Slashdot Mirror

But she's representative of a large group of people who, when confronted with science they don't like, just discard the science, declare the researchers in question frauds, and then assume somehow the universe will be okay, because, you know, apparently the universe owes specific ideologies a big favor, and would never dream of having physical laws that would create some sort of problem for that ideology. In Palin's case, she's a pretty hard right Christian, so I'm fairly certain she believes God would never make oil harmful, because, well, God loves oil and wants us to burn as much of it as we can possibly can.

Well, now that you bring that up...
"We believe Earth and its ecosystems—created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth’s climate system is no exception. Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history." http://cornwallalliance.org/20... signed by "Scientists (including 13 Climate Scientists) and Medical Doctors" and Pat Boone, too! http://cornwallalliance.org/20...
Sure, God destroyed the earth with that flood thing, but that was a long time ago! Jesus would never let coal hurt us!

But she's representative of a large group of people who, when confronted with science they don't like, just discard the science, declare the researchers in question frauds, and then assume somehow the universe will be okay, because, you know, apparently the universe owes specific ideologies a big favor, and would never dream of having physical laws that would create some sort of problem for that ideology. In Palin's case, she's a pretty hard right Christian, so I'm fairly certain she believes God would never make oil harmful, because, well, God loves oil and wants us to burn as much of it as we can possibly can.

Well, now that you bring that up...
"We believe Earth and its ecosystems—created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth’s climate system is no exception. Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history." http://cornwallalliance.org/20... signed by "Scientists (including 13 Climate Scientists) and Medical Doctors" and Pat Boone, too! http://cornwallalliance.org/20...
Sure, God destroyed the earth with that flood thing, but that was a long time ago! Jesus would never let coal hurt us!

Greenpeace

What is Greepeace's religion?

Sierra Club

What is the Sierra Club's religion?

World Wildlife Fund

What is the World Wildlife fund's religion?

I could go on, but those are some pretty major, well known examples that you really shouldn't even need to have pointed out to you.

Here is some examples of actual religion based anti-environmental groups:

The Cornwall Alliance http://cornwallalliance.org/

Who say:

Around the world, environmentalism has become a radical movement. Something we call "The Green Dragon." And it is deadly, deadly to human prosperity, deadly to human life, deadly to human freedom and deadly to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Make no mistake about it, environmentalism is no longer your friend. It is your enemy. And the battle is not primarily political or material, it is spiritual. ... As Christians, we must actively trust God and obey His word. So when it comes to environmental stewardship, we must reject the false world view, the faulty science and the counterfeit gospel that threatens to corrupt society and the church.

The Unification church and http://polluterwatch.com/anti-... the American Freedom Coalition, which also takes part in the Wise Use" anti environment group.

That's what I mean by Religion and religious groups, not some cockamamie slashdot re-definition of religion as having a thought.

Unfortunately, Dr. Spencer has a history of getting these graphs wrong.

Additionally, it should be noted that Dr. Spencer is a signatory to An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming, which states that "Earth and its ecosystems – created by God's intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence – are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting". His use as an expert on climate matters is significantly diminished by that public declaration that "god will fix it for us". If his signing of that declaration is sincere, he is no longer performing scientific research.

Actually, climate change skeptics publish in mainstream journals all the time. There's always loose threads you can pull at.

For example RW Spencer is an evangelical Christian who believes that climate change would contradict God's will. Yet he still gets published in mainstream journals.

This demonstrates the extreme open-mindedness of science, when compared to virtually any other field of human endeavor. Yes, the process is slanted in favor of the prevailing wisdom, but people who disagree with the majority opinion aren't ostracized or prevented from publishing, no matter *why* they believe what they do. Scientists believe things for all kinds of un-scientific reasons: aesthetics, hunches, even personal dislike for other scientists. Religion isn't any less scientific than any of that stuff, but you leave that stuff in the locker room when you're on the playing field, so to speak.

Naturally people whose papers get rejected by reviewers think the referees were unfair. But it's not like *other* skeptics can't get their papers published; they just have to play by science's rules.

It's long past time to face facts: the Earth is getting hotter, and to deny it is an exercise in fantasy.

Nobody is denying that it got like 0.2 degrees hotter in the past 10 years, it's the fact that some people seem to be making the leap between it getting hotter and humans not trading enough carbon credits, now that is an exercise in fantasy.

Roy Spencer seems to be popping up in a lot of denier posts, being one of the few deniers (of man-made gw) among those who should actually have a clue. However, he's also a signatory to this curious statement, which contains such gems as:

We believe Earth and its ecosystems—created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth’s climate system is no exception. Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history.

This in itself doesn't invalidate his science, but it does mean that he's cast his lot with a bunch of pretty anti-scientific people, and has a decidedly non-scientific basis for his approach to science. That said, his "science" is also... controversial, to say the least, to the point that a journal editor-in-chief relinquished his position after having published a flawed article of his.

All this makes me very skeptical to anything claimed by this personnage, apart from the fact that his findings seem to be demolished by the scientific community he claims to be a part of. His credibility also suffers from his being a creationist who also seeks to deny or invalidate huge areas of well-established science. In short, he comes across as a scientific crook, and you guys come across as pretty desperate for constantly referring to him.

I'm not a climate scientist, but neither am I an automobile engineer, and I still put my faith in those who are everytime I ride a car. I wouldn't, however, trust a car designed by the lone crazy-ass engineer who claims that everyone else is doing it wrong, that brakes in cars are just for wimps, and that God should cater to everyone's braking needs.

* Man Eating Duck dons asbestos underwear *

Why is it so hard to accept that human actions can have consequences ?

Because God wouldn't allow that to happen.

No, seriously, that is essentially what many of these nuts believe.

http://www.cornwallalliance.org/articles/read/an-evangelical-declaration-on-global-warming/

So this is supposed to cast doubt on his credentials as a climate scientist... how, exactly?

His views on Intelligent Design don't cast doubt on his credentials as a climate scientist. It's mostly just an interesting talking point.

What does cast doubt on his views as a climate scientist is the fact that he signed the Cornwall Alliance Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming. This declaration basically states that the signers believe that God created a planet far too resilient for mere mortals to possibly mess it up, and that we must continue our reliance on fossil fuels. So, essentially, it doesn't matter what the data says, Dr. Spencer's faith will always trump the science. He's convinced that God would never allow AGW to occur.

Dr. Spencer is a true Denier. Nothing you can show him will shake his absolute conviction that AGW can't happen. All the data in the world will not change his mind. That is why he's not credible.