Hurricanes, Climate Alarmism, and the Elementary Forms of Religious Life

Image credit

Climate alarmism is dissociated from rational analysis. It is perpetuated by a community of believers cultivating certain articles of faith, regardless of the scientific evidence. The hype stays alive by virtue of its adherents' constantly reassuring each other of the urgency and indubitable truth of their beliefs. They are not a community of critical scientists or supporters and appreciative sympathisers of the scientific method; instead they form a totemic society: the shared belief in the elevated and untouchable value of their tenets/fetish/totem is what constitutes the group, lending it a sacred character.

The essence of religion, Durkheim finds, is the concept of the sacred, the only phenomenon which unites all religions. "A religion," writes Durkheim, "is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden—beliefs and practices which unite into a single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them."

It is not what they believe in that matters but the intensity with which their beliefs are held and the ability thereby to strengthen and perpetuate the cohesion of the totemic community.

The hallmark of a member of a totemic group is not reason and insight matter but devoutness and compliance with specific convictions. 

The hurricane is one of the totems of the community of climate alarmists. The belief in this community-forming symbol contrasts strongly with the scientific evidence, exposing the religious dogmatism underlying the movement.

Writes Kenneth Richard, who also provides ample references supporting his contention,

It is well documented in the scientific literature that a cooler climate is associated with more weather extremes and hurricane activity, whereas a warmer climate leads to a reduction in weather extremes and hurricane activity. [...] 

The Washington Post editorial board has apparently decided that conclusions found in the scientific literature are subservient to their political aims. 

Therefore, they may be justified in blaming out-of-favor politicians and those who “deny” that humans cause extreme weather events for the devastating consequences of an impending landfalling hurricane. 

Below are several scientific papers published within the last year that do not seem to support the Post‘s angle that says we can reduce hurricane landfall frequencies if only we can agree to believe, rather than deny, that humans are responsible.

The source.

See also here.