Is Climate Alarmism a Religion?
In a recent Youtube commentary, Canadian skeptic, Dr John Robson asks a provocative question: has climate alarmism taken on the character of a religion—and not in a good way?
He begins by rejecting an easy caricature. Calling something a “religion” is not automatically an insult. Religion, he argues, represents humanity’s attempt to grapple with the deepest questions: Why are we here? Do we have moral duties? Is there a higher order? Serious thinkers across centuries have taken such questions seriously, and faith itself is not absurd.
watch the video below:
The problem, Dr Robson contends, arises when secular movements borrow the trappings of religion without its substance. In his view, parts of the contemporary climate movement display features more commonly associated with religious zeal: public rituals, moral denunciations, creeds that must be affirmed, and harsh treatment of perceived heretics. Terms like “denier” function less as scientific critique and more as moral condemnation. Public shaming replaces debate.
He points to highly emotional rhetoric—claims of mass extinction, moral guilt over daily habits, and apocalyptic urgency—as resembling sermons more than policy discussions. The insistence on strict orthodoxy, he suggests, mirrors sectarian enforcement rather than open scientific inquiry.
Robson also criticizes attempts to sacralize environmentalism explicitly. Articles proposing Earth Day as a religious holiday, calls for “spiritual revival” to combat climate change, and celebrity-led ceremonies invoking the sacredness of nature are, in his view, examples of instrumentalized spirituality. Religion, he argues, cannot be manufactured for policy ends. Genuine faith begins with belief in truth, not with a political objective in search of moral leverage.
He is particularly skeptical of selective appeals to religious authority. When church leaders speak on climate change, media outlets celebrate their moral authority; when those same leaders address traditional doctrinal issues, they are often dismissed. This, Robson argues, reveals that religious language is being used opportunistically—embraced when it advances climate activism, ignored when it does not.
Attempts to revive indigenous spiritual narratives or promote Gaia-like earth reverence fare no better in his analysis. If no one sincerely believes these doctrines, they cannot function as authentic religion. A faith adopted merely for its perceived social utility is hollow. As he puts it, once religion is treated as a tool rather than a truth claim, it loses its power.
Ultimately, Robson maintains that while stewardship of creation may be a legitimate religious principle, it must follow from truth—not from alarmism. You cannot begin with a desired policy outcome and then construct a quasi-spiritual framework to compel obedience.
His conclusion is blunt: climate change is not a religion. But in its more strident forms, climate alarmism can resemble a cult—heavy on sanctimony and moral absolutism, light on humility and genuine faith.
source www.youtube.com
Terry Shipman
| #
St. Greta of Thunberg. Yes, that fits. May all her worshippers bow down before her and be blessed by her awesome presence as she speaks words of wisdom revealed from the climate gods.
Reply