JoNova

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


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

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



Archives

The forbidden history of unpopular people

Excellent video. This man is good. The message is spot on.

This is an edgy fast paced narrative about why we owe the most to some of the most unpopular people in history. It’s about free speech: why it matters, why we may lose it. About the threat that Finkelstein poses.

“It’s about arrogance, it’s about powerful people here in Australia who believe that they are smarter than you, that their opinion is worth more than your opinion, and that their thinking is better than your thinking, and if you think they’re wrong, you should just shut up.”

There have been nutters in history who were reviled, derided, hated, and spat on. A few of these held the answers that saved countless lives — including quite possibly, yours and mine.

The home site is The Forbidden History -  it has a high resolution, larger screen display.  This was a crowd sourced project costing $27k. Money well spent. He is raising money for part II and III. Topher has his own site and other video’s here.

Share it with your friends.

On Free Speech:

“The first thing we know is that it’s very expensive

The second things we know is that it’s offensive

The third thing we know is that no matter what the price, it’s worth it.”

***

Them Smart, You Dumb, End of Story.”

Help stop the News Media Gestapo

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (111 votes cast)
The forbidden history of unpopular people, 9.5 out of 10 based on 111 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/6npcamc

110 comments to The forbidden history of unpopular people

  • #
    Mark Hladik

    The free flow of information, and the free exchange of ideas, is now, and has always been, the bane of despots everywhere.

    Even if I disagree with your opinion, I embrace your ability to verbalize it, as you should embrace my ability. If you do not, then you are the one at fault, not me.

    My regards to all,

    Mark H.

    00

  • #

    If you think we have free speech in Australia, try running a productive business and publically questioning the entire theory of AGW.

    00

  • #
    Richard deSousa

    So very apt today in a world full of do gooders. NYC’s mayor, Bloomberg, wants to save the lives of the citizens of NYC by banning large portions of sugary drinks! You can’t make this up!!! Kick Gillard’s arse back to the Outback in 2013!

    00

  • #
    Jaymez

    The video is well written and well presented and given the importance of the topic, just the right length.

    No matter what political persuasion you are, it is in your interests to fight against restrictions on free speech because you can be sure that whatever party is in power in the future, they will want to appoint ‘friends’ to the council and will try to influence what they consider as ‘fair and reasonable’.

    Topher makes a very good point (a number of times), that free speech can be offensive on occasions. But we can’t afford to give away free speech in order to avoid offending anyone. I can think of any number of comments which may not be considered ‘Fair and Reasonable’ by an over politically correct News Media Council. For instance, “The Prime Minister is an idiot”, “God is a Myth”, “By today’s standards Mohammed was a paedophile”, “The Treasurer is an economic illiterate”, “Tim Flannery wouldn’t know if his arse was on fire”. Yes I know some of those comments would be considered controversial. But under the Finklestein proposals on the operation of a News Media Council, if I made any of those comments on Jo Nova’s Web Site, both myself and Jo Nova could be found to be in breach of the “fair and reasonable” standards and at risk of various penalties and a prohibition on discussing the topic in the future.

    I was proud to have provided some financial support for this crowd sourced video project. Topher plans to do a couple of more if he can get the funding. So support it if you can. Pass this video on to others to spread this worthwhile message.

    00

  • #
    David, UK

    Brilliantly put. Some things that the Intellectual Elite (read The Left) have made a crime to voice openly in once-free societies: racism, sexism, ageism – lots of “isms,” Holocaust denial, “xenophobia” – that’s a laugh, making an irrational fear a “hate crime”. And if you’re for free speech then by implication you must obviously support the views of racists, sexists, phobics, etc, etc. Control the speech and you control the thoughts. 1984 anyone?

    00

  • #
    David Davidovics

    Excellent video. I don’t think Canada has a media council comparable to what is being proposed in Australia, but we do have ‘human rights tribunals’ that already carry out many of the things this man is warning about.

    If you say something deemed to be offensive, you get dragged before the tribunal and have no access to legal representation,appeal, or judgment by peers.

    Political correctness used to be a joke, but maybe we should stop laughing.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    Some things that the Intellectual Elite (read The Left) have made a crime …

    It is not just “the left” who see themselves as the intellectual elite. It occurs at both ends of the political spectrum, and no more so than in the UK, where the class structure still guarantees an idiot a job in government as long as he is from “a respectable family”, can physically survive the rigours of a Public School, and overcome the boredom of three years at the London School of Economics.

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    With the Finkelstien Enquiry & now the AG Nicola Roxon announcing a move to put the affairs of parliamentarians beyond FOI, you get the impression that the formula is “beyond scrutiny is beyond reproach”.
    It does not work for me. I like to think I’ll know what value I get for my money.
    History has a lot of examples of ruling classes which have come unstuck in a very ugly way for losing touch with the people they rule.

    00

  • #

    Thank, that was very good. And thank you for your excellent work.

    00

  • #
    pat

    Summer isn’t very popular in Britain:

    4 June: UK Daily Mail: Freezing June! It’ll rain all week, feel chilly and we might even see snow on Britain’s highest peaks
    Up to an inch of rain fell across large parts of the country yesterday
    Unsettled weather expected to continue until next weekend
    Highest temperatures during the day forecast to drop to the mid-teens
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2154340/Freezing-June-Itll-rain-week-snow.html

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    Thankyou for posting this Jo. This video is brilliant. Loved every second of it!
    Our government has selected and rewarded advisors who will only say what they wish to hear. As emperors with no clothes they have become factually challenged truthaphobes. How can sanity ever prevail if reality becomes illegal due to the orthodoxy being in error and forced to stay that way?
    This is the choice between a stagnating educated delusion or a continuing intelligent evolution.

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    Thanks for that Jo – it’s really good. A well constructed argument with an extremely important message.

    It’s been the constant tinkering of do gooders and the political correctness brigade that has undermined capitalism. It is well on the way to undermining the very concept of a free society as well.

    00

  • #
    Stacey

    Absolutely brilliant.
    Just like a mini skirt; long enough to cover the subject and short enough to be interesting:-)

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    “Free speech is being taken off you!” the speaker says. Things are really crook when people don’t already know and have to be told.

    How come it is that those who would remove freedom of speech are in control – who put them in that position of power?

    What is the ultimate agenda of those who would take away natural law and replace it with granted indulgences?

    What is the cause of the general populations apathetic mindset?

    00

  • #
    Pete

    Topher is good value. As one of the sponsors of this vid., I appreciated his effort. However, he didn’t address the need for limits to free speech… for instance, should we be ‘free’ to shout “Fire” in a crowded theatre, or to publish untrue statements about persons, or to inflame a riot? The analysis needed to be a bit more analytical and a bit less rhetorical.

    00

  • #
    timg56

    I love this guy.

    00

  • #
    brc

    An excellent presentation, one that is worthy of spreading far and wide.

    The beauty of the presentation is that it doesn’t fall down party lines. OK, so some parts of the Labor party pushed this report but I seriously doubt that all of their supporters agree with the report.

    There is no argument against any of the topics. None. If you disagree with what is presented, surely your only comeback is that people must be ruled over by a self-appointed and selected elite. As he says, if you’re too dumb to figure things out, then you must be too dumb to vote.

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    Control of the media, NBN Co internet filter and more are reminders of UN Agenda 21, new world government and the other Fabian Socialist new world order objectives that far too many Australians appear to be blissfully unaware of or are not interested in knowing about.

    00

  • #
    Philip Bradley

    I think this is one aspect of a wider phenomena that I’d call Aversion to Change. Societies don’t like their core ideas and principles to fail, because that would require changing them, and so endeavour to protect them. The same applies to individuals and businesses. I read today about large numbers of zombie companies in Europe, propped up by cheap money, and tying up capital and resources that need to fail in order for a recovery to occur.

    00

  • #
    J.H.

    Well said and nicely presented. I just had to laugh when he pinged Finklestein’s very first arrogant sentence. Classic.

    00

  • #

    First we get the Finkelstien Enquiry & now we get Attorney General Nicola Roxon’s attempts to put all parliamentarians beyond the Freedom of Information Act. Both Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin would have approved. The politicians would then be above scrutiny although not beyond reproach, but beyond public reproach.
    The Labor Party now sees itself as an uncorrupted ruling class above any criticism, with its financial needs fed by the working lives of all of the Australian population.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Of course free speech is non-existent. I’ve said things on this blog that have led (temporarily) to the removal of my right to comment. Personally, I’m happy that the owners of blogs engage in censorship. For me to enjoy a blog requires some degree of discipline from other participants, and when they fail to exercise that themselves, its up to the owner of the blog to make the tough decisions.

    So while I support free speech (don’t we all?), I do have a problem with powerfull media interests promoting their ideology. One only has to look at the UK where Tony Blair resented being forced to attend briefings with Murdoch editors, but knew that the price of not doing so would be to lose government. So should the Murdoch press be allowed to bring down governments they don’t like? And while Topher distinguishes between opinion and facts, in practice its very hard to stop people spouting wrong “facts”. Like the people who say the holocaust didn’t happen. They just make up stuff that isn’t true, and say that it supports their argument, and that they are being persecuted by the Jewish conspiracy for speaking the truth.

    Its not as simple as Topher makes out.

    00

    • #
      paul

      Sounds like your whole comment was a ruse to bring in Holocaust Denial then slap it down straw-man style. Sounds like there are some areas of free speech that you prefer not to see so free yourself.

      00

  • #

    I first saw some of Topher’s videos a couple of years back now when Andrew Bolt linked up one of his videos about Victoria Water, that being the infamous North South Pipeline for Melbourne’s water.

    He also has a few other videos, and they are at the following link

    Topher’s Videos

    The one I would direct you to is the bottom one on the list from 2009 I think, and titled Unpopular View #1.

    It deals with the Wonthaggi Desal Plant, specifically mentioning something that has happened yet again, the major flooding on the Mitchell River.

    That desal plant cost, and benefit (or lack thereof) aside, this plant is quite literally liquid electricity.

    A typical reverse osmosis desal process consumes 6KWH of electricity to produce 1 cubic metre of fresh water.

    Wonthaggi will produce 200 Gigalitres of water a year, (200 Million Cubic Metres) hence consuming 1200GWH of electricity, an absolutely monumentally huge chunk out of Victoria’s already dwindling power supplies.

    The incongruity of it all is that this amount of power is 10% of the total yearly output from that plant of dread, Hazelwood, and if Hazelwood generates 25% of all Victoria’s power then the desal plant will knock 2.5% of that power availability off that dwindling total.

    So, when some arty farty greenie says that they will construct renewable power to run Wonthaggi, huh, what absolute bovine waste product. The desal plant requires power on a 24/7/365 basis, so no renewable plant can cover that.

    What it effectively means that when the desal plant is up and running, then Hazelwood becomes a necessary part of Victoria’s power needs, if they want to have that availability of water.

    But hey, what would greenies know about that.

    Amazing, appease one set of greenies and then alienate them with the same single statement.

    And now, we have he Mitchell in major flood yet again, costing Victorians, (both individually and collectively) millions in losses.

    And the perfect place for the Dam on the Mitchell. Well Victorian Labor covered that base too. They made it a National Park.

    Topher explains it absolutely brilliantly. Just take the time and watch his video. The man’s very clever.

