There are dozens of moral issues on which the Catholic Pope can and should pronounce, along with dozens of doctrinal questions which should be addressed and resolved.
All of them are within the acknowledged competency of the Pope.
The story (myth? fantasy?) of Global Warming is not one of them.
So when Pp Leo XIV begins his reign by approving and celebrating a "Mass for the Environment" ...
...Delivering a homily – comprised of a prepared text and initial off-the-cuff comments – Leo said that Francis’ writings are still relevant today: “In a world that is burning, both from global warming and from armed conflicts, which make Pope Francis’ message in his encyclicals Laudato si‘ and Fratelli tutti so relevant today.”
“Only a contemplative gaze can change our relationship with created things and bring us out of the ecological crisis caused by the breakdown of our relationships with God, with our neighbors, and with the earth, as a result of sin,” he added, referencing Laudato Si’....
...the Pope burns his credibility. Not only within the Church--where many of the faithful understand that "warming" is not scientifically credible but worse, has all the earmarks of a gigantic financial scam--but also external to the Church, for the same reasons.
Pronouncing on matters beyond his competence puts an individual (Pope, Bishop, President--whatever) at risk of earning that faint scorn from others which accompanies a march to irrelevance, even in matters over which he DOES have well-informed competence.
IOW, dear Leo: don't burn your cred. You'll need it in the next several years for the tough questions about morals and doctrine.
“Pronouncing on matters beyond his competence”
ReplyDeleteYou do this all the time, Dad29.
Regardless, Pope Leo XIV is well versed in the subject.
The subject being ecology.
ReplyDeleteThis is well beyond your scope, Dad29.
Hey, anonymous, I have been following and reading dad as well as making stupid comments here for many many years, and I can tell you one thing : Most topics he addresses are not-beyond his scope or ability to talk about. Dad is a marksman, and that translates to his blog as well. When he aims and fires, he hits the Mark
ReplyDelete.
That’s why you’re feeling butt hurt right now but about what he has written
I say this with the greatest respect for dad
Greg
I get it. He is your buddy. You will defend him. But that’s just out of blind loyalty, not truth.
DeleteGreg, I know who this twerp is. He specializes in drive-by farting and--as you will notice--never responds with hard facts when confronted.
ReplyDeleteI've decided to ignore him. But I'll leave his posts up for laughs from serious people.
“never responds with hard facts when confronted.”
DeleteOf course I offer facts. It’s just that you are unwilling to admit you’re wrong.
“But I'll leave his posts up for laughs from serious people.”
The joke is on you.
If the climate is warming, that is a good thing. Human life does better in warmer climates. There is no reason to believe the climate will warming perpetually.
ReplyDeleteIt is also good if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing. CO2 is necessary for plants to thrive and as our population increases the better plants thrive the more food we humans will have.
Finally, we all should be concerned about keeping our planet and its ecological system as clean and healthy as possible.
I’ll take your comment, anony 4:25 pm, as sarcasm.
DeleteI see you have a Karen defending the global warming narrative.
ReplyDeleteMy bullshit detector is focused on the imprecise, vague, immeasurable to the point of nonexistent aspects of the "global warming, aka, climate change" ideology.
Karen, please let us unenlightened idiots know EXACTLY what the current temperature of the "globe" is.
Tnen Karen, please let us unenlightened idiots know EXACTLY what the temperature of the "globe" will be.
Then Karen, please inform us environmental under educated individuals know IF the EXACT temperature the "globe' is changing into is a temperature never ever existing in the history of life on earth.
Claiming change without specifics is like claiming a change in percentage without other reference points.
I saved 12%!!! Yeah me! I must be brilliant. So brilliant I must be a Karen.
Your bullshit detective is on the Fritz.
DeleteAnd as Dad29 once said, do your own damn research.
I will voluntarily ban myself after this last comment. I have known since the days of dial up internet that you do not feed a Karen. This particular Karen, however, seemed to truly need to feel self righteous and I took the bait. My bad. Sorry Dad29.
ReplyDeleteI did understand her point about doing my own research and this is what I discovered. The temperature of the "globe" is 73.56 degrees Fahrenheit and has been this temperature for the last 4.57 billion years. In other words, this is the "global temperature constant", universal and unchanging. Tiny variations sometimes occur in periods of abnormal volcanic activity, but data abnormalities are rounded down or ignored. This is the new Scientific Method.
Some misguided theorists claim an ice age recently covered Wisconsin. If true it would be a factual challenge to the truth of the "global temperature constant". Highly credentialed academics on government grants point out, however, that if glaciation was a real phenomenon, one would expect to find both large bodies of melt water in the vicinity of Wisconsin AND evidence of boiling oceans in the South Pacific to counter balance the northern freeze, thus preserving the "global temperature constant". To date, there is no evidence that the South Pacific was ever turned into the worlds largest claim bake.
So while the "global temperature constant" is affirmed, I was able to demonstrate, via my personally programmed digital output machine, that if people continue to behave like they are "special", there will be an irreversible and thus eternal change to the "global temperature constant" The new "global temperature constant" will be 85.03 degrees Fahrenheit, which happens to be the ideal temperature for all organic based life to thrive. This will of course be horrible due too overpopulation and pollution and swarms of locusts and killer bees. It is a bleak picture that does not need to happen.
Doing my own research has been a pleasure and a learning experience and I recommend the process to anyone who desires to unearth factual evidence to support deeply believed opinions. I now ban myself. - Fritz
To Fritz, please follow through with your self imposed ban.
ReplyDelete“Some misguided theorists claim an ice age recently covered Wisconsin. If true it would be a factual challenge to the truth of the "global temperature constant".”
Nope.
Scientific evidence overwhelmingly confirms that large parts of Wisconsin were indeed covered by glaciers during the last glacial period, known as the Wisconsin Glacial Stage. This period occurred roughly between 70,000 and 10,000 years ago, according to the Schlitz Audubon Nature Center. The advance and retreat of these glaciers had a profound impact on Wisconsin's landscape, shaping its topography, creating its many lakes, and leaving behind distinctive landforms like moraines, drumlins, and kettles.
One direct consequence of glacial activity is the formation of large bodies of water. As glaciers melt, they release enormous amounts of water, leading to the formation of proglacial lakes and altering existing river systems. Lake Michigan, for example, owes its existence to the scouring action of glaciers, which created a depression in the earth that subsequently filled with meltwater. The famous "4-Lakes" of the Madison area (Mendota, Monona, Waubesa, and Kegonsa) are also remnants of glacial meltwater accumulation in ancient river valleys dammed by glacial debris.
The idea that a frozen north would necessitate a boiling South Pacific to maintain a "global temperature constant" is a misconception not supported by scientific understanding of Earth's climate system. While global temperatures were indeed lower during glacial periods compared to today, the distribution of temperature change was not uniform. Research indicates that while high-latitude regions, particularly in North America and Europe, experienced significant cooling, temperatures in the tropics and subtropics showed smaller changes.
Further research on ocean sediments and proxy records from the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), roughly 20,000 years ago, confirms that while some regions experienced greater cooling, the South Pacific was not "boiled". Studies on deep-sea sediment cores provide valuable insights into past ocean conditions and indicate a more complex response to glacial cycles than a simple north-south counterbalancing of temperature extremes.
The geological evidence in Wisconsin, combined with climate reconstructions based on various data sources, strongly supports the reality of past glaciations and challenges the notion of a strictly constant global temperature. Scientists studying glacial periods aim to understand the complex interactions between various factors that influence Earth's climate and how the planet responds to changes in atmospheric composition and solar forcing.