Steve Ghan (May 5) wrote “Why does the Union-Bulletin publish letters by Steve Singleton [who] clearly does not understand the difference between books and peer-reviewed literature?”
I would not presume to answer for the U-B, but applaud it for allowing both sides of this controversial and important issue to be presented, unlike Ghan of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby and anti-pipeline activist Jonas Magram (letter to the U-B from Iowa) who wish to suppress my views that they disagree with regarding global warming. How unscientific!
Ghan’s three claims demand a response: (1) He’s wrong about the value of books. The many books I’ve quoted over the past 18 years contain countless scientific papers by climate and related scientists that are both peer-reviewed and not; (2) the climate-related peer-review process itself has been hopelessly corrupted (this is well documented and I’m sure Ghan is aware of it .... anyone can do an Internet search on “climate peer-review corruption” and see); and (3) Climate scientists are physicians for the Earth? Trust them? A May 2016 Johns Hopkins study in the BMJ indicated medical errors are the third-leading cause of death in the U.S. (Over 250,000 per year.) Yet, I trust American physicians far more than any biased, closed-minded climate scientist.
Speaking of books, interested students should read Professor Ian Plimer’s “How to get expelled from school.”
Plimer (University of Adelaide), noted geologist and emeritus professor of Earth sciences at the University of Melbourne was head of Earth sciences and is honorary fellow of the Geological Society of London. His book underscores peer-review bias; that for scientists to declare certainty (on climate) shows how this bias has overwhelmed the scientific method; how the “climate clan” is peer-reviewing and publishing their own grant-earning dogma.
How peer-review, “far from being the golden standard, is used by the climate industry to approve or censor science according to its own agenda.” He claims, accurately, that the “debate is over” ploy was engineered to stop discussion, claiming there has never been a serious debate on human-induced global warming: “The only reason there are attempts to stop debate is because the arguments in support of it have all been shown to be weak, concocted or discredited.”
In “Science is Not What You Think,” Professor Henry Bauer wrote, “Today’s ‘Galileos’ are the scientists who sponsor claims that radically challenge existing beliefs [like] the Fred Singers about global warming and climate change.” I agree.