The Lorax

That's not what I said--although maybe you've never heard of nukes. I simply negated the asinine and indefensible claim the humans have no control over nature. If you think the Word says that humans have no control over nature, then you are in denial about reality. You are in denial about mass pollution, desertification, deforestation, and all the other massive human influences on the face of the planet. I cited some of these phenomena but like a good denialist you ignored the evidence and went right to personal attacks. Insult my knowledge and my faith if you want, but my views aren't plainly contradicted by reality. Yours are, though.

Wrong. No complaints here. Wrong. Fertilizers create microbial blooms which deplete the oxygen in the ocean to the point that not even the microbes can continue to live. Do some research on eutrophication. Are you sure we did it all and isn't this exactly what Darwin taught us? No. The extinction rates reflect drastic environmental changes and things like hunting. Extinction is ordinary, but not in these numbers. This is what is called a "mass extinction," a rare historical event. Acid rains happens, therefore it's not a hoax. And you didn't answer the question: Did acid rain happen before the Industrial Revolution? What on earth are you talking about? Can you draw that up on GoogleEarth or something? I'll look for some pictures. For now, read this. If you're arguing that the Gospel says humans have no control over nature--that has been said here--then you're evading not just responsibilty, but reality.

Oh really? Did we not put a gaping hole in the ozone layer? (And later, due to international efforts, manage to fix it.) Are there not dead zones in every major ocean, some millions of square miles, where no life exists at all because of fertilizer runoff? Have we not driven thousands of species to extinction in the last 100 years? Did acid rain happen before the Industrial Revolution? Is there not a continent of plastic, twice the size of Texas, floating in the middle of the Pacific? How'd that get there? ... My friend, if you think we have no control over the environment, then you don't have a clue. Open your eyes. Reality contradicts your rhetoric. And I find it appalling that anyone would use The Word as an excuse to be utterly irresponsible regarding this planet. God is not our nanny.

This goes back to what is bugging me. It seems like both sides are more interested in fighting each other than looking to do what is best. We Conservative Christians see "earth worship" and socialist agenda in the Environmental movement, and so we fight against all environmentalism. I've learned to view things differently because I learned the principle of stewardship, and I believe we need to be good stewards of the land as much as we are to be good stewards of our homes. So, what I am saying here to you, Lorax, is that if you want to make in-roads among Christians, you need to search the Scriptures for principles on stewardship and use this as your argument-base. I watched a program where a Christian woman went to the Christians who live on an island in the Chesapeake Bay (their primary industry is crabbing) and taught them Biblical stewardship. Her message stirred the watermen's hearts enough to make a pact to practice Biblical stewardship of their island and the Bay. You can read about it here. (More links can be found here.) Thank you for the advice. I'll check out that article. "Environmental pushing" can be done in any number of ways. But may I remind you that one reason we got in the situation we're in is by taking the economically expedient option. That isn't to say the more profitable option, but the option that is more profitable in the short term. For instance, we make disposables out of material that is basically immortal, material that will outlive us. How stupid is that? Well it was cheap. But now there are continents of plastic floating in every major ocean, some twice the size of Texas. And that plastic is ending up in fish and ultimately ending up in us, affecting our endocrinology in ways that we don't even know about yet. We you look at environmental reform and the economy, you need to look at both the short and the long terms. Many anti-environmentalists look only at the short term when they claim any kind of reform will hurt our country. But it's that kind of short-sightedness that put us in this position in the first place.

No. But what a strange question. That you dismiss scientific evidence as "propaganda" is telling. And if there is a punishment for ignoring said evidence, that punishment is going to come from the Earth itself, not from man. That punishment will come in the form of rising temperatures and tides, in desertification and drought. If your question was actually a serious one--was it?--then I think you should take a serious look at the issues at hand. Classic. If you don't like it, write it off as a religion. We see this again and again. Evolution? A religion. Obama? A religion. Global warming? A religion. It's a quick and easy way to demonize something without even addressing it.

...Nor is the overwhelming majority of scientists a number to be marginalized, yet that is the intent of the article. Ignore the majority, side with the minority...for no reason other than wishful thinking. Let's shirk our responsibility now and leave it all to our children. That's easy. The average American consumes the most resources of any citizen on Earth. Have you ever seen the environmental footprint of Americans compared to other countries? It is staggering. If we're not careless pigs, then we shouldn't play the part. We should get on that. That's great. Even the little things count. But the numbers don't lie, Justin. Americans consume--and waste--more than people in any other country. That's not a point I'm afraid to bring up. More people need to hear it--and they need to do something about it. No, they don't. By writing off their efforts, you are doing more harm than good. I don't doubt that you have good intentions, but by writing off this theory, you are doing more harm than good. You are fooling yourself.

I completely agree, nebula.

Edit Link*

"Hey, look, some scientists still disagree with AGW, so we can keep living like careless pigs."

This is terrible. I'm friends with the man's daughter--she goes to my school--and he was scheduled to speak at our commencement. Praying for him.

It's remarkable--you and I use such vastly different rhetoric that we tend to clash even though we agree on the fundamental points. I think that the Qu'ran, taken to the letter, is a very dangerous thing. But I don't think most Muslims are so extreme. Many are apathetic if not disenchanted with their sham of a religion, and they simply won't obey its more insane and destructive commands. The only way Muslims will take over this country is with the assent of our government like you see in Europe. I hope and pray this won't happen, but I'm quite sure it won't for a number of reasons.

Thanks for an uplifting post, OH! Conservative Islam is an obvious threat to soceity, but so is extremism of all kinds. We shouldn't ever forget that.

Rush Limbaugh did not win the Nobel Peace Prize. Al Gore did, however.

The amazing thing is that this windbag could be arrested for inciting riots in Denver. How's that for peaceful.

An apt note. Hunter, it appears you're a theistic evolutionist. That makes two of us. I see complexity as a testament to God's genius, to His foresight, and to the subtleties of His ongoing creative mechanisms--evolution among them. I too was troubled by the tone of the OP as well as its intention. In no obvious way does the concerned discovery disprove or even disparage evolution. If it does, then artsylady hasn't made clear how.

For the third time, what makes you think this? I guess. I just don't see evidence that Satan is responsible for this when humans are already so good at deceiving themselves. It's my belief that false religions run the gamut from outright shams (like Scientology) to honest mistakes stemming from misinterpreted numinous experiences, drug trips, whatever. People are gullible and foolhardy.

Typology and numerology are generally bogus. You can find patterns in anything if you look long enough. That's my first instinct, but if you have something compelling then I'd certainly like to see it. Me too. If only I had the time. I do see the problem, but writings are not necessarily exempt from this problem. The same thing can happen to a document if it is transcribed over and over again by different people. Where did you get the idea that Hindus are atheist? Go and ask a Hindu if they are an atheist and tell me what they say. Or look it up. Perhaps you are confused with the East's everything / nothing dichotomy. Sometimes they see many gods as one god and one as many. Or all gods as none. It's strange and confusing, to say the least, but it's not the same as atheism. And it's a cultural tradition, not an accidental contradiction. But so many religions aren't all that feel-good and loving. Do you think celibacy and fasting are fun and enjoyable? Most people don't think so, yet most religions practice practice them in some ritual or role. Almost every religion has some class of monk or nun who takes an oath to refrain from pleasure. This seems neither Satanic nor feel-good. It just doesn't fit your explanation. Many religious traditions persist in spite of their not-fun, not-pleasurable nature.

Indo-Aryans. Too many of them to count, probably. However, Hindus don't think the authors "invented" the Vedas. They think the people who wrote the Vedas were divinely inspired, that is, they were recording divine knowledge, not making stuff up. No idea. Does the Bible have that sort of thing? Sounds fascinating...could you give me an example? There is prophesy in the Vedas, though admittedly I don't know much about it, being a Christian and not a Hindu. I know of one prophesy you might find interesting: they predict that Krisha (the avatar of the head god Brahma) will return to Earth on a white horse in the end times. There are a lot of Krishna-Jesus parallels: Krishna was allegiedly born to a virgin, and his birth was heralded by a star, and visited by three wise men, and he died by crucifixion. Hinduism existed long before the Vedas (and the Bible) were books. The Vedas were originally an oral tradition that went back into the Bronze Age, perhaps even 5000 years ago. Hindus are not atheist, they are polytheist. They believe in a single creator god, Brahma, and two other main gods, Shiva and Vishnu. These gods have myriad incarnations and there are tons of less powerful gods as well. A lot of Hindus understand the minor gods to be myth, but all Hindus believe in Brahma. We think differently, I guess. Here's how I see it: If Satan created all other religions, they would all be unbelievably savage--worse even than Wahabi Islam. For instance, there's no way they would have rules about compassion and kindness. But most sects of most religions do teach compassion in one form or the other, even if these teachings are ignored by adherents. I think false religions might be tainted by Satan, but it doesn't make sense to say all false religions were created by him. They are, for the most part, too...nice. Surely Satan could do much worse than, say, Buddhism.

I think you've been watching too much TV. Have you ever been in a lab?

I think artsylady's point was in the thread's title: she doesn't like scientists. She thinks they're big poo heads. And she wants to share her belief with us even if--or perhaps because--it might upset some people here. In doing so, she's given us remarkably concise tutorial on how to appear opinionated and tactless in a social environment.

You're not very familiar with Hinduism. Hinduism is based on books called the Vedas, which were written over several centuries. The complete corpus of Vedic mantras as collected in Bloomfield's Vedic Concordance (1907) are 89,000 feet long, of which 72,000 occur in the four Samhitas. "Some guy or maybe two" could not have written all those books. The books represent a long oral tradition and oral traditions are transmitted by thousands of people. This is true, but don't forget Islam's scriptures include the Bible. Who committed the fraud and why?

What is the difference between a massive conspiracy theory and a massive deception?

The existence of God is not obvious to everyone. The word faith is used for a reason. What are you implying? You think atheists are closet theists?

This is an interesting thread. As a Christian, you already know my answer to the question, but I've got a question I'd like other Christians to answer: Other than Christianity, are all religions massive conspiracy theories?