The Religious Movement of Global Warming Advocates?

[Ron in Regina]

Of course, I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. Science is a human enterprise and suffers from all the same weaknesses any such enterprise does, like ego and greed and so forth. Some truly awful things have been done in its name and it has to take responsibility for the consequences. But religion makes claims that seem to me to be unique, and power corrupts it uniquely because of them. Most faith traditions make some absolute truth claims, and it's an easy step from there to claiming both a right and a duty to interfere in the lives of people who don't accept them. That is the danger, it's the reason for the separation of church and state, and the reason why they must stay separate.

Wow...That's a mouthfull. I can see a parallel between what you're
saying about Religion, and the Global Warming Movement....but
that's another Thread.

Religions have been at war with each other since the dawn of religions. Nobody seemed to take exception to it so why is anybody getting their panties in a knot about science jumping into the fray? At least they bring something tangible to the argument.

A very interesting insight there Cliffy, it never occurred to me to put it that way, but I think you've hit on something profoundly true. And I promise you I'll steal that idea for future conversations. The religious have been telling each other for millennia that every other religion is wrong, and fighting and dying over their claims and counter claims, now science is telling them they're ALL wrong and it's time to stop that nonsense. And I take some small comfort in the thought that science is extremely unlikely to organize armies to march against the religious. It'll just argue.

This would be the Thread. Can anyone else see the parallel between Religious
Zealots and the Extremist Advocates of the Global Warming Movement? God
Forbid (Pun intended) that you question Global Warming/Cooling/Change, you
will be a Heretic to the movement!! The Science it Settled!! Hallelujah Brother!!
Can you give the Reverend Al Gore an Amen? Can you give the Reverend Al
Gore an Amen???

I didn't think Science was ever settled myself. Science is questioning and
questioning hypotheses that try to explain observations, and testing those
hypotheses in valid and repeatable and reliable ways...but nothing is ever
set in stone...'cuz if the questioning stops, the knowledge stops, and the
right question that might prove an old hypotheses incorrect might never be
asked. Wouldn't "Settled & Unquestionable" Science be a Religion?

I know I'm out'a my scope here....but what if Hawking never questioned
Einstein? I'm not a member of the Tinfoil Hat Crowd, but I'm not sold.
Organized Religion sets off my Spidey Senses, and so does blind faith
on one side of a debate calling the other side Heretics for questioning it.
That stops feeling like Science and starts feeling like Organized Religion.

"Hey Galileo! The World is Flat and the Sun Circles the Earth! Now shut-up
and Stop Asking Questions, You Heretic!" That's the vibe I get just reading
through most of the AGW Threads here. Are my Spidey Senses failing me,
or does anyone else get that vibe? Much of the science is beyond me. I'll be
honest....but my gut tells me something about those arguing the different sides.

I don't want to argue AGW here. There are many Threads on that already. My
question is, "Has the Global Warming Advocates Movement become an
Organized Religion?"

Here's a Definition of Organized Religion to get things started: A religion in
which rules exist to govern the means by which adherents participate in the
religion. Yes...I know...the word "religion" is used twice in the one sentance to
define Organized Religion....it came from here: organized religion - Wiktionary

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Are my Spidey Senses failing me, or does anyone else get that vibe?

I think your Spidey Senses are right on the mark, which is really just another way of saying I agree with you. :smile: The scientific consensus is that global warming is real and human activities are significant contributors to it, but there's a significant and legitimate minority of qualified people challenging that claim. If my memory's correct, the figures are around 85% in support of the consensus (which is what makes it the consensus) and 15% against. But it's no longer a scientific debate, it's become a political debate, and that's where it gets messy. And evangelical. I've mostly stayed out of the global warming threads here, though I've read them and could probably contribute something useful from the scientific perspective, simply because they're political debates about a scientific question, and that's not the way to settle them. Only science can settle them, but the difficulty so far is that the data aren't really good enough to definitively prove the case, they are merely strongly suggestive but leave room for doubt. I've seen David Suzuki, whom I used to admire, be extraordinarily and inexcusably rude and dismissive towards qualified people who legitimately and thoughtfully challenge the consensus, and as a scientist he should know that's simply wrong, and deeply violates the spirit of scientific inquiry. And that's really what's wrong with the whole debate, and why I don't take part in it.

 

[karrie]

religion, atheism, global warming, conservation, consevatism, liberalism.... every last one of them a chance for a zealot to get a toe hold and preach their freaking heads off.

 

[Ron in Regina]

There is no real Right or Wrong answer here, and maybe I worded things
poorly in my opening post....but what does your "belly" tell you when you
read (or listen) to both sides of the debate on Global whatever-it's-called
-today?

One side (to me) seems respectful, and one side is rude & dismissive.

Why?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I try not to think with my belly... :smile:

I think global warming is real, but I'm not yet convinced human activity is the cause, or even a major contributor, the measurements are too close to the noise level in the data. I think there are people on both sides who are dismissive and rude, and people who are respectful and thoughtful. I listen to the latter, and tend to dismiss the former, because they can reasonably be presumed to have an agenda other than simply arriving at the truth. Think vested interests.

 

[Liberalman]

global warming is considered an earth ffart and will pass

 

[darkbeaver]

Global Warming ate my data

Tags:

• SCIENCE/HEALTH/CLIMATE/NATURE

The world's source for global temperature record admits it's lost or destroyed all the original data that would allow a third party to construct a global temperature record. The destruction (or loss) of the data comes at a convenient time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia - permitting it to snub FoIA requests to see the data.

 

[CDNBear]

Global Warming ate my data

Tags:

• SCIENCE/HEALTH/CLIMATE/NATURE

The world's source for global temperature record admits it's lost or destroyed all the original data that would allow a third party to construct a global temperature record. The destruction (or loss) of the data comes at a convenient time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia - permitting it to snub FoIA requests to see the data.

Wow DB, your post sure blows a big hole in the foot of the GW community...lol...thanx.

Nothing makes me laugh harder then a self inflicted wound...

Professor Phil Jones, the activist-scientist who maintains the data set, has cited various reasons for refusing to release the raw data. Most famously, Jones told an Australian climate scientist in 2004:

Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.​

 

[darkbeaver]

Here's a Definition of Organized Religion to get things started: A religion in
which rules exist to govern the means by which adherents participate in the
religion. Yes...I know...the word "religion" is used twice in the one sentance to
define Organized Religion....it came from here: organized religion - Wiktionary

I agree. You can see the same religious framework holding up mainstream science, especially in astrophysics and archeology and history and politics. My personal favourites are the religions of economics and Holy Capitalism. It's very interesting how very poor educations presented as very good educations have enabled the massive rise in religions thinking while simultaneously maintaining the false belief that religion has been in decline. So the next obvious question is who constructs and maintains the ad hoc religions and why.

 

[AnnaG]

I don't want to argue AGW here. There are many Threads on that already. My
question is, "Has the Global Warming Advocates Movement become an
Organized Religion?"

It might as well be a religion. It's also given birth to the rebellious anti-AGW religion.

Here's a Definition of Organized Religion to get things started: A religion in

which rules exist to govern the means by which adherents participate in the
religion. Yes...I know...the word "religion" is used twice in the one sentance to
define Organized Religion....it came from here: organized religion - Wiktionary

I prefer M-W's definitions than Wiki's:

• Main Entry: re·li·gion
• Pronunciation: \ri-ˈli-jən\
• Function: noun
• Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely
• Date: 13th century

1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
— re·li·gion·less adjective

3 and 4 would be the applicable definitions, I think.

 

[AnnaG]

There is no real Right or Wrong answer here, and maybe I worded things
poorly in my opening post....but what does your "belly" tell you when you
read (or listen) to both sides of the debate on Global whatever-it's-called
-today?

One side (to me) seems respectful, and one side is rude & dismissive.

Why?

I look at the data and see that global warming is the trend of the climate change. I don't really care if it is partially anthropogenic or not. I do think it's a good reason for people to smarten up and act responsibly towards our home, though ( and fortunately the majority of our kids are becoming sensitive to it, I think. Perhaps they may see a day when humans can be responsible). Unfortunately, as Dexter said, it has become political and the message is being lost to us "grownups" in the scuffle.

BTW, my innards tell me that we have definitely made an impact on our environments so the idea of making an impact on climates isn't out of the question.

 

[AnnaG]

Global Warming ate my data

Tags:

• SCIENCE/HEALTH/CLIMATE/NATURE

The world's source for global temperature record admits it's lost or destroyed all the original data that would allow a third party to construct a global temperature record. The destruction (or loss) of the data comes at a convenient time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia - permitting it to snub FoIA requests to see the data.

So? I think there'd be enough data from all the other sources to compensate for the loss.

 

[AnnaG]

Wow DB, your post sure blows a big hole in the foot of the GW community...lol...thanx.

Nothing makes me laugh harder then a self inflicted wound...

Actually it more likely only blows a hole in the foot of the emotional types who are on the GW bandwagon.

 

[AnnaG]

I agree. You can see the same religious framework holding up mainstream science, especially in astrophysics and archeology and history and politics. My personal favourites are the religions of economics and Holy Capitalism. It's very interesting how very poor educations presented as very good educations have enabled the massive rise in religions thinking while simultaneously maintaining the false belief that religion has been in decline. So the next obvious question is who constructs and maintains the ad hoc religions and why.

lol you sure can come up with loopy stuff sometimes, Mr. Beaver. You're a hoot! Anyway, to answer your question: Plutonians, I think. I saw one writing an article for a climactic science journal one time. It had a thermometer sticking out of what I thought was an ear. It had a suitcase which it opened and a little planet that looked like Earth appeared hovering over the desk a few inches. I could see little flashes of light which I thought were lightning strikes, and white angelhair floating around the little planet. The Plutonian would watch it for a while and click the odd button on it's model remote and then jot down stuff. And once in a while it would use the thermometer to take a reading and then jot down more stuff. It belched (I think) and a semi-transparent cloud of greyish brown stuff engulfed the miniplanet. Then I had to go so I don't know what happened after.