BABY, IT’S HOT OUTSIDE
By William Urban
President Obama has announced that Climate Change is the greatest problem facing our nation and the world. Not many people here or over there agree — we have problems here and out there that are immediately important, and therefore grab our attention, but who can disagree with a president who has had such splendid successes with the economy, foreign policy and health care? He’s on a roll and his time in office is running out.
Worse for him, fewer and fewer Americans are buying the Global Warming argument that underlies the panic. Partly this is because fewer people trust the UN, many mistrust this administration, and some don’t even trust moderate Republicans.
Religions and political movements prosper best when they have an inspiring leader. In 2008 this was Barack Obama, but Hope and Change did not tell us much about his environmental agenda. Even four years later we still didn’t appreciate how deeply committed he was to closing down coal and oil. It was like his whispered comment to President Medvedev of Russia, “Tell Vladimir I can be more flexible after the election.” The economic impact of his plans is only now becoming apparent. Rhetoric was always his strongest point, but good speeches will not power the air-conditioner or the electric car that will eventually supplant the hybrids that has not yet replaced the conventional automobile.
How is Climate Change a religion? First of all, it is a belief system that stands independently of facts. If the recorded temperatures remain flat in spite of ever higher CO2 levels, it must be because the heat is hiding somewhere. If Michael Mann’s hockey stick was historically inaccurate, it still demonstrated a higher truth; if Mann would not share his data with other scientists, that was to prevent them from using his research to undermine his thesis that temperatures would soar, and soar quickly. If Michael Mann’s emails demonstrated that he tried to suppress dissenting ideas, then criticism should be directed at the hacker who broke into his system.
College and university scientists remind students that science is based on concepts that are continually tested and retested. That is, a theory is a theory, and scientists are constantly challenging whatever we believe at the moment. A case in point in the recent contention that fats are not bad for you. That is, our bodies need protein, carbohydrates and fats, but only carbs will add to that tire around our middles. The gluten-free movement had already stumbled onto this, but without the statistical proof. Now it looks as though you can enjoy that hamburger as much as you want, as long as you don’t eat the bun.
Will this theory last long? Not if recent experience is any model. But more important than the health benefits is the public concluding that scientists don’t know any more about what they are talking about than they do.
This isn’t true, of course, but anyone who remembers the actors portraying doctors smoking and recommending one cigarette over the others will recall that back then scientists were the next thing to God. Higher, perhaps, even, if He even existed. (There are still quite a few folks who think Ph.D should be spelled Go.D.)
The religion of Climate Change has a philosophy that anyone familiar with St. Augustine or Calvin will recognize, which is that humans are basically no damn good. Human beings will mess up everything — themselves, their societies, their environment — and even the best intentions and best efforts will be ineffective in achieving salvation. The UN report on Climate Change confirms this. Even if we stop polluting right now, the temperature will continue to rise, and nothing we do can turn it around.
We might slow it a bit in years to come, but the fact that the US has been working on pollution for decades is ignored. US output of CO2 has fallen recently and is now back at 1992 levels. That is according to Mother Jones magazine, a publication hardly in the pocket of the Koch brothers who are blamed for all of America’s ills, but especially coal mining.
Predestination, one of the central pillars of Calvin’s theology, never prevented his followers from trying to do God’s work. We see this in their tireless efforts to abolish slavery, to promote women’s rights, to eliminate slums and reduce poverty, and by passing strong laws, to stop smoking, drug use and alcohol abuse. Calvinists strongly endorsed education, which is why when local Presbyterians founded Monmouth College, they insisted that it offer a first-class educational program. They were also tolerant (the first Black applicant was admitted, the first Asian applicant, the first Roman Catholic, and presumably the first atheist) and discussions about scientific truths were encouraged. Back in the nineteenth century President J.B. McMichael announced that he saw no conflict between evolution and religion, thus avoiding the nasty debates that tore many colleges and universities into angry factions.
In contrast to this open-mindedness, those who believe in Climate Change insist that the warming trend is “settled science” and call skeptics “deniers.” This is truly the triumph of belief over the scientific method.
Will it be hot this summer? Probably. I remember last August as blistering, while. June was pretty nice. But that was just my bad memory. The State Climatologist reports; August was dry, but normal temperatures; September was very hot and dry. That confirms that I, like everyone else, tend to remember facts that reinforce my beliefs, not those which undermine them. For the year 2013, in spite of a warm January, Illinois was five degrees cooler than 2012, and had more rainfall.
None of this will discourage Climate Change enthusiasts from saying that human beings have been evil and that we deserve what we will get.
Climate change is occurring, of course. In the 1830s and 1840s Louis Agassiz demonstrated that the earth had experienced an Ice Age. This ran against the Bible, but Christians came to accept it. Today Climate Change is a religion for atheists. Is that an improvement?
Review Atlas (May 15, 2014), 4.
