octave
-
Posts
4,267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
49
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Our Shop
Movies
Posts posted by octave
-
-
So the massive attrocities in the middle east, involving country populations is trhe actions of a minority in respose to the teachings of a book by a desert dwelling, paedophilic, drug taking slave trader. OK, terrorism, drug trade gangs and selling, shooting on the streets of sydney etc etc is the actions of a minority so why do the majority not take action to clean these crimes etc up.
Why don't majority of men ensure that their fellow men don't rape and murder young women walking home as has happened all too often here. The fact is that criminal acts are perpetrated by criminals. I don't assume that my chinese friend is a member of a drug triad and I don't believe the Italian down the road is part of the mafia although of course there is an exceedingly small chance that they could be. In the end it is about relative risk. My assumption is that your perception risk is greater than mine. I try to stay rational.
-
What if you told a feminist that you believed that all women were prostitutes because all hetero women use their sexual attributes to secure what they need for their own survival and that of their offspring?
Well of course I would not say that because this is not my experience in my personal life and I would not for the reasons I explained, to extrapolate from the behavior of a few to the a group as a whole is really is not my style. I try to take people as I find them I my assumption is the you probably do too.
-
The perennial problem is that a tiny minority, usually locally-born children of immigrants, can be easily radicalised.
I do take that point and I also understand that you are not necessarily making broad judgements although some do. The argument often goes like this, a tiny number may want to do us harm and the vast majority do not. I can't know which are the tiny majority so I am entitled to treat the whole pool of people as being potentially dangerous. The trouble is that this principle applied to other things may be troublesome. A feminist once said to me that men are rapists, I of course said I am not, she replied that whilst that may be true she could not tell which men were potential rapists and which were not. This of course is true but a society that slides into thinking that there are genders, races, religions (and I say this as an atheist) or any other group, could end up on a slippery slope to bad things. The notion that we can predict behaviour of an individual from some wider generalization that may even be partially true risks possibly punishing the innocent whilst failing to detect the people with malicious intent. Jails are full of people with poor levels of education but this tells me nothing about the neighbour who is inarticulate or poorly educated.
The issue of the people overseas now is very tricky and to me at least not black and white.
-
Do those Bible Belt religious zealots, instruct their followers to kill.
Do they allow their follows to leave & become Moslem.
Do the Moslems allow their followers to become Christian.
I think I can live with ALL Christian zealots, without fear of even Stoneing for adultery.
Lots of Chistian zealots come door knocking, to this day, I have not seen One Armed &ready to kill, like they do overseas.
spacesailor
If the vast majority of Australian muslims wanted to do us in it would have happened by now. We too easily fall for stereotypes. I would suggest that most Australian muslims don't attend the local mosque just as most nominal christians don't attend church. My neighbours (until recently) were lovely people and to my knowledge did not attend mosque. She wore a scarf although often would not be wearing it. He started fasting for ramadan but stopped because he came down with the flu so obviously not too committed. As far as I can see they were only muslim to the degree that many would say they were christian. I understand that you personally may fear and loathe them but I think it is misplaced. Personally I fear radicalism where ever it comes from.
-
Getting back to climate change.
Exxon is being taken to court for knowing about climate change in the 1980s from its own scientist but suppressing it's own studies and actively misleading the public and politicians. This is not unlike the tobacco industry and like the tobacco industry cannot get away with this forever.
Some time ago I posted documents from Shell detailing the evidence of it's own experts.
http://www.climatefiles.com/shell/1988-shell-report-greenhouse/
Dr. Martin Hoffert did work for Exxon in the 1980s and this is what he has to say now.
And for more context a slightly longer version. (but with irritating background music)
It should be interesting to follow the court case.
-
This talk in London is already sold out....
When: Monday 4th November 2019, 6.00pm - 7.30pm
Where: Committee Room 4, House of Lords, London SW1
Many of the threats to the Great Barrier Reef, such as from sediments and nutrients from agricultural runoff, and from climate change (either natural or manmade), have been greatly exaggerated. Far from being in very poor condition, the GBR is actually one of the most pristine and unspoiled ecosystems on earth. The manifest discrepancy between alarmist claims and observational evidence is due to a systemic failure of Quality Assurance systems used for science and relied upon for public policy decisions.
About Peter Ridd
Peter Ridd is a geophysicist with over 100 publications in international journals and 35 years working on the Great Barrier Reef. He has interests in coastal oceanography, the effects of sediments on coral reefs, instrument development, geophysical sensing of the earth, and mangrove swamp hydrodynamics. Until being unlawfully fired by James Cook University he worked as an academic and also led its very successful consulting group called the Marine Geophysics Laboratory that works on the development of instruments including sediment deposition sensors, tilt current meters, and mine paste pipe monitors.
