Foundation Corona Committee, 118th session on August 19th, 2022

Patrick Moore, PhD – Co-Founder & Ex-President of Greenpeace

(Original language: English)

[Transcript from Team corona-ausschuss-info.com + Ed]


Reiner Fuellmich: [02:58:54]Patrick Moore
Okay, back to English now. Dr. Patrick Moore– hello, Dr. Moore. it’s very nice that you took the time and that you even stayed with us when we kept you waiting. You are the cofounder and ex-president of Greenpeace, you’re an author, you have a Bachelor of Science in biology and a PhD in ecology. You’re the director of CO2 Coalition dot org. This coalition seeks to engage in an informed and dispassionate discussion of climate change, humans’ role in the climate system, the limitations of climate models and the consequences of mandated reductions in CO2 emissions. One of your quotes– I want to quote it– is: “We are facing a situation where a huge number of very powerful organizations and elites are calling for policies that are a suicide pact, a death wish of some sort.” That’s, that’s pretty strong. What do you mean by that?

Patrick Moore:
I mean there is collective self-loathing at work here. I believe that many people think that humans are essentially evil. I don’t understand why. I use the term “original sin”, which is a term used in Christianity by extremists who believe that we are born evil or with evil at least, maybe not a hundred percent, but a belief that we are the enemies of nature, is how it’s expressed in the environmental field, the enemies of the earth.

[03:00:46]
And so, to me, this is too much like some kind of weird extremism of thinking. What it leads you to do is to not care about the fate of the human species in a collective sense. It may be you still love your mother or your wife or your children, but in– for some reason you project the idea that we are destroying the planet. And it’s strange, because anybody who goes in an airplane and flies over the the countryside can see that most of it is green except the deserts, of course,which– the only reason they’re not green is because there’s no water there. And… even there, there are oases and patches of green. And indeed, during the first, approximately the first half of the Holocene interglacial period, which depending on when you say it started, is 10 to 12 thousand years before now. The first half of that, the entire Sahara desert was green, and there are even maps showing where the villagers were. It was mostly animal herding of goats and sheep, and there were people spread all across there.

[03:02:16]
And as the climate cooled, beginning about 6000 years ago– and that’s the one of the great contradictions of this idea that the earth is getting too hot it was warmer during the, what is called the Holocene Thermal Optimum or climatic optimum, which was the first half of the Holocene. And looking back through the ice core records, at the record of previous interglacial periods, we can go back 800,000 years, which is approximately 8 interglacial periods. We can see that they are generally warmer at the beginning. In other words, coming out of the major glaciation events, the temperature soars up in approximately 10,000 years and comes to a high point, and stays there for a while, and then begins slowly to cool for the next 85,000 years, into the next glacial maximum. And most people refer to the most recent glaciation, which peaked about 20 to 22 thousand years ago– they call it the “last” glaciation, as if it was the final one. I don’t know in German if you have a confusion of these words, “last” meaning “the most recent”.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Actually yes, we do we have the same name.

Patrick Moore: [03:00:49]
Yes. So… as I always say, the most recent one, which does not assume that there will not be another one. Whereas the Commission on Stratigraphy or stratigraphic, which is the United Nations oriented body– I don’t know if they’re actually officially part of the United Nations– but there is that, this connection, whose role it is to look back at the rocks and the ages of the earth. And they’re the ones who name the Cambrian period, the Carboniferous period the Phanerozoic [Eon] period, all these periods which are broken down and they decided– and we don’t know _when_ they did it and we don’t have any written rationale for doing it– they have decided that the Holocene interglacial period as it was usually called is in fact an epoch or epoch E-p-o-c-h, but in fact it is just a perfectly normal interglacial period in the Pleistocene ice age, which _is_ an epoch. The Pleistocene ice age is 2.6 million years old, and this was a– it’s arbitrary where you say it started. Because it basically– we are presently at the end of a 50 million year cooling period in the earth’s climate. This is well documented. The peak of the… warmth was called the Eocene Thermal Maximum, and it was 50 million years ago– 15 million years after the asteroid event that caused mass extinction of the dinosaurs and many other species.

Reiner Fuellmich: [03:05:40]
Did I get the, did I get the numbers correct, Dr. Moore? we’re presently at the end of a– did you say 15 million year cooling period?

Patrick Moore:
50, five zero.

Reiner Fuellmich:
50, OK.

Patrick Moore:
The thing about the earth warming and cooling that people need to understand is that there have been many periods of warming and cooling in this ice age. We have the interglacial periods, which are the warm periods, which are short in comparison. They’re about 10,000 years long. And then there’s 90,000 years where the earth is either gradually going… like, it’s sort of like a sawtooth. The planet comes out of the major glaciation quickly in 10,000 years, and stays warm for 10,000 years. And then gradually over 80,000 years, goes back into another glaciation. That pattern has been very steady. They’re… not all exactly the same looking, but it’s quite amazing how regular these cycles are.

[03:06:56]
The– it is thought by some, not just thought but believed, that this is in synch, which it is, with what are called the Milankovitch cycles, which are the result of the gravitational effect of Jupiter and to some extent Saturn. Most people don’t know that, for example, the oceanic tides have a slight effect from Jupiter, not just the moon and sun. The moon and the sun are the primary gravitational causes of the tides, but Jupiter is in there. Its footprint can be seen. And so these cycles in the Pleistocene– this is a unique period from the point of view that the most– the ice age before this one ended 250,000,000 years ago. This was the Karoo, K-a-r-o-o. You can see that I’m sort of going back in time to try to bring us forward again to the present day and put it in context of the history of the earth’s climate, not just what happened last week or in 1920. And– because most of the people who are discussing the climate change issue don’t even care about anything that happened before 1850 or so, because that’s when we started putting CO2 in the atmosphere.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yes some people seem to be conflating climate and weather, too.

Patrick Moore: [03:08:28]
Well, this is really interesting, because they started out calling it “global warming”, and then when there was a fairly long period of about two decades where there was no net warming, they changed it to “climate change”.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
And now any change in the climate is considered being caused by us. And, but by, for a long time, when someone said, “Well, it was very cold last winter”, they say, “Oh, no no. That’s just whether. That’s not the climate. The climate is of an average over a long period.” Now all they talk about as extreme weather.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
So it’s degenerated into that. But humans have short memories. I mean, even your lifetime is a short memory compared to the history of the earth. And so it’s easy and you may– I don’t know if you’ve… familiar with my most recent book, _Fake, Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom_.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Not yet, but I will make myself familiar with it.

Patrick Moore: [03:09:38]
It’s interesting. It’s just come out in Dutch. It’s also in South Korean, and it’s being… published in Hungarian. I’m… hoping Spanish and German translations will occur, because they’re much more, would be much more widely read.

Reiner Fuellmich:
But it has as already come out in English, right?

Patrick Moore:
Oh yes. It’s sold a lot of copies in English.

Reiner Fuellmich:
What’s it’s title again?

Patrick Moore: [03:10:07]
_Fake, Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom_. It was meant to be sensationalist. The… little old man on the front cover is holding up a sign that says, “You will perish in flames!” It’s actually from ghostbusters. And just, just to, you know, how crazily hyped this whole thing is: like as if a hurricane is something coming from hell, when in fact it’s a weather event caused by cold and warm air meeting each other over the ocean.

So it’s been happening forever. And in fact, when the earth warms, hurricanes become less intense and less frequent, because when the earth warms– people have a hard time with this, because the earth is cool now, this is a cold period in the history of the earth right now, even though it’s an interglacial period, which in terms of the Pleistocene ice age is a warmer period. But when the… ice comes, which it has done 40 to 45 times, the early periods that– you know, it’s over two and a half million years ago; we don’t have totally accurate records. But most of these records of longer term climate are from marine sediment cores. They drill down into them marine sediments, and different isotopes can tell you actually the temperature, how much CO2 there was in the atmosphere, and a whole bunch of other things. And it’s… marvelous that we can do this.

[03:11:57]
And for shorter time periods, in the hundreds of thousands of years, the ice cores from Antarctica and Greenland where that ice is– in… Antarctica started to freeze 30 million years ago, whereas the north pole didn’t start to freeze until about three million years ago. So the south pole is always colder than the north pole, because the south pole is predominantly ocean and the north… half of the earth is predominantly land, way more land.

And the land heats up, as you know. On a hot day in the summer, the ocean might warm a bit on the surface, but the land really warms a lot. So that’s why the northern hemisphere is warmer than the southern hemisphere. Let me get to…

OK, so the ice age before this one was called the Karoo; I mentioned that. It was 100,000,000 years long from 350,000,000 years ago, around the time of the Carboniferous period, when trees first existed. Plants were all floppy, with no rigidity to them before lignin came into existence. And then the cellulose became the rebar and the lignin became the concrete. And a tree is like a reinforced concrete column. It is flexible enough so that it doesn’t break easily, but it’s very strong. And so this is when trees came. But at the same time, the earth was plunged into a global glacial period called the Karoo. And as I say, it lasted 100,000,000 years. It’s all well recorded in the ocean sediments. 1958 was the International Geophysical Year. That is when it was confirmed that the tectonic plates were real, that the earth’s crust was moving. Before that, it had been ridiculed for suggesting such a thing. This was proven during that time.

[03:14:14]
And at the same time, a great deal was understood about the history of the earth’s climate as a result of all the ocean cores that were drilled by these special- purpose ships that were built for the 1958 Geophysical Year. And these things are– even something so recent is kind of, tends to be lost in time. And so this ice age is 2.6 million years on. That’s quite small compared to 100,000,000. We have absolutely no idea when the Pleistocene ice age will end, none. Yet, this is where I was getting to: the International Commission on Stratigraphy has declared this interglacial period an epoch, which means that the Pleistocene ice age is finished, it’s over. So they are perpetuating this lie that we know now that the ice age is over, because the Holocene is an epoch.

And now there’s people who want to have _another_ epoch starting in 1950, called the Anthropocene, in other words, the age of humans, or the age when humans control universe, or whatever. So they’re trying to give it that feel, that now we are the main cause of everything on the earth; when in fact, the sun– as some people say, it’s the sun, stupid– because obviously we wouldn’t be here if there wasn’t a sun.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore: [03:15:58]
And it does fluctuate in terms of its energy output at many different levels. It has cycles, the eleven-year sunspot cycle, for example. And there– I guess the one fundamental statement is: there is absolutely no scientific proof that CO2 is the main cause of temperature, just isn’t any. As a matter of fact, CO2 and temperature are mostly out of sync. And where they are closely correlated, it’s clearly the temperature that is causing the change in CO2. And that is visible in the chart in my book. Of the most, the previous four, including this one, interglacial periods, punctuated by glacial periods, where the CO2– and this is where Al Gore made his mark with his film that won a Nobel Prize, apparently, or–

Reiner Fuellmich:
_An inconvenient Truth_, yeah. Very inconvenient. But there’s much more inconvenient truth now.

Patrick Moore:
Yes. He said, “[look you can see that CO2 and temperature are totally correlated; therefore, the CO2 must be driving the changes in temperature]”, when in fact it is absolutely certain that it is the temperature that is driving the changes in CO2. And I will explain. First, there’s about an 800-year lag between the change in temperature and the change in CO2. The effect never comes before the cause, when you have a cause-effect relationship. And so we can see that the change in CO2 follows the change in temperature, doesn’t come before it. But even more important, we understand the physical process involved: when the earth warms, the oceans warm. When the oceans warm, they give off gas; when the oceans cool, they absorb gas. A simple proof of this: you take a glass of cold water out of the fridge and put it on your table. You will soon see little bubbles forming on the glass inside. This is the gas coming out.

So it’s interesting, the opposite here, because when the air is warmer, it holds more water vapor– the opposite sort of thing of when the sea is warmer it holds less gas. So liquids are more easily absorbed by warmer gases, but gases are not as absorbed by warmer liquids. It’s an interesting physical fact that it’s true. And so the… cycle of CO2 through the Pleistocene ice age ranges from– the most recent glaciation, the low point, was 180 parts per million; and the previous three, it was slightly higher. The high point is about 260 to 280, so it’s quite a big change. It’s like, not a doubling, but half again as much. And that’s because the oceans hold nearly fifty times as much CO2 as the atmosphere does. So a one percent change in the ocean’s CO2 content makes a very large change in the atmosphere CO2 content, like 50 times, by comparison. So that’s… why those fluctuations occur. So Al Gore had it absolutely backwards, and yet he prevails to this day.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Why do you think that is so?

Patrick Moore: [03:20:30]
It’s almost as if people want to believe in doomsday–

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
–and so the reason my book is titled Fake _Invisible_ Catastrophes– in… physics, there’s this holy grail called the Unified Field Theory, where– they say some day– it’s sort of like e=mc squared, on steroids, where not only does the energy and the matter but also the… electric field and gravity and everything in physics will be in one big super formula, right? I have a unified theory of scare stories. They are all based on things that are either invisible, like CO2, radiation, or whatever the supposed bad thing is in GMOs. So obviously it must be invisible, because no one has shown it to us. The funny thing about the GMOs is: whereas CO2 and radiation are real things, but they are invisible; there is nothing in GMOs. If there was something in GMOs that was bad, it would have a name. But whatever the bad thing is– so they’ve made a multi-billion-dollar anti-GMO campaign out of something that doesn’t exist, never mind being invisible.

Viviane Fischer: [03:21:50]
Weren’t there studies of, like, negative… results from, like, do you know, whatever cows eating and gene-manipulated soya beans or things like that? And I don’t know if it’s not, if it’s one hundred percent unproven, but there’s issues. But I mean the scares may be like, exaggerated, that–

Patrick Moore:
No no, there’s nothing.

Viviane Fischer:
Uh-huh.

Patrick Moore: [03:22:14]
There is nothing, or it would have a name. Everything is made of things. Everything is made of chemicals. Everything is made of atoms, and everything has a chemical formula. Everything. There’s nothing that… exists that doesn’t have a name– that we _know_ exists. So therefore the… it is a simple fact that we do not know anything that exists in GMOs that is negative. Nothing. As a matter of fact, because they’re so much more thoroughly tested than non-GMOs, it can be concluded that they are safer. Because there are many natural products that have negative effects on your health. And… like some people are allergic to peanuts, for example, different things. So… and there’s, they know what’s in the peanut that’s causing this allergy. They know its name. So that there… this is just a fact. There… is nothing in GMOs that has been identified that is harmful to anything. So the–

Viviane Fischer:
That’s amazing.

Patrick Moore: [03:23:23]
Yes, it is quite amazing. I have fought for many years now to have golden rice, which is a genetically modified rice which contains beta carotene as rice has no beta carotene in it which is how we make vitamin A in our bodies. Carrots are called carrots because of beta carotene and… so almost anything that is orange like a yam or cantaloupe, this is beta carotene. And it is necessary not only for your eyesight, but it was disc– it wasn’t that many years ago it was recognized that it’s also necessary for your immune system to function properly. And so in the… developing world, between one and two million children die every year from vitamin A deficiency, because their main source of… energy is rice. And unlike corn, or maize as you call it, and carrots and even potatoes have some beta carotene in them, there is no beta carotene in the grain of rice. Every green plant has beta carotene in its leaves, but we don’t eat the leaves of rice. So … and half a million children go blind each year– because beta carotene is necessary for your eyesight– from having only a cup of rice a day, in slums and… remote villages, mainly.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore: [03:24:58]
So the poorest of the poor. But there are many of them. And one to two million die each year. And they– two scientists, one German and one German-Swiss, invented beta– invented golden rice, in 1999. So over 20 years ago they created it, by putting the genes from corn into rice, so that the rice plant put beta carotene in the kernel, in the grain, in the same way that corn puts beta carotene into the kernels of corn. So that they gave it that… ability.

But Greenpeace, particularly the Hamburg branch, which is the most powerful branch of Greenpeace in the world, has done everything in their power to stop golden rice from being implemented. And we, in the Allow Golden Rice Now campaign, are the only ones campaigning for golden rice. Scientists are working on it, politicians and bureaucrats are making rules about it, but we have been campaigning against Greenpeace. And they refuse to make an exception for this life-giving humanitarian product.

It’s been proven that it works. They… fed it to children, and the scientists who fed it to children were eventually fired from their top jobs in the science community in China, because Greenpeace made it out as if they were poisoning the children with… golden rice.

Reiner Fuellmich:
This sounds almost as though you’re lamenting that Greenpeace has become beholden to business interests.

Patrick Moore: [03:26:52]
Well Greenpeace has become basically a… oh, I– it… went from being a humanitarian organization trying to stop nuclear war, to dropping the the “peace” part more or less altogether. And now only the “green” was important.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
And this is when it shifted to humans being the enemies of the earth.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
And now they’re basically just a– first it turned into a business, a big fundraising business. I was there for 15 years, in the top committee, the entire time. I was a founder in 1971. I was on the first voyage to stop nuclear testing. I was the leader of many of the campaigns, throughout the whale campaign in particular. And eventually, though, we got to where we were dealing with toxics. I just have to close the window here. A breeze has come up.

[03:28:11]
And… well, they’ve… basically turned into a behind the– back room– you know, we were, all our offices were open to the public when we started. For years, people could just come in and meet us. And now these, they’re basically teamed up with the World Economic Forum. Nobody even knows the names of the people in Greenpeace any more. They’re back room… conspirators, looking for ways to raise money, by scaring people. So the way I put it is, with the climate issue: you’re driving down the road in your SUV; you’re afraid you’re killing your grandchildren, because they’re telling you you are. This makes you feel guilty, so the combination of fear and guilt makes you open your wallet and send a bunch of money to Greenpeace.

[03:29:13]
But they have basically become a like a Ponzi scheme, almost. It’s… quite despicable, in my view. and as I say, i have studied science all my life. I’m 74. I… have– my parents gave me the Books of Knowledge when I was 12, and I read them from cover to cover, 20volumes. And that I– ever since then, I have had a thirst for knowledge and understanding, cause effect. You see, a lot of people don’t understand that there’s a difference between correlation and causation. And this is the problem with CO2 and temperature. They are indeed correlated in this last… you know, couple of centuries, because the Little Ice Age reached its coldest in around 1700, so 320 years ago. And then it started to warm again. Long before humans were using fossil fuels, the climate started to warm. The River Thames in London last froze over in 1814. It hasn’t frozen over since. And that had nothing to do with fossil fuels or CO2. It’s just that we’re in the modern warm period, which is similar to the medieval warm period, which is similar to the Roman warm period, which is similar to the Minoan warm period, each of which are about a thousand years apart.

[03:30:46]
We don’t know what the cause of that cycle is. We… just do not know. Because sometimes it’s very hard to figure out what the cause of things is. But because it’s so complicated– you know, the IPCC itself, they try to hide this. And sometimes I think they’ve even actually removed it from their text. But it’s well documented. The [IPCC]– and I’m being pretty much verbatim here– said that because the climate is multi factorial– in other words, there are many factors involved in its changes– non-linear– in other words, things don’t go in straight lines, there’s all kinds of different factors. Each factor has a different relationship with the… climate.

But more important, the word they use is “chaotic”. And chaotic. Chaos is– there’s some very big books been written on the subject of chaos. Chaos basically means unpredictable. You cannot see through it into the future. When it’s– in liquids, there’s laminar flow and turbulent flow. When a boat is moving through the water slowly, you see the water just passing over the hull really nice and smooth. And the– as you speed up, the water starts to boil, and… you cannot make a mathematical equation to express the motion of the water when it’s chaotic. Turbulence is chaos, and so they say [03 seconds sound breakup] multifactorial, non-linear and chaotic. Therefore, future climate states cannot be predicted. They say that themselves. And then they go about building all these multi-million dollar computer models and predicting it.

[03:33:04]
… have absolutely no, they have absolutely no basis to do that, because as anybody who knows a computer knows, if you put the same numbers into it over and over again, you get the same numbers out of it over and over again. It never changes. Computer models have no… flexibility. So if… you assume that CO2 causes warming, then you put that in the computer. And of course the output will show warming, because you have put numbers into it that assume that CO2 is causing warming, when we actually don’t have any, any proof of that whatsoever.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Now if I… try to see the bigger picture of what you’re saying, then all of a sudden we’re dealing with Greenpeace as a… I guess another one of those captured agencies. Would you go that far? Because that’s the impression I get.

Patrick Moore:
Of course, they’re.. no longer leading. They are no longer leading. They are… just followers of this, and taking advantage of it. They’ve got nobody in there who is an expert in climate change.

Reiner Fuellmich:
So they’ve been taken over by the World Economic Forum.

Patrick Moore:
Basically, yes.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm. Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
I don’t know the structure well enough, but yes, close.

Viviane Fischer:
Sorry go ahead.

Patrick Moore:
Go ahead.

Viviane Fischer:
Now I was just wondering… so you would think we don’t have any climate problem at all. And if… the earth heated about like, whatever, one or two or three degrees or whatever because of like the normal kind of–

Reiner Fuellmich:
normal cycles.

Viviane Fischer:
…normal cycles, then we, it would just be a little different, maybe you know, but maybe like we have… the desert now green or whatever. It… would just be no problem. You see no problem for us at all. Is that correct?

Patrick Moore:
There will always be problems for us.

Viviane Fischer:
Yeah, but like not in the sense of–

Patrick Moore:
The world wasn’t–

Reiner Fuellmich:
No reason to panic.

Patrick Moore: [03:35:15]
The world wasn’t designed for us. We are, we have to adapt to the world. Let me just go back to the early years. We are… actually a tropical species. This is something that escapes most people. We evolved in Africa, at the equator, and we could never have come from Africa into any other climate, if not for fire, shelter and clothing. We could not, you could not live where you live now, I could not live where I live now. We would be dead right away. And so therefore we have to recognize that to begin with, that we are a tropical species.

[03:35:57]
And you also have to recognize that the most biodiversity in the world is in the tropics. Also, the most humans in the world are _still_ in the tropics, by far. You can look at a chart on images on the internet of the number of people there are at each latitude. They have a really graphic chart showing that. And most people are in the tropics, between the two tropics.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
By far the most. And almost nobody is– well, there’s nobody at the south pole or the north pole. There’s just nobody there, except there may be one little station with some scientists in it. But that’s it. And so biodiversity is… highest in the warmest climates, so long as there’s enough water. The deserts are actually not at the equator. The deserts are at more like thirty degrees, where it’s driest. And that’s all caused by the atmospheric circulation variables. But if you think how many species there are in south… in the southern hemisphere, at Antarctica, for example. There’s quite a few species in the ocean, but once you come to the land, it’s rather sparse.

[03:37:20]
So we know that ice is the enemy of life, and yet everybody’s worried about the glaciers melting. Right? And they say, well if the glaciers melt, then there won’t be any water for irrigation. And I’m like, well what if the glaciers were growing over your fields, like they did so many times in the past? The whole of Canada was covered in ice twenty thousand years ago, a mile deep, a kilometer and a half deep. Some places it was three kilometers deep, like Montreal. There was three kilometers of ice on Montreal twenty thousand years ago, and the sea was 400 feet or 120 meters lower than it is today. So– and as a Canadian, I grew up with feet inches and pounds, and had to make the transition during my university years to metric. So I can… sort of speak in both languages, but I know you don’t do feet, inches and pounds. But 120 meters lower, the sea was, because so much of the water from the sea had come, become ice on the land.

But we are a tropical species, and therefore from a human perspective, a warmer world would be more desirable, because when the world warms– this is what people don’t know– when the world warms, it does not warm in the tropics. It warms inadvertently [sic]towards the poles. So five million years ago, Canada’s arctic islands were fully forested, with giant camels in them. This is a known fact. It’s there in the fossil record. There were trees where there’s now barren tundra. But the tropics, of course, had people in them all through these periods of the ice ages. The tropics never froze, but they also didn’t get any warmer during the warm times of the earth. And I’m not talking just about this Pleistocene ice age.

I mean, back in the Eocene Thermal Maximum, when the earth was _much_ warmer than it is today on average, there was… life at the poles. Whereas today there isn’t. Antarctica was once forested four hundred million years– sorry, two hundred million years. See, the period… between the ice age prior to this one, which only started 2.6 million years ago– the previous one had ended 250 million years before then– or is it two hundred I forget now. But it’s… such a long period of time when there was no ice on either pole of the earth, and life flourished through those times. That’s– when the dinosaurs went extinct was one of… the warmer periods. But they went extinct because of an asteroid hitting the earth and sending so much dust up into the stratosphere that it blocked the sun for a number of years and caused mass starvation. That’s what that was about. We don’t know the cause of some of the other extinctions. Like the Permian was actually the worst one, two hundred and fifty million years ago. But that’s so long ago that the record is a little bit sparse. It could have–

Viviane Fischer: [03:41:05]
…do you know, this scare that by the ice poles meltiing, we’ll have so much more water that we’re all going to drown. And that Germany’s going to be covered until, I don’t know, down to Bavaria by… water. Is that realistic at all, or is this just a–?

Patrick Moore:
Well, for one thing, all the ice in the arctic, almost all of it, is floating on the ocean. So when it melts, it makes no difference to the sea level.

Reiner Fuellmich:
…makes perfect sense.

Patrick Moore:
Antarctica and the Himalayas glaciers… are making–because the earth has been warming for the last 300 years, the sea has been rising at about one point five millimeters per year. If you look at the record going back to the most recent glaciation, the sea rose 400 feet, 120 meters until about seven thousand years ago… sorry, am I getting this right? Yes, about seven thousand years ago, pretty much all of what they call the low-elevation, mid-latitude glaciers had melted. And all there was left was the polar ice caps, which have remained surprisingly in place since. Our interglacial periods, like the one we’re in now, which is already ten thousand years old, have not melted the north and south pole ice caps.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore: [03:42:44]
And the… earth in net, is net cooling now for the last 6000 years. That’s, people think that this little blip of warming that were in now, which will be five hundred years long if it’s the same as medieval and Roman and Minoan periods, those… are from Greenland ice cores which are, you know, more recent times.

Reiner Fuellmich: [03:43:08]
You’re saying net cooling for the last how many years?

Patrick Moore:
Six thousand.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Six thousand years.

Patrick Moore:
Five to six thousand. When… the Sahara became a desert again, or… whatever it was before. We don’t know necessarily what it was before then. But we do know that there were people living all across it,

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
and that it was green. And one of the theories as to why the Egyptian empire emerged was because all those people came into the Nile valley, thus creating more, more of an urban situation. And that is when the Egyptian empire emerged: is after… the deserts stopped being green. So that’s just a hypothesis, but it makes some sense.

Reiner Fuellmich: [03:43:58]
So in other words, Dr Moore, if we look at the influence that the World Economic Forum– which you mentioned and we have been mentioning over and over and over again– if we take the World Economic Forum and the people who are behind it out of the equation, then maybe we could agree on what Franklin D. Roosevelt said: “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”. And that’s what drives or what the World Economic Forum is driving, in many, many, many respects, including global warming or climate change. This is probably an oversimplification, but that’s how I see it. Would you agree with that?

Patrick Moore:
Yes, I agree with that. I also believe that most of the people involved at that level have never had a job in their lives.

Reiner Fuellmich:
I do, too.

Patrick Moore:
They have… never had to fend for themselves. They’ve been privileged all their lives, and when they say things like, “You will own nothing and be happy”, when … someone says that to me, I think they should probably be put in jail or something.

Reiner Fuellmich:
I agree.

Viviane Fischer: [03:45:12]
Can I ask you about the, you know, like in 2015. I took part in a three-day seminar about, like, you know, interventions, solar radiation– with regards to solar radiation management, and, you know, like, geoengineering, these kind of thing. So I would like a– it was a– do you know, like by scientists. And… you know, they all had good connectionss to this xxxx. Keith, David Keith, I think is his name, from Harvard. And do you know, with this idea that you should pump into the air like… I don’t know, the amount of stuff that came out of the Icelandic volcano every year, in order to kind of darken the, you know, the sun, basically, in order to avoid the global warming.

I mean, there’s– do you know, at that time, there was also a… publication from someone working at the here the German air, aviation agency, you know, that published a lot of studies with regards to climate and these kind of things. And she said that when you look at these new, do you know, these cirrus clouds that come from radiation– she called them, I think new type of cirrus clouds, or so. They would cause, like, net heating. Like every year, the amount of what we can see from radiation since– from aviation since its beginning.

[03:46:42]
I mean, do you think that these… clouds, you know whatever– can they also lead to some sort of, like, local atmospheric changes? Or like, whatever, like weather changes, that it gives people the impression that there has something changed. I mean, what I remember from when I was little, that, you know, you had a lot of, you have like, say five hot days. And then it all builds up, and then boom– some… big, you know, like storm comes down, or like a lot of water. And I think that has… become less. And do you see some connection there, or is this just like, whatever… it’s nothing to it, like from–

Patrick Moore: [03:27:46]
I come back to chaos. It’s never the same anywhere ever. It constantly changes. The seasons are… more, you know, they’re true because the earth is tilted a certain way. But then that’s the only reason there are those seasons. If the earth was straight up and down, it would be _very_ different. I mean, but it would still be livable, much of it. Why are, why is there all this ice on the poles of the earth, when for 200 million years, there was none? We don’t know the answer to why the earth plunged into the Pleistocene ice age, out of the Eocene thermal maximum. That… graph is easy to find on the internet, and… I want to talk about CO2 for a bit, though.

As you know, all life is carbon-based. All the carbon in life comes from CO2. CO2 was once 5000 parts per million in the atmosphere, back at the Cambrian Explosion, which is when– not many know, that for the first three billion years of life, it was all unicellular, microscopic and confined to the sea. There was no life on the land. Approximately 570 million years ago, the Cambrian Explosion began, in which
multicellular life forms emerged, sort of like jellyfish type things, with no skeleton or shell, just a blob, but a big blob.

And then eyes evolved in some of them. And then shells evolved. Calcium carbonate is made from calcium and carbon dioxide. So at that time, the CO2 was at approximately five thousand parts per million. It had probably been much higher hundreds of millions of years before that, and hundreds before that. It probably was at its highest during the early first billion years of the earth. Sorry… yes, the earth is 4.6 billion years old. And during the first billion years, is probably when CO2 was at its highest, because that’s when volcanism was at its highest, when the earth was still very hot, and finally cooled to form a crust on the surface. And still lots of volcanoes spewing CO2 into the atmosphere. Because all the CO2 came from the interior of the earth, in the same way that all the water gassed out from– hot, and it just kept gassing out. And then as the earth cooled, the water turned into water, into liquid. So CO2 and water are the primary components of life. Then there’s all the minerals– potassium, calcium, sodium etc., iodine, even, we need, and chlorine.

[03:50:56]
One of the reasons I left Greenpeace, finally, was that my fellow directors, none of whom had any formal science education, decided to start a campaign to ban chlorine worldwide. And I had to point out to them that chlorine is part of sodium chloride, table salt, which is an essential nutrient, [without] which life would… not live, could not live. Not just us, but every form of life needs sodium chloride, needs chlorine. Adding chlorine to drinking water was the biggest advance in the history of public health. And in ours pools and spas, to prevent the water-borne communicable diseases from spreading easily among people. And 85 percent of our medicines are made with chlorine chemistry, and 25 percent of them have chlorine in them. If you look at the label on your flu or cold medicines, you will see a little “Cl” at the end of quite a few of them.

So here I am, a scientist concerned about toxics, because that was– the last five years I was in Greenpeace, toxic… dumping especially in the rivers of Europe and… Britain– was our main ambition. North America passed laws for clean air and water long before Europe did. And we brought that campaign to Europe with– we had the riverboat, where we went up the rivers and plugged the pipes of factories that were putting toxic waste into the water by an underwater pipe. So we plugged the pipe, so the waste backed up into the factory and made a story.

And… but at the same time, most of the international directors– I like to say you don’t need to be a nuclear physicist to want to stop nuclear war. You don’t need to be a marine biologist to want to stop thirty thousand whales from being slaughtered every year. But you do have to know something about science to get into the toxics issue, because the chemistry of life and the chemistry of medicine and all of that is a very complex subject.

And my fellow directors decided that because chlorine was part of DDT, part of PCBs, and there’s one other one that’s well known, I forget its name now. But chlorinated hydrocarbons–

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
Dioxin.

Patrick Moore:
Dioxin, that’s the one I was thinking of, yes. So they just said everything with chlorine in it is evil and must be banned, when… most of our medicine has chlorine involved in it. And… because chlorine is part of table salt, which is an essential nutrient. But if you take a cup of table salt and ingest it, you will die. Because it will desiccate the insides of you. And so some things are necessary in small amounts, not harmful in larger amounts than you need, but then become harmful at a certain higher level. And this is just the… like in medicine, you know, the main rule is: do no harm. In toxicity, the main rule is: the poison is in the dose. In other words–

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I have a question. May I have a, may I have a question.

Reiner Fuellmich:
That’s Dr. Wodarg. This is Dr. Wodarg talking over the phone.

Patrick Moore:
Yes, I can hear you now.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I’m very sorry, because it was a very bad connection. I tried to reach you again, so I hope I succeed. I left the session; I was interrupted when you were speaking about the carotene, I think. It was where the… golden rice.

Patrick Moore:
Yes.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
The golden rice. And I was very astonished because you were now, you were saying yes, we need this genetically modified food, because of health. And I was– it’s very interesting, this discussion. I enjoyed very much, because I think there is– we mix together several things. You know, the genetically modified food is genetically modified organism, they all have a patent. And what is… toxic for society is the patent, and not always the substance. Because it is– they are monopolizing the seeds. And they are… industrializing agriculture. They are keeping away the people from… traditional ways of using the earth, of using food. Because they… patent it, they monopolize it, and they unify how to treat earth. So I think we get poorer as human beings, because there are, there will, we know there will be no farmers in future who know what to do when weather changes or when the condition changes, but they don’t know any more all the methods we can use to produce foods. But if there’s this big industry producing food, with their patents. And they… use this trick to modify genetically– they have a patent on living substances, on bacteria, on… viruses and on–

Patrick Moore:
There are patents on non-GM foods. the people… who who breed flowers have patents on them. They have names and everything, and they’re registered and patented. For growing roses, for example. They’re not GM.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I was… fighting with Germany–

Patrick Moore:
It doesn’t have to be GM to get a patent. You can patent any–

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
Yeah, you’re right. And I was fighting with–

Patrick Moore:
What the Greens have done is, they have made it, they… said, oh no, we can’t have this GM food, so let’s have lots of rules and regulations. And so now it costs a hundred million dollars to produce a GM seed, and so they’ve made it so only the large corporations can afford to do this. And instead of making it so that it was just like normal breeding. The– people have been breeding plants and animals for tens of thousands of years. And–

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
Yes.

Patrick Moore:
–now we have this new technique, which– people think the devil is involved, when in fact it is only moving genes around. And now the CRISPR process, the gene editing process, they don’t even move any genes. They just turn them on and off. So if… you, you may know that many seed varieties were created through nuclear bombardment. They… there are these nuclear parks where they expose plants. When they produce their seed, they give them radiation at various doses. And then they plant those seeds and see what comes up. And if something comes up interesting, than they have got a new variety from… bombarding it with radiation. Also chemical mutagenesis is one of the main ways of producing new seed varieties, where they– colchicine is one of the main chemicals used. These chemicals cause mutation in the genes, and so they put a hundred thousand seeds into a bath of colchicine and then plant them and see what comes up. And so it’s a very, it’s not… specific at all. It’s totally random, whereas genetic modification is totally specific. They know exactly what gene they’re putting in and with CRISPR, they know exactly what gene they’re turning on or off.

[03:59:20]
So… but I want to stay on climate. Because I really want to discuss CO2 in a little fuller way. First off, CO2 was 5000 ppm and then it– at its lowest period we know of in the history of the earth, it was 180 ppm at the peak of the last glaciation when the oceans absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere because they were colder. Coming out of the most recent glaciation, the CO2 rose to 260 ppm, still among the lowest it’s ever been in the history of the earth. I believe, and I don’t believe anybody has any evidence to the contrary, that the 180 ppm was the lowest CO2 has ever been in the history of the earth, and that was only 20 thousand years ago. Why did this happen? Why did CO2 go from 5000 to 180?

Two reasons. The first one, which is the smallest, is fossil fuels. The fossil fuels are made of life. The coal is made from forests, and the oil and gas is made from marine organisms falling to the bottom and being sunk into the sediments over time. In other words, all fossil fuels were made with solar energy. In making those fossil fuels, CO2 had to be taken from the oceans and the air, depending on whether you were in, whether the life was in the land or in the water. That is why, partly why, the CO2 has gone down: because it has been locked up in sediments called coal, oil and gas.

When we burn fossil fuels, we are simply returning the carbon dioxide to the atmosphere and the oceans where [it] came from. The oceans and the atmosphere are in equilibrium regarding CO2. If CO2 goes up in the air, goes higher in the air, some of it goes into the sea to continue with the equilibrium at the surface. The reason there’s CO2 in the oceans is because it was absorbed from the atmosphere, because CO2 is a gas. CO2 does not occur in any other form than a gas at earth temperature. Whereas water can be in a gas, a liquid or a solid. Water is a much more interesting molecule in some ways.

[04:02:01]
But CO2 is the basis of life, _the_ basis of the carbon in life. And so– but… that is not the main thing that caused the CO2 to go from 5000 to– you know, when we started putting fossil fuel, CO2 into the atmosphere, it was 280. Why did it go from 5000 to 280? The answer is: calcifying marine species, that make shells for themselves out of calcium and carbon dioxide. And… those are the corals, which is about fifty percent of the calcification that occurs in the sea; the clams, the oysters, the mussels, the barnacles, the shrimp, the lobsters. What happened when the Cambrian Explosion occurred and multicellular life forms emerged over five hundred million years ago? These soft species learned to make armor plating for themselves, like a knight in armor, with… it’s the same principle. They made themselves much more able to defend their bodies, by having shells on them. So this was a brilliant invention by life. _Except…_ it presages or predicted the end of life, because as these species continue to pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, it just became lower and lower and lower. We have that graph because it went from 5000, and more, earlier, to 180 in the atmosphere. And only because the world warmed again coming out of the last glaciation did it come up to 280. And now it’s at 420 because of our CO2 emissions. But what this represents is that we have reversed the continual loss of CO2 to the sediments in the form of shells.

[04:04:19]
I don’t– you probably know the word limestone; and marble and chalk. The… white cliffs of Dover are made from the skeletons of coccolithophores, which are a microscopic-size marine plant. All of the, all of the calcium carbonate, in the form of limestone, marble and chalk, is from life. These rocks are from life. And we came along– whereas the early species who learned to make the shells for themselves did so for a good reason, but inadvertently, in other words unknowingly presaged the end of life by sucking all the CO2 out of the atmosphere and the water, because there is no large source of it any more… from volcanoes. The US Geological Survey says that volcanoes emit less than one percent of the CO2 [that] we do. So what _we_ have done, by using fossil fuels for energy, is inadvertently saved life from an end that would, in terms of geological time, was going to come fairly soon. Within three to five million years, there would be not enough CO2 for plants to exist. At 150 parts per million, plants begin to die. It had fallen to 180 parts per million, at the most recent glaciation. This is a fact. And we came along and restored a balance to the global carbon cycle. That’s what we have done.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:06:24]
Why doesn’t anyone talk about this? I think the only person whom I have ever seen speaking like this, only much less scientific, is the founder of the American Weather Channel. And he attacked a CNN reporter– not physically, but he told him– Shut up. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Patrick Moore:
John… Coleman. John Coleman.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah, that’s him. Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
He’s brilliant.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah. That’s the impression I got, too.

Patrick Moore:
But he’s been… sidelined. They throw him out like trash.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Patrick Moore:
And I, I get the same treatment. I just got… banned from LinkedIn.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Well, this is–

Patrick Moore: [04:07:11]
They call it “restricted”. I’ve been restricted. And it comes up now when I try to sign in to my linkedin, where I have 3950 people following me regularly. And I got 118 thousand on Twitter, and I haven’t been banned there. I have to be careful, though. But linkedin has banned me now. And it comes up that they say, “We want your identification” now. There’s just a screen that says “You have to send us a photograph of your passport before we will even consider letting you back in again.” It’s… humiliating, right? That’s what they’re trying to do, is humiliate you.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:07:56]
They’re doing this to every one of us, to everyone who is asking questions, who is questioning the official narrative, which is now so threadbare that many people– and… by the day, the number is rising– many people are seeing through this. That’s why they’re so scared of us.

Patrick Moore:
I think you’re correct. I hope you’re correct. I… I’m not sure. I hear contrary, contradictory things out of the United States right now. I see that Liz Cheney last very heavily in her effort to be the, run for the Congress. So that indicates things are going the right way. On the other hand, I hear that there is now a question whether or not the Republicans can take the Senate. And so, as, you know, as a Canadian, I’m much more interested in American politics than I am in Canadian politics. And not only that we have a complete dunce running our country– not that the United States has anyone any better– but I don’t know what, how you’re doing over there, but the English-speaking–

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:09:08]
Same story. Same story. There’s no difference, but it is coming out. It’s all being exposed. And that’s I think, what’s making the difference. Because more, more people, even those people who don’t agree, who are still in line with the government, as far as this plandemic is concerned, many people are beginning to see other parts of the picture, of the agenda. One of them being global warming, of course.

Patrick Moore:
Yes.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Another one being the Ukraine story. It’s all a big hoax, and parts of this, parts of the truth are coming out, and that’s why we’re so grateful for you taking the time and the effort to explain about global warming and climate change. And I’m very glad, because you’re giving a lot of people a lot of hope. “There is nothing to fear but fear itself”, and the fear-mongering comes from the World Economic Forum and its string pullers.

Patrick Moore: [04:10:07]
Yeah. Yeah, it’s really quite something. But you know, I– one of the big problems is that 80 percent of humans are urban now.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah, that is a big problem.

Patrick Moore:
Used to be the exact opposite, where 88 percent of the people were on the land and had a… feel for the dirt.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
And, or what, the wood and the forests and–

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
all. So, the way I put it is: you got this guy, he’s sleeping in his thirtieth-floor condominium in the center of a city, while the trucks are bringing food in from the farms at night to stock the shelves. He never sees that. He goes down the elevator in the morning, and there’s food there. Where did it come from? They want to ban fossil fuels. How do they think the truck came into the city? Had do you think the harvest was made– with machines. Right, and they… have no concept of that. They’re in another world altogether on their cell phones. So this is… why I’m afraid that democracy might not be able to… to deal with this.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:11:25]
It depends on the speed… it depends on the wake-up speed. And I think we’re making good progress. I mean–

Patrick Moore:
That’s good to hear.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah, I really do think we’re making good progress, and people are connecting. All of the people who are now realizing– many people are understanding that it’s not a good idea to live in the bigger cities. Not just because they don’t understand about nature any more, but for other reasons as well. But more and more people are beginning to wonder about what, about these
anti-corona measures, which don’t seem to make any sense; about global warming. This is a very important topic, because that seems to be the next step in order to keep us in panic mode. Then there’s going to be global-warming or climate-change lockdowns. This is what many people are afraid of, not because they’re _imagining_ this, but because it’s all out there in the open. It’s all in _The Great Reset_, or in _The Fourth Industrial Revolution_.

But it’s all a pack of lies. And once you begin to realize that there is a big lie, then you wonder about all the other so-called facts that they’re trying to tell you through these official narratives.

Patrick Moore: [04:12:42]
Do you know about the Manhattan Contrarian? Francis Menton?

Reiner Fuellmich:
Nope.

Patrick Moore:
Look up the Manhattan Contrarian. He writes a regular blog. [ https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/ ]
He’s brilliant. He’s a high-level New York financier, lawyer, whatever, I’m not sure exactly. But he is… the head of the Global Warming Policy Foundation in… North America, which is a London-based group. Do you know Benny… Pizer?

Reiner Fuellmich:
No.

Patrick Moore:
Benny Pizer is the head of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which has changed its name on its masthead now, to Net Zero Watch.

Reiner Fuellmich:v
What is that supposed to mean?

Patrick Moore: [04:13:32]
It… means that they are following the “net zero” debacle… call it. This is the suicide, this is the suicide pact.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah. Now I understand. Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
This the death wish.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
And, when in fact carbon dioxide is the basis of life, and that China and India should be applauded for producing the most of it. Because it’s… fertilizing all our forests and food crops. It is the main reason why crop production increases every year, because of the CO2 being better. At… 420 parts per million, it’s still only about a third of the optimum level of CO2. All greenhouse growers purposely inject CO2 into their greenhouses to make it 800 to 1200 ppm. Whereas it’s 420 outside in the air. And they do that because they get thirty to fifty– they [get] even sixty percent greater yield. And the fact is, plants continue to improve in their growth rate up to about 3000 ppm. But there’s a curve, economic curve, where for the greenhouse growers, they don’t get as much return for the money, because it costs money to buy CO2 or make CO2. The only way you can make CO2 is by burning natural gas. So that’s what… a CO2 generator is. It’s just a natural gas burner.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:14:58]
Yeah, that’s interesting. Because one of your– that’s really interesting, because one of your countrymen, I think it was Matthew Ehret who explained to us how this works. He’s also a Canadian. He’s a, an investigative journalist. But he… explained this to us, not in as much scientific detail as you have done, but that was the first time I ever noticed that, that they’re actually actively producing CO2 in greenhouses, for example, in order to further growth. I didn’t know. I had no idea.

Patrick Moore: [04:15:35]
Fly over North or South Korea. It’s really cool. Many of the valleys– because it’s a very mountainous place. It’s a lot like British Columbia, actually, which is the second largest array of mountains in the world after the Himalayas, where I… live. And, but in… South Korea, many of the valleys are glassed right over, like for miles, because they’re doing intensive agricultural production in there, and they’re adding CO2 to the atmosphere inside those greenhouses, and getting twice as much food off the same area of land as they would at, in the open. Becides which, you can control everything in a greenhouse, including insects–

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
et cetera… Right, I mean, it’s… a whole other world. And they… don’t even need soil; hydroponics, just adding nutrients to water and letting the roots be in the water is… a huge part of it now. So–

Viviane Fischer:
That’s so crazy. So you have to basically pay on both ends. You pay for like, adding the CO2. and then you also have to pay for getting rid of the CO2. I mean that, do you know, that’s what they, what sort of the agenda is.

Patrick Moore: [04:16:48]
Yes… it’s completely ridiculous. We in the CO2 Coalition, we are now about 110 chosen people. I’m a… founding member in 2016. We– all the people who are members of the CO2 Coalition are vetted before they’re accepted as members. You can’t just buy a membership. And every one of them believes that CO2 is positive in every way. There is no way in which it is negative at the present time. No way, nothing.

Viviane Fischer:
And can I ask you, these, do you know, these fear, do you know, the topic that’s the, do you know, the methane would pop out of the Siberian soil, you know, when it’s too warm. And then also, like from the, from the oceans or something else. And that’s so much more toxic and so much more problematic. And like, do you know, increasing… of …the global warming–

Patrick Moore:
It’s a lie. It’s all a lie.

Viviane Fischer:
It’s also a lie? I can’t believe it.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Wow.

Patrick Moore: [04:18:00]
The earth has been way warmer than this for most of its existence. This is a cold period. This is the funny thing: CO2 is lower than it’s ever been in the history of life. This, world temperature is lower than it has been for hundreds of millions of years. All these things, it’s exact opposite of what they’re saying. It’s all in the record. it’s there for anyone to see.
And if you read my book– you know, here’s a… funny story. They say the polar bear is going to go extinct because of climate change, right. If it wasn’t for climate change, there wouldn’t be any polar bears. That’s what _made_ them, going into the ice age. There was no ice on the arctic until three million years ago. And even two million years ago, there wasn’t as much as there is today. The Eurasian brown bear– you probably know about the Eurasian brown bear. It’s what we call a grizzly bear. The Eurasian brown bear– some walked across the Bering land bridge during the glaciation period when the land was connected between Asia and and North America, the same way that humans got on this side, 15 thousand years ago. At the same time, the Eurasian brown bear, as the ice came closer to the coastline and joined to the coastline of Norway and Russia, the Eurasian brown bear began to go out on the ice, because they could hunt for seals out there. And they turned into the polar bear, over half a million years of evolution. So if it wasn’t for climate change, there would be no polar bears. It’s, it– you cannot deny the truth of that statement. Because if the ice had not come, there would be nowhere for polar bears to exist. And the ice wasn’t there before. It was open. The whole arctic was open until about three to five million years ago, when it started to freeze in the winter.

[04:20:14]
And what people don’t realize is that for six months every year, there is no sun in the arctic, no sun. The sun is only there in the summer. Well, in the, between the equinoxes, it’s not, there’s no sun for six months. No wonder it freezes. There’s no heat coming. The only way heat can get to the arctic is through the atmosphere moving. The winds can take some warmth there. But there’s no warmth from the sun, zero. It goes below the horizon and never comes up for six months. Same in antarctic.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Is it true that …the ice is growing instead of melting?

Patrick Moore:
This year, as the summer ice expanded from the previous year. But there’s, there are cycles.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
There’s no doubt that… the earth has warmed slightly since 1700, when the Little Ice Age peaked. And then, as I mentioned, in– the last time the Thames River froze over was 1814.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore: [04:21:30]
It… was freezing over at least once per decade before that, during the Little Ice Age. The Little Ice Age followed after the medieval warm period, when the Norse colonized Greenland, and then they fled. In about 1300, there wasn’t a single Viking left in Greenland, only the Inuit, who had lived there for thousands of years already and had their own way of life. But they weren’t farmers. The Inuit are not farmers. There’s nowhere to farm. Whereas the Vikings came and found on the southern tip that there was some place to farm. Did you know that the word Russ– you must know these things over in Europe; but over here we’re ignorant about European history a bit. R-u-s-s– _those_ were the Vikings.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore: [04:22:20]
They… owned the Caspian Sea trade route. And that’s why so many blonde Russians– because they came from Scandinavia. We only know they came west to Greenland, Iceland, Greenland and also Newfoundland. There was a colony of Vikings on Newfoundland in… that period, one thousand AD. And… now of course we’re in the modern warm period. But it’s been a very slow process. It’s only warmed about 1.4– 1.2 Celsius, is what– and they say another one degree will wipe out the human race or something, you know. It’s ridiculous what they’re saying. There– this 1.5 degrees– that would be _definitely_ beneficial. It’s nowhere _near_ enough to cause any harm. It would mean we could– every… one degree Celsius, you can grow food 200 kilometers further north in Canada and Russia, which is a huge expanse of land.

So this whole thing is, is a house of cards, as they say. And I’m hoping you are right that maybe if we pull two or three cards out, it will fall down.

Reiner Fuellmich:
I think it’s falling down already. That’s why they’re pushing so hard. They’re in a panic. They’re trying to put _us_ in a panic because _they’re_ in a panic.

Patrick Moore:
I see.

Viviane Fischer: [04:23:56]
And… do you think, like, I mean this whole talk about like free energy, or like some other sort of energy, like say maybe from the water, you know, is there something to it? So maybe we could just like also disconnect from the whole fossil kind of thing?

Patrick Moore:
No, the answer is no. They talk about hydrogen, right? My reply to that is: sorry there are no hydrogen mines. Hydrogen is not a primary fuel. It has to be produced, in a factory, with energy. And then when you get the hydrogen, it is an extremely volatile, miserable thing to work with it. It eats metal. …It’s highly corrosive. …It’s such a small molecule that can escape from nearly anything. It’s just a complete falsehood that hydrogen could be a major factor.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm. Okay.

Patrick Moore: [04:24:58]
You see– But on the other hand, the de-salinization of sea water is a viable thing to do, to get more fresh water. That has nothing to do with energy, though. It takes energy to do it, of course. But the real solution is nuclear energy. And the reason for that is that nuclear energy is applicable anywhere in the world. There’s nowhere that you cannot produce a nuclear energy source. You can cool them with both water and air. You can put them on a barge and float them up a river in Russia to a remote place. You can– if you… think about it, what does a nuclear plant produce? It produces electricity, and electricity can easily be turned into heat, as we know, like a baseboard heater.
So everything that is stationary can be one hundred percent run on nuclear energy. And that means every building in the world can be run, for it’s heat, air conditioning, hot water and appliances, can all be run on nuclear energy. That’s 35 to 40 percent of the world’s energy use right there, buildings.

Every ship, big ship, can be run on nuclear energy. Russia has five icebreakers that are nuclear. That means they don’t have to refuel them in… winter, when they’re up on the ice fields. And every cargo ship could be run on nuclear. If you can take a submarine under water for three months with a hundred nuclear missiles on it, running on nuclear energy, you can run any boat on nuclear energy. Rolls Royce has been building nuclear power supply for British submarines for 50 or 60 years. We know how to do these things. In addition, large machines in a… mine, like the big shovels. They don’t move very far each day, so even they could be, can be tethered. And they have this, actually. They can have electricity going to them. That can come from a nuclear plant. Every train in the world can be electrified.

[04:27:31]
The only real problems are big cargo trucks and big farm equipment, those kinds of things. Very difficult to run them on a… wire, because you have to have a cable to it, to get electricity to it. Whereas this whole move now to have all the passenger cars electric– if they took away the subsidies, almost no one would buy them, except for a novelty. The… if… cool, there’s no doubt about that. But they cost a lot more, and the 500-pound battery, lithium ion battery, is equivalent to energy of 120 pounds of fuel, of diesel or gasoline. So it’s nearly five times as heavy. And you have to, of course, move the battery when you’re driving uphill. This is just a fact. So I… of course, I don’t believe there should be a law against making electric vehicles, but I also don’t think they should be subsidized, because people should have to make a choice based on how much it costs to make that thing.
And–

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:28:55]
So what you’re saying, Dr. Moore, is that our view of the world, in particular when it comes to the production of energy and also to CO2 is upside down. it’s–

Patrick Moore:
Absolutely.

Reiner Fuellmich:
So this is, we’re– We have been led to believe that electric cars are the solution, whereas in reality, it’s still fossil fuels. They’re not as dangerous as they say they are, and it’s also nuclear energy which is, as I gather from what you’re saying, not as dangerous as they have been claiming that are all these power plants are. It’s not true.

Patrick Moore:
There are 440 operating nuclear plants 24/7 in the world today.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore: [04:29:45]
Only one nuclear plant caused the death of humans. And most of those were the firefighters trying to put out the 10-day blaze at Chernobyl. Three Mile Island killed nobody, didn’t even injure anybody. Fukushima did not kill anyone from radiation, although nearly two thousand people died from the evacuation. They took people from intensive care wards and put them in gymnasiums, where they died. So they wouldn’t have died if they’d been left in their intensive care wards in Fukushima. Nobody received enough radiation at Fukushima to consider that anybody would be harmed. So only one nuclear reactor has caused a bad accident. You have to remember 20,000 japanese died in the tsunami, 20,000. During that episode, CNN had a headline which said, big headline that said, “Nuclear crisis deepens as bodies wash ashore”, as if the nuclear plant had caused the 20,000 deaths. That was–

Viviane Fischer:
… pollution into the… ocean, the sea water at Fukushima. That’s nothing?

Patrick Moore:
It goes to the sediments. It’s nothing.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Wow.

Viviane Fischer:
But is there, I mean, are there studies–

Patrick Moore:
You don’t see fish with five eyes there.

Viviane Fischer:
Pardon?

Patrick Moore: [04:21:22]
You don’t see fish with five eyes. …It’s all totally overblown. That’s because radiation is invisible, and they can make up anything they want about it.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
But radiation is all around us. The sun is radiation. Lay in the sun for eight hours with no clothes on, and see what happens to you. That’ll kill you, too. So it’s… all about the poison as being in the dose.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
And… radiation– there’s a thing called her hormesis. Do you know this word?

Reiner Fuellmich:
No.

Patrick Moore:
H-o-r-m-e-s-i-s. It is the proven fact that radiation challenges the body’s cellular repair mechanism and thus makes it stronger.

Viviane Fischer:
Well, this is, I mean, I am, let me… Google that. Is that. I’m really curious. Or like, it…

Patrick Moore: [04:32:12]
Hormesis. Yes. It’s a commonly understood thing amongst radiation people, radiologists.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Viviane Fischer:
But why would you then have protection like for… mammograms or something like that?

Patrick Moore:
It’s totally, it’s totally overdone by a hundred or a thousand times.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Uh-huh.

Patrick Moore:
Totally overdone. You can’t see it. They make you afraid of it. They make you afraid of things on purpose.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yes, we realize that. And it’s becoming ever more obvious.

Patrick Moore:
Yes.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Let me–

Patrick Moore: [04:32:46]
If you read the chapter on radiation in my book, you will see a lot of information there.

Reiner Fuellmich:
I will.

Patrick Moore:
I’ve studied this deeply, ever since I went on the campaign to stop nuclear testing in Alaska. I was on the first voyage of Greenpeace against five hundred– five megaton hydrogen bomb. And we stopped it. We stopped those bombs, by going there, doing something.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah. Let… me–

Viviane Fischer:
Are there studies on this hormesis?

Patrick Moore:
Pardon me?

Viviane Fischer:
Are there studies on this… hormesis phenomenon? Do you know, this like low, that low radiation is beneficial for you? Are there studies done?

Patrick Moore:
Yes.

Viviane Fischer: [04:33:30]
Maybe, I mean it would be fantastic if you can– I mean, these, you have, do you know, like mentioned so many things that are–

Patrick Moore:
… it’s in my book.

Viviane Fischer:
… so surprising. So it would really be great to have some, you know, sort of, some studies to… take a deeper look into that. Because that’s really, I mean, putting everything upside down.

Patrick Moore:
Well, it’s only at low levels that it– just like any other factor. At low levels, it has no negative effect. And some things at low levels actually have a positive effect, whereas it– and table salt is the perfect example. At low levels, it’s absolutely essential for your life, to be there right now. You couldn’t be there if you didn’t have sodium chloride in your body.

Reiner Fuellmich:
And–

Patrick Moore:
But if I, if I put a _cup_ of sodium chloride in your body, you would die. So the poison is in the dose.

Reiner Fuellmich:
And so homeopathy is another case in point, isn’t it?

Patrick Moore: [04:34:28]
Yeah I’m not, I don’t know enough about it, and I’m not sure that it is as valid.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
I think it’s more of a folk remedy thing.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Okay. Here’s–

Patrick Moore:
But not– but on the other hand, herbal medicine is a real thing.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Okay.

Patrick Moore: [04:34:45]
Of course. There are many herbs that have medicinal value. But going back to … radiation. There is more nuclear fuel than we need for a hundred thousand years. And that’s because when people say “nuclear waste”, they are talking about nuclear fuel. And people don’t understand: the simplest thing is that Uranium-235 isn’t the only fissile isotope on earth. Uranium-235. “Fissile” means: can be in a nuclear reaction, can create a nuclear reaction and make energy. When it does that, it changes into Plutonium-239 primarily. But Uranium-235 is only point seven percent of natural uranium. The other 99.3 percent is Uranium-238, which is not fissile, but is fertile. “Fertile” means it can be converted into a fissile isotope in a nuclear reactor. And that’s what happens. When you burn– see, Uranium-238 is usually… made larger quantity. I’m trying to think of the word that’s used. Enhanced. It’s let’s say enhanced. Through– these days it’s with cyclotrons.

They separate the Uranium-238 and the Uranium-235 so that now there’s four percent Uranium-235 and a whole bunch of Uranium-238, which is not discarded, but stored as Uranium hexafluoride gas in great big canisters. There are huge depots of this all over the world, Uranium-238. All that Uranium-238 can eventually be turned into Uranium-23– into Plutonium-239, which can make a nuclear reactor.

[04:37:17]
If you look at the Russian BN600 and BN800, these are nuclear reactors on the Caspian sea that are operating commercially today, using Plutonium-239 as their fuel. So what that means is that that 99.3 percent that will… not burn unless it’s turned into Plutonium-239 by using the 235 to do it can all become nuclear fuel. Then there is Thorium. These people always talk about a Thorium reactor. But Thorium is not fissile. But it, like… Uranium-238 is fertile, and can also be turned into Uranium-233, which is fissile. And there is four to six times as much Thorium in the earth’s crust as there is uranium.

So I don’t know if you know, I’m… not a religious person, But I went to bible school when I was a kid because my granny sent me there. And I learned about Jesus’ parable of the loaves and fishes, loaves of bread and fishes. And he was with a multitude of people, and with one fish and four loaves of bread, he fed the entire multitude. And here the little bit of Uranium-235 we have in the earth’s crust can be multiplied by a thousand times or more. We can even mine Uranium from the sea water. It’s so valuable that minute amounts of it are worth a lot of money.

[04:39:14]
So there’s enough– the main point is, there’s enough nuclear fuel to last until the end of time as far as we know it.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Dr. Moore, let me just ask you one question just to see, just to make clear that you’re not in line with those people who are advocating, in my view, the destruction of life and creation. You said, I think one of your, one of the things that you’ve been quoted for saying is: you are arguing for a balance between taking from nature, which feeds us, and taking care of nature. Even though you’re, you don’t mind genetically– GMO, you don’t go as far as, in my view, crazy people like Harari and others who believe that creation itself should be in the hands of men, that we should go into transhumanism and all that. That is not your case. You are arguing, based on this quote from you, I mean, for a balance between taking from nature, which feeds us, and taking care of nature. But you do not believe that we should be the creators of, like, transhumanist people.

Patrick Moore:
I’m… not quite sure what you mean by being creators of transhumanist people. What are they?

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:40:54]
This is what… the main… I guess you could call him muse of a Klaus Schwab, his name is Noah Yuval Harari, that’s what he argues for. That we are better than God. We can make whatever we want to make.

Patrick Moore:
Yeah, well that’s ridiculous.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Good. I’m glad you’re saying that.

Patrick Moore:
We can make whatever we can make. We can make a hell of a mess out of everything right now. Solar is cheaper than gas and oil, when in fact they have this thing called the “levelized cost” or something. The Manhattan Contrarian actually wrote a piece yesterday on that whole thing, that’s very good. Because what they’re trying to do is… hoodwink us into thinking that wind and solar is cheaper–

Reiner Fuellmich:
Um-hm.

Patrick Moore:
–than the other forms of energy, when in fact– let me go through this quickly.

Patrick Moore: [04:41:48]
Okay. So we’re going to have most of our energy coming from wind and solar now. So the wind and solar is available at best probably 25 percent of the time. But let’s give it a third of the time. Let’s say it can produce enough energy to run the cities and factories a third of the time, because of course it’s dark all night. It, there’s no solar energy at night. And the beginning of the day and the end of the day, when the sun is low in the sky, you really don’t get much out of it, either.

So you’re looking at maybe eight hours of decent sunlight, which is one third of the day. And then there’s the clouds, which screw up your one third of the day quite often. So that’s… solar. Wind is even less predictable, of course, and long term. So now in order to– and of course, you’re going to have battery backup, for when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining. But it’s pretty hard to charge the batteries when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining. In other words, you have to– when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining, you not only have to provide a hundred percent of the electricity for the cities and factories, but you have to charge the batteries then, too. That’s the only time you can do it.

[04:43:02]
So now you need three times the cpacity that you needed from reliable energy that runs 24/7. So instead of having a thousand megawatts, you need 3000 megawatts of wind and solar installed, so it costs three times as much– actually it costs _more_ than three times as much, because you haven’t even paid for the batteries yet. Now pay for the batteries, and you have, all a sudden, the gross… what do you call it, you know, the “gross capital income” or whatever. You’ve… got– there isn’t enough money in the world. It would use all our money. We wouldn’t have any money left to buy a car, buy food or anything, if you– It’s just a fact. That’s what it adds up to.

