Tuesday, April 10, 2007

God vs. Gore?

Let me preface this short entry by saying that it will not be nearly long enough to say all that I am thinking on this matter. I'm going to make a broad, sweeping statement to which there are many bullet-points I will not address. If you have something to add, subtract, or multiply, feel free to put it in the comments.

I loved An Inconvenient Truth. It actually made me somewhat-fond of Al Gore, who previously evoked zero emotion from me either way. I have always been a "turn the lights off when you leave the room" and "turn the water off when you're brushing your teeth" kind of girl. My parents instilled these things in us not so much for the sake of the environment as for the sake of saving money. It makes sense, though, on both counts. I recycle and I try to "decrease my imprint" on the earth. I think that being a Christian naturally requires me to stop being so egocentric and be a better steward of the earth that God is letting all of us use.

But is the sky falling?

Yesterday I had Easter dinner with my family and my dad engaged me in a discussion about global warming and all of the legislation that will occur as the notion of gloom-and-doom is propagated. Then he reminded me of this verse, where God is speaking to Noah after the 40-day flood ended and Noah and his family were finally able to leave the ark.

This is what God says:

"While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."

In my mind, that settles it. Of course, we may cause some serious problems for ourselves by not taking care of things in the proper way, but I don't believe that global warming will be the end of us.

I'd love to write more, but I'm interested in hearing your thoughts as well...


Mike said...

First, let me say that there are intelligent, well-meaning people on both sides of this issue, so disagreeing doesn't mean hating.

I believe that humans are called to be stewards over the rest of God's Creation. He's given us charge to do so, and that comes with a sober responsibility to respect the work of His hands. So we must not squander resources, or waste them for vanity's sake.

That being said, it's clear to me that the so-called consensus over human-affected global warming (HAGW) is maintained with a strong arm in the scientific community. I cannot call HAGW settled science. It might be true, but it might be not. And if it is true, nothing in the current body of work suggests that we can change it (smarter minds than mine tell me that the underlying math is not simple).

There are a number of a priori assumptions in the HAGW school of thought that I'm not willing to make. Do I believe we should respect the earth? Yes. Do I think we should conserve natural resources? Certainly: as you've said, there's even an economic argument for doing so.

Like I said, intelligent, well-meaning people disagree on this issue, and I don't want to villify those with whom I disagree. However, those who want us to modify radically our way of life at great human and economic cost have the burden of proof with them, and to date, from this observer's point of view, they have failed to meet it.

TLC said...

Agreed. Well put, Mike!

Lindsay said...

i wonder if the cavepeople voted for the leader with the best stance on how to combat the coming ice age. :)

rachie said...

I totally agree with you. We are to be good stewards with all that God has given us. Our actions have consequences. However, I don't believe that global warming will be our doom. God is still in control and Jesus is coming back. The question isn't whether the world will end because of global warming. The question is do we really want to live in a crappy environment because we didn't care for what God has given us?

split ends said...

yeah, i was gonna say some pretty smart-sounding stuff, but mike beat me to it.

Jenni said...

I'm with you, TLC. And Mike.