    Tony.

    00

  • #
    Mark

    Kevin,

    The vast majority of fluoridation is by way of soluble hexafluorosilicates such as sodium. Not exactly small molecules (Na2SiF6)

    I am, by the way, totally opposed to involuntary government decreed medication whatever the dental associations spruik.

    Won’t it be fun when the gastroenterologists succeed in getting the water supply dosed with Epsom salts in the interests of colorectal health!

    00

  • #
    agwnonsense

    I am just a nobody with a highschool education and I really envy Topher”s eloquence “outstanding” Climate Change is Natural and CO2 is Life.

    00

  • #

    [...] The forbidden history of unpopular people [...]

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Yes tell them to eat cake!!!

    OT Mann E. M. (Michael) the fibber! caught out..I just found this..
    2001. Looks like a certain Mann WAS in agreement with solar influence on climate.
    So whats his name doing on a paper like this?

    Solar Forcing of Regional Climate Change During the Maunder Minimum
    Drew T. Shindell1, Gavin A. Schmidt1, Michael E. Mann2, David Rind1 and Anne Waple3
    + Author Affiliations

    1 NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Center for Climate Systems Research, Columbia University, New York, NY 10025, USA.
    2 Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22902, USA.
    3 Department of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
    ABSTRACT

    We examine the climate response to solar irradiance changes between the late 17th-century Maunder Minimum and the late 18th century. Global average temperature changes are small (about 0.3° to 0.4°C) in both a climate model and empirical reconstructions. However, regional temperature changes are quite large. In the model, these occur primarily through a forced shift toward the low index state of the Arctic Oscillation/North Atlantic Oscillation as solar irradiance decreases. This leads to colder temperatures over the Northern Hemisphere continents, especially in winter (1° to 2°C), in agreement with historical records and proxy data for surface temperatures.

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/294/5549/2149.abstract

    00

  • #
    PaddikJ

    I’d love to post the video to my FaceBook wall here in Denver, CO, but when I go to the actual YouTube page I’m informed that the video is “unlisted” & I can’t see it.

    Suggestions?

    00

  • #

    [...] Joanne Nova writes: This is an edgy fast paced narrative about why we owe the most to some of the most unpopular people in history. It’s about free speech: why it matters, why we may lose it. About the threat that Finkelstein poses. [...]

    00

  • #
    Joe's World

    Jo,

    Currently I am in an interesting discussion on experimentation of atmospheric gases in laboratory testing to the actual planet physical mechanisms.
    Many assumptions and following the laws at all costs currently is the mentality.
    What is being missed by all sides currently is the volume differences of the atmosphere to an actual container.
    Because of our planets shape, the container would have to be pie wedge shape in order to contain the same volume as to what laboratories use. The velocity difference from on our planet surface to the outer atmosphere has much less gases due to compression differences and volume space.

    Hope we don’t loose our free speech as science is currently REALLY screwed up!

    00

  • #
    Mark Hladik

    The only famous quote Topher could (should?) add to the video (maybe he has it planned for the future) is:

    “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

    Regards,

    Mark H.

    00

  • #
    Bob Kutz

    This is why I love your website Jo!

    00

  • #

    [...] Australia “It’s about arrogance, it’s about powerful people here in Australia who believe that they are smarter than you, that their opinion is worth more than your opinion, and that their thinking is better than your thinking, and if you think they’re wrong, you should just shut up.” –Excellent video.

    00

  • #
    Alexander K

    Excellent stuff, Jo, but just one quibble – who the heck is John Mills? I suspect Topher was actually quoting John Stewart Mill, not the father of Hayley!

    00

  • #

    great video Jo, thanks for posting… as Topher wanted it shared, I’ve obliged

    cheers from a happy-about-Wisconsin American living in Auckland ;)

    00

  • #

    Sorry, the site will be down today for some hours. Hopefully we can restore those lost comments. — Jo

    00

  • #
    jaytee

    Great. I was looking for a Tips place ( not the Tip Jar: Sorry Jo ) to post a link to this, and here it is. I’m happy and proud to be a contributor to Chris Fields’ work: his Unpopular View work is well worth a look.

    It’s a pity he’s reduced to begging for funding, when the Arts Council ( Australian, means Money for Nothing, As Long As You’re A Leftie ) can fund people painting trees blue. The man is brilliant. This vid should go viral; whether it will is up to us.

    00

  • #
  • #
    Steve Meikle

    It is the essence of bigotry to think that truth, real or presumed, is a license to compel.

    They don’t want honesty of speech or of thought.

    They are tyrants and fools.

    I have shared this excellent video on my facebook page

    00

  • #
    crosspatch

    While I absolutely love the message, “raising money” to produce YouTube videos? What a novel idea. I should get my young daughter right on that! She has produced several and not even dented her allowance.

    00

  • #

    [...] The forbidden history of unpopular people (video) [...]

    00

  • #
    amabo

    You should move your ratings thingy, I just hit a 3 or 4 rating because I was trying to click on the keep reading link.

    00

  • #

    [...] is better than your thinking, and if you think they’re wrong, you should just shut up.”  The forbidden history of unpopular people  (JoAnn [...]

    00

  • #
    Thomas

    Well I tried to place a comment here a few days ago, 400,403 and finally internet web browser dies freezes??? I wonder if this is something the ISP is doing?? Probably as Telstra and 2 other (As far as I know) ISP have been using new hardware and software to monitor and folter our browsing? The other day I tried to make a Congrats comment regarding this video and I got a bit carried away as I just saw an article on bigpond news that google has had an sharp increase by world Governements and not Socialist dictators or communist but democratic free world governments to remove political web sites and blog sites. Over 40% increase in requests, Google must have a big legal team.. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/06/19/tech-google-content-removal.html?cmp=rss

    Google getting more government requests to delete content, pass on user data
    CBC News
    This nwas found on CBC News as Telstra only has these articles for a short time and thenm they are replaced and we can no longer make comments about news on the web site.

    This is now becoming more prevalent, and one has to ask why? What are they afraid off? What are they up to? What are they hiding and why try to prevent the public from expressing. passing, and informing others off.
    How will these changes impact the future generations and our children?

    [Thomas, we have been going through a server change and that may be why you had problems] ED

    00

  • #
    Thomas

    Finally I bypassed the Bigpond and Google search engine using startpage to make a comment here, yey it worked. Now I wait and see if they shut me down again or send ASIO after me??

    This video is extremely well presented and dare I say bravely.

    Yesterday 20th 06 2012 I read and news article from a website that stated that google is being asked more frequently over 40% increase by Governments and their departments to take down content and web sites they find offensive not only that they are being asked to reveal the content creators or web site owners details??? January this year I find out from a friend that Google was ordered to shut down over 1000 Christian web sites by the US Congress. In GOD WE TRUST, huh what god?
    If Christian websites are being declared security threats (and I do admit some of them are radical). However, not all are Cults. What concerns me is that some of the conspiracy theories have too much evidence to be dismissed. Now we have to tread very carefully, as the people behind the push to silence and control us are the ones that hold the big sticks. When I was younger I thought that Australia becoming a Republic may be a good thing. Now I realise that I was so naive and ignorant as are a lot of people today. The Constitution was designed and in Common Law passed down by Biblical teachings in a lot of cases and by previous laws handed down by England. This was meant to prevent certain power hungry individuals and organisations from enslaving the common and middle class people and offers protection against Governments doing the same thing. However, these days more than ever (and it has been going on for a long time) the individuals God Given Rights protected by the Constitution have been taken away. We the silly whom are too busy running our daily lives and whom are kept ignorant were not even aware of what was and is going on.
    Simply putting it if you control the media, education, legal system and the ones that enforce it as well as the military. You have power over the masses.

    00

  • #
    Thomas

    Cont.
    We have not learned from history and our past, and if the younger generations are educated in a specific structured way they will be indoctrinated into accepting what they are thought as fact and reality and very few will awaken to what is really going on. One of the lessons the power brokers have learned from history is that divided masses are easier to control, Power is not enough to retain control by force, so what is the solution? Well the new age of communications and transport has made the world a lot smaller. Unite the world with a central governing body, and retain control through financial occupation.
    He whom controls the money controls the world. However, it is not a single person. If you have a vested interest and there may be risks that that interest will be attacked you organise more security. Currently, the security is often in the shape of military, Police and private security.
    The problem is huge and it has gone beyond the average persons capacity to have any influence.
    Now what I have done is left my self open as a target for those that wish to retain the power, as I can be seen as a person whom is enticing conflict. I do not agree with violence and it is something that we all would refrain from. However, the way things are going it may get to the stage where the people start to rebel as is the case in many western democracies where the people are hurting. The distribution of wealth is no longer 20% owning 80% of the wealth, it is said to be 1% owning 92% (Do not quote me as I am reading from some websites and can not verify these figures) The traditional belief of the lower,middle and upper class has changed drastically.
    Whom is considered to be rich? Any one with a few million dollars, in who’s opinion and by what measure? By the person that earns $50,000 to $100,00 a year and has his own home or a rental Investment property? This person is poor, but the ones below him are even more poor, people that have billions are middle class, the rest are just various degrees of lower class. Now lets say that some families are worth trillions of dollars or organisations. There is the real power..
    The power to influence, sponsor, buy peoples loyalty, opinions, religious persuasions, hell some have sold out their souls. Hmm, Interesting concept. Can we separate the religion from the financial and political?? Really, isn’t that what we are told, no politics, no religion to be discussed specially at the dinner table. Lets bury our heads in the sand and hope this is all a figment of some conspiracy nutters imagination and that it does not exist. Dangerous this may be, as this is where they want you to be. In an imagined utopia.

    00

  • #
  • #

    [...] post here last month on The Forbidden History of Unpopular People garnered a very enthusiastic response. “It’s about arrogance, it’s about powerful people [...]

    00

  • #

    [...] Topher, with his excellent “Forbidden History” video? Well, his earlier videos were on the problems of water shortage in Melbourne, and the Labour [...]

    00

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    Rereke Whakaaro

    Sorry, I don’t understand your comment. Are you saying that students at the London School of Economics are idiots, or those who graduate in Economics are idiots?

    Given the state of Europe, at the moment after 50 years of policy guided by economists, either view could be said to have merit.

    00

  • #
    Anton

    You are joking aren’t you Rereke? The 1960s trendies who unleashed political correctness, having exploited freedom of speech to the hilt in their youth, now discriminate AGAINST the people you are whinging about. When were you last in UK?

    00

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    How come this comment appeared with a thumbs down?

    Is your moderator starting on the road to censorship?

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    No I wasn’t disparaging the LSE, per se. It is just my observation that a lot of the less effective civil servants in the UK seem to have passed through that institution, where, by the way, they became advocates of Keynesian economics.

    My reference to idiots was in the sense of the original Greek, idiōtēs – “a person lacking professional skill”.

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    pattoh

    History has a lot of examples of ruling classes which have come unstuck in a very ugly way for losing touch with the people they rule.

    Rule? I think you have just touched on the problem. When pressing for election are they not applying for a job? If elected, are they not public servants. A public servant and a bureaucrat are at opposite ends of the spectrum. By what authority do they call themselves a government [means mind ruler]? Mindsets need changing!

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    Arrogantly believe that they rule.

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    Britain definitely needs a carbon tax con.

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Wiith spring almost over & mid-summer fast approaching in England, there has been almost no hay fever this year, it has been so cool & damp, yet still with some very sunny days.
    That is a great relief & totally unprecedented since I developed hayfever in childhood, almost half a century ago.

    Meanwhile Queen Elizabeth II’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations are proving something of a washout, and with some participants being treated for hypothermia
    Jubilee Washout
    Still that’s just weather, and weather is a typical feature of our British climate, ‘though it is at bit chilly for June.

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Victoria & NSW have been taking a bit of a weather battering.
    Flight & ferries suspended
    Gales, floods & monster waves

    Is it Global Warming, the recent Solar Eclipse or the Transit of Venus ?

    No. My money’s on it being Queen Elizabeth’s Diamond Jubilee, because the correlation between Royal Events & Royal Visits with terrible weather events is well known, as it Always rains on Royal Parades

    00

  • #

    Perhaps that should have read:

    large numbers of zombie countries in Europe, propped up by cheap money, and tying up capital and resources that need to fail in order for a recovery to occur.

    It’s the bogus ideology that’s produced the European catastrophe. Homogenizing hundreds of different cultures doesn’t work over 20 generations. The objective of the European State is fundamentally flawed and any money poured into it only destroys well-being.

    Europe’s strength is that of diversity in a small area. You don’t build a nation by destroying its strengths.

    00

  • #

    Topher identified the insidious evil of “political correctness” as a restriction on free speech.

    Self-censorship is more damaging than censorship by others because it forces one to lie to oneself. That self-deceit is deemed not only acceptable but also desirable. There is active training in society to encourage such dishonesty.

    The deceit has no bounds. When does one stop telling lies? How can one tell the difference if one has damaged one’s internal judgement of honesty and truth?

    00

  • #
  • #
    pattoh

    KM

    I was thinking more along the lines of the French Revolution & American Independence.

    I have often thought about those long lines of sleek white Com Cars as backed up tumbrels.

    Beware the baying masses, they are swelling.

    Get your knitting ready!

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    John Brookes

    in practice its very hard to stop people spouting wrong “facts”…… They just make up stuff that isn’t true,

    Look in the mirror.

    00

  • #

    Freedom of speech doesn’t extend to making others listen.

    Your freedom of speech is uncompromised by the censors on blogs because that freedom doesn’t extend to those blogs any more than does parking your car in somebody else’s garage without their permission.

    Start your own blog if you want to exercise your freedom of speech without censorship.

    00

  • #

    So while I support free speech (don’t we all?), I do have a problem with powerfull media interests promoting their ideology.

    The ideology of that “powerful media” will only gain traction if it resonates with the majority of the people.
    For example, the Australian ABC and the Fairfax media are cut from the same cloth, but their ideology doesn’t resonate with the majority.

    No need to be worried about the media John. It’s time to worry only if and when the media are in bed with the government.
    In the current political environment, we should count our lucky stars for the Murdoch press.
    If we only had the ABC and Fairfax with the current Green Labor government, we would already be known as the Union of Socialist States of Australia

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    You are a chronically cofused person man Brooksie.

    You are not talking about free speech but the abuse of it, a distinction which was absent in the Bolt judgement and Finkelstein’s egregious report.

    Murdoch is being punished in England for his papers’ alleged contraventions. In England, as in Australia Murdoch press enjoys high readership with something like 70% of newspaper readership from about 30% of the papers.

    In effect you are restating Finkelstein’s odious justification; which is because the general public cannot see, or do not react to Murdoch’s alleged immorality/illegality/undue influence and continue to patronise his publications Murdoch should be punished beyond any proven illegal acts and the public should be censored.

    00

  • #
    Ross

    John
    The question that has to be asked of Finkelstein et al is , Why now? for these proposed regs.
    World wide the newspaper publishers have taken “political sides” or sided with important issues since newspapers first started. You just have to read the history of the Hearst publishing empire to get a taste of it.
    It could be argued that there is LESS need to any intervention now as with the Internet it easy for anyone to find alternative veiews on an issue.

    00

  • #
    catamon

    Its not as simple as Topher makes out

    Yup, but its not going to stop him advocating the sale of what rights and influence we have to the person with the deepest pockets. Another angry tosspot on the intertubes.

    00

  • #
    brc

    How is it that all you idiot lefties completely miss the clue train, day after day?

    Free speech is not forcing joannenova.com.au to print your comments.

    Free speech is not forcing Rupert Murdoch to print a correction.

    If you force Joannenova.com.au to print anything you demand of it, then this site probably would have to close comments and lose a large part of its utility.

    If you force Rupert Murdochs paper to print every single retraction and apology forced of it, then the papers will gradually dwindle. Who wants to spend a couple of bucks on a paper full of retractions and apologies? Column inches cost money. Forcing a private company to print things naturally damages the papers viability. So the obvious outcome is that the paper becomes a very grey, boring print, to avoid being forced to print anything someone found offensive. And given that the government of the day selects the people to run the watchdog, the paper would soon be forced into printing what the government and it’s supporters say.

    Right now, if you’re seriously wronged by a paper, there are many, many avenues to have your say. In the hurly-burly world of free speech, people get offended and trade blows all the time. That’s a good thing.

    But the most idiotic thing of people like you supporting the Finkelstein approach is that you can’t even see 2 years into the future. Say this press council is set up. Say it is given the powers. Then Tony Abbott gets in, and at the urging of some of his backers, installs Andrew Bolt as the head of the organisation. The lefties go apopleptic, but there is nothing they can do, no court of appeal, it’s a done deal.

    Then Andrew decides that anything promoting climate alarmism isn’t fair, and amounts to hate speech because it condemns people in the developing nations to suffer with no energy and reduced calories. Andrew then forces the Age, the ABC and Green Left Weekly (yes, them) to print the views of Christopher Monckton every time they trot out a climate alarmism piece.

    You might very well scoff at the idea. But this is how your support of the Finkelstein report is seen by ‘us’, the other side of the political divide. This all came about because Bob Brown and Stephen Conroy didn’t like being bashed from pillar to post on a daily basis for having stupid policies.

    Seriously. Open your eyes. This is a fork in the road, and one of those paths leads to seriously bad consequences. And all you can do is say ‘but Murdoch printed something nasty’.

    Grow up, act your age and finally admit to yourself the world isn’t perfect, and no amount of stupid government regulation is going to make it so.

    /rant

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Tony

    Re:

    A typical reverse osmosis desal process consumes 6KWH of electricity to produce 1 cubic metre of fresh water.

    The water those desal plants pump out might be fresh but not necessarily pure.

    Ineffectiveness of Reverse Osmosis units

    Reverse Osmosis [RO] manufacturers’ claim they can remove fluoride. Don’t believe their claim$.
    RO units work on the same principle as our kidneys. Think of a mesh, like the mosquito netting on your screen door. The mesh lets in air, but not mosquitos, because air molecules are smaller than mosquitos.

    An RO unit is thus great for removing “heavy metals” like Pb (Lead), Hg (Mercury) and Cd (Cadmium), as well as Cl- family compounds like PCBs and PCP’s (Poly Chlorinated Phenyls and BiPhenyls) because these are all large molecules relative to the size of H2O. In fact, even Cl (the smallest of these) is relative large (molecular weight of 35 g/M) and so if the RO unit is new and it is well made (ie. with precision tolerances on the RO membrane) it might even filter out some of the Cl. Note the “ifs” and conditions in the last sentence.

    So, an RO unit will not filter out F atoms, as F atoms are too similar in size to H2O molecules.
    http://www.just-think-it.com/no-f.htm

    00

  • #
    Philip Bradley

    A significant element in the state Labor mania for desal plants (we have one here in WA) is that they represent a disguised subsidy to over-paid union jobs.

    00

  • #
    Anton

    “The desal plant requires power on a 24/7/365 basis, so no renewable plant can cover that.”

    Demineralisation plants are one of the few things that CAN be powered by intermittent energy sources like solar-to-electricity. Why? Because of reservoirs to store their product.

    To get rid of smaller molecules as well as larger ones, revert to the Multi-Stage Flash (MSF) distillation process used in the first continuous-flow deslination plants, installed in Kuwait in the 1950s and designed by R.S. Silver, one of the unsung geniuses of the 20th century.

    00

  • #

    for instance, should we be ‘free’ to shout “Fire” in a crowded theatre, or to publish untrue statements about persons, or to inflame a riot?

    Firstly, welcome back from your 20 year coma Pete.

    People have been and are free to yell fire in a crowded theatre. In fact there are many people who yell fire repeatedly in every theatre they enter. I’ll name just a few of them….

    Tim Flannery
    Will Steffan
    James Hansen
    Clive Hamilton
    etc etc, you get the picture.

    The key here is that although these people are free to yell fire, others, like us, are NOT free to yell back ‘relax folks, there is no fire’.
    Left to these people, soon saying there is no fire may well be illegal.

    00

  • #
    ExWarmist

    If “Sex in the City II” was on – the “Fire” shouter was probably doing everyone a favour.

    On a more serious note – don’t we already have laws to deal with shouting “Fire” and causing a panic where people get hurt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence

    So yes – you are allowed to scream “Fire” in a crowded theatre – but if anyone is hurt in the panic, and there is no fire – expect to be punished.

    Note that the law as it stands allows us to deal with malicious idiots – we don’t need another law with destructive consequences for dissent against authority to be imposed to “save us” from malicious idiots.

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    “Fire”

    Complete and utter red herring. There already exist a plethora of offences both criminal and civil to prevent or punish such scenarios; such as defamation, incitment etc.

    The problem for the Finkelsteins of this world is that the defences to these charges are truth and reasonableness. This works both ways so that if things are said which are true and reasonable then they are not actionable.

    This is why the plaintiffs in the Bolt case did not proceed against Bolt in defamation; they knew that ‘hurt feelings’ do not sustain an action, nor did Bolt say things which were unreasonable. It is a pity that Bolt and/or his legal advisors went all ‘girlieman’ and did not appeal.

    Topher’s video is spot on and I direct readers to these 2 articles which cover similar ground.

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    http://www.lovethetruth.com/books/pawns/03.htm

    “Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late… It means the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern schoolteachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit objects for derision… It is said slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties.”
    Maj. General Patrick R. Cleburne, CSA, January 1864
    http://confederatecolonel.com/resources/quotes/

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    KM

    The populace of drones like you & me are being kept sedated & ignorant by an endless stream of soap operas & lifestyle programs telling us how to live & think* ( in amongst the product placements & advertisements).

    And who is getting their snouts in the trough with all the advertising telling us how great & benevolent our government is?

    *smarter BENEVOLENT people do the thinking for us so we just go to work, pay our taxes & get our drugs from the toxic box in the corner of the lounge.

    GO RUPERT!!!!!!!!

    00

  • #

    With Union Super fund investments as well.

    Tony.

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    The Gold Coast Tugun (Queensland)
    Desalination Plant — $1.18b
    ❝ DESALINATION PLANTS
    MAY BE BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH ❞
    extract from report by
    Kenneth Davidson
    Senior columnist at ‘The Age’
 (Australia)

    http://fluoridationqueensland.com/blog/

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Lucky they can’t remove flouride, as its good for your teeth.

    00

  • #
    Twodogs

    Compelling article, but not entirely convincing. Firstly, we don’t brush our teeth with hydrofluoric acid, and compounds behave differently to elements. There’s a contradiction in the toxicity claims versus the acceptable ppm.

    Years ago after encountering this issue, I did a rudimentary study to test the claim by a pediatric nurse that local residents had worse teeth than the neighbouring council due to the absence of fluoride. When compared to the respective populations, I found that Gosford council had 4 times as many dentists per capita than Wyong council – the one with added fluoride. So where is the empirical evidence that fluoride causes ill health at the levels found in our drinking water?

    He has made a compelling case based on theory, not empirical evidence. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I’m not convinced. However, we are on a scientific blog, so maybe others will enlighten us with their knowledge.

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    As JB says:-
    “Its not as simple as Topher makes out.

    Topher highlights:-
    It’ll be very expensive.
    It’ll be offensive.

    The simple bit, for those who can, is in realising that without it there would be tyrannical oppression.

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    That was back in the day, pre- industrialisation, when there was no suggestion of an Anthropogenic influence on climate

    00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    What’s really weird is that Hansen published a paper in 2000 arguing CO2 had NOT caused the majority of modern global warming: http://www.pnas.org/content/97/18/9875.long

    But we argue that rapid warming in recent decades has been driven mainly by non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as chlorofluorocarbons, CH4, and N2O, not by the products of fossil fuel burning, CO2 and aerosols, the positive and negative climate forcings of which are partially offsetting.
    [...]
    Non-CO2 GHGs.
    These gases are probably the main cause of observed global warming, with CH4 causing the largest net climate forcing.
    [...]
    Carbon Dioxide. CO2 will become the dominant climate forcing, if its emissions continue to increase and aerosol effects level off.
    [...]
    We argue that black carbon aerosols, by means of several effects, contribute significantly to global warming. This conclusion suggests one antidote to global warming, if it becomes a major problem. As electricity plays an increasing role in future energy systems, it should be relatively easy to strip black carbon emissions at fossil fuel power plants. Stripping and disposal of CO2, although more challenging, provide an effective backup strategy.
    —-
    – James Hansen*

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    What “sale” and what “advocating”?

    If you must troll at least have some connection with reality.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    .
    Catamon and a connection to reality ??
    Cohenite, I’m disappointed in you.

    Catamon, JB, Ross James, MattB, Sillyfilly, Maxine and our other trolls live in an alternate universe, where desal plants, high speed rail links, multitudes of electric cars, and heavy industry generally, are all powered by sunbeams and pixie dust, stored in magic jars.

    You expect some kind of connection with reality ????????

    00

  • #
    Catamon

    “What “sale” and what “advocating”?”

    Ok, small words where possible for you mate.

    He’s advocating that regulation is inimical to free speech. Haven’t heard that line anywhere else Wot!! Well, thats fine if you are a media owner who can afford the TV and print outlets to get you message across. Say what you like and if someone sue’s you who cares, you have deep pockets.

    On the other hand, if you have effective regulation then the not so well off have an avenue to pursue media owners who need a kicking.

    My position is that effective regulation can be a good thing, rather than by nature the end of the world as this boy is pushing.

    Now i know that might not quite fit the “regulators are coming to bonk my dog and shoot my womenfolk” mindset here, but its hardly divorced from objective reality.

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    No not fantasy , just with other people’s money, and plenty of it.
    The supply is limitless when it’s being taken from ‘those that can afford it’.

    This time round though it may be different, as global economy teeters on the brink of what society needs. /sarc off

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    Hope springs eternal. It has to given the level of idiocy thriving in the land as Catamon demonstrates.

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    The EU is failed due to zombie banks and failed hedgefunds and criminal derivative markets ALL run from London (economic criminal capital of the world). Let em burn the ECB, Goldman Sachs, Deutshbank and the Bank of England. Jail the lot.

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Yes but that paper still argues for the GHG theory and still relies on its ‘trueness’ The only thing that may influence local temperature maybe black carbon aerosols as they claim.

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Education has a lot to answer for & it’s wasted on the young.
    .
    But Hey! Why waste it, when it can be used to indoctrinate them?

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    OK, you posted as I did above, not that I recant.

    What you say is high nonsense:

    On the other hand, if you have effective regulation then the not so well off have an avenue to pursue media owners who need a kicking.

    So under the benevolent umbrella of government regulation, as recommended by the Fink, every poor but honest broker will be given recourse to remedy any slight, however fanciful, against the high and mighty, as personified by the dastardly Murdoch.

    Are you John Pilger? I mean such rubbish is typical of the quest for utopia of the left, which is to say all those who think big brother can solve the slings and arrows their fevered imaginations dredge up.

    Murdoch is deflated every day by countless blogs and internet sites. The only kicking Murdoch needs is if the facts are wrong in which case defamation can be pursued; and I know several lawyers who do magnificently extracting damages from the MSM, including Murdoch, for the downtrodden of society.

    And this is the point; if individual rights are not compromised by the government, and by rights I mean due process and equality before the law, then Murdoch and his ilk are constrained far more effectively then government regulation of the Fink variety can ever achieve.

    But of course this current government wouldn’t know how to spell due process let alone preserve it; would it? Which is why it pursues its own agenda against the media it doesn’t like.

    00

  • #
    Catamon

    cohenite, i suspect this is written just for you.

    Interestingly it ties in well with the OP vid. Fear doubt and uncertainty.

    00

  • #
    Allen Ford

    I don’t think there is a better summation of the issues surounding free speech than this one from Ayn Rand:

    Freedom of speech means freedom from interference, suppression or punitive action by the government—and nothing else. It does not mean the right to demand the financial support or the material means to express your views at the expense of other men who may not wish to support you. Freedom of speech includes the freedom not to agree, not to listen and not to support one’s own antagonists. A “right” does not include the material implementation of that right by other men; it includes only the freedom to earn that implementation by one’s own effort. Private citizens cannot use physical force or coercion; they cannot censor or suppress anyone’s views or publications. Only the government can do so. And censorship is a concept that pertains only to governmental action.

    00

  • #
    catamon

    I don’t think there is a better summation of the issues surounding free speech than this one from Ayn Rand:

    But she was an idiot who wrote tiresome and ridiculously immature trash like Atlas Shrugged?

    And the passage you have quoted isn’t even internally consistent.

    Private citizens cannot use physical force or coercion;

    Twaddle.

    they cannot censor or suppress anyone’s views or publications

    More twaddle. Sub editors are “private citizens” and they fark around with the meaning and headlines of articles and letters all the time.

    Only the government can do so. And censorship is a concept that pertains only to governmental action.

    Bollocks. Sheesh, what some people will accept as gospel is quite amazing.

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    Really, that is just rubbish; and why was it written for me? I believe in [real] environmental issues just from the viewpoint of humanity NOT nature.

    Murdoch has a posse of pro-AGW writers beginning with that sanctimonious twit, Steketee who even thinks Brown was a positive for the nation.

    When people criticise Murdoch they do so not because he has balance, after all even Murdoch believes in AGW [!], but because he gives ANY space to the anti-AGW/left side of the debate

    00

  • #
    Philip Bradley

    There was a large anthropogenic influence on temperatures in the pre-industrial era from all the wood that was burnt. Lots of black carbon and hydrocarbons in the atmosphere. Today, we have the cleanest atmosphere in several thousand years.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Don’t worry Joe. The people who do this experimental work have figured out this stuff.

    00

  • #

    An enclosed space can never mimic the behaviour of a free stream of air.

    What many “forget” in the subsequent studies of the sciences are the first principles and the assumptions that are made to derive the formulae upon which e.g. GCM are built. They cannot relate what is observed back to first principles. Often because the process of formulating a model causes them to only see the model with its inherent assumptions.

    The insurmountable problem for an “atmospheric experiment” is one of gravity. Gravity is a necessary part of the heat transfer mechanism within the atmosphere. It’s not scaleable … you can’t change the fluids to offset the inability to build a chamber that’s 100 km high without upsetting the consequences of inter-molecular forces being different.

    00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Having just seen The Avengers, I’d add a movie quote…

    Steve Rogers: The uniform? Aren’t the stars and stripes a little… old fashioned?

    Agent Phil Coulson: With everything that’s happening, the things that are about to come to light, people might just need a little old fashioned.

    Not a great work of literature or philosophy there, but it seemed oddly appropriate.

    00

  • #
    BobC

    John Brookes
    June 5, 2012 at 10:23 pm · Reply
    Don’t worry Joe. The people who do this experimental work have figured out this stuff.

    Who are you talking about John? I know a lot of climate scientists and I don’t know one who does “experimental work”. If fact, anyone who dares to do experimental work on the theories of climate, like Henrik Svensmark, gets attacked for it.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Svensmark gets attacked? Didn’t he suggest a cosmic ray experiment, and then CERN actually did the experiment? That is some sort of attack and repression.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    That would be physicists Bob, not climate scientists.

    00

  • #
    BobC

    John Brookes
    June 6, 2012 at 10:27 pm · Reply
    Svensmark gets attacked? Didn’t he suggest a cosmic ray experiment, and then CERN actually did the experiment? That is some sort of attack and repression.

    Who said anything about repression? But now that you’ve brought it up, the head of the physics lab at CERN did instruct the lab’s scientists not to discuss Svensmark’s CLOUD experiment results. I doubt he did this because of his own beliefs, but more likely to avoid negative consequences for the lab.

    I thought you read RealClimate, SkepticalScience, and the other warmist blogs — you must have missed the scalding they tried to put down on Svensmark, like this one where RealClimate contributor ‘rasmus’ claims that Svensmark must have ‘adjusted’ the data to get his results. (Psychological Projection perhaps?)

    Here’s a less confrontational attempted debunking of CLOUD, where the author uses notoriously adjusted climate ‘data’ to argue that the results of Svensmark’s laboratory experiment are irrelevant.

    That would be physicists Bob, not climate scientists.

    Glad you acknowledge the difference. Svensmark’s a physicist — are you agreeing with him that solar effects likely dwarf GHG’s w.r.t. the climate? Over 5800 physicists have signed the Petition Project’s statement that:

    “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

    00

  • #
    Philip Bradley

    CERN is run by physicists.

    00

  • #
    Twodogs

    So, you’re saying the German and French banks are good corporate citizens, are you? A nice excuse for taxing the British. So much for the advantages of EU membership. Its German and French tariffs on British goods and services all over again. It looks like history is about to repeat itself.

    00

  • #
    Mark Hladik

    Somehow, a “climate scientist” who is not an astute physicist (in the first place) just doen’t fly with me. The “climate” obeys the same rules of Physics as every system in the Universe.

    It appears that the only people who have no knowledge of Physics today are ‘mainstream’ climate “scientists”. They claim to be able to ‘model’ a dynamic, non-linear, near-chaos system. They claim that something is a ‘positive’ feedback, when there is a wealth of evidence that the ‘positive’ feedback is, in fact, NEGATIVE. They refuse to acknowledge that the climate system is not following the predictions of those models, and refuse to abandond those faulty models. Any true scientist is ready to change his/her mind, when the data tell the tale, regardless of what it is.

    It seems to me that the term ‘climate scientist’ is getting very close to becoming an oxymoron.

    Mark H.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Isn’t the London School a Fabian center?

    00