People send me stuff.
Just last week we heard that Dr. Robert Carter had been blackballed at his own university where he served as department chair, and now we have this from Dr. Murray Salby, sent via email.
Between John Cook, Stephan Lewandowsky, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, plus Mike Marriot and his idiotic ideas, I’m beginning to think Australia is ground zero for AGW crackpottery.
This email’s accusations (if true I have independent confirmation now, title changed to reflect this – Anthony) is quite something, it illustrates the disturbing lengths a university will go to suppress ideas they don’t agree with. So much for academic freedom at Macquarie University.
From: [redacted]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 2:25 PM
To: [redacted]
Subject: From Murry Salby
Thanks for your interest in the research presented during my recent lecture tour in Europe.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/06/another-nail-in-the-climate-change-coffin.php
Remarks from several make it clear that Macquarie University
is comfortable with openly disclosing the state of affairs,
if not distorting them to its convenience. So be it.
Macquarie’s liberal disclosure makes continued reticence unfeasible.
In response to queries is the following, a matter of record:
1. In 2008, I was recruited from the US by “Macquarie University”,
with appointment as Professor, under a national employment contract with
regulatory oversight, and with written agreement that Macquarie would provide
specified resources to enable me to rebuild my research program in Australia.
Included was technical support to convert several hundred thousand lines of computer code,
comprising numerical models and analyses (the tools of my research),
to enable those computer programs to operate in Australia.
2. With those contractual arrangements, I relocated to Australia.
Upon attempting to rebuild my research program, Macquarie advised that
the resources it had agreed to provide were unavailable. I was given an excuse for why.
Half a year later, I was given another excuse. Then another.
Requests to release the committed resources were ignored.
3. Three years passed before Macquarie produced even the first major component
of the resources it had agreed to provide. After five years of cat-and-mouse,
Macquarie has continued to withhold the resources that it had committed.
As a result, my computer models and analyses remain inoperative.
4. A bright student from Russia came to Macquarie to work with me.
Macquarie required her to abandon her PhD scholarship in Russia.
Her PhD research, approved by Macquarie, relied upon the same computer
models and analyses, which Macquarie agreed to have converted but did not.
5. To remedy the situation, I petitioned Macquarie through several avenues provided
in my contract. Like other contractual provisions, those requests were ignored.
The provisions then required the discrepancy to be forwarded to the Australian employment tribunal,
the government body with regulatory oversight.
The tribunal then informed me that Macquarie had not even registered my contract.
Regulatory oversight, a statutory protection that Macquarie advised would govern
my appointment, was thereby circumvented. Macquarie’s failure to register
rendered my contract under the national employment system null and void.
6. During the protracted delay of resources, I eventually undertook the production
of a new book – all I could do without the committed resources to rebuild my research program.
The endeavor compelled me to gain a better understanding of greenhouse gases
and how they evolve. Preliminary findings from this study are familiar to many.
http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/speaker/murry-salby/ Refer to the vodcast of July 24, 2012.
Insight from this research contradicts many of the reckless claims surrounding greenhouse gases.
More than a few originate from staff at Macquarie, which benefits from such claims.
7. The preliminary findings seeded a comprehensive study of greenhouse gases.
Despite adverse circumstances, the wider study was recently completed. It indicates:
(i) Modern changes of atmospheric CO2 and methane are (contrary to popular belief)
not unprecedented.
(ii) The same physical law that governs ancient changes of atmospheric CO2 and methane
also governs modern changes.
These new findings are entirely consistent with the preliminary findings,
which evaluated the increase of 20th century CO2 from changes in native emission.
8. Under the resources Macquarie had agreed to provide, arrangements were made
to present this new research at a scientific conference and in a lecture series at
research centers in Europe.
9. Forms for research travel that were lodged with Macquarie included a description
of the findings. Presentation of our research was then blocked by Macquarie.
The obstruction was imposed after arrangements had been made at several venues
(arranged then to conform to other restrictions imposed by Macquarie).
Macquarie’s intervention would have silenced the release of our research.
10. Following the obstruction of research communication, as well as my earlier efforts
to obtain compliance with my contract, Macquarie modified my professional duties.
My role was then reduced to that of a student teaching assistant: Marking student papers
for other staff – junior staff.
I objected, pursuant to my appointment and provisions of my contract.
11. In February 2013, Macquarie then accused me of “misconduct”,
cancelling my salary. It blocked access to my office, computer resources,
even to personal equipment I had transferred from the US.
My Russian student was prohibited from speaking with me.
She was isolated – left without competent supervision
and the resources necessary to complete her PhD investigation,
research that Macquarie approved when it lured her from Russia.
12. Obligations to present our new research on greenhouse gases (previously arranged),
had to be fulfilled at personal expense.
13. In April, The Australian (the national newspaper), published an article which
grounded reckless claims by the so-called Australian Climate Commission:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/last-summer-was-not-actually-angrier-than-other-summers/story-e6frgd0x-1226611988057 (Open access via Google News)
To promote the Climate Commission’s newest report is the latest sobering claim:
“one in two chance that by 2100 there’ll be no human beings left on this planet”
Two of the six-member Australian Climate Commission are Macquarie staff.
Included is its Chief Commissioner.
14. While I was in Europe presenting our new research on greenhouse gases,
Macquarie undertook its misconduct proceedings – with me in absentia.
Macquarie was well informed of the circumstances. It was more than informed.
15. Upon arriving at Paris airport for my return to Australia, I was advised that
my return ticket (among the resources Macquarie agreed to provide) had been cancelled.
The latest chapter in a pattern, this action left me stranded in Europe,
with no arrangements for lodging or return travel.
The ticket that had been cancelled was non-refundable.
16. The action ensured my absence during Macquarie’s misconduct proceedings.
17. When I eventually returned to Australia, I lodged a complaint with the
Australian employment tribunal, under statutes that prohibit retaliatory conduct.
18. In May 2013, while the matter was pending before the employment tribunal,
Macquarie terminated my appointment.
19. Like the Australian Climate Commission, Macquarie is a publically-funded enterprise.
It holds a responsibility to act in the interests of the public.
20. The recent events come with curious timing, disrupting publication of our research
on greenhouse gases. With correspondence, files, and computer equipment confiscated,
that research will now have to be pursued by Macquarie University’s “Climate Experts”.
http://www.science.mq.edu.au/news_and_events/news/climate_change_commision
Murry Salby
Michael Palmer says:
July 9, 2013 at 10:01 am
On the other hand, being “sceptical” about another man’s assertion of simple fact means to assume that he is a liar.
____________________________________________
We should be first of all skeptical about our own conclusions, especially if they are based on incomplete evidence. I have no doubts that what Dr. Salby wrote is true, but I have serious doubts it is the whole truth.
Based on this mail, we are fully entitled to pity Dr. Salby and organize help for him.
But we are in no position to judge Macquarie or accuse them of wrongdoing without even hearing their side of the truth. That’s just plain wrong.
Clearly academic freedom is under attack at Macquerie university by the high priests and political masters of AGW.
This is a very worrying situation which has disturbing parallels with Lysenkoism which flourished under the state patronage of Stalin.
Did you see that, Perlwitz? PUOSHU means put up or shut up. If you have any substantiation of your smears against the honesty of Salby you need to put them here.
This news comes as no surprise. Here in our own country physics professor Eric Hedin at Ball State University is under attack by University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne for teaching a honors course on the “Boundaries of Science,” In the approved class, Dr. Hedin suggested texts favorable to and critical of intelligent design. For this heresy, his career at Ball State might be over.
Also under attack is astrophysicist Guillermo Gonzalez, who was recently hired at Ball State University. Guillermo’s specialty is finding and writing about exoplanets. But because of his view that the design of the universe is not an accident triggered attacks once again by Jerry Coyne. Dr. Gonzalez has never taught ID in class, but by merely holding that view is enough to put your job in jeopardy.
Expect to see more stories like Professor Murry Salby’s here in America as the NCSE exerts more pressure on Universities teaching climate change “science”. This is about academic freedom and people should stand up for what is right!
Macquarie’s failure to register the contract may not have been an accident- it may have been deliberate. If there was a deliberate attempt to defraud and injure Salby, then this could be criminal, as Moncton pointed out. There will be a new government in Oz in a short while. This could be another Climategate, or bigger, if it all spins out. Someone should see that it does spin out.
Perlwitz,
What’s your interest in the matter? Is it just that you have a hard on to try to catch somebody in a logical fallacy, are you looking for more ‘what got me snipped’ material for your ridiculous blog, or are you going someplace with this?
BTW, thanks for providing an amazing ironic spectacle by actually having the cajones to come here and imply Dr. Salby is lying and then accuse people of confirmation bias. I don’t get to see people mock themselves to that degree often.
As always, best regards.
Answer regarding Professor Murry Salby’s publications:
Fundamentals of atmospheric physics / Murry L. Salby Salby, Murry L. (författare)
ISBN 0-12-615160-1
San Diego : Academic Press, cop. 1996
— — —
Physics of the Atmosphere and Climate [Elektronisk resurs]. Salby, Murry L. (författare)
ISBN 9781139159173
2nd ed.
Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2011.
Engelska 1 online resource (718 p.)
Numerous people are commenting on the rot in the ed system. It is global with the dominant drivers being the UN, the OECD, and, believe it or not, the accreditation agencies. What Salby is running into, what I have tracked back to the Soviet Union and forward to 2013, and what made me think of David Christian and the Big History Project that has been troubling for a while, ALL have one thing in common.
A coordinated effort to create a common belief system that unifies like a cosmology and is believed like dogma and that reality does not shake. It was developed as a philosophy around 1960 in a nerdy expression Ascending from the Abstract to the Concrete. But the officially supplied beliefs–the Generative Metaphors or Filtering Lenses to use two common expressions act as the guide for how the world is perceived. The purpose is to push Statism and prevent unauthorized technological innovation and basically get most of us behaving like serfs without really seeing it that way.
Think of all the stories as attempts to prevent Unapproved Personal Knowledge. It’s also the reason no one teaches reading properly anymore.
One more point, research universities did not independently all start pushing these Bad Ideas. Apart from accreditation, higher ed administrative conferences now push the idea that governments run the economy and work together with Big Business and the research universities. We are all just the passengers that exist for he sake of the ship.
I have seen the docs from decades ago laying out this as a global political strategy and I have listed to Presidents of major universities make it clear they know this strategy well. “And Governments Must Facilitate Everything” was a direct quote.
I’m going to download Salby’s latest video on this. Just in case…
Perlwitz claims the mass balance argument proves Salby is wrong about the source of CO2
If Perlwitz watched Salby’s lecture, he would understand why the mass balance argument in fact proves nothing, as it involves a single equation with two unknowns, insufficient to determine a unique solution.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/06/climate-scientist-dr-murry-salby.html?showComment=1370978113222#c1094879382476014584
Michael, under typical academic conditions, professors who write textbooks have graduate students and post docs doing the research and writing the first drafts. The rate of paper production doesn’t fall.
The fact that Salby’s publication rate fell indicates that he wasn’t getting the grad students and post docs. He seems a good guy who would attract students. His publication hiatus began after 2008, the same year he went to Macquarie. This hiatus is then consistent with the story of getting trouble from Macquarie, rather than support.
Let us concentrate on verifiable facts.
A key one is the failure to register his contract. This has been stated to be a fact and evidence provided to back it up.
Now this has deprived Salby of certain employment rights under Australian law, that the University assured him he had when negotiating with him.
He needs to follow this up to see if this was just pure oversight or a deliberate action. If deliberate and more than one person was involved in the decision, then that is Conspiracy to deny someones lawful rights and that is an illegal act.
Should be a starter for ten in this case. He needs to put the allegation to them and if he does not get a satisfactory response a complaint to the Police should follow.
Alan
Nope. That’s UEA in Norfolk, England. This just shows that cultural links are geographically more important than physical miles in the modern world. Interesting.
Also, Ferdinand Engelbeen … I disagree with your assumptions about constancy of CO2 reservoirs but I may be wrong (this isn’t the post for that).
However to everyone else, I want to emphasise that Ferdinand Engelbeen, throughout this thread has shown how a real scientist disagrees with another.
He may be right or he may be wrong but this is how to challenge another’s ideas without silencing another’s ideas.
If true that’s just sickening.
Antiactivist says at July 9, 2013 at 5:12 am
No, do not.
Challenge his arguments.
Disprove his assertions.
Mock his prejudices (it can be funny).
But do not censor him.
mpainter says:
July 9, 2013 at 11:42 am
“Macquarie’s failure to register the contract may not have been an accident- it may have been deliberate.”
I love a good conspiracy theory. I’ll take it a step further and propose that Macquarie may have lured Salby to Australia for the express purpose of isolating him, and silencing him if he went off the farm. Let us not forget the Team and the lengths they can go to to protect their ideology.
Ryan says July 9, 2013 at 5:45 am
Actually it would advance the debate.
The Medieval Warm Period is just about 800 years ago. CO2 ice-cores from Antarctica show that CO2 follows temperature by about 800 years. I have argued for years that that is a confounding factor for the theory of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
The only counterpunches have been that:
A) The MWP didn’t exist (ha ha, even Michael Mann is embarrassed by that blunder)
or
B) No-one has published that research and it would change the whole paradigm if they did – which everyone would love (Nobel prizes, glory and pretty girls/boys etc.)
Yet now we see that option B is not true. Self-interest expressed through institutional politics trumps science.
Why doesn’t that anger you, Ryan?
It peeves me, somewhat.
Hockey Schtick says:
July 9, 2013 at 12:05 pm
Perlwitz claims the mass balance argument proves Salby is wrong about the source of CO2
If Perlwitz watched Salby’s lecture, he would understand why the mass balance argument in fact proves nothing, as it involves a single equation with two unknowns, insufficient to determine a unique solution.
If the natural circulation was the main source of the increase in the atmosphere, as Salby – and Bart – claim, then there would be an upspeed in ratio with the CO2 emissions by humans, which more than doubled over the past 50 years. That would more than halve the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere, but we see the opposite: the residence time increases in more recent estimates, which points to rather stable circulation in a growing reservoir.
Moreover if the oceans were the source, that would give an imprint on the 13C/12C ratio’s in the atmosphere which is not oberved:
http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/klim_img/deep_ocean_air_increase_290.jpg
But that is a reason for discussing things out, not a reason to behave like the university did.
As Kate over at SDA says
“What is the opposite of Diversity………University”
In his numerous, ongoing posts written during his taxpayer-paid work day, Perlwitz asks:
“It is interesting to watch how almost all of the ‘skeptic’ crowd here just accept all those claims by Salby he makes in this email as true at face value w/o being a bit skeptical. Why is that?”
Apparently Perlwitz has never heard of the principle: “Silence is concurrence”. Macquarie U. has not responded — not even with a general, boilerplate comment that Dr. Salby is wrong in his facts.
Scientific skeptics have been all over Perlwitz’ runaway global warming beliefs from the get-go; they have answered with alacrity and facts — verifiable facts that easily deconstruct Perlwitz’ climate alarmism. But by contrast, Macquarie has posted no rebuttal of any kind to Dr. Salby’s very serious accusations of wrongdoing.
Silence is concurrance.
Ferdinand Engelbeen says:
July 9, 2013 at 12:47 pm
“…then there would be an upspeed in ratio with the CO2 emissions by humans, which more than doubled over the past 50 years.”
No, the human inputs are simply negligible with respect to the natural flows, and the evolution is essentially what it would have been regardless of the human inputs. This is obvious in the data.
alex says:
July 9, 2013 at 12:31 am
Alex, do you watch ‘The Big Bang Theory’? You know the trouble Sheldon has with sarcasm …
There are many Sheldons in this world!
This is a very sad and disturbing story.
And as we have seen it fits the pattern of Climategate emails, of warmista behaviour throughout the whole CAGW story. It reminds me of the case of prof. Jaworowsky and many other. Will be interesting to learn how this particular case will evolve in the future.
Obviously the universities in Australia have enough money to throw on Gergis studies or for Lew papers, however behave so badly with skeptics scientists.
The problem resides maybe ironically with too much money available for universities from public teats which this way fed an unproductive, useless university bureaucracy very much dependent on government money.
So what do they do? They please the masters, there is no competition for science.
Maybe a significant reduction in money spend on various “research” might improve the quality.
“If it disagrees with observations its wrong” – so very clearly stated. Of course such call to reality and science could not be tolerated by the climate church.
janama says:
July 9, 2013 at 8:53 am
Thank you for posting the 2 videos. Very instructive.
Sounds reasonable (no reference but I have seen your record and you wouldn’t make the statement without being able to back it up). I’ll accept that.
Ok the imprint is not observed but should it be? Really?
You know the source of Oceanic CO2? How much is from undersea volcanoes or evolutionary changes in the lifespan of biota? And what is the C12:C13 ratio in the deep underground or photosynthesising microorganisms?
Also, (very speculative this) if the reservoirs change then do the periods of inflow and outflow change?
But actually, this is not the post to discuss this.
This post is about academic policy and the search for knowledge. If you don’t feel it right to reply let no-one think you in anyway the lesser. Quite the reverse, perhaps.
Bart says:
July 9, 2013 at 1:01 pm
No, the human inputs are simply negligible with respect to the natural flows, and the evolution is essentially what it would have been regardless of the human inputs. This is obvious in the data.
Not the right place to discuss these thing out – again – but if the residuals in the atmosphere doubled over time (in ratio with human inputs) and natural inputs are to blame, the whole circulation must double in speed…