January 31, 2015 by JImbo
A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.
Key there… BELIEF… not a set of facts but simply belief (faith) regardless of proof.
That is why a religion is not a scientific theory.
And that is why “Climate Change” as it currently stands is either:
a) Religion based on less than proven “facts”
b) Misnamed and should be what we called it for years as “normal weather patterns.”
Let me show you what I mean with some practical examples.
Consider the following “objective facts” from National Geographic this month.
These are cited as “proof of massive global warming…. ie “climate change” as it’s being used this year.
Oooh! Scary graphics! All in red to show danger and heat wave!
Scary…until you look at the dates.
Supposedly between 2081 and 2100 this disaster will happen.
Really? They couldn’t predict the “Blizzard of 2015” with any accuracy up to 24 hours out… but they will know the weather for all of Florida 80-100 years from now?
If that’s considered “fact” then why is it so crazy when I say that “Someday Jesus is coming down from Heaven?” I don’t even give a specific date or time or place… just “someday” and it’s considered “fringe?”
Or even scientifically when I say “There is a 50/50 chance historically of either an EMP pulse in the next 100 years.” That is historically proven probability. It keeps happening over and over yet no one seems to upset about all the electrical grid on Earth shutting down instantly, killing billions of people.
Nope, nothing to worry about there.
Or perhaps when I suggest that historically speaking we are on track for a giant asteroid impact with Earth in the near future (within say a few thousand years)
That too is proven through regular happenings throughout our history. Yet still… THAT is crazy.
However, imaginary numbers based on… well more flawed numbers and bad temperature measurements… is supposed to be taken as gospel?
How about this gem?
So… unsatisfied with a lack of “climate change inspired” disasters, the scientists kept trying to skew data until they made it SOUND bad. Of course, if you look at their own charts it’s STILL the average number of tornadoes a season (if not less)…AND the number of tornadoes are down. Plus, they’re not hitting land as often (and killing fewer people.)
However, you have to make it SOUND TERRIBLE so… ‘OHMIGOD THERE ARE DAYS WITH MORE THAN ONE TORNADO!!!”
Again, they prove nothing. The data does NOT support their claims. Not just in this instance, but across the board.
Let’s see some of that here.
Oooooh look at the poor homeless child! Awwwww! Must be evil pollution and bad weather! (Maybe it’s the Dick Cheney Weather Control Machine of Death ™?
Huh…well, if you actually LOOK at the charts and compare the number of people in flood-prone areas… to the number of people affected BY floods… you see that they correlate pretty well. The floods aren’t more severe. There are just more dumbasses living in flood areas.
Note that includes EVERYWHERE. It’s not just the poor in Bangladesh or the rich in Miami. It’s a LOT of people choosing to live near the water and in hurricane/tornado areas. Of course those tend to be places where the weather is nice the other 99.9% of the time….
So, should we be surprised that three times as many people living in flood areas will mean three times as many people flooded out when the water comes in?
This is what passes for “climate research?” Skewing data to try to create false “disasters” and “impending doom” scenarios instead of simply describing what is actually happening?
How is this any different than saying “That’s not cancer… it’s God punishing you for your sins?” Or “It’s a miracle!” (not the medicine the doctor gave you that saved your life.)
Go ahead and believe in “Climate Change.” I’ll continue to call it “normal weather” but whatever. Just don’t try to sell me a bill of goods about all this “IMPENDING DOOM!” Back it up with SOME sort of facts. Otherwise, it’s not science. It’s just faith…in a religion.
Conveniently this “religion” always involves the “sins” of man (pollution, overpopulation, capitalism, etc) And somehow this “religion” ALWAYS requires the same “penance”…namely the rich, productive countries in the world have to give all their money to the poor, less productive countries and “share the wealth.”
I’m not sure if it’s just an innate hatred for humanity in general or just a handy way to introduce Socialism into the school kids’ curriculum.
This “Climate Change” crap is the same as teaching “Creationism” in schools. There is the same amount of “evidence” for it.
I’m with you about keeping the waters clean. Local pollution sucks. However, the “fixes” are NEVER common sense and practical.
For example the “Keystone XL Pipeline” would CUT pollution. By using pipelines instead of trucks and rail cars, it uses less energy to move oil, meaning less pollution. You NEVER hear that on the news.
Fracking for more natural gas also CUTS pollution since it is the cleanest fossil fuel around.
Then there’s the skyrocketing amount of pollution from “Third World” countries. China and India now have larger economies than us now… but no one is calling for THEM to cut pollution despite China producing a LOT more pollution than us now with their coal fired power plants.
In fact, the very method of “controlling pollution” favored by the Left (“carbon credits”) is both ridiculous and historically important.
First of all, the link between CO2 and “climate change” is tenuous at best. Second, since air breathing animals all exhale CO2 it’s kinda crazy to call it an “industrial pollutant” isn’t it? Same with methane (farts basically.)
The “carbon credits” are supposed to be a way to purchase “forgiveness” for your sin of “pollution.” That’s funny. Back in the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church used to give their Bishops blank “Indulgences” to sell. They absolved you of any sin…for the right price.
Did it do anything to stop sin? I’m gonna guess…no. However they DID make the Catholic Church very wealthy.
The reasoning is EXACTLY the same.
“Make sinning expensive and people won’t sin.”
Yeah, we know how well THAT works.
Now we’re supposed to believe that the people making tons of money on these “carbon credits”…for doing nothing basically… aren’t doing it for the money?
History would tend to disagree with you.
Unfortunately, the very people that preach in our schools about “Man Made Global Warming” or whatever they’re calling it this week don’t think in these terms. They tend to be the same people to worship government as the answer to all solutions (making the President Jesus I suppose, a martyr hated for his skin color? Does that make Al Gore the Pope of Big Government/Global Warming? Or is that Warren Buffet? Or George Soros maybe?)
They cannot see their blindness and inability to even READ the facts set before them. I’m willing to see more data on this, but everything I’ve seen so far (from many, many, many source) seems to be incomplete, misinterpreted, misleading or downright wrong.
What was that they said about the Communists? They had to get rid of God because they disliked the competition with their own idols of power? Same idea.
In fact, looking at the goals of each movement (wealth redistribution, punish the rich, man is sinful and must be controlled by a big government, etc) I think the case could be made that this movement is simply an offshoot of Socialism/Communism/Progressivism/Fascism/Statism.
Want to test the theory?
Try suggesting they come up with ANY solutions that DON’T involve big government, regulations and costing the rich more money. Ask for a private sector of voluntary solution.
Go ahead. Try it. Bet they can’t do it.
That would be blasphemy.