 |
|
|
|
Ian Plimer | |
|
List Price: £25.00
Our Price: £13.50
Author:
Ian Plimer
By Quartet Books
- New
- Mint Condition
- Dispatch same day for order received before 12 noon
- Guaranteed packaging
- No quibbles returns
 Laughing Gas for the Heretics!, 2010-06-11
The thesis of the book is that climate change happens, has always happened and is, almost entirely, natural, even today when we have industries, aeroplanes etc. The author makes out what was, for me, a very convincing case that demolishes the case put forward by the "global warming"/"climate change [via human industry etc]" fanatics.
The author also makes the, for me, equally convincing parallel with both the Middle Ages attempts to stifle free debate in science and (in respect of the response of the "climate change" fanatics)the "Holocaust" industry and its attempts to have imprisoned those who want to find out what exactly happened during the Second World War, regardless of the wishes of a particular special interest group (Jews/Zionists).
The author goes through history to show (in more detail than I already knew) the many warming and cooling trends which have happened even in recorded history. This is not, as in the case of the climate change fanatics, reliant on computer models and speculative mathematics: there is hard historical evidence for many of the warming trends which have occurred and indeed been more beneficial for humanity and the animal and plant kingdoms than the corresponding cooling trends. The last warming trend of importance was the Mediaeval one, which lasted from circa 900 to circa 1350. Before that the Greco-Roman period from a few hundred years BC to about 450 AD. This is historical fact, as are the remains of hundreds of farms which once existed (until some time before 1500) on Greenland. The present warming trend started in about 1850. Since about 2000, we appear to be, again, in a cooling trend, contrary to the predictions of the fanatics of the 1990's. Fact not theory.
The author makes clear decisions where he can. Example: Do human emissions of CO2 create sea level rise. Answer: No. He gives chapter and verse as to why there is actual or apparent sea level rise in parts of the Pacific. He also makes the pertinent point that the basic measurements on which the whole "climate change [by man]" scam is based are often inaccurate. He notes that the IPCC models ignore or mainly ignore the huge importance of cloud cover on temperature. Cloud cover has varied over the centuries.
The whole climate change [via humanity] scam is fatally flawed from the outset BUT the problem is that a lot of scientists, universities and politicians would have to have their ricebowls taken off them were the scam to be exposed. Hence the lies, concealment of data, fraudulent data or use of data etc.
I am not a scientist but the basic theses the professor examines is understandable to any reasonably open-minded resonably-intelligent person. I found only oone ambiguity personallly, which seemed to lump the Roman Republic in with the Roman Empire but of course one did develop directly from the other, in terms of both society and time.
The author cites the Latin saying "ubi dubium ibi libertas" ("where there is doubt, there is liberty"). The climate-change scam has sucked in a host of fanatical "believers" (i.e. those who need to believe in something in a superficially relatively irreligious age). The Guardian columnist George Monbiot is one such (cf. Scared to Death, which exposes some of his other blinkered errors and rants), who wrote in his newspaper in 2006 that "Almost everywhere, climate change denial now looks as stupid and as unacceptable as Holocaust denial." The author of this book writes:
"we are facing the greatest threat in my three score and two years. It is not globall warming. It is the threat from policy responses to perceived global warming and the demonising of dissent. These policies also threaten freedoms and the nature of science and religion. Policy changes have the ability to reduce base energy supplies of electricity that underpin employment and the standard of living." He goes on to add that...
" There are calls for trials and imprisonment of those scientists who, on sciientific evidence, do not agree that human emissions have changed climate. Such scientists are called deniers and are compared to Holocaust deniersw."
For me, there are many parallels between the two "denials". Where there is no doubt (eg, that the sun will rise tomorrow morning) there is no anger, no calls for suppression of "heresy". Where there is a doubt, then people differ and some vested interests embedded in society want to ban "denial" if they cannot laugh down the "heresy".
In the UK, we see that the most fervent "climate change" advocates outside the ranks of often self-interested or narrow scientific interests are politicians. We have "climate change denial is flat earth science" (David Miliband: scientific expertise zero, experience of life virtually zero); we have "climate change denial is crazy" (little Nicky Clegg: scientific expertise zero, experience of life outside freeloading almost zero). Etc.
The hidden aim of the established lobby seems to be to force mainly Europe to reduce its living standards to the level of somewhere like China, to destroy Europe's independence and way of life.
The aim of the fanatics is to impose their own Pol Pot regime over Europe in time. One only has to llook at the hardfaced "Green" M.P. Caroline Lucas and her views of opposing opinions (ban the BNP, ban climate change deniers etc) to see that a ghastly wave of such people has crested in the seedy streets of Brighton.
As for the totally shambolic Copenhagen conference and jamboree, what sticks in the mind (apart from the President of the Maldives, a very very silly little man, clapping over his head and jumping up and down like a demented monkey... keep the European aid funds flowing!...) is the sheer vanity of the major delegates (stand up, Milibands) who seem to have thought that their vote could somehow decide whether or not to limit temperature rise over the next few years to 1, 2 or 4%! They deserve the Order of King Canute!
There are plenty of what Lenin called "useful idiots" around, spouting the carbon-reduction case: see the maiden speech by Nicola Blackwood, Conservative Party MP for Abingdon, which highlighted past river floods in her constituency and which blamed "climate change" for those and future floods (i.e. not private companies building "little boxes made of ticky-tacky" on river flood plains etc...). What else can one expect from a Cameron Cutie bimbo, though?
The real danger to the Earth and its people, animals and plants is not the use of fossil fuels by Europe but the sheer increase in population of non-Europeans, particularly in China and India.
No! We want a decent life and a decent world. "We will not give up that which makes Life worth living!" [Adolf Hitler, Nuremberg 1934]. Europe must start again to take its true place in the world, for its own sake AND that of the wider world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|