We are still studying “Pope” Francis’ anti-Catholic
encyclical and will soon present our view of the evil document. Before then,
here is an interesting piece by Maike Hickson and John-Henry Westen:
Who’s that one-world climate guru
who helped present the pope’s encyclical at the Vatican?
by
Maike Hickson and John-Henry Westen
Prof. John Schellnhuber |
On Wednesday the Vatican announced
that Pope Francis
has appointed controversial German Professor John
Schellnhuber as an ordinary member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
Schellnhuber was one of the
four presenters of the new encyclical on the environment, Laudato
Si’, on Thursday. He is also scheduled to chair a session of a Pontifical
Academy for Sciences educational workshop on “Children and
Sustainable Development” set for November.
Schellnhuber is the founding
Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Chair
of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU). He is considered one of
the world’s leading climate scientists, and one of the strongest advocates of
the theory that the earth is undergoing catastrophic global warming. Perhaps
most famously, he is the father of
the “two-degree” tipping point – namely, the idea that if the earth warmed up
by two degrees beyond what temperatures were at the beginning of
industrialization, in the words of German Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen,
"life on our planet, as we know it today, would no longer be
possible."
According to the New York
Times, in 2009 he told a conference that if the earth’s
temperature rose by around five degrees Celsius, the human population would be,
in the words of the reporter, “devastated.” “In a very cynical way, it’s a
triumph for science because at last we have stabilized something –- namely the
estimates for the carrying capacity of the planet, namely below 1 billion
people,” he is reported to have said at the time.
Although these comments have been
widely misinterpreted to indicate that he believes the current capacity of the
Earth is one billion people, in context he is referring to the capacity should
the temperature rise five degrees Celsius. Referring to the possibility of a
drop in the Earth’s carrying capacity, he himself said, according to the New
York Times article, “I think we can do much, much better.” His estimate of the
current carrying capacity of the earth is unknown.
Schellnhuber is also known for his
advocacy of a one-world government. In order to avoid his catastrophic
predictions for unchecked climate change, Schellnhuber proposes the need for
indispensable forms of world governance – or in his own words, a “global democratic
society” – to be organized within the framework of the United Nations.
Schellnhuber says in his 2013 article “Expanding the Democracy Universe” that
“global democracy might be organized around three core activities, namely (i)
an Earth Constitution; (ii) a Global Council; and (iii) a Planetary Court.” He
then described these three activities as follows:
“... 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.”
In his 1988 study “Geocybernetics:
Controlling a Complex Dynamical System Under Uncertainty,” Schellnhuber said
countries should relinquish “a good deal of national sovereignty” in favour of
“powerful supra-national institutions.” He wrote:
"While the borders of nation states
have become almost irrelevant to global economic players (for instance) after
the end of the Cold War, human and natural rights are still confined and
dominated by thousands of frontiers. This situation can only be overcome by
giving up a good deal of national sovereignty and establishing a true regime of
global governance. As a prerequisite, the rather symbolic parts and pieces of
the UN system must be transformed into powerful supra-national institutions:
allons corriger le futur!”
Schellnhuber is also a full member
of the Club of Rome, a think-tank that describes itself as "a group
of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity."
While the organization currently
tackles a variety of issues, it continues to do so following the trajectory
laid during its foundational event in 1968 in Rome, at which it started an
international campaign to reduce the world's population. It claimed that at the
time the world's carrying capacity to hold the ever-growing population was
already at its limit. The book-length report, Limits of Growth,
which was written for the Club of Rome in 1972, was one of the starting points
for the worldwide attempt to reduce the population by aggressive methods of
promoting birth control and the killing of pre-born children. As recently as
2009, the Club of Rome has
reaffirmed that "the global issues which were the
focus of the 1972 Report, ‘Limits to Growth’ are even more severe and urgent
today."
Schellnhuber has been a prominent
counselor to the European Union and to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. He is
co-chairman of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU).
In a May 2014 interview with the
musician Pierre Baigorry, Schellnhuber claimed that sometimes politicians have
to take citizens to task “with coercion” to overcome their own resistance to
change. In that same interview he hoped that President Obama would take the
necessary steps to do so. “We need a kind of 'Climate Gandhi,'” Schellnhuber
said.
He is also well known for his June
19, 2012 interview with Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, where he suggested
politicians need to take their lead on climate change from scientists like
himself. “The role of climate science remains to slam the problem-facts on the
table and to identify options for appropriate solutions,” he said. “The role of
politics is then to mobilize the will of the citizens with the aim of
implementing decisions that are based on science.”
Schellnhuber has little patience
for those who do not accept his scientific theories and conclusions. “I have
made a tiring process of learning. […] After a while [of these tiring exchanges
about the scientific matter], I realized in each single case that the man – it
was never a woman – was driven by a nearly religious zeal,” he told the German
internet portal Zeit online on October 11, 2007. “At the end of the debate, we
were turning in circles, and I did not get through with the cool scientific
rationality. That is similar to people who do not accept Darwin's evolution
theory: 'This theory cannot and may not be true!' Such people you cannot at all
convince with the help of the insights of biology.”
Source: LifeSiteNews.
No comments:
Post a Comment