Climate Change Advocates Attempt To Shut Down Debate By Censoring Opposition
Those who have read my blog posts for any length of time have run across my assertion than, to the secular humanists among us, ‘science’ is their religion. To those who truly understand it, science is nothing more than a tool and – like all tools – it has its limitations. But to those who chose to reject Him, science has taken the place of God. This is why people who have placed their faith in science react so violently to anyone who challenges their ‘scientific’ certainties. To them, it is heresy. This is never more clear than when hard evidence is presented that challenges their beliefs. If they truly understood science – real science – they would re-examine those beliefs. But instead, they most often react by rejecting that evidence and attacking those who present it. Were science a recognized religion, this reaction would be consistent with dogma. Well, we have more evidence of that science is the religion of the secular humanist in the news with how these so-called science followers are reacting to challenges over climate change.
Before we start, we must remember some history that many Americans were either never taught, or are too young to remember. In the 1970’s, it was the coming ice age that was going to kill us by destroying the areas necessary to grow enough food to feed the world’s population. This was being pushed by the likes of Ted Danson and was supposedly based in science. Back then, if you didn’t believe we were less than a couple decades away from the next global freeze, you were a denier (though they hadn’t started using that term yet). By the time the eighties came to a close, they had changed their mind and now ‘science’ was absolutely sure man was causing global warming. According to the ‘scientific’ models, we should all have permanent sunburns by now. The problem is, the actual events did not support either dire warning, so they coined the term ‘climate change.’ This is not science, friends: it is the worst type of politics. An artificial crisis intentionally manufactured so as to scare people into surrendering their individual rights and liberties for the sole purpose of allowing self-appointed elites to rule over them. And we have proof of this.
First, there have been many reports that much of the data used to support the earliest claims that global warming was real and man-made has been shown to have been based on bad computer models and – in many cases – it was deliberately falsified:
When it is pointed out that there is widespread fraud and bad methodology being used to manufacture the desired results concerning global warming, rather than following sound practice and taking time to re-examine the challenges to their findings, global warming crusaders attack the people who have challenged them – much the same way people of faith often attack people who challenge their religion:
But we must understand that the evidence against global warming is not only real, it is being published by the very people who stand the most to gain from it and, therefore, have been pushing the claim the hardest:
Al Gore has become a billionaire by pushing the global warming fraud. It is a fraud not because there is zero evidence of climate change; but because there is zero evidence that whatever change is happening is entirely man-made and that man can do anything to alter that change. Science claims to know so much, but when challenged to tell us what the earth’s normal temperature is (or should be), science cannot provide an answer. We are reasonably sure that the earth has been much warmer than it is now, and it was much warmer before man even existed. So to claim that the normal temperature should be cooler than what it is now is to assume we are not in one of the long-term cooling periods we find in the ice records. And there are many other problems with the anthropomorphic climate change assertions. What they all demonstrate is a systematic misapplication of real science and the scientific method. Rather than use the tool to learn, the tool is being used to further political and economic gain.
Now, after exerting so much energy and still failing to convince the world that global warming is a ‘scientific fact,’ the global warming crowed is trying to shut out the challenges to their faith. They call skeptics ‘deniers,’ but how can one deny something that science has yet to prove? After all, it was only 40 years ago that science had ‘proved’ we should all be freezing to death right now. And the current data shows there is no cooling, which undermines the current claims that we will soon be cooking. The defenders of global warming also claim that the masses are stupid – too stupid to understand that the ‘scientific consensus’ is that global warming is real. Well, anyone who understands the scientific method knows that ‘consensus’ is not part of the process: something either is, or it is not known. A simple way to put it would be to remember that, at one time, the consensus was that the earth was flat, and then that the earth was at the center of the universe. So, does that mean the earth is still flat and the center of the universe simply because there was a ‘consensus’ that they were true? If you see the absurdity in that statement, understand that the claim of ‘consensus’ in global warming is exactly the same. If you need to appeal to consensus to establish a fact, then it has not been scientifically established as fact. It is just what a group believes to be true, but that doesn’t make it so. This leaves us to wonder who the stupid people are here: the global warming crowed, or those who are challenging their methods and findings.
Unfortunately, if they have their way, we may never find out. Not only is the media helping to isolate and ridicule those who are trying to challenge the global warming crowed, debate on the issue is starting to be shut down:
There is a very close parallel between the way the ‘global warming is science’ crowed and devout members of a certain religion behave when challenged on their beliefs. Ask a devout Muslims how Muhammad can be a prophet when he said all true prophets are descendant from Isaac, yet Muhammad proudly declared himself a direct descendent of Ishmael. Ask a Muslim how he can ignore the Bible when Muhammad commanded he read and accept it as “guidance and light,’ and how, if Muhammad commanded this, he can hate the Jews and Christians. And when he replies that the Bible was corrupted by liars, ask him why the Dead Sea Scrolls – buried 1500+ years before Muhammad lived, can confirm all those “perverted” Bibles. And then, to top it off, insult Muhammad to his face; call Muhammad a lying pedophile and see what happens to you. I suspect the result will be much the same as though you had pushed a global warming advocate against the wall with the facts arrayed against them.
And they say their ‘science’ isn’t their religion…