octave

Through history the Jews have been killed by many different countries recent history should tell us this wrong,there has always been anti-Semitic people of all races through time ,so they have stood up to and defeated 6 to 1 arab countries, surrounded on all sides by hateful (mostly arab) counties yet you seem to think that they (Israelis) have no right to retaliate, yes they are backed by the US and. So my question is do you think that they should be exterminated ? as most arab countries want to, it mostly comes back to religion they say that the Jews killed that ficticiuos jesus and the whole world blames them for that Oh and I do support them in their claim to Israel

I find it hard to understand why you think it is fair to displace people from their homes no matter who lived there a thousand years ago. Would you happily give up your home for the descendant of a previous occupant? I bet you wouldn't

In spite of that, I think don't think we can even go back to before 1948, in other words, I accept the continued existence of Israel but not it's expansion or occupation of the west bank etc. these areas were not part of the original deal.

No, I obviously don't think that Isreal should be exterminated but at the very least they should honour the original deal which was a homeland for Palestinians and for Jewish people but through various conflicts and the encouragement of settlers this is being eroded.

For a brief history of the conflict

Your right ISRAEL didn't exist BUT it was the Jewish peoples homeland they were ther before Palestine was for thousands of years ,

Your right Australia didn't exist BUT it was the Aboriginal peoples homeland they were there before Australia was for thousands of years ,

I don't think you truly believe in the principal you are proclaiming.

The mass of the Earth is increasing, it may match the 12.5mm."( watch the night sky & see all those streaks of light "shooting-stars" Falling on to US).

 

spacesailor

It is an interesting question as to whether the Earth is gaining or losing mass. The increase in mass from meteorites is counteracted by two things radioactive decay ie mass becoming energy and also loss of hydrogen and other gasses from the atmosphere.

Is Earth Gaining Mass Or Losing Mass?

Is the Earth gaining or losing mass over time?

When the pla(a known terrorist organization )stops indiscriminte bombing of Israel there will be consequences for the Palestinian people stop the backing of pla Israel also have a right to live peacfully and we all know that the arab nations want Israel destroyed/annihilation has anyone here been in Israel when the rockets are landing its very scary (i was there a few years ago when this happened) it claims the lives of innocents,also what about the times when the arabs capture a Israeli they torture maim and then drag the body through the street's the arabs are dangerous fanatics abd that sort of behavior warrents swift and retaliatory action

I think there is plenty of fault on both sides. The idea we can divide everyone into good and evil is simplistic.

This is disgusting and the UN need to do something about the food shortages in the GAZA strip. . it's disgraceful. . .

https://www.google.com/sear...

Phil if you believe a google picture search provides evidence how life in Gaza is then I submit this google picture search life in gaza - Google Search

However, this is not how I prefer to have intelligent debates.

I support the Israelis

I support the right of people to live in safety with decent standards regardless of where they are born.

Interestingly most democratic country list correlates quite well with this list World Happiness Report - Wikipedia

In 1950, the world population was 2.6 billion.In 2019, it is 7.7 billion. This 7.7 billion is a lot more than the estimates for 2019 were some years ago.

 

Actually, I agree it probably will not exceed 10 billion, but not for the nice reasons put forward by well-meaning bleeding hearts.

What we do know is the percentage rate of population growth peaked in the 60s (a baby boom that I am part of) and is steadily decreasing. In terms of actual numbers of births - Total annual births were highest in the late 1980s at about 139 million,[8] and as of 2011 were expected to remain essentially constant at a level of 135 million,[9] while deaths numbered 56 million per year and were expected to increase to 80 million per year by 2040.[10] The median age of the world's population was estimated to be 30.4 years in 2018.[11]

Don't get me wrong there are way too many of us to live as we do however it is important to understand how population growth works and how it is growing. It is often said that we have exponential growth but we don't There is also a perception that the problem is the birth rate but without falling below replacement rate there is little we can do at that end of the equation. The total number of the population is determined by how many children are born and how long we live.

The global fertility rate has halved since 1950. In 1950 the rate was 5 children per women. in 50 years it has dropped to 2.5 children per woman. The problem is not really any longer at the source but those people from before the fertility rates dropped. If fertility rates don't increase the problem becomes life expectancy. If life expectancy stays the same it is predicted that the population will reach about 10 billion and remain stable in 50 years. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/sp.dyn.tfrt.in?end=2017&start=1960&view=chart

Here is a good explanation.

OK just to tie together a few different topics. . The thing that pisses me off about the conservatives is this, they are not at all interessted in preparing for the future. By way of an example consider electric vehicle policy The conservatives may have a policy on EVs in a year or so, Meanwhile almost every vehicle manufacturer has anounced their phase out of IC engines. Most of the larger cities in Europe have anounced in the near future a ban on IC engines. Norway has already reached the 50% of new registrations being EV (and the grid did not explode) and yet conservatives foolishly think we do not need a policy. Where will we buy IC piowered cars whan then rest of the world has moved on. I do not want to live iin a backwater because conservatives are sh1t scared of change.

Don't do it OK... we need more sensible lefties here, not less!!

My son moved to NZ 5 years ago and is about to become a NZ citizen. He keeps trying to convince us to move to NZ and I must admit the idea is becoming more and more appealing.

Guns are not the problem. In the USA the problem is Yanks. They are a stupid race, little education and little sense.

Every country has it's share of idiots but I prefer my local idiots to be unarmed.

There are 24 countries that emit 0.5-1.5% of the global co2 emmisions. This equals about 24% of global emmisions. Using the logic that our emmisions will not make any difference would surely apply to the other 23 countries with similar emmisions. 24% of co2 emmisions would fall into the category of we are too small to matter.

Our politics are being driven by a small number of highly vocal forsooth-sayers. The population of the Australian continent is 24.6 million with a population density of 3.26/ sq km. 5.75 million of us live in just two cities -Sydney and Melbourne. Compared to the Northern Hemisphere continents, Australia is still unoccupied. It would seem that a major source of human-produced carbon gases is metropolitan ground transport and electricity generation.

I posted this some time ago when we were talking about climate change. I shows atmospheric carbon gas levels over one 12 month period. The commentary mentions that the production of these gases from Australia is highest in our summer as a result of bushfires.

 

Would it be the case that the coal we export contributes to the northern hemisphere co2 emmisions?

Reply

I'm not 100% sure, but I think that Spacey may have been slightly tongue-in-cheek.

Ah could be, I am of the opinion that we need a specific font for sarcarsm.

That is the definition of Conservative. To conserve the things as they are unless there is a persuasive argument for change.

When I was twenty my life worked pretty well but I am glad that I have gradually change the way I live my life. To get up every day and do the same thing is boring and unimaginative just because it worke in the past. If you do not try new things how do you know what you are doing is the best you can do?

The conservative view in the early days of the car was to yell at drivers - “Get a Horse!” greeted almost every automobile which appeared on the roads" Car History - Get a Horse! (Part 1: Early Skepticism)

What was the conservative veiw of woman being allowed to vote?

For many years conservatives told us that same sex marriage would be the end of society yet in 2017 it was finally allowed, is it a disaster for society, doenst look like it.

Early conservative attitudes to the aeroplane were not particularly positive. Being progressive means usually being vindicated by history whereas the passage of time usually makes coservatives look unenlighten and sometimes foolish.

Now only the crims have them, (other's have to hide their's away from the world), also the boys in Blue have them , ( so don't argue with the police )

"There are now more than 1 million registered guns in NSW, and 90,000 have been registered in the past two years alone, according to NSW Firearms Registry data released under freedom of information laws."

Sorry but I disagree, your statement is obviously incorrect which must be a little embarrasing for you.

Other than that you seem to suggest that we are negetaviely impacted because there are too few legal gun owners compared to criminals who possess guns. Which country would you prefer us to be like perhaps the US?

"You do undertstsnd that the budget is in deficit dont you????? This means it spends more than it gets."NOT according to Sco mo !.

 

Labor made ALL that dept, AND his government has made a surplus.

 

HE , doesn't lie. does he.

 

spacesailor

"The 2018 budget forecast a deficit of $18.2 billion. ... The 2017 budget forecast government spending to be in surplus in the 2020/21 fiscal year, while the 2018 budget forecast a surplus of $2.2 billion in2019/20. The government's debt level is forecast to be $629 billion in 2019/20."

Scott Morrison finally acknowledges budget remains in deficit as voters go to the polls

But we are not in surplus are we?

And if/when we are you do understand that surplus means you earn more than your operating expenses and after sevicing your debt interest you have some left over. You can have a surplus but still be in debt.

Space is there anything that you are not unhappy with?

WISH LISTA pension from the amount of the collected gst . ( it must be More than what the government lets go into the Pension)

 

If the government "don't get it" Who does ?.

 

spacesailor

The government spends what it gets in tax revinue and often more. You do undertstsnd that the budget is in deficit dont you????? This means it spends more than it gets.

"Producers gouge the system by agreement and don't try to keep prices down".AND the government wants it that way, as every dollar spent puts 10 cents in it's coffers !.

 

The more your power cost you, the more the government gets in GST.

 

spacesailor

True but of course gst is not kept by the government but used to pay for things like your pension and health care.

Octave you have forced me to re-read all my posts to see if I used the term conspiracy. I didn’t and don’t believe there is a conspiracy. The closest I came was to say computer modellers are scamming us- I could go into great detail about why I believe this. The alarmists are just doing what they think is best for everyone, but this gives themselves permission to overstate the case. I am sitting in a theatre right now in a presentation on the Epiroc electric mine truck. Technology like this will do more than all the Bob Browns for our environment.

The climate models are not the sole evidence. I think it was Arrehenius in the 1890s that proposed that the earth climate warmed by increasing the amount of CO2. It is only since 1960 that climate modelling has had any input into the debate. Getting rid of the models does not invalidate the physics.

but this gives themselves permission to overstate the case.

Just to be clear are you saying there is a case but it is being overstated?

I am not suggesting you have use the word conspiracy however my take is that it is implied.

"The world expert on the Maldives is Niklas Nils-Axel Morner:

He wrote the official report on sea level (which was unsurprisingly

suppressed):"

You posted a link to something called Climate Change and political Pollution, here is the last paragraph:

"Don’t be fooled: we can’t control the weather nor are we doomed to apocalyptic destruction. The data contradict the propaganda: no quick melting of the ice caps, no worrisome increase in sea level or hurricanes, no tales of terror. We are facing an aggressive political agenda, based on a totalitarian, Malthusian and pagan ideology, promoted by a powerful and noisy minority, in which the apocalyptic threat is nothing more than an effective instrument to manipulate public opinion. Science has been hijacked and polluted by politics. Our planet is not in danger, but our freedom most certainly is.

You also said this: #56 "You ask for sea level, temperature and ice loss data rather than opinion. I have posted links before to explanations of how the data has been manipulated and misrepresented.

#160 NASA is a victim of the funding trap and the need to maintain public support. There are plenty of credible studies that refute NASA interpretations of the data, but they are almost impossible to get published or peer reviewed. Also reputable popular science journals like New Scientist, for example, refuse to publish material that goes against the alarmist doctrine. Make no mistake, this is public hysteria on the scale of the Salem witch hunts. It isn't evil, just misguided.

We could argue about what constitutes a conspiracy but some of the above would seem to lean that way.

Whilst you may not doubt the actual satellite readings or temperature records some do. They misrepresent data harmonization without understanding how or why it is done and they ignore the fact that many reading harmonizations are in fact down rather than up. They suggest that scientist are biased in order to make money however they rarely apply the same scepticism to perhaps a geologist who may have work or wish to work for the companies that employ geologists.

A mining vehicle that runs on renewables getting near pure carbon out of the ground more efficiently for BURNING is a great leap forward?

I agree but sometimes you have to take any bit of "progress" you can. What I would hope for is that these vehicles will perform so well that other industries might follow. Many new technologies have to overcome resistance to change and scepticism. It is not much a leap forward but at this stage, I will celebrate any small change.

I wish you could all see the presentations on drones, robots, autonomous vehicles etc. mines are gearing up to run on electric loaders and trucks powered by renewables.

Yes, it is interesting as an avid follower of new technology I am quite aware of this.

World's Biggest Battery to Boost Solar in Texas Oil Country

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Caterpillar talks up its new ultra-class electric drive mining trucks - International Mining

This is actually one of the reasons I lean towards optimism. We already see building renewable is the cheaper option. We, of course, need some of this to be base load and storage is becoming much cheaper. The price point at which it becomes a no brainer is close. Most new technologies do require a helping hand in their early days. Governments built highways and other infrastructure to facilitate the wider usage of the car. The cost of building a new airport is not only bourne by the travelling public.

It is difficult to find a CEO of a mining company or petrochemical company that does not at least publicly accept the evidence for anthropomorphic climate change.

Climate Change - Woodside Energy

There are new opportunities if we are clever and forward-looking. New technologies are not built of fairy dust, minerals are still required to build batteries etc

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/climate-change-and-renewables-driving-new-mining-boom-mining-chief-says-20181029-p50cm5.html

As far as climate change goes I suspect that we will never agree and as I say what you or I believe makes little difference. To be honest what I find the most challenging about your opinion is that if you are right we are talking the most massive conspiracy ever involving nearly all the whole scientific community as well almost every scientific body. The only conclusion surely is that NASA etc are corrupt for some reason, you will probably suggest it is to get funding but I would suggest that NASA would do better saying "Hey Donald we can prove climate change is not a problem or not happening, but it will cost a lot" Any proposition that requires a large conspiracy is likely to be problematic. Why are some many so many doubters, not actually climate scientists? Sure this does not make them wrong but many people make claims about cancer but I do not think it is foolish to seek one's treatment from an oncologist rather than an accountant.

I must say I am interested in the way this "conspiracy" would work? when was it started? How do all the space agencies make sure their measurements match? Since NASA data can't be relied upon where you advise someone go for information? Is NASAs aeronautical research dodgy as well?

Will Australia be part of this exciting technology, or will be left behind by the rest of the world (including Tunisia)?

World’s largest battery: 200MW/800MWh vanadium flow battery – site work ongoing

We can always buy technology from China rather than being forward-looking an innovative ourselves.