• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Mining and the Greens

Status
Not open for further replies.

Scotty

David Codey (61)
Elfster,

The geothermal (hot rocks) power is being developed here in Australia. There are at least 2 firms doing work in this area, one of which is now part owned by Origin (last I looked anyway). This will be a source of base load power in this country in the future, but still has a few years yet before it reaches any large scale format.
 

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
There is some promise with geothermal out in the Cooper Basin in South Australia. Santos have been there for years with onshore gas in Moomba (that's a shit of a joint if ever I saw one), but firms are looking at the hot rocks too. I'd be more than happy if that could be made commercial, because you can supply base load power with it.
 

Cutter

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I saw that on telly the other night. Good to see that they got their big donations in before seeking to cut it off. Do I say, not as I do eh?

We know that in the US the correlation between campaign spending and votes is pretty strong. It seems to be heading that way in Australia too. On that basis, the Greens need to finance their campaign somehow. By what alternative means would you suggest they do so? They were as good as their word and banned the donations and would go further if they had the support.
 

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
It's the hypocrisy that grates with me. They set themselves up to our moral guardians and then receive the largest donation in Australian political history, $1.6m from Graeme Wood (founder of Wotif). Now after receiving said donation, they want to close the gate. I think I could be forgiven for thinking that it was a bit cynical on their behalf. I couldn't give a rats arse about the size of political donations, but I'm not the one who's made a song and dance about it -- Bob Brown is. If he really believed in what he says, wouldn't he knock the donation back?

I'll also add that if you cap donations, then what you'll end up with is a bunch of rich people funding their own campaigns, which I would argue does less to further democracy than the alternative.
 

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Scotty; that argument is fair enough (claiming to have a higher moral ground but still being hypocrites like the rest), but your original statement is nowhere near what you just stated - hence why I mentioned that. Saying "if they do x, then imagine what they might do/they will do y!" generally isn't a valid or strong argument.

But parties who attempt to take a moral high ground have to be twice as careful as the others with what they do. And the Greens are one of those parties. Especially with donations - the work the Greens have done carefully vetting NSW Labor's donations is commendable, as they have caught out Labor not declaring donations and hiding donations through Unions.

BTW, Bob Brown is too far left and too outspoken on marginal issues and if the Greens want to grow they need to find a new leader soon.
 

Ash

Michael Lynagh (62)
Catch the Fire ministries are a bunch of crazies. One of their leaders blamed the Victorian bushfires on the decriminalisation of abortion and claimed to have prophetic visions of the fires.

http://ozsoapbox.com/rest-of-australia/what-the-hell-is-wrong-with-catch-the-fire-ministries/

BTW, Peter Costello was closely aligned with those crazies, including taping a special Australia Day message for them a few years back.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/11/costello-tries-to-hose-down-catch-the-fire-connection/
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/01/22/costello-continues-to-catch-the-fire/

Costello should have had better sense.
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
I love some of those comments on the 'floods are caused by Rudd criticising Israel' article. My all-time favourite is this one- persist to the end, it pays off:

agree whole heartedly.

Thankyou so much for writing this, and brining this to everyone’s attention. Praise the Lord. I’m going to direct anyone I see grieving to this post. I believe that the earth is at serious risk of being forever alone.

Too long has humanity lived in it’s own ignorance, and strayed away from the light. Too long have people sinned, without a thought for the repercussions. Whilst my every thought and prayer is with the lord’s flock, I cannot help but think that this revelation is washing away mankind’s taint. I cannot help but believe that this cleansing will open the disbelievers eyes to the word of the almighty lord. Praise the lord.

I hope that QLD, Australia, and the entire world can take heed of these dire warnings, lest the lord must further demonstrate his holy wrath. What does this display say about the amlighty’s power level. Over 9000 people need to repent, and confess their sins if they are ever to be free of guilt. Praise the Lord.

I cannot thank you enough for all the prayers that you have already offered for all of these unfortunate souls. Today, my son came to me after watching some of the footage. He said to me, ‘I’m 12 and what is this?’ Upon hearing that I burst into tears. I see this kind of wrath being wrought upon the sinners, and I do not want my children to grow up, being able to be lured into these ways

We need to give glory to the lord for our abundant blessings. The almighty works in mysterious ways, however we all know that he spites heathens for their blasphemy. Praise the Lord. My continuous prayers are with all those effected. I’m sure that there are a lot of emotions within people’s hearts at the moment. Earlier today, I visited my parents, told my mum. She got scared and said, ‘You’re movin’ with your auntie and uncle in Bel-Air.’ Bless her and the Lord.
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Also that Bob Brown article is a fucking disgrace. If Abbott came out and said something similar he would be abused from all corners. To say the flood was caused by global warming is one thing, but to then say that mining companies are culpable is another thing entirely.

The Greens are a major party now, and need to start acting like it. This is primary school stuff that helps no-one.
 

Scotty

David Codey (61)
Ash,

Fair comment, but I know you are smart enough to interpret my original statement further. And I'm sure you already thought the same thing (about the moral high ground issue). In saying that, of course my original statement was meant to have an inflammatory tinge to it.

Stott Despoja's article from business spectator.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...crutiny-pd20110117-D6RMV?OpenDocument&src=kgb

The issue of political donations is vexed. Arguably, a pure party that purports to occupy the moral high ground should be prepared to forgo donations that exceed the limit that the party deems immoral or unacceptable. Then again, when everyone else is doing it, it is impossible to compete otherwise.

Such funding is pivotal especially when used, as this was, for mainstream television. Television advertising (and the Greens had effective and appealing ads) is crucial in a successful campaign.

I remember, now fondly, being at a fund-raising dinner in 2001 which charged diners well below the donor limit yet, Greens supporters organised a soup kitchen outside to emphasise how inappropriate it was to accept donations from business!

It’s amusing in retrospect (given the Greens do the same dinners now) but there is an important lesson – especially for balance-of-power parties – that engagement with business and industry is crucial.
 

Scotty

David Codey (61)
Also that Bob Brown article is a fucking disgrace. If Abbott came out and said something similar he would be abused from all corners. To say the flood was caused by global warming is one thing, but to then say that mining companies are culpable is another thing entirely.

The Greens are a major party now, and need to start acting like it. This is primary school stuff that helps no-one.

It seems their supporters completely ignore this sort of shit and back them no matter what.
 

The_Brown_Hornet

John Eales (66)
Baba, that post is terrific. There really are some nutcases out there.

On the other hand, there isn't enough rotten fruit in Australia that could be hurled at Bob Brown right now.
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
Gerard Henderson's take on Bob Brown's comments:

Eco doomsayers: blind to history, unreliable tipsters January 18, 2011

Senator Bob Brown is old enough to know better. Literally.

At the weekend, the Greens' leader blamed the coal industry for the floods currently devastating large parts of Australia. In the media release headed "Coal barons should help pay for the catastrophes", he argued for an increased tax on the coal industry to "help pay the cost of the predicted more severe and more frequent floods, droughts and bushfires in coming decades".

The Greens leader, who was trained in medicine, is a very effective politician. It's a pity, however, that he does not spend more time reading history. Born in December 1944, Brown was almost 30 when, in January 1974, the area around Brisbane was inundated with water - in a flood which killed 14 people.

Advertisement: Story continues below If Brown studied history he would know that there were numerous floods in Brisbane in the 1890s - in 1890, 1893, 1896 and 1898. Eighteen ninety-three was the worst year, with the height of the flood measured at more than nine metres. The history of the time is documented in Ronald Lawson's book Brisbane in the 1890s, which was published a year before the 1974 flood.

Lawson had this to say about the two floods that afflicted Brisbane in 1893: "Railway lines were temporarily cut, the river blocked, the bridges destroyed, warehouses inundated, and stock ruined. Furthermore, since most workers' homes were in low-lying areas, the floods exacerbated the plight of many of the unemployed."

In 1893 the working class tended to live in the low-lying areas, close to the river. By 2011, these areas were very much the preserve of the more affluent, who were encouraged by the Brisbane City Council, especially during Jim Soorley's time as lord mayor (1991-2003), to embrace the Brisbane River.

During the past week, the Premier, Anna Bligh, has been praised widely for handling the flood crisis in Queensland. She deserves this. Campbell Newman, Brisbane's Liberal lord mayor, has also put in a sterling performance. Newman's military background has equipped him well for crisis management. But there is more to it than this.

Newman approaches the crisis with considerable authority. He has been one of the few senior Queensland politicians who have told it as it is. Newman's message is blunt. Brisbane was built on a flood plain. This explains why there has been so much flooding of Brisbane - in the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. Put simply, Brisbane has flooded in the past and, sadly, it will flood again.

When Brisbane flooded in 1893 and 1974, at levels higher than last week, no one blamed global warming in general or the chief executives of coal companies in particular.

In his statement at the weekend, Brown overlooked the fact that the reason the flood peak was higher in 1974 than 2011 turned on the construction of the Wivenhoe Dam, which was opposed by environmentalists of the day.

What has been particularly valuable about the extensive media coverage, particularly on ABC News 24 and Sky News, has been the focus on older Australians in Brisbane and in numerous towns on various rivers. They remember past floods in Queensland, NSW, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, just as older Victorians, who experienced the bushfires of Black Saturday 2009, remembered Black Friday of 1939.

Writing in The Age last Friday, Ellen Sandell declared that "these floods should be a deafening wake-up call". She is national director of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition. Sandell wrote: "As a young person who will inherit the world being created now, I want us to start talking about what needs to happen to prevent this kind of tragedy from occurring again and again. I don't want to live in the kind of world we are previewing right now."

Sandell is a true-believing environmentalist. Pity she does not know more history. There has always been droughts and bushfires and floods in Australia, before and after European settlement. There always will be. If Sandell does not want to live in this kind of world, then the only solution is personal emigration. The problem is that most countries, over the ages, have experienced weather disasters. It's called nature.

The problem with so many environmentalists turns on their capacity to exaggerate, which is exacerbated by a lack of historical awareness. There is much of the eco-catastrophist in lawyer/politician Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, film and book. Yet he remains a hero of the green movement.

It's much the same with the American academic Paul Ehrlich. The thesis of his 1968 book The Population Bomb was that "the battle to feed all of humanity is over". Ehrlich predicted that "in the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions will starve to death". He even prophesied that Australia would close its borders in 1974 to prevent a fever pandemic.

None of this happened. Yet Ehrlich is still making predictions of doom. He was interviewed on the Radio National Late Night Live program a year ago, but no one spoke about false prophecy. It's much the same with Brown. Eco-catastrophist seers are rarely held to account for unfulfilled predictions or historical amnesia.

In recent years, there has been much public funding of environmental causes. Brown's ahistorical approach to weather disasters indicates Australia should put more resources into history courses. Let's start with the Brisbane floods of 1893, 1974 and 2011.

This is such a tired argument that misses the point on climate change entirely. After every bushfire, drought, flood or cyclone the first reaction is from the Greenies who point to climate change, and then the response from the far right is always to point to a bigger bushfire, drought, flood or cyclone that occurred in the 1870s and say 'we have had a bigger [event] before, therefore climate change is crap'.

He neglects to comment on the fact that sea temperatures are at a record high, and we have just had our hottest year on record, and wettest December. But at the end of the day the article is a drastic over-simplification of what climate change is all about. It is not simply a case of events being CAUSED by climate change. Rather, climate change didn't cause the flood per se, but it probably increased its intensity.

I am not a massive Greenie but the data on climate change is hard to ignore. It is hard to deduce what is truly going on whilst it is happening though, and I am always sceptical about what the Green lobby has to say about natural disasters. But this article, like most from Henderson, is a tired rant with no relevance to the larger debate.
 

matty_k

Peter Johnson (47)
Staff member
Can we create a GaGR Institute so that we can comment on anything and everything that we like and get it published nationally.
 

Ruggo

Mark Ella (57)
Directly blaming the coal industry is silly. Our natural disasters are becomming far more intense and it is not unreasonable for humans to be asking if our interaction with our earth is affecting this trend. I think I get what he was trying to say but how he went about it was total bullshit. If the Greens truly believe in social compassion, they should punch themselves in the head for making these stupid comments in so many peoples time of need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ash
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top