Climate change: Pope urges action on clean energy

The headline is from a BBC article which said: Quote.

Pope Francis has said climate change is a challenge of “epochal proportions” and that the world must convert to clean fuel.

“Civilisation requires energy, but energy use must not destroy civilisation,” he said. […]

Modern society with its “massive movement of information, persons and things requires an immense supply of energy”, he told the gathering.

“But that energy should also be clean, by a reduction in the systematic use of fossil fuels,” he said.

“Our desire to ensure energy for all must not lead to the undesired effect of a spiral of extreme climate changes due to a catastrophic rise in global temperatures, harsher environments and increased levels of poverty.”

The world needed to come up with an energy mix that combated pollution, eliminated poverty and promoted social justice, he added.

As many as one billion people still lack electricity, he said. End of quote.

Yes, well, give them access to cheap energy then, not expensive solar, wind, wave or whatever.? Problem solved!

Moderate elevations in the earth?s temperature, and especially increases in carbon dioxide, are actually beneficial to agriculture and help humans to flourish. This is because longer growing seasons means greater overall productivity making food more abundant, which is good for the starving, and more affordable, which is good for the poor.? Isn’t this what the Pope should be caring about?

Speaking of the poor, the price of using renewable energy sources is much higher than the cost of using traditional fossil fuels. As such, the negative consequences for those in poverty, is massive.

But that was not really what this post was about.? The Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic Church.? Note the last word ‘church’.? He is their spiritual leader with the task of looking after their spiritual welfare and their eternal souls.? I am not sure where it says that his job description includes climate science.

Shouldn’t the Pope check in with his handbook, the Bible, first?

Commandment eight: Do not bear false witness.? Why not ask for honesty and truth in all areas of teaching and research instead, especially climate ‘science’?

If the Pope checked the start of the Bible, (Genesis 1) he would see that the Bible teaches that men and women are to rule over and improve the environment through their wise stewardship; whereas environmentalism teaches that the natural world is best left alone in a pristine condition.

The Pope would also see that all of the earth?s resources should be used wisely and none of them rejected. Genesis says that God gave mankind dominion over creation, One way to do this is by transforming raw materials into resources and using them to meet human needs. This means that leaving everything in the Earth in its natural state unused is not good stewardship.

If the Pope believed the Bible, he would accept that what God created was perfect and was to be wisely used for our benefit. As such, ?fossil’ fuels are not intrinsically ?bad?.

If the Pope believed the church’s doctrine of a benevolent creator God he would understand that the earth is ?resilient? rather than inherently ?fragile?.? ?A benevolent creator God would put his creation into a robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting world. Although it is obvious that the earth and its subsystems are susceptible to damage by human action, an all-wise, all-powerful, God (such as the one the Pope is supposed to believe in) would design any natural systems to respond in ways that suppress and correct that damage rather than magnify it catastrophically. It is not hard to find Bible verses which suggest that God, rather than humans ultimately control the weather.

So my question to the Pope is, which God do you serve?? The God your book the Bible reveals or the god of popular opinion?