The Pope’s Top Climate Change Advisor Does Not
Believe In God – But He Does Appear To Believe In ‘Gaia’
Posted: 23 Jun 2015
04:43 PM PDT
![]()
The concept of ‘Gaia’ has deep roots in
ancient paganism. Many of the advocates of the ‘Gaia hypothesis‘
do not consider themselves to be religious, but in reality it is a kind of
“scientific pantheism”. This quasi-scientific theory was popularized by
James Lovelock in his book entitled “Gaia: A New Look At Life On Earth“, and apparently
this is a theory that Schellnhuber endorses. The following is an
extended excerpt from a recent article by William M. Briggs…
In the Gaia Principle, Mother Earth is alive,
and even, some think, aware in some ill-defined, mystical way. The Earth
knows man and his activities and, frankly, isn’t too happy with him.
This is what we might call “scientific
pantheism,” a kind that appeals to atheistic scientists. It is an updated version
of the pagan belief that the universe itself is God, that the Earth is at
least semi-divine — a real Brother Sun and Sister Water! Mother Earth is
immanent in creation and not transcendent, like the Christian God.
What’s this have to do with Schellnhuber? In
the 1999 Nature paper “‘Earth system’ analysis and the second Copernican
revolution,” he said:
Ecosphere
science is therefore coming of age, lending respectability to its romantic
companion, Gaia theory, as pioneered by Lovelock and Margulis. This hotly debated
‘geophysiological’ approach to Earth-system analysis argues that the
biosphere contributes in an almost cognizant way to self-regulating feedback
mechanisms that have kept the Earth’s surface environment stable and
habitable for life.
Geo-physiological, in case you missed it. Cognizant, in black and white. So dedicated is Schellnhuber to this belief
that he says “the Gaia approach may even include the influence of biospheric
activities on the Earth’s plate-tectonic processes.” Not the other way
around, mind you, where continental drift and earthquakes effects life, but
where life effects earthquakes.
He elaborates:
Although effects such as
the glaciations may still be interpreted as over-reactions to small
disturbances — a kind of cathartic geophysiological fever — the
main events, resulting in accelerated maturation by shock treatment, indicate
that Gaia faces a powerful antagonist. Rampino has proposed personifying
this opposition as Shiva, the Hindu god of destruction.
So why would the Pope rely on the “expertise”
of someone that does not believe in God, but that argues that “Gaia faces a
powerful antagonist”?
Perhaps someone should ask him.
And someone should also ask the Pope why he is
hanging around with someone that believes that our planet is
overpopulated by six billion people…
Schellnhuber is most famous for predicting
that the “carrying capacity” of the earth is “below” 1 billion people. When confronted with this, he called those who
quoted him “liars.” But he then repeated the same claim, saying, “All I said
was that if we had unlimited global warming of eight degrees warming, maybe
the carrying capacity of the earth would go down to just 1 billion, and then
the discussion would be settled.” And he has often said that this
temperature tipping point would be reached — unless “actions” were
taken.
Schellnhuber is also an unashamed
globalist. In a previous article, I discussed how he believes that we
need a global government, a global constitution and a global court that would
have authority over all the other courts on the planet. The following
is an excerpt from a very disturbing
article that he authored…
Let me conclude this short contribution with a
daydream about those key institutions that could bring about a sophisticated
— and therefore more appropriate — version of the conventional “world
government” notion. Global
democracy might be organized around three core activities, namely (i) an
Earth Constitution; (ii) a Global Council; and (iii) a Planetary Court. I cannot discuss these institutions in any detail here, but I
would like to indicate at least that:
– the Earth Constitution would transcend the UN
Charter and identify those first principles guiding humanity in its quest for
freedom, dignity, security and sustainability;
– the Global Council would be an assembly of
individuals elected directly by all people on Earth, where eligibility should
be not constrained by geographical, religious, or cultural quotas; and
– the Planetary Court would be a transnational
legal body open to appeals from everybody, especially with respect to
violations of the Earth Constitution.
So why is Pope Francis surrounding himself
with such people?
Does he have similar hopes for the future?
Without a doubt, the Pope’s latest encyclical
fully embraces Schellnhuber’s views on climate change, but it doesn’t stop
there. The Pope also expressed a very negative view of human progress,
and he appeared to be echoing many of the exact same talking points that
radical environmentalists have been hammering us with for years. The
following comes from a recent article by Steven
Malanga…
The encyclical, whose title is derived from a
line from St. Francis of Assisi’s Canticle of the Sun (“Be praised, My Lord,
through all your Creatures”), is being welcomed by some in the scientific
community because it proclaims that climate change is real and that humanity
must address it. But the nearly 38,000-word document—most of which is not
about climate change—actually reads like a giant step backward for the
Church’s social teaching: a rejection of technological progress; a dark,
narrow vision of human nature that ignores the enormous gains the world has
made in alleviating human suffering; and an almost antihuman call,
reminiscent of the most radical environmentalists, to reduce human activity
drastically as the only way to save the planet. As Michael Shellenberger,
president of the Breakthrough Institute and co-author of An Ecomodernist
Manifesto, observed: “When [the] Pope speaks of ‘irrational faith in human
progress’ I want him to visit the Congo to see what life is like when there
is no progress.”
So what does all of this mean?
Could it be possible that this Pope is far
more radical than most people ever imagined?
If so, what does that mean for the future of
Catholicism?
Please feel free to tell us what you think by
posting a comment below…
Michael Snyder is the
author of The Beginning Of The End and Get
Prepared Now. You can get his new DVDs entitled “Economic Collapse, World War III
& The Death Of America” and “The Regathering Of The Ten Lost
Tribes Of Israel” from the Prophecy Club.
|
Friday, 26 June 2015
The Pope’s Top Climate Change Advisor Does Not Believe In God – But He Does Appear To Believe In ‘Gaia’
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment