In recent decades, environmental issues have emerged as a major source of concern for our society. Churches, except for a small percentage, have largely remained silent on how Christians should approach and even help overcome the environmental challenges.
As a result, Christians have remained susceptible to being deceived by unbiblical principles that demand subscription to radical environmental viewpoints, often antithetical to the biblical doctrines on our relationship with the creation.
These radical theories are often promoted as scientific theories. In reality, they are merely predictive guesses, not hard truth based on solid evidence. With no proactive discourses on such matters in the church, Christians tend to absorb the radical principles and make choices based on them.
Vegetarianism and veganism, for example, are the most common radical environmentalist principles that have infiltrated the church. They have roots in Eastern philosophy and cannot be justified as a morally superior dietary lifestyle.
Other, more radical, principles are often mixed with science to make them more appealing to the masses.
In the 20th century, population control was the most dominant radical environmental theory. Proponents argued that the world will run out of food and other essential resources by the end of the 20th century because of growing population.
But their theories failed. Twentieth-century population growth failed to lead to resource depletion. The world now produces a record number of food crops. Most resource prices are falling—signaling that they are more abundant now, not less. Life expectancy has increased dramatically throughout the world.
Today, a new radical principle is being injected into the church: catastrophic anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (CAGW). In simple terms, CAGW is the belief that greenhouse gas emissions from human activity have caused a dangerous increase in global average temperature (GAT).
However, this time, the radical environmentalists—learning from all the mistakes they made in the 20th century—have made their CAGW theory closely resemble science, making it hard to distinguish it from truth.
Yet CAGW is a radical proposal. Unlike climate change, which is real and continuous, CAGW largely relies on assumptions and forecasts about GAT that are far from the truth.
Real science, using paleoclimate data, shows that current changes in climate (predominantly warming) are neither unprecedented nor dangerous. The radical environmentalists want people to believe current climate changes are unprecedented and will worsen in the future.
Real climate science says warming is driven by many various factors, including changes in the earth’s rotation and tilt toward the sun, cycles of energy and magnetic wind output from the sun, ocean circulations, cloud cover, changes in concentration of greenhouse gases (GHG) and various other natural factors. But the radicals want the masses to blindly believe that increased atmospheric GHG concentrations, driven by human activity, are the primary driving force behind the modern warming.
Real climate science has shown us that climate and weather are unpredictable. CAGW radicals want us to trust their faulty computer climate models as legitimate, dependable, accurate tools of climate prediction. Yet computer models failed constantly in the past two decades to predict the trend and magnitude of change in GAT.
Radical environmentalists use several strategies to silence those who try to critically review their distortion of climate science. One is to call anyone who disagrees with their theory a “denier.”
As E. Calvin Beisner put it, “belief in ‘climate change’ (shorthand for dangerous man-made warming that must be mitigated even at the cost of trillions of dollars and potentially trapping billions in poverty) really is a leap of faith.” But unlike the Christian faith, which is based on evidence, CAGW is based on imaginary forecasts about future climate states.
Surprisingly, the church has fallen for this crafty bait. The pope, the archbishop of Canterbury and many other Christian leaders are now ardent supporters of the climate alarmist movement. Even some Christian scientists have joined the chorus.
Not one but many wolves have infiltrated the sheepfold. It is high time that the shepherds equip themselves with sound doctrine on environmental stewardship, the counter perspectives and how to discern between lies and truth.
The church needs to do a great deal of study to understand the complex web of climate science, the radical players involved in the debate, and how it compares with the biblical command to steward the creation while wisely using natural resources to meet people’s needs.
The scientists, economists, theologians and other scholars of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation think human-induced global warming is real. They also think empirical evidence indicates that it is relatively small and largely benign. They think efforts to reduce it by substituting wind, solar and other renewable energy sources for fossil fuels would do more harm than good both to humanity and to the entire biosphere. They provide scientific, economic and engineering reasons for this view in hundreds of articles and several major papers on their website.
This article was originally published at Charisma News.
Dan Pangburn says
Did you know?
Water vapor is a greenhouse gas
Since both have been accurately measured worldwide (Jan, 1988) 7 WV molecules have been added for each CO2 molecule.
Each WV molecule is about 5 times more effective than a CO2 molecule at absorb/emit of earth source thermal radiation.
About 86% of WV increase is from irrigation which is economically limited.
Warming is also limited by how much WV the atmosphere will hold.
Much more info and supporting analysis is at http://globalclimatedrivers2.blogspot.com
louis wachsmuth says
Oh my goodness, Cornwall finally admits that humans do have a role in climate change, that is, a warming earth. But, you say it is only a minor problem. Say, try to tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Californian citizens fleeing record fire storms, due to record dry environmental conditions. By the way, the bible has many verses that link selfish human activities with environmental destruction, which are always ignored by people with little biblical knowledge.
“Listen to the word of the LORD, O sons of Israel, For the LORD has a case against the inhabitants of the land, Because there is no faithfulness or kindness Or knowledge of God in the land…. Therefore the land mourns, and everyone who lives in it languishes Along with the beasts of the field and the birds of the sky, and also the fish of the sea disappear.” Hos 4
“The earth is also polluted by its inhabitants, for they transgressed laws, violated statutes, broke the everlasting covenant. Therefore, a curse devours the earth, and those who live in it are held guilty”. Isa 24
Dan Pangburn says
You have been hoodwinked. Burning fossil fuels has nothing to do with climate but the CO2 so produced has enhanced food production by at least 15%.
Bani L says
Louis,
I’m just curious about something. Since you have quoted from Scripture, do you believe what the Bible says, from beginning to end?
louis wachsmuth says
Yes, I am even a “young earth creationist.”
Bani Li says
Hi Louis,
I’m just curious about something. Since you have quoted from Scripture, do you believe what the Bible says? I would like to discuss with you more on this.
louis wachsmuth says
tigardlou@gmail.com
Vijay says
Louis,
Good to hear from you again. And good to see you quote scriptures.
E. Calvin Beisner says
Lou, I wish you’d read Cornwall’s items more carefully. We’ve always said that human emissions of CO2 and other “greenhouse” (better infrared-absorbing) gases almost certainly make the atmosphere warmer than it otherwise would be. Our argument has been that since the computer climate models that are the basis of predictions of rapid and dangerous warming from CO2 emissions predict 2 to 3 times the warming actually observed over the relevant period, they cannot accurately depict the climate system’s response to CO2 and therefore can’t give us reliable predictions. We have argued instead that more empirically based estimates of climate sensitivity (warming in response to increased CO2) justify a much lower amount and thus either much less dangerous or perhaps neutral or even net beneficial.
California’s wildfires were due far more to decades of wildland mismanagement (failing to remove undergrowth that gives so much fuel to the fires once they start) and ignition by accidents in electric grid infrastructure than anything having to do with global average temperature or even local dryness. (California’s big drought ended several years ago and recent years have had above-normal precipitation.)
Ian says
Hi Louis,
quote:
“By the way, the bible has many verses that link selfish human activities with environmental destruction, which are always ignored by people with little biblical knowledge.”
Louis, are you telling us that the destructive events recorded in the bible
were the result of people burning fossil fuels in there SUV’s?
or is it as you quoted in your text:
BECAUSE THERE IS NO FAITHFULNESS OR KINDNESS OR KNOWLEDGE
OF GOD IN THE LAND… THE EARTH IS ALSO POLLUTED BY ITS INHABITANTS
FOR THEY TRANSGRESSED LAWS, VIOLATED STATUTES, BROKE THE
EVERLASTING COVENANT.
louis wachsmuth says
The point of human history is that mankind always seems to screw things up one way or another. Part of the problem is basic greed, another part is too many humans cramped in too little real estate. The witness of the bible covering thousands of years confirms this. Sure, one could say the Lord was unfair by turning the buried living creatures from Noah’s flood into fossil fuels because of the environmental damages, but who are we to judge? The Lord could have made plastics easy to compost, but rather they cover the oceans, killing everything. Too thick concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide is bad, but the Lord chose that outcome. At least us humans should have the brains to recognize that we are trashing the earth, though there is little we can do to reverse the mess.