Dr. Patrick Moore, PhD., says he left Greenpeace in 1986 because they began adopting positions that were not backed by science.
I don’t know if the man is a Christian but he successfully defines the difference between the biblical idea of the stewardship of Creation (or stewardship of the earth) and what has become known today as environmentalism [1:19-2:21].
When the biblical idea of the stewardship of Creation results in the detriment of human life is when it crosses the line into environmentalism. As Christians, I believe we should steer clear of the word and use the biblical term.
Remember, stewardship of Creation is entirely biblical and the result is never to the detriment of human life [Genesis 1:26-31]. Environmentalism elevates the planet and the animals above humanity and the result is always to the detriment of human life.
2 responses to “Co-founder of Greenpeace Explains Why He Left the Organization”
Nuclear power does not make for a green environment and the proof is in Japan. Ask the folks from Fukushima just how safe, cheap, and green nukes are. They will never recover their lands, ever. Dr. Patrick Moore is not an environmentalist and Im glad he left Greenpeace, he left greenpeace to become a nuclear supporter. I wonder how much Mr. Moore has gained financially for his nuke support. Even Science doesnt support Mr. Moore claims, shame on him.
i appreciate your comment. the man has a science background and the fact of the matter is the scientific evidence does not come down on the side of man-made global warming. humanity is going to suffer greatly because we are accusing ourselves of doing something we’re not doing and taking actions that are entirely unnecessary. and many of the people pushing this agenda will be first to not like the results at all.
if you’re suggesting the man is a hypocrite, i’m wondering how you feel about Al Gore, the Godfather of Global Warming, selling his TV company to Al-Jazeera which is funded by “big oil” and making a slick $100 million profit on it? you realize he tried to do it before the January 1st tax hike took effect even after expressing his view that the rich should pay their fair share? Does that sound to you like the actions of someone who actually believes what he’s been telling everyone else? Doesn’t that raise a red fag for you? we’re being lied to so he can line his pockets. is that not the very thing you are against? any rational person would be.