The earth is not in danger and therefore is not in need of "saving".
I realize chemicals have produced more food, albeit lower quality in regard to nutritional positives, which in turn causes dis-ease, which in turn ... and so on, and so on ...
The idea that the product of industrial agriculture causes more disease is a fantasy.
Feeding starving people prevents disease. Food I grow myself tastes better than factory food, but I can live just fine on factory food, and "organic" food, by which I assume you mean chemical free food, is a fashionable niche product for people whose economic status allows them the luxury. If, however, you want to feed the world, chemical fertilizer and pesticides is the way to do it. It's like windmills vs. petroleum. One technology is cute, cool, and contributes a tiny bit on the edge of the economy, the other one powers the entire world.
Christ didn't mean for us to dump a bunch of chemicals on His earth and expect wonderful pluses to come from it.
That is a complete mischaracterization of modern industrial farming. By the way, do you really think that Jesus wants all those billions of people killed by malaria because of the ban on DTD to have died that way? I mean, think of the children!
The chemical industry, along with the rest of industrial capitalism, have raised humanity from wretchedness, poverty, and disease. Romanticizing an earth free of industry and disdaining chemicals because they are somehow "ungodly" is the kind of thinking one hears from 10-year-old girls. In the real world, it's better to go with what actually works.
billions = millions
One also hears it, all to often, from middle-aged Roman Catholics and "crunchy-cons."
Unfortunately.