Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Censored science

  1. #1
    Site Caretaker Dave A's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    20,979
    Thanks
    3,055
    Thanked 2,462 Times in 2,067 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12

    Censored science

    Can South Africa afford the luxury of politically motivated censorship of our scientific community? Dr Anthony Turton has been suspended by the CSIR and prevented from delivering a paper on water issues in South Africa to a CSIR conference. To me, that paper could be the Silent Spring of the SA scientific community.

    Dr Turton is a member of the CSIR's natural resource and environment unit and was due to deliver a keynote address on water quality at the CSIR's "Science Real and Relevant" conference on Tuesday 18th November 2008. On Monday, Turton was told he could not give the address.

    "I was told it had been pulled, and I was instructed not to be on the premises. I was given three different reasons by three different people," Turton said.

    What he intended to present was Three Strategic Water Quality Challenges that Decision-Makers Need to Know About and How the CSIR Should Respond, a thought provoking read on a number of levels that certainly seems to be in line with the theme of the conference.

    Melanie Gosling of the Cape Times reported this as the CSIR response:
    Asked to comment, the CSIR said it acknowledged South Africa's water quality problems were of national importance and it had invested "significant resources" to address them.

    Turton's address was withdrawn because certain statements "could not be sufficiently substantiated", and because he had shown burning victims, which could offend sensitive people.

    The CSIR allowed the paper to be included "as part of the conference proceedings".

    Turton had included images of xenophobic violence in the paper with the caption asking if "this type of anger could be unleashed in response to perceptions of deteriorating public health as a result of declining water quality?"
    On 21st November Dr Turton was suspended from the CSIR for "bringing the CSIR into disrepute and failing to obey a lawful instruction," and instructed to vacate the premises.

    Let's be honest here - the problem with this paper is not that it contains pictures the audience couldn't handle, or that it lacks substance. It quite simply doesn't comply with the current regime's preferred view of things.

    Possibly more disturbing than the paper's underlying theme that there needs to be much more investment in our technology capacity is the CSIR's message that politics is more important than the science.
    Last edited by Dave A; 30-Nov-08 at 07:25 PM.
    The trouble with opportunity is it normally comes dressed up as work.

  2. Thanks given for this post:

    Chatmaster (30-Nov-08)

  3. #2
    Platinum Member Chatmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    1,065
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 97 Times in 63 Posts
    There are a couple of issues here that needs to addressed. First of all, this is a blatant censoring of real facts.

    Each and every point that he makes are substantiated by facts.

    The images are none of which we haven't seen many times before and the presentation is down right shocking. It is clear that it address a real issue that needs immediate attention but instead he is being bullied in the hope that he will keep quiet. The final issue is, how much truth are being hidden by our existing government about other issues?

  4. #3
    Gold Member irneb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Jhb
    Posts
    625
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 111 Times in 97 Posts
    Sounds a lot like those telling Eskom to up their production capacity in the early, mid & late '90s ... only to be fired because they're "not team players".

    The water issue had been a longstanding problem, especially here in Gauteng. Being in the building industry I've noticed the municipal reason for not allowing further development in certain areas: "Water supply / drainage infrastructure is insufficient & won't be upgraded in the foreseeable future" ... Forget about electricity, you'll need your own bore-hole & french-drain (not that you want the 2 that close together).

    It's definately an example of the current regime's ostrich mentality ... stick our heads somewhere else & forget about the problem. Then if someone pulls our head out of the sand (by pointing out facts), kick them in the shorts.

  5. #4
    Site Caretaker Dave A's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    20,979
    Thanks
    3,055
    Thanked 2,462 Times in 2,067 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Gauteng, the golden goose of the South African economy, will run out of water in the next five years unless urgent steps are taken to reduce theft, waste and pollution, Water Affairs and Forestry Minister Lindiwe Hendricks has revealed.

    Hendricks briefed journalists in Pretoria on Thursday on the state of water supply and warned that demand would outstrip supply by 2013 in SA's most important water resource, the Vaal River System.

    This system supplies 60 percent of the economy and 45 percent of the population with water, and the department estimates that demand for water in Gauteng will rise by 30 percent over the next 20 years.

    "Significant intervention measures are necessary to ensure sufficient water of the required quality is made available to support community and industrial water needs, including associated energy generation and agriculture," the minister said.

    The caution comes amid a furious public debate over the recent suspension of Council for Scientific and Industrial Research scientist Anthony Turton, who stands accused of bringing the institution into disrepute after suggesting the country faces political and social unrest unless the water crisis was addressed urgently.
    full story from IOL here
    Anthony Turton's read on the potential for social unrest gets reinforced in this story:
    Police used pepper-spray and rubber bullets to disperse 3 000 people who had closed off a section of the N2 highway on Thursday in protest against a R44-bn development in the area.

    Early morning traffic was brought to a standstill as protestors burnt tractor tyres and logs on the national highway.

    Disgruntled residents from the eMacambini area on KwaZulu-Natal’s north coast KwaDukuza and Richards Bay were protesting against KZN premier Sbu Ndebele’s failure to respond to community concerns about the proposed development.
    full story from M&G here
    One other snippet from the first story:
    She (Water Affairs and Forestry Minister Lindiwe Hendricks) said the first order of business was to stamp out water theft, or what the department euphemistically calls "unlawful extraction".
    Unlawful extraction - now there's a term to cherish.
    The trouble with opportunity is it normally comes dressed up as work.

  6. #5
    Silver Member Frankincense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Durban,South Africa
    Posts
    201
    Thanks
    66
    Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
    It all seems to tie in with the deliberate "depopulation of the globe" agenda which we are not supposed to know about, as we are taught to see this as mere ostrich regime politics who bury thier heads in the sand. Actually the Ostriches don't give a damn about us or our families, and probably have residences elswhere should all our bore holes and septics become one and the same thing...while they count the embezzled cash....

    "The final issue is, how much truth(s) are being hidden by our existing government about other issues? " ....more fire!

  7. #6
    Site Caretaker Dave A's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    20,979
    Thanks
    3,055
    Thanked 2,462 Times in 2,067 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Francois View Post
    ...the deliberate "depopulation of the globe" agenda...
    Such an agenda exists?

    Somewhere along the line we've discussed sustainable development here. What struck me on that issue is the lack of discussion about solving the obvious root cause of the challenge in the first place - too many people.
    The trouble with opportunity is it normally comes dressed up as work.

  8. #7
    Gold Member irneb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Jhb
    Posts
    625
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 111 Times in 97 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave A View Post
    too many people.
    Root cause? Well, according to Adam Smith (the so called Father of Economics) this is his reasoning for turning the Economic Sciences to what was known as the dismal science, which basically goes: as population growth is exponential and production growth is linear, population would always outstrip economic growth ... thus the average person would always become poorer. Further he noted that there's only a finite amount of land & resources available, so when population grows beyond a maximum point people will starve.

    He's not the only economist to have stated this, just the 1st. Even David Riccardo or Thomas Malthus said much the same.

    This sounds logical, but today's economics are leaning more towards the J.M. Keyenes school of thought which in some cases states that larger populations cause economic growth as more people = more demand for goods and services.

    The basic difference between the 2 are:

    • Smith (classical economics) states that demand has no bearing on growth, it's all to do with supply (i.e. more production). A balance in the proportion of different goods / services produced is the only reason for over- / under-production.
    • Kaynes (modern economics) states there must be an equilibrium between supply & demand, and thus the economy grows / contracts to reach such equilibrium.

    But also, don't think that Kaynes is correct. These days more and more economists are breaking from the "modern" version (which started just after 1930's). Some of the new schools of thought are sounding much more like Smith's conclusions of the 1700's. This becomes much more prevalent in today's so called recession (some would say it's the start of a new depression) as the main reasons for this was over consumption & over demand caused by money being available too easily through very lax loaning laws & systems.

    So it doesn't really sound too far fetched that such an agenda could exist. It may even be a "good" thing if you are one of those who want the world as a whole to become better off, instead of not wanting those children to die of hunger. I'm sure there must be some people like that, always stating: "For the good of the many, the few must suffer".

  9. #8
    Silver Member Frankincense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Durban,South Africa
    Posts
    201
    Thanks
    66
    Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
    I see "For the good of the few, the many must suffer".

    Ultimately the goal is to reduce the earth's population for the simple warped reason that the less there is for you and me, the more there will be for the few.

    The elite just love birth control. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Ted Turner are among the ultra rich that have donated billions to spreading the gospel of contraception, abortion, and feminism using the United Nations and "US Aid." Rockefeller funded the invention of the pill, the IUD and owns the rights to the abortion drug RU-486. In the last 50 years, billions of public dollars have been spent on "family planning" designed to limit population by deceit and coercion, including compulsory abortion and infanticide. In "The War Against Population (1988)," Dr. Jacqueline Kasun writes that in 1981, a directory of population control agencies in Washington DC listed 92 private (but mostly publicly funded) agencies, 12 United Nations and 57 agencies of the US government (p. 198). "The real problem of government family planning is not one of families out of control but of planners out of control," she wrote (p.211).

    For the same reason, the Elite is behind "sexual liberation" and "gay liberation." Through funding and media control, they make us regard sex as a recreation/physical release rather than as the expression of a spiritual bond (i.e. a loving marriage) resulting in children.

    The Elite modus operandi is to finance and promote disgruntled minorities in order to destabilize and undermine the world.

    Feminism fits the elite's depopulation agenda. Since 1963, when "The Feminine Mystique" was published we have experienced an unprecedented breakdown in the family. More than half of all children are now born out of wedlock; the number of single parent households has tripled. In "The Broken Hearth," William Bennett writes: "Most of our social pathologies, crime, imprisonment rates, welfare, educational underachievement, alcohol and drug abuse, suicide, depression, STD's, are manifestations, direct and indirect, of the crackup of the American family (p.4)."

    The US birthrate has been cut from 4 to 2 children per woman, the European and Canadian is 1.5. (We need 2.2 just for replacement.) Russia (1.17 children) will see its population plummet from 145 million to 115 million by 2015. In the "Death of the West," Pat Buchanan argues that population decline is responsible for the inevitable extinction of the West.

    Reproduction requires the most delicate care. In the case of human beings, the female must be prepared for motherhood and honored for her contribution to society. The male must be shown that the standard of manhood is to provide leadership and sustenance for mother and children. Both mother and father must be able to give their children intellectual and spiritual guidance.

    Instead, in schools and universities, the tender shoots of feminine sexuality are crushed under the feminist jackboot. Young women are taught that heterosexual sex, marriage and family are inherently oppressive. Homosexuality on the other hand is an act of rebellion that is "chic" and "normal."

    The Ostriches heads here in SA will remain buried in the sand, because they may just know what's going down, we do.....why would they care?

  10. #9
    Site Caretaker Dave A's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    20,979
    Thanks
    3,055
    Thanked 2,462 Times in 2,067 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Given that we're a species with the capacity for concious choice, what is the priority here - increasing the number of people who live on this planet or improving the average quality of life?

    I can't help thinking we're faced with a quantity vs quality choice.
    The trouble with opportunity is it normally comes dressed up as work.

  11. #10
    Diamond Member wynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    east london
    Posts
    3,338
    Thanks
    548
    Thanked 624 Times in 523 Posts
    Warren, Bill and Ted realize that if they don't spend millions on birth control they will have to spend billions on other aid.

    Europe realised that if they don't make Africa a decent place to live, Africa was going to come live with them.

    Now if only our guys could realise that if they don't make Zim a good place to live, Zim is going to continue to come live with us.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 25-Nov-08, 06:06 PM

Tags for this Thread

Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.

Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •