Ali Rizvi nails it in this tweet. Link. *
- Thread starter op2
- Start date
LOL. Man made global warming is an article of faith. We have no idea the degree of man's role. We know the planet has warmed slightly since coming out of the Little Ice Age around 1850. Lots of speculation as to man's role. Lots of wrong climate models. Lots of wrong forecasts. An unexpected global warming hiatus. Seems like a lot of warmists have a lot of faith.
BTW, as I have said many times, it takes more faith to be an atheist than a believer.
The Earth doesn't care that we live here...
It's doing it's own thing...
We're just here for the ride...
It's doing it's own thing...
We're just here for the ride...
I don't think his point has to do with climate change per se but rather the difference in the degree of skepticism religious people show towards different subjects.
Exactly, people of faith don't blindly employ faith in all parts of their lives, instead they blindly employ faith in some parts of their lives (like resurrections) and then use extreme skepticism in other parts (like climate change).
And your point? The Paris Accord was a disaster in so many respects. It did almost nothing for global warming. It enriched nations at the expense of the U.S. It would have enriched trial lawyers in the U.S. It was a giant transfer of wealth from the U.S. to other countries. And because people of faith recognized these facts, he mocks them?
BTW, you can believe this almost perfect universe and life was created by accident resulting from a single explosion, and I submit that belief requires much more faith than to believe it was designed.
The point is you'll search until the cows come home for ways to not believe in climate change but not search at all for ways to not believe in angels.
You're making this about climate change. It is about the Paris Accords. What part of that do you not understand? One can believe in man made global warming and still realize the Paris Climate Accord was a disaster for the U.S. and would have done virtually nothing to solve the problem.
Rizvi's tweet mentions climate change, not the Paris Accords. I don't think that's really his point though anyway. Instead it is how much some people will try to debunk climate change or the Paris Accords or whatever and then turn around and accept religious claims on faith.
Trump removed us from the Paris Accords. That is what this is all about. His tweet is either stupid (since this is not about global warming but a really bad deal for the U.S.) or it is irrelevant because it is not about global warming.
Moreover, his tweet is stupid because those of faith believe they have evidence/proof. Not just from the Bible but from the universe and life itself. Much more proof than believing it all happened by accident as apparently he believes.
And exactly what proof do you have of virgin births, angles and dead messiah resurrections?
Just because you can post a picture of something doesn't mean it exists. Prove it to me mathematically, Euclid.
The tweet talks about angels (or some might say angles) and virgin births and resurrected messiahs rather than talking about a designer. But you lose either way because you can't prove any of it. For the record, I don't know how or why (if any reason) the Big Bang happened. You don't either but just won't say so. "I don't know." It's so easy. Just say it.
You're deflecting. I said there is a designer and believe that through faith and through evidence. You believe the universe and life happened by accident. I have more proof and thus need less faith than you or the idiot Tweeter.
His tweet was clearly referring to God and believers. God is the designer and creator of the universe and all that is in it.
