I firmly believe everyone has a right to defend their views, so rather than simply state Professor Plimer is mistaken, I emailed him this morning to query his statements;
Dear Professor Plimer,
I understand the debate on climate change is a “heated one”, and that you have taken a very public position on the issue.
I agree with sentiments expressed that there should be a robust debate on the issue, and that there is room for dissent in science.
I’d also note that when your book “Telling lies for God” was first published I read and enjoyed it very much. Indeed, it helped me confirm my world view as “sceptical” and alerted me to the dangers of those who would misrepresent science.
I hope you don’t mind me contacting you on above issue, but recently I heard (and read) several public statements made by you comparing the percentage of CO2 emissions of volcanic activity vis-vis human exhalations.
I note the following statements made by you:
An article titled “Climate changing: how global warming lost its science and support”. [IPA Review, Vol62/1 pg 30-31]:
“Humans only contribute to three per cent of the annual exhalation of carbon dioxide (CO2) and it has been shown that this small human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere drives climate change…”
In an interview on Bega 2550 it was reported:
“Professor Plimer says volcanoes emit far more carbon gas into the earth’s atmosphere than human’s 3 per cent annual carbon release….”
I query this, because your statements seem to be at odds with the scientific literature that I have read.
As a consequence, I would politely and humbly ask that you clarify your position on this and cite the appropriate references. As a member of the general public I have an interest in the debate. Though I am not a scientist I firmly believe in the value of good research, as I am sure you do.
I will also note that I maintain a blog that takes a critical view of some of the claims of climate change sceptics. However, I do not wish to simply throw accusations at people or organisations, and that everyone has the right of reply.
The site in question is https://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/
It is my usual practice to publish exchanges, as both sides on the debate have called for honesty and transparency.
If I made any claims which are not factual, I am happy to retract them. However, on the above issue I am concerned that the scientific literature does not support the figure of “only three percent” of C02 emissions
I’m not sure Plimer will reply, but if he does I’ll be curious.