What drives those of Faith to ignore Scientific Facts?

Well the 'unpleasant' would be if they go downward; that's why they're all goody-two-shoes - to guarantee that they go upward?

 

And it's obvious that you don't realize that are 28,000* different religious beliefs from various theologians and none of them agree with each other. What was the point you were trying to make?

* Probably more. But it's a catchy number.

 

(my emphasis)

Common sense tells you the world is flat.
Common sense tells you the earth is stationary.
Common sense tells you the sun comes up in the East, moves overhead and goes down in the West.
Science doesn't always agree with common sense. Science is usually right.

 

Can science get corrupted?

Science can't but the scientists sure can.

 

There is enormous differences when you use the term religion.

But in groups, not so much.

I would almost be certain there are various sects calling their religion voodoo. But do they entirely disagree with each other?

Honest brokers of global climate science admit they still know a lot less than they will in 100 years. Science will no doubt advance to the point they will then be able to pinpoint things much more.

Even in my lifetime, the old joke is you know the weather by going outside to see. That if you believe the weatherman, you are a fool.

Today we know weathermen are very accurate so long as they stick to the known.

Some of us recall the days when your weatherman gave us hints of what would happen. Today they are more trusted.

Remember Patton turning to a religious man for a prayer for good weather at the Battle of the Bulge?

 

Sure.
The scientists who said cigarettes don't cause cancer because they got big bucks from the tobacco industry.
The scientists who deny AGW because they get big bucks from the likes of the Heartland Institute.

Also, there are scientists who, like all other kinds of people, have their ingrained beliefs. I don't think Fred Hoyle was corrupt, but he went to his grave denying an expanding universe.

 

I call it faith in yourself. Not Faith that GOD exists.

I see the entire universe the same way you see a magical painting. I don't know the artist, never met him, can't see him but see the work. I know an artist did the painting. I know GOD created the Earth and more, the entire universe.

It takes an humble man to allow GOD to get credit thinking that maybe man created the universe and all life. But man is not that qualified.

 

But you see those grants as non corrupting? If man will lie to you over tobacco use, weather and climate is less of a problem since he assumes his lies won't matter. Nobody will die by believing man causes climate nor die if they do not believe man is in full control of climate. I do not accept man is in charge of global climate.

Have you ever stopped to think how arrogant man is to assume he controls global climate?

 

YES!
Protestants disagreed with Catholics to the point they killed each other. Shiites disagree with Sunis so much they kill each other. Many Christians do not consider Mormons or JWs to be Christians.

Scientists all know they still know a lot less than they will in 100 years.

So?

 

i am a LDS. I have chatted with fellow LDS discussing this so called hot place where you meet Satan.

Frankly I am extra puzzled since we don't discuss that. I have been to some other churches and never heard them speak of some dreaded hot place. But I did not show up often so perhaps they did later.

We see heaven as if it is on three planets. Planet 1 is this planet. Die and you might stay here. Or get selected for planet 2 or even 3. But I can't wrap my mind around this hell you speak of.

 

Space buffs do. Oh and the BBC. Tell the BBC you're a cosmologist/astrophysicist/universologist and they'll believe every single word you tell them, no matter how barmy. It's true!

 

I can verify you told the truth by saying there are alleged Christians who deny we LDS are also Christians.
This claim by them is so simple to refute. I was in a non denominational church and heard the pastor call me a member of a cult. To his credit, he did not know I was a LDS.

If they visit our church, they can't possibly be there over 20 minutes and still think we are not Christians.

One needs to know the history of the Catholics, the protestants and others such as the Church of England. I noticed in Germany there are small towns that have just a Lutheran church or a Catholic Church. Big cites have room for both. We LDS have a good number of Germans in our church. I have encountered members from Korea, the Philippines, and other countries. They appear to really dig our church.

Non believers have no reason to care about church teaching nor history of churches. It is 100 percent a waste of non believers time. I don't waste time on various religions of India. But I am not against any of them. What is practiced in Japan or Korea does not bother me one bit.

 

That is an impressive list.

I believe there are plenty of biologists that accept GOD and accept GOD as the creator.
Do they shun evolution?

Evolution once could be just science. But too many people turned it into politics. Politics should not be the standard. Democrats latched onto evolution to try to play around with science. Mixing the two fails.

I love this debate.

I take them way back. Forget first man. Forget first chimpanzee. Forget something, animal--- that yet has no legs. Forget an animal with no eyes. Forget the animal with no brain.

Start with what comes first. Was it cyanobacterium as Dr. Schopf concludes? He published a fine book that takes you from non life to basic life and explains it pretty well. i have seen maybe one poster posting that claims he read that book by Schopf called Cradle of life. But still the chattering class keeps talking nonsense to each other.

What, using your imagination, could take things from bacteria all the way to modern human? By accident? Even science with the best tools has not changed a bacteria to the next thing they could evolve to. And they are trying very hard.

 

To me, the expanding universe offers more proof that GOD created it than it would he did not.

Clearly to expand, things had to have energy imparted to them. Stars move super fast. That took an enormous energy spurt. But was the energy always there? Was the universe pretty vacant at one time? Where is all this stuff going to at blinding rates of velocity? Why was Gravity needed? Does Gravity function on enormous stars as it functions on small stars? Why would gravity differ?

I may seem to minimize this by saying GOD did it, but to me it is precisely that simple.

Do I think GOD will play magic tricks when you die?

I see this as one extremely long process and think but for GOD none of us could exist. To mock GOD makes no sense to me.

You know, there are maybe thousands of animals i have never seen up close or in many cases, at all. But I read that they do exist. I don't need to handle a unique Jumping Spider to know it exists. I don't need to feed a Black Mamba to believe in it.

I think what I am saying is I go by the product. We are the product of enormous energy. It was enormous to spawn so much in the entire universe. I see more than life on this planet. I believe life is far more spread than that.

If I can believe and accept life all over the universe, surely i can accept GOD as the creator.

 

It's always the right that turns science into politics.

 

Thank you for proving my point, there are many religions and all vary somewhat or to the extreme. But you are touting a "consensus" among scientist that AGW is settled. CERN just came out with a new report stating the Sun is the primary driver of the climate on Earth. Now I wouldn't call CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research a conservative organization, but it sure does throw a monkey wrench into your consensus.

Also, just as an aside, the human genome project still has not found the 'gay' Gene even though many scientist still claim it is biological, not a choice. Just saying......

 

Fine for you, but if you can't cite any facts to support the "God did it" hypothesis, no one else is going to accept it. Not based on reason, anyway.

It is totally mindblowing, for me at least, to contemplate just what the universe is and why there is something rather than nothing, i.e. why is there a universe and us in it rather than just, well, nothing. What is all of this? It's totally weird to think about. Still doesn't compell me to insert the "GOD" answer, though, because there is nothing observed and observable to back that up. It's as empty as speculating that it's due to the Great Green Arkleseizure.

 

Link? Thing is, I doubt any climate scientist is going to disagree with this. AGW does not require the sun not to be the "primary driver" of Earth's climate. A secondary or tertiary driver of climate can still change it, obviously.

 

Please, you haven't got a clue as to what that is.

The problem being, of course, that the religion you obviously mean to derogate admits no possibility that God will be fooled by such a pretense.

 

So, you found that climate scientists weren't excited about answering polling questions. OK. Maybe so.

The issue of "settled science" has to do with the central premise. There are differences of opinion on various sub-problems.


Then, you decide to delve into the science. With that I do have a problem. Whether the sensor count on Antarctica is "enough" is NOT something that can be guessed at by those who have no clue about exactly how we do (or should) go about measuring earth's temperature in order to detect change. I'd point out, for example, that using ground based stations measuring surface air temperature is not the only way that temperature is measured.

Taking "fun facts" out of context and then promoting them as indicating YOUR view is a really bad idea. It has NOTHING to do with science.

If you want to cite something from science, go ahead. That would at least be more interesting.

 

God bless ya. (lol) I know a guy who's cup runneth over with Jeebus, a little goes a very long way. He's a good guy, other than that.

 

Oh sorry, I forgot that 'God' is all-knowing, and is keeping his beady eye on all of us 24/7. ( )

 

Total BS claim. I have one word for you - Lysenkoism.

 

Hilarious!

Thanks for the comic relief!

 

I wouldn't call CERN a group studying climatology, either.

But, nobody has claimed that the sun isn't the primary source of heat.

The issue with our climate is that there is a balance between heat arriving and heat leaving earth. We can affect that balance. Small changes can affect our average temperature over time just like a small weight can change the balance of a playground see-saw.