FREE HEAVEN AND EARTH: GLOBAL WARMING: THE MISSING SCIENCE PDF

Ian Plimer | 504 pages | 16 Jul 2009 | Taylor Trade Publishing | 9781589794726 | English | Lanham, United States Heaven and Earth : Global Warming, the Missing Science Paperback | eBay

Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Details if other :. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Heaven and Earth by Ian Plimer. Climate, sea level, and ice sheets have always changed, and the changes observed today are less than those of Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science past. Climate changes are cyclical and are driven by the Earth's position in the galaxy, the sun, wobbles in the Earth's orbit, ocean currents, and plate tectonics. In previous times, atmospheric was far higher than at present but did not drive c Climate, sea level, and ice sheets have always changed, and the changes observed today are less than those of the past. In previous times, atmospheric carbon dioxide was far higher than at present but did not drive . No runaway or acid oceans occurred during times of excessively high carbon dioxide. During past glaciations, carbon dioxide was higher than it is today. The non-scientific popular political view is that humans change climate. Do we have reason for concern about possible human-induced climate change? This book's pages and over 2, references to peer-reviewed scientific literature and other authoritative sources engagingly synthesize what we know about the sun, earth, ice, water, and air. Importantly, in a parallel to his book challenging "creation science," Telling Lies for God, Ian Plimer describes Al Gore's book and movie An Inconvenient Truth as long on scientific "misrepresentations. Get A Copy. Hardcoverpages. More Details Original Title. Other Editions 3. Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Heaven and Earthplease sign up. Lists with This Book. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. May 25, Blair rated it did not like it Shelves: science-climate. Ian Plimer is a professor of Geology at the in Australia, specializing in mining geology. This book, his view of the science of climate change, is a difficult read, with a large number of footnotes sometimes taking up half the page. The text often wanders, perhaps to use up some of the references he has accumulated. For readers unfamiliar with climate science, or science in general, this may create an impression of an expert author with a vast array of evidence to back up Ian Plimer is a professor of Geology at the University of Adelaide in Australia, specializing in mining geology. For readers unfamiliar with climate science, or science in general, this may create an impression of an expert author with a vast array of evidence to back up his writing, which is not necessarily the case. The History chapter, the one closest to his actual expertise, is a detailed account of the many changes that have occurred in climate, mainly over the past few thousand years. Unfortunately, that history is not known to nearly the same level of detail in which it is presented. As in any science, there is much debate and uncertainty about the magnitude and timing of these events. Throughout the book Plimer rarely gives any hint to any such uncertainty. According to Plimer's account, every plague Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science collapse of a civilization was directly caused by a climate change event. In reality, there is much debate among historians about the role of climate change, and it is only sometimes considered to be a contributing factor. The extreme climate determinism here is rather curious, given that it is usually those concerned with anthropogenic climate change who invoke images of civilizations collapsing due to climate. The historical events do not always align with the climate changes that supposedly caused them. For example, the decline of the Roman Empire Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science well before the peak of the Roman Warming. Contrary to Plimer, the "Dark Ages" was not a climatic period, or even a "terrible time to be alive. The extreme events he describes appear to Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science a single volcanic eruption with "meteor and comet swarms" no lessnot the general climate of the period. Rather than people starving, agriculture became more productive due to the invention of a superior plow. If Europe was freezing in the dark, why did the center of power migrate northward from Italy to France, then to Germany during this period? A statement such as "by AD the global climate was far warmer than at present" is misleading because only the European climate is known in any detail. A regional climate change often has only a small global Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science. The book used as a reference instead of the version, available for free online could not have had any information on the global climate of the period. But although much of the detail is wrong, the general picture of a variable climate in the past is valid. In particular, warming climates are often not always associated with improved agriculture, while cooling often leads to and stormy weather. An informed and balanced discussion of the relevance of this to a warming climate in the future would be welcome, but it is not to be found here. Instead we get told the false dichotomy that because climate changed naturally in the past, human caused change is not possible in the future. As another example of the quality of the references, on page 59 we are told that during the Roman warming "tropical rains in Africa caused huge flooding of the Nile and many great buildings were inundated. These changes in rainfall, river flow and lake levels were widespread. In general, references tend to be given for minor items, while major and controversial statements get none. The remainder of the book, departing ever further from his expertise, is