The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The rocks man and the columnist > Comments

The rocks man and the columnist : Comments

By Stephen Keim, published 11/12/2009

Is Ian Plimer, author of 'Heaven and Earth', a climate change sceptic or a misguided idealogue?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. All
i recommend that everyone go to the abc website and watch the lateline exchange.

>> Was it just an opportunity for Monbiot to put the questions to Plimer that Plimer had already refused to answer?

you say that as if it is a bad thing.

>> And Jones basically ganged-up on Plimer with Monbiot,

nonsense. the whole point between monbiot-plimer is that plimer claims to be the expert, makes claims, and continually refuses to answer questions about those claims. plimer's performance last night was classic plimer.

last night, plimer was repeatedly asked questions because he repeatedly evaded answering them. jones did what any decent journalist would do. if anything, he was too tolerant of plimer's continual obfuscation and misdirection.

>> I also found Plimer underwhelming.

graham young found plimer "underwhelming". heh heh heh.
Posted by bushbasher, Wednesday, 16 December 2009 8:53:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Clearly Ian Plimer, in his exalted position as a Scientist, considers it beneath him to answer questions from a mere journalist. Therefore he wouldn't stoop so low as to deal with the issues on a program like Lateline.

In that case it's about time he allowed his analysis to be properly tested by other important people (presumably other Scientists). This would be fairly easy - he would just need to submit some papers on global warming to scientific journals for peer review.

But given his work is so full of glaring errors, it's much simpler (and more profitable) to publish it in a book, pretend it's science and ignore the critics.
Posted by Cazza, Wednesday, 16 December 2009 10:37:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
it's hardly surpising Pilmer supporters are disappointed by his performance on Lateline,
the guy's a shonk, a total fraud waving around a book of fairytales he's trying to sell.

thanks for the exposition Graham.
Posted by whistler, Wednesday, 16 December 2009 10:55:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I personally am a bit mystified why Pilmer still has credibility. Granted Pilmer has always said that "Heaven and Earth" is a work of advocacy rather than science. But after reading responses from people whose work he "quoted" in there it become evident he went well beyond honest advocacy. There were more than a few who said he was outright lying about their work and views. Surely this was obvious from what was reported at the time.

Bazz: "Another question is CO2 above, say 500 ppm really something to worry about ?"

My understanding the problems stem more from the rate of change rather than the change itself. CO2 is rising faster now than at any time in Earths history. The worry seems to be two fold. First is the water. Changing weather means rain ends up in different places. The monsoon disappearing in the worlds most populous area (Asia) is a possibility. The water will fall somewhere else - but Asia would starve. And dry / wet cycles get longer. Think the 10 year drought we just had turning into 20 years. Even at this early stage water is the principle cause of consternation here in Australia.

The second problem is the ability of the biosphere to cope with such a change, as evolution works more on the scale of millennia. If is doesn't we could see mass die offs in our food chain.

But back the importance of rate: if these changes happened over a millennia like they usually do, it would not be a problem. But if it happens in decades ... well you can't move billions in decades.

Bazz: "Are there other times when temperatures have been reasonable and yet CO2 has been well above present levels."

Yes. Approx 3 times now (900ppm) at the end of the Permian. Don't take too much comfort from that though. The Permian ended with the biggest mass extinction the planet has seen, 95% of species and 99.5% of individuals dying.
Posted by rstuart, Wednesday, 16 December 2009 1:34:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've now seen the 'Lateline' segment, and I must say that Plimer came across as a pompous, evasive git. Monbiot, on the other hand, acknowledges the damage done recently to the public perception of climate scientists while calmly insisting that Plimer address the very striaghtforward questions asked about claims he made in his book.

Even Tony Jones comes across as reasonable compared to Plimer. I think that any credibility Plimer might have had with respect to climate change science has gone completely down the gurgler.

The climate delusionists need to find a new poster boy.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 16 December 2009 2:53:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rstuart,

I'm also amazed that Plimer has "credibility" with climate change "sceptics". You might find this link interesting.

http://www.badscience.net/2009/12/copenhagen-climate-change-blah-blah/

The scepticism is psychological rather than intellectual.
Posted by mac, Wednesday, 16 December 2009 3:00:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy