You know that parable about the pastor on the church roof during a flood and ignoring all help because god would save him until he dies and god is like wtf did you turn away all my help…
Works really well with climate change too and us ignoring all his help to help prevent the catastrophe it is/will cause.
“Ignorance is bliss” People, not all but many, want religion because it teaches them all they have to do is believe and pray to a God and everything will be well. That even when things are bad, that they just need to roll with it because there is a plan that they are part of and they should not lose faith. That is all and it is simple. It also gives certain groups, genders, ethnicities power over others, which makes them feel special and entitled.
When you start to give a person with this kind of faith facts and logic that is contrary to what they have been told it angers them because it scares them. It angers them because it tells them they aren’t entitled and they cant keep on with their actions because there will be consequences. They like propaganda that says “all is well, dont listen to those scary fake facts.” This comforts them.
Those people want to stay feeling entitled, believing they are special, that their actions cause no harm, and stay in blissfull ignorance.
Science is not faith based. It is empirical and truths can be observed and proven. Yes there are hypothesis yet to be proven, but they are based on facts that suggest they may be true. Religions simply require faith with no proof what you are believing in is true.
Science will not dispell any spirtuality there is in the universe but it will eventually tear down most religions. We are very likely not the only living organisms in the universe, yet most religions depict Gods that resemble us. This is as bad as thinking the Earth is the center of the solar system, which is why it was considered blasphemous when the idea was first introduced that it was not.
The good thing about science is that it doesn’t require faith.
This idiot should never be allowed a position of responsibility. He’ll do what the voices in his head tell him to do, not what’s proven to be effective.
idiots
Faith that those cheques from the oil industry will keep arriving.
A Minnesota Republican lawmaker has dismissed climate change concerns by declaring that her faith is in Jesus Christ rather than scientists. Rep Mary Franson, a long-serving member of the Minnesota House, made the comments during a committee hearing last week.
Mary Franson is not fit to hold office and should be removed.
People like that should be disqualified from any position of power.
They should be housed in special units where they are prevented from doing harm to other people.
Religion is a cancer, and I’m so fucking tired of the apologetics from my fellow leftists on it.
Sounds like these lawmakers should be forced to dismiss gravity concerns right until they can’t.
I never understood why people claim to not have “faith” in Science. Science doesn’t want anyone’s faith. It wants facts, it wants proof, it wants repeatability.
Religion and Science should not be in conflict. Science gives us powerful tools to explain the Universe, but cannot explain what cannot be observed. If you believe in a higher power, there is plenty of room for that higher power to operate outside of what Science can tell us.
People who claim to not have “faith” in Science are just ignorant. Science will keep going, though, no matter what they believe.
Organized religion conditions people not to think but to view everything through the lens of their dogmas. Faith (unquestioned acceptance of prescribed believes) being nr 1. May never occur to them that the scientific method does not require said unquestioned acceptance.
Religion and science is in conflict because they’re antithetical to each other.
Science demands that all you “believe in”, all your statements, derivations, conclusions, explanations, be based on fact - and if the supporting information changes, so do your statements/derivations/conclusions/explanations. Essentially, you write the book based on observations, and if the observed things change, so does the book.
Religion is the other way around. All your observations, all your conclusions, etc., must bow to the book first. Anything that doesn’t fit the book is the work of the devil, thus bad.
There’s no place for inconsistencies, for reiteration of the book (let alone rewriting - unless it’s officially approved ofc), it is the ultimate source of truth, unchanging and ever-existing.
Of course you then get denominations that consider the Bible not the word of God but the human-transcribed (thus faulty) version of the word, therefore are much more flexible on how things are interpreted, but that still doesn’t allow science to co-exist with religion when the latter can be utilised to invalidate a fact-based system.
WHY DIDN’T GOD GIVE US MICROWAVE OVENS? THEY MUST NOT WORK AFTER ALL.
“There’s no place for inconsistencies, for reiteration of the book (let alone rewriting - unless it’s officially approved ofc)”
So who the fuck is the official source confirming that the NIV is as consistent as the NEB, KJV, the Dead Sea Scrolls and other versions of the Bible?
