Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Pope Francis has demanded skeptics renounce climate skepticism, and affirmed his support for strongly partisan initiatives such as the EPA Clean Air Initiative.
According to The Guardian;
In a tougher-than-expected call for action on global warming, the spiritual leader of more than 70 million American Catholics defied calls among some Republicans to steer clear of politics by making clear he believed this was a moral issue.
“Climate change is a problem which can no longer be left to a future generation,” said the pope, who invited contrast with the civil rights struggle by invoking the spirit of Martin Luther King Jr in support of his argument.
…
“Mr President, I find it encouraging that you are proposing an initiative for reducing air pollution,” the pope said with a slow, deliberate delivery that left little room for misinterpretation.
The following is a full video of the speech at the White House
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4iDF0RPXgU
His Holiness has ignored approaches, from those who have sought in good faith to present other viewpoints.
It seems ironic, that the Church effort to repeat the mistakes of the past, occurs on the 500th anniversary of a letter written by Galileo. The letter explains in simple terms, why the Church’s efforts to define scientific truth , to quash scientific uncertainty with religious moral authority, were so misguided. Words of wisdom, which are as applicable today, as there were when Galileo wrote them (quote courtesy of Dr. Willie Soon);
Therefore let these men begin to apply themselves to an examination of the arguments of Copernicus and others, leaving condemnation of the doctrine as erroneous and heretical to the proper authorities. Among the circumspect and most wise Fathers, and in the absolute wisdom of one who cannot err, they may never hope to find the rash decisions into which they allow themselves to be hurried by some particular passion or personal interest. With regard to this opinion, and others which are not directly matters of faith, certainly 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. Therefore in my judgment one should first be assured of the necessary and immutable truth of the fact, over which no man has power. This is wiser counsel than to condemn either side in the absence of such certainty, thus depriving oneself of continued authority and ability to choose by determining things which are now undetermined and open and still lodged in the will of supreme authority. And in brief, if it is impossible for a conclusion to be declared heretical while we remain in doubt as to its truth, then these men are wasting their time clamoring for condemnation of the motion of the earth and stability of the sun, which they have not yet demonstrated to be impossible or false…
Read more: http://genius.com/Galileo-galilei-letter-to-the-grand-duchess-christina-annotated
Given that to date climate alarmists, whose claims are based on computer models, have failed to produce a model which can predict the climate, it seems fair to suggest things are still very much undetermined and open.
Update – Video link updated, the original video was removed by the user who posted it.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Catholic church had their chance to run things a few hundred years ago, and they botched it. This guy should stay out of politics and concentrate on cleaning up the ample problems existing in his own organization.
The whole idea of a man who considers himself “infallible,” as the figurehead of a medieval organization devoted to magical thinking, being consulted on a SCIENTIFIC subject should be ignored for the absurdity it is. The data stands on its own merit; without the Pope’s endorsement or that of any head of state, for that matter. THAT’S what we must continue to shout from the rooftops.
I notice that all of the atheists and hard core lefties who pooh-pooh anybody who is religious and use that as “proof” that they don’t know anything about science are suddenly embracing the Pope as the new Climate Change oracle. You can’t make this stuff up anymore, and they claim satire is dead.
Keitho…Spot On!
The Pope clearly has no faith in the universe God created if he believes all those things He gave to us to use can harm it.
+100
Francis has chosen Cardinal George Pell as his cleanup guy. He is effectively a tough, new financial controller for the Church. He is also a well-informed Aussie climate skeptic. Ignore the Guardian and keep an eye on Pell!
IF the Pope was a Catholic, he could not take the positions he takes on current issues, and IF the Pope was religious, thus believed in God, the same would be true. Thus, since he has taken positions that run counter to the “book” that his supposed faith is based on, one has to guess that either he is not a Catholic, does not believe in God, has no faith in the book upon which his faith is blessed, or has decided that he transcends them. My guess is that it falls to the first, not the second, but then again, I guess they could be considered the same.
I wonder if the Pope is as concerned about the ongoing slaughter in his own neighborhood, or is he worried that he might be labeled a Crusader? Can’t offend that religion of peace eh? At the present rate I would expect to see the minarets go up at St. Paul’s shortly. Welcome to the Inquisition, Part Deux.
Just call me Galileo Galilei, or does the Pope know any history?
I realized years ago that if there really is some higher power, it is unlikely to be in the form of a man who lives in the sky. I become more convinced of this with each passing day.
The conclusion is that the pope has confirmed ‘climate science alarmism’ as a religion. It was about time. The real scientists can now proceed with their good work. It may be another 400 years before the church changes its stance.
Uh, he is the Pope – therefore espousing a faith-based initiative should come as no surprise.
It is disappointing however, since his stance would directly influence much of the World’s poor in an adverse manner.
That’s what most religions are good at … keeping people poor and ignorant. Better pay up if you want to go to heaven.
+100!
Don’t forget ‘guilt ridden’ along with poor and ignorant.
It really is sad when bigots go out of their way to display their ignorance.
I not a bigot, I’m just stating a fact. Much like the religion of AGW. Present the evidence and still the true believers have their heads in the sand. The evidence in this case is that every prediction made has failed . Is that science or a belief system? For the record, I am deeply spiritual. I can hold 2 different ideas at the same time, simply because what I know is incomplete and what I feel is different than what I think. Paying homage to an Inman or priest, no so much. I can read and think also. They aren’t heavens royal messengers to me.
I find it ironic that among all the pomp and circumstance that is normally reserved for the most celebrated of us mere mortals, we have the leading compassionate marxist proclaim to the leadership of the free World that free market-capitalist fortitude is BAD but, adulation of idols and covetousness of the successful is GOOD! Can I get an Amen from all the secular progressives?
Don’t agree. You are confusing religion and churches, and they are not the same. You are referring to churches.
I’m not confused. The meaning is quite clear. The arguments with AGW, I don’t consider them debates, have been about nitpicking. It snows or freaking cold, that s weather. It’s hot somewhere, evidence of global warming. One is climate and the other weather, depending on how the argument is turning.
Yes
rishrac,
” I am deeply spiritual. I can hold 2 different ideas at the same time…?”
To me, it seems quite clear that many terms which we see everyday in the news and such, have been intentionally warped and essentially “mythologized” beyond recognition in various ways, such as “climate denier” for one rather obvious example to those who follow this site, by people who have agendas which involve manipulating us in various ways, and who have some degree of control over what I’ll call cumulatively; the “mass media” systems. .
I think most here can grasp (to say the least) that this is going on now, but may fail to grasp that it’s quite possible, indeed I say extremely probable, that this has been going on for a very long time. As in, before we realized such “linguistic” manipulation was going on at all, in the mass media systems.
We have been “conditioned” I believe, through the mass media, to think of religion as an essentially irrational form of human thought/behavior, based on things like “blind faith” and feelings and ideas that adherents are strongly attached to in a sort of slavish way. But this is a linguistic trick, it seems to me, which often results in a sort of slavish attachment to the idea that one is not “religious” at all.
You speak of “climate science” as having become a religion, and I agree it has. I also think science in general has become a religion, which I am a “member” of, and virtually everyone commenting here is too . . Because we share a common faith in what Mr. Newton called “the experimental philosophy”, and believe many things it has “revealed” and “preached” are truth, in a universal sense. I am not an adherent of the “science as incorruptible quasi entity” sense, in the “scientific community as virtual priestly class” sense. To me that is false religion, as in belief in something that is not real/true.
If one drops the “conditioning” I believe we have all been subjected to since birth, so to speak, and allows the term to simply mean a belief system one adheres to/practices “religiously”, regardless of whether any particular sort of Entity is involved, one can see that all people are religious in various ways. The term then loses much of it’s manipulative value/power, and we can speak rationally about what we believe in and why, without all the divisiveness our “manipulators on high” are surely quite pleased to see us entangled in, as I see the world I find myself in.
