http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/global-warming (there is also a link to a technical version of the article at the top of this article)
So this article is from 2006 but it was nice to read something that was less one sided. This actually makes it a little harder to analyze in this way but I'm gonna give it a shot anyway. Not choosing a side is still a stance and the author uses forms of legitimation to support this stance.
The article starts by briefly stating the common portrayal of global warming by the media and then he questions these conclusions with the statement "...we need to separate interpretations from facts."
The author then legitimizes himself by indirectly stating his credentials in the statement "Practically all atmospheric scientists (the author included) agree that global warming has occurred."
By questioning the extreme views and agreeing with the "facts" he attempts to establish himself as an objective writer. He then goes on to write about the warming that has occurred and the possible reasons for it.
"However, if all the greenhouse gases have caused an increase by 60% CO2 in equivalency units, and man has only warmed the atmosphere about 0.6°F, then these climate simulations are much too sensitive to the effects of CO2." He puts doubt on the severity of the warming effect of greenhouse gasses effects by questioning the methods (in the previous paragraph) used for prediction but he agrees that they are part of the reason for the warming.
"Unfortunately, the media and proponents of significant technology-induced global warming have demonized many qualified critics..."
The author ends his article by saying that more research is needed and that each person should test for himself both sides of the issue. Being a biblically based scientific website he ends the article with a statement that is consistent with his stance. "Although God gave us the command to have dominion over the earth, He also instructs us to care for and be good stewards of it." I was very happy that he included this because I get very annoyed when my fellow Christians use the first half of that statement to defer responsibility for taking care the earth.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
its good to see an article not lean to heavily on one side of the issue.did the article mention anything on the rising of the oceans and platonic plate movement?
ReplyDeleteIt is refreshing seeing the big picture of the Judeo-Christian God's will. Like you said, the more common argument involves man's mission to dominate. I remember it well from my church-going days.
ReplyDeleteMy general cynicism keeps me from transitioning into a full-on pagan, but the more time I spend on this earth the more sorry I feel for what we've done to it. If the concept of owning land bothers me (which it does), how can I process a damage so far reaching and so seemingly irreversible?
Before I run off rambling, can it really be argued that any higher power condones killing the earth? The Bible's creation story is by no means egalitarian--the grass was never worth as much as Adam or Eve--but surely we were never given the right to abuse God's creations...right?
Mason, no I didn't see anything on that but I admittedly did not read the entire technical version of the article.
ReplyDeleteHey Holly, thanks your comment. It has always bothered when people use man's God given authority as an excuse to abuse the earth. To me it is like a child living in a house provided by their parents. The child is more important than the house, but as a parent you generally teach your children to not destroy the house. Authority and responsibility go hand in hand. (if i wanted to get technical with the metaphor i suppose a house with a child is going to take some wear no matter what)
I just had the chance to go hiking in interstate park on Saturday and it was absolutely gorgeous. If I love my God as my heavenly father and I truly believe he made all this, then there is no question I want to take care of it.
"how can I process a damage so far reaching and so seemingly irreversible?" I can't answer that for you but as follower of Jesus (Christian has a lot of stigma attached to it, sadly much of it deserved)I hold on to the hope that this isn't our final home. Just as Jesus' death and resurrection redeemed us from "a damage so far reaching and so seemingly irreversible" (sorry to take you out of context :) )The bible says one day He will in a sense redeem nature by creating a new earth. Does this mean we can do whatever we want with "this earth", of course not, just as I don't destroy my dorm room just because I am not living their next year... okay maybe that's a bad example lol but I think the point is still there.
p.s. I really don't mean to just pester you with my talk about the Jesus but to misquote Michael Crichton "Everyone has an agenda, especially me."
much love, Jared
oops. haha "the Jesus" that made me laugh...
ReplyDelete