|That's the trail, over and between the rocks--an example of the kind of rocks I deal with, and also maybe a metaphor for the rocky path ahead as we deal with climate change? Or am I stretching it?|
|Art that was at the Telephone Pioneers Shelter the first time I hiked through--I hoped it'd still be there, but it wasn't.|
1. It's too late to do anything, so why try? We may as well just party and enjoy civilization now.
2. All of the signs of climate change parallel those of biblical apocalypse, so climate change is good news, because it will make Jesus come back faster.
3. Or this one: even if there is a mass extinction event, and 90 percent of people die, it'll be good for the earth. It'll be a good thing if seven billion people die—only the strong will survive, and the world will remake itself post-apocalyptically.
This last one is the one I believe that future generations will find most objectionable. After all, it will be them that die.
I continue to find myself talking about climate change all of the time on the trail. Referring people to my blog. As of today, I've had three nights (or more) of climate conversation in a row.
The first was with an environmental-science major named Dakota, one of the Iowa Girls, who agreed with me about the dire fate of the forest. Recent science suggests that trees may react very badly to a projected three-degree rise in temperature, dehydrating much more quickly than people.
"Yeah," she said. "All of the trees are dead."
The next night with Macklemore, the nihilist audio engineer.
Tonight it's Fizzles, a northbound Nevada hydrologist. I told her I try to write about these things, although I don't know how to publish what I write. I want to write for Christians, to remind them that faith means action here on earth. That a human mass extinction means seven billion souls dead. I want to write to explain to believers how faith and science are compatible, that evolution is a form of creation.
And I want to write articles for scientists, telling them how to convince a layperson of the value of their work. To help ordinary people understand and *believe* the science of climate change. To explain to ordinary people the vast amounts of innovative technology that already exists to solve the problem, to save the trees and our grandchildren. That we can switch to sustainable energy with little loss to our standard of living, if we can manage massive economic dislocation. I want to explain the history of revolutionary movements, that change is possible through activism, even if only a small percentage of people become active. That we are the sleeping giant, but that we can awake. That we've awoken in the past. That the ship of state is driven by us.
But where to publish these articles? The only places that publish about climate change are leftwing or green magazines whose readership is already convinced and does nothing. Conservative Christian politics has been co-opted by rightwing conservatives and is in bed with the enemy, Big Oil.
I said, to Fizzles, that Christians believe that our life—each individual life—has meaning. That gives us a reason to fight against mass destruction, against death. I believe that Christians are the only ones who can combat the sheer Darwinism of that belief system, that says the world'd be better off after a mass die-off.
I just can't manage to be that much of a nihilist. Really, is everyone else? And then I think maybe I am, that maybe all of the people who believe that the planet needs it are correct, that maybe even God is saying that we need it. In the face of this argument, I find myself quailing, my faith uncertain. Is human death really something to be prevented? Or have we inflicted so much harm that we need a Dying to bring other life back?
Can I really believe that? Would I have said that before the Holocaust? Is this Holocaust different because it will not be just one particular race extinguished?
But it will be. It'll be the poor people in the global south, who already die in boats. There are already climate refugees. We just don't care.
That was one new answer Dakota gave me: it's because the people who will die are poor. It's the same problem humans have always had. We've never cared about the poor or the weak.
Christians are specifically commanded to care for the poor and the weak. We are commanded to protect the least of these. It's why we took the lead on abolition, and why I believe, eventually, we'll take the lead in fighting carbon dioxide emissions.
The fundamental problem is not carbon dioxide or climate change or drought or water shortages or blizzards or hurricanes. The fundamental problem is our ability to talk back to powerful oligarchies. Speaking truth to power has always been the problem. As Buddha did. As Jesus did. As Francis did. As Luther did. As Gandhi did. As King did. As Mandela did.
Even the French and Soviet revolutions did. Successful and unsuccessful revolutions prove the lesson of history, that people have power. People choose to believe that they do not, because it's easier. And my faith gives me hope that the Spirit may yet animate us to make change for the better. To take to the streets. That there is still time.
Fizzles and I discuss awhile, finding common ground. I explain my Christianity in the face of her skepticism, my faith the only weapon I have against nihilism. My faith is the only thing that gives me hope for change, my belief that God gifted human beings not just with souls but also with ingenuity, which is why we have science. And faith and science together can give us solutions.
And then Hare, another thru-hiker, comes over. He's a Christian from Montana. He believes that the droughts and wars mean the Rapture is coming, and we don't need to worry about stopping people from dying. We just need to convince all the people who are going to die to go not to hell but to heaven. I say: but what about justice? What about Christ's kingdom here on earth?
[Hiking the same section in 2004, much less concerned about climate change.]