staringclown

Advanced members
  • Content count

    6884
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by staringclown

  1. Sorry, couldn't resist.
  2. Diversity is the key to avoiding property pain Good grief. This is Labors fault and nothing to do with my own greed.
  3. I long to be happy. Can't avoid gas costs in Canberra in winter. It is required to thaw ms clown and myself out. Plus cooking with gas is a must.
  4. Not sure. Having been involved and witnessed more than my share of ego driven pub fights it generally begins with q: What you looking at? a: a deadsh*t? q: well don't just stand there? a: you ain't worth it mate q: f*ck off wanker a: you wanna go champ? q: I'll kick the sh*t out of you a: come on then? punch thrown. It's on.
  5. In terms of the amping up of rhetoric has NK trumped Trump? Where can he go from NK claiming war has been declared? Yes I have declared war is unthinkable. No I haven't is a backdown of sorts. Mind you the Korean War never actually ended. It's a truce, so technically a state of war has existed for decades.
  6. I had one of those energy saving switches that kill standby power a few years back. It was a bit flaky and kept turning off the telly mid watch. I finally got sick of it and tossed it out.
  7. The article from the ABC says different. The coal fired power stations were paid for completely with tax payers dollars not just subsidised. If you factor in the construction costs, the negative externalities of fossil fuels (pollution and subsequent health costs, mitigation of CO2 emissions, the risk of developing stranded assets, trade penalties by the rest of the world for not meeting emissions targets, , economic damage caused by global warming) they would be way more expensive. There is no such thing as an open market place. The government regulates virtually every industry. The interventions being made into private businesses now by the so called party of the free market are extraordinary. Renewable subsidies have raised power prices by 16% of the total rises. Lack of investment due to the lack of a clear policy have raised prices far more than renewable subsidies. This is objective fact and has been measured. Poles and wires a the largest portion of the rises. Removing subsidies on all forms of generation is a moot point. We'll never see it. The government knows that renewables are popular and that the majority of the population are concerned about AGW.
  8. Now I'm confused. You use a media report that cites a scientific paper to disprove warming. The scientists that wrote the paper issue a clarification claiming the media have made false assertions. The media got it wrong either because of incompetence or to deliberately mislead the public. It is obvious that the 'journalists' have mislead you, not the scientists. A quick browse of the paper shows that. Yet you disown the science and stick with the 'journalists' view?
  9. The reliability is less about base load and more about peak demand. We don't require 'dual' systems.We require more rapid deployment during peak periods. I'm glad that you are finally accepting the science is valid. Here's the author of the paper you cited on the false assertions made by the media on his recently published paper.
  10. Hehe. No doubt T will come up with a zinger. That's if he can stop attacking Iran, Venezuela, athletes, Mexico, muslims and LGBTI long enough.
  11. The truth about soaring power prices: wind and solar not to blame
  12. Who is winning in the purile, childish name calling so far?
  13. There's a reason that government offer subsidies or impose taxes. It's to influence behaviour. The government obviously wants to increase renewable energy adoption to meet their Paris climate objectives. Hence the subsidies.
  14. The other problem with gieaver is that his rant is factually wrong on several points. He says weird things like: CO2 is invisible. Clouds aren't water vapour, they're water droplets. What's more water vapour isn't a driver of climate change as the warmer the atmosphere the more water vapour is held, and the more precipitation occurs. Yes they do. The IPCC report deals extensively with the urban heat island effect. He hasn't done his homework and it shows. He is very old though. Not meant as an ad hom, he is not a fool. He just knows nothing about climate science and given his own ad hom attacks against Obama and al gore seems to have a political axe to grind. He is paid by the heartland institute which lessens his claims of being independent.
  15. He certainly has the right to question the science as a Nobel laureate. So do the other Nobel laureates. The same year he decides to express his view, 36 others expressed theirs via the Mainau declaration. That's 36 to your one. Thats 36 Nobel laureates that don't believe it's pseudoscience after a half day googling.
  16. Did you actually watch the video? Leaving aside the guy is a physicist with expertise in superconductors rather than climate science, he says at the beginning that he googled climate science for half a day to examine the topic. No published papers. Just google. For half a day. He must be be some kind of savant. I'll see your Nobel laureate and raise you one. Only mine won theirs for climate science. http://www.mediatheque.lindau-nobel.org/videos/31236/atmospheric-chemistry-and-climate-in-the-anthropocene-2012 http://www.mediatheque.lindau-nobel.org/videos/31331/the-science-and-policy-of-climate-change-2012
  17. I don't need confidence. I've got evidence. Nothing in science is 100% certain. Science doesn't deal in certainties. It deals with evidence and probabilities. Still you can achieve 95% certainty using statistics. In the same way that juries convict criminals 100% proof isn't required. If a reasonable doubt is all you require then you don't have one in the global warming debate. I always enjoy hearing from the genuine skeptics. The ones that aren't in the paid employment of the fossil fuel industry and are qualified in the field. Got any links?
  18. Scientists were wrong then so they're wrong now... By that logic the flat earther's were wrong so the earth isn't a sphere. There were far more published papers in the seventies predicting warming than an ice age. 6 times as many. They were less newsworthy however.
  19. two year old coders What a load of sh*t. Although, the current skill level I experience at work is that of a two year old.
  20. We do seem to pass on citizenship rather than language...
  21. Housing affordability woes will continue for decades without major overhaul, CEDA says They must have the powers of Nostradamus. 40 years. That's like making a prediction in 1977 about today. Hats off CEDA. I don't disagree with most of the points though.
  22. Gerard Minack, Satyajit Das. Absolute bear porn.
  23. It's certainly the far rights best chance in a long time. To change the world to how they want it. Of course it won't be what they actually want. Their own futures won't be enhanced. The promises they were made won't eventuate. Bannon has been sacked and he's admitted as much. The swamp doesn't drain easily. It fights back. I was hoping that Abbott would remain in power for similar reasons. Give 'em enough rope so to speak... I've heard a load of opinion lately about not upsetting the alt right for fear of enlarging their base. One nation here is a case in point. Governments need one nations votes. And their base has legitimate grievances. High unemployment, no benefit from globalisation etc. They're looking for someone to blame. Lots of talk about universal income as well (hats off to you sir for raising this long before it became a thing) George Brandis stood up this week and it was good to see. I hardly ever agree with George. I can't agree with the pandering to opportunists argument. Let Trump speak on please, but the mass movement of the alt right needs to be opposed at every every opportunity along the way. Handing over any ground to any party that doesn't deal in actual evidence based policy is dangerous. In keeping with Godwin's law I will not mention names. It's encouraging that the "free speech" rally in Boston was met with overwhelming numbers of counter protesters. I don't like to see violence and I think overwhelming numbers against illustrate the level of support within a democracy and provide a suitable smack down for an offensive minority view . Likewise with Hanson. Also, likewise with Turnbull. I don't understand why the minority in his own party hold so much sway. Bipartisan support for evidence based policy will bypass the nutters on both extremes. The marginal seat holders would applaud the rise in their standing and would keep the far right rump at bay vis a vis leadership challenges. Grow a pair Mal if you want to do right by the country rather than preserve your own job. Even if you fail, in the long run you win. History will remember you favourably. rant over
  24. She got what wanted. A cheap headline and the enhancement of her reputation as an 'outsider' condemned by the swamp. Her smile grew the longer Brandis spoke and her supporters lapped it up just in time for the Queensland election.
  25. Absolutely. If NK shoot first they are deader than disco. It will be akin to pearl harbour. Carnage will ensue so I doubt very much it will actually happen. If it does I'll concede the point on rationality. I'm on the cusp of fifty and will hope to avoid the call up. I'm not skilled with the bayonetz.