What's interesting to note is how many morons completely ignore what is at issue here: that Plimer is a fucking liar and can't substantiate his dumb-ass claims!! But then again, since when have shit-for-brains deniers been interested in facts.
Dunning-Kruger effect: The psychological phenomenon where unskilled people not only lack the competence to make good decisions, but also lack the metacognition to realise that the decisions they're making are bad, in comparison to the actual good decisions made by skilled people.
Global skeptics are spreading as the reality of Global cooling seeps into the public's senses. Yet another freezing winter is forecast as our Sun begins to enter a Grand Minimum.
@cephylus Climategate, satellitegate, glaciergate..and the list goes on. Agw is a hoax created by the very people who will prosper from this :transfer of wealth", PERIOD.
Remember, their fix is to tax. Need I say more? Or are you going to make any more stupid ass comments?
@bannor99 One of the funny things about your comment of Bush Sr first proposing Cap and Trade,(which is probably true) is the fact that during an interview, Obama claimed Cap and trade was his idea.
Monbiot the arch idiot of the guardian( shame about its financial position, but no wonder). This week the American Astronomical Society predicted a Grand Solar Minimum along with the possibily of a little ice age. Who else could think that the world's climate can be turned down like a room thermostat but this idiot Monbiot.
@Richard482 I do my own searching thanks, other people tend to guide you to propaganda videos. I look forward to another freezing winter here in the uk.
@david222444 "I do my own searching thanks" Not good enough research obviously. "I look forward to another freezing winter here in the uk." The temperature of the UK which only covers 1.5% of the earths surface does not represent the other 98.5%. Got that?
He is actually more stupid than I previously believed; previously I thought he was one of the most idiotic people talking about nuclear data. Now he's just dumbest guy in the room with his mouth open.
@DeafFret because you can trase back who funds all these universities and departements and it's always the same people. who would you rather trust? mainstream media, who is also funded by these same groups, or independant journalists? they are devious imo because 1 they are funded by the same people who are going to profit from all of these factions and 2 they are going to/already have put in place CARBON TAXES, when they are the ones making the world run on oil.
@gunfart aren't the people who fund the environmental and climate sciences departments at universities, the "same people" who fund the volcanology and oncology departments, i.e, the taxpayer?
@gunfart you maintain that climate scientists are "devious" because of who they're funded by. My point is that all sciences are funded in the exact same way, by the exact same people, so I can only presume you distrust them all.
@DeafFret well ok, maybe some of them are being misled, maybe some of them are being pressured, maybe some of them don't want their funding to be stopped, i'm not saying everysinle one of them is devious, because I havn't heard every one of them. I'm also not saying that I think every scientist in the world and their claims within any feild are untrustworthy just because of the source of their funding.
The point is, we are already paying carbon taxes to a hypocrytical system.
How stupid do you have to be to believe Plimer? I'd bet a billion that if you took 100 believers and 100 deniers and compared their IQ and education levels and the believers would totally trounce the deniers. See CO2 traps long wave radiation (heat). And humans have added more of it to the atmosphere. But this is SO complex right wing idiots can't understand it... Even after 50 years of research, ALL the worlds top scientific institutions agreeing and 97-98% of ALL climate scientists.
Good for Ian Plimer! He shows George Monbiot up good and proper! What happened to George Monbiot? He was once a decent journalist and now he spends his time smearing people trying to expose the Climate Change Con and those trying to give the public the truth about 9/11.
@topologyrob I beg to differ. I think Carbonism is a sham. The thing you need to learn about REAL science is that it doesn't need propaganda and psychological manipulation to promote itself. Plimer, Bellamy and others don't need to produce adverts showing exploding schoolchildren and people having their hearts ripped out like Aztec sacrifices. Turn off the news and read before it's too late!
@benthejrporter It's reading which will lead anyone with any degree of critical thinking to quickly realise that climatology is more reliable than the extraordinarily shoddy sham of propaganda trying to get people to delay action because "the science is uncertain". Few things in science are more certain than the fact of human-induced climate change, if you look at the evidence. The propaganda you are referring to is not science (it's a rather badly conceived bit of black humour). Facts remain.
@topologyrob "A rather badly conceived bit of black humour"!? Are you serious!? I suppose Birth of a Nation was actually just made for a harmless joke by an ex-slave! I think I'd have more convidence in the so-called "facts" is people who even questioned them weren't sacked from being presidents of wildlife trusts! It makes me laugh when Monbiot tells us he's checked the sources. Like his reply will be: "OK, I'll tell you the truth. I don't care about having my house reposessed".
@topologyrob Monbiot is a zealot who will be cheering when the government rations petrol, seizes all cars by eminent domain and aborts babies in the womb by law! He'll be made a hero of the New World Order and they'll put up a statue of him next to the Georgia Guidestones.
@topologyrob Based on what radical ecologists are saying. It's the elephant in the room: "We need fewer people on this planet- there are too many people and they're not stopping reporducing. ERGO: People will have to be made to die". You see, it's all very well to talk about "climate science", but there is no such thing at the moment. Science is a very fragile thing. If it gets in any way polluted with political motives then it ceases to be science at all. It becomes propagandized pseudoscience.
@benthejrporter But it's a mistake to conflate science with radical ecology. There is definitely such a thing as climate science - it's the large collection of scientific evidence represented in peer-reviewed scientific literature on the topic. You need to bring some evidence that it's been corrupted by political motives - the only "evidence" I've seen so far is simply smear campaigns from vested interests. Or do you have new information?
@benthejrporter "If it gets in any way polluted with political motives then it ceases to be science at all."
WHAT POLITICAL MOTIVES? For christ's sake, there's no conspiracy among all the scientists to deliberately misinform you, all right? The "propaganda" you're talking about has been wholly initiated by the other side. Note the smear campaign headed by Exxon Mobil, against the head of IPCC. Wake the fuck up.
@DamLazyFuk No YOU wake the fuck up! You're the one having your brain addled by videos of exploding schoolchildren and not being told how any climate scientist who speaks out against MMCC is made a pariah! As if these guys don't have mortgages and families!? I've witnessed personally how easy it is to generate and maintain a climate of fear. Real and true science doesn't need propaganda and terror to promote itself! What motives? The one to create the New World Order! See David Icke + Alex Jones
@DeafFret I dunno but that's how it normally works right? They are told to write about/give input about cirtain topics otherwise their funding is stopped. Maybe stephen hawking needs loads of funding for his other projects he has.
@gunfart Is it? Where is your evidence that that is "how it normally works"? Volcanologists don't predict volcanos to get funding. Oncologists don't falsely diagnose cancers for the money. Why do you believe that climate scientists are particularly devious in this regard?
@DeafFret Climategate? Also since the climate change is all about money that burocrats will handle and disperse as they see fit its the bureaucrats that fund climate change liars. Big paycheck for many coming out of cap and tax.
All the farms, millions of animals-thousands of chooks,thousands of sheep,thousands of cows have been lost in the floods! While Rudd and Gillard are handing out billions in foriegn aid to Africa and Asian countries,and Haiti! While Australian borders have been opened under Rudd....And legal immigration has been increased for 3rd world settlers! This country is in huge debt.
@piginasack Well go and move to a Socialist state like Venezuela or Libya or the Soviet Union and live it up in a slum building and slave your ass off every day for a rat sandwich to eat and sewer water to drink and bathe in.Fk Monbiot the stupid left wing fagget cock sucking Western hating Western deindustrialising wealth distributing Communist criminal! Fk all you left wing fools! DEATH TO THE COMMUNISTS!!! LONG LIVE RONALD REAGEN,MARGARET THATCHER,AND JOHN HOWARD!!
@megadak123 - Ah, the dumbass troll. Your words are truly defining of your charactor and viewpoint. Wake up and stop sucking your own cock before it falls off.
And I hope your bankrupted by Gillards new carbon tax you useless fagget sack because this country is finished because of dumb ignorant cocksuckers like you who voted for Gillard,go eat a dick and enjoy watching the country go down the drain because this country is finished!
@piginasack I hope you look forward to paying 1000% more for your food petrol power water and everything you need to buy to live your worthless sack of shit life,even paying to breath,under Gillard and Fishhead Wayne Swan and Bob Browns Carbon Tax.But I guess you havent found out yet as your too busy sucking every drop out of Bob Browns cock you far left Gay cocksucking cu.nt
I hope Blackpool sinks into the sea... Real or not, I don't care...! if we were that arsed switch off every electrical item between 7 and 8...! Government law! so I don't have to sit and hear about fucking coronation street or any other mind numbing idiot soaps!
take the time to read a book go have a wank or for those who are in relationships do a sex! think of the money E.D.F. will not be taking off you! Course FREEZERS may defrost a small loss. mine contains fish cakes! anyways the song 'walking on sunshine' is funny when you think about it.
owentong44 fair point, the sad thing is that scientific analyse is so corrupted by political influences. Political parties work on consesus and everybody will tow the party line where science should always question.
Great question, what caused large and diverse changes in the past that was not man made to what causes climate change now. Man certainly has a hand in climate changes, but how much. Trouble is we only hear from the opposite extremes. Total deniers of any changes to the doomsdayers at the other end. Some where in between lies the truth.
@bessymaypearl this is a good point, with which i agree. however, it doesn't make any ground on what action should be taken and how we should analyse the scientific evidence.
Take the time to read about the earths 4.5 billion year history you will find that there have been many greater & swifter fluctuations in the earths temps than the last 150 years. Mann's hockey stick is a proven fraud & he has never been bought to task. Ask the alarmists to prove their theories, not only those who dare question them. There are as many scientists on both sides of the argument, Only the alarmists on the climate change gravy train.
@bessymaypearl ...and only the handful of qualified scientists with their pockets being lined by the petrochemical industries and their affiliates. The budgets of the likes of Pat Michaels and Fred Singer dwarf the grants given to hard-pressed honest scientists by many, many times. Who has proved Mann's hockey stick a fraud? If you think McIntyre's point-missing, tendentious exercises are proof, I've got a bridge to sell you...
@bessymaypearl you could consider some supporters of climate change theory to be "alarmists". Just as those who deny climate change could be considered stupid. If you think about the extreme weather patterns Australia has had in the last 10 years and particularly the last few months, you could consider climate change denial to be immoral. Even If if you think climate change theory might be false, you should do something about it.
@piginasack not really. Australians (or at least the overwhelming majority) have always wanted action on climate change. If u look at the surveys from 07 at the newspoll site, something like 95% considered climate change a problems. In every survey that newspoll has on the subject, the overwhelming majority (85%+) attribute climate change to human activity. Some attribute Rudd's success in 07 to his promised ETS. And sure enough, as soon as he shelved the ETS his popularity crashed.
@bessymaypearl most global 'climate change scientists' agree the AGW is happening - nearly every major scientific body endorses the IPCC recommedations - only deniers (without any peer reviewed) research. Plimer has 500 factual errors in his bool
@bessymaypearl when is Monbiot going to go and cleanup Fukushima? Alex Jones has a standby offer for a ticket for him and Ann Coulter to go and help with the cleanup. Maybe they can sleep in the reactor cores while they work there.
What is the motivation for denying climate change? So that the party can continue! So that we can keep living beyond our means. Keep capoism going. Climate change aside, carbon emission reduction will produce cleaner air, which is surely a better quality of life than the clogged freeways currently offer.
Some commenters are talking about predictions in the 70s that cooling was happening.
In the 70s, scientists demonstrated the close agreement between Milankovitch cycles and the paleoclimatic temperature record. We know the periods of each of the component Milankovitch cycles accurately, so it is easy to show that the most recent peak in solar flux due to the Milankovitch cycle was about 6000 years ago.
George Monbiot is an ugly degenerate with no qualifications. I hope he reads this. NEVER EVER EVER put that ugly mug up again Geroge! Please don't have any children either.
These comments show the problem. Many voices here have fallen for the well laid traps to create doubt about climate change. How about doubting this: if you continue to spew filth into the air, poison our earth and water and use up our finite resources at a terrifying rate then it's logical that this is going to make a mess of the future for our children.
All you who believe in the deniers have been utterly fooled by highly paid manipulators of the media. It's a science don't you know?
Since the beginning of recorded history, data shows that humanity has sat around waiting for it all to end. This pessimistic outlook was based upon the unfounded jabbering of many insane freaks who simply couldn't live with their own mental insecurities.
Those type were AND STILL ARE trying to find cause for our ultimate demise. Years ago it was people like astrologers & priests & even Nostradamus had a shot at it - but today they have another name - today we call those freaks ... GREENIES!
Phil Jones, the head of the British Climatic Research Unit at the heart of ClimateGate, told the BBC: the recent warming trend that began in 1975 is not at all different than two other planetary warming phases since 1850; there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995, and; it is possible the Medieval Warm Period was indeed a global phenomenon thereby making
the temperatures seen in the latter part of the 20th century by no means unprecedented.
@ivanv1952 Yes, we pay for this excellent journalism -pursuing scientific fraud and misinformation. Plimer needs to be brought to task for his repeated and demonstrable lying.
Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined. - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
Probably should keep goofy politicians out of this. No one takes them serious. (I hope) This whole thing was born on the back of politics (1988 Hansen speech) and that's the problem.
If you think no-one takes Inhofe seriously, then you are out of touch with reality. He's the figurehead of the whole US climate "sceptic" campaign. All of the quotes you give could have been lifted directly from his list of "scientists who dissent over man-made global warming".
Incidentally, Peden is not a scientist. He's a webmaster, and certainly isn't an atmospheric physicist.
But you would have guessed that, being the "sceptical" creature that you are.
Many distinguished scientists refuse to participate in the IPCC process, and others have resigned from it, because in the end the advice that the panel provides to governments is political and not scientific. - Dr. Bob Carter, Paleoclimate scientist, James Cook University and former chairman of the earth science panel of the Australian Research Council.
It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who dont buy into anthropogenic global warming. - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
I am a skepticGlobal warming has become a new religion. - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
worst scientific scandal in the historyWhen people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists. - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
Good point by Monbiot when he points out that most governments support anthropogenic global warming theory.
Most governments also support the theory that there is a deity (god) up in the clouds who created the planet earth. So that means we all have to believe that.
No-one expects governments to come up with proof or evidence. That's what scientists are for. The fact that scientists have managed to convince most of the world's governments (except Saudi Arabia) of the severity of the problem tells its own story. To compare governments taking expert scientific advice to them holding religious beliefs is absurd, idiotic.
There is an alliance between the energy multinationals and rthe Green movement. The aim of this alliance is to set up a world government in which the global economy is subverted by compulsory carbon credit trading. Al Gore himself had strong association with the multinational Enron, who put money in his purse in return for the promise to sign Kyoto. Copenhagen is no different. Do not be fooled - you and many others are being brainwahed by these malicious, power-hungry individuals.
Lies. The number of dissenting earth scientists has now grown to 31000, 15000 of whom are working at PhD level. The IPCC itself has rank and file scientists dissenting. IPCC papers are actually reviewed by a 'select', much smaller group of scientists than the 15000 usually claimed.
The reason there are not many dissenting scientists you know of is because they fear censorship from authorities if they speak out against AGW. Plimer is one of the few who dare to. He was not convicing in this debate, but that does not mean AGW is not a fraud.
Censorship by what authorities?! Good science will win through because it has to be based on evidence. Unfortunately, the anti-AGW camp hasn't got any good evidence and precious few good scientists.
Plimer simply has no evidence to support any of claims he makes in interview. It is a mental exercise to find a claim grounded in observable fact.
Unfortunately very few people have any scientific understanding at all, and the claims of Plimer will carry unwarranted respect.
It is of note that there are never a respected scientist to argue against the global warming theory, mainly as those scientists agree the evidence and its likely conclusions.
This is not a good debate. It's just sledging! Earth to Plimer and Monbiot: 'Calm down, guys. WE've got a few hours here, its not a 20/20. Stop slogging and wait for the right ball.'
Governments have accepted the anthropogenic global warming thesis because it allows them to control its citizens and tax them more. Government is about control.
When communism collapsed in 1991, the socialists, Marxists and communists were emasculated as free market capitalism proved its excellence. They turned to the green movement to try and put the chains back on and lead us down the road to serfdom. They are watermelons, green on the outside, red on the inside. They are communists
Monbiot is pathetic. The whole intellectual edifice of anthropogenic global warming is crumbling and the global cooling deniers are worried, hence their increased hystericism and alarmism. Dr Richard Lindzen and Dr Fred Singer have destroyed the warming arguments. The warmists have lied and smeared to gain their positions, and you are now failing. Monbiot or his warming chums have not been able to explain the Medieval Warming Period or the Roman Optimum.
How is it a fact? Please explain the Medieval Warming Period, or the Roman Optimum, or the Little Ice Age? Explain why temperatures have been stagnant since 1998. Explain why global temperatures dropped by 0.7degrees in 2007, cancelling out the net rise of 0.6 degrees in the 20th century. Explain how 1200 snow and cold records were broken in December last year. AGW has about as much credibility as your logical and analytical skills
I'm sorry to break this to you, but logic and analysis don't consist in picking just the fragments of evidence that you can patch together to fit your pre-conceived view. It's the sum of evidence that matters. Individual years, seasons, regions, countries taken in isolation don't alter the overall picture. Eight of the warmest 10 years on record have been since 2000. While parts of the northern hemisphere were cold this winter, Australia was sweltering in a heat wave.
The existence of a Medieval Warming Period doesn't negate the theory of anthropogenic climate change at all. I don't know why people seem to think it does. I have no idea about snow and ice records, but I do know that according to the US NOAA last year was the 4rth hottest on record, globally. The ten hottest years on record have all been in the last 12.
@DeafFret I have one correction to make that is the U.S. record has been updated with improved data and now shows 1998 is the warmest in the U.S. 1934 is now ranked 3rd warmest. The 2000s was also the warmest decade in the U.S with the 1990s ranked 2nd and the 1930s ranked 3rd. U.S year 1. 1998 2. 2006 3. 1934 4. 1921 5. 1999 U.S. decade 1. 2000s @ .70 2. 1990s @ .50 3. 1930s @ .43 I calculated the decadal avgs. using the GISS data. I just thought I should give updated info.
Of course it does. The fact is temperatures have been far higher in the past than they are now. And those temperature variations are nothing to do with CO2 emissions. CO2 makes up a tiny proportion of our atmosphere. Less than 1%. Professor Richard Lindzen has poured scorn on the idea that CO2 causes climate change. CO2 is vital for life
@Mickmars90 nobody is denying that climate has changed in the past, that is a strawman argument. The quesiton is what is causing it change now.
Unlike past changes, Modern climate change does not correlate with volcanoes, solar activity, tectonic plate movements, or orbital variations. The only thing it correlates with is: man made CO2 increases.
@HarpoSpoke Actually what I would have said is that we can't explain it by anything *other* than CO2. That's a differentthing from saying "we can't explain it". Truth is that AGW is the only theory that fits the facts.
Senator James Inhofe, Fox news, Pat Robertson, Sarah Palin etc. American "scepticism", in particular, is profoundly tied to religious extremism and anti-scientific dogma. Climate science, on the other hand, deals with facts and evidence.
So no, it's not like a religion. That would be your lot.
There is no conspiracy. But what this whole global warming movement is like was the idea back in the late 90's that technology around the world was going to collapse or go haywire because of something called the Millenium Bug. It is also like back in the 1970's when large groups of scientists believed that there was going to be another ice age over the coming decades. Both were accepted as fact but later proved to be massive hoaxes. Again, no grand conspiracy but more of a grand mistake.
OmegaRage, please provide a reference to a peer reviewed article from a science journal that in the 70's warned of the imminent onset of an ice age. Thanks in advance!
Funny, I googled global cooling I found an entire WIKI page on 1970's global cooling.
I actually think it is your side that is losing. You got nothing you wanted done at Dopenhagen, all major polls showing that interest in climate change is decreasing and scepticism is growing and the biggest example can be shown in my very own country when after Climategate broke, we got a new opposition leader elected on the basis of his climate scepticism...
@OmegaRage - sorry but I can find no reference on your google search of a peer reviewed article in a science journal from the 70's that warned of the imminent onset of an ice age. Please provide such a reference or retract your claim, LOSER!
Mate, is that all you have got? Your trying to be right about the fact that whether or not there were peer reviewed articles in the 1970's and somehow this is going to advance the argument for climate change? The argument was that people (like John Holdren) believed that there was an ice age coming, and it would not have matter if or if not it was peer reviewed, because he was wrong. Just like people like at the IPCC and the CRU Hadley (who produce peer reviewed articles)...
@OmegaRage - Science is published in the peer reviewed scientific press. YOU have provided no references of peer reviewed articles in science journals of the 70's period warning of an imment ice age. If you can not provide such references then your claim that the scientific community made such warnings is bogus. Do you understand or are you dumber that dirt and not quite as clean?
The best thing about that is, I really don't care. Just like I shouldn't care about the oceans rising and gobbling up my house, or crops dying because because of the imminent drying of the earth.
Hmmm... what's this, "Oceanic Mechanisms for Amplification of the 23,000-Year Ice-Volume Cycle
William F. Ruddiman 1 and Andrew McIntyre 2" and this, "Variations in the Earth's Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages
J. D. Hays 1, John Imbrie 2, and N. J. Shackleton 3 ", why, it's a bunch of articles from many years suggesting an imminent cooling... but why should I care, they're wrong!
@OmegaRage that second one is not about any "global cooling", it's about a seres of regular variations in the Earth's orbit known as the Milankovitch Cycles. That is pretty well accepted as fact, and doesn't predict any "imminent" global cooling, unless you consider some 30 000 years to be imminent.
Smoking with lung cancer - simple science, well proven. HIV & AIDS - easy science, well proven. Man made climate change is much more complex and no one or one organisation can currently know enough about it all to be certain, or to be certain of the appropriate response. Cutting emisions with no preperation for what might happen regardless is just ludicrous!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Monbiot is a nasty evil, little right wing, mainstream corporate slimeball. His parents were senior right wing British politicians (father was chairman of the conservative party).
He is an ultra conservative who's friend Paul Kingsnorth had close connections to the far right, neo nazi Goldsmith family.
Erm, Moonbat's one of the biggest Lefty's in Britain. He writes for the Grauniad, which is a liberal lefty rag. He's about as far from an ultra conservative as it's possible to get.
Monbiot is watered down Nazi, like the rest of his environmental pals. He had the cheek to call his colleague, Zac Goldsmith's uncle Edward a Nazi. The Goldsmiths are a notorious extreme right wing billionare family.
Edward Goldsdmith was such a very obvious Nazi, It was an embarassment to Monbiot.
The Neocon Guardian is desperately beating the war drums against Iran, by the way. It is a liberal corporate newspaper who's purpose is to make money.
How many socialists do you see here ? Bernhardt was in the SS, Philip was a Nazi.. These people's parents supported Hitler. Rudolf Hess flew to Britain to meet men like this. Goldsmith, Lucan and Aspinall plotted to overthrow the Wilson government.
Prince Charles, Prince Philip, Prince Bernhardt, Viscount Porrtt, Lord Melchitt, Oliver Tickell, George Monbiot, Zak Goldsmith, David de Rothschild, Paul Kingsnorth, James Lovelock, Edward Goldsmith , John Aspinall. Lord Lucan.
He DELIBERATELY concedes the first 4-5 minutes of the debate (CRU etc) because .....
Plimer would have then deflected to talk about CRU and climategate for 20+ minutes.
The idea behind the debate was Monbiot exposing Plimer as a LIAR and a FRAUD. 6 minutes in Plimer is still deflecting, accusing others of Misdemeanours.
Monbiot humours that, minimises the debate on CRU thus allowing more time to expose Plimer for the FRAUD he is.
You're pretending the science is wrong because you think you don't like the solutions.
But what's wrong with wind, solar or geothermal power? What's wrong with energy efficiency and modern high-speed electric public transport?
You're just defending old, inefficient, dirty technology - you're trying to stand in the way of progress. I can understand why fossil fuel companies keep lying about this, but you're just being duped by them.
Yes, that's another debate. Rudd's CPRS is a complete fraud: the Continue Polluting Regardless Scam. Faking action, not taking action.
We need direct climate action to phase out coal-fired power and coal exports and replace them with renewables, which can now do baseload, as well as efficiency to reduce demand.
There's a new hi-tech goldrush going on - think exports to replace coal! We're missing out because Rudd and Abbott are still backing last century's power brokers.
To be honest I'm undecided about climate change, however HIV definatelty does not cause AIDS. This is blatent propaganda
utubedetective72 1 month ago
I think they are both idiots
radioactivebsr 1 month ago
This all seems uncannily reminiscent of the "controversy" over the health effects of tobacco in the late 1950's and early 60's.
apeswithhobbies 1 month ago
Watch the bottom right corner at 7:51. A bus disappears!
mgo26 2 months ago 3
What's interesting to note is how many morons completely ignore what is at issue here: that Plimer is a fucking liar and can't substantiate his dumb-ass claims!! But then again, since when have shit-for-brains deniers been interested in facts.
jh190959 3 months ago
Dunning-Kruger effect: The psychological phenomenon where unskilled people not only lack the competence to make good decisions, but also lack the metacognition to realise that the decisions they're making are bad, in comparison to the actual good decisions made by skilled people.
Autonova 3 months ago
Global skeptics are spreading as the reality of Global cooling seeps into the public's senses. Yet another freezing winter is forecast as our Sun begins to enter a Grand Minimum.
david222444 4 months ago
Monbiot= polite intelligent informed.
Plimer= rude stupid ignorant.
widebody123 5 months ago
@widebody123 Monbiot= left-wing media, Auther, columnist
Plimer= Professor
Need I say more.
MrOTLChamp 4 months ago
@MrOTLChamp
Monbiot = professor of philosophy, environmental science & policy, and planning
Plimer = professor of mining geology
And don't say any more, please.
cephylus 3 months ago
@cephylus Climategate, satellitegate, glaciergate..and the list goes on. Agw is a hoax created by the very people who will prosper from this :transfer of wealth", PERIOD.
Remember, their fix is to tax. Need I say more? Or are you going to make any more stupid ass comments?
MrOTLChamp 3 months ago
@MrOTLChamp It was a US Republican President - George Bush the Elder who first proposed cap and trade.
bannor99 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bannor99 And your point is what?
MrOTLChamp 3 months ago
@bannor99 One of the funny things about your comment of Bush Sr first proposing Cap and Trade,(which is probably true) is the fact that during an interview, Obama claimed Cap and trade was his idea.
MrOTLChamp 3 months ago
Ian Plimer and the truth about Climate Change:/watch?v=PgNeUTAFy7U
StopFundingIsrael 6 months ago
Comment removed
david222444 6 months ago
@david222444 That aint the latest news. It's been known for decades.
Richard482 6 months ago in playlist 2Cat
Monbiot the arch idiot of the guardian( shame about its financial position, but no wonder). This week the American Astronomical Society predicted a Grand Solar Minimum along with the possibily of a little ice age. Who else could think that the world's climate can be turned down like a room thermostat but this idiot Monbiot.
david222444 7 months ago 2
@david222444 "along with the possibily of a little ice age"
watch?v=adAvYK1O-ic&feature=channel_video_title
Richard482 6 months ago in playlist 2Cat
@Richard482 I do my own searching thanks, other people tend to guide you to propaganda videos. I look forward to another freezing winter here in the uk.
david222444 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david222444 "I do my own searching thanks" Not good enough research obviously. "I look forward to another freezing winter here in the uk." The temperature of the UK which only covers 1.5% of the earths surface does not represent the other 98.5%. Got that?
Richard482 6 months ago
Anthropological climate change is joke. and so are all off you.
aus2045 7 months ago
"It's about money"...
Bravo! Says it all; Plimer summed it up quite nicely.
TheColonelsKitchen 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He is actually more stupid than I previously believed; previously I thought he was one of the most idiotic people talking about nuclear data. Now he's just dumbest guy in the room with his mouth open.
waterspindle 7 months ago
@DeafFret because you can trase back who funds all these universities and departements and it's always the same people. who would you rather trust? mainstream media, who is also funded by these same groups, or independant journalists? they are devious imo because 1 they are funded by the same people who are going to profit from all of these factions and 2 they are going to/already have put in place CARBON TAXES, when they are the ones making the world run on oil.
gunfart 7 months ago
@gunfart aren't the people who fund the environmental and climate sciences departments at universities, the "same people" who fund the volcanology and oncology departments, i.e, the taxpayer?
DeafFret 7 months ago
@DeafFret yup. whats your point? if you want to go right back to the source, then yes it is the tax payer who pays for it all.
gunfart 7 months ago
@gunfart you maintain that climate scientists are "devious" because of who they're funded by. My point is that all sciences are funded in the exact same way, by the exact same people, so I can only presume you distrust them all.
DeafFret 7 months ago
@DeafFret well ok, maybe some of them are being misled, maybe some of them are being pressured, maybe some of them don't want their funding to be stopped, i'm not saying everysinle one of them is devious, because I havn't heard every one of them. I'm also not saying that I think every scientist in the world and their claims within any feild are untrustworthy just because of the source of their funding.
The point is, we are already paying carbon taxes to a hypocrytical system.
gunfart 7 months ago
How stupid do you have to be to believe Plimer? I'd bet a billion that if you took 100 believers and 100 deniers and compared their IQ and education levels and the believers would totally trounce the deniers. See CO2 traps long wave radiation (heat). And humans have added more of it to the atmosphere. But this is SO complex right wing idiots can't understand it... Even after 50 years of research, ALL the worlds top scientific institutions agreeing and 97-98% of ALL climate scientists.
StunnedByStupidity 8 months ago
@StunnedByStupidity "Even after 50 years of research, ALL the worlds top scientific institutions agreeing and 97-98% of ALL climate scientists."
It's absolutely astounding how much disrespect the scientific community gets. Downright appalling.
DamLazyFuk 8 months ago
Good for Ian Plimer! He shows George Monbiot up good and proper! What happened to George Monbiot? He was once a decent journalist and now he spends his time smearing people trying to expose the Climate Change Con and those trying to give the public the truth about 9/11.
benthejrporter 9 months ago 2
@benthejrporter Yeah right. We don't buy your fairy tale of climate denial. It's a sham.
topologyrob 8 months ago
@topologyrob I beg to differ. I think Carbonism is a sham. The thing you need to learn about REAL science is that it doesn't need propaganda and psychological manipulation to promote itself. Plimer, Bellamy and others don't need to produce adverts showing exploding schoolchildren and people having their hearts ripped out like Aztec sacrifices. Turn off the news and read before it's too late!
benthejrporter 8 months ago
@benthejrporter It's reading which will lead anyone with any degree of critical thinking to quickly realise that climatology is more reliable than the extraordinarily shoddy sham of propaganda trying to get people to delay action because "the science is uncertain". Few things in science are more certain than the fact of human-induced climate change, if you look at the evidence. The propaganda you are referring to is not science (it's a rather badly conceived bit of black humour). Facts remain.
topologyrob 8 months ago
@topologyrob "A rather badly conceived bit of black humour"!? Are you serious!? I suppose Birth of a Nation was actually just made for a harmless joke by an ex-slave! I think I'd have more convidence in the so-called "facts" is people who even questioned them weren't sacked from being presidents of wildlife trusts! It makes me laugh when Monbiot tells us he's checked the sources. Like his reply will be: "OK, I'll tell you the truth. I don't care about having my house reposessed".
benthejrporter 8 months ago
@benthejrporter Well if you can't see the British humour, I can't help you. Sorry mate.
topologyrob 8 months ago
@topologyrob Monbiot is a zealot who will be cheering when the government rations petrol, seizes all cars by eminent domain and aborts babies in the womb by law! He'll be made a hero of the New World Order and they'll put up a statue of him next to the Georgia Guidestones.
benthejrporter 8 months ago
@benthejrporter What do you base such wild allegations on?
topologyrob 8 months ago
@topologyrob Based on what radical ecologists are saying. It's the elephant in the room: "We need fewer people on this planet- there are too many people and they're not stopping reporducing. ERGO: People will have to be made to die". You see, it's all very well to talk about "climate science", but there is no such thing at the moment. Science is a very fragile thing. If it gets in any way polluted with political motives then it ceases to be science at all. It becomes propagandized pseudoscience.
benthejrporter 8 months ago
@benthejrporter But it's a mistake to conflate science with radical ecology. There is definitely such a thing as climate science - it's the large collection of scientific evidence represented in peer-reviewed scientific literature on the topic. You need to bring some evidence that it's been corrupted by political motives - the only "evidence" I've seen so far is simply smear campaigns from vested interests. Or do you have new information?
topologyrob 8 months ago
@benthejrporter "If it gets in any way polluted with political motives then it ceases to be science at all."
WHAT POLITICAL MOTIVES? For christ's sake, there's no conspiracy among all the scientists to deliberately misinform you, all right? The "propaganda" you're talking about has been wholly initiated by the other side. Note the smear campaign headed by Exxon Mobil, against the head of IPCC. Wake the fuck up.
DamLazyFuk 8 months ago
@DamLazyFuk No YOU wake the fuck up! You're the one having your brain addled by videos of exploding schoolchildren and not being told how any climate scientist who speaks out against MMCC is made a pariah! As if these guys don't have mortgages and families!? I've witnessed personally how easy it is to generate and maintain a climate of fear. Real and true science doesn't need propaganda and terror to promote itself! What motives? The one to create the New World Order! See David Icke + Alex Jones
benthejrporter 7 months ago
@benthejrporter check out alan watt too at cuttingthroughthematrix. com
gunfart 7 months ago
@gunfart Yes, Alan Watt is very interesting.NB: He's not to be confused with Alan Watts, the British spiritual philosopher.
benthejrporter 7 months ago
@DamLazyFuk do you realise who funds all these scientists? and do you realise that your going to have to pay for a load of carbon taxes?
gunfart 7 months ago
@gunfart who's funding Stephen Hawking to believe in anthropogenic climate change?
DeafFret 7 months ago
@DeafFret I dunno but that's how it normally works right? They are told to write about/give input about cirtain topics otherwise their funding is stopped. Maybe stephen hawking needs loads of funding for his other projects he has.
gunfart 7 months ago
@gunfart Is it? Where is your evidence that that is "how it normally works"? Volcanologists don't predict volcanos to get funding. Oncologists don't falsely diagnose cancers for the money. Why do you believe that climate scientists are particularly devious in this regard?
DeafFret 7 months ago 5
@DeafFret Climategate? Also since the climate change is all about money that burocrats will handle and disperse as they see fit its the bureaucrats that fund climate change liars. Big paycheck for many coming out of cap and tax.
zepproxx 6 months ago
Send Monbigot to Fukushima, no one believes him with very good reason.
Get him a Fukushima mud face mask seeing as he loves radioactivity so much, what a loads of wollocks he spouts.
Who is paying him to do this??????
010vision 9 months ago
Comment removed
wfmediaonline 10 months ago
Rudd and Gillard hate farmers and the country and couldnt give a fk about the country or our ability to feed ourselves.
megadak123 11 months ago
All the farms, millions of animals-thousands of chooks,thousands of sheep,thousands of cows have been lost in the floods! While Rudd and Gillard are handing out billions in foriegn aid to Africa and Asian countries,and Haiti! While Australian borders have been opened under Rudd....And legal immigration has been increased for 3rd world settlers! This country is in huge debt.
John Howard zero Government debt!
Rudd and Gillard already in billions of debt.
Australia the dumb country!
megadak123 11 months ago
Death to the Communists,or Death for the free world! Fk Monbiot and Stalin
megadak123 11 months ago
@megadak123 - Capitalism doesn't mean freedom.
piginasack 11 months ago
@piginasack Well go and move to a Socialist state like Venezuela or Libya or the Soviet Union and live it up in a slum building and slave your ass off every day for a rat sandwich to eat and sewer water to drink and bathe in.Fk Monbiot the stupid left wing fagget cock sucking Western hating Western deindustrialising wealth distributing Communist criminal! Fk all you left wing fools! DEATH TO THE COMMUNISTS!!! LONG LIVE RONALD REAGEN,MARGARET THATCHER,AND JOHN HOWARD!!
megadak123 11 months ago
@megadak123 - Ah, the dumbass troll. Your words are truly defining of your charactor and viewpoint. Wake up and stop sucking your own cock before it falls off.
piginasack 11 months ago
And I hope your bankrupted by Gillards new carbon tax you useless fagget sack because this country is finished because of dumb ignorant cocksuckers like you who voted for Gillard,go eat a dick and enjoy watching the country go down the drain because this country is finished!
megadak123 11 months ago
@megadak123 - Ah, you're a Howard loving troll. Clearly you are the biggest faggot of all. Sorry, game over.
piginasack 11 months ago
@piginasack yeap and you keep jerkin off to Bob Browns ass
megadak123 11 months ago
@megadak123 thank you for summing up the argument for climate change scepticism.
DeafFret 11 months ago
@piginasack I hope you look forward to paying 1000% more for your food petrol power water and everything you need to buy to live your worthless sack of shit life,even paying to breath,under Gillard and Fishhead Wayne Swan and Bob Browns Carbon Tax.But I guess you havent found out yet as your too busy sucking every drop out of Bob Browns cock you far left Gay cocksucking cu.nt
megadak123 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I hope Blackpool sinks into the sea... Real or not, I don't care...! if we were that arsed switch off every electrical item between 7 and 8...! Government law! so I don't have to sit and hear about fucking coronation street or any other mind numbing idiot soaps!
MrAntihollywood 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
take the time to read a book go have a wank or for those who are in relationships do a sex! think of the money E.D.F. will not be taking off you! Course FREEZERS may defrost a small loss. mine contains fish cakes! anyways the song 'walking on sunshine' is funny when you think about it.
MrAntihollywood 1 year ago
Comment removed
MrAntihollywood 1 year ago
Comment removed
MrAntihollywood 1 year ago
Man made climate change and natural climate change are two different things.
Baadger 1 year ago
This guy Monbiot is a complete arsehole and a total cunt!
daindo91 1 year ago
owentong44 fair point, the sad thing is that scientific analyse is so corrupted by political influences. Political parties work on consesus and everybody will tow the party line where science should always question.
bessymaypearl 1 year ago
I'm surprised that GM even bothered giving this lunatic a reception.
widebody123 1 year ago 4
@widebody123 just don't complain when you have to pay all these carbon taxes.
gunfart 7 months ago
It is not a conspiracy, it is just bad science and idiocy.
arbide2 1 year ago
"Global Warming Denier".
One of the best catch phrases I've ever heard in my life.
bobbygnosis 1 year ago
thanks youtube for fucking up the comment format. bunch of corporate assclowns
piscesgutt 1 year ago
Great question, what caused large and diverse changes in the past that was not man made to what causes climate change now. Man certainly has a hand in climate changes, but how much. Trouble is we only hear from the opposite extremes. Total deniers of any changes to the doomsdayers at the other end. Some where in between lies the truth.
bessymaypearl 1 year ago
@bessymaypearl this is a good point, with which i agree. however, it doesn't make any ground on what action should be taken and how we should analyse the scientific evidence.
owentong44 1 year ago
Take the time to read about the earths 4.5 billion year history you will find that there have been many greater & swifter fluctuations in the earths temps than the last 150 years. Mann's hockey stick is a proven fraud & he has never been bought to task. Ask the alarmists to prove their theories, not only those who dare question them. There are as many scientists on both sides of the argument, Only the alarmists on the climate change gravy train.
bessymaypearl 1 year ago
@bessymaypearl and what causes those changes?
DeafFret 1 year ago
@bessymaypearl ...and only the handful of qualified scientists with their pockets being lined by the petrochemical industries and their affiliates. The budgets of the likes of Pat Michaels and Fred Singer dwarf the grants given to hard-pressed honest scientists by many, many times. Who has proved Mann's hockey stick a fraud? If you think McIntyre's point-missing, tendentious exercises are proof, I've got a bridge to sell you...
joecushley 1 year ago
@bessymaypearl your comment lacks any scientific substance.
owentong44 1 year ago
@bessymaypearl you could consider some supporters of climate change theory to be "alarmists". Just as those who deny climate change could be considered stupid. If you think about the extreme weather patterns Australia has had in the last 10 years and particularly the last few months, you could consider climate change denial to be immoral. Even If if you think climate change theory might be false, you should do something about it.
rimian 11 months ago
@rimian - Its been a bit of a wake up call for Australians hasn't it...
piginasack 11 months ago
@piginasack not really. Australians (or at least the overwhelming majority) have always wanted action on climate change. If u look at the surveys from 07 at the newspoll site, something like 95% considered climate change a problems. In every survey that newspoll has on the subject, the overwhelming majority (85%+) attribute climate change to human activity. Some attribute Rudd's success in 07 to his promised ETS. And sure enough, as soon as he shelved the ETS his popularity crashed.
DeafFret 11 months ago
@DeafFret - Agreed, but I have noticed that the growing voice of dissention over the past 2 years has suddenly faded.
piginasack 11 months ago
@bessymaypearl most global 'climate change scientists' agree the AGW is happening - nearly every major scientific body endorses the IPCC recommedations - only deniers (without any peer reviewed) research. Plimer has 500 factual errors in his bool
tekinoztralia 10 months ago
@bessymaypearl when is Monbiot going to go and cleanup Fukushima? Alex Jones has a standby offer for a ticket for him and Ann Coulter to go and help with the cleanup. Maybe they can sleep in the reactor cores while they work there.
jaba987 10 months ago
What is the motivation for denying climate change? So that the party can continue! So that we can keep living beyond our means. Keep capoism going. Climate change aside, carbon emission reduction will produce cleaner air, which is surely a better quality of life than the clogged freeways currently offer.
ninyae 1 year ago
Some commenters are talking about predictions in the 70s that cooling was happening.
In the 70s, scientists demonstrated the close agreement between Milankovitch cycles and the paleoclimatic temperature record. We know the periods of each of the component Milankovitch cycles accurately, so it is easy to show that the most recent peak in solar flux due to the Milankovitch cycle was about 6000 years ago.
Thus there should be cooling now.
But there is warming.
What is causing the warming?
alltheirbase 1 year ago
Now george, you smashed this guy. Time for Monkton!
propositionjohnston 1 year ago
George Monbiot is an ugly degenerate with no qualifications. I hope he reads this. NEVER EVER EVER put that ugly mug up again Geroge! Please don't have any children either.
flamingvacuumcleaner 1 year ago
These comments show the problem. Many voices here have fallen for the well laid traps to create doubt about climate change. How about doubting this: if you continue to spew filth into the air, poison our earth and water and use up our finite resources at a terrifying rate then it's logical that this is going to make a mess of the future for our children.
All you who believe in the deniers have been utterly fooled by highly paid manipulators of the media. It's a science don't you know?
dramaticuslionus 1 year ago
Ian Plimer spews out lies while his country burns. Is half of Australia engulfed in fire real enough evidence of global warming?
raleighl 1 year ago
Which half is burning, Raleigh? I'm down under here and I can't see a puff of smoke for fuckin miles around.
IMIGHTBEPETERGRIFFIN 1 year ago
Since the beginning of recorded history, data shows that humanity has sat around waiting for it all to end. This pessimistic outlook was based upon the unfounded jabbering of many insane freaks who simply couldn't live with their own mental insecurities.
Those type were AND STILL ARE trying to find cause for our ultimate demise. Years ago it was people like astrologers & priests & even Nostradamus had a shot at it - but today they have another name - today we call those freaks ... GREENIES!
IMIGHTBEPETERGRIFFIN 1 year ago
Phil Jones, the head of the British Climatic Research Unit at the heart of ClimateGate, told the BBC: the recent warming trend that began in 1975 is not at all different than two other planetary warming phases since 1850; there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995, and; it is possible the Medieval Warm Period was indeed a global phenomenon thereby making
the temperatures seen in the latter part of the 20th century by no means unprecedented.
scrollandkey 1 year ago 2
Tony Jones (the idiot) giving blow job to Monbiot (the retard). And Australian Taxpayers have to pay for this shit.
ivanv1952 1 year ago
@ivanv1952 Yes, we pay for this excellent journalism -pursuing scientific fraud and misinformation. Plimer needs to be brought to task for his repeated and demonstrable lying.
topologyrob 1 year ago
Phil Jones, anybody seen Phil Jones?
OmegaRage 1 year ago
You know the game is up when theirs patronization and interruption, sorry MR Monbiot youre a liar and know nothing about real science
On a personal note youre a fucking idiot
andy69607 1 year ago 2
George Monbiot=marxis eco naxis
climate change is dead
your cult is busted
motoxmainia 1 year ago
Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined. - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
Sen. James Inhofe: "God's still up there. We're going through these cycles... the science really isn't there."
plevyman 1 year ago
Probably should keep goofy politicians out of this. No one takes them serious. (I hope) This whole thing was born on the back of politics (1988 Hansen speech) and that's the problem.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
If you think no-one takes Inhofe seriously, then you are out of touch with reality. He's the figurehead of the whole US climate "sceptic" campaign. All of the quotes you give could have been lifted directly from his list of "scientists who dissent over man-made global warming".
Incidentally, Peden is not a scientist. He's a webmaster, and certainly isn't an atmospheric physicist.
But you would have guessed that, being the "sceptical" creature that you are.
plevyman 1 year ago
@pleyvman-so your logic here is that anything quoted by Inhofe is to be discarded.
Ok...that means anything quoted by Al Gore is also discarded. Same exact logic. We can play it that way if you want.
Or are you operating under an idea that Al Gore is less of a politician than Inhofe or is taken less serious?
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
Many distinguished scientists refuse to participate in the IPCC process, and others have resigned from it, because in the end the advice that the panel provides to governments is political and not scientific. - Dr. Bob Carter, Paleoclimate scientist, James Cook University and former chairman of the earth science panel of the Australian Research Council.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who dont buy into anthropogenic global warming. - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
I am a skepticGlobal warming has become a new religion. - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
worst scientific scandal in the historyWhen people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists. - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
Good point by Monbiot when he points out that most governments support anthropogenic global warming theory.
Most governments also support the theory that there is a deity (god) up in the clouds who created the planet earth. So that means we all have to believe that.
Prez Obama actually believes in AGW and a god.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
Most governments also believe the earth revolves around the sun.
plevyman 1 year ago
Main point being that most governments believing something is not proof that it is true.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
No-one expects governments to come up with proof or evidence. That's what scientists are for. The fact that scientists have managed to convince most of the world's governments (except Saudi Arabia) of the severity of the problem tells its own story. To compare governments taking expert scientific advice to them holding religious beliefs is absurd, idiotic.
plevyman 1 year ago
There is an alliance between the energy multinationals and rthe Green movement. The aim of this alliance is to set up a world government in which the global economy is subverted by compulsory carbon credit trading. Al Gore himself had strong association with the multinational Enron, who put money in his purse in return for the promise to sign Kyoto. Copenhagen is no different. Do not be fooled - you and many others are being brainwahed by these malicious, power-hungry individuals.
PhysicalsimForever 1 year ago
Lies. The number of dissenting earth scientists has now grown to 31000, 15000 of whom are working at PhD level. The IPCC itself has rank and file scientists dissenting. IPCC papers are actually reviewed by a 'select', much smaller group of scientists than the 15000 usually claimed.
PhysicalsimForever 1 year ago
The reason there are not many dissenting scientists you know of is because they fear censorship from authorities if they speak out against AGW. Plimer is one of the few who dare to. He was not convicing in this debate, but that does not mean AGW is not a fraud.
PhysicalsimForever 1 year ago
Censorship by what authorities?! Good science will win through because it has to be based on evidence. Unfortunately, the anti-AGW camp hasn't got any good evidence and precious few good scientists.
joecushley 1 year ago
Plimer simply has no evidence to support any of claims he makes in interview. It is a mental exercise to find a claim grounded in observable fact.
Unfortunately very few people have any scientific understanding at all, and the claims of Plimer will carry unwarranted respect.
It is of note that there are never a respected scientist to argue against the global warming theory, mainly as those scientists agree the evidence and its likely conclusions.
ckerton1 1 year ago
Monbiot isn't at all attractive (at least to men like me). Use ODI tactics: take the first 10 overs to play yourself in. Don't fire 'til the 35th.
PhysicalsimForever 1 year ago
This is not a good debate. It's just sledging! Earth to Plimer and Monbiot: 'Calm down, guys. WE've got a few hours here, its not a 20/20. Stop slogging and wait for the right ball.'
PhysicalsimForever 1 year ago
WHAT A SMOKE SCREEN!!!!.....Too bad Monbiot is so damn attractive.
omkari3 2 years ago
Governments have accepted the anthropogenic global warming thesis because it allows them to control its citizens and tax them more. Government is about control.
When communism collapsed in 1991, the socialists, Marxists and communists were emasculated as free market capitalism proved its excellence. They turned to the green movement to try and put the chains back on and lead us down the road to serfdom. They are watermelons, green on the outside, red on the inside. They are communists
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Monbiot is pathetic. The whole intellectual edifice of anthropogenic global warming is crumbling and the global cooling deniers are worried, hence their increased hystericism and alarmism. Dr Richard Lindzen and Dr Fred Singer have destroyed the warming arguments. The warmists have lied and smeared to gain their positions, and you are now failing. Monbiot or his warming chums have not been able to explain the Medieval Warming Period or the Roman Optimum.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
"The whole intellectual edifice of AGW is crumbling".
Your sanity is crumbling...
plevyman 2 years ago
Typical of the global cooling denier to question to mental state of a sceptic. Shoot the message not the messenger
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Your statement shows that you aren't in touch with reality. AGW is a fact. Public doubt on the issue is akin to public doubt about evolution.
plevyman 2 years ago
How is it a fact? Please explain the Medieval Warming Period, or the Roman Optimum, or the Little Ice Age? Explain why temperatures have been stagnant since 1998. Explain why global temperatures dropped by 0.7degrees in 2007, cancelling out the net rise of 0.6 degrees in the 20th century. Explain how 1200 snow and cold records were broken in December last year. AGW has about as much credibility as your logical and analytical skills
Mickmars90 2 years ago
I'm sorry to break this to you, but logic and analysis don't consist in picking just the fragments of evidence that you can patch together to fit your pre-conceived view. It's the sum of evidence that matters. Individual years, seasons, regions, countries taken in isolation don't alter the overall picture. Eight of the warmest 10 years on record have been since 2000. While parts of the northern hemisphere were cold this winter, Australia was sweltering in a heat wave.
plevyman 2 years ago
The existence of a Medieval Warming Period doesn't negate the theory of anthropogenic climate change at all. I don't know why people seem to think it does. I have no idea about snow and ice records, but I do know that according to the US NOAA last year was the 4rth hottest on record, globally. The ten hottest years on record have all been in the last 12.
DeafFret 2 years ago
Actually, NASA data shows that 1934 was the hottest year on record.
Mickmars90 2 years ago
Actually, NASA data shows that 1934 was the hottest year on record IN THE UNITED STATES, but not globally. Do you understand the distinction?
DeafFret 2 years ago
Simplex1swrhs90 1 year ago
@Simplex1swrhs90 "improved" data is right. their improvements can prove anything.
god is anger with us and we must appease them by a new luddism.
RL36D 1 year ago
Of course it does. The fact is temperatures have been far higher in the past than they are now. And those temperature variations are nothing to do with CO2 emissions. CO2 makes up a tiny proportion of our atmosphere. Less than 1%. Professor Richard Lindzen has poured scorn on the idea that CO2 causes climate change. CO2 is vital for life
Mickmars90 1 year ago
@Mickmars90 nobody is denying that climate has changed in the past, that is a strawman argument. The quesiton is what is causing it change now.
Unlike past changes, Modern climate change does not correlate with volcanoes, solar activity, tectonic plate movements, or orbital variations. The only thing it correlates with is: man made CO2 increases.
DeafFret 1 year ago
DeafFret pointed out exactly how AGW theory works.
We can't explain it, so we assume it is CO2.
We also know we don't understand how the chaotic climate operates yet, but that doesn't stop us.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
@HarpoSpoke Actually what I would have said is that we can't explain it by anything *other* than CO2. That's a differentthing from saying "we can't explain it". Truth is that AGW is the only theory that fits the facts.
DeafFret 1 year ago
Point taken.
But the fact that we do not yet understand how the climate works means it is poor "proof" to say "This is the only thing we know that explains it".
150-300 years into the current warming period....and we are still waiting for the doomsday that AGW believers say will happen due to warming.
Sounds a lot like a religion.
HarpoSpoke 1 year ago
Senator James Inhofe, Fox news, Pat Robertson, Sarah Palin etc. American "scepticism", in particular, is profoundly tied to religious extremism and anti-scientific dogma. Climate science, on the other hand, deals with facts and evidence.
So no, it's not like a religion. That would be your lot.
plevyman 1 year ago
@HarpoSpoke religion would be to not try and explain it at all, and simply ascribe events to an enigmatic deity called "nature".
DeafFret 1 year ago
There is no conspiracy. But what this whole global warming movement is like was the idea back in the late 90's that technology around the world was going to collapse or go haywire because of something called the Millenium Bug. It is also like back in the 1970's when large groups of scientists believed that there was going to be another ice age over the coming decades. Both were accepted as fact but later proved to be massive hoaxes. Again, no grand conspiracy but more of a grand mistake.
OmegaRage 2 years ago
OmegaRage, please provide a reference to a peer reviewed article from a science journal that in the 70's warned of the imminent onset of an ice age. Thanks in advance!
AtomSmash3r 2 years ago
Four words:
DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK
OmegaRage 1 year ago
@OmegaRage - ahahaha I did and I didn't find any. How odd. Back up your claim or withdraw the comment, LOSER!
AtomSmash3r 1 year ago
@AtomSmash3r
Funny, I googled global cooling I found an entire WIKI page on 1970's global cooling.
I actually think it is your side that is losing. You got nothing you wanted done at Dopenhagen, all major polls showing that interest in climate change is decreasing and scepticism is growing and the biggest example can be shown in my very own country when after Climategate broke, we got a new opposition leader elected on the basis of his climate scepticism...
OmegaRage 1 year ago
@OmegaRage - sorry but I can find no reference on your google search of a peer reviewed article in a science journal from the 70's that warned of the imminent onset of an ice age. Please provide such a reference or retract your claim, LOSER!
AtomSmash3r 1 year ago
@AtomSmash3r
Mate, is that all you have got? Your trying to be right about the fact that whether or not there were peer reviewed articles in the 1970's and somehow this is going to advance the argument for climate change? The argument was that people (like John Holdren) believed that there was an ice age coming, and it would not have matter if or if not it was peer reviewed, because he was wrong. Just like people like at the IPCC and the CRU Hadley (who produce peer reviewed articles)...
OmegaRage 1 year ago
@OmegaRage - Science is published in the peer reviewed scientific press. YOU have provided no references of peer reviewed articles in science journals of the 70's period warning of an imment ice age. If you can not provide such references then your claim that the scientific community made such warnings is bogus. Do you understand or are you dumber that dirt and not quite as clean?
AtomSmash3r 1 year ago
@AtomSmash3r
The best thing about that is, I really don't care. Just like I shouldn't care about the oceans rising and gobbling up my house, or crops dying because because of the imminent drying of the earth.
OmegaRage 1 year ago
Hmmm... what's this, "Oceanic Mechanisms for Amplification of the 23,000-Year Ice-Volume Cycle
William F. Ruddiman 1 and Andrew McIntyre 2" and this, "Variations in the Earth's Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages
J. D. Hays 1, John Imbrie 2, and N. J. Shackleton 3 ", why, it's a bunch of articles from many years suggesting an imminent cooling... but why should I care, they're wrong!
OmegaRage 1 year ago
@OmegaRage that second one is not about any "global cooling", it's about a seres of regular variations in the Earth's orbit known as the Milankovitch Cycles. That is pretty well accepted as fact, and doesn't predict any "imminent" global cooling, unless you consider some 30 000 years to be imminent.
DeafFret 1 year ago
.... which are wrong!
OmegaRage 1 year ago
@AtomSmash3r
Really funny, I could sense that bowling lava pit in that first passive aggressive response of yours. All it took was that wee bit of prodding...
OmegaRage 1 year ago
Smoking with lung cancer - simple science, well proven. HIV & AIDS - easy science, well proven. Man made climate change is much more complex and no one or one organisation can currently know enough about it all to be certain, or to be certain of the appropriate response. Cutting emisions with no preperation for what might happen regardless is just ludicrous!
notheusernameiwanted 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Monbiot is a nasty evil, little right wing, mainstream corporate slimeball. His parents were senior right wing British politicians (father was chairman of the conservative party).
He is an ultra conservative who's friend Paul Kingsnorth had close connections to the far right, neo nazi Goldsmith family.
eric144144 2 years ago
@eric144144 You gotta admit it though. He's right.
DeafFret 2 years ago
@DeafFret
He isn't right. The only reason the mainstream corporate/criminal media support global warming is precisely because it is a giant corporate scam.
Trillions in carbon credits for Co2 emitters (esp oil companies) and trillions in derivatives for the banks.
Check out the IETA and Angrymermaid (FOE). Check out Hasper Kirkby's cloud experiment at CERN.
eric144144 2 years ago
Erm, Moonbat's one of the biggest Lefty's in Britain. He writes for the Grauniad, which is a liberal lefty rag. He's about as far from an ultra conservative as it's possible to get.
lambertatom 2 years ago
@lambertatom
Monbiot is watered down Nazi, like the rest of his environmental pals. He had the cheek to call his colleague, Zac Goldsmith's uncle Edward a Nazi. The Goldsmiths are a notorious extreme right wing billionare family.
Edward Goldsdmith was such a very obvious Nazi, It was an embarassment to Monbiot.
The Neocon Guardian is desperately beating the war drums against Iran, by the way. It is a liberal corporate newspaper who's purpose is to make money.
eric144144 2 years ago
@lambertatom
How many socialists do you see here ? Bernhardt was in the SS, Philip was a Nazi.. These people's parents supported Hitler. Rudolf Hess flew to Britain to meet men like this. Goldsmith, Lucan and Aspinall plotted to overthrow the Wilson government.
Prince Charles, Prince Philip, Prince Bernhardt, Viscount Porrtt, Lord Melchitt, Oliver Tickell, George Monbiot, Zak Goldsmith, David de Rothschild, Paul Kingsnorth, James Lovelock, Edward Goldsmith , John Aspinall. Lord Lucan.
eric144144 2 years ago
its kind of funny how he is refering scientists as corrupt. scientists are usually the smartest, but they are usually the ones with the least power.
SawViking 2 years ago
But don't worry your going to get your CARBON TAX
it's been ordained by Maurice Strong, And Lord Rothschild.
blokeatone 2 years ago
Comment removed
great0white0shark 2 years ago
Clever Monbiot strategy.
He DELIBERATELY concedes the first 4-5 minutes of the debate (CRU etc) because .....
Plimer would have then deflected to talk about CRU and climategate for 20+ minutes.
The idea behind the debate was Monbiot exposing Plimer as a LIAR and a FRAUD. 6 minutes in Plimer is still deflecting, accusing others of Misdemeanours.
Monbiot humours that, minimises the debate on CRU thus allowing more time to expose Plimer for the FRAUD he is.
The rest is history.
glenrufus 2 years ago 8
Yes don't Tax people just let the free market handle it? - Or do nothing?
How about paying for your polution!
When has a free market ever addressed environmental threats adequately. Never ever ever!!
propositionjohnston 2 years ago
@propositionjohnston Good to hear you don't
pollute Propo you sanctimonius twat. The biggest carbon
footprint in OZ is that of MMMMMMMMMMassive
public sector, statistics you won't get on the MINING ROYALTY
FUNDED ABC You Hypocrates
blokeatone 2 years ago
Bastard liar global warming is a fraud
Graham6762 2 years ago
You're pretending the science is wrong because you think you don't like the solutions.
But what's wrong with wind, solar or geothermal power? What's wrong with energy efficiency and modern high-speed electric public transport?
You're just defending old, inefficient, dirty technology - you're trying to stand in the way of progress. I can understand why fossil fuel companies keep lying about this, but you're just being duped by them.
jondoig 2 years ago
Comment removed
great0white0shark 2 years ago
it hasn't finished the debate on how the
CARBON TAX solves the problem..........you know the
TAX they're going put on mining, you know the mining
that pretty much pays for Australias' Massive bureacracy.
You know the mining the of stuff we're gonna stop using.
THE CARBON TAX , The silver bullet.. Hows' the weather
there in Canberra,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,LOLLLLLLLLLLL
blokeatone 2 years ago
Yes, that's another debate. Rudd's CPRS is a complete fraud: the Continue Polluting Regardless Scam. Faking action, not taking action.
We need direct climate action to phase out coal-fired power and coal exports and replace them with renewables, which can now do baseload, as well as efficiency to reduce demand.
There's a new hi-tech goldrush going on - think exports to replace coal! We're missing out because Rudd and Abbott are still backing last century's power brokers.
jondoig 2 years ago
On what planet anyone who imagines Plimer wasn't made to look like a complete fool here, lives on, I can't imagine!!
propositionjohnston 2 years ago