And it has the Goracle too.

August 6, 2013 ****
Global Warming as Faith****

*By* *Norman Rogers* <http://www.americanthinker.com/norman_rogers/>****

Global warming is a scientific theory, but is mostly about faith. Faith
plays a bigger role in science than we care to admit. Allegedly
well-meaning intellectuals of the 1930s believed in and defended Stalin's
Russia in the face of massive and accessible evidence that "scientific"
communism had given birth to a terroristic, totalitarian state. Today's
believers in global warming, like the intellectuals in the 1930s, fiercely
defend their wacky faith in the face of massive and contrary evidence. They
are vested in a theory that is precious to them. Their scientific studies
pick and choose from an evidence buffet. ****

When an ideology is precious, the believers become aggressively hostile
toward infidels. The global warmers do not have dungeons or Siberian labor
camps, though one wonders how far they would go if they could. James
Hansen, a scientist and the most famous global warming preacher after Al
Gore, want's to put executives of fossil fuel companies in jail for "crimes
against 
humanity<http://www.environmentalleader.com/2008/06/24/james-hansen-try-fossil-fuel-ceos-for-high-crimes-against-humanity/>."
Al Gore thinks that people who deny his faith are like people who think
that the moon landing was staged in Hollywood. In other words, those who
question the global warming faith are either criminals or crackpots. This
is tolerance as practiced by those who have appointed themselves to save us
from imaginary disaster.****

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, better known as the
IPCC<http://www.ipcc.ch/>,
has the same relationship to the believers in global warming as the
Communist International or Comintern had to the believers in communism. The
Comintern held world congresses and acted to enforce ideological
conformity. The IPCC has grandiose meetings with delegates from many
countries. The IPCC publishes propagandistic tomes on climate science. Like
the central works forming the intellectual basis of Marxism, the IPCC's
publications are dense, turgid and full of dubious science. Many of their
claims have been exposed as phony in *The Delinquent Teenager who was
Mistaken for the World's Top Climate
Expert<http://www.amazon.com/Delinquent-Teenager-Mistaken-Climate-ebook/dp/B005UEVB8Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1374848997&sr=8-1&keywords=delinquent+teenager+ipcc>
* by Donna LaFramboise. Fellow traveling organizations, like the United
States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) slavishly cite the IPCC as
if nothing further is needed to prove a point. The USGCRP is our
government's baby IPCC. It has a big budget and publishes outrageous
propaganda<http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/adventures_in_the_climate_trad.html>.
The behind the scenes boss of the USGRCP is John Holdren, Obama's science
advisor and a longtime environmental extremist. The IPCC and the USGCRP are
authoritarian organizations that promulgate a doctrine, not organizations
conducting a scientific investigation. Science is window dressing.****

It should not seem impossible, or even remarkable, that governmental
organizations and highly educated scientists have become fanatical
followers of a global warming ideology. Similar movements and ideologies
have captured the fancy of intellectuals, scientists, and governments many
times previously. In the first half of the 20th century, the eugenics
movement <http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/eugenics/eugenics.html>in the
United States was extremely popular and embraced by the people like the
presidents of Harvard and Stanford and funded by foundations like the
Rockefeller and Carnegie. The eugenics movement advocated forced
sterilization and restriction on immigration by "inferior" races. These
ideas were widely implemented by laws. Much of the eugenics ideology
originated in the United States and the ideas were exported to Germany
where the Nazis adopted them. Eugenics was not only disrespectful of human
rights, but the scientific support was faulty and superficial. If we think
that the elite won't fall for similar ideas today because the intellectual
classes of today are more enlightened than those of 100 years ago, we are
living in a fools' paradise.****

The crimes against humanity of the 20th century, perpetrated under systems
like Communism, Socialism, Nazism, Maoism, and Fascism, should be familiar
to everyone. These movements had in common a tunnel vision on the part of
the followers that lead to a disrespectful attitude toward human needs and
rights. The global warming ideology is disrespectful to the needs of the
poor and developing peoples of the world who need technology and energy.****

The appeal of global warming is not based on empirical evidence or good
science. The appeal is
emotional<http://www.amazon.com/True-Believer-Thoughts-Movements-Perennial/dp/0060505915/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375648430&sr=1-1&keywords=eric+hoffer>.
Somehow these ideas fill a hole in the adherent's psyches. Many thinkers
<http://www.amazon.com/Intellectuals-Marx-Tolstoy-Sartre-Chomsky/dp/0061253170/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375648497&sr=1-4&keywords=paul+johnson>have
suggested that intellectuals as a class feel underappreciated and thus they
are attracted to ideologies that give them a sense of personal importance.
The twentieth century is littered with the remnants of ideologies that
enjoyed popularity and then collapsed from their internal contradictions.
Global warming and closely related ideas like clean energy, sustainability,
biological diversity, green political parties, nature worship, organic
food, etc. have currently taken root in the intellectual imaginations of
the masses of unemployed and underemployed graduates. The seeds were
planted by their college professors.****

A wonderful example of ideological conformity and half-baked science
is the Atmospheric
Sciences 
<http://atmo.tamu.edu/weather-and-climate/climate-change-statement>department
of Texas A & M University. The Atmospheric Sciences department is
considered to be among the best in the world. All tenured and tenure track
faculty, except one assistant professor, have subscribed to what amounts to
an IPCC loyalty oath or a confession of faith. This is what was published
on their website followed by the names of 23 faculty members:****

We, the faculty of the Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences of Texas A&M, agree
with the recent reports of the the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change that:****

1. It is virtually certain that the climate is warming, and that it has
warmed by about 0.7 deg. C over the last 100 years.****

2. It is very likely that humans are responsible for most of the recent
warming.****

3. If we do nothing to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases, future
warming will likely be at least two degrees Celsius over the next century.**
**

4. Such a climate change brings with it a risk of serious adverse impacts
on our environment and society.****

This statement is full of ambiguity and error. For example, it is an error
to associate the last 100 years with the CO2 theory of global warming. Only
the last 40 years are relevant because the effect of CO2 and other
greenhouse gases only became significant 40 years ago.****

The statement says it is "very likely" that humans are responsible for most
of the warming. In IPCC jargon, "very likely" means 90% probable according
to expert judgment. Expert judgment is the opinion of the very people who
deeply believe in global warming and write IPCC reports. Half of the
warming of the last 100 years was in a burst from 1910 to 1940 and that
could not have been caused by greenhouse gases, because we weren't
generating enough greenhouse gases then to cause that warming, according to
the theories of the global warmers.****

Two degrees Celsius will have serious, adverse impacts? A difference of 2
degrees C in the average temperature is what you get if you move from
Boston to New York. Besides, according to the computer models, embraced by
the believers, the warming will be
concentrated<http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-projections-of.html>near
the north and south poles, during the winter and at night, not at high
noon in populated areas, as one might otherwise imagine.****

So what gives? These professors are not dummies. Why would they subscribe
to such a statement? The only explanation is that they have been blinded by
their faith. How is it compatible with the spirit of free inquiry to
"encourage" everyone to sign a statement endorsing a particular, and
obviously defective, point of view? Are they trying to root out dissenters?
My opinion is that at Texas A & M they have simply made explicit the demand
for ideological conformity that is present in most academic settings where
global warming is studied. Getting people to swear to something that is
obviously untrue is an excellent test of loyalty. Only unquestioning, blind
believers will endorse an untruth to support the cause.****

The enemies of the global warming believers are dissenters, effectively
infidels or pagans. Scientists who dissent are especially despised and
persecuted because global warming is supposedly based on science and thus
scientist's who dissent are a special threat to the faith. To the
believers, a scientist who dissents is like a bishop of the Catholic Church
who becomes a Mormon.****

To see examples of the persecution of dissenting scientists is easy. It's
everywhere on the Internet. The websites DeSmogBlog, Climate Central, The
Daily Climate, Real Climate, and Skeptical Science, to name a few examples,
criticize scientists who don't toe the ideological line DeSmogBlog
maintains a data base of people it doesn't like, including scientists. The
general theme of these websites is that the infidels are in the pay of oil
companies or coal companies. This theory is repeated again and again, but
in reality the oil and coal companies are far too timid to actively support
global warming dissenters. The few examples of coal or oil companies
actually giving money to dissenters or dissenting organizations are so
minor that one suspects that the gift was an accident or bureaucratic
snafu. The theory of a fossil fuel company conspiracy is untrue, but is
constantly repeated because the believers are unable to think of any
legitimate reason why anyone would dissent from what to them is revealed
truth.****

I have had numerous conversations with climate scientists that start off
with a promise not to repeat what is said. The closeted dissenters want to
make sure that they won't be outed before they will speak freely. These are
people with families and responsibilities that have to take precedence over
bucking the establishment. Even scientists with tenure or vested government
pensions are very careful. They know that the believers can make the lives
of dissenters miserable in ways beyond cutting off their livelihood.****

The global warming faith is in big trouble because warming of the Earth
stopped 15 years
ago<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html>.
The movement is trying to transition to the idea that CO2 encourages
extreme weather events and acidification of the ocean. Let's hope that a
drastic cooling takes place so as to hasten the demise of this sinister and
destructive movement.****

*Norman Rogers has written many articles on global warming. He is a Senior
Policy Advisor for the **Heartland Institute* <http://heartland.org/>*, a
Midwest think tank. He maintains a
**website*<http://www.climateviews.com/Climate_Views/Home.html>
*.*****


*Page Printed from:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/08/global_warming_as_faith.html
* at August 06, 2013 - 10:08:14 AM CDT****


__._,_.






__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to