Certified Legendary Thread The Random Non Footy Chat Thread - General Non Footy talk

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has anyone seen American Hustle ? , is it any good?.
Average though watchable. Wolf of Wall St eats it on toast.
Couldn't get over the worlds weirdest comb-over.
 
Very true, but.............while some see it as a resistance to play on what is deemed by some a religious holiday, I actually support the players getting the days off simply to have some time with family and friends like normal people.

Most of them have to play footy the next day so they can't act like normal people at all, they have to prepare for their game and go to bed early.

A lot of em might even be at the club going over strategy or on a plane if playing interstate
 
Most of them have to play footy the next day so they can't act like normal people at all, they have to prepare for their game and go to bed early.

A lot of em might even be at the club going over strategy or on a plane if playing interstate
Just my 2 bob's.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Has anyone seen American Hustle ? , is it any good?.

I thought it was epic. Really well acted and a subtle humour that a lot of people in the cinema didn't seem to appreciate. I was sitting there with a mate pissing ourselves. But we were the only ones haha. It's got a good plot too.
 
Anyone else as pumped to see the Grand Budapest Hotel as I am? Wes Anderson is up there with my all time favourite directors. Really looking forward to seeing it!
I am looking forward to seeing this movie, hopefully tomorrow night in place of a Crucifixion Cup match. Anything other than stay inside on Good Friday night contemplating my navel or regretting my penis size.
 
Anyone else as pumped to see the Grand Budapest Hotel as I am? Wes Anderson is up there with my all time favourite directors. Really looking forward to seeing it!
I've seen it.
Will be interested to compare notes
 
Anyone else as pumped to see the Grand Budapest Hotel as I am? Wes Anderson is up there with my all time favourite directors. Really looking forward to seeing it!
I'm up for it for sure. I'm actually holding off seeing it when it comes out because my work is screening it for staff at the EOFY. Have to avoid spoilers until then! But yeah I love Wes Anderson.
 
I'm up for it for sure. I'm actually holding off seeing it when it comes out because my work is screening it for staff at the EOFY. Have to avoid spoilers until then! But yeah I love Wes Anderson.
What is an EOFY? Why add to an already inexhaustible list of mystery acronyms?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

End Of Financial Year. I didn't make it up, either. Foxtel had a Happy EOFYS promotion only a couple of years ago where the "S" represented "sale".
 
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...imate-refugees-inevitable-20140412-36k47.html
Treasury chief Martin Parkinson says climate refugees inevitable
Date
April 13, 2014
Nick O'malley
Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson has told an audience in Washington it appeared inevitable that Australia would have to resettle climate change refugees in the coming decades.

Dr Parkinson had just given a speech about international economic co-operation at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies when an audience member from Fiji asked a question that deftly linked two of the Australian government's most sensitive issues - climate change and refugee policy. He wanted to know what role Australia would play in resettling people from the region faced with the impact of climate change.

''[It] doesn't necessarily arise because you wake up one morning and find water around your ankles because the sea level has risen,'' he said. ''We are seeing it already in some of the small island countries where you are seeing potable water degradation in fresh water wells. If climate change plays out the way scientists believe, then it will be inevitable that there will be climate change refugees in our region and it would naturally fall to Australia and New Zealand to welcome any of those because of our historic links with those countries.''

He said Australia already assists countries in the region adapt to the changing climate and to cope with natural disasters such as cyclones.

It is understood that Dr Parkinson has been ousted as Treasury secretary by the Abbott government because of his association with climate change policy.

He was due to depart in June but this month it was revealed that Mr Abbott had asked him to stay on until the end of the year to help with Australia's presidency of the G20.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-inevitable-20140412-36k47.html#ixzz2yipZ2V4Q

http://conservationbytes.com/2014/04/16/south-australias-tattered-environmental-remains/
Yesterday I gave the second keynote address at the South Australia Natural Resource Management (NRM) Science Conference at the University of Adelaide (see also a brief synopsis of Day 1 here). Unfortunately, I’m missing today’s talks because of an acute case of man cold, but at least I can stay at home and work while sipping cups of hot tea.

Many people came up afterwards and congratulated me for “being brave enough to tell the truth”, which both encouraged and distressed me – I am encouraged by the positive feedback, but distressed by the lack of action on the part of our natural resource management leaders.

The simple truth is that South Australia’s biodiversity and ecosystems are in shambles, yet few seem to appreciate this.

So for the benefit of those who couldn’t attend, I’ve uploaded my slideshow for general viewing here, and I understand that a podcast might be available in the very near future. I’ve also highlighted some key points from the talk below:

  • Australia ranks 9th worst in the world for absolute environmental degradation [1]
  • We have a legacy of deforestation, most notably in south-western Western Australia and Queensland from the mid-1970s to 2000s [2]
  • Australia has the highest modern mammal extinction rate on Earth, and declines are continuing
  • Australia has the world’s longest, contiguous human-made structure in the world – the ‘dog’ fence. It costs taxpayers millions to maintain each year and prevents dingoes from suppressing feral meso-predators (cats, foxes) that eat native wildlife
  • Australia has elected the most environmentally destructive federal government in modern history, with already a legacy of devastating anti-environmental policies implemented within only 6 months of taking office (see also great discussion on this here)
  • Most of South Australia’s forests were cleared in the 19th and early 20th Centuries [2]
  • Native forests cover only about 9 % of the State’s area [2]
  • There is < 10 % of the original forest cover in the Mount Lofty Ranges [2]
  • There is < 4 % of the original forest cover left in the Adelaide Plains [2]
  • Broad-scale clearing of vegetation was apparently stopped in 1991 with the implementation of the Native Vegetation Act; however, each year in South Australia there are between 1000 and 2000 hectares legally cleared, and over 200 hectares cleared illegally [2, 3]
  • Only about 1 % of the South Australian State Budget is allocated to the environment (including the EPA), which compares to about 20-25 % for both health and education. Nationally, it’s about 1.2 % (see figure above)
  • This is despite over 5 % of the State’s revenue depending on agriculture in the broadest definition of the term (it is 2.4 % nationally), with 56 % of the $3 billion national wine exports coming from South Australia. We also depend on $760 million annual from the seafood industry and substantial proportion of our income from tourism indirectly linked to our environment
  • Yet there is no dedicated, broad-scale research into the importance of pollinator communities on these essential sources of income, or the role of healthy coastal systems on our fisheries production
  • According to the 2013 State of the Environment South Australia report [3], the grades given to various components are:
    • native vegetation = poor
    • threatened species & communities = very poor and declining
    • soil condition = fair
    • introduced species = very poor
    • marine communities = extent and condition declining
    • pollution = decreasing
    • human population pressures = increasing
    • threatened marine species = increasing protection, but heightened threat from sea level rise and ocean acidification
  • Having reviewed the biodiversity and marine chaptersof theSOE13 report [3] myself, I can confidently say thatthere are a few problems still with it:
    • It provides misleading statements about total vegetation cover (i.e., it glosses over the devastating losses already incurred)
    • It mentions biodiversity offsets as a meaningful component to combat continued vegetation losses, when it has been clearly demonstrated [4] that biodiversity offsets do not work, because native vegetation cannot be replaced (both in terms of biodiversity and function)
    • The indicator species chosen are apparently random, not justified in terms of function or representativeness and do not provide adequate coverage of the State’s ecosystems
    • There is inadequate long-term monitoring data or capacity in South Australia, such that it is impossible to track change in environmental performance over time
    • The State has an unachievable and distracting ‘lose no species’ policy (see here for critique)
    • There is no dedicated legislation for ecosystem protection in South Australia apart from the Native Vegetation Act 1991 and the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972. Ecosystem considerations are mere afterthoughts in otherwise non-targeted legislation
  • There are some smaller ecological function projects being done around the state (see one example I’m involved with here), but nothing that’s across agricultural and environmental sectors, and nothing of large enough scope to make a difference
In summary, the major impediments to environmental improvement in South Australia are:

  • There is a State-level disconnect between biodiversity conservation and agriculture;
  • The pastorlism industry has a strangle-hold on the NRM Boards and Biosecurity SA;
  • There are too many piecemeal cross-institutional research projects, and little big-picture leadership;
  • The national anti-environment agenda is killing state initiatives;
  • There is too much complacency and nearly no environmental leadership in Parliament
So what to do?

  • We need to arrest all native vegetation clearance immediately;
  • We need state-wide forest and soil carbon assessments;
  • We need dedicated ecosystem intactness legislation;
  • We need a representative system of long-term monitoring sites and the associated funding to support them in perpetuity;
  • We need a much better research agenda to determine the water flow regimes on wetland health and function;
  • We need broad-scale reforestation endeavours linked to the carbon assessments and markets arising;
  • We need agricultural intensification, not expansion, to limit land transformation.
There is no one left alive in South Australia that can remember the pre-European environmental baseline, so we have a jaded and myopic view of what our environment should look like. Complicate this shifting baseline syndrome with the rapidity of climate changes, and you have a confused, rudderless management outlook that will continue to degrade our ailing life-support system.
http://conservationbytes.com/2014/04/16/south-australias-tattered-environmental-remains/
 
Anyone else as pumped to see the Grand Budapest Hotel as I am? Wes Anderson is up there with my all time favourite directors. Really looking forward to seeing it!
It was a sumptuous visual and verbal romp of a movie projected in a narrow, square frame on the screen. The two young ladies beside me yapped through the previews prior to the movie. Fortunately, though they laughed frequently and heartily during the film, they mirrored my own response, and I realised that I needlessly feared the potential annoyance the girls might present. I didn't know anything about Wes Anderson other than Darjeeling Limited, but was impressed by his style and attention to detail. Go see it.:):D
 
It was a sumptuous visual and verbal romp of a movie projected in a narrow, square frame on the screen. The two young ladies beside me yapped through the previews prior to the movie. Fortunately, though they laughed frequently and heartily during the film, they mirrored my own response, and I realised that I needlessly feared the potential annoyance the girls might present. I didn't know anything about Wes Anderson other than Darjeeling Limited, but was impressed by his style and attention to detail. Go see it.:):D

Tried to see it yesterday at the Westgarth Cinema, but the cinemas was packed. Will try again on a less busy day.
 
Happy Easter

2jdkpec.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top