A fired British executive is suing his former employer on the grounds that he was unfairly dismissed due to religious views -- his belief in global warming.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Posted on 04/29/2009 10:34:22 PM PDT by neverdem
A fired British executive is suing his former employer on the grounds that he was unfairly dismissed due to religious views – his belief in global warming.
According to the Independent:
“In the first case of its kind, employment judge David Sneath said Tim Nicholson, a former environmental policy officer, could invoke employment law for protection from discrimination against him for his conviction that climate change was the world's most important environmental problem.”The judge ruled that Nicholson’s extreme green views fit the definition of “a philosophical belief under the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations, 2003.” So strong were these “beliefs,” that they “put him at odds with other senior executives within the firm.” The 41-year-old told the employment tribunal that, as head of sustainability at Grainger plc, Britain's largest residential property investment company, he constantly tangled with fellow-executives over the company’s environmental policies and corporate social responsibility.
“The difference between science and religion is the difference between a willingness to dispassionately consider new evidence and new arguments, and a passionate unwillingness to do so.”
If Sam Harris’s description of religion vs. science, then global warming is definetely a religion.
Faith: belief in things unseen.
You’re right - the whole idea of “man-made global warming” is a pagan religion. Obama and the Congressional National Socialists think they are high priests of Global Warming, beating on the drums, praying to the Gods of the Greenhouse Gases, spreading ignorance around the country.
Obama wants Cap & Trade, which would be a death sentence for our economy. I have to wonder if Obama and the other Socialist sponsors of this legislation are aware of basic facts. For example: 1) greenhouse gases are not evil, they are essential to keeping the earth warm enough for humans; 2) the most common greenhouse gas is water vapor; 3) CO2 is not pollution, it is essential for plants and humans; 4) CO2 is only a trace element in the atmosphere at 380 parts per million; 5) humans and their activities account for only 3% of CO2 emissions each year; 6) the earth has had cycles of cooling and warming about every 1,500 years due to variations in the sun’s activity and our orbit around the sun; 7) these cycles are beyond human control; 8) about 1,000 years ago, Greenland had vineyards; 9) the earth is cooling now, not warming relative to prior decades; 10) water expands when cooled (or frozen) and contracts when heated, so warmer temperatures would reduce sea levels as ice caps melt; and 11) a major reduction of sun spots in recent years suggests a coming mini ice age.
An excerpt from the March 2009 issue of The American Spectator: “All scientists agree that if man-made global warming is real, it would leave a fingerprint in the form of temperatures increasing with altitude in the tropical troposphere portion of the atmosphere up to a hotspot about 10 kilometers above the surface, reflecting the pattern of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Warming due to solar variations or other natural causes would not leave such a fingerprint pattern. Recently, higher-quality temperature data from balloons and satellites ... enables us to settle the man-made global warming debate definitively. The data from weather balloons shows the opposite pattern: no increasing warming with altitude, but rather a slight cooling with no hotspot. The satellite data shows the same result: no increasing temperature with altitude, no hotspot, no fingerprint, maybe again a slight cooling with altitude. Game over. QED. The global warming empire is rattling around but has not and cannot come up with an effective response. The data is the data. The science is the science. Man-made global warming is a hoax developed to serve powerful special interests.” (This was written by Peter Ferrara.)
Obama may not know these things, or he may be choosing to ignore the facts in order to create a huge new bureaucracy of socialist government control over our lives. Cap & trade would cause a huge decrease in GDP along with a huge increase in energy costs for Americans, and massive unemployment - probably higher than 15%. This will weaken our national defense capability versus our enemies, threatening capitalism and freedom.
Everyone should write to his or her Congressmoron. Remind them of the facts and the damage that would be caused by “cap & trade”.
This is GREAT news because now we can challenge all this climate change legislation based on the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment!
Ruth Bader Ginsburg says we should respect the precedents of foreign courts, so this ruling by a British judge that belief in Global Warming is a religion therefore means that any legislation related to climate change would be a direct violation of the first ten words of the Bill of Rights.
A fired British executive is suing his former employer on the grounds that he was unfairly dismissed due to religious views -- his belief in global warming.
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
You mean if my faith is in opposition to what my company does, I can force them to do what I want them to do, without holding an executive position, or owning voting stock?
Wow, who knew??
My tagline used to be:
Global Warming is to Revelations as Darwinism is to Genesis.
We already know that this religion has a “Jihad” like does the Muslims.
That way, he can search for Green-minded executives who also meet EEOC Diversity Guidelines. E.G., An Afro/Asian/Native American Transvestite Transexual PETA member, in the last stages of AIDS wearing Birkenstocks, a pink ribbon, a Sierra Club pin, and of course it goes without saying, an Obama campaign button.
Let us pray. We pray thee, O Lord, that this wanker and all of his significant others, regardless of race, creed, color, date of birth, and or sexual orientation, be devoured by deviant polar bears in a leisurely fashion for our edification and delight. Amen.
Nice try LOL.
Even the State Department worships the gods of “climate change”.
http://www.state.gov/g/oes/climate/
Recently there has been a woman on the TV show Jeopardy who works for the State department, and she said she spends all her time on “climate change”. Talk about a waste of our taxes!
The lunatics are running the mental hospital.
[The CEO] “showed his contempt by flying out a member of the IT staff...to deliver his Blackberry....”
And was it a she, and pretty too?
I don’t know about some of the other things listed, but your number 10 struck me as partly wrong, so I Googled “effect of temperature on water volume”. The facts are that water is the most shrunken at 4 degrees Centigrade, about 39 degrees farenheit. As it goes lower it starts to expand. Also as it goes higher it also expands. Since the kind of warming that global warming people are talking about is well above 39 f, then the water would definitely expand.
You cynic you :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(molecule) It is far more complicated than people imagine, which is why homo sapiens doesn’t really understand the climate on earth. Predictions about what will happen 50 years from now are bogus. We don’t even know where a hurricane will make landfall in 48 hours, except to say, “somewhere between Lake Charles, LA and Pensacola, FL - but maybe it will turn back and hit Tampa”
From The American Spectator March 2009 page 48: “The North Pole’s Arctic ice cap is primarily over water. So if it melted completely, sea levels would decline, not rise. However, the melting of ice and glaciers over land leads the resulting water to run into the oceans, producing increased sea levels. The South Pole’s Antarctic ice cap is primarily over land. But recent trends have been for the Antarctic ice cap to expand, while it is the Arctic ice cap over water than has been reported as receding due to slight melting. That slight Arctic melting was due to temporarily warm ocean currents. In the past couple of years, that slight melting has been reversed, and the Arctic ice cap has been restored to 1979 levels.”
10) water expands when cooled (or frozen) and contracts when heated, so warmer temperatures would reduce sea levels as ice caps meltI think we're on the same page here anyway, but gleeaikin is correct about the way water behaves.
water is the most shrunken at 4 degrees Centigrade, about 39 degrees farenheit. As it goes lower it starts to expand. Also as it goes higher it also expands.The reason ice cubes float is right in that sentence. Also, if the Arctic Ocean surface ice melts, it takes up exactly the same amount of space as it did when it was ice. If the Antarctic melted catastrophically (a nuclear weapon, for example, more like a bunch of nuclear weapons; or a great big bolide impace), it's reasonable to expect that the water would mostly be near freezing when it hit the oceans, and therefore would absorb heat from the surrounding waters, freshen them, and cool them down. Over time, the loss of the weight of the ice would lead to isostatic rebound, Antarctica would rise, the ocean basins would deepen at the same time (roughly 70 per cent of the surface is water, but most of the rebound would be in the southern hemisphere, where much more of the surface is water). Thus, after the immediate rise, over centuries the sealevel would decline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
