The United States tops the list of so-called climate change “deniers,” according to a new study by a UK market research group being reported in The New York Times. The researchers apparently asked people from many countries, including the US, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, China, and India, the question, “To what extent do you agree or disagree? The climate change we are seeing is largely the result of human activity.” The New York Times then asked, “Where in the world is climate change denial most prevalent?” The answer? America, supposedly.
Well, this question really didn't have anything to do with people denying climate change—really, it was about the reasons behind climate change. I’ve never met anyone who actually denies that climates change! It’s pretty obvious that climates can change on a large and small scale within our own lifetimes. The big issue is not if, but why … and what does it mean?
What many of these secularists and climate change alarmists are doing with climate change is the same thing that many secularists do with the creation/evolution issue. Creationists are accused of “denying science” because we deny that molecules-to-man evolution occurs.
When secularists and the media say that we “deny science”—like National Geographic did last year—they stir people’s emotions and make them think that we deny reality. But creationists don’t deny science! We first need to define what is meant by science, like I did during my debate with Bill Nye “the Science Guy” last year.
There are two different kinds of science: observational and historical. Observational science is done in the present and is directly testable, observable, and repeatable. It’s what put man on the moon, the rover on Mars, and builds cell phones and medical innovations. It’s what enabled creation scientist Dr. Raymond Damadian to invent the MRI.
Historical science, however, is very different. It’s not directly testable, observable, or repeatable because it deals with the past. It must be interpreted, and what you believe about the past is going to determine how you interpret the evidence.
So creationists don’t deny science—we deny the evolutionary interpretation of the evidence.
And the same situation exists with the climate issue. Because some people, often people who start with God’s Word and not man’s ideas about the past, don’t agree that man is responsible for much of climate change, then climate-change alarmists and the media class such people as climate-change deniers. But we don’t deny climate change! We simply are skeptical of the rather scant and spurious evidence of man’s big responsibility, because we come from a different starting point.
You see, those who have a different worldview—such as biblical creationists—see small changes in climate differently than those who believe in millions of years. And we also recognize that climates have been changing since the global Flood of Noah’s Day about 4,350 years ago. So, obviously, we’re going to reach different conclusions (you can read more about these conclusions in this article by Avery Foley).
Now, by making the claim that people who deny alarmist predictions are climate change deniers, alarmists stir emotions against them because it is obvious that climates do change. But it’s a false accusation!
Just because someone doesn’t agree with the secularists’ interpretation of climate change (just like a creationist who doesn’t agree with an evolutionist’s interpretation of the fossil record), they are accused of being climate-change deniers (just like creationists are called science deniers). And this is simply not true.
Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
This item was written with the assistance of AiG’s research team.