# Using The Climate Alarmists' Logic To Prove God
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [May 7, 2017, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056 "2017-05-07T07:47:26Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 5
### Author:  [@Great\_White\_Dope](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_White_Dope)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/81 "2017-05-09T13:47:35Z")
> [@Mangetout](#):
>
> 95% of children aged 4 believe in Santa
> 95% of conspiracy wackos believe the moon landing was a hoax
> etc
>
> The argument for climate change is not based solely on popularity of the position, but also, _quality of the data_.
The argument is based on two things: The quantity (consensus) and quality (experts) of the believers. It’s _argumentum ad populum_ and a_rgumentum ad auctoritatem,_ rolled into one.
In a nutshell:
\*“The overwhelming majority of the people who best understand **A** , believe **A** to be true. Therefor, **A** is almost certain to be true. You may disagree, but your non-expertise opinion is invalid.”
\*
The problem with this, as I’ve brilliantly displayed in the opening post, is that A can be filled by many things.
Theologians are the experts on God, and they overwhelmingly believe in God. Using climate change alarmists’ “reasoning,” this makes God’s existence almost certain. Those who disagree are deniers.
You can talk about evidence all you want. You’re not an expert, and so you’re incapable of properly evaluating evidence, at least not to the level of the experts, who, might I remind you, find the evidence compelling enough to overwhelmingly believe in God.
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/82 "2017-05-09T13:59:45Z")
Please don’t hijack my grilled cheese discussion. Thanks.
---
### Author:  [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/83 "2017-05-09T14:05:08Z")
> [@Great\_White\_Dope](#):
>
> The argument is based on two things: The quantity (consensus) and quality (experts) of the believers. It’s _argumentum ad populum_ and a_rgumentum ad auctoritatem,_ rolled into one.
>
> In a nutshell:
>
> \*“The overwhelming majority of the people who best understand **A** , believe **A** to be true. Therefor, **A** is almost certain to be true. You may disagree, but your non-expertise opinion is invalid.”
> \*
> The problem with this, as I’ve brilliantly displayed in the opening post, is that A can be filled by many things.
>
> Theologians are the experts on God, and they overwhelmingly believe in God. Using climate change alarmists’ “reasoning,” this makes God’s existence almost certain. Those who disagree are deniers.
>
> You can talk about evidence all you want. You’re not an expert, and so you’re incapable of properly evaluating evidence, at least not to the level of the experts, who, might I remind you, find the evidence compelling enough to overwhelmingly believe in God.
Not the same god, and not the same evidence.
As usual the fatal logical flaw in your argument is that “Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.” - Tim Minchin.
And [observation of the melting of cap ice due to global warming has been observed](https://www.ted.com/talks/james_balog_time_lapse_proof_of_extreme_ice_loss) (meaning that a result of the longer it goes, ocean rise, was one of the scientific predictions that was on the money), and at worst levels than the optimists and deniers thought it was possible.
---
### Author:  [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/84 "2017-05-09T14:06:08Z")
> [@Great\_White\_Dope](#):
>
> Theologians are the experts on God, and they overwhelmingly believe in God. Using climate change alarmists’ “reasoning,” this makes God’s existence almost certain. Those who disagree are deniers.
The difference with science is that they don’t go off and study behind closed doors, then appear to proclaim that something is true. Science looks at data, the data they use is available for everyone, and their methods are available for everyone. You can go examine the data yourself, and if you come to a different conclusion that’s based on facts, publish that.
Theologians have no data, no way for anyone to check their results. It appears to anyone from the outside that they’re just making shit up.
_Theology - it’s the subject without an object!_
---
### Author:  [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/85 "2017-05-09T17:19:56Z")
> [@Great\_White\_Dope](#):
>
> The argument is based on two things: The quantity (consensus) and quality (experts) of the believers. It’s _argumentum ad populum_ and a_rgumentum ad auctoritatem,_ rolled into one.
>
> …
I don’t know what argument you’ve been participating in, but: no, it isn’t - it’s additionally based on the _qualities of the evidence being argued_.
> [@](#):
>
> You can talk about evidence all you want. You’re not an expert, and so you’re incapable of properly evaluating evidence, at least not to the level of the experts, who, might I remind you, find the evidence compelling enough to overwhelmingly believe in God.
Fine, then your assertions mean nothing outside of your walled garden where the evidence can be understood - in that case, it’s still a different scenario to the one you are trying to lay it alongside.
---
### Author:  [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/86 "2017-05-09T17:46:24Z")
> [@Great\_White\_Dope](#):
>
> Theologians are the experts on God
No, they’re not. They’re experts on the historicity of their church, it’s books and it’s notable figures; and, as noted, there’s precious little concensus among them.
---
### Author:  [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/87 "2017-05-09T18:27:49Z")
> [@Great\_White\_Dope](#):
>
> Theologians are the experts on God, and they overwhelmingly believe in God. Using climate change alarmists’ “reasoning,” this makes God’s existence almost certain. Those who disagree are deniers.
As has been noted, theologians are not experts on god, they are scholars of theology. That means that they know all about _claims made about_ (usually one specific) god.
