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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

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



Archives

Great moment in Academic rigor: The Conversion bans skeptics, and “surprise” finds their readers want climate action

The Conversation accidentally provides a great case study in confirmation bias

It’s how the fake consensus in science was created in the first place. Just sack the skeptics, poll the survivors, and pretend you’ve “discovered” something scientific!

Academic Rigor at The Conversation.

The Conversion gets excited in 2022

A staggering 10,000 people took part in our #SetTheAgenda poll, and voters’ number one issue was climate change.

“Climate change was overwhelmingly the number-one issue on our readers’ agenda. In fact, more than 60% of you picked it…”

We wonder what they will do with the other 40%?

People were asked to pick three topics from a set list, so the 60% is inflated too.

Flashback to 2019:

“The Conversation” bans all skeptical scientists from commenting

What kind of conversation only has one side? Paid propaganda.

by Jo Nova

The Conversation is a site established** by your taxpayer dollars, in countries where 50 – 60% of the entire population don’t agree with the IPCC’s dominant mantra. Yet no matter how qualified you are, no matter how good your argument, your evidence and your data, you, we, half the population, is now banned. The editor Misha Ketchell has officially  blocked unbelievers, and thus effectively admitted that they can’t reply to skeptics, and that skeptics are posing too many questions they can’t answer. They’ve been deleting skeptical comments for years, so it’s good that they finally have the honesty to admit it.

The irony of a site called “The Conversation” which won’t allow a conversation is perfect Owellian Newspeak. Let’s just call it The Conversion from now on (thanks Travis) — the mission is to help converts keep the faith. Yesterday they published hatemail from Tim Flannery calling scientists who disagreed, deniers who are “predatory threats” to his own children. Today they’re banning half the population.

The comments at the Conversation are everything you’d expect:

Wit and wisdom at the Conversation.

h/t Ben Beatty

*Typos may be deliberate.

10 out of 10 based on 80 ratings

143 comments to Great moment in Academic rigor: The Conversion bans skeptics, and “surprise” finds their readers want climate action

  • #
    johnbuk

    Wow, if Glynn Palmer is still around [one hopes he hasn’t disappeared up his own rectum] he must be very concerned that some 40% of the TC readers are nowhere near
    his “education and intensely informed” level. What a shock. Perhaps he needs to up his game to improve their knowledge?

    221

    • #
      Mark Allinson

      I think Glynn Palmer was trying to tell us that he has been “intensively informed.”

      101

    • #
      rowjay

      Now that he has 60% on board, and truly believes in a non-hydrocarbon world, then its time he started to “educate and intensely inform” the Chinese and Russians to abandon hydrocarbons – he will get much more bang for his buck there as our puny total emissions really do not rate the effort.

      111

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Educate and intensively informed? Used to be termed brainwashed.

      81

    • #
      Mantaray Yunupingu

      Kinda got me beat why anyone cares what the snobs have to say. Don’t know much about the show / website in question as it’s only for snobs by the look of it.

      Reading here that non-conformist opinions are banned by The Conversation is the same as learning Skateboard Monthly doesn’t publish anything panning Skateboards, or that Seniors Magazine is aimed at seniors, or that Teddy-Bear-Lovers.com expects contributors to be Twsst-Bear fans.

      What am I missing here?

      BTW: When it comes to fashionable fads, Orwell already told us long ago what’s what…”One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.” Who needs any further verification that George was, and still is, correct?

      10

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    If you wander around talking to yourself then The Conversation is the place for you.

    292

    • #

      not if you’re a skeptic though….

      210

    • #
      GlenM

      Agnotology comes to mind. Willful ignorance. For so-called crème de la crème of society, the denizens there display a poor understanding of the science they purportedly uphold. It is preposterous that such pretenders get public funding. Post truth pulp fiction posing as informed opinion.

      111

  • #
    James Murphy

    They really should rename the site to “The Monologue”.

    391

  • #
    James Murphy

    People like “Glynn Palmer” do not want to educate anyone, they only want to make it known that they consider themselves morally and intellectually better than those who do not agree with them.
    One of the big mistakes made on both sides of a particular argument is to think that people you disagree with are stupid. Sure, some percentage will not be the sharpest knives in the kitchen, but there is probably some other reason or combination of reasons why people hold differing viewpoints.

    271

    • #
      Dave in the States

      I’m not familiar with the Conversation but as to both sides of the argument making assumptions, I find it usually goes like this:
      You say your skeptical.
      They axiomatically assume you are ignorant, or more recently “mis-informed”, followed by, “Scientists say..”
      When you begin to articulate a scientificaly literate conversation, they can’t reciprocate.
      They then usually just try to shut down the “conversation,” or dismiss your argument (which they have no rational rebuttal to) as non authoritive.

      171

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    O.K. I’m Converted.

    From whatever to wherever doesn’t matter, the important thing is that I’m coverted and can no longer be deemed to be a rebel and the government can rest easy; at least for the moment.

    Unfortunately I’m not qualified to comment on the Conversation because I’ve not watched T.V. for five years now.

    There is however, a parallel universe and while driving there’s an opportunity to catch up on the radio side of the ABCCCCs misleadia activity.

    Even with the focus on CV19 and the coming election they still find airspace to remind us that “Global Warming and death by incineration due to CO2 levels in the atmosphere” is of ongoing concern; we must act now.

    No conversation there, it’s just blatant propergander with no let up; and we need more renewables.

    The truth, or bigger picture, is not important to our ABCCCC but needs airing anyhow.

    Our small planet sits in space and the investigative journalists push the idea that we are overheating our home by our heartless human activity in working to stay alive.

    All this rubbish is in direct contrast with the bigger picture reality.

    In truth, our biggest worrying is heat loss.

    Our tiny home is surrounded by an endless heat sink which beckons any energy to escape to the void and leave us shivering.

    The constant harping on climate change is actually the reverse of reality; we are in danger of freezing and joining deep space at just 1.4 C° above absolute zero.

    The only thing that saves us from annihilation is our daily ration of Solar energy and we must appreciate the truth that we need to have a conversation about this;
    we are not in danger of overheating , we constantly face the opposite thermodynamic reality that we face great danger from cooling and becoming insignificant blocks of ice on a lonely planet.

    KK

    471

    • #
      PeterS

      Who needs the ABC when our own PM is convinced we must act on climate change? Here’s an extract of his interview conducted with 2GB

      Well, the low emissions technology plan costs us $20 billion, investing in the technology, which is going to continue to change the world and which is going to get electricity prices down and keep powering our industries. And we’ve got to develop those new technologies, whether it’s in hydrogen, ultra low cost solar, energy storage, at much more cheaper rates and an important one, soil, carbon measurement. We want to get that down to $3 per hectare. One of the reasons why we need to get the encouragement to improve those pastures is to ensure that you can measure these things at an affordable cost. So this is just a very practical plan, a very practical plan which says you don’t have to punish Australians, you don’t have to make Australians feel guilty about what their jobs are. They can keep doing their jobs. They don’t have to face higher taxes or more regulation. We can get there with the way we’re already getting there because our emissions are already down by 20 per cent and our economy’s up by 45 per cent.

      So the answer to our woes is simple. Reduce the cost of alternative means of power generation and have no new taxes. One major problem. Just about everything is now increasing in cost and it’s very likely given the spending habits of our governments we will succumb to hyperinflation, especially in the US. All we need now is the ALP+Greens to form government in their own right and send us directly over the cliff faster than what the LNP is doing. How about we say no to both major parties? It might be our only hope to survive. If not then perhaps we do need to get it over and done with as fast as possible so we can rise up from the ashes renewed and awake instead of bumbling along like zombies in the dark for too long with despot leaders who don’t have clue what they doing to our way of life.

      https://www.pm.gov.au/media/interview-ben-fordham-2gb-21

      291

      • #
        Kalm Keith

        Bizarre comment from our PM.

        And he has access to the combined scientific and engineering wisdom of the Australian Public Service to guide him.

        But, you know, Green Hydrogen.

        312

      • #
        David Maddison

        It sounds like Tim Flannery is still advising the government. He couldn’t have written Morrison’s policy any better himself.

        And just because Morrison/Flannery claim “you don’t have to punish Australians”, that doesn’t make it true. Obviously Australians are being severely punished and will be much more so under future LibLab policies.

        291

        • #
          Hasbeen

          Actually I think Morrison is resisting extreme pressure from the majority of the western world, to go a lot further than he has. If we want to have any allies & friendly nations I think he has to at least pay lip service to being part of the ratbagery.

          I just wish I was more sure of this analysis, it would make it easier to vote for him.

          80

          • #
            Kalm Keith

            Agree.
            While I detest what he’s doing it’s occasionally possible to see some of the arm bending coming from the big guns.
            Trouble is that he is sending loads of cash into the renewables pit and it would be nice to know what return we are getting. Has his compliance saved export industry and military alliance?

            70

          • #
            Richard+Jenkins

            Are turnbull’s advisers and beauracrats still running the PM office?
            Turnbull quickly replaced Abbot’s staff with green zealots.

            80

          • #
            MP

            So his lying to them or to us or both.
            Still a liar and unfit to hold public office.

            40

      • #
        Bruce

        This “Hydrogen” plant caper is an enormous transfer of tax-payers “hard-earned” into the pockets of political shills and enemies of reality. Publicly raising technical questions about generation, storage and transport of the stuff may produce “interesting, (in a Chinese curse sort of way), consequences.

        Pretty simple.

        How much also finds its way “offshore” will be “interesting”. Attempting to find out may also be detrimental to your health.

        It is ALL about the “spillage”.

        230

    • #
      another ian

      KK

      I got bitten by technology yesterday.

      A son put a new radio in a work vehicle and I couldn’t work out how to turn the bloody ABC off.

      360

  • #
    Gunther

    They believe in the free flow of information, not the misinformation of science deniers.
    They ban flat Earthers for the same reason.

    [Baiting. Nill value 1st comment. – LVA]

    05

    • #

      True LVA, but an apropos display of a “Conversation” Fan defending his site with namecalling.

      Don’t hold back with the Academic Rigor Gunther.

      30

    • #
      b.nice

      Maybe you can tell us what we “deny” that you can provide actual scientific proof for.

      We can wait.

      20

    • #
      b.nice

      It would be interesting to ask two questions of the Conversation contributors.

      1. Does anyone intend to vote for anyone except the Greens, or maybe Labor ? (are there any parties to the left of the Green.. maybe those instead)
      You can be pretty sure there would not be a conservative voter in the whole lot.

      2. Is there anyone who’s income doesn’t depend on maintaining the AGW meme.

      30

  • #
    Erasmus

    The disturbing aspect of all this is just how many anti-democratic people people have media pulpits, and how intent they are on silencing dissent. – after decades of lauding dissenters and whistleblowers.

    211

  • #
    David Maddison

    This is the standard methodology of the Left.

    They refuse to discuss in a rational manner, any aspect of their ideology so just silence/censor/cancel their opponents.

    They know they couldn’t defend their position in a rational, polite, evidence-bases conversation between two people.

    And they have perverted the scientific process by falsely claiming science is about consensus.

    Science was never about consensus. The Left have endlessly promoted the fraudulent statement that “97% of scientists believe in anthropogenic global warming”. Even if 97% of scientists did believe that (which they don’t) the supposed consensus would NOT make the claim of anthropogenic global warming true.

    In 1931 a book was published denouncing Einstein’s Theory of Relativity called “100 Authors Against Einstein”. Einstein responded with words to the effect “Why 100? To defeat relativity one did not need the word of 100 scientists, just one fact”.

    A final point, the Left use “sceptic / skeptic” as a derogatory term. Scepticism is what genuine scientists practice, by definition.

    In essence, the Left are at war against science, reason and Western civilisation itself.

    391

    • #
      roman

      “They know they couldn’t defend their position in a rational, polite, evidence-bases conversation between two people.”

      Nope. They _believe_ they are absolutely correct and therefor it not being materially possible for them to be wrong and therefor any skeptics _can only be_ sickly retarded to the point of derangement and a threat to civil society. In censoring skeptics they believe they are the good vigilent ones bravely attending to others’ irrational behaviour.

      They’re not scared to talk. Rather ‘talking to skeptics’ carries as much meaning to them as it means to normal people to ‘talk’ to some dog’s gift steaming on the foothpath. Real life skeptics should understand this.

      Ironically, it may be the case that the climate change believers are the ones who cannot be reasoned with and who need to be censored – for the sake of a functioning society.

      Maybe that’s what conservatism is; a narrow path from which you do not stray. Where it may be better for society to stop the occassional genius if it means also stopping the development of a misfit class – that might end up wanting to do things like de-industrialise while also imagining all the good stuff will continue to be available…

      20

    • #
      Curious George

      When you are “woke”, you just know. There is absolutely nothing to discuss.

      20

  • #
    b.nice

    That is what is so good about this forum, you allow mostly open debate.

    And there have been some good ones , particularly when it comes to the CV-19 stuff.

    Trouble is that the two or three climate goonies that come here are basically useless when it comes to even simple physics/maths/climate, and remain evidence free, relying totally on regurgitation of AGW mantra.

    And no-one from the Conversion would dare put even their little finger near here, lest they actually be converted to reality.

    171

    • #
      Old Cocky

      Nick seems to be a quite competent mathematician.

      31

      • #
        b.nice

        Who is Nick? I don’t recall seeing that name here.

        80

        • #
          el+gordo

          He might mean Nick Stokes (I think he is Oz) who hangs around at wuwt.

          40

          • #
            Old Cocky

            He’s posted here mow and again as well.

            51

            • #
              b.nice

              I’ve only been posting a couple of months.

              I have read some of Nick’s posts on WUWT.. Yes, competent, but everything he posts is deliberately twisted to fit his deeply held ideology.

              Easy enough to see through if you look.

              I think he is secretly a skeptic, but has old friends in CSIRO he doesn’t want to offend.

              101

              • #

                I’ve only been posting a couple of months.

                using this name and IP address. You need to come out of the closet Andy.

                67

              • #

                btw “I’ve only been posting a couple of months”, is its own giveaway.

                48

              • #
                Serp

                He was posting his own covid epidemiology charts around two years ago; I’ve rummaged through history and my memory but the site name has not emerged.

                No matter what views one espouses stokes will find and pose a counter view; he’d be a very difficult colleague.

                20

  • #
    b.nice

    Far enough down to go a bit off topic ?

    but OUCH !

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/05/01/electric-bus-catches-fire-after-battery-explosion/

    Which Aussie states are buying these death traps?

    171

    • #
      Lawrie

      I was surprised by the inaction of those around who seemed to ignore it.

      80

    • #
      David Maddison

      The text on the video says there were no injuries.

      What a spectacular explosion! One of the best EV fires I’ve seen.

      There is now real viewing competition between spectacular EV fires and spectacular windmill fires and distintegrations.

      Let the games begin…

      251

    • #
      Ronin

      QLD are building some.

      50

    • #
      MP

      Hydrofluoric acid is formed on contact with water. This is one of, if not the most dangerous acid, lethal in small amounts.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5577247/#!po=0.781250

      Why is the green dream ruled by the law of unintended consequences?

      From the comment section of b.nice’s link

      161

      • #
        Deano

        I remember as an instrument making apprentice being shown pictures of hands with fingers missing due to the long term effects of hydrofluoric acid burns. I believe it was used to etch glass back in the day. Horrible stuff.

        00

    • #
      Lawrie

      That smoke appears to be carbon neutral too. Non toxic. Completely safe. So much nicer that petrol fumes.

      181

      • #
        David Maddison

        Yes, only special carbon-neutral smoke is released.

        And special hydroflouric acid (and HF gas) that is harmless, unlike other hydroflouric acid and HF gas gas that is arguably the most dangerous acid in existence.

        Incidentally, HF is a weak acid but it is still incredibly dangerous for other reasons.

        90

        • #
          MP

          Going from memory as I use the stuff, most people use the stuff without knowing. (rust converter)

          A small amount on the skin you may not know its on you, is absorbed through the skin and taken up in the bones where it chases the calcium. It dissolves your bones, this is when the unstoppable pain starts.
          We had a large amount of a calcium gel, if you got it on your hand you plunged it into a bucket of the gel, filled a rubber glove up with gel, put your hand in and tape the glove to your arm, truly scary stuff, been there done that.

          100

          • #
            David Maddison

            The concentration in rust removers and other cleaning solutions is 2% (When present) which is relatively harmless but must still be treated with respect. I should have specified above that the concentration used in labs and certain industrial processes of 50% in aqueous solution is what’s extremely dangerous.

            40

            • #
              MP

              I know, I was just highlighting it is in everyday products (accessible to kids).
              I use it in labs and for pickling pipelines/equipment, we dilute it down on site, which is how I got it on my hand. I did not realise at the time until I started getting a slight burning, tingling sensation in my hand, nothing visual, but having read the Dept of mines alerts/investigations on accidents I took it seriously, nothing else occurred, it may of been my imagination knowing of the signs or the above worked, not going to do a repeat to find out.
              Very respectful of that acid, you cannot be cautious enough.

              30

            • #
              Graeme No.3

              When I worked with hydrofluoric the company insisted that only 35% be used. The problem with 70% was that it had an aesthetic effect on skin and was absorbed and damaging the bone before calcium ointment was applied. Knew a bloke in got a splash in the Laboratory (despite precautions) and despite calcium ointment was on heroin for 3 weeks and off work for another 3.
              Dangerous stuff and putting into the air in suburban areas is more stupid than most Green “solutions”.

              30

        • #
          Geoff Sherrington

          David M,
          I regard HF as a a strong acid, stronger than HCl for example.
          We used to go through about a Winchester a week in my lab, of concentrated HF dissolving silica and silicates in rock analysis. About 5 litres volume, enough to kill a few hundred people if sprayed over them.
          Geoff S

          20

    • #
      Ross

      Why do they put the batteries in the roof? Or would the fire be worse if they were in the base of the bus?

      30

    • #
  • #
    Kalm Keith

    That footage is extraordinary but not unexpected.

    Was that smoke poisonous? That’s one bus gone; only 148 left.

    I understand that President Macromicron is offering a lump sum of one million Roubles for volunteers to set an example and go on the next tram leaving the terminus under renewable battery power.

    The Conversion refuses to discuss this matter.

    141

  • #
    David Maddison

    Douglas Murray has just released a book called “The War on the West: How to Prevail in the Age of Unreason”.

    He is interviewed by Jordan Peterson. The interview is at https://youtu.be/fd5qf4pG-xg

    At the interview segment 18:10 to 18:23 Murray says:

    “And a third explanation which I think is perhaps more persuasive is that actually if you go for the Enlightenment philosophers you get to one of the absolutely key things to assault if you’re going to assault the West, which are the ideas of rationalism and reason and the application of the scientific method and much more…”

    That explains it all, really.

    131

  • #
    another ian

    I guess there is no realisation that

    Australian Population – 10,000

    might not have been?

    20

  • #
    Nb

    ABC poll: Best political systems.

    1) Communism

    ———————————–
    Thank you for your vote.

    00

  • #
    David Maddison

    The Conversation is not on ABC but it might as well be because that’s the source of much climate catastrophist propaganda which the drones who watch The Conversation would no doubt also watch. (As Jo pointed out in links The Conversation was founded with a grant of six million dollars of your hard-earned taxes.)

    Morrison has done absolutely NOTHING to force Their ABC to adhere to their legal obligation of impartiality.

    Even his appointment of Ita Buttrose as Chair was an enormous disappointment, one of her first pronoucements being that she could see no evidence of bias at Her ABC.

    181

    • #
      MP

      They are all linked, the government (us) funds the ABC, SBS, Sceptical Science and the con-versation.

      101

    • #
      Dave

      Funded by the following in Australia!

      An old source but I would say more Uni’s now support it!
      Here is a later Partner List

      All by the taxpayer in reality.

      And why does CSIRO fund them?

      CSIRO, Melbourne, Monash, RMIT, UTS, UWA, ANU, ACU, Canberra, CDU, CQU, Curtin, Deakin, ECU, Flinders, Griffith, JCU, La Trobe, Massey, Murdoch, Newcastle, Notre Dame, QUT, Swinburne, Sydney, UniSA, USC, USQ, UNE, UNSW, UQ, UTAS, UWS, VU and Wollongong. The strategic partners are Commonwealth Bank, Corrs Chambers Westgarth, and the Victorian State Government.

      61

    • #
      b.nice

      Morrison is a weak, spineless, sycophantic, Turnbull clone, constantly sucking up to the greenie agenda.

      I will be glad when he is gone, even if replaced with Albanese.

      At least with you Albanese you won’t get the pretense.. you know the guy is a complete idiot from the start..

      And we won’t have to wait a fraction of the time before things collapse completely

      151

      • #
        David Maddison

        Morrison is a weak, spineless, sycophantic, Turnbull clone, constantly sucking up to the greenie agenda.

        Absolutely!

        He is a despicable individual who believes in notbìng, fights for nothing and understands nothing.

        And the Turnbull/Photios pick.

        90

      • #
        el+gordo

        The punters see Albo coming home in front.

        40

    • #
      el+gordo

      ‘ … enormous disappointment …’

      Totally agree, captain’s pick has been a disaster.

      50

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      I don’t know whether The Monologue is on their ABC television but it frequently pops up on their ABC web site.

      30

  • #
    David Maddison

    I think that the really scary thing is that Leftists, at least the “useful idiots”, not their controllers, actually believe their own lies.

    41

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Dunno David. Do sheep have sufficient cognitive ability to believe anything?

      They undoubtedly have instincts but beliefs is probably anthropomorphising. Then again I know from experience that dogs have feelings that can be hurt by being laughed at so anything is possible. Perhaps the average earthworm has complete cosmic consciousness.

      41

  • #
    el+gordo

    With 40% of the pollution sceptical its a shame we have no candidates running.

    71

  • #
    Neville

    I’d like their dopey Conversion to answer a few simple questions…….
    Even the Wiki graph ( using UN data) proves that the USA + EU co2 emissions are lower today than 1970 or 1990, yet China, India and other developing countries co2 emissions have soared since Dr Hansen’s speech in 1988. Please explain?
    How come tide gauge SLs today are about the same as the last 100 years, or about 1 to 2 mm a year or about 4 to 8 inches by 2122?
    Why are the global wildfires burnt area much lower today than previous centuries?
    Why have deaths from extreme weather events dropped by 95% over the last 120 years? Population then ( in 1900) under 2 billion, but today 7.9 billion?
    Think about it?
    Why is global life expectancy today about 73 and why is everyone much wealthier today as well?
    How come poor Africa can increase their population by 1 billion in just 50 years and their life expectancy has also increased from 46 years to 63 years?
    Again think about it?
    How come Antarctica hasn’t warmed in the last 70 years and why has the Antarctic peninsula shown a cooling trend since 1998? See Nature study and the BAS study of Turner et al.
    Dr Christy and Dr Spencer can’t find their so called HOT SPOT at the 10 to 12 klm height above the equator. So how do you explain this H S absence?
    Why was the Holocene Optimum so much warmer than today for thousands of years and Boreal forests grew right up to the Arctic coastline, yet there’s just Tundra today?
    Why were SLs so much higher as well and even their ABC admits that SLs on our east coast were 1.5 metres higher just 4,000 years ago? See ABC Catalyst, Ken Stewart’s historic studies,data, graphs etc.

    Polar bear population in the 1950s just 5,000 but today 25,000 to 30,000. Again think about it?

    Why has the world been Greening for the last 30 + years?

    Why are 87% of Coral islands either increasing in size or are stable? See Kench studies, Duvat studies etc.

    Why are Tornado trends lower today and why has that lower trend been observed since the 1950s?

    Why are cyclone trends lower today in the Australian region than they were in 1970? See BOM data.

    Why were the extremists’ projections so wrong since the first Earth day in 1970? Think about all of the above data and then please wake up.

    Willis Eschenbach has covered so much of the above data and here’s his link AGAIN.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/wheres-the-emergency/

    181

  • #
    Neville

    Here’s another four buses quickly catching fire in China and I don’t think the fifth bus would be safe for future use either.
    BTW if any EV catches fire there’s little time for passengers to get out. And usually they take hours to extinguish.
    But don’t expect the Labor, Greens loonies to think or understand or care about any of this evidence.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T71cVhxG_v4

    91

  • #
    Ronin

    ” Yesterday they published hatemail from Tim Flannery calling scientists who disagreed, deniers who are “predatory threats” to his own children.”

    This clown is seriously deluded, get some professional help old son.

    121

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Flannery? What’s a one trick pony going to do for a living? It’s all he’s got.

      71

    • #
      Grogery

      Tim Flannery, to prove his point, should have strapped himself into a concrete chair at the bottom of one of those dams that was never going to fill again.

      111

    • #
      David Maddison

      I hope Flannery is enjoying his waterfront home.

      Why is that all these climate catastrophists love to live by the water despite claims of sea level rise?

      Obama, Gore, Turnbull, Gates, Zuckerberg, Flannery, Gillard, (there are many more) etc. all promote the supposed sea level rise but all live by the sea (at least have some of their houses there). I guess they can all afford the expensive seaside property. Climate catastrophism is profitable for some.

      10

  • #
    another ian

    Maybe another topic for “The Monologue” to discuss

    “EPIC DEAD CAT BOUNCE FOR STUPID EURO PAYMENT PLAN”

    https://richardsonpost.com/jorge-vilches/26838/epic-dead-cat-bounce-for-stupid-euro-payment-plan/

    50

  • #
    Strop

    The “Conversion” has an article today trying to explain why some coastlines are expanding despite sea level rise.
    I guess it’s an attempt to counter “denialists” who use land increases as a point against the sea level rise fears requiring a reduction in CO2 emissions.

    You’d think the article would be full of examples of land loss as well as the “denialists” examples of land gain. Particularly given the article refers to positive sediment budgets and negative sediment budgets and hints at one beaches gain being at the expense of another beaches loss. But, of all the beaches they investigated they only found gains. The article does not contain an example of a beach losing land. The article of course refers to future predictions and pushes the case for needing action on climate change.

    But curiously, research shows some coastlines and even low-lying coral reef islands are actually growing rather than eroding in the face of rising sea levels.

    This goes against the general understanding of how climate change impacts the coast and has led to confusion that has been, in part, deliberately sown into public discourse by climate change deniers. So what’s going on?

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) forecasts sea levels to reach up to 1.01 metres higher (relative to the 1995-2014 level) by 2100 if global emissions continue unabated.

    This increase in sea level may drive a loss of sediment to the beach that current positive sediment budgets can no longer offset. This could trigger erosion in beaches presently growing.

    So it’s important coastlines presently growing aren’t seen as evidence that sea level rise does not drive coastal erosion. Nor that such coasts are free from future erosion risk.

    https://theconversation.com/why-some-beaches-including-in-queensland-are-getting-bigger-despite-rising-sea-levels-180964

    10

  • #
    Turtle

    The Monologue.

    10

  • #
    John Connor II

    60 countries sign declaration that commits to bolstering “resilience to disinformation and misinformation”

    The United States (US) and 60 partner countries, including the United Kingdom (UK), Canada, Australia, and members of the European Union (EU), have signed a sweeping “Declaration for the Future of the Internet” which commits to bolstering “resilience to disinformation and misinformation” and somehow upholding free speech rights while also censoring “harmful” content.

    https://reclaimthenet.org/60-countries-sign-declaration-misinformation/

    Well at least the readers here know the truth about most things like AGW, Covid etc. They can censor knowledge now but it’s too late.
    Remember their act at election time.
    Don’t vote for the buzzards, it only encourages them.

    Meanwhile in France:

    French Election FRAUD Puts 2020 To Shame — Millions Of Uncounted Le Pen Ballots Found

    If you thought the U.S. election in 2020 was bad, it’s nothing compared to the sham election that just went down in France.

    Emmanuel Macron, a former Rothschild banker and World Economic Forum “Young Global Leader,” may have been crowned the “winner”, but millions of Le Pen voters lost their ballots and rights on Sunday.

    https://en-volve.com/2022/04/29/french-election-fraud-puts-2020-to-shame-millions-of-uncounted-le-pen-ballots-found-video/

    Like I said before – elections around the world won’t offer the change the masses expect. They can’t when the system is corrupt.
    Vive la..you know revol..thing..

    20

  • #
    Furiously+Curious

    I’m just 100 pages into a so far magnificent book, “Rising Tide’ – ‘The great Mississippi flood of 1927 and how it changed America’, by John M Barry. (Readily available on Abebooks) It beautifully rolls across current memes – climate change, natural disasters, mitigations, bureaucratic clusterf..ks, climate refugees’. It’s got it all, and written in late 90’s, before the present trench warfare situation, muddied the waters, so to speak. This was the flood that drove nearly a million, rural, southern blacks north into the cities, after maybe hundreds of thousands of square miles were flooded for months. (I haven’t got that far yet, so I’m short on that detail).
    I’ve just read that a handfull of literal engineering genius’, explained how the river could be tamed, and then we watch as the newly created bureaucracy, over decades, compromises itself into doing the exact opposite. Instead of helping the river scour out it’s bed, they forced the bed higher and higher above the low lands!
    “Science, he knew does not compromise. Instead science forces ideas to compete in a dynamic process. This competition refines or replaces old hypotheses, gradually approaching a more perfect representation of the truth, although one can reach truth no more than one can reach infinity. But the Mississippi River Commission never became a scientific enterprise, it was a bureaucracy. The natural process of a bureaucracy, by contrast, tends to compromise competing ideas. The bureaucracy then adopts the compromise as truth, and then incorporates it into it’s being.”

    20

  • #
    PeterS

    Another example of the war against energy in the West, being promoted by the usual propaganda sources.

    War On Energy

    10

  • #
    TedM

    This is also off topic, but as it’s something that Jo may wish to consider for another post I’m putting the comment up now.

    “British children up to 52 times more likely to die following a COVID shot: gov’t report”.

    The link: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/children-in-britain-up-to-52-times-more-likely-to-die-following-a-covid-shot-report-finds/

    10

  • #
    Neville

    More on the “BLOOD BATTERIES” that run all of the EV’s lunacy and fra-d and con tricks.
    Obviously the Labor + Greens comrades couldn’t care less and will happily lie to the voters about this vile industry and spend billions of $ to promote and encourage these scumbags and their ongoing TOXIC disasters.
    Rowan Dean on Outsiders also quoted from this Indian report and the young Indian woman has done an excellent job of highlighting this killer industry and the swines involved, like China, Tesla, VW etc.
    It only takes about 9 minutes to watch her video and I’m sure most of us will learn from it.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/04/30/chinas-blood-batteries/

    71

  • #
    Ross

    The Conversation was and always probably will be a “leftie” echo chamber. Joined it years ago when we first got the internet thingy. I thought it might be a great forum for “conversation” about a range of subjects where erudite comments were provided by academic contributors, etc. Boy, did I get a dose of disappointment quickly. There was a competition at one stage – to see how far a “conversation” went before someone called someone else a nazi in a post. Usually when that slur was made its was the end of the conversation. One of the founders of TC was an ex editor of the Melbourne Age. So, say no more. It’s just now MORE of a leftie echo chamber.

    20

  • #
    STJOHNOFGRAFTON

    Rebuttal to The Conversation: It’s not science if it can’t be questioned.

    30

  • #
    el+gordo

    On the question of climate change The Conversation is biased, in that they don’t publish anything outside of accepted dogma. The sin of omission means its propaganda.

    102

  • #
    Kim

    The choice is GND or survival. Pick it.

    30

  • #

    That survey is completely pointless.

    44

    • #
      MP

      Haven’t you got a parade and picnic to attend today.

      No way I want to be paying you public holiday rates, come back tomorrow.

      31

      • #

        The ACT does not have one. I donate my holiday pay to the construction of red roads.

        24

        • #
          MP

          Going to need more money, the locals are making them black again, got anymore holidays owing?

          41

          • #

            Didn’t the LRADs burn off their faces first?

            02

            • #
              MP

              Not installed as of yet, poles are in though. Its government funded, so you know, lots of leaning on shovels and lollipop people, things are slow.

              20

              • #
                Geoff Sherrington

                MP,
                A mob of Council roadworkers headed off to a distant job to fix potholes. Went to start work, found they had forgotten to load shovels. Called the Supervisor back at base “What do we do, we have no shovels?” Supervisor replied “I guess you’ll have to lean on each other.”
                Geoff S

                40

    • #
      el+gordo

      The survey is flawed.

      ‘The majority of respondents (59.6%) were women.’

      40

      • #
        MP

        Are you a biologist?

        50

        • #
          el+gordo

          We should be aware that women are more inclined to believe CO2 causes global warming.

          21

          • #
            MP

            Point of personnel privilege, point of personnel pwivlidge.

            Hi MP here, pronoun I/Me.
            Pwease downt wuse Gendered wangwidge here. The term birthing person, that or it, are expectable as they are inclusive.
            Also some of us here are sensitive to the term “aware” as this is frowned upon because we have government we can trust to be aware for us.

            You also appear to be analysing things, STOP IT, JUST STOP IT.

            10

          • #

            Of all the incredible shortcomings and biases in this you choose the easiest to correct for –

            10

            • #
              el+gordo

              Yes, they understand nothing on the science and instead put their faith in scientists. There is a gender bias.

              What other incredible shortcomings do you see?

              10

  • #
    Catherine

    TU Delft:
    ‘Technical University Delft, The Netherlands’

    KNAW:
    ‘As the forum, conscience, and voice of the arts and sciences in the Netherlands, the Academy promotes quality in science and scholarship and strives to ensure that Dutch scholars and scientists contribute to cultural, social and economic progress. As a research organisation, the Academy is responsible for a group of outstanding national research institutes. It promotes innovation and knowledge valorisation within these institutes and encourages them to cooperate with one another and with university research groups.’

    Frans Timmermans:
    ‘Frans Timmermans has been charged with making sure we’re all on board with saving the world. The European Commission’s climate chief and executive vice president is the first custodian of the EU’s multi-decade project to turn the Continent carbon neutral by 2050.’

    —–
    —–

    – Open New Year’s letter from Guus Berkhout (president of CLINTEL) to the Rector of TU Delft:

    The Netherlands, The Hague, January,1 2022

    Dear colleague van der Hagen,

    As a former student, former PhD candidate, former professor, former member of the Executive Board of TU Delft – and also an active member of the KNAW – I focus on you on the first day of the new year.

    Scientific organisations serve society by promoting, creating and passing on new scientific knowledge through research and education. Today, quality universities have become a unique source of prosperity in the region where they are located. The higher the scientific level reached, the greater the contribution to prosperity.

    Universities must therefore promote excellence at all times. This means that they should not settle for docility, but strive for leadership in their best scientific fields. It also means that universities should be communities without ideological and political goals. And above all, in universities, the principles of freedom of expression and freedom of research must not be negotiable under any circumstances!

    History shows that it is precisely ‘different’-thinkers who ensure scientific progress. These scientific ‘rebels’ must therefore be given every freedom to question the existing and to bring forward new insights, with the aim of getting closer to the truth. Universities should nurture these scientists. After all, consensus in science means the end of progress.

    How different it is in politics. Politics is not about truth, but about power. In the most favourable situation, that power is obtained democratically. Whoever manages to collect the most votes will come to power. With political rebels it ends badly, as we know. Finding the truth therefore has nothing to do with what the political majority wants. Every university must therefore stay away from politics.

    In short, truth-finding (argumentum ad verecundiam) and power collection (argumentum ad populum) do not fit together at all. Even worse, they bother each other. The conclusion is therefore that executive boards should not play parliament in their university boardroom.

    The above brings me to the honorary doctorate that you will award to Frans Timmermans. This politician has done pretty much everything in the past to abuse science. He did this by equating truth-finding with political majority formation. This has led to the glorification of a climate theory that does not correspond to what we observe in nature – i.e. is scientifically incorrect – and that has led to the introduction of a climate policy that has plunged Europe into an energy crisis. And this energy crisis means that Europe has entered a negative socio-economic spiral. What social merits are you actually talking about?

    It was already clear at that time that Timmermans intended to misuse science for his own political gain. The past ten years have only confirmed that. And consensus science has participated in that. As a ‘climate university’, TU Delft fully supported this. Now to award an honorary doctorate to this man?

    Finally, I repeat, Frans Timmermans’ climate policy has plunged Europe into an energy crisis with major socio-economic consequences. Look at the facts! I therefore urge you not to award this man an honorary doctorate.
    TU Delft will go down in history as the technical university that – under your leadership – scientifically supported the destructive climate policy of this politician and then even honoured it with an honorary doctorate.

    Colleague van der Hagen, start the new year well and show courage by retracing your steps. Do not award an honorary doctorate to this politician. It’s still possible!

    With collegial greetings,’
    ———-

    – A little bit of good news: maybe there will be the possibility of some conversation/ debate:

    April 2022:

    ‘TU Delft is preparing a lecture and debate cycle on climate change, the university has confirmed. The cycle is intended for alumni and students, but also serves as an ‘open debate’ with society.

    Rector van der Hagen writes:
    We focus primarily on informative lectures to provide interpretation and deepening of this complex and broadly living issue. The open debate can then be held with the entire public. The combination of informative lecture and debate is particularly formative for our students to be able to take note of different visions on the climate issue and its possible solutions.

    With the planned series on climate change, TU Delft would like to take a new step to map out all the scientific arguments in relation to climate change. It would be one of the first universities in the world to initiate such an urgent debate in this way.’

    31

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      The letter and comments by Mr. Berkhout is itself worthy of wide acclaim.

      There are good people out there.

      21

  • #
    David Maddison

    You can bet that the “disinformation” that will be censored by Biden’s controllers in the US and Morrison’s in Australia respective Ministries of Truth will be the actual truth such as discussed on this blog, not the Leftist lies of supposed anthropogenic global warming.

    20

  • #

    More ABC entertainment !
    (I am begining to enjoy watching these programms,..its almost comedy !)
    4 Corners last night,.. Twiggy and Cannon Brooks spruking their unshakable belief in Australian Solar powering Singapore via “ a big extension cord like you get in Bunnings !”….and the “ultimate energy source”,..Hydrogen !
    CB could not deny that there is money to be made in these ventures, and Twiggy artfully avoided the financial returns by emphasizing the investment he is making in technology development .
    Of course, no really probing questions from thw ABC.

    71

  • #
    David Maddison

    The political left’s attempts to silence ideas they cannot, or will not, debate are a confession of intellectual bankruptcy.

    Thomas Sowell

    91

  • #
    STJOHNOFGRAFTON

    Rebuttal to Conversation: If it can’t be questioned it’s not science!

    10

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    The whole topic here reminds me of these wise words:

    Trust science. Studies show that if your parents didn’t have children there’s a high probability you won’t either.

    Geoff S

    60

  • #

    I did this survey and as soon as I started clicking things they didn’t want me to click the survey got itself in a loop and wouldn’t work. I HATE liars.

    50

  • #
    yarpos

    I love the Glynn Palmer at the end. They really do think they are special dont they? its quite laughable given the state of modern Universities. The hubris, it burns.

    00

  • #
    Ian MacCulloch

    I am delighted to confirm that Jo Nova joins the select and dare I say it, the elite, amongst those who question AGW. None on the banned list question climate change just man’s capacity to alter the flow of nature.
    Yes, as a geologist I have also been banned from The Conversation.
    The dreadful thing about The Conversation is the lack of curiosity amongst their commenters. It is as though 1910 and to some extent 1835 (end of the LIA) represent the beginning of time.

    10

  • #
    CHRIS

    The Conversation = The Ministry of Truth (George must be rolling in his grave).

    00

  • #

    […] Great moment in Academic rigor: The Conversion bans skeptics, and “surprise” finds their… […]

    00