Climate Change and The Great Delusion


First published December, 2015 on…



I received a letter this week (June 2017) from a man who worked for decades with large corporations as an agronomist and agricultural financial analyst. And then, he writes…

It was through that experience that I noticed that trends, policies, corporate training and management techniques were going in a curiously nonsensical direction. It was this movement away from common sense and reason that drove me to questioning and searching for truth, that led me much closer to God…

In one respect, I am not surprised by what is happening around us—the utter “eclipse of reason” with an accompanying intolerance—since I have felt called to prepare readers for this for decades. On the other hand, I am sometimes startled at the extent of the Death of Logic in our times. There is a real, tangible, and horrifying blindness today. It helps, then, to receive reminders from time to time of what is presently occurring.

I had a powerful dream a while ago of an enormous tsunami coming ashore. It was so real and forceful that I was really quite caught up in the literal imagery. It wasn’t until later that day that I remembered my writing The Spiritual Tsunami on the present and coming “strong delusion” that St. Paul warned about. Indeed, later that morning, I received an email from an acquaintance of mine, a priest who is a renowned and solid theologian. “As you know,” he wrote, “the apostasy (spirit of rebellion) of Paul’s prophecy in 2 Thess 2:3-8 is occurring. It is a matter of years before the lawless one is revealed.”



In previous writings (such as The Parallel Deception) since the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, I have shared with you a strong warning I received in prayer over the course of several weeks that we have “entered into dangerous days” and “times of great confusion.” But then, this is nothing new. Sr. Lucia of Fatima spoke of a coming “diabolical disorientation.” And Jesus said to Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta:

Now we have arrived at approximately the third two thousand years, and there will be a third renewal. This is the reason for the general confusion, which is nothing other than the preparation for the third renewal. If in the second renewal I manifested what my humanity did and suffered, and very little of what My divinity was accomplishing, now, in this third renewal, after the earth will be purged and a great part of the current generation destroyed… I will accomplish this renewal by manifesting what My divinity did within My humanity. —Diary XII, January 29th, 1919; from The Gift of Living in the Divine Will, Rev. Joseph Iannuzzi, footnote n. 406

Keeping in mind that “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”[1]cf. 2 Pet 3:8, the prophet Hosea wrote:

Come, let us return to the Lord, for it is he who has torn, but he will heal us; he has struck down, but he will bind our wounds. He will revive us after two days; on the third day he will raise us up, to live in his presence. (Hos 6:1-2)

This is all to say: do not panic or lose hope as you watch this confusion grow denser and spread wider. You need to have An Invincible Faith in Jesus. As this priest above said, I believe we are beginning to smell the first whiffs of that strong delusion St. Paul spoke of that is a direct result of The Hour of Lawlessness in which we are now living.

…the day of the Lord is [not] at hand… unless the apostasy comes first and the lawless one is revealed… Therefore, God is sending them a deceiving power so that they may believe the lie, that all who have not believed the truth but have approved wrongdoing may be condemned… because they have not accepted the love of truth so that they may be saved. (2 Thess 2:2-3, 11, 10)

We have to be aware—not afraid, but aware—of what is happening beyond the surface of certain events. Here, I will focus on just two: Pope Francis and “climate change.” Bear with me—you’ll see where this is going…



Among the most dangerous delusions at this moment, in my opinion, is the suspicion held by a growing number in the Church that the Holy Father is an anti-pope. This suspicion has only been fueled further by Pope Francis’ embrace of man-made “global warming”. From his recent encyclical:

…a number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity… The same mindset which stands in the way of making radical decisions to reverse the trend of global warming also stands in the way of achieving the goal of eliminating poverty.Laudato si’, n. 23, 175

Indeed, according to Reuters, Pope Francis went so far as to say recently that, unless something is done in Paris on global warming, the world will be “at the limits of suicide.”[2]cf. Reuters, Nov. 30th, 2015

There is, of course, such a thing as climate change. It has been happening since the earth was born. However, the question here is whether we are seeing “man-made global warming.” Since this is a matter of science, one does not have to agree with the Pope’s opinion on the subject, even if it appears in a papal encyclical. The reason is that the science is not within the mandate of the Church’s commission. While I am in full agreement with the Pope that Ettore Ferrari/Pool Photo via APmankind is doing irreversible damage to the planet (see The Great Poisoning), there are serious questions when it comes to embracing “global warming” as “settled.” In fact, I think “global warming” is a diabolical distraction from the real damage that is occurring to the planet through unsustainable farming practices and essentially “corporate terrorism” that puts profits before the planet. And yet, we don’t hear a peep from world leaders on these real crises. Yes, follow the money-trail, and you’ll know why. 

Now, I want to note that Francis is not the first Pope to comment on controversial scientific subjects. St. John Paul II also warned about “ozone depletion” in a World Day of Peace message:

The gradual depletion of the ozone layer and the related “greenhouse effect”has now reached crisis proportions as a consequence of industrial growth, massive urban concentrations and vastly increased energy needs. Industrial waste, the burning of fossil fuels, unrestricted deforestation, the use of certain types of herbicides, coolants and propellants: all of these are known to harm the atmosphere and environment… While in some cases the damage already done may well be irreversible, in many other cases it can still be halted. It is necessary, however, that the entire human community—individuals, States and international bodies—take seriously the responsibility that is theirs. —January 1st, 1990;

While that “crisis” seems to have been averted, it is disputed to this day whether or not it was a natural cycle (observed long before now-banned “CFC’s”’s used as a refrigerant were even used), or a scheme to make professional environmentalists and chemical companies rich.

But the point is this: both Francis and John Paul II have rightly identified that mankind is polluting our environment. [3]see The Great Poisoning This is the real environmental crisis: what we are dumping into our oceans and fresh water; what we are spraying on our plants and soil; what we are releasing into the atmosphere over our cities; what chemicals we are adding to foods; what we are injecting into our bodies; how we are manipulating genes, etc.

The violence present in our hearts, wounded by sin, is also reflected in the symptoms of sickness evident in the soil, in the water, in the air and in all forms of life. —POPE FRANCIS, Laudato si’, n. 2

But apparently, “man-made global warming”—not this poisoning, not Islamic terrorism, crippling national debt, a “third world war” or cyber attacks—has emerged as the “greatest threat to future generations,” according to former President Obama. [4]; Jan. 20th, 2015

…as though Muslim terrorists are sitting around in Syria making nefarious plans to expend carbon, cursing the new Global Alliance Against Cow Farts. —Ben Shapiro, Nov. 30th, 2015;

Forget about such sarcasm. To even soberly question man-made global warming, to examine other opinions, or to explore opposing science immediately places one under the label of being a “denier” or “hater” (see The Reframers). As The Australian reports,[5]cf. there is a “Call for delegates with contrarian opinions to be ejected from the UN talks.” Is it just me, or is this the most unscientific approach you’ve ever heard of? The words of St. Paul come to mind:

…the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (2 Cor 3:17)

Let that be the first clue that there is perhaps another spirit operating at this hour. And so, let’s leave behind the Holy Father for a moment and look at “the greatest threat to future generations.”



I spent eight years in television journalism; I was awarded Canadian documentary of the Year for a medium-sized market.[6]cf. watch What in the World is Going On? I say this because I have always striven then, and now, to be objective; to carefully examine claims and evidence, whether religious or secular. Which is why the unfettered embrace of “man-made” global warming, without any room for dissent, is disturbing. The reason is that the history and science behind this hypothesis is both questionable and dark. But first, the science…

We are told that it is settled—that “99.5 percent of scientists and 99 percent of world leaders” are in consensus that global warming is man-made.[7]President Barack Obama, Dec. 2nd, 2015, And yet, climate change scientists were caught red-handed fudging data in the infamous “Climategate” scandal that was quickly swept under the carpet.[8]cf. “Climategate, the sequel: How we are STILL being tricked with flawed data on global warming”; The Telegraph Furthermore, as the U.S. Chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology noted recently in The Washington Times, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is deliberately leaving out crucial satellite data from its climate projections.

Atmospheric satellite data, considered by many to be the most objective, has clearly showed no warming for the past two decades. This fact is well documented, but has been embarrassing for an administration determined to push through costly environmental regulations. —Lamar Smith, The Washington Times, Nov. 26th, 2015

Update (Feb. 4th, 2017): Now, ‘astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data [NOAA] rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.’ [9], February 4th, 2017; caution: tabloid And this from Dr. John Bates, who was the principal scientist of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. [10]Read his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology: Why? Why would scientists and politicians fudge data or adopt a dictatorial position on man-made climate change? A surprising answer came from no less than the co-founder of Greenpeace, a radical environmentalist group.

Climate change has become a powerful political force for many reasons. First, it is universal; we are told everything on Earth is threatened. Second, it invokes the two most powerful human motivators: fear and guilt… Third, there is a powerful convergence of interests among key elites that support the climate “narrative.” Environmentalists spread fear and raise donations; politicians appear to be saving the Earth from doom; the media has a field day with sensation and conflict; science institutions raise billions in grants, create whole new departments, and stoke a feeding frenzy of scary scenarios; business wants to look green, and get huge public subsidies for projects that would otherwise be economic losers, such as wind farms and solar arrays. Fourth, the Left sees climate change as a perfect means to redistribute wealth from industrial countries to the developing world and the UN bureaucracy. —Dr. Patrick Moore, P.h.d., co-founder of Greenpeace; “Why I am a Climate Change Skeptic”, March 20th, 2015;

In a new documentary called the “Climate Hustle”, thirty renowned scientists and climate experts have stepped forward to challenge the oft fraudulent claims and unscientific approach to climate change. In fact, several well-respected scientists, studying the long-term and enigmatic cycles of the solar sun, are suggesting that the earth could be headed into a period of global-cooling, if not a mini-ice age.[11]cf. “Sun’s bizarre activity may trigger another ice age”, July 12th, 2013; The Irish Times; see also The Daily Caller But that science is mostly being ignored. For one, there is no money to be made on “global cooling.” And as of late 2017, a new study from satellite data shows no acceleration in global warming for the past 23 years. [12]cf. The Daily Caller, Nov. 29th, 2017

Update: NOAA has been caught cooking the books again, fudging the data of extreme cold temperatures that swept through North America in 2017-2018: “NOAA has adjusted past temperatures to look colder than they were and recent temperatures to look warmer than they were.”[13]cf.



So why are some world leaders so eager to implement greater restrictions, “carbon taxes” and other controls on nations? Another answer may lie in the darker roots of the environmentalist movement. For instance, the Club of Rome, a global think-tank, has admitted to inventing “global warming” as an impetus to reduce the population of the world.

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself. —Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider. The First Global Revolution, p. 75, 1993

The most effective personal climate change strategy is limiting the number of children one has. The most effective national and global climate change strategy is limiting the size of the population. —A Population-Based Climate Strategy, May 7, 2007, Optimum Population Trust

Sustainable development basically says there are too many people on the planet, that we must reduce the population. —Joan Veon, UN expert, 1992 UN World Summit on Sustainable Development

This mindset was embraced by the late Maurice Strong, considered the father and “St. Paul”[14] of the global environmentalist movement. Population control was part of his ideology. After his death on November 28th, 2015, the UN 

environmental agency stated: “Strong will forever be remembered for placing the environment on the international agenda and at the heart of development.”[15]cf., Dec. 2nd, 2015 The words “development” or “sustainable development” are known to essentially be code words for the dismantling of free markets and reduction of populations and their growth. The United Nations has been exposed before in its use of broad and vague terms such as this. For example, “reproductive health” is essentially the progressive code word for “access to abortion” and “birth control”.

The push for population control or “demographic transition”, as well as global governance, was aggressively advanced by Strong in Agenda 21, a rather disturbing 40 page document with Marxist underpinnings. And now Agenda 30, using similar language, is the new goal set before the United Nations. Journalist Lianne Laurence has written an excellent but chilling summary of Strong’s legacy that we are reaping today: see her article here.

Strong is not alone, however, in the admission that the “global warming” narrative carries ulterior ideological goals. In 1988, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, Christine Stewart, told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”[16]quoted by Terence Corcoran, “Global Warming: The Real Agenda,” Financial Post, December 26th, 1998; from the Calgary Herald, December, 14, 1998 And by this is meant the complete re-ordering of the world economy. The Chief Climate Change official of the United Nations, Christine Figueres, said recently:

This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years—since the industrial revolution. —November 30th, 2015;

U.S. Senator, Timothy Wirth, then representing the Clinton-Gore administration as U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs argued: “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”[17]cited in The National Review, August 12th, 2014; quoted in The National Journal, August 13th, 1988

And in 1996, echoing The Club of Rome, former Soviet Union President, Mikhail Gorbachev, emphasized the importance of using climate alarmism to advance socialist Marxist objectives: “The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order.”[18]Quoted in ‘A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind’, by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p.5; cf. Speaking at the 2000 UN Conference on Climate Change in the Hague, former President Jacques Chirac of France explained that, “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance, one that should find a place within the World Environmental Organization which France and the European Union would like to see established.” [19]

Of course, the immediate response of many ill-informed Christians and secular analysts has been to say, “Well, the Pope is calling for a new economic order as well!” But as I explained in The Parallel Deception, what the Catholic Church means by this and what the globalists mean are two very different things. The Catholic Church, in her social doctrines, has consistently urged the principal of “subsidiarity”, which puts the human person at the center of economic growth without caving in to the greed of unfettered capitalism (what Francis calls “the dung of the devil”) nor the inhuman ideologies of Marxism.

Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the body social, and never destroy and absorb them.Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, “IV. The Principal of Subsidiarity”, n. 186, p. 81

Hence, Pope Francis has rightly and consistently condemned “ideological colonization”, including the attempt to subvert national sovereignty.

No actual or established power has the right to deprive peoples of the full exercise of their sovereignty. Whenever they do so, we see the rise of new forms of colonialism which seriously prejudice the possibility of peace and justice. —POPE FRANCIS, World Meeting of Popular Movements, Bolivia; July 10th, 2015; Reuters



Thus, it is admittedly troubling to see the terms “global warming” and “sustainable development” in Pope Francis’ encyclical, Laudato si’—as much as one would be surprised to see the words “reproductive health” printed in Humanae Vitae. As St. Paul warns, “what fellowship does light have with darkness?”[20]2 Cor 6:14

Regarding the encyclical, Australian Cardinal Pell says:

Its got many, many interesting elements. There are parts of it which are beautiful. But the Church has no particular expertise in science… the Church has got no mandate from the Lord to pronounce on scientific matters. We believe in the autonomy of science. —Religious News Service, July 17th, 2015;

I have vigorously defended Pope Francis’ pontificate for the reason that he is the validly elected Vicar of Christ and successor to Peter.[21]cf. Papalotry? While calling us out of our apathy, comfort-zones, and self-satisfaction, he has not changed one letter of the deposit of faith, nor can he. But that does not mean that he cannot misstep in matters outside of “faith and morals” or sin like the rest of us. And thus, the Holy Father is not immune to criticism:

Now, apart from faith (doctrine contained in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, and articulated by the Magisterium) and morals (what is “good” over what is “bad”), the Pope may remain tacit or not choose to emphasize this or that issue pertaining to ethics (what is “right” over what is “wrong”), and this, sometimes on account of socio-political motives. Now, in answer to the question of whether one may be critical of the Pope in the arena of ethics, so long as one, in being critical of his advice, never loses sight of the fact that he is the Vicar of Christ on earth who possesses the charism of infallibility on matters ex cathedra pertaining to faith and morals, and whose non ex cathedra teachings on faith and morals are to be respected, it remains one’s prerogative to be so. —Rev. Joseph Iannuzzi, Theologian, from “Can one be critical of the Pope?”; see PDF

But the question I have—and we should all have—is since it is a fact that many parts of Laudato si’ were not written by the Pope but by scientific experts and other theologians, how much of the Pope’s opinion on the matter is informed by his advisors? Has he simply taken as fact what those, whom he has presumed are of good will, have told him is infallible science?

Reading various news websites and forums, it is clear that many Catholics think that the Pope controls and is aware of absolutely every aspect of the Vatican Secretariat and Curia—the respective political and religious governing bodies of the Vatican. Not only is this absurd, but it is impossible. The number of departments and personnel means that the Holy Father must rely on the advice and co-operation of the Cardinals and staff who work with him. And as we’ve seen time and again, particularly in Benedict XVI’s reign, those assistants cannot always be trusted (and I haven’t even said anything yet about the credible allegations that Freemasonry and Communists have infiltrated the Vatican.)

The claims against Pope Francis, made by not a few “conservative” Catholics and subtly propagated in some Catholic news outlets, boils down to this: because they rightly perceive the general confusion in the Church, they wrongly conclude that the Pope is, therefore, expressly complicit. This is a judgment. It is so for the very reason that we do not know his heart, nor what his advisors have told him, nor what he fully knows about what is going on around him in secular affairs. In fact, it is my personal opinion that the Holy Father is not as tuned into current affairs as many presume, and here’s why.

He was once a night club bouncer, and after becoming a priest, preferred to spend most of his time among the anawim, the poor and needy. As a result, it is possible that Jorge Mario Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, is as simple in some ways as the fisherman he succeeds. At least, he seems to have suggested this himself. He speaks and reads very little English (and hence, his understanding of Western culture has to be very limited). He admitted that he does not use the internet or watch much television. He said he reads only one Italian newspaper and that he is not an expert on political or economic matters. And recently, it was stated that the Pope was completely unaware that his comment, “Who am I to judge?” had created such an uproar—which itself indicates how much the Holy Father follows the media that you and I read. And this may be more important than we realize, as the debate on “global warming” is mostly confined to the Western media.

This is all to say that Pope Francis, in his genuine concern for the real economic and resource imbalances in the world and the real damage we are doing to the environment, has accepted as scientific fact that which may not be. The irony is that, if climate scientists have their way, more poisons and heavy metals will likely be sprayed into the atmosphere through chem-trail weather modification in order to reflect sunlight back into space.[22]see The Great Poisoning; also cf. “The United Nations Admits Chem Trails are Real”, March 24th, 2015; your; “Massive US Senate Document On National And Global Weather Modification”; Given that the science of climate change has been wrought with controversy, fraud, misguided ethics and the fact that we know relatively little about long-term earth and solar cycles… it is surprising that the Vatican has even touched the topic at all. But then again, Pope Benedict’s words come to mind that the Church’s suffering often originates from within.

This was always common knowledge, but today we see it in truly terrifying form: the greatest persecution of the Church does not come from external enemies, but is born of sin within the Church. —POPE BENEDICT XVI, interview on flight to Lisbon, Portugal; LifeSiteNews, May 12th, 2010



We are living in a period of great confusion if not the first signs of that “strong delusion” that St. Paul warned would come. But he also concluded his discourse on the “lawless one” by giving the antidote to Antichrist’s deceptions:[23]cf. The Great Antidote

Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours. (2 Thess 2:13-15)

We have no mandate to pronounce definitively on scientific matters. Rather,

It is Jesus whom we proclaim, admonishing everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone perfect in Christ. (cf. Col 1:28)

We have 2000 years of Sacred Tradition that have remained intact, and will continue to long after Pope Francis and you and I are gone. Hold fast to it. Hold fast to Christ. And remain in communion with the Holy Father who has consistently upheld Sacred Tradition, despite what his detractors might say. As papal biographer William Doino Jr. points out:

Since being elevated to the Chair of St. Peter, Francis hasn’t flagged in his commitment to the faith. He has urged pro-lifers to ‘stay focused’ on preserving the right to life, championed the rights of the poor, rebuked gay lobbies who promote same-sex relations, urged fellow bishops to fight gay adoption, affirmed traditional marriage, closed the door on women priests, hailed Humanae Vitae, praised the Council of Trent and the hermeneutic of continuity, in connection with Vatican II, denounced the dictatorship of relativism…. highlighted the gravity of sin and the need for confession, warned against Satan and eternal damnation, condemned worldliness and ‘adolescent progressivism,’ defended the Sacred Deposit of Faith, and urged Christians to carry their crosses even to the point of martyrdom. These are not the words and acts of a secularizing Modernist.December 7th, 2015, First Things

Still, many are angered and disgusted that “images inspired of Mercy, of humanity, of the natural world, and of climate changes” were projected onto the facade of St. Peter’s at the start of the Jubilee Year of Mercy.[24]cf. ZENIT, December 4th, 2015 Nonetheless, the Holy Father’s forray into embracing a questionable science does not forfeit his papacy nor his role as chief shepherd to feed Christ’s flock. Rather, the consistent appeal of the Blessed Mother to “pray for your shepherds” takes on more urgency than ever. So, continue to trust that Jesus will guide the Barque of Peter through every storm, including this present Great Revolution, where powerful men are attempting to subvert the present order and bring all nations under their control.

So-called man-made “global warming” appears to be one of their tools—whether all of its advocates are aware of this or not.



The Great Poisoning

The Reframers

The Death of Logic – Part I

The Death of Logic – Part II


Thanks for your support.
Bless you, and thank you!


Click on the banner below to subscribe.
Your email will not be shared with anyone.

NowWord Banner


Print Friendly, PDF & Email


1 cf. 2 Pet 3:8
2 cf. Reuters, Nov. 30th, 2015
3 see The Great Poisoning
4; Jan. 20th, 2015
5 cf.
6 cf. watch What in the World is Going On?
7 President Barack Obama, Dec. 2nd, 2015,
8 cf. “Climategate, the sequel: How we are STILL being tricked with flawed data on global warming”; The Telegraph
9, February 4th, 2017; caution: tabloid
10 Read his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology:
11 cf. “Sun’s bizarre activity may trigger another ice age”, July 12th, 2013; The Irish Times; see also The Daily Caller
12 cf. The Daily Caller, Nov. 29th, 2017
13 cf.
15 cf., Dec. 2nd, 2015
16 quoted by Terence Corcoran, “Global Warming: The Real Agenda,” Financial Post, December 26th, 1998; from the Calgary Herald, December, 14, 1998
17 cited in The National Review, August 12th, 2014; quoted in The National Journal, August 13th, 1988
18 Quoted in ‘A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind’, by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p.5; cf.
20 2 Cor 6:14
21 cf. Papalotry?
22 see The Great Poisoning; also cf. “The United Nations Admits Chem Trails are Real”, March 24th, 2015; your; “Massive US Senate Document On National And Global Weather Modification”;
23 cf. The Great Antidote
24 cf. ZENIT, December 4th, 2015