Quote:

SPEECH ‘AT RISK’ FROM FACT CHECKERS JAMES MORROW - FEDERAL POLITICAL EDITOR Australians’ free speech could soon by limited by the “entrenched bias” of independent fact checkers under provisions of a proposed misinformation bill, new research has suggested. The warning comes as legendary Australian businessman Dick Smith won a rare apology from the ABC on Tuesday night over an ABC RMIT fact check he claimed was “full of lies”. Mr Smith received the apology after he sent a three-page letter to ABC managing director David Anderson complaining that he had been mischaracterised. The first of its kind research by the Institute of Public Affairs into 970 “fact checks” performed by RMIT and the AAP found that 65 per cent of verdicts came down favourably on the side of centre-left politicians. The bias was even worse when it came to specific issues such as climate change and Covid-19 policy. IPA researchers found that 81 per cent of fact-checking investigations targeted critics of government climate change and energy policy while “almost none of the controversial claims made by activists such as predictions of imminent catastrophe, have been investigated”. Reviewing fact checks during the pandemic, researchers found that 94 per cent of fact checks targeted critics of government Covid-19 policy, despite official claims about everything from the effectiveness of masks to the origin of the virus largely in doubt. The IPA warned that this could see freedom to debate controversial ideas curtailed under planned misinformation legislation. A “guidance note” issued last year by the government said that under the terms of the law, regulators could use “fact checkers or other third party contractors … to monitor compliance” with misinformation rules. Research by the IPA previously found that 91 per cent of fact checks about the failed Voice to parliament referendum were used to target claims of Voice opponents.

What's next? Rigged election results??????

Quote:

while “almost none of the controversial claims made by activists such as predictions of imminent catastrophe, have been investigated”.

How do you fact check a prediction?

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 8:04am:

Quote: while “almost none of the controversial claims made by activists such as predictions of imminent catastrophe, have been investigated”. How do you fact check a prediction?

Er... you check if they turned out to be accurate.  Like this:

2007
Tim Flannery,  at one time Australia’s Chief Climate Commissioner, declared rather bizarrely in 2007 that hotter soils meant that “even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and river systems”.


2012
Widespread drenching rains flooded towns and cities and dams full to the brim and overtopping. Indeed, the rainfall that we had last year not only filled Brisbane City’s Wivenhoe Dam water supply storage, but also all of its flood mitigation capacity. The resultant releases of water required to prevent a truly catastrophic dam failure contributed to the inundation of large parts of metropolitan Brisbane.



Doubting Thomas - the first fact-checker
https://content.api.news/v3/images/bin/322f3318cb50871b2da9fb458db51ef1?width=1024

So you do nothing for 17 years? That's what they have been accused of not doing?

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 8:04am:

Quote: while “almost none of the controversial claims made by activists such as predictions of imminent catastrophe, have been investigated”. How do you fact check a prediction?

It wouldn't be a fact would it?

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 8:50am:

So you do nothing for 17 years? That's what they have been accused of not doing?

So you support this fact checking style of censorship?

Or is it you're prepared to ignore it because your pet "Climate change" and "renewable energy" propaganda is in the mix?  ;D

Gnads wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 9:14am:

freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 8:50am: So you do nothing for 17 years? That's what they have been accused of not doing? So you support this fact checking style of censorship? Or is it you're prepared to ignore it because your pet "Climate change" and "renewable energy" propaganda is in the mix?  ;D

Censorship?


Gnads wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 9:11am:

freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 8:04am: Quote: while “almost none of the controversial claims made by activists such as predictions of imminent catastrophe, have been investigated”. How do you fact check a prediction? It wouldn't be a fact would it?

No it wouldn't. The suggestion that predictions ought to be fact check is kind of desperate.

Most fact checks I have seen are solidly based in fact. On the vax it was still consistent with current knowledge even if parts turned out to be somewhat debatable.

There have been periods of time when it was the left that tended to conspiracy theories. Currently the right of politics very much tend to be between nutso and extreme nutso.

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 9:49am:

Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 9:14am: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 8:50am: So you do nothing for 17 years? That's what they have been accused of not doing? So you support this fact checking style of censorship? Or is it you're prepared to ignore it because your pet "Climate change" and "renewable energy" propaganda is in the mix?  ;D Censorship? Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 9:11am: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 8:04am: Quote: while “almost none of the controversial claims made by activists such as predictions of imminent catastrophe, have been investigated”. How do you fact check a prediction? It wouldn't be a fact would it? No it wouldn't. The suggestion that predictions ought to be fact check is kind of desperate.

Yeah a form of censorship .... if you post an opinion that's contrary to say an offical govt post or organisations post it gets picked up by the fact checking programs and over rides what you may have posted & the post you make is not allowed/deleted as misinformation or untrue.

It happens & it's censorship.

Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted?

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 10:50am:

Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted?

Of course, by the very definition  = Latin censor, from censere "to appraise, value, judge."

Frank wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 11:52am:

freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 10:50am: Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted? Of course, by the very definition  = Latin censor, from censere "to appraise, value, judge."

What language are we speaking?

good article gands but wont really help.

there is no longer a debate between fact and fiction
between right and wrong
between the truth and lies.

the debate is now between us and them


trump was probably the first to recognise the paradigm shift

its not possible for climate skeptics and climate cultists to debate

there is only winning and losing



i watched on 60 minutes last night as the mainstream media did a hatchett job on tesla for safety issues

this is the result of musk endorsing trump

if musk had endorsed biden, the 60 minutes peice would have been a hatchett job on musk rivals

in such a world you will learn much more and succeed only by reading

the art of war
the 49 laws of power and
machievellis "the prince"


debating your opponent is a fools errand

again trump saw this early on

you dont debate, you deride and belittle and make fun of them
you take away their power

and the winner effect is very real

still a good read

Well my predictions have a 79% success rate.
Not hard to achieve really... on this little pale blue dot of limited possibilities and outcomes for all.
There is only one direction (out of 9) that Politics itself can take and it like all others can only go so far on this small world.

I predict that Britain in the name of Political 'truth' - having prevailed against Germany's, France's and Italy's false claim of being the Political truths apparent 'in the world of today'... will eventually 'sacrifice itself' in the face of the Unification of Islam & Israel as its replacement.
...but the British 'truth' will finally be resurrected in the 'far' West of North America that takes back, what it threw away long ago to become finally 'Great America' in the name of Political 'Truth'.

...ah Predictions.
Pretending that Australia was found and colonised before America is like 'cheating' and seeing the answers before the questions.  ;)

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 10:50am:

Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted?

In a fashion.

Jasin wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 12:10pm:

Well my predictions have a 79% success rate. Not hard to achieve really... on this little pale blue dot of limited possibilities and outcomes for all. There is only one direction (out of 9) that Politics itself can take and it like all others can only go so far on this small world. I predict that Britain in the name of Political 'truth' - having prevailed against Germany's, France's and Italy's false claim of being the Political truths apparent 'in the world of today'... will eventually 'sacrifice itself' in the face of the Unification of Islam & Israel as its replacement. ...but the British 'truth' will finally be resurrected in the 'far' West of North America that takes back, what it threw away long ago to become finally 'Great America' in the name of Political 'Truth'. ...ah Predictions. Pretending that Australia was found and colonised before America is like 'cheating' and seeing the answers before the questions.  ;)

If you have glass balls you should wear well supported underpants so you don't smash them together when you're ravaging a savage. ;D

Gnads wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:46pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 10:50am: Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted? In a fashion.

What sort of fashion?

aquascoot wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 12:04pm:

good article gands but wont really help. there is no longer a debate between fact and fiction between right and wrong between the truth and lies. the debate is now between us and them trump was probably the first to recognise the paradigm shift its not possible for climate skeptics and climate cultists to debate there is only winning and losing i watched on 60 minutes last night as the mainstream media did a hatchett job on tesla for safety issues this is the result of musk endorsing trump if musk had endorsed biden, the 60 minutes peice would have been a hatchett job on musk rivals in such a world you will learn much more and succeed only by reading the art of war the 49 laws of power and machievellis "the prince" debating your opponent is a fools errand again trump saw this early on you dont debate, you deride and belittle and make fun of them you take away their power and the winner effect is very real

Indeed.
The only point in any debate is to demolish your opponent's premises.  They are wrong because they start wrong.

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:51pm:

Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:46pm: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 10:50am: Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted? In a fashion. What sort of fashion?

Their freedom to post their opinions is removed.

Gnads wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:55pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:51pm: Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:46pm: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 10:50am: Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted? In a fashion. What sort of fashion? Their freedom to post their opinions is removed.

What do you mean by freedom to post?

Gnads wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:49pm:

Jasin wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 12:10pm: Well my predictions have a 79% success rate. Not hard to achieve really... on this little pale blue dot of limited possibilities and outcomes for all. There is only one direction (out of 9) that Politics itself can take and it like all others can only go so far on this small world. I predict that Britain in the name of Political 'truth' - having prevailed against Germany's, France's and Italy's false claim of being the Political truths apparent 'in the world of today'... will eventually 'sacrifice itself' in the face of the Unification of Islam & Israel as its replacement. ...but the British 'truth' will finally be resurrected in the 'far' West of North America that takes back, what it threw away long ago to become finally 'Great America' in the name of Political 'Truth'. ...ah Predictions. Pretending that Australia was found and colonised before America is like 'cheating' and seeing the answers before the questions.  ;) If you have glass balls you should wear well supported underpants so you don't smash them together when you're ravaging a savage. ;D

I couldn't help it if the Mongolian horse chick laid back on her table with her mouth open to be 'balled' on the slopehead. I was only in my 20's and far from home among the nomads.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 12:04pm:

...its not possible for climate skeptics and climate cultists to debate

I'd have to disagree with that claim.  The scientists you pejoratively
call "cultists" are armed with factual climate data gathered, sorted
and researched for decades, if not centuries.  All of these data have
been peer reviewed by hundreds of other scientists, and published
in thousands of science papers and journals the world over.

What empirical climate data do the skeptics have?  Anything like this...

In a temperature record stretching back into the late 19th century,
the ten hottest years have all occurred since 2010. The hottest
by a large margin (at the time of writing - early this year) was 2023,
with 2016 in second place. In both cases man-made global warming
augmented by El Nino nudged these years into pole position. One
of the top ten, 2022, was also the warmest La Nina year on record.


aquascoot wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 12:04pm:

I watched on 60 Minutes last night as the mainstream media did a hatchet job on Tesla for safety issues. This is the result of Musk endorsing Trump If Musk had endorsed Biden, the 60 Minutes piece would have been a hatchet job on Musk rivals...

LOL... seriously?

Have you now resorted to manufacturing your own conspiracy theories
Aqua?  Aren't there enough of the bloody things out there in cyberspace
to keep you happy mate?

And if I may offer a couple of unrelated suggestions:  Can you please
get your broken CAPS key fixed, and also download one of the many
free spell-checkers.

Frank wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:54pm:

The only point in any debate is to demolish your opponent's premises...

Nope, the only point is to prove your own.

If you do that, then the debate is won by you—and with less mental effort.

EG:  Thousands of people claim the Earth is flat, and they have
truckloads of "evidence" proving that (or so they mistakenly think).

It's virtually impossible to disprove their claims without a lot of
laborious intellectual effort, but it's far, far easier to prove my
claim that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.

freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:56pm:

Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:55pm: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:51pm: Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:46pm: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 10:50am: Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted? In a fashion. What sort of fashion? Their freedom to post their opinions is removed. What do you mean by freedom to post?

You must have been a right prat at school.

The right hate fact checks for the same reason that they hate facts.

Fact is not relevant to the right.

Gnads wrote on Apr 1^st, 2024 at 7:55pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:51pm: Gnads wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:46pm: freediver wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 10:50am: Do you also think it is censorship when people get banned from this forum or posts get deleted? In a fashion. What sort of fashion? Their freedom to post their opinions is removed.

OH I was thinking in terms of 70's fashion bell bottom jeans and paisley shirts, well deserved censorship IMO.

AusGeoff wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2024 at 9:16am:

In a temperature record stretching back into the late 19th century, the ten hottest years have all occurred since 2010.

Well firstly there was little data for most of the earth in the 19th Century. Secondly, According to Prof. Phil Jones, CRU, most of the normals for the southern oceans were mostly made up until the Argo  buoys. And even now despite what the dots show of the Argo's deployed, there is very little ocean coverage. 3,000 Argo buoys to cover 60S to 60N leaves a lot of ocean not represented each time readings are taken.And the oceans cover 80% of the earth. What does that tell you about the quality of the data?

"Sample size was another problem. A single observation station in the entire Southern hemisphere reported data in the first three years of the HadCRUT4 record and only nine were reporting by 1859. "

https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/52041/1/52041-mclean-2017-thesis.pdf

AusGeoff wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2024 at 9:24am:

Frank wrote on Apr 1st, 2024 at 7:54pm: The only point in any debate is to demolish your opponent's premises... Nope, the only point is to prove your own. If you do that, then the debate is won by you—and with less mental effort. EG:  Thousands of people claim the Earth is flat, and they have truckloads of "evidence" proving that (or so they mistakenly think). It's virtually impossible to disprove their claims without a lot of laborious intellectual effort, but it's far, far easier to prove my claim that the Earth is an oblate spheroid.

Arguments about geography are about facts. The planet Earth is experimentally  demonstrable to be spherical. Opinions and premises of opinions do not come into it.
Arguments about politics, values, opinions, perceptions, on the other hand, are not experimentally demonstrable but stand on value judgements and unexamined assumptions not shared by the opposing parties