Guest svarg26 Posted February 14, 2011 now that brisbane is about to flush away a years supply of water from the dam. i am wondering how many years of water restrictions it took to save that amount of water. it certainly makes a mockery of the whole "we don't have enough water for everyone" hoopla. how many people did this "higher educated" derived policy kill? just asking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) Licka. I have called Hutch an idiot many times on the Global Cooling thread, which I've avoided for weeks now because it descended into this sort of nonsense. I don't shy away from doing so though (calling him an idiot, that is), because Hutch is not averse to throwing jibes around himself, and it now appears that he also thinks violence is an appropriate strategy to win an argument about science. And on the matter of insults, I asked one of my Asian friends what she thought of Hutch's comment, and she thought that it was offensively racist. It actually takes a lot to make me start on that sort of name-calling, but one sure way of doing so is to use bogus ideological claims, paranoia, and/or pseudoscience as arguments whilst simultaneously claiming that thousands of the worlds best scientists in physics, in chemstry, in climatology, in ecology, and in medicine (in the case of HIV denialists) are either all incompetent to do science, or are perpetrating a global conspiracy and fraud, or both. Hutch is a master at this sort of grandiose diagnosis. If one carefully reads his posts is becomes evident however that he doesn't actually use any real science himself, or any otherwise reliable data, to back his ideas - it's all just opinion and tabloid chum. Which brings me back to the pointof all of this. Hutch, can you use some numbers and credible analyses to support your claims, and to refute mine? And remember, this is the sustainable global population thread, so pick something I have said about the number of humans on the planet and detail why my reporting of the science is wrong. Edited February 14, 2011 by WoodDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
synchromesh Posted February 14, 2011 Environmental Militant Killed by Police at Discovery Channel Headquarters Manger said the suspect had "metalic canisters" strapped to his chest and back. When Lee was struck by police bullets, one of the canisters "popped." Police have not confirmed if the canisters were a bomb, but Manger said the "device may have gone off" when he was shot. In a rambling manifesto on Lee's website, believed to have been written by Lee, the writer rails against "disgusting human babies," "parasitic infants," and says people should "disassemble civilization." The manifesto also calls on Discovery to "broadcast to the world their commitment to save the planet." Discovery Channel Gunman Penned ManifestoOn his website, Lee posted a rambling manifesto under the title "My Demands," which espouses a far-radical environmentalist and misinthropic philosophy and calls on the channel to cease programming about giving birth, war and weapons. "The planet," he wrote, "does not need humans." The document, which appears to have been created on July 17, is interspersed with references to esoteric philosophers, childish language, misspellings, and capital letters. Lee writes that the channel should cease its current programming and replace it with a game show about reducing the global population. The channel, he wrote, should produce a program about "how people can live WITHOUT giving birth to more filthy human children since those new additions continue pollution and are pollution." "The world needs TV shows that DEVELOP solutions to the problems that humans are causing, not stupify the people into destroying the world. Not encouraging them to breed more environmentally harmful humans," he wrote. "Saving the environment and the remaning [sic] species diversity of the planet is now your mindset. Nothing is more important than saving them. The Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels. . . The humans? The planet does not need humans," he wrote. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 now that brisbane is about to flush away a years supply of water from the dam. i am wondering how many years of water restrictions it took to save that amount of water. it certainly makes a mockery of the whole "we don't have enough water for everyone" hoopla. You're using faulty logic here. If the dam is kept full to the brim, and there is another storm cell in the near future of the sort that brought the floods, then the flooding will be more catastrophic than it was in January. Oh, and there is a risk of the dam failing, to boot. That would be a clever move, wouldn't it? Not. It seems to have escaped the notice of many that the SOI is indicating that the La Niña might not peter out in a few months as it was expected to do, so the risk of further flooding is greater than previously predicted. The only way to guarantee that there is capacity to save lives in such a circumstance is to release the flood capacity that is currently occupied. If it means that water has to be released, then so be it. I can imagine what would be said if they kept it and thousands more people ended up dying in an even bigger flood or a dam breakage. What would you be saying in that case, svarg26? Your problem is that you imagine that the current infrastructure is able to capture all extreme La Niña water, and then trickle it out during droughts. It's not designed to do that - one of the problems is that the dam is no longer big enough to deal extreme events, as it was thought to be when it was built. And making a dam large enough to actually be able to do so is probably beyond the current technical and financial capacity of Queensland. how many people did this "higher educated" derived policy kill? Exactly to which ""higher educated" derived policy", as opposed to a commercial management policy, are you referring? Just asking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 What's your point Syncro? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted February 14, 2011 Licka. I have called Hutch an idiot many times on the Global Cooling thread, which I've avoided for weeks now because it descended into this sort of nonsense. I don't shy away from doing so though (calling him an idiot, that is), because Hutch is not averse to throwing jibes around himself, and it now appears that he also thinks violence is an appropriate strategy to win an argument about science. And on the matter of insults, I asked one of my Asian friends what she thought of Hutch's comment, and she thought that it was offensively racist. It actually takes a lot to make me start on that sort of name-calling, but one sure way of doing so is to use bogus ideological claims, paranoia, and/or pseudoscience as arguments whilst simultaneously claiming that thousands of the worlds best scientists in physics, in chemstry, in climatology, in ecology, and in medicine (in the case of HIV denialists) are either all incompetent to do science, or are perpetrating a global conspiracy and fraud, or both. Hutch is a master at this sort of grandiose diagnosis. If one carefully reads his posts is becomes evident however that he doesn't actually use any real science himself, or any otherwise reliable data, to back his ideas - it's all just opinion and tabloid chum. Which brings me back to the pointof all of this. Hutch, can you use some numbers and credible analyses to support your claims, and to refute mine? And remember, this is the sustainable global population thread, so pick something I have said about the number of humans on the planet and detail why my reporting of the science is wrong. Ha ha ha ha......It will only be violent when you have the guts to say it to my face....You will have an opportunity to apologize..This community is not that big and I am going to a few events this year and I am bound to run into you, I will make a point of it....You will be pointed out to me....If you have no issue with anything you have said to me to set me on this path then you will have no issue saying them to my face...I followed your links pal...your insults are in a lot of those as well...Idiot is not the only one...I'm not threatening you....A threat is something you may do...You have continually insulted me so man up and do it to my face....I will...and I look forward to it...You will learn that hiding behind a computer does not absolve you from responsibility for what you say... and as for picking your arguments apart I still can't stop laughing at all your calculators...The 5 calculators to live your life by hey? See ya soon.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
synchromesh Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) And on the matter of insults, I asked one of my Asian friends what she thought of Hutch's comment, and she thought that it was offensively racist. Kinda redundant, no? What's your point Syncro? What's yours by asking me that question? Edited February 14, 2011 by synchromesh Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted February 14, 2011 You're using faulty logic here. If the dam is kept full to the brim, and there is another storm cell in the near future of the sort that brought the floods, then the flooding will be more catastrophic than it was in January. Oh, and there is a risk of the dam failing, to boot. That would be a clever move, wouldn't it? Not. It seems to have escaped the notice of many that the SOI is indicating that the La Niña might not peter out in a few months as it was expected to do, so the risk of further flooding is greater than previously predicted. The only way to guarantee that there is capacity to save lives in such a circumstance is to release the flood capacity that is currently occupied. If it means that water has to be released, then so be it. I can imagine what would be said if they kept it and thousands more people ended up dying in an even bigger flood or a dam breakage. What would you be saying in that case, svarg26? Your problem is that you imagine that the current infrastructure is able to capture all extreme La Niña water, and then trickle it out during droughts. It's not designed to do that - one of the problems is that the dam is no longer big enough to deal extreme events, as it was thought to be when it was built. And making a dam large enough to actually be able to do so is probably beyond the current technical and financial capacity of Queensland. how many people did this "higher educated" derived policy kill? Exactly to which ""higher educated" derived policy", as opposed to a commercial management policy, are you referring? Just asking. Which brings me back to your infamous quote when YOU blamed GLOBAL WARMING......Now you admit the dam was too full...DER! More of that rain you said wasn't going to happen.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lickapop Posted February 14, 2011 Ha ha ha ha......It will only be violent when you have the guts to say it to my face....You will have an opportunity to apologize..This community is not that big and I am going to a few events this year and I am bound to run into you, I will make a point of it....You will be pointed out to me....If you have no issue with anything you have said to me to set me on this path then you will have no issue saying them to my face...I followed your links pal...your insults are in a lot of those as well...Idiot is not the only one...I'm not threatening you....A threat is something you may do...You have continually insulted me so man up and do it to my face....I will...and I look forward to it...You will learn that hiding behind a computer does not absolve you from responsibility for what you say... and as for picking your arguments apart I still can't stop laughing at all your calculators...The 5 calculators to live your life by hey? See ya soon.... settle down...your in the wrong community threatening people....racism, threats...your on A ROLL Let me know all the things of how I have insulted(albeit never meant to insult you) you and if we meet I will fucking gladly tell you to your face. LMFAO at how you take all this so serious. Tell me the chemical cocktail your on so I can at least understand all this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lickapop Posted February 14, 2011 couldnt get weed this week? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lickapop Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) mrs kick you out? lose your job? feel intimidated by higher educated? insomnia? house burn down? scared about climate change? little man syndrome? ashamed? pissed off because you didnt get the $1000 flood relief stimulus 2 money? centerlink fuck up your payments this week? oh why so much anger? tell me dog died? cat? to much rain? not enough rain? worms? stolen generation? pissed off because you can only give out 1 neg? Edited February 14, 2011 by lickapop Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) settle down...your in the wrong community threatening people....racism, threats...your on A ROLL Let me know all the things of how I have insulted(albeit never meant to insult you) you and if we meet I will fucking gladly tell you to your face. LMFAO at how you take all this so serious. Tell me the chemical cocktail your on so I can at least understand all this Wasn't directed at you and you know it...But I'm happy to give you the chance..now off ya go...best get out of your school clothes... If you haven't worked it out yet Woody makes me and a little bit of this and then I'm back to thisand finally he brings me to this Edited February 14, 2011 by hutch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lickapop Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) so much anger. I know your type Edited February 14, 2011 by lickapop Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 Which brings me back to your infamous quote when YOU blamed GLOBAL WARMING......Now you admit the dam was too full...DER! Do I have to use really little words so that you understand, hutch? I said, to paraphrase, that to the extent that the warming of the planet has caused the enhanced evaporation of ocean water which fell as precipitation over eastern Australia, then yes, global warming has exacerbated the flooding. That's different to "blaming global warming", although I suspect that you don't understand why. Oops, I didn't use little words, did I? More of that rain you said wasn't going to happen.... When exactly did I say this? And hutch, just so you know, I've archived this thread for posterity. I'm not scared of your threats of violence (I doubt that you could hit me harder than I've been hit in the past), but my safety and my kids' has been threatened by real bullies before and there's no way I'm going to quietly allow someone to threaten me or my family again. It's one thing for anonymous people to slag off at each other on a web forum, but physical violence is something else entirely. If you ever feel the need to debate science with your fists or with a cricket bat you'll be standing in a dock faster than you can say "charged with assault". And hutch, just so you know some more, that's a warning, not a threat. I broke a vertebra in my back once, and it's now seriously displaced, and if anyone ever decides he has the right to endanger my already dicky spinal health he'd better be prepared to face conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm, and committing GBH, and to pay a suit for paraplegia. If you're prepared to endanger my glass vertebra because you have a glass jaw, go for it. As I said, you've been cautioned. Now, can we get back to some science? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lickapop Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) yes please I was really enjoying this thread until all the anger One thing I was curious about and have not been able to find is..what time frame are we looking at to reach 10billion souls? Edited February 14, 2011 by lickapop 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted February 14, 2011 Do I have to use really little words so that you understand, hutch? I said, to paraphrase, that to the extent that the warming of the planet has caused the enhanced evaporation of ocean water which fell as precipitation over eastern Australia, then yes, global warming has exacerbated the flooding. That's different to "blaming global warming", although I suspect that you don't understand why. Oops, I didn't use little words, did I? When exactly did I say this? And hutch, just so you know, I've archived this thread for posterity. I'm not scared of your threats of violence (I doubt that you could hit me harder than I've been hit in the past), but my safety and my kids' has been threatened by real bullies before and there's no way I'm going to quietly allow someone to threaten me or my family again. It's one thing for anonymous people to slag off at each other on a web forum, but physical violence is something else entirely. If you ever feel the need to debate science with your fists or with a cricket bat you'll be standing in a dock faster than you can say "charged with assault". And hutch, just so you know some more, that's a warning, not a threat. I broke a vertebra in my back once, and it's now seriously displaced, and if anyone ever decides he has the right to endanger my already dicky spinal health he'd better be prepared to face conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm, and committing GBH, and to pay a suit for paraplegia. If you're prepared to endanger