U.K. Judge Rules Climate Change a 'Religion'
An executive has won the right to sue his employer on the basis that he was unfairly dismissed for his green views after a judge ruled that environmentalism had the same weight in law as religious and philosophical beliefs.
Featured Talent
On FOX News Channel
Follow Fox Nation
FOX Forum Posts
- 10 Thoughts On Thanksgiving
- We Shouldn't Fear Terror Trials In NYC
- 4 Reasons Holder Failed to Convince Me on Terror Trials
- Rudy Time, Again?
- MICHAEL GOODWIN: Terror Trials a Reckless Act
- Democrats' Health Care Sleight of Hand
- The Trouble With Harry's Health Care Bill
- Who’s On Trial --KSM or George W. Bush?
- Obama Has Accomplished Nothing On the World Stage
- Why Does Obama Fail to Imagine the Worst Case Scenario?
Most Talked About
- Should Every Member of Congress Promise to Read the Health Care Bill?
- Are We Watching a Failed Presidency?
- Teen Responds to MSNBC Stunt
- Gallup: Obama Job Approval Down to 49%
- Obama to the Troops: 'You Guys Make a Pretty Good Photo Op'
- Sarah Palin Makes Her 'Factor' Debut
- Jesse Jackson: 'You Can't Vote Against Health Care and Call Yourself a Black Man'
- Biblical Anti-Obama Slogan? Psalm 109:8
- McCain Risks Losing Senate Seat
- Shoot-out: Geithner Asked to Resign, Slams GOP
Real American Stories
FOX Fan
Thank You for Your Submission!
HArkansan
I have developed a religion where I think that paying taxes is a sin. Do you think
a U.S. judge would uphold this?
dingo
It wsn't a US judge, and he didn't say that climate change is a religion.
Lou Prett
Related satire: Critics Worry Influence of Global Warming Religion on Congress Violates Separation of Church and State http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/10/critics-worry-influence-of-global.html
Who is Jane Akre?
I suppose I might as well admit it. I've been praying to glaciers for years now.
rdk
I think folks have missed the point. Religion is based on faith and not science; whether it is true or not is up to the individual. Likewise, environmentalism is based on faith; it is most certainly not based on science.
dingo
Not based on science? It's based on mountains of evidence, research, and peer-reviewed papers. You have to actually refute that stuff, not just state offhandedly that it isn't science.
spinfree
So you see. There's a lot of crazy people in the U.K, too.
MichaelPS
So Global Warming is real after all. Because, if it is a religion, it must be true.
Jim in JAX
Just like Al Gore created the internet and Obama's Stimulus Bill created 600K jobs. Yeah, right.
dingo
Gore DID create the Internet. He wrote the bill that got the initial funding for the Internet, and he got it through Congress..
SpitFireConservative (Not PC either)
Here's who weatherman-in-chief hired for this:
Todd Stern - International Climate Czar
Anti business former White House chief of Staff- Strong supportrer of the Kyoto Accord. Pushing hard for Cap and Trade. Blames US business for Global warming.
Keltic1
Is there NO COMMON SENSE LEFT ANYMORE?
Lemure
It is like a cult and too many have jumped on without knowing they are heading into an iceberg.
Rose Commander
More like a cult than a religion...
rcaamo
Well it certainly has profits.....excuse prophets....of doom.
Woody B
I LIKE IT. The only down side to this is that I now have to go along with the 'separation of church and state' nuts. I don't understand why they haven't read the constitution on this matter. The US government had absolutely zip, zero, nada to do with the establishment of Christianity.
K. MARX
Oh, give me a break. As usual, this is c__p reporting. Everyone on this entire plain of existence except for the people at fox, the republicans in congress (who also voted against the rights of gang rape victims the other day) and the energy industry know that the science doesn't lie. I don't even believe that this judge in britain even exists, knowing fox.
d'Raven
Hey, Idiots, did you even read the original link, it was from telegraph.co.uk. Stop believing on your own lies.
dingo
Idiots? Can you read? The Telegraph headline is fine. It's Fox's rewrite that's wrong.
dingo
Oh, he exists. He just didn't say what Fox claims. They made that bit up.
dingo
All the proof necessary is in the Telegraph story. If you can read, you can see that he didn't say that climate change IS a religion. He said it has the same legal status AS a religion or a philopsphy. It simply could not be more plain.
Chainsaw Hirko
talkey, talkey, talkey.....why don;t u prove it....fox has sourced their story.....what about u
Founding Fathers Son
The human impact on global warming is a religion at best. History shows us that climate change is cyclic; truth be known, there are several hundred "experts" that seriously disagree with Mr. Internet inventor's climate theory, but neither big government nor the state-run media will afford them the opportunity to he heard by we li'l folks. Besides, look at how much money that big Al would lose if our society was not forced into buying into his fantasy... he'd have a few less personal jets and homes. What a freakin' waste of tax dollars!
dingo
Why do you assume that the "several hundred 'experts'" are right and the many thousands are wrong? Not a lot of logic to that. And, by the way, I'd be real surprised if you can really come up with "several hundred" climate scientists who disagree with the basic premise that increasing greenouse gases will over time cause warming of the atmosphere.
dingo
Nothing blind about it. I've researched this subject for years (yes, both sides). What the scientists say makes sense. What the deniers say doesn't. You, for example--it has NOT "been getting colder." If you say that, you have not done your research, and you don't understand how climate trends are measured. In other words, you've blindly accepted what you've read from the "skeptics".
GRuss
Yet you are willing to blindly accept Global warming as fact even though there has been no increase in temperature in years and in fact has been getting colder.
funsailing
Finally a person with the guts to call it what it is!!!! There is absolutely No scientific proof to any of their "religious green probaganta"
Paladin
The judge got it right. There is no scientific data to prove that man made CO2 causes either global warming or global cooling. It is the religion of the tree huggers.
FAILURE-IN-CHIEF
Al Gore hired by K-Y to promote Global Warming Jelly .
Learn 2 Swim
Of course it's a religion, the followers have to have FAITH since there is no scientific data to back up the claims. If you don't believe in it, there is something wrong with you.
imsteph555
Climate change....just another way to get us all onder One World Governance...
Get the US out of the UN Now....
But is like a religon to the sheep that follow the line of cr*p.
Throughout history there have been times of cooling (great potato famine and the dark ages is now believed to have been originally dubbed that not just because of the dark 'times' that they lived in but because of increased rain/clouds and cooling in the weather) and heating (some severe with world wide famines).....funny-we weren't driving cars or using coal then!
Don't get me wrong---I have been recycling for years---that just makes sence.
However don't shove faux eco friendly products on me and compound them with taxes and taking orders from world entities that go against our own nations constitution!
dingo
Please explain how the fact that there are natural causes for changes in climate means that there can't ALSO be human causes. Thanks.
dingo
Ken, we've increased global CO2 concentrations by around 30% in just 50 years. We know for a fact that CO2 retains heat (that's simple physics), so It's hard to imagine how this would NOT affect the temperature. What is your basis for saying that we can't affect the climate?
Ken in Atlanta
In order for man to change the environment, it would either take a very long period of time or all out nuclear war.
On the other hand, a serious lack of proof should give anyone pause.
I suggest you check back with me in one thousand years.
mara123
I wish we had some judges like that here.
speedbump
"Mr Nicholson hailed the Employment Appeals Tribunal ruling as "a victory for common sense" but stressed climate change was "not a new religion".
He said: "I believe man-made climate change is the most important issue of our time and nothing should stand in the way of diverting this catastrophe."
CAN WE SAY THAT'S THIS IS LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH? OBAMA WOULD LOVE THIS GUY.
speedbump
BIG QUESTION
Is the judge giving the concept of God and global warming the same weight because neither can be proven scientifically?
I THINK I LIKE THAT JUDGE!
Ghostwalker
Call me backwards if you want to......I live in Indiana, and I cannot tell the difference between 19 or 20 degrees below zero.
dingo
Ice can tell the difference between 32 and 33 degrees. You may not be able to feel it, but a small change in the long-term global average temperature can make a big difference.
Critical Mass
Global warming is a scam.
Perhaps that's why its considered the same as religion.
MichiganVet
I am amazed that so many still buy into the JUNK SCIENCE behind behind the scam. Is it liberal indoctrination ore have they been Gored? if the latter, and they make investments which lose money on the premise, they may have legal recourse to sue "good ole' Al" to cover their losses.
Judex
Another question, Dingo; Why would the editors at Fox write such a bogus headline? What do they hope to gain? My sense is that anti-global warming forces, seeing the trend moving against them, will now grab at anything that seems (and here it only seems) to cast doubt on the science. I think it would better if they simply accepted the claims of science but, following their conservative bent, try to offer 'non-state sponsored' ways to reduce global warming. They will look less silly and perhaps in the process learn to read better.
dingo
Well, that's a very good question, and one that I don't have an answer for. Certainly your suggestion makes more sense than what they're doing. My general sense is that Murdoch and Ailes have defined the tone and direction at Fox, and the writers have to hew to it or lose their jobs. Now, Murdoch & Ailes are no dummies. They know that stuff like this headline is nonsensical, but that appears to be the way they want it. Why? I wish I knew. Maybe we should borrow the global warming "skeptics" mantra: follow the money.
dk
Follow all the money, not just Gore's. Oil, coal, energy, tranportation--they have some of that, too, and they want more.
Chainsaw Hirko
look at gore's wallet......follow the money dingy
Judex
Another question, Dingo; Why would the editors at Fox write such a bogus headline? What do they hope to gain? My sense is that anti-global warming forces, seeing the trend moving against them, will now grab at anything that seems (and here it only seems) to cast doubt on the science. I think it would better if they simply accepted the claims of science but, following their conservative bent, try to offer 'non-state sponsored' ways to reduce global warming. They will look less silly and perhaps in the process learn to read better.
dingo
@Markster: No, he didn't equate it with religion. He gave it the same legal status AS religion. That's not the same thing as saying that it IS a religion, is it? Suppose that instead of "environmentalism" the ruling was on having green hair. So now the judge says, "You can't fire someone for his religious or philosophical beliefs or because he has green hair." Now, does that make having green hair a religion? Here's another question to ask yourself: The judge mentioned both religious and philosophical beliefs, so why doesn't the headline say "UK Judge Rules Climate Change a 'Philosophy'"? Why did the headline writer pick religion and ignore philosophy?
Ken in Atlanta
Because religion carries more weight then philosophy.
Apparently they were afraid to us evolution.
cwbell
You mean like because you smoke are overweight, or the way you dress and even hair color People are being fire every for this same reasons
dingo
Of course, as soon as I post this, the original reply shows up. I do wish they'd fix this site.