Putting papal authority behind yet another failed scientific paradigm
Guest post by Alec Rawls
As Galileo insisted about the perversity of his persecution by the Catholic Church: “[I]t is impossible for a conclusion to be declared heretical while we remain in doubt as to its truth.”
Now 400 years later, with the Pope’s new Laudato Si’ encyclical, Dr. Soon notes that the Vatican is again engaged in this same error, lending papal authority to highly uncertain scientific views that lie well outside of the Church’s sphere of moral authority.
Willie’s op-ed can be found at the Breitbart News website. I’ll just post a trio of fair-use excerpts here:
The verdict is clear: Any attempt to stop the use of available fossil fuels for life and all human activities will cause far more harm and lead to more deaths than the theological belief in future catastrophic disasters endorsed by the encyclical. Even worse, the church knows that many of the predicted catastrophic disasters from the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide are highly exaggerated if not outright fraudulent. Yet Laudato Si’ gives credence and praise to these predictions by relying on climate models scenarios that have been proven to be false.
Plus:
I fear that this encyclical is driven not by science, but by social motivations and political yearnings.
And again from Galileo:
“[C]ertainly no one doubts that the Supreme Pontiff has always an absolute power to approve or condemn; but it is not in the power: of any created being to make things true or false, for this belongs to their own nature and to the fact.”
See: YouTube Gielgud The Grand Inquisitor. Dostoevsky was a seer.
‘Economically illiterate, futile and worst of all immoral’
OT
when You look up Obamas buddy Merkel’s carriere.
She, an ex DDR physicist.
As chancelor Kohl’s environment Minister did a study on Leukämie – of course the studie showed enhanced child death’s near nuclar plants.
some above statistic noise.
Not mentioning that nuclear plants are settled near big citys for direct energy supply – where Leukämie is heading statistic noise.
Her defense Minister K.T.zu Guttenberg with a copy/paste Doctor found asylum in the US.
And her Minister of education Anette von Schavan with her political reached academic status was made diplomat to the Vatican.
A few weeks ago I suggested a cartoon for Josh. This pope holding a copy of Das Kapital to his heart and the caption — The New Useful Idiot.
Eugene WR Gallun
I like it.
must be me gone crazy.
Thinking against a sane world of 7 bl.
Regards – Hans
Drudge is running a story from https://stream.org/scientific-pantheist-who-advises-pope-francis/ claiming “Pope’s key science advisor is atheist who believes in ‘Gaia, not God’ ”
The site is currently overwhelmed
@ur momisugly Mike M. @ur momisugly 9:26am, Got through but I am not surprised at all by his “believe”, it takes all kinds!
mod – we can bide time.
Best Regards – Hans
mod:
next step Sigmar Gabriel, Merkels 1st environment minister, announced he will do away with the nuclear plants CO2 emissions.
me gone crazy.
or the internet still holds trace.
Hans
It is discouraging to see the lack of insight to the strings controlling the AGW scam and most bad things happening on this planet today. Consider the timing of the Catholic church scandals hitting the mainstream news wires, including Canada’s Steven Harper requesting an apology from Pope Francis weeks before the aboriginal residential school atrocities committed by the Catholic church. Now that the encyclical follows the genecidal line of Prince Philips WWF expect the Catholic Church scandals to disappear from the headlines. British Knight-Commander John Schellnhuber’s contribution to the writing of the encyclical should also be noted. I can go on and on but the fact remains that we are following an agenda clearly etched on the not so mysterious Georgia Guide Stones.
Galeleo is rolling over in his grave.
BobW and littlepeaks and especially any active or ‘retired’ Catholics above, should have a look at
http://planetshifter.com/node/1724
It is a rather lengthy expose of the complete corruption of the Catholic and other churches and their soul-selling to the pagan faith of Gaia.
I too was puzzled for a time by this encyclical but when you read the article above, most of the pieces fall into place.
The following piece of doggerel was written prior to the encyclical.
PAPAL BULL
God does not control the weather anymore
It’s the Pagans Club of Rome and Albert Gore,
Will our Head Honcho in a poncho see fit
To declare Global Warming Holy Writ;
Is he about to demonise CO2
By ending black smoke emissions from his flue,
Must we now pray to the pagan goddess Gaia
Ignore Christmas – feast with Saturnalia.
I once learned the Ten Commandments at the knee
Of a Mother who explained the Didache,
Prior to the miracle of electric light
She could not teach her brood reading in the night;
So if this Pontiff says Africans must stay
In fuel poverty- it’s their Auto-da-fe,
All those fossil fuels are theirs and bountiful
Not to exploit them – is just more Papal Bull.
His Holiness should stick to promoting God
Instead of embracing scientific fraud,
How can the poor gain a title to this earth
When denied the means by energetic dearth;
Since Global Warming stopped in ninety seven
Voodoo climate scientists appeal to heaven,
Their unending swill of of money in the trough
Should not the shorn sheep finally switch off?
Will Pope Francis instruct every Catholic
To believe the new Creed of the Hockey Stick,
Reprinting our Bibles in a shade of green
Ignoring the teachings of the Nazarene;
Deifying Mother Earth and the occult
For our sins of Emissions and the Indult,
I’ll stick to my faith in the God of Passion
Ignoring the UNsustainable fashion.
We are told – ignore the warming of the sun,
George Orwell foresaw Agenda Twenty One,
The Master Plan – control the population
For Climate Realists – excommunication;
Papal dabbling in this science of ill repute
Will turn Mother Church into a prostitute,
So as we await the next Encyclical
Ignore junk – be it Ecclesiastical.
Sorry but Soon’s Galileo analogy is completely backwards. Pope Francis is using the best science along with his moral authority to encourage his flock to wean themselves off fossil fuels. Four hundred years ago the Catholic Church condemned one of the most recognized scientists of the time because his views conflicted with the bible. Galileo would be proud of Pope Francis’s encyclical.
Sorry, but your opinion is completely backwards. Pope Francis did not use the best science available, having completely forbade participation by voices critical of the science. If the Pontiff is so concerned with the well being of his flock, then why would he ask them to make their lives more difficult by forsaking cheap, plentiful, reliable power from fossil fuels?
Your presumption to speak for Galileo, further diminishes the worth of your opinion.
I posted a question above on why did the Pope endorse (somewhat) AGW, i.e., what incentive. What I didn’t state is that he has to know the endorsement causes misery/death for the poor.
I guess Luke has that “special” science that the rest of us can’t obtain. Either that or we are all shills.
@ur momisugly Charley +1
He’s correct. This is very similar to what happened to Galileo.
Atheists teach a rewritten history of what happened 400 years ago, claiming that the Catholic Church attacked science in favor of a false religious belief. And they use this lie to “prove” that the Bible is false.
What actually happened was that they affirmed science, as it had been passed down by Aristotle. While empirical evidence obviously had its place, it was subservient to *logic* in Aristotelian science, i.e., to the whims of powerful people. And those powerful people within the Catholic Church government controlled higher education, publishing and money.
Galileo was right, and he had the empirical evidence to prove it, but the “97% concensus” of those in power was that Galileo was wrong. And to secure their powerful positions, they disallowed dissent and so labeled Galileo a criminal “denier”.
This is obviously parallel to today, only instead of a Catholic (“universal”) Church government, science is controlled by United Nations governance in concert with federal governments. Today powerful people in governments and the academy secure their power by disallowing dissent. And here we thought that science had progressed since the Middle Ages.
Mark Twain was right that history doesn’t repeat, but it does sometimes rhyme.
Galileo’s heliocentric model was no more correct than the geocentric one he disagreed with. The sun is not the centre of the universe, so Galileo could not have had empirical evidence to prove that it did.
And if he hadn’t embarrassed the Pope (his friend and supporter) by making him look like an idiot, things might very well have turned out very differently.
THis is complete overkill… I live in South America. No one here takes Kirchner seriously (Current President of Argentina) no one has and never will. Same applies to an Argentine pope. Look at it as a joke. That’s the way most Argentines would. He’s a joker and so is Kircnner and most politicians. LOL
can’t be helped. but even ignoring those people leaves you guilty.
thx for patience. Hans
The day (any) religion actually embraces real science is the day that it will all fall down as a pack of false cards. With respect to those who maintain a religious stance, that is your prerogative and all credit for maintaining a faith when such faith is difficult to demonstrate (scientifically). Some people need to believe, just the same as lottery players who believe they will win the lottery! (despite the fact that the winning odds are well explained and documented!). I have no beef with them, only the turmoil that all religion seems to create amongst different peoples and faiths!
Papal involvement in the AGW meme is probably partly political and partly to do with maintaining an ‘authoritative’ stance i.e. papal missives, etc…
Those religious types that ‘believe’ may also be persuaded by Papal ‘instruction’ – but I would find it hard (as a scientist) to accept any instruction on ‘what to believe’! – so I am curious as to how the real scientists (especially the AGW skeptic ones) who may be (catholic) religious, feel about this Papal direction? Do they change their views? Do they now question their religion?
“The day (any) religion actually embraces real science is the day that it will all fall down as a pack of false cards …”
Only the “religion” that you think you know. The Roman Catholic Church began as a very different thing than what it is now. The beginning was dominated by the Gnostic beliefs. They believed that one must know God and not just believe. They looked for experiential proof. Today we might call these kind of folks “mystics”.
There is a question that mankind has always had. How did anything come to be in this universe? Where did matter and energy come from? How did life start? These questions are outside of the realm of science as it is practiced today. (hell, science claims that universes just happen by random chance!)
Some believe that everything you see around you is just the Tao/God/Intelligence/Whatever acting out a great drama in which he/she/it plays all parts. Everything is therefor God. (ok, that is greatly over-simplified by I don’t intend to type a book here)
My point is that “religion” property understood has nothing to fear from science.
@markstoval
quote’ (hell, science claims that universes just happen by random chance!)’. Yep, and that is by far more believable than some omnipotent creator! – especially given the things we know have or do happen ‘by random chance’, such as genetic mutations for a simple example, asteroids, etc – just my view, you understand. The philosophical and spiritual side of religion is good (my opinion) in teaching respect, tolerance, etc – and that surely has a valuable place in society. I have no problem with religion from that aspect.
The grey area comes when those that believe in religion can never truly accept real science (such as the random life formation) imho – and vice versa, those that believe in science can hardly accept blind faith religion, and either are ‘forced’ to make compromises . I personally don’t hold up science as having all the answers (yet!) but I do believe that we can find those answers in time – hence, I myself do not accept religion as anything more than spiritual ‘comfort’ for those that require it (and many folk do!). Many scientists are supposedly religious – that’s no problem until it comes to the crunch when, one day, they have to compare and contrast evidence for/against what they believe on either side. I don’t envy those folks as it must be hard to discard or ‘minoritise’ one or the other especially after many years of ‘belief’? Personally, I would like for religion to be reduced to sociological type guidance and drop all the blind faith aspect in some ‘written’ teachings or other (such as Papal directives!).
John Dalton was a Quaker. Arthur Eddington was a Quaker. Jocelyn Burnell (discoverer of quasars) is a Quaker. Your religious education seems to be somewhat limited.
Kev-in-UK
The point of the argument is that God, or whatever you want to refer to, is not part of the universe we can know. God is in some sense “outside” the universe, so we cannot understand God, that is a mystery beyond our understanding. Gödel’s incompleteness theorem is and example of how we can state problems in a system of thinking that cannot be proved or decided. He dealt with natural numbers but it has been extended into many other areas. Mathematics is the ultimate logical language. Of course most spoken languages aren’t nearly as precise so we can express a multitude of lies, contradictions, and impossibilities that can’t even be analyzed, much less proven. For instance: “What I am saying is a lie” or “global warming in almost certainly caused by human actions”.
This isn’t spirituality or even religion. This is using religion or spirituality for appeal to authority. I wonder if this ever happened before in history and how it worked out? Mixing science, religion and politics. This is a mess. I don’t think many people are taking it seriously though.
So true. Power, money, politics. Science is with skeptics, but global warming is a political fight.
Modern empirical science was begun by Christians who were seeking to understand the Creator better. They allowed dissenters like Darwin to research and make his case against established knowledge, unlike today where the atheistic humanists attack dissenters and seek to criminalize open inquiry.
The pope said that most of the greenhouse gases are the result of human activity. B.S. A long ago article in Scientific American pegged the co2 flux at about 200 billion tons per year with about half from the oceans and the rest from land. There might be more refined numbers out now but the human contribution was said to be about 8 billion tons (probably closer to 10 billion today).
Question , what is the actual science behind the notion of ‘social justice ‘
Answer , there is none
So wherever you see ‘social justice ‘ tapped unto what are supposed to be scientific claims you know it is not science in the first place.
You can be moral person without science and it is possible for science to be used for amoral purposes. but science itself cannot met the requirements of having a moral basis. That only comes from that wish to use or misuse it.
@knr, + a bunch, thanks.
Social justice is an anti Christian teaching if it takes from the productive and gives to the non productive. Jesus was clear in his teaching that being non productive was not aceptable. But if social justice you prevention of the abuse of power and wealth then that’s good. The accumulation of wealth and power once brought out the anti trust actions but now govt is a partner in crime and the Church partners with govt.
Max
Sigmar Gabriel was Merkels first POP Minister:
her first Minister on duty of juvenile ‘pop’ culture.
must be me going crazy.
as with computer games:
Next world, please.
The visionary wisdom of the attendees of the First Council of Nicaea is astounding. Over 1600 years of coherent consensus. Now it starts sounding like Trinity is under amendment. Promises a helluva show in our lifetime.
Thanks, Anthony. You do good work.
From http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/06/19/gas-of-life-pope-encyclical-on-climate-change-ignores-science-on-carbon-dioxide/
“Scientific analysis proves that the biology and chemistry of the ocean is and never was controlled by the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”
Should be:
“Scientific analysis proves that the biology and chemistry of the ocean is not and never was controlled by the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”
The missing “not” is a typo I often do. I hope someone fro Breitbart sees this.
Does this make the case for sainthood for Al Gore? He did work some miracles with video and invented the internet.
Santo Corpulento
Another reason to admire Willie Soon. His comment: “I fear that this encyclical is driven not by science, but by social motivations and political yearnings” captures in one sentence the risk of having a religious leader ignorantly wade into the realm of what belongs to Caesar. But that’s also what I expect of a Pope that’s committed to political Marxism and it’s “social justice” agenda, a view shared with those pro-big government leftists who push for wider acceptance of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming belief not because they’re really worried about warming, but because they know what a politically powerful club it is. These are people whom, if proved wrong, thereby implying less risk to human civilization, would feel bad, who would feel cheated out of their “righteous” power.
Any sort of muscular Christianity is dead. One by one, all the isolated holdout outposts of principle have been abandoned in favour of a touchy feely religious experience. The soldiers of Christ who manned those solitary keeps for centuries have walked away into the wilderness to die of despair.
https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2015/06/20/the-sickening-encyclical/
Pointman
mod, AAA+++
hard times to go.
appeasment never made it.
as the US say: popcorn!
great blog. Hans