Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Climate worriers appear to be increasingly looking for ways to exploit people’s religious faith, to coerce ordinary people into accepting green destitution; into abandoning mechanised transport, into letting farmland return to wilderness.
Can imams drive action on climate change in Pakistan?
Imams and other religious leaders are an under-used means of pushing action to combat climate change, experts and religious scholars say.
Religious leaders have the moral standing to call on people and businesses to consider the environmental impact of their activities and take a bigger role in reducing their own carbon footprints and finding ways to cope with the growing impacts of climate change, experts said at a multi-faith meeting in Islamabad.
Maulana Tahir Ashrafi, central chairman of the Pakistan Ulema Council – the country’s council of religious scholars – told the Thomson Reuters Foundation that imams in Pakistan could have “unprecedented influence” in bringing action on climate change.
But first, he said, they need training to both understand and communicate the issues accurately in a country hard-hit by climate-related drought, flooding, crop losses and other problems.
“We religious leaders in Pakistan can talk about climate change with people as long as we become knowledgeable about climate change and its other facets,” he said.
At the recent gathering, which drew scientists, religious scholars and academics, Charles Amjad, an American professor emeritus at the Luther Seminary in Minnesota, said relying only on political and non-governmental organisation leaders to drive climate action was a mistaken approach.
“We must realise that people do listen to religious scholars in mosques, priests in churches, rabbis in synagogues and pundits in Hindu temples in most developing countries, far more than they do to politicians, bureaucrats, media and mayors,” he said.
“This power of faith activists must be tapped for addressing climate change,” he urged.
Read more: http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2016/03/31/can-imams-drive-action-on-climate-change-in-pakistan/
For much of the history of civilisation, during the Dark Age, ordinary people were prey to the unscrupulous – to tyrants who exploited the honest faith of ordinary people, to coerce acceptance of inequity and injustice. Then along came the Age of Reason, and the Age of Enlightenment. Instead of simply accepting whatever they were told, ordinary people started to question, to demand answers, to know the evidence. People started to demand rational government, justice, liberty and fair treatment.
The Climate activist appeal to reason has failed – their evidence sucks, their models don’t work, public interest is plummeting, and their habit of calling people names, when their shoddy science is questioned, is starting to wear thin.
The obvious, if audacious solution – roll back the clock, and restore the Dark Age of unquestioning obedience to arbitrary authority.
Got this April 1, with climate alarmism can’t tell if it’s a joke but hope it is.
When you actually have no argument to support what you want to do – talking about “de-carboning” the energy production and insuring a lack of affordable energy when energy demands brought on by increasing cold require it – you first appeal to those that are malleable and you can win over. This has been going on for years.
Since that program has run its course and you have reached all that you can, then you turn to the religious values and try to use “religious ethos” to bend some of those that resisted your earlier program. If all goes well, you will have a majority, then you can use the hammer of government to drive your program through – taking disbelievers to court, etc., and await its natural results – in this case, freezing to death as many of the unwanted population as possible.
Toss in a couple of good “designer diseases,” to finish off as many of the weakened unwashed majority that you don’t want, and you get yourself a world with that magical, mythical perfect number of humans, under a billion. You, naturally, never intend to “leave it in the ground,” as petroleum has many more uses than merely creating energy – think plastics and other synthetics that cam be created from it. Why “burn” something and make profit once when you can use and recycle and make profits many times?
When you find intelligent, educated religious figures, such as the Pope, espousing the climate religion, realize that that person isn’t speaking from his religious beliefs, he is speaking from his financial expectations. The “high priests” of Climatology, be they Pope, “pseudo-scientist,” or political figures, are not in it for Gaia, they are in it of “My-ah,” as in my-ah wealth.
The Anglican Church I attended until recently pushes the Green line quite seriously. Knowing these people personally, I can assure you that they at least will not get one single net in their own pockets for this. It’s like with the Fair Trade coffee, which I would buy too if I still drank coffee; it actually COSTS them money and effort. these are intelligent educated people, but not educated in science. The climate scare is integrated with their belief in social justice which is very much part of their religious belief. If CAGW projections showed any sign of relating to reality, they would be RIGHT to push the GReen line. People they trust tell them it DOES match reality. One of my own intelligent educated colleagues goes on climate marches, even, without any financial benefit to himself, because he believes there is a 97% consensus. When I challenged this I was out firmly in my place; who was I to disagree with so many? In this case, I suspect hat the Pope is not an organ grinder but a monkey.
UN did not establish UNEP, UNFCCC and IPCC to fix climate, they did it to attack and fix the.Western world.
“Carbon Footprint” is already starting to sound a little “quaint.” As in, “things we briefly worried about when we didn’t know nuthin’.” A lot of pearl-clutching goes on here on WUWT about the climateers “halting human progress,” when I’ve yet to see the slightest bit of evidence that is happening, most especially in what we once called the “Third World.” They’re modernizing at warp speed, and will be calling the shots in the world economy soon if we don’t take steps to remain competitive–like next-generation gas and nuclear.
Why look at Pakistan, where you have the highest rate of believers in any civilised country in the US? Al Gore toured with a “christian version” of his talk as well. How can there even be such a thing?! Are there different “facts” that somehow only can be understood or appreciated by christians?
