[QUOTE=Telfer86;10881759]..........WA closed to everyone & QLD stating they will remain closed to Vic/NSW until 28 days of zero new cases (hasn't been achieved anywhere).........................[/QUO

I believe it's 28 days of no new community transmissions.

Your question is why, I for one, am glad that most people are happy for our STATE politicians to allow their decisions to be driven by the medical experts. I can see people having opinions that are driven by personal belief / political / financial position etc, but this!!!

I was Aeromedical at the time, we were clad up like surgeons, complete with booties. I'll be honest, we were ****ting out pants because we had young children and didn't know how it was transmitted. The fear and unknown lasted about 2 months when with a sigh of relief the news came, it's ok guys it's blood to blood, you can lose the protective gear and became limited to the paramedics only when the patient was bleeding. The grim reaper campaign went on for some time after that. International travel back then was only qantas and a minuscule of what it is today. (well before march anyway)

28 Days of no new community transmission from unknown sources. But if you read the Judges' comments in the Palmer trial, it goes above that even, to the point where if they don't know if there's unknown transmission or not they'll keep the border closed too...EDIT: And as a guide, NSW's best run in that regard to date has been 22 days, followed by 13 and then 10 days.

I just don’t understand how you can trust an expert who is paid to give advice to help the pay master spin their yarn.

Yes, just read the first few paragraphs and I agree, but you obviously didn't read much as you've have understood where he was heading with this and whom he was criticising.

"Science is probably the last bastion of true freethinking but is being swallowed by this make-money-get-profit world. Science and scientists are becoming more and more detached from the pure curiosity that once drove them, and they are embracing this notion of profitable science, which means that an idea must first be sold in order to be explored."

I wonder where this is heading......?

"In naturally profitable scientific fields, for e.g. pharmacology, biotechnology or applied physics, the price is lower, and usually consists on adjusting the direction of a certain study to the best economic outcome."

Well, I expected that! But what followed was also no surprise:

"........But what when there is no direct profit? Fundamental science, for example. To be able to sell it in order to get funding a scientist is frequently forced to bend or adjust the narrative used to describe its project. From that moment onwards, it doesn’t matter how hard he will then fight to ignore the adaptations used in the marketing plan. His focus, his scientific agenda is forever deviated, since he must present results in line with what was proposed. One good example is how climate change is frequently introduced into projects which have nothing to do with it."

And the same with this:

"We are embracing, in science and as scientists, the same values and rules of the financial markets. We have transformed it into the monetisation of science (see Horton, 2016). This means that no longer the primary goal of science is to increase knowledge for the growth and prosperity of mankind but to obtain profits and be economically strong, under present neoliberal economic principles" So those same neoliberal economic principles which are damaging our societies are also responsible for pulling down our higher education; surprise, surprise!

And on it goes with pointing out the present failures in the world's higher education systems. But I think your wedded anti science view has clouded your ability to read this with an independent mind, allowing you to jump to the conclusion that this piece supports your political views, but it doesn't. Sure, there are problems, but this piece doesn't provide evidence that the system has corrupted the science that is used to support the view on CC or CV. The argument on "peer" reviewed work is well known and there is a scientist in Melb who has taken it upon herself to shine a light on this problem and she has had a reasonable amount of media expose for it recently (last 6 mths or so). A lot of this "peer" reviewed work is out of very low level journals (and a reasonable % out of China) and are large part of the problem is the need for published "research" by Unis etc. So for peer reviewed work, it's the standing of the journal that matters, claiming peer reviewed means nothing if the journal is of low standing, and the highest standing journals guard their reputations because without them, they're are worthless.

However, conflating this issue with all climate science is pure rubbish, most of the direction on CC is coming from the likes of, Australia: CSIRO, BoM, previous Fed Gov Chief Gov Scientist, UNSW CC unit, US: NASA's Goddard Institute, NOAA, Academy of Sciences, US equiv of BoM, UK: Royal Society (oldest science org in the world), UK Academy of Science. Afaik, every reputable science org supports the consensus on CC. We are not talking bottom of the rung science, we are taking the top levels.

The article also points out the profit driven area of science these days, that being the bio / pharma areas. So who is corrupting the actual outcome of science, those at the bottom rung or the profit driven areas. Who provides the money for all of these web based anti CC stances? The fossil fuel and vested interests in not wanting any change that will impact their profitability.

I'm not wedded to CC, for the life of me I cannot see for me, an emotional benefit and definitely no financial benefit in accepting CC, or CV responses. Why would a normal person want to, with all of the negative outcomes of that acceptance. For me it's simple, the bulk to the science supports it. Unfortunately we now have to endure that fallout.

Mr Peabody, the article doesn't support your view, you've conflated it with your beliefs.

Edit: "A good read on the scientific experts of today! " Yeah nah. It isn't a read of scientific experts today, it's a comment on the declining "standards" of science in general, just as you have varying standards of aviation around the world REGARDLESS of the same regulatory standards worldwide. Imo your comment is further evidence of your misunderstanding of the article.

So I guess that's the paid experts on both sides of the fence, that means the side of the fence you sit on as well? Because one way or another they are both paid for their opinion, however public health experts are nowhere near at risk if the disagree with their paymasters, which is not the case for the private arena.

You need look no further than "religion" for the answer to those questions.

Just some general comments on peer review (academic, not science)

Tonight I’m in the process of peer reviewing (rejecting!) a paper for one discipline’s annual conference. I don’t know the author(s). They won’t know who reviewed their paper.

Peer-reviewed journals within disciplines are usually rated (category A, B & C in the discipline I’m most familiar with). It has to be much higher quality research to get published in a Cat A.

I’m going to respectfully disagree. I think public service is more susceptible to corruption. Anyway, your point that you can’t believe anyone holds true. Hence just follow the statistics and formulate ones own opinion on the state of play.

I too find myself referring more and more to government websites, source documents and scientific papers.

The difference between those and what appears in the media is disappointing to say the least.

I am afraid that our CMO let the cat out of the bag.

I really feel for the CHO and Premier when it comes to non-quarantined requests to attend a funeral.

If you say NO you will be heartless. But if you say YES, well, we all know how likely “social distancing” is expected to succeed at a funeral.

A single COVID case at a funeral could easily become 50-100 in a day, and next you know it, you have Melbourne in July. There are usually a lot of elderly and vulnerable people at a funeral. So you, as Premier, or CHO, will get to feel like Dan for the next 6 months at least, because you gave her an exemption.

Yeah. True. Unless, of course, it’s a “very significant“ funeral.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-...icant/12132614

Yep. Been there, seen it, bought the T shirt! :suspect:

I guess the “crossing state border from a hot zone without quarantine” factor was not involved in that one.

But your point is well noted. Poor form.

What’s the QLD definition of a hotspot? ACT has a better record than QLD. All because 1 person from NSW flew from Canberra into Brisbane. But you can sail a super yacht from Melbourne for maintenance that could be done in Melbourne, lie on the paperwork about not stopping anywhere and be allowed to stay.

As each day passes, the Sweden model looks like it was the more rational option. Let’s also not forget that Covid is not Ebola. Listening to the media, you’d be forgiven for thinking they were one and the same.

Seems Queen P house is falling down around her receiving a flogging in the media today, Queen P wouldn't allow CMO to do a conference without her as thats her spot on the TV but now CMO stands alone at press conference to take the heat, 3 ministers quit. The thing that gets me our PM has allegedly had a phone call to plead to QLD to allow a daughter attend a funeral who comes from ACT (over 60 days without a case) and she reverts to "I'm being bullied" seems she cant handle the heat. Then for the ultimate slap in the face admits to giving the wealthy special treatment Tom hanks brings nothing to Australia really but "because we need the money"! open your border let the business operate to what they were.

QLD GOV is a disgrace to our nation, another family had to get a Go Fund Me page going so they could pay for the quarantine to see their dying son, this is having real effects on peoples lives.

Coronavirus Australia: Queensland’s border rules cruel, hypocritical state … unless you’re Tom Hanks

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...090a?width=650Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk welcomes the AFL grand final – and more than 400 hangers-on, to Queensland, left. 'Crew' aboard Victorian Mark Simonds' superyacht sail in against the rules, but can stay, top. Meanwhile, the borders are policed, and requests for exemptions to attend funerals denied. Pictures: News Corp/Channel 9/News CorpAh, Queensland.

Outrageously hypocritical one day. Horrendously cruel the next.

How else to explain decisions being made around the NSW border – which, by the way, is open to Queenslanders.

They are welcome in Byron, and in Bondi.

No quarantine required. Just come on down.

But just try being getting into Queensland, henceforth, the callous state.

Ray Hadley has been leading the charge on this, on radio 2GB in Sydney.

Yesterday, he had a man who is 39 years old, and dying from cancer. He lives in Brisbane.

His four children, aged seven to 13, live with their Mum, across the border in NSW.

They want to see their dad before he dies.

Permission denied.

Denied!

Scott Morrison tried to intervene. He is an evangelical Christian, but you don’t have to be, to ask for mercy in this case.

Okay, said Queensland. One of the children can come over the border, and he’ll be driven to his father’s beside to say goodbye for one hour, and then it’s back to NSW with him.

And why?

Nobody can explain it.
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...a31d?width=650Traffic at the NSW-Queensland border. Picture: Jason O'BrienCovid is not rampant in NSW. What are the chances of this man’s children having it and spreading it? Minuscule.

Then, today, another case: Sarah is 26 years old, and she was raised in Queensland, but now lives in Canberra.

Her father was dying.

She applied for permission to see him before he died.

She didn’t get her exemption until Friday. It was too late. He died on Wednesday. So she won‘t ever see him again.

Well, at least she could go to the funeral, and be with her family, and pay her respects.

She took her exemption paperwork and went to Brisbane, and straight into hotel quarantine.

From there, she applied for an hour’s release to attend the funeral.

Denied!

But not just denied: the bureaucrat in charge told her she shouldn’t even be in Queensland. Why not?

Because the exemption was to visit her dying father. And he’s dead, so, you know, what are you even doing here?

The inhumanity boggles the mind.

Again, there is essentially no Covid in Canberra. What chance that she’s infected? None. Why can’t she quarantine with her family? Distance herself at the funeral for an hour?
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...06b0?width=650The Lady Pamela at a Gold Coast marina after millionaire construction magnate Mark Simonds and his family sailed her up from Melbourne for maintenance. They were fined and quarantined, but they can stay. Picture: News CorpPeople are carrying on like the rest of the country has been to Chernobyl. Like everyone else is toxic. But we know that‘s not actually the case.

Which brings us to the shocking hypocrisy.

Tom Hanks flew into Queensland this week. He’s not in hotel quarantine. He came on a private jet. So if you’re famous, in you go.

It also helps to be rich.

We all know the story of the millionaire family from Victoria who sailed up to Queensland on a luxury yacht, saying the boat needed maintenance.

They hopped off at Eden to get coffee. They weren‘t crew, as they claimed, but a man, his wife, their kids, and a friend, who is Lindsay Fox’s daughter.

They were fined, and forced into quarantine, but they’ve been allowed to stay in Queensland, which was of course their goal.

And why? One of them is a major sponsor of the Geelong Cats.

They want to go to the footy.
https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/...a2ad?width=650The AFL’s Gold Coast hotel quarantine bubble. Picture: SuppliedSpeaking of footy, who are all the people allowed into Queensland, on the guise of being with the AFL?

We’ve been told that James Sutherland – former boss of Cricket Australia – is there.

How did he get an exemption to travel? He is on the board of the Geelong Football Club. And he’s apparently got “experience with touring sports teams.”

There are a heap of wives, kids, support staff, hangers-on as well.

Ah yes.

If only you were the second cousin of an AFL commissioner’s son, you too could be in Queensland. Beautiful one day, acts of beastly cruelty the next.

Caroline Overington