The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2016 AFPAll references to Australia removed from U.N. climate report over tourism fears
SYDNEY©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2016 AFP
13 Comments
Login to comment
Haaa Nemui
More proof that the UN is an absolute joke.
Mocheake
This really stinks. They are more worried about money than actually protecting the reef. Not surprising but sad.
glasshouse
There will no reef left if they don't do something about it...Then that means 0 Tourist dollars...
SenseNotSoCommon
Queensland, home to the Great Barrier Reef, exported record 220M tonnes of coal in 2015
http://www.worldcoal.com/coal/12012016/Queensland-coal-exports-up-in-2015-2016-33
Can't have your cake and eat it.
smithinjapan
Hopefully news of this coverup bring even more attention and less tourism.
dcog9065
Does the UN really have much of a point?
sf2k
The UN can only represent the countries under itself. This is on Australia not the UN obviously
They don't want their coal production to come into question and ironically they have now highlighted their hypocrisy by omission. Congrats
BurakuminDes
This is how right-wing governments with little concern for the environment roll, folks, especially in an election campaign. Many senior members of this dreadful Conservative government we have in Canberra - including the moronic redneck Deputy PM Barnaby Joyce - are climate-change denialists.
Its unlikely ANY coral reefs worldwide will be viable tourist sites in 30 or so years - see them while you can (the Great Barrier Reef is spectacular.)
presto345
A fine example of the 'apres nous le deluge' mentality.
albaleo
The idea of a "Union of Concerned Scientists" worries me.
My understanding of the purpose of science is increasing our knowledge of the physical world, warts and all. A thrown stone obeys the laws of gravity irrespective of who threw it. It has no motive, and science should have no motive or concern beyond increasing our knowledge. Isn't what we do with that knowledge just as relevant to concerned butchers or concerned ballerinas as it is to scientists?
Having said all that, it doesn't explain why all references to Australia were removed from the report. I'll blame bad journalism for my lack of understanding. Quotes from Greenpeace and the like don't constitute knowledge.
Black Sabbath
Agreed. Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
SenseNotSoCommon
Damn these liberals and their pesky facts!
albaleo
I didn't know us liberals had any facts, pesky or otherwise. Scientists on the other hand...