Ross Cameron led me to a wonderful blog

Always a plus when frustration with a serial nutcase gets to you.

Why does the Sydney Morning Herald keep running drivel from Ross Cameron, the one time Liberal member for Parramatta?

Is it a way of testing that the punters are alive, and if they send in missives correcting the drivel, they must surely be doubly alive? Is it the Miranda the Devine factor in play? You know, if you put Gorgeous George in the ring, people will scream for blood and even pay good hard cash for the spectacle?

Or is it because this is the best they can do, by way of commentary? In which case surely the SMH and the country have gone to the dogs…

Oh I thank you, Loon Pond, from the bottom of my heart, for that. And for this.

The only question is why, at this time of year, the SMH chooses to publish such a half baked pile of tripe when there are surely many other scribblers around who could do a good and measured job on the subject at hand. Is it a desire to be worse at the game than The Australian in a spiral to the bottom in the quest for hits?

Most likely. Cameron scored a decent number of outraged hits, and poor old abused, long suffering history copped the biggest hit of all …

I will add you to my Google Reader immediately.

Ross Cameron is a scientist today. He is one of those who leaps from a sensible discussion about whether a carbon tax is a good idea or not to a  rehash of several of  the old furphies about climate science and climate change. The one thing he does not seem to have done is seriously read the report he attacks. That’s this report:


He’s not alone of course: see The Climate Commission Report on Catallaxy where we see again how admiration for Hayek and Ayn Rand trumps scientific objectivity in this matter every time. The truth is indeed inconvenient, it appears, for that little corner of right wing pseudo intelligentsia.

Not that Cameron is intelligentsia, pseudo or otherwise. The tropes are there, all as threadbare as they were last year or the year before.

  • THEY are shutting down debate. (As if there seriously IS a debate any more!)
  • THEY should realise scientists make mistakes.
  • THEY were shown to be corrupt at ClimateGate etc etc…
  • WE are the bearers of the NEW PARADIGM! Kuhn abuse – a cliche if ever. Think of all the other NEW PARADIGMS such as vaccination being truly evil, or Intelligent Design being – um – intelligent. You get my drift? Of course it may also be said that the true paradigm shift which Cameron and his brighter fellow thinkers have missed out on is the one that says there is such a thing as anthropogenic global warming and this is a serious problem.

So boring, so predictable, and in the long run so tragically irrelevant. The climate couldn’t give a shit about our political fetishes. It just does its thing – more in response, we now know, to what we do to it than we hitherto suspected.

Go and read the report. It is far more substantial than its detractors are prepared to admit. 

Further reading

Switching off denial: a guide

If you’re a sceptic, then I salute you.

Sceptics are people who don’t take things at face value; they demand facts, and are ready to change opinions based on the weight of evidence, even if that goes against personal preferences or beliefs. I like to think that I’m a bit of sceptic myself (although I’ll need a bit more evidence before I’m sure).

Deniers, on the other hand, refuse to accept evidence that conflicts with their personal beliefs, desires or ideology. People in denial gather reasons and excuses, however flimsy, that allow them to not believe in whatever unwelcome truth they’re trying to avoid.

No serious sceptic could doubt that human-caused climate change is real, and serious – the evidence is just too overwhelming. However, many people are still in a state of denial over climate change, for a wide range of reasons. Fortunately, opinion polls show that the majority of the public accept the reality of the climate problem; however, the number of people who take climate change seriously seems to be slipping back in some countries. If we want to keep building a global movement for climate justice, then we need to face up to the problem of denial.

Here are some handy weapons for tackling climate change denial head-on…


A serious examination of the Climate Commission Report by someone who know the science can be found at:

The Critical Decade – Part 1: The Science