Remember one thing: In those countries, the rulers TELL their people what they’re going to do–they don’t have to ASK them. Cuts to the chase pretty quickly, which is why we need to be looking over our shoulders. Yes, they’re in thrall to religion right now, no less than we were until probably WWII, and many parts of the USA still are. A gate into gullible minds? Only if their religious leaders allow themselves to be politicized for the gain of a few. Stewardship of the Earth is one thing; policy that’s environmentally irrelevant and counterproductive entirely another.
The “facts” are not different, the presentation is. That’s how marketing works.
I always turn to an aesthetic, fascist fraud for Sunday devotions…….
But first, he said, they need training to both understand and communicate the issues accurately in a country hard-hit by climate-related drought, flooding, crop losses and other problems.
Oh good. So a bunch of imams or going to explain to a bunch of desperately poor, uneducated, angry people that all their woes are due to droughts, flooding, crop failure and other climate problems caused by CO2 emitted by westerners?
I somehow don’t think this is going to end well….
That is precisely the “Climate Justice” plan. Another ‘justification’ for terrorism.
Ah, David, you forgot the N- BOMB part !
in a country hard-hit by climate-related drought, flooding, crop losses and other problems.
=================
no doubt the prayer mat will stop global warming. it has evidently worked wonders in preventing drought, flooding, crops losses and other problems.
Forgot earthquakes .
Interesting, thanks, it would have been good to have a better reproduction of ‘The Gleaners’ but perhaps ‘The Raft of the Medusa’ would have been even more appropriate (left to our fate and at the mercy of the elements surviving by cannibalism).
At one time Provincetown at the tip of Cape Cod was a “starving artist” colony. My parents visited every summer and once came back with an “almost adequate” reproduction of Millet’s Gleaning that hung in their living room for 40 years. So I’m used to bad reproductions.
Of course Norman Rockwell was also a summer resident there, but he was hardly starving.
The issue isn’t religion versus science. It never was. Religion and science do not compete (I accept some minor variants of religion do so -some evangelists- but they are the exception). 19th and 20th century history has shown us clearly that believers and unbelievers are equally capable of being manipulated by tyrants or charlatans. The 21st century, so far, just continues teaching us that clear lesson.
Hoplite
Thanks for that. My own religious tradition teaches thinking based on foundational principles, one of which is the independent investigation of truth. I know from reading hundreds of comments on WUWT bashing all religious thought that there is a cultural expectation that religion and science are not just incompatible, but fundamentally in disagreement.
To sustain such an erroneous position materialists devote a lot of effort to setting up straw man religious positions then happily flay them with their ‘logic’ as their friends cheer from the sidelines.
There is nothing about religions that prevents them being studied scientifically, and there is noting in science that prevents a religious person from accepting logically expounded proofs. The fact is that few people are capable of following logical arguments through to their true conclusions. Devoted materialists, having rejected all aspects of the spiritual world, are trapped in a limited space trying to explain numerous aspect of reality using only a few meagre tools.
The core error is to deny, apriori, any revealed facts. A student of religion, unencumbered by such a hobbled starting point, is free to investigate all that is available and all that has been revealed by the Founders of the great religions, traces of nine being still available to us. This is a good starting point for a discussion, a scientific investigation, into whether or not the holy texts of the world contain ‘facts’ that were not know prior to the writing of that Book. Revealed knowledge scares the hell out of the materialist philosophers because it undermines their world view. They elevate themselves to the position of pious leadership and practice the very priestcraft they claim to abhor. Priestcraft, at its root, is when one tells another what something means and demands acceptance.
Climate science is filled with priestcraft. I do not accept that it is filled with priests, or ‘climate mullahs’. That they behave like priests is true, which is why we must be freed from them, overcoming our collective tradition, and grow up. The independent investigation of truth shows that CO2 has but little influence on the global temperature and the rest is noise.
Materialist culture, particularly the Western philosophers, have been trying to carve a spot where they can sit in judgement of their ‘inferiors’ and practice priestcraft of their own devising and for their own ends, one of which is the destruction of true religion which poses an existential threat. It is in fact a religion of irreligion and has its high priests who demand obedience from the masses (and funds).
There is no time in history when the independent investigation of truth is more necessary or more possible.
Crispin,
I often read your thoughtful contributions which are always without malice.
I don’t know how you spend your days, but you seem to have a broad understanding of politics, science, philosophy and religion. You seem to have years on your side.
WUWT needs minds like yours to frame the CAGW movement ( and other profanities) appropriately.
… ie priestcraft…climate mullahs… very astute and clever.
Have you ever thought about making multimedia productions? “There is no time in history when the independent investigation of truth is more necessary or more possible.” N’est ce pas?
Paul W
Isn’t it interesting that just as we need a tool in order to advance society, one becomes available?
I hold a like respect for your numerous contributions here at WUWT.
With respect to priestcraft, this is a very important point. Humanity was ever in need of guidance and for centuries the level of development was such that a small minority of humans were engaged in specialised study in order to guide the rest about right and wrong. That is a fact and we made progress because of it. Science and religion went hand in hand. Logic was and is part of religious studies for it requires the construction of proofs. Many great men of science were religious scholars first.
The advance of society also saw a lot of carpetbagging pretenders who neither understood the greater questions nor cared to consider them. They just wanted money and power and so on. We have allowed them too much influence.
One of the strangest of phenomena is the way we have tolerated the idea that morality, ethical rules, are ‘made up’ and ‘evolved’ at the direction of humankind. I have seen this idea written a hundred ways. Into that leaky vessel is tossed the claim that ‘religion was invented by Man’ in order to ‘satisfy a need’ and to ‘explain the universe’. They wish! All the great Revelations have overthrown the dominate paradigms of their day.
One hundred years ago the fight against the ether was not yet settled. Darwin, who was wrong about several things, was battling Lamark who was wrong about other things. Einstein, who was wrong about yet other things, was focused on bringing down the ether and framed his science to do so conclusively. Lots of effort was expended on preconceived notions.
These days we spend a lot of money ‘fighting climate change’ which is really just another preconceived notion. The great threat is not climate change but the willingness of crowds to accept as fact preconceived notions for which there is such threadbare evidence that even cherry-picked confirmation-biased observations are insufficient to sustain. Imagine, the ‘climate scientists’ have to resort to adjusting observations – the antithesis of empiricism – to manufacture alarm. It is pathetic house of cards and will collapse under its own weight. Though manifestly false, it is not sufficient to stand by and wait. It is morally correct to ‘stay the hand of the oppressor’. This instruction implies both volition and a firm grip.
Many people claiming standing as scientists are really just materialist philosophers. It goes far beyond climate science. Instead of just ‘doing’ they think out loud about how to think about doing. Their approach begins and ends with words.
Philosophising is good for it requires a strict devotion to logical processes. In a parallel WUWT article Leo is writing that he doesn’t believe in God but can’t prove he doesn’t exist. Bertrand Russel is famous in part for proving that God does exist, but declared, after constructing his proof, that he didn’t believe in Him anyway. It would have impinged too much on his vain imaginings to accept his own logical proof. That is what a materialist philosopher does: rejects logical proofs in favour of preconceived notions, particularly when the acceptance of the proof displaces one far outside a comfort zone. Russel realised the implications of his proof for his 20th Century school of thought and chose infamy.
The priests and mullahs of the climate establishment also realise full well the implications of the mountain of evidence stacked against their unholy claims. Their response is not ideological retreat, but a predictable advancing of claims that they, above others, have the capacity to define what constitutes moral behaviour and righteous conduct. While it usually involves a fiscal penalty, the core motivation is a desire to have their priestcraft skills acknowledged and their pronouncements given the status of revealed knowledge – canons, as it was put so well last week. They want to define what ‘sin’ is and what constitutes ‘penance’. Whenever you encounter someone who tries to prescribe correct procedure, they are usually seeking leadership, at times, merely for its own sake. Trust all men, but tie up your camel.
Crispin.
I agree with you that humanity is in great need of guidance and historically that guidance has come from a broad spectrum of intellectuals. Nowadays the intellectual class within the Internet medium seems narrow to those who are competent using computers and contributing to wikipedia. I categorized those as gamers and the programmers. Without a doubt, these people are smart however more often than not they lack experience in the broader world outside your areas of expertise. They’re often easy to identify because they are profoundly ignorant of subjects that would have been part of core learning if you studied the classics or took a foundation year at college. Science programs are very good teaching science but they’d leave a brilliant segment of humanity simply ignorant of a large portion of human learning. I think it is contingent on people like you Crispin, who can communicate in this forum, understand the scientific nature of the preponderance of the subject matter, but also place it in context, to the large political moves that are happening, but more importantly to how it affects our humanity. WUWT , Anthony, allows the truth to be told. First and foremost free speech in truth are our greatest gifts.
The study of logic and philosophy is absolutely essential in helping thinkers learn to know what they know and learn to be cognizant of the boundaries of their ignorance. A good dose of intellectual honesty superimposed on discipline reasoning is a hallmark of fruitful discourse.
My interest in the Galileo issue for example is rooted in the errant mythology, demagoguery, scapegoating, and ultimately the misleading pathway to honest reasoning. Its use is more befitting the behavior of the global warming alarmists.
I agree with you that most great men of science were religious scholars first. I will make a distinction between scholarship and adherence. Most people move in and out of adherence due to any number of things in life. I would like to refer you to John Lennox, a professor of mathematics at Oxford university. He makes a very strong case that the development of the scientific method (science in general) uniquely came form the Christian mind. That it is a consequence that the underlying assumption of Christians is that the cosmos is orderly and rationally intelligible. He does a good job of it. I agree with you that without acceptance of a divine mind, scientists “hobble” themselves into a kind of conformity that has terminal boundaries.
Lastly, the connection of all classic learning to science and the notion that science is part of all human reasoning and its inseparability from logic, and faith, is the core activity of the Magis Center for Faith and Reasoning, directed by Robert Spitzer SJ. Spitzer is brilliant.
I don’t understand the attraction to priest craft and the manipulation of masses and the seeking of power. But you are right about that. It is fundamental to the CAGW adherent mind set.
Well, until later, good day.
If ever I am in Waterloo I will let you know via Anthony.
Excellent. Now if we could just dispose of the whole mythical “Dark Age” – that “indestructible fossil of self-congratulatory Renaissance humanism” (- C.W. Hollister) – once and for all. Recommend Rodney Stark’s “How the West Won” for the particulars.
Paul W
You are most welcome to Waterloo, a small city with a remarkable population. It is home to, among many things, the Perimeter Institute and its amazing people. I will introduce you to some unexpected and open minds labouring in other fields.
