Did Megan Basham Lie About Gavin Ortlund?

Gavin Ortlund is the most vocal opponent to Megan Basham’s new book Shepherds For Sale: How Evangelical Leaders Traded the Truth for a Leftist Agenda. He is named in chapter one of Basham’s book which exposes the money influence behind Evangelicals who advanced an environmentalist agenda.

Gavin Ortlund is introduced as someone with “preppy guru vibes” (24) poised to reach the next generation, as well as someone with connections to the broader Big Eva as shown by his affiliation with the Tim Keller Center. Basham then asserts that his 2022 video was an ideal example of what liberal activists wanted to see in terms of messaging Evangelicals on the issue.

The key theme of the episode titled “Climate Change: Why Christians Should Engage,”56 is that evangelicals have been “very skeptical or apathetic” about the issue because they’ve been politicized by the right. He begins in characteristically soft tones by asking his audience to consider “orienting their postures” to the subject in such a way as not to be “closed off.” He then shares that he’s “deeply burdened” that too many Christians have dismissed the idea that human-caused climate change poses a significant risk to humanity “without having studied it, not based on the evidence, but based on the socio-political associations.”

“I think the main thing is just in the United States in recent decades, though not back in earlier times, issues of environmental stewardship, and particularly climate change, have been associated with political liberalism,” [Ortlund] says. “And evangelicals have tended to be politically conservative. And I think that is the biggest single factor for why more Christians aren’t more active in leading the charge on something like climate change.” From there, Ortlund launches into a layman’s recitation of the most common tenets of the climate change movement—namely, that it is settled science because “every other scientific body of national or international standing agrees that human-caused global warming is a serious problem.” (25)

Gavin Ortlund does in fact say these things in his video. He even ends the video acknowledging how it takes courage to speak out on climate change because Christians will be seen as becoming liberal in doing so. Although Gavin Ortlund gives a disclaimer about not being apocalyptic, Basham rejects the disclaimer. Basham furthermore compares Ortlund’s talking points on climate change to Greta Thunberg, particularly when he discusses the political instability that could arise (25).

From there, Basham explores the scientific evidence that debunks Gavin Ortlunds talking points. Gavin Ortlund makes one citation in the entirety of his video Basham points out, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Basham shows that this is a political organization with material composed by delegates, not scientists.

Ortlund cites only one scientific authority in his video, the same one the [Evangelical Climate Initiative] cited 16 years earlier: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which he describes as a group of leading scientists from all over the world. He goes on to say that every “scientific body of national or international standing agrees that human-caused global warming is a serious problem.” To not accept that consensus, he says, is to buy into “conspiracy and hoax;” it is a failure to “take a responsible posture” as a Christian.

As for why Ortlund feels his brothers and sisters must accept the prevailing climate change narrative, he offers nothing more original than those three magic words: love your neighbor. (26)

In terms of chronology, Basham’s characterization of Ortlund’s video is out of order. The “love your neighbor” legalism asserted by Gavin Ortlund comes at the very beginning and the argument about scientific conspiracy comes towards in the middle, but it could hardly be considered dishonest as he asserted that “love your neighbor” was a principle of his video.

From there Basham has a scientist witness who is consulted to expose the validity or lack thereof of the “scientific consensus.” The 97% of climate scientists statistic referenced by Ortlund is misleading and would include climate skeptics like Dr. Roy Spencer. A professor, Cal Beisner, a theology professor countering environmentalism since the mid-2000s, is then quoted in the book chiding Ortlund for not reading the IPCC report because if he had, he would not have made a ridiculous claim (28). The IPCC is then debunked referring back to a news event dubbed Climategate at the time.

The fact of the matter is Gavin Ortlund’s video is perhaps worse than Basham’s characterization of it. She was far more gentle with Ortlund than deserved. Despite Gavin Ortlund’s insistence on “hitting the books” and doing the research, he fails at basic earth science in the video.

For instance, Gavin Ortlund gives a layman’s explanation of greenhouse gasses, attributing carbon dioxide as the main culprit in climate change. Obviously, it’s false to assume that carbon dioxide is a pollutant which Ortlund arguably falls short of doing. However, Ortlund erroneously claims that once carbon is in the atmosphere it stays there forever. This ignores the carbon cycle in which some carbon both in the atmosphere and on the ground can exit the cycle, nevertheless, carbon in the air does circulate to plants on the ground and ultimately functions as a fertilizer.

Moreover, Ortlund claims that extreme weather events are the most compelling reason to care but argues for worse hurricane seasons which is a debunked narrative. Although 2017 was a bad year for hurricanes, America went since Katrina without a major hurricane making landfall. It’s also wrong of Ortlund to attribute wildfires to climate change as these are not natural disasters, and a major contributing factor in California is poor forest management. Even Ortlund’s concerns about sea level changes are unfounded as the sea level is localized.

What Megan Basham doesn’t include is perhaps worse than what she did include. Ortlund advocates an “all of the above” approach to solving climate change. This explicitly included government action. Ortlund advocates for some form of environmental policy, although he does not specify exactly what it is. However, all the current policy proposals are premised that carbon dioxide is pollution.

Moreover, Gavin Ortlund does claim that climate change is a pro-life issue which is a classic subversion effort within pro-life activism meant to water down the issue. Calling things outside of abortion (and human euthanasia) a pro-life issue renders the term meaningless.

Gavin Ortlund concludes his video by touting the bravery of Christians who speak out on this issue, stressing its urgency. He claims that people who do so are seen as liberals but that Christians must take the lead on this issue. Although he advocates for “all of the above,” Ortlund calls for more climate struggle sessions under the guise of dialog, an identical tactic by those who promote Critical Race Theory.

Megan Basham sees Gavin Ortlund as a rising star in Big Eva. Perhaps he is, but with proper exposure, he won’t have an influence on the church much longer.