The Smithsonian.com, a reliable cheerleader for global warming alarmism, published a celebratory article yesterday reporting that carbon dioxide injected into the earth in Iceland turned into rock, promising to offset global warming from CO2 emissions. But while continuing research keeps reducing the amount of warming estimated to eventuate from CO2 emissions, other continuing research confirms […]
Three Cheers for Hunger? Learn More »
Last month, I discussed how Christianity cannot impose veganism on its adherents because doing so would violate the freedom we have in Christ as well as our lordship over creation. In other words, humans are superior to animals and thus eating animals is within the bounds of the created order. But I also noted that
Christianity, Veganism, and Animal Suffering Learn More »
Veganism is the lifestyle philosophy of people that avoid eating, wearing, or using animal products or their by-products. They don’t eat meat or the products that derive from animals, even when the animal is not killed, such as milk. Now the rationales for adopting this lifestyle vary. Some do it for alleged health benefits, others
Why Christians Don’t Impose Veganism Learn More »
Humans should only be eating animals raised under humane conditions. Sounds perfectly innocent doesn’t it? After all who wants to think of animals suffering just so that he/she can have a cheap burger or chicken patty? This is essentially the argument cleverly proffered by Pete Letheby in the article “Farmers team up with the Humane
Think Carefully Before Welcoming Humane Society Policies Learn More »
To borrow a phrase from another debate (where it is misused), the science is settled. So is the economics. As Peter Suderman points out, the federal Environmental Protection Agency proposes reducing from 18.5 billion to 15.2 billion gallons the amount of renewable fuel (essentially, ethanol, almost all from corn) it requires refiners to mix into total U.S. gasoline
End Federal Ethanol Policy’s Harm to the Poor and the Environment Learn More »
The public debate regarding genetically modified (GM) food has for the most part been driven by practical considerations. For those on the side of GM food, the economic and social benefits far outweigh any possible negative consequences (if there even are any). In this vein, Reason magazine science correspondent Ronald Bailey points out, “With biotech corn, U.S.
A Theological Framework for Evaluating Genetically Modified Food Learn More »
