On December 10th, 2006, globally recognised Humanist, Science buff, authour of at least ten books and captivating speaker, Robyn Williams introduced  another excellent episode of Ockham's Razor for ABC's Radio National. Entitled "Apocalpse Now" the subject material was presented by Dr. John Reid, a Melbourne based neuroscientist.

It dealt with the challenges humanity faces in managing exploding populations, dwindling resources and climate change in the face of human nature and our ability to minimise cognitive dissonance. Aussies are in debt to Williams for his dedication to excellence in science and the publics understanding of the actual role, methodology and value of all sciences. The Science Show is his baby and has run since 1975, seeing Robyn prove himself as a quick witted an effective Science journalist and broadcaster.

Thus it is with considerable gratitude that many "in the know" look forward to his presence when introducing Ockham's Razor. The title is one many will immediately recognise and in doing so accurately predict the production style of the program. William of Ockham was a 14th century English monk. His contribution to scientific explanation is Ockham's Razor itself and is noted famously; Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate, which translates as entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. The ABC website "About" page extends the philosophy to production technique clearly informing interested parties:

More so, it is often the speakers role or intention to lay out hard evidence, proposed solutions and respected findings or predictions they have not made. At most a few sentences of reflection may be included. Hence it is with something close to disbelief I find at Creation Ministries International an article, viciously and slanderously "critiquing" the episode published on Janurary 26th, 2007. Written by Aussie Creationist, Christian Fundamentalist and enemy of reason Bill Muehlenberg, fallaciously attacking Williams, Reid and exploiting the style of presentation to claim insouciant nonchalance on Williams part. The title, Melbourne Atheist - chillingly consistent aplication of evolution gives away it's intention to bolster the theistic position that evolution is a malignant force. One that both hides the truth about "creation" and applies genocidal ideologies fit for extreme Stalinists, Nazi's to anyone who asks the hard questions and finds evidence to challenge the worth of "Mans dominion over all the Earth".

I had to chuckle. Reid opens with his skeptism - as a scientist - that humanity will find a way to manage our challenging future, through science. He claims so because people are adept at deluding themselves. Although Reid was referring to passive delusion leading to apathy and inaction - particuarly on the morally difficult issues - Muehlenberg grabs the ball and sprints over the line into the realms of malignant fantasy and reckless zealotry. All the time, trying to make the old "no God, no morals" claim. By the way I know what you're thinking. ABC Science Show, Ockham's Razor and Williams vs "Creation Ministries International" and Bill Muehlenberg? It's a no-brainer, and yes, Bill offers zero evidence to substantiate a solid refutation. But if you're interested read on.

What became truly fascinating is that every piece of Muehlenberg's article is a false and deceptive construct, built upon demonstrably false claims and invented references to "arguments" that appear nowhere in Reids presentation. In fact, Reid actually argues the opposite to what Bill accuses him of on specific points. Muehlenberg misses this or intentionally ignores it because if one is not for God, one is indeed for evil and unspeakable deeds. Bill is a true believer. He takes the bible as absolutely literal and indeed favours the shiny new toy Creationists frequently play with: Biblical End Times.

It is impossible to accept Bills piece as anything but comical, until one realises he not only claims Australia is at civil war over morality, but is also a worthy foot soldier. Jesus must return as the world ends. Why would any sensible person ignore an open invitation to paradise and attempt to save our wonderful planet?

The scriptures are clear. Redeem or be damned for eternity. Could this be the basis for such a childishly and demonstrably false piece by Bill Muehlenberg? There are over twenty demonstrably slanderous and fallacious claims about Dr. Reid, Williams, science, the production piece itself and the existence of active dynamics seemingly bent on destroying humanity. All on a piece supposedly quoting from another on how to save humanity!

The only way to deconstruct Muehlenberg's Rally-to-arms against reason, is to go through his fallacious and insultingly personal attack on Reid and measure it against Reid's actual presentation transcript on ABC Radio National. This episode Firesnake does just that. Let's forgive Bill for deceptively slandering Robyn Williams: there's no way one can miss the intention of Ockham's Razor to be something more than succinct. Muehlenberg forgoes journalistic credibility to his detriment. Had Williams satisfied Bills need for hand-holding the show would lose it's impact. Bill's real gripe is that Robyn has no theistic persuasions.

Acknowledging climate change is an easier topic than population control, Reid is then at pains to stress it is birth rate, not living persons, we must reduce if we do decide we cannot sustain present growth. Reid argues that he has little confidence in civil means solving the problems. Primarily voluntary abstinence from procreation, due to the urge to do so and the belief in an inalienable right to have children - more affluent than their parents. At no time does he claim he has an alternative solution. At no time does he propose so much as plucking a blade of grass.

He refers to the findings and suggestions of international bodies and advances the calculations specific to population, ecological foot printing, sustainability and climate change. Just to be clear: all Reid's advances note the need to reduce birth rate as a documented strain on food and essential resources, land availability and care and climate change. Reid uses an entire paragraph thusly: "Let us canvass them", after noting theories and findings do exist.

This is a tired trick Creationists favour. Actually, Darwinian evolution by natural Selection explains the evolution of all life on the planet and our astonishingly improbable presence as a superior primate. I don't say "improbable" as in "unlikely". I mean to point out we can calculate the probability of being born, and this includes understanding the probability of our planet forming, genesis of life, the irrefutable march of evolution, the achievements and trials of our species over 1/4 million years and finally the fact our parents "dumped" billions of suitable gametes when only two came together to achieve conception. And, how many others could either parent have conceived with?

Simply put, whilst we are just half a chromosome away from chimps and indeed higher primates, Evolution explains why we are certainly not in the same ball park as microbes, slugs or diseases. Bill has no idea of how evolution works. No religious fundamentalist can hold to their beliefs and hope to seriously comment on this brilliant scientfic theory nor the hard facts that support it. Evolution proves why Bill is deluding himself. And his response is not untypical.

Other ridiculous offences include linking only to other similar pieces on the same site and claiming Dr. Eric Pianka urged dropping Ebola virus on 90% of humanity - to a standing ovation of people like Reid. It turned out to be one person who "certainly gained that impression". It is a false claim, period. He also links to other pieces which twist the words of scientists and criticise Robyn Williams. Consider this quote from another piece by David Catchpoole and Jonathon Sarfari, "Doomsday Glee":

Muehlenberg's personal attack on Dr. Reid is unmistakable and very telling about the true nature of modern Christian charlatans. Muehlenberg has attributed an entire malignant mindset to Reid based solely on his own vile mess which he then leaps into for a further four paragraphs. Bill tells us that food prices are cheaper. Global crises are not to be considered as accurate and it is actually a "birth-dearth" that has supposedly led to the challenges we face on our very trouble world. He denies globally accepted findings on climate change and insists we can easily continue to feed a population of 12 billion. His offerings include:

Not surprisingly we have the "anti-Christian" theme of Reid's piece invented, and then explained to us, by Bill. He peppers his piece with taunts and insults such that one finds it hard to follow his train of superstition. Even though Dr. Reid notes that the "three horsemen of the apocalypse - war, famine and pestilence" would be both cruel and inefficient at reducing the population it is the following Muehlenberg seems to have really reacted to:

Bill Muehlenberg concludes:

As Dr. John Reid correctly notes;

Human beings are self-deluder's. We can convince ourselves, in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary, that black is white and heat can flow from a cooler to a hotter body. It is this power of self-delusion that leads us to believe that somehow we will find a way to fix the problem of our unsustainable consumption of the Earth's resources.

Or as Stephen Hawking noted in January 2007:

"Humankind must Understand The science that rules our life. Otherwise how can we meet the future if we don't know our options?"

Firesnake awards a Clear and Present Danger To Critical Thought to Bill, with a brilliant entry score of 9.2/10  for:

• creating misinformation by selective quotation
• linking selective quotes of another's work to demonstrably false claims
• attributing negative and malignant personality traits to innocent academics and supposedly those who reject his version of reality
• misleading over the facts of evolution
• cultivating and nurturing the fallacious claim non theistic views equate to genocidal ideologies
• and indoctrinating innocent, gullible or vulnerable people with an aggressively anti-evolutionary, anti-scientific and dangerously ignorant viewpoint

All articles mentioned are here.
Music: Garageband.

Gags,

1 hr, 4 min
25 MB

Paul Mullett is like tinea. No mater how many exhaustive feats one tries to avoid reinfection, he can reappear with a vengeance. More so - putting odour aside - it's painfully irritating to look at and remove traces of his presence. Finally, one moist, warm and dirty environment in which he thrives is Melbourne's Herald Sun; aka The Pulp and Print Court.

Suspended from active duty, and remaining a force within the "police union" [website here] he is described fondly as the "embattled union boss" in the PPC. State Premier John Brumby is somewhat serious about his police corruption "watchdog", although experts point out only a seperate dedicated body will solve the full problem. Prior Premier Steve Bracks was a fool to yield to any of Mullett's demands - many of which arose after investigations revealed his illegal ways.

Please feel free to reacquaint yourself with Paul Mullett and his honest approach to power struggles.
Flash Audio: OPI Police Phone Taps; Ashby, Mullett, Linnell. Explicit Language
Direct Download - "save as" here.

That his involvement in corruption, bullying of members, cowardice, threatening of female officers, tipping off murder suspects and ethical breaches may secure a 25 year jail term is of no moment within Murdoch's pages. This is a paper in which police are perpetual "heroes", reporting on whom is biased milk-sop pulp fiction and who regularly run beat ups and campaigns based on fallacious claims they initially propose. It's a fertile ground for a conspiracy nutter to air his paranoia. Selfless heroes with a swan song "What About Me?". Sure guys, sure.

It is the latest most recent association with Melbourne's only real rag-paper that beggars belief. A day after we learn from two other sources Mullett faces a challenge from within his own union, the PPC excelled itself. The paper forwarded a "survey" packed with leading questions to a one third minority of members, collated the predictable results and pretended to have a "news" story. Packed with distractions like "devastating", "shock findings", "graphic results", "pressure" on Chief Commissioner Nixon, readers were bound to lose their way. We hear primarily of the 69% who dislike Christine Nixon. We had to wait on the good Commissioner herself to hear that only 69% of one third of Victoria Police were suitably "pulped" - shall we say. Put another way, she's actually admired by the bulk of her members.

The very fact the Herald Sun survey includes responses critical of Mullett's suspension when the reality is that even his closest confidants want him gone, and ask only questions about their beat up dynamic can't be ignored. More so, most of the detail is superflous. It's a Mullett vs Nixon beat up. The Police Association Magazine actually notified members of the impending survey. Disenchanted members and Nixon antagonists had pencils at the ready. Herald Sun readers can join in. Unaware of the world outside their boxes the uncritical readers had an opportunity to vote on her performance themselves. This was replaced by a "new" poll on whether these corrupt cops should have stun guns and automatic pistols.

Ironically, it's other leading piece was coverage of a rally primarily attended by Police Association members and somewhat peppered with other emergency service members. In a nutshell Police supposedly want more members, more resources, less females and no "improper association policy". The final sticking point requiring police to reveal all social contacts of a criminally dubious nature. In this episode we look at how valid these concerns are in the present climate and in the context of Mullett's real history. The final insult was the "editorial". Remember, this entire story is nurtured by this newspaper. There really is no problem other than a demonstrably right wing appraisal of it's own delusion. It included:

Police have also challenged falling crime statistics and are intent on labeling the forward progression of modern policing as "the softly, softly approach". The tiny minority who bemoan the morale-eroding "feminisation" of the force almost certainly realise they act for Mullett - not themselves. The reality is that Victoria Police has a problem. Mullett is yet to address issues raised in previous episodes here; Mullett's Mumbles, Mullett's Motives and Corruption in Victoria Police, extending back to Janurary 2007. On the issues raised by the Herald Sun farce one must note Victoria has below average numbers of female officers with only one other state having less. Policing today requires a sharp mind and access to data for economic exploitation. Police deal with people - not characters. The PPC may wish it were otherwise but our crime rate has fallen 23.5% under Nixon. To this we can add that of the 20 best performing service areas, 14 had more than a quarter of female members.

The onus is on proponents of this rot to serve up some evidence. It's doubly offensive coming a day after we hear of a national youth homelessness crisis. These individuals present with dual problems of substance/medication use/abuse and psychological disorders of almost any magnitude. Certainly they come daily into police contact. Is brute force really what we want here? Or is it the skills of a well educated and properly trained compassionate person we need to step back to see clearly?

The other annoyance is double standards. Victorian Police are certainly corrupt - charges have been laid, conversations heard. I actually think the "improper association" idea is going to be a logistical nightmare, possibly discriminatory and perhaps of limited value. I also think it's a great idea. Victoria has no Spent Convictions Policy. Our L.E.A.P. database is compromised. Our privacy is a joke in Police hands and to Police members. Today, Victorians can loose careers, homes, families and worse solely due to the brandishing of criminal "records" by insouciant police and their nosey assistants. In other words, you and I have no such "protection" in our relationship with authorities or indeed their flawed and discriminatory use of our own personal history.

That we, as a community, pay taxes for this corruption to run unchecked in the largest law enforcement body in the second largest city in a so-called "globally progressive democracy" is, objectively speaking, utterly fascinating. Just how gullible are we? Fairly so, I'd wager. 

In January 2007, in The Australian Don Stewart former Supreme Court Judge, Royal Commissioner and founding director of the NCA said the "deep seated and continuing corruption" will only be  finally managed with a Royal Commission. He claimed at the time recent findings were "the tip of the Iceberg", describing the task of cleaning up Victoria Police as "herculean". "Only a wide ranging Royal Commission will do it". The article went on to report:

"Mr Stewart is one of the most senior legal figures in Australia to warn that Victoria has failed to address police corruption. In 2005, former royal commissioner and former ASIO head Edward Woodward said corruption in the state was at its highest level ever".

"I take the opposite view," he says. "Why the Victoria Police don't want, and the Victorian Government will not have, an independent wide-ranging judicial inquiry into police corruption, such as was had in Queensland and NSW, is obvious. They know that it would reveal what they don't want revealed."

Mr Stewart says that, while head of the NCA, he met opposition from many members of Victoria Police, whom he describes as "bad as any". He says he had to terminate the secondments to the NCA of a number of state-based police because of concerns over their conduct".

In March 2007 in an interview with Damien Carrick for ABC's The Law Report, Stewart noted,

"We have to look at establishing proper agencies, research areas, but looking at them, making them transparent, auditing them all the time. You can't let the police investigate themselves, it doesn't work, never has done, never will. And there are all sorts of ways that you can endeavour to maintain integrity, and I don't want to become involved in the discussion of this in any way, but one cannot but be aware of what is happening in Western Australia at the moment. It's not just the police obviously who can become involved in corruption and corroding to use your word, of institutions. There are other people who can be, other people in powerful places. Including politicians.Not only politicians but public servants at high level. Money is a great incentive. I don't know how you get rid of greed, you can't just wave a magic wand and say 'From now on the human race shall be greed free'. It doesn't work like that. It is part of the human condition...".

Damien Carrick: The more things change, the more they stay they same.

Don Stewart: They do. And it reflects the human condition, and we can't change that. All we can do is our best to minimise it.

This Episode Firesnake looks at these fun times with audio grabs from the main players. We also award a Clear and Present Danger to Critical Thought to Paul Mullett himself. He slam dunks a more than respectful score of 8.6 / 10 for being himself. Of course, moaning about "weakening" female officers, then using a picture of a "diminutive female" disarming a shoddy copper during a rally to highlight the true evil of these people we call women, was delightful.

The real issue some say is this silly business of human rights and fear of "being sued". This "thuggery" - yes we're still on about a "diminutive" lass - demands we actually compromise our very definition of democracy such that law enforcement have unprecedented powers and limited accountability.

Where have I seen that before?

All articles touched on are here.
Music thanks to Garageband.






Gags,

51 min.
19.5 MB.