Cap-and-Trade Dangerous Answer to Questionable Climate Change
by: Doug Carlson - May 13, 2008 - comments: 6
Schools, businesses, and shopping malls are “going green” in an attempt to cut greenhouse gas emissions and thereby slow or mitigate perceived global warming. Indeed, green has become the new blue.
The battle for “green” even led Time to drop its trademark red-border cover for green in its April 28 issue—just the second time in 85 years the magazine has changed color. Encased is a doctored picture of the six brave Marines at Iwo Jima raising not an American flag but a large redwood tree. “How to Win the War on Global Warming,” reads the title of the cover story, seemingly elevating global warming to a struggle on par with World War II.
Stewardship of God’s creation is a biblical directive for Christians. But much of the hysteria fueling the trend toward “green” centers on a highly questionable theory, propagated by some as fact and a consensus issue, that the Earth is experiencing cataclysmic global warming and humans are the chief culprits.
A sizeable bloc in Congress, led by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and John Warner (R-VA), is now pushing legislation built on this shaky soil. In June, the Senate will debate the America’s Climate Security Act of 2007 (S. 2191), which would set in place a cap-and-trade policy requiring cuts in emissions by 15 percent below 2005 levels by the year 2020. It would restrict companies to specified outputs of greenhouse gas emissions (cap) and allow companies with spare carbon allowances to sell “credits” to others that have exceeded their limit (trade).
While the intent is noble, the fallout is downright dangerous. First, the bill falsely assumes the science is settled and makes humans largely to blame for climate change. This message emanates from such sources as the United Nations, mainstream media, and former Vice President Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth. What’s often left out of the reporting is mention of the growing dissension among scientists. Several months ago, more than 400 prominent scientists—some of whom are current or former members of the UN’s Intergovernmental Climate Change Panel—jointly rejected the so-called “consensus” on man-made global warming.
Southern Baptists have registered their cautions on the climate change debate as well. In 2007, messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention’s annual meeting overwhelmingly passed a resolution acknowledging the unsettled science and opposing government-mandated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Ironically, data from the four leading weather agencies show that temperatures actually cooled, not warmed, in 2007, and by record margins.
Second, the cap-and-trade bill would severely harm the economy and the impoverished worldwide. The United States would lose an estimated 3.7 million jobs in 2020 and 13.1 million jobs by 2050, according to a study by the American Council for Capital Formation. Americans would also face steep increases in energy costs, jumping 49 percent for natural gas and 30 percent for retail gasoline by 2020. And escalating food prices would hit hardest the poorest in the U.S. and around the world, some of the very people the bill purports to protect.
Third, the projected benefit of this energy tax in disguise is minimal at best. Even those who believe that humans are the primary cause of global warming recognize that without an international effort, global temperatures will be virtually unaffected. Furthermore, even if the U.S. joined the Kyoto Protocol—the largest international endeavor to cut carbon dioxide emissions—and every current signatory nation were compliant, global warming alarmists themselves admit that it would only reduce global warming by 0.07 degrees Celsius by 2050.
In light of these concerns, ERLC President Richard Land joined more than 70 scientists, economists, and pro-family leaders in a March letter to members of the Senate urging them to reject the Lieberman-Warner bill. If you share these concerns, please tell your senators to oppose the America’s Climate Security Act of 2007 (S. 2191).
Amid all the climate confusion, the Christian’s mandate for creation care is clear: God told Adam to keep and to till the garden (Gen. 2:15). We should do no less. Scripture also teaches that God created man in His own image (Gen. 1:27), a distinction from the rest of creation. It is therefore the Christian’s duty as a responsible steward to seek to cultivate the Earth for mankind’s benefit, while also caring for creation.
A proper biblical perspective coupled with sound science should guide all good intentions for the environment.
To learn more and to sign up for a monthly newsletter on biblical stewardship, please visit the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation.
The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission is involved in representing Southern Baptists on issues such as creation care and environmental stewardship. If you would like to help us continue our efforts, please click here.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Science, Environment
6 comments (post your own) feed
1 On May 13th, 2008, at 3:09pm, Tom Tirey wrote:
Dear Richard,
Someone had better Tell John McCain that this could be the crowning blow,because it is with me!!! I live in a senior citizen complex. There are 65 present residence and we have coffee every morning and discuss politics. After his speech in Oregan 5/12/08 I polled the Group and they agreed with me that if he doesn’t back off this bad science. He lost all there votes!!! The only reason I as a Christian was going to vote for him was the judges,but anybody that stupid I can’t vote for!!!
IN HIS LOVE,
Tom Tirey
2 On May 13th, 2008, at 3:40pm, Frances M. Hobdy wrote:
Senators, I am against this bill and would appreciate you voting against its passage.
3 On May 13th, 2008, at 9:39pm, Pratt Dean wrote:
Do people who talk about climate change like John McCain ignore such content as above when framing their policy hopes? How can intelligent leaders of broad awareness appear so naive about the climate change issue? For the sake of freedom and prosperity for the people of the U.S.A. and beyond, pray for common sense leaders who can effectively communicate the facts and their ramifications according to climate history and science. Pray that the majority of senators make educated judgments and vote no to S2191 (Climate Security Act of 2007).
4 On May 14th, 2008, at 10:02am, Juanita Lee wrote:
It doesn’t matter what the subject is, whether it’s global warming, the economy or the war, all of the leading politicians will say what the public demands, and unfortunately most of the people speaking up the loudest are not Christians and Satan is working overtime. Much prayer is needed for this country and the question asked “What can I do?” God is still in control.
5 On May 15th, 2008, at 3:11pm, Debbie Payton wrote:
What does the ERLC mean by “Stewardship of God’s creation is a biblical directive for Christians.”? I agree with you, but specifically, what kinds of actions should Christians take to demonstrate that stewardship and pro-actively care for the Earth?
6 On Jun 9th, 2008, at 7:51am, Jolene Atkins wrote:
After doing some reading about the Lieberman-Warner bill, most notably: “Five Myths About the Lieberman-Warner Global Warming Legislation” by Ben Lieberman, this a very dangerous piece of legislation.
I urge you not to vote for the Lieberman-Warner bill. Please do not do subject the American people and do not subject the rest of the world to the consequences of this very bad legislation.
Sincerely,
Jolene Atkins