The Green Faith

A substitute for Christianity

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP). Greta Thunberg’s great-grandfather turns out to be the inventor of the greenhouse effect and population reduction through eugenics.https://blogfactory.co.uk/2020/04/21/greta-thunbergs-great-grandfather-turns-out-to-be-the-inventor-of-the-greenhouse-effect-and-population-reduction-through-eugenics/

======

This is the article. https://hobart.catholic.org.au/2022/05/10/exposing-the-modern-green-religion/

The short piece on the article -Archbishop accused of promoting climate change denier’s views on anniversary of Pope’s landmark letter

By Loretta Lohberger

Tasmania’s Archbishop has been accused of promoting the views of a climate change denier at the same time the global church is marking the seventh anniversary of Pope Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si: On care for our common home.

Key points:

• The official publication of the Catholic Church in Tasmania has published an article quoting a climate change denier

• The article appeared at the same time the church globally was marking the seventh anniversary of Pope Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si: on care for our common home

• Concerned Catholics Tasmania said the article had caused widespread concern among the faithful

The May edition of the Catholic Standard included an article titled Exposing the ‘modern green religion’, a report of a speech given by geologist Professor Ian Plimer in Hobart at the invitation of the Christopher Dawson Centre, a think tank established by Archbishop Julian Porteous.

In the article, Catherine Sheehan, the Archdiocese of Hobart’s communications coordinator, wrote: “Professor Ian Plimer has written his most recent book on what he believes is a worrying trend in the debate of the science of climate change.

“He argues that the movement claiming human activity is responsible for global warming has been transformed into a ‘modern green religion’ filling the void left by the decline of traditional Christianity in first-world Western countries.

“For 25 years Professor Plimer has been asking fellow scientists to provide even one study that clearly shows human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing global warming. To date, he maintains no such proof has been offered.”

=====

Idolatry is not new in the world. Nor is greed. Christianity was new once but swiftly blended with the existing power structure. And this continues today with the current Christian sects. Quite interestingly, Communism and the Green movement are closely connected. One year after Chernobyl, Mikhail Gorbachev announced the creation of “Green Cross International”, an organization whose president he is still today. It is fighting for the worldwide adoption of the “Earth Charter”, a document drafted in close cooperation with the Rockefellers. Torsten Mann shows in his new book that the real aim of this charter is promoting world communism under the new “global sustainable community” label. https://xyu.livejournal.com/785408.html

Rudolph Bahro, former chief ideologist for the DDR called his Autobiography “From Red to Green.” Vaclav Klaus, the first president of the Czech Republic after the end of the Soviet dictatorship, warned that “Celebrating the end of communism is inappropriate. It is creeping back in different forms under different flags and slogans.”8 He continues, “As someone who lived under communism for most of my life, I feel obliged to say that the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity at the beginning of the 21st Century, is not communism or its various softer versions. It was replaced by ambitious environmentalism.”9. https://www.tfp.org/green-is-the-new-red-the-metamorphosis-of-communism/#easy-footnote-bottom-7-59376

https://climatism.wordpress.com/2019/05/15/draconian-climate-change-policy-back-to-the-medieval-green-world/. Greens dream of a zero-emissions world without coal, oil and natural gas. They need to think what they wish for.

First there would be no mass production of steel without coke from coking coal to remove oxygen from iron ore. People could cut trees in forests for charcoal to produce pig iron and crude steels, but forests would soon be exhausted. Coal saved the forests from this fate.

But here is Bill Gates: (the website article is long, and interesting and Gates is near the end) https://thecontemplativeobserver.wordpress.com/category/communisation-of-europe/

