Hardly impartial
Millions of column inches have been taken up on the Climate Commission’s one-sided and alarmist report, and most of those column inches haven’t had the benefit of an ounce of critical thought. Oddly, none of the journalists at Fairfax or the ABC have considered the vested interests at work in the commission, the careers built on global warming alarmism, the corruption of science by the IPCC, the lack of any opposing or dissenting views, the political influence of a government desperate to pass a carbon tax, and any number of other red flags which any independent thinking person would raise.
No, the media regurgitate the press release and the report without any consideration of any of those issues. Of course, Labor has been spruiking the report for all its worth – as if its conclusion has come as some kind of surprise! What did they expect from a bunch of scaremongering alarmists like David Karoly, Will Steffen and Matthew England? Balance? I think not. And neither did they. This whole edifice is nothing more than a propaganda machine, spewing out climate predictions on demand from a government in thrall to the Greens, and desperate to get traction on its flawed climate policy.
Then there is the inevitable “trust the scientists.” As if everything a scientist says is beyond question. Wheeling out the old chestnut about the patient with cancer, they crow, who would you trust? The three specialist oncologists or the quack? Over at the Impact of Climate Change blog, this post sums that attitude up perfectly:
The Hon. Julia Gillard, yesterday, explained that she accepts expert, scientific advice:
“The science is in, climate-change is real. The science is clear: man-made carbon pollution is making a difference to our planet and our climate. […]
“When I first met Ian Frazer, and he told me he had a cervical cancer vaccine that could cut the rates of cervical cancer for women and girls, I didn’t pretend to myself I knew enough about cancer to second-guess what he was telling me was right.
“He was right; he’s a scientist. We’ve got climate scientists here who are telling us exactly the same about the nature of global warming and the climate of our planet.”
That’s “harmless carbon dioxide gas”, rather than “carbon pollution”, Julia, by the way. And the response?
When I met Claudius Ptolemaeus and he told me that he could accurately represent the geocentric universe as a set of nested spheres, I didn’t pretend to myself I knew enough about astrology to second-guess what he was telling me was right; he’s a scientist, and couldn’t be mistaken. (source)
And what is the difference between oncologists and climate scientists? Climate science has been corrupted by money and politics, things that the medical profession manages, in the main, to rise above [yes there are specific exceptions, primarily in connection with pharmaceuticals of course, so don’t bother writing in]. For years, climate science was obscure, and suddenly, a crisis! Climate science is suddenly on the front pages of newspapers. Entire climate science departments have sprung up at universities all over the world, government climate departments have been established in virtually every country, the UN has climbed aboard the bandwagon and set up hundreds of climate committees, such as the IPCC. In other words, billions and billions of dollars spent, and the careers of thousands of scientists at stake.
And we somehow expect the results of all this to be impartial? If there were no climate crisis, none of these departments would exist, and climate science would return to that forgotten corner of the lab. That is why it is mainly retired scientists who dare speak their doubts about the “consensus” out loud.
So until the Climate Commission opens its eyes and ears and invites dissenting views to be part of its reporting process, it will remain nothing more than a hopelessly biased propaganda machine and mouthpiece for a government hamstrung by the Greens.
Australian Climate Madness 
When my podiatrist told me that corals can’t live in warm water so I should have both my legs cut off, who was I to question his superior knowledge?
He tells me artificial legs are much better than the originals, and don’t smell at all. If everyone gets artificial legs the price will come right down, there will be lots of new artificial leg jobs and Australia will lead the world in artificial leg technology.
I am just worried now that some fool will start an anti-artificial leg scare campaign and spoil the future for all of us!
It’s sad to say that there is not one person in this country fit to wear the title Journalist The last honest reporter to report the truth of a story without fear or favour died about the same time as the Dodo. Now it’s a case of which story best suits the interest of the establishment
FACT – Police go through RIGOROUS psychometric testing and training in ethics before being inducted into police forces. In fact they are even referred to as “Australia’s finest” due to the responsibility, pride and integrity associated with the position.
FACT – The promotional and funding system within police services is highly politicised.
With this in mind have a read of this:-
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/opi-overland/story-e6frgczx-1226063305210
QUESTION – After you’ve seen what the executive of “Australia’s Finest” are capable of ask yourself why it is generally accepted that scientists are above this type of behaviour?
QUESTION – Ask again why “Australia’s Finest” may find it necessary to “bend” the rules “just a little” with those statistics.
QUESTION – Ask yourself what use statistics of any kind are that have been “bent” even if ever so slightly…
Perhaps Julia would like to explain why she doesn’t accept expert scientific advice from equally qualified and expert scientists that disagree with those that she accepts advice from?
Because those scientists are the “wrong” scientists. They say things which she doesn’t agree with, and therefore she doesn’t listen to them. Enlightened approach to scientific debate, don’t you think?
They would much rather listen to the likes of the well educated & intelligent climate guru Mr Gore. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/climate-expert-al-gore-got-d-natural-sci
Here is one article from The Punch about the Climate Commission report, which tells it like it really is…………….
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-governments-climate-commission-is-full-of-it/
Broadly speaking, bereavement tends to be long-term. I wouldn’t underestimate either, the long term effects of observed depression, stress or anxiety. the real question is “what has that do do with fossil fuel use”.
Astrology! …………… FFS
Oh i get it, satire.
Flannery is Gillard’s Labor’s Climatic Prostitute. He also seems to be not entirely normal. Just watch for a while his facial expressions and body langauage. Either he is drunk on his ill gotten powers or he is smoking something! Of course, for medicinal purposes only. His book certainly seems to have been written under influence…..or maybe he was kissed by a muse on high!
Thanks for enlightening me. These few comments from Juliar only document the obvious fact about her background. Bogan Queen who loves to surround herself with charlatans, court jesters and fluffers. Her arrogant style in parliament, with voice raising to hysterical pitch whenever asked to provide some answer to totally sensible question speaks thousands words about her arrogancy as well as that of the Labor/Green/Turncoats mob.
The Pharmacutical industry and the medical profession are also overseen by an exceedingly robust regulatory system which amongst other things closely details the scientific procedures to be followed when conducting research. Virtually all warmist, “research”, would be rejected out of hand if subjected to standards of similar rigour. A “Climategate” in the pharma industry would have resulted in criminal proceedings against both the companies concerned and individual research workers.
Absolutely. Excellent point. Thanks.