Saturday, September 21, 2019

Climate Change in Context – 1. Getting the “Atmosphere” Right

This weekend, youth from 150 countries were so concerned about the global threat of climate change that they left their classrooms and took to the streets to urge world leaders to act.  As a science educator, I encouraged student involvement in learning.  So, I commend these students for their initiative, but I wonder if they are knowledgeable enough to preach to adults, many of whom lack consensus on whether or how much humans are responsible for climate change.

I am often asked, “Do you believe in ‘climate change?’” or, “Do you think humans can stop climate change?” or, “What do you think about “climate change?” 

The first two questions are easy.  My answers are, “Yes” and “No,” respectively.  Yes, according to science, climate change has been occurring for as far back as we have records or can extrapolate.  Geologic evidence suggests quite a few sudden, major, catastrophic changes in both the atmosphere and landscape of Earth—the kind of catastrophic events that can bury and preserve animals and plants within rocks or polar ice.  Because climate change has been occurring since long before human impacts on the Earth were significant, it is doubtful that we can stop climate change now.  If we could, what climatic conditions would we prefer for each latitude and biome?  Would we eliminate deserts?  Expand rain forests?

My answer to the third question, “I don’t always know what to think,” reflects my attempt to approach scientific issues with humility and healthy skepticism.  Therefore, I want to use this first of a series of articles on “Climate Change in Context” to emphasize the importance of two virtues that seem necessary in our discussion of global scale issues like climate change-- civility and humility.  If we want to make any headway on climate change or any other issue, there must be an “atmosphere” of civility and humility.


We can easily fill the atmosphere of our discussions with “hot air” and accomplish little else when we lack civility. Polite communication must underly every discussion, and this means both listening and speaking politely with one another.  The Apostle James wrote, Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry (James 1:19).  Perfect advice, isn’t it?  However, notice in the verses just before v. 19, James urges readers to humble themselves, recognize their proneness toward pride and selfishness, and their need to seek wisdom that comes from a gracious God.

David Rupert’s article in Patheos entitled “What the Bible Says about Civility” has numerous Scriptures encouraging civility through a spirit of humility, kindness, and self-control.  These are fruit of the indwelling Spirit of God (Galatians 5: 22-23) which ought to enable Christ-followers to be examples and to be winsome contributors to discussions of controversial issues (1 Peter 3: 15).

Rupert quotes Jim Brown, author of Ending our Uncivil War: A Path to Political Recovery and Spiritual Renewal who said,

We’re in a Binary Age, where nuance is rare, complexity is verboten and sharp political battle lines are drawn. Churchgoers on both sides of our national mess are reluctant to turn a cheek, fine with abandoning the least of our brothers or condemning anyone who is wealthy, and adamantly opposed to loving their enemy. In fact, some want blood. They want Barabbas.

Those who purpose to engage in conversation, debate, and social media messaging with civility and humility can create an atmosphere in which contention can give way to understanding of one another’s differing motives and perspectives.   Polite humility is essential when discussing the nuances of complex scientific data and differing interpretations.  For example, read the following pairs of “climate change claims” and consider how you might participate in polite dialog in an effort to understand them:

Notice that neither claim denies that increased global temperatures have been measured..  But the two claims disagree as to which is the cause and which is the effect.  If increasing global CO2 is the result and not the cause of changes in global temperatures, then climate science needs to objectively tell us like it is lest our policy proposals miss the mark.  As we will see later, Allan M.R. MacRae supports Scientific Claim #2 in “CO2, Global Warming, Climate, and Energy.”

Humility among scientists and reviewers of research manuscripts is essential if we are to avoid ethics violations.  I have written in “The Conscience of Science” of the many incidents in which scientists reportedly falsify data, suppress or hide contradictory results, or refuse to review research that may favor an opposing claim.  So, it is important that our electorate be educated not only in the science of global ecology and climate science, but that we learn to be discerning of the political motivations and forces that take opposing sides in the debate about climate change. 

First, are policies being grounded on the basis of “good science” and correct conclusions about climate trends?  Second, are proposed solutions properly targeted to solve the environmental problem, or are they aimed instead at simply justifying the concentration of more power in Washington, DC as part of a social experiment? 

Clearly, we can see that “climate change” has a context—one that demands of all Americans our best efforts based on high moral and ethical standards of conduct in both the sciences and in politics.  For this, I will suggest that we need fewer street marches and more classrooms that teach at least the historical importance of the foundation provided by our Judeo-Christian heritage.

In particular, a good atmosphere for dealing with climate change will demand that we understand and apply the biblical narrative of Genesis 1 and 2 which we will consider in Part 2.  We can only wonder sadly as how many of the estimated 4 million people who marched this weekend for climate change have any knowledge or understanding of how important Judeo-Christian ethics have been to the foundation of human civilization. 


As I watched a Swedish schoolgirl, Greta Thunberg, likely not familiar with the biblical narrative, spawn a global movement, I am reminded to exercise humility and restraint lest I jump to conclusions about her qualifications to lead.  In this regard, I conclude with another quote from Jim Brown by David Rupert, as a prescription that may go far toward improving the “atmosphere” of our classrooms, conference rooms, and even the street marches for climate change:

The path to political recovery and spiritual renewal requires work.  We can turn the cheek, but not be weak.  We can lift up the least among us, as uncorrupted religions teach, while we respect and improve our laws.  We can love our enemies deeply – “agape,” as the Greeks, Christ, and Dr. King encouraged.

But David Rupert wonders, “Are we too far gone?”

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comment