Before you say it, I know I'm giving him attention, too. Cardinal George Pell, the old fool, got lots of press for being a climate denialist, again. After a talk, he denounced the climate scientists for not being scientific, while he, the guy who believes angels and saints and great magic boojums in the sky, knew better because "'I spend a lot of time studying this stuff."
I suspect he's another graduate of Google University.
But Pell is irrelevant. The real question is, why do the newspapers cover his pronouncements in any serious way? The man is comic relief, nothing more.
More like this
In a piece ironically titled "Be prudent with climate claims" (behind The Australian's paywall, search for the title if you want to read it) George Pell declares that, unlike him,
"many politicians have never investigated the primary evidence."
Cardinal Pell's response to the Greg Ayers dissection of Pell's parroting of Plimer is telling -- he is unable to offer any sort of scientific argument and
Tim Stephens, who is Director of the Sydney Centre for International Law at the University of Sydney and also one of Cardinal Pell's parishioners writes in Eureka Street (published by the Australian Jesuits) about his effor
A vote to resolve the debt ceiling political crisis failed last night because House Republicans--who hold a majority in the House of Representatives--opposed the bill.