General Debate 23 May 2010

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment160

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (160)

Login to comment or vote

Viking2

Agree reid. Saw that bits of that program and it makes me a somewhat angry. I have said for years that we are dong something wrong when we are locking up so many young men.
That something is the disenfranchisement of young men in the workplace. We have ditched the jobs, we have given women control of the mens environment and we have priced young men out of the work place and we wonder why they get angry.
On the other score Hughes and Clark and their cronies have shut down all the sheltered workshops that looked out for the people like that young man. They and Bradford delighted in destroying thousands of hours of selfless work the many spent in building that part of our social system.
They destroyed the opportunity for handicapped people to have a meaningful day in a safe environment all because they were not paid enough in their opinion and MSD wants control of everyone. Now that work like so much else has gone to Chinese workers and Kiwi’s men are left to go to prison. And before BB and others start on its about self estem and people who are denied jobs by the state apparatus and its control of lives soon lose their self estem. It has nothing to do with GFC. It all began well before that. the day you socialists voted socialists into Govt. about 1986.
Hughes is a bastard. Ask Rex.

I totally despise these communist socialist bastards and their friends. Key I’m afraid isn’t much better.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 8:48pm
big bruv

Nomestradamus

Funnily enough I have not yet found the time to fly down to Crimechurch and have a coffee with the mad dad, I had other things that I thought were more pressing.

On Monday I decided that eating a plate full of ground up glass was more appealing.
On Tuesday I decided that sticking pins in my eyes was more fun.
On Wednesday I visited the dentist and asked him to perform a route canal without any pain killers
On Thursday I chose to drive four inch nails into my thighs
On Friday I really pushed the boat out and read the Green party manifesto.

Having said all that, I am available to help with the campaign, I can be a great help to D4J, but I think I might work on policy from the relative safety of the upper north Island.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 8:51pm
gravedodger

nb, I thought I acknowledged the result went the way of the better team . How did the Hurricanes go at the weekend, Oh yeah thats right they were not up to it and missed the play offs , so sad. Whats the goss on fatty weepu going to toss the toys is he. Ask the drugged one, he’s just joined your supporters team, good moves eh… !.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 8:53pm
nickb

Haha, bruv perhaps we should ask him if we can be on his strategy team.

gravedodger the point I am making is that the crusaders are a shadow of their old self. They only made it as far as they did because of the startling paucity of half decent teams in the competition (with a few exceptions).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 8:57pm
side show bob

“fat -fuck hunters on horses”, no I wouldn’t really say so, most are pretty lean mean shit kicking machines. Not that you would find me on one of those animals, they have to many brains for me. Besides most of the riders are fairly hot chicks that like a bit of blood sport. Perhaps if you would like to come to a hunt philly we could show you how the hounds love to chase the prey.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:08pm
philu

‘vote for mad dad…he’s so sad…’

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:09pm
philu

oh..!..riders that bray…!

..how delightful..!

..what i’m missing…eh..?..

‘fairly hot chicks..’

damning with faint praise…

big-thighed/horsey-gals were they..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:11pm
gravedodger

nicb two of the Crusaders games gave me a good deal of disappointment, they just weren’t up for The Reds and The Force and that may well be a chink in the preparations of the coaches. I was unfortunate to be at Canberra stadium the night Benny Blair had his night of horrors and when Colin Slade made his uncharacteristic start on the “bomb” I thought here we go again, however I thought he came back well.
Are you aware of the fitness problems Frewan is coping with, after heart correction. It creates a problem for the Bench management as they are unable to get more than a part game out of him but he is a worthy talent. The one I am most concerned with is Carter since his return from France and injury he has not got near where he was and Chris Jack is further proof for those of us who are wary of bringing them back from a stint with the money in Europe.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:16pm
philu

are you one of the peasants they favor…

.by riding over your land..?

..when they ‘hunt’…

and allowing you to feed/water/rest them…

..did you have a family-forelock-tugging practise this morning..?

oh peasant..!

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:19pm
side show bob

Personally I’m not really worried about their thighs…. wink, wink, say no more.
My darlin wife as thighs to die for.
And how is your horse looking
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:20pm
dad4justice

“I can be a great help to D4J”

Piss off big blouse! I need advice from a coward like you – like I need a 6 inch hole in my head.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:20pm
philu

i thought you already had one..

..that ‘six inch hole’..in yr head…

didn’t you spend some years going through a self-trepanning stage/phase…?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:23pm
nickb

“Vote for Mad Dad- The People’s Mayor”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:24pm
side show bob

Oh no philly, these are all socialist horses they only ride over DOC land, and the hounds only chase socialist hares, promise.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:25pm
krazykiwi

[phil ,] How is your horse looking?

Not too well. Just on the phone to my insurer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:35pm
philu

surely..’the peoples’ mare..’…?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:38pm
side show bob

Krazy, I doubt if that’s Pilly’s horse, look at it’s thighs, obviously to higher class for our philly.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 9:52pm
Luc Hansen

Repyling to

krazykiwi (5204) Says:
May 23rd, 2010 at 7:07 pm

and correcting one of his most egregious lies, that the IPCC scientific world is a trough full of well remunerated scientists.

In fact, the IPCC has a full time staff of only about a dozen, and does not pay for the science it accepts for inclusion in it’s reports, which are already at least two years out of date before hitting the streets. These scientists work for free, many conducting their research outside of work, or as part of their daily job if permitted by the employer in question.

NIWA, for example, would see research into climate change as essential to its core functions – the study of weather and climate systems, and the effects or potential effects on New Zealand. That is surely a good thing.

Many scientists are employed by universities and research projects that are published in recognised, prestigious journal are part of the job description. Funds get allocated by the institution, which are typically, of necessity, hard-nosed, miserly creatures.

So all this work then gets sent to the IPCC.

As an aside, not all work accepted by the IPCC is peer-reviewed. This is because it also accepts “grey literature” that is typically from developing nations who don’t have the access to publication of scientists from developed like hours, or from NGOs. It was one such report that caused all the fuss about the Himalayan Glaciers, but the fact is that most of the glaciers will be largely gone by around that date anyway – but most certainly not all.

krazydude, why don’t you stop behaving like Ian Wishart, who lies on nationwide TV, but is allowed to get away with it by a bumbler interviewer, and do some research before promoting your lies?

Even respected consultancies like McKinsey have conducted their own studies, under their own resources, and found that the economic case for fighting climate change is a net benefit.

But also, just who is spending the billions you are talking about? What billions? Pray tell. You know, front up with facts. For example, Bill Gates is funding research into wind powered, remote controlled boats designed to roam the high seas seeking out cloud formations and dispersing fine droplets of water to seed these cloud with greater reflectivity capacity. It’s his own money, adding to economic activity, and with the potential to buy us more time to wean ourselves off oil, gas and goal to produce our energy.

And that’s the point. Our civilisation is not going to revert to some kind of hunter-gatherer lifestyle, although some misguided weirdos undoubtedly call for that, but i doubt Bill Gates falls into that camp.

So again, stop lying. Stop distorting. Look for real facts, hard science. But of course, you don’t like that, do you? Because you want to be seen as a true genius, one who can cut through the chaff, and guide us to the promised land.

Problem is, we all have to be dead to reach that perticular destination.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:17pm
Say Goodbye to Hollywood

Luc reminds me of that other fucking idiot Roger Nome, who once posted here. There can’t be two idiots so similar can there?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:21pm
side show bob

OK Luc, I think you are as mad as a cut snake but if you could save the world from ?????????????? how would you go about it???????????. And please if your answer is tax you deserve nothing but a white jack in a big brick house.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:30pm
krazykiwi

Luc, you put your faith in Gore, Pachauri et al, but I don’t. If you had billions you may be choosing to join with Gate. But I would not.

The dogma of climate change is fundamentally flawed. It starts with a presupposition of impending doom, and then seeks to apply money and scientific credentials towards proving that imminence. Well the tide is turning, and the tower of untruth-built-upon-untruth is crumbling as the weight of objective science is applied. You would do well to stand back. But you won’t.

And I will thank you not to call me a liar. I am convinced of something that you in no way agree with. That is your right. But to slur me so is evidence of you loosing the plot. Pull yourself together and display some dignity.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:33pm
philu

‘liar’../..’liar’..?

you are totally full of shit…!

i told you before about the national acadamy of sciences reports..

..and you just blithly ignore that irrefutable evidence..

..and just carry on with your fucken ‘belief-bullshit’..

how can you be anything else but a fucken liar..?

..(and thick/obtuse as a fucken plank to boot….that much is obvious..)

that’s spelt l-i-a-r….

…eh..?

peddling/pushing proven falsehoods..

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:40pm
krazykiwi

phil, The only lying in climate science comes from those who claim that their evidence is irrefutable. Zero marks. Try again.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:42pm
philu

that’s..’national academy of sciences’…

do you even fucken know what that is..?.you fucken ignorant moron..!

it’s not ‘my’ fucken evidence..

..fox-watcher..?..are you..?

does that explain the group madness often displayed on this site..?

little beck-wannabes..?..are you..?

fucken knuckle-dragging/mouth-breathing/cardie-wearing/greasy-comb-over twitchers….!

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:52pm
Luc Hansen

krazy, you lie again: there was no presupposition of impending doom. It was a gradual realisation of the reality that is now enveloping us.

Point to one article published in a science journal – you know, Nature, Science etc – and find an article that proves your point. I can tell you, there are none, because such articles cannot be supported by any factual evidence.

The IPCC does us one great disservice; no, make that two:

1. It is too out of date by the time it publishes its report. In today’s world of fast communications, it could be a lot more agile, and for this reason alone I think the Pauchari should be replaced.

2. It’s reports are too conservative, as is being borne out by current facts. This is because the three working groups operate on a consensus basis, so the reports reflect the most conservative view as this is what at least everyone can agree with. Far more appropriate would be to adopt a system like, say, our jury system, where two out of twelve can get overridden.

This issue has been around a long time. It’s mature now, and no government that we would deal with disagrees with the consensus. Not one. Think about it.

Even JK has come around, sort of. He took office a denier, but was quickly appraised of the facts.

I do not retract my accusation one jot. You deliberately set out to misinform, like Owen McShane, and the only reason is your own psychological demons.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:53pm
Luc Hansen

Phil, take it easy. I was doing OK on my own.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:54pm
side show bob

Krazy, you are a top person but you are arguing the wrong point when you deal with Luc. I wait for the day Luc can explain how the money taken out of this country can lessen the drought we experienced this year. If we are going to save the world can you ask Luc if he can start at NZ. If he says this is not possible then why the hell should we waste good money on something that is a excuse for the one world government.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 10:58pm
krazykiwi

phil, You’re more unhinged than normal tonight … and that’s saying something. What’s the matter… are those MSD folks busy auditing your lazy, drug haze of a lifestyle?

That aside, just found this interesting story. Basically the Pachauri’s IPCC has been caught red handed telling porkies again, this time in attempt to cover up using unpublished, evolving research material, and then cherry picking the alarmist bits to support the predetermined CAGW outcome. This is a very detailed, almost forensic analysis of the situation.

Folks, the IPCC is an integrity-free zone, a complete farce on which the worlds policy makers are supposed to create wealth transfer taxes. We must resist!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:03pm
Luc Hansen

ssb

sure, I will tell you my ideas – well they not really mine, but I agree with their logic.

Scrap our ETS regardless, it’s just another tax and with exemptions for the biggest polluters anyway. Aussie has backed out, and so should we. So should the EU because…

We should all just sit back and tell the US and China to sort out their shit first. These two determine the success or failure of any coordinated approach.

Whatever they come up with (and it means China and all the poor nation being given a break) we will have to follow BUT

I hope they adopt the carbon tax idea, where all the revenues are divided up annually amongst all taxpayers and distributed back to the public. Thus, the incentive is their for us to modify our behaviour, and those producers who have a smaller carbon footprint will find greater favour with the general public.

Failing all that, we need to arm ourselves up as much as we can, more than we can afford even, to protect ourselves as we are one of, if the the most, luckiest countries. And we will be desirable property. I would prefer that we develop our owns arms industry, as it is cheaper to develop our own than buy US stuff (although Israel might do a pretty good deal; Russian stuff is not up to the mark).

How’s that. Pretty comprehensive, if not exactly pretty?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:09pm
krazykiwi

SSB – I feel for poor old Luc. He’s bitten hard on this CAGW lie, and would hold fast even if we were plunged into an ice-age next year. I take no pleasure in seeing someone make a complete fool of themseves, but Luc is obviously keen to push me on that.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:12pm
Luc Hansen

Why don’t I have permission to edit my postings?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:13pm
side show bob

Krazy, zombies like Philly and Luc are canon fodder, it’s incredible how the masses have been sucked in. I know I do not have the ability to argue on the same intellectual level as they do but I don’t have to. There are others that have proven AGW is the biggest crock of shit ever dreamt up. And they have laid the facts out and they wait!!!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:17pm
reid

“Whatever they come up with (and it means China and all the poor nation being given a break…)”

Er, isn’t China on track to overtake Japan as the world’s second largest economy sometime this year? US is not far behind Luc.

How long precisely does it take before one begins classifying China as “Developed?”

With all the obligations that entails.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:20pm
Luc Hansen

krazy, that lady distorts as well. You would get on well with her. Does your wife know?

Anyway, Pachauri is correct. The study was completed before 2006. The fact that it was not published until later does not mean the IPCC automatically disregards it. As Pachauri explains, not every IPCC published work is necessarily peer-reviewed, and this would be an example where an exception was made. So what’s the problem? What’s the fine toothcomb stuff meant to prove?

Nits nits nits you must scratch a lot!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:22pm
Luc Hansen

reid, look at their percaptita income. China only recently has lifted over 600 million people to an average income of slightly over $US1 per day. It’s population is three or four times that of the US, so your stats need to take this into account.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:24pm
Luc Hansen

Lets set a benchmark China can agree with: it’s a developed nation when it’s per capita income is equal to or greater than the US. How’s that?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:27pm
side show bob

I’m sorry Luc but how does China pay a carbon tax when the state owns all??????????? think about it. Who sets the carbon tax ?????????. What you really want is a world where the state is God. I don’t believe the world is in trouble from AGW you do, why are you right and I’m wrong ???. Are you willing to place a lot of your future earnings on something that is very very very suspect.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:27pm
Luc Hansen

ssb there is nothing suspect about AGW. The big problem is that it is happening faster than is generally acknowledged because people like you demand proof to a standard that is impossible except in hindsight.

Carbon taxes would be set in accordance with the prevailing PPP (purchasing power parity) and would be minimal for developing nations.

I no more want state control than you do, but people like you have to realise that collective actions (like, democracy; let’s forget for the moment about the colonialism and the genocide and the extant military oppression) have helped to build the west into a great civilisation.

A refundable carbon tax does not benefit the government. How do read that into it?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:41pm
side show bob

“We should all sit back and tell China and the US to sort their shit out first”, you are right Luc, best of luck. But we all know we mos well piss into a 50 knot wind. We are a pimple on a rats arsehole so why does our stupid government feel they must tax everyone to prove nothing. I always thought that if you wish to make a point you lead by example, (example does not included stealing million of dollars) This country is going in the right direction, yes we can do better. Ask Philly he knows all about dairy farming, but the long and short of it is that the planet will only get greener when people realise it pays to look after the environment. Taxing everyone is perhaps the worst possible call.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2010 11:50pm
tom hunter

Are you willing to place a lot of your future earnings on something…..

SSB – Luc does not have any future earnings.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:02am
Luc Hansen

I have never advocated setting an example. I do say we should do our bit, but not in isolation. I have already said I don’t supports ETS schemes, but we may have to accept one eventually.

I see a major problem coming in that people combat the ETS scheme by denying climate change. That wouldn’t happen under a refundable carbon tax scheme.

However, it may take a series of major disasters that can be clearly sheeted home to climate change to get the kind of actions necessary. Even then, we will need to go to geo-engineering, luckily not particularly expensive, to help counter the inevitable temperature overshoot we are headed for (that’s over 2C).

But we will have to cross our fingers that it’s not already too late and the tipping points are past the point of no return. No one will know for a long time.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:06am
side show bob

Luc I know you mean well but your politics go against human nature, sadly for your good self, there are a lot of people “like me” . You speak of collective action, sorry Luc you speak of communism. The world will only be saved if individuals are aloud free enterprise and the chance to live their own lives. You can speak of collective all you like, you must start thinking Luc that if you truly believe in AGW the collective will not solve the problem, where is the incentive? Was not the pollution worst in the 19th century??? did not free enterprise lessen this pollution, why have things changed??????????????
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:07am
Luc Hansen

Tom, wtf are you on about?

Mr nasty personified. have you killed any arabs lately? You have a good wank every time one is?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:07am
Luc Hansen

ssb a carbon tax is to encourage exactly the free enterprise you speak of.

You have to remember even free enterprise is regulated for he greater good. We have the Reserve Bank setting interest rates, the Commerce Commission setting rules etc etc. That’s all state control, to a lesser degree, but still state control.

By your definition of collective actions, democracy is communism. Isn’t that just a little bit silly?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:11am
side show bob

Luc I know you have a new baby, please don’t tell (it, sorry) the world is stuffed. It’s not stuffed. The world sure has a lot of problems but it always has. Don’t worry about something that may happen in 100 years enjoy your life now. I know you worry about the future but if you spend most of you life worrying about what might happen you fail to see what is happening now. Look after what you have got, ok you believe the it’s all over red rover, I don’t. Would you like a bet?????????
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:29am
tom hunter

Luc I know you mean well …..

Don’t kid yourself SSB. It’s not just that people like Luc put bullets into the heads of Kulaks (e.g. “rich” farming peasants not all that different from you), but that they felt so righteously good about doing so.

From gleefully urging the North Vietnamese on 40 years ago as they used the standard playbook of communist butchery, to his smugly triumphal contemplation of the Jews being swamped by a rising tide of Arab revenge, we’re talking about a deeply ugly human being.

AGW is just the latest wheeze in trying to bend people like you and me (climate criminals) to his flaccid will.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:33am
tom hunter

Ah well. Past midnight so I will leave one mention of reality for the believers.

The current atmospheric CO2 concentration level is 387ppm.

If we could cut global CO2 emissions to those of the late 1950’s (and note that the world’s economy is three times larger now), and if we held them at those levels for the next 7-8 decades the CO2 concentration in the year 2100 would be – about 450ppm.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:38am
Luc Hansen

ssb in about one hundred years, hopefully, my daughter will be nearing the end of her life (we, her parents, have great longevity in both families!) and her children, my grandchildren, will be mere middle aged. So that feels pretty close to me. Yhink about it.

I don’t think the world is stuffed. I think that eventually the major powers will act together, and I am optimistic that it won’t be too late.

Also, I let my kids make up their own minds. I have been quite proud at family functions when my kids have let it be known that although I have strong views, they never felt compelled to adopt mine and that I always encouraged them to find out for themselves. They are now both nearing 40. I won’t be any different with my daughter, and this debate will be well over by the time she pays attention to it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:47am
Luc Hansen

Tom 450 ppm is achievable and would be a success. There would still be overshoot, with a lot of dislocation for millions, but we can live with it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:48am
side show bob

Luc you miss the real point of what a tax is. A tax is a way to limit an individuals choice on how they live their life. Carbon tax ,OH COME ON, carbon is the most important part of our being . Why not tax oxygen, hydrogen, for fucks sake. You speak of state control, you are dead right, we need state control we don’t need a totalitarian state . The states main function should be to provide our defense and protect our property rights, the rest will take care of themselves.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:53am
Luc Hansen

And Tom, just who were the butchers in that war? Are you unaware still of the secret Cambodian bombing campaign ordered by Kissinger? Or of how many million of tonnes of munitions dropped on South Vietnam – yes, those we were meant to be saving? And since the Domino theory, like the WMD lie to justify slaughter in Iraq, has failed to eventuate, why did 50,000 young US men die?

And when you talk about Arab revenge, I’m impressed. It means you recognise they have something to avenge. Maybe there is hope for you yet!

Hell, I might even say a prayer for you tonight! (Does g-d listen to an atheist?)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:53am
Luc Hansen

ssb

that’s true extremism. Rush Limbaugh and Lindsay Perigo style “step change” to social hell.

There is not a lot of point engaging in that, because although NACT is nibbling at it, it can’t take bites in a basically centre-left electorate. End of story.

Also, your recipe is what helped to get us into this problem and I fail to see how increasing the dosage will cure the patient.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 12:57am
tom hunter

Better get a good night’s sleep Luc – somewhere a gay man is being hunted by an Islamist and they need you well rested to defend them.

The gay man I mean – figured I’d better make that clear to you in case you find yourself getting all multi-cultural and unable to do the right thing as you so abysmally failed to do so 40 years ago.

By the way – revenge is a very ugly, despicable, soul-destroying emotion. Somehow I’m not surprised you’re into it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 1:06am
side show bob

Tom I doubt if God was to state AGW was a crock of poop people like Luc would not change their view one iota, Luc’s life isn’t about “climate change” it never has being. Luc and people of his political leaning believe AGW is their chance to “fix the world”. Like everything else these delusional people believe in a system where big government becomes the almighty, quite simply they are wrong.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 1:12am
Luc Hansen

By the way – revenge is a very ugly, despicable, soul-destroying emotion.

So you don’t support the war in Afghanistan?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 2:02am
sbk

“we will need to go to geo-engineering,”..geo-political(one world government)..geo-demographical(the relocation wealth/jobs, west to east)..Luc,you can take your “geo-engineering” and shove it up you know what..it appears you speak through it anyway.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 5:47am
wreck1080

why is nick smith such an absolute twat?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 7:16am
wreck1080

In addition to that, he is intimating that NZ has the highest carbon emissions in the world.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 7:17am
krazykiwi

[Luc] krazy, that lady distorts as well. You would get on well with her. Does your wife know?

She identified a blatant, bare-faced lie from the head of one of the most powerful global policy lobby groups. All you can do is slur her (and I for that matter). I feel sorry for you.

[Luc] Anyway, Pachauri is correct. The study was completed before 2006. The fact that it was not published until later does not mean the IPCC automatically disregards it. As Pachauri explains, not every IPCC published work is necessarily peer-reviewed, and this would be an example where an exception was made. So what’s the problem? What’s the fine toothcomb stuff meant to prove?

The IPCC has regularly lied about their report contents. To wit:

“People can have confidence in the IPCC’s conclusions…Given that it is all on the basis of peer-reviewed literature.” – Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC chairman, June 2008

.. and ..

“The IPCC doesn’t do any research itself. We only develop our assessments on the basis of peer-reviewed literature.” – Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC chairman, June 2007

.. and ..

As IPCC Chairman Rajendra K. Pachauri recently stated: ‘IPCC relies entirely on peer reviewed literature in carrying out its assessment…'” – US Environmental Protection Agency, December 2009 (bottom of PDF’s page 7)

“This is based on peer-reviewed literature. That’s the manner in which the IPCC functions. We don’t pick up a newspaper article and, based on that, come up with our findings.” – Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC chairman, June 2008
Now don’t take my word that AR4 is filled with anything less than peer reviewed material as repeatedly claimed by Pachauri (although even a casual read will turn up references to Greenpeace studies, newspaper stories and blog posts)

The following summary outlines what’s wrong with AR4. The analysis was compiled by 43 researchers, and their review methodology is openly published. They crawl through every chapter multiple times and check more than 18,000 references cited. Their finding is that AR4, the ‘Gold Standard’ in climate science is a shoddy attempt to build a case in support of CAGW, rather than a serious scientific publication.

UN’s Climate Bible Gets 21 ‘F’s on Report Card
— all 18,531 references cited in the 2007 IPCC report were examined
— 5,587 are not peer-reviewed
— IPCC chairman’s claim that the report relies solely on peer-reviewed sources is not supported
— each chapter was audited three times; the result most favorable to the IPCC was used
— 21 out of 44 chapters contain so few peer-reviewed references, they get an F
— 43 citizen auditors in 12 countries participated in this project

[Luc] Nits nits nits you must scratch a lot!

Running low on ad hominem’s last night, were you?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 8:44am
philu

“..Phil, take it easy. I was doing OK on my own..”

no you aren’t/weren’t…

you are just doing that groundhog day routine with the morons,..

why don’t you focus on the three..(!) reports issued last week…

..from the national academy of sciences…?

..they supersede the ipcc…and are more relevant/recent/up-to-date-data..

instead of just repeating that ghastly/boring fucken waltz..?

but maybe you enjoy the dance..?

and hey..!..rightwingers tell me to ‘shut up’ all the time..eh..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2010 8:55am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Child Cruelty

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

No, Fossil Fuels Are Not Being “Subsidised”
Utopia
Sabotaging justice
No Right Turn
2024 Listener’s Choice Podcast Awards
The Daily Blog
What would Sumner say about Trump and Vance’s pro-tariff rhetoric?
Not PC
The 2024 US Election: A No-Win Scenario
The Standard
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Word of the day
Hompaddock
A tariffying prospect for Kiwi exporters: Trump plans to tax imports – but a Harris presidency would be not much better
Point of Order
NZ media’s “propagandisation” of the US Election
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
Your Cheatin’ Ballot II: Pennsylvania
No Minister
THE PUNCHING ABOVE OUR WEIGHT EMBARRASSMENT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
US military-industrial-sports complex.
Kiwipolitico
The Battle for Democracy
NZCPR
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d