All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Forgot to add that I would love to see South Australia go 100% renewables and see what happens. Right now they're surviving mostly on gas strangely enough, despite their 'glowing' green credentials! Live Supply & Demand
  3. I doubt they would refuse. The missiles could be purchased together with their nuclear subs which can launch them, ready made, off the shelf. Probably cheaper than the R&D we've been paying for failures.
  4. Today
  5. It would set an interesting precedent
  6. Does this sound awfully familiar? California Climate Policies Facing Revolt from Civil-Rights Groups
  7. The article states: Why? Why can't Australia buy already functioning nuclear missile systems from the US?
  8. I agree mr m. Conscription hasn’t worked here forever. Plus nuclear capability would cost 4% of GDP. Double the current spend. I thought you chaps were all about small government? The cost of nukes would put the cost of renewables in the shade. The one, conclusive reason why Australia won't go nuclear
  9. Yesterday
  10. But of course, what else could it be: How Climate Change Is Impacting Global Hunger certainly not the effects of population growth, cyclical effects of low sun spots, political instability, etc.
  11. The added costs will need to be paid by someone ... consumers eventually. Telstra's power bill shock: Energy costs jumped by $200m in two years
  12. That also classifies as defence spending. Instead of those expensive customised French subs, it probably would have been cheaper to wait until drone subs are available (with nuclear warheads) or just buy the fit for purpose nuclear subs from the US. Also totally agree - that approach is not going to happen here.
  13. A nuclear ICBM capable navy plus militia-trained population like Switzerland would probably avoid threat of invasion and significantly reduce military spending in Australia. But not going to happen.
  14. You will find similar was said about the coming ice age and eugenics that I mentioned earlier. The Nazis formed an entire ideology around eugenics - all scientific tests show that the germanic race is superior. Climate change will go down as yet another fine example of mass pyschology and how the sheeple can be manipulated. I'd be surprised if within 10 years 'climate change' doesn't quietly disappear to save face.
  15. I'll concede that there is a certain amount of hubris creeping into my arguments. It's been a long time that I've been arguing about global warming online. GHPC was 2007? I reckon the hubris has arisen from frustration that this country can't arrive at a consistent policy. That combined with a few vodkas when I post. I don't want to come across like I think cobran is beneath me though. Apologies to cobran if that's how I come across. I don't doubt the he feels as strongly about his views as I do mine. I realised a while back that I won't convince cobran. The best I can hope for is that other undecided readers might find my logic more convincing. Perhaps a forlorn hope in the post truth world. There is a certain disadvantage in arguing based on science. I can't claim absolute certainty as there is always a level of uncertainty in science. I always figured that once we had reached the age of enlightenment that we wouldn't go backwards. Society would be progressed based on evidence rather than ideology. Not turning out like I thought at the moment. I'm a Neal Stephenson fan. Sure I've played a lot of D&D and my balls didn't drop until I was 25 but most of my reading is non-fiction. I'll have to check out Stross and Rajaniemi.
  16. The latest scare mongering from the 'unbiased' Washington Post: Climate change is real. Welcome to the new normal. Now let's compare to the weather in 1926: Miami-Dade County 1926 Hurricane
  17. Outback NT Rural Report I'll bet on Indigo's forecast over the globull warming one:
  18. Last week
  19. Another climate change prediction from 2004 that will be declared as false. Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us So $squillions spent on this BS predictions and we have people still believing the unadulterated BS!
  20. If renewables are now cheaper as some claim, then what is the concern about abandoning the RET? It would stand on its own if it was cost competitive.
  21. Defence spending is never an option as you never know what the other side will do. You only have to read world history to know that. What has been the cost of moving from the cheap, reliable fossil fuels to renewables - $squillions around the world. All the carbon limitations have forced industry & consumers to bear expensive changes to support what is an unreliable technology that is not as cost efficient. I'm totally agnostic as to how power is generated. I'd be quite happy for all subsidies & limitations to be removed and let the cheapest and reliable energy source(s) win. What could be fairer than that?
  22. What is the cost to the general public of Climate change policy? Do you think anything good came out of it? I sort of figure that there have been a bunch of technical advances which are going to be super useful. Perhaps you have a similar opinion to mine regarding warfare. I hate it and think we should knock it off as insanely wasteful of resources, lives and planetary stability but I can't deny some pretty useful advances are pretty much a direct result of it.
  23. So overall not change in size? Mass balance of the Antarctic Ice Sheet from 1992 to 2017
  24. For EVs to fully replace oil burners, they need fast charging, range and ability to charge in the middle of nowhere. Scottish battery ‘breakthrough’ could charge electric cars in seconds
  25. People are entitled to their own belief system. But when it gets imposed on others and worst of all, at great cost to the general public, it is a different matter altogether. There is no irrefutable evidence for the drastic actions taken. I expect the current version of the theory - 'climate change' (the previous 'globull warming' has already been debunked as its predictions have failed to materialise) will go down with the Ice Age theory that gripped scientists 40 years ago and Eugenics over a century ago. But people will pay much more for this one and I'm betting nobody will be held to account when it is debunked. As I've said before, we don't have the choice of not paying for stupids' stupidity. Alberta farmers fret over recent snowfalls that delayed harvest, damaged crops - officially still summer there.
  26. You two are funny. I am deliberately being mean here so neither party can claim I am biased. Cobran wants to use global warming to show that politicians / scientists / anyone claiming to know better than him are corrupt arseholes beneath him. Clown wants to use global warming to show that people with beliefs that can't be swayed by his better argument are idiots beneath him. The actual argument, to me, seems to be about how we progress society. If they were sci fi readers Cobran I am guessing would be an Asimov/Heinlein fan and Clown would be a charles stross fan (but secretly prefer Rajaniemi). Arguing about the thing abstractly related to your world views seems kind of pointless when you could just argue about how individuality should be encouraged or expressed.
  27. ... and this was the BOM's forecast for winter Looks like they've drank too much of that global warming cordial!
  28. Drought could cut NSW winter crop production by almost 50%, report warns
  1. Load more activity