God’s Plan for Climate Change

Pic: Roman Eisele (CC)

Pic: Roman Eisele (CC)

Could droughts, heatwaves, superstorms and, for good measure, a polar vortex or two finally force a real change in U.S. policy?

Not if God’s Plan gets in the way.

According to a 2011 Baylor University study, seventy-three percent of Americans believe that God has a plan for everyone. And the more strongly they believe in God’s Plan, the more likely they are to see government overreach in the affairs of Americans. As Christianity Today pointed out, this distaste for government’s role in human affairs “…diminishes as belief in God’s plan wanes.”

It’s a simple juxtaposition—God’s preset course for history trumps any scheme concocted by humans. And any human-centered efforts that deny the Almighty’s heavy hand in the writing of history are, at best, apocryphal and, at worst, heretical.

In the case of the environment and climate change, human impact on something as big as the whole of God’s creation is, in and of itself, a dubious proposition. This makes human-centered explanations of climate change or the sixth mass extinction not only incidental, but even self-aggrandizing. It also fosters a willingness to accept the otherwise unacceptable, and this willingness is predicated on one simple turn of phrase—it’s all part of God’s plan.

Climate is part of God’s Plan.

Extinction is part of God’s Plan.

In fact, the end of the world is part of God’s Plan.

And because it nullifies Genesis—the alpha that sets up Armageddon’s omega—the science of evolution remains the biggest challenge to the veracity of that plan. If evolution is right, then Genesis is wrong. If Genesis is wrong, then God is either a liar or superfluous. And if we are not created in God’s image or living out God’s script for our lives, then humans are not quite as special and unique as we’d like to think.

For that thirty-three percent of Americans who, according to the most recent Pew poll, refuse to accept anything but Genesis, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Without God’s Plan, humans alone have to shoulder the burden of responsibility for turning a once quite real Eden into sweltering Hell on earth.

That’s why almost a century after the sad circus of the Scopes “Monkey Trial” and over one and a half centuries after Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species was first published, the obvious fact of evolution remains a relentless, if completely mind-boggling, controversy for a group of devout Americans who inadvertently, subconsciously or intentionally abet the greed and avarice of Big Carbon.

Read the full article at Newsvandal

Follow at @newsvandal

33 Comments on "God’s Plan for Climate Change"

  1. Follow the money being pumped into this belief system. Largely by people who know the actual science, but believe that being sufficiently wealthy will ensure that the bad consequences of global warming will happen to the 99.99% and not them.

  2. It’s very simple. Things I like–like GMOs and cheap gas–are part of God’s plan, but things I don’t like–like the government telling me not to do something that will affect others–are the work of Satan.

  3. It’s all ok, because the second coming is soon. All those dirty heathens will be gone, and the earth will be returned to it’s paradisaical beauty. All according to Dog’s plan.

  4. emperorreagan | Feb 21, 2014 at 11:04 pm |

    God’s going to smoke us out of these clothes that he didn’t want us to find out about in the garden of eden.

  5. I am as agnostic about “Anthropogenic Global Warming” as I am about any other organized religion.

  6. BuzzCoastin | Feb 22, 2014 at 12:54 am |

    god should get a Twitter account
    and weigh in on this

  7. misinformation | Feb 22, 2014 at 5:27 am |

    Is that a picture of god flashing an illuminati hand signal?

  8. “…the obvious fact of evolution…”

    Then excuse me but why is it only a theory and not a law? Or do you have indisputable evidence (and no, I’m not God Squad, just anti-laziness in arguments)?

    • Calypso_1 | Feb 22, 2014 at 1:40 pm |

      Both molecular evolution and genetic evolution are observed, tested and reproducible. Many of the mechanics have been worked out at this point. The difficulties that most people seem to have are with larger morphological changes. If you understand both the mechanics and the timescales these are appear to occur over than than the concepts are far less problematic. One of the primary challenges in explaining speciation to the satisfaction of a wider audience is that the mechanisms of morphological expression are still largely unknown. This however is not primary to the underlying process of change.

      • kowalityjesus | Feb 22, 2014 at 2:32 pm |

        Human appreciation of scale should be part of college cirriculum. An inability to understand the possibility of drastic morphological change in evolution over vast amounts of time is just one facet of a wider cognitive barrier. There are all sorts of metaphors that we can use to try to bring a recognizable scale to prehistoric time or outer space or the atom.

      • BuzzCoastin | Feb 22, 2014 at 8:34 pm |

        I just read a paper outlining the extant problems
        with Darwin’s theory
        not the least of which is
        the explanation of how one specirs evolves into another
        or any proof thereof
        aka the missing link
        there are also issues caused by our knowledge
        of how dna sorta works

        it’s a nice huristic
        but it breaks down in specific places

        it’s not the final word on the subject

        • Calypso_1 | Feb 22, 2014 at 9:02 pm |

          If you are stuck on the term ‘missing link’ than there is a problem. One, it has no relevance outside of the popular focus on gross external morphology being of primary significance. Two, the fossil record is full of them. The challenge facing some in seeing this more clearly is a matter of understanding sample rate.

          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 22, 2014 at 9:09 pm |

            the fossil record is full of them

            name one

            Darwin became a religious belife
            just like creation theory
            unprovable heuristics
            that break down in specific places

          • Calypso_1 | Feb 22, 2014 at 9:32 pm |


            darwin has nothing to do with it. he was one man. religion has nothing to do with it. existence of gaps in knowledge is not contested nor relevant to the existence of all other evidence.

          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 23, 2014 at 12:07 am |

            gravity is a law of nature
            how it works is a theory
            evolution is a law of nature
            darwinism is a theory

            to mistake the map for the territory
            is easy to do

          • Calypso_1 | Feb 23, 2014 at 12:43 am |

            darwinism is map you are using.
            no wunder you are lost.

            new roads are added to the territory everyday, some folks just don’t walk down them

          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 23, 2014 at 1:06 am |

            Golforgilhisjurylegs! Brian Lynsky, the cub curser, was questioned at his shouting box, Bawlonabraggat, and gave a snappy comeback, when saying: Paw! Once more I’ll hellbowl! I am for caveman chase and sahara sex, burk you! Them two bitches ought to be leashed, canem! Up hog and hoar hunt! Paw! A wouldbe martyr, who is attending on sanit Asitas where he is being taught to wear bracelets, when grilled on the point, revealed the undoubted fact that the consequence would be that so long as Sankya Moondy played his mango tricks under the mysttetry, with shady apsaras sheltering in his leaves’ licence and his shadowers torrifried by the potent bolts of indradiction, there would be fights all over Cuxhaven. (Tosh!)

          • Calypso_1 | Feb 23, 2014 at 1:36 am |

            copypasta joyce; ever more oft the thought-terminating cliché

          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 23, 2014 at 2:11 am |

            an astute observation

            outta the mouth of babes

        • kowalityjesus | Feb 23, 2014 at 2:08 am |

          I don’t deny that existence is really too weird to fit into a framework of theory. I maintain, though, that evolution is about as close as we can get. And I rebut against myself that too many weird artifacts exist to try to quantify the history of all life.

          • BuzzCoastin | Feb 23, 2014 at 2:27 am |

            history is replete with theories
            that were based on partial data
            which became hardened into belife
            when new data shattered the theory

            it is the height of hubris
            to assume wee know diddly
            about something beyound comprehension

            wee are chimps posing as rocket scientists

          • kowalityjesus | Feb 23, 2014 at 10:09 am |

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeJoVeKSsyA I am quite sure this guy would not exactly agree with you on that, but I am also quite sure that this guy would be at a complete loss for words in the face of mystery. Still highly recommend.

  9. As long as the spiritual realm and the material realm are considered two separate things, people will keep using one or the other to justify not taking responsibility for their own lives. Acknowledging that we have some power of choice — and therefore responsibility for our own actions — is the basis of freedom.

    Whether the belief system is…
    god made me do it
    genetics made me do it
    real politic made me do it

    They are all the versions of the Nuremberg Defense… the boss made me do it. And they are all excuses for failing to take responsibility for being an asshole.

  10. kowalityjesus | Feb 22, 2014 at 2:42 pm |

    I have thought about this a lot. I came to the conclusion that either 1. since carbon in small quantities over long periods of time is actually good for plant life, we should not be as big of arseholes and use fossil fuels way more sparingly, saving the lot of it so it can be used for something way more awesome when we have much better technology in the future, like using coal for high-entropy bases for a “replicator” of sorts to the glory of God 2. God knew this was going to happen, and the integrity of the earth does not matter as much as human volition, i.e. “go and subdue the earth” for God-knows-what reason.
    If everybody lived like me though, we wouldn’t have a problem with global warming, but then the world would probably be boring.

  11. Jonas Planck | Feb 23, 2014 at 1:07 pm |

    If God has a plan for everything, and God is omnipotent, then nothing any human can do will ever go against that plan. Any scheme concocted by humans is part of that plan, no matter how much the faithful want to think it goes against God’s plan. This also would mean that there is no such thing as free will, therefore there is no such thing as sin. All sins are part of the plan. So they have nothing to be judgmental about, and no right to condemn anyone, because all sinners are only doing God’s will. Inshallah

  12. Holy shit, I can see the fnords!

Comments are closed.