This morning as I drew my first tantalizing sips of coffee, I listened to Sen. Barack Obama tell a newscaster what he meant when he said that Americans would have to make sacrifices if he were elected president. Most of the sacrifices he mentioned related to global warming. Government, in his opinion, should make laws about what cars we drive and what light bulbs we purchase in order to help save the ozone layer, reduce global warming, and save the planet.

It’s refreshing to hear candidates list their expectations rather than just make broad promises. A leader points the way, even at the risk of his own popularity. But there are good leaders and bad leaders, wise ways and misguided ways. And so we must say, “Let the citizen beware.” Almost two years ago, RP pastor and college professor Richard Holdeman wrote an article for the Witness about stem-cell research. It’s the best article I’ve read on the subject, a seamless combination of biblical perspective and scientific acumen.

What he asserted was the astounding proposition that following biblical guidelines regarding stem cells actually leads to more reliable medical advances than following an amoral perspective. He said that ethical, readily available stem cells (such as from umbilical cord blood) were actually better than the embryonic stem cells that many scientists, actors, and politicians had been lobbying to use.

Nearly two years later, the world seems to have discovered the fact that embryos don’t need to die to advance healing. Of course, Christians dare not turn this apparent victory into a simple “I told you so.” Some Christians have been quick to advocate or debunk scientific theories without doing real science. God gives us the Bible as an always reliable guide, making clear that murder of human life is never acceptable; but the Bible didn’t indicate that the Earth must be the physical center of the solar system in order to be the focus of God’s work. That was sloppy Bible interpretation and a lack of scientific work.

Let’s take the “Holdeman” approach to the topic of global warming, looking to the Bible for perspective, boundaries of discussion, etc., and also using our God-given capabilities in science, math, and reason to evaluate the evidence and the rhetoric. Interestingly, when we seek to do that, some of the same red flags shoot up that appeared in the stem-cell controversy.

What is widely circulated in the media as the only logical view on global warming is actually a construct based on a fraction of the relevant scientific evidence. While many scientists diverge from the prevailing position, their voices, along with those of many wise Christians, are being squelched by the media bullhorns.

If, like me, you’d like to step away from the bullhorns long enough to dig into some of the evidence, I hope you will read both theme articles in this month’s magazine. The two articles go together, with one demonstrating the Bible’s view on the environment, and the other delineating the evidence about global warming that you probably won’t hear on the major networks—at least not for a couple of years.