Seventy plus responses out of 1278 (not 1400, and yes, I checked) is a relatively small proportion. But you didn’t say that; you described those 70 replies, and your 8000 words, as ‘my tiny involvement’. Unless you’re mentally feeble, with no understanding of commonly used English words, you’ve resorted to intellectual dishonesty, again. Since you claim a degree in English from a reputable university, we really have no choice but to assume the latter.
Sigh the definition of” tiny ” is this :
adjective: tiny; comparative adjective: tinier; superlative adjective: tiniest
“a tiny hummingbird”
synonyms: minute, small-scale, scaled-down, mini, baby, toy, pocket, fun-size, petite, dwarfish, knee-high, miniature, minuscule, microscopic, nanoscopic, infinitesimal, micro, diminutive, pocket-sized, reduced, Lilliputian; More
All rely on a comparison to a larger whole thus my involvement in this thread even at
“70” out of 1285 comments IS a tiny proportion of the whole and my description of said postings as my tiny contribution both accurate and of course entirely honest
And this is how it goes: you pile one intellectually dishonest statement on top of another, as I found out many months ago when I responded to some of your arguments in good faith. I’m long past the point of trying to engage with you on those terms.
But You are the one being dishonest here not I
Rather than do that, I choose to highlight your ongoing intellectual dishonesty, by examining the content and style of your posting. But that certainly doesn’t make me a vigilante moderator.
The content and style of my posting is tot the topic here and by trying to police them you certainly are trying to be a vigilante moderator
Now obviously, you don’t like being criticised like this, but since this isn’t your forum you simply can’t control how other people respond to you.
You are simply meddling in a role that is beyond the remit of any commentator here which is to discuss the topics put up by the staff writers.
If you don’t want to be criticised for being dishonest, don’t be dishonest. That’s entirely within your control. Very little else is. And obviously, if it’s not me criticising you, then it’s going to be someone else. That is the simple reality you have to face.
You have made this claim before it was bullshit before and its bullshit now. your obsession with me will not be placated by anything I do now just as it has never been placated in the past in other forums when you have used other names.
The whole point of these threads is that ordinary folk can discuss the issues and enjoy doing so.
In saying that you highlight exactly why it is that it’s so important that your behaviour is challenged. You aren’t ordinary folk: you’re an extremist with an axe to grind, and have no concern for reality, logic, or decent argument – those things only get in your way. Your ongoing intellectual dishonesty removes any possibility of others here enjoying an argument with you. I’m clearly not the only person to think that.
I am simply not in any sense an “extremist” my political position on the political compass turns out to be slightly left of center in the more libertarian quadrant, And clearly the only one with an axe here to grind is you.
Your intellectual dishonesty is, of course, also extraordinarily arrogant: so far as you’re concerned, the rules of civilised argument simply don’t apply to you.
Lets consider what the rules of civilized behavior are in this place, Hmm It boils down to being polite and affable to your interlocutors and trying to stick to the topic, yep I think I manage to do that pretty well without any major trouble, But lets look at your behavior here by way of contrast… Every comment you have posted to this thread have been intended to bag me personally (contrary to community standards) not one of them has addressed the topic and you have even managed to have about half of those comments disallowed by the real mods so it would seem that YOU are the one who does not get the rules of civilised argument not I
“It’s not hard to see the religiosity of many of the arguments from your side of the issue.”
My side of the issue is that of my fellow scientists. For those not trained in the intellectual rigors of that discipline old habits of thought die hard. I see even more similar patterns among those who deny the science but rather than accuse them of being a religion I criticise their lack of evidence, lack of logic and sheer scholastic sloppiness. Science is a discipline.
I am not trained in the sciences but I have had a life time interest in debating believers about their religion this webpage lays out the science as a religion proposition quite well
But don’t despair because like many religions Science certainly has some good utility when it comes to living our lives better.
Similarly you need to provide evidence for your assertion re scientists such as me; otherwise you are merely expressing a belief, bereft of evidence.
This piece looks at the issue as a matter of semantics
I have some family members who are christian but can’t make sense of their beliefs.
I have long rejected any notion of the supernatural but at the heart of Christianity is the simple notion of treating others as you would wish to be treated and various rather admirable ideas about being kind to each other.
I’ve known christian ministers who have become atheists.
Yes and I have known a few dedicated Marxists who started out as Catholics, maybe the common ground is certainty and a love of central authority
I had a number of colleagues who are muslim and have traveled into the then war zone muslim regions of the southern Philippines. They have the best food.
Not for me, I come form the English tradition of plain food
rather than having so many flavorings added that you can’t taste what you are actually eating.besides which I could never give up bacon!
To remind you yet again of what you should already know: the heart of delusion lies in maintaining an idiosyncratic belief or impression, despite that belief or impression being contradicted by reality or rational argument.
You are over thinking what is an entirely innocuous participation in this comment thread by little old me
And quite clearly, the gap between reality and what you think and say goes directly to the issue of delusion. So let’s see what new evidence you provide.
You are the one who is delusional here
…you obsess with my tiny involvement with a thread that has nearly 1400 comment by other people in it.
The hard reality is that you’ve made more than 70 replies in response to this article, and have pasted considerably more than 8,000 words, yet you characterise that as your ‘tiny involvement’.
I had not bothered to count my comments here but even the most rudimentary math will tell you that even with 70 comments out 1400 is substantially less than one twentieth of a single percentile of the whole thread and unlike your comments (which are all,including the ones removed by the mods, about bagging me) I have been engaging in a civil and affable manner with people like Walsunder and mostly on the topic here as well.
Do numbers as uncomfortable as those really not serve as a wake up call to just how far away your thinking is from reality?
The whole point of these threads is that ordinary folk can discuss the issues and enjoy doing so. I am in fact quite good and keeping to the posting rules here and I really don’t understand why you are so obsessed with confronting me when I comment here. Its simply not your place to play vigilante moderator and if you would stop playing your silly game it would be better for everybody here.
Sadly, the rest of your arguments are hardly any better.
The tory bloke I handed out how to vote cards next to at the recent council elections was mad keen on Rugby Union as are so many of his ilk. In Brisbane Rugby League has always been the working class game.
Another thing we agree on.
As I said I have spent years knocking football of all types now as I get older I enjoy following it as common ground with my two brother which has meant that I have had to try to get may head around its rules and conventions I now think I know enough to just about have a conversation about the game and not sound like a total noob…
“I just don’t rate many of the things done ‘to address climate change’ very highly when it comes to their effectiveness.”
You should give yourself more credit for what you have done as one of the 7.4 billion and as one of the human population of a country with one of the
highest per capita carbon emission rates.
Well I have done my bit when it comes to treading lightly on the planet and I have been really big on reusing and recycling stuff….
That said can I explain why I think that the use of that per capita claim is rather bogus? It does nothing for but suggest, . erroneously, that we are more imprtant in the global equation than we actually are and its only ever raised to activate reader’s guilt chips (mine has long been disabled) in fact its essentially a rather dishonest polemical device invented to let the much bigger emitters like China and India off the hook > In terms of the global problem a per-capita measure of emissions is meaningless. Surely you can see that can’t you?
I have three cats and much experience in their herding. However we are talking about science and its application, something I’ve spent a lifetime doing with some success.
Sure but as you will probably appreciate when you try to herd four cats its exponentially more difficult than heading three of them, five is an order of magnitude more difficult and sic is more difficult again ect ect
We are not talking about religion and singing from the same song sheet. I note that for someone who like myself claims to not do the god thing or religion thing, you keep using the language and ways of thinking of religion and those who talk of god things.
Its a metaphor Wal
As for singing in tune my partner has a good singing voice as has our daughter. I can harmonise passably. These things are somewhat genetic. We got free stout in Ireland.
The point being that singing together is not easy or can be reliably assumed.
“the band you are a big fan of”
I don’t think of my appreciation of the many bands I’ve seen and enjoyed could be classified as fandom. The last wonderful band I heard was that behind Mary Black earlier in the year but at my age fandom is not the right word to describe my appreciation but neither was it the right word to describe my appreciation of Roy Orbison in 1968 or the Talking Heads in 1979.
I was probably at that same Talking Head concert in 79 if it was in Brisbane ! loved that band and the album “more songs about buildings and food”
Musicians are people who’s work I appreciate in much the same way as I appreciate the work of scientific colleagues. Some however are outstanding in what they produce. My partners teenage boyfriend among others invented punk rock and is still very good music. A work colleague did groundbreaking work and received a Nobel Prize and is also still doing good work.
I’m married to a music teacher as it happens.
You talk of ” the faith” that I “have become part of”. I am not part of any faith. Where is your evidence that I am? Are you basing this assertion on your belief rather than evidence?
Like a lot of atheists I have always been fascinated by religion and belief and as such you start to notice the religiosity of believers in lots of things. I have been following the climate issue for a very long time and its not hard to see the religiosity of many of the arguments from your side of the issue.
“Any thread here at the Guardian is usually full of its” (Iain’s religion’s) “true believers.”
How do you know these posts are from true believers in your religion if you don’t attend their church?
I have never been inside a mosque but I none the less know a fair bit about Islam and likewise I have never been a member of any church but I have learned a great deal about Christianity. What irt boils down to is if you engage with the believers in a faith for long enough you do learn a lot about the tenets of that faith over time.
My church going in the last year has unfortunately been restricted to funerals.
Yeah I can dig that a family friend of mine dies unexpectedly yesterday and its very sobering to see how fragile life is.
My partner grew up in a Rugby League mad family. My daughter goes to matches and socialises with some of the players
My immediate family think that I have caught a dread disease because I have taken an interest in league very recently after spending years describing it as “the unspeakable chasing the uneatable” But I do have two brothers who are mad Keen about the game and its nice to share that with them.
If as you claim the carbon footprint of your family is lower than the per-capita average why do you discourage your family? I encourage my large family in their many endevours.
I don’t discourage any of them, in fact I bore the pants off then talking about how to be energy efficient and enthusing about good design and engineering. I just don’t rate many of the things done “to address climate change” very highly when it comes to their effectiveness.
So here you are, an obvious political extremist,
No that is not correct at all did one of those political compass things only last week and I come out slightly to the left of the political center
claiming that you can accurately represent not just your own thoughts on the subject of the UN, but the prior hopes and expectations of two former leaders of the ALP, one of whom was previously the youngest-ever Federal Court judge, went on to become the President of the UN General Assembly, and helped to draft the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights.
Its hardly that much of a stretch to suggest that those who created the UN had expectations of it that are different to the current reality. Especially if you have some understanding of the the historical period. Heck all you need to appreciate is that the UN was created in the hope that it would stop war and help resolve international conflicts and compare that to what has happened to see 6taht the expectation has not been realized.
To do that you provide not even a single skerrick of evidence, either of what their expectations were or how the UN has failed them, but let that whole astonishing argument rest on your own authority.
Just read some post WW2 history or go to Doctor Google
So far as I can tell, despite your occasional attempts to claim that it’s just ‘little old me’ behind all of these posts, you genuinely think your authority is enough for an argument of that gravity.
You really are desperate to vilify me at every opportunity aren’t you? I am here in a place were we ordinary folk can discuss the issues de jour in a very casual way and everyone, with you a notable exception, seems to get that its a place for laid back argument more a kin to the back bar of the pub than the hallowed halls of our parliaments or a court of law. As such I am not the one being arrogant here, you are.
The exact same arrogance was on display right at the start of this thread, with your woeful and completely unsupported misrepresentation of government’s primary purpose.
Its simply my opinion and as a conversation starter, given that mine was the first comment its served well enough.
And yet – although you repeatedly pull stunts like these,
What stunt would that be? getting out of bed early enough to be first commenter in a thread?
demonstrate time and again that you’re incapable of presenting or even following a reasoned argument, and clearly have no commitment at all to intellectual honesty
The opinion I started this thread with may be right or wrong but how is it “intellectually dishonest”?
– you have a problem when people wonder if you’re essentially delusional?
I think that YOU are the one who has lost touch with reality here as you obsess with my tiny involvement with a thread that has nearly 1400 comment by other people in it
To remind you of what you should already know: the heart of delusion lies in maintaining an idiosyncratic belief or impression, despite that belief or impression being contradicted by reality or rational argument.
You are clearly projecting your own issues here, But then this is nothing new for you is it? You can change the name, as you have so many times but you can’t change your style or your obsessions.
You say that “in terms of the global whole we are responsible for less than two percent of the whole” (world’s net carbon emissions) so how can we believe that what we do matters when the rest of the world is not really going to dance to the hymn to Gaia?”
The human population of the “global whole” world is 7.4 billion or 296 groups of roughly 25 million people. Almost every one of these groups of 25 million people is responsible for less than 2 % of the total net global carbon emissions. But together in conjunction with our outstanding contribution they make quite an impact. We all contribute. We’re all responsible.
Yes but you miss my point here because getting that whole population to all sing form the same song sheet and to be in tune is like trying to heard cats and about as melodious (how is that for mixed metaphors!)
This is not a matter of belief but a matter of simple mathematics. What every one of those 296 groups of 25 million people do matters. What Australia does matters. What you do matters. We must face up to our responsibilities particularly as a country with one of the highest per capita carbon emissions.
So how precisely are we going to get them singing in tune Wal? My wife is a music teacher so I have seen how hard it is to get one person to sing on key getting 7 billion in tune is nigh on impossible
The the vast majority of those other 295 groups of 25 million people have carbon emissions less than those of Australia and are making efforts to reduce their emissions.
You are kidding yourself on that one, a few are trying a greater number are paying lip-service and the rest think that climate change is a lower priority than waging war or Jihad on their traditional foes.
I’m not familiar with the hymn to Gaia of which you speak. I hope it has a good beat and is fun to dance to. But at least you are being realistic in realising that your funny little religion and its dance rituals will not catch on in the big world outside the appropriately named Mount Mee.
I am not the one trying to propagate that hymn Wall that would be the band you are a bog fan off. My tune is more the hum of the mig welder and the roar of an angle grinder as I work on my current eco friendly project.
I am anonymous for family and political reasons, but am honest about my most enjoyable career in biological and geological science. Will provide a synopsis of my career if you require it.
Does that mean that you family are embarrassed by your political opinions?
As for your CV, thanks for the offer and I’ll take a rain check on that if its OK with you. As I’m sure that you will appreciate anonymous people can make any sort of claim that they please about their qualifications and it is simply impossible to know how truthful they are, Others also use anonymity maliciously to harass and defame people and I am rather sure that the internet would be a far more civil place if everyone was required to post under their own names.
I don’t bother with books on religion particularly those from North America.
maybe you shoukld because then you may understand the faith that you have become part of better.
Do you have any experience with this religion.
Any thread here at the Guardian about climate change is usually full of its true believers and thaey are equally evident on twitter as well
I note that you live on the far outskirts of town where the more fundamentalist and right wing religions often pop up. Haven’t seen any of it here in the city.
If that is so then I have not seen it in the more than thirty years that I have lived in this part of the world, but then I’m an atheist so church going is not part of my life (apart from the occasional wedding or funeral)
Unfortunately the Broncos more experienced players are away at State of Origin camp. It’s hard to relax with my partner screaming at the TV.
Some common ground!
I totally agree that the absentee of star players makes the Broncos weaker however the State of Origin Games make up for it even for the most diehard Bronco fans.
Another day and back into the fray.
As for those of us who carbon emissions are well below our country’s per capita value, such a virtue should be celebrated as it’s far from an empty gesture. Don’t be so disparaging of those who are doing something practical.
Believe it or not but the carbon footprint of my whole family is lower than the per-capita average too.
The commenting lark is not a quest to impress anyone, its a game I play for my own amusement.
In that case, I’m not interested. Like I said; childish.
So are you claiming that your commenting here serves some higher purpose other than your own amusement?
“Coral reefs that have high rates of coral death following bleaching can take many years or decades to recover.”
If you read the report you will see that coral bleaching does not necessary equal coral death as you are suggesting here
I’m afraid Iain that “many years or decades” does not qualify as “a very short period of time”. Who’s sprouting bullshit now?
In terms of climate events it is a short period of time but the report also points out that bleaching does not equal coral death and that only about 5% of the bleached coral will not recover from the bleaching events
There is no absence of global level action as countries around the world, including our own, undertake to reduce their carbon emissions.
Two things about that , is it enough of an effort to have a measurable effect?
Secondly is there any actual empirical evidence that shows reducing Carbon emissions will make a difference to the climate?
The warming of our climate is a response to net carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels increasing our atmospheric CO2 concentration from 280 to 400 ppm in just over a century. Reducing those net emissions literally reduce the degree of further warming and in time lead to a decline in warming.
Can you cite some empirical evidence that this assertion is verifiably true?
Reduction in our country’s emissions can be achieved without shutting down entire economy as shown by the reductions achieved in 2012/13 and 2013/14 during a period of economic growth. Unfortunately the current governments efforts to reduce carbon emissions have been more expensive, less effective and less practical.
You are missing the point of me mentioning shutting down our entire economy, in terms of the global whole we are responsible for less than two percent of the whole so how can you believe that what we do matters when the rest of the world is not really going to dance to this hymn to Gaia?
So, based on your practicality the way to address what are becoming alarming and very serious environment issues is to ignore (and even airbrush) the truth and do nothing until someone else bothers.
No my approach is to avoid the urge to “just do something, anything” if that “something, anything” makes no difference.
What do you think can be done? Come on you chide me for may cynicism but do you have any bright ideas about how we can even try to address this problem?
The reports of government and intergovernmental agencies of the physical realities uncovered by science are but one step to finding the truth of what’s happening.
In this respect the reports of UN bodies such as UNESCO are no more unreliable in regard to their summaries of the scientific literature than are the reports of government bodies such as GRRMPA.
I would trust an Australian entity far more than one under the control of the UN everyday of the week.
Australia through its Government representatives, Frank Forde and Herbert Evatt, played a key role in the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 in San Francisco following the Second World War.
And sadly it has not really lived up to their expectations and hopes
The many and various UN bodies such as UNESCO, UNICEF, the Human Rights Commission, the WHO, the FAO and thew IMF all play an important role all over the world.
They try too but they are all rather deeply flawed and subject to political agendas of those who run them, for instance the Human rights commission is chaired bay the bloody Saudis at present and you think that fine and dandy???
I’m not familiar with the “Green Religion” and its rites that you are talking about.
In this innovative and deeply felt work, Bron Taylor examines the evolution of “green religions” in North America and beyond: spiritual practices that hold nature as sacred and have in many cases replaced traditional religions. Tracing a wide range of groups—radical environmental activists, lifestyle-focused bioregionalists, surfers, new-agers involved in “ecopsychology,” and groups that hold scientific narratives as sacred—Taylor addresses a central theoretical question: How can environmentally oriented, spiritually motivated individuals and movements be understood as religious when many of them reject religious and supernatural worldviews? The “dark” of the title further expands this idea by emphasizing the depth of believers’ passion and also suggesting a potential shadow side: besides uplifting and inspiring, such religion might mislead, deceive, or in some cases precipitate violence. This book provides a fascinating global tour of the green religious phenomenon, enabling readers to evaluate its worldwide emergence and to assess its role in a critically important religious revolution.
GBRMPA (the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority), whose “Coral Bleaching Risk and Impact Assessment Plan”, has the task of managing the impact of coral bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef.
Yes and I have cited them several time sin this thread
They do not have the task of addressing the underlying cause of bleaching events on that reef and others becoming more severe and more frequent.
Well just tell me what it is that we can do that will make any difference to said events. And No doing something which “may” help in a century or more does not count.
This is the task of other sections of the Australian government and of the governments of other countries concerned with the reduction of net carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.
Well my point is that such action is simply not going to happen, in fact global emissions are going to keep increasing no matter what we say or do in this country.
In recent years the Australian government has not been doing everything it practically could to address the cause of the global bleaching events we have seen since 1997/98.
what more do you think we can do that will give us tangible results?
A pathetic reply, practically no where on earth is enough being done to combat environment issues and in any case you are simply being obtuse and you know it.
Which is sort of my point. You see first and foremost I am a completely practical man so when someone argues that we need to do something my very first question is always “will that thing do any good?” which is why I don’t buy into there being any advantage in things like ETS or carbon tax regimes. For them to work at all they would have to be operating at a global level with every person on the planet involved. That is simply impossible for political reasons
Your lame attempt to praise the government for censorship on this issue is transparent and clearly demonstrates your real purpose as a right wing apologist.
Besides the fact that wanting to opt out of a Unesco enterprise not being “censorship” I am apologizing for no one here.
The right wing have yet (if ever ) been able to get up to speed on environment issues mainly because greed is more important than actually looking after the world we live in. So much for credibility on the economic future.
No we just like to see effort and treasure expended on things that will actually work where as your side of the polity seems to be really big on making gestures that have one one result which is to signal your “climate virtue”
Hook, line, sinker, rod and boat.
On a mobile phone, avatars area hard to discern.
Kept you busy.
Thought you might have been on a phone, I stick to my PC which has clear advantages namely a proper keyboard and no predictive text even so I am sadly not immune to typos.
You did not even try to answer my question, you just give a vacuous response that I’d expect from a schoolchild, and then whinged about being asked difficult questions to do with the law and stuff.
OK I’ll try to give you what you want, all government needs revenue to function and in this country that revenue is raised by levying taxation on the economic activities of our residents and citizens. Naturally enough it is more a more sustainable revenue stream if the administration runs its affairs in a way that facilitates the creation of prosperity. Thus, as I said earlier, the entire Constitution implicitly prioritizes protecting our economic activity above the needs of other countries or non citizen individuals.
You don’t impress anybody by posting screeds of responses all of the same low quality “argument”.
The commenting lark is not a quest to impress anyone, its a game I play for my own amusement.
So why do you condone government lying, if you are confident all is being done ?
In what way is the government being untruthful here?
Or is striking evidence from the record not lying, including lying to your paying customers, the tourists?
No one has struck anything “from the record” the department simply did not want to have anything to do with a corrupt and worthless UN instrumentality.
Your reply post to me is as fatuous and as superficial as all of your posts.
Just took the time to check out exactly how I last responded too you and I think that I gave reasonable responses to each of your err “arguments” so as you wnat serious lets consider just how well you practice wht you preach shall we?
You possess little in the way of knowledge and you can not engage in mature argument at all and the infantile rubbish you post is worthless.
Empty assertion and insult is all we have in this sentence
As for being old well you certainly seem to have wasted your life because judging by your posts you do not possess either the academic back ground or anything more than a rudimentary education.
I have a degree from Queensland University as it happens and there is no way that you are in any sort of position to judge my life as wasted. Essentailly this sentence is like the one before it just more ad hominem fallacy.
You will never change anyone’s opinion on here or any other sight(sic) if any of these post(sic) are your usual effort quite simply because you can not put aside the stupidity and form a cohesive argument that makes any sense.
Essentailly this sentence is like the one before it just more ad hominem fallacy.You see its like this, if you always play the commenting game on “easy”, as you do, by seeking out a place where you know that will be accompanied by many ideological fellow travelers its easy to get up votes for your comments an to therefore have a false sense of your own self worth. But what you are really doing is kidding yourself. On the other hand I know that I have to work more to be appreciated here. I am playing the game here on “hard” and therefore each up-vote I receive is actually worth more to me because it takes more effort to earn it.
As for humour do not fool yourself any further you just come across as ignorant, stupid and infantile.
I pointed out that you have no sense of humour and you respond in an utterly humourless way with more insults
As for proving anything to you about my public or private life forget it as for referencing my comments get off your lazy butt and do it yourself age does not give you the right to be an ass nor does it prove you are knowledgeable.
It is simply good manners and good form to provide links to any thing that you quote in a comments thread, clearly you have neither.
If you wrote posts that produced a cohesive argument and respect for the argument and the people who give their time to engage with you then the tone of the replies to you would begin to show some respect instead of the derision shown here.
No one is holding a gun to you head and forcing you to respond to my comments, as for tone I simply respond in kind to my interlocutors, often with sarcasm but that is what we grown ups do.
As I said before grow up.
Right back at you because I sense a great deal of emotional in your arguments where you would be better served reason.
I will leave you to your trolling.
LOL you should try using less of the ad hominem fallacy.
On the contrary it shows that we won’t waste time and effort on empty gestures to signal our climate virtue
You’ve just spent four hours pretending that Australia’s economy is more important than the future of the entire planet.
No that is not my argument at all, and I have not spent that much time on this site either
You’ll probably be shocked when no one heeds your cry for help when a tsunami fails to quell the relentless forest fires in the outback.
We call them “bushfires” here so I guess that you are not an Aussie are you?
You might want to heed Adam Hills’ advice about being a dick.
If I wanted advice about being a Dick I would certainly look to one as experienced as Adam Hills.
You might have been correct except the fact that our unique environment, (what our tourism is based on) will be destroyed and therefore any tourism with it. You aired against yourself which is a unique achievement.
You are working on an erroneous assumption that “addressing climate change” is going to be at all effective in solving the bleaching issues of the Barrier reef Frankly if you read what the government is actually doing you will see that they ARE doing everything humanly possible to deal with the issue.
In the very short term perspective, here that means tomorrow and the next few weeks, the Australian government may be taking the right course of action.
In the long term it is taking the worst possible course of action.
What more do you think we can do?
The Australian government needs to take it’s head out of the sands of denial and start implementing some positive actions to combat climate change.
you do understand that we can only have any effect on about 2% of global emissions don’t you? Even if the AGW proposition is absolutely correct how do you think that we could do anything more than we are doing now?
Back to the old superhero of the intellectual right, stuff, eh?
You need to lighten up a great deal, its Friday, kick of your shoes crack a cold one and chill out a bit, if it takes your fancy there is Friday night football and its Broncos v Wests Tigers playing so it should be a good game
I am here because I love a good argument…
And that old lie as well! Bingo!
What other reason would I be here for? and why would I lie about it anyway?
That’s not a given. What immunity to testing by the scientific method? The proposition or hypothesis that the global warming of the last century is due to net carbon dioxide emissions from humans burning fossil fuels has been well tested by the scientific method and is now an established theory to explain observations.
You really don’t seem to understand the scientific method Wal
As what is being told about is reality there is no need for personal belief. Hence your thoughts are based on an error that you have made.
I’m not trying to be a smart-arse here but is English your first language? because what you have given me above simply makes no sense.
except that what is being discussed above is reality and I doubt that anyone whatever their politics are in love with that reality. It says much about your state of mind that reality is toxic to you.
I think after reading your comment here my grasp of reality must be a great deal firmer than yours is.
What would be better ? To protect the economy by actually taking real action on orotecting the environment and thereby protecting it in to the future or to protect economic enterprises by airbrushing the truth that the environment is under real threat, the barrier reef ( as an example ) is under severe and irreversible threat and the more people that know that will mean more people will seek to protect it. Censorship and head in the sand thinking is promoting short term ignorance at the cost of long term economic viability.
If you go to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority website and check out what they are actually doing about the problem then you may see that they are doing everything that is humanly possible and unless you have any better practical suggestion of how they can better address the issue then please share it.
The “lies and half truths of you panic merchants” is Iain’s term for the reality of 50% coral bleaching on the northern Great Barrier Reef.
Actually what I am trying to point out here is that the government through the GBRMPA is doing everything that it practically can to address this problem (see the PDF here) but typically those of you who have got the Green religion all seem to think that what is really needed is some sort of expensive but futile genuflection to Gaia even though those particular actions will make no practical difference to the climate in the foreseeable future
With your present attitude towards environmental issues the elimination of the Australian people would seem to be a priority.
You certainly deserve the Eichmann prize for silly justifications for genocide! Please enlighten me as to why the attitude of this humble scribe to the environment would justify the the murder of 20 million of my fellow Aussies?
Pathetic and sad. All that proves is that you’re incapable of discussing issues at an adult level.
really you have the gall to say that here? Have you not noticed that a goodly proportion of those who comment here just want to vent their hatred of the government? On the other hand I do try to answer all of those I engage with politiely and in affable manner and you can’t be more adult than that.
If the Australian government wanted to protect the interests of our economic enterprises they would not only support accurate reporting on the risks climate change poses to our natural assets and the knock on impacts on tourism, they would be taking serious action to address climate change.
In the absence of any coordinated global level “action” nothing that our government can do (up to and including shutting down our entire economy) will make the slightest bit of difference to the climate.
So what precisely do you think that we can actually do?
That they are doing neither shows they don’t give a shit.
On the coronary it shows that we won’t waste time and effort on empty gestures to signal our climate virtue
You make assumption after unsubstantiated assumption not unusual for someone who can not support argument.
When your interlocutors are hiding behind a pseudonym as you do one is forced to use deduction to determine their bonafides
My private history is none of your business but I have been an extremely successful farmer who never needed or required government assistance unlike some of my lazy and stupid brethren who spend too much money on cars, equipment and holidays when they don’t have the money and can never seem to save in case of problems with the weather or pests (including moronic LNP politicians).
I’ll take that on face value
Instead of posting something as childish and idiotic as –
“Those Karl Marx underpants of yours must be awfully uncomfortable becase they are obviously TOO tight.”
Your sense of humor has obviously had a by-pass. In my experience an excess of dour sanctimony is a sure sign of the regressive left’s pernicious influence.
Do something original like stick to the subject or perhaps ask a question or writing something less infantile than a 10 year old.
Lighten up and try being more generous in debate, you may both enjoy the process more and have a better chance of convincing other that you are correct.
Actually Australia has become one of the worst countries in managing its environmental assets and now ranks as the 12th most polluting country per capita in the world.
When ever we see something with a “per capita” caveat we should know that some one is feeding us bullshit, especially when they provide no citation for their claim
Try reading, try researching try to assimilate some knowledge before making and absolute twat of yourself online or answering my posts.
What make your posts so special? you are just another anonymous AGW blowhard
Finally it is more than obvious that your knowledge on the subject of farming is not even rudimentary it could not even pass as superficial and I’m more than confident in saying that if you have ever farmed then your endeavour would not have been successful.
Simple question for you given you claim to be a successful farmer, when using any fertilizer were you always mindful of using it frugally because you were aware of the downstream effects and the need to reduce the cost of production?
Laziness is the bane of many people and your superficial one answers lack even a hint of intelligence and instead are reliant on poorly written innuendo and stupid insults.
I see that you don’t get sarcasm and banter
I wish I was still young enough that I could “grow up” However as I’m actually an old codger I will just continue as I am thank you very much
When the reef is gone, what will you say to all the tourism operators?
The reef will not be gone any time soon, what may happen though is that there could be some changes at its northern limits if the seas remain too warm on a consistent basis, I expect also that we may see it extend further south into waters that are currently too cool. The bottom line though is that there will remain a tourist attraction of great beauty long after you and I are gone from this world .
Iain, you can paint a shit chrome but you can’t turn it into silver.
Clearly metallurgy is not your strong-point. Firstly one does not apply chrome as a paint its usually applied by way of electroplating and on top of that Chromium is an entirely different element to silver
Keep trying though buddy, it’s fun to read
I aim to have fun commenting here so I am glad to have fans of any sort, even those with an unusually high pitched singing voice thanks to the surgeon’s knife like yourself.
If it’s a religious movement Ian then you will burn in hell, the hell created by wilfully blind zealous bigots like you and other science-denying idiots.
As a life long atheist I have long been immune to threats of eternal damnation
It’s not a matter of left and right Ian, it’s a matter of right and wrong. And you are manifestly wrong.
Given the immunity of the AGW proposition to testing by the scientific method I don’t think that you can be so sure that I am wrong.
Pathetic and sad. All that proves is that you’re incapable of discussing issues at an adult level.
The first step towards winning any debate is to get your opponents to argue on your terms and I won’t fall for your attempt to get the debate focused on the minutiae of our constitution.
Try something other than pedantry and leagalese
Its is the lies and half truths of you panic merchants that I object to on this occasion which is why I think the government has done the right thing here.
See here’s the thing Iain, I don’t agree that I tell lies on the subject of climate change
.Telling a “lie” does by definition require an intent to deceive.
You think I do and you object, which is fair enough.
I think that you personally believe that you are telling the truth, but that belief is erroneous.
But you tacitly admit that the Government tells lies and you approve of it.
If that was what I wanted to say I would just say it, that said I recognize that in the game of politics all players dance around the dichotomy between discretion and open veracity
One side can lie, the other side cannot.
That makes you a hypocrite, Iain.
The thing is I reject your claim here, Both sides are adept at the dance of truth and how well they each manage to impress with their moves is the point of the game.
Your comments provide a compelling argument that elements of the LNP and their apologists should not be trusted with governing a progressive modern democracy.
Well thankfully ours is a “modern democracy” rather than ” progressive modern democracy”
You make statements that beggar belief with the use of false premise (primary purpose) , straw man tactics (usual suspects) and simplistic and Imprecise assumptions.
How is my premise false?
How does my turn of phrase constitute “straw man tactics”?
‘Usual suspects’? Suspected of what?, ‘self flagellation’ another attempt to insert demeaning and emotive terms to support a weak and trite argument.
Sigh you are obviously unfamiliar with my allusion to the classic film Casablanca which would see the corrupt police chief (played by Claude Raines) order his flunkies to “round up the usual suspects” Its a light hearted way of describing your fellow activists. As for Self-flagellation well its a most apt allusion to the pennants of the middle ages who thought that by the infliction of self punishment they could buy their way out of Purgatory.
I think it is a good thing that you post here because you set a benchmark that we can all use as a reminder that our concern for the future is justified. Could it be that you are actually planted to cement those concerns?
I am here because I love a good argument and because I think that so many ideas that the Regressive left are in love with are actual toxic and should be challenged here as much as anywhere else.
I know you love facts, text, credible sources, cut and paste and slabs of information and have tried to get me removed in your previous posts and report button hits, whining that information I present doesn’t conform to community standards!
Oh you are the same person who has had three different identities over the last few months alone, by way of contrast I have been posting here under my own name since 4 Jun 2013 so what does that say about who can play the game here properly?
It would seem to me that your citations are arguing that Unesco is corrupt therefore we should have nothing to do with anything it does, which is another good reason that any efforts to have Australia removed form its pronouncements is a good thing on that basis alone. That siad I have just heard on the ABC that the minster is saying theta he knew nothing of the report at all anyway.
Iain, you are so wrong mate. Get your head outta your asre and realise that there will be zero interest from abroad once the word gets out on social media…..and tell that to your pollies mate..fukcing idiots.
You must be young because what so many of the twitterati fail to realize is that social media is utterly ephemeral and its a left wing bubble that is largely disconnected from the greater realities of our polity.
I wonder how much tourism dollars will flow in once all the coral is bleached and there’s no marine life to see cos it’s moved on elsewhere….
Coral reefs are actually very resilient and in a very short period of time those areas that have experienced bleaching will recover, just as they have many times in the past.
Iain, perhaps you need to educate yourself about the economic impact of climate change on Australia.
The climate has NEVER been static and what we need to be and therefore do is flexible so that we can exploit the opportunities that a tinge in the climate may bring and survive the challenges that it also delivers
Pretending it isn’t happening won’t make it go away.
Likewise panicking about the things that may never happen is a great waste of effort and emotional energy. Being able to adapt if and when we have to is a far better thing to aspire to than just jumping up and down screaming “the sky is falling!!!! “
Your usual support for Coalition lies, deceit, disinformation, secrecy, lack of transparency, censorship….a faithful factotum of the Coalition, couldn’t give a damn about the corruption as long as his Coalition is in power.
Breathe, man, breathe….
Sick stuff mate, an enemy of the state those that adhere to such a prescription for ‘democracy’.
You need to work on your sentence structure; because this one makes no sense at all
Iain , you are absolutely correct BUT with one slight edit, it should read………
“It is the “CURRENT Australian governments……………………….”
No my original claim need no edit
and there in lies the problem and why the Govt. must change at the next election
The Labor party should be kept as far away from the treasury benches as long as is humanly possible until they learn to have greater fiscal responsibility, most especially we need to see them embrace the idea that they should promise less but deliver more.
Yes Iain, climate change is all a left wing plot invented just to annoy you.
No its a religious movement exploiting our secular age and the misanthropic tendency of you minions of the left… Any annoyance that it may give me is incidental rather than being a core intention.
They’ve done the right thing?
Yes, of course they have if your one of there mates and you’re running off with pockets full of tax payers money!
We are not talking about Labor and the Greens
The neoliberal LNP have covered up extensive abuse of the Australian environment that the Australian tax payers will in the long term have to pay for.
We are one of the better countries in the world when it comes to managing our environmental assets as it happens
And they done it for what and who?
The Australian People that’s who
A bunch of neoliberal hangers on who have ripped the guts out of the environment for dodgy developments and farming practises for nothing more than unsustainable short term gain. Short term gain that only these few dishonest farmers and developers will get any benefit from.
I bet that you have never been closer to any sort of agriculture than the produce section of the supermarket, because if you had any experience then you would understand how hard our farmers try to control the use of fertilizers simply because they are not cheap and more importantly because these men and women of the land do think about the future far more than you give them credit for.
This sort of behaviour is nothing new from neoliberal LNP governments and is just the same as little Johnny Howard wasting over a decade’s worth of profits from irreplaceable natural resources that were shipped overseas and the forgone tax used to pad out the profits of despicably dishonest companies that headquartered themselves oversea to avoid even more tax.
Those Karl Marx underpants of yours must be awfully uncomfortable becase they are obviously TOO tight.
The LNP have a long record of funnelling wealth up the ladder to corporations and wealthy individuals and that money mostly ends off overseas in the pockets of non Australians leaving us the tax payer to clean up useless developments and polluted, toxic mine sights(sic). With just a nudge and wink to the companies to get out before they are caught.
Your should try reading something other than Das Kapital
The Australian government’s primary purpose was to hide it’s gross dereliction in addressing climate change in any meaningful way.
You may not have noticed that the Labor party is not currently in office (thankfully!) and the current scheme, for all of its shortcomings has met all of its targets at a rather modest cost.
Bullshit, the Australian government has multiple responsibilities to its citizens
Sure but I suspect that you failed to notice that I cited the PRIMARY responsibility not the ONLY one.
and it is irresponsible to reduce everything to crude market economics that always gets prices wrong because it does not factor in the social and environmental costs of production.
And I wads not doing that either
Unfortunately we are all stuck on the same planet together where a capitalist creed of self interested parasites operate at the great expense of the Australian people and it flora and fauna.
Capitalism may be imperfect but it actually works better than any of the socialist alternatives that failed so badly during the latter part of the last century .
The Australian government’s primary purpose is to protect the interests of our economic enterprises and they have therefore done the right thing here. Of course the usual suspects here will argue that instead we should engage in endless self flagellation and have no regard to the one species that minions of the left fervently wish would become extict, namely the Australian people.
Gee you sound just like two other “people” who thought that pasting big slabs of far left text from elsewhere constitutes a proper comment. It doesn’t actually and in fact its against the community guidelines.
That said had the Labor party’s NBN conception been commercially viable then it would not have been necessary for the government to create a more affordable option. Interestingly I had a conversation with a group of people at may local library yesterday and while we all had our beefs about the quality of the broadband that we can get the conclusion that we came to was this, what we need is reliable internet, rather than the Ferrari that Labor promised we all agreed that a Ford would be adequate, especially if it meant that those of us in more rural circumstances would have a chance to get improved services sooner.
Iain, c’mon, if you can’t do better than this, give it up. Of course, lowered carbon emissions for a few years didn’t impact on the climate.
So how long will it take before we can see any results then Jane? You clearly believe that emission reductions will be a big part of the “cure” so how long will it take before we can see a result?
Do you know anything at all about climate science?
Clearly more than you do
Maybe you should learn more about this and less about merely asserting free market ideology.
Never been a big fan of “free market ideology” as it happens in fact quite teh opposite on this issue because I think that all dreivitives trading (of which the carbon market is an example) is either/or a giant Ponzi scheme or a form of gambling wearing a sort of false cloak of respectability.
Still not the point, Iain. Are you by any chance a lawyer?
It is precisely the point.
Look imagine that you have a slow degenerative disease, like say MS now we know very well that this disease is untreatble and then a man comes along and offers a cure that will make regular withdraws from your wallet with the vague nation that the payments will eventually make some small chnage to your condition and some vague time into the future. how long would you keep paying for the “cure” without seeing any tangible result? One year five years Of fifty years?
Its the same with all of those ETS and Carbon tax schemes; Vague promises of an effect that are not due to be met within our lifetimes, Yet you are absolutely certain that they will work because some white coated priest has insisted that they will.
Basically you’re saying that Australians are too lazy to foster a basic level of science literacy.
ERR… No that is not what I am saying at all
You don’t get to “buy the claims”, no more than you get to tell a surgeon how to remove a tumour.
Its a figure of speech that you obviously don’t understand, as for surgery, as much as I respect and admire the skills involved (and I have watched a fair bit of it online because I am interested in such things) the principles are actually quite simple its like anything else that humans do with tools and in many ways rather akin plumbing.
This is the greatest challenge – How to educate people who are so arrogant in their (complete lack of) knowledge that they refuse to “believe”? (emphasis on “believe”, as if you get a choice to “believe” in science or not).
My point which obviously needs reiteration to you is extremely simple we are told repeatedly that if we reduce emissions of CO2 it will mitigate the prophesied climate change I just want to know how will we even know of things like the European ETS scheme (which has been running for more than a decade ) has made the slightest bit of difference?
You clearly believe in this Green religion but I want to see some empirical data that shows all of these efforts worth it.
2) carbon emissions went down when the ETS was operating, so it did have some effect.
The issue is not that carbon emissions may have decreased but did that decrease make the slightest bit of difference to the climate. I say it made NO measurable difference.
Not the point, Iain. You said that we simply don’t buy the claims that these measures will make the tiniest bit of difference to the climate Just you and a few other denizens of the deniosphere believe that. We do not accept your and your fellow-travellers’ claims.
If that were the case then you would have no trouble at all demonstrating just how the climate has been positively improved by any one of the existing schemes, like the long standing ETS in Europe. Can you show any difference to the climate as a consequence of that scheme having existed? ANY Difference?
The facts are simply this, if there has been a difference because of the existing schemes then we simply can not measure it they are precisely like this
Just look at the ALP primary vote figure is still well below 40% and as such Labor can not win on that.
The ALP is not proposing a tax; they advocate an ETS, which is different.
Call it what you like Janeee in the eyes of teh public is still an unnecessary impost that has the same fouls smell as Gillard’s unloved Carbon tax
Face it, you only have to imagine you hear the word tax and you need a sedative and a lie down.
On the contrary I fine with taxes in general its Taxes imposed on a bullshit pretext that I detest.
Bill Shorten has put an ETS squarely on the agenda and it isn’t hurting him in the polls, despite the less favourable economic climate post GFC. You focus on the individual cost of addressing climate change, but don’t consider the costs of NOT addressing it. People will work it out if the case is made properly.
The coalition have not even really began to eviscerate Shorten on his attempt to revive the carbon tax but you can be certain that their advertising closer to the poll will make sure the electorate has a comparison with Labor’s now abolished tax and this new iteration. The only reason that he released this policy so early was in the hope that it will fall off the people’s radar by polling day. He is going to be sadly disappointed barbecue people do not forget how Labor has form for lying about energy taxes and they will down vote them as a consequence.
Surely the biggest impediment to any development in indigenous areas is the absence of a tradition of good governance and sound management practices of both communities and projects. Get that right and there will be lots of progress but if you can’t achieve these things then we will still be reading about the “promise” of development in a decade from now.
Well it seems to me that you are counting chickens that are very far from being hatched here. I don’t usually think much of NM because its is so far too the left but I do agree that with such a long campaign this election is going to all be about attrition and to that end the government is taking the right approach of chipping away steadily at the ALP’s credibility and no where are Labor weaker than they are on their accounting and costings.
Actually he’s trying to conflate live exports and drownings at sea as an unsubstantiated attack on Labor. Pretty obvious.
No its more of a suggestion that Indonesia facilitated more boats as payback for the Gillard’s ban and its not an unreasonable suggestion that does fit the historical facts. Gillard like most Labor leaders was shit scared of anything that would further antagonize the inner city luvvies who would desert Labor for the Greens so instead of using a more delicate and considered mechanism to address those cruelty issues she chose the blunt instrument of a export ban. Indonesia has never been afraid to use the “asylum seekers” as a foreign policy tool and all that Barnaby has done is suggest that the increase in numbers at the time could well have been deliberate rather than a coincidence.
Rather typically you seem to think that we should be Kowtowing to Indonesia all of the time, but I don’t think they would respect us if we did so. Barnaby is very clearly talking to his own rural constituency when he talks about the disastrous suspension of the Live cattle trade done to placate the inner city trendies because it was they who suffered real loses because the Gillard government were too stupid to address the bad optics in a way that did not harm our own interests in the process.
I think your suggestion for swags is good for that small percentage who are homeless by nature, by that I mean those who refuse to seek help and somehow can’t stay in a job/ house.
Glad we agree on this
But the greater proportion of homeless people can be helped, and do seek it. Mostly this is people with children. For those, money is the only solution. Receiving their first month rent, and help with other services and advocacy, is the difference between getting a step up and being left to sleep rough/ kids being taken into care.
Sure I appreciate that, most people in this category are clearly “savable” with intervention but for many its just a short step down into the first category of permanent inability to maintain a place to live.
As for the ‘inherently homeless’, I just think we need to change our view of them. Homeless can be a way of life. Understanding them and treating them as a non threatening element of society, would be refreshing.
I agree with that too which is why I endorse the services that help mitigate the worst aspects of their situation, the ability to be clean and to have a decent meal and a warm and dry billet does wonders for the well being of the destitute
I have personally been through various situations. I realised a house isn’t a home necessarily, and for many people, home was something that was destroyed very early on…
Yes I can appreciate that I have not ever been destitute but then I had parents who lived through WW2 in England and they inculcated all of their offspring with the importance of first paying your rent, then your tucker, then any luxuries. The easy credit culture that we now have often leads people into terrible debt and an inability to manage their lives in a sustainable way. Once you have debts you can’t pay its easy to end up homeless and as I expect you clearly understand once you have gone over that cliff its bloody hard to get on your feet again. But for that economic resurrection to “take” you have to chnage your habits and THAT is more of an impediment to solving the homelessness problem than a lack of money.
The point that so many who opine about the homeless ignore is that there will always a small percentage of our population who can’t manage their lives well enough to maintain a roof over their heads and short of running their lives in a very paternalistic manner no amount of money is going to “save” them from their own vices. I long ago concluded the best solution to the homelessness problem was two fold firstly for those who need it give them a “street swag” so they can sleep warm and dry and secondly arrange for them to have a locker of sorts where they can store their possessions during the day. Services like the mobile laundry and grooming services have value too but anyone who claims that the problem can be solved by just more throwing money at it is simply kidding themselves.
Julie Bishop glowing – think you need to adjust the brightness on your set.
I was speaking metaphorically as you must know.
The only thing glowing about Bishop was her fake tan running into the crevasses of the bitter black holes she calls eyes.
That ideological underwear is a few sizes too small
Angry is the word I’d use.
If your read of her emotion is that far off you have a problem with your perceptions
All the fascists are angry when they have a fight on their hands as it confuses their born to rule mentality.
Read less Karl Marx its rotting your brain…
6 weeks to go…the LNP will self implode the further it goes,
No they won’t, they are a very disciplined crew
forever attempting raids,
The AFP does not dance to the LNP tune
vilifying displaced people,
punishing those telling the truth by law. and trying one desperate measure after another in their now familiar race to the bottom politics (thanks Johnny).
The applause was for Pyne’s gifts as a rather arch and camp panto villain. I’m always reminded of Kenneth Williams in Carry On mode. He could be hilarious, but you were never in any doubt that there was a deeply troubled and unpleasant individual underneath.
You are amazing;y wrong on both counts, Christopher Pyne is a good minister and a very erudite man to boot and for the most part there was never much real malice in any of Williams Carry on characters, and the man himself was, like Pyne, a real gentleman.
Iain, Newspoll says Coalition majorly on the nose.
If you read more that Guardian headline you will see that Labor have not made much of an improvement in their primary vote at all, and Turnbull is still much preferred over Shorten as PM. At best you could say its even money
If you are relying on a fucking TV audience to get your electoral poll results you are in serious trouble.
Qanda audiences are almost always left leaning which is why I noted Pyne’s good reception there
Newspoll is the one poll even more accurate than the bookies.
No, the only poll that is ever truly accurate is the one counted on the night of the election
I watched the Bishop interview, but with the sound turned off. The effect was startling, because her face was so mobile, smiling, eyes dancing, radiating and glowing as though she had not a care in the world, she was almost flirting with the camera, and the sum effect was that she was trying too hard to project a message that “everything is fine here”.
You may not like it but what you have just said confirms what I posited earlier namely that the government are traveling well and not in despair as joey Rocca was claiming( I don’t think she was actually “trying too hard BTW)
It has nothing to do with like or dislike, she had an easy ride on 7.30 last night.
Why do you think that such interviews should be confrontational?
I get out plenty, the scare and lie campaigns are not working this time.
Yes, I don’t think much of Labor’s campaign either.
The LNP are blasting all sorts of Ads and nonsense, I tune out very quickly nothing of substance in them.
frankly most of teh Colalition ads I have seen have been quite positive so far (and I am a subscriber to their youtube feed.
Labor more than deserve to govern, these last 3 years of destruction and inaction from the Coalition have been a disgrace.
What do you mean by that in bold?
You must have your mind closed wide shut if you can not see the damage this government has done over the last 3 years.
Pray tell us precisely what you think the problems have been, Bet you nominate asylum seekers, Gay marriage and Climate change
How does a doubling of the deficit and the imminent loss of the triple A rating strike you?
Not a big deal actually but if the senate had not been so obstructive that would not have happened as you well know
Pyne, ? Australia’s answer to Donald Duck, but slightly less intelligent.
Bishop, ? Bring my helicopter round James, we don’t want to be driving as much as 50 miles to-day do we. After all $5k is peanuts for a “Politician” when it’s only taxpayers money we are blowing
i think that your Che Guevara underpants are too tight matey, they are cutting off the circulation to your brain….
Come off it, she is pathetic.
we get that you don’t like her but you prejudice probably means that you did not even watch the interview that I was alluding to.
Labor has come a long way and all the dirt and muck the Coalition tries on is failing.
Of course labor have come a long way but I simply don’t think they have come far enough to deserve government, they need quite a bit more of time in opposition.
As for the effectiveness of the government campaigns, well if you get outside of the Guardian left wing bubble you will probably find a very different picture of how effective they are.
If you don’t want to be identified as an LNP shill, I recommend losing the “Rudd/Gillard/Rudd” bit . . . it’s a bit of a giveaway.
I have been using that term for longer than the LNP have and I will continue to do so because its a great way to remind people of just how dysfunctional the ALP were when they were last in government.
Your a dill mate.
No just a conservative
Nobody has worshiped Gaia since well before the Council of Nicea made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire when the worship of the Greek Dark Age mother goddess was pretty much extinct.
Who said anything about worshiping an ancient deity?
Confusing a dead religion with the scientific Gaia Hypothesis, which turns out to now to be an accepted theory, as taught in Earth Systems Science modules in Universities around the world just shows was a bigoted uniformed closed minded petty individual you really are.
I am not at all confused but you are right that I am alluding to Lovelock’s hypothesis but you are confused yourself if you think that my metaphor is meant to be read literally. Its a simple descriptor for the the way that the Greens seem to think that Humanity is an antagonist to the biosphere rather than being as much a p[art of it as any other animal is part of it.
You’re in for a rude shock when the ALP win the election.
Labor certainly can win, however I don’t expect that they will win. They may pick up a few more seats BUT I don’t think that they have enough in the tank to overcome the sins of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd years.
Julie Bishop glowing? Now that’s a stretch, sourpuss wouldn’t know how to.
Clearly you did not see the show in question.
Labor are moving along nicely, releasing policies and Bill is doing a great job interacting with the community, a natural leader.
Yet their primary vote remains at an unwinnable low level
You are projecting you deepest desires here but it is totally at odds with reality. I saw Christopher Pyne on QandA last night and he did well enough to get the strongest applause at the end (over Albo) and I also saw Julie Bishop on the 730repoet and she was positively glowing. If there is any desperation out there its from Labor and the Greens who are trying to propagate the same sort of nonsense that you are delivering here. There are still six weeks to go until the election and until the votes are all cast its anyone’s to win or loose.
The more it discourages the better, we could do better with less of these Lycra’d Loonies,
Try living on my mountain they are a total menace most weekends
although your comment re helmets is lunacy at it’s greatest. Head trauma is the most serious of injuries and any protection is not enough
No it recognizes a very simple truth that many people would use bicycles for short trips around their home but they don’t because of the stupid looking helmets.
for too long Cyclists have been able to get away with some quite bad behavior on the roads, ignoring red lights, and other road rules with impunity. A crackdown on that sort fo thing is a good thing. However the compulsory use of helmets is an affront to our civil liberties and it discourages a lot more casual use of bicycles within our cities and towns.
Australia isn’t broken?
not in nay fundamental way it isn’t. We have a functional economy, a divers polity and a working democracy/ While we are not perfect there is a lot more that is good than bad here
If that’s your best standup line son, then you’re better orf sticking to your day job shouting the odds for the IPA/LNP/News ltd Partei and their appalling handmaidens …
Sharing my wisdom here is not my day job, its just my vocation.
On the contrary, this is exactly what is happening. They are not being prevented from enrolling, they are being dissuaded. The end result is the same.
How so, when its well known that the very day that a young person turns 18 they are expected to enroll to vote, at every election the electoral commission runs advertising campaigns to get them to enroll, In fact none of this would happen at all if anyone was trying to dissuade young people from voting
Wow. Luckily we don’t all have that attitude. We’d still be living in caves bashing women over the head with big sticks.
We as a society long ago gave up using blunt instruments as a courtship tool because there ARE better ways to find and keep a mate. The point is we changed to something that definitely is a better way. Too often You minions of the left just want to change just for teh sake of change with a vague hope that the change will be positive, sometimes it might be but more often it is a step backwards that could have been avoided with just a tiny bit more caution in the first place
That is not what you implied in your first post.
You see democracy is a very liberal club in this country which is very easy to join, you fill in one very simple application form, prove you are a real person and you are in for life. In my opening comment I was actually alluding to the old adage that goes something like this ” if you don’t vote for the left when you are young then you have no heart, but if you continue to vote for the left as you mature then you have no brain” and trying to imply that young people being lured into leftism is a waste of time for our polity.
Uhuh. Sure thing buddy. You go on living in your little mind cave. The rest of humanity will progress without you.
One thing you learn when you graduate into long trousers is that change for its own sake is seldom a good idea and instead you appreciate the adage that if it isn’t broken then don’t try to fix it.
Society is leaving you behind.
Not at all
Don’t be scared of change.
I’m not scared of change, but I do loathe the “all chnage is good” mindset of the left because I have seen too many examples where your fellow minions of teh left have changed things for the worse and as a consequence I would rather see change only when we have a very high confidence that it would actually be a good thing.
You might find empathy rewarding.
How does empathy matter in this context?
I love democracy Slender, but part of democracy is letting the politically unengaged waste their votes if they fail to register to vote or if they are too stupid to cast a formal vote. Both registering to vote and casting a formal ballot ain’t that hard so do you really want the result of an election to hang on the stupidity of those who can’t learn to vote properly?
And the problem here is what precisely?
The young people in question would probably be wasting their vote on the Greens or the ALP so its no great loss if they neuter their own suffrage
Throwing the Captain overboard to install the Messiah — who turned out to be just a very haughty boy — was ‘playing the long game’?
One thing that is certain is that Abbott is not doing a Rudd and whiteanting his own party so I think That the sadly necessary leadership change will be a benefit. That said I was of course talking about the long game of the campaign itself and on that score I don’t see Shorten going the distance with out a major stuff up, its the Labor way
But be patient, Iain: Games of Tones will resume soon after 2 July.
The game that interests me is what will the Labor party do when it works out that its lurch to the left has not payed off for them
“the Carbon Tax card
still stings the ALP and is hated by most voters, a good card actually
the Asylum seekers Card,
Once you get away from this place and out into the real world that one trumps the ALP every-time.
and The union thuggery card”
If the remaining unions were not either irrelevant or hot beds of thuggery you might have a point…. What are they down too now? 17% of workers?
Your house of cards is about to come crashing down.
On the contrary its a good hand for this current game
Well I think that the Coalition are playing the long game better than the ALP who seem to be a greater risk of running out of steam before the big day.
That remains to be seen. The tranche timing of the ALP policy will have been carefully measured.
As will the Coalition’s campaign
Don’t forget that the LNP were caught on the hop with the timing and depth of the ALP on corporate tax concession and the negative gearing policies.
I don’t agree with that assessment
This indicates a considered strategy which if well orchestrated will see the campaign through.
Both sides clearly have a plan but I think that the ALP still carry more unsavory baggage that has yet to be exploited by the government
What I would like to see is the financial details of both parties.
To what end?
Maybe by right wing gronks.
No by most sensible people
Well received means a bounce in the polls however small.
I’m not sure what rock you live under but since that budget the Coalition’s and Mr Harbourside’s popularity has continued to slide.
Well from under my rock I can see that we are in an election campaign whcih makes Polling less trustworthy that usual
Why are the tories so opposed to honesty?
We’re not, that is a leftist failing
I certainly don’t know how conservatives work, you all seem very broken to me….however I do understand middle Australia as I “are” one.
Middle???? pull the other one!
Agreed. My judgement is that you are simply wrong…but this is a sport to you and you’ve chosen a side who you will support regardless.
No I have chosem the lesser evil of the two choices
SSM is a good thing
You may think it a good thing but very few in the center or among conservatives will change their vote because of it and in fact many RW labor voters may well go the other way because of it so not a vote winner fro Shorten.
an emission’s trading scheme is a good thing
Apart from the Greens Fringe who won’t vote ALP this is not a positive
I’ll see your Union scare and raise you one Mafia
I don’t know where you get the Mafia thing from (though there is a new game due out October7) but the Unions have been a liability rather than an asset fro the Labor party for sometime
Not even worth rebuffing as its just so fatuous.
Fatuous or not its true
You are quite correct there Tim, but its not only the boats that a Shorten/Greens win would revive there is also the Carbon tax, more license for Union shenanigans and the usual labor infighting that worries the voters.
Turnbull may not be perfect but his are a far safer pair of hands that Shorten’s every day of the week.
its over for Turnbull Coalition Team
Its part of the labor party DNA to have a great acuity for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
shorten/Labor have more than enough policies to talk about
Yet they have no way of paying for them OR fixing the deficit problem without killing our economy stone dead
What has the Turnbull coalition Team , lies about jobs and growth which coalition supporters do not believe
No they have the potential to give us stability and that is a very attractive possibility.
Problem is, it’s May and the Coalition have been empty since the 2014 budget …
Not at all, the latest budget has been rather well received as it happens and its the ALP cup full of a toxic Koolaid (carbon tax revived , disunity on boats, and the possibility of them getting ion bed with the loopy Greens) that will be more significant.
Ah I well remember the Newman invincibility claim as well and the polling numbers supporting Newman…but on the day, with pencil in hand, QLD kicked him out with one huge swing.
That was then this is now and We have a crappy Labor administration in the state Parliament so the voters can see that choosing Labor was bad idea then and now its even worse with Shorten & the Greens as the option other than Turnbull.
Lets face it Iain…Turnbull has been a massive disappointment to middle Australia and he still have a du front bench filled to the brim with an assortment of weirdos and throwbacks.
As a card carrying lefty I don’t think that you have any idea how conservatives or middle Australians weigh up the options and how in the end most of us choose the lesser of the evils. Shorten is by far a worse option that Turnbull and with his endorsement of Gay marriage , and the possibility of him reviving the Carbon tax, his debt to the union movement and almost Zero charisma he simply can’t be trusted.
Yes Iain, I’m sure they’d much prefer ‘believable’ promises such as those made with regard to education, health , pensions, the ABC and so on.
No matter what the ALP promise in any of those categories they always have great difficulty explain how they are going to pay for their grand schemes, Financial management is always Labor’s weakness and the voters will undoubtedly be reminded of their tendency to over promise and under deliver on those promises.
Yes, of course there is a way to go. However the current trends do not bode well for the Coalition.
The ALP primary vote has hardly moved and all of the preference assumptions in the polling is based on the last election when Clive Palmer was in the mix, his political and financial implosion alone should make you skeptical of the results of that polling. Turnbull still leads Shorten by a big margin in the preferred PM question.
Your personal observation or ‘sense’ is, unless you have statistically significant data to support that opinion, at odds with the current analysis.
Some times Gut feelings are just as good as polling
I personally don’t trust polls per se as they, as in the example of the UK election, were spectacularly wrong. I also believe they include a proportion of tactical ‘votes’.
Agree with you there
Nevertheless, Australia has an entirely different voting system, not dependent on turn out and smoothed through the transferable vote.
Sure I understand that
What is more interesting is the consistent and significant slide in Turnbull’s personal ratings. To me this is a better barometer of the country’s emotions.
Well I think that the Coalition are playing the long game better than the ALP who seem to be a greater risk of running out of steam before the big day.
Can’t identify a 100 year long term temperature trend, what hope have to got with a 30 month poll trend?
Shorten is actually rather like CO2, insofar as the true believers like yourself vastly over rate his influence on our political climate when in reality he has about as much charisma as a used franger.
Counter your Ace with my Joker:
Landslide win to Shorten on 2 July.
You are right about one thing and that Shorten is a Joke in the political pack, but in this game Jokers are not wild they are worthless, especially when they are in the same hand as the Carbon Tax card , the Asylum seekers Card, and The union thuggery card…
Not here in the make or break state of Queensland where is 58 to 42 in favor of the government. frankly I expect that in the end people will value stability over some unbelievable “promise” from the ever unreliable ALP. They will also remember the ALP’s greatest hits to the economy like the Carbon tax and the endless boats
I meant to say the second of July but as it happens the second of June is probably when Shorten will have blown is load anyway…
There is many a slip twixt cup and lip, so the minions of the left who are already celebrating should take a chill pill. There are many days to go until the people decide and then we will see what people actually do. Personally I am not sensing the ALP being attractive enough to do it. If anything I am seeing a party that is going to be running on empty by the second day in June.
Your comment highlights the real issue in so much of the third world, namely the almost total lack of any sort of consistent or(by our standards) good governance which will of course be more of a threat to the people of those countries than any chnage in the climate.
Same old hypocrisy about fossil fuels from the followers of the new Green Religion