The Evidence

If "Religion is the Opiate of the Masses," Science is the Opiate of the Intellectual Classes.

Do you really believe you're an Evolving Ape, or that God will Take Your Call? It's time to end this destructive conflict.

Topics for Discussion

Climate Change: A Noble Lie?

It seems that even Evolving Apes want a Religion

If you have been “educated” to believe you’re an ape, you will long for a primitive planet where everyone swings from trees on their way to work. Are the Evolving Apes in academia evolving or regressing?

Cleaning up the environment is a noble goal; however, those who know they have been given dominion over the Earth by a loving God, will be less likely to pollute it in the first place. Since I posted this link the “science” of global warming has been proven to be a hoax. The “science of evolution” is an even bigger and more destructive scam. In an effort to give this atheistic “Noble Lie” some moral relevance, academia elevated the Earth to a god-like status, and indoctrinated children to worship the environment as the source of life.

A “Noble Lie” as described by Plato:
An Audacious fiction, fabricated by the intellectual class to control society. A lie fabricated with good intentions. See the link The Noble Lies of Science and Religion on the Navigator.

Global Warming / Climate Change / Environmentalism – Noble Lies?
Are modern scientists above creating a “Noble Lie?” The following newspaper article details one of the first academic attempts to address the conflicting beliefs of science and religion. Offered in the form of a thesis given to the American Association for the Advancement of Science by religious philosopher Loyal D. Rue. It reveals the bizarre mind-set of the scientists and clergymen alike, as they begin to grope for a new paradigm.

Please read this article carefully. In my forty years of research, I have never seen a more accurate portrayal of academia’s growing philosophical crisis.

Post Bulletin, Rochester, Minnesota, July 20, 1991 by George W. Cornell, AP Religion writer.

Religious philosopher Loyal D. Rue says modern culture urgently needs a “noble lie” – a myth that links the moral teachings of religion with the scientific facts of life.

He said science “has eroded the plausibility of the Judeo-Christian myths. It has got to our heads and consciousness in such a way that the traditional myths can’t be swallowed.”

The myths, he said, include archaic views of the universe; a presumption that humans are at the center of existence; and the stories of Jesus’ resurrection and of Moses bringing God’s ten commandments down from a mountain.

Dispel the myths of religion, and all that is left is nihilism, which considers life and the universe meaningless.

“Nihilism is not something that can be argued away…,” he said. “I assume it’s true. But it is ultimately destructive,” a “monstrous truth.”

The myths served as a framework for religious teachings that brought about man’s betterment, Rue says. Without their “integration of cosmology and morality” – of cosmic facts with idealism – people will deny fixed standards and do whatever they choose, splintering society.

Or they might embrace the “totalitarian option,” which relies on government to force humans to behave, he said.

Rue, 46, a professor of religion and philosophy at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa, presented his thesis at a recent symposium of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington.

A church-going but skeptical Lutheran, Rue suggests that we start all over and create a new myth – a “noble lie” that squares with what is known scientifically, something that is convincing though it may not be factual.

What would that lie be? He doesn’t specify. “It remains for the artists, the poets, the novelists, the musicians, the filmmakers, the tricksters and the masters of illusion to winch us toward our salvation by seducing us into an embrace with a noble lie,” he told the scientific meeting.

Perhaps, he said in an interview, it is possible to rework, transpose and rephrase the Judeo-Christian tradition to make it plausible again.

In any case, the illusion must be “so imaginative and so compelling that it can’t be resisted,” so “beautiful and satisfying” that all would feel they would have to accept it, he told the meeting.

“What I mean by a noble lie is one that deceives us, tricks us, compels us beyond self-interest, beyond ego, beyond family, nation, race…that will deceive us into the view that our moral discourse must serve the interests not only of ourselves and each other, but those of the earth as well.”

He said this lie would present a “universe that is infused with value. And such a universe is ultimately, I think, a great fiction. The universe just is. But a noble lie attributes objective value to it.”

“…The great irony of our moment in history” is that what “we have most deeply feared” – being deceived – “is the ultimate source of our salvation from psychological and social chaos.”

He said “a good lie, a noble lie, is one that can’t be shown to be a lie by exposing it to a known truth or to science.”

“We need a kind of myth, a story, a vision of universality, that will get us pulling together, not just as Americans, but that will make us one, and give us solidarity of purpose…. It must be a lie that inspires us to give up selfish interests in the service of noble ideals…” he said.

“Without some kind of shared orientation, we can’t cooperate and can’t have a coherent society.”

“Without such lies we cannot live.”

An excerpt from The Awful Truth, by Patrick J. Conway:

Fiction writers, using absurdity, could not fabricate a more outrageous scenario to dramatize the incredible confusion in academia than the actual events as they are reported in this article. How did we get to the point where a philosophy professor feels comfortable giving a speech to an audience of scientists, proposing that we create a “noble lie?” This is a very serious problem that we simply cannot afford to ignore. It is critical that we try to understand the rationale that makes Professor Rue feel justified in making such a bizarre suggestion.

First let me say that I do not fault the professor for his brainstorming. Like Rabbi Kushner, author of When Bad Things Happen to Good People, he is forced to operate within the bounds of two bogus academic paradigms, science and religion. This limits his options; nevertheless, he identified the real problem and had the courage to address it in an open forum. The professor is absolutely right when he singles out the incompatibility of the scientific and religious paradigms as the source of our rampant immorality. Recognizing the failure of these ideologies to produce a moral society, Rue reasons that if, as science contends, evolution is a truth and Creation is a myth, then the fault must lie with the Judeo-Christian myth. Being required by academia to use that mistaken belief as a given caused him to assume that the problem could be solved by replacing the biblical paradigm with a new myth that would “jive with the scientific facts of life” – thus the noble lie.

But why a noble lie? Merely juxtaposing these two words should set off intellectual alarm bells, because it creates an oxymoron. As I studied Professor Rue’s book on the subject, By The Grace Of Guile, I began to understand the reasoning behind his unusual recommendation. Academia’s acceptance of evolutionary science as a truth evokes the concept of a universe that is devoid of meaning. That scientific philosophy has produced a generation of nihilistic college students who have lost their sense of morality. Alarmed by the potential consequences of a fully amoral society, Professor Rue is suggesting that we try to create a noble lie that will help us infuse the nihilistic universe of evolutionary science with moral values. The professor is quoted as saying that “science has eroded the plausibility of the Judeo-Christian myth,” making it impractical in the post-modern world. This quote reveals that his concept of a noble lie is based on academia’s declaration that ancient history is merely myth. Taking that erroneous belief to its logical conclusion, Professor Rue apparently thought that if the ancients were able to establish moral societies by deceiving themselves with theological fables, then, with the help of modern “tricksters,” we should be able to develop a more believable lie and use it to motivate society to behave morally. It is a huge leap of logic, but one can easily see how our erroneous paradigms would lead the professor to reach such a peculiar conclusion.

Professor Rue rightfully chided the scientists for failing to produce a wholesome paradigm when he said that without the “integration of cosmology and morality,” people will deny fixed standards and do whatever they choose, splintering society. Here he cuts right to the heart of the matter by identifying the separation of logic and morals as the cause of the problem. As we have seen, this was a direct result of the breakup of science and religion after Galileo. That split left us without a universal standard, so people began to view morals from a personal perspective. The results are obvious. Professor Rue is absolutely right when he states that if we continue to use our current amoral system to educate our children without giving them some kind of noble philosophy to bind them together, we will eventually be forced to rely on a totalitarian government to keep order. Well said, professor! It is not possible to articulate a more accurate description of the societal mayhem produced by the mindless ideological jihad between the cults of science and religion. Unfortunately, efforts to save these flawed paradigms by creating a hybrid philosophy based on a more believable lie will be equally disastrous. In fact, it is the collapse of our original myths of “evolution from the primates” and “a personal God” that precipitated the current crisis.

Do you really believe you’re an Evolving Ape. or that God will take your call?

This article exposes the dilemma in both disciplines. The perceived inviolability of the theory of evolution has intellectually neutered scientists and clergymen alike, and caused them to abandon the search for an uplifting noble truth. Trapped by a cult-like desire to protect their beliefs and intimidated by the perverted concept of tolerance that permeates all of academia, both sides now appear to be willing to consider creating yet another myth in order to keep the peace and save the status quo. Notwithstanding, absent his noble lie, I applaud Professor Rue’s efforts and endorse most of his points. I agree that our current beliefs are defunct and that we are in desperate need of a new paradigm. In fact, Professor Rue came very close to solving the problem when he said that:

it might be possible to rework, transpose and rephrase the Judeo-Christian tradition to make it plausible again.

Here I am in total agreement with the professor. Instead of discrediting the ancient texts, we should question our current interpretations of the events they chronicle. We must put aside our preconceived beliefs and reexamine that history in an effort to find a new paradigm that will, as he said, make us one and give us solidarity of purpose. Only a noble truth can achieve such a lofty goal.

See Paradigm Lock, Educated Ignorance, and The Amoral Majority, Chapter Six of The Awful Truth, by Patrick J. Conway. Available in our Bookstore.

Professor Rue’s concept of a “a good lie, a noble lie,” is the inevitable consequence of academia’s accreditation of the Atheistic Noble Lie first proposed by Plato in BC380. See the link Noble Lies of Science and Religion.

Climate Change / Global Warming / Environmentalism
Describing his concept of a Noble Lie, Professor Rue is quoted as saying:

“What I mean by a noble lie is one that deceives us, tricks us, compels us beyond self-interest, beyond ego, beyond family, nation, race…that will deceive us into the view that our moral discourse must serve the interests not only of ourselves and each other, but those of the earth as well.”

Are Climate Change, Global Warming, and Environmentalism the “Noble Lie” envisioned by Professor Rue?

A Noble Truth 
To solve the mystery of human existence, we must answer these critical questions:
  • Why is academia ignoring the collapse of the ancient world? Obviously, it is one of the biggest cataclysms in the history of planet earth. Why is it that “Climate Change Scientists” aren’t even the slightest bit interested in what caused that catastrophe?
  • What is the meaning of the fall of the gods, collapse of the ancient world, and subsequent rise of human rule of the earth, precisely as foretold in the ancient texts?

Answering those questions will end the pathological ignorance of the evolving apes in academia, and their symbiotic enablers in the cult of theology.

The Awful Truth by Patrick J. Conway provides a non-religious explanation for human existence, with definitive answers on our origins, purpose, and future. It is historically accurate, and verifiable with empirical evidence. Think of the potential. Bookstore

It is time to face The Awful Truth, something is terribly wrong in science, religion, and academia.

Did the second coming of Jesus cause the collapse of the ancient world? You decide; Discovery

If you have not read our answer, please click on the  Discovery link before leaving the website.

Password Reset

Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.