Climate change denier Ian Plimer in the news again

YouTube GWPF video snapshot

Former mining geologist Ian Plimer (left) is nothing if not persistent. 

North Coast Voices has been noting his biased, inaccurate & frequently irrational opinions since December 2008.


This was the fall-out from one of his articles published nine months ago.

The Guardian, 24 July 2020:

An op-ed by Prof Ian Plimer in the Australian, which was condemned as blatantly false by climate scientists, has been found to have breached standards by the Australian Press Council. In November, his column titled “Let’s not pollute minds with carbon fears” argued that there “are no carbon emissions. If there were, we could not see because most carbon is black. Such terms are deliberately misleading, as are many claims.”

The article also referred to the “fraudulent changing of past weather records” and “unsubstantiated claims polar ice is melting”, as well as “the ignoring of data that shows Pacific islands and the Maldives are growing rather than being inundated”.

Despite a chorus of criticism at the time, the former editor John Lehmann defended Plimer’s article, saying “his voice is one of many which are important in the mix”.

In a lengthy adjudication the Oz was forced to publish on page two on Friday, the press council said the article contained inaccurate and misleading material in its claims that the Bureau of Meteorology had fraudulently changed weather records and that Plimer’s claims that there was no evidence polar ice was melting were misleading.

The newspaper breached two of the general principles of reporting: ensuring factual material is accurate (principle 1) and ensuring facts are presented with reasonable fairness and balance and opinion is based on fact (principle 3).

The council found that while it would have preferred Plimer’s links to the mining industry were disclosed in the column, the Australian did not breach guidelines in not disclosing because Plimer’s “past or present directorships of mining companies and advocacy in the debate around climate change were so well known” that it was not required.

Plimer is a professor of geology and well-known climate change denier who has served as a director of a number of mining firms, including Gina Rinehart’s Roy Hill Holdings and Queensland Coal Investments.

In reviewing the article last November, University of New South Wales professor Katrin Meissner wrote: “This article is an impressive collation of the well known, scientifically wrong, and overused denier arguments. It is ideologically motivated and, frankly, utter nonsense.”….

Very predictably News Corp rolled out a climate change denier to help buttress the Morrison Government's stubborn contrarian stance

Here is mining company director/shareholder and sometimes owner, as well as consultant to industry, Ian Plimer, joining in the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison-Murdoch Coalition's ongoing attempt to deny anthropomorphic global warming and climate change.

In the opening paragraphs of the article Plimer exceeds his previous infantile opposition to the science of climate change. 

The Australian, 22 November 2019, p.12:

Talk of an emergency is ignorant, populist scaremongering

As soon as the words carbon footprint, emissions, pollution, and decarbonisation, climate emergency, extreme weather, unprecedented and extinction are used, I know I am being conned by ignorant activ­ists, populist scaremonger­ing, vote-chasing politicians and rent seekers.

Pollution by plastics, sulphur and nitrogen gases, particulates and chemicals occurs in developing countries. That’s real pollution. The major pollution in advanced economies is the polluting of minds about the role of carbon dioxide. There are no carbon emissions. If there were, we could not see because most carbon is black. Such terms are deliberately misleading, as are many claims...... [my yellow highlighting]

As most high school students would be able to tell Mr. Plimer - not that he needs telling as he was university educated and his purpose here is to obfuscate not inform - "Carbon" is shorthand for "Carbon Dioxide Equivalent" or CO2-e. 

These terms covers what are known as "Greenhouse Gases" such as water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, some artificial chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons and hydrocarbons.

Again, a high school student would be aware that black carbon is a dangerous air polluting element - mainly produced by the incomplete combustion of oil or coal and the burning of wood. It also contributes to global warming.

However, the reason black carbon has not turned the sky into permanent darkness that Plimer suggests as an outcome is that it has not yet reached saturation levels in the atmosphere.

Though black carbon can lead to very low visibility for prolonged periods as the bushfire smoke over Sydney and rural/regional Australia this month demonstrated and, open-cut coal mining on a weekly basis and city traffic periodically demonstrate throughout the year.

Bushfire smoke over Sydney NSW, 21 November 2019
2GB Image

Bushfire smoke in Clarence Valley NSW, 22 November 2019
NSWRFS Image

Air pollution over coal mine, Hunter Valley NSW, circa 2019
The Singleton Argus Image

Smog in Melbourne Vic, 28 June 2018
ABC News Image

Mr. Plimer makes a fool of himself in his attempt to fool others - when the evidence of black carbon pollution is both before our eyes and in the air quality readings that state governments collect. [See NSW EPA website]

Former Australian PM John Howard speaks up in support of current PM Scott Morrison

Former Australian prime minister John Winston Howard began 2020 by praising the current prime minister and closet climate change denier, Scott Morrison.

Apparently Howard has long shared Morrison's denialist world view. Do readers remember this?

ABC News, 13 December 2011:

Former prime minister John Howard has lent his support to a book aimed at school children which argues the theory of human-induced global warming is a scam. 

Last night, the former prime minister launched the publication, the latest from controversial geologist Professor Ian Plimer. 

The book, called How to Get Expelled From School, rejects the predominant scientific opinion on climate change. The book is billed as "an anti-global warmist manual for the younger reader". 

Professor Plimer launched the book, a follow up to his book Heaven and Earth, at the Sydney Mining Club. 

The new work includes 101 questions which it says students can use to challenge their teachers on climate science. 

Professor Plimer says worried parents prompted him to write the book. 

"After Heaven and Earth came out I had many parents write to me and say, 'Look, what do we do, our kids are being fed activism. 

I want my children to have the basics of scientists, I don't want to be fed activism'," he said. Mr Howard helped launch the book and last night said the "progressive left" had a "grip on the commanding heights of education instruction in this country"....

ROFL comments made by Oz public figures

Some weeks it seems that the meeja is littered with comments made by Australian public figures which are inane, hypocritical, absurd or offensive (sometimes all at the same time). So out there that you have to laugh when they catch your eye. Here's just a few.......

Liberal Party Senator Corey Bernardi; "For Australia's sake, we need to ban the burqa...In my mind, the burqa has no place in Australian society. I would go as far as to say it is un-Australian." May 6th 2010

Andrew Forrest, mining magnate; "...the Federal Government has misled Australians with its so called tax on miners' super profits when it's in fact a nationalisation of 40 per cent of the mining industry." May 6 2010

Australian Leader of the Coalition Opposition Tony Abbott; "OK, so the climate has changed over the eons and we know from history, at the time of Julius Caesar and Jesus of Nazareth the climate was considerably warmer than it is now," May 8th 2010

Professor Ian Plimer; "....carbon dioxide is plant food. The more we get in the atmosphere the better it is for agriculture and the better it is for forests growing. I think it's wonderful." May 3rd 2010

David Oldfield , One Nation co-founder and radio jock; "....complained that electric fences surrounding the Christmas Island detention centre were not active and called on the Coalition to immediately switch them on if elected. "We don't want them to get out ... and if they do try it, they will be fried," May 7th 2010

Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce; "Death duties and land taxes are both recommended by Henry as needing investigation, so don't be surprised if Kevin Rudd starts taking the opportunity to use them to prop up his Government," May 6th 2010

Andrew Bolt, right-wing journalist: "What did the Prime Minister know and when did he know it?" May 8th 2010

Senator Eric Abetz, new Senate Liberal leader: "I have very large shoes to fill,...The opposition will continue to ensure that all legislation is appropriately scrutinised and considered. As before, all issues will be treated on a case-by-case basis with one simple test: is it in Australia's best interests?" May 4 2010

Catherine Deveny, sacked Age journalist & comedian: They have lined their pockets with gold through my bravery and off-colour remarks." May 6th 2010

A personal and poltically incorrect list of the leading Aussie idiots and semi-idiots of 2008

For their active support of climate change denialism in the face of evidence that anthromorphic global warming is occurring:

• Dr John Nicol
• David Archibald
• Professor Bob Carter
• Professor Lance Endersbee
• Dr David Evans
• Viv Forbes
• William Kininmonth
• John McLean
• Professor Cliff Ollier
• Professor Ian Plimer
• Dr Walter Starck
• Dr Tom Quirk
• Tim Blair
• Andrew Bolt
• Jennifer Marohasy

Prime examples of their work are highlighted at the denialist website Australian Climate Science Coalition and at Tim Lambert's Deltoid.

For their sheer political ineptitude in Federal Opposition:

• Malcolm Turnbull
• Brendan Nelson
• Julie Bishop
• Warren Truss
• Tony Abbott
• Joe Hockey
• Wilson Tuckey
• Alby Shultz

Just read Hansard or search Open Australia for the many examples of why these nongs are ensuring their parties are still so far behind in opinion polls.
My personal favourites were the collective dummy spit after losing government which saw the Coalition Opposition force both the Speaker and Acting-Speaker to suspend the House of Reps and the Tuckey-Shultz boycott of the historic Apology to the Stolen Generation.

Sheer political ineptitude as an individual state MP:

• Steve Cansdell (Nationals MP for Clarence) - constantly bleating to the media but never actually getting anything done in Macquarie Street.

Sheer political ineptitude as an individual federal MP:

• Luke Hartsuyker (Nationals MP for Cowper) - the best instances of his performance can be found here and here.

The most disgraceful state government since the Bjelke-Petersen government:

• The Labor Iemma & Rees governments in New South Wales - enough said!

The most disappointing Rudd Government ministers:

• Kevin Rudd - failing to actually create policy which will keep his election promises on water security, climate change etc.,
• Peter Garrett - failing to protect the environment across Australia when large commercial interests are involved and abandoning the whales in Antarctica
• Stephen Conroy - for being his politically dishonest and prissy self
• Jenny Macklin - ensuring the former Howard Government's racist policy towards indigenous remote communities continues
• Julia Gillard - failing to eradicate some of the most contentious elements of the former Howard Government's WorkChoices legislation

The silliest political/lobby group:

• The Young Liberals - trying to recreate McCarthyism in 2008. A free belly laugh at their expense can be found here.

Most inane blog:

• Australian Women Online - just read that blog's opinion on Internet filtering and debate here and here.

Most opinionated private citizen:

• Gerry Harvey - a very wealthy business man who obviously declared himself an expert on both 'no-hoper' welfare recipients, Centrelink payments and charitable donations.

It must be true - it's on the Internet! according to one NSW climate change contrarian

One example of climate change contrarianism found in a Sydney Morning Herald report on 6 March 2012 where the financial trigger is more than obvious:

But a property developer, Jeff McCloy, said he was contemplating leading a class action suit against the council, which he said was ''falling for this unjustified, worldwide idiocy about sea level rises''.

Mr. McCloy recently arranged for climate change sceptics Ian Plimer, Bob Carter and David Archibald to address residents and councillors,…..

Mr. McCloy is seeking to gain approval for a subdivision of 24 homes that is likely to be affected by the Lake Macquarie planning guidelines…..

He said he had studied sea level rise on the internet and concluded it was rising at only a very slow rate, and that rate had slowed in the past decade, so any planning restrictions were unjustified.

As the Lake Macquarie mayor has observed; "Jeff is unashamedly a climate change sceptic and he won't be swayed, but he expects other people will be swayed by him" .

He is also Chairman of the McCloy Group which says of itself that it is a Hunter-based property group with a diversified portfolio of commercial and residential assets. Our portfolio currently holds more than 21,000 m2 of commercial office space in the heart of Newcastle’s CBD, attracting long-term, quality tenants, including Telstra, The Wests Group and Wesfarmers’ subsidiary, Blackwoods. The McCloy Group is staging construction of over 1,600 council-approved residential lots geographically spread in the Hunter. And we have almost 2,000 lots in the pipeline.

That he is seeking to publicly pressure Lake Macquarie Council and the NSW O’Farrell Government at this time probably has some relationship with the fact that Lake Macquarie Council has recently reviewed its  Draft Lake Macquarie Waterway Flood Study (2012) and Draft Lake Macquarie Waterway Flood Risk Management Study and Plan (2012) to include the effects of predicted sea level rises to the year 2100.

During this review climate change contrarians and local residents received a fair hearing in the community consultation phase (more than 90% of workshop participants were residents who own foreshore properties that are vulnerable to flooding and sea level rise) and it appears no additional properties were identified as affected by flood or sea level rise.

So it would appear that Mr. McCloy already knew his own residential property was in an ‘at risk’ area and his present concerns are purely commercial in nature.

Sadly the McCloy Group stance is typical of developers operating along the NSW coast.

A few words on climate change from those hearings on the hill

The Senate Select Committee on Climate Change hearings in April-May 2009 threw up these lines in the battle between believers and sceptics, in a brief sampling of the transcripts published so far:

Senator BOSWELL—Has that sea level started to rise? Is there a rise in sea level?
Dr Raupach—Yes, it is starting to rise. It is going up at over three millimetres per year at the moment. The point is that these areas have economic implications. I am also not an economist but I cannot imagine that any of those three or other climate change impacts that we are talking about would be free of economic implications. It is not the economy versus the climate.

Prof. Steffen—If you want to know what is happening to the climate system, do not look at the atmosphere, look at the ocean. You will really see what is happening there. There is no cooling since 1998 in the ocean. In fact recent corrected measurements done by John Church and colleagues show that the ocean has warmed 50 per cent more than we had thought, once we got our sensors improved and their interpretation. The ocean records are absolutely clear. The earth's climate system is warming. It continues to warm. There has been no cooling trends over the past 10 years.

Senator CAMERON—The Science of Climate Change from the CSIRO—

Prof. Franks—I notice it is a very thin document.

Senator CAMERON—What will this appearance do for your careers?

Prof. Carter—A very important point of your question is that the same week that those 2,000 people, not 2,000 scientist, were meeting in Copenhagen, 700 people, mostly scientists, were meeting at another climate conference in New York that came to diametrically the opposite conclusion to the Copenhagen conference.

Prof. Karoly—My guess is that you will not get very much of a range of perspectives, but you may. First of all, Bob Carter and Stewart Franks are in fact in a minority of both scientist and climate scientists in Australia. In fact, neither of them is a climate scientist who publishes actively in the climate science literature.

Senator BOSWELL—That is not what they said. They said they did publish.

Prof. Karoly—Not in climate science literature. They publish in small journals.

CHAIR—Senator Cameron?

Senator CAMERON—Witnesses, professors!

CHAIR—Do not be overwhelmed, Senator Cameron. We are all senators.

Senator CAMERON—I am nearly professored-out today, I must say.

Prof. Karoly—If Professor Plimer is correct he will win the Nobel Prize for proving that climate change is not happening due to increasing greenhouse gases. I think the chances of that are much lower than the chances of anyone else on this panel winning the Nobel Prize.

Senator BOSWELL—Have you read the Australian today?

Dr Simshauser—Sorry, Senator, I have not.

Senator CAMERON—Is that the Australian you are reading, is it?

Senator BOSWELL—Yes.

Senator CAMERON—Oh, no.

Senator BOSWELL—That is the paper that actually got you elected, so I would not complain too much!

Senator IAN MACDONALD—Good call, Bozzie!

Senator BOSWELL—I do not know whether we achieve a great deal when one group of scientists puts the boot into another group of scientists. I do not know who is right and I do not know who is wrong and I do not believe we will ever find out. What I do understand—

Prof. Steffen—The point about science is that it is not just one group of scientists putting the boot into another group of scientists. Science is not like politics or religion. It is not what you believe and you debate that; it is an observation and evidence-based activity in which we constantly challenging each other. Members of the panel challenge each other.

CHAIR—Thank you very much, gentlemen. Whoever wants to respond to this can do so.

There was a fairly significant article in the Australian last week talking about ice in the Antarctic.

Senator IAN MACDONALD—As there was again this morning.

CHAIR—You might be able to enlighten us about that.

Dr Allison—My specialty is in ice. I have been working in glaciology for about 40 years, in both ice sheets and sea ice. I am not sure how familiar the panel is with ice in Antarctica, but a lot of misinterpretations get into the press about what is going on and why it is going on. I have a cartoon here, which I might try to talk to. I have a few copies that I will hand out. A lot of the reports that you see in the press confuse ice on the land, ice that originates from snowfall—what we call 'meteoric ice'—which is in ice sheets, glaciers and ice shelves, with what is called sea ice, which forms largely by direct freezing of the ocean in the polar regions. I have not seen the Australian, but there has been a recent report on an increase in the extent of Antarctic sea ice. I will put that aside for a moment.

Dr Allison—In my opinion, the newspaper article that you are talking about was selective. It concentrated on a rise in ice in East Antarctica. There is a very much greater loss of ice from West Antarctica. There is clear evidence now that overall the Antarctic ice sheet is losing ice at a rate of somewhere between 0.2 and 0.3 millimetres of sea level per year. The East Antarctic is very close to imbalance. There may be a slight increase, but it is more than offset by the loss of ice from West Antarctica by discharge and from the Antarctic Peninsula.

Mr Gunn—I think there is absolutely no doubt that the scientific consensus is that this is a global problem that needs to be fixed up globally. I do think it is inappropriate, sitting in a public servant's chair, to comment more broadly on policy within Australia, but—
Senator CASH—That is why I asked that political issues be put aside.
Mr Gunn—It is a very simple question. This is a global problem and needs to be addressed globally.