Pope Francis proves intelligence and morality not required for Papal Edicts


Pope Francis sells his soul to the climate change hucksters – calls on all people to give up their wealth, prosperity, and their lives to “save the planet.”

There is a prophecy that says Pope Francis will be the last Pope of the Catholic Church.  It is not clear why, whether he will betray the faith or if some outside agency, like Moslems nuking Vatican City during the next Papal Conclave of the College of Cardinals will.  But the first man elevated to Pope to be born in the Americas has proven to be a leftist agent with his validations and outright endorsements of the worst evils in the world today;

  • Islam
  • Socialism
  • Climate change fraud

These ideologies are as anti-Christian and anti-American as is possible to be.  Islam calls for conquering, enslaving, and oppressing all the world in the name of Allah making any claim of being a religion of peace bogus on its face.  Socialism requires a tyrannical government of ruling elites who dictate and determine who will prosper, while making all their subjects equal in the worst possible ways.  And man-made climate change is the fraud by which American leftists defraud the gullible into voluntarily surrendering their wealth and power.

Rich people don’t go to Heaven

Jesus never said you must live in poverty to be a Christian!  Yet this is exactly what Pope Francis advocated in his climate change encyclical – that everyone give away all their wealth and live in poverty.  This advocating of socialism is the very antithesis of Christianity.  Poor people have never been known to help others outside of being physically present to lend a hand, and socialist dictators never helped any populace because they are more intent on gathering wealth for themselves than benefiting others.  Socialism is never for the benefit of the people, but is the contract of kings who live as nobles while the populace lives as peasants, and only the gentry that serve the nobles prosper by their good will.

Pope Francis Encyclical calls for poverty and spending to fight climate change

In contrast, many rich American Christians have benefited billions of people throughout the world in the form of creating businesses with high paying jobs, producing products that make people’s lives better, plus investing in hospitals, schools, libraries, medical research, infrastructure, missionaries, and charities.  These things are not built by governments, but by motivated businessmen.  By example of the Right vs. Left, Gov. Mitt Romney devotes over 20% of his income to charitable causes, as well as conducting a business that benefits many other businesses, whereas Barack Obama gives less than 2% of his taxpayer provided salary and none of his other personal wealth to charity, and has instituted policies giving taxpayer wealth to his cronies who fail at business.

This is par for the course for leftists who believe in hoarding wealth for themselves – the very thing that the Left always accuses the Right of doing.  Poverty never ennobled anyone or rendered aid to others.  Most of the lower class is comprised of the most greedy, envious kinds of people who are willing to steal from others because they lack the skills to earn for themselves.  America is the first nation in history to make it possible for people to rise up out of poverty to form a Middle Class and advance their culture and society to previously unknown heights, even to rise to the top of the Upper Class like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Sam Walton.

What Jesus taught about wealth

When Jesus said a rich man must give away all his earthly possessions to follow Him, He was not saying rich men must be impoverished before the Christ would be their Savior.  He was speaking to one man who wanted to be a Disciple, but was unwilling to give up his worldly goods to preach the Gospel of Christ.  Likewise, when Jesus said, “It is as difficult for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven,” He was not saying it is not possible for rich people to go to Heaven.

Listening to non-Christians tell Christians how to interpret what Jesus said is like listening to students tell a CEO how to run a business, or listening to civilians tell soldiers how to fight a war, or listening to liberals who don’t understand science tell conservatives who do know science about how climate change works.  Jesus never advocated for poverty, and He certainly never said mankind is a virus killing the Earth and should kill themselves off!  People of the anti-Christian Left are the last people on Earth to whom a Christian should listen, especially if they are elevated to a station like the papacy.  Francis is not the first Pope to promote anti-Christian ideologies, but he may be the last.

{Author’s note: If Pope Francis wants to tell leftists who believe in socialism and man-made global warming that they are the ones who should devote all of their wealth to saving the planet from this fraud, I have no problem with that.  It’s when they demand that our wealth be confiscated to do so and not be givers themselves but takers, which is always their policy.  Leftists believe in the fantasy that socialism is Utopia and ignore the reality of history in which socialism is tyranny, and man-made global warming is the fraud by which they part money from fools.}

Climate change deniers vs. Chicken Littles

Reforming Islam is as absurd as reforming Christianity

Related articles;

Faith in God kills

Americanism vs. Socialism

Other articles;

Morality in humanity

A litany of liberal lies about Bush and other Republicans

(Please like and share this with your friends.  Let them know the truth.  To subscribe click on “follow” and respond to the email WordPress sends you.)

