Moderation thus far is QED.
It is nothing like faith.
Don't make your problem with the available evidence a question of faith or you discredit faith.
Like I said, don't bring faith into politics.
If you believe that people who believe climate change is an emergency are taking part in a faith-based movement that is a huge logical error on your part.
Faith is a personal choice. Examining evidence and coming to a conclusion about what is real is a matter of logic and reasoning. They are completely different, and mixing them is not just poor form, it exposes your motivated reasoning.
You talk past the topic. You get called out on it. You double down. You loftily say that we're talking past each other, when you're the one who tries to insist we follow you on a journey to how science is a religion.
Naturally your experience must be that people are talking past you. Because you don't know how to engage in the conversation, you just know how to divert.
If you insist on talking past the topic then pointing out that we're talking past each other is your first step to, maybe, perhaps, noticing that your approach to this conversation is the problem.
It's unclear where I have insisted anyone do anything.
But let me do that now, and insist that you have both the last word and an excellent rest of your life.
The same people making these claims tell me that I should "believe science".
Not sure if I really want to worship any sort of tool, e.g. a wrench, when my community of faith is already a sustaining source of joy.