Interview w/ Jeremy Collins of Theonomoney: Discussing ESG From a Biblical Worldview

00:00

Interview w/ Jeremy Collins of Theonomoney: Discussing ESG From a Biblical Worldview

September 28, 2022

How should Christians think about ESG scores? Thanks to my brother Jeremy, we have a fruitful discussion about the trojan horse of ESG scores and how we ought to think of them. This is by no means an exhaustive take on the issue but rather a starting place. Thanks for listening!

Theonomoney links:

* Listen at https://open.spotify.com/show/4AEls1eCXR4uLeDNFDdoYv

* https://gab.com/Theonomoney

* https://twitter.com/Theonomoney

* https://www.facebook.com/Theonomoney

Key Texts:

* 2 Thess. 3:10

Social Media:

* Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/For-The-King-105492691873696/

* Gab page: https://gab.com/ForTheKingPod

* Twitter: https://twitter.com/ForTheKingPod

* Fountain.fm -> https://fountain.fm/show/U78tm316mhRmq1LFZ6HS

Support:

* Donate Crypto: https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/f63fd7db-919e-44f6-9c58-8ec2891f3eb5

* Kingly Clothing: https://www.bonfire.com/store/for-the-king/

Contact:

* Website: forthekingpodcast.com

* Email: forthekingpodcast@gmail.com

Transcript

[Music] Don't think I will even ask you to make Jesus Lord of your life. That's the most preposterous thing I could ever tell you to do. Jesus Christ is Lord of your life.

Whether you serve him or not, whether you bless him, curse him, hate him, or love him, he is the Lord of your life because God has given him a name that is above every name so that the name of Jesus Christ every knee shall bow. In tongue confess that he is Lord. Some of you will bow out of the grace that has been given to you and others will bow because your kneecaps will be broken by the one who rules the nations with a rod of iron.

[Music] And I'll not apologize for this God of the Bible.

[Music] Friends, hello. Welcome to the For the King podcast.

I'm your host, Rocky Ramsey, and on this podcast we proclaim the edicts of the king, namely and chiefly, that Yahweh reigns. This week I'm talking about ESG scores with my friend Jeremy from Theonimoney. Hey everyone.

I'm sorry, what? I just said hey everyone. Oh yeah, hi. Thanks for joining me.

I appreciate you being here, brother. You guys should remember Jeremy and I talked about Theonimoney a few months back, so having him on again to help us think about ESG here. This is a big hot button topic of recent, and we kind of just want to talk about biblically how to think about these things.

And really what it is maybe to make you aware if you've never even heard of what we're speaking about today. So ESG stands for environmental, social, and governance. We'll get into kind of what exactly, like unpack that.

But just so you know what the purpose of these scores are, this is an indicator or a metric that investors use when looking at different companies in the Wall Street American market. I mean obviously this is being shipped overseas too. A lot of European countries do similar things in terms of what they're looking for, because there's going to be similar kind of progressive worldviews there.

But the main goal of an ESG score is to help investors determine basically what the worldview of the company is that they're investing into. So that's pretty much what we got going on here. There's this big conservative movement against it, and Jeremy and I are going to kind of unpack that.

So Jeremy, what are your thoughts and what have you seen so far with this ESG movement? What are your thoughts initially? Yeah, I think I don't know if I'm jumping ship and anything you want to talk about in a little bit and not yet, but ESG is an issue. It's an issue related to definitions as we'll see here in a little bit, but it's also an issue related to questionable views of what the future might hold now. Rocky and I are both post-mills, so we think the long-term future is going to be good, but there are ups and downs in that.

And there are some things with ESG that are related to concepts such as the Great Reset, which is in a conspiracy theory. I mean, Justin Trudeau, like two or three years ago, said that the pandemic is a good time for a great reset or something along that line where he literally used the word "great reset" in a speech. Which shouldn't be surprising from someone who, speaking of conspiracy theories, some people think is actually the son of Fidel Castro.

I don't know where that started, but I've heard people say they think Trudeau is actually the son of Castro. Yeah, that's interesting. I've heard he's been to Davos many a time.

So, I mean, he's running the net crowd of the Great Reset, you know? Mm-hmm. Well, this is kind of related to all of it because, as we'll see when we get into definitions a little bit, the way environmental, social, and governance boards are defined, and the way the idea was put forward is related to, like, Great Reset Marxist type ideas, not to how we as Christians would, from Scripture, define those various terms and what ideals look like for those various terms. Exactly.

Yeah, it's a bad... We have a battle of worldview here, which is... I mean, yeah, we're post-mill, Jeremy, you know? But we're also, as we talked about last time I had you on, we're presuppositional. So, when you are, you know, critiquing any worldview or any manifestation or fruits of a worldview, which is, you know, ESG is a fruit of a worldview, we're gonna have to look at the presuppositions underlying them. So, yeah, can you kind of walk us through maybe defining some of this, you know, environmental, social, and governance? You know, what's going on there? What's some of your wisdom on how we're thinking about that? Yeah, so, you want more, like, my thoughts on it, or more, like, the notes that you compiled? Well, could you just kind of... Let's just start defining it here so we can kind of work through this episode with having everything kind of tightened up here with the definitions.

Okay, yeah, so the environmental would be how... Well, let me say this way, more or less what the environmental, the E and ESG means is, how much does this company align with the Green Revolution, with the Green New Deal, or as a... Oh, I think he's Doug Wilson's brother and he Wilson's uncle calls it the Green New Steel. Yeah. Gordon Wilson, I think is his name.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, basically, yeah, more or less, it's supposedly how good is this company for the environment, but when you look at it, it's really how much does this company align with the Green New Deal type versions of environmentalism, not actual scientific environmentalism, which is very different than Green New Deal type stuff. Exactly.

Yeah, do they align with our funded studies that are producing results of what we think we ought to do environmentally? Yeah. On their social score, this one's probably a little bit harder to define because, I mean, it's such a vague term, but in a way, this one and the governance board might be a little bit related because both can relate to the various ethnicities that make up the organization and things like that. Uh-huh.

Now, that one's probably followed a little bit more under the governance than it does under the social score, but I think you can follow a little bit under both. Yeah. And, yeah, so you can ask questions with this, like how are workers treated, are facilities safe, things like that.

And, like, depending on how we go about trying to answer those things, what we think the ideal is, those are really good questions to ask, but if your background, if your presuppositions in answering those questions is, like, how friendly is this company towards LGBTQ? Exactly. And do they treat their LGBTQ employees just like they treat their straight employees? Do they, I don't know, give two gay dudes paternity leave because they just adopted a baby or crazy stuff like that? Yeah. Do they give mothers two days off of grievance leave because they just got an abortion? Which, if abortion is a morally good thing, why do you need grievance leave after getting an abortion? Okay, yep.

Yeah, exactly. And then the governance score is, a lot of it just has to do with how diverse they are, not how many diverse viewpoints they have. They want to have diverse viewpoints that all agree on their woke stuff, which, by the way, is not actually a diverse viewpoint.

What they mean by diverse viewpoints is they want a woke black guy, a woke white guy, and a woke black woman, and a woke Asian woman all working together towards the same woke ideas. That's their understanding of being diverse. Yeah.

Yeah, so you can already see, you know, how their presuppositions, their worldview is impacting, like you're saying, Jeremy, how these questions are answered. Even like, yeah, with the social, like when you're talking about how workers are treated, somebody can claim like, oh, I'm not allowed, you know, they didn't fund my abortion, I'm being treated inhumanely. And if that's your operating assumption when you go into creating a score on how worried an investor should be for a company, then you're not going to actually get good results.

You're not going to end up with companies that God sees as actually doing a godly business, you know. So, yeah, I mean, once we have all these things to find and we actually start fleshing it out, you know, it's not just this acronym ESG. It's a whole worldview.

It is an extension of the arm of Marxism. Is that fair? I mean, that's kind of my analysis at the end of the day. I mean, do you agree? Oh, yeah.

Well, especially since the governance part and some of the social stuff and all of that has ideas behind it that are like some of the things that play into those parts of the ESG have to do with like feminism and critical theory, which are very Marxist ideas, especially critical theory. Every form of critical theory is Marxist. It's just what type of Marxism depends on the word that comes between critical and theory.

Yeah, no, that's great. That's good. So, okay, I guess now that we have things defined, you know, what do we make of this? You know, what are some conclusions we can start drawing on? Like, how do we take the good and spit out the bad? How should Christians think about this? You know, what are some of your initial thoughts there? I think as far as take the good and spit out the bad on this, it would probably look more like taking the raw skeleton of what ESG means and then redefining just about every single word.

And I don't know how much that leaves other than some of the words are the same but have different definitions really much at all. But yeah, I mean, there are good ideas in here. Like we as Theonymus, we're Theonymus in our economics.

It's one of the really like the main purpose of Theonomy. I try to make every episode in some way related to Theonomy, economics or both. And we are not libertarian when it comes to our economics.

Now, I think superficially Theonymus and Libertarians can look pretty similar in their economics. But in a way, it's kind of two people started with completely different foundations. And in the end, their answers sometimes didn't look too far off from each other, but at other times looked very far off from each other.

Because we like Libertarians allow for a lot of freedom in the market, but we have objective rules in the market that a libertarian would really struggle to argue for. Like a Christian libertarian could to some degree argue for objective morality in the market, I think. Although he would probably struggle to know how to apply that to the market and non-Christian libertarian doesn't really have anything other than the whims of society to give any sort of moral conclusions to the market.

So as Christians, we're not like that. We're not going to say whatever a company does that makes money for its shareholders, if it's a publicly funded company, is a good thing. We're going to use the foundations of God's Word for what's a good thing.

If a company does something sinful in order to make money, I don't care whether that sinful thing makes it $10 or $10 billion, it should not have acquired money in a sinful manner. And that would relate to all three parts, the environmental, the social, and probably even the governance of ESG, but it would look very different because our foundations are rooted in the Bible, not in whatever cloche swab says to do in order to bring about the great reset. So we would look at environmentalism and we would say, yes, a company should take into account environmental things.

That company should, Rockin, I believe, be run by post-millennial Christians who say, "What can I do to build a great company that provides good things that other people are willing to pay for, that I can pass this company on to my children so they can make it even bigger and better and have it make more money, but also that does no harm to the planet and perhaps even makes the planet better off for my company having been here, not just right now, but 9,000 years from now." I used 9,000 because if I remember right, the lease that the original Guinness, not Oz Guinness, not these other Guinnesses right now, but the guy that actually started the company, he took a 9,000 year lease. He does not own the property that the first Guinness beer facility was built upon. He leased it out with a 9,000 year lease.

So what are we doing to try to make the planet better 9,000 years from now because of our company? And how does that relate to the environment by trying to take dominion of the planet in a way that is glorifying to God? Yeah, those, Jeremy, those are really good points. Yeah, I agree with all that. One thing I was thinking in the midst of you talking, just when we're considering theonomy and extracting principles from God's law and applying it to our modern day civil environment and our workplace or even owning a company, I'm looking here at this graph that we have for our ESG scores here.

In terms of environment, we're worried about toxic emissions and waste. So I would want to extract the principle from the ox that gores. You know, on your homestead enterprise property, that there's a piece of machinery, per se, right? The ox that is known to damage and create chaos in the world, right? Therefore, the ox should probably be put to death or if it does harm somebody, you're held liable for that.

So if you, in the same sense, we extract that principle and we look at toxic emissions, the Christian would most certainly be concerned. Like you're saying, how am I impacting the earth thousands of years down the line? Am I doing things that are that's not loving to my neighbor? Am I giving people cancer downstream from my emissions in my factory here and dumping into the river? That's happened many times in our society. And that was not transgressing any pagan law.

That was transgressing God's law, not loving your neighbor. That's what was wrong there. And the Christian can basically reinterpret this whole ESG system into what God's law most clearly says about how we treat our neighbor and how we do business.

So I don't know, kind of what your thoughts off that, because I mean, that's kind of something I was thinking of. And I think it applies here. Yeah, I think that was a really great way, I hadn't thought of, to apply the spirit of a particular law to other related issues.

Besides just the direct application of that law. Yes, yeah. Yeah, God's law, there's so much to learn from, I guess is the point on why we're, why are we, you know, why are we Theonymus? It's like that exact reason you can, you can extract so many principles.

I mean, we're just scratching the surface. Honestly, we have a lot of work to do exegetically on God's law still, even after Rush Dooney and Gary North and all these guys, we have a lot of work still. Yeah, so like a good way to start something that while the people promoting ESG might not be against this particular thing that's bad for the environment, because a lot of times they don't seem to be against things that are actually bad for the environment, they're just like to look like they are.

Some states, Indiana being one of them, uses an, I don't know, I think it's an insecticide or something to protect the crops that is chemically very similar to Agent Orange. I think we talked about this before, I don't know if it was when you were on my podcast or I was on yours. Yeah, it's glyphosate, Roundup, Roundup is, the compound's glyphosate is very similar to Agent Orange, like you're saying.

Yeah, like literally military veterans get paid from the government for having been exposed to Agent Orange in war, and yet we're throwing something almost the same thing onto the plants that we eat, that on warm, humid summer days, get into the lower parts of the atmosphere, it can spread to nearby towns. Yeah, exactly. So, yeah, things like that are things that we as Christians would say, this is something environmental that we actually need to be against.

Exactly, I agree. So what do you think about, let's think about some of the social score stuff, the human rights, you know, they're pushing, oh, does this company provide funding for women to go get abortions in abortion legal states, or do you fly the gay pride flag, or do you donate to Black Lives Matter? How would a Christian kind of understand, you know, business and the free market and looking at who they're going to invest in based on some of these social aspects? What do you think there? I think we can pretty well summarize that with just more or less whatever they're doing, don't. That's probably a good principle.

Just, yeah, don't do that. Well, I mean, socially, though, there are things we can apply here, like, let's not, you know, basically use something that's just more or less slave labor to try to get our product as cheap as possible. Now, also, sometimes we have to make sure we're looking at both sides when it comes to purchasing things from other countries with a lower rate of pay than the US, because people will talk about, oh, look, we're buying stuff from this other country and we're paying these people like a dollar a day to build this stuff for the slave labor.

Well, it could be, but we do want to make sure we're actually looking at it rightly before we say that. Because if it is, that is wrong and it needs to not happen. But purchasing power in the US is different than purchasing power in the other countries around the world.

Purchasing power is what your dollar can buy. And so just because one single dollar in the US right now is like basically nothing, there are other countries where the purchasing power of their currency compared to the purchasing power of ours is very different, where one US dollar there is like a lot of money. So if we're looking at that country where we think it's so horrible, they're getting paid a dollar a day.

But we also look at like cost of living there and their currency and how much our currency is and their dollars and things like that. And we say, oh, actually, a dollar, one US dollar or the equivalent in their currency to one US dollar a day actually puts them in middle class and their country. And before they started working in this factory, they were back on the family farm where they were making now on a farm a lot of times in third row countries like that.

Or even a lot of American farms, you're not exactly quote unquote making a lot of money because you're not selling a lot. You're using your own crops to survive. But if we could just quantify into money, everything they were making, whether they were selling it or eating it themselves, they were making a quarter a day on the family farm.

And so we just multiplied their daily income fourfold and brought them from below what would be the poverty line to that country to what would be middle class in that country. So I'm okay with someone in a different country getting paid a dollar a day and US dollar equivalency if that's actually a really good wage in that country. Now, I think it's basically slave labor if you're doing something like that when a dollar a day is nothing in that country.

And like that one place I heard of in China where they had issues with people jumping out of the factory building to commit suicide and their solution wasn't to increase the situation in the factory. It was to put in a net so that way you wouldn't die. You would just land in the net before you hit the ground.

That's actually really wrong. Yeah, that's wild. I did not hear that, Jeremy.

But that's something I heard in a business class in college. Wow. Yeah.

So obviously, Christians would have something to say there. And it's very nuanced. So you have to look into it to make sure this is this is an actual evil thing that's happening and not just the appearance of evil in this kind of Marxist hierarchical understanding of overseas labor wages.

So I think that's important. So here's a question I have for you about governance. It's very important for these people, this kind of Marxist revolutionary in the business world, to have a bunch of different perspectives ethnically.

We need to have, like you said, the token black person and the token Asian and the token Spanish speaker, things like that. Do Christians care about, you know, is that is that going to be a big deal that we have to have? Do you have to link arms as a Christian with an atheist? Do we need to have an atheist on the board to really help, you know, mellow out our perspective here on the business we're doing? You know, do we care about these kind of diverse perspectives, whether it's ethnically or or ideologically? You know, we need to have the token atheist or the token Buddhist. You kind of see where I'm going with that? Yeah, diverse perspectives are good as long as we know what we're meaning when we say diverse.

You know, if we have a bunch of Christians that are running this business and you've got the one guy who's an expert in accounting, you've got another guy who's an expert in legality, you've got another guy or several people who are an expert in particular aspects of the company's day to day business. Those are technically different perspectives, but they're ones that are needed if you're going to have a business that's doing well. Yeah, exactly.

Yeah, I think I think that's kind of the crux there. It's we should we need these diverse perspectives according according to the business we're running, not not according to some social agenda that does nothing for the company besides give some some, you know, some minority, minority group of voice in the company. You know, and that was one of the big criticisms I saw looking into this that, you know, historically, when we think about capitalism, you know, is there a return for my investment? You know, those who, you know, what is it? Second Thessalonians 3 10 that if you don't work, you won't eat, you know, whoever doesn't work shouldn't eat.

Is there a return on my investment? That's usually what you care about when you're doing business while doing it ethically, obviously from a biblical worldview. But now we have, oh, does this person need this, you know, social minority ticket? That's what we care about, right? So it's not it's not if you work, you'll eat. It's it's you'll eat if you look a certain way or have a certain ideology.

And even if you don't work hard, you're still going to eat. Yeah. And that's more important than how much money looking at the business level, not individual employee level.

And that's to many going into this stuff is even more important than how much money the business is making. It's like, you know, it doesn't matter that they're barely making any profit. Their profit margin on their costs is like barely enough to have the business be in the black each year.

Yeah. Fun fact, that's where the term Black Friday comes from. But it's like, but this business checks all the boxes for, you know, being gay friendly and they put the black square for BLM and all this other stuff.

Whereas this other one, that's like a Christian company that doesn't want to show partiality in any direction and isn't for things God hates like homosexuality. And they have an amazing profit margin on their costs of doing business. But because of ESG, the first one is apparently better than the second one.

Yeah. Yeah, that makes sense. And going back to different perspectives, there are different ways other than just different areas of study that perspectives can be helpful.

It might be helpful to have, say, like one guy that's the child of successful business people who's been in the business world his whole life. And then another guy that like grew up poor and through his diligence and studies and hard work and God's blessing him worked his way into being near the top. Someone like Ben Carson and what he did to become one of the most well known neurosurgeons in the world growing up in Detroit on food stamps.

Yeah. Yeah, that's a good point. Yeah, that could go so deep.

And we want to recognize that as Christians, you know, God's kingdom is very diverse. Every tribe, every tribe, tongue and nation will bend the knee, you know. So, you know, diversity is not necessarily a bad thing, but there has to be some kind of unity, a worldview that would unite you.

Right. So even in a company, you need to be on the same board ethically and what the goals of the company are. You know, so we would want technically we want all these people to be post-mill, theonomic, reformed, Baptist Christians.

I was actually thinking it could be good to have like a reformed Baptist and a Presbyterian and a conservative reformed Anglican. Not one of these like Anglicans that has like a lesbian pastor or something like that. Like it could probably be good to have different viewpoints that way in a business.

They're not going to church together trying to fight over whether the family that just had a kid is going to baptize them now or later. Yeah, they're in a business together. Yeah, no, that's a good point.

That's a good point. Yeah, well, I think we've kind of, you know, there's the Christian worldview part of this. That's kind of our remedy of this that we want to share with you.

Those are really good thoughts, Jeremy. I appreciate that. I guess one other question I have real quick as we kind of wrap up here.

You know, this whole this whole thing, this whole conversation is kind of geared towards helping people understand how they ought to invest their money in the American market. So how should Christians kind of think about that? You know, how do we do we want to start, you know, for instance, with like Netflix versus pureflix or even going to lower TV and watching entertainment that way? You know, do we start making those moves as Christians? What's the way forward here? Do we kind of have our own ESG, per se, with the Christian worldview, God's law behind it? And do we as individual investors try to start making decisions gathered around that kind of goal? And when we do think, you know, post-millennial, I guess, in that sense, starting to build a heritage for our children, starting our own businesses, things like that, you know, what are your thoughts there? I think it's important to do all that stuff, but I need more than like 10 seconds to think about it before I'd want to take too much on it. I know, I know.

That was kind of off the cuff. I don't know. I don't know.

My initial thoughts. Yeah, we should be doing that kind of stuff. Maybe that'd be a nice little teaser, maybe something we can revisit in the future.

I think it's important for Christians to be doing their own stuff, but let's not do like the pureflix. Let's just do a bad copy of what the world is doing. Let's do something like a lore where it's something different than what the world is doing.

It's not Netflix and it's not Kickstarter. It's something that's kind of a combination of the two. Yes, that's a good thought.

Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, here's the biblical worldview with this.

Are there any last thoughts, Jeremy, I guess on ESG? Yeah, just for a minute or two, I want to drop back to the E, environmental, and say these people that talk about how great they are from the environment, a lot of times promote things that actually isn't really good for the environment. Like you can look at this study. There's probably been a lot of them by now showing how my 2007 Chevy Impala is much better for the environment than a Tesla.

Yeah. Because you're thinking, oh, look, your car is putting all of this bad stuff into the atmosphere when it's driving down the road and the Tesla is it. Yeah, but one, where did the electricity for that Tesla come from? And two, we have to think about how you make the car and also how you recycle or throw away the car when it dies.

And the parts that make up my Impala are much more recyclable and the parts that aren't are not nearly as bad for the environment. As when that Tesla dies and gets thrown away. Yeah.

No, that's good. I've looked into that a little bit. I mean, dude, when these Teslas start to kind of the batteries need to be replaced in these Teslas here in a few years when things start mounting up that way.

That is just going to be wild. These batteries are not easy to recycle. And usually they cost more than the car themselves.

So, I mean, again, we're being sold a lot. I mean, I agree with you. And they're only rated for 10 years.

My Impala is 15 years old. If it was a fully electric car, I probably wouldn't be able to use it anymore. Yeah.

I know it's sad, dude. I'm right there with you. And the electricity, yes, they come from somewhere.

And most of these people are not in favor of nuclear power plants, which are actually way better for the environment than traditional power sources and much even better for the environment too than all of these solar panels and the windmills and stuff. The only way in which I'm a fan of solar panels is if I can get some on my house in such a way that the ROI over time will save me more money than they cost to put up. Because as far as just clean energy goes, solar panels aren't actually better for the environment than just traditional coal.

The nuclear power plants like Fermi near Detroit, close to where I grew up, is actually way better for the environment. But a lot of these green people are against nuclear power plants. Like, listen, we know what went wrong with Chernobyl and we know how to make sure that doesn't happen again.

We're fine. Yeah. Yeah, I agree.

And yeah, nuclear is a great source of energy. Honestly, brother, I mean, so my undergrad environmental science, I got a master's in environmental engineering. So I mean, I've looked into a lot of this stuff.

That's kind of my field. You know, I work for environmental corporation. So fossil fuels have a greening effect on the Earth.

All of that fuel used to be carbon. That was, you know, it was daylighted. It was above.

It wasn't sequestered. It was an active in the in the carbon cycle. You know, it wasn't buried, you know, you kind of see what I'm getting at there.

So all that greenery used to be above the Earth and the Earth's temperature was not so wild that life couldn't exist. So what I think with the fossil fuels, I think that this is again in God's plan, he sequestered all that carbon with the flood. And in his providence, he knew that this would be the fuel source by which we would kind of start reversing parts of the fall when I think post-millennial, about, you know, right after Christ's ascension, you know, we have this slow rise in our technology the past 2000 years to the point we're at now.

And it's almost fantastical the things we can do because we have the energy from fossil fuels. And this has a greening effect on the Earth. This, you know, we went from like 450 parts per million to like 470 or 480 in the atmosphere.

This allows plants to grow larger and faster quicker. There's a study of plants that have a CO2 pumped into them in a greenhouse and they grow much larger, much faster and bear more fruit. So I think this is, I'm sorry, what? And they not only do that because plants take in carbon dioxide and turn it into oxygen just like we do the reverse, they end up making more oxygen.

So I think it's so dumb how these people, they've got to know they're lying. No one can be this dumb to say this themselves unless they're just hearing it from other people and not thinking critically that carbon dioxide is bad for the environment. It's literally just what plants breathe.

Now, I know there's like technical ways that you should word that, not how I did, but for all intents and purposes, carbon dioxide is what plants breathe. So how is it bad to put more carbon dioxide in so our plants can be healthier so they can turn that carbon dioxide into more oxygen and maybe even the oxygen level of the atmosphere could rise. If we keep going down this, I'm going to talk about the canopy theory because I think before the flood, the oxygen levels were much higher than they are now.

Yeah, no, I think I pretty much agree with the canopy theory. So that'd be kind of fun maybe to have a conversation about that. But yeah, now if we're talking about carbon monoxide, I agree.

Oh, that's awful for you. Careful. Yeah, we should really try to make sure we're not pumping a bunch of carbon monoxide into the atmosphere because if they get back out of hand, it'll actually kill people.

Exactly. Yeah. But carbon dioxide, that's basically just plant food.

Exactly. Yeah. And that's all the carbon and carbon dioxide is how plants make glucose, the carbon chain of glucose.

So not only creates oxygen, breathable air, but it's also what makes food. It's where glucose comes from. So again, I just kind of want to maybe provide some rhetoric like you kind of started this there.

So I thought I'd add some since that's kind of my field. But this march against methane, which is just C with the carbon with four hydrogen atoms, and then carbon dioxide, this march against these carbon-based molecules is completely stupid and ridiculous. And carbon is actually great and methane is actually perfectly fine for the environment.

So if we want to talk about hurting the ozone layer and stuff, I remember from a science textbook in high school was quantifying like different stuff released into the atmosphere. And like the oceans by existing do more harm to the ozone layer each year than humanity does. A single volcanic eruption does more harm to the ozone layer than all of human history ever has.

Exactly. Yeah, Krakatoa, some of these bigger volcanoes released way more particulate matter and bad gases into the… Yeah, so I'm right there with you. So let's as Christians, let's do good science, right? There's good science out there to combat this stuff.

There's God's law that helps us think about the social and governance part of this. And there's ways Christians can actually talk about this and have a productive and helpful thing to say in the conversation. So I guess one thing to just quickly kind of tie it back to one thing we mentioned in the beginning is we do think that there are in many instances, though probably not all, there are some useful idiots.

But in many instances, this is intentional to try to harm the economies of various nations to usher in great reset type things. Exactly. Yeah, that's honestly the big picture right there.

That's kind of the crux of it right there. There's a goal. Okay, well, hey, Jeremy, brother, appreciate you joining me.

Really good thoughts. Always appreciate your wisdom and what you have to add. Hey, guys, go check out his podcast, The Onomani.

It's on all podcast catchers. Anything specific you want to say there? Yeah, so if you drop this pretty soon after we record, then two, maybe three episodes back will be an episode I did on the Jubilee. And a lot of people really enjoyed.

Actually, I learned some stuff about the Jubilee just recording that episode. There are some things I mentioned I had never heard up until like two days before that episode dropped. As I was reading Gary North's chapter on the Jubilee and his Leviticus commentary and gave some quotes from Gary North in there and just talked about how the Jubilee doesn't support loan forgiveness the way people say it does.

It doesn't support redistribution of wealth. It was very specific to Old Testament Israel and it was tied to land, not necessarily straight monetary wealth, but land wealth in a very specific way for specific purposes that don't have bearing today on wealth redistribution. So you want to learn how all of that works and how actually population growth would over time make the Jubilee the way people misunderstand it or they would really make the Jubilee irrelevant for the purposes.

People understand it for today. And if you want to learn more about that, listen to that episode on the Jubilee. Yeah, guys.

Yeah, go make sure to go do that. Support Jeremy. He's doing really good work on Theonimoney.

I love listening to his podcast. So again, it's Theonimoney, Jeremy Collins, and it's on all podcast catchers. Thanks, Jeremy, again, for being on today.

I always end with the doxology in 1 Timothy 1 17 to the King of the Ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, the honor and glory forever and ever. Amen. Solely.

Ayo. Glory.

[Music]