about promoting all possible causes of climate change except carbon dioxide. Extreme and unsubstantiated statements are common, such as "there is no such thing as the greenhouse effect," or there is no correlation between carbon dioxide levels and global temperature. In fact, there is a good correlation wherever there is reasonably certain data on all but the shortest time scales. So on page 26 we are shown a chart of temperature compared to carbon dioxide levels, and are told "this diagram shows that the hypothesis that human emissions of CO2 create global warming is invalid. Any trend can be generated by cherry picking the right six years, as any practicing geologist should know. Similarly, no mathematically literate scientist could make the extraordinary statement on page that "in Australia, 40 major floods were recorded from to Of these, 24 occurred during the first cycle of a double sunspot cycle and 16 in the second cycle, again Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science the very strong relationship between solar activity and climate. An example of the desperate attempt to find any cause of warming other than carbon dioxide is found on page"as the oceans contain 22 times more heat than the atmosphere, ocean heat contributes greatly to driving climate and the unseen submarine volcanism can have a profound effect on the surface heat of the Earth. As for under-sea volcanoes affecting the climate, the reference he gives is a paper on a single submarine volcanic vent system. The paper only says imagine, actually checking a reference! It is only examining the effect of the heat on local biology, not the global climate. But the ultimate departure from reality is found on page"between andthere have been more than more than 90, measurements of atmospheric CO2 by the Pettenkofer method. These showed peaks in atmospheric CO2 inand In the atmospheric CO2 content ppmv was higher than now. If there was any truth to this, the entire case for global warming would be falsified, and the rest of the book would not be necessary. But almost no scientist, even those most skeptical about global warming, would take this nonsense seriously. My question is, how can a scientist with a good reputation in his own field write a Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science that is so full of Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science and every possible class of logical fallacy? The examples I give are representative of what is found on almost every page, backed by a horde of references that do not actually support his Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science. This is the pseudo-science of a post-modern artist, for whom facts are merely the raw materials to construct a personal fantasy of both what climate science is, and the data that may or may not support it. This book may be of use someone who is looking for examples to make critics of climate change look foolish. Those looking for "ammunition" to support a preconceived view that global warming is a complete fraud may also think this book useful, but consider the consequences of making a "Pettenkofer method" type of statement to an informed audience. Anyone who actually wants to understand more about the global warming controversy is advised to look elsewhere. To be honest, I quit on this book. From what little I actually read at the beginning, I just didn't believe the rest of the book was going Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science be any more accurate than the beginning. By accurate, I mean that the author a geologist and director of several mining companies had made several statements, purportedly according to the mainstream science, which was contrary to what the science actually showed. I only know that because I've taken several college classes on climate change, and was famil To be honest, I quit on this book. I only know that because I've taken several college classes on climate change, and was familiar with the findings of the IPCC and major scientific bodies. So I did a quick google search on the author and the book, and found that most reviews were consistently negative. Those reviews were was enough to convince me to put the book down, and instead look for books written by people who do actual climate science, and without links and conflicts of interest with coal mining operations. They noted that Plimer's denialist book on global warming was published in and sold about 20, copies in Australia and a similar amount in the USA. The book was universally panned by scientists as full of errors and even accused of plagiarism. After the publication of his book met with harsh criticism from The Guardian's George Monbiot, who derided the book, saying that "Since its publication in Australia it has been ridiculed for a hilarious series of schoolboy errors, and its fudging and manipulation of the data". Plimer and Monbiot eventually crossed swords on Broadcasting Corporation program Lateline in December, Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science by Ian Plimer

Try to Download directly 6. Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume. Robyn Williams: Ian Plimer's book Heaven and Earth has been high up in the bestseller list for three or four weeks now. His unswerving dismissal of climate change Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science should come as a surprise to those of us in the general public who expect science to get its facts right, especially in matters which really count, because the stakes couldn't really be higher. So what's going on? How could one of our best-known geologists, together with some of his like-minded colleagues, Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science so much at odds with all the leading journals, the academies and most of the specialists in climate studies? We've already had one review on this week in The Science Show about earth scientist Professor Malcolm Walter, and it can still be heard online. Today, for Ockham's Razorwe have one of Australia's top scientists, whose job is to assess the merits of research across the nation. Kurt Lambeck: I'm an earth scientist whose research is directed at the interactions between the solid earth, the oceans, ice sheets and atmosphere. And this research is directed not merely to interpret the geological record, but to distinguish between cause and effect, and to understand what may happen when natural and anthropogenic forces clash. In recent years my research has been on sea level change from millions of years to recent times. And this has included geological field work in Australia, Europe, Antarctica, Greenland, amongst other areas, and has given me some insight into at least this one aspect of climate change. I believe this allows me to conclude that Heaven and Earth is not a work of science, it is an opinion of an author who happens to be a scientist. There is no dispute that the geological record shows that climate change has occurred throughout the earth's history. The dispute is over whether the modern record can be understood in terms of the natural background processes or whether there is a new human factor that changes the rules about climate change. To address this requires more than geological insight. It requires an understanding of the underlying physical, chemical and biological processes and an ability to model them so as to test alternative hypotheses. To say that geology is the only way to integrate all aspects of the environment is like saying that physicists and chemists should not get involved in biology. How can I take this advice seriously when I see other geologists proclaim with equal conviction, that the record points to imminent planetary doom because of human action? No single discipline is equipped to handle the complex problems of climate change. Probably nowhere is it more important for the disciplines to come together than in understanding how the components of the solid earth, the oceans, atmosphere and ice sheets, feed off each other and interact in their response to internal and external forcing mechanisms. No single institution and certainly no single individual can do this alone. The problem is simply too complex and this is why processes such as the IPCC are important. In seeking consensus, extremes are filtered out. What happens to non-consensus views is that they get tested in the peer- reviewed literature, and if the hypothesis stands up to this probing, it becomes incorporated in subsequent analyses. If it fails to stand up, it will be ignored by the scientific community until new evidence comes to light. Thus an important part of the synthesis process is that it is an iterative one and if one looks at the successive assessments, one can identify shifts and critiques that have led over time, to improvements in the understanding Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science climate change. It is important to recognise that scientists are not consensus animals. We are all driven by our own demons: the satisfaction of being able to understand a particularly complex question, a desire to use science to improve the human condition; a search for recognition and fame and the next Nobel prize or a search for notoriety in the public gallery. Thus the concept that hundreds of researchers are conspiring to defraud the world's policy-makers requires a level of conspiracy theory that not even Dan Brown has reached. Professor Plimer has said that Heaven and Earth is not written for the Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science but for the general public. This is an important objective but it is not an excuse for sloppy science or for the misrepresentation of science. I focus here on the section on sea level, because in his public discussions he has extensively used this to argue that all change is 'natural'. If this had been written by an honours student, I would have failed it with the comment: You have obviously trawled through a lot of material but the critical analysis is missing. Supporting arguments and unsupported arguments in the literature are not distinguished or properly referenced, and you have left the impression that you have not developed an understanding of the processes involved. I would then identify a number of specific issues which, while in isolation could be seen as minor, collectively indicate carelessness at best, and at worst an attempt to undermine the integrity of the science case. Here are just a few examples. There is geological evidence that suggests that the Earth has gone through extreme glacial episodes in the distant past. Plimer states that change from extreme glacial to extreme warm conditions occurred within a few centuries. Whether this is correct or not is a legitimate point of debate. But further on, he states that to raise sea level by 4 to 6 metres from the melting of West Antarctica, in the near future, is Hollywood fantasy. That may well be true. But there Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science no consistency in his argument. If at one time the planet can exit from near-global glaciation conditions in a few hundred years, then why can a comparatively minor adjustment of the West Antarctica ice sheet not occur on the same time scale? Is it a case of seeing only what you want to see? Plimer uses the example of ocean floor doming and sea floor volcanism to illustrate geological processes that have modified sea level. He states that during such events monstrous amounts of heat are released into the oceans and that huge volumes of water are displaced, causing sea level to rise. If I use his example of a km x km plateau raised by 1 kilometre, the volume of displaced water is about one million cubic kilometres, which when distributed over the oceans brings sea level up by about 3 metres. But the formation of these plateaux occur on a time scale of a million years and longer, and the associated rate of change is only of the order say. Likewise, Plimer's monstrous amounts of heat released into Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science oceans do not produce a measurable global signal on the human time scale. Much research has gone into modelling those kinds of earth deformation in order to understand the long-term, sea-level effects, and realistic order of magnitude estimates can be made. While impressive when viewed on the geological time scales, changes of metres over 1 to million years, imply rates of change that are insignificant when compared with the modern record of sea level change. None of this research is referred to. Instead, he states that models for present do not take them into consideration. The peer-reviewed scientific debate is extensive and combative, but there is an accepted conclusion that modern sea level rise, corrected for the geological background signals, can only be explained by a Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science contribution from thermal expansion Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science the oceans and from melting of mountain glaciers, and that both of these changes are consistent with the observed and modelled temperature changes during the past century. Much is made in the book of the difficulty in reaching a reliable assessment of the modern sea-level rise from the instrumental record. From my own work, I agree that the analysis is difficult and not without pitfalls and that in the past different conclusions have been reached because some of these pitfalls were not recognised. But with time these have been addressed, new data has been identified, and analysis methods have improved. To argue therefore that because there are discrepancies with superseded results we cannot believe any of the results is to take a strange view of the process of science. There is in fact a quite remarkable convergence of the interpretation of the observational evidence of what has been happening to sea level in the past or so years. This points to an increase in the globally averaged rates by a factor of about 2, and this is consistent with what is expected from the climate models that include both natural and anthropogenic forcing. None of this is discussed in the book. To give his arguments a semblance of respectability the book is replete with references. But the choice is very selective. Plimer will quote, for example, a paper that appears to support his argument, but then he does not mention that the conclusions therein have been completely refuted in subsequent papers. Elsewhere, he refers to a specific question raised in published work but does not mention that this issue has subsequently been resolved, has been incorporated in subsequent analyses, and is no longer relevant. Or he simply misquotes the work or takes it out of context. An example of this is a reference to my own in the Mediterranean where he gives quite a misleading twist to what we actually concluded. Other examples can be identified in this section, and throughout the book. Together they point to either carelessness, to a lack of understanding of the underlying science, or to an attempt to see the world through tinted spectacles. But why do I really care? There is no doubt that climate change has occurred from the time the planet first acquired its atmosphere. What we also learn from the geological record is that the planet's 'mood' swings are finely balanced: that the shift from one state to another can be sudden on the geological timescales. For the last million years it has swung between major glaciations and the more temperate periods like today within which homo sapiens has Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science its home. Our understanding of these cycles is of a delicate balance between external forcing, in this case solar insolation caused by variations in the geometry of the earth's orbit and its rotation axis, and complex feedback mechanisms involving the oceans, ice sheets and biological and surface processes. The present climate system shows all the hallmarks of an unstable system tenuously held under control by the astronomical forcing and perturbed at intervals by other forcing such as the injection of volcanic dust and gases into the atmosphere. We also have a good understanding of the basic physics and chemistry of the atmosphere and oceans and of the nature of the various feedback mechanisms. What we have learned is that the changes of the past years cannot be quantitatively expressed by natural processes alone. Only the addition of greenhouse gases lead to a satisfactory explanation of what has been observed and all the Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science results are showing that the changes in temperature, in sea level, and in are tracking near the upper levels of the IPCC forecasts. This is Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science matter for concern whose underpinning science needs to be debated. For us, the questions are: can 9-billion people in survive if there is a global disruption of our climate during this century? Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science the costs of such disruption exceed the short-term costs of implementing technologies and practices that lead to a stabilisation of emissions? How can the technologies and changes in lifestyle be implemented without causing their own disruptions? The science community has the responsibility to provide the best evidence to help our policymakers reach conclusions that are founded Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science science, that are based on our best current understanding. This is in the interests of society as a whole, not only of particular interest groups. Spreading confusion through poorly argued science does not help in addressing this question. Audio Player failed to load. Play Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to seek, up and down arrows for volume. Duration: 13min 25sec Broadcast: Sun 7 Junam. Transcript plus minus. Next week, a talk Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science Memes, those genes of the mind, by Don Tinkler from . I'm Robyn Williams. Credits plus minus. Credits Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science Robyn Williams. Producer Brigitte Seega. Sun 18 Oct Sun 11 Oct Sun 4 Oct Sun 27 Sep Heaven and Earth, Global Warming: The Missing Science by Ian Plimer, Paperback | Barnes & Noble®

Heaven and Earth: Global Warming — The Missing Science is a popular science book published in and written by Australian geologistprofessor of mining geology at Adelaide University[1] and mining company director Ian Plimer. It disputes the scientific consensus on climate changeincluding the view that global warming is "very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic man-made greenhouse gas concentrations" [2] and asserts that the debate is being driven by what the author regards as irrational and unscientific elements. The book received what The Age newspaper called "glowing endorsements" from the conservative press. Ideas in it have been described as "so wrong as to be laughable". Heaven and Earth was a bestseller in Australia when published in Mayand is in its seventh printing, according to the publisher. Published inA Short History was based on a decade's worth of radio broadcasts by Plimer aimed mainly at rural Australians. It became a bestseller and won a Eureka Prize in He attributed this to there being "a lot of fear out there. No one wants to go against the popular paradigm. The company has a history of publishing books on "culture, justice and religion", including many books on Christianity and Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science in particular. It has also published fellow Australian climate change skeptic Garth Paltridge 's book, The Climate Caperwhich likewise criticises the climate change consensus and the "politicisation of science". According to Plimer, he wrote Heaven and Earth after being "incensed by increasing public acceptance of the idea that humans have caused global warming" and set out to "knock out every single argument we hear about climate change. Critics have regularly questioned Plimer about his commercial interests in the mining industry, [14] but he defends the independence of his views, saying that these commercial interests do not colour his arguments, which are based on pure science. Critics note that Plimer has opposed a carbon trading scheme in Australia, saying that "it would probably destroy [the mining industry] totally". In the book, Plimer likens the concept of human-induced climate change to and asserts that it is a "fundamentalist religion adopted by urban atheists looking to fill a yawning spiritual gap plaguing the West". Environmental groups are claimed to have filled this gap by having a romantic view of a less developed past. The book is critical of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCCwhich he claims has allowed "little or no geological, archeological or historical input" in its analyses. The book is critical of political efforts to address climate change and argues that extreme environmental changes are inevitable and unavoidable. Money would be better directed to dealing with problems as they occur rather than making expensive and futile attempts to prevent climate change. In the book, Plimer asserts that the current theory of human-induced global warming is not in accord with history, archaeology, geology or astronomy and must be rejected, that promotion of this theory as science is fraudulent, and that the current alarm over climate change is Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science result of bad science. Heaven and Earth received substantial coverage in the Australian and international media. It produced a highly polarised response from reviewers, with members of the conservative press [13] praising the book and many scientists criticising it. A Wall Street Journal columnist called the book "a damning critique" of the theory of man-made global warming, [22] while the Guardian writer and activist George Monbiot listed some of the book's errors with the comment: "Seldom has a book been more cleanly murdered by scientists than Ian Plimer's Heaven and Earthwhich purports to show that manmade climate change is nonsense. Since its publication in Australia it has been ridiculed for Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science hilarious series of schoolboy errors, and its fudging and manipulation of the data. Canadian Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science John Moore said it was "widely criticised by fellow scientists as just another collection of denier hits. Barry Brook of Adelaide University's Research Institute for Climate Change and Sustainability, who is at the same university as Plimer and has debated climate change issues with him, [25] described the book as a case study "in how not to be objective" and accused Plimer of using " selective evidence ". Brook said that Plimer's "stated view of climate science is that a vast number of extremely well respected scientists and a whole range of specialist disciplines have fallen Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science to delusional self-interest and become nothing more than unthinking ideologues. Plausible to conspiracy theorists, perhaps, but hardly a sane world view, and insulting to all those genuinely committed to real science. Many reviewers highlighted factual and sourcing problems in Heaven and Earth. Colin Woodroffea coastal geomorphologist at the University of Wollongongand a lead chapter author for the IPCC AR4wrote that Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science book has many errors and will be "remembered for the confrontation it provokes rather than the science it stimulates. David Karolyan atmospheric dynamicist at Melbourne University and a lead author for the IPCC[30] accused Plimer of misusing data in the book and commented that "it doesn't support the answers with sources. The book can then be placed on the shelves alongside 's State of Fearanother science fiction book about climate change with many footnotes. The only difference is that there are fewer scientific errors in . Ian G. Entinga mathematical physicist at MASCOS, and author of Twisted, The Distorted Mathematics of Greenhouse Denialsimilarly criticised what he described as numerous misrepresentations of the sources cited in the book and charged that Plimer "fails to establish his claim that the human influence on climate can be ignored, relative to natural variation. Michael Ashleyan astronomer at the University of New South Walescriticised the book at length in a review for The Australian in which he characterised the book as "largely a collection of contrarian ideas and conspiracy theories that are rife in the blogosphere. The writing is rambling and repetitive; the arguments flawed and illogical. It is not "merely" atmospheric scientists that would have to be wrong for Plimer to be right. It would Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science a rewriting of biology, geology, physics, oceanography, astronomy and statistics. Malcolm Walter, the Director of the Australian Centre for AstrobiologyUniversity of New South Walescommented on Plimer's "fallacious reasoning," noting the "blatant and fundamental contradictions" and inconsistencies in the book. Walter told ABC Radio National that Plimer's interpretation of the literature is confused and that Plimer "bit off more than he can chew. I have been a friendly colleague of Plimer's for 25 years or more. Chris Turneya researcher of prehistoric climate changes, of the University of Exeter 's Department of Geography, stated the book was "a cacophony of climate skeptic arguments that have been discredited by decades of research. Writing in Earth magazine, emeritus USGS geologist Terry Gerlach commented that the book "illustrates one of the pathways by which myths, misrepresentations and spurious information get injected into the climate change debate. In Gerlach's view, this was ironic considering that the book professes to provide the "missing science" on climate change. Retired meteorologist William Kininmontha long-standing critic of climate change theory, [38] supported the book in a commentary published in The Australian in which he wrote that "Plimer's authoritative book provides the excuse and impetus to re-examine the scientific fundamentals [of climate change]. The scientists' criticisms were rejected by Plimer, who embarked on a Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science tour following the book's publication in a bid to lobby the Australian government to change its policies on climate change to reflect what he called "valid science". Plimer's book has received "glowing endorsements in the conservative press" according to Adam Morton of The Age. He is a prize-winning scientist and professor. The Spectatora conservative British magazine, [44] made the book the cover Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science of its 11 July issue. Leigh Dayton, science writer for The Australianexpressed dismay at Plimer for having "boarded the denialist ark" and described his arguments, such as his claims that scientists had been playing along with the view of human-induced climate change "in order to keep the research dollars flowing", as "a load of old codswallop ". Dayton criticised Plimer's "shaky assumptions" and "misinformation", describing his assertion that the IPCC 's scientists "whip up scary agenda-driven scenarios" as "fanciful". In The TimesBob Ward called the book an angry, bitter and error-strewn polemic. The Australian's coverage of Heaven and Earth attracted criticism from Robert Mannea lecturer on politics at in Melbournewho criticised the "gushing praise" given the book. Manne deplored the willingness of The Australian to "give books such as [Plimer's] the kind of enthusiastic welcome hundreds of others published in this country every year cannot dream of receiving", calling this "a grave intellectual, political and moral mistake". George Pellthe Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, wrote in The Sunday Telegraph newspaper that Heaven and Earth was "likely to make a huge difference to public opinion" and defended Plimer from charges of being a climate change "denier" because "history shows the planet is dynamic and the climate is always changing. Former Australian Federal Representative and pro-mining [55] maverick Graeme Campbell has sought to use the book to get "the other side of the debate" on climate change into schools. Lyn Allisonleader of the Australian Democrats from tocalled Plimer the "pet denialist " of 's newspapers, and accused Plimer of "happily cashing in on his speaking tours and his book". From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Global warming portal. University of Adelaide. Retrieved 31 March Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Age. Retrieved 30 March Retrieved 28 March The Australian. Retrieved 11 July Archived from the original on 10 October Retrieved 4 September Kalgoorlie Miner. Archived from the original on 16 October Retrieved 20 July The Times. The Courier. Retrieved 9 August The Advertiser. Retrieved 22 May Why I'd put global warming on ice". Retrieved 30 Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science Retrieved 14 April Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 24 July . The Guardian. National Post. Archived from the original on 21 July Retrieved 17 August Retrieved 5 July Australian Science Media Centre. Archived from the original on 29 August Australian Broadcasting Corporation. University of Melbourne. Retrieved 6 Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: The Missing Science Retrieved 21 July Retrieved 28 August Retrieved 29 August Archived from the original on 12 September Retrieved 10 August