Lomborg will get his consensus centre up, Pyne is on the search for a new location now, and he will find one, he may not even use Tax payer money to fund it, it will be paid for by AGL who will get a 4ml kickback for putting in 3 new recycle bins.
And Trip, Every country has some form of a “science court” in the EU its Ministry of Science, Innovation and Higher Education, in the US its National Science Board, they all answer to UNESCO globally.
They were all set up to stop people like Lomborg publishing bullshit and calling it fact, he had charges brought against him by for using deliberately misleading incorrect data, 19 countries in the EU where part of action, he was charged, but later got off because a Economics body argued that his argument was economically accurate and that his work had economic merit.
the end result and the resounding reason he cant find work in the EU, was defunded by his own country, took up residence in America being funded by oil companies.
What we know is that he knows how to fudge science to suit economic argument.
The Skeptical Environmentalist was heavily criticized in a review in Nature, Lomborg´s reaction was: "If I really am so wrong, why don´t you just document that?" - and then, when this was documented, he ignored the facts.
Lomborg will get his consensus centre up, Pyne is on the search for a new location now, and he will find one, he may not even use Tax payer money to fund it, it will be paid for by AGL who will get a 4ml kickback for putting in 3 new recycle bins.
And Trip, Every country has some form of a “science court” in the EU its Ministry of Science, Innovation and Higher Education, in the US its National Science Board, they all answer to UNESCO globally.
They were all set up to stop people like Lomborg publishing bullshit and calling it fact, he had charges brought against him by for using deliberately misleading incorrect data, 19 countries in the EU where part of action, he was charged, but later got off because a Economics body argued that his argument was economically accurate and that his work had economic merit.
the end result and the resounding reason he cant find work in the EU, was defunded by his own country, took up residence in America being funded by oil companies.
What we know is that he knows how to fudge science to suit economic argument.
UWA have finally been shamed into backflipping on Lomberg. Cancelled his appointment, are returning the money to the govt.
The UWA statement is a masterwork of weaseliness though. It should be framed and hung in some sort of Cowardly Principleless Bureacratic Shitheadedness Hall of Fame, so future generations of ■■■■-covering self-interested drones can look, learn, and issue ambiguous self-exonerating statements. Check it out news.uwa.edu.au/201505087564/message-vice-chancellor-australian-consensus-centre
It’s pretty shameful that they have been bullied in to rejecting the funds.
Bullied? WTF? People expressing an opinion isn't bullying. Or do you have evidence that they sent in some strong-arms to pressure the chancellor?
I am not up to the climate change modelling section, but the first 30% of the book is really good. Just wondering if anyone had taken a look. It focuses on the inherent limitations of modelling dynamic and chaotic systems and how bias plays a role.
I am not up to the climate change modelling section, but the first 30% of the book is really good. Just wondering if anyone had taken a look. It focuses on the inherent limitations of modelling dynamic and chaotic systems and how bias plays a role.
I will give that a read, it looks pretty interesting
I am not up to the climate change modelling section, but the first 30% of the book is really good. Just wondering if anyone had taken a look. It focuses on the inherent limitations of modelling dynamic and chaotic systems and how bias plays a role.
How are you so sure in your prediction of getting to the last bit?
I am not up to the climate change modelling section, but the first 30% of the book is really good. Just wondering if anyone had taken a look. It focuses on the inherent limitations of modelling dynamic and chaotic systems and how bias plays a role.
How are you so sure in your prediction of getting to the last bit?
But no, none of what science is measuring and telling us is happening. It’s all an elaborate conspiracy by the all powerful climate science illuminati who threaten the poor fossil fuel folks who are just trying to make an honest living. They’re hiding in their dusty university departments all on conference calls with each other swearing allegiance to the great Gore who is behind all of it.
It's the model for payment that's the real problem.
Imagine if they paid say 30% to the actual landowner where the installation is, & distribute the rest to all those within X km’s radius on a sliding scale or some such. It would compensate for any devaluation, & in fact as the rental/compo payments would transfer to anyone buying any home within the zone, the values would likely go up.
I think we’d find a drastic reduction in the “Sick” people too. Not saying some might not be genuine, but it’s ■■■■■■ damning that country wide, the ones that don’t make a dollar & feel screwed are the ones that do.
Well, the previous State Liberal Government here in Victoria, put a 2 km zone around a turbine, and it could not proceed without “agreement” with residents within the zone. Wind Industry cried foul, and told everyone that it cost jobs, affected climate change etc, etc. reality was that it did effect their bottom line by a few million if they had to buy out properties or create sound barriers or renovate homes, but they didn’t even discuss options, they just lobbied harder. New Labor Government has cut zone to 1 km. Why? In fact there is no research to show that 500 m, 1 km, 2 km or whatever makes a difference. So it is all about politics.
And my experience is people get sick whether they get paid or not. Check out the Waubra region, where some of the owners who leased space for turbines have moved house, and others have been now purchased by the Windfarm operator. Why?
And your assertion about who get sick, is just part of the propaganda and spin put out there by this Industry. It is just not true.
It’s the model for payment that’s the real problem.
Imagine if they paid say 30% to the actual landowner where the installation is, & distribute the rest to all those within X km’s radius on a sliding scale or some such. It would compensate for any devaluation, & in fact as the rental/compo payments would transfer to anyone buying any home within the zone, the values would likely go up.
I think we’d find a drastic reduction in the “Sick” people too. Not saying some might not be genuine, but it’s ■■■■■■ damning that country wide, the ones that don’t make a dollar & feel screwed are the ones that do.
