Mike Carlton earlier failed to provide empirical scientific evidence for his climate belief. Instead, he introduced religion, race and his “conspiracy theories” into Australian climate discussions. Such tactics are increasingly seen as diversions hiding lack of evidence.
Contrary to facts, the vicious and false implied anti-Semitic smear was spread by Graham Readfearn and Ben Cubby.
Despite ample documented evidence some journos fail to discuss UN and Australian corruption of climate science.
See appendices 2, 6, 6a, 7, 8, 9 and others here:http://www.conscious.com.au/CSIROh!.html
All journos and program producers who push climate alarm based on human carbon dioxide contradict empirical scientific evidence. They’re deliberately or inadvertently supporting corruption of climate science.
Are they dishonest? Or are they group thinkers? Or dependent? Or lacking strength to question what they initially perceived as the popular tide? Or naively aligned with vested interests stealing money by fabricating, pushing and/or milking unfounded climate alarm?
Given the facts and empirical scientific evidence, is their behaviour in misrepresenting modest cyclic global warming that ended in 1998 irresponsibly or negligently incompetent or is it deliberately dishonest?
Given that too many federal MPs are afraid of the media’s power, it’s easy to see many were herded into falsely accepting fabricated and unfounded climate alarm. We empathise.
Should all Australians pay the price for abusive journalism? None should. Please Axe the Tax, Drop Direct Action and hold journalists accountable.