The Today programme have given another climate change denier airtime - unchallenged. ‘Scientist’ Ian Plimer sees no link between carbon dioxide and temperature.
For the second time in a matter of weeks, the Today Programme this morning offered a platform to a climate change denier. Once again, the person invited on was somebody without any credentials to talk about climate science since they are not a climate scientist and have never published a peer reviewed paper on the subject.
Australian contrarian author Ian Plimer was left unchallenged to spout nonsense on the primetime BBC slot despite his argument having been systematically pulled apart by real climate scientists over at realclimate.org – a commentary site on climate science by working climate scientists.
He said:
“The fundamental point is that over the history of time, climates have always changed, we’ve had rapid changes, they’ve been large, they’ve been driven by extra-terrestrial forces, they’ve been driven by many other forces in the past, but not one great climate change in the past has actually been driven by carbon dioxide, and carbon dioxide is plant food, we cannot stop carbon emissions because most of them come from volcanoes, it is a normal element cycled around in the earth, and, my science, which is looking back in time, is saying we have had a planet that’s been a warm, wet greenhouse planet for more than 80 per cent of the time, we’ve had huge climate changes in the past, and to think that the very slight variations we measure today are a result of our life, we really have to put ice blocks in our drink.
“If you put 2 and 2 together, then you have to explain the three periods of cooling since the little ice age finished and during those three periods of cooling we’ve actually had carbon dioxide increase, so there is a disconnect between carbon dioxide emissions and temperatures because since 1850, we’ve had a warming period from 1860 to 1880, then we’ve had a cooling until 1910, then we had a warming until 1940 – in fact the North-West passage was open – then we had a cooling until the 1970s, and the people who are trying to frighten us witless now about runaway global warming were in fact those who were frightening us witless about an oncoming glaciation in the 1970s, then we’ve had a warming, up until the late 90s, now we’re in a cooling phase, so if we’d only had warming, then there would be a connect between carbon dioxide and temperature. There is not.”
Plimer added:
“When you look at my critics, they are people who are rent seekers, they have everything to gain by continuing the process of frightening people witless by following the party line … I’m saying that they are taking advantage of the current situation … Now we have a war against climate change and there’s a huge number of people out there that have their careers staked on it and are the beneficiaries from this process … The word belief is a word of politics and religion, it’s not a word of science; my scientific opinion is married to evidence…”
Leading NASA climate scientist, Gavin Schmidt, who has dissected Plimer’s argument in detail, found it to be based amongst other things on a “basic logical fallacy”. Needless to say nobody from NASA, the IPCC, the Royal Society or the Met Office was invited on to explain why Plimer was talking rubbish. Neither did Justin Webb, interviewing, explain Plimer’s lack of authority on the subject.
Listen to the interview in full below and download it here:
76 Responses to “Today give carte blanche to ‘scientist’ who denies link between CO2 and temperature”
Billy the Kid
Rupert you need help – calm down, it’s just a blog – why are you so serious in life? If you can stop ranting for a minute and catch your breath you might want to answer the points raised here.
Wolfgang Knorr says CO2 absorption isn’t included in Climate Change modelling – like the suns heat. Since our own government proposes carbon capture then why not? His data shows (data Rupert – not opinion, it’s called science) that CO2 is absorbed at a higher rate than previously believed.
“The study relied entirely on empirical data, including historical records extracted from ice samples in the Antarctic, rather than speculative climate change models”
Now, without ranting Rupert and placed with the EVIDENCE in front of you and knowing, as everyone does, that the planet is getting colder…. explain why you’re right, as a responsible representative of people in Norwich, to be ringing and emailing people with stupid unproven scaremongering.
Read the Times this morning Rupert. The majority of people in this country disagree with you and do not believe man made CO2 is causing Global Warming. You are in a minority (doesn’t mean you’re wrong) and you and your other Flat-Earthers need to get your facts straight.
You can smear, discredit and lie about people with views different to yours all you want Rupert but you are arguing without any scientific basis whatsoever because the planet is getting colder.
Let me guess Rupert. You believed it was right for this government to sack the scientist Professor Nutt over his FACTUAL reports on cannabis?
As regards to reporting your behavior to Caroline Lucas I do so because I have voted Green in the past and hate it when people like yourself make the party look foolish. I’m sure she cares how her party is perceived even if you don’t.
Same with the BBC. If you rang as an individual I’d have no problem with it but you huffed and puffed up your chest thinking you were important because you’re a Green Councillor and that that gives your opinion and yourself more credence. It doesn’t Rupert because you have NO scientific basis on which to be making your claims. Just flawed opinion.
Mankind going extinct if an agreement isn’t reached….PAH. Grow up.
Anon E Mouse
Rupert Read – so you do want to be an MP (what a surprise) – I’ve just checked the Norwich East results where you came in behind UKIP. With the backward views you force on other people I’m surprised you got any votes at all. I guess you “Can fool some of people all of the time”.
[I’ve removed this last statement – on second reading, it definitely falls outside our comments policy – WS]
Anthony
It’s kinda obvious that the whole global warming situation is far too complex to calculate what caused it and/or how we can cure it.
Anyone who does try to figure it all out should take all factors into consideration – the sun, the moon, magnetic fields, asteroids (and the effect), o3 depletion, blah, blah blah!
Even then, with all the evidence, all you can say is a guess!
What we should do is play the odds and try fix things as best we can, not bury our heads in the sand like a stupid bird.
willstraw
This chain is getting a bit nasty. I’m not going to take sides other than to say that one commenter stepped over the line with a personal attack and I’ve removed their comment.
Be passionate, but be nice, or I’ll put an end to this thread.
Anon E Mouse
Aw c’mon Will – this thread is just getting interesting!
Let me guess Bill stepped over the line? (again)
He’s away next week so your blog should be safe.
This is a very good blog Will – keep up the good work!