<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font size="+2"><font face="Calibri"><i><b>October 5</b></i></font></font><font
size="+2" face="Calibri"><i><b>, 2023</b></i></font><font
face="Calibri"><i><br>
</i></font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><i>[ New religious exhortation from Pope
Francis ]</i></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b>‘Laudate Deum’: A brief guide for busy
readers </b> <br>
</font><font face="Calibri">LUKE COPPEN<br>
October 4, 2023 <i><br>
</i></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri"><i> </i> </font><font
face="Calibri">Writing in his new apostolic exhortation Laudate
Deum (“Praise God”), released on the Oct. 4 feast of St. Francis
of Assisi, the pope said the planet was approaching a “point of
no return” as global warming hurtled toward the maximum
recommended limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) higher
than the pre-industrial average.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “Even if we do not reach this point of no
return, it is certain that the consequences would be disastrous
and precipitous measures would have to be taken, at enormous
cost and with grave and intolerable economic and social
effects,” he wrote. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “Although the measures that we can take now
are costly, the cost will be all the more burdensome the longer
we wait.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> While that is the text’s headline message,
the document — a sequel to Francis’ 2015 encyclical Laudato si’
— contains much else besides. Here’s a brief guide for busy
readers...</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"><b> It’s short</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The first thing to note is that Laudate Deum
is strikingly short for a document in the Pope Francis era. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The exhortation clocks in at around 8,000
words, compared to the 40,000 words of Laudato si’ and the
60,000 words of the gargantuan 2016 apostolic exhortation Amoris
laetitia. It can be read comfortably in half an hour.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <b> Why ‘Praise God’?</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The document’s opening words — or “incipit”
in Latin — relate to St. Francis of Assisi, the patron saint of
ecology. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “‘Praise God for all his creatures,’”
Laudate Deum begins. “This was the message that St. Francis of
Assisi proclaimed by his life, his canticles and all his
actions.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> Unlike Laudato si’, which began with a
direct quotation from St. Francis’ “Canticle of the Creatures,”
Laudate Deum appears to start with a paraphrase seeking to
capture the spirit of the saint’s work.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> A Google search for the phrase “praise God
for all his creatures” brings up a Sept. 1, 2019, Angelus
address, in which Pope Francis said: “From today until Oct. 4,
the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi, it is a favorable time to
praise God for all his creatures and to assume responsibility
before the cry of the Earth.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> In a striking editorial choice, readers must
wait until Laudate Deum’s final paragraph for a direct
explanation of why the text is entitled “Praise God.” </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “‘Praise God’ is the title of this letter,”
Francis writes. “For when human beings claim to take God’s
place, they become their own worst enemies.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <b> Tackling skeptics</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> In Laudate Deum, Pope Francis goes into
battle with people who he believes downplay or deny outright the
severity of the threat posed by climate change. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> He devotes 10 paragraphs to rebutting common
objections, such as that the world has historically experienced
periods of cooling and warming, and that steps to protect the
environment will destroy jobs. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “I feel obliged to make these
clarifications, which may appear obvious, because of certain
dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions that I encounter,
even within the Catholic Church,” he notes.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “Yet we can no longer doubt that the reason
for the unusual rapidity of these dangerous changes is a fact
that cannot be concealed: the enormous novelties that have to do
with unchecked human intervention on nature in the past two
centuries.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri">A sense of urgency</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> There’s a notably urgent tone throughout
Laudate Deum. Eight years on from the publication of Laudato
si’, Francis believes that the world has largely failed to rise
to the challenges he outlined in the encyclical.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> He writes that “with the passage of time, I
have realized that our responses have not been adequate, while
the world in which we live is collapsing and may be nearing the
breaking point.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The “technocratic paradigm” that he deplored
in Laudato si’ has continued to wreak havoc. “Artificial
intelligence and the latest technological innovations start with
the notion of a human being with no limits, whose abilities and
possibilities can be infinitely expanded thanks to technology,”
he says. “In this way, the technocratic paradigm monstrously
feeds upon itself.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> Meanwhile, he believes that the
international consensus needed to combat climate change remains
weak. He offers a detailed critique of recent United Nations
climate change conferences, seeing them broadly as failures,
with the possible exception of the 2015 edition in Paris, which
produced an agreement that observers believe was influenced by
the publication of Laudato si’. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The pope looks ahead to the next conference,
which will be held Nov. 30-Dec. 12 in the United Arab Emirates.
He seems unenthusiastic about the venue, noting that the UAE is
“known as a great exporter of fossil fuels,” and oil and gas
companies are planning new projects in the country. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> But despite his sadness at the
ineffectiveness of global institutions, he insists that “to say
that there is nothing to hope for would be suicidal, for it
would mean exposing all humanity, especially the poorest, to the
worst impacts of climate change.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <b> Criticism of the U.S.</b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> Pope Francis cites a 2019 U.S. bishops’
document on climate change approvingly in Laudate Deum’s third
paragraph.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> But elsewhere, he suggests that the U.S. is
one the main culprits of the climate crisis.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> “If we consider that emissions per
individual in the United States are about two times greater than
those of individuals living in China, and about seven times
greater than the average of the poorest countries, we can state
that a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected
with the Western model would have a significant long-term
impact,” he writes.</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> <b> Footnote curiosities </b></font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> Laudate Deum’s footnotes consist largely of
references to other texts of the Francis pontificate,
principally Laudato si’. They also amply cite documents produced
by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The exhortation alludes to the 2008 book
“When Species Meet,” by the U.S. professor Donna Haraway, which
explores the notion of “companion species.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> But perhaps the quirkiest reference is to
the Russian writer Vladimir Solovyov’s apocalyptic “A Short
Story of the Anti-Christ.” </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The story, published in 1900, imagines the
emergence of an Antichrist who establishes himself as a global
authority and seeks dominion over Christians worldwide, but
faces heroic resistance from Church leaders and is ultimately
vanquished by Christ. </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> </font><br>
<font face="Calibri"> The pope doesn’t delve into the story’s plot
in Laudate Deum, but limits himself to quoting Solovyov’s
“ironic comment” about an “age which was so advanced as to be
actually the last one.”</font><br>
<font face="Calibri">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/laudate-deum-a-brief-guide-for-busy">https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/laudate-deum-a-brief-guide-for-busy</a></font></blockquote>
<p></p>
<p>- -<br>
</p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><i> [Go ahead, read the entire document -
only 8000 words... </i></font><font face="Calibri"><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/10/04/0692/01509.html#inglese">https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/10/04/0692/01509.html#inglese</a> </font><font
face="Calibri"><i> scroll for different languages </i></font><font
face="Calibri"> </font><font face="Calibri"><i>]</i></font> </p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><b> APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION<br>
<br>
LAUDATE DEUM OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS<br>
<br>
TO ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL<br>
<br>
ON THE CLIMATE CRISIS</b><br>
<br>
1. “Praise God for all his creatures”.This was the message that
Saint Francis of Assisi proclaimed by his life, his canticles
and all his actions. In this way, he accepted the invitation of
the biblical Psalms and reflected the sensitivity of Jesus
before the creatures of his Father: “Consider the lilies of the
field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell
you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of
these” (Mt 6:28-29). “Are not five sparrows sold for two
pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten in God’s sight” (Lk
12:6). How can we not admire this tenderness of Jesus for all
the beings that accompany us along the way!</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri">2. Eight years have passed since I published
the Encyclical Letter Laudato si’, when I wanted to share with
all of you, my brothers and sisters of our suffering planet, my
heartfelt concerns about the care of our common home. Yet, with
the passage of time, I have realized that our responses have not
been adequate, while the world in which we live is collapsing
and may be nearing the breaking point. In addition to this
possibility, it is indubitable that the impact of climate change
will increasingly prejudice the lives and families of many
persons. We will feel its effects in the areas of healthcare,
sources of employment, access to resources, housing, forced
migrations, etc.<br>
<br>
3. This is a global social issue and one intimately related to
the dignity of human life. The Bishops of the United States have
expressed very well this social meaning of our concern about
climate change, which goes beyond a merely ecological approach,
because “our care for one another and our care for the earth are
intimately bound together. Climate change is one of the
principal challenges facing society and the global community.
The effects of climate change are borne by the most vulnerable
people, whether at home or around the world”.[1] In a few words,
the Bishops assembled for the Synod for Amazonia said the same
thing: “Attacks on nature have consequences for people’s
lives”.[2] And to express bluntly that this is no longer a
secondary or ideological question, but a drama that harms us
all, the African bishops stated that climate change makes
manifest “a tragic and striking example of structural sin”.[3]<br>
<br>
4. The reflection and information that we can gather from these
past eight years allow us to clarify and complete what we were
able to state some time ago. For this reason, and because the
situation is now even more pressing, I have wished to share
these pages with you.<br>
<br>
<b> 1. The Global Climate Crisis<br>
</b></font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri">5. Despite all attempts to deny, conceal,
gloss over or relativize the issue, the signs of climate change
are here and increasingly evident. No one can ignore the fact
that in recent years we have witnessed extreme weather
phenomena, frequent periods of unusual heat, drought and other
cries of protest on the part of the earth that are only a few
palpable expressions of a silent disease that affects everyone.
Admittedly, not every concrete catastrophe ought to be
attributed to global climate change. Nonetheless, it is
verifiable that specific climate changes provoked by humanity
are notably heightening the probability of extreme phenomena
that are increasingly frequent and intense. For this reason, we
know that every time the global temperature increases by 0.5° C,
the intensity and frequency of great rains and floods increase
in some areas and severe droughts in others, extreme heat waves
in some places and heavy snowfall in others.[4] If up to now we
could have heat waves several times a year, what will happen if
the global temperature increases by 1.5° C, which we are
approaching? Those heat waves will be much more frequent and
with greater intensity. If it should rise above 2 degrees, the
icecaps of Greenland and a large part of Antarctica[5] will melt
completely, with immensely grave consequences for everyone.<br>
<b><br>
Resistance and confusion</b><br>
<br>
6. In recent years, some have chosen to deride these facts. They
bring up allegedly solid scientific data, like the fact that the
planet has always had, and will have, periods of cooling and
warming. They forget to mention another relevant datum: that
what we are presently experiencing is an unusual acceleration of
warming, at such a speed that it will take only one generation –
not centuries or millennia – in order to verify it. The rise in
the sea level and the melting of glaciers can be easily
perceived by an individual in his or her lifetime, and probably
in a few years many populations will have to move their homes
because of these facts.<br>
<br>
7. In order to ridicule those who speak of global warming, it is
pointed out that intermittent periods of extreme cold regularly
occur. One fails to mention that this and other extraordinary
symptoms are nothing but diverse alternative expressions of the
same cause: the global imbalance that is provoking the warming
of the planet. Droughts and floods, the dried-up lakes,
communities swept away by seaquakes and flooding ultimately have
the same origin. At the same time, if we speak of a global
phenomenon, we cannot confuse this with sporadic events
explained in good part by local factors.<br>
<br>
8. Lack of information leads to confusion between large-scale
climate projections that involve long periods of time – we are
talking about decades at least – with weather forecasts that at
most can cover a few weeks. When we speak of climate change, we
are referring to a global reality – and constant local
variations – that persists for several decades.<br>
<br>
9. In an attempt to simplify reality, there are those who would
place responsibility on the poor, since they have many children,
and even attempt to resolve the problem by mutilating women in
less developed countries. As usual, it would seem that
everything is the fault of the poor. Yet the reality is that a
low, richer percentage of the planet contaminates more than the
poorest 50% of the total world population, and that per capita
emissions of the richer countries are much greater than those of
the poorer ones.[6] How can we forget that Africa, home to more
than half of the world’s poorest people, is responsible for a
minimal portion of historic emissions?<br>
<br>
10. It is often heard also that efforts to mitigate climate
change by reducing the use of fossil fuels and developing
cleaner energy sources will lead to a reduction in the number of
jobs. What is happening is that millions of people are losing
their jobs due to different effects of climate change: rising
sea levels, droughts and other phenomena affecting the planet
have left many people adrift. Conversely, the transition to
renewable forms of energy, properly managed, as well as efforts
to adapt to the damage caused by climate change, are capable of
generating countless jobs in different sectors. This demands
that politicians and business leaders should even now be
concerning themselves with it.<br>
<br>
<b> Human causes</b><br>
<br>
11. It is no longer possible to doubt the human – “anthropic” –
origin of climate change. Let us see why. The concentration of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which causes global warming,
was stable until the nineteenth century, below 300 parts per
million in volume. But in the middle of that century, in
conjunction with industrial development, emissions began to
increase. In the past fifty years, this increase has accelerated
significantly, as the Mauna Loa observatory, which has taken
daily measurements of carbon dioxide since 1958, has confirmed.
While I was writing Laudato si’, they hit a historic high – 400
parts per million – until arriving at 423 parts per million in
June 2023.[7] More than 42% of total net emissions since the
year 1850 were produced after 1990.[8]</font></p>
<p>12. At the same time, we have confirmed that in the last fifty
years the temperature has risen at an unprecedented speed, greater
than any time over the past two thousand years. In this period,
the trend was a warming of 0.15° C per decade, double that of the
last 150 years. From 1850 on, the global temperature has risen by
1.1° C, with even greater impact on the polar regions. At this
rate, it is possible that in just ten years we will reach the
recommended maximum global ceiling of 1.5° C.[9] This increase has
not occurred on the earth’s surface alone but also several
kilometres higher in the atmosphere, on the surface of the oceans
and even in their depths for hundreds of metres. Thus the
acidification of the seas increased and their oxygen levels were
reduced. The glaciers are receding, the snow cover is diminishing
and the sea level is constantly rising.[10]<br>
<br>
13. It is not possible to conceal the correlation of these global
climate phenomena and the accelerated increase in greenhouse gas
emissions, particularly since the mid-twentieth century. The
overwhelming majority of scientists specializing in the climate
support this correlation, and only a very small percentage of them
seek to deny the evidence. Regrettably, the climate crisis is not
exactly a matter that interests the great economic powers, whose
concern is with the greatest profit possible at minimal cost and
in the shortest amount of time.<br>
<br>
14. I feel obliged to make these clarifications, which may appear
obvious, because of certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable
opinions that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church. Yet we
can no longer doubt that the reason for the unusual rapidity of
these dangerous changes is a fact that cannot be concealed: the
enormous novelties that have to do with unchecked human
intervention on nature in the past two centuries. Events of
natural origin that usually cause warming, such as volcanic
eruptions and others, are insufficient to explain the proportion
and speed of the changes of recent decades.[11] The change in
average surface temperatures cannot be explained except as the
result of the increase of greenhouse gases.<br>
<br>
<b> Damages and risks</b><br>
<br>
15. Some effects of the climate crisis are already irreversible,
at least for several hundred years, such as the increase in the
global temperature of the oceans, their acidification and the
decrease of oxygen. Ocean waters have a thermal inertia and
centuries are needed to normalize their temperature and salinity,
which affects the survival of many species. This is one of the
many signs that the other creatures of this world have stopped
being our companions along the way and have become instead our
victims.<br>
<br>
16. The same can be said about the decrease in the continental ice
sheets. The melting of the poles will not be able to be reversed
for hundreds of years. As for the climate, there are factors that
have persisted for long periods of time, independent of the events
that may have triggered them. For this reason, we are now unable
to halt the enormous damage we have caused. We barely have time to
prevent even more tragic damage.<br>
<br>
17. Certain apocalyptic diagnoses may well appear scarcely
reasonable or insufficiently grounded. This should not lead us to
ignore the real possibility that we are approaching a critical
point. Small changes can cause greater ones, unforeseen and
perhaps already irreversible, due to factors of inertia. This
would end up precipitating a cascade of events having a snowball
effect. In such cases, it is always too late, since no
intervention will be able to halt a process once begun. There is
no turning back. We cannot state with certainty that all this is
going to happen, based on present conditions. But it is certain
that it continues to be a possibility, if we take into account
phenomena already in motion that “sensitize” the climate, like the
reduction of ice sheets, changes in ocean currents, deforestation
in tropical rainforests and the melting of permafrost in Russia,
etc.[12]<br>
<br>
18. Consequently, a broader perspective is urgently needed, one
that can enable us to esteem the marvels of progress, but also to
pay serious attention to other effects that were probably
unimaginable a century ago. What is being asked of us is nothing
other than a certain responsibility for the legacy we will leave
behind, once we pass from this world.<br>
<br>
19. Finally, we can add that the Covid-19 pandemic brought out the
close relation of human life with that of other living beings and
with the natural environment. But in a special way, it confirmed
that what happens in one part of the world has repercussions on
the entire planet. This allows me to reiterate two convictions
that I repeat over and over again: “Everything is connected” and
“No one is saved alone”.<br>
<br>
<b> 2. A Growing Technocratic Paradigm</b><br>
<br>
20. In Laudato si’, I offered a brief resumé of the technocratic
paradigm underlying the current process of environmental decay. It
is “a certain way of understanding human life and activity [that]
has gone awry, to the serious detriment of the world around
us”.[13] Deep down, it consists in thinking “as if reality,
goodness and truth automatically flow from technological and
economic power as such”.[14] As a logical consequence, it then
becomes easy “to accept the idea of infinite or unlimited growth,
which proves so attractive to economists, financiers and experts
in technology”.[15]<br>
<br>
21. In recent years, we have been able to confirm this diagnosis,
even as we have witnessed a new advance of the above paradigm.
Artificial intelligence and the latest technological innovations
start with the notion of a human being with no limits, whose
abilities and possibilities can be infinitely expanded thanks to
technology. In this way, the technocratic paradigm monstrously
feeds upon itself.<br>
<br>
22. Without a doubt, the natural resources required by technology,
such as lithium, silicon and so many others, are not unlimited,
yet the greater problem is the ideology underlying an obsession:
to increase human power beyond anything imaginable, before which
nonhuman reality is a mere resource at its disposal. Everything
that exists ceases to be a gift for which we should be thankful,
esteem and cherish, and instead becomes a slave, prey to any whim
of the human mind and its capacities.<br>
<br>
23. It is chilling to realize that the capacities expanded by
technology “have given those with the knowledge and especially the
economic resources to use them, an impressive dominance over the
whole of humanity and the entire world. Never has humanity had
such power over itself, yet nothing ensures that it will be used
wisely, particularly when we consider how it is currently being
used… In whose hands does all this power lie, or will it
eventually end up? It is extremely risky for a small part of
humanity to have it”.[16]<br>
<br>
<b> Rethinking our use of power</b><br>
<br>
24. Not every increase in power represents progress for humanity.
We need only think of the “admirable” technologies that were
employed to decimate populations, drop atomic bombs and annihilate
ethnic groups. There were historical moments where our admiration
at progress blinded us to the horror of its consequences. But that
risk is always present, because “our immense technological
development has not been accompanied by a development in human
responsibility, values and conscience... We stand naked and
exposed in the face of our ever-increasing power, lacking the
wherewithal to control it. We have certain superficial mechanisms,
but we cannot claim to have a sound ethics, a culture and
spirituality genuinely capable of setting limits and teaching
clear-minded self-restraint”.[17] It is not strange that so great
a power in such hands is capable of destroying life, while the
mentality proper to the technocratic paradigm blinds us and does
not permit us to see this extremely grave problem of present-day
humanity.<br>
<br>
25. Contrary to this technocratic paradigm, we say that the world
that surrounds us is not an object of exploitation, unbridled use
and unlimited ambition. Nor can we claim that nature is a mere
“setting” in which we develop our lives and our projects. For “we
are part of nature, included in it and thus in constant
interaction with it”,[18] and thus “we [do] not look at the world
from without but from within”.[19]<br>
<br>
26. This itself excludes the idea that the human being is
extraneous, a foreign element capable only of harming the
environment. Human beings must be recognized as a part of nature.
Human life, intelligence and freedom are elements of the nature
that enriches our planet, part of its internal workings and its
equilibrium.<br>
<br>
27. For this reason, a healthy ecology is also the result of
interaction between human beings and the environment, as occurs in
the indigenous cultures and has occurred for centuries in
different regions of the earth. Human groupings have often
“created” an environment,[20] reshaping it in some way without
destroying it or endangering it. The great present-day problem is
that the technocratic paradigm has destroyed that healthy and
harmonious relationship. In any event, the indispensable need to
move beyond that paradigm, so damaging and destructive, will not
be found in a denial of the human being, but include the
interaction of natural systems “with social systems”.[21]<br>
<br>
28. We need to rethink among other things the question of human
power, its meaning and its limits. For our power has frenetically
increased in a few decades. We have made impressive and awesome
technological advances, and we have not realized that at the same
time we have turned into highly dangerous beings, capable of
threatening the lives of many beings and our own survival. Today
it is worth repeating the ironic comment of Solovyov about an “age
which was so advanced as to be actually the last one”.[22] We need
lucidity and honesty in order to recognize in time that our power
and the progress we are producing are turning against us.[23]<br>
<br>
<b> The ethical goad</b><br>
<br>
29. The ethical decadence of real power is disguised thanks to
marketing and false information, useful tools in the hands of
those with greater resources to employ them to shape public
opinion. With the help of these means, whenever plans are made to
undertake a project involving significant changes in the
environment or high levels of contamination, one raises the hopes
of the people of that area by speaking of the local progress that
it will be able to generate or of the potential for economic
growth, employment and human promotion that it would mean for
their children. Yet in reality there does not seem to be any true
interest in the future of these people, since they are not clearly
told that the project will result in the clearing of their lands,
a decline in the quality of their lives, a desolate and less
habitable landscape lacking in life, the joy of community and hope
for the future; in addition to the global damage that eventually
compromises many other people as well.<br>
<br>
30. One need but think of the momentary excitement raised by the
money received in exchange for the deposit of nuclear waste in a
certain place. The house that one could have bought with that
money has turned into a grave due to the diseases that were then
unleashed. And I am not saying this, moved by a overflowing
imagination, but on the basis of something we have seen. It could
be said that this is an extreme example, but in these cases there
is no room for speaking of “lesser” damages, for it is precisely
the amassing of damages considered tolerable that has brought us
to the situation in which we now find ourselves.<br>
<br>
31. This situation has to do not only with physics or biology, but
also with the economy and the way we conceive it. The mentality of
maximum gain at minimal cost, disguised in terms of
reasonableness, progress and illusory promises, makes impossible
any sincere concern for our common home and any real preoccupation
about assisting the poor and the needy discarded by our society.
In recent years, we can note that, astounded and excited by the
promises of any number of false prophets, the poor themselves at
times fall prey to the illusion of a world that is not being built
for them.<br>
<br>
32. Mistaken notions also develop about the concept of
“meritocracy”, which becomes seen as a “merited” human power to
which everything must be submitted, under the rule of those born
with greater possibilities and advantages. A healthy approach to
the value of hard work, the development of one’s native abilities
and a praiseworthy spirit of initiative is one thing, but if one
does not seek a genuine equality of opportunity, “meritocracy” can
easily become a screen that further consolidates the privileges of
a few with great power. In this perverse logic, why should they
care about the damage done to our common home, if they feel
securely shielded by the financial resources that they have earned
by their abilities and effort?<br>
<br>
33. In conscience, and with an eye to the children who will pay
for the harm done by their actions, the question of meaning
inevitably arises: “What is the meaning of my life? What is the
meaning of my time on this earth? And what is the ultimate meaning
of all my work and effort?”<br>
<b><br>
3. The Weakness of International Politics</b><br>
<br>
34. Although “our own days seem to be showing signs of a certain
regression… each new generation must take up the struggles and
attainments of past generations, while setting its sights even
higher. This is the path. Goodness, together with love, justice
and solidarity, are not achieved once and for all; they have to be
realized each day”.[24] For there to be solid and lasting
advances, I would insist that, “preference should be given to
multilateral agreements between States”.[25]<br>
<br>
35. It is not helpful to confuse multilateralism with a world
authority concentrated in one person or in an elite with excessive
power: “When we talk about the possibility of some form of world
authority regulated by law, we need not necessarily think of a
personal authority”.[26] We are speaking above all of “more
effective world organizations, equipped with the power to provide
for the global common good, the elimination of hunger and poverty
and the sure defence of fundamental human rights”.[27] The issue
is that they must be endowed with real authority, in such a way as
to “provide for” the attainment of certain essential goals. In
this way, there could come about a multilateralism that is not
dependent on changing political conditions or the interests of a
certain few, and possesses a stable efficacy.<br>
<br>
36. It continues to be regrettable that global crises are being
squandered when they could be the occasions to bring about
beneficial changes.[28] This is what happened in the 2007-2008
financial crisis and again in the Covid-19 crisis. For “the actual
strategies developed worldwide in the wake of [those crises]
fostered greater individualism, less integration and increased
freedom for the truly powerful, who always find a way to escape
unscathed”.[29]<br>
<br>
<b> Reconfiguring multilateralism</b><br>
<br>
37. More than saving the old multilateralism, it appears that the
current challenge is to reconfigure and recreate it, taking into
account the new world situation. I invite you to recognize that
“many groups and organizations within civil society help to
compensate for the shortcomings of the international community,
its lack of coordination in complex situations, and its lack of
attention to fundamental human rights”.[30] For example, the
Ottawa Process against the use, production and manufacture of
antipersonnel mines is one example that shows how civil society
with its organizations is capable of creating effective dynamics
that the United Nations cannot. In this way, the principle of
subsidiarity is applied also to the global-local relationship.<br>
<br>
38. In the medium-term, globalization favours spontaneous cultural
interchanges, greater mutual knowledge and processes of
integration of peoples, which end up provoking a multilateralism
“from below” and not simply one determined by the elites of power.
The demands that rise up from below throughout the world, where
activists from very different countries help and support one
another, can end up pressuring the sources of power. It is to be
hoped that this will happen with respect to the climate crisis.
For this reason, I reiterate that “unless citizens control
political power – national, regional and municipal – it will not
be possible to control damage to the environment”.[31]<br>
<br>
39. Postmodern culture has generated a new sensitivity towards the
more vulnerable and less powerful. This is connected with my
insistence in the Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti on the primacy
of the human person and the defence of his or her dignity beyond
every circumstance. It is another way of encouraging
multilateralism for the sake of resolving the real problems of
humanity, securing before all else respect for the dignity of
persons, in such a way that ethics will prevail over local or
contingent interests.<br>
<br>
40. It is not a matter of replacing politics, but of recognizing
that the emerging forces are becoming increasingly relevant and
are in fact capable of obtaining important results in the
resolution of concrete problems, as some of them demonstrated
during the pandemic. The very fact that answers to problems can
come from any country, however little, ends up presenting
multilateralism as an inevitable process.<br>
<br>
41. The old diplomacy, also in crisis, continues to show its
importance and necessity. Still, it has not succeeded in
generating a model of multilateral diplomacy capable of responding
to the new configuration of the world; yet should it be able to
reconfigure itself, it must be part of the solution, because the
experience of centuries cannot be cast aside either.<br>
<br>
42. Our world has become so multipolar and at the same time so
complex that a different framework for effective cooperation is
required. It is not enough to think only of balances of power but
also of the need to provide a response to new problems and to
react with global mechanisms to the environmental, public health,
cultural and social challenges, especially in order to consolidate
respect for the most elementary human rights, social rights and
the protection of our common home. It is a matter of establishing
global and effective rules that can permit “providing for” this
global safeguarding.<br>
<br>
43. All this presupposes the development of a new procedure for
decision-making and legitimizing those decisions, since the one
put in place several decades ago is not sufficient nor does it
appear effective. In this framework, there would necessarily be
required spaces for conversation, consultation, arbitration,
conflict resolution and supervision, and, in the end, a sort of
increased “democratization” in the global context, so that the
various situations can be expressed and included. It is no longer
helpful for us to support institutions in order to preserve the
rights of the more powerful without caring for those of all.<br>
<br>
<b> 4. Climate Conferences: Progress and Failures</b><br>
<br>
44. For several decades now, representatives of more than 190
countries have met periodically to address the issue of climate
change. The 1992 Rio de Janeiro Conference led to the adoption of
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC), a treaty that took effect when the necessary
ratification on the part of the signatories concluded in 1994.
These States meet annually in the Conference of the Parties (COP),
the highest decision-making body. Some of these Conferences were
failures, like that of Copenhagen (2009), while others made it
possible to take important steps forward, like COP3 in Kyoto
(1997). Its significant Protocol set the goal of reducing overall
greenhouse gas emissions by 5% with respect to 1990. The deadline
was the year 2012, but this, clearly, was not achieved.<br>
<br>
45. All parties also committed themselves to implementing
programmes of adaptation in order to reduce the effects of climate
change now taking place. Provisions were also made for aid to
cover the costs of the measures in developing countries. The
Protocol actually took effect in 2005.<br>
<br>
46. Afterwards, it was proposed to create a mechanism regarding
the loss and damage caused by climate change, which recognizes as
those chiefly responsible the richer countries and seeks to
compensate for the loss and damage that climate change produces in
the more vulnerable countries. It was not yet a matter of
financing the “adaptation” of those countries, but of compensating
them for damage already incurred. This question was the subject of
important discussions at various Conferences.<br>
<br>
47. COP21 in Paris (2015) represented another significant moment,
since it generated an agreement that involved everyone. It can be
considered as a new beginning, given the failure to meet the goals
previously set. The agreement took effect on 4 November 2016.
Albeit a binding agreement, not all its dispositions are
obligations in the strict sense, and some of them leave ample room
for discretion. In any case, properly speaking, there are no
provisions for sanctions in the case of unfulfilled commitments,
nor effective instruments to ensure their fulfilment. It also
provides for a certain flexibility in the case of developing
countries.<br>
<br>
48. The Paris Agreement presents a broad and ambitious objective:
to keep the increase of average global temperatures to under 2° C
with respect to preindustrial levels, and with the aim of
decreasing them to 1.5° C. Work is still under way to consolidate
concrete procedures for monitoring and to facilitate general
criteria for comparing the objectives of the different countries.
This makes it difficult to achieve a more objective (quantitative)
evaluation of the real results.<br>
<br>
49. Following several Conferences with scarce results, and the
disappointment of COP25 in Madrid (2019), it was hoped that this
inertia would be reversed at COP26 in Glasgow (2021). In effect,
its result was to relaunch the Paris Agreement, put on hold by the
overall effects of the pandemic. Furthermore, there was an
abundance of “recommendations” whose actual effect was hardly
foreseeable. Proposals tending to ensure a rapid and effective
transition to alternative and less polluting forms of energy made
no progress.<br>
<br>
50. COP27 in Sharm El Sheikh (2022) was from the outset threatened
by the situation created by the invasion of Ukraine, which caused
a significant economic and energy crisis. Carbon use increased and
everyone sought to have sufficient supplies. Developing countries
regarded access to energy and prospects for development as an
urgent priority. There was an evident openness to recognizing the
fact that combustible fuels still provide 80% of the world’s
energy, and that their use continues to increase.<br>
<br>
51. This Conference in Egypt was one more example of the
difficulty of negotiations. It could be said that at least it
marked a step forward in consolidating a system for financing
“loss and damage” in countries most affected by climate disasters.
This would seem to give a new voice and a greater role to
developing countries. Yet here too, many points remained
imprecise, above all the concrete responsibility of the countries
that have to contribute.<br>
<br>
52. Today we can continue to state that, “the accords have been
poorly implemented, due to lack of suitable mechanisms for
oversight, periodic review and penalties in cases of
noncompliance. The principles which they proclaimed still await an
efficient and flexible means of practical implementation”.[32]
Also, that “international negotiations cannot make significant
progress due to positions taken by countries which place their
national interests above the global common good. Those who will
have to suffer the consequences of what we are trying to hide will
not forget this failure of conscience and responsibility”.[33]<br>
<br>
<b> 5. What to Expect from COP28 in Dubai?</b><br>
<br>
53. The United Arab Emirates will host the next Conference of the
Parties (COP28). It is a country of the Persian Gulf known as a
great exporter of fossil fuels, although it has made significant
investments in renewable energy sources. Meanwhile, gas and oil
companies are planning new projects there, with the aim of further
increasing their production. To say that there is nothing to hope
for would be suicidal, for it would mean exposing all humanity,
especially the poorest, to the worst impacts of climate change.<br>
<br>
54. If we are confident in the capacity of human beings to
transcend their petty interests and to think in bigger terms, we
can keep hoping that COP28 will allow for a decisive acceleration
of energy transition, with effective commitments subject to
ongoing monitoring. This Conference can represent a change of
direction, showing that everything done since 1992 was in fact
serious and worth the effort, or else it will be a great
disappointment and jeopardize whatever good has been achieved thus
far.<br>
<br>
55. Despite the many negotiations and agreements, global emissions
continue to increase. Certainly, it could be said that, without
those agreements, they would have increased even more. Still, in
other themes related to the environment, when there was a will,
very significant results were obtained, as was the case with the
protection of the ozone layer. Yet, the necessary transition
towards clean energy sources such as wind and solar energy, and
the abandonment of fossil fuels, is not progressing at the
necessary speed. Consequently, whatever is being done risks being
seen only as a ploy to distract attention.<br>
<br>
56. We must move beyond the mentality of appearing to be concerned
but not having the courage needed to produce substantial changes.
We know that at this pace in just a few years we will surpass the
maximum recommended limit of 1.5° C and shortly thereafter even
reach 3° C, with a high risk of arriving at a critical point. Even
if we do not reach this point of no return, it is certain that the
consequences would be disastrous and precipitous measures would
have to be taken, at enormous cost and with grave and intolerable
economic and social effects. Although the measures that we can
take now are costly, the cost will be all the more burdensome the
longer we wait.<br>
<br>
57. I consider it essential to insist that “to seek only a
technical remedy to each environmental problem which comes up is
to separate what is in reality interconnected and to mask the true
and deepest problems of the global system”.[34] It is true that
efforts at adaptation are needed in the face of evils that are
irreversible in the short term. Also some interventions and
technological advances that make it possible to absorb or capture
gas emissions have proved promising. Nonetheless, we risk
remaining trapped in the mindset of pasting and papering over
cracks, while beneath the surface there is a continuing
deterioration to which we continue to contribute. To suppose that
all problems in the future will be able to be solved by new
technical interventions is a form of homicidal pragmatism, like
pushing a snowball down a hill.<br>
<br>
58. Once and for all, let us put an end to the irresponsible
derision that would present this issue as something purely
ecological, “green”, romantic, frequently subject to ridicule by
economic interests. Let us finally admit that it is a human and
social problem on any number of levels. For this reason, it calls
for involvement on the part of all. In Conferences on the climate,
the actions of groups negatively portrayed as “radicalized” tend
to attract attention. But in reality they are filling a space left
empty by society as a whole, which ought to exercise a healthy
“pressure”, since every family ought to realize that the future of
their children is at stake.<br>
<br>
59. If there is sincere interest in making COP28 a historic event
that honours and ennobles us as human beings, then one can only
hope for binding forms of energy transition that meet three
conditions: that they be efficient, obligatory and readily
monitored. This, in order to achieve the beginning of a new
process marked by three requirements: that it be drastic, intense
and count on the commitment of all. That is not what has happened
so far, and only a process of this sort can enable international
politics to recover its credibility, since only in this concrete
manner will it be possible to reduce significantly carbon dioxide
levels and to prevent even greater evils over time.<br>
<br>
60. May those taking part in the Conference be strategists capable
of considering the common good and the future of their children,
more than the short-term interests of certain countries or
businesses. In this way, may they demonstrate the nobility of
politics and not its shame. To the powerful, I can only repeat
this question: “What would induce anyone, at this stage, to hold
on to power, only to be remembered for their inability to take
action when it was urgent and necessary to do so?”[35]<br>
</p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><b> 6. Spiritual Motivations</b><br>
<br>
61. I cannot fail in this regard to remind the Catholic faithful
of the motivations born of their faith. I encourage my brothers
and sisters of other religions to do the same, since we know
that authentic faith not only gives strength to the human heart,
but also transforms life, transfigures our goals and sheds light
on our relationship to others and with creation as a whole.<br>
<br>
<i>In the light of faith</i><br>
<br>
62. The Bible tells us: “God saw everything that he had made,
and indeed, it was very good” (Gen 1:31). His is “the earth with
all that is in it” (Deut 10:14). For this reason, he tells us
that, “the land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is
mine; with me you are but aliens and tenants” (Lev 25:23).
Hence, “responsibility for God’s earth means that human beings,
endowed with intelligence, must respect the laws of nature and
the delicate equilibria existing between the creatures of this
world”.[36]<br>
<br>
63. At the same time, “the universe as a whole, in all its
manifold relationships, shows forth the inexhaustible richness
of God”. Hence, to be wise, “we need to grasp the variety of
things in their multiple relationships”.[37] Along this path of
wisdom, it is not a matter of indifference to us that so many
species are disappearing and that the climate crisis endangers
the life of many other beings.<br>
<br>
64. Jesus “was able to invite others to be attentive to the
beauty that there is in the world because he himself was in
constant touch with nature, lending it an attraction full of
fondness and wonder. As he made his way throughout the land, he
often stopped to contemplate the beauty sown by his Father, and
invited his disciples to perceive a divine message in
things”.[38]<br>
<br>
65. Hence, “the creatures of this world no longer appear to us
under merely natural guise, because the risen One is
mysteriously holding them to himself and directing them towards
fullness as their end. The very flowers of the field and the
birds which his human eyes contemplated and admired are now
imbued with his radiant presence”.[39] If “the universe unfolds
in God, who fills it completely… there is a mystical meaning to
be found in a leaf, in a mountain trail, in a dewdrop, in a poor
person’s face”.[40] The world sings of an infinite Love: how can
we fail to care for it?<br>
<br>
<b> Journeying in communion and commitment</b><br>
<br>
66. God has united us to all his creatures. Nonetheless, the
technocratic paradigm can isolate us from the world that
surrounds us and deceive us by making us forget that the entire
world is a “contact zone”.[41]<br>
<br>
67. The Judaeo-Christian vision of the cosmos defends the unique
and central value of the human being amid the marvellous concert
of all God’s creatures, but today we see ourselves forced to
realize that it is only possible to sustain a “situated
anthropocentrism”. To recognize, in other words, that human life
is incomprehensible and unsustainable without other creatures.
For “as part of the universe… all of us are linked by unseen
bonds and together form a kind of universal family, a sublime
communion which fills us with a sacred, affectionate and humble
respect”.[42]<br>
<br>
68. This is not a product of our own will; its origin lies
elsewhere, in the depths of our being, since “God has joined us
so closely to the world around us that we can feel the
desertification of the soil almost as a physical ailment, and
the extinction of a species as a painful disfigurement”.[43] Let
us stop thinking, then, of human beings as autonomous,
omnipotent and limitless, and begin to think of ourselves
differently, in a humbler but more fruitful way.<br>
<br>
69. I ask everyone to accompany this pilgrimage of
reconciliation with the world that is our home and to help make
it more beautiful, because that commitment has to do with our
personal dignity and highest values. At the same time, I cannot
deny that it is necessary to be honest and recognize that the
most effective solutions will not come from individual efforts
alone, but above all from major political decisions on the
national and international level.<br>
<br>
70. Nonetheless, every little bit helps, and avoiding an
increase of a tenth of a degree in the global temperature would
already suffice to alleviate some suffering for many people. Yet
what is important is something less quantitative: the need to
realize that there are no lasting changes without cultural
changes, without a maturing of lifestyles and convictions within
societies, and there are no cultural changes without personal
changes.<br>
<br>
71. Efforts by households to reduce pollution and waste, and to
consume with prudence, are creating a new culture. The mere fact
that personal, family and community habits are changing is
contributing to greater concern about the unfulfilled
responsibilities of the political sectors and indignation at the
lack of interest shown by the powerful. Let us realize, then,
that even though this does not immediately produce a notable
effect from the quantitative standpoint, we are helping to bring
about large processes of transformation rising from deep within
society.<br>
<br>
72. If we consider that emissions per individual in the United
States are about two times greater than those of individuals
living in China, and about seven times greater than the average
of the poorest countries,[44] we can state that a broad change
in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model
would have a significant long-term impact. As a result, along
with indispensable political decisions, we would be making
progress along the way to genuine care for one another.<br>
<br>
73. “Praise God” is the title of this letter. For when human
beings claim to take God’s place, they become their own worst
enemies.<br>
<br>
Given in Rome, at the Basilica of Saint John Lateran, on 4
October, the Feast of Saint Francis of Assisi, in the year 2023,
the eleventh of my Pontificate.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/10/04/0692/01509.html#inglese">https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/10/04/0692/01509.html#inglese</a><br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Calibri"><br>
</font></p>
<font face="Calibri"><br>
<i>[The news archive - looking back at politics how we have
changed since 1988 ]</i><br>
<font size="+2"><i><b>October 5, 1988</b></i></font> <br>
October 5, 1988: Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen (D) and Indiana
Senator Dan Quayle (R) discuss global warming in the Vice
Presidential debate, with both men agreeing that the problem must
be addressed during the next four years; Bentsen suggests that
natural gas and ethanol might be alternatives to oil dependence.
(49:33-52:45)<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://youtu.be/99-v2Farbjs">http://youtu.be/99-v2Farbjs</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<p><font face="Calibri"> <br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><br>
=== Other climate news sources
===========================================<br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><b>*Inside Climate News</b><br>
Newsletters<br>
We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every
day or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web’s
top headlines deliver the full story, for free.<br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/">https://insideclimatenews.org/</a><br>
--------------------------------------- <br>
*<b>Climate Nexus</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*">https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*</a>
<br>
Delivered straight to your inbox every morning, Hot News
summarizes the most important climate and energy news of the
day, delivering an unmatched aggregation of timely, relevant
reporting. It also provides original reporting and commentary on
climate denial and pro-polluter activity that would otherwise
remain largely unexposed. 5 weekday <br>
================================= <br>
</font> <font face="Calibri"><b class="moz-txt-star"><span
class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>Carbon Brief Daily </b><span
class="moz-txt-star"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up">https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up</a></span><b
class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> <br>
Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon
Brief sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to
thousands of subscribers around the world. The email is a digest
of the past 24 hours of media coverage related to climate change
and energy, as well as our pick of the key studies published in
the peer-reviewed journals. <br>
more at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief">https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief</a>
<br>
================================== <br>
*T<b>he Daily Climate </b>Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*">https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*</a>
<br>
Get The Daily Climate in your inbox - FREE! Top news on climate
impacts, solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered week days.
Better than coffee. <br>
Other newsletters at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/">https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/</a>
<br>
<br>
</font> </p>
<font face="Calibri">
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only -- and carries no
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers.
Text-only messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and
sender. This is a personal hobby production curated by Richard
Pauli<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain cannot be used for
commercial purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list. </font><font
face="Calibri"><br>
</font>
</body>
</html>