IN Your Letters (The Standard, July 21) human-induced climate change deniers again advertised their paranoia, misrepresented science data, made misleading and unsupported statements and basically regurgitated the fluff and nonsense that is the stuff of their discredited beliefs.
David Hounslow lost me when he alluded to conspiracy theories, but the concept that deniers were suffering religious intolerance because climate change is a new world religion struck me as ludicrous.
Ian Plimer’s letter had lots of data and while it had the appearance of respectability it was basically gobbledegook.
Ian Plimer is the deniers’ “scientist” pin-up boy. He is and has been a director and chairman of many mining and mineral companies.
How sad it is that he has tarnished his fairly illustrious career in geology by trying to pretend to be an expert in climate science.
He has no credibility in the field of climate science (his academic training was in mining engineering).
Peer review publication is the hallmark of genuine science-based articles.
Plimer has never had a climate change denial piece published through the peer review process.
His denier opinions published in book form three years ago were thoroughly discredited by real experts in the field.
Some noted his book and his views were pseudoscience designed to misrepresent and misinform.
One expert in the field pointed to numerous errors, non-science and nonsense, and concluded the book should be classified as science fiction.
More than 80 developed and developing countries not only acknowledge the consensus on human-induced global warming but have put in place actions and targets for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
These include Australia, Canada, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Russia and the USA. To even think that some sort of conspiracy of the magnitude that could cause even the most energy-intensive nations to participate in programs to reduce emissions is beyond laughable and beggars belief.
If you have a problem with your brain, would you really take advice from a podiatrist (foot doctor) or would you sensibly, as virtually every one would, seek the professional and scientific expertise of a neurologist (brain doctor)?
Deniers please answer the question truthfully and then ask yourself, why am I listening to a geologist tell me “stories” about our climate?
Craig Homberg, Mannerim Avenue, Warrnambool