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

ACMA, media watchdog, says lies by omission at the ABC are OK

Media Bias, voting behaviour of journalists.This story of Beliaik’s is making waves, cross-posted already at Catallaxy. Through letters and FOI’s he shows that the ABC won’t publish expert stories that don’t fit their personal political beliefs (specifically on climate and corals), and that the main industry “watchdog” is such a puppet they don’t even mind.

In February Beliaik tipped off the ABC about breaking news that showed the Karl et al “pausebuster paper” was hyped, broke rules. A former NOAA scientist (Bates) was blowing the whistle on unapproved key datasets, which weren’t archived properly. He also talked about how the key software had conveniently disappeared when the one sole computer it was on, crashed.  Unlike other leading news services around the world, the ABC didn’t report this, even though they had pushed the Karl paper when it came out. Effectively, they hid the counter story from their audience.

When he complained to the ABC the first thing they mentioned was that the story wasn’t covered by other media in Australia. Now I thought the point of a $1b public broadcaster was to cover important things other media don’t, but the ABC (which is the only media outlet here with a dedicated science unit) won’t report on corruption in climate science. Quite probably, other media would have reported it if the ABC had led the way. Can we get that billion dollars back, thanks?

Tellingly, the geniuses at the ABC also effectively claimed that they knew more than Dr Bates and could dismiss his opinion.

Here iJohn Bates bio:

John Bates, Ph.D. in Meteorology, spent the last 14 years of his career at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (now NCEI) as a Principal Scientist, where he served as a Supervisory Meteorologist until 2012. He won the NOAA Administrator’s Award 2004 for “outstanding administration and leadership in developing a new division to meet the challenges to NOAA in the area of climate applications related to remotely sensed data”. He was awarded a U.S. Department of Commerce Gold Medal in 2014 for visionary work in the acquisition, production, and preservation of climate data records (CDRs).

So faced with an expert whistleblower the ABC found a couple of scientists who disagreed, and then admitted  that their job was to robotically repeat what government funded scientists say without question:

Overall, the ABC’s coverage reflects the weight of scientific opinion in this area, which favours the view that global warming is happening and that human activity contributes to this warming. 

So if the government employs 99% believers in a bizarre theory that we can control the weather and they produce meaningless, incompetent and repetitive papers, with code that “disappeared” you won’t hear about it from the ABC. Remind me what we pay them for?

Beliaik reported the ABC to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) whose core reason for existing, they say,  is ” Making media and communications work for all Australians”. 

You might think our publicly funded broadcaster might not be “working” for all Australians if it won’t publish stories telling views that fit with half the population, but you’d be wrong. According to Beliaik that “ACMA ruled that I can’t complain about something that didn’t happen.” Thus lies by omission, and selective, biased editing, is permitted by a network of government funded agencies. It starts with scientists being funded to find a crisis, who selectively don’t publish inconvenient papers. Then that bias is spread by a media outlet that won’t publish expert whistleblower complaints. Then that bias is protected by a media regulator that, by definition, will never rule against overt, unarguable bias by the public broadcaster.

I say whatever we pay ACMA, we want that back too.

– Jo

PS: ACMA Budget here, is that $108m, see p79?

 

________________________________

TheirABC, diverse views and the FOI Act

Guest post by Beliaik

When is it OK for our national broadcaster to thumb its nose at its own code of practice?  The obvious answer is never, but we know it happens routinely.  So what can the common worker-drone do about it?  Not much, but we can at least try to use existing legislation to draw attention to the more egregious examples.

One such attempt is described here.  Settle back, this is lengthy.

With the ‘splodey-headed ABC-luvvies  fairly busy being maximally outraged by the US citizenry’s choice for their highest public office, it seemed a good time to try and sink the slipper into them over their second most-passionately held world view – our unfolding ”climate disaster” – and their deranged reporting of it.

The story begins back in February when I thought to tip TheirABC off about the breaking story of the NOAA whistle blower, Dr John Bates.  Here’s what I sent…

G’day ABC news tips department

I read the following article with interest, but can find no reference to it on the ABC. Given the numerous articles featuring NOAA on your website, I wonder if you will feature it soon?

https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/04/climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/

The NOAA whistleblower has been big news across the blogosphere and since the ABC never shows stories that counter the global warming narrative I thought it was time you proved your critics wrong.  Here’s another link to it.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02/04/bombshell-noaa-whistleblower-says-karl-et-al-pausebuster-paper-was-hyped-broke-procedures/

It has already broken in the British media, here…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html#reader-comments

And in the US media here …

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/02/05/whistle-blower-global-warming-data-manipulated-paris-conference/

… and here …

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/02/06/delingpole-noaa-scandal-gives-trump-the-perfect-excuse-to-drain-the-climate-swamp/

Everyone has the internet with them everywhere these days, so bias in some issues can be quite visible in terms of non-reporting.  Please show your lack of bias so those who feel the ABC should be sold off to private enterprise might be placated for a while.

I look forward to your early response on the matter.  You don’t want to wait until after the POTUS tweets on it do you?  Really?

Needless to say, they didn’t cover the John Bates story, even though I tipped them off twice more.

The next step was a complaint to TheirABC’s complaints department…

Subject: Failure to cover the NOAA whistleblower reveals the ABC’s refusal to show both sides of the global warming debate

Your Comments: The ABC claims to provide balanced news and editorials – you tell us that all the time!  Why then, has there been such a pointed failure to cover the material provided by whistleblower and retired NOAA climate expert John Bates?

John Bates wrote of this on renowned climate scientist Judith Curry’s blog – here – https://judithcurry.com/2017/02/04/climate-scientists-versus-climate-data/ – that

“A NOAA NCEI supervisor remarked how it was eye-opening to watch Karl work the co-authors, mostly subtly but sometimes not, pushing choices to emphasize warming. Gradually, in the months after K15 came out, the evidence kept mounting that Tom Karl constantly had his ‘thumb on the scale’—in the documentation, scientific choices, and release of datasets—in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy.”

Later John Bates says this, “So, in every aspect of the preparation and release of the datasets leading into K15, we find Tom Karl’s thumb on the scale pushing for, and often insisting on, decisions that maximize warming and minimize documentation.”

He also says, “I also raised concerns about bias; here we apparently see Tom Karl’s thumb on the scale in terms of the methodologies and procedures used in this publication.”

A reasonable person would find it quite newsworthy that such an eminent figure has come forward to accuse the former director of NOAA of “putting his thumb on the scale” but it has not been covered by the ABC…  Why?

While climate alarm is last on most people’s list of worries, it sucks up a disproportionate amount of our taxes and your air-time – so why won’t you cover something that helps shed light on what we climate sceptics have been saying for years?

You can’t say you didn’t know because I tipped you off on 7/2, 8/2 and 9/2/16 – and I can provide copies of the acknowledgement emails if you’d like.

I look forward to your early reply.

Naturally the luvvies were having none of that!  Here’s their reply…

 Thank you for your email.

Your complaint has been considered by Audience and Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of content making areas within the ABC. Our role is to review and, where appropriate, investigate complaints alleging that ABC content has breached the ABC’s editorial standards. These standards are explained in our Code of Practice which is available here -http://about.abc.net.au/reports-publications/code-of-practice/.

You have complained that a failure to report recent Dr John Bates’ criticisms of Dr Tom Karl’s 2015 climate study is evidence of ABC bias.

We note that this story received relatively little coverage in major media in Australia.  According to a report published by Associated Press, Dr Bates subsequently stated in an interview that there was ‘no data tampering, no data changing, nothing malicious’; another study has since confirmed the Karl calculations; and the journal that originally published the Karl research has rejected the allegation that it was rushed to print.  In our view, the ABC’s lack of coverage of this story does not demonstrate a lack of impartiality, but rather a fair and reasonable assessment of its news value.

The ABC has provided extensive and ongoing coverage of issues relating to climate change across a range of programs and genres, presenting a range of different perspectives.  Overall, the ABC’s coverage reflects the weight of scientific opinion in this area, which favours the view that global warming is happening and that human activity contributes to this warming.  This approach does not, of itself, indicate an undue favouritism for a particular perspective.  Rather, it is consistent with the concept of ‘a balance that follows the weight of evidence’, which is identified in the ABC’s editorial standards as one of the hallmarks of impartiality.

Thank you for giving the ABC the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

Because I work to a system of creating maximum cognitive dissonance in the minds of leftarded journalists, the next step was a formal complaint to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).  Leaving out the somewhat tedious detail, ACMA ruled that I can’t complain about something that didn’t happen.  Who knew?

Fair enough, then, obviously it was time to complain about articles that did get published.  The first complaint was about a News24 interview.

Complaint re interview on ABC TV News24 – Breach of code of practice

Program time    0951 and again at 1044 (Queensland time, not fake time)

Program date    16/03/2017

Subject                Alarming story about coral bleaching being caused by CO2 emissions

Interviewee – Prof Andrew Baird from JCU

Interviewer – Kathryn Robinson

G’day

This morning Kathryn Robinson interviewed a coral scientist whose livelihood depends on him finding alarming stories about the reef.

Every question and comment from your interviewer fed into the global warming alarmist narrative and not one single remark referenced the sceptical side of this issue.

JCU’s pompously named “ARC Centre of Excellence in Coral Reef Studies” have never been able to answer quite simple questions from the sceptical side.  See Julian Tomlinson’s editorial from today’s Cairns Post – attached – to support this.

Kathryn might have asked how the claimed process of man-made carbon dioxide emissions suspended in the atmosphere and emitting down-welling long-wave infrared back-radiation are able to heat the micro-millimetre-thin surface layer of the sea without the phase change of water immediately re-releasing that heat energy as water vapour – but she didn’t.

Kathryn didn’t ask Professor Baird if he was aware that infrared radiation will not penetrate water – (which is why infrared firefighting cameras are useless in searching a waterway for a submerged person).  It would’ve have been informative to be aware of the limitations of a marine ecologist’s knowledge of physics.

Kathryn didn’t ask what other sources of heat may have warmed water in the Coral Sea other than the alleged CO2 greenhouse effect – for which zero empirical evidence has ever been put forward.

Kathryn didn’t ask about the influence of the recent El Nino event on Coral Sea temperatures – an entirely natural cycle with no connection to humans burning fossil fuels.

The bleached areas of the GBR are bathed by the South Equatorial Current, which is heated by sea-floor volcanicity in the Vanuatu-Solomons region – which has some of the world’s most active and spectacular volcanoes.  But Kathryn didn’t ask about heat from that source.

The Vanuatu-Solomons volcanic zone has many sea-floor hydrothermal vents that release sulphur compounds that are toxic to the microorganisms that are the basis of the reef’s food chain; but Kathryn didn’t ask about those compounds affecting the coral.

Oxybenzone, an ingredient in many sunscreens worn by reef researchers and tourists alike, is highly toxic to coral, even in minute quantities.  But Kathryn didn’t ask about its effect on coral either.

Coral is the ultimate survivor from the past 400 million years of ever-changing climate, but Kathryn didn’t ask why it should suddenly be so sensitive to minor water temperature changes.

The ability of coral to expel and replace symbionts is an evolutionary superpower that other species can only dream of, but Kathryn didn’t ask about that.

Kathryn didn’t ask how come coral can live in waters much hotter than ours, such as the Middle-East, and much colder as well, like New Zealand.  Not even how coral seem to be OK in blazing hot sun at low tide, either in shallow, easily-heated pools or exposed to the air.  Nor how the same species thrive in slightly deeper water where it’s colder.

The interview didn’t stray to water quality, but the ARC Centre of Excellence in Coral Reef Studies were completely unaware a coral reef could live happily under the permanent mud-plume of the Amazon River…

Kathryn and the ABC have failed to comply with these parts of their code of practice.  In fact, Kathryn and the ABC have aided and abetted the promulgation of scandalously weak claims as if they were somehow supported by empirical evidence and were to be accepted as fact.

Standards:

4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality.

4.2 Present a diversity of perspectives so that, over time, no significant strand of thought

or belief within the community is knowingly excluded or disproportionately represented.

4.3 ……..

4.4 Do not misrepresent any perspective.

4.5 Do not unduly favour one perspective over another.

 

The Robinson-Baird interview demonstrates that:

  1. The ABC are only showing one side of the “man-made global warming killing coral” argument, they don’t gather news and information or present views with due impartiality.
  2. The ABC knowingly excludes a significant perspective, the one that rejects the nonsense “97% consensus”.  To be sceptical of the man-made global warming alarmists’ claims is a perfectly valid and significant strand of thought; – scepticism belongs in science – consensus only has a place in politics.  The ABC disproportionately represent the alarmist side, to the extent that the sceptical side is never, ever presented.
  3. The ABC misrepresent the sceptical side by failing to provide us with fair and equal opportunity, or, indeed, any opportunity, to present counter-arguments to the alarmists’ scare stories.  This ABC misrepresentation robs the sceptical side of the credibility they so generously offer the alarmist side.  Sceptics contend that the human influence on climate is negligible, ultimately beneficial and in no way catastrophic, but the typical ABC viewer wouldn’t know that.
  4. The ABC unduly favour the alarmist side of the climate debate over the sceptical side ion two ways; by providing the alarmist side with seemingly unlimited platform space and never, ever asking any hard-to-answer questions and by refusing any space on any platform whatsoever to the sceptical side.

These are gross and serious breaches of the ABC’s code of practice that lead to erroneous beliefs amongst our political and bureaucratic classes who then spend billions of our dollars on a problem that doesn’t need fixing while many more serious and pressing environmental and societal issues are ignored.

If the ABC was true to its own rules people like me wouldn’t need to write to Senators asking for it to be sold off to private enterprise.  Conservative views are rarely heard on the ABC – I feel excluded in viewing almost all ABC News products.  My voice is never heard on the ABC.  It’s like the ABC has evolved into the Alinsky Brainwashing Corp.

Now you’ll be wondering how TheirABC could fob off such logic.  Here’s how they did it.

Thank you for your email regarding an interview with Professor Andrew Baird on ABC News 24 on 16 March 2017.

Your email has been considered by Audience and Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of content making areas within the ABC.

Our role is to review and, where appropriate, investigate complaints alleging that ABC content has breached the ABC’s editorial standards. These standards are explained in the ABC Code of Practice which is available here - http://about.abc.net.au/reports-publications/code-of-practice/.

We have reviewed the interview.  The presenter introduced the interview stating that new research from scientists at James Cook University had examined three major coral bleaching events over the past 20 years and found that the mix of species in the northern parts of the reef have changed forever, with some reefs losing 80% of their corals.

She said that the researchers had concluded that parts of the reef would never fully recover from repeated bleaching of its corals, and the researchers were calling for immediate action to curb climate change to limit further damage to the reef.

Professor Baird was introduced as a co-author of the study and he was asked a number of questions on the topics mentioned in the introduction.

There was nothing in the interviewer’s questioning which indicated an undue favouritism for a particular perspective, or a lack of due impartiality.

As advised in my previous reply to you, the ABC’s coverage reflects the weight of scientific opinion in this area which favours the view that global warming is happening and that human activity contributes to this warming.

This approach does not, of itself, indicate an undue favouritism for a particular perspective. Rather, it is consistent with the concept of ‘a balance that follows the weight of evidence’, which is identified in the ABC’s editorial standards as one of the hallmarks of impartiality.

Should you be dissatisfied with this response, you may be able to pursue your complaint with the Australian Communications and Media Authority, www.acma.gov.au.

Yours sincerely,

The next step was to take the complaint to ACMA:

G’day ACMA

You’ll recall I recently complained to you about the bias of Their ABC.  You told me I had to use specific examples of bias that had been broadcast, as opposed to sweeping failures to abide by their code of practice as demonstrated by newsworthy events the ABC has failed to cover.

Fair enough, those are your rules.  This complaint is the first that I hope fits your rules.

First please read my first attachment “2017-03-16 Complaint re interview on ABC TV News24.pdf”.

Somewhat surprisingly, Their ABC responded promptly.  Please read my second attachment “2017-03-17 ABC email reply – coral complaint dismissed.pdf”.

You will note the ABC defends their bias with appeals to authority and consensus.

First, on ‘consensus’, the Cook et al “97% consensus” paper was junk science at its worst and has been thoroughly and extensively debunked.  Only the alarmist community subscribe to it now.

Second, on ‘appeals to authority’, if Their ABC are so big on authorities they don’t come much bigger than the United States Government.  Here’s what Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget said last week,

“As to climate change, I think the President was fairly straightforward saying we’re not spending money on that anymore. We consider that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that. So that is a specific tie to his campaign.”

Their ABC said their approach is “…consistent with the concept of ‘a balance that follows the weight of evidence’… but it isn’t.  It is consistent only with the memes of the alarmist community – all of whom are dependent on the continuation of climate alarm for their ongoing incomes.

It is a reasonable expectation that for 1.6 billion taxpayer dollars the ABC will carefully examine all sides of every argument and conform to their code of practice.  But it doesn’t and it isn’t.  Since I started writing this I’ve learned that the G20 are dropping reference to “climate change”, too, in response to the changed White House position.  World events have well and truly overtaken the ideological slaves at Their ABC.

My recommendation is that the ABC needs to be stripped back and rebuilt with much stricter guidelines requiring journalists and presenters to separate their personal ideology from their professional role and to resume proper investigative journalism that fully informs the viewer of ALL sides of EVERY argument.

Now you’re wondering how the ACMA-luvvies batted such devastating reason away.  Here’s how they did it.

RE: Your complaint about ABC News 24 broadcast on ABC News 24 on 16 March 2017

Thank you for your complaint about ABC News 24, referred to in your correspondence received on 20 March 2017.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) considers all complaints to be important and your concerns have been logged in our database to help identify potential recurring or systemic compliance issues with legislation, Codes of Practice and Standards.

When deciding whether to investigate a particular matter, the ACMA considers a range of public interest factors including the specifics and/or merits of the matter, the nature and seriousness of the issue raised, the matter’s potential to affect the community at large and its priority in relation to other matters of public interest.

We acknowledge that this matter has given you cause for concern, however, the ACMA has decided not to proceed with an investigation into your complaint because:

  • ABC programs are not obliged to ensure that every perspective on an issue receives equal time or that every facet of every argument is presented within a particular broadcast.
  • the ABC has extensively covered the issues of coral bleaching and climate change on its platforms, following the weight of scientific evidence.
  • the ACMA has conducted a number of investigations which explain the impartiality standard in the ABC code, for example BI-270 and BI-257.

For more information about the ACMA’s broadcasting investigations, including its approach to opening an investigation, please refer to the information here:

http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/About/The-ACMA-story/Regulating/broadcasting-investigations-1

If you have concerns about the way the ACMA has treated your complaint, you may make a complaint to the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman or seek independent advice about avenues for review. The Ombudsman can investigate complaints about the administrative actions and decisions of Commonwealth government agencies. More information can be found on the Ombudsman’s website at: www.ombudsman.gov.au or you can call 1300 362 072.

Yours sincerely,

Obviously ACMA are heavy green Kool-aid drinkers, too.  To be sure I went through the whole ABC complaint-ACMA complaint process a second time (reporter Anna Salleh interviewing serial alarmist Terry Hughes from JCU) with the same result.  I’ll spare you the tedious (4000-word) details of that transaction.

FOI

This brings the narrative to the FOI request, dated 20/04/2017.

FOI Contact Officer, Corporate Affairs, Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Written FOI request and ‘sufficient information’

This written request is an application for the purposes of the FOI Act.

The document I seek is a list of links to articles related to “global-warming”, “climate-change”, “CO2” and “coral bleaching” that represent the sceptical view of those respective debates – as presented by the ABC on all its platforms.

I have listened, viewed and searched for years and I’ve not found any sceptical articles on the ABC’s platforms.  There are plenty of articles that represent the alarmist view of these debates, but no sceptical ones.   (Sceptical and alarmist for the purpose of this application are defined below.)

I will be satisfied with a list of the last twelve months sceptical articles – unless there are none in the last twelve months.  In that event I will be satisfied with a list of the last ten years of sceptical articles.

Your search is likely to be more effective than mine.  If after a reasonable amount of searching you can find no ABC articles representing sceptical views that have been published in the last ten years then please just say so.

Form of the document/s

I have no way of knowing the form of the document/s.  It could be one or more schedules or data-base search runs or program lists or staff instructions or minutes of meetings or emails between staff – only you could reasonably know.

It could even be emails between members of the ABC Corporate Affairs unit and others in relation to my non-FOI request for such a list two weeks ago.  That would be a good place to start – check and see if anyone did work up a list but just hasn’t been given the nod to send it to me yet.

Definition of Sceptical and Alarmist for the purpose of this application

Articles on “global-warming”, “climate-change”, “CO2”, and “coral bleaching” can be sorted into Sceptical or Alarmist views by comparing their message themes with these general definitions;

Global warming – Sceptical view

The present gentle global warming is natural and similar to the Minoan Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period (about 3000,2000 and 1000 years ago respectively).  This warming is entirely beneficial to all life on Earth.

Global warming – Alarmist view

The present alarming global warming is unnatural and in no way similar to the Minoan, Roman or Medieval Warm Periods.  This warming represents a serious threat to all life on Earth at some point in the future.

Climate change – Sceptical view

The climate has always changed and is changing now.  Changes are primarily driven by solar cycles, orbital variations, planetary albedo, ocean currents and the laws of thermodynamics.

Climate change – Alarmist view

 The climate has changed naturally in the past but it is changing now in a way it shouldn’t be.  These changes are directly attributable to humanity’s use of fossil fuels.

CO2 – Sceptical view

The planet was nearing a low-CO2 extinction event and humanity’s use of fossil fuels returns much-needed sequestered carbon dioxide to the biosphere and is generally beneficial.  The benefits of carbon dioxide far outweigh any negatives put forward by its detractors.  The additional warming effect of humanity’s CO2 emissions is largely insignificant.

CO2 – Alarmist view

The planet has a natural CO2 steady-state that is far lower than present levels and the human contribution to raising them is highly damaging.  The costs of carbon dioxide far outweigh any positives put forward by its supporters.  The additional warming effects of humanity’s CO2 emissions are highly likely to result in catastrophic consequences for the climate.

Coral bleaching – Sceptical view

Coral bleaching is caused by a range of natural cycles working separately or together in a way not yet fully understood by the science community.  Reef ecosystems in general are quite poorly understood by the science community.  Bleaching appears to have no connection to humans mining or burning coal.  Ocean temperatures are not significantly influenced by atmospheric CO2 levels.  Great Barrier Reef coral ecosystems generally appear to be in robust good health.

Coral bleaching – Alarmist view

Coral bleaching is caused by humans and is well understood by the science community.  Reef ecosystems in general are very well understood by the science community.  Bleaching is caused by humans mining and burning coal and releasing other CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.  The oceans are warming up due to increasing atmospheric CO2 levels and that is harmful to coral.  Great Barrier Reef coral ecosystems generally appear to be in catastrophically-declining health.

Signature and address

Here’s TheirABC’s official response – dated 15/05/2017….

FOI REQUEST – REFERENCE NUMBER 2017-011

I refer to your request for access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act) in your email of 20 April 2017. Specifically, you have sought access to the following:

“A document with a list of links to articles related to ‘global warming’, ‘climate change’, ‘CO2’ and ‘coral bleaching’ that represent the sceptical view of those respective debates—as presented by the ABC on all its platforms from 21 April 2016 to 20 April 2017.

If there are no articles from the last 12 months, [you] will be satisfied with a list of the last 10 years of sceptical articles.”

I note that in our acknowledgement letter to you on 4 May 2017, we stated that for the purposes of FOI we would assume that by “articles” you were not only referring to written pieces, but to broadcast news and current affairs content on ABC television, radio and online services.

I am authorised by the Managing Director under section 23 of the FOI Act to make decisions in respect of requests made under that Act. Following is my decision in relation to your request.

Locating and identifying documents

I have taken reasonable steps to identify and locate all relevant documents. My search for these documents involved contacting the following relevant people, who in turn consulted with relevant managers and staff within their respective teams:

Director News

Manager Editorial Policies, News.

I requested that searches be conducted of all hard and soft copy records for documents which fall within the scope of your request. As a result of those searches, no documents were identified.

Under section 24A of the FOI Act, the ABC may refuse a request for access if all reasonable steps have been taken to find a document and the ABC is satisfied that the document does not exist. In the present case, I consider that all reasonable steps have been taken to locate relevant documents. I am further satisfied that the requested documents do not exist and therefore access to them is refused pursuant to section 24A of the FOI Act.

If you are dissatisfied with this decision you can apply for Internal or Information Commissioner (IC) Review. You do not have to apply for Internal Review before seeking IC Review. Information about your review rights is attached.

Yours sincerely

Next consider this extract from TheirABC’s code of practice….

4. Impartiality and diversity of perspectives

Standards:

4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality.

4.2 Present a diversity of perspectives so that, over time, no significant strand of thought or belief within the community is knowingly excluded or disproportionately represented.

4.3 Do not state or imply that any perspective is the editorial opinion of the ABC. The ABC takes no editorial stance other than its commitment to fundamental democratic principles including the rule of law, freedom of speech and religion, parliamentary democracy and equality of opportunity.

4.4 Do not misrepresent any perspective.

4.5 Do not unduly favour one perspective over another.

If TheirABC were meeting those standards we would be seeing articles representing views from both sides of the climate debate.  But we don’t.  We only ever see alarmist articles.  Those people who only take news from the ABC may well be unaware that a “diversity of perspectives” even exists in the climate debate.

The purpose of this exercise was, as noted, primarily to trigger cognitive dissonance amongst all the worker-luvvies who now know for a certainty deep in the backs of their minds that they are not meeting their own corporate standards.  They may never acknowledge their bias publicly, but that seed of self-doubt is planted.

The secondary reasons included forming the basis of a Ministerial missive requesting Senators Fifield and Nash to sell Their ABC – which has been submitted.  It included this para….

“It is time the ABC sank or swam on its own merits.  Please sell it.  Right now.  Yes, the left will scream.  But they can put their money where their mouths are and buy it.  That way they’ll at least be its legitimate owners rather than the occupying force they are today.  That way I and other conservatives won’t be funding the left’s propaganda machine.”

There’ll also be a formal complaint about the breach of the code of practice to the luvvies at ACMA – when I get to it.

This not a goal-oriented mission, it’s more a system-oriented activity in line with Dilbert creator Scott Adams’ philosophies.  That way there’s no disappointments when the luvvies pretend they have done nothing wrong.

All right, JoNovaians.  Long story complete.  Any suggestions?

Cheers, Beliaik

(The tag grew from a local pollie noting she got a tummy pain whenever she saw me approaching.)

 

h/t John, Dave B, Pat, Jim

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (98 votes cast)
ACMA, media watchdog, says lies by omission at the ABC are OK, 9.3 out of 10 based on 98 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/n8s8wee

217 comments to ACMA, media watchdog, says lies by omission at the ABC are OK

  • #
    Egor the One

    Defund the ABC 100 % .
    This Marxist Propaganda Monstrosity needs to be abolished along with its counterpart, SBS !
    Both these forced taxpayer funded monoliths have wall to wall Globull Warmers and holier than thou pontificators, most of whom would be unemployable in private enterprising real jobs .

    602

    • #
      el gordo

      The pseudo Marxist propaganda needs to be stopped immediately, but I insist we don’t dismantle the organisation until they acknowledge to the public that they have a global warming bias.

      Its extremely important that the masses become familiar with the true situation in relation to climate change. After that you can frog march the newsroom out into the street and begin the dismantling.

      314

      • #
        David Maddison

        Good idea el gordo. Not only should they acknowledge their lies about globull warming but all the other lies they have told against the conservative and moral side of politics as well. It would make for an interesting final broadcast.

        92

    • #
      Dennis

      The ABC Board is appointed by the government of the day and I understand new directors to replace the ones Labor appointed are now appointed. There is a new Managing Director too. So what is the excuse now for not forcing ABC employees to adhere to the ABC Charter rules and regulations that were put in place when Parliament decided to isolate ABC from direct political interference from governments, the Charter created I understand at the time the ABC Act legislation was enacted?

      The ABC Act effectively makes ABC independent from government despite being wholly owned by the Commonwealth of Australia through the federal government. But governments are still required to make budget provisions to fund this “public broadcaster” that effectively competes with private sector broadcasters that must produce revenue to pay operating costs and profit to pay dividends to shareholders.

      150

      • #
        Dennis

        I really hate it when ABC presenters smugly say ABC is an independent broadcaster !!!

        360

        • #
          Phillip Bratby

          Just like the smug BBC in the UK.

          250

        • #
          RicDre

          And PBS (Public Broadcasting System) and NPR (National Public Radio) in the US.

          170

          • #

            Don’t forget about the other media outlets in the US, most of which lean far to the left, especially when it comes to politically divisive issues.

            130

            • #
              Ross

              All of the above named media outlets also have the temerity to refer to RT as the Russian Govt propaganda arm.

              70

              • #
                Graham Richards

                RT is the second best news service for me.

                Their reporting is probably 70% correct & bias is barely detectable.

                Our commercial TV seems to change as often as one changes underwear.
                I believe they prefer obfuscation to outright bias &/or lies.

                30

            • #
              Rick Bradford

              And don’t forget CBC in Canada, maybe the worst of the lot, and that’s up against some pretty stiff competition.

              111

    • #
      Freedom of Beach

      ABC: the Australian Broadcasting (C)omission?

      271

    • #
      Apoxonbothyourhouses

      Beliaik asks for suggestions. What he gets is meaningless frothing at the mouth such as sell the ABC / make it honour its charter and so on. Outcome a warm fuzzy feeling for correspondents but not a mm of forward movement towards the objective.

      THE reality is that until there is a true conservative as PM nothing but nothing will change. Why should it? The ABC budget gets an increased budget and Turnbull appoints a mate and fellow traveller as chairman who immediately concludes there is no bias. Weep Beliaik, weep. 10 / 10 for effort but whilst our PM needs to suck up to the ABC for votes and the cabinet are a bunch of sycophants your cause is forever lost.

      130

      • #
        Beliaik

        Apoxonbothyourhouses

        To all who see this sort of effort as futile, I say it as all in how you choose to view it.

        I don’t expect to change anything quickly or single-handedly. Rather, I’m working to a system of creating little time-bombs of cognitive dissonance in leftard minds.

        The beauty of this system, which I call “relaxivism” is there are no goals. When you don’t expect to win (achieve a specific goal) there is no disappointment when the (predictable) loss happens.

        Relaxivism strives to craft specific moments of cognitive dissonance to implant in the minds of the luvvies with the hope that it evolves into a critical thought process over an extended period of time and results in a gradual opening of their minds to other ideas.

        The failure of the target to immediately demonstrate cognition of the implanted concept might be interpreted as failure of the relaxivist system, but that would be simply a matter of expecting a result too soon.

        In many cases, the seed of doubt will take years to mature.

        In the ABC FOI example the minor anxiety that is created when the ABCV luvvies realise, deep in the back of their minds, that they’re not meeting their own written CoP standards is the moment when the seed of self-doubt is planted.

        200

        • #
          Rick Bradford

          With respect, the cognitive dissonance is already present in “leftard” minds. That’s why they do what they do in the way they do. Rational minds don’t work like that.

          Even confronted with blatant failures of their worldview, they cling to it, because it is essentially all they have. Even when you prove them wrong, they will not, indeed they cannot, admit it.

          The people in these organisations will never change their ways; it is the organisations themselves, which house and nurture these people, which need to be defunded and thrown into the tea lady’s rubbish sack.

          I hope you continue to take the fight to the ABC whenever you can. You might get more satisfaction if you ask them direct questions, perhaps as a series of bullet points, than as a long over-arching story. One thing ‘leftards’ hate is direct and unequivocal questioning.

          140

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          Beliack, you are on the right track, but your style is off-putting. I pulled out early. Too tired.

          03

        • #
          Apoxonbothyourhouses

          I really hope your resilience continues. I tried for years to get some meaningful input into our local MP’s thinking with a complete lack of success. Your efforts to counter ABC groupthink are admirable but doomed to fail. Your message is a one time event whereas their groupthink is reinforced 24 / 7.

          It is going to need a revolution to alter Australia’s course. Another Maunder Minimum might just do the trick.

          20

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        We seem to forget that the ABC was formed and modelled on the British BBC.

        The BBC was created, as a private company in 1920. It transitioned into a Public Service Corporation during the latter half of the 1920′s.

        It became the primary propaganda organ of the British Government during the Second World War, because the British knew the Germans would listen in. The population were told to read the Government News Sheets (which were also propaganda) if they wanted the “truth”.

        The BBC Charter requires it to provide balanced reporting. “Balance”, in this regard, means both sides of a story equally. The “central essence” of that story is not required to be “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, it simply has to reflect the “central essence”.

        So the question is, “Is what is being reported, the central essence?”, which can be translated to, “more or less” what is happening?

        Propaganda has to have an element of truth, to be believable. But it would not be propaganda if it was totally true, and anyway, if it were totally true, nobody would believe it.

        You can substitute “Advertising” for “Propaganda”, and it is the same stuff – the terms are interchangeable.

        21

  • #

    When everyone is complicit up to their necks, there really isn’t much that you can do, other than wait it out. Eventually the false façade will crumble.

    343

    • #
      el gordo

      It may take a little time, this snippet from an obscure left wing poll.

      ‘Just over half the people surveyed – 51 per cent – said they trusted the ABC more than any other news outlet with 46 per cent of Coalition voters saying it was their most trusted news outlet, 55 per cent of Labor voters and 70 per cent of Greens voters.

      ‘More than half of the people surveyed – 55 per cent – said the ABC needed a permanent funding boost, including 48 per cent of Coalition voters, 63 per cent of Labor voters and 70 per cent of Greens voters.’

      The Courier

      80

      • #

        I have friends who believe that the ABC and The Age are totally balanced in their reporting. So I am not surprised at the survey results.

        160

        • #
          PeterPetrum

          Me too. We have friends who are (or were!) Liberal voters who get all their news from the ABC and the Sydney MH and are totally bemused when I tell them tales such as above. They have never heard of 18c, did not know that there has not been any gerbil worming for the last 20 years or that the world is getting greener, thanks to extra CO2. I suspect that many, so called, conservatives are in the same boat.

          350

      • #
        James

        Can you provide a link to the complete survey? You can get whatever results you want from a survey, by asking the right questions. If you want an answer that they need more funding, then make statements about popular programmes that have been discontinued. Imply that they were discontinued due to lack of funding. Then ask if you think if you think they ABC needs more funding.

        50

        • #
          • #
            RobbertBobbertGDQ

            Gordo,
            The poll, conducted by Research Now for think tank the Australia Institute, found voters trusted and were supportive of the national broadcaster regardless of their political leanings….
            The Australian 22 Aug 2015…
            The Australia Institute was founded two decades ago by Leftist academic Clive Hamilton,
            Richard Denniss, a former Greens staffer, handed over the executive director’s role in June to another former Greens staffer, Ben Oquist, who served as Bob Brown’s chief of staff. Hamilton has run as a Greens candidate, as has the institute’s chair Lin Hatfield Dodds.

            Ms Mandy Rice Davies speaking about The Scandal of the Profumo Affair (1960s) is famously, but incorrectly quoted, as stating…he would say that wouldn’t he?
            That is the best way to approach any research sponsored and quoted by The Australia Pinocchio Institute.

            00

        • #
          el gordo

          James I can’t find the polling questions from Research Now, but here is Essential with much the same line.

          ‘New polling from Essential Research shows Australia’s most trusted media outlet remains ABC television news and current affairs: 70% of voters have some or a lot of trust in it, including 21% who say they have “a lot of trust”. But that’s down three points from January of this year. SBS television news and current affairs is also trusted, with 65% of voters having some or a lot of trust. ABC radio news and current affairs scored 63% for some or a lot of trust, but that’s down seven points since January.’

          Crikey 2013

          PS All of the regulars here are aware that polls are dodgy and slanted.

          50

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Bemused, sorry for red thumb error. Meant to be thumbs u
    GeoffW

    101

    • #

      That’s OK.

      On another note, I suspect that few in the general public truly understand how biased the media and all their supporters really are when it comes to anything that they disagree with, which is everything that’s not Green-Left. I’m dealing with this right now with a small-town newspaper that follows the same drum beat as their ABC, The Age, Guardian, Washington Post, New York Times; utter bias and, if not outright lying, lying by omission.

      The true tyranny represented by the media is that you cannot disagree with them and have that disagreement published for all to read. The only way that you can do this is via blogs, forums or the like which, unfortunately, the general public is not usually aware exists or can be bothered to seek out. If we had something like an Australian version of Breitbart, that would go a long way to balance the viewpoint.

      200

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Congratulations Beliaik for a great job. You’ve put in a lot of work to let the ABC and ACMA know that their bias reporting does not go unnoticed. It’s clear that the ABC do not meet their own standards for the equality of free speech for all Australians. A legal challenge on this matter alone would surely be successful.
    Regards GeoffW

    521

    • #
      Climate Heretic

      “A legal challenge on this matter alone would surely be successful.” This and this alone (successful or not) would bring to light what is going on.

      Regards
      Climate Heretic

      200

    • #
      Beliaik

      Thank you GW and all green thumbers.

      The red thumber has likely been implanted with a cognitive dissonance seed that may already be showing signs of germinating.

      90

    • #
      shortie of greenbank

      A legal challenge may end the same. A few years back NIWA won a case where they had been shown to be negligent if not basically criminal yet the judge wouldn’t remove themselves from the case despite conflict of interest, the judge then went on to allow any and all weird wonderful and whacky alarmist rhetoric but basically stopped any witnesses that was contrary to NIWA case.

      After the event the left leaning whackos that pass for a press there had titles such as

      Cranks lose court case against NZ temperature record, NIWA awarded

      Now I believe in much of this the NIWA temperature record was already found separately to be faulty so the ruling of what would normally be a formality one way ended up being a deceptive victory for ‘the temperature record’.

      I wouldn’t be confident with any court proceedings especially given the lack of coverage given if the judge did have a bias towards alarmist investments like the NZ Judge did.

      21

  • #
    PeterS

    Most people still don’t get it. The reason the ABC is alive and well is both major parties want to instigate socialism to the full extent. The only difference between the two is one wants to do it much faster than the other and with slight differences. That’s all. The ABC along with the state government schools are the vehicles to achieve their dream (our nightmare). The same is true for the US except Trump came along and he is threatening to destroy their grand plan, which is why the MSM and the rest of the swamp creatures are doing everything and anything to get rid of him. I doubt even Trump knows all this. He’s just an opportunist who came along at the right time. He’s only now seeing how difficult it is. He ain’t seen anything yet.

    300

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      PeterS:

      I recommend reading
      https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/find-them-fix-them-and-then-destroy-them/

      Yes, Trump has been getting enormous resistance, as the Left react to their loss of power and imagine that they can rerun the election (with a better candidate). Yes, there is a Special Council for the Russian Allegations but that isn’t at all the win for the Left as they imagine.
      Firstly the allegation that Trump released “sensitive intelligence” to the Russian Ambassador has been denied by all 5 present.
      Secondly, the media itself published that “sensitive intelligence” 2 months previously.
      Thirdly, the Special Council has the powers to investigate the ‘leaks’ and that could well leave the Media having the choice of abandoning their source(s) (making it very difficult to get more in future) or looking like complete liars (and possibly liable for huge damages).

      230

      • #
        Dennis

        As we know from the Rudd & Gillard union controlled Labor years here, 2007 to 2013, and their taxpayer funded media department and numerous advisors, spin doctors, psychologists, marketing experts, researchers, etc., “fake news” is churned out daily and fed to the partisan, compliant MSM journalists.

        Until the Hawke Labor government was elected in 1983 federal ministers each had a “press secretary”, Barry Cassidy of the ABC was PM Hawke’s press secretary. Until NSW Premier Wran offered advice, create a media management department and move press secretaries into it and give them vast taxpayer funded resources to monitor radio, television and printed news sources, gather negative stories and counter with positive stories for the government. Use political spin daily, and throw mud at the political opponents. Even engage clever speech writers and use them to supply you with clever comments to use in parliament and elsewhere. Like NSW Labor Premier Carr referring to the NSW Opposition Leader as “the vertical Corgi” – yap yap yap.

        Rudd & Gillard expanded the media management department to even have a section dedicated to digging up dirt on Tony Abbott. They didn’t find much but did use allegations like him allegedly punching a wall when there were no witnesses.

        ABC has become captive to the left side of politics. Rudd & Gillard bribed them with large funding increases and even broke a contract with the private sector for broadcasting into Asia for ABC to broadcast for the government, extra funding too.

        In fact, PM Rudd early in his term in office diverted the RAAF VIP Fleet 737 executive jet when flying on government business to Perth to Broome WA where on a weekend he met a private sector broadcasting company’s chairman and agreed to a substantial broadcasting fees cut for all private sector broadcasters. Since that time they have saved well over one billion dollars divided between them all.

        Journalist Paul Sheehan wrote a book: The Electronic Whorehouse which I recommend to everybody who would like to better understand media and how they manipulate. Even paid advertising presented as news items.

        130

        • #
          Dennis

          A former cabinet minister once complained to me about how unprofessional journalists were becoming, that was in the Wran Labor period in NSW. I asked him why the media spread so many deceptive partisan stories for Labor. He said journalists now go to schools of journalism where they received brain washing from socialism based tutors.

          And, that the Wran Labor government hand feeds journalists with media releases written so that they can hand them in and save themselves the effort of writing a news story.

          110

      • #
        PeterS

        It’s not just the left who are ganging up on him. It’s coming from all sides. He’s an anomaly to the political regime. It’s a shame we don’t have someone even remotely like him here to drain our swamp.

        130

      • #
        James

        We never heard much about Muller when he was head of the FBI. He just did his job. Fund raising for RNC and Trump’s next campaign is going extremely well and breaking records. His base likes him, and I suggest that swing votes to not beleive the B.S. from the MSM/DNC.

        Democrats on the other hand are destroying their base. So called Blue dog democrats are abandoning them. There are only so many tranny freaks to attact to that party!

        90

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘He’s just an opportunist who came along at the right time. ‘

      He’s a charismatic leader who came along at the right time, but may end up drowning in the swamp.

      80

    • #
      davefromweewaa

      Don’t you worry about Donald, PeterS. He is the Roadrunner, the media is the Coyote! Every time they think they’ve got him it blows up in their face!
      Beep beep!

      150

  • #
    Griffo

    Keep up the good work Belliak,I thought you might have been a long lost refugee from Siberia with a name ending in K ,but I get it. I remember many years ago, the ABC book dept. published a book written by Ian Plimer, A Short History Of Planet Earth,where I first learnt that there was another side to the climate story. Plimer had at that time emerged from a battle with the Creationists on evolution and I think he stated that the Alarmists were equally resistant to reason as the Creationists.
    The ABC would not publish any thing from Plimer these days,Richard Glover an ABC Sydney Radio presenter gave Plimer a go once or twice ,but has fallen into step with the current party line.Richard Feidler(or Fidler) has an ABC interview program which quite recently breached the code in repeating an interview with Brian O’Brien an eminent Australian atmospheric physicist who does not subscribe to the warming meme in full. Feidler should be hauled through the complaints Dept for letting a small chink of light into the dark,depressing hole that is the ABC.

    120

    • #
      Beliaik

      Thank you for the additional reference Griffo.

      Commenters here and over at the Cat have now alerted me to 12 articles that would have fallen within my description in the FOI request.

      60

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Good show! Academia and the 4th Estat are the problem. I’m working on it but I feel like Sisyphus sometimes. We will do what we can through reason and logic.

        20

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    “It is time the ABC sank or swam on its own merits. Please sell it. ”

    I don’t think that it is saleable. Who would buy it? It is worse than Fairfax which at least has some assets. Nor would the Left put up the money, they always want others to pay for their pastimes.
    What I think can be done is to split it into various individual channels for the various audiences. Children’s programs, Rural programs, BBC repeats, and News & Current Affairs (perhaps better named Child Minded) programs. You may wish to add a Cultural channel to encourage local writers etc. but I think that will be throttled at birth by the inmates. Split the money and the existing channels between the Groups and reward those who improve productivity and standards – that alone would suffice to wipe out the dominance of the Green Commentariat.

    120

    • #
      Dennis

      One major problem: It would require the support of both houses of Parliament, the present hostile Senate would never agree to sell ABC or even merge it with SBS and cut out one budget funding liability.

      70

    • #
      PeterS

      Both major parties have zero interest in getting rid of the ABC as it suits their agenda. For starters both leaders desperately need a carbon tax or similar to bring in more revenues. Little do they know it will only accelerate the destruction of our economy. They don’t have the brains to understand that. They also thrive on power and more power. The ABC helps them there by pushing back any opponents who are perceived as a threat, be they individuals or minor party.

      170

      • #
        PeterS

        Look at it this way. If we didn’t have the ABC and we allowed minor parties to be held in much better light, both Shorten and Turnbull would be scared to bits.

        80

    • #
      Griffo

      Bananas in Pajamas would be the only program made by the ABC that might attract a bid for the rights.

      50

  • #
    thingadonta

    My feeling is the ABC will not change their biased ‘angle’ on most matters, unless one first changes the structure in which they, and by extension academia, operates.

    The worst bias within the ABC is probably within the ‘environment’ section. (To take a typical example, I once read a report on fracking in the ABC’s environment section which said and I quote ‘the people of the Kimberley are against fracking’ and ‘we should stand up for them’. Which people? What proportion? Regardless of whether you are for or against fracking, the story as reported isn’t true, some of them living there are for it, and some aren’t, but this isn’t what was reported, and it wasn’t even reflective of government policy at the time, so in this case the ABC wasn’t even acknowledging what was official policy). Part of this bias in environmental reporting is, no doubt, that most jobs and funding in the ‘environment’ deal with ‘environmental protection’ and various remedial actions of perceived negative effects of human development, or other human-related issues. Because most funding and jobs therefore revolve around valuing ‘protection’ or conservation, you get very little representation from scientists involved in development, or miners, or similar. (The very argument itself is often skewed, as when ‘scientists’ are reported to be on one side, and greedy developers on the other, which completely ignores the fact that there are entire government departments full of scientists who are also developers). This imbalance ultimately skews the science, because of an associated policy of correlating weight of representation with weight of opinion. In other words, if you employ 9 people to look after the environment and 1 person to develop it, you will get a science which tends, by weight of opinion, to reflect the values of the 9 rather than the 1. This problems affects most mining and fossil fuel activities and industries, because the actual total number of people directly associated with the science of other of these developments is usually relatively small, especially within government, research, and academia.

    ABC bias within legal and economic matters is, I would argue, a bit better than within any ‘environmental’ matters, and the main reason for this is simply that many more people are trained in economics and the market, and are watching what the ABC says. There is still bias there, don’t get me wrong, but I would argue that it isn’t nearly as bad as within environmental reporting, simply because there are more people who represent others stances and are well trained within the fields of economics and law, than there is say, miners within environmental departments, or environmental scientists who are trained in mineral economics or policy. Note here also, that the whole field of ‘climate change alarmism’ is essentially and largely, a mining-related problem-burning fossil fuels apparently significantly warms the planet, and so you can see how I would argue it is largely an example of lack of representation from miners and fossil fuel earth scientists, and mining activity and value in general, that leads to the skewed science.

    I have worked in mining for a number of years, and I am certain that there sometimes exists an element of irrationality against mining and fossil fuels in the broader community. And this irrationality, over what is often just a hole in the ground, is exploited by certain people, including journalists, who play on people’s fears and irrational elements, to ultimately skew and corrupt the science. The very same thing goes for climate change, which is essentially an anti-mining, or a ‘mining-caused’ issue. This level of irrationality and skewed science is now extending into economics. law, medicine, and the whole planet.

    As for the structural change required to balance bias in the ABC, it does start with funding and employment. If you only fund a certain angle, then that angle tends to predominate over time. Within the environment and earth sciences, this problem has been acute for decades. Before the advent of modern environmentalism earth science departments couldn’t get funding to carry out the most basic teaching or tasks, now most funding goes to environmental causes, with predictable results. (What we learnt when I studied earth sciences in the 1980s within a major university department was predominantly crystals). Within the ABC, what must happen is the recognition of skewed funding and allocation of resources to one side of an issue, or only certain field and departments, and so this starts within academia. You can’t have 9 people working for conservation and none or 1 for development and expect a balanced perspective. What you will certainly get is a lack of information, which leads to bias confirmation. Often people are simply uninformed in even the most basic matters related to mining. (e.g. Kevin Rudd).

    The ABC will never cure its’ bias until it restructures and re-allocates resources and employment, and this also extends to academia, since academia is often relied on to provide expert opinion or advice. And so to fix the ABC, you also have to reform and restructure funding within academia as well, not an easy task. Oil geologists shouldn’t have to jump over to environmental science just to keep up their research and their jobs within academia for example, which I have seen occur, and crystallography shouldn’t be the major topic taught within an earth science department, simply because they will only employ lowly payed tutors who happen to have a crystal hobby.

    Just some thoughts, but in my view the ABC will never change in any significant fashion, until one restores balance within academia, especially within earth sciences and law, but also other fields, and this requires major changes to the way funding is allocated within universities, and the way they are subsequently structured.

    You see the scale of the problem.

    220

    • #
      PeterS

      The ABC won’t change because both Shorten and Turnbull do not want the ABC to change. If it did and was not biased it would quickly lead to the demise of both major parties.

      40

  • #

    I keep thinking what’s going to happen when the truth actually does come out.

    So many people from every walk of life will have so much egg on their faces, none of them the ordinary people, but the politicians, the scientists, the educators, and the media who have all pushed this for all its worth.

    The ordinary person just believes what they are told, and never take the time to actually understand it, because, well, they can’t, because they don’t have the education, so they just believe what they are told, because they don’t expect ALL of these people to be telling untruths, and colluding together.

    All of those ordinary people will be absolutely ropeable, and, I’m afraid, it will take a disaster of some sort for the first truths to start coming out, and then a courageous person to actually make a stand and say that it’s all been wrong.

    Then, there will nowhere to hide, and that’s what worries me.

    It’s not a case of, hey, it all only started as a practical joke to see how far we could take it. It’s too late for that now.

    And every one of those people who have been pushing it will, all of them, be looking for someone else to blame.

    This isn’t something that will just fade away. It’ll end in a huge and not very pretty crash of some sort.

    We fight small little skirmishes that mean almost nothing, so we’re not going to make any impression.

    We just have to wait it out, and that’s the great pity, that our voices are not heard, and even if they are heard, they are immediately discounted.

    It won’t be one of us who provides that first insight. It has to be some sort of disaster, because now that it is so huge, there’s too much money to protect, and those making that money will do everything they can to continue what they are doing.

    In effect, I think that as much as we do do, it’s all a waste really. We’d like to think we are making an impression, but it’s a lost cause now.

    We just have to wait for that looming disaster, and hope we survive.

    Even after that, even when we say that we’ve been saying this all along, we’ll become the biggest targets of all, because it was people like us who caused the spigots of all that cash to be turned off.

    I know it probably sounds depressing, but it’s too big now and has a life of its own. Us, well we just nibble away at the edges hoping we are making an impression, but the tiny little bites we are taking out of the humungous monster aren’t even noticed.

    Tony.

    322

    • #

      Look, I know this looks like I’m trying to drum up visits to my home site, but hey, that’s neither here nor there to me.

      As I have often mentioned, I started all this back in 2008, and I had a plan to try and work out what it might take to comply with the Kyoto Protocol and replace the the coal fired plants with renewable power to comply with what Kyoto called for, based only on the US, because that was where the Blog site was located, (Harrisburg Pennsylvania) and was their main readership

      I thought it would tap out after ten Posts maybe, and then that would be it for me, but the more I looked, the more I needed to write about and that original Series morphed into more than 50 (long) separate Posts spread across four Months. Even then I thought that was it, but I just kept on going.

      Occasionally I look back at that first (really amateur) Post, and still smile at the two glaring mistakes I made, but I still think I said what I wanted, and laid my thinking on the line.

      That Post is at the following link if any of you need a good laugh for the day.

      Kyoto – A Perspective (Part1) (dated 22Mar2008)

      It’s hard to actually believe I’ve been butting my head up against that wall for nine years now.

      Tony.

      241

      • #
        Ted O'Brien

        Tony I agree with others here that we have lost the battle. Few realized it till it happened, but the closure of Hazelwood was the defining event. Highlighted so dramatically by the power failures in South Australia.

        The question now is, where do we make the next stand?

        This will take too long, but I’ll try. Our grandson from Queensland came downmarket aged about 17 to live, driving on Ls. He insisted:”Pedestrians have right of way”. I remonstrated, his mother backed him up. So I checked. I was right, except that the compulsion to use a pedestrian crossing extends only 20 metres, not 50 as I believed. I don’t know the finer details of that law.

        Apparently that doesn’t apply in Queensland. So did the ALP in Queensland bring in that law after they got rid of Joh Bjeke Petersen? He didn’t allow pedestrians to block the streets and prevent people from going about their business. The ALP supported the demonstrators.

        The people who blocked the streets in the 1960s and 1970s have been running the country now for 30 years. Is it time to turn their own laws against them?

        In the mid 1980s the National Farmers’ Federation organized the biggest demonstration Canberra has ever seen. Using the same technique I use for counting livestock I counted 37,500 in the “march”, and a lot of people did not do the march. There were more than 40,000 people there. But it was a one day wonder, and gained nothing. Even the media reported it as 20,000, and well they knew they were selling us short.

        But we did discover that if you hired a bus Canberra wasn’t nearly as hard to get to as we had believed. That rally was a one day wonder, but with a different plan it could have been a ten day rally of 4,000 people, which would have been a pain for the pollies.

        Back to now. Many people commenting here are “seniors”. Some of whom like to travel. Might it be possible to get a travel agent to organize a coach trip to Brisbane and find enough supporters to fill the coach? Once there that right of way law might be used to gain sufficient notice to enable publication of the cause.

        00

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          I did not write that word downmarket. And I didn’t proof read properly either. Nor have I found how to disable the predictive text.

          00

    • #
      Robdel

      I agree Tony. It will require a HUGE crisis which directly affects the people and especially the politicians. A crisis which also involves continual blackouts. The people will only endure so much but when their way of life is totally impinged upon they may wake up (I hope).

      120

    • #
      PeterS

      As history proves it will end in tears. As I keep saying people will not force a change by stop electing the either major party until they are our of their comfort zone and demand a change. They will only ever be out of their comfort zone in sufficient numbers when things are really bad. We are not there yet, not even close. Be patient.

      90

    • #
      OneWorldGovernment

      I agree.

      I’m sorry but I stole this post and put it up with attribution to you on the CatallaxyFiles.com open thread for May 20th OneWorldGovernment
      #2385642, posted on May 21, 2017 at 12:18 am

      I’ve ripped this out of replies to Belliaik’s post at Joe Nova.
      post number 8.

      Sorry I said post #8 when you are post #9.

      I also put it up at Pointman’s blog https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2017/05/18/dismantling-obamas-darker-legacy/#comment-25109

      I haven’t yet put it up at Watts place because I am hoping that someone else will pick up the posts.

      Kind regards and thank you.

      40

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘We’d like to think we are making an impression, but it’s a lost cause now.’

      With the greatest respect, the war is just about to kick off and we’ll need your expertise.

      If world temperatures begin to climb again then we have lost, but otherwise we can’t lose. What you do on your blog and Jo does here are extremely important, remain steadfast and patient until the global cooling signal becomes so obvious that aunty cannot ignore it.

      120

      • #
        Beliaik

        El Gordo, the war analogy is apt.

        My system (relaxivism) is similar to lying in cover on a ridge as a battlefield sniper, firing targeted shots to harry enemy troops. It’s not about “goals” or “wins” – it’s about maintaining a distracting barrage.

        My main mechanism is letters to the editors of my local papers. It’s cheap, easy, fun and reaches those who’ve never heard of the blogosphere.

        140

        • #

          The problem I find is that no one, and let me repeat that ….. NO ONE has even the tiniest understanding of any form of electrical power generation.

          The believe implicitly that they are all the same, they just all generate electricity.

          Try and explain, in even the simplest of terms, the difference, and people immediately switch off, because it’s all out of their realm of understanding, and let’s be frank here, they don’t really WANT to understand.

          If that electricity just keeps coming out of the proverbial hole in the wall, then, to them, it’s all the same.

          It’s not just the general populace, but goes all the way back up the chain, to the journalists, to the politicians, and then right to the top of the tree, the Scientists. That’s not really the fault of any of them, because as Scientists, they know Science, and have (literally) no comprehension of the engineering of electrical power generation, because to them, again, it’s all just comes out of the hole in the wall, so they also believe it’s just the same.

          The fault I do have with those three levels above the general populace, the journalists, the politicians, and the Scientists, is that they have the actual ability to actually read the truth for themselves, but none of them even bother, just believing it full stop.

          That’s why I’m certain that the end result which will eventually lead to the truth coming out will come from that electrical power generation side of this debate.

          When it reaches that critical point where that one plant closes, and the result is that renewables have to take over, and they can’t do it, then and only then will people begin looking for the truth.

          I know all this sounds like I might be making too much of myself in that belief, but after so long of doing all this, I’m now certain of my facts.

          At the start, even though I had a strong background in all matters electrical, even I was reticent to actually write it down, because I knew I was the only one saying these things, and there was serious doubt in my mind that I ….. MUST be wrong. That actually focussed my mind, and I looked, and I looked, and I looked, and everything I found backed up what I was doing, that I was correct. What I wanted was data, not opinion, because all opinion was that renewables (wind and solar) could replace traditional coal fired power.

          When I went and mentioned these things at other sites, I was mercilessly flamed, shot down, and shredded. I stopeed doing that and even now when I occasionally go to those sites, I still get flamed.

          No one wants to know, because for so long now,they have been told by everyone (literally) that renewables like wind and solar are the only way forward.

          The biggest thing I have is this.

          If coal fired power is the largest producer of CO2, and the problem is so dire, then why haven’t those in power just shut them all down, immediately? And if it’s so bad, why is everyone turning a blind eye to what China is doing? All they ARE doing is making excuses, changing the subject, and ignoring it totally, and spinning what is actually happening.

          The only thing they have done is to try and find a way to make money out of it.

          I’m a nobody, literally, so all I have is my own site and this one here at Joanne’s site, and if I can convince even just a couple of you, then that’s enough for me, because pretty soon, a couple becomes a few, a few become a few more, until many see the problem, and when the bovine waste does impact the rotating wind generating device, then that will be less people who will have dumbfounded looks on their faces, offering that Dorrie Evans excuse ….. Why wasn’t I told?

          There’ll be nothing to do then, too late, but at least we’ll be able to explain things to the masses who will be furious.

          Tony.

          151

          • #
            Beliaik

            TonyfromOz

            What you do has high value. You help non-experts such as myself understand the technical side of generation. I then use it in my relaxivist sniper fire.

            At the level I operate it is more about the persuasion than the facts. But my persuasion and my cognitive dissonance time-bombs must be based on the facts.

            That is where your service in invaluable. I thank you for it.

            170

            • #

              Yeah, thanks Beliaik.

              The only thing (the only thing) that keeps me going now is the ….. “$hit, he’s right” principle.

              The fact that I get flamed is water off a duck’s back to me now, because I know the facts rote.

              What I know is that for every five or ten flamers, there’s at least one reader who will bother to go and find facts that I might point them to.

              That reader then quotes the above statement, and won’t dare leave a comment anywhere for fear of being flamed themselves, but at least they have an idea of what to look for in the future.

              I suspect that there’s quite a lot of them really, but because of their lack of technical engineering expertise, they rarely repeat it, but if I can be at least the tiniest bit comprehensive, then they have a reference to point others to.

              Don’t get me wrong, I love what I do, because it’s an extension of what I did at Wagga Wagga as a technical trades instructor in the electrical trade. There is nothing more satisfying than seeing the light go on in a student sitting in front of you. Sitting here in front of my monitor screen, I don’t get to see that, but I know it’s happening.

              The trick is distilling something so technical down to a manner that the average person can see. If I have done that, then I know I’m getting somewhere.

              Tony.

              160

              • #
                Craig Thomas

                The problem is that your opinions are fossilised in the past and you are beholden to beliefs that you have repeatedly demonstrated are immune to new information.
                The cost of emitting CO2 the way we have been doing makes the cost of migrating to technologies that mitigate CO2 emission an attractive option. You refuse to accept a raft of facts that stands behind this simple equation.
                Like the old codgers who continued to deny plate tectonics right up until the 1980s, you cling to old “facts” that have long been proven wrong by the last 3 decades of advances in human knowledge and the resulting technology.

                02

              • #
                Beliaik

                Craig Thomas

                Put down the green Kool-aide and take the red pill.

                You’ve been brainwashed by the establsihment.

                20

  • #
    TdeF

    Well done! My continuing commentary on man mad global warming is summed up in the single concession
    “humanity’s use of fossil fuels returns much-needed sequestered carbon dioxide to the biosphere ”

    No, it doesn’t The amount of fossil fuel output is trivial compared to the rapid exchange of gases with the ocean.

    In 1956 Dr Suess demonstrated that despite WW1 and WW2, the amount of man released CO2 was under 2% using simple radio carbon dating. Old CO2 has no C14. This 2-5% is still true today. CO2 levels are set by ocean temperatures, nothing else. The physical equilibrium is expressed as Henry’s Law. Unilateral injection of CO2 makes no difference as the sum total of the atmosphere’s CO2 is less than 1/50th of the free CO2 dissolved in the oceans and the cycle time is 14 years. Nothing is left of WW2 CO2. The idea that it has accumulated since 1900 is not science but supposition based on nothing at all. 1/64th is left.

    It is my one major contribution to the skeptical side. I am unhappy that every discussion of the skeptic view immediately concedes directly or by implication that man has substantially increased CO2.

    The more likely and correct hypothesis supported by simple physical chemistry is that a slightly warmer ocean surface has released slightly more CO2. How simple is that? No elaborate theory need, no Greenhouse gases, no hotspot. There is simply no case to answer. Our output is negligible on a planetary scale. The rest is ego.

    As for the idea that the 50% extra CO2 since 1900, man released or not, somehow selectively and directly heats the Coral sea, that is utterly illogical as you say.

    The war on CO2 has to stop. It is a war on Western democracies and it is being waged by our information gatekeepers, the ABC. Deceit is consistently telling only one side of a story. Propaganda.

    220

    • #
      TdeF

      I am not being the slightest critical, just on my old bandwagon that the very first step in the logic of man made Global Warming is wrong. The first step is not whether CO2 is a Greenhouse gas or whether it is an effective or significant Greenhouse gas. The first step is whether we have actually changed the level of CO2 or whether it was natural. Perhaps caused by the sun?

      There are three explanations for two things going up at once. One is that the first causes the second. The next is that the second causes the first. The third is coincidence between unrelated phenomena.

      So why should we accept it obvious that CO2 causes warming? Why would we not at least consider that warming the oceans releases CO2. When 98% of all CO2 is in the ocean, it seems obvious. It also fits the facts as the Coral sea is warmer but the air is not and the steady rise of CO2 is unaffected by anything we do.

      This is especially annoying given the implication is that CO2 is exclusively warming the Coral sea, the same CO2 causes droughts in some countries, rain in others, that CO2 is shrinking the Arctic ice cap while ignoring the record growth in the Antarctic. One is predicted, the other is an anomaly? There is little actual science being used anywhere, just appeals to journalistic consensus but the far more simple explanations are just being ignored.

      ABC science ‘expert’ Robyn Williams predicted the ocean should be 20-30 metres higher in Sydney by now. It isn’t. Where is the apology?

      Sell the ABC. Let people pay to watch it. No one would.

      260

      • #
        Climate Heretic

        Cement production is responsible for around 5% of the worlds man made co2.[1][2]

        So yes man does emit carbon (breathing anyone?).

        Regards
        Kim Roberts
        [1] Wikipedia Ref
        [2] Cement Industry Foundation

        41

        • #
          TdeF

          Reduction of metals in general requires carbon. Steel and Aluminum. It has the characteristic of taking oxygen away from metals and then mysteriously turning into a harmless gas which bubbles away. So smelting is a great CO2 producer too. Until very recently, we all thought CO2 was harmless, great for the planet. Now we are told that it is evil and pollution. One of these stories is wrong.

          80

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            TdeF:

            Most people think that there is Good carbon and Bad carbon. Good carbon is natural, kind to children and pet dogs and plays nicely with the Unicorns at the bottom of the garden. Bad carbon is black, unnatural, fattening and causes climate disagreements among scientists. That last is about the level of understanding shown by a “world saving, arm waving” Climate Scientists.
            From there people go on to believe that ‘renewable’ electrons are good and cheap and reliable. Admittedly some are starting to wonder “if renewables are really so cheap, why are my electricity bills going up as more renewables are added?” When the blackouts start then a lot of people are suddenly going to wake up and there will be trouble.
            You will see politicians abandoning the sinking ship amid signs of panic. The media will be struck dumb (or dumber than usual). The Greens will shout their usual excuse that “renewables weren’t really tried enough” but people will no longer be listening. The economy will slump but that will be the start of the recovery and within a few years the Great Climate Change Scam will only interest historians, satirists and a few pathetic socialists meeting semi-secretly in dingy inner city coffee bars and dreaming of the “good old days” when people listen to them.

            80

      • #
        David Maddison

        Here Williams tries to say he was misrepresented by Andrew Bolt but Bolt then proves that he did claim a 100 meter sea level rise.

        http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/contrast-and-compare-as-100-metres-williams-complains/news-story/33c6c88c3df124e908c3806cfdaaeda3

        10

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘….a slightly warmer ocean surface has released slightly more CO2. How simple is that? ‘

      Your hypothesis has my full support.

      70

      • #
        TdeF

        Thanks. Add Dr Weiss’ full and simple explanation of the entire history of temperature for the last 2,500 years with the De Vries (210 year) Solar cycle and the induced 25 year PDO (Pacific Decadal Osciallation) and entirely without any monotonically changing CO2.

        So there are full and simple explanations of both the temperature and CO2 increases. In fact almost trivial observation. Even Warmists admit CO2 is not enough on its own to explain the temperature change, so a theory of amplification by water vapour was invented and has been refuted by the lack of a hot spot over the equator.

        The desperation to explain slight warming on CO2 is so great, it is amazing that more scientists do not speak out. Almost universally the ones who do are retired.

        So we get the journalistic elites dictating science. Ironic. It used to be the bureaucrats in the Vatican who silenced Copernicus, Galileo and Luther. Since the invention of printing, it has been the socialist journalists. The printed word freed us. Journalism is now used to enslave us through deliberate misinformation. Now we are paying massive Climate indulgences in our electricity bills.

        121

      • #
        Craig Thomas

        So – to continue your hypothesis – we can confidently predict that the ocean surface will show a reduction in CO2 content?
        Right?
        Do you think that prior to coming up with these kinds of assertions, the asserter could do this necessary testing *first*?
        Or are we content with the “cool story, bro” approach, here in Nova Land?

        Not only that, but an analysis of atmospheric CO2 will demonstrate that the average molecular weight of atmospheric CO2 has increased as a result of ocean release, considering that fossil fuel C and ocean surface C have different isotopic profiles?
        Right?
        Has the asserter done this testing?
        More “cool story, bro”?

        I ask all this, because I am an intensely sceptical person….

        12

        • #
          Beliaik

          Craig Thomas

          Spend a couple of years reading every post here and at WUWT. And all the comments.

          When you’ve got enough knowledge, come back and talk again.

          11

          • #
            Craig Thomas

            Well, you can rely on blog comments, personally I prefer primary sources and raw data.

            Each to his own, I guess, although your definition of “knowledge” could definitely do with some work.

            02

            • #
              Beliaik

              Craig Thomas

              If you’d read anything other than what the MSM feeds you you’d know those comment threads often carry links to get you around paywalls and to the actual papers. There you can see the “science” isn’t anything like what you’ve been told by the MSM.

              Remember Craig, if the CO2 myths were true you’d need to give up your phone, your car and your electricity. If you’re such a believer, why haven’t you done that already?

              11

              • #
                Craig Thomas

                You said you rely on blog comments.
                Now you say you read primary research.

                Were you lying then, or now?

                11

              • #
                Beliaik

                Craig Thomas

                Ah, you have reading comprehension problems! Relax! The climate scares are a hoax. Follow the money…

                The alarmist scientists want money, fame and prestige.

                The mainstream media want scariest-ever stories.

                The cultural-Marxists want control of societal values.

                The socialist billionaires want control of the means of production.

                The industrial enviro-profiteers (esp. Chinese) want to surf peaking production waves.

                The ideologically-driven eco-loons want to “save Gaia” through de-industrialisation.

                The neo-Malthusians want to reduce human populations.

                The virtue-signallers want other useful idiots to be impressed by their slavish conformance to the meme.

                But the big one is Governments. They desperately want a morally-palatable, over-arching and unavoidable big-new-tax-on-everything but especially on the air you breathe. They need it to pay for all the “entitlements” they buy votes with.

                10

        • #
          tom0mason

          Craig Thomas,

          Interesting argument…
          “So – to continue your hypothesis – we can confidently predict that the ocean surface will show a reduction in CO2 content?”

          So, YOU extend somebody’s idea then criticize them for your extrapolations.

          From your thought bubble, you seem to be running on the misunderstanding that the climate system is some sort of linear predictable system with completely known, closely coupled cause and effect features. It is not it never has been.

          10

    • #
      Craig Thomas

      This is absolute garbage. If there is *one* thing we know with considerable certainty, it is the amount of CO2 being emitted by the burning fossil fuels. Just ask Murry Salby, who, despite his failings, is enough of a scientist to know that you cannot credibly deny plain facts.

      And the amount of CO2 being emitted by the burning of fossil fuels is approximately 50% of the annual increase of CO2 that accumulates in the atmosphere.

      *Nobody*, and I mean *NOBODY*, with an ounce of common sense or a capacity to understand numbers would question where the annual increase in atmospheric CO2 is coming from when we *know* that 2x that amount is being emitted through the burning of fossil fuels.

      It is difficult to convey just how completely and utterly silly it is to deny these facts.

      12

      • #
        Beliaik

        Craig Thomas

        You’ve jumped the shark, mate. Showing your slavish support to the mainstream media meme here just leaves you looking ignorant.

        11

        • #
          Craig Thomas

          No facts there….probably for a reason.

          We know how much carbon is being emitted as CO2 from the combustion of fossil fuels – about 8 Gt/year.
          We know how much carbon in the atmosphere is increasing – about 4Gt/year.

          So we know that the sinks are absorbing 4 Gt/year more than is being released. (In fact the sinks are absorbing more than that, because concrete and land use changes are also net emitters).

          This is absolutely basic maths. If you don’t know this stuff, you *really* should n’t be calling others ignorant.

          12

          • #
            Beliaik

            Craig Thomas

            Every day every news source carries made-for-media stories released by climate alarmists. They’re usually quite scary but when you drill for facts there’s not much to match the hype.

            Compensating for this facts shortage should be easy for a member of the global warming faithful such as yourself.

            Just explain in clear terms, without referring to computer models, the convincing proof that the current gentle warming is caused solely by CO2 generated from fossil fuels.

            Account for CO2 from all sources and pay particular attention to explaining why temperature increases have slowed while atmospheric CO2 content is still increasing.

            Your explanation must account for the immutable laws of physics and will reference conservation of energy laws, the Stefan–Boltzmann law and the second law of thermodynamics.

            If you can’t explain it simply and soundly to others then you don’t understand it yourselves and you don’t deserve to be criticising people her.

            00

  • #
    Dennis

    May I remind all again of the inquiry ordered by the Abbott government minister conducted by BoM management into allegations that climate change and weather media releases did not match BoM historic record data. The report admitted that errors and omissions were found and steps were being taken to ensure it did not continue to happen.

    PM Abbott recommended to his cabinet that independent auditors be commissioned to conduct due diligence at the BoM but he was out voted. No doubt by the same cretins who were plotting to overthrow him.

    160

  • #
    • #
      PeterS

      The MSM and the rest of the swamp is too big to drain quickly. I doubt very much it will ever happen as it’s full of very powerful people, even more powerful and richer than Trump. What concerns me though is all this fight back from the MSM and others to impeach Trump even if unsuccessful will lead to great turmoil. Clearly Trump is being set up for failure from so many different groups. I wish him well as I find his intentions are good. But remember no one is perfect.

      100

      • #
        TdeF

        America supports Trump. That is why I read Breitbart.com. For every so called news item, there is a counter item which does not get out because as in Australia on their ABC, it does not support their story. Luckily there is a lot of information on the internet and Trump is using Twitter to say what he thinks, not what CNN/Washington Post/New York Times/Hollywood say he says. It is possibly the first time Twitter has made a real difference.

        I am also mightily puzzled by the Russian thing. What are they have supposed to have done? The Democrats funded a recount in Washington and called it off when they found the ballot stuffers were Democrats. Now the Russians ‘influenced’ an election? How? No one bothers to say. It is just ‘The Russians’. High level meaningless drivel presented as news.

        As for Comey, the Democrats were yelling for his scalp, until he was fired. Nuts.

        181

    • #
      TdeF

      It was reported that 95% of journalists donated to Hilary’s campaign. And 98% of DC voted for Hilary. Trump has a huge swamp to drain. Trump bashing in Europe is as great, filtering the good stories out and concentrating on the bad, not matter how silly. It is amazing for the Germans to see Trump as the new Hitler. As I remember it, Hitler was German.

      91

      • #
        Diogenese2

        Actually he was Austrian! Born and raised near Linz. He moved to Munich in 1913 and enlisted, by administrative mistake in the German army. he fought the war entirely against the British.
        Ypres 1, Somme , Arras, Passchendaele. At Ypres 1 he was one of the 611 survivers of his battalions 3600. His military career followed the same pattern. At the Somme we wounded him and in October 1918 got him with mustard gas. he lost his voice but regrettably recovered it.
        But at least you can’t say we didn’t try!

        80

        • #
          TdeF

          Unfortunately you also made him a hero awarded the Iron Cross. So he dedicated his life and the lives of 40 million other people to show the world he was smarter than the Prussian Generals. He was wrong. What saved Europe from Germany was Hitler. He stopped the army at Dunkirk. He believed in the Luftwaffe. He thought if the Russians could not defeat Finland, they would be a pushover. He thought the atom bomb was a waste of time. Lucky.

          40

          • #
            David Maddison

            Hitler didn’t pursue the atom bomb to any great extent because nuclear physics and theoretical physics in general was regarded as “Jewish Physics” (German: Jüdische Physik) as opposed to German Physics (Deutsche Physik). Among those Jewish physicists that escaped the Nazis were Bohr, Born, Einstein, Nossal and the “father of the H bomb” himself, Edward Teller.

            10

            • #
              Griffo

              I doubt that Niels Bohr was Jewish,he stayed put in his native Denmark during WW11,but apparently provided some information to the Allies about Nazi activity regarding the atom bomb.

              00

  • #

    The ABC postures as Bambi while it is, in fact, the 800 pound gorilla astride Australia. Its main victims, aside from truth and impartiality, are the private media outlets, which are overwhelmingly of the urban green left.

    Life is easier for the likes of 2GB and that small section of the Murdoch press which tends conservative, since they can offer an alternative. The slop Fairfax is entitled to sell for profit, the ABC gives away for free on a massive scale. Fairfax became hopelessly self-indulgent in the pre-internet years when its “Rivers of Gold” classifieds gave it a guaranteed revenue. Now the rivers are dry and there’s just the aging teenie-bopper journalists whom few want to support with hard money when they can suck up their daily dose of correctness from the smug cucks and preachy convent girls of the ABC – gratis and by the barrel.

    Call me soft, but I actually defend the right of Fairfax to survive, especially since the mysterious death of the peace movement. The Posh Left seems as happy with Big War as it is with Big Gov, Big Green and Big Debt. So what is the Left even for these days?

    While I may feel free to mostly ignore the SMH and the Age, there is no doubt that they have a market and demographic which have been snatched away from them by Big Government posturing as benevolent “Auntie”. The fact that they are too thick to see it is beside the point.

    120

  • #
    Gee aye

    This should be called the tl;dr thread. What a bunch of windbags.

    So many hurt feelings when no one listens.

    511

    • #
      Dave

      Gee Eye,

      If it’s too hard, just go to the ABC news, sit & listen!

      And they are called Hydrostor Bags now!

      Wind bags are so old Geeeye!

      No hurt feeling I hope!

      Use Google!

      61

      • #
        Gee aye

        I’d defend the ABC even if it took a dump on its desk

        414

        • #
          Dave

          Dump:

          Several examples of DUMP
          1. He came in with four shopping bags and dumped them on the table
          2. They accused the West of dumping out-of-date medicines on Third World countries
          3. To move information from a computer’s memory to another place or device
          4. To suddenly end a romantic relationship you have been having with someone
          5. A place where people are allowed to leave their rubbish
          6. A place where things of a particular type are stored, especially by an army
          7. Down in the dumps
          8. Have/take a dump

          Which one do you mean Geeeye?

          51

      • #
        Gee aye

        I’d defend the ABC even if it took a dump on its desk

        416

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘So many hurt feelings when no one listens.’

      The major parties and msm are in lockstep and for some of us its like living under a dictatorship, so there is frustration waiting for climate to change.

      50

  • #

    When I knocked down a big pawlonia tree just outside the window where I get best TV reception I completely lost SBS, which has evolved into some sort of free channel for cult movies judging by the broadcast guide. Rather than try to get reception back, I now let SBS airwaves float aimlessly by on the ether.

    As for ABC, I don’t turn it on. When people talk of some manipulative 4 Corners report or what was prattled on Q&A (is that ABC or SBS?) I can happily plead ignorance. The TV is for footy and cricket. Then it’s turned off immediately.

    Because the number one thing to do is to turn them off. That’s OFF, with two F’s.

    100

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      “PROOF” that they really are tree huggers?

      Of course you can now expect a raft of projects wanting funding to find which trees store the Truth and radiate it as needed. I expect exciting news about the ABC and synergy with poison ivy.

      40

  • #
    pat

    Beliaik -

    perhaps you could utilise some of the Public Editor statements re New York Times hiring of Wall St Journal columnist, Bret Stephens, who is consider a slight CAGW sceptic, tho he isn’t really.

    NYT is not a taxpayer-funded entity, so can do as they like, but even they are realising how one-sided their “news” coverage is:

    3 May: NYT: Bret Stephens Takes On Climate Change. Readers Unleash Their Fury
    by Liz Spayd, Public Editor
    Thomas is among the thousands of readers who have written in protest since Stephens, a conservative, took a seat among the elite, and mostly liberal, ranks of Times Opinion writers. His first column last weekend — arguing that climate data creates the misleading impression that we know what global warming’s impact will be — produced a fresh geyser of complaints, either to the public editor, on the letters pages or posted on the column itself. No subject since the election has come close to producing this kind of anger toward The Times. Among the scores who have taken to social media are several of Stephens’s new colleagues in the newsroom, some welcoming him aboard, others not so much. I expressed my own concerns about Stephens after his hiring, but I support the general principle of busting up the mostly liberal echo chamber around here…
    I stand among the readers who worry that Stephens is minimizing the serious risk of climate change by referring to the “modest” warming of the earth and likening polling data to sophisticated climate models…
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/03/public-editor/bret-stephens-climate-change-liz-spayd-public-editor.html

    22 Apr: NYT: Seeking More Voices, Even if Some Don’t Want to Hear Them
    by Liz Spayd, Public Editor
    A day of reckoning along that path came earlier this month, when editorial page editor James Bennet did his part to broaden reader horizons by naming conservative Bret Stephens to the prestigious — and mostly liberal — roster of Times columnists…
    Stephens’s coronation produced a fiery revolt among readers and left-leaning critics. They rummaged through his columns for proof that he is a climate change denier, a bigot or maybe a misogynist. More complaints came into the public editor’s office than at any time since the election, with many readers threatening to cancel their subscriptions. (I’m told relatively few actually have.) Inside the building, some of Stephens’s future colleagues posted his “greatest hits” on a bulletin board. And a handful of newsroom staffers, most notably columnist Max Fisher and Cairo bureau chief Declan Walsh, have challenged Stephens on Twitter…
    The Stephens episode touches the third rail of a debate surfacing as The Times looks to include a wider range of views, not just on the Opinion pages but in its news columns. It raises the question of whether readers want rules around who should be heard and how. And it raises the even larger issue of whether The Times should be a paper for all of America or whether it’s already been claimed by one side…
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/public-editor/seeking-more-voices-even-if-some-dont-want-to-hear-them.html?_r=0

    you could also excerpt something from Bret Stephens’ first column & his followups, linked from the 3 May link above.

    hope that helps. keep up the good fight. wish I had your perserverance.

    90

    • #
      TdeF

      I had a wonderful cruise with a dinner group including a Jewish pharmacist and his wife, a great Cunard cruise around the Black Sea. Delightful people. The Times is owned by a Jewish family we know and he was amazed, as it is the most outrageously anti Semitic rag around. So from Climate Change to Jewish issues, the New York Times is a disaster, a group like the Age in Melbourne, the Guardian and the ABC, captured by groupthink and driving them all out of business as they all at one time served very conservative customers. These were the elite media. Now they are just run by elitists, utterly biased and consider everyone else as deplorables, deluded conservatives and rusted on voters. They are all going the way of the dodo.

      150

    • #
      clipe

      Good thinking Pat. That will ramp up the ‘cognitive dissonance’ bombardment.

      40

    • #
      Beliaik

      Much appreciated, Pat.

      40

  • #
    gnome

    Exactly the same situation back in 2012 when little Aussie battler Gergis proved that the hockey stick applied just as well in the Southern Hemisphere.

    Much hype, but total silence when the Gergis piece of rubbish was withdrawn, and no mention -ever- of Gergis’s attitude when questioned prior to the withdrawal.

    If it’s ABC science, it’s crap. If it’s ABC opinion, it’s crap. If it isn’t crap it isn’t on the ABC.

    110

  • #
    Beliaik

    G’day JoNovaians

    Attacking TheirABC on the climate debate front is an extension of my retirement hobby – which I call ‘relaxivism’ – effectively the opposite of ‘activism’ (the very word looks Green to me these days).

    I defined relaxivism for Urban Dictionary like this; “Relaxivism is the use of reason and logic to calm a fellow citizen who has become alarmed or agitated by prophecies put forward by special interest groups. Relaxivism strives to remove hysteria and emotion from debates and to replace it with rationality and scepticism.”

    Basically I use info taken from blogs by Watts, Spencer, Nova, Ball, Curry et al and use it to smack down greenies in the letters columns of my local papers. It’s great to see all the ‘splodey-headed responses making their side look even stupider.

    Relaxivism is similar to lying in cover on a ridge as a battlefield sniper, firing targeted shots to harry enemy troops. It’s not about “goals” or “wins” – it’s about maintaining a distracting barrage.

    Because it’s system-oriented, rather than goal-oriented, there is no expectation of “winning” as such, so no sense of “banging one’s head against the wall”.

    The point of the system is to plant little cognitive dissonance bombs in the mind of the leftarded readership by highlighting two or more divergent truths.

    The little package of anxiety that develops when those minds attempt to consolidate two strongly-held but conflicting beliefs can lead two ways. Commonly a fantasy is developed to account for it – “Beliaik is a clueless idiot”. But sometimes it results in a learning moment that can, over time, lead to a change in opinion – “That clueless idiot Beliaik may have had a point”.

    Shitstirring, I mean, relaxivism, has always been my strength, so I decided I should become a kind of ‘Johnny Appleseed’ of the climate debate in retirement. ‘Beliaik Doubtseed’, if you like, planting cognitive dissonance bombs using the steady aim and patience of the sniper.

    It’s a war against stupidity that we’re fighting. We gotta go with our strengths. Words are our bullets. When we stop firing, they win by default.

    Letters to the editors of local newspapers is cheap, easy, fun and reaches those who’ve never heard of the blogosphere. Here’s today’s submission for my area’s regional daily.

    The Editor

    In the last ten years the ABC has published just over 10,500 “climate alarm” articles across its many platforms.

    The ABC are huge supporters of the (fake) “97% consensus” and use it to justify their very biased reporting.

    But, wait! The ABC’s Code of Practice requires it include all views, no matter how diverse.

    Therefore there should be about 325 climate articles that represent the “other 3%”, right?

    So where are they? Intensive searching yielded none.

    The ABC were asked for them under Freedom of Information laws. They couldn’t find any either!

    This is proof, if you still needed it, of the blatant bias of our public broadcaster. They appear to have abandoned any pretext of sound journalism.

    The ABC is now nothing more than the political left’s propaganda machine – at a cost to taxpayers equivalent to building four new major hospitals each and every year.

    To add insult to injury the ABC just advertised for a “twitter manager” for 4 Corners – with a salary package of over $100,000 per annum.

    It is time to sell the ABC. Let it compete with other media companies on its own merits – if it can.

    Yes, the left will scream. But they can put the money where their mouths are and buy it. At least then they’d be its legal owners and not an occupying force.

    Beliaik
    (The 10,500 figure for climate articles was pulled out of my ar… computer models.)

    280

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘The ABC is now nothing more than the political left’s propaganda machine …. ‘

      The green blob holds the levers, the left and right have been duped into compliance with political correctness.

      Its about saving the planet for our grandchildren, so along with the half truths its the emotive factor which overwhelmed the populace. We have to eradicate the Trots from the newsroom, but its important that these free radicals admit they got it wrong on climate change before dismantling begins.

      I’ve just gone into a partnership with an SBS fella, we are starting a very small media business in preparation for the end times.

      30

    • #

      The ABC is DEF to GHI*.
      *Genuine Hard-headed Investigation.

      50

    • #
      Gee Aye

      Good luck

      30

  • #
    PeterPetrum

    Jo and Beliaik, what a fantastic article and all hats off to you, Beliaik, for your persistance. But it has left me absolutely fuming. What insolence, what ignorance what total, abject and complete arrogance from these two taxpayer funded bodies. I am speechless – now!

    160

  • #

    Sins of omission? Not possible says the ABC.
    ACMA, rules that ‘you can’t complain about
    something that didn’t happen.Ergo propter hoc
    - *not* observing the ABC Code of Practice
    re impartiality and diverse perspectives is
    a non-event. Ergo – propter hoc, ABC Code
    of Practice is not a real Code of Practice,
    it’s more an invocation ‘giving to airy nothings
    a local habitation and a name.’ (h/t the bard.)

    80

  • #
    cedarhill

    Quite a historical cycle going from the Stone Age to the Bronze Age to the Iron Age to the Age of Enlightenment to the Age of Reason and now to the Age of Lying.

    60

  • #
    Philip Mulholland

    “ACMA ruled that I can’t complain about something that didn’t happen.”

    Brilliant. I must remember to use that next time I forget to put out the trash bin.

    70

    • #
      TdeF

      In Catholicism it is called a sin of omission, not doing something you should do. It was the denouement in the last episode of Seinfeld, where they were all arrested for not helping when they should have helped, a crime in New England but standard behavior in New York. Not doing something you should do and are paid to do is doubly culpable when you operate under a charter of impartiality like the ABC.

      What on earth is the point of have a huge government broadcaster who is not accountable to anyone and not accountable to the charter under which it was set up. That is utterly out of control. A billion dollars a year, possibly $1.5Bn with their SBS.

      All with the blessing of their best friend, Malcolm Turnbull who uses the ABC as his own cheer squad and used them as communication minister to topple the real prime minister. I suppose Malcolm thinks he is a real Prime Minister today, not a lame duck like Gillard.

      If Abbott resigned, he would lose his majority so he is there only because of Abbott’s loyalty to the party, a loyalty Labor born and bred Turnbull does not have. It is Malcolm’s party and his ABC, not ours. His government too, for a little longer.

      140

    • #
      Rereke Whakkaro

      Yesterday, upon the stair,
      I met a man, who wasn’t there,
      He wasn’t there again today,
      I wish that man would go away.

      20

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    The code of the New Age

    1. A change in name, changes the thing.
    2. If you don’t talk about it, it didn’t happen.
    3. If it didn’t happen but you do talk about it, it happened.
    4. An often repeated lie, becomes true if enough believe it.
    5. A desired end is noble if it is said to be noble.
    6. If the end is noble enough, any means is justified.

    At the base it devolves to Reason, Reality, and Logic gets in the way of their plan. Hence they ignore it, refuse to name it, and willfully follow a path that denies the existence and efficacy of Reason, Reality, and Logic. They are at war with reality and such as we are expected to be annihilated.

    100

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      After many years of watching this CAGW train wreck in motion, I agree; but permit me to amend a couple of points.

      1.
      2.
      3. If you believe it happened, it happened.
      4. If other people believe it, it’s definitely true.
      5. It’s noble if its for the greater good.
      6. If it’s for the greater good but people resist, they must be forced.

      40

      • #
        Lionell Griffith

        Thanks,

        Same idea in different words.

        The sad thing is they think they can get away with it. The sadder thing is they have been getting away with it at our expense for decades. The worst thing is that we let them get away with it.

        On their own, they have nothing and can do nothing. They cannot even sustain their own lives without taking what others have produced. It is way past time to stop feeding them.

        40

        • #
          Greg Cavanagh

          I was just changing the phraseology, not the idea behind it.

          There does seem to be two different human ideologies, and they are as incompatible as oil and water.

          Those who are strongly community orientated, to the point of sharing everything. And Conservatives who like to let everyone reap the rewards of their own efforts, for their own good or hurt.

          10

  • #

    I was not happy with Dr. Bates’s backtracking on his criticism of Karl and the latter’s “pausebuster” paper, making it appear to be merely a matter of “ignored procedure”. The ABC used that backtracking to deny Beliaik’s complaint, quite easily and seemingly reasonably. If I had been in charge, I would have fired Karl, and after Bates’s backtracking, I would have fired him as well (if they had still been in their positions, which they weren’t, Karl quitting quickly, after his paper, to avoid any unpleasant consequences of his treason against science.

    The real sin in the Karl paper was its substitution of lesser quality data (not meant to be used as Karl did) for previously accepted good data, and NOAA’s all too hasty accepting its data adjustments as the new official standard for their data products. That’s all, and more than enough to fire everybody at NOAA who went along with it. Bates with his “ignored procedures” is irrelevant at best, and surely misdirecting.

    So the bottom line remains the incompetence of all the scientists in any position of authority and trust. For those of you who still don’t know my position, which I have written over and over again for the past 7 and 1/2 years, since my Venus/Earth temperature vs. pressure comparison: There is no valid global climate science, and no competent climate scientists.

    And to take down an incompetent climate science and the “global warming” Big Lie will require entirely other than the likes of someone known as “Beliaik” (“belly-ache”). Tell that guy, or group, to use his/their real name(s). Get serious.

    51

    • #
      Beliaik

      Harry Dale Huffman

      Most people will be hard-pressed to remember my name – or yours – in twenty minutes time.

      A name like “Beliaik” is far more memorable.

      Anyway, it matters not who I am. What matters is the subject at hand.

      Personality politics simply obscure the real issues.

      100

  • #
    toorightmate

    During the last few years, my world has shrunk appreciably.
    No ABC
    No SBS
    No CNN
    No NYT
    No WP
    No Fairfax media
    No Cadburys
    No Vegemite
    No Qantas
    No Jetstar
    Despite the sacrifices, I continue to exist.
    Maybe a change to 18C might assist?

    70

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      I gave up television about 20 years ago. I’ve not missed it one bit.

      And newspapers have always been very poor. In my teens, my brother got into the local paper for something he did with the Surf Lifesavers. They got the story completely ass backwards. I think our entire family has ignored the papers ever since.

      40

      • #
        Gee Aye

        Yeah I remember that. And before that newspapers were brilliant.

        31

        • #
          Greg Cavanagh

          Do you purposely read what wasn’t written or are you just baiting?

          It was a clear demonstration of how lazy and careless the reporters were.

          00

  • #
    Dave in the States

    How did your their ABC cover climategate? Here in the states unless you heard it on talk radio you did not, and still don’t, even know about it. Karlization is fairly what the climategate conspirators were calling for, and is really an extension of that scandal. It has been ongoing. Come to think of it except on talk radio, Bate’s whistle blowing didn’t happen either. Even there, it was like a brief wind storm forgotten after a day.

    41

  • #
    Bob Cormack

    Two points:

    1)

    Overall, the ABC’s coverage reflects the weight of scientific opinion in this area, which favours the view that global warming is happening and that human activity contributes to this warming.

    John Bates would, almost certainly, agree with this opinion. (My wife used to work for him and is responsible for some of the data sharing and archiving software now used almost universally among government climate scientists.)

    Bates’ claim was that the “pause-buster” paper didn’t use proper data (perhaps not even real data — who can say, since it wasn’t archived), and was shoddy in a number of other aspects.
    ABC’s actions make it clear that they have no problem with promoting junk science, as long as it matches their agenda.

    2)

    CO2 – Sceptical view

    The planet was nearing a low-CO2 extinction event…

    The only way to argue against this is to claim that the CO2 proxies used by the AGW promoters are wrong and that CO2 concentrations were significantly higher in the past. (Not something I expect them to try.)
    Repeatable experiments in greenhouses show that plant life collapses at CO2 concentrations less than ~ 180 ppm (about the concentration 20,000 years ago, according to ice cores):

    (Plant Growth Lower Limits on CO2)

    And, as any greenhouse operator knows, most plants don’t reach their peak growth efficiency until concentrations are above 500 ppm — this is why nearly all greenhouses use CO2 generators to raise the level:

    (Johnson Gas Commercial CO2 Generators)

    If the CO2 proxies used by the AGW advocates are correct, then we barely dodged what would have been a major extinction event in the recent past (20,000 years ago, when CO2 levels supposedly reached 180 ppm:

    (CO2 concentrations from the Vostok Ice Core)

    110

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    ACMA, media watchdog, says lies by omission at the ABC are OK

    I’ve most likely said this before in the face of these tactics but here goes one more time…

    If it’s Ok to lie by omission then why is the oath taken by each witness in a court case exactly the following?

    Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, THE WHOLE TRUTH and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

    Hand on the Bible too for whatever that’s worth these days.

    They can be confronted with no better answer than that. And unless someone tells me otherwise I would expect that to hold even in Australian, British or any other courts where respect for honesty is demanded. That includes the courts of public opinion and scientific integrity too, not to mention personal integrity.

    They have nowhere to hide except in weak-kneed excuses, diversions, appeal to someone they hope will excuse them, whatever it may be that is worthless except to the dishonest.

    How hard is it to recognize that to lie by omission is just a plain old lie with the same status as any other lie?

    Apparently for some it’s impossible. How do they sleep with themselves at night?

    61

  • #
    TdeF

    Another Great Delingpole article, this time on hoaxing the social scientists with an entirely fake paper. They used an automatic paper writer which produced phrases like “pre-post-patriarchal society”. Very funny.

    However Delingpole’s final comment applies as well to the Global Warming hoax.

    “But they do not hold out much hope for it having any more effect on the b*llshit in the social sciences industry than Sokal’s hoax did – because leftist stupidity in academe is so heavily entrenched.”

    and journalists are now almost exclusively leftists. (snipped).

    40

  • #
    TdeF

    Now I have no idea why my comment is in moderation. It might be the name Delingpole. Enjoy Breitbart

    40

  • #
    David Maddison

    What makes JoNovans different? Why is it that we can easily see the fallacy of CAGW and most of the sheeple, even seemingly intelligent ones cannot? “In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”

    63

    • #
      Mark

      Great question. The pause, in particular, invites at least a second examination of AGW. Why is this not screamingly obvious to others?

      40

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      David M,
      I’ve occasionally pondered the same question, and think the common “thing” could be that we:
      a) were exposed to some trigger which jarred;
      b) investigated that and confirmed a view opposed to the “official” one;
      c) have time, and confidence, to explore and challenge our “betters”; and
      d) are beyond the threat of losing our employment.

      In my case:
      a) “An inconvenient Truth” omitted any mention of Ice Ages and the Milankovitch cycles;
      b) Encyclopaedia Britannica, and an old text book re-affirmed and old memory;
      c) I’m retired now, and my internet setup has vastly improved; and
      d) No boss to get upset by my “heretical” views.

      Cheers,
      Dave B

      30

  • #
    BoyfromTottenham

    Yes, we all agree that the ABC is biased and unaccountable, and that pollies on both sides won’t touch it, but surely the unasked question is ‘what can be done about it?’. Obviously complaining is ineffective, as Beliaik (thanks for your strenuous efforts!) has shown. With support from both sides of politics, no help there. Would a crowd-funded legal challenge work? I would happily pledge $500 to such an endeavour, every year if needed (and I am a patient man). Any takers?

    70

    • #
      Beliaik

      BfT

      It always comes back to the problem of trying to organise independent-minded conservatives. (See herding cats.)

      A proposal such as yours could be a task for a group I’d like to form called “SitDown!”. SitDown! would be a relaxivist group of retirees and other like-minded conservative folk who would be opposites to the alarmist activists at GetUp!

      I’d also like to form a group to combat nonsense greenie climate science articles in all media. We could call that group the “Calm Logical Environmentalists Against Normalising Socialism” (the Cleans). The Cleans would be a group of (mainly-retired) scientists who would match the alarmists press release for press release.

      These groups would need a rich and friendly benefactor. Anyone know a conservative version of G Soros?

      With The Cleans’ serious conservative writers and SitDown!’s calm-them-down-give-them-a-cup-of-tea relaxivists we might just crack the leftoid nut.

      I pitched these ideas to the Bernardi camp – but I haven’t heard back from them.

      But others have been in touch and I have calls to return – so we can live in hope.

      90

  • #
    TedM

    “the ABC has extensively covered the issues of coral bleaching and climate change on its platforms, following the weight of scientific evidence.”

    The ABC builds it’s own weight of “scientific evidence” by choosing the sources that they reference and interview.

    110

  • #
    David Maddison

    Dr Norman Swan presents medical programs on Their ABC and I used to respect him until he started promoting climate change nonsense. He and his colleagues produced this anti-science and anti-engineering submission to the Climate Change Authority on the inquiry into power system security.

    https://www.dea.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Special-Review-of-power-system-security-electricity-prices-and-emissions-reductions-submission-05-17.pdf

    QUOTE “Wind and solar power are cheaper than that from coal and gas when all the externalities of health costs and pollution are taken into account8, and if the cost of GHG damage is included, the true cost of coal-fired electricity would be close to double the nominated cost9 and the cost of wind, solar, and storage will continue to decline10.”

    The group represented is Doctors for the Environment Australia.

    https://www.dea.org.au/new-fact-sheet-climate-change-impacts-on-health-healthy-planet-healthy-people-dea/

    QUOTE “Doctors have today launched a climate change and health fact sheet describing the catastrophic consequences a continued rise in global temperature will have on the health of our families and communities, unless we act immediately.”

    61

  • #
    pat

    19 May: NoTricksZone: Germany’s Energiewende “An Economic, Social and Ecological Disaster”, Writes Top German Socialist!By P Gosselin
    http://notrickszone.com/2017/05/19/germanys-energiewende-an-economic-social-and-ecological-disaster-writes-top-german-socialist/#sthash.uO52Z1UA.tUHJe7SK.dpbs

    30

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    This is on topic if the topic more broadly is trustworthy sources of information on matters of political importance.

    House Science Committee members just sent a letter to President Trump insisting he stop relying on fake news
    http://www.popsci.com/house-science-committee-letter

    “The Trump Administration has been defined by chaos and alternate facts, but it has also consistently shown total disregard for science,” Beyer told Popular Science. “Trump himself famously called climate change a Chinese hoax, so it’s not surprising that he has been repeatedly taken in by false stories that may reinforce his worldview but bear no resemblance to the truth. We are urging him to appoint reliable staff informed by sound science, including a Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, so that he can at least give himself better access to accurate information which we hope will lead to better policies.”

    My guess is this has nothing to do with the president’s inputs and is prompted more by the president’s output. The immune system of the NAS has detected a toxic element and is trying to set up a barrier to block further intrusion.

    60

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Sorry, I should have included another goldmine quote from that article.
      Sound logic deployed in an amazing double standard:

      Science advisory boards tackle the question of, “how do you bridge uncertainty in a complex society where you can’t know everything?” says [Sheila Jasanoff a Professor of Science and Technology Studies at Harvard University]. “For that you need balance.” “What we’re seeing right now are things that are pathological and problematic,” she adds. “One is targeting specific individuals, which is always a bit suspect in the science world. And two, a replacement of one type of stakeholder with another, instead of recognizing that it’s the multiplicity of the stakeholders that produces the reliability of the knowledge.

      In almost the next breath, the article claims the global cooling ice age consensus of the 1970s never existed despite being recorded in numerous magazines and newspapers around the world.

      A balance formed from a multiplicity of stakeholders is said to be a good move for reliability of policy decisions, but as soon as anyone gives airtime to climate skeptics this is derided as creating false balance and false equivalence.
      Do these experts know what they sound like?

      60

  • #
    Cynic of Ayr

    Perhaps a long bow, but your request for, “A document that lists all the skeptic articles on the ABC etc…”
    Naturally, no such document exists! There is no likelihood of it ever existing. For one, the ABC would never imitate such a document.
    This is plain in their reply. They say,”No such document exists.”
    This is a true statement, in answer to your request for a document. There can be no argument at all. They are not lying, covering up, or being devious.
    The document does not exist. End of story.

    Perhaps your query should have asked the ABC to create such a document.

    10

    • #
      Beliaik

      Cynic of Ayr

      An FOI request must describe the form of the document. Here’s what I submitted (from the text of the main article – above)

      “Form of the document/s

      “I have no way of knowing the form of the document/s. It could be one or more schedules or data-base search runs or program lists or staff instructions or minutes of meetings or emails between staff – only you could reasonably know.

      “It could even be emails between members of the ABC Corporate Affairs unit and others in relation to my non-FOI request for such a list two weeks ago. That would be a good place to start – check and see if anyone did work up a list but just hasn’t been given the nod to send it to me yet.”

      The phrase “… data base search runs …” was intended to cover the angle you note.
      Plenty of documents in the context of databases only exist when they are specifically sought. That’s my understanding from prior experience.

      From this it appears reasonable to conclude they had found no sceptical articles. Period.

      And yet commenters here and at Catallaxy have alerted me to twelve so far.

      Perhaps I gave the ABC the impression I was lost and confused and they felt it appropriate to fob me off. One takes one’s chances…

      50

      • #
        Cynic of Ayr

        “The phrase “… data base search runs …” was intended to cover the angle you note.” Granted.
        Couple of things. I am on your side! I hope you did not deduce otherwise.
        All I was pointing out was that the bastards would not hesitate to use any mealy mouthed excuse.
        “Oh! You didn’t mean actual documents already in existence! Silly us! Still… No.”
        You just can’t afford to give them a millimetre of space.
        However, congratulations for work well done, perseverance well persevered with, and it seems retention of your sanity, despite having to deal with recalcitrant children.
        I could not have done it. My short temper would have resulted in outrageous references to their family connections, to their low brain cell count, and numerous other rants that would have brought the attention of Triggs the Inquisitor.
        Regards

        10

  • #
    pat

    CAGW seeps into most progs on ABC – whether Landline, Gardening Australia, Books & Arts, whatever.
    which reminds me, it’s time for the Venice Biennale, an ABC fave:

    19 May: ABC: Monumental hands emerge from Venice’s Grand Canal to highlight the effects of climate change
    A pair of giant hands rising from the water have been unveiled on Venice’s Grand Canal — a sculpture by contemporary artist Lorenzo Quinn intended to highlight the devastation of climate change.
    The artwork, titled Support, shows two huge hands emerging from the canal to “support” the historic Ca’ Sagredo Hotel in such a way that they appear to be preventing the 14th-century building from sinking into the water…

    Support was unveiled to coincide with the opening of the 2017 Venice Biennale, a major art show held in locations across the city…
    Quinn made the hands — which each weigh more than 2,200 kilograms — in his Barcelona studio before they were ***brought to Venice to be installed in the Grand Canal…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-19/giant-hands-emerge-from-venice-canal-highlight-climate-change/8542652

    no attribution, but Michael Cathcart/ABC Books & Arts recently had:

    16 May: ABC RN Books & Arts: Art for art’s sake at the 57th Venice Biennale
    Arts journalist Fiona Gruber joins us from Venice to review the 57th Venice Biennale…

    Fiona writes for everybody:

    LinkedIn: Fiona Gruber
    ABC, The Guardian, the Australian, Times Literary Supplement
    Melbourne, Australia
    https://au.linkedin.com/in/fiona-gruber-45821339

    however, don’t know if Fiona wrote the “monumental hands” piece, which kind of gives the impression the sculpture is part of the Biennale, which it isn’t:

    15 May: Mashable: Maria Gallucci: Enormous hands rise from a Venice canal to highlight climate change
    Venice, a UNESCO World Heritage property, was founded in the 5th century atop a mosquito-filled marsh…
    Quinn said he initially conceived Support for this year’s Venice Biennale, a famous contemporary visual arts exhibition, but the project wasn’t accepted. So Quinn and the gallery that represents him, Halcyon Gallery in London, decided to work directly with Venice city officials to install the sculpture…

    The hands will be on display through Nov. 26, the last day of the Venice Biennale.
    After that, Quinn said the sculpture will likely ***go on tour. The artist has received multiple requests to install the hands at other UNESCO World Heritage sites, such as Italy’s Pisa, and cities suffering the effects of climate change.
    http://mashable.com/2017/05/15/venice-hands-sculpture-sea-level-rise/#Ita.ukAWXiq7

    ***this sculpture’s CARBON FOOTPRINT looks like GROWING AND GROWING. also getting the impression UNESCO funding might be involved!

    Wikipedia: Lorenzo Quinn, the fifth son of actor Anthony Quinn
    By the age of 21 he gained the respect of the New York art community when he was commissioned to make an art work for the United Nations of which a stamp was later made…
    Shortly after, in 1994, Quinn was commissioned by the Vatican to create a sculpture of Saint Anthony…
    He has also been a patron for many charities and was a Young Artists Patron for Unesco…

    more to come…

    20

    • #
      David Maddison

      I thought the science was that Venice is sinking because:

      1) Subsidence due to pumping out groundwater.
      2) Ground compaction due to centuries of building.
      3) Plate tectonics which is causing the ground to both sink and tilt.

      51

    • #
      David Maddison

      I thought the science was that Venice is sinking because:

      1) Subsidence due to pumping out groundwater.
      2) Ground compaction due to centuries of building.
      3) Plate tectonics which is causing the ground to both sink and tilt.

      21

  • #
    tom0mason

    Nurse Ratched will be round soon with the prescribe dose of ABC, Fairfax, etc for you each to take.
    Those unwilling to comply will be subjected to further treatment.

    Now, where is Randle McMurphy? You have some ‘special’ treatment prescribed.

    40

  • #
    pat

    the Venice Biennale has CAGW form, but did Huang get two outings – 2013 and 2015?

    2013: ABC: Tuvalu teams up with Taiwanese artist for exhibition
    Kate Arnott for Newsline
    In danger of becoming the first nation in the world to be swallowed up by the sea, Tuvalu has teamed up with a Taiwanese eco-artist to raise awareness about climate change at the Venice Biennale.
    Taiwanese artist Vincent Huang’s work in Venice conveys the idea that the fate of developing countries is closely linked with that of developed ones…

    2015: SBS: Venice Biennale installation highlights Tuvalu’s battle with rising seas
    Mr Huang and Mr Berguis were selected by Tuvalu to come up with its installation, which went on display earlier this month.
    “Crossing The Tide” consists of three swimming pools whose water levels rise and recede, causing an uncomfortable walk for visitors crossing the only available path…

    back to Lorenzo Quinn.
    there are thousands of search results on the “Hands”/Venice story, including at Grist, Skeptical Science (where it gets Photo of the Week in Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming Digest #19, posted by John Hartz), Lonely Planet, even the Weather Network in Canada, which has a video telling viewers to watch out for the “Hands” visiting their Canadian City some time in the future.

    Lorenzo has CAGW form too:

    2015: ThisIsColossal: The Force of Nature: A Series of Sculptures That Depict Mother Nature Hurling Planet Earth in Circles
    by Johnny Strategy
    After witnessing the destruction brought on by hurricanes in Thailand, the Southern U.S. and around the world, Italian sculptor Lorenzo Quinn began creating a series of sculptures titled ‘Force of Nature’…
    The sculptures, which have been installed all around the world, remind us of this fact. And for Quinn they also harken back to something more ancient and primitive: “This would be reminiscent of the early statues made as peace offerings to the Gods in the hope of quenching their anger.”…

    LOTS OF MONEY IN IT TOO:

    6 Jan: UK Evening Standard: Ruth Bloomfield: Climate change-inspired sculpture could be erected in Trafalgar Square
    Lorenzo Quinn’s sculpture will weight between eight and 10 tons
    A sculpture inspired by climate change and “dedicated to Mother Nature” could be erected in Trafalgar Square.
    Plans have been submitted to install the 16ft work, which shows a figure trying to harness the Earth, on a plinth in the shadow of Nelson’s Column at the top of Whitehall, close to the statue of Charles I.
    Force Of Nature II, by Italian artist Lorenzo Quinn, is 40ft long and weighs between eight and 10 tons
    Halcyon Gallery in Bond Street, which represents Mr Quinn, has submitted the plans to Westminster council…
    PIC: Lorenzo Quinn’s Force of Nature II
    Smaller, limited edition versions of the piece are priced from £50,000 to around £300,000. One has previously been displayed in Berkeley Square.

    Having a sculpture in such a landmark spot would be a priceless shop window for Mr Quinn’s work…
    Udi Sheleg, the gallery’s chief executive, said the project would be a “win, win, win situation” for the council, the public, and the artist…

    “The local authority gets a piece of public art installed for free, and of course it raises awareness for the artist.”…
    He doubts a buyer will come forward given the sculpture’s size and potential cost, and denied the project was a direct attempt to sell Mr Quinn’s work…

    He said: “In the case of sculpture the commercial element is relatively small because sculptures are of a limited edition nature; this is art that can sell anyway. It is more of a branding exercise.”

    Mr Quinn, 50, the son of late Hollywood star Anthony Quinn, said the inspiration for Force of Nature II was disasters triggered by climate change, such as the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami and Hurricane Katrina in 2005…
    A decision on the plan is expected next month. A council spokesman said he could not comment on the application but that the council had a track record of promoting street art and sculpture.
    http://www.standard.co.uk/goingout/arts/climate-changeinspired-sculpture-could-be-erected-in-trafalgar-square-a3434051.html

    Lorenzo tweeted the above in January this year, yet another sculpture, basically the same, was installed in 2011 in Berkeley Square! go figure.

    RedesignReport: Photo of the Day: The Force of Nature II By Lorenzo Quinn
    By Nicole Parada
    In light of recent events, we can all agree that Mother Nature is not very happy with us…
    Artist Lorenzo Quinn felt that it was time for another peace offering. In February 2011, the contemporary sculptor installed his piece, The Force of Nature II, in Berkeley Square in London, England. This piece is among a few other slightly modified sculptures distributed in various locations around the world dedicated to Mother Nature.
    As described by Lorenzo Quinn:
    “We live with a false sense of security only to be awakened by Mother Nature’s fury, almost as if she needs to remind us of her presence and our responsibility towards her child (The Earth).”
    And as part of his signature, Lorenzo Quinn’s work is accompanied by ‘poems’.
    This was the poem that was displayed alongside The Force of Nature II:

    Grab the reins,

    keep your wits

    Life is fleeting,

    moments fly

    Blind the eye,

    feel the way

    Throw off heed

    and just believe

    — Lorenzo Quinn

    30

  • #
    Alfred (Melbourne)

    When I first came to Australia 7 years ago, I used to like to watch the movies in French, German and so on on SBS. After a while, I noticed that these movies seem to be largely financed by the EU. A closer look revealed that the narrative invariably involved one of the following:

    1- Jewish suffering under the Nazis – rarely any mention of suffering by other groups like the priests, trade unionists, social democrats, gypsies, Poles, Russians, Belorussians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Greeks, Yugoslavs etc.

    2- Gay and lesbian themes.

    3- Illegal immigrants suffering before victoriously arriving at their new “homeland” in some French slum.

    4- Never a single inkling of nationalism or pride in one’s own society. Never any hint of the modern wars of colonialism in the Middle East and Africa

    I think the screen-writers in Europe have twigged this for a long time. If they want their work to appear on screen, they must include one of the above ingredients – preferably more than one.

    It goes without say that I stopped watching this nonsense a long while back. I could write such a story myself about some African from Mali, who was ostracized by his/her tribe because of his/her sexual preferences and who crosses the Mediterranean on a raft before being saved by a wonderful Jewish NGO worker who smuggles this precious being into Paris.

    60

  • #
    David Maddison

    Steve Goddard on Twitter shows that as CO2 has naturally increased, so too have forest fires decreased in the US, the exact opposite of what warmists claim.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/stevesgoddard?lang=en

    70

  • #
    pat

    another glimpse behind the FakeNewsMSM curtain:

    May: GatewayPundit: #BrockGate: Playbook Shows Media Matters Has Access to Raw Data From Facebook, Twitter, and More
    Following yesterday’s exploration of the #BrockGate documents and our look at Media Matters’ “Trump War Room”, new findings indicate that Media Matters has access to the raw data of numerous social media platforms, plus the power to influence their understanding on what is and isn’t “fake news.” …
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/brockgate-playbook-shows-media-matters-access-raw-data-facebook-twitter/

    30

  • #
    pat

    ***how funny it is written from the DEAD SEA:

    20 May: AP: The Latest: Mogherini warns against US cuts in UN funding
    ***DEAD SEA, Jordan (AP) — The Latest developments at the World Economic Forum in Jordan (all times local)…
    6:20 p.m.
    The EU foreign policy chief says Europe does “not see eye to eye” with the Trump administration on major issues such as trade, climate change and funding of U.N. agencies, but can “easily” work with the U.S. on BLAH BLAH…

    Mogherini warned that threatened U.S. cuts in funding U.N. agencies “would create a major security issue worldwide, including in Europe.”…

    8 a.m.
    More than 1,100 politicians and business people have come together to find ways to transform stagnant economies of the troubled Middle East and North Africa.
    The World Economic Forum’s regional gathering is looking at how to encourage entrepreneurship and technological innovation to create private sector jobs in a region with 30 percent youth unemployment…
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_MIDEAST_WORLD_ECONOMIC_FORUM_THE_LATEST?SITE=MYPSP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-05-20-11-30-23

    30

  • #
    pat

    ***Climate change POLICIES will affect EVERONE’S pension prospects

    20 May: Financial Times: Mark Fawcett: ***Climate change will affect millennials’ pension prospects
    Nest’s Mark Fawcett says the long-term future of the global economy is green
    Millennials aren’t thinking much about retirement, but climate change is something many of them care deeply about.
    That’s smart, because by the time they retire, climate change and whatever humans do in the next 30 years to mitigate its effects will almost certainly have transformed the way we live; a transformation that could also have a big impact on their prospects for retirement…

    For institutional investors with long-term horizons, the debate is not whether there will be a transition to a lower-carbon economy, it is about how quickly it occurs. Pension fund trustees in the UK have spent some time pondering the legalities of climate-related de-risking strategies, and some still are. Now these strategies are becoming an investment imperative. Short-term policy shifts may well have short-term effects. But for millennials saving into pensions for the next 40 to 50 years, the global transition to a low-carbon economy, which appears highly likely, is a more significant trend…

    Among the world’s largest institutional investors, whose ranks Nest will join in the coming decade, that long-term picture is guiding our thinking. The smart money is being used to signal to businesses that a profound economic change in the way power is generated is happening.

    Over the next 15 years or so, £1.7tn is due to flow into defined contribution pensions in the UK. We believe a significant proportion of those assets will be channelled towards a greener global economy.
    (Mark Fawcett is chief investment officer of Nest, the UK state-backed workplace pension provider)
    https://www.ft.com/content/b9ee86d8-3962-11e7-821a-6027b8a20f23

    30

    • #

      So then, where’s the problem with retirement funds sinking vast fortunes into renewable power plants?

      Pretend you are a fund member now aged in his or her 30s. The fund sinks a huge amount of money into a new renewable power plant. Each year, that plant returns a little fraction to the fund.

      Then, after 20 to 25 years (tops) the plant coughs and dies. No more income from the plant. That money is lost forever, and here you are, still only in your 50s, now with a fund that has lost the Principle it originally paid out, and being the owner or part owner, now has to shell out for its removal, or replacement, another huge chunk of money.

      THAT’S the problem I have with retirement funds sinking large amounts into renewables.

      Tony.

      160

  • #
    pat

    21 May: NZ Herald: Freezing weather set to continue after heavy snow caused chaos across the country
    Winter last night arrived early for many New Zealand towns, plunging temperatures down as low as -6.5C in the Central North Island…
    A major highway north from Dunedin and a stretch of State Highway 1 in the Central Plateau are closed to vehicles this morning due to snow.

    Most of State Highway 87 between Sutton and Outram is shut, the NZ Transport Agency said…
    A snow plough and other contractors were brought in to clear the road and allow trapped trucks and cars to get through…
    Heavy snow on Saturday caused major disruptions across the country, delaying flights, closing roads and making driving treacherous.
    And the icy chill is not over yet…

    But the wild weather was a promising sight for skiers with snow falling on Mt Ruapehu for the first time this year as well as further south at Coronet Peak and on the Remarkables…
    Icy temperatures were expected to drop even lower than last night, tonight, with the likes of Queenstown plummeting to -3C.
    Frosts could even reach as far north as Northland tonight…ETC
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11859965

    not MSM, but love the headline:

    Early-Stage Antarctica Death Rattle Sparks NY Times Journalists Trip
    UK Progressive Magazine-17 hours ago

    30

  • #
    pat

    Fairfax finally covers the LG Energy Solutions Pty Ltd solar scam. when will ABC cover it?

    21 May: SMH: Heath Aston: Solar panel scam: Hunt for the identity thief who cost scores of Australians their dream
    To his staff he was Tony Smith. To banks and financial authorities he was Tony Agius.
    To investigators he appears to be little more than a puff of smoke left behind by someone who could be living in Asia, possibly Hong Kong or Beijing.

    And to a growing list of consumers across the country who believed they were buying solar panels for their homes, he is the man who stole their savings…READ ON
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/solar-panel-scam-hunt-for-the-identity-thief-who-cost-scores-of-australians-their-dream-20170519-gw8vy0.html

    40

  • #
    el gordo

    We can whinge about aunty being blind in one eye, but its no different to the BBC or ARD.

    ‘Interestingly in Germany, almost everyone believes Trump committed crimes, even though they don’t know what they are talking about. This is so because most Germans get their news filtered by the publicly funded media outlets, like ARD television.

    ‘A recent report on mass negative reporting of Trump found that Germany’s flagship ARD public television took the top spot worldwide in negativity, with 98% of its reports being negative, RT here writes. (PS: RT is just the messenger here).

    ‘Most Germans I meet say they simply cannot understand how Americans could have elected Trump. And as long as they continue relying on outlets like ARD for information, they surely never will.’

    - See more at: http://notrickszone.com/#sthash.gkhsihPe.dpuf

    10

  • #

    CO2 Can’t Cause the Warming Alarmists Claim it Does

    The issue isn’t if man can alter the climate, he can. The issue is if CO2 produced by man can cause the warming that alarmists claim that it does. I am skeptical simply because of the physics that support the greenhouse gas effect. The only defined mechanism by which CO2 can cause climate change is through the “thermalization” of long-wave infrared radiation between 13 and 18 microns. CO2 can also result in cooling due to radiation, but the climate alarmists never mention that fact, and this article will focus on the warming aspect.

    https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/05/10/co2-cant-cause-the-warming-alarmists-claim-it-does/

    30

  • #
    pat

    20 May: Guardian: AFP: Pope to talk immigration, climate change in Wenders doc
    Pope Francis will offer his thoughts to the camera in a new documentary by Oscar-nominated director Wim Wenders, its backers have announced at the Cannes film festival.

    “A Man Of His Word” will see the Argentine pontiff respond to questions submitted from people around the world, with US production company ***Focus Features billing the film as “the first in which a Pope addresses the audience directly, discussing topics such as ecology, immigration, consumerism and social justice”…
    http://guardian.ng/news/pope-to-talk-immigration-climate-change-in-wenders-doc/

    May 2015: Guardian: Cannes fights climate change: top directors back environmental initiative
    Major directors, including Wim Wenders and Bernardo Bertolucci, sign up for Film4Climate initiative to reduce impact of film production
    by Ben Child

    Film4Climate, which is staging events today and tomorrow at the Cannes film festival, is an initiative of the ***World Bank’s Connect4Climate program…
    Wenders added: “To combat climate change is one of the major tasks of our generation.”…
    https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/may/18/cannes-fight-climate-change-top-film-makers-back-environmental-initiative

    Focus Features is not exactly an independent production company:

    ***Wikipedia: Focus Features
    Focus Features is an American film production and distribution company, owned by Comcast through the Universal Filmed Entertainment Group division of its wholly owned subsidiary NBCUniversal…
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_Features

    20

  • #
    pat

    nothing politically partisan about the movie mob!
    ***and no surprise where they go looking for their information!

    20 May: Variety: Brett Lang: Trump Controversies Making Waves in Cannes
    Buyers and sellers, studios executives and stars confess they’re glued to their smartphones, waiting for email alerts and updates on the latest White House scandal.
    “I’m obsessed with it,” said Stuart Ford, CEO of sales and production company IM Global. “The first thing I do in the morning is check the news. The last thing I do at night is check the news.”
    Michael Moore also Skyped in for a talk with Harvey and Bob Weinstein on Friday to whet buyers appetites for “11/9,” an anti-Trump documentary.

    Even films that don’t have an explicit connection to Trump allude to his stormy presidency. ***Focus Features chairman Peter Kujawski introduced “Pope Francis: A Man of Word,” a documentary about the Catholic leader, by saying, “At a time when our political leaders seem to be doing little actual leading, we have to look to others for guidance.” Trump was not mentioned by name, but it was clear whom he was talking about…

    With a six-hour time difference between the French Riviera and Washington, D.C., the eye of the scandal, it can be hard to know what’s being missed. That’s led to frustration on the part of some news-watchers, and lots of late nights of scrawling through websites or watching ***CNN to try to learn the latest development…
    http://variety.com/2017/film/markets-festivals/donald-trump-cannes-film-festival-1202438283/

    20

  • #
    pat

    can’t see the Grattan report online as yet, but surely it is being SPUN like crazy in this ABC piece.
    some of it doesn’t even make sense as it tries to defend wind & solar & CAGW policies in general:

    21 May: ABC: Grattan Institute warns of looming summer energy crisis without reforms
    AM – By senior business correspondent Peter Ryan
    The report, to be released on Monday, warns the next flashpoint could be as early as next summer unless energy authorities find extra capacity to avoid a repeat of last September’s blackouts in South Australia and potential outages in Victoria…

    Grattan Institute energy program director Tony Wood told the ABC’s AM program that rushed responses by politicians exposed consumers and businesses to higher energy prices and put the Government’s emissions reduction targets in danger.
    “A decade of toxic political debates, mixed messages and policy backflips has prevented the emergence of credible climate change policy,” Mr Wood said.
    “But if governments take matters fully into their own hands, the results are likely to be painful.
    “Customers will pay more for their electricity, supply could become even less reliable, and Australia still may not achieve the emissions reductions required.”…

    Grattan describes South Australia as “the canary in the coalmine” given that wind has supplied more than half of its electricity consumers so far in 2017, while most other states get less than 10 per cent from wind and solar.
    South Australia is exposed to outages given that, at times, wind supplies 75 per cent of the state’s energy needs, the report said.

    While a national energy security plan is negotiated, the report suggested some currently mothballed generators should be recalled to ensure reserves are on hand in an emergency.
    Mr Wood said the “go it alone” plans created uncertainty and risk, destroying opportunities for the National Electricity Market (NEM) to drive new investment in Australia for low-cost, low-emissions electricity.

    In “Powering Though: how to restore confidence in the National Energy Market”, Grattan suggests power generators should be rewarded for being flexible and responding quickly to shortages.
    At the same time, the report said consumers should receive financial incentives to relieve stress on the system by limiting the power they use at peak times.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-21/grattan-institute-warns-of-looming-summer-energy-crisis/8545522

    when will ABC do a Four Corners on the multitude of problems created by intermittent energy, the many pitfalls/dangers of wind turbines, the grand theft of solar panels in India, the hazards of fighting house fires when solar panels/inverters are involved, etc etc etc?

    60

  • #
    Michael

    Nice work.

    This reflects my own experiences of complaining to the ABC over the last decade regarding their climate alarmism. I never took it to the next step of the ACMA, but am amazed that their responses to you are almost a carbon copy of some of the responses I have had from the ABC juniors in Canberra who make up their “independent” complaints department. You could be forgiven for thinking that these ABC and ACMA types might have been sharing a soy latte and pear cake some time.

    Their dismissive, template responses always share some common ingredients.

    - That they are not obliged to cover all viewpoints in a single piece
    (OK what about if, on average over many pieces, you never cover a dissenting view?)

    - Strawmen like the bit about Bates saying there was no data tampering
    (He never said there was data tampering, only confirmation bias in data selection)

    - That they are reflecting the “scientific consensus’ and therefore the “weight of evidence”
    (There is no robust evidence for any such scientific consensus)

    - In the case of some of my complaints, some hysterical ranting about how many learned societies, scientific bodies etc would think my complaint ludicrous.

    - They never address the substantive, scientific criticisms of the green propaganda they are presenting.

    I think I can still dredge up examples of my cavalier responses from the ABC and would be happy to supply them as evidence of their abuse of due process. The Ombudsman is specifically charged with ensuring that the public sector adheres to its own stated processes. There are multiple and clear instances of evidence that the ABC and ACMA are not doing so.

    20

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    Latest shennigans….

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-21/grattan-institute-warns-of-looming-summer-energy-crisis/8545522

    Engineering australia into a govt-dependent basket case….one Fabian step at a time….

    Like I said, you cant have a mess this big and people not know about it….ergo…..

    “Years ago Australia and Argentina were the richest countries in the world, Argentina went down a path of bad strategic decisions and policies, and slid down a road into poverty and chaos,” Senator Xenophon told Insiders.

    “If we don’t deal with the gas crisis, Australia will see its living standards decline substantially and it will plunge us into very high levels of unemployment and scar our manufacturing sector on a long-term basis. We need to tackle this head on.”

    10

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    More evidence of govt stuff ups with renewable power….

    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/fastmoving-clouds-how-cs-energys-kogan-creek-solar-boost-project-failed-20170516-gw5p2u.html

    In a report to ARENA last September explaining why the project was cancelled, CS Energy pointed to steam pipes that rusted in the Queensland climate and “rapidly moving clouds”.

    “That’s rubbish,” says Ian Canham, who managed the site for Areva Solar from 2011 to 2013. “That just means [the clouds are] going to get out the way and the sun’s going to come out again. Solar works extremely well when the sun’s out.”

    A veteran project manager with 30 years’ experience, Mr Canham detailed a litany of planning, management and communication failures, compounded by the “aggressive” management style of Areva Solar’s US-based executives.

    Mr Canham said pipes had rusted when they were left uncollected at the Port of Brisbane during the 2011 floods because of a dispute between Areva and shipping company DHL. As a result only 20 per cent of them were useable.”

    00

  • #
    pat

    how accurate was this forecast?

    17 May: ABC: A severe weather event which will bring with it a month’s worth of rain in just a matter of days is set to lash Australia’s east coast
    A severe weather event which will bring with it a month’s worth of rain in just a matter of days is set to lash Australia’s east coast.
    The wet weather will stretch from Queensland to Tasmania, bringing unusual May falls to inland parts of New South Wales and Queensland…

    ABC doesn’t seem interested in updating it.

    following was one of the top headlines on Macquarie Network (Fairfax) radio as well & I doubt it was ever updated with the facts:

    21 May: Bolt Blog: NO, THE NATS HAVEN’T FALLEN TO THE WARMISTS
    The Sydney Morning Herald was so excited: “An emissions intensity scheme could become official policy of the NSW Nationals on Friday, a move that would represent a split from the federal leadership and a challenge to the Turnbull government’s climate change agenda.”
    In the end, the motion was supported by just seven people at the conference, leaving about 120 people against.
    Strangely, that fact has not been reported by any Fairfax paper, leaving readers with the false impression that the Nationals were about to cave on global warming…
    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/no-the-nats-havent-fallen-to-the-warmists/news-story/57d65a829d95b7fdd87e208f59d1e969

    10

  • #
    pat

    includes every CAGW Fake meme imaginable:

    22 May: Guardian: Ben Doherty: New coalmines will worsen poverty and escalate climate change, report finds
    Oxfam attacks Australia’s ‘climate policy paralysis’ and urges it to promise no new coalmines and end public subsidies
    The Oxfam report, More Coal Equals More Poverty, says the climate change impacts of coal-fired power will disproportionately affect the world’s poor and – with most of the energy-poor households in developing countries beyond the reach of electricity grids – new coal-fired power plants won’t bring them energy.
    “Renewables are the clear answer to bringing electricity to those who currently live without it,” the report says…

    The Oxfam report cites the example of the two most populous nations on earth – with emerging middle classes in the hundreds of millions – China and India, which have recently suspended or abandoned plans to build new coal-fired power plants in favour of renewable energy…

    “Against the backdrop of an imperilled Great Barrier Reef and extreme weather disasters, Australia’s carbon pollution is continuing to climb – the tragic consequence of more than a decade of climate policy paralysis and short-term political opportunism,” (Oxfam Australia’s chief executive, Helen Szoke) said.

    “Renewable energy is set to power the ***fair economies of the future and Australia can make a choice to be part of that…”…
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/22/new-coalmines-will-worsen-poverty-and-escalate-climate-change-report-finds

    more fun from Cannes!

    22 May: 9News: AFP: Schwarzenegger criticizes Trump’s ‘backward’ plans to revive coal
    “He’s back in the Stone Age,” the Hollywood star told AFP…
    “As far as the environment is concerned, he is misinformed,” he said.
    But “one man” cannot destroy the Earth, he argued, particularly a leader as ineffective as the billionaire businessman.
    “So far nothing has got done since he became president. Nothing,” he added.
    “When I hear he wants to bring coal back, that’s going backwards. The next thing he’ll want to bring horses and buggies (carts) back,” the actor and activist told reporters at the Cannes film festival…

    Schwarzenegger produces and narrates a new documentary by the son of undersea explorer Jacques Cousteau, “Wonders of the Sea 3D”, which he claimed would make “people fall in love with the ocean”…
    http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/05/22/04/04/schwarzenegger-criticizes-trumps-backward-plans-to-revive-coal

    00

    • #

      (my bolding here)

      The Oxfam report cites the example of the two most populous nations on earth – with emerging middle classes in the hundreds of millions – China and India, which have recently suspended or abandoned plans to build new coal-fired power plants in favour of renewable energy…

      Well that’s a flat out untruth right there.

      Last year China increased its coal fired power generation to 3905TWH, and for perspective that’s Australia’s coal fired power multiplied by 24. The increase alone was equal to Australia’s total power generation from coal fired sources, around 160TWH.

      It has increased dramatically each year for the last 8 years I have been watching, and shows no sign of letting up.

      Tony.

      40

  • #
    pat

    22 May: SMH: Adam Morton: China to partly fund new CSIRO climate research centre
    CSIRO’s re-embracing of climate change research will be underlined on Monday when the national science agency announces a new centre partly funded by Chinese interests.

    Based in Hobart, the $20 million centre will examine the role oceans will play in future climate change, including their influence on floods and drought. It will be half funded by China’s Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology…

    The Centre for Southern Hemisphere Oceans Research will also look at the capacity of seas to keep absorbing carbon dioxide – more than 90 per cent of heat has been taken up by oceans in recent decades – and the expected impact of melting Antarctic ice shelves…

    CSIRO has committed $8.25 million to the Chinese partnership, with the balance from the universities of NSW and Tasmania…

    It follows CSIRO’s announcement in November it had signed a technology licensing agreement with Chinese solar company Thermal Focus allowing it to use the agency’s patented solar concentrating technology in its local market.
    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/china-to-partly-fund-new-csiro-climate-research-centre-20170521-gw9sr2.html

    00

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      Cor Pat,
      Does this mean that they are now saying that CO2 and Heat are identical?

      ” The Centre for Southern Hemisphere Oceans Research will also look at the capacity of seas to keep absorbing carbon dioxide – more than 90 per cent of heat has been taken up by oceans in recent decades – and the expected impact of melting Antarctic ice shelves… ”

      Cheers,
      Dave B

      00

  • #
    pat

    Lewandowsky’s old mate, Adam Corner, has a new CAGW propaganda plan. George Marshall (who abandoned the climatedenial.org blog) is co-founder of the “thinktank”!

    22 May: Daily Mail: Reuters: Laurie Goering: Time to ditch the polar bears? Climate change looks for a new image
    LONDON, May 22 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – What does climate change look like? For many people, the first – or perhaps only – image that comes to mind is of smokestacks, or polar bears perched on ice floes.
    “If you go to Google and click on climate change images, you have to go a long way before you hit many images of people,” says Adam Corner, research director at Climate Outreach, an Oxford-based thinktank that aims to boost public engagement on climate change.
    But climate change already is affecting billions of people around the world…

    “There´s nothing wrong with polar bears,” he said. “But they´re very distancing images. They identify climate change as something that happens far away where most people´s lives aren´t. They don´t do justice to the richness of the human experience of climate change.”
    In an effort to widen that narrow view, Corner´s organisation has launched a new portal for climate change images.
    Inspired by Facebook executive Sheryl Sandberg´s Lean In effort – which has worked to make sure online searches for images of women offer up more than just lingerie models – the Climate Visuals portal showcases a diverse range of climate change photographs drawn from stock photo agencies.

    Images so far, provided by early partners such as U.S.-based Aurora Photos, include U.S. homeowners installing attic insulation, women in Burkina Faso pumping scarce water, and European researchers studying the migration of grasses in the Alps. There are scientists monitoring glaciers too – but no polar bears…

    Before launching the portal, Corner and colleagues conducted surveys in the United States, Britain and Germany to find out what people liked – and didn´t – about photographs of climate change…
    However, people don´t like being made to feel guilty about their personal choices – such as flying rather than taking the train, or eating steak rather than vegetables – so showing a family going on holiday on a plane as an example of what needs to change “can backfire”, Corner said…

    He is also working with World Press Photo to try to establish a new award category for climate change photographs in next year´s competition…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-4528470/Time-ditch-polar-bears-Climate-change-looks-new-image.html

    “thinktank” team can’t come cheap!

    Climate Outreach: Our Team
    Dr. Adam Corner: Research Director ETC
    George Marshall: Co-founder and director of projects ETC
    MANY, MANY MORE
    PLUS TRUSTEES…READ BIOS
    LINK TO PARTNERS & FUNDERS FROM “ABOUT US” TAB AT TOP OF PAGE
    http://climateoutreach.org/our-staff-and-trustees/

    00

  • #
    Peter C

    Your have done a great piece of work belliaik. It required a lot of effort and persistence.

    Now you have been published in both JoNova and Catallaxy which means quite a lot of people have read about what you have done. I hope that Andrew Bolt or Tim Blair might also give you a mention.

    What is to be done? I am not sure. Your efforts have been brushed aside so far but have not gone in noticed. I think there is a thing called a tipping point. It seems to need about 10% of people to get involved for a new idea to get going. We are not there yet.

    I don’t think that the Sheeple should be dismissed. It it not that they are incapable . They have other things to worry about which seem more important at present. Remember that the men and women in the street voted for Brexit and then for Trump.

    You had an idea for some co-operation in letter writing and the like. I might help with that.

    Also encourage the politicians who are trying to stand up for what is right and true.

    10

    • #
      Beliaik

      Peter C

      We have to go with our strengths. We have to do what we can. For me, that’s letters to newspapers. For Jo, it’s her brilliant blog.

      But whatever our individual strength is, we have to keep the effort up. Brexit and Trump could indeed be examples of the rarely-seen “tipping point”.

      Maybe a cresting wave is a better analogy.

      It’s always sad when you don’t paddle quite hard enough to catch that perfect wave. So let’s make sure we are paddling hard enough.

      And if we miss the wave we need to get better at what we do so we’re ready for the next one. They didn’t paddle hard enough in France recently…

      40

  • #
    pat

    Megan was a bit of a croc story expert at NT.com; now she tackles UHI (Urban Heat Islands) – she prefers “Urban Island Heat” for much of the article – but she’s not curious as to whether or not City thermometers might distort the average global temperature:

    22 May: news.com.au: Megan Palin: Urban island heat effect: Rising temperatures in Aussie cities could create death traps
    SOME parts of Australia are very hot – unnaturally hot, in fact. They’re turning into death traps, and it’s our own fault
    AUSTRALIAN cities are 5C hotter compared to surrounding areas because of a phenomenon known as the ‘Urban Island Heat’ effect that could eventually turn them into death traps.
    Densely populated urban areas including Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane are baring the brunt of the UHI across the country and not even a looming winter can stop it.
    The UHI occurs when natural permeable surfaces including grass, plants or bush land are replaced with concrete, asphalt and infrastructure.
    According to the Centre for Science Education (UCAR), urban development causes surfaces that were once permeable and moist to become impermeable and dry…

    According to UNSW researchers, extreme city heat could cause train lines to crumble and could cause heat stress, damaging our organs.
    “Since 1900, extreme heat events have killed more Australians than bushfires, cyclones, earthquakes, floods and severe storms combined,” the researchers said…
    http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/urban-island-heat-effect-rising-temperatures-in-aussie-cities-could-create-death-traps/news-story/0b035c4707ea8f81e32ee0df4fa546bf

    00

  • #
    pat

    ***amazing. this is all it will take to keep warming to 2C! lol.

    22 May: Australian: Graham Lloyd: Land management changes the low-cost way to cut emissions
    Australia could meet a 2C warming target under the Paris agreement at no cost to business using actions that saved money over the long term, a study by advisory firm RepuTex found.
    Better land management including forestry, environmental plantings and carbon farming could deliver 40 per cent of potential savings. The switch to renewable energy could account for another 30 per cent, RepuTex said…
    This would enable Australia to cut emissions by 45 per cent below 2005 levels compared with the federal government’s target of between 26 and 28 per cent. It would also ***deliver on the Paris-agreement headline target of keeping warming to 2C…

    RepuTex said such a cut could be reached by implementing all abatement measures below $20 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent ­ (CO2-e) in 2030.
    But the cost of abatement would be more than offset by financial benefits, the RepuTex modelling showed.
    The research has been released as the government faces pressure to increase funding for its Direct Action program…READ ON
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/land-management-changes-the-lowcost-way-to-cut-emissions/news-story/eaa311fadd2d5963774b94c3bcf9bb95

    00

  • #
    Interested

    There’s really not much we can do about the ABC and other ‘Marxist State Media’ in Australia. They’re too big now and peopled largely by individuals who’ve been through the Australian education system since it became the plaything of the Left.
    Socialists (I call them Fabians) have steadily infiltrated every large societal organisation in the Western world. It’s taken several decades but their work is largely done and in my view the momentum is effectively unstoppable.

    The climate thing and the coral bleaching are just a couple of tools being utilised in a much larger project which is being run by the UN and its subsidiary, the EU, with the help of what I call ‘The Billionaires Club’ (Soros, Branson, Bloomberg, etc.) For a sobering rundown on what’s been going on, plans laid down for your future and mine since the 1990s, check out ‘Agenda 21′ on the net. It describes the UN’s directives and goals for a world very different to the one we in the West have known for all of our lives.
    It constitutes a kind of Soviet Union but on a scale Stalin could only dream about – and this time, there’ll be no slipping under the barbed wire to escape to freedom because this USSR will extend in all directions without borders.

    Originally, Malcolm Turnbull wanted to be a big wheel in the ALP but ended up leading the LNP. No matter. Fabian infiltration means there’s now no difference. It doesn’t matter two hoots who you vote for; you’ll get what you’re given … and like it. You have no choice.
    To follow Australian politics as though they mean something is to demonstrate you don’t understand the game.
    Call me paranoid but, whenever I see a political argument in the Aussie media, all I see is a play – with actors mouthing their lines. It’s a sham.
    And I no longer lose sleep over who wins office because it’s totally irrelevant.
    What you get is creeping communism, no matter where you put your mark on the ballot paper.

    As far as I can tell, we’re heading into a solar grand minimum, which should bring about Global Cooling. Our only real hope is for the temperature drop to be significant because we’ve abandoned (or are in the process of abandoning) our access to reliable fossil-fuel power generation.
    Personally, I’m looking forward to the chaos.
    I don’t vote any more.
    I don’t care any more.
    Not because I don’t actually ‘care’ about Australia, as such, because I do and I always will. But it’s just that there’s nothing I can do.
    Many of my own younger relatives and their friends are shocked and horrified that I don’t believe Global Warming is a manmade catastrophe in the making, and there’s nothing I can say to convince them I’m not an anti-science ignorant redneck.
    What we need are rolling blackouts; endemic high unemployment; and people freezing their butts off in the dark with no TV, no internet, and no mobile phones because there’s no electricity available to re-charge them!

    There’s no guarantee this will shake Australians out of their torpor but it may be the only chance we’ve got. For the ‘useful idiots’ who mindlessly facilitate the Fabian agenda a severe dose of reality is in order, I think.

    20

    • #

      Interested — that’s what they want us to believe, but it doesn’t have to be that way. We still have free press. There is a lot we can do…

      30

  • #
    kevd

    Beliak,
    I congratulate you on your efforts so far. From a brief read I can tell however that should you wish to achieve more than “relaxivism” for your efforts your pencil will need some sharpening. Whilst the topic for these endeavors may be ‘science’ the means are in fact an ‘art form’, known as civil administrative jurisdiction. The complaints dep’t and ACMA clearly hold an advantage in their understanding of this and therefore over you… at this stage. Put simply your’re playing checkers and they’re playing chess…as per the act.

    What stands out to me having read the relevant codes and Acts is the use of terms like “weight of evidence”…. What are the sources of this weight?.. that an “independent” “unit” within this statutory body(gov”t) uses? Here’s another gem ” the ABC’s coverage reflects the weight of scientific opinion…” I do hope that an “independent unit” within a “government body” uses non governmental sources as well….. to reflect a balanced “weight”..

    What I find most egregious though is the rather circular logic that ” it is consistent with the concept of ‘a balance that follows the weight of evidence’, which is identified in the ABC’s editorial standards as one of the hallmarks of impartiality.”…. and yes within the code this statement does hold true…..However, one of my favourite tactics in quelling bureaucratic pirates is what I like to call ‘a perversity in findings’. Where the absurd is seemingly justified, as it appears in this quote. The best way to highlight this is always by an equivocal but equally absurd example. hmmm..Galileo and the consensus against him comes to mind… on the basis of the above quote it seems the ABC would not have bothered to report his findings either..had they been around at the time.. and all would have been well in the world… What this statement does possibly point to however is a real “crack” in the codes themselves and the possibility that either, they may not comply with the ABC Act 1983 S8 OR that an error has occurred in the interpretation of the code OR both. This is what makes pirates suddenly behave, when you show them an error/mistake, it’s known within civil administrative jurisdiction as a failure of due process and/or an error at law.

    Remember though this is chess not checkers..accordingly..Your style of writing will need to change Beliak, no cheap jabs about sell-offs, negative averments about “not wanting to seem bias”, these are “tells” and the unnecessary playing of your hand.. it shows the legally trained individual running the complaints dep’t or ACMA or FOI that you’re both an amateur and no threat… because you cant speak the code.

    Anyway there’s my suggestions…
    if you would like some assistance in writing your next stage you’d be welcome to contact me

    btw found this little gem too…http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-10/sunderland-objective-reporting-has-never-been-more-necessary/6764320

    10

    • #
      Beliaik

      kevd

      Yes, please, I’m preparing the next ACMA complaint now and your help would be greatly appreciated.

      I’m aware of my shortcomings in bureaucratic chess – it’s a place where words can mean whatever they want them to mean. I’m fitted with the Asperger’s wiring diagram and bureaucratese is one of many things that baffle me.

      How might I get hold of you?

      00

      • #
        Kevd

        kevd67@gmail.com Send me some background docs and whatever you’re drafting

        00

      • #
        FarmerDoug2

        Tummy Pain. Suspect you haven’t done to bad. You, we, might be playing chess with the bureaucrats but our target is the masses. Trump and brexit show they are not a lost cause. As you have indicated relaxed persistence is the way, not antagonism. Good on you. Doug

        10

  • #
    Craig Thomas

    Why would the ABC repeat or even bother commenting on the demonstrably false claims by David Rose? Why would they give oxygen to a journalist who published a blatantly faked graph to accompany his fake criticisms of Karl’s work?

    Bates’ information has been analysed and been found to be almost entirely meritless. Bates has some extremely minor points to make about data handling, and nothing whatsoever to say about analysis.
    Karl’s data *has* been subjected to the usual NOAA protocols, and his methods are available for anybody to analyse and attempt a replication….which has been done, without anybody finding any errors.
    As for the “disappeared software” – that’s right up there with chemtrails and bigfoot….total fantasy, invention, not to say kooky lies.

    02

    • #
      Beliaik

      Craig Thomas

      Did you deliberately choose an image of a young pre-WWII N@3! brownshirt to reveal your political motives?

      01

      • #
        Craig Thomas

        Can’t address the facts….resorts to ad hominem.
        Your mum
        must be proud

        10

        • #
          Beliaik

          Craig Thomas

          You’ve amply demonstrated you are a slave to the establishment meme. You come on here spouting snippets from ridiculous media stories that are not based on a shred of reproducible science and display an image that is only missing the SS insignia.

          Then you have the unmitigated gall to claim you’re subject to ad hom attacks?

          As I said above, explain in clear terms, without referring to computer models, the convincing proof that the current gentle warming is caused solely by CO2 generated from fossil fuels.

          Account for CO2 from all sources and pay particular attention to explaining why temperature increases have slowed while atmospheric CO2 content is still increasing.

          Your explanation must account for the immutable laws of physics and will reference conservation of energy laws, the Stefan–Boltzmann law and the second law of thermodynamics.

          If you can’t explain it simply and soundly to others then you don’t understand it and you deserve ridicule for both your image and your ignorance.

          By the way, have you given up your CO2-producing phone, car and electricity yet? If not, you’re also a hypocrite.

          00