On the "global warming as a religion" theme, Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, has been rumoured to have taken to calling the green lobby within the Government and the Conservative Party the "environmental Taliban". As I said in my previous post, the Greenies get quite rattled by this sort of thing, and Britain's four main Green NGOs, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, the RSPB and WWF-UK, have recently written a joint letter to him asking him to clarify the situation.
If Osborne is likening climate change campaigners to the Taliban, that is, I think, a more apt term for describing their assertiveness and the potentially ruinous consequences of following their advice than comparing them to a religion.
I remember they used to have a much more liberal attitude years ago in regard to imposing Greenery on the rest of us. For example back in the 1970s they used to advocate renewable energy only in terms of it being "off grid" electricity generated by householders. Renewable energy was even called "soft energy" by its main advocate, Amory Lovins, in the 1970s to reflect the idea that it was regarded as an easier way to generate electricity than the supposedly more complicated "hard energy path" of large power stations and electricity distribution networks provided by the military-industrial complex. But since the 1990s the Greenies have decided to impose renewable energy on everybody via what they used to call the hard energy path.