Why I believe that the latest Encyclical should be withdrawn


This is a very difficult topic for me, because normally I have no problem with the Encyclicals that have been released by the Catholic Church. I am a Catholic. However, this time I believe that the Encyclical should be withdrawn and that the passages relating to climate change should be removed.

The reason that I believe that those passages should be removed is that I believe that what has been written is in fact contrary to what comes from Scripture and that it has nothing to do with faith and morals. There are other reasons for thinking that these passages should be removed.

I do agree with a lot of the content of the Encyclical, especially what I have seen of the published document. I agree that those who are responsible for destruction of the rainforests should in fact heal what they have destroyed, or in other words they need a tree planting program to replace the rainforest that they have destroyed.  I agree with comments about pollution for example, but I would have added a few riders because in some countries the pollution levels have improved. My last visit to New York has proved to me that it is not as bad as I originally thought and the pollution levels had dropped to the point that I was not plauged by a sinus headache like my first experience. Ditto for going to Sydney and Melbourne in Australia. The pollution levels have definitely dropped over a 30 year period.

Where I vehemently disagree is that we have to been concerned about the lie that is the climate change ideology. Pope Francis’s reliance upon the science is in fact contrary to the Scriptures. Please note I am not anti-science at all, and I do not believe that Scripture is totally anti-science. My concern here is that in some circles science is pitted against Scripture in such a way that science is seen by atheists as the be all and end all. In other words the atheists have replaced God with science in their short-sighted world. On top of that, the person responsible for the climate change screed in the Encyclical is an atheist.

In my view, the world is not in danger from what is called climate change. Over a a lifetime I have not seen or felt anything that could change my mind on this matter. Australia, for example has always had floods, bushfires, drought etc. etc. Some years are worse than others. It is necessary to point out that the policies of Councils can in fact influence the outcome of bushfires. I point to the most serious bushfires in my lifetime that killed more than 20 people in Marysville and elsewhere in Victoria as an example as to how stupid policies can be deadly.  Recently in my location, we experienced a cyclone. I knew that it was a cyclone because of the way that the trees were swaying as I looked out from the safety of my home. The cyclone was not named because it was unexpected. I note here that this is my second experience with a cyclone. Some people have tried to exploit this cyclone by claiming it as an extraordinary event. However, the locals say differently. It is something like a one in 10-20 year event in the region and is therefore not evidence of a change in weather patterns.

The fact remains that world has been experiencing a long hiatus from both warming and cooling. There has been a pause that is now about 17 years long. This is not an indication to me that we are in danger of being fried to death.

The climate change charlatans are not scientists. They use computers and computer models. They manipulate the data in order to come to the conclusion that they want. This includes manipulating the data for our summers claiming that they are the hottest ever when in fact it is not the case at all. Giving these charlatans money to prove their point has led to a lot of junk science conclusions. Over and over again there have been reports that conclude that some disease or other will be on the increase because of climate change when in fact this is not the case. This includes studies on the pattern of malaria outbreaks. It is all junk because the “scientists” do not bother looking to all of the factors involved

Basically, what I am saying is that this particular Encyclical is flawed because of the reliance upon an atheist junk scientist who has written the portion on climate change. The report does not meet any stringent standards in regard to its content. People who are opposed to the current climate change hysteria were not given a voice in order to display the contrary view.

On the other hand, we who are handpicked by God to be on this earth have a role as guardians of the earth and in particular of the flora and fauna that also occupy the earth. As the guardians of all these things we are responsible for tending them. In our suburban life that means maintaining a garden, and if we have animals it means caring for them, and not allowing them to be starved or the subject of cruel actions.

Advertisements

Comments are closed.