PopeWatch: Moonbeam

Pro-abort Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown (D. La La Land) fits in nicely with the current crowd at the Vatican:


The Vatican gave social media kudos this week to California pro-abortion Governor Jerry Brown for his climate change crusade, calling him a “true leader” and extolling what it deemed Brown’s “defending the dignity and freedom of each person.”

The praise came in the form of a tweet from Casina Pio IV – an account for news from the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS) and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (PASS). It was a response to Brown’s tweet earlier this month touting his recent two-week European climate talk tour – for which the Vatican was a venue.

“Bravo Jerry,” the Vatican tweet said, “you are a true leader who seeks the good of the people defending the dignity and freedom of each person, and the good of the planet threatened by human activity that uses fossil fuel!”

The tweet concludes with three praying hands emoticons.

Brown had addressed the Vatican-conducted “Health of People, Health of Planet and Our Responsibility: Climate Change, Air Pollution and Health” conference in early November.

At the Vatican climate event, Brown said that ‘brainwashing’ was in order to get people to come around to the disputed idea of manmade climate change.

“At the highest circles, people still don’t get it,” the California Democrat said. “It’s not just a light rinse” that’s required. “We need a total, I might say, ‘brainwashing.’

“We need to wash our brains out and see a very different kind of world.”


Go here to read the rest.  The Pope occasionally condemns abortion with words, but the actions of his Vatican belie his words.

More to explorer


  1. “….you are a true leader who seeks the good of the people defending the dignity and freedom of each person, and the good of the planet threatened by human activity that uses fossil fuel!”

    But Jerry Moonbeam Brown opposes nuclear power – the only baseload alternative to fossil fuel – tooth and nail. He is overjoyed at the San Onofre shutdown, and he has arranged for Diablo Canyon to follow suit in a few years. Californication will be completely denuked. Where the frack do they propose getting the energy from? Useless worthless wind mills and solar cells that don’t work 70% of the time?

    Let the Vatican and Brown both be anathema!

  2. LQC, I think that you should realize that you are fighting a losing battle in nuclear power advocacy. The anti-nuclear crowd has the power of widely held disinformation that most accept as fact. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and the Japanese reactor – or, more precisely, how they have been portrayed in the media, have turned countless people against nuclear power. Anytime there is a problem at any nuclear reactor the local news has it as one of the headlines – just as when a priest is accused of abuse (but almost never when it happens due to a public school teacher). Then there is the issue of how to handle the spent fuel rods. Nobody wants them anywhere around and Nevada has been adamant about not allowing Yucca Mountain to be used as a storage site. Westinghouse – the nuclear power unit owned by Toshiba, formerly part of the Westinghouse Electric Company, is facing Chapter 11 reorganization.

    Natural gas is easier to convert to electricity. So is coal. The American Thinker had an article about clean burning coal technology that handles almost all of the pollutants generated by coal.

    Common sense is not something that applies to either Jerry Brown or the powers that be in the Vatican.

  3. ….by golly, the Vatican should bestow the Margret Sanger award to Jerry Brown.
    Geeesh. What a tweet. ” DEFENDING the dignity and freedom of EACH person”…Jerry Brown?

    I hope the dead fetus’ visit Casino Pio IV in his dreams..each aborted baby from California.

    What? They are not persons….just blobs of tissue.(?) Shame on the Vatican!

  4. There is no evidence Global Warming has killed anyone. There is ample evidence that abortion is a holocaust greater than any in the history of the world. This pope is a quisling.

  5. For the record, I agree with Penguins Fan. However, a few facts are in order. I have provided these before in previous posts in various orders, but they bear repeating.

    The mortality rate per terawatt-hour of energy generation is lowest by orders of magnitude in nuclear energy even including the accidents of Windscale (1957), SL-1 (1961), TMI (1979), Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011). See Deaths per Terawatt Hour here:


    There is a table part way down the web page which tabulates deaths per terawatt-hour by energy source. Coal generation has the most fatalities at 244 deaths per terawatt-hour worldwide and 10 fatalities per terawatt-hour in the United States. Oil generation has 52 fatalities per terawatt-hour. Natural gas (otherwise known as explosive methane or CH4) has 20 fatalities per terawatt-hour. Solar generation has 0.1 fatalities per terawatt-hour. Wind generation has 0.15 fatalities per terawatt-hour. Hydro-electric generation has 0.1 fatalities per terawatt hour. Nuclear generation has the lowest by an order of magnitude or more compared to the others: 0.04 fatalities per terawatt-hour.

    Now consider this also: A single uranium fuel pellet (about the size of a fingertip) contains as much energy as 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas, 1,780 pounds of coal or 149 gallons of oil. See picture here:


    That means that the amount of waste nuclear generates is miniscule compared to the amount of waste that natural gas, coal and oil generate. Burning all that gas, coal and oil does nothing to change the mass of fuel consumed, but simply dumps it willy nilly into the environment. But all the so-called “high level radioactive fuel waste” (which is really used fuel available for fast neutron burner reactors) According to the US Nuclear Energy Institute, “Over the past four decades, the entire industry has produced 76,430 metric tons of used nuclear fuel. If used fuel assemblies were stacked end-to-end and side-by-side, this would cover a football field about eight yards deep.” See:


    Now compare this to the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of tons of coal ash sludge that Duke Energy dumped into the environment from 14 of its coal fired power plants. And by the way, coal emissions are MORE radioactive than what a nuclear power plant is allowed to release. Why? Because of the naturally occurring uranium, thorium and radium in coal. And fracking and drilling for natural gas and oil release MORE radioactivity than what a nuclear power plant is allowed to emit. Why? Because of the Ar-41 and Rn-222 that gets released from the ground during the fracking and drilling processes.

    And as for long-live radioactivity from spent (i.e., used) nuclear fuel, there is a simple solution: reprocessing and use in GE-Hitachi’s sodium cooled fast neutron burner reactor or Thorcon Power’s molten salt reactor.

    Lastly, whenever the cry of renewable energy is mentioned, bear in mind that “wind farms require up to 360 times as much land area to produce the same amount of electricity as a nuclear energy facility….. Solar photovoltaic (PV) facilities require up to 75 times the land area.” Furthermore, wind and solar have capacity factors less than 30% which means that 70% of the time when you need energy from those sources, you won’t get it. If wind were so great, then why don’t we still use sailing ships to transport merchandise across the sea as the ancient Phoenicians did? If solar were so great, then why don’t we still bake bricks in the sun as the ancient Sumerians did? Renewable energy should be more correctly named “green energy, black death,” for as Germany is finding out from its denuclearization in its hysterical reaction to Fukushima, solar and wind don’t work 24 / 7 to supply baseload power, so what are the Germans doing? Razing whole towns for dirty brown sulfur coal to burn in making electricity. And by so doing they release MORE radioactivity than any of their nukes ever did. Think on that irony. Think and do NOT feel. To hades with your feelings. Use your God-given brains!

    Conclusion: if we are really interested in safety, and we are really interested in reducing our waste footprint to be good environmental stewards, then we will go nuclear. We won’t dump our fossil fuel excrement into the environment and we won’t tear up the land for useless worthless twirling blades and shiny mirrors.

    It gets tiring repeating the same truths over and over and over again. But the enemy constantly repeats his lies and the truth is this: God has endowed Earth’s crust with enough thorium and uranium to power a highly technological civilization of 12 billion people for the next 10 thousand years such that no one need freeze in the dark of winter or sweat in the sweltering heat of summer again. We do NOT have an energy problem. We have a sin problem. That’s what it is and that’s what it has always been. A wicked and adulterous generation cannot abide the strict rules and regulations required for safe use of nuclear power, so we will choke on our fossil fuel fumes while we pray to goddess Gaia and bask in the glory of our eco-friendly renewable energy projects.

  6. Climate change is about “people pollution” and “population control”. Those “rabbity procreators” must be stopped and their generation must be eliminated.
    The human souls endowed by “their Creator” at conception must be scraped from the womb and God must be evicted from the public square, conversation and belief.
    As Philip has said, may the souls of the innocent children aborted keep “moonbean” and his henchmen at the Vatican awake at night.

