The global warmists are already insisting that Patrick Moore is not really one of their co-founders. He quit the organization in 1986, and as recently as October 2014 he called it "evil," so let's not pretend some current leader in the enviro movement suddenly turned.
Still, given his pedigree, this will be a difficult guy for the global warmists to destroy. They'll come up with a strategy to be sure, but even if you can succeed with the character assassination - which they're quite good at - you still have to deal with the substance of his argument:
My skepticism begins with the believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model. The entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario is the hypothesis increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat the Earth to unlivable temperatures.
In fact, the Earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization.
The idea it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous.
Recently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced for the umpteenth time we are doomed unless we reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to zero. Effectively this means either reducing the population to zero, or going back 10,000 years before humans began clearing forests for agriculture. This proposed cure is far worse than adapting to a warmer world, if it actually comes about.
This is really the issue with global warming, and it's the reason this is a contentious and partisan issue. The left only touts global warming because it serves as an excuse for things they want to do anyway - massive new taxes and government controls on industry. If it was presumed the only response to global warming was tax cuts and freer markets, then every liberal would insist global warming was a fraud.
You know it and they know it.
Moore's makes a compelling case that global warming alarmism deserves a highly skeptical reception. But his even more compelling point is that, even if it was for real, the proposed solutions are terrible ideas. And the proposal solutions are really all the global warmists are interested in, because this is really all about more power and control for government.
Anyway, you can be the personal assault on Moore and his integrity will be coming and coming soon. Apostasy like this will not be tolerated.
