Thread: Politics again - Facts dont matter

Good to see everyone having a laugh. I was chuckling out loud, another reason for my workmates to suspect my sanity, as if they need another....

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

Damian,

I was requoting figures from RN breakfast a few days ago but the official numbers are here Australian Immigration Fact Sheet 2. Key Facts in Immigration my bad I think long term and 456's may have been included in the quoted figure. Here is a perspective paper from the Govt website Boat People, Illegal Migration and Asylum Seekers: in Perspective (Current Issues Brief 13 1999-2000), it quotes 3123 for 1999.

So how much has changed from the feudal days? food for thought,

I could taunt you for believing anything in the media but I shall resist...

I had had a look at the BOS site a while back and half recalled the data. That page you found has some good stuff all in one place but gee it's a messy presentation.

I used to work with a gentleman, quite a deep thinker but with a strong socialist bent, who suggested that feudalism is the natural way of things and all societies drift back that way eventually. He was often right, and may be in this instance, I don't know.

I regard myself as cynical, pragmatic and tactical in my approach. I ahve no time for the hippies who stand outside the system and throw rocks at it. Never worked, probably never will. I prefer to get inside and take any win I can get. Any improvment is better than none.

There is an old saying about mechanic's cars and builder's houses. Perhaps lawyers are less likely to adhere to the law knowing how much they can get away with ? They are certainly overrepresented in politics. I don't agree with a lot of what Campbell Newman does, but it is quite clear he's an engineer not a lawyer, and at least he's trying to get something done unlike his predecessor who did nothing but critisize. Sooley reminds me a lot of Keeting and likewise loves to take credit for things he had nothing to do with.

I will read the rest of the article and comment later.

Edit: http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sh...litigation.htm this is interesting. About 1500 cases challenging department decisions, taking an average of 6.5 moths to settle. 13500 refugee visas a year. Not all teh cases will be challenging refugee application decisions. Hours of entertaining reading on that site.

Some of the statment in the globe article concern me. I'll possibly post an analysis later.

what is taught a law schools?

bs

Here is a classic, the scandal that led to the original "Climategate" that basically trashed Rudd and Turnbull. The real problem is that there has actually has been no impropriety.

Climategate Scientists Cleared, But Media Slow To Report It

And people who are stupid enough to believe the likes of Piers Ackerman, Andrew Bolt and Miranda Devine need to think very carefully. Im sure they wont apologise for the libel they committed. I wish I had a bankroll to put these people back in their little lying holes. They rule our political process. Be scared folks, the conservatives are coming and they dont play by any recognisable rules.

That's why we have phrases such as, "no smoke without fire", so they can convince themselves that they are right - after all they said it so it must be true.

Originally Posted by jimbur

That's why we have phrases such as, "no smoke without fire", so they can convince themselves that they are right - after all they said it so it must be true.

I think therefore I am!! QED!

Calm. Calm.

It will be nice up your way when it warms.
As for myself, I'm looking forward to the drowning of the Gold Coast.
Hope it happens before I disappear off this mortal coil.

When you talk about the conservatives coming, I guess you mean the incipient re-election of the Labor Party?

Greg

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

Here is a classic, the scandal that led to the original "Climategate" that basically trashed Rudd and Turnbull. The real problem is that there has actually has been no impropriety.

Climategate Scientists Cleared, But Media Slow To Report It

And people who are stupid enough to believe the likes of Piers Ackerman, Andrew Bolt and Miranda Devine need to think very carefully. Im sure they wont apologise for the libel they committed. I wish I had a bankroll to put these people back in their little lying holes. They rule our political process. Be scared folks, the conservatives are coming and they dont play by any recognisable rules.

Well, the title of this thread is "facts don't matter", so I guess a whitewash will do.

You can review the emails all you want. The FACT is they refused to release their raw data. I don't know if the raw data would support or undermine their position (I haven't seen it), but the simple fact is there is plenty of evidence they were biased in their actions against both people and evidence that went against the case they were trying to make.

I haven't looked at the emails. I don't care about them. I have been watching the antics of this "club" for 15 years. I don't know if they are right or wrong but I have no inclination to believe anything they expect me to accept on trust.

Just because a reporter says it's so, doesn't make it so. Just because a panel of selected "sound" people say it's legit, doesn't make it legit. The ONLY thing that matters in a scientific case is the data, and that is MIA.

Calm, calm.

Frustration isn't good for the gout.

There was a great talk on global warming (... sorry, climate change) a week or so ago at one of the 'Institutes'
What was illuminating was that for the first time, the speaker actually stated that there would be some 'winners' out of the coming warming of the earth, however his conclusion was that there would be more losers than winners..... and I guess if the sea levels rise around 300 metres, that could be the case.....

But in the interim, I want to see a defined list of the sinners (sorry, winners, typo only) and losers.

Then I can make up my mind whether this warming is good or bad.
I'm even handed at present.

As I can't ski anymore, snow doesn't count, but Antarctica could become the new snow bunny paradise
If we have more sea, through levels rising we can have more fish and as I age and my teeth fall out, that could be a good thing

It's difficult.
So Damian, your next list please could be of the positive benefits or global warming??
And Sebastiaan, you could perhaps list the negatives???
And then I can decide???

Originally Posted by Greg Ward

When you talk about the conservatives coming, I guess you mean the incipient re-election of the Labor Party?

Both the L's are as conservative as the other. Both of them reek of the stench of their own entrenched self interest. Its the character assassination with no natural right of reply that matters to me. If you tried it on one of these media slets (kiwi pronunciation) you would be sued before you could blink. But the gloves are off, the facts dont matter, and there are very powerful forces making sure that facts wont matter.

Its very depressing as I value honesty, integrity and giving the other bloke a fair go. Perhaps Im the conservative one here....

Chuckles. I'm actually not cranky today. Change as good as a holiday

To answer your question, I don't know.

My principle intersest in this issue is that whenever someone whips out the "science" word in order to give an argument magical credibility that good science was done. I object to faith being relabeled as science. The rules for science are well understood. You either abide by them, or it's not good science.

Understanding the many elements in climate study is so huge it actually exhausts me just thinking about the range of issues, let alone the detail.

Here you go, a couple of possibilities off the top of my head. Faster growth in vegetables, more pruning but quicker flowers and food. Warmer water, comfy swimming. Someone might actually WANT to visit Melbourne....

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

Both the L's are as conservative as the other. Both of them reek of the stench of their own entrenched self interest. Its the character assassination with no natural right of reply that matters to me. If you tried it on one of these media slets (kiwi pronunciation) you would be sued before you could blink. But the gloves are off, the facts dont matter, and there are very powerful forces making sure that facts wont matter.

Its very depressing as I value honesty, integrity and giving the other bloke a fair go. Perhaps Im the conservative one here....

I heard snatches of an 'interview' this morning. I would swear that the gentleman from the media was frothing at the mouth. Sounded as if he needed a rabies shot.

I thought extra carbon dioxide would assist plant growth and I think it does a bit, but it also allows plants to better produce chemicals that assist in protection, so we get and increase of cyanide in many plants under increased CO2 and not much extra veggie, sorry that suggestion doesn't work.

I think one 'positive' will be better growing conditions all across the tundras regions of Europe, Russia and Canada so those areas can become the food basins of the world.

Also it appears that N Australia will receive more rain, so we can grow more food in NT and N WA and less in the Riverina. perhaps different species of rice and perhaps have a Chinese export market in frozen geese and geese hunting as they increase in numbers to eat the rice, perhaps introduce Canada geese to replace those pesky Magpies.
Greg

This is getting a bit off topic Greg but there are a few glaring issues for me.

The Indus Valley is fed by the glaciers of the Himalayas. They are melting and will not be producing the volume of water that the populations of Eastern India and Bangladesh need to do the basics like grow food. Its hard enough for these people as it is, visit Calcutta and you will understand what I mean. There may be a few boats headed our way. Similarly Africa and the Middle East is expected to continue drying with more famines / wars etc. It matters to me that people suffer. On a lighter note German Spatlese wines will become rare.

I expect polar ice sheets will melt and mass extinctions will happen to all sorts of species. They probably wont disappear but shrink. Not only in the polar regions but low lying human habitations as well. Although we do not actually use all these species they have intrinsic value as fellow travellers on the planet. Remember that we essentially all have the same DNA and biological heritage and we live on a closed system.

The increase in CO2 will lead to more growth where there is water. There is also the prediction that weather variability will increase and this is the least understood effect. What it also means is different rain patterns, more variability in storms and monsoon patterns, and stronger storms.

Bear in mind that there are actually four major environmental changes taking place at the moment. The first is climate change, well thrashed; then there is the fourth great extinction ie we are getting rid of species and genetic variability at a great rate; pollution by man made chemicals ie we add thousands of new molecules to our planet every day without fully understanding their effects. And finally my personal favourite; the inevitable decline of the oil resource. This will mostly be an economic problem although I expect more wars and as usual it will be the poor who will suffer the most.

One last point, the tactics used to discredit the science are well documented. There is a great break up of individual tactics here denialism blog : About Its all a bit obvious but the title of the thread says it as far as I am concerned. Damian is as incapable of changing his mind as I am mine. Fascinating stuff the old brain.

I used to believe the AGW mantra but after the way I saw governments posturing it became clear that it was in the interests of academia to tow the line.
Funnily the same things happens with nutrition, people don't get mass publication or funding for further study if their results don't satisfy what those holding the purse string want to see,
Simple economics really.