Is the Global Warming debate the new 'religion'?

Question

I'm normally in the Religion and Spirituality section - the debate in there is usually quite fierce - but nothing compared to what I've seen in here!
I see the GW-Believers and the GW-Non-Believers going after each other with gusto!
Is this issue polarising people's attitudes?
Will we end up with GW Terrorists?

Raccoon - that's why I put 'religion' in quotes.

Mr Jello - thanks for the link, I'll look it up

PeachSchnappeReturns - I quite agree. Even if you don't believe that Global Warming is happening, we should still all be more conservative in our use of resources. What harm can it do to be more green?? It certainly won't hurt the environment.

Answer 1

GW-non-belief is akin to religion, in the sense that its adherents believe in the face of well-established scientific evidence. It is similar to creationism, in the sense that its adherents begin their arguments from a foregone conclusion, and attempt to distort the scientific evidence to fit. It is also similar to fundamentalism, in the sense that its adherents attack the scientific conclusions because they incorrectly fear that those conclusions will be used by others to destroy their way of life.

Answer 2

It is certainly more like religion than science, It is not the climate change part, but the 'man made' part that has become a religious belief.
The essence of science is that any statement should be able to be shown to be wrong.
For the MM GW believers, if it gets warmer or colder, wetter or dryer, extreme weather events get more frequent and intense or less frequent and intense, it is attributed to global warming. So whatever happens, it confirms the doctrine. This is not how science is done.
An example: It is one of the basic axioms of meteorological science that extreme weather events are driven by the temperature difference between the equator and the poles, the warmer the global temperature, the smaller is this difference because the poles heat up and cool down faster than the equator. So a warmer climate should produce fewer, less intense hurricanes, yet the global warming believers claim that more intense and frequent are the result of global warming.

Answer 3

No. Man made global warming has been proven by scientists.

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/329.php?nid=&id=&pnt=329&lb=hmpg1

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686 and:

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know... Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point. You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

There is one similarity to religion. Being a skeptic about global warming is exactly like believeing in a 6000 year old Earth. You have to ignore science and the data to do so.

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"

Answer 4

The "religion" has existed for some time now. The Pagans and Druids practiced the worship of nature thousands of years ago. Many of their festivals are incorporated into the Christian faith.

More recently science and religion has combined into a religious movement called Gaianism or Deep Ecology.

A "common religious perspective" hasn't yet been developed yet because no emperor finds it fashionable yet, as happened with Christianity. I think that the majority of people are looking for a new "raison d'etre" and Deep Ecology could become the next world wide religion.

And yes, every religion has its zealots, they usually bring their emotional baggage with them when they join.

Answer 5

I just don't get it though. Even if Global warming isn't happening and the Earth is following a natural trend (most probably) we're still burning fossil fuels at a fast rate. We still haven't found a solution to the fuel crisis so we're all still heading for disaster.

Answer 6

ill grant you the jist of the two components a million. liberals who attempt to persuade each and each physique that the climate is changing so they purchase "eco-friendly" products that illedgedly shop the earth inspite of the easy actuality that it takes extra beneficial ability to steer them to love that then they shop and that they arrive to a decision so which you will have the flexibility to purchase them so they could get money and larger administration over human beings employing international warming. 2. is the conservative section that the earth is going by means of employing organic and organic heating and cooling cycles (thats why there are ice a whilst and spots between ige a whilst earlier human beings existed) the earth is getting warmer statistically yet its not being extra approximately by means of guy its a organic and organic cycle, i cant undergo in techniques which volcano they are saying it became yet whilst it eruoted it shot extra beneficial pollutents into the eair once you communicate that guy invented fire. so as that could desire to make it easier to comprehend its not extra approximately by means of guy. So fairly the eco-friendly homestead effect looks sturdy in theory yet there's no information that it exists. the earth gets of course warmer and cooler. additionally the "information" of it comes from experimetns that have been replaced so as that human beings could desire to get what they arrive to a decision for to take heed to out of it and what they had to take heed to became that international warming is particularly.

Answer 7

Because scientists who have descending views are kept from having access to the news and popular media, it has a very similar tone to the old roman church and its inquisitions.

I would not be surprised to see the tactics become more violent as more of the scientists face their fear of ostracism and openly challenge the Holy Global Warmth Alarmist Empire.

Answer 8

It is a diversion from other problems that need solving, but cannot be addressed because the solutions would have a major negative effect on corporate profits. Little details like nuclear waste disposal, waste and fraud in government spending, and destruction of tropical rainforests around the world.

Answer 9

It's not religion, it's science. It's not a matter of belief, it's a matter of accepting or rejecting the scientific evidence. No, there will not be global warming terrorists, unless perhaps we get to a point where the effects of global warming are very bad and governments still aren't doing enough to prevent them.

Answer 10

Oh yes. I love it, it makes me laugh. It worries me too. If you dont recycle, wear sackcloth and ashes, then we're all going to die! I used my car today, but afterwards I killed my firstborn. That should offset my carbon footprint. The little bastard wont be flying off on holiday in the future.
Really though, people are becoming zealots.
How long before the Green Police?