Skip to comments.
Why Did Global Warming Become a Moral Matter?
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/03/why_did_global_warming_become.html ^
| Tim Thorstenson
Posted on 03/23/2007 11:40:19 AM PDT by ventanax5
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
1
posted on
03/23/2007 11:40:20 AM PDT
by
ventanax5
To: ventanax5
brilliant post. I love the quasi-religion reference.
2
posted on
03/23/2007 11:43:27 AM PDT
by
GOP_Muzik
(If all the world's a stage then I want different lighting)
To: GOP_Muzik
It's not a quasi-religion, it's a full-blown one. It's as scientific as Scientology is, but no more. When you forbid anyone to question the tenets of your faith, you're no longer dealing in science, you're dealing in religion.
3
posted on
03/23/2007 11:51:57 AM PDT
by
Doug Loss
To: ventanax5; Killing Time; Beowulf; Mr. Peabody; RW_Whacko; honolulugal; SideoutFred; Ole Okie; ...
4
posted on
03/23/2007 11:52:14 AM PDT
by
xcamel
(Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
To: ventanax5
Making a "moral" argument out of Global Warming takes away all science and leaves just emotions. Truth doesn't matter, only feelings matter.......thus my tagline du jour....
5
posted on
03/23/2007 11:54:09 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(If it's consensus, it's not science. If it's science, there's no need for consensus......)
To: ventanax5
He doesn't understand that it is a "moral" matter within the religion of Global Warming. Every religion has its own morality code, and this is in the code of the Global-Warming religion -- the Chruch of What's Happening Now.
6
posted on
03/23/2007 11:55:13 AM PDT
by
expatpat
To: Doug Loss
When you forbid anyone to question the tenets of your faith, you're no longer dealing in science, you're dealing in religion cultism.
Corrected.
7
posted on
03/23/2007 11:55:45 AM PDT
by
rottndog
(If you don't believe in the abolition of government run schools, your views aren't radical enough.)
To: GOP_Muzik
8
posted on
03/23/2007 11:57:27 AM PDT
by
delacoert
To: ventanax5
One aspect of this that the author doesn't touch on is the "Bush factor." I am absolutely convinced that Bush's skepticism about global warming is one of the factors that motivated global warming proponents to ratchet up the rhetoric and demonize anyone who expressed any reservations about the reality, causes, or effects of global warming.
To: ventanax5
American morality has until the 1960's been based solely on the Judeo-Christian values found in the Bible. Once we started abandoning those principles, morality became whatever we wanted it to be. And since man is "born in sin, shapen in iniquity", and "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?", we quickly find ourselves on the "wide path to destruction". That is why only when God delivers "whoseover will" from their fallen state, will love, joy, and peace be restored eternally to creatures once again "in His image and likeness". As long as this fallen world persists, with Satan "going about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may to devour", man will be in a consistent state of "trouble like the sparks that fly upward" from a fire.
10
posted on
03/23/2007 11:58:17 AM PDT
by
HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath
(All the horns of the wicked also will I cut off; but the horns of the righteous shall be exalted.)
To: ventanax5
ALL liberal issues are moral - that's why they don't need the tenets of traditional religion, they have their own.
11
posted on
03/23/2007 12:00:44 PM PDT
by
Let's Roll
("the left is rearranging the beach to make sure the tsunami comes in as unimpeded as possible." -)
To: ventanax5
In this case 'why' is a valid question. 'Why' implies purpose, choice, and falls into the field of Ethics. That global warming has some of the trappings of religious matters does not make it religious nor its followers, but appearing in moral choice is possible outside religion. Global warming would not present a moral choice however, since that is an individual perquisite, but a state choice, which is possibly ethical. However, 'why' is not a scientific question and that a scientist asks it does not make it scientific.
12
posted on
03/23/2007 12:02:08 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Treaty rules;commerce droolz; Repeal the Treaty)
To: ventanax5
because it is now a religion and Al Gore the High Priest.
To: ventanax5
He may be a scientist, but this piece goes to show that "being a scientist" does not necessarily equate with being able to reason outside of his chosen field.
Thorstenson apparently doesn't even recognize the fact that he's actually making a moral argument of his own -- which rather unfortunately concedes the point against which he's trying to argue.
Moreover, the controversy in question has to do with the assumption that human actions -- essentially voluntary ones -- play a role in global warming. And, on the other side, there's the questions of suppressing dissent, false reporting on both sides, and so on.
Of course there's a moral component to the debate.
14
posted on
03/23/2007 12:09:58 PM PDT
by
r9etb
To: ventanax5
it is exactly what the liberals have always (unfairly) accused us conservatives of doing The fellow makes many good points, but this isn't one. The charge is not unfair at all. One need merely read a FR crevo thread to see it. And I will say further, that even on AGW there are many conservatives who cannot view it as a scientific matter but only as a necessarily political one. But political vs. moral matters not, there's no essential difference in the behavior.
15
posted on
03/23/2007 12:13:58 PM PDT
by
edsheppa
To: ventanax5
Why Did Global Warming Become a Moral Matter?So that the masses would give up their freedom and their money willingly?
To: Steve_Seattle
One aspect of this that the author doesn't touch on is the "Bush factor."I agree. If Bush is for it, then you have to be against it. There is never a middle ground where you can meet. You have to fully demonize Bush and everything he believes in, period.
17
posted on
03/23/2007 12:21:01 PM PDT
by
Elyse
(I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
To: ventanax5
It's never been a moral mater. It's always been a means to advance socialism.
To: ventanax5
I don't think the author has quite posed the problem correctly. If global warming is real, and will have serious negative consequences, and if it is largely caused by human activity, then it IS a moral matter. What he is trying to say, I think, is that global warming has become an "idee fixe" - an obsession - for many people, and that this prevents them from even considering whether there is evidence against it, and allows them to demonize the global warming skeptics. The problem is not that the issue might have moral ramifications, but that it has become such an emotionally laden topic for some people that they have become impervious to contrary facts.
To: ventanax5; Miss Marple
As a geologist I would like everyone to google "oolite".
See what happens to exess CO2 in the atmosphere.
20
posted on
03/23/2007 1:12:44 PM PDT
by
CPT Clay
(Drill ANWR, Personal Accounts NOW.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson