Saturday soapbox

Saturday’s soapbox is yours to use as you will – within the bounds of decency and absence of defamation. You’re welcome to look back or forward, discuss issues of the moment, to pontificate, ponder or point us to something of interest, to educate, elucidate or entertain, amuse, bemuse or simply muse, but not abuse.
The Master Shift's photo.

Be a reverse terrorist. Plat. Plan. Scheme and launch random acts of life. Incite it. Invite it. Ignite it. Shake this world to its foundaiton . And enjoy yourself in the process. – Robert Mann.

30 Responses to Saturday soapbox

  1. JC says:

    Mmm, another 24mm rain overnight which is pushing us towards 70+ for the month plus some good hard rain in Sept. Looking coastal its a bit down on us although I see Tauranga got 38mm last night. These are EBoP gauges so not official figures.

    That takes us comfortably into the New Year and hopefully a normal Summer dry.

    JC

  2. Dave Kennedy says:

    Interestingly the rational voices on Syria are ridiculed.

    “But what has Corbyn said that is so stupid or dangerous? In the wake of the attacks in Paris, he declared that Britain ‘must not be drawn into responses that feed the cycle of violence and hate’. He has urged his country not to ‘keep making the same mistakes’ in the Middle East, something he has been saying for decades. ‘Enthusiasm for interventions has only multiplied the threats to us,’ he says, not unreasonably. He has said he will not support airstrikes in Syria unless it is clear that military action will help us achieve our strategic objective of defeating Isis.”

    http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/jeremy-corbyn-is-more-sensible-about-syria-than-david-cameron/

    It seems that bombing a country to bits and killing thousands of innocent people is how most people believe that peace can be won. Those young people who have their families killed by unmanned drones should be grateful that the UK cares. ISIS is shocking but at the end of the day how can many Syrians tell the difference between a US bomb and and ISIS one? 😛

  3. Andrei says:

    Dave Kennedy ISIS may provide the casus belli for the UK to join in the carnage in Syria but the real target is Bashir al Assad

    On the other hand the end goal Russia’s involvment is to assist the Government in Damascas regain control over all Syrian territory and re establish law and order

    So while on the surface the Western goals and the Russian goals seem the same (destruction of ISIS) they are in fact in contradiction to one another

    Watch Hollande’s and Putin’s joint press conference yesterday and look at the body language particularly Hollandes

    Pay close attention to what each said

    On the other hand if this is too much for you we could divert ourselves by discussing Taylor Swift sightings in Queenstown

  4. Dave Kennedy says:

    I agree with you, Andrei. By feeding arms to rebel groups opposed to Assad the US actually armed and strengthened ISIS. While we may dislike Assad, was he ever as bad as the Saudi regime that the West supports? Whether we agree with him or not, Putin has a logical strategy, the US and its allies do not. Continual air strikes come with huge collateral damage that just feeds the terrorists.

    All though it is a difficult topic I would rather discuss this than Taylor Swift 😉

  5. Andrei says:

    Did you watch the whole thing David Kennedy?

    What is interesting is which bits get reported depending on the narrative the publication wishes to promote.

    Did you know that Bashar al Assad is the most westernized Arab leader there is and that he lived in London for many years working as a Harley Street opthamologist?

    Or that prior to the so called Arab Spring he was a reformer

    His crime in Western eyes is that he is friendly with Iran, for the Turks it was his granting of a limited autonomy to the Kurds, I suspect and for the Saudis the Iran thing along his secular multi confessional state that irritated

  6. Dave Kennedy says:

    Also climate change that has had an influence on the Syrian situation. A drought of many years forced rural people into the city and stretched the internal resources which led to social unrest:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/science/earth/study-links-syria-conflict-to-drought-caused-by-climate-change.html?_r=0

  7. Andrei says:

    David Kennedy @ 6:20pm phtttttttttttttttt

    People can be beautiful – lets go with that for now

  8. Paranormal says:

    Quelle surprise, the latest thing evil Climate Change has supposedly caused…

    Shame the facts don’t match the reality: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/25/syrian-drought-created-isis-urban-myth/

    But what else would you expect with Greenwash.

  9. Dave Kennedy says:

    There are fewer and fewer deniers as time progresses. To be a denier about AGW now takes a really determined effort to ignore all the science and evidence around us. Very impressive 😉

  10. Will says:

    There is a revealing picture of the Syrian drought that ends exactly along the Israel border. Syria brown, Israel green.

    I’ve been through a few droughts in recent years, so I planted summer crops. Didn’t occur to me to invade Europe, or cut anyone’s head off. Although, any more risible, junk science and that could change.

  11. Paranormal says:

    Interesting comment DK at 11.45 – particularly when you admit you don’t do science and your belief is based on faith in those that benefit from the fraud that is AGW.

  12. Name Withheld says:

    To be a denier about AGW now takes a really determined effort

    As opposed to joining the gatherings of the gullible for a march of the morons?

  13. Dave Kennedy says:

    “joining the gatherings of the gullible for a march of the morons?”
    NW, One of the best represented professions at our Invercargill march were doctors. http://www.orataiao.org.nz/about

    Given that it is scientists and doctors leading the concerns about climate change vs the likes of yourself and Paranormal (who steadfastly refuse to read anything that may challenge your views) I think I am on safe ground. I know few people who would refer to our top scientists and medical specialists as morons. 😉

  14. Gravedodger says:

    I am not a denier in your incestuous, convoluted sad little world Mr Kennedy.
    Of course the earth is warming , it is the total nonsense you and your coven of witches and argument of wizards continue to promulgate around CO2 in the atmosphere that is the sick joke of 2015.
    It is a weapon that originated with the campaign against “Big Oil” that was a cause celebre in the anti wealth created mantra of hippies.
    Extended to “Big Coal” then some bright spark thought up the great little earner with allocating funding for research in places of learning and another tax on wealth creation, so much adored by socialists the world over.
    That was when the facial hair adorned and their army of enablers really gained traction
    In normal circumstances the hypocrisy and obscene riches accumulated by many of the charlatans with Alphonse Gore the most prominant manifestation, who would normally earn the ire of people such as Mr Kennedy but as a leader of the handbrake rort on all activity to alleviate poverty and starvation across the globe, such avarice is ignored.

    Yes Mr Kenedy, activity around current manipulations of the carbon cycle that sustains life on the third rock that might cause minimal variations in global surface temperatures in parts of the planet while the rise in growth of vegetation feasting on the raised availability of CO2, is never considered by the warped minds who slurp at the tax funded troughs of academia and socialism, as the very real positive.

    It is worth noting that the original Luddites and their disciples predicted the end of times because the coal that energised the industrial revolution would ‘run out’ and man would be forced to return to forest habitations, just earlier ‘bs’ and no smart manipulator of those times hit on the “carbon tax” rort that has occurred in the 21st century.

    Exactly what will the 50 000 souls landing in Le Bourget achieve, well apart from the essentially hypocritical massive carbon footprint, a big fat zero, ah but wont they have fun on thir OPM’s funded junket

    I know my thoughts will earn only scorn from your closed mind you have handed ownership of, to the master manipulators and Mafiosi of the AGW church but I feel better already.

    You call me a denier Mr Kennedy so I will accord you the title of “Goremless”.

    Btw there isconvincing evidence of the luxuriantly vegetated Euphrates Valleyjutdown the road from the AGW devastated Syria and notfar awaytothe West is the nowsovery productive nation of Israel that a hundred years ago was a forlorn desert inhabited by remnant Jews and Palistinians, thatwas created by hard work under the Government of Israel to the flowering of the desert. Meanwhile in Gaza much of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria Iraq and Iran the aridity continues, to grow.

    Perhaps the promotors of AGW being the problem in Syria may have meant “Another Goremless Wanker” bunch ofmorons, now that may be the truth.

  15. Andrei says:

    you are an enthusiastic support supporter of the 3% of scientists who doubt the 97% consensus

    Those are random numbers chucked about that mean nothing

    Define what a scientist is? How long is a piece of string?

    And do you seriously think the residents of Saana or Aleppo etc give a flying fuck about nonsense projections of what the sea level might be a century hence David Kennedy?

    Just count your blessings that you live in a time and a place that you can fill your tiny little brain with this nonsense instead of spending your days dodging incoming artillary as you trudge through sewerage to find clean water.

    What a empty headed moron you are

  16. Dave Kennedy says:

    Dear dear, such abuse, Andrei. Already around the world people are suffering because of climate change. The countries wanting some real commitment from the the worst emitters represent the poorest people. It is they who will suffer most from the consequences of climate change that we have helped cause. The Government’s own climate discussion paper revealed the average annual emissions per capita in the world is 8 tonnes, New Zealand’s emissions per capita is 17 tonnes and we are taking one of the weakest targets to Paris.

    If I am a moron so are all of the people involved with in these institutions:
    http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

    For someone who is so keen to expose the suffering caused by needless wars you should be supporting the millions of people suffering from climate change as well. This will have a far greater impact that all the current wars put together.

    http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/sep/27/climate-change-poor-countries-ipcc

    Your anger and personal abuse is misdirected Andrei and even my “tiny brain” can process the huge holes in your argument.

    What institutions and which scientists are on your side again? I have had these arguments before here and found that many who comment on this blog support a TV weatherman’s blog over NASA, NIWA and the Royal Society. Extreme gullibility is alive and well and those who will believe in such dodgy sites appear to be mainly armed with expletives and abuse than facts or reason.

  17. Will says:

    What if you get all you ask for Dave? Desperate times for people like me, tax cuts for you, but everything goes as you wish? What then?

    Global emissions will continue to rise, climate will keep changing the way it does…but will our sacrifice actually shut you up? My guess is not. We cannot make people like you happy and we’d be fools to try. You’re never satisfied.

  18. farmerbraun says:

    “Extreme gullibility is alive and well ”

    Had to laugh at that pearl – written without a trace of irony.

  19. Name Withheld says:

    If I am a moron so are all of the people involved with in these institutions:

    You missed it didn’t you?
    the hypocrisy and obscene riches accumulated by many of the charlatans
    Once again the point sails over your head.
    Without bothering to climb.

    Let me spell it out for you.
    Those on the gravy train are certainly NOT morons. They are cleverly getting rich on the back of gullible empty headed morons like yourself who fall hook line and sinker for this hoax.

  20. Dave Kennedy says:

    NW, you are truly taken in by the fossil fuel industry. Oil companies are amongst the richest in the world and yet they still receive billions of subsidies every year.
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/12/us-taxpayers-subsidising-worlds-biggest-fossil-fuel-companies

    I find it incredible that you rise in defense of these hugely polluting but highly profitable entities and still claim that those who oppose them are the ones rolling in dosh. Please name ten climate campaigners who are benefiting from their activities financially that come close to the salaries mere contracters in the oil industry.

    http://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/10-highest-paid-contract-jobs-in-oil-and-gas-industry/

    I predict this will be yet another challenge that can’t be met 😉

  21. Andrei says:

    You are beyond help Mr Kennedy

    coming soon to your town – still babble away while you still can

  22. Andrei says:

    Never mind David Kennedy – alls well with the world

  23. Dave Kennedy says:

    Andrei, we may not agree on climate change but at least we have similar views on how mindless distractions fill people’s minds to allow the powers that be to ignore their responsibilities…and we won the the world cup, Richie should be nighted for services to humanity and there is always the flag…distractions aplenty.

  24. TraceyS says:

    “joining the gatherings of the gullible for a march of the morons?”

    NW, One of the best represented professions at our Invercargill march were doctors. http://www.orataiao.org.nz/about

    Given that it is scientists and doctors leading the concerns about climate change … I think I am on safe ground.

    Good luck with that. Until very recently scientists and doctors believed that women eating peanuts while pregnant was the cause of potentially life-threatening nut allergies in their offspring. Millions of women would have been given wrong advice and nut allergies in children actually increased as a result.

    There never used to be such a thing as nut bans in schools did there? Now bans are so commonplace as to be almost universal.

    Nut interactions are a much, much easier subject-matter to study than climate interactions. Surprising that scientists and doctors got it wrong really…or is it?

    “It is not that I’m so smart. But I stay with the questions much longer.”
    ― Albert Einstein

    Why is it so difficult for some people to accept when others choose “staying with the questions much longer”?

    Why should they be insulted with terms like “denier”?

    It’s not right.

  25. Mr E says:

    Dave,

    My current position is agreement that climate change is happening. And currently I believe that on the balance of probabilities, AGW is real. I am keeping an open mind regarding this position, because I am aware how poorly climate models have predicted current circumstances. More importantly I am very aware of the fallibilities of some models.

    We use models to predict weather days in advance, and we know that the further into the future we try and predict, the less accurate the result is. Climate models look to predict decades into the future. To think it is an exact science is stupidity.

    If you were to accept 10 day weather models as 100% accurate, it would rain nearly every day in Invercargill, as that is so commonly the 10 day prediction.

    http://metservice.com/towns-cities/invercargill#!/ten-day

    My actions regarding climate change are therefore impacted by the question of accuracy of climate modelling. I look to climate science for measures of accuracy to check I am not over or under reacting, and almost always I am disappointed with their inability or what I call poor description of accuracy.

    What I often see is scenario testing by modellers presented as a measure of error. Sometimes what they will do, is put a range of figures into a model and present them as conservative, or extreme scenarios. And sometimes that is considered as error. Sometimes they compare multiple models to convey a message of accuracy. That really annoys me. Scenario testing of models is not a measure of error.

    I have seen it time and time again where modellers forget to add up the error contained in a model and instead simply provide scenarios testing as error.

    When we combine variables together through functions, the errors of those variables can undergo what is known as Error Propagation. There are complicated rules around error propagation assessment, but to explain the point – sometimes the error becomes very big very fast. And it happens when we multiply or add variables together.

    You have described to us, that you are not a climate expert, so tend to blindly accept ‘consensus’. But I would appeal to you to consider accuracy because it should impact the extent of reaction.

    If the error or climate modelling is very high, there is a risk, strong reaction could be over reaction, and regrettable action.

    My next point is that I cannot accept the Green Parties approach regarding climate change. If AGW is real, the Green Party seek to make it worse. They do that by seeking to tax our agricultural industries. In the absence of universal taxes, a tax on NZ farms will make us less competitive against other exporters. It is widely understood that NZ farmers are some of the most carbon efficient producers. Whether they be conventional or organic, we are very efficient at what we do. A tax on our industries will likely drive down productivity, giving less efficient producers in other countries a competitive edge. Therefore the net result for the environment of the Greens policy is bad.

    To me it seems the very people who want action on climate change also seem to be the people pushing to make it worse.

    I think this is the inconvenient truth of the Greens policy. To date I have not heard any Green come up with a credible argument to that reality. I reckon the Greens spew rhetoric aimed at winning votes, rather and deal with the realities of dealing with climate change.

    Speaking of which, how was the climate walk/wander/waffle? I understand some decided not to march. Must have been too hard?

    Man there are some clowns out there…

    My own activities are focused on real benefits. I think benefits come from greater efficiencies. More output from less input. And my word aren’t NZs great at that?

    I think the true climate change aggravators are those that have low output for high input. I wonder how many climate activists fit that bill?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: