It's confusing that Sky News in Europe has done a complete 180 degree turn on climate change, while the australian one keeps spouting the same old lies:
> Ridd presented a lecture based on the rejection of scientific findings that Australia’s sugarcane industry was damaging the Great Barrier Reef. [35]
> Ridd’s appearance was sponsored by the Queensland CANEGROWERS association, which opposed legislation to enact new water quality enforcement measures aimed at protecting the Reef from industrial runoff. The Australian Institute of Marine Science and the Center of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies supported the legislation, while the industry and Ridd claimed that it would be bad for business. [35]
> Commenting in advance of his lecture, Ridd said:
> “As I have been stating clearly for some time now, the scare stories about the Great Barrier Reef started in the 1960s when scientists first began work on the Reef. Since then, they have been crying wolf. […] The Reef is actually in great order. So are farmers really killing the Great Barrier Reef through run-off of pesticides and fertilisers, and mud in flood periods? No.” [35]
> Officials from the UN cultural agency and the International Union for Conservation of Nature released a report on Monday warning that without "ambitious, rapid and sustained" climate action, the world's largest coral reef is in peril.
...
> We'll very clearly make the point to UNESCO that there is no need to single the Great Barrier Reef out in this way" with an endangered listing, Ms Plibersek told reporters.
> "The reason that UNESCO in the past has singled out a place as at risk is because they wanted to see greater government investment or greater government action and, since the change of government, both of those things have happened," she added.
https://www.desmog.com/peter-ridd/
> Ridd presented a lecture based on the rejection of scientific findings that Australia’s sugarcane industry was damaging the Great Barrier Reef. [35]
> Ridd’s appearance was sponsored by the Queensland CANEGROWERS association, which opposed legislation to enact new water quality enforcement measures aimed at protecting the Reef from industrial runoff. The Australian Institute of Marine Science and the Center of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies supported the legislation, while the industry and Ridd claimed that it would be bad for business. [35]
> Commenting in advance of his lecture, Ridd said:
> “As I have been stating clearly for some time now, the scare stories about the Great Barrier Reef started in the 1960s when scientists first began work on the Reef. Since then, they have been crying wolf. […] The Reef is actually in great order. So are farmers really killing the Great Barrier Reef through run-off of pesticides and fertilisers, and mud in flood periods? No.” [35]