The Pope has spoken

Posted: June 15, 2015 by Andrew in climate

imageThe climate Comms event of, at least this week, has arrived early due to a leak. The Vatican has released its view on the state of the planet. Much anticipated by some on both sides of the debate, the leak will no doubt leave the usual suspects scrambling to spin the Encyclical for all it is worth.

A crime against nature is a crime against ourselves and a sin against God”

The Bishop Hill blog reports that a copy of the Encyclical has been leaked to the Italian media. Initial indications are that it will be seen as a damp squib.

This appears to be the Vatican’s version of a summary for policy makers. AGW is not however the main theme. Much time is spent expressing concern for the environment as you would expect if the essay were written by the WWF or Greenpeace. To be honest, there are some concerns expressed that are hard to argue with. There is a call for action in the areas of poverty, water, green energy and the Rainforests and many more besides. AGW gets a couple of paragraphs to itself, with sentences taken almost straight from the IPCC. Many other references to AGW are thinly spread throughout the whole document.

Find a comfy chair, as it is long, and read the Translation Here.

The Guardian has spotted that the Vatican rejects the use of Carbon Credits

Update: A good day to bury bad news

Comments
  1. “The Catholic Church
    Now enters the fray,
    The UN dictating
    What the Pope has to say;
    God pushed aside,
    Left in the wings,
    As the UN puppet masters
    Pull the Pope’s strings…….
    http://rhymeafterrhyme.net/global-warming-and-the-catholic-church/

  2. Roger Clague says:

    The Pope is taking his inspiration from Francis of Assisi. The message he takes from Francis is “Sister Mother Earth”
    The Pope say the cause of the damage to our “Common house” is “Global economic dysfunction”
    He does not say more about this. He uses the politically neutral language of care for the planet.

    It is rather rambling and aimed at damage to nature broadly not climate change in particular.

  3. It is what you would expect a psychic reading for Mother Earth to look like–generalities in the vaguest of language. The Pope is a spiritual fraud.

  4. oldbrew says:

    I’m afraid the RC church is out of its depth on this issue.

  5. Fanakapan says:

    Wasn’t this the same firm who said that the Sun went round the Earth ?

  6. wayne says:

    At least if he, his cardinals and his environmentalist ‘friends’ take their own convictions they won’t be a jettin’ about the world any longer. But fat chance, seems they just officially joined the global unclean hypocrites.

    But he can’t put that guilt trip on me, have travelled less that 1000 miles per year for the last eight years… and how do I know… my odometer tells me so.

    OTOH, maybe he was just addressing the Al Gores of this world.

  7. E.M.Smith says:

    If there is guilt available to be peddled, the Roman Catholics will do it. Remember that they are the inventors of the Original Indulgence. ..

    (no need to rant at me about being anti Catholic. Mom & Dad are Catholics, I’m married to a Catholic, and attend mass about once a month…)

  8. P.A.Semi says:

    > Wasn’t this the same firm who said that the Sun went round the Earth ?

    No, that were _scientists_ of that time…

    Also the scientists of former times said, that the living creatures like insects are born by themselves out of a non-alive mud. The recent scientists has just shifted the view, that the living creatures born some day very long ago from the non-alive mud…

  9. oldbrew says:

    Fanakapan says: ‘Wasn’t this the same firm who said that the Sun went round the Earth ?’

    They backed down from that position a long time ago – 1992 in fact:/
    http://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/01/world/vatican-science-panel-told-by-pope-galileo-was-right.html

  10. PeterF says:

    So, it was a leak? Or perhaps an intentional feeding to the press so the Vatican can see where problems are, or what to adjust?

    It may be more interesting to find the differences between the “leaked” and the final version.

  11. craigm350 says:

    Reblogged this on CraigM350 and commented:
    2,000 years of accumulating wealth and making canny investments means the “poor” church is actually sitting on vast wealth in securities, property, works of art and other assets.

    A report in Italy’s L’Espresso claims the Vatican is worth €9-10 billion (£7-8 billion). London assets include shops on New Bond Street including the jewellers Bulgari and a property in St James’s Square.

    Other international assets – funded by a huge donation by Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini as a thank you for recognising his regime – include places in Switzerland and a home belonging to former French President Francois Mitterrand.

    Even the figure of €9-10 billion is believed to be an under-estimate – the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples is said to have holdings of €7 billion.

    In recent years, the church has paid out vast amounts in compensation to child sex abuse victims, including $2.5 billion in the US alone.

    In a startling recent admission, Pope Francis said one priest in 50 may be a paedophile.
    http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/pope-franciss-church-poor-has-assets-worth-billions-1457383

    Of course it’s all about the poor. Greenpeace really, really cares about the poor too, so much so that they are happy to prevent access to cheap lifesaving energy whilst they jet to work and all over the planet for climate jamborees. No wonder the Church were so keen to join in the crusade.

  12. craigm350 says:

    Chiefio is spot on with the indulgences. Nothing like money given to the Church to wash away sins and guilt. Maybe the Church can absolve itself of their army of perverts by building field upon field of Ivanpah solar towers and a few more Swansea Bays?

    I happened to be in church a when they were railing against the deviance of gay marriage. My blood boiled. Why? because the Church is/was deep in the mire for predatory pervert priests destroying children’s lives so the audacity to call it deviant…

    The sexual abuse happened at the Catholic School that some family of mine went to. ‘father’ was notoriously creepy and it turns out ‘father’ was protected by the church for decades so he could keep on preying on children. A member of my family was a pupil was lucky to escape his clutches and their school life was made hell because of it being told they – a child – had psychological issues! The priests’ violent sadism (there was more than one predator in the school system it turned out) was encouraged as an outlet for their deviant proclivities – if they can’t have them beat them was it in a nutshell. A lukewarm apology years down the line to the abused children just did not cut it. So yeah dear Pope why not ‘save the planet’ like the Church has ‘saved the children’?

    I mean it’s not like this is ongoing any more (checks update to this post)…erm.. it’s not like the Greens had links with groups advocating sex with children (checks notrickzone)…erm…erm…it’s not like the then Pope met Jimmy Saville or gave him a papal knighthood…erm…erm…erm.

    I’ll shut up now and I hope no one’s taken offence. Many of my family are deeply religious and don’t harm others nor support the crimes by *some* in their organisation. I only wish the Catholic Church would shut up instead of regurgitating and adding to the endless liberal elite #greencrap ahead of COP21. They have caused enough damage without adding to another bunch of zealots lunacy

  13. hunter says:

    The Church was at its finest in recent times under St. John Paul II. It is no where near that today.
    Tough times but the Church will survive. This Pope? To be forgotten and soon.

  14. ivan says:

    You would think that if the Pope was that concerned for the poor in Africa and other places he would be calling for the rapid construction of coal fired power stations in those places to supply the much needed power to enable the people to rise from their poverty. But no, all we get is a rehash of the green blob manifesto coupled with Agenda 21 – in other words complete bull (is that why they call some of these things papal bulls?)

  15. Ron Clutz says:

    In the excitement over the Pope’s encyclical and the upcoming Paris conference, people are not talking about how CO2 mitigation efforts, if successful, would put civilization onto an unsustainable path.

    https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/mitigation-is-bad-for-us-and-the-planet/

  16. oldbrew says:

    Some scientists are now proclaiming they won’t change their minds on the alleged global warming issue until they’ve been proved wrong for 50 years – starting now.

