Expert argues climate change assumptions wrong

[hagenar]

Pilmer's book is a series of arguments based on incorrect data. One of his pieces of reference literature states that the sun is not made from hydrogen and helium but is similar in composition to a meteorite. The man is just a professional sceptic with no other published climate research work to his name.

[mydogbanjo]

Read Plimers' book. Raises some interesting questions about the politics of Global Warming.

[somerandombrowser]

The main reason I don't beleave this man is the fact that the authors of the literature he sited in his book have said directly that he misquoted and tiwsted the facts to where they no longer represent the origional report, and that he's using old data that has since been refuted, retested and proven wrong.

[pseudotruth]

Looks like Plimer's got some more explaining to do. Looks like he's been passing-off other people's work as his own.

Google

Plimer the plagiarist

[radoa1]

Therefore - what DID you think we were playing?

[Geology2008]

According to the IPCC, 150 billion tonnes of carbon go into the atmosphere from natural processes every year. This is almost 30 times the amount of carbon humans emit.

[radoa1]

its actually 220 biilion. Man's output is on top of this and with the rapid in crease in emmission, nature cannot regulate atmospheric C02 as effctively as it should as per the Carbon Cycle. Use your brain instead of regurgitating someone elses garbage!

[Geology2008]

hahah garbage!! Your calling the IPCC garbage it really shows how little you know.

[radoa1]

what kind of weak come back is this? This does nothing ton challange what I have said. A waste of space.

[Geology2008]

sorry i didnt know we were playing childish games!! my bad.

[radoa1]

geology - out of juice?

[Geology2008]

no its just i dont find talking to an uneducated idiot as one of my priorities sorry if Ive got a life outside of youtube

[radoa1]

for a person who claims to have another life, you didnt waste anytime responding. Is been a pleasure Geology in exposing your psoting as utter gargage and making you look like a fool. Bye!

[Geology2008]

haha look like a fool ...well we will let youtubers decide that! you should probably go back over it aswell and note that your uneducated, unsupported and utterly stupid responses actually make you the fool! bye

[radoa1]

"I know man doesn't have a bigger effect then Ocean emissions or Volcanic emissions of co2"

How do you know? When and where was your paper published?

[radoa1]

can you tell me about life on earth during these periods when  atmospehric C02 was high?

[WeAreChangeBrisbane]

Prosperous? Normal?

[radoa1]

Fantastic - could you please provide the source for your answer.

[WeAreChangeBrisbane]

My source? The fact that I'm in existence due to my ancestors not dying from "catastrophic" climate change.

The climate will always change, hence 'Climate Change' but it's hardly man-induced climate change. Perhaps to a small degree as it's obvious that due to 6billion living on the planet there'd be at least some impact.

Can you tell me about Earth back then?

I believe if we are alive today and co2 was higher back then today shouldn't be a problem.

Let's focus on real environmental problems

[radoa1]

Do I really have to educte you. Humans have only been around for about 100,000 years. Ok here we go - of the five periods in the history of Earth that had the highest levels of extinction were all linked to climate change, fossil evidence shows. Of the five mass extinctions, the most recent was the Cretaceous-Tertiary, 65 million years ago, when temperatures were about 4C higher than today.

[WeAreChangeBrisbane]

I just wrote a good response...doesn't show :(

Could you provide a source that refutes that?

Google: Climate and CO2 in the Atmosphere

It's short but sweet and if you don't approve then whatever man, I know man doesn't have a bigger effect then Ocean emissions or Volcanic emissions of co2 so you'll tax me when you knock down my door.

[radoa1]

I personally dont have the evidence as I am not a researcher within this scientific field. I however have read many peer reviewed scientific papers on this subject and find the argument for anthropogenic warming irrefutable. I dont discredit the argument - the climatetologist have done it for us. Have I said something to upset you?

[Geology2008]

No you haven't its just that there is significant evidence to support his argument and in scientific literature if any evidence is to support the contrary, than the established theory has to be challenged.

[radoa1]

again to you - what actual evidence to support what actual causal factor/s are you talking about?

[Geology2008]

read his book!!! open your ears and mind and stop being so one sided.

[Geology2008]

Have you read the book or are you placing all your opinions on the one you tube video you have just seen?

[Geology2008]

anyone would think you worked for the government.

[radoa1]

All his argument are old news. Same old. The fact that they have been busted long ago seem to escape you. Any one would think that you work for for fossil fuel industry.

PS - govt? Are you kidding? We have In Aust a party that is a global warming denier while the other a global warming hypocrite. A lose-lose outcome for the people of Aust. and for global action on this matter.

[Geology2008]

But the so called 'old news' argument did not look at climate over geological, archaeological, historical and modern time as Plimer has done.Over time, the history of CO2 content in the atmosphere has been far higher than at present for most of time. Atmospheric CO2 follows temperature rise. It does not create a temperature rise. CO2 is not a pollutant.

Old news I have not heard of any significant research into anthropogenic global warming in the past unless you could remind me???

[radoa1]

I read the scientific literature and make a reasoned assessment. You got a problem with that?

[Geology2008]

What evidence do you have to support your argument? You cant just displace and discredit an argument with immature comments that dont even make sense.

[radoa1]

plimer should stick k to fighting creatianism Too much CO2 will destroy life on eartas we know it - the higher the conc the more likely this is to happen

[Geology2008]

and what qualifications do you have?

[cityzenkane108]

Spot on, scientific absolutism is and has been the greatest fanaticism known to man. There are going to be alot of people with egg on their faces, lets make this clear, C02 is good for the planet! Wake up.