Jensen for "All things Science" Minister

[Rorschach]

Dennis Jensen would be a great science minister

Dr Dennis Jensen in Parliament

Dennis Jensen spoke out about the hype around global-warming as long ago as 2004, when there were almost no politicians (or anyone for that matter) daring to publicly mention any skeptical thoughts. It was so risky. What he said then is still largely true.

Jensen obviously knows what science is, can see through the sacred cows, and has the background to foster and filter good science from bad. Science is much more than “climate”, and vested interests pull at it from all directions. We need a science minister who won’t be fooled by slick press releases or activists wearing lab-coats.

Science is broken, web sites are funded to smear senior scientists, namecalling is rife to the highest levels. Government funded work no longer belongs to the public — instead so-called scientists and their universities fight legal battles to hide it from critics, while they run away from public debate. Science has been misused, exploited and corrupted, to justify sweeping changes to the economy, our laws, potentially our way of life. The ARC has lost its way, funding political research disguised as “psychology” that is transparently designed to denigrate voters who disagree with the government. These millions could have gone to medical research instead.

No matter what Jensen says, he will be attacked by the religious acolytes of climate change (see Graham Readfearn) for the most ridiculous of things (like things that he has never said). The country needs to rise above the frivolous and naked attempts to control policies by childish verbal intimidation.

Dennis Jensen has a PhD in Materials Science and Physics, experience at CSIRO and in Defense Science and Technology Organisation. He’s the most highly qualified member of Parliament in any area of science.

He foresaw in 2004 that the theory of man-made global warming was “suspect” and would probably come unstuck — the models were failing, some of the data was being hidden from view, and other data was questionable. This was not a full time research project, nor his specialty, and he held no full time position requiring him to investigate man-made global warming, and yet almost all of what he said then stands the test of time and all the newer results since then has borne out his judgment.

[Rorschach]

Excerpts from...
Dr Jensen's Maiden Speech-GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH - Address-in-Reply - House of Representatives - 17 November 2004

Having spent my youth in an authoritarian nation, I have long cherished the notion of the rights of the individual, freedom of choice and expression, and the right of people to succeed in their business, unencumbered by government red tape and restrictions. To a large extent the Howard government has delivered on all of these areas.

Prior to being elected to parliament and after completing my PhD I was a research scientist, most recently working as a defence analyst. This has given me insight and knowledge on the issues relating to Australia's defence. Indeed, we live in what an ancient Chinese curse would call `interesting times'. The last five years have seen a massive change in the geopolitical situation world wide and this has resulted in a paradigm shift in defence. This new reality has to be accepted and acted on. There are those who do not accept this paradigm shift and see the new circumstances as a mere perturbation on what has gone before. To understand the fact that the current state of affairs is a significant shift, we need to reflect on what the situation has been historically.

Family law needs to be revamped to ensure adequate sanctions for those ignoring access provisions and the psychological wellbeing of the children concerned. Child support provisions also have to be revisited. There are far too many non-custodial parents who are being financially crippled for many years by the excessive portions of wages that are taken for child support measures. Clearly, not all divorces can be amicable. Whilst this is recognised, we must ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, children do not become the flotsam and jetsam of ruined relationships.

Also on social issues, I take a very dim view on retrospective action that the tax office takes in many cases, such as the so-called tax effective schemes. Retrospectivity is patently unfair, and when the tax office keeps retracting previous rulings and then charging those caught up in these retracted rulings not only the tax but penalties and interest as well, it becomes clear that here you have a bureaucracy that is profiting by its own ineptitude.

Another problem with traffic legislation relates to the incorrect setting of speed limits. Internationally, it is known that the 85th percentile method is the best way of setting speed limits for road safety. This method is almost totally ignored in Australia, apart from many bodies paying lip-service to it. Instead, we get the results of junk science and fraudulent statistics thrown up to demonstrate that ever reducing speed limits and ever increasing enforcement are the way forward. They are not, and we need to improve driver training as a priority.

Australia is a nation where the tyranny of distance is apparent and individual mobility is extremely important. As this means that cars and traffic will be with us for the foreseeable future, we need to act on this and institute nationally mandated high standards of driver training as a matter of priority. Australia's love affair with the motor vehicle brings to mind the environmental consequences of our use of fossil fuels. Being an analytical person, I tend to take a dim view of sacred cows that are not backed up by verifiable facts. One example of these sacred cows having wide currency is the issue of global warming.

This issue has been taken up by parts of the community with almost religious fervour; however, the problem is that the science backing the claims is suspect. The warming trend that has been covered repeatedly in the media has been generated from ground based measuring stations. Problematically, these stations are affected by urban heat islands. Of course, this is not mentioned by the proponents of global-warming theories. There are far more reliable ways to measure global temperatures, such as through the use of Aerosonde balloons and satellites, which are unaffected by urban heat islands. Unfortunately for the global warmers, the data from these sources do not show the warming trend, so, disingenuously, only the ground based readings are used.

There is another piece of evidence that runs counter to the global warmers' view. The major scare issue with global warming is that of melting polar caps, particularly the Antarctic ice cap. All models for global warming have the maximum increase in temperature occurring at the poles, for good reason: the absorption of heat by greenhouse gases occurs predominantly at temperatures that are common at the polar regions. So, given this, maximum heating should be observed at the polar regions. The problem for the global warmers is that this is not happening. Of more than 10 measurement stations in Antarctica, only one, on the Ross Ice Shelf, shows the warming trend. The rest exhibit no such heating. There is much other data pointing to the fallacy of the global warming scare campaign. Despite this, the global warmers want us to not only bet our economy but, more likely, significantly damage our economy on a theory that will probably go the way of the flat earth theory: restricted to a few adherents who have become totally divorced from reality.

Do not for a moment think that this makes me an antienvironmentalist. I believe that there are significant benefits to be had by controlling harmful emissions. In fact, in many cases a reduction in emissions can result in economic benefits as a result of converting some of the pollutants collected into useful products. This leads me to conclude that during this term of the Howard government we should be focusing on positive solutions to the many challenges which we face. I wish to sincerely thank the people of Tangney for voting for me and thereby bestowing this significant honour upon me. I do not take this honour lightly and I assure the people of Tangney that I will do my utmost to see to their best interests.

for the whole speech...
http://www.dennisjensen.com.au/meet-den ... den-speech" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jovial_Monk]

Do we need a separate thread for all the crazy appointments the simian makes?

Appointing Jensen to anything will make his constituents, who hate him, angry. Could well be an indie running against him in 2016 a la Mirabella (& Windsor, Oakey and Andren.)

Jensen is anti–science! Must have been some Lib female could do the role?

What a series of stupid choices the simian is making! Can’t wait to see what else when I come back from shopping! What a giggle!

[boxy]

Seems like a perfect candidate for the job, if you want to placate the masses, and pay lip service to their sacred cows.

[Rorschach]

Seems like a perfect candidate for the job, if you want to placate the masses, and pay lip service to their sacred cows.

How so?

[Jovial_Monk]

The idiot Jensen is not a minister and the simian does not have a Science minister at all!

What the Church teaches is obviously good enough for old Piss&Moan!

[Rorschach]

The idiot Jensen is not a minister and the simian does not have a Science minister at all!

What the Church teaches is obviously good enough for old Piss&Moan!

oh dear... drug rage Drunky monky?

Jensen isn't an idiot.... care to post some facts to back up your idiotic claim?
Yes there is no Science Minister.

There was none under Labor either.

Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research
Minister for Higher Education
Senator the Hon Kim Carr

Minister for Indigenous Health
Minister for Defence Science and Personnel
Minister for Veterans' Affairs
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on the Centenary of ANZAC
The Hon Warren Snowdon, MP

If you are incapable in your current state to make sensible argument why don't you piss and moan somewhere else. I''ll be voting for that since you seem incapable of saying anything sensible.

BTW you drug addled sod... the topic says "All things Science"