suspicious minds

I agree with Cardinal Pell that on climate change, "the science is more complicated than the propaganda!" It's certainly more complicated than Pell's own propaganda.

"The evidence on warming is mixed, often exaggerated, but often reassuring. Global warming has been increasing constantly since 1975 at the rate of less than one fifth of a degree centigrade per decade."

That reassures him? That the globe will have warmed by a whole degree in just fifty years? When it only took a few degrees difference to bring on an ice age?

"We know that enormous climate changes have occurred in world history, e.g. the Ice Ages and Noah’s flood, where human causation could only be negligible."

I'm trying to follow his logic: When humans weren't around, they obviously couldn't have caused climate change. Therefore, even though now they are around and have clearly changed the planet somewhat from the time of Noah, they still can't have caused climate change. Hmmmm...okay!
It's bizarre to me that Pell preaches having faith in a mythical deity despite there being absolutely no scientific evidence for the existence of such a creature, and yet he preaches denial of climate change in the face of abundant scientific evidence.

"I am deeply skeptical about man-made catastrophic global warming, but still open to further evidence."

Funny, whenever atheists ask for evidence, we are told all we need is faith.

"What we were seeing from the [climate change] doomsdayers [is] an induced dose of mild hysteria, semi-religious if you like, but dangerously close to superstition."

That's a bit rich. One of the country's leading purveyors of one particular brand of superstition, lecturing everyone else about superstition?
I guess if you believe that a God created the world in seven days, you probably think He can fix it in seven days too. And that way, you don't have to take any responsibility or do anything to attempt to fix it yourself--except maybe just pray a bit harder.

ps. Pell might find this story enlightening.