| The Green religion |
| Thursday, 03 April 2008 | |
|
By Wlliam York
In 1517 Pope Leo X offered indulgences (where “the penance for sin [became] a commercial transaction instead of a genuine change of heart”) for those who gave alms for the rebuilding of St Peters in Rome. His most aggressive marketer in Germany was the Dominican Johann Tetzel who so annoyed Martin Luther that Tetzel’s actions were a major contributing factor to Luther writing the 95 theses and consequently the start of the Reformation. In our modern world we are assailed by a Green religion in the West with its belief in man-made climate change. We are told to cut our greenhouse gas emissions and live a different life. In addition we may trade our emissions individually or nationally. This may well be the start of carbon indulgences. What can we learn from an experience 500 years ago? Perhaps we should first identify the equivalent bodies. There is probably not an exact one-to-one correspondence. The Green religion has energised the public and politicians entirely through an often compliant media. Its origins are diffuse and might include sources ranging from the Gaia hypothesis to the deeply felt attachment of some Germans to the great forests of the Rhine that shielded the Germanic Tribes from the Roman Legions. The Apostles are the Non Governmental Organisations who have laboured for up to 50 years on this task. There have been a number of trial runs with Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb. The first eventually resulted in the banning of DDT for the control of mosquitoes and hence malaria. This has probably caused the death of tens of millions of people in Africa where the approved treatments of netting and insecticide-coated netting have proved to be 10 per cent to 50 per cent as effective. The Ehrlich inspired scare does not seem to have cost the community any long lasting loss except for Paul Ehrlich who needed to settle his lost bets with expensive bottles of wine. It is not clear whether there are 12 Apostolic NGO’s. Indeed some may have departed from what is best described as a “broad” church to seek more or less radical solutions. As Rome was at the centre in the 16th century debate so the present central organisation must be the United Nations and the IPCC. It is not clear whether there is a Pope but perhaps he is the Chairman of the IPCC, The College of Cardinals gathered about him are Government functionaries, Presidents of National Academies and the Heads of National Research Organisations. The Religious Orders are the academies, universities and research institutions where those skilled in their professions work for the benefit of the “church”. As in the 16th century, things tend to get out of hand when the religious orders have to deal with the public. The ideas of boiling seas and rising water levels conjure up the images that Hieronymous Bosch and Pieter Bruegel painted so vividly. So we see the spokespeople for the NGO’s paint equivalent catastrophic scenes with the intention of driving the public in the desired direction. Perhaps the most interesting parallel comes with the 16th century sale of Papal Indulgences as we start on carbon indulgences, where we can buy carbon “offsets” to assuage our consciences. The equivalent to Johann Tetzel would seem to be former Vice-President Al Gore who has not only represented his “church” very effectively but also made money from his representations. If Gore is the Tetzel of the Green Movement, who is the Martin Luther? The current best choice is Bjorn Lomberg. Their career paths are similar. Tetzel won his advanced degrees by arguing for the doctrine of indulgences against the views of Luther. When Luther replied, the Dominican Order felt itself attacked and responded. The Pope wanted to try Luther in Rome but Frederic the Wise of Saxony insisted that Luther be tried in Germany. The Pope ordered him to appear before his legate Cardinal, Thomas Cajetan, who was a member of the Dominican Order. There was no thought of a conflict of interest there. For Lomborg, the publication of The Skeptical Environmentalist may be seen as the equivalent of Luther’s 95 Theses. Lomborg was accused of scientific dishonesty. Environmental scientists made complaints against him to the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty, a body under Denmark's Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. The charges were that The Skeptical Environmentalist contained deliberately misleading data and flawed conclusions. On investigation the committee supported the complaints finding the following problems with Lomborg’s work:
But on appeal to the Ministry the findings were invalidated. Finally after some acrobatics no further action was taken. (As an interesting reversal, some of these criticisms of Lomborg have been levelled at the IPCC. The Hockey Stick temperature chart being the best known complaint.) The parallel with the interrogation of Martin Luther is fascinating. Luther’s enemies in Germany, the Papal courts and indeed Rome misjudged Luther. They would not yield anything to him so finally the break came. Like Rome, the IPCC has behaved with arrogance and refused to respond to many of its critics, in particular the economists. On examination its processes are not unlike the defensive position of the Church with Luther. Then and now there is a veritable maze of conflicted interests. So there was a benefit from Papal Indulgences, the rebuilding of the Basilica of St Peter’s. When will we have our Green Reformation and what will our generation have to show for its carbon indulgences? An opinion provided by OnlineOpinion.com.au - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate. Comments
(7)
written by
Graham Luxury-Yacht , April 03, 2008
"Like Rome, the IPCC has behaved with arrogance and refused to respond to many of its critics, in particular the economists."
Those bloody scientists, wasting their time investigating things and being media whores to pinky billionaires. Every time I turn on the tellie all I ever see is scientists, reading the news, explaining the world to us and trying to bloody educate us. I really am getting so sick of everything being controlled by people listening to scientists in their smarmy-warmy white lab coats being all clever and everything. The only fact that matters is the size of my bank account. (Oh, and your credit account, you need to buy stuff from me to be happy.) The latest insult to actually have the big-headed bespectacled hordes actually advising the IPCC is just the last straw. It should be patently obvious that the economists know so much more about the real world and even about that little grubby sub-specialty, science. Lets face it, if we didn't have constant growth, exploitation of cheap labour, resource stripping and the ability to promote rampant consumerism and continuous waste we wouldn't be in the fantastic and rosy picture we find ourselves in today. What has science ever done for us? Nothing. Just like the Romans. We really need to make a stand against the increasing scientific literacy and understanding. Close down CSIRO, ban PhD's, put the DDT back into Cool-Aid and get those dogmatic scientists making decent profits for the big end of town. What could ever be more important than the economy?
written by
Vivienne , April 08, 2008
The church has traditionally been sceptical about science, especially the areas of interface with Creation and our beginnings. However, mainstream churches have failed in their theology by ignoring the natural world, being fearful of the consequences of ruling out God! No wonder we have "green" environmentalism, a form of spirituality, because Christians have failed to honour Creation and have preferred "dominance" and ownership of the planet rather than stewardship and humility. A lot of the anthropocentric attitudes to non-human creatures, and the enslavement of animals, has been reinforced by the church's arrogant attitudes. Souls are lives, and breath, and it is not just given to humans.
written by
John M Reid , April 08, 2008
To all those who deride Professor Ehrlich and his predictions, I suggest you download a copy of the WWF/Global Footprint Network/London Zoological Society Living Planet Report 2006 (www.panda.org, the 2008 report should be published shortly), and, perhaps my paper, "Overpopulation–the stone guest at the table" Google John M Reid, then, as Judith Wright once remarked, "Stand up anyone who cannot do arithmetic".
written by
Penta , April 13, 2008
It is history that derides "Professor" Ehrlich. It has a nasty habit of defying his holocaustic aspirations.
written by
Rick Shea , May 01, 2008
Malthus and Ehrlich were just a bit ahead of their time.
It's amazing how short a span of time we consider to be "long term." "Long term trends" in the stock market, and "long term economic trends" are an amazingly short blink of an eye when stacked up against the long history of this planet. Yet we smugly assume that our brief experience during our brief span is some sort of eternal truth. And Ehrlich and many others do not have "holocaustic aspirations." In fact, theirs is the humanitarian message of hope that humans actually can use their eyes and their moderately large brains to prevent some of the many disaster we seem to be edging toward -- Peak Oil, peak soil, total collapse of fish stocks, water shortages, species extinctions, and a host of other issues are in the news daily now, and only an arrogant speciescentrist would deny that they are real threats that are near to becoming more.
written by
Damir Ibrisimovic , May 03, 2008
The threat of global warming is real, man induced or not. However, our envisioned carbon trading economies are in real danger of becoming an equivalent to papal indulgences.
Without proper carbon accounting and related legislations we already have profiteering without real reductions in CO2 emissions. And here, UN and our politicians lag behind. We also need a chain of new professions, like carbon accountant, and I haven’t heard that our educational institutions are working on this. There is plenty of work and I do not, unfortunately, see people rolling up their sleeves. This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
|




More importantly however, is that Bjorn's work was not published by the the scientific branch of Cambridge press and hence did not get refereed by people with relevant backgrounds. In short it avoided the peer review process that underlies the advancement of knowledge (in that case science).
Finally, having a go at he usual targets (DDT, population etc), simplifies reality and serves no purpose in broadening our societies general knowledge. For example, if DDT had been continued to be used in the way it was in the 50s' and 60's (i.e. wastefully) the insects would almost certainly be immune to it by now and therefore it would no longer be used. Also, the residue in the environment would be a lot higher.
A final note. The church was the big power in Europe in the 1500's and had close connections with the rich of Italy and Europe. Martin Luther was just a minor in the chain. In todays world, in which camp would Martin Luther sit?
(a) The big powerful and rich companies and their politically influential friends.
(b) The scientists who aren't really paid that much and must make their names through peer reviewed literature.
I think I know the answer.