Global Warming: Dr. Patrick Moore, PHD in Ecology and founder of Greenpeace

[mark kennedy]

I haven't spent a lot of time on the topic but found this interesting discussion on the subject. Dr. Moore seems credible with a long history of being active resisting threats to the environment. Some interesting history here of Greenpeace, originally they were protesting underground nuclear testing in Alaska, actually the Aleutian Islands . After a while it became known that whales were being hunted by the tens of thousands. The key idea in his position is that yes, there is global warming but it's a naturally occurring long term trend:

Is the Earth warming? Well, yes, there’s been slight warming in the past 300 years since the peak of the Little Ice Age. But guess what? There’s no scientific proof that this is caused by carbon dioxide. And simply asserting a hypothesis does not prove it to be true.

But that doesn’t stop environmentalists, activists, and the most troubling – politicians – from calling carbon dioxide a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees. It’s so bad that governments say we need to tax it! (Patrick Moore, Sensible Environmentalist: The truth about carbon dioxide)
​

I was as dismayed as anyone else when the US pulled out of the Paris Accords so I did some looking around. I realize there is a counter argument to Patrick Moore's thesis here, I welcome it.

Feel free to respond as you see fit, but I think it's important to understand that man being the primary reason for global warming has alternatives.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[majj27]

I'll see if I can find time to watch this, because Moore is kind of like a weird Rorschach blot. He's really been all over the place on his views. If nothing else, it should be interesting.

EDIT: Whoopsie. I was thinking the OTHER Patrick Moore, the German hating British Astronomer.

 

[mark kennedy]

I'll see if I can find time to watch this, because Moore is kind of like a weird Rorschach blot. He's really been all over the place on his views. If nothing else, it should be interesting.

It's worth hearing him out, he is certainly making more sense to me the Al Gore did. I'm not crazy about his elaborate discussions of CO2 levels throughout natural history but he does offer an inverse logic to main stream scientists on the subject.