Environmental Religionism

I took my son last week to see the IMAX film “Grand Canyon.” Once again, I found myself entrenched in a propaganda film. Instead of getting to enjoy the incredible beauty of the Grand Canyon (there were surprisingly few of the stunning shots we come to expect), the filmographer followed a family of environmental activists (accompanied by a “Native American” guide who happens to be a direct descendant of the original inhabitants of the Grand Canyon) through the Colorado River as they talked about how “sick” the river was and how soon it would be irrevocably destroyed.

Along the way, they referred back with great reverence to the “natural river” – in past tense, of course – noting the time before dams redirected the once natural river. I guess the river wasn’t natural anymore.

This confirms the oft stated notion that environmentalism is itself a type of religion. The theology undergirding this particular film is that there is a “natural state” of the river that has an inherently greater wisdom than that of a man-affected, dam influenced river. River left alone – good. River touched by man – bad. Nature – backed by supreme intelligence. Man – informed by supreme ignorance.

But here’s the inherent contradiction. They say that the formerly “natural” river had its own higher wisdom and is indeed greater than all the ideas of man. BUT, this same all-wise and powerful nature is for some reason unable to overcome or adjust to influences of man. Why can’t all-powerful nature find its way around man’s contrivances, if it’s so wise?

Actually, the film does subltly argue that nature can do so. They showed once arid sandbars that some dozen or so Native Americans once farmed on. But now that the river has changed, the sandbar is now lush with new green stuff. Good, right? Nope. The “natural” way was for the sandbar to be there for the dozen or so Native Americans. Green stuff, bad. Brown stuff, good. That’s nature’s way. But isn’t the green stuff now there (as an indirect result of man’s work) just as “natural.” Unless they believe that the same engineers that built the dams sneaked out there to plant greenery just to foil nature once again.

But think if it had happened differently. Imagine that a HUGE slab of rock had fallen off of the side of Grand Canyon some hundred years ago and dammed up the river. This formed new lakes and changed the flow of the river. Now there’s green stuff instead of brown stuff everywhere. Wouldn’t the naturalists be standing amazed at natures way of finding a way? That’s what I saw out of this. Nature doesn’t writhe around in some anemic state because man does his thing. Nature finds a way. And sometimes, nature turns brown stuff green! If these folks want to worship nature, worship it right!

But, they would say, nature has no fighting chance because we’ve warmed the planet. For the past fifty years, and perhaps fifty years to come, the river has been drying up. It’s half as full as it once was. GLOBAL WARMING is to blame. YET, and this is an important “yet”, early in the film, they document why the wonderful Native Americans no longer inhabit the Grand Canyon. Some thousand years ago, there was a – get this – FIFTY YEAR DROUGHT that caused the river to nearly dry up. They couldn’t grow food, and they had to leave. I won’t insult your intelligence by pointing out that contradiction.

If environmentalism has religious elements to it, it’s the flakiest, non-substantial religionism that I’ve ever encountered. And next time, I hope not to shell out $16 to hear about it.