Neocons!, help me understand
How do you rationalize rejecting the science of global warming while embracing the invisible-man-in-the-sky dogma?
Why don't you reject all science in favor of God?
Or do you just cherry pick everything?
In reference to most of the nonsense in the bible that most christians don't even know is there, you could saythat they all cherry pick. Biblical literalism doesn't work, and if they don't believe that then they're just making their own morality and claiming it's from the bible. So, yes, you're right. It's called hypocrisy.
share[deleted]
>>>Neocons!, help me understand
There is no more evidence God doesn't exist than there is he does exist. On that count, both are faith positions. That's why atheism is a type of religion. It requires faith. Personally, when I see nature and the universe, it would take more faith to believe it all happenned randomly than believing it was God's handiwork. As far as a specific religion, however, (i.e., christianity or islam or hinduism, etc.), I freely admit that part is faith, or preference. Does that answer your question?
And yet I can tell the difference between faith and evidence, and I keep them separate. You, however, cannot distinguish between faith and science, and you mix them both up together. That's why you believe in man-made global warming even though you see no scientific evidence for it. And you call that "science". LOL. Which is pathetic, because it's not. At least I freely admit religion is faith-based, while you claim your beliefs are science. Again, they're not. It's nothing more than anti-corporate, anti-capitalist Leftwing dogma, which basically amounts to a replacement religion for atheists and agnostics which you have confused for science. If your side cared about science, you wouldn't claim "the debate is over". You'd want to hear all sides of the issue. Yet you don't because your belief in man-made global warming is not science, it's faith. You're a religious nut, essentially.
Free speech
So sad.
shareWell said. And it should be noted that the liberals assertion that all conservatives ("neocons", to use their vernacular) are Christian zealots hell-bent on cutting off the head of non-believers - another major religion already owns that method, however - is not even close to truth.
The man-made global warming theory is just that...theory...and will remain so without absolute direct proof of fact. So, to bolster the theory, data is cherry-picked and "non-believers" publicly browbeaten into submission. To promote it as fact, one must "believe" or have "faith"...welcome to the newest religion of the leftwing libs.
"Quit moving your head woman, you'll spill my beer!!"
Um, clarification: Atheism is the LACK of faith. And please stop with that ridiculous "atheism is a religion" argument. No it's not. Do two things: Look up the definitions of atheism and religion. Vastly different. Try again. Thanks for playing, though.
shareYou have no proof God doesn't not exist. You have no evidence God does not exist. Yet you believe he does not exist. In fact, you think you KNOW God doesn't exist. Don't look now, but that's called faith. Fundamentalism, actually. LOL.
Free speech
Is it faith that there is no tooth fairy?
shareI’m confused.. Your post is dated last month and yet you write that made global warming has no scientific evidence..
This may have been a point to argue 10-20 years ago, but now there is so much 'FACT' the debate is over in scientific circles..
Also, is does not take faith to not believe in god. If I told you I believe in a tea port that circles earth, does it require ‘faith’ to not believe in the tea pot?
No, it requires a sound logical judgment.
Science does not have to prove god does not exist to make it so, the same as science does not have to prove a tea pot does not circle the globe to make it false.
Guess a lot of hard work and money has gone into fooling the public that climate change is not happening
"Aug. 13, 2007 issue - Sen. Barbara Boxer had been chair of the Senate's Environment Committee for less than a month when the verdict landed last February. "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal," concluded a report by 600 scientists from governments, academia, green groups and businesses in 40 countries. Worse, there was now at least a 90 percent likelihood that the release of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels is causing longer droughts, more flood-causing downpours and worse heat waves, way up from earlier studies. Those who doubt the reality of human-caused climate change have spent decades disputing that. But Boxer figured that with "the overwhelming science out there, the deniers' days were numbered." As she left a meeting with the head of the international climate panel, however, a staffer had some news for her. A conservative think tank long funded by ExxonMobil, she told Boxer, had offered scientists $10,000 to write articles undercutting the new report and the computer-based climate models it is based on. "I realized," says Boxer, "there was a movement behind this that just wasn't giving up."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20122975/site/newsweek/page/0/
[deleted]
You have no proof Fairies doesn't not exist. You have no evidence Fairies does not exist. Yet you believe they does not exist. In fact, you think you KNOW Fairies doesn't exist. Don't look now, but that's called faith. Fundamentalism, actually. LOL.
I made it a bit more "rational"...
Free Beer now!!
So what if you call it faith? I don't give a damn how you categorize my beliefs, because you calling science "faith" doesn't detract from the fact that absolutely no evidence exists that God exists.
I'll humor you and admit that science is faith. But it sure is a hell of a lot more of a reasonable faith that religion is, seeing as how we can actually, and take careful not of this, we can ACTUALLY support our "faith" with empirical evidence.
Now stop sounding so ignorant.
FREE SPEECH!
[deleted]
You have no idea of what you speak. Just remember that always.
------------------------------------------
"I'll not be threatened by a walking meatloaf!"
I agree and I am an atheist. It's hard to see either side when you look at facts and not dogma. If God was all powerfull and real there would be no global warming, cause would you bake the ones you made and love? And If global warming was man made why is it getting worse but smog and polution in general are way down from the 60's and 70's. Suns getting hotter folks. Can we change that?
There is no more evidence God doesn't exist than there is he does exist. On that count, both are faith positions. That's why atheism is a type of religion. It requires faith
There is no more evidence that your shoe do not fly around your romm at night while you are asleep and no one is looking than that they do. That is why they are both faith positions. To think such magical occurances are not commonplace is a type of religion. It requires faith.
Yup that is exactly what you are stating but are too stuck within your own religion not to see it.
Atheism is not a religion.
It isn't; many theists try and try and try to paint it into that
corner, and yes, people say atheism when asked their religion as a
shorthand way of saying. "I don't buy into that god hype at all."
However, it isn't a religion. It is disbelief. A special name for a
disbelief, only because the belief is so widespread and widespread.
There is many thing people do not believe in, say for instance, UFO
abduction or Santa Claus....Is it a specific "religion" for this
disbelief, NO! Disbelief is not a religion.
So Atheism is not a religion, stop calling it such, or you will be
treated with the scorn appropriate for someone who lies