Something I feel it is worth emphasizing on this thread, to which I alluded above, is the fact that there are many ‘scientific facts’ available from Scriptures that were written centuries before humanity had the skills and tools needed to verify them. These sources of guidance were not limited to abstract ideas but practical facts about the nature of the universe. For example in the Tablet of the Universe it is written that all celestial bodies are surrounded by a much larger sphere of nearly undetectable matter (now called Dark Matter). This is ‘the latest’ theory, even though this information could have served as a guide to astrophysicists long before now. It further says that there is a much larger sphere of another type of matter surrounding the one just ‘discovered’. That knowledge is still beyond the limited thinking of even the most up-to-date materialist.
By denying the material content of revealed knowledge the materialist cuts off the shortcuts available to anyone who can read. It is truly bizarre. I think they fear that were they admit there is available to us knowledge that exceeds our own, they might be forced to accept the other guidance about life, the universe and everything. It is as if by accepting the gifts of knowledge available and freely offered, they would be accused by their peers of ‘thinking wrong thoughts’ or ‘accepting as fact something based on faith that the author had superhuman knowledge’.
Imagine that in 50 or 100 years some cosmologists earn a Nobel Prize for discovering there is a yet larger shell of ethereal material surrounding the shell of Dark Matter now agreed to be enclosing each celestial body. The well-read Indian or Bolivian peasant will shrug and say, “I knew that already. What’s the big deal?” What reward should one be given for discovering what we have already been told is there?
“Ah, but now we can prove it!”
Excuse me? We need to have a long think about what constitutes a ‘proof’.
Crispin and Paul,
Thank you both for sharing this amazing, intelligent, wise, and profound dialog here in the open for all to benefit from. An unexpected oasis that both my heart and my brain were refreshed by!
I think Mr. Worrall depends far too much on what he was taught about science and religion in grade school or what he learned from non-scholarly sources. The idea of the Dark Ages has largely disappeared from discussions by serious scholars in the History of Science. It remains one of the most commonly espoused myths about science and religion. See Myth 2 in Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion (see https://books.google.ca/books?id=_Wj-ruvGFvgC&dq=galileo+goes+to+jail+and+other+myths+list+chapters&source=gbs_navlinks_s ).
Seems a good time to mention that it was the ACADEMICS of Galileo’s day, not the Church, who were defending Ptolmeic science against heliocentric theory. They jus dragged the Church into the argument.
Thanks, ClimateOtter! As a non-scientist, I find it disappointing that the scientifically trained people who comment here are sometimes happy to expose not only their willful ignorance of history, but also their arrogant treatment of historical fact. Perhaps they believe that the lessons of history are of a lower order than scientific knowledge? Regardless, that wouldn’t excuse their errors, which tend to debilitate our common duty to truth. “More effort needed”.
Yeah, the ignorance of recent and even not-so-recent historical scholarship in these comment sections is profound. Of course, it’s hard to get everything right, and even despite that defect this is without doubt one of the most indispensable sites out there.
The reason Newton existed happily in Protestant England whereas Galileo was put under house arrest and prevented from publishing clearly shows that religious fanaticism kills knowledge. When the weather turned cold during the Little Ice Age, all religious people in Europe, both Protestant and Catholic, went into witch burning blaming mostly women for bad crop yields.
Religious insanity is a huge danger to humans. People mindlessly kill ‘unbelievers’ and ‘witches’ and it destroys science as well as basic morals and turns people into mindless robots.
@ emsnews, + many! And sadly that does not appear to change any time soon. If ever. The “church” of gore is the same thing.
Lacking a pinnacle predator other than ourselves, war is the historic check on our population expansion. We do it to ourselves . . . knowingly.
Surely you’re not implying that atheistic insanity that “mindlessly kills” believers is to be preferred simply because it relies on the “science” of Lysenko or CAGW? Are the “mindless robots” of NoKo really better off because their grossly obese Dear Leader is an atheist?
ensnews,
From the Wiki;
“The classical period of witchhunts in Early Modern Europe and Colonial North America falls into the Early Modern period or about 1450 to 1750, spanning the upheavals of the Reformation and the Thirty Years’ War, resulting in an estimated 35,000 to 100,000 executions.”
Over a hundred million people were murdered by atheistic regimes and their minions in just the last century . . Did you forget?
John Knight,
May I refer you to RJ Rummel’s life work. He is now dead but he created the term democide.
His calculations of democide (death of a country’s own people by its government) are here:
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
262,000,000 deaths in the last 116 years nearly ALL are by totalitarian socialist (and atheist) regimes.
Atheism, ultimately and always enables the casual destruction of human beings.
Fanaticism of ANY kind is dangerous, and to narrow the focus down to simply the religious strain of it, is to deny that it exists in every ideology , no matter what it may be.
Equally dangerous, and intellectually stunted, is the tendency to make sweeping generalizations about entire categories of people. Making blanket statements suggesting that “all religious people” in Europe went into witch burning is as bigoted as suggesting that all people of a particular race are inferior, or that all citizens of a given country are psychopaths.
The moment someone starts making claims about “all” people in any group they engage in logical fallacy, and it makes me examine you more negatively, not them.
