Inside the Church of Climate

Reposted from The American Institute for Economic Research

Robert L. Bradley Jr. – April 2, 2021

At an environmental forum, Julian Simon once asked: “How many people here believe that the earth is increasingly polluted and that our natural resources are being exhausted?” 

After a roomful of hands shot up, Simon then asked: “Is there any evidence that could dissuade you?” Encountering silence, he followed up: “Is there any evidence I could give you—anything at all—that would lead you to reconsider these assumptions?”

After more silence, Simon answered: “Well, excuse me. I’m not dressed for church.”

Today’s Church of Climate holds three resolute beliefs:

  1. The human influence on climate is pronounced and controlling
  2. That influence cannot be positive or benign, only catastrophic
  3. Global governance can and must solve this problem

Square this with the impressive, even stunning, statistics of human betterment since the Industrial Revolution, especially in the last 75 years. One would think that these parishioners should be relieved, even happy. But theirs is an anti-humanist philosophy, not to be debated but worshipped. It is a creed that sees nature as optimal, not to be violated by humankind. Deeply pessimistic, it is the deep ecology worldview.

Optimal Nature

Optimal nature lurks behind the current climate debate. As Yale climate economist Robert Mendelsohn noted in The Greening of Global Warming (1999: p. 12): 

There is an unstated myth in ecology that natural conditions must be optimal. That is, we must be at the top of the hill now.

Back in the 1970s, a new Ice Age was feared from sulfur dioxide emissions from coal plants, the Global Cooling scare. Even offsetting forces were rejected by Paul Ehrlich, Anne Ehrlich, and John Holdren (Ecoscience: 1977, p. 686):

There can be scant consolation in the idea that a man-made warming trend might cancel out a natural cooling trend. Since the different factors producing the two trends do so by influencing different parts of Earth’s complicated climatic machinery, it is most unlikely that the associated effects on circulation patterns would cancel each other.

To members of the Climate Church, the planet “has been delivered in perfect working condition and cannot be exchanged for a new one.” An issue of World Watch magazine, “Playing God with Climate,” scolded man for interfering with the Earth’s default condition.

Deep Ecology

A radical wing of the modern environmental movement rejects an anthropocentric (human-centered) view of the world in favor of an ecocentric view.

In contrast to shallow ecology, concerned with pollution and resource depletion in the developed world, deep ecology defends “the equal right” of lower animals and plants “to live and blossom.” Deep ecology rejects what it sees as a master-slave relationship between human and nonhuman life. States Arne Næss (in Peter List, Radical Environmentalism: Philosophy and Tactics, 1993: p. 19):

Deep ecology stresses the interrelatedness of all life systems on Earth, demoting human-centeredness. Man must respect nature as an end in itself, not treat it as a tool of man. The human ego and concern for family and other loved ones must be joined by a similar emotional attachment to animals, trees, plants, and the rest of the ecosphere.

To hurt the planet, then, is the same as inflicting bodily harm on oneself. “In the broadest sense,” state Bill Devall and George Sessions (Deep Ecology, 1985, p. ix), “we need to accept the invitation to the dance—the dance of unity of humans, plants, animals, the Earth.” To get to this point, we need to “trick ourselves into reenchantment” (p. 10) with nature.

The platform of the Foundation for Deep Ecology (“a voice for wild nature”), formulated by Arne Næss and George Sessions, condemns the current interaction of man and nature and calls for population decreases and lower living standards. In its words:

  1. The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves … independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.
  2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.
  3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.
  4. Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.
  5. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.
  6. Policies must therefore be changed. The changes in policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures … will be deeply different from the present.

The platform goes on to state that radical change is necessary, “appreciating life quality … rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living.”

From Al Gore … 

Al Gore’s angst about “dysfunctional civilization” crosses over into deep-ecology metaphysics. “Our civilization is, in effect, addicted to the consumption of the earth itself,” Gore stated in Earth in the Balance (1992):

This addictive relationship distracts us from the pain of what we have lost: a direct experience of our connection to the vividness, vibrancy, and aliveness of the rest of the natural world. The froth and frenzy of industrial civilization mask our deep loneliness for that communion with the world that can lift our spirits and fill our senses with the richness and immediacy of life itself.

Eschewing incrementalism, Gore called for “bold and unequivocal” global action where “the rescue of the environment” is “the central organizing principle for civilization.”

That “central organizing principle” is what Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek could not have envisioned: a global central planning where each and every economy of 196 sovereignties must be coordinated via taxes, tariffs (“border adjustments), and efficiency mandates to reduce, and even reverse, the emissions of the green greenhouse gas in particular, carbon dioxide (CO2). 

… to Bill McKibben

Bill McKibben’s The End of Nature(1989: p. 216) fingered the “terminal sin” of man’s altering nature and complained that “the greenhouse effect is the first environmental problem we can’t escape by moving to the woods.” He lamented how “the cheap labor provided by oil” makes the “deep ecology model” difficult to fathom, much less implement” (p. 200).

McKibben in a recent New Yorker column put more of his climate cards on the table: “If one wanted a basic rule of thumb for dealing with the climate crisis, it would be: stop burning things.” The combustion era must reach “a swift end,” whether it concerns oil for transportation, natural gas or coal for electricity, wood fires in the home, or grilling outdoors. Don’t light a match either.

Humanistic Alternative

Getting humans back in the picture, philosopher Alex Epstein reminds all that untamed nature is not only of benefit but also perilous. “If good and evil are measured by the standard of human well-being and human progress,” he states, “we must conclude that the fossil fuel industry is not a necessary evil to be restricted but a superior good to be liberated.” In this regard, “We don’t need green energy–we need humanitarian energy.”

Epstein then reverses the climate narrative:

Nature doesn’t give us a stable, safe climate that we make dangerous. It gives us an ever-changing, dangerous climate that we need to make safe. And the driver behind sturdy buildings, affordable heating and air-conditioning, drought relief, and everything else that keeps us safe from climate is cheap, plentiful, reliable energy, overwhelmingly from fossil fuels. 

In The Future and Its Enemies, Virginia Postrel warns against the stasis mentality—the belief that “a good future must be static; either the product of detailed, technocratic blueprints or the return to an idealized, stable past” (1998: xii)—versus dynamism, which embraces “a world of constant creation, discovery, and competition” (xiv). 

Philosophy, not only economics and political economy, matters in the global warming/climate change debate. Start by checking your premises—and those of your intellectual opponents.

4.8 36 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 3, 2021 10:07 am

Example of a follower:

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 10:42 am

At first I thought that was blood streaming away from this idiot but it is more likely black paint that he was going to use to vandalize the building. Interesting how the girl hovering refused to say where he fell from too.

Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 3, 2021 12:21 pm

There are two men in suits who seem to be observing. If they work for the bank, why did they not prevent the vandalism and trespassing on the building?

Reply to  TEWS_Pilot
April 3, 2021 4:10 pm

If they’re private security guards, they only observe and report. They’re not supposed to touch anyone except in self defense.

Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 4, 2021 7:20 am

I’m sure that black paint is soy based and was hand-made using sustainable crockery. 🤣

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 10:52 am

So the punk got what he deserved.

Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 11:24 am

What an idiot….

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 11:58 am

I feel sorry for his family and friends.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Paul Penrose
April 5, 2021 9:57 am

Downvoting me because of that simple compassionate thought? Wow, I guess all I can say is “haters are gonna hate”.

Eamon Butler
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 4:43 pm

Now, there’s another useful lesson for them.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Scissor
April 4, 2021 6:16 am

I shouldn’t laugh, but……..

………. ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Reply to  Scissor
April 6, 2021 9:23 am

Great candidate for a Darwin Award.

April 3, 2021 10:12 am


Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 10:38 am

Gobbledygook, so many of these people lack clarity of thought and speech. Great makeup job, delicately applied with a trowel….

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 3, 2021 10:55 am

First thought I had was “that’s Morticia Addams!” Do you suppose her “partner” dresses like Gomez?

Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 3, 2021 7:50 pm

ha ha trowel …. now that made me laugh, and also reminded me that I need to do some work in the garden tomorrow. Thanks.

D Boss
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
April 4, 2021 5:29 am

I expect her troupe of flying monkeys is backstage…. She does look like the wicked witch – the flesh colored microphone appears like a huge wart too. Seriously, add some green makup and voila:

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 10:53 am

Symbolically makes them much easier to be led. Sorta like a COVID obedience mask.

Screen Shot 2021-04-03 at 10.51.23 AM.png
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 3, 2021 12:43 pm

I wonder about the total number of rings that she has. I would avoid following her through security.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 3, 2021 3:49 pm

Pasting such a photo is a derogatory insult to cows

Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 12:26 pm

IAI.…International Association of IDIOTS?…I always take my science advice from someone who looks like a cheap knock-off of Morticia Addams with a NOSE RING.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 12:54 pm

What an unbelievable load of meaningless words, all cobbled together to tell the audience nothing about anything.
That requires a very special kind of useless idiot. Just remember, someone felt she was ideal to have on a panel in front of an audience?
How embarrassed must that person have felt?

Reply to  Rod Evans
April 3, 2021 7:45 pm

They are likely just as dumb as she is, or more!

Steve Case
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 9:40 pm

Google this for some fun: “post modernism gibberish generator”

Steve Case
Reply to  Scissor
April 3, 2021 9:47 pm

OH, besides the non-sense spewing guest, why do all the guests put up with sitting hard stools while the host like some sort of queen bee presides seated in a throne.

Reply to  Scissor
April 4, 2021 4:11 am

There is only one possible response to Morticia Addams outpouring of verbal sewerage:

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Scissor
April 4, 2021 6:19 am

Nope, didn’t understand a word of what she said.

Pop Piasa
April 3, 2021 10:29 am

The perfect scientology to control the population through fear.
Here’s my rhyming response:

An Ode to the Church
                       On Fighting Climate Change

Bureaucrats and Global Planners
Preach in agitated manners,
Predicating great disaster:
“Climate change we now must master!”
Human guilt and blame beseeching:
“Children shame we should be teaching!
Man has sinned by overreaching
Fragile Gaia’s limit!”
Beware: this bold apostasy
Spins prophesy from vanity!
The firmaments will never be
Controlled by mortal hands.
So, use this world, as best you can,
To take care of your fellow man
And leave Earth’s destiny to God’s great plan!
This Universe is God’s, alone
Commanding elements He owns.
Perplexes any man’s control,
Yet, still provides for every soul!

Tom Halla
April 3, 2021 10:35 am

To paraphrase a comment of Judith Curry’s, they believe in the science in the same way a child believes in Santa Claus. They will say “Believe the science” and have no idea of what science is.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Tom Halla
April 3, 2021 10:55 am

They will say “Believe the science” and have no idea of what science is.

You know that’s the case when you provide an alternative, contradictory POV and they either stick their fingers in their ears or just become angry. Some say they “agree to disagree” without any understanding that they have been proven wrong.

The truth is, AGW is not about science at all. It’s about a narrative that fits an agenda.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Rory Forbes
April 3, 2021 11:17 am

Rory said “The truth is, AGW is not about science at all. It’s about a narrative that fits an agenda.”

The narrative not only fits the agenda, it empowers the agenda and justifies noble-cause corruption in those who build their lives around their newfound religion in the church of omnipotent greenhouse in carbon.

Last edited 1 year ago by Pop Piasa
Reply to  Rory Forbes
April 3, 2021 11:18 am

Right you are, same can be said about COV-19, it’s an agenda, not science anymore

Reply to  Tom Halla
April 3, 2021 11:16 am

Sounds like Greta… 😀

Reply to  Tom Halla
April 3, 2021 12:05 pm

I note that agw disciples always refer to THE science.

Just as establishment religions followers refer to the teachings of THE church.

Reply to  Mr.
April 3, 2021 12:41 pm

And Deadheads refer to THE show. It doesn’t even matter which show.

Indoctrination is easy to spot if you listen closely. The indoctrinated will always refer to their favorite obsession in the familiar tense. Just as their response to people with differing opinions always begins with “THEY”, because “they” certainly are not “WE”.

On the outer Barcoo
Reply to  Doonman
April 3, 2021 2:38 pm

Winston Churchill once described a fanatic as someone who won’t change his (or her) mind and won’t change the subject.

Reply to  Tom Halla
April 3, 2021 6:39 pm

Very True Tom BUT….At WUWT you are fighting with facts and stats that the opposition doesn’t care about. They take the postmodernist view that your facts have no relevance and the results justify the means. Why do you think that most of the theories that intellectuals pronounce are reduced to a simplicity that is mind-bogglingly stupid ie CO2 drives the whole of the worlds temp, weather and cataclysmic events and Interest rates is the only lever to drive the world’s economy.

You can jump up and down about the complexity of these things until you are blue in the face but you have no simple, believable and stupid solution that the emotional cripples, women and children who make up the majority who drive the CC argument will swallow.

Reply to  Tom Halla
April 4, 2021 8:06 am

You can usually tell who they are simply by the use of that phrase.

Joel O'Bryan
April 3, 2021 10:48 am

The deeply entrenched anti-nuclear power movement, utterly opposed to any and all new nuclear power plant construction and swift decommissioning of existing ones in Western countries, within all these Green organizations exposes them for the evil and deceit they are.

Last edited 1 year ago by Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 3, 2021 12:02 pm

Quite right. If the alarmists truly believed that an existential climate crisis was imminent thanks to carbon dioxide emissions, they would be parading up and down demanding nukes, not windmills.

That they don’t like nukes makes their agenda look less like real fear and more like an aversion to modern human civilisation generally. What sort of future do they picture should their plans bear fruit? Whatever it is, it ain’t the way things are going to turn out.

Reply to  Jit
April 3, 2021 12:18 pm

Amish People like, but they are not ready at all for the first step.

Reply to  Jit
April 3, 2021 12:57 pm

“That they don’t like nukes makes their agenda look less like real fear and more like an aversion to modern human civilisation generally. “

A big part of this to insure a general scarcity of all things. Abundance derails their entire religion. The raison d etre of their agenda across the board melts away in the sunny day of abundance. They fear and loath economic growth.

On the outer Barcoo
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 3, 2021 2:40 pm

Bit of a bugger if you’re relying on cancer radiation therapy for yourself or a loved one.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  On the outer Barcoo
April 4, 2021 4:54 am

They also don’t think that people should die. They’ve hit the reset on their video games too many times. COVID-19 has upended their world because people are dying and that is not natural in their perfect environment.

On the outer Barcoo
Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
April 4, 2021 7:49 am

Immortality – the New Frontier!

Joseph Zorzin
April 3, 2021 10:49 am

Thanks, Charles, for passing along that item from Mr. Bradley. I just sent that link to the major “players” in the climate “debate” here in Massachusetts- the veritable Caliphate of Climate Emergency Religion.

MM from Canada
April 3, 2021 11:11 am

“Today’s Church of Climate holds three resolute beliefs:

  1. The human influence on climate is pronounced and controlling
  2. That influence cannot be positive or benign, only catastrophic
  3. Global governance can and must solve this problem”

If human influence cannot be positive or benign, only catastrophic, then there is no point in doing anything at all to “mitigate climate change,” because everything we do just makes things worse.

Last edited 1 year ago by Mary Jones
April 3, 2021 11:22 am

At first, nature is never in balane, was never, will never be.
At second, the beloved nature, if a tiger or a polar bear is hungry it eats best ever environementalist as any other prey, without questioning any philosophy

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Tom in Toronto
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 3, 2021 11:56 am

It’s the ‘disney effect’. Animals and even trees and rocks have the same thoughts, feelings, and intelligence as humans and are, for the most part, more noble and righteous than us.
“But I know every rock and tree and creature
Has a life, has a spirit, has a name”
-Colors of the Wind, Pocohontas

These people have no clue what nature is really like because of all the comfort and prosperity hundreds of years of work and innovation and clever utilization of the earth’s fuel resources have brought them.

Reply to  Tom in Toronto
April 3, 2021 12:28 pm

Animals and even trees and rocks have the same thoughts, feelings, and intelligence as humans

If we consider the intelligence of CC activists an CC church believer, I’m not sure they reach the rocks or trees intelligence quote…..

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Mike Lowe
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 3, 2021 1:10 pm

But that MUST be true. Prince Charles has told us. Many times!

Reply to  Mike Lowe
April 3, 2021 1:22 pm

Prince Charles ? He seems to be the result of inbreeding with all bad consequeces, and his IQ ? Better not ask for.

George Tetley
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 4, 2021 2:01 am

If you did a analysis you would find that the majority of the climate change believers live in overcrowded environments, just ask a farmer or the villager to describe climate change and you will get a honest reply,. Ah what, ???

Hoyt Clagwell
Reply to  Tom in Toronto
April 3, 2021 12:42 pm

Perfectly stated Tom. If these protesters were left in the wilderness with nothing more than what God gave them, I’d give them three days. That’s how kind Gaia is.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Tom in Toronto
April 3, 2021 12:49 pm

It’s pure and unadulterated anthropomorphism. One of the best psychological weapons to target the emotions or consciences of people.

Paul Penrose
April 3, 2021 11:57 am

One of the more important things I’ve learned from 59 years of life is that if you want to understand what people actually believe, don’t examine what they say, but watch what they do. These “deep ecology” promoters don’t act like they really believe it, so I conclude that they don’t. That’s not to say that I can know what their motivations are for being such flaming hypocrites, but that’s surely what they are.

Reply to  Paul Penrose
April 4, 2021 7:09 am

Paul, Green Environmentalism is a secular version of the Fallen State narrative, an ancient cosmology of Western thought manifest in the apocalypse eschatology of the Judeo-Christian culture. This worldview always include fantasies of massive human suffering as punishment for offending God, in this case tampering with the optimal state of nature. And it always includes a path to salvation for the select few.  

In Green Environmentalism the ancient fear of nature is distilled into a fear of CO2. In California the rich buy EV’s and home generators, while actively trying to prevent the world’s poor from obtaining electricity by burning fossil fuels, the single most important step to helping those poor people survive climate change. 

In this view, they aren’t really hypocrites at all. Green Environmentalism is a secular religion. It’s a religion of rich people sacrificing the poor for Gaia. It’s elitist and racist.

April 3, 2021 12:14 pm

This planet’s environment (nature) is now, and has always been, inherently hostile to all forms of fauna & flora.

“Survival of he fittest” (evolution) requires nature to keep throwing environmental hand grenades at all species, just to ensure they can maintain their foothold in the general hierarchy of life forms.

(That said, the Darwin Awards is nature’s little helper that we humans came up with all by ourselves)

Reply to  Mr.
April 3, 2021 1:01 pm

Microscopic life forms, whether or not they provide the basis for more complex life, must certainly be granted the “fittest” of all life inasmuch as they consume all more complex life forms, plants or animals, in the end.

April 3, 2021 12:32 pm

1 – Is it possible to harm the environment? Obviously it is.

2 – Have we in the West worked really hard to protect the environment? Obviously we have and we have enjoyed great success.

Steven Pinker points out that civilization has made great strides. Almost everything is better than it has ever been in the history of the human race and things keep getting better.

There are those who deny the progress we have made. They are the progress deniers. They are horrible and should not be tolerated.

One example would be racism. In my own lifetime we have made amazing progress on racism. When I was a kid, racism was casual. People would say, write, and do racist things and not give them a second thought. Now people bend over backwards, way too far as it turns out, to avoid giving the impression of racism. So why are we still being hectored to “do the work” because, as white people, we are irredeemably racist?

There is an excellent interview of linguists Steven Pinker and John McWhorter. The first half is about linguistics but the second half is about progress denialism.

In my present grumpy mood someone who harasses me about being a white male or whatever is going to get accused of being a denier, loudly and with both barrels as it were.

Abolition Man
Reply to  commieBob
April 3, 2021 1:50 pm

When someone brings up racism, be sure to ask if they believe in Critical RACIST Theory! That is the theory that promotes racism and segregation against anyone perceived as being privileged, especially white males! If they do, be sure to ask them what they know of the Abolition Movement! The only group to EVER fight against slavery and win was started by European ancestry Christians who welcomed anyone who shared their goals! When someone accuses me of being racist I reply that everyone is racist to some extent; but only those who are REALLY racist deny that they are!
The modern version of the Abolitionists work to stop human trafficking and sex slavery, as well as free those in bondage from the Progressive indoctrination system that cripples the student’s mental abilities and their chance to live a happy and productive life! Apparently, even after 150 years, the DemoKKKrats are still pro-slavery!

Steen Rasmussen
April 3, 2021 12:57 pm

Maybe news to some of you? For many years the IPCC have driven a whole agenda based on the assumption that man made CO2 is the control knob of the climate on Earth – maybe based on the assumption, that no one would really be able show that this is NOT the case. However a Norwegian team of Scientists in 2020 made a physical experiment to measure the actual IR absorption or Backscatter radiation from CO2. What did they find out? Well you better read their paper found here;
As I read it, it is now clear by measured evidence, that CO2 warms the atmosphere – but with a very minor effect. Other scientists suggests that it is because of a molecule of CO2 when it is triggered by long waved IR, it will release its energy in another wave length (in the radio frequency) and thereby it is not able to back scatter the energy in the same band as received. Hopefully this will be shown by evidence very soon! But until then big efforts might be done to cover up all the evidence that might explode the whole concept of AGW. SteenR

Last edited 1 year ago by Steen Rasmussen
Reply to  Steen Rasmussen
April 3, 2021 1:02 pm

Don’t you have a direct link ?

