Poor reasoning and intellectual dishonesty - Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom by Patrick Moore

In 'Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom', we are introduced to ten instances of 'climate panic' which Patrick Moore, former founder of Greenpeace, attempts to refute. These examples range from the bleaching of coral reefs in Australia to claims of climate-led polar bear extinction. Inevitably, the contents of this book were controversial, and it is not too surprising that the description of this book is no longer even shown on Goodreads. However, in the spirit of diversifying the perspectives I encounter on climate change, and because my interest was sparked by his Triggernometry interview, I decided to pick it up. What if we really are all overreacting?

Unfortunately, there seems to be some misleading sleight of hand occurring throughout the text in which, in refuting a particular aspect of a claim, he refutes the whole thing altogether. Frequently, Moore cites the conditions of the Earth over the past several billion years as evidence that the predictions or observations of scientists today in response to climate change are overblown. While it may be true, based on his claims, that global warming is no threat to life in general, his claims do not refute the claim that global warming is a threat to life as we know it. For example, in discussing Polar bears he asserts that Polar bears only exist because of climate change; that is, because we are currently in an Ice Age. This has nothing to do with concerns about loss of habitat for Polar bears today - just because they haven’t always existed and had a habitat does not mean the premature loss of their (sub?)species is any less of a concern. He goes on to note that polar bear populations have risen, claiming that this “may be due to reduction in summer sea ice, not because of it” despite also noting widespread ban or restriction of hunting the bears which preceded their rise in population. 

Similar claims are made in regards to corals and coral bleaching due to ocean acidification and temperature rises, as Moore points to the great biodiversity of coral reefs existing mostly in the warmest parts of the oceans. This assertion does not refute the claim that warming of the seas will negatively affect corals. An important thing to understand is that all living things have a set of conditions within which they can survive (a niche). A rise in global sea temperatures, perhaps, will not drive coral reefs extinct, but could dramatically change the distribution of these corals. In already warm areas, a sustained increase above the range of habitability of these plants still results in loss of coral reefs and biodiversity unless there is some effective way to transplant these species into now ideally warmer waters in other parts of the world. Further, the short term recovery of the Great Barrier Reef after mass bleaching in 2016 is consistent with other bleaching events internationally which have resulted from temporary increases in ocean temperatures (Baker, Glynn, & Riegl 2008), and so does not refute concerns about long-term temperature changes. Perhaps his conclusion to this would simply be that it doesn’t matter, that every species has an endpoint, but that is not the point he makes in his book. Similar issues of reason are found throughout the book as Moore falsely believes one claim to negate the other when the two are, in fact, independent.

This issue of false equivalence is often based on or bolstered by a further issue - that the sources referenced do not always support the claim which the author attributes to them. This is outlined clearly by Holman (2021), who upon contacting both Moore and some of the researches referenced found that he had misrepresented the conclusions of their findings in order to support or discount claims on which they did not report. Further, some of Moore’s claims about references are false, as a large part of his argument in Chapter 2 about bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef hinges on the allegation that articles citing a 93% of corals affected by bleaching have no factual basis upon which to make this claim. This is false, as [this] ARC Centre for Excellence of Coral Reef Studies press release from 2016 demonstrates a clear, and not particularly hard to find origin for the 93% statistic. This could, certainly, be a simple mistake. It is, however, a misleading one for readers of the book that do not desire or have the time to fact check some of his claims.

Moore also continually downplays the significance of the social impacts of environmental changes. Sea levels rising? Just move inland. Got money? Build some dykes. Nevermind that ‘just move inland’ is a much taller order on the scale of a nation like Bangladesh than for the average fishing village in Roman Britain. Inevitably, he will dismiss concerns about such events as climate refugee crises as the result of alarmism or false computer modelling. Though once again, dismissing the significance of social concerns presents a misleading sense of environmentalist arguments. For instance, Moore discusses the benefits of waste combustion as an effective way to deal with non-recyclable materials and reduce landfill. Certainly, this is an option to consider, but he misrepresents arguments against such plants as the result of some sort of fear of combustion in general or mild concerns about combustion of recyclable materials. In doing so, he neglects public concerns about the safety of combustion of non-organic materials which often characterise opposition to waste-to-energy power plants (Sun, Ouyang & Meng 2019, pp. 2473-2474).

Despite his clear contrarian nature, Moore bizarrely does not take umbrage with GMOs, instead standing with the scientific community he has criticised throughout the book to illustrate the safety and potential benefits of utilising genetically modified crops. In general, Moore is introducing arguments that I have never heard before, which I appreciate (poor skepticism is better than no skepticism.) As far as I can tell, some of his broader points are worth consideration and further research (both at the level of the personal and the academic), and I genuinely would like to learn more about his theory that increased atmospheric CO2 does not lead to increased temperatures, and could be beneficial to biomass. As such, I do think this book could be worth a read if you approach it, as with anything, a critical eye. Sir David Attenborough is not right about everything, but neither is Patrick Moore, and so it is disheartening to see so many people clearly interested in environmental science take his word for gospel without interrogating either his arguments or attempting to truly understand those of his opposition.

