Holy See delegation backs 1.5-degree global-warming limit [CWN]


#1

The Holy See’s delegation at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris has announced its support for a legally-binding international agreement that would seek to limit a …

More…


#2

This just leaves me stunned. Are they also backing limitation of sunspots to one every ten years and bringing the moon a mile and a quarter closer to the earth?


#3

This plays right into population-control advocate’s hands. Maybe it’s a blessing in disguise, and people will reconsider the wisdom of NFP. But why do that when we can have hysterectomies, freeze eggs, and hire surrogates?


#4

Add to that no supernovae within 30 light-years, and a moratorium on solar proton events.


#5

Gee.
My sights are not that high.

I just want to outlaw rain during my vacations.

Can’t we do that?
I mean really. How hard is it to create a legally binding international agreement that it will not rain while I am on vacation?
If all the nation’s agree, surely I will have pleasant weather for my vacation. . .right?


#6

If the temperature in my city varies by more than 20 degrees F. in a day, as it sometimes does, will we be in violation of the treaty?

Certainly the sunspot cycle needs to be regulated as well. And there should be a blanket prohibition against the sun evolving into a red giant star.

There will also need to be a prohibition against any nuclear ground burst anywhere, as well as a prohibition on volcanic eruptions, to avoid global cooling. Might as well approach it from both angles.


#7

Seriously :rotfl: here.


#8

Mocking the Holy See?:hey_bud:


#9

This was a case where a delegation, not the Holy See itself, said something that was definitely mock-worthy. So – mocking the Holy See? No. Mocking this particular statement, by this particular group from the Holy See? Yes, definitely.


#10

This whole climate conference is a push for more population control through evil means. The Vatican should denounce the whole thing instead of participating.


#11

this! ^


#12

But it doesn’t. So do you stand against it?


#13

“Not the Holy See itself” what did you expect? The Pope?

Monsignor Bernardito Auza, Apostolic Nuncio to the United Nations,
Monsignor Auza and colleagues,Paolo Conversi, the Secretariat of State, and Tebaldo Vinciguerra, of the Pontifical Council Justice and Peace


#14

Supernovae in that radius occur once in ever 230million years. it’s amazing the amount of hear-say that goes into attempts to justify your position.

There are numerous other solutions to this problem, GM crops and funding for space travel being two. If the Vatican were to stand against this conference, they would once again place themselves on the wrong side of history.


#15

Ellis and Schramm said as much 20 years ago, so nothing particularly new with that particular statement of Earth’s meanderings through the Milky Way. However, SPE occur orders of magnitude more frequently, so there is a temporal relevance that is difficult to escape. Justification? None needed, my position sits quite well on it’s own.

Space travel is an energy intensive proposition, and one that is wholly dependent upon fossil fuels. Personally, I’ve nothing against either space exploration or fossil fuels; a near perfect pairing of technology and a primary energy source. The wrong side of history? That sounds like prognostication to me; do you polish that crystal ball often?


#16

Where is the call to fine countries that permit active volcanoes in their territory? Etna and Vesuvius are both close enough for the Vatican to be concerned.

We are expecting a record high of 60 degrees F here in northern Indiana tomorrow and I love it. I will burn hardly any fossil fuels to heat my home.


#17

:smiley:


#18

We have all been through these climate change conferences before.

Nobody is serious about them. If was not all about schmoozing and posh lifestyles for all the invitees, this would all be done by teleconferencing in order to save the environment from the jet-setters.

Of course, some will disagree, including those who back laws to demand the climate not rise in temperature by more than a degree and a half.


#19

This plays right into population-control advocate’s hands. Maybe it’s a blessing in disguise, and people will reconsider the wisdom of NFP. But why do that when we can have hysterectomies, freeze eggs, and hire surrogates?

reminds me of something the John Birch Society would say. Maybe we should try and trust the church a bit more than fearing they are dupes for the population control advocates.

Nobody is serious about them. If was not all about schmoozing and posh lifestyles for all the invitees, this would all be done by teleconferencing in order to save the environment from the jet-setters.

true, flying is horrible for CO2 emissions.


#20

I didn’t realize that the John Birch society was an opponent of population control measures.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.