Complete video at: fora.tv Australian geologist Ian Plimer argues that, for many agnostics and atheists, the cause of environmentalism has replaced organized religion as a matter of personal faith. —– While the world’s religions have inspired stunning acts of creation, they also have been implicated in some of the darkest deeds in human history. If God cannot be blamed for such moments of evil, His priests and prophets at least have a case to answer. So what might they say? That religion is unfairly blamed — and that we should look to other factors? Admit that there are problems but argue that on balance the good outweighs the bad? That there is no alternative; that people need religion like they need air? – Intelligence Squared Ian Plimer is Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne and Professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide. He is a prominent critic of creationism, and is famous for a debate with creationist Duane Gish in which he asked his opponent to hold live electrical cables to prove that electromagnetism was ‘only a theory’. He has published over 120 academic papers and six popular books. He is also a prominent member of the Australian Skeptics. In 2004 he was awarded the Calrk Medal by the Rioyal Society of NSW. In the late 1990s, Plimer was involved in legal proceedings concerning the location of Noah’s Ark, in which Plimer was ultimately unsuccessful. His most recent book, Telling Lies For God, has a forward by Archbishop Peter Hollingsworth. Professor Plimer argues that religion is important for the fabric of society.
Feb 182010
When Dan Brown, in the mouth of Max Kolher, said ‘Bondong science and religion is the greatest scientific blasphemy’, I agree. Why dosen’t Plimer: while he nails creationists he still believes in the same God they do! This is entirely contradictory. You cannot believe in God (or any nonphysical phenomenon) and be a scientific materialist unless you wish to contradict yourself. Atheist + AGW sceptic = awesome! (and correct)
I agree with Prof. Plimer on everything except his belief that people need a spritual part to their lives. I loved hsi book on global warming until the very end, when he infuriated me by saying: ‘Mankind’s stupidity is matched by God’s mercy, which is infinite’. Prof. Plimer, l can only be with you 100% when you not only admit enviromentalism is a religion, and the AGW is bullshit, but admit that there is no God and all types of Christianity are bullshit as well.
Whoosh …. missed my point.
My point is THAT is exactly Plimer’s argument when questioned about his fabrications, blatant dishonest misrepresentations &his data in his book.
Ducks and dodges the questions with “are you a scientist? etc etc etc.
Never …. ever …. attempts to answer the questions about his data, sources or claims.
If he HAD an argument with basis he WOULD respond to the questions regarding his book…. Yes? Instead he ducks, dives, & repeats the same unsourced claims.
Ummm, who said it wasn’t?
But religion IS about pie in the sky. It’s supposed to be, because it’s supposed to alleviate the fear of death and provide an alternative to the mediocrity of life. Marxism declined because it didn’t satisfy that need, and environmentalism will only succeed if it takes it into account.
Why do you hate the Planet?
@glenrufus get angry, just because you disagree. I go to UoA and have had classes with Plimer. Fundamentally he disputes irrational arguments which do not accept substansiated and evidenced points of view. You insulting remarks with out any relevant position. It doesnt really matter what you major in, disregarding an argument with basis and not providing an alternative makes you look like a fool. Esentially you just proved Ian’s point in your dogmatic dislike and refutation of his position.
um geology is a science
Ahhhh, Plimer defence 101, LOL
When I was in University people concerned about the environment were from science based (and admittedly social backgrounds also).
What is hilarious in all this is Plimer et al (al = Geologist) defence being hoooo boy are you a scientist?
Let’s be real here. YOU’RE a FECKING GEOLOGIST.
You’re in no position to question scientific credentials especially when you’re defending an idiot that makes random arbitrary claims about volcanic emissions.
(rolls eyes)
When I was in college (UC Santa Cruz) I know scores of environmentalists. To a man, all of them majored in Poli-Sci, film, theater arts, women’s studies, sociology, or humanities. Not a one majored in anything that required any substantive knowledge of the hard sciences.
Environmentalism is a religion…a religion that enable the scientifically ignorant to represent themselves as scientifically literate.
Onya Plimer! Love your work man. We need a proper debate on this; not climategate-esque tactics!
@rockshop115 Is biology a church too?
church and science should never be used in the same sentence.
Hehe,
Biggest fraud going.
Sad really, a personification of how an individual can regress.
Behaving exactly the same as the creationists that he scorned and battled for years.
Oft attacking flaws in the science with zero scientific evidence for his own point of view …. just as his old enemies the creationists would have done.
A sad regression of a man. Plimer is now behaving just as the creationists did.
Writing books that are as fictional as the bible he once argued against ..Just sad
Ian Plimer is one of the greatest men on the planet. Despite constant criticism and controversy, he continues to fight valiantly against the forces of false science. The sheep from the Church of Climatology must be saved from their folly, before it destroys their lives!
@pokerstaaars
If you look at the reaction against sceptics, it is almost always very aggressive and personal. That in itself points toward Plimers argument as being generally true.
He’s not completely incorrect but he’s also off target IMO. Because a scientist or athiest is passionate they are priests or dogmatic? I don’t think so. Science doesn’t need to be believed, it’s observed and the evidence speaks for itself. However, if your on the streets preaching evolution and anti-theism, then yes, one may call you such things.
One might think that even the simplist of those among us would be able to comprehend the truth of your statement jeykeUK.
At last, someone who speaks the truth.
@austdata
How is he a zealot? he is a skeptic.
You would be more believable if you weren’t a zealot.
The problem, as I see it, is both sides appear to be run by zealots and zealots should never be believed.
Well I think that a scientist willing to distort facts and research for money would do better working in the private sector, than the public…
I don’t get this whole ‘conspiracy’ of scientists faking global warming to get grants… I mean, surely this is a worse plot than Bush creating 9/11 to invade Iraq? Getting grants for climate change research has been a very arduous struggle as far as I know.
I mean, ExxonMobil alone spent $16 million (as far as we know) to fund “skeptics” etc..
The scientists getting millions in govt grants from the IPCC also have a rather obvious conflict of interest.
I don’t see how the professor’s mining interests invalidate his views. certainly his presentation here is cogent and logical. We all have interests, our families and careers, our hobbies and pastimes …. presumably there is nothing wrong inherently in having an opinion that is consistent with our interests?