Atheists Borrow from Christian Doctrine

Evolution borrows Christian Dogma

If evolution is the path through which life, and indeed human life, resides on this planet than there are many problems with how humanity is treated.

Evolution teaches that man is nothing more than an animal. It resides at the top of the food chain simply because it has become intelligent by means of natural selection. Evolutionists believe that man is a product of the earth, and a product of the universe, that there is nothing inherently majestic or special about human beings in the cosmos.

If man is no different that the animals, than his access to the resources of the planet should be no more restricted than an ant, or a duck.  As the animals all have equal access to the resources of the planet, than man being nothing more than an animal should also have the same access without restrictions.  There is no evolutionary reason for man to not build whatever he wishes where ever he wishes anytime he wishes. No reason for an animal to restrict  its use of the resources of the planet that spawned its very existence.

Environmentalists want man to be restricted from using some resources because it "harms" the environment. That is not logical, because if man was made from the same materials as the earth was made, than by not allowing him free use of all the resources is the same as genocide, and has potential to lead to extinction of the species.  In theory the planet spawned all life spontaneously, than all life can be said to be a product of the planet, and human use of the planet is no different than a plant using decayed waste as a nutrition source. So where did the idea come from that man is the master of the planet and needs to care for the environment?

The idea that man is higher than the animals, and that he needs to subdue the planet and be its steward comes from the Bible. Many environmentalist and atheists are borrowing from Christianity to make their claim.  The only possible reason for man to be restricted from complete access to Earth in its entirety is because the Bible teaches that man was made higher than all other animals and was commanded to rule over the whole planet and cultivate it.

So there is absolutely zero evolutionary reason for man to not:

Drill oil in the Gulf of Mexico
Cut down forests
Build in wetland areas
Burn coal and fill the skies with smoke
Ignore a minor temperature change
Create chemicals that kill insects
Put animals in cages
Use animals for experimental purposes
Drive massive vehicles
Create antibiotics that kill pathogens
Have intercourse with animals
Fish, hunt, or destroy other species, even to the point of extinction
Clone, or genetically modify any life form
Enslave other races, genders, species



No evolutionary reason at all!


The only argument that man should not do these things is because the earth was created perfect and man was put in charge of taking care of the planet by the Creator of the planet.  Your welcome!

Climate Change from a Climate Change Scientist turned Skeptic

The science is not settled on this matter. If the predictions of the climate models was correct, then we would be seeing the obvious effects of global warming already, but still no islands have sunk, and the icecaps have not melted. There is 30 years of data to prove that none of it has happened as predicted.

Climate Change Theorists: the new flat earthers

If you do a perusal of history, there are times when conventional, accepted science is so corrupt that the so-called scientists do everything they can to shut down real science. You get the whole "let's not let Galileo 's theory of a solar centered system see the light of day" attitude, and you get the nay-sayers proclaiming Columbus would fall off the edge and giving him ships would be a huge waste of the state's funds. These periods are led by a phenomenon called "scientific elitism". Basically a time when scientist think that they are the experts and ordinary citizens are not equipped to handle the complexities of scientific discovery by themselves.

This is part and parcel of today's science. You know it is. Any theory such as......I don't know....... global warming denial is looked at as something that needs to be shut down, no debate, no allowing the theories to see the light of day. After all, if they were the elite of science they would simply go along with the consensus that global climate change is the theory of the day and not try to interject any simple data into the pot. There is no room for simple observable data, there is no room for the scientific method, there is no room for thinking outside the box.

When scientists try to keep the everyday person out of the whole process of science and ensure us that they are the ones who know, watch out.... true science is not the goal.... the real goal is .....

money, power, control and ego. Stephen Hawking is a perfect example of the problem of elitist scientists. He wheels around saying he can prove there is no need for Divinity in creation. He touts his big bang theory and mocks anyone who has data or hypotheses that diverge from his theory. He thinks that only he is capable of understanding the creation of the universe. Well guess what, he is wrong, just as wrong as the scientist that held the consensus that the earth was flat.

There has been so much information coming out about the falsification of data by the climate scientists and the corruption of government funding of programs that verified the hypothesis of global climate change; that anyone who continues to push the theory can only be seen as corrupt. There is no science in climate science, unless it is classified as "junk science". The scientific method has been totally abrogated by today's climate scientists.

Let me give one example. One of my favorite targets is the whole idea that the universe is simply the result of a cataclysmic explosion of a singularity. How preposterous. Let me hit on just one quandary the big bang theorists have yet to explain. I have yet to find any scientist who can explain how a galaxy can keep its shape. Think about it this way.......when a marching band goes around a corner, the inner members march in place while the far edge is practically running. Lets apply this to a spiral galaxy, how is it possible that there are arms? The stars on the outer rim would need to be traveling at multiple times the speed of light to simply keep the shape, while the inner stars would never be allowed to rotate around the center. This is just one of the "mysteries" that scientists cannot explain with their theories.

And when someone comes up with a possible explanation that refutes the pet theory of big bang, they are resoundingly repudiated and made a laughing stock. Why? Because today's scientists are on an ego trip the size of a small continent. This is the same kind of attitude that led to the dark ages. If you don't believe me, look it up. There is a tendency of science to ebb and flow, and it has always been the attitude of scientists themselves that have led the charge. We are entering, or may have already entered, another dark age of scientific discovery. And the global climate change scientists (and Al Gore) are at the center.