Someone asked me a question on Facebook, and I since I put a little thought into my answer I thought I would reproduce the answer here (edited only very slightly):
Q: Hi Mr. Smith,
I’ve been wanting to ask you something that I’m sure you’ve already addressed somewhere. When we were all in the Dallas congregation, you gave a sermonette in which you presented a study that said that global warming was not real. Are you still of that opinion?
A: Howdy, TF! You know, I don’t remember that sermonette at all! Do you know the date I gave it? I might be able to look up my notes.
As for my opinion now, I believe the following things to varying degrees of certainty (forgive me if this is sloppy–I’ve never put it into words before):
(1) I do not have enough information to decide if global warming is real, and even less information when it comes to deciding whether or not global warming, if it is real, is human caused (anthropogenic global warming or AGW).
(2) I do have enough information, however, to personally conclude that “climate scientists” *also* do not have enough information to determine these things to the certainty they claim (and I believe this concerning both sides of the debate).
[These two leave me as a data-based agnostic: I don’t know if the globe is actually warming in a manner that represents a significant trend that properly projects into the future, and, even if so, I do not know if that warming can be convincingly declared man-caused. I believe that, if warming is man-caused, it should be taken seriously; yet I believe that huge claims require powerfully convincing evidence — the larger the claim, the more powerfully convincing the evidence needs to be.]
(3) I believe that bias has degraded both sides of the debate, leaving scientists corrupting their data and not always behaving like scientists (clearly demonstrated by the “Climategate” e-mails). I assume (inappropriately?) that, again, both sides of the debate are influenced by such biases. That could be discussed in more detail, if I had more time.
(4) I believe that an infinitely greater concern is theogenic global warming — that is, the God-caused kind. 🙂 If mankind would put one-tenth as much effort into repenting of sin as it does into “proving”/”refuting” global warming, we would not have to worry about it because God would be freer to work amongst us, helping us to be proper stewards of His Creation, instead of having to leave us alone with our relative guesswork.
I hope this helps! I have enjoyed the chance to put these ideas into words, though if I weren’t in the middle of camp preparations I could probably word it all much better.
Again, if you can find the date of that sermonette, I would love to go back and look at my notes. Thanks!