a simple question about faith and science

[Germinator]

here is a simple question about faith and science,... w/ no real simple answer

ever consider,... denial of man made climate change is actually the work of the devil

and the reason,... the devil is sowing mistrust of scientific warnings of man made climate change because, he wants mankind to destroy creation

https://ibb.co/WytJnWh

 

[Germinator]

^^^
continued

learned long ago people are not as smart as they think they are,... AND WRT to the topic of climate change science,... people are more akin to the idiot "Homer Simpson" rather than "Einstein" the genius

https://ibb.co/wBvhR54

basically too often, people way over estimate their abilities (which as I learned going to a catholic high school, should be considered a sin of pride)

https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/pride

to grasp the basic science of climate change requires first of all a basic understanding of how orbital dynamics changes (over geological time)

simply said, when less sunlight hits the earth, the atmosphere cools down AND when the time frame of the earth receiving less sunlight is tens of thousand of years,... the planet goes through an extended winter period AKA an "ice age"

as a knucklehead studying physics (decades ago) happened to read a 1976 paper on the topic, AND looking at the math/science of a three body system/chaos theory, seems a pretty straight forward application WRT the 1976 "hard science" journal article (which I've placed a copy of a PDF on google docs)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EfozEScJ9h_m1TzvvKj2FkV-wRY_cL0x/view

the second bit of background information monday morning climate science "armchair experts" all seem to be missing is any understanding of the basic chemical/physical properties of various greenhouse gases, then there is the keeling curve AND how its just an extension of the chemical combustion process on a "yuge" scale

the question(s) of faith come into play when,... since the devil isn't going to be able to destroy creation directly,... as I see things he is enlisting the assistance of political "useful idiots" to do his evil dirty work for him

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

bottom line, seems there is a form of demonic possession (in play)

I say this because of wide spread oppression to the simple scientific findings (which I've outlined) AND from my vantage point am seeing way too many "useful idiots" obsessing on topics like politics AND basically are not looking at the actual basic science (see article about Demon Attacks - Obsession, Oppression and Possession)

https://spiritualdirection.com/2017/03/20/demon-attacks

thoughts?

 

[Colin Norris]

here is a simple question about faith and science,... w/ no real simple answer

Here's a simple question about Satan.
Do you really believe that crap exists?

 

[Germinator]

Here's a simple question about Satan.
Do you really believe that crap exists?

the value of religion (catholic in my case),... is that it gives one an addition point of view that is possible other wise (specifically a "moral" POV) that is useful to keep people from doing dumb things

leaned long ago to not to read the bible as being literal (for example in the book of genesis, where god is said to have created the heavens and the earth in seven days),... back in the day, there was no "scientific method" so the ancient people did with what they had on hand,... story telling and oral tradition

 

[Dragonfly]

ever consider,... denial of man made climate change is actually the work of the devil

There is no such thing as “the Devil”.

Doesn’t exist.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

There is no such thing as “the Devil”.

Doesn’t exist.

WHAT?

So I can't use the excuse "The devil made me do it" anymore?

 

[Germinator]

WHAT?

So I can't use the excuse "The devil made me do it" anymore?

somewhat related, awhile back there was a podcast I found interesting about "creating [a loving or a vengeful] god"

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/16/628792048/creating-god

the reason I found the podcast interesting is because it kinda points out, if a person believe in a "loving" god WRT the issue of "climate change" the person is more apt to use the excuse god will fix any mess I or any of my fellow believers get into,... said another way individuals who believe in a loving god will most likely say,... I can drive my SUV and the CO2 it creates is of no consequence because god will take care of me

OTOH if a person believes in a "vengeful" god WRT the issue of "climate change" the person is more apt to see there are consequence for their actions,... which is kinda the reason I posted this topic

as an individual who understands the basic science of climate change, I think perhaps it is time to introduce the concept of consequence (of actions) from a religious POV,... this is because a few years ago went to a "catholic answers" faith and science conference here in san diego

https://www.catholic.com/audio/cal/cal-8735

and was disturbed to find people attending had essentially no clue (or interest) in climate science

 

[HIP56948]

The so-called Devil is actually some of the human race.

 

[911Sparky]

I don't believe in god or the devil, so my answer is that when earth is destroyed, we only have to look in the mirror to find someone to blame.

 

[Noodlegawd]

I don't believe in god or the devil, so my answer is that when earth is destroyed, we only have to look in the mirror to find someone to blame.

You must have one hell of a fancy mirror if it survives the Earth being destroyed.

 

[it's just me]

here is a simple question about faith and science,... w/ no real simple answer

ever consider,... denial of man made climate change is actually the work of the devil

and the reason,... the devil is sowing mistrust of scientific warnings of man made climate change because, he wants mankind to destroy creation

https://ibb.co/WytJnWh

"Climate change" is politics, not "science".