So, yes I say, one can hold two different ideas at the same time, and still be quite rational and logical and sane, even if the mass media manipulators speak as though one must chose between various “belief systems” they offer up as though mutually exclusive alternatives.
And, dispense with much of the rancor and strife that our “programmed” images might cause us to become mired in, because we “paint with broad brushes” as they do. The will call someone a Christian, Muslim, scientist, conservative, liberal, etc, etc . . as though those were clear and distinct signify, which is simply not true. And, may be a literal lie, as in the “wolf in sheep’s clothing” sort of deception my Lord describes and warns about.
To me, no one is a Christian, until I see that they actually strive to do as Jesus instructs in a particular Book, regardless of what they tell me about their religion(s). And that’s because i have been warned that many will come, and say he is Christ, with a lying tongue and a deceitful heart. To me, the Pope is just a man, and I don’t assume in any way that he is a follower of my Lord, period. It is literally a sin to me (missing the mark), to assume such thing.
It’s strictly a “show me” stance I take, because talk is cheap, and I am a grown man, not an infant, and I live on a planet infested with habitual liars . . one of whom is writing these words, worm that I am, of no account or wisdom of my own.
It’s been changed to doubter. I consider myself a critic, not a doubter, skeptic, or deinier.
I was a critic for a while, now I’m more of an unbeliever. It is not logically possible to my mind, that warming routinely leads to increased atmospheric CO2 (as the ice core record seems to me to be quite clear about), and that increased CO2 routinely leads to further warming.
That’s a surefire recipe for hell on earth, and the joint would have long ago become dominated by such a “feedback loop” of mutually reinforcing globe-wide effects, by any logic I can muster. CO2 simply cannot be such a “poison pill” in this planet’s system, as far as I’m concerned.
PS, Not saying those with the science chops ought to stop being critics, but I’m a logic/philosophy guy, so I can’t really be much use in the “technical” realms. I’ve been fighting in the “civilian” trenches, where I could be of some use exposing the “civilian” side of the scamming. Stuff like this Pope deal I can handle, but not the heavy duty math/model/data crunching kinda things.
Pope Che the 1st.
Right on!
The Commie “Liberation Theologists” have at least temporarily won the day by their palace coup against a real Catholic to install a Marxist pope. But IMO it won’t last.
JohnWho,
“It is disappointing however, since his stance would directly influence much of the World’s poor in an adverse manner.”
(The “matter of faith” aspect is somewhat nebulous/difficult to me, since it seems absolutely clear that science is in fact a “faith-based” belief system, which I happen to hold as (potentially) valid/informative, because I believe the time/space continuum (and all that it consists of), is constrained in numerous extremely precise and consistent ways. I really don’t see how anyone could truthfully deny they are routinely making faith-based judgments and assessments in the scientific realms of knowledge . . for it seems rather self evident to me that no man has a mind that can rightly be spoken of as dealing in absolute truth or fact (beyond perhaps the sort of “I think, therefore I am” level, anyway).)
I am not disappointed in what this man has done, properly speaking, because I fully expected it, for various reasons. I do however agree with what to me is a very revealing aspect of what is inevitably going to happen to the cost of food and other basic necessities which many human beings can barely manage to acquire for their own and their families’ very survival.
The only reason I can’t rightly accuse those “on high” who are pushing this “global warming” agenda mass murderers altogether, is because I cannot be absolutely certain which persons are knowingly advocating for the suffering and deaths of (I believe) many millions, and which are simply ignorant of the repercussions of adding substantial costs onto a broad range of goods. I cannot believe that no one at the UN or in our Governments thought about this . . it’s absurd to me to think this is not well understood by a great many in positions of authority/power.
To me, the whole “global warming” scare is an obvious snow-job so to speak, for many reasons, and I believe it has been promulgated mostly by con artists. I have examined the evidence and logics involved (to a great extent), and find no good reason to think atmospheric CO2 is “driving” much of anything about our climate(s).
And for this Pope fellow to call it “pollution”, is to me a slander against God Himself, Whom I believe (as this man ostensibly does) Created this world, and within which that gas is vital for life itself, beyond any “scientific” doubt. That One knows what He is doing, and the concept that He set the earth balanced on a virtual razors edge, such that some infinitesimal alteration in the composition of the atmosphere could send it into a thermal death spiral, amounts to calling Him an idiot, to me.
Eric you are off the rails.
The Pope is following the dominant view of climate science, the opposite of what the church was accused of in Galileo’s time.
The allusion to the “Galileo Affair” isn’t even logical.
Can you expand on your point?
It is. Once again, the Roman Catholic Church is pretending to have authority as to what is “true” and “not true.” There are significant issues with the “facts” that some activist scientists are proffering as well as huge issues with the solutions that politicians and activists are offering in response.
The Roman Catholic Church is also again going down the path of political interference. Each time they have done so in the past they enjoyed a brief surge of popularity and membership, but that was followed by a long period of slow decline.
The Pope is a man. The wrong man in any position is always a problem.
I’m not sure that science (climate or other) has a ‘view’.
Now that I’m a Doubter, I doubt that the pope knows very much science, his chem tech diploma notwithstanding; he appears to know politics, however.
The science is a convenient cloak for the agenda of world control. Those who control the energy resources of the world will have a choke-hold on every other market, to destroy at will. I tried to warn my church with this poem, but was rebuffed and chided for “not agreeing on the principal of climate change”. It is a revamped version of the one I wrote pertaining to the Pope.
An Ode to the Church
On Fighting Climate Change
Fear provoking ‘global planners’
Speak in agitated manners,
Predicating great disaster:
“Climate change we now must master!”
Human fault and shame beseeching:
“Children, guilt we should be teaching!
Man has sinned, by overreaching
Fragile Gaia’s limit!”
Beware this new theology,
And future woes it claims to see.
The firmaments cannot yet be
Controlled by mortal hands.
So, “fix this world” as best you can,
But first, care for your fellow man!
The earth will then be more as God has planned.
All creation is God’s and He alone
Commands the elements He owns,
Perplexes any man’s control,
Yet still, provides for every soul!
I think it is quite biblically well supported. I’m gathering scripture references which support it before trying again on the preacher (along with presenting him climate science facts he is ignorant of).
Dawtgtomis
Very good stuff for a very good cause it seems to me, thank you.
(An offering of sorts perhaps: The earth will then bloom as God has planned )
Paul Westhaver,
“The Pope is following the dominant view of climate science, the opposite of what the church was accused of in Galileo’s time.”
In both situations the church makes faith-based statements of what is and what is not physical reality. I suppose you would still see the two situations as opposite if you think today’s climate consensus is based on real science rather than politics. Copernicus’ Heliocentric model works pretty well, while CAGW models have proven useless for forecasting. See the difference? Alluding to the “Galileo affair” is perfectly logical.
The Galileo/Catholic church issue is generally misunderstood. This will help:
http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-ptolemaic-smackdown.html?_sm_au_=i5VF4657F1fjt223
Paul Westhaver, The allusion to the “Galileo Affair” is perfectly logical : the pope then was following the dominant view of science as it was then, opposing the rational opinions from Galileo. Popes should keep thier noses out of politics and science and concentrate on the spiritual domain where the can speak with some more authority.
Everyone has authority on spirituality. Anyone and everyone can author anything thing they want concerning spirituality, and no one is ever wrong!
Have you been touched by his Noodly Appendage?
The Pope is following the dominant view of climate science, the opposite of what the church was accused of in Galileo’s time.
==============
incorrect.
The Church was supporting the dominant consensus view, that the sun and planets revolved around the earth. Galileo was supporting the skeptical minority view, that the earth and planets revolved around the sun.
The Catholic Church tends to incorporate animist beliefs into its various brands of folk-Catholicism. Unusual though, for a pope to urge global acceptance of one such set of animist beliefs, particularly one with a demonstrated strong aversion to tenets of Christian theology.
