Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 80

Thread: Follow the (Climate Change) Money

  1. #21
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    65,160
    Amen (Given)
    14126
    Amen (Received)
    28975
    So, again.... the analogy....

    I believe that Jesus is the answer to man's sin problem, and that acceptance of Jesus Christ is necessary for Salvation. I preach that unapologetically.
    When I encounter unbelievers, I know it's my job to win their heart and mind with the Gospel.
    I know that calling them idiots or treating them with hostility does nothing to win them over, and only drives them away.
    If somebody mocks me for being a "preacher" or "pastor" (as a number of liberals have here on Tweb) I don't take that as an insult, because it's my calling.

    Those who believe that bad things will happen because of climate change.... well, here's where the analogy breaks down.
    They preach doom and gloom without a sure solution.
    They make prophecies that often fail.
    They get really triggered when you label them "climate preachers".
    They double down with insults and really wild and crazy statements -- like you'd expect from an old fashioned hellfire preacher, or, better yet, from the folks at Westboro.

    Come to think of it -- the climate preachers here on Tweb seem more like the folks from Westboro than....

    Interesting.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  2. Amen mossrose, LostSheep amen'd this post.
  3. #22
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    65,160
    Amen (Given)
    14126
    Amen (Received)
    28975
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    ...sneering comments such as “climate preachers".
    So why is this a "sneering" comment? Because you and your ilk frequently sneeringly call me "pastor" or "preacher"?

    One of the jobs I've held in a couple of companies for whom I've done consulting was actually titled "technology evangelist".

    Look at this definition from Wiki (seems compatible with what I knew the job to be, and what I actually did)...

    A technology evangelist is a person who builds a critical mass of support for a given technology, and then establishes it as a technical standard in a market that is subject to network effects.[1] The word evangelism is taken from the context of religious evangelism due to the similarity of relaying information about a particular set of beliefs with the intention of converting the recipient. There is some element of this although some would argue it's more of showcasing the potential of a technology to lead someone to want to adopt it for themselves.


    So, let's adapt that to Climate....

    A Climate evangelist (preacher) is a person who builds a critical mass of support for Climate Change, and then establishes it as a technical standard in a market that is subject to Climate effects. The word evangelism is taken from the context of religious evangelism due to the similarity of relaying information about a particular set of beliefs with the intention of converting the recipient. There is some element of this although some would argue it's more of showcasing the dangers of Climate Change to lead someone to want to accept it for themselves.


    So why are not climate advocates "climate preachers", and why do you find this term so offensive.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  4. #23
    tWebber firstfloor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    invalid value
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,112
    Amen (Given)
    23
    Amen (Received)
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    See, it's jackass comments like this that reinforce the idea that you guys are "climate preachers" of the extreme televangelist flavor. It would be like me saying if you don't accept Christ, you hate your grandchildren.

    You people are just nuttier than fruitcakes, which makes your message incredibly distasteful.
    Firstly, it’s not OUR message. Climate science provides politically neutral facts about the world.
    In Romans 1:20 we read the people are without excuse. The same applies to climate change. The question for each of us concerns our legacy because we will be fortunate enough to miss the collapse.
    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
    “You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott
    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell

  5. Amen Tassman amen'd this post.
  6. #24
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    65,160
    Amen (Given)
    14126
    Amen (Received)
    28975
    Quote Originally Posted by firstfloor View Post
    Firstly, it’s not OUR message.
    Yes, it is. To the same extent that the Gospel is MY message, though I'm not the one who established it.

    Climate science provides politically neutral facts about the world.
    Except, of course, those "facts" are mixed with a whole bunch of propaganda and false preachers, such as Al Gore, who pervert the "gospel" of climate change, and some of those "facts" have been doctored.

    In Romans 1:20 we read the people are without excuse.
    But that doesn't require me to call unbelievers idiots and insult them at every turn - it requires me to show them the Truth.

    The same applies to climate change.
    So, you're accepting this concept that climate change supporters like you are "climate preachers"? You don't take offense at that term?

    The question for each of us concerns our legacy because we will be fortunate enough to miss the collapse.
    You appear to be accepting, and even supporting, my analogy.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  7. Amen mossrose, LostSheep amen'd this post.
  8. #25
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    22,988
    Amen (Given)
    6662
    Amen (Received)
    8260
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassmoron View Post
    Why are you so reluctant to accept global warming when the consequences if true, as seems likely, are so harmful?
    This is basically Pascal's Wager applied to global warming.

    Yet you don't accept this line of reasoning as sufficient to take Christianity seriously.

    Curious.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  9. Amen Sparko amen'd this post.
  10. #26
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    54,803
    Amen (Given)
    5611
    Amen (Received)
    23933
    Quote Originally Posted by Starlight View Post
    Why would it do so? Let's say the federal government is paying for the costs of the building of the new solar and wind power stations out of general taxes that might otherwise be spend somewhere else (e.g. military-industrial complex), what the average person with their energy bill is then paying for is the running costs of the power stations. If those are coal power stations they are paying for buying the coal each year that is burned to provide the power. If those are wind or solar power stations they are paying for no fuel. It would seem likely to be cheaper then for them?
    If it were more economical and profitable to use renewable energy then that is what energy suppliers would be using, Starlight. Businesses are driven by profit. Consumers are driven by prices. If you provide them with cheaper energy they will flock to it. There is no need for government subsidies and all that if it is a good deal. The only reason you need government subsidies is when you need to hide expenses or force people into doing something unpopular.

    Solar and wind farms take up a LOT of real estate and infrastructure. That ain't cheap. Or even doable in many parts of the country. That is why most solar farms are out in the west where land is plentiful. Hydroelectric is a good renewable energy source but it too is dependent on geography.

  11. #27
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    54,803
    Amen (Given)
    5611
    Amen (Received)
    23933
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    This is basically Pascal's Wager applied to global warming.

    Yet you don't accept this line of reasoning as sufficient to take Christianity seriously.

    Curious.
    Good observation.

  12. #28
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    22,988
    Amen (Given)
    6662
    Amen (Received)
    8260
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    Good observation.
    Watch, he's going to come back preaching his unshakable faith in the scientific method with a circular argument that can be summarized as "We know it works because we know it works."

    (Poor kid still hasn't figured out that insisting that the scientific method is the only valid means of testing truth claims is a self-defeating assertion.)
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  13. #29
    tWebber Roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,997
    Amen (Given)
    819
    Amen (Received)
    1536
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    This is basically Pascal's Wager applied to global warming.

    Yet you don't accept this line of reasoning as sufficient to take Christianity seriously.

    Curious.
    Good observation.
    It is a surprisingly good observation.

    It fails in practice because one premise of Pascal's wager is that there is no way to determine whether or not there is a god.
    We can try to determine whether climate change is occurring, and whether our actions are affecting it. There is no need for a blind wager because we can make informed decisions.
    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

    mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

    Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.

  14. Amen Tassman amen'd this post.
  15. #30
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    54,803
    Amen (Given)
    5611
    Amen (Received)
    23933
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy View Post
    It is a surprisingly good observation.

    It fails in practice because one premise of Pascal's wager is that there is no way to determine whether or not there is a god.
    We can try to determine whether climate change is occurring, and whether our actions are affecting it. There is no need for a blind wager because we can make informed decisions.
    Wrong. Both depend on being able to find out the truth in the future but making the choice now. A bet.

    There is good evidence for God now if you want to look. It is not a blind wager.

  16. Amen Mountain Man, LostSheep amen'd this post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •