In a social media universe, one needs to look at not only the formal news coverage, but also the number of efforts like the above, inspired by something like the Pope’s encyclical.
The number of parodies and youtubes pro and con suggest that the the Climate letter has had the desired effect sparking discussion, including unhinged right wing outrage.
Below, a rant from a far-right conservative Catholic science denier, decrying “Antipope Francis'” acceptance of evolution, among other things.
Carl Pope in EcoWatch describes the sea change that the encyclical is part of:
The Republican reaction to Pope Francis’s climate encyclical, juxtaposed to the Democratic congressional rebellion against President Obama on trade, suggest that climate and energy are powerfully disrupting the grid-locked orthodoxy which has dominated American politics for the last decade.
–Archbishop Pedro Barreto Jimeno of Huancayo, Peru warned that Francis “will have many critics, because they want to continue setting rules of the game in which money takes first place. We have to be prepared for those kinds of attacks.”
The Pope took his critics into account—making it clear within the text of Laudato Si that his approach to the environment is firmly rooted in traditional Catholic views of the uniqueness of human life and the need for a non-market based common good—drawing a line clarifying that he is not preaching a “new age” form of Catholicism.
(Reactionaries’ bewilderment that the Catholic Church’s option for the poor extends to concerns about protecting the poor from greenhouse enhanced droughts, heat waves and rising oceans echoes their glib assumption that a presumed “social conservatism” would fence in American Hispanic voters, override their communitarian economic and environmental attitudes, and allow Republicans to retain Hispanic voter loyalty while still promising to “self-deport” 11 million of their relatives).
It is more a gale than a fresh breeze when the most ground-breaking Pope since John XXIII links poverty and climate, in a way which leaves the far-right sputtering—(just as it was a powerful symbol when a daughter of the Church, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, broke with President Obama on trade citing climate concerns).
Indeed, something fundamental is shifting this summer in political and cultural attitudes around climate.
Compare this year to the summer that preceded Copenhagen; the dominant 2009 news on climate was the grinding failure of the U.S. Senate and the Obama Administration on climate and energy legislation. And the rest of the news was equally dispiriting—no progress, little ambition, cynicism about the prospects.
Six months out from Paris, a new dynamism is palpable. Hawaii just committed itself to 100 percent clean energy by 2045. The California Senate pledged the world’s seventh largest economy to a 50 percent emission cut by 2030—including petroleum. The first quarter witnessed a stunning 76 percent growth in U.S. residential solar installations over the previous year. Georgia joined the growing list of states that permit homeowners to generate their own rooftop solar electrons, while giant (and historically conservative) Georgia Power proclaims that it will promote and grow clean power just as aggressively as it previously dominated coal and nuclear.

If biodiversity is now a “religion” I guess I will join that…
The amount of stupid from these people is astounding. It’s like they are unable to have several thoughts in their heads. If e.g. a Christian tells us that we should be kind to our neighbours, do we then claim that Christianity was forced upon us by the end of a sword and that therefore we do not need to be kind to our neighbours? I cannot see why the pope’s faith makes him any less right about taking care of our planet and its biodiversity.
I’d say free market economics, or capitalist industrialism, has as much in common with a faith or religion as any other form of deity worship. The “invisible hand” being the object of the devotees reverence. It must be a religious faith because anything that doesn’t agree with the principles of their faith is externalsed, or denied altogether. The fact that the faithful control the mechanism for delivering the messages from the “invisible hand” is analigous to how religions of the past controlled the message delivery system.