The totally off-topic thread

[RooFlyer]

No one has a bias which predisposes them to be convinced by the science on climate change.
Whereas there are many biases driving those who call themselves " sceptics".
Many (including some participants in this thread) have jobs which in whole or part depend on the fossil fuel industry.
Actually, that includes me!
Others simply don't want to recognise the need to change our economy and way of life.
There is a huge economic inertia behind the fossil fuel economy.
It is laughable when those who accept the science on cliamte change are accused of being biased or having a vested interest.
This debate isn't even a debate in the rest of the world.
It has been articifically prolonged here because it was lent credibility by a rump of dinosaurs in the coalition.
I'm going to unsubscribe from this thread and leave you to play with the dinosaurs.

Preliminary: 'Climate change' is used when the issue is 'man made climate change'. Small detail. Climate change is a natural phenomenon that's been going of for billions of years.

This has to be a wind-up, surely. But in the absence of winks and knowing the righteousness of 'climate change' alarmists in general, it may not be. So what do we learn?

'Climate change' believers are unbiased.
'Climate change' sceptics are naturally biased.
Sure, why not? that's scientific.

Those who us who post against the climate change alarmist industry have vested interests.
Sure, why not? Al Gore was the first Climate Change billionaire; Tim Flannery is more in the millions category rather than billions, but who's counting?

We need to change our economy and way of life.
Sure, why not? Not flying CO2 belching planes to exotic holiday destinations would be a start. 'Think Global, act Local' is a popular Green slogan. Or should we rather keep flying around at the pointy end and let the poor of India and Africa stay poor and miserable so we can all feel much better while sitting in the First Lounge? Action or sanctimony is a choice that comes to mind.

This is only a debate in Australia.
...
Now I know its a wind-up.

There is a rump of dinosaurs in the Coalition.
Damn. That rump won a massive federal election victory where one of the big issues was the Carbon Tax (abolition thereof). As Churchill may have said: "Some Dinosaur. Some rump."


The climate of the earth has been changing ever since the earth cooled enough for brittle continents to form. To suggest that it has not changed is simply silly. Yes folks "I believe in climate change." :shock:

I've thrown this challenge out before: Say what caused the last ice-age to come-on, and what caused the "global warming" to end it? Then the answer usually comes back "Oh, its the rate of change today which is different." So, what was the rate of change in the ice age onset / release 20,000 years ago? The one 1 million years ago? The one 2 million years ago? The recent one we can get a fair idea, but the further back we go, the less precise it gets. So how do present day climate alarmists know that the present rate of change is faster or slower than previously? (Ignoring the inconvenient truth that the 'change' has actually stopped for the past 15 years. )

Obviously there is a data set of one. And the predictions made by the best climate scientists just 15 and 10 years ago have been proved to be wildly wrong (ie CO2-temperature correlation).

As I say: if you believe that man made climate change is a big problem, and that CO2 is warming the earth, do your bit to help. Stop flying. or is it not that serious after all?

 

[Katie]

Our appointment is August and then we expect to get offer shortly thereafter. Wheee, where have the years gone? Likely you'll pay a terms fees in advance sometime between now and then, if it's like similar offers we'v heard

No appointment for this old girl and her daughter.
We have to pay $500 now, and $500 in a year's time. That $1k will be refunded when she completes year 12 in 2024! But don't talk about the money around Mr Katie.

 

[medhead]

Actually, you'll find that I accept nothing because I can't be bothered looking into it. But that doesn't prevent me from calling out stuff that doesn't support itself, or the conclusions that others draw from it, with rigorous scientific analysis. I can think of a dozen unanswered scientific questions about the figure in the story you linked. As I said, I haven't judged Wallace. I'm perfectly happy to accept, at face value, that he has papers and analysis to support his figure. The issue is being presented a story, with so many questions, and being asked to accept as a matter of faith that someone has committed scientific fraud. I don't accept that precisely because I don't take a dogmatic position.

You both seem to have overlooked the main point, which is that conclusions drawn from suspect data must, by extension, also be suspect. I don't take a dogmatic position as you apparently do. I just have a distaste for scientific claims that require "faith" and can't be substantiated with proof in the form of testable facts. I find it odd that you are are inclined to accept, apparently without question, flawed data and conclusions because they align with your beliefs while at the same time you're happy to savage people like Wallace for having the gall to expose the flaws in the data. There is no science which is above critique no matter what side of the climate change debate it supports but it seems you have trouble viewing the information dispassionately and objectively.

Cast sarcastic aspersions on Wallace if you like (in reality he is merely representative of the broad climate debate) but his contribution is valuable because he exposed the fact that the chart produced by Feely and Sabine, which they claimed proved a strong correlation between atmospheric CO2 and falling oceanic pH levels, was not based on reliable data. Data should prove or disprove an hypothesis on its own merits - there should be no tolerance of science that relies on massaging the data to fit the hypothesis, irrespective of whether you think it's basic chemistry or not.

"Yes it's possible that some process in the oceans counteracts the acidification but without definite proof or even theory it's just drivel".

On that we are in complete agreement, TheRealTMA. So why are you so antagonistic towards someone who advocates the pursuit of that definitive proof without fear or favour as to where that proof will lead? Ecosystems are not test tubes; they are complex and that's why their behaviour can't be distilled down to the simplicity of basic chemistry. Has it escaped your observation that the projections based on climate modelling seldom match subsequent real life measurements? My reaction to that is to ask "Why?" - and it's hard to come to any other conclusion than it's because the science, or the scientists that produced it, weren't up to the task.

When was the last time you asked "Why?".

On the point of being antagonistic towards someone who advocates the pursuit of proof. Catalyst just didn't a story on wifi radiation based on the views of Devra Davis. Devra Davis advocates for the pursuit of proof. But she has also said, during the lecture that I attended, that wifi radiation causes brain cancer. There is no know mechanism for this to happen but she just knows it causes cancer. The pursuit of proof is not sufficient reason to just accept someone's opinion.

 

[JessicaTam]

I thought it was a joke when I first saw it, but then the ads keep coming.

Pride + Prejudice + Zombies

Really? :shock:

 

[serfty]

I thought it was a joke when I first saw it, but then the ads keep coming.

Pride + Prejudice + Zombies

Really? :shock:

Nah... there is no way on earth I'm clicking that link (or even mouse-hovering to see the URL) !

 

[trixydoza]

I'm not keen on the movie, but the literary genre has its merits.

The author of Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters was also behind the magnificent Last Policeman series.

 

[amaroo]

Some big numbers in this lot.

 

[Bindibuys]

How good is it to obtain a "Faculty Medal" from your University??

 

[coriander]

Thomas Dux Port Melbourne is reported to be also closing imminently.

Though the plans show a Thomas Dux store on the ground floor of the planned new Beacon Cove tram terminus plus apartment block.

 

[feezable]

1hr 20mins on hold with Qantas and still waiting.... the joys of being bronze....

 

[Bindibuys]

1hr 20mins on hold with Qantas and still waiting.... the joys of being bronze....

I found calling at 4am was good, you connect with the NZ call centre, usually straight away.

 

[feezable]

I found calling at 4am was good, you connect with the NZ call centre, usually straight away.

It became a case of refusing to HUCA and the call was finally answered after 1hr 59min, I am very thankful for speaker phones.

Next time I will be calling at 4am, thanks Bindibuys

 

[Flashback]

It became a case of refusing to HUCA and the call was finally answered after 1hr 59min, I am very thankful for speaker phones.

Next time I will be calling at 4am, thanks Bindibuys

I had a similar wait recently and that was as a QF Gold, and also "middle of the night" for Australia.

 

[anat0l]

I know that winning awards is important for particular airlines, but I am sick as hell of all the "Vote for Us!" spam.

I guess, at least airlines don't send out "vote for us" messages campaigned as "you'd be a fool to vote for the other airline(s)", cf. Australian election campaigning.

 

[vetrade]

How good is it to obtain a "Faculty Medal" from your University??

I would say particularly good, Bindibuys. It reflects academic excellence and only a small number of students in each faculty would get one. In a "lean" year they may not award any students in a particular faculty. I'm not even sure that all faculties award medals. I know Melbourne Uni has a Dean's Honours List which I think is their alternative to Faculty Medals, so Faculty Medals are not necessarily awarded by all unis. Maybe MU has both but I haven't heard of them awarding faculty medals. I do know that the top 3% get on the MU Dean's Honours List because my son made the list for both his degrees.

 

[Bindibuys]

thanks Vetrade, I had to go looking after posting. Looks like each Faculty awards only 1 medal at UoN.

 

[cove]

It is a Perth Modern School reunion year for graduates from 1966. Where did all those years go? No wonder my French and German do not work very well.

 

[GarrettM]

It is a Perth Modern School reunion year for graduates from 1966. Where did all those years go? No wonder my French and German do not work very well.

It'll be my 20th reunion this year for the 1996 class of (the now long gone) Swanbourne SHS. I'll see who organises it and what it entails before I decide if I want to attend. I'm still friends with most everyone I would want to see and see them often enough as it is.

If you're interested in picking up those language skills again cove I hear the Michel Thomas method works really well. I've got the Spanish course but have been distracted since getting it. Only worked through the very basic beginnings so far. I wanted German or Dutch but MrsGM suggested Spanish was more useful. A fine theory, except I have no intention of returning to Spain in this lifetime, or visiting any other Spanish speaking country.

But if I could find a way to make a living in Holland....

 

[GarrettM]

Oh, and I think I'll take advantage of this one....

Ticketmaster - Promotions

 

[RAM]

Although a lot of "green" principles make sense, what I find difficult to come to terms with regarding the greens is that they adopt the attitude: it's my way or the highway. Stuff that! All of life is a compromise from the time you are born.

or "Do as we say not as we do."

For example: Which Political party accepted the largest ever single donation in Australian political history, when, what was it used for and from whom?

Answer:

• The Greens, Bob Brown pre the 2007 Federal election.
• Used to pay for the entire Greens Federal Election advertising campaign across all media types - print, radio and TV (and some cinemas allegedly).
• Paid by a Tasmanian property developer who coincidentally wanted to get land rezoned to allow a $35m resort to be built.

Curiously enough, a Federal Senate Inquiry was called immediately post-Election to much fanfare but coincidentally post-election jockeying with the Greens and ALP saw the Inquiry not gain any publicity for the duration nor for its results.

Or which State Green hopeful campaigned in NSW for the 2011 State Election on a platform of putting high rise tower blocks of units on Royal Randwick Racecourse, a project he had advanced while Mayor of Randwick?

Or which Greens' Councillor in 2012 seconded a motion to rezone Crown Land from public open space (non-operational) to commercial (up to 8 storey high rise)? BTW - land backs on to single storey residential properties. Curiously enough the current State Govt had already plans to put a 20 storey tower on that site.

Not sure about that line earlier in another post about scratch a Green and you'll find Red. Seems these days it is scratch a Green and you'll find Blue.