The new religion is environmentalism. It has all the elements of classic, superstitious religion. They worship "planet earth," no amount of data, even from respected climate scientists are top universities, can thwart their faith in man-made global warming. Point out the fact that the most draconian measures suggested to stop man made CO2 production would only reduce a tiny fraction of output and that it in itself is a tiny fraction of the total new CO2 in the atmosphere each year, and what do you get? Denier! Unscientific!
Yes, they actually use the religious term "denier." You are denying the faith.
Carbon is the new Satan. Notice that in common talk it's not even CO2 anymore, but just shorthand carbon. "Carbon" is catchy. Carbon credits. Carbon emissions. Carbon footprint.
More informed leftists will be quick to say, "Oh, well, but we mean CO2, everyone knows that," and yet they perpetuate the wildly inaccurate use of the word "carbon" because innately they know it more rhetorical force and makes a better bogey man in the minds of the faithful masses.
All you need to do to get grant money or to gain immediate sympathy for your foolish decision to by a Chevy Volt is to say, "I'm doing it to reduce my carbon footprint," and all challenges are off. End of discussion. It's a personal decision.
Junk scientists are the evangelists of the day, along with political hay makers and corporate inside trackers who see a gold mine in any new forced regulations. If one of these enviro evangelists says man is causing global warming via evil carbon, then by golly, the leftist faithful are convinced and it is "received" science, or "settled" science. "Settled science," is of course code word for anything that can't really be demonstrated or proven by the scientific method.
No one talks about the laws of heredity or the laws of gravitational attraction as "settled science" because anyone, anywhere, anytime can verify those results by experimentation. That's science.
But the left likes to blur the line between science and theory, or just plain philosophy, whenever it is convenient. And to bolster their "faith" they bully into submission any dissenters. "Well, all these scientists voted and agree so it must be true."
Does this sound familiar? Take away 400 years and you have Galileo being put on trial. And by whom? By the same scientists of his day who had "received" Ptolemy's cosmology as settled fact. The debate in Galileo's day was that the heliocentric view didn't yet have positive demonstration of it's truth. Of course later, when Galileo defended his Two World Views, it was taken as an attack on Pope Urban VIII at a time of great upheaval in Europe and alienated those who had been sympathetic. But even the Inquistional conclusions, in the Vatican archives that Napoleon obtained, shows that the theologians of the Inquisition, like Galileo himself were chiefly concerned that scientific demonstration be given, not mere conclusions or evidence in favor, yet lacking proof. William E. Caroll writes (Pastoral Review, April 2012),
When we speak of Galileo’s defence of the thesis that the Earth moves, we must be especially careful to distinguish between arguments in favour of a position, and arguments which prove a position to be true. In fact, Galileo and the theologians of the Inquisition accepted the prevailing Aristotelian ideal of scientific demonstration which required that science be sure and certain knowledge in terms of necessary causes, not the conclusions of hypothetical or probabilistic reasoning which today we tend to accept as science.And in fact, even in Galileo's day the church was open to what could be scientifically demonstrated:
Cardinal Roberto Bellarmino, the learned Jesuit theologian and member of the Inquisition, told Galileo that if there were a true demonstration for the motion of the Earth then the Church would have to abandon its traditional reading of those passages in the Bible which appeared to be contrary.The left makes prophesies, none of which ever need come true, because they will one day, they are certain. Just keep waiting and looking to the east, or west, or wherever.
Of course, the left says, with the environment the stakes are too high to put off doing something now by being bothered with scientific demonstrations of man made global warming, or even what the effects might be.
And of course, this is not science at all. And this is why groups like the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio this year are proposing more than $2.1 trillion a year in wealth transfers from "rich countries to poorer ones" in the name of fostering a "green infrastructure."
How will the UN do this? By new "carbon taxes for industrialized countries" to transfer the wealth. It's socialism pure and simple, but on a global scale.
Socialism has always needed a vague bogey man, one you can't ever get your hands on--because then it could be solved, and in the solving would become useless to them.
But this is the way of the left