References:
ARC Centre for Excellence of Coral Reef Studies 2016, 'Only 7% of the Great Barrier Reef has avoided coral bleaching', Coralcoe.org.au, viewed 15 July 2021, https://www.coralcoe.org.au/media-rel....

Baker, AC, Glynn, PW, & Riegl, B 2008, 'Climate change and coral reef bleaching: An ecological assessment of long-term impacts, recovery trends and future outlook' Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 435–471, doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2008.09.003.

Holman, S 2021, 'Fact Checking Patrick Moore, Climate Skeptic', The Tyee, viewed 15 July 2021, https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2021/06/0....

Sun, C, Ouyang, X, & Meng, X 2019, 'Public acceptance towards waste-to-energy power plants: a new quantified assessment based on “willingness to pay”' Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, vol. 62, no. 14, pp. 2459–2477, doi: 10.1080/09640568.2018.1560930. 

Sand Talk - Can Indigenous Thinking Really Save the World?

In 'Sand Talk: How Indigenous Thinking Can Save the World', Tyson Yunkaporta attempts a sprawling exploration of indigenous thought patterns across the world as centred by his own experiences as an Aboriginal Australian. Each chapter explores a single theme through the development of a symbol and works to introduce a particular thought pattern or practice in a way that is broadly accessible and thought-provoking. 

Integral to this text is the discussion of the production of knowledge, as he explores different 'ways of knowing' and the 'indigenous knowledge systems' used in indigenous knowledge production. Though I have studied epistemology (theory of knowledge) to some degree before, I think that Yunkaporta’s explanations of these key concepts were both effective and accessible.These indigenous processes are frequently contrasted with what he perceives to be the Western standard of knowledge production on a given point. In this juxtaposition, however, Yunkaporta repeatedly makes claims both about the nature of Western culture and history that just don’t add up while frequently overgeneralising the nature of Western knowledge production. He readily admits he’s no expert in either Indigenous cultures or the Western cultures he often critiques, so approach any broad claims about either with some respect and skepticism. Though I do question why he bothered to make sweeping generalisations knowing that this was the case. Perhaps, this was just to provide a clear contrast to what he perceives his own culture does instead, but I felt it discredited his through-line argument against simplistic thinking in the face of complex challenges. 

Further, certain key issues as far as indigenous cultures were glossed over or dismissed without adequate discussion despite being at times relevant to the discussion. On the case of domestic abuse and paedophilia in Australian indigenous communities, Yunkaporta fails to truly address the issues of today (see Indigenous Child Safety) and instead focuses on potential bad reporting of observers during first contact. He further goes on to claim that paedophilia isn’t an issue because traditionally adolescence was not as extended as it now is and that it wasn’t just old men preying on young girls, it was old women praying on young boys too (see the chapter 'Duck Hunting is Everybody's Business'):

Selective recording of observations by anthropologists and early settlers popularised the    idea that old men used their power and influence to marry underage girls and monopolise the young women of the group. This ignored the fact that old women did the same with young men - a mechanism that makes sense in terms of maintaining stable populations with low birth rates. It also served to curtail the excesses of youth and to mentor young people in how to navigate the complexity of sexual relationships. You may think of this as paedophilia, but bear in mind that this was an era when adolescence lasted months rather than years - all over the world, children became young adults and married sooner in those days. 

Some further examples of bizarre claims made throughout include the assertion that vitamin D deficiency due to anti-skin cancer campaigns has killed more people than the cancer would have, another being that neural changes caused by literacy are abhorrent. Unsurprisingly then, this book is largely devoid of references to back up any such claims, but maybe I’m just missing the point.

As others have stated, this book has little to do with indigenous thinking changing the world. Sure, there are moments in which an approach or idea could be useful when applied at scale, but the title overpromises on what are effectively broad ways of understanding the world. Further, indigenous thinking and culture is by its nature relegated to only small groups of people, and so I see no real place for the non-indigenous majority to adopt any of what is described in the book - you can’t just become indigenous. This exclusivity of indigenous knowledge is hesitantly acknowledged by Yunkaporta, as he notes the secrecy of Aboriginal Australian cultures. I doubt that this overpromising title is the fault of Yunkaporta, however, and was likely some sort of marketing push to sell more copies of an otherwise challenging and pertinent collection of essays.

This book will likely challenge things you take advantage of in your worldview, things you didn’t even consider to be part of any worldview at all. Yunkaporta does this in a way that is fascinating and accessible through a melding of art, memoir and analysis (as he calls it: “yarning”.) For this reason alone, this book is a worthy read for anyone vaguely interested in philosophy or world history. Take it slowly, and you’ll get far more out of mulling these ideas over than trying to ram them into your likely very differently wired skull. 

References:

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2014, Indigenous child safety, AIHW, Canberra.

Yunkaporta, T. (2020). Sand Talk : How Indigenous Thinking Can Save the World. Harpercollins Publishers.