Which camp are you in?

[joe-90]

There is one group in here that swears by science. There is no God. The Universe came into being by gravitational forces. We have a group of scientists and their supporters that swear by it.We'll call this group Group A.

The other group says that everything must have come from somewhere, and something must have acted to make the nothing something. We call that something God. We'll call this group group B.

Now lets talk about climate change:

The scientists of the world that say nothing can happen without a reason, say that climate change is a man made phenomena. This is the view of group A.


Group B say that climate change is 'just natural' and it must happen by magic because they don't know what has caused it - but they KNOW it isn't man-made. They don't know how they know - they just know.


So which camp are you in? Science or mumbo-jumbo malarkey?

 

[jockscott]

Joe, there are scientists out there who dispute "climate change".. Which camp do you think these ones belong in?

 

[enyam]

My blood group is A,I'll be in that one.

 

[sooey]

Hey joe, did you see you're mate megatwat is back?

 

[enyam]

Hey joe, did you see you're mate megatwat is back?

Of course he did,one and the same.

 

[sooey]

I don't believe that.

 

[joe-90]

Joe, there are scientists out there who dispute "climate change".. Which camp do you think these ones belong in?

Name a few then. (he won't).

Either you believe the scientists - or you don't. Scientists almost unanimously agree that climate change is man-made. So do you believe the science? Or the hokey-pokey?

 

[jockscott]

Joe, there are scientists out there who dispute "climate change".. Which camp do you think these ones belong in?

Name a few then. (he won't).

Plenty here to go at Joe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

 

[Diane2]

Joe, there are scientists out there who dispute "climate change".. Which camp do you think these ones belong in?

ive just visited Iceland.....the country....(not the shop), where they say all the ice will all have melted within 100 years due to climate change.....then they will have to change the name of their island to just "Land"

 

[EFLImpudence]

There is one group in here that swears by science. There is no God. The Universe came into being by gravitational forces. We have a group of scientists and their supporters that swear by it.We'll call this group Group A.

The other group says that everything must have come from somewhere, and something must have acted to make the nothing something. We call that something God. We'll call this group group B.

That's not really the difference.

If you are satisfied to call whatever brought the universe into being (no one really knows) God, then that could apply to A or B.

According to your statements, in A gravity could be called God; in B something else could be called God.


The trouble with creationists is that they think there is an omnipotent, infallible being who made everything and no argument, no matter how logical, will convince them otherwise.

There would be no difficulty at all for such a being to prove her existence but, no, she leaves it up to the individual to believe or not - how convenient.

However, should some scientific fact be proved absolutely so that even the creationists accept it, they merely change the rules to cover this.

Then it is always those who 'believe' who persecute those who don't even though it is against their own rules; never the other way round.


Religions are just invented means to control the population.
You will note that those in charge of this means all seem to live in luxury paid for by all the others.
The Normans introduced Christian feudalism to Britain which persists to this day.
It is very gradually being rejected by those who can think for themselves but in its time was just as vicious and barbaric as another religion still is.

 

[Norcon]

EFL Impudence wrote

It is very gradually being rejected by those who can think for themselves but in its time was just as vicious and barbaric as another religion still is

And pales into insignificance when compared to the atheists records of barbarity and cruelty.

 

[snico]

Joe, there are scientists out there who dispute "climate change".. Which camp do you think these ones belong in?

Name a few then. (he won't).

Plenty here to go at Joe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ientific_assessment_of_global_warming[/QUOTE]

Love it when good old Joe gets silenced

 

[rjm2k]

Love it when good old Joe gets silenced

Yeah, he did the same when I pointed out that Einstein wasn't religious, as least he gives in when he knows he's wrong.

 

[ladylola]

Joe, there are scientists out there who dispute "climate change".. Which camp do you think these ones belong in?

Name a few then. (he won't).

Plenty here to go at Joe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ientific_assessment_of_global_warming[/QUOTE]

and yet something like 95-97% seem to agree that humans are the cause
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

On Joe's other point then I tend to dismiss the whole omnipotent supernatural god argument and lean towards the science. However, I do have some misgivings about the big bang being the start of the universe and everything . I think that both camps just can't get there heads around the idea that we may just be living in an infinitely large and old universe.

 

[jockscott]

and yet something like 95-97% seem to agree that humans are the cause

LL they may well agree, that it's us humans causing it, but put these scientists all together in one room, with a kettle and a teapot and they couldn't decide between themselves which one would make the cuppa's.
I'm convinced that "Climate Change is a natural phenomenon. One which governments latched on to, so they could raise even more revenue through taxation. (they've probably agreed with the scientific community to throw money at them, just as long as they "prove" it's us causing it.) Therefore "Climate Change", becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.