The issue of Peter Ridd's dismissal should not be separated from the fact that he's an avowed skeptic of anthropogenic climate change. No university anywhere should be obliged to employ people with blinkered views which are at complete odds with the overwhelming body of evidence in their particular field. To argue as Ridd does that water pollution and climate change do not threaten the reef is clearly an ill-informed position. The fact that he's a poster boy for the IPA is further proof that his views are highly problematic!

Thanks Bronwyn for reminding us of Professor Ridd's
lack of objectivity - which as you point out would have
been problematic for the university. He's entitled to
his opinions - but not to try to enforce his claims
onto others. Most unprofessional behaviour.

In my world, this is the view.

The unrecognised problem with this topic:
Academics are responsible for the production line of journalists. (Along with all professions). Those journalists are unsuccessful if not tainted by the rainbow ideology, resulting in the assassination of culture and blinkered view of life through Academic indoctrination, then if not compliant to the call, no job.

Moving on to what appears as the expectation I take sides in a disagreement between enemy forces.

I don’t, and I don’t care what skin they tear from each other in their bitch-out.

Dan.

Diver dan,

We will give that all the consideration
it deserves.

The vixen enters the blackberry bush!

Dan

Bronwyn, Foxy,

The first porkie is that Ridd is " an avowed sceptic of anthropogenic climate change"

Ridd was a leading reef researcher a sceptic of other academics publishing "studies" with shoddy research and "results" that weren't supported by the research.