497: Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom! (with Dr. Patrick Moore)

Brian Nichols  0:05  
focusing on winning arguments. We're teaching the basic fundamentals of sales and marketing and how we can use them to win in the world of politics, teaching you how to meet people where they're at on the issues they care about. Welcome to The Brian Nichols Show. Well, happy Friday there, folks, Brian, you're on The Brian Nichols Show. Thank you for joining us on of course, another fun filled episode. I am as always your humble vote. And today, we have a returning guest he is setting the facts straight. When it comes to trusting the experts and following the science. Dr. Patrick Moore returned to the program.

Dr. Patrick Moore  0:44  
Hi, Brian, good to be back.

Brian Nichols  0:46  
Great to have you back. Dr. Moore. Thank you for joining us here on the episode of today's episode, The Brian Nichols Show, I am so excited to have you back on the program because a lot has been happening since we last had you on the program where the topic of conversation was trust the experts. We're all in this together if it sees one life, and of course, follow the science, Dr. Moore and we've seen, I don't know, it seems a lot of those experts that we were told to blindly trust and blindly follow the ones that you were pointing out here on the episode you joined us with last time, maybe we shouldn't be blindly following. So number one, let's before we go that route, let's reintroduce yourself to The Brian Nichols Show audience and talk to us what's been going on in the world of Dr. Patrick Moore.

Dr. Patrick Moore  1:30  
Well, what's been going on is this insanity about stopping the use of fossil fuels, dirty fuels, as they like to call them. And what they're doing is they're calling carbon dioxide dirty. Most of our technology today does a really good job of scrubbing the actual pollutants, like sulfur dioxide and a few other chemicals out of the exhaust from coal plants and automobiles. I mean, the catalytic converter did that with all of the automobiles a long time ago. But nowadays, even China is putting the best technology on for pollution control on all the fossil fuels they're burning. So when they say dirty, they're talking about carbon dioxide, the most important food for all life on Earth, carbon dioxide isn't dirty. In fact, it's invisible. If it was dirty, you could probably see it. But it's invisible. And that's why it's easy to make up a scare story about it, because no one can see for themselves what's really going on. And that is the the topic of my recent book, fake invisible catastrophes and threats of doom. I call it the unified theory of scare stories. And what they are unified by is that they are all about things that are either invisible, like carbon dioxide, like radiation, they make it seem like nuclear plants are going to kill everybody overnight when there's 100 plants operating in North America and not one person's ever been injured by them in 5060 years. So that's how dangerous nuclear is and how dangerous radiation is. And then there's the secret ingredient in GMOs, genetically modified foods that is going to kill everybody, even though people have been eating them for years now. And billions of meals have been consumed. And there's no evidence of any harm. But the funny thing about that is the bad thing. And GMOs is not only invisible, it simply doesn't exist. If it existed, it would have a name and a chemical formula. So they've made a multi billion dollar industry against genetically modified foods, which is a really important advance in agriculture and science. They have made that into a scare story, when there is absolutely nothing there. At least with radiation and co2. There is something there, which is invisible. The other aspect is things which are very remote, so remote, that they might as well be invisible to most people. And that's why polar bears and coral reefs are used as the scare stories about climate change that is going to they're going to go extinct. They're all dying in the oceans. And it's all lies. The polar bear population has grown tremendously since the treaty was signed in 1973. To end unrestricted hunting, something you never hear about because they don't want you to know that the treaty was signed and the population has grown. And also, coral reefs are underwater. They said 93% of the coral reef is nearly dead. 93% of the coral reef is bleached and dying. So nearly dead, bleached and dying do not mean dead. When you're dying, you're not dead. And then the funny thing was Forbes had one that said that the coral reefs were in their final terminal stage, as if there were other terminal stages before the third one, terminal stage number one, terminal stage number two, terminal stage number three and then the final terminal stage which still isn't dead, because if you're dead, you're dead, you're not in a terminal stage. So they've got away with this kind of thing. And at the bottom line, the invisible part of this whole process, politically and socially, is that the politicians giving the money to the scientists to provide them with these scare stories is never part of the story. The story is all about how the scientists have done a new study, which suggests, or perhaps says that it might happen, that something horrible is going to come about. And that's what the politicians want. They want a scientist that they can bring as an expert, to say, we believe that if we don't stop using fossil fuels, civilization will end and all the animals will die, and birds will fall from the sky, etc. It's all lies. But the media, and the activists use this, to make their money, advertising for TV and radio, and donations to Greenpeace, you know, you're driving down the highway in your SUV, and you're afraid you're killing your grandchildren, because that's what they've told you. And that makes you feel guilty. The combination of fear and guilt is a very powerful motivator, you will open your wallet and send Greenpeace a great big check. Because that makes you feel better that you're maybe doing something to help for the future. That is the problem we have today. And the scientists, the politicians, the media, and the greens, as they like to call themselves, which is a rather meaningless marketing term. They have got you by the consciousness of your fear and guilt. And so we've got to get to the bottom of this and get the truth of what's really going on out. And what's really going on is that we are returning the co2 to the atmosphere that was taken out by life in the first place, all of our fossil fuel emissions of co2, were once in the atmosphere, and were removed by plants making fossil fuels and by marine creatures, making shells for themselves out of carbon dioxide and calcium. That's what those shells are made of co2 from the oceans. And when co2 is removed from the oceans by the shells dropping to the ground, the bottom of the ocean and turning into, into to limestone and marble and chalk. That means that there's less atmospheric carbon dioxide to because the atmosphere and the oceans are in equilibrium. So when the oceans lose co2, they take more co2 from the atmosphere that's been going on for 500 million years, since marine creatures learned to make shells to protect their soft bodies. And this is not known to the average person and it needs to be known. And if you need if you want to know it, read my book, fake invisible catastrophes and threats of doom, which has a whole bunch of chapters on all these subjects, including the nuclear energy subject, which is probably the biggest solution to reducing fossil fuels. Because I believe we should reduce fossil fuels, not because of climate change, because they are limited and precious. And if we can find something like nuclear energy, which has almost an unlimited amount of potential fuel, and is one of the safest technologies and is reliable, unlike wind and solar, which only work about a third of the time, so you have to have gas plants to back them up. And that means you keep using more fossil fuels, the more energy you use, you're going to need more fossil fuels to be there when the wind and solar isn't, you don't have that problem with hydroelectric as well as nuclear energy. And nuclear energy can be built anywhere. Hydroelectric is limited by rainfall and terrain. But nuclear is not limited by anything. You can put nuclear on a barge as they've done in Russia and send it down a river to a remote village where you don't have to use diesel generators anymore, because now you've got a nuclear reactor that can supply all the energy. So I'll quit there, Brian, and see if you have any reaction to it. Oh, I

Brian Nichols  9:07  
do because so a couple things. Number one, I'm gonna I'm gonna remove nickels here from my name for a little bit and with my Brian Stelter from CNN hat on, because, you know, he's just always so full of wisdom with his reliable sources over there. And he'll say, but Dr. Moore, you see the 97% of scientists to argue that we're seeing humans causing global warming, and it's mainly due to co2, or you look at the experts that we are supposed to trust over the past two years with regards to COVID-19. And how, yes, we're supposed to trust all their models that show millions and millions and millions of people dying within months. So the trust the experts monitored going back to Brian Nichols here that hurt being Brian Stelter. But yes, you look at what was being promoted, it has been promoted. This has been promoted from the climate change conversation. It has been promoted. Throughout the entire conversation over COVID and the entire pandemic, is this trust the experts, you don't know what you're talking about, because you're not a climate expert. You're not an epidemiologist, you're not name, whatever the the title they're looking to put in place here. So Dr. Maurer, what would be number one, your response to that claim to the claims that well, the majority of scientists agree, why are we having these random robe, scientists out there who are not trusting the science,

