I have often thought of writing on the whole climate change issue but hesitate cause it is so divisive. Let me share two thoughts though that really concern me more than the truth about the science.
The students we are working with are growing up with two conflicting arguments. To oversimplify, there is the Al Gore side and the skeptic side. Both have scientists and data that they claim supports their view and refutes the opposition. It used to be, as in for many centuries, that when two opposing views came to light, the proponents of each would debate them to see which had more merit. This was a helpful way to hash out the issues and help people see more clearly. In fact, such debate is actually for the good of all because we come to a better understanding and reach better conclusions. Today though, we get accusations of fraud and mere childish behavior from our world leaders. It used to be that these debates helped upcoming generations form more logical arguments and learn to work through their differences. Today, the standard default is to claim offense and engage in name calling. What does this do for a generation that is not learning conflict resolution or how to engage with opposing views?
There is a deeper issue at stake even than what I just brought up. What if one of the two viewpoints is radically correct? By that I mean, take one side and imagine the outcome if they are totally correct. If the skeptics are correct, then the media, politicians, and international governmental bodies have lied to us. I’m not confusing the idea of being mistaken for actually telling a lie. What I mean is that if the most extreme accusations of the skeptics were true, then this thing was fabricated on scant evidence. If on the other hand, the climate change people are correct in their worst predictions, then we are about to face practically a global meltdown. Either way, I am predicting a generation that is angry beyond our wildest imagination and the real potential will be for actions of the most drastic nature. Why would they not be really ticked? And then who are they going to trust? This would likely create an anger so deep and a mistrust so profound that it affects every aspect of life. Now, we can sort of rest in a hope that the truth is somewhere in the middle of the extremes. Yet, to what extent one side persuades the masses will determine the extent of the damage. What I am thinking of here is the possibility that in seeking to fix the global climate change issue, we could easily destroy the world economy and make this planet a very difficult place to live. On the other hand, we could see people so put off by the hysteria and hype that they fail to become better stewards of the environment.
So, how do we address the issue with students? Is it possible to change the outcome in terms of the results that are almost inevitable with them? The two outcomes I have suggested are the lack of ability to debate issues, and the possible angst of a generation that feels ripped off. I do think that we can approach this with good biblical teaching and a historical perspective that will enable at least the students we work with to get a better lesson and experience from it all. Then again we could ignore it as a contentious issue and spend our time focused on the usual matters of our ministries. Is this a vital teachable moment?
Two opposing articles in the news this week might help us understand the polar divide (no pun intended)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/opinion/28gore.html
Leave a Reply