Climate Change: Faith and Fact


Welcome. There are roughly 80 million evangelical Christians in America and for years a majority
of their ranks have refused to take global warming seriously. Many were swayed by the
likes of Rush Limbaugh, who said, “If you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot
believe in manmade global warming… you must be either agnostic or atheistic to believe
that man controls something he can’t create.” Then there is the powerful Republican James
Inhofe of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, who said: “God’s still
up there, and the arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change
what he is doing in the climate is, to me, outrageous.” So it is that while more Americans believe
global warming is real and caused by human beings, some two-thirds of white evangelical
Christians are not convinced. And they wield a lot of political clout. These are people
who believe that to be saved by god you must be born again – your heart and mind transformed
by a cathartic spiritual experience. But as the climate crisis worsens every day, it’s
clear these good folk need a different kind of conversion, one that opens them to the
reality overtaking us. Only someone they trust, one of their own, is likely to help them see
the light. Which brings us to Katharine Hayhoe. You may
have seen her with the actor Don Cheadle on the opening episode of Showtime’s award-winning
documentary series, “Years of Living Dangerously.” KATHARINE HAYHOE in Years of Living Dangerously:
When I look at the information we get from the planet I look at it as God’s creation
speaking to us. And in this case there’s no question that God’s creation is telling us
that it is running a fever. BILL MOYERS:
That fever has been running high on the plains of Texas, where Katharine Hayhoe lives. West
Texas is cattle country. Or it was, until prolonged drought killed off the livestock
business and devastated towns like Plainview. DON CHEADLE in Years of Living Dangerously:
It’s 10am on March 16th, 2013. This has become a weekly ritual. Each Saturday these
people walk the four miles around the Cargill meat packing plant on the edge of town. They’re
praying for rain and for the plant to reopen. Six weeks ago it closed, and overnight 10
percent of the area’s entire workforce was laid off. It shut down because of a three-year
drought that devastated the cattle herd here in Texas. And without cows, you can’t run
a meat packing plant. CHURCH PASTOR in Years of Living Dangerously:
Father, we pray for the situation in Cargill, by God. Because as you bring the moisture,
as you bring the rain conditions will change, my God. Because it’s your rain– BILL MOYERS:
Katharine Hayhoe knows those believers well. She, too, is an evangelical Christian, also
a rising star of climate science, named this year as one of “Time” magazine’s “100 Most
Influential People.” She and her husband, Andrew Farley, who’s a pastor, teach at Texas
Tech University in Lubbock. Together, they wrote this book, “A Climate for Change:
Global Warming Facts for Faith-Based Decisions.” Welcome. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Thank you for having me, Bill. BILL MOYERS:
When I saw the film I couldn’t believe that that was the Plainview, Texas I knew many
years ago. Then it was bustling, like a beehive. The film reveals it as an almost lifeless
place. Now why are you convinced that this has to do with global warming instead of just
the usual droughts that come and go in West Texas? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Everybody living in Texas knows that droughts are just part of life there. So the first
question people always ask is, well, how is this any different from what my daddy or my
granddaddy experienced way back when? First of all, we see things changing. We see
plants and trees flowering earlier in the year. We see birds and insects and other animals
farther north than they ever used to be. It’s warmer now in every season of the year in
Texas because of climate change. So along comes this drought just like you had 30 years
ago and 50 years ago. But now it’s so much warmer that more water
evaporates from the soil, more water evaporates from our lakes and our rivers and our streams.
And the drought is more severe than it would have been otherwise. We had an incredibly
severe drought that summer of 2011 throughout Texas and Oklahoma. And that drought conditions
persist until today. BILL MOYERS:
As a scientist, you study consequences over time. And is it what’s happening over time
that has led you to think this is not just the weather, this is change? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
That’s exactly right. One of the most common things people do is they say, oh we had a
cold year. Or, oh we had a wet summer. Therefore, where’s all this stuff? Where’s all this global
warming? Climate is defined as the long-term average over at least 20 to 30 years. So we can’t just jump on some band wagon immediately
and say, oh that heat wave was definitely climate change. We have to very carefully
analyze the data and look to see if there is a trend laid over the pattern of natural
variability. So we’ve always had our highs and lows, our wet and dry. But the assumption
that our society is built on is that over long periods of time, 20 to 30 years, it all
averages out. This is the assumption that we build our houses
on, that we design our cities on, that determine where we grow our crops. What happens if that
line is no longer stable? Then we still have our pattern of natural variability but the
highs are getting higher over time. And that’s exactly what we see. BILL MOYERS:
The Christians who show up in the film think drought is an act of God. Are they counting
on faith to save them? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Oh yes. I mean, there are signs everywhere saying, pray for rain. During a drought, every
church has a sign out front saying, pray for rain. They have prayer rallies, they have
prayer walks. We believe that God has the ability to do
