Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 05/24/2011 7:29:36 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) is using the weight of a Vatican report about the urgency of tackling global warming to urge Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans to hold another hearing on climate science.
Waxman, the panel’s top Democrat, sent a letter Monday to the committee's GOP chairman asking for a hearing with authors of a Vatican report issued in May and a separate National Research Council (NRC) report from this month that also called for action to cut emissions.
The letter could put committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) in a politically sensitive spot if he does not agree that the report by the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences is worth a committee hearing.
Waxman and Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) – who is the ranking Democrat on the Energy and Power Subcommittee – note in a letter to Upton, “Both reports find that climate change is occurring and that urgent action is needed to address its dangers.”
Upton steered a bill through the committee and later the full House that blocks the Environmental Protection Agency’s power to regulate greenhouse gases.
Upton argues that the rules will cost jobs and raise energy prices. He has sought to steer debate on his bill away from climate science and toward the economic effects of EPA rules.
But many Republicans are openly skeptical of climate science. At a committee markup of the bill in March, Democrats forced a vote on an amendment that called on Congress to accept the scientific consensus that climate change is occurring, it is caused in large part by human activity and it is a threat to human health.
The amendment failed, and Waxman and Rush pointed to that vote in their Monday letter calling for a hearing on the Vatican and NRC reports. They wrote:
“While the conclusions reached in these reports reinforce what scientists have been telling us for years, they illustrate the remarkable scientific consensus on the issue and present constructive efforts to find solutions. We believe members would benefit by hearing from the authors of these reports, particularly since a majority of the Committee voted earlier this year to deny the existence of climate change.”
Where the hell is the aCLU when you need them? This is a violation of their “church and state” thing.
I sure am NOT surprised by the institution of ‘social justice’ weighing in on the side of leftist. Genesis 8:21-22 is what God promised in spite of the claims of idiots.
I sure am NOT surprised by the institution of ‘social justice’ weighing in on the side of leftist. Genesis 8:21-22 is what God promised in spite of the claims of idiots.
committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.)... steered a bill through the committee and later the full House that blocks the Environmental Protection Agency's power to regulate greenhouse gases. Upton argues that the rules will cost jobs and raise energy prices. He has sought to steer debate on his bill away from climate science and toward the economic effects of EPA rules.And of course, the important thing is that he's in favor of CF bulbs [/s], so get the torches and pitchforks.
They want their money pretty bad. Livelihood does that to people.
Global Warming on Free Republic
What did Nostrildamus see and when did Nostrildamus see it? AND, who is paying him to protect their enviro bidness?
Is your post double important? Is that why theres two of them?
Sorry, I did not realize I did a double post. Neither are of any actual great importance, just a comment on the ways of this world in high religious outposts. Wonder if the 'spell' of Galileo will haunt them forever?
LOL! I was just thinking the same thing.
When it comes to issues of spirituality and morality, the dems can’t scurry away from the Vatican fast enough!
When it comes to something the Vatican doesn’t claim to have any sort of authority - boy oh boy - no the dems are all excited.
They never to fail to disappoint me when I need a good laugh.
It’s another sign of the times. Even the Catholic Church will be part of the one world religion that mixes everything in and around worship of the earth.
Don’t jump to any conclusions yet. The left also jumped on an excyclical Pope Benedict wrote saying he was for a NWO which was ONE LINE in a 30 page document. They did the same to him with the Muslims a while back.
The report is titled Fate of Mountain Glaciers in the Anthropocene. From page 3 of the report:
Declaration by the Working GroupRelated threads:We call on all people and nations to recognise the serious and potentially irreversible impacts of global warming caused by the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants, and by changes in forests, wetlands, grasslands, and other land uses. We appeal to all nations to develop and implement, without delay, effective and fair policies to reduce the causes and impacts of climate change on communities and ecosystems, including mountain glaciers and their watersheds, aware that we all live in the same home.
