Why the Left Shouldn’t Laugh at Religious Doomsday Predictions

May 24, 2011 By 11 Comments

But global warming is only the most recent doomsday scenario offered by the left.

Here is a small sample of some others:

Recall the Time and Newsweek cover stories about how heterosexual AIDS would become a national plague — since “AIDS doesn’t discriminate.” Skeptics who said at the time that heterosexual AIDS in America was largely a scare were called “anti-science.” But Michael Fumento, the science writer who wrote “The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS,” first in Commentary Magazine and then as a book, turned out to be right. In America, it was a myth.

At the Democrat National Convention in 2000, the Democrats featured five children ages about 5 to 11 who recited lyrics about the doomsdays they could look forward to growing up in America. The first child, for example, said this:

“When I grow up … Will I be able to see a rainbow in a smog-filled sky? Will there be any trees alive?”

In his 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” Stanford Professor Paul Ehrlich wrote: “In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.”

Another doomsday prophecy from the left:

Two prominent feminist writers, Gloria Steinem and Naomi Wolf wrote in their bestselling books, “Revolution from Within” and “The Beauty Myth” — and the news media reported — that 150,000 girls and women per year die of anorexia nervosa. The number is actually fewer than 100.

There is one major difference between leftist and religious doomsday scenarios. The religious readily acknowledge that their doomsday scenario is built entirely on faith. The left, on the other hand, claims that its doomsday scenarios are entirely built on science.

That there is little truth to the left-wing claim is not as important as the fact that these doomsday scenarios have undermined the status of science. How many scientists have been compromised by their joining the research-money and fame bandwagons of left-wing apocalyptic predictions? And how has this affected the public’s perceptions of science and scientists when it comes to contentious issues?

The left had its laugh this past weekend, but only because it’s a lot easier to laugh at religious doomsdays than at leftist ones.

 

Pages: 1 2

Filed Under: Afternoon Edition, Daily Mailer, FrontPage
About

  • Amused

    Not really Prager , climate change has been predicted long before it became a political football and talking point . Scientists have predicted extremes in weather patterns DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING . Warmer temperatures means more evaporation of water into the atmosphere , from oceans , lakes and even the land . Which means there's more water vapor in the atmosphere , bringing about heavier rain and snowfalls , because rising warm air is the mechanism for rainstorms , tornadoes ,and hurricanes .Droughts are in effect brought about by too much water evaporating from dry land .Enough water vapor in the atmosphere and that water vapor itself becomes a greenhouse gas .Science is a-political although one would never know it listening to the rhetoric expounded .Republicans have made the issue a democratic "ruse " no doubt due to Al Gore . However our own military and intelligence agencies think otherwise .

    • Jim_C

      I wouldn't hold my breath expecting Prager to get your point. He'd rather compare apples to oranges here.

    • MMS

      "Science is a-political"

      Interesting you should say that. About ten years ago, I took a MA level class on scientific history in which my professor and a high school science teacher surprised me with the fact that Newton's theories were accepted by the Royal Academy only after dealing dirty with opponents with competing theories. They made no bones about the situation, that it was political, not scientific, and I believe the same argument is made about Galileo's run in with the pope in the excellent book "Galileo's Daughter". History of science is full of this kind of thing. So it's not the rhetoric of the moment at all. It is normative even for scientific inquiry. It's merely pop science explained in newspapers that tidies up the situation to make it appear to be apolitical.

      • Jim_C

        It's a fair point. It's politics that govern the publishing of scientific papers, as well–albeit more the internicine politics to which all academic disciplines are subject.

        However, science in particular has to offer reproducable data and there is such a thing as scientific consensus. there is scientific consensus that global warming exists; however, the reasons why it exists are certainly up for debate. My only pet peeve is that "global warming" tends to be used as a stand-in for ALL environmental concerns. Whether or not pollution is causing global warming is not my biggest concern: whether it winds up in my drinking water certainly is.

    • Eric Gisin

      “Scientists have predicted extremes in weather patterns DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING ”
      Yesterday Dr Roy Spencer pointed out that increased tornados are associated with cool weather and PDO cycles. Backed it up with data, unlike alarmist claims.

  • pennswoods

    During the earth's over 3 billion year history our planet has gone through constant periods of climate change. Most recently, Europe endured a mini ice age from the 1300's until the late 1700's. The last major Ice Age ended about 10,000 years ago thanks to natural global warming for which I am thankful, otherwise where I now live in Pennsylvania would be under a mile of ice. Please give me an idea what is the "normal climate" for the earth was, is, or should be. My uneducated guess is we are living in a brief golden age of climatic conditions which have, since the end of the last ice age, been beneficial for the human race. As far as Al Gor goes. He is no different than the gloom and doom sayers and other "prophets" of the end times from the past and present only he is slick shyster who wears a Brooks Brothers suit and speaks to politically correct brain washed Ivy League half wits and other so callled educated elites who need their own "end times" and other fantasies to try and control our lives in the name of Socialism or some other political or Green ideology.

  • Reason_For_Life

    While I laugh regularly at religion based end of the world scenarios the secular "Global Warming" doomsday is far more ridiculous. That crackpot radio minister made two unsuccessful predictions about the end of the world. In 1998 the IPCC made 31 predictions of a single factor – global temperature increase. Every single one was too high.

    This was the best article by Prager in a long time. He's completely correct that science looks bad when crackpot leftists pretend that their fantasies are based on science.

  • BS77

    The atheists and secularists have lots of dogmatic ideas…the big bang theory, global warming, certain aspects of Evolution….all are as nutty as the world ending on May 21.

    • LooseCannon

      Georges Lemaitre a Catholic priest proposed the Big Bang Theory … just saying

    • Jim_C

      "The atheists and secularists"…uh huh. Sure. Oh, you mean SCIENTISTS?

      Just to prevent you from looking like a total fool in front of people who actually bother reading books, studying things, caring about accumulated knowledge, etc.: NONE of those things are even remotely as nutty as the world ending on May 21.

      You are ignorant; that is your right. I'd be careful about parading that around, though.

  • WilliamJamesWard

    This so called radio evangelist must have had a very bad understanding of
    the New Testament or and agenda known only to himself. Clearly he was
    far off the Biblical teaching of end times. Matthew 24:36, Mark 13:32 and
    Acts 1:7 clearly point out that no one knows the time of the end, no not
    even the Angels of Heaven nor the Son, only The Father. That this man
    was making a fool of himself is obvious but it gives rise for criticism made
    by Biblically uneducated non-believers and scoffers who wish to detract
    from the central issues of prophecy. Serious believers know there will
    be false prophets and not to sound unkind, nitwits………..The true story of
    today is the prophecy of "Jerusalem being a stumbling block to the World",
    something to be seriously concerned about, Zechariah 12:3……..Todays
    Christians that understand and believe support Israel and know Jerusalem
    is the most important City in the World……………………………….William