To a degree, I agree with you, but I don't think it's as subjective or arbitrary as you say.
You seem to be saying that it's subjective but only within a range close to your own views. However the fact that some people take the bible 100% literally, while some dismiss it completely, and others like you and me are somewhere in between, means it is completely subjective.
Quote:
The question is, does embellishment, allegory or other styles or writing aside from historical narrative ruin the foundation of faith?
No, because faith does not rely on evidence.
Quote:
The book of Job, for example, details conversations between Satan and God. Did those literally, historically happen?
They may have done, to the people who passed that conversation down through the generations by word of mouth before it was finally written down by someone else and then translated multiple times over the years into the current version. I guess you need to decide how accurate the current description of that conversation is, assuming it ever happened. Does the current description accurately represent the 'nature of God' as the originator of the story intended? Who knows. Does that matter, as long as you gain something from the story? Probably not, but it's still just a story written by a man and not evidence of the existence of a god.
They may have done, to the people who passed that conversation down through the generations by word of mouth before it was finally written down by someone else and then translated multiple times over the years into the current version. I guess you need to decide how accurate the current description of that conversation is, assuming it ever happened. Does the current description accurately represent the 'nature of God' as the originator of the story intended? Who knows. Does that matter, as long as you gain something from the story? Probably not, but it's still just a story written by a man and not evidence of the existence of a god.
Catweasel laugh. Gawd, mouzealot really on a roll.
No evidence of the god (spiritual realm). No the evidence that a man (mouse) not driver of 20th century climate change (natural world).
Does lack of evidence mean that a God not exist or man(mouse) climate change not exist? No it does not.
So if mouzealot's positions or views of world cannot be a support by a evidence, should mouzealot's post simply discharge from man-hole?
Catweasel say no because its express reflect a insight into society.
Use mouzealot's own foundations:
1.) Its opinion on a climate or a god cannot be the support by evidence, therefore its beliefs is based on a faith. 2.) If evidence essential to exist of phenomenon, then mouzealot's position is complete no logic.
My position is straightforward and logical, and can be summarised as follows.
1. The climate has always been changing, for billions of years, long before humans were around 2. The earth has sustained hotter and colder periods in the past, higher and lower CO2 levels, ice caps, sea levels etc 3. The climate is complex, it is influenced by many factors, and we don't yet fully understand how or why it changes 4. We don't have accurate granular historical data for the past 200 years, never mind the past billion 5. Given point 4, we have no way of telling whether recent changes in the climate are unusual 6. We are unable to measure the extent to which human activity influences changes in the climate 7. We can't prevent the climate from changing 8. We should focus on adapting to inevitable climate change, rather than trying to prevent the climate from changing
This is called logic, but as we've seen, logic is useless when debating believers in a faith or a religion. I stopped debating religion a long time ago, because at the end of the day it doesn't matter how much logic you employ, the religious believer will simply turn around and say 'I'm right because it says so in the bible'. In other words, the men who wrote the bible are infallible and if they wrote it in the bible then it must be true. Any alternative books/texts/theories are ignored or ridiculed ('haha you think we came from monkeys!') because only the bible can be right. The same faith is demonstrated by anthropogenic climate change alarmists - it doesn't matter how much logic you use, they simply turn around and say 'I'm right because the men who write climate change papers say so'. Scientists with alternative views are ignored or ridiculed, and logic is ignored, because only the 'consensus' climate change scientists can be right.
Most of your points are true BUT most of the logical conclusion your draw depends on point 7. Point 7 also ties in nicely with the theme of this thread, religion and climate change.
Point 1: Yes, but what does this mean? Children have always been drowning so should we bother trying to prevent it? Point 2: Yes, undoubtedly. This point can also be used as a case for action - we have seen the huge changes, and undesirable climates that are possible. What was the temperature last time CO2 was 400ppm? Point 3: True, do we fully understand anything before we manipulate or take advantage of it? Do you understand how GPS works? Do you understand the chemistry inside your car engine? Do you know how microwaves work? Do scientists understand gravity? Point 4: True, but good statistical analysis can help here. Point 5: See point 4. Point 6: If you have a stable river flow, then widen and dredge the river mouth a little bit then upriver there is 10% less water, how much is this the fault of widening the river? Do you continue to widen the river and blame the variable rainfall? Point 7: True in the strictest form, untrue in your example. Point 8: We should do both because we will need to. Putting efforts into both horizon 1 and 2 projects is required. Horizon 1 projects of adaption will provide immediate results by reducing the effects (they will need to be done anyway), Horizon 2 projects of prevention of further damage.
Point 7 is undoubtedly correct if taken at face value. All it really states is we cannot force the climate to remain static - there no doubt that this is true. However humans can change the rate and direction of climate change over longer periods of time. By longer periods of time I mean hundreds of years, this is still magnitudes shorter than your typical geological time scales (but I admit the medieval warm period appears to be an exception - albeit only recorded over a small area of the planet).
Equating science and religion is not new, but it is interesting.
FWIW I've been agnostic since primary school. Scientists are over represented among agnostics, especially the good ones.
I wonder if Catweasel believes? No point asking him as he wouldn't give a straight answer anyway...
I'd be willing to bet 3:1 that Catweasel does NOT believe in god. The lack of belief certainly gels with his posts in this thread, but people have an amazing ability to hold contradictory belief structures in their heads.
Catweasel also has a significantly higher ability to question beliefs than is acceptable for believers in faith.
Also I just considered that for this poll to be about belief in god and climate change you would need to remove the effects of age bias. Increased age is likely to be correlated with belief in god and inversely correlated with climate change.
"[The Native Americans] didn't have any rights to the land and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using.... What was it they were fighting for, if they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their "right" to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal, or maybe a few caves above it. Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to take over this continent." * Source: "Q and A session following her Address To The Graduating Class Of The United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, March 6, 1974"
Ayn Rand was a midget standing on the shoulders of the giant, Marx!
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
I'd be willing to bet 3:1 that Catweasel does NOT believe in god. The lack of belief certainly gels with his posts in this thread, but people have an amazing ability to hold contradictory belief structures in their heads.
Catweasel also has a significantly higher ability to question beliefs than is acceptable for believers in faith.
Also I just considered that for this poll to be about belief in god and climate change you would need to remove the effects of age bias. Increased age is likely to be correlated with belief in god and inversely correlated with climate change.
Would the Catweasel like the existence of a God? Yes it the surely a would. It a relish to be able to leave its mortal fur and frolic in fluffy clouds and eat juicy melons bigger than its paws.
Its comments about contradict belief is area of deep fascinate. But it a think that belief structures often dominate more by Herald Sun and socialization than empiricism and a so-the-called logic. And mouzealot exhibit that the belief conundrum perfectly.
But whatever the hurdles and puzzles of a knowledge theory throws at a forum, most is at very the fundamental level, yet even supposedly potent mouzealots collapse in heap.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy
