4 ms·
It's a totally fair question. It definitely doesn't make sense to nail it down to a single year... However, the same facts convince and persuade diffrent peop
by diydsp 12y ago
It's a totally fair question. It definitely doesn't make sense to nail it down to a single year...
However, the same facts convince and persuade diffrent people through different aesthetics and contexts. This is especially true in today's age of the economy of the sign and the nearly mainstream replacement of Christian theology with science.
IOW, it's to make it scientific b/c so many people believe in science.
This of course ignores the fact that there are still many people UNpersuaded by science. So, to convince them will require another web page wrapping the same concepts and facts in the aesthetics and belief systems that will persuade them...
(Unfortunately the belief system of Christianity has already been eroded to some extent by the concept opposing climate change theory called "Christian Dominion" in which it's a religious duty to consume all the resources possible before the second coming, so those of us who feel strongly about this manner will have to subdivide and find new ways to convince the stubborn.)
- DanAndersen 12y ago>"Christian Dominion" in which it's a religious duty to consume all the resources possible before the second coming Question: is this a doctrine as they would state it, or an exaggeration? I've heard of doctrines of "man has stewardship over the earth" in the sense of all nature being for man's use, and also doctrines of "God will provide" and thus that overpopulation cannot be a significant issue. but I haven't heard official statements of the "use everything up before the Second Coming as a moral imperative" before. Sources?
- mc32 12y agoI am areligious, but I thought stewardship, in their context meant 'looking after' more than 'exploiting'.