Thursday, 30 June 2011

Truth Seeking Scientists? Church of Latter Day Academics?

The ABC has reported (link in title) that a letter circulated by a Natalie Latter trying to prevent Lord Christopher Monckton from speaking at the Notre Dame University.  My suggestion to Ms Latter is to return to her Alma Mater, the University of WA, where Lord Monckton is also to speak (see HERE) buy a ticket and then show where he is wrong. 
The Oxford English Dictionary says that scientific method is: "a method of procedure that has characterised natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."
Has Ms Latter heard Lord Monckton speak or is she just reacting to warped media reports? She is quoted as saying that Lord Monckton stands for the kind of ignorance that universities have a duty to counter.
Has she observed Lord Monckton?
If she hasn't heard Lord Monckton is she herself speaking from a position of ignorance?
Perhaps, as an aside, Ms Latter could explain, if the "science is settled" and there is consensus, why more money is being granted for "Climate research."
As to the aforementioned media reports, Lord Monckton slammed recent media coverage.
"Only last week one of your leading newspapers, leading columnists, wrote a column saying that people like us should be gassed," he said.
"No apology and none of you have gone round to her house and thrust microphones in her face and said don't you think you're being a bit unfair.
"So there is very plainly a nasty double standard here."
Tom Nelson reminds us that IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri likened Bjorn Lomborg to Hitler:
Pachauri told a Danish newspaper in 2004: “What is the difference between Lomborg’s view of humanity and Hitler’s? If you were to accept Lomborg’s way of thinking, then maybe what Hitler did was the right thing.”And remember all the publicity and letters like the one below (Latter's) that followed Pachauri's outrageous comment? Remember Pachauri's sincere apology?       Neither do I.
So, there was very plainly a nasty double standard there, as well!

Bunyip exposes the signatories to Latter's letter HERE
From Andrew Bolt:  
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/not_worthy_of_the_name_academic#85267Andrew Bolt Reports that there is a "scandalous attempt by “academics” not just to gag free speech, but to counter inconvenient opinions with a cowardly ban rather than an argument:

More than 50 Australian academics have signed a letter urging Western Australia’s Notre Dame University to cancel a speech by British climate change sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton… "

Must have forgotten the basis of seeking the truth? Or afraid, if the truth comes out, their research grants for further investigation into what they claim is a scientific consensus (so why more research??) will be in jeopardy.

Bob Brown and Media selling up Australia

In a rather falteringly delivered address to the Press Club, Bob Brown sold out Australia and the Press Club also sold out Australia by not reporting the big story.

The Climate Sceptics are presenting Lord Christopher Monckton at a series of talks around Australia. Before his last Australian tour, Christopher had revealed that part of the draft Copenhagen agreement was a push for a UN-led World Government. 2GB's Alan Jones and others pointed this out. This was scoffed at by both the Main Stream Media and the Warmist blogs.

For Example, when Janet Albrechtsen wrote about it, Deltoid's Tim Lambert wrote:
Problem is, Monckton's reading of the proposed framework for negotiation -- hardly a completed treaty -- was woefully inaccurate. And that's a nice way of putting it. The document clearly does nothing whatsoever to promote any sort of world government, and indeed, it refers to the efforts of national governments repeatedly.
Yesterday, in his Press Club address, Bob Brown called for a World Government. He said one person, one vote. He also said that the headquarters could be here in Australia. Well, Bob, with a World population of 6,775,235,700 and an Australian population of 21,875,000; that makes us only 0.32% of the world's population.


We could have world headquarters in Australia? Tell him he's dreaming, son. Incidently, the world government rant by Brown is not included in the Green's official transcript linked in title.



 In 2006 Bob Brown was a guest of talk-show host Dolly Putin: (From The Age)
Senator Brown will be the special guest of talk-show host Dolly Putin, an opinionated blonde described (by herself) as a heady cocktail of Pamela Anderson and Germaine Greer. The proud owner of a petrol-guzzling four-wheel-drive, Dolly doesn't believe in global warming or the scarcity of water. And the problem with endangered animals, she says, is that there are just too many of them.
Yesterday, Dolly Putin again linked up with Bob Brown. Bob Brown address included:
Some $50 billion reaped from Australia’s mineral resources will be sent overseas as dividends to foreign owners according to a Greens-commissioned paper I am releasing today - Foreign ownership of Australian mining by economist Naomi Edwards.
Naomi Edwards is the real name of  comedienne Dolly Putin. It appears her paper on mining prepared for the Greens was another comedy address. Matthew Stephens writes of this report in the Australian:
Just for starters, every assessment of the level of foreign ownership of Australia's mineral wealth, and therefore the level of capital outflow in dividends, is rendered materially wrong by a relatively simple error that could have been avoided if only Edwards had bothered to contact the companies that are the focus of her assessment.
Edward says 83 per cent of the mining industry is foreign-owned, a conclusion based on the view that BHP Billiton (which does not have a hyphen, Naomi) is 76 per cent-owned by foreign shareholders and and Rio Tinto is 83 per cent foreign-owned.
Perhaps, Dolly, er sorry, Naomi should go back to funny ha-ha instead of funny peculiar.