Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
"The 17 findings made by the university, the two speech directions, the five confidentiality directions, the no satire direction, the censure, the final censure and the termination of Ridd’s employment were all unlawful."https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/16/james-cook-university-professor-peter-ridds-sacking-ruled-unlawful?CMP=share_btn_tw …
Judge: “[The] university has ‘played the man and not the ball’” Remarkably, the university continues to claim: "we have not taken issue with Dr Ridd’s rights to academic freedom." and that he "was not sacked because of his scientific views" Right....
James Cook University may have already spent over $1 million in legal fees attempting to silence Peter. They had assumed that sooner or later he would run out of money and courage.https://www.spectator.com.au/2019/04/peter-ridd-has-defeated-the-climate-inquisition-thanks-to-you/ …
Heretic! Blasphemer! Burn him! Climate 'science' as religious movement and these are the Inquisition.
I didn't even realise there was such a thing as a "no satire direction"
Congrats to Peter Ridd. It’s a sad world when a judge has to tell a university that they may not like the research of some of their professors, and that the just have to live with it.
I find it ironic you used the guardian article about the issue - note their smarmy near apology for publishing the facts of the case in the yellow box at the bottom.
I guess that’s one way of getting a consensus 
Yeah, and this ruling has nothing to do with science or censorship. Ridds views have never been censored.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