 

[Germinator]

Here's a simple question about Satan.
Do you really believe that crap exists?

FWIW there is a quote by einstein

“science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind”

to illustrate why why one w/ out the other is recipe for disaster, lets first consider the unscientific test(s) used in salem witch trials of colonial massachusetts

http://listverse.com/2012/07/27/10-tests-for-guilt-used-at-the-salem-witch-trials/

as I see things, if the people of faith (back in colonial massachusetts) had a good basic understanding of science, then forced confession by dunking, pressing AND bound submersion (i.e. tests-for-guilt) would be viewed as idiocracy

now lets consider the various nazi medical experiments

http://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/medical-experiments

as I see things, if the nazi “scientists” had a solid faith based moral compass such as the 10 commandments,... then the various subjects used in concentration camp medical experiments would be viewed as human beings (AND I would hope god fearing nazi “scientists” would realize “thou shalt not kill”)

...so still think taking into account a religious POV is crap???

 

[Germinator]

"Climate change" is politics, not "science".

sadly WRT the issue of climate change there is too much political bull$hit AND not enough understanding of basic science

 

[Overitall]

I don't believe in god or the devil, so my answer is that when earth is destroyed, we only have to look in the mirror to find someone to blame.

Won't be possible if the "earth is destroyed". Along with the earth's destruction will be your own demise.

 

[911Sparky]

Won't be possible if the "earth is destroyed". Along with the earth's destruction will be your own demise.

No, I have a bunker constructed of trump's lies about the election, it will survive anything.

 

[Overitall]

No, I have a bunker constructed of trump's lies about the election, it will survive anything.

Be sure to wear lipstick. It'll look good when you kiss your ass goodbye.

 

[Eriech]

^^^
continued

learned long ago people are not as smart as they think they are,... AND WRT to the topic of climate change science,... people are more akin to the idiot "Homer Simpson" rather than "Einstein" the genius

https://ibb.co/wBvhR54

basically too often, people way over estimate their abilities (which as I learned going to a catholic high school, should be considered a sin of pride)

https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/pride

to grasp the basic science of climate change requires first of all a basic understanding of how orbital dynamics changes (over geological time)

simply said, when less sunlight hits the earth, the atmosphere cools down AND when the time frame of the earth receiving less sunlight is tens of thousand of years,... the planet goes through an extended winter period AKA an "ice age"

as a knucklehead studying physics (decades ago) happened to read a 1976 paper on the topic, AND looking at the math/science of a three body system/chaos theory, seems a pretty straight forward application WRT the 1976 "hard science" journal article (which I've placed a copy of a PDF on google docs)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EfozEScJ9h_m1TzvvKj2FkV-wRY_cL0x/view

the second bit of background information monday morning climate science "armchair experts" all seem to be missing is any understanding of the basic chemical/physical properties of various greenhouse gases, then there is the keeling curve AND how its just an extension of the chemical combustion process on a "yuge" scale

the question(s) of faith come into play when,... since the devil isn't going to be able to destroy creation directly,... as I see things he is enlisting the assistance of political "useful idiots" to do his evil dirty work for him

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

bottom line, seems there is a form of demonic possession (in play)

I say this because of wide spread oppression to the simple scientific findings (which I've outlined) AND from my vantage point am seeing way too many "useful idiots" obsessing on topics like politics AND basically are not looking at the actual basic science (see article about Demon Attacks - Obsession, Oppression and Possession)

https://spiritualdirection.com/2017/03/20/demon-attacks

thoughts?

Thoughts?

Somebody was bored lol

 

[Colin Norris]

FWIW there is a quote by einstein

“science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind”

to illustrate why why one w/ out the other is recipe for disaster, lets first consider the unscientific test(s) used in salem witch trials of colonial massachusetts

http://listverse.com/2012/07/27/10-tests-for-guilt-used-at-the-salem-witch-trials/

as I see things, if the people of faith (back in colonial massachusetts) had a good basic understanding of science, then forced confession by dunking, pressing AND bound submersion (i.e. tests-for-guilt) would be viewed as idiocracy

now lets consider the various nazi medical experiments

http://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/medical-experiments

as I see things, if the nazi “scientists” had a solid faith based moral compass such as the 10 commandments,... then the various subjects used in concentration camp medical experiments would be viewed as human beings (AND I would hope god fearing nazi “scientists” would realize “thou shalt not kill”)

...so still think taking into account a religious POV is crap???

Firstly, Einstein was an atheist. Dawkins speaks at length about how he often referred to religion but without doubt, an atheist.

I'm not interested in bible quotes and silly religious bits.
The question was simply. Do you believe there is a Satan?
If you do, can you show the irrefutable evidence of bit.

