Another Reason Christians are Dangerous

[robvalue]

Yeah I agree, it's a serious stretch to suggest Christianity promotes animal welfare. It barely raises women to the level of human.

But then people are free to make up whatever they want about it and call it Christianity. That's how religions work.

I would like to think everyone has a moral obligation to look after animals and the environment, because it's a nice thing to do. It shouldn't require threats or promises.

[chimp3]

Combine that view of global warming with Prosperity Theology and we have a very dangerous mix. God's Love Canal.

[GUBU]

I thought we'd already crossed the threshold for a runaway climate shift?
The permafrost is melting and the methane stores are being released.
The opportunity to bring it back has passed and we are now looking more in terms of clinging on by any means.
This is a representation of our position at this point:

So we're at the point after Deanna's pointed the guns away from the enemy shooting at us?

[Astonished]

It's certainly a tall order to come up with a truly irrational belief that is completely benign.

Not a tall order at all.  There's a pen here on my desk.  I hold the truly irrational belief that the pen is self-aware and spends all of its time thinking up new names for cloud formations.

Boru

Is it a belief held with the same unshakeable conviction you get from most theists' beliefs? Otherwise it doesn't seem to fit the bill. Kind of like the flying spaghetti monster...nobody really believes in it, it's just a response to how ridiculous the idea of theism is in general. If you're just making up something, it hardly compares to actually believing wholeheartedly in something irrational because the latter is actually going to affect your decisions and behavior.

[AceBoogie]

Regardless of whether he believes that man made climate change is a thing or not, as a Christian he should still believe he has a moral obligation to take care of the plants and creatures and planet that God created. If he doesn't, then that's his own failing.

It's very nice that you personally feel this way but unfortunately, very many Christians would absolutely disagree with you.

It's insanely dangerous to say, no matter what we do god is going to end things the way it wants.

What's funny is many Christians will make this claim yet will still get dressed and get up for work every morning, pay their bills, etc. Why not quit your job give away all your possessions and follow god like Jesus did? Hell, Jesus even said if your family disagrees with your beliefs, abandon them too because they're not as important as god!

My manager told me today that he thinks gay people should be allowed to marry because "they'll answer to god in the end, anyway" I almost laughed right in his face but was fortunately able to contain myself.

[Rhondazvous]

It's certainly a tall order to come up with a truly irrational belief that is completely benign.

Hey Astonished~! good to see you.

They’re only benign when it serves them. When they want to kick somebody’s ass, they believe in kicking ass. When somebody wants to kick their ass, they’re all about love and peace.

[Drich]

Maybe I should rephrase that. What Christians are being taught is dangerous.  I’m not talking about the annoying stuff like our eternal destination or god helping them find their car keys. I’m talking about something that can’t be ignored.

I was talking to a guy today, a really nice guy. I’ve known him for years and he never before said anything religious to me. Until today and it was a whammy.

Today turned out pretty warm and sunny with lots of birds so I mentioned global warming. He said he didn’t believe in global warming. I asked him what he meant by that. He said god knows how the earth is going to end and nothing can happen to the earth no matter what we do to it. god controls the weather, not man.

It was the “no matter what we do to it” part that frightened me.   We now have a man in the white house who holds the same opinion.

We are nearly at the point of no return now. We can’t keep this planet from turning into a global dystopia without sacrifices that few of us are willing to make.  And the ones who claim that their god created this world are saying “fuck the planet.”

You guys are all f-ing morons..

Do you know where or what the 'big fix is for global climate change?'

Carbon credits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit

It is a tax Clinton was going to put in place to charge you bleeding heart dummies too dee da dee to know in order for one to claim climate change based on carbon emissions, one must account for 1000s years of solar output (how much heat/light the sun produces ) in relation to how much the planet absorbs. We MAYBE have 100 years of data. So with 100 year picture science claims the sky is falling.. and what do you dummies do? Blame God and Christianity when too many people wake up from the BS and want something real to replace the money grubbing science that puts hippies into a tizzy.

[The Industrial Atheist]

You guys are all f-ing morons..

Do you know where or what the 'big fix is for global climate change?'

Carbon credits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit

It is a tax Clinton was going to put in place to charge you bleeding heart dummies too dee da dee to know in order for one to claim climate change based on carbon emissions, one must account for 1000s years of solar output (how much heat/light the sun produces ) in relation to how much the planet absorbs. We MAYBE have 100 years of data. So with 100 year picture science claims the sky is falling.. and what do you dummies do? Blame God and Christianity when too many people wake up from the BS and want something real to replace the money grubbing science that puts hippies into a tizzy.

http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Solar irradiance
It's reasonable to assume that changes in the sun's energy output would cause the climate to change, since the sun is the fundamental source of energy that drives our climate system.
Indeed, studies show that solar variability has played a role in past climate changes. For example, a decrease in solar activity is thought to have triggered the Little Ice Age between approximately 1650 and 1850, when Greenland was largely cut off by ice from 1410 to the 1720s and glaciers advanced in the Alps.
But several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the sun:

• Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the sun either remained constant or increased slightly.
  

• If the warming were caused by a more active sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere. Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere. That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.
  

Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases
----------------
Why must we havethousands of years of information of the suns energy output?

[Faith No More]

You guys are all f-ing morons..

Do you know where or what the 'big fix is for global climate change?'

Carbon credits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit

It is a tax Clinton was going to put in place to charge you bleeding heart dummies too dee da dee to know in order for one to claim climate change based on carbon emissions, one must account for 1000s years of solar output (how much heat/light the sun produces ) in relation to how much the planet absorbs. We MAYBE have 100 years of data. So with 100 year picture science claims the sky is falling.. and what do you dummies do? Blame God and Christianity when too many people wake up from the BS and want something real to replace the money grubbing science that puts hippies into a tizzy.

Calls people fucking morons. Thinks we only have 100 years of data.

At this point I can only assume you're just trying to out-stupid yourself at every turn. The truly amazing thing, however, is how successful you are at it.

[Drich]

You guys are all f-ing morons..

Do you know where or what the 'big fix is for global climate change?'

Carbon credits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit

It is a tax Clinton was going to put in place to charge you bleeding heart dummies too dee da dee to know in order for one to claim climate change based on carbon emissions, one must account for 1000s years of solar output (how much heat/light the sun produces ) in relation to how much the planet absorbs. We MAYBE have 100 years of data. So with 100 year picture science claims the sky is falling.. and what do you dummies do? Blame God and Christianity when too many people wake up from the BS and want something real to replace the money grubbing science that puts hippies into a tizzy.

http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Solar irradiance
It's reasonable to assume that changes in the sun's energy output would cause the climate to change, since the sun is the fundamental source of energy that drives our climate system.
Indeed, studies show that solar variability has played a role in past climate changes. For example, a decrease in solar activity is thought to have triggered the Little Ice Age between approximately 1650 and 1850, when Greenland was largely cut off by ice from 1410 to the 1720s and glaciers advanced in the Alps.

By all accounts these were very minor changes in solar output.

But several lines of evidence show that current global warming cannot be explained by changes in energy from the sun:

citation please..

• Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the sun either remained constant or increased slightly.

  
  
  citation please, what method of recording solar out put was avaible to us in 1750? is it as accurate as the deep space sun probes we have recording the sun now? or the equipment used in 1950 when this source says we first started measuring the suns energy output:
  http://history.aip.org/climate/solar.htm
  
  

• If the warming were caused by a more active sun, then scientists would expect to see warmer temperatures in all layers of the atmosphere.
  

• Instead, they have observed a cooling in the upper atmosphere, and a warming at the surface and in the lower parts of the atmosphere.

You and your 'nasa guys' do know "heat" does not travel through a vacuum right? light does but not in the form of heat, but in the form of light waves which contain radiant heat. so in the upper atmosphere where there isn't any atmosphere or very little of it measurring 'heat' is pointless. Heat needs 'air' to be detectable, as in Measurable heat is the differential between the convective and radiant transfer, so the temp of an object is determined when the rate of heat transfer is zero.
http://www.new-learn.info/packages/clear.../temp.html

So in the upper atmosphere where the air is thin even though you have full unobstructed line of site to the sun's complete energy, the temp is and always been very low Because there is little to no air to facilitate the transfer of heat from it's radiant source.

So to say "you would expect to see increased temps in the upper atmosphere due to increased solar activity, is to not understand how heat is friggen measured or transferred in a form that we can relate to a temp.

So beg you pardon when I ask for a citation, because your 'nasa' article seems to be falling flat on high school science

That's because greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere.

You mean Air, unlocks the radiant heat potential in a beam from the sun, and can be measured as heat... Well duh?!?!

Climate models that include solar irradiance changes can’t reproduce the observed temperature trend over the past century or more without including a rise in greenhouse gases

They can, but not without stratospheric cooling which is what we have.

Why must we have thousands of years of information of the suns energy output?

Because sun cycles last for centuries. If you do not have thousand of years to set a base line how can you see the pattern?

What you guys fail to understand is that "Science" for the last idk 500+ years supports solar out put s being the reason for global warming and or cooling. It wasn't till the mid 1990's did several people in the government devise a way to make money with this "The sky is falling" junk science.

I can remember just a few years ago you could still find all sorts of information on solar output AND The Earth's ORBIT that explained in great detail global climate change. It's all gone now. It seems what is left is in old encyclopedias.. Maybe trump will bring back the truth.

All "TSIF-ers" "The Sky is Fallingers" have done is shown the climate is not static.. Well no duh.. (for most of us we already knew this) for those who don't, they think their carbon credits will save them.

Hey Retards (TSIF-ers) IF Carbon in the air is the problem then the only solution is a global population reduction of 2/3rds. So go home and Kill the first two people you see let the 3rd one live and repeat till everyone has gone through your process.

Otherwise who are you to tell anyone in a 3rd world country going through an industrial age of their own, that they must go backwards social so you can have all the things green house gas has done for you.

---

You guys are all f-ing morons..

Do you know where or what the 'big fix is for global climate change?'

Carbon credits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit

It is a tax Clinton was going to put in place to charge you bleeding heart dummies too dee da dee to know in order for one to claim climate change based on carbon emissions, one must account for 1000s years of solar output (how much heat/light the sun produces ) in relation to how much the planet absorbs. We MAYBE have 100 years of data. So with 100 year picture science claims the sky is falling.. and what do you dummies do? Blame God and Christianity when too many people wake up from the BS and want something real to replace the money grubbing science that puts hippies into a tizzy.

Calls people fucking morons.  Thinks we only have 100 years of data.

At this point I can only assume you're just trying to out-stupid yourself at every turn.  The truly amazing thing, however, is how successful you are at it.

essentily 100 years is being way generous. 1950 is when we seriously started identified and started accurate recording the data points we now use. The fact that you think any different, and chose to speak without checking MAKES the moron I said you where.

http://history.aip.org/climate/solar.htm

The link above is a complete history of science surrounding climate change. While I do not support it's final conclusion as the article does not take into consideration the data points that would ultimately affect climate rendered by a "3d huluhoop effect the earth's orbit would have in conjunction with solar output, I believe the article does indeed correctly follow how climate change via green house gas verse solar sunspots cycles would have..

Again, I am saying solar out put in conjunction with orbit over century long cycles determines climate (As did the last 500 years of science) this article maps out sunspots effect out a particular type of solar output/cosmic rays. But the article does accurately describe how and when our knowledge of climate change data was and is gathered.

So 1950 sport that means with 67 years of data youre people claim the sky is falling, and because I am not in a panic makes me the less credible??!?! Again the Sky is falling junk started in the late 90's AND inorder for to believe this bunk you have to ignore over 500 years of solar science and observation, even several mini Iceages with in the last 3 or 400 years, all of which is completely contrary to what your sky is falling doctrine tells you...

You know what you douche bags had you go for the last 10 years or so. give it a rest and let the adults run the world again. Maybe next time you all can do something with aliens or 'alien credits.' Some special tax that will help those who pay it avoid being probed