Lion of the Blogosphere

Parents who indoctrinate their children with climate change alarmism

with 146 comments

Parents have always indoctrinated their children with their stupid religious beliefs, and as I’ve stated many times, climate change alarmism is a religion like Christianity and Islam, so it’s not very surprising.

Anyone who has sent their own kids to religious school has no call to criticize climate change alarmists for doing something similar. It would be the pot calling the kettle black.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 22, 2019 at EDT am

Posted in Religion

146 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Parents who send their kids to religious school are not trying to hijack the national discourse and short circuit reasoned debate by holding kids up as a shield. In my opinion, the manipulation of the Parkland kids, the abuse of Greta Thunburg are all examples of frankly contemptible manipulative behavior that will do those kids no favors.

    That has nothing to do with parents sending kids to religious schools.

    Mike Street Station

    September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  2. I notice you do not cite Judaism as a stupid religion.

    Also, plenty of basically secular people their kids to religious schools. More about keeping one’s kids in their own community/culture/race then it necessarily is about the religion.

    fakeemail

    September 22, 2019 at EDT am

    • Judaism is a stupid religion. Happy?

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Any form of parochialism is a detriment to any individual.

        One thing that proles share with NAMs is the lack of drive or ambition to leave’s one community and to see the world. A good example are the guidos in Staten Island who are stuck in their low brow culture, not so much because their parents are prole, but because the individual lacks any initiation to see the world beyond their local confines.

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I’ve seen the world. The world sucks.

        destructure

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • On one of the Portuguese language blogs a native Brazilian once left a comment: ‘ I’m eternally grateful to G-d for speaking Portuguese, the most beautiful language in the world, and for belonging to the true Catholic faith’. When I read it, I thought of you Lion, and how messed up you are. Here a man enjoys his culture, which is what he genetically is suitable for, and finds a way to love the demanding, mystical, irrational Catholicism. Good for him. Judaism is the expression of the Jewish people genetic uniqueness. Instead of connecting to it, you agonize about your miserable childhood. You really have a loose screw, mate. I feel very sorry for you because you are a nice guy otherwise.

        Yakov

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • And how right the guy was: Portuguese and Italian are the most beautifully sounding languages in the world and Carholic passion suits the Iberian character.

        The world is a beautiful place. I love traveling and getting a genuine feel for different people and cultures, but when you study a culture in depths, like I’m doing with Spain, Portugal and my own Jews, the future doesn’t look very promising, but having a cheerful disposition and believing in the Messianic redemption one way or another helps.

        There is having a purpose and meaning in life and there is being happy. Two aren’t always overlapping. Religion gives purpose and meaning, but you can be happy without it or not happy with it. But when you stop running around and being happy and think, you still need purpose and meaning.

        Lion is a mess though and it’s a pitty.

        Yakov

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • “Any form of parochialism is a detriment to any individual”.

        What is a detriment to the individual is going through life with the belief that unfounded assertion is equivalent to an argument let alone a proof.

        “One thing that proles share with NAMs is the lack of drive or ambition to leave’s one community”

        Untrue on the prole side. I’m not a NAM and so I cannot speak for them. Drive to leave one’s community is likely led by a youthful spike in dopamine and its facilitation of novelty and reward seeking. In terms of evolution, it is likely a means of both spreading genes and lowering competition for community females. The strong impulse to travel dissipates in most by middle age, especially if one has traveled.

        “and to see the world”.

        In spite of the appeals to some or other vague learning process that are sure to follow, the value in that can largely depend on what part of the world that one is from.

        “A good example are the guidos in Staten Island who are stuck in their low brow culture, not so much because their parents are prole, but because the individual lacks any initiation to see the world beyond their local confines”.

        A poor example on multiple counts.

        First, guidos have some community culture and thus at least some political protection that other groups lack. If being “parochial” is what earned them that, then it has earned them some measure of improved survival and that result refutes your, again, vague attempt at a point. This logic is easily expanded to logically justify the “parochial” nation.

        Second, who says that Italians don’t travel and that young Italians don’t have an increased drive for such on par with other young people?

        Third, your references seem to strongly correlate to socioeconomic status. As such, any C level graduate student would quickly rule out your conclusions due to the fact that poor people can’t afford to travel much.

        Fourth, the race mixed Italians are a poor reference do to their hybrid nature that may affect brain architecture and the resultant drives.

        Mike

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Leon did that to annoy and provoke… like he did with Epstein.

      destructure

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Lion has said several times that Judaism “sucks.”

      gothamette

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • My impression was that he was doing it to annoy a couple of his orthodox readers.

        destructure

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Not my impression.

        gothamette

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • He is in agony and needs a shrink, only hurting himself.

        Yakov

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • When you’ve lost your God it hurts.

        I wrote a book about that.

        gothamette

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “I wrote a book about that.”

        Are you speaking both autobiographically and figuratively? If I’m reading you correctly, then we have that in common.

        destructure

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • No, I’m saying I actually wrote a book. A book-book.

        gothamette

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Oh, you mean did I lose my God? Yes.

        gothamette

        September 25, 2019 at EDT am

      • Lion has consistently come across as non-religious and just the other day said that (some) kosher food tastes awful.

        He has a low opinion of all religions. I wonder about Steve Sailer. He’s never said he is religious but he doesn’t seem to make derogatory comments about religions in general.

        Frau Katze

        September 26, 2019 at EDT am

      • I feel that Lion thinks that Judaism is one thing that stopped him from being TOOS.

        gothamette

        September 26, 2019 at EDT pm

  3. There is a profound difference, religious people at least recognize there’s an element of faith. While the climate change crowd think it’s all science, hence why not strong arm people into it? It’s science, so shut up already! At this point it’s secular orthodoxy and no dissent is tolerated.

    Oh have you ever listened to the No Agenda podcast? It’s hosted by the actual inventor of the podcast Adam Curry, they do news and current events deconstruction, you would dig it:
    https://www.noagendashow.com/

    guest

    September 22, 2019 at EDT am

    • “There is a profound difference, religious people at least recognize there’s an element of faith. ”

      I disagree. The truly religious believe that their religion is truth.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • It is not contradicting, they believe it is true but they are well aware that it is a belief rather than a scientific truth, unlike climate change proponents.

        Hashed

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • The scientific truth and religion are separate realms is a modern concept. It was not understood that way before the enlightenment, and it’s not currently understood that way in Islamic countries.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “The scientific truth and religion are separate realms is a modern concept. It was not understood that way before the enlightenment…”

        But we’re in a post enlightenment era. I agree with guest that true believers in climate change don’t think they are believers at all, simply rational thinkers and everyone else is stupid.

        Mike Street Station

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • “It is not contradicting, they believe it is true but they are well aware that it is a belief rather than a scientific truth, unlike climate change proponents.”

        This!

        In America in 2019, virtually every person of faith recognizes that they have a belief. That makes all the difference.

        Modern religion in America is very far from forcing itself on people. Instead it has to bring value or people won’t participate. Most people expect their religion to make their lives better. It has to ‘prove’ its worth. And the worth of religion for religious people and society can be massive and has many facets:

        (1) Religious people can cope with death and severe loss, where religion gives a message of hope. Death and loss for non-religious people is black and hopeless.

        (2) Religious people are generally happier, many studies have shown.

        (3) Religious people have a community. America outside of faith communities is much more isolated.

        (4) Religion teaches people to behave. Virtually all mass shooters in America were estranged from religion with the exception of one notably different religion. A Christian believer is taught that if they do that, they would spend eternity in hell.

        (5) Religious people save a ton of money on therapy. Non-religious people need therapy for everything, while religious people can get solace and hope from their faiths. Most people can’t afford therapy and without religion they have nothing when bad stuff inevitably happens.

        (6) Nonreligious societies wreak themselves by tending toward Communism and socialism.

        (7) Nonreligious people in developed countries have incredibly low average fertility (far below replacement) to the point that nonreligious societies decline steeply in short order. I can think of no exceptions to this among European countries.

        (8) Without normal channels for their religious impulse, most people will substitute extreme leftism, SJW totalitarianism, Communism or environmental paranoiacs. They are unlikely to become some post-religious, ultra-enlightened future man.

        Notice that none of these many about benefits of religion actually requires it to be true. The truly enlightened approach is to recognize that the better religions massively benefit a society and its people apart from whether it is true.

        Dan

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • Don’t delude yourself, Lion. Every parent indoctrinates their kids. It’s the whole job description.

        njguy73

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Don’t delude yourself, Lion. Every parent indoctrinates their kids. It’s the whole job description.”

        Did I say something that disagrees with that?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I just wanted to make sure you didn’t view indoctrination _as such_ to be bad. I’m sure if you had a kid you’d indoctrinate him/her with SWPL attitudes.

        njguy73

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • As your ngram identified the crossing point was when the 1992 when the Soviet Union fell.

      Both nuclear disarmament/fears and “the climate crisis” are essentially the same thing- leftists ginning up and amplifying fear to advance their anticapitalist agenda. a. manufacture a crisis b. dont let it go to waste.

      They have identified that there is a need some people, especially women, to have things to worry about. Orwell had it right that there really needs to be a benign thing for society to worry about other wise they are easily diverted.

      This is completely different from religion, as usually the focus is on the immaterial world. The amount of eschatology is negligible. And as history has demonstrated, religion is helpful for human survival and progress.

      Lion of the Turmabar

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “a benign thing for society to worry about”
        I’d be curious for more context and expansion on what Orwell thought on this matter. I’m not aware of these comments of his.

        For most women, for most of history, the benign thing they worried about was their own children. Of course, relevant to Lion’s post, this doesn’t seem to be holding leftists back so much, or at least it’s not holding back a certain class of leftist women. I think a big part of the problem might be having too few children and starting too late. I wonder how many of these activist kids have more than 1 sibling? Seems to be a very small number.

        If Greta’s mother was busy with some much younger children (or if Greta was the youngest and her mother had already gotten a number of children out of the house), she probably wouldn’t be so engaged in foisting activism upon her daughter.

        But the other thing women worry about is their relationship with God. There are a fair number of unmarried, childless women in the church, and many such women — perhaps most — are sane and grounded. If such a woman is unchurched and doesn’t have kids by the time she’s 30, she will almost certainly not be grounded.

        Wency

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • “But the other thing women worry about is their relationship with God.”

        Gaian women worry about their relationship with the Planet.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • @Lion:

        One difference is that educated Christian women tend to be on the non-judgmental side of things. They are often soft on LGBT — they recognize it’s a sin, but stress that they think other Christians are too hard on them. (To be clear, when I say “Christian”, I leave out Episcopalians and other such that are pro-LGBT.)

        Meanwhile, evangelical leftists tend to be extraordinarily judgmental, believing their enemies to be pure evil and beyond redemption.

        Wency

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

  4. Thank u for the hat tip.

    gothamette

    September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  5. “Anyone who has sent their own kids to religious school has no call to criticize climate change alarmists for doing something similar.”

    Eh, it’s pretty different. My parents sent me to religious school, but I know now that they themselves didn’t literally believe in any of that crap at all. They just naively thought that a religious upbringing was necessary to instill good morals, in the most general possible sense. The climate change indocrtrinators are more on the level of weird evangelical types who are so paranoid about cultural influence that they home school their kids and tell them that the dinosaurs never happened and so on.

    JM

    September 22, 2019 at EDT am

  6. Ultimately, this indoctrination will lead to more SWPLfication of society.

    It’s prole to generate energy with fossil fuels.

    Ok, what, who's this again?

    September 22, 2019 at EDT am

    • And yet frequent air travel to Iceland or wherever is a pillar of the SWPL religion. Hell, I can’t even get my wife to stop doing it. I wish they’d at least be internally consistent.

      hdo

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  7. “Anyone who has sent their own kids to religious school has no call to criticize climate change alarmists for doing something similar. It would be the pot calling the kettle black.”

    I respectfully disagree. When religious people pass this on to their children, the faith is just that: faith. To be sure, not all religious people view their faiths as beyond reason, but most do. With climate alarmists, they believe (wrongly, but still…) that their belief in climate catastrophe is entirely based on reason and therefore have every right to demean anyone who disagrees with them as ignorant and superstitious. In other words, they are every bit as obnoxious as the most fundamentalist religious people. And not at all like most believers.

    dbp

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  8. “climate change alarmism is a religion like Christianity and Islam”

    With respect to wealth, education and freedom, Christianity has a pretty good record when it comes to founding successful countries. Islam and atheism not so much, though atheism has the better record of the two. Secular religions are generally about stopping or destroying something. Your statement about climate change alarmism is too narrow; environmentalism in general is a religion.

    TWBC

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Christianity has a pretty poor track record, actually – Nigeria, Kenya, pretty much every South American country other than Chile, the Philippines. On every continent there are plenty of examples of Christianity failing miserably to create a workable society. At the end of the day HBD matters more than religion. I would prefer to live in Turkey over Venezuela any day of the week. All things being equal, are Christians smarter, harder working and more successful than Muslims? Christians in Egypt, Lebanon and Iraq might indicate yes. But even in those countries it’s hard to separate the genetic effects from the religion. The problem with Islam is less the religion qua religion, it’s the kind of people it tends to attract. Much like Southern Baptists. There is nothing particularly great or inspiring about Judaism – a religion of sheep farmers based on a violent and cruel collection of archaic stories and dressed up with centuries of medieval legalism – but over those centuries it attracted a better sort of people and that makes it an interesting religion. Same can be said for the Anglican Church, until recently anyway.

      Even if you believe Climate Change is a religion, since most high IQ people and people with social status believe in it, you are far better off going that route than sinking into the mud with the Muslims and the Evangelicals. Your best bet for a religion if you want to stay socially conservative is to join the Mormons.

      Peter Akuleyev

      September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • “Christianity has a pretty poor track record, actually – Nigeria, Kenya, pretty much every South American country other than Chile, the Philippines. ”

        Obviously genetic effects matter a lot. Some countries won’t be tech superpowers either way. But the question is whether the religion makes the people and societies that practice it better or worse than they would otherwise be. Maybe these poor countries don’t look good by western standards but they were even poorer, and in a state of constant war and cannibalistic before.

        I like the example of the people of Scandinavia. Where they were once pillaging Vikings, filthy brutes in a state of poor civilization under their Norse war-religion, after Christianity they become extremely civilized.

        Climate Change is a bad religion, because practitioners are hopeless, angry, anti-capitalist and will probably have no children. Greta Thunberg is just a miserable basket-case, raging at everyone including those supposedly on her side. Can you imagine being married to someone like that?

        Dan

        September 25, 2019 at EDT am

      • “Greta Thunberg is just a miserable basket-case, raging at everyone including those supposedly on her side. Can you imagine being married to someone like that?”

        This sound like a trick question to get someone to admit to pedophile thoughts.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 25, 2019 at EDT am

      • A lot of failure is a pretty good record compared to 100% failure. With a couple of Asian exceptions, pretty much every free, wealthy, educated country on Earth was founded by Christians. Most (or rather, all) of the atheists I know are smart people; that doesn’t alter the fact that explicitly atheist societies are, in every case, a disaster. I agree with the IQ claim to a point, but there’s a level beyond which it doesn’t do you any more good. There are a number of reasoning errors high IQ will not protect you from (confirmation bias in particular) that are pretty dangerous when combined with hubris. Some interesting stuff if you’re bored: http://keithstanovich.com/Site/Research_on_Reasoning.html

        TWBC

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

    • What countries were founded on atheism?

      Mike Street Station

      September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • The USSR. Pretty explicitly actually. Not a good track record.

        Peter Akuleyev

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • Eh…insofar as the Soviet Union was a totally separate country from the Russian Empire. The PRC is explicitly atheist too, but I don’t think of it as “founded on atheism.” It’s still China.

        Mike Street Station

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

  9. There are lots of reasons to send your child to a religious school that are separate from religion. Primarily it allows you not to send your child to public school where their life may be at risk. If you found a conservative religious school they would also be spared the Marxist indoctrination of climate change, gayness and everything else associated with modern leftist propaganda Also, there’s nothing wrong with inculcating rudimentary rules of behavior in children. The Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule. That sort of thing. Putting the fear of God into them so to speak. Without such instruction it’s quite likely that school children would rapidly descend into Lord of the Flies type arrangements.

    Nedd Ludd

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  10. According to this, liberalism is increasingly associated with the lack of religion.

    “since 1990, the share of liberals who never attend religious services has tripled.”
    https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/09/22/is-the-religiosity-of-the-right-driving-the-secularization-of-the-left/

    Of course this does not count climate change and other such beliefs as religion.

    Roger

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  11. I attended my city’s climate festivities and talked to some of the student “strikers” and their parents. The common theme is that there is this problem, that the government is going to fix it (or force corporations to fix it) and that no sacrifice will be required by ordinary people. They spoke in the abstract about how “we need to solve this problem,” but when I asked them to go into specifics about what “we” would need to do, it came down to “we need to get out here and protest and demand that the government fixes the problem.” They saw not being in school as a Friday as a great sacrifice on their part. When I brought up the economic issues with the “fixes,” electric cars costing more than gasoline-powered cars, solar electricity costing more than coal-fired electricity, it was all dismissed with the confidence that the government would fix it either by picking up the tab directly or making “technological advances.” “Technological advances” are easy, just write down what you want, get the government to give it money, and those nerds will figure out a way! Oh, and “jobs.” If some method is inefficient, just tax the rich and use the money to create more jobs. They equate economic growth with job creation even in our moment of low unemployment. The AGW deniers, in their view, were a bunch of dumb proles shilling for billionaires, as they are convinced that it is “billionaires” and “oil companies” who will be the only ones who have to pay for all their green stuff.

    At the same time, the richer, smarter supporters of AGW alarmism can hear a different message: that it will be the dumb proles who wind up paying the regressive green taxes. They don’t consciously think this, after all, it is equality, the rich man will be required to buy an electric car just as the poor man will. Both will have to make sacrifices.

    AGW alarmists, thus, are much better at persuasion than AGW deniers and this is why they are winning the debate. The perception of the latter is that they are servants of the rich, if they want to change it, they need to start attacking the rich directly and with substantial policy proposals, not just empty rhetoric. They should demand a ban on private jets:

    https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/09/ban-private-jets-climate-change-green-new-deal

    They should emphasize how they are defending poor and middle class people who would be most harmed by regressive green tax policies. Almost none of the rich are AGW deniers, so there’s no tactical or moral reason for AGW deniers to defend them.

    Alexander Turok

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Thunberg reminds me of AOC.

      But she and her followers never mention that nothing the West can do will stop the CO2.

      The CO2 is also very much coming from China and India. The latter think, not without reason, that it’s not fair that they can’t industrialize because the West has already caused this problem.

      BTW, there is no argument that CO2 is not increasing. It’s been measured since about 1960. There’s also no argument that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

      The argument is whether or not such warming as we see (mostly in the Arctic and Antarctic) is caused by the increase in CO2.

      We are dependent on highly complex computer programs that are beyond the ability of most of us to evaluate.

      Thunberg is extremely off-putting though.

      Frau Katze

      September 26, 2019 at EDT am

    • And yes, a solution is immensely complicated and would require huge changes. Greta is so ignorant that she doesn’t realize that her fancy yacht is made from synthetic stuff that cost CO2 too.

      She should have arranged for a wooden boat to be built for her. It wouldn’t have to be a raft, a ship like Columbus sailed didn’t create CO2 in particular.

      And no fair having planes keeping watch on her. Air traffic will have to cease completely. There is absolutely no substitute for jet fuel.

      And ships will return to using sails.

      Frau Katze

      September 26, 2019 at EDT am

  12. “Anyone who has sent their own kids to religious school has no call to criticize climate change alarmists for doing something similar.”

    Not necessarily. We send our children to religious schools and we’re agnostic. We’re not sending them there for the religion. On the contrary, if religion were our motive then we’d be sending them somewhere else since those schools do not represent our family’s religious background at all.

    destructure

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Pretty damn cynical.

      Daniel H

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Yes it is. But most of the other parents aren’t sending their children to those schools for religious reasons, either. Personally, I think the denomination and schools are making a big mistake. And, if they asked me, I’d tell them that. But they haven’t asked me. And, given the lefty bent of the denomination and schools, most of them would disagree with me anyway.

        destructure

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

  13. “Anyone who has sent their own kids to religious school has no call to criticize climate change alarmists for doing something similar.”

    Not necessarily. We send our children to religious schools and we’re agnostic. We’re not sending them there for the religion. On the contrary, if religion were our motive then we’d be sending them somewhere else since those schools do not represent our family’s religious background at all.

    destructure

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  14. I remember reading somewhere not long ago that the leaders of the USA in the middle third of the last century felt that encouraging religious participation of a conventional sort (mainline Protestantism, Catholicism, Judaism, possibly LDS) was an important element in promoting good, solid middle class values and positive social behaviors (e.g. work ethic, charitable giving, community involvement, having children within the confines of marriage, etc. etc.) It also had the advantage of being the least intrusive and least costly way of accomplishing that goal.

    Compare that to the Soviet model of the time: official atheism and a police state with extensive surveillance and harsh punishment of dissidents to keep people in line. I’d bet there are people within the climate change movement who would in their honest moments say that, yes, the government should spy on “climate science deniers” and impose criminal sanctions on them if they express heretical views.

    Sgt. Joe Friday

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “I’d bet there are people within the climate change movement who would in their honest moments say that, yes, the government should spy on “climate science deniers” and impose criminal sanctions on them if they express heretical views.”

      That’s the same thing that Muslims believe about apostates and blasphemers.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  15. There is a difference because traditional religions have belief systems that have evolved over many thousands of years, and the only belief systems that have survived are those that promote group survival. So whilst the mythology itself is bullshit, the lessons will help a group survive (ie have lots of children, promote group solidarity and order, defend territory, etc. ) Climate change alarmism is a brand new religion that has not been under any Darwinian selection so no reason to assume any of it’s lessons will help group survival.

    DataExplorer

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • All religions were once knew. And one can say that climate change alarmists have adopted some of the beliefs of Christianity.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • That misspelling of “new” was profound. Don’t ever fix it. In Eden (eternity), we knew/know/will know all religions.

        Cosmic, Yo

        September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  16. The reason any faith – be it Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Zoastrasism – whatever – deserve respect is that they acknowledge that with all the mumbo jumbo they take their truth as faith, not “science”.

    Neo-paganism AKA environmentalism is just as faith based as the aforementioned but pretends to be derived from “science”.

    Hence, traditional religions are more honest than climate alarmists.

    MagyarGeci

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Religions traditionally practiced in the USA are what I know best, and admittedly that isn’t much.

      But whatever you call climate alarmism, it does have a lot of the trappings of older, more established religions:

      a) A supreme being, in this case the planet earth or Gaia or whatever
      b) A prophet (Paul Erlich? Al Gore?)
      c) An end-of-times prophesy
      d) Dietary restrictions followed by the most observant devotees (vegetarianism/veganism)
      e) Sins for which a congregant can be excommunicated
      f) A holy scripture (pick any environmental tome of the last 30 years)
      g) A priesthood (pick just about any Democrat politician or activist)
      h) A system of indulgences whereby a believer can pay to have their ongoing, repeated sins excused and remain in the supreme being’s grace
      i) Televangelists who get rich off of gullible believers who want to be saved (some overlap with (b) and (g) )
      j) A festival day where all believers gather to have their faith re-affirmed (Earth Day)
      k) Religious indoctrination of the young, before they are old enough to question the faith’s teachings
      l) Rituals intended to mystify non-believers and make them question their own faith
      m) An adversarial being nearly as powerful as the supreme being, tempting believers into sin (consumerism)

      Sgt. Joe Friday

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  17. If climate change alarmism helps good stuff like traditional wildlife and habitat conservation, that’s great. If it helps bad stuff like allowing “migrants” to migrate, that’s awful. It would be considered rude and would never happen, but that Swedish kid should be asked, point blank, yes or no, “do you prefer this [a pic of a cute endangered animal] or this [a pic of a Somali]? You can’t have both!”

    Touch and Go

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  18. I think some parents send their children to religious-affiliated schools to get the kids away from NAMs. Even NAMs do this. My black female coworker sent her four daughters to a popular, large Catholic high school in my community. Since the daughters were not Catholic, they were not required to participate in the school’s Catholic activities.

    E. Rekshun

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  19. Silly comparison. Kids who go to Catholic schools mostly want to be left alone. They might be bused to a pro-life rally once a year (see: smirking kid), but that’s about it. Conversely, the people who run woke public schools want to control every aspect of your life.

    Brendan

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  20. You have said it many times, but it’s so true. And I can speak as a catholic raised in two of the most fanatic group among the 1 billion catholics : FSSPX and CRC.

    And the thing is that there are extremely gifted people among the most fanatic. I would say than CRC is the most high IQ natural community that I know. The average guy is the 3000 followers (it’s down from 50 000 in the sixties) is around 125.

    I think that WBC crazy people themselves are around 115 IQ … and all their leaders are above 130.

    Bruno

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Wow I didn’t realize you were a SSPXer. I nearly married a SSPX guy and your observation is correct, there were a lot of highly intelligent individuals in that group. My ill fated engagement was to a man who had pi memorized to 2000 digits. He was also a jeopardy contestant.

      I often wondered why someone so smart (and in the hard sciences) could be so fanatical. He didn’t believe abortion should be allowed even in the case of ectopic pregnancies – untreated ectopics are fatal to the mother and there is NO way to save the embryo. I actually know a guy whose wife died of an ectopic.

      That being said fierce secularism and ‘only if science proves it’ can grow as socially irrational as religious wackos.

      toomanymice

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Memorizing pi out to 2000 places sounds very autistic.

        Frau Katze

        September 26, 2019 at EDT am

    • Is anyone supposed to know what your acronyms mean?

      destructure

      September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Society of Saint Pius X

        My 2¢

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • And WBC is Westboro Baptist Church and Louis Theroux (BBC) has made three documentaries about them, the first two are great.

        They have won a Supreme Court case recently ans it was litigated by themselves. They were the first one on civil rights cases for black people !

        Bruno

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • SSPX= society of st pius X, an ultra conservative catholic sect. They are (unofficially) antisemitic/ holocaust deniers.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_Saint_Pius_X

        (this is the church mel gibson belonged to)

        WBC= westboro baptist church?

        CRC= not sure?

        toomanymice

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • CRC is even more anti-Semitic and more high IQ than FSSPX.

        It’s contre réforme catholique. The founder abbé de Nantes is dead.

        If you speak French here are catechism class for children (40 classes of 20 minutes)

        Here a conference for a brother about Quran :

        Bruno

        September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • Westboro Baptist Church is a church of 43 people. It’s amazing the amount of attention it receives considering how small and irrelevant it is.

        Mike Street Station

        September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • Define your acronyms, please, never heard of them (I was raised atheist).

      Frau Katze

      September 26, 2019 at EDT am

  21. The major religions, especially Christianity, have a long history of creating wealthy, stable and powerful civilizations. Environmentalism is nothing more than some austerity program created by communists designed to deny the average person access to energy.

    It’s too bad these children could not be sold into slavery like the result of the first Children’s Crusade.

    map

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

    • There’s a saying, “Environmentalists are like watermelons — green on the outside but red on the inside.”

      destructure

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Communism is a blasphemous offshoot of Christianity.

      Daniel H

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

  22. Too much yammering about faith/religion, etc.

    The climate change people are a doomsday cult.

    gothamette

    September 22, 2019 at EDT pm

  23. Why not buy land just behind oceanfront for cheap. When sea advances, yours is now oceanfront land, worth millions. Why aru not all the fat cat cats buying up land in a strip just inland of the coast anticipating a future where it’s the new beachfront.

    SlushFundPuppie

    September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • Because they don’t really believe it. That’s why they are still buying coastal properties.

      Mike Street Station

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

  24. My mother was totally apathetic toward religion and politics. I received no religious instruction or political indoctrination. But I didn’t end up as an atheist or a leftist.

    I firmly believe that there is a God – a higher power that guides the evolution of the universe. I do not believe that events unfold randomly, at least not totally. There is an element of design and choice. But I do get the impression that God can be somewhat capricious.

    The notion of the multiverse has long fascinated me. I would very much like to believe that there is an infinite number of universes and that anything and everything that can happen has happened, is happening, and/or will happen in at least one of them. It is comforting to think that, even if I am a total screw-up in this universe, there are trillions upon trillions of other universes in which I am happy and successful.

    If the multiverse theory is true, then you can do anything – literally anything – you want without any need for reflection or regret. Need money? Just go ahead and mug someone, or rob a bank. Even if you get arrested and/or killed in this universe, it doesn’t matter, because “you” are only one of trillions upon trillions of iterations of yourself. “You” are totally expendable, meaning that you have complete and total freedom of action. “You” need not concern yourself with abstract notions of morality and/or self-preservation. “Do what thou wilt,” indeed. It’s a liberating thought, isn’t it?

    As for politics, I lean right because I do not believe in the perfectibility of man. Most people are nasty, selfish, stupid assholes who spend their miserable lives inflicting needless pain on one another. But I’m not a total pessimist. I do harbor some hope that, given the proper incentives, most of us can keep most of our worst impulses under control most of the time.

    Stan Adams

    September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • I lean right because I do not believe in the perfectibility of man.

      This is why I find Trump completely unbelievable as a “conservative”. Conservatives want to reign in and redirect man’s worst impulses in a system of natural hierarchy, laws and tradition. Trump is a libertine who caters to people’s worst impulses and appetites. This is why most populists make very poor conservatives, and reflects how baby boomers in general (with their natural narcissism) have produced a remarkably unattractive pool of conservative leaders compared to previous generations.

      Peter Akuleyev

      September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • I don’t believe it works like that. Even if there were interdimensional ‘versions’ of you they would still be unique beings in the absolute sense. Even identical twins in the same physical dimension are considered absolute individuals. The action and reaction of one twin does not negate the action or reaction of the other. If one twin robs a bank you don’t say, no matter, the other twin didn’t rob a bank.

      I am an involuntary projector, and based on what I’ve seen there are what might be called alternate universes, ie worlds similar to this one but with some alterations. I don’t know if these are entirely different planets or different timelines. It’s possible timelines are constantly being rewritten and in that respect you as an individual are constantly being rewritten. But that is different from the idea of infinite versions of the same universe stacked up in a pile.

      There is also the idea that we create universes in a kind of infinite loop or tendril effect (a tendril sprouts a tendril sprouts a tendril and so on); each consciousness creates a universe and is constantly recreating it. I don’t really understand this idea fully, but it makes sense if you consider the universe only exists in one place (perspective) at any given time.

      In vedic philosophy of the five ‘elements of existence’ only action and reaction (behavior) are finite. Everything else, including physicality, soul, and time are immutable.

      toomanymice

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “If the multiverse theory is true,”

      The basis of multiverse theory is that time and space are so vast that everything that could possibly exist does. And if there were an infinite number of universes then I suppose that would be true. But is there really an infinite number of universes? I can’t prove there’s not. But not being able to prove something doesn’t exist is not evidence that it does. So I’m not convinced of the multiverse theory. And I don’t see what difference it would make to me anyway. The only “version” of me that I care about is this one.

      destructure

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Lot’s of science fiction depends on it!

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • There’s no proof either way, no. But it’s still fun to think about.

        Is it possible that there is a universe that is identical to this one in virtually every respect, where I am exactly the same in virtually every respect, except that today I wore a red shirt instead of a blue one? Yes, it is. Is there a universe where I wore a black shirt? A white shirt? A brown shirt?

        Is there a universe in which I left the house stark naked? Or one in which I dressed up as an S&M ballerina? (I’m a husky guy.)

        How many nearly-identical versions of me are there? An infinite number, or a nearly-infinite one?

        Think about all the possible permutations of any given situation – say, eating a meal at a restaurant. Is there a separate universe for each and every possible meal that I might conceivably eat?

        There could be trillions upon trillions of iterations of me that are eating at the restaurant where I am sitting right now. The only difference is that one is eating chicken, one is eating salmon, one is eating steak, and so on. One is eating a rare steak, one is eating a medium steak, one is eating a well-done steak, and so on. One is eating a rare steak with a baked potato, one is eating a rare steak with mashed potatoes, one is eating a rare steak with fries, and so on. One eats only one fry, one eats two, one eats three, and so on.

        One is eating the waitress, a la Hannibal Lecter. And yet another one is eating his own eyeballs after having gouged them out with a steak knife.

        If there are trillions upon trillions of iterations of me that are 99.99999999999% identical to me in almost every respect, and trillions upon trillions upon trillions upon trillions of iterations of me that are different in varying degrees, then does anything I do matter at all? In this universe, yes, but in the larger cosmic sense?

        Stan Adams

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • This stuff is important if you are running a D&D campaign with time travel. Or writing an unauthorized fanfiction sequel to the Heinlein novel where the guy goes back in time and has sex with his grandmother and becomes his own grandfather.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “As for politics, I lean right because I do not believe in the perfectibility of man.”

