Back in 2005, the Jared Diamond and his book received wide applause by those supporting the green political party. His tour was commented upon, in this publication at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=64 which is a summary of a longer critique of the Australian chapter.

Dr Marohasy's longer paper can be downloaded at http://www.ipa.org.au/library/EE%2016-3+4_Marohasy.pdf and concludes:

"In a world full of information, but much of it spin, it can be very difficult to distinguish propaganda from fact. Anyone who wants to understand the world as it really is will need to apply a good deal of self-discipline and focus on the evidence.

Diamond set out to write a story about environmental damage and he has not let the facts get in the way of this predetermined agenda. By relying almost exclusively on secondhand reports from environmental activists, Diamond incorrectly concludes that the Australian environment is on the brink of collapse."

It is perhaps little wonder that two of the key acknowledgements for his 'Mining' Australia Chapter is Climate Change Commissioner Tim Flannery and Australian Greens Leader Senator Bob Brown.

Perhaps there needs to be closer scrutiny of claims being made to justify current environmental policy of the Green ALP partnership.

Mark, It seems to me the article was about your objection to the climate change science and that is what I was asking about – your objection not the facts that you base your objection on. I’d like to understand what you have that means you can see through to the truth more clearly than all the ‘scientists’ who work in the area.

I’m not looking for facts about why the science is wrong, but an explanation about why in this particular area of expertise you will not accept the majority opinion. Why you can the ‘truth’ and they cannot.

I have checked out your OLO articles and they don’t tell me what I want to understand about your position and how you came to have such disdain for this particular area of science.

Sorry can’t buy your book. I am very poor and depend on the public library. Are you in the library system or should I ask them to get your book in for me? Will it answer what I want to know or do you not think that self-examination is a useful exercise

Atman - true. People just see this politically correct stuff and dump all critical reasoning, and that includes the scientists. Some scientists seem to have lost all objectivity altogether.

Bugsy - true, it is a lot of space to waste on someone who shopuld be disregarded but then a lot of space has been wasted praising him to the skies and, as well know, the balance of the cyber universe must be restored.

cinders - thanks for pointing out that stuff. I knew I was coming very late to the party with the material on Australia, but perhaps the article will do a little more to push Diamond back into well deserved obscurity.

Mollydukes - again the article is only tangentially related to climate. What I said was that the debate is cooling, which is true for the general public (albeit not for the political elite in Aus with the carbon tax) and certainly in the US. As for the book, I doubt its in the library system, but if you drop me a line on ecocriminal@optusnet.com.au I'll send you a couple of the chapters as they left me..

Somehow I don't think you have been paying attention Mark. You are a noisemaker. You have just made a lot of noise telling us about a person you don't think anyone should pay attention to. I doubt that this sort of treatment will help in any way to push him to obscurity. If anything it will help in the other direction. But if you feel that it is bringing balance to the cyber universe, then more power to you...

Oh by the way, your book now has 10 copies in the Brisbane City council Library and one ordered for the State library of Victoria.

You're welcome.

Mark, as you say the article is only tangentially related to the topic of climate change but this was your motivation for writing it surely? And I am only interested in your motivation. To quote Spinoza “I seek to try not to laugh at human actions, nor to mourn about them or to detest them but to understand them”.

And I’d love to understand the amazing fact that lots of old blokes like you, who once loved scientists and saw them as being at the forefront of progress, now see one set of them as very bad people. What happened?

So your intention is to debunk Jared Diamond’s support for climate change, on the basis that he makes mistakes in his facts, therefore his hypotheses are flawed? No problems there. But, I think you are mistaken about how much influence he has had on the issue. I doubt that Diamond’s hypotheses have or had very little influence on people’s support for the climate change theory.

The basis of most people’s – that I know anyway - belief that climate change is happening, that human activity causes it and that the changes will not be a good thing for humans, is predicated on the fact that the vast majority of scientists still say this is the case and I don’t understand why we should doubt that the majority opinion in science is the best truth.

Mollydukes you need to get out more, your social circle is far too restricted.