Senator Fielding And The Age Letter Writers

It would seem that many others feel as I do about Senator Fielding and his ludicrous assertions - this time on climate change.

Read the letters in The Age. Here are a few typical quotes:

"You see, on one hand, we have tens of thousands of experienced and expert scientists, who review each other's work, scrutinise statistics and footnotes, and who agree that human activity is contributing to climate change. On the other hand we have a handful of spokespeople and interest groups who make pie-in-the-sky declarations and do not publish their claims in scientific journals because they wouldn't stand up to the most rudimentary scrutiny. Now a certain flat-earther Senator has just joined the crackpot crew of the latter."

"STEVE Fielding has come out firmly dismissing climate change. If we needed one more reason to accept that global warming is real, we've probably just got it. You have to be stupid or wilfully ignorant to distrust the endlessly mounting evidence."

"ANY politician who denies 30 years of peer-reviewed scientific evidence on climate change, and is prepared to go against the views of thousands upon thousands of climate scientists is not fit to hold public office."

I could not agree more. The sooner this moron is voted out the better.

Bring on the double dissolution election I say.

Senator Fielding - Born Again Denier or Neanderthal?

I have long doubted Fielding's intelligence. His arguments on various matters do not seem very logical.

And now this.

Senator Fielding has apparently released a document, which The Age says, was prepared "with the help of some of the country's most prominent climate-sceptic scientists." In this document he apparently says of global warming that "there's not enough evidence that it's real."

A born again denier or just a denier. The clue is possibly in the phrase "unconvincing green science". Why not just unconvincing science?

Family first? My kids and others will suffer because of ill-informed idiots like this. Family last more like it.

Definition: Neanderthal (noun) (slang) :
a) an unenlightened or ignorant person; barbarian
b) a reactionary; a person with very old-fashioned ideas

As I said in the previous post: "it never ceases to amaze me that people with no scientific background and apparently little in the way of logic skills are convinced that they know better than the world's most eminent scientists (as opposed to the few hacks the sceptics can always rely on) "

I rest my case. Bring on the double dissolution election I say.

The Gippsland Times And Credibility

For some years now, often in the "Letters To The Editor" column but also in articles by journalists as well, The Gippsland Times has insisted on printing the chemical formula of Carbon Dioxide as CO2 with the 2 super-scripted and not as CO2 with the 2 sub-scripted, which is the correct version.

Chemical formulas do not use super-scripts.

No one has ever commented. Why one wonders? Here are some possibilities.

1. There a technical problem which prevents this from appearing in print
2. There is ignorance on the part of staff as to the correct nomenclature
3. There is ignorance in the wider community, particularly amongst letter writers, as to the correct nomenclature

And here are some responses in the same order.

1. The Times manages super-scripts and other papers get the sub-script correct so this seems unlikely
2. Given the number of spelling mistakes, including homonyms (reign not rein or vice versa) that one sees in The Times, this is a distinct possibility
3. A very real possibility, considering the amazingly ignorant rant against climate change that appears in the "Letters To The Editor" column, some of it actually claiming to be "based on science" but in fact trots out the same old discounted sources or stuff from groups with vested interests - it never ceases to amaze me that people with no scientific background and apparently little in the way of logic skills are convinced that they know better than the world's most eminent scientists (as opposed to the few hacks the sceptics can always rely on)
   

So credibility? You think they could at least make an effort. Meanwhile, The Times is worth reading to keep up with local events and classifieds but not use for much else except lighting the fire.

Turnbull Fiddles While Australia Burns

I see that Malcolm Turnbull, aka The Wanker For Wentworth, continues to live up to the epithet I have been using for him for some years now.

Any government needs to be held accountable by a robust opposition, but searching for political scalps instead of getting on with the real job of oversight is just evidence of a very poor opposition. Not to mention an arrogant leader with a lack of political skill and a party with no credible policies.

Just the tactic of obstruction.

Meanwhile, things like Carbon Trading and other important issues are completely side-tracked.

Turnbull should go. But who would replace him I hear you say? The Smirker is quitting, Julie Bishop aka The Head Girl would be a disaster. Joe Hockey? Tony Abbott?

Good question. For the sake of the country a new face would be welcome.

Reds Under The Bed - Spare Me!

So Malcolm Turnbull, aka The Wanker For Wentworth, is now reverting to a 1970's Reds Under The Bed fear campaign. In a word - pathetic.

Joel Fitzgibbon did a dumb thing in not declaring his "free" visits to China but really!

The media of course have lapped it up and gone along with the whole thing BUT for the most part have not asked the most important question.

Who is running Australia, the Government or the Defence Department?

If it is the latter, as a democracy we are in big trouble. It is clear that individuals in Defence cannot cope with change so they seek to undermine the Minister and thus the Government.

Some people would call this treason. The individual(s) concerned should be dealt with as soon as possible and all politicians should applaud this action as commendable in terms of supporting our democracy and stop petty and pathetic attempts at point scoring.

Stephen Conroy's Internet Filter Defence

Oh dear! Another clueless Communications Minister, add him to the long list.

When defending how harmless (PG rated) images from artist Bill Henson appeared on the now notorious blacklist, Conroy's response according to The Age was as follows:

"..... a computer malfunction caused harmless Bill Henson images to be added to its blacklist, rather than an incorrect assessment of the content."

Well guess what, that excuse was used repeatedly to excuse billing errors etc. when computerisation was being introduced many years ago. It was no excuse then and it's no excuse now.

Why?

Because computers are true morons, they only ever do what they are programmed to do from the minute you turn them on until you turn them off. It's either a programming error or simply the result of poor programming that causes problems, human error in fact. His Department and his responsibility in the form of The Australian Communications and Media Authority, in this case.

No wonder he was openly laughed at by the audience to the ABC's Q & A the other night. See The Age for details.

So who's the real "moron" now?

Litigation Lawyers Smell Money Not Smoke

Well it didn't take them long! Even before the Royal Commission had it's terms of reference settled they were whipping up the poor shell-shocked bushfire victims with promises of more money.

But who for? Not the victims I'll bet but for the Litigation Lawyers themselves. Why so?

If a power line falling down in the worst conditions on record is not an "act of god", to use the insurance company jargon, then what is? This action is doomed to fail, the victims will get nothing BUT the Litigation Lawyers will have their pockets lined by the fees they charge to bring the matter to court. The bushfire victims will be victims once more.

And what if the action did succeed anyway? We, the people, are the State of Victoria and it is we who would be paying the price. We, the same people who have been giving generously of our money and/or our time to the bushfire victims already.

The banks may be bastards but litigation lawyers exploiting the poor, the shell-shocked and the gormless are worse.