There is no saving our universities. The Lomborg Consensus Centre has been axed in response to pure emotional hysteria. The Abbott government should immediately set up the Centre anyway, make it independent from the universities, which don’t deserve another cent.
Bjorn Lomborg, who believes the IPCC science but disagrees with their economics, is too “dangerous” for UWA. Poor petals! He wants to get more environmental and human benefit from government spending — which is a disaster for the Green Gravy train. Lomborg commits the unforgivable sin of failing to feed friends of big-government. So he had to be punished, nothing is more scary that “funding a skeptic”. (See Tim Flannery’s reaction). But ponder how they have overplayed their hand: Lomborg is not a skeptic of the science, the Consensus Centre wasn’t going to write on climate change, and yet, it was unthinkable?
ABC news:
UWA cancels contract for Consensus Centre headed by controversial academic Bjorn Lomborg
The University of Western Australia has cancelled the contract for a policy centre that was to be headed up by controversial academic Bjorn Lomborg after a “passionate emotional reaction” to the plan.
There is no free speech in academia, only the illusion of it.
If UWA taught students what free speech is, and why it is needed, the petition would have been laughed out of town. But they reap what they sow — after years of politically correct propaganda, UWA is a victim of its own intellectual shallowness. The UWA students were merely doing as they had been taught.
The Federal Government had pledged to contribute $4 million to the Consensus Centre, a think tank that was to use methods similar to those used by Dr Lomberg’s Copenhagen Centre.
Dr Lomborg has attracted controversy for suggesting that the dangers of climate change are overstated, and that society faces other more pressing challenges such as global poverty.
In a statement, UWA Vice Chancellor Paul Johnson said the creation of the centre had attracted “mixed reactions” from staff, students and the general public.
Academia is lost. Let it go, and start again with real centres of higher education. New ones.
Look at how the VC of UWA defends the decision:
I have stated many times that it is not a centre to study climate change, that the University was not providing any direct funding to the Centre, and that that Bjorn Lomborg would not be involved in its day-to-day operations.
Obviously it would be a disaster if a rational economist studied climate change.
Therefore, it is with great regret and disappointment that I have formed the view that the events of the past few weeks places the Centre in an untenable position as it lacks the support needed across the University and the broader academic community to meet its contractual obligations and deliver value for money for Australian taxpayers.
By its very nature a centre of this sort requires co-operation of a wide range of people across many fields.
The academic staff of UWA have thrown a tanty, and frozen Lomborg out. That says everything you need to know about how intellectually weak they are.
The Australian budget is due next Tuesday. The Abbott government could get some real savings if it stops funding centres of Higher Propaganda.
h/t DonS, Stuart, Ian, BernieL, Timboss.
* * *
If this makes you angry, please send some support to real science and real free speech so we can fight back.
There are no government grants funding this blog and we rely on people like you to help us beat the bullies.
If you can help me pay our bills, I can help get your views to reach more people.
And if you run a business that would like to advertise to 6,000 discerning global readers a day, please email me. joanne AT joannenova.com.au
I am disgusted by my old university.
310
It’s obscene. But now, par for the course.
If that course happens to be in Unicorn Husbandry.
201
West Australia is a stupid place for unicorn husbandry, you need rainbows for effective unicorn fertilisation and WA is simply too dry.
251
Its kind of like a bad dream…..although we are spirally toward an academia version of Krystal Nacht if we are not careful.
Jo I agree – I think places of higher education are not universities.
It seems academia in this country is populated with Brown Shirts…..although as Newmans comments on CAGW being a UN end run around democracy has lit the fuse on the whole thing…..now we have to watch and see what happens…..
Australians generally are fine when they have been hoodwinked and know no better, but once they have been exposed as gullible fools and know it, look out…..
20
I see the press calls Lomborg “controversial”. This is Orwell-speak for anyone the journalist disagrees with. The press would never describe an academic who wants to terminate the Australia coal industry as “controversial”.
I have just part-transcribed a Melbourne University seminar where its Associate Professor of Geography Dr Peter Christoff, who teaches climate politics and policy, calls for legal bans and punitive fines on broadcasters and individuals for ‘climate denial’. This would be “based on the fact that unchecked climate denialism over time would cause loss of freedom and rights, the death of thousands of humans, the loss of entire cultures, effectively genocide , extinctions…
“The legislation to be contemplated might be roughly framed around things like Holocaust Denial legislation which already exists in 17 countries, focused on the criminalisation of those who public condone, deny or trivialise crimes of genocide or crimes against humanity…
“The [fifth] objection [to his proposal] is that this is simply unworkable, inquisitorial, having the perverse effect of increased attraction to banned ideas and their martyrs. It will depend on the application of such law. If it is selective and well focused, with substantial fines and perhaps bans on certain broadcasters and individuals whom I will not name, who stray from the dominant science without any defensible cause, it would have a disciplinary effect on public debate. There still would be plenty of room for peer reviewed scientific revisionism and public debate around it, but the trivial confusion that is being deliberately generated, would be done away with, and that is a very important thing at the moment.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOwZuRUnu24 from 20 minutes.
His proposal was heard with equanimity by the panel comprising Professor Helen Sullivan, Director of the University’s Centre for Public Policy (introducer); Professor Eckersley; activist Dave Kerin; and Professor of Rhetoric Marianne Constable (University California, Berkeley). The young audience showed no negative reaction.
Professor Sullivan, summing up at 1.54.20, said Christoff’s contribution was useful as “just about how you might start to use the law and possibility of the law, to generate a sense of resistance and generate people out of a passivity. I would not want to think Peter’s contribution was off the point; it is ‘in there’ and may be part of the mix and something we need to be thinking about.”
The press would never describe Christoff or Sullivan as “controversial”.
60
tony thomas,
Thank you very much for bringing this to our attention. In a recent thread one Sarah Bath 1975 made a comment referring to a movement to introduce legislation similar to the Holocaust D—-l legislation. We all thought she was either a troll or a bot /sarc but now that you bring us this new info, maybe we’ll all wake up to what’s going on out there in the real world.
By wake up I mean to go further than just acknowledge that the greens/progresives (whatever you want to call them) are moving forward with their plans but to actually do something about it.
Is there a way you could post the entire transcript for all to see?
Abe
20
In the Quadrant article Socrates tells his executioners that by killing him they will rouse the ire of the multitude. Today I heard an editorial on an ABC radio channel that was highly critical of the actions of the UWA.
40
Over-grazing by unicorns has in the past reduced rainbows. Climate is changing however.
20
Turtle is correct. I am appalled.
Why would anybody support UWA in light of This decision.
The Alumni need to stop providing their annual contribution to the Hackett Foundation forthwith.
When the Hackett Foundation phones you looking for your contribution say no; and say why. Ask them to note the reason down.
Socialism has had a very big win here. The Green menace has had a very big win here.
We should never forget; nor ever forgive the UWA management or the UWA academics.
272
Turtle – “I am disgusted by my old university”.
King Geo and the majority of my fellow UWA geo graduates agree with you.
UWA has lost a lot of credibility cancelling Bjorn Lomborg’s “Consensus Centre”.
Like the Univ of QLD and Uni of NSW, UWA has been hijacked by what James D calls the “Watermelons” (red on the inside & green on the outside). The “Watermelons” are an “insidious cancer” that can only result in “Economic Misery”.
152
The Abbott government should stop funding this “university”
60
But they won’t. They are too scared to do anything, which is why the Left always win.
Even though they are too scared to act, you would think that at the very least they would demand a ‘please explain’. But, again, they won’t.
Has anybody seen anything from Jensen yet?
10
All employers should refuse to employ any graduates of such a sub par university.
20
In the end Lomborg and that set up was just going to be another academic trough for an elite group of snouts,nothing would have come of it,any recommendation would be ignored by govt,just because they may have a mindset that is agreeable to us doesn’t make them right.
All totalitarian govts from all spectrums have been supported by academia.
Academics are like talk-back radio jocks politicians and prostitutes,they are all for sale to whoever will pay a price.
50
This is not limited to one institution:
I have personally seen a University Chancellor in Victoria, BC, Canada publically attack Grad students for failing to buy into the myth of CAGW and threaten their standings at the university (Royal Roads University)
McGill students (led by the faculty) regularly demonstrate (near riots) against anyone who doesn’t toe the party line regarding CAGW and other topics.