“[…] But, as we make it [i.e. energy] cheaper – and let’s say, let’s go forward making it twice as cheap -, we need to meet a new constraint. And that constraint has to do with CO². CO² is warming the planet. And, the equation on CO² is actually a very straightforward one: if you sum up the CO² that gets emitted, that leads to a temperature increase. And that temperature increase leads to some very negative effects: the effects on the weather, perhaps first the indirect effects, and the natural eco-systems can’t adjust to these rapid changes, and so you get eco-system collapses. Now, the exact amount of how you map from a certain increase of CO² to what temperature will be and where the positive feed-back starts, there’s some uncertainty there, but not very much. And there is certainly uncertainty about how bad these effects will be, but they will be extremely bad. I asked the top scientists on this several times: ‘Do we really have to get down to near zero? Can’t we just, you know, cut it in half or a quarter?’ And the answer is that until we get near to zero, the temperature will continue to rise. And so that’s, that’s a big challenge. It’s very different than saying, in a word, a 12-foot-high truck train to get under a 10-foot bridge, and we can just sort of squeeze under. This is something that has to get to zero. Now we put out a lot of carbon dioxide every year, over 26 billion tons. For each American, it’s about 20 tons; for people in poor countries, it’s less than one ton. It’s an average of about 5 tons for everyone on the planet. And somehow we have to make changes that will bring that down to zero. It’s been constantly going up, it’s only various economic changes that have even flattened it at all. So we have to go from rapidly rising to falling and falling all the way to zero. This equation [CO² = P x S x E x C] has four factors, a little bit of a multiplication: so you’ve got the thing on the left, CO², that you wanna get to zero, and that’s gonna be based on the number of people [P], the services each person uses on average [S], the energy on average for each service [E], and the CO² being put out per unit of energy [C]. So let’s look at each one of these and see how we can get this down to zero [laughing cynically] as probably one of these numbers [i.e. either people, or amount of services per person, or energy input per service, or CO² release per unit of energy] is gonna have to get pretty near to zero [heavy Satanic laughter from the audience showing this elite gathering understands well that what is planned is depopulation], that’s a fact from High School algebra, but let’s take a look: first, we’ve got population. The world today [as of 2010] has 6.8 billion people, that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now, if we do a really great job, on new vaccines, health-care, reproductive health services [so, you see, they’re counting heavily also on abortions!], we could lower THAT [he speaks of people!!!] by perhaps 10 or 15%. But there we see an increase of about 1.3 [billion in world population]. The second factor is the services we use. This encompasses everything: the food we eat, clothing, TV, heating [it’s obvious: they have in mind a system like in communist Romania under Ceausescu, where people, in the most critical years, couldn’t ‘heat’ their apartments more than, if at all, 10 or 12° Celsius; that’s what they want to do to us – it’s sick, it’s completely unnecessary, but it’s nevertheless real!]; these are very good things [with a devilish smirk on his face]: getting rid of poverty means providing these services to almost everyone on the planet, and it’s a great thing for this number to go up [which in reality they do not have in mind at all, not for industrial countries, not for Third-World countries; they simply want to use their ‘redistribution’ scheme as one further element in bringing down the West]. In the rich world, perhaps the top 1 billion, we probably could cut back and use less, but every year this number on average is going to go up, and so overall that will more than double the services delivered per person. [Commenting on a photograph projected on a screen supposedly depicting young men in Guinea, Africa, sitting at night in the street under public street lamps, reading:] Here we have a very basic service: do you have lighting in your house to be able to read your homework? And in fact these kids don’t, so they’re going out and read their school work under the street lamps. Now, efficiency, ‘E’, the energy for each service. Here, finally, we have some good news: we have something that’s not going up, through various inventions and new ways of doing lighting, through different types of cars, different ways of building buildings; there are a lot of services where you can bring the energy for that service down quite substantially, some individual services even bring it down by 90%. There are other services like how we make fertilizers, how we do our transport, where the rooms for improvement are far, far less. And so overall here, if we’re optimistic, we may get a reduction of a factor of 3 to perhaps a factor of 6. But for these three factors [grinning], now we ‘ve got from 26 billion to, at best, maybe 13 billion tons, and that just won’t cut it. So let’s look at the fourth factor: Now, this is going to be a key one [cynical laughter from the audience – after all, all this is about the West’s economic self-destruction]: and this is gonna be the amount of CO² put out for each unit of energy. And so the question is: Can you actually get that to zero? [He is talking of an economy that releases ZERO CO²!!!] If you burn coal, no. If you burn natural gas, no. Almost every way we make electricity today – except for the emerging renewables and nuclear – puts out CO². And so what we’re going to have to do at a global scale [China and Russia will never participate in this, but will solely watch as the West is being brought down] is create a new system. And so we need energy miracles. [Does he allude to Tesla technology?] And when I use the term ‘miracle’, I don’t mean something that’s impossible. [One should correct: miracles properly so called belong to the spiritual sphere, not to the sphere of technological invention; materialists and materialist megalomaniacs however can’t help seeing inventions as ‘miracles’, as that’s the only type of ‘miracle’ this godless folk is willing to recognise.]  You know, the micro-processor is a ‘miracle’, the personal computer is a ‘miracle’, the internet, net services are a ‘miracle’. So, the people here are participated in the creation of many ‘miracles’. Usually we don’t have a deadline, or you have to get the miracle by a certain date; usually you just stand by, and some come along and some don’t. THIS is a case where we actually have to drive at full speed and get a miracle in a pretty tight time line. […]”