Climate Otter,
True. Nowadays there is a gamer/cartoon notion of the complex politics of 500 years ago and they are often judged with modern knowledge and modern prejudices. Copernicus had already LONG published his heliocentric model with the written endorsement of and dedication to, Pope Paul III . Galileo, in a letter to Kepler, expressed FEAR of being labeled a “Copernican” because the protestant reformationists ( and science elites ) were attacking the existing power structure. One weak point was the church’s publication of Copernicus’s theory. Galileo was afraid of losing his street cred amongst the protestant scientists. It was a legitimate fear. Did you know what happened to the protestant who assisted Copernicus publication? The protestant “science elites” had him fired from Wittenberg.
On 1 November 1536, Cardinal Nikolaus von Schönberg, Archbishop of Capua, wrote to Copernicus from Rome:
Some years ago word reached me concerning your proficiency, of which everybody constantly spoke. At that time I began to have a very high regard for you… For I had learned that you had not merely mastered the discoveries of the ancient astronomers uncommonly well but had also formulated a new cosmology. In it you maintain that the earth moves; that the sun occupies the lowest, and thus the central, place in the universe… Therefore with the utmost earnestness I entreat you, most learned sir, unless I inconvenience you, to communicate this discovery of yours to scholars, and at the earliest possible moment to send me your writings on the sphere of the universe together with the tables and whatever else you have that is relevant to this subject..
So, criticism has to be taken in view of wide spread modern ignorance and persistent bigotry.
Climate Otter,
True. Nowadays there is a gamer/cartoon notion of the complex politics of 500 years ago and they are often judged with modern knowledge and modern prejudices. Copernicus had already LONG published his heliocentric model with the written endorsement of and dedication to, Pope Paul III . Galileo, in a letter to Kepler, expressed FEAR of being labeled a “Copernican” because the protestant reformationists ( and science elites ) were attacking the existing power structure. One weak point was the church’s publication of Copernicus’s theory. Galileo was afraid of losing his street cred amongst the protestant scientists. It was a legitimate fear. Did you know what happened to the protestant who assisted Copernicus publication? The protestant “science elites” had him fired from Wittenberg.
On 1 November 1536, Cardinal Nikolaus von Schönberg, Archbishop of Capua, wrote to Copernicus from Rome:
Some years ago word reached me concerning your proficiency, of which everybody constantly spoke. At that time I began to have a very high regard for you… For I had learned that you had not merely mastered the discoveries of the ancient astronomers uncommonly well but had also formulated a new cosmology. In it you maintain that the earth moves; that the sun occupies the lowest, and thus the central, place in the universe… Therefore with the utmost earnestness I entreat you, most learned sir, unless I inconvenience you, to communicate this discovery of yours to scholars, and at the earliest possible moment to send me your writings on the sphere of the universe together with the tables and whatever else you have that is relevant to this subject..
So, criticism has to be taken in view of wide spread modern ignorance and persistent bigotry.
Never underestimate the stupidity of large groups.
For some reason, the larger the group, the less intelligent it is.
To the best of my knowledge this is a much under studied phenomenon. It has always amazed me that the intelligence of a group of intelligent people can be so much less than the sum of the individual intelligences (in fact even less than that of just one person!). I have noticed this at some of my previous employers. This ‘organisational intelligence’ does not seem to be a research topic of much interest.
I have been a member of various committees both large and small over many years. It is my observation that the majority at any meeting will go along with the leadership. It takes a strong contrary voice to even initiate discussion. This is true regardless of the education status of the participants. Most are fearful of appearing divisive, or lacking in knowledge of the subject, so remain quiet and vote with the majority.
On a different note I am saddened by the general tone of the comments here. I read this article as my own denomination has bought into the “save the earth mantra”. I spoke against it, as did others, to no avail. The decision is not binding in the authoritative ways that faith based organizations can be but it carries influence. I oppose this any time the matter is raised.
Finally, I truly regret the anti-faith based assumptions so casually thrown out. It is possible to be a critical thinker and a person of faith. These two are not incompatible. Interestingly I find the greatest fervency in the “scientific” approach which seems compelled to disprove the existence of any faith based concepts. Like all human endeavors it seems that some can only feel good when they are demeaning others. Sad but apparently true.
“To the best of my knowledge this is a much under studied phenomenon.”
Or you could just remember a little Kierkegaard: The Crowd is untruth. Human beings are not merely embodied minds. Our primary motivators are fear of mortality and envy / status-seeking / amour propre. To really understand this, you might try something that has always rung true to me, at least a little: the mimetic theories of Rene Girard.
It’s referred to as “groupthink” and is highly researched.
The First Law of Tourism states: “The total intelligence of any group of tourists equals the intelligence of the least intelligent member of the group divided by the total number of people in the group.”
I’m sure it applies in other fields as well.
Intelligence is subject to the law of averages just like everything else. Half of the population has an “above average IQ” and half has a “below average IQ”. The trick with large groups is determining whether or not it overrepresents one half of the population. 🙂
I think this is more insidious than it looks.
Within their book, the unbelievers are the root of all evil and are blamed for just about everything. Which is why unbelievers should be subjugated and pay protection money (verse 9:29). This is not protection from outside attack, but the same kind of protection that was once offered in Chicago.
Blaming the ills of Pakistan upon climate change is an extension of blaming everything upon unbelievers. It is the unbelievers in the West, India and China who have caused climate change, and therefore the unbelievers are still evil, and still should be subjugated and taxed. And if they don’t “feel subdued and pay the protection tax with willing submission” (9:29), we have a few more events at airports and subway stations. And then they will be more subdued.
None of this is new, it has been going on for more than a thousand years.
R
@ ralfellis, make that thousands of years, if not forever.
The Age of Enlightenment was brought to Europe via the Protestant movement. The Vatican, on the other hand, was busy suppressing science and did so until my own day. My own family was a series of astronomers over the centuries, for example. And this was possible thanks to ‘no doctrine’ policies of Protestants.
You would turn this into a Protestant versus Catholic row! Most of the seats of learning in Europe were all founded before the reformation. While the tension the reformation created may have accelerated the development of science it hardly was its originator.
Eh? The Royal Society was only founded once the war against the Catholic Church had been won. And the Industrial Revolution began because of the resulting scientific and technological gains in this new Age of Reason. So everything you see around you, has been achieved because the Catholic Church had been put back into its Dark Age box.
Unfortunately, our esteemed leaders have recently sought to unleash a new Dark Age religion upon us, just when we thought the Age of Reason was unassailable. So the whole war of religion, which ran for more than a century, will have to be fought all over again. You have to ask yourself, why? Why would they do that?
Exercise: discover the scientific discoveries of monks and other clerics before the before Reformation, and specifically Catholic scientists since then. Take as many months as necessary. Revise your ‘judgement’, and try to recover your reputation.
>>Monks and Clerics
We all know that wisdom was held before and outside the Catholic Church, The Greeks and Egyptians were fully conversant with the spherical Earth and the Heliocentric solar system, long before Copernicus and Galileo. But any advances through the Dark Ages were made despite the Church, not because of it. Why do you think people like Bruno and Tindale were burned at the stake? You think this was because the Catholic Church was openly supporting accademic enquiry??
R
1/10 for submitting. Re-read Task Description. [Hint: Be prepared to learn].
Come on then, Gerard. What did Catholic Monks invent, that had not been invented previously by the Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Romans and Indians?? Please do tell. You are blowing hot air, because you know nothing about this history.
R
Preparatory Remedial Assignment: Due to your failure to satisfactorily complete the previously set task, the following is suggested: Assess the output of 20 of the most important Medical Schools founded in Middle Ages Europe. You may discount earlier anatomical etc knowledge. This is your last chance.
@ralfellis – I was speaking about universities and not scientific societies. Many European universities predate the reformation.
>>Assess the output of 20 of the most important Medical
>>Schools founded in Middle Ages Europe.
The massive Asclepion hospital on Kos dates from the 4th century BC, some 2,000 years before the Christian Church decided that washing might not be a bad idea. The Christian Church was more interested in burning 250,00 Cathars, because they believed that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, than medical assistance. Barbaric creed.
R
Emsnews
I feel you are in error on this. The Reformation and the Enlightenment were the result of the knowledge and arts of the great universities of the East and Middle East finally penetrating the cloud of ignorance that hung over Europe for many centuries.
The key event was when one of the popes went to Alexandria and got a proper education at university and took home with him a new vision of who advanced a society could be.
Another was when Magnus, the educator of Thomas Aquinas, devoted to acquiring and learning from the great books of the much more developed and scientifically advanced Middle East. It was Magnus who enlightened Thomas, who in turn shared the knowledge and attitudes. The enlightenment in Europe was not a bootstrap enterprise. It was modern science, engineering and philosophy finally penetrating the dark woods where squabbling princes and conjuring witches held sway for millennia.
Nonsense. The Middle East’s centers of learning were all run by Syriac Christians and Babylonian Jews, just as universities in the Gulf States today are nearly all run by Americans and Europeans. Work in the east is the prerogative of the dhimmi unbeliever, not the ruling elite.
There is not one single claimed eastern invention or advance, that was not a previous invention from a previous society – mostly Greek, Persian and Roman. There was a claim only last week by that Raslan guy, that the Mos east invented hopitals, while conveniently ignoring the great Asclepion hospital on Kos, than had been built in the centuries BC.
Ralfellis
That’s funny. I have seen you make the same comment before, denigrating certain cultures. Perhaps you have heard of the great library at Alexandria.
As for ‘Muslim’ inventions which you indirectly aver don’t exist, perhaps you have heard of knitting, algebra and the zero as a place holder in mathematics.
The kings of Europe had personal physicians from the universities in the Middle East and itinerant scientists with pointed hats incanted ‘Abracadabra’ over their potions. They were Arab scholars making a living among the elite in the little kingdoms of Europe.
And what are the objects painted on the tall conical hats of the alchemists? Look familiar?
>>Perhaps you have heard of the great library at Alexandria.
Eh? The Great Library of Alexandria was Egypto-Greek. It was destroyed by the Christians in the 3rd century and then further destroyed during the Muslim invasions of the 7th century. The comment at the time (which may have been about a Mesopotamian library) was that destroying the books was doing god’s work. So to be using the library at Alexandria as an example of Islamic learning is perverse in the extreme.
As to algebra and the zero, they were both invented in India, long before Islam was invented.
Please get your facts right. As I said before, Islam has never invented anything. And the knowledge that was preserved in the East was preserved by the Syriac Christians who ran the Mesopotamian university system. Remember that one of the greatest universities of Mesopotamia was the Jewish seminary at Pumbeditha, which is now callled Fallujah. And it was, of course, wholly Jewish.
R
It’s bad enough when mad scientists try to brainwash people into stupidity but bringing God botherers into it …
Mind you, I suppose that the God botherers have had thousands of years trying to persuade people to believe in their imaginary friend(s) of choice so maybe the mad scientists are looking on them as some sort of role models.
At least the ‘God botherers’ left us cathedrals. The mad scientists will leave only ‘eco crucifixes’ and a few survivors clinging to ‘The Raft of the Medusa’.
JS Bach must have been … what faith again, please?
It’s not exploiting faith, it’s simply the modern day one true faith which has moved in to fill the moral vacuum. That’s the basic appeal of the thing; it gives people a higher mission to save the Earth.
http://tinyurl.com/hcnkdpf
Pointman
Exploiting faith to champion environmental alarmism has been going on at least since Gore’s “Earth in the Balance” was published in 1992.
https://youtu.be/mJM5mipwebw
Any port in a storm. They are reaching Peak Desperation. Code Red.
Climate what? This is a ‘craze’, ‘hysteria’, a neurosis, a mania, a flock of birds, a pride of lions, a frenzy of zealots, and Mao’s little Red book for bots! These fear of climate-change maniacs are completely out of their dismal little gourds. If birds flock, they do flock together, so yeah, why not put all the barking mad zealots under the same umbrella … or is it just a put on? … yup … naughty Eric.
The don’t say AGHE, GHE, DAGW, AGW or even GW. They say CC, since every change – positive or negative – is climate change, and then they just let the reader think about anthropogenic enhanced greenhouse effect. It is just clever way of moving goalposts. It is a clever way of making bad news from minor neutral changes.
To pull imams into CC ‘combat’ (they are not trying to solve problems, but to ‘combat climate change’ since it sounds so brave) is the most deviously idiotic example of overdosed red-green idealism growing in well-meaning MSM.
Staring blankly at the opening. Wow. How do you qualify as an expert in Islamic Greenhouse Effect Adaptation? Just asking.
It is dated March 31 – not April 1 – and written for Reuters nickname ‘Staff’ as a brantlog* entry, because not many are brave enough to let their name associated with bullshit like that.
* web + rant + log
There is a tendency to trash the worst elements of religious practice. One will, of course, get a rejoinder about the Marxists and their atrocities. Trofim Lysenko, anyone?
Most religions (Western religions, as I do not know enough about Hindus or Buddists to have an opinion) have had cycles of fanataciasm and scholarship. The last real time the Muslims as a society had dominated science was before the Mongol invasions. Christian tendencies are better known, but an argument can be made that Luther et al was a popularization of scholasticism. It can also be argued that the Christians were stealing forms of argument from Rabbinic Judaism.
It is very easy to get very shallow, as it is effective. People tend to make a religion about any set of beliefs, with the same set of flaws showing up most times.
Perhaps this may have something to do with it.
http://investmentwatchblog.com/pakistan-government-warns-citizens-to-prepare-for-global-cooling/
Since Pakistan’s goverment is not playing ball and going off script and warning instead of Globule cooling, well the alarmists half to call out the Imans.
They are playing with the worst possible fire.
michael
Has got to be MSM’s little April Fools Joke for we unwashed masses, as I found this one today
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-01/holes-in-the-sun-are-threatening-to-throw-birds-gps-off-course
Even the links they presented are stating nothing more serious than a G1 ‘warning’ which is minim warming level.
“Geomagnetic Activity: Geomagnetic activity is expected to be predominantly Quiet during the rest of day 1 (1st April), however late on day 1 or more likely during day 2 (2nd April), a high speed solar wind from coronal hole #67 is expected to reach the Earth, with geomagnetic activity likely to reach Minor Storm level (G1). Geomagnetic activity is likely to be generally unsettled (Kp3) thereafter on days 3 and 4 (3rd and 4th April).
Energetic Particles/Solar Radiation: Solar radiation is expected to remain at low background levels. ”
Or a ready excuse for all the turbine chopped migratory bird carcasses.
I do not like the sound of this. This is encouraging Islamic religious leaders to create plans on how to reduce the CO2 footprint of the Infidel West.
Does Islam have any tenets on the stewardship of the land that would make environmental concerns a good fit? Historically, when it comes to land, Islam has been all about conquest and that is just about it.
According to a history of Egypt I once read, written by a Muslim, the agricultural productivity of Egypt plummeted catastrophically after the Muslim conquest, and did not recover to Roman levels until the 19th century. (Typed with in finger on an iPad, please excuse typos).
In Naomi Klein’s book – “This Changes Everything”…. she maligns the reputation of Sir Francis Bacon….. the man who came up with the scientific principle concept…… but not because of that….. Later she blames the Judeo-Christian societies for today’s so-called AGW issues…. Then later in her book she puts in a good word for the green efforts of some of the Muslim sects….. Finally she aligns her agenda with ancient North American spiritualism…. on the basis that aboriginals live in alignment with mother nature or Gaia…. But if that were not enough, she not only pushes for divestment but calls upon all religions to divert tithes and offerings away from missionary support and towards the green agenda…… In summary it is very easy to see through her scam…… She and her friends have deliberately meddled with Canadian aboriginal society so as to build up barriers against pipelines in BC as well as Atlantic Canada…. Sometimes I think that she is the person that unhinged Lepine to commit his atrocity against women at the college in Quebec years ago….
test
I’m sorry Mr Drysdale, the test came back positive, you need to go to the free clinic.
