The totally off-topic thread

[coco50]

Have you ever noticed in LOTFAP that you are the only one in the restaurant that is drinking wine at lunchtime ?

Most of the other diners seem to drink that terrible cold tea stuff. Personally I am a freshly ground coffee man and don't like tea at all. But really, what's wrong with a glass of good wine for lunch ?

Nothing! If it was a good red, your doctor would probably approve - as long as you were drinking in moderation - over a few hours! Don't forget that in the 1920s after the passing of the Volstead Act, the LOTFAP was supposed to be as dry as an Islamic state. Plenty of wowsers still there.

 

[RooFlyer]

Clearly Tas is a special case.

In terms of the recycling. SWMBO has told me that she read something where the inventor of Nespresso pods is dismayed at the lack of recycling of the pods. So much so that he wouldn't have done it if he knew. Nespresso have a separate recycling pathway from normal council recycling.

<snip>

That rang a bell .. yes, of course you are right. Although I don't use Nespresso pods at home, the gumpf there makes me feel so much better about using coffee pods ... its "sustainable"

Re plastic shopping bags, Coles Bay on the east coast of Tas was the first place in the world to ban them. I have a holiday rental place there - its a wonderful marketing tool! People can stay with a warm fuzzy feeling while they stay, with air con blasting out. <Edited>

There will be no dignity in work on a dead planet.

Let me express this in a very general way, not specific to coffee pods and our discussion here. The more the green movement and its acolytes resort to simply absurd hyperbole, assuring everyone that the planet will peg it unless we conform to their pre-industrial vision of utopia (usually expressed having jetted around the world First Class to speak at a Global Warming conference at a luxury venue such as Cancun ), the more I am comfortable in my own position of ignoring them.

 

[JohnK]

I have learned to ignore anyone who is associated with the green movement.

It's a lot like religion. Nothing they can say or do will change my belief.

 

[marki]

I have learned to ignore anyone who is associated with the green movement.

It's a lot like religion. Nothing they can say or do will change my belief.

Hello JohnK this quote comes to mind " green on the outside, red on the inside"

 

[Pushka]

Banning plastic bags in SA just means we now have to pay 15 cents to buy them.

 

[medhead]

That rang a bell .. yes, of course you are right. Although I don't use Nespresso pods at home, the gumpf there makes me feel so much better about using coffee pods ... its "sustainable"

Re plastic shopping bags, Coles Bay on the east coast of Tas was the first place in the world to ban them. I have a holiday rental place there - its a wonderful marketing tool! People can stay with a warm fuzzy feeling while they stay, with air con blasting out. <Edited>



Let me express this in a very general way, not specific to coffee pods and our discussion here. The more the green movement and its acolytes resort to simply absurd hyperbole, assuring everyone that the planet will peg it unless we conform to their pre-industrial vision of utopia (usually expressed having jetted around the world First Class to speak at a Global Warming conference at a luxury venue such as Cancun ), the more I am comfortable in my own position of ignoring them.

Every week I smuggle highly illegal single use plastic shopping bags in to South Australia. I often wonder what the explosive testing person thinks.

As for ignoring greens, not really the best option. 98% of the time they bang on about pointless hyperbowl But occasionally they have a good point.

 

[drron]

The problem is that the present Greens are Preservationists rather than Conservationists and there is a big difference.One glaring example is on bushfires where the Greens are against most winter fuel reduction burn offs whereas in the 60s and 70s the Conservation movement was part of the push to encourage it.Sadly by the early 90s Governments tired of the fight with the consequence now that we are having more serious fires.

I was president of the Sydney Uni Conservation Society in 1969.We set up a magazine that did attract a wide base particularly with fellow students just possibly due to it's title-the Ravaged And Polluted Environment magazine.Doubt we could get away with it now.But we ran campaigns including one about the death of coughle Creek-it was successful so that now coughle Creek is a much nicer environment.

I was Treasurer of the Myall Lakes Committee which succeeded in getting sand mining banned and a National Park established.
Also on the Colong committee which successfully got this cave system protected.Worked with the NSW NPWS and I was with several work parties putting in gates and barriers blocking access to some sensitive caverns.Came across a blog a couple of years ago with a with a familiar name that had an article on these caves with nice pictures including one with a bit of my handiwork.
Colong Caves – 21-22 September 2013 | David Noble Blog

And Rooflyer because of this interest I did get to walk into the original Lake Pedder.Unfortunately all my pictures of this were stolen in 1974.

And I do agree with recycling.Plastic bags for example are a major threat to our oceans.I put in a rainwater tank when our local council had made that illegal.These things I think are just commonsense.

 

[medhead]

I don't get this objection to sand mining. They do a pretty good job of rehab.

As for banning plastic bags, the thing that gets me is that my use of those as rubbish bags. Post ban I need to buy plastic rubbish bags, so the ban doesn't really reduce my use of plastic but increases the cost. If someone doesn't want to buy plastic rubbish bags they're just going to throw away loose rubbish like plastic wrapping for example. To me that would seem to increase the risk of loose bits of plastic blowing off a landfill and into the ocean.

 

[RooFlyer]

The problem is that the present Greens are Preservationists rather than Conservationists and there is a big difference.One glaring example is on bushfires where the Greens are against most winter fuel reduction burn offs whereas in the 60s and 70s the Conservation movement was part of the push to encourage it.Sadly by the early 90s Governments tired of the fight with the consequence now that we are having more serious fires.

<snip>

Exactly. As you say, Greens are Preservationists not Conservationists. They believe 'the natural environment' is the state of things in their lifetime, and never to change.

For those that haven't been following, Tas had virtually no spring rains, so by summer the state was pretty dry. To the Greens here, this 6 month drought was a 'sure sign of Climate Change'. Then we had a bunch of thunderstorms and the lightning ignited about 70 fires, many in wilderness and otherwise inaccessible areas. About 2% (gasp!) of the World Heritage Area got burnt by naturally occurring fires. Not a typo - 2%. Well, the Greens went mouth-foaming feral. Demanded resources go to protecting the World Heritage areas (meh; too bad for the people and their houses); now they are demanding a Senate enquiry into the response. Saying that these areas are 'lost forever' 'have never seen fire' and will remain 'devastated for ever'.

The extent of burning was exacerbated by the absence of fuel reduction burns and the near absence of fire trails allowing access to many of the affected areas. Guess which pressure group drove those decisions?

Of course these areas have seen fires before (peat coring has shown this) and of course they will 'recover'. They will go through the normal evolution of the biosphere for alpine areas; it might take 5,000 years to get back to the 'climax' alpine vegetation there was there (and still is there in vast untouched areas), but so what? (For those wondering, I did study some botany at Tas Uni )

The real problem is that the Greens and Greenpeace have been in there, filming the burnt areas, drooling at the prospect of showing this 'evidence of climate change' around the world. Bad for Tasmania's tourist industry and economy, but what do they care? To them, viewing the burnt areas is environmental cough and I can just imagine Bob Brown's reaction.

 

[Pushka]

The Greens confuse weather with climate. When it's to their advantage. Otherwise it is ignored.

 

[RooFlyer]

I don't get this objection to sand mining. They do a pretty good job of rehab.
<snip>.

I don't think anyone really minds sand mining, do they? After all the processing removes all that wicked radioactivity from the sands and the environment. Who wants their kids to be playing on a radioactive beach?

I once visited a mate on a sand mine near Capel and was leaning against a drum. He suggested that it I wanted to have kids, I should move on. It was a drum of thorianite about to be shipped off :shock:

 

[cove]

Has anyone got figures on just how many folks are applying to withdraw money out of their superannuation funds due to financial hardship and what the average amount they can get? Of course this is for people who are not of retirement age.

 

[medhead]

The Greens confuse weather with climate. When it's to their advantage. Otherwise it is ignored.

Weather is a manifestation of climate. I'm pretty dismayed at the current gutting of BoM weather observers.

I don't think anyone really minds sand mining, do they? After all the processing removes all that wicked radioactivity from the sands and the environment. Who wants their kids to be playing on a radioactive beach?

I once visited a mate on a sand mine near Capel and was leaning against a drum. He suggested that it I wanted to have kids, I should move on. It was a drum of thorianite about to be shipped off :shock:

Very true. The gold coast beaches are nice and white because sand mining removed all the evil radioactive black sand.

You're mate is perpetuating a green/Simpsons myth. Reduced reproductive capacity starts are much higher doses than possible from a drum of sand. Permanent effects happen at much higher dose levels again, such that you'd probably be more worried about the nausea and vomitting.
But it's always good to have someone tell me that they haven't had babies yet when they're worried about working with radiation.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

I would find the ignorance amusing if it wasn't depriving me of glaciers to hike on and coral reefs to dive on.

 

[Pushka]

I would find the ignorance amusing if it wasn't depriving me of glaciers to hike on and coral reefs to dive on.

Isn't walking on glaciers environmentally damaging?

 

[RooFlyer]

I would find the ignorance amusing if it wasn't depriving me of glaciers to hike on and coral reefs to dive on.

Ah! The old "You disagree with me therefore you are ignorant" canard. As I think I've said before, I have studied the earth's climate through millions of years via the rock record; can analyse down to the year with varved sediments. Much more illuminating than, say, the past 200 years, or 2,000 years with tree and ice coring. As I also said before, conservationists imagine the current environment should be how it should stay and fret about 0.1's of a degree change on an 'average'. Completely ignorant that the earth's climate has changed dramatically even over the past 20,000 years (either ignorant or "hiding the decline" ). 20,000 years ago you would have had a super amount of glaciers to hike on. 500, 200 and 100 million years ago, reefs you cannot imagine. These things come and go with monotonous regularity. No biggie.

Weather is a manifestation of climate. I'm pretty dismayed at the current gutting of BoM weather observers.
<snip>

One of my current hobby horses. Our local Met observer (volunteer) is getting on and has been missing many daily observations, sometimes for more than a week at a time. Everybody understands and doesn't mind because of the situation but the issue has been replacing this person.

I called the Met Bureau. Much obfuscation ... :
"We haven't found anyone to replace them"
"Have you asked? Have you put a notice up locally?
"Well, no"

Much more waffle resulted in nothing of use. So I wrote to the head of the BoM here in Tasmania politely asking if and when we are going to get more consistent readings locally and do they plan to call for a replacement volunteer. No reply, of course. I'm sure he's too busy saving the planet. Who needs field data when you've got a super computer and a model?

 

[RooFlyer]

What's that you say? there's work to be done?

Rats.

 

[penegal]

Don't got bringing facts into an emotive debate - you might scare off the children...

 

[medhead]

Ah! The old "You disagree with me therefore you are ignorant" canard. As I think I've said before, I have studied the earth's climate through millions of years via the rock record; can analyse down to the year with varved sediments. Much more illuminating than, say, the past 200 years, or 2,000 years with tree and ice coring. As I also said before, conservationists imagine the current environment should be how it should stay and fret about 0.1's of a degree change on an 'average'. Completely ignorant that the earth's climate has changed dramatically even over the past 20,000 years (either ignorant or "hiding the decline" ). 20,000 years ago you would have had a super amount of glaciers to hike on. 500, 200 and 100 million years ago, reefs you cannot imagine. These things come and go with monotonous regularity. No biggie.

IMO it is the rate of current change, not the change itself. 20000 years compared to 100 to 200 years.

One of my current hobby horses. Our local Met observer (volunteer) is getting on and has been missing many daily observations, sometimes for more than a week at a time. Everybody understands and doesn't mind because of the situation but the issue has been replacing this person.

I called the Met Bureau. Much obfuscation ... :
"We haven't found anyone to replace them"
"Have you asked? Have you put a notice up locally?
"Well, no"

Much more waffle resulted in nothing of use. So I wrote to the head of the BoM here in Tasmania politely asking if and when we are going to get more consistent readings locally and do they plan to call for a replacement volunteer. No reply, of course. I'm sure he's too busy saving the planet. Who needs field data when you've got a super computer and a model?

A friend has just got back from Antarctica. They are a BoM observer. They have been told they'll be replaced by a robot in 2 years time. Good luck finding someone from BoM

What's that you say? there's work to be done?

Rats.

Tedious work for me. but I'm being hammered with emails from demanding "customers".

 

[esseeeayeenn]

Climate scientists have access to the geological record. They don't agree with your conclusions.
I work with earth scientists, including geologists, as well as engineers of various types.
I have a deal with them. I don't try to design bridges and they don't try to draft contracts.
The same caution should apply to anyone stepping outside their own area of expertise.
Even when that is from one area of science to another.