Climate nonsense from Australia's Chief Scientist

Eyes closed, ears closed, brain closed

Who isn’t really a scientist at all any more. She has become an alarmist environmental advocate, along with the majority of the climate science community. She has already decided that “the debate is over” and that we should all be blindly committed to “tackling the problem”, and screwing our economy for no benefit whatsoever. All of this is evidenced by her wholly unscientific comments at the Gold Coast climate conference:

”Often a scientific argument for climate change, and the ways in which humanity has contributed to it, is confused with political or economic arguments for or against a particular course of action to mitigate or adapt to climate change,” she said.

‘The consensus within the scientific community about the main points of the science is strong, [sorry what has consensus to do with science again?] whereas the consensus within the political community – and those who elect them – about what to do about it is less strong.

”While it is unfortunate that Australian politics and a large fraction of the citizenry may be polarised with respect to the best course of climate action, it would be not only unhelpful but tragic if this polarisation led to a societal divide in our commitment to act.”

On the ”gap” between the scientific understanding of climate change and that of policymakers and the public, Professor Sackett said scientists needed to better translate their work into lay terms.

Yet more weasel words, and more blaming “lack of communication” for the fact the public aren’t buying the spin.

Eyes closed, ears closed and brain closed. What hope is there for impartial, freethinking scientific enquiry with quasi-religious dogma like this from Australia’s Chief Scientist?

Read it here.


  1. The Loaded Dog says:

    Tofu or mung bean salad anyone?

  2. Amazing the degrees you find in CocoPops boxes..

  3. I wonder if she has ever considered why the “political consensus” is less strong.. here’s a hint: there isn’t scientific consensus.

    The only problem with translating the science into lay terms is that the science is wholly flawed. It is nigh on impossible to convince someone that the Earth is flat when what they’re looking at is round.

%d bloggers like this: