Peter Ridd has won his case against JCU on all counts.

He was fired for being, amongst other things, uncollegial. He wouldn't toe the JCU line and criticised other scientists work.



Some background -

"The dispute between Professor Peter Ridd and James Cook University is an issue of importance well beyond the immediate matter of academic freedom of speech. The attempt by the JCU administration to silence Professor Ridd is misguided, damaging to the reputation of the university and of questionable legality.  Worse yet, it ignores a clear opportunity to turn the matter into a positive outcome for JCU, Professor Ridd and the wider community. It is time for the Governing Council of JCU to exercise its oversight responsibilities and intervene with the administration to change course.

The key concern of Professor Ridd is the widespread acceptance of unverified research claims as a basis for government policy with no critical assessment.  This problem in particularly rife in the environmental sciences and much of the management of the Great Barrier Reef is founded on it. That the problem of dubious science is not just a fringe opinion is evidenced by several recent extensive reviews in leading scientific journals. These studies have found that about half of reports published in leading journals fail to yield similar results when attempts have been made to replicate them. In view of the numerous complexities, uncertainties and inherent variabilities of environmental phenomena it can be safely assumed that GBR research will not be a shining exception."

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2018/02/peter-ridd-vs-jcu-obligati...

DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 16^th, 2019 at 6:04pm:


So tell us how judges determine scientific truth.

But science is advanced by people having alternative views - not by attempting to shut them up. Why were the climate science community so outraged they went to the Uni to voice their concerns and the attempt to gag him?

Evidence the new paper on 400 years of coral bleaching - that puts paid to the claims of it being a new type of event.

DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 16^th, 2019 at 6:17pm:


Yes. So why did JCU go down that path? Why try to gag him? Surely if the science was correct it was easily proven.

From my edit: "Evidence the new paper on 400 years of coral bleaching - that puts paid to the claims of it being a new type of event."

DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 16^th, 2019 at 6:26pm:


Ego. Yes. Absolutely. Couldn't have their pet theories questioned. They are supposed to be scientists, right. That's what comes with the turf. Hypothesis. hypothesis testing.

DonDeeHippy wrote on Apr 16^th, 2019 at 7:05pm:



Ahh, yes. The Stephen Schneider defence.

"On the one hand we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but& which means that we must include all the doubts, caveats, ifs and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists, but human beings as well. And like most people, we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we have to get some broad-based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This double ethical bind which we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."

https://judithcurry.com/2011/07/21/stephen-schneider-and-the-“double-ethical-bin...

or excerpts

https://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/DetroitNews.pdf




To be a climate scientist or a climate activist - that is the question.

lee wrote on Apr 16^th, 2019 at 6:13pm:

lee wrote on Apr 17^th, 2019 at 12:10pm:


Please provide evidence on any papers referring to bleaching as a new type of event. Or are you just talking nonsense again.
Bleaching is becoming more common as the world warms, but it is not a new event

That's a poor try even for you

lee wrote on Apr 17^th, 2019 at 12:10pm:


Now show me where anyone has said it is a new event....