This is How the Religious Right Justifies Their Total Ignorance About Proven Science

christianity-scienceThe topic of climate change has been a growing issue in this country (and the world for that matter) for the last several years.  And while it’s always been an important topic, increasing erratic weather patterns and rapidly melting polar ice have really put this global threat on the front pages.

Yet with more and more evidence that humans are causing climate change, we have fewer and fewer people in this country trusting the overwhelming consensus from the scientific community that humans bear responsibility for what’s happening to our planet.

That’s what happens when one of the two most powerful political parties in this country sells out to big oil companies and takes up the stance that “climate change is a hoax.”

But even beyond the fact that these politicians are shills for big oil (which of course stands to lose hundreds of billions of dollars if we ever became energy independent by way of solar or wind energy), there’s another huge group of people in this country that will never believe in man-made climate change.

The religious right.

To tens of millions of these people, even if climate change is really happening, they don’t believe it’s being caused by humans, it’s just all part of “God’s will.”

And to me that’s a terrifying thought.  To know that tens of millions of Americans wouldn’t support any measures to combat climate change simply because they believe that it’s God who’s causing it.

Essentially climate scientists can present their evidence to these people, prove to them how climate change is real, and they’ll simply look at the information and say, “Yeah, it’s because God’s causing it.”

These are also the people who try to justify dinosaur fossils by either saying they were “planted there by God” to test our faith or somehow dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together just a few thousand years ago.

But the problem is, you can’t combat that ignorance.  This is the problem with people who follow faith blindly.  Faith doesn’t need to be proven.  So basically these people can maintain a system of beliefs, without any proof whatsoever, and if scientific evidence shows them something they can’t really deny is happening – they can simply dismiss it as “part of God’s plan.”

That’s why many conservatives don’t believe in climate change.  They honestly believe that the push to combat climate change is another “liberal anti-Christian attempt to spit in the face of God.”  Many of them believe that if climate change is real it’s God’s doing, so humans are powerless to do anything to stop it.

It’s utter insanity.

And the worst part is, their ignorance on climate change impacts everybody.  Because if that ignorance continues to hold back real progress in doing everything we can to try to reverse the damage we’ve done to our planet, we’ll pass a point where there’s nothing we can do (if we’re not there already), and we’ll all suffer the horrible consequences of an ever-increasing uninhabitable planet – not just them.


Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Jim Bean

    THERE is a tombstone in an English
    churchyard with the following six-word epitaph: “I told you I was sick.”

    As the number of closures
    in the manufacturing and minerals-processing sector grows, it is worth
    reflecting on how and why the repeated warnings from these sectors about the
    debilitating impact of steadily higher energy costs were ignored.

    Less than a decade ago,
    Australia enjoyed the lowest energy costs in the developed world. It was an
    intrinsic part of our comparative advantage as a trading nation. But today that
    advantage has largely gone.

    As a result of the carbon
    tax, the renewable energy target and a range of other energy policy
    interventions at the federal and state government level, Australia has some of
    the highest electricity costs in the developed world.

    Household electricity
    prices have increased by more than 110 per cent in the past five years, and are
    projected to increase another 7 per cent in 2014-15.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.a

    • Joseph Minardi

      Climate change is real. Your god is not.

      • Jim Bean

        And intellectually, you reign supreme. I think I got it.

      • HarbingerOfReality

        I would be more nuanced then that. The probability of the Bible God
        (ether version) existing outside of believer’s imaginations is equal to
        the probability that the universe rests on the back of a cosmic sea
        turtle.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        GOD does exist
        =====================================
        defining GOD is impossible
        I like ” god simply is what is”
        ,,,,,,,,,,,,sea turtle? no!! cosmic TEGU!!!

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        perhaps his definition of “GOD” remains the problem.
        GOD cannot be defined; ergo——why do religious trash keep trying( an crying)?

    • Pipercat

      Couple of little details you omitted, by accident I’m sure:

      The Author is: Brendan Pearson is chief executive of the Minerals Council of Australia. The Australian version of the American Petroleum Institute.

      The news outlet The Australian is owned by: News Corp Australia.

      No bias there at all…

      • Jim Bean

        The potential for bias is irrelevant if the information provided is accurate, and it is. If you go through life blindly dismissing everything you hear from a source you distrust, you go through life an idiot. If you go through life blindly accepting everything you hear from a source you trust, you likewise go through life an idiot.

