Discussion Random Discussion

[St Kilda Death]

Deleted offensive post

You're using it to push right wing propoganda.
So you must detest yourself?

 

[gringo2011]

Deleted offensive post

The thing about Abbott, who calls the people who believe that global warming is man made a "Climate Cult", is that he is potentially a member of Opus Dei. They are some kind of crazy catholic cult branch with strong links inside NSW Liberals. He literally believes in deviant beliefs.

I would say if it's the mainstream, that climate concern is not the cult, thats the accepted orthodoxy. Fringe nutters that go against the grain would be more the cult. Something that as a cult member he should understand.

 

[Hubnester]

Time to stop feeding and start reporting

 

[Kildonan]

Facts on bushfire seasons:
1974-75: 117 million hectares burnt across Australia
2019-20: 15 million hectares burnt and growing across Australia

Wow!
For the idiots and flogs from Australia and the rest of the world that think climate change made these fires...I didnt realise co2 levels and climate change could travel back in time like the DMC DeLorean off Back To The Future.

View attachment 803001

...and this is exactly the behaviour I predicted of you, Johnny Ray

This is typical of the right wing - they don't believe the science unless someone comes along and agrees with their own view. This process shows a complete disregard for science and the scientific process. (See confirmation bias)

Science is not a list of facts or tables. It is a process which is used in order to try and find the truth.

Let me explain confirmation bias for you. Confirmation bias is a tendency to seek out or interpret new information as support for previously held beliefs.
It is one of the most powerful and pervasive errors of deductive reasoning. We all do it to some degree. In an effort to understand the world we produce a mental framework that helps us deal with the complexity of systems. We tend to notice, accept and remember information that appears to support the framework of beliefs we hold. We also ignore, distort or dismiss information that contradicts our framework of beliefs. This process works unconsciously in our minds to produce the powerful illusion that the facts support our beliefs.

Having an organising and explanatory system for all the information we deal with is helpful. It helps speed up decision-making and gives us confidence that we understand the world to some degree. The problem is that this is an illusion. We are doing it all the wrong way around.

Confirmation bias is the granddaddy of all biases. Being aware of it does not make you immune. It is remarkably common—it is used by psychics, mediums, mentalists, and homeopaths, just to name a few. These people rely on you remembering the hits and forgetting the misses.

Scientists have developed a method of procedure consisting of systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses. It is called the scientific method. One of the problems scientists encountered as science matured was that the data was sometimes flawed. There was bias in the data - this arose from several sources i.e. the original study design, the data collection, the analysis.

Scientists are keen to avoid bias of any kind because biases threaten scientific ideals such as objectivity, transparency and rationality. The scientific community has made substantial efforts to detect, explicate and critically examine different types of biases (Sackett, 1979; Ioannidis, 2005; Ioannidis, 2018; Macleod et al., 2015). One example of this is the catalogue of all the biases that affect medical evidence compiled by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University (catalogueofbias.org). Such awareness is commonly seen as a crucial step towards making science objective, transparent and free from bias.

My point about Johnny Ray was that he had no idea of the 1974/5 fires until he saw an article (probably in a right wing publication) that provided data that fit nicely into his preconceived world view. His delight was evident in his post.

"There was a big fire a long time ago so I'm right" statement.

Does the presence of a fire which burned a large area a long time ago change the relationship of atmospheric CO2 with heat retention?
Does any one fire change the scientific principles that climatologists use to make their models which allow them to make predictions?
Do the predictions of climate scientists suddenly stop being accurate?

This was a fire that burned a huge area, but it affected only a few people. Why? Because it was in the far west of the state. No-one lived there. Most of the extent of it was unknown and of little concern until satellite images showed just how big an area it was.

Consider this hypothetical - what if the subsequent climate has changed that area of western NSW to desert. What if the region is now so barren that the region could not even support a fire the dimension of the 1974/5 fires. Any fires in that region are bound to be smaller. Is that supportive of Johnny's stance?

[Its getting late so I will finish this rant tomorrow]

 

[bergholt]

"There was a big fire a long time ago so I'm right" statement.

Unfortunately that's the same argument many people are making with climate change and this year's fires.


But in reality one data point never proves anything. It's about the trend over time. Both these arguments are wrong:

- "There was a big fire a long time ago so this fire can't be related to climate change."
- "There's a big fire this year so climate change must be happening."

This is the same as saying things like:

- "There was a hot year a long time ago so climate change isn't happening."
- "It's snowing so climate change isn't happening."
- "Today is 45 degrees, must be climate change."
- "This is the hottest year on record which proves climate change is real."

You have to look at the trend over time, and not doing so leaves you open to people like Johnnyrayflamingo (who doesn't know any better, he's just parroting what he's been told) citing a data point here or there which suits their argument.

Some environmentalists are doing this disingenuously, most don't know any better. Statistical illiteracy (innumeracy?) is at epidemic proportions.


The right argument, as I said upthread, is:

- "It doesn't matter whether these fires particularly are exacerbated by climate change. The next one will be, or the one after that. Unless we want this sort of thing to happen more frequently, we have to fight climate change."

 

[pebblesofsand]

Facts on bushfire seasons:
1974-75: 117 million hectares burnt across Australia
2019-20: 15 million hectares burnt and growing across Australia

Wow!
For the idiots and flogs from Australia and the rest of the world that think climate change made these fires...I didnt realise co2 levels and climate change could travel back in time like the DMC DeLorean off Back To The Future.

View attachment 803001

I thought you'd gone - but here you - back again desperately trying to confirm you're got no effing idea. (Heads up - don't bother - we know that already)

Are you seriously trying to compare an outback grassland fire to the destructive fires of 2009 and 2019/20 that have killed hundreds of people and destroyed thousands of houses. That's seriously warped "logic" mate!!!

FYI (Not that it will make any difference)

The vast majority of 1974/75 fires had almost no impact and much of the damage was found by satellite after the fact.

 

[Stewart66]

...and this is exactly the behaviour I predicted of you, Johnny Ray


Let me explain confirmation bias for you. Confirmation bias is a tendency to seek out or interpret new information as support for previously held beliefs.
It is one of the most powerful and pervasive errors of deductive reasoning. We all do it to some degree. In an effort to understand the world we produce a mental framework that helps us deal with the complexity of systems. We tend to notice, accept and remember information that appears to support the framework of beliefs we hold. We also ignore, distort or dismiss information that contradicts our framework of beliefs. This process works unconsciously in our minds to produce the powerful illusion that the facts support our beliefs.

Having an organising and explanatory system for all the information we deal with is helpful. It helps speed up decision-making and gives us confidence that we understand the world to some degree. The problem is that this is an illusion. We are doing it all the wrong way around.

Confirmation bias is the granddaddy of all biases. Being aware of it does not make you immune. It is remarkably common—it is used by psychics, mediums, mentalists, and homeopaths, just to name a few. These people rely on you remembering the hits and forgetting the misses.

Scientists have developed a method of procedure consisting of systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses. It is called the scientific method. One of the problems scientists encountered as science matured was that the data was sometimes flawed. There was bias in the data - this arose from several sources i.e. the original study design, the data collection, the analysis.

Scientists are keen to avoid bias of any kind because biases threaten scientific ideals such as objectivity, transparency and rationality. The scientific community has made substantial efforts to detect, explicate and critically examine different types of biases (Sackett, 1979; Ioannidis, 2005; Ioannidis, 2018; Macleod et al., 2015). One example of this is the catalogue of all the biases that affect medical evidence compiled by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University (catalogueofbias.org). Such awareness is commonly seen as a crucial step towards making science objective, transparent and free from bias.

My point about Johnny Ray was that he had no idea of the 1974/5 fires until he saw an article (probably in a right wing publication) that provided data that fit nicely into his preconceived world view. His delight was evident in his post.

"There was a big fire a long time ago so I'm right" statement.

Does the presence of a fire which burned a large area a long time ago change the relationship of atmospheric CO2 with heat retention?
Does any one fire change the scientific principles that climatologists use to make their models which allow them to make predictions?
Do the predictions of climate scientists suddenly stop being accurate?

This was a fire that burned a huge area, but it affected only a few people. Why? Because it was in the far west of the state. No-one lived there. Most of the extent of it was unknown and of little concern until satellite images showed just how big an area it was.

Consider this hypothetical - what if the subsequent climate has changed that area of western NSW to desert. What if the region is now so barren that the region could not even support a fire the dimension of the 1974/5 fires. Any fires in that region are bound to be smaller. Is that supportive of Johnny's stance?

[Its getting late so I will finish this rant tomorrow]

Mate covered it very well , however while the richest people on the planet use mediums such as TV & press
to confuse and divide opinion nothing will change in fact get worse.
Tell a lie often enough it becomes a fact ..........Roger Ailes ..

Lying today by people in power all over the World has become the order of the day , hence the anger not
from quiet people but the loudest voice in the room.

 

[Yawkey way]

The thing about Abbott, who calls the people who believe that global warming is man made a "Climate Cult", is that he is potentially a member of Opus Dei. They are some kind of crazy catholic cult branch with strong links inside NSW Liberals. He literally believes in deviant beliefs.

I would say if it's the mainstream, that climate concern is not the cult, thats the accepted orthodoxy. Fringe nutters that go against the grain would be more the cult. Something that as a cult member he should understand.

Too much dan brown gringo, anyway I think Abbott is on record stating that he isn’t and never has been a member of Opus Dei.

 

[gringo2011]

Too much dan brown gringo, anyway I think Abbott is on record stating that he isn’t and never has been a member of Opus Dei.

They are well entrenched in NSW and a lot of the conservative right of the Federal Libs are influenced by them. They are a big influence on our political system. Google it. Abbott was for years considered to be given an armchair ride through politics thanks to his links to the hard right conservative catholic interests in the state and federal political system. Not much separation of church and state here.

David Clarke (Australian politician) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Yawkey way]

They are well entrenched in NSW and a lot of the conservative right of the Federal Libs are influenced by them. They are a big influence on our political system. Google it. Abbott was for years considered to be given an armchair ride through politics thanks to his links to the hard right conservative catholic interests in the state and federal political system. Not much separation of church and state here.

David Clarke (Australian politician) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Maybe, maybe not in relation to Opus Dei although undoubtedly like minded people from many groups push their candidates forward.

The question is what do they do when they get there, wasn’t there a group of about 20 odd Christian’s of various backgrounds some time ago that used to meet and pray together in Parliament House. I couldn’t see any harm in it then and I still don’t, let’s just judge them on how they represent their electorates and the country. I have little interest in how many Freemasons, knights of the southern cross etc are members of parliament.

Tony Abbott was given the boot at the last election by zali steggall, the people for better or worse have spoken.

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

So if the bushfires aren't as bad in the next 2020/2021 bushfire season does that mean we have fixed this man made climate change thing in 12 months?
Especially if the bushfires in the 2021/2022 bushfire season aren't as bad. Maybe we would have cracked this nut if this comes true! Greta would be proud of us and she will post a nice pic about us Aussies on Instagram along with Kim Kardashian and Leo Decaprio.

Bushfires are bushfires. They happen everywhere in Australia. Just because some impact life more than others doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[jwikked]

So if the bushfires aren't as bad in the next 2020/2021 bushfire season does that mean we have fixed this man made climate change thing in 12 months?
Especially if the bushfires in the 2021/2022 bushfire season aren't as bad. Maybe we would have cracked this nut if this comes true! Greta would be proud of us and she will post a nice pic about us Aussies on Instagram along with Kim Kardashian and Leo Decaprio.

Bushfires are bushfires. They happen everywhere in Australia. Just because some impact life more than others doesn't mean they don't exist.

I doubt it will be anywhere near as bad given the areas burned this year.
Be serious for one minute, are you trolling or do you genuinely think you’re correct and everyone else is wrong?

 

[prophetic1]

Looks worse than the photoView attachment 801039

Joseph.M.W. TURNER would have loved this image its like a contemporary 'Steamer in a snow storm'.........

 

[gringo2011]

Fire chief calls out debate around fuel reduction burns as 'an emotional load of rubbish'

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews moves to shut down calls for a massive increase in fuel reduction burns and is backed up by the state's fire chief, who says the debate involves "hysteria".

www.abc.net.au

This was echoed this morning by the NSW fire chief who said he has claims from residents for new shade cloth and the Laserlite roofing getting ember holes. I'm not sure the green thing has anyone claiming it except people trying to divert attention from the debate.

 

[gringo2011]

Joseph.M.W. TURNER would have loved this image its like a contemporary 'Steamer in a snow storm'.........

Except unlike Turner this looks someone laid a euphemistic "steamer" in the snow.

 

[gringo2011]

Maybe, maybe not in relation to Opus Dei although undoubtedly like minded people from many groups push their candidates forward.

The question is what do they do when they get there, wasn’t there a group of about 20 odd Christian’s of various backgrounds some time ago that used to meet and pray together in Parliament House. I couldn’t see any harm in it then and I still don’t, let’s just judge them on how they represent their electorates and the country. I have little interest in how many Freemasons, knights of the southern cross etc are members of parliament.

Tony Abbott was given the boot at the last election by zali steggall, the people for better or worse have spoken.

I'm not a fan of religions getting themselves in to politics. It's fine while it's your brand of religion but would people have the same level of acceptance if it was Muslims, Jewish or Hindus getting a foot in? I'm thinking religion is fine as a concept but in a society that claims to be democratic, decisions coloured by ideology are better off removed from laws for the greater good.

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

A classic example of what I meant by these green lunatics being the last to help and donate. The utter shame of this during a hot forecast later on in the week. The police leaders told them this is not time for very obvious reasons which are common sense to 95% of the population.

F'ing idiots.

 

[prophetic1]

Except unlike Turner this looks someone laid a euphemistic "steamer" in the snow.

just trying to take the heat out i guess....of the thread i mean.....phew!!!!

 

[gringo2011]

A classic example of what I meant by these green lunatics being the last to help and donate. The utter shame of this during a hot forecast later on in the week. The police leaders told them this is not time for very obvious reasons which are common sense to 95% of the population.

F'ing idiots.

View attachment 803313

In fairness you have no idea that they didn't do anything before this. Also people keep donating goods instead of money because we don't trust each other and this morning the RFS in NSW were saying it's a new distorter as people donate stuff that they can't store or process.

We need to fund the fire services better and who knows, these people might just agitate the government into action. Modern governments have to be dragged kicking and screaming in to anything. I personally don't want Scomo sacked, Dutton would be next in line and he has all the charm of one of those Amazon fish that crawl up your urethra and eat you from the inside out.

 

[CursingFijian]

The moment ScoMo started using other peoples money to launch ad based PR campaigns about his fire fighting efforts then duck dickhead hunting season was declared open.

JRay's commentary simply reflects the messaging that he is getting elsewhere in his life. EDIT: It's like coming across a real life casualty of the The Great Hack.

If we want to be kind we can call him misinformed. If you wanted to take a stronger opinion on the matter then you would call him a troll. In my opinion, he is deliberately lighting spot fires on this forum, pun intended, for the sole benefit of gaining some satisfaction from watching the rest of us become agitated. I think it's time we let that sleeping dog lie.

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

 

[Crusty Undies]

So if the bushfires aren't as bad in the next 2020/2021 bushfire season does that mean we have fixed this man made climate change thing in 12 months?
Especially if the bushfires in the 2021/2022 bushfire season aren't as bad. Maybe we would have cracked this nut if this comes true! Greta would be proud of us and she will post a nice pic about us Aussies on Instagram along with Kim Kardashian and Leo Decaprio.

Bushfires are bushfires. They happen everywhere in Australia. Just because some impact life more than others doesn't mean they don't exist.

Actually no. It doesn't. And if you'd read this post by Berg you'd understand why

Unfortunately that's the same argument many people are making with climate change and this year's fires.


But in reality one data point never proves anything. It's about the trend over time. Both these arguments are wrong:

- "There was a big fire a long time ago so this fire can't be related to climate change."
- "There's a big fire this year so climate change must be happening."

This is the same as saying things like:

- "There was a hot year a long time ago so climate change isn't happening."
- "It's snowing so climate change isn't happening."
- "Today is 45 degrees, must be climate change."
- "This is the hottest year on record which proves climate change is real."

You have to look at the trend over time, and not doing so leaves you open to people like Johnnyrayflamingo (who doesn't know any better, he's just parroting what he's been told) citing a data point here or there which suits their argument.

Some environmentalists are doing this disingenuously, most don't know any better. Statistical illiteracy (innumeracy?) is at epidemic proportions.


The right argument, as I said upthread, is:

- "It doesn't matter whether these fires particularly are exacerbated by climate change. The next one will be, or the one after that. Unless we want this sort of thing to happen more frequently, we have to fight climate change."

 

[Joffaboy]

The moment ScoMo started using other peoples money to launch ad based PR campaigns about his fire fighting efforts then duck dickhead hunting season was declared open.

JRay's commentary simply reflects the messaging that he is getting elsewhere in his life. EDIT: It's like coming across a real life casualty of the The Great Hack.

If we want to be kind we can call him misinformed. If you wanted to take a stronger opinion on the matter then you would call him a troll. In my opinion, he is deliberately lighting spot fires on this forum, pun intended, for the sole benefit of gaining some satisfaction from watching the rest of us become agitated. I think it's time we let that sleeping dog lie.

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

Exactly. Dont know why anyone would give him oxygen.

Just put him on ignore and watch him wither.

 

[Premium]

Exactly. Dont know why anyone would give him oxygen.

Just put him on ignore and watch him wither.

Joffa did you get caught up in the floods in Indo

 

[Joffaboy]

Joffa did you get caught up in the floods in Indo

I go in August mate. That's if the fires or WWIII doesn't get me first

 

[CaptainRisky]

Exactly. Dont know why anyone would give him oxygen.

Just put him on ignore and watch him wither.

Yes i should have done that instead of biting back at his ----------- posts , it copped me a ban for doing so , he sure know how to wind people up