Fanatical and about to fall

Mark Scott's legacy may well be to see the ABC's reserve of credibility seriously eroded when its failure to fact check all the half truths it has portrayed as proofs of sea level rise over a decade finally addressed by scientists .(eg  Kurabati )
The ABC does a really poor job of representing science  in spite of its high advocacy.   The reasons are documented elsewhere and by science prophets from the past.   It would be amazing if the ABC reverse themselves out of the cul de sac by themselves , but as our forebears taught us - better to confess than go on in denial .

Like the attempt to shore up the shoreline on rising sea levels , the tide will turn and they will have, for the sake of history , to be identified as playing  a role for a whole decade in muddying the waters .
If they can't get these political and scientifically sensitive matters right what other things should we trust them about ?
Its especially dangerous for our public broadcaster because the game of giving each side a fair go is often met ( in a statistical sense ) but not when the controversy runs deeper and the conservation needs to be deeper ( qualitative and speculative ) The idea of proving things work should not be left up to the media and political class. ABC needs to employ and publish work from practicing professional scientists.
. The ABC have yet to realise that it would be innovative and productive to link to sites which at least put another point of view . All Talk back hosts religiously guard their sense of control by not allowing sensible callers to converse with each other - which would mean the conversation  would really move on .  ABC are no better than commercials at the moment in  not doing this .  I no longer listen partly because of this monotony and predictableness. So much for festivals of dangerous ideas ,

Old reactionary noise never dies unless it has a permanent drip feed from the public purse

Emperor Julian would be pleased with our Philip Adams (He is able to sell the old as new again ) but we have little reason to be .He's stale old bread.  Instead of using his considerable wit and wisdom to promote his favorite worship chorus of progress and evolution,  he takes us back ten years to Hitchens talking about Thomas Payne - what  a pain it was, same old same old , ABC repeats rather than ABC up to date

As a practical scientist I cringe when he defers to what I know , Tis something he only thinks he knows - he simply doesn't know and its shows in the way he calls us gods of reason .( He also as a worshiper doesn't ask questions like a good scientist would , Why ? Presumably he can't cope with my rationality and his pathetic and pedantic game of lumbering logomachy ....  at the edges of reason)

" Can  you think of someone modern who still promotes Payne 's version of freedom "Silence was the stunned reply .So much for progress and all from our gurus

There is no-one who dares to run the simple freedom and equity arguments beyond there allotted time ( very short) . Nature not only abhors a vacuum, its diversity refuses to be drafted into the equity only important mode of these modern but short lived pedants ( as Payne , Rouseauu etc etc  were all like Shaw heretics and paying the price for same - irrelevance and ineffective )

 I'm all for less government but the hypocrisy of the fabian left is they only have governement. Without a reformation people's bad side requires a "government good "assumption , The fabians should disband or at least stay out of the government pushers brigade as they are irrational about its dangerous infallibility - and esp once they are on committee.
The more substantial boundary rider was  Orwell who realized that freedom and prosperity, pushed in the name of equality,  was birdbath deep  . The trouble is,  as our century proves oh so well with all its tyrants running the argument , is that the simple can do a huge amount of damage  before the fire runs out; Before the substantial ( and science) rules over the simple

Can this man who doggedly limits his reason to what he himself can see,  survive the onslaught of the future -- - a reaction to the prison the determinants have created , A more "romantic period "if you must ?
The recurring and countercultural idea  that there is more to knowing that knowing will ever know is coming . His version of science is "its the answer to everything"  and yet Payne like Chambers should have scientists adoring him for his prophetic brilliance  if it were true .

Young people rebel from being put in his cage. His and the ABC war on everything may have some adherents because its natural for young people to be that way , Whats not natural is to not recognise when you grow up;  whats good in the past and reinforce it for our kids sake .  Resilience builds on a foundation, not complete freedom.

Will be interesting to see who has the courage to review S Neimen republished "Evil in Modern thought " . I only hope whoever does,  will challenge another simple mistake not even accepted by psychiatrists - That religion  can be poison tis true , but its not possible to be human without having one, Whatever the result of her confrontation we know denial about wh knows will continue .
I hope someone has the courage to let her witness to us with her own well thought through words .
At least stop the latest denial by the determinists " You don't need religion "
" Religion and political activism begin where reason is missing "

Moral judgements make the ABC a laughing stock

Symbolized by the cynical change of Compass to The Moral Compass,  ABCTV  has finally come full circle and "accepted "( still some denialists in there?) that every institution and presenter "who goes along to church "has a faith .

More importantly. ABC admitted that unlike the bad ( good ??who knows these days ) old days when they promoted "morality is bunk" ( eg faith that "science will tell you how to live not some old framework from past )
They see Progress ,  in the WGP religion as adaption - looks more like a revamped view from their christian heritage .A rear end collision or revolution?
After all Feine ( Tuesday)and Uhlmann ( saying how Greens will live forever and all things good about how they " do things"  are full of their very OWN  adjectives of moral judgments--" good"+ bad "   Not acceptable  for public paid reporters ,( Feine even said someone must be a "liar" if they didn't agree with him( listen to the transcripts Tuesday 5th May 2015)  .

Beware  
A pure belief in progress without believing in a light and a direction, can clearly mean you quickly go around in circles and are seen to be doing so (Our  evidence based approach)-   we are your honest friends here . Watch your ABC if you can bear it , I'd rather watch fish in a bigger pond 

The hero of Fabianism knew this better than most of those who feign him . He played with the idea of change but only because he had in his piggy bank  the moral framework of a " good girl " and a  good moral teacher, ( I have the divine spark within me) So why was the idea of Pygmalion so engaging but the product of all that excitement about the new age , change and equality  so unproductive  ( shaw's support for the revolution ) His mother and he appear in the play but like most Westerners he ignored the safe framework from which creative tensions arose .  The recognition of that fact led his friend Gilbert to lower his status to that of a mere plagiarizer and heretic . Shaw for all his wisdom led people astray in the same way as many of his less reactionary and unthinking comrades did . Do you want to remembered for the same - half stating the case or worse ridiculing your parents most insistent words ?

Be sure you know what mix of tried and tested you apply to your own life before you do what secularism not tries to do to us - squeeze us into its own very tight mould .and denial of its ineffectiveness in motivating.

ABC innovative or predictable ? Open or closed ? Superficial or substantive ?

Jon Feine who clearly has spent far too long cocooned in the ABC,  has his ultimate faith in Innovation . "If you are doing what you were doing ten years ago" , it seems to him , you R a dinosaur . He didn't need to tell us yesterdaywhat his church affiliation is - we have known for years; we at least ave been listening  (The church of the wonderful God of  Progress   WGP )
Yes Iview makes sense and is a sound innovation . .Feine being the monocultural believer he is , cannot see sideways . Jon hasn't weighed up the big picture in his own program where he still controls the discussion ( see notes on774 blog about this years ago)
ABC's stale old  list ( just a few egs)
- Lack of innovation in youth programs like no  community TV ,
-the dumb and dangerous "do what you like "( WGP) sunday school" of Rage .Ultimately "kids will learn" (WGP doctrine), who cares if such innovation breaks up families?
-SOSO  formula for promoting science haven't changed - only got more flashy ( Quantum , Science show, docos on Sunday night )
-- One might rationally assume  there important for church teaching doctrine - that's why they don't change ??

What too many ABC pewpreachers  lack,  as advocates of the truth,  is the understanding that our religious views can cloud our objectivity - all us . Feine like Tony  Jones regularly interrupts and controls the discussions on their programs  ( if need to justify this watc them try  to discuss 10 totally diiferent distraction items in one hour ---prejudice delivered predictably .
Tony Jones runs the only party in town where the conversation amongst the  biggest celebrities in town is controlled by him .And noone complains about his Fuhrer like behaviur esp managemnet who fund him to be so
Jones tries to make it fun but really its his gig and he doesn't really laugh. Last nights charity gala event said to support the poor in disaster areas looked more like  a specific good image gig for Peter Singer whose very own charity and political causes were given all the bright lights.,,,,,,, and we left unfed .