Trump calls climate change crisis ‘fake science’, Greenpeace goes berserk, gets caught in a lie

This really might end up being “quote of the year” rather than “quote of the week”. This morning Pres. Donald Trump tweeted about Dr. Patrick Moore the co-founder of Greenpeace. What he said is creating a firestorm amongst some green organizations.

Too many those are fighting words, and Greenpeace has already fired back obviously very upset. But at the same time they are illustrating just how much of a bunch of liars they are:

The problem is, we’ve already caught them out on this lie, because the Internet never forgets:



Read the whole thing here

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 9:01 am

Green heads exploding just hit 8.2 on the Richter Scale.

Bill Powers
Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 10:29 am

The best bit as they were exploding on twitter, nary a word on how Moore is wrong and they are right which could end the who kerfuffle. No rather they want to argue that Moore is not one of them, even though he was, as if that somehow will make their fake science legitimate.

Reply to  Bill Powers
March 12, 2019 3:12 pm

They called him a “paid lobbyist.” Please, no one tell them the genetic fallacy isn’t an argument.

David Lilley
Reply to  damp
March 13, 2019 2:34 am

Greenpeace called him a “paid lobbyist” ? Greenpeace is ostensibly a charity but in reality it is a ruthless multi-million dollar business whose objective is partisan political activism.

Reply to  David Lilley
March 23, 2019 9:09 am

I’ll repeat this, again!

Revenue Canada has withdrawn Greenpeace’s charitable (and tax advantageous) status as its activities “have no public benefit.”

Mike Bromley
Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 10:47 am

8.2, with the remaining 1.8 (total 10) muffled by the splattering of grey matter.

Reply to  Mike Bromley
March 12, 2019 11:10 am

Richter scale is NOT a score out of ten. It is a logarithmic scale of energy. Thus it has no upper limit.

Trump calls climate change crisis ‘fake science’

Well, no, actually he just quoted someone else who said that. ( But let’s pretend Trump said it himself, I’m sure MSM will and that way we will have to support them ! )

because the Internet never forgets:

Thank you, I’m sure most of the AGW warriors now in GP have never heard of Patrick Moore.

Robert of Texas
Reply to  Greg
March 12, 2019 12:21 pm

The Richter Scale measures the amplitude at a certain distance from the epicenter, not actually the energy of the whole. One can infer energy of the earthquake if one knows the local geology well enough. But the same energy released can result in different measurements at different locations, so the measurement is at best a proxy for the earthquake energy.

The Richter Scale is a base-10 logarithmic scale of the amplitude, not energy. It has a practical upper limit of about 8. All modern earthquake measurements use a different measurement scale entirely, and then get reported as a Richter Scale measurement because that is all the public knows about.

From Wiki: “The energy release of an earthquake, which closely correlates to its destructive power, scales with the ​3⁄2 power of the shaking amplitude. Thus, a difference in magnitude of 1.0 is equivalent to a factor of 31.6 ( = ( 10 1.0 ) ( 3 / 2 )…in the energy released; a difference in magnitude of 2.0 is equivalent to a factor of 1000 ( = ( 10 2.0 ) ( 3 / 2 )…in the energy released”

As for an upper bound, Greg is right in that there is no predefined upper-bound, but there are practical limits to the amount of energy that can be transferred through geologic strata – somewhere north of 8 on a Richter Scale and probably north of 10 on an MMS.

The Richter Scale doesn’t really work on anything past that (past an 8). The “Moment Magnitude Scale” (MMS) which is used in modern times will measure past an 8 and has been used to measure earthquakes into the 9’s. There has never been, to my knowledge, an earthquake measure past about a 9.5 MMS (or similar scale).

Reply to  Robert of Texas
March 12, 2019 8:18 pm

I remember a geography textbook back in 5th or 6th grade explaining how in a theoretical Richter 12 quake, buildings would be thrown into the air and the ground would be moving up and down in waves from the epicenter like pond rings from a thrown stone.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Greg
March 12, 2019 12:21 pm

So it goes all the way to eleven?

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
March 12, 2019 1:30 pm


Hahahaha! My thoughts exactly!


Craig from Oz
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
March 12, 2019 6:30 pm

Walter, why don’t you just make ten bigger and make ten be the top number and make that a little bigger?

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
March 13, 2019 7:59 am

Nice “Spinal Tap” reference, there 😂

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Greg
March 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Also…there is no gray matter there to splatter.

(Glad I played a small role 5 years ago…finding stuff from 7 years ago. On the anniversary of the Interwebs, I think it shows that it can work for good. At times.)

Reply to  Greg
March 13, 2019 1:07 am

Has Trump hurt your feelings?

So sorry (not!)

Mickey Reno
Reply to  Mike Bromley
March 12, 2019 11:23 am

Patrick Moore pushed the 10:10 Red Button on Greenpeace.
ha ha ha ha

Here’s that incredible, stupid bit of PR, for those who’ve never seen it:

D Anderson
Reply to  Mickey Reno
March 12, 2019 11:38 am

There is a growing number of people who literally hate humanity. No exaggeration, no hyperbole. Literal fact.

Reply to  D Anderson
March 12, 2019 11:58 am

Yep. And they tend to LOVVVVE animals. They consider ALL animals to be “peaceful and loving” … while man is vile and deadly.

These people should all be banished to live on the African Veldt … naked and afraid. THAT would solve many problems all in one REAL WORLD example.

Richard Patton
Reply to  D Anderson
March 12, 2019 12:11 pm

I discovered that while doing a research paper in `95. They literally want to “off” 96.5% of the earth’s population. At that point, they said that the maximum human population the Earth could support is 250 million.

Glen Ferrier
Reply to  D Anderson
March 12, 2019 12:45 pm

D Anderson: It is worse than you think; they hate all things carbon (carbon pollution); therefore they hate all life… plant and animal alike. They even hate the earth itself, as it contains substantial amounts of carbon pollution.



Reply to  D Anderson
March 12, 2019 3:18 pm

liberal fact?

Reply to  D Anderson
March 13, 2019 3:58 am

kenji: “Yep. And they tend to LOVVVVE animals. They consider ALL animals to be “peaceful and loving” … while man is vile and deadly.”

kenji, if they really loved animals they wouldn’t slice up birds, roast birds alive, and explode bats from the inside.

(My point: WE are the ones who really love animals, we skeptics. So stop poking fun at animal lovers because real animal lovers are your allies and friends (me for example).)

Reply to  Mickey Reno
March 12, 2019 11:39 am

that commercial is absolutely disgusting. they always give away their tell.

Reply to  MatthewDrobnick
March 13, 2019 4:09 am

you’ve obviously not watched monty python, or have not understood British humour!

Reply to  Mickey Reno
March 12, 2019 1:44 pm is a 404 error message has 2 words “nice page”

what is that? is it a pbs thing or is it someone showing the absurdity of greenpeace?

Reply to  Mickey Reno
March 12, 2019 3:44 pm

A very clear self expression of psychopathy in steroids at large, MSM and institutionally supported…in many ways.


george Tetley
Reply to  Mike Bromley
March 23, 2019 8:29 am

Green/piece ?
Hello do those stupid people not remember New Zealand ?
Seems it is a place of Firsts 1 First in the world to give the women a voting right, and to get rid of a G/P Warrior, and now another first with a shooting spree

Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 10:48 am

Dr. Patrick Moore was a co-founder and Past-President of Greenpeace. He left Greenpeace in the early 1990’s. Here is why – read Moore’s essay, “Hard Choices for the Environmental Movement”, written in 1994, especially “The Rise of Eco-Extremism”

Patrick observed that Eco-extremism is the new “false-front” for political Marxists, who were discredited after the fall of the Soviet Union circa 1990 and took over the Green movement to further their political objectives. I have corresponded with Patrick on this essay and we both agree that he “nailed it”.

The Green movement is really a smokescreen for the old Marxists. Their history is horrific and reprehensible – and I include the entire cabal of socialists, Greens, global warming alarmists (aka warmists) etc.

It is clearly NOT about the environment or the well-being of humanity – almost everything they have done is anti-human AND anti-environmental.

In the 20th Century, socialists Stalin, Hitler and Mao caused the deaths of over 200 million people, mostly their own citizens. Lesser killers like Pol Pot and the many tin-pot dictators of South America and Africa killed and destroyed the lives of many more. Not all these people were murdered by psychopathic tyrants – many deaths in the FSU and China were caused by starvation and deprivation, due to the false agricultural science called Lysenkoism.

Recent Green Death probably started with the 1972-2002 effective ban of DDT, which caused global deaths from malaria to increase from about 1 million to almost two million per year. Most of these deaths were children under five in sub-Saharan Africa – just babies for God’s sake!

Warmists can take credit for food-for-fuels hunger, the clear-cutting of the rainforest to grow sugar cane for fuel ethanol and palm oil for biodiesel, the rapid draining of the vital Ogallala aquifer for corn ethanol and biodiesel, bird-and-bat-chopping wind turbines, runaway energy costs and reduced electric grid reliability, increased Winter Mortality and similar social and environmental disasters.

The number of Excess Winter Deaths and shattered lives caused by runaway energy costs in the developed world and lack of access to modern energy in the developing world probably exceeds the tens of millions of malaria deaths caused by the DDT ban.

The Greens are the great killers or our age.

Robert Davis
March 12, 2019 11:34 am

Allan I have a cousin tell me all about the Soviets involvement in both the Peace & Environmental movements years ago. He had 40 years in the “Agency” all over this planet. At least they don’t hide being good little Marx’s today.

Dusan J
Reply to  Robert Davis
March 12, 2019 12:45 pm

That’s why they are sometimes called watermelons – green outside but red inside.

March 12, 2019 2:40 pm

Very well said. Worth spreading around.

March 12, 2019 6:12 pm


WHO tells us 120,000,000 people in developing nations will die from respiratory conditions by 2050 from inhaling smoke from open fires used for cooking and heating. This could be alleviated by allowing them to build fossil fuel power stations to deliver cheap, relaible elctricity.