my glass vertebra because you have a glass jaw, go for it. As I said, you've been cautioned. Now, can we get back to some science? Goodness gracious...listen to yourself......you do what you need to do....Most people on being brought into a police station for the first time always let the cops no they have week kidneys or liver.....Its a common laugh around cop shops....How dare you even suggest I would in anyway harm your family....They can't help having a father who bullies on line.....But the biggest load of crap would have to go to this: I f you ever feel the need to debate science with your fists or with a cricket bat Why is it okay for you to debate science with insults and bullying as you do? Make a Habit of being attacked by people do you? wonder why....wouldn't have anything to do with the type of person you are? See how it feels to be bullied? You didn't like it did you...why were there people bullying you? So you now say you know what it feels to be bullied but you have no issue in doing to me as a means of showing off.... Any time I see you bullying another on this forum I am going to jump down your throat...thats a warning...not a threat... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hutch Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) yes please I was really enjoying this thread until all the anger One thing I was curious about and have not been able to find is..what time frame are we looking at to reach 10billion souls? MMM yes...you just never contributed to it......til now Edited February 14, 2011 by hutch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Legba Posted February 14, 2011 How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth? um... one? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 One thing I was curious about and have not been able to find is..what time frame are we looking at to reach 10billion souls? That's a complicated question Licka, because it depends on a lot of stochastic parameters and on government policies. The best way of framing it is to ask what will the population be in 2050, which is a bit of a landmark in various demographic models. If things go roaringly and there are no early or major impediments to human population growth, the upper figure for 2050 is 10.5 billion. The intermediate figure (more likely) is 9 billion, and if there is an active global campaign to reduce family size along with the commencement of more environmental disasters, the world population might only go up to 7.5 billion by 2050. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 How dare you even suggest I would in anyway harm your family I didn't say that you threated my family - you obviously to not understand how to interpret conjunctions, or Boolean choices. I said that I take seriously any threat to myself or my family. Understand? And really, who's the bully here? Me, because I point out when people use poor logic, ideology, conspiracy, and pseudoscience, or you who wants to dust me up behind the tents? Now, back to the science that you are so averse to... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
synchromesh Posted February 14, 2011 (edited) How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth? um... one? And really, who's the bully here? Me, because I point out when people use poor logic, ideology, conspiracy, and pseudoscience, or you who wants to dust me up behind the tents? And hutch, just so you know some more, that's a warning, not a threat. I broke a vertebra in my back once, and it's now seriously displaced, and if anyone ever decides he has the right to endanger my already dicky spinal health he'd better be prepared to face conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm, and committing GBH, and to pay a suit for paraplegia. Edited February 14, 2011 by synchromesh 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 Why is it okay for you to debate science with insults and bullying as you do? Make a Habit of being attacked by people do you? wonder why....wouldn't have anything to do with the type of person you are? See how it feels to be bullied? You didn't like it did you...why were there people bullying you? So you now say you know what it feels to be bullied but you have no issue in doing to me as a means of showing off....Any time I see you bullying another on this forum I am going to jump down your throat...thats a warning...not a threat... Hutch, I don't give a rat's arse what you call me, because I don't consider that to be bullying. Similarly, if I think that someone else is being an idiot on a forum and I can point to data that supports my contention, I'll call it. If someone's prepared to say something stupid, when it's previously been pointed out to them to be stupid, they should be prepared to wear the resultant derision. And I notice that you never actually stick with any point when I tell you that you're wrong - it's just on to the next pseudoscientific cannard and ignore the glaring contradictions to your poor arguments. In such circumstances do you actually wonder why you're being flamed? However, physical violence and threats thereof are a different thing altogether. I would never threaten anyone physically, and your doing so puts you in a completely different catgory of bully than your glass-jawed perception of me being one for calling you an idiot. What do you think that makes you? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 Syncro. It goes to show how there are conspiracies, and then there are conspiracies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
synchromesh Posted February 14, 2011 Which is which? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WoodDragon Posted February 14, 2011 Which is which? Ah... ...conspiracies are conspiracies, and conspiracies are conspiracies. Understand, grasshopper? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
