After widespread petitioning science now classed as a religion:

In a daring move to avoid further lawsuits, leaders in the science community have petitioned to be classed as a religion. After more than three years of litigation over their climate change theories the move has been welcomed by scientists who are tired of spending their days in court:

"This isn't what I signed up for. I became a scientist to come up with theories and then spend the public's money to see if I was right. Just because I haven't proved any of them yet doesn't mean I should be sued for it. Where will it end? Would Einstein be sued because time travel hasn't been proven yet?"

The similarities between science and the majority of already existing religions was highlighted by the brick wall that has been hit on both sides of human existence as far as the scientific community are concerned. Evolution research (our past) was originally the best way to get funding from the government and philanthropists, but after decades of theories and no conclusive evidence the money soon dried up. Climate change (our future) then became the cash cow needed to keep the millions of scientists around the world in gainful employment. Gustav Merenkovich, who has produced more than thirty climate change theories of his own, explained why science had never made the switch to religion before now:

"We had always tried to distance ourselves from main stream religions. We made them our sort of enemy, it was the best way to get funding from people like politicians and movie stars who love to see themselves as intelligent. Rich people don't give money to religions because religions don't put their benefactor's names on buildings or call their research foundations after them. It's all just about vanity for them so we pandered to it to stay in business."

The move it seems, like most scientific direction, is governed by money. The big question on everyone's lips is how can science even class themselves as a religion after the barrage of insults they have thrown at religious organisations over the years? Gustav continued:

"It used to be that science was all about fact. We would find a disease, we would try and find a cure. Now more than 90% of science funding goes towards stuff that is practically un-provable like climate change. Don't get me wrong, I love coming up with theories on what is going to happen but it is all speculation at best."

The change in status to a "religion" would mean that people could not sue scientists as the research produced would no longer be presented as fact:

"It is already the case that most of our believers and followers have faith in our theories no matter what they are and no matter how often they change. They honestly believe everything we tell them. If we focus on faith in our research, as opposed to presenting it as fact, then we should still be able to raise enough funds to keep our scientists employed but we could no longer be sued. We would portray the many different versions of climate change the same way religions portray the many different versions of the end of the world. They don't get sued just because the second coming hasn't happened yet!"

The biggest sigh of relief comes from whistle blowers who, until now, have been afraid to come forward with information regarding the scams and false data used to get funding from government organisations. One insider related to us his joy in now being able to go about his work without fear of reprisal.

"They scare people to get money, we scare people to get money, it's what religion is all about and people accept that."