Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
I meant that climate change activism resembles a belief system. Any that deny it are accused of heresy. You're a non-believer, an outcast, the peddler of evil words against the Righteous. If was centuries ago you'd be burnt at the stake.
I read about the cross-over a while back and have sought out the paper I read. Worth a read. Interesting reveal into the human creature if nothing else.
http://oro.open.ac.uk/46740/1/94_98_Bhagwat_3.pdf |
I think ultimately you can make this argument about a lot of things of which there is a scientific consensus and some controversy over it. It's not uncommon to hear proportions of intelligent design describe evolution, they call it Darwinism, as a belief system too. I am sure there was some aspects of the way climate change activists act that share characterisations with those in a belief system but the underlying 'belief' is based on an overwhelming scientific consensus and not faith.
The comparison to intelligent design is quite apt really because they behave in the same way. There is a lot of talk, lots of attention, but little science behind it and when challenged on this they
resort to accusations of a scientific establishment shutting them out. They also like to dress it up as an open discussion of ideas as if that's what decides what is true. Science isn't an open discussion of ideas in which open minded people challenge each other and all views are equally valid however much they wish it was.
In the end there isn't much reason not to believe The Royal Society and NASA know better than people who have little grounding in the subject.