Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Blogging » When even the most devout start to question their faith

When even the most devout start to question their faith

Nice piece and interesting to see Lovelock realise that those like Gore and Flannery have been , to say the least over egging the pudding.
Cheers Comrades………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Photobucket

Climate Nonconformist

The man who devised the pseudoscientific, collectivist theory of a Gaia/superorganism has conceded to being alarmist.

From MSNBC (of all places):

James Lovelock, the maverick scientist who became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism, has admitted to being “alarmist” about climate change and says other environmental commentators, such as Al Gore, were too.

Lovelock, 92, is writing a new book in which he will say climate change is still happening, but not as quickly as he once feared.


He previously painted some of the direst visions of the effects of climate change. In 2006, in an article in the U.K.’s Independent newspaper, he wrote that “before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”

This is the man…

View original post 110 more words

Advertisements

61 Comments

  1. Stuart.W says:

    Hi Iain, Thought I’d say Hi and give you a wrap for the James Lovelock piece, yeah their world is crumbling but Gore will probably scrounge another Billion before they’re snuffed out.

    And let’s not forget the public primary schools ram Gore and Flannery’s crap down the innocent children’s throats at every opportunity. There will be plenty of spot fires to put out for some time yet.

  2. PKD says:

    Oh iain, looks like you’ve found another denialist to hold hands with you.

    Maybe we should get all the denialists on here so you can all keep sprouting your nonsense about how its all a con of greedy sicentists tryinh to extract our money,,,out of sight, out of mind! 🙂

  3. GD says:

    So if it’s not a con to extract our money, what is it?

    Once again PKD the floor is open for you to answer.

  4. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    how many years now has it been that I have been offering you the opportunity to put the AGW case and how many years have you been procrastinating and finding excuses not to deliver?
    mate, as the saying goes if you aren’t going to piss then get off the pot.

  5. Stuart.W says:

    It’s a good chance PKD knows it’s a con, But as his side of politics wants this wealth re-distribution so it becomes a good idea, regardless of the consequences. People like PKD don’t think for themselves, they wait for words from Flannery, Gore etc,then preach them down the line.

  6. PKD says:

    Aah Iain, every single time I have patiently explained to you AGW science in comments here I am putting forward the science to you.

    That you willfully then ignore time and again.

    There is nothing I would say in a post that I haven’t repreated ad nausuem in comments. So really what’s the point.

    You stick to your denialist faith and I’ll stick to my science.

  7. PKD says:

    Stuart, and what would my side of politics be then hmm?
    Leaving aside your gross preumption on my politics when you dont even know me, Just what would my side – or anybody elses side – of politics have to do with AGW?

  8. Iain Hall says:

    PKD
    when have you ever patiently explained to you AGW science?
    According to my recollection what you mostly do is appeal to the authority of “climate scientists” with the unflinching devotion of a true acolyte of the millenarian green faith.
    You see I think that the reason that you have never delivered that blog post is that you quite simply lack the ability to put your belief in AGW into a cogent argument that would earn anything other than derision and laughter because its damn hard to make “trust the climate scientists” meaningful when you don’t understand their arguments well yourself.

  9. PKD says:

    Well if that were true Iain (which it’s not, but nice try) then I would at least be in good company given you have never put a cogent argument out at all.

    Because all those things you accuse me of e.g. deferring to ‘climate scientists’ (people who actually know what they are talking about more than you) you are equally guilty of. More so given the ‘climate scientists’ you religiously defer to are regularly debunked as denialists claiming to be sceptics.

    But then, that’s what you also like to do isn’t it?

  10. Iain Hall says:

    Of course what I said in my last comment is true PKD why don’t you have a good look for a comment of yours that ” patiently explained …AGW science? I defy you to find one that does.

    More so given the ‘climate scientists’ you religiously defer to are regularly debunked as denialists claiming to be sceptics.

    On this occasion I am actually talking about the originator of the Gaia theory telling us all that he got in wrong, now as he is one of the foundational thinkers upon whom so many followers of the Green faith have based their liturgy are you really going to call Lovelock a “denier”?

  11. PKD says:

    PKD why don’t you have a good look for a comment of yours that ” patiently explained …AGW science? I defy you to find one that does.

    Consider yourself easily defied Iain.

    Of course, I have given up trying to talk AGW science with you since then Iain, but anytime you want to cut out the denialist stuff and start thinking objectively about the science….well, you know where to find me.

    Ciao.

    https://iainhall.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/bbcs-biased-reporting-of-global-warming-the-consequences/

    PKD on January 19, 2011 at 7:10 pm said:

    Your lot has to prove these preposterous claims of planet threatening AGW

    Lets get things straight.
    AGW is firstly concerned with demonstrating that increasing the concentration of known Greenhouse gases will cause an increase in the average global temperature.

    That part is pretty irrefutable given greenhouse gases even without man adding to them have been demonstrated to keep our planet ~30 degrees (from memory) warmer than it would be if greenhouse gases didn’t exist. Still people like Iain here still struggle with accepting the basic greenhouse gas part of the science.

    AGW is then secondarily concerned with what the severity of the impact of the increasing average temperature is likely to be. That part is (IMO) varied and less certain, but lets be clear – the odds of the impact being more favourable overall than not are pretty damn small given the delicacy of ecosystems. After thats its just nit picking and quibbling on ‘how bad is it really going to be?’ on the part of the genuine sceptics (of which there seem to be none around here). Which is pretty lame of them frankly.

    Yes I agree though, some claims on the impact are preposterous, but if you think there isn’t going to be any impacts caused by a warmer globe then you’re deluding yourself.

  12. GD says:

    The planet survived the Medieval Warm Period, Greenland was actually green; they grew grapes in Britain. Today people freeze to death in Britain because they can’t afford the exorbitantly unnecessary energy costs imposed by Green legislation.

  13. Richard Ryan says:

    Natural wastage—- on this planet too many humans to support. World War 111 bring it on, nuclear attacks will kill more people. Yeah Yeah Yeah—blame the Greens.

  14. Iain Hall says:

    Sorry PKD but that citation is a fail, because you don’t “patiently explained …AGW science” at all in that comment
    Care to try again?

    The problem with your citation is not the bit where you correctly point out that the Greenhouse effect is essential for our continued existence in the planet but the fact that you fail to establish the veracity of the anthropogenic part of the AGW theory, sadly for you that is the weakness of most proponents of this theory, you can’t demonstrate the causal relationship between human activity and the perceived changes, all you do is assert the relationship without empirical evidence of causality.
    Further as GD suggests in his comment you are only assuming that any warming will be detrimental when the historical evidence is that a warmer climate is likely to give us a more pleasant and fecund future.

  15. PKD says:

    Say so maybe we have finally reached the point of your scepticism Iain? You appear to deny that mans actions in increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will warm the planet? In that case you are clearly a denialist, otherwise perhaps you’d care to explain yourself a bit more clearly?

    Oh and a special congrats to Ryan for making GD’s post look like Plato in comparison. And that takes some doing! 😉

  16. Craigy says:

    Does this help you Iain?

  17. Iain Hall says:

    PKD

    You appear to deny that man’s actions in increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will warm the planet?

    Mate you make some incorrect assumptions here, firstly I think it highly likely that humanity is having some affect upon the climate of the planet, that is not however the pertinent unanswered question of the issue; the real question is to what extent is humanity responsible and that is entirely unanswered with any actual data your precious “climate scientists”, lots of assertions and assumptions but actual empirical data? much less.
    Craigy
    can’t you do better than Wiki mate? 🙄 Just remmber that anyone can edit Wiki, even me 😉

    Alan

    I am not interested in proving anything, especially that which I know nothing about.

    So why are you bothering to argue the toss here?

    What you think reflects badly on me interests me not, I would rather be summed up by somebody whose opinion I would value..

    So why are you bothering to argue the toss here?

    I simply state you pretend you know lots about lots of things and being a conservative somehow makes you smarter than somebody that leans to the left.

    Actually I know some very smart lefties and some conservative who a dumber than a bag of hammers, it is simply not may position at all that political position is an indicator of intelligence. That said I do take the piss out of lefties whoa re actaully full of themselves and well, dumb about certain issues like AGW.

    Oh, before I forget…I have heard that Andy has a job in transport, with double the salary of his previous job.
    It tends to happen when you are good at what you do.
    Be happy for him won’t you?

    Andy who and why should I care?

    PS: You may call it animosity, I just call it the truth.

    I call a spade a spade mate.

  18. Craigy says:

    This one then Iain?

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/311/5762/841.abstract

    (One of the references from the wiki.)

  19. Ray Dixon says:

    There’s a Q & A special on climate change tonight. Should be worth watching – yes, that includes you, GD.

  20. Craigy says:

    Denialist 101 from Iain, no attempt to analyse the science in the Wiki, just the dumb “anyone can post to wiki” argument. This is why Iain can’t see beyond Bolt’s opinions. Where’s the open mind you claim to have…..?

    And here is another set of “leftists”…. It seems that US science is full of them…

    http://www.pnas.org/content/108/42/17296.full

    This time studying how the climate can cause human crisis….Could this be what Flannery is talking about? Don’t see much alarm going on in this paper, just research.

    Still what are all those ‘leftist’ words worth when compared to the quick post by Bolt that makes it all so clear for you……Some of us despair at the stupidity…

    And just to add to your grief (and clearly to Bolt’s as well, if his disingenuous attack in today’s Hun is any indication) how good was Bob Brown on Q and A this week? What a class act he and his partner Paul are. All the best to Bob, getting out while he still has his health is a lesson to us all.

    And on other matters, good to see Bolt and Price are going to 2GB. That station has far too much influence amongst rednecks and bigots. This should fix it, even wingnuts can’t handle the buckets of stupid and raging anger against fellow Australians that comes out of the mouth of those two.

  21. Craigy says:

    “Should be worth watching”

    Nah….it’ll just be more ABC leftist crap Ray, Fox News and Andrew Bolt is where you get the truth about climate change don’t you know?

  22. Ray Dixon says:

    Yeah Craigy. Actually I think GD should swallow his anti-ABC prejudice and watch it because I reckon Tony Jones is far more impartial and objective and that Q&A will produce a surprisingly balanced view that might help those on both sides of the argument. Imagine the agenda if Bolt were running such a show!

  23. alan says:

    Dunno how your reply got on this thread, but, whatever.

    “Andy who and why should I care?”

    Well you spent a lot of time on here saying he got all he deserved, and going by his current job, he certainly did, just not what you thought was deserved.

  24. Iain Hall says:

    Well I still don’t know who you are talking about Alan

  25. alan says:

    Well I don’t intend to tell you his name.

    If “Andy” does not ring any bells, then I suggest you go get checked for Alzeimer’s.

    I mean if I spent a lot of time talking about somebody and what he did or didn’t do; I am sure I would not forget.

  26. Damage says:

    Ray you think Jones is ” impartial and objective ” yet his show will be “surprisingly balanced” ??????????
    I have to agree – it would be surprising.

  27. Ray Dixon says:

    Surprising to GD et al (including you, obviously).

  28. Damage says:

    I noticed in the promo that the AGW protagonist goes with the “…..you’re taking a risk with humanity’s future….” argument. I hope Minchin asks if she’s an atheist. Coz isn’t that a huge risk too?

  29. Damage says:

    No – just surprising I think.

  30. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    How many posts do you think there are at this blog? I’ll tell you that there are 3366 of them mostly written by me. Guess what? I have not actaully committed them all to memory so if you want to allude to someone who has been the subject of criticism from me then stop the bullshit speaking and riddles and spit it out.

  31. Damage says:

    most written by you and not a single comment by PKD that explains climate change.

  32. GD says:

    Jones is “impartial and objective”

    you must be joking…

  33. Damage says:

    On what subject and by what estimate is Jones either?

  34. Ray Dixon says:

    Just watch it, GD. If you don’t then you won’t be able to object when and if I write about it.

  35. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, I think ‘Alan’ means Andy Bolt.

  36. Ray Dixon says:

    Or Andrew R……. maybe ?

  37. GD says:

    Yes, sir Ray! I’ve still to see the Bob Brown episode from last week. Looking forward to that for lots of laughs.

  38. Iain Hall says:

    Maybe a certain self pleasuring tram driver Ray

  39. Ray Dixon says:

    GD, the Bob Brown interview was, um, startling for how loopy and off-the-planet he is. And if he was talking like that in the party room it’s no wonder they said, “um, Bob, we think it’s time you stepped down.”

    Iain: Ah yes, the twitpicing tram driver. Glad to hear he’s landed on his feet.

  40. Iain Hall says:

    Hopefully he has learned a lesson from the whole experience, namely that what you do online is not separate from your real life.I can’t for the life of me think whay Alan would characterise three posts out of over three thousand about that Twit is me spent(ing) a lot of time talking about somebody its very little actaully.

  41. GD says:

    Q&A Climate Debate. Not one climate scientist on the panel but there’s Rebecca Huntley – ’Her law and film studies led her to become interested in film censorship, feminism and pornography..’

    Yep, that should help decide things….

  42. alan says:

    Calling it 3 posts confirms you have Alzheimer’s.
    That’s not counting the myriad others I have seen elsewhere stating your position on that subject(and a trillion others come to think of it).
    Crikey, I must be as bad as you spending my time reading all those blogs.

  43. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    You exaggerate the quantum of my care factor about the chap in question, As Ray suggests its probably a good thing that he seems to have fallen on his feet.
    In any event what is it to you?
    Are you his lover or something?

  44. alan says:

    He’s not anything to me, it’s just the Herald Sun(well the whole company actually) offends my sense of honesty and truth,
    He was a marked man because of stuff he had written on his blog(which was generally not my cup of tea), about that pathetic excuse for a newspaper.

    So do you think people of the calibre of Bolt or Singer or Flowers have ANY journalistic ability?
    You don’t think the paying public deserve more?
    I wonder how their paywall is going.
    Not too good I would expect, when basically you have nothing to sell but lies and biased opinion, rather than just plain honest to goodness news or unbiased commentary, written by real journalists.
    But it’s obvious that News Ltd has no place for people that want to be proper journalists without fear nor favour.

  45. Ray Dixon says:

    I seriously doubt that the H-Sun went after AB just because of his opinions of their paper.

  46. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    It takes all types to make the world and this simple fact is reflected in our media, especially when you consider just what is available “news” is online these days if you don’t like what News LTD serves up then don’t read it.
    That said you seem to have the mistaken belief that unbiased news reporting is possible when the reality is that all reporting and journalism has some sort of bias and all journalists have their own political agendas.
    But getting back to Blume he was and remains a self admitted wanker and the only reason that I wrote about his antics on twitter was that he was a very good example of how not to use social media.

  47. alan says:

    I try not to, but unfortunately it pops up often times when googling.

    Journalists may have opinions on who is the better party, but with a good journalist you shouldn’t be able to pick which it is.

    There is so much to write about with regards to politics in particular presently, why the need for dishonesty?
    The truth is, in my opinion, neither party is worth pissing on, and both have much to answer for,
    But, only one of those parties is getting it from News Ltd presently(well for the last umpteen years).
    I would be pretty sure it’s an opinion shared by the majority of the voting populace.
    Although it’s much more than just politics why I despise them(News).
    I actually know Rupert’s mother(well I did, she is very old now)because we sometimes supported common charities(her much more than I), so sometimes met at functions.
    How can such a beautiful person, have such a horrible son I wonder.

    As for that idiot Bolt.Once a proud employee of the Labor Party say he?
    Now idiot or not, he would have to know Labor is more right now than it has ever been.
    So if they are left wings idiots now, what were they when he was a ‘proud’ employee!?
    He is simply a nasty piece of work, and no I don’t vote Labor, so I can see that nonsense for what it is…..NONSENSE,

  48. Ray Dixon says:

    I don’t care what the papers write. Or what Andrew Bolt says. If you agree with him you were probably going to vote that way anyway. People do not decide which party to vote for based on third party information, let alone third party bias from the media. They are more discerning than that.

    You sound like Craigy, who seems to think only he and a select few are smart enough to see through the media bias when the reality is most people do.

  49. damage says:

    Poor Anna Rose. How many times did she say that she was frightened? Fear fear fear. There’s no need – say the left – to fear people who fly planes into buildings, but the climate you should be terrified of.

  50. GD says:

    Great comment, damage.

  51. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    I try not to, but unfortunately it pops up often times when googling.

    personally I can never get the idea that one should not read the media that supports or endorses political opinions contrary to your own. My inclination is to read left leaning reportage and then I stand a chance of understanding just how those of the left really think about the issues and when you know what in forms the thinking of your opposites you stand a better chance of effectively opposing them. That should work just as well for lefties but far to many of them just retreat to reading the like minded and that is their weakness.

    Journalists may have opinions on who is the better party, but with a good journalist you shouldn’t be able to pick which it is.

    I totally disagree with that. All journalists have their bias and their personal opinions and frankly I would rather that they be honest about it than to try to maintain the pretence of neutrality. Of course what they also need is enough generosity to be truly fair to the opinions that they disagree with.

    There is so much to write about with regards to politics in particular presently, why the need for dishonesty?

    I don’t think that News is being dishonest about the Gillard government, if you want to see dishonesty then you need look no further than the Fairfax press who are doing their very best to soft peddle on Labor.

    The truth is, in my opinion, neither party is worth pissing on, and both have much to answer for,
    But, only one of those parties is getting it from News Ltd presently(well for the last umpteen years).
    I would be pretty sure it’s an opinion shared by the majority of the voting populace.

    Well then as one of them has to be the party of government you must then surely decide who is the lesser of the two evils. I would suggest that the current polling and the election results in both Queensland and NSW say that the majority of the public consider the Coalition a far better bet for good governance than Labor

    Although it’s much more than just politics why I despise them(News).
    I actually know Rupert’s mother(well I did, she is very old now)because we sometimes supported common charities(her much more than I), so sometimes met at functions.
    How can such a beautiful person, have such a horrible son I wonder.

    I really don’t think that Rupert is anywhere near as bad as you suggest he is certainly ruthless and successful but horrible? Hmm depends how you definet that I suppose.

    As for that idiot Bolt.Once a proud employee of the Labor Party say he?
    Now idiot or not, he would have to know Labor is more right now than it has ever been.
    So if they are left wings idiots now, what were they when he was a ‘proud’ employee!?

    How does that saying go about being a socialist in your youth and then a conservative as you get older? I was a lefty for most of my life but I had the scales fall from my eyes as I got older and saw more and more the faults and foibles of leftist ideology there is no reason to think that someone like Bolt has not seen the light as he has matured as well.

    He is simply a nasty piece of work, and no I don’t vote Labor, so I can see that nonsense for what it is…..NONSENSE,

    I suspect that you Vote Green Alan 😉 Because you have the sort of dogmatic rigidity to your thinking that is a prerequisite to being one of the faithful.

  52. alan says:

    “You sound like Craigy, who seems to think only he and a select few are smart enough to see through the media bias when the reality is most people do.”

    I don’t know who Craigy is.
    I also don’t think I am the only one that sees through media bias, how you perceive me as believing other don’t, is beyond me

    And while I am typing this I can see a comment that reckons…..
    “I suspect that you Vote Green Alan 😉 Because you have the sort of dogmatic rigidity to your thinking that is a prerequisite to being one of the faithful. ”
    ……Well your reckoning is way off. Try again. I would lump them as being as bad as the other two.
    Basically we don’t have any worthwhile choices at the moment imo.
    But I digress, one of the things that brought me this site and my opinion of the owner, could be expressed as …dogmatic rigidity!!!
    Am I as bad with the perception as you obviously are?

  53. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    When you have any conversation with someone new it is rather like a dance between strangers, you test out the way they move and what floats their boat. Its a game of give and take and I can only work with what you are willing to give, you on the other hand have all of my archive and, ah hmm, my “reputation” to draw on.
    You say that you don’t vote Green, well I’ll take that at face value but if not the Major’s and Not Green what does that leave? The Monster Raving Loony Party?

    Oh and Craigy is a long time regular here at the Sandpit.

  54. alan says:

    “How does that saying go about being a socialist in your youth and then a conservative as you get older? I was a lefty for most of my life but I had the scales fall from my eyes as I got older and saw more and more the faults and foibles of leftist ideology there is no reason to think that someone like Bolt has not seen the light as he has matured as well.”

    Now that is funny.
    Bolt only sees what he want to see, and will twist anything to suit what ever it is he wants to get across.
    He is a fraud, and I would say exactly the same if the tripe was favouring left over right.

    In a way, I am not sure that he could possibly believe half the things he comes out with himself.
    Presenting himself the way he does has probably made him very wealthy.
    You not only get the rabid followers hanging on your every word, you also get those like me that despise him passionately. A win win situation so to speak.

    I sometimes read his blogs, and in days gone by, a vast amount of the comments would be edited out, or not published because of the manner the opinion is expressed.
    But it is New Ltd, so as long as it’s the right side having a go at the wrong side, we can put the message however we like, but we will not allow the opposing messages to be in the same vein(well mostly they don’t get a look in anyway)
    Anyway, It’s like he is the Pied Piper and most of those writing the comments are the lemmings.

  55. alan says:

    It leaves nobody basically, and my vote wouldn’t help anyway, because I am in a safe Liberal set.
    And why try to categorise me anyway.
    Left and right is simplistic twaddle.
    I am right in some things, left in others, and centre too, often times…….JUST LIKE MOST PEOPLE.

  56. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    Bolt only sees what he want to see, and will twist anything to suit what ever it is he wants to get across.
    He is a fraud, and I would say exactly the same if the tripe was favouring left over right.

    well that prompts me to ask just what to you see as “genuine” when it comes to political commentary? and who do you think actaully meets those high standards of yours?

    In a way, I am not sure that he could possibly believe half the things he comes out with himself.
    Presenting himself the way he does has probably made him very wealthy.

    Moderately well off I expect but hardly “wealthy” by contemporary standards.Surely you are not one of those people who run their politics on hate and envy?

    You not only get the rabid followers hanging on your every word, you also get those like me that despise him passionately. A win win situation so to speak.

    I agree that bolt inspires passion either for or against but isn’t that part of the job description for anyone who is tasked with engaging the public on the issues?

    I sometimes read his blogs, and in days gone by, a vast amount of the comments would be edited out, or not published because of the manner the opinion is expressed.

    I know from this blog that moderation of comemnts can be a thankless task if you are too free and easy the trolls go bonkers and if you are too tough you stifle the banter and debate. No matter which way you go you end up upsetting someone so I would not put too much weighting on Bolt’s comment policies because they really are no worse than many other popular site with lots of comemnts.

    But it is News Ltd, so as long as it’s the right side having a go at the wrong side, we can put the message however we like, but we will not allow the opposing messages to be in the same vein(well mostly they don’t get a look in anyway)

    Well all I can say I that I welcome contrary viewpoints as long as they are presented with civility and good grace.

    Anyway, It’s like he is the Pied Piper and most of those writing the comments are the lemmings.

    Its never that wise to so lightly dismiss the views of Andrew’s fans they do represent a sizable part of the political spectrum.

    It leaves nobody basically, and my vote wouldn’t help anyway, because I am in a safe Liberal set.
    And why try to categorise me anyway.

    Ah don’t be such a defeatist Alan 😉 I’m just trying to get a grip on where you are coming from

    Left and right is simplistic twaddle.
    I am right in some things, left in others, and centre too, often times…….JUST LIKE MOST PEOPLE.

    Yes I dig that sentiment Alan However we all find some value in such broad generalisations in our quest to understand others. You see despite my tendency to make jokes at the expense of lefties (calling them latte sippers ect) I never hold anyone’s politics as a reason to despise people.

  57. alan says:

    Why would I envy him having money?
    Even though I despise him, I wouldn’t doubt his work ethic.
    Not to mention I would be pretty sure I have a lot more than he does.
    I don’t envy anybody having money, so long as they got it honestly.
    In fact some would say how I make my money is not too ethical, but it’s legal, and it’s only possible from hard work.

    “its never that wise to so lightly dismiss the views of Andrew’s fans they do represent a sizable part of the political spectrum.”

    That I would dispute passionately.
    I would bet just as many conservative voters dislike him as much as I do.
    I have often thought shrinks would be in paradise, delving into the psyches of a lot of his comment writers too.

    And your last sentence….I don’t despise Bolt for his politics, I despise for him for what in my opinion he is.
    A pretentious fraud.

  58. Iain Hall says:

    Alan
    Why would I envy him having money?

    I did not say that you envy his money. It sounds to me that you envy his influence and prominence in the debates de jour.

    Even though I despise him, I wouldn’t doubt his work ethic.

    I’ll take that as an admission that you let hate be your guide when it comes to political discourse.

    Not to mention I would be pretty sure I have a lot more than he does.
    I don’t envy anybody having money, so long as they got it honestly.

    Fair enough

    In fact some would say how I make my money is not too ethical, but it’s legal, and it’s only possible from hard work.

    As this seems rather at odds with your previous statement above I’ll have to ask you what it is that you do to make a quid,

    That I would dispute passionately.
    I would bet just as many conservative voters dislike him as much as I do.
    I have often thought shrinks would be in paradise, delving into the psyches of a lot of his comment writers too.

    There are cranks on both sides of the spectrum Alan and if you read forums you would probably find just as much (if not more )loopiness as you find in Bolt’s comment threads.

    And your last sentence….I don’t despise Bolt for his politics, I despise for him for what in my opinion he is.
    A pretentious fraud.

    How so I think that one of the reasons for his success is that he has a certain Everyman openness that resonates with people.

  59. alan says:

    I make my money gambling, only in my case it’s not gambling.
    Just gambling on things where the probability of the event can’t be calculated with certainty.
    My predictions just have to be better than the public and I win, and the betting agencies give me rebates for betting with them, so that even those times when I lose(the majority), I don’t lose it all.
    That generally means horse or greyhound races of which there are no shortage in Australia.
    I suppose you could call me a statistician, although I am only self taught, apparently I can do things with data that most others can’t.
    As I sit here writing this stuff, I also make money as the computer churns it out.
    But I had to write the software to enable this, so I suppose I am a programmer too!!

    “Bolt resonates with people”…..haha, that had me laughing…..only those that are silly enough to listen and be fooled, by a bigger one.

  60. alan says:

    Oh dear me, when I read instead of glance, I can’t stop laughing.
    No wonder you stick up for Bolt, you have some of the same qualities.
    You should be pleased then.

    Quote: “I did not say that you envy his money. It sounds to me that you envy his influence and prominence in the debates de jour.”

    Haha, no idea what de jour means, but if you think I envy him his influence then you are crazy.
    Exactly what influence would that be?
    I may write stuff on here or other forums(apart from here they will be exclusively betting forums), but I would be in no hurry to try to influence anybody in any way.
    Basically futile anyway.

    QUOTE: “I’ll take that as an admission that you let hate be your guide when it comes to political discourse.”

    Haha, tell me that’s a wind up, you can’t really be serious……can you?
    I thought Bolt was over at News Ltd.
    A lesson in how to twist, he has taught you well.

  61. Iain Hall says:

    Alan

    No wonder you stick up for Bolt, you have some of the same qualities.
    You should be pleased then.

    I’ll take that as a compliment 😉

    Haha, no idea what de jour means, but if you think I envy him his influence then you are crazy.
    Exactly what influence would that be?

    “de jour” is French for “of the day”
    You clearly do envy he influence otherwise you would not despise him as much as you clearly do.

    I may write stuff on here or other forums(apart from here they will be exclusively betting forums), but I would be in no hurry to try to influence anybody in any way.
    Basically futile anyway.

    I don’t believe that, we all write our opinions to convince others or to seek validation and I think that you confuse an often elusive destination with the pleasure of the journey, personally I enjoy the journey and don’t worry too much about the destination.

    Haha, tell me that’s a wind up, you can’t really be serious……can you?
    I thought Bolt was over at News Ltd.
    A lesson in how to twist, he has taught you well.

    Yes I’m serious Alan, you claim to detest Andrew Bolt and if you look up your thesaurus you will see that detest is a synonym for hate, hence my reasonable observation that you let your hate power your thinking about politics. You certainly haven’t shown any generosity to those holding opinions contrary to your own.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: