Science Deniers

A label often attached to those who doubt either Darwinism or man-made global warming is “science-denier”. If one questions either the assumptions or the conclusions of either of those narratives, one is assumed to be anti-science, as if disagreeing with a conclusion was the same as losing all contact with reality. But I have to say in the dispute about a number of issues, I have a strong suspicion it is not really about the science. Why?

Because I have a pretty direct example of agendas driving conclusions in spite of evidence coming from the other side of the political and religious spectrum.

Choice Words about Environmentalism and Population Control

I just thought this quote from Chuck Colson Breakpoint article this morning was choice.

In contrast to the Christian idea of stewardship, which “wishes to conserve and protect the natural resources of the planet for the sake of future generations,” this viewpoint “wishes to eliminate future generations for the sake of the planet.”

It illustrates the contrast between naturalism run amok and good sense stewardship, between seeing man as created in God's image and charged with caring for all of creation vs. man as merely another part of nature to be controlled. Francis Schaeffer was all for preservation of the environment (Pollution and the Death of Man). But he clearly did not see humans as a disease to be eradicated for the sake of the environment. Another reason why a Christian voice in issues of public policy is a necessity.