Obligatory, 9/3/15

Why do people believe what they believe?

That's a question I sometimes think up when I've criticized AGW.  But it can also apply to just about anything that requires a belief, such as a religion.

This is likely to be a think piece, and by rights, should be lengthy.  Since there is little time for this, shall I write it?  Certainly not now, but perhaps over the course of the next several days.

What have I written thus far?  It seems that I've been dancing around this subject for at least a month, probably more.  I've checked my "morality" subtopic in the category listings, and the last post I found on it included a piece on the failings of Christianity.  This is bound to upset those who believe in it.  As for me, I pretty much have been struggling with it all my adult life.  It's off and on.  Currently, I am feeling pretty rational, so I'm moving into the skeptical range of that.  But if it upsets, it probably shouldn't.  The best way to approach a religion may well be from the skeptical side.  If you can satisfy the doubts, then you can believe in it with all your heart.

But would most people approach it like that?  No.  When I watched the video last night, it was revealed that--- during the persecutions during the reign of the Emperor Diocletian, many of those who professed to be Christians, rather easily gave it up for clemency.  Evidently, many of those who professed a belief were rather weak in it.  There were those who kept with it, and were persecuted for it.  Diocletian's persecutions were among the worst, so I understand.  So, I'm going to go out on the limb and say that most people don't really believe in what they say they believe.

Yet, people have to believe in something.  I'd say it is almost one of the most fundamental of needs.  But it isn't "carved in stone".  People can be quite malleable in what they believe in.

The same is with AGW.  You can end that "faith" rather easily like Diocletian did.  Perhaps even easier without the need for persecutions.  You can certainly disprove a faith, any faith like AGW.  Make no mistake, the AGW business is part of the complex of behaviors that can be called a religion.  AGW is like "creation science".  It is a religion masquerading as a science.  It is definitely not science, nor is AGW.

You challenge that AGW is a faith?  Well, consider this:  AGW proponents probably believe a complex of ideas that inevitably turn to the belief that whatever man creates is bad, and whatever nature does is okay.  Thus, anything "man-made" is to be avoided.  You are to avoid foods that are grown with pesticides and fertilizers, for example.  They must be "organic".   It follows the same line throughout.  You cannot solve the AGW issue without reducing the population down to what it was before the Industrial Revolution.  Make no mistake, the Industrial Revolution was the single most bad thing in the minds of those who believe in AGW.  For that is when man's inventions started being a real threat to Mother Earth.

Look at it this way:  AGW is part of the complex of behaviors that can be described as nature worshipping.  Nature is their God.  Anything that man does is "fallen", and therefore evil.  Consequently, if you try to cure man's problems with more of man's inventions, you only get even more problems and more evil.  That's why the AGW crowd really isn't interested in solving the AGW "problem".  For the "problem" is much deeper than carbon dioxide.

If you try to reason with a true believer, you will get nowhere.  Reason can't overwhelm faith.  Hence, all attempts to show how this isn't really a problem, and even if it were a problem, it could be fixed --- must always fail with these people.  To acknowledge your point means to acknowledge a failure in your faith.