The Catholic Church works with national and local governments throughout the entire world on maintaining and expanding their schools, hospitals and various social outreach programs often with government funding.
It is in the best interest of the Catholic Church to work with governments to ensure the flow of money continues and increases. Global Warming is a Money Maker.
Wrong. It’s doing exactly what it did in Galileo’s time, and as usual, is just as wrong.
In the early 17th century, the Church defended the biblically based consensus, just as it now defends the politically correct consensus. It’s just as wrong now as it was then.
This pope has even less justification than the popes who persecuted Galileo.
The more times change, the more they stay the same.
Pontiff Pilot.
LOL
Now that’s funny.
Seems as if His Holiness puts man before God, that mankind controls his destiny and not God.
I truly wish he wouldn’t do this…..it calls into question all of his judgements
What? As if!
“but numerous scientific studies indicate that most of the global warming in recent decades it is due to the large concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxide and others) mainly emitted due to human activity.”
…while the opposite is true
The Vatican is air-conditioned. All is well.
=============
And won’t be losing theirs, even while they demand that everyone else go without.
The Vatican must be air-conditioned to reduce CO2 and humidity damage from all those tourists tramping through the
PristineSistine Chapel.No kidding.
I don’t think the Pope resides in the Sistine Chapel or Vatican Archives. His air-conditioned residence is a separate building.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/pope-francis-air-conditioning-climate-change-encyclical
Air conditioning transfers heat from indoors to outdoors, converting electricity to additional heat in the process. If the Pope refuses to give up his air conditioning while insisting others do so, the message to the poor is clear: “Eat my heat, sukkas!”
“initiative for reducing air pollution,” So, the Pope, like the President, does not have a clue that CO2 is NOT pollution.
This ‘fact’ is not lost on many, but unfortunately the demand for RICO is aimed at shutting them down as well.
http://moonbattery.com/graphics/obama-francis-on-board.jpg
This is beyond interference. This is Inquisition-vintage totalitarianism. It’s coming unleashed on society everywhere. And meanwhile the scourge of unheard-of proportions has landed on Europe….and soon to arrive on North America’s shores. And everybody will be wringing their hands in Paris while Rome Falls.
Pretty Neat, huh?
This problem carries the seeds of it’s own solution. Will we grasp the opportunity?
No, it isn’t. The worst thing about Inquisition was that ACTION followed words, and in very nasty ways. Here I see words but no action will follow as the Church is quite powerless (fortunately).
And BTW IMO it is not even “interference”. Expressing an opinion is not interference. Actions have to follow for it to be an interference. Saying “those who don’t do this will be excomulgated / punished in some way by the Church” would be interference. “Everybody should do this” is not.
The dead mutilated and violated bodies of agnostics and atheists after crucifixion and beheading, just like in Saudi Arabia, will not appease the blood thrust and power mongering of this Latin Pope.
My intelligent and thoughtful catholic friends are in despair at this idiot.
Hopefully he is the last one…pg
Probably the last Pope; probably not the last idiot.
@p.g.sharrow
If Nostradamus and St Malachy are to be believed – he is the last one.
http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/pope-francis-pontiff-nostradamus-stmalachy/2013/03/14/id/494661/
When I was 8 years old I was a skeptic of the infallibility of the Pope. The Catholic school sisters were not pleased with my attitude. At 69 I am still a skeptic of any authorities infallibility, even a pope…pg
I am not skeptical on authority of infallibility, as skepticism can imply uncertainty, and I am completely certain that no one is infallible.
…and he goes on to say that everyone wants to live on a clean planet
If that’s so….why are the rich clean countries giving money to undeveloped countries..to clean them up
Read about it on the White House facebook page and all the inane comments. They don’t like fact checking. https://stream.org/whats-true-whats-false-obamas-global-warming-claims/
The Guardian today also carried an article claiming that Paul Ehrlich says that the Pope’s climate push is raving nonsense without population control. I blogged as follows:
“All activist scientists lose touch with both scientific objectivity and reality. This was Ehrlich in 1971:
“By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people … If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”
On the other hand the Pope is an authority on religious fantasy, so catastrophic climate change is right up his street”
It dropped a pebble in the pond.
From today’s Wall Street Journal …
… Pope Francis is becoming an aggressive public player in secular politics, from the environment to economic policy. That carries risks, not for Francis alone, but for the papacy and the institution the pope leads.
It is said widely that Francis will never allow himself to be co-opted into anyone else’s political agenda. The pope is famously his own man. But the pope has no control over whether he is co-opted into the political goals and strategies of others.
A TV commercial airing this week from NextGen Climate Action, funded by billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer, unfurls frightening images of wildfires and floods and ends with Francis waving and smiling at us over the words, “With compassion and love—Pope Francis.” It’s propaganda, but legitimate propaganda by current standards.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-politicized-pope-1443047131
I’ve just come across a transcript of a speech given by Pope Pius X when he attended the 1904 Olympic Games in St Louis. He spoke in support of the EPA action of the time to ban horse poop in the streets of the US. He said that ‘Horse poop is a problem which can no longer be left to a future generation’ and invited contrast with the Civil War struggle by invoking the spirit of Abraham Lincoln in support of his argument.
He’s had years of practice believing the unbelievable. I don’t think it is part of his job description to be the sharpest knife in the block. He seems a gullible fool to me. And a danger to the poor of the world.
I don’t understand why the Pope has adopted the stalking horse of the culture of death. His actions are embarrassing from a science perspective and fly directly in the face of the teachings of Saint John Paul II.
The pseudo science of climate catastrophe is a religion to some. Apparently Francis has decided to lead us into this religion
Perhaps God is fixing the Earth by replenishing CO2 to a higher level that is beneficial to all the plants that were created by him/her/it. Perhaps the Pope is in conflict with God’s plan and doesn’t even know it.
The fundamental problem that I see with this pope is his sole mates seems to be those who share his politics rather than his theology.
Rent-a-Pope
Resourceguy,
Exactly. Popes have been rented for untold centuries. Rent-a-Pope is a big part of their business model. Pope Francis eschews capitalism at the same time as the Catholic Church comprises one of richest (and corrupt) corporations on the planet.
A prayer for the Pope on his visit to the U.S.
Dear God. We come to you in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with praise and thanksgiving.
We thank you for a bountiful harvest, that thanks to the increase in CO2 levels since the industrial revolution provides food for an additional 2 billion people without starving. (1)
We thank you that the earth is getting greener, so that a wider variety of plants and animals can find habitat. (2)
We praise you for the clouds You put in the sky on the second day of creation that act as the thermostat of the earth so there is a cap on how warm it will get, especially in the tropics that has found its stable temperature. (3)
We thank you for the warming in the temperate regions since the little Ice Age, making wheat farming possible way up in Canada. (4)
We thank you that this warming causes less hurricanes,(5) less tornadoes,(6) less winter storms,(7) gives more rain(8) and less droughts.(9)
And we thank you for the increase in CO2 that is delaying the onset of the coming Ice Age.(10)
And we thank you there is a inexhaustible supply of Thorium, suitable for sustainable and distributed nuclear power so that the energy needs of the future is not dependent on fossil fuel.(11)
And now, we ask you, God to protect the Pope’s soul from the evil forces waiting him in Washington and the United Nations.
They will talk a lot about Carbon Pollution, with which they mean CO2. CO2 is not a pollutant, but real pollution is a great threat to our well being and deeds to be combated at all levels. This takes large amount of energy to clean up the environment, and is made more difficult by making energy more expensive, so please, God, make the Pope see through all their lies.
And please Lord, make the Pope realize their predictions of doom come from failed climate models (12)
He has a meeting with godless and anti-Christian people who advocate Global Governance and the merging of all religions under this secular government.(13)
Jesus never said: Do as the Romans do, but this Pope is in danger of allying himself with these forces and agenda 2030, The New World Order.(14)
Lord, may all Christians heed Your calling in 2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
And Lord, may there be a revival among all who trust in the finished work on the Cross, and follow the Lord, Jesus Christ, and may there be an awakening that the battle is spiritual, and Global Governance leads to even more tyranny,
And God, we thank you as in Lamentations 3:22-23 Because of the LORD’s great love we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail. They are new every morning; great is your faithfulness.
And we pray this in the Name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Amen.
And now for the explanations: (in progress) http://lenbilen.com/2015/09/22/a-prayer-for-the-pope-on-his-visit-to-the-u-s/
Amen, lenbilen. A very fine prayer indeed, I feel.
The Pope’s comment today in his address to congress regarding avoiding looking at things as good or evil is too much hinting of moral relativism for my liking. Being too judgemental is obviously to be avoided but in the end there is, indeed, good and there is, indeed, evil. While he says this he at the same time makes judgements regarding something much less clear, like the cause of global warming, still not proven scientifically and obviously politically driven towards the forced redistribution of wealth. Taxes are also not charity as they are, in the end, at the point of a gun. Finally, to make these pronouncements aimed at the raising of the plight of those less fortunate while the Church is one of the most wealthy organizations in the world rings somewhat hypocritical. Jesus said to the rich man who asked what he needed to do to get into heaven, “sell everything you own and give it to the poor, then come and follow me”. There was much good in what he said but too much political advice, no matter how politely offered.
Since the cost of the Papal visit to Philly alone is estimated at $48 million, it’s not exactly a donkey ride into the city gates with some palm fronds thrown down.
On arrival in the US on a very large aircraft:
King James Bible Luke 20:46
<blockquote)Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
Bugger! COLD morning fingers in ‘sunny’ South Australia
Next up, labor union over reach tactics, high speed rail projects, and automatic expansion of the debt ceiling. Why bother with addressing Congress, since it is bypassed at this point in exec order over reach?
Paul Westhaver…”The Pope is following the dominant view of climate science, the opposite of what the church was accused of in Galileo’s time.”
No, I believe it is right on target. The largest majority DID NOT believe Galileo and so forth just like our situation now with AGW skeptics, The current Climastrologists are the new inquisition, and this Pope, perhaps even like the one of their time, believes their assertions are correct. But most especially because the solutions they propose would SEEM (are at least represented) to be in favor of the poorest. But you cannot expect the Pope to be a proper scientist, again he is being willfully mislead by improper and unethical ones. I think if he were truly aware that the damage inflicted was detrimental to the poor, he would certainly be against it, as its supposed help for the poor is probably the main reason he cares at all.
I am a Catholic (spare me your off topic rants please) and a well informed skeptic. This (thankfully) does not fall under the cloak of infallibility as recognised by the Pope himself. So he openly admits he may be wrong. But his office is political, and his next most important job is politics, it is just poorly understanding non-catholics who think otherwise. I do wish he were on the correct side of this issue, but it is perfectly understandable why he is not.
Don’t understand why the pope considers “the solutions they propose would SEEM (are at least represented) to be in favor of the poorest”. Reality says it is the exact opposite. Cheap, reliable energy with infrastructure (sewage systems, clean water, and electricity) allow the poor to raise their standard of living.
The seeming benefit to the poor comes from the annual wealth transfers to the undeveloped countries that the UN wants them to be paid. Some of that money would go to Catholic charities, etc., in those countries. Third world cardinals, now a majority, are strongly in favor of this redistribution. So was Peron, wihin Argentina.
PS: In the Third World, the governments, media, and populations are strongly in favor of receiving transfer payments from the UN. If the pope were to throw cold water on those hopes, it would lose popularity and its flock would shrink That had to worry the Vatican. That’s probably why skeptics were shut out of its confabs. They don’t want to be embarrassed. Later, when this scare abates, the Vatican will blame Science for leading it, and the world, astray.