Tag Archives: Nobel Peace Prize

Are we there?

100 years ago today a saint was born… Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta on how to love God.


Catholic Climategate: Truth Vs. Falsehood


“We have, of course, the patron of the environment. I asked the children at school here, recently, I was talking the environment, and I asked, I checked the school, and asked, does anyone know who the patron saint of the environment is? A little girl put up her hand, a 12 year-old, she said, St. Al Gore…”    

Irish Archbishop Dermot Clifford   


  “Fear makes men believe the worst.”    

Quintus Curtius Rufus (fl. 100 AD, Roman Historian)   

  On 10 November 2009 Irish Bishops launched a pastoral reflection on climate change entitled ‘The Cry of the Earth’ [HERE]. The pastoral from the Irish Catholic Bishops Council calls for ‘ecological conversion’ of everyone and among other recommendations aimed at educating Catholics and inspiring local eco-action, prods their conversion through spiritual formation–inviting pastors to include the theme of care for God’s creation in homilies, prayers of the faithful, and even, examinations of conscience.  

At the launch of “Cry of the Earth” Archbishop Dermot Clifford was joined by other contributors to the pastoral including Professor John Sweeney. Prof Sweeney is a geographer attached to the Irish Climate Analysis and Research Units in the department of geography at NUI, Maynooth. He was a contributing author and review editor of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). With several hundred other climatologists, he shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore. Speaking during the launch, Professor Sweeney’s comments included the following statement:   

“Belief in global climate change is not a matter of faith. The evidence that the planet is undergoing rapid climate change is factual and beyond scientific dispute. In terms of causation, for almost all the world’s atmospheric scientists, the debate about the human contribution to climate change is now over.”   

Well, maybe not…   

10 days later, On November 20th, news flashed across the internet [Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’? ] reporting that hacked and/or leaked e-mails revealed concrete evidence that publicly funded climate scientists responsible for collecting, assessing, confirming, and informing the international community concerning real or perceived threats of Global Warming had, quote, “perverted their science in the service of social and political causes.”    

Early on into what is now being called the greatest scandal ever within the scientific community, one columnist reading from the e-mails went on to charge the prominent scientists with, quote: “Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims, and, perhaps, most troubling of all, communication between one another on how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process.”   

Catholic Green Schools    

Also present with Archbishop Clifford and Prof Sweeny at the Launch of “Cry of the Earth” was environmentalist  Fr. Sean McDonagh SSC, Author of  ‘A Green Cristology’ and many other eco-works, including the paper “Climate Change, The Response of Catholics”, which I read.  

In it, Fr. McDonaugh concludes that global warming will have, in the main, a negative impact on human kind and most other forms of life in the biosphere. He goes on to ask: 

 “So what steps should the Catholic Church take globally to deal with this reality that is poised to bring pain, suffering and death to millions of humans and other creatures?” 

  His response was, “The Churches should be in the forefront in tackling global warming at the moral level.”  

 “Scary stuff”, I thought to myself as I read along. And how much more so for Irish Catholic school children whose futures according to the “Cry of the Earth” pastoral, which Prof Sweeney helped author, consists in this terrifying scenario:  

  • Increasing heat waves, floods, storms, fire and droughts, causing death and displacement for hundreds of millions of people. Between 200 and 600 million people will experience extreme hunger.
  • By 2080 between 1.1 and 3.2 billion people will face water shortages.
  • Flood waters could make life difficult for between 2 and 7 million people in New York and Tokyo alone. The effect would be greater in cities such as Shanghai, Lagos, Rio de Janeiro or Manila.
  • A rise of 1 to 2 degrees Celsius could see the extinction of one third of the species of the world.
  • Glaciers retreating in the Himalayas will affect billions of people in Asia. This would create tens of millions of environmental refugees, who would be forced to leave their place because it is no longer habitable.

This last, glacier retreat in the Himalayas affecting billions, has come under recent attacks by sceptics because of speculative evidence offered up as truth and obstinately defended without apology by Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And just today, [HERE] Pachauri finds himself under increased pressure to resign after the head of Greenpeace called for him to step down. Indeed, a quick Google of Rejendra Pauchauri finds [HERE] the real possibility of personal financial conflict of interest with the position he holds as Chairman of the IPCC. 

All this will be flushed out in the end, of course, and is not the pure focus of this post. But, the situation in Ireland does cause wonderment here in America… 

If a non-Catholic member of the now highly suspect IPCC such as Prof Sweeney is invited to help author a Catholic pastoral in which compromised climate data was used as evidence to fortify doomsday scenarios, and thus scare Catholic populations into action, including our children, we must ask what many other international organizations and authorities are attempting to discover about the IPCC today, namely: 

Was this intentional manipulation? And if so, for what purpose(s)? 

There’s also this question that comes to mind — Who is educating Catholic bishops and school educators in America on the truth or falsehood of climate change science? 

After all, this is not just a simple push or reminder to use common sense as good stewards of the earth, but instead, as happens in Ireland, is an all-out effort directed toward the complete re-orientation of Catholic school systems in re-educating our children… As the following video from the Archdiocese of Chicago seems to reveal, ‘the greening of our children in defense of the climate and salvation of the planet appears to supercede the greater commission of defending the faith from error and saving souls for Christ…   

Let me know what you think on the subject…

Next Post: “Whose educating who in the greening of our schools?”

ED. NOTE: I’m not a scientist. If there are errors here I’ll gladly give way to truth if I’m in error…. But, will the IPCC?


FULL TEXT: Remarks by the President on Winning the Nobel Peace Prize

[picapp src=”b/3/a/1/President_Barack_Obama_b04e.jpg?adImageId=4973580&imageId=6760672″ width=”406″ height=”594″ /]


Rose Garden

11:16 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Good morning.  Well, this is not how I expected to wake up this morning.  After I received the news, Malia walked in and said, “Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo’s birthday!”  And then Sasha added, “Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up.”  So it’s good to have kids to keep things in perspective.

I am both surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee.  Let me be clear:  I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations. 

To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who’ve been honored by this prize — men and women who’ve inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

But I also know that this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women, and all Americans, want to build — a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents.  And I know that throughout history, the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it’s also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.  And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action — a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century.
These challenges can’t be met by any one leader or any one nation.  And that’s why my administration has worked to establish a new era of engagement in which all nations must take responsibility for the world we seek.  We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people.  And that’s why we’ve begun to take concrete steps to pursue a world without nuclear weapons, because all nations have the right to pursue peaceful nuclear power, but all nations have the responsibility to demonstrate their peaceful intentions.

We cannot accept the growing threat posed by climate change, which could forever damage the world that we pass on to our children — sowing conflict and famine; destroying coastlines and emptying cities.  And that’s why all nations must now accept their share of responsibility for transforming the way that we use energy.

We can’t allow the differences between peoples to define the way that we see one another, and that’s why we must pursue a new beginning among people of different faiths and races and religions; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect.

And we must all do our part to resolve those conflicts that have caused so much pain and hardship over so many years, and that effort must include an unwavering commitment that finally realizes that the rights of all Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security in nations of their own.

We can’t accept a world in which more people are denied opportunity and dignity that all people yearn for — the ability to get an education and make a decent living; the security that you won’t have to live in fear of disease or violence without hope for the future.

And even as we strive to seek a world in which conflicts are resolved peacefully and prosperity is widely shared, we have to confront the world as we know it today.  I am the Commander-in-Chief of a country that’s responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies.  I’m also aware that we are dealing with the impact of a global economic crisis that has left millions of Americans looking for work.  These are concerns that I confront every day on behalf of the American people. 

Some of the work confronting us will not be completed during my presidency.  Some, like the elimination of nuclear weapons, may not be completed in my lifetime.  But I know these challenges can be met so long as it’s recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.  This award is not simply about the efforts of my administration — it’s about the courageous efforts of people around the world. 

And that’s why this award must be shared with everyone who strives for justice and dignity — for the young woman who marches silently in the streets on behalf of her right to be heard even in the face of beatings and bullets; for the leader imprisoned in her own home because she refuses to abandon her commitment to democracy; for the soldier who sacrificed through tour after tour of duty on behalf of someone half a world away; and for all those men and women across the world who sacrifice their safety and their freedom and sometime their lives for the cause of peace. 

That has always been the cause of America.  That’s why the world has always looked to America.  And that’s why I believe America will continue to lead.

Thank you very much.

11:22 A.M. EDT

Obama Peace Prize — “We’ll…, he has won Iowa”

FLASHBACK January 2008:  With all Democratic precincts reporting, Obama had the support of 38 percent of voters, compared to 30 percent for John Edwards and 29 percent for Hillary Clinton. “The numbers tell us this was a debate between change and experience, and change won,” said CNN political analyst Bill Schneider.


[picapp src=”2/4/c/a/US_President_Obama_efde.JPG?adImageId=4937186&imageId=6735225″ width=”500″ height=”316″ /]

So, the possibility of change won again. And, at this point, I suppose, Cindy Sheehan would have rather had Hillary Clinton…

After the official announcement that President Barack Obama had won yet another “popularity prize” a reporter asked what Americans already know, 

“President Obama, despite all the good things he’s trying to do, with nuclear disarmament and the Middle East peace process, he has achieved nothing, nothing concrete as yet. What is the reason for giving him the prize, and is your committee risking the accusation of being a little political by giving this precious award to a U.S. President?”

The reporter had it right.  As did Saturday Night Live:

This weekend “Saturday Night Live” opened with Fred Armisen as President Obama, delivering an address from the Oval Office. Noting up front that he’d failed to secure the 2016 Olympic Games for Chicago, Armisen’s Obama said it was just further proof that his detractors’ fears are unfounded: How could he transform the country into something resembling the former Soviet Union or Nazi Germany when he’s failed to accomplish anything at all? “When you look at my record,” he said, “it’s very clear what I’ve done so far, and that is nothing.”

Two “Wingnut” conspiracy questions:

1. Who will be the first prominent American in either politics or the media to ask—“Was Afghanistan put on hold until after announcement of the Nobel Peace Prize?

Oh, don’t be too quick to call me mean and cynical! Notice who nominates:

Nominators include former laureates; current and former members of the committee and their staff; members of national governments and legislatures; university professors of law, theology, social sciences, history and philosophy; leaders of peace research and foreign affairs institutes; and members of international courts of law.

Which, leads me to my second wingnut question–

2. Did a certain Catholic university president, from an once prestigious Catholic University in the upper Midwest, (who honored the president with an honorary law degree this year), have any prior knowledge about the nomination of President Barack Obama for the Nobel Peace Prize?

Just asking.