Man can not serve 2 masters. Pick one!...Global Warming vs. Evolution

Our conversation is based on another video LI (AKA Liberal Idiot) wanted me to watch. Click here if you'd like to watch it but it's not worth sitting through with all of it's rediculiousness.

It's entitled "Top 10 signs that you're a Christian Fundamentalist" I think the name speaks for it's self. So, as I was watching this video I got stuck on #5 which states the following...

"You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of the earth (4.5 billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents guessing that the earth is a couple of generations old."

oh boy, Let the games begin!

Me-- I'm kind of stuck on #5. If the Earth is 4.55 billion years old...why all of the sudden is it just about to COMBUST if we don't start living "green?" I guess the first 4.55 billion years were really hard on the earth...huh?

LI--Seriously, I am a bit disappointed

Me--I'm sure a scientist would be the first to warn about global warming but, then say the the earth is 4.55 billion years old. Something here doesn't make sense.

LI--I would say that pollution from factory farms, gas from the animals in those factory farms, nuclear waste, oil spills, cars, smoking, and everything else in between and so forth were all really hard on the Earth. And, that's just the most basic factors from the top of my head.

Me--i'm sure our ancestors were much harder on the earth than we were. and, can you imagine the amout of pollution in the air when we were ALL animals?!? I'm not sure how we lived through that.

LI--What?? How much harm can a Neanderthal cause with a stone?

Just as I am baffled when I watch Glenn Beck talk, I am baffled when certain people say "going green" like it's a bad thing. How is it bad? Glenn Beck has given progress a bad name and it baffles me.

Me--I have no problem with people doing their part in recycling so trash doesn't pile up in landfills and pollute the water...but, this whole "green" movement has gone too far.

Anyway, does the evolution theory not state that humans have been around for more than 2 million years (at least as recognizable humans)...and, they had to eat. I would think they would have worked, worked, and reworked the land. Doing this for 2 million years would no doubt put quite a strain on the earth if it were not sustainable. So, therefore, either the green movement and global warming is a farce or evolution is.

LI--back then, the Industrial Revolution had not yet even come close to society. Are you seriously going to argue that the Bushmen way of life is more harmful to the Earth than what we've been doing to it with the start of the Industrial Revolution? Really?

I have a problem with egocentric worldviews, especially when the source of arrogance derives from religion.

Me--I didn't say it was MORE harmful. but, we're talking about, what..150 years since the industrial revolution vs. over 2 million years of people and animals using the earth and it's resources over and over again. So, if revolutions in industry could damage the earth to the point of no return in such a short amout of time. How was it able to withstand for over 2 million years. And, ancient cities were pretty advanced for their time.

LI--They did not have factory farming - true story.

Me--they may not have had factory farming (that you know of) but, they no doubt had just as many cattle. What's the difference if they fart in one area or all spread out...same amout of gas going into the air.

LI--I think factory vs. hunting and gathering is key here.

ME--I think 100-150 years vs 2.2 million years is what's key here, actually. And, that doesn't even include all of what happened to the earth BEFORE, as you say, humans were using the land.

LI--I think arrogance is looming over the person who takes the Bible literally.

Me--honestly, i've met some very arrogant christians as well as evolutionists. i don't think it takes a certain belief to be arrogant.

LI--"What doesn't make sense? Is it not egocentric to say that humans have not harmed the Earth? Why not? We pretty much abuse it in any way that we can, Jana."

Me--So, if we abuse the land anyway we can then that further proves my point about 2.2 million years of abuse.


Stay tuned! I'm pretty sure this conversation will be picked back up tomorrow.

The Pot calling the Kettle Black!

So, LI wanted me to watch a video on Egocentric thinking. Here's a link to the video so you can see it, too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olE06nSACjs

now, since you've seen the video...our conversation will make sense.

Me--ok, I watched it. So, because, I believe in the God and that he created the Earth and everything in it I'm selfish and not intellectual? ...or is it because I disagree with you, much of science and evolutionists so therefore I have no logic? Good NIGHT!!! ---talk about Egocentric!

LI (Liberal Idiot)--You initially told me that God gave us this land to optimize it and use it as we want... er, we're not the only species on the planet. Is it not selfish? You don't buy into the "green movement" and I still really don't understand why... I do realize it's easier to go on living the way we have than to make sacrifices towards a cleaner world.

Me--I totally believe that God gave us the land to use and made it sustainable. Call me selfish...but, I do value humans over animals and if we need the land to survive then we should use it!


So, Am I wrong for being selfish and valuing human life over animals? What is this world coming to that animals are now equal to humans?

I are not a racist!!!

LI (Liberal Idiot)--And, I have yet to meet a non-racist Tea Bagger, thank you very much.

Why give the Tea Party the time of day when they don't know what the differences between communism, fascism, socialism, and Nazism are. WHY?! Sorry, too bad so sad.

ME-- I would like to know what you think they are doing that is so racist?

and, teabagger or not..we know when we're being screwed over!

LI-- Their grammatically incorrect signs say it all.

Well, this one is just really too easy. Apparently, racist and grammatical errors are the same thing. At least, they are if you as a LI (Liberal Idiot).

The answer is obvious...

Me: "I'd been meaning to ask your opinion of the DOJ sueing Arizona, yet, pardoning the Black Panther leader that thinks it's necessary to "kill all the white people and their cracker babies?" Major Double Standard?"

LI (A.K.A--Liberal Idiot): "I don't think that bringing up the Black Panthers lessens the disgust I feel towards Arizona (and like-minded people). but, if you want to talk about the Black Panthers, might as well shed light on the KKK, mountain militia, and the Westboro Baptist Church."

--hmmm...what?!? Way to dodge the question. Could it because LI knows the only appropriate answer would have been. "Well, it's a total double-standard. And, now I understand who's side the Obama administration is on." Wow! This has TOTALLY opened my eyes to the truth. but, alas...still an LI.

I'm not even sure about this one.

A little background on this conversation. LI (Liberal Idiot) is calling out Glenn Beck for saying that Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK.

LI: " Really, Beck? Last time I checked, Byrd was a member of the KKK and also dreamt of a "rebirth" and a "new chapter" in American history. He also called African Americans "negroes," "race mongrels," and "the blackest specimen from the wilds."

Well, we all know that Byrd WAS a member of the KKK. And, that all that Beck said here was true. LI even admits it. So, why is LI mad at Glenn Beck for saying this?

Your guess is as good as mine...