Is Belief in Global Warming a New Religion?

[Jason]

When a bunch of freak tornadoes hit the nation recently and killed upwards of 50 people, John Kerry was quick to blame Global Warming:

(I) don't want to sort of leap into the larger meaning of, you know, inappropriately, but on the other hand, the weather service has told us we are going to have more and more intense storms," Kerry said. "And insurance companies are beginning to look at this issue and understand this is related to the intensity of storms that is related to the warming of the earth. And so it goes to global warming and larger issues that we're not paying attention to. The fact is the hurricanes are more intensive, the storms are more intensive and the rainfall is more intense at certain places at certain times and the weather patterns have changed.

Yet the New York Times noted that "tornado experts said there was no evidence that the deadly storms were related to global warming or anything other than the clash of contrasting cold and warm air masses that usually precedes such events."
The Times went on to quote the Governor of Tennassee:

"The wrath of God is the only way I can describe it," Gov. Phil Bredesen of Tennessee said after a helicopter flight to survey the damage. "I'm used to seeing roofs off houses, houses blown over. These houses were down to their foundations, stripped clean."

Is there a parallel here? When a natural disaster occurrs the religious person speaks of God and the global-warmist invokes "climate change," while neither has any real evidence to support their claim.
The only difference seems to be that while most religious individuals will concede that the mind and motives of God is mysterious to mortals, the global-warmist insists their invocation is the predictible outcome of science.

Not convinced?

The National Post reports that Canadian scientist David Suzuki has "called for political leaders to be thrown in jail for ignoring the science behind climate change":

"What I would challenge you to do is to put a lot of effort into trying to see whether there's a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail because what they're doing is a criminal act," said Dr. Suzuki, a former board member of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.
"It's an intergenerational crime in the face of all the knowledge and science from over 20 years."
The statement elicited rounds of applause.

So the global-warmists are talking about imprisoning heretics.

[Ginnie]

Interesting.
So you think there is absolutely no hint of evidence of Global Warming? Not even a little? A little tiny bit? ;D

I am all mixed up on this issue myself. When confronted with 'An Inconvenient Truth' and 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' one is left perplexed and dizzy.
I used to really like David Suzuki, he wrote an excellent book called 'Good News for a Change' that was upbeat and positive. The last few years though he has joined Al as an alarmist. He tends to bend information or mis-information the same style.
I bet that audience was very pro-Suzuki to begin with.

I might even go further than him. I think all Canadian politicians should be thrown in jail. They are a nitpicking, partisan, childish, truthtwisting and foolish bunch. That's why I don't follow politics that much, their infantile behavior just iks me to death.
Can John McCain run for Prime Minister?

They don't make them like they used to:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYuQ5NhYRCU

[wdmundt]

Scientists seem to be in agreement that you can't say "this storm" or "that storm" is the product of global warming. However, the science does seem to be fairly clear that global warming and climate change are upon us and that humans are primarily responsible. Controversy about this is largely manufactured.

As for throwing people in jail -- if politicians covered up the dangers of radiation and then worked to let business spew radiation into the atmosphere until it killed everyone, I think you'd have the same kind of case. Is that what we are doing today? Are we deliberately masking the danger of something that could kill us all just to help out some big businesses that are causing it?

[Jason]

I'm not talking about whether global warming is real or not - I'm talking about whether it's become a religion to those who believe it's real.

[PhantomWolf]

Global warming is, whether it's caused entirely by humans...

[tedward]

It does appear to be that if someone says it is not then the "with us or against us" stance is trotted out. I don't know enough about it and rely on better informed people for info. Just hope all debate is not stifled.

[reynoldbot]

phantomwolf said:

Global warming is, whether it's caused entirely by humans...

Of course, there are multiple factors that contribute to global warming, so the more appropriate question is whether the majority of it is caused by humans. I believe global warming is significantly caused by humans. Most of the science points in that direction, and it seems the people who are quick to question that stance tend to underestimate just how much damage we can really do. The tv series Planet Earth documented just a tiny fraction of the massive damage we have caused to the Earth and still it was pretty daunting.

The one thing that still seems to be pretty poorly understood is how interconnected parts of ecosystems are and, more significantly, how interconnected multiple ecosystems are. For instance, what does the extinction of a certain species of tree frog do to a rain forest ecosystem in South America? How does the razing of forests in Borneo affect weather patterns and ecosystems in Indonesia and Australia? In essence, how many bricks can you knock out of a wall before it comes crashing down? What we are doing now is systematically knocking out bricks, and every few years we manage to rebuild maybe a portion of one we knocked out. I have no doubt we are capable of causing global warming.

I agree with Jason though. When politicians twist the problem into something it's not in order to lay blame for localized weather, they undermine the work scientists have been doing. Global warming is not a scapegoat.

[Jason]

But there's something even more precious to be gained if we do the
right thing. The climate crisis offers us the chance to experience
what few generations in history have had the privilege of
experiencing: a generational mission; a compelling moral purpose; a
shared cause; and the thrill of being forced by circumstances to put
aside the pettiness and conflict of politics and to embrace a genuine
moral and spiritual challenge. - Al Gore

So Al Gore sees himself as involved in a spiritual cause.
Those who don't believe in Global Warming are, to him, on the wrong side of a moral isssue. In other words, they're evil.

[wdmundt]

jason said:

I'm not talking about whether global warming is real or not - I'm talking about whether it's become a religion to those who believe it's real.

Religions aren't verifiable. Global warming is verifiable. Faith is not required to believe in global warming. A rational thought process will lead one to see that global warming is happening. So no, it is not a religion.

[Jason]

You seem to still be missing the point I'm trying to get at here, Wdmundt. It's not whether the cause is real or not, but whether the behavior of the people who have signed on to it is that of reasonable people who have made a rational decision, or those of zealots who have been converted to a new faith.

This talk of imprisoning the nation's leaders for refusing to believe sounds like the same sort of hysteria that led to witch burnings a few hundred years ago.

[wdmundt]

My argument was this:

As for throwing people in jail -- if politicians covered up the dangers of radiation and then worked to let business spew radiation into the atmosphere until it killed everyone, I think you'd have the same kind of case. Is that what we are doing today? Are we deliberately masking the danger of something that could kill us all just to help out some big businesses that are causing it?

[Jason]

Are you saying that global warming has already killed people, and that if leaders of the US had acted sooner those people would be alive today?

[wdmundt]

I'm saying that the science is clear, climate change is coming and humans are responsible. Politicians who deliberately drag their feet now may one day find themselves in figurative and literal hot water. Conservatives have deliberately watered down the very idea that global warming is real so as to forestall any corrective actions that they see as potentially damaging to the economy and responsible businesses.

It is irresponsible to not do something about this while we still have a chance.

[Jason]

But is it irresponsible to the point that those leaders should be imprisoned, or killed?
Or is that an over-reaction?

[wdmundt]

Imprisoned or killed? No. But if climate change happens sooner rather than later, they might want to go into hiding.