Guest post by Bob Fernley-Jones
[Note from Ric Werme: Bob asked me to help post this while Anthony was away. I'm not familiar with everything going in this matter, but the previous post appears to have been welcome in Australia. (The A in ABC does not stand for American here!) Besides, Bob Carter inspired my first climate web page and I met him last year. He's a good guy. So is his book.]
A) Media Watch dismissed Professor Carter’s book, The Counter Consensus despite that it has had high acclaim. (See below)
B) Media Watch attacked commercial talk-radio on the attitude of the “shock jocks”, on global warming, yet, surprisingly, only one of the accusations of falsehoods was appropriate. (one against Alan Jones; arguably the most notorious shock jock).
Now let’s look at the Science Show’s recent record of “fair play” first:
Science Show versus Bob Carter:
1) 24/Sep/2010 Email from the Science Show producer, invited Professor Carter to have a telephone interview following an unheard critique by Bob Ward.
2) 26/Sept/2010 Reply Email from Bob Carter suggested amongst other things, an interview on his book which was declined. Additionally, based on previous experience with Bob Ward, an already published response was emailed to the producer, but was ignored during the broadcast. (instead, it was posted on the ABC website, for the “convenience” of listeners)
3) 2/Oct/2010; Bob Ward, a PR man from the London School of Economics egregiously attacked a two year old paper by Professor Carter. (without reference to the professor’s already published response to Ward’s previously published attack, or his other 100 or so papers etc)
4) 18/Dec/2010, Science Show (Robyn Williams) chatted with David Suzuki with reference to his recent book.
5) 1/Jan/2011, Science Show interviewed Tim Flannery on his new book.
6) 8/Jan/2011, Science Show replayed a launch speech by Naomi Oreskes on her new book.
7) 26/March/2011, Science Show interviewed, James Woodford, Quote: author of superb book The Great Barrier Reef
8) 26/March/2011, Science Show interviewed Richard Pearson author of book, Driven to Extinction
9) TBD, Email from Professor David Karoly of 21/March201 discussed intention to provide a strong critique of Professor Carter’s book. (See below)
For more detail on 1) through 6), see previous WUWT article (link repeated here).
Items 3) through 9) involve people of opposite view to Professor Carter. Professor Karoly of the IPCC in particular has a vested interest in condemning Professor Carter’s book. Everything was blandly accepted by Robyn Williams, the presenter, and his interviews of favoured authors commonly amounted to Dorothy Dixers.
Media Watch versus Bob Carter:
10) 21/March/2011, Media Watch slammed Professor Carter’s book, mainly on the basis of this Email from Professor Karoly:
From: David Karoly Sent: Monday, 21 March 2011 5:20 AM To: Jonathan Holmes Subject: Review of Carter’s Book in 2010: Hi Jonathan, I have received emails from several people asking me about my review of Bob Carter’s book, Climate: The Counter-Consensus, which is being prepared for Robin Williams Science Show. I have read the book twice but not yet completed my review in writing. A general comment on the book: While it has fewer gross errors than Ian Plimer’s book Heaven+Earth, it is a mixture of scientific facts with misinformation and misinterpretation, as well as outright errors, spun around a framework of personal opinion. Its conclusions are inconsistent with any scientific assessment of climate change prepared by any major national or international scientific body, such as the US National Research Council, the British Royal Society, the Australian Academy of Science, or the IPCC. His claims of a counter-consensus on climate change based on sound science are wrong. Best wishes, David
It will be interesting to see some specifics, but meanwhile, some other scientists that have praised Bob Carter’s book are:
* An absolute must-read; Professor Jan de Ruiter (U.S.A.)
* Should be in every library and school in the world. – Dr. Hamish Campbell (N.Z.)
* is excellent from every perspective. He uses gripping language and is very precise in everything, covering the whole range of issues from the science through the social and economic implications to the fraudulent behaviour of AGW people. Dr. John Nicol (retired physicist, James Cook University).
* Magnificent! Would that all politicians, and some so-called academics, would both read and understand what is really going on. Emeritus Prof. David Bowen (Cardiff University, pers.comm.)
* is one of the best books I have ever read (and I have read a lot). Professor Antero Jarvinen University of Helsinki).
* provides an up-to-date and informed guidance to the scientific criticism of the climate catastrophe hypothesis, and it is an essential contribution to the debate. Emeritus Professor Roland Granqvist
* presents a level headed argument for the problems facing the planet and exposes the media/government generated hysteria surrounding the debate. Gerald Beesley (MSc, DIC Geology).
* A thorough analysis of the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming. This splendid book should be required reading for anyone interested in the climate debate. Dr. Phil Playford
For a fuller list of over 40 enthusiastic reviewers, click here.
Media Watch also asserted that Professor Carter is not a climate scientist, but a mere marine geologist. However, here is a brief description from James Cook University (School of Earth and Environmental Sciences) on his climate research:
Bob Carter is actively researching climate change, using datasets drawn from DSDP/ODP/IODP seabed cores from the Southwest Pacific Ocean on drilling legs 90, 188 and 317. Some of these cores contain high resolution climate information at decadal scale. He is also active in topics in more general sedimentology, stratigraphy and marine research.
See also his extensive research paper listing there. (of course, not all climate scientists are meteorologists as in the case of the IPCC’s Professor Karoly)
END OF PART A) Part B), to follow, concerns an attack on commercial radio shock jocks, whom both I and Media Watch detest, however, that does not justify many errors or misrepresentations as broadcasted on 21/March/2011. BTW, the transcript has attracted over 300 comments, many of them strongly critical of Media Watch bias.
About Bob Fernley-Jones
I’m a retired mechanical engineer, and I guess that because in my science, any bad assumptions can get people killed, I have an abhorrence of many things that are perpetrated by academics in some areas of science. In the case of so-called climate science, the culture and bias in some media is also repugnant to me. I’m hoping that the ABC will improve its self regulating policies and culture to eliminate bias, and this website is under development towards that end. (if necessary).