Comments on: Plimer wants to talk science? OK, here goes… http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/05/plimer-wants-to-talk-science-ok-here-goes/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:48:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Jonathan Edwards http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/05/plimer-wants-to-talk-science-ok-here-goes/#comment-26082 Jonathan Edwards Wed, 06 May 2009 23:34:33 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=55512#comment-26082 Here is another damming review of Plimer's book by Profesor Barry Brook, Director, Research Institute for Climate Change and Sustainability, Uni of Adelaide. (Both Plimer and Brook are from Uni. Adelaid) http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/ I really want to read the book but might wait till I can buy a cheap second hand copy, which hopefully will not be that long away!! Here is another damming review of Plimer’s book by Profesor Barry Brook, Director, Research Institute for Climate Change and Sustainability, Uni of Adelaide. (Both Plimer and Brook are from Uni. Adelaid)

http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/

I really want to read the book but might wait till I can buy a cheap second hand copy, which hopefully will not be that long away!!

]]> By: Bruce Hogben http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/05/plimer-wants-to-talk-science-ok-here-goes/#comment-26001 Bruce Hogben Tue, 05 May 2009 11:12:22 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=55512#comment-26001 Like you, David Coady, I could find no fault with the article but for a simple literal. Like you, David Coady, I could find no fault with the article but for a simple literal.

]]> By: Tony Kevin http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/05/plimer-wants-to-talk-science-ok-here-goes/#comment-25977 Tony Kevin Tue, 05 May 2009 06:29:40 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=55512#comment-25977 This is the best and most relevant refutation of Plimer's deeply fallacious book that I have seen. Thank you, Dr Glikson. Editorially, it would be a helpful convenience to readers if article titles and co-authors of the cited references were listed in the references. It's tedious to have to open up each article to know if one has read it already or not. Tony Kevin This is the best and most relevant refutation of Plimer’s deeply fallacious book that I have seen. Thank you, Dr Glikson.

Editorially, it would be a helpful convenience to readers if article titles and co-authors of the cited references were listed in the references. It’s tedious to have to open up each article to know if one has read it already or not.

Tony Kevin

]]> By: David Coady http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/05/plimer-wants-to-talk-science-ok-here-goes/#comment-25945 David Coady Tue, 05 May 2009 04:13:00 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/?p=55512#comment-25945 It's the "tenets" of physics, not "tenents". It’s the “tenets” of physics, not “tenents”.

]]>