This article has interesting stats about teaching climate change in schools. I would have thought it was more standard curriculum. I did not know certain states were trying to make sure it never got taught at all.
It said most parents don’t address climate change with their kids. How about in your homeschool? Do you bring up climate change? Use certain books or projects that explore the issues? Are you doing anything for Earth Day this year?
Interesting article – especially the bit about certain states (including mine) introducing bills prohibiting “the teaching of any issue included in a state political party platform, on the grounds of anti-indoctrination.”
I’m not surprised that parents and teachers would want to shy away from something that can feel very politically charged. I’m not sure whether I’ve actually used the term “climate change” with my kids (though they’re pretty young), but I don’t think I’d avoid it if it came up in materials we used. Our recent Scholastic newspaper covered Earth Day on a first-grade level but didn’t actually use the term “climate change” – which is probably just a semantic issue.
I’m happy to teach about conservation and consumer responsibility, but I’m not sure I feel entirely equipped or informed enough to answer questions about the science behind climate change, especially when it can be hard to separate science from politics or hype. But this as well as young-earth creationism is one reason why I’d prefer not to use “Christian” science textbooks – I tend to assume that secular ones will be less likely to shy away from topics like climate change, although I’m sure that isn’t always the case.
Good topic! As a teen in Niger, we lived on the edge of the desert, and no one there disputed climate change. The battle against the desert was constant, with “Dust Bowl” like dry seasons and a spreading Sahara. On the other hand, someone in church in Michigan last year said that the promise of seasons after the flood meant that God would guard against climate change (I think @pevaquark also posted something about that recently). Given that there are parts of the world whose seasons don’t resemble ours at all (such as summer and winter), it’s a stretch to imply that that is what God meant. It’s interesting how political it can be.
Ranger Rick and National Geographic World magazines were quite helpful as children’s resources in favor of climate change education for us.
In my area, climate change is often denied or if accepted, then the man -made aspect is cast as doubtful. Teaching it is school would be risky for a teacher’s career.
Of course, it is really more a political marker or signaling than than a thought out position. In some sense, it may be more controversial than evolution, as it is more closely aligned with political positions. Good topic as long as we can avoid political division here.
Speaking of climate change, we’ve started watching the Netflix series called Our Planet – a new documentary which has had some pretty amazing videography so far. The first two episodes we’ve seen have really pushed the climate change aspect (at least from my perspective), including a long scene of ice and snow falling into the sea in the polar regions. At one time I would have called such a thing “propaganda,” but I’m a bit more sobered by it now.
I saw that in our Netflix suggestions. I’ll have to check it out.
How should believers respond to apathetic evangelicals (and others) who claim God will simply ‘fix’ global warming, if it gets out of hand, like this disturbing article?
I’m a big enthusiast in ‘rewilding’ as a solution to climate change, i.e. letting damaged landscapes regenerate, so more forests are created, to produce oxygen, and more animals are around to produce CO2 to feed the plants.
This plan includes reintroducing new populations of predatory animals such as wolves to countries such as Britain, where they can control deer numbers and allow forests to regenerate.
Alongside being environmentally useful, it is also economical, since it boosts wildlife tourism.
If you are intrigued, read the book Feral by George Monbiot. (be warned, he does seem to be hostile to aspects of the Bible, though not without warrant)
Regarding kids, both my kid’s hubbies work in the oil industry, so it is complicated. They are actually pretty environmentally woke, probably recycle more than me, but live in a work environment that is pretty hostile.
There are interesting parallels to evolution in the climate change debate. They both begin in the conflict framework. With evolution you have Huxley framing the debate from a Scientism/Atheist standpoint. Climate change has always been framed in a political context of conservative vs. liberal, Republican vs. Democrat. I think both sides come at it so hard that they have a difficult time accepting valid points and criticisms because they are naturally skeptical of what might happen if they give an inch. So they listen only to people that confirm their biases and demonize the other side. It devolves into an us and them mentality. Even when great programs like Our Planet come along, it’s hard for some not to view it with cynicism created by so much baggage. It’s hard to open up your mind when you’re repeatedly demonized as a “climate denier” or a “socialist”. We don’t intentionally teach climate change as much as we try and teach good stewardship from a Christian view of God’s good creation. We try to make it as agenda-free as possible.
Great article and really useful for me as a mom of 2 kids. Yes, I definitely talk about climate change with them, explain why this happen and how can we influence that. They really love to talk about that.
Not so much among most of the scientists studying the issue. It’s much less of a proxy for them.
Perhaps. But they’re not the ones framing the public debate. That’s been done by politicians and talking heads who like to polarize the narrative.
Yeah. This reveals once again that the veneer of civilization – particularly the post-Enlightenment advance – is pretty thin.
Out of curiosity, what do you think is the best solution to climate change?
I think planting trees/rewilding is the best solution.
I think it has to be a combination of government mandates and regulation and personal action on the individual level. But the reality is neither governments nor individuals have much of a history of doing anything until they are smack in the middle of a disaster, so I’m not super hopeful.
Planting trees is good. Teaching more sustainable agriculture in the majority world. I actually think GMOs can be a good thing in some places if they increase food production. Increasing education about contraception and family planning in many areas of the world would help. Doing what we can to reduce fuel dependence and develop infrastructure for clean energy. Changing our diets to more efficiently use resources and have less of a carbon footprint. Exploring and developing urban agriculture techniques so food for cities can be more locally sourced. Drinking tap water in places where it is safe instead of bottled water.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.