kentish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Given the nature of the site I suppose it is
> understandable that the focus would be on
> "relgious fundies". They make a good whipping boy
> even although outside their ability to vote they
> have no more control over the issue than any other
> group. One site I checked indicated that
> aspproximately 90% pf papers skeptical of climate
> change come from right wing think tanks. The site
> gave no indication of religious leaning. Since
> many would claim that "fundies" lack thinking
> skills perhaps this leaves them out.
I'm not saying religion per se causes climate change denial.
I am saying that a tenet of far-right EV religious fundamentalism is climate change denial -- as well as the denial of evolution and of science and fact-based objective reality in general.
https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/51571/PDF/1play/Denial of climate change being caused by human activity, or anthropogenic climate
change, is thought to be divided between political lines with Republicans generally denying
climate change while Democrats believing that climate change not only exists but is caused, at
least in part, by humans. There appears to be a correlation between being religious and being a
climate change denier. According to a Pew Research poll, 47 percent of Catholics acknowledge
that climate change is anthropogenic, with 62 percent of Catholic Democrats but only 24 percent
of Catholic Republicans believing in the anthropogeneity of climate change. The source of this
denial may be that the deniers believe that that man is all that is to be valued. Imago Dei, the
predominant intrinsic value system of religious monotheists, excludes non-humans, leading to
neglect of the environment, even if it is closely tied to human beings. We have examined further
this relationship between religion, the imago dei intrinsic value system, and anthropogenic
climate change. Converting anthropogenic climate change deniers may be a matter of including
the environment as being inseparable from human life, so that those that hold imago dei close,
can now start taking care of the world they live in.
There is a correlation between being religious (usually the data are focused on Christians) and
being a climate change denier. This is an extension from Imago Dei and the evolution argument.
Because Imago Dei prioritizes man over anything else, the claim, whether it is true or not, that
man is no different from animals and that they follow the same laws, has led to some tension
between the two groups. According to a poll, only a third of Americans believe the truth value of
Evolution (6). Victor Stenger also makes a link between the kinds of “belief” in evolution. He
generalizes and says that Christians don’t believe in the scientific consensus, but in a quasi-
evolution: they do not believe that man is a random occurrence, but that there was a divine will
associated (6). In fact, the very idea of man being a happenstance appears to incite some
indignation among the group, causing a counter movement that both deny Evolution as well as
Climate Change. It is interesting that Climate Change is also at the center of this battle, but the
subtlety appears to be this: they do not deny that the climate is warming, or at least many don’t,
but the fact that man is causing it, that is the issue. But with the shifting of attack to climate
change, the consequences are much greater: whether or not someone believes evolution is a fact,
it will continue to work whether or not it is believed. Climate change, however, if someone
doesn’t believe in it, will continue to contribute to it. A denial of evolution harms the denier,
the scientific community, and the reputation of the United States with the rest of the industrialized
world. A denial of climate change, however, harms everything: the humans the Imago Deists
hold dear, the environment, and all life.
https://youtu.be/ulmpK7X5kiY