I just listened to the debate on the Pat Kenny show on Wednesday between Australian mining magnate and climate change denier Ian Pilmer and Irish Times journalist Pat Kenny. It is really hard to know whether Kenny is as ignorant on the subject of climate change as he makes out or whether he to is directly or indirectly in the pay of Big Oil/Gas/Coal etc..
He claimed the next day that only one comment was received by the show in support of John- is that in any way credible?! I couldnt listen on the day but heard the archived version of the show today and sent in my response to the pat Kenny show:
Dear Pat I just listened to the “debate” between Ian Pilmer and John Gibbons which was broadcast on your show on Wednesday December 2nd. At this stage in the game, with the evidence for anthropogenic climate change so clear and the predictions form the climate models that Pilmer dismisses coming in right on time- viz the recent flooding due to increased sea surface temperature in the this country- it is truly shocking to have the national broadcaster be involved with such a misrepresentation of the science. The climate is changing right under our very noses, destroying lives and livelihoods not just for the poor in far away places but our very own friends and neighbors here at home. Pilmer is indeed a charlatan and John was very brave to call him that on air; he has already been completely discredited by George Monbiot whose criticisms of his book have not been in any way addressed by Pilmer; you are surely aware of this. While it is completely obvious that many in the mining industry have clear vested interests, and the evidence for an orchestrated climate denial industry has been clear since before Kyoto, the suggestion that Gibbons and other journalists have a vested interest in fear-mongering is outrageous and absurd. Your stance of “showing both sides of the argument” is completely corrupt ; you may as well ask respectable scientists and journalists to debate the flat earth society for “balance”. The damage you are doing as a climate change denier to the public understanding of the most important scientific issue of our time is severe; in my opinion you have forfeited your right to play the role you have and wiled the influence you you. You should resign from your position on RTE and retire to your home where you at least will be presumably sufficiently well healed to survive the coming catastrophe.
Sincerely Graham Strouts
The charge of a religious faith-based approach on the side of the established science is one we are familiar with whenever debating quackery or pseudo-science; an excellent overview of how science actually works is found here on RealClimate.
Good on you, Graham. Just been watching fantastic refuting of those emails on youtube. Youve probably seen it already but if you havent, hes called potholer54 and all his videos are damn fine. Spent three hours pouring over them last night. Andy
Yes! Potholer- whoever he is!? is brilliant. I was planning to put up a few other links on the issue shortly. Cheers Andy.
Regarding Ian Plimer, who also spoke in a UCC debate - Climate Change: Global Warming – Fact or Fiction on Dec.3, his opponent at this debate environmental scientist Declan Waugh, has outlined a fairly comprehensive list of inaccuracies and flaws in Plimers book here: http://westcorkgreens.blogspot.com/2009/12/debate-with-professor-plimer-on-his.html My point is that UCC should not be even proposing Climate Change – Fact or Fiction is a suitable topic for debate in a time when 90%+ scientists agree that climate change is a reality.
Thanks for that Edel, I absolutely agree, nor should Kenny entertain such a charlatan. It is amazing that Pilmer can get a platform to claim “the earth has been cooling the last 10 years” when it was the hottest decade ever recorded- just basic stuff anyone can understand. For the record, human spam-bots who write to me to say that Kenny is just “showing both sides of the debate” will be deleted here. There is no debate over the science- the world is warming and we are to blame.
Graham
Appreciate your taking on PK. At least 10 people contacted me directly who either emailed or texted his show, not a single one of their comments were read out, guess he was too busy to notice these? At times, I’m truly embarrassed at what passes for journalism in Ireland.
Pat was a thundering disgrace on that show – I thought I’d slid into a parallel universe. I can’t listen to him in the same way any more – once the scales fall off your eyes, there’s no putting them back.
OK, the IT guy came across very badly – but that was no excuse for Pat’s behaviour. What bothered me was:
There’s a saying: “You can’t make a man understand something if his livelihood depends on him NOT understanding it. Certainly true of Pilmer, and obviously true of a great number of the general public, who seem to be incapable of imagining any effect on the environment by themselves or their lifestyles. Happy motoring to the bitter end…
The skeptic said that the climate would change, regardless of what we do. Therefore, his model cannot be falsified – as any change we see will be due to “natural” forces. A hypothesis that cannot be tested isn’t science, Pat. What exactly did they teach you when you were a chemical engineer?
The “debate” was nothing more than a string of two way ad hominems. Pat should have closed both down, and forced them to stick to the damned data. The fact that people emailed the show congratulating RTE on the “debate” shows that most people wouldn’t be able to distinguish a real debate from an American wrestling match. They should have their right to vote revoked.
If Pat wanted to host a real debate, then why didn’t he ask on a climate scientist to debate a scientist, instead of a journalist?
If it’s true, as has been stated here, that people emailed in support of the IT journalist, and that PK claimed that there was only one email of support, then Pat is either a liar or a charlatan.
*
Strange to say, but only in the last few days have I noticed the incredible pro-FF bias of RTE – their coverage and commentary really is a disgrace to the taxpayers. Particularly awful are Mary Wilson on “Drivetime” and Rachel English…they amount to little more than government BAU cheerleaders.
So very, very glad that I don’t pay a license fee… (a benefit of being an ex-pat).