Pope condemns climate change prophets ...

.
Good for him.
- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501316&in_page_id=1811&ito=1490

.
Reading what the Pope said as displayed on a web page highlighting "The Bitch Factor" displaying an image of Fergie "WITHOUT her make-up" and profoundly revealing that: "The Spice Girls are vain, ambitious and desperate for publicity..." is NOT the way I choose to spend my precious time on any day of any week, but this was brought to my attention anyway.
_______

According to Simon Caldwell, writing for the Daily Mail, Pope Benedict XVI has:

"suggested [my emphasis of a weak word] that fears over man-made emissions
melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing
more than scare-mongering."

As Pope, could it be said that "Benedict XVI" might be an authority on "scare-mongering" ... ?

Just a question, and I leave it to you to decide for yourself.

"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 the dogma of the environmentalist movement."

Will the Pope next "suggest" that the "international community" ought also to base its policies issues such as abortion ...

"on science rather than [on] dogma" ... ?

Life is full of surprises, it is.

"The 80-year-old Pope said the world needed to care for the environment but not to the point where the welfare of animals and plants was given a greater priority than that of mankind."

What priority should be given to "animals and plants" ?

If "animals and plants" no longer have a place to "live and prosper" on planet earth, how is it possible the "human animal" will survive ?

Has the Church purchased a new planet already ?

"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."

The Pope seems to be speaking my language - I want to hear more.

"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."

Future generations of ... whales ?
- Polar bears ?
- Monarch butterflies ?

Without question there are costs involved, and most of the true costs seem to be seldom factored in to the full equation of SURVIVAL on this planet.

What is a truly "just distribution" of the commodification of Planet Earth ?

Certainly we must "accept responsibilities" at a time when "postponing decisions" has continued far too long.

Joint decisions toward "agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances" ought to have been arrived at decades ago when it became clear that we were facing possibilities which threaten our survival, but unless "solutions" are profitable, they are not included in any "consensus"
- and that is a factor which most needs changed.

Washington's denial that "global warming" was a threat continued until a "consensus" was found in which pollution could be sold or traded for profits, and since then it has been a crisis deserving of millions of dollars in advertising and legal fees
- environment commodified simple as that, but of course that is not the Pope's doing.

Dialogue is always preferable, but at some point one has to, as they say, "shit or get off the pot"
... only in this case, the "talkers" have already shit, only to find out there is no way to flush.

There has been far too much "talk" about our environment - about the only home humans have on which to live - and precious little action, and I see nothing of particular substance in this Daily Mail article to move humanity toward any particular PROGRESS, but it is comforting to know the Pope is concerned about the issue.

As I see it ...

.

what is the true cost of our actions ...

.
A quote from THE CORPORATION [5/23] Case Histories:

"Our civilization is not flying because it's not built according to the laws of aerodynamics for civilizations that would fly. Of course the ground is still a long way away, but some people have seen that ground rushing up sooner than the rest of us - the visionary has seen it and has told us it's coming. ... Every living system of earth is in decline; every life support system of earth is in decline ... and these together constitute the biosphere. The biosphere that supports and nurtures all of life, and not just our life, but perhaps 30 million other species that share this planet with us."

... expresses very well what I want to say myself.

"Intergenerational Tyranny"


The ground is not so far away as it may seem - not so far as we have become used to thinking.

Some people simply stop listening when I talk of these things, and they must also stop listening to others too, since I am not saying much that has not been said already by others more experienced and more knowledgeable than myself.

How long CAN we continue to live so easily as though none of this were happening, as though unborn generations will not have to pay a severe price for our "comforts" today ?

The answer, it seems, is that we can continue doing what we are doing until it kills us.


Some folks want to hear only "positive" talk, and I am one of them
... but to do or say no more weighs on my conscience.

I have no desire to selectively demonize anything or anyone, but I think we all have an obligation to focus on what is wrong - not to be or to seem negative, but to improve things, to correct what is wrong, and most of all, to SURVIVE - for life itself to survive.

Somehow we have to learn how to talk and communicate in ways which engage others in our personal spheres, setting fire to apathy in a loving way.

Yes, our economy depends on "consumerism" and corporations do and provide some very good things, yet the sum total of it all is that system is destroying our planet.

We cannot build cars for the head of household of every family on earth to drive, nor can we build highways on which all of them may drive - not because we are incapable of the task, but because there is not room enough, because of what doing so would deprive us.

We can grow food enough for 7 billion human beings to eat and do it sustainably, but at what expense to other species, the loss of which again deprives us of more than we gain ?

We can convert food crops to alcohol to power our vehicles, but who decides which of us do not get to eat as a result ?


We have to stop quibbling over individual processes and their "cost vs benefit" and whether we are "inhibiting progress"

We have to change the way we think about the very core principles underlying those processes - learn how to calculate *true cost* in every case, and proceed with only what is sustainable - not sustainable for humans, but for the earth on which humans depend.

It is a matter of life or death.

Playlist: The Corporation (complete, chapters 1 to 23)
- http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=FA50FBC214A6CE87

.