A new bi-governmental report on global warming, heavily counter-argued and debunked by Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, might raise questions as to whether it is a result of political lobbyism. The report, published recently by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, in a joint collaboration with The Royal Society, the UK equivalent, presents a straight-forward examination of global warming, its effects, and in particular, the human factor.
Moore, a Canadian ecologist, was a co-founder of Greenpeace, a global environmental campaign group, which he parted ways with in 1986 as he felt it rapidly turned politically left winged.
As neither Moore nor the bi-national collaboration of science academies appear to disagree that the Earth is in fact gradually moving into a warmer era, the essential disagreement seems to be whether global warming is a bad thing or a good thing. There also seems to be a dispute as to whether mankind is to blame for it. Since both sides coming out of the scientific community appear to disagree significantly, some people might start to question whether there are other potential interests involved on either side. Some might further ask whether the new report on global warming is a result of political lobbyism.
Moore voiced his opinion as he addressed The Senate and Environmental Works Committee. He reportedly told U.S. Senators that there was no scientific evidence to suggest emissions of carbon dioxide as the fundamental cause of what he labels a minor warming of the planet’s atmosphere over the course of the past century. Further, he added that if such proof were to exist, it would be accessible to all in writing.
Pointing to a time frame between 450 and 500 million years ago, when the carbon dioxide emissions were more than tenfold those of today, he says that modern life evolved and flourished under those conditions 500 million years ago, and that 450 million years ago there was an ice age under the same conditions of emission levels of carbon dioxide.
The report, which to some people might look more like a detailed high school textbook rather than a science paper, was reportedly created and presented to inform the public on global warming, and further, to inform and discuss in a straight-forward manner using plain language. The structure is plain and accessible, consisting of a summary, a Q&A of 20 questions, the basics of climate change and a conclusion, but several of the points made in it come challenged and debunked by Moore, as he presented his arguments.
Dr Doug Parr, Chief Scientist at Greenpeace UK, reportedly stated that when it comes to climate science, the organization accepts the consensus view commonly put forth by the vast majority of the scientific community and world governments. Co-founder and former member, Moore, has on several accounts butted heads with Greenpeace over conflicting views. He has strongly advocated logging, as he states it is good for reforestation and reportedly, he attacked campaigners for invoking fear on the matter of nuclear energy.
Some might question whether the new report on global warming, recently put forth by the national science academies of the U.S. and the UK, is a result of political lobbyism, as it has been challenged by ecologist Patrick Moore. The report is available online in its entirety.
By Halldor Fannar Sigurgeirsson
NAS Report (PDF)