Global Warming Propaganda and the Biblical Worldview

Print
E. Calvin BeisnerAccording to the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, the first command God gave to mankind was to “be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth, subdue it, and rule over” everything in it (Genesis 1:28). Many environmentalists, following the lead of Lynn White, Jr., whose article "The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis,” first published in Science magazine in 1967 and reprinted many times, believe that command is the real root of environmental degradation because, so they think, it validates abuse of the environment. Thus it’s not surprising to find considerable antipathy to the Bible and its worldview in the environmental movement.

In reality, that command, taken in its context, requires humanity to exercise dominion over the Earth in a way that glorifies God and serves our neighbors by enhancing its safety, fruitfulness, and beauty—incrementally transforming more and more of the Earth into garden (Genesis 2:15). No Jewish or Christian theologian or Biblical scholar has ever interpreted it as permitting abuse. The Greens’ accusation, therefore, asserts a straw man.

"...environmentalism’s hostility to Biblical faith arises in many quarters. One of the most troubling is school curriculum that exposes a captive audience of young, impressionable children to a steady drumbeat of Green propaganda, much of it openly hostile to Biblical faith, but even more of it subtly so."

Nonetheless, environmentalism’s hostility to Biblical faith arises in many quarters. One of the most troubling is school curriculum that exposes a captive audience of young, impressionable children to a steady drumbeat of Green propaganda, much of it openly hostile to Biblical faith, but even more of it subtly so. (For examples, type “environmental curriculum” plus the name of any given state into an Internet search engine and start reading.)

Consider a case in point: “The Magic School Bus and the Climate Challenge,” a book and Webcast video from Scholastic.com. It tells Kindergartners through third graders about the serious danger of global warming caused by burning fossil fuels and how we all can “go Green” to “help save the planet” by resorting to wind, solar, and other alternative energy sources.

Is this message consistent with a Biblical worldview? It’s certainly not impossible, in this post-Fall world in which all people are sinners (Romans 3:20) and the Earth itself is under God’s curse because of our sin (Genesis 3:17-19; Romans 8:18-23), for human beings to do things that harm the Earth.

"...the widespread belief that human emission of carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases, though by comparison their contribution is slight) is causing what either already is or will become dangerous global warming rests on an assumption—common to almost all environmentalist thought—that goes well beyond this. It is that the Earth and its natural systems are extremely fragile and thus subject to catastrophic harm even by comparatively tiny influences."

However, the widespread belief that human emission of carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases, though by comparison their contribution is slight) is causing what either already is or will become dangerous global warming rests on an assumption—common to almost all environmentalist thought—that goes well beyond this. It is that the Earth and its natural systems are extremely fragile and thus subject to catastrophic harm even by comparatively tiny influences.

To be specific, in the case of global warming the hypothesis is that increasing carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere from about 270 parts per million by volume to about 540 parts per million by volume (that is, from about 27 thousandths of a percent to 54 thousandths of a percent) would cause catastrophic heating that could jeopardize human civilization as we know it, or even perhaps all life—although CO2 would still make up less than 0.06 percent of the atmosphere.

In a moment I’ll suggest some empirical arguments against that hypothesis, but first let’s focus on the worldview issue: whether that hypothesis is consistent with a Biblical understanding of God as Creator and Sustainer of His creation, and the climate system as part of that creation. And to take the issue out of the highly charged one of global warming, let’s apply it to an analogy. Suppose an architect designed a building so that if someone leaned against one wall it would collapse. Would anyone say, “Oh, that architect must be brilliant!”? No. But that’s the view of Earth’s climate system presupposed by global warming alarmism. Let me explain more fully.

Even proponents of the hypothesis acknowledge that, according to basic physics, doubling atmospheric CO2 would cause only about 2.16 degrees Fahrenheit of increase in global average temperature. Nobody thinks that would be harmful; indeed, most studies indicate it would benefit most parts of the Earth, lengthening growing seasons in high latitudes, increasing rainfall, and thus improving agricultural yields and plant growth generally. The fears all come from the belief—generally embraced by those working under the auspices of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)—that climate feedback mechanisms would greatly magnify that warming—indeed, by about 250% (to 5.4F) to 375% (to 8.1F). That belief entails that Earth’s climate system is highly fragile and unstable—exactly opposite what the Bible implies.

"In short, then, the Christian worldview provides a basis, a presupposition, from which to be quite skeptical of the kind of reasoning that leads to fears of catastrophic, anthropogenic (manmade) global warming (CAGW)."

In short, then, the Christian worldview provides a basis, a presupposition, from which to be quite skeptical of the kind of reasoning that leads to fears of catastrophic, anthropogenic (manmade) global warming (CAGW).

That’s not the only reason why many Christians—including many Christian climate scientists and other natural scientists—reject fears of CAGW. Increasingly in recent years empirical research has provided significant support.

The fears assume high “climate sensitivity”—that climate will warm a lot because of increased CO2 concentration. But increasing empirical observations point to low “climate sensitivity”—that climate will warm very little. Why? Because the overall feedback mechanisms are not positive (magnifying the influence of any given stress on the climate system) but negative (reducing it). That is, they’re finding that the climate system, though not static or in equilibrium (no natural system is), is generally stable, varying within a fairly narrow range—just what the Biblical worldview implies.

A variety of different studies increasingly lead these scientists to believe that the 2.16F of increased warming that would come from doubled CO2 in the absence of feedbacks is not magnified by the overall feedbacks (to about 5.4F to 8.1F) but rather is reduced by them (to something in the range of 0.9-1.8F). For just one illustration of that, see the recent work of Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist in climatology at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, discussed in his two most recent blog posts here and here. They’re a little technical and assume that readers are already familiar with some of Spencer’s ongoing work in this field, but the basic case can be summarized briefly.

We start with a fact that will surprise the vast majority of the public, since the media have failed to pass this along effectively: There has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995. Alarmists have been puzzled by this. Lately one hypothesis offered to explain this lack of atmospheric warming is that the “missing” heat (“missing,” of course, only if one first assumes overall positive feedbacks) is being absorbed into the deep oceans, from whence, sometime in the future, it will return to the atmosphere, causing a sudden increase in temperature. The work on which Spencer reports demonstrates that this isn’t the case—because in fact there’s been no warming in the deep ocean over the period in question. This entails that the “missing” heat—if indeed there is any—is going out into space, whence it will never return. That, in turn, means that overall feedbacks are negative (minimizing warming from added CO2) rather than positive, the climate system is stable rather than fragile, and the fears of CAGW are unfounded.

"“The Magic School Bus and the Climate Challenge” presents only the alarmist view of global warming, with no balancing consideration of the scientific, let alone the worldview, objections to it. It thus will cause unnecessary fears among children who view it. This puts it in the category of propaganda, not true education."

The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation has made the case against CAGW in greater depth in the major study, A Renewed Call to Truth, Prudence, and Protection of the Poor: An Evangelical Examination of the Theology, Science, and Economics of Global Warming (the work of 29 theologians, scientists, and economists) and in climatologist Dr. David Legates’s lecture “Putting Out the Dragon’s Fire on Global Warming,” part of the 13-part DVD series Resisting the Green Dragon.

“The Magic School Bus and the Climate Challenge” presents only the alarmist view of global warming, with no balancing consideration of the scientific, let alone the worldview, objections to it. It thus will cause unnecessary fears among children who view it. This puts it in the category of propaganda, not true education. It’s precisely the kind of thing against which Dr. Michael Farris, founder and chancellor of Patrick Henry College and founder and chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, warns in his lecture “From Captain Planet to Avatar: The Seduction of Our Youth,” in Resisting the Green Dragon.

E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D., is Founder and National Spokesman of The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, a network of evangelical theologians, pastors, ministry leaders, scientists, economists, other academics, and policy experts committed to bringing Biblical worldview, theology, and ethics together with excellent science and economics to promote simultaneously (a) balanced, Biblical Earth stewardship, (b) economic development for the poor, and (c) the proclamation and defense of the gospel of Christ. A former Christian college and seminary professor, Dr. Beisner has written over 10 books, including Where Garden Meets Wilderness: Evangelical Entry into the Environmental Debate.