Joanne Nova wants this man to teach your children.
That’s should make any parent uncomfortable since not only are there dozens of errors in the “science” he writes, he also shows a clear lack of integrity and honesty.
Books, unlike peer-reviewed science, can contain ANYTHING the author would like to write, regardless of whether it contains any truth or not. This was made abundantly clear when Ian Plimer’s Heaven and Earth was analysed. The problem it seems is that Ian Plimer is not a climate scientist, and has never published any paper on climate science; hence he makes many mistakes.
All scientific theories are built using evidence. The more evidence gathered supporting a particular theory, the stronger that theory becomes. Should there be evidence that goes against a theory, that theory becomes weaker. If there is evidence to prove a theory wrong, it becomes invalid and replaced by newer theories. That’s how science works. This process has brought us about the understanding of all facets of science.
The theory behind Anthropogenic Global Warming is based on physics, and there is mounting evidence that shows the planet is warming because of our greenhouse gas emissions. Plimer on the other hand presents fragmented arguments that instead of building an understanding of climate science, sadly is full of contradictions (Nova style).
As exposed on national television by George Monbiot, Ian Plimer writes in his book …
satellites and radiosondes show that there is no global warming
… and gave reference to a paper by Charles F Keller. The paper actually says …
The big news [is] the collapse of the climate critics’ last real bastion, namely that satellites and radiosondes show no significant warming in the past quarter century. Figuratively speaking, this was the centre pole that held up the critics’ entire ‘tent’. … But now both satellite and in-situ radiosonde observations have been shown to corroborate both the surface observations of warming and the model predictions.
Plimer quotes the science and by removal of the words at the start of the sentence, gets the meaning completely backwards.
We all make mistakes, but it’s how you handle those errors that really defines the character of a person. When interviewed on TV, and presented with the errors in his book, rather than acknowledge the mistakes, Ian Plimer’s would repeatedly ignore the question and instead would try to divert the topic.
Plimer is not the sort of character I want presenting “the honest truth” to our children.