undefined | Better HN

0 pointsflukus6y ago0 comments

> The debate was called for by opposition parties after evidence came to light that a paper critical of carbon emissions trading was being suppressed

This is disappointing but it's not climate change censorship, it's ETS (as a solution to carbon emissions) censorship.

Edit - And he was probably wrong anyway, look at the results of the ETS in action: https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/climate-cuts-cov...

0 comments

0xy6y ago

Given he was bullied and harassed, do you think someone could oppose climate change at CSIRO and not be bullied and harassed?

ETS and climate change are inextricably linked and related.

If the establishment cannot even handle dissent on solutions, how could they handle dissent on the actual problem?

flukusOP6y ago

It's a single incident, have you got any evidence of a trend?

Considering the next conservative government cut funding to the CSIRO, particularly in climate science areas is there any evidence that it's about the report itself or is it just about not pissing off the current government?

Considering how heavy handed the climate deniers have been (https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article129837...) you're going to need more examples.

0xy6y ago

Just curious, would you trust a scientific organization that would compromise scientific ethics including censorship and bullying at the whim of the current government in order to preserve their funding?

I'm not sure if you're defending or supporting CSIRO here. Bending to the whims of the government is reprehensible for an "independent" organization.

Also, consider the words of the scientist who was censored: "Managers said it was a political hot potato — too political to publish". [1]

So CSIRO is acting politically, using bullying and harassment to force censorship.

I don't see why I should have to prove a trend, I've already shown the chilling effect they intended. [2] Speak against the political grain, and get severely punished personally and have your career ruined. This means politics is driving climate science through intimidation.

Honest question: do you think anyone would put their livelihood, career and reputation on the line to question the political status quo after someone was publicly executed for doing so?

[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2017-05-02/csiro-missing... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

0xy6y ago

Given he was bullied and harassed, do you think someone could oppose climate change at CSIRO and not be bullied and harassed?

ETS and climate change are inextricably linked and related.

If the establishment cannot even handle dissent on solutions, how could they handle dissent on the actual problem?

flukusOP6y ago

It's a single incident, have you got any evidence of a trend?

Considering how heavy handed the climate deniers have been (https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article129837...) you're going to need more examples.

0xy6y ago

I'm not sure if you're defending or supporting CSIRO here. Bending to the whims of the government is reprehensible for an "independent" organization.

Also, consider the words of the scientist who was censored: "Managers said it was a political hot potato — too political to publish". [1]

So CSIRO is acting politically, using bullying and harassment to force censorship.

Honest question: do you think anyone would put their livelihood, career and reputation on the line to question the political status quo after someone was publicly executed for doing so?

[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2017-05-02/csiro-missing... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse