Dr. Patrick Moore was right: @Greenpeace IS full of shit

I am not keen on this blog Wattsupwiththat as it is too close to GWPF and climate change denial for my liking . However I would suggest that Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth actually feed these views with their unreasonable and inaccurate claims.

Though I am well to the left of both Moore and Wattsup, this blog makes some excellent points.

I also reckon GP and FoE actually damage the environmental cause both by their stridency and dishonesty.

I hope no one raps my knuckles for re-blogging this

Watts Up With That?

I’ve never had a headline like this, but Greenpeace deserves it for their mind-bending defense in a defamation lawsuit: basically their defense is “we publish hyperbole, therefore it isn’t actionable because it isn’t factual”. GMAFB!

Dr. Patrick Moore, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace, whom they have tried to erase from their website, resigned from the organization because:

The organization I co-founded has become a monster. When I was a member of its central committee in the early days, we campaigned – usually with success – on genuine environmental issues such as atmospheric nuclear tests, whaling and seal-clubbing.

When Greenpeace turned anti-science by campaigning against chlorine (imagine the sheer stupidity of campaigning against one of the elements in the periodic table), I decided that it had lost its purpose and that, having achieved its original objectives, had turned to extremism to try to justify its continued existence.

Now Greenpeace…

View original post 729 more words

1 thought on “Dr. Patrick Moore was right: @Greenpeace IS full of shit

  1. Paul Braterman

    Watttsup is to climate science as Evolution News and Views is to evolution science; but if things are as they describe them here, then your outrage against Greenpeace is once again vindicated.

    My only comment would be, have you verified the quotation in the Wattsup piece as carefully as you would verify a quotation in Evolution News and Views, both for accurate reporting and for fair description of context?

    Greenpeace has long since ceased to be a useful contributor to debate, but this takes matter further. If it really has justified factual mis-statements as rhetorical hyperbole, then it has joined ENV and Breitart and, indeed wattsup in poisoning the wells of discourse.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s