40
My wife is a UWA alum and has just severed all connections with the organization and the alumni association. I wish I could do the same, but I have no connections there to sever!
10
i’ve been watching the tennis in Madrid and cannot believe i’ve returned to your website to find this news, jo.
surely today will go down as one of the most shameful in Australian academic history.
almost as shameful
8 May: ABC: Greg Hunt distances himself from Maurice Newman’s claim UN seeks global authoritarian rule
By Johanna Nicholson
When questioned on whether he shared Mr Newman’s views, Mr Hunt distanced himself from the comments.
“It’s not been something that I’ve expressed, it’s not something that I would express,” he said…
Mr Hunt said the Government was working alongside all parties to address climate change and that he had had “very constructive talks” with Ms Figueres earlier this week.
“We want to address the problem, we’re working with other countries and we’re working with the international organisations,” he said.
“Individuals are entitled to their views, our approach is to work constructively with all international parties.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-08/greg-hunt-distances-himself-maurice-newman-un-attack/6455596
by their own words you shall know them…the “appointed” ones.
Christiana Figueres was appointed as the new Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in 2010, and was reappointed for a second three year term in July 2013.:
3 Feb: UNRIC: Figueres: First time the world economy is transformed intentionally
“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history”, Ms Figueres stated at a press conference in Brussels.
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 – you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation.”…
http://www.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-figueres-first-time-the-world-economy-is-transformed-intentionally
p.s. jo, u need an apostrophe in Lomborg’s.
142
““It’s not been something that I’ve expressed, it’s not something that I would express,” he said…”
Greg Hunt says he hasn’t expressed it, because he wouldn’t [dare] and not that he disagrees with it.
172
Eddie, that is absolute nonsense. You appear to be nothing more than an apologist providing cowardly cover for a two faced politician.
62
Thanks for that Sam. Perhaps I’m reading too much into his choice of words. The “working constructively with all International parties ” as he goes on, does sound strikingly similar to utterances from the C. Figueres in recent days, as if they might be concocting something between them. If they think they are being smart I do hope he realises what he’s dealing with, before she puts one over on him.
71
“Passionate emotional response”, but no facts! I thought that universities were supposed to deal in facts, but then, maybe not if it threatens their income. Here are some facts from Maurice Newman: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-08/greg-hunt-distances-himself-maurice-newman-un-attack/6455596 Maurice for PM!
92
Facts? At NWA? Reported by ABC?
82
The correct response to assertions is to ask for facts.
31
And the silence was deafening.
41
So let’s ask him
00
Friday afternoon announcement, just to compound their cowardice.
131
btw ABC originally had the headline:
‘Passionate reaction’ sinks UWA Bjorn Lomborg Consensus Centre’
which can be seen 3 times on jo’s abc linked page despite not appearing in the url:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-08/bjorn-lomborg-uwa-consensus-centre-contract-cancelled/6456708
the original headline can be seen in the right sidebar, in Top Stories menu and Just In menus at the bottom of the page.
on ABC’s News homepage, the original headline – ‘Passionate reaction’ sinks UWA Bjorn Lomborg Consensus Centre’ – appears above the summary of jo’s linked page, in the right sidebar, plus in the Most Popular menu at the bottom of the page.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
shut down the ABC.
111
Passionate counts for more than rational, it seems.
211
It’s the fear of the truth coming out.
42
Passion over reason: Religion. Dogma training.
Perhaps the opponents were afraid that their lack of intellectual capacity to rationally challenge Lomberg’s arguments would be exposed.
203
Kristallnacht mentality
rules in Academia.
193
Agree Beth. The tyrannical left sure seem to have long knives and know to use them.
I believe it is time for the leading countries of the West to have a basic and fundamental re-evaluation and discussion of the role of universities and the role and amount of direct public funding and public funding of students attending them.
I am not proposing more government control of universities–that seems to be their major problem. I am proposing a discussion of if there should be any public funding of universities and any tax free status.
We need higher education. But do we need higher education that has devolved to tyrannical leftists appendages to the socialists and Marxists?
112
Nicely put Beth.
The demise of German science in the 1930’s with the departure of the intellectual and science greats for the US and the UK was Hitler’s gift to the World. German science never recovered its pre-eminent global position, conceding it to the US and the UK among others.
We appear to be witnessing an evisceration of western science by eco-marxists or those with eco-marxist leaning, the kind of folk who reflexively adulate Russell Brand and now inhabit the Universities and university departments, and who have made disagreement untenable. It guarantees a decade or two of execrable mediocrity, you know, the sort exemplified by The Conversation.
Watch the rise of Chinese and Indian science.
62
eco is Marxist. The whole purpose of the eco movement is to eliminate private management of industry.
42
I note government funding is being shifted away from the Conversation http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/government-funding-for-the-conversation-website-to-be-axed-christopher-pyne-20150505-ggv19d.html
00
Well done Beth, it took me 5 paragraphs of drivel to say that.
10
Made a suggestion at work recently , it required lugging of 25kg of specialist kit over long distances for days at a time in very bad & demanding conditions……
I suggested that only blokes should do it……just like you don’t logically see women digging trenches or anything else that requires significant strength.
Well….. I think every femi-nazi within 200 miles descended….I stood my ground….sent them bonkers……
I’m not sexist, I do admit to being a bit 1950s in my thinking at times, and I am very pragmatic.
30
Sorry…the point I was trying to make is that its possible to stand up to the PC crowd and win….they rely on weight of numbers and spineless officials to pander to them.
Like all bullies, they only need one person to stare them down and the crawl off squealing about the “unfairness” of it all….
I shake my head….
50
For a supporting laugh, check out the “tampon tax” controversy in the House of Commons (Canada). http://globalnews.ca/news/1985430/ndp-wants-to-remove-tampon-tax-from-menstrual-products/
00
Yes, in a similar vein, at work (a large quango) a group of girls were complaining that the new CEO is a man, whereas 70% of the employee roll was women. So I said to them that there is a simple solution, and that is that women should be fired and men hired until a 50-50 ratio was achieved and then their complaint would be solved. The looks on their faces were priceless indeed.
60
ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
20
Late line last week.
Flannery reckons he was worried about, wait for this,
“misinformation emenating from the Lomberg consensus centre”.
Unbelievable.
230
He would recognise it if he saw it.
30
shut down the ABC. – Would anyone notice if they did?
141
Only the Socialist Party – they wouldn’t have anywhere to meet…..
Ouch….
10
Universities, the last vestige of freedom in the Middle Ages. Now indistinguishable from the medieval church. What has happened? Why people supposedly best equipped with mental faculties and knowledge opportunity have surrendered what is most dear to their existence, independence and courage. Is this just the corruption by money or there is something that I am missing here?
I thought that having a “moderate” will soften the message and the reasoned course will be eventually plotted. Sadly I see that any decent is toxic showing again that this debate is about either you are with us or against us.
281
Its simple. Our universities and schools have been captured by globalists pushing for the new world order agenda 21. They’ve been cultivating the “Climate Youth” for some time now using the same brainwashing techniques Hitler used to program his youth. People very easily slip into Lots of the Flies mode when they are ENCOURAGED to. [SNIP Lets not go there.]. The lemmings would follow in a second and i doubt there is a crime they wouldnt commit for their “cause”.
122
I think there is hope – there is an old saying men lose their minds in a group and recover their senses one by one.
I think the best antidote is teaching school kids that :
(1) Their teachers are being made lie to them about CAGW because they have to follow a govt-mandated syllabus, that happens to contain a lot of lies about CAGW.
(2) The world is very safe and ownt run out of resources
(3) That over population is wrong – great resource http://www.overpopulationisamyth.com
(4) That there is a global control grid that is trying to be laid down through Agenda 21.
(5) That most mainstream “news” outlets are untrustworthy.
(6) That examining the basic science behind CAGW shows very quickly there is no CAGW.
(7) That our climate is a very complex beast, and cant be modelled thoroughly yet – and when we look at the IPCC models we see they fail.
Its sad we have to get kids to learn about propaganda so quickly, but there is a battle for our kids minds that we didn’t start, but we need to fight ferociously for. We need to protect them from having their minds hijacked and wrecked by Socialist group-think paralysis .
