Discussion Random Discussion

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

Why did those bushfires happen? Because Australia is a dry country. There are three options as to why the current bushfires have been so catastrophic though. One, they aren't any worse than previous fires but our government is less prepared than 10 or even 40 years ago. Two, climate change is making bad bushfires worse and unpredictable. Or three, both. I don't think you'll like any of these answers though so I'm curious what non sequitur you'll use this time.

Nonsense. Your map still explains nothing. Its pseudo science.

I suspect you are young and are gripped in a current catastrophic mindset, just like the scientists and harbingers of death that convinced themselves of an impending new ice age in the early 1970's. Humans have always liked to think they are the pinnacle of history during their lifetime for fear of not feeling important and nothing special.

Planet Earth will keep ticking over and over...and over.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The was i see it , a lot of the measures needed for "total efficiency " are anti globalization.

International Shipping is around 2 % of the worlds emissions. Crappy cheap ships that last a few years and are scrapped.
Ships that use horrible inefficient diesel engines.
If someone in Australia tries to make something, close to the source of its use, their costs are high and they are taxed to the hilt.
Its not just the manufacturing costs of goods overseas, its tax avoidance.

To me total efficiency involves, generating power close to where its needed, and vertically integrating products as much as possible.

 

[pebblesofsand]

Ask them. I wasn't alive nor are there records from Europeans.

Its kind of ironic that the custodians of this land managed the threat just as well or better than modern day Australians for thousands of years.

Indigenous methods and knowledge need to be brought into the hazard reduction side of things, not dismissed and laughed at.

I have - and the answers to both questions according to Gunnai Kurnai elders is that they let it burn.

So here comes possibly the easiest question I've asked of you. A simple yes/no answer will suffice. Is that the fire "management" methodology you would advocate for modern Australia?

PS - Minor point - the types of "traditional" burning being advocated primarily relate to vastly different lanscapes than the massive eucalypt forests of the great dividing range.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Researchers in Australia take key step toward battery of the future

An international team of researchers believe they have made a breakthrough that could extend the life of the batteries that power smartphones and electric cars.

www.theage.com.au

This is really interesting and shows what happens when we fund research.

We never capitalize on the output of such research.
Patent law is terrible, it barely allows inventors to break even. So they quickly sell their tech to the highest bidders ( overseas).
Then we have software, covered by "copyrite" a system originally devised to protect authors from plagiarism.
So now lots of big companies making engineered product argue about whether their machine language, driving similar machines , is copied or not.
If you break it down to its simplest level, it HAS to breach copyrite.
"your honor this man as used a "Print" command to print. He clearly copied it. "

Most software is a composite work of software coders, who don't put any "art" into it.

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

I have - and the answers to both questions according to Gunnai Kurnai elders is that they let it burn.

So here comes possibly the easiest question I've asked of you. A simple yes/no answer will suffice. Is that the fire "management" methodology you would advocate for modern Australia?

PS - Minor point - the types of "traditional" burning being advocated primarily relate to vastly different lanscapes than the massive eucalypt forests of the great dividing range.

All avenues need to be explored and implemented. Both traditional and modern but the government needs to implement full time land carers as that fella mentioned.

To the crux, you will never stop bushfires but we can try limit them.

 

[pebblesofsand]

All avenues need to be explored and implemented. Both traditional and modern but the government needs to implement full time land carers as that fella mentioned.

To the crux, you will never stop bushfires but we can try limit them.

"All avenues need to be explored and implemented" - eureka!!! - Johnnyray has seen the light!!!!!

Fella's - our job is done!!!!!

 

[ScrappyDo]

Every rare occasion l visit this thread, l leave appalled by some of the idiotic sh1t that some (usually the same) posters continue to spew out on subjects they clearly know nothing about.

A perfect demonstration of the ego driven thought patterns, pseudo intellectualism and fear of personal responsibility that continues to stunt the progress of our species.

What's that saying again?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you can't fix stupid...Or something like that..


I'm glad there's some members here with the stomach to argue for reason page after page. I wish l could do the same, but life is to short, as is my temper and tolerance for effwits..

I'm gonna start on the whiskey now to burn this garbage out of my brain. Hopefully l remember not to visit here again.
Happy weekend fellas..

 

[gringo2011]

Then why did the biggest bushfires in Australia's known history (117 million hectares over 5 states) happen in the summer of 74-75? That was nearly 50 years ago.

Or in 1851 where 5 million hectares of Victoria burned and a million sheep died? That was around 170 years ago.

The link between that image and bushfires makes no sense then.

I'm pretty sure you don't even believe what you write and just enjoy trolling the idiot liberals like me, but, I'm in my 40s. We have family all over Gippsland so I can only speak with experience of that area, since the 1980s which is as far back as I remember, Gippsland has been deforested in a big way.

Bushland used to lap the highways back then which were single lanes from pretty much Dandenong to the NSW border. We used to get a train to go stay at my grand parents that had those old red carriages with wire luggage racks and vinyl bench seats. The toilet had a hole that dropped onto the tracks and the hand basin was this big art nouveau fold down chrome thing. You'd stop at Warrigal and go to a canteen for food or eat at the dining car which was like something out of the 1920s.

Warrigul was a town with trees all around it and the towns were little stops between farms and bush. You drove out of Sale to Bairnsdale and there was trees. Cann River was pristine rainforest all the way to NSW and there was tall timber on the ides of the highway that looked like the Black Spur. Do it all now and you hardly see a tree except for the tops of the hills. What isn't farms is estates. In 1851 and 1974 I'm willing to bet that there was a lot more bush to burn is my long winded point.

How Australia became one of the worst deforesters in the world - triple j

And what you can do to help.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

I'm pretty sure you don't even believe what you write and just enjoy trolling the idiot liberals like me, but, I'm in my 40s. We have family all over Gippsland so I can only speak with experience of that area, since the 1980s which is as far back as I remember, Gippsland has been deforested in a big way.

Bushland used to lap the highways back then which were single lanes from pretty much Dandenong to the NSW border. We used to get a train to go stay at my grand parents that had those old red carriages with wire luggage racks and vinyl bench seats. The toilet had a hole that dropped onto the tracks and the hand basin was this big art nouveau fold down chrome thing. You'd stop at Warrigal and go to a canteen for food or eat at the dining car which was like something out of the 1920s.

Warrigul was a town with trees all around it and the towns were little stops between farms and bush. You drove out of Sale to Bairnsdale and there was trees. Cann River was pristine rainforest all the way to NSW and there was tall timber on the ides of the highway that looked like the Black Spur. Do it all now and you hardly see a tree except for the tops of the hills. What isn't farms is estates. In 1851 and 1974 I'm willing to bet that there was a lot more bush to burn is my long winded point.

How Australia became one of the worst deforesters in the world - triple j

And what you can do to help.

www.abc.net.au

Nah, I do believe in what I write and I'm not trolling anyone (but we are all guilty of throwing a little bit of hot curry on our posts from time to time). It might surprise you, but I sit in the centre in the political and social spectrum. I am neither left or right wing.

At the moment, I am really detesting the BS, politics and links to man made global warming surrounding these naturally occurring and man made bushfires. It disgusts me on all levels. Actual real and practical measures need to be put in place to try minimise them if at all possible. Bushfires are a staple of our very dry and arid country. The custodians of our land learnt to live and deal with them as we are now and have tried since the first big recorded bushfire of 1851..

Finally, this random discussion forum is a bit of a left wing love fest that is very biased to one side of the story, politics, facts, science, opinion, etc. Those in that camp might disagree but my eyes see it clearer than a soaring eagle sees a mouse at 1000 feet.

 

[Nutsngum]

At the moment, I am really detesting the BS, politics and links to man made global warming surrounding these naturally occurring and man made bushfires. It disgusts me on all levels. Actual real and practical measures need to be put in place to try minimise them if at all possible. Bushfires are a staple of our very dry and arid country. The custodians of our land learnt to live and deal with them as we are now and have tried since the first big recorded bushfire of 1851..

These things are not mutually exclusive you know. You can still maintain the fire prevention whilst tackling climate change.

But the real reason is that you are a lazy human being who disbelieves climate change because it may impact the easy comfortable life you lead in some way. Its okay mate, I get it, you're just one of the millions of lazy average Australians who believe in doing the same thing.. which is basically nothing.

 

[Kildonan]

View attachment 804426
So what's the scientific explanation for why this isn't climate change or why it doesn't exacerbate the bushfires?

This clearly shows a trend. One can see the progression from a varying pattern but mainly green right up until the 1980's but then the trend is more yellow and rather rapidly progressing to red.

This is a trend and the pattern is suggestive but not yet strong evidence for climate change.

What is more compelling is that all the natural factors would have us cooling - and those that genuinely believed that mankind is too powerless to destroy a planet, looked at the natural cooling effect of solar radiation and recent volcanic activity placing particulate matter in the atmosphere reducing the amount of light that reaches the Earth. So many predictions were made that Earth would stop warming and resume cooling - every one of them were wrong. Many of these were not climate scientists, but had ideological reasons (usually religious) to believe the way they did.

Climate scientists took into account the cooling effect of reduced solar activity and the particulate matter in the atmosphere (there are other factors but this is not my area of expertise so a simple explanation is all I can offer). Despite this they predicted global warming. They were conservative in their predictions. There are many tipping points which suddenly alter the equations and complicate the models they use. They also admitted they were wrong in some predictions - like the rate of global CO2 levels did not rise at exactly the rate they predicted - so they investigated to find out why and discovered that more CO2 was being dissolved in the oceans than they predicted which has something to do with cold ocean currents carrying this dissolved CO2 deeper - now this feature has to be fully investigated to see if this will present as another tipping point.

The upshot of all their trials and errors has been the creation of a model which predicts global temperatures with greater and greater accuracy.
They are still underestimating the increase in temperature - so there are some minor factors still at play, but the science is strong and only getting better.

Let me remind you that those predictions that contradict the climate scientists have all proven wrong.

It is these predictions that make the argument from climate scientists compelling. They made predictions that went against the natural trend of climate on Earth. Their predictions of a warming Earth with increased rates of extreme events is showing to be accurate. This is despite the bleatings of climate change deniers.

So how do climate change deniers continue to believe something other than the facts?

Much of the groundwork for denialism was initiated in the USA. Their coal and oil industries played an essential role in climate change denial and were joined by other corporations concerned about the US government's efforts to control CO2 emissions. Peabody coal, Exxon Mobil, and industry groups like Western Fuels Association and the American Petroleum Institute have provided direct funding to contrarian scientists such as Patrick Michaels as well as several conservative "think tanks". Exxon Mobil has been the most important source for climate change denial. Another key mechanism was that these wealthy bodies have set up "associations" such as the Information Council on the Environment, The Global Climate Coalition and The Cooler Heads Coalition. The conservative side of politics especially (although there is evidence that all sides of politics are vulnerable to the huge amounts of money involved in maintaining the right to pollute the Earth with impunity) has conspired with the oil companies to maintain profits through legislation

There are a number of web sites dedicated to climate denialists. They provide propaganda, graphs and memes to further this cause.
Russian bots also exacerbate the situation. A warming Russia is considered to be desirable and they have political interests as well as self-interests in allowing the climate deniers to persist and flourish.

There are also a number of web sites which attempt to counter the lies: see Skeptical Science - Arguments from Global Warming Deniers

 

[Yawkey way]

I'm pretty sure you don't even believe what you write and just enjoy trolling the idiot liberals like me, but, I'm in my 40s. We have family all over Gippsland so I can only speak with experience of that area, since the 1980s which is as far back as I remember, Gippsland has been deforested in a big way.

Bushland used to lap the highways back then which were single lanes from pretty much Dandenong to the NSW border. We used to get a train to go stay at my grand parents that had those old red carriages with wire luggage racks and vinyl bench seats. The toilet had a hole that dropped onto the tracks and the hand basin was this big art nouveau fold down chrome thing. You'd stop at Warrigal and go to a canteen for food or eat at the dining car which was like something out of the 1920s.

Warrigul was a town with trees all around it and the towns were little stops between farms and bush. You drove out of Sale to Bairnsdale and there was trees. Cann River was pristine rainforest all the way to NSW and there was tall timber on the ides of the highway that looked like the Black Spur. Do it all now and you hardly see a tree except for the tops of the hills. What isn't farms is estates. In 1851 and 1974 I'm willing to bet that there was a lot more bush to burn is my long winded point.

How Australia became one of the worst deforesters in the world - triple j

And what you can do to help.

www.abc.net.au

I’m sorry to hear that, I always thought southern NSW and NE Victoria were gods own country.

I haven’t been past the prom in over 20 years, but your description of the train brought back some memories, I caught that train quite a few times back in the day. My mates and I caught the train to Wonthaggi once before it stopped running on our way to camp at inverlock, that was a strange contraption.

My grandfather on my mothers side was from Bairnsdale and my wife’s grandfather retired to eden. We loved in so much back in the day that we had our honeymoon in Merimbula. The amount of land we’ve cleared is a joke imo, do we have a coherent policy on anything in this country.

 

[borderbarry]

On the clubs website under the players, each player had their total Brownlow votes shown. However about 2 or 3 years ago the club stopped showing the Brownlow votes. Does anyone know why the club stopped showing these details? I know the club does not have full control over its website, but still.

 

[Yawkey way]

This clearly shows a trend. One can see the progression from a varying pattern but mainly green right up until the 1980's but then the trend is more yellow and rather rapidly progressing to red.

This is a trend and the pattern is suggestive but not yet strong evidence for climate change.

What is more compelling is that all the natural factors would have us cooling - and those that genuinely believed that mankind is too powerless to destroy a planet, looked at the natural cooling effect of solar radiation and recent volcanic activity placing particulate matter in the atmosphere reducing the amount of light that reaches the Earth. So many predictions were made that Earth would stop warming and resume cooling - every one of them were wrong. Many of these were not climate scientists, but had ideological reasons (usually religious) to believe the way they did.

Climate scientists took into account the cooling effect of reduced solar activity and the particulate matter in the atmosphere (there are other factors but this is not my area of expertise so a simple explanation is all I can offer). Despite this they predicted global warming. They were conservative in their predictions. There are many tipping points which suddenly alter the equations and complicate the models they use. They also admitted they were wrong in some predictions - like the rate of global CO2 levels did not rise at exactly the raate they predicted - so they investigated to find out why and discovered that more CO2 was being dissolved in the oceans than they predicted which has something to do with cold ocean currents carrying this dissolved CO2 deeper - now this feature has to be fully investigated to see if this will present as another tipping point.

The upshot of all their trials and errors has been the creation of a model which predicts global temperatures with greater and greater accuracy.
They are still underestimating the increase in temperature - so there are some minor factors still at play, but the science is strong and only getter better.

Let me remind you that those predictions that contradict the climate scientists have all proven wrong.

It is these predictions that make the argument from climate scientists compelling. They made predictions that went against the natural trend of climate on Earth. Their predictions of a warming Earth with increased rates of extreme events is showing to be accurate. This is despite the bleatings of climate change deniers.

So how do climate change deniers continue to believe something other than the facts?

Much of the groundwork for denialism was initiated in the USA. Their coal and oil industries played an essential role in climate change denial and were joined by other corporations concerned about the US government's efforts to control CO2 emissions. Peabody coal, Exxon Mobil, and industry groups like Western Fuels Association and the American Petroleum Institute have provided direct funding to contrarian scientists such as Patrick Michaels as well as several conservative "think tanks". Exxon Mobil has been the most important source for climate change denial. Another key mechanism was that these wealthy bodies have set up "associations" such as the Information Council on the Environment, The Global Climate Coalition and The Cooler Heads Coalition. The conservative side of politics especially (although there is evidence that all sides of politics are vulnerable to the huge amounts of money involved in maintaining the right to pollute the Earth with impunity) has conspired with the oil companies to maintain profits through legislation

There are a number of web sites dedicated to climate denialists. They provide propaganda, graphs and memes to further this cause.
Russian bots also exacerbate the situation. A warming Russia is considered to be desirable and they have political interests as well as self-interests in allowing the climate deniers to persist and flourish.

There are also a number of web sites which attempt to counter the lies see Skeptical Science - Arguments from Global Warming Nutters

Quite a few posters have mentioned religion in the climate change debate.

I don’t watch a lot of current affairs and haven’t watched free to air for years, I’m also fairly selective about what I read online and I’m not on social media so I must be missing something.

I thought the pope was a supporter of the need to address climate change and has issued an encyclical to that effect stating that climate change is real and mainly a result of human activity. So who’s driving the denial from a religious perspective?.

 

[Yawkey way]

On the clubs website under the players, each player had their total Brownlow votes shown. However about 2 or 3 years ago the club stopped showing the Brownlow votes. Does anyone know why the club stopped showing these details? I know the club does not have full control over its website, but still.

Probably doesn’t make great reading, I don’t think our players as a group have polled very well.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I'm pretty sure you don't even believe what you write and just enjoy trolling the idiot liberals like me, but, I'm in my 40s. We have family all over Gippsland so I can only speak with experience of that area, since the 1980s which is as far back as I remember, Gippsland has been deforested in a big way.

Bushland used to lap the highways back then which were single lanes from pretty much Dandenong to the NSW border. We used to get a train to go stay at my grand parents that had those old red carriages with wire luggage racks and vinyl bench seats. The toilet had a hole that dropped onto the tracks and the hand basin was this big art nouveau fold down chrome thing. You'd stop at Warrigal and go to a canteen for food or eat at the dining car which was like something out of the 1920s.

Warrigul was a town with trees all around it and the towns were little stops between farms and bush. You drove out of Sale to Bairnsdale and there was trees. Cann River was pristine rainforest all the way to NSW and there was tall timber on the ides of the highway that looked like the Black Spur. Do it all now and you hardly see a tree except for the tops of the hills. What isn't farms is estates. In 1851 and 1974 I'm willing to bet that there was a lot more bush to burn is my long winded point.

How Australia became one of the worst deforesters in the world - triple j

And what you can do to help.

www.abc.net.au

Wow Gringo, your memory is shot.

The burbs moved in between Packenham and Berwick but it was cleared farmlands for a long long time before that.
Same with Warragul, except for a few area's of bush it was cleared farmland all around it.
Outside the bush reserves, there are probably more trees now , since there have been a few plantations put in.

The old single lane road gave the impression you were driving through forest, but it was a narrow strip beside the road. If you turn off at the roadhouse ( the one with Hungry Jacks ) you can go on the old section of single lane highway, up past picnic point, to the Robin Hood hotel. The strip of trees are still there. The trees aren't gone, they just put the new road in the middle of a cow paddock.

Most of Gippsland was cleared when it was settled 200 years ago, some of the places in the hills re-forested when it became too hard for the settlers of the time to keep it clear.

There was no bush between Warragul and Moe. Not even in my Parents living memory.

And the trains were old. But they were good. Go to Europe, you get food and toilet facilities on the Car. The people who catch the country trains now, get a cheapo service. It lets commuters use it from Packenham, so that oldies, and other people who can't drive get the suburban crush on their way home from visiting their medical specialists.

When i was a kid, a trip from Morwell to the CBD was like 3 hours. Mostly due to getting stuck in a 100 car line behind an old Commer van going 60, and then having to use Princes Highway (Dandenong Road). to get all the way to the city.

I used to memorize the towns as a kid.

Hallam.
I used to call it "Fountain Gate" because it had the big fountain things there at the estate. Not much of Narre Warren on the road then.
Berwick was always a nice looking town, and just a little cleared space until you got to Officer , which had nothing much at all.
There were/still are trees along the old road between Officer and Packenham. Packenham was bypassed, but the town planners have since let them build it in, so they had to bypass the bypass.
Packenham to Drouin ( up past where Gumbaya park is) was where it seemed to be through trees all the way.

Nilma was like a suburb or Warragul even then, only a few houses, surrounded by clear farmland.
Darnum had a pub and a store.
Clear farmland all the way to Yarragon, Trafalgar, a few trees at Moe South.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Kildonan]

Quite a few posters have mentioned religion in the climate change debate.

I don’t watch a lot of current affairs and haven’t watched free to air for years, I’m also fairly selective about what I read online and I’m not on social media so I must be missing something.

I thought the pope was a supporter of the need to address climate change and has issued an encyclical to that effect stating that climate change is real and mainly a result of human activity. So who’s driving the denial from a religious perspective?.

The religious aspect is probably more American in origin. Essentially there was already a number of extant official bodies to obfuscate climate science in the US. The climate deniers also infiltrated conservative political bodies and religious bodies to further their stranglehold on the political will.

A common meme was that Man is too infinitely powerless to damage / destroy what God has made for us (Earth). He wont allow climate change endanger us, He will protect us.

It grew to a condemnation of scientists for their conceit that Man could conquer God and destroy the Earth.

There are religious institutions (and conservative political bodies which is much the same thing) who still rail against climate change and support government that actively denies.

Religion and Views on Climate and Energy Issues

 

[plugger66]

On the clubs website under the players, each player had their total Brownlow votes shown. However about 2 or 3 years ago the club stopped showing the Brownlow votes. Does anyone know why the club stopped showing these details? I know the club does not have full control over its website, but still.

We haven’t had a Brownlow vote for 3 years

 

[Crusty Undies]

I blame you and your generation, things have really deteriorated since around the time you were born.

yeah nah fair call

 

[Crusty Undies]

Nonsense. Your map still explains nothing. Its pseudo science.

I suspect you are young and are gripped in a current catastrophic mindset, just like the scientists and harbingers of death that convinced themselves of an impending new ice age in the early 1970's. Humans have always liked to think they are the pinnacle of history during their lifetime for fear of not feeling important and nothing special.

Planet Earth will keep ticking over and over...and over.

There is literally nothing to be "convinced by". I showed you an infographic that displays the average temperature in every region of Australia in recorded history. There isn't any room to twist the data, fudge the numbers or overhype the facts. It's all publicly available info that's been neatly collated into an easy to understand image that apparently, isn't as easy as I thought it was, since you seem to be struggling with it.

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

Good news comong through for Vic.

Mild weather brings a moment of respite from fires

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

There is literally nothing to be "convinced by". I showed you an infographic that displays the average temperature in every region of Australia in recorded history. There isn't any room to twist the data, fudge the numbers or overhype the facts. It's all publicly available info that's been neatly collated into an easy to understand image that apparently, isn't as easy as I thought it was, since you seem to be struggling with it.

You linked the image to bushfires. Its very wrong to link them as the history of bushfires show. The connection is pseudo.

 

[Crusty Undies]

You linked the image to bushfires. Its very wrong to link them as the history of bushfires show. The connection is pseudo.

Hahaha. Ok mate. But it's not pseudoscience trying to claim that the untested and undocumented methods of "fire management" from aboriginals is better than what we currently have? Like I said, either we're worse at managing bushfires now than before, which can be directly attributed to budget cuts. Or the way we manage them hasn't gotten any worse, but nonetheless they are harder to manage than at any other point in history which is pretty directly attributable to climate change and temperature increases. Or, the most likely outcome given all the evidence I have consistently laid directly infront of your eyes only for you to lazily glaze over and pronounce some other completely irrelevant non sequitur as the real reason; both.

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

Hahaha. Ok mate. But it's not pseudoscience trying to claim that the untested and undocumented methods of "fire management" from aboriginals is better than what we currently have? Like I said, either we're worse at managing bushfires now than before, which can be directly attributed to budget cuts. Or the way we manage them hasn't gotten any worse, but nonetheless they are harder to manage than at any other point in history which is pretty directly attributable to climate change and temperature increases. Or, the most likely outcome given all the evidence I have consistently laid directly infront of your eyes only for you to lazily glaze over and pronounce some other completely irrelevant non sequitur as the real reason; both.

As I stated, a blend of traditional and current hazard reduction methods is required. Its pretty arrogant to dismiss aboriginal methods given they successfully managed the threat for thousands of years. They know country better than anyone. The custodians of our land should be listened to, not ignored or dismissed.

Stop linking the current bushfires to climate change to try help a green ideology based agenda get more traction, its devious BS.

 

[Kildonan]

I actually agree with Johnny on a few things.
We can learn a lot from our indigenous peoples. They are custodians of this land, they have been for an unbelievable amount of time. They remain so now, despite the white invasion and now multicultural occupation of this land. Their practices have served them well but arguments can be made that strategies which worked for millenia may now be obsolete. The Earth has been changed - its atmosphere is now warmer, the flora and fauna are altered, and the combustible loads are different to what used to be. The timing of burns has to be more critically planned, there are more interests to take into account. Our society already has rules and regulations that take the decision-making away from random individuals and given to trained experts who make risk assessments to decide when and where to burn.

We have to learn to trust these true Australians with a more complex situation than they traditionally had to deal with.