Bishop Hill The encyclical leaked
Jun 15, 2015 Climate: WG3 A copy of the encyclical has been leaked to the Italian press. A copy can be seen here, for those who speak Italian. Maurizio advises that his impression is very much that this is going to be seen as a damp squib. He points in particular to this paragraph (translated mostly by Mr Google):
For poor countries, the priority should be the eradication of poverty and social development of their inhabitants; at the same time the scandalous level of consumption of certain privileged sectors of their population must be considered and better counter corruption. Of course, they must also develop less polluting forms energy production, but for this they have need to rely on help from countries that are grown much at the expense of pollution today the planet. The direct exploitation of abundant solar energy requires that you establish mechanisms and subsidies so that developing countries can have access to technology transfer, for technical assistance and financial resources, but always paying attention to concrete conditions, since the compatibility of the systems with the context for which they are proposed is not always properly assessed. The costs would be low when compared to risk of climate change. In any case, it is above all an ethical choice, based on solidarity of all peoples.
Reader Comments (58)
Headline read today :Pope: climate change is mainly man made. I paraphrase:-
Karl Marx, " Roman Catholicism: entirely man made".
Headline today: "Pope: global warming mainly man made".
I paraphrase:
Karl Marx: " Roman Catolicism: ENTIRELY man made".
Ah... woffle :-)
A Climate Inquisition averted then -phew!-
There must be more than a few disappointed wannabe eco-Torquemadas out there.
Pope Jeffrey Sachs...I mean...Prof Bergoglio...oh well...he is worried about the poor (who isn't) and says we need be careful in giving drinking water to all (who disagrees) and should focus on eradicating poverty (who wouldn't want to).
In the process he states a lot of less-than-exact scientific pronouncements but hey, nobody was going to give him the Nobel Prize in Physics anyway.
BTW item 117 is against abortion. It will be good to see this point supported by the most unlikely people, in order to push climate change action forward.
I thought the whole point of the Encyclical was to Canonise Mann.
St Michael of Mann would have seemed so much more in keeping with his perceived idea of himself. He could have told the Judge, that as he was Enforcing the Will of God, he was more righteous than any mortal judge.
With the Pope appointed as one of His apostles, the Climate Change bun fight in Paris, would have had heavenly canapes, and no one would have noticed the lack of science.
Item 136 is an attack on greenies who support stem cell research
Item 188 invites to an open and transparent debate. That presumably excludes the Climategaters, and the BBC.
"at the same time the scandalous level of consumption of certain privileged sectors"
To my knowledge, the Vatican sits on a huge fortune which could be partially used to feed the needy.
There's a section on "Diversity of Opinion" on page 46-48, paragraphs 60-61, including (according to google translate)
"On many concrete issues the Church has no reason to propose a final word and realizes he must listen and promote honest debate among scientists , respecting differences of opinion . "
I think climate activists are going to be disappointed. The whole idea of relying on the Pope and the Catholic Church for advice on science seemed absurd anyway.
224 invites to sobriety and humility. All the climatechange jet-setters, taken care of.
In other words, when considering the tradeoff between using solar energy subsidized by rich countries instead of poor countries' own fossil fuel generation capability, "The costs [of solar] would be low when compared to risk of climate change. In any case, it is above all an ethical choice, based on solidarity of all peoples."
Solidarity is a term near and dear to the Marxists, who define it as "the fundamental ethic of the workers’ movement, obliging workers to support the struggles of all other oppressed people." - https://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/s/o.htm
There is apparently also some Catholic uses of the term, but here it seems to have a heavy odor of liberation theology.
Perhaps they meant socialism--an equal sharing of poverty--and made a mouse click error in their thesaurus.
Golf Charlie
That was always unlikely, more so when we got word that in its present (ie 2 months ago) form it was never going to get past the Curia.
1. Climate Change is not a matter of "faith and morals" so anyone who was hoping for some infallible statement of doctrine was always going to be disappointed.
2. "The most serious problem facing mankind ever" doesn't really cut much ice with someone who knows that "the most serious problem facing mankind" is Satan, "the liar and father of lies" (to quote Christ!).
Now, you may well be one of those who does not believe in the existence of hell and sin and the devil but be sure that Francis does, as do all those who seriously call themslves Catholic, and global warming will just have to take second place. Add to that the fact that there are some very shrewd cookies in high places in the Church and though they may well not be regular readers of Bishop Hill they are quite capable of recognising a situation that is perhaps not quite as its protagonists would like us all to believe!
The paragraph quoted above aligns very much with what I would have expected from Francis and in one way goes a bit further than I have seen in previous encyclicals about social affairs with a very direct attack on those who exploit the poor of their own countries.
On that, he and I are certainly at one as several of my posts here and elsewhere show.
Politics and religion don't mix and never have, it's way past time for the Church to give politics up, for the good of mankind.
Surprising though it is to some, the pope has no power over the Sun, the Moon and the heavens and the Catholic Church cannot yet move tectonic plates, it has some pull over people but no longer can it, the papacy - pull the wool over peoples eyes so much.
Unfailingly - they, in a line of recent popes and now this holy See fails to surmise, that, the greatest hindrance to the advancement and technological edification of mankind - more especially in the developing world is - um................ Mankind. Particularly though not exclusively - in Africa where the topmost echelons of nations such as Sudan, Zimbabwe, South Africa - who long ago - vanquished the root of all evil - the white man was sent packing and yet - what was put in its place, something even more malign - racist Africans - no less.
Corruption, peculation, war and governments ploughing £$€billions into the machines of war - that's Africa's problem - not and for heavens bloody well sakes - the nebulous myth of climate change.
Though, what Africa needs first and foremost - is political reform. Good luck with that - because: that's gonna need a miracle.
Presumably, there'll shortly be an avalanche of statements suggesting the encyclical is 'not really that important'.
Mike Jackson, despite the best efforts of home and school upbringing, I am not a religious person, but have respect for the good work done by Christians Jews and Moslems (the main religions that I have personal familiarity with)
I do have great memories of Dave Allen, Life of Brian etc I think the Pope has exercised great judgement, in the face of emotional blackmail.
That global warming alarmists resorted to religious faith, to support their belief system, and failed, raises my respect for .the Pope, and further decreases my respect for 'climate science'.
"God moves in a mysterious way
His wonders to perform;"
I pray for it Mike but my inner paradox, pragmatism usually prevails.
Though, I can still gaze in awed wonder at the Rose window in York Minster, 'see' and feel the blood seeping into the stone at Beckets' shrine above the vestigial remains of the church of St. Augustine, later rebuilt as a great Cathedral in Canterbury and walk in Henry's footsteps to Walsingham - deep meditation and prayer brings solace and comfort, friend.
Torquemadas?
Tomo has no idea
http://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2015/06/after-10-conferences-everyone-expects.html
"'...at the same time the scandalous level of consumption of certain privileged sectors...' To my knowledge, the Vatican sits on a huge fortune which could be partially used to feed the needy." --benpal
I feel a powerful and ironic urge to get all judgmental about the Vatican's judgmentalism. ¿Who was it said, "Judge not, lest you be judged."
"...[T]he white man was sent packing and yet - what was put in its place, something even more malign - racist Africans - no less." --Athelstan
Malign, indeed. I recently read an interesting novel/historical account that touches on the subject. The problem isn't all racism per se; it's primarily tribalism. In South Africa, that even included white tribalism. The book is South African ex-pat Mark Fine's "The Zebra Affaire."
One more promotion and this guy is God, and THIS is the best he can do ??
"this is going to be seen as a damp squib."
Amen.
Andrew
23. The climate is a common good of all and for all. Globally, it is complex, connectied with many conditions essential for human life. There is a very consistent scientific consensus indicating that we are today disturbingly heating the climate system.
In recent decades, this heating has been accompanied by a constant rise in sea level, and is hard not to relate this to the rise of extreme weather events, regardless of the fact that we can not attribute a scientifically determined cause to each event in particular.
Humanity is called upon to be aware of the need to change life styles, of production and consumption, to combat this heating or, at least, the causes that humans are responsible for or accentuate. It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanism, the changes in the orbit of the Earth, the Solar cycle), but numerous scientific studies indicate that most of the global warming in recent decades s due to the large concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane NO, nitric oxide and others) mainly emitted due to human activity. Their concentration in the atmosphere prevents radiative heat of the sun earth being dispersed into space. This is especially enhanced by development model based on the intensive use of fuels fossil, which is at the center of the energy system. Land use policy has also had this effect, mainly through deforestation for agricultural purposes
Eli believes that the behavior here comes under the rubric of whistling past the encyclical.
Russell
heh - I saw that ...
Pope Francis strikes me as a thoughtful man of some principle with some considerable humility. Eco loonery in religion - as with politics - works across denominations and faiths to some extent - and the Roman church has its share and no doubt as with everywhere else - the activists having wheedled their way up the decision tree have the ear of policy makers.
I think the equivocating woffle is a reflection of rather less than wholehearted overall endorsement of the "evidence" as proffered by the AGW crew - things are done for the most part in the church's interest albeit simultaneously portraying any action to be for the common good of the flock.
I suspect that long experience of dealing with zealotry tempered this to a more nuanced approach. I shudder to think what a real enthusiast might have done - the comment above was only partially in jest. People have mentioned Africa - a continent I've worked in plenty over the years and a veritable powder keg when it comes to religious differences.... If a religious organisation for the maintenance of environmental rectitude was launched there - it'd make Saudi's Mutaween look like boy scouts.
It would seem that the Catholic Church still doesn't do physics - no change there then.
No greater proof that AGW is not based in science but rather based in Politics. "In any case, it is above all an ethical choice, based on solidarity of all peoples."
The Roman Catholic church became, over the past 2 millennium, the richest organization on the planet deploying these same social science techniques of fear and guilt. The very same strategy being deployed by 21st century politics, fear and guilt, will cower the masses while the government strips them of their stray pennies. With 7 Billion people and growing, billions of stray pennies will make the governments of the world even wealthier than the Catholic Church. The masses in the meantime will remain penniless and hungry. What little middle class there has been, will disappear. Yet the earth will warm and cool, warm and cool as it has since the dawn of time 4.5 Billion years ago. Oh what a great hoax our leaders have cooked up. It appears they are learning from history. The history of religion. All you secular warmingists ought to be concerned at the injection of God into your failing secular religion. You might except in your world the end justifies the means.
Eli being unfamiliar with Roman Catholic teaching, won't be able to understand that the Pope is asking the Faithful to take care of the environment for the sake of the poor. As long as the aforementioned Faithful will do accordingly, following their true and honest belief in what should be done, they'll be good Roman Catholics.
Paragraphs verbatimly extracted from who knows where with verbiage uncharacteristic of the Pope, won't matter much.
The Pope's a Catholic. Who'da thought!
You'd think the pope would have a quick word with the old geezer in the sky...but then what exactly would he ask for? Warmer is BETTER for everyone on Earth, but that's supposed to be the problem. Cooler won't do it, that's for sure.
They haven't thought this one through have they?
I see nothing that could be viewed as objectionable in the quoted paragraph.
Then there is the section Eli quoted. That represents pure faith, in the high priests of the Church of CAGW.
Athelstan (6.18PM) Amen!
Eli
I suppose you realise that the extract you trotted out is perfect proof that nobody at the Vatican did anything other than simply regurgitate what Sachs et al dribbled into their ears. The encyclical appears to be absolutely nothing new (I shall read the full text when I get an English copy) and will change absolutely no minds inside or outside the Catholic Church.
Back to sleep.
"abundant solar energy"
Not where I live. On earth.
I think that the Catholic Church will still exist in 30 years.
I don't think the next UK General Election will be fought, without Global Warming being treated with derision.
cheshirered, I don't think Global Warming Alarmists thought any of this through, apart from the hope of securing popular support. It is 'hearts and minds', 'indoctrination' 'belief control' 'consensus creation' 'propaganda', in fact everything that science is not.
Hence the Pope gains my respect, for denying the charlatans their moment.
Michael Mann will still claim Sainthood, to go with his Nobel prize.
Amen to that. So be it.
Now I'll actually read the leak in the confidence that the Pope is till a Christian.
But I'll reserve judgement until I see the real encyclical.
Climate realist trials to start shortly at the Vatican...
As Omnologos points out in a few comments above, the references to climate science are relatively peripheral to the meat of the document, which deals largely with man's responsibilities to his neighbour.
I'll wait for the released english text; the quality of the translations of the encyclicals is usually very good. Mr Google does rather mangle the syntax and subtlety.
We should always compare the text to the hype. This was supposed to change the climate debate. Does anybody still believe it will?
Where is the excommunication of skeptics, where is the denouncing of deniers, what part of the Letter deals with the upcoming Paris meeting.
It's likely to be remembered as "when the simplest Pope in living memory got convinced by Jeffrey Sachs". Oh wow. /sarc
omnologus after the first leg of this important tie, the score is:
Pope 1 Climate Science 0
Climate Science are claiming a win on the 'Away' goals rule, but failed to note that 2 × 0 = 0. Basic Maths remains Climate Science's crucial weakness, along with science.
When he refers to concrete conditions, I assume the Italian rules out translating this as cement, which is 5% of global warming?
The whole thing is stated to be a development of the social teaching of the church: it is about morals not faith. The draft encycilical assumes various scientific beliefs which are widely believed to be true and puts them together with unchanging aims such as the relief of poverty and stewardship of the earth to conclude that specific goals for the present time should have the approval of the church. Readers of this site do not need to be told that the supposed facts are far more dubious than most people know, but nothing in this gives them the force of doctrine. There is no question of excommunicating climate disbelievers because no factual statement about climate is said to be a matter of faith. I could imagine people reading it 200 years from now and thinking that it was a fair-minded, rational pronouncement given the state of knowledge at the time, much as we now make allowances for teaching which assumes the truth of medieval science but is rational granted the educated opinions of, say, the 14th century.
Philip Neal, if your estimate of the 14th century becomes uncomfortable for the Global Warmists, they will rexamine all evidence, kick it about a bit, and find that it exactly matches the number they first thought of.
Plagiarising Dickens, the Vatican is like a signpost forever pointing the way to go but never going there.
If the alarmists are too</> successful at spinning this encyclical their way, then it will do the pope's credibility no good at all, once the house of cards finally comes tumbling down. I know he is supposed to be above issues of credibility, but hope, for his own sake, that his advisers have left plenty of rabbit-holes in the text for him to run down, exclaiming 'I didn't mean that..' over his shoulder.
The only way to make the poor of this world richer is contraception, education of women and the supply of cheap electricity.
According to the website of the Vatican Information Service
I wonder if covering the countryside in pointless windmills counts as "environmental degradation". Or that to "grow in responsibility towards the common home that God has entrusted to us all" could be read as preferring fracking to solar panels all over the place!Just askin'.
On the radio bulletins on R4 this morning the BBC are calling it an encyclical on Climate Change, which it patently isn't. No mention of the parts of the encyclical that they would find more challenging.
15 Koptic Christians kidnapped in Libya thousands of Jews (in Paris) and Christians driven out of the Middle East and North Africa by the Islamic State and the Pope only wants to talk "Big Climate" .
How'd it get leaked ? well presumably the GreenBlob of thousands of NGO PR offices and media activists like BBC/Guardian have all been issued with pre-info so that they can release an onslaught on the actual publication day.
@Cumbrian Lad NOT "encyclical on Climate Change" well official title “Laudato Sii: on the care of our common home”
could be shortened to the "encyclical on the ENVIRONMENT"
...but we shouldn't let them get away with twisting that to say environment and "climate change" are interchangeable
- Surely today's actual ENVIRONMENTAL negatives are due more to habitation loss ..And that's the problem that while Greenies are so focused on clearing land for biofuels and subsidy farms of solar and wind ..they are actually damaging the environment.