One of my hopes and goals is that when RICO-style prosecutions begin, Climate Depot and Marc Morano are among the first to “go.” And by “go,” I mean to jail. And if Morano et al think for one nanosecond that they will be protected, or anyone will be watching their backs when the methane hits the fan, well, they are forgetting the scum they work for.
The Climate Depot website (run by Morano) has this shtick down pat. He does not, by the way, have an original thought in that matted. nasty-looking head of his. He does not come up with an original idea, notion, concept, plan, etc. He just regurgitates what he’s told to say. It’s primarily two things: he posts excerpts from articles that support his fossil fuel master’s needs (in other words, articles about their assertion that climate change is NOT happening), or he posts links to articles which he wants his nitwit followers to blindly descend upon and just cause trouble. I have been on the receiving end of the latter type of post. Whatever. Nutcases, start to finish. And last night, he posted a link to an article about the incredible 15 year old climate activist, Xiuhtezcatl Roske-Martinez (I have written about him before) which elicited all kinds of hateful and despicable comments because of Morano. Fully recognizing what was up, I added my two cents to the climate denier shills comments in defense of that sweet and inspiring kid.
Here is an example of how Morano and his website work. The headline from yesterday’s Climate Depot nonsense (keep in mind that he has millions of viewers per year):
THAT bunch of nonsense leads to a Breitbart site which totally and deceptively misleads the reader about an interview with Bishop Mario Toso who worked with Pope Francis on his encyclical about climate change.
When you click on the link to the article quoting Toso, it is ONLY in Italian. No translation. So guess what? They can say and interpret it in any way they choose. And they choose to scramble and mix up any and all information to the point that it does not even remotely resemble the facts. But also guess what? I’m Italian. So, if you click on the link to the Breitbart article and see how they’ve implied that the Vatican is backpedaling about its message regarding global warming, and you go to the Italian language link and figure out what Toso was actually saying, it’s entirely different.
So, Breitbart’s article states that the Pope’s ghostwriter “denied that Pope Francis had any intention of canonizing scientific theories regarding climate change, but only wished to assert his authority on the moral level.”
First of all, you can’t “canonize” a theory or thing. Canonizing is what you do to people who are to be considered, or recognized, as saints.
I translated the Toso interview. Breitbart clearly thought they were ordering off an a la carte menu transcribed by a chimp with a typewriter because they were just picking and choosing what to highlight and misquote. And why, you may wonder, does it even matter? Why have the right wing lunatics, fueled by petro dollars, been twisting themselves into pretzels for half a year at the prospect of Pope Francis’ encyclical? The answer is 1.2 billion. As in Catholics. The reason that Climate Depot, Heartland, Cato, every Republican Senator, and all the oil and gas corporations on Earth are tripping over themselves to discredit and malign the Pope is that 1.2 BILLION people inflamed at the notion that we are knowingly killing our planet is a nearly insurmountable challenge. I am not even kidding when I say that putting a hit out on the Pope is within the realm of possibility.
1.2 billion people. Try to name one other person ON EARTH that has that kind of following. I’ve tried to imagine who else that might be and I’ve got nothing.
Back to the Breitbart “interpretation” of what the Pope’s ghostwriter said…
Toso actually said that he did work on Pope Francis’ first draft of the encyclical, commenting that if the Pope Francis had merely wished to address the very serious problem of climate change vis a vis only the Catholic Church and Catholic followers, he would have left it the way that Toso first drafted it.
In the first draft, Toso states that the original encyclical had a long introduction and explanation of the climate crisis as viewed from a theological, liturgical, sacramental and spiritual perspective. Toso then says that significant changes were made after the initial draft (by Pope Francis) to not only speak to Catholics, but also to non-believers and people of every other faith, in order to put forth the most immediate, powerful and far reaching message possible. Indeed, the interviewer states that, compared to the methodology used in the Pacem in Terris of John XXIII who addressed his message to “all men of good will,” Pope Francis deliberately changed the intended recipients of his encyclical to “every person living on the planet.”
The interviewer asks Mario Toso about criticism coming out the United States that Pope Francis is determined to tell scientists what to do and what the scientific facts are, and how to proceed. Toso says that THAT was never the Pope’s intent. He says that Pope Francis understands that the issues involved in solving the climate crisis are complex and also involve social, cultural, anthropological and ethical issues. Toso says that the Pope believes that the solutions must be integrated in order to protect the natural environment to include not only humans, but also all animal and plant species. The path forward must include the “rejection of indiscriminate and unlimited use” of natural resources and must include a switch to renewable energy.
The way that Toso uses the term canonize is in a different context. In fact, Breitbart has chosen to use it so literally as to deliberately put it in the wrong context. Toso is saying that the Pope’s intention was not to usurp scientists’ work on environmental issues and climate change, and incorporate them into the Catholic Church’s canon, which, after being absorbed into the doctrine of the Catholic religion, would lead to the Vatican turning around and preaching to non-believers, scientists and scholars, about what they should do.
Toso says that Pope Francis felt it more appropriate to forcefully acknowledge the science, which Toso refers to as “irrefutable” and “incontrovertible” and then address the climate crisis from a moral perspective. Toso emphasizes that the Pope believes that the science is sound and settled. And he believes that the Catholic Church is better suited to build upon that science and address the problem from an anthropological and ethical standpoint.
All of that got translated into something along the lines of, “Hey, you Catholics, don’t worry if you don’t want to believe the Pope about climate change. It was just a suggestion.” Or some other such lie and nonsense. Which would be wrong on ALL counts. From interperation to intent. Come on, RICO. Hurry up already!