Global Warming, the new religion.

*Arrianna* · Dec 26, 2006, 04:28 PM

Ok, first disclaimer: this thread is not for discussing whether or not man made Global Warming is true.

Recently I have been listening to people defending man made global warming against skeptics and I am being reminded strongly of fanatical religious discussions defending religion against skeptics. For them it is something one shouldn't even question. It appears to have become a matter of blind faith.

So as I was wondering to myself if it had become a matter of "religion" for many I discovered an article that hit upon what I was thinking.

World Watch by Orson Scott Card

Quote:

I've been waiting a long time to see real science applied to global warming.

Finally, there's a bit of rationality applied to the subject.

Not that there haven't always been real scientists involved. But either they, or the people writing about their work, have been functioning like "creation scientists" -- they are already convinced, so instead of testing their own ideas, they turn whatever data comes along into "proof" of their belief in order to persuade the ignorant unbeliever.

Whether the temperature's going up or down, whether they're talking about the fall of civilizations or the disappearance of species in ancient times, it's always somehow a proof or demonstration or warning about the peril of global warming.

The sky is falling, so we must shoot the dog.

Here are the questions we've always faced on this issue:

1. Has global temperature risen?

2. If so, how much?

3. Is this out of line with temperature fluctuations in the past?

4. What have the consequences of global temperature change been so far?

5. What have the consequences of warming or cooling been in the past?

6. How rapid are the changes?

7. To what degree are today's global temperatures the result of human activities?

8. What evidence is there that current changes, if any, are part of a broad trend rather than a temporary fluctuation?

9. If human activity is causing global warming, then what is the cost of stopping those human activities compared to the cost of allowing global warming to continue?

10. When computer models are used to predict future temperature trends, how do we know that all significant variables have been included?

11. How well have these computer models predicted temperature change in the past?

12. How do we know that human activity that causes global warming is not saving us from even worse global temperature change?

Time and again, I've read the little religious testimonies from scientists and writers about science, bearing witness to their personal faith in global warming, without seeing even a hint that they have addressed any of the questions above except in the most superficial way.

Most of them seem to start with the article of faith that any unexplained phenomenon is the result of human actions, and any phenomenon resulting from human actions must be bad, and any price humans must pay to stop doing these bad things is worth it.

It's the New Calvinism: Humans are evil by nature and should be punished, even if the punishment won't solve the problem, and even if the problem is actually better than the "solution."

So what do you think? Has belief in Global Warming risen to levels of religious fervor? Is it something that "must be believed" without question or is it simply a matter of some political debate?

Chubz · Dec 26, 2006, 06:38 PM

I would have to say that it has become something of a religious fervor, and also been compounded by poltical debate. The arguments surrounding global warming are completely on opposite sides of the scale, and there is absolutely no room for any middle ground in the debate.

Without going into what causes global warming, I'll just say that the Earth does go through transitory stages of environment, otherwise there wouldn't have been an ice age, because the environment would have stayed the same. That doesn't happen.

But the lines of argument with global warming are so diametrically opposite, that there is no allowance for any argument in the middle ground. Add to that political leanings, and the debate is split into factions.

You have those on the left saying that global warming is caused by humans, who help screw up the world each day by spending money, because it funds big corperations who spill more toxins into the air, and by driving a car to work you're dooming the entire planet.

On the right side, you have those who say global warming isn't a big deal (or that there IS no global warming) and that any mention of it is fear mongering done by liberal whiners.

The debate is so heated that the two sides pretty much try and force you to unquestionably believe what they are saying, and there's no room for minutely disagreeing. Anyone who tries to argue in the middle ground generally gets losts in the argument because the two sides are screaming so loud. The news media isn't going to pay attention to anyone arguing the middle ground, because the two main sides provide better stories.

It's really become a matter of "you are" or "you aren't." In all honesty, the majority of people who argue either side probably aren't that well educated about their argument, and are simply following along with the flock because they believe what they are being told (or screamed should I say hehe)......since science isn't able to prove either side of the argument, the matter comes down to simple belief in what is being said (trying to link this to religion). There is no middle ground.

*EDIT: I should say that I'm basing this post on how this topic is presented through the media. However, in terms of the divided line between the arguments, I can certainly say that if I were to go to my university and say that global warming is just a natural occurence, I would be swarmed immediately and told how I was wrong, and that human civilization is to blame for everything.

Actually, I can give a little example of this. I was at the university the other day returning books to the library, and had parked in a 15 minute parking zone. My friend stayed in the car, and I left it running since I was only going to be two seconds, simply dropping the books into the return box. Once I got back to the car, my friend told me that while I was gone, someone had driven up in a truck, gotten out, and started telling my friend to turn the car off because letting it idle was destroying the earth, and bad for the environment.

Hassun · Dec 27, 2006, 01:35 PM

If treating it as a religion will decrease our pollution I'm even willing to tolerate a global warming pope.

People who deny that it's there are wrong. Plain and simple. The climate IS getting warmer and wetter. (Whether it is temporary or not I don't know.)

All the people who say "it isn't all that bad" should just put a sock in it. Even IF it isn't all that bad. Why? because you can at least try to decrease the problem.
Man-made/natural causes/combination/... It doesn't matter, the problem is there and we had best start doing something about it lest we want to have more desert and gigantic floods.

**LenMiyata** · Dec 27, 2006, 04:33 PM

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Also complicating the issue is the time factor. By the time there is solid proof that Global warming is occurring, and to the extent of the change that will happen, it will already be too late to do anything about it.

Pushing the concept of Global Warming is almost like the concept of selling insurance. Insurance is not something the buyer can make money on, and no one wants to be in the position to collect on it. But when you need that Insurance, you need it badly...

*Arrianna* · Dec 27, 2006, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hassun

If treating it as a religion will decrease our pollution I'm even willing to tolerate a global warming pope.

Ummm... Hassun, I didn't expect you to prove me right so clearly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Also complicating the issue is the time factor. By the time there is solid proof that Global warming is occurring, and to the extent of the change that will happen, it will already be too late to do anything about it.

So, on subject, it's like finding out if God is real when you die?

I keep hearing that scientists who don't support the theory are having their funding slashed and being censored by various governments. It reminds me of how the Catholic church used to censor scientific discoveries.

JefferyXie · Dec 28, 2006, 03:23 AM

I guess it is a bit of a religious fever because people talk about it as if they are actually worshipping it and a political debate due to the fact that there are leaders like John Howard the prime minister of Australia and Tony Blair the British talking about the global warming issue.Globla warming is bound to affect the younger generation more than the elder and it is they who should find the solution to solve it.Sure there isn't much we can do about it,but doing every little thing by everyone can make a huge difference.

**LenMiyata** · Dec 28, 2006, 09:58 AM

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrianna

:... I keep hearing that scientists who don't support the theory are having their funding slashed and being censored by various governments. It reminds me of how the Catholic church used to censor scientific discoveries.

Though of course, it's different in this country, as the Bush administration has gone so far as to edit government funded scientific papers and reports to lessen the degree of the findings, and have tried to muzzle scientists working working in federal government research divisions from speaking to the press...

*Arrianna* · Dec 28, 2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Though of course, it's different in this country, as the Bush administration has gone so far as to edit government funded scientific papers and reports to lessen the degree of the findings, and have tried to muzzle scientists working working in federal government research divisions from speaking to the press...

Links please. That's quite the statement without something to back it up.

**LenMiyata** · Dec 28, 2006, 01:28 PM

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrianna

Links please. That's quite the statement without something to back it up.

Bush administration blocks report linking hurricanes to global warming

Rewriting The Science, Scientist Says Politicians Edit Global Warming Research - CBS News

Climate Researchers Feeling Heat From White House

Bush Administration Quashes Own Scientists Agreement on Global Warming and Hurricanes | Greenpeace USA

Politics & Science - Investigating the State of Science Under the Bush Administration

U.S. Senators Seek Investigation of Bush Attempts to Silence Scientists on Global Warming

Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming - New York Times

U.S. Wants No Warming Proposal (washingtonpost.com)

NASA scientist rips Bush on global warming - Environment - MSNBC.com

Bush covers up climate research | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

Center for Biological Diversity - Press Release

AP Wire | 11/14/2006 | Greens sue Bush administration over global warming report

ABC News: Censorship on Global Warming Alleged

I could go on and on and on...

*Arrianna* · Dec 28, 2006, 07:31 PM

I'll see your disgruntled NASA scientist (upset about red tape and government oversight) supported by Greenpeace and raise you:

1 Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, 2 Senators threatening congressional censure of supporters of skeptics, and 8 State Attorneys who are setting Global Warming Policies themselves.

All of this only seems to prove my point. It's not about discussion anymore, it's "us vs them". A new religious crusade has started and if you are not for them you are against them.

**LenMiyata** · Dec 28, 2006, 08:31 PM

Grumble Grumble Grumble

This issue isn't so much a Religions crusade, (that is, unless you consider the worship of $$$ a religion), ultimately boils down to MONEY...

For a government to actually address the issues of Global Warming, would require a reallocation of government goals and funding, changes to the tax structure, and major changes to the world economy. The disruptions that would be caused by this are not only undesirable to persons and companies in position of power and influence, they represent a threat for their ability to make $$$. So it's not surprising that they would try to deny or suppress research that is counter to their position...

Now scientist who disagree, this is the natural state of Science. Ideas and data MUST be discussed and debated, and the majority consensus will agree on the most correct ideas and information. As a comparison to your Exxon researchers, the link that first connected tobacco products to lung cancer was first discovered in the late 1950s, yet Tobacco company sponsored researchers claimed up to only a few years ago that the scientific data was invalid and that there was no cancer link to tobacco...

And I see your 8 Attorney Generals with the Supreme Court case concerning the EPA and Greenhouse gases...
Global warming debate hits Supreme Court - CNN.com

Dec 26, 2006, 06:38 PM	#2 (permalink)
Chubz Diamond in the Rough Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Vancouver Island, British Columbia Posts: 365 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Credits: 329	Re: Global Warming, the new religion. I would have to say that it *has* become something of a religious fervor, and also been compounded by poltical debate. The arguments surrounding global warming are completely on opposite sides of the scale, and there is absolutely no room for any middle ground in the debate. Without going into what causes global warming, I'll just say that the Earth does go through transitory stages of environment, otherwise there wouldn't have been an ice age, because the environment would have stayed the same. That doesn't happen. But the lines of argument with global warming are so diametrically opposite, that there is no allowance for any argument in the middle ground. Add to that political leanings, and the debate is split into factions. You have those on the left saying that global warming is caused by humans, who help screw up the world each day by spending money, because it funds big corperations who spill more toxins into the air, and by driving a car to work you're dooming the entire planet. On the right side, you have those who say global warming isn't a big deal (or that there IS no global warming) and that any mention of it is fear mongering done by liberal whiners. The debate is so heated that the two sides pretty much try and force you to unquestionably believe what they are saying, and there's no room for minutely disagreeing. Anyone who tries to argue in the middle ground generally gets losts in the argument because the two sides are screaming so loud. The news media isn't going to pay attention to anyone arguing the middle ground, because the two main sides provide better stories. It's really become a matter of "you are" or "you aren't." In all honesty, the majority of people who argue either side probably aren't that well educated about their argument, and are simply following along with the flock because they believe what they are being told (or screamed should I say hehe)......since science isn't able to prove either side of the argument, the matter comes down to simple belief in what is being said (trying to link this to religion). There is no middle ground. EDIT: I should say that I'm basing this post on how this topic is presented through the media. However, in terms of the divided line between the arguments, I can certainly say that if I were to go to my university and say that global warming is just a natural occurence, I would be swarmed immediately and told how I was wrong, and that human civilization is to blame for everything. Actually, I can give a little example of this. I was at the university the other day returning books to the library, and had parked in a 15 minute parking zone. My friend stayed in the car, and I left it running since I was only going to be two seconds, simply dropping the books into the return box. Once I got back to the car, my friend told me that while I was gone, someone had driven up in a truck, gotten out, and started telling my friend to turn the car off because letting it idle was destroying the earth, and bad for the environment. __________________ Many Thanks To SasuraiHell For The Sig!* Last edited by Chubz; Dec 26, 2006 at 07:19 PM.
Status: Offline

Dec 27, 2006, 01:35 PM	#3 (permalink)
Hassun shittle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Pretiacruento Posts: 7,113 Thanks: 0 Thanked 46 Times in 40 Posts Credits: 27,124	Re: Global Warming, the new religion. If treating it as a religion will decrease our pollution I'm even willing to tolerate a global warming pope. People who deny that it's there are wrong. Plain and simple. The climate IS getting warmer and wetter. (Whether it is temporary or not I don't know.) All the people who say "it isn't all that bad" should just put a sock in it. Even IF it isn't all that bad. Why? because you can at least try to decrease the problem. Man-made/natural causes/combination/... It doesn't matter, the problem is there and we had best start doing something about it lest we want to have more desert and gigantic floods. __________________ Gorecreeps inc.
Status: Offline

Dec 27, 2006, 04:33 PM	#4 (permalink)
LenMiyata Grouchy Old Anime Otaku Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Silicon Valley, California Posts: 4,529 Thanks: 0 Thanked 62 Times in 57 Posts Credits: 46,369	Re: Global Warming, the new religion. Grumble Grumble Grumble Also complicating the issue is the time factor. By the time there is solid proof that Global warming is occurring, and to the extent of the change that will happen, it will already be too late to do anything about it. Pushing the concept of Global Warming is almost like the concept of selling insurance. Insurance is not something the buyer can make money on, and no one wants to be in the position to collect on it. But when you need that Insurance, you need it badly... __________________ FAVOURITE THREADS EXPLAIN why, or risk an infraction. Rantings of a Grouchy Old Anime Otaku
Status: Offline

Dec 28, 2006, 03:23 AM	#6 (permalink)
JefferyXie Shichibukai Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 613 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Credits: 310	Re: Global Warming, the new religion. I guess it is a bit of a religious fever because people talk about it as if they are actually worshipping it and a political debate due to the fact that there are leaders like John Howard the prime minister of Australia and Tony Blair the British talking about the global warming issue.Globla warming is bound to affect the younger generation more than the elder and it is they who should find the solution to solve it.Sure there isn't much we can do about it,but doing every little thing by everyone can make a huge difference.
Status: Offline

Dec 28, 2006, 07:31 PM	#10 (permalink)
Arrianna Lady Barronmore Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,110 Thanks: 13 Thanked 65 Times in 55 Posts Credits: 47,761	Re: Global Warming, the new religion. I'll see your disgruntled NASA scientist (upset about red tape and government oversight) supported by Greenpeace and raise you: 1 Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, 2 Senators threatening congressional censure of supporters of skeptics, and 8 State Attorneys who are setting Global Warming Policies themselves. All of this only seems to prove my point. It's not about discussion anymore, it's "us vs them". A new religious crusade has started and if you are not for them you are against them. __________________ l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l Thanks to Kaos for the awesome sig!
Status: Offline

Welcome to AnimeOnline.net, your personal Anime Community!	Anime Online Rulez!

Dec 28, 2006, 08:31 PM	#11 (permalink)
LenMiyata Grouchy Old Anime Otaku Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Silicon Valley, California Posts: 4,529 Thanks: 0 Thanked 62 Times in 57 Posts Credits: 46,369	Re: Global Warming, the new religion. Grumble Grumble Grumble This issue isn't so much a Religions crusade, (that is, unless you consider the worship of $$$ a religion), ultimately boils down to MONEY... For a government to actually address the issues of Global Warming, would require a reallocation of government goals and funding, changes to the tax structure, and major changes to the world economy. The disruptions that would be caused by this are not only undesirable to persons and companies in position of power and influence, they represent a threat for their ability to make $$$. So it's not surprising that they would try to deny or suppress research that is counter to their position... Now scientist who disagree, this is the natural state of Science. Ideas and data MUST be discussed and debated, and the majority consensus will agree on the most correct ideas and information. As a comparison to your Exxon researchers, the link that first connected tobacco products to lung cancer was first discovered in the late 1950s, yet Tobacco company sponsored researchers claimed up to only a few years ago that the scientific data was invalid and that there was no cancer link to tobacco... And I see your 8 Attorney Generals with the Supreme Court case concerning the EPA and Greenhouse gases... Global warming debate hits Supreme Court - CNN.com __________________ FAVOURITE THREADS EXPLAIN why, or risk an infraction. Rantings of a Grouchy Old Anime Otaku
Status: Offline

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Global warming!	jaderabbit	Debate and Discuss	44	Sep 01, 2006 07:50 PM
religion	Wing 0	The Vault	19	Sep 15, 2005 10:10 AM
What religion are you?	Brittle_Bullet999	The Vault	51	Aug 21, 2005 11:59 AM
Global warming	GuardianAngel1292	The Vault	34	Aug 04, 2005 01:46 PM