Surely those of you older than 40 remember Hugo, The Abominable Snowman. Tunneling underground to Palm Springs for vacation, Bugs and Daffy take a wrong turn and they end up in Nepal. There they meet Hugo, who wants to make them his pets, and hug them, and pet them, and squeeze them and name them George. It gets hot, and Hugo slowly melts, saying, "Gosh, its hot in here!"
So, Christian people, is it hot in here? I found this item very interesting. Read more about it, here. Here is the website, and the signatories of the statement are here.
I have not found the location of the website from "Evangelicals Who Think Climate Change is Hooey", or "Jesus Would Drive A Big Ole SUV.com". However, I find this all interesting, and worthy of thought and discussion in the church.
Don't you?
3 comments:
Steve,
You said (in “Gosh Its Hot In Here,” 2/8/06):
“I have not found the location of the website from ‘Evangelicals Who Think Climate Change is Hooey’, or ‘Jesus Would Drive A Big Ole SUV.com’. However, I find this all interesting, and worthy of thought and discussion in the church.”
Well, if you find The Evangelical Climate Initiative’s report (“Climate Change: An Evangelical Call To Action”) interesting and “worthy of thought” then perhaps you’ll find it interesting to look at the “other” side of the issue. The act of considering both sides improves the integrity of one’s intellectual journey, no?
The “other” side in question, here, is the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance which issued the letter in opposition to the Evangelical Climate Initiative’s issuance of a report. You can find the letter signed by James Dobson and Chuck Colson and others at the website of the alliance at: http://www.interfaithstewardship.org/pages/home.php.
More importantly, you can also find a report (“An Examination of the Scientific, Ethical and Theological Implications of Climate Change Policy” by Roy W. Spencer, PhD, Paul K. Driessen, Esq. and E. Calvin Beisner, PhD) that provides an alternative view of global warming listed at the ISA website at: http://www.interfaithstewardship.org/pdf/ISA_Climate_Change.pdf.
Here’s my point: a great deal of the “gravitas” posited to the idea that we can be confident of how global warming will affect our future and of how we can take current actions to decrease the negative effects of such warming – is based on the fact that most people are ignorant of the details of this complex issue and, therefore, tend to accede to the somewhat simplistic presentations offered in the mainstream mass media.
The problem is: the views of the media, of policy groups, of think tanks, of “experts” at the United Nations (such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and other journalistic or public policy enterprises -- do not necessarily represent scientific findings on this issue in the detail and complexity that the findings deserve. Instead, what are being offered by these groups are opinions influenced by political and cultural biases as much as by scientific knowledge. The United Nations itself, for example, is a highly political body.
Genuine scientific findings can best be understood by looking at a broad range of articles submitted by research scientists to peer-reviewed scientific professional journals. These are not always easy to read, though summaries are provided in the articles or in the same journals. Another possibility is to look at papers prepared by the National Academy of Sciences; they are summaries of findings in the scientific field.
Now, if you take a good hard look at the “alternative” views (such as the report I mentioned at the ISA’s web site) and follow up with some time spent in the NAS’s reports, you’ll discover that the media’s impressions of the issue do not match the manner in which the scientists are actually explaining these issues; there are broad agreements, yes, but these are mixed with differences as well.
Primarily what you’ll find are uncertainties within the scientific literature, terms used such as “”likely” or “unlikely,” and descriptions that contain a whole range of variables when considering possible climate scenarios for the future. You’ll find that information given by the media has often been chosen for its dramatic impact and not for its accuracy in conveying the limited nature of scientific knowledge about climate prediction. For example, worst-case possibilities are often reported while normal range figures are left out.
The NAS report “Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions (2001)” – found at http://newton.nap.edu/books/0309075742/html/ -- was requested by the White House in 2001 from the NAS itself in order to procure a full (but summarized) view of what was happening in the field of climate research at the time. Reading the report is eye-opening because it emphasizes the tenuous nature of climate knowledge and warns against the easy conversion of this information into a quick guide for public policy.
I’m not claiming that global warming is not occurring. What I’m saying is that the exact extent of it – and how much fossil fuel use (or decrease of use) will affect it – is largely a matter of approximation and initial assumptions. The “best guesses” on how to proceed with policy are a matter of politics and special interests – and of the agendas being driven by various parties.
Evangelicals are risking division, here, because they’re getting involved in specific political controversies concerning various groups that claim they’re representing the views of “objective science” when they’re actually representing quite prosaic political ideologies and opinion-trends among the nation’s cultural elite.
I hope you take another look at this issue.
My question...When the church takes a stand on such things as global warming (spending their time and efforts on the subject and argueing for or against it with others who are either Christians or not), what kind of positive or negative impact is it making on what Jesus asked of the church, Matthew 28:19-20 "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age?"
Cindy Ovokaitys
It took me awhile, but I found my own answer...It was right in front of me all along, staring at me...we take up such stands for our children and their children and their children. However, as Rick mentioned, we have to be careful to discern what is opinion and what is truth.
Cindy Ovokaitys
Post a Comment