• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Pope Francis blames 'human selfishness' for global warming

5,983
Posts
15
Years
  • Spoiler:


    First off, the Pope's a chemist by training. Do you think that Pope Francis, as the spiritual shepherd of over a billion Catholic Christians, holds any sway over his flock and the world at large? Will this convince the religious unconvinced wherever you live? What's your opinion of the Pope in general?

    Other articles discussing this story:

    CNN - Pope Francis: 'Revolution' needed to combat climate change
    The Washington Post - 10 key excerpts from Pope Francis's encyclical on the environment
    The Guardian - The pope's encyclical on climate change – as it happened
    The Atlantic - Why the Pope's New Climate-Change Doctrine Matters
    Wall Street Journal - Pope Delivers Strong Message on Climate Change in Encyclical 'Laudato Si' '
    Reuters - Pope calls for 'action now' to save planet, stem warming, help poor


    Discuss.
     
    Last edited:

    The Void

    hiiiii
    1,416
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • Pinkie-Dawn

    Vampire Waifu
    9,528
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • My feelings are mixed on the subject. While it's necessary to look for green alternative renewable resources, so we won't have to rely too much on fossil fuel and other limited energy sources, but I've been proven that we are not causing climate change, for it is a natural thing, and that the world is currently in a global cooling stage, though it doesn't explaining why the ice caps are still melting.
     

    Neo_Angelo

    Used Discharge!
    98
    Posts
    9
    Years
  • The pope is right, we are to blame for our planets destruction. Not just global warming (we do contribute to the speeding up of the natural process). If you look at it this way, all life is sustained through equilibrium, Nature requires balance, there needs to be the same amount given as taken away.

    Currently as a species, we humans are consuming far more resources than we replenish, our over population and rapid reproduction is what will kill this planet off, not only that, we have no consideration for other animals, we have caused so many to go extinct because we kill for fun, over indulge and waste so much.

    Because Humans are greedy, wasteful and careless as a whole, it would take a hell of a lot of effort for everyone to be on board and start doing everything we can to save our planet. Just think, because we have evolved into intelligent (debatable) species, we end up fighting each other, blowing each other up with nuclear bombs (causing mass damage to the planet making parts uninhabitable), causing upset in the food chain (perfect example is cows, chickens and pigs are now vastly overpopulating the environment compared to other none tamed species).

    Basically, we need to really think about what we are doing, how can we give back more than we take? there is only so much the planet will take before everything is destroyed, and that will be the end of us. Our biggest threat as a species? ourselves!

    We have so many technological advances, and we've designed groundbreaking stuff, there are people who are using that technology to save the planet, we need to find new ways of utilising our technology so we can replenish the resources quicker than we harvest them.
     

    The Void

    hiiiii
    1,416
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • My feelings are mixed on the subject. While it's necessary to look for green alternative renewable resources, so we won't have to rely too much on fossil fuel and other limited energy sources, but I've been proven that we are not causing climate change, for it is a natural thing, and that the world is currently in a global cooling stage, though it doesn't explaining why the ice caps are still melting.

    Natural? Name one species of plant or animal that burns plastic and styrofoam, releases CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and HFCs (hydrofluorocarbons), and emits greenhouse gases from fossil fuels for their own purpose, on a daily basis.

    Proven? There is a scientific consensus -- 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that global warming is a result of the actions of man.
     
    25,530
    Posts
    12
    Years
  • My feelings are mixed on the subject. While it's necessary to look for green alternative renewable resources, so we won't have to rely too much on fossil fuel and other limited energy sources, but I've been proven that we are not causing climate change, for it is a natural thing, and that the world is currently in a global cooling stage, though it doesn't explaining why the ice caps are still melting.

    Global Warming does occur naturally, but the scientific community at large has accepted that humanity's impact on the environment has increased the speed and severity of global warming significantly and weakened the ozone layer. This is not natural global warming we are experiencing, this is the systematic destruction of the only planet we currently have the means to survive on. The reason the ice caps are melting is because the planet is becoming too hot for them to remain frozen.

    As for this pope, I like this one. He seems to be doing a lot of good things and quite frankly I don't care what religion you are from if you're trying to do some good in the world then you're okay in my book. I can only hope that not only the numerous Roman Catholics are listening to the pope's advice but that people of other religious or unreligious beliefs also respect what he is trying to do.
     

    Pinkie-Dawn

    Vampire Waifu
    9,528
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • Natural? Name one species of plant or animal that burns plastic and styrofoam, releases CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and HFCs (hydrofluorocarbons), and emits greenhouse gases from fossil fuels for their own purpose, on a daily basis.

    Proven? There is a scientific consensus -- 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that global warming is a result of the actions of man.
    The planet itself isn't getting warmer, only the oceans other than the deep sea.
     

    The Void

    hiiiii
    1,416
    Posts
    13
    Years

  • ...but if you'll listen to a popular science video like DNews then surely you'll believe:
    NASA
    American Association for the Advancement of Science
    American Chemical Society
    American Geophysical Union
    American Medical Association
    American Meteorological Society
    American Physical Society
    Geological Society of America
    IPCC
    A joint statement from the Academia Brasiliera de Ciências, the Royal Society of Canada, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Academié des Sciences, the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher, the Indian National Science Academy, the Accademia dei Lincei, the Science Council of Japan, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the US National Academy of Sciences, and the Royal Society

    ...because you know, they have the actual scientists who make the actual studies.
     
    Last edited:

    Pinkie-Dawn

    Vampire Waifu
    9,528
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • Not to be all source elitist, but a source that isn't some clickbait Youtube channel would be preferred.
    Here's an article about Mars experiencing climate change without the presence of humans:
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html


    And here's a 30 minute video that's less click baity than the previous video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTTaXqVEGkU


    I'll have to ask my friend to provide me the sources he found once he's online.
     

    Pinkie-Dawn

    Vampire Waifu
    9,528
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • .....Did you even read the next page?
    Huh, I never notice that article had a second page (I've only read the first page). Guess I'll have to either wait for my friend to provide me his sources or I have dig deeper myself if he refuses (he doesn't enjoy getting into debates).
     

    Omicron

    the day was mine
    4,430
    Posts
    14
    Years
  • I think these images speak for themselves.

    201501.gif


    201501.gif


    We are not on a global cooling era, the fact that parts of the US were colder doesn't mean the rest of the world is.
     
    25,530
    Posts
    12
    Years
  • I don't disagree that global warming is caused by human selfishness but don't think pushing a socialist agenda is the answer. If he feels the moral responsibility is on the rich maybe he should sell the billions of dollars worth of religious artifacts stuffed inside the Vatican and donate the proceeds to greenpeace or whatever.

    Whilst I'm not a huge fan of how ridiculously wealthy the Vatican is either for various reasons, I don't think we should write this off just because he's pushing some agenda. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't (he's a politician more or less, so he probably is) but the long and short of it, is that this could have a very positive effect on the world.
     

    The Void

    hiiiii
    1,416
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • If he feels the moral responsibility is on the rich maybe he should sell the billions of dollars worth of religious artifacts stuffed inside the Vatican and donate the proceeds to greenpeace or whatever.

    I beg to differ. Those artifacts represent over 2000 years of tradition, history, and culture. They're priceless. The Vatican is essentially a functioning museum. This pope already spoke out against bishops and priests who live in mansions (he defrocked the luxurious bishop of Berlin, for example), and Catholic orders such as the Knights of Columbus (which gives around $200 million in charity every year) and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (which sends about 100 000 military paramedics to over 120 countries) have served the poorest of the poor without having to sell countless relics.

    I personally think religious thought is silly and all too magical, but I can appreciate that the Church has done at least enough, to the best of its power, to address issues such as global warming and worldwide hunger.
     

    Her

    11,468
    Posts
    15
    Years
    • Seen May 5, 2024
    Well, I mean, I don't think anyone in the church actually has the power (let alone the desire) to sell off the various assets that the Vatican has in its possession. Such artifacts would be impossible to measure the wealth of and the actual logistics of such a sale are mind-boggling.

