Pope of a Different Climate

Posted by Worldview Warriors On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 6 comments

by Bill Seng

“Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance…For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.” ~Matthew 25:34-36

He appears to be a pope with a heart for the poor who are crying out for justice. But he is not a pope for those who silently pray that someone will recognize their plight and take action that might provide them relief. It has been disappointing to see than an institution that has been the most powerful force in the pro-life movement is now headed up by someone who is more concerned about “social justice” and what the weather is going to be like 50 years from now than for people who are actually dying early as a result of their low quality of life. Whether you know it or not, if you are one of the millions who buy into the phenomenon that we now call “Global Climate Change,” you are unwittingly buying into an agenda that discourages the propagation of life.

Because of Pope Francis, carbon emissions have become public enemy number one on a global scale. Where it used to be a political mandate, now there is an added spiritual mandate that one must conform to the demands of environmentalists who claim that climate change is the world’s most threatening force (never mind the reality that our country just agreed to allow a country with aspirations to bring about the end of the world to have a nuclear weapon). Carbon emissions have been demonized as being a detrimental greenhouse gas that causes global warming and destroys Mother Earth’s o-zone. It is ignored that the most abundant greenhouse gas, H2O, makes up 75% of our wonderful blue planet and dwarfs the impact on the environment that CO2 has. In other words, the ocean will contribute more to the overall climate than all of the carbon emitting sources in the world combined.

The manufactured reality that Pope Francis buys into is that carbon emissions are destroying the planet through Global Climate Change. If this were true, we are in huge trouble because all living organisms exhale CO2. (You are evidently not supposed to remember the fact that plants need CO2 to survive, by the way.) But instead of going the route of China and limiting the number of children each couple has (I think it is now one child per family), the globally approved method for reducing carbon emissions is by reducing carbon emitting pollutants. For this purpose, fossil fuels are number one on the hit list.

The liberal environmentalists insist that if we chop down a few million trees, clear out large fields, and replace the trees with gigantic windmills that are well known for killing off winged members of the endangered species list or with solar panels, we might be able to produce enough electricity to energize Thomas Edison’s first light bulb (which is also an environmental hazard).

Another measure that is greatly encouraged is the electric car. Electric cars release us from the strangle hold that fossil fuels have on our lives. All you do is plug it into the wall and in about 3 hours you have enough energy to drive about 50 miles. And where might this energy that powers this car come from? A power plant that produces energy through coal. Face it, your electric car is fossil fueled. I intend all of this to illustrate that fossil fuels are not a problem. They are a solution to what is now known as energy poverty.

In a letter to the pope, a big person in the fossil fuel industry reminded him of how people live who are deprived of fossil fuels in their countries. They don’t have energy for their factories, fuel for their vehicles to propel them long distances in short frames of time, and they lack the ability to provide lasting heat for their homes that they might enjoy basic necessities like hot meals and warm water at the press of the button or turn of a dial. What is worse, they are forced to cook and heat their homes in more traditional ways, like burning wood, which cause millions of people worldwide to fall victim to respiratory illnesses and die. And yet the United Nations is fighting hard to prevent third world countries from being able to enjoy the life-saving luxuries that fossil fuels provide. The pope does not only allow them to go unopposed; he helps them to push their agenda forward, all for the sake of saving the world. If you ask me, this is throwing out the baby and the bath water. The ones hurt the most are those in poverty.

To millions of people across the globe, the pope represents Christ’s presence on earth. I do not think he is as educated as he should be on this topic, and he is letting many faithful followers down by insisting that the solutions to their problems are indeed the problem itself. I am not going to say that Jesus would be a big oil lobbyist, but I will say that he would be pleased to see his servants fighting against tyrannies who are knowingly and willingly oppressing the poor despite the slander they face along the way. Might I be so bold to say that the oil company that I work for has done more good for my community in two years than all of the churches and social programs in our city combined in ten years? And I am not even kidding when I say that is a generous estimate to the churches and social programs. The pope needs to hear us. America needs to hear us. Those in poverty need to be heard and we can be their voice. But the road will be bumpy along the way.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.


Anonymous said...

" I do not think [the Pope] is as educated as he should be on this topic"

This is priceless, coming from someone who uses arguments like "plants need CO2 to survive" and "fossil fuels are not a problem. They are a solution"

Here is my generalized versions of your arguments. Am I misrepresenting you?

- X amount of something is good and necessary, so how can 2X amount be a bad thing?

- X is a solution for problem Y, so I can discount X causing issue Z

William Seng said...

I don't understand what you have against the parts of my post that you cited. I honestly do not believe you are prepared to debate me on this topic (sorry if I sound arrogant). To find out where I am coming from so that you can build a better argument, go to industrialprogress.com and do some research. Then, jump on YouTube and watch Ted Cruz debate the president of the Sierra Club. Tell me if there is anything interesting in either of those 2 resources. If those are not good enough for you, check out the book, a disgrace to the profession by Mark steyn (you can do that after you get back to me, especially since I have only heard excerpts from this book thus far). You must educate yourself on both sides of this debate if you are truly pursuing truth.

Anonymous said...

I was pointing out logical fallacies in your arguments. That requires zero knowledge of the subject at hand. You have no idea what my knowledge of the subject is (you don't even know my position, I could be critiquing the arguments made by someone on the same"side", just as Ken Ham tells creationists not to use the "if we came from apes, why are there still apes" argument). Would you like me to explain what I have against those parts?

Your blog post lacks focus, so it is very hard to know what I would be debating you about.

Am I debating about whether the planet is warming? or whether humans are causing it through CO2 emissions? or whether they are causing a large amount of change? or whether that change is good?

If you don't believe that humans are causing the planet to warm significantly through CO2 emissions, then there is no reason to even debate about how good fossil fuels are... of course they are great!

If we are debating about whether humans are causing global warming, then I don't think any of your suggestions are very useful. None of them (including the CEO of the Sierra Club) seem to have much relevant education.

William Seng said...

My point is clear, a global initiative to support an initiative to thwart man made climate change is not only flawed in its foundations, but also dangerous. The Pope, for whatever reason, does not seem to put 2 and 2 together.

Don't cop out with the, "you have no idea of what my stance is" argument. Do you mean to tell me you agree with everything I say, but you just don't like my logic? Come on, really?

JD70 said...

Then Anonymous, instead of playing games just tell Bill what you have issues with. Just come right out and say it. Playing games through threads on Blog posts gets a bit tiring. This comment is no dis what-so-ever, just saying, get to your point so this can more forward. Thanks for your future candor.

JD70 said...

To your comments Anonymous about, "If you don't believe that humans are causing the planet to warm significantly through CO2 emissions, then there is no reason to even debate about how good fossil fuels are... of course they are great!" and "If we are debating about whether humans are causing global warming, then I don't think any of your suggestions are very useful. None of them (including the CEO of the Sierra Club) seem to have much relevant education."


I'm not sure what you are debating because you haven't made it clear but scientific data is pretty interesting on this.