"Time to move on", says SteeleRedux. That's the way it was when men women and children were being chopped up and gassed. Other people in a safe zone knew or had a good idea what happening but they chose to move on, doing nothing toward solutions.
It's virtually the same these days, even court proceedings are being gagged to silence what is really going on.
So let's forget what is really happening to the GBR and world ocean! Move on, eh?

http://www.facebook.com/buzzfeedfyi/videos/781655798884760/

http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/436816-joe-bidens-2020-ukrainian-nightmare-a-closed-probe-is-revived

Another one the ABC 'forgot" to mention ?

Guys please. Isn't the question about whether there was sufficient justification for Ridd's dismissal right now being assessed by our judicial system?

You lot have your opinion and I have mine but this has gone before the Federal Court for adjudication and we should be prepared to accept the result. If it is deemed unjust he will either be reinstated or compensated.

I fully expect if sufficient doubts are raised with research then there will be a proper process for a review of it to occur. No university wants its reputation tarnished through academic misconduct.

You don’t have an opinion SR you have a side to support.

Anyone who doesn’t realise most of the garbage put out by AIMS & James Cook is for grant generation, & to satisfy the publish or perish of academia today is as they say, “a bloody idiot”.

Most of it is unverifiable, un repeatable rubbish, which was Ridd’s problem. When he took this up with management he was told to go away. Management was/is more interested in grant money than any factual science.

This case is probably as big a test of our legal system, as it is of academia. It will be interesting to see how the judge stands up to pressure to not rock the boat.

There is a question whether Dr Peter Ridd was justified in saying what he did that led to his dismissal. Its not just about speaking about the institution.

Independent evidence indicates GBRMPA management is dysfunctional and their associated science is out of date, out of touch and very incomplete. For example the GBRMPA area and boundary does not include nearshore coastal current that transports various point source nutrient into GBR waters.
Increase in sewage and industrial nutrient pollution is increasing proliferation of excessive algae.

Invasive algae is smothering and damaging seagrass food-web nurseries and reef coral. Small fish nurseries feed pelagic ocean fish on which ocean animals and islander people depend for essential protein.
Yet the northerly flowing Australian east coast sediment dispersal current and the dissolved nutrient load it transports is not scientifically measured and assessed, as it most certainly should be. Why hound and handicap food producing farmers while unmanaged city sewage dumped daily, goes unnoticed?

Sediment from land settles quickly, rarely reaching the actual GBR generally about 40 miles offshore, whereas dissolved nutrient bonded to fresh water within fresher ocean surface water is pushed and transported long distances by prevailing wind, including from say Sydney sewage outfalls to Cape York and beyond. If the nutrient overload is not taken up beforehand it travels, including through or over GBR reef-proper coral.

Absence of ABC news reporting about nutrient pollution leading to damage of the GBR and other consequences, seems to be associated with members of the judiciary lacking adequate understanding of the GBR and ocean and Ridd’s view, making relevant adjudication incomplete.

Academics seem to depend on published evidence but marine science barely knows the basic biology of oceans, a marine biology professor has said to me that science knows even less than that. This is why local knowledge of substance should be communicated and taken in to account.

There is need for relevant communication and complete court hearings and complete science. Modern science. The world ocean is in big trouble. If Peter Ridd can see problematic science then his view should be heard. Not gagged.

You have it wrong JF Aus, but I don't know why.

The Oz east coast current is a south running current, not northerly. At times it is elliptical, bringing everything back to where it started, but mostly anything from Sydney ends up in Bass straight, never in the north.

Up in reef territory there is no prevailing current with in the reef. Only tidal flow parallel to the coast, flooding to the south & ebbing to the north mostly, but in the opposite direction in some areas depending on the local reef configuration. The only current is outside the reef, & is again south going.

As for prevailing winds, they are south east, so any local nutrients are blown on shore.

I don't know if you have ever spent any time around the reef. Inshore there was a major problem years ago when governments were throwing money at farmers to buy super phosphate, & dramatically over fertilise the country. Those days are long past, & farmers are using as little as possible of expensive fertilisers.

The recently much in the news Cid Harbour had a large area of seaweed, not algae, covering areas of what once was inshore coral. This was I believe fertilised by farm nutrients. Over the last 20 years that weed growth has diminished greatly.

I don't get around as much as I used to, so I don't know if that is a local or wide spread effect.

I agree the farmer is a scapegoat for many ills, but we are unlikely to solve any with the bunch of incompetents involved in reef "science" today.