Environmentalism and More Government Control

Steve Milloy rightly dedicated an entire chapter in his book Green Hell to the fact that America has its first green president. Steve is also the founder and publisher of junkscience.com, which is a worthwhile web site to visit. He begins chapter 11 of his book by asking the following question: “So what does the election of Barack Obama as president mean for the green agenda?”[1] Many today would merely shrug their shoulders at such a question. Do we need to connect the dots between the president and environmentalism? Indeed, we do. We might also add political correctness to the dots that need to be connected.

Two green organizations that invested financially in Mr. O’Bama’s run at the presidency are the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters—not Conservative voters, but Conservation voters. Both of these organizations invested in O’Bama’s state Senate race as well. Thus, after two substantial donations to his “cause,” it’s payback time. Carl Pope, Sierra Club president stated what payback meant in no uncertain terms when he said, “We are not electing the Archbishop of Canterbury or a saint. We’re electing an American politician. Is he susceptible to pressure? He damn well should be. This is a democratic society. Do I worry that he’s going to cave massively in response to special interests? No, I don’t. We’re not going to go away when he’s elected. We and other forces that are supporting him are going to stay organized.”

Astute readers will recall that during the primary, Mr. O’Bama promised—that’s the best word here—that if his green policies passed that the American consumer would see a drastic hike in the costs of electricity and gasoline. They would be a necessary consequence of his programs. Few were paying close attention then, it seems. Of course, this is of a piece with Mr. O’Bama’s belief that human beings are causing global warming/climate change. Since man is part of the problem in Mr. O’Bama’s equation he needs to be punished. The Lieberman-Warner proposal was not stringent enough for the president. According to LW, tradable emissions permits to coal-fired electric utilities and carbon-emitting companies would be issued. “Seventy-five percent of the permits would have been given to emitters for no charge, while 25 percent would have been auctioned. This plan was described as a ‘financial disaster’ by the CEO of Duke Energy, Jim Rogers.”[2]

Mr. Rogers—no the other one—is a greenie himself, but he calculated that the 75-25 split in LW would require Duke to increase its electricity rates by 40% in the first year! Here’s the kicker: The current cap-and-trade bill favored by O’Bama and the Dems “is much more severe than the failed Lieberman-Warner proposal.”[3] This means that for the family that endures the long, cold winters in Minne-so-cold and has a heating bill of $300/month, they can expect a heating bill around $420 for the same service. In addition, Mr. O’Bama just doesn’t seem to get it that higher electricity prices “will stoke inflation and raise unemployment.” Again, this translates into Americans losing jobs—Ohio unemployment is now around 15%—and still having to pay higher electricity costs. No doubt, the O’Bama administration will find a welfare program, paid for by a couple of millionaires to help the unemployed. When in doubt, tax the rich.

This begs the question: Why would an evangelical church support such nonsense? Neither O’Bama nor evangelical leaders can reverse the curse that God placed on the created order because of sin. This is one of the areas that never gets mentioned in the current global warming debates.

Far as the Curse is Found

This summer, I’m preaching a summer series on the biblical doctrine of the covenant. We’ve had a number of visitors from broadly evangelical backgrounds visiting and they hear us talking about being a covenant community and a covenant family and they wanted a word of explanation. Therefore, I decided to give them a summer of explanation. As is prudent, I began in the book of Genesis. I introduced this summer series by laying out a couple of key texts that will guide us through the entire series: Isa. 46:8-10[4] and Luke 24:27,[5] 44[6].

The Isaiah text not only speaks about God declaring the end from the beginning, but also about God’s sovereignty in his counsel and purpose. In Luke, the emphasis is on the fact that Jesus is to be found throughout the Old Testament. Therefore, we are very imprudent to neglect finding God’s plan and his Messiah—not O’Bama—in Scripture. My point here is simply that rather than depending on “science” to show us the way on global warming, evangelicals might want to first do a thorough study of the Word of God and then to measure “science” by God’s infallible Word.

Dr. Roy Spencer issues an apt warning to us so that we don’t place science on a pedestal. He writes, “I will explain why the theory of manmade global warming will always remain just a theory, despite increasing numbers of people who are trying very hard to convince you it is a fact. The emotional attachment that these people have to catastrophic global warming can be traced to a variety of self-interests—careers, political and social policies, philosophies and religious beliefs—all masquerading as science.”[7]

Far too many of us today bow at the altar of science, as if it is the panacea for all of life’s questions. We believe that scientists are a separate breed and that scientists are neutral, somehow unaffected by the fall of man into sin. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Spencer shocks us, but puts matters into perspective when he writes, “In order to begin to understand why there is so much debate about manmade global warming in the science community, you need to first accept that science doesn’t provide us with truth. The practice of scientific investigation involves tools to help us explain how the physical world might work.”[8] He adds, “In our technologically driven age, people want to believe that all of life’s questions will eventually be answered through science.”[9] Many really do, don’t they?

Scientists are, therefore, human beings—fallen human beings. “They have religious, economic, and political biases and opinions—their own worldview.”[10] What this means is that a Neo-Pagan scientist will give you the “Roman” answer to the question of global warming and will leave God out of the picture. How can this be, in any way, acceptable to evangelical churches? Spencer further shocks the scientific world when he states, “Manmade global warming is simply assumed to be true because we have no reliable way of observationally separating natural sources of global warming from human sources. Maybe the ‘fact’ that the Earth has warmed can be considered to be ‘truth.’ Why the Earth has warmed, though, is another matter entirely. If you want possible physical explanations for what we observe in nature, go to science. I you want truth, go to church.”[11] While scientists may hypothesize about the earth’s “thermostatic control mechanism,” the Christian will speak of God. Moreover, many people live in areas where the weather changes rapidly. In Southern California, where I live, predicting the weather is a piece of cake: paradise. Hawaii is the same. Summers in Phoenix are calculable: You’re going to roast your backside off. 120 degrees of dry heat will eventually cook a twenty pound turkey.

But Boston and other places are more difficult to predict what the weather’s going to be. If our climatologists cannot predict more than ten days in advance what the weather is going to be, why do we trust them to go back hundreds of years to tell us what was not recorded? In our next installment, we’re going to investigate what Scripture says about creation, the Fall, and man’s total depravity; all unlikely candidates for discussion about global warming, but you’ll see that they have everything to do with the way we think about this issue. Here’s a hint: how many secular environmentalists take God’s curse upon the created order because of Adam’s sin seriously? For that matter, how many modern Christians do?

---

[1] Steve Milloy, Green Hell. How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You can Do to Stop Them, (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2009), p. 195.

[2] Ibid., 197.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Remember this and stand firm, recall it to mind, your transgressors, remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, “My counsel shall stand and I will accomplish all my purpose…”

[5] And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

[6] Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

[7] Roy Spencer, Climate Confusion. How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies That Hurt the Poor, (NY: Encounter Books, 2008), p. 9.

[8] Ibid., 35. Emphasis in the original.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid., 37.

[11] Ibid. 44.