Greenpeace report aims to stifle debate on climate science

Wichita’s Koch Industries has come under attack from an environmental extremist organization for its support of open debate and dialog about the science of climate change.

A report issued by Greenpeace uses inflammatory language and a one-sided view of the facts surrounding climate change in order to attack those it disagrees with. This comes at a time when scientists and the public are becoming increasingly skeptical of the claims of extremist organizations like Greenpeace — and with good reason, too.

Revelations such as the emails from the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, for example, have peeled back the veneer and revealed extremists who have more than the pure pursuit of science as their agenda. This Greenpeace report is another example.

As an example of the way the report presents facts in an attempt to make its case, here is the report’s criticism of one public policy foundation that received Koch funding: “… [it] has hosted Bjorn Lomborg twice in the last two years. Lomborg is a prominent media spokesperson who challenges and attacks policy measures to address climate change.”

To thinking people who value open discussion of issues — rather than wholesale and uncritical acceptance of environmental extremism — providing a forum for Lomborg (author of The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World and Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming) is a good thing to have done. We need institutions such as Americans for Prosperity, The Cato Institute, and The Heritage Foundation to provide balance to mainstream media that has bought in — emphatically and largely uncritically — to global warming alarmism.

There are those who have broken free from groups like Greenpeace, and the remarks of one give us insight into the true nature of these groups. Patrick Moore, who at one time was President of Greenpeace Foundation in Canada, has said this on the environmental extremists’ need to continually invent disasters: “At the beginning, the environmental movement had reason to say that the end of the world is nigh, but most of the really serious problems have been dealt with. Now it’s almost as though the environmental movement has to invent doom and gloom scenarios.”

Moore shows that he totally understands the harm of radical environmental groups like Greenpeace: “The environmental movement has evolved into the strongest force there is for preventing development in the developing countries. I think it’s legitimate for me to call them anti-human.”

This reveals the true anti-human, anti-progress agenda of environmental extremist groups like Greenpeace. They deny the tremendous progress and benefit to humans that industrialization — propelled by capitalism wherever it is allowed to thrive — has produced. They don’t want to let the debate and discussion proceed.

Koch Industries has provided this response to the Greenpeace report:

In a consistent, principled effort for more than 50 years — long before climate change was a key policy issue — Koch companies and Koch foundations have worked to advance economic freedom and market-based policy solutions to challenges faced by society. These efforts are about creating more opportunity and prosperity for all, as it’s a historical fact that economic freedom best fosters innovation, environmental protection and improved quality of life in a society.

The Greenpeace report mischaracterizes these efforts and distorts the environmental record of our companies. Koch companies have long supported science-based inquiry and dialogue about climate change and proposed responses to it. Koch companies have put tremendous effort into discovering and adopting innovative practices that reduce energy use and emissions in the manufacture and distribution of our products.

We believe the political response to climate issues should be based on sound science. Both a free society and the scientific method require an open and honest airing of all sides, not demonizing and silencing those with whom you disagree. We’ve strived to encourage an intellectually honest debate on the scientific basis for claims of harm from greenhouse gases. We have tried to help bring out the facts of the potential effectiveness and costs of policies proposed to deal with climate, as it’s crucial to understand whether proposed initiatives to reduce greenhouse gases will achieve desired environmental goals and what effects they would likely have on the global economy.


16 thoughts on “Greenpeace report aims to stifle debate on climate science”

  1. Carbon dioxide is plant food. The efforts by the far left nutcases to turn carbon dioxide into a “pollutant” demonstrate an ignorance about basic biological realities on this planet. Plants need CO2 to survive on this planet. Animal life needs O2 to survive.

    The real issue is about power and not the environment. The real issue is a government takeover of energy production and determining the use of energy. Should power be taken from the people and sent to our government masters in Washington, or the UN in NY? I say NO.
    The verbose, always campaigning Bamster and Algore both say yes. They are wrong.

  2. I assume you are getting paid by Koch or a Koch-funded group to write something like this. Today the British Parliament exonerated the scientists at the University of East Anglia. Bjorn Lomborg has been exposed as a scientific hack. Are the CEO’s of General Electric, Dow, Dupont, Nike, Alcoa, John Deere, Johnson & Johnson “environmental extremists?” They must be according to your standards, if they have called for specific and meaningful action to deal with human-induced global warming. Just go to the US Climate Action Partnership website. You guys are the fringe.

  3. Climate change war is over, Al Gore lost, and should pay for all of the jobs lost due to his film.

  4. If I recall correctly, the past president of Greenpeace resigned, as he said, due to the take-over of Greenpeace by Marxists/Communists. These greenie’s should be ignored and shunned.

  5. Realitycheck sounds like my son’s “dyed in the wool” Democrat buddy. He’s already made up his mind, so don’t confuse him with facts. I agree with Wichitator.

  6. As much as I am starting to dislike the Kochtopus I am in agreement with them on this issue. Al Gore would have been an eco-billionaire if the whole climate change fraud had not been exposed. I am morning the death of the incandescent bulb, the new green bulbs are crap and give off a warm vomit like light. I never thought I would see the day when the federal government would be telling me which light bulbs I could buy!

  7. The hoax of ‘global warming’ has been exposed;bless the hacker of the astounding e-mails from CRU,he/she deserves a Nobel prize,unlike the fake guru Al Gore.Greenpeace,and other groups of rabid environmentalists should be held accountable for the damage they have done to the economy.Real people have suffered losses of jobs, and freedom to do as they wish with their own properties.
    I am ashamed to admit I was a member a few years ago.

  8. I expected this.

    I am a Libertarian, but I don’t ignore history or facts. I came to this organization seeking reasoned debate – like on the odious smoking ban. Instead, I find little reason and much vitriol.

    This quote from the article speaks volumes: “…it’s a historical fact that economic freedom best fosters innovation, environmental protection and improved quality of life in a society.” (This is a classic example of how a black-and-white outlook gets nowhere.) That is not a “fact” at all. Consider buffalo, West Virginia coal miners, child labor and Monsanto’s near monopoly on corn and soybeans (ask the farmers of these crops if they think this “free market” worked out for them).

    Regarding the CO2 as plant food, one needs trees and other plants to perform the plant version of the Krebs’ cycle. Clear cutting whole swaths of rain forest every year defeats that purpose.

    I agree that capitalism is a good thing. Profit is a good thing. I am a capitalist. I also happen to think there are obvious responsibilities that come with large-scale operations in as much as they have an effect on others. If I want to leave a dead cow in my back yard, stinking up the neighborhood, that wouldn’t go over so well with the neighbors, even though it is on my property. Further, if the rotting carcass gets into the local ground water and contaminates my neighbors’ wells, there is more than just the smell to consider.
    Frankly, if I put a bunch of Atrazine on my soil and it gets into the common ground water, we have the same scenario.

    People have lost no work – save loggers and whalers – as a result of folks becoming environmentally conscious. Many more jobs are lost from NAFTA and other schemes to export work abroad so that the “free market” can continue to profit. Other companies have, in fact, created jobs in the name of greater environmentally-friendly efforts (look at PetroSun, inc. as an example, though there are many, many more than that).

    Debating national and international topics here – or anywhere – requires a larger command of the facts than has yet been exhibited in this discussion. Local topics are those to which we should adhere, again, like the smoking ban.

  9. Fuller: Greenpeace Claims on Corporate Funding to Deny Climate Science Could be Overblown

    Greenpeace claims that an “out-of-sight” corporation in the United States has channeled some USD25 million to fund grants and alleged front organizations that debunk the science behind climate change, according to the Examiner.

    In its latest report, environment activists pointed to Kansas-based Koch Industries as “the financial kingpin of climate science denial,” funding think tanks and spokespersons that shoot down scientists’ warnings about the changing climate.

    Writer Thomas Fuller, however, said Greenpeace could be reading too much from the Koch philanthropy: The company has long been providing funds for think tanks around the U.S., including energy and environment research centers.

    “The Greenpeace story doesn’t mention how long Koch (and Exxon, for that matter) have been funding organisations like this. That’s because their funding predates any controversy about global warming. That’s right, they were giving money to these conservative think tanks back when news stories were worried about global cooling–and even before anyone was worried about the climate at all,” Fuller wrote in the Examiner.

    http://devex.com/articles/fuller-greenpeace-claims-on-funding-for-climate-change-denial-could-be-overblown

  10. I personally don’t know, nor care, what Greenpeace avers. Climate changes have little to do with Greenpeace or Rush Limbaugh. It is happening and we should be aware of it.

  11. I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. — Barry Goldwater

    This assumes that the speaker is God – infallible. Didn’t we chuck this out some time ago?

  12. “Realitycheck” is trying to keep reality in check for the sake of a political agenda. It’s widely understood that the British Parliament committee that interviewed Phil Jones in such a nice and friendly way and then wrote a conclusion based on what Phil Jones said he wanted them to say, was a rigged committee filled with people on Jones’ side of the scam. Nothing about getting people on the same side together to support one another changes the facts or “exonerated the scientists at the University of East Anglia.” Just because that committee is corrupt, doesn’t mean that the rest of the world is going to roll over and get stupid.

  13. Carbon is a plant food. Ok, take a plastic trash bag and wrap it around your head and keep it there for 10 minutes. No dont, it will kill you. You moron are you kidding me. Just because Fox Noise says their scien tif a gal blathering blustering idiots proclaim it so does not make it so. These jerks are the worst of the worst. The Koch brothers actions lead to the death of hundreds of thousands every single year. Their wreckless disregard for human life is only outdone by people like Hitler.

  14. The nut jobs called the Koch brothers are baby killers. Yes, they are as they pump billions of tons to toxic sludge into both the air and water. It is not about climate change it is about killing innocent Americans who have no part of the vast evil empire of two sick men who completly disregard human life in favor of some edict issued by their father the biggest of the three nut jobs. Vanity is what these worthless scum bags a chasing. They claim to be Christians. Oh really, what Christian commits first degree premeditated murder. Yes, their pumping billions of tons of toxic sludge into the air and water may take a little longer to kill but it does the job. Putting a bullet in a persons head is quick and fairly painless but these sick scum bags drag it out as the persons body is ravaged by their toxic chemicals. Cancer eats them from the inside and they die a truly horrible death. Yes, these baby killing murders should be behind bars for not only crimes against nature but first degree pre meditated murder. I know of no Christian who would wantonly kill other people for money? Maybe in their sick distorted world it is possible but no here and not now. I want to hear one of these worthless scum bags say that God created planet earth to have the mindless Kock brothers come down here to destroy it and kill hundreds of thousands of people. They make a mockery of real Christians and they make a mockery of God. The sick perversion of democracy knows no bounds as these thugs use their ill gotten fortune to rape pillage and murder all in the name of Christiananity. Somebody has to tell these worthless thugs in suits they are cowards and baby killers. I am not afraid of these worthless scum bags. So they kill me I will never agree that destroying Gods creation is a Christian thing nor will I agree that killing innocent men women and children is ok. They are going to be in for a rude awakening when they stand in judgement before God. Eternity is a long time to think about the pain and suffering they have caused the people of the world. The truly sad thing is that if were not for these stone cold baby killers all of this could have been avoided. They may get mad reading this but one thing is for sure they respect me because I was one of the few who had the courage to tell these sick thugs they were worthless baby killing cowards.

  15. News Flash: There is not one single CEO of a major big oil company that does not belive mankind is responsible for climate change. Yes, check it out. Apparently the nutty baby killing Koch brothers have not kept up with their peers. They are sorry for the hundreds of thousands they have killed and the vast stretches of wildlife areas they have destroyed. Where does it end. How can these men lie day in and day out and cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands with their black death.

  16. Do you realize when the nutty Kock brothers buy a politician like James Imhuff, it is a perversion of democracy? Thier actions represent the single worse example of destroying representative Government. Yes, when men like this do not even try and hide the fact they have bought off a politician it makes me sick. They are proud of their prowess. Hardly the stuff legends are made of. What kind of legacy will these two nut jobs be remembered? Killing hundreds of thousands pumping billions of tons of toxic sludge into the air and water. Killing innocent men women and children who were misfortunate enough to live close to one of they sites. The only person happy with the Kock brothers is Satan himself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>