One of New Zealand's top global warming promoters has been sacked by NIWA.
Now I happen to think Dr Salinger is wrong about Global warming. However if the facts are as stated this is a worrying development.
We need robust debate on matters of public policy. And although in this case the debate has been a trifle one sided, on Dr Salinger's side, firing him in this manner will not enhance the quality of that debate one iota.
There has to be more to this than meets the eye. I predict storms ahead.
Leading Government scientist Jim Salinger, an international pioneer in climate change research, has been sacked for what he says is talking out of turn to news organisations.
Now I happen to think Dr Salinger is wrong about Global warming. However if the facts are as stated this is a worrying development.
We need robust debate on matters of public policy. And although in this case the debate has been a trifle one sided, on Dr Salinger's side, firing him in this manner will not enhance the quality of that debate one iota.
There has to be more to this than meets the eye. I predict storms ahead.
Unauthorised public speaking by a government official is against the rules. He did it. He got sacked.
ReplyDeleteThere should be more of it.
Since lefties typically assume rules don't apply to them, they will be the majority of the ones to go. Boo hoo.
What you say is correct for bureaucrats, I'm not so sure about scientists since science thrives on challenge.
ReplyDeleteBut since "climate science" has more to do with politics than science pre se perhaps you are correct.
I'm a bit conflicted in how I see this.
Institutions that dismiss workers with no written warning need to be prepared to make the case again in front of a tribunal. Especially if their related procedures are poorly defined.
ReplyDeletePotentially, this can cost the tax payer.
Looks like a NIWA scientist can't have his own opinion in his spare time. Which is actually a point I agree with - if he's trading as a NIWA scientist, he doesn't have a spare time opinion on climate change.
Those that live by the sword, die by the sword?
Next question - do they know that his opinions are about to be refuted? Are the winds of climate change changing? Were they seeking to batten down the hatches to minimise the damage from the unfolding storm?
Was brand reputation water damaged from a rising tide of new information?
Our fair weather friends may be feeling the heat.