I really do not believe the majority has much sway with God.
And "God" has no sway with me. What's you point?
Matthew 7:14
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few therebe that find it. This nation was founded on Christian principles but that in no way makes every citizen a Christian.
Sure it was, sure it was. Christian principles like "democracy"? The only way to think that the US was founded on "christian principles" is to ignore the differnce between the 1st amendment (freedom of worship) and the first commandment (worship only one specific god).
After this diversion back to the point.
You're the one with the random bible quotes in a thread about liberalism in the US. Whatever.
1. The mocking by breaking tablets. 2. Mocking by rewriting the 10 commandments.
Isn't it your Moses who broke those tablets? Not sure what that has to do with any subject of this thread. And as for rewriting them. There are 3 copies of the 10Comm. in the Torah and none is the same. Who rewrote them?
“Demonstrated science” Is a bit of overkill here.
Which one? Evolution or climatology? You referenced both in the same short post. (They are not related to each other.) Climatology is pretty well established (and the seeming subject of the rest of your post), but evolution is extremely well established.
There are many reputable scientists who disagree with the so call science you refer to.
Many, maybe; reputable, in their own fields perhaps, but these lists of scientists opposing climate or evolution science are populated with people from outside the fields. They are not actual experts. A chemist is not an authority on evolution. A physicist is not an authority on climate. It doesn't matter how reputable they are in their own areas. (And Evolution and Climatology are very much sciences. Knock off the "so-called" bit.)
There are also many scientists who agree publicly only because of fear of losing positions.
Poppycock. A great lie told by deniers. Such pressure does not exist and the people who propagate this falsehood either know this or they are ignorant of how science actually works.
This movement is not about saving the planet it is about gaining money, power and controlling the every day lives of the masses.
Climate models and science are in no way dependent on what activists in "a movement" do with them. But even among "the movement" the vast majority just want to avoid catastrophic alterations of our global economic, political, and ecosystems as would come from climate change.
Al Gore became quite wealthy promoting sacrifice for you and I while destroying the planet in his jet and using obscene amounts of energy in his mansion.
The science is not true or false based on the actions of any hypocrite, including Algore.
Responsible use of resources is a good and noble thing but this movement only uses that as a front for evil intent. When those fooled by this find themselves riding bicycles, eating tofu, freezing in the winter, roasting in the summer, taxed into poverty they will all too late see the scam.
Go ride a bike it would be good for you.
We should all already be dead or up to our necks in melted polar ice caps if the alarmist of 20 years ago knew what they were talking about.
I really don't care what "the alarmists" say. The climate models of 20 and 30 years ago were quite on point given the amount of CO2 emitted since then. This is why we say the science is well established -- it has a solid track record at this point.