Vatican astronomer cites possibility of extraterrestrial 'brothers'

[eccles]

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican's chief astronomer says there is no conflict between believing in God and in the possibility of extraterrestrial "brothers" perhaps more evolved than humans.

"In my opinion this possibility exists," said the Reverend José Gabriel Funes, head of the Vatican Observatory and a scientific adviser to Pope Benedict XVI, referring to life on other planets.

"How can we exclude that life has developed elsewhere," he said in an interview with the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, published in its Tuesday-Wednesday edition. The large number of galaxies with their own planets makes this possible, he noted.

Cont:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/world/europe/14iht-vat.4.12885393.html

The problem is that the Vatican thinks there is a "god"

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/338944ab03c0aededb.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=17571)

[korenyx]

They want to be the first to convert them.

[Nosi]

Frankly, the Vatican is the last place I'd thought would even look seriously at the possibility of UFO's.:boggled: They have it lodged tight in the dark ages regarding other matters...

[Hux]

I fear the poor alien sods would be treated like the South Americans were. We broadly accept that aliens will look nothing like us; evolution whilst probably universal, is after all contingent. So if we are made in the image of God, where is that going to leave Mr. Alien?

The Catholics will be the first on the shuttle to tell these hapless creatures all about the evils of condoms.

[six7s]

Our resident pharoah, Akhenaten, is ready!

http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/Greetings.gif

:D

[six7s]

"In my opinion this possibility exists," said the Reverend José Gabriel Funes, head of the Vatican Observatory and a scientific adviser to Pope Benedict XVI, referring to life on other planets.

"How can we exclude that life has developed elsewhere," he said in an interview with the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, published in its Tuesday-Wednesday edition. The large number of galaxies with their own planets makes this possible, he noted.

Cont:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/world/europe/14iht-vat.4.12885393.html

The problem is that the Vatican thinks there is a "god"Sad, innit?

www.examiner.com/ Vatican prepares for extraterrestrial disclosure (http://www.examiner.com/x-2383-Honolulu-Exopolitics-Examiner~y2009m11d12-Vatican-prepares-for-extraterrestrial-disclosure)
The Vatican, through Funes, is supporting the idea that the incarnation of Christ is a unique event in Earth’s history tied in to humanity’s ‘fall’ and ‘original sin’. This idea was a major focus in Father Funes’ May 2008 interview which was titled "The extraterrestrial is my brother." Funes said that intelligent extraterrestrial life may not have experienced a ‘fall’, and may be “free from Original Sin … [remaining] in full friendship with their creator.” This makes it possible to regard them as ‘our brothers’ as Funes explained:

Just as there is a multiplicity of creatures on earth, there can be other beings, even intelligent, created by God. This is not in contrast with our faith because we can't put limits on God's creative freedom… "Why can't we speak of a 'brother extraterrestrial'? It would still be part of creation…

Most importantly, Funes’ statement makes possible the idea that Christianity can be exported to extraterrestrial worlds that have not experienced a ‘fall’ and are free from original sin.Its sad that a man with such a wealth of resources "can't put limits" on his own delusions and, instead, faffs about with such an obscure and inane aspect of an otherwise fascinating subject

[Beerina]

They want to be the first to convert them.

Almost certainly aliens will have a significantly older and larger society, and will thus have memes much more evolved at spreading.

These will blow away our crappy, young, weak memes like "Christianity", "Islam", and even "socialism". Their memes will no doubt have ego-soothing sub-memes to buttress their goodness at forcing these ideas on us at the point of a gun.

I suspect many around here would readily adopt them. I cannot predict what they would be like, but I can predict many of you would fall for it.


And, of course, if I were writing a Twilight Zone episode, the punch line at the end would be, "Instead of worrying whether they have souls, we should be worrying about whether they think we have souls."

[Segnosaur]

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican's chief astronomer says there is no conflict between believing in God and in the possibility of extraterrestrial "brothers" perhaps more evolved than humans.

Not sure why this should be too surprising.

The catholic church may be messed up on some issues (birth control, etc.). However, in many ways they're more enlightened when it comes to scientific issues than many other branches of christianity. (For example, its not the catholic church wish is trying to stamp out the teaching of "godless evolution".)

[six7s]

Not sure why this should be too surprising.

The catholic church may be messed up on some issues (birth control, etc.). However, in many ways they're more enlightened when it comes to scientific issues than many other branches of christianity. (For example, its not the catholic church wish is trying to stamp out the teaching of "godless evolution".)It might not be surprising

It is, however, ridiculously inconsistent - for the sort of reasons you identify...

The catholic church has a long, and despicable record of stymying both the advance and the dissemination of knowledge

[Third Eye Open]

Lol. This sounds like "Aliens are neat! Let's see if I can shoe horn this in between my god beliefs somehow."

[six7s]

Lol. This sounds like "Aliens are neat! Let's see if I can shoe horn this in between my god beliefs somehow."I reckon its nothing more than the latest scene from teh tragi-comedy farce that is 'Oh christ, science is discovering yet more stuff that unequivocally contradicts our woo'

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/... The Vatican claims Darwin's theory of evolution is compatible with Christianity (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html)The Vatican has admitted that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution should not have been dismissed and claimed it is compatible with the Christian view of Creation.

Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said while the Church had been hostile to Darwin's theory in the past, the idea of evolution could be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas.

Father Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti, Professor of Theology at the Pontifical Santa Croce University in Rome, added that 4th century theologian St Augustine had "never heard the term evolution, but knew that big fish eat smaller fish" and forms of life had been transformed "slowly over time". Aquinas made similar observations in the Middle Ages.

And, as any fule noes: if you repeat the same lie often enough...

:dl:

[dropzone]

The Vatican Observatory (http://vaticanobservatory.org/) is far, FAR less doctrinaire than many Prostestant sects. This is because the Mother Church is, mostly, less dogmatic than it was 500 years ago. Yeah, Pope Benny issues encyclicals about birth control, but most Catholics ignore them. And these people are more-Protestant than people with similar goals were at a half-of-us-a-minimum.

[Orphia Nay]

Pfft. The RC Church haven't got a hope. Everyone knows that aliens believe in Xenu, not God.

[Hux]

Almost certainly aliens will have a significantly older and larger society, and will thus have memes much more evolved at spreading.

These will blow away our crappy, young, weak memes like "Christianity", "Islam", and even "socialism". Their memes will no doubt have ego-soothing sub-memes to buttress their goodness at forcing these ideas on us at the point of a gun.

I suspect many around here would readily adopt them. I cannot predict what they would be like, but I can predict many of you would fall for it.


And, of course, if I were writing a Twilight Zone episode, the punch line at the end would be, "Instead of worrying whether they have souls, we should be worrying about whether they think we have souls."

I share your views beerena but Im not so optimistic.

There will be civilisations out there that are much younger too. So are we saying religion is a phase that young ignorant societies go through? I find it very difficult (but highly desirable) to wonder how the US will lose its religiosity. How Islam will one day find Islam of no consequence and so on. I just cant see it happening and I would have no confidence in any society to shrug off these memes. Of course Ii understand that all that needs to happen is for stronger memes to push them aside but where will they come from?

I am also sure there are many here on Earth that would view these Alien folks as God like.

[quarky]

The Vatican is a bit slow. They didn't recognize the egg's role in conception until the 1950s.

[six7s]

The Vatican is a bit slow. They didn't recognize the egg's role in conception until the 1950s.This is too cryptic for me...

Maybe there's too much blood in my caffeine supply...

Anyhoo...

I'm guessing y'ain't saying that the papists were ignorant of the human reproductive organs...

If so, what are you saying

Please explain
:)

[Robin]

The Vatican is a bit slow. They didn't recognize the egg's role in conception until the 1950s.
I don't know about that - but they raised the possibility of life on other planets about 600 years ago.

[The Nimble Pianist]

Isn't this a bit inconsistent with current Catholic teaching?

Though the Catholic Church allows its faithful to accept evolution (including the common ancestry of humans and other primates), it requires that Catholics still believe in a literal Adam and Eve from whom all humans descend. Holy Mother Church states that to dismiss the 'monogenic' ancestry of human beings (despite the fact that this is statistically impossible) is to deny the dogma of Original Sin.

Why would the upper ups in the Vatican leave open the possibility of alien brothers, even possibly more evolved brothers if there's no way for them to have been subjected to the inherited Original Sin?

No Original Sin = No need for Jesus = No need for Holy Mother Church! :D

[six7s]

Isn't this a bit inconsistent with current Catholic teaching?Yeah... but at least they're consistently inconsistent :p

Why would the upper ups in the Vatican leave open the possibility of alien brothers, even possibly more evolved brothers if there's no way for them to have been subjected to the inherited Original Sin? My guess is that its a case of once bitten, twice shy combined with a distict dislike for the taste of humble pie...

For centuries, they got away with spouting any old crap - simply because they were - literally - the authorities

In more recent times, they have been frantically trying to to reverse-engineer their so-called divinely inspired catchism with newly-discovered aspects of reality... and for many gullible souls, its worked...

www.timesonline.co.uk Vatican thumbs up for Karl Marx after Galileo, Darwin and Oscar Wilde (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6884704.ece)October 22, 2009

Karl Marx, who famously described religion as “the opium of the people”, has joined Galileo, Charles Darwin and Oscar Wilde on a growing list of historical figures to have undergone an unlikely reappraisal by the Roman Catholic Church.

L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, said yesterday that Marx’s early critiques of capitalism had highlighted the “social alienation” felt by the “large part of humanity” that remained excluded, even now, from economic and political decision-making.

<snip/>...Marx’s theories may help to explain the enduring issue of income inequality within capitalist societies.

“We have to ask ourselves, with Marx, whether the forms of alienation of which he spoke have their origin in the capitalist system,” Professor Sans wrote. “If money as such does not multiply on its own, how are we to explain the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the few?”

Related Links


Vatican claims Oscar Wilde as one of its own (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6716323.ece)



Vatican buries the hatchet with Darwin (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5705331.ece)



Vatican seeks to rehabilitate Galileo Galilei (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5238365.ece)


With reassessments such as these it may be wondered which formerly unacceptable figure could be next. Last year the Vatican erected a statue of Galileo as a way of saying sorry for trying the astronomer in 1633 for his observation that the Earth moved around the Sun; in February a leading official declared Darwin’s theory of evolution compatible with the Christian faith, and in July L’Osservatore praised Oscar Wilde, the gay playwright, as “a man who behind a mask of amorality asked himself what was just and what was mistaken”.

<snip/>

This overturns a century of Catholic hostility to his creed. Two years ago Benedict XVI singled out Marxism as one of the great scourges of the modern age. “The Marxist system, where it found its way into government, not only left a sad heritage of economic and ecological destruction, but also a painful destruction of the human spirit,” he told an audience in Brazil.

Then again the Pope has been busy reappraising modern capitalism. Benedict’s latest encyclical, Charity in Truth, offers a direct response to the recession, arguing that global capitalism has lost its way and that Church teachings can help to restore economic health by focusing on justice for the weak and closer regulation of the market.<snip/>

Professor Sans’s article was first published in La Civiltà Cattolica, a Jesuit paper, which is vetted in advance by the Vatican Secretariat of State. The decision to republish it in the Vatican newspaper gives it added papal endorsement.

My guess is that now, in the 'information age', they are trying to mitigate the risk of any possible future embarrassments, no matter how 'far out' it might seem...

And who knows? maybe, for young, nerdy catholics, it might be cool to have a pontiff willing to talk to ET... remember... they already believe in talking snakes!

[Nosi]

I fear the poor alien sods would be treated like the South Americans were. We broadly accept that aliens will look nothing like us; evolution whilst probably universal, is after all contingent. So if we are made in the image of God, where is that going to leave Mr. Alien?

The Catholics will be the first on the shuttle to tell these hapless creatures all about the evils of condoms.

Presumably, your poor alien sod will be dropping in on us most likely, and not us dropping in on them. That requires technology greater than our own so that means we have to mind our manners. If we are very lucky, they will be benevolent, like Vulcans.

[Nosi]

Yeah... but at least they're consistently inconsistent :p

My guess is that its a case of once bitten, twice shy combined with a distict dislike for the taste of humble pie...

For centuries, they got away with spouting any old crap - simply because they were - literally - the authorities

In more recent times, they have been frantically trying to to reverse-engineer their so-called divinely inspired catchism with newly-discovered aspects of reality... and for many gullible souls, its worked...

www.timesonline.co.uk Vatican thumbs up for Karl Marx after Galileo, Darwin and Oscar Wilde (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6884704.ece)

My guess is that now, in the 'information age', they are trying to mitigate the risk of any possible future embarrassments, no matter how 'far out' it might seem...

And who knows? maybe, for young, nerdy catholics, it might be cool to have a pontiff willing to talk to ET... remember... they already believe in talking snakes!

It's very possible that an ET has already slapped the Holy See with it's undeniable presence. It could be like the traveling fart in the classroom. Everyone may soon be unable to avoid knowing about it's whopper of a HELLO!:jaw-dropp

[geni]

Isn't this a bit inconsistent with current Catholic teaching?

Though the Catholic Church allows its faithful to accept evolution (including the common ancestry of humans and other primates), it requires that Catholics still believe in a literal Adam and Eve from whom all humans descend.

For highly non standard definitions of literal yes.


Holy Mother Church states that to dismiss the 'monogenic' ancestry of human beings (despite the fact that this is statistically impossible) is to deny the dogma of Original Sin.

Humans are decended from a very small number of people however so it's not statisticaly imposible. Genetics strongly suggests otherwise.


Why would the upper ups in the Vatican leave open the possibility of alien brothers, even possibly more evolved brothers if there's no way for them to have been subjected to the inherited Original Sin?

No Original Sin = No need for Jesus = No need for Holy Mother Church! :D

Which rather neatly provides a justification for not having to go out to convent the heathens.

Most likely it's pure interal politics with the more liberal wing trying to stamp it's theology on the matter before the conservatives get around to that area.

[quarky]

This is too cryptic for me...

Maybe there's too much blood in my caffeine supply...

Anyhoo...

I'm guessing y'ain't saying that the papists were ignorant of the human reproductive organs...

If so, what are you saying

Please explain
:)

Its a man's, man's world. They weren't ignorant, but sexist. I'll try to find a link. Its a true thing. Maybe someone will beat me to it.

[six7s]

Though the Catholic Church allows its faithful to accept evolution (including the common ancestry of humans and other primates), it requires that Catholics still believe in a literal Adam and Eve from whom all humans descend. Holy Mother Church states that to dismiss the 'monogenic' ancestry of human beings (despite the fact that this is statistically impossible) is to deny the dogma of Original Sin.Thanks for posting this... it got me thinking :)

I was born, raised and partially educated in a catholic community... and this is 'news' to me...

That ain't to say I disagree with what you wrote... just that it wasn't - for me - a biggie... but then our priests and nuns were always very vague when it came to dogma, catechism and such stuff - hiding behind looooong, convoluted waffle

Anyhoo... like I said, thanks for making me think, which made me curious enough to find this:

www.catholic.com/library/ Adam, Eve, and Evolution (http://www.catholic.com/library/Adam_Eve_and_Evolution.asp)
The controversy surrounding evolution touches on our most central beliefs about ourselves and the world. Evolutionary theories have been used to answer questions about the origins of the universe, life, and man. These may be referred to as cosmological evolution, biological evolution, and human evolution. One’s opinion concerning one of these areas does not dictate what one believes concerning others.

People usually take three basic positions on the origins of the cosmos, life, and man: (1) special or instantaneous creation, (2) developmental creation or theistic evolution, (3) and atheistic evolution. The first holds that a given thing did not develop, but was instantaneously and directly created by God. The second position holds that a given thing did develop from a previous state or form, but that this process was under God’s guidance. The third position claims that a thing developed due to random forces alone.

Related to the question of how the universe, life, and man arose is the question of when they arose. Those who attribute the origin of all three to special creation often hold that they arose at about the same time, perhaps six thousand to ten thousand years ago. Those who attribute all three to atheistic evolution have a much longer time scale. They generally hold the universe to be ten billion to twenty billion years old, life on earth to be about four billion years old, and modern man (the subspecies homo sapiens) to be about thirty thousand years old. Those who believe in varieties of developmental creation hold dates used by either or both of the other two positions.

The Catholic Position

What is the Catholic position concerning belief or unbelief in evolution? The question may never be finally settled, but there are definite parameters to what is acceptable Catholic belief.

<snip/>

The Church does not have an official position on whether the stars, nebulae, and planets we see today were created at that time or whether they developed over time (for example, in the aftermath of the Big Bang that modern cosmologists discuss). <snip/>

Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter— the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.

While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it [B]in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution.

<snip/>

Adam and Eve: Real People

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).

In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: "When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own" (Humani Generis 37).

The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents" (CCC 390).


If that's an example of 'definitive teaching', then I guess 'Convoluted Waffle 101 must be a compulsory subject at all seminaries

[Marduk]

I have it on good authority that there will be no "Alien" contact until we have evolved enough to understand what real science is. Until that day there are warning buoys out in the Kuiper belt playing a looped tape of "beware sky daddy believers ahead"
:D

[geni]

If that's an example of 'definitive teaching', then I guess 'Convoluted Waffle 101 must be a compulsory subject at all seminaries

It's generally referred to as theology. It's actualy a good thing. Religions that can't do it risk resorting to more violent means to avoid the appearence of flexibility.

[six7s]

It's generally referred to as theology. It's actualy a good thing. Religions that can't do it risk resorting to more violent means to avoid the appearence of flexibility.So...

not ok = hurting people physically
ok = screwing with peoples heads

Got it!

Thanks :)

[geni]

So...

not ok = hurting people physically
ok = screwing with peoples heads

Got it!

Thanks :)

PR is accepted as legal within most juristictions so the answer would appear to be yes.

[six7s]

What is PR?

[SezMe]

I can see it now. We get to Plant Gerkq and everyone is walking around with a little guillotine around their neck. Turns out their Jesus was some French-like guy who was beheaded by a Asian-like guy in an area much like Salt Lake City.

But there's a small contingent of people who poo-poo the whole thing. They think some Jews got nailed to a cross in some far away planet...their known as atheists. :)

[geni]

What is PR?

Public relations AKA propaganda

[Hux]

I have it on good authority that there will be no "Alien" contact until we have evolved enough to understand what real science is. Until that day there are warning buoys out in the Kuiper belt playing a looped tape of "beware sky daddy believers ahead"
:D

The first six words of your message are the most troubling. I worry about you. :o

[six7s]

I, for one, welcome our new theistic overlords

[Beerina]

The Vatican Observatory (http://vaticanobservatory.org/) is far, FAR less doctrinaire than many Prostestant sects. This is because the Mother Church is, mostly, less dogmatic than it was 500 years ago. Yeah, Pope Benny issues encyclicals about birth control, but most Catholics ignore them. And these people are more-Protestant than people with similar goals were at a half-of-us-a-minimum.

I read an article in a (rare that I ever buy it) issue of Astronomy magazine an interview with the Vatican Astronomer, who was very agreeable with these kinds of things. Within a year or two he was fired for that. :(

[Beerina]

Almost certainly aliens will have a significantly older and larger society, and will thus have memes much more evolved at spreading.

These will blow away our crappy, young, weak memes like "Christianity", "Islam", and even "socialism". Their memes will no doubt have ego-soothing sub-memes to buttress their goodness at forcing these ideas on us at the point of a gun.

I suspect many around here would readily adopt them. I cannot predict what they would be like, but I can predict many of you would fall for it.


And, of course, if I were writing a Twilight Zone episode, the punch line at the end would be, "Instead of worrying whether they have souls, we should be worrying about whether they think we have souls."

I share your views beerena but Im not so optimistic.

There will be civilisations out there that are much younger too. So are we saying religion is a phase that young ignorant societies go through? I find it very difficult (but highly desirable) to wonder how the US will lose its religiosity. How Islam will one day find Islam of no consequence and so on. I just cant see it happening and I would have no confidence in any society to shrug off these memes. Of course Ii understand that all that needs to happen is for stronger memes to push them aside but where will they come from?

I am also sure there are many here on Earth that would view these Alien folks as God like.


I am not saying religions are a thing young, ignorant societies go through (compared to an ancient galactic civilization.) Rather that our currently dominant religions are the product of the evolution of different spreading sets of ideas we, in general, label "religion".

Certain sets spread faster than others, and those that did so, did so by adopting ideas that helped them spread faster than the competition.

I would expect the dominant "religions" of an ancient, massive galactic (or universal) society to be highly optimized in this manner, and to easily brush aside our amateurish attempts at such, like Christianity and Islam. I throw in "Socialism", too, as a secular "religion", so to speak. (They're all evolving, spreading memes, and ones that are in direct competition. Yes, even Christianity in the West, vs. socialism, which is currently on top, having reduced Christianity to a toothless, de-clawed housecat, a quaint "lifestyle choice" of no consequence.

And how did it do that? The adaptation was disgustingly simple. Replace "for God" with "for The People" and "We'll make life better for you after you die" with "We'll make life better for you before you die, but at some unspecified* point well into the future.")


And note that both Islam and socialism, and, before de-clawing, Christianity, have no problem adopting the consciousness-soothing submeme of using force to jam itself onto unwilling people, under the "it's good for you even if you don't realize it" abusive irrelevancy.

I would be extremely surprised if any alien race didn't arrive with a set of laws to force on us "for our own good". Our alien oppressors wouldn't be some clownish dictatorship, but rather well-meaning acolytes of some highly seductive and optimized religion or quasi-religion.




* Often explicitly specified, but said date about as trustworthy, and malleable, as a "The world will end tomorrow!" sign.

[KingMerv00]

Let me see if I have this right:

Astronomer says something really obvious about the natural world and gets extra attention because of he devotes the rest of his life to the supernatural? Is that fair?

[Nosi]

The first six words of your message are the most troubling. I worry about you. :o

Feeling a bit green are we?:boggled: