Part 1: Professor Ian Plimer Interviewed by Brian Carlton; Heaven and Earth

[TheIdeasMatrix]

Plimer is the best! Awesome lecturer!

[incometaxdebt]

informative file

[rimian]

Plimer is the director of three mining companies: Ivanhoe, CBH Resources & Kefi Minerals. I'd expect a journalist to disclose this information especially when Plimer criticises his opposition of having a conflict of interest.

Why doesn't this journalist quiz Mr Plimer about the mistakes in his book? eg: That humans emit less CO2 than volcanoes & the earth has been cooling since '98. There's a huge list of well publicised errors in this book.

This is poor quality news and poor quality science.

[ABNNewswire]

The quality of the news is excellent, the science is debatable (as all science should be). This is an interview and your expectations are unrealistic. The book was just released. This was an opportunity for the author to represent his views fairly, which he did, and at that time there were no "well publicised" errors. It is commendable that people are looking at these issues closely now, and without views from any side, there would be no call to action.

[rimian]

OK, it may have been a while ago. I certainly don't have unrealistic expectations. I asked myself "Who is Ian Plimer?" and found out he's the director of 3 mining companies after a simple google. You'd probably know he signed a book deal from his press release promoting it. Kaching!

He's talking about the conflict of interest of climate change supporters quite clearly, If you're a news service, you're supposed to be critical. People need quality information on such an important issue.

[ABNNewswire]

Understood, however a "simple google" for Tiger Woods may uncover that he is a 21 year old who just won a masters tournament. People cannot expect quality information by looking at the top three results in a simple google search. I would consider that an unrealistic expectation. Perhaps your expectations are not unrealistic in terms of discovering meaningful answers, but it is your method of collecting the information.

[rimian]

Yes, of course. You check your facts. For example: "BH Resources paid Plimer $A125,000 in 2009 and $181,003 in 2008" (which you'll notice I mentioned yesterday). How come I have to tell you this?

This isn't news at all. It's an endorsement by a corporate press release distributor. I refer to the interviewer's quote at the end of part 3 "It's a great read" and "I urge anyone who's interested in the subject to have a read".

[nickatnoon61]

@rimian Thanx bud, I don't listern to 'SUITS' anyhow as a rule. If you want ULTIMATE TRUTH, go to the loveforlife website! It will rock you down to yer socks!!! cheers!

[nickatnoon61]

Respond to this video... This ASSHOLE , both of them, are FUCKING CLUELESS about nature, and living in harmony with it! RAPING the Earth for profit is their agenda!

[Darthbelal]

there's plenty more pseudotruth, I've read Nature magazine's view of the whole e-mail business, they stated that AGP deniers are "a small fringe group" which is rather odd considering some tens of thousands of scientists went and signed the Oregon Petition. I've deliberately focused on one quote from those hacked e-mails, to see if you could explain away using tricks to "hide" a decline. You can't. There's plenty, plenty more ammo I can pull out of the box, should you care to argue more.

[pseudotruth]

ddd999

'.....One e-mail talked of displaying the data using a 'trick' — slang for a clever (and legitimate) technique, but a word that denialists have used to accuse the researchers of fabricating their results. It is Nature's policy to investigate such matters if there are substantive reasons for concern, but nothing we have seen so far in the e-mails qualifies.....denialists use every means at their disposal to undermine trust in scientists and science.'

Ggl

'Climatologists under pressure'

[Darthbelal]

Quote from Phil Jones not taken out of context as follows: "Ive just completed Mikes Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from

1961 for Keiths to hide the decline." Tell me, pseudotruth, is manipulating data to hide results a "legitimate" scientific technique?

[pseudotruth]

Darthbelal

This claim has been debunked. Only idiots believe it.

[Darthbelal]

you didn't answer the question, pseudotruth. To use a trick to hide data sounds an awful lot like fraud, rather than calling others names, rebutt my point.

[pseudotruth]

Darthbelal

It's been debunked. You are fishing for dross.

[Darthbelal]

I didn't ask for a statement, or what I you think I was fishing for or what your opinion is of those who believe that Jones' statements are an indication of fraud or not. I've asked for a rebuttal. I'm asking for you to illustrate why using a trick to hide the decline is NOT hiding truth on global warming. Either you come up with a counter statement or you go away, dammit.

[pseudotruth]

Darthbelal

You obviously don't want to listen. The denialists' dishonest claims have been debunked - Fact!

The journal Nature put it very clearly, if they had seen evidence of wrongdoing, they would, but since there isn't anything, they won't. Only idiots believe the dross.

The fact remains that the output from the CRU temperature curves is only slightly different from NASA GISS; RSS TLT and UAH TLT. The differences are due to structural differences.

So the email business is all froth!

[pseudotruth]

dddave999

Your inability to understand the sequence of events as generally known is indicative of a low intelligence.

Only the hacker really knows what he did. However there are good reasons to believe that the hacker was based in North America. which means that in all likelihood it wasn't an inside job / whistle-blower. It was part of the denial industry so beloved of idiots.

[weallknowitstrue]

There were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - just as Dr. Hans Blix said; But, the Republican media machine didn't want us to hear that.

And, there is NO dangerous climate change caused by human carbon dioxide - just as the "independent scientists" are now trying to tell us! But, the Democrat media machine doesn't want us to hear that.

We are made to run from one boogieman to next, as each political party achieves its own agendas for them & their money mates.

SEE Professor Bob Carter

[pseudotruth]

weallknowitstrue

Carter is not a climate scientist, he is a geologist and arrogantly, claims to understand what specialist experts do not. His claims are incompatible with the evidence and therefore false.

He is associated with at least two organisations that have received Exxon funds.

A member of New Zealand Climate Science Coalition an anti-science group dedicated to refuting claims that recent anomalous warming is man-made.

Google

Spot the recycled denial V Prof Bob Carter

[captainboggles]

Heyy... thank god someone has their brains in and their head screwed on... Hooray for Prof Plimer... some sense amongst the hysterical and emotive band wagon.... you mean you believed all that global warming bullshit??? Suckers....

[pseudotruth]

captainboggles

Perhaps you would like to enlighten us why we should believe Plimer? You need to realise that you need to refute substantively the allegations detailed in my posts by demonstrating they are untrue!

Failure to address those problems will of course indicate that Plimer is not to be trusted.

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

If you had bothered to look at my links, you would find irrefutable evidence of Plimer's coal interests; plagiarism; manufactured graphs; doctored graphs; misrepresentations of the science & etc.

Simple! Prove that all these allegations are untrue!

Google

Ian Plimer Heaven + Earth checking the claims Enting

Ian Plimer Ivanhoe mine director coal

Ivanhoe SouthGobi Energy Resources coal

Plimer the plagiarist

Monbiot Let battle commence! Climate change denialist ready for the fight

[pseudotruth]

Either Plimer is telling the truth or not

If Plimer's telling the truth and is right then he should destroy the 'myth of AGW' as he claims with his science and publish his findings in the scientific literature - a web-of-science peer-reviewed journal like 'Nature'

Plimer is wrong and his claims are just twaddle. The reason why Plimer doesn't submit his ideas to 'Nature' is that he'd get sued for causing injuries to the reviewers, when they split their sides laughing and fell off their chairs

[ABNNewswire]

If submiting ideas to Nature causes the reviewers to split their sides laughing, then I suppose they do not qualify as rational enough to make qualified judgements.

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

Plimer's pseudo-scientific drivel would cause so much hilarity among scientifically qualified knowledgeable reviewers, because apart from the plagiarism; the doctored graphs; bogus graphs and the repeated misrepresentation of the science. Plimer's theories have all been debunked

Heaven + Earth is being promoted as 'a scrupulous and scholarly analysis'. - This is a bare-faced lie. [Cover blurb (PB Ed.) by fellow denialist the scientifically unqualified Lord Lawson]

[ABNNewswire]

You are not listening. Accusations without substantiation is akin to playground tantrums.

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

Plimer's so-called science is revealed as a litany of lies; bogus accusations; half-truths and deceptions. When challenged to substantiate his claims in a format that permits cross-examination; he chickens-out

Plimer is a wind-bag; a snake-oil salesman who makes bogus claims

Stating the truth about Plimer is neither an ad hominem nor an attack; it is stating the truth

Plimer must either stand-up and reveal his evidence or be known forever as a charlatan

[pseudotruth]

Plimer's directorships encompass a number of mining companies. AFAICT, only Ivanhoe produces coal. The other interests seem to be metal ore mines.

Google

Ian Plimer Ivanhoe mine director coal

Ivanhoe SouthGobi Energy Resources coal

The fact remains Plimer has a vested interest in undermining [!] the science of AGW.

Add to that plagiarism and telling outright lies - that makes his resumé really stand-out!

Ian Plimer Heaven + Earth checking the claims Enting

[ABNNewswire]

Google all you like. If you attack the man rather than address the topic, you fail. Science works on evidence, not consensus, that is what science is all about.

[zebazian]

I think I am not the only one getting a smell of what is emanating from his mouth....

[pseudotruth]

It looks like Plimer is guilty of plagiarism.

Google

Ian Plimer is a con artist

Plimer the plagiarist

[SPLIMLETLET]

At last, the voice of reason.

Listen to all the Climate Change 'Believers' try to shout him down. How dare anybody be skeptical about Anthropomorphic Climate Change. No dissent will be allowed. Burn him at the stake!

Have I made my point?

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

Since Plimer refuses to answer Monbiot's questions, do Plimer and us all a favour and answer them for him!

I and many others [including Plimer] look forward to the answers. They can be found at:

google

Monbiot Let battle commence! Climate change denialist ready for the fight

[pseudotruth]

If Plimer's arguments were as watertight as he claims, he would have submitted them to a premier peer-reviewed scientific journal like 'Nature' for publication.

The fact is that he hasn't, he put them in a book that has been slated by numerous scientists.

For a list of the errors and deceits in Plimer's Climate drivel,

google:

Ian Plimer Heaven Earth checking the claims Enting

The only 'missing science' is the science missing from Plimer's arguments!

[ABNNewswire]

Jesus had the same problem with the Pharisees. The priests of atmospheric science are boiling in their own bile.

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

'The priests of atmospheric science are boiling in their own bile'

I note you have nothing of substance to say about the science. Plimer certainly doesn't!

google:

Ian Plimer Heaven Earth checking the claims Enting

[ABNNewswire]

You are incorrectly assuming that saying nothing is having nothing.

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

The science that Plimer repeatedly misrepresents, is extensive, multi-disciplinary and continues to accumulate.

To conclude what Plimer does, requires a considerable amount of deceit.

Plimer makes many false claims. However Plimer refuses to argue his case where his claims can be cross-examined. e.g the debate with Monbiot that he chickened-out of.

If the science existed, Plimer and others would have has it published in a relevant p/r scientific journal.

He hasn't - QED

[pseudotruth]

ABNNewswire

Are you hiding your light under a bushel, or is there no light to hide?

What about answering Monbiot's questions? Surely they aren't that hard! Of course if Plimer had answered them, he would have revealed his 'science' to be mumbo-jumbo.

Which is why he chickened-out!

[aGlobalWarmingHOAX]

Thank god for Plimer!

[brownie003]

bring spoony back to MMM!!!!!!!

[ABNNewswire]

I saw someone reading the book "Heaven and Earth - The Missing Science" on the bus this morning..

[alignwithtruth]

Great interview. I am about half way through the book and I am finding it very helpful. Thanks Ian, for making the very great effort to write such a text. All power to you.

[mrtplottens]

I urge you to follow the debate which is due to take place between George Monbiot and Ian Plimer regarding this book. Many scientists have stated that Plimer's book is full of errors (see link below). Let's wait and see how Plimer answers Monbiot's specific questions, and consider whether we then want to trust his book as being scientifically accurate.

guardian(dot)co(dot)uk/environ­ment/georgemonbiot/2009/aug/05 /climate-change-scepticism

[ABNNewswire]

I sure hope someone films it!

[alignwithtruth]

Thanks for the link mrtplottens. I will take a look. I am still making my way through the book. I am finding it heavy going, and I am doing my best to find what is really going on here. The huge number of reputable scientists on both sides of the argument (man made CO2 being the main cause of global warming) has me on a search. Thanks.

[CandianBear]

I agree! let's remain skeptical about this man's claims until we are provided with the information on which he is basing his claims... hold him to his own standards- Answer Monbiots questions openly and cite your sources so we can all make up our own minds! cheers

[pseudotruth]

mrtplottens

It's fairly obvious that Plimer has chickened-out!

[inirapsag1]

Brian Carlton - Host TopGear!

[squidy2786]

Very interesting topic I just purchased his book. As an environmental scientist BSc the only question I have is what is his invested interest? He is a geologist meaning does he have invested interest in selling fossil fuels? I have been taught to think about both sides of all scientific debates. Other than this I think scientific arguments against human induced global warming have been a long time coming. I await the follow up.

[kreuland]

It's great to hear real science actually being demonstrated rather than screaming politicians looking to fatten their wallets... I am also glad to hear such a reputable Geologist doing so. This interview aligns with the reading I have been doing to get informed... It's amazing what you learn when you actually check it out for yourself rather than follow the sheep to the slaughter... Thank you for speaking out, and I wish Obama received this better. It does not fit his plan for the World ;<)

[concerned1juan]

Excellent interview. Thanks spoonman !

[burrellex]

Don't worry - I'm a geologist - my mind was already open!

[burrellex]

Should be compulsory viewing!

[ABNNewswire]

I agree, mind opener....

[CanardDeChien]

This is a good interview, what he says about the blinkered focus on Atmospheric science was particularly striking to me,

[dave7072]

Great video :)