Dr. Patrick Moore  10:30  
you may notice that the rogue scientists aren't being paid by politicians, they're not using taxpayers money to produce these stories. But, and I am an expert on climate. I've been studying it for 40 years, and I'm deeply knowledgeable in science. And the big mistake that people are making when they look to a majority of scientists believing in anything, doesn't matter what it is. That is not how science works. First, there isn't a majority of scientists who believe that there is a climate emergency. Those are politicians, and activists, and media, people who say that, if you took a poll of all the good scientists studying the climate in this world, very few of them would say it was an emergency, or a crisis, or a catastrophe, like they these people are saying, most importantly, though, science is not about majorities. Science is a process of discovery, which usually involves one person discovering something. That's why they say that Einstein discovered the theory of relativity, it wasn't as if there were 3000. Other scientists discovering it, at the same time, he discovered it, Galileo discovered that the earth was not at the center of the universe, and that it went around the sun, and so did all the other planets. And for that he was put us in house arrest. Most of these major discoveries that actually are true, are rejected by a majority of the public in the beginning. Darwin had to wait a long time, before his theory of evolution was finally accepted. And so did Einstein. When Einstein discovered the theory of of of sorry, of

E equals MC squared is what I'm saying relativity. When he discovered that 100, scientists signed an article saying he was wrong. And his response to that was why 100, it only takes one to prove that I'm wrong. That's how science works. It has three stages, it starts with observation. It cannot be science, if there is not something that has been observed. Nobody can actually observe what co2 is doing. It's all very theoretical. So that's why there are, it's easy to say that it's doing something when no one can see it, and see for themselves. So the thing is, is it starts with observation, then you repeat the same process over and over to make sure it wasn't a fluke. And you try to remove any outside variables other than the ones you're trying to understand. So that you don't have other things interfering with what you're looking for in a cause effect relationship. So science is about observing causes and effects. Sometimes they get the cause and effect mixed up. That's what they've done with co2 during these plays, to seen ice age periods, where they're saying that co2 is causing the temperature to go up and down. It's actually the temperature that's causing co2 to go up and down. That is a fact. But it's not recognized because it's, it sort of spoils their story. The second thing you do is, is verification, as I said, doing it over and over again. And then comes replication. Replication is when you give it out to the world and say, Okay, I've done this 100 times, and it works out the same way, every time. Why don't you guys try it and see if it works for you. And if a whole bunch of other people find exactly the same thing with good methodology, methodology is the sort of big part of science where you try to make sure that what you're looking at is pure, that you're not getting interfered with other variables, of which there are many in climate of course, that's why you can't really build a computer model to predict the future of client of climate or much of anything for that matter, because any system that is chaotic, which you have to say the climate and weather is a very chaotic phenomenon. You can't predict it because you can't see through chaos. That's one of the main definitions of it is that you can't predict it. And yet they pretend that they're predicting this nature of the climate with these computer models, computer models are not science, they are tools that you're trying to use with the best knowledge you have. But they love to exaggerate it, they exaggerate the amount of warming co2 actually causes by like four or five times in many of these models. And then it does look like the earth is going to warm rather quickly. But the truth is, since about 1700, the Earth has been warming at a very slow rate, little over one degree Celsius, or a little less than two degrees Fahrenheit in 300 years. And when we started burning fossil fuels 150 years ago, and especially since about 1950, when we put about 90%, of what we've emitted into the atmosphere, the rate of the temperature increases has not changed, it just is still going up, as we would have expected it to given the cycles from the Roman warm period to the Dark Ages cold period to the medieval warming period, to the Little Ice Age cooling period, ending around 1700 and starting to warm again, which we would expect it to do for another 200 years, given the cycles of the last 6000. So that's my response is that it has nothing to do with majorities. And one of the reasons there's a majority is because a majority of the climate scientists are being paid with taxpayer money by politicians to give them the answer they want.

Brian Nichols  16:30  
You took the words right out of my mouth, I was gonna say it sounds like instead of following the science, it's following the dollars, Dr. Moore. And that's unfortunate, right? Because we have been told, especially over the past two years to trust the science and now a lot of people, especially because they are seeing the science that they had been told to trust over the past two years, just crumbled before their eyes, the experts that were propped up now being quickly pushed to the side. It's the the old cane yanking them off stage. And you're seeing this across the board where people are not just rejecting experts in I would say public health, but across the board. And I guess when we were on the conversation last time, there was a little bit of a from my perspective, I was like, Well, how do we get people to wake up? You know, my position on the show is we do sales and marketing. We talk about building solutions. I know you're talking about new killer and stuff. But you do how do we get some people who are so stuck on the narratives that they're they're buying hook line and sinker to actually wake up and say, Well, maybe, maybe I not right? Maybe the solutions that have been presented, and the problems that these solutions are supposed to solve aren't really problems at all. And now they're starting to maybe look at different ways of doing things. I think we have an opportunity now for more people who are actually opening their eyes. So let's meet those people, Dr. Moore, where they're at right now in questioning some of the stuff, what would be I guess, beyond nucular energy, one of the best ways for us to show not just alternative solutions out there, too, and to your point, trying to make a more eco friendly world, not necessarily one, where we're going against some, you know, invisible narrative. But what are other things that we can do to actually help build real tangible solutions for people to pay attention to our ideas and our solutions across the board?

Dr. Patrick Moore  18:16  
Well, the truth is, we have already changed our way of doing things so much in the last 50 years, like 50 years ago, most of the cities, you can hardly see your hand in front of your face for the smog. And that has been largely reduced. There are some cities that have inversions, occasionally, where that even the much lower amount of pollution that is produced creates a sunlight produce smog. And that's that's kind of hard to avoid. It isn't going to kill everybody though. And the thing is, people have to understand the people who are in the city, which is a big majority. Now, if you're asleep, at the, on the 30th floor of your condominium, the trucks are coming in from the farms with the food to stock the shelves in the center of your city and all around it. Now, if we actually did reduce fossil fuels to such an extent that the farmers didn't have any fertilizer anymore, because that's where that comes from to comes from fossil fuels. The haber bosch process, won two Nobel Prizes in the early 1900s when they learn to make nitrogen fertilizer. And if that stops, and that's in the news, already, people are being told about it. Famine would be one of the worst possible results of this situation. And the tractors and big machines that are growing the food out in the in the farmlands, they use fossil fuels and the big trucks bringing it into the cities us fossil fuels, you're not going to run those machines on batteries anytime soon, just not going to happen. So your shelves are empty. If this kind of scenario occurred, the crisis would begin in the urban centers, because the people out in the country would keep the food for themselves. If there wasn't enough to feed the people in the city, then chaos would break out and there'd be civil war and horrible situations. Just look at this, this war in Ukraine. I mean, it's just one little part of the world. Look what it has done to upset the applecart. Now, we've got a situation where we may be into a downward spiral that will end in a real crisis, because we were trying to stop a fake crisis, which is this, you know that the earth is going to get too hot. The co2 that we're releasing, is greening the earth, because it is the fertilizer for plants, carbon dioxide, that's what they eat. And if they didn't have it, they would die. And co2 had been declining in the global atmosphere, all of this is available on the internet, you just have to look for it. co2 was 5000 parts per million half a billion years ago, it's went down to 180 during the last glaciation, and came back up because of the warming causing co2 to come out of the oceans back into the atmosphere to 280. We've brought it back to 420. Now, that is still only a third of what greenhouse growers put in their greenhouses to make plants grow optimally. The reason that C four plants evolved, not many millions of years ago, was because the C three plants were starting to starve of co2 at the levels it had gone then, like even what is even higher than what we have now. This is one of the lowest levels of co2 in the history of life, and we are in the place to seen Ice Age. Even though this is an interglacial period, which has been happening every 100,000 years. The glaciers happening every 1000 100,000 years to in concert with the Milankovitch cycle of Jupiter's gravitation affecting the Earth's orbit, and tilt, et cetera. This is all established.

These, this ice age is still here. We're in the Pleistocene Ice Age. Look at the record from the Eocene Thermal Maximum look up Eocene Thermal Maximum e ocen. E, Thermal Maximum 50 million years ago, we've been in a cooling of the earth for the last 50 million years. It's all there for your eyes to see. It's a very interesting story. If you want it all, in one book, buy my book, fake invisible catastrophes and threats of doom. It has nearly 2000 reviews on Amazon 95%, five and four star reviews. It's, it's made for people who don't know science to read. I don't use big words, where I do I explain what they mean. And you will have no trouble understanding the book. And you will have no trouble recognizing how many really good references I give, for not just me saying it. I'm telling you, for example, that the coral reefs, the most biodiverse coral reefs are in the hottest oceans in the world. In the Coral Triangle of Indonesia in the shallow seas of that archipelago. That's where there's over 600 species of corals. During the last 50 million years, the range of coral reefs has shrunk. And the biodiversity of most areas has gone down. Because the water has cooled. The Caribbean is the second warmest ocean in the world, and it has lost 50% of its coral species due to cooling over the last 50 million years. The Coral Triangle is therefore a refuge in the warmest oceans in the world. Corals are not dying because of heat. They died because of cold and are now in a much more restricted area. In the tropics. There's no coral reefs in England, or Canada, or Sweden, or New Zealand. So study this. And one way to get started. There's there's nearly 400 Peer Reviewed references in my book and you can go to them if you read every one of the references in my book, you would be an expert on this subject. Because that's how long it's taken me to become one is by finding these materials and putting them in my book to show you that the scare story you're you're getting about the Earth getting too hot is ABS solute BS, the Earth has been warmer than it is now, for nearly all of life, there's only been three ice ages in the last half billion years. And none of them have been any any colder than this. But this, this one is about the same temperature as they were, why they happen. They're not in any pattern. It may be because of the movement of the plates of the tectonic plates on the earth, which is a very chaotic situation where it's not just in a cycle of some kind. They're moving all over the place. And the Rocky Mountains were made by them. And so are the Andes and sower, the Himalayas, made by these plates crashing into each other. And it happens a few millimeters a year, but over a million years. That's quite a few millimeters.

Brian Nichols  25:49  
That'll add up. Yes. Well, hey, fake invisible catastrophes and threats of doom, Dr. Moore mentioned is available over on Amazon, we'll make it easy for you. All those links will be included in the show notes, including the entire transcript from yesterday's episode, as well as the 495 Plus episodes that we have here of The Brian Nichols Show. And folks if you enjoy today's episode, well, yep, please do me a favor. When you go ahead and share today's episode, make sure you give yours truly attend. Please go ahead and give Dr. Mora tag as well. We'll make sure include his social media there in the show notes again, all you got to do is click that artwork there. In your podcast catcher, it'll bring you right to today's episode over at the Brian Nichols show.com. But with that being said, Dr. Patrick Moore, thank you for joining the program. Any final thoughts for the audience today?

Dr. Patrick Moore  26:36  
My twitter account where I have over 107,000 followers is EcoSense. Now, Patrick Moore at EcoSense now, and I tweet quite regularly and I get a lot of feedback. I get a lot of retweets. And I hope to see you there.

Brian Nichols  26:55  
There you go. All right, folks, well, hey, there's your call to action. And again, if you enjoy the episode, please do me a favor. Like I said, when you go ahead and share it, make sure you go ahead and give yours truly attack as well as Dr. Moore Yes, we'll include that social media link in the show notes and oh, by the way, folks, make sure you go head to the Brian Nichols show.com forward slash shop to check out what we have are don't nuke me bro Joe Biden shirt that will be leaving The Brian Nichols Show shop here soon into the vault. So make sure you get yours today before it's gone for good. But with that being said, it's Brian Nichols signing off here for a happy Friday for Dr. Patrick Moore. We'll see you next week

Unknown Speaker  27:31  
for listening to The Brian Nichols Show. Find more episodes at the Brian Nichols show.com

Transcribed by https://otter.ai