things like that, but as Christians I think we also believe that God set up the world
such that there are these types of natural events, good and bad, and there are consequences
to our actions. And so in this case, first of all we have
developed an agricultural society in a semi-arid environment. One that depends on an aquifer
that is going one way fast. So as we become more and more vulnerable to rain fall, that’s
just when climate change is coming along and altering that rainfall. So it’s a series of
choices that we’ve made as a civilization, a society, at the local scale, national, and
global, often not knowing what the result or the impact of those choices would be– BILL MOYERS:
But all their lives, those people were told that God is omnipotent. If you challenge them
on that and say, not God, but we have to change the course or we will suffer from global warming
irrevocably, aren’t you undermining their faith? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
That’s one of the most frequently asked questions that we get. And so when my husband, who’s
a pastor, when my husband and I wrote this book together, he was the one who laid out
the book and said, these are the questions that we have to answer. And number one on
that list was, if God is in control, if that’s what we believe, then how could something
like this happen? But isn’t that the age-old question? Every
time something happens in our lives, or that of our community, or our country, we think,
if God is in control, how could that happen? How could a plane full of innocent people
on their way to the AIDS research conference be shot down? And as I’ve talked to more and more people,
I’ve started to figure out what the questions are that people have. And if you tackled the
questions head-on, how do we know this is real? Why do we think it’s humans, not a natural
cycle of the sun or volcanoes, or anything else? Why do we care about it? Why do I care
about it? Here are my values, and here, based on my
values, are why I care. If we can get past the issue of rhetoric and politics, and actually
start talking about what’s in our hearts, I have seen amazing things happen in terms
of moving forward to look at solutions that are consistent with the values that we have. BILL MOYERS:
So let me ask about you. When it comes to science as you said, you crunch the data.
You analyze statistical models, but to become a Christian, you don’t crunch the data. You
don’t analyze the models. But why do you require evidence as a scientist, that you don’t require
as a believer? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
One of my favorite versus comes from Hebrews in the New Testament. It talks about how faith
is the evidence of things not seen. By definition, science is the evidence of things that are
seen, that can be observed, that are quantifiable. And so that’s why I see faith and science
as two sides of the same coin. Science is by definition bounded by what we
can conceptualize, what we can document, what we can observe. And faith, I think, is the
other side of that. Why does this even exist? Why can we do science? Why does the world
make sense? Why are there elegant, physical laws describing the behavior of our atmosphere
that also apply to galaxies on the other side of the universe? BILL MOYERS:
And yet people we both come from, people who love us and we love, remain distrustful of
science, and of scientists. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
For a long time, many of us have felt like scientists are on one side espousing one set
of values. And Christians and or conservatives are on the other side. And so along comes
this new issue of climate change, which in my opinion has enormous theological implications.
It is entirely consistent with the Christian faith to love others and to love our neighbors. So along comes this issue of climate change,
but who are the primary spokespeople? It’s these pointy-headed scientists who have been
on the other side of the fence, on many other issues regarding creation, evolution, the
age of the universe. Even other issues today, like, genetic modification and things like
that. So, it’s no surprise that when you get a messenger who is not trusted, who you perceive
as not sharing your values, that you know, why would you believe them? BILL MOYERS:
It was so clear from the film that you have actually made some converts. NELLY MONTEZ in Years of Living Dangerously:
I’m Nelly. I used to work at the Cargill plant. KATHARINE HAYHOE in Years of Living Dangerously:
Oh, ok. DON CHEADLE in Years of Living Dangerously:
She was just talking about how all, that she hadn’t really thought about … well tell
me what you were … NELLY MONTEZ in Years of Living Dangerously:
Just, you know, like the things you know the things that we can do as far as, you know,
taking some of that layer of blanket off, you know, right there, I’m sitting there going
I didn’t know that. Wow, you know, I didn’t know that. […] I had never heard of climate
change. After hearing Katharine I was just like wow. If we start using the right things
and doing the right things we could probably save our planet. BILL MOYERS:
Do you often get feedback like that? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
In person, I would say there’s more positive feedback than negative. But in terms of not
in person, internet, email, letters, things like that, I would say it’s probably about
99 percent negative. And I get five to ten times more hate mail from Christians than
I do from atheists for example. BILL MOYERS:
Well, caring about climate is entirely consistent with who we are as Christians. But over the
last several decades, we have increasingly begun to confound our politics with our faith.
To the point where instead of our faith dictating our attitudes on political and social issues,
we are instead allowing our political party to dictate our attitude on issues that are
clearly consistent with who we are. BILL MOYERS:
What does that tell you? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
That this issue pushes a button. It is a giant red button as big as this table, and it really
makes people mad because they feel like it threatens something that they hold dear. And
that’s because we’ve been told that you can’t be a Christian, or you can’t be a conservative,
or you can’t be a person of faith or even a person of integrity and agree that climate
is changing, that humans are responsible, and that there’s something really important
we need to do about it. BILL MOYERS:
Who’s telling them that? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Well, if you read the social science, which is honestly my favorite reading material these
days, we have found out from social science that number one, if you take conservative
Protestants and you ask them what they think about climate change, but you control for
age, for conservativism, and for political party affiliation, then the bias drops out.
That’s what is accounting for conservative Protestants thinking climate change isn’t
real. It’s our political affiliation. But here’s the thing. In the majority of cases,
if you really dig down to the bottom of people’s objections to climate change, they’re not
based on the science. They’re based on the solutions. People fundamentally object to
the solutions to climate change, because climate change is a tragedy of the commons. So by definition, one individual’s actions
will not be sufficient to address the problem. We have to act together. Together it means
government. People are fundamentally opposed to government solutions to a problem. And
so, but it’s a lot easier to say it isn’t a real problem, than to say it is a real problem,
and it’s a very serious problem. But we don’t support any action to do anything about it. BILL MOYERS:
I think I hear you suggesting that conservative Christians are Republicans who, are deeply
influenced more by Republican opposition to government than by global warming itself.
Because if they take the science seriously, we have to do something about it. And the
only way we can do something about it, is collectively through government. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Yes, I believe actually that climate change is a casualty of much larger societal issues.
Just to give you an example going back even farther, when we talk about climate change,
the words we hear are things like carbon tax, and government legislation. If you go back in history, what was the whole
American Revolution, what did the whole American Revolution come from? It came from tax and
government tyranny, and government imposing sanctions and taxes on people that they didn’t
think were fair. And so I think it’s actually imbedded in the American psyche to object
to big government solutions that involve taxing people’s rights to do or use whatever they
You’ve been quoted saying you feel like the conservative community, the evangelical community,
and many other Christian communities have been lied to. By whom? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
So with climate change, we have people who we trust in our community. We have people
who are Christians, we have people who call themselves Christians, we have conservative
leaders who may not be Christian but are very respected within the community. And these
are the people standing up telling us it’s a hoax, it’s not real. Or even maybe it’s
real, but it’s not a big deal and we don’t have to worry about it. BILL MOYERS:
Well, this is the puzzling thing. You know, why so many conservatives in leadership positions,
Republicans I’m talking about, why do they dismiss the science? What do they have to
gain, except the satisfaction that they’re limiting the growth of government? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
That’s, oh that’s a great question. And honestly, trying to figure out that question is one
of the main reasons why I am now in the department of political science. My background’s originally
in physics, and then atmospheric science. And then just a couple of years ago, I actually
moved departments for multiple reasons, as all of us do. But one of the reasons is because
I feel like the science is there. We have all the information we need to take
precautionary steps on this issue. It’s not a scientific issue, it’s not a matter of one
more report will do it. One more national climate assessment, that’s what will solve
the problem. One more new analogy, and people will get it. Information is not the answer.
The answer has much more to do with who we are as humans, and how we function politically. BILL MOYERS:
So why is it that two Christians walking down the same road of faith suddenly turn in exactly
the opposite directions of belief about this issue of global warming? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
I think it relates to the fact that we often look to leaders we trust and respect to tell
us what to think about it. And especially in the more evangelical parts of the Christian
community, we have a leadership vacuum. I mean, aside from Billy Graham, it’s hard to
name a conservative Christian leader who’s been around for decades. People come and go.
We don’t have a Pope Francis. We don’t have, you know, John Paul, who has written very
extensively and eloquently on the environment. So in that leadership vacuum, especially in
the more conservative parts of the church, our political leaders step in. People who
share values with us. The media steps in, people who will say the things that we agree
with in terms of you know, abortion, gun control, immigration, things like that. So I think
it’s a matter of we are being told things by people who don’t like the solutions to
climate change, and have decided that it’s a lot better and it’s a lot smarter to deny
the reality of the problem than to acknowledge it exists, but say you don’t want do anything
about it. So we have people, for example, like Bob Inglis.
Probably every politician when they’re first elected, say, to Congress, they might be walked
into a room and shown a picture of Bob Inglis and said, let me tell you what happened to
Bob. He, very conservative person on every single issue, except climate change. His son
convinced him that climate change really was real. Bob had the moral courage to stand up
and say it is, and he was out. BILL MOYERS:
Uh, huh. In the primaries. BILL MOYERS:
Presumably by many very Christian– KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Absolutely. BILL MOYERS:
And he is an outspoken Christian man. He shared every single value with people except for
that one, and that one was enough to end his career as a politician. But I mean, you know
Christians. We have a history of majoring on the minors. I grew up in a church where the church split
between cousin Gordon and somebody else over whether when you get to heaven you cups of
equal size filled with different amounts of joy, or whether somebody gets a full cup of
joy but the cups are different sizes. So compared to that, climate change is a much bigger issue. BILL MOYERS
So you said the recently, “the evangelical world is the last significant holdout on the
reality of this issue.” This issue of man-made global warming. Do they have the muscle to
prevent us from saving the planet? KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Goodness, I don’t know the answer to that question. And I’m glad I don’t, because what
motivates me is hope. The hope that by just changing a few minds, by giving, and it’s
not, the responsibility is not mine to actually change their minds. I see my responsibility
as giving people the information they need to make the right decision. And so bringing the issue home and saying,
climate change isn’t just kind of number 151 on a list of things you care about. Let’s
look at the top five things you care about. Let’s look at your kids health, your job
security, how much your bills cost to pay, like, your air-conditioning bill and your
water bill. And your faith. Let’s look at things that matter, and then let’s talk
about how climate change interacts with and affects the things that you already love,
you already hold dear. And so my hope is, I don’t know how many people have to make
the right decision to change the balance. But all I know is, I’m just gonna do my part. BILL MOYERS:
All right, then give people some concrete, specific things they can do about it. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Three things. The first thing we can do is prepare to adapt to what we can’t avoid. We
already have a great idea of what is happening in each part of the country. Are we getting
more frequent heavy rainfall and flood events? Are we seeing rising sea level? Are we seeing
stronger hurricanes? Are we seeing more heat waves? Look at the U.S. National Climate Assessment,
great resource online, written in very plain English. Not for scientists, for other people. That tells us what’s coming, and it just makes
sense. It’s like we’ve been driving a car all these years, looking backwards. We need
to take our eyes off that rearview mirror and actually look down the road and say, in
ten, 20, 30 years, how high will sea level have risen? Therefore, should I be building
my house here? How warm, or how wet, or how dry will it be
therefore what types of crops should we be planting, if any? So that’s the first thing,
adaptation. The second thing we have to do is mitigation. Mitigation is reducing the
amount of energy we’re getting from carbon-based fuels. We can do that two ways. We can switch
to alternative sources of energy, or we can use less. So on an individual level, the number
one thing I recommend is going online and figuring out what our personal carbon footprint
is. The enormous balloon of carbon dioxide that
we produce every year. And if it’s a good carbon calculator, and there’s many good ones,
it’ll give you a list of ten, twenty, thirty things that you specifically could do depending
on how far you drive to work, how big your house is, what part of the country you live
in, how much money you have, things like that. Number three is we live in a democratic society.
We need to tell our leaders that we care about this issue. Tell them, I’m a mom, and I care
about it because of my kids. I’m a Christian, and I care about it because of my faith. I’m
a conservative business person, and I care about it because I want a healthy economy.
And the myth is that climate change and a healthy economy are opposed. BILL MOYERS:
We have the ability and I think we have the responsibility, to do that in the society
that we live. BILL MOYERS:
Your parents were missionaries. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
I’m starting to think I might be. BILL MOYERS:
I mean, imagine a world where, you know, the highways are made of solar panels that charge
our cars as we drive. Where every house is just made out of shingles of solar panels
with a little wind turbine in the corner. Where we have no air pollution anymore, you
know, killing children with asthma and people with respiratory disease. I mean, I know this
sounds like utopia. BILL MOYERS:
Sounds to me like it could be a new gospel. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
It may be. A gospel that builds on the resources that God has given us. We have more than enough
abundant energy to power our society from wind, from solar, from tides. All the things
that we believe, as Christians, God created and has given to us as a free gift. So I think
that there is the ability to have a better future, one that is built on the goodness
that God has given us here in this world. BILL MOYERS:
Katharine Hayhoe, thank you very much for being with me. KATHARINE HAYHOE:
Thank you Bill. BILL MOYERS:
On Sunday, September 21st, Americans from all over the country are gathering here in
New York City for the People’s Climate March. It could be the largest such march and rally
ever. And it comes two days before delegates from around the world will meet at the United
Nations for a summit on climate change. The demonstrators will urge the leaders and activists
in attendance to act now to stop global warming before it’s too late. At our website, you can find
out more about the People’s Climate March and the UN summit plus our continuing coverage
of climate change news. That’s all at I’ll see
you there and I’ll see you here, next time.


57 Responses

  1. Jennifer Isaacs

    September 13, 2014 4:01 am

    Though there is finger pointing nothing gets done. I am glad some theists and atheists alike are on similar views to some things. Like separation of church and state, and science like climate change. Now only if there can be usefulness to come of it all.

  2. walkermydawg

    September 14, 2014 1:30 pm

    Fucking faith.  Faith is the purposeful suspension of not critically thinking.  It is nothing to be proud of.

  3. sheepwshotguns

    September 14, 2014 11:17 pm

    i just dont get how in the age of the internet people can still be religious. you have all this information about the world at the tips of your fingers, you see all the bat shit crazy people and the patterns of fallacious styles of arguments. how you dont come to the conclusion that your brand of magic is childish nonsense, i dont know… laziness i suppose.

  4. infinityand0

    September 16, 2014 2:35 am

    Holy shit. Katherine is not helping. She is not only deluded enough to believe the Jesus nonsense, but she actually thinks that fossil fuels can be replaced by wind and solar. And solar panels for roads. 

  5. 666sigma

    September 21, 2014 6:17 am

    She is spot on, but she is ignoring the fact the Big Government Ststists are using global warming as a way to enforce their bias toward big government collectivism.

  6. 666sigma

    September 21, 2014 2:58 pm

    My views are the exact opposite of hers.  I knew at the age of 7 that the bible was a bunch of bullshit, just as I knew that Santa Claus was a bunch of bullshit when I was 5.  I am considered a conservative because I believe in the constitution, but the constitution is liberal, not conservative.  There is nothing LIBERAL about big government.

    I believe in global warming and that it is almost certainly manmade, but I also know that the climate models are bullshit.  I build complex models for a living and the results are based on your assumptions.  If you assume "greenhouse gases" will warm the planet than so will your model.  The guess is to what degree, but there is no way these models can even come close to modeling a complex system like the earth's climate. If each assumption is 90% correct, the final result will be pure crap and will produce a result consistent with your underlying assumption.

    I place far more emphasis on direction or anecdotal evidence than the crap spewed by the politically controlled scientific bodies.  And this is where I agree with her.  The public is not getting the science.  They are getting the politics.  The migration of tropical plants, insects and animals further north is undeniable as is the migration of plants to higher elevations.  Nature (God) is telling us the planet is changing. 

    But nature is also telling us that the scientists do not fully understand what is going on (which is usually the case).  Religion may be bullshit, but most scientific fact is also ultimately proven wrong.  The one thing that the history of mankind shows is that the scientists are ultimately proven wrong. 

    We were told that fat made us fat because it has more calories and high carbohydrate diets were the way to lose weight.  The so called "scientists" have been fighting their demonstrably proven fallacy for decades.  Their theory was a calorie is a calorie, but they had no clue about the complex interactions of the human body and they reached a wrong conclusion.  And this is fact even though many so called scientist dispute their erroneous assumptions=conclusions=facts.

    They also assume that Greenhouse gases will raise the temperature of the planet.  I assume that they have experiments that prove that CO2 will retain more heat than the our atmosphere, but I have never seen one experiment that proves this.  They also have no explanation for the increase in Antarctic ice coverage nor the lack of demonstrable global warming for the past 15 years or so (even though we know that China, India and SEA have likely doubled the world's greenhouse gas production over that time).  Their models do not show a 15 year stabilization in earth's temperatures. We should be several degrees warmer by now under some of these models.  I even saw a few articles recently where scientists say that global warming has been absorbed by the Atlantic Ocean.

    Today, the Dust Bowl would be blamed on global warming.  That is a fact, but I never hear any discuss of this.

    That said, a chart of human population growth on this planet looks exactly like the growth of a deadly virus in a host animal.  Any scientific analysis of the real world impact of this parabolic pattern shows that it is always catastrophic.  They all crash.  Infinite growth is not possible on anything that is finite. 

  7. Nonsuch2much

    September 23, 2014 6:16 pm

     I've been a practicing heathen for 50 years. Please forget the religious aspect and try to figure out what she's doing right. She presents the causes and effects of climate change/global warming in such a calm, mater of fact manner she disarms and convinces many deniers. I've seen another video where she handles a rather belligerent member of the audience perfectly. I also read her book – again,very effective presentation of current scientific knowledge. It's easy to skip the parts for 'true believers". We need more scientists with her kind of communication skills.

  8. Scott Fain

    September 23, 2014 8:42 pm

    From a study re: "Scientific consensus on Anthropegenic caused global warming"….i.e. They counted the number of ACTUAL scientific papers published in various scientific journals, (almost 1,000 papers/studies) & tallied up the numbers of papers that support human-caused global warming vs. The number of papers that do NOT support the idea of human-caused global warming….the following verbage is a brief synopsis of their findings….of climate scientist polled/papers published….97.1% of scientists polled agree, we (humans) ARE at least partially, to blame, and there virtually ARE no genuine scientist who dispute these findings…..but, SOMEHOW in this country a large % of the public (over 50%) there is a continuing "misperception" that more study is needed & no causal relationship yet exists….I think it is fairly obvious that this mis-perception is mostly attributable to an intential mis-information/obfuscation by various right-wing talk radio personalities, (non scientists) intended to "muddy the water" for their own agenda. ….following is excerpt from findings, I will also post link to the report in its entirety…..

    "Surveys of climate scientists have found strong agreement (97–98%) regarding AGW amongst publishing climate experts (Doran and Zimmerman 2009, Anderegg et al 2010). Repeated surveys of scientists found that scientific agreement about AGW steadily increased from 1996 to 2009 (Bray 2010). This is reflected in the increasingly definitive statements issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on the attribution of recent GW (Houghton et al 1996, 2001, Solomon et al 2007).

    The peer-reviewed scientific literature provides a ground-level assessment of the degree of consensus among publishing scientists. An analysis of abstracts published from 1993–2003 matching the search 'global climate change' found that none of 928 papers disagreed with the consensus position on AGW (Oreskes 2004). This is consistent with an analysis of citation networks that found a consensus on AGW forming in the early 1990s (Shwed and Bearman 2010).

    Despite these independent indicators of a scientific consensus, the perception of the US public is that the scientific community still disagrees over the fundamental cause of GW. From 1997 to 2007, public opinion polls have indicated around 60% of the US public believes there is significant disagreement among scientists about whether GW was happening (Nisbet and Myers 2007). Similarly, 57% of the US public either disagreed or were unaware that scientists agree that the earth is very likely warming due to human activity (Pew 2012).

  9. Paul Wilkinson

    November 29, 2014 4:51 pm

    These evangelical Fuckwits make me wanna bang my head against the wall in frustration. I refer not to this eloquent speaker, but the people she refers to who don't accept climate change. What the fuck are the rest of the planet who are at least trying to make some headway into tackling the problem of climate change make of some group of dumb fuck evangelical americans who are STOPPING the whole world from making real progress on this issue that could ultimately see the demise of our species.
    – It makes my fucking blood boli and I hope that this evangelical (K Hayhoe) who seems to at least have her head screwed on when it come to CC can make some inrods into her fellow evangelical dumb-fuck way of thinking. I wish to fuck they would wake up and realise that "god" is and always will be MYTHOLOGY! (for the record, I am British)

  10. cosa65

    December 30, 2014 2:08 am

    Everyone has their religion to believe in -including belief in global warming- As I was raised– I was taught there were 4 ice ages  Hence  we have  the Red River valley here in Minnesota-North Dakota– without man and "Industrialization"  there has been catastrophic "Climate CHANGE  and will continue regardless on "Man" and his interaction
    According to the "Enlighten Scientists,The altitude the Ice in Minnesotan exceeded 2000 ft higher than Denver a mere 12,000 years ago- so says the Bronze roadside monument in Granite Falls Minnesota  Worship "Science" if you like– But be prepared to be disappointing — it is all a belief system 

  11. Fulton Jack Waterloo

    January 21, 2015 10:18 pm

    Poor Katherine: she does not realize that the refusal to recognize climate change, and to be willing to make hard decisions to mitigate it, is INHERENT in Protestantism. If the most momentous event in your life, salvation, is a totally subjective experience, unattached to any community or vetting authority, then how can the larger community have ANY claim on your actions? It boils down to "Jesus and me are good buddies," and I will be raptured out before the stuff hits the fan. It is called SUBJECTIVISM, and it began with the Protestant Reformation…

  12. Sglod ap Tatwn

    February 18, 2015 1:36 am

    Matthew 16:3 and in the morning, 'Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.

  13. Wilbur Wafer

    March 16, 2015 1:53 pm

    ahahaha the christians in texas praying for rain. that is fucking priceless. i love global warming.

  14. Brent Lancaster

    July 7, 2015 8:49 pm

    Very cursory treatment by Moyers. Im a huge fan but here he fails to elucidate the issues represented in this ostensibly complex centaur of a guest. Faith science blah blah blah. Not a great discussion.

  15. Richard Pauli

    July 18, 2015 12:21 am

    About 12 minutess in she offers a great analysis of the problem Her message is gentle and correct. thank you

  16. Marcus Porcius Cato TheYounger

    August 27, 2015 9:31 pm

    It is a common resource problem. An Econ 101 problem. Assigning private property rights can help the global warming problem. But these two millionaire hypocrites, who got rich at the tit of big government and TENs of thousands of Dollars (Suzuki gets $30,000 per speech.). Also, Moyer gets our tax dollars to put on his propaganda PBS indoctrination TV show and Global Warming speeches. Both are so blinded by their irrational fear and ignorant juvenile emotional hatred of Capitalism, they think making a clean environment should be only a political problem. They are liberal activists unwilling to admit their ignorance clouds their judgement. Capitalism and markets can help solve the problem with, for example, trade-able permits. Also, the Capitalist price system will help take care of the rest, if negative externalities are put into the price via a Pigouvian tax or fee.

