The science is settled, Galileo edition

The geocentric world view that Galileo's inquisitors were still so fond of in 1632:

And, of course, that world view was completely wrong but it took the Catholic Church a very long time to admit its mistake.

Fast forward almost 380 years (almost as long as it took the Church to acknowledge its mistake)...this video, complete with an Annie Leonard-soundalike narrator, was shown during the first part of a two-part presentation on climate change and fracking at a local parish last night:

The climate change presenter stated baldly, "There is no debate about global warming. The only questions are how fast is the climate changing and how severe will that change be."

That's a complete lie.  Of course there's continuing debate, most especially since November 2009 when the "Climategate" scandal broke, and to suggest otherwise—or to state baldly, as in this instance—is disingenuous (and as someone on another blog observed recently "Disingenuous is a fancy word for lying.").  Many of us out here amongst the great unwashed know this:

And for an alternate, specifically Catholic point of view on the global warming hysteria (although the folks last night didn't seem to think that there is or ought to be an alternate view amongst Catholics);

And to back up the assertions in the video above, links to more than 150 files containing documents, John Holdren's Powerpoint presentation at Woods Hole in 2006, tax returns for organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club, videos, charts, etc., may be found here.  The hard evidence to support a differing viewpoint on "climate change" and a different interpretation of the motives driving environmentalists certainly exists.

As for the fracking part of the presentation?  Well, we've blogged about the differing opinions on that topic before. Last night's presenter, in a "disingenuous" attempt to appear to be fair and balanced, did mention that an alternate interpretation of fracking had been published by a couple of faculty members at Penn State—but then sneeringly remarked that their work had been funded by the gas industry.  That of course, is way, way different from the work produced by pure-as-the-driven-snow Cornell professors on fracking—whose study was funded by the leftist Park Foundation.  Just sayin'.

And like manna from heaven, into my lap just fell this from Investor's Business Daily (via South of 5 and 20):

...The safety mantra was raised once again last Thursday when Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the appointment of a seven-member panel to study hydraulic fracturing, commonly referred to as "fracking," and come up with new safety standards that address concerns raised by environmentalists.

....We believe the safety issue is a cover for the Obama administration's ideologically driven animus toward fossil fuels and its deliberate campaign to raise energy prices — and thereby to make its favored "green" alternatives look more competitive and attractive.

But there are never any ulterior motives as far as the "global warming," anti-fracking crowd is concerned. Everything is always for our own—and Gaia's—good. We're just too thick to see it.

Oh, yeah...and Galileo?

In March 2008 the head of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Nicola Cabibbo, announced a plan to honour Galileo by erecting a statue of him inside the Vatican walls. In December of the same year, during events to mark the 400th anniversary of Galileo's earliest telescopic observations, Pope Benedict XVI praised his contributions to astronomy. A month later, however, the head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, Gianfranco Ravasi, revealed that the plan to erect a statue of Galileo in the grounds of the Vatican had been suspended.


This post is an excellent piece. It is a significantly better presentation than the one on Monday night that inspired it. In addition, it is refreshing to see and hear a presentation that is trying to persuade you, rather than a propaganda piece that is attempting to bully you into believing a certain way. What offends me the most about Monday night's presentation, is the use of church teaching to bully the observer into accepting a political agenda, put forth in large part by atheists and communists.

<blockquote> <p> <em>What offends me the most about Monday night&#39;s presentation, is the use of church teaching to bully the observer into accepting a political agenda, put forth in large part by atheists and communists.</em></p> </blockquote> <p> Touch&eacute;!</p>