Dr. Patrick Moore, who was one of the original founders of Greenpeace who left the organization in disgust of their current political zealotry, and Greenpeace is now trying to have him erased from history for daring to do that. He has now produced this interesting video in conjunction with with Prager University that is sure to put some people into conniption fits.
Global Warming activists will tell you that CO2 is bad and dangerous. The EPA has even classified it as a pollutant. But is it? Patrick Moore provides some surprising facts about the benefits of CO2 that you won’t hear in the current debate.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This video is beyond stupid.
Please explain.
I am too stooped to understand how this is stupid. Please enlighten me with your Gaia given gift of intelligence.
Oh its you, don’t bother. You are are an idiot.
Great video.
Readers should also read the “The Many Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment” by Drs Craig and Sherwood Idso:
http://www.co2science.org/education/book/2011/55benefitspressrelease.php
I’m still way behind on this issue – how can a gas needed for the cycle of life between plants and animals be classed a pollutant?
“Dr. Patrick Moore, who was one of the original founders of Greenpeace who left the organization in disgust of their current political zealotry…”
Dr. Moore left Greenpeace in 1986, so what does his leaving 30 years ago have to do with Greenpeace’s current positions? In fact, he himself said he left over their position on chlorine and PVC, among other chemicals – not over CO2 or climate change: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120882720657033391
I assume Anthony meant current at the time zealotry. The Zealotry that has continued ever since in many changing flavours..
I did not see a political angle in his reasons for leaving. It was because he felt they were not using enough science in making their decisions. If there is a political angle in opposing chlorine and PVC, I’m all ears.
Great lecture except one statement: “…by mid-century we will have to feed 8 to 10 billion people.”
Who is this “we” that “must” feed 8-10 billion?” Does this childish socialist political thinking need to wriggle into every science discussion? Let’s overcome the emotionalism instead of pandering to the grandiose. Leave it out.
BREAKING NEWS:
Hugo Weaving, acting as spokesman for the IPCC, Greenpeace, The Royal Society and Oregon State University, has made this statement in a press conference today:
“The purpose of life is to end.”