Shadow Minister,

You'll have to be more specific as to where the link lied.
His case is not about Ridd's "freedom" to say what he wants
but it's about the breach of the university's code of conduct
whether you like the code or not.

In any case we shall have to wait and see what the Supreme
Court decides.

Foxy, the court can only decide if Prof Ridd was rude to his colleagues
or what he said was within the Uni's rules for politeness.
The court cannot decide whether the GBR is doomed or not, it is not
within its jurisdiction.

In the long run, the court aside, it will be evidence on site that matters.

Foxy wrote: "His case is not about Ridd's "freedom" to say what he wants
but it's about the breach of the university's code of conduct
whether you like the code or not."

Not quite. Its about whether the Code of Conduct can be used to suppress dissent from the politically acceptable science.

Bazz wrote: "it will be evidence on site that matters"

I'm not at all sure the evidence will be allowed to matter. The evidence will be required to fit the narrative.
I honeymooned on the GBR (South Molle Island) back in the 1970s and at the time I was told that the reef was in real danger and would be gone within two decades. Of course in those days the culprit was the great cooling scare. Mrs mhaze and I made a brief visit to the same island in 2019 out of nostalgia. Guess what. We were told the reef was in real danger and would be gone in two decades

Yesterday I heard that the temperature in Alberta Canada had climbed to 49C! Breaking the previous record by 10C?

This occurring during a La Nina Phase and a waning solar (cooling) phase! And like the annual summer melt of the "permanently" frozen tundra, unprecedented!

I don't believe the climate change denial cohort disbelieve the evidence or the record that shows an upward spike in the trend! I believe the real, if unspoken, concern for these BS artists, is their investment in coal or their revenue stream from coal, or gas and oil.

Many posting here, may not even be residing here but abroad? St Petersburg e.g.?

And doing all they can to support the like of Mr Ridd and his cabal with downright BS, writ large!?

Those with their heads up their fundamental orifice? (Somewhere warm and comfortable) May have an excuse for not seeing reality? Or what we could do about it!?

And are terrified that the powers that be, may embrace something like MSR thorium and couple it to electric vehicles and graphene underlayed highways? A combination that permanently ends any reliance on fossil fuels, makes the production of hydrogen from waste heat almost a certainty!

And those that have the wit to grasp this massive economic opportunity? May well become an energy-exporting economic superpower!

Let Mr Ridd have his day in court, present his evidence, if he has any other than his controversial opinion!

And because I believe that's all he has? Another nail in the coffin of the (cage-rattling) climate change denialists, many commenting here!
Alan B

Bazz,

The Peter Ridd case is about Ridd breaching JCU's
code of conduct. His case in the High Court is based
on the terms of his contract.

AlanB.,

Thank You for your kind words to me.

The Peter Ridd case is highly contentious and divisive.
It will be interesting to see what the High Court decides.

Yes it will be interesting.

The Supreme Court is as much on trial here as is Peter Ridd, or James Cook Uni. It is really a trial of the elites verses the little bloke. It is probable the high court will see themselves challenged as much as the rest of the elites, & the university sector.

It will be interesting to see if justice will be served. We have already seen that the left, who normally love a whistle blower, are totally on the side of the elites in this one.