The sandpit seems to be going well, so I’m starting a new one. Please continue any ongoing discussion in the old sandpit. Meanwhile, this is the place for new side-debates, matters arising, Strocchi-length theoretical expositions and so on.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
John Quiggin 
One is forced to ask whether the Strocchiads should be classified as theoretical or merely rhetorical in nature.
I would like to see a picture of this sand pit since I wish to construct a sand pit of my own so that I can make sandcastles and whatnot at any time of the day.
Alan, maybe you should be asking Strocchi if he ever had a left-wing association before moving to the right.
Rat, 4 railroad sleepers on edge, arranged in a square and filled with sand, will do nicely for 1 or 2 kiddies, just add more sleepers for larger gatherings. Moistening the sand will make it much easier to shape into castles and suchlike.
The downside is the difficulty of stopping cats from crapping in it, and of course having your sandcastle knocked down by big smarty-pants kids. Look out, here comes Terje!
I would have thought the best advice on how to build castles out of sand would be available from Level 9, 377 Sussex Street, Sydney 2000 NSW.
@Ron E Joggles
Good idea however it isn’t for kids… unless you count me as a big kid… oh wait….
I’d much rather a tarpit.
@Donald Oats
Ever since Strocchi renamed it the sin bin its been deserted! (maybe thats why the sandpit is working so well). I think the Prof means fresh desert sands.
I wont be the only one tarred Don. Some of this lot have somewhere to go now with the long winded sidetracks….(and Ill have somewhere to go for a robust discussion) – straight to the fresh sands.
Id rather it wasnt a tarpit. That would make me a tarbaby.
The Holocene has reached its used by date?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/heading-into-new-little-ice-age.htm
Will CO2 save us?
El gordo, do you believe:
1. CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, or
2. Human activity has not increased CO2 concentration by about a third over the past two hundred years.
This website misrepresents science.
The data from ice cores shows that, unlike previous centuries, there has been no change in temperature for 129 years before 2000 (1870’s) until 2000 [ie 7 metres of core depth]
Prior to this, temperature regularly varied, and the average over each 6-metres cohort was always less than from the 1870’s when a dramatically warmer pattern set in.
The data clearly shows a warming trend due to some radical change in the atmosphere that hit the globe around the middle of the nineteenth century (1850+).
The fact that all the variation that existed for the prior thousands and thousands of years, has been abolish, could be an artefact of industrialisation compromising the ecology.
The facts these denialists put up as evidence for “heading-into-new-little-ice-age” in fact show the opposite.
We are now locked into a permanent high, that has stuck for over 130 years.
Data is at: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/temp/vostok/vostok.1999.temp.dat
el gordo, a while ago there was a blogger (whom I cannot remember) was trying to incite violence. Did you write the following ‘In India we would expect bloodshed and might tell the Church-builders not to be surprised when it happens’.
CW
Thanks for those numbers. Do you consider Mann’s hockey stick legitimate?
el gordo, for some reason I get the feeling I will not get a response from someone who has big reds jumping in the top paddock.
That quote is not mine, although I admit to having a degree in Quote Mining.
Tell me el gordo, who would want to impersonate a card carrying ‘denier’ of global warming who praises wright wing totalitarian regimes.
Moshie – el gordo should be in here – he has been warned. He is definitely not on the main page LOL. Havent we all done climate science delusionism to death? I think El Gordi could be related to Tony G.
‘Havent we all done climate science delusionism to death?’
Give up the green pills, Alice.
This is a sand pit, not a cess pit.
Can you find somewhere else to vent?
Chris – I note that Treasury has been completely cleared of “leaking” the coalitions costing black holes…very quietly and unobtrusively announced by Murdered media today.
There were no leaks. Another artificial intelligence creation by the Coalition….
Oh the lies. The lies. They ought to be called the Libellious Party, not the liberal party.
I may have just posted this in the wrong place, but I thouglt some would enjoy it:
In an amusing result for several “experts” the AEC hsa finally finshed the vote count and final tally with preference distribution. Labor WON by a small margin: 50.12 to 49.88
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2010/09/17/final-2pp-50-12-49-88-to-labor/comment-page-2/#comment-634110
I wouldn’t pretend that this is a particular mandate for anything, but it certainly gives the lie to thoes claiming the coalition had “won” when the truth was that the margin was too close to call and the counting wasn’t finished.
Actually this is not so Socrates.
Currently, the 2PP count is 93.21% complete.
William Bowe has said that it is no longer mathematically possible for the ALP to lose the 2PP, but the count does continue.
Well, hello Fran, fancy meeting you in Quiggin’s sandpit. Still pushing nuclear power over clean coal?
@Fran Barlow
me thinks el gordo has been here before Fran under a different name – could it be Jimbo Rose?
Call me Winston Smith. I want everyone to read this and get back to me with a critique.
Click to access Communicating_climate_change_to_mass_public_audiences_0.pdf
I don’t think so Alice. One of the things I’m good at is picking tone, syntax and register. It’s very hard to disguise that if you post for any length of time.
I’ve read enough of El Gordo’s material and Jim Rose’s as well and I very much doubt they share an author.
Sir John Beddington has commissioned a summary of the science of global warming and you can see the Orwellian tone in his softly spoken words.
‘Nothing in e-mails or IPCC controversies rises to a level that would call into question the core understandings about global climate disruption.’
Global climate disruption? I want global warming back, front and centre.
I would’ve thought it a lot more Orwellian to represent oneself, falsely, as someone from the far left who loves Julia in order to try and persuade people to accept your message. There may perhaps be someone out there on the ‘far left’ who ‘loves Julia’, but it would surprise me.
@el gordo
You are too late el Gordo
Even the miners want something done. So do have the denialists who have been reduced to silence in the face of right wing luminaries making noises about “doing something about it”. The Greens go the big swing in the last election – I wonder why? Even your own right wing types can see that change is in the air and they are going to be part of it or they will be left behind.
El Gordo – tell me…will you be the last denialist still waving his little flag of nonsense into the wind where no-one (even in your own party) will even want to hear you?
Sad – just sad.
Thankyou for those reassuring words, Alice. The Denialati Party will never abandon me and I can’t imagine where you heard that rumor.
I was hoping to find Fran, this morning’s Oz had an article by Scott Ludlam lecturing on nuclear power. Personally, I’m ambivalent on this issue and need a brief education.
Ludlam is a Green and just a casual read will illustrate his ignorance on nuclear power.
A way to deal with el gordo is to:
a) confine his confine his OT trolling to the sand box, and:
b) don’t engage him there.
He left deltoid when he was ignored on his restricted thread. He’s pretty easy to ignore when you consider his points are weak/unconvincing, and lack relevance and substance.
BTW,
El gordo is an unemployed sports journalist from Bathurst. His family are ashamed of his antics and embarrassed when he talks global warming when out with friends. He claims his son joined Greenpeace, but he claims many things that remain unsupported.
His interests included yanking your chain and diverting your attention. Engaging him leads to unproductive discussion.
Janet Akerman, what a lovely surprise.
jakerman is correct, just ignore me. Wait a minute…’he claims many things that remain unsupported.’
Hmmm…like what exactly?
@jakerman
Does he have a drug problem?
Chris, I don’t know, but he exhibits delusional behavior.
He probably thinks people are talking about him.
I wonder if that supercilious ass Christopher Pyne will continue to say that the Gillard government is “illegitimate”? The other good news today was confirmation that Stephen Fielding has lost his Senate seat, and even better, so has that upper-class twit Julian McGauran.@Socrates
@Ron E Joggles
Dont speak too soon. Senator Fielding is about causing as much damage with Tony Abbott as he can before July next year. He already announced his intention to block supply (and everything else I imagine) if he can – publicly.
@jakerman
Jackerman – not so long ago there was a “concern” troll in here who claimed he was once a member of Greenpeace, started out as an activist and then “saw the light” about AGW. Cant for the life of me recall his name but ..el gordo has definitely been here before and he hasnt just been watching from the sidelines.
By chance I found John Quiggin’s name on a scrap of paper and came down for a look about a week ago. Can’t remember being here before that.
Delusional? Highly unlikely.
Fielding is no spoiler, from the smh.
In a positive sign for the new minority Labor government, Senator Fielding praised Prime Minister Julia Gillard as a “very good negotiator” and a good listener.
“I think she has a very good chance of making it work,” he said
@el gordo
You are delusional el gordo – you have commented on Frans views historically here and other previous comments. You didnt just drop in here “about last week after noticing John Quiggin’s name on a scrap of paper”.
What a load of old bollocks.
DNFFT applies.
Dear Prof – we need a cess pit now.
Alice, I agree EG is delusional, however his comments on his past reading of Fran may be from deltoid.
@Alice Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought that there were no supply bills required before the new Senate sits. Perhaps someone who knows can enlighten me. In any case Fielding’s last few speeches in the Senate should be entertaining – Mc Gauran’s too, if he is still hyperventilating about “fraudulent” AGW evidence.
I found JQ’s name on a scrap of paper in my top left hand pocket. Vaguely remembered, but didn’t know what to expect.
This sandpit is addictive, congratulations to the author, certainly beats a Deltoid dungeon.
In IPCC FAQ 6.2 they explain why climate change today is unusual.
… ‘there is no evidence that this rate of possible future global change was matched by any comparable global temperature increase of the last 50 million years.’
Simply unbelievable.
@Ron E Joggles
I hope you are right Ron E (re supply)…as we an obviously expect the worst from Fielding who threw a little tanty because the Coalition didnt slide seamlessly into the leadership. I wont say that behaviour was limited to the Coalition as Penny Wong also threw a little tanty saying green votes were really labor’s. Im not that fond of seeing the unquestioning party loyalty slip showing.
@Alice
rather above should say “limited to Coalition sympathisers masquerading as independents”
@Ron E Joggles
That’s true. There aren’t. The 2010-11 budget has already passed and the 2011-12 budget can be put after June 30 2011, when the ALP will hold the numbers.
Of course, even if this were not the case the claim that “Senator Fielding migh block supply” is boneheadedly ignorant and is repeated only because talking heads in this country (let’s not dignify them with the title “journalist”) are by and large intellectual indolents. The senate is not like the UN Security Council. Supply can be blocked only by half of the senate voting to reject or defer it, and the senate is composed of more than two senators. Fielding can propose that 33 other senators join him in taking this course, but Abbott has ruled this out, and even if he got it into his head to do this while they still had an equal number of senators and supply came up and all coalitionists maintained solidarity, it would not be Fielding “blocking supply” but the coalition blocking it with Fielding’s support.
Fielding is not merely a fool, but a self-aggrandizing windbag who is, five and a bit years after sliming his way into the senate on the basis of a malign and idiotic piece of horsetrading by the ALP to get FF support for Jacinta Collins in NSW and screw the Greens in Victoria in favour of a Democrat, still dining on the utter and unremitting stupidity of the mainstream commentariat.
It’s disappointing to see an echo of this rubbish here.
@Fran Barlow
Fran – it was Fielding who first spouted it himself in the heat of not knowing whether his partisan support for the liberals was going to play out in terms of their leadership support. Ill be glad when that ratbag is gone. So will his electorate judging by his paltry votes. Ill admit to being bone headedly ignorant about parliamentary processes…frankly it bores me to death… when both major parties dont seem to even remotely connect with the electorate that votes them in.
” With climate change policy now being shaped by a cross-party committee comprising politicians and outside experts, Ms Gillard said that what she said before the election no longer applied.”
A cross party committee without the conservatives? Outside experts not including Carter or Archibald?
Looks like a dead rubber.