Carbon tax scrapped

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by Barrykgerdes

And anyone blaming Tony Abbott for his views is obviously just a left wing supporter

Barry

Not even slightly. Cant stand any politicians as a rule for the simple fact that, with very few exceptions, they cant think beyond the election cycle and "popularist" policies. Abbott is just an extreme version of the above. Both major parties and most of the others are just the same.

Take Jacqui Lambie for example. Really!!!, did someone actually vote for her??? I owe no allegiances to any of them and if I bothered wasting my time voting, I'd only vote for someone prepared to minimise damage to the environment.

[Astro_Bot]

Originally Posted by Deeno

Typical....
The very first post was politically inflaming and now there are nine pages, with some foul language thrown in for good measure. What a wonderful site this has become for children.

Whatever happened to the TOS.

You're not alone. I've made that comment several times, including directly to mods. For whatever reason, they're letting it go. IMHO, it's damaging the reputation of IIS.

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by Deeno

Typical....
The very first post was politically inflaming and now there are nine pages, with some foul language thrown in for good measure. What a wonderful site this has become for children.

Whatever happened to the TOS.

Oh well, last time I logged on a moderator had posted a religious video....says it all really...........

Originally Posted by Astro_Bot

You're not alone. I've made that comment several times, including directly to mods. For whatever reason, they're letting it go. IMHO, it's damaging the reputation of IIS.

I was the first to alert Mike about this and other threads that go against the TOS.
If it was up to me they'd be gone from the onset.

It's Mike's forum and it's his decision what gets scraped.
As moderators we have no say in what gets deleted, we only discuss, suggest and alert Mike of the thread topics.
He decides what goes and what stays.

As for the religious video, it was in response to a thread that I felt was belittling what I believe in.
You can't have it both ways, to allow anti-religious material but not allow responses to it.

As I said we're doing only what Mike wants/allows.

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by el_draco

Take Jacqui Lambie for example. Really!!!, did someone actually vote for her???

Yes, apparently men with money and "packages" voted for her. Thankfully, I only have one of the 2 , so don't meet her pre-requisites.

Seriously, she seems the sort you'd see in a pub wearing a ridiculously small mini-skirt drinking like a fish, chain smoking and swearing at everyone. Pub Trash.

But I digress.

[xelasnave]

Mike is to be supported for his outstanding leadership
Folk who overstep the mark condemn themselves by exhibiting bad behaviour
I do think this thread has been most useful and interesting...indeed information..Those who make personal attack part of their delivery may notice now bad it looks should they reread their posts

[icytailmark (Mark)]

i so think the carbon tax was a good thing. It made people think about how much electricity they used on a daily basis.

[Larryp (Laurie)]

Originally Posted by icytailmark

i so think the carbon tax was a good thing. It made people think about how much electricity they used on a daily basis.

Electricity prices had already gone through the roof before the carbon tax was introduced.
I certainly did not need a carbon tax to make me think about my electricity usage!

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by LewisM

Yes, apparently men with money and "packages" voted for her. Thankfully, I only have one of the 2 , so don't meet her pre-requisites.

But I digress.

So....., you're loaded then?
I could be her next best friend... I'm broke
...second thoughts... I lied; I sometimes hate being "visual"

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

Originally Posted by icytailmark

i so think the carbon tax was a good thing. It made people think about how much electricity they used on a daily basis.

I would not exactly say that was true, I would say the price of electricity made people think of how much electricity they used. The carbon tax was just a component of that price. We have had quite a few contributing factors to the electricity price in the last few years.

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by Astro_Bot

You're not alone. I've made that comment several times, including directly to mods. For whatever reason, they're letting it go. IMHO, it's damaging the reputation of IIS.

There are various ways to look at this situation:

1/ Someone comes out with a statement that is patently wrong and you can ignore it. In that case, many others see the unchallenged statement as acceptable and before you know it, it's government policy.

2/ Someone comes out with a statement and its patently wrong and you challenge it, That forms the basis of a robust and occasionally "warm" to heated conversation. Regardless, its a conversation that usually delves into facts and fallacy... That, in my opinion is healthy debate and a good way to contribute to discussion. I might also put it out there that Science has been a hot bed of heated debate for a VERY long time.

3/ Someone comes out with a statement and its patently wrong and you call in mods to quash what can at times be lively, humorous and heated debate. You end up with a Nanny state, or worse, a Police state.

4/ Someone comes out with a statement that is patently wrong and you ignore the thread. That's called freedom of choice.

5/ In a similarly robust thread, a very wise person put it out there that "what is said in the thread, remains in the thread" That was a reality check that reminded us of how pathetically insignificant everything we have ever done, ever will do and every "debate" we have, really is.

Personally, I'd prefer a robust and occasionally heated debate to any other option, provided what is said in the thread stays in the thread. I have found that, contrary to damaging the reputation of IIS, I have been challenged and enlightened, at times educated, at times vindicated and at all times intellectually stimulated. Gotta be good.

... and Renato is SO MUCH FUN !

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

I owe no allegiances to any of them and if I bothered wasting my time voting, I'd only vote for someone prepared to minimise damage to the environment.

So by that statement, are you implying you did not vote in the last federal election?

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

There are various ways to look at this situation:

1/ Someone comes out with a statement that is patently wrong and you can ignore it. In that case, many others see the unchallenged statement as acceptable and before you know it, it's government policy.

2/ Someone comes out with a statement and its patently wrong and you challenge it, That forms the basis of a robust and occasionally "warm" to heated conversation. Regardless, its a conversation that usually delves into facts and fallacy... That, in my opinion is healthy debate and a good way to contribute to discussion. I might also put it out there that Science has been a hot bed of heated debate for a VERY long time.

3/ Someone comes out with a statement and its patently wrong and you call in mods to quash what can at times be lively, humorous and heated debate. You end up with a Nanny state, or worse, a Police state.

4/ Someone comes out with a statement that is patently wrong and you ignore the thread. That's called freedom of choice.

5/ In a similarly robust thread, a very wise person put it out there that "what is said in the thread, remains in the thread" That was a reality check that reminded us of how pathetically insignificant everything we have ever done, ever will do and every "debate" we have, really is.

Personally, I'd prefer a robust and occasionally heated debate to any other option, provided what is said in the thread stays in the thread. I have found that, contrary to damaging the reputation of IIS, I have been challenged and enlightened, at times educated, at times vindicated and at all times intellectually stimulated. Gotta be good.

... and Renato is SO MUCH FUN !

+1 . I hate party poopers and mods pets.

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by tlgerdes

So by that statement, are you implying you did not vote in the last federal election?

Mate, I haven't voted since the 1980's I got a "please explain" from the electoral office for not voting in a state election when I had been living overseas for a year. When I got back I wrote back and said, "The lot I would have voted for had proven themselves to be incompetent fools, and I was of the opinion that the alternative would be no better" and I left that state the same day.

History proved me right and I have seen state and federal elections come and go with monotony and NOT ONE of the buffoons has even voiced concerns about the fundamental issue that will drive this country into the dust, that being over-population Why waste my time voting? We live in a dis-functional political system and I for one have no intention of encouraging the morons..

Correction: Kelvin Thomson MP regularly raises this issue, and is totally ignored by govt.

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

There are various ways to look at this situation:

1/ Someone comes out with a statement that is patently wrong and you can ignore it. In that case, many others see the unchallenged statement as acceptable and before you know it, it's government policy.

2/ Someone comes out with a statement and its patently wrong and you challenge it, That forms the basis of a robust and occasionally "warm" to heated conversation. Regardless, its a conversation that usually delves into facts and fallacy... That, in my opinion is healthy debate and a good way to contribute to discussion. I might also put it out there that Science has been a hot bed of heated debate for a VERY long time.

3/ Someone comes out with a statement and its patently wrong and you call in mods to quash what can at times be lively, humorous and heated debate. You end up with a Nanny state, or worse, a Police state.

4/ Someone comes out with a statement that is patently wrong and you ignore the thread. That's called freedom of choice.

5/ In a similarly robust thread, a very wise person put it out there that "what is said in the thread, remains in the thread" That was a reality check that reminded us of how pathetically insignificant everything we have ever done, ever will do and every "debate" we have, really is.

Personally, I'd prefer a robust and occasionally heated debate to any other option, provided what is said in the thread stays in the thread. I have found that, contrary to damaging the reputation of IIS, I have been challenged and enlightened, at times educated, at times vindicated and at all times intellectually stimulated. Gotta be good.

... and Renato is SO MUCH FUN !

Do you want the 5min argument or the full half hour!

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by tlgerdes

Do you want the 5min argument or the full half hour!

Knock your socks off.... I love a good debate. I am no genius but always enjoy hearing a broad range of opinions, whether I agree with them or not.

I am also more than delighted to acknowledge when I am wrong and thank the one who enlightens me. Ask my wife

[AndrewJ]

Do you want the 5min argument or the full half hour!

PayPal or Western Union????

Andrew

[Astro_Bot]

Originally Posted by el_draco

In a similarly robust thread, a very wise person put it out there that "what is said in the thread, remains in the thread

Well, thank you for calling me "wise", though I think you may be mistaken!

My perspective in making those remarks is that:

• This is one of several recent, divisive threads that have nothing to do with astronomy in any of its forms.
• There's no shortage of other outlets where people can have their say.
• Despite wishes to the contrary, some people hold on to grudges and I've seen other forums suffer greatly when off-topic arguments got out of hand and good members decided to leave or new ones joined for the wrong reasons (e.g. for the barney, not for astronomy) - the tone of the whole forum can change for the worse.

It's not that I'm trying to claim that I'm a model IIS member (waaaaay too late for that, unfortunately) but IIS is supposed to be a welcome place to share a love of astronomy, and if people are being turned off by off-topic arguments (as apparently they are), then I think that's a shame ... and there's no need, not here.

Anyway, just another 2c worth.

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by Astro_Bot

Well, thank you for calling me "wise", though I think you may be mistaken!

My perspective in making those remarks is that:

• This is one of several recent, divisive threads that have nothing to do with astronomy in any of its forms.
• There's no shortage of other outlets where people can have their say.
• Despite wishes to the contrary, some people hold on to grudges and I've seen other forums suffer greatly when off-topic arguments got out of hand and good members decided to leave or new ones joined for the wrong reasons (e.g. for the barney, not for astronomy) - the tone of the whole forum can change for the worse.

It's not that I'm trying to claim that I'm a model IIS member (waaaaay too late for that, unfortunately) but IIS is supposed to be a welcome place to share a love of astronomy, and if people are being turned off by off-topic arguments (as apparently they are), then I think that's a shame ... and there's no need, not here.

Anyway, just another 2c worth.

... all good points and I heartily agree.

The differentiating point in this case is that the issue will impact on you and I, our children and theirs, not to mention the rest of the planet and the species that have the right to exist.

Once raised, I'll stand up to those who attempt to deny the Science or attempt to defend the indefensible.

Likewise, I would hate it if these discussions spilled out into other forums. The astronomy should be paramount in this group but this is a "General" Chat forum and many other unrelated topics are also discussed.

[wulfgar]

Originally Posted by icytailmark

i so think the carbon tax was a good thing. It made people think about how much electricity they used on a daily basis.

In principle I'm in agreement with a carbon tax. But it doesn't mean the one we had was a good one or well thought out.

I'm even more suspicious of the international carbon ETS, which to me seems to be an international money grab by investment banks. An ETS was virtually selling permission to pollute, with the twist that those who don't pollute end up paying for polluters.

[doppler (Rick)]

Maybe the "global warming" is a good thing. If the sun is going through a cool phase?
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthsci...lobal-Warming/