Have the climate change deniers learned the creationists tactics?

Interesting question. I wonder if most creationists actually believe in manmade GHG driven climate change, given that both require an unquestioning mind and suppose mankind has special status.

Creationism or intelligent design makes much more sense then Spontaneous generation, Equivocal generation, Abiogenesis or Biopoesis, the so called scientific studies that produced the ridiculous notion that life on Earth somehow arose from inanimate matter. Then evolved from that Spontaneously generated primordial sludge or soup to you. At any rate, that mythological occurrence would have taken a much warmer globe then we have right now.

It is a known fact that life flourished most during the very warm periods and that most major extinctions occurred during the longer ice ages and the warmer interglacial periods. You ask BB “can you name one climate scientist, global warming activist, or pro-environment politician who thinks the earth is flat?” I would answer yes, if you can find one that believes in Spontaneous generation, Equivocal generation, Abiogenesis or Biopoesis, Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Then I believe that they could argue in favor of a flat earth and produce, to their satisfaction, more bogus science to prove that it is true. It's all in the money and the power that is available.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.