    As one MP said – we’ll all be dead by then.
    http://www.thegwpf.com/were-all-dead-before-royal-society-admit-they-may-be-wrong-says-mp/

  17. P.A.Semi says:

    I have not read the encyclic yet, but what you selected as a logo:

    > A crime against nature is a crime against ourselves and a sin against God

    is absolutely true, the Pope is right in saying this. He is not a climatologist or scientist and needs not to be and has no reason to disrespect meaning of renown scientists of his time. (If you feel to be scientist, you should fight someone, who is not a good scientist but pretends to be, but you cannot accuse non-scientist of being not scientific… Fight IPCC, gain respect with arguments so loud, that even non-scientists will here you and need to say, that you are right…)

    You (and me and them, all) are RESPONSIBLE either to God, if you believe, or to future generations of children, and rather to both of these, for the living space you bequeath to them.

    WHAT does it mean to protect nature is different in each time, but the fact, that the treasure of Earth must be preserved in best possible conditions is eternally right.

    About warming – if you blindly numerically evaluate NCEP/NCAR analysis data since 1948, the average temperature really grows a little. But then if you look more inside, it is probably, because flow patterns are changing and some places, that used to be very cold, are not so cold now. One cannot say how much of this is caused by humans and how much by Solar variation.
    Global warming does not mean “warming everywhere” – IF one day the temperatures would rise that much to melt Greenland, the temperature in Europe will drop very remarkably, because now the Greenland diverts polar vortex down to Canada and it only returns to Europe much warmed on its way through Atlantic. Otherwise, if you look to the vortex circling Antarctic at our latitudes, it is very very windy and rather cold…

    But the warming is probably only a smaller side of the problem, the clean air and oceans and forests must be preserved, and the reserves of fossil energy cannot be exhausted to the empty bed.

    It’s not only about Europe, the polution is much worse coming from China and you probably only little estimate, how dirty and ugly would Earth be, if we all and China especially will live like pigs, as we used since 1800s… It improves a little, but it needs to be improved a lot, especially in the worst parts, but they would rather follow the best parts being even better… (So if the air polution in Europe is rather bearable now, there still must be some pressure for improving it, so that the parts, that are much worse, feel the tension to become better too, since if you say – in my neighbourhood it is just fine, don’t panic guys, than the people in much dirtier parts also consider – don’t panic, why to bother?)

    One of the biggest future problems for the civilisation is fuel exhaustion, while not having ready other technologies to make energy. You must start to prepare now, decades in advance, because switching from fossil-fuel-predator regime to sustainable eternal regime takes decades, and if the civilisation is to be here for some more millenia, it cannot rely on very time-limited energy sources. (Is there a hundred more years of oil&coal, or hundred fifty? Not more. What about the energy source for next few thousand years ?! What about the wars fighting for the last rests of oil worldwide, if the civilisation will be still oil-thirsty after some 80 years as it is now?)

    Do you, euro-americans, complain about poverty, that brings to you the ecology efforts? Do you mean it really? Do you really know, what “poverty” means?! No, you don’t, living in the richest part of the world, you hardly know, what hunger means… How much of children in your neighbourhood died of hunger? None or only few… Do not ever dare to complain about poverty due to any ecology or other well-meant efforts…

    And don’t you dare about your children or children of your mates? They will come to much more distress, if we will not start to act to protect this civilisation and planet…

    There must be a pressure for clean and eternal energy sources. If the current alternatives to dirty and time-limited energy sources are not good enough, there must be more pressure to find even cleaner and more optimal eternal (=renewable) energy sources. There is no way back to stop this search and switch, sitting back in coal-warmed and lit houses until the coal-fire extinguishes…

  18. PeterF says:

    oldbrew says:
    June 16, 2015 at 3:51 pm
    Some scientists are now proclaiming they won’t change their minds on the alleged global warming issue until they’ve been proved wrong for 50 years – starting now.

    See, this is a heck of an improvement over the Vatican, whom it took some 350 years to rehabilitate Galileo! So the Royal Society is rather quick in its actions.

    It is on a par with Wegner’s continental drift, which took a good 50 years to be accepted (after his death). Today we have a Wegner Institut in Germany, proclaiming CAGW.

    Other things were a bit faster, like jumping genes, dicovered 1950, nobel prize 1983 (to Barbara McClintock), 33 years later. Or quasicrystals, dicovered 1982, nobel price 2011 (to Dan Shechtman), 29 years later.

    Don’t be so hard on the royal socientists, 50 years at 30 billion spending per year is a mere 1500 billion spend for nothing.

  19. Fanakapan says:

    PeterF;

    Interesting point about the 50 years.

    But, assuming a period of learning before becoming an ‘Accredited’ scientist, and at most a 35 year working life after, it would seem that in order to get said scientists opinions at the end of the period will require the services of a Medium🙂

    Clearly such Un scientific proclamations are more indicative of their attitudes towards tenure and pensions, than actual science.

  20. ren says:

    Pope acts in accordance with tradition. Since 97% is correct, it can not be otherwise.

  21. E.M.Smith says:

    @P.A.Semi:

    I see you have eaten the Running Out Panic! apple of the Global Warming Theorists. Fear not. We are NOT running out. Known and in hand technologies provide all the energy and stuff we need essentially forever. (The sun consumes the planet first).

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/there-is-no-energy-shortage/

    A way to get electricity forever at about present prices with known tech:

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/05/29/ulum-ultra-large-uranium-miner-ship/

    some other related bits:

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/there-is-no-shortage-of-stuff/

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/unlimiting-resources-basalt-for-a-high-tech-stone-age/

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/uranium-from-seawater-advances/

    Note that known recoverable resource of hydrocarbons is measured in TRILLIONS of bbls of oil equivalent. All it takes is a small price rise to turn resource into reserves. BTW, right now oil markets are in glut conditions… and oil prices are dropping. Despite taking Iran, Iraq, and Libya essentially off line…

    We have over 300 years of known fossil fuels, and hundreds of more years of probable… so call me about 2315 A.D. and we can decide if nuclear is the best replacement or not…

  22. P.A.Semi says:

    I appreciate the unlimited energy source is “in hand”… So why do we burn coal any more?

    As a former chemist, I know that coal and oil are a precious source of “raw material” for plastic and other carbon materials, and it will be at short supply sooner or later (think in next few millenia perspective, please)…

    And to say it more clear: The global warming is a scarecrow. The problem is getting out of supplies, upcoming oil-wars near the oil drainage, and dirt in nature. (And IF the uranium power-plants have a major catastrophe each 30 years – Long Mile, Chernobyl, Fukushima and poisoned Pacific, it is a dirty source too…)

    So if you cry, that the scarecrow is anoyant, your children are going to fall into abyss. But if you say to people there is an abyss, they would not care that much… They didn’t care, so the scarecrow of AGW had to be raisen, and voila, they take care now…

    I believe, that the clean and eternal energy source will be soon available and used, but for this to happen, there must be some strive for it, and it may cost something, which ultimatelly will pay out in less than a century…

  23. P.A.Semi says: June 17, 2015 at 3:32 am
    I believe, that the clean and eternal energy source will be soon available and used, but for this to happen, there must be some strive for it, and it may cost something, which ultimatelly will pay out in less than a century…

    What did you have in mind that Chiefio did not mention? Pay out in what? There is sufficient time with what we have to wait for the next big scam!!🙂

  24. kuhnkat says:

    Apparently the Pope really is Commie/NWO:

    “Francis also called for a new global political authority tasked with “tackling … the reduction of pollution and the development of poor countries and regions”. His appeal echoed that of his predecessor, pope Benedict XVI, who in a 2009 encyclical proposed a kind of super-UN to deal with the world’s economic problems and injustices.”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/15/pope-francis-destruction-ecosystem-leaked-encyclical

    This is the worrisome part. Another unelected group of Bureaucraps with dictatorial powers over us.

  25. P.A.Semi says:

    What Chiefio did not mention?

    The 300 years of oil reserves is a false fairy tale, and sorry, the civilisation planning cannot be built on fairy tales.
    Reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves table estimated oil reserves, the only important numbers are in the bottom row, the totals. It does not matter, that single country has reserves for 300 years production, the totals are for 64 years only.

    It is similar to US shale gas bubble – the false numbers with 100-year reserves, where actually it is for next 10-15 years only… Also the shale gas is one of most dirty energy technologies this civilisation has found, because deep water spoiling recovers at least for a millenium – for those 10-15 years of more oil production…

    For methan clathrate, one can read, that the estimate decreases by an order of magnitude per decade – also one fairy-tale, that will shrink to nearly nothing before starting to drill it?

    The 10000 year of uranium reserves is also a fairy-tale – if you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_reserves table totals, we have after 70 years of burning uranium burnt 1/3 of reserves, which means less than 150 more years – “less” because usage rate increases, plus some 30 years with higher-cost recovery…

    So instead of thousands of years of fossil fuels, there is no more than 200, and possibly 400 years of ever-more-expensive coal…

    Yes, the usage of biomass (including garden and urban wastes) to oil may be a good way of renewable energy source… The biomass is just another form of conserved Solar energy. Can you show me it working on any large scale? Not yet…?

  26. ivan says:

    P.A.Semi,

    If you take wikipedia as an authoritative source then I have a bridge to sell you. That which you are quoting is thinly covered green propaganda with no hard evidence to back it, just like climate change.

  27. Graeme No.3 says:

    P.A. Semi

    With 54 years reserves what oil company is going to look for more? More importantly, why would they admit to every drop they have got, causing the price to drop because there was lots available.
    Look what happened when gas from frakking took a share of the market in one, admittedly large, customer.

  28. dscott says:

    Yeah, but you know God loves the sinner but hates the sin…

    No one wants dirty air or water, so I say yell, “sinner” at Al Gore for living way beyond the means of most people when all he really needs is a hut with running water and a toilet. AND IF you really believe in Global Warming then you have no right to buy anything made in China given their assault upon the air and water with their pollution.

    But hey, virtue signaling is the new righteousness for the self righteous liberal/socialist. Just say you believe and all is unnoticed of your despoiling of the planet. In Evangelical Christian circles back in the 1980s we use to call this “Cheap Grace”. I find it offensive that the average liberal/socialist expects all of society to pay for their “salvation” when they themselves refuse to significantly contribute themselves.

  29. Graeme No.3 says:

    I assume that there will be no more candles burning or incense wafting in the churches and cathedrals. Will this effect the tourist trade?

  30. ren says:

    Unfortunately, the temperature in the lower troposphere falling since 1998 and will fall further. El Niño is weakening, and AMO decline. This is proof that CO2 does not work, because the CO2 is in the troposphere.
    http://woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1998/plot/rss/from:1998/trend
    https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/seasonalclimateoutlook/southernoscillationindex/30daysoivalues/

  31. Susan Fraser says:

    Craigman350

    We all feel shame for the sexual abuse of children, especially when it happens in our own house, whether by grandfather, father, brother, or by Doctors, Institutional carers, Clergy, sports mentors, teachers, Politicians, celebrities. and not to mention children used in the sex slave trade preyed on by tourists

    Who doesn’t know someone abused as a child? It is up to all of us to stop this.

  32. p.g.sharrow says:

    THE POPE is WRONG!

    While you can commit a sin against another being, you can not commit a sin against GOD! You can not commit a sin against this planet!

    The Roman Church and it’s pope are the last vestige of the Roman Empire, an empire that has brought ignorance and poverty to much of humanity for 1500 years. Better that remnant be erased for the good of all mankind.

    WE Christians DON”T NEED THEM. pg

  33. oldbrew says:

    Dr. Bill Gray Responds To Pope Francis

    ‘Pope Francis’s Climate Encyclical Is Unwise and Should Not Be Acted Upon – by Bill Gray’
    http://realclimatescience.com/2015/07/dr-bill-gray-responds-to-pope-francis/