Posted: April 16, 2019 Filed under: Australia, Climate Change, Climatism, Great Barrier Reef, Sceptics | Tags: Climate Change, Climate Change Hoax, Climatism, Global Warming, Great Barrier Reef, James Cook University, JCU, Peter Ridd, pseudoscience, Scepticism is Science, science, Science and Environment
“BLIND trust in authority
is the greatest enemy of the truth.”
– Albert Einstein
A BIG WIN for freedom of speech and academic freedom as former JCU Great Barrier Reef expert, Peter Ridd, wins wrongful dismissal case against James Cook ‘University’.
ALSO, a massive win for climate scepticism and the fight against sloppy, pseudoscientific ‘science’ driven by Leftist dominated academia driving the $2,000,000,000,000 US per year (2 Trillion) man-made
global warming climate change agenda.
via The Australian :
James Cook professor’s sacking ruled ‘unlawful’
A Federal Court judge has ruled that James Cook University acted unlawfully when it sacked professor Peter Ridd after he publicly criticised the institution and one of its star scientists over claims about the impact global warming had on the Great Barrier Reef.
Professor Ridd, who worked at the university for 40 years, challenged the dismissal in the Federal Circuit Court, saying the university breached its own enterprise agreement which allowed all staff to express controversial or unpopular views.
The physics professor argued that the Townsville-based university, which is renowned for its marine science expertise, dismissed him for breaching the university’s code of conduct.
Handing down his decision today, judge Salvatore Vasta said that the 17 findings used by the university to justify the sacking were unlawful.
“The Court rules that the 17 findings made by the University, the two speech directions, the five confidentiality directions, the no satire direction, the censure and the final censure given by the University and the termination of employment of Professor Ridd by the University were all unlawful,” Judge Vasta said.
A penalty hearing will be set for a later date.
At a hearing last month, Professor Ridd’s barrister Stuart Wood argued his client was entitled to criticise his colleagues and the university’s perceived lack of quality assurance processes.
In 2016, Professor Ridd emailed a journalist to allege that images given to the media by the Australian Institute of Marine Science and Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority were misleading because they showed poorly affected corals, which were selected over nearby healthy coral and used to show “broad scale decline” of reef health.
Professor Ridd claimed the use of the images was “a dramatic example of how scientific organisations are happy to spin a story for their own purposes”.
He also said his colleague Professor Terry Hughes, the head of JCU’s Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, would “wriggle and squirm” when asked to explain the discrepancies in the images.
Professor Ridd was censured again when he repeated the claims on Sky News.
After a third alleged violation of the code of conduct, Professor Ridd was sacked in April 2018.
GREAT BARRIER REEF related :
A GBR Must Read :
STATE Of The Climate Report :
IPCC Extreme Weather Report 2018 SR15 :
TEMPERATURE Related :
ORIGINS Of The Global Warming Scam :
(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)
Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.
Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!
Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content. Every pledge helps!
Click link for more info…
Thank You! Jamie.
Posted: March 27, 2019 Filed under: Alarmism Debunked, Alarmist media, Alarmist Predictions, Arctic, Climatism, Dud predictions, Empirical Evidence, Fact Check, Polar Bears | Tags: Alarmism, arctic, Climate Change, Climate Change Alarmism, Climatism, Fake News, Global Warming, Mainstream media, mainstream media alarmism, Polar Bears, School Strike 4 Climate, science, Science and Environment, Sea Ice, Susan Crockford
POLAR BEARS – We Are Fine | CLIMATISM
“Inuit believe there are now so many bears that
public safety has become a major concern,”
– Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe,
government document says – The Globe and Mail
“Public safety concerns, combined with the effects of
polar bears on other species, suggest that
in many Nunavut communities, the polar bear
may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”
– Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe,
government document says – The Globe and Mail
DIRE predictions of an “ice-free” Arctic have remained popular on the climate change fear-mongering circuit, owing to the psychological and political currency of all things melting and not least the emotional relevance applicable to the fate of the Arctic’s most famous resident and ‘global warming’ mascot – the polar bear.
SOME of the failed Arctic sea-ice predictions by alarmists ‘scientists’ and the fake news media over the years :
- “Arctic summers ice-free by 2013” (BBC 2007)
- “Could all Arctic ice be gone by 2012?” (AP 2007)
- “Arctic Sea Ice Gone in Summer Within Five Years?”(National Geographic 2007)
- “Imagine yourself in a world five years from now, where there is no more ice over the Arctic” – Tim Flannery (2008)
- “North Pole could be ice-free in 2008” – Mark Serreze (New Scientist 2008)
- “Gore: Polar ice cap may disappear by summer 2014” (USA Today 2009)
- “Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within 4 years” (Guardian 2012)
- “Say Goodbye to Arctic Summer Ice” (Live Science 2013)
- “Ice-free Arctic in two years heralds methane catastrophe – scientist” (The Guardian 2013)
- “Why Arctic sea ice will vanish in 2013” (Sierra Club 2013)
- “Next year or the year after, the Arctic will be free of ice’” – Peter Wadhams (The Guardian 2016)
Source : CLIMATE DUD-PREDICTIONS : ‘Ice-Free’ Arctic Prophesies By The ‘97% Consensus’ And Compliant Mainstream Media | Climatism
CURRENT STATE OF THE ARCTIC
MINIMUM sea-ice extent has been trending up over the past twelve years. The EXACT opposite of what the mainstream media and ‘97% experts’ have been telling you :
MINIMUM Arctic sea-ice volume has been rising, not declining, since 2007 :
@KiryeNet キリエ on Twitter : “The Arctic has been refreezing for 12 years…minimum sea ice volume has been rising since 2007”
ARCTIC SEA-ICE EXTENT TO DATE
ARCTIC sea-ice extent is very close to the 1981-2010 median :
ARCTIC TEMPS & MELT CYCLES
ARCTIC temperatures and melt cycles correlate almost perfectly with ocean circulation cycles (AMO), and show no correlation with atmospheric CO2 levels :
Reykjavik, Iceland Temperatures Vs. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation
NO other icon of ‘Global Warming’ epitomises its very own false narrative like the polar bear does for ‘Climate Change’.
WITH deadly irony, polar bear numbers have grown dramatically as carbon dioxide emissions have risen in lock-step. A CO2 correlation, at last!
INDIGENOUS Inuit’s of Northern Canada are now facing the very real task of having to cull the population as “the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”
“Inuit believe there are now so many bears that public safety has become a major concern,”
“Public safety concerns, combined with the effects of polar bears on other species, suggest that in many Nunavut communities, the polar bear may have exceeded the co-existence threshold.”
Nunavut’s polar bear population is unsafe, government document says – The Globe and Mail
POLAR BEAR POPULATION (1981 – 2015)
Polar Bear Population (1981 – 2015)
POLAR BEAR POPULATION – THE LATEST COUNT!
via Susan Crockford PhD :
Susan Crockford is zoologist with more than 35 years experience, including published work on the Holocene history of Arctic animals. She is currently an adjunct professor at the University of Victoria, British Columbia.
About | polarbearscience
Latest global polar bear abundance ‘best guess’ estimate is 39,000 (26,000-58,000)
It’s long past time for polar bear specialists to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate that will never be achieved and determine a reasonable and credible ‘best guess’. Since they have so far refused to do this, I have done it for them. My extrapolated estimate of 39,000 (range 26,000-58,000) at 2018 is not only plausible but scientifically defensible.
In 2014, the chairman of the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG) emailed me to say that their global population size number ‘has never been an estimate of total abundance in a scientific sense, but simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand.’
In my new book, The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened, I contend that this situation will probably never change, so it’s time to stop holding out for a scientifically accurate global estimate and generate a reasonable and credible ‘best guess’. Recent surveys from several critical polar bear subpopulations have given us the information necessary to do this.
These new numbers make it possible to extrapolate from ‘known’ to ‘unknown’ subpopulations within so-called ‘sea ice ecoregions’ (defined in 2007 by polar bear scientists at the US Geological Survey, see Amstrup et al. 2007), as shown below, to update old estimates and generate new ones for never-studied areas.
USGS – Polar Bear Ecoregions
Since the PBSG has so far refused to take this step, I took on the challenge. I contend that an estimate of about 39,000 (range 26,000-58,000) at 2018 is not only plausible but scientifically defensible. See the graph below from my new book:
Global polar bear population size estimates to 2018. From Chapter 10 of The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened (Crockford 2019).
This new estimate for 2018 is a modest 4-6 fold increase over the 10,000 or so bears that existed in the 1960s and after 25 years, a credible increase over the estimate of 25,000 that the PBSG offered in 1993 (Wiig et al. 1995).
However, my new estimate is much larger than the improbable figure of about 26,000 (range 22,000-31,000) offered by PGSG biologists in 2015 (Regehr et al. 2016; Wiig et al. 2015). The scary question is this: what do Arctic residents do if there are actually as many as 58,000?
See my new book (Crockford 2019) for the full rationale and references used to arrive at this figure.
The bottom line: it is scientifically unacceptable for the PBSG to continue to refuse to provide an extrapolated ‘best guess’ global estimate for polar bears, given that the scientifically accurate estimate they crave is essentially unattainable. An estimate of about 39,000 (range 26,000-58,000) at 2018 is not only plausible but scientifically defensible. Read the rest of this entry »