living in the beauty of dirtyfaith

So.  With the apparent “leaks” (read: stolen) from mail “in” and “out” boxes from the CRU;  conservatives, moderates, and liberals (and everyone else) are engaged in a new battle for planet Earth.

Those skeptics of climate change have valid points with some of the revelations that these e-mails provide.  Are some scientists trying to distort some data?  Are scientists who disagree with many or all of the conclusions of climate change proponents having a harder time being published?  Perhaps.  As with anything, we will always have some people who try to do anything they can to prove a point they are trying to make and will do what they can to shut others out of the conversation who disagree with them.

However, The Guardian had a great article on this whole situation.  One of the things that you will not hear from certain circles is that these e-mails date back 13 or so years.  Now, if one is covering up then it doesn’t matter how far back it goes but remember that just because one (or two, or three – out of thousands) covered up 13 years ago doesn’t mean that 1, 5, or 10 years ago they (or anyone else) were covering up data that they were coming across.

Plus, anyone can cherry pick.  A lot of what was “revealed” were one sentence statements that were supposed to cast doubt on the whole scientific community who saw climate change as a real and growing problem.  Here is the problem:

“I love my dog.  I wish she were dead.  Not because she is horrible, but because she is suffering from a horrible disease.”

Someone could come along and pull out my sentence: “I wish she were dead.” and brand me a horrible dog owner and person.  How could I ever wish my pet dead?  But what happened?  My sentence was taken out of its full context that provided the essential meaning to what I was saying.

It seems as well that much of this is referencing so-called paleoclimate data – reconstructing past climate scenarios using data such as ice cores and tree rings. “Climate change is based on several lines of evidence, not just paleoclimate data.” said Bob Ward, director of policy and communications at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics.

Beyond these things lies the simple fact that much that is found in favor of climate change is peer-reviewed (of course peer-reviewed is, often, the most reliable source of information in these matters).  Plus there is the piles of piles of data that support climate change to some degree.  So, obviously, the concept is that thousands of scientists are working together to pull a fast one over on… the world.  Just that conspiracy alone should keep Glenn Beck busy for the next 6-9 months.

Even for those scientists who argue that climate change is real and happening there is not one single uniform opinion about how fast it is happening, how long it has been truly going on for, the detailed scenarios of what may happen, the amount or extent of human activity that is contributing to climate change, the course of action that must be pursued to take care of this potentially serious issue.  What they realize, though, is that something….something is happening and it must be addressed.

Many people, especially anxious conservatives, especially of the religious stripe, are uncomfortable with the whole global climate change debate, conversation….overwhelming evidence, that anyone who has concern for the environment, in whatever shape, is deemed a loon, a liberal, a wacko,  or enviro(mental)ist.

So how is this:  why not call it “creation care”?  Okay, not my phrase, but a good one nonetheless. Creation Care sees a multitude of issues and umbrellas it under the banner of taking care of, being good stewards of, not abusing what has been entrusted to us by God.  Would this make it more palatable for Christ-followers in particular?  Would they see that there are numerous verses that show to whom the earth belongs and that one of our responsibilities is to care for the Earth.  We are tenants.  We are not owners.

Quoting at length from the EEN’s website: “the environment” is actually a part of God’s creation – of which humanity is also a part. This is important to stress. As many of the scriptures below will demonstrate, the Bible teaches that both “nature” or “the environment” and humanity are part of creation. Both are inextricably linked to one another, have been ever since God formed us from the earth (Gen. 2:7; 3:19; Ps. 104:27-30), and will continue to be in God’s future when we will exist as resurrected bodies on a new earth (I Cor. 15:35-44; Rom. 8:19-23; Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21:1). In other words, humanity and the rest of creation are part of all of creation.  Therefore, creation-care does not just mean caring for “nature,” nor does it just mean caring for humanity; it means caring for both. A biblical creation-care ethic is a holistic ethic.”

What type of Christ-follower could disagree with this?  Only one who is blind, unaware of what Scripture teaches about creation, really doesn’t care what scripture teaches, or one who is driven more by their politics than their faith on these moral issues.

I certainly don’t have all the answers, I struggle to find balance and right thinking on global concerns.  But the issue is whether we are asking the questions, constantly, sincerely and not with the idea of proving others wrong but looking at where we may be wrong in our thinking and where we need to, perhaps, get closer to the heart of God in these issues.

There is a saying that applies to the church in particular but can be applied at the individual level: always reformed, always reforming.  My thinking has changed in the last 5-7 years on a whole host of issues (including climate change).  I don’t think I have become more liberal or crazy, but, I truly believe, more in line with the heart of God on some issues.  I am not there perfectly (not even close) but I sense I am moving in the correct direction.  “Moving”….ahhh, that’s the key word.  That’s the difficult word.  That word makes all the difference.