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 3, 2021 3:27 pm

I assume it’s this one. I haven’t read it yet.

Steen Rasmussen
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 3, 2021 3:48 pm
Reply to  Steen Rasmussen
April 3, 2021 8:02 pm

Someone needs to take a close look at this research. If they can’t find obvious flaws, then it needs to be replicated. Perhaps the Heartland Institute or a similar organization could arrange funding.

Starting in the 1800s there are a variety of experiments that purport to demonstrate that CO2 absorbs energy and heats up. I suspect most of them are flawed. Al Gore’s version was outright faked.

The CO2 absorption band that matters is around 15 um. That corresponds to a temperature of -80 C. Given the temperatures the historical experiments were conducted at, the energy absorbed by the 15 um line shouldn’t have had much effect.

When I did a web search trying to find other experiments to corroborate the linked paper, the first hit was the linked paper. I’m guessing that nobody has been able to conduct a valid lab experiment that has been able to demonstrate backscatter heating from CO2. It seems like a logical thing to try and I expect that it has been tried more than just once.

Reply to  Steen Rasmussen
April 4, 2021 9:54 am

It does, thanks !

April 3, 2021 1:12 pm

mckibbens right ; we have to stop burning things . its time we end human metabolism . the root and the archetype of all consumerism .all those hungry cells craving hydrocarbon fuel to burn . killing plant and animal alike for their selfish needs . it’s oxygen and oxidation which is the great destroyer , not co2 which transforms itself
from lifelessness to life .

Last edited 1 year ago by garboard
Reply to  garboard
April 3, 2021 1:25 pm

Prohibit DHMO, Dihydrogenemonoxide – now !
It’s so deadly to humans, animals, plants…..

Last edited 1 year ago by Krishna Gans
Reply to  Krishna Gans
April 3, 2021 2:57 pm

Ban O2…don’t let that Evil Carbon have any.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  garboard
April 4, 2021 3:36 am

McKibben has a wood stove in his home. He admitted it in one of his books. I’ve read all his books and they suck- very, very boring.

Jaime Saldarriaga
April 3, 2021 1:36 pm

Climate is a descriptive long term (=>30 years) multiple concept characterization of the Atmospheric Variation of a Geographical Body.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jaime Saldarriaga
April 3, 2021 1:37 pm

The peace and tranquillity of Landru be with you

The Archons are not of the body…

Laws of Nature
April 3, 2021 1:56 pm

>> How many people here believe that the earth is increasingly polluted and that our natural resources are being exhausted?

Well.. that seems like a very dumb question IMHO as there is no doubt that mankind uses natural resources and most of them are finite!? I think the audience got it right…

Reply to  Laws of Nature
April 3, 2021 2:04 pm

Only mankind uses natural resources ? I doubt that.

Using “renewable energy” based on solar power and windmills, or increase the use of EV, there may be some material soon at their end, that’s right.

Reply to  Laws of Nature
April 4, 2021 10:22 am

You think things just disappear when they are used? The only thing lost off this planet is what is sent out of earth orbit. And material in the form of meteorites and fine space dust more than makes up for this loss.

Abolition Man
April 3, 2021 2:06 pm

Thanks, Robert (and Charles,)
A nice breakdown of what I like to call the High Church of Climastrology; but you neglected to mention where it fits in the pantheon of Progressivism!
Climastrology is just one of the sects within the larger organism; although it receives much of it’s support and funding from other brethren! Without extensive financial, moral and media support from other Progressive denominations, Climastrology would disappear off the public’s radar rather quickly as few see it as a major impact on their lives. With the Communist insurgents seizing power in DC the American public wil get a chance to see how disastrous these religious-based policies really are!
Maybe that will inspire the first major pushback against the Progressive religious nuts that have taken over our schools and institutions! A man can dream, can’t he!

April 3, 2021 2:32 pm

Once the world was Paley’s timepiece, created and wound up by God at the Creation and left ticking steadily for us to examine and to marvel at. Perhaps this was appropriate in the early 19th Century but there has since been a vast increase in the range of phenomena accessible to science. Wherever we look we see a Universe that is chaotic and unpredictable; more like stock market than timepiece. Furthermore it is not the pristine perfection of a Laplacian universe that matters, but rather its imperfections. Without occasional, random imperfections in nucleic acids, life could never have become more complex than the virus. Turbulence is everywhere, in cumulus clouds, in breaking waves, in the sound of a clarinet and yet it is inaccessible to the elegant equations of 19th century physics. By presupposing an underlying perfection, we blind ourselves to the amazing realities of the world around us. Only by experiment and observation can we truly see.
Reid (2019) “The Fluid Catastrophe”.

April 3, 2021 3:05 pm

More like communism….both Xi and Putin laugh at the useful climate fools who help them undermine the west… little cost to them. However, China is having problems ….recent dust storm over the country which may go across the Pacific to Callyfornia to some extent. Past few years China has been hit with cyclones and flooding…has created a disaster with planting trees in the desert – it does not work – who knew? Damming rivers has left Wuhan (home of Wuhan Virus) with a mostly dry river bed. Communism always fixes things…sort of like Joey Biden’s work.

April 3, 2021 3:11 pm

And the political fallout of this in the “democratic” West is that the government thinks its job is to protect the well being of the Planet verses championing the well being of the people” they ostensibly represent. And what the well being of the Planet is, is anyone’s guess (they can and do make it up, and get wealthy in the process) because the Planet can’t speak or vote you out office. Using a religious metaphor, it is like the priest class building a statue of a God, then asking the inert statue what it wants. What a system!

An the further irony of this is that you have to go to Russia to find the old fashioned opposite position:

Western Liberalism has outlived its purpose – Vladimir Putin w/ Financial Times

That interview was an excerpt from a 2 hour interview Vladimir Putin did with the Financial Times. The best quote / summation comes at the very end of the interview, hence I started the video there, but the entire thing is worth watching. IMHO

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
Mickey Reno
April 3, 2021 3:17 pm

L Ron Gore and Michael Miscavige Mann have given their cultists their marching orders. KCSW (Keep Climate Scientology Working). Disobey and become disconnected, from your family, your friends, your country and your species. Welcome to the cult of Climate Scientology. Oh, here’s a portrait of L. Ron Gore, everyone applaud to the portrait. Now, get out there and recruit raw meat, preferably rich celebrity TV and Movie stars.

April 3, 2021 3:47 pm

The idea of Man’s responsibiliy to be in control of the Climate seems to be closely related to some religious beliefs such as Original Sin, the Garden of Eden, Repentance and Self Flagellation and possibly even resurrection. Unfortunately the idea has been kept on life-support by many related money making initiatives and schemes.

April 3, 2021 3:57 pm

It really is time for a coronal mass ejections. Only then will those of us surviving appreciate what controls both the climate and our civilization.

Mike Maguire
April 3, 2021 3:59 pm

To win the case for political agenda.

  1. Make up a very convincing sounding narrative. Tell people that it’s for altruistic cause X or cause Y………..saving the planet is one of the best. Who could be against that? (other than deniers trying to sabotage your effort and big oil wrecking the planet for selfish financial gains).
  2. Tell them that it’s based on the science and that all the real scientists universally agree on it. Those that disagree are conspiracy theorists or have evil motives.
  3. Repeat it over and over and over….for decades in this case.
  4. Don’t let observations or contradictions get in the way with reality. Effectively censor sources that have authentic data/evidence that contradicts your message. If they get loose with a message that’s picked up and gains traction…….. smear them based on #2.

Ex-KGB on Ideological Subversion: How the UN/IPCC hijacked science/brainwashed the world. Previously warmer. Polar bear hoax. Sept. 2019

John Robertson
April 3, 2021 5:22 pm

Doom Doom Doom,is the recurring chant.
Gang green kills its host,in every form it takes.
The assassins of civil society are the same pathogen killing a body when gaseous gangrene sets in.
The Cult of Calamitous Climate is Government Religion.
Created by Bureaucrats,Protected from exposure by courts(Just Us System) and endlessly promoted via government funded propaganda.

The very institutions that were created to prevent mass hysteria,ensure evidence based public policy and encourage truth in Governance…
Are the scum who created the UN IPCC scheme.

April 3, 2021 6:40 pm

It’s a big church that goes all the way up to His Holiness.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Chaamjamal
April 4, 2021 3:44 am

Saint Greta Thunberg and “climate scientist” Bill Moomaw recently met with the Dalai Lama on Zoom to enlist him in the battle to save the Earth- it’s on YouTube.

Matthew Sykes
April 4, 2021 2:26 am

Pollution is a tricky one, yes, in may ways it is reducing, no lead in petrol etc, but then we have dioxins, and plastics as new pollutants, so no sooner is law enacted, new pollutants are created.

