Verballed on Twitter

Simon Chapman doesn’t like having statistics explained to him:

Doofus” – Fantastic. That’s your tax dollar at work.

Mind you, he’s probably still pissed off I got The Conversation to update his disclosure statement on a recent article. He had originally declared something like this:

Simon Chapman does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

Completely false, of course. He has received funding from the Department of Health and Ageing, the Preventive Health Research Grants Program, the National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Cancer Institute all of which actively campaign to suppress tobacco consumption. So he is hardly a disinterested observer. Apparently ethics and full disclosure are for the little people.

This entry was posted in Hypocrisy of progressives. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Verballed on Twitter

  1. JC

    @SimonChapman6 @TheIPA @SincDavidson Simon chapman the Baghdad Bob of plain packaging. Stop hiding proper disclosure Chapman It’s a bad look

  2. JC

    @SimonChapman6 @TheIPA @SincDavidson also, what’s with the bow tie/dinner suit in the pic. Not even a bit pompous?

  3. Mick Gold Coast QLD

    From JC at 8:46 pm :

    Aren’t you supposed to add the details of your Suicide Hot Line when you’re messaging the feeble of spine, society’s most vulnerable and all that?

    I know, I know – he does need to step outside with a coffee and a smoke to calm down a bit.

  4. Marion of the Glades

    Sinc, I think you’re wrong about plain packaging. Sorry.

  5. JC

    Sinc

    I believe there’s some background about Chapman getting involved with green hustler types pushing propellers on sticks (windfarms) in a very heavy handed way. I think I recall that he was on the payroll of Hepburn Wind.

    Here’s some background on the “professor” in a parliamentary inquiry.

    But it is the statement that has prompted him to threaten me, utilising a law firm that was instrumental in the set-up of Hepburn Wind. He has threatened to sue me for libel over this statement unless I pay him $40,000 plus costs. He has threatened to sue me for libel unless I organise an apology on the website of 2GB and an anti-wind farm website called Stop These Things. He has threatened me with contempt of parliament and a breach of parliamentary privilege if I raise these matters in the Senate. This reaction by Professor Chapman is something that my more experienced parliamentary colleagues have labelled a blatant try-on. It is another attempt by the wind industry to silence me, to scare me off and to intimidate me. It is a case of a Sydney university academic firing shots across the bow of the blacksmith from Ballarat. This is something he has done before now, tweeting about my position on this issue, always in the context of my background as a blacksmith—a background, I add, that I am enormously proud of. I remain one of the wind industry’s most stubborn and outspoken critics. I will not be silenced. I will not give up on the injustice inflicted on people who claim to be impacted by living near turbines. I will not stop. My comments to Alan Jones were a series of rhetorical statements or questions about the assumptions members of the public should be entitled to make when somebody professes to be qualified to speak about an issue of public health. In other words, I was asking people to check that so-called experts on this issue are relevantly trained and qualified. It is a reasonable request. Our media and the internet are crawling with self-appointed experts. Daily we operate in a cacophony of opinion presented as fact.

    Professor Chapman has been an outspoken critic of those who have dared to question the wind farm orthodoxy. But is Professor Chapman a medical doctor? Is he legally entitled to examine and treat patients? Is he qualified in acoustics or any other aspect of audiology? Is he a sleep specialist? Does he hold any qualifications in bioacoustics or physiology or neuroscience? How many wind farm victims has he interviewed directly? How many wind farm impacted homes has he visited? Professor Chapman claims to receive no payment from the wind industry. How many wind industry conferences, seminars and events has he spoken at? How many wind industry events has he attended? Writing on the Crikey website in November 2011, Professor Chapman lamented how many conferences do not pay speaker’s fees, and, when one conference organiser refused to pay his hotel bill, he withdrew. This is the same Professor Chapman who was photographed at a campaign launch in Melbourne by the Danish wind turbine manufacturer Vestas. Did Vestas pay your hotel bill and other costs, Professor Chapman? These are reasonable questions—they put in context his actions.

    More here at the link on this gentleman.

    http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=CHAMBER;id=chamber%2Fhansards%2Ff4dd5936-2ce6-4435-b150-bc9e6f0a03b4%2F0198;query=Id%3A%22chamber%2Fhansards%2Ff4dd5936-2ce6-4435-b150-bc9e6f0a03b4%2F0000%22

  6. JC

    The last para in the link is particularly enlightening on the professor of plain package and windfarms.

    If Professor Chapman proceeds with this action, I look forward to having him answer in court those questions I have raised here tonight—questions about his qualifications, his expertise and his links with the wind industry financial or otherwise. I look forward to his cross-examination under oath as equally as I look forward to mine. I say this: his action, if it proceeds, is doomed in a legal setting or elsewhere for one reason; it is not based on the truth.

    Wow. He’s certainly pissed off someone.

  7. Bruce of Newcastle

    Honesty is for the little people. Also lefties are never wrong. They move their brains to fluffy-unicorn heaven before that can ever happen.

    PPL is not doing what he thinks. All it is doing is moving consumption to the black market and increasing consumption through price deflation. It doesn’t work for marijiuana so why would it work for tobacco? The companies can no longer compete on brand so they are instead competing on price. Consumers are exquisitely sensitive to price, and price discovery is not affected by tax beyond a certain fairly low level. Which is why black markets eat authoritarian government tax legislation for lunch, every time.

  8. Sinclair Davidson

    I think you’re wrong about plain packaging. Sorry.

    Don’t be sorry – be proud. Stand up and be counted.

    I may well be wrong – but the evidence is going to take a long time to come in, and there is going to be a lot of work (in the Sir Humphrey terminology) generated by this policy. So far I’ve had several media interviews on this, op-eds, posts here at the Cat, I’m currently working on a revise and resubmit on an article for a journal, and so on.

    How do you think I earn my living. After this I’ll be able to point to a lot activity at my work performance appraisal with my HoS. We’ll get impact, publications, media exposure, the Feds will give the Uni more money, all is good. :) If it wasn’t for bad policy, like this, I’d have to get a real job.

  9. Joe

    Sinc,

    Do you feel offended?
    S18C immediately.
    Hit it hard, hit it often!

  10. Gab

    Do stop beating Mr Chapman around the noggin with facts, Sinclair. You how that upsets him.

  11. pete m

    baldness is not a race.

  12. pete m

    What is funny is Sinc is dispassionately discussing facts without a dog in the race as it were, and these people are so bound up in the “rightness” of their case they keep losing it.

    Happens all the time with lefties and their pet wet dream polices.

  13. Sinclair Davidson

    pete m – it gets worse. They keep saying I have a dog in the race. If only my bank account reflected all those claims.

  14. ChrisPer

    In my opinion, Simon Chapman is an activist, not a scientist. He wrote an extended gloat called ‘Over our dead bodies’ celebrating the state smashing the shooters in 1996-1999. He was a major figure in the anti-gun movement, then published research purporting to show all sorts of benefits from lives saved while concealing his past activist affiliations. He cant help descending to sexualised abuse of his opponents either – ‘priapic’ shooters, ‘gun-lusting lobby group’-

    Don Weatherburn, head of BOCSAR, tore him a new one in the SMH Letters for not letting facts change his mind, like a scientist would.

  15. Leigh Lowe

    The point about the righteous defenders of good causes seeing no need to declare any interest they might have.
    How often do we see Greenpeace types being quoted on environmental matters as honest brokers and totally disinterested parties.
    But if you want to speak out in favour of, say, coal mining, you better not have a great uncle who once owned a Briquette yard in Brunswick.

  16. JC

    pete m – it gets worse. They keep saying I have a dog in the race. If only my bank account reflected all those claims.

    lol.. The old leftie conspiracy theory.

  17. Nanuestalker

    The old leftie conspiracy ” I’m only a poor activist, you’re just a capitalist” theory.

    FTFY

  18. ChrisPer

    Today I submitted to the Senate inquiry on ‘The ability of Australian law enforcement authorities to eliminate gun-related violence in the community’. I didn’t bother much with their terms of reference, but under h: any related matters I cut loose on the dishonesty of activists including Professor Simon Chapman, and described how the social influence model of mass killings indicated that they may well have been partly caused by the media stunts of Roland Browne and Rebecca Peters. Martin Bryant’s police interview has a few clues that they may have directly influenced him in a show broadcast October 1995 giving detailed instructions in getting illegal guns, and using them in massacres, all with an attractive spokesmodel in flanno showing and repeating how easy it was. The Coroner found they provided the script followed by one suicide, and that inquest was held only a few weeks after Port Arthur.

    Chapman is a tosser. a SMUG tosser.

  19. H B Bear

    Chapman is a tool of Big Anti-Tobacco.

  20. Some History

    ChrisPer,
    That’s a nice comment on Simon Crapman. “Priapic”? Yep, that’s one of Crapman’s favorite put-downs. I’ve seen it a number of times in his antismoking blather-fests. Snowdon recently had a thread on Crapman’s overuse of the Monty Python “Black Knight” analogy:
    http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/simon-chapman-tedious-self-plagiarist.html

    There’s another fav in Crapman’s limited repertoire – “priceless”. On rare occasions Crapman actually makes an appearance on comments boards. When the questions get a little tough for the croaky bully, Crapman ends a comments sequence with “priceless”, at which point commenting becomes closed. Here’s a recent example from The Conversation (what conversation?). See exchange with “John Anderson” towards the bottom of comments:
    https://theconversation.com/electronic-cigarettes-hope-from-the-hype-may-harm-your-health-27444

  21. Some History

    In my opinion, Simon Chapman is an activist, not a scientist.

    Again, from the antismoking angle, Crapman is only an activist. Here’s one of Crapman’s early contributions to antismoking, his manual on how to do propaganda, The Lung Goodbye. He presented excerpts at the 5th World Conference on Smoking & Health in 1983. Some of his deceptive suggestions are still used today.
    http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gjq72f00/pdf;jsessionid=32A42DE3836FEBD65B9FE6696FCE11BA.tobacco03

    [Remember that Crapman started his “illustrious” antismoking career by defacing tobacco advert billboards with his BUGA UP gang]

    That Crapman and his antismoking buddy, Mike Drab, hold senior academic positions (and highly influential with the legislature) is testimony to how far down the gurgler contemporary academia has spun. And the rot isn’t confined to Australia.

  22. Leigh Lowe

    Aha!
    You categorically deny involvement in the smokes industry, but do not refute the “doofus” tag.

  23. .

    Don Weatherburn, head of BOCSAR, tore him a new one in the SMH Letters for not letting facts change his mind, like a scientist would.

    Give that man a cigar.

  24. talleyrand

    Let us say of Professor Chapman, Barba Tenus Sapientes.

  25. Toiling Mass

    People like this guy like ‘disclosure’ because it enables ad homs, innuendo and gotchas.

    They need you to tell them because being an activist causes severe atrophy of skills in research.

  26. He does lose his rag easy, doesn’t he? It’s quite clear that the words were mine and just a typo that Chapman’s name was inserted instead.

    However, Chapman has in the past attributed what I have said to someone else in order to have a dig at them, when it was very obvious that they hadn’t written it.

    http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/jewel-robbing-spotted-in-bmj.html

    By Chapman’s own logic, that makes him a weapons grade doofus, no? ;)

  27. gabrianga

    I thought Labor’s Shadow Attorney General had staked his claim to the name Doofus back in the 80′s?

    Must be a breed.

  28. Plain packaging is just another part of the war on drugs.

  29. Dr. Sir Fred Lenin

    I have a brand new uni degree a piece of paper thet says I am clever,given to me by people who have pieces of paper saying they are clever which were given to them by people with pieces of paper etc.etc.I
    I want ti be noticed,I want the left media to write down my clever words,what can I do?
    I have it ,i will pretend to be an expert on something we socialists have decided we dont like .
    Eureka ! Smoking ! Yes unless its Pot ,we socialists hate it,,Pot should be legal,Tobacco banned,its harmfull,Pot isnt ,it doesnot cause Psychological problems does it ?

  30. rebel with cause

    The war against e-cigs is even more disturbing. Anyone with a brain should be all for a technology that stops second hand smoke and stops the littering of butts, let alone the fact that it is effective at helping lifelong smokers to quit or substantially reduce their intake.

  31. Grumbles

    Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos

  32. DMS

    He’s extraordinarily juvenile and combative in dealing with dissenting commenters beneath that article. I thought he was an academic? I expect past tense passive voiced, disinterested analysis etc. He virtually says “you’re dumb” a couple of times in response . Odd behaviour.

  33. mizaris

    So Chapman is a liar as well as an idiot. Whooda thort!!!!

  34. James of the Glen

    What is Windfarm Chapman going to do now Pacific Hydro has finally consulted world-renowned acoustic engineer Steve Cooper to investigate the devastating noise effects of the Cape Bridgewater wind “farm” near Portland, Victoria?

    Still more denials from the Windfarm Wonderboy? It’s getting harder by the day for Chapman and his mates to hide.

Comments are closed.