comes from the sky, so you have to have water in the sky. And guess what? Cold air doesn't carry much moisture. In fact, some of the driest places on the earth are also some of the coldest places on the earth. So, in order to get an ice age, you need snow. And in order to get snow, you need evaporation. And in order to get evaporation, you need some form of heat. So it's actually quite a complicated thing to make an ice age. You need more evaporation, more snowfall, and less snowmelt. So if you want to translate those last two little things there, what you need to come up with is you need cooler summers and warmer winters.

20:38Not warm winters, just warmer, so that you get snowfall. And the cooler summers do what? Prevent the snow from melting. That way you can accumulate the snow that turns to ice. Everybody tracking with me? That's actually quite complicated. So you need. Cooler summers and more snowfall in the winter. Is it actually very, very difficult to get that? And secular science has been trying hard to build a model of how you actually get a ice age started. And about 100 years ago, there was a guy that wrote a book called Mathematical Theory of Heat Phenomena Produced by Solar Radiation. Really interesting reading.

21:39His name was Malakovich, and he postulated that there's changes in the tilt of the Earth. Y'all knew the Earth's axis is tilted, right? It's like a big spinning basketball, but it's on an angle. And that angle makes us have the seasons. If we weren't actually in Texas, you know, there are two seasons in Texas, summer and not summer. But other places, believe it or not, do actually have four seasons. And that's because as the sun rotates, well, as the Earth rotates around the Sun, that is a thing, that the shortest distance from the Sun to the planet changes. Location.

22:32We just passed the automobile equinox. I think yesterday was the equinox. Is that correct? Two days ago? 22nd. What are we? 25th? Three days ago. Yeah. Okay? So what we're doing is we're changing the tilt of the earth that's facing the sun, and so that's how the seasons change. And that tilt can change a little bit, okay, over time. And the distance of the earth from the sun changes over time as well. Okay, so there's a little bit of change in that. And if you have both of those things happening at the same time, Milakovich calculated that you could have a decrease in solar radiation that would actually cool the earth somewhat.

23:33And he worked out the movements of the Sun and the Earth, and he came up with what's called a period. So the periodicity of this change is on the order of 100,000 years or so. So what he did is he postulated that this cooling period would happen periodically and So every time that the Earth and the Sun entered this certain aspect, that there would be an ice age. And so in 1976, there was this seminal paper. This was one of the papers that really put climate science on a footing of being able to predict ice ages in the cores that they were recovering, okay? by measuring chemicals in the core. And I'm giving you a simplified version of this, okay? But you can go read this yourself if you want to figure this out. And so in 1976, these guys came out and they basically said the data that we're finding in our cores matches this Milankovitch cycle. And so therefore, that's really strong evidence that the Milankovitch cycle is actually what causes the ice age, or the ice ages. And some people were like, that's a really weak signal. There's got to be more to it than just that. But we will take it at its face value that this is enough to get the thing kick-started. It's just the small change in the solar radiation.

25:26Well, To make a long story short, these authors in 1976 based their whole analysis on this one spot in the core where they had to have a place to measure from. And so they dated this sediment core that they took, and I think it was from the East Indian Ocean, very deep sediment. And they said, okay, this is, we have a magnetic reversal. The magnetic field of the Earth reversed 700,000 years ago, and we can see that reversal in the core, okay, because there's little crystals in there, magnetite, that is oriented differently. And so we're going to call that 700,000 years, and then we're going to see where these spikes are that tell us that there was an ice age, okay, and it matches the Milankovitch cycle. And everyone said, yay, we've got it, and they went on from there. In the early 90s, some other researchers went back, and because they were having a hard time tuning their cores to the cycle that they were using, which is the Milankovitch cycle, they decided to redate the 700,000-year magnetic reversal. And they re-evaluated, they threw out the radiometric date, and they, based on some evidence, of chemical evidence of other cores. With Ice Age signals, they re-established the date for that magnetic reversal at 780,000 years.

27:09So if you really believe that the Earth is 4.3 billion years old, 80,000 years doesn't make that much of a difference, does it? But guess what? It does when you're trying to match the data to a cycle. And so no one went back to this paper. But that redating completely destroyed the foundation of the Milankovitch cycle. And so in 1997, somebody tried to clean up the mess. So in secular science, no one has actually gone back to redo all of this. They built an entire house, and the foundation is incorrect. So it's a house of cards now.

28:04And if you want to know more about this, there's a guy at the Institute of Creation Research. His name is Dr. Jake Hebert. And he wrote about five or six papers on this subject, and he tried to get them published in peer-reviewed journals, and they didn't accept his papers. So he published them in some creation journals. But he shows you. With the hard mathematics, that the whole system of the Milankovitch cycles is based on erroneous data. So, what I'm telling you is, you can throw that whole thing out, it doesn't work. You can stretch it and try to tune in as much as you can, but the Milankovitch cycle is not a thing anymore in reality. So, the bottom line is, we still don't know what causes an ice age from a secular point of view. Okay? Is everybody with me? Now, in 2014, there was a debate between Ken Ham, who runs Answers in Genesis, which is the world's largest Christian apologetics organization, and the science guy, Bill Nye. How many of you saw that debate? Okay? It's worth your time looking it up and watching it. But in that debate, Bill Nye said: you guys that believe that the earth is young are wrong because I can unequivocally prove that it's old by showing you an ice core. Because I can count the layers in an ice core and show you. That the earth is older than what you say it is just by counting layers in an ice core. And the core he was talking about came out of Greenland. There's a couple of different big, long ice cores that have come out of Greenland. And just to give you an idea of what it takes to drill for ice core, it's quite complicated. You use hot water in a big tube, and you drill for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of meters. And apparently, when you get a core, you hold it up in triumph because it is a big deal. Now, when you look at these cores, what you see at the top is that you have what are described as annual layers. But we're going to drop the annual for a second because that's interpretation, is it not? What you see is light layers and dark layers. And the interpretive framework says that the light layers are summertime and the dark layers are winter time.

31:01In actuality, what's happening is that there are times when the temperature produces layers of ice that are white, and then those layers that are dark are produced at different times at different temperatures. Okay? And so this is the top of an ice core, and you can count the layers. And if you say, okay, it accumulates annually, then you can just start counting. One, two, three, four, five, six. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Mmm. Let's skip that. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. 23, plus or minus what? Well, I skipped one or two, right?

31:45So pretty simple, pretty straightforward. And if you go to that fountain of knowledge called Wikipedia, they'll explain it to you. It says an ice core from the right site can be used to reconstruct an uninterrupted and detailed climate record extending over hundreds and thousands of years. Now do you see why ice cores are important? Because the chemicals in the ice core can be correlated to temperature, and temperature is a way of measuring the climate. And so if you don't have temperature measurements that go back far enough, you can grab them out of an ice core.

32:19Okay? Now, here's where it gets a little sticky. Follow me. Or follow Wikipedia. It says dating is a difficult task. And teenagers, they're not talking about what you think it is. Although that would probably be a true statement the way you're thinking about it, too. Okay? They're talking about actually counting the layers in the ice core. Five different dating methods have been used for these Greenland cores. Wait a minute, I thought it was just a straightforward counting. So how do we get five different methods out of the one, two, three? Is it new math? That's a thing, too, isn't it?

33:00By the way, look at, look, we're talking about a core that's a couple thousand meters long, and each method has a different error rate. 300 years per meter at the 100-meter depth, 600 years per meter at the 200-meter depth, 7,000 years per meter at the 400-meter depth, 5,000 years per meter at the 800-meter depth, 6,000. By the way, if you're missing by 6,000 years per meter, and what's a meter, guys, for those of you who are still stuck in the English system, it's about yay long, right? It's a little bit more than 3.14 feet. Okay? So we're talking about you have one of these, and you're missing 6,000 years in the counting.

33:57Does anybody see a problem with that? How does that happen? Are they just missing layers? No. Here's the problem. As you get deeper, the layers thin out and eventually they disappear. So about past maybe 100 to 150 meters into the core at about maybe 6,000 years. Of annual layers, you don't have any more layers that are distinguishable to the eye. So, how do you count something you can't see? Ah, you use a model. Yeah, yeah, you use a model. So, here's what you do: you measure the whole height of the ice core, and you say, okay, I know how much pressure the ice on top of a certain point in the ice is putting on that, okay?

35:11And then I'm going to calculate how thin that layer should be for a certain amount of time. And so, I can infer how many layers there are by knowing how much ice there is above it and how much time has passed in order to count that layer as an annual layer. Did you hear what I just said? What are they inferring? How much time has passed in order to count how much time has passed? So, the ice flows, and as you load it up, it acts like a liquid, it flows out.

36:01And the layers get thinner and thinner and thinner. And so, what you have to do is you can't just say how much pressure there is to make the ice squish down to measure that layer, but you also have to know how much ice flowed out. And how much ice flows out depends on how much time it's been there. And so, what they do is they assume a very, very old age, they put that into the model, and then they get lots of layers to count.

36:30Does that seem like science to you? Is that like observable, testable, falsifiable, repeatable? Is that the scientific method? No. Now, here is where it gets even trickier. Because now, what they're doing to catch the chemical signal in the core is they're sampling the core and they sample based on where their model says the layer should be. So, they've now told us where the layers are based on how much time there is that's passed, and they're guessing at that. And so, they're saying, okay, this core is 600,000 years old, and so we're going to have this many layers at the bottom of it that we can't see, and so each layer is going to be this thick, so we need to sample at these intervals in order to get the climate record for those 600,000 years.

37:30It's a completely circular system. And when they measure these chemicals to get the temperatures, they see these really wild swings. This is an 80,000-year age record. And look at this. These are swings in temperature over 20 degrees Celsius. annually. And we're worried about the global temperature going up how much? Yeah, what's the big prediction right now? That the Earth is going to warm up by how much globally? Does anybody know? What are we scared of? One degree change annually. And we're talking a swing within two layers of 20 degrees C.

38:31And it's this data that's driving the science, that tells us that the Earth is in danger because it's really sensitive to carbon. This is where the folks that believe that the climate change is enough to throw out all the other things that we need to be worried about and concentrate on that. This is where this is coming from. Is this real? So let me give you a courageous perspective. What they're measuring here actually is not annual layers, but storm layers.

39:16And as the storm comes in, the temperature drops. Can you get a 20-degree difference in a storm? If you've lived any amount of time in Texas, you know that you can walk out in the morning and be wearing shorts and by lunchtime be going, I do not need shorts anymore. I need long pants and a jacket, right? When a cold front moves in or across the panhandle. So if these wiggles, rather than being over 80,000 years, what if they're just over a couple of hundred years? And they're measuring individual storm events? Does that change the interpretation of what our climate will be doing in the future? Markedly.

40:07Markedly, because then this data becomes something completely different. It's either a record of global change or a record over a long, long, long period of time, or it's a record of a small transient change, drastic but small, as a local storm front. Oscillations in that record represent temperature changes up to 36 degrees Fahrenheit in a few changes. We're talking about global temperature. That's what they're measuring here. They don't think they're measuring the temperature at a certain point. What they're saying is this chemical tells you the average. And therefore, radical changes are considered possible in today's climate. That's why this is so important. Okay? The creationist model, I've already told you, the signature of annual labors.

41:07And so let me put this in perspective. In 1942, a flight of P-38 Lightning fighters had to land and they were abandoned on the ice sheet in Greenland. By the way, don't ever land your plane like that. It's bad for your health. In 1989, an entrepreneur said, hey, those warplanes are worth a fortune now. I'm going to go try to recover them. And they built a hot water drilling operation that enabled them to get a couple of men down to the plains with hot water hoses. They completely melted an ice cavern around, and they took out one of the P-38s in pristine condition. She's known as the Glacier Girl. And she was buried under 80 meters of ice.

42:09Did you hear that? When did that flight land? 1947. When was it recovered? 1989. And it had been buried under 260 feet of ice and snow. So, what does that tell you about ice accumulation on our planet? It can happen really, really, really rapidly. So, in closing here, in Genesis, it tells us that God flooded the earth. And as part of that flood, there were fountains of the great deep and floodgates in the sky. And the rain fell for 40 days and 40 nights. I've already presented here in a previous talk rapid plate tectonics, where the plates, when Noah left on the ark, he left on one continent, Pangea. By the time that 375 days had passed and he was able to disembark off the ark, he was on a world that was brand new, seven continents rifted apart. All those mid-ocean ridges that you see right there opening up, by the way, this is 15 days between this picture and this picture right here. All those mid-ocean ridges are pouring hot motor. Molten lava into the ocean, and that creates steam jets that have been modeled to thrust moisture into the air 80 miles. That can sustain a rainstorm for 40 days and 40 nights. And guess what? You end up with an ocean that's about 20 degrees Celsius hotter than it was when it started. So, in order to build an ice age, you need a warm ocean. And that, my friends, is warm.

44:01Okay? Why do you need a warm ocean? Because that drives evaporation. The more evaporation you have, the more ice you get. And not only was there warm ocean, but there was a huge amount of volcanism. So, the acronym that I want you to keep in your head to build an ice age is heat. This is Dr. Jake Hebert's model: heat. First, heat, the H stands for hot. Okay, so you have a hot ocean. The E stands for evaporation. The hot ocean drives a lot of moisture into the air, and now you have a huge cloud cover, and it's snowing a lot in the northern climes.

44:46Then A stands for aerosol. And what that is, is the stuff that is the sulfuric acid and the particles that are blown out of volcanoes, the big eruptions. Put aerosols into the air, and you can see the little arrows of sunlight bouncing off of those aerosols. So you get abiatic cooling. So that gets cooler summers. By the way, the big volcanic eruptions that have been recorded here in modern history have all resulted in a marked cooling over the entire globe that you can measure. So after Mount Pinatubo erupted, the summer after that was markedly cooler here in Texas. And so you get cooler summers. Does that sound like what is needed? And then you get accumulation of ice.

45:44And you get a 700-year, by creationist models, about a 700-year-long ice age following the flood. The flood was a huge tectonic event. And so until you get all of the volcanism cleared, until you get the oceans cooled, you're going to have this driving mechanism that drives snowfall, ice sheet accumulation, and an ice age right after the flood. And secular science now has identified that that last, the last ice age, they call the ice age, which we call as creationists call the ice age, the one that followed the flood, it dropped. Sea levels by about 700 feet. And so, if you drop the sea level, if you take, where did the sea level, where did that water go? Into the ice. Okay, so the water ends up in the ice sheet, the oceans drop, and what appears? Land bridges. And we know now that the indigenous people who settled all the way down into Patagonia, which is South America, they have the DNA of the Siberians in the steppes of Russia. So those people traveled across the Bering Strait, across the land bridge, into Alaska. And here we have, this is from the archaeological website of Arkansas, which is sad today, by the way. The University of Arkansas is very sad today.

47:21Look at these. These are migration routes for the Indians that settled in Arkansas during the ice age. And so the biblical model is that the dispersion, and these are the glasses now that we're going to fit on our heads. This is that, remember, I told you this is about thinking biblically. What happened to the population after the flood? What was God's commandment to Noah's family? Spread out, multiply, fill the earth. What did they do? They disobeyed. Right? They did not spread out. And so God made them spread out. And by the time they did get to spread out, the animals had already done their spreading out. And so what we see is that the animals went first, and then the humans came after them, following the megafauna that was prevalent right after the flood. And so they migrated from the Tower of Babel throughout the entire globe as the oceans were still down. Job, the oldest book in the Bible, shows that at that time the ancients were well acquainted with ice.

48:44And this is in the Mediterranean climates. Okay? Is there ice there now? Well, at the higher altitudes, sometimes on Mount Hermon, it snows. But look at this. It says, the expanse of the waters is frozen. Does that happen in Israel today? Check this verse out. This is Job 38, 29, 30. From whose womb has come the ice, and the frost of him who's given birth, water becomes hard like a stone, and the surface of the deep is imprisoned. Job is, or this is out of the speech that God gave Job, but this is telling you that the ocean here has ice on it.

49:28Okay, salt water. With ice. So, what I'm telling you here is that Joe records the memory of the ice age in the Bible. Isn't that cool? So, thinking biblically, pushing this forward now, are we as believers to be concerned about the environment? Yes, because we are stewards of it. Are we to be afraid that the earth will flood again? No, we have a rainbow promise. Are we to pull the ripcord and become panicked about global warming, global cooling, or climate change? No.

50:15Because God has got it. Okay? He's sovereign. He's built the earth to be our home. We need to be good stewards of it, but we don't need to act like we're God because we're not. And we don't need to panic about changing the earth in such a way that it becomes untenable because our home is not here anymore, right? We have a home. We're just passing through. We need to take good care of it, but it's not our mother.

50:54Okay? The earth is not our mother. And The science that is driving the climate change hysteria is based on models that are based on interpretations that are godless. Does that make sense? Okay. All right, let's pray. Heavenly Father, thank you for this time that we've had to talk about the ice age. We're thankful, first of all, that you're God and we're not. And we're thankful that you've created this world in a complex way that allows us to flourish. Help us to be mindful of the stewardship you've given us in terms of taking care of your creation. But help us also not to get involved in the hysteria and the hubris of thinking that somehow we could completely unhinge this planet because of an interpretation of data that is based on godlessness. So help us to navigate this topic wisely. Help us to think biblically as we talk to our friends and neighbors. And help us to act in such a way that brings you glory. And we pray all these things in Jesus' name. Amen. It's