The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Science or silence? My battle to question doomsayers about the Great Barrier Reef > Comments

Science or silence? My battle to question doomsayers about the Great Barrier Reef : Comments

By Peter Ridd, published 12/2/2018

The reef is supposedly almost dead from the combined effects of a warming climate, nutrient pollution from Australian farms, and smothering sediment from offshore dredging.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Hieroglyphs carved in stone cliffs...? Like the 25,000 year old skulls found in the early 1980's in caves near Margaret River region in WA. Examined in Europe (Switzerland I was told) & identified in 1983/4 as a race of taller white skinned 'Aboriginal peoples' later wiped out by successive waves of Australoids aka: modern aborigines - the Nyoongar.

No apologies needed, no 'Sorry Day ?' "...move along these aren't the droids you're looking for" kind of thing. More Jedi mind tricks by the academics with their paid for degrees and doctorates handed to them by the vested interests & the Aboriginal Industry sycophants.

Would love to know where those archaeological finds ended up.
Posted by Albie Manton in Darwin, Monday, 12 February 2018 1:47:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
' Ultimately, I am fighting for academic and scientific freedom, and the responsibility of universities to nurture the debate of difficult subjects without threat or intimidation.'

you are a hero Peter. Unfortunately to much of academia is cowardly. They know stepping outside the narrative is almost as difficult as a conservative getting a 10% of time on the abc.

btw good to hear the reef still doing well. In the 70's I was told it would be well and truely stuffed by now. Oh well the scientist who survived by telling lies have to sleep with it.
Posted by runner, Monday, 12 February 2018 2:13:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peter, your stance is heartening to anyone who values science, and deplores the actions of those, like James Cook University, who back the climate fraud being perpetrated on us.
Bob Carter was instrumental in uncovering the climate fraud by exposing the baseless “science” put forward by the IPCC. For his trouble, he was harassed by JCU, which was probably one of the contributing factors to the heart attack which caused his death.
JCU shamelessly attacks anyone exposing fraudulent climate “science”, and is a prime candidate for Nigel Calder’s “Hall of Shame” for climate fraud promoters.
Congratulations, Peter, on this article, and your courage in standing up to climate fraud.
Posted by Leo Lane, Monday, 12 February 2018 9:23:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nigel Calder, who has since died, wrote this in 2011, so the climate fraud has been no secret, but the fraud promoters are determined and vicious, as demonstrated by JCU:
"Hall of Shame
Retracing those 14 years, what if physics had functioned as it is supposed to do? What if CLOUD, quickly approved and funded, had verified the Svensmark effect with all the authority of CERN, in the early 2000s. What if the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had done a responsible job, acknowledging the role of the Sun and curtailing the prophecies of catastrophic warming?
For a start there would have no surprise about the “travesty” that global warming has stopped since the mid-1990s, with the Sun becoming sulky. Vast sums might have been saved on misdirected research and technology, and on climate change fests and wheezes of every kind. The world’s poor and their fragile living environment could have had far more useful help than precautions against warming.
And there would have been less time for so many eminent folk from science, politics, industry, finance, the media and the arts to be taken in by man-made climate catastrophe. (In London, for example, from the Royal Society to the National Theatre.) Sadly for them, in the past ten years they’ve crowded with their warmist badges into a Hall of Shame, like bankers before the crash."
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/24/breaking-news-cern-experiment-confirms-cosmic-rays-influence-climate-change/
Posted by Leo Lane, Monday, 12 February 2018 10:15:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Leo Lane.

I don't think climate change is in debate. What is debatable is the cause!

Curmudgeonathome

You make the point, as do I, money is at the root of the problem.
Posted by diver dan, Tuesday, 13 February 2018 9:29:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This problem of bulldust published as scientific truth is a product of the overexpansion of academia, & far too many universities, courses & graduates.

What do you do, when your faculty is turning out graduates every year into a world that has too many marine biologists already?

You could stop the courses, & lose your job, or you could try to generate a looming catastrophe, requiring lots of your graduates to join research facilities or university staff.

The very best thing we could do for the reef would be halve funding for AIMS, the Marine Park Authority & James Cook, then halve it again in 5 years. As a minimum student intake must be reduced by 75% or perhaps much more.

Of course it is not just Marine Biology that is in this position, but at least half, & probably a much higher percentage of faculties at most universities.

Anyone should be able to pay to study at university, but less than 15% of the current students should be funded by the tax payer. They are just not bright enough to advantage those paying for their education, with their subsequent work life.
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 13 February 2018 9:57:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy