
When Global Warming Kills Your God - benbreen
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/06/when-global-warming-kills-your-god/372015/
======
themartorana
I highly doubt that the Yup’ik fishermen are even contributors to global
climate change, but we expect them to then completely stop fishing the waters
they have fished for decades because of change we're largely to blame for?

From forced settlements to fishing bans, we're _still_ forcing our will on
indigenous people.

Edit: the religious argument does seem a stretch to me, and wouldn't be
necessary if common sense was used.

~~~
briandear
"We're largely to blame for.." Are we?

If humans cause climate change and industrialization began around 1850, then
logically, there'd be an exponential and consistent increase of global
temperatures. Al Gore himself said that, in five years, the polar ice cap
would be ice-free.. and he said that 7 years ago. There hasn't been warming
for almost 18 years, yet CO2 emissions (especially from China are still
increasing.)

The facts are very clear: CO2 increased, temperatures have not. Another fact:
the climate changed long before humans were around to drive Escalades.

The AGW movement is nothing more than an anti-capitalist false flag with a
professed desire for wealth redistribution. Al Gore, for example loves the
environmental movement so much because he became a multi-billionaire as it's
Chicken Little. Those who still follow the religion of human-caused global
warming are like a bunch of elderly Soviets nostalgic about Stalin's First
Five Year Plan.

Ottmar Edenhofer, a UN official with the IPCC said, "One has to free oneself
from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.
This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems
such as deforestation or the ozone hole." In that same interview he made the
case that "climate change" policy was more of an anti-globalization policy
than actual environmental policy.

Greenpeace cofounder Dr. Patrick Moore, who would presumably know more about
environmentalism than almost anyone reading this, rejects the climate-anti-
capitalism hysteria that has co-opted the "old" environmentalism of reducing
pollution, whaling, overfishing, nuclear waste and other, more pure
protections of our environment.

Let the downvoting begin! I am always amazed that within such a smart bunch as
HN readers, that there is still a large number that ignore critical scientific
analysis and instead let political or ideological beliefs cloud their
otherwise rational minds. It's almost religiously intense. Rarely do I see a
balanced debate on the subject of human-caused climate change. It's like
telling Christians that Jesus wasn't resurrected.

~~~
lowken10
I couldn't have said it better my self. Global Warming is the biggest
scientific fraud since Galileo got into trouble with the Catholic church over
the idea that the earth is not the center of the Universe.

~~~
seanflyon
I hate to break it to you, but Galileo was not a fraud.

------
gambiting
Globar Warming is definitely contributing to this process, but I think some
people are definitely trying to fight natural processes which would have
happened anyway. Sure, it's sad that a village or a road got taken by water -
but that would have happened eventually anyway, right?

In Poland there used to be a church build right by the sea on a cliff - but
the sea has eroded the cliff(as seas do), and now only one wall of that church
stands, on a tiny piece of land , and which is getting further eroded every
single year. Yet because the church(or rather, those few bricks of the last
remaining wall) have a religious significance to some people, millions of
zlotys are spent each year trying to reinforce that one remaining bit of rock.
Why? The cliff erosion is a completely natural process which was bound to
happen. And there are even people who say it's "work of god" that the wall is
still standing - while to others it's completely clear that only massive
reinforcements that are built with hard cash are keeping it standing.

~~~
bojo
> Sure, it's sad that a village or a road got taken by water - but that would
> have happened eventually anyway, right?

That's not the point of the article anyways. I think we can agree that the
Yup’ik people understand that their villages are going to disappear and that
they will have to move. Traditionally they were nomadic people as it was,
although they don't really have many choices as to where to go these days.

------
tokenadult
If global warming is killing your god, it may be time to find a new god. After
reading the description of Yup’ik religion in the article, all I can say is
that their perception of what is necessary to do is not the only possible
response to the situation that faces Yup’ik people in that place. The
environment has been changing throughout the existence of human beings (we
know from archaeology that humankind has lived through ice ages and some major
changes in sea level already), so human beings will have to go on being
adaptable to face the changes that are inevitable in the environment, and
think with sound judgment about how to keep some kinds of changes from
happening, if that results in the best trade-offs for humankind. Religion can
not be exempted from that general process of human beings reality-checking
their own thinking to see if their adaptations to their environment (and
adaptations OF their environment) are successful or not.

~~~
japhyr
This is about much more than religion. The western approach to life is to work
at a job to earn money to pay for food an shelter. The subsistence approach is
to spend much of your time hunting and gathering, and maybe some of your time
working for money.

Many people are so far removed from the subsistence approach, that they can't
relate to what these people are going through. Asking these people to stop
fishing and move to a place where they can find other work is the cultural
equivalent to telling everyone on HN to stop working in tech-related fields,
and go find something else to do. Sure you could do it, but it would take part
of your identity away. When your two-year old kid looks up and asks why you're
not doing something your people have done for thousands of years, that's a
hard question to answer. The Yup'ik people, and all other people who lived
subsistence-based lifestyles responded to previous environmental change by
finding a different area to live their subsistence lifestyle. That is not
really an option. The move away from subsistence is much more drastic than
many people can fully understand.

My perspective on this is shaped by having moved to Alaska 12 years ago, and
knowing many people who live a subsistence lifestyle to varying degrees.

------
dreamweapon
I was hoping the title would refer to, you know, _our_ tacit "God": our
unrelenting faith in gratification through material consumption; essentially
unbounded and ever-accelerating growth; and the idea that we can safely ignore
any non-human impact this pursuit of "happiness" may have (or for that matter,
to future human generations).

~~~
maaku
What does consumerism have to do with religion and spirituality? Seriously,
what's the non-hyperbolic connection?

~~~
dreamweapon
Consumerism _is_ the de-facto spirituality for many people in the West.

And that's a fairly non-controversial statement to make; no hyperbole, there.

------
Gravityloss
"The Yup´ik way of life is non negotiable."

Sound familiar?

------
arlenmark0987
Great Point

------
qwerta
CO2 is poisoning salmon. Stop it!

------
gd1
Yawn. Someone will have to update the list:

[http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm](http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm)

~~~
phaemon
I have to wonder about the wits of someone who thinks that something can't be
true, because it causes _so many_ problems.

~~~
burke
The list doesn't seem to imply that global warming isn't happening; just that
people are pretty quick to blame things on it.

~~~
DanBC
That's a great point that needs to be made. Science reporting sucks.

Sadly that particular version of the list was created by someone who thinks
climate change is bunk and the list is a tool used to deny climate change.

~~~
briandear
Actually everyone agrees that the climate is changing. The debate is over
whether humans cause it.

~~~
acdha
A near-total majority of scientists who study the climate say humans are
causing climate change and the opposition is a mix of people paid by the
fossil fuel industry, conservatives motivated by tribal loyalties to make
another tedious attack on environmentalists, and would-be contrarians who may
or may not realize they've been duped by the previous two groups.

The only debate is how much further death and destruction will be caused by
the short-term profit crowd.

