Climate Change Catastrophism, like every religion, has its holy rollers. A New Jersey Star-Ledger op-ed by Tom Moran, With these dunes destroyed, the climate disaster gets personal, is just that--holy rollerism. To the climate holy rollers, every recurring natural event, no matter what--you name it; heat, cold, drought, heavy rains, storms of every stripe, beach erosion--has a ready explanation provided courtesy of holy rollers--climate change! “Climate Change” is to Catastrophists as “God” is to religionists--a ready "explanation" for anything they feel like.
Moran moans:
I left the following comments, edited and expanded for clarity:
For 20,000 years, people have moved or mitigated rising sea levels and other hazards like heat waves. The risks of living near oceans, and of climate generally, always existed. And if human activity is contributing to sea rise, who’s to “blame?” Do coastal dwellers/visitors use electricity? Drive a car? Consume food produced on farms? Buy products produced in factories? Access modern healthcare? Enjoy heating, cooling, and sanitation systems. Clean water on demand? If human activity is a cause, then the coastal dwellers are just as guilty as everyone else. If everyone is to blame, then no one is to blame: Global warming is simply a natural byproduct of improving human living fueled by reliable energy. Virtually every human on the planet benefits.
Where is talk of the risks of insufficient reliable energy? Or the positives of a warming climate? Or the cruel futility of forcing people into unreliable “renewables” that drive the cost of electricity up, thus living standards down? Why are catastrophists so terrified of the deep and wide case provided by opponents--the books and studies showing climate change/global warming to be mild and manageable, and humans flourishing right along with the alleged “catastrophe.” Why are they brushed off as “skeptics” and “deniers?”
Catastrophists’ dredge up anecdotes featuring real problems. But for every anecdotal problem, one can observe, all around, a long list of benefits. So their monstrous campaign against reliable energy--especially fossil fuels--is resisted in America. But the catastrophists have a new weapon. Borrowing from religion, they trot out a new gimmick--guilt. It’s “personal,” says Moran. I’m suffering, and it’s your fault, if you’re a “skeptic”--or a Republican. It’s may be sad to see dunes washed away (especially when you ignore that man has be replenishing beaches and rebuilding dunes for decades). But it’s hard to feel sympathy for other people’s problems when those people start blaming the world--and me--for their problems. I rejected Christianity because of its ideology of guilt. And I reject Environmentalism’s ideology of guilt. I reject the climate holy rollers. I reject the war on human flourishing. I reject unearned guilt for living!
Related Reading:
Climate Alarmism and the Catholic Church; Faith-Based Allies in the War on Prosperity
Pope Francis: Prosperity, Liberty, and Climate Change are the Common Enemy
Creationists and Climate Change Ideologists: Perfect Together
The Pope Adopts The Religion of Environmentalism—Michael J. Hurd
The Unholy Alliance Between the Climate Change Catastrophists and the Christian Left
Sierra Club's Jeff Tittel Smears Star-Ledger Article and its Contributors for Excluding Climate Religion from Hurricane Analysis
Moran moans:
So, it broke my heart when I visited last weekend and saw the damage that climate change had done. Suddenly, the political was personal.
For decades, the gently rolling dunes behind the beach have extended for hundreds of yards, the sea grass a magical mix of greens, yellows and tans that seem to sparkle as sunset approaches. It may be the prettiest spot on the Cape, a place where my family and many others line up the kids to take photos.
I arrived last weekend and saw those magical dunes had been flattened, leaving a much narrower strip of dunes, along with lots of bare sand. Thanks to rising sea levels and a series of four tough storms in March, the ocean breached the dunes, and like a merciless thief, carried away the treasure.
Moran goes on to frame the issue of climate change--only the man-made kind--as something that is unequivocally bad that must be “fought.” That’s not new. But here, Moran introduces a new tactic: He introduces the term “personal.”
I left the following comments, edited and expanded for clarity:
For 20,000 years, people have moved or mitigated rising sea levels and other hazards like heat waves. The risks of living near oceans, and of climate generally, always existed. And if human activity is contributing to sea rise, who’s to “blame?” Do coastal dwellers/visitors use electricity? Drive a car? Consume food produced on farms? Buy products produced in factories? Access modern healthcare? Enjoy heating, cooling, and sanitation systems. Clean water on demand? If human activity is a cause, then the coastal dwellers are just as guilty as everyone else. If everyone is to blame, then no one is to blame: Global warming is simply a natural byproduct of improving human living fueled by reliable energy. Virtually every human on the planet benefits.
Where is talk of the risks of insufficient reliable energy? Or the positives of a warming climate? Or the cruel futility of forcing people into unreliable “renewables” that drive the cost of electricity up, thus living standards down? Why are catastrophists so terrified of the deep and wide case provided by opponents--the books and studies showing climate change/global warming to be mild and manageable, and humans flourishing right along with the alleged “catastrophe.” Why are they brushed off as “skeptics” and “deniers?”
Catastrophists’ dredge up anecdotes featuring real problems. But for every anecdotal problem, one can observe, all around, a long list of benefits. So their monstrous campaign against reliable energy--especially fossil fuels--is resisted in America. But the catastrophists have a new weapon. Borrowing from religion, they trot out a new gimmick--guilt. It’s “personal,” says Moran. I’m suffering, and it’s your fault, if you’re a “skeptic”--or a Republican. It’s may be sad to see dunes washed away (especially when you ignore that man has be replenishing beaches and rebuilding dunes for decades). But it’s hard to feel sympathy for other people’s problems when those people start blaming the world--and me--for their problems. I rejected Christianity because of its ideology of guilt. And I reject Environmentalism’s ideology of guilt. I reject the climate holy rollers. I reject the war on human flourishing. I reject unearned guilt for living!
Related Reading:
Climate Alarmism and the Catholic Church; Faith-Based Allies in the War on Prosperity
Pope Francis: Prosperity, Liberty, and Climate Change are the Common Enemy
Creationists and Climate Change Ideologists: Perfect Together
The Pope Adopts The Religion of Environmentalism—Michael J. Hurd
The Unholy Alliance Between the Climate Change Catastrophists and the Christian Left
Sierra Club's Jeff Tittel Smears Star-Ledger Article and its Contributors for Excluding Climate Religion from Hurricane Analysis
No comments:
Post a Comment