Is climate change the new faith?

Fanatics must stop playing fast and loose with global warming data

Simon Hoggart
The Guardian, Saturday 6 February 2010

As a climate change agnostic – and I suspect most of us are, especially now, and more especially after the Guardian series this week – I've been bothered by two aspects of the argument. The first is the religious overtone. Humankind has always wanted to blame its own behaviour for natural events, whether Noah's flood, plagues of frogs, or volcanos which demonstrate that the gods are angry.
Three years ago a British bishop announced that gay marriage had caused our floods. I've often wondered whether global warming is another example of this, an irrational belief designed for a rationalist world.
And there is an element of religious faith in the true believers. Those who disagree are "deniers", with its echo of fanatics who don't believe in the Holocaust. Years ago I saw a sceptic howled down at a British Association meeting; scientists shouldn't behave like that. If people disagree with you they might not be morally wrong, or agents of Satan. (Or big oil, as the believers often claim.) This ties in with my second worry. Clearly many believers have played fast and loose with the data: since what they believe is true beyond doubt, they have a right – no, a moral duty – to suppress any evidence that might contradict them.
Years ago I cowrote a book, Bizarre Beliefs, about various crazy things people believe in, such as astrology, the Bermuda Triangle and spiritualism. Most of them generated vast amounts of data from which believers simply cherry-picked whatever suited their case. The world's climate produces millions upon millions of facts and figures, and it's very easy to select the ones that suit you and ignore all the rest.
Of course I don't know who's right. But I'm not surprised to see the true believers struggling.
✒The Tories want to bring in big changes at the BBC, and no doubt they will. But ask yourself one question: which is the more popular and respected institution in this country – the BBC or the Conservative party? Mind you, this government is no better. We have lost the fight on product placement, so that the programmes we watch will soon be legally contaminated by clandestine advertising.
The fact that a Labour government has brought this in, to please the millionaires who run commercial television, is as shameful as anything else they have done.
✒The other day we were crossing a bridge, on the pavement, when a cyclist – aged around 40, I'd guess – pounded towards us ringing his bell. We declined to jump out of his way, so he had to wobble on to the road, from where he yelled "Fuck off!"
I know it's only a small majority of cyclists who give the rest a bad name, but they are only one of the menaces that make simply walking down the street so much harder these days. Nobody carries a suitcase any more; instead they pull them behind on wheels, occupying twice as much space. In 1,000 years, anthropologists will wonder why we all suddenly developed spindly arms. People listening to iPods or speaking on the phone are in a world of their own, and have to be avoided with special care.
For some reason many people seem to have stopped watching where they are going, so they suddenly stop in the middle of a fast-moving crowd, or walk briskly out of shops without looking to either side, or just go into reverse for no apparent reason.
Then there are chuggers – charity muggers – and people handing out leaflets and cheap phone cards. A walk down the street is like an army assault course for not-very-fit people.
✒Baby buggies seem to get steadily bigger, so that if you're behind two mums having a chat, it's like being blocked on a motorway while one gigantic truck edges past another at a total speed of half a mile an hour.
The other day two of these vast things, like scaled-down SUVs, were wheeled on to a packed bus I was in. The first juggernaut occupied all the space provided for strollers, so the other had to block the whole aisle, making it impossible for other passengers to move.
That mother looked fraught and harassed, and I felt sorry for her, but it didn't occur to either of them to get off and wait for a less crowded bus.
✒I had to go to and from Manchester twice this week, and was able to plan ahead, so I found that with a railcard I could get a first-class single on some trains for £22.45. Marvellous. Space for a laptop, room for your legs, free Wi-Fi, delicious snacks and drinks included. I could have swilled gin all the way to Wilmslow and got the trip, in effect, for free.
Meanwhile a bossy voice on the loudspeaker was warning anyone who didn't have the right paperwork that they would be charged the full single fare – £131, standard class! And it's not just a scary threat: I've seen them do it. Standard class on Virgin Pendolino trains may get there as soon as first class, but your knees are jammed against the next seat, the aisles are narrow and there is almost no space for luggage, as I found on a crowded evening train when first class would have cost about £40 more.
Isn't this all a bit crazy? Even air fares aren't as ridiculously varied as this.
✒Spellchecks on computers produce some delightful mistakes. I've pointed out before that we've lost "bated" breath (as in "abated") but "baited" breath implies that you have a worm stuck to your tongue. Even the Guardian has described a wrecked car as a "right-off". Nobody seems to know the difference between "phase" (a stage in a process) and "faze" (confuse or bewilder). And the other day, the Times said that Andy Murray was "trying out a new racket on the tour", which may imply that he was flogging the other players fake Rolex watches.