        I believe people are adaptable, but not infinitely adaptable. There comes a point where Mother Nature intervenes and says, “Get back to basics.”

        “Most people are nasty, selfish, stupid assholes who spend their miserable lives inflicting needless pain on one another. ”

        Wow. You are way out of my league. I thought I was cynical in believing ppl are jealous, territorial and aggressive.

        gothamette

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “If the multiverse theory is true, then you can do anything – literally anything – you want without any need for reflection or regret. Need money? Just go ahead and mug someone, or rob a bank. Even if you get arrested and/or killed in this universe, it doesn’t matter, because “you” are only one of trillions upon trillions of iterations of yourself. “You” are totally expendable, meaning that you have complete and total freedom of action. “You” need not concern yourself with abstract notions of morality and/or self-preservation. “Do what thou wilt,” indeed. It’s a liberating thought, isn’t it?”

      That was actually the basis of a Larry Niven short story, All the Myriad Ways. After other dimensions are discovered, people go crazy and commit terrible crimes because of exactly the issue you described.

      Mike Street Station

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

  25. If the religion that you transmit to your children makes them more likely to desire children it’s not stupid to pass it on. Most people who want children want grandchildren and of course from an evolutionary point of view high fertility religions are the winners while low fertility liberalism is the loser.

    I think the way most religions do this is that they end up associating positive childhood experiences with the rituals and beliefs. You think nostalgic about your childhood and how much you liked getting Christmas presents and it reminds you of all the ceremonies and songs about Jesus that back then you wanted to skip to get to the presents ASAP – but as an adult your memories all get mixed together so that Jesus song makes you nostalgic and the idea of bringing forth a new generation to experience the same feels good.

    There have of course been religions in the past that were bad at promoting procreation (even religions that decided that sex is entirely immoral) but they tend to disappear. There’s value in giving your children a religion that has proven procreation promotion capability – that will massively increase your odds of getting grandchildren – and it’s a strange thing to have children but then instill some leftist anti-fertility ideology in them.

    My parents were right-wing but not religious at all and we had no religion or leftism at home. This is definitely a dead end route. I feel kind of empty with no drive to have children and atheist groups are full of disgusting commies so I have no way to form connections with people who would have the same beliefs. Everyone in my family that isn’t miserable in middle age has found religion and I’d probably be happier that way too, I just can’t force myself to do it.

    Jaakko Raipala

    September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • “I think the way most religions do this is that they end up associating positive childhood experiences with the rituals and beliefs.”

      I HATED anything Jewish when I was a kid.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 23, 2019 at EDT am

      • It showes.

        Yakov

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Lion, had your parents raised you on the Upper West Side instead of Staten Island, you’d love being Jewish.

        And you know it.

        njguy73

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Lion, had your parents raised you on the Upper West Side instead of Staten Island, you’d love being Jewish.”

        This depends. I’d would say that MAYBE if my parents exposed me to a more liberal type of Judaism, maybe my earliest memories of it wouldn’t be so negative.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Reform, perhaps?

        njguy73

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • It’s so sad. Lion associates being Jewish with being gauche and prole. Class is everything to him. It IS sad.

        “If the religion that you transmit to your children makes them more likely to desire children it’s not stupid to pass it on.”

        Exactly.

        gothamette

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Judaism sucks because it sucks, not because it’s prole or SWPL.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • @destructure,

        here’s your answer.

        gothamette

        September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • There are people who hit the genetic lottery, and there are people who hit the geographical lottery in NYC. During the Pre-Guiliani days of NYC, it was often undesirable to reside in certain parts of Manhattan where the neighborhood was NAM and crime infested, such that a place like Staten Island was a more of an attractive option. Despite this, living in Manhattan does provide an easy access to the many of the cultural institutions on the Upper East and West Sides, in comparison to a place in the outer boroughs. By being in proximity to these institutions allows an individual to develop a cosmopolitan view of the world than someone who lives in Staten Island.

        If you think Reform Judaism is cool, I have news for you. Learning about the Jewish intellectuals from the Medieval Ages, and studying their works, and even better, in their original languages, like Judeo-Arabic or Hebrew is a lot more exciting. Would you rather study Judaism, or study about Jews who embraced rationalism, science and logic over Jewish superstition?

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “I HATED anything Jewish when I was a kid.”

        Including himself.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Do you have any idea how crappy and boring Jewish religious services are? Hours of chanting in an unintelligible language.

        Plus ridiculous dietary laws. And “holidays” that are actually punishments where you aren’t allowed to do anything.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Ridiculous dietary rules.”

        I’m guessing that’s why the early Christians (including a number of former Jews) tossed them out. Paul had a lot of influence here. But they crept back in a way, although Protestants totally ditched them.

        Frau Katze

        September 26, 2019 at EDT am

      • “Hours of chanting.”

        There are two types of singing with the (strongly influenced by Russia) Orthodox Church in America. One type is the boring chanting. But the other type is just regular tunes.

        Apparently wealthy and high born Russians travelled to Europe where the Catholic Church seems to have played a large role in the new harmony-based music. There is a vast amount of Christian music. The Catholics weren’t suspicious of it at all.

        The Protestant Reformation only slowed it down slightly. Most new Protestants were not about to give up music. So Puritan attempts to suppress it totally failed. JS Bach (a Lutheran organist) put the seal on the deal with a huge output of Christian music.

        The wealthy Russians returned with tales of this wonderful music. The Russian church compromised. They would include some of the new style. The ban on instrumental accompaniment remained. But the choirs are good enough that they carry the tune for the rest.

        Greek Orthodox is mostly just chanting. Boring.

        But the Orthodox did have a long history of translating everything into local languages (whilst the Catholics stuck to Latin).

        Frau Katze

        September 26, 2019 at EDT am

  26. My kids and grandkids all went to schools with kids from observant families. This separation is mandatory because kids from secular families that are there to get ‘ values’ or keep them from public schools are completely incompatible with religious kids and bring their home values to school. The two should never mix. In my high school the kids coming from catholic schools were pretty bad. It seemed that religious instruction really had gotten under their skin. To be taught one thing in school and see a different attitude ar home is not educational, or at least this is what I think.

    Yakov

    September 23, 2019 at EDT am

    • You should have replied to my comment above. Our comments obviously belong together. I don’t send my children to the schools I do for them to “get values” or “keep them from public schools”. Those weren’t my reasons. Regardless, it’s worked out very well for us.

      PS: I learn more from you than you realize.

      destructure

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

  27. There is probably a genetic component to religiousness. As a child, I loved the normative construction of fundamental Catholicism. But I never believed in the fundamentals. I never believed the priest had any power, nor Jesus was god, nor the church possessed the truth. And i thought people had been hypnotized into believing the stuff. I had to be very duplicitous because my father was very good at spotting inconsistencies.

    Once he asked a faux dévot where was the body of Jesus and he answered somewhere Jerusalem, making it obvious he didn’t believe in resurrection. The right answer is at the right hand of god (who happens to be the same person 😂)

    Bruno

    September 23, 2019 at EDT am

  28. Was at my 35th college reunion this weekend.

    It quickly became apparent there was a big gulf between the never-moms and the moms. No never-mom failed to make a gratuitous ‘this administration’ comment. None of the moms did so. The moms and never-moms didn’t really mingle much. Only the never-moms hovered around the gay guys. Several of the moms expressed distinct scorn for aspects of SJW culture. The never-moms were full on Haridans.

    Curle

    September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Mothers instinctively are afraid that non mothers will steal their child. Similarly, married women generally avoid hanging out with non-married.

      My 2¢

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

  29. Lion.
    Trump showed solidarity with Indian PM visiting Houston at the rally. BTW, the stadium sold out with 50,000 seats. That’s a LOT of Indians in Houston.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.axios.com/trump-at-texas-howdy-modi-rally-in-photos-65164c4b-1c8c-404e-86fe-76d08184ef4a.html

    Meanwhile Bernie criticized Indian PM and Trump. Looks like if Bernie wins nomination it’s Trump in our household. 🙂

    mpt

    September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Trump will do anything if it buys votes.

      gothamette

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • That Modi rally was the one of the weirdest things I’ve ever seen in politics. Trump shows up, turns it into a Trump rally, and practically gets Modi’s endorsement.

      I’ve never seen anything like that.

      Mike Street Station

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.

        gothamette

        September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • The Dems and msm spent 4 years throwing everything they had at Trump. And he’s currently polling at 52%. I suppose the economy could take a crap or a couple of swing states could go the other way. Otherwise, next year’s election is his to lose.

        destructure

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • Maybe that’s why they are deciding to go for impeachment now.

        Mike Street Station

        September 25, 2019 at EDT am

  30. It is easy to change a rational non-religious person into a deeply religious person by giving a neuroleptic medication and then the Bible or equivalent book a day or so later. Risperidone will do it. It turns off rational part of your brain, so that emotional part immediately grabs the Bible. It is reversible. So, yes, it is genetic.

    My 2¢

    September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • I believe that.

      Curle

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • I wonder if that would work against other irrational beliefs, such as there being 52 genders…

      Mike Street Station

      September 25, 2019 at EDT am

  31. Religion done right instills morals and work ethic. The religion of climate change only instills fear.

    Trendy

    September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Climate change instills the morals of Reuse, Renew, Recycle! Which are the most important morals according to “green” types.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

      • These are slogans from poor societies. Someone wants to make developed nations’ citizens and other residents poor. Economic development stalled, so someone wants to increase their profits by making worker bees poor, through policies like destruction of unions, unrestricted immigration, income reduction etc.

        My 2c

        September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • Don’t forget “reduce”. It’s likely that reduce and reuse are the only ways to cut down on pollution from single use plastics, since even plastics you recycle may not be recycled. This is from another blog I read:

        Second of all is the very real issue that most of the recyclables don’t actually ever get recycled. In today’s world, the recycling companies have cut business deals with overseas companies that have agreed to recycle these goods. The idea behind those companies is, they recycle used goods, and then resell the recycled materials back to manufacturing companies to make new bottles, bags, and more.

        While this does occur, presumably, a lot of the time, it simply doesn’t. At this point, the base raw materials for manufacture of those products are still inexpensive enough that it ends up being cheaper for the companies to manufacture the “recycled” material from new, raw materials, or to simply purchase new materials. Now, for many people in middle America, this doesn’t actually matter one little bit. They get their feel-good dose of “I’m doing the right thing by recycling!” and they don’t give two shits what happens to the raw materials once they leave their curbside.

        With the recent proposals to ban single-use plastic drinking straws, many on the Right jumped up and down and threw fits about how it wasn’t actually the US consumer that was polluting the oceans. It was the Chinese and other countries that were simply dumping barge loads of plastic into the ocean to dispose of them. Those people aren’t wrong…but they’re not really right either, and that’s something we talked about last week that is really, really, really hard for a lot of people to digest.

        Those barge loads of plastic trash being dumped into the ocean are—more often than not—then same plastics that companies in those countries agreed to recycle. Of course, the AnCap/Libertarian argument is that it doesn’t matter, because it’s still the fault of those companies, because they had a contractual obligation to do what they said they would do, and actually recycle the materials. Once the transfer has been made, it’s not the problem of the American waste management company anymore, and it’s certainly not the problem of the American consumer.

        Which, from a strict philosophical perspective, is a case that can be legitimately made…sort of. The real problem begins however with, determining, in your own mind, at what point do you begin to hold culpability for continuing to maintain an agreement with someone who is harming others, when you KNOW they are harming others? What about when they’re actually harming you? If you eat seafood, there’s a really, really, really good chance that is happening. There have been a number of studies conducted that have found ridiculously high levels of microplastics present in both seafood and in humans. Plastics have, further, been found to harbor dangerously high level of estrogenic compounds, which wreak havoc on the human body’s ability to autoregulate a number of natural functions. Maybe being a little worried about environmental impacts isn’t such a bad thing after all?

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  32. I mostly find the CO2 global warming stuff hilarious and irrelevant. We are clearly staring down an energy crisis. The good coal and oil are gone. We’ll *wish* we had the CO2 to emit.

    All the economic models pretend there’s still tons of coal and oil when it’s clearly already about half gone. Nobody has proposed viable alternatives. If you think solar and wind work you’re an idiot.

    I’d be very comfortable with people suggesting to their kids that economic growth as it was known in the 19th and 20th centuries is probably over. In contrast, climate fear mongering is just a stupid speculation.

    bobbybobbob

    September 23, 2019 at EDT pm

    • Always got 4th gen nuclear fission. But from what I’ve read we have hundreds of years of coal left, and still lots of oil and natural gas and oil shale.

      CamelCaseRob

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • The people claiming huge remaining supplies don’t understand the situation at all. The remaining supplies are so crappy and expensive to extract they will remain in the ground forever. It will cost more to get that stuff than it could ever produce in economic returns. We’re about over half done on fossil fuels. Meaning we’ll rip through what’s left in no time. There’s a lot of natural gas in north america and it’s absolutely criminal that they’re allowing oil frackers to flare massive amounts of it off. But most of the rest of the world is not so blessed. We will be using less energy going forward. People are going to long for the days when they could debate about climate change and how stupid electric cars are. The reality is people will be walking and cycling a lot more, and eating less stuff shipped long distance.

        bobbybobbob

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • I guess you’re not familiar with pickup trucks running on wood gasification.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  33. Meanwhile sea levels keep rising, glaciers keep melting and global temperatures are at an all time high.

    Peter Akuleyev

    September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • Those are dubious facts. If they’re happening it is due to us coming out of the last ice age.

      CamelCaseRob

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • Either way, global warming is going to cause a lot of disruption. Problem is the right is abdicating the field to the left. They will control the narrative because the right is mostly in denial.

        Peter Akuleyev

        September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

      • “Either way, global warming is going to cause a lot of disruption…”

        Either way? Either global warming is almost entirely man made, in which case we MIGHT be able to do something about it, or it’s natural, in which case all of the straw banning and Telsa driving won’t make a difference. It’s kind of important to know which “way” it is before trying to change the entire economy of the world.

        Mike Street Station

        September 25, 2019 at EDT am

    • Global temperatures are higher than they were during the Jurassic?

      MoreSigmasThanYou

      September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  34. Interesting one, Dutton on religion and IQ

    I would agree that climate change has the traits of a religion, as other non transcendent beliefs such as communism have. How to distinguish between a “good and a “bad” religion is a bit more tricky, probably a good guideline is to see if a religion promotes positive ethnocentrism and group interest rather than a universal/globalist perspective that sacrifices close group interest for an external one.

    Catholic Christianity, despite its original globalist/universal calling, has been put into a highly western European-centric perspective and mixed with a significant dose of ethnocentrism since early medieval time until probably 1500-1600. Contemporary Catholicism has gone fully globalist – promoting mass migration and help of the ” poor others” vs. your group interest – in this sense not much different from climate change alarmism.

    Judaism on the other end is exclusive and massively promotes close group interest in a us vs. them logic. In this sense, I would not call it a stupid religion, it has an extremely clever design: it promotes the set of values that are needed for a group to continue existing and preserve itself.

    Christian Protestant religions are a bit of a weird mix, not being centralised, they have the ability to be more group related and can be easily customised to local needs and can radically diverge into new branches (such as mormonism) which can have a lot of group based non-globalist traits.

    Seingalt

    September 24, 2019 at EDT am

  35. Religion is about Man serving G-d, not G-d serving Man. The discussion here focuses on the benefits that people can get out of religion. The religion with the greatest benefits is the winner! It’s as if the religions have to compete for adherants by offering the most attractive package. On this plane Christianity is number one with G-d sacrificing his Son(sic!) for redemption humanity! Philosophically this is the pagan thinking. Judaism, the only true religion, has as it’s symbol the founder of the faith Abraham sacrificing his son to G-d! This is the fundamental difference.

    I’m not saying that in other religions there are no men serving G-d selflessly or that contemporary Judaism doesn’t have some confusion on this issue, but their general direction is man centered.

    Yakov

    September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • In Judaism you serve God. In Christianity, God serves YOU!

      (Which is why Christianity is way more popular.)

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

      • Not all Christianity, mostly just the prosperity gospel.

        “On this plane Christianity is number one with G-d sacrificing his Son(sic!) for redemption humanity!”

        Yes Christianity does hammer this point home. It can be used to make you feel very guilty. Jews don’t really have to feel guilty. Their God sent plagues on them in the old testament, and then in the 20th century he gave them the holocaust. Being one of God’s chosen people sucks.

        The only kind of guilt a Jew might need is survivor’s guilt. Art Spiegelman for example has a lot of that.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

    • “Judaism, the only true religion, has as it’s symbol the founder of the faith Abraham sacrificing his son to G-d! This is the fundamental difference.

      I’m not saying that in other religions there are no men serving G-d selflessly or that contemporary Judaism doesn’t have some confusion on this issue, but their general direction is man centered”.

      For goodness sake, Yakov. I generally like what you write, but for a religious man you lack a lot of topical knowledge: including historical and theological context. And you talk a lot of smack in a forum where challenging Judaism generally isn’t taken on its own merits (ie: well). How does the saying go? People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

      Mike

      September 25, 2019 at EDT pm

  36. Look at the comments. Golden. All is not lost:

    gothamette

    September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • This is what the face of TPTB’s moral, intellectual, and cultural bankruptcy looks like.

      My 2¢

      September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

  37. Or writing an unauthorized fanfiction sequel to the Heinlein novel where the guy goes back in time and has sex with his grandmother and becomes his own grandfather.

    That’s more or less the plot of the German sci-fi series “Dark” on Netflix. It’s excellent.

    Jonas Kahnwald

    September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • Damn, you ruined it for me!

      About Heinlein: now that I think about it, most of Heinleins later books are like fanfication of his earlier books, so we probably don’t need any amateur fanfiction.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 24, 2019 at EDT am

    • I can’t believe you gave the plot away to “Dark.”

      map

      September 25, 2019 at EDT am

  38. Off topic, but have you seen “Falling Down”? I’d like to see you do a review of that movie some time.

    ack-acking

    September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

  39. ALERT! Lion has to see this, from iSteve:

    The Indians I’ve come into contact with aren’t bad people individually. But they’re just kind of stupid. They’re dirty, smelly, and un-hygenic. The idea that they’re some super smart tech geniuses is a huge meme. They train their entire lives to do IT – of course they’re going to be better than some white kid who just graduated university, and no training costs. Doesn’t mean they’re better or smarter.

    Indians are a massive threat to Canada and the USA. They are subversive. They are dirty, smelly, and humble while poor and in school, but once they get rich they become extremely uppity, short sighted and arrogant.

    Their children become anti-white SJWs, as we’ve mentioned before. “Brown” male children are highly unpleasant, often aping the negro culture and becoming gang bangers. The females are pleasant though.

    On an individual level, Indians are much nicer than Chinese. On a societal level, they are far, far worse. Chinese don’t have kids and are rapidly aging. In 50 years they will have almost no population pressure outwards.

    Indians are the greatest threat to our countries right now.

    Vipltd

    September 24, 2019 at EDT pm

    • All non-european immigration is a threat. Focusing on a particular ethnic group confuses the issue.

      Yakov

      September 25, 2019 at EDT am

  40. Lion, I can undersrand your childhood trauma. It’s almost impossible to get over it. I had something similar with my hatred for the secular Yiddish literature and for Thomas Mann. Growing up I heard my parents discussing his book ‘Joseph and his brothers’ and saying that our forefathers were savages. That triggered in me a life long hatred of the man. The work, which he considered his best, apparently impressed my parents and they continued going back to it through the years. I’ve never missed an opportunity to give them a piece of my mind and to trash Sholom Aleichem along the way for good measure. Now think: wouldn’t it be rational to at least peruse the r22book, to judge it on its literary merits and in the context of its time? The author was a Nobel Prize laureate in Literature after all? But I will probably never do it. It still sits on my mother’s book shelf to be literally trashed one day.

    Draw the parallel, mate.

    Yakov

    September 25, 2019 at EDT am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: