THE SILLY's Ben Cubby, a man who missed his true calling as a minor Simpson's character, seldom lets consistency stand in the way of his reporting, and never when pals of a greenish tinge want a little publicity. Today it is the Animal Liberation Society, which is about to present some sharp-eyed cocky with an opportunity to bring down a $14,000 drone.
"Let's say we find a sheep dying from fly strike, we can record the location on a GPS and notify the authorities," the ALS's Mark Pearson tells Cubby, who takes it all down without breaking the habit of a professional lifetime and applying a little independent curiosity.
A few paragraphs later, and still dutifully transcribing, Cubby reports one of the activities Pearson's drone will be looking to film:
THE Silly's environmental guru, a modest fellow with much to be modest about, wonders why this little blog has published nine posts concerning his sweet self:
Barely more than a youngster and evidently quite easily distracted, Ben will learn as he grows older that finding time for important things isn't all that hard. Indeed, one can even get in a fair bit of golf and fishing without entirely forsaking curiosity.
Take this story, for example, which Cubby and colleague Peter Hannam rushed into pixels yesterday afternoon. Apart from demonstrating that there are still a couple of good things to be said of the ALP -- that would be "Martin" + "Ferguson" -- it also demonstrates what happens when reporters allow a blinkered sympathy for the cause to trump an inquisitive nature. It is not that the story is wrong, or not obviously so, it is simply that it neglects to ask any obvious questions. For example, here is a video of the researchers discussing their methods, which involve strapping some sort of a sniffing device to their car and then going for a drive.
It all seems quite reasonable, and perhaps there is nothing that can be said to fault it. But no reader of Cubby's story would know that because there is no mention of what other men and women of science might make of the technique. For example:
On the bitumen and travelling at speed, the car's engine revolutions would be low and its emissions, which might (or might not) contaminate the readings, could conceivably produce the "natural" 2ppm-or-less referenced in the video. By the same token, the bitumen itself might seal emissions, keeping readings artificially low.On broken ground -- beside a pipeline, say -- where the vehicle will be making harder work of it on more porous surfaces, recorded emissions could quite conceivably be higher.
The thing is, while these questions arise in a curious mind, they seem not to have nagged at Cubby, who appears to have made no effort to ascertain the efficacy of high-speed automated sniffing.
Nor has he placed the researchers in the context of their views, which a link to the video (above) might have achieved. Each researcher is quite clearly a warmist, so the diligently curious would want to place their pronouncements in that frame, just as it might also have been worth noting that Dr Santos is doing very nicely with climate-related ARC grants. Very nicely indeed.
And then there is the manner in which, as Ferguson noted, the sniffers began trumpeting their findings before getting the all-clear via that peer review business we hear so much about -- at least we hear about it when it suits the sort of alarmists the shark sooker is given to quoting. As for deniers, well they get a less sympathetic hearing, as this sad video of a young zealot having his ears pinned back attests. Make a note, by the way, of Cubby's emphasis at the 5:50 mark on the vital importance of peer review. Yesterday, however, when writing of the paper that drew Ferguson's ire, Cubby's approach was markedly different. The lack of peer review was merely mentioned and passed over. As for the fact that the paper has been seized upon and trumpeted by anti-CSG groups far and wide, well that context is not mentioned at all.
That a near-bankrupt company still finds the money to pay Cubby's salary and that he returns the favour by being so often unquestioning is really quite sad. Carbonphobia is costing all of us, even Cubby, a good deal of money. Curiosity is a splendid thing, often satisfying in itself. As a steward of the public trust, Cubby really should give it a try. His warmist mates might think less of him, but he could draw on the compensatory satisfaction of knowing he would no longer be accused of serving as an eager shill.
Until then, someone has to do it -- no matter how much an inquiring nature interferes with golf and fishing. Some things are worth the time, and getting as close as possible to the truth is prominent amongst them.
A NOTE: Seriously, Ben, curiosity does not demand all that much time. This post, start to finish, including the googling, writing and linking, took all of 38 minutes 53 minutes with corrections. You must spend at least that much time every day policing the office re-cycling bin.
WILL someone please pass the Silly Moaning Herald's Ben Cubby a box of tissues he can share with fellow sob sister and warmist tragedian Graham Redfearn:
Here's the photo that set the boys to blubbering...
... and their anguish grew only worse as others joined the weep-a-thon...
Amidst all the sniffling for 200kgs of flake, neither Readfearn nor Cubby wondered how a shark came to find itself sucked into an oil rig's bowels nor considered that their readers might find an explanation interesting.
No doubt they were too busy penning their finny friend's obituary and arranging for a wreath to be delivered.
THE SILLY’S little green imp Ben Cubby keeps the faith – the
faith in cherrypicking, that is. The Arctic is melting, he tells readers,
advising that the cracking pace at which ice is vanishing represents “the
impact of warmer air and water temperatures” which “can be directly measured”.
Yes, it can be directly measured – as it was back in March,
when ice levels were up and nudging the 1980s average. Somehow, perhaps because he was
too busy being a carbon-tax supporting quality journalist, the easily distracted Cubby neglected to
mention that little fact.
WUWT has all the charts, some of which show declines while others describe increases. Fairfax shares should be so lucky.
I think this raises a serious ethical concern. One would have to be utterly naive to imagine that the journalists employed by Fairfax Media are free to say negative things about Earth Hour – or about environmentalism in general. Yet Australia’s recent Independent Inquiry into the Media and Media Regulation report makes no mention whatsoever of Earth Hour in its 474 pages.
Here is a question it would be interesting to hear McKnight answer:
Given that Australian authors generally earn peanuts, and allowing that you advocate the distribution of public assets unto each according to his needs, do you feel comfortable accepting $196,647 on top of your six-figure academic salary?
And, for a follow-up:
The books you are selling here tonight, will you be retaining the royalties on those sales, or do you intend to return the proceeds to the taxpayers who funded your research?
The gathering will be held here:
Sunday 18 March
5.30 - 6.30pm (drinks provided)
Manning Clark House Garden*
11 Tasmania Circle, Forrest
(H/T: Australian Associated Press Eoin Black, a quality journalist, who has tweeted word of tonight's gather.)
UPDATE: If you hope to make the acquaintance of the Silly's senior alarmist, Ben Cubby, prepare to be disappointed. He will be too busy shrugging off sceptics' attempts to have him consider points of view other than those of the souces for whom he takes catastropharian stenography.
Don't you just love that weary "if you insist". The Galileo people might as well save the cost of a stamp.
IT’S FUNNY the things that get Fairfax journalists in a tizz. Forget the past three Question Times, each a ding-dong exercise in red-blooded democracy and not bad theatre, either. A Prime Minister who won’t answer questions, a sleazebag Speaker bestowing favourable rulings on his government patrons, the PM-in-exile who can barely suppress his smile while upstaging his replacement at the Dispatch Box – that has been spectators’ delightful daily fare. Even as we pay our political class for the pleasure of watching it confect the means to relieve us of cash and liberty, this week in Canberra must be acknowledged for its sweet compensation of superb entertainment.
One is inclined to urge poor Morton to look away, lest the spectacle of so many scandals worth investigating brings on a nervous collapse. Already anxious at the prospect of climate change's encouragement of bushfires, floods, cold weather and hearing-impaired clownfish, the very idea that the architects of the carbon tax might soon be out of office could push the poor boy right over the edge.
Fortunately, Silly colleague Ben Cubby is made of sterner stuff, keeping his advocate's eye on both the ball and all the latest catastropharian talking points. While he paid scant attention to the Climategate emails, except to dismiss them, no such restraint is evident in his immediate coverage of a warmist front’s revelation that its enemies raise and distribute funds in the name of encouraging public debate. As Andrew Bolt points out, Cubby has shown no interest in looking at the vast sums supporting the alarmists he endorses. That wouldn’t be quality journalism, which apparently demands reporters present only information which concurs with their preconceptions and personal points of view.
Still, if Cubby were to engage in unauthorised curiosity, he might put a few questions about funding to some people much closer to home than James Cook University's Bob Carter.
Or he might ask his employer’s chief financial officer if Morton’s colleague, Melissa Fyfe, drew her standard salary plus expenses while jogging for several weeks down the length of Australia’s east coast to “raise awareness” of climate change.
And while he has the big bean-counter on the phone, why not ask about Fairfax Media’s part-ownership of Earth Hour? If Cubby cannot get a comprehensible answer on that one, not to worry. Boy On A Bike – not, fortunately, a quality journalist – has unearthed all the details.
If Cubby finds the answers embarrassing, no problem. He can deep six them, along with all those un-put questions about Climategate and its local players.
That’s quality journalism, folks, just in case you hadn’t noticed.
UPDATE:The Heartland Institute says the documents the ardent Cubby has re-broadcast are of dubious provenance. "One document, titled “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy,” is a total fake apparently intended to defame and discredit The Heartland Institute.It was not written by anyone associated with The Heartland Institute. It does not express Heartland’s goals, plans, or tactics. It contains several obvious and gross misstatements of fact."
Expect Cubby and his Fairfax climate crew to go the full mea culpa in tomorrow's paper. All he need do is admit to being gulled once again -- an announcement few readers would have trouble accepting.
UPDATE II: The Silly has just updated its story to make mention of theHeartland Institute's objections, linking to the relevant press realease. At the foot of its story, however, it persist in providing a direct link to the disputed documents.
Funny, that. Can anyone recall Fairfax providing a hot link to Climategate I and II?
THE SILLY'S Ben Cubby, tickled pink at his paper's loss of only 12% of its circulation in the past year, enjoys a moment of sublime satisfaction with Misha Ketchell, late of Media Watch and now standing tall for truth beside Andrew Jaspan at The Conversation, where circulation doesn't matter because taxpayers cover both their weekly cheques.
BLOGGER Dragonista puts a question via Twitter to the Silly's Ben Cubby, who is none too keen on working for Gina Rinehart (links added at the Billabong):
Things are just a little different at the Silly, where sequential tweets from green guru (and environmental editor) Ben Cubby reflect sympathy's new priorities.
PRODIGIOUS TWEETER Ben Cubby, who moonlights as the Silly’s environment editor, alerted his followers on May 9 to this story, which identifies ExxonMobil as the leading patron of the most prominent deniers.
Nine of the top 10 climate skeptic scientists work with organisations that receive money from ExxonMobil
What’s that old saw about a lie getting halfway around the world before truth gets its pants on?Well, as Cubby's item was retweeted, the folks at.the populartechnology blog pulled up their strides and sent a questionnaire to the 10 boffins identified as beneficiaries of Big Carbon’s dirty dollars.
Cubby shouldn't believe everything written in green ink, it turns out.
