So you trust data sets (which are easy to fake) Over people acting in their own best interest and survival?
I suspect he's like me and trusts valid reasoning applied to evidence over faith-based ideas. It really isn't difficult to conclude soundly that climatological catastrophe is here as was prophesied by the scientists, is manmade, is getting worse, and will continue to do so into the foreseeable future. One can conclude that himself just by looking at CO2 ppm and global temperatures trends over the last few decades, and assorted proxies for warming such as glacial melting, sea-level rising, and coral blanching. This is as simple and straightforward as vaccination rates versus severe illness and death rates for Covid.
Those that can't do that but recognize the power of critical thinking and the existence of experts and expertise will also come to the correct conclusions because of that. It's just the cohort that isn't aware of what critical thinking is let alone that it exists and what can be known because of it. This is the Dunning-Kruger cohort, who think that all opinions are arrived at the way that they arrive at theirs - guessing who to trust - and therefore, no opinion is better than any other including their own uniformed opinions. This is sometimes described as thinking too highly of their own skills, but I think that that is not correct. They think that everybody else is down in the guess zone with them because there is no other zone to rise into.
On the contrary.. [The Bible] is VERY relevant
The Bible is entirely irrelevant to unbelievers. It plays no part in their lives. They consult it for nothing because it explains nothing and doesn't address the relevant issues of modern life like reproductive freedom and democracy, stem cells and greenhouse gas emissions, vaccines and the value of a college education. Open it to a random passage and find nothing that one can use. Let's look at the fifth scripture of the fifth book of the Bible, the tenth of the tenth, fifteenth of the fifteenth, twentieth of the twentieth, etc., for pearls of wisdom. Where not possible, I used 5:5 again
Deuteronomy 5:5 - "You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.
2 Samuel 10:10 - "In the course of time, the king of the Ammonites died, and his son Hanun succeeded him as king."
Ezra 15:15 (doesn't go that high; here's 5:5) - "But the eye of their God was watching over the elders of the Jews, and they were not stopped until a report could go to Darius and his written reply be received."
Proverbs 20:20 - "If someone curses their father or mother, their lamp will be snuffed out in pitch darkness."
Lamentations 25:25 - (doesn't go that high; here's 5:5) "Those who pursue us are at our heels; we are weary and find no rest."
Amos 30:30 (no such verse; here's 5:5) - "do not seek Bethel, do not go to Gilgal, do not journey to Beersheba. For Gilgal will surely go into exile, and Bethel will be reduced to nothing."
The whole book is filled with that kind of language. Believers consider it important, but that is different from relevant. Where is the relevance in any of that or anything else in the book? Occasionally, I stop on a TV preacher's show, usually an American with a southern accent and big hair. Recently, I heard one discussing a story of Elijah and Elisha from
2 Kings. Take a look at the link, and then try to imagine this man trying to make this story relevant to his audience.
That is absurd [snip] You confuse religion with politics.
You responded to, "Just look at how many evangelicals want to destroy the planet because they believe it is part of their theology, the End Times." He didn't mention politics, and that's not absurd. It's accurate. Do you know why evangelical Christians are Zionists? It's not because they love Israel or the Jews.
Christian "ideology" has nothing to with the Republican party.
Yet somehow, the Republicans managed to impose Christian ideology on the women of America.
