Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Evangelicals and global warming
Evangelicals and global warming
Apr 2, 2025 8:30 PM

After much whispering and pre-publicity, a group of 86 evangelical leaders has announced their support for what The New York Times calls “a major initiative to fight global warming.” As part of the “Evangelical Climate Initiative,” they are calling for “federal legislation that would require reductions in carbon dioxide emissions through ‘cost-effective, market-based mechanisms.'” (For a response from another group of evangelical leaders, go to the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance.)

I have great respect for the supporters of this initiative, and I don’t doubt their sincerity. And I’m glad to see a call for “market-based” solutions to a problem. Unfortunately, this looks to me like another example (alongside the fuzzy advocacy of the ONE Campaign) of Christians, evangelicals in this case, endorsing a hip cause without thinking through its economic logic.

I doubt any of these evangelical leaders has relevant expertise when es to global warming, especially since the scientific issues involved are plex and change from day to day. So presumably they are simply trusting the advertised “scientific consensus” on this issue and using that perceived consensus as a filter for interpreting mundane events, like ice melting in Antarctica. That’s a problem, not only because the consensus is more manufactured than real (that is, objectively decided), but also because a scientific consensus that the planet is warming still wouldn’t tell us what to do about it. That’s a prudential question that can only be answered by taking account not only of the intended consequences of a policy, but also its unintended consequences.

The issue is not whether we should see ourselves as stewards over creation. That’s a non-negotiable Christian principle. The issue is whether these evangelicals have done the obligatory serious thinking before advocating a specific public policy.

When es to global warming, there are at least four separate issues to keep in mind. You don’t need to be a climate expert to do this.

(1) Is the planet warming?

(2) If the planet is warming, is human activity (like CO2 emissions) causing it?

(3) If the planet is warming, and we’re causing it, is it bad overall?

(4) If the planet is warming, we’re causing it, and it’s bad, would the monly advocated (e.g., the Kyoto Protocol, restrictions on CO2 emissions) make any difference?

If I had to guess based on current evidence, to question (1) I would answer: “Probably.” That is, we’re probably in the middle of a slight warming trend. So in a trivial sense, the climate is “changing.” I say this is trivial, because we know from natural “data recorders” like ice cores that historically, Earth’s climate is always changing. In fact, the last several thousand years, corresponding to recorded human history, have been uncharacteristically mild.

What about (2)? Are CO2 emissions causing this warming? Notice that the question isn’t whether CO2 is a green house gas. That’s uncontroversial. The question is whether the increase in atmospheric CO2 from human activity is causing warming, or whether one of the many natural feedback mechanisms is mitigating its effects? For example, in some cases, increase in CO2 leads to more plant growth, which in turn sequesters CO2. This is one of many examples of a natural feedback process that makes long range climate prediction unimaginably difficult. So at the moment, in answer to (2), I would say: “We don’t know.”

What about (3)? Is it obvious that global warming would be bad, overall? No, it’s not. It might be a net gain. In fact, it’s possible that human CO2 emissions could be preventing an overdue ice age, as Guillermo Gonzalez and I mention briefly in The Privileged Planet.

More specifically, is it obvious that the world’s poor would be worse off, overall, than they would be if the global climate stayed exactly the same? No, it’s not obvious.

Finally, what about (4)? Is it obvious that a reduction in American CO2 emissions, for example, would make much difference? No, it’s not obvious. And is it obvious, as this evangelical statement implies, that a call for restrictions on CO2 emissions would benefit the poor? No, it’s not.

Here, then, is the problem with the statement by this group of evangelical leaders. It treats the answers to these four questions as obviously “yes.” And it’s only on that baseless assumption that the statement can connect our responsibility as stewards with a specific policy position.

My point here is not to make any decisive pronouncements on global warming, or its more recent, and more vacuous substitute, “climate change.” My point is, rather, to plead with evangelical leaders not to do so, and not to pretend that they know more than they can possibly know. That’s especially true when es to the media-hyped global warming bandwagon, of which these evangelical leaders have now, unwittingly, e a part.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
American Evangelical Protestantism For The 21-Century
[Thanks to RealClearReligion for linking. — Editor] Anthony Chute, Christopher Morgan, and Robert Peterson have delivered a real gift toward building a unified future in their newly released Why We Belong: Evangelical Unity and Denominational Diversity. This edited volume brings together Anglican (Gerald Bray), Baptist (Timothy George), Lutheran (Douglas Sweeney), Methodist (Timothy Tennent), Pentecostal (Byron Klaus), and Presbyterian (Bryan Chapell) representatives to do two things: (1) the contributors give personal narratives of how they became a part of their respective...
Obamacare’s Bait and Switch
When a business advertises a particular product in a particular way but secretly delivers something different, it’s considered fraud. When a government agency advertises a particular product in a particular way but secretly delivers something different, it’s considered . . . what, a necessary evil? Huffington Post’s Jason Cherkis spent two days at the Kentucky State Fair with workers from Kynect, the state’s health marketplace. A middle-aged man in a red golf shirt shuffles up to a small folding table...
Is Augustine Obnoxious, Too?
Earlier this week, Elise noted an essay by Rev. Schall, which asked, “Do Christians Love Poverty?” Michael Sean Winters at the National Catholic Reporter also responded to the piece, with ment, “Almost everything about this essay is obnoxious.” But I think Winters really misses the central insight of Schall’s piece, which really is an Augustinian point: A person who sorrows for someone who is miserable earns approval for the charity he shows, but if he is genuinely merciful he would...
The Economics of Profiling
I ran across this video yesterday (courtesy of ESA), which I thought presented some interesting challenges and issues: The video was presented on Upworthy as an example of something “all white people could do to make the world a better place,” that is, use their white privilege to address injustices. A number of economists, including Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell, have written about the power of the market economy to e racism and discrimination, to put people into relationships on...
The Reason Markets Fix Mistakes
Pro-market advocates often talk about how markets are self-correcting. But why do businesses in free markets fix their own mistakes? Because if they don’t, customers and other stakeholders will punish them: Lululemon, which produces yoga and other athletic apparel, provoked outrage from its devoted customer base when it released a flawed product earlier this year: see-through yoga pants. Founded in 1998, pany had built trust and loyalty among its yoga-loving clientele for delivering quality products: In just 15 years, Lululemon...
New Mexico Supreme Court: ‘All Of Us Must Compromise’
The New Mexico Supreme Court, in a ruling regarding a Christian photographer who declined to photograph mitment ceremony of a same-sex couple, stated that this violated the state’s Human Rights Act. In 2006, Elane Huguenin, a professional photographer, was asked to photograph the ceremony of a lesbian couple. Huguenin declined, citing her religious beliefs, and subsequently had plaint filed against her with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission. She was found guilty of discrimination and fined. Justice Richard Bosson, in...
Obamacare: Driving Up Costs And Driving Down Those Insured
Delta Airlines has announced that it foresees a spike in health care costs for pany to the tune of $100 million a year. A Delta executive, Robert Kight, has said that fees associated with Obamacare will be costly, but won’t likely be more beneficial than what pany’s employees now have. One of the costly items pertains to an annual fee of $63 per “covered participant” next year. pany estimates this means a more than $10 million expense in 2014. The...
Beyond Gardening and Governance: Cities Need Business
[This post was co-authored with Chris Horst, director of development at HOPE International. He is a This is Our City fanboy and is grateful that Christianity Today has given him freedom to write about manufacturers, mattress sellers, and solar product designers, all working for mon good in Denver, where he lives with his family. Chris blogs atSmorgasblurb, and you can connect with him on Twitter at @chrishorst. His first book, Mission Drift, will hit shelves this spring. The views expressed...
Get a Free Copy of Kuyper’s ‘Wisdom and Wonder’
If you haven’t yet bought a copy of Abraham Kuyper’s Wisdom and Wonder, you now have no excuse: You can get the Kindle edition from Amazon for free. As Jordan Ballor explained at the time of publication, this book consists of 10 chapters that the Dutch theologian and statesman Abraham Kuyper had written to be the conclusion of his three-volume study mon grace. But due to a publisher’s oversight, these sections were omitted from the first printing. So they appeared...
The Future is Paranoia
We know the government is listening, watching, gathering information. We know that we’re being told it’s all for our own good; after all, who wants to miss a possible terrorist attack? Sleeper cells, the Boston bombers, the haunting memory of 9/11 say all of this is necessary for our safety, right? Not so fast, says Peggy Noonan. First, she reminds us that the NSA has – at least technically – only limited authority when es to spying on American citizens....
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved