jump to navigation

Plimer challenges the climate scaremongers with answers to 101 questions January 27, 2012

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
1 comment so far

Plimer challenges the climate scaremongers with answers to 101 questions

January 11 2012

The second print run of Ian Plimer’s How to Get Expelled From School is now shipping, the publisher, Connor Court, told Australian Conservative.

The first print run sold out before Christmas.

Professor Plimer penned the best-selling Heaven and Earth in 2009. His new book continues to examine the issues surrounding the massive climate change scare-up and brings historical perspective to the issue. Plimer is Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences at The University of Melbourne and arguably Australia’s best-known geologist.

Professor Plimer says that past natural climate changes have been larger and more rapid than the worst case predictions, yet humans adapted. Is human-induced global warming the biggest financial and scientific scam in history? If it is, we will pay dearly, he says:

Read the rest here


Professor Ian Plimer is out of his depth…..says Tim Flannery! December 14, 2011

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,

Professor Ian Plimer is out of his depth…..says Tim Flannery!

14 December 2011

Oh dear, Tim Flannery on Australian TV (Channel 10, The Project) saying Professor Ian Plimer is “out of his depth” with regards to his skeptical views on man-made climate change. Hmmm let’s have a look at Tim Flannery’s failed climate predictions below and then tell me who is out of their depth!!!

In 2005, Flannery predicted Sydney’s dams could be dry in as little as two years because global warming was drying up the rains, leaving the city “facing extreme difficulties with water”.

Check Sydney’s dam levels today: 73 per cent. Hmm. Not a good start.

In 2008, Flannery said: “The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009.”

Check Adelaide’s water storage levels today: 77 per cent.

In 2007, Flannery predicted cities such as Brisbane would never again have dam-filling rains, as global warming had caused “a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas” and made the soil too hot, “so even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and river systems … “.

Check the Murray-Darling system today: in flood. Check Brisbane’s dam levels: 100 per cent full.

For more of Flannery’s many failed predictions click here. If Flannery tells you that your city is about to run of our water, move to higher ground and invest in an umbrella company.

Professor Ian Plimer is the author of the excellent book “Heaven & Earth” as well as his new release “How to get Expelled from School

Climate change ‘sceptic’ Ian Plimer argues CO2 is not causing global warming November 13, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Climate change ‘sceptic’ Ian Plimer argues CO2 is not causing global warming

The Telegraph
November 12, 2009

Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist from Adelaide University, argues that a recent rise in temperature around the world is caused by solar cycles and other “extra terrestrial” forces.

He said carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, widely blamed for global warming, is a natural phenomenon caused by volcanoes erupting.

“We cannot stop carbon emissions because most of them come from volcanoes,” he said. “It is a normal element cycled around in the earth and my science, which is looking back in time, is saying we have had a planet that has been a green, warm wet planet 80 per cent of the time. We have had huge climate change in the past and to think the very slight variations we measure today are the result of our life – we really have to put ice blocks in our drinks.”

Most mainstream scientists agree that the recent warming period was caused by an increase in carbon dioxide since the industrial revolution.

However Prof Plimer said the world has experienced three periods of cooling since 1850 and furthermore carbon dioxide was increasing during many of those cooler periods.

“If we had only had warming, then there would be a connect between co2 and temperature, there is not,” he added.

Read the rest here

Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science – Audio Interview with Professor Ian Plimer October 24, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
1 comment so far

Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science

Via Financial Sense, October 24, 2009

For audio interview click here

Climate, sea level, and ice sheets have always changed, and the changes observed today are less than those of the past. Climate changes are cyclical and are driven by the Earth’s position in the galaxy, the sun, wobbles in the Earth’s orbit, ocean currents, and plate tectonics. In previous times, atmospheric carbon dioxide was far higher than at present but did not drive climate change. No runaway greenhouse effect or acid oceans occurred during times of excessively high carbon dioxide. During past glaciations, carbon dioxide was higher than it is today. The non-scientific popular political view is that humans change climate. Do we have reason for concern about possible human-induced climate change?

This book’s 504 pages and over 2,300 references to peer-reviewed scientific literature and other authoritative sources engagingly synthesize what we know about the sun, earth, ice, water, and air. Importantly, in a parallel to his 1994 book challenging creation science, Telling Lies for God, Ian Plimer describes Al Gore’s book and movie An Inconvenient Truth as long on scientific misrepresentations. Trying to deal with these misrepresentations is somewhat like trying to argue with creationists, he writes, who misquote, concoct evidence, quote out of context, ignore contrary evidence, and create evidence ex nihilo.

Ian Plimer, twice winner of Australia’s highest scientific honor, the Eureka Prize, is professor in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at The University of Adelaide and is author of six other books written for the general public in addition to more than 120 scientific papers.

For audio interview with Professor Plimer click here

To order Heaven and Earth click here

Creating catastrophe by Professor Ian Plimer August 25, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Creating catastrophe

Professor Ian Plimer

Professor Ian Plimer

By Professor Ian Plimer
Quadrant Online, August 24, 2009

Destroying the factory, building the bureaucracy

The government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme has the potential to ruin Australia’s productive economies and to build an even greater bureaucracy. Even the name of this bill should ring warning bells as carbon is the foundation of life and is not a pollutant.

It is claimed that there is a scientific consensus about human-induced climate change. Consensus is a process of politics not science. There is certainly no scientific consensus about human-induced climate change and the loudest voice does not win scientific discussions. Science is married to evidence, no matter how uncomfortable.

To argue that temperature has increased 0.8ºC since 1850 is misleading because the Little Ice Age ended in 1850 and it is absolutely no surprise that temperature increases after a long cold period. Since 1850, there has been temperature increase (1860-1880, 1910-1940, 1976-1998) and decrease (1880-1910, 1940-1976,1998-present) and the rate of the three periods of temperature increase has been the same. A simple question does not get asked: What part of warming and cooling since 1850 is natural? The first two warmings could not be related to human additions of CO2 from industry hence why wouldn’t the 1976-1998 warming also be due to natural processes?

It is claimed that, since 1950, human additions of CO2 has been the dominant cause of warming. The scales and rates of temperature change in the past have been far greater than when humans emitted CO2 from industry. What has caused the coolings (1940-1976 and 1998-present) or, by some tortured logic, is global cooling this century actually global warming cunningly disguised?

At present, atmospheric temperature is decreasing and CO2 is increasing again showing that CO2 is not the principal driver of climate change. Planet Earth is a warm wet greenhouse volcanic planet. The planet is dynamic, change is normal. Five of the six major ice ages occurred when the atmospheric CO2 content was up to 1,000 times higher than at present and for half of Earth history CO2 has been sequestered naturally into algal reefs, coral reefs, sediments, altered rocks, bacteria, plants, soils and oceans. This process is still taking place.

The hypothesis that high atmospheric CO2 drives global warming is therefore invalid. The Earth’s atmospheric CO2 initially derived from volcanic degassing. Much of it still does and the rest is recycled CO2 from the oceans, rocks and life.

The claim that warming will increase in the future has been disproved by the climate modellers’ own data. Climate models of the 1990s did not predict the El Niño of 1998 or the cooling in the 21st Century. If such models are inaccurate only 10 years into the future, how can they be accurate for longer-term predictions? Furthermore, when these models are run backwards they cannot be used to identify climate-driving processes involving a huge transfer of energy (e.g. El Niño), volcanoes, solar changes and supernovae. Models tell us more about the climatologists than they do about Nature.

Another claim is that climate cannot be reversed. This invokes a non-dynamic planet. The fact that previous warmings with an atmospheric temperature some 5ºC higher than now (e.g. Minoan, Roman, Medieval) were reversed is conveniently ignored as are the great climate cycles driven by the Sun, the Earth’s orbit, tectonics and tides seen on modern, archaeological and geological time scales.

‘Tipping points’ are another sensationalist unsubstantiated claim. In past times when atmospheric CO2 and temperature were far higher, there were no tipping points, climate disasters or runaway greenhouse. The climate catastrophists attempt to create fear by mentioning the carbon cycle but just happen to omit that significant oxygenation of the atmosphere took place when the planet was in middle age and this process of photosynthesis resulted the recycling and sequestration of carbon.

Read the rest here

Sceptics create a best-seller! August 6, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

Sceptics create a best-seller

Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun
Thursday, August 06, 2009

Professor Ian Plimer’s Heaven and Earth, a bestseller here despite being rejected by four preachy publishers, has now been released in the US – and should do some damage to global warming alarmists there, too, to judge by its Amazon ranking:

Amazon.com Sales Rank: #132 in Books…

Popular in these categories:…

#1 in Books > Professional & Technical > Professional Science > Biological Sciences > Ecology
#1 in Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Meteorology
#1 in Books > Science > Earth Sciences > Climatology > Climate Changes

Once more scientists and politicians realise there’s an audience for scepticism at the claims of warming alarmists, more will speak out.

Meanwhile, a new paper by Henrik Svensmark implicates the sun in global warming – and cooling:

Our results show global-scale evidence of conspicuous influences of solar variability on cloudiness and aerosols… From solar activity to cosmic ray ionization to aerosols and liquid-water clouds, a causal chain appears to operate on a global scale.

Anthony Watts explains:

This paper confirms 13 years of discoveries that suggest a key role for cosmic rays in climate change. It links observable variations in the world’s cloudiness to laboratory experiments in Copenhagen showing how cosmic rays help generate atmospheric aerosols. This is important, because it confirms the existence of a sun-earth atmospheric modulation mechanism for clouds and aerosols.

But there’s been a big jump in global temperature for July.

Global warming is the new religion of First World urban elites July 29, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

Global warming is the new religion of First World urban elites

By Jonathan Manthorpe,
Vancouver Sun, July 29, 2009

Geologist Ian Plimer takes a contrary view, arguing that man-made climate change is a con trick perpetuated by environmentalists

Ian Plimer has outraged the ayatollahs of purist environmentalism, the Torquemadas of the doctrine of global warming, and he seems to relish the damnation they heap on him.

Plimer is a geologist, professor of mining geology at Adelaide University, and he may well be Australia’s best-known and most notorious academic.

Plimer, you see, is an unremitting critic of “anthropogenic global warming” — man-made climate change to you and me — and the current environmental orthodoxy that if we change our polluting ways, global warming can be reversed.

It is, of course, not new to have a highly qualified scientist saying that global warming is an entirely natural phenomenon with many precedents in history. Many have made the argument, too, that it is rubbish to contend human behaviour is causing the current climate change. And it has often been well argued that it is totally ridiculous to suppose that changes in human behaviour — cleaning up our act through expensive slight-of-hand taxation tricks — can reverse the trend.

But most of these scientific and academic voices have fallen silent in the face of environmental Jacobinism. Purging humankind of its supposed sins of environmental degradation has become a religion with a fanatical and often intolerant priesthood, especially among the First World urban elites.

But Plimer shows no sign of giving way to this orthodoxy and has just published the latest of his six books and 60 academic papers on the subject of global warming. This book, Heaven and Earth — Global Warming: The Missing Science, draws together much of his previous work. It springs especially from A Short History of Plant Earth, which was based on a decade of radio broadcasts in Australia.

That book, published in 2001, was a best-seller and won several prizes. But Plimer found it hard to find anyone willing to publish this latest book, so intimidating has the environmental lobby become.

But he did eventually find a small publishing house willing to take the gamble and the book has already sold about 30,000 copies in Australia. It seems also to be doing well in Britain and the United States in the first days of publication.

Plimer presents the proposition that anthropogenic global warming is little more than a con trick on the public perpetrated by fundamentalist environmentalists and callously adopted by politicians and government officials who love nothing more than an issue that causes public anxiety.

While environmentalists for the most part draw their conclusions based on climate information gathered in the last few hundred years, geologists, Plimer says, have a time frame stretching back many thousands of millions of years.

The dynamic and changing character of the Earth’s climate has always been known by geologists. These changes are cyclical and random, he says. They are not caused or significantly affected by human behaviour.

Polar ice, for example, has been present on the Earth for less than 20 per cent of geological time, Plimer writes. Plus, animal extinctions are an entirely normal part of the Earth’s evolution.

Read the rest here

Meet the man who has exposed the great climate change con trick July 10, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,

Meet the man who has exposed the great climate change con trick

By James Delingpole
The Spectator, 8th July 2009

James Delingpole talks to Professor Ian Plimer, the Australian geologist, whose new book shows that ‘anthropogenic global warming’ is a dangerous, ruinously expensive fiction, a ‘first-world luxury’ with no basis in scientific fact. Shame on the publishers who rejected the book

Imagine how wonderful the world would be if man-made global warming were just a figment of Al Gore’s imagination. No more ugly wind farms to darken our sunlit uplands. No more whopping electricity bills, artificially inflated by EU-imposed carbon taxes. No longer any need to treat each warm, sunny day as though it were some terrible harbinger of ecological doom. And definitely no need for the $7.4 trillion cap and trade (carbon-trading) bill — the largest tax in American history — which President Obama and his cohorts are so assiduously trying to impose on the US economy.

Imagine no more, for your fairy godmother is here. His name is Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology at Adelaide University, and he has recently published the landmark book Heaven And Earth, which is going to change forever the way we think about climate change.

‘The hypothesis that human activity can create global warming is extraordinary because it is contrary to validated knowledge from solar physics, astronomy, history, archaeology and geology,’ says Plimer, and while his thesis is not new, you’re unlikely to have heard it expressed with quite such vigour, certitude or wide-ranging scientific authority. Where fellow sceptics like Bjorn Lomborg or Lord Lawson of Blaby are prepared cautiously to endorse the International Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) more modest predictions, Plimer will cede no ground whatsoever. Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory, he argues, is the biggest, most dangerous and ruinously expensive con trick in history.

To find out why, let’s meet the good professor. He’s a tanned, rugged, white-haired sixtysomething — courteous and jolly but combative when he needs to be — glowing with the health of a man who spends half his life on field expeditions to Iran, Turkey and his beloved Outback. And he’s sitting in my garden drinking tea on exactly the kind of day the likes of the Guardian’s George Monbiot would probably like to ban. A lovely warm sunny one.

Read the rest here

Hysteria is the real threat, not global warming July 9, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Hysteria is the real threat, not global warming

By Andrew Alexander
The Daily Mail, July 9, 2009

With Tony Blair launching his own plan to save the world (groans), and the G8 leaders also unveiling their thoughts about global warming, this is a big week for environmental fanaticism.

Whatever he or they offer, it will not be enough to quell the warmists’ semi-religious fervour.

They are like medieval preachers, proclaiming to baying crowds that the end of the word is nigh.

Well, is it? There are two separate climate issues – the extent of global warming and the role that humanity plays in it.

Some facts help. The famous 1996 report by the International Panel on Climate Change predicted serious global warming and blamed mankind.

But, since then, the world has disobligingly stopped warming. And two years of global cooling erased nearly 30 years of recorded temperature rises.

What was the worrying rise in temperature – so exciting for those whose computer models used the past to predict a grim future?

Given the margin of error associated with the old-style thermometers which were, until only recently, used to record temperatures, it should be stated thus: over the past 100 years, temperature has risen by 0.7C – plus or minus 1.3 degrees!

The only importance the serious scientists can attach to such a figure is that less serious people think it meaningful.

My own science teacher would have kept me in after school for saying this was a valuable figure.

But, as you will have noticed, it worked. The catastrophists piled in – some of whom had previously flourished warnings about global cooling. For some, any figure will do, especially when it gives them a media profile (and grants for research)

Read the rest here

In Defence of ‘Heaven and Earth’ (Part 2) June 21, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
1 comment so far

In Defence of ‘Heaven and Earth’ (Part 2)

Jennifer Marohasy blog, June 19, 2009

DON Aitkin, a former member of the Australian Science and Technology Council and Foundation Chairman of the Australian Research Council, wrote to Kurt Lambeck, President of the Australian Academy of Sciences, concerning his public criticism of Ian Plimer’s new book Heaven and Earth.  Professor Aitkin waited ten days for a response, and, in its absence, has decided to release his letter more widely.

Date: Sun, Jun 7 2009 7:03 pm
From: Don Aitkin

Dear Kurt,

It was a coincidence that I started to write a set of comments about your review of Ian Plimer’s book when The Canberra Times told me of your Queen’s Birthday honour, for which I congratulate you. I’ll make a further tiny comment about that at the end.

I didn’t hear your talk, but I have read the transcript, and make some comments about it, given Robyn Williams’ remark, in introducing you, that ‘the stakes couldn’t be higher’. I might have simply read, shrugged and passed on, had it not been for your comment that ‘Heaven and Earth is not a work of science, it is an opinion of an author who happens to be a scientist’. I puzzled over that line. It’s the kind of remark I would make about the IPCC authors’ statement that they were 99 per cent certain, or whatever the figure was, that the warming we were having was the result of human activity. That was not science, if you will allow me to say so. It was the opinion of scientists. My own feeling is that the claim would have been better expressed as ‘We are pretty sure that…’

Indeed, the IPCC reports, the last two of which I have read, seem to me very similar, in that respect, to ‘Heaven and Earth’. There is abundant use of refereed journal articles, and that’s fine. The science there described is used for the purposes of the IPCC. And that’s fine too. We use what others have done for our own purposes. What then distinguishes the 4AR from Heaven and Earth? Ian Plimer uses what he can find to build a case, and so do the IPCC authors. Both think they are right. I can’t myself see a difference.

I agree with you (and I am sure that Ian Plimer would too) that ‘climate change’ is such a complex process that no single individual can do the work necessary to explain it all. But that is why we use the work of others, knowing that we cannot do everything, but hoping that we have made a contribution — and knowing also that later someone else will come and show faults in what we have done. I see no reason to suppose that the IPCC process is necessary, and you have quite frankly recognised some of the faults in it. There are many others, and they don’t give me great confidence in the output.

Nor do I see any need for consensus — and that is the second remark you made that prompted this comment. As I see it, science is never about reaching consensus — that’s a political process. Science is about formulating hypotheses and testing them experimentally. Inasmuch as there is consensus about anything (the kind that allows textbooks to be written) it too is understood to be subject to review and dislodgment if the evidence points elsewhere. And Plimer’s book offers abundant examples of that kind of evidence.

Read the rest here