Opinion

Government must ignore the megaphones and listen to the science

Ian Bushnell 14 January 2020
Currowan Fire

The Currowan Fire: the response to the bushfires must be science-based and acknowledge climate change. Photo: Ulladulla Fire and Rescue.

It’s only to be expected but the calls for a greater slash and burn approach to the landscape have come thick and fast during the ongoing bushfire crisis, given prominence on the usual platforms that play down the links to climate change and global warming.

One can understand the logic – reduce the fuel and you reduce the fire, but it’s more simplistic than just simple.

And people from the Victorian Premier to the NSW and Victorian fire chiefs have been quick to put out these spot fires of distraction in the middle of trying to save property and life.

NSW met its hazard reduction targets but has still suffered. Victoria did not, but the opportunities to do so safely were extremely limited. Both fire chiefs stressed that the window for safe hazard reduction is getting smaller as the fire seasons lengthen and the climate changes.

Even where there has been reduced fuel, even in some cases bare fields, fire has been undeterred.

Nonetheless, blowhards such as Coalition backbenchers Barnaby Joyce and Craig Kelly (yes, of that trainwreck of an interview with Piers Morgan) continue to spout half-truths, myths and downright lies about the benefits of hazard reduction and prescribed burning, and those dark (Green) forces preventing it from being practiced.

Despite the Greens having hazard reduction and back burning listed on their platform for years, they are repeatedly demonised for stopping landholders and national park managers doing the work, and blamed when fires break out.

As many have pointed out, the Greens do not control any relevant council or government in Australia and have no power or even desire to veto such work.

Yet, this canard continues to be rolled out whenever a bushfire rears its head.

Some who have lost their properties, including farmers, point to the fuel loads and argue more could have been done, and this is perfectly understandable, if not the entire story.

It feeds into a false narrative that if landowners could just be left alone to manage their properties as they see fit all would be well, ignoring the fact that both Queensland and NSW have loosened rules for vegetation management that has led to an explosion in land clearing.

It’s a persistent 19th-century frontier mentality that can no longer be afforded in these times, which is calling for a transformation in the way we relate to the land.

Others such as the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) and the Australian Forest Products Association (AFPA) have been, as ANU researcher Professor David Lindenmayer says, ”crassly opportunistic” in calling for more ‘active management’ of forests, including selective logging.

Scientists say the forestry industry’s approach would only increase the fire risk, opening forest canopies to the sunlight and exacerbating drying and understorey growth.

Changes to forest and land management, probably incorporating Indigenous practices, will be part of the response but it must be science and evidence-based.

No doubt in the inquiry to come when the crisis pauses (we can’t say ends because that is the nature of the beast we are now dealing with) the megaphones will be trained on the inquisitors in a bid to drown out the quieter voices of science and reason.

It is worth noting that the events of this spring and summer were predicted with unerring accuracy more than a decade ago in Ross Garnaut’s 2008 Climate Change Review, which examined the scientific evidence around the impacts of climate change on Australia and its economy.

The group of retired fire chiefs who so desperately wanted to meet with the Scott Morrison’s government were strident in their fears about the fire season, but were ignored.

Government in Australia has preferred to listen to the naysayers and the vested fossil fuel interests instead of the experts and scientists, whose alarm is now growing as the clock for action ticks down.

Its narrow focus on what constitutes economic growth has seen it be a laggard in positioning the nation for the inevitable transition to a green economy.

When the investigations begin, government, including a Federal Government seemingly in thrall to its right-wing denialist rump, must look to the science and ignore the megaphones of delusion and blatant self-interest.

It is also time for scientists, professionally a sober and not so communicative lot, to muster their arguments and raise their voices so they can be heard above the din, and the gravity of the disaster facing the country can be fully understood.

It really is time for Australia to wake up before it is too late.

Original Article published by Ian Bushnell on The RiotACT.

What's Your Opinion?

64 Responses to Government must ignore the megaphones and listen to the science

Order
Debra Zonkey Debra Zonkey 4:55 am 16 Jan 20

The government had an agenda all along to go into the national parks and log them. There are few things more unaustralian than that. Austtslai clearly must review the dangerous timber export industry that has wrecked havoc all up and down the coastline since September. Did national parks burn? Yes. Were the areas burned flanked by logged forests? Yes. Did forestry light fires to protect their timber, fires that su subsequently got away? Yes. Just look at the situation around clouds creek for a find example of how well that went. There is no question that removing forests results in a dryer hotter landscape thst regrows with different vegetation that is more fire prone than original Forests. Please don’t buy into Australian government propaganda that claims more logging and cattle grazing is the answer. A quick study of recent fires proves this is not so.

Beverley Mcdowel Beverley Mcdowel 3:04 pm 14 Jan 20

The blatant lies and misinformation are breathtaking

Andrew Nelson Andrew Nelson 11:01 am 14 Jan 20

Yes. Let’s ignore the eco fascists sooking in the street.

Pantha S Jaskiewicz Pantha S Jaskiewicz 10:32 am 14 Jan 20

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/12/queensland-school-water-commercial-bottlers-tamborine-mountain?CMP=share_btn_fb

Judy-Ann Emberson Judy-Ann Emberson 9:42 am 14 Jan 20

PM worked for Minerals and has deep Coal connected Senior Staffers: Adviser, Speech writer, Environment Minister, Canavan, Kelly, Taylor and more.

Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 8:41 am 14 Jan 20

A very good article , so sad to see that it’s content is proven by some of the misinformed comments .

Sue Middlebrook Sue Middlebrook 8:14 am 14 Jan 20

How many times do the ‘deniers’ have to YELL ‘we are not DENYING the climate is changing, but we are NOT alarmists!’ They are taking a more measured and pragmatic approach, looking at BOTH sides of the science, checking the data and the results, working towards ways to adapt to the changes and finding the right way forward for EVERYONE.

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 8:26 am 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook complete rubbish it’s denialism and nothing else

    The science is out , there is no other side .

    Sue Middlebrook Sue Middlebrook 8:30 am 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson Again that’s the problem, your blinkers are firmly in place along with your fingers in ears. But that’s your prerogative. I tend to open my eyes and ears so I can read and listen to all sides (which I assure you there are more sides to the story).

    Sue Middlebrook Sue Middlebrook 8:32 am 14 Jan 20

    And I’m not denying anything! In fact I wholeheartedly agree climate is changing ... it always has and it always will!

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 8:39 am 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook you are the one being blinkered if you are denying the facts , which you are . You clearly don’t believe in man made climate change and are exactly who the article is aimed at .

    I’m sorry that people like you feel it’s it’s ok to ignore the established science . In what way exactly are YOU checking the facts ? Lol 😂 unless of course you are a world renowned scientist?

    You are of course using tired old cliches to back your sad and inexcusable position .

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 8:58 am 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson are you a world renowned scientist or are you blindly believing what you are told...not all scientists agree ...Sue Middlebrook is entitled to her opinion which is in line with scientists...yes the climate is changing and has done for thousands of years and will do for thousands more....

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 9:04 am 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson I am a retired researcher , the evidence is irrefutable

    The climate has been changing but not like it currently is right now as a result of man made interaction.

    You have Nothing to base your negligent argument on.

    It’s Sad you don’t know better

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 9:07 am 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson I’m sure your friend doesn’t need anyone to speak for her

    Uninformed opinion is just that and it’s time to become properly informed .

    Sue Middlebrook Sue Middlebrook 9:47 am 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson One researcher a scientist does not make. How many other researchers have come up with an opposing view to yours? Or different results? But you believe yours, as I said, your prerogative, but I prefer to check other researchers and take ALL research results together.

    Bridge Gibson Bridge Gibson 9:50 am 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson ...... you need to come out of retirement and do more research!

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 9:52 am 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook clearly not

    Because if you did you would understand that the debate is over , science is clear .

    Funny that you think you know better than the majority of the worlds scientists, the emergency services , the fire chiefs and the academics .

    But hey you just keep on believing in yourself 🙄 there’s nothing wrong with a healthy self belief .

    But there is something seriously wrong with Denialism whilst our homes and wildlife are burning .

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 9:56 am 14 Jan 20

    Bridge Gibson the denialist is strong in this one ☝️

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 10:09 am 14 Jan 20

    Bridge Gibson that fire burned 2 million hectares at a time when they did not have aerial bombers. The recent fires have burned 10 million and began 2 months earlier. There is none so blind as a person fanatically wedded to their anti-science views. It is clearly you who needs to do some research. Try reading some analysis before you share memes from the clown that made us a laughing stock in the UK. https://theconversation.com/some-say-weve-seen-bushfires-worse-than-this-before-but-theyre-ignoring-a-few-key-facts-129391

    Ruth Stanbury Ruth Stanbury 10:36 am 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook yes and the only real answer is to cull more than half of the human population - and I don’t think that is going to happen. We all need to do what we can now and not wait for governments to tell us what to do.

    Deb Rozzoli Deb Rozzoli 11:42 am 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook stick to your guns and don't listen to these guys - they are, in fact, the denialists in refusing any information that counters their agenda (which we know is not about the environment at all). This is more an opinion piece than an article and this site is an echo chamber (is Karin real?) - best not to waste your time here

    Steve McEvoy Steve McEvoy 12:24 pm 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook ‘it always has and it always will’ is a denialism of the current ~100y or so catastrophic rate of change which is caused by human activity. It hasn’t always & it won’t forever; there is no Plan(et)B

    Lyb Maree Lyb Maree 12:32 pm 14 Jan 20

    I've reviewed the evidence, and I am alarmed. It would be nice to live wrapped up in the delusion that everything will be okay, but sadly there's no evidence for that point of view.

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 12:44 pm 14 Jan 20

    Deb what information are you referring to? Because it would appear that your lot are the ones refusing to acknowledge the reality.

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 1:09 pm 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson

    Maxine Power Maxine Power 2:03 pm 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson

    Deniers is an accusation by religious zealots brainwashed by media pushing a narrative:

    The religion of climate alarmism.

    Climate has always changed and, like weather and medicine, is a very complex science that is never settled.

    Julia Walsh Julia Walsh 2:57 pm 14 Jan 20

    .....’cause there is nothing ‘alarming’ about this fire season, right?

    Cool & normal!

    .... I’m with the alarmists 🔥🌏🔥

    Matt Neenan Matt Neenan 6:12 pm 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson it is 99% of climate scientists. That's a lot.

    There are not "sides". There is scientific fact.

    Problem lies with vested interests spouting mistruths and misrepresenting that as science.

    Matt Neenan Matt Neenan 6:14 pm 14 Jan 20

    Bridge Gibson how many aerial fire fighters were used in 1851?

    Volunteers?

    Fire trucks?

    You should also keep in mind the frequency of such events.

    Tanya Caroline Whyman Tanya Caroline Whyman 8:35 pm 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook yes there WERE more sides to the story. That was before we knew what climate change was. But we were all warned. So clearly your blinkers are on with your fists jammed in your ears.

    Kerry Brogan Kerry Brogan 9:48 pm 14 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook The following are scientific organisations that hold the position that Climate Change has been caused by human action (easily verifiable).

    No one has ever been able to provide a list of actual scientific organisations refuting climate change.

    Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile

    Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal

    Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana

    Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela

    Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala

    Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico

    Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia

    Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru

    Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal

    Académie des Sciences, France

    Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada

    Academy of Athens

    Academy of Science of Mozambique

    Academy of Science of South Africa

    Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)

    Academy of Sciences Malaysia

    Academy of Sciences of Moldova

    Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic

    Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran

    Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt

    Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand

    Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy

    Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science

    African Academy of Sciences

    Albanian Academy of Sciences

    Amazon Environmental Research Institute

    American Academy of Pediatrics

    American Anthropological Association

    American Association for the Advancement of Science

    American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)

    American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians

    American Astronomical Society

    American Chemical Society

    American College of Preventive Medicine

    American Fisheries Society

    American Geophysical Union

    American Institute of Biological Sciences

    American Institute of Physics

    American Meteorological Society

    American Physical Society

    American Public Health Association

    American Quaternary Association

    American Society for Microbiology

    American Society of Agronomy

    American Society of Civil Engineers

    American Society of Plant Biologists

    American Statistical Association

    Association of Ecosystem Research Centers

    Australian Academy of Science

    Australian Bureau of Meteorology

    Australian Coral Reef Society

    Australian Institute of Marine Science

    Australian Institute of Physics

    Australian Marine Sciences Association

    Australian Medical Association

    Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society

    Bangladesh Academy of Sciences

    Botanical Society of America

    Brazilian Academy of Sciences

    British Antarctic Survey

    Bulgarian Academy of Sciences

    California Academy of Sciences

    Cameroon Academy of Sciences

    Canadian Association of Physicists

    Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences

    Canadian Geophysical Union

    Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society

    Canadian Society of Soil Science

    Canadian Society of Zoologists

    Caribbean Academy of Sciences views

    Center for International Forestry Research

    Chinese Academy of Sciences

    Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences

    Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)

    Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research

    Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences

    Crop Science Society of America

    Cuban Academy of Sciences

    Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters

    Ecological Society of America

    Ecological Society of Australia

    Environmental Protection Agency

    European Academy of Sciences and Arts

    European Federation of Geologists

    European Geosciences Union

    European Physical Society

    European Science Foundation

    Federation of American Scientists

    French Academy of Sciences

    Geological Society of America

    Geological Society of Australia

    Geological Society of London

    Georgian Academy of Sciences

    German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina

    Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences

    Indian National Science Academy

    Indonesian Academy of Sciences

    Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

    Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology

    Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand

    Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK

    InterAcademy Council

    International Alliance of Research Universities

    International Arctic Science Committee

    International Association for Great Lakes Research

    International Council for Science

    International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences

    International Research Institute for Climate and Society

    International Union for Quaternary Research

    International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics

    International Union of Pure and Applied Physics

    Islamic World Academy of Sciences

    Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities

    Kenya National Academy of Sciences

    Korean Academy of Science and Technology

    Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts

    l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal

    Latin American Academy of Sciences

    Latvian Academy of Sciences

    Lithuanian Academy of Sciences

    Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences

    Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology

    Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts

    National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina

    National Academy of Sciences of Armenia

    National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic

    National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka

    National Academy of Sciences, United States of America

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    National Association of Geoscience Teachers

    National Association of State Foresters

    National Center for Atmospheric Research

    National Council of Engineers Australia

    National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    National Research Council

    National Science Foundation

    Natural England

    Natural Environment Research Council, UK

    Natural Science Collections Alliance

    Network of African Science Academies

    New York Academy of Sciences

    Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences

    Nigerian Academy of Sciences

    Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters

    Oklahoma Climatological Survey

    Organization of Biological Field Stations

    Pakistan Academy of Sciences

    Palestine Academy for Science and Technology

    Pew Center on Global Climate Change

    Polish Academy of Sciences

    Romanian Academy

    Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium

    Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain

    Royal Astronomical Society, UK

    Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters

    Royal Irish Academy

    Royal Meteorological Society (UK)

    Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences

    Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research

    Royal Scientific Society of Jordan

    Royal Society of Canada

    Royal Society of Chemistry, UK

    Royal Society of the United Kingdom

    Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

    Russian Academy of Sciences

    Science and Technology, Australia

    Science Council of Japan

    Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research

    Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics

    Scripps Institution of Oceanography

    Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts

    Slovak Academy of Sciences

    Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts

    Society for Ecological Restoration International

    Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

    Society of American Foresters

    Society of Biology (UK)

    Society of Systematic Biologists

    Soil Science Society of America

    Sudan Academy of Sciences

    Sudanese National Academy of Science

    Tanzania Academy of Sciences

    The Wildlife Society (international)

    Turkish Academy of Sciences

    Uganda National Academy of Sciences

    Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities

    United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    University Corporation for Atmospheric Research

    Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

    Woods Hole Research Center

    World Association of Zoos and Aquariums

    World Federation of Public Health Associations

    World Forestry Congress

    World Health Organization

    World Meteorological Organization

    Zambia Academy of Sciences

    Anne Ham Anne Ham 6:05 pm 16 Jan 20

    Sue Middlebrook there is no ‘two sides’

    There’s science and there is not science.

Dave Stewart Dave Stewart 8:06 am 14 Jan 20

Just Wondering, regarding the Upper Management of the Park's and State Forests, how many are actually qualified to manage land ie: ex Farmer's.

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 10:12 am 14 Jan 20

    Australian farmers have a terrible track record for land management. Why would we put them in charge of such a precious resource?

    Glenn Merrick Glenn Merrick 6:54 pm 14 Jan 20

    I would suggest all of them would have higher qualifications than most farmers. Farming and natural resource management have similarities but are not the same.

    Dave Stewart Dave Stewart 8:11 pm 14 Jan 20

    Glenn Merrick But qualifications don't make you smart or endow you with common-sense.

Julia Walsh Julia Walsh 7:52 am 14 Jan 20

Check out Matt Canavan tripping over himself to ensure we are not hindered to export 500 MILLION TONS of COAL to India PER YEAR 😳

He writes as if there is NO ALTERNATIVE source of energy

Julia Walsh Julia Walsh 7:51 am 14 Jan 20

Yep. Some big corporate mega-phones have stuffed our politicians’ ears sooooo full of money they can’t hear the facts.

‘ Climate denialism and the unwillingness of Australian politicians to devise effective climate action policies is no fluke, any more than the long-term willingness of the Liberal Party to defend the big banks and enable their misconduct was a fluke. It was the result of millions in donations, the influence of industry figures at both staffer and political levels, and the capacity of mining companies to offer politicians lucrative jobs after they leave public office.’

https://www.crikey.com.au/2019/11/18/climate-denialism-rotten-political-system/

Jason Lewington Jason Lewington 7:48 am 14 Jan 20

This story only focusses on a couple of the mistruths currently spread by the "megaphones" out there.

As the Commissioner of the RFS has confirmed time and time again, NSW Emergency Services have seen record budgets, yet elements out there keep saying "NSW emergency budgets have been slashed". ABC even did the sums and confirmed there is no proof to the claims that budgets were cut.

This fire season is the first that Australia has its very own large air tanker (owned by the NSW RFS) and the fleet of leased LATS and VLATS is the largest ever - meanwhile people are claiming that there was no additional air tankers?

This fire season has been full of many furphies and all of them unnecessarily undermine the confidence in agencies.

The media also need to stop reporting the words of the association that calls itself the VFFA and claims to be the representative association of the NSW RFS volunteers... The RFS only has one official association and it's the NSW RFSA and every time the media goes with statements from this radical / fake VFFA they are causing more harm than good, including frustrating the majority of volunteers from the RFS.

    Julia Walsh Julia Walsh 7:55 am 14 Jan 20

    Here’s proof of budget cuts

    Jason Lewington Jason Lewington 8:02 am 14 Jan 20

    Julia Walsh that is one small section of the budget... The previous year was bolstered with extra capital funding for several once off capital projects including a new head office and training academy. (You don't build them yearly).

    The budgets are far more complex than what can be shown in a one page screen shot.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-05/fact-check-are-nsw-firefighters-facing--budget-cuts/11747396

    Jason Lewington Jason Lewington 8:04 am 14 Jan 20

    Julia Walsh if you don't believe me... Then believe the well respected RFS Commissioner.

    https://www.facebook.com/407644335947340/posts/2796337990411284/

    Valeria Molony Valeria Molony 8:20 am 14 Jan 20

    And why we are still burning and so many fires are out if control if everything is so good with budget and resources

    Jason Lewington Jason Lewington 8:30 am 14 Jan 20

    Valeria Molony all the money and resources can't just put the fires out... If you think pouring money into the fires means they will suddenly go go out your mistaken.

    Julia Walsh Julia Walsh 3:03 pm 14 Jan 20

    James, I understand that but the capital expenditure should have been sustained at the higher level

    given all the warnings of an unprecedented fire season. For example we should absolutely have had at least one more of these:

    https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/federal/government-rejected-major-air-tanker-expansion-20200103-p53onl.html

    And yes I saw the commissioner speak at that press conference and can almost feel Gladys’ knife to his back; she is of the same government that forbid public scientists attending a conference on climate change around that time from linking the bushfires to climate change. Unbelievable

    Maxine Power Maxine Power 11:13 pm 14 Jan 20

    The fuel loadings in our National Parks are at least 10x what air tankers can extinguish.

    A drop from an aircraft is equivalent to a light shower of rain about 4mm.

Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 7:48 am 14 Jan 20

1 Scientist says this and another Scientist says that...so depends on which Scientist you want to listen to.....gotta have fossil fuel...gotta have timber...so ?????

    Tim Coen Tim Coen 7:54 am 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson Sorry Faye, but 97 climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warming and only 3 others contend humans aren't.

    Sue Middlebrook Sue Middlebrook 8:01 am 14 Jan 20

    Tim Coen Only 97? And 3 don’t agree? This is the problem ... check your data before writing ... and I think you’ll find there’s something missing (plus check your ‘scientists’. Mickey Mouse purports to be one of them!)

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 8:30 am 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson NO they don’t !

    Please read the science it’s very clear

    The majority are in total agreement . The science is now irrefutable

    There IS no other side , other than paid denialists acting in the interests of the fossil fuel industries.

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 8:49 am 14 Jan 20

    Majority....that's not all....yeah well...could be paid scientists too....

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 8:50 am 14 Jan 20

    Karin I'Anson majority...not all....and I assume the scientists are getting paid...

    Karin I'Anson Karin I'Anson 9:12 am 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson you presume ?? So ?? That makes it real then ?

    🙄

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 9:59 am 14 Jan 20

    if I assume the scientists are getting paid are you telling me you don't think they get paid..........I presume as much as you do....cause you don't know who is paying the scientists you believe the same as I don't know who is paying the scientists I believe....so 1 side has paid believers and the other side has paid denialists...so therefore its all about the money !!!

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 10:13 am 14 Jan 20

    Follow the money, Faye. The "paid scientists" are invariably the 3%, and they are in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry.

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 10:16 am 14 Jan 20

    Jo Hann we can debate this until the cows come home except they aren't going to.....you are teling that the Climate Change Scientists are not being paid.....rubbish !!!!

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 10:19 am 14 Jan 20

    My sister was a geologist for a large coal mining company. She has since had a career change and is a marine biologist who is trying to find ways to save the Great Barrier Reef. I promise you - she was far better remunerated for the geology position. There is no money in accepting the science, but there's billions in carrying on as usual.

    But hey: I've actually read the peer-reviewed science. All you seem to have done is tuned in to Andrew Bolt 🤷‍♂️ There's no rational discussion to be had with deniers.

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 10:23 am 14 Jan 20

    have no idea who Andrew Bolt is....and don't care … and their is no rational discussion to be had with Climate Change Believers...and I am glad you can read because I can too.....

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 10:26 am 14 Jan 20

    Jo Hann ...Dr Judith Curry is a climatologist... she has written papers on this and she states it is a hoax...can find more for you but you probably wouldn't be interested...

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 11:08 am 14 Jan 20

    Judith Curry profits from gullible deniers 🤷‍♂️

    I have read her work - it has been repeatedly discredited and she relies on ad hominem to make her arguments (even though she has clearly not even read the papers she allegedly responds to).

    She goes so far as to deny that the climate is warming - you would have to be living in a cave deep underground to believe her. But of course, your degree at the University of Hard Knocks taught you to ignore observable reality in favour of the weasel words of a cherry picked academic. How silly of me.

    Faye Simpson Faye Simpson 1:01 pm 14 Jan 20

    Jo Hann … not worth replying to … discussion went downhill fairly quickly … and now you are just being insulting...

    Jo Hann Jo Hann 1:57 pm 14 Jan 20

    Of course you can't reply. Curry has no integrity and has resorted to attacking her ex colleagues instead of applying scientific method. Feel free to provide any of her assertions regarding climate change that have not been debunked. $100 says you can't.

    Tim Coen Tim Coen 1:59 pm 14 Jan 20

    Faye Simpson its not a matter of believing, its a mstter of accepting research done by smarter and better educated people than you and me. Do you dispute the veracity of GPS co-ordinates that rely on the Special Theory of Relativity which is far more complex than the accumulation of known and measurable greenhouse gases in the air? Would you like to fly in an aircraft piloted by me because I 'believe' I can fly it even though I have never flown an aircraft? Belief or not in global warming is not the point. The overwhelming majority of qualified people who've studied it have, after eeighing up the evidence have concluded human are causing carbon pollution which is altering our atmosphere and causing it to heat up.

Stephen Kambouridis Stephen Kambouridis 7:41 am 14 Jan 20

Governments have been driven by the profit demands of industries such as fossil fuel and timber. IT'S TIME TO LISTEN TO SCIENCE.

Top