-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it right to deny the American people jobs because of your religion?
- Thread starter Reverend Rick
- Start date
I think a better explanation would be that there is not a level playing field globally.
Billy Bob the gig er done guy drives an ancient rusty truck because he does not have a job.
The jobs are held by children working in sweat shops that polute.
Now you want Billy to drive a Prius.
Making Americun werkers produce products in a green fashion is much like telling him not to smoke while firing one up in the same car.
I'm sorry, my big thumbs and my I-phone don't get along.
What I meant to say was Git-R-Done.
[youtube]4TU-li1BqZ4[/youtube]
Only in America with Larry the Cable Guy: Git-R-Done - YouTube
Nobody in the know has ever said that the average temperature isn't increasing. The term "climate change" came into favour because it more accurately describes the total effects.
The problem isn't just that the average global temperature will rise a bit; the problem is all the changes this will cause, like desertification and change in the habitat range of different species. Also, even though we're seeing an increase in temperature on average, this won't have uniform effects. In fact, in some cases, it can even cause localized cooling (such as in Northern Europe, if the warming Atlantic Ocean kills the Gulf Stream current).
But there's been no change to the prediction that the global average temperature is increasing rapidly.
Git-R-Done. It's an American thing:
Urban Dictionary: git r done
Ooooh... don't call Larry the Cable Guy a Yank. That'd be like calling you a limey.That wouldn't have made sense to me either hahaha
Crazy yanks.
OK, now that I am on computer, what I was saying is, this is a global thing and one country will not fix this problem.
With my example, having one person in a car not smoking does not change anything if someone else lights up in the car.
The people in India and China are taking our jobs while they polute.
The good ol boys like Larry can't afford to be green.
Anyway, here is Larry on global warming.
[youtube]jW_5BT6oFhQ[/youtube]
Larry the Cable Guy on Global Warming - YouTube
With my example, having one person in a car not smoking does not change anything if someone else lights up in the car.
The people in India and China are taking our jobs while they polute.
The good ol boys like Larry can't afford to be green.
Anyway, here is Larry on global warming.
[youtube]jW_5BT6oFhQ[/youtube]
Larry the Cable Guy on Global Warming - YouTube
Yeah, I hope Panda does not think that we believe Larry over the scientists.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
That'd be like calling you a limey.
[youtube]y6UZl7ax5xI[/youtube]
Best TF2 domination line ever - YouTube
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
No, that comparison is ridiculous.
Incorrect. Global warming is a fact. The question is why it's happening.
No, they're not. And besides, I don't remember Obama chaining himself to a tree.
Sorry, this is just plain stupid.
You did nothing here to refute my claim. Your attempts to attack being green are failing miserably. When you make stupid claims like those in the OP and in this post, it's impossible to take you seriously. If you want to have a serious discussion, I'm all for it, but you have to leave these silly claims out.
Last edited:
You miss the thrust of his OP.
The religion of GW is not that GW is occurring, but rather how people develop a faith about coping with it.
Analogy time: In days of yore, all people observed the Sun, but some people coped with it by worshiping a Sun god.
I think Rev Rick is trying to help you see outside of the box. Tis good to be open to novel perspectives.
That's how we learn.
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
Partially true. But holding with your analogy......if Obama has considered all that generations of scientists have learned about the sun, and Obama is treating it like a massive ball of hydrogen plasma, continuously exploding in a horrific nuclear fusion maelstrom.
. While the GW deniers are, (without any evidence or verifed science), treating it like the unblinking eye of an all-seeing god. :bow:Then who exactly is open minded, and who is still living in a box?
Who is working with science, and who is faithfully obeying their religion? :sarcastic
The trick is to consider all possibilities.
I recommend leaning towards the most reasonable, while being open to other views.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
But that isn't what Rick is actually doing. He's creating a straw man that doesn't accurately reflect environmental concern. He's taking something he disagrees with (either due to misunderstanding or deliberate ignorance) and coming up with an exaggerated distortion.
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
:yes: That is the way of all science.
I tend to lean with the scientists and away from the politicians and self-interested money-grubbers.
As ex-governor Arnie said....roughly......If you have cancer and 99 doctors tell you to use surgery and chemotherapy. But one doctor says just wave some duck feathers over your heart and you'll be fine.......then which recommendation do you take today?
Thats not my position, I live a green life.
I have stated that I am a global warming agnostic.
This is not really about GW, it is about spending money we don't have on inferior technologies that go bankrupt while denying our country energy we can use right now that private industry would fund and create jobs because it does not fit into a persons green faith.
Obama wants expensive cars that folks cannot afford.
Obama wants to give money to technologies we cannot get on line or cannot afford.
Don't you believe we all should get back to work first and worry about our visions of green technology that does not exist that are too expensive later?
Buying a Prius is a good idea. Getting a job first is a better idea.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
This isn't about seeing outside the box. I'm always open to novel perspectives, as long as they're not obviously ridiculous. Saying "believing in global warming is a religion" is much different than saying "some people develop a faith about coping with global warming". At least the second one is not quite as silly, but it's also not what Rick said.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
This is about you making wacky claims that hinder real discussion. It's OK to disagree with a decision to put funds into up-and-coming technology to try to bring out new possibilities. What's not OK is to make wild accusations like "green faith" and "being green is a religion", etc.
Again, this is the problem. If you make stupid claims out of ignorance that are directed at unfairly criticizing someone you disagree with, you're not going to get a good discussion. Obama does not want this.
Same as above. Obama does not want this. You're distorting things. Again, you can say "I disagree with the idea of giving money to alternate fuel technologies". That's not a problem. Just don't make crap up to make the opposing viewpoint sound worse than it actually is.
What Obama wants is to encourage new technologies that lessen our dependence on oil, and in funding them partially, hopefully get them to the point of competing with oil in cost to consumers.
Both are good ideas. I don't see why it's an either/or proposition. Last I checked, the economy was steadily improving.