      • Jeffrey freeman.

        Says the guy who broad brushed liberals…. Lmao.

      • Pipercat

        Sorry Jim, but this is pulled from an opinion piece by this Pearson fellow. Why I had to call it out. I suggest you look up these gentlemen instead:

        Dr. Micheal E. Mann
        Dr. Ben Santer
        Their opinions are peer reviewed.

        When you (us) make a mess, it’s going to cost money to clean it up.

      • Jim Bean

        Mann is the guy who made skeptics out of so many with his hockey stick trick. As for ‘peer reviewed’, if all the scientists working for the oil and gas company agree (peer reviewed) on something, your not gonna buy it. But if all the scientists being paid to ‘help’ us with global warming say global warming is a catastrophic threat (so keep the money coming), you DO believe them. Conversely, if all the scientists working for the government say the XL pipeline is NOT a threat, you reject it. Bottom line – there is no pragmatic process by which you arrive at what you’ll believe and what you won’t. You decide based on what makes you feel good emotionally and who you don’t like.

      • Pipercat

        Multiple straw men.

        Dr. Mann is:

        “The Distinguished Professor of Meteorology at Penn State University, with joint appointments in the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (EESI). He is also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center (ESSC).”

        Not some guy, yes?

        … and certainly not some industry shill.

        Also, peer review is not compartmentalized by industry, that’s just plain disinformation. Peer review is open to all of the peers in the scientific community; even the ones outside of the particular discipline.

        Thanks for giving me some feedback on the Hockey Stick. That feedback is basically reinforcing my conclusion on how to smear scientific data and the scientists who published it. If for no other reason because the data is not convenient to certain monied interests. Since that graph is compiled with observations and empirical data, my belief, and yours, become irrelevant.

        Whether you believe the science, or not, doesn’t make the science any less authentic.

      • Jim Bean

        I can only counter that scientific data not in support of the impending doom warming hysteria is also not convenient to certain ‘monied interests.’ I believe in science. I also believe science often gets it partially or completely wrong and I don’t believe something tagged with the label ‘science’ is impervious to the biases that all humans are vulnerable to.

      • Pipercat

        None of these scientists are saying there is impending doom; what they are saying is once we reach a certain threshold, there will be no turning back. In fact, Dr. Mann is on the record as saying we can still stop the process and mitigate the damage.

        Make no mistake, the glaciers are melting, the permafrost is thawing out, ocean currents are changing course and acidification of the oceans are getting to a point of no return.

        Science is a consensus of many voices and belief does not enter into it. The biases are weeded out during peer review and recreation of the results.

        So I leave with this:

        Anthropogenic Climate change is real, it’s caused by us and it’s the greatest threat we as a species face.

      • Jim Bean

        There is no science saying it is real. There is a scientific model and theory that says ‘the more CO2 in the atmosphere, the more of the sun’s heat that is trapped.’ Unfortunately, CO2 concentrations have increased steadily each of the past 15 years but the temperatures have failed to do their part. Faced with this crisis, scientists set out to find something to explain it. Not surprisingly, they did.

      • Pipercat

        That’s a paraphrased quote from Dr. Mann. I’ll defer to his judgment as a preeminent expert in the field climate science. Now if you have issues with his expertise, you can find him on Facebook. Very affable and I’m sure you can convince him otherwise using your vast expertise in the field of climatology and paleoclimatology.

      • Jim Bean

        The US Great Lakes were covered with glaciers just 12,000 years ago. Not 12 billion, not 12 million, not twelve hundred thousand, just 12,000 – as in ‘a little more than 120 lifetimes ago. Significant non-man-made global warming caused that humongous mass of miles-thick ice to melt – not little-itty-bitty global warming. Your beloved scientists want you to believe that the climate that has been changing forever should have stopped changing and the most recent trends should have stalled. You believe Mann and I’ll believe in history. Follow the money, my friend. Its not that I don’t believe in global warming – I do. Its not that I don’t believe man contributes – I do. I simply don’t believe you’re going to make any significant impact on climate change with you’re CO2 obsession but you ARE going to cause us significant economic misery. I and will scientifically predict that after you have, and after its failed to provide the promised results, you are going to say, ‘Well, it would have been much worse if we hadn’t done what we did. Say, how bout them Mets?’

      • Pipercat

        This is just verbose and evasive. Again, if you are so sure of this, take this to him. He’s on Facebook. Also, belief does not enter into it. Science is a tool and not a belief system. Make this argument to an expert and argue with one of them. See how far you can get. The science and the data is there for all to see; assuming they want to see in the first place.

      • Jim Bean

        The science and data there to see are what they’ve put forth for you to see and believe. They are human and not infallible like you think. You want to believe – I want to remain uncommitted. For me to believe, the general trend in temperatures has to be consistent with the trend in CO2 concentrations – no ifs, ands, and buts. That’s what the model is predicated upon. I’m sure you believed them when they said hurricane seasons were going to much more severe right ahead of them becoming much less severe. This is Mann’s ticket to the spotlight. No evidence and no challenge is ever going to make him falter in his position. And if you think me pointing to the glaciers over the Great Lakes melting is ‘being evasive’ then there is more going on in your head than data processing.

      • Pipercat

        Now you are making this about me. Challenge Dr. Mann. He’s on Facebook. Michael E Mann. Look him up. Try this on him and see how far you get. Hit him with all of this stuff. He can explain peer review, data collection, proxy data, trend lines and how CO2 works in the biosphere. Since you have made this about me, I personally think you don’t have the guts to do it.

      • Jim Bean

        I”M not on facebook.

      • Pipercat

        I can understand that, believe it or not.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        understandable,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, collecting info from another source would irk U

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        tony gwynn RIP,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
        now- look up the stats of ed delahanty and dave orr and (sliding) billy Hamilton!! ( hall of fame billy Hamilton; not the rocket in reds outfield today)

      • Julie Wickstrom

        People paid by the oil companies have the same chance to be peer reviewed. If their findings are not consistent with others in their field of science then their findings will not be considered viable. The whole point of science is to be unbiased and rational. It may be fishy if only scientists employed by oil companies don’t believe in human climate impact while the majority of scientists do. Oil money is more plentiful than alternative energy.

      • Jim Bean

        If liberals believed in what you say, then they would have believed the numerous independent scientific studies that indicated the XL pipeline had no potential to be the environmental Armageddon they were hoping for.

      • Julie Wickstrom

        Hey Jim Bean. Did you choose the name because you are a fan of Jim Beam?

      • Jim Bean

        Which of your trusted new sources was the first one to report to you that, alas, the O administration would be unable to provide the two years worth of subpoenaed Lois Lerner emails because 6 (six) computer servers had coincidentally crashed simultaneously just (also) coincidentally whipping out the very emails the administration was refusing to provide?

    • Could I interest you in my company’s custom made tombstones, inscribed with the words “My Electric Bills Were Real Low” in an elegant Gothic script?

      • Jim Bean

        Who do you know who has an electric bill that is ‘real low” who could use such a tomb stone?

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        he said ”bills WERE real low”….. not ” is real low”
        translates to ; usage after they are gone
        jimbo,,,,,,,,,,,,, ya gotta keep up here
        ========================================
        and that bit about Australia got crushed by the guy who responded– facts; it seems– are anathemal to U

    • HarbingerOfReality

      Might I interest you in a tombstone that reads: “So what if we killed all life on earth? It was totally worth it for the record first quoter profits!”

      • Jim Bean

        None of your scientists are predicting that is what will happen if we do nothing. Long term, they are predicting global warming will delay the mass extinctions that the next inevitable ice age will bring. They don’t talk about it much for economic reasons.

      • Nathan Marcy

        Bullshit. You’re just as bad as people who deny climate change is happening. You think it’s happening, but it isn’t or won’t be that bad. Climate change definitely has the ability to cause mass extinctions. It has to be stopped immediately.

      • Jim Bean

        The climate has been changing continually for billions of years and someone convinced you they are going to stop it in its tracks. You should hold you’re breath until then.

      • HarbingerOfReality

        Yet very rarely does it change at a rate exponentially greater then the typical norm through the planet’s history. And times of rapid change in the geological record correlate with mass die offs of life and mass extinctions. And the onset of ice ages occurs over the course of thousands of years not decades to centuries that man made disruptions are happening in.

      • HarbingerOfReality

        And you are an example of true moral corruption. Its irrefutably established that disruptions to the planet’s climate systems causes mass death of fauna. And this is demonstrably NOT caused by an unfortunate natural phenomena but is a CHOICE. And I’m not talking about the whales or polar bears but the die-off will include BILLIONS OF HUMAN LIVES. Compared to you and those like you the crimes of all the genocidal regimes of history pale into insignificance.

      • Jim Bean

        You need to google ‘first earthday predictions’ to gain some perspective. The sky isn’t falling.

      • Nathan Marcy

        The climate has changed more in the last 100 year than in the last 100 million years before it. Carbon is at 400 ppm for the first time since the Cambrian period. Humans are causing it, and humans can stop it.

      • HarbingerOfReality

        Admittedly, my comment was a certain degree of hyperbole. Perhaps once the wet-bulb temperatures wipe out all warm blooded land animals the reptiles will do a better job with the planet.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        hey!!! I own a pet TEGU!!
        ( he gave U a “like” on ur post)

    • David Wilson

      If you believe the Australian newspaper re carbon tax or any political spin you are deluded. Fact is energy costs in Australia have not risen because of the carbon tax , they have risen because the privatization of the energy infrastructure companies which has allowed them to over invest in electricity infrastructure. Electficity consumption has dropped due to lower demand If you believe the right wing press you are are taking misinformation to further the ends of the owners of the press. Ref federal budget for a reality check .

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        annoying regressives with facts again???

  • jwveverka

    My favorite is how they godsplain lightspeed and redshifts that clearly indicate the universe is billions of years old

  • Goodsmack

    Faith can be defined as the suspension of critical thinking.

    • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

      cessation of,,,,,,,,,

  • Sondra Rene Eisenman

    while I agree the religious right has their agendas .. however we should include that even people are just mistrusting of the science community …even medical as such that lobbying and money have served questionable research for political propaganda and monetary incentives on silver platter and have no real agenda to serve the care of humanity or the enviroment. People just do not trust the sources any longer and have given up. I really believe majority of people have become cynical anymore and it is easy to believe in a GOD they can trust than a man that is completely capable of sin. They want to hold on to some sort of morality in this world, but unfortunately some dogmas give them little room to be open minded.

    • Kim Johnson

      I think people who “just don’t trust the sources” are the same ones who are too lazy to check things out. They’d rather be spoonfed infotainment rather than watch CSpan to find out what actually IS going on in Congress, turn on Democracy Now??? What no weather bunnies??? AAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH.
      Americans, in general, prefer their heads in the sand and not having to think critically about an idea, a problem, a creation, whatever. And that is what’s sad.

      • HarbingerOfReality

        A beautiful insight. People love an easy and egotistical lie about being the ‘special friend’ of a brutal space dictator rather then the hard work to understand and accept reality as it is.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        or a “special friend” of some dude who may or may not have walked upon the earth– whom these bovaristic lemmings claim fervently is GOD

  • J

    I am a christian and I believe that we cause it… not God. After all … if you really believe the bible… you know that it was us who caused alot of bad things for the earth when we first sinned (adam and eve). So there are alot of things that science says that I believe and there are alot of things that I believe religiously. Some make sense… some proven… some take faith… end of story. Of course we cause the bad climate… that is obvious. Not hard to use your brain to figure that out. Some christians like to blame everything on God… when truth is… its our fault. Some things are not always His will… he gave us free will remember? If we wanted something and HE always made it His way… then its not really free will is it? Some things He does… some I think He sits back and lets us see our on undoing so we realize His way is much better if we follow Him. One of those things is of course… taking care of the earth.

    • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

      do U really believe that a man who walked upon this planet is GOD?

    • Julie Wickstrom

      If you have read the bible, humans are “stewards”, therefore it is our job to do what we can to take care of our habitat. I appreciate that you are sensible and not blind. I don’t understand the idea going around that science and facts are anti-religion. We need more people calling that as bull. People can have whatever spirituality they want. Science helps explain our world. It is unfortunate that we have such an impact on our environment.

      • Patrick

        Its because Science completely contradicts what the Bible says, then again the Bible completely contradicts what the bible says……..

    • Patrick

      You believe in Adam and EVe? I am a religious Studies Major, and Adam and Eve did not exist. Religious Scholars identify the people who wrote the bible as sources. and the “P” Source wrote Adam and Eve after most of the Genesis was written by the “J” source, (we also see this with Moses and Exodus, thats why think that Moses never existed or Abraham because THERE IS NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE!) So how can you believe in Adam and Eve, A Talking snake? You have read the bible right? You do know that Genesis has 2 creation stories, NOT JUST ONE. There are 2 creation myths both completely different, so if you believe Your God created this planet and the Universe, then which Myth is correct? They both cant be true because they COMPLETELY contradict each other, so which one is true?

  • nancecedar

    Fossil fuels don’t come from dinosaurs. They come from much older plants the absorbed huge amounts of carbon from the atmosphere, which allowed free oxygen to become about 20% of the atmosphere, so we can breathe. If all that carbon is rereleased into the atmosphere, we WILL die!

    • zobva

      I hate to be the one to tell you this… but we’re all going to die regardless.

      • Kim Johnson

        And, I guess, its ok to destroy all along with us? Yes, I know I’m going to die someday, and acknowledging that, I also don’t try playing hopskotch on the expressway!

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        seems the idiots who text ad infinitum while driving do play “hopscotch” on freeways

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        and we do have many among us who are already dead,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, just listen to regressives and religious (over)zealots

      • Patrick

        So should we not care about the shape we leave the planet in for our children and their children?? You know stupid comments and ignorant statements like yours put me in a bad mood, because I wish people would take more care and responsibility to preserving the shape of the planet. but then I see comments like yours and all i can think is that you dont care, and only care about yourself, pure selfishness. Good Riddance go run in front of a train.

  • Jerry Graybosch

    They see the environment like a big swimming pool that cannot be polluted no matter how much we all piss in it. Why? Because it’s big? Man has a long, well documented history of polluting regional air and water to the point of unhealthfulness. Why assume we can’t have larger impacts?

  • HarbingerOfReality

    Its simple really. The entire foundation of the religion is the desire for global genocide, at its core its pure hatred of all life. They don’t even pretend to hide it.

    • zobva

      Dumb statements by non-religious people are every bit as ignorant as dumb statements by religious people.

      • Nathan Marcy

        He certainly couldn’t match the idiocy you spouted off above. You’ve got to have shit for brains to think like you do.

      • HarbingerOfReality

        Hardly a “dumb statement”, simply familiarity with the Christian religion. Every iota of its marketing propaganda about “love and forgiveness” is exposed by its gleeful relish of mass murder and masturbatory fantasies about global genocide.

      • giankeys luvs shemale porn

        with one serious difference:
        religious scum claim to be going to a perfect afterlife which excludes NON religious– a claim based upon simply that they BELIEVE
        religion equals control and profit FROM that control

  • zobva

    I do not find the Bible and science mutually exclusive at all. Much of the Pentateuch is allegorical, including the stories of the creation of Adam and Eve in the Garden and Noah and the flood. I do believe that God created life, and then that life evolved. Science has no better explanation. Sure, I can believe that there was a “big bang” … but where did the matter and energy come from that were in that big bang? How is it possible that anything exists without a beginning? Science has no answer. At least religion simplifies it to, God has no beginning and no end. And the New Testament admits that “now we see as through a glss darkly…” because there are things we cannot understand.

    As for this article which keeps saying that Christian fundamentalists are ignorant. They are not ignorant. They are intentionally intellectually dishonest.

    • Jenny

      “At least religion simplifies it to, God has no beginning and no end.” – But to simplify it to a supernatural being is the problem. Man has created over 2,000 gods of which 0 have been proven, or have any type of validation. Considering the enormity of the universe, it is preposterous to believe that a tiny, tiny area of the world in which we live is where “The God” has chosen to appear or rather ‘talk to people’.

      Science does not have all the answers at this time, but it sure has answered many, and changed when necessary.

      I’m afraid there is cognitive dissonance with all believers, fundamentalists or not.

    • HarbingerOfReality

      So your unchanging god sat on his ass for all eternity then at some point – without anything changing – started creating the universe. But nothing at all changed and your god is all there was so nothing could have changed to cause your god who could not have caused himself to start creating because he does not change to start creating . . . um yeah, I’ll leave you to think about that . . .

  • freethinker666

    On a positive note, they will be the first ones to die.