I think it coincidental that the ten commandments were written in stone but never seen again and how no one was there to witness them coming from God.
What can be asserted without evidence can dismissed without evidence.
It's ironic how you mention the Nazi killers etc. You have forgotten the millions and millions slaughtered as a result of religious wars etc by people who believed they were doing the work of a god that doesn't exist.
Where's their moral compass comrade?
Don't even try to place any blame on atheism for those crimes. Since you mentioned it, do you remember the deal the Vatican did with Mussolini and Hitler prior to the invasion of Italy etc? That was religion conveniently allowing slaughter of people to save their own arses. Where's your moral compass there?

 

[Colin Norris]

the value of religion (catholic in my case),... is that it gives one an addition point of view that is possible other wise (specifically a "moral" POV) that is useful to keep people from doing dumb things

leaned long ago to not to read the bible as being literal (for example in the book of genesis, where god is said to have created the heavens and the earth in seven days),... back in the day, there was no "scientific method" so the ancient people did with what they had on hand,... story telling and oral tradition

They said part about that is the same scenario is still happening as we speak. People are believing everything about religion and it's gods without one sceric of evidence ever presented. They gave not moved far from Neanderthals.
You're religion doesn't give you a point of view. Because what is says is total rubbish. Try this. Immaculate conception and virgin births, resurections and dead men walking yet you think that crap is a basis for an alternate point of view???
It's a straight out lie and you can't deny that. Then there's to thise who believe they have unique access to gods thoughts and commands proceed to carry out their own hatreds and thoughts under the guise, God told them????
Don't make me vomit please. You have been conned.

 

[Eriech]

sadly WRT the issue of climate change there is too much political bull$hit AND not enough understanding of basic science

Too much understanding; not enough faith in "science ".

 

[NWRatCon]

here is a simple question about faith and science,... w/ no real simple answer

ever consider,... denial of man made climate change is actually the work of the devil

and the reason,... the devil is sowing mistrust of scientific warnings of man made climate change because, he wants mankind to destroy creation

https://ibb.co/WytJnWh

Although I am not a "believer" in the usual sense, I appreciate the theological question posed, and see it as a an extension of the "good steward" theologic viewpoint: that people of faith have an obligation to be good stewards of the planet we have been gifted. I happen to agree with that philosophy as a sound theological tenet.

While some people will be put off by the reference to "the devil", I approach your question more as a theological construct than literally (as I also approach the Bible). It's also a way to address the religiously-minded about a topic many reject out of hand. I think it is a useful paradigm.

I once had a heated argument with a fellow student who took the view, based upon his religious beliefs, that we should do whatever we pleased with the planet, because God gifted us this planet and if we messed it up, God would intervene to save us. I think he missed several important lessons in the Bible to get there, and told him so. (Here's an example of my approach at the time: What It Means to Be a Good Steward in the Bible with Examples (Gentle Christian Parenting).)

I've never seen science as oppositional to religion, although many religiously "devout"/literalists oppose science (for I believe misguided reasons), and some "rationalists" see religion as gobbledygook. They needn't be. I see compatability as possible. More importantly, as I see your approach, to reach those who are devout, it is important to use language and religious understandings that they will appreciate.

 

[Overitall]

Although I am not a "believer" in the usual sense, I appreciate the theological question posed, and see it as a an extension of the "good steward" theologic viewpoint: that people of faith have an obligation to be good stewards of the planet we have been gifted. I happen to agree with that philosophy as a sound theological tenet.

While some people will be put off by the reference to "the devil", I approach your question more as a theological construct than literally (as I also approach the Bible). It's also a way to address the religiously-minded about a topic many reject out of hand. I think it is a useful paradigm.

I once had a heated argument with a fellow student who took the view, based upon his religious beliefs, that we should do whatever we pleased with the planet, because God gifted us this planet and if we messed it up, God would intervene to save us. I think he missed several important lessons in the Bible to get there, and told him so. (Here's an example of my approach at the time: What It Means to Be a Good Steward in the Bible with Examples (Gentle Christian Parenting).)

I've never seen science as oppositional to religion, although many religiously "devout"/literalists oppose science (for I believe misguided reasons), and some "rationalists" see religion as gobbledygook. They needn't be. I see compatability as possible. More importantly, as I see your approach, to reach those who are devout, it is important to use language and religious understandings that they will appreciate.

Very well said. Your approach is one I can appreciate.

 

[Germinator]

Although I am not a "believer" in the usual sense, I appreciate the theological question posed, and see it as a an extension of the "good steward" theologic viewpoint: that people of faith have an obligation to be good stewards of the planet we have been gifted. I happen to agree with that philosophy as a sound theological tenet.

While some people will be put off by the reference to "the devil", I approach your question more as a theological construct than literally (as I also approach the Bible). It's also a way to address the religiously-minded about a topic many reject out of hand. I think it is a useful paradigm.

I once had a heated argument with a fellow student who took the view, based upon his religious beliefs, that we should do whatever we pleased with the planet, because God gifted us this planet and if we messed it up, God would intervene to save us. I think he missed several important lessons in the Bible to get there, and told him so. (Here's an example of my approach at the time: What It Means to Be a Good Steward in the Bible with Examples (Gentle Christian Parenting).)

I've never seen science as oppositional to religion, although many religiously "devout"/literalists oppose science (for I believe misguided reasons), and some "rationalists" see religion as gobbledygook. They needn't be. I see compatability as possible. More importantly, as I see your approach, to reach those who are devout, it is important to use language and religious understandings that they will appreciate.

seems someone gets the point I was trying to make,...

FWIW I consider myself lucky in that I was born to two catholic parents AND was given a pretty good catholic education

basically growing up my mom use to collect medical supplies from the hospital and bring them down to orphanages down in Mexico (and as a kid I use to be dragged along and was shown not everyone is so lucky to have two well educated parents who realized that charity is more than just donating money or paying lip service,... its also giving time and effort, trying to actually leave the world a better place that you found it)

sadly too many don't appreciate the value of looking at an issue from a religious POV,... the biggest problem I see living in the USA is worshiping at the alter of money and material goods,... which if one looks at the "science" realizes that a consumer based economy causes lots of environmental damage

the sad reality is,... humanity is up $hit creek w/ out a paddle simply because a consumer based society would require the the equivalent of four or five earth's, to live the "American Dream" consumer lifestyle,... AND simple fact of the matter is we only have one "home planet" w/ ever dwindling nature resources (to support an ever growing population)

having attended the "catholic answers" faith and science conference back in 2018, noticed many religiously "devout"/literalists oppose climate science,... so started wondering if it was possible to make them see the problem of one "home planet" w/ ever dwindling nature resources (to support an ever growing population) AND eventually came up w/ the OP theologic viewpoint

perhaps it was "divine inspiration" or more likely it was lots of extra time at home playing around w/ image software (i.e. a covid distraction), so now kinda have developed a talent of creating "mashup art" to hopefully get people to think about issues a bit deeper

[sarcasm ON]

for example,... since this a debate-politics web site,... question for "low information voters" is,... TRUMP the devil's "useful idiot???"

[sarcasm OFF]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_information_voter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

PS FWIW recently listened to a podcast I found interesting that is somewhat related to "religion" (in that its a topic that should not be spoken of in polite society),.... the topic of the podcast "Is there something about the human brain that makes it hard for us to grapple with climate change?"

https://www.npr.org/2016/04/18/474685770/why-our-brains-werent-made-to-deal-with-climate-change

 

[NWRatCon]

One of my favorite chaplains in the Army had the best approach to the "business". His approach was that to be successful it was necessary to come to where the person to be ministered to was. In order to be successful in convincing people of faith of their need to be environmentalists it is necessary to come to where they are and speak their language. That is not necessarily, at least initially, to push the science, but to establish a strong theological basis for accepting that science. That is why I appreciate your thread.

One of the reasons I moved away from the church (there were many), was the prevalence of "punitive theology". It always seemed to me to be contrary to the the core of Christian theology. That is why stewardship theology appeals to me. It seems more consonant with the principle lessons of Christian theology. Your parents seemed to have lived those lessons. I truly appreciate that.

 

[Colin Norris]

Although I am not a "believer" in the usual sense, I appreciate the theological question posed, and see it as a an extension of the "good steward" theologic viewpoint: that people of faith have an obligation to be good stewards of the planet we have been gifted. I happen to agree with that philosophy as a sound theological tenet.

While some people will be put off by the reference to "the devil", I approach your question more as a theological construct than literally (as I also approach the Bible). It's also a way to address the religiously-minded about a topic many reject out of hand. I think it is a useful paradigm.

I once had a heated argument with a fellow student who took the view, based upon his religious beliefs, that we should do whatever we pleased with the planet, because God gifted us this planet and if we messed it up, God would intervene to save us. I think he missed several important lessons in the Bible to get there, and told him so. (Here's an example of my approach at the time: What It Means to Be a Good Steward in the Bible with Examples (Gentle Christian Parenting).)

I've never seen science as oppositional to religion, although many religiously "devout"/literalists oppose science (for I believe misguided reasons), and some "rationalists" see religion as gobbledygook. They needn't be. I see compatability as possible. More importantly, as I see your approach, to reach those who are devout, it is important to use language and religious understandings that they will appreciate.

It's silly to attribute stewardship of the planet because it was gifted to us by God. There is No God and never has been other than in your mind. The planet for billions of years ago like the trillion and God had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Nothing.
There has never been anything written in bibles etc to justify your position. It is a poor justification really.

Anyone who dismisses science with the knowledge