OT GW

Thats right. Got it in one.

ong.

s

They don't really have anyone else they can use, and this current "thing" is completely on the nose and unelectable.

**No luck involved. I've had my fair share of incompetent, or uncaring doctors. IME, that amounts to about 30% of them. That said, if my life was in the balance, I'd rather be attended by a doctor than a plumber.

-- Trevor Wilson

He reminds me of something Ah - I remember now :

"Polly want a cracker"

"Polly want a cracker"

e

and

The people that share those views is referred to as "The Majority of Australians"

Interesting too, how he accuses anyone who disagrees with him of having religious motives or associations, but to date, no one has brought up religion except him.

This time it is Catholics who are referred to.

Interesting that their former leader Latham wrote similar in his book (I don't know if he mentioned the Liberals) after leaving the ALP.

If nothing else, he was in a position to know a lot more about the organisation than most.

Their demise started in the 80's when power factions started taking power away from local party members and started annoiting their local candidates.

The "Green Slime" has been growing for longer, very slowly. It does well when large segments of the people are fed up with BOTH major parties. Hint, slime is an essential biological phenomina(sp?).

I sadly doubt it.

Hahahahaha, i'll believe that when I see it.

>

Yep, people are just about past ex trade union leaders and they can not follow another woman with another woman (novel).

The alternative isn't, sadly.

**Of course. I never assumed that the majority of Australians were particularly bright. Did you? Look at the success of the following:

• Alan Jones

• The Murdoch Press

• Its a Knockout

• The Bolt Report

• Today

• A Current Affair

• Danoz

• Sunrise

• Deal or no Deal

• Today

Tonight

• Etc

**Bollocks. No, not bollocks. An outright lie. What I DO accuse those who have dissagreed with me (in this thread) of being is ignorant. None have admitted to reading the IPCC AR4.

, but to date, no one has brought up religion

**Another lie. I suggest you read the thread carefully.

**And I was not the first.

-- Trevor Wilson

on

ome

er

an

an

s o s

in

l and

.

No, there are a lot who aren't, but a lot have awoken in the last couple of years

Look at the success of the following:

Haven't heard the guys program but if he is exposing AGW for what it is, he cant be too bad.

Taken down by the "Thought Police" and had his human rights trampled recently so therefore must have been credible or would have been left alone.

Can't say I watch any of that.

Can anyone else on here comment if they do ?

Probably true that you aren't the first, but you bring it up the most often.

**I accept your admission that you lied.

Go read AR4.

-- Trevor Wilson

Which doesn't quite explain how they were able to maintain the most successful federal Labor Government in Australian history from 1983 to

1996!... And if weren't for the totally uninspiring Beazley would've been back in office after just two terms in opposition (at most).

They're suddenly doing exceptionally well as the loony left desert Labor in droves (and aren't likely to return). The Greens are to Labor what One Nation was to the National Party... except that Gillard has been stupid enough to form an alliance which has pissed off the moderates, who then vote Liberal. The biggest obstacle to an even greater exodus is Abbott.

The only direction remaining for Labor is down!

--
John H

Wife watches Sunrise... for the morning news I think (I prefer The Australian). ;)

'Deal or no Deal' is a must, where folk claiming to be teachers, etc, demonstrate their complete inability to perform simple mental arithmetic. I'm yet to see a climatologist but it's probably only a matter of time! :)

--
John H

tion

pt

t

some

mber

s,

ok

than

than

of

has

d

do

o

s.

aks

is

, in

in

g

e.

e l

ell and

...

of

e

no, i stated the obvious

Mine occasionally watches that. (has it on while she is doing stuff around the house) It gives me a good incentive to get out of the house and do something constructive. As soon as you hear an ad for a miracle vacuum cleaner, exercise gear or whatever that is a good motivation.

I can remember occasionally seeing the ending of that show a while back, which was on just before the news (When I used to watch the 6pm news). People paid very dearly for the lack of knowledge of probability and statistics.

"Well, there is $100,000 and 50c on the board, would you like to take a turn at knocking out the 50c and walking home with a massive $100k - or take the offer of $50k".

They also fail to realise that $50k tax free (tax free as a competition prize, unless the laws have changed since last time I looked)

- Is worth a hell of a lot more than just 50k - its worth what you need to earn to NET $50k after tax. (depends on bracket you are in)

- It is probably worth $250k + if you are in the early years of a mortgage when you take 25 yr of non tax deductible interest into account and the tax paid on the earnings to pay that.

- Taking that much financial and associated mental stress out of your life, allowing you to spend more time with your family, or your wife not being forced to work if she doesn't want to - PRICELESS.

No wonder we have a bloody financial crisis...... ;)

Probably.

One good thing to come out of the current political mess is that the Greens have peaked, and come the next election they'll be acting as ushers guiding what remains of the Labor party into the remotest corner of the political wilderness.

As I said, I live in hope.

--
Regards,
Noddy.

Trevor, kindly substantiate your claim.

In an appropriate measure of detail.

--
Cheers,
Paul Saccani
Perth, Western Australia.

Clearly not, otherwise you would not have made it a major focus of your life to do so.

--
Cheers,
Paul Saccani
Perth, Western Australia.

That is not a logical fallacy in itself. These organisations may be seen to be experts in fields relevant to the subject, and it s Trevor's contention that there is a consensus amongst such experts.

The flaw you should be aiming at is the complete and outright falsehood that they "tell us that AGW is the most likely explanation for the warming that has been noted.".

They don't, so Trevor's claim fails on that basis.

Trevor will cite various papers and what not from various members, committees and such like, but that will not prove his claim that the organisations "tell us that AGW is the most likely explanation for the warming that has been noted.".

Nonetheless, I have invited him to provide evidence of this claim.

--
Cheers,
Paul Saccani
Perth, Western Australia.