Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I am about to write questions much of what I have written in this space, in numerous columns, over the past five years. Perhaps what I have written can withstand this questioning. Perhaps not. The greater question is, am I - and you - capable of questioning our own orthodoxies and intellectual habits? Let's see.
The subject of this column is not small. It is a book entitled Heaven And Earth, which will be published tomorrow. It has been written by one of Australia's foremost Earth scientists, Professor Ian Plimer. He is a confronting sort of individual, polite but gruff, courteous but combative. He can write extremely well, and Heaven And Earth is a brilliantly argued book by someone not intimidated by hostile majorities or intellectual fashions.
The book's 500 pages and 230,000 words and 2311 footnotes are the product of 40 years' research and a depth and breadth of scholarship. As Plimer writes: "An understanding of climate requires an amalgamation of astronomy, solar physics, geology, geochronology, geochemistry, sedimentology, tectonics, palaeontology, palaeoecology, glaciology, climatology, meteorology, oceanography, ecology, archaeology and history."
Good Post, and thanks for the link. It's only what I have been saying all along - watching the global warming people is like watching seven blind men describe an elephant. Each takes a small percentage of the information, and makes a declaration as to its interpretation, without taking into account that there is far more that they don't know than they do know.
Good Post, and thanks for the link. It's only what I have been saying all along - watching the global warming people is like watching seven blind men describe an elephant. Each takes a small percentage of the information, and makes a declaration as to its interpretation, without taking into account that there is far more that they don't know than they do know.
I guess if an Australian columnist reviewing a book by a maverick scientist trying to make a buck is what floats your boat it must have a pretty shallow draft. Unless the reviewer is misquoting him the author pretty much rewrites the conventional wisdom for every branch of science he discusses. He offers no proof for his bashing, just declares the experts wrong. By most measures, that makes it opinion.
I guess if an Australian columnist reviewing a book by a maverick scientist trying to make a buck is what floats your boat it must have a pretty shallow draft. Unless the reviewer is misquoting him the author pretty much rewrites the conventional wisdom for every branch of science he discusses. He offers no proof for his bashing, just declares the experts wrong. By most measures, that makes it opinion.
?????????????
I'm confused - I read the link and don't see how you come to the conclusion that "the author pretty much rewrites the conventional wisdom for every branch of science he discusses. He offers no proof for his bashing, just declares the experts wrong".
Unless one has read the book, how can one come to that conclusion?
The reviewer states:
Quote:
Heaven And Earth is an evidence-based attack on conformity and orthodoxy, including my own, and a reminder to respect informed dissent and beware of ideology subverting evidence. Beware the climate of conformity | smh.com.au
.adSpot-textBox {clear:both;background:#fff;margin:0;padding:0;bor der:none;width:420px;float:right;} .adSpot-textBox h5 {background-color:#ffff;border:1px solid #ffff;color:#A1A1A1;font-size:9px;margin:0;padding:0}
Thanks for the heads up on the book. Looking forward to reading it.
Sounds like one more reason why the Obama admin is anxious to get Cap and Trade quickly pushed through. In addition to raking in all the $$,
the Feds (especially those in office before Obama was President) don't want to look like fools if they do nothing and it is proven that the IPCC report and model were incorrect.
Plus, if they quickly put Cap and Trade in place then they can claim they saved the world. They surely will also claim that all those who did not believe in the man-made GW crisis were wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
