Ian Plimer-"how to get expelled from school". part1- a Peter Mungo Jupp film

professor ian plimer discusses the need for his new book"how to get expelled from school" Our children are being fed a load of codswallop and used as political pawns

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• -climategate2
• ian plimer
• petermungo jupp
• global warming
• ice core studies
• sea level rise IPA
• climategate 2

[ed1phant]

Antarctica first started accumulating ice ~35Ma ago, not because of the development of the ACC but because of the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere as a result of the orogenesis and erosion of the himalayan mountatin system as suggested by Zachos et al (1999).

[AncientDestructions]

@ed1phant AMAZING how theory supplants facts . Did Antarctica have ice accumulate on it or was it a catastrophic event? BUTwhere do you get the proof that CO2 was the culprit ? You thinks you can go back thousands or millions of years ago and know what happened ?Shear arrogance .Please don't mention ice core data as they exist on the paradigm of one year per layer. So often theory is confused with FACT Plimer he is a practising scientist not a theory driven advocate who demands CO2 is evil

[tapolna]

Nothing like a person, who has been paid by a major polluting industry, to talk to the impressionable young people about the enivironment and the climate. Talk about bias! Why not get someone from BP talk about the Gulf of Mexico? How about someone from the nuclear industry talk about Fukusima? We dont' for the same reasons this guy should not secrete one sylable about the environment or climate. But hey, he can talk about public speaking, persuasion. Hitler was also good at that

[AncientDestructions]

@tapolna Prof Plimer is talking about CO2 . Despite the hysteria this is not a pollutent. It is necessary for life. It is the companies bent on money from Carbon buybacks that are the real scoundrels, hell bent on constructing schemes to rip us all off that Plimer is astounded at. No one has prooved that man made CO2 emissions create global warming

[MrWolfduke]

Pilmer is a geologist. He is a director of mining companies. He has not the education or independence from polluters to make these statements. To all the egos on this thread who cannot accept the science is and then profess to have uncovered a scam with their barely highschool education.... then show me all the hundreds of scientists and their papers. They're not there !!

[AncientDestructions]

@MrWolfduke I studied under Plimer . He is an earth scientist As one time head of Earth sciences at uni of melb. this is totally within his mandate Last time I heard earth sciences included weather.

[Dodger481]

The fact is that we have not seen any warming in 15 years, during this time period c02 emissions have skyrocketed. Anyone with a brain can deduce that c02 is not a strong driver of the temperature. AGW DEBUNKED.

[TheDelhiDuck]

@Dodger481 Hi Dodger. Can you please quantify "Very small".

[Dodger481]

@TheDelhiDuck

No one knows that, thats the point. The science is not settled and we need to know the quantum of this relationship to verify AGW. What we do know is that the effect on climate is very small as we can see due the lack of warming under conditions of record c02. Clearly the gig is up, no warming has certainly coold the zeal to combat this mythical problem.

[TheDelhiDuck]

@Dodger481 Unless you can quantify the term "strong", and unless you can quantify the effects of CO2 on atmospheric temperature then, it is logically impossibile for you to be "100% sure that CO2 is not a strong driver of climate".

[Dodger481]

@TheDelhiDuck

Since we have seen record c02 emissions and no record temperatures, obviously the c02 factor has been lost in the myriad of other variables that affect climate. This is called real science, examining real world observational data to either confirm or deny a theory. Prior to computer models it is how the biological sciences worked.

[gmakepiece]

@tapolna Ah, the Hitler Card. Well played, laughable unread incurious groupthink mob minded ecofascist left drone. Excellent logical fallacy. Five stars. greenspirit com, climatedepot com, wattsupwiththat com, greenhellblog com, zombietime com, thepeoplescube com, lookingattheleft com breitbart com, michellemalkin com, steynonline com, jihadwatch org, ringospictures com, commieblaster com, bestobamfacts com, atlasshrugs2000 typepad com, iowahawk tyepad com, colonelrobertneville blogspot com

[TheDelhiDuck]

@Dodger481 So it is a driver of climate, just not a "strong" one? What does constitute strong? Do you know the actual figures on say CO2 in ppm and the corresponding affect on average global temperatures?

[Dodger481]

@TheDelhiDuck

100% sure that c02 is not a strong driver of climate, that much everyone knows.

[TheDelhiDuck]

@Dodger481 So you're 100% sure of something, even though "It's far too early to make such prognostications. We need some more study into the many unknowns of cliamte science."

[Dodger481]

@TheDelhiDuck

Yes, no signifigant warming, we can both rest easy and emitt c02 to our hearts content. We have to concentrate the real issue, reducing our CFC's to save the ozone layer.

[TheDelhiDuck]

@Dodger481 Cool, so you are 100% certain that rising CO2 levels will not create any significant warming.