Patrick Moore Exposes Climate Fraud
The convert from Greenpeace, Dr Patrick Moore, has given Melbourne audiences and Chanel 10 watchers of Andrew Bolt a veritable feast of information and analysis damning governmental action to reduce CO2 emissions and other extremist environmental proposals. And he also met in Canberra yesterday with a small group of MP’s and CEO’s of a couple of organisations exposed to extremist proposals and in some cases actual government policies.
His tour of Australia continues for another week or so. Although not a climate scientist, Moore has a doctorate in ecology and environmental science. After 16 years with Greenpeace prior to his resignation in 1986, he spent the following 28 combating its policies. So he has experience on both sides of the fence.
Moore’s presentations showed he has very considerable expertise on the factors influencing climate and on policies conducive to improving the environment and at the same time adding to economic development. I have rarely heard anyone as able to identify problems and benefits of policies and convey these in manner understandable to the intelligent layman. At the lunch I arranged at The Australian Club, almost without drawing breath Moore spoke for about 40 minutes and answered questions for another 40. He was then given a standing ovation by the 50 attending.
His presentations, which are reflected in the these two documents made available here (transcript of Andrew Bolt’s interview and an article in Quadrant Magazine on Oct 28 by Tony Thomas titled ‘Patrick Moore Goes to War‘) covered a wide area and included the following points:
- Humans are part of the earth and are not the enemies of it that many “greens” attempt to convey ;
- The absence of any warming over the past 18 years when 25 % of all CO2 emissions went into the atmosphere doesn’t fit with the supposed science;
- As confirmed recently by the US Space Agency (NASA), there is no “missing” heat under the oceans. Even if there was, nobody would know whether or not it constituted a threat and when that might happen;
- There is actually a “shortage” of CO2 and much higher concentrations in the atmosphere would be beneficial to plant and tree growth;
- There is no scientific case for stopping fracking. No water contamination has occurred during the use of that technology in the US;
- Warmists are wrong to suggest that warming will lead to water shortages and require the building of desalination plants. Warming would likely lead to higher rainfall;
- Genetically modified rice – so-called “Golden Rice” – provides Vitamin A and more extensive use of it in developing countries would save the lives of many children. Yet Greenpeace opposes its use ;
- Greenpeace also opposes the cutting down of trees. But the forestry industry has considerable potential if it is based on replanting of trees cut down.
It is rare that I am so praiseworthy of a speaker but Patrick Moore deserves high praise. The Federal government would benefit greatly if it were to invite him back for, say, three months to educate politicians, bureaucrats, business and church leaders.
Why Restore Fuel Excise/Agree Direct Action Now
In today’s Herald Sun Andrew Bolt argues (see Excise Hike Just Fuels Myth below) that the restoration of the excise on fuel and the announced agreement with Palmer on Direct Action could have been avoided by challenging the “ludicrous warming propaganda that now passes as news”. He adds to Patrick Moore’s points by listing three incorrect claims on warming threats.
While the excise change is justifiable, its timing seems strange coming straight after Abbott’s reminder that the Coalition supports lower taxes and when the Victorian party is behind Labor in polling with only four weeks to the election. What might have helped could have been a joint announcement on making sensible use of the environment by removing the absurd restrictions on fracking in Victoria.
While the Direct Action policy will have little effect on reducing emissions, it also gives unjustified credibility to the need to reduce emissions at a time when, after a six day UN meeting, the best agreement which could be reached on a possible international agreement on lower emissions was to have two additional meetings next year (see Rifts remain at UN talks on Climate Pact below) and when the European Union announcement of a major change in policy on renewables turns out to have no substance (see EU renewables target ‘merely symbolic’ below).
EU’s Meaningless Announcement on Renewables
A few days ago our SBS TV news reported the announcement by the EU that by 2030 it would be producing 27% of energy from renewables. This is meaningless as there is not even an attempted enforcement provision because Poland, which is a large user of coal, refused to give any commitment. Note also that the AFR report below says that Germany has been increasing its use of coal (now at 43%) as is the Netherlands, while business is said to be “desperate for certainty about carbon policy”.