Australian Politics Forum - BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened Reply #30 - May 13^th, 2012 at 8:37am You obviously believe what happens in the ANU is more important than the science itself. You can't debate the science so you are going to resort to ad hominem attacks and childish name calling. Knock yourself out, progs.
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #31 - May 13^th, 2012 at 9:39am

MOTR wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 8:37am:

You obviously believe what happens in the ANU is more important than the science itself. You can't debate the science so you are going to resort to ad hominem attacks and childish name calling. Knock yourself out, progs.

Thank you so much for your permission. We all know it is needed.

This is about the non-credible scientists. Not the non-credible science.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 45675 Gender:	Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened Reply #32 - May 15^th, 2012 at 4:44pm well the scientists said they were threatened and in fact, they werent. You dont think that is relevant?
Back to top	AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..." IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #33 - May 26^th, 2012 at 10:48pm

ABC issues correction on ANU scientists email threats claim

THE ABC has issued a correction acknowledging that 11 emails sent to climate scientists at the Australian National University contained abuse, but no death threats.

The correction, posted on the ABC's website late on Thursday, follows criticism from The Australian and ABC TV's Media Watch.

It comes three weeks after The Australian reported that Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim had examined the emails and found no death threats, while adjudicating on an attempt to obtain their release from the ANU under the Freedom of Information Act.

That FOI request had been submitted by lawyer and blogger Simon Turnill, who was seeking to check the veracity of the ABC's report of June 4 last year that in the previous six months "several of Australia's top climate change scientists at the Australian National University have been subjected to a campaign of death threats, forcing the university to tighten security".

The correction indicates that the ABC now accepts its report about Mr Pilgrim's decision on May 11 should have said the emails contained no death threats, rather than just saying they contained abuse.

But the ABC has not disavowed last year's reports about death threats. It says the ANU believes its staff did receive death threats, but they did not come to light in the FOI exercise.

In response, Mr Turnill wrote to ANU asking it to make public whatever evidence it has about death threats.

He drew its attention to the ABC's statement in the correction that "the ANU maintains that staff have received death threats in other communications not released under the FOI action".

He asked the university when such death threats were received, who received them, what form they took, whether the university referred them to police and what evidence it held about the existence of death threats. He wrote this information was covered by the terms of a second FOI request he served on the university.

"However, I would respectfully suggest that given the significant media interest in this story the university consider releasing the evidence of those death threats which it holds without the need for another protracted FOI procedure," Mr Turnill wrote.

The full text of the ABC's correction says: "On May 11, the ABC reported on the release under FOI of a number of emails relating to climate change received by staff at the ANU.

"The story should have made clear that the emails were found to be abusive, but NOT to constitute death threats or clear threats of violence.

"However, the ANU maintains that staff have received death threats in other communications not released under the FOI action. The story has been clarified and updated." The correction comes after a series of articles about the affair in The Australian and criticism from Media Watch about the way the ABC had handled the incident. On Monday, Media Watch called for a clarification.
-----------------------

Still more BS BS BS to come

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/abc-issues-correction-on-anu-scientists-em...

Back to top

IP Logged

NBNMyths Gold Member Offline Posts: 560 Gender:	Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened Reply #34 - May 26^th, 2012 at 10:57pm Nice of the ABC to issue a correction. Now, will that oversized tabloid The Australian issue a correction for their errors as well? Pigs might fly. http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3507732.htm
Back to top	Debunking the FUD on the NBN IP Logged

mozzaok

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #35 - May 27^th, 2012 at 5:08am

The glaringly obvious fact of the AGW debate, being occupied on the positive side by predominantly sensible, intelligent, concerned global citizens, and on the negative side by reactionary extremists, and the politically extreme, as well as a substantial proportion of certifiably crazy, unstable, conspiracy theorists, should tell anyone all they need to know.

LOONIES ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

Now anyone who cannot concede that point is not worth talking to, because they are denying a basic truth that all humanity has experienced to some degree or other, and I know from personal experience, I would rather fight tough, than CRAZY, anyday.

That loony denialists who accept unquestioned, the moronic fallacy that climate scientists promote false information about Global Warming, so that they may profit financially from doing so, are most certainly deficient in either mental ability, or even more likely, and certainly more dangerously, MENTAL STABILITY.