    Though, on the topic of the Vatican/Catholic Church's finances, here is an interesting read:
    What we do know is that Vatican Bank, officially titled the Institute for the Works of Religion, manages €5.9bn ($7.3bn, £4.64bn) of assets on behalf of its 17,400 customers. And it manages €700m of equity which it owns. Another titbit to emerge is that it keeps gold reserves worth over $20m with the US Federal Reserve.

    The bank has been caught up in a number of scandals in the past, including the funding of priests caught up in sex abuse allegations and of money laundering for the Mafia and former Nazis.

    This is why there are moves within parts of the church to make it more like a normal bank and open up its accounts for greater scrutiny. Protections for religious organisations mean it does not currently face the same transparency obligations as other financial institutions.

    An investigation by the Economist estimated that the American Catholic church alone – which has the fourth largest follower base by country, behind Brazil, Mexico and the Philippines – spent $170bn in 2010 on things like healthcare, schools and parishes.

    Money flows in from individual donations from Catholics, government grants, the church's own investments and corporate donors.

    According to Georgetown University, the average weekly donation of an American Catholic to the church is $10. There are 85 million in North America, meaning each week the Catholic Church pulls in $850m through donations from individual Catholics.

    Vatican City itself has a rich economy relative to its size. Though data is scarce, and the exact GDP figure is unknown, the CIA estimates Vatican City's 2011 revenue to be $308m. It only has a population of 800 people, meaning its nominal GDP per capita is $365,796 – making it the richest state on the planet by this measure.
     

    Sir Codin

    Guest
    0
    Posts
    His point was that someone who's sitting as the leader of a city state with more wealth than many small nations has no business lecturing us about "human selfishness", or the "evils of materialism" as it makes him look like a hypocrite.

    The Pope is certainly right to finally acknowledge that climate change, loss of biodiversity, and pollution are real and a problem, but his message of "the rich must do their part", based on what he's said in the past, basically amounts to "give the poor your money and property" which basically has socialist undertones.

    As someone who detests any system that can only work with increased government control bordering on totalitarianism, I can honestly say "GG Pope, but still, fuck you."
     
    5,983
    Posts
    15
    Years
  • His point was that someone who's sitting as the leader of a city state with more wealth than many small nations has no business lecturing us about "human selfishness", or the "evils of materialism" as it makes him look like a hypocrite.

    The Pope is certainly right to finally acknowledge that climate change, loss of biodiversity, and pollution are real and a problem, but his message of "the rich must do their part", based on what he's said in the past, basically amounts to "give the poor your money and property" which basically has socialist undertones.

    As someone who detests any system that can only work with increased government control bordering on totalitarianism, I can honestly say "GG Pope, but still, **** you."

    I wouldn't say that. It would have socialist undertones if he made reference to government compulsion, but he didn't. If the pope can't advocate for the rich to give to the poor, then how could he possible advocate donation and philanthropy?
     

    The Void

    hiiiii
    1,416
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • His point was that someone who's sitting as the leader of a city state with more wealth than many small nations has no business lecturing us about "human selfishness", or the "evils of materialism" as it makes him look like a hypocrite.

    But unlike those small nations the Vatican doesn't spend most of its money on standing armies and infrastructure, it spends it on building churches, hospitals, schools, and funding philanthropic orders like the Jesuits, the Dominicans, the Knights of Columbus, the Military Order of Malta...

    The Pope is certainly right to finally acknowledge that climate change, loss of biodiversity, and pollution are real and a problem, but his message of "the rich must do their part", based on what he's said in the past, basically amounts to "give the poor your money and property" which basically has socialist undertones.

    Honestly I think he's just echoing what Jesus would say:

    If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.​
    Matthew 19:21​
     

    Sir Codin

    Guest
    0
    Posts
    I'm not religious in any way shape or form.

    You are literally preaching to the fucking choir, Void.
     
    Back
    Top