Jump to content
Rocket Salad

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

So by that thinking, we can **** the environment, then buy a new one with the money we've saved. Brilliant idea.

Yeah I sad the same thing a page or so ago. 

As long and the banks and big multinationals continue to make huge profits, we will all be safe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

So by that thinking, we can **** the environment, then buy a new one with the money we've saved. Brilliant idea.

The point was that questions based on false binaries are often bullshit arguments 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, trinube said:

 

I'm out of this thread - it's pissing me off how nonsensical people can be. I don't want to end up in the mental health thread.

Bye then

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

The point was that questions based on false binaries are often bullshit arguments 

Is it false

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is false is the idea that what Australia can do reasonably, or even what is being asked of us by the most extreme climate extremists, will make one iota of difference to the outcome.  Unilateral action will do almost literally nothing at massive comparative costs (due to our geography, very low population density and economic drivers) and other nations are doing very little that they wouldn't already be doing without a "climate crisis."  Do you really think the UK power supply is regularly coal free because it's greener?  Utter bullsh*t, it's for energy security since Maggie shut down the coal mines and as with almost all nations with low CO2 energy it is heavily paid for through the use of nuclear.

China is still building massive coal fired power stations (alongside other less greenhouse gas producing technologies) as well as making literally billions of tonnes of cement which is about as CO2 intensive a building product as you will find.  India lives on coal as does Indonesia.  There is half the world's population all trying to struggle their way out of poverty.

I'm a pragmatist.  Carbon dioxide might be the greatest evil the world has seen, it may not.  If we wanted to, in 10-15 years Australian power generation could be carbon free.  There is not a nation in the world that has the conditions for nuclear as good as we have.  Stable geology (for both storage and operational safety), a population based around a massive ocean offering plentiful cooling water, an abundance of space and also some of the greatest reserves of the material used in a reactor.  Anyone who suggests that climate change is man's greatest ever threat but isn't screaming for nuclear, let alone those that take it off the table completely, do not have a shred of credibility.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BarryBevan said:

Is it false

Yes

The water in your analogy would have a positive effect i.e. quench my thirst 

Thr effect of bankrupting our economy on the climate would be negligible at best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Stikman said:

Me too.

Me three 

Labor would need to shake off their ideological coalition partners for that to happen though 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

19 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Me three 

Labor would need to shake off their ideological coalition partners for that to happen though 

Why don't the GOVERNment, govern and do it? They have the numbers, do they have the balls? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, roxii said:

 

Why don't the GOVERNment, govern and do it? They have the numbers, do they have the balls? 

Because these days its better to do nothing rather than do something and risk offending someone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't have the numbers, only in the lower house.  And would it be responsible if Labor said that should they win an election in three years they will shut it down?  It wouldn't be in construction by then but a lot of money would have been committed.  Besides which the point is that if they were all serious about climate change there would be no need for political bravery, it would be universal policy for all parties but that won't happen when the scare campaigns would mean annihilation for the first to go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, roxii said:

 

Why don't the GOVERNment, govern and do it? They have the numbers, do they have the balls? 

I understand that the legislation prohibiting nuclear power is due for review this year, so hopefully they will do as you suggest 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

Yes

The water in your analogy would have a positive effect i.e. quench my thirst 

Thr effect of bankrupting our economy on the climate would be negligible at best

That was not the question 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we talk international politics here? Given the US' close relationship to Israel and Saudi, and their respective hatred of Iran, the tightening of the oil export embargo by the US on Iran, the recent escalation of tensions in the Gulf and the increased US military presence there etc etc...

Does The Donald want to start a war in the Middle East?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/06/2019 at 9:56 PM, IronJimbo said:

Which releases some particulate matter such as sulfur, but the vast majority of what is released when coal is burned is heat, water vapour and co2

Sulphur dioxide is released which is a gas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/06/2019 at 10:09 PM, Ex-Hasbeen said:

So the acid rain caused by Sulphur dioxide released from burning coal was a myth? Or maybe another Government conspiracy to tax people more.

Sulphur dioxide plus water in the atmosphere can lead to sulphuric acid (H2SO4). The roses around Sheffield in the UK (steel works plus coal fired power going back a while) were spotless due to the acid rain killing the aphids. Useless fact!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

Just stating what Karoly agreed 100% with but then disagreed with on Q&A where no one was there to question/counter him. As usual an ABC agenda and stacked audience and guests.

That needn't stop you (or Iron Jimbo) pointing out the logical slight-of-hand employed to reach a duplicitous conclusion, rather than just posting or quoting it as if it's a legitimate.

Or can you genuinely not see what's wrong with it?

The Q&A audience is stacked? They always disclose the political leanings of the audience at the beginning of the program and it's appeared broadly reflective of society whenever I have watched it.

Tickets for Q&A are open to anyone who chooses to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Every said:

The Q&A audience is stacked? They always disclose the political leanings of the audience at the beginning of the program and it's appeared broadly reflective of society whenever I have watched it.

Yeah, it's usually 33% Labor, 33% Green and 33% conservative

#abcbalance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Yeah, it's usually 33% Labor, 33% Green and 33% conservative

#abcbalance

Obviously you don't usually watch it.

#ijbs

Edited by Paul Every

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we should do is get all the people who believe in climate change to sell their houses and cash in their super and other assets and invest in this great fix.

The rest of us can sit back and see what happens.

For the record, I much rather fix the issue with plastics in the ocean......... That at least is something that is fixable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

 

For the record, I much rather fix the issue with plastics in the ocean......... That at least is something that is fixable.

So would I (I work in the plastic's industry), if we could just get people to recycle, instead of throwing it in the bin or on the ground.

We can't get enough recycled PET back

But the chance of the lazy many doing the right thing is dismal!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

What we should do is get all the people who believe in climate change to sell their houses and cash in their super and other assets and invest in this great fix.

The rest of us can sit back and see what happens.

For the record, I much rather fix the issue with plastics in the ocean......... That at least is something that is fixable.

I recently read or heard that 90% of the ocean's plastic debris emanates from 10 river systems. Not sure of the source or its veracity but it's pretty obvious Australia isn't a major contributor.

That's why I throw my plastic in the ocean. Until China, India and Indonesia clean up their act, we might as well.

Anyone who wants to see the Pacific gyre cleaned up, should sell their house, cash in their super and other assets and invest in the clean up.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Four Corners looks interesting next week.

https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/extinction-nation/11228758

Warning (for some): This program may contain scenes of scientists talking about their fields of expertise, the left-wing conspiracy theory that the Reef is in a parlous state (not just Qld), and is produced by and broadcast on the ABC. Some viewers may find these distressing.

Edited by Paul Every
  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

What we should do is get all the people who believe in climate change to sell their houses and cash in their super and other assets and invest in this great fix.

The rest of us can sit back and see what happens.

For the record, I much rather fix the issue with plastics in the ocean......... That at least is something that is fixable.

Let's say that worked. How could  I, as an investor, stop anyone that didn't invest from enjoying the cleaner environment that I created?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, FatPom said:

Let's say that worked. How could  I, as an investor, stop anyone that didn't invest from enjoying the cleaner environment that I created?

That's fine, but once IronmanFoz cleans the oceans, he may not let you swim in them any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought a few of these 'brilliant' scientists may have spoken up about the potential effects on the ocean when man introduced plastic bags into the world or used coal as energy and the effect on the environment?  For scientists, they don't seem very smart....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

That's fine, but once IronmanFoz cleans the oceans, he may not let you swim in them any more.

I'm a triathlete, therefore hate swimming anyway. :lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Prince said:

I would have thought a few of these 'brilliant' scientists may have spoken up about the potential effects on the ocean when man introduced plastic bags into the world or used coal as energy and the effect on the environment?  For scientists, they don't seem very smart....

When man started using coal as energy, the only other option was chopping down a tree, or butchering a whale. The "brilliant" scientists were still grasping with the shape of the world, and how to make gold from lead.

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

When man started using coal as energy, the only other option was chopping down a tree, or butchering a whale. The "brilliant" scientists were still grasping with the shape of the world, and how to make gold from lead.

Thats why we need to listen to andrew bolt instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, a consensus decision, I am amazed. Nuclear power it is................

Edited by Bosco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bosco said:

Good, a consensus decision, I am amazed. Nuclear power it is................

:wallbash::wallbash::wallbash:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Paul Every said:

 

Anyone who wants to see the Pacific gyre cleaned up, should sell their house, cash in their super and other assets and invest in the clean up.

 

This is brilliant...... all of you have been hooked, lined and sinkered.....yes you all took the bait. 

Noone wants to put there own money in to fix things that can’t be fixed or will make the most minuscule difference if at all (climate change) but your all prepared to put “our” money in via governments taxing us in multiple forms to piss it up a wall (climate change). 

But for something that can be fixed regardless of which country is at fault you quite prepared to have me do the thing that you won’t. 

This is hypocrisy at its greatest. Thread can be closed now :)

ps: when I reference ‘you’ or ‘your’, this does not mean Paul it is the collective of the responders who took the bait. Thank you!

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Parkside said:

This makes as much sense as Malcolm Roberts being elected again by Queensland.

This thread is making Trump look logical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Logic and politics should not be used in same sentence. If you hold Trumps political views, everything he is doing is logical (IJ), if you don’t, well you are the rest of us. That said - logic is in the eye of the beholder 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone here donate to cancer cure charity - I figured my little $50 wont make a difference so I stopped.

 

Thats the kind of logic that helps us all advance - not

Edited by symo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew Bolt would be proud!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

double 

Edited by Rog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

ps: when I reference ‘you’ or ‘your’, this does not mean Paul it is the collective of the responders who took the bait. Thank you!

Oh we know! Pretty much every time you mention your you actually mean you’re.

Edited by Rog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

This is brilliant...... all of you have been hooked, lined and sinkered.....yes you all took the bait. 

Noone wants to put there own money in to fix things that can’t be fixed or will make the most minuscule difference if at all (climate change) but your all prepared to put “our” money in via governments taxing us in multiple forms to piss it up a wall (climate change). 

But for something that can be fixed regardless of which country is at fault you quite prepared to have me do the thing that you won’t. 

This is hypocrisy at its greatest. Thread can be closed now :)

ps: when I reference ‘you’ or ‘your’, this does not mean Paul it is the collective of the responders who took the bait. Thank you!

 

 

Too good a post not to have fun with, whether it be a fishing expedition, trolling or serious.

Nothing to do with hypocrisy.

Thanks for posting. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/06/2019 at 12:14 AM, IronmanFoz said:

Watched a David Attenborough program last night on "The great Barrier Reef'. The reef was part of the landmass originally as part of the limestone hills. The sea levels were much much lower and this has occurred on several occasions. So the sea level rising equation went out the window!

So what's your point?

No one is saying that coral reefs have only evolved in the late Holocene when sea levels have been similar to today's levels.

Corals are ancient organisms and reefs exist in shallow waters, so of course reefs have previously existed in different areas to today, dependent on sea level.

Also be careful not to confuse the existence of prehistoric marine sediments as a definitive indication of past sea level. You can find fossilised marine sediments on Mt Everest.

As for current concerns regarding bleaching of the GBReef and other reefs, we know that bleaching occurs in response to elevated ocean temperatures (among other stressors), and that since 1980 bleaching events are becoming more severe and more frequent, resulting in coral ecosystems displaying less ability to recover between bleaching events.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/06/2019 at 8:20 PM, IronmanFoz said:

 Q&A ...... As usual an ABC agenda and stacked audience and guests.

Last Monday's Q&A audience stats:

Lib/Nat 34% (vs 41% of primary vote in May's election).

Labor 32% (vs 33%)

Greens 9% (vs 10%)

Undecided 12% + Other 12% = 24% (vs 15%)

"Stacked"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Paul Every said:

Last Monday's Q&A audience stats:

Lib/Nat 34% (vs 41% of primary vote in May's election).

Labor 32% (vs 33%)

Greens 9% (vs 10%)

Undecided 12% + Other 12% = 24% (vs 15%)

"Stacked"?

32% Labor + 9% Greens + 12% so-called 'Undecided' (GetUp) + 12% so-called 'Other' (Socialist Alliance) = 65%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...