Perhaps universities should be like higher courts which allow dissenting opinions by judges, but that opinion must be fully documented. There is an irony in that JCU won't tolerate a dissenting view within its own ranks yet both the Qld and Federal governments encourage new coal mines in the state. In other words authorities higher than JCU take what amounts to a dissenting view.

While I support a coal phaseout and measures to protect the GBR I don't think mainstream climate scientists are infallible. For example I think those who think we can replace fossil fuels with wind and solar are deluded and undermine their credibility on climate science. A compromise might be to drop litigation and pay Ridd an income so he can write for alternative journals.

"In the first place, it is fearsomely expensive". What better way to keep the average plebs down. Law is for the rich and influential, and highly organised groups.

It is a great pity that we don't have an educated - and interested - electorate so that the 'by the people' part of governing could be in play. But that is just wishful thinking in rooted Australia.

Expecting the government to straighten out the matter. Loud scoffing. What's the difference between Scott Morrison and Harold Holt? Holt went missing only once.

Since when have universities not been partisan in their individual structure?
To deny that obvious fact makes this question a nonsense.
Ridd and his problems are not worth one dollar. He is actually a part of the common enemy.

Dan

Graham, Peter is only the tip of the iceberg , how many other scientists are concerned but do not raise their heads for fear of losing their positions or prospects for advancement. Bill Burrows left over his concerns about the deleterious fallout from the Veg Acts . All this sends a very clear message - do not rock the politically correct boat and follow the politics not the science
The replication crisis is real and creates very rubbery vs robust science
Thank you providing a forum for the politically incorrect opinions

I would think that someone who is not prepared to sit quietly when they know an authority is prepared to tell straight out lies, as most obviously are, would be worth more than the whole lying organisation.

If we could get a few meteorologists doing the same the world would be a much better place.

Sorry, Graham, but I disagree! The entirely impartial court is the most appropriate place for this highly contentious issue to be resolved!

And on the evidence, as presented! Rather than the controversial opinions of Mr Ridd!

In as much as the most important view in the room is the dissenting one! It also follows that it's logical and relies on factual evidence! Rather than highly controversial opinion!?

Mr Ridd and his extreme right-wing cohort may wish otherwise? But those of us for whom the truth is the most important goal! A good outcome!

I have no sympathy for folk who peddle patent propaganda in its place!? The issues to be ventilated are too important and as important as life or death!

Let Mr Ridd stand or fall on provable facts! And if that isn't an entirely fair outcome? What would w have to replace it?

Space-age and unbeatable lie detection that is available to the general public!? While we do have that technology! Nobody in the pork pie industry wants to see it deployed, least of all Mr Ridd and his right-wing cohort!?
Alan B.