Well, I'm (finally) here to say that I think this may be the most interesting religious argument against anthropogenic global warming that you have yet shown me! I suspect you will also find my response to it to be the most interesting yet. This may sound disappointing, but in order to prepare you for my response, I would like you to read the biblical book of Esther. It's only 10 chapters, which I was able to read through in less than an hour. You don't have to use the link I provided (or anything digital at all!), but if you do I suggest reading it on a mobile device and clicking "Hide Note #s" since, as good as the notes are, they can distract from the narrative in this ancient work of irony. This adds to the irony, but I assure you that though it has nothing to do with climate, it is relevant to that link.
Also, I haven't gotten the job yet, but last I checked the posting was still up. It'd be my first "workplace" job that pays money. (I've had a volunteer job that was in an office, and I've done math tutoring on an informal, person-to-person basis, so I've never had a job that was both at the same time.)
The Charlie Brown thing will have to wait until next VM, but who does know how old they are?
Now, it would be too quick to jump to conclusions, and too broad-brush-strokes of me to say Patheos is the gang. But you are definitely the friend! While I appreciate the idea that atheists may need to understand the depth of theological arguments (and would certainly suggest that any number of non-theists have just plain missed this or that point), believe it or not, I'd say that theists need to really understand non-theist objections. I have noticed that at times, the best argument against a non-theist argument is...another non-theist argument. But I'll have to wait to give you more info on both sides of that, and info about Patheos and textual criticism, until I send you a PM (hopefully shortly.