Started By
Message

re: Why do most conservatives embrace a lack of evidence re: climate change but not religion?

Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:13 pm to
Posted by LSUlunatic
Member since Dec 2006
6833 posts
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:13 pm to
My original post was aimed an understanding the inconsistency re: the burden of proof needed for climate change but not religious beliefs. I don't understand why some apply reason in some instances but not others.

eta: I think the inconsistency is attributable to a false narrative people intake in order to support their own ignorances. Thoughts?
This post was edited on 11/23/14 at 3:17 pm
Posted by NC_Tigah
Member since Sep 2003
125405 posts
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:29 pm to
quote:

eta: I think the inconsistency is attributable to a false narrative people intake in order to support their own ignorances. Thoughts?
Climate change claims falsifiability, and in many instances has been falsified.
Religion, not so much.

LINK

What about that is confusing?
Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46631 posts
Posted on 11/23/14 at 3:37 pm to
quote:

I think the inconsistency is attributable to a false narrative people intake in order to support their own ignorances. Thoughts?


Religion isn't really falsifiable because many of its ideas involve things that supposedly exist outside the physical universe. We don't have the ability to test religion.

Now, we can falsify certain claims of various religions (such as a global flood) but religion in general can't be disproven.

That doesn't mean there is any good reason to believe any of the claims made by organized religion are true, though.
This post was edited on 11/23/14 at 3:39 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram