She asked the Czar if he were concerned about El Niño, as proof of man’s effect on the environment. “I really don’t have time,” we replied. “You don’t have the time to address this crisis?” she demanded, annoyed that the entire Earth was engulfed in flames and here was the Czar, fiddling like Nero.
Actually, she followed along with Czar for a good city block. The Czar asked if she was aware that Los Niños had been occurring for thousands of years as a natural phenomenon, and indeed she had her memorized answer handy about its effects on the environment, from starvation to flooding. So the Czar asked her a question that was a bit worrisome: that El Niño is a recurring change that promotes flourishing of life in the Atlantic, and that if there were a way to stop El Niño, you would harm Atlantic sea life. Also, was she aware that Los Niños mean reduced hurricanes and a longer growing season for the Northern Hemisphere, meaning that fewer people starve and suffer less destruction? And that fisheries, which the Czar knows you hate, can go belly up and solve another of your crises?
“I really don’t have an answer for that,” she bravely confessed. The Czar felt obliged confessed that he did not expect an answer, and suggested she do some actual research rather than parrot what someone else was saying. And if she did the research, she might find Greenpeace was not the organization she expected.
No, the Czar did not expect an informed, academic response to these questions, for Greenpeace—like so many environmental action groups who solicit funds—is not composed of environmentalists. They are composed of liberal political activists who are after donated funds. Funds that pay salaries for sinecure jobs like enviro-political activism. They want you to pay them to screw around all day.
Once you get these guys on the science of what they’re shilling, they derail. It usually takes two-to-three questions. Greenpeace is no exception, and very often demonstrates an appalling lack of environmental…what is that word? Clue, perhaps?
Like their report on the North Pacific Gyre, which purports to be a floating island of trash in the Pacific Ocean that is twice the size of Texas. Except, it turned out to be a questionably understood section of the ocean with one piece of trash per square kilometer, making it—as it turns out—one of the cleanest places on Earth.
Then there was their demand to ban a chemical known as phthalate ester, due to its horrifyingly toxic affects on health. This phthalate, which is found in some forms of PVC (probably the most common plastic there is), allegedly causes cancer although the evidence on this is lacking. As usual, the science just isn’t there. That did not stop President Bush from signing restrictions into law, however, last August. And California has enacted bans going into effect right now. Except prices to go up on safe plastic goods.
And then there was their attack on Apple, in which a Greenpeace thesis condemned the computer manufacturer’s environmental record based, apparently, only on unrelated statements found on Apple’s website.
An embarrassing Greenpeace gaffe was the 1986 departure of original founder Patrick Moore, who left Greenpeace in some disgust when the organization demanded a worldwide ban on chlorine due to its hazardous effects on drinking water. Turns out, chlorine is a great way to purify water, and adding a bit of bleach to drinking water is not only safe to do, but is recommended in survival situations.
Moore eventually realized that a handful of well-intentioned kids had been replaced by a goon squad of opportunist agenda-driven activists. Moore is also a firm believer in nuclear power. Some folks can eventually be made to read.
Today, Greenpeace does not accept Moore’s comments, doubts he was even a member, let alone a critical founder, and frankly will progressively never even heard of him, sell-out liar that he is.
That can be understandable, when facts and research are not your strengths. The Czar fails to worship at the feet of Mr. Moore, either, and smugly notes that if there is one thing liberal action groups hate more than me, it’s each other.