  7. What is it that makes Jerry Brown so appealing? Or what is it about the folks in California who find Jerry Brown so appealing? And the spooks in the Vatican, what about them? Most mysterious. I imagine Mark Shea has an answer.

  8. Micheal Dowd.
    “What is it that makes Jerry Brown so appealing? Or what is it about the folks in California who find Jerry Brown so appealing? And the spooks in the Vatican, what about them.”

    My guess.

    The spirit of the world is mightier within these individuals and dominates their thoughts, words and actions because they have turned their backs on Truth. Not nurturing a relationship with with God.
    (My apologies if your question was rhetorical.)

    Mark Shea has answers alright…so did Charles Manson. Both of them had/have plenty of answers. They just never took the time to read the questions.

  9. LQC, From United Hemispheres mag SEP 2017: ” Diamonds Are the World’s Best Friend. All that glitters is…nuclear waste? The diamond industry has gained an odd new player, and its sparkle comes from a surprising source: nuclear waste. Researchers at England’s University of Bristol found that leftovers from power plants (which normally leave behind a radioactive trail for millennia) can be safely stored in lab-created diamonds. When these diamonds get close to another radiation source, they can generate a small current, acting as tiny batteries that can produce clean energy for thousands of years. Better yet, they’re more cost-effective than other disposal methods-and less radioactive than a banana.”
    The article goes on and in closing references Dr. Chris Hutton of the school’s Interface Analysis Centre. “The #diamondbattery project as it’s called on Twitter, recently received funding.”
    Quoting Dr. Hutton, “Proving we can make use of nuclear waste in a battery that lasts for 5,000 years should help the public understand that waste [can be] managed safely, and not left for future generation to deal with.” Article written by Hannah Lott-Schwartz.
    Guess the Pope Francis and Gov. Brown do not fly the friendly skies of United.

  10. Indeed, CAM!

    Here is a simple Youtube video from the University of Bristol explaining how the Brits plan to use as batteries diamonds made from the radioactive graphite in the neutron moderators installed within their old Magnox reactors:


    Here is Dr. James Conca’s article on the same:


    Any reasonable radioactive source (for example, Nickel-63) can be used in place of Carbon-14 in diamond batteries – just form the diamond around the source.

    As I have said before, we do NOT have an energy problem or a nuclear waste problem. We have a sin problem. Only a wicked and adulterous people would throw God’s gift of virtually unlimited clean safe energy back in His face, refusing to do anything constructive about the so-called “waste” generated from using such energy. Those radioactive isotopes in used nuclear fuel (spent nuclear fuel is a misnomer because 95% of usable energy remains in the uranium and plutonium) and activated reactor components are actually valuable in medical radio-isotope therapy, radio-isotope generators for robotic spacecraft and elsewhere. But if we as a people cannot abide the moral laws of the Ten Commandments, then how shall we abide the safety regulations on nuclear energy? It’s really that simple.

    PS, every week or so there is an explosion of so-called “natural” gas (or methane – CH4) or a petroleum tank or whatever which devastates a local community with death and destruction, but these don’t get reported and popularized. Just look at how quickly we have forgotten about the Lac Magantic petroleum railroad disaster in 2013 in Quebec, Canada which destroyed an entire town, and killed more people than TMI and Fukushima put together. Do any of us remember that? Do any of us consider that the toxic crude oil and other chemicals spilled everywhere have poisonous chemistry that never ever decays away? Yet each of us well remembers Fukushima at which less than 12 people died, all from industrial safety accidents during recovery operations after the disaster and none from radiation. Think on that. Even the Deep Water Horizons disaster during the Obama administration is a long forgotten memory, but not Fukushima, not Chernobyl, not TMI. Why is that and who monetarily benefits from such skewing of the public paradigm? It certainly isn’t the Nuclear Energy Institute. But as for Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP, etc……….???????? Every time I see one of their “natural” gas commercials, I think “CH4 – almost as explosive as H2 in the Hindenburg.”

