There’s already good reasons to be conflicted about modern environmentalism. And the unfolding Climategate scandal will, most likely, only inflame that anxiety.
If anyone should be concerned about the environment, it should be Christians. And frankly, I wonder why more Christians aren’t more concerned. It could be argued that the first role of Man was to steward the earth. If God is the Creator, then this place we live is His Masterpiece. Defacing a Rembrandt is nothing compared to dumping sewage into our oceans and toxins into our air. But if you’re like me, I’m finding it hard to balance a reasonable concern for the environment with the radical politicization of the issue.
The New Environmentalism — the one that appears at the root of so much climate change hysteria — swings between poles of Earth Worship and Socialism, Paganism and Politics. On one hand are those who celebrate Earth Day as Pagan Day. To them, environmentalism is a kind of religion that replaces the Judeo-Christian worldview by deifying the planet and its inhabitants. On the other hand are Anti-industrialists who seek to control society — transportation, business, food, energy, etc. — through EPA regulations (or what some have called Eco-fascism). As Bradley Doucet wrote in Why On Earth are We So Worried About the Planet?
At their worst, environmentalists do not merely lack confidence in our ability to solve our problems and fail to analyze costs and benefits. At the most extreme, they are positively against technological progress. They are not just against the pollution caused by cars; they are against cars. They not only favor energy-saving light bulbs; they favor turning out the lights. They do not merely criticize the ills that accompany our civilization; they criticize civilization itself.
Climategate reinforces the suspicions of many that legitimate environmental concerns have been hijacked by pagans and/or radical anti-industrialists, and that data is being suppressed to push through an agenda. Rather than objectively researching both sides of the issue and letting the chips fall where they may, we are now facing the possibility that scientists and academic elites — our global braintrust! — are complicit in, dare I say, some type of conspiracy, fudging numbers to force their hand. Only, in this case, the “hand” is a complete reshuffling of the deck.
Would cutting carbon emissions help the environment? Probably. But in light of this unfolding data, can we even be sure that the data we’re getting isn’t skewed? Yes, I want to be a good steward of the earth. But can I do so without, in the Al Gore sense, “going green”? Which leaves me to ask, How does one practice real environmentalism without buying into the politics and spirituality of the Eco-fascists?
No one in reality should want to unduly pollute the planet, right? But this climate change gobbledegook is the same hysteria we "older" ones have seen since every previous way-out scare originated. What bothers me more than anything is the sheer arrogance of thinking man's breathing can destory this planet. Granted we haven't at times been the best stewards and cleanup in a lot of places needs to continue along with finding solutions to particular problems related to specific messes, but God is in charge of the destruction of planet earth, and it won't happen because of junk science. It will happen when God says "Enough!" to man's sinfulness, having given a basic outline of it all without a specific timeline.
The outright lies of these global warming types defy reason. And, yes, it does make anything reasonable about environmental issues a pain to hear because so much of it seems based upon whackiness rather than on real rational help for the particular issues where improvement is needed.