by Lewis Loflin
Environmentalism in Southwest Virginia has often prioritized ideology over the practical needs of local communities, reflecting the quasi-religious and technophobic tendencies I’ve critiqued in my previous articles. As a Deist, I’ve spent over 50 years studying earth science, focusing on empirical data and applied science, and my skepticism stems from observing waste, fraud, and a disconnect in “green” initiatives here in Appalachia. The Earth is resilient, as mechanisms like homeostasis and hysteresis demonstrate, but modern concerns about pollution and CO2 must be addressed affordably—starving people cannot protect forests. Environmentalism’s failures in this region underscore the need for science-driven solutions that prioritize human well-being alongside responsible stewardship.
In May 2022, I turned 65, marking over five decades of engagement with earth science and nature, starting from my early teens in Norton, Virginia. My passion for applied science, honed through college studies and extensive reading on environmentalism, has shaped my perspective. I focus solely on empirical data, rejecting computer models as a basis for policy due to their consistent failures, as I’ve discussed in my climate studies. I advocate for full transparency in data and methods, especially given the significant waste and fraud I’ve observed in government-funded “green” initiatives in Appalachia. Millions have been squandered on hype, neglecting the real needs of struggling communities, a pattern I’ve also critiqued in my analysis of the Appalachian Regional Commission.
My skepticism is rooted in reason, not ideology. As President Eisenhower warned in his 1961 Farewell Address, the scientific-industrial complex can harm the public good if unchecked, a concern echoed in Southwest Virginia where secrecy has led to the misuse of public funds. The public must become more scientifically literate to hold decision-makers accountable, ensuring decisions are based on rigorous science, not political agendas or quasi-religious zeal.
I grew up in Norton, Virginia, in Wise County, where coal mining was the backbone of the economy. Since the 1970s, strip mining and mountaintop removal have reshaped the landscape, with a 2009 Appalachian Voices study reporting 1.2 million acres surface-mined across the region and over 500 mountains destroyed. In Wise County alone, 40% of the land has been affected. While these practices have environmental costs, they also supported livelihoods in a region with few economic alternatives. Environmentalism’s blanket opposition to mining, often framed as a moral crusade to protect “sacred” nature, ignores this reality, as I’ve noted in my critique of the Green Religion in Appalachia.
The waste, fraud, and abuse of government grants in Southwest Virginia highlight the need for transparency, especially in EPA regulations. For example, over $1 billion has been invested to revitalize rural economies in Southwest and Southside Virginia, with $100–$200 million from the Virginia Tobacco Commission allocated to “green energy” research. Yet, these initiatives have consistently failed: Exide Battery in Bristol, Tennessee, received $35 million but closed; a $9 million switchgrass oil project collapsed; and $140 million in green energy research centers, including one in Bristol, Virginia, now stand empty. Other ventures like fish farming, eco-tourism, and carbon capture research have also failed, reflecting a lack of adherence to the scientific method and a focus on ideological agendas over practical outcomes.
The 1975 National Academy of Sciences study, *Understanding Climatic Change: A Program for Action*, aligns with my earth science education, confirming that climate is dynamic and cyclical. It notes, “The average surface air temperature in the northern hemisphere increased from the 1880s until about 1940 and has been decreasing thereafter… during the period 1958–1963, the mean temperature decreased by about 0.6°C.” This cooling, attributed to natural variability, challenges modern narratives that focus solely on post-1979 warming. NASA reports a warming rate of 0.15–0.20°C per decade since 1975, totaling about 0.75°C over five decades, but when adjusted for the 0.6°C drop from 1940 to 1975, the net increase since 1940 is only 0.15°C (*NASA Earth Observatory*). Climate advocates often cherry-pick 1979 as a baseline to exaggerate warming, ignoring earlier cycles influenced by volcanic eruptions like Tambora (1815) and Krakatoa (1883), as I’ve explored in my climate studies.
Government agencies like NOAA and NASA have adjusted pre-2000 data, as revealed in Senate hearings, to fit political narratives, eroding trust in their methodologies. This mirrors the quasi-religious alarmism I’ve critiqued, where science is subjugated to ideology (*Science Under Siege*, p. 359). As my article on homeostasis shows, climate operates in cycles driven by solar activity, cosmic rays, and geological processes, not solely CO2, which has been far higher in the past without catastrophic outcomes. The Earth’s resilience, through mechanisms like CO2 sequestration in oceans and plant growth, ensures stability when reasonably cared for.
Environmentalism’s failures in Southwest Virginia stem from its ideological bent, often treating nature as divine and rejecting technology, as I’ve discussed in my critique of environmentalism’s technophobia. The “green” initiatives here—backed by central planning and “experts”—prioritize political and social change over practical results. Projects like the empty Bristol research center and the failed switchgrass oil venture reflect a disconnect from the scientific method, driven instead by the Green Religion’s view of Gaia as “pristine” (*Science Under Siege*, p. 358). This echoes the broader trend of environmentalism as a quasi-religious movement, more focused on moral crusades than addressing local needs, as I’ve noted in Appalachia’s broader context.
Despite these failures, Appalachia’s ecosystem remains resilient. Forests cover over 90% of the region, including Norton, and strip-mined areas have largely regrown. Wildlife like deer and black bears thrive, to the point of causing issues—bears enter towns in East Tennessee, and deer-related auto accidents are common (I’ve hit three myself). Predictions of ecological collapse from the 1960s and 1970s have not materialized, underscoring Earth’s ability to adapt when reasonably managed, as I’ve explored in my homeostasis article. Yet, environmentalism’s focus on alarmism—whether ice ages, resource depletion, or climate change—continues to harm rural America, already strained by globalism, without offering viable solutions.
My 50-year journey has led me to view environmentalism as a failed ideology, with climate change as its latest iteration—a decades-old attempt to re-engineer society through New Age spiritualism, often at odds with traditional Western values. While the Bible places humanity above nature with a transcendent deity, the Green Religion elevates Gaia above humanity, as seen in Al Gore’s *Earth in the Balance* (1992), which I own and critique as a religious crusade (*Science Under Siege*, p. 358). James Lovelock, in *The Ages of Gaia* (1988), acknowledges that his Gaia hypothesis has become a religion, a term he uses to defend his earlier work (*Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth*, 1979). This quasi-religious mindset, as I’ve discussed, prioritizes ideology over science, leading to policies that fail communities like Southwest Virginia.
I’m not a Christian—I’m a rationalist who values science and technology over corrupted, government-funded science often driven by predetermined outcomes. Before the Manhattan Project, American science was largely privately funded, fostering innovation. Today, government-funded science seeks expected results to justify policy, a trend Eisenhower warned against. Environmentalism’s technophobia, as I’ve critiqued, rejects solutions like nuclear power that could reduce pollution affordably, while its alarmism—evident in the Paradise California Fire, caused by natural drought cycles and human error, not climate change—misleads the public (*Science Under Siege*, p. 356).
A November 17, 2008, NASA article confirms water vapor as a major player in climate, constituting about 10% of Earth’s water (*NASA*). Plants release water vapor through transpiration, and oceans through evaporation, with more vegetation leading to more water vapor—a feedback loop influencing local climate. Water vapor can reach 4% of the atmosphere (40,000 PPM), compared to CO2 at 400 PPM, a 100:1 ratio. This highlights water vapor’s dominant role in climate dynamics, often overlooked in CO2-centric narratives. As my homeostasis article explains, Earth’s self-regulating mechanisms—like CO2 sequestration and plant growth—ensure stability, but modern policies must focus on affordable solutions, not alarmism.
As a Deist, I approach environmentalism with a focus on reason, empirical data, and the Earth’s resilience, as demonstrated by homeostasis and hysteresis. Climate cycles, driven by natural factors like solar activity and water vapor, have shaped the planet for millennia, as my studies on the Vikings in Greenland and the Lost Colony of Roanoke show. Modern concerns about CO2 and pollution are valid, but solutions must be practical and affordable—communities like Southwest Virginia cannot prioritize environmental ideals over economic survival, as I’ve argued in my Appalachia critique. Environmentalism’s failures here stem from its quasi-religious ideology and technophobia, rejecting the technologies that could balance human and environmental needs.
The Earth has endured far greater challenges than today’s CO2 levels, thriving through natural cycles. We should reduce pollution where feasible—e.g., transitioning to nuclear power—but not at the expense of rural economies already strained by globalism. Policies must be grounded in science, not the Green Religion’s alarmism, ensuring transparency and accountability to prevent further waste and fraud.
Environmentalism has failed Southwest Virginia by prioritizing ideology over science, wasting millions on failed green initiatives while neglecting the region’s economic needs. By embracing the scientific method, transparency, and affordable solutions, we can address environmental challenges without harming communities. The Earth’s resilience offers hope, but only if we reject quasi-religious alarmism and technophobia, focusing instead on reason and practical innovation—a path that honors both nature and humanity’s potential.
Updated 2025 by Lewis Loflin. Extracts from *Science Under Siege* by Michael Fumento.
Acknowledgment: I’d like to thank Grok, an AI by xAI, for helping me draft and refine this article. The final edits and perspective are my own.
Click to Visit!