The sadly unremarkable thing about this article is that appeal to authority seems to be the most common logical error in public-facing propaganda on “global warming-weirding-climate change-next meme”.
Naomi Klein makes it clear in her book “This Changes Everything” that the judeo-christian societies are to blame for our current, assumed AGW crisis…. she attacks the reputation of Sir Francis Bacon, who brought about the scientific principle….. which, today, seems to be all but abandoned, by climate scientists. She also aligns her agenda closely with the ancient spiritualism of North American aboriginals based on their lifestyle that is assumed to work with nature rather than opposed to it. But later in her book she solicits all religions to shift their tithe and offerings in support of missions work instead towards the green agenda.
Keep in mind that her previous books were all about fighting global capitalism…. But, so as to hit the sweet spot so as to sell more books, she aligns her anti-capitalist stance with the more popular green agenda…so as to make more money….I could go on and on…… but in summary…. IMHO…. we are dealing with an author who is a complete nutbar!
Is there a casual link between force and faith in either direction?
That is the question of importance.
Contrast it to the question of whether there is a casual link between force and reason in either direction.
Faith has its roots in a different metaphysical view than reason does; they share no fundamental concepts.
John
“Faith has its roots in a different metaphysical view than reason does; they share no fundamental concepts.”
What God told you that, John? Or did you just assume your imagination is a magical window into the hearts and minds of multitudes?
In the Book, faith means belief in things one cannot see/perceive directly. Reason obviously involves exactly that, right?
Another reason for the Imams to wag their fingers at their flock.
Oh but they do love that finger wagging, those Imams.
WUWT?
“Religious leaders have the moral standing”
ROTFLMAO
Yeah, like that “religious” leader who instructed his followers to murder anyone who did not buy into his version of reality.
“But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.”
JohnKnight @4/2 3:15pm: If there were any reason to believe that the Book is anything more than the raving of a bunch of ancient goat herders, faith would be superfluous. John Whitman @4/1 7:07am ain’t foolin’. Failure – or refusal – to understand the truth he so eloquently stated is the root cause of not just the CAGW insanity, but all the insanity in this lunatic asylum of a world.
Davn
“JohnKnight @4/2 3:15pm: If there were any reason to believe that the Book is anything more than the raving of a bunch of ancient goat herders, faith would be superfluous.”
Any reason renders faith superfluous? . . That would be true if and only if “any reason” meant absolute proof . . obviously.
Dark Age of unquestioning obedience to arbitrary authority.
_____________
Eric Worral –
Dark Age of unquestioning obedience to arbitrary authority.
_______________
is the roundabout picture –
Hans
Coexist. That means you too climate alarm thugs.
One of the precepts of Islam is that infidels are liars and their word is not to be trusted. They trust only the words of the Quran and the imams who interpret Shariah Law for them. Also Muslims accept they they will die anyway, so they may as well die in the service of Allah rather than suffering from the effects of the ‘irresponsible’ behavior of us heathens, infidels, gentiles and heretics.
I tell people that the analogies between the present age and medieval times are actually quite striking. In this age, the federal government and its employees are the equivalent of the vatican and it’s corrupt monastery system. A villager’s role was solely to keep quiet and continue paying up. Check out the early chapters of William Manchester’s “A World Lit Only By Fire” and see for yourself!
Proving my point re the profound shunning of historical fact here, Manchester’s ‘World lit only by fire’ : “Professional historians, however, have dismissed or ignored the book because of its numerous factual errors and its dependence on interpretations that have not been accepted by experts since the 1930s at the latest …”. “More effort needed, please”.
Manchester’s book is rubbish. At that point, what part of the world was lit by something other than fire?
Seriously, read Stark’s How the West Won for a quick, concise take down of the whole Dark Age myth. And then follow up on his footnotes to go deeper.
More effort is needed, indeed.
“A villager’s role was solely to keep quiet and continue paying up…. ”
Actually, that sounds more like Imperial Rome. As Roger Osborne’s “Civilization” relates, after the fall of the Western Empire, a couple of thousand Roman cities disappeared precisely because those cities existed only for local administration, to collect taxes and quarter troops. “They were centres of consumption, not production, and had no autonomous reason for existence.”
I guess they are running out of ideas. They’ve tried everything, gone everywhere and still people don’t listen. Gosh. Where do they go to from here? What’s left?
I think from now on, we should refer to the people who believe in AGW as ‘believers’ or devout/faithful believers. Goes perfectly with denier.
I would back use of ‘The Raft of the Medusa’ as an illustration over ‘The Gleaners’. However something by Hieronymus Bosch (Last Judgement) or Albrecht Durer (Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse’) could get even closer to the ‘Dark Age’ problem. Islam makes a good partner for CAGW as both sanction Taqiyya or lying in the interests of the Faith.
Eric Worrall,
‘Was uns trennt ist die gemeinsame Sprache.’
Karl Kraus.
agonal indogerman.
This is what all this climate change nonsense is truly about…control. Wikileaks exposes how the elites use environmental cause to push for global governance. WattsUpWithThat should do a series on how climate control is really designed to rob people of their freedoms.
Uh Oh!!! Does that mean that if I speak ill of Mikey, I’m risking being suicide bombed?
Deliver us from carbon and lead us back the low-carbon footprint Dark Ages……….