Monday, 23 January 2012

Climate Change - the benefits

Why is it, that whenever a debate rages on about climate change, no-one ever asks the following question?

The world is warming, I don't think anyone denies that. BUT what percentage is man made, and what percentage is natural warming?

It would be stupid and naive to assume that the worlds warming problems are soley associated with mankind and our pumping of Co2 into the air.

From what I have read, scientists state that the average world temperature about 1500-2000 years ago, was about 2C warmer than our average temperature today. Hhmmm, the polar bears survived, mankind survived ... maybe there's a bit of hocum going on today?

I'm of the opinion (as are a lot of other people), that Climate Change has grown into a huge industry. And that industry must keep propelling itself on and on to sustain itself. And how do you do that .. you create so much hype around climate change that you end up in the governments pockets.

I'm all for cleaning up our planet, but lets be realistic about it and not let ourselves become the victims of sensationalism. The world is not going to end. If water levels rise, its quite possible they would have risen irrespective of humans being on the planet.

The only thing that really affects us globally now is that we've become a race that is accustomed to living next to the oceans and seas. Which is not good if water levels rise. Thats's our fault for building cities so close to the water. Of course, we're not to know a hundred years ago that the worlds climate is dynamic and constantly changing. What happens if we have a mini ice age in a hundred years time? (or a full on Ice Age for that matter).

In reality, humans have been on this planet for a mere speck in time. We haven't been here long enough to witness all of natures weather and climate changes. An ice age may last for 3000 years, as may a warmer patch. What if we are just seeing the end of a mild climate era, and now we're heading into the warm cycle. It could be warmer (than our ''norm'') for the next 2000 years. If the pro climate change people feel they are so correct in their assertions, why aren't they pushing governments to re-locate cities that will potentially be under water in the next 50 years. New York and Sydney may end up being 200 kilometers inland from where they are now?

In addition, maybe it won't be so bad if it does warm up a bit. If I remember my lessons at school, when it warms up, there is more evaporation from the seas. That evaporation turns into large water droplets, and eventually large water droplets fall to the earth as rain. Soooo ... maybe previously dry areas like the middle of Australia and Sahara Desert may end up being lush and green. OK, we might not have as many polar bears, but we may have a better chance at feeding the starving millions that we'll have in 50 years.

If you listen to some pundits, water is going to be a much needed and rarer commodity in the future. Therefore, if it rains more (due to global warming), that's a good thing - right? We might get the chance to use previously dry and arid land for farming. If we get enough rain, we could build more dams for hydroelectric schemes to generate more eco friendly electricity. Of course, we'll be buggered in 2000 years when the next ice age settles in!! But, I'm not going to get too upset about that!

Get Real

Street Church Spokesman Caleb Corneloup - What hate message shall we push to Adelaidians today?

Check out the above link to AdelaideNow website before reading my comments.

I read with interest the attempt by Street Church Spokeman - Caleb Corneloup - to just about sue everyone around him for defamation of his character... what a load of crap..

The messages the group spread really are HATE MESSAGES ... at least in todays modern society, Most people of today who are intelligent would agree with me, and dare I say, Anne Moran from the Adelaide City Council does too. I haven't had many a good word to say about Anne Moran in the past, but in this instance, good on her for sticking it upfor the average person.

As far as I'm aware, to commit ''defamation'' a persons character has to be personally damaging in respect to future job prospects or career prospects. If you simply get the shits up, but it doesn't damage you professionally or careerwise (if you could call Caleb Corneloup having a career), there would be no case to answer ? Tell me if I'm wrong please?

As far as I can see from this story, Anne Moran has attacked the ''message'', not the individual. And as such, TOUGH LUCK.

I'm personally sick of these preachers filling our streets with hate messages. The sooner we get rid of them, the better. I'm all for free speech (just as I'm doing here), however, it doesn't give you the right to stuff it down peoples throats. We should have a choice as to whether we want to listen to it or not. A shopping precinct, being Rundle Mall, is not the place. Go and finds some olf shed somewhere and preach away. Those that want to listen, will come, those that don't, will stay away.

Caleb Corneloup and your sheep followers, your messages of hate are plain bullshit. You should be ashamed of your actions. People like you love peddling hate messages. We, the decent people of Adelaide are sick of you. Just go away and fade off into the distance (like your group will eventually do anyway as your sheep followers come to their senses). Go on - sue me. I've said nothing personally damaging about you, and neither has Anne Moran. Your court case(s) will fail, so tough luck. Thats what the people of Adelaide think about you and your hate. We are allowed to say our messages as well. You may not lick them, but freedom of speech hey pal!

I can imagine you sitting at home all alone, Googling your name to see how popular you are, and how your message is getting out there. NOT.

Get Real

Friday, 6 January 2012

Tropical Plant Conservatory to go whilst politicians live it up

You can tell that you're in South Australia when the government wants to get rid of something which is iconic and draws people to SA. Yes, the Bicentennial Conservatory is to have its heating cut down or removed resulting in the death of (some?) tropical rainforest plants.

Yet, the government finds the money to send politicians and ministers all over the world on expensive ''fact-finding'' trips which are claimed to be for the good of the State, when we all know it's about having a holiday at taxpayers expense.

I for one, would like to know what has been implemented in South Australia as a result of one of those ''fact-finding'' trips? We never hear any politician come out and say ''We are going to start this or implement this, as we found it works great in Italy or Madrid''. In addition, we know its par for the course for the politician to say that they've ''slaved their guts out''. Geez, I'd say that to if I was in government and was taking a nice holiday paid for by the tax-payer.

At the end of the day, we have such a small population and Adelaide is quite a small city, yet the government is so top heavy with bloody leeches sucking it dry for what its worth. Thanks Mike Rann for helping blow our government worker population out of proportion.

It really pisses me off about the waste of money in the government. In reality, most of the overseas trips taken by politicians need never happen. I thought the idea of having these people in government is that they are expertise in their area and allow their expertise to be used for the good of the State. If they are not experts, what are we paying them for ?

I think its time our various political parties (and lets face it - they are all as bad as each other) get real and start becoming really efficient. Get rid of all the dead wood at all levels in government - state and federal. And cut back this unwarranted spending on overseas holidays by politicians. To my way of thinking, if our elected politicans can't work out what to do themselves about our countries various woes and problems, what are we paying them for ?

Get Real

Monday, 2 January 2012

Arizona couple tie up their kids with duct tape

What is wrong with these people? Most people would say "well, that's Americans for you", but I'm not so sure. Given both the parents age, 19 and 20, I'd say it's mostly immaturity and a stupid stupid sense of what they were doing.. was... fun. On top of it, to then upload those pictures to Facebook for the world (and your friends) to see what cruel bastards you are, just goes to show the lack of maturity some people have.

To be married at 20, and to have a 2 year old I think says it all. In Australia, they'd be called bogans, typical of young unmarried mothers (and fathers) who have no sense to think of using contraception and they think that having a baby is a laugh. When the reality and sleepless nights kick in, so usually does the violence and immaturity. Unfortunately, in a lot of cases, the poor little kids and toddlers suffer at the hands of their ill prepared ''far too young parents''.

For christs sake, if you're young and sexually active, it doesn't take much to buy condoms or go on the pill. Isn't that better than having a child who'll be a teeenager, possibly before the parents are 30?

Get Real