Dr. Moore, Greenpeace co-founder: AGW Skeptic

[DKW 86 6,388]

http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/20/why-i-am-climate-change-skeptic

Please remember to cover your keyboards before your heads explode.

Also remember that i am posting this without any commentary from myself.

Editor’s Note: Patrick Moore, Ph.D., has been a leader in international environmentalism for more than 40 years. He cofounded Greenpeace and currently serves as chair of Allow Golden Rice. Moore received the 2014 Speaks Truth to Power Award at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change, July 8, in Las Vegas.

I am skeptical humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future. There is no scientific proof of this hypothesis, yet we are told “the debate is over” and “the science is settled.”

My skepticism begins with the believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model. The entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario is the hypothesis increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat the Earth to unlivable temperatures.

In fact, the Earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization.

The idea it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous.

Recently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced for the umpteenth time we are doomed unless we reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to zero. Effectively this means either reducing the population to zero, or going back 10,000 years before humans began clearing forests for agriculture. This proposed cure is far worse than adapting to a warmer world, if it actually comes about.

IPCC Conflict of Interest

By its constitution, the IPCC has a hopeless conflict of interest. Its mandate is to consider only the human causes of global warming, not the many natural causes changing the climate for billions of years. We don’t understand the natural causes of climate change any more than we know if humans are part of the cause at present. If the IPCC did not find humans were the cause of warming, or if it found warming would be more positive than negative, there would be no need for the IPCC under its present mandate. To survive, it must find on the side of the apocalypse.

The IPCC should either have its mandate expanded to include all causes of climate change, or it should be dismantled.

Political Powerhouse

Climate change has become a powerful political force for many reasons. First, it is universal; we are told everything on Earth is threatened. Second, it invokes the two most powerful human motivators: fear and guilt. We fear driving our car will kill our grandchildren, and we feel guilty for doing it.

Third, there is a powerful convergence of interests among key elites that support the climate “narrative.” Environmentalists spread fear and raise donations; politicians appear to be saving the Earth from doom; the media has a field day with sensation and conflict; science institutions raise billions in grants, create whole new departments, and stoke a feeding frenzy of scary scenarios; business wants to look green, and get huge public subsidies for projects that would otherwise be economic losers, such as wind farms and solar arrays. Fourth, the Left sees climate change as a perfect means to redistribute wealth from industrial countries to the developing world and the UN bureaucracy.

So we are told carbon dioxide is a “toxic” “pollutant” that must be curtailed, when in fact it is a colorless, odorless, tasteless, gas and the most important food for life on earth. Without carbon dioxide above 150 parts per million, all plants would die.

Human Emissions Saved Planet

Over the past 150 million years, carbon dioxide had been drawn down steadily (by plants) from about 3,000 parts per million to about 280 parts per million before the Industrial Revolution. If this trend continued, the carbon dioxide level would have become too low to support life on Earth. Human fossil fuel use and clearing land for crops have boosted carbon dioxide from its lowest level in the history of the Earth back to 400 parts per million today.

At 400 parts per million, all our food crops, forests, and natural ecosystems are still on a starvation diet for carbon dioxide. The optimum level of carbon dioxide for plant growth, given enough water and nutrients, is about 1,500 parts per million, nearly four times higher than today. Greenhouse growers inject carbon-dioxide to increase yields. Farms and forests will produce more if carbon-dioxide keeps rising.

We have no proof increased carbon dioxide is responsible for the earth’s slight warming over the past 300 years. There has been no significant warming for 18 years while we have emitted 25 per cent of all the carbon dioxide ever emitted. Carbon dioxide is vital for life on Earth and plants would like more of it. Which should we emphasize to our children?

Celebrate Carbon Dioxide

The IPCC’s followers have given us a vision of a world dying because of carbon-dioxide emissions. I say the Earth would be a lot deader with no carbon dioxide, and more of it will be a very positive factor in feeding the world. Let’s celebrate carbon dioxide.

Patrick Moore (pmoore@allowgoldenricenow.org) was a cofounder and leader of Greenpeace for 15 years. He is now chair and spokesman for Allow Golden Rice.

[cooltigger21 0]

This guy better have some good bodyguards. The AGW crowd will be coming after him, not literally, but the rebukes and assault on his character will begin in earnest. Investigations into his life and business will be done. Everything that can be done to marginalize him and destroy his credibility will be done.

[AURaptor 1,113]

BOLO for any fatwas that AlGore may have issued on Dr Moore.

[AFTiger 282]

OK line 'em up. Dr. Moore is a hack. Heartland is a denialist site and doesn't count as real science. You are too stupid to understand science. I am tired of dealing with denialists. I am the only one here that understands real science.

Did I miss any?

[Weegle777 63]

He has no credibility, is a denier, and anything he puts out is nonsense.

**Getting this in before the Jonestowners chime in.**

[Weegle777 63]

Dang, AF you beat me to it!

[Weegle777 63]

Oh and, don't forget this one:

"You are unteachable, and are too far gone for me to educate you."

What a load of crap.

Translation:

You are much too intelligent and aren't a sheep, so I can't make you believe in my pseudo-intellectual, faux-scientific mumbo jumbo, so I will seek those who are gullible enough to buy the crap that I am selling.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Best thread here in awhile. Can't wait for the AlGorian crowd to get here and crucify Dr. Moore.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Proud Tiger

[AURaptor 1,113]

Oh and, don't forget this one:

"You are unteachable, and are too far gone for me to educate you."

What a load of crap.

Translation:

You are much too intelligent and aren't a sheep, so I can't make you believe in my pseudo-intellectual, faux-scientific mumbo jumbo, so I will seek those who are gullible enough to buy the crap that I am selling.

Communists and the Khmer Rouge had a solution for folks like that....

[Weegle777 63]

They usually post in packs. They are probably PMing each other to divise a posting strategy.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

You read my mind.

[AFTiger 282]

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

The silence from the GW crowd has been deafening. Is this one just to much to spin?

[au75 75]

i agree 100% with the article.

[cooltigger21 0]

So far nothing has happened to this guy but it can't be long before it does. Steve Goddard had his twitter account suspended. He's been big on questioning the "settled science" AGW crowd. http://twitchy.com/2...asks-whos-next/

[DKW 86 6,388]

Here let me start the defense: My understanding of the AGW Debate is this:

1) We are at some of the warmest temps recorded.

2) These temps have been essentially flat for years now.

3) By far, most of the AGW Models have ridiculously over-forecast the temperature change.

4) Pollution is bad.

5) In general, carbon fuels are not optimal.

6) We should be aggressively and proactively be pursuing wind, solar, nuclear, hybrids, etc so as to strengthen our energy independence.

7) In the past there have been other ridiculous over assertions, The Mann Hockey Stick Graph, that have seriously damaged the credibility of some of the AGW Supporters.

Edited March 23, 2015 by DKW 86

[Weegle777 63]

Denier.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Here let me start the defense: My understanding of the AGW Debate is this:

1) We are at some of the warmest temps recorded.

2) These temps have been essentially flat for years now.

3) By far, most of the AGW Models have ridiculously over-forecast the temperature change.

4) Pollution is bad.

5) In general, carbon fuels are not optimal.

6) We should be aggressively and proactively be pursuing wind, solar, nuclear, hybrids, etc so as to strengthen our energy independence.

7) In the past there have been other ridiculous over assertions, The Mann Hockey Stick Graph, that have seriously damaged the credibility of some of the AGW Supporters.

Does any of this warrant putting coal miners out of business? Or, carbon credits, or a carbon tax or throwing away unimaginable amounts of money on crony capitalists ventures in green energy? if all we're going to do is consider the left's intent and not the results of their policies then fine. None of their policies work as intended and that's not even subject to debate. If they did we'd already be in utopia. We're already over $18 TRILLION dollars in the hole trying to get their.