Thanks Anne for the notes on the speaker
IAN PLIMER :
"if green activism achieves its aims, the Third World will remain in poverty. Western countries will become impoverished and even more reliant on China which uses climate change as a weapon against the West. " (Introduction to "Green Murder")
"Australia's net contribution to global atmospheric carbon dioxide is negative. We are already Net Zero" ( The Spectator Australia, Australia is already Net Zero, page 2)
" Net Zero has nothing to the environment and climate change and is all about power and the transfer of hard earned wealth" ( The Spectator Australia, Australia is already Net Zero, page 3)
Our planet is dynamic. We, as humans, cannot influence a major planetary process. Continents can drift or pull apart, and leak out gasses, which go into the atmosphere. Cycles of climate occur every 400 million years. It is a fact that after warming, we see an increase in carbon dioxide. We are currently in an ice age. Glaciation began 20,000 years ago. Warmer times on the Earth have already finished. Furthermore, every 43,000 years, the Earth's axis shifts. It is a general truth that solar cycles heat the Earth.
During question time, Ian responded to a query about carbon dioxide and its relationship with climate by arguing that no-one has shown this connection.
In fact, carbon dioxide only increases after warming of the Earth. It is dangerously low, with insufficient levels in the atmosphere, to sustain the greening of the planet. To prove that we are heading in the wrong direction , Ian argued that "Humans have no effect on the way the climate changes, in terms of the planet as a whole"
The process of consensus inevitably leads to the lack of thrashing out a policy. Predictions made about the state of the environment never happen, and not one of the predictions has proved to be correct. This leads to two possibilities :- firstly, that population is being controlled and secondly, that the population is kept scared. Another point which Ian raised on at least two occasions, during his presentation , was the correlation between belief and religion and the total lack of deference for politics and politicians. Above all, understanding history and historical periods of time is essential to deal with the patterns of climate. As he said, " Narrative is not acceptable because we do not teach history". His observations were repeated throughout the presentation, that global warming is a religion in the Western World and the view that politicians are followers and not leaders. When you argue that 97% of scientists all agree about climate change, then you have become a poltician.
Finally, Rob Simpson raised a very good point. None of us are trained scientists. Where do we obtain our views about climate change, if not from the media? Ian gave the response : that we should not believe, but rather that we should apply common sense and ask " Who is pushing the line?"