I want to get elected!

[slcmorro]

Every time I see a bike doing 400mph, pulling monoes or riding in thongs and shorts I feel like pulling them aside and pointing out that they are ******* it up for the rest of us.

Good luck catching them at 400mph. Even Seb Vettel would struggle.

 

[benno1973]

Nukes = lots of clean power.
GMO = lots of poor people fed.

That's an oversimplified, one-sided argument. I don't think that you can say that the Greens are ignorant and uninformed if they raise alternative viewpoints like:

Nukes = uranium mining, radioactive waste, Chernobyl, Fukushima
GMO = increased herbicide use, Monsanto, unproven health risks

Edit: removed dig at Dave

 

[treefiddy]

Are you arguing that nuclear power is clean and safe?

I don't necessarily agree with both the above policies, but I don't think these policies make them kooks?

They are divisive issues, but a complete ban on all things nuclear is a bit kooky. For instance, why shut down the OPAL reactor at Lucas Heights? Advancements in non-uranium nuclear technologies would be a win for everyone.

Seeing as nuclear reactors provides more power with less waste and less environmental harm than coal, I'd much rather live closer to a nuclear plant than coal. Especially when considering that nuclear reactors put less radiation into the atmosphere than coal plants.

That said, technology in power generation is increasing so rapidly that there would be little point in investing in nuclear power now. Nuclear power shouldn't be dismissed though, even if is only to highlight the negatives of coal power generation.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

Nukes = lots of clean power.
GMO = lots of poor people fed.

When the greens can present a viable alternative, they'll have an argument worth considering.

It's this ****** mindset that men in labcoats are subversively plotting our destruction we need to shake.

RE clean energy: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/4/29/renewable-energy/100-renewables-feasible-aemo

I'm not necessarily against nuclear power either, but would prefer heavy investment in renewables. It just makes sense long-term, and will only become more and more viable as energy storage technology progesses.

FTR I'm not against GM crops as long as there is sufficient regualtion (which there probably is, I have no idea, haven't really looked into it).

 

[Dave70]

That's an oversimplified, one-sided argument. Were you saying the Greens were ignorant and uninformed?

I'll preface this by saying I've nothing against 'renewable' energy. Sun, wind methane from **** or whatever.

Historically however, the greens love to demonize nuclear energy and GMO based on hysterical rhetoric, not facts. They have said 'this is evil' and that's that. Potential goodness is simply dismissed out of hand on principle.

How about willfully ignorant and deliberately uninformed?

 

[Dave70]

RE clean energy: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/4/29/renewable-energy/100-renewables-feasible-aemo

I'm not necessarily against nuclear power either, but would prefer heavy investment in renewables. It just makes sense long-term, and will only become more and more viable as energy storage technology progesses.

Me to.

But in the meantime, lets exploit the fact that Australia seismically surefooted and rich in uranium instead of turning ourselves into the planets quarry.

 

[benno1973]

Historically however, the greens love to demonize nuclear energy and GMO based on hysterical rhetoric, not facts. They have said 'this is evil' and that's that. Potential goodness is simply dismissed out of hand on principle.

How about willfully ignorant and deliberately uninformed?

Sorry Dave, removed my dig at you and edited my post above.

Still don't believe that they are 'willfully ignorant and deliberately uninformed'. They just have a different opinion to you is all.

 

[Dave70]

Sorry Dave, removed my dig at you and edited my post above.

Still don't believe that they are 'willfully ignorant and deliberately uninformed'. They just have a different opinion to you is all.

Never ever mind that mate.

 

[stakka82]

I'm a bit of a closet greenie but can't side with either their stance on nuclear power or their stance on GMOs.

Nuclear power is the best short term solution to climate change, simple as that. We don't have tectonic issues here, and we would be building state of the art modern reactors. In the mean while, steadily increase investment and incentives for the renewables (as we already do, to an extent).

We have been genetically modifying things for a long time, the process is just quicker now. Feeding more and more people with dwindling resources (and in the face of more extreme weather events) makes GMO a no-brainer.

Disclaimer: both have to be done carefully, in a heavily regulated fashion, but that being the case I can't see the moral quandary.

2c

 

[mash head]

http://www.biggamefishingjournal.com/pew_hutch_article.html
The above article gives an insight onto the Pew Charitable trust. This group funds most of the environmental groups around these days and basically is the pupetmaster. I have seen them in action and believe this article to be true. I had a quick search fro who funds the Greens and am willing to bet my balls that these guys would be there but couldn't find the info with a quick search. Ive seen enough lies through environmental science that I am very sceptical now. The above guys have basically screwed up my love and trust in science.
Its back to the cupboard with a foil hat for me.

 

[seamad]

Australia is pretty unique in that we have uranium and stable geology for waste storage. Instead of just being miners we should process uranium into fuel rods and lease them to other countries, and when spent they can return them for storage and then get new ones. That way we get more dollars out of it and there is less material around for the wrong people to get hold of.

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

Re GMO

Monsanto no longer have the patent rights to Glyphosate ( Roundup). What Monsanto are effectively trying to do is control the seed stock. Basically you have to buy the seed from them. They own any seed produced by that crop. You are not allowed to keep seed for sale or use for nect sessons crop.

GMO has the potential for great things, the problem is that that large entities want to own and control GMO for profit.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

Ive seen enough lies through environmental science that I am very sceptical cynical now.

fixed

 

[TasChris]

RE clean energy: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/4/29/renewable-energy/100-renewables-feasible-aemo

I'm not necessarily against nuclear power either, but would prefer heavy investment in renewables. It just makes sense long-term, and will only become more and more viable as energy storage technology progesses.

FTR I'm not against GM crops as long as there is sufficient regualtion (which there probably is, I have no idea, haven't really looked into it).

I agree renewables like bio fuels... No sorry kooky Greens are against renewables.

Cheers
Chris

 

[Liam_snorkel]

I agree renewables like bio fuels... No sorry kooky Greens are against renewables.

Cheers
Chris

yeah, those kooky greens.

• Protection of prime agricultural land, water and infrastructure from urban expansion, mining, inappropriate biofuel crops and other competing uses and encroachments.
• Support for the development and use of biofuels which are derived from agricultural waste, or from biofuel crops grown to rehabilitate marginal and degraded land.

http://www.greens.org.au/policies/sustainable-agriculture

 

[Dave70]

Re GMO

Monsanto no longer have the patent rights to Glyphosate ( Roundup). What Monsanto are effectively trying to do is control the seed stock. Basically you have to buy the seed from them. They own any seed produced by that crop. You are not allowed to keep seed for sale or use for nect sessons crop.

GMO has the potential for great things, the problem is that that large entities want to own and control GMO for profit.

Large entities controlling **** for profit is pretty much the way of the world, nothing to see here.

Thing is, the farmer feeding his family dirt in some third world **** hole because his wheat keeps dying due to not being able to fight off a preventable pest or disease couldn't give a **** for our legal or moral conundrums.
He's starving now.

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

Large entities controlling **** for profit is pretty much the way of the world, nothing to see here.

Thing is, the farmer feeding his family dirt in some third world **** hole because his wheat keeps dying due to not being able to fight off a preventable pest or disease couldn't give a **** for our legal or moral conundrums.
He's starving now.

And the large entity dont give a **** about the starving farmer. They know that the farmer will prob save seed for himself because he is dirt poor. So do you think they will make their seed available....

 

[Phoney]

I'm a bit of a closet greenie but can't side with either their stance on nuclear power or their stance on GMOs.

Nuclear power is the best short term solution to climate change, simple as that. We don't have tectonic issues here, and we would be building state of the art modern reactors. In the mean while, steadily increase investment and incentives for the renewables (as we already do, to an extent).

As I pointed out before - where are you going to build them? NIMBY's will never have it.

Look at how much opposition the James price point gas hub generated (it recently got struck down in court), and that's on an unpopulated stretch of coast near Broome. For every person like you who might say "Hey I've got no problem living near one" there'll be another several dozens angry parents with prams who will kick up a very loud fuss.

 

[hsb]

Bunbury is a perfect location.

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

"Harold, they are building something next door"

"Its OK Ethyl, I will do something about it......Hello Mr Laws my name is Harold and they are building something next door...."