Malcolm Roberts Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party
6:25 pm
I move:
The Senate notes that:
(a) valid scientific data proving cause-and-effect is vital as the only credible justification for policies claimed to be based on science;
(b) the following are often used today in our communities as substitutes for science, yet are not science:
(i) populist views and anecdotes about weather events,
(ii) short-term perspectives of cycles out of context,
(iii) unsubstantiated claims of 'having the science',
(iv) name calling,
(v) claims of consensus,
(vi) so-called peer-reviewed literature,
(vii) appeals to authority,
(viii) academic fallacies, and
(ix) emotional claims or statements; and
(c) the ultimate arbiter of science is empirical scientific evidence, being:
(i) objectively verified hard data as physical measurements and/or physical observations, and
(ii) presented in a logical framework proving cause and effect.
Jonathon Duniam Tasmania, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Forestry and Fisheries
6:26 pm
I seek leave to make a short statement.
Jonathon Duniam Tasmania, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Forestry and Fisheries
While there are some self-evident truths in this motion about the nature of science and research, if forced to a division, the coalition will oppose it on the basis that it also contains a great deal of conjecture and subjectivity.
Anne Urquhart Tasmania, Australian Labor Party
I seek leave to make a short statement.
Anne Urquhart Tasmania, Australian Labor Party
Labor will not be supporting this motion. This is a thinly veiled attack on climate scientists and established climate science. I would like to place on the record that Labor notes and celebrates peer-reviewed science as science, unlike Senator Roberts. We will develop our climate change policies and decide our targets in accordance with the science.
Question negatived.