The Globe “news” story on the front page found a way to turn the Pope’s visit into an anti-Bush global warming story; your headline claims, “Benedict may discuss warming…Stances have differed from those of Bush.” You quote an Archbishop: the Pope “will insist on the moral imperative that all, without exception, have a grave responsibility to protect the environment.”
This is a typical global warming alarmism tactic: accuse those who disagree with a political program to limit CO2 of not caring about the environment. No one has explained adequately how limiting a non-toxic gas essential for plant growth puts you on the side of helping the environment.
Furthermore, the Globe overlooks the many significant criticisms the Pope has expressed of global warming hysteria. His speech on December 12, 2007 “condemn[ed] climate change prophets of doom,” calling them “scaremongers.” The Daily Mail reported: “The 80-year-old Pope said the world needed to care for the environment but not to the point where the welfare of animals and plants was given a greater priority than that of mankind.”
Is the Pope’s stance on global warming really fundamentally at odds with that of President Bush?