GOP Lawmaker Dismisses Climate Change Because It's Not in the Bible: 'If You Read the Good Book You Know How It Ends'

A Republican lawmaker has sparked controversy after reportedly questioning the reality of climate change by pointing to the Bible, arguing that the issue is not addressed in scripture. Her remarks have reignited debate over the role of religious beliefs in discussions about climate science and environmental policy.

Minnesota Representative Mary Franson made the remarks during a House Capital Investment Committee meeting, saying she was not concerned about climate change. The discussion focused on future weather trends and infrastructure, but Franson said she did not become concerned by the issue, arguing that her faith was not placed in climate change or scientists directing environmental policy.

'When we talk about climate change, I don't get upset about it. I don't get worked up about it because my faith is not in climate change. It's not in scientists dictating what we should and should not do to save the environment because my faith is in Jesus Christ, right? He's the same today, tomorrow, and forever, yesterday, and so, you know, if you've read the good book, you know how it ends; it's not with climate change.'

Her reference to the Bible has also prompted online discussion about how politicians interpret scripture when addressing modern environmental questions.

What the GOP Lawmaker Said About Climate Change

The GOP representative's remark appears to suggest that her understanding of the future is informed primarily by biblical teachings rather than scientific projections about the planet's climate. Her comments have consequently attracted criticism from people who argue that religious belief and scientific evidence address different questions and should not be treated as interchangeable sources of information.

She was called out in particular by House DFL Floor Leader Jamie Long (DFL – Minneapolis), who issued the following statement:

'Rep. Franson's extreme remarks have no place in any arena of serious policymaking. Minnesotans believe in science and are concerned about the scientific consensus that climate change is causing real harm to our state. Scientists aren't concerned about climate change because the world is ending; they are concerned about the quality of life for people living on our planet now and in the future.'

He continued: 'Rains are becoming more intense, temperatures are rising year-over-year, and the weather is becoming more unpredictable, with conditions changing frequently between wet and dry extremes. Anyone with eyes can see these trends, and our infrastructure can't always handle these conditions.'

Long also said legislators have a responsibility to future generations of Minnesotans, including ensuring the state's roads, bridges, water infrastructure and public buildings are prepared to withstand extreme weather events.

What Does Science Say About Climate Change?

The scientific evidence for human-caused climate change is extensive. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) states that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate and that human activity is the principal cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.

The central scientific explanation is that activities such as burning coal, oil and natural gas increase the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These gases trap additional heat, contributing to a rise in global average temperatures.

Scientists also examine evidence including shrinking glaciers, declining Arctic sea ice, rising sea levels and changes in ecosystems.

That evidence does not depend on whether climate change is mentioned in religious scripture. Instead, it comes from physical observations and scientific research conducted across multiple disciplines.

Climate Change Remains a Political Flashpoint

Climate change continues to be one of the most politically divisive issues in the United States. Republicans and Democrats frequently disagree over the scale of government intervention required to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and prepare communities for climate-related risks.

The lawmaker's comments have added another dimension to that debate by placing biblical interpretation at the centre of an argument about climate change. Her remarks are likely to continue attracting attention precisely because they illustrate the tension between religious conviction, political ideology and scientific evidence.