Tag Archives: Science & Politics

The “GBR Swindle” revisited – response to Peter Ridd

Posted on by
4

It seems that “The Great Barrier Reef Swindle” and my subsequent response generated a fair amount of debate throughout the blog world and the scientific community. Dr Ridd has posted his response to the my comments regarding the science behind the response here, and in keeping with the science and debate, see my response below.

Before I go into detail on this, attached is one of the paired photographs from the inshore reefs in Bowen, Queensland detailing local scale changes on the Great Barrier Reef during the 20th century (photographs speak louder than words):

 

Continue reading →

High and Dry

Posted on by
Reply

Just spent the weekend reading “High and Dry” – a recent release by a newcomer, Dr Guy Pearse. Pearse is an ex-liberal party member, environmental policy author and speech writer for the former Australian environmental minister Robert Hill, who recently finished his Ph.D at the ANU (and co-wrote the Greenhouse Mafia documentary that aired on ABC’s Four Corners last year). The book deals with the relationship between the the network of lobby groups, industry associations and their influence on the Australian Federal Government’s climate change policies. Altogether a fascinating read for anyone who is interested in politics and climate change in Australia – follow Pearse’s comments on the upcoming election and related environmental issues.

Climate shifts news round-up

Posted on by
Reply
  • Reporting in Nature, researchers from Canada show that: “… anthropogenic forcing has had a detectable influence on observed changes in average precipitation within latitudinal bands, and that these changes cannot be explained by internal climate variability or natural forcing.” Whilst no-one wants to be quoted on record that the current flooding across Europe and England is related to climate change (although see some media sources), a Reuters article states an inconvenient truth: “floods force many to face climate change reality“.

Oh dear, here comes another expert on the Reef.

Posted on by
20

peter_ridd.jpgThis time it is Dr. Peter Ridd (an expert in marine physics) who is claiming that there is an even greater swindle going on with respect to the Great Barrier Reef. The title of Dr. Ridd’s opinion piece dated 19th of July 2007, says it all – “The Great Barrier Reef Swindle”.

His thesis? Hundreds of scientists who work on the Great Barrier Reef are all also involved in the same sort of cover-up and conspiracy that we were told about in the Great Climate Change Swindle! Big news indeed.

Yes, same story, scientists make up the doom and gloom tale so that they can get lots of research money from unsuspecting agencies and donors.

Sound familiar? Jennifer Marohasy has written similar things in the past (and she loves his opinion piece!). Oh, and guess who Dr. Peter Ridd reports to in his role as Science Coordinator to the newly created” Australian Environment Foundation“? Continue reading →

When journalism fails!

Posted on by
7

Piers Akerman, the conservative journalist from the Daily telegraph, with his extensive (sic) background in science is now an expert on … climate science! More so, apparently, than the Australian of the year Professor Tim Flannery or Australian Federation Fellow, Professor David Karoly. Just have a look at the latest contribution to his blog — a response to the ABC showing of the BBC production “The Climate Change Swindle“. Not that Ackerman hasn’t been wrong before.

Apparently Akerman knows something that scientists from the best academies in the world don’t know, and that is that climate change is bunk. Do not get me wrong here: true skeptic arguments make important contributions to the debate on global warming and climate change. This is actually the way science works – by continually criticizing its ideas, and by thereby improving its accuracy and veracity. Continue reading →

Photographs from the coldwater bleaching event (17/07)

Posted on by
Reply

 

An update with recent photographs from the 2007 cold-water bleaching event at Heron Island (from Dr Selina Ward, a researcher and lecturer at the University of Queensland). At high tide, the bleaching (loss of the symbiotic algae) is clearly evident in the branching coral from the submerged reef flat (left); at low tide the exposure of massive corals (center) and branching corals (right) results in significant levels of mortality. See my post below (“Winter bleaching again on the southern Great Barrier Reef”) for further comment.

 

Australian Academy of Sciences rebuts skeptics swindle.

Posted on by
Reply

It would seem that no one who has any credibility supports the recent airing of the climate skeptic film, ‘The great global warming swindle’. Here is the press release from Australia’s most exalted science body. It is also worthwhile going to the specifics of the Academy’s rebuttal (www.science.org.au/reports/index.htm).

Thursday 12 June 2007 : Verdict remains the same: the CO2 is guilty

The Australian Academy of Science maintains the view that recent global warming is caused by unprecedented CO2 levels in the atmosphere, despite claims made in a recent documentary. Continue reading →

Barrier Reef ‘can adapt’ to warmer times

Posted on by
11

  • Updated (13/07) – See Dr van Oppen’s response below.

So said a headline in The Australian this morning.

Based on a study coming from the lab of Dr Madeleine van Oppen, the article made the amazing leap from a study in which scientists have found that many corals have several varieties of symbionts to saying that the Great Barrier Reef can adapt to climate change.

And it wasn’t the papers fault (which was published in the peer-reviewed journal, Coral Reefs – doi 10.1007/s00338-007-0244-8).  This is actually what the senior investigator on the paper, Dr van Oppen, said “”This flexibility discovered in our research is important in understanding the past evolutionary success of these coral species and their future survival capacity in the face of changing climate,”

Continue reading →

Swindled – an evening lost

Posted on by
1

After putting the kids to bed, I got my mug of cocoa and sat down to watch The Great Climate Change Swindle. Let’s call it ‘Swindle’ because that is how I felt once it had rolled out across Australia.What I was rather disappointed by was the attempt to sell me, the average citizen, a series of thinly disguised half-truths about the lack of a linkage between carbon dioxide and global temperature, and then how the activity of that vicious orb in the sky was driving the climate.

The dulcet tones of Durkin waxed and waned, through the ‘facts’ and how dodgy scientists must be – I must have dozed off, but I seemed to come to as I was told that Margaret Thatcher had started the equivalent of Marxist, greenie plot called Climate Change so she could get into nuclear energy. Wow, I never knew!

Continue reading →

ABC & Lateline

Posted on by
Reply

Thursday 12th July, 8.30pm – ABC television are showing the controversial documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle“, written and directed by Martin Durkin followed by a Lateline analysis (10.30pm) interviewing Durkin and a range of scientists who oppose and support Durkin’s proposition. This will be essential viewing – originally shown in Britain by Channel 4 as ” Everything you’ve ever been told about Global Warming is probably untrue” (more).

Analysis of the “scientific facts” and social commentary to follow shortly from www.climateshifts.org and John Quiggin’s blog (www.johnquiggin.com) – watch this space. Meanwhile, take a look at two contrasting pieces published in The Australian newspaper yesterday (10th July)”:

“Sun not behind global warming”
– Leigh Dayton (10/07/07)		 “It’s good sense to avoid consensus on global warming”
– Bob Carter (10/07/07)
Updated: See Professor Ian Lowe’s detailed response in today’s Herald Sun (11/07/07):

“The Channel 4 film is indeed a great global warming swindle. It purports to show scientific evidence casting doubt on the conclusion that most of the recent climate change is due to human burning of fossil fuels. In fact, most of the “science” is either wrong or selective, so the film does not pose any real question about even the cautious conservative conclusions of the IPCC. If it is shown without an appropriate public health warning, it could give the misleading impression that the science is still uncertain and delay even further the urgently-needed concerted response..”