  11. I am in full agreement with LQC about the generation of electric power. Nuclear power is far better than any other method. As well as the methods of handling spent fuel, I believe that breeder rectors can use spent fuel rods for fuel. LQC, please clarify.

    Coal, oil and natural gas have a place. Natural gas and oil are superior means of powering vehicles. Natural gas is better for cooking, drying clothes and heating. Coal can be obtained relatively cheaply and coal can be converted to other forms of energy. The point is that clean energy exists and it does so without any stupid climate treaties or Governor Moonbeam or the caudillo Pope.

  12. And I agree with Penguins Fan – “Coal, oil and natural gas have a place. Natural gas and oil are superior means of powering vehicles. Natural gas is better for cooking, drying clothes and heating. Coal can be obtained relatively cheaply and coal can be converted to other forms of energy. The point is that clean energy exists and it does so without any stupid climate treaties or Governor Moonbeam or the caudillo Pope.”

    I am just asking for a level regulatory playing field. No govt money for any energy source. No dumping our refuse into the environment. If we can do carbon capture and clean coal, then GREAT! But don’t unfairly handicap the nuke industry to prevent fair competition in the free market. Excessive regulations against nuclear strangulate the industry and unfairly bias the system for fossil fuel.

    PS, get this. Purveyors of natural gas loves wind and solar because they always require spinning fossil fuel reserve for the 70% of the time wind and solar don’t generate electricity.

    Another PS, why not use the thermo-catalytic Fischer-Tropsch process to produce oil from coal using nuclear steam heat? Oil and gas may always predominate the transportation industry. I got nothing against that. Hey, I use a fossil fuel car! I bet we all do.

  13. By the way, regarding used nuclear fuel (or nuclear “waste”), Dr. Eric Loewen at GE-Hitachi has a solution. I used to work with him when I was employed by GE-Hitachi. I can’t go into details in a public forum on what we worked. But you may absolutely rely on what he has to say – see publicly available Youtube videos below:




  14. LQC, Thanks for the “diamond” and prism reactor you tube links. Easy for a novice to understand.
    The ignorance out there on nukes is amazing. Some years ago here was a proposal to bring a medical isotope related business to our county which sorely needs jobs. Some of the local ignorants with “No Nukes” signs and negative editorials in the weekly paper successfully killed the project.
    Although the US uses 50% of the world’s supply of medical isotopes, none are produced in the US.

  15. By the way, not to belabor a point nor to diverge from the topic of idiot Moonbeam anti-nuke governor of the State of Californication, but 75 years ago yesterday was the first self-sustained nuclear chain reaction at the Chicago Pile under a team of scientists headed by Enrico Fermi:


    If gasoline had started in the public consciousness with napalm used in Vietnam or crude oil with the Lac Magantic disaster or off shore drilling with the Deep Horizons disaster, then there would be few if any internal combustion engines. However, nuclear started in the public consciousness with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Governor Moonbeam and the rest of the eco-wackoes use that to their advantage while hyping hysteria over the myth of global warming. People really need to read “The First Nuclear Era: The Life and Times of a Technology Fixer,” by Alvin Weinberg.


    I dislike how as he aged he came to believe in the fiction of global warming, but nevertheless, this is an excellent history. And as our resident historian par excellence, maybe one day Donald McClarey could be prevailed upon to do a story on this??????? 😉 Also include “The Second Nuclear Era: A New Start for Nuclear Power.”


  16. Methane (natural gas) really isn’t fossil fuel. Methane is created by rock formations underground through most of Pennsylvania (the Marcellus and Utica shale fields). New York State and Maryland have banned fracking as a means of extracting this energy. Why? They are stupid.

    Not long ago, a massive oil and gas reserve was found in the West Texas Permean basin. The Senate version of the tax cut law releases part of ANWR for drilling.

    The potential here is enormous. Sooner or later, the Visegrad nations of Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic are going to tell the EU to shove it. Austria and Slovenia may join the Visegrad Group. This represents a major market for American energy. American nuclear power, natural gas, petroleum and clean coal technology will be availabe to these nations without Brussels sticking their nose in it.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: