SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Despite the santorum splattered about, the Pontiff of the Church Universal and Triumphant [EDIT: This is actually referring to the Roman Catholic Church, not the Church Universal and Triumphant] is going to agree with the climate change consensus in an encyclical to be released on Thursday. Early leaks give some idea of the content.
Pope Francis is preparing to declare humans as primarily responsible for climate change, call for fossil fuels to be replaced by renewable energy and decry the culture of consumerism, a leaked draft of his much anticipated statement on the environment suggests.
The source for this somehow concerns Australians, but we will take any indication of infallibility where we can get it.
So the humble submitter has to wonder, does this mean that climate-change deniers are now to be considered heretics, rather than just Petro shills or anti-environmental conservative conspiracy theorists? It does add a entirely new dimension to the debate, and I hope that God will forgive your Conservative asses for screwing up Her creation in the quest for profit.
UPDATE - janrinok 18 Jun 12:36UTC
is it possible to update/append aristarchus' post "Pope Affirms Anthropogenic Global Warming" (https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=15/06/17/0317256), as follows:
Update: The encyclical can be read and downloaded here.
I am not affiliated with the submitter, aristarchus, or the pope. I have a slightly paranoid reason for asking for this update; it is my experience that, whenever politically important documents are published, the actual document often gets overshadowed by an enormous load of blog commentary, providing a bit of "damage control" and "spin". It is my fervent opinion that the readership of Soylentnews deserves to read the actual source documents. (It's only 82 pages long, in this case, anyway).
Original Submission
(Score: 3, Informative) by VortexCortex on Wednesday June 17 2015, @08:34PM
Considering that man made global warming is frequently used among elites (e.g., Bilderberg group, Bohemian Grove attendees [wikipedia.org], etc.), to excuse heinous agendas in order to "save the planet", and considering the Vatican's part in globalist agendas, this doesn't surprise me a bit. You need the Vatican's support if you really want to push forth agenda driven pseudo intellectual propaganda as part of your plan for a new world order, A.K.A. Novus Ordo Seclorum. [youtube.com] The whole world has to get on the train and agree that all countries must give up a bit of their sovereignty (a little at a time, until no country is sovereign), this is done by global agendas promoting world wide legislation such as those which will supposedly curtail Anthropogenic Global Warming. From a propaganda standpoint the media is conquered, as are institutions of education, one of the last remaining influential and borderless institutions was organized religion, but as TFA demonstrates religion too is been co-opted.
From a purely religious standpoint, to integrate newfound evidence with one's beliefs, the the Vatican need not endorse AGW, or other hypotheses: The Pope merely need endorse science as a valid tool to examine God's creation with... This goes beyond that into the realm of propaganda. Not only are ordinary skeptics now "deniers" or "shills", and those of the military being told it is dereliction of duty to questioning the degree of man made climate change, those of the Catholic faith (a significant portion of voters) are now pressured into blind acceptance.
I don't doubt that Climate Change is happening, or that lifeforms can affect the entire world (hello, O-zone layer), but I'm cautious about the politicization and sensationalizing of science to further agendas through scaremongering; Especially I question the extreme means that are eventually proposed to solve any crisis -- be it a manufactured crisis or not. "Never let a good crisis go to waste", is the battle cry of politicians. Those that instantly label skeptics as oil industry shills should consider the flip side of the coin: Who stands to benefit from AGW? AGW supporters can help to line the pockets of energy companies with subsidies for "clean energy", or with scams like the pointless Carbon Credits market. I'm not saying I don't want new tech that harnesses wind, water and sun... but I find it incredibly odd that Nuclear Energy is quite often off the table considering it's a far cleaner energy all things considered (esp. batteries), and can compliment and stabilize other clean energy productions; The real issue is that nuclear energy is heavily regulated and far more costly to expand into, so what's pushed for by AGW propaganda is primarily the other "clean energy solutions" that existing energy companies can easily expand into to make more money, esp. by receiving large government pork handouts for doing little or nothing to adopt alternative energies. See also: Scaremongering after the Fukushima earthquake, and the extreme "elimination of all nuclear" proposed -- what will take the place of nuclear power? Exactly.
IMO, the most worrisome component of the Man Made Climate Change agenda will be setting precedents via enacting Global Laws. If the TPP is anything to go by I think we should be very wary of global legislation. Given even an overview of history one should become prepared to level healthy skepticism at anything with such wide reaching support, esp. that which is "good for us" or "for the good of all" (AKA, "for our own good") -- Not merely accept it as groupthink or because a religious figurehead says to. Having seen the corresponding "too many people" depopulation propaganda, and considering that the Vatican would be against reproduction regulations, my friends and I are taking bets on when a "Final Solution" for Climate Change will be proposed...