Co-Founder of Greenpeace explains why he is a climate skeptic

americanthinker.com ^ | 3/21/2015 | Rick Moran

[rktman]

Got yer dose of schadenfreud for the day right here...

The co-founder of the granddaddy of green groups, Greenpeace, explains in a Heartland editorial why he is a climate skeptic. Patrick Moore, who left Greenpeace in 1986 because, in his words, it "took a sharp turn to the political left" and "evolved into an organization of extremism and politically motivated agendas," pulls no punches when criticizing his former colleagues in the green movement:

[rktman]

Mr. Moore better hope barbara boxcar doesn't hear of this. She'll be on him like a fly on XXXX. Not that they would bully anyone.

[9thLife]

There are now online classes in “how to deal with climate change denial” at edX. No, really.

[MeshugeMikey]

Thank you.

Today;s “eviromentlists” by and large sure arent Yesterday’s enviromentalist.

Theyve kidnapped and adopted the use of the term, but there ends the similarity!

[BRL]

My line is that anyone who uses the words “climate change” is a “gobal warming “ denier. So I simply ad to their “global warming” denial and also deny the political agenda attached to “climate change”

[Popman]

Any time I meet a "global cooling denier" I ask them this question: What percent of the earths atmosphere is the evil global warming greenhouse gas called CO2?

Most answer between 2% and 10 %

Then I inform them it's .04 % That's 211' of 5280' which is a mile...

My follow up question: how can .04 % of any gas change the earths atmosphere?

[mollynme]

I read Moore’s original article earlier today and particularly liked the last line:

Let’s celebrate carbon dioxide.

I think it’s time for a new bumper sticker!

[rigelkentaurus]

Pogman - you missed the decimal place location. 0.04% of 5280 is 2.11

[sauropod]

Boxer needs to shut the frick up!

[GOPJ]

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.

Great post...

[Repeal The 17th]

I ask:
If mankind can control the temperature or the CO content of the atmosphere,
what do you think the correct temperature and CO content should be?

[quantim]

climate skeptic

The argument is basically lost in the title much to the smiles of the left.  It's kind of like the question, 'how often do you beat you wife' kind of thing.

A climate skeptic ought to be the political bodies or individuals that purport AGW rather than the other way around.

The war on fossil fuels will continue unabated however, and using the climate is just another way to tax and spend by the DC crowd.

[Zhang Fei]

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-08/uol-aae080910.php

[aquila48]

Good one - I think I’ll steal it.

[Chode]

watermelons... green on the outside and communist on the inside

[wita]

Facts don’t seem to matter much to the faithless, Godless, self absorbed, long nose busy bodies all too concerned with what the rest of the world seems to be doing to “them”.

As if “they” were of such importance that anyone would pay them any mind. So in order to garner their due, they must be so in your face radical that it will gain them the attention to which they are entitled.

[The Great RJ]

Denier! (heretic)...the dogma of St. Algore is totally correct and cannot be questioned. Bring on the climate change Inquisition to punish this heretic. (sarcasm)

[pieceofthepuzzle]

“If mankind can control the temperature or the CO content of the atmosphere,
what do you think the correct temperature and CO content should be?”

Exactly! This, to me, is the essence of the flaw in their ‘settled science’ argument. If we could dial in an exact atmospheric CO2 concentration, what should it be? If we could change it today, let’s say lower it a bit, what would that do? The bottom line is that no one knows the answer to that question, and therein lies the problem with ‘settled science’. Who knows? If we lowered CO2 right now it might be disastrous.

[Repeal The 17th]

Interesting thoughts from the original article:
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/03/20/why-i-am-climate-change-skeptic
-
“...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.
Without carbon dioxide above 150 parts per million,
all plants would die.
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...”
-
Makes me wonder if there is some long term millions of years cycle where:
The CO2 increases, and the plant life explodes.
The plants absorb the CO2, and the CO2 decreases.
The plant life dies off, and the CO2 increases.

[Popman]

Thanks...I thought I had put the decimal point in before I hit “post”

Wish we had a edit button...

[USS Alaska]

Then I inform them it's .04 % That's 211' of 5280' which is a mile...

.04% of 5280 feet is 2 feet 11inches not 211 feet, I think your calculator slipped a little.