Right-wing blogs promote global warming skeptic who falsely claims volcanoes to blame for CO2 in the atmosphere

Drudge, BigGovernment.com promote "scientist" who says CO₂ is "not causing" warming

Drudge Report: "Scientist: CO2 not causing global warming..." Internet gossip Matt Drudge linked to the Telegraph article on the Drudge Report with the headline, ""Scientist: CO2 not causing global warming..." From the Drudge Report:

BigGovernment.com: "Scientist: CO2 Not Causing Climate Change." Andrew Breitbart's website BigGovernment.com also linked to the Telegraph article with the headline, "Scientist: CO2 Not Causing Climate Change." From BigGovernment.com:

But in the article, one of Plimer's central claims about CO₂ emissions is false

Telegraph: Plimer says "[w]e cannot stop carbon emissions because most of them come from volcanoes." The November 11 Telegraph article says that Plimer "argues that a recent rise in temperature around the world is caused by solar cycles" and that "carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, widely blamed for global warming, is a natural phenomenon caused by volcanoes erupting." From the article:

Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist from Adelaide University, argues that a recent rise in temperature around the world is caused by solar cycles and other "extra terrestrial" forces.

He said carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, widely blamed for global warming, is a natural phenomenon caused by volcanoes erupting.

"We cannot stop carbon emissions because most of them come from volcanoes," he said. "It is a normal element cycled around in the earth and my science, which is looking back in time, is saying we have had a planet that has been a green, warm wet planet 80 per cent of the time. We have had huge climate change in the past and to think the very slight variations we measure today are the result of our life -- we really have to put ice blocks in our drinks."

Most mainstream scientists agree that the recent warming period was caused by an increase in carbon dioxide since the industrial revolution.

USGS: Human activities release "more than 130 times the amount" of CO₂ than volcanoes

USGS: "Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO₂ emitted by volcanoes." From the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) fact sheet about volcanoes:

Comparison of CO₂ emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.

Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO₂ into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO₂ by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO₂, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO₂ emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)

USGS Hawaiian Volcano Observatory: Volcanic CO₂ emissions "comprises less than 1 percent" of global emissions. A February 2007 article from USGS's Hawaiian Volcano Observatory also notes that human-caused CO₂ emissions dwarf that of emissions from volcanoes. From the article:

Gas studies at volcanoes worldwide have helped volcanologists tally up a global volcanic CO₂ budget in the same way that nations around the globe have cooperated to determine how much CO₂ is released by human activity through the burning of fossil fuels. Our studies show that globally, volcanoes on land and under the sea release a total of about 200 million tonnes of CO₂ annually.

This seems like a huge amount of CO₂, but a visit to the U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) website (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/) helps anyone armed with a handheld calculator and a high school chemistry text put the volcanic CO₂ tally into perspective. Because while 200 million tonnes of CO₂ is large, the global fossil fuel CO₂ emissions for 2003 tipped the scales at 26.8 billion tonnes. Thus, not only does volcanic CO₂ not dwarf that of human activity, it actually comprises less than 1 percent of that value.

Scientists can identify CO₂ emissions from fossil fuel burning versus CO₂ emissions from other sources. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), "[t]he increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration is known to be caused by human activities because the character of CO₂ in the atmosphere." From the IPCC:

Emissions of CO₂ (Figure 1a) from fossil fuel combustion, with contributions from cement manufacture, are responsible for more than 75% of the increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration since pre-industrial times. The remainder of the increase comes from land use changes dominated by deforestation (and associated biomass burning) with contributions from changing agricultural practices. All these increases are caused by human activity.

[...]

The increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration is known to be caused by human activities because the character of CO₂ in the atmosphere, in particular the ratio of its heavy to light carbon atoms, has changed in a way that can be attributed to addition of fossil fuel carbon.

Plimer's past global warming claims have been widely criticized by climate experts

Gavin Schmidt: Plimer's book full of "made-up 'facts.' " After Plimer came out with a climate skeptic book called Heaven and Earth, Gavin Schmidt, a climate modeler at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, wrote on his blog RealClimate.org that the book has "made-up 'facts.' " Schmidt wrote, regarding the debate on climate change:

However, recently there has been more of a sense that the issues being discussed (in the media or online) have a bit of a groundhog day quality to them. The same nonsense, the same logical fallacies, the same confusions -- all seem to be endlessly repeated. The same strawmen are being constructed and demolished as if they were part of a make-work scheme for the building industry attached to the stimulus proposal. Indeed, the enthusiastic recycling of talking points long thought to have been dead and buried has been given a huge boost by the publication of a new book by Ian Plimer who seems to have been collecting them for years. Given the number of simply made-up 'facts' in that tome, one soon realises that the concept of an objective reality against which one should measure claims and judge arguments is not something that is universally shared.

Schmidt issued step-by-step refutation of Plimer's "bizarre claims" about climate, including Plimer's claims about volcanoes' contribution to CO₂ levels. After Plimer challenged George Monbiot, an environment reporter at the Guardian who has been extremely critical of Plimer, to answer several questions about climate change, Schmidt issued a step-by-step refutation of "some of Plimer's more bizarre claims." In response to Plimer's question about volcanoes' contribution to today's CO2 levels, Schmidt replied, "IPCC FAQ is all that is required. Do volcanoes produce more CO2 than human activity? Not even close."

University of Adelaide director of climate science: Plimer's views on climate are "naive, reflected a poor understanding of climate science, and relied on recycled and distorted arguments that had been repeatedly refuted." Barry Brook, who is the director of climate science and one of Plimer's colleagues at the University of Adelaide, has repeatedly criticized Plimer's arguments about global warming, asserting that he has "relied on recycled and distorted arguments that had been repeatedly refuted." From a post on Brook's blog, BraveNewClimate.com:

I've been critical of Ian's views before (see here and here). In short, my view was that Ian's assertions about man's role in climate change were naive, reflected a poor understanding of climate science, and relied on recycled and distorted arguments that had been repeatedly refuted.

[...]

Ian Plimer's book is a case study in how not to be objective. Decide on your position from the outset, and then seek out all the facts that apparently support your case, and discard or ignore all of those that contravene it. He quotes a couple of thousand peer-reviewed scientific papers when mounting specific arguments. What Ian doesn't say is that the vast majority of these authors have considered the totality of evidence on the topic of human-induced global warming and conclude that it is real and a problem. Some researchers have show that the Earth has been hotter before, and that more CO₂ has been present in the atmosphere in past ages. Yes, quite -- this is an entirely uncontroversial viewpoint. What is relevant now is the rate of climate change, the specific causes, and its impact on modern civilisation that is dependent, for agricultural and societal security, on a relatively stable climate. Ian pushes mainstream science far out of context, again and again.