The Dog’s Bollocks

Truth is like a dog’s bollocks – pretty obvious if you care to look.

Jennifer Marohasy does irony, again

“The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda. Perceiving the truth has always been a challenge to mankind, but in the information age (or as I think of it, the disinformation age) it takes on a special urgency and importance.”

“I would suggest that this job is not made any easier by activist-journalists who deliberately set out to deceive…”

“The hoax is really just more misinformation from those who distrust science and is illustrative of the increasing blurring of the line between advocacy and science journalism.”

Jennifer Marohasy » Magazine Duped by anti-GM Activist – A Case of More of the Same

Oh, Jennifer, the irony!

Filed under: Environment, Humour, Media, , , ,

10 Responses

  1. Dave Bath says:

    Nice one Slim! Mind you, your choice of quotes is more representative than her selection of data to support her positions IMHO.

    (Pity you couldn’t find something mentioning “lobbying” rather than just “advocacy”, but reading to much of her stuff is hypertensive!)

  2. graemebird says:


    How can you fall for this climate crap? YOu challenge daily my opposition to Euthanasia.

    So lets have the evidence then you complete cunt?

  3. graemebird says:

    What is ironic then you fucking idiot. You explain the irony to me!!!

    So you are an idiot. You don’t understand science. You’ve fallen for this racket. You are a moron.

    And you think something is ironic?

    Explain it to me you dim bulb.



    To think that the rest of us have to support low-wattage types like yourself.

  4. slim says:

    Ah Graeme! And a happy new year to you, too! Good to see you haven’t made any silly new year resolutions, like, oh, I don’t know, to be more civil when commenting on blogs, for example.

    The point of the post is the irony of a person – whose salary is funded by corporate donors such as Monsanto, BHP-Billiton, Murray Irrigation and who knows else, to provide a stream of ‘journalistic’ commentary on environmental issues, whose modus operandus is to confound, confuse and dissemble with an anti-science campaign for political ends – then turns up quoting extensively from a learned scholar, about how that is not a good thing to do, when a Right wing Culture Warrior takes a flesh wound!

    FYI I trained and worked as a lab scientist for 8 years, so I have more than a passing understanding of the scientific method and science in general. That we do not agree on AGW is as obvious as the bollocks on bull dog, but the simple reality is that given the nature of the model, neither the sceptic or the AGW-concerned will be able to categorically declare victory for at least 25 years. By then the science and evidence will be more solid, will leave little doubt for political exploitation by either denialists and ‘warmaholics’, as Jen so quaintly refers to them/

    No amount of screaming, abuse or claims to the contrary will bring the science to conclusion. At the moment, the debate is simply political static, and it ain’t gonna change any time soon.

    Thanks David. This was a quick post based on my nearly choking with laughter while drinking my coffee – sorry I survived, Graeme.

    You are correct in demanding that Jennifer Marohasy declare her funding sources, as good science has never come out of such vested interest groups. To do so would give her opinion more authority and dare I say credibility. To not declare her interests always leaves her integrity open to question.

  5. slim says:

    Curiously, Jennifer does not refer to herself as a pro-GM activist, despite characterising Katherine Wilson as an anti-GM activist. Two sides of the same coin. Takes one to know one.

  6. graemebird says:

    So you’ve fallen for this anti GM crap as well?

    Is there any irrationality that you don’t subscribe too?

  7. graemebird says:

    “That we do not agree on AGW is as obvious as the bollocks on bull dog, but the simple reality is that given the nature of the model, neither the sceptic or the AGW-concerned will be able to categorically declare victory for at least 25 years. ”

    Bullshit. No model of human origin can impact the natural world. Ergo the irrational flat earth model (it is literally a flat planet model) is not to be considered in this matter. If CO2 had a more-than-beneficial warming effect we would have found that evidence by now.

    Look at your anti-reason approach. The 25 year excuse is a lie made up on the fly. This is not what “the model” said. The fraud is a movable feast in that the model, proved wrong, has now given itself a 25 year time limit.

    But it is the validity of the model ITSELF that we are to judge if we are not stupid cunts like yourself. And this is a model that is entirely ludicrous.

  8. graemebird says:

    Funnily enough there is a lying TV show about global warming on SBS right now. They had it that we will be desperately hot in the 30’s which is the opposite of what science tells us.

  9. slim says:

    “Is there any irrationality that you don’t subscribe to[o]?”

    In the sense that you regard anyone who doesn’t subscribe to your view point as irrational – no.

    An interesting perspective from John Quiggin.

  10. Kezza Phi says:

    It amazes me how sceptics cant believe how people can be concerned about global warming based on science, yet they believe its rubbish based on deception, lies and misinformation. I think at some level they must know this as they resort to insults and abuse to try and make their point. Unfortunately most of them wont be around when they are proven wrong, but more unfortunately for those that are…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

The Dog’s Bollocks

What they say

The Dog's Bollocks: "Bollocks" is one of my favourite words, and this is now one of my favourite blogs and I've only been reading it for five minutes. – John Surname

This is the person who tried to analyse Hayek. This is actually a person who needs a shrink. – JC

Shut up slim. You’re an idiot.
Just you stay honest and keep that thinking cap on. – GMB

Insightful perspectives on politics and discussion of matters epistemological? I’m sold! - Bruce

Add to Technorati Favorites

Flickr Photos

%d bloggers like this: