Now that the Pope has demanded allegiance to the global warming scam, can we expect official church persecution of climate heretics?
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- spren on HUD Climate Advisor
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Tel on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Petit_Barde on Ellen Flees To The UK
- dm on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Causes Of Increased Storminess
Hey man, stop teasing Catholics. Orthodox Catholics are overwhelmingly “climate deniers” and dot feel represented by the new misguided policies coming from the Vatican.
Quite so!
The current Pope makes me pine for the days of Pope John Paul. Heck… he makes me pine for a pope like Rodrigo Borgia.
Their main weapons are hyperbole, models, adjustments and a fanatical devotion to the cause.
Well, the good thing about Catholicism is that we are allowed to dissent in these matters, something that the CAGW religion followers are not.
Unfortunately while Central and South American Catholics are more awake, American Catholics are not and they compose 1/3 of the American population. That is the real target.
Gail,
American Catholics are notoriously unruly. The pope will change few minds on the issue; but he might make some more silent. But that is all — American Catholics don’t get their science from the Vatican.
Mark,
I frequent a flea market that is the biggest meeting place for Hispanics in the area. Some of them were surprised at how ‘controlled’ American Catholics were by the Church. Those conversations are what I was going by.
I do not think the Progressives realize how politically savvy the Hispanics are. I have had quite a few interesting conversations over the years.
I believe that but I do not think many of them realize how politically savvy Progressives are in constructing boxes like “Hispanic” and pressing entire peoples into it.
Colorado, Unlike the blacks they are very used to corrupt politicians and can spot them. It will be a matter of who is using whom.
Wait, our *three* no *four* main weapons are hyperbole, models, adjustments, homogenization and a fanatical devotion to the cause… and nice red uniforms.
FYI http://www.montypython.net/scripts/spanish.php
With the Pope pontificating the way he is, it does not bode well for his level of intelligence if he cannot understand that CO2 is not a pollutant, or a magical gas that is supposedly the thermostat for planet earth.
We got several worse (much worse) popes in the past.
We will survive.
That is the beauty of the catholic Church.
Their 3 no 4 main tactics are….. 🙂
No, not tactics…Weapons!!
http://youtu.be/vt0Y39eMvpI
No, not the comfy cushion!!!!
Ni?
For skepics and the average citizen, a mild warming of the earth’s climate would be akin to the provision of a real “comfy chair”. For alarmists, the Monte Pythonesque “comfy chair” of warming is imagined as an object of dread.
Holy crap!
Thread winner!
I wonder which leading Climate crusader we can expect the Pope to appoint to his newly created “Climate Inquisitions” charged with seeking out those who commit the crime of questioning papal doctrine on climate.
Well it would have to be a Mann with a nasty disposition.
No One Expects The Spanish Inquisition
Actually Dr Rummel would. Democide: Death by Government
It is the low information Useful Idiots that can not see the firing squad headed for them.
The Elite with their Malthusian mind set have made it clear they would like to thin out the human herd.
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner, founder of CNN and founder of the UN Foundation. Former Senator Tim With who orchestrated the nasty trick designed to get Congress to ratify the UN Framework on Climate Change is now President of that foundation. He even brags about it!
Going further back in time George Bernard Shaw, a co-founder of the Fabian Society (mother of the Progressive movement in the USA) is very blunt about culling the human herd.
Source: George Bernard Shaw, Prefaces (London: Constable and Co., 1934), p. 296.
Another founder of the Fabian society showed the same mindset.
This mindset has not disappeared. It is just not talked of. UK hospitals were paid to kill disabled babies and old folks until the scandal reached parliament just recently. The UK energy policy is killing thousands of pensioners a year or sending them to hospitals where they are subject to the whim of a system that is just as likely to kill you as heal you.
Civilization is just a very thin veneer laid over the top predator on earth. We need to remember that.
Printed words doesn’t do it justice. Shaw was a scary man. When I ask my Progressive friends what they think of George Bernard Shaw, well of course they adore him. When pointed out the things he said as in your example, they don’t believe it. I have to prove it using videos.
Don’t forget Mary Sanger!
I have these two articles on Sanger booked market.
http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm
http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=939
I had this booked marked on Shaw… The quote I used was up on that site but got scrubbed. SURPRISE!
http://www.zimbio.com/George+Bernard+Shaw/articles/I08Va40hsJ2/Real+George+Bernard+Shaw+Fabian+Socialist
Actually most of the sites I had book marked about Shaw got scrubbed. He opened his mouth too much and let the true nature of the Fabian/progressives show through.
Excuse the spelling, I am half a sleep.
The Catholic Church once threatened Galileo if he did not change his views on planetary motion. Turned out Galileo was right. Galileo was forced to recant what he knew was right, or face persecution by the church.
The decision to force Galileo to recant has been used to deride the church to this day. Today the current Pope has given us another reason to ridicule the church for centuries to come.
The discussion on Galileo is here:
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/12/29/pope-demands-that-catholics-end-bad-weather/#comment-474862
Galileo’s problem was his pride and his big mouth. He failed to follow properly established processes which scientists had to follow. The Vatican in many cases refereed these scientific discussions. Remember, in the eyes of the Europeans, astronomy was considered a part of Church Dogma in many narrow cases. What Galileo did was no different from a theologian who announced some new heretical idea, but refused to prove in “court”.
This may not seem justified in today’s world. But, it was no different in Islamic lands, in India, or in China.
Galileo had the opportunity to convince the Church to go with the heliocentric theory and chose to ridicule the Pope. Putting it simply, if Galileo didn’t suffer from Aspergers, the RC would have gone with heliocentric models long ago.
One problem was the use of pseudoscience (which couldn’t happen now?) so the Church was happy with Copernicus’s book for seven decades after its publication. Then the criticism was philosophical and not theological (although reference to scriptures was always thrown in. That is why we have seven colours of the rainbow , orange and indigo). Tolsani’s arguments were a bit like you couldn’t point out the 60 year period in the temperature record without a physical model predicting it.
Then there was the real problem that the Copernicus system was not a good model for predicting planetary motion despite the supposed simplicity of circular orbits. Kepler went with the heliocentric model because he thought it would better represent God’s geometry of the universe, and came up with something that didn’t require epicycles (like the Copernicus model did). It was still not good enough to predict planetary motion to sway people from Aristotle rather than the Bible. But the problem always was how having the Sun at the centre of a model could be turned into theological argument. A bit like modelling of the effects of CO2 could be blown out of all proportion to argue that we should condemn the poor to poverty.
All SUVs will now come with a new “climate indulgence” payable to the Church. Sports car indulgences come with a marriage annulment package discount option.
Indulgences, exactly what I think when I hear that Algore buys “carbon credits” to offset his incredible carbon footprint.
So can we consider these posts to consitute Tony’s version of nailing the 95 Theses to the Church doors.
Having apparently failed with his liberalizing family encyclical (divorced/remarried Catholics still cannot receive the Sacrements) he moves on to climate change.
We know for sure climate change has to do with core Church concerns about sin and faith…Noah, rising sea levels, and all that. So square in the center of obvious Papal doctrinal expertise…
No wonder the Chinese supress Christians. Else they would have to cut emissions cause the Pope said so.
Even Monty Python would have struggled to do justice to this. Would have added another fun page to essay Climatastosophistry in Blowing Smoke, but alas the book is now published.
I’m sorry, Rud, but that just displays ignorance of the catholic faith, or ill-will towards it, or, perhaps, both.
At the moment we are in a hiatus between two synods on “the family”. After the second synod has concluded we can expect an “exhortation”, not an “encyclical”. The difference is perhaps not significant, but your impatience perhaps is.
As for your misunderstanding or misrepresentation of papal authority, which touches on the topic of this thread: as several catholic commentators here have pointed out, for the Holy Father to speak on climate, at least in the terms that people seem to expect, would not benefit from any degree of papal authority and, in my view as well as many others’, would be imprudent.
The Extraordinary Synod on the Family was of the Pope’s choosing. All of the members of the Synod were hand picked by Francis. And Pope Francis ruled over the Synod with an iron fist – something that has never been done in a very, very long time, if ever. He appointed Cdl Baldiserri as its President and Bishop Forte as its secretary. With the Synod dead-locked in votes to approve a number of controversial paragraphs, Francis appointed 6 new Bishops to end the deadlock. Without those votes, the Rilatio document would have looked quite a bit different. But, in the end, at the very last minute and without approval of the Synod members, Forte inserted 3 new paragraphs into the final Rilatio. The following day, when the Rilatio was published, Baldiserri order all communications between Synod members to cease; no one in the Synod could publicly or privately offer a shred of criticism. Two nights later, during the final official working meeting, 20 influential bishops rebelled. These Bishops ranged from Cdl Pell from Australia to Cardinal Burke of the US, and all of the African Cardinals. They forced Baldiserri to remove to gag order. Baldiserri looked to Francis, who simply nodded and left. It was obvious to all the Pope Francis knew what was going on the entire time. The 3 offending paragraphs subsequently failed to get the final votes necessary. But, hours before the Synod closed, Pope Francis ordered they be reinstated.