1,000,000 people per year will go blind and die because they lack a small amount of vitamin A in their predominantly white rice diet. This can be alleviated with GM Golden Rice but Greenpeace won’t allow it.

500,000 people die every year in developing countries from poor sanitation which could also be alleviated by allowing them access to cheap, reliable electricity to provide fresh water and modern sanitation.

These people could be helped were it not for elite, wealthy, privileged, western socialists who don’t give a damn about anything but their personal welfare.

Jim Yong Kim, former President of the World Bank, a physician and Obama appointee, with the remit to end world poverty by 2030, was clear that he wouldn’t lend Africa money to build fossil fuelled power stations. Instead, he gave much of the available money to China.

And if renewable energy is so frigging cheap, why don’t these people have it!

Reply to  HotScot
March 12, 2019 8:29 pm

Good comments HotScot my friend. One quibble:

You wrote “500,000 people die every year in developing countries from poor sanitation”.

I recall that about 2 million kids below the age of five die from contaminated drinking water very year – about 70-80 million dead little kids since the advent of global warming alarmist nonsense.

The funds already squandered on global warming alarmism and green energy nonsense could have paid for clean water and sanitation systems in every village in the world.

March 13, 2019 2:35 am


That was information I found on drainage only, simply crappy or non existent sewage systems.

I shall add yours to my list, I’ll do a little digging for the source though.

The utter waste of money on the climate change scam is staggering when people just need what we in the west have, reliable, cheap electricity to improve their lives beyond all recognition. I hate to be evangelical about it but when I recite these numbers to people they either just flat out don’t believe me or change the subject because they don’t want to hear it.

But they’ll salve their conscience by donating money to WWF which is arming thugs with AK49’s and allowing them to imprison and torture innocent villagers on trumped up charges of poaching.

March 13, 2019 5:33 am

The World Health Organization says that every year more than 3.4 million people die as a result of water related diseases, making it the leading cause of disease and death around the world. Most of the victims are young children, the vast majority of whom die of illnesses caused by organisms that thrive in water sources contaminated by raw sewage.

Trillions of dollars of scarce global resources and millions of lives have been wasted on global warming/green energy nonsense and other green enviro-scams.

A fraction of these wasted trillions could have put safe water and sanitation systems into every village on Earth, and run them forever. About two million kids below the age of five die from contaminated water every year – about eighty million dead little kids from bad water alone since the advent of false global warming alarmism.

The remaining squandered funds, properly deployed, could have gone a long way to ending malaria and world hunger.

Reply to  HotScot
March 13, 2019 2:39 am

Hot Scott
what a good idea – put electric grid lines over 1000s of miles to every small village. (police them to stop theft of electricity, or destruction of links by terrorists) – remember to generate electricity you need water to get the steam to drive the turbines and water only available reliably on coasts. get villagers to spend years of earned cash on cookers, fridges, water pumps, etc, then get them to spend money they do not have on purchase of electricity.
Do you not see and understand the problem?
These humans need low tech help. a starter would be a simple light/computer/ run from solar and battery storage.
Your ideas would be great if all you wanted was factories producing cheap sports shoes.

Reply to  ghalfrunt
March 13, 2019 3:36 am

China has managed to bring mains electricity to hundreds of millions of poor subsistence farmers, who can now cook and refrigerate their food and light their houses. Strange isn’t it?

Reply to  ghalfrunt
March 13, 2019 4:10 am

that’s communism for you!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to  ghalfrunt
March 13, 2019 4:15 am

ghalfrunt wrote:
“a starter would be a simple light/computer/ run from solar and battery storage.”

Many organizations are funding these simple solar-to-battery solutions now, including several that I am helping. Better than nothing, but not enough energy for cooking, so indoor air pollution from indoor cooking fires is harming and killing many people, especially in sub-Saharan Africa.

False global warming alarmism is the great killer of our time.

Rural electrification in Africa has been set back many decades by the extremist position of the Green (aka Marxist) movement.

Reply to  ghalfrunt
March 13, 2019 10:58 am

it is not cheap installing powerlines to properties even if a local low voltage line is present close by.
I also ask again (for I’ve asked before) who will pay these costs, who will pay for cookers, (over £15 for a single ring), who will pay for the electricity used ($0.08 / kWh minimum) ? My (efficient) fridge freezer uses 2kWh/day in a cold climate – these 2 items would chew through the best part of £90 a year) is USA going to donate this amount to all 3rd world humans?

uk costs:
How Much will it Cost?
It’s very difficult to predict as each site, even on the same street, will be different. You need to be aware of your situation before estimating the costs involved. Take the following examples:
Site one is a new bungalow on an unmade lane on the outskirts of a village where the supply is overhead and the pole is within the plot. The supply is brought down the pole and then routed underground in trenches dug by the self builder. This could cost around £450.
Site two requires a single phase supply off the main line which already runs over the self builder’s plot. The work involves installing a new pole with a mounted transformer (on the self builder’s own land) then running the cable 35m to the house. The quotation given is £7,000.
Site three requires supply in a rural position, entailing a 60m road dig with the distribution company digging as far as the boundary. This could cost up to £10,140.

D Anderson
Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 11:34 am

“Green heads exploding”

If only we could harness that energy for the good of mankind.

Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 11:47 am

Like over-ripe brussel sprouts!😂😂😂

Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 1:02 pm

Moore did not in fact join the committee that later named itself Greenpeace until 1971. It was formed in 1970. Ipso facto, Moore was not a founder. You cannot found something that someone a year earlier founded.

That a branch of Greenpeace later erred in calling Moore a founder does not make Greenpeace a liar when they say he was not a founder.

It’s all a stupid point to argue over anyway.

And it’s not as if Trump has a rep as a truth teller – in fact, obviously, just the opposite. He is well known today as the lyingest political leader in the world, with nearly 9,000 documented lies counted by the Washington post to date.

So any argument that pits Trump the Liar against any other person or body on the basis of telling a lie is like having Vlad Putin accuse an American of not being pro-American enough.

Reply to  Duane
March 12, 2019 1:52 pm

Read his book;

“I joined Greenpeace before it was even called by that name. The Don’t Make a Wave Committee was meeting weekly in the basement of the Unitarian church in Vancouver.

…We realized all-out nuclear war would be the end of both civilization and the environment–hence the name we soon adopted, Greenpeace, as in “let it be a green peace.”

As he worked on the GP constitution it’s pretty safe to say he was there at the beginning…

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Teddz
March 12, 2019 3:00 pm

An organisation doesn’t exist until the constitution is adopted. He helped write it. I believe he was a founder. GP said he was a founder. Patrick says he was a founder.

We all know GP has been trying to pretend Patrick was not a founder because his departure was on principle (trying to ban chlorine), just as when he joined them (to stop nuclear testing). His departure was very embarrassing for the others because they lost their only scientist-founder. Like many spent organisations, they were looking for a new niche to use for fund-raising. They abandoned principles when the money became good and they had backing from serious communists and “revolutionaries” like the crowd in Toronto who backed/produced the “Guerrilla” newspaper sold by hippies on the street corners.

I tried to get a job there as a writer once. They refused, saying accept my claimed political affiliation “apolitical” did not exist in their universe.

Toronto was about being a hippie and a draft dodger. Vancouver was more about….well, actually it was the same now that I think about it, but we had CHUM-FM. GP was an oddity that rapidly evolved from a Quaker-based silent protest to far more violent things intended to “deliver messages”.

I have walked the deck of the Rainbow Warrior II and went below. In person, they were a very, very reticent bunch at that time. It was like walking into a group where everyone knows something.

David Chappell
Reply to  Teddz
March 12, 2019 8:41 pm

It’s interesting that, of the names in the wayback page, Patrick Moore is the only who appears to have any science background at all.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Duane
March 12, 2019 2:57 pm

So; what you’re saying is that the founding document that was produced by Greenpeace itself is inaccurate?

If such a simple and critical document is so wrong, how then do we trust any other document they produce?

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
March 12, 2019 3:19 pm

Some do, some don’t, some will, some won’t. I might.

I recall my wife wore a T-Short with that written on it.

Reply to  Duane
March 12, 2019 6:17 pm


You might note that Moore is the only scientist (albeit a student) amongst those above. You might also note he’s the only ecologist amongst those above.

It would kind of make sense to recruit someone as a founder who actually knew what he was talking about.

Garland Lowe
Reply to  Duane
March 12, 2019 8:18 pm

Your hatred of Trump may be affecting your logic. Have you counted Hillary’s, Bill’s, Barrack’s, Nancy’s, or Chuck’s lies? There are more I could name.
Probably not.

Reply to  Duane
March 13, 2019 1:19 pm

Trump is the most investigated and critically-examined President in history. The fact that his detractors can find NOTHING with which to implicate him makes him extraordinary in modern times.

Imagine if anyone should investigate other past Presidents to the same extent and what they might uncover?

Pilot Dave
Reply to  McComber Boy
March 12, 2019 2:43 pm

“settled science” is political, not science – They only cite the supply side, not the demand side of CO2 (Plant food), They only talk about the affects on temperature from CO2 raise, never the affects on agriculture (Every greenhouse operator knows increased CO2 = increased crop yield.)

There are two very simple facts the Liberals will not acknowledge:

#1 This Earth can only sustain 2 billion people without burning fossil fuel – John Deere does not run on batteries… so, what to do with 5 billion dead bodies?

#2 The “deal” Trump wisely backed us out of would have taxed USA and sent this money to the #1 and #4 producers of CO2 – Chairman Mao’s China, and India…

Three very HUGE issues with her GND that any 6th grader would point out –

#1 – Even IF she could get our airline industry eliminated in 10 years, the airlines owned by China, Russia, Cuba, etc will be happy to fly Americans across the world’s oceans, from Canada / Mexico…. (Think about the 50K TSA workers who voted Democrat, but will be out of work)

#2 – Elimination of ALL fossil fuel in 10 years means we can no longer make steel as it requires COAL to pull the oxygen out of the melt. You can melt metal with electric furnaces, but you can not MAKE steel without coal.

#3 – without fossil fuel, 5 billion people will starve to death – John Deere does not run on batteries.

Reply to  Pilot Dave
March 12, 2019 6:20 pm

“They only talk about the affects on temperature ”

I sure hope, as a pilot, that you know the difference between affect and effect.

Garland Lowe
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
March 12, 2019 8:24 pm


March 12, 2019 9:06 am

Greenpeace goes berserk?
Isn’t that their normal operating condition?

BTW, you misspelled berserk in the headline.

Reply to  Anthony Watts
March 12, 2019 10:43 am

It’s still wrong in the link!

Richard G.
Reply to  Anthony Watts
March 13, 2019 12:53 pm

I subscribe to the Meriwether Lewis school of spelling where you get to spell a given word multiple ways in any paragraph. Thanks Anthony for a great forum.

March 12, 2019 9:06 am

The banner says “Resist Greenpeace”? I’m OK with that 😉

Russell Cook
Reply to  PaulH
March 12, 2019 1:02 pm

Ha! Meanwhile, resistance is futile, and one of these days our anti-science Greenpeace friends will figure that out.

Reply to  Russell Cook
March 12, 2019 6:02 pm

You will be assimilated.

Reply to  PaulH
March 13, 2019 5:47 pm

Saw this from 1998 and thought it worth mentioning, “Revenue Canada has decided to refuse to recognize Greenpeace as a charity. The ruling was handed down this past week. The environmental group failed for the third time to gain charitable status after it was first revoked in 1989. The decision means that the environmental group will not be able to offer income tax receipts to its donors. Revenue Canada’s charities division says that the Greenpeace Environmental Foundation can’t be considered a charity because its activities “have no public benefit.” !!!

March 12, 2019 9:07 am

My reading of the rules and standards of Twitter indicate that Greenpeace should be blocked for their fake news.

Curious George(@moudryj)
Reply to  Rob_Dawg
March 12, 2019 9:27 am

Not really sure about that. An incomplete list of founders and first members is posted; there is no way to tell who is a founder and who is one of first members. Dr. Moore could have been a founder. To disprove it, the GreenPiss needs to produce something stronger than a document with commissars vanished.

Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 9:45 am

Read that archived webpage, Curious G — it plain-as-day lists Moore under a page-heading that reads, The Founders of Greenpeace, as one of the founding members of the “Don’t Make A Wave” committee whose name was changed to “Greenpeace”.

I don’t know how clearer it could be made.

Claiming that Moore was not a founder is plainly a lie. Plainly. Period. No question. That’s what the archived Greenpeace webpage says. Thus, they are presenting false information on a social-media website. A lie. Fake news.

Curious George(@moudryj)
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
March 12, 2019 10:08 am

Are you talking about the web page reproduced in the post? The heading of the page reads The Founders of Greenpeace. It is NOT followed immediately by a list of names. That list appears only farther down, and it is presented as Founders and first members. Maybe you see something else?

Ill Tempered Klavier
Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 10:16 am

Yes, each one listed is a founder and a first member. duh.

Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 10:31 am

Curious George

There is no distinction between Founders and First Members so take your pick. Moore has said for years he was a Co-founder, how can they disprove it when there is credible evidence to support his claim?

Unless of course they produce some documentation from the time, but this was a bunch of activists. Activists aren’t renowned for their record keeping.

Even if they had records the worst he could be is a Founder Member it doesn’t mean his exit from the organisation is any less meaningful. He left because they turned from a genuine environmental group to a political, money making machine which abandoned it’s scruples.

He also stated in an interview he was the only scientist amongst them, which according to that list, he is. Who would start an ecological campaigning without an ecologist as a prominent member, perhaps even a Founder? Clearly, he’s far more qualified than any of the others.

Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 12:39 pm



Moore is on the list on down, yes, FOLLOWING those exact words describing what that group of names is. How much more “immediate” are you looking for? What words exactly are you looking for to convince you that Moore was a co-founder? A member of a group that FOUNDED an organization IS a co-founder. Moore was a member of the seed group that founded the committee that changed its name to Greenpeace. I just do not see how it could be any clearer.

What I am seeing is exactly what it says.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
March 12, 2019 3:48 pm

“The problem is, we’ve already caught them out on this lie, because the Internet never forgets:”

and everything posted on the internet is accurate.

no mistakes ever!

Gerald Machnee
Reply to  Steven Mosher
March 12, 2019 5:40 pm

**and everything posted on the internet is accurate.**
rephrased to:
**and every lie posted on the internet is accurately copied.**

Richard G.
Reply to  Steven Mosher
March 12, 2019 8:50 pm

And gas lighting is strong on the internet.

Listen to what Patrick Moore says, not what someone says about him. His analysis rings true. “There is no climate crisis, there’s weather and climate all around the world.”

I have said many times myself, there is no global average climate. All climate is local.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
March 13, 2019 2:40 am

Steven Mosher

You should know. Not much you post is accurate.

Particularly your credentials.

ferd berple(@ferdberple)
Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 10:20 am

list of founders and first members
“And” means Moore was both a founder and a first member.

And/or would mean he might not have been both.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 10:57 am

Com’on Curious, you know you are in company with a loftier standard of curiosity than that.

Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 11:41 am

Greenpeace hasn’t produced anything to support their claim Moore wasn’t a founder.
The archive is evidence that he was. This is also:

“In 1971, Moore was a member of the crew of the Phyllis Cormack, a chartered fishing boat which the Committee sent across the North Pacific in order to draw attention to the US testing of a 5 megaton bomb planned for September of that year. Greenpeace was the name given to the boat for the voyage and it would be the first of the many Greenpeace protests.[11] Following the first voyage, key crew members decided to formally change the name of the Don’t Make a Wave Committee to the Greenpeace Foundation. These decision makers included founders Bob Hunter, Rod Marining and Ben Metcalfe as well as Patrick Moore.”
One of Wiki’s two refs show Moore as a founder of “Greenpeace Foundation”, the other by “Greenpeace International”, verifying the first ref (with the exception of omitting any mention of Moore).

This is likely much more on the topic:

“Greenpeace insiders have debated about “founders” since the group became famous in the mid-1970s. In the early years, no one thought about it or cared.”…14636.16714..16890…0.0..0.132.1082.0j9……0….1..gws-wiz…….0i71j0j0i30j0i8i30j33i10.xFa7zE60Jpc

Reply to  Glenn
March 12, 2019 7:43 pm

I believe the Phyllis Cormack set sail for the Aleutian Island of Amka (it used to be called Amchitka, but somebody blew the chit out of it).

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Curious George
March 12, 2019 12:31 pm

George: “And” is conjunctive. The listed persons were founders AND first members. They were both. The statement is not in any way ambiguous.

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
March 13, 2019 12:50 am

They used to call such people “founder-members” .

March 12, 2019 9:09 am

Go Trump go! Fund science that shows CO2 is safe, it will sit there forever and forever be a thorn in the side of the CAGW argument!

Thomas Homer
Reply to  MattS
March 12, 2019 10:29 am

MattS: “Go Trump go!”

Precisely! President Trump has fundamental science on his side.

Carbon based life forms require Carbon and participate in the Carbon Cycle of Life. Organic Carbon is sourced from atmospheric Carbon Dioxide via photosynthesis by plants and phytoplankton. Life depends on the extraction of Carbon from CO2. CO2 is necessary for life.

That’s fundamental science.

The Theory of CAGW offers no laws, axioms, postulates, nor formulae. There is no actual science to apply. That’s a vacuous theory.

Fundamental science vs vacuous science.

Reply to  MattS
March 12, 2019 12:03 pm

How about making an “endangerment finding” that a “Green New Deal” elimination of carbon-based fuels and products will KILL a MASSIVE number of humans?

Time for the EPA to return to PROTECTING the ACTUAL environment!

Reply to  MattS
March 12, 2019 6:25 pm

“Fund science that shows CO2 is safe”

That’s still agenda-driven science. Just fund objective science, open and transparent.

bit chilly
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
March 12, 2019 7:27 pm

+1. Science carried out in a partisan manner is never going to be good science, no matter who is funding or supportive of it.

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
March 12, 2019 8:38 pm

Choosing what does and what doesn’t deserve funding is inherently making a value judgement, a reflection of bias. As far as funding is concerned, science cannot be strictly objective. Neither for that matter, can education. Choosing what should and what shouldn’t be taught is an inherent value judgement.

The best these disciplines can do is strive to be dispassionate and reflective enough to recognize and account for their biases.

Leftist activism, of course, is not exactly known for having a handle on dispassion or self-reflection.

March 12, 2019 9:09 am

Gosh, how I envy my American cousins. Look what we have to put up with in the UK, Theresa May.

Reply to  Julian
March 12, 2019 9:22 am

Forgotten Blair already? He’s baack.

Reply to  bonbon
March 12, 2019 10:13 am

Oh for some Voltaire inspired man management!

Byng byng!

James Schrumpf
Reply to  Peter Wilson
March 12, 2019 10:24 am

Pour encourager les autres?
(Not even gonna try for proper accents)

Nice pun with “Byng Byng.” Not many Americans would get this reference (though everyone here will, of course).

Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 12, 2019 11:27 am

James Schrumpf


I have never read Voltaire so haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.

I’m a layman and your expectation that people understand higher academic attainment is precisely why sceptics can’t persuade people AGW is bunk.

(I appreciate it was a joke but, it was also my opportunity to make a point).

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 12, 2019 12:27 pm

In 1756, the British Admiralty sent Admiral John Byng to prevent the French from taking Minorca. Byng arrived when the island was already under siege, and, after an indecisive naval engagement, withdrew without relieving the siege. Byng was court-martialed and hanged for “failure to do his utmost.” This brought charges that he had been used as a scapegoat for ministerial failure. On his tombstone it says “bravery and loyalty were insufficient securities for the life and honour of a naval officer.”

French author Francois Marie Arouet (1694 – 1778, “Voltaire”) had his fictional character Candide witness such a hanging in the eponymous novel and remark:

“Dans ce pay-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres.”
“In this country it is good to kill an admiral from time to time, to encourage the others.”

