In a time when modern science and scholarship have begun to cast doubts on traditional faith, many on the left, right, and center are increasingly abandoning traditional religion. While most such people on the center-right are content simply not to believe, many on the left continue to cling to the salvationist ethos. In the past, that impulse was satiated with communistic reveries. If religion was the opiate of the masses, socialism was the heroin of the secular leftist.
That no longer seems, at least outwardly, to be the case. With a worldwide record of abject failure, socialism lost its claim to the miraculous. Despite this, the left's desire for cosmic justice remained unfilled; it was only a matter of time before something stepped into the teleological breach.
That something is radical environmentalism. In a fantastic essay at his site Number Watch, John Brignell shows how extreme environmentalism has become a secular religion. The comparisons are striking and ought to give pause to any agnostic or atheist wary of the influence of religion on society. Even if you don't share Bridgnell's view of religion, this is an essay worth reading. Here's a small excerpt:
It is in the nature of religion to be authoritarian and proscriptive. Essential to this is the concept of sin – a transgression in thought or deed of theological principles.
Original sin in the older religions derived from one of the founts of life on earth – sex. The new religion goes even further back to the very basis of all life – carbon. Perhaps the fundamental human fear is fear of life itself. The amazing propensity of carbon to form compounds of unlimited complexity made the existence of life possible, while its dioxide is the primary foodstuff, the very start of the food chain. Every item of nutriment you consume started out as atmospheric carbon dioxide. It is therefore the ideal candidate for original sin, since no one can escape dependence on it. This manna that gave us life is now regularly branded in media headlines as “pollution” and “toxic”: surely one of the most perverse dysphemisms in the history of language.
The corrective to sin in religion is absolution, and the power of most religions comes from their claim to have the monopoly on absolution. So it is with the new godless religion. Furthermore, it is in the nature of religion to create false markets. In the time of Chaucer the Pardoner sold papal indulgences, which freed the prosperous from the consequences of sin. Likewise, the new pardoners sell carbon offsets. As in so much of both ancient and modern society these activities divert effort from wealth creation and so act as a drag on the economy. They also grant to the rich a comfort that is not available to the poor – a sure road to success. [...]
Religions vary in their treatment of unbelievers, from disregard to slaughter. The new religion relies at present on verbal assault and character assassination, though there are those who would go further. They call the infidels “deniers” – a cheap and quite despicable verbal reference to the Holocaust. There is a sustained campaign to deny the deniers any sort of public platform for their views.
Apostates are universally even more reviled than infidels. They have turned their backs on the true faith, whichever that might happen to be. Partial apostates, or heretics, are even more loathed and through the ages have been subjected to the most appalling punishments and deaths. In the case of the “sceptical environmentalist”, Bjorn Lomborg, he is of the faith. In fact he is a serial believer; accepting, for example, that eating celery causes two percent of all cancers and, of course, that global warming is man made, but he rejects the sacrificing of humanity to the belief. This is unacceptable! What are a few million deaths from dirty water, mosquito bites and other hazards so long as people can be made to conform? So far he has only been assaulted with insults and custard pies. Patrick Moore, a founder of Greenpeace, broke with the movement over its growing anti-human, anti-scientific tendencies and drift into extremism. The last straw for him was the campaign against chlorine, not only an essential component of human life but also the basis of one of the most dramatically life-saving hygienic interventions. He has, consequently, been subjected to a prolonged campaign of vilification, described as an eco-Judas, turncoat and traitor. Every minor commentator or blogger who manifests disbelief can expect to be the target of abuse from self-appointed protectors of the creed.
Read the rest.
—Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and its Executive Editor.





















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
High Priest
August 24, 2007 - 08:48 ET by allanfIs Al Gore akin to "Jesus" in this new religion. He receives nothing but fawning adoration.
Not in his time
August 24, 2007 - 09:41 ET by metroxJesus didn't receive fawning adoration 'in his time' (time he was alive), in fact, he received quite the opposite, did he not?
Well then
August 24, 2007 - 10:21 ET by allanfWell then how about Jim Jones or David Koresh?
The Cuckoo's Nest
August 24, 2007 - 09:03 ET by ThalpyAnd these are the people we should look to for leadership?
Jesus
August 24, 2007 - 09:04 ET by conantIf Fat Albert is the new Jesus I'll head down to my shop and can have a cross ready by noon. Anybody want to chip in a couple of nails?
Fred Thompson is the new
August 24, 2007 - 15:51 ET by Chidi NwachukhuFred Thompson is the new Jesus, replacing Ronald Reagan.
I read a great quote one time
August 24, 2007 - 09:15 ET by HelenSBut I can't remember what book it was in. (my apologies to the originator of the thought). The quote loosely said, "Man, created in the image of God, is awesome. God, created in the image of man, is safe"
(The concept is stated quite nicely in Colossians 2:8 - “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ”)
It seems that these people who will look everywhere for their god except at God, will continually limit him to their own limitations. They also seem to have given themselves the power to both define the crisis or issue and to be the ones best able to correct or save themselves from it (I won't go so far as to say "save us from it" since I really don't think they're interested in saving anyone who is not toeing the party line. Their viciousness toward anyone not agreeing with them is quite sobering)
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
everyone needs some kind of
August 24, 2007 - 13:21 ET by TruthMongereveryone needs some kind of religion
God made us that way
make sure you choose the right one:)!
Global Warming
August 24, 2007 - 09:18 ET by TunaGoogle "Al Gore" and "Generation Investment Management" and you will gain some insight into the former politician's dubious motivation.
If you are a card carrying member of the "consensus scientist community", you might have wanted to think twice about having as your spokesperson a fellow whose resume includes:
1. 2 out of 3 debate losses to George Bush*
2. A total absence of credibility with 50% of the American public--the half with brains.
3. Signed on as a figurehead for a group of greedy Wall Streeters whose goal is to leverage "warmer hysteria" into enormous wealth.
4. Looks like a fat Johnnie Cash wannabe--who might have a bovine-like carbor footprint.
*His handlers have resolved issue #1 by declaring the debate as being "over". Breathtaking.
The absence of any scientific proof aside, this bunch of grant-grubbing nitwits (aka "The Consensus"), sealed its fate when it chose Albert Gore as its leader. Normal people can be thankful for that, and look forward to the next episode of "Enviornmental Hysteria for Fun and Profit".
Gore as money grubber
August 24, 2007 - 14:46 ET by Matthew Sheffieldis a more correct scenario than Gore as would-be prophet.
But then again, many people who called themselves prophets are out for money, so perhaps it's not so off-base.
perhaps...
August 24, 2007 - 14:49 ET by LionKingPerhaps Gore is more interested in PROFIT than being a PROPHET.
Author,know thy subject...
August 24, 2007 - 09:18 ET by The Wicked ConservativeOriginal sin in the older religions derived from one of the founts of life on earth – sex.
As if, jack ass. This misconception of Judeo/Christian beginnings is a so commonly accepted yet such farce. Adam and Eve were supposed to reproduce like bunnies to fill the Earth. That aside he does have some valid parrallels but he misses the true point. Humans were created with spiritual inclinations. The secularist will deny God and fill that need with all kinds of tripe like AGW. When can we expect Amanpour to cover Gore's Warriors? The statement that can sum this whole thing up is...
If you don't believe in God, you'll believe in anything.
You can't save the Earth unless You're willing to make other people sacrifice. Dogbert the Green Consultant summing up the elite left.
How can a belief system
August 24, 2007 - 09:19 ET by LeonHow can a belief system based on empirical data be considered a religion?
GW supporters can point to ample evidence to validate their claims.
A religion on the other hand is based on minimal data and primarily on faith.
This GW is a religion push is just a classic form of propaganda branding. Marginalize an enemy by depicting it through extremes.
It could almost work except that on your side you have 10 oil-backed scientists arguing against GW, while GW supporters have the rest of the scientific community.
If it weren't for that, you're fantaticising of GW might actually work. As such, it just looks silly.
Evidence
August 24, 2007 - 10:02 ET by TunaOk, site some of the "ample evidence"--from the "rest of the scientific community"--maybe you can turn some people around here.
Peer reviewed
August 24, 2007 - 10:23 ET by jay_1975"A new study by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz contends that the Earth's climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the UN's recent climate study claims. Schwarz's work will be published in The Journal of Geophysical Research. The study is just one of several peer-reviewed scientific studies challenging global warming alarmism: The Belgian Weather Institute concludes that carbon dioxide does not have a decisive role in global warming and a study by two Chinese scientists says CO2's role in warming is 'vastly exaggerated.' Plus, new research by University of Washington mathematicians shows a correlation between high solar activity and periods of global warming."
These peer reviewed (love to throw that term back in some faces) studies are based on hard evidence, not computer models. AGW supporters like Gore (he must support it with the lifestyle he chooses) base their faith on computer models that are increasingly being shown to be fundamentally flawed in that they only take into account the smallest portion of factors that drive our climate. Those who cry every time a SUV is started or an incandesent light bulb is turned on seem like the fanatical religious front to me.
UN vs THE JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL REASEARCH
August 24, 2007 - 10:27 ET by PawpawNGee, who's gonna believe the Journal of Geophysical Reasearch over the almighty UN!!
Science doesn't matter
August 24, 2007 - 10:54 ET by jay_1975Unfortunately, no one with the power or clout to make the right decissions.
Liberalism contains all
August 24, 2007 - 10:26 ET by ConservativeRexLiberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as "religion". Under the guise of not favoring religion, liberals favor one cosmology over another and demand total indotrination into theirs. The state religion of liberalism demands obeisance (to the National Organization for Women), and formulaic imprecations ("Bush lied , kids died!" "Keep your laws off my body!" "Arms for hostages"). Everyone is taxed to support indoctrination into the state religion through the public schools. The Church Of Liberalism -GODLESS- Ann Coulter 2007
Liberalism
August 24, 2007 - 10:32 ET by Sergeant ROCKHence, it's similiarity to that of communism which also sought to replace religion with an ideology that made them God - more or less.
Kucinich/Paul '09
Religion isn't all blind faith
August 24, 2007 - 10:27 ET by Wonder95A religion on the other hand is based on minimal data and primarily on faith.
Spoken like a true non-believer who doesn't know what he's talking about. If you actually take the time to investigate the Bible, you will discover that from a historical and scientific standpoint, faith in the Bible is more and more justified by the evidence, not blind faith.
Agree...
August 24, 2007 - 11:32 ET by TruthMattersIf faith and knowledge are inversely proportional (an increase in knowledge means a decrease in faith), then the more evidence against Christianity the better. Indeed, believing something you knew to be false because of overwhelming evidence would be a great virtue, biblically. God would be most pleased, on this view, with those who knew the resurrection never happened, yet still believed.
The apostle Paul call such a person pitiful, however:
According to Paul, if we believe contrary to fact, we believe in vain and are fools.
Lastly, it isn't "faith" that saves us or provides a cure, it is the OBJECT of your faith. My OBJECT is certainly not Global Warming.
If faith and knowledge are
August 24, 2007 - 18:49 ET by Wonder95If faith and knowledge are inversely proportional (an increase in
knowledge means a decrease in faith), then the more evidence against
Christianity the better.
Huh? If it were true, but it isn't. The more knowledge of something being true, the more faith I have in it because I know it's true, not vice versa.
Indeed, believing something you knew to be
false because of overwhelming evidence would be a great virtue,
biblically.
That's not biblical at all. If you actually read it you will see that it says to question all things and believe that which you know to be true. Believing something you know to be false is not only absolutely stupid (e.g. The Goracle), but also unbiblical.
Not a Clear Statement
August 24, 2007 - 21:48 ET by TruthMattersI apologize for not being clearer. I was trying to describe that there are some people who believe the more knowledge you have about something, the less faith plays a part. In other words, some people believe that blind faith is a virtue. As I later indicated in my post, this view is not biblical..
This is still probably confusing so ignore the post altogether..
Bottom line, I agree with your POV.
TM
August 24, 2007 - 21:51 ET byi think your post was just fine.
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
Leon, you say.... "GW
August 24, 2007 - 10:29 ET by bassndudeLeon, you say....
"GW supporters can point to ample evidence to validate their claims."
This is a GW claim. Remove all the faulty and in some cases, false and fabricated, data out and your left with nothing. Fabricated and faulty data is not evidence.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Evidence
August 24, 2007 - 10:34 ET by BeanManIt seems that much of the Algore evidence is anecdotal.
They claim that monsoons in India are global warming caused, they provide no evidence other that it really rained more than it did last year.
Glaciers are melting on Greenland, Nancy Pelosi saw it first hand. It's summer and glaciers melt and fall into the ocean and create icebergs every summer. Actually the total ice cover for Greenland is increasing or stable over 95% of the country. Most of Greenland's glaciers are on the internal portion of the country surrounded by mountains and have no outlet to the ocean.
The average temperature has risen and will continue and then spike up they say. They point to the fact that the average temperature is continuing to rise. The average temperature in the last century has risen by less than 1 degree celcius and none of it in the last ten years. In fact 90% of the temperature increase recorded was prior to 1950.
Whenever a species goes extinct, they associate it with GW and that GW is causing mass extinction. Species are going extinct at the same rate they always have. there is no increase in that rate and hasn't been for many decades.
Killer heat wave in 2003 caused by global warming, why have there not been others?
More tornados than ever. Actually more reporting of smaller tornados account for the increase. F3 and below were not reported, now they are.
More deadly hurricanes - no hurricane scientist has signed up to this.
Climate modeling predicts it. Read Chaos Theory and you'll understand how utterly impossible it is to try and predict weather or climate for more than a day or two. Most weather forcasters rely on historical data and not modeling. There are just too many variables for models to be accurate. There aren't millions of variables, there are tens of billions of variables and in reality there are an uncountable number of variables becuase the whole atmosphere is one giant random number generator.
The other day someone posted here at least 40 or 50 peer-reviewed articles, by scientists of all stripes, that do not support man-made global warming.
Since government is coercion, politics is largely the exercise of deception regarding the intended use of coercion - George Orwell
Goddess Gaia
August 24, 2007 - 10:36 ET by P.J. GladnickI burn a carbon credit offering every evening to the Goddess Gaia.
As does my spouse :o)
August 24, 2007 - 10:54 ET by HelenSHis is generally a Paul Garmirian belicoso. Unless he's been on travel outside of the U.S., in which case it might be a Cohiba.
Me, I just sit idly by sipping my port.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
Myth Buster
August 24, 2007 - 11:19 ET by NBFI'm tired of people regurgitating the "sold indulgences" myth. They were never sold. Anyone who wants to use the term "indulgence" should be forced to read these two articles to keep from embarrassing themselves:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Myths_About_Indulgences.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/Primer_on_Indulgences.asp
Selling carbon credits might have some apt comparisons, but indulgences aren't one of them.
Climate change is also
August 24, 2007 - 11:37 ET by wiwfClimate change is also known as weather, you dolts.
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested,
exiled, or hanged." -Abraham Lincoln
False Religion
August 24, 2007 - 11:57 ET by takingmyconstitutionalOne could construct a similar analysis of the Church of the Immaculate Free Market. The faith of its members is so absolute that they feel compelled to ridicule, condemn, or destroy all sinners--including respected scientists---who suggests that externalized costs (in the form of pollution) should be condemned, taxed, or regulated.
As far as I can tell,
August 25, 2007 - 17:59 ET by hydrodynDMAs far as I can tell, takingmyconstitutional has never posted more than
one comment under any topic and has never responded to a post directed
at him.
Never.
Just throwing that out there.