Climate sceptic geologist Professor Plimer (University of Adelaide, South Australia) has published a book entitled “Heaven and Earth – Global Warming the Missing Science” that sets out to demolish the hypothesis of man-made global warming that is supported by an overwhelming international scientific consensus (for quotations comments by outstanding scientists and scientific bodies on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) see detailed articles on the Yarra Valley Climate Action Group website, specifically “CLIMATE EMERGENCY: What Outstanding Australian Scientists Say“: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/climate-emergency-what-outstanding-australian-scientists-say and “CLIMATE EMERGENCY: What Top World Scientific Experts Say: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/climate-emergency-what-top-world-scientific-experts-say ).
SCROLL DOWN TO FIND THE ATTACHED REVIEW OF THE BOOK BY DR ANDREW GLIKSON (Earth and paleoclimate scientist, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia) entitled "Key Science Problems with Plimer's "Heaven and Earth" - be patient, it will only take a few moments to appear).
Before reading further, note that science is about the critical testing of potentially falsifiable hypotheses - whereas anti-science spin is about selective use of asserted facts to support a partisan position.
I have not read Plimer's book but as a dedicated scientist with a 4 decade scientific career I was deeply offended by the following anti-scientist comments by Plimer on ABC TV (see Ian Plimer interviewed by Tony Jones, ABC Lateline, 27 April 2009: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2554129.htm ):
Quote: “TONY JONES: OK, is it really your claim that climate scientists have banded together in a kind of gang to commit a scientific fraud?
IAN PLIMER: Well, the IPCC is a group of fellow travellers who reinforce each other, but they're looking at the atmosphere. They're not looking at the total system of the planet, which includes the influence of space, the influence of sun, the influence of the oceans, ice and the earth. So this book is a holistic view of the planet. They are taking one part of the planet out, and just the atmosphere.
TONY JONES: OK. It's a reasonable imputation, though, to suggest they might be perpetrating a scientific fraud if you go by what's in your book. I mean, "... the culture of believers has now developed, they survive by playing safe to acquire research funding." You keep making this analogy to getting research funding being the main driving reason behind their science.
IAN PLIMER: Well, there's not much research money around and if there is a war on cancer, then there's more funds go into that war on cancer. If people are frightened witless about frying, then there's more research money goes into that. Now, there's a small coterie of climate comrades who review each other's work, be it a research grant or a research paper, they use the same set of data, and for some really surprising reason, they actually come up with the same conclusions. And I'm arguing their view is a very narrow scientific view and that science is much broader than their small view”. End quote.
Below are quotes from and references to other cogent demolitions of climate sceptic Ian Plimer's “Heaven and Earth – Global Warming the Missing Science.”
1. The right wing Australian Murdoch Empire newspaper “The Australian” reported about the book and quoted criticism of the book by Professor Barry Brook (University of Adelaide, South Australia), reporting his following comments: “[used] selective evidence …[Plimer’s] stated view of climate science is that a vast number of extremely well respected scientists and a whole range of specialist disciplines have fallen prey to delusional self-interest and become nothing more than unthinking ideologues …Plausible to conspiracy theorists, perhaps, but hardly a sane world view, and insulting to all those genuinely committed to real science… confusing … [case study] in how not to be objective" (see The Australian, 23 April 2009: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25372986-30417,00.html ).
2. Professor Barry Brook has written a cogent review of “Heaven and Earth”. His review ends with the comment “The launch [of “Heaven and Earth”] ended with a statement of conviction from the master of ceremonies that this book will become a classic, alongside the other great works of modern science. Well, it may well be held up as an example for the future. An example of just how deluded and misrepresentative the psuedo-sceptical war against science really was in the first decade of the 21st century” (see Barry Brook, “Ian Plimer – Heaven and Earth”, BraveNewClimate, 23 April 2009: http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/ ).
3. Tim Lambert (computer scientist at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) has provided a detailed, page-by-page critique of “Heaven and Earth” in much the way one would review a scientific manuscript. His critique commences with the comment: “I agree with Barry Brook that Ian Plimer's approach to climate science in Heaven and Earth is unscientific. He [Plimer]starts with his conclusion that there is no "evidential basis" that humans have caused recent warming and that the theory that humans can create global warming “is contrary to validated knowledge from solar physics, astronomy, history, archeology and geology”.He accepts any factoid that supports his conclusion and rejects any evidence that contradicts his conclusion” (see Tim Lambert, “The science is missing from Plimer’s “Heaven and Earth”, Deltoid, 23 April 2009: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/04/the_science_is_missing_from_ia.php ).
4. Professor Ian G. Enting (ARC Centre of Excellence for Mathematics and Statistics of Complex Systems, University of Melbourne) has also provided a detailed, point-by-point critique of “Heaven and Earth” and provides the following damning Overview: “Ian Plimer’s book “Heaven + Earth – Global Warming: the Missing Science” claims to demolish the theory of human-induced global warming due to the release of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Overall: it has numerous internal inconsistencies; it often misrepresents the operation of the IPCC and the content of IPCC reports; in spite of the extensive referencing, key data are unattributed and the content of references is often misquoted. Most importantly, Plimer fails to establish his claim that the human influence on climate can be ignored, relative to natural variation” (see Ian Enting, “Ian Plimer’s “Heaven + Earth” – Checking the Claims”: http://bravenewclimate.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/plimer1a6.pdf ).