Cause the different versions alone bring about a shit ton of inconsistencies.
What I meant by that is that inconsistencies between reality and the book are not accepted.
If the Bible says the sky is green, then it’s green, and if it’s blue, well, that’s the work of the devil and shouldn’t be. Regardless what scientific explanation there is.
You are absolutely insane if you think religion is consistent and science isn’t.
See my other reply - by “inconsistencies” I meant between reality and scripture. Scripture always comes first in religion, even if reality is proving it wrong.
See e.g. religious types claiming being gay is a sin and unnatural, because the Bible says so, meanwhile nature proves them wrong daily with homosexuality being actively observed in hundreds of species…
This kind inconsistency is what I was referring to.
Religion and Science conflict because they make irreconcilably different claims about reality, and have fundamentally different epistemologies.
They disagree as to what truth is and how it can be determined.
Religious people who cannot find the ‘faith’ to ‘believe’ in Science are people who have been brainwashed into religious extremism, which shapes their entire worldview and acts as their default mode of understanding reality.
These are people who would rather kill all the Scientists as heretics, as they have often done throughout history.
Their answer would be that Science will not go on if they… destroy all non-religious education, throw the Scientists into jail, or just kill them.
Historically it‘s exactly that incompatibility of both concepts that created a tension from which certain progress has been born. It‘s fundamental to our evolution as societies. It‘s only times when extremism takes over that either becomes destructive. And it doesn‘t really matter on which side you look - Religion only has a longer record of precedent.
Much of the hatred we saw throught the 19th and 20th centuries though was based on a fundamentally materialist framework. Nazis really thought they were up to something, they could scientifically prove their point and offer the „pragmatic“ solution. To themselves they were utilitarian. Racist ideology does the same. In hindsight it‘s all a big fuss - a net of false assumptions, flawed methodology and manifestation of biases. For the people living during the time it was science.
You see, my point is: It‘s not so much about religion or science, it‘s about trying to control narratives - to utilize them, to weaponize them against deviants. Science has learnt from that - at least a big part of it - even some religious institutions learnt from it. But that doesn‘t stop people from doing what they feel is their nature.
science is just a method of observation. the reason why they hate it so much is because it keeps messing with their idiot garbage superstitions. they need collective ignorance to survive
Science still requires faith of a sort.
The Royal Society in London, a scientific institution since the 1600s, official motto is “On no one’s word”. One of the fundamental ideas of science is that everything should be reproducible. You literally don’t need to take anything on faith.
Presuming you have all the instruments you need, an unlimited budget and the time to repeat everyone’s studies, yes.
If only there was a review system in place where people with similar systems could confirm others findings… Maybe their peers…
<palpatine> Your faith in your peers is yours!</palpatine>
As far as everyone not having the expertise to independently verify every claim, true. But you could independently verify it with enough time and will to do so, unlike with religion.
Yes.
Only what you aren’t capable of reasoning on your own. I can’t reason astrophysics, so I take what astrophysicists say on faith. I can reason some physics, though, and I have to either accept that there’s a giant conspiracy with upper level physics, or that the people who study it know what they’re talking about. Each takes a kind of faith, but the latter requires much less.
Yes, although science requires some empirical measurements too, so unless that’s a gaschromatograph in your pocket and you’re not just happy to see me, quite a bit of faith is implicit in our understanding of the world. Deserved, but faith nonetheless.
I mean, I can get a gas chromatograph, then test it however many times I need to, to prove to myself that it’s accurate, then use it to test whatever I’m suspicious of. I don’t feel the need personally, but if a person wants to, they can. It’s honestly not even as expensive as I would have expected- plenty of options under €1000.
And for more advanced science, the same applies- it would require a lot more faith to believe that everyone with more than two college chemistry classes is lying about the nature of the world than that they’re not.
But yes, you need faith in either direction. Just a lot less of it if science is real.
Yep. Which is all I’m saying to several people’s apparent shock and horror.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I didn’t downvote you, but I think it’s more that that’s true for everything. What if everyone in the world has conspired and I’m secretly the subject of the Truman show? It takes faith to believe that any of the news that I watch is real, and faith to believe that a car accident I pass on the highway wasn’t staged to get a reaction from me. Believing in that giant conspiracy would take orders of magnitude more faith than believing that huge numbers of unassociated people are not intentionally deceiving you though, so comparatively, you don’t need faith. Because faith is required for “knowing” literally anything other than that you exist, saying something requires no faith is obviously hyperbolic.
This is the behavior why I think that religion should, and one day will be classified as a mental illness
The problem I’ve been realizing over the last few years is that while I have no need for religion myself, there are a lot of “if there wasn’t a god, why doesn’t everyone go around killing each other all the time” types out there. Things might be even worse if religion wasn’t there to make those ones control themselves.
It’s truly terrifying. “If there’s no hell, what’s stopping you from raping and murdering.”
Nothing. I rape and murder as much as I want to, but incidentally that amount is zero.
Yet more often than not the religious people are the ones doing the killing.
If religion is really what stops these people, then religion is covering for mental illness that ought to be addressed instead of hidden away in churches.
The truthism that there’s no morality without Jesus is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve ever heard and it’s an absolute testament to the lack of empathy and intelligence of religious people
I wish global warming wasn’t global.
Wouldn’t that be amazing? The countries that do it to themselves suffer. Not the ones who didn’t.
It’s not globally uniform. India is getting completely fucked, meanwhile most of the US just has to wait and see why happens to Florida this year.
To be fair, the US got Trump and co, so maybe India is getting the better deal. Even the Maldives are going to be more liveable the the US.
Removed by mod
Fuck the Guardians Of Pedophiles.
And how do you think Jesus would handle climate change from Heaven?
Maybe…by encouraging human beings to solve the problem that humans created? The one thing she refuses to do?
The Parable of the Drowning Man
A storm descends on a small town, and the downpour soon turns into a flood. As the waters rise, the local preacher kneels in prayer on the church porch, surrounded by water. By and by, one of the townsfolk comes up the street in a canoe.
“Better get in, Preacher. The waters are rising fast”.
“No,” says the preacher. “I have faith in the Lord. He will save me”.
Still the waters rise. Now the preacher is up on the balcony, wringing his hands in supplication, when another guy zips up in a motorboat.
“Come on, Preacher. We need to get you out of here. The levee’s gonna break any minute”.
Once again, the preacher is unmoved. “I shall remain. The Lord will see me through”.
After a while the levee breaks, and the flood rushes over the church until only the steeple remains above water. The preacher is up there, clinging to the cross, when a helicopter descends out of the clouds, and a state trooper calls down to him through a megaphone.
“Grab the ladder, Preacher. This is your last chance”.
Once again, the preacher insists the Lord will deliver him.
And, predictably, he drowns.
A pious man, the preacher goes to heaven. After a while he gets an interview with God, and he asks the Almighty, “Lord, I had unwavering faith in you. Why didn’t you deliver me from that flood?”
God shakes his head. “What did you want from me? I sent you two boats and a helicopter!”
Love each other. Love god. Both are about loving God‘s creation - if you‘re into that kind of stuff.
That‘s the main quest in christianity - and as far as I‘m aware in all other religions. So „dismissing Climate change concerns“ because you don‘t want to trust people who are knowledgable about the matter, at least from my agnostic point of view, is about as contrary to those beliefs as it can get. Because you‘re so superstitious that you can‘t acknowledge the fact you might be biased, you might be uninformed, you don‘t understand, that you simply assume everyone else must be stupid or evil.
That guy they pretend to love so much is said to have said: „ Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?“.
But they comfortably leave out all the parts in the Bible that are purely about self-reflection, self-awareness and self-knowledge.
Remember that time Jesus said fuck the planet, and also fuck your neighbor over? Peppridge Farm remembers
When you assume Jesus agrees with all your personal decisions, you don’t need to worry about what the other side thinks.
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.
-Susan B. Anthony
