Should global warming be classified as a religion?

To the Dupes, it is a religion = their god is Gaia the earth goddess (mother earth) to which humans are parasites.

You will see the common belief that the world is overpopulated and resources are finite, parroted by the dupes.

Of course deniers should be silenced and attacked as agents of terrible corporations - and big government is our savior.

When they destroy our financial infrastructure they may get their wish of depopulation with the anarchy that should follow.

Read about how these crackpot scientists formed the Global Warming Hoax - Their program of Eugenics which they hope to eliminate over 6 billion parasite humans:

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202...

Many of these crackpots are still active today with the liberal news media giving them credibility.

I see some fine answers, thanks J S, guess I'll hit the new area:

"Further they insist we believe in the supper natural powers of their prophets who claim to foretell the future"

The powers at work here are the most natural ones if ever there were any. The earth works in certain ways. We've learned lots about it. There is debate about some aspects, but even car mechanics debate about how cars work, they don't debate that it does.

It must be the climate scientists that you're referring to as prophets. These guys study natural phenomena and try to model it with neato computer programs. If that seems like a supernatural prophet kind of thing... well isn't that awesome. It still seems pretty magical to me every time I see a fish swimming underwater. What's wrong with that? Still quite legitimate that fish are going to be swimming. People probably wouldn't "believe" in fish swimming if they had never seen one, just real hard to find these people =P

As for the post right before mine... The heck man? Read a little about that journal. You've cited a journal that exists solely to disagree. Let's just fight cause we can... In defense of it, I'll say that in science we do try to take the opposing side to our own arguments, and only publish in real scientific journals if we can't "disprove the negative hypothesis". AKA - show something actually happened.

On the side note of that Gaia thing - Next thing you know somebody will say Genetics is a religion because Gregor Mendel was a munk! (/end rant section[sorry!])

In closing, however the idea was concocted, some of the basics seem to be pretty solid. Lots of people are looking into it, it holds up.

Let's boil back to the original question about making it a religion because people believe: Do you believe that we need food to live?

- Does this mean that there should be a Food Religion? The chefs could be the prophets with supper natural powers. I've seen tons of pictures of food, even statues. If ever there was a religion to be declared...

Yes, because we all know that religion is dangerous to mankind. The Spanish Inquisition, and Gestapo, would be proud of these Warmer types.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApbJh...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Apzv3...

This as been asked before - in both this section and the "Religion & Spirituality" section... Some of the answers I received were quite amusing...

Definition of religion "a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny"

Since the current and widely accepted scientific theory that has been published in scientific journals that are peer reviewed would show that it is not a belief. It is a widely accepted theory...

The fact that there is little scientific proof that has been conducted and published in reputable scientific journals deny global warming (blogs and web sites that have no reputable citations don't count). Since people that believe that global warming is not occurring have no legitimate scientific evidence that is well established would mean that people that don't believe more of a religion.

If you mean an undying faith in something even though there is no scientific proof, then it definitely should be.

That is easy to say if you are not affected

and sounds like a cop out to change or

being responsible with our bio resources,

Also one cannot claim that Global warming stands alone

like Gary Cooper against the evil politicians who are manipulating truths to plunder the masses

I do not think you are not looking for the truth or answers

your mind has been made up and you only want to find people who share your opinion ,which from a global point of view is a minority,the rest of the world tends to go with science or physical evidence.

http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/globalwarming...

.

check this interactive globe

Global warming is but a component, in a group of destructive forces at work such as ;deforestation,desertification,soil and water contamination ,irresponsible or wasteful utilization of bio resources , air pollution,Non sustainable Agriculture,over pumping carbon aquifers

all concepts which are definitely not part of the Natural Processes of the Natural world,all real and not like religion ,ideas that are believed because it is written in some old book

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiaA9...

WHICH WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR,

The most prolific growth on this planet is part of the day in the mist and most of the time under clouds ,and the least growth is always directly in the sun .

To exchange the one for the other means changing local climates

We are exchanging Nature with Tar , concrete and open spaced mono cultures.

In 300 years half of the planets forests have gone ,and in the last 50 years half of the wet lands ,and rain forests

These Areas absorb heat during the day and release heat at night ,

Cause cloud formation(shade).humidifying the air on the surface as well as releasing excess water at the roots that keep rivers flowing ,which in turn brings more water into the Environment .

As well as contributing to absorbing carbon emissions as do the leaves of the trees together with the oceans .

All in all many factors which directly affect the local Environment .

The loss of the above resulting in rivers drying up ,less rain ,desertification,loss of habitat for many species and so on.

dryer and hotter surface environments which can manifest in different weather patterns such as tornadoes or bush fires

I may be stupid or Naive but somehow i believe that lots of these local environmental changes, can add up to affect global weather, If there are enough of them (and there are)

And then on top of that comes the story of the effects of pollutants released into Nature and especially the Air ,by MAN http://earthissues.multiply.com/photos/album/5/EMI...

A cocktail of events and a lot of the ingredients have MAN written all over them

So it is safe to assume that we should look at ourselves as well for possible improvements ,rectifying Eco errors that are with in our powers.

What is a safer bet

to be or not to be

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiFzm...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvIJn...

yes since there are numerous companies out there that will bring in the dough like the religions do

You seem to misunderstand both religion and science. Religion generally involves gods or goddesses and science generally involves scientists. The theory of anthropogenic global warming has many scientists, but no gods or goddesses.

As for telling the future, one of the key criteria for a sound scientific theory is it's ability to predict something. If the climate models all said 2008 would be cooler than 1988, then your criticism may have a point. But since they predicted warming and that happened, that's considered good scientific confirmation (not religion).

Lol. Making silly comparisons between some thing and religion doesn't make that thing a religion. All it does is undermine the usefulness of the concept of religious belief.