« Olympics Summary Justice | Main | Deep Joy »

High Priest Of Climate Change Says We Is Not A Religion

Environmentalism is not a religion | James Murray | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Of all the blithering nonsense climate deniers throw at the environmental movement, there is perhaps one criticism that does real damage – that "green is the new religion".

We can handle the scientifically illiterate and ethically questionable attempts to undermine evidence of climatic change using cherry-picked data and discredited theories, just as we can counter the increasingly futile attempts to question the importance of the green economy and the efficacy of clean technologies. The scientific evidence linking greenhouse gas emissions and potentially dangerous levels of climate change is now so well proven, and the physical demonstration of effective clean technologies so prevalent, that the guileless smears attempted by self-styled "climate sceptics" lack their former sting.

They are fighting a losing battle with science and evidence, hence the increasingly vocal suggestion that green is the new religion. This line of attack is hugely effective and highly damaging....

Looks like a duck walks like a duck and sounds like a duck but tastes of chicken apparently.


I frequently drive past the trailer in the picture, although part of the message has recently been ripped off, (as were the locals). It was not put their until several months after the windfarm started operation and people had direct experience of it. Many times the blades are motionless for much of the day and when it was stormy recently, they were shut down. Without subsidy they would not be there.

Apologies for an incorrect "their" instead of "there". There, there!

To [mis]quote The Bard:

Me thinks he [James Murray] doth protest overmuch ...

Even the former High Priests of envionmetalism are calling it a religion.

" . . . so well proven . . . " implies proof.

Forgive me, but once proof has been established, doesn't the debate end ?

My question for this Murray person: when a person persists in arguing after the facts have refuted the argument, is that something other than religion? Or if not, should one just call it stupidity?

I have just posted a reply at Nourishing Obscurity about this. The phoney war is over, we are now fighting in earnest. We can see the fear in their eyes, they are losing the arguments, they have lost the science arguments, they have lost the "big oil" argument. This must be the biggest scam in all of human history. This is a fight for our hearts, minds and, above all, our minds. now is the time to insert the blade, then twist it.

I meant to say "... and above all, our SOULS." not to repeat minds. Oh, never mind.

"cherry-picked data and discredited theories"

Pot - kettle?

I say it IS a religion. Consider the facts:

1. It requires faith, is not based on and does not accept rational argument.
2. It has its High Priests and its Heretics.
3. It requires pointless highly visible sacrifices (see above, wind farms etc).
4. It demands unquestioning obedience to its dogma, and viciously attacks any dissent.
and finally, most decisively:
5. It gets into bed with the civil power and they justify and prop each other up.

These are the characteristics of organised religion through the ages.

I rest my case.

Post a comment