Ian Plimer on his new book, Heaven and Earth:
“The reason I put this book out,” he says, “is to start a debate. The fact that I’ve now flushed out a few scientists to criticise me in public is wonderful because we’ve never had a [scientific] debate. Consensus is a word of politics; it’s not a word of science.”
very true.
He’s sparked a debate. It’s a pity that his opponents are mud-slinging with words like “fraudulent” and “dishonest” to describe his work. But at least they’re engaging in some kind of debate.
Plimer talks about consensus being a political word. Let’s keep in mind, also, that when decisions are made by government committees (such as the IPCC or various “bodies”), that’s a political process, not a scientific one. Having a well funded government organisation like the IPCC taking a stand on a particular issue, to borrow from their own terminology, adds a “forcing” to the debate, that pushes it relentlessly in a particular direction.