Plimer and Silicon Chip

That is just as bad and meaningless as a Rudd speech. Pile of self contradictatory claptrap. As well, an elected member of The Greens has NO freedom to act in the best interest of their constituents.

Tom Keneally is a blinkered fool who doesn't know what he is talking about. He fails to understand the great difference between Australian before WWII and after and why more people are not going to be good for this country.

g0h1.html

Ross Gittins is an economist who thinks everything can be fully measured and valued by its dollar worth.

Whereas your total evidence is a report by career bureaucrats?.

**My evidence was supported by science.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

**Nope. It is policy. Please feel free to compile a full list of Federal political parties that have any reference to population policy.

Pile of self

**Yet. Give it time.

**Huh? The cited article SPECIFICALLY refers to the conflicting issues of population growth and CO2 emissions. It demostrates PRECISELY my point. Keneally may, or may not be a "blinkered fool". That is not the point. He raises some very important issues which need to be discussed. **Factually untrue. Gittens is one of the few economists who sees past the immediate Dollar.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Actually it is supported, in the main, by bureaucrats and academics whose jobs depend on the AGW scam. If and when the scam collapses there will be thousands of them made jobless. In addition to the bureaucrats and academics feeding directly at the trough there are now numbers of lawyers, accountants and sundry consultants who see a living to be made in promoting the scam.

I am not optimistic that those feeding at the trough will ever acknowledge that they are wrong even as the ice caps creep down over Canada and northern Europe. I am more optimistic however that the general public, who are the inevitable losers as this scam continues, will distrust the exaggerated claims of the warmers as these become increasingly strident and bizarre. When this happens the politicians, or at least the smarter ones among them, will figure out where the votes lie and what is needed for re-election.

R

**Not once, not EVER have you supplied any shred of evidence to support these recent claims of yours:

"much as your rants on firearms of a few years ago."

" More recent and more detailed study shows that CO2 always lags temperature."

"There are more than 500 cites in the first third of Plimer's book."

"Are you the Trevor Wilson who used to post loony ideas about gun control?

If so have you switched your loony tunes?"

Supply your cites or retract your claims. You have failed, despite repeated requests, to supply any evidence to support your nonsense.

by bureaucrats and academics

**As opposed to liars like Lindzen (paid more than US$2,500.00/day by fossil fuel intests) and Plimer (who has worked for many mining companies over the years)? Bollocks. Find me ONE CSIRO scientist who is paid more than $2,500.00/day for research into AGW. Just ONE scientist. Bet you cannot. The fossil fuel industry is huge and very wealthy. They can afford to corrupt scientists like Lindzen and Plimer to write lies in place of real science.

If and when the scam collapses there

**Scam? Place you science here:

And to think less than 6 months ago you were actually citing my design in Renew:

Go figure.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.eevblog.com

I don't have an opinion either way, but where is the ice cap creeping down? I was under the impression, given by photographic evidence, that glaciers are receding.

Additionally, I don't think they call it global warming, but climate change, depending on what the ocean currents do.

It isn't a definite population policy. It just includes population as another buzzword. The greens will NEVER post the population policy they believe it.

No, as an elected member of the greens, you must follow what the caucus decides. They have no capacity for independent action on any issue.

Nope, he argues for greater population for Australia for the benefits it will bring.

>

Climate change is the normal state of the climate on this planet; i.e. the only constant is change. It is just the time factor seems slow to humans.

Global warming is more correctly the amount of energy flowing around the planet. More energy pumping through the climate means greater chance of a climate extreme and more weather extremes on the way.*

The ice will creep down on Europe again if the gulf stream flips/stops.

• A shor term analogy might be the economy; when the money flowing picks up and gets real wild, market distortions happen, then something breka ands a crash happens, the money disappears from circulation and the economy slows down, to gradually build up again.

Yep, that's why I said "most".

The main definition is IIRC something like "no reasonable expectation to make a profit. I'd be most perplexed if anyone can claim having made a profit from an SC article alone! Perhaps if you did it as part of similar regular income work or some such.

Dave.

--
---------------------------------------------
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.eevblog.com

unless

to

to

Which is fine only as long as the tax department agrees it is a hobby. And that may well be the case for most people. Claiming blanket coverage for all contributors as a "hobby" however is incorrect.

MrT.

"COULD", you are joking that they may NOT be right? And population is projected to reach 9 or 10 Billion by the middle of the century or so. And nobody is even sure if it will decrease then or just keep climbing. Australia's current record level of population increase is certainly not consistent with government claims we need to do something about climate change, that's for sure! Still no sign of an end to Howard's baby bonuses or immigration levels either!

MrT.

Overpopulation, YES. However nuclear weapons are only a major problem IF they are used. Disposal of radioactive material is a problem of course, but probably more of it comes from nuclear power plants I will bet.

But as to the thrust of your main argument, NOT everyone cares about seeing their name in print enough to waste their time generating income for someone else!!! Personally I would rather put such articles on-line for everyone to see for nothing, and NOT have other people profit from MY endevours. You are entitled to make your own decisions however, but *not* necessarily criticise those not willing to do the same, IMO.

MrT.

log.com

In my case according to my accountant - the definition was whether the "hobby activity activity was run in a organised and businesslike way, and for a clear purpose of generating income, and unrelated to your current business activity" (or similar wording). I remember in my case that "hobby" income" from activities that were similar to my profession, were a problem area.

In the end, the amount involved wasn't that great, and it was considered less hassle just to pay the tax rather than possible extra accountants fees and possible risk of a dispute over the claim.

As it seems clear from your videos that you are an electronics professional and earn taxable income from that, and are probably using for your "SC hobby income" instruments, tools, home office, proportions of electricity, rent/mortgage on that you may claim as legitimate work related deductions on against your work income, this may possibly create a problem or "grey area" for you, in these circumstances.

As an example - writing/selling books on internet dating - as you mentioned in another post, is clearly totally unrelated to your electronics related profession, (it might not be if you ran a dating agency ;) doesn't use your work related equipment, and unless I am wrong, is probably done more for fun and hobby, or advising others on the subject rather than pursuing a career as a writer - should be a clear-cut case of "hobby income".

(Note, these are my recollections of tax advice that I was given some

6 years ago, they aren't necessarily correct or maybe not still valid with possible tax law changes made to this matter since that time and should really be confirmed with an accountant.)

For anyone considering claiming to the ATO that any sort of income is "hobby income", it would be very wise to consult an accountant first.

people

This rather contradicts that :

"Australia has an obligation to accept humanitarian migration including that resulting from climate change"

So being unable to control other countries population growth, that obviously locks us into unsustainable growth of our own.

The Greens unfortunately have no idea which way to go on climate change, but at least they do admit it :

"there are complex issues involved in population policy"

MrT.

"Mr.Turd "

** The possibility that they WILL BE USED increases every day.

That possibility IS the single, greatest threat facing mankind.

How typically asinine of Mr Turd to so grossly misinterpret Dave's comment.

** Seeing one's name in print is not the point - the telephone directory does that. Having ones efforts and ideas judged worthy of publication in a national magazine is what generates a sense of achievement. ** Time spent that benefits both oneself and others is never wasted.

What an utter ass Mr Turd makes of himself for saying it is.

** Nothing is all any of your demented ideas is worth.

** Fat chance of that, no matter what a vile Turd like you did.

..... Phil

snipped-for-privacy@newsfe17.iad...

ut

Agree on overpopulation. Worse still we are breeding exactly the wrong sort of people (at huge taxpayer expense).

Nukes seem to me to be a necessary evil and the nuclear weapons club will only grow.

Since the Iraq WMD fiasco, and the illegal invasion, other nations that are not (now) friends with the US (IE: Iran) have found that nukes are necessary if you are to survive and avoid invasion or annihilation.

If and when this US economic/currency collapse occurs, and the "protection racket" that we are on the receiving end of from the US falls over, Australia might regret not having been in the nuclear weapons club. Worse still would be places like South Korea and the middle eastern nations that are "protected".

In the past I don't recall any nation that had nukes being invaded. When push comes to shove, it seems its the only form of protection that has a deterrent effect. EG: China, North Korea, Former USSR, etc.

There is Pakistan of course that is unfolding, that could get interesting.............

ng

one

or

y

Each to his own, there isnt any wrong or right answer to this one.

My 2c worth would be that you would probably have better chance of exposure in Australia by being published in Silicon Chip, rather than being on a unknown personal web page that might never be found by the majority of people. If you have a unique project that few have thought of asking for, didn't know it existed or could be done, but it has benefit, this is a way to get the idea out there and the "Wow - what a great idea, I could use one of these" factor occurs. (IE: grabbing the attention of people who normally wouldn't have thought of such a project and therefore wouldn't search the web for it, but when shown it, and it is explained they can see the benefits and then want to buy and build it).

Bob Parker's ESR meter is probably a good example of this, and a brilliant device.

If you are producing a project with proprietary parts (ie a coded microcontroller) that can't just be grabbed off the shelf as a standard part by regular kit suppliers, and you want to sell the chip rather than publish the code, then SC probably would help you get more sales than an unknown webpage. Whether sales of this type are worth the trouble is another matter.

Yep, the way it works is you keep all those receipts for parts, books, etc that you used in developing the project. so Income = $10, but expenses = $1,000, equals deduction of taxable income of $900.