The Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies is launching a campaign calling for respect and to remove a “stain” on their profession cause by “climate denialism” (do we suddenly deny we even have a climate).
If they are so sure that the views presented by the “denialists” are antiscientific, perhaps they will show why with hard, empirical evidence. Are the skeptical scientists who rely on the afforementioned hard, empirical evidence also damaging to science?
Australian Climate Madness points out the reasons the alarmists have lost respect.
Andrew Bolt compares the credentials of the CEO of the federation, Anne-Maria Arabia to those of respected skeptical scientists. And she has the gall to denounce the views of Professor Richard Lindzen.
Campaigns such of these that attempt to demonise non-believers are the real affront to science and free-speech. This attempt to delegitimise dissent has no place in a free society, and politics does not belong in the noble realms of science.
Climate Nonconformist 
I’m particularly intrigued that they use the definite article, ie: “Respect THE Science”.
Why then didn’t they just say, “Respect Science”? They’d be less likely to be seen as tools of a desperate government policy with their noses in the same trough.
One suspects the campaign is being (indirectly) Federal Government funded with the Labor’s mates typical nudge and wink.
A Gen Y sceptic? There is hope yet !
We (at NoCarbonTax) are doing research on the indoctrination of our schools – and it is horrific.
Good anti-consumerism, conservation and charity sentiments completely hijacked by anti-human and CO2 phobia messages. More to come.
Did you get much of this in school and how come you saw through ?
I don’t think it was as bad at my school. Most of the green ideas came from the student leadership.
It was columnists like Andrew Bolt who led me to the realisation that we are being led down a dangerous path.
Pingback: Skeptics attacked, once again, without specifics | Climate Nonconformist
Pingback: CSIRO Fail | Climate Nonconformist
The global debate regarding global warming has resulted in two apposed opinions, the defence of which on both sides is becoming excessively much more heated that our climate.
Whilst expressing their various arguments, both sides for various reasons have enabled others to cash in on the gravy train by advertisements etceteras. Global warming for government is now a means of raising money to enable a temporary respite from their past failings, and too many of the opponents of global warming have reasons as to why they are prepared to have the debate go on for years to come.
The statement made immediately above results from 15 year of frustrating attempts to have evaluated my 65 years of work on the fundamental dynamic nature of matter and associated mysteries. Arising from what I consider a logical description of the dynamic nature of gravity and gravitation, the 168 page work finds that there is a presently completely unknown phenomenon in the form of a Gravitational Thermal Effect that and due to any slight change in gravity, then and dependent on the circumstances of the gravitational change, there would be either a heating or cooling affect.
The referred to work has an ability to explain now baffling physical anomalies. However, the proposed changed concept of gravity and gravitation requires a rewriting of physics. Despite the kinematical description of gravity provided by the Theory of General Relativity teaching that gravity results only from the warping of space, the work emphatically requires that the warping of space (explained) results from the gravitational abilities of matter and not the reverse. My work is not appreciated by the scientific community because it provides reasons as to why Black Holes and various extensions of the Theory of General Relativity, although having a mathematical existence, they cannot have a physical existence. My work is available for small price at Lulu.com and has not sold one copy to the general public. It is buried amongst of a huge number of books all claiming to have a fictional or nonfictional value.
Pingback: Skeptics and Science | Climate Nonconformist