Elimination of mercury

"Vernon" there@atthere wrote in message
m...



Much more, but in a short period of time.
As has been stated over and over that the amount in today's vaccine and in
amalgam is minute, maybe way too much, but overall not the largest source
of mercury in our or the young's environment.


Vaccine input is 200 times over EPA limit, so hardly "minute" as seen in the
autism epidemic. And I doubt any kid got autism from a strip light unless
it was sleeping under one.

I have known they give off mercury but I need to see the actual research
showing how much etc,

"john" wrote in message
...

"Vernon" there@atthere wrote in message
m...



Much more, but in a short period of time.
As has been stated over and over that the amount in today's vaccine and
in amalgam is minute, maybe way too much, but overall not the largest
source of mercury in our or the young's environment.


Vaccine input is 200 times over EPA limit, so hardly "minute" as seen in
the autism epidemic. And I doubt any kid got autism from a strip light
unless it was sleeping under one.

I have known they give off mercury but I need to see the actual research
showing how much etc,

"RESEARCH"????

It isn't research.. Get off your butt and find ALL sources of mercury in
today's environment.
It is not some lab research.

"As has been stated over and over that the amount in today's vaccine and in
amalgam is minute, maybe way too much, but overall not the largest source
of mercury in our or the young's environment."

Learn to read, or have you had too much exposure to mercury.

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article .com,
"cathyb" wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
snip

If a college biology professor stated that a "creator" created mankind
and lots
of plants and animals, I doubt that his political correct bosses and
fellow professors would treat him with much respect. I should note that
Darwin mentioned that he believed that a creator was involved in the
creation of life on this earth in the last paragraph
of his famous book. Some high school science teachers have been fired for
telling their students that God created life.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


If a chemistry professor stated that mercury was the cause of autism, I
doubt that he would be treated with the same respect that they treated
other professors and his bosses.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


The reason that professors are not fired is usually because of tenure
(sp ??).

Oh, I see. You have no example of anyone being fired for teaching that
pollution doesn't cause global warming. Not surprising; it's not a done
deal and there are arguments and research showing that it does, and
that it's negligible in the big scheme of climate change. I know little
about it, but the consensus seems to be moving steadily towards
pollution being a major problem.

But basically, you were bull****ting when you wrote that someone would
be fired for disagreeing with that consensus.


What is your opinion of Dr. Boyd Haley?

Very low indeed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,
Thanks for your post. No, I don't know the names of any professors that
have been fired for teaching their students that global warming also took
place during PETM (Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximun). Some experts believe
that the
global warming that is now taking place is happening for the same reasons
that it took place during PETM.

I've no idea if that is so, but I'll take your word for it. Your
argument is specious, though: no professor would be fired for that
reason, because no professor would deny, or even try to hide the fact
that the earth has been subject to global warming before. It's not in
question. Although I don't know the specifics, not being a
climatologist, it's common knowledge that the earth has suffered
periods of cooling and warming. The question is whether suffering
warming now, and if so, is mankind contributing?


Pollution is a major problem but volcanoes
are usually ignored when global warming is discussed in science classes. I
have NOT seen Al Gore's movie about global warming but it's my guess that
the "pollution" produced by volcanoes was NOT discussed in detail in that
movie.

Why not watch it instead of guessing? Gore, of course, is neither a
climatologist or a professor: he's a politician and entertainer, and
not really relevant to a discussion of academic freedom.


It's my guess that the people that work with Dr. Boyd Haley also have a
"low" opinion about Dr. Boyd Haley. His bosses probably give have poor
evaluations.

Obviously that wouldn't surprise me either, since he's come up with a
theory and failed to provide any evidence to back it up. Oh, and he's
sticking with it in the face of evidence that refutes it, always a bit
embarrassing for a scientist.


Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
I visited google and typed "fired professors" and found lots of examples
of professors that have been fired. In some of those cases, academic
freedom was
involved. I tried to copy and paste one of the articles but failed. I
suggest that you type the name "Thomas Klocek" into the google search
engine and read
some of those articles. He was a professor that taught that Israel had a right
to exist and was an advocate for Israel. Some of the Arab students in his
class (or classes) complained and he was fired. I believe that this is a
clear cut case of Professor Kocek's Academic Freedom being violated. I
could not find any examples of professors that were fired related to
teaching that global warming is NOT caused by pollution from factories and
cars. I am sorry that I did not write down the URL of the site that I
visited.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I certainly don't deny that academic freedoms are occasionally
infringed, although in the case you mention, I think it was simply his
freedom of speech that was infringed, since he was fired over something
that had nothing to do with his work; apparently he got into a
political slanging match outside of the classroom.

However, you claimed that someone would be fired for disagreeing with
the prevailing consensus in the context of their work; the examples
that you gave were a biologist espousing creationism and a climate
scientist not espousing a human impetus for global warming.

This is nonsense: if these scientists provided evidence to back up
their hypotheses, they would be listened to; if they did not they would
rightly be derided. For the first case, no such evidence has been
found; for the second, there are a fair few scientists out there
denying that global warming is caused by pollution, and I haven't
noticed any of them being sacked.

"Vernon" there@atthere wrote in message
m...


"RESEARCH"????

It isn't research.. Get off your butt and find ALL sources of mercury in
today's environment.
It is not some lab research.

"As has been stated over and over that the amount in today's vaccine and
in
amalgam is minute, maybe way too much, but overall not the largest source
of mercury in our or the young's environment."

Learn to read, or have you had too much exposure to mercury.



as I thought, you have no evidence of the amount of mercury given off by
strip lights

you were the one claiming they give off more than vaccines or amalgam--in an
attempt to downplay the vaccine stuff

I thought you had some reserach to back it up

you know peer review--what you pharma boys always go on about

"john" wrote in message
...

"Vernon" there@atthere wrote in message
m...


"RESEARCH"????

It isn't research.. Get off your butt and find ALL sources of mercury in
today's environment.
It is not some lab research.

"As has been stated over and over that the amount in today's vaccine and
in
amalgam is minute, maybe way too much, but overall not the largest source
of mercury in our or the young's environment."

Learn to read, or have you had too much exposure to mercury.



as I thought, you have no evidence of the amount of mercury given off by
strip lights

you were the one claiming they give off more than vaccines or amalgam--in
an attempt to downplay the vaccine stuff

I thought you had some reserach to back it up

you know peer review--what you pharma boys always go on about


ITEMIZED
1. I said that the mercury given off by amalgam / vaccine may be way too
much.
2. I said there are other things in our environment that expose us to
mercury.
3. I said florescent lights, not strip lights.
4. I didn't say they "give off" anything.
5. The biggest scam is when someone diverts attention to one thing in order
to hide others.
6. Protect the young by learning the entire environment to which they are
exposed.
7. Some here have not had so much exposure to mercury and other heavy metals
that we can consider more than one obsession.

8. Don't blame YOUR slowness on mercury. It could be genetic.

None of these articles have anything to do with the use of chelation
therapy and the removal of heavy metals from the body. Nor do any of
them have to do with the potentially lethal side effects of chelation
therapy. Not that we're surprised that Jan off off topic - again.

And your article is wrong, but seeing as they're written by a bunch of
paranoid conspiracists, we're not surprised. Chelation therapy with
EDTA/EGTA has a few medical uses, and is currently in at least a dozen
clinical trials. It's just not the cure-all you and your ilk like to
pretend it is. I'll write this out the way you like, but unlike you
I'll support my statements with outside material:

FACT: Chelation therapy is not an effective treatment for heavy-metal
contamination.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docsu m

This one is good - education and cleanup do more then chelation for lead
poisoning:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...t_uids=8899376

FACT: Chelation therapy is used by the general medical community, and is
a current topic of several clinical trials, even though it has few
proven benefits:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um

FACT: Chelation therapy is very risky, and is associated with multiple
deaths. Which is why a lot of work has gone into finding alternatives
which are safer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um

Bryan

In article . com,
"cathyb" wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
In article .com,
"cathyb" wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
snip

If a college biology professor stated that a "creator" created mankind
and lots
of plants and animals, I doubt that his political correct bosses and
fellow professors would treat him with much respect. I should note that
Darwin mentioned that he believed that a creator was involved in the
creation of life on this earth in the last paragraph
of his famous book. Some high school science teachers have been
fired for
telling their students that God created life.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


If a chemistry professor stated that mercury was the cause of autism, I
doubt that he would be treated with the same respect that they treated
other professors and his bosses.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


The reason that professors are not fired is usually because of tenure
(sp ??).

Oh, I see. You have no example of anyone being fired for teaching that
pollution doesn't cause global warming. Not surprising; it's not a done
deal and there are arguments and research showing that it does, and
that it's negligible in the big scheme of climate change. I know little
about it, but the consensus seems to be moving steadily towards
pollution being a major problem.

But basically, you were bull****ting when you wrote that someone would
be fired for disagreeing with that consensus.


What is your opinion of Dr. Boyd Haley?

Very low indeed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,
Thanks for your post. No, I don't know the names of any professors that
have been fired for teaching their students that global warming also took
place during PETM (Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximun). Some experts believe
that the
global warming that is now taking place is happening for the same reasons
that it took place during PETM.

I've no idea if that is so, but I'll take your word for it. Your
argument is specious, though: no professor would be fired for that
reason, because no professor would deny, or even try to hide the fact
that the earth has been subject to global warming before. It's not in
question. Although I don't know the specifics, not being a
climatologist, it's common knowledge that the earth has suffered
periods of cooling and warming. The question is whether suffering
warming now, and if so, is mankind contributing?


Pollution is a major problem but volcanoes
are usually ignored when global warming is discussed in science classes. I
have NOT seen Al Gore's movie about global warming but it's my guess that
the "pollution" produced by volcanoes was NOT discussed in detail in that
movie.

Why not watch it instead of guessing? Gore, of course, is neither a
climatologist or a professor: he's a politician and entertainer, and
not really relevant to a discussion of academic freedom.


It's my guess that the people that work with Dr. Boyd Haley also have a
"low" opinion about Dr. Boyd Haley. His bosses probably give have poor
evaluations.

Obviously that wouldn't surprise me either, since he's come up with a
theory and failed to provide any evidence to back it up. Oh, and he's
sticking with it in the face of evidence that refutes it, always a bit
embarrassing for a scientist.


Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
I visited google and typed "fired professors" and found lots of examples
of professors that have been fired. In some of those cases, academic
freedom was
involved. I tried to copy and paste one of the articles but failed. I
suggest that you type the name "Thomas Klocek" into the google search
engine and read
some of those articles. He was a professor that taught that Israel had
a right
to exist and was an advocate for Israel. Some of the Arab students in his
class (or classes) complained and he was fired. I believe that this is a
clear cut case of Professor Kocek's Academic Freedom being violated. I
could not find any examples of professors that were fired related to
teaching that global warming is NOT caused by pollution from factories and
cars. I am sorry that I did not write down the URL of the site that I
visited.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I certainly don't deny that academic freedoms are occasionally
infringed, although in the case you mention, I think it was simply his
freedom of speech that was infringed, since he was fired over something
that had nothing to do with his work; apparently he got into a
political slanging match outside of the classroom.

However, you claimed that someone would be fired for disagreeing with
the prevailing consensus in the context of their work; the examples
that you gave were a biologist espousing creationism and a climate
scientist not espousing a human impetus for global warming.

This is nonsense: if these scientists provided evidence to back up
their hypotheses, they would be listened to; if they did not they would
rightly be derided. For the first case, no such evidence has been
found; for the second, there are a fair few scientists out there
denying that global warming is caused by pollution, and I haven't
noticed any of them being sacked.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
Most professors are smart enough to wait until they have tenure before
they start teaching hypotheses without evidence. They probably don't even
care if their politically correct bosses and fellow professors treat them
like trash.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Bryan Heit" wrote in message
...
None of these articles have anything to do with the use of chelation
therapy and the removal of heavy metals from the body. Nor do any of them
have to do with the potentially lethal side effects of chelation therapy.
Not that we're surprised that Jan off off topic - again.

What are you blathering about?

Most people post what they are replying to.

FACT: It was NOT me that mentioned chelation in this thread.



And your article is wrong, but seeing as they're written by a bunch of
paranoid conspiracists, we're not surprised. Chelation therapy with
EDTA/EGTA has a few medical uses, and is currently in at least a dozen
clinical trials. It's just not the cure-all you and your ilk like to
pretend it is. I'll write this out the way you like, but unlike you I'll
support my statements with outside material:

What article? Where have I ever mentioned a cure-all??

FACT: Chelation therapy is not an effective treatment for heavy-metal
contamination.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docsu m

This one is good - education and cleanup do more then chelation for lead
poisoning:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...t_uids=8899376

See the title of this thread.. It is NOT about lead.

FACT: Chelation therapy is used by the general medical community, and is a
current topic of several clinical trials, even though it has few proven
benefits:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um

FACT: Chelation therapy is very risky, and is associated with multiple
deaths. Which is why a lot of work has gone into finding alternatives
which are safer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docs um

Bryan

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docsu m

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...ubmed_docsu m

http://drcranton.com/chelation/research.htm

"cathyb" wrote:


Jason Johnson wrote:
In article .com,
"cathyb" wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
snip

If a college biology professor stated that a "creator" created mankind
and lots
of plants and animals, I doubt that his political correct bosses and
fellow professors would treat him with much respect. I should note that
Darwin mentioned that he believed that a creator was involved in the
creation of life on this earth in the last paragraph
of his famous book. Some high school science teachers have been fired for
telling their students that God created life.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


If a chemistry professor stated that mercury was the cause of autism, I
doubt that he would be treated with the same respect that they treated
other professors and his bosses.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


The reason that professors are not fired is usually because of tenure
(sp ??).

Oh, I see. You have no example of anyone being fired for teaching that
pollution doesn't cause global warming. Not surprising; it's not a done
deal and there are arguments and research showing that it does, and
that it's negligible in the big scheme of climate change. I know little
about it, but the consensus seems to be moving steadily towards
pollution being a major problem.

But basically, you were bull****ting when you wrote that someone would
be fired for disagreeing with that consensus.


What is your opinion of Dr. Boyd Haley?

Very low indeed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,
Thanks for your post. No, I don't know the names of any professors that
have been fired for teaching their students that global warming also took
place during PETM (Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximun). Some experts believe
that the
global warming that is now taking place is happening for the same reasons
that it took place during PETM.

I've no idea if that is so, but I'll take your word for it. Your
argument is specious, though: no professor would be fired for that
reason, because no professor would deny, or even try to hide the fact
that the earth has been subject to global warming before. It's not in
question. Although I don't know the specifics, not being a
climatologist, it's common knowledge that the earth has suffered
periods of cooling and warming. The question is whether suffering
warming now, and if so, is mankind contributing?


Pollution is a major problem but volcanoes
are usually ignored when global warming is discussed in science classes. I
have NOT seen Al Gore's movie about global warming but it's my guess that
the "pollution" produced by volcanoes was NOT discussed in detail in that
movie.

Why not watch it instead of guessing? Gore, of course, is neither a
climatologist or a professor: he's a politician and entertainer, and
not really relevant to a discussion of academic freedom.


It's my guess that the people that work with Dr. Boyd Haley also have a
"low" opinion about Dr. Boyd Haley. His bosses probably give have poor
evaluations.

Obviously that wouldn't surprise me either, since he's come up with a
theory and failed to provide any evidence to back it up. Oh, and he's
sticking with it in the face of evidence that refutes it, always a bit
embarrassing for a scientist.


Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
I visited google and typed "fired professors" and found lots of examples
of professors that have been fired. In some of those cases, academic
freedom was
involved. I tried to copy and paste one of the articles but failed. I
suggest that you type the name "Thomas Klocek" into the google search
engine and read
some of those articles. He was a professor that taught that Israel had a right
to exist and was an advocate for Israel. Some of the Arab students in his
class (or classes) complained and he was fired. I believe that this is a
clear cut case of Professor Kocek's Academic Freedom being violated. I
could not find any examples of professors that were fired related to
teaching that global warming is NOT caused by pollution from factories and
cars. I am sorry that I did not write down the URL of the site that I
visited.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I certainly don't deny that academic freedoms are occasionally
infringed, although in the case you mention, I think it was simply his
freedom of speech that was infringed, since he was fired over something
that had nothing to do with his work; apparently he got into a
political slanging match outside of the classroom.

However, you claimed that someone would be fired for disagreeing with
the prevailing consensus in the context of their work; the examples
that you gave were a biologist espousing creationism and a climate
scientist not espousing a human impetus for global warming.

This is nonsense: if these scientists provided evidence to back up
their hypotheses, they would be listened to; if they did not they would
rightly be derided. For the first case, no such evidence has been
found; for the second, there are a fair few scientists out there
denying that global warming is caused by pollution, and I haven't
noticed any of them being sacked.

I've sat in the room when Professor Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining
Geology at the University of Adelaide, expressed what could only be
called dissident views about global warming. He was at the University
of Melbourne then, but he got a better job at UoA later.

http://www.adelaide.edu.au/directory/ian.plimer
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Peter Bowditch" wrote:
"cathyb" wrote:


Jason Johnson wrote:
In article .com,
"cathyb" wrote:

Jason Johnson wrote:
snip

If a college biology professor stated that a "creator" created
mankind
and lots
of plants and animals, I doubt that his political correct bosses
and
fellow professors would treat him with much respect. I should note
that
Darwin mentioned that he believed that a creator was involved in
the
creation of life on this earth in the last paragraph
of his famous book. Some high school science teachers have been
fired for
telling their students that God created life.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He
would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if
he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


If a chemistry professor stated that mercury was the cause of
autism, I
doubt that he would be treated with the same respect that they
treated
other professors and his bosses.

If the professor came up with some evidence for his contention, he
would be treated with respect; this hasn't so far happened. He
would,
quite rightly, be treated with derision in any science department if
he
tried to make such a claim without evidence.


The reason that professors are not fired is usually because of
tenure
(sp ??).

Oh, I see. You have no example of anyone being fired for teaching
that
pollution doesn't cause global warming. Not surprising; it's not a
done
deal and there are arguments and research showing that it does, and
that it's negligible in the big scheme of climate change. I know
little
about it, but the consensus seems to be moving steadily towards
pollution being a major problem.

But basically, you were bull****ting when you wrote that someone
would
be fired for disagreeing with that consensus.


What is your opinion of Dr. Boyd Haley?

Very low indeed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello,
Thanks for your post. No, I don't know the names of any professors
that
have been fired for teaching their students that global warming also
took
place during PETM (Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximun). Some experts
believe
that the
global warming that is now taking place is happening for the same
reasons
that it took place during PETM.

I've no idea if that is so, but I'll take your word for it. Your
argument is specious, though: no professor would be fired for that
reason, because no professor would deny, or even try to hide the fact
that the earth has been subject to global warming before. It's not in
question. Although I don't know the specifics, not being a
climatologist, it's common knowledge that the earth has suffered
periods of cooling and warming. The question is whether suffering
warming now, and if so, is mankind contributing?


Pollution is a major problem but volcanoes
are usually ignored when global warming is discussed in science
classes. I
have NOT seen Al Gore's movie about global warming but it's my guess
that
the "pollution" produced by volcanoes was NOT discussed in detail in
that
movie.

Why not watch it instead of guessing? Gore, of course, is neither a
climatologist or a professor: he's a politician and entertainer, and
not really relevant to a discussion of academic freedom.


It's my guess that the people that work with Dr. Boyd Haley also have
a
"low" opinion about Dr. Boyd Haley. His bosses probably give have
poor
evaluations.

Obviously that wouldn't surprise me either, since he's come up with a
theory and failed to provide any evidence to back it up. Oh, and he's
sticking with it in the face of evidence that refutes it, always a bit
embarrassing for a scientist.


Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
I visited google and typed "fired professors" and found lots of examples
of professors that have been fired. In some of those cases, academic
freedom was
involved. I tried to copy and paste one of the articles but failed. I
suggest that you type the name "Thomas Klocek" into the google search
engine and read
some of those articles. He was a professor that taught that Israel had a
right
to exist and was an advocate for Israel. Some of the Arab students in
his
class (or classes) complained and he was fired. I believe that this is a
clear cut case of Professor Kocek's Academic Freedom being violated. I
could not find any examples of professors that were fired related to
teaching that global warming is NOT caused by pollution from factories
and
cars. I am sorry that I did not write down the URL of the site that I
visited.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I certainly don't deny that academic freedoms are occasionally
infringed, although in the case you mention, I think it was simply his
freedom of speech that was infringed, since he was fired over something
that had nothing to do with his work; apparently he got into a
political slanging match outside of the classroom.

However, you claimed that someone would be fired for disagreeing with
the prevailing consensus in the context of their work; the examples
that you gave were a biologist espousing creationism and a climate
scientist not espousing a human impetus for global warming.

This is nonsense: if these scientists provided evidence to back up
their hypotheses, they would be listened to; if they did not they would
rightly be derided. For the first case, no such evidence has been
found; for the second, there are a fair few scientists out there
denying that global warming is caused by pollution, and I haven't
noticed any of them being sacked.

I've sat in the room when Professor Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining
Geology at the University of Adelaide, expressed what could only be
called dissident views about global warming. He was at the University
of Melbourne then, but he got a better job at UoA later.

Is that an anecdote?? Hypocrrite. Proven Liar+spammer.

http://www.adelaide.edu.au/directory/ian.plimer
--
Peter Bowditch