About dustyk103

This site is my opinion only and is unpaid. I am a retired Paramedic/Firefighter with 25 years of service in the City of Dallas Fire Dept. I have a B.A. degree in Journalism, and A.A. degrees in Military Science and History. I have spent my life studying military history, world history, American history, science, current events, and politics making me a qualified PhD, Senior Fellow of the Limbaugh Institute, and tenured Professor for Advanced Conservative Studies. 😄 It is my hope that readers can gain some knowledge and wisdom from my articles.
This entry was posted in Climate Change, Religion and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Pope Francis proves intelligence and morality not required for Papal Edicts

  1. radman414 says:

    It’s not a good sign for the church when the “Vicar of Christ” essentially says that man, and not God, is in control.

    Liked by 1 person

    • radman414 says:

      The myth of global warming is a $22 billion/year hoax…and the facts are amazingly simple: CO2 is a “trace gas” in air, insignificant by definition. It absorbs 1/7th as much IR, heat energy, from sunlight as water vapor which has 188 times as many molecules that capture 1200 times as much heat making 99.8% of all “global warming.” CO2 does only 0.2% of it. For this we should destroy our economy?

      Liked by 1 person

  2. dustyk103 says:


    Bassy Kims of Yesteryear Dusty Koellhoffer • 2 hours ago
    You write that as if socialism is a bad thing, Koellhoffer.

    You return any of that big, fat, firefighter’s pension of yours yet? We’re sick of our tax dollars supporting you. It’s socialism.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer Bassy Kims of Yesteryear • 2 minutes ago
    You question my knowledge of socialism as if you believe the fairy tale that socialism is all about being “good and fair.” History has proven socialism to be anything but. As for the rest of your accusations;

    #1 tax dollars do not pay my pension. Dallas police and fire have a private pension not controlled by the city or they already would have raided it like Democrats raided Social Security. 20% of our salaries went into that pension fund, so asking me to return what I have earned is just typical Democrat thievery.

    #2 The history of socialism, like Islam, is written in blood. The only people that want it are greedy, petty, envious little creatures who would rather steal from those who work than do the work to earn it.

    If you believe rich people should give their money to others then why don’t you demand the rich Democrats in government, or rich liberals in Hollywood, or the rich cronies to whom Democrats give tax dollars and make tax loopholes for give their money to others?

    The answer is because you and your ilk are self-righteous, hypocritical thieves and liars.

    Why do you write this kind of stupidity here rather than in the article? The answer to that is because you didn’t read the article and are trying to dissuade others from getting an education because liberalism is all about keeping people ignorant about the truth of socialism.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 2 hours ago
    How is the Pope espousing the socialism you decry?

    Is he a greedy, petty, envious little creature who wants to steal from you?

    You confuse the history of socialism with the history of communist revolutions, and bring in your hatred of Islam, which is not germane to the topic.

    And you also don’t address your idiotic idea that climate change is a “fraud.” It does not seem as if you take research scientists very seriously. Or maybe you take them as seriously as you took your own science education.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • in a few seconds
    He is espousing socialism by declaring that everyone should be equally poor, but has no problem living in grand opulence himself. I don’t confuse socialism with anything as communism, fascism, Nazism, and Islamism are all children of the same ideology of elitist rule of the masses. As for the “science” that CO2 causes global warming, answer the question of how a heavier than air gas creates a “greenhouse bubble” above the stratosphere. It’s a fraud perpetrated on dupes who are ignorant of basic science.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 11 minutes ago
    YOU are obviously ignorant of basic science, since the greenhouse properties of CO2 have been known for over 150 years.

    YOU are very confused about socialism.

    “communism, fascism, Nazism, and Islamism” are all children of the same ideology of elitist rule of the masses.”

    Apparently you do not know what “elitist rule” is, or that Nazism and fascism are examples of right-wing extremism. Nazism and fascism are examples of rule of the masses by unaccountable, private, often corporate elites. By contrast, communism and Islamism are both examples of anti-elite populism, but very different and unrelated to each other.
    Islamism is theocracy. Communism is rooted in an economic system, and of the four examples is the only one that is a product of left-extremism.

