The Greater Hoax

“You Can Save the Earth”?

Are you enjoying Creation this Earth Week? The first nationwide Earth Day was held on April 22nd, 1970, on the 100th anniversary of the birth of Vladimir Lenin, the founding father of the Soviet Union. Some say the date is only coincidental. Some say it’s isn’t.

I don’t know. But I do know this: Behind the ‘Save the Earth’ movement runs a forceful undercurrent of hostility to God that is consistent with his state atheism. Take a look at these snippets of media coverage on James Inhofe’s new book, The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future:

That last one, from Rachel Maddow’s personal blog on the MSNBC website, is especially telling, considering Maddow interviewed Inhofe and said she read the whole book. Presumably she invited him onto her show to discuss it, but she appeared wholly uninterested in the substance of it or the science supporting it. In fact she looked rather peeved when he went into it, but that could be because he blew her out of the water when it came to discussing the science. Click here to see the interview.

Clearly, what to her is all about going along with ‘consensus,’ is, to him, all about the science. That and serving the American people. And he knows what he’s talking about. The Senator, who serves on the Senate Committees on Environment and Public Works writes:

“I began my own investigation into the science in 2003, because I found out how much the ‘solution’ would cost and I said that if the United States was even going to consider such expensive, drastic measures that would fundamentally change our economy, the science driving that decision had better be solid. After my rigorous research, I found that it was not – and over the course of six years, more and more flaws continued to surface.”

This was in keeping with his principles for responsible public service:

“Because the Environment and Public Works Committee has primary jurisdiction over the issue of global warming, I realized that as Chairman, I had a profound responsibility, as any ‘solution’ to global warming would have far-reaching impacts for our nation. That’s why from the moment I took up the gavel, I established three key principles for our work on the committee: (1) it should rely on the most objective science, (2) it should consider the costs on businesses and consumers, and (3) the bureaucracy should serve, not rule, the people.”

The Greatest Hoax chronicles Inhofe’s decade-long service on behalf of the America people, explaining in plain language the scientific research and the legislative processes whereby it has been politicized, if not bastardized, in the name of saving the planet. In The Greatest Hoax he chronicles his efforts over nearly 300 pages and documents his facts with over 400 footnotes.

But Maddow mentions none of this, either in the interview or in her blog post titled, “Inhofe refutes climate science with scripture.” So where does that title come from? Inhofe is an unapologetic Christian. He quotes scripture;

“As long as the earth remains there will be springtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night.” (Genesis 8:22)

Professing evangelicals differ on environmental politics, and Inhofe’s opponents, both in the media and Congress, use that to try and bring him in line. It is in that context that the Senator references this verse from Genesis. “God is still up there,” Inhofe reminds the evangelical alarmists, “and he promised to maintain the seasons and that cold and heat would never cease as long as the earth remains.”

So, to Rachel Maddow, Inhofe is an ‘opponent of climate science.’ Not ‘an opponent of a political agenda,’ not ‘an opponent of a scientific theory,’ but ‘an opponent of climate science’ due to ‘the far-right senator’s interpretation of Scripture.’ It’s as if the interview never happened and the Scripture quotation was the only sentence she read from the book. ThinkProgress and Right Wing Watch practice similar journalistic malfeasance. Meanwhile, the good Senator does his job, unswayed by sneers and mockery.

I don’t know enough to predict the future of the planet. But I do know that when the truth comes out, two things will be clear: (1) There is a God up there who has the earth and its climate firmly in hand, and (2) Senator Inhofe’s objection to green politics is not based on his interpretation of Scripture.

This week, marvel away at the beauty of the earth. And do what you can to preserve and protect the life that lives on it. But marvel even more at its maker, who created it out of nothing and daily holds and sustains it in the palm of his hand.

To believe otherwise is to buy into an even greater hoax.

Related articles:

10 Comments on “The Greater Hoax

  1. Typical Terrell — relate everything that you disagree with to communism and atheism. Terrell, don’t you think one can be concerned about global warming and ecology (conservation) without it being a communist, atheist plot? Shame on you!!!


  2. Les, if you wish to respond to either of the points made in the post, here they are: (1) There is a God who has the earth and its climate firmly in hand, and (2) Senator Inhofe’s objection to green politics is not based on his interpretation of Scripture.


  3. I would expect nothing less of Maddow. Good journalism consists of knowing how to gather & decipher reputable information and viewing it from several angles in order to ‘get at’ the truth. She is obtuse. She sees only what supports her argument-of-the-day, she talks over her guests, asks them questions & interrupts their answer before they’ve fully offered it; she is nothing more than a talking head.

    In regards to Inhofe’s book, I admire that he cared enough about Mankind to not only investigate the “science” but to also understand the financial burden it would place on the citizens of this country. Watching the Billions of Dollars this administration continues to spend on failed “Green Energy” concepts makes me sick for my children & grandchildren. I would rather them endure a 1 or 2 degree temperature change 50 years from now than see their futures bankrupted immediately.

    Isn’t Maddow from the party that believes in evolution? Wouldn’t she then hold the belief that we could adapt to a 1 or 2 degree temperature change 50 years from now?


  4. Yes, Rachel Maddow’s views on political issues are no secret. At least she is intelligent and not a demagogue like Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck. People who get their news mainly from MSNBC or Fox News basically only want to get information that agrees with their political bias. At least CNN tries to give a balanced view of things.

    95% of world climate scientists believe in man-made climate change and believe we need to do something about it sooner rather than later. Those who care about the future of our country and our planet need to be concerned about climate change. Inhofe and his ilk are concerned that most Americans don’t want to keep giving corporate welfare to oil companies. After all, he is bought an paid for by the oil companies and their supporters.


  5. Inhofe is outstanding, Liza. Did you watch the interview with Maddow? He was well conversant on the science of this and he was downright charming toward her. Made me smile throughout.

    Another thought concerning the evolutionist: To the evolutionist, there is really no reason to attempt to control the climate. The fittest will survive, and biological life will evolve whether the earth heats up or cools. There is no reason to value life nor are there any grounds for moral imperatives unless there is a God who created life. It is the evolutionist-moralist who is confused.


  6. That’s ridiculous, Terrell. By your definition of how God works in the universe and what people who “evolutionists” believe, then medications should not have been created by scientists to change the course of disease to mitigate suffering and prolong life. You love to misrepresent what those who disagree with you say, so you can belittle them. What happen to the sin of bearing false witness?


  7. Les, I don’t engage in verbal brawls.

    You were invited above to respond to either of the two points made in this post. Here are the two points again: (1) There is a God who has the earth and its climate firmly in hand, and (2) Senator Inhofe’s objection to green politics is not based on his interpretation of Scripture.


  8. (1) I presume then that you don’t take medication, because God has your health firmly in hand, and (2) Senator Inhofe’s objection to green politics is based on his being paid off by Big Oil.


  9. Pingback: Chicken Little Redux | Right Angles

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: