Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

‘ STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES’

By

That’s what Forrest Gump said his Mama always told him.

Exhibit # 1 : Rick Santorum — GOP presidential wannabe.  On a Monday radio interview the ‘sweater vest’ candidate warned Pope Francis to ‘leave science to the scientists’ after it was announced that the Catholic Church was going to release an encyclical letter on the environment June 16 — its strongest statement to date on the moral dimensions of the issue.

Only problem is — Francis WAS a scientist before he became a priest.  He got a Masters Degree in Chemistry from the University of Buenos Aires.  OOPS !

That’s OK, Rick.  You and the rest of your ‘clown show’ Republicans keep denying what 97 % of actively publishing climate scientists are warning us — that climate warming is due to human activity.

November 2016 can’t come soon enough.  And that’s a fact !

Fred Rich LaRiccia

Founder, P.O.W.A.R. ( Progressives Organizing Wakefield to Advocate for Reform )

 

 

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. The Pope apparently does not have a masters degree in Chemistry, more like an Argentine equivalent of an associates degree, part of his training to be a pharmacist that he gave up pursuing to be a priest. That said, he clearly has more scientific training than Rick Santorum, and even if we ‘left it to the scientists’ nearly all of them would tell him climate change is the gravest threat to our planet today. The encyclical drops June 18th and I can’t wait to read it!

  2. Thanks for the correction, James. In yesterday’s National Catholic Reporter, James Reece cited numerous press reports incorrectly claiming Pope Francis had a Masters Degree in chemistry. He writes : ‘It is true that Pope Francis studied chemistry and worked as a chemist prior to entering the seminary. But Jorge Bergoglio never graduated from university prior to entering seminary.’

    I stand corrected and apologize for the confusion.

    Fred Rich LaRiccia

    P.S. It still doesn’t change my view that when the Pope addresses the environment he will do so with wisdom, integrity and moral force.

    • Wisdom? Because he has a “titulo” from pharmacist school? At best we are talking about a guy with a “certificate from a community college.” Please Fred, for the love of god, The pope may have “wisdom” with all things church-ish but the environment he does not.

      In the Argentine system, “the título (same word used for a secondary diploma or a university degree) was earned at about age 19 after an extended secondary program,” Liebscher said. “Not everyone who goes to secondary school gets one of those diplomas, and the título really represents something beyond our high-school diploma, something akin a certificate from a community college in the U.S.”

      http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/does-pope-francis-have-masters-degree-chemistry

      I wouldn’t even trust the pope to do my taxes.

      • Not to put too fine a point on it, global warming is real, and according to a recently released study, any research to the contrary is riddled with errors (at best).

        To establish context, the abstract is quoted in full below:

        Monckton of Brenchley et al. (Sci Bull 60:122–135, 2015) (hereafter called M15) use a simple energy balance model to estimate climate response. They select parameters for this model based on semantic arguments, leading to different results from those obtained in physics-based studies. M15 did not validate their model against observations, but instead created synthetic test data based on subjective assumptions. We show that M15 systematically underestimate warming: since 1990, most years were warmer than their modelled upper limit. During 2000–2010, RMS error and bias are approximately 150 % and 350 % larger than for the CMIP5 median, using either the Berkeley Earth or Cowtan and Way surface temperature data. We show that this poor performance can be explained by a logical flaw in the parameter selection and that selected parameters contradict observational estimates. M15 also conclude that climate has a near-instantaneous response to forcing, implying no net energy imbalance for the Earth. This contributes to their low estimates of future warming and is falsified by Argo float measurements that show continued ocean heating and therefore a sustained energy imbalance. M15’s estimates of climate response and future global warming are not consistent with measurements and so cannot be considered credible.

        On the broader issue of the Catholic Church and science, in this case evolution:

        Catholics have nothing to fear from science’s honest inquiries, honestly explained. On the contrary, every new discovery is a source of wonder and a reason for giving praise to God. Of the Creator, we can say with St. Paul, ” … from the foundations of the world, men have caught sight of His invisible nature, His eternal power and His divinity, as they are known through His creatures” (Rom 1,20).

        • Thanks for the hot tip, but I already knew global warming was real.

          For what it’s worth paul I get it. Fred has been around here longer than me so I have to kiss his bum bum and agree with everything he says. When the pope speaks of the environment he apparently does so with “wisdom” because ya know he has a certificate of completion from Pharmacy school … they just don’t give those certificates out to just any 19 year olds you know.

          • Is it that Santorum is right that the Pope isn’t a scientist and thus can’t speak about climate change (even though somehow Santorum and other non-scientist Republicans consistently claim they know better than 97% of scientists?), or is it simply to mock the Pope for not having a MA degree in science?

            I would wager he still has more credentials regarding chemistry than a baker, unless knowing which extract to use in a cake recipe counts as chemistry. I would also wager his views hold sway over 1/6 of the human population and a majority of the American Congress which adheres to his faith. He is a moral authority, whether you are or aren’t Catholic, just as the Dali Llama is whether you are or aren’t Buddhist. Both are making ending climate change signature issues for the faiths they lead, as are other faith leaders from evangelicals like Jim Wallis to Anglican’s like Justin Welby to secular humanist philosophers like EO Wilson and we should encourage and not mock faith embracing reason and the scientific consensus on this issue.

            • “when the Pope addresses the environment he will do so with wisdom” is complete bull shit! That’s my point.

            • …while the Pope being a scientist would have made Santorum’s comment hilarious, the real point is do people who claim not to be scientists (which definitely includes yours truly) have the wisdom and humility to listen to those who are.

        • “Catholics have nothing to fear from science’s honest inquiries, honestly explained. On the contrary, every new discovery is a source of wonder and a reason for giving praise to God.”

          There was a time when the church would torture and kill you if you didn’t believe god created the sea and the fish and the birds in 6 days. That bull shit you quoted is the churches reaction to in your face fact that directly contradicts their teachings. To continue with their story of creation in 2015 would be a joke, and that’s why they needed the above spin to continue their ponzy scheme.

          • Do you think climate change is a threat or not? It’s a yes or no answer. The Catholic church has had a shaky relationship with science in the past and certainly in the present, but even if it is opposed to modern understandings of sexuality it is certainly an ally against global poverty, immigration reform, and climate change. These priorities were there before Francis even, but definitely those are the three public priorities of his papacy, along with cleaning up the corruption in the Curia.

            Was the church incorrect on science in the past? Absolutely, every modern pope and Catholic figure has apologized for the blemishes. As a human institution it is fallible, utterly so as anyone growing up in the church in Boston can tell you. But on this issue, the Church is aligning itself with the scientific and moral consensus against continued inaction and indifference to climate change. Anyone concerned with that issue, regardless of their religious affiliation, should welcome such an ally.

            • That is why I said “Thanks for the hot tip, but I already knew global warming was real.” See?

              The author of this terrible, and poorly researched article tried to pass the Pope off as a man with a “Master’s Degree in Chemistry” – please. The man has a certificate from a 2 year pharmacy school, my god man? He’s the guy that stands up and blames any random snow storm on Climate Change … While the flat earthers laugh and point out that he was a pharmacy school dropout … which he is.

              Please I’ll trust the pope’s “wisdom” when it comes to blessing holy water, but not climate science.

              • The point is, he is more of a scientist than Santorum, even if Santorum’s original point was wrong to begin with. Jeesh.

                • if we had to rate the men on Fred’s bull shit meter the pope comes out as more scientist-ish

                  Good point! Really

                • FRLR in the past for his overenthusiastic embrace of some stuff I don’t like but to call his post a lie is way over the top. He believed he was reporting the truth and was simply mistaken. Calling it a lie is pretty gross.

                • He didn’t deliberately try to mislead anyone, and when he was corrected he admitted the error.

              • The man has a certificate from a 2 year pharmacy school, my god man? He’s the guy that stands up and blames any random snow storm on Climate Change

                You’re saying that the Pope does that? I’m going to need a source that quotes or shows him doing that.

                Oh, I almost forgot:

                LOL

Archives