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



Australian Speakers Agency


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

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Quick tell the investors: Twitter is a kindergarten for communists, not there to make profits

Another Project Veritas operation exposes what’s going on behind the lines at Twitter and the most astonishing thing is not the political censorship but how Twitter is run like a Day Care centre for student activists. It’s not  a profit making business, so much as a university club with salaries for people who may only work 4 hours a week and brag about being “left left left” and as “commie as f**k”. If they need days off, they just don’t turn up to work. Sometimes they take months off. “Mental health is everything”.

No wonder Twitter employees hate Musk and are stress eating —  They have jobs where they get paid to take a month off, and no one cares how efficient they are, or what their sales figures or expenses were. Nice work if you can get it.

Which begs the pointed question of who is paying for all this?

If Twitter isn’t there to make money, who is pouring the dollars in, and is the political censorship the whole point? And if that’s the case, and it sure looks like it is, TWTR is a listed trading stock and the words fraud and fiduciary duty seem apropos. If Twitter really is a communist megaphone, not a business, Elon Musk is exposing it, even if he doesn’t buy it. He’s pulling the capitalist-legal strings and if it’s an investment facade, it will unravel.

Project Veritas has a video of Twitter Senior Engineer, Siru Murugesan, explaining the work culture unwittingly to a hidden camera.

Wonder how the Twitter shareholders feel about this:

Twitter Sr. Engineer, Siru Murugesan

“Everyone gets to do what they want, no one really cares about OPEX (operating expenses), like capitalists [do], …they care about our health, In Twitter, mental health is everything. … Like if you are not feeling it, you can take a few days off. People have taken months off, — they will come back. But you always like, do your best at any time.”

Twitter culture (and free-paychecks) turn employees into communists:

“Like I started working for Twitter and became left. I think it’s just like the environment, like you, you’re there and you become like this commie — they call it Commiefornia for some reason.

But Elon is already getting to Siru and he surprisingly even admits it:

Elon makes some good points sometimes. I am slowly starting to buy his side a little bit.

Amazing the power of free speech.


That Twitter Culture:

The sad thing is that if Murugesan and other Twitter employees were educated in the West, they were never taught much about free speech, and were easy pickings for the weak excuses offered up in Twitter-world.

Suri openly says that “Twitter does not believe in free speech”. But he thinks that free speech is just whether you want to “bully and harrass people”.

“For example, like if you bully a transgender, the right thinks it’s okay. The left does not.”

Essentially the right tolerate bullying, he says, but the left “need it to be censored” or they will leave the platform, (making them sooky snowflakes in need of protection.) In snowflake world, it’s not that free speech is a quest for truth that may save lives and stop injustice,  but that the worst thing in the world is to be bullied. All the gulags, slavery, death and disease is simply invisible.

The grand success of capitalism and free speech is to create people so protected from actual harm, hard work and pain that being bullied might be the worst thing that ever happened to them.

Keep reading  →

9.7 out of 10 based on 45 ratings

Tuesday Open Thread

9.3 out of 10 based on 4 ratings

Net-Zero surrenders Australia’s Economic, Military advantage to China says UAP

Bless Craig Kelly for saying the obvious that hardly anyone else will say*


The faster Australia gets to Net Zero the more we surrender to China.     | Photo by Christels

China is too poor to rush to Net Zero but it cheers us on. It calls itself a developing nation while it develops a nuclear fusion plant, launches hypersonic weapons, runs a shadow war in space “every day”, and landed a rover on the far side of the moon (which has been cruising around now for a full year).

It’s too poor to do Net Zero, but it’s rich enough to buy off our Pacific neighbors, while we close factories so we can keep the lights on. China buys a belt and road while we buy off the Weather Gods with sacrificial Green electrons and try to to stop storms 100 years from now.

China is digging up more coal than any nation on Earth, but it didn’t even turn up to Glasgow. One year ago China suddenly cut its wind and solar subsidies, and reduced it’s carbon trading scheme back by two thirds. Yet Australia is going double gangbusters to install more renewable watts per capita than anywhere on Earth.

On Saturday Australia has an election where both major parties have Net Zero policies. But anything that Australia supposedly achieves with Net Zero, China wipes out in a couple of weeks. And everything Australia loses, like manufacturing, China gains.

China plans to dig up 4300 million tons of coal this year and use it all. Australia extracts about 500 million tons and exports most of it. With coal at phenomenal prices and a global energy crisis, Australia is looking at earning $100 billion dollars just from coal exports this year, which would pay for all the hospitals, schools and public housing we could want. We could be ramping up production but no one is even talking about that.

We are the most sparsely spread population living on the remotest continent, but none of our major political parties are bothering to even check the UN committee diktats that tell us to cancel our own coal industry and turn our electricity grid into a weather changing Voodoo machine.

President Xi is very happy about that!

Craig Kelly slams net zero target as ‘surrendering’ to China


“We see the idea that we go to net zero by 2050, when the communist Chinese say they will do nothing at all until 2030 and then maybe by 2060 they’ll do something,” [Craig Kelly] said.

“A policy of net zero, which we reject, will otherwise surrender an economic, political and military advantage to the communist Chinese and I as a member of parliament I am not going to stand by and let that happen and be silent about it.”


Net-Zero Will See Australia Surrender ‘Economic, Military’ Advantage to China: UAP Leader

The Epoch Times

Kelly, however, said that coal exports brought $100 billion of revenue into the country each year, and the wealth from Australia’s resources provided room for debate on social services like the health system and National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Do slaves lives matter? Not to the Greens

An investigative report from The Epoch Times has revealed that around six out of 10 Australian solar farms were sourcing panels from Chinese manufacturers likely to be using Uyghur forced labour in their production chain.

The Fake Green “independents” sponsored by a renewable billionaire investor, defend China all the way:

Meanwhile, Monique Ryan, the teal independent for Kooyong in east Melbourne, said Australia had handled its relationship with the CCP badly.

“China is our biggest trade partner, and the relationship with our biggest trade partner should be treated with respect and sensitivity, not with macho, breast-beating belligerence,” she said during a Sky News Australia-organised debate.

Yet China currently controls around 90 percent of the world’s supply chains for the precious resource, a situation that governments are pushing to change by establishing their own independent production chains.

*And David Archibald of course, long time skeptic, polymath, and running in Curtin in Western Australia. UPDATE: Apparently not running. Though still warning of these dangers, of course.

9.8 out of 10 based on 76 ratings

Inconvenient: The four pillars of civilization all require fossil fuels, and more of them

Not the kind of article we’d expect to see in Time Magazine. A 100% endorsement of the inescapable need for fossil fuels?

The Modern World Can’t Exist Without These Four Ingredients. They All Require Fossil Fuels

By Vaclav Smil, Time Magazine 

Four materials rank highest on the scale of necessity, forming what I have called the four pillars of modern civilization: cement, steel, plastics, and ammonia are needed in larger quantities than are other essential inputs. The world now produces annually about 4.5 billion tons of cement, 1.8 billion tons of steel, nearly 400 million tons of plastics, and 180 million tons of ammonia. But it is ammonia that deserves the top position as our most important material: its synthesis is the basis of all nitrogen fertilizers, and without their applications it would be impossible to feed, at current levels, nearly half of today’s nearly 8 billion people.

Does any other odd factoid capture the rise of China so well?

China now produces more than half of the world’s cement and in recent years it makes in just two years as much of it as did the United States during the entire 20th century.

Thanks to communist central planning much of that concrete may be mal-invested and mal-constructed and in need of demolition but that just needs even more fossil fuels.

Despite cement, steel, plastics, and ammonia  being so different, they have three things in common, Smil says: they can’t be replaced by other things easily, we need more of them than ever, and they all absolutely have to have fossil fuels.

Ammonia synthesis uses natural gas both as the source of hydrogen and as the source of energy needed to provide high temperature and pressure. Some 85% of all plastics are based on simple molecules derived from natural gas and crude oil, and hydrocarbons also supply energy for syntheses. Production of primary steel starts with smelting iron ore in blast furnace in the presence of coke made from coal and with the addition of natural gas, and the resulting cast iron is made into steel in large basic oxygen furnaces. And cement is produced by heating ground limestone and clay, shale in large kilns, long inclined metal cylinders, heated with such low-quality fossil fuels as coal dust, petroleum coke and heavy fuel oil.

But if you think that’s demanding — look at the shopping list for Electric Vehicles:

 A typical lithium car battery weighing about 450 kilograms contains about 11 kilograms of lithium, nearly 14 kilograms of cobalt, 27 kilograms of nickel, more than 40 kilograms of copper, and 50 kilograms of graphite—as well as about 181 kilograms of steel, aluminum, and plastics. Supplying these materials for a single vehicle requires processing about 40 tons of ores, and given the low concentration of many elements in their ores it necessitates extracting and processing about 225 tons of raw materials.

The only politically correct line in the whole article was one slipped in there about reducing fertilizer by eating less meat. But really, it was nothing compared to the ideological advertising we’ve come to expect and it was in a section quietly headlined “Ideas — Climate Change” ?

Keep reading  →

9.5 out of 10 based on 89 ratings

Monday Open Thread

9.9 out of 10 based on 7 ratings

Would $350 million from Big Pharma be enough to buy Fauci and NIH approval — Who knows, it’s a secret

The Swamp is not even hiding the corruption, just the exact dollar figure

Big-Pharma logoAnthony Fauci is effectively King of the National Institute of Health. He gets paid $450,000 a year — the highest paid public servant in the United States. In just one year alone the NIH dished out $30 billion to more than 50,000 recipients. And there are royalty payments that flow back the other way, which amounted to $350 million dollars over the decade from 2010-2020. And here’s the weird thing, most of those royalty payments are secret.

Thirty billion dollars is an awfully big carrot, and even though $350 million seems small in comparison, it’s awfully big compared to the salaries of the few key decision-makers. It’s an obvious conflict of interest, and lives are at risk, but it’s not even being disclosed.

If Big Pharma were paying off people to get their drugs approved, it would look a lot like this. And if Big Pharma (or the asset managers that own big pharma) were also paying off the media to silence reporting of NIH corruption would the media ignore this story — exactly like it does?

In a normal world this type of corruption would be front page news. There is no reason royalty payments should be secret.

Tim Brown, The WashingtonStandard

Bombshell: NIH Hid Fauci & Other’s $350 Million In “Royalty” Payments From Big Pharma

The conflict of interest alone should have been enough to remove Dr. Anthony Fauci and others from positions inside the National Institutes for Health, the Food and Drug Administration and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Yet, here we are as a bombshell has been dropped unmasking that not only did Fauci and other bigwigs receive $350 million “royalty” payments from Big Pharma, but the NIH tried to hide those numbers.

OpenTheBooks filed some, wow, 47,000 FOIA requests last year. They have a federal lawsuit running against the NIH and are seeking those royalty payment details.

NIH Scientists Pocketed $350 Million in Royalties — Agency Won’t Say How Much Went to Fauci

Dr. Anthony Fauci received 23 royalty payments, but the NIH has yet to disclose the sum total of those payments.

Recently, our organization at forced NIH to disclose more than 22,100 royalty payments totaling nearly $134 million paid to the agency and nearly 1,700 NIH scientists. These payments occurred during the most recently available period (September 2009 – September 2014).

Keep reading  →

9.7 out of 10 based on 65 ratings

Here’s real Misinformation: The average Australian thinks we make an astonishing 10% of global emissions

What are they on? About twenty years of government funded propaganda and guilt.

Most Australian voters don’t have a clue — half of the nation thinks we make 10% of global emissions when the truth is more like 1%.

Climate change might be the greatest moral challenge of our lifetimes but most Australians are in the dark about what the real numbers are. They probably assumed that if we were only making one-tiny-percent, the government, the ABC, or even the education system might have told them. After all, we’re spending $13 billion dollars a year. What exactly are public universities for if not for letting Australians know this kind of data?

Where was the Government? The conservatives in charge keep throwing away their own best arguments.  Almost like they want to hang on to a few wealthy seats while they miss the chance to ignite middle Australia.

But the ignorance is no accident. All the players — the politicians, the academics, the ABC, ANU, CSIRO, Schools, Universities, et al and all sundry, all profit from Big Government. They serve the government first, and not the people, and that’s the problem.

Liberals playing politics with pretence Australia can change global climate

Chris Kenny, The Australian 

A survey this week by Compass Polling tested what percentage of global emissions people thought could be directly attributed to Australia. Astonishingly, the average answer was 10 per cent – 10 times higher than the reality. Half of all respondents put the figure at 10 per cent or higher. More than 10 per cent of respondents said Australia contributed 20 per cent or more of global emissions. And a slightly lower proportion got it right at around 1 per cent.

This level of ignorance is reprehensible when you consider the media, political and educational fixation with climate change over the past two decades.

Yet few people call it out; the major parties, most of the media, and academe, all constrain the debate within absurd boundaries of make believe – they all pretend our climate policies matter.

Wait til Chris Kenny finds out that we make 1% of human emissions which are only 4% of total emissions, so that’s 0.04% or 4 parts in ten thousand of all the CO2 emissions on Earth. And that’s assuming CO2 emissions matter in the first place, which they probably don’t given how the effect of CO2 is dwarfed by the effect of water, and the tiny warming (such as it is) is beneficial in any case.


But he’s spot on with the money. The only electorates where climate change matters are the ones that can afford Gucci:

It is no accident that the most prominent voices in the climate change policy debate are millionaires and billionaires, nor is it surprising that they find the most receptive audiences for their prognostications in the wealthiest postcodes.

These are not people who have lost their jobs because of the expensive transition to renewable energy – well, except for Turnbull and Rudd. Rather than fall victim to closed factories or skyrocketing power prices, these people have added to their wealth thanks to the taxpayer-subsidised renewable energy boom.

Spender’s campaign posters promise a “better climate for Wentworth”. I guess this must be what you give the voters who have everything.

How many votes would Scott Morrison win if he pointed out it was a rich man’s fantasy to change the worlds weather and the poor punters were the ones who would pay?

When the rich campaign to tax flights and fuel they are just clearing out some riff raff from the roads and airports, and lining their own pockets with government funded gravy.

Here’s a graphic that’s hard to find

Australia circled in red. New Zealand too (below Australia). Most graphs are done per capita, for obvious reasons, not per country. And of course the best graphic doesn’t exist. I want the one that shows all these countries next to “plants”, “oceans”, “animals” and “microbes”.

CO2 emissions country by country, graph.

If CO2 mattered at all, there are only a few players that count.

10 out of 10 based on 92 ratings

Weekend Unthreaded

10 out of 10 based on 10 ratings

The Misinformation Age with Bill Maher

Stick with this — step over the cheap shots at Trump and predictable hits on conservatives — Bill Maher is doing a cracker job on a soft left audience. He’s packaged up a dose of medicine about how important free speech is. His is a rare voice on the left pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of censorship.

“Keeping you safe and sorting out the lies is your job” (not Twitters)

We always focus on the producers and never the consumers, as if we’re all helpless dumb blondes ready to believe everything…

People lie, that’s what people do. Every age is the misinformation age, and whenever a new means of communication comes along some reach for the censor button. In 1858 the New York Times thought we couldn’t handle the Transatlantic Telegraph. “It was superficial and too fast for the Truth”…

He also tosses a cold bucket or two on the lefty willingness to believe the Covid stats, and effectively calls all the censors “assholes”.

 In America you have the right to say what you think, to be wrong, and to be an asshole. 

And if you think you know everything and no one else could possibly have another truth you should be glad of that protection — because you’re an asshole.

There are things to learn here.

9.7 out of 10 based on 61 ratings

Do 100 million lives Matter? De Santis announces a Victims of Communism Day

Ron DeSantis announces that November 7th will be a day to honor the Victims of Communism

A true leader:

“I notice, that people who escape communism for free societies never choose to go back…”

“There are probably more Marxists on college faculties in the United States than there are in all of Eastern Europe combined.”

“The body-count of Mao is something that everybody needs to understand.”

The key parts are from 2:30 – 5:00.


Students will learn what Marxism does:

Beginning in the 2023-2024 academic year, high school students enrolled in US government courses will get at least 45 minutes of instruction each November 7 describing how “victims suffered under these regimes through poverty, starvation, migration, systemic lethal violence, and suppression of speech.”  – New York Post:

The legislation means students will learn about Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot

Keep reading  →

9.5 out of 10 based on 62 ratings