By acting now, in the spirit of common but differentiated responsibility, we accept our duty to one another and to the stewardship of a planet blessed with the gift of life. We are committed to ensuring that all inhabitants of this planet receive their daily bread, fresh air to breathe and clean water to drink as we are aware that, if we want justice and peace, we must protect the habitat that sustains us. The believers among us ask God to grant us this wish.
What do I mean by consistent?
Well, I have found in my 7 years of hanging around this joint that FReepers have a great tendency to suspect the bias of news articles and particularly suspect the motivations of Democrats. Except in one case: when the Catholic Church is mentioned. Oh, sure, when abortion, euthanasia, John Paul II vs the USSR, or other popular things are mentioned, they will say "God love 'em", but if it is something negative...then we have This is a violation of their “church and state” thing or I sure am NOT surprised by the institution of ‘social justice’ weighing in on the side of leftist or the like.
Instantly
Like clockwork its predictable.
So let us examine this article like a FReeper examining an MSM report like it was about anything else:
Opening line of the article:
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) is using the weight of a Vatican report
So what is this saying? Henry Waxman, a liberal's liberal, one who is so left wing that he would be unelectable almost anywhere but in the district he's representing in SoCal, is using the weight of a Vatican report. Hmmmmm.....(This is the same Vatican that he, I am certain, has condemned for their stand on abortion, homosexual "marriage," etc)
"...a Vatican report..."
Was this a Vatican report?
Well, not exactly. It was a "Vatican report" about as much as a Rand or Mitre Corporation study or a university report is a US government report, reflective of US government policy. The confusion about this is natural, as most people don't know that much about how the Vatican government works, so they think that each and every thing coming out of every Vatican office (or sponsored agency) has been personally blessed and signed off by the Pope.
A scumbag like Waxman can then use that ignorance to establish some sort of "moral authority" for his position. Ironic considering how immoral this person is.
Look at what he actually wrote:
A May 11 report commissioned by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences at the Vatican also emphasized the dangers of climate change.[3] The Pontifical Academy operates under the direct protection of the Pope to promote the progress of mathematical, physical, and natural sciences. It has had 76 Nobel Prize winners among its members.
Isn't it interesting that the scumbag Waxman would try to invoke Papal authority to bolster his claims?
And then isn't it interesting that FReepers would decide to take Waxman at his word? Or trust MSM writing? Well, I guess when it's convenient...
As a side-note, the Papal Academy of Sciences traces its origins back to 1603, when it was founded as the Accademia Dei Lincei. One of its more prominent members at the time was Galileo Galilei. It sort of went by the wayside after several decades and was re-established in 1847. Its purpose is to promote the study of the sciences.
Waxman's statement "...operates under the direct protection of the Pope" is an accurate statement, but is rather misleading. There haven't been any scientists burned at the stake for witchcraft for the past several hundred years. But that is the origins of it: back in the Renaissance, scientists who questioned the normal orthodoxy could end up facing a trial for their efforts. By placing a group of scientists under the "protection of the pope," they were far less vulnerable to being given the "marshmallow on a stick" treatment.
A little bit of an irrelevancy now, I would think.
And then we have Waxman "It has had 76 Nobel Prize winners..." -- talk about classic Argumentum ad Verecundiam. Geez.
One of the members of the academy is Stephen Hawking...as if he speaks for the Vatican...on anything.
I guess what I really don't understand is why FReepers, who are cynical as hell when reading anything in the media, instantaneously buy any MSM statement attributing something to the Vatican or accusing the Vatican of anything as if the MSM is speaking the gospel. Why this suspension of cynicism?
Because Catholics are evil.
Because the MSM in their opinion is wrong about everything except when it comes to a hit-piece or a slur or a falsehood against Catholics. Then the MSM is to be believed and cited as "proof" -- no matter how much a sane person will point out, as you did, that they distorted the message (as normal).
A member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has said that heaven is a fairy tale. So there you have it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.