The Politics Thread 2019

Discuss all the events of the day

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 23996
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by PigRickman » May 14, 2019, 9:04 pm

T_R wrote:
May 14, 2019, 8:51 pm
PigRickman wrote:
T_R wrote:
May 14, 2019, 8:06 pm
gangrenous wrote:Imagine how unstoppable Malcolm Turnbull leading a party without Abbott and his conservative pals would have been.

There’s no way I can vote for a party that doesn’t even accept climate change. Then they make matters worse by being divided and having no policy, so electricity prices go up and investment is stalled for absolutely zero benefit. At least with the Labor policy the raised prices are doing some good.

Same with the NBN, paid 70% of the upfront cost for 20% of the value and significantly greater upkeep due to older and mixed technologies. Clowns.
Read the book 'Born to rule?'. It quite honestly changed my opinion of the man.
how and why?
Im naturally sceptical of biographies of any kind... either it's authorised and is essentially a how every many hundred page fluff piece, or it's unauthorised and, from my experience, working on a very clear agenda.
I've got about 6 or 7 meters of shelf space with political biographies, and I completely agree with that in most cases.

I thought Born to rule? was very balanced. It was almost overawed with his list of achievements, but really looked into the character of the man, and was not massively generous in regard that.

Yeah ok, i might look into it then.
I've read a decent amount of biographies, and always found the best ones are on historical figures where enough time has passed where true balance is able to be achieved, rare to find it in modern day biographies
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers & Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9141
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 14, 2019, 9:22 pm

dubby wrote:Gangers, climate change is NOT carbon based. Do your reading man!!
Why do this dubby? You know where it goes.

Me do my reading...

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 29954
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by dubby » May 14, 2019, 9:27 pm

greeneyed wrote:Carbon emissions are producing climate change according to the vast bulk of climate change scientists. The scientists who claim otherwise are pretty much employed by carbon emitting industries to say so. And then there are genuine crack pots.
That's rather glib and offensive.

Most of those supporting climate change are paid to support carbon dioxide based climate change.
GE, look at all the outlandish claims made by Gore and Flannery- melting ice caps (they're growing), more cyclones (we're getting less), no more snow (we had record snowfall), polar bears are increasing in numbers, the Pacific islands are not disappearing, and the BOM itself was exposed for fudging temperatures.

Even if Australia went 100 % renewables tomorrow it would not make one bit of difference to the world climate



Sent from my SM-G960F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Image

User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 29954
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by dubby » May 14, 2019, 9:29 pm

You're right, gangers.
Those who want to believe will. Those who don't, will be ridiculed.

-88/11 gangers. Image

Sent from my SM-G960F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Image

User avatar
-TW-
Mal Meninga
Posts: 29592
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by -TW- » May 14, 2019, 9:43 pm


dubby wrote:
greeneyed wrote:Carbon emissions are producing climate change according to the vast bulk of climate change scientists. The scientists who claim otherwise are pretty much employed by carbon emitting industries to say so. And then there are genuine crack pots.
That's rather glib and offensive.

Most of those supporting climate change are paid to support carbon dioxide based climate change.
GE, look at all the outlandish claims made by Gore and Flannery- melting ice caps (they're growing), more cyclones (we're getting less), no more snow (we had record snowfall), polar bears are increasing in numbers, the Pacific islands are not disappearing, and the BOM itself was exposed for fudging temperatures.

Even if Australia went 100 % renewables tomorrow it would not make one bit of difference to the world climate



Sent from my SM-G960F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
This is tin foil hat stuff for the ages

Sea levels are rising at 3.3mm per year, and have risen 240mm since 1880. More intense cyclones and blizzards, 13 of the last 14 years have been the hottest in record.

I mean if you want to wipe out half the planet feel free, but the vast majority don't

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk



User avatar
dubby
Don Furner
Posts: 29954
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: Western Sydney

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by dubby » May 14, 2019, 9:45 pm

HmmImage

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Image

User avatar
Dr Zaius
Laurie Daley
Posts: 19206
Joined: April 15, 2007, 11:03 am
Location: Queensland somewhere

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Dr Zaius » May 14, 2019, 9:52 pm

Jesus Christ Dubby.
RIP Greenbits: 2007-2014

User avatar
-TW-
Mal Meninga
Posts: 29592
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by -TW- » May 14, 2019, 9:52 pm

I'd happily believe NASA and the CSIRO over some muppet on a Facebook page

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

Facebook gives you garbage like this:

Image

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 124186
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by greeneyed » May 14, 2019, 10:13 pm

I cannot see how it is offensive to point out the consensus of scientific opinion.
Image

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9141
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 14, 2019, 10:27 pm

I’m quite surprised Labor haven’t gone at Facebook over not filtering those posts on the basis of fake news/election influence.

User avatar
Sterlk
John Ferguson
Posts: 2901
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Sterlk » May 14, 2019, 11:43 pm

The Rickman wrote:
May 14, 2019, 8:56 am
Doesn’t matter if you vote independent, at the end of the day you have to preference one out of Labor and the Liberals.
Not so. You might end up with a Labor vs. Coalition TPP contest in the vast majority of House of Representatives seats, but even then your first preference influences how much public funding an independent or minor party gets from the electoral commission. If you vote outside the majors you're helping the little guy recoup costs, and giving them a chance to grow and become more effectual next time around.

The Senate is a different story again. In the ACT we only have two Senate seats, so it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that they'll be 1x Labor and 1x Liberal - though that's increasingly moving towards 1x Labor and 1x Green, still a long shot but I think the long term trend is against the Libs there... and Zed's personal brand isn't as good as it has been in years gone by. In larger states however, where they have a bunch more seats up for grabs, you'll typically have an equal share going to both majors and there'll be two seats left - one going to a right-wing minor party, and another to the left. That's how the Greens and ONP get Senate seats, people vote for them; it doesn't all come back to Labor vs. Coalition.

Nobody should feel trapped into voting for the majors due to the 'inevitability' of their re-election, that might end up happening, but it's definitely not how the system works. If you want to give your first preference to a minor party, do it. Depending on where you are, you could land them one of the last few Senate seats available in a state. Even if it comes to nothing and your preferences elect somebody from the majors, you'll land the minor party an extra couple of bucks in public funding, and the majors will see their primary votes bleed a certain direction, which can have an effect on their future policies.
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9141
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 15, 2019, 6:31 am

What’s something you’d consider yourself an expert in dubby?

What would you do if I waltzed in and told you you knew nothing in that area, and I knew everything based on reading an article on a random website?

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9141
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 15, 2019, 8:10 am

Let’s take the obvious- the Canberra Raiders! Imagine we were having a discussion about how the Roosters squad is absolutely stacked and the Raiders can’t compete with that. Imagine someone came into the thread and wrote:

“You guys can’t be serious! Like the Raiders don’t have a stacked squad. Wasn’t that long ago you signed Tedesco (https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2014/05 ... s-tedesco/) one of the best players in the comp. Has a lock on a blues jersey. He is phenomenal averaging about 2400 run metres a season, while the average for half backs is just 200!

You also signed Mansour - he’s a beast, and Ennis (https://www.nrl.com/news/2014/05/27/jam ... h-raiders/). I mean Ennis went on to have a huge role in the Raiders best season in years in 2016. No one who knows the Raiders would argue he had a huge influence on their finals campaign, leading his team to the premiership. I’ll never forget him firing up the crowd with the Viking Clap. Plus you have just signed him again in 2019.

Ricky Stuart, one of the greatest halves in history. Currently with the Raiders and you still wouldn’t start him over either of your current halves.

Mal Meninga, immortal, Raiders player. One of the greatest to ever lace a boot. Not a single one of the other immortals is still playing football.

Plus all those other internationals in your squad from tier 1 countries. Rapana, Hodgson, Bateman, Tapine, Whitehead, Papalii and I’ve no doubt missed a few.

So don’t tell me the Raiders don’t have a stacked squad.”

Now if you don’t know much about Rugby League, my post actually looks quite knowledgeable. In fact there’s even nothing in it that’s factually inaccurate (I made up the stats, but no doubt you’d find something similar in the actual stats). It’s mixed with enough full truth and referencing that it may even stand up to a casual reference check.

But everyone here knows that it is utter ducking nonsense. This is what your posts on climate change, and the sources that you reference, look like to people who understand science.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15572
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 15, 2019, 9:09 am

Sydney Harbour is of course tidal. I am pretty sure that post was satirical.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21295
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 15, 2019, 9:47 am

T_R wrote:
May 15, 2019, 9:09 am
Sydney Harbour is of course tidal. I am pretty sure that post was satirical.
good one. Now you've gone an wreck it. :x
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15572
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 15, 2019, 9:54 am

Don't be mean
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41791
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 15, 2019, 9:57 am

Sterlk wrote:
May 14, 2019, 11:43 pm
The Rickman wrote:
May 14, 2019, 8:56 am
Doesn’t matter if you vote independent, at the end of the day you have to preference one out of Labor and the Liberals.
Not so. You might end up with a Labor vs. Coalition TPP contest in the vast majority of House of Representatives seats, but even then your first preference influences how much public funding an independent or minor party gets from the electoral commission. If you vote outside the majors you're helping the little guy recoup costs, and giving them a chance to grow and become more effectual next time around.

The Senate is a different story again. In the ACT we only have two Senate seats, so it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that they'll be 1x Labor and 1x Liberal - though that's increasingly moving towards 1x Labor and 1x Green, still a long shot but I think the long term trend is against the Libs there... and Zed's personal brand isn't as good as it has been in years gone by. In larger states however, where they have a bunch more seats up for grabs, you'll typically have an equal share going to both majors and there'll be two seats left - one going to a right-wing minor party, and another to the left. That's how the Greens and ONP get Senate seats, people vote for them; it doesn't all come back to Labor vs. Coalition.

Nobody should feel trapped into voting for the majors due to the 'inevitability' of their re-election, that might end up happening, but it's definitely not how the system works. If you want to give your first preference to a minor party, do it. Depending on where you are, you could land them one of the last few Senate seats available in a state. Even if it comes to nothing and your preferences elect somebody from the majors, you'll land the minor party an extra couple of bucks in public funding, and the majors will see their primary votes bleed a certain direction, which can have an effect on their future policies.
I understand all of that completely Sterlk, but even if you vote Independent, if your seat comes down to Labor vs Liberal you will still have to choose one.

That was my entire point, I wasn't telling Nocko not to vote Independent.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41791
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 15, 2019, 10:00 am

greeneyed wrote:
May 14, 2019, 10:13 pm
I cannot see how it is offensive to point out the consensus of scientific opinion.
There was absolutely nothing you posted that was offensive, except for the fact that you proved dubby wrong.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 23996
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by PigRickman » May 15, 2019, 10:00 am

Dubby:
Doesn't believe in carbon based climate change, and says it's glib and offensive to label people who dont as crackpots

Also dubby:
dubby wrote:
May 14, 2019, 9:45 pm
HmmImage

Ol dubs, Cracky McCrackpot!
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers & Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41791
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 15, 2019, 10:04 am

That photo really is the worst "evidence" I've ever seen.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21295
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 15, 2019, 10:32 am

My concern about carbon emissions is not so much climate change. Its widely accepted that its a contributor to it. Whats is far more fuzzy is it's level of contribution to climate change. When you take into account Australia's contribution to global emissions the cuts we're proposing is like trying to control a bush fire with a water pistol. Unless there are a lot more and a lot larger water pistols joining the fight it won't make any difference.

My point is that for Australia to use combating climate change as a reason for reducing emissions and investing in renewables is just an attempt at taking the moral high ground. I would like see greater investment in renewables and reduction in emissions for more tangible reasons i.e. creating sustainable energy and to stop pumping **** into our air.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41791
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 15, 2019, 10:39 am

Northern Raider wrote:
May 15, 2019, 10:32 am
My concern about carbon emissions is not so much climate change. Its widely accepted that its a contributor to it. Whats is far more fuzzy is it's level of contribution to climate change. When you take into account Australia's contribution to global emissions the cuts we're proposing is like trying to control a bush fire with a water pistol. Unless there are a lot more and a lot larger water pistols joining the fight it won't make any difference.

My point is that for Australia to use combating climate change as a reason for reducing emissions and investing in renewables is just an attempt at taking the moral high ground. I would like see greater investment in renewables and reduction in emissions for more tangible reasons i.e. creating sustainable energy and to stop pumping **** into our air.
Australia should be doing our bit to combat climate change just as much as the big polluters. It really isn't fair to point fingers at everyone else and do nothing, because then nothing gets done by anyone.

Having said all that, while coal power plants are still being used in the world (and like it or not, that's going to be a reality for the foreseeable future), we should ABSOLUTELY still be selling our coal to burn. Our coal is some of the best quality in the world, has higher energy, lower moisture and generally lower trace elements and "nasties" than many of the alternatives. To stop burning Australian coal forcing more Chinese/Indian type coals to be burnt is actually counter-productive to climate change, the environment, and human health in general.

Also, while steel is still being used, Australian coking coal will always be needed, which is the most important element of our industry anyway. People seem to forget that if the world magically went 100% renewable tomorrow, Australian coking coal would still be in heavy demand. Coal mining doesn't just disappear or become a redundant industry with the shift to renewable energy sources (which I'm also all for).
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21295
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 15, 2019, 10:57 am

The biggest challenge is the need to sustain human population growth in the manner we've become accustomed in the technology age. The key is striking the balance between quality of life and repsonsible use of resources.

Fortunately we have solution literally at our fingertips.

Image
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13409
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Green eyed Mick » May 15, 2019, 12:36 pm

Northern Raider wrote:
May 15, 2019, 10:32 am
My concern about carbon emissions is not so much climate change. Its widely accepted that its a contributor to it. Whats is far more fuzzy is it's level of contribution to climate change. When you take into account Australia's contribution to global emissions the cuts we're proposing is like trying to control a bush fire with a water pistol. Unless there are a lot more and a lot larger water pistols joining the fight it won't make any difference.

My point is that for Australia to use combating climate change as a reason for reducing emissions and investing in renewables is just an attempt at taking the moral high ground. I would like see greater investment in renewables and reduction in emissions for more tangible reasons i.e. creating sustainable energy and to stop pumping **** into our air.
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 41791
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 15, 2019, 12:44 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:
May 15, 2019, 12:36 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
May 15, 2019, 10:32 am
My concern about carbon emissions is not so much climate change. Its widely accepted that its a contributor to it. Whats is far more fuzzy is it's level of contribution to climate change. When you take into account Australia's contribution to global emissions the cuts we're proposing is like trying to control a bush fire with a water pistol. Unless there are a lot more and a lot larger water pistols joining the fight it won't make any difference.

My point is that for Australia to use combating climate change as a reason for reducing emissions and investing in renewables is just an attempt at taking the moral high ground. I would like see greater investment in renewables and reduction in emissions for more tangible reasons i.e. creating sustainable energy and to stop pumping **** into our air.
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/
Well it's quite obvious to me that NASA is in on the grand conspiracy.

Thank god that a plucky group of billionares and coal/gas tycoons are around to keep the rest of those pesky scientists who have obviously been paid off honest!
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21295
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 15, 2019, 1:19 pm

Green eyed Mick wrote:
May 15, 2019, 12:36 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
May 15, 2019, 10:32 am
My concern about carbon emissions is not so much climate change. Its widely accepted that its a contributor to it. Whats is far more fuzzy is it's level of contribution to climate change. When you take into account Australia's contribution to global emissions the cuts we're proposing is like trying to control a bush fire with a water pistol. Unless there are a lot more and a lot larger water pistols joining the fight it won't make any difference.

My point is that for Australia to use combating climate change as a reason for reducing emissions and investing in renewables is just an attempt at taking the moral high ground. I would like see greater investment in renewables and reduction in emissions for more tangible reasons i.e. creating sustainable energy and to stop pumping **** into our air.
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/
That's assuming their historical measures are equally accurate to their current measures. Even so it's still measuring correlation, not contribution. It's almost impossible to measure precisely the contribution of man made carbon emissions to current climate change compared to what would be the natural cycle. To do so means they would need to know what the natural cycle would have been at any given point in the future.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
papabear
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6059
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by papabear » May 15, 2019, 3:43 pm

Am I the only one who thinks the health of the oceans and plastic waste in same is a bigger environmental issue at the moment then carbon emissions.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13409
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Green eyed Mick » May 15, 2019, 5:35 pm

Carbon dioxide pollution is a significant cause of climate change. And plastic pollution, while being a serious environmental problem, is far less of a concern than climate change.

Hope that helps address your concerns.

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24562
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Manbush » May 15, 2019, 6:09 pm

With the outrage over Folaus comments I’m surprised people are happy to vote for someone who shares identical beliefs and less likely to end religious privilege to discriminate under the guise of religious freedom.
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9141
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 15, 2019, 6:20 pm

Northern Raider wrote: That's assuming their historical measures are equally accurate to their current measures. Even so it's still measuring correlation, not contribution. It's almost impossible to measure precisely the contribution of man made carbon emissions to current climate change compared to what would be the natural cycle. To do so means they would need to know what the natural cycle would have been at any given point in the future.
So let me paraphrase to see if I’ve got this. You’re standpoint is:

The CO2 content might just be correlated, despite the physics showing how CO2 content in the atmosphere would lead to increased temperature through understood physical processes dating back to the 1800s.

Also you would like to gamble that the recent rapid increase to levels not seen for millions of years is maybe (perhaps? Please?) related to some geological quirk, and not the industrial revolution. Despite knowing full well the masses of CO2 we are emitting into the atmosphere through artificial human processes.

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9141
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 15, 2019, 6:38 pm

The strongest correlation in the climate change “debate” is between those who accept anthropomorphic climate change and their knowledge of science.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15572
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 15, 2019, 7:35 pm

Manbush wrote:With the outrage over Folaus comments I’m surprised people are happy to vote for someone who shares identical beliefs and less likely to end religious privilege to discriminate under the guise of religious freedom.
Please show evidence of that.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21295
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 15, 2019, 8:18 pm

gangrenous wrote:
May 15, 2019, 6:20 pm
Northern Raider wrote: That's assuming their historical measures are equally accurate to their current measures. Even so it's still measuring correlation, not contribution. It's almost impossible to measure precisely the contribution of man made carbon emissions to current climate change compared to what would be the natural cycle. To do so means they would need to know what the natural cycle would have been at any given point in the future.
So let me paraphrase to see if I’ve got this. You’re standpoint is:

The CO2 content might just be correlated, despite the physics showing how CO2 content in the atmosphere would lead to increased temperature through understood physical processes dating back to the 1800s.

Also you would like to gamble that the recent rapid increase to levels not seen for millions of years is maybe (perhaps? Please?) related to some geological quirk, and not the industrial revolution. Despite knowing full well the masses of CO2 we are emitting into the atmosphere through artificial human processes.
Hey, I was merely responding to GEM's questioning that the measure of man made emissions contribution to climate change was fuzzy. The link he sent didn't show any precision to the measure. I'm not about to respond to your Straw Man arguments as it's not relevant to my previous post.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13409
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Green eyed Mick » May 15, 2019, 8:49 pm

Manbush wrote:
May 15, 2019, 6:09 pm
With the outrage over Folaus comments I’m surprised people are happy to vote for someone who shares identical beliefs and less likely to end religious privilege to discriminate under the guise of religious freedom.
I think anyone surprised by Morrison's response hasn't been paying attention.

Green eyed Mick
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13409
Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
Location: Canberra :(

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Green eyed Mick » May 15, 2019, 9:04 pm

Northern Raider wrote:
May 15, 2019, 8:18 pm
gangrenous wrote:
May 15, 2019, 6:20 pm
Northern Raider wrote: That's assuming their historical measures are equally accurate to their current measures. Even so it's still measuring correlation, not contribution. It's almost impossible to measure precisely the contribution of man made carbon emissions to current climate change compared to what would be the natural cycle. To do so means they would need to know what the natural cycle would have been at any given point in the future.
So let me paraphrase to see if I’ve got this. You’re standpoint is:

The CO2 content might just be correlated, despite the physics showing how CO2 content in the atmosphere would lead to increased temperature through understood physical processes dating back to the 1800s.

Also you would like to gamble that the recent rapid increase to levels not seen for millions of years is maybe (perhaps? Please?) related to some geological quirk, and not the industrial revolution. Despite knowing full well the masses of CO2 we are emitting into the atmosphere through artificial human processes.
Hey, I was merely responding to GEM's questioning that the measure of man made emissions contribution to climate change was fuzzy. The link he sent didn't show any precision to the measure. I'm not about to respond to your Straw Man arguments as it's not relevant to my previous post.
It's settled science. look it up.

https://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en&as_sdt=0,3

Post Reply