JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

Australian Environment Conference Oct 20 2012


micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Australian Survey of Scientists: Quick speak up while you can!

A comment from Speedy is worth taking up.

I fear they will close the survey soon. Don’t miss the chance to let them know how disappointed you are in falling standards of scientific integrity in our major scientific institutions and associations. These groups should be speaking out against unscientific behaviour, illogical announcements, and a lack of empirical evidence in policy proscriptions. These institutions should be serving the public.

The survey is for members of Australian Science Associations and members of FASTS.

Jo

Here’s a survey for those of us who are engineers/scientists in Australia – see below. It’s a chance to input our opinion to the peak body of the scientific societies of Australia. Don’t let your silence indicate your consent of their pro-AGW stance!

FASTS and APESMA are working together to advocate and promoting the issues of science and scientists to the government, key stakeholders and the public. We have the ear of the government and we want to make sure we use it to best reflect what our members – you – think.

The survey seeks your feedback on the big issues we all face, the professional issues you face and what you think the priorities we should be pursing to improve the position of science and scientists in Australia.

A range of organisations will be involved. This is a rare and important opportunity for the profession and a chance to have your say. We strongly encourage you to participate.

The survey will take around 15 minutes to complete and is only open until 24th September (even though the covering page says 16 September). There is a meeting to discuss early results on Monday, so please complete the survey by Friday, 17 September at 12 noon if possible.

If you complete the survey you will go into the draw to win a free ticket to attend FASTS annual flagship event Science meets Parliament in Canberra, which brings together some 200 scientists from around Australia to meet with federal parliamentarians and learn about the political process and how your work is important to it.

Click the link below to get started:

http://FAST-SURVEY-2010-Members.questionpro.com

Cheers,

Speedy

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.5/10 (2 votes cast)
Australian Survey of Scientists: Quick speak up while you can!, 5.5 out of 10 based on 2 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/2fqut2n

15 comments to Australian Survey of Scientists: Quick speak up while you can!

  • #
    speedy

    Jo

    Thanks for bringing this opportunity to the attention of the realist population. There is enough intellectual horsepower on this blog to make even a dyed-in-the-wool AGW advocate (God forbid) – THINK!

    My only concern is that FASTS are becoming part of the problem and not the solution if they are aim for political influence instead of scientific integrity. We need to be a conscience to these people who are preferring political favour to scientific truth!

    Thanks again,

    Speedy


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Tim

    Pure science opens up exciting new horizons. Corporatised / politicised science invents contrived outcomes for profit and propaganda. We all know the difference. As a survey of one, I say lets get the funds back to real science – and maybe here’s an opportunity to tell them to pass this message on to the government.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Siphonomics

    Politicized scientists are worth their weight in gold, traditional scientists are two-a-penny, which is why science-for-hire is now big business. Rain making is back in business, falling standards of scientific integrity are just an unintended consequence.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Politics, in the post modern sense of the word, destroys science and everything else it touches!

    Politics (post modern type): Any principle and any value, no matter how fundamental, can and will be compromised as long as it is thought that it can be gotten away with. If the plan fails, more of the same is done only it’s done harder while blaming the victims for the failure. The downfall of such “plans” will happen and it has happened before.

    The phrase “Après moi, le déluge” (“After me, the deluge”) is attributed to the King of France Louis XV (1710-1774):


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    Hmmm maybe the federal parliamentarians could be asked what their personal magnetic footprint is:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xPw_XRXa5w


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Real scientists probably stopped speaking out many many years ago. The acid rain scam taught a lot, a lot,
    about the way forward in politically correct, beneficial, and mostly funded science “research”..
    Anyone remember Ed Krug. Well, as one of his colleagues put it, way back when
    “He was,” a colleague says, “a bit immature in the area of political science.”

    This is a sobbering read, with many echos to the present (Many suggest that acid rain was a dry run for the real one..).
    http://sppiblog.org/news/rear-mirror-the-epa-vs-ed-krug-over-the-acid-rain-scare#more-2463

    A couple of excerpts.
    During the late 1980s, acid rain was a hot topic. Environmentalists said that it was an ecological catastrophe.
    George Bush made an acid-rain policy an important part of his kinder, gentler agenda.
    Together, the president and environmentalists helped push through Congress the Clean Air Act of 1990,
    the most sweeping regulatory law in history.
    Some important people had their reputations staked on this legislation, and
    they didn’t need Ed Krug telling taxpayers acid rain is no big deal.

    and,

    Trout survived better in the Adirondacks around the turn of the century than in earlier times because
    of extensive slash-and-burn logging of that area.
    Eliminating the acid vegetation caused the soil to become more alkaline (a high pH), reducing the acid flowing into lakes and streams.
    In turn, the lakes became more hospitable to fish. After “forever wild” legislation stopped the logging in 1915,
    the watersheds reverted to acid soils and vegetation, and the lakes became acidic again.
    End of excerpts.

    “mineral titration theory” – does anyone remember or give it credence today. Thought not.
    This is all a bit like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas – the silence will be deafening.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Bruce of Newcastle

    Did the survey, though it seemed to be complete at only 16% on the progress bar, then it restarted at the beginning. I hope FASTS are more precise with the data than the software appears to be.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    speedy

    Bruce

    Had exactly the same problem. I posted the link to another computer and did it from there. Worked OK the second time. You might be able to delete all the cookies and that may achieve the same result. But it is frustrating, yes.

    Cheers,

    Speedy


    Report this

    00

  • #

    The survey worked for me right through to 98%, then I presume it was complete but I was sent to the start. For the most part it seemed better than most surveys, and did appear to be a sincere attempt to get feedback at FASTS. However some questions show that they are not thinking or aware of the deficit of logic, reason and scientific integrity of members, and that this might be an issue.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    A C of Adelaide

    Sorry but I failed to complete
    It looked like a load of push polling, where they were effectively asking people to endorse their preconceived positions rather than canvass new information.
    Maybe it got better further in but I didnt like the look of it at all.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Did the survey, right to the end. Helps being a member of a scientific society though (M.AIG, M.IEEE)


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Deadman

    See the ABC’s latest Catalyst for global warming climate change, including such pearls as these:

    NARRATION: Scientific alarm about the risks of climate change is rising as quickly as the greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels.

    NARRATION: The Catalyst decade started with a warning from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the world was warming faster than ever anticipated.
    Dr Stephen Schneider: It’s off the charts relative to everything else that’s happened.
    NARRATION: The last ten years have challenged our notion of a stable climate that’s safe to live with, as ice sheets shrink, corals bleach, currents shift, rivers run dry, and glaciers retreat.

    NARRATION: The latest finding from the IPCC is that global warming over the last 250 years is extremely likely to be due to human activities, like burning fossil fuels and land clearing. Ice cores now show that the current atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is at its highest level in at least 800,000 years.
    Dr Neal Young: Certainly what’s coming out now is a very strong and clear picture that big things can happen in the ice sheets. It could have a dramatic effect on the ultimate sea level rise over this coming century.
    NARRATION: Over the previous century, the planet warmed by nearly one degree, mostly in the last fifty years. But now we also know the extra carbon dioxide is making the chemistry of the oceans more acidic.

    NARRATION: As debate* warms up about putting a price on carbon, it will take public opinion and government action informed by good science [!] to bring our emissions safely under control.

    * A debate, strangely, which ever features only one side of an argument.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Alan

    Completed the survey ok but like AC of Adelaide thought it was a bit like push polling.Thought they were attempting to ask questions to the answer they already had. Also their definitions of science/science jobs were too narrow and did not see my organisation there – Aus Institute of Mining and Metallurgy


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Now what idiot gave my non partisan, unbiased statement of fact, and thus not opinion, a thumb’s down score. A boneheaded AGW troll?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    David Cooke

    I started filling out this survey on the basis that I’m in the Australian Systematic Botany Society (ASBS) and it was affiliated with FASTS. Then I discovered that ASBS broke from FASTS a few years ago! This is good, I never particularly wanted the connection to FASTS as it’s just a trade union for scientists – agitating for more money, more influence, more government favours. If science is going to recover the respect of the broad public we’ll need to show we’re interested in more than our own remuneration.

    The list they give of affiliated associations is actually quite small, can it be that other associations have been dropping out of the FASTS ratpack?


    Report this

    00