Global Warming as Religion

In the spirit of Rip's recent sea level posts (here and here), some thoughts on global warming as religion from John Brignell at Numbers Watch: 

...The Royal Society, as a major part of the flowering of the tradition, was founded on the basis of scepticism. Its motto “On the word of no one” was a stout affirmation. Now suddenly, following their successful coup, the Greens have changed this motto of centuries to one that manages to be both banal and sinister – “Respect the facts.” When people start talking about “the facts” it is time to start looking for the fictions. Real science does not talk about facts; it talks about observations, which might turn out to be inaccurate or even irrelevant.

The global warmers like to use the name of science, but they do not like its methods. They promote slogans such a “The science is settled” when real scientists know that science is never settled.

...The world might (or might not) have warmed by a fraction of a degree. This might (or might not) be all (or in part) due to the activities of mankind. It all depends on the quality of observations and the validity of various hypotheses. Science is at ease with this situation. It accepts various theories, such as gravitation or evolution, as the least bad available and of the most practical use, but it does not believe.

The great difference between science and religion, notes the author, is that religion demands belief, while science requires disbelief.  The full article is somewhat lengthy, and draws parallels between common elements of theology and the AGW movement, which Brignell calls "a new eco-theology."

Again, to be clear, none of this indicates global warming isn't happening, or isn't man-made.  The only thing that indicates that, one way or the other, is evidence.  It is itself a problem, however, that our understanding of the subject is seen through the lens of politics and reasoning that is, very simply, counter-scientific