70
Now for the burning(banning) of the books,you all know that it is coming?
40
This sends another shiver down the spine.
It seems to me to be as scientifically indefensible as the acts we saw at climategate inquiries where the investigators were chosen to whitewash. More importantly, there are more and more diverse cases since 2009 where whistleblowers are not invited to participate in reviews that they precipitated and the main or only evidence is taken from known fellow travelers.
If this is not nipped in the bud, it will rapidly become the normal way to dismiss objection/whistleblowing/minority views.
And these people have the gall to accept ‘academic’ as a description. Wow.
251
Christopher Pyne said he would find another university, probably not the university of NSW.
Friday Funny: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/05/08/dam-bureaucrats/
50
Where did he say that?
He’s a miserable two faced weakling.
If he had any sense he would seriously damage UWA financially. Hip pocket politics. It’s all the miserable cowards deserve.
60
‘Australia’s education minister, Christopher Pyne, has vowed to find another university to host the Bjorn Lomborg “consensus centre” and is seeking legal advice about a decision by the University of Western Australia (UWA) to hand back $4m in federal government funding awarded for it.’
Lenore Taylor / Guardian
40
Why not allocate the $4m to the CSIRO and set up the Centre there?
I know the place is full of green alarmists but what are they going to do, resign in protest?
10
Sam that was good el gordo
20
“Dam”
20
The UWA says is cancelled the contract after a “passionate emotional reaction”.
So intellectualism is about whether something doesn’t stir an emotional reaction.
Who pays these people?
270
Thingadonta asks:
“Who pays these people?”
Answer: unfortunately, you and I do.
The real question is: why do we continue to vote for these fraudsters who purport to act on our behalf?
Greg Hunt is a disgrace. He needs to financially damage UWA. Really hurt them.
130
Funding for Universities is Christopher Pyne’s department,
20
“The scale of the strong and passionate emotional reaction…”
Proof positive that this ‘end of the world’ cult is nothing but religious fervor.
The advent of this worldwide cult – intent on dominating all social, economic, legal and political spheres – puts the small timers like daesh, to shame.
Be proudly heretical and oppose these ‘death’ cults!
142
message for Greg Hunt:
8 May: UK Telegraph: Andrew Critchlow: New government faces potential energy crisis, warns expert
New government will have to address capacity shortfalls to avoid blackouts
Ahead of the results of one of the closest elections in decades, Simon Virley, UK chair of energy and natural resources at KPMG, has warned of tight energy capacity in 2015 and 2016.
“The next couple of winters are expected to be among the tightest this decade in terms of electricity capacity margins due to announced plant closures; while Britain’s overall dependence on imported energy is soaring as North Sea production declines,” he said.
According to KPMG, the margin for power generation this winter could be even lower than the 4.1pc winter outlook provided by National Grid last year following the potential closure of plants at Killingholme and Longannet.
Blackouts have been a persistent concern for UK business. Last year National Grid was forced to unveil a series of measures to keep more power generation in reserve in an effort to boost spare capacity to 6pc, a level perceived to be a safe threshold…
Meanwhile, plans for Britain’s first new nuclear plant in a generation at Hinkley Point still depend on receiving final investment approval from French utility EDF. The company said last year it wanted to decide on the £24.5bn project in Somerset by the end of March but that deadline has now slipped.
***Some critics argue that a focus on renewables has left Britain’s power network now dangerously short of spare capacity. Official figures show that renewables generated 19.2pc of UK supplies in 2014, with solar contributing 1.2pc.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/utilities/11589712/New-government-faces-potential-energy-crisis-warns-expert.html
the UN’s End Game:
Wikipedia: Technocracy
The term technocracy was originally used to advocate the application of the scientific method to solving social problems. According to the proponents of this concept, the role of money, economic values, and moralistic control mechanisms would be eliminated altogether if and when this form of social control should ever be implemented in a continental area endowed with enough natural resources, technically trained personnel, and installed industrial equipment. In such an arrangement, concern would be given to sustainability within the resource base, instead of monetary profitability, so as to ensure continued operation of all social-industrial functions into the indefinite future. Technical and leadership skills would be selected on the basis of specialized knowledge and performance, rather than democratic election by those without such knowledge or skill deemed necessary…
In the 1930s, through the influence of Howard Scott and the Technocracy movement he founded, the term technocracy came to mean, ‘government by technical decision making’, using an energy metric of value. Scott proposed that money be replaced by ***energy certificates denominated in units such as ergs or joules, equivalent in total amount to an appropriate national net energy budget, and then distributed equally among the North American population, according to resource availability…
The American economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen was an early advocate of Technocracy, and was involved in the Technical Alliance as was Howard Scott and M. King Hubbert (who later developed the theory of peak oil)…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy
61
and a lot of that renewable wind energy has to traverse most of Scotland on newly built pylon lines to get to the population centres, not to mention all the Hydro used to stabilise the Grid. Let’s hope the new SNP administration there doesn’t feel tempted to make matters worse. Cameron’s already talking in his victory speech of giving them new Tax raising powers.
40
I wonder if you’ve read “Technocracy Rising” by Patrick M.Wood?
Connects a lot of dots!
10
joseph –
just saw your question. haven’t read Wood’s book, but read about it online & hope to get hold of it. i used his “end game” phrase, which is probably what made you ask.
the re-emergence of technocracy & the attempts to introduce a carbon currency are subjects i’ve been researching for years. to thwart both, i agree with Wood that it’s pointless to frame CAGW as left/right. a waste of time & energy.
example. in the UK election, Obama strategist, David Axelrod, advised Miliband, while Obama’s Jim Messina advised Cameron, & now Messina has just rushed back to give his all to Hillary Clinton.
why get worked up about any of them? best wishes.
00
joseph – u may have read these, but just in case:
2007: Personal Carbon Trading: Lessons from Complementary Currencies
by Gill Seyfang
Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE),
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom
Acknowledgements
This work was part of the interdisciplinary research programme of the ESRC Research Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE).
This model has been enthusiastically endorsed by key actors in the UK government, notably Rt Hon David Miliband, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs .
http://www.academia.edu/3057993/Personal_carbon_trading_Lessons_from_complementary_currencies
April 2010: Rolling Stone: Matt Taibbi: The Great American Bubble Machine
(This article originally appeared in the July 9-23, 2009 of Rolling Stone)
From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression — and they’re about to do it again
***Gone are Hank Paulson and Neel Kashkari; in their place are Treasury chief of staff Mark Patterson and CFTC chief Gary Gensler, both former Goldmanites. (Gensler was the firm’s co-head of finance.) And instead of credit derivatives or oil futures or mortgage-backed CDOs, the new game in town, the next bubble, is in carbon credits — a booming trillion dollar market that barely even exists yet, but will if the Democratic Party that it gave $4,452,585 to in the last election manages to push into existence a groundbreaking new commodities bubble, disguised as an “environmental plan,” called cap-and-trade…
Goldman won’t even have to rig the game. It will be rigged in advance…
The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the “cap” on carbon will be continually lowered by the government, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time. The volume of this new market will be upwards of a trillion dollars annually; for comparison’s sake, the annual combined revenues of all electricity suppliers in the U.S. total $320 billion.
Goldman wants this bill…
Back in 2005, when Hank Paulson was chief of Goldman, he personally helped author the bank’s environmental policy, a document that contains some surprising elements for a firm that in all other areas has been consistently opposed to any sort of government regulation. Paulson’s report argued that “voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem.”…
Goldman is ahead of the headlines again, just waiting for someone to make it rain in the right spot. Will this market be bigger than the energy futures market?
“Oh, it’ll dwarf it,” says a former staffer on the House energy committee…
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405
***of course, Hank Paulson didn’t go away, as he is now co-chair of Risky Business, alongside those equally-CAGW-concerned individuals, Michael Bloomberg & Tom Steyer. lol.
10
Just saw this excellent comment by frasier on hotcopper:
“A university that will only present 50% of viewpoints probably deserves 50% funding.”
That sort of cut could arouse a few passions down at Hackett Hall.
271
Perhaps Jo, with all your experience publishing peer-reviewed science, could take up the position instead.
428
Perhaps Timboss, if you were proud of your arguments you might use your name?
314
I didn’t make an argument Jo. I made a suggestion.
15
Maybe Timboss, perhaps you could give a definition of science, that separates the subject from beliefs and from pseudo-scientific pap. A definition that could be similarly applied to pharmacy to separate drugs that save lives from fake slimming products sold by lots of fake claims and only cause flatulence.
Or show from the history of science where advances in knowledge have been made when there is a dogmatic consensus that stifles dissent. You will be a long time finding it.
122
Timboss,
This site is a prime example of free speach.
It allows you use an open and transparent forum to post your opinions, which of themselves advocate the denial to others of the same opportunity because you disagree with their position.
Why are you so fearful of questioning the science?
102
Actually this site seems heavy handed with its moderation. I’m not free to say what I like, am I mods? 🙂
06
Timboss,
Climate alarmist do not like to publish alternative views and will always try delete alternative argument threads in order to actively shut down any debate that questions the meme – as proven by the successful efforts to shut down Lomborg.
This strategy will only be affective as long as all the alarmists stick to the instruction manual.
It all turns to worms when the alarmist predilection for shutting down debate actually become the focus of frustration for those same alarmists who also shut down the very same avenues that would allow them to take their fight up to the line, to match wits and science, to tackle the “denier” head on, and to score those personal little victories that their fragile egos crave, it’s a personality defect that alarmists all tend to share.
You only post here because the same sites you support that deny others the freedom of speech don’t give you the anonymous satisfaction you crave of challenging alternative views.
I mean, all that censorship you support doesn’t give you an opportunity to show-off in front of your comrades.
Just as well really, although it must be a bit galling for you.
It’s not good form to let them see you lose every debate.
Oh, I just got it, that’s why you post here anonymously.
70
TIMBOSS-
Specific examples of past moderation of your offerings, please.
Mods would not mind verbatim repeats, with your judicious cull of occasional words plausibly triggering the naughty corner visit – if it happened.
I have used my real name, only, for about 15 years of blogging now, with no sweat.
Have you little to fear but fear itself?
Geoff.
10
Je suis Bjorn.
180
That is very good!!! I like that (snicker, snicker, snicker still LOL hehe).
50
You may also want to say hello to paul.johnson AT uwa.edu.au … since he bases his research appointment decisions on “passionate and emotional responses”…
100
When pollie Hunt tries to explain this to pollie Abbott he may start to understand at last how damaging the “consensus” is to rational discourse. Ahhh hubris!
(OT- the ABC is sulking- try looking for UK election results on the news site. It takes a lot of digging to find anything.)
(OT- the ABC’s fact check on paracetamol prescriptions is even worse than usual. They can’t acknowledge that over-the-counter drugs bought from a pharmacy are commercially equivalent to off-the-shelf purchases anywhere.)
70
Bjorn is not against man made Global warming. He does not question it. He only questions the social and economic impact. So the alleged passion is about what? This is absurd and illogical activism, like boycotting chocolate shops because the owners are Jewish? That an Australian university agrees with such nonsense is an indictment of the university and any belief in freedom of speech. Group think clearly reigns supreme at the Univ of WA. Death to the unbelievers, even if they believe?
Has there ever been such an absurd own goal? It ranks with Chris Turney’s expedition, the Ship of Fools, trapped in Antarctica by the ice which wasn’t there.
Universities have become politically naive prisoners of the twitterati.
351
Yes but his views interfere with the gravy train the tows the cool aid tanker. Cant have that!
161
The Gravy Train is government funded.
If Abbott and Hunt had a mind they would financially damage UWA and spike the cool aid tanker accordingly.
Unfortunately, they’re gutless wonders. Hunt in particular.
81
It’s really scary when you think about the ramifications. The guy is a global warming believer, and yet they want his head.
Imagine the danger to the rest of us if they can ever be convinced to “save their planet”…
yeah, I know, over the top, never gonna happen, not in a million years, silly thought….
81
The flashpoint of their passion is “renewabubbles”
From that flows restructuring consumer society (by deliberately not meeting demand) and eventually engendering a collective (by controlling both demand and production). The Soviets/Mao etc are just so last-century or two
And I’m called cynical 🙂 🙂
Amazing …
70
I can see how eliminating free speech might require co-operation from the right people.
120
150
????
The depths of depravity in Oz’s academia and leftist reach apparently cannot be determined.
It is a long way down and if I look again later I think they will still be falling.
They know no shame or remorse.
120
Climate Zealot own goal! Can Lomborg be attached to CSIRO funding next!
61
I am not sure I should be surprised after the UWA’s other appointments around the climate change religion eg The Lew…
However, I do see this as a very sad day when a major university can be bullied into PC conformity by greenie groupthink. It shows just how much power this misanthropic cult has amassed. It’s socially unhealthy.
111
Bullied?
I feel they sought and embraced this choice.
60
They have no shame and very thick hides… (For some reason the Gruffalo comes to mind)
40
On better news, Australian born Natalie Bennet, leader of the UK greens and economic ignoramus, lost her seat by coming 3rd and gaining %13 of the vote.
220
Well done the Poms.
100
I’m tempted to say, “How predictable.”
But I won’t. I’ll just be polite instead and let their actions speak for themselves. That voice is loud enough.
50
as an UWA Alumni, I’m hurtin bad tonight
oh the shame
90
Truly, the Age of Unenlightenment. Passionate belief now over rules rationality.
https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/the-age-of-unenlightenment/
Pointman
110
Even for climate séance, it’s a very gutsy move to pull the plug on such a high profile academic.
Have to get in before Ruairi! 😀
– – – – –
When Greens despair at the news
there’s differing climate views,
axing Bjorn Lomborg
is all that the Borg
of global warming can choose.
Climate consensus takes guts.
It’s danger; no Ifs or Buts.
As soon as Bjorn lands
His project’s been canned.
Crikey, those warmists are nuts!
Climate experts declare it’s dire,
Thermometers mustn’t go higher!
And if you say Nay
at UWA,
your funding just might expire.
251
You get a thumbs up for the Star Trek reference Andrew 🙂
60
A very nicely constructed treble Andrew and well done.
20
On April 25, 2011 (six months after my Venus/Earth temperatures comparison, which disproves the global-warming greenhouse effect and separates the competent from the incompetent in so-called “climate science”), I submitted the following comment to this site (it may seem to start out off-topic on this thread, but read on):
“You cannot shame Barack Obama. I wrote to him, on paper, about the unrecognized crisis of incompetence in science the day after he was elected, and received only a 3X5 card with ‘thank you for writing’, after 4 months. He was brainwashed from his youth, epitomizes the current widespread inability to focus on the critical evidence in any field, and personally exults in what I, to put all the political hysteria in the proper perspective, call the ‘War of the Insane Left’. They are out for revenge (against the Bush presidency, against past slavery and racism, against the excesses of capitalism, and yes, probably against every personal injustice each of them has experienced in life), and for them the ends justify any means that comes to hand. I just saw a portion of a TV program on ‘The Third Reich: The Rise’, within the last hour. It was familiar to me, and was depressing (knowing how it would play out), so I didn’t continue watching it. The Left is trying to emulate the rise of the Third Reich; that is, they want all the power and no opposition. Anyone of any maturity knows that government, academia, and all large institutions utilize the same absolute power, absolutely corrupted and corrupting, to maintain themselves and those at the top. And ALL of our scientific and political institutions, and the media, have already been suborned by the supposedly righteous image they have been projecting for decades. The global warming hysteria is just the current tip of their spear, to be pushed regardless of the truth. And just as most Germans were not Nazis, most of those defending the obscene cllimate “consensus” are not evil. They are, however, thoroughly incompetent, and brainwashed to be accepting of evil. All the signs are that it will only get worse, until there are no ‘lukewarmers’ left, in climate science, all of science, or in politics. Shortly after, it will be World War III in earnest. And it will be our own fault if we refuse to see it coming.”
162
while watching nadal vs dimitrov, i came across this unbelievable, even extraordinary, new Ipsos Climate Change Report:
8 May: SMH: Peter Hannam: Most Australians view climate change as already causing weather extremes: Ipsos
A clear majority of Australians view global warming as already causing extreme weather events such as storms, droughts and floods and just 3 per cent say “there is no such thing as climate change”, according to the findings in an Ipsos survey.
Just over 60 per cent of the 1063 respondents in the report – the eighth annual survey on the subject – viewed climate change as behind extreme events, with similar numbers also linking the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef and rising sea levels to warming global temperatures.
Separately, about 40 per cent of respondents viewed climate change as either entirely or mainly caused by human activity, while another 43 per cent said both human and natural forces are at play. Just 3 per cent dismissed climate change altogether and another 4 per cent viewed changes as entirely naturally…
The Ipsos survey joins reports over the past year by the CSIRO and the Lowy Institute pointing to an uptick of concern among Australians about climate change. Worries tended to drop after 2007 before increasing again after about 2011…
***Respondents, though, were a lot more certain that the large weather event or extreme natural disasters are caused by climate change, than human issues such as increased refugee arrivals.
Only 30 per cent said climate change is already causing environmental pressures in other countries that might prompt migration, with another 4 per cent saying that will be a trigger over the next decade. A further 5 per cent say it may cause migration over the 2026-2065 period.
Christiana Figueres, the United Nations chief climate change negotiator, told an audience in Sydney this week that immigration would loom large in the future.
“I cannot begin to tell you the immigration nightmare that Australia would face if we do not arrest climate change,” Ms Figueres said. “You can use your imagination and then multiply it, times 10.”
“You think you have a problem with boat people now? Friends, you would seriously have a problem,” she said…
***Renewable energy retains “huge support” among respondents, with 56 per cent saying it was a priority for action. Separate Ipsos surveys have found 87 per cent support roof-top solar and 78 per cent back large-scale solar plants, Mr Clark said…
In a departure from some other surveys, older people were over-represented in several categories backing action on global warming. For instance, respondents among those described as “active believers” with a strong or urgent concern for climate change were more likely to be aged 50 or older.
Members of this group were also more likely to be university educated and vote Labor or the Greens…
Younger respondents may be “more worried about getting ahead in life and getting things started, whereas some of the older generation are actually sitting down and thinking about their future, and their children’s and grandchildren’s future,” Mr Clark said.
***By contrast, the slightly larger “passive doubters” segment – at 31 per cent versus 27 per cent – was “strongly” leaning towards the Coalition and the least likely of the three main groups to have a university degree…
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/most-australians-view-climate-change-as-already-causing-weather-extremes-ipsos-20150508-ggww6v.html
it would seem all the questions assume something called “climate change” that is the equivalent of CAGW.
Ipsos has done climate reports for AXA Insurance in the past. no mention in this one as to who commissioned it, that i can find:
PDF: 12 pages: Ipsos: CLIMATE CHANGE REPORT APRIL 2015
Background…
Climate change is already affecting Australia with more intense and more frequent droughts and heatwaves, rising sea levels and changing rainfall; these changes have resulted in increasing pressure on water supplies and agricultural production.
So what do Australians think of the issue?…
P4: Figure 1 shows the top environmental issues in terms of perceived need for action since 2007. Renewable energy has topped the list of issues for the last five years (in the most recent study 56% identify this as an issue to address). Along with sustainability (41%), it has also proved one of the most stable measures over time.
P7: When will climate change start to bite?
Two thirds (66%) of Australians agree that climate change poses a serious threat to our way of life over the next 100 years, and although fewer are as sure about the more short-term future, more than half (58%) still agree that climate change poses a serious threat to our way of life over the next 25 years…
P12: Endnotes: Participants were recruited from Ipsos’ online ‘MyView’ panel.
http://ipsos.com.au/Ipsos_docs/CC2015/Ipsos_Climate_Change_Report_2015.pdf
41
Cornered rats.
Do not behave in a rational manner.
Especially if they were never rational as normal rats..
The modes and models of Academia are collapsing.
Good riddance, as they have been dead from the top down since at least the 1980s.
Certification Mills.
Empty boasts on paper their only product.
Servants of Indolence,Decay and Career Parasitism.
Public Education always ran the risk of becoming Public Indoctrination.
Once that goal is achieved, the winners are the fools and Bandits.
A pyric victory as civilization flames out under their “helping hands”.
If I was from Ontario, Canada I would call this “WYNNING”.
I guess Animal Husbandry is not an approved subject for “higher” education.
Parasites only prosper on a healthy Host.
Simple mathematics… far beyond the yen of professional sponges.
This site as with WUWT are leading the way into the future of education.
Self education, where facts, opinion and conjecture are thrown to the wolves of other persons perception.
Science without the basic methodology is religion.
Such pseudo science is hollow, tasteless and indigestible.
Climatology..Scientology.
111
If it was about finding solutions and investigating climate, any worthwhile scientific organization would welcome a center that was independent and could offer unbiased information.
There’s much to be learned on the complex subject of climate, so why not follow scientific tradition and encourage debate? Unless you want to discourage debate, that is. ‘Totalitarian’ springs to mind.
After all, WA is only a venue. So relocate it already.
40
And why would history not repeat itself ?
00
“The Shiny Bauble Syndrome”
The “Warmists” reactions and hysteria often remind me of a cat being distracted by a rapidly moving shiny object that has just come into it’s field of view.
The irrational behavior of these people , who rush to silence contradicting opinions, or opinions that do not fully support their world view is very much like the erratic behavior of our feline friends.
The almost incredulous one dimensional thought processes that pervade these groups is sometimes beyond comprehension, and to characterize Bjorn Lomborg’s views as too “dangerous” for UWA is simply irrational.
Essentially what has happened is :-
The IPCC with their climate projections, have erected a Christmas tree and let the cats in …
and the burden of cleaning up this mess will no doubt fall to us “skeptics “. 😮
61
My grandmother used to tell the story of one inner city council in Melbourne who shall remain nameless…..
She always said that the Left would run the streets and facilities down badly, and so the right wing council would be elected, to fix it all up again.
The point I am making is the Left are like petulant children, who want it all their own way and throw massive tantrums when it doesn’t go their own way.
Like most bullies, you just need to stand up to them, be the adult, and take them firmly in hand.
40
OriginalSteve,
I agree wholeheartedly with you and I like the story from your grandmother. It reveals that nothing much has changed in the way that “Socialists” or as here in America “Democrats” do business.
The bullying that you speak of is a very “worrisome behavior” and “the councils” whose existence of which many of us are ignorant , often are short sighted groups of people with little or no understanding of what is practical.
The struggle to reduce Government and it’s incompetence continues….
00
This is atrocious. Anyone who has ever disbelieved the claim that the climate alarmists control academia, the peer review process, research funding, and most of the main stream media, they just need to look at this as classic proof.
Lomborg is an entirely rational and globally respected Economist and Social Policy expert, who doesn’t question the ‘consensus view’ climate science. He says because that isn’t his area. So he only addresses his mind to considering that if the IPCC predictions are right, what is the most cost effective and socially fair way to handle the predicted problems?
His research demonstrates that reducing CO2 emissions is far more expensive and much less efficient than adapting to predicted climate change. He also shows that adaption rather than mitigation is much fairer on the global poor compared to the punitive outcomes of attempts at mitigation. In other words dramatically reducing access to cheap electricity and clean reticulated water, and better agricultural techniques using inexpensive and proliferate fossil fuels.
But this position diametrically opposes the rabid environmentalist line, which is to de-industrialise the world, despite the fact we know Russia, China, India, Brazil, Indonesia and so many other developing countries have absolutely no intention of reducing C02 emissions.
Australia now has lost the opportunity for reasonable policy development regarding climate change adaption from this proposed centre, and UWA is saying that the creams of the climate alarmists are more important to the University than reasoned research and scholarship and the opportunity to expose their academics and students to contrary positions. The University has lost any right to demand Government funding for their pet projects if they can afford to turn their nose up at this opportunity.
I can only reiterate Jo’s call for reader’s financial support. Imagine what people like Jo Nova could have achieved with a small fraction of the grants, funding and donations from left wing environmental groups that the climate Alarmists have received.
We have so few well regarded, hard working skeptic voices out there, and Jo Nova has proved herself incredibly effective and persistent over the years. She can take much credit for swinging public opinion in Australia away from unquestioning acceptance of the climate scare. Jo Nova was at the forefront of getting the Carbon Tax scrapped including participating in and promoting the convoy to Canberra. The repeal of the carbon tax is not only saving Australians billions of dollars and saving thousands of jobs, it made other countries around the world, and importantly other politicians, stand up and take note.
So when Jo Nova writes:
If this makes you angry, please send some support to real science and real free speech so we can fight back. There are no government grants funding this blog and we rely on people like you to help us beat the bullies. If you can help me pay our bills, I can help get your views to reach more people.
Please don’t ignore it if you can afford anything. Send her some financial support. We need Jo Nova to keep up the good fight!
So hit the link and send some money! http://joannenova.com.au/about/donations/
Maybe even consider a regular payment or stick a note in your diary to chip in again at a later date. I know your support is much needed and much appreciated. I have of course done my bit. 🙂
133
Consolation prize http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-32639813
00
It is the triumph of belief, prejudice and ignorance. It the climate change zealots had a much better policy argument – whether intellectually or morally – then would not be worried about encouraging debate. They would then let others compare and contrast the arguments on either side, and show the winners. As proper intellectuals, they would know that even if they were wrong, by causing the other side to engage those winning arguments would be refined and be better stated. In so doing, they would be serving the advance of counter-arguments.
What I find particularly repugnant is that Lomborg brings great thinkers together to debate, to get the very best out of them. It is not Lomborg on his own.
For example, one of the late arrivals in attacking Lomborg was a British-based blogger who goes by the name of …and then there’s Physics. After his ignorant attack on Lomborg I responded on my blog. A real-life academic physicist, he had nothing positive to say on the scientific achievements of climatology. All what he had was name-calling, derogatory comments and shifting the arguments. I invite you to compare and contrast what he says with my comments.
82
I receive random Alumni News via email from my old University that are now automatically deleted, when an ex-board member of your place of learning insults your intellect simply for questioning why a hypothesis is now considered a wrongly perceived consensus then little hope remains for intellectual reformation.
It was called the University of Ballarat and recently changed to Federation University, how appropriate the initials F.U. apply to the disrespectful destructive actions towards 300 years of critical development.
From my ‘flawed’ thinking and experience when something has been continuously altered or messed with to the point it becomes inoperable then scrap it and start again, using new materials but trusting old and proven designs, it’s the only way to guarantee success and years of productive service.
80
“Students, staff and graduates are the key stakeholders at this institution, and it is so important that they are being heard.” (dailymail)
~ ~ ~
So, people against free speech demand to be heard?
. . .
Update:
via tomnelson@twitter:
Statement from Bjorn Lomborg on the UWA decision. Says he’s committed to establishing an Australian Consensus Centre.
80
I think the trick is to use their own Alynski tactics against them – focus on the lack of debate and go after it ferociously.
Its this blocking of debate that’s actually their achillies heel, after all, if the science is settled, how could a debate hurt?
10
Buying chocolates made me feel better.
70
Fact-check:
Climate change a UN-led ruse, says Tony Abbott’s business adviser Maurice Newman (smh)
“This is not about facts or logic. It’s about a new world order under the control of the UN.”
Environment Minister Greg Hunt said Mr Newman’s position was not a view “I have or would express”.
~ ~ ~
It is not Newman’s ‘view’, but a re-quote directly from the UN website:
Figueres: First time the world economy is transformed intentionally
~ ~ ~
ABC Lateline May 8, 2015:
UN climate chief responds to tirade from PM’s adviser
. . .
In all fairness, the ABC failed to ask any relevant questions about Figueres’s Brussels statement.
And that’s a fact-check of their ABC.
60
Commentators have discussed this in terms of free speech and academic principles. Does the climate establishment want to shut down other opinions?
But actually most of the noise has been about the four million dollars. It’s that grubby and quite blatant. Someone got cash which should have gone to me and my mates.
101
Most of it does. From Andrew Bolts blog
– former Labor prime minister Julia Gillard appointed honorary professor at Adelaide University.
– former Labor foreign affairs minister Stephen Smith appointed Winthrop Professor of Law at the University of Western Australia.
– former Labor Premier Carmen Lawrence appointed professor of psychology at the University of Western Australia.
– former Labor Premier John Bannon appointed associate professor at Adelaide University.
– former Labor backbencher Maxine McKew appointed a Vice Chancellor’s Fellow at Melbourne University.
– former Labor NT Chief Minister Clare Martin appointed Professorial Fellow at Charles Darwin University.
– former Labor Deputy Premier John Thwaites appointed Professorial Fellow and head of the Monash Sustainability Institute at Monash Unviersity.
– former Labor science minister Barry Jones appointed honorary professor at Melbourne University.
– former Labor Premier John Brumby appointed Professorial Fellow at Monash University.
– former Labor ACT Chief Minister John Stanhope appointed Professorial Fellow at Canberra University.
– the Grattan Institute, a Left-leaning think tank at Melbourne University, given $30 million by the Rudd and Brumby Labor governments.
– the Whitlam Institute, a shrine to Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam at the University of Western Sydney, created by Labor Governments and given $7 million by the Gillard Government for refurbishment.
– Islamist apologist Waleed Aly appointed lecturer at Monash University’s Global Terrorism Research Centre despite not having a doctorate.
– former Age editor Andrew Jaspan appointed head of The Conversation, a Leftist on-line news and views site funded by universities and the then Labor federal government.
– former Age editor-in-chief and Leftist Paul Ramage appointed Vice Chancellor Professorial Fellow at Monash University.
– warming alarmist Tim Flannery appointed professorial fellow at Melbourne University’s Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute to preach global warming.
[Sorry, don’t know why this was caught in the filter.] ED
40
Commentators have discussed this in terms of free speech and academic principles. Does the climate establishment want to shut down other opinions?
But actually most of the noise has been about the four million dollars. It’s that grubby. A rival got cash which should have gone to me and the people I work with.
31
I thought that the point of a college,
Was to broaden one’s reason with knowledge,
To enlighten with truth,
The fresh minds of the youth,
And the wisdom of others acknowledge.
171
It’s really starting to become serious, the new form of Macarthyism for having communist beliefs, but in this case for having doubts about climate hyperbole. What’s next a thought branch of the AFP for non believers!
51
Robert. It’s for having doubts about communist beliefs.
30
We appear to be reaching another period in the world’s history where the equivalent of book burning is emerging again.
If you disagree with something, don’t argue your case, try to eliminate your opponent’s opportunities to express themselves.
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” George Orwell
“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.” Oscar Wilde
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” George Washington
“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” Benjamin Franklin
For shame UWA, for shame.
30
John Derbyshire said it best.
30
O/T but in line with some comments re. the ABC there’s this little gem. This leaves little doubt on the ABC’s function.
30
Well as per usual I don’t hide my light under a bushel.
I went to Uni under protest basically. I did a Grad. Dip. in OHS Management and a Master V Commercial Fishing. I had no interest whatsoever in getting involved with the university system because every single experience I have had with Unis has only served to deepen my cynicism about their value to society.
My first experience was studying for my Master V at the NT University (now Charles Darwin). I was unfortunate enough to get involved in a debate with a couple of hippies about immigration. Their views were predictably narrow and poorly thought through, but what got me most was their utter unwillingness to engage in a debate. The second they suspected I was not on their side, the poison and vitriol began to spew. The topic was lost and their insults became the topic.
This basically typified my experience with so called higher education both in and out of the classroom. In my OHS studies I invariably had 10 years more experience in the subject matter than my lecturers, with the exception of ergonomics. Yet I was actively discouraged at all stages from contributing that knowledge, rather I should regurgitate the course material if I wanted to “get along”.
My summary of Universities generally is that they are a place where a lot of stupid people go to gain a feeling of superiority, accompanied reluctantly by some genuinely intelligent and enthusiastic learners, who soon have that beaten clean out of them.
The stupid people somehow confuse attendance with learning. They believe that passing through the front gate of the institution magically conveys the knowledge of all ages upon them, whether they have studied or not. They then use this new found omniscience to browbeat the unfortunate masses of even stupider people who would all no doubt perish, but for their brilliance. (That ones for you Tim)
Im glad the whole Lomberg thing has happened. Sceptics who didn’t know much about him have now hopefully learned a little more about this luke warm, apologist. Hes just riding the gravy train with the rest of them and deserves 10 times the ridicule for believing the junk science, than he does accolades for being sensible about the actions to counter the fantasy. (Im sure that’s about as tough as Jo will allow, its half as tough as Id like to be)
Meanwhile the loony left/green Unis have exposed themselves in a very public way as utterly uninterested in advancing their knowledge of the management of their fantastic delusion. Its their delusion and they will damn well stagger about drooling in their own way RIGHT! Don’t need no steeenking assistance from a denier.
Its been the most amusing and entertaining thing to happen in this sphere for a while. A nice punctuation mark of how utterly fantastic the entire farce is. You couldn’t write it as a fiction, no one would find it credible.
111
Here’s the original link.
00
In a way we should be grateful to the Univ of WA.
They have made it clear that to extremely left academia, the media, political classes and public servants in general, man made Global Warming is not about ‘The Science’.
Lomberg does not question ‘The Science’ but he dares question the political response and so must be silenced. You are not allowed question far left politics at our activist universities. This is not just about warming either. They are too busy rewriting history.
101
But its better than that TdeF
“UWA Academic Staff Association vice president Professor Stuart Bunt said the move was not censorship.
“This isn’t about censorship at all … Lomborg is not a climate [change] denier; he believes the scientific evidence which overwhelmingly shows that climate change is happening, he just debates the economics of how we should deal with it,” Mr Bunt said.”
Its proof positive that the vast majority of warmists have no interest in a debate of any kind. Not even on the economics of monster killing.
The vocal minority who would have howled this into being, don’t even care that Bjorn is on their side. Its simply the fact that if his centre goes ahead there will be a discussion. Nothing is more dangerous in their minds than a discussion of any kind.
Christopher Pyne got it completely wrong when he tweeted.
“What a sad day for academic freedom when staff at a university silence a dissenting voice rather than test their ideas in debate #auspoI”
Lomberg is not a dissenting voice. He’s barely a sensible voice, hes just a grabby, opportunistic voice. I mean how can you say on one hand I believe the science that predicts Armageddon in our lifetime, but then that I think we should only build 3 wind turbines to stave it off rather than 7. Loooopy!
They are all so well suited to each other its delicious. For me its like watching a boxing match between Christine Milne and Tim Flannery, there are only winners.
80
Thanks. My point precisely. The University openly admits the critical objection is to his economic projections of Global Warming, an area in which he is very qualified. This is censorship. The denial gives it away. Nothing less than projections of global disaster are permitted, except for communist governments like the UN and China, which are exempt, even exemplary.
90
The UWA have learned how *not* to dance clumsily on the trigger of loaded shotgun, when the business end is in their mouth.
I suspect the publicity this will attract will have them all figuratively flogged ( on the quiet ) for giving Sceptics the very public platform to further expose the CAGW nonsense.
30
As a UQ alumnus, I was ashamed to be associated with an institution that offered the John Cook Denier-slagging course.
But I think UWA has just trumped UQ for intellectual bankruptcy. I feel sorry for UWA alumni, especially Jo. I can only imagine the despondency you must be feeling.
After 31 years in industry, I’m now taking time to work towards a second Masters degree (different field, obviously). But this time at QUT. Just in first semester, but so far I like what I see.
90
Good to see someone correctly using the singular alumnus and plural alumni.
00
handjive posted a link to ABC Lateline, but it warrants excerpting:
8 May: ABC Lateline: UN climate chief responds to tirade from PM’s adviser
EMMA ALBERICI: One observer with a very keen eye on Australia’s energy debate is the United Nations top climate negotiator, Christiana Figueres. She told a conference in Melbourne this week that Australia must step away from its reliance on coal exports as the international appetite for it decreases and pointedly she noted that Australia was the highest per capita emitter of coal pollution, among industrialised countries.
EMMA ALBERICI: I want to start with the article that appeared today in the ‘Australian’ newspaper, written by the Prime Minister’s chief business adviser Maurice Newman. He’s a well-known climate sceptic, ***for want of a better word, and he’s attacked you quite personally. He says, “Why with such little evidence of climate change does the UN insist the world spend hundreds of millions – billions of rather a year on futile climate change policy. Perhaps Christiana Figueres has the answer.”
Let me ask you the question?
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES: Well, you know, Emma, I came to this country with a very open heart for this fantastic country, and with a very open mind for what the Government has decided that they want to do on climate change…
What is from a very broadly consulted point of view in Australia, what are Australia’s advantages? And what are Australia’s opportunities in moving into the ***21st Century energy matrix?…
EMMA ALBERICI: But do you think there would be merit in that kind of meeting to educate him in what you’re talking about?
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES: You know, I don’t think people need education. It’s a question about an open heart, an open mind as I said at the beginning. I’m always happy to speak to anyone who would like to speak to me. I’m ***25 hours a day available to anyone…
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES: I think he (PM Abbott) is definitely correct that coal has been absolutely crucial for humanity. I also hope that he is very, very correct in saying that Australia is going to be the world’s primary energy source. It depends on how you define energy.
EMMA ALBERICI: No, he said coal would be the principal energy source for decades to come. Do you agree?
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES: I don’t think ***science would agree with him. I also don’t think the financial community agrees with that. What I see is a very, very clear retrenchment of the finance community, both on the part of multilateral development banks as well as commercial banks, as well as long-term investors, retrenching from investment in coal just because of the growing risk, asset risk, financial risk that coal is becoming.
So I think that’s a question not to me but rather to those who will finance…
(CHINA CAGW/COAL/RENEWABLE RHETORIC)
EMMA ALBERICI: On the issue of the renewable energy target that’s now been set today, interested to know your view on the inclusion of burning native wood as a renewable energy source?
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES: Well, I must admit that I was not in the details of something that is absolutely within Australian purview to know what the original understanding was. I would have thought that the conversation was mainly about ***solar and wind. I did not know that there were other things included in the package…
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4232634.htm
did you ask Maurice Newman to join in this conversation, ABC? so many things WRONG with this interview, not least the fact Figueres has 25 hours in her day (lol). sounds like her grasp of figures is not too good.
51
If you’re constantly flying around the world in a jet, then you too can have 25-hour days.
00
original headline
Abbott’s ally baffles with wild theory
NEWS.com.au-19 hours ago –
has been changed. guess the original could be too easily spoofed as in
‘CAGW “wild theory” baffles some’ (or wild hypothesis)
8 May: News Ltd: Matthew Dunn: Tony Abbott’s chief business adviser thinks the UN are using climate change to implement global authoritarian rule
In response the Climate Change Council called for Mr Newman to resign over his misleading comments.
“His anti-science, fringe views are indistinguishable from those made by angry trolls on conspiracy theory forums and are not befitting of someone with a position of such influence,” a statement on the website reads.
“While major financial institutions like the World Bank, HSBC and the IMF are warning about the business risks of climate change and taking clear advice from the world’s best scientists, Australian business’s top representative to government is in another orbit.”
Shadow Minister for Resources Gary Gray distanced himself from Mr Newman’s comments this afternoon telling ABC Radio Melbourne that his “old friend” had become “cranky” in his old age and while he was free to express his opinion, no-one had to agree with him.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/tony-abbotts-chief-business-adviser-thinks-the-un-are-using-climate-change-to-implement-global-authoritarian-rule/story-fnjwvztl-1227347169152
20
I think the CAGW mob will rue the day they tried to slag off Newman. He is one bright and intelligent guy, and whatever his faults, he spoke the truth.
He shone a light into the dark, and now the cockies are scrambling back under the fridge out of the light while hissing at him……
30
Fairfax brings out the “top” guns:
8 May: SMH: Maurice Newman’s climate conspiracy a joke: top UN climate official
by Lisa Cox, Mark Kenny, Tom McIlroy
PHOTO CAPTION: The United Nation’s top official on climate change, Christiana Figueres
And the opposition has weighed in as well, with Bill Shorten calling on the Prime Minister to disavow the views of his outspoken business expert.
Neither Mr Newman nor the Prime Minister responded to calls on Friday.
Christiana Figueres who is visiting Australia to discuss progress toward a global deal said Mr Newman’s claim that climate change was an UN “hoax” designed to lead to world domination, was a joke…
Speaking in Canberra, Ms Figueres said the comments must have been an attempt at humour.
“I really don’t take it very seriously because it doesn’t respond to the reality or to facts,” she said…
Ms Figueres even described the Newman comments as “really good fun”.
“We live in a world of free press and free opinion and, you know, if that’s the humour in Australia then that’s the humour in Australia … I have my own sense of humour. It’s quite fine.”…
***Ms Figueres would not be drawn on whether it was appropriate for Mr Abbott to be receiving advice from Mr Newman ahead of December’s
Paris climate talks…
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/maurice-newmans-climate-conspiracy-a-joke-top-un-climate-official-20150508-ggxlga.html
8 May: UK Telegraph: Australia PM adviser says climate change is ‘UN-led ruse to establish new world order’
by Jonathan Pearlman, Sydney
In his comment piece – described by critics as “whacko” – Mr Newman said the world has been “subjected to extravagance from climate catastrophists for close to 50 years”…
Professor Will Steffen, a climate change scientist, told The Australian Financial Review: “These are bizarre comments that would be funny if they did not come from [Mr Abbott’s] chief business adviser.” …
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/11591193/Australia-PM-advisor-says-climate-change-a-UN-led-ruse.html
Pearlman’s “critics” plural who call Newman “whacko” is simply the new Greens Party leader Di Natale. no wonder Pearlman gave no link to back up his claim:
8 May: ABC PM: Little support for PM’s top business adviser over UN climate conspiracy theory
SIMON LAUDER: But the leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Richard di Natale, suggests Mr Newman’s views have been influential.
RICHARD DI NATALE: What we’ve got the tin foil hat brigade running the show at the moment within the Coalition. This is wacko stuff and when you’ve got people like Joe Hockey saying “wind farms are offensive” you know where this is coming from and for a party that says we’re here to protect industry, we’re here for business and for jobs, this takes us in the opposite direction…
SIMON LAUDER: Mr Newman says the UN (United Nations) is not working alone, that it’s enlisted compliant academics and gullible media, including the ABC, using fear and appeals to morality to push its agenda.
Melbourne University climate scientist, Professor David Karoly, who is also a member of the Federal Government’s Climate Change Authority, says the Prime Minister’s chief business adviser must live in an alternative reality.
DAVID KAROLY: There is definitely no agenda by me or any group within the United Nations to govern the world. There is an agenda to try to communicate the best information available from scientists to the general public to make them aware of the risks due to climate change.
SIMON LAUDER: And is fear a useful tool for that?
DAVID KAROLY: Look, fear is not a useful tool. Reality is a useful tool to communicate the information and it is clear that Maurice Newman does not live in the current world where there is evidence of climate change impacts both in Australia and around the world. Maurice Newman lives in some alternative reality where there is a global conspiracy for government by the United Nations.
SIMON LAUDER: The CEO of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Kate Carnell, says Mr Newman is going too far with his argument that the UN is trying to take political authority over the world…
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4232431.htm
too much to expect any of the MSM would actually quote Figueres own February comments!
30
This is the “political correctness” (which is intensely political, without ever being correct) that bedevils virtually any Western university. Greg Lukianoff wrote “Unlearning Liberty” about this phenomenon several years back. He showed how “accepted” views were imposed on newcomers to US universities, on pain of instant suspension for those who failed to sign up. American universities, without apparent irony, graciously granted “free speech areas”, where students were permitted to express opinions that were otherwise verboten. Predictably, the spirit of censorship has now further encroached into these oases of supposedly free speech.
From a friend at a leading British university, I understand that such tendencies are widespread in the UK, too, although the different way in which British universities function possibly means that the PC blackmail is less powerful here. Nevertheless, it is clear that hard-left political opinions are mandated at Anglosphere places of “learning”. The English-speakers aren’t the worst, either. Needless to say, the French universities lead the way into self-inflicted pointlessness, closely followed by Italy’s.
30
“a win for academic integrity and common sense”!!!
how scared this lot, including ABC, are of any views that are not their own:
9 May: ABC: Students praise UWA for ditching controversial $4m Bjorn Lomborg Consensus Centre think tank
Students at the University of Western Australia (UWA) say the decision to can controversial Danish academic Bjorn Lomborg’s Australian Consensus Centre is a win for academic integrity and common sense…
UWA student guild president Lizzy O’Shea said students were concerned about the impact the centre, inspired by self-proclaimed “sceptical environmentalist” Dr Lomborg, could have on the university’s reputation.
“It’s a really good sign as far as community action goes that if enough people have mobilised against something, and don’t support it, that people will change their minds,” she said.
***”The fact that we had international partners saying they wanted to pull out because of the association. So the reputational damage was probably the main complaint.
“There are a number of people who take issue with Lomborg’s methodology, and with Lomborg’s sort of research standing.
***”The example that I use is there was a unit at UWA that used to use Lomborg’s book as an example of bad science, and what not to do for students, and so a primary concern was the fact that he would be allowed to be associated with UWA when we hold our first year students who are 17, right out of high school, to a higher standard than that.”…
Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce said the decision did not give university students enough credit, to decide for themselves which facts are relevant.
“I like an exciting world where you can hear challenging points of view, even if you disagree with them,” he said.
“Universities, they’re supposed to be the crucible of allowing people to investigate and ponder an idea and come up with their own conclusions.”
Meanwhile, National Tertiary Education Union’s WA division secretary, Gabe Gooding, said members would be relieved and rejected suggestions that Dr Lomborg’s views were being censored.
***”Those people who were particularly supportive of it will be painting this as censorship but it’s absolutely not censorship, it’s about the academics being really concerned about academic standards and the integrity of the institution,” Ms Gooding said.
***”It’s never been about shutting down an alternative view.”…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-09/students-praise-uwa-for-ditching-bjorn-lomborg-think-tank/6457210
40
“It’s never been about shutting down an alternative view.”
Technically, I suppose that that’s true. The likes of Gabe Gooding don’t even acknowledge the existence of an alternative view.
40
Dear Mr. Johnson,
Thank You!!
By declining the offer to have a Consensus Centre at UWA, you have shown your hand and that of, as you claim, UWA staff and students.
The centre, in your words, was “to deliver robust, evidence-based knowledge and advice to the Australian Government on potential policy reforms and other interventions that will deliver the smartest, most cost-effective solutions in areas ranging from poverty, social justice and food sustainability”. Your decision to decline the offer was made because of only two items: Bjorn Lomborg and the possibility that someone in the centre might debunk the hypothesis of Climate Change.
Your Staff and Students are vehemently opposed to Doctor Bjorn Lomborg appointment. They will not accept dissent from their religious belief.
There is no “Consensus” in science, Consensus is the antithesis of science. Every hypothesis, every theory must be challenged and challengeable. Every study, every piece of research, every published paper must be analyzed and challenged by all and sundry, every experiment has to be reproduced by somebody else. According to UWA that might be the case with all research except Climate Change. This religion cannot be challenged.
You also state, in your press release that the ” importance of academic freedom to encourage staff and students to engage in the open exchange of ideas and thought; and fostering the values of openness, honesty, tolerance, fairness, trust and responsibility.”, By your action you have demonstrated the absolute opposite and not for the first time, the Lewandowsky saga definitely not a case of “open exchange of ideas” or “openness, honesty”, in the case of doctor Lomborg the, so called “importance of academic freedom” and ” fostering the values of openness, honesty, tolerance, fairness, trust and responsibility” are just empty words that look good on the stationery.
The staff and students at UWA and you by association are guilty of censorship of the highest degree.
“Is it appropriate for Doctor Bjorn Lomborg to be associated with UWA?” You ask, It is not only appropriate but it is imperative for UWA to have somebody of the caliber of Lomborg if the University wants to start to repair its reputation in the scientific and academic world.
Sincerely
I could have probably written another couple of hundred words… but I tought it might become too repetitive.
30
Universities are no longer centres for free thinking and debate. They are now centres of mixed left wing ideologies and untruths. It’s that simple and it’s a fact, easily proven by the scientific method using observational data and true best practices in research that was widely used in the past when they were centres of excellence, but no more.
20
Bjorn Lomborg fights back in WSJ.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-honor-of-being-mugged-by-climate-censors-1431558936
00