Hasbeen,

I know that you really believe that.

So I won't argue any more.

Instead lets wait and see what the Supreme Court
decides and whether Ridd succeeds as a "whistle
blower."

Hasbeen

Ridd is not a whistle blower. What exactly is the illegality or corruption he's supposed to be blowing the whistle on?

Ridd is nothing more than a disgruntled employee who's been sacked by his employer for breaching the university's code of conduct. His behaviour was uncollegial and unprofessional and while JCU might regret the infamy his sacking has brought down on them, he is certainly no whistle blower.

The only whistle Ridd blows is the dog whistle he blows loudly and often to his fellow fossil fuel enthusiasts and anthropogenic global warming denialists.

Bronwyn,

That you clearly have no clue as to the issues Ridd raised with respect to the papers published by other researchers shows that your contribution is purely ideologically based and a complete joke.

Ridd reviewed a couple of papers by colleagues and found glaring errors, either in the "results" that were not supported by the data, or serious errors in the data collection.

Note the JCU has not contested his findings.

Shadow Minister,

Ridd's findings were not on trial and that was not
why he was sacked. And JCU scientists and his peers
did contest his findings. You are repeating things
that simply are false. Just as Ridd has done. And
he's been discredited. Move on.

cont'd ...

You criticized on another discussion the Australian
Coral Reef Society's critiques of Ridd saying that
they were an interest group.

Quoting from the web:

"The Australian Coral Reef Society plays a key role
by promoting scientific research on Australian coral reefs.
Because it is not aligned to ANY vested interests the
society's views are sought by government policy makers,
conservationists and ALL those interested in coral reefs
who need impartial and expert advice."

Unlike Ridd who is funded by fossil fuels and cane grower's
money.

Foxy,

I took the time to read the full transcript of the judgement of the first trial. Specifically mentioned was the fact that during the trial and the two hearings at JCU the validity of Ridd's findings were never disputed.

If you have evidence that Ridd's findings were disputed, please show me where.