Basic flaws in climate gospel
letter published in The Australian Financial Review, 16 June 2009
[Square bracketted words deleted by Ed]
In reviewing geologist Ian Plimer’s book (June 13-14), Mark Lawson rightly concludes it “adds up to a powerful argument against any policy that tries to curtail emissions (of CO2) until we know more about the problem.” His conclusion is certainly more balanced than other commentary in the AFR attacking Senator Steve Fielding for seeking an independent inquiry into the supposed scientific consensus favouring curtailment.
It is puzzling that a responsible newspaper [such as Review] does not examine in detail the view promulgated by Climate Change Minister Minister Penny Wong (and others) that such a scientific consensus exists when it is clear that there are many scientific experts (and others) like Plimer who have revealed fundamental flaws in the gospel according to the consensus mythologists.
One illustration alone of the absence of substance in the Minister’s view can easily be detailed. The history of temperature changes shows that in three periods, covering 117 of the last 158 years, temperatures fell or did not increase. It must be obvious, therefore, that no confidence can be placed in a claim that temperatures will increase as CO2 emissions do but which history shows didn't work for well over half the time of the supposedly critical period proving the thesis.
Indeed a rising proportion of the population is sceptical of the thesis, as shown by the record sales of 26,000 of Plimer's book. Such sales almost certainly outnumber any sales of publications arguing for curtailment.
An independent inquiry as suggested by Fielding would also reveal the long history of similar claimed climatic change/environmental threats by scientists that have turned out to be totally false.
Des Moore
Director Institute for Private Enterprise,
South Yarra Vic