By contrast, scientists produce real, practical, useful results. We see it all around us. Right here. No deity created this here internet thingy, no faithful prayed it into existence, and most clerical types find it a bit problematic. Science does stuff, religion, more often than not, tries to prevent stuff.
So, we tend to be much more likely to heed the word of scientists because they have a proven track record and their work tends toward convergence. Theologians tend to be more divergent, so their ideas are given less credence. And their track record is nowhere near as good as that of scientists.
---
### Author:  [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/88 "2017-05-09T18:34:51Z")
To paraphrase Robert Heinlein, theology is unique amongst the “sciences” because it is a study with no definable subject matter. We can all define life (biology, zoology, botany) at least to a certain extent, ditto the Earth (geology, meteorology, chemistry), stars and planets (astronomy), etc. These are all things that can be seen, even if indirectly, can be measured and recorded, the results of which can be duplicated (or refuted).
Define God? Measure God? Good luck with that. :rolleyes:
---
### Author:  [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/89 "2017-05-09T18:36:11Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#):
>
> Please don’t hijack my grilled cheese discussion. Thanks.
A slice of lightly buttered bread, with cheese grated on top, singed under the oven broiler until the cheese is bubbly. _That_ is the only proper grilled cheese sandwich. It also solves the other problem, as the cheese protects the bread from getting soggy when you put a tomato slice on top. Or anything else. Cucumber slices would be good.
---
### Author:  [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/90 "2017-05-09T19:11:57Z")
> [@Great\_White\_Dope](#):
>
> The problem with this, as I’ve **brilliantly** displayed in the opening post, is that A can be filled by many things.
(Snipping and bolding mine)
I’m not really sure you understand the meaning of “brilliant.” I say this because your OP is most certainly _NOT_ brilliant.
---
### Author:  [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/91 "2017-05-09T19:22:43Z")
Take the grilled cheese and other food product hijack to a different thread.
[/moderating]
---
### Author:  [@Bullitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bullitt)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/92 "2017-05-09T21:19:48Z")
> [@eschereal](#):
>
> As has been noted, theologians are not experts on god, they are scholars of theology. That means that they know all about _claims made about_ (usually one specific) god.
I’d put it a little differently. Theologians are experts on the evidence that God has left for us. Written evidence, archaeological evidence, historical evidence.
---
### Author:  [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/93 "2017-05-09T21:26:29Z")
> [@Bullitt](#):
>
> I’d put it a little differently. Theologians are experts on the evidence that God has left for us. Written evidence, archaeological evidence, historical evidence.
Yeah. Evidence. :rolleyes:
---
### Author:  [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/94 "2017-05-09T21:39:42Z")
> [@Bullitt](#):
>
> I’d put it a little differently. Theologians are experts on the evidence that God has left for us. Written evidence, archaeological evidence, historical evidence.
There is no archeological evidence. Historical evidence would be the same as written evidence, although few today would claim that the written evidence is actualy historical.
---
### Author:  [@Bullitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bullitt)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/95 "2017-05-09T21:50:29Z")
> **[Biblical archaeology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_archaeology)**
>
> Biblical archaeology is an academic school and a subset of Biblical studies and Levantine archaeology. Biblical archaeology studies archaeological sites from the Ancient Near East and especially the Holy Land (also known as Palestine, Land of Israel and Canaan), from biblical times.
> Biblical archaeology emerged in the late 19th century, by British and American archaeologists, with the aim of confirming the historicity of the Bible. Between the 1920s, right after World War I, when Palestine came ...
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/96 "2017-05-09T21:53:36Z")
> [@Bullitt](#):
>
> [Biblical archaeology - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_archaeology)
And which of all that is evidence that your god left for us, as opposed to evidence that some places and peoples mentioned in the Bible have historical counterparts?
---
### Author:  [@Bullitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bullitt)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/97 "2017-05-09T21:58:23Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> And which of all that is evidence that your god left for us, as opposed to evidence that some places and peoples mentioned in the Bible have historical counterparts?
Well now, it depends on your point of view, doesn’t it? My general answer is all of it is evidence that God left for us. And that includes the Bible.
---
### Author:  [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/98 "2017-05-09T22:03:23Z")
> [@Bullitt](#):
>
> evidence that God has left for us.
Can you support this claim?
---
### Author:  [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/99 "2017-05-09T22:06:07Z")
> [@Bullitt](#):
>
> [Biblical archaeology - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_archaeology)
Well, the problem with that is that while that is evidence for the people and cities from the times of the heroes and legends, we do not think nowadays that when Schliemann found Troy that therefore we got then evidence for the Gods of Olympus.
Unless you are Percy Jackson.
---
### Author:  [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)
#### Post date: [May 9, 2017, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056/100 "2017-05-09T22:10:31Z")
> [@Bullitt](#):
>
> I’d put it a little differently. Theologians are experts on the evidence that God has left for us. Written evidence, archaeological evidence, historical evidence.
Evidence that it is _claimed_ that it left for us. From what I understand, jehovallah is ominmax. Which means it is omnipotent. From a strict logical perspective, omnipotence is exactly the same as impotence, so any claims about what some omnipotent deity has done are the epitome of questionable.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056.md?page=4)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/using-the-climate-alarmists-logic-to-prove-god/786056.md?page=6)