Yes, CJ, there is a difference between "those who are legitimately concerned about the negative effects of climate change and environmental degradation" and "environmentalist nutters"; that was my point.

But, as someone like Bjorn Lomborg has found out, you can be legitimately concerned about climate change and the environment, but the moment you contradict the received dogma of the Environmental religion and start arguing from evidence and reason, you are damned to the fire as an unforgivable heretic.

You want to know where I stand on climate change and environmental degradation? Yes, they're real, but they're not as bad as the dogma would have them to be, and they can and will be dealt with. Humans will not become extinct. In fact, I strongly suspect the species will continue to thrive over the next century.

Sorry if that doesn't jibe with the scary, ooga-booga, repent-and-be-saved dogma of the Gaiaists, but that's where the evidence leads me.

CLOWNFISH..

I really didn't think there was much hope of us agreeing about much BUT....

when you said :

//Of course climate science is not a religion, ipso facto. Neither was Marxism, for instance. Yet, like Marxism in its time, "capital C" Climate Change (which I capitalize to distinguish reasoned climate science from "Alarmism"), and Environmentalism in general, have become an ersatz religion for many people in the secular West.//

and our resident CLIMATE ALARM LEMMING CJ said:

//I love the way that climate change denialists and others who are inimical to environmental sustainability are always trying to reduce those who they see as their opponents to the status of dumb religionists.//

Dumb Religionists :) CJ.. you took the words right out of my mouth.

CLOWNY.. for some further AMMO on your skepticism of the 'alarmists' like CJ and his Green Religious cult.. see the thread on GREEN VOTES please.. I'm sure you have some useful input.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3701

Please read my last couple of posts about 'The Network' :)

Here's my idea, for what it's worth;
any organisation which can show the majority of funds raised (at least 50%) actually get to the disadvantaged people who need it, should be declared tax exempt; regardless of whether they are religious or secular organisations.
I'm talkin' genuinely disadvantaged here; I know our noble representatives -among others- would claim to be disadvantaged if they had to work for less than 3 times the median wage...
Imagine churches spending their money on their poor parishioners, instead of stained glass windows, and being the only brick or stone building in western shanty towns and slum (church owned) suburbs.

Clownfish, you know as well as I do that the "Gaia religion" discourse is a trope that's routinely trotted out by denialist hacks like Bolt, Blair etc. I'm aware from your contributions here that you're somewhat better educated, which is why I was surprised that you posted the nonsense that you did before.

It seems to me that our positions aren't all that far apart with respect to climate change. I lean towards the view that what we're collectively doing now is contributing to it, and also stuffing up virtually every other aspect of the environment upon which we all ultimately depend.

You seem to agree, except that you have what seems to me to be a groundless faith that we can carry on as usual and sort out the problems later.

That's all fine and good, but I'm a little perplexed as to why you want to push the extreme denialist spin that environmentalists are somehow necessarily "religious".

I can assure you that I, for one, am not. I just see the planet going to hell in a handbasket due to human activities, and I really want us all to work out a better way of subsisting.

Well! Isn't this just wonderful. The entire brains trust of olo can't come to terms with today's responsibilities of a world that's such in short demand of time to think.
You all know my thoughts on religion, "and what a 19th century thinking base that's serve's no-one! ( at this point in time ) but in the short time of the day of nothing,( the smart seem to be the ill-informed ) one must think, what is next.

Look people! The world as one must happen! I do care how you do it. But the growth of humans is not the answer. I watch how you all conduct yourselves in a some-what (with your human thoughts) way of no-brained thinking's.

I am neutral in all of thinking. Just step out and have a good look at whats happening with a planet you say you all love. You all know me.......so cut the sh@t.

Answer me this Question

continued.

If we all kill this planet, where are we going to spend our money?

Does the truth hurt that much! And the youth have to wear the filth of a planet that the 19th century retards have no idea of the consequences of their actions.( big plus for mining tax ) When you uni students pass and get your degrees, will these children that you will bear and love have a place in today's world which has no place for the current count of the ridiculous masses in which you have no problems with your child being on centrelink benefits or worse. Let me tell you something about the human species. The mindset of all humans fall upon the time of birth to the time of death. Thats 80 years at best. In that time all humans with all their flaws are unfortunately confined to that time frame of each humans existence. This means you will take what you can get in your short ridiculous life spans and the world you need to live upon you cant see it dieing beneath your feet.

Oh how smart you are when it comes to saving your own species. Religion is just a fundamental mindset carried out by the evolving species we are and we have viewed in all human history of how the religious cultures have not served humanity with the current dignity that mankind deserves in the 21st century. (Iraq war and more!)