Juno News - Climate Alarmism and CO2, with Dr. Patrick Moore

00:00:00.000 You're tuned in to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:00:10.560 Sitting down with Dr. Patrick Moore, founder, co-founder rather of Greenpeace and also

00:00:15.620 chair of the CO2 Coalition based in Washington, D.C. We talked on the phone a couple of months

00:00:21.020 ago. It's good to be sitting down in person here in Alberta. Nice to meet you, Andrew.

00:00:24.840 So you and I spoke last when you had been cancelled from speaking at an event in

00:00:29.580 Regina. And of course, the great irony is that the whole event had to be cancelled because

00:00:33.120 of everything to do with the coronavirus. And, you know, one of the things that I found

00:00:37.840 interesting is that your radical proposition that I guess makes you so cancelable in the

00:00:42.440 eyes of people is that you believe that CO2 is a net positive, whereas the prevailing wisdom

00:00:49.660 and, you know, take from that word what you will from all of the so-called experts is that

00:00:53.920 CO2 is destroying the planet. And how is something so fundamentally at odds with what the main

00:01:01.400 narrative we hear from the alarmists? How can you deviate so radically from that and still

00:01:06.280 be in a minority?

00:01:07.680 It's they who deviate. How you can think the most important molecule for life, carbon dioxide,

00:01:14.240 which is where all the carbon in all life comes from, and we are a carbon-based life form,

00:01:19.380 how you can think that could possibly be net negative is just beyond the pale. I mean,

00:01:25.360 it's basically throwing science and logic out the window altogether.

00:01:31.020 The big talk we hear from a lot of the carbon tax proponents in Canada and other jurisdictions

00:01:36.860 is that greenhouse gas emissions are the big enemy of everything and that you have to then to deal

00:01:42.660 with that, tax it to disincentivise production of it. CO2 gets lumped in very easily.

00:01:48.840 by a lot of these people with the other greenhouse gases that are supposedly so harmful. So do you

00:01:53.780 think that it's just CO2 that needs to be isolated from that discussion? Or do you think that by and

00:01:57.980 large, on all of the things that we hear referred to as greenhouse gases, we need to rethink whether

00:02:02.640 they're as negative as people are saying?

00:02:05.160 Well, first, if there were no greenhouse gases, there'd be no life on the earth.

00:02:09.140 The greenhouse gas is water, of which is the most important one by far. So I don't think they're

00:02:14.300 against water vapor. Last time I looked as it being some kind of poison, but water vapor and clouds

00:02:20.300 and ice control the climate so much more than anything else. If it were not for the greenhouse

00:02:26.280 gases, the earth would be 33 Celsius colder and life could not be here. So the greenhouse gases

00:02:33.860 are necessary for life and CO2 is necessary as a food for life. They're two completely different

00:02:39.960 things. CO2 is also a greenhouse gas as well as being the primary food for all life. But the most

00:02:46.860 important point is there is no historical evidence that CO2 causes the temperature of the earth to

00:02:53.980 change in any way. None whatsoever. You can look at the historical evidence in the glacial periods.

00:03:00.960 You can look at the historical evidence back 500 million years ago. And the ice ages, for example,

00:03:06.740 when the earth gets cold, have nothing to do with the CO2 levels. Sometimes there's an ice age when CO2

00:03:12.960 is very high. Sometimes there's one when it's very low and vice versa. Sometimes they go in completely

00:03:17.860 opposite directions for tens of millions of years. While CO2 goes up, temperature goes down. And while

00:03:23.360 CO2 goes down, then temperature goes up. This is in the historical record. The only evidence that CO2

00:03:29.860 causes warming is in computer models that are built to say it does. People don't realize that computer

00:03:35.920 models are not a crystal ball that can predict the future. There is no such thing as a crystal ball.

00:03:41.140 It is a mythical object like reading your palm, right? And trying to tell the future by reading

00:03:46.780 your palm. A computer model, you put your assumptions in it. And what your assumptions are come out the

00:03:53.420 other end of it. It's based on what you assumed was the correct number. And they just assume that CO2

00:03:59.140 will cause warming. So they put that in the computer. And of course, the computer shows warming.

00:04:04.360 But just because CO2 is going up now and temperature is going up now in this modern warm period

00:04:09.520 does not mean there is a cause-effect relationship between the two. And the only times there seems to

00:04:15.280 be a cause-effect relationship between the two is when temperature drives CO2, not the other way

00:04:20.620 around. When the oceans warm, CO2 comes out of it. When the oceans cool, CO2 goes into it, changing the

00:04:27.760 amount of atmosphere there is, CO2 there is in the atmosphere. But it isn't what's changing the

00:04:32.680 temperature. The temperature is being changed on cycles that are with the Milankovic cycle, which

00:04:38.200 is solar cycles. Solar and Earth tilt cycles. It's right there for anyone to see. But these people don't

00:04:45.660 want to know anything that happened before 1850. Like for them, that's when the life began and the

00:04:50.780 Earth began or whatever. That's the only years they're really interested in. They deny that the

00:04:55.220 medieval warm period existed. They deny that the Roman warm period existed. But they did exist. And

00:05:01.260 they just ignore the Holocene. This is the interglacial is called the Holocene right now.

00:05:06.440 It's 10,000, 11,000 years long. The first half of it was warmer than it is now. That was called the

00:05:12.000 Holocene Climatic Optimum. And everybody who studies climate knows that's there. That it was

00:05:17.720 warmer than. The Sahara was actually green. There were goat and cattle herders all across the whole

00:05:23.020 Sahara up until about 6,000 years ago when it suddenly broke. The Sahara dried out. And since

00:05:31.520 then, it's been getting colder. But it's been getting colder. But we're in a little warm blip now.

00:05:37.200 But before that, it was the Little Ice Age. Then it was here. Then it was there. Then it was here.

00:05:41.980 Then it was there. Then it was here. Then it was there. So that's going backwards.

00:05:45.220 It's been cooling for 6,000 years. And that's all in the Greenland ice cores. Anybody can see it.

00:05:52.080 So your position is not that the warming isn't happening, which is, I think, another

00:05:56.400 position that you hear from some of your colleagues that are classed as deniers by people. You're saying

00:06:01.760 that the warming is not anthropogenic. It's not man-made. And that it's also not all that atypical.

00:06:06.980 It certainly is not atypical at all. Even during this last 10,000 years, there's been periods of

00:06:13.660 warming and cooling that have been more rapid than this 1 degree in 300 years. That's all it is,

00:06:18.520 you know. It's 1 degree Celsius in 300 years since the peak of the Little Ice Age in 1700,

00:06:25.500 300 years ago. That is what has happened, slight warming. We would have expected that because it was

00:06:32.920 in the same cycle as from the Roman warm period into the Dark Ages cold period into the medieval

00:06:38.760 warm period 1,000 years ago into the Little Ice Age. The Little Ice Age peaked in 1700, and now we're

00:06:44.060 in the modern warm period. So we would have been expecting a warming. Those other cycles had nothing

00:06:50.100 to do with CO2 because it stayed the same the whole time, 280 ppm. We've raised it up to 415, and it hasn't

00:06:57.340 changed the rate of warming at all. The rate of warming is 1 degree per 300 years, which is like

00:07:04.260 the United Nations is predicting amounts up to five times or more than that to occur. But again,

00:07:10.980 those are all based on computer models, not on real measurements. You can't measure the future yet.

00:07:16.320 That's the problem. And people are acting as though you can know what the temperature is going to be

00:07:21.140 in 80 years from now.

00:07:22.480 Well, and also with great precision about, you know, we've all heard the cataclysmic predictions

00:07:27.080 that we've got 12 years left, basically, and all of these sorts of things. But it's not just that

00:07:32.340 things are getting worse that these people say. It's that they know with certainty. And the flip side,

00:07:38.960 though, I think is almost more dangerous, which is, well, it's a possibility, so shouldn't we prepare

00:07:43.780 for it? And then they use that as a justification for all sorts of dangerous economic policies and other

00:07:49.080 public policies. So we should prepare for an invasion by Martians. 1.00

00:07:53.400 Well, but to your point that you can't predict the future, how do you push back against these

00:07:57.160 people that say it's a possibility? Because that's almost more dangerous than the people that are

00:08:01.520 claiming it's a certainty, the ones that say, well, it may or may not happen, but these are all the

00:08:05.480 things we should do anyway.

00:08:07.440 Well, you don't spend half of civilization's wealth on something that might not be true.

00:08:13.440 I mean, you have to wait before you do that. We didn't prepare for the virus before it happened.

00:08:20.240 I mean, sure, we have health agencies and stuff, but you can't do anything about something until

00:08:24.720 it happens. And nothing is happening right now. The weather is happening, just like it always has.

00:08:31.080 So people are trying to make out as if there's unusual things happening now. There aren't. Even

00:08:36.620 the United Nations IPCC says there is no increase in drought, flooding, wildfires, hurricanes, or

00:08:44.300 tornadoes. It's normal. And some of them are actually declining. And in a warming world, we would

00:08:51.260 actually expect hurricanes to decline because they depend on the difference in temperature between

00:08:56.540 tropical air and temperate air in the north. It's where those air masses meet. That's why you don't

00:09:01.580 have hurricanes on the equator because the air is all hot there. But where the cold air and the warm

00:09:07.740 air meet is where these cyclones are formed. And that should go down as the temperature, when the

00:09:13.980 earth warms, it warms inadvertently towards the poles. It doesn't really change at the equator any

00:09:18.780 significant amount. And that's how they can get away with saying Canada is warming twice as fast as

00:09:24.220 the rest of the world. Because the whole northern hemisphere is warming twice as fast as the rest of

00:09:29.420 the world. Maybe a degree and a half instead of 0.5 at the equator. You know, it's always that way

00:09:37.580 when the earth warms and cools. It does so inadvertently towards the poles. That's why they're so cold and 1.00

00:09:43.260 the equator is still so warm. But when the earth warms into the greenhouse ages, which are when the

00:09:49.580 earth is warm everywhere, there were tropical forests at one time on Canada's Arctic islands. And then as

00:10:00.140 the world cooled over the last 50,000 years, we're at the tail end of a 50,000 year cooling. I've got

00:10:06.540 to get my numbers right. We're at the tail end of a 50 million year cooling period today. 50 million years

00:10:13.580 ago was the Eocene Thermal Maximum. And it has been cooling in fits and starts over that whole 50 million

00:10:20.780 period until we get to the glaciation we're in now, the Pleistocene Ice Age. We are still in the

00:10:27.980 Pleistocene Ice Age. It is not over. People think the last glaciation was the end of the, of the Ice Age.

00:10:34.780 That was just one of about 45 glaciations that have come and gone during the Pleistocene Ice Age,

00:10:41.740 where the temperature has sunk to lower than it has been in the last 250 million years since the

00:10:47.500 last Ice Age, which was the Karoo, which ended 250 million years ago after a hundred million years.

00:10:54.620 That Ice Age lasted a hundred million years. We know that. It's true. You never hear these people

00:10:59.900 talking about what the real climate change that's happened on this earth from Ice Age to Greenhouse

00:11:05.820 Age back to Ice Age again over a 350 million year period. Those are the real changes. 0.90

00:11:11.500 in climate. What we're in now is nothing. This is just normal weather in a Holocene interglacial period,

00:11:18.140 of which there have been 45. And they've all been on this, on the cycles of the earth's tilt or the

00:11:24.940 cycles of the earth's orbit. We know that for sure. You said earlier on that all of the climate researchers

00:11:31.420 know this stuff. They all know about the cycles. They know about the history. They know about the

00:11:36.940 trajectories you've described here. Are they just ideologues? They're so hell-bent on this alarmist

00:11:43.580 narrative that they're kind of overlooking things that are fully within the realm of their research

00:11:49.260 and all of that? Or is it just about the money? And I've heard that argument that, you know, there's no

00:11:53.500 grant funding for proving a negative, but there's lots for proving that it's a problem. Is it just about

00:11:57.900 the money? Or do you think there is an ideological thing that's sweeping?

00:12:01.340 Well, there is ideology involved. And nobody would say the world is going to end in 12 years if it

00:12:07.980 wasn't kind of like a religious cult, right? It isn't going... What does the world ending look like

00:12:13.500 anyways? Is it going to blow up? Is it melting? Is it all the water dries up? No, nothing like that's

00:12:18.940 going to happen. And it's just silly, actually. It's childish to say the world is going to end in 12 years, 0.79

00:12:24.620 or even 1200 years. I mean, it is not going to end anytime soon. It's been here for 4.5 billion years,

00:12:31.820 and life started 3.5 billion years ago. And 500 million years ago, modern life emerged. And we are

00:12:38.620 now at the highest biodiversity the planet has ever been. Biodiversity has simply increased all,

00:12:44.460 every time, even when there's an extinction, it comes back more biodiverse than it was before.

00:12:49.180 And National Geographic published that graph in 1999, February 1999. They published the graph of

00:12:56.300 global biodiversity. And it shows it higher now than it's ever been in the history of life.

00:13:00.860 And we're told that half the species are going extinct any day now.

00:13:03.660 Well, we hear this about wildfires as well, where every time there's a wildfire,

00:13:07.100 it always comes back with a lot more vibrance.

00:13:09.660 They say, yes. The wildfires in the US were so much more extensive in around 1900 to 1930. That's

00:13:18.300 when people started managing for wildfire prevention. And the reason they've been rising

00:13:22.860 in the last 20 years is because urban greens have got control over the management of rural forests,

00:13:28.300 and the foresters are no longer managing them. And also because they're building their houses

00:13:32.540 in coniferous forests on either side, you know, 120-foot trees of needle trees, which are pitchy,

00:13:38.700 and when their crowns catch fire, that's the end of it. The wind just takes them 100 miles an hour,

00:13:43.100 and nothing can outrun that. And all their houses burned down. That's just stupid planning.

00:13:48.860 But the fact is, in the United States, where there's a lot of public forest, 0.99

00:13:53.740 and a lot of private forest, the private forests almost never burn. The public forests burn because

00:13:59.020 they're mismanaged. So we're told by a lot of the, again, I keep going back to so-called experts,

00:14:05.740 I don't know what else we can describe them as that's not terribly unflattering, that

00:14:10.300 everything is a symptom of climate change. Wildfires are climate change, cold weather,

00:14:14.220 warm weather, droughts, everything is climate change. And how do you push back against that

00:14:20.140 narrative when it seems like there's not a single piece of evidence that would ever refute what they

00:14:24.940 believe? Because they view everything, they weave it into that overarching narrative. So I know you've

00:14:29.900 been very frustrated by this, because you've been talking about these things for decades now.

00:14:34.620 How do you think we need to? The climate has hardly changed. They're talking about the future that's

00:14:41.340 going to be dramatic changes in the climate. You know, climate, the official definition of climate is

00:14:46.700 the average weather over the last 30 years. So it's a role, a moving average, right? And if you take

00:14:53.180 the climate of this earth, all it's done for the last 300 years is get a little bit warmer.

00:15:00.460 You know, and a lot less people are freezing to death than did back then.

00:15:03.980 20 times as many people die from the cold as die from the warmth.

00:15:07.420 The only climate refugees in this world are people flying south from the winters in the north. 0.99

00:15:13.260 Yeah, no one from Florida is spending their summers in Canada or their winters in Canada.

00:15:18.460 No, they're not. Well, they might come here in the summer, because long nights and long days and

00:15:23.980 sunny weather. It's a nice time to come to Canada. That's when most people do come to Canada. But they 0.86

00:15:28.940 don't come here in the winter, except the people who come skiing. They'll come here in the winter,

00:15:33.500 because that's fun to do in the snow, and they might not have any snow in their country. But the bulk

00:15:38.060 of people who are going to another place are people going from cold places to warm places.

00:15:43.020 When you're a climate refugee yourself, because you moved from BC to Mexico, did you not?

00:15:47.260 Well, we have a place there, yes. And we go there in the winter.

00:15:50.860 But if you were from Mexico, you probably wouldn't have a winter home in northern Alberta or something.

00:15:55.340 No, not likely.

00:15:57.340 And why then do we hear this rhetoric from the Liberal government in Canada, for example,

00:16:02.860 about climate refugees from Africa? I mean, again, I have no frame of reference,

00:16:06.860 having never been there, not being an expert on this. But we're told the portrait is a very grim

00:16:11.660 one, that you've got communities that can't grow food, that don't have water, all because of climate

00:16:15.900 change. It's all lies. They're coming here because they want to come to a better country that's got

00:16:20.620 a higher standard of living and better education, better health care and all that. One of the reasons

00:16:25.980 that people in Africa are still in such a dire strait is we won't let them use fossil fuels to make 1.00

00:16:33.260 electricity. We won't help them. That's why China- We're imposing our environmental virtue 0.99

00:16:38.140 signaling on African nations.

00:16:40.220 Yes. Meanwhile, we use a lot more fossil fuels than they do. But that is why China is expanding 0.57

00:16:46.380 its influence so much into Africa and South America, is because they will build the coal plants

00:16:52.620 and then take 10% interest on the revenue from them, just like any business would do. But then the

00:16:58.060 people have electricity and can build their society up. There's also still, of course, a lot of tribalism

00:17:04.060 in Africa. It's nascent there. I've been through lots of sub-Saharan Africa and it's pretty tough in

00:17:11.900 parts. I think we should be doing more to encourage them to develop a decent energy infrastructure,

00:17:17.660 because that is definitely the basis of a large part of our standard of living,

00:17:22.140 is the fact that we have electricity and fuel, the energy to run our system with. And I think

00:17:28.140 a lot of the climate alarmists, the real climate alarmists like Al Gore, who isn't a scientist and

00:17:37.740 the people- There's so many of them that aren't scientists who are the leaders of the alarmism.

00:17:42.300 Then the scientists who are alarmists are like Michael Mann. He is actually a complete fraud. I mean,

00:17:47.820 he denies the history of science. He projects these horrible future scenarios. And he basically is

00:17:58.300 assassinates the character of everybody around him. And Google's in on it, Facebook's in on it,

00:18:04.220 Twitter's in on it. If you Google me, you will find that all the character assassination websites

00:18:10.300 come first. Not what I've done in my life, not who I am or all of the things-

00:18:15.500 But all of the denunciations from Greenpeace-

00:18:17.340 Yes, and it's just character assassination. It's that I'm in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry,

00:18:23.820 and I work for polluting industries. They use the term polluting industry. Actually,

00:18:28.940 they say the word industry like it's a swear word, like he works for industry.

00:18:32.780 Yeah. Well, that's the thing. I mean, when you talk about investment in Africa and infrastructure

00:18:36.620 and anywhere in the world, it's very difficult when the alarmists view industry itself as the enemy.

00:18:43.020 Yes. They view true progress as being the enemy.

00:18:45.660 Yeah. And actually, where are things made by industry, right? And science used to be actually

00:18:53.340 more done by the private sector. And when the private sector invests in science,

00:18:56.940 they actually expect something useful might come out of it. Well, actually,

00:19:00.220 something useful does come out of the government-funded science, fear. Fear of the future and

00:19:05.740 fear of the climate. So that helps the politicians. And one of my hypotheses, and I'm writing a book

00:19:12.300 that will include this. I think this is a really important insight in many ways in that nearly all

00:19:18.220 the scare stories today are about things that are invisible, like CO2. Like, you can't point over

00:19:24.060 there and say, look what the CO2 is doing over there. So, or so remote that nobody can go and

00:19:29.660 observe them for themselves. So, because you can't observe it directly yourself, which is the first

00:19:35.580 basis of science, is observation. Seeing something happen and saying, oh, maybe this is causing this,

00:19:41.740 and then doing an experiment to verify whether or not there is a cause-effect relationship there,

00:19:46.700 and then giving it out to be replicated by independent people, other people than you.

00:19:51.180 So then, pretty soon, you've got a hypothesis that's turning into a theory. And, but you can't

00:19:56.140 do that with things that are invisible very easily. So, if something, if you're basing your story on

00:20:02.380 something that is invisible, you depend on the activists, the media, the politicians, and the

00:20:09.500 scientists, all of whom have lots of skin in that game. You depend on them to tell you what's really

00:20:15.420 happening. So, when they tell you that CO2 is causing this or that or the other, you can't see it.

00:20:21.260 You have to believe them.

00:20:22.220 And then you expand that to the media, and as you were saying, the tech companies.

00:20:25.980 Yes, and the tech companies and the politicians who want scare stories that they can tell their

00:20:32.540 voters they're going to save them and their children from. You know, you're driving down

00:20:36.060 the highway in your SUV, you're afraid you're killing your children and your grandchildren,

00:20:40.220 right? So, you get guilty about that. And then you send a big check to Greenpeace or one of these other

00:20:44.940 so-called charities that are going to save the world for you. That's how that works. They are

00:20:50.060 very good at getting their hands in other people's pockets and extracting money from them, like up to

00:20:56.380 half a billion dollars going into Greenpeace and these other groups.

00:20:59.260 So, you still do this. You still talk about these issues. You still write about them.

00:21:04.860 Is there still a bit of hope or optimism that you have?

00:21:08.220 Well, the reason I'm writing the book I'm writing now is so that it's there as a record

00:21:12.860 of what I believed at this time in history. And I think it will bear out. As a matter of fact,

00:21:17.580 I know it will. The scare, for example, about GMOs, genetically modified foods,

00:21:25.660 have they ever shown you what it is that's in there that is harmful?

00:21:28.860 No. Under a microscope? I'm told I have to be against them. But no one's told me why.

00:21:34.380 Well, it's because it's invisible, right? Radiation is invisible. So, they can make up

00:21:39.340 all kinds of scare stories about it. And pesticide residues in food are invisible. So, that gives the

00:21:45.500 organic people, which in the sense of food, the word organic is strictly a marketing term. It has no

00:21:51.500 scientific basis to it whatsoever. Organic in chemistry means the chemistry of carbon,

00:21:56.380 which is all food, pretty much, because all food is from living things that are based on carbon.

00:22:03.580 So, all our food is organic in that sense, except maybe salt. Beyond meat burgers.

00:22:10.220 Well, they're organic, yeah, no matter what they've got in them. The other things, though,

00:22:16.380 are almost all caused by CO2. They say that the coral reefs are dying from CO2. How many people can go

00:22:22.060 and see if CO2 is killing the coral reefs? First, you can't see the CO2. Secondly, the coral reefs are

00:22:27.900 underwater, right? And not that many people go there. So, the scientists who are studying the coral

00:22:32.780 reefs and making the headlines, 93% of the coral reefs are dying. 93% of the coral reefs are nearly

00:22:40.380 dead. 93% of the coral reefs are terminal. None of those things are dead, right? Dying, nearly dead,

00:22:46.620 and terminal are not dead, right? So, they can get away with saying that, because if someone goes

00:22:51.580 there and say, well, they're not dead, they can say, well, we didn't really say they were dead.

00:22:56.220 We said they were almost there. Yeah. Well, yeah, I mean, my wife and I moved into a house,

00:23:01.180 and we inherited a garden, not having any ability to do any gardening. And there are lots of flowers

00:23:05.740 there that don't look all that good, but that does not mean that the garden is dead. It doesn't mean

00:23:09.020 it's over. There's a cycle to these things. Yes. They grow, they go away. Everything dies.

00:23:14.060 Mm-hmm. That's what people don't seem to get. There's nothing that doesn't die,

00:23:18.380 doesn't have an end of life, right? And then a new one is born, hopefully, usually. And coral reefs

00:23:24.460 are no different. Parts of them die all the time. And sometimes hurricanes smash them up. Sometimes

00:23:31.180 boats run into them and damage them. Sometimes people overfish them. And so, it's not that there's

00:23:38.860 no issues with reefs, but reefs are thriving all around the world where reefs can grow.

00:23:44.620 The proof of this thing about them dying because the seas are too hot, the richest coral reefs in

00:23:51.420 the world, with the most reef fish too, the most biodiversity of corals and reef fish, is in the

00:23:56.620 warmest oceans of the world, which is the Indonesian Archipelago Sea, which is a shallow sea. It's year

00:24:04.140 round, for year round, it's the warmest ocean in the world, and it has the highest biodiversity. It is

00:24:08.860 actually a kind of sanctuary. As the world has cooled over the last 50 million years, the range of

00:24:14.460 corals has shrunk into a much smaller space near the equator than it was when the world was hot.

00:24:20.860 That's just, so really, yes, it's cold that has reduced the area of coral, not heat.

00:24:28.460 Well, glad we can have you here to break through a lot of the noise on this. We've talked about the

00:24:32.460 sea, the air, the land. I think we've pretty much covered all the bases. We'll get you on space next

00:24:36.380 time. Patrick Moore, thank you so much.

00:24:38.460 Thank you, Andrew.

00:24:39.580 Thanks for listening to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:24:41.740 Support the program by donating to True North at www.tnc.news.

Juno News - August 15, 2020

Climate Alarmism and CO2, with Dr. Patrick Moore

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript