staringclown

Advanced members
  • Content count

    7335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by staringclown

  1. Bought time I say. Music being one of the three great pleasures in life. So I'll kick off, My likes are extensive. Started liking punk (pistols, skids, iggy pop, public image ltd, joy division) graduated to manchester beat (stone roses, insiral carpets, blur, smiths, the the, ride) and then everything jazz classical, opera, techno. Australian music (chris wilson, paul kelly, deb conway (including do re mi), go-betweens, necks, nick cave, dirty three, john butler,saints, ed kuepper) eclectic (squarepusher, orbital, art of noise, ) heavy side ( alice in chains, metallica, Anyway point is most things besides gangsta rap and recent r & b. but do lie grand master flash, spearhead, massive attack, disposable heroes of hypocrisy and the like. Play: bagpipes First concert: Kevin Borich express and Mi-sex Glen hotel eight mile plains First album: the cure seventeen seconds.
  2. Even John Howard of all people...
  3. I think you're on to something...
  4. First of all the government claim of gigabits per second is rubbish. There is little or no contention on those lines. However the coalition plan will limit your speed to pretty much what you have now. So the question is do we need an NBN? Points for: It can be extended to produce greater speeds with changes in the devices at each end of the pipe. It's fibre optic to the home dude think about the movie/gaming (and on a serious note real time conferencing and work productivity gains). Uploads at equal speed to downloads. Interactive. Cool. Crikey have an excellent summary. All that is required to achieve expert status within a relatively short read. link part 1 link part 2 Points against: It's expensive.
  5. I'm genuinely happy for you and hope it works out. Weird to hear a house price with a one in front of it! Legal decisions are made on evidence. Policy decisions are made on evidence (or at least they should be) IMHO. In my book evidence is the basis of rationality in decision making. I appreciate this involves certain philosophical beliefs that I hold. I take very little on faith. I'll give you an example. I phoned my insurance company to report a modification to my vehicle. I was advised by the rep that I was not required to report such modifications. I was surprised and requested a copy of the policy to check. The policy clearly described that if I didn't report such modifications then the insurance company was within its rights to not pay the policy. I called back and was given the same advice, I stopped the rep and related the section detailing my "responsibilities". I then got to report my modifications. If I'd taken that advice on faith, I could have voided my policy. I'd be up for thousands. In god we trust, all others bring evidence. My mum had the prayer of serenity on the wall when I was growing up. I'm an atheist as you know but that does not render religious doctrine without merit. I regard the bible generally as a rule book for harmonious society. (except for the weird old testament stuff) The science of climate change falls into the category of things that can be changed. Just like the ozone hole and the banning of clorofluorocarbons. We managed that OK. The point is that it's not even that the climate hasn't changed before. It's the rate of change that is the distinguishing feature of this event. It's so rapid that it does not allow most species to evolve quickly enough. The timescale of the change is too short.
  6. 6 blade razors?
  7. Congrats on the house sol. I disagree with your characterisation of the CC 'debate' as religious. One side relies on evidence. If the evidence changes then so does my opinion. The other on conspiracy, anecdote and wilful ignorance. This article in the guardian sums it up nicely. If you're bored with the future of your grand children then I'm curious to know what excites you?
  8. That would be the preferred option for the reasons that you state. The money gets put straight back into the economy. It's what I meant by an about turn on ideology. Unfortunately, the government haven't signalled anything of the sort. I fear that a more likely result will be to provide a less efficient stimulus to the "base"
  9. Back to the main game then. Yield curve inversion China and Germany (eu and asia) economies faltering Trade war which nobody wants to look weak Not many shots in the locker left. A government that is ideologically opposed to raising dole for max stimulus Infrastructure spending also tepid Calls on the reserve bank (and the Fed by Trump) to lower IR No deal Brexit Hong Kong Kashmir record breaking 'no recession' in Oz It hasn't been this exciting to be bearish for quite a while. I predict stimulus. Maybe helicopter money. Maybe QE in Oz. And if the government has any sense an about turn on ideology.
  10. I'm not sure it was the shaved head. The crazy rants against just about everybody and the lack of good music were also an influence in the 'weird' categorisation. A bit like Bono. I still listen to Sinead. At least the earlier stuff. If she puts out a decent single again I'd be happy to listen again. I don't agree with her views on most things. It's like the argument as to whether you can still appreciate Wagner due to his anti-semitic views. Or whether the statue of Rhodes should be toppled at Oxford Uni. Or Winston's anti-Indian racism. Historical revisionism seeks to erase history. I'd prefer that such flaws were remembered. So as to be avoided in future. And now a tune...
  11. Why not? Compared with instagram, snapchat and twitter that allow nothing else but vacuous analysis I find your deeper examination refreshing Anders. Feel free to blog on. Forums in general seem to be falling out of fashion. Meh. I feel there's still a place for the forum. At least for a well reasoned argument. Poor old cobran couldn't manage a well reasoned argument. So he gone. I hope that the door doesn't bang his arse on the way out.
  12. Fine. I'll lock the thread. Because if you have no burden of proof, you're just trolling.
  13. That's rich coming from you who've provided absolutely no proof of anything. You rely on google alerts to post any headline around the world that had some cold weather. You don't even read the articles. That's why you post a school kids blog and call it proof. Here's the homogenised data versus the actual data - massive difference eh?
  14. Your bait and switch is growing tiresome. You post some sh*t about Fort Denison when no-one has claimed that Fort Denison is at threat of inundation. YOU posted that the Netherlands and Florida were predicted to be submerged and then ignore all evidence that flooding has been increasing and that if not for preventative measures that's exactly what would be happening. Then you post the blog of a high school student to support your nonsense in regard to all time records being broken. You're a f*cking joke! You keep sh*tting on about "homogenised" data. You don't have a clue what it even means. You use NOAA data which you also have been shown to not understand to support yours claims. Oh sorry, it is only valid when it shows cooling? What about Jennifer Marohasy? Is she a climate scientist? No, she's a biologist. The pay for publish "Journal" in which she was published has been shut down. Probably due to the fake reviews it accepted.
  15. No sh*t Sherlock. If something is prevented by definition it doesn't actually happen. Your replies are growing increasingly bizarre. Are you claiming the the billions spent by the Dutch weren't necessary? Severe Coastal Flooding in Florida Is Getting Worse, New Study Finds So now you don't even require your sources dismissing climate change to have finished high school. At least your NZ professor has a qualification. Albeit in fibre rather than climate science.
  16. They use the same data that you use when you talk about the medieval warm and the little ice age. Florida sea level rise costing 4 billion While you're in the Netherlands be sure to take a look at the very impressive and expensive engineering works the dutch have had to build since 1978 to prevent the country being submerged.
  17. Warming unlike anything in 2000 years: study
  18. Cobran is running in ever decreasing circles... Eventually he'll run into himself and fall over. How we'll laugh!
  19. Or I could ask the bloke across the street for his opinion. It would be equally valid.
  20. I agree - Duffy should definitely lose his tenure. Knows nothing about climate science and just keeps putting out ill-informed false information.
  21. Not long - next election at best