THE First Finding handed down by Judge Salvador Vasta in the Peter Ridd court case concerned Bramston reef off Bowen and a photograph taken in 1994 that Terry Hughes from James Cook University has been claiming proves Acropora corals that were alive in 1890 are now all dead – the fringing reef reduced to mudflat.
Meanwhile, Peter Ridd from the same university, had photographs taken in 2015 showing live Acropora and the need for quality assurance of Hughes’ claims.
Both sides were preparing evidence for over a year – with the lawyers apparently pocketing in excess of one million dollars – yet there was no interest in an independent assessment of the state of Bramston reef.
It more than once crossed my mind, that with all the money floating around for reef research and lawyers … there could perhaps be some mapping, or just one transect, at this most contentious of locations supposedly indicative of the state of the Great Barrier Reef more generally.
In his judgment Judge Salvadore Vasta was left to simply conclude that it was unclear whether there was now mudflat or coral reef where an extensive area of Acropora coral had been photographed back in 1890, but that Peter Ridd nevertheless had the right to ask the question.
Indeed, the court case and the appeal which must be lodged by tomorrow (Tuesday 7th May), is apparently all about ‘academic freedom’ and ‘employment law’, while the average Australian would perhaps be more likely to care if they got to see some coral and some fish – dead or alive.
I visited Bramston Reef over Easter because I couldn’t wait any longer to know if the corals in Peter Ridd’s 2015 photographs had been smashed by Cyclone Debbie that hovered over Bowen two years later, in April 2017.
As I drove into Bowen, I took a detour towards Edgecombe Bay, but I didn’t stop and explore – because I saw the signage warning of crocodiles.
Peter Ridd had told me that his technicians had approached from the south south-east in a rubber dinghy to get their photographs. The day I arrived (April 18, 2019), and the next, there was a strong south south-easterly wind blowing, and no-one prepared to launch a boat to take me out.
On the afternoon of Easter Friday – ignoring the signage warning of crocodiles – I walked through the mangroves to the water’s edge. I found the mudflat which Terry Hughes had claimed now covers once healthy Acropora coral and walked across it. The other side of the mudflat there was reef flat with beds of healthy Halimeda. This area of reef flat over sand extended for nearly one kilometre – before it gave way to hectares of Acropora coral.
Professor Hughes had just not walked far enough.
When, with much excitement, I showed my photographs of all the Acropora to a Bowen local. He described them as, “rubbish corals”. He seemed ashamed that the corals I had photographed at Bramston reef were not colourful.
For a coral to make the front cover of National Geographic it does need to be exceptionally colourful. Indeed, for a woman model to make the cover of Vogue magazine she needs to be exceptionally thin. But neither thin, nor colourful, is necessarily healthy. Indeed, Acropora corals are generally tan or brown in colour when they have masses of zooxanthellae and are thus growing quickly – and are healthy.
White corals have no zooxanthellae and are often dead, because they have been exposed to temperatures that are too high. Colourful corals, like thin women, are more nutrient starved and often exist in environments of intense illumination – existing near the limits of what might be considered healthy.
Such basic facts are not well understood. Instead there is an obsession with saving the Great Barrier Reef from imminent catastrophe while we are either shown pictures of bleached white dead coral, or spectacularly colourful corals from outer reefs in nutrient-starved waters … while thousands of square kilometres of healthy brown coral is ignored.
Peter Ridd did win his high-profile court case for the right to suggest there is a need for some quality assurance of the research – but I can’t see anyone getting on with this. The Science Show on our National Broadcaster, hosted by a most acclaimed scientist journalist, has reported on the case just this last weekend. Rather than launching a dinghy and having a look at Bramston Reef, Robyn Williams has replayed part of a 2008 interview with Peter Ridd, and let it be concluded that because Peter Ridd holds a minority view he is likely wrong.
Understanding the real state of the Great Barrier Reef is not a trivial question: it has implications for tourism, and the allocation of billions of dollars of public monies … with most currently allocated to those properly networked – but not necessarily knowledgeable or prepared to walk beyond a mudflat to find the corals.
To be sure to know when I post pictures at this blog, and to get the latest news regarding the Peter Ridd court case including the possible appeal by James Cook University, subscribe for my irregular email updates.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
It seems that GBR ‘science’ has become like armchair politicians; all show and no substance, or ‘fake’ news that proliferates the web these days.
Thank you Jennifer. You seem to be doing the work that JCU students should be doing.
Searching beyond the immediate ‘first glance’ takes time, effort, and energy- all sadly lacking in our present day of sound bite journalism, reality (sic) TV, feel good symbolic gestures, and, apparently, much GBR science. Keep searching Jen.
Thanks Jenifer for all you have done and are doing to help Peter Ridd and to expose the catastrophic state of freedom to be properly skeptical in academia.
The ABC science unit suggests that the emboldening of climate skeptics is going to result in challenges of the consensus view.
Whats their idea of ‘academic freedom’? How does their idea relate to ‘group-think’. Whats ‘peer pressure’?
It’s just great that Robyn Williams did interview Peter Ridd on the science show, despite the obviously hostile nature of the questions asked. Given that the most resent report was on Peter Ridd and ‘the unfair dismissal case’, was Peter asked to provide an update.
I invite Robyn Williams to interview me on the Science Show.
My thanks also Jennifer.
What a great idea ! Doing some actual field research on the reef and checking it the area so publicised is mudflats or coral reefs…
Real science !
As for Robyn Williams, I know also from direct experience back 20 years ago, that he is an arrogant & thoughtless bastard only to willing to suppress the news and the science he disagrees with. Now that is a big issue as he’s still living in the ideologies of the 1950’s.
Jenn, this is pretty serious stuff. I’m only a bush lawyer, but negligence like this on the part of Hughes has to be going pretty close to fraud. The McBride case, from memory, was to do with lies which were used to raise funds. Hughes appears to be doing pretty much the same thing.
PS please don’t get eaten by crocodiles though!
Jen, isn’t it amazing what you find when you choose to live in the real world?
As opposed to a climate crisis world?
Just like with sea level rise, if these true believers actually had been paying attention most of their lives they would know that local sea levels have gone nowhere during their lifetimes.
But let’s face it, there’s no money in climate facts these days.
Thank you Jennifer..it’s sad that some people can’t see the truth because of the pile of money in front of it.
Very brave of Jennifer to do this – crocodiles, the most immediate threat followed by the power bases with oh so much to lose if her observations get widely known. Nothing like a reality check on allegations that $billions are needed. It’s a well know fact that storms damage the reef & Cyclone Debbie gave Bowen a hiding. Around Townsville, the reef is gorgeous – Debbie missed by 600km – oodles of gorgeous coral – particularly one that is dusty pink. It has rings that resemble the petals of a giant flattish rose. Gorgeous or not, don’t know if I would be able to dive with crocodile warnings. Why isn’t this brave & dedicated woman working in a university? Oh yes, of course a $billion academic power base depends on silencing her.
Reality Strikes! How unique. Real observations always beat models & predictions. Well done Jennifer.
We look forward to you joining us when you’re next in Sydney to renew acquaintance, old friends & the state of affairs surrounding the GBR on the one hand & the BoM on the other.
Rgds, Jim Simpson
Convenor , Climate Realists of Five Dock
And to think that Malcolm Turnbull tried to throw around half a billion bucks at a problem which did not exist! His academic empire builders would have been laughng all the way to the bank!….Oh! must fly….4 Corners is about to lift the lid on the latest university racket of ripping off overseas students. A ‘must watch’ program.
Hi Jennifer, well done once again ! you are a true scientist.
Not like the ones that are on-the-take, I really don’t know how they sleep at night knowing that they are traitors to real science. Shame, Shame, Shame !!
Their motto has to be “Never let the facts get in the way of a good Climate Change Story”,,,and my bank account number is xxxxx.
Anyway, please stay safe, that was a bit risky.
we really don’t want to lose you.
You’re so brave Jennifer, totally admire what you’re doing. Please try to get onto MSM with this story. The Peter Ridd case is surely a landmark case for Academic Freedom and for independent HONEST peer review.
Surely one of the great Feminists controlling MSM will give you airtime to expose this rubbish for what it is; LAWFARE of the Cultural Marxists controlling more and more of Universities, our schools, our bureaucracies and our media. Is Ita Buttrose completely in bed with the Marxists?
If Morrison isn’t brave enough to call out the rubbish of Climate Alarmism maybe you need to speak to Palmer who at least is brave enough to put his money where his mouth is to attempt to stop this World domination of the Power Elites.
You’re on the front line with those crocodiles which gives you STAR POWER now to face the Power Elites destroying our Western Civilisation that once prized intelligent factual debate. Now days if you don’t agree with the Post Modernists and their One World New Order you’re immediately branded a far right Nazi or Fascist of just quietly disposed of which is what they wanted to happen to Peter Ridd. So many like Ridd on the world stage today…Jordan B Peterson, Douglas Murray, Neil Ferguson, Melanie Philips, Ayran Hirsi Ali and here in Australia Bernard Gaynor fighting the fight of his life to save the Aust. Defence Force from annihilation under the Marxists/Feminist take over.
God be with you and give you all the strength and courage you need to fight this stupidity.
Thank you Jennifer
Jennifer so refreshing to see someone actually observe and report on a claim . It validates all of the scientists who are stating the facts on the the GBR while the likes of ABC “journalists” and others just repeat what the “catastrophists” are claiming about the demise of the reef,
> ” … the appeal which must be lodged by tomorrow (Tuesday 7th May)”
Now 4:45pm EST Tuesday May 7th. Has such an appeal been lodged, does anyone know ?
Hey Ian,
I have been on-edge for the last two days waiting for 5pm, Tuesday/today.
I phoned Peter at 5 past 5, and he said that there is a chance they could file online … and that they probably have until midnight tonight.
He will talk with his lawyer first thing in the morning, and then we will know for sure.
Fingers crossed they won’t appeal. Then it will be a case of negotiating a remedy/ the Judge determining the remedy.
He wants his job back.
Thanks Jennifer – so today Wednesday May 8th will tell us.
I’ve just got off the phone from Peter … theoretically they/JCU had until yesterday to appeal (3 weeks since the Judgment?).
They didn’t! Ya.
But if the ‘remedy’ negotiations fail then they/JCU actually still have until three weeks after that. What!
So, we are not done with all of this quite/just yet. But it is looking good!
Peter will be posting something at his GoFundMe site/page later today. I will update subsequently, this should include all the legal detail.
“a photograph taken in 1994 that Terry Hughes from James Cook University has been claiming proves Acropora corals that were alive in 1890 are now all dead”
I assume this is a straw man, that Terry Hughes has not actually claimed this photo as proof of such a thing. Do you have a citation?
“there was no interest in an independent assessment of the state of Bramston reef”
As you seem to be aware, “this trial was purely and simply about the proper construction of a clause in an Enterprise Agreement” – Vasta.
More power to you Jennifer.we have observed similar coral recovery around the North Barnard islands since the devastations of cyclones larry and yasi. Riddy seems to be the only scientist with his eyes open.
Geoff,
No straw man here. I would like you to read the following to the end, and then re-read the above post …
Peter Ridd’s career only started to falter when he began to question the veracity of some of the claims by some of his colleagues about the perilous state of the Great Barrier Reef.
It really all began when he questioned the veracity of before and after photographs being used by his colleague Terry Hughes to suggest fringing coral reef near Stone Island in the central Great Barrier Reef had been reduced to mudflats.
Professor Terry Hughes – FAA, ARC Laureate Fellow and Director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies – is world famous for research on coral bleaching caused by global warming and was recently dubbed by the journal Nature as “Reef sentinel” for the global role he has plays in applying multi-disciplinary science to securing reef sustainability. Meanwhile, Peter Ridd has suggested that Hughes just makes stuff-up, specifically that Hughes has promoted fake or misleading photographs.
The photographs were presented by Hughes at a conference in Cairns in 2012, and then published the next day on the front page of the Cairns Post newspaper.
They accompanied a front-page story written by journalist Peter Michael entitled ‘Ocean Eden Faces Ruin’ with the subheading ‘Scientists issue bleak report on Reef’s future’. The newspaper article is still available on the internet via the University of Queensland website and begins:
‘Australia is losing the war to protect the Great Barrier Reef as experts yesterday unveiled before-and-after photos of devastated coral reefs to warn of a dire fate for “Eden beneath the waves”.
‘Opening a five-day international coral reef symposium in Cairns, the world’s top marine scientists yesterday told of a perfect storm of threats on top of the evil twins of global warming and ocean acidification …’
The newspaper article, quoting Hughes, claimed a photograph of mudflats taken in 1994 [the photograph is labelled off Bowen, and has the Gloucester Island backdrop as per Bramston Reef], was typical of what was once spectacular fringing reef near Bowen … suggesting that a once extensive coral reef as shown in a photograph taken in 1890 has since been totally destroyed by farming [The 1890 photo is labelled near Stone Island and has the same Gloucester Island backdrop].
The photographs have since became a symbol of reef ruin with the purported cause of destruction variously attributed to sediments from farming, coastal development more generally, and most recently global warming.
The photographs have been on the GBRMPA website, and also the ARC website. The words and images indicate that what was once a coral reef has been reduced to mudflat. In fact, there is a mudflat and there is also coral reef … it is a very extensive reef.
> “But if the ‘remedy’ negotiations fail then they/JCU actually still have until three weeks after that”
I had thought that Vasta was to deliver penalty details shortly. If so, how does that square with the above “remedy” negotiations ?
Hi Ian,
I’m not sure about ‘penalties’ – can you elaborate?
Following is the note that Peter sent out to his funders/those how made a donation late yesterday:
“Dear All,
Despite considerable bad publicity, especially in the North Queensland media, James Cook University (JCU) has still not ruled out an appeal.
The next legal step will be the “remedies” hearing in the coming months.
I will be pushing hard to get back to JCU as an academic but given the Vice Chancellor’s remarks that she does not accept that JCU did anything wrong, one has to be concerned how she might react with me “back in harness” – with her holding the reins.
The legal people are working on ways to mitigate this danger. It appears that they can appeal up to 3 weeks after the remedies hearing so we still have many months to wait.
In the meantime I continue to work on the book on the Great Barrier Reef and why it is not particularly threatened, and two initiatives to improve science quality. So the delay will be well spent.” Ends.
Thanks Jennifer
It seems clear that JCU, and its’ VC in particular, regard “remedies” as potential penalties, which is why I used the term initially.
Peter Ridd also raises the issue of a workplace and a boss toxic for him if he is reinstated. This is an issue I had raised quite some time ago. “Go Away” money would be considered a penalty by JCU, I suspect. One it would reluctantly pay, however, to be rid of a troublesome priest and an annoying judge.
Probably some will label me cynical (golly …) but these issues are part of a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis that is conducted by professionals, including litigation lawyers, every hour of every day.
I have great admiration for Peter and his family in resisting the encroachment of the Disenlightenment.