Patrick Moore is a paid shill for the nuclear industry — through op-eds, astroturf groups, and relentless cozying up to reporters, he works around the clock to convince the public that nuclear is safe and clean and economical and consequently that it deserves billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies.
Fine. That’s his right. What’s not OK is that the press insists on introducing Moore as "one of the founders of Greenpeace," often burying or entirely failing to mention his current shillery. In Moore’s youth, in the ’70s and ’80s, he was indeed heavily involved in Greenpeace. Then, around 1986, for whatever reason, he flipped and became a corporate "consultant" for industries that have since included timber, fishing, and now nuclear.
Seems to me his activities over the last 20 years are more relevant to identifying him than his ancient and now clearly desiccated idealism. No?
Aaaanyway, I bring all this up in order to point you to a just-released official Greenpeace statement on Patrick Moore:
While it is true that Patrick Moore was a member of Greenpeace in the 1970s, in 1986 he abruptly turned his back on the very issues he once passionately defended. He claims he “saw the light” but what Moore really saw was an opportunity for financial gain. Since then he has gone from defender of the planet to a paid representative of corporate polluters.
Ouch. Greenpeace goes on to disavow any connection to or relationship with him, describing some of his anti-environmental positions and rebutting them.
There you go: Greenpeace no likey Patrick Moore. He no likey Greenpeace. The two are Mars and Venus. Will this convince journalists to accurately identify Moore? I won’t hold my breath.
