Persia Posted June 20, 2011 #1 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Top Australian scientists have united in a new campaign to defend their credibility amid fresh death threats aimed at key climate change scientists. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/20/3248032.htm?section=justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 20, 2011 #2 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Defend credibility? What credibility? Their support for gm & making black holes on earth demonstrates that they are insane & dangerous. Sorry to generalise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted June 21, 2011 #3 Share Posted June 21, 2011 And yet, you do it anyway. You condemn Climatologists because you dislike Agriculturalists and Physicists. How well-balanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted June 21, 2011 #4 Share Posted June 21, 2011 It dead set sounds like the ideal of the *ahem* open minded. Some people seem to fear what science will reveal. Death threats? For scientific process? Those are the ones who be dangerous. Lets hope they are identified and locked up appropriately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 21, 2011 #5 Share Posted June 21, 2011 And yet, you do it anyway. You condemn Climatologists because you dislike Agriculturalists and Physicists. How well-balanced. Are you replying to me? Who said I was condeming climatologists? They're not all GW extremists. I was condeming the general attitude prevalent & propagated in academia. I think you're generalising too, but do you realise it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Bismarck Posted June 21, 2011 #6 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Sad, just sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 21, 2011 #7 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Death threats? For scientific process? Those are the ones who be dangerous. Lets hope they are identified and locked up appropriately. I'm not defending anyone crazy enough to make death threats, but it would be stupid not to try to understand their grievances. Mainstream scientific institutions go along with inhumane & immoral political policy, at the extreme risk & expense of the public. No democracy or caution, just reckless insanity spouted from these idiots. Maybe that's what they're annoyed about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted June 21, 2011 #8 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Are you replying to me? Commenting, more than replying, but yes. Who said I was condeming climatologists? You referred to them as "insane & dangerous". That is considered a condemnation. They're not all GW extremists. I was condeming the general attitude prevalent & propagated in academia. Yes, hence the comment regarding the irony of someone claiming to hate to generalise, yet doing so anyway. I think you're generalising too, but do you realise it? Actually, when I generalize, I tend to point it out, as I usually engage in arguments of a rather specific nature. As far as this specific thread goes...where exactly am I generalizing about anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 21, 2011 #9 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Ironic too how the more scientifically advanced we get, the more potential for catastrophe. Every label is a generalisation. You assume a lot too. & I didn't claim to hate anything either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted June 22, 2011 #10 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Ironic too how the more scientifically advanced we get, the more potential for catastrophe. ...that's not irony. Actually, that's pretty predictable. Every label is a generalisation. Most labels are pretty specific. When one doesn't use labels, and one just refers to an entire swath, that is when it becomes generalizations. You assume a lot too. & I didn't claim to hate anything either! Well, you claimed I was generalizing, and when asked to show where, you did not answer. Now you are claiming that I am assuming, but again, you are not showing where I am assuming anything. Additionally, you are implying that you have been accused of hating something. No one here has even come close to accusing you of anything like that. Are you having the same discussion as we are? Frankly, it sounds like you have already decided what others are going to say, rather than respond to what they are actually saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 22, 2011 #11 Share Posted June 22, 2011 ...that's not irony. Actually, that's pretty predictable. Most labels are pretty specific. When one doesn't use labels, and one just refers to an entire swath, that is when it becomes generalizations. Well, you claimed I was generalizing, and when asked to show where, you did not answer. Now you are claiming that I am assuming, but again, you are not showing where I am assuming anything. Additionally, you are implying that you have been accused of hating something. No one here has even come close to accusing you of anything like that. Are you having the same discussion as we are? Frankly, it sounds like you have already decided what others are going to say, rather than respond to what they are actually saying. Is this a "scientist hitting back"? Except no death threat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted June 22, 2011 #12 Share Posted June 22, 2011 In a manner of speaking, yes. Except for the death threat part, of course. I believe one of the biggest mistakes that scientists make is allowing the media to have free reign with reporting research. They really need to get out there and strong-arm the media to start publishing accurate news, not sensationalist news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 22, 2011 #13 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I believe one of the biggest mistakes that scientists make is allowing the media to have free reign with reporting research. They really need to get out there and strong-arm the media to start publishing accurate news, not sensationalist news. Scientists have authority over mass media? I thought mass media was the propaganda wing of certain controlling forces. Publish accurate news? Why would they want to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted June 22, 2011 #14 Share Posted June 22, 2011 If they had authority, they wouldn't need to strongarm them. And the mass media is not the propaganda wing of anything beyond making a buck. The key to a scientists success is in finding a way to make accurate news as exciting as sensationalist news. Since that may not be possible, they will have to settle for making sensationalist news more painful for the mass media to publish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oly Posted June 22, 2011 #15 Share Posted June 22, 2011 And the mass media is not the propaganda wing of anything beyond making a buck. How do you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Fish Posted June 22, 2011 #16 Share Posted June 22, 2011 The key to a scientists success is in finding a way to make accurate news as exciting as sensationalist news. Since that may not be possible, they will have to settle for making sensationalist news more painful for the mass media to publish. the media will always spin things the way they want to portray something, and the way something is portrayed is dictated by who controls the media. anyone in the media knows this is true. I seriously doubt these death threats are anything real at all. just made up or exaggerated to slur those with opposing views as dangerous. " an email threatening my life." not only does this sound unlikely, but why has no-one been arrested or identified? are emails anonymous all of a sudden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Fish Posted July 1, 2011 #17 Share Posted July 1, 2011 "CLAIMS prominent climate change scientists had recently received death threats have been revealed as an opportunistic ploy, with the Australian National University admitting that they occurred up to five years ago. Only two of ANU's climate change scientists allegedly received death threats, the first in a letter posted in 2006-2007 and the other an offhand remark made in person 12 months ago. Neither was officially reported to ACT Police or Australian Federal Police, despite such crimes carrying a 10-year prison sentence." http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/carbon-death-threats-go-cold/story-e6freuzr-1226071996499 maybe it should be a crime to lie about a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted July 1, 2011 #18 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Mainstream scientific institutions go along with inhumane & immoral political policy, at the extreme risk & expense of the public. No democracy or caution, just reckless insanity spouted from these idiots. Maybe that's what they're annoyed about. ????? What the ... are you talking about? Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted July 1, 2011 #19 Share Posted July 1, 2011 I seriously doubt these death threats are anything real at all. just made up or exaggerated to slur those with opposing views as dangerous. The wing-nuts murdered an abortion doctor up in Wichita. You never know what some politically-motivated psycho will do, so you better take it seriously. Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted July 1, 2011 #20 Share Posted July 1, 2011 maybe it should be a crime to lie about a crime. Maybe it should be a crime to publish stuff you can't verify. The article you're quoting is an editorial - not even a news item. Editorials don't have to be actual; they're just somebody's opinion. Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now