The point of this long post is to emphasize that Pope Francis has a tyrannical streak in how he manages things. He has upset long standing traditions and the Vatican II idea of the Pope being only a primus inter pares amongst the college of fellow bishops.
So he fits right in with all the other international would-be tyrants.
I agree with your analysis of the synod, JP, but not so much with that of Vatican II. It was, after all, Vatican I that authoritatively limited papal authority.
Are they still looking volunteers for that one way trip to Mars, this planet’s getting way too weird for me! lol
A green “investment” fund and litigation for damages? CAGW is the basis for the greatest mass transfer of wealth the world has ever seen. This Pope will lap up every drop of the Kool-Aid.
well we know that the carbon tax has zero impact on the problem, so why not try prayer ?
I suppose at least its another parameter to feed into the models
In fact , I can see a barny in a few decades. The UN claiming they averted the sea levels rising because of their climate fund, O bummer because of his pen and phone, and the pope because of the power of prayer
Right now I suspect that many Alarmists have been praying for warming and melting ice for some time. It seems that every once in awhile one or two of those that were once the most evangelical for their warmest religion are indicating their faith may have been shaken a bit. Another couple years with no appreciable warming and we may see a whole lot of them suffering a crisis in their faith.
They can not keep fudging the temperature data or you are going to keep hitting those ’34 °F and rain days’ that are actually 29 °F and a foot of snow, like I caught last February and spread all over the internet.
Are many honest enough?
way out of his pay scale…………
If there was ever any doubt that the Pope was a hard core leftist, this should remove it.
I think I recall Cardinal Pell from Australia being a very strong sceptic on global warming. Will that go down well with the pope.
Could someone tell me exactly what the pope has stated regarding global warming? Then we can argue with him about the truth value of his statements. He might then learn something that he does not yet know. So might we.
And you might like to try this… go outside and watch the sun rise and set and try to prove that the earth goes round the sun and not vica versa – while living in the 16th century. Your conclusions are right but your “scientific” arguments are wrong but you tell the pope that he’s an idiot anyway and that he has to rewrite the bible. His reply is that you may hold that opinion but that you must not teach it as the truth as, wait for it, your arguments are WRONG.
It’s all so easy when you are an “educated” blogger of the 21st century laughing hysterically at the antics of the plebs way back then. And after 500 years all the ammunition you have is, “Galileo!, Galileo!, Galileo!” when most of you have little or no idea about the history and philosophy of science at that time.
Take a look at the unbelievable lies and corruption of the entire scientific edifice regarding climate science right now, the outright fraud and profiteering in all our previously hallowed institutions. Many of you mumble appreciatively when “scientists” trot out the word “dark” for whatever they have no idea about and propose an infinite number of universes to bolster their idiocy. Yes, we are now so more advanced than those morons in the “dark” ages! (I’m thinking we are living in the “dark” ages now).
The Holy Father is infallible when it comes to matters of faith and morals. If he states that the Earth revolves around Pluto or that CO2 makes gravity heavier he is, like everyone else, capable of being completely and utterly wrong. Oh, by the way, he’s quite aware of that you know! Many of you seem to believe that he hasn’t got a clue what his “job” is all about. He’s there to safeguard the revelation of Christ and help us get to Heaven, not to “pontificate” on matters outside his jurisdiction. Contrary to much ignorant popular belief he’s not an idiot. And it’s highly unlikely that he has anything but a tiny smattering of knowledge regarding climate science. He’s got “experts” for that and those experts can and might be as corrupt as so many others in this decaying world.
And though I’m both a Catholic and a sceptic of the global warming/CO2 claim I’m educated enough to know that I could be wrong too. I don’t think I am but I will always be sceptical both of the global warming scam and my own beliefs regarding political and scientific controversy. I’ve been wrong before. I am likely to be wrong again.
Oh, and one last thing; after five hundred years I’d like to hear another example, or perhaps, ten, of how totally and utterly wrong the Catholic Church is other than that tired old refrain about Galileo. It was not the proudest time in the history of a two-thousand year old institution but not at all what the Enlightenment myth-makers made it out to be in their attempt to destroy the Church.
Ron Van Wegen
Bachelor of Applied Science
(Science Information Services)
Deakin University
Melbourne, Australia
Excellent.
Actually, contrary to the press, Pope Francis hasn’t said dogs go to heaven nor that Catholics have to believe in, or do something about, man-made global warming. He is supposed to publish an encyclical on the latter topic in a few months.
People interested in truth in one arena ought to be interested in truth in any and every arena and, therefore ought to wait until… you know… it’s actually been published. And they ought to read it, too, rather than news reports about it.
Does not matter what the Pope’s encyclical says any more than what the body of the IPPC report says (especially the draft before the politicians amend it). The propaganda machine is already in action and that is what the majority of US voters will see.
https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=pope+%22global+warming%22&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&gws_rd=ssl
Bravo!
The very fact that this Papacy has thrown his his Mitre into this political/social/scientific ring does not concern you Mr. Van Wegen? I’m not Catholic but it sure bothers this Christian given the fact that the Vatican has it’s own substantial scientific resources in many fields, including earth and planetary sciences and yet it appears went outside of it’s own resources to gain advise from well known less than objective subject matter experts on this issue.
Yes, Bravo!
I too am a catholic scientist (a proper scientist, and a practising one).
“Could someone tell me exactly what the pope has stated regarding global warming? Then we can argue with him about the truth value of his statements. He might then learn something that he does not yet know. So might we.”
He has no official views; however, the Pope has made many offhand comments. Officially, it is the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which made the announcement this week. I read the original news piece from a Twitter post linked to Think Progress. At first I was skeptical, as Popes usually reserve Encyclicals (also known as Exhortations or Papl Bulls (in the very old days) ) to either make a significant theological or doctrinal point (see Humanae Vitae or Domini Iesus) or a critical political point in dire need of being said (see Mit Brennender Sorge). Pope’s must be careful in how they use Encyclicals. Above all, they must not undermine existing Church Doctrine and Dogmas – that is, Encyclicals should not introduce anything new or novel. Their main goals are usually to teach forgotten Dogmas and Doctrines, or to emphasize some theological point that for the moment needs emphasis. Pope Pius XI issued his Encyclical Casti Connubi, in reference to the 1930 Anglican Conference at Lambreth, which for the first time, allowed the use of artificial birth control. It wasn’t that the Church suddenly forbade its use (the oldest Church prohibition’s against birth control go back to the 1st and 2nd Centuries); but, Pope Pius XI wished to re-emphasize this teaching.
It still am skeptical that Pope Francis will waste his moral capital on an encyclical concerning “Climate Change.” The Curia has to know that a)the science is indeed not “settled”, and b) Climate Science has nothing to do with the Catholic Church and its teachings. Yes, he is free to do so. But, he will be detracting from the moral seriousness of his position; if he does issue such an encyclical, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) will be seen as nothing better than any other world figures out on the look for applause. More seriously, Pope Francis will be seen as giving his official imprimatur to an entire industry dedicated to making the poor more poor, and the Middle Class miserable.
It would be much better if he tackled serious issues with the Church (Christianity and more specifically, Catholicism is in terminal decline in Europe; it is hemorrhaging parishioners in Central North and South America, and is under violent attack in Africa and the Middle East.
I disagree that the decline is terminal in Europe. Things are looking up in some places, where we have faithful bishops.
The fact is that the Catholic laity will do what they have always done and ignore the edicts coming from the Vatican on a range of issues such as birth control, marriage etc and answer to their own consciences. As far as the Vatican is concerned they have no moral authority until they clean up their act on sexual abuse. If the pope issues a fatwa on CAGW I will ignored it because my carbon footprint is less than the popes. Besides they are not following their own teachings on the matter of Caesar.
Richo I am old enough to remember when many Catholics religiously ate fish on Friday and it was even what was served in all the public schools around here for lunches on that day.
Many will of course ignore but many will not. If they had ignored such things in the past I wouldn’t have had Catholic friends as a kid who had 5 to 8 siblings I think.
When ‘Globalisation’ was all the rage, the Greens latched onto Global Warming as a ‘global’ issue they could bring to the table.
The Roman Catholic Church has always had global aspirations.
Its (rather late) affiliation to the Warmist cause comes as no surprise.
I saw this and thought of you: http://brotherlapin.com/2014/12/30/rubi-donkey-writes-to-the-pope/
Rubí Donkey was excommunicated by the Democratic Underground.
Thomas de TorqueManna?
Have you seen them in a room together?
http://s5.postimg.org/apslm650n/torqumemanna.jpg
This Pope should get laid and shut the hell up.