Why do you believe that Peter Ridd (not a marine biologist) is more knowledgeable about the stat of the reef than just about all the other scientists in this field?
I am not a scientist so when I see a claim I must try to understand it and see if those claims are corroborated by other scientists. I have no direct knowledge of whether vaccinations cause autism but I will take the evidence of the many experts in the relevant area rather than the few often but not always unqualified contrarians.
The suggestion is often made that people like me are socialists trying to bring down the capitalist system. Whilst I can't speak for others I personally thrive in the capitalist system. I believe it is the cause of our problems but more importantly will also be the solution.
If we are discussing motives, Peter Ridd's speaking tour is sponsored by the right wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs and the Australian Environment Foundation which to spites it's name is also known to be on the right.
I would suggest that these groups are not so concerned with the reef itself or the accuracy of the scientific evidence but rather with removing impediments to building mines in that area. Indeed Peter is your interest in climate science about accuracy in science or is it more related to you work as a mining consultant? That may seem a little rude of me to suggest self interest but you are free to ascribe motive to my acceptance of mainstream science.
-
I just started trading shares with an online broker, seems easy and trouble free so far.
-
No, Marty. It hasn't worked for cigarettes.
All that effort HAS resulted in some reduction of smokers numbers, but nothing like the reductions we need to make in our polluting ways!
Australian Bureau of Statistics website:-
"In 2014-15, 16.9% of males and 12.1% of women smoked daily, with a similar but higher pattern in 1995 (27.3% of men compared with 20.3% of women)."
Not even halved.
Also note that the young people taking up smoking is much higher than the older quitters.
I don't see these numbers as a raging success story.
I see the reduction of smoking as reasonably successful especially over a longer time frame. In 1945 72% of males and 26% of females smoked. In 1980 this had dropped to 41% males and 30% of females. Now it is 16% male and 12%. It has become a minority activity. It would be interesting to find out whether people who do smoke do so to the same degree. I remember in the 80s working with a guy who smoked 4 packets a day. We are probably left with the recalcitrant group who will probably never quit.
Back to co2 etc. Realistically if we could halve emissions in 20 years I certainly would be enthusiastic.
-
I read 37.5%. Of $2 million.
Allowing $ 750,000.
Going to the community. Those unemployed in that community will get unemployment.
Am I wrong? .
spacesailor
It says this money has created 79 jobs.
Also this money has gone towards education, health aged care and dialysis.
Why do you see this as a negative outcome?
-
The Budgies are eating fly,s.
On the top of the Rock it,s fly free, with veiws you'd need an untralight to get.
So they get $750,000. For living under the rocks shadow. & unemployment as well as all the other government handouts ?.
spacesailor
Clearly you did not read the article
The Uluru family tours venture is partly funded by their share of the income received from the operation of the park. Traditional owners receive 25% of gate takings and each year they allocate some of their rent income to community development projects. In 2018, the project created employment for 79 locals across the region. There has been investment in education, aged care, dialysis and sports. At Mutitjulu the rent income has built a much-loved public pool.
-
Do you know who gets what from the rock income?
Under the original agreement they get 25% under a new deal 37.5%
"Traditional owners receive 25% of gate takings and each year they allocate some of their rent income to community development projects. In 2018, the project created employment for 79 locals across the region. There has been investment in education, aged care, dialysis and sports. At Mutitjulu the rent income has built a much-loved public pool."
Under the original ownership agreement, 25 percent of the takings from park entrance fees of $25 go back to the traditional owners.
The new deal will allow $750,000, or 37.5 percent of the total $2 million collected each year, to be allocated for projects in the indigenous communities living near the base of the iconic rock landmark.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/uluru-tourist-fee-funding
-
The newly-appointed aboriginal surgeon thanks them for their "affirmative action" which enabled him to get this job. Would you be that person?
I would be happy to have surgery performed by any suitably qualified surgeon. I am happy to fly in a commercial aircraft piloted by a suitably qualified pilot regardless of gender or ethnicity. I don't believe that medical degrees are being handed out to people who have not attained a suitable level of competence, I don't see any evidence of this. I believe there are approximately 400 indigenous doctors and I would imagine that if they were not competent this would be showing up in statistics regarding adverse outcomes.