Reply to  James Schrumpf
March 12, 2019 2:56 pm

Actually Admiral Byng was shot on the quarterdeck of HMS Monarch.

Reply to  Peter Wilson
March 12, 2019 1:06 pm

Many Americans know Edgar Poe and should know what happened at the restaurant. Voltaire, real name François Marie Arouet, who changed his name (maybe today diagnosed with ADS?), was high on the visitors glowing list.

ferd berple(@ferdberple)
Reply to  Julian
March 12, 2019 10:12 am

Look what we have to put up with in the UK, Theresa May.
Think that is bad. We’ve got TruDope. Shock of all shocks, the NYT and ODEC have taken him to task. And the CBC and the rest of the canucklehead press have even gone so far as to risk their $600+ handout by mildly suggesting that a rotten fish might not smell so sweet.

Reply to  ferd berple
March 12, 2019 10:27 am

They’ll be back on board the Liberal train well before the next election. The only reason they’re reporting his transgressions now is it’s too big to ignore and the election is months away. Plenty of time for it all to die down and become “yesterday’s news” well before the writ is dropped.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Art
March 12, 2019 3:30 pm

The CBC brass know the Conservatives will never give them $300m to carry on their bizarre crusades. As the election nears we will be told, from the news, who has the divine right of rule in Ottawa.

Think about that. Very few organisations have $300m riding on the result of an election. Because of fearsome incompetence on the middle-right, don’t be surprised in the NDP gain a chance at a minority government.

Reply to  ferd berple
March 12, 2019 11:34 am

ferd berple

Theresa may and her useless cronies have taken 3 years since the announcement of the Brexit referendum NOT to sort out Brexit.

We won WW1 in 4 years!!!

mike the morlock
Reply to  HotScot
March 12, 2019 12:32 pm

HotScot March 12, 2019 at 11:34 am

You guys were in it from 1939 until 1945, a bit more then 4 years We were in it from 1941 to 1945, that was 4 years. Don’t sell yourselves short you did a great job. Of course you may just be listing the time period you had allies 🙂

Oh yes that goes the same for Canada Australia and New Zealand and the rest of the Commonwealth.


Paul C
Reply to  mike the morlock
March 12, 2019 2:01 pm

WW1 – 1914 – 1918.

Andre Lachance
Reply to  mike the morlock
March 12, 2019 2:16 pm

Mikey , Mikey, Mikey … There is a bit of a difference between WW1 which HotScot refers to and WW11 which you are referring to.

Reply to  mike the morlock
March 12, 2019 5:44 pm

Mike the morlock.
Read and understand.
World war one.1914 to 1918.

Reply to  mike the morlock
March 12, 2019 6:29 pm

Give Mike the M a break. He clearly has comprehension issues, such as not knowing the difference between “then” and “than”.

Reply to  HotScot
March 12, 2019 1:30 pm

If McArthur had not moved in ye would still be fighting to the last man.

Javert Chip
Reply to  bonbon
March 12, 2019 4:46 pm

“Moved in” where?

william matlack
Reply to  Julian
March 12, 2019 11:45 am

You think you got it bad.lmao. Wehave that dimwit JUSTIN TRUDOPE for a primeminister They dont come any dumber than him.Although the people that voted for him………..

Reply to  Julian
March 13, 2019 9:26 am

A real lamb in lion’s clothing, that woman.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  drednicolson
March 13, 2019 10:02 am


Trying being Canadian….

The good news is, Prime Minister Socks Zoolander is probably going to have his dimples handed to him in the next election.

The better news, he might be charged with a major crime.

The even better news, he’ll be charged as an adult.

Sal Minella
March 12, 2019 9:10 am

It appears that the prez quoted Patrick Moore. Is that quote accurate? If so, it is much bigger news than if Trump said it.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Sal Minella
March 12, 2019 9:28 am

Yes, I saw the interview myself this morning.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tom in Florida
March 12, 2019 10:48 am

I saw the Patrick Moore interview, too, and it was a good one. Moore did call climate science Fake Science, and he went on to make a good case against CAGW.

I can see why President Trump was impressed with the Moore interview.

It’s rumored, and probably true that Trump watches Fox&Friends all the time. I, personally, consider Fox&Friends the best news program on television. If you want to know what’s going on then watch Fox&Friends. They will give it to you straight.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 12, 2019 11:54 am

When I travel internationally, the worst thing is the crap fake CNN in airports and hotels. I complain at each venue, and watch Fox on my laptop.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Fred
March 12, 2019 3:36 pm

I think CNN actually pays airports to display their channel prominently.

D Anderson
Reply to  Sal Minella
March 12, 2019 12:42 pm

Anthony had a story about him on March 10th. Go back and look at it if you haven’t already

Carl Friis-Hansen
March 12, 2019 9:11 am

Thanks to both The President and The Doctor for for being so strait forward. Now, if just the MSM would be so investigative to align with WUWT and get the indoctrinated sheeple to be properly informed too.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
March 12, 2019 9:49 am

Hahahahahahaha — good joke there.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
March 12, 2019 11:09 am

Carl, it’s not the MSM, it’s the YSM (Yellow Stream Media) and its members are jurinalists (Swedish pronunciation)n or urinalists (American). They pee on our collective legs and attempt to convince everyone it’s raining.
The reference for the ‘Y’ in YSM is what was termed The PeePee Dossier that was pushed by the leftist supporting owned Press Corpse alleging that Trump paid Russian prostitutes for “Golden Showers” on a bed once slept in by the previous president of the US. It ties it into the old days of “Yellow Journalism.”

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  H.R.
March 12, 2019 3:36 pm

The once-a-year newsletter produced by the Engineering students at Carleton U in Ottawa (appropriately printed on yellow newspaper) is known as, “The Piss-Coloured Rag”. It was the only claimant on the basis of appearance, but on the basis of content, it has much competition these days, especially bad jokes that pass for journalism.

March 12, 2019 9:12 am

Green heads exploding reminds me of the Movie Martians Attack. The humans discover that martian heads explode when a country western tune is played

March 12, 2019 9:16 am

That be Slim Whitman, I believe. 😃

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Spuds
March 12, 2019 10:23 am

Indian Love Song was the name of the tune, as I recall.

March 12, 2019 10:01 am

The humans discover that martian heads explode when a country western tune is played

There was a funny Twilight Zone episode similar to that — perpetual liar got abducted by aliens and he disabled them inside the flying saucer by playing his harmonica. Of course afterward everyone laughed & didn’t believe him.

Reply to  beng135
March 12, 2019 10:38 am

How about former surgeon, now wino Burgess Meredith find a doctor’s satchel in a trash can, discovers a scalpel that cuts without inducing bleeding. Cleans himself up, gets up in front of body of eminent surgeons and the press, to prove it works by cutting his own throat. Just then, aliens in a flying saucer realize they left the satchel on Earth by mistake and recall it. Sad!

Neil Jordan
March 12, 2019 10:48 am

Here’s the link. Yes, the green heads really explode.

March 12, 2019 6:32 pm

Mars Attacks.

March 12, 2019 9:14 am

The webcast you ran of an interview with Moore noted that he left Greenpeace when they started a drive to ban chlorine, and the others refused to pay any attention to his noting that chlorine was an element, and quite common. He also noted that the organization had been taken over by leftists.
Trump is crude, rude, and so shallow he damn near beads up. But he has been right on enough major issues thus far I am mostly pleasantly suprized.

Reply to  Tom Halla
March 12, 2019 9:26 am

Shallow? He knows exactly how deep the swamp is, and the way to drain it – no platitudes!
Still, there is a Leviathan still lurking – just watch Pence, Rubio, Pompeo flounder!
Keep fishing!

Michael C
Reply to  bonbon
March 12, 2019 10:15 am

Now if only he actually wanted to drain the swamp instead of making it deeper… I have liked a few of the things that Trump has done or tried to do but the man made his money through deceit and feeding off the government trough and I have seen nothing to make me believe that he’s interested in closing the loopholes that made him richer. Don’t pay attention to him or his opposition to climate change. Look at what his appointees have done to exploit the system.

Reply to  Michael C
March 12, 2019 10:53 am

You believe Bloomberg? ‘Nuff said.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Michael C
March 12, 2019 11:06 am

“Now if only he actually wanted to drain the swamp instead of making it deeper… I have liked a few of the things that Trump has done or tried to do but the man made his money through deceit and feeding off the government trough and I have seen nothing to make me believe that he’s interested in closing the loopholes that made him richer.”

Methinks you are assuming things not in evidence. Don’t believe everything the leftwing tells you. Even Trump is innocent until proven guilty.

Trump is doing all the things one should expect from a conservative. If you are a conservative, you should love just about everything Trump does.

If you are a self-righteous, morally-superior Republican, then you might not like Trump. But that’s just a personality problem the never-Trumpers have.

I see Paul Ryan has reared his ugly head today to denounce Trump’s behavior, saying that will cause Trump to lose the next election. Yeah, Paul, he should act like you and stab people in the back who trust him, like you did Trump. Right? As long as he speaks so he doesn’t offend anyone.

You know what, Paul? I think Trump’s “offensive” language is one of his greatest assets, or rather his willingness to use it to take on the crazy left. You never used offensive language to take on the crazy Left, did you Paul? That’s right, you never took on the crazy Left at all, with any type of language, now did you.

Shut up and fade away, Paul. We don’t need you preaching morality to us. Go stab some other person in the back. That seems to be what you are good for. Your present statement being another example of your backstabbing.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Michael C
March 12, 2019 11:26 am

He gives his President’s salary to the war vets’ for medical purposes, he funded his own campaign. Had he wanted to further enrich himself, he would have joined in with crony capitalists, set up pay to play, and made his own real estate, etc. small by comparison. He’s a billionaire business man who is used to getting what he wants.

Is he a nice sweet fellow you would like to have as a friend? Probably no. But don’t conflate this with the job at hand. He’s going to remake the world from under your feet, hopefully with you noticing. He will sweep the next elections and he will continue to transform the Republicans to a real political party.

He will be emulated. The grey mold of nèomarism even in Europe where they love this ugly stuff is going to be stopped in its tracks. Yeah, Trump is changing the world.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 12, 2019 12:06 pm

The thing is, he has the guts to SAY what millions of us are THINKING but lack the moxie, the platform and the stature to articulate. For the first time since I’ve been coming to this board there is suddenly PUBLIC DEBATE about “global warming/climate change/crisis.” People are cracking the books and fact-checking some of that “settled science.” See which books are best-sellers on Amazon!

If I know human nature, its cool to be bad-ass, and there’s nothing much more dangerously transgressive at the moment than sticking it in the eye of the Leftist agenda. I’m betting lots more red-pilled greenies are going to come out as having switched sides. Hey, if I can be detoxed from an entire lifetime of indoctrination, so can anyone! 😉

Richard Patton
Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 12, 2019 12:34 pm

Lincoln said of Grant when he was told that Grant was a drunkard, “I like him-he fights.” The same goes for Trump “I like him-he fights.” I just wish a lot more Conservatives would get a spine and fight.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 12, 2019 12:59 pm

“The thing is, he has the guts to SAY what millions of us are THINKING but lack the moxie, the platform and the stature to articulate.”

What the Left and the Never-Trumpers hate most about Trump is he doesn’t sugar-coat the truth, he blurts it right out. And they can’t stand the truth. Such as “some Mexicans coming across the southern border are rapists”; or “Climate Change is a Hoax!”; or “in Charlottesville there are good people on both sides”. Trump exposes their delusions every time he opens his mouth.

Of course, his opponents distort everything he says, but if you listen to Trump’s actual words you will see he is speaking the truth (for the most part). His opponents claim Trump has told 10,000 lies, but the truth is those are 10,000 distortions of the truth by Trump’s enemies.

Rather than wade through all that leftwing propaganda to debunk it, let’s request that Trump’s enemies provide us with just one *consequential* lie Trump has told. I have asked this question before but haven’t had a credible response to it yet. Noone seems to be able to come up with a consequential lie Trump has told.

Searching for a consequential lie.

Ty Hallsted(@thallstd)
Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 12, 2019 2:02 pm

“he will continue to transform the Republicans to a real political party.”

I hope so but fear you may be overly optimistic on that point.

Reply to  Michael C
March 12, 2019 11:53 am

If he wins a second term and the Republicans retake the House, which will be with more Trump supporters, he will then truly begin to drain the swamp. At this point with a Dem House, and even at the beginning of his first term with Ryan, and multiple House squishes, many now gone, he had no leverage.

After the next election I think that if I lived in the DC area I would sell my property to get out before the property values begin to drop as he moves major portions of the national bureaucracy out of there into flyover country and also cuts the overall number of bureaucrats in federal government employ.

Everyone seems to forget he was not a politician. He was not like Reagan who had a great many of trusted contacts familiar with the function of government to use to help him fill the thousands of appointed positions. Obama used the DNC and Clinton to help fill out those positions with like minded leftists. Trump didn’t want Bushies. He took Ryan’s buddy Priebus to attempt to appease Ryan an get him on board but the number of never Trumpers made most legislative progress (other than tax cuts) impossible. He has had many appointees who never worked in the DC bureaucracy and failed in their positions. After he is re-elected, many people who are afraid to work for him now will come on board, and snowball down hill will be the operative phrase.

I have been astounded in the quickness of his learning curve while in office. He resisted the calls to declassify documents that would show the corruption in the DOJ and FBI saving the release of the truth until the time it can greatly benefit his re-election next year. I think we will have October surprises galore.

Reply to  Tom Halla
March 12, 2019 9:55 am

Tom Halla

You are saying very crude words about DT. He is THE president on this planet, and he is doing THE things which every president should do.

Oh I am so envy to you US citizens. I´m almost turning green, luckily just only on my face.

Reply to  F1nn
March 12, 2019 10:07 am

Perhaps ‘Greenpeace’ should be renamed ‘Greenface’.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  Photios
March 12, 2019 10:33 am

Try “Greedpeace”, it fits the personal outlook of its leaders.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
March 12, 2019 11:14 am

You mean Greedpiece, don’t you?

Pa Wi
Reply to  Photios
March 12, 2019 11:10 am

Or Greenpeace be remonikered “Greenfleece” greed and power is their hinge..and their door swings wherever they can get traction to sustain the cash flow to the high ups and “partnerships” of the organization.

Reply to  F1nn
March 12, 2019 12:42 pm


Paul Johnson
Reply to  Tom Halla
March 12, 2019 10:57 am

Tom – The problem you and many others have with President Trump stems from the dual nature of the U.S. Presidency. The President is both the Head of State and the Chief Executive. Many long for the President to be a surrogate king; noble jet relatable. Donald Trump is blunt, profane and hard-edged. He has, however, good policies and can get them implemented. He is an awful Head of State, but a great Chief Executive.

old engineer
Reply to  Paul Johnson
March 12, 2019 12:46 pm

I have never seen the office of president described that way, but you are absolutely correct in your description of the office and how Trump fills it. Perhaps because the media mostly covers the “head of State” part, we’ve had many presidents who spent most of their effort on being Head of State. It’s nice to have one focused on the result – making America great (in the sense of the economy) again.

Reply to  Paul Johnson
March 13, 2019 7:42 am

Paul Johnson — correct. The president is elected to run a country, not be some kind of moral figure — that should be done by family, relatives, teachers, friends, neighbors, church, whatever. All I or anyone else should be “concerned” about is how well he runs the country.

PS — The tendency to “need” the president to be some kind of moral guide is prb’ly because the other sources I mentioned in many cases are failing to do so nowadays.

D. Cohen
Reply to  Tom Halla
March 12, 2019 11:54 am

Trump has what might be called the **businessman’s gift**. Successful businessmen have to be first to take advantage of a new opportunity before anyone else realizes it’s there — hence they have to be willing to act on insufficient information and routinely have hunches that are correct enough to point them in the right direction. Journalists and academics — in fact almost everyone who writes for a living, which also includes lawyers come to think of it — are implicitly taught to gather sufficient information to convince ordinary reasonable people before making a statement or decision. This tends to make them mediocre businessmen at best and even the most talented ones have no idea what to make of Trump’s actions and statements. Do I need to add that today’s political establishment is overwhelmingly dominated by people trained as lawyers, academics, and journalists?

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Tom Halla
March 13, 2019 10:10 am


Yesterday, he tweeted about airplane design and wondered if they were too complicated.

The Usual Suspects smirked and called him an idiot (again).

But…if people didn’t have such visceral reaction to everything he says, and weren’t easily as dumb and compulsive as he is, they’d know that THIS ISN’T A NEW QUESTION TO ASK!!!


Are Modern Airplanes Dangerously Overengineered?

Between increasingly automated cockpits and lightweight materials untested over an aircraft’s entire lifespan, some aviation watchers are worried the tech of planes is moving too fast. In the wake of revelations about Air France 447, PM’s editors take a long, hard look at aviation safety.

Last line: “Historically, the aviation fatality rate has dropped sharply with each new generation of aircraft. But an unsettling fact comes with technical advances: Loss of control, which often involves human error, is now the single most common cause of air crashes worldwide.”

Reply to  Tom Halla
March 13, 2019 12:04 pm

Ah, but if you are having a problem with thugs, liars, and thieves, what type of person do you recruit to drive them out? Moralizing, nice guys, like Jimmy Carter, make terrible Presidents even if everyone is trying to get along. If you want to shake things up, you need a really tough, don’t-give-a-damn boss who makes demands and takes no prisoners. Things are so corrupt in Washington, than anyone less than a Trump would be totally ineffective.

One of the biggest advantages Trump has is that those who oppose him have no idea how far he is willing to go to get his way, and that paralyzes many of them. That works especially well in foreign relations.

March 12, 2019 9:14 am

Typo in the title. It is berserk

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Javier
March 12, 2019 9:47 am

Also, “Too many…” should be “To many…” (while we’re nit-picking).

Jim Hodgen
March 12, 2019 9:16 am

As amusing as this doublespeak is, it is porbably also even more important to ponder that the current trajectories of the PDO and AMo are going to be causing measurable temperatures and weather experiences that will not support the carefully crafted positions of the climate acognoscenti.

This is going to be evoking and provoking more and more desparate statements and behaviors as the cash cow falls to its knees and then flat on the ground. We should be both mentally and psychologically prepared for ‘extreme’ responses to the world as it no longer can support even the most tortured CAGW’positions.

A look back at the ‘Projectors’ that were selling shares in the Silver mines around London in the latter part of the 18th century shows that even as it became apparent that there was no silver, their use of the law to compel people to keep putting money into the venture and keep bankrupting their shareholders to keep their own fortunes intact is instructive and possibly predictive.

Rejoice… but be warned. the lie won’t die easily or without a fight.

bit chilly
Reply to  Jim Hodgen
March 12, 2019 7:38 pm

Jim as much as i agree with you re the AMO and PDO , if you know what happened when some ARGO bouys were giving the “wrong” readings previously i don’t think i would bet on ocean cooling changing the narrative.

steve case
March 12, 2019 9:18 am

The other day there was an appeal to email the White House. I sent a simple message:

CO2 is NOT
a Problem.

Donna Becker
Reply to  steve case
March 12, 2019 10:18 am

I also sent an e-mail supporting the proposed climate change investigation.

steve case
Reply to  steve case
March 12, 2019 2:39 pm

I’ve never posted on Twitter, today was my first. On President Trump’s Twitter, I replied:

B I N G O!

CO2 is NOT
a Problem

President Trump just hit a home run

March 12, 2019 9:20 am

Until the not so fine people from Greenpeace explain how Stone Age humans contributed to the recession of the glaciers 25-13K years ago while chasing mammoths and mastadons around, they are SOL.

March 12, 2019 9:34 am

Not only is Greenpeace composed of liars but also hypocrites.

Look at the list of organizations that have donated, and tell me if you think all the money from those foundations is fossil-fuel free:

[scroll down the page to “Donations”]

March 12, 2019 9:38 am

Patrick Moore isn’t a co-founder of Greenpeace… he was part of a nuclear test ban organisation which was one of several groups which came together as Greenpeace, at which point he promptly left. There’s no evidence he ever wanted any sort of organisation about the wider environment or climate change -he just wanted to ban nuclear testing. There’s no way he can claim ‘his’ organisation has somehow been subverted (unless it gives up opposing nuclear testing)

(I’m puzzled at support for someone who wanted the US not to have a nuclear deterrent in these pages!)

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 9:47 am

The second highlighted area clearly says : “Patrick Moore – Greenpeace”……D’OH !

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 9:48 am

Moore is pro-nuclear, civil nuclear. He jumped ship because of that. In the last few days he has gotten very cross about the GND. Tweets right on the mark.

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 9:49 am

I believe Patrick Moore (and old GP site) , and I don’t think you know any better than him.

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 9:53 am

(I’m puzzled at support for someone who wanted the US not to have a nuclear deterrent in these pages!)

grifster, tho rare nowadays, it IS possible for the indoctrinated to throw off the brainwashing & realize they had been wrong.

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 9:55 am

Your version doesn’t quite jibe with the document above. Do you have a link or a source or any kind of citation?

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 9:59 am


I’m usually tolerant of your contributions, but this time, I have to question whether you can read or understand the written word of English. Look at the archived webpage screenshot. What does the heading say? — The Founders of Greenpeace

What does it say that Moore was a founding member of? — The Don’t Make a Wave committee.

What does it say the Don’t Make a Wave committee changed its name to? — Greenpeace

So, let me put it together for you:

Moore was a founding member of the committee whose name became Greenpeace.

“Founding” means the start of. It does not matter what Greenpeace evolved into — Moore was a founding member of what it first started out as. He left what he helped found, because it no longer maintained the integrity of the organization that he helped found.

Greenpeace should explain it this way, instead of telling lies about what they themselves represented on their website.

I guess you think that George Washington is not a founding father of the United States, since certain critical issues have changed since his time.

Stop trying to re-define language to suit your own narrative. It’s such a predictable desperate move of climate alarmists today. [read as a yawn]

John Endicott
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
March 12, 2019 10:27 am

I have to question whether you can read or understand the written word of English

I’ve long ago come to the conclusion that he can not, judging by how often he posts links to support what he says that when one actually reads the link they turn out *not* to support what he says at all.

Philip Clarke
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
March 12, 2019 11:43 am

Nope. There is no single event that one can point to as the unambiguous ‘founding’ of Greenpeace, however this ‘Don’t Make a Wave’ committee was founded in 1970, the year before the boat trip, by Dorothy and Irving Stowe and Ben Metcalfe, who thus have a good claim to be the original co-founders. They had already renamed the boat Greenpeace by the time Moore applied to be on the voyage in 1971.

Here is Moore’s application letter, dated March 71 and the reply from the Committee.

Not that it matters; this is just an appeal to authority argument, which would in any case fail because Moore and GP parted company over three decades ago.

Reply to  Philip Clarke
March 13, 2019 12:15 am

This letter is interesting as evidence the DMAWC already existed before PM applied to join. So calling him a co-founder of GP is subject to interpretation, but none the less it prove he asked to join GP in its beginning. We can safely bet that he probably has been influential by his credential and early presence at GP. In my book it qualify nicely as good meat for a resume.

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
March 12, 2019 6:36 pm

“I’m usually tolerant of your contributions, but this time, I have to question whether you can read or understand the written word of English.”

It’s called willful ignorance.

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:00 am

Obviously Griff can´t read. Back to school!

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:00 am

Just because Greenpeace has stumbled all over the whacko map in search of fake issues to pontificate about doesn’t change the FACT that Patrick Moore was there and instrumental in kicking the stupid ball of crap down the hill.

Curious George(@moudryj)
Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:00 am

Griff likes to provide a lot of documentation – but where did it go?

Bob boder
Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:03 am

Griff it says right on the web page Founding members, then on the next section it says the group was renamed green piece and then it says the group organized a boat to witness the event and on the boat were among others “Patrick Moore, GREENPEACE”. so unless he quit and then came back in the interim he clearly is one of the founding members of greenpeace. Please go away again you are making a fool of yourself as usual.

Eric H.
Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:05 am

Moore joined the Don’t Make a Wave Commitee in 1971 which evolved into Greenpeace foundation in 1972 and Moore was involved. ” Following the first voyage, key crew members decided to formally change the name of the Don’t Make a Wave Committee to the Greenpeace Foundation. These decision makers included founders Bob Hunter, Rod Marining and Ben Metcalfe as well as Patrick Moore.[12][13]” Moore left Greenpeace in 1986.

John Endicott
Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:37 am

Patrick Moore isn’t a co-founder of Greenpeace

Yes he is. Greenpeace’s own about page (via the way back machine) says so. That they went all “soviet commissars vanish” in recent years doesn’t change the facts.

he was part of a nuclear test ban organisation

which then changed its names to Greenpeace (again, per their own about page via the way back machine).

(I’m puzzled at support for someone who wanted the US not to have a nuclear deterrent in these pages!)

Eh? these pages rarely even cover war issues. What makes you think these pages are frequented only by war-hawks? While being anti-CAGW might coincide with someone being pro-nuclear energy, it does not automatically make them pro-war/pro-certain types-of-weapons-of-war. One can be a peacenik anti-nuke weapons kind of person and still be pro nuclear energy, you know. Moore is pro-nuclear energy, I’d say that’s more relevant to the topic of CAGW (vis-à-vis carbon emissions) than his stance on weapons of war.

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 10:54 am

Moore has presented proof of his claim.
That you prefer to believe liars is already known.

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 6:06 pm

Griff fact check stat update … cited 22 … lies 19 .. truth 2 .. ambiguous 1

Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 7:10 pm

Griff, I don’t understand why you would call Patrick Moore a liar. He was there getting Greenpeace off the ground and I don’t believe you were. So I am the one who is puzzled.

Bob boder
Reply to  Shelly Marshall
March 13, 2019 3:44 am

He said the same thing about Dr Crockford and had that blow up in his face, He said the same thing about Dr Soon and that blew up in his face as well. Griff is a serial slanderer.

Robert Austin
Reply to  griff
March 12, 2019 7:57 pm

he was part of a nuclear test ban organisation which was one of several groups which came together as Greenpeace, at which point he promptly left

Moore spent 14 years in Greenpeace. Griff, if 14 years is your idea of “promptly”, you must be deranged. But more likely you are just a NPC spouting alarmist dogma with no concern for the facts.

March 12, 2019 9:42 am

..I’d say it was “Quote of the Decade”… !

March 12, 2019 9:43 am

Greenpeace admits that it lies, or in “weaselspeak”, makes “non-verifiable statements of subjective opinion.” uses “hyperbole and heated rhetoric” and should not be taken “literally”.

Greenpeace also claims immunity from any responsibility for the “reports” or “studies” it commissions in support of its campaigns.
“The information presented and opinions expressed are generic only and are not intended to be a comprehensive economic study of nuclear power station development, nor to provide legal advice, and should not be relied on or treated as a substitute for specific advice concerning individual situations. We accept no responsibility to any party to whom this Research Report or FUPSIM software is made known. Any such party relies on the Research Report or FUPSIM software at their own risk.”

March 12, 2019 9:49 am

This is standard operating procedure for Greenpeace, to “unperson” those who who leave the fold. If I recall, Patrick Moore’s initial dispute with Greenpeace had to do with the Green Blob’s fight against golden rice. The Blob wants everything and anything GMO eliminated, regardless of the benefits… like the vitamin A in golden rice that helps prevent blindness in children.

Reply to  PaulH
March 12, 2019 10:02 am

It’s standard operating procedure for Communists to “unperson” those that leave the fold.

Geoff Sherrington(@sherro1)
March 12, 2019 9:50 am

Jim H,
As well as silver, a more comparable scare was from USA Establishment scientists reaping Megabucks by claiming man-made chemicals were causing a cancer epidemic starting 1980s. Close parallels to global warming scare. It has all been rehearsed before. Must read is book The Apolyptics by Edith Efron. Learn how these scare cycles end. Geoff

Michael in Dublin
March 12, 2019 9:54 am

If renewables can produce an adequate supply of consistent, reliable and cheap energy, why would hoards of investors and the private sector not line up to get into this sector? Why are they only interested if there are huge government subsidies and tax incentives? Why do they not believe the proof is in the pudding? Could it be that their due diligence gives the thumbs down?

These are simple questions. Greenpeace, please give us a simple and short answer.

Dr. Bob
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
March 12, 2019 10:12 am

There is really no way that renewables can supplant fossil fuels. The US produces 16.5 million bbl/day of crude oil and natural gas condensates, and they consume essentially the same amount, 17 million bbl/day. The DOE conducted a very detailed study of the available biomass in the US and concluded that if we used all available biomass, such as all harvestable forests, all agricultural waste and product, grew renewable energy crops on all arable land including land bank land, and harvested all sources of wastes from land fills, we would have 1 billion tons of biomass feedstocks for making renewable hydrocarbon fuels. (Hydrocarbon fuels are the only drop-in fuels that work in the current infrastructure.)

The rate of conversion of biomass into hydrocarbon fuels is limited by the energy content of the feedstock, the efficiency of conversion, and the requirements that the fuels meet specifications that make them useful in existing equipment. So making drop-in fuels from biomass yields about 1.4 bbl/ton. Thus for a billion tons of feedstock, this is 1.4 billion bbl of product per year or 3.835 million bbl/day or roughly 22% of our total consumption of fuels.

However, this would require all forests be harvested and all available land be used to maker energy crops. This would raise so many protests from environmental groups that the current protests over pipelines would seem like a party, not a protest. It simply will not happen.

Joel O'Bryan(@joelobryan)
Reply to  Dr. Bob
March 12, 2019 10:26 am

And Then There’s Coal….

Reply to  Dr. Bob
March 12, 2019 11:33 am

Stop it with all that math. You know math confuses me.

Reply to  Dr. Bob
March 12, 2019 11:36 am

Many critical industries use large amounts of energy and require continuous service. Two of those are the steel and cement industry. You cannot shut down a continuous caster or rolling mill. A rolling mill with multiple 15,000 HP motors requires very serious power stability. The semiconductor industry is another critical industry also very dependent on reliable power and have agreements with the power companies for continuous power. Shut down the diffusion process or crystal oven and you start over.

Idiocracy was intended as a parody not an instruction manual! It must be part of the Cliff’s notes for liberal arts these days.,

William Astley
Reply to  Dr. Bob
March 12, 2019 11:39 am

I agree. Large scale use of biofuels is not ‘green’ or practical.

The true environmental advocates are against biofuel.

Biofuel is expensive and its use does not significantly reduce human emitted CO2. It also causes significant ecological damage and reduces habitat.

The letter makes for pleasant reading but it also begs the question: is this EU-biofuels love affair actually worth saving? The starting point here should be an honest assessment of why the relationship went sour.

March 12, 2019 9:58 am

The Seinfeld Greenpeace episode kind of sums it up.

March 12, 2019 10:00 am

The climate psychopaths, the brainwashed and climate fraudsters will never give up :

– in the seventies, they pushed the scam of the coming ice age due to human activity, after the AMO and PDO reversal in the late seventies, this scam became “Global Warming” and after the “Pause”, it has been renamed “Climate Change”.

Be prepared to see it renamed again Global Cooling in the few years to come … until a new “pause” or reversal takes place again.

This scam is all about Malthusianism and eugenics (remember Paul R. Ehrlich : “The population bomb”) :
– two pseudo-theories that proved to be junk science many decades ago.

March 12, 2019 10:08 am

Green peace? No there will be war, pestilence, insurrection and untold destruction with the folding stuff-
Or something like that? Add it to Swindlers List-

John Endicott
Reply to  observa
March 12, 2019 10:19 am

Green peace? No there will be war, pestilence, insurrection and untold destruction

didn’t you know “War is peace / freedom is slavery [and] ignorance is strength.”. 1984 was supposed to be a warning not an instruction manual.

David L. Hagen(@hagendl)
March 12, 2019 10:16 am

Greenpeace uses Stalin’s methods to make people “disappear”.
Just like Stalin, Greenpeace has edited out Patrick Moore from the latest The Don’t Make A Wave Committee list of founding members.

March 12, 2019 10:26 am

I do believe a Founder IS a first member! DUH!

Reply to  td
March 12, 2019 11:10 am

You old fuddy duddy. You have to contextualise these things nowadays. It’s a feel kinda thing and if you don’t feel like it then it aint so. Apparently with that kind of emotional feel you can run national power grids and lotsa unfeeling techy stuff like that.

March 12, 2019 10:32 am

The eco-activist examined the four slips of paper which he had unrolled. Each contained a message of only one or two lines…

Mainstream Media 03/12/2019 climate change malreported rectify

Mainstream Media 03/12/2019 Patrick Moore was a Greenpeace founder malreported rectify

Orwell didn’t foresee the Wayback Machine.

John Endicott
Reply to  fretslider
March 12, 2019 11:10 am

I would assume part of the Ministry of truth’s job is to “correct” the way back machines records as well. Fortunately the real world hasn’t full caught up with Orwell’s 1984

Reply to  John Endicott
March 12, 2019 1:24 pm

“Tell me” said “O’Brien how many fingers am I holding up”?

It was Burton’s last and one of his greatest and most memorable acts.
I recommend Griff to watch it some day!

(That and Sellers in Kubrick’s great classic with Teller as the lunatic with the brilliant ideas.)

Joel O'Bryan(@joelobryan)
March 12, 2019 10:32 am

On the morning after the November 2016 election, as the realization that Trump had indeed won the White House, we all knew that at least the next 4 years were going to be a fun filled time. Green’s and Liberals going nuts, falling into despair, going nuts, falling into nut, repeat ad nauseum. Get more popcorn, repeat.

So far the The Donald has not let us down. I look forward to the next 6 years of this to continue.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 12, 2019 1:41 pm

It’s no fair to gorge popcorn – he is surrounded by swamp creatures who would like to gorge on him! Show support for Trump – get him to sign on as he intends with China’s BRI and drive the swamp creatures to utter uncontrollable rage. Why not, it’s fun! I can imagine the rabid dance Pence, Rubio and Pompeo would throw! Not even mentioning Schiff et al!
Grass skirts, anyone?

Ralph Bullis
March 12, 2019 10:35 am

Easy to check on the origins of Greenpeace and Dr. Moore’s part played. I was at the University of British Columbia in the late 1960s when Greenpeace was first organized to protest bomb tests in the Aleutian Islands. Greenpeace, as Dr. Moore correctly points out, has since morphed into an international conglomerate of “green” causes that have become a menace to humanity. Some us are still around and we remember. Greenpeace should be banned as economic terrorists (as India has done) and as vandals and criminals.

March 12, 2019 10:38 am

Stop ecoterrorism. Greenland was green and CO2 was much higher before!

E J Zuiderwijk
March 12, 2019 10:38 am

Actually, that is two lies in GP s tweet. Not only was More a founding member, he is also not a paid lobbyist but his own man.

March 12, 2019 10:42 am

LMAO!! If it weren’t for lies…the Left would have NOTHING to say at all…

Ben Gunn
March 12, 2019 11:00 am

It is interesting to note that of the five listed in the Greenpeace document Patrick Moore is the only one with a science related degree. The other four are a social worker two attorneys and a deep sea diver.

Reply to  Ben Gunn
March 12, 2019 11:15 am

Ben Gunn, I was typing the exact same thing until I noticed your post right above.


William Astley
Reply to  Ben Gunn
March 12, 2019 11:56 am

I agree. Science requires the ability to look at questions without emotion and make decisions/recommendation based on facts.

Patrick More helped formed Greenpeace because he cared about people and the environment.

Moore still cares, the difference is he now knows the facts do not support CAGW and the solution to the problem that does not exist, causes significant damage to the environment and to people.

March 12, 2019 11:40 am

In the immortal words of “Dad’s Army”:

“They don’t like it up them, do they?”

Bruce Cobb
March 12, 2019 11:57 am

“Patrick Moore was not a co-founder of Greenpeace. He does not represent Greenpeace. He is a paid lobbyist, not an independent source. His statements about @AOC & the #GreenNewDeal have nothing to do with our positions.”
Let’s see, they start with a lie, then move to a red herring, then another lie, ending with a huge, moronic red herring. They are getting more and more desperate and hysterical with each passing day. We’re winning.

March 12, 2019 12:03 pm

As usual the BBC and the Independent put a different spin on it.

“Greenpeace hits back at Trump tweet on climate change denial”

“Trump repeats false claim there is no climate change crisis as he brands science ‘fake'”

Both the BBC and the Independent support Greenpeace’s claim that Patrick Moore was not a co-founder of Greenpeace.

Both show their true colours as out-and-out liars.

Sad times.

Reply to  leitmotif
March 12, 2019 12:52 pm

BBC = “Blatantly Bumbling Confabulators”

The Independent = “Independent of Truth”

Just wow ! — It is so blatantly obvious what liars they all are, and how some minds are bent on riding this warp-speed falsehood with them.

Robert of Texas
March 12, 2019 12:53 pm

Hmm, well according to what I can find online, Patrick Moore is not considered one of the founders. I cannot say if history has been rewritten, only what is written now.

For example, above it clearly says “The committees Founders and First Members”, so Patrick is at least a First Member. From Wiki (which I actually expected Patrick to have been deleted from entirely) it says “key crew members decided to formally change the name of the Don’t Make a Wave Committee to the Greenpeace Foundation. These decision makers included founders Bob Hunter, Rod Marining and Ben Metcalfe as well as Patrick Moore.”

Sp clearly the editors of that Wiki entry separated Patrick from being a Founder (but at least acknowledge he exists!).

I found this:
But every reference it points to is gone.

What is obvious and was unknown to me – The progressives HATE this person. Wow, what a huge amount of time and effort is spent on denying his early roles in Greenpeace and in assassinating his character. This means he is likely effective in getting his ideas across. I guess I should be paying MORE attention to what he is saying – I mean if Greenpeace is so rattled then he is onto something.

Reply to  Robert of Texas
March 13, 2019 1:22 pm

Like gangs, the Left saves its worst for defectors.

Gary Pearse
March 12, 2019 1:00 pm

The thing I like about Trumps tweets is they go to 100million+ people. There’s a bang in that buck for sure. Probably more like 500million internationally. He’s a one man campaign. Europe falling apart, the Paris Accord washed away in tears, Gilets Jaune factories now France’s largest industry, they are selling abroad now. Stupid Champagne Soshulists, burning their billions trying to get totes elected reveals them as nit that smart after all. A wiseman would have rolled up his tent on the midway and retired to Monaco as soon as Trump got elected. I almost shed a tear when yesterday’s man Soros disgraced himself in Davos when the Pres showed up – is that all you really got schmuck?

Reply to  Gary Pearse
March 12, 2019 1:50 pm

Chateau Soshulis – haven’t found that – is a Grand Cru or Brut?

March 12, 2019 1:59 pm

My “Green Head” is exploding!

Please don’t link to anything on a Greenpeace website or social media, I might inadvertently read the blatant lies they spew causing my bullshit detector to melt and my hatred of lies and liars to explode the blood-pressure.

I’m really “Green”, wanting what’s best for the Earth and all of the life on it and in it. I don’t want jerk-offs useful-idiots to cover it with ineffectual solar cells and wind mills, that are full of toxins and pollution themselves.

But also I don’t believe in stealing and lying, so could never support socialism in any form.

Dennis Sandberg
March 12, 2019 4:29 pm

I love the smell of green slieze melting in the morning.

March 12, 2019 4:44 pm

I would add that the Greenpeace website still says Greenpeace was founded in 1972-the year Patrick Moore joined. -Better save it before they realise their mistake, because they contradict it elsewhere.

“Irving Stowe died of pancreatic cancer on 28 October 1974, aged 59 – only two years after Greenpeace was founded. ”

But they also say elsewhere that the entity that became Greenpeace was already in existence ‘for a year’ by the time Patrick joined-in 1972, as an entity called ‘Don’t Make a Wave Committee’, but this entity was formed in 1970.

“Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year.”

“In 1970, the Don’t Make A Wave Committee was established; its sole objective was to stop a second nuclear weapons test at Amchitka Island in the Aleutians.”

The voyage occurred in 1972, and Patrick applied for it in March 1971, and was accepted. His application was to the ‘Don’t Make a Wave Committee’, so the name hadn’t yet been formerly changed to Greenpeace, although it lists both ‘Don’t Make a Wave’ and ‘Greenpeace Canada’ on the reply.

Also of note, is they give special mention to ‘4 founders’ on the above founder webpage-one of whom also responded to an ad in the paper-David McTaggett. (This ad was also likely made by the ‘Don’t Make a Wave Committee’).

“Responding to a newspaper ad placed by a newly-founded group called Greenpeace, the Canadian-born former entrepreneur promptly renamed his sailing boat “Greenpeace III” and set sail to confront a French nuclear weapon test.”

So, David is considered ‘a founder’ when responding to an ad by a newly formed group called ‘Greenpeace’ (likely ‘Don’t Make a Wave committee’, but if the group was already formerly called ‘Greenpeace’-as he also changed the name of his boat to ‘Greenpeace 3’- then its likely this ad was made even later than when Patrick responded), whilst Patrick is not. Hmmmm………

Inconsistency anyone?

Reply to  thingadonta
March 12, 2019 4:48 pm

I would add to the above that Patrick may have joined in 1971, not 1972- as I stated above-the year the fateful boat sailed-because he also applied for it in March 1971.

Reply to  thingadonta
March 12, 2019 4:54 pm

Very few people have a good enough memory to be a successful liar.

Reply to  Tom Halla
March 12, 2019 5:16 pm

Actually I made a bit of a mistake in the above. Greenpeace still clearly say the organization was ‘founded’ in 1972, AFTER Patrick had already applied, and in all likelihood already joined, in 1971. He was certainly there in 1972 when the organization was renamed from Don’t Make a Wave Committee to Greenpeace, because he was on the voyage in 1972. And if David was a founder, responding to an ad in the same way Patrick did (but likely afterwards), then Patrick was a founder as well.

Reply to  thingadonta
March 13, 2019 5:58 pm

From memory, after one of the other times that Moore has had to defend this claim, it was found that ALL members of the Phyllis Cormack, aka: Greenpeace applied for a berth on the voyage in writing, including the owner/captain of the Phyllis Cormack!

March 12, 2019 5:44 pm

Trump and Fox unfortunately are not the faces you want leading the anti-AGW movement. This is an old tactic, control the opposition by having those who wont have much credibility to lead it.

Indeed a number of Republican Senators and Big Oil have paid lip service to AGW, perhaps sensing its something they can exploit to their advantage.

Expensive alternative energy prices allows oil prices to increase as well, and less production growth increases the life of cheap oil reserves so that more can be sold later in a higher price environment. Reducing the rate of consumption also allows less CAPEX investment in looking for and developing new supplies

Also, getting in at the ground level with subsidized renewable energy will allow them to control these industries as well

1/4 of all oil is used for petrochemicals. There will always be demand even if the energy component shrinks. Besides, the military uses more oil than most countries for energy/fuel. Thats never changing

The only victim will be the middle class. Energy and goods inflation and added taxes should finish them off. Its pretty much a bipartisan goal to finish off the middle class. Doing a pretty good job of it even without the green economy.

March 12, 2019 6:38 pm

As with everything one should put things into context. It was the 1960 tees, Racial Carson had just written “Silent Spring” against DDT. The testing of atomic bombs was conducted on the surface and the known level of radio activity in the atmosphere was rising.

The Japanese were busy hunting the whales and people were unsure just what was going on.

We had the population bulge of the Baby Boomers, those born as the troops returned from WW2, so lots of idealistic young folk.

So this was the situation which lead to the formation of the “Green peace movement”.

But as with so many organizations, when the initial objectives, the atomic
bomb testing, and a slowdown in the hunting of the Whales had been stopped, , the members of Green peace having tasted a degree of political power wanted more.

It came about that at this time Communism was in serious decline, so many Westerners dream of a all Communistic World had failed. So they jumped onto the nearest new thing, which happened to be Green peace.

That was when Patrick Moore decided to leave, but he was clearly a senior
member of the initial organization. A Co-founder.


Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
March 12, 2019 6:54 pm

Like removing Trotsky from the Stalin photos.

March 12, 2019 7:32 pm

Yes sir climate science is indeed fake science in the grand tradition of fake science. It got started with the ozone hole when the UN discovered the power of debilitating fear.

March 12, 2019 8:06 pm

Of course it is fake science, because clouds are warming the planet rather than GHGs..

March 13, 2019 2:40 am

All thing is meaning trump say yes, do yes

March 13, 2019 4:53 am

I was on the front row of some of those early Amchitca Don’t Make a Wave protests across Western Canada in the early 1970’s. I think it was in Saskatoon in 1971 when the movement was really taking off with the first big marches, where the University Of Sask had co-organized the protest with the early GreenPeace prototype, with the focus of trying to shut down the northern uranium mines in Saskatchewan which was reportedly selling the yellowcake to make the bombs that were being tested at Amchitca and for the French in the South Pacific. I still remember that Patrick Moore was the intelligent one there giving the speeches, and Paul Watson was the noisy guy on the bull horn. Those protests were legitimate, especially given this was just 25 years after WW2 and the Atomic bombs being used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not to mention the stupidity of blowing up nuclear bombs on an earthquake fault in Alaska.

But little did I know at that time that the thousands of mainly other teenagers and baby boomers such as myself were planting that seed for what would come of that movement, being Green Peace International, and now the group we skeptics probably despise the most in trying to expose the truth about CO2 and CAGW/CC. Maybe that is why I am now so passionate about doing my little part to expose this and shed some light where I can, because I feel a little guilty about helping that group get established. Now I too feel I have to speak out about things and if enough people do, I think we can ensure that the right thing happens in the end.

March 13, 2019 6:29 am

“Fake science “is an accurate description see
It concludes:
“When analyzing complex systems with multiple interacting variables it is useful to note the advice of Enrico Fermi who reportedly said “never make something more accurate than absolutely necessary”. The 2017 paper proposed a simple heuristic approach to climate science which plausibly proposes that a Millennial Turning Point (MTP) and peak in solar activity was reached in 1991,that this turning point correlates with a temperature turning point in 2003/4, and that a general cooling trend will now follow until approximately 2650.
The establishment’s dangerous global warming meme, the associated IPCC series of reports, the entire UNFCCC circus, the recent hysterical IPCC SR1.5 proposals and Nordhaus’ recent Nobel prize are founded on two basic errors in scientific judgement. First – the sample size is too small. Most IPCC model studies retrofit from the present back for only 100 – 150 years when the currently most important climate controlling, largest amplitude, solar activity cycle is millennial.
his means that all climate model temperature outcomes are too hot and likely fall outside of the real future world. (See Kahneman -Thinking Fast and Slow p 118) Second – the models make the fundamental scientific error of forecasting straight ahead beyond the Millennial Turning Point (MTP) and peak in solar activity which was reached in 1991. These errors are compounded by confirmation bias and academic consensus group think.”

March 13, 2019 3:19 pm

Climate “Science” just as with so many “Causes”, is today all about money.

Other peoples of course, so as has been said so many times, “Just follow the

money trail.


March 13, 2019 4:50 pm

October 29, 1971: On the way back to Vancouver, Hunter and Metcalfe proposed that upon their return, they should reconstitute the organization as the “Greenpeace Foundation“. Hunter borrowed the term “Foundation” from Isaac Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy.

November 1, 1971: Jim Bohlen, Irving Stowe, and Paul Cote met to wrap up the Don’t Make a Wave Committee. They decided that Hunter should set up Greenpeace Foundation as a separate organization, but this isn’t what happened. The Don’t Make a Wave Committee had legal standing and a surplus of funds, so upon reflection, it seemed counterproductive to start over. Ben Metcalfe brokered a deal to keep the organization in tact and turn its attention on French nuclear testing in the South Pacific.

January 21, 1972: The Don’t Make a Wave Committee resolved to change its name to the “Greenpeace Foundation” and turned over $9,678 to Dorothy and Ben Metcalfe.

May 4, 1972: The Provincial Societies office in Victoria, British Columbia registered the name, “Greenpeace Foundation.” Patrick Moore was present at the registration of Greenpeace Foundation.

The above information can be found in the book, “Greenpeace: The Inside Story: How a Group of Ecologists, Journalists and Visionaries Changed the World” by Rex Weyler.

Rex Weyler was a director of the original Greenpeace Foundation, the editor of the organisation’s first newsletter, and a co-founder of Greenpeace International in 1979.

I have read the book and if you can find a copy in your local library I highly recommend it. It destroys Greenpeace’s claims that Patrick Moore was NOT a founder.

Also via WayBack, we have this (all links are still working):

Reply to  BruceC
March 13, 2019 5:17 pm

It should also be noted that the Don’t Make A Wave Committee was founded around September-November 1969.

March 14, 2019 1:14 am

I don’t like the direction this tread has gone – debating whether Dr. Patrick Moore was a co-founder of Green peace. He was there at the beginning…etc., etc.
What makes the warmist’s heads explode is this quote from the president’s tweet:

“The whole climate crisis is not only Fake News, it’s Fake Science. There is no climate crisis, there’s weather and climate all around the world, and in fact carbon dioxide is the main building block of all life.”

That is what they don’t like…!!! I actually saw some comments in the thread that claims that carbon dioxide is poison….A lot of peeps believe this BS.

%d bloggers like this: