Jump to content
  • Welcome to Whats Up Austraila!

    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in

octave

Members
  • Content Count

    1,132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

octave last won the day on March 5 2018

octave had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

332 Excellent

About octave

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The things that were being asked for were these 1. No new coal, oil and gas projects, 2. 100% renewable energy generation and exports by 2030. 3. Fund a just transition and job creation for all fossil-fuel workers and communities. Seems pretty reasonable to me, I did not hear anything about to complete dismantling of the modern world as the "alarmists" claim.
  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3zrqotjw7A
  3. Really drifting into conspiracy territory there. Let's say that was true, it is just as disturbing how quickly this story was spread and how many people wanted to believe it was true. So do you really believe this? Equating emission controls with some sort of socialist plot seems pretty whacky to me. I live on part time work and my investments, I certainly have no wish to tear down the economy. So was Joseph Fourier a rampant socialist? How about Tyndall or Arrhenius? Are CSIRO koolaide drinking socialists? How about the board of BHP? Bom secret plan to introduce socialism. Sorry that just sounds lame. Of course there are some who may have this goal but this does not change the physics. If the weight of the evidence contradicts the theory then I will happily abandon it. The weight of the evidence supports the theory at this point in time. Sure, you can cherry pick articles graphs and study but you have to admit that the evidence against is sparse. I am going with the consensus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change I believe this is rational. I doesn't really matter what a few people believe, the changes are happening. I am not anti miner, in fact like any technological revolution we are going to need minerals such as cobalt, lithium, copper etc.
  4. So the first thing on my FB feed this morning was posted by a friend (now ex friend) of a park full of rubbish. The Title of this picture claimed it was the disgusting aftermath of the climate march in Sydney. The crusty old commenters were incandescent with rage. Look at these horrible young people who claim to be concerned about the environment trash Sydney's Hyde park. Immediately my BS sensor went off. For a start having lived in Sydney in the past (as the poster also does) this did not look like Hyde park Sydney. After quick search I found that this is an old picture from a different event in a different country and was first posted in april and not at all related to the climate event. It is not hard for an intelligent person to fact check. Pretty disgusting tactics Apparently propagated by the facebook group The Australian Youth Coal Coalition. Other versions of this tactic have appeared overseas also. https://7news.com.au/news/climate-change/the-real-story-behind-viral-photo-of-climate-change-protesters-leaving-rubbish-behind-in-sydneys-hyde-park-c-465028 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/protesters-hyde-park-rubbish/ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/21/climate-strikes-hoax-photo-accusing-australian-protesters-of-leaving-rubbish-behind-goes-viral https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/climate-change/the-picture-of-rubbish-left-behind-by-climate-change-protest-exposed-as-fake-news-ng-b881330435z https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/a-climate-change-photo-that-has-been-shared-more-than-34000-times-has-outraged-facebook-users/news-story/2271ff0fd36fe1be9282b31be1de3977
  5. I attended the one in Geelong, it was well organised by these intelligent articulate young people. There were as many if not more older folks there.
  6. I am sure you are aware that NASA does more than build rockets. i am sure you are aware of it's Earth observation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Observing_System JPL is a facilty that mangaged for NASA by Caltec. So you believe NASAs site is a beautifully funded propagander site. I feel you need to expand and this. SoUS government (under Trump) is funding this "propaganda. I think it is fair to ask you to what end? Under Trump I imagine that the surest path to more funding would be to support Trump's position on climate change ie give us another few billion and we will produce propaganda that supports your case. So Peter what other sites are propaganda? I am guessing CSIRO and Bom as well as Australian Institute of Physics the list is too long to reproduce here. I guess the geological world may provide you with some support because of course geologists are the natural experts when it comes to the physics of the atmosphere however it seems like most geological bodies accept the science. I guess you believe BHP are drinkers of Koolaide? https://www.bhp.com/media-and-insights/reports-and-presentations/2019/07/evolving-our-approach-to-climate-change Or perhaps Shell? Shell oil says it will quit a lobbying group that opposes global climate goals As for Russia and China, I cannot comment on what an "unnamed spokesman" said without out knowing who they are and what exactly they said. I do note however that both Russia and China are signatories to the Kyoto agreement and the Paris agreement. The term drinking the Koolaide infers that you think my positions is a little crazy. I would suggest that it is a lot more difficult to support your position. Your position is contrary to the majority of the scientific community. I did go back a read this whole thread and in our interactions I did pose many questions which mostly you have not addressed. I have always posted detailed (I am sure many would say tedious) answers to your questions.
  7. The grass requires water and the cattle require water as opposed to just a crop whether it be beans or wheat or barley or whatever. Your assertion is that do gooders make statements without knowing the facts so what I am asking you is what are the facts. Now is your chance to educate us. You say that you grow beef with water from dams and creeks on your property you are you saying that vegetable growers are unable to do this? Why? don't you transport your cattle to the saleyards and are they not then transported to the abattoir? Obviously certain areas are suited to different types of farming, if crops cant be grow ion the Darling Downs then fine, who is saying they should be? I think there may be a little paranoia here, yes there are people who try to convince people to switch their diet to vege but this is surely no more annoying than the bloke on TV who tries to convince me to eat lamb on Australia day but I can deal with that. For twenty years I owned and lived on 44 acres on the southern tableands and during that time no one stopped me from arranging for feral pigs to be culled. I am not even sure what mechanism they would use to prevent me from doing that, in fact I had it done because I was compelled to by the Rural Land Protection Board. Someone may express displeasure because they don't believe in culling pigs but so what? It is you right and at least when I lived on the land it was my obligation. As soon as name calling is used instead of evidence I usually assume that the evidence may be difficult to come by. Tree hugger or redneck are just stupid stereotypes people use.
  8. octave

    Newstart

    Firstly I don't know enough about this to form an opinion but I understand there are places where this is up and running, Alaska, Finland etc. Not sure whether these systems work or not. In terms of the tax take, most people would still work and pay income tax. I think most universal income schemes are a pretty basic amount and I would imagine the majority would still rather earn enough to buy a house and travel etc. Also income tax is just one source of taxation, even people who only receive the aged pension ( a form of social wage in that you get it whether you have paid tax or not) are still tax payers by virtue of the fact that they pay gst and sales tax etc. As I say I am not too knowledgeable about this idea but I have seen it supported by serious economisits so I think it is fair to assume that the question of taxation is not just a whoops forgot to consider that scenario.
  9. One of these things is caused by unawareness and or wanting to cling to the past (in my view) and the other is caused the direct exploitation of another human whilst knowing the harm caused. By way of an example buying a consumer product that is made with child labour is bad if you are aware of the origin and method of production. Most people are unaware or at least try not to think about it. Yes it has a levell of wrongness about it but human nature being what it is we are able to ignore wrongness that is not right in front of us. In terms of climate change I do not think shaming or name calling ever works. I am a strong believer in information and data. I think people find it hard to accept that anything they do (or I) could be anything less than wonderful. Personally I try to do the right things but I am self aware to understand that I still drive my car, fly a plane and travel overseas. For this reason I think we need to tackle these problems at a society level so that we can maintain a modern comfortable life.
  10. I am not convinced that is correct re beans and cattle but of course the only rational way to know is to examine the hard evidence. I am wondering what information you used to come to these conclusions? By the way I dont give a toss what others eat. I am not in a position until later today to check the facts and figures but I would be willing bet a reasonable sum of money that it takes more water to produce kg of beef compared to a kg of vegetables. But again evidence and data is the only way to know.
  11. I suspect that the definition of a do gooder is determined by the beliefs of person making the judgement. The term is often used as an alternative to a rational fact based critique. I give a small monthly donation to .a charity that helps educate people in third poor countries and contributes to projects that help provide clean water etc. Am I one of those nasty "do gooders"?
  12. I would agree that "doing good" should be evidence based. All too often people confuse their gut feeling with what the evidence suggests. It is all too easy to cherry pick evidence that supports what we want to believe.
×
×
  • Create New...