Global Warming = Repeated Apocalyptic Hallucination Tendency?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by fivepoint, Nov 23, 2010.

  1. fivepoint macrumors 65816


    Sep 28, 2007
    Do secular humanists duplicate other religion's desire for apocalyptic teachings (global warming) and the teachings of enlightened prophets ('climate scientists') to help them perceive the future as something more relevant and easily manipulated by their puny existence? Are we all victims of a natural human thought process that puts us at the 'center of the universe' and at a time which is uniquely suited to change the future for better or worse?

  2. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030


    May 18, 2004
    perhaps it's the same sort of impulse that causes tea party types to claim obama is a socialist trying to destroy the country
  3. MyDesktopBroke macrumors 6502

    Jun 2, 2007
  4. chrmjenkins macrumors 603


    Oct 29, 2007
    People make extraordinary claims to sell books by fudging or purposefully misinterpreting data.

    Facts are stubborn things. They indicate a warming that is not in line with previous periodical changes known to have happened.
  5. floyde macrumors 6502a


    Apr 7, 2005
    Monterrey, México
    I was going to write a reply, but I think that this guy on the Scientific American page already said it better:

  6. rdowns macrumors Penryn


    Jul 11, 2003
  7. eawmp1 macrumors 601


    Feb 19, 2008
    The hot air is probably responsible for global warming. :rolleyes:
  8. skunk macrumors G4


    Jun 29, 2002
    Republic of Ukistan
    You're imagining things.
  9. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Oct 9, 2006
    Well what is not up for debate is have human cause massive envomental problems over the years and still causing them.

    Yes they have. There is no debating the fact that humans have caused desertification in some parts of the world and causing it grow rapidly. Humans have killed entire lakes with their polution acction. Destroied huge areas of land by making them to salty.

    Humans have been poluting the air for a long time. Those reason alone should be good reasons to clean up action. Global climate (the correct term) is something human have had an effect on. You can not have those massive things happen and not effect the global climate.
  10. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Feb 14, 2004
    OBJECTIVE reality
    The idea of drawing parallels between religious and scientific apocalyptic warnings is pretty silly. The latter's based on tangible, real-life things like nukes and pollution; the former on ancient writings of which we have no evidence. It's an interesting idea, but I don't buy it for one second.
  11. NT1440 macrumors G4


    May 18, 2008
    I'm positive that the vast majority of climate scientists around the world have just hallucinated empirical data and thousands of independent and peer reviewed studies. Just positive!
  12. hulugu macrumors 68000


    Aug 13, 2003
    quae tangit perit Trump
    I agree about the human tendency, however, I think Thomas Malthus and Paul R. Ehrlich provide the best counter example.

    Both Malthus and Ehrlich based their ideas on observation of the situation at that time, however, it wasn't that both men were wrong, rather that the situation changed. Ehrlich was proven wrong because of dropping human birth rates in Europe and the 'green' revolution in India. They were wrong because we reacted to their warnings.
    Similarly, concerns about the ozone layer led to a broad consensus on action, which has observable and measurable affect. Those who said the ozone layer could disappear weren't wrong either.

    For instance: the gas light on your car lights up and your companion says, "you're going to run out of gas." You heed the warning, pull into a gas station, and fill the tank. You don't then get back into the car and call your companion an idiot because he's now wrong. He was right at the time.
  13. takao macrumors 68040


    Dec 25, 2003
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    last time i checked apocalypse meant "revelation" or "lifting of the veil" more correctly

    and honestly you don't have to look far to see what happens with a 'runaway climate': just look at the Venus
    by all means we might already be in a runaway process and don't even know yet
  14. skunk macrumors G4


    Jun 29, 2002
    Republic of Ukistan
    It's just "Venus". ;)

    You're right of course, there may be nothing we can do to stop it, but we could at least try not to hurry it along.
  15. Eraserhead macrumors G4


    Nov 3, 2005
    When the Economical Environmentalist can cut his emissions by 40% in a year, even when he made 2 intercontinental flights with little personal sacrifice I think its an achievable goal.
  16. Counterfit macrumors G3


    Aug 20, 2003
    sitting on your shoulder
    No no, he means we'll all be topless ladies without arms.
  17. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Mar 22, 2010
    Good question. I could ask the same thing... with a slight twist...

    Do Libertarians duplicate other religion's desire for apocalyptic teachings (unfunded mandates) and the teachings of enlightened prophets (Ron Paul) to help them perceive the future as something more relevant and easily manipulated by their puny existence?​
  18. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816


    Dec 16, 2004
    Birmingham, AL
    Every religion needs an Or Else-type scenario. This new gaianism is no different.
  19. obeygiant macrumors 68040


    Jan 14, 2002
    totally cool
    Although it would be funnier to get back in the car and call my companion an idiot. lol :)
  20. CaptMurdock Suspended


    Jan 2, 2009
    The Evildrome Boozerama
    "Gaianism"? That's what you think is at the center of the study of climate change? A religion with a name that you just came up with?
  21. Sydde macrumors 68020


    Aug 17, 2009
    That name is not exactly made up, but I seriously doubt anyone would apply it to their own belief set.

    But the Apocalypse would be something more like when Hati, Managarm and Sköll have fed well and finally gained enough strength to pull down Mani and Sol, and grim Fimbul at last gives way to Ragnarok: for us mortals it is a big show, but we are powerless to do any more than watch.

    By comparison, anthropogenic climate change is something we may be able do something about, to stave off or even reverse. In that respect, "apocalypse" is somewhat inappropriate. We need not be mere spectators. The biggest hurdle, though, is to overcome the Pollyannas who say we should do nothing, or even study the situation more.

    Yes, it has the potential to be very bad. It also may not be bad at all, but the latter case is much less unlikely if we just keep doing what we have been doing.
  22. william sire macrumors regular

    william sire

    I’ll get back to you on that one.
  23. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816


    Dec 16, 2004
    Birmingham, AL
    I didn't coin the term, it was either Half Sigma or Steve Sailer (can't recall which at the moment). But as whomever of them it was put it, post-Christian mother nature worship just doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well.
  24. Evangelion macrumors 68040

    Jan 10, 2005
    Fivepoint doesn't believe in global warming because Goebbels on TV and radio told him to not believe in it.
  25. skunk macrumors G4


    Jun 29, 2002
    Republic of Ukistan
    Irrespective of whether or not you choose to put an apocalyptic gloss on the current situation, it is obvious that there are many ways in which we can act to make our presence on the planet more sustainable and less destructive. You don't need to dress it up as an apocalypse, it's just good housekeeping.

Share This Page