The Intimidation Factor. Charles Redfern
yield nothing, display offense when the astronomers show photographs of a round planet, and demand a wider audience. The sad fact is that enemy-centered, antagonistic parties do not play for win-win resolutions.
More on that dynamic later. Suffice it to say that such has been the scene in the debates over climate change and creation care: The deniers kept at it while the moderates demurred, darkening discussions over national policy.
For instance . . .
A few samples of denial in Christ’s name illuminate the underlying dynamic.
Sample One: In 2009, Republican US Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois read from Genesis 8:21–22 in a hearing of the Energy and Commerce Committee: “Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though all inclinations of his heart are evil from childhood and never again will I destroy all living creatures as I have done. As long as the earth endures, seed time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, will never cease.” Then a passage from Matthew 24: “And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” The Congressman interpreted: “The earth will end only when God declares it’s time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood . . . I do believe that God’s word is infallible. Unchanging. Perfect.”
I applaud Shimkus’ reverence for God’s Word. I’ll also point out that most credible scientists are not predicting the earth’s destruction or humanity’s extinction. They are, however, forecasting droughts, weird weather, and rising sea levels—all of which expand the possibilities of calamity.
Shimkus also said this: “Today we have about 388 parts per million [of carbon dioxide] in the atmosphere. I think in the age of the dinosaurs, when we had most flora and fauna, were probably at 4,000 parts per million. There is a theological debate that this is a carbon-starved planet, not too much carbon.”36
Sea levels in the dinosaur era were 550 feet higher than today’s. Much of the modern United States was under water.
Sample Two: Shimkus was at it again in 2012, when Mitch Hescox, President and CEO of the Evangelical Climate Network, testified before the House Energy and Power Subcommittee on the merits of Environmental Protection Agency regulations aimed at reducing mercury pollution from coal-fired plants (research indicates that one in six children are born with threatening mercury levels). Hescox stood on a solid consistent life foundation, which places the protection of the unborn within a broader pro-life context: All human life is sacred, from conception to the grave—which means curbing mercury levels is a pro-life issue. “Let’s not endanger our children with a substance we can control,” said Hescox. “We must protect the weakest in our society, the unborn, from mercury poisoning.”
Shimkus responded by reading a statement from the Cornwall Alliance web site: “The life in pro-life denotes not quality of life but life itself” and only refers to “opposition to a procedure that intentionally results in dead babies.”37 Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) employed the guilt-by-association tactic: “I find it extremely ironic that Rev. Michell Hescox and the Evangelical Environmental Network think that the pro-life agenda is best aligned with a movement that believes there are too many people in the world, actively promotes population control, and sees humans principally as polluters.”38
Apparently, Senator Inhofe was unaware that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops also supported the regulations.
Sample Three: The Family Research Council had already impugned Hescox and the EEN when it claimed the organization “has received funding from such liberal groups as the Rockefeller Foundation, and specific signatories are beneficiaries of the largesse of far-Leftists like George Soros and Ted Turner” (Hescox denied that charge). An FRC e-mail issued a dire caution: “Since the beginning, factious people and religious cults have tried to infiltrate, divide, deceive and delude us (Ephesians 6:10–13).” So EEN is suspect.
I cry to the FRC: Why are you so sure you have not been seduced, deceived, and deluded?
Sample Four comes from Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy. While dazed Philippine survivors picked through debris of Typhoon Haiyan, he inaccurately blogged on November 13, 2013: “Much of the worst hysteria about apocalyptic Global Warming has cooled, especially after more than 15 years of no global temperature increases, evincing at least that climate computer models are less than infallible.” He then skipped past warnings from President Reagan’s Secretary of State, George Schultz,39 The World Bank, the US commander of the Pacific Fleet,40 a dozen retired admirals and generals,41 two hundred evangelical scientists,42 the Christian Reformed Church (an NAE member),43 and the many leaders who signed Evangelical Climate Initiative, and declared: “Some of the most committed believers in the theory that human activity is uniquely fueling a disastrous increase in temperature are on the Religious Left.” He singled-out former Chicago Theological Seminary President Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, “who’s ordained in the ultra-liberal United Church of Christ” and who “faulted Global Warming skeptics for the murderous typhoon in the Philippines.” She allegedly displays “unwavering faith in apocalyptic global warming” and “strict adherence to climate fundamentalism.” His last line evokes Greek mythology’s earth goddess: “But zealots like Thistlethwaite will not likely forsake the solace of Gaia’s temple, from which they’ll continue to issue thunderbolts against the heretics who dare to doubt.”44
I could supply other samples, but that will do for now.
Many US evangelicals are in danger of sealing themselves in a clannish cul-de-sac, perhaps isolating themselves from their own international tribe. Their brothers and sisters throughout the world embrace the imperative of addressing human-induced climate change. Yet the deniers have monopolized the US debate, invoking “unity” to silence their perceived enemies while growing shriller themselves. This is not sound argument. This is classic intimidation.
Unfortunately, climate change is a symptom of an overall ethos. We’ll probe another symptom in the next chapter.
9. “Caring For God’s Creation: A Call To Action,” https://www.nae.net/caring-for-gods-creation/.
10. Doran & Zimmerman, “Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,” Eos, Volume 90, 21–22.
11. Gillis, “An Alarm in the Offing on Climate Change,” New York Times Green: A Blog About Energy and the Environment, January 14, 2013.
12. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Climate Analytics, Turn Down The Heat, November, 2012; cf., Schneider, “World Bank warns of ‘4-degree’ threshold of global temperature increase,” The Washington Post, November 19, 2012. Also see Eilperin, “World on track for nearly 11-degree temperature rise, energy expert says,” Washington Post, November 28, 2011.
13. UN News Center, “New UN report cites ‘unprecedented climate extremes’ over past decade,” July 3, 2013.
14. The report can be found here: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/.
15. Found here: https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/.
16. Kaiser, Davids, Bruce, Brauch, Hard Sayings of the Bible, 89.
17. See Houghton’s presentation to the National Association of Evangelicals:“Climate Change: A Christian Challenge and Opportunity,” March 2005.