Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

I mean, damn. He's the last person on earth to pretend he's guided by firm evidence on anything--ESPECIALLY about the earth! As evidenced by how long it took for them to officially accept some of its basic facts...!!!


Can't hear ya, Peach!

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than...dogma

Sorry, my head just exploded.

I grew up in both churches, but now....

"The family needs a home, a fit environment in which to develop its proper relationships. For the human family, this home is the earth, the environment that God the Creator has given us to inhabit with creativity and responsibility. We need to care for the environment: it has been entrusted to men and women to be protected and cultivated with responsible freedom, with the good of all as a constant guiding criterion. Human beings, obviously, are of supreme worth vis-à-vis creation as a whole. Respecting the environment does not mean considering material or animal nature more important than man. Rather, it means not selfishly considering nature to be at the complete disposal of our own interests, for future generations also have the right to reap its benefits and to exhibit towards nature the same responsible freedom that we claim for ourselves. Nor must we overlook the poor, who are excluded in many cases from the goods of creation destined for all. Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow. It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances. If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations. Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken, decisions aimed at strengthening that covenant between human beings and the environment, which should mirror the creative love of God, from whom we come and towards whom we are journeying.

8. In this regard, it is essential to "sense" that the earth is "our common home" and, in our stewardship and service to all, to choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions. Further international agencies may need to be established in order to confront together the stewardship of this "home" of ours; more important, however, is the need for ever greater conviction about the need for responsible cooperation. The problems looming on the horizon are complex and time is short. In order to face this situation effectively, there is a need to act in harmony. One area where there is a particular need to intensify dialogue between nations is that of the stewardship of the earth's energy resources. The technologically advanced countries are facing two pressing needs in this regard: on the one hand, to reassess the high levels of consumption due to the present model of development, and on the other hand to invest sufficient resources in the search for alternative sources of energy and for greater energy efficiency. The emerging counties are hungry for energy, but at times this hunger is met in a way harmful to poor countries which, due to their insufficient infrastructures, including their technological infrastructures, are forced to undersell the energy resources they do possess. At times, their very political freedom is compromised by forms of protectorate or, in any case, by forms of conditioning which appear clearly humiliating."

This isn't really about the environment, except in passing, as a specific instance of the issue he's really concerned about.  He's concerned about people leaving the church in favor of "heresy."  The specific case here is eco-spirituality:  he has a long track record in his previous position of coming down hard on progressive thinkers/heretics like Matthew Fox, who he essentially drove from the church for espousing "Creation Spirituality" (from Wikipedia):

<boxquote>Theologian and Episcopal priest Matthew Fox, formerly a Roman Catholic priest of the Dominican Order claims that revelation is found in two places: the Bible and nature. Therefore, the bulk of his teachings and texts lie in these two foundations. It is a mystical philosophy that celebrates the universe, emphasizes creativity as a key component of the universe, and believes that all people have a divine creative impulse. It espouses a panentheist view of God.  [snip]

Creation Spirituality begins with the notion of creation as an original blessing as opposed to original sin. For Fox sin results not so much from disobedience with God's laws as it does from disconnectedness to God's creation. He compares the seven traditional sins to seven principles of Creation Spirituality: cosmology, feminism, liberation, compassion, prophecy, creativity, and community.</boxquote>

If it was a global economic summit dealing with an impending collapse of the world economy, for which the proposed solution was Socialism, he'd be saying the same things, only railing against liberation theology (which he also has a track record of silencing).

Full disclosure:  The free rein given Benedict in his earlier role as a modern-day "Grand Inquisitor" was a significant part of why I (and my wife) left the Catholic church; we could not in good conscience be party to such a thing.  (I go on at greater length about the former Cardinal Ratzinger in this diary I posted over at Big Orange during the food fight that erupted when he was elected pope... probably the only diary in the history of the place to ever get compliments from both Armando and MSOC, LOL)

It's not about the suffering of the poor, or the protection of creation.  It's about doctrinal correctness and the maintenance of the structures of power.  Dostoevsky nailed it.

Ecological collapse is already happening. Your resentment of the word doesn't change the fact that it is occurring.

This dovetails nicely with its longstanding crap about how "god" will provide for all the excess babies these golden swindlers helped create.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

I don't much listen to what old, white billionaires have to say about anything.

Particularly when they live in castles.

nalbar

If we do nothing, then the feces hits the rotating air circulation device, and nature will force a population crash in ways that will be most unpleasant.  On the other hand, if we act proactively and work to reduce human population, then it won't be quite as bad.

This of course flies in the face of the Vatican policies regarding contraception, and I suspect that this is what has the Pope's knickers in a twist.