Posted in: Science

Climate Change Believers And Deniers Equally Silly Says Environmental Guru

James Lovelock calls the environmental movement a religion

Influential scientist, inventor, and environmentalist James Lovelock is having some second thoughts about the whole climate change thing.

In the context of a doom-and-gloom United Nations climate science report, Lovelock, 94, described the environmental movement as becoming “a religion, and religions don’t worry too much about facts.” He added that “It’s just as silly to be a denier as it is to be a believer. You can’t be certain.”

In an interview in which he offered the above comments, Lovelock — a fracking supporter — also seemed to be backpedaling from his dire, alarmist predictions made in a 2006 book of a coming global warming climate catastrophe. “I was a little too certain in that book. You just can’t tell what’s going to happen. It could be terrible within a few years, though that’s very unlikely, or it could be hundreds of years before the climate becomes unbearable,” he acknowledged.

A favorite of the environmental movement, Lovelock is probably best-known for his “Gaia” model of the earth as a single organism. “Lovelock himself became something of a guru to environmentalists in the 1960s when his Gaia hypothesis postulated that living and non-living parts of the Earth form a complex interacting system that has a regulatory effect on the Earth’s environment that acts to sustain life.”

Last month, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore told Congress that “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years … no actual proof, as it is understood in science, actually exists.”

Whether you are a climate change believer or skeptic, or undecided, the role of the media and government officials in this politicized debate has become very off-putting.

The environmental movement, and liberals and Democrats from President Obama on down, along with most big media outlets, have declared that the climate-change debate is “settled.” The notion of declaring something as far-reaching as climate change — which started out as global cooling and then became global warming prior to the climate change appellation — as conclusively established seems to run counter to the scientific tradition. Isn’t the purpose of science to continually probe for new information and then discard accepted theories when additional knowledge makes them obsolete?

Do you think that the climate change movement is a religion that lacks a factual basis?

[Image credit: Bruno Comby]

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

4 Responses to “Climate Change Believers And Deniers Equally Silly Says Environmental Guru”

  1. Paul Merrifield

    32 years of science's 95% certainty is anything you want to "believe".
    So they are 100% sure the earth is round and 95% sure human CO2 will flatten it?

  2. David Clement

    it seems like in this day in age to not go along with the status quo opinion of global warming is professional suicide for scientists. there for those dissenters have a lot more credibility than those who simply jump on the bandwagon in order to protect themselves. his comment about religion was to say the very least, but……… I like this guy. thanks for the information.

  3. Amy Westerbank

    Do you think that the climate change movement is a religion that lacks a factual basis?
    If it lacked a factual basis, you would not see temperature data trending upwards as you see in NCDC HADCRUT3 GISS and others. That they continue to trend upwards indicates warming. In fact, even when you remove other possible causes like Rassmussen (SP?) 2011 did, you still get an increase in temperatures.

    On another note:
    Do I care what one political party says about what is going on with our climate?
    No.
    I care about what the data says. And when the data shows increasing average temperatures, then the average temperatures are clearly increasing.