The Global Warming Issue: The National Association of Evangelicals Adopt a Do-Nothing Policy

An Evaluation of Key Factors in Climate-Change Science

By Tamara Hardison, published Jul 24, 2006
Published Content: 104  Total Views: 83,730  Favorited By: 18 CPs
Rating: 3.6 of 5
Five years ago, in 2001, Bush refused to sign the Kyoto agreement, and now, Davis Guggenheim has released a documentary on Al Gore’s campaign to raise awareness of global warming. Even after leading scientists all over the world, including the muzzled Dr. James Hansen of NASA, have presented very convincing scientific evidence that global warming is a present and futuristically catastrophic phenomenon, Guggenheim’s documentary is still being met with opposition. Many spheres of influence are still operating a do-nothing policy. One of the most surprising spheres is the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE).

In June 2004, the NAE leaders Ted Haggard and Richard Cizik signed the Sandy Cove Covenant, a declaration of intent for evangelical leaders to create a consensus statement concerning the dangers of human-induced climate change. But, immediately afterwards leaders such as James Dobson of Focus on the Family and Richard Roberts, President of Oral Roberts University, pressured the NAE not to take a position on global warming. In January 2006, Dobson, Roberts, and twenty other leaders signed a letter stating they believe that room should be left for “Bible-believing evangelicals to disagree about the cause, severity and solutions to the global warming issue” (Mieszkowski). Even before Dobson and Roberts signed the letter in January 2006, in March 2005, a statement issued by Tom Minnery, Focus on the Family Vice President of Government and Public Policy, was posted on the Focus on the Family website declaring that they do not support the global warming issue, that the proponents of global warming “have attempted to manipulate the issue to stifle advances in numerous fields – advances that would benefit the lives of people the world over, including many of its poorest citizens,” and that “any issue that seems to put plants and animals above humans is one that we cannot support” (Minnery). The NAE represents an influence over thirty million members – a very significant influence.

The Global Warming Issue: The National Association of Evangelicals Adopt a Do-Nothing Policy
The Global Warming Issue: The National Association of Evangelicals Adopt a Do-Nothing Policy

Peru in 1980

Credit: Eric Lee

Copyright: Paramount Classics

Takeaways
  • The "Hocky Stick" is a legitimate model. McIntyre and McKitrick falsely suggested otherwise.
  • The Urban Heat Island Effect does not significantly contribute to average increase of surface-temp.
  • Both the IPCC and the NAS reported scientific consensus.
Resources
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
 
 
this is to wick: the reason of spending large amounts of money on trying to protect our planet is that although it's inevitable, if we really (really really) do something about it, then there might be a chance for the future generations!! but if we do nothing, they will have to suffer the consequences of our stupid and ignorant actions! Save the planet! Save human kind from itself and its ignorance!

Posted on 06/25/2008 at 1:06:09 PM

 
When Kyoto was up for the Senate Vote in 1997, not even one person voted for it. Voted down, 95 to 0. Al Gore himself didn't vote for it. His signature of it later was purely symbolic. Just sayin'.

Posted on 04/30/2008 at 3:04:34 PM

 
Interesting. I thought most of the scientists say it's too late to turn the problem around...the same scientists that say global warming is a man-made problem. If it's too late, why pump billions of dollars into trying to reverse the effects?

Posted on 08/29/2007 at 11:08:00 AM

 
Wow! This is dynamic information clearing up the inception of the detrementaal "do-nothing" policy opposing action against global warming. To base a scientific policy on an Associate Professor of Theological History as opposed to listening to actual scientists is radically irrational. Thank you for the information.

Posted on 07/25/2006 at 9:07:00 AM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
 
Most Commented On