But of course CO2 is beneficial, and we are trying to reduce our impact.

And that is the thing, we are trying, though clearly some private industry will put profit above pollution, these need close monitoring.

April 4, 2021 5:06 am

As much as these wackos detest Humans, why have they not leaped off of something and demanded that their followers follow suit?

Will they give up the technology that they use constantly and live a humble life, as did my Scottish, Cornish and Irish ancestors before they came to America in the 18th & 19th centuries? I doubt it. They want to preach at everyone else but the probability of giving up their comfort cushions is slim to none.

No burning anything, not even to cook and keep warm? You first, dorkwad, and I want to see how YOU make it through a deep winter with no heat and frozen food that has to be thawed and cooked before you can eat it. That would be a hoot.

]What a bunch of self-righteous pompous a – – – – – – -s.

I’m going back to watching Bob the Baby Volcano growing up on Iceland now. Quite a show of earth-building at its best.

Reply to  Sara
April 4, 2021 5:16 am

I will add here that these people really do need their own planet, and they need it ASAP.

Describing this as a religious movement is as close to the mark as you can get. Fanaticism is not a pretty thing. This is what it is, in polite language, and nothing else: fanaticism.

April 4, 2021 5:31 am

Al Gore is the Joel Osteen of the Church of Warming.

Kevin kilty
April 4, 2021 6:36 am

“we need to accept the invitation to the dance—the dance of unity of humans, plants, animals, the Earth.”

If someone can point me toward a more sickening bit of sophomoric writing, intended to cloy the parishoners’ senses, please don’t.

April 4, 2021 9:09 am

Don’t know about “the Church of Climate”, but regarding its “three resolute beliefs”:

The human influence on climate is pronounced and controlling

The IPCC puts it rather less ‘resolutely’ than this. There has been a human influence on radiative forcing, but natural influences are also contributting to climate change (AR5, 2018):

Natural and anthropogenic substances and processes that alter the Earth’s energy budget are drivers of climate change… The largest contribution to total radiative forcing is caused by the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 since 1750

That influence cannot be positive or benign, only catastrophic

Again, not nearly so black-and white from the IPCC. Back in 2007 (AR4) they pointed to numerous observed and projected advantages to warming conditions, from earlier spring planting of crops in the Northern Hemisphere, reduced demand for heating in Northern Europe and expected increased aggregate yields of rain-fed agriculture in North America.

Global governance can and must solve this problem

Global cooperation isn’t necessarily about global governance. It certainly hasn’t been in the past.

David L. Hagen
April 4, 2021 3:15 pm

Stephen C. Meyer summarizes recent discoveries that 1) Universe has a beginning. 2) It is very finely tuned. 3) Life has a very high information content. The supports “In the beginning God created … and he saw that it was very good.” Genesis 1:1, 31. The misled ecological hysteria asks again “Did God say?” It fails to recognize how amazingly well controlled our climate actually is, with absolute global temperatures varying by < 1%. We have the opportunity to use more of the geologically stored solar energy to boost technologies and economies while we work to develop cheaper dispatchable sustainable millennial energy.

Paul of Alexandria
April 5, 2021 8:13 am

Deep ecology stresses the interrelatedness of all life systems on Earth, demoting human-centeredness. Man must respect nature as an end in itself, not treat it as a tool of man. The human ego and concern for family and other loved ones must be joined by a similar emotional attachment to animals, trees, plants, and the rest of the ecosphere.

Which, if you think about it is self-contradictory. If humans are separate from nature (and who has ever held that nature is a tool? Christians, at least, hold that we are given nature as a trust to manage wisely) than we have no responsibility to nature in and of itself. We only have a responsibility to ourselves to use it wisely so that we do not damage ourselves in the long run.

On the other hand, if we are part of nature, than we have no more or less responsibility than, say, the beavers or the termites – that is to say none at all. The rest of “nature” either adapts to us or dies, morality doesn’t enter into the equation. Now we, being intelligent creatures, can choose to take either a long or short view of things, and plan accordingly, but there are no mandates.

An interesting point, however: I read an article a while back talking about Calcutta’s pollution problem. Essentially, they just ran the sewage discharge pipe out to sea bit and dumped it into the open ocean. Well, somebody became concerned and cleaned up the outflow – and the fishing industry collapsed. Turned out that one man’s sewage was another fish’s free lunch.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights