Australia’s oldest art is dissolving. The science meant to protect it has been rewritten. Now, insiders are speaking out.
When Dr John Black released his recent analysis of the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Program (MRAMP), the message was clear: decades of compromised science and industrial capture have brought the world’s oldest outdoor gallery to a point of crisis.
Dr Black’s report is a forensic critique of the data and governance underpinning Australia’s most sensitive cultural-heritage landscape. He finds that monitoring systems designed to protect the ancient petroglyphs of the Burrup Peninsula—a site that achieved World Heritage status in July 2025—have been skewed by inconsistent baselines, unvalidated models, and a lack of independent oversight.
Six salient points that dissolve the politics.
Dr Black’s peer-reviewed paper in Rock Art Research reveals six major findings that the government’s executive summary conveniently omitted:
- Rock porosity rising near industrial sources — evidence of acid attack eroding protective varnish layers.
- Acid gases proven corrosive: NO₂ and SO₂ produce pores even in base rock, accelerating surface decay.
- Rainfall pH misrepresented: marine contamination inflated alkalinity; true readings show acid rain (pH 4.3–6.5).
- Surface pH trends falsified by changing methodology rather than real improvement.
- Biological balance collapsing: varnish-building cyanobacteria disappearing; acid-tolerant microbes expanding.
- Manganese content halved since 1994—direct evidence of long-term degradation.
Beyond the data, Black exposes deeper issues:
- Scientific integrity compromised — unverified calibration, selective datasets, and opaque reporting.
- Industrial influence entrenched** — consultants assessing their own clients’ emissions.
- Governance failure** — structural conflicts of interest and lack of peer review.
- Urgency of reform** — without independence and open data, Australia risks breaching UNESCO conditions.
Inside scientists speaks out
If Dr Black’s report proved the science was compromised, the events that followed proved the system was too.
In May 2025, ABC journalist Rhiannon Shine exposed that the WA government had altered key MRAMP findings to justify a 45-year extension of Woodside’s gas operations.
Emeritus Professor Adrian Baddeley — one of Australia’s most respected statisticians — called it “unacceptable interference in scientific integrity.”
A crucial degradation-threshold graph was removed from the official report without author approval. Professor Benjamin Smith called the revised summary “not worth the paper it’s written on.”
For many inside Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation (MAC) and allied agencies, these revelations confirmed what insiders had long warned — that scientific concerns, conflict-of-interest disclosures, and critical peer reviews were repeatedly sidelined.
Traditional Owner Raelene Cooper has since called for decision-making power to return to custodians, free from industry capture.
Together, these voices — academic, cultural, and ethical — are converging on the same truth: Murujuga’s governance has failed to insulate science from politics.
The legal reckoning flushing out the truth
The contest over Murujuga has now moved from scientific inquiry to the courts. Two landmark legal actions are underway, challenging both federal and state approvals of Woodside’s North West Shelf (NWS) extension to 2070.
The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) has lodged a Federal Court appeal alleging that Environment Minister Murray Watt unlawfully took into account economic benefits from Woodside’s unapproved Browse project when approving the NWS extension, and failed to properly consider downstream and climate impacts.
In a separate action, Friends of Australian Rock Art (FARA) argue that the decision ignored the cultural and heritage harms to Murujuga and weakened protective conditions after industry pressure. FARA is also pursuing a WA Supreme Court challenge to the State’s own approval, asserting breaches of environmental and heritage law. (The Guardian, 13 October 2025)
These parallel cases coincide with new evidence brought to light by Professor Benjamin Smith’s widely read opinion piece, “Gaslighting: The Inside Story of the Woodside North West Shelf Approval” (October 2025), which detailed how Minister Watt’s own Statement of Reasons acknowledged that nitrogen and sulfur oxides from the NWS are degrading Murujuga’s petroglyphs. Smith’s analysis also revealed that the minister originally supported a zero-acid-emissions target by 2030 before conceding to Woodside’s claims of “technical infeasibility.”
Traditional Owner Raelene Cooper, who has become a national symbol of cultural and environmental advocacy, continues to lead efforts to assert Indigenous custodianship and the right to meaningful consent over Murujuga’s management.
Together, the legal actions by ACF and FARA, the scientific findings of Dr Black and Professor Smith, and the leadership of Cooper represent a pivotal moment. The outcomes will determine whether Australian heritage law can withstand corporate and political pressure — or whether, as Smith warns, “gaslighting” has become institutionalised within the environmental decision-making process.
The imminent release of the next MRAMP report will test whether the government and industry are willing to confront the scientific and governance failures laid bare over the past two years. After the revelations by Smith and Black, the report’s independence will be under intense scrutiny — from UNESCO, the Senate, and the global scientific community.
Can Australia prove that Murujuga’s protection is independent, transparent, and scientifically sound?
An achievable roadmap for recovery
Dr Black’s report offers a blueprint for renewal:
- Publish all MRAMP data since inception.
- Commission an independent international audit
- Base emission thresholds on real-world data, not models
- Mandate zero acidic emissions using available technology
- Empower Traditional Owners to co-govern monitoring and data
These steps would restore credibility and make Murujuga a model of heritage protection and environmental accountability.
Dr Black’s findings affirm what whistleblowers and scientists have long known: the Burrup’s protection will fail so long as evidence is filtered through political and industrial interests.
Yet there is hope. Raelene Cooper continues her advocacy. Dr Benjamin Smith and Dr John Black keep publishing. Professor Baddeley has spoken out. Momentum is building for integrity, transparency, and Ngarda-Ngarli cultural leadership.
The truth is emerging. The question is: will it emerge in time?
If Australia acts now, Murujuga could shift from scandal to redemption — proof that truth and science can still prevail over expedience.
Zero emissions on the Burrup Peninsula isn’t radical — it’s the minimum owed to Traditional Owners, to international commitments, and to basic scientific integrity.
Nigel Carney is a researcher and writer on cultural heritage, governance, and environmental integrity. His statutory declarations and supporting evidence were tabled in the Australian Senate in 2024.
Access the full report of Dr John Black here.
Hashtags: #Murujuga #RockArt #ScientificIntegrity #Whistleblower #EnvironmentalJustice #IndigenousHeritage #Woodside #WesternAustralia #UNESCO #WorldHeritage #HeritageProtection #ClimateAction