Who Dares to Blaspheme Against the Environment and the Climate?

Does Environmentalism and Climatism equate to a cult or a radical ideology?

What’s the difference between a rigid belief and Environmentalism and Climatism?

When is Judgement Day?

Who are the Four Horsemen?

You know, people were killed in the past for not conforming to religion.

You know, people are killed in Islamic nations for not conforming to Islam.

So, is there any sunlight between Environmentalism and Climatism when compared to a Cult or a Radical Ideology?

Hmmm, I don’t believe there is.

Perhaps these Environmentalists and Climatitsts are simply hoping to inherit paradise and have 70 virgins upon arrival.

Advertisements

145 thoughts on “Who Dares to Blaspheme Against the Environment and the Climate?

  1. AMEN TO THAT! The whole global warming thing is a huge cult as you say and it’s not about saving the environment. It’s about Agenda 21 and world domination. It’s their “Green Mask”, which is all about enslaving and dominating the globe with carbon taxes. It is literally about a one world government that controls and dominates every part of our lives. The insanity of the climate change priests reached radical critical mass over the last few years and Al Gore and his NWO controllers are laughing all the way to the bank. There is no global warming or climate change or whatever they want to call it. But there is a cabal of very rich and powerful people who are trying to take over the world though…and their boss is the evil one. Praise God Jesus already won the war!

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      And that’s why the want Jesus and Christianity out, ever since the beginning, Kings and rulers have feared God, because they know that they have zero real control over anything.

          1. No. But I give more credence to modern scientific research than I do to the Bible, which was written almost 2,000 years ago by 40 or more “authors” who were mostly superstitious shepherds and who thought the sun revolves around the Earth, which they believed was the center of the universe.

              1. I know and understand the scientific method, including testing of scientific a hypothesis, uncovering scientific facts, and scientific theory. (See this post: https://fivedotoh.com/2019/02/23/repost-its-just-a-theory/). And when 97% of scientists worldwide agree that we are entering into an environmental crisis that may cause irreparable damage to our planet due to climate change, I believe them more than non-scientist politicians who are getting huge donations from oil, gas, and coal companies.

                1. bottomlesscoffee007

                  Ah ha, so you think science is better than religion? A theory is a guess, no matter how you present it.

                  1. Read the link I provided. You’ll see that a SCIENTIFIC theory is much more than a guess. And science and religion are also apples and oranges.

                    1. bottomlesscoffee007

                      It’s still a guess. I read it Fandango and that’s why I said, it’s still a guess.

                    2. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Ha, you’re hilarious Fandango. Is evolution proven beyond a reasonable doubt? Last I checked, it seems that evolution is still a theory. Is evolution no longer a theory?

                    3. It’s a scientific theory with tons of scientific and physical evidence to substantiate it. Creationism has no evidence whatsoever, other than a storybook known as the Bible. If you seriously don’t believe in evolution, Coffee, there’s just no hope for you.

                    4. And I am not rigid. I weigh the evidence and I formulate opinions. I find scientific investigation to be more compelling than faith-based beliefs. Show me credible evidence of God’s existence and I will happily change my opinion.

                    5. bottomlesscoffee007

                      You gotta make that decision on your own Fandango. It’s faith, man. I believe in God. He is the one for me. I still enjoy science, but science is the latest religion.

                      Science, it seems is no longer scientific. It’s more about population control than it is about freedom.

                    6. And yes, it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt except to those who believe that the Bible should be taken literally and is an accurate history of creation.

                    7. A scientific theory is not a guess. It’s not a hunch. But you can choose to continue to believe that science is just one, big guessing game if you want to.

                    8. Do you know how to read? A scientific hypothesis is an educated guess. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

                    9. bottomlesscoffee007

                      So, if a theory is not a guess, then it is not a theory and it is then a fact. But, theories aren’t facts are they. They are theories, not 100%, therefore they are guesses or estimations at best.

                    10. In science, a fact is an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and, for all practical purposes, is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow based upon further examination and new discoveries.

                    11. bottomlesscoffee007

                      So, how do we convince ourselves that we know what is happening is what we really believe? If climate change is real, then wouldn’t that require science to cease? If the science continues, then we might find out that we’ve been doing more harm than good.

                      It seems rather rash to me that the “science is in” and we know how to fix something.

                    12. In science, a theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. It ties together all the facts about something, and provides an explanation that fits all the observations. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It’s as close to proven as anything in science can be.

                    13. bottomlesscoffee007

                      So, a theory is concrete? Theories have never been disproven? Like, never ever?

                    14. Coffee, I’ve tried to explain what scientific hypotheses are, what scientific facts are, and what scientific theories are and you can’t seem to comprehend any of it. This is what I meant when I said that your eyes may be open but you refuse to see.

                    15. bottomlesscoffee007

                      I can’t comprehend? Is theory fact or not? Is theory concrete or not? If it is not, then it is a guess.

                    16. I hate not being able to reply to a particular comment. This is the latest one in your exchange that I can reply to.

                      I just wanted to say that it was very interesting to read your and Coffee’s exchange on the topic of theories.

                      Whether you think evolution is 100% accurate, or not, you should be able to see what Coffee was saying about theories. Your explanations show exactly what Coffee was arguing – that they are not something that should be believed 100%. That there is a chance that they aren’t accurate. There were SCIENTIFIC theories in the past that have since been disproved. Can you acknowledge that?

                    17. I never claimed that evolution is 100% accurate. I claimed that all the scientific evidence supports evolution as the most likely manner in which humans came to inhabit the planet. But I do claim that the story of genesis in the Bible, while highly entertaining and imaginative, is 100% inaccurate.

                      You asked if I can acknowledge that scientific theories in the past have been disproved. Since scientific theories are based upon scientific facts, let me again post what I referred Coffee to: “In science, a fact is an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and, for all practical purposes, is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow based upon further examination and new discoveries.”

                    18. I’m glad to see that you are able to admit that evolution might not be 100% accurate.

                      The thing is that the scientific evidence “supports” evolution, because that is the direction of the research. One day, someone thought of evolution, and then more people got on the bandwagon and started supporting the theory. If there is something specific you are looking for, research will always be biased. There are more than a couple of scientists, who say that evolution does not always make sense. That some pieces of the puzzle are missing. What does that mean? Maybe it means that we just haven’t found them. OR, it means that we are trying to put together the wrong puzzle pieces. We can’t prove something we don’t know anything about. Maybe there is something else, other than evolution, or creationism? Or maybe there is something that is a combination of both? And why do you think that the Bible is 100% inaccurate? Because the evangelists didn’t use statistical analysis as we know it today?

                      I enjoyed reading your repeated quote. What I read is: “Yes, I’m aware that evolution might be totally disproved tomorrow. However, I will not admit that directly.”

                    19. I’m not sure how you ever read into anything I said that I’m “aware that evolution might be totally disproved tomorrow.” I think, more than likely, evidence will continue to support and reinforce the theory evolution. As to being 100% sure of anything, anyone who claims that is a fool.” But I am sure that your characterization of scientific research and study as being biased because it is aimed at proving a theory is highly inaccurate. Most such studies are aimed at taking a hypothesis and employing systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypothesis in order to prove or disprove it. In fact, criticism is the backbone of the scientific method.

                      And why do I think the Bible is inaccurate? Where is the firmament? Is the Earth the center of the universe? Does the sun revolve around the Earth? Did the entire planet ever flood? Was a woman created from the rib of a man? Come on, man. How can anyone take the Bible as anything but great fiction? Listen, all it would take is one piece of verifiable evidence that God exists to destroy atheism. But there is no such evidence. There is tons of evidence to support evolution. So are you going to accept NO evidence whatsoever that God exists or acknowledge that there is overwhelming evidence in favor of evolution?

                    20. “I never claimed that evolution is 100% accurate.” + “Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow based upon further examination and new discoveries.” = You’re “aware that evolution might be totally disproved tomorrow.” Also, the fact that you agree with the details, but refuse to let the details influence your big picture shows how set in your ways you are. It’s not a surprise, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.

                      Scientific research showed that eggs are good. Then, it showed that eggs will kill you. Then, we were told to eat them in moderation. Now they are the best thing one could eat.

                      My conversation was never about creationism/ the Bible vs. evolution. It was aimed at focusing on some details and seeing if people who are set in their ways are able to be objective.

                      However, have you ever heard about the origin of the Black Sea? And how scientists cannot all agree on the “facts”?

                    21. I’m talking about science. And research. And evidence. Confirming what you said – what is considered scientifically sound today might not be the same tomorrow.

                    1. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Oh, so I don’t agree with you, so in your mind, I am wrong. Interesting how religion and science seem to always lead to the same devastation.

                    2. bottomlesscoffee007

                      I’ve never witnessed climate change or evolution. Have you? What do you base your findings on? Did you compare your estimations to a control and differentiate between the two? What was ruled out?

                    3. I am not a climate scientist. I am not a paleontologist. But I accept the scientific theories of such scientists as explanations for the origins of species and for environmental effects. Upon what basis do you deny evolution or climate change?

                    4. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Evolution, hmmm, if evolution was true, then why are there still apes? Why is there no specific or exact “missing link” if you will. It all seems rather convenient that everything lined up perfectly from then until now.

                      Climate change, yeah I can appreciate that. I just don’t think we have the control we wish we had. Humans might own a fraction of climate change, but really. We cannot control the grass in our own backyard and we cannot control how or where fat is stored on our own bodies.

                      Yet we assume that we can control the tides, the seasons and harness the weather.

                      The “proof” that has you convinced, has fulfilled your personal criteria. Just as my faith, has fulfilled my personal criteria.

                      We all make choices and we all believe what we believe. Yet, it seems that many cannot simply allow others to believe what they want. It’s all about people control.

                      Whether from the church or the laboratory. We are operating on blind faith, yet both sides are demanding control from the other.

                      Freedom and fulfillment, choose what you want as I will. There is no need to compete. The more one attempts to dominate the other, the further me move from one another.

                      Honesty in faith and honesty in science. Mutual respect for one another is what is missing.

                      You do you and I’ll do me. Allow the individual to decide for themselves, since the individual must believe for themselves for it to be true.

                    5. “if evolution was true, then why are there still apes?” Why do creationist always ask then stupid question? Humans did not evolved from apes. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Anyway, as you said, you do you and I’ll do me.

                    6. bottomlesscoffee007

                      You can’t answer it can you? LOL. The attempted condescension says it all. You don’t have an answer, so you claim it is dumb!!! LOL, you’re hilarious Fandango.

                    7. I did answer it. Humans did not evolve from apes. Apes and humans both evolved from a common ancestor. THAT is the answer. And it is a dumb question to ask since no scientific theory ever claimed that humans evolved from apes it’s just a argument concocted by creationists to muddy the waters.

                    8. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Who’s the common ancestor? So, apes and humans split somewhere along the line?

                    9. Yes. Most scientists and paleontologists agree that humans split from our closest African ape relatives in the genus Pan around six to seven million years ago.

                    10. Once again, a scientific theory is not simply a “best guess,” but if that’s what you want to believe, that’s your right.

                    11. I did answer it. Humans did not evolve from apes. Apes and humans both evolved from a common ancestor. THAT is the answer. And it is a dumb question to ask since no scientific theory ever claimed that humans evolved FROM apes. It’s just something concocted by creationists to muddy the waters on what evolution is all about.

                    12. bottomlesscoffee007

                      So….. you still haven’t provided any type of answer. Just an ambiguous statement really. What is the common ancestor?

                    13. Sheesh. Our closest living biological relatives are chimpanzees and bonobos, with whom we share many traits. But we did not evolve DIRECTLY from any primates living today. DNA also shows that our species and chimpanzees diverged from a common ancestor species that lived between 8 and 6 million years ago. You can do your own research on this by reviewing relevant scientific documents, unless the only source if your “scientific” knowledge comes from the Bible.

                    14. bottomlesscoffee007

                      I thought we were closer to mice and pigs. So, we’re is that ancestor? Where is the proof of that ancestor?

                    15. “Our closest animal relatives are the great apes: chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas. About 98% of the DNA in our genes is exactly the same as in chimpanzees, making us as closely related to a chimp as horses are to zebras. Where’s the proof? DNA. Where’s the proof that God exists?

                    16. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Well, that depends on how you are looking Fandango. God is everywhere and in everything. How was dna developed? Where do cells come from? We haven’t explored the rainforest to the fullest extent, the oceans are still being explored and new discoveries are still being made.

                      We still do not fully understand our own brains? Yet we think we have the key to life itself?

                    17. “God is everywhere and in everything.” And he’s invisible, mysterious, and supernatural. How convenient for you and everyone who buys into that fiction.

                    18. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Hahahah, ah Fandango. I can understand how you may be unable to understand. You apparently already know all the answers.

                    19. bottomlesscoffee007

                      So, you have a problem with or it bothers you that people believe in God?

                      Why do you have such an issue with people believing in God Fandango? Do you take issue with Muslims and Jews as well? Or is it just Christians that bother you?

                    20. I don’t have a problem with people believing in God, Coffee. Whatever floats your boat, you knows. I just find it interesting that God is the answer to unknowable questions. As an atheist, I don’t believe God exists. I believe that man created God in his own image. As to religions, I treat them all the same…any religion that bases it’s dogma and beliefs on a made up deity (or deities). And my only problem with religion and the religious is when they try to impose their beliefs on others.

                    21. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Ah ha, Fandango. Well, from my experience, both personal and from observing others. A belief in God is backed up both from personal experience and by asking questions. You see, in many “houses of God” as is in many “scientific research facilities” questions are not allowed. You are expected to believe based on the teachings of others.

                      Anyone who truly believes in God or in science, does so because they have witnessed it themselves. That is all. God wants us to ask questions, just as in science, we are expected to ask questions and discover for ourselves.

                      So you see, an inquisitive mind is required for both. Yet both will always be corrupt, since humans have figured out that money and profits are to be made, by convincing many that they are the authority on the subject.

                      We all practice science and we all investigate. Sometimes we don’t require a bunch of evidence and sometimes we do.

                      Asking questions is the root of every belief.

                    22. Ah ha, Coffee. From my experience, both personal and from observing others, acceptance, not questions, is the order of the day for “houses of God,” while questions, not acceptance, is the modus operandi in “scientific research facilities.” So it seems that I say potayto, you say potahto; I say tomayto, you say tomahto; potayto, potahto, tomayto, tomahto, let’s call the whole thing off!

                    23. Sorry, I’m on my first cup of coffee. I hit reply before I intended. Where was I? Oh yeah, religion and the religious imposing their beliefs upon others. I think religion and beliefs are highly personal matters. So why do religious people feel compelled to proselytize, to persuade people that they are right and anyone who doesn’t believe as they believe is wrong? Look at how many people through the ages have been killed in the name of God and religion. Why is that necessary? Why is the “other religion” or the lack of any religious belief always such a threat?

                      So bottom line, I have no issue with people believing in God or in Christianity. As you so aptly put it, you do you and I’ll do me. If you’d prefer to not have me express my lefty, heretical, and blasphemous opinions on your blog, let me know and I’ll refrain. I’m not as provocative on my blog as you are…most of my posts are flash fiction, But I will occasionally express my opinions on political and religious hypocrisy there. Feel free to express your opposing views, but do not expect me to turn the other cheek.

                    24. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Quite the contrary Fandango. I appreciate and enjoy our back and forth. Your wit and intellect make me think and require me to respond accordingly.

                      This is why I write, to learn and to engage. So, please continue to push back. If you stop Fandango, I might become dumber than I already am.

                      I despise echo chambers Fandango. I want to grow and learn and the only way I can is if I continue to ask for candid comments.

                    25. That may be the case, Coffee, but when you do get candid comments, if you agree with them, and it seems most of your commenters agree with you, you embrace them. But if you get comments like mine, which push back, you become almost combative and go into attack mode. So I know you like to debate, but I don’t think you’re really willing to listen. Then again, neither am I. Which makes this kind of a waste of time for both of us.

                    26. bottomlesscoffee007

                      That’s the problem with reading text. We insert our own attitudes into what we read. Believe it or not, I don’t feel as if I was getting combative.

                      To be honest, I had a smile on my face and I looked forward to every comment you left. I realize that even though we were disagreeing, you were coming from a place of thoughtfulness and honesty. That is why I continued to respond back. There was not a combative bone in my body when I would reply.

                      That is why I would love to hand you the mic. We don’t have to agree, yet it is incredibly powerful and educational to have these discussions, no holds barred.

                      You did not attack me personally as I did not attack you personally. We discussed the issue and it was a great discussion. At least from where I’m sitting it was.

                    27. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Me and you got some solid chemistry man. I really wish you would do a podcast but I can understand and respect your decision.

                    28. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Really? You think so? I think it’s good to converse with those opposite of me. It’s how we learn and grow.

                    29. Again, replying to the latest comment in the thread that I can, after reading the whole exchange.

                      Fandango, you can believe what you want to believe, but I would recommend you brush up on your arguing techniques.

                      You say you choose to believe in evolution even though you’re not a scientist working in that field, yet you refuse to accept that some people choose to believe in creationism even though they’re not God. Why is 1 OK, while the other isn’t?

                      You say that we have proof that we come from the same ancestor, yet we do not have any proof what that ancestor is. Why can’t it be God?

                    30. My position (or belief) is based upon reams of scientific study, data, and evidence. So yes, I choose to believe that such evidence has validity. If people choose to believe in creationism based upon faith, which is believing in something despite a lack of evidence, that’s their right. And if you want to believe that God is the answer to everything, that, too, is your right. But to suggest that because apes still exist, humans can’t have evolved from apes is a poorly worded, nonsensical question. And that’s what I tried to explain to Coffee.

                      I’m sorry if you find my arguing techniques wanting.

                    31. We evolve. Apes not so much. I guess survival of the fittest?
                      Why is it easier to believe that we come from the same ancestors than to believe something that has been believed to be true for thousands of years? The Bible is a pretty thick book, too. Written by multiple people telling the same story. The Bible is a testimony. Faith is based on that. Not only belief.

                      Your definition of evidence is very subjective.

                      I’m not trying to convince you of anything. I’m just poking holes in your story. And it saddens me to hear that you don’t see them.

                    32. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Without a doubt. Not just the western world though, throughout the world, Christians have been persecuted and prosecuted, from North Korea, to China the Middle East, India, Russia and beyond.

                    33. I said the Western world, because that is what I have the most experience with, and because the West is supposed to be symbolic of freedom, etc. But I agree that is the case all over the world. In Africa people still die for their faith.

                    34. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Oh, that makes sense. My b Goldie. The west is held up as the measuring stick for the rest of the world.

                    35. If you truly believe that there are more holes in the theory of evolution than there are in the stories from the Bible, then there’s nothing left to say. It saddens me that you think that the thickness of a book written by multiple people thousands of years ago makes it more reliable than the research of thousands of scientists coming up with the same results over the past century. Sad, indeed.

                    36. I like how selective you are in your understanding and in picking what is and what isn’t an argument.

                      Discussions used to be fun. I think I wrote a post, or two WAAAY back on that.

      1. Wow! I am not cultish but I do believe we need to take care of our planet. There are more eco-friendly ways of doing things. I read just today about a tanker leaking oil into/into a coral reef. The polar ice cap is melting, that can’t be a good thing. All the chemicals we’ve dumped into the soil, water and atmosphere cause damage.We need to take better care of our home or it will wind up unlivable.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          I’m not saying we shouldn’t be good stewards, quite the contrary actually, we should be good stewards.

          I’m talking about people talking about how the world will end if we don’t do something. We cannot control the grass in our own backyards, we cannot control where fat is stored within our own bodies. Yet for some reason we assume we can control the heavens, the tides, the weather. Seems rather prideful in my estimations.

          The demands that are being made, for everyone to succumb to or to be penalized or ostracized. The dire consequences are that of not succumbing to God. It seems funny to me that science is touted as the truth, yet, when it comes to science, how often has science changed in the past 50 years?

          Do we even understand the effects of what is being proposed? Or are we just rushing to failure over and over and over?

          1. What demands?
            I saw that clip you posted about science vs religion. “Bitch”😂 it’s true that data can be used to support any point. It’s also true that as knowledge grows things believed to be true, may no longer be so.

            1. bottomlesscoffee007

              I just see the similarities between science and religion. It seems to suggest that no matter what anyone believes, everyone needs a belief system.

              So, in religion, if you don’t succumb, you will go to hell.

              In science, if you don’t succumb, you will die in a fiery ball or you will drown. The storms will swallow the earth and everyone in it.

              Both use faith, yet both oppose one another. I guess for many, there can be only one, like in highlander!

              1. Any group that insists their way is the ONLY way needs to GO AWAY.

                I see your point. Everyone does have a belief system. Who’s to say what is “right”? I’ve said before that I’m not religious, but I would never tell anyone else they shouldn’t believe whatever they want. Faith or atheism is a personal choice.

                1. bottomlesscoffee007

                  Exactly, it is personal, therefore, the expectations are personal as well as the responsibilities.

                  1. The problem is that the Earth belongs to all the life on it but not every human does their part in caring for it. Some humans actively destroy it. We can’t have “live and let live” when it comes to global, environmental things.

                    1. Aw shucks😊 thanks! You’re not so bad yourself.
                      We’ve proven that people with completely different ideas on politics & religion can still get along. We totally rock, dude!🙌💪

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      How people are appalled if you don’t believe in God. How some people are appalled if you don’t believe in climate change.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          Are we not allowed to believe and not believe without being punished by the “true believers”?

          1. Yes, l got you the first time 🙂

            Our opinions are down to us, we all choose to believe in what we believe in – and shouldn’t be judged by others – that’s what your post is asking?

            What we therefore choose to believe in we shouldn’t be crucified for by those who disagree 🙂

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      Sure, and I even think that humans own a fraction of climate change.

      At the same time though, how do we compete with volcanoes? Or Forest fires? What about China, India, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Russia etc?

      1. We certainly have had a hand in trashing the place. No doubt. But, climate…HAARP has tried to screw with it & the damn chemtrailing but, MOST of what is going on is Earth, Herself…including the rise in CO2. That is Her.

  2. “You know, people are killed in Islamic nations for conforming to Islam.” You mean, are killed for NOT conforming to Islam.
    I absolutely agree with you. It’s a cult – like evolution. Have you listened to Don Patton’s videos?
    Love the last line 🙂

  3. Maybe it’s a part of a scam to have us pre-pay for a 1 way ticket to the Moon/ Mars/ etc? That way we leave the Earth for others to have to themselves? We go off to die, and they stay here rich as hell? Survival of the fittest. Population control. Etc.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      That’s exactly what it is Goldie. Population control. Whether from the pulpit or giving a lecture on science. All designed to establish control and dependency.

  4. The same people who easily accept every other lie pushed by the globalists are accepting man made climate change as fact . They need to believe that someone is going to take care of them . The scare tactics work well . Mind control has been refined to a very effective science . And those who don’t believe will be punished .

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      Exactly PK. Theories are discussed as if they were not theories. People control and mind control. I’m pretty sure the earth is going to be fine, just as it always has.

      People have traded God for nature. People want to move away from God, yet they do not realize, they still need to believe in something. So, they still practice faith, just not in God and not into a practice that will save them.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          Exactly PK. Nothing ever changes. Regardless of what anyone says, we are as we always have been.

      1. Don’t you think it’s funny how “meditation” has replaced “prayer”? Those to be very similar (if not the same), yet one is celebrated, and encouraged, while another not so much.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          Yes, yes I do Goldie. We all have some belief, yet some refuse to call it faith. They would rather their belief trump everyone else’s. It’s the proof to me that people are the same they have always been.

          It’s all about winners and losers. People have been persecuted since the dawn of time for blasphemy, just as they are today. Sad really. It becomes apparent to me that many are not strong enough to allow freedom to others. It’s always “my way or no way”. Then they pile on “facts”, when the fact of the matter is, you don’t really know until you know and every belief from religion to evolution to politics and beyond are all personal choices that we as individuals make. Yet we can never allow the other side to make their own choices for themselves.

  5. Does Environmentalism and Climatism equate to a cult or a radical ideology?
    Yes, absolutely.
    What’s the difference between a rigid belief and Environmentalism and Climatism?
    No difference. People who are environmentalists and pro-climate change, global warming, etc., are usually quite firm in their beliefs.
    When is Judgement Day?
    Read Revelation chapter 20.
    Who are the Four Horsemen?
    Read Revelation 6.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      I was asking redundantly. It seems those who worship the environment seem to look down upon us that believe in God.

Please Like This Post, Follow and Comment to Aid in the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.