Scientists Campaign Politicians for Respect

Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrintE-mail

Scientists campaign politicians for respect according to ABC News 20 June 2011. Over 200 scientists from around Australia have gathered in Canberra to meet with politicians and launch a campaign named “Respect the Science.” According to Anna Maria Arabia, CEO of the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies, the campaign “is really aimed at looking at the misinformation campaign that's being run against the scientific evidence largely coming from the climate change debate ... and seeing how that is undermining the nation-building work of our scientists.” The scientists are blaming “climate deniers” for the “misinformation campaign” and are hoping to show the politicians and general public how the peer review process works in science to guarantee the best results. Chief Scientist of Australia, Professor Ian Chubb, explained: “It is about ensuring that people understand that there is proper science, properly conducted, properly reviewed and properly debated.”

ABC

Editorial Comment: When scientists have to seek the protection of politicians (who are mostly non-scientists) they are, in effect, admitting their opinions will not stand up to honest scrutiny. Try for a brief interview with Geology Professor Ian Plimer, who has taken a strong stand against climate change being a man made phenomenon, and you will discover that neither he nor any other climate critic can get a paper published unless it supports the “in” view. The much vaunted peer review process is gaining a track record being a guarantee only that the entrenched position stays that way, and that is no guarantee of truth or even good research. Getting an article published in a peer reviewed journal merely indicates that the reviewers agree with the original authors, or at least think their ideas acceptable enough to be discussed seriously. The process of peer review also means that if the "peers" have already decided a position is wrong, or should not be discussed, it won’t be published, irrespective of how factual it is.

However, in this world that God has made, things are true or false irrespective of who says them, how many people say them, or where they are written. Things that are true do not cease to be true just because a science journal refuses to publish them. If something is false, it will not be made true merely by being said by a science professor, written in a well known science journal, broadcast in the popular news media, or because a green-dominated government says we can trust the scientists it employs in the public service, which is where many of these 200 come from.

There is just one last thing – when the public finds out they have been had over climate change, with or without carbon taxes, we predict the public opinion of science and scientists will plummet way lower than it is now. (Ref. politics, philosophy, global warming, prediction)

Evidence News 22 June 2011

q_and_a2
crc_youtube
outdoor_museum_panel
free_audio2