For my regular visitors, if you find that this blog hasn't been updating much lately, chances are pretty good I've been spending my writing energy on my companion blog. Feel free to pop over to Home is Where the Central Cardio-pulmonary Organ Is, and see what else has been going on.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

A fascinating read

I am of the personal belief that we humans have an ingrained need to worship. Something. Anything. It seems to me that there is an innate desire to seek out something greater and more powerful than ourselves, and turn to it as a source of inspiration and solace - or justification for our atrocities.

Religion fills that need. In an increasingly secular society, that need doesn't go away. Instead, people who turn their backs on religion, seem to fill that need with something else, and turn *it* into their religion. Human intellect, science, money, philosophical concepts, material goods, current trends, etc. - all these things have been used to fill that need.

So it was with interest that I found this speech from Michael Crichton on Environmentalism as Religion, written in 2003. It's a very interesting read.



  1. Wow, What an article! I thought it was great. I am on the side that doesn't believe in all the hype of global warming.

    I must say I was shocked that he sited second hand smoke is not a problem. If that is really true I am as bad as the rest, because I have really bought into that!

  2. I did a double take on the second hand smoke thing, too - but not as much as I would've if I'd read this just a year ago. One thing I've been learning through all my research is the incredible amount of partisan BS that's out there. A lot of things I used to be sure of, I now either doubt, or have completely overturned my opinions.

    Funny thing is that, when I sent the link to a couple of lists I'm on, that was the one thing I thought people would object to, and it never came up! Instead, I had someone send a link/quote about the evils of cancer causing DDT (I'd like to see if anyone can show even one person who can unequivocably be shown to get cancer from DDT), while others objected to the FDA being described as a "scientific" organization that the EPA would be better modeled on. I happen to think the FDA has some major problems. To me, that just demonstrated how bad the EPA must really be.



Drop me a line...