Global warming skepticism

Ken Alexander has an excellent editorial in this month’s edition of The Walrus on global warming. Alexander doesn’t believe that Harper is naive about global warming whatsoever. Indeed, he’s downright Macchiavellian! Trampling on the success of Kyoto, Canada (with an obvious nod to the US) has insisted that either everyone does the global warming jig or no one does. Obviously not everyone can, so Canada has refused to partner up and dance. Alexander writes,

At Bali, Canada framed itself as Britain circa 1800: a developing country, not yet industrialized, even backward, and as a result its own and the world’s environmental hereafter will be sacrificed for the economic here and now.

This positioning – Canada like Britain then, like India and China today – was a stroke of strategic genius, and as markets remain volatile and we settle down to do our taxes, Harper believes it will sell.

In a roundabout way, this brings me to my question: why don’t evangelicals on the whole care about this? Why do we get our panties in a dither over scientists expressing concern that the earth might be heating up? Is it really a green-Marxist conspiracy? Come on. Is it really a direct assault on capitalism? Meh.

An unfortunate consequence of the evolution-creation debates is that evangelicals have become skeptical of science in general. This is ironic given how dependent we moderns (and wannabe pre-moderns) are on science.

Are there arguments against global warming? I’m sure there are, possibly even good ones. But, that’s not my point. Why is it that our immediate impulse is to scoff and say ‘here we go again’? It’s interesting, no?