And how much mining is, are we going to have, you know. You’re going to have to have the ability to provide at least three or four weeks at full power with batteries, when it gets cloudy and stops blowing. That can happen. You can’t have a situation where the power just goes out everywhere. The whole thing about electricity is, it’s instantaneous. We never thought of _storing_ it before. It’s already stored, in the form of fossil fuels. That is a storehouse of solar energy. Fossil fuels are the largest storehouse of solar energy in the world, the largest solar battery in the world. We just can’t build enough batteries to do that.

[04:44:54]
And if you look at the whole economics of wind and solar, you will see that they are a parasite on the larger economy. That is what they are. They suck the blood out of the larger economy, in the form of subsidies, tax credits and mandates. “You must buy this energy now, even though it costs three times as much as the other one.” That’s a mandate. “We will give you a hundred billion dollars in tax credits to write off against your profits doing something else.” So General Motors, General Electric, for example, they build wind turbines. They also build jet engines. When they make a profit on the jet engine, they can write it off on these tax credits they got from their windmill.
So they pay no tax. That’s how it’s working. It’s all a massive subsidization.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah. Yeah, that’s–

Patrick Moore:
It’s going to come crashing down. What I say is… they should rust in place, as in rest in peace.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:46:21]
Rust in place. That’s cool. Dr. Moore, this was extremely insightful. We could probably go on for hours and hours, but some of us will probably want to read your book. I do. But I’m, I have to catch a plane, a train, rather, in order to go back to where I live. I don’t live in Berlin. I come here every Friday to do these sessions. But this was eye opening, and I know that it’s been eye opening for most of our viewers, as well. It’s–

Patrick Moore:
What is your, what is your profession or daily life?

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:47:01]
I’m a lawyer. I’m a lawyer and I depend, when I talk about corona, global warming, all the other things that are currently on people’s minds, I depend on experts to explain these things to me. And I don’t see any of these experts talking to our governments, which I have come to the conclusion are _not_ our governments, but the World Economic Forum’s governments, through this Global Young Leaders program. That’s why we set up this investigative committee. We believe that our government, our parliament should have set up such an investigative committee, but they haven’t. So that’s why we’re doing this on our own, because we want real answers from real people, not scientism but science, not paid science but people who really know what they’re talking about and who are not doing anyone a favor, but who believe that what they’re telling us is based on real evidence.

And I believe that you’re doing that, and that’s why I’m really grateful. As a lawyer, you don’t… we don’t understand anything about global warming, but now that you’re explaining this to us, I can even make a legal analysis of what we have been told. And my legal analysis is simple: we’ve been lied to.

Patrick Moore:
Well, thank you very much for what you’re doing. What… is your, I didn’t see your name.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:48:32]
My name is, my first name is Reiner. I’m… I have a PhD in law, which is possible to do in Germany and in… many of the other countries as well. But I’m also, I’ve been admitted to the bar in California and here in Germany, so I’ve been practicing law on both sides of the Atlantic, but most of my courtroom experience is here in Germany. And I, my firm and I have been representing consumers and small- and medium- sized businesses against large corporations, usually fraudulent corporations. So this is where we meet, more or less, you and I, because you seem to have come to the same conclusions as I have through my legal practice, and you through your scientific research.

Patrick Moore:
Oh very good, Reiner. Best of luck with what you’re doing. Do you have my e-mail address?

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yes I do, and definitely want to stay in touch, because there’s more to come, I think, and we need we need much more of your expertise.

Patrick Moore:
Fantastic. I will do anything I can to assist you.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Thank you very much. And thank you for taking the time and the effort today. And have a great weekend.

Patrick Moore:
You too. Thanks very much, and Wolfgang too.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD: [04:49:50]
Thank you too. It was very, very interesting.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Yeah.

Patrick Moore:
All the best.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I was fighting with Greenpeace some… 10 years ago, against patentability of… biological things. I was fighting in Germany with the German chapter, yes the one from Munich. We were fighting against patents on life. It was very interesting, was very good.

Patrick Moore:
Very good, Wolfgang.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I learned a lot.

Patrick Moore:
Thank you very much. Bye-bye now.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
Thank you.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:50:21]
Thanks a lot. We’ll see, we’ll stay in touch.

[transcription continues from German-to-English simultaneous translation]

Yes, Wolfgang, we’ve about reached the end. I never talked to a single guest for such a long time, but, well, that was one abyss opening after the next, after all what we’ve been through.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I don’t know what to believe any more. I mean, my worlds are just crashing down. Because all of a sudden, there’s a new take on nuclear power plants.

Reiner Fuellmich:
For me, it’s completely new for me. I saw a tendency–

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
So it’s not just enough to think that somebody is stupid and everything he does is stupid. You really have to analyze all the little parts in it.

Reiner Fuellmich:
It’s very crazy. I think we really have to drill down into details of that, if the destruction of our worldview has a real-life basis. I want to look at this in detail before. If that were the case, we’re… into pure madness. But I think we really should check on this.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD: [04:51:40]
Well, as you see, Viviane, reality is not something that’s just out there waiting for us. It is something that we ourselves are creating.

Viviane Fischer:
Well, as he said, the the observer in the double-slit experiments having an effect is fascinating. So I think we should really take a close look. I’m going to look at that. We can ask other experts as well. It is fascinating theses, many of it very new for me. We don’t know.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Many of the things are in line with what Matthew Ehret said. I don’t have a feeling that he didn’t know, that Patrick Moore doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I think, on the contrary, he knows _exactly_ what he’s talking about. And I think that the so-called scientists that to are being presented by the mainstream, they don’t know what they’re talking about. And for that, I have one short example. Sorry, Wolfgang.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
I have to say it was a highlight for me from the people that I’ve heard, because he triggers so much. He gets me off track. I’m insecure now, as I’m just trying to re-puzzle my worldview. All the things that you hear from politics, what we should do, and what the future is going to look like. They don’t know what they’re talking about, really, do they. So it’s like Louis XIV, the, who pushed– Well you say, they say you can have lots of independent communities and everybody does their own power. For him, it was important to get independent of the big corporates that monopolized everything. That was important, and I didn’t hear any counter arguments today. The technologies if they are controllable and if we improve them so that we can control them, that we can control them decentralized as well. Like you can do something and one thing in South Korea and something else in Andalusia, and Germany a third thing. Then that is thrilling, that’s interesting. I think it’s very good that we expose ourselves to these insecurities. That is, I think is very fruitful.

Reiner Fuellmich: [04:54:19]
That’s the only way forward. That’s the only way that you learn new things, by opening yourself to completely new ideas. And these ideas– I know that there are a whole bunch of people who see it just like him, except that we don’t really get that information. Why? Because these global corporations, by controlling the mass media, and the politicians simply suppress any opinion that is not in line with them.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
So the majority determines who’s the idiot. And if you got your hands on the mass media, it’s very easy to do that. And we must stop these media to show us the world they want to show. And they just blind us with everything that they sell. So if you meet people who tell you what they see on TV, you get… issues. So we have to have the multitude of media, and we have to reach out to these people. And that’s why we have to know how media are funded, who pays for… us, for example. So transparency is important, that we know who pays, and so that we can question these things. I think that’s very good and we would need that for all media.

Viviane Fischer:
And I think that we have to think of all the alternatives in a more intensive fashion. I said that already. I met somebody who’s dealing with the mineralation [sic] of soils and how many important minerals are being ingested with our food. And to show these projects that can inspire others. And I think we have to go much deeper into that. He doesn’t think that there are energy sources that we haven’t thought of yet. And I’d be… curious. Maybe there is something that will be fascinating, anyhow.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
The largest source of energy that we as humans have is our brain, our emotions, our intellect, and the cooperation of both, allowing children to try out everything that’s in them and question everything, stay curious. That’s what we call education. So that doesn’t have to happen in schools or other institutions of the like. But children have to have the opportunity to understand this, to ask questions and scrutinize contradictory, contradicting names and… answers. Making people critical, as critical as possible, that is what I think is most important. And for the time being, if… I see these things it’s all just uniformed and equalized. I don’t see much of an exit to that. So it’s good to get into all these insecurities, and I think we’ll have to think about these things, how to keep our fantasy up and growing and develop things.
So we have lots of topics to cover.

Reiner Fuellmich:
Well, that’s one thing that we just had. On the one hand, it was something that perturbed, but in a positive fashion. If everything is true that he said, then our problems aren’t existent in that form, our energy problems. And our global warming problematic doesn’t even exist. It is something that our politicians and the mainstream media try to tell us.

Wolfgang Wodarg, MD:
Well that’s a trick of the marketing; they want to sell things. It’s… “There’s only three there. Just get your last– get your copy. Only a few left.” And so that’s… it. They say “there’s so little energy left” and I know that– so we may be in fear of power being turned off, so I’m re-thinking of solutions. So that’s something you can do. Well it is enriching if you get unrest–

Viviane Fischer:
Wolfgang, if we continue like that and move into new spheres, then with warm hearts and pure thoughts, we can immediately then heat our… houses. I think there’s lots of room for improvement still.

 


Imprint / Privacy Policy / Contact Send / support