On May 11, 2:20 pm, "ozonb" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message

...
On May 11, 12:39 pm, wrote:





On May 11, 12:08 pm, Fran wrote:

On May 8, 11:53 pm, Roger Coppock wrote: It's not a best seller
over a Amazon books, where
they currently have it "Out of print -- limited availability."

And it's not in the top ten Australian books in either the non-fiction
or fiction categories according to Nielsen Book Scan.

1. 9780977544097 Underbelly:Tale of Two Cities John Silvester & Andrew
Rule Floradale Press $24.99
2 9780340936177 My Booky Wook Russell Brand Hachette $27.99
3 9781921351433 Dreams from My Father Barack Obama Text Publishing
$24.95
4 9780747585664 Eat, Pray, Love Elizabeth Gilbert Bloomsbury
$24.95
5 9781846053450 Dear Fatty Dawn French Century $34.95
6 9781741963595 The Country Women's Association Cookbook Murdoch
$29.95
7 9780733325328 Spotless 2 Shannon Lush & Jennifer Fleming ABC Books
$19.95
8 9780141042886 A New Earth Eckhart Tolle Penguin $26.95
9 9780646470801 4 Ingredients Kim McCosker & Rachael Bermingham 4
Ingredients $17.95
10 9780670072972 Crunch Time:Lose Weight Fast and Keep it Off
Michelle Bridges Penguin $34.95

Fiction:

1 9781741757866 Handle with Care Jodi Picoult Allen & Unwin $32.99
2 9780230529205 Assegai Wilbur Smith Macmillan $49.99
3 9781846052590 8th Confession James Patterson Century $32.95
4 9780593057049 Gone Tomorrow Lee Child Bantam $32.95
5 9780718154455 Corsair Clive Cussler & Jack B. Du Brul Michael
Joseph $32.95
6 9780593053379 One Day at a Time Danielle Steel Bantam $32.95
7 9781847441843 The Host Stephenie Meyer Hachette $32.99
8 9780007240425 Once in a Lifetime Cathy Kelly HarperCollins
$32.99
9 9781847245458 The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Stieg Larsson
Quercus $22.95
10 9781921470202 Just Take My Heart Mary Higgins Clark Simon &
Schuster $29.95

||||

This may shed some light:

||||
Ben McNeil investigates Andrew Bolts claim that Ian Plimer's error-
filled Heaven and Earth has 25,000 copies sold or ordered:

Indeed, if a non-fiction book has 25 000 copies sold in Australia it
is a massive blockbuster. I was suspicious when reading through the
SMH book section the last couple of weeks and 'Heaven and Earth' not
being listed in their top-seller list for non-fiction. Being a little
more rigorous, Bookscan, which track book sales in Australia doesn't
list it in the top 10 for non-fiction for the month as of the time of
this blog entry . Seem a little odd to you?

Further investigation by a publisher friend of mine who is registered
to track book sales through Bookscan reveals a big discrepancy between
known sales and what Bolt quotes. According to Bookscan there were
3242 total sales for 'Heaven and Earth' up until Friday, May 1. That's
sales in all the major booksellers like Dymocks, Angus & Robertson,
etc across Australia.

According to my publisher friend, add about 10-15% on that number to
capture the sales from book-sellers not part of Bookscan (smaller book
chains, university co-ops etc). So the total sales of 'Heaven and
Earth' book is probably about ~3700.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009..._and_earth.php
||||

Fran

Wow you sure make a better argument with stats than you do against the
contents of the book

The Plimer screed is so riddled with poor scholarship that it's
scarcely worth the effort.

======================================

For example?



Well you might think that Plimer would deal with one of the key
features of the GHG warming fingerprint -- coterminous stratospheric
cooling with near surface warming -- which affirms the claims about
the role of CO2/GHGs. Plimer ignores it for all of his 500 pages of
polemic because he is either ignorant of its importance or more
likely, can't reconcile it with his central claim.

Plimer reduxes the now discredited graph from Durkin's Great Global
Warming Swindle -- which Durking himself had to withdraw. Plimer was
so impressed with this that he used it three times in the book. Plimer
wanted to keep using it though because he thought Durkin was the
victim of political correctness -- so this was a deliberate
falsification.

He also used (without reproducing) the Graph from AR4 Summary for
Policy Makers claiming that it showed cooling for 100 of the last 160
years. Like his claim about Durkin's graph, that is just flat out
wrong.

Amazingly, he also claims that Mt Pinatubo's eruption released "very
large quantities of chloroflourocarbons, the gases that destroy the
ozone layer" and cites on this point Brasseur and Granier who say
nearly the opposite:

"after the eruption of Mount Pinatubo, the input of chlorine to the
stratosphere was probably small".

CFC's are also GHGs so the point was to claim that a rise in GHGs was
correlated with a fall in global temperatures following Pinatubo. Much
later in the book and for the same reason he claims that "Pinatubo
emitted as much CO2 as humans in a year" and yet there is no data to
back this claim and Mauna Loa shows this is bunkum.

He also claims Arctic sea ice is expanding when it is retreating.

He also claims that "In fact, satellites and radiosondes show that
there is no global warming" (p382) but the cite he gives for this says
the opposite.

|||

The big news since CFK03 is the first of these, the collapse of the
climate critics' last real bastion, namely that satellites and
radiosondes show no significant warming in the past quarter century.
Figuratively speaking, this was the center pole that held up the
critics' entire "tent." Their argument was that, if there had been
little warming in the past 25 years or so, then what warming was
observed would have been within the range of natural variations with
solar forcing as the major player. Further, the models would have been
shown to be unreliable since they were predicting warming that was not
happening. But now both satellite and in-situ radiosonde observations
have been shown to corroborate both the surface observations of
warming and the model predictions. Thus, while uncertainties still
remain, we are now seeing a coherent picture in which past climate
variations, solar and other forcings, model predictions and other
indicators such as glacier recession all point to a human-induced
warming that needs to be considered carefully.

http://www.thescientificworld.com/TS...ch&From=Result

|||

He claims (at p437) "Chapter 5 of IPCC AR4 (Humans Responsible for
Climate Change) .. is based on the opinions of just five independent
scientists". The reference is not only wrong, but there were 50
independent scientists looking at this section.

There's plenty else, but this is simply an opinion piece by an
embittered spruiker for the polluters' lobby.

Fran