The pattern of this crazy denialist culture is unfortunately exacerbated by, and in some ways, validated by, a National Newspaper, in that they would seek to try and create an unfairly false impression of the facts, by cherry picking details they believe support a contrary view, and then extrapolate that they have somehow debunked the whole thrust and validity of the original premise, in this case, that real scientists are under physical and psychological threat, from denialist loonies.

The Australian, if I was a dead fish, dipped in batter and deep fried, I would still recoil from ever coming in contact, with that rag.

Back to top

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #36 - May 27^th, 2012 at 6:24am

mozzaok wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 5:08am:

The glaringly obvious fact of the AGW debate, being occupied on the positive side by predominantly sensible, intelligent, concerned global citizens, and on the negative side by reactionary extremists, and the politically extreme, as well as a substantial proportion of certifiably crazy, unstable, conspiracy theorists, should tell anyone all they need to know.

LOONIES ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

Now anyone who cannot concede that point is not worth talking to, because they are denying a basic truth that all humanity has experienced to some degree or other, and I know from personal experience, I would rather fight tough, than CRAZY, anyday.

That loony denialists who accept unquestioned, the moronic fallacy that climate scientists promote false information about Global Warming, so that they may profit financially from doing so, are most certainly deficient in either mental ability, or even more likely, and certainly more dangerously, MENTAL STABILITY.

The pattern of this crazy denialist culture is unfortunately exacerbated by, and in some ways, validated by, a National Newspaper, in that they would seek to try and create an unfairly false impression of the facts, by cherry picking details they believe support a contrary view, and then extrapolate that they have somehow debunked the whole thrust and validity of the original premise, in this case, that real scientists are under physical and psychological threat, from denialist loonies.

The Australian, if I was a dead fish, dipped in batter and deep fried, I would still recoil from ever coming in contact, with that rag.

Your almost there. All you need to do is reverse the logic denialist/AGW believer and you are on a winner. Cant have it one way without the other im afraid.

So then you are back to square one. lol try again.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened Reply #37 - May 27^th, 2012 at 6:43am This thread has nothing to do with politicians, so I have moved it to the General Board.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #38 - May 27^th, 2012 at 7:05am

muso wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 6:43am:

This thread has nothing to do with politicians, so I have moved it to the General Board.

This type of thread was good enough to be in the political area when the loons came out to tell us the scientists got death threats, well lied about the death threats, but whatever floats this boards boat.

Back to top

IP Logged

nairbe

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2587
Rural NSW
Gender: male

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #39 - May 27^th, 2012 at 8:31am

progressiveslol wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 6:24am:

mozzaok wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 5:08am:

The glaringly obvious fact of the AGW debate, being occupied on the positive side by predominantly sensible, intelligent, concerned global citizens, and on the negative side by reactionary extremists, and the politically extreme, as well as a substantial proportion of certifiably crazy, unstable, conspiracy theorists, should tell anyone all they need to know.

LOONIES ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

Now anyone who cannot concede that point is not worth talking to, because they are denying a basic truth that all humanity has experienced to some degree or other, and I know from personal experience, I would rather fight tough, than CRAZY, anyday.

That loony denialists who accept unquestioned, the moronic fallacy that climate scientists promote false information about Global Warming, so that they may profit financially from doing so, are most certainly deficient in either mental ability, or even more likely, and certainly more dangerously, MENTAL STABILITY.

The pattern of this crazy denialist culture is unfortunately exacerbated by, and in some ways, validated by, a National Newspaper, in that they would seek to try and create an unfairly false impression of the facts, by cherry picking details they believe support a contrary view, and then extrapolate that they have somehow debunked the whole thrust and validity of the original premise, in this case, that real scientists are under physical and psychological threat, from denialist loonies.

The Australian, if I was a dead fish, dipped in batter and deep fried, I would still recoil from ever coming in contact, with that rag.

Your almost there. All you need to do is reverse the logic denialist/AGW believer and you are on a winner. Cant have it one way without the other im afraid.

So then you are back to square one. lol try again.

You pathetic answer proves Mozza's point. The denialists are being plain fruity. Your position has nothing to do with GW or AGW it is pure partisan politics and only further demonstrates the dangers of unthinking people who blindly follow.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3507732.htm

This would be a reasonable start point for you to begin to actually understand the issue. From here you can search a bit more but do watch the whole thing not just the bit's you want to hear.

Back to top

"Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage."
Confucius

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #40 - May 27^th, 2012 at 8:41am

mozzaok wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 5:08am:

The glaringly obvious fact of the AGW debate, being occupied on the positive side by predominantly sensible, intelligent, concerned global citizens, and on the negative side by reactionary extremists, and the politically extreme, as well as a substantial proportion of certifiably crazy, unstable, conspiracy theorists, should tell anyone all they need to know.

LOONIES ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

Now anyone who cannot concede that point is not worth talking to, because they are denying a basic truth that all humanity has experienced to some degree or other, and I know from personal experience, I would rather fight tough, than CRAZY, anyday.

That loony denialists who accept unquestioned, the moronic fallacy that climate scientists promote false information about Global Warming, so that they may profit financially from doing so, are most certainly deficient in either mental ability, or even more likely, and certainly more dangerously, MENTAL STABILITY.

The pattern of this crazy denialist culture is unfortunately exacerbated by, and in some ways, validated by, a National Newspaper, in that they would seek to try and create an unfairly false impression of the facts, by cherry picking details they believe support a contrary view, and then extrapolate that they have somehow debunked the whole thrust and validity of the original premise, in this case, that real scientists are under physical and psychological threat, from denialist loonies.

The Australian, if I was a dead fish, dipped in batter and deep fried, I would still recoil from ever coming in contact, with that rag.

In 2010 the environment editor of the Australian, Graham Lloyd, defended his paper's editorial position on climate change. Under the stewardship of Chris Mitchell the paper had been accused of "running a virulently anti-greenhouse line, allowing the news pages to become a parody of dispassionate journalism, verballing scientists and attacking science in pursuit of a larger ideological battle".

Those of us who read the Australian Know what Clive Hamilton was on about. Mitchell, however, felt slighted and regretted not suing Hamilton.

"I now regret not suing Clive Hamilton over Scorcher and various other writers who have completely misrepresented my position and, much more importantly, that of the paper," Mitchell says.

"In essence we have allowed misleading polemics to frame the debate about our views and assumed smart people will see our real position simply by reading our paper. That apparently has not been enough for some on the extreme Left of the debate."

So what is the real position of The Australian on the issue of Anthropogenic Global Warming. Here are extracts from Lloyd's defence.

Quote:

But the position taken by the newspaper in its daily editorial column, or leader, has been clear for well more than a decade.

In the editorial of April 6, 1995, the paper said: "The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring unnaturally, primarily as a result of industrial development and deforestation, is no longer seriously disputed in the world."

On November 2, 2006, the paper said: "You can accept the significant risk that the climate is warming while wishing to employ scepticism and scientific rigour when working out what to do about it. Eventually an international carbon pricing system that sets proper price signals for pollution will further drive this process."

It has accepted the findings of the UN panel on climate change. On February 5, 2007, it said: "The real news from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's latest report, issued last Friday in Paris, is the higher level of implied scientific certainty - first that global warming is unequivocally happening, and second that humans are, in the panel's view, highly likely to be causing most of it.

And on June 4, 2007: "It is now well accepted that while taking action on climate change will cost money, not acting may cost much more. The longer the wait the higher the additional cost. This does not, however, suggest that any action will deliver the hoped-for economic savings."

On February 22, 2008, it said: "Australia has much at stake in this debate. If climate change is not mitigated, Australia could be one of the biggest losers because of our hot, dry variable climate. If Canada gets a little warmer, it opens up the North-West Passage.

"If Australia gets a little warmer, the Murray-Darling food bowl is desiccated. We have much to gain from the development of a rational approach to climate change, and Professor Garnaut has given us a solid place to start."

On December 5 last year: "This paper has held to three key points - that the planet may be at risk and action is needed; a preference for a market-driven solution; and an awareness that an early entry into a low-carbon economy would give Australia a first-mover advantage.

And on December 21 last year: "Despite Copenhagen's failure, the meeting did demonstrate that there is no longer mainstream political opposition to reducing greenhouse emissions. While the specific impacts of climate change are not agreed, there is a global political consensus that all governments must act."

To summarise.

Global warming is unequivocally happening, and humans are highly likely to be causing most of it.

The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring unnaturally, is no longer seriously disputed in the world.

Australia has much at stake in this debate. If climate change is not mitigated, Australia could be one of the biggest losers because of our hot, dry variable climate.

Eventually an international carbon pricing system that sets proper price signals for pollution will drive the solution.

Taking action on climate change will cost money, not acting may cost much more. The longer the wait the higher the additional cost.

An early entry into a low-carbon economy would give Australia a first-mover advantage.

There is a global political consensus that all governments must act.

The surprising thing is that The Australian's editorial position is not unlike mine. In fact, it is my position. Yet every time I debate the issue with a mate of mine he always seems to be able to drag out the Australian, which he reads everyday, and point to an article or opinion piece that either questions or denies global warming, the scientific consensus of AGW, the efficacy of a market based solution or the extent of the global political consensus. Articles and opinion pieces which include the evidence that has informed the editor's AGW position are very few are far between.

A reader who relies on the Australian as their primary source of information would quite likely be unable to accept there was a scientific consensus, and would no doubt be surprised to learn that those who select his news have come to a very different conclusion.

Back to top

« Last Edit: May 27^th, 2012 at 8:46am by MOTR »

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #41 - May 27^th, 2012 at 11:27am

nairbe wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 8:31am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 6:24am:

mozzaok wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 5:08am:

The glaringly obvious fact of the AGW debate, being occupied on the positive side by predominantly sensible, intelligent, concerned global citizens, and on the negative side by reactionary extremists, and the politically extreme, as well as a substantial proportion of certifiably crazy, unstable, conspiracy theorists, should tell anyone all they need to know.

LOONIES ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

Now anyone who cannot concede that point is not worth talking to, because they are denying a basic truth that all humanity has experienced to some degree or other, and I know from personal experience, I would rather fight tough, than CRAZY, anyday.

That loony denialists who accept unquestioned, the moronic fallacy that climate scientists promote false information about Global Warming, so that they may profit financially from doing so, are most certainly deficient in either mental ability, or even more likely, and certainly more dangerously, MENTAL STABILITY.

The pattern of this crazy denialist culture is unfortunately exacerbated by, and in some ways, validated by, a National Newspaper, in that they would seek to try and create an unfairly false impression of the facts, by cherry picking details they believe support a contrary view, and then extrapolate that they have somehow debunked the whole thrust and validity of the original premise, in this case, that real scientists are under physical and psychological threat, from denialist loonies.

The Australian, if I was a dead fish, dipped in batter and deep fried, I would still recoil from ever coming in contact, with that rag.

Your almost there. All you need to do is reverse the logic denialist/AGW believer and you are on a winner. Cant have it one way without the other im afraid.

So then you are back to square one. lol try again.

You pathetic answer proves Mozza's point. The denialists are being plain fruity. Your position has nothing to do with GW or AGW it is pure partisan politics and only further demonstrates the dangers of unthinking people who blindly follow.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3507732.htm

This would be a reasonable start point for you to begin to actually understand the issue. From here you can search a bit more but do watch the whole thing not just the bit's you want to hear.

Oh you poor darling. Things not going your way I see. Have a cry.

Back to top

IP Logged

nairbe

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2587
Rural NSW
Gender: male

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #42 - May 27^th, 2012 at 1:26pm

progressiveslol wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 11:27am:

nairbe wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 8:31am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 6:24am:

mozzaok wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 5:08am:

The glaringly obvious fact of the AGW debate, being occupied on the positive side by predominantly sensible, intelligent, concerned global citizens, and on the negative side by reactionary extremists, and the politically extreme, as well as a substantial proportion of certifiably crazy, unstable, conspiracy theorists, should tell anyone all they need to know.

LOONIES ARE POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

Now anyone who cannot concede that point is not worth talking to, because they are denying a basic truth that all humanity has experienced to some degree or other, and I know from personal experience, I would rather fight tough, than CRAZY, anyday.

That loony denialists who accept unquestioned, the moronic fallacy that climate scientists promote false information about Global Warming, so that they may profit financially from doing so, are most certainly deficient in either mental ability, or even more likely, and certainly more dangerously, MENTAL STABILITY.

The pattern of this crazy denialist culture is unfortunately exacerbated by, and in some ways, validated by, a National Newspaper, in that they would seek to try and create an unfairly false impression of the facts, by cherry picking details they believe support a contrary view, and then extrapolate that they have somehow debunked the whole thrust and validity of the original premise, in this case, that real scientists are under physical and psychological threat, from denialist loonies.

The Australian, if I was a dead fish, dipped in batter and deep fried, I would still recoil from ever coming in contact, with that rag.

Your almost there. All you need to do is reverse the logic denialist/AGW believer and you are on a winner. Cant have it one way without the other im afraid.

So then you are back to square one. lol try again.

You pathetic answer proves Mozza's point. The denialists are being plain fruity. Your position has nothing to do with GW or AGW it is pure partisan politics and only further demonstrates the dangers of unthinking people who blindly follow.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3507732.htm

This would be a reasonable start point for you to begin to actually understand the issue. From here you can search a bit more but do watch the whole thing not just the bit's you want to hear.

Oh you poor darling. Things not going your way I see. Have a cry.

;D

You truly have completely made an absolute idiot out of yourself. What a goose. You didn't even watch the link did you? you have not even bothered to understand the timeline nor realised the complete rubbish the Australian wrote to suck fools like you in. The original article in the Canberra Post does not refer to ANU scientist receiving death threats, the scientists were moved before the time of the emails due to someone making threats in person and others have in fact received death threats around the country. The facts that has been revealed in this are how the media get it wrong and to how people like you end up with egg on your face. regularly.

Back to top

"Faced with what is right, to leave it undone shows a lack of courage."
Confucius

IP Logged

Peter Freedman

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5275
Wellington
Gender: male

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #43 - May 27^th, 2012 at 4:29pm

As far as I can tell there were some isolated threats more than a year ago. They were not taken very seriously.

Then someone in the media got hold of the story on a slow news day and beat the sh#t out of it leaving out some salient facts (such as the timeframe involved). Then the media who didn't break the story decided to beat the sh#t out of the media that did.

No doubt the truth is out there somewhere but has now been so muddied we will probably never find it.

Back to top

God grant me the patience to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and, above all, the wisdom to tell the difference.

IP Logged

mozzaok

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: BS BS BS. Climate scientists were not threatened
Reply #44 - May 27^th, 2012 at 6:28pm

Well progs, from your nonsensical replies, can we assume that you did not follow the links to the source material, which examined just who said what, and when???

This thread is about decent people being harassed and threatened, because loonies do not understand what their work is, or what it means.

Denialists even here, choose to characterise these poor victims of intolerable abuse, as liars, because they accept the irresponsibly written article from the Australian, on face value.
The Australian is the denialists most trusted source of expert opinion from the mainstream aussie media, because of the opinion pieces promoting denisalist lies in a similar vein to those they glean from nutty bloggers.

Not unlike the political leader whose campaign to become PM, it so tirelessly champions, the Australian presents an almost schizophrenic stance on the issue, with editorials declaring the science is accepted, and that action is required, at the same time that they run a far greater proportion of opinion pieces which vehemently declare the opposite, effectively promoting ALL the popular denialist lies.

Their actions so closely follow those of Abbott, as to make you wonder if he is setting their agenda, or merely following it?

Denialists have the habit of going off half cocked based on false information and ridiculous suppositions they latch onto from other deniers, and misinformation blogs, designed for the express purpose of creating a place where loons can get their lunacy validated.

Denialists, by definition, just love denying facts, as well as latching onto loony conspiracy theories, it seems.

The unchallengeable facts are that Climate scientists in Australia have received DEATH threats, as well as other disgusting harassment, the level of which was so bad, that their employer relocated them, for the sake of their safety, as a responsible step to maintain their duty of care, to provide a safe work place.

The issue behind the issue is, that having a political leader who makes statements like, "climate change is absolute crap", such as Tony Abbott has done, helps to create a toxic environment, which gives these crazy denialists all the justification they need, to feel vindicated in trying to intimidate scientists whose work they refuse to accept.

They do not have the decency to try and actually inquire into the facts which these scientists present, but take the usual loony shortcut, just like the political leader they support, and declare agreed upon scientific consensus is crap, thereby negating any chance that they ever actually listen to the facts, and merely keep parroting denialist lies, whilst adding their own virulent hatefulness to the mix.

Back to top

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!

IP Logged