I was looking through some old photos today taken during my RAAF basic recruit course in 1979. There was a course corporal named Thompson, he used to frighten the life out of me. This fellow was well known in the RAAF an aboriginal with a handlebar moustache which was meticulously waxed. Extremely well respected and later in my time in the RAAF when we met on more equal terms I discovered an amazingly funny raconteur. The fact is that the most important attribute of the guy his character.
I read today that there are 1600 indigenous members of the ADF and as far as I know there is nothing to suggest that their performance does not meet the required standards.
By the way the first indigenous surgeon in Australia was Kelvin Kong in 2006 now Associate Professor at John Hunter Hospital. I would not be anxious if he was my surgeon.
-
I again googled " percentage of aborigines on welfare NT" and saw the 86% figure. Personally, I was surprised it wasn't higher. Then I thought about the government jobs reserved for aborigines.
Aside from artists, actors and footballers, I personally don't know of any aborigine productively employed without government help. There must be a few. But I reckon the 86% errs on the side of assigning more real jobs than is the case.
As an aside, this guy I know had a contract to teach aboriginal trainees how to drive earthmoving machinery at a NT mine. The guy was actually part-aborigine himself. Well he failed all the trainees and will never be asked back.
I still can't find it. Why is it not possible to post a link? Does 86% include aged pensions? Family payments?
I did have an idea that your original post had little to do with the rock.
What you are saying is that 86% are on welfare (although this remains to be confirmed) and of the remaining ones are obviously doing created unnecessary jobs or jobs given to them.
Also according to a mate of yours they are so thick they cant be taught to drive a excavator.
Is that a fair summary?
-
My real objection is about how the aborigines are acting without regard to money. If they do damage to the income-earning aspect of the rock, in my opinion they should get less income themselves.
The gate takings at Uluru are split between the local owners and national parks so yes IF it impacts on gate takings. Until the recent the recent undignified flurry most people did not climb the rock an yet visitor numbers were healthy.
You can google up the percentage of NT aborigines on welfare and get the figure of about 86%.I did google it and could not find that. When I post a figure I just about always post a link. Apologies but I am always skeptical of unsourced assertions. If you have already googled then why not include a link.
-
Latest data on who is using coal
[ATTACH]3341[/ATTACH]
Of course should be read in conjunction with this graph'
[ATTACH]50402._xfImport[/ATTACH]
-
My wife says that they moved the walk back away from the rock not long after we were there. I remember the path being real close to the base of the rock itself .
I have not been myself but here are some pictures taken by a friend of mine last week from the available walks.
You can walk around Uluru you can camp you can do segway tours around Uluru you can even tour around Uluru on a Harley motorcycle for goodness sake!
https://www.ayersrockresort.com.au/experiences/detail/uluru-motorcycle-tours
https://www.ulurusegwaytours.com.au/
I am not a spiritual person although I usually attempt to respect other peoples beliefs where possible. I think that purely for reasons of protecting a quite soft rock from scarring and the crass addition of chains and posts hammered in, it is not a huge ask people to resist the urge to clamber over it.
Rangers regularly climb the rock to bring down rubbish and according to a ranger interviewed recently sh1t. Not to mention rescuing people who get into trouble. I believe 37 people have died on the rock.
If people want to see it then walk around it, camp near it, photograph it, even ride a Harley motorcycle around it, all these things are possible. Perhaps do a joy flight.
As far as I am concerned this is pretty much a non issue. When I go to the aviation museum there are aircraft that I would love to climb inside an get a better look at but I can't.
[ATTACH]50387._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50388._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50389._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50390._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50391._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50392._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50393._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50394._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50395._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50396._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50397._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50398._xfImport[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]50399._xfImport[/ATTACH]
-
Octave looks like we read the same material. I am not objecting to the methodology or the results, but to the precision which has been attributed to the results.
Fair enough, I just suspect that what we have in the more popular press is a headline number whereas what we more than likely have in the published study itself would be a more forensic breakdown of the figures.
-
After posting the above I found the research summary. They put out clay tiles and counted the spawn that landed In the bleached areas. On average they counted five, versus a claimed 45 previously, though no information about where that average came from. So 40 less out of 45 is 89%. but no way were they measuring within one percent.
Can you point me to where you read that?
-
I am sure the 89% was the upper range of some measurement. My objection is that it gives a false impression of accuracy, that the measurement was within 1%.
It is illegal, for example, to report that 1000 assays in a gold mine gave a grade of 3.147 grams per tonne. The correct statement is 3.1 grams per tonne.
similarly here, 90% would be a statistically reasonable statement while 89% gives false confidence in the data.
OK so you don't actually know how the measurements were performed.
The method involves attaching 1000 clay tiles to to the reef in set locations just before a spawning event. These tiles or settlement panels are left for a given time and then retrieved. These panels are then examined and the coral polyps are counted and compared to the panels from the last measurement.
It is possible to come up with a precise number. If a tile had 100 polyps last time and only 11 this time well that is a precise percentage decrease. Of course there are confounding factors which are spelt out in the paper https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1081-y
Whilst you can read the abstract for free it will cost you $8.99 for the full paper.
Here is a news article which covers this study.
What order of precision would you be happier with? You tell me that grams of gold are measured to 1 decimal place so what would be the acceptable level for counting individual polyps through a microscope?
The 89% figure is a headline figure. The raw data detailing the numbers on each tile are available.
Let me be clear and say that any study is open to criticisms, this is what science journals like "Nature" are about. I imagine that other scientists probably did question methodologies but as far as I am aware it has not been overturned.
i said in an earlier post that I would try to stick to facts. The statement about 89% was made, that is a fact. I bet the real measurement was a statistical result, perhaps a mean of 49% with a range of plus or minus 30%, that would be consistent with the statement and the level of accuracy possible. It is pure politics but this political BS can impact all of NQ society if it is unchallenged.
It is just absurd to pronounce this figure as BS when you don't know how is was arrived at.
Saying it must be BS without looking at the actual study is not what being a true skeptic is about. I intend to buy the complete study and will happily share it with you because I would be interested in hearing your criticism.
-
you can't disagree with most of this BUT alarm bells must ring about “up to 89%”. So we can measure spawn within 1%? This is complete BS and the sort of nonsense scientists throw in to make us think it is science. And what does the “up to” mean? And what is global heating?
How was the spawn rate measured? Note I don't usually ask a question that I don't know the answer to already or as in this case have researched. Surely to rationally dismiss the 89% figure you would need a good idea of how it is arrived at.
-
These kind studies are more than just headline figures. the methodology is usually clear and the raw data is available.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03175-2
-
Even easier for you to simply Google it.
For which in just mere seconds you will eventually be rewarded with "HELE power stations".
Bex I am aware of work being done but this is not what robinsm said,he said this
Do you not realise that there is technology available that stops CO2 and smoke from burning coal actually entering the atmosphere.This is what HELE could do
HELE technologies are commercially available now and, if deployed, can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the entire power sector by around 20%.
The smoke etc is processed and steam is the only product releasedHELE does not claim to release only steam.
I am all for technological advances and perhaps one day what robinsm suggests may be possible.
I think i am correction saying that the technology burn coal on not release any CO2 SO2 or NOx does not at the moment exist and is not being used, that was what was being suggested.
This is what to proponents of HELE claim it can do.
https://www.worldcoal.org/reducing-co2-emissions/high-efficiency-low-emission-coal
-
everyone seems to be down on coal fired power stations. Do you not realise that there is technology available that stops CO2 and smoke from burning coal actually entering the atmosphere. The smoke etc is processed and steam is the only product released. The other by products are commercially absorbed in liquids and commercailly used. Very eco friendly. No water and drowned forests, no chine syndrome and no ugly wind turbines.
I realise thisa argument is not accepted by the tree huggers but it is real and achievable.
It should be easy for you to post a link to information on this technology. Where is it being used? Where can I read the details of this process. I must admitt it does sound fancifull to me.
-
I think they have moved the walk around the base back well away from the rock itself.
Bruce I can find no evidence of this, can you tell me why you think this may be the case?
How this is justified is a mystery to me. I hope I'm wrong and that walking around the base is not being curtailed.Without knowing whether the walk has been banned or moved this question is rather premature and pointless.
Plus, I don't think that the rock really sacred to the indiginous except of course its pecuniary value.Again you think or you know. You seem to be setting up a straw man argument here.
You could actually determine the facts before condemning the people involved.
The Sunshine State
in Politics
Posted
Actually I have read some of it also I have read most of the bible, mainly in order to further my arguments against all religions.
Deuteronomy 17
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Deuteronomy 13:
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
To use an example from my own life I have a colleague who is Iranian although she refers to herself as Persian. She holds a Doctorate in music is a concert pianist teacher and author. In her spare time she climbs mountains. The very reason she is here is because her family as so called intellectuals escaped from Iran. Her birth certificate says muslim but this is automatic. She has no interest in changing our way of life or committing acts of violence and yet she is sometimes treated with suspicion by more paranoid folks. My point is not about the people in the camps or levels of immigration it is about being rational.