    Essentially, you are saying, “I can reject anything I don’t like as being all the same and I have no responsibility to sort out distinctions, so please don’t ask me to define anything so that I know what I am talking about.”

    YOU are the dupe, and quite ignorant in every respect.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • in a few seconds
    “greenhouse properties of CO2 have been known for over 150 years.”

    That’s a blatant lie.

    “Apparently you do not know what “elitist rule” is, or that Nazism and fascism are examples of right-wing extremism.”

    That is also a blatant lie based on leftist paradigms that falsely attempt to portray the Right as espousing the same kind of totalitarianism as espoused by the Left.

    I don’t have to accept your definitions of anything and only debate according to your rules, especially when your point of view is so wrong. Essentially what I say is that I do not accept any leftist paradigm, I will sort things out according to what they are, and separate them by distinctions on which they are based, not by what leftists want people to believe.

    No one is fooling me about the basis of leftist ideology, so you’re attempt to label me an ignorant dupe is just attempts to deceive the ignorant of which I am not one. I know leftists far too well and easily expose the lies you tell.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 9 hours ago
    Don’t get mad at me because you don’t know anything about the composition of the earth’s atmosphere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

    Also, if you had ever read a history of the Weimar Republic or the Nazi era, you would be familiar with the fact that the Nazis identified themselves as right-wing, their predecessor parties were right wing, and their successor parties were right wing. To the extent they had any popular support, it was through their grass-roots opposition to the left, communism in particular.

    It’s really humorous that you think you can “easily expose lies” when you are the one who is in possession of a completely delusional view of the world.
    1 • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • in a few seconds
    There is no difference between Nazis and Communists except their economic model. Believing themselves to be the ideological opposite of Communists was their own fallacy and only works in the leftist paradigm. A leftist group thinking itself to be rightwing is as self-deluding as people who think the TEA Party is the new KKK.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 10 hours ago
    “no difference between Nazis and Communists except their economic model.”

    Uh, the economic model is kind of the point. That is the main distinguishing feature between left and right.

    Yes, the economic model was fundamentally different. So was the societal structure.
    In the traditional definitions of political left and right that go back to the time of the French Revolution, the two main areas of difference were the economic and social structures. The right was monarchist and authoritarian, and later deferred to business; the left was populist and democratic, and later sought to regulate business. Fascism is right extremism; Communism is left extremism.

    “Believing themselves to be the ideological opposite of Communists was their own fallacy.”
    NO. They WERE the opposite of communists.
    “only works in the leftist paradigm.” That doesn’t make any sense. These are historically well-established categories, not part of some “leftist paradigm.”
    The Nazis never were leftist, and always were defined as right-wing. You’d know that if you’d ever read any mainstream historical accounts of 20th century Europe.

    I didn’t bring up either the KKK or the Tea Party. They really don’t have anything to do with each other.

    Did you not ever study history in college–or did you not go to college?
    1 • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • a few seconds ago
    The construct of a paradigm in which both extremes are evil while the center is good does not work rationally. Just because that’s their opinion doesn’t mean it has to be mine. It’s like saying that people must balance their degrees of evil to achieve good.

    Something is either good or evil. In the case of political ideologies there is either liberty or slavery, and all totalitarian governments whether monarchical, despotic, Communist, Nazi, fascist, Islamist, or any other in which a ruling elite lords power over the masses is slavery to the state.

    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 9 minutes ago
    It isn’t a “construct of a paradigm.” It is how politics has worked for over two centuries.

    Extremism is evil, I will grant you, because it leads to terrorism and, if in power, totalitarianism. But just because any political viewpoint can be taken to extremes, that doesn’t mean they are all the same. That’s just intellectual laziness.

    Neither conservatism nor liberalism is evil; surely you can grant that.

    I refer you to Andy_Kreiss’s comment below.
    • Reply•Share ›
    classical*music*lover classical*music*lover • 10 hours ago
    edited for a typo.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Andy_Kreiss classical*music*lover • 8 hours ago
    I was just talking about this the other day with another poster, bilbodies, the strange take the right wing, binary brain has on left and right relating to economic systems.

    If a totalitarian government labels themselves communist or socialist, despite not resembling these systems in any way, the right will try to connect them to 21st century liberals in the United States.

    At the same time, they’ll try to pretend that right wing fascists, who seem to have the same enemies lists, loves and hates, as American Republicans, are somehow close to liberals.

    I guess they just start with the “liberal=bad/conservative=good” foundation, put everything into a left/right box, in the most simplistic way, and stop thinking. Dusty seems to be a prime candidate for the cult, enthusiastically and ideologically opposed to thinking.
    1 • Reply•Share ›
    xpatYankeeCurmudgeon classical*music*lover • 9 hours ago
    “Nazism and fascism are examples of rule of the masses by unaccountable, private, often corporate elites.”

    Ignorance on parade.
    • Reply•Share ›

    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • an hour ago
    All paradigms are models constructed by someone to express their opinion. I believe those that have the same kinds of people on the extremes are wrong.

    As for liberalism and conservatism it depends on which definition of liberalism/conservatism you use. The 21st century definition of these is not the same as the 19th century definitions.

    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 2 hours ago
    You write in your linked blog piece that the “three worst evils in the world today” are Islam, socialism, and “climate change fraud.”
    Yet you provide no documentation, certainly not for why climate change is a “fraud,” or why accepting the science is evil. Because, you realize, the implication of calling the overwhelming opinion of scientists the world over both fraud and evil is tantamount to saying that scientists are both lying and evil. Question: do you harbor similar doubts about the theory of evolution? (in my experience the two topics sometimes go hand in hand).

    In your other comments here below, where you flatly deny basic atmospheric physics by claiming that calling CO2 a greenhouse gas is a lie, you show yourself to be science-illiterate. Your own blog posts on the topic keep repeating opinions but offer no serious engagement with or rebuttal to the science itself. You even cite Ted Cruz as an authority.

    I looked at some of your other blog posts. Do they conform with Tea Party and libertarian ideology? Yes. Are any of them backed up with sources and documentation? No. They are just opinions, and not very well argued ones. You clearly have touched a chord with your conservative admirers. But, I call shenanigans. You have some ground to make up before anybody but true Tea Party/libertarian believers will regard you as anything but historically illiterate either.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • a few seconds ago
    “Yet you provide no documentation, certainly not for why climate change is a “fraud,” or why accepting the science is evil.”

    First of all, I did not say science is evil, that’s just stupid.

    If you want documentation then you must read every article I have written, follow every link I provide, and follow every link provided in them. The information you expect me to include in a single comment of a post is absurd.

    A single fact that destroys the global warming narrative is that CO2 is heavier than air and does not accumulate above the stratosphere. There are no scientific facts that the Left uses that disproves simple physics.

    I find it laughable that you call me intellectually lazy when I have written over five hundred articles investigating facts behind frauds presented by leftist ideologues. It’s even more dishonest of you when you expect me to impart the knowledge and wisdom of sixty years in a single comment.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • an hour ago
    1. I agree that extremists are wrong, and that they tend toward extreme authoritarianism and totalitarianism. The key question, if your goal is to thwart extremism, is to understand what they are extremists ABOUT. Anything else is simple-minded nonsense and partisan self-righteousness.
    2. While I agree that concepts of liberalism and conservatism have changed over time, they have not changed as much as you think they have. Your “21st century” defintions of liberal and conservative are ludicrous and unhistorical, merely self-serving.

    You also have a propensity for citing yourself as an authority. In fact, your argumentation is entirely circular. There are very few external, far less authoritative sources cited on your blog.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • a few seconds ago
    and that is just your opinion.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 18 hours ago
    “A single fact that destroys the global warming narrative is that CO2 is heavier than air and does not accumulate above the stratosphere.”

    That’s ridiculous, and ignorant.

    The place where CO2 accumulates and acts as a greenhouse gas is the troposphere, which is also where most clouds form. When scientists refer to the greenhouse effect, they are referring to the troposphere. The stratosphere is very dry has very little water vapor. Saying that CO2 is “heavier than air” is a rather ridiculous thing to say, since it is part of the atmosphere.

    As to your “over five hundred articles,” none of the ones that i found linked with the topic of climate change refer to any science whatsoever. They just reference each other and the words of some politicians insisting it is a fraud. No.Science. At.All. Not even any named scientists. Just conspiracy theories.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • in a few seconds
    In five hundred articles it gets redundant, and as I said, I can’t link and say everything in every article. You want to find the science you call ridiculous and ignorant, keep digging.

    For the truth of it, people don’t listen to the science, just as you don’t when you make the dishonest claim that the greenhouse effect takes place in the troposphere just because CO2 molecules are mixed in the lower atmosphere. People need to hear the truth, that this is just a political fraud to scam them of their money to “save the planet.” If you were going to make an honest argument and debate, you would have posted your comments in the article instead of here to dissuade people from reading and learning the truth.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 7 minutes ago
    Stating that CO2 is a greenhouse gas in the troposphere is not dishonest. It’s basic atmospheric science.

    It is you who are being ignorant and, as a result, dishonest.
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • in a few seconds
    It’s a lie proven by every picture ever published about the greenhouse effect.


    I’m done with your B.S. and all the liars who post in links to deter others from learning the truth. From now on I will only debate people in the article and denigrate the liars who will not. You and your ilk are just wasting my time.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 23 minutes ago
    And, once again, you cite your own blog as authority.
    That’s borderline solipsism.

    I’m sorry that you are so far gone in your ideology that you can’t read graphs properly and have bought into an incompetent grasp of science.
    • Reply•Share ›

    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • 25 minutes ago
    “this is just a political fraud to scam.”
    That’s idiotic. Scientists have been researching the climate for generations; they publish their findings in peer-reviewed journals; they go on site to hot spots in climate change and report their observations; they constantly seek to improve the accuracy of their working concept of how the earth’s climate works.

    And, no, I am not interested in drumming up traffic on your circular-reasoning vanity blog. You offer a lot of conservative red meat and opinion there, but actually very little reasoned, evidenced-based argument on your website. I clicked through about 10 of your articles on climate change without encountering a single named scientist or specific published climate observation. It’s easy to pretend that climate change is a scam if you never engage the science in the first place. Tell me: is your conviction that climate change is a political fraud based on your politics or religion?–because it certainly isn’t based on an intellectually-serious engagement with the science.
    • Reply•Share ›


  3. Arthur W. DiMatteo says:

    Oh no not a prophecy! Now I’m really worried.

    If you know so much about science and history, why resort to such ridiculous religious mumbo-jumbo? I have a prophecy of my own: no thinking person will ever be convinced by this.


    • dustyk103 says:


      It is not “mumbo-jumbo” when it is a part of the history of the Catholic Church. As for my own prophecy; more and more people will see through the Left’s frauds of global warming and socialist ideology.


      • Arthur W. DiMatteo says:

        Dude do you even read the stuff you link to?

        The department chair at Boston College said that mumbo-jumbo has “about as much reliability as the morning horoscope.” The professor at Georgetown, a Jesuit, says: “St. Malachy’s prophecy is nonsense.”


        • dustyk103 says:

          Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Just because they believe the opposite of what I do does not mean I either have to believe as they do or condemn them for it. We just agree to disagree as neither can be proven correct. The scientific facts about global warming being caused or even influenced by man to a degree to make a difference to the planetary climate, contrary to beliefs of faith, are easily proven to be false.


  4. dustyk103 says:

    {Author’s note: It’s a shame that people are so myopic they always want to post comments against an article being read rather than debate on the article.}


    Dr. Skull Dusty Koellhoffer • 2 days ago
    How is the Pontiff’s plans not in keeping with Jesus’ teachings, the teachings of the major religions, or plain human decency?
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer Dr. Skull • 10 hours ago
    For starters you should pay attention to how the Pontiff lives and how he tells others to live.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›
    classical*music*lover Dusty Koellhoffer • an hour ago
    So, because the Pope is treated as the Pope he is unqualified to comment on how people who are not the Pope live their lives>?

    Then why the heck is he the Pope?
    • Reply•Share ›
    Dusty Koellhoffer classical*music*lover • a few seconds ago
    Why is a king the king? Why is a CEO the CEO? Why is the socialist committee chairman the chairman? Why condemn one overlord who lives like royalty over the masses and not all?
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›

    Dusty Koellhoffer • a few seconds ago
    It is such a shame that such a good question should go to waste in a link to a comment to deter people from reading the article rather than being debated within the article.
    • Edit• Reply•Share ›


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.