Is the idea of man-made global warming the next new religion?

There's no solid data to prove anything, and it's impossible to get accurate readings of the temperature thousands of years ago.

So, this whole "man-made" global warming (or climate change, whatever) is basically a faith.

It's great that people are going green and all, but scientists haven't reached the consensus the media would have people believe.

Can those who say they believe in man-made global warming really say that they've thoroughly researched both sides? When I believed in it, I didn't look at the other side at all.

2009-02-24T21:23:17Z

"Two words: scientific. consensus."

Four words: So. Says. The. Media.

I was talking to two professors who said they went to a convention about this sort of thing, and that everyone was fighting about it. Reporters who tried to talk about the other side of the debate got fired.

2009-02-24T21:26:10Z

"Whether or not it's real, what's the harm in going green?"

Hello, did you even READ my details? I said the "going green" thing was great. I've got a pretty low carbon footprint. But man-made global warming is still a lie.

2009-02-24T21:26:44Z

"How bout the fact that temperatures have INCREASED fourfold over historical temperature increases..."

Considering we had the coldest/snowiest winter in ten years...

2009-02-24T21:29:50Z

Another thing they mentioned: CO2 doesn't affect temperature. Temperature affects CO2. If you ever wondered why Gore didn't put the two lines together, that would be why. They don't fit; there's a two-hundred year time lag.

Also: where are all the experiments showing that CO2 affects the climate? There are none. So this is a faith, not a fact.

2009-02-24T21:35:03Z

"teh evul Librul m3dia!"

Actually, I considered myself a Liberal till recently (now Libertarian). And I voted for Obama. So there. :P

2009-02-24T21:35:35Z

"not where I life, its actually been quite mild."

Good for you, haha. I had to shovel my car out of a foot of snow. And my university cancelled classes for the first time in thirty years.

2009-02-24T21:38:30Z

"Ya...because you sound like a regular expert in the subject. Where'd you get your Ph.D? Harvard? Yale? Oxford? MIT?"

I took a class on global warming. It wasn't the class I thought it'd be--it took everything I believed to be true about AGW, and I discovered it all to be a lie. I've got over two-hundred pages of notes and articles, if you'd like.

2009-02-24T21:41:12Z

Blessed Cheese Maker: But how do you KNOW that didn't happen before?! No one possibly can!

2009-02-24T22:05:45Z

"First you believed what you heard about global being man made was true. Then you took a class that took the opposite point of view and now you believe that??????"

Basically, I'm saying that I'm skeptical, leaning on the negative side. Everything that I was taught about global warming turned out to be a lie. Everything that people claimed to be fact turned out to be fiction.

2009-02-25T05:09:15Z

"yeah antarctica isn't melting and if it is, it's a naturally occuring event"

Uh, yeah. There's evidence that if melted before. Then during the ice age, grew. Now it's melting again. Then, during the ice age that should be happening any year now, it will grow again. Such is the cycle of the earth.

You know, in the seventies, they were freaking out about global cooling. There were books, it was on the news, and so on. Sounds familiar, huh.

Anonymous2009-02-24T21:21:39Z

Favorite Answer

"it's impossible to get accurate readings of the temperature thousands of years ago"

Whoever told you that, certainly wasn't a scientist. Most scientists will admit that the verdict is still out on how much effect our emmisions are truly having on climate change, its the politicians that promote or reject it with fervor like religion.

Its good to be cautious about jumping on politically popular postitions, however, keep in mind that the conservatives were claiming that the earth wasn't warming at all just 5 years ago, and as more and more scientific data becomes available, they have switched thier positions to Global warming isn't manmade. They were wrong before, and laughed at and belittled scientists claiming it was happening back then, so I have give little weight in what they have to say about it now, that it is conclusive that the world is warming.

If a majority of scientists agree that we are having an effect, I am prone to believe the majority, just as with gravity, volcanic theory and plate techtonics. That many educated people, all testing and measuring concurring has meaning.

43

Anonymous2009-02-24T21:58:05Z

The scientific consensus is well documented and vast.
The media is the only outlet that has portrayed a conflict of ideas. In the scientific community there is an overwhelming consensus that the science says the causes are man made. What you are saying is completely ill-informed and sounds basically like somebody who listened to a propagandist. Just wikipedia "scientific consensus on global warming", or read the Scientific American article on it, or read the statement by the National Science Academy or The European Science Academy or the Society for the Advancement of Science or one of any other 100-200 Scientific groups that have issued strong, affirmitive statements, backed by actual data (not anecdotal evidence like "Gee we had a really cold winter!").
All of these organizations have concurred, over and over again, that global warming exists and that its causes are almost certainly man-made. The media, which is largely controlled by multinationals with vested interests in fossil fuels, has presented the situation as a debate when in plain fact it is not.

01

robert f2009-02-24T21:26:52Z

I'm not convinced of global warming. However, a lot of research seems to support it. And, it can't be a bad thing to cut down on the poison we release into the atmosphere. As long as we don't destroy economies in the process.

And, sorry, but I don't believe any reporters were fired for asking questions.

First you believed what you heard about global being man made was true. Then you took a class that took the opposite point of view and now you believe that??????

00

Anonymous2009-02-24T21:25:49Z

THere is a lot of controversy amoung scientists regarding man made warming but either way its got all the earmarks of a just cause toward which we may all be driven for a number of years till the ice age starts then it will be man made global cooling and the christians will all mill around saying it is a sign of the end of times while we franticly burn fossil fuels trying to warm the place up and I like strawberries better than blueberrys

10

?2016-05-29T06:37:38Z

AGW is a Religion designed to promote Marxism. Deceit & Lies are just part of the MO. And if a high priest or two gets caught, well you can't tar the whole Religion for a few bad apples -right? Saving the planet is just too damn important. AGW believers will simply believe occasional moral lapses were done with good intent. The notion of 'confirmation' is a scientific one & AGW isn't science, it's faith. So rest assured nothing is confirmed.

00
Show more answers (22)

Related Questions

Aren’t Peter Gleick’s recent actions confirmation of the criminal nature of the man-made Global Warming scam?Is Global Warming a Religion?Why do people still deny Global Warming?Time to think about global cooling and the next ice age?Are global warming believers big-hearted generous people who care about others?

Trending Questions

An atheist just wrote on this forum "atheism is not merely 1 thing only. Atheism covers a diverse range of ideas". Is he correct?31 answersHas anybody learned anything from Religion & Spirituality during the last 14+ years?90 answersWhy are there still people saying that Catholics are not Christians?11 answersWhy are there so many denominations of Christianity if it’s the one genuine religion? Sounds like they can’t make up their minds?23 answersfor atheists,How did you become an atheist?  What was your reason for leaving the faith?24 answers