Understanding Pope Francis’ Encyclical On ‘Climate Change’


July 5, 2015 | By Luis Miranda

(The Real Agenda) By denying poor countries access to fossil fuels, or a realistic replacement to promote their development, Pope Francis is indeed condemning them to perpetual poverty.

Neither Solar, nor wind energy sources are viable substitutes due to their poor output and their vast demand for land.

Let’s start by the conclusion, and along the way understand why Pope Francis’ latest effort to attract people to the Church of Climate Change is a failure:

Pope Francis has made an enormous mistake while attempting to weigh in on the global warming/climate change debate.

His perceptions on both global warming and climate change as well as other topics that he took a shot at, such as the use of fossil fuels and their role in the appearance of “catastrophic” atmospheric events related to the emission of carbon dioxide, which incidentally is a well-known and scientifically proven life-giving gas, are proof that he did not have any scientists by his side before or during the writing of the document.

The Pope started his peregrination towards the “scientific consensus” altar on the left foot. Along with his lack of scientific understanding, which has been demonstrated on the text of the encyclical, the Pope of the people also banned news coverage of his meeting with United Nations representatives and in doing so discriminated against journalists who wished to attend. The reason for the ban was the reporters’ public skepticism about the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

The 184-page long Holy Encyclical dedicated several of its paragraphs exclusively to address the environmental concerns contained in the Pope’s mind. These paragraphs are the ones that will have the attention of this article.

Let’s take a look at the first of the Pope’s statements directly addressing climate.

The climate is a common good, belonging to all and meant for all. At the global level, it is a complex system linked to many of the essential conditions for human life. A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system.In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon.

Humanity is called to recognize the need for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption, to combat this warming or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it.

It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanic activity, variations in the earth’s orbit and axis, the solar cycle), yet a number of scientific studies show that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity.

Concentrated in the atmosphere, these gases do not allow the warmth of the sun’s rays reflected by the earth to bedispersed in space. The problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system. Another determining factor has been an increase in changed uses of the soil, principally deforestation for agricultural purposes.

This paragraph is full of factual errors that can be easily pointed out and corrected with data from well-known international agencies whose observations and the evidence obtained during the process paint a different picture.

First, the planet is not getting warmer. According to data from the NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Earth stopped warming 18 years ago and the planet has seen a new global cooling trend for the past 10 years.

The next point where the Pope is incorrect is on the alleged rising sea levels. In this case, NOAA’s own data also refutes the Pope’s claim about significant increases in ocean levels and the supposed coming catastrophic rise due to global warming. In reality, oceans have risen na average of 8 inches per 100 years, since there is a registry.

Then, there is the Pope claim that man-made global warming causes events such as hurricanes, tornadoes, drought and heat waves to become more prevalent and intense. However, evidence and historical perspective say otherwise. As explained by James H. Rust, a retired professor of nuclear engineering, and fervent critic of the current ‘business as usual’ situation on energy policies, “suggesting carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is causing these changes is very tenuous when examining similar past events in times when carbon dioxide changes were not occurring.”

Last but not least, on the paragraph above, the Pope blames Carbon Dioxide for the current and impending heat and the general contamination of the environment. As explained by Rust, neither CO2 not any other greenhouse gas influences solar radiation because they are transparent in the wavelength spectrum. CO2 is not an environmental contaminant either as it is the main source of ‘food’ for plant life, which is what animals, plants and us humans eat. If there is one significant outcome that must be noted from the presence of large amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere is that CO2 abundance promotes better agricultural output. In sum, CO2 is a life-giving gas.

Without delay, let’s read and then analyze Pope Francis’ beliefs on what he calls a “vicious circle” regarding the carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. In the paragraph below, he references statements that have also been disproven with Science, not doctrine.

Warming has effects on the carbon cycle. It creates a vicious circle which aggravates the situation even more, affecting the availability of essential resources like drinking water, energy and agricultural production in warmer regions, and leading to the extinction of part of the planet’s biodiversity.The melting in the polar ice caps and in high altitude plains can lead to the dangerous release of methane gas, while the decomposition of frozen organic material can further increase the emission of carbon dioxide. Things are made worse by the loss of tropical forests which would otherwise help to mitigate climate change. Carbon dioxide pollution increases the acidification of the oceans and compromises the marine food chain.

If present trends continue, this century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level, for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the world’s population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our mega cities are situated in coastal areas.

Since most of the Pope’s assertions are linked to carbon emissions, let’s emphasize again that CO2 is not a pollutant, but a gas that serves a food source for plant life. CO2 abundance translates into more robust flora, both agricultural and wild rain forests, which he incidentally mentions as being threatened. As it has been pointed out by experts, CO2 can be considered a fertilizer which promotes more significant plant growth and with less need for water.

A direct effect of more CO2 as an available food source means having the potential for growing more food and for rain forests to grow larger. More about the positive social and economic impact of a carbon rich world can be read in a report titled “The Social Costs of Carbon? No the social benefits of Carbon, published by the American Coalition for Clean Coal electricity. The document also compares its findings to those of the report issued by the Federal Interagency Working Group.

In his struggle to attempt to produce a strong case, the Pope continues talking about climate change and what he calls its serious global implications for the poor, the group he likes to talk about a lot and who he feels an ally of in every single issue.

Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades.Many of the poor live in areas particularly affected by phenomena related to warming, and their means of subsistence are largely dependent on natural reserves and ecosystemic services such as agriculture, fishing and forestry. They have no other financial activities or resources which can enable them to adapt to climate change or to face natural disasters, and their access to social services and protection is very limited.

For example, changes in climate, to which animals and plants cannot adapt, lead them to migrate; this in turn affects the livelihood of the poor, who are then forced to leave their homes, with great uncertainty for their future and that of their children. There has been a tragic rise in the number of migrants seeking to flee from the growing poverty caused by environmental degradation. They are not recognized by international conventions as refugees; they bear the loss of the lives they have left behind, without enjoying any legal protection whatsoever.

Sadly, there is widespread indifference to such suffering, which is even now taking place throughout our world. Our lack of response to these tragedies involving our brothers and sisters points to the loss of that sense of responsibility for our fellow men and women upon which all civil society is founded.

The Pope wants people to believe that climate change represents a much more serious threat to the poor than war, which is the main reason people are constantly displaced in third world nations.

Migrants flee their land because they are being displaced by powerful military forces, as it happens with the Palestinians, with people in Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Ukraine. In this paragraph the Pope makes it clear that he does not think the poor nations should have the ability to develop as the rich countries did.

Pope Francis does not want the poor to enjoy the benefits that development provides, such as low-cost transportation, good communications, heating in cold places and cooling in warm place, which are the conditions observed in most fo the third world. As we mentioned at the beginning of this article, Pope Francis wants the poor to be poor in perpetuity.

On the issue of doing away with fossil fuels, the Pope says the following:

Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with current models of production and consumption.There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced, for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable energy.

There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies. Some countries have made considerable progress, although it is far from constituting a significant proportion. Investments have also been made in means of production and transportation which consume less energy and require fewer raw materials, as well as in methods of construction and renovating buildings which improve their energy efficiency. But these good practices are still far from widespread.

The worst part of the Pope’s encyclical is that he does not provideviable solutions, limiting his opinions to unproven statements, flawed science and non-existent alternatives. He calls for dropping fossil fuels as the main source of energy and calls for the adoption ofalternative energy sources without citing those alternatives.

If we assume that he refers to solar radiation, wind and biomass as those “alternative sources”, once again, the Pope shows complete ignorance on the inability of those sources to power development throughout the third world.

In addition to not providing clear solutions, the Pope conveniently left out what is perhaps the most serious threat to the planet and to humanity itself: Geoengineering. No public discussion about environmental threats can be taken seriously if it does not address geoengineering, the manipulation of te climate via aerosol spraying over the skies.

Humanity is being showered by aluminum, cadmium and barium among other heavy metals, which are directly responsible for the death of flora and fauna and for the appearance of previously unknown disease, yet the Pope omits geoengineering from his environmental driven encyclical?

According to neurologist Russell L. Blaylock, M.D.”nanoparticles of aluminum are infinitely more reactive and can easily penetrate the brain”

My major concern is that there is evidence that they are spraying tons of nanosized aluminum compounds. It has been demonstrated in the scientific and medical literature that nanosized particles are infinitely more reactive and induce intense inflammation in a number of tissues. Of special concern is the effect of these nano particles on the brain and spinal cord, as a growing list of neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) are strongly related to exposure to environmental aluminum.

The chemicals contained in aerosol sprays are responsible for increasing incidence in cancer, Parkinson’s disease, dementia, respiratory issues, asthma, and bronchitis, among others, but those who informed Pope Francis about the imminent dangers of environmental destruction did not warn him about the disaster being caused by the global program of geoengineering that has been active since at least 1960 and how this program threatens the planet and humanity?

I am no scientist, but I have devoted the last 18 years to studying topics such as environmental destruction and I can humbly say that Pope Francis has done no good to the environment by repeating the same propaganda that comes out of the mouths of political and corporate interests. Pope Francis has lost a great opportunity to call on his followers to wake up from the long trance where most of humanity has been due to the lack of courage from people in leadership positions.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio: You have failed your faith, your church, humanity and the environment by not recognizing publicly that the official environmental agenda is a ploy to keep people in the third world living in misery for the rest of their lives and in doing so furthering the secretive depopulation agenda that the leaders of the world have carried out for decades and that the Vatican and the Catholic Church have helped to keep secret. You have chosen sides and you have chosen to side with the power-hungry elite who wants to bring about a world government to fully dominate humanity. In fact,you have called for global governance yourself in the latest encyclical.

This encyclical should be understood as irrefutable proof that the Pope, the Vatican and the Catholic Church are working against and not along humanity.

Luis R. Miranda is an award-winning journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief at The Real Agenda. His career spans over 18 years and almost every form of news media. His articles include subjects such as environmentalism, Agenda 21, climate change, geopolitics, globalisation, health, vaccines, food safety, corporate control of governments, immigration and banking cartels, among others. Luis has worked as a news reporter, on-air personality for Live and Live-to-tape news programs. He has also worked as a script writer, producer and co-producer on broadcast news. Read more about Luis.


See original article here: http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/understanding-pope-francis-encyclical-on-climate-change/

TFD recommends that you visit The Sleuth Journal for other pertinent articles.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.