X hits on this document

PDF document

Ian Plimer’s ‘Heaven + Earth’ — Checking the Claims - page 39 / 64





39 / 64

From my experience of challenging creationism, I argue that the global warming movement is an ascientific urban religious fundamentalist movement detached from the environment.

dherents uncritically accept information from the web,

ikipedia and blog sites, yet

have little knowledge of integrated interdisciplinary science.

They anonymously criticise my book Heaven and Earth, but have not read it.

None of this addresses the criticisms from those, like myself, who do not hide behind anonymity.

Transcript at: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2009/2716078.htm

Monbiot vs Plimer

George Monbiot’s engagement came in response to the 2009/7/8 article by James Delingpole in The Spectator. Monbiot responded with an article Spectator recycles climate rubbish published by sceptic in the Guardian on 2009/7/9: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/jul/09/george-monbiot-ian-plimer

This led to an extensive correspondence, both published and by e-mail, between Monbiot, Plimer and The Spectator.

Some of the steps were:

  • Plimer challenged Monbiot to a debate

  • Monbiot agreed subject to the condition of Plimer’s answering a set of written questions

(some based on earlier versions of this document);

  • Plimer responded by proposing his own set of questions and the proposed debate in the

UK did not happen.

number of scientist have prepared answers to Plimer’s questions. One example is on the RealClimate website where the questions are ranked as to both relevance (mostly very low) and for whether they make sense: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/08/plimers-homework-assignment/

debate of sorts was broadcast on the and link to vodcast):

BC program Lateline on 2009/12/15, (transcript


In this broadcast, Plimer was asked about two specific issues. The first was that his claims about CO2 from undersea volcanoes contradicted surveys by the US Geological Survey. The second concerned Plimer’s citation of a paper by Keller (footnotes 1710 and 1718) with Plimer had reversed what was said in his cited reference (see items 76, 77). This behaviour was de- scribed as fraud. Plimer’s evasion of these questions is reproduced here with the permission of the producer.


lright. I’m gonna stick to some of the questions that Mr Monbiot’s been

asking you.

The issue of measuring temperatures at the heart of this.

Once again, you take issue with Ian

Plimer’s claim that satellites and radio sons48

show there is no global warming.

Tell us why?

48This should be radiosondes (IGE).


Document info
Document views198
Page views198
Page last viewedTue Jan 17 03:33:46 UTC 2017