    But for a country wide consensus, the lying has to stop. For example, Germany gave up some of their Nuclear power plants and introduced wind mills etc.. The renewable energy, HOWEVER, was so inefficient and pricy that GERMANY,S now buy electricity from French Nuclear plants. This is typical of government boondoggle attempts at helping the people. Our faith in government has to be based in reality, not PBS Marxist Socialist talking heads. Capitalism can help with the Global warming answer if Moyer , M Moore, Suzuki, etc…. can cure their capitalism and market ignorance.

    Dr Suzuki owns 3 houses, that are more like mansions. His $30,000 a speech has made him wealthy. His emissions due to all his $30,000 speech locations and his homes is a disgrace. Noah Chomsky and Al Gore have also made a fortune from global warming. They both are millionaires and own more than one house. Al Gore just built a mansion on the California coast. Environmentalist leaders seem to put HYP in HYPOCRITE.

    Hysteria much Dr Suzuki?. If you want to cut the world living standards toward subsistence levels based on climate models that are not even able to accurately predict how clouds affect the climate, Suzuki better defend his position better than this,

    Perhaps a viewing of the video "Cool it" by Bjorn Lumborg , would help Dr hysteria calm down a bit so he can awake into a sensible reality.

    His economic ignorance and His arrogance is beyond belief. Economics can show us the way to help alleviate climate warming's negative effects, without starving 100s of millions in the process. And may I point out that Climatology is not a science. Dr Suzuki doesn't seem to understand that. And Further Science is a Human invention Dr Dimwit.

  17. Deacon Verter

    September 2, 2015 1:08 pm

    Hayhoe is only on Moyers as a freak. Other climatologists are more knowledgeable but Hayhoe is a professed Christian and lives in Backwater USA where her science views are in the extreme minority. This makes her a novelty. Please ask Mrs. Hayhoe to reveal her position on the truth of Adam and Eve, Noah's Flood, the Tower of Babel and the Gospel story of zombies emerging from their graves after the supposed Jesus was supposedly resurrected. Then watch her turn red!

  18. Vern Williams

    February 8, 2016 4:18 pm

    Continued belief in CAGW goes in the face of the facts. I am an Oceanographer and US Navy Nuclear Engineer who has looked at the alteration of data, failure of AGW models and failed predictions and found CAGW wanting. If you look at the time of the American revolution and that is the last solar minimum which impacted the ability to grow food and we are heading into another global minimum that we need to worry about more than warming.

  19. Greg Wiens

    April 8, 2016 10:58 pm

    And in my area of Central Saskatchewan, we have seen longer growing seasons, more rain, better crops and more land opened up to crops due to better growing conditions.
    The only negative is we see slightly more tornadoes.

  20. Yo ski

    May 27, 2016 1:57 am

    Let climate conscious living start from the top down… just like the bailouts and high paid ceo's, pay no attention to climate change prattle till you see the rich behaving by the same rules and ideas

  21. sessi akojenu

    October 11, 2016 12:42 am

    God gave human beings the creative ability to create as human beings are children of God.This creative ability is what separates human beings from animals.And this is why God made human beings leaders over animals, even though animals were created before the creation of human beings.

  22. sessi akojenu

    October 11, 2016 12:49 am

    As such, averting a negative climate change is possible through the collective will and action of people.

  23. Answers in Reality

    December 15, 2016 2:14 pm

    Please Christians of America, please stop listening to the likes of Ted Cruz and Donald Trump and instead listen to people like this wonderful woman. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

  24. Jamie Walker

    December 19, 2016 2:42 pm

    the biggest damage to enviroment is jet engine emission of jet fuel pray for less fossil fuel burned emissions

  25. Controlled Substance

    April 1, 2017 11:23 am

    Christians tire me. Those people walking around a cattle plant praying for rain seem like absolute fools to me. I don't mean that as an insult, I mean that as an encouragement to the people who are not so foolish to spend their time actually solving the problem.

  26. Novitatis Veritatis

    July 26, 2017 4:26 pm

    22:12 it's not Utopia, it's what the world would be like without Big Oil, Republicans and Corporate Democrats.

  27. Theodore Araujo

    September 30, 2017 9:33 pm

    We are getting to a position on this earth where we must abandon fantasy and base decisions, and lives, on evidence. It is unfortunate that Mrs. Hayhoe can't abandon myth. It undermines her science.

  28. Gatica Antonio

    October 18, 2017 7:38 pm

    Global Warming is a real thing I do not understand how many of these climate deniers got into positions how in gods name these clowns stupids idiots liars ignorant maybe for convenience some maybe but the rest of the herd my god only in the United States this take place

  29. Gatica Antonio

    October 18, 2017 7:42 pm

    Climate deniers do not see what is going on for example all the wild fires right here in California and other states The amount of rain in Texas and other states the number of hurricanes and intensity of these events when they are going to take their heads of their asses and see what is going on all over the world

  30. myunicorn life

    January 17, 2018 7:18 pm

    climate change is an agenda to bring along a one world government the pope will be the head of it thats why he is the one pushing this agenda .i would like you folks to watch this video you can find it on yutube its called, DC EVANGELISM. i also want to recommend a book that shows why climate change will lead and how your rightsand freedoms will be stripe away the book is called,THE GREAT CONTROVERSY and the writter name is ELLEN GOULD get the book just called the ABC BOOKSTORE and order it or you can download the ELLEN G WHITE APP and download the book on your phone,or you can read it online ,but the page that the authour speaks of climate change is page 541 liberty of conscience threaten.

  31. Jason C.

    February 6, 2018 10:39 pm

    Katharine Hayhoe is proof religion does not make Americans ignorant of science. In the USA people become ignorant of science by 1. the public school system dumbing them down 2. following a political ideology that is inherently anti-science.

  32. Brian Moore

    June 29, 2018 9:44 pm

    I spoke with this woman on twitter and she blocked me when I proved that climate change is in no way settled science.

  33. John C.

    October 7, 2018 1:22 am

    Interviewer asks: "why do you require evidence as a scientist, that you don't require as a believer". Many individuals such as Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel have required evidence. In fact each was very antithetical to anything "religious", and aggressively against those who claimed to believe. Their opposition prompted each into researching this "fraud" foisted upon humanity in order to disprove it conclusively. Their ensuing research did not support their initial hypothesis, quite the opposite.

  34. Estoy Hasta LaMadre

    November 4, 2018 9:54 pm

    What a fucking stupid conversation. Another "NEW" name to the "old" hysteria: "Climate Shift"

    On one side "Faith-Christians and in the other scientist"? FUCK!!!!

  35. Estoy Hasta LaMadre

    November 5, 2018 2:11 pm

    Now I know why I have this demonic diarrhea for the last 30 years!

    It was the "Climate Change"

    Now, this "wonder girl" asshole thinks she can turn the knob of the planet temperatures with lawsuits!!!

    We are saved!!!!

  36. Estoy Hasta LaMadre

    November 5, 2018 2:18 pm

    This woman is the "universal compendium" nonsensical cliches!

    She should be institutionalized!

    So faith equals integrity!!!!…that translates into climate change…Government "solutions"?
    Conservative Christians? ….just how much shit can you hold in your peanut brain?


    What an asshole

  37. zwtart

    January 6, 2019 7:46 pm

    Everyone hear should check out Illiberal Reformers by Thomas Leonard. I respect this lady for her ambition, intellect and faith. But, she sounds no different than Richard Ely preaching the social gospel in early 20th century. There’s a reason why people fear government action, especially when it aim is a moral one.

  38. CosmicMicron

    January 25, 2019 5:06 pm

    You know those films that start like '' scientists have been saying for many decades but in the end it was too late…. our heroes the only survivors of their city run through the desert''' ?
    It kinda feels like it now…


    April 14, 2019 12:53 pm

    Can you say CHEMTRAILS? Deliberate engineering. Government is behind this and by 2023 want to control weather. Look up they are blocking the sun. Have your vit d levels checked.

  40. Theresa Champagne

    June 23, 2019 4:59 am

    Beyond the climate change issue, I can't understand how such a brilliant woman can embrace such a, for lack of better term, KOOKY faith. She obviously (and her husband) applies reason to her science, then throws reason out the window when it comes to faith.

    I'm gonna ask what most evangelicals ask: Is she really a Christian?

    I'm not a believer and I'm asking that.

  41. Don Mazar

    July 17, 2019 5:24 pm

    Whatever our own personal views are regarding climate change may be, we ALL ought to take at least a closer look at what we believe about what sort of environment future humans on this planet will experience. I believe it is unfortunate that many of my friends feel that they should not have to bear any responsibility for ensuring a reasonably "comfortable" (and safe) environment for future generations. This "controversy" has been taunting the minds of thinking individuals for far longer than two decades, and TOO MANY politicians (here in 2019 America) are seemingly either feigning ignorance, or are professing ambivalence to their constituents. Thankfully 2020 is an election year across the United States.

  42. Curtis Webber

    September 12, 2019 10:36 pm

    And for that atheist the planet gave us oceans of oil and coal to use like the air and the water and plants. We are not as high in temperature as the past four times it was higher and when it was higher plant life and animal life was more then know. Enjoy it while it last soon we will drop into colder climate as it always has.


Leave a Reply