ABC's War on Science – Part 1

War on science

Following the lead of an infamous warmist blog, I thought we’d start a new regular section, the ABC’s War on Science, where we can document the national broadcaster’s frequent smears and attacks on anyone that dares question any part of the alarmist gospel.

And what a cracking way to start, with Graham Readfearn on top form, writing an article that consists entirely of innuendo, with no challenges to the facts at all! It’s all the usual whining that we’ve heard a thousand times before:

Climate sceptics, deniers, contrarians – call them what you like – are engaged in a fight for column inches, radio waves, TV talk-time and community sentiment.

In Australia, the issue has turned decidedly unsavoury, with climate scientists revealing inboxes chock-full of hate and Government advisors being slurred as Nazis. [Readfearn forgets all the equally abhorrent slurs on sceptics, natch – Ed]

But as a memo from US Republican communications guru Frank Luntz revealed in 2003, the most important aspect of climate change denial is not to throw hate, but to sow doubt.

Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.

Doubt is the product of the climate change denial industry – an industry which is tightly knit, well resourced and globally linked. (source)

Actually, I’m not tightly knit or globally linked to anybody, just to clear that up. So we can run through the usual smear list:

  • Links to Big Oil and Exxon? Check [by the way, being in hock to Big Green is just fine – Ed]
  • Links to mining companies? Check
  • Links to Heartland? Check
  • Links to Tea Party? Check
  • Use of “denier”? Check
  • Claims that “deniers” are “well funded”? Check [laughable, seriously laughable – Ed]
  • Challenging any of the arguments put forward? … er, silence.

People tend to forget that it isn’t the sceptics that are demanding that the global economy is turned upside down and our standards of living trashed in order to appease Gaia – it’s the warmists. And nothing is going to stop me from holding everything they say to the fullest account possible, to ensure that their case (if indeed they have one) is based on honest, impartial, apolitical science – and nothing else.

I guess we should be pleased that this is all that the warmists have got left in their tool-bag. Smears, ad homs and innuendo. Because, as we all know, there sure ain’t anything else.


  1. Rick Bradford says:

    the climate change denial industry – an industry which is tightly knit, well resourced and globally linked.

    Emotionally, it is very important to the Warmists to fantasise themselves as the heroic little guy standing up to an evil monolithic entity.

    In the same breath, they then turn round and say that all the world’s scientific bodies ‘support’ their viewpoint.

    They’re not sure if they’re David or Goliath.

    • Excellent point.

      • Simon, I have to say that your effective banning of me from your site is pathetic. You talk about debate, but hardly a contrarian view is ever published. If one is, it attracts a “GO AWAY” (as one of mine was) or some other non-rational response. It is clear that your site is not about searching for truth but pushing a position already decided, no matter what new evidence might come along.

        You will be pleased to know that I won’t bother you again!

  2. Shooter says:

    Those Who Control the News Influence the Views!

    Some info I dug up on our loverly ABC

  3. War on Science; well put. Warmists want to take us back to medieval times technologically, well they are half way towards doing so scientifically, reverting us to our pre-enlightened days.

  4. Another story missing in action, in ABC’s on going war!

    • Thanks for the link, Marc – you’re right, I will be totally swamped, but we have to start somewhere. I guess your “missing news” slot and my “war on science” slot will complement each other…!

  5. Rick Bradford says:

    And, if you can believe it, the jihadis at Deltoid believe that the ABC is biased against AGW.

    • Mate, nothing surprises me anymore. Actually Counterpoint is one of the rare programmes that seems to have some balance. But that’s unacceptable of course. Only outright submission to the religion.

  6. I’ll quite happily admit that I work in the oil industry, and have done so for a number of years, and in all honesty, my life is as enjoyable as it is due to the (good, but not amazing amounts of) money I have made from ‘Big Oil’, but I have never ever been told what I should think, or say in relation to “the environment”.

    I used my rational judgement, scientific background, and general common sense to decide that I don’t believe the hype.

  7. Richard N says:

    ABC bias is most clearly displayed by their TV newsheadline captions which run across the screen during the news.They are always pro warmist and pro labor eg highlighting only positive news about the carbon tax and naming indivduals who support it . As a general rule ,the nearer an election,the more blatant the bias.They will sure be working themselves up for a full on attack on anyone who is the least bit skeptical on global warming coming up to the next election..All pretence at impartiality will go out the door.

  8. Aert Driessen says:

    You would have to pay someone to monitor what ABC is saying on climate change; I have given up on them. I have also cancelled my subscription to the Canberra Times. Both only publish one side of the debate. It’s a waste of money. I’ll just wait for the next election. It’s the only way I can keep my sanity.

%d bloggers like this: