Many including my wife did not want to believe that our universities could be so rotten that they would promote the global warming scam, merely for the millions it brought in in research grant money.

They still thought that James Cook was simply the rotten apple when they wasted a million dollars of our money in legal fees, perusing Peter Ridd in court, again to protect their Great Barrier Reef grants money, when he exposed they were producing corrupt research results to keep the money flowing. I admit for years I didn't want to believe it either.

Now the total rottenness of the whole sector is on display, & no reasonable person could deny it.

They have built their whole financial structure on grant money & foreign student fees. We know they will tell any lie to protect their grants, but even those who recognised how immoral they had become, never believed they would endanger the health of the nation to protect their income.

They have obviously put pressure on the government to allow canceled travel from China to recommence, even as the virus infections multiply around the world, to allow Chinese students into the country, regardless of the danger to us.

Any thinking person must be disgusted with the avarice of the whole sector.

Yep ! Academics !

Drain the swamp.

They have already declared a pandemic is on its way.

This will be a cynical response.

The "educated" are taught from the outset, of their superior worth.
Simple mans language; taught to respect arrogance.

But "real life" on the ground is beautifully levelling.

That really is the big shame of education. Pity it wasn't the humbling experience it should be.

And so, to extrapolate that all out to an end of life observation; what hope for the the majority of the uneducated, labouring under this yoke of extreme arrogance?

It's interesting to observe from which pile the right wing faction grows from, don't you think?
And it will be interesting to see in the near future, will that right wing uneducated pile re-elect Donald Trump.

Dan.

diver dan,
I have long maintained that reward for effort is the only way. Effort in Academia is great however, that effort is of hardly any or even of no use to society as someone with only academic education is incomplete.
It's like saying this bloke has read all the books about aeroplanes & flying, would you be his passenger if you knew he'd never touched the controls ?
It's experience that counts, not just remembering multiple choice questions.
Doctors, engineers & professionals in general would be useles as mere Academics if they didn't do their hands-on stuff ! And, that's exactly what the average Academic is. Highly educated but ailch experience & sense & logic ! We see these "experts" on TV every minute of the day !

Hasbeen,

Why are you picking on the Chinese? They have just as much right to be here as you.

In fact they probably have more right because Chinese sailors sighted Australia a couple of hundred years before the British.

Mr Opinion,

But you're an academic, are you not?

Of course, Chinese students should not be singled out, those from Tierra Del Fuego where the virus is raging should be excluded first.

Dear Hasbeen,

How's it going old cock? Good?

You wrote;

"They still thought that James Cook was simply the rotten apple when they wasted a million dollars of our money in legal fees, perusing Peter Ridd in court"

Mate, you still rewriting history I see. It was Ridd who took the university to court not the other way around. Facts do matter old boy, do try and stick to them.

Is Mise,

I'm not an academic.

the truth is that anyone that can deny biology and declare a baby born with a penis is not male will lie about anything. Anyone who denies a baby in a womb isn't human denies biology and lies in order to justify murder. Academia became deceitful a long while ago. No wonder thinking people don't trust our institutions anymore.

runner,

You took the words right out of Hasbeen's mouth.

Misopinionted,

How do we know you're not just an academic ? Can you prove on OLO that you are neither an academic nor, for that matter, an atheist ? Or even a university graduate, which most of us doubt ? Or an Australian either ? Can you prove categorically on OLO that you are any of these ?

Otherwise, you continue to provide ample evidence that you are an idiot. Either that or a chimpanzee with an infinite number of keyboards. Yes, that makes more sense.

Joe

If money was taken from the public without their consent and handed over to bakers, then it wouldn't take long until nearly all bakers would become corrupt to the core!

DAMN BAKERS!

If we can't trust bakers with the Dough, then who can we trust ?

Dear Individual,

«If we can't trust bakers with the Dough, then who can we trust ?»

But we CAN trust bakers at this time: they are not corrupt since they do not receive any tax-payer's funds. If they did receive, then it would be the time to worry, not now!

Thanks guys for demonstrating that you don't have to be an academic to be dumb.

Some specifics.

Hasbeen: Just maybe global warming isn't a scam but real, even if you don't agree? If you have personal evidence to reject it as a scam (rather than just being influenced by on-line stuff), you are presumably an academic who has spent years researching it and can demonstrate it is faked?

Individual: "It's like saying this bloke has read all the books about aeroplanes & flying, would you be his passenger if you knew he'd never touched the controls?"

Perhaps you are not aware that to be come a licenced pilot, you have to actually learn to fly a plane, so you would NEVER be a passenger in a plane with someone who had only read books (unless the pilot had collapsed and an unlicensed person was trying to land the plane). Have you done any research as to how many academic aircraft engineers and designers are pilots? Most, I would think. I have known a couple of academics who had pilot's licences (one their own plane), one a botanist (studies plants!). Basically, your analogy is weak. People who teach and research a scientific subject in universities do have practical experience, because that is actually how you do scientific research - hands-on, in the field and/or in the lab.

Ps I am not an academic, though I did work in a university in a technical capacity decades ago.

Hasbeen, Peter Ridd did not expose 'corrupt science".

"He has published an article in the journal Marine Pollution Bulletin calling for greater quality control processes in reef science — using examples from nine key reef studies.

The article has been rebutted, also in Marine Pollution Bulletin, by a group of reef scientists arguing the piece "demonstrated biases, misinterpretation and selective use of data" as well as failing to acknowledge many of the claims had already been addressed within the scientific literature.

Dr Brodie was an author on one of the studies criticised, and said Dr Ridd cherry-picked papers.

"He picked quite old studies, and I've alone published 50 to 60 papers since then on the same areas, none of which he cited," Dr Brodie said." http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-04-23/peter-ridd-reef-science-climate-change/11026540.

Note: he attacked the research by cherry-picking old problems that had been recognised and corrected. This is how good science works: new research correcting earlier inadequate work, including increased quality control. For Ridd to cherry-pick just the old work and not consider the corrections and better procedures was not "exposing corrupt science". The kindest comment is that it reflects poorly on Ridd's understanding of how science works. I'll leave readers to consider what other reasons/motives he may have had.

The university did handle the situation badly, but Ridd's unfair dismissal claim was upheld in court because of the failure of university procedure not because of his views on climate science.

Ridd has subsequently been on anti-climate change speaking tours http://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/environment/2019/11/23/peter-ridd-and-the-climate-sceptics/15744276009129.

Why aren't you criticising him for making money out of climate change through these tours? By the way, academics don't personally get any money from grants; it goes into research expenses: field costs (travel, accommodation, food, petrol, boat charter), lab analyses, and possibly salaries for technical staff. Do you think Ridd uses his speaker's fees for research?

Diver Dan,

Aren't you being rather arrogant in claiming the higher moral ground for the "uneducated" because their experience of "real-life" is so beautifully levelling? Isn't it (ironically) arrogant to claim to be humbler, and so much worthier, than the "educated"?

See "The Four Yorkshiremen". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAdlkunflRs.

Cossomby I happen to be an ex fighter pilot, with many carrier landings, so know a bit about pilot training. I also have a couple of years aerodynamics, & meteorology in there as well. How much do you have?

Then about 3 years ago I started to doubt the global warming scam was a fact, so spent 3 months getting my math back up to where I could follow the theory, & understand the formula involved in the theory. Once you do that the whole thing totally falls apart.

This showed me that many academics, I would previously have trusted to tell the truth were just a little worse than used car salesmen, when it came to helping with their lies to improve university cash flows.

If you are fool enough to believe the scam, go for it, I can't help those who are too silly to look at the facts. My lady refuses to look at the facts, because like many she can't stand the thought that those she holds in high esteem could be lying to us so totally.

Unless you are a gravy train rider, I suggest you try to understand the theory, rather than be both made a fool of, & accept the lies of those you believe are your betters. They aren't.

Has been, I have read papers that Global warming is a normal historical event, and those that believe by closing down coal fired power stations that cause the Green House gasses will reverse that warming; and make the Earth Climate stable. This is the Hoax that Governments want you to believe: that we can stop the Climate from changing.

Dear Hasbeen,

You write;

"so spent 3 months getting my math back up to where I could follow the theory, & understand the formula involved in the theory. Once you do that the whole thing totally falls apart."

Yet you have never spelled out what that math entailed. How about you do it now.

The history of the earth was rewritten by pseudo scientist with the evolution hoax. Now climate history is being erased, fiddled with and rewritten by pseudo scientist. The word UNPRECENTED is just one of the misleading and lying terms being used. These soothsayers are nothing but deceivers or completely bereft of any integrity.

SR if you don't have the education, or are too lazy to put in the effort, I am not interested in trying to educate you. Do so by your own effort.

However if as I believe, you are a gravy train rider, or simply a globalist trying to use the scam for political purposes, there is nothing in it for me trying to educate those who refuse to see facts.

Do so by your own effort.
Hasbeen,
SteeleRedux only sounds intelligent because he uses Grammarly !

Dear Hasbeen,

You have trotted out this limp wristed excuse so many times before it is nauseating.

The last time we really engaged on this you were talking about decreasing temperatures on the peninsula saying "See my new post highlighting NASA figures showing 20 years of Antarctic cooling."

I showed multiple stations on the peninsula having a warming trend.

Then this news;

"Antarctica has logged its hottest temperature on record, with an Argentinian research station thermometer reading 18.3C, beating the previous record by 0.8C.

The reading, taken at Esperanza on the northern tip of the continent’s peninsula, beats Antarctica’s previous record of 17.5C, set in March 2015.

A tweet from Argentina’s meteorological agency on Friday revealed the record. The station’s data goes back to 1961."

Well that blew your so called cooling trend apart didn't it.

Come on mate, I have gone and done in-depth study of the evidence too and it checks out for me. Cough up for once. Whatcha got?

Hasbeen, Given your experience as an ex fighter pilot, with knowledge of pilot training, aerodynamics, & meteorology, you would have to know that no-one can get a pilot's licence without practical flying experience - this is common knowledge. Also many aeronautical engineers would be pilots, as I said. It is not necessary to be a pilot to know this. So why would you challenge me for pointing out the obvious weakness in Individual's analogy? Just because I am not a pilot I can't state an obvious fact about flying?

Although I don't work in academia, I have a couple of science degrees, with a lot of chemistry, some maths and stats, and have worked in the area of geology/landscape/environmental history of the late Pleistocene (the ice ages). So I am familiar with the chemistry of the greenhouse effect on the atmosphere, and the relation between air and ocean C02 storage, and also the actual climate and environmental changes over the few hundred thousand years. I've been doing this for a bit longer than 3 months, nearly 50 years.

I could repeat all the evidence for global warming, and rebut all the misconceptions about the current situation based on the long-term history of the earth's climate (eg. because there used to be huge amounts of CO2 hundreds of millions of years ago, a bit more now won't be a problem for us). That would be pointless, since you have convinced yourself that it is all a scam.

So, with three months update in maths, you have concluded 'that many academics, I would previously have trusted to tell the truth were just a little worse than used car salesmen, when it came to helping with their lies to improve university cash flows'. What next: a three month crash course in medicine so you don't have to pay medical specialists the high fees they charge to improve their practice's cash flow?

Hasbeen: Just a follow-up. You believe that you 'can't help those who are too silly to look at the facts'. But I don't feel the same: I think if you looked at the 'facts' more carefully you might decide it isn't a scam at all. I don't 'accept any lies', mainly because I don't think there are any, and I don't accept anything other scientists say at face value because I think they are 'my betters'. I do accept that we still don't know exactly what is going to happen, because the atmospheric and oceanic circulation is so complex, and we will probably always have problems with trying to model it. Failures in modelling attempts are par for the course especially in such complex science; it's how we learn.

Nonetheless, the evidence so far gives serious cause for concern which is why so many people have been spelling out the worst case scenario. And if you prepare for the worst case scenario and it doesn't happen, then you'll be ahead of the game (I might hazard a guess that flying involves such worst case preparation?). Basically, no climate scientist wants to be attacked 20 or 30 years later with: 'You knew all along that this was likely to happen! Why the X&$@ didn't you warn us?'

And as my petroleum geologist brother said to me: 'we ain't seen nothing yet. Just wait till the oceans release all the extra CO2 they have been storing for the last 100 or so years'.

Finally, could you perhaps turn your maths to the question: why would the burning of tens to hundreds of millions of years worth of stored biomass (coal, oil) in just a 150 years NOT have an effect on the atmosphere? I've asked other climate change sceptics this and never got an answer.

Cossomby, if you have a bit of math, go & have a look at todays post on the NoTricksZone blog.

It has a long mathematical refutation of every thing you currently believe in your deference to authority.

It is pretty heavy going, but no one who does not actually try to understand the physics has no right to lecture anyone who does. This lot gave me a headache about half way through, as I always try to falsify these things when I read them, to prove to myself I am understanding what I am attempting to understand.

So far no such luck, but as I said only half way through it.

I recommend it to SR & Mr O, although I doubt they would dare to even read such stuff, in case it destroys their beliefs. If you are game, give it a try yourself.

There are many papers you could try. 200 such peer reviewed papers were published in Germany alone last year proving CO2 can not cause much if any warming. A number of them have pretty good arguments to suggest it actually increases convection, causing increased heat loss from the surface, & is a cooling agent. I can't fault them, but remain to be convinced. We definitely do not have a handle on the climate yet, & will probably not have for decades if not centuries.

We most definitely will not get there if we try to live with alternate energy. At our present development of science coal, hydrocarbons & nuclear will be necessary for a long time, for civilisation to progress.

Come on Cossomby, not that old nail. An equally old answer.

The stone age did not end because they ran out of stones.

Cooking on dung fires did not stop because we ran out of dung. Some poor buggers without coal fired power of course still have to use dung.

We didn't stop cooking on fuel stoves, [coal, coke or wood], because we ran out of them either.

We will develop new energy sources long before we run out of any of our current fuels. It won't be wind or solar, that is for sure. Nuclear could supply most of our needs right now if we had a sane population, & even those fools who resist it will be clamoring for it, if the lights start going out. Meanwhile give thanks for what you have inherited, & try to enjoy your life.

try to enjoy your life.
Hasbeen,
Does that include scuba diving on Endeavour reef today ? ;-)

That should be enjoyable Individual. I've never been that far north inside the reef, I have always gone out & come back in via Fitzroy Passage, off Cairns. It gives an easier angle of sailing if heading for PNG or the Solomons.

It is over 30 years since I've been on the water up there. They have been using Hill Inlet at the northern end of Whitehaven beach on Whitsunday in the Queensland advertising again, & it stirs an old longing every time I see it.

It looks like most of you people on The Forum OLO either live in Queensland or are from Queensland.

That answers a lot of questions.

Hey Mr Opinion,

"It looks like most of you people on The Forum OLO either live in Queensland or are from Queensland.

That answers a lot of questions."

Yeah like what exactly ?
If you have some observations you wish to share with the rest of us go right ahead.

I've got some observations too.
- At least we haven't handed over our capital city to the Chinese like Sydney.
At least we haven't handed our capital city over to African gangs like Melbourne.
And we're the place all you southern people go to and start a new life in after you're sick of the crap down south.

You turn our nice cities, into your crap cities.
And you come up here bringing your stupid grovelling 'subservience to foreigners' attitude that your escaping from, and then try to impose it on us.

What's wrong with QLD mate?
Is it because we have Pauline Hanson?
The question is why don't your states have any Pauline Hanson's?
That's because your states already well and truly sold out.
Your states are already owned by foreigners.

You walk around Sydney and you see a sad and broken people whose city doesn't belong to them anymore, and the housing there doesn't look like it's improved since the 80's
Havent the people in western Sydney ever heard of render?
You cities an ugly dump full of foreigners where everyone's building granny flats in their back yards.

But as a Uni student, I'm sure you see things differently to me.

Dear Armchair Critic,

I don't mind you having a swing if someone disses your state but facts do matter.

Both Victoria and Queensland both have had net increases in interstate migration coming to them for each of the last 10 years.

To be fair this is in good part because NSW is the first port of call for many immigrants.

However Queensland has more people bolting out the door than Victoria by a sizable margin, either absolute numbers or by percentage.

That answers a lot of questions.
Particularly about Mr Opinion, more of an exposé really, of him/her/it !

Armchair Critic,

The Chinese have just as much right to be here as you.

Sydney is Australia's first Chinese city and before long Queensland will be full of Chinese as well. You just need to accept the fact that Australia has a Chinese future.

Hey SteeleRedux

"However Queensland has more people bolting out the door than Victoria by a sizable margin, either absolute numbers or by percentage."

I didn't know that, sorry.
Thanks for the info.

Hey Mr Opinion,

"The Chinese have just as much right to be here as you."

How do you figure?

"Sydney is Australia's first Chinese city and before long Queensland will be full of Chinese as well. You just need to accept the fact that Australia has a Chinese future."

I accept that people like yourself probably helped make it so.

Armchair Critic,

According to maze there is only 1 in 50 people in Australia who is Chinese.

So don't you go worrying about the Chinese taking over Queensland like they are doing in Sydney and Melbourne.

They will eventually, we're ripe for the picking.
Australians can't compete when Chinese have business and family contacts back at home, to import manufactured goods.
Slowly all the chips on the board will be transferred to Chinese hands, it's inevitable.
Especially since the first place these Chinese graduates will look for a business opportunity outside Communist China is here.

Armchair Critic,
I don't think the likes of Paul1405, SteelRedux, Mr Opinion etc are actually Australians.
I know many Australians & none of them are as silly as that lot !