Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
It's a funny thing in politics that because National already has the rugby vote sewn up, they don't need to pander to it. Which is probably all that having a special ministry would achieve anyway. What can a ministry with no money do anyway, other than provide a convenient scapegoat, when the scale of NZ investment in the RWC becomes apparent to the billion-odd rugby watchers around the world? And the outgoing government and financial crisis are plenty scapegoats enough.
-
I would think that in general terms the truth or not of people causing Global warming would be overshadowed by the action to make the planet more sustainable and a nicer place to be in/on. Let's clean up the act (Act) anyway.
I think that's wrong, sorry. If it is not true that humans are causing Global Warming, or it's not true that we can reverse it, then that matters a great deal. It will not be 'overshadowed', quite the opposite. Our actions will be overshadowed by their failure to have an effect.
That is why it will always remain an experiment in my mind (if we can actually ever succeed in doing something to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions). It will also be a massive experiment in humanity's ability to cooperate on the issue. I'll be pleasantly surprised if we actually manage to perform it. I really don't think we will in my lifetime, but then I never thought I'd see America elect a black president either, so maybe times they are a changin'. Let's hope.
-
Why the brain explosion when it comes to something like climate change?
Because it's a mistake to equate intelligent with correct. I think most lawyers are intelligent people, but all of the time, half of them are standing for a false proposition (the guilt or innocence of the accused). Their cleverness doesn't make them right.
You can always make a case for both sides. In fact, you should always try. But truth itself is quite independent of the cases made. The accused either did or did not do what they were accused of. The climate either is or is not affected by human behavior. It doesn't matter to the climate what the majority of scientist think about it, except in so far as their heads might radiate some heat. What does matter is the effect those scientists might have on our decisions. Even then, it is possible that even an overwhelming majority of scientists could be completely wrong. The history of science is littered with plenty of instances of this, usually just prior to theories that are more correct making huge credibility breakthroughs due to discoveries or inventions.
But having said that, I don't advocate that you should ignore the majority of scientists, or cherry pick a minority, when you make massive political decisions. That would be irrational. To me the only scientific way forward on climate is to experiment, to actually try to have a human chosen influence on the climate. If we can't, the theory is debunked completely, or the solutions shown to be impractical. If we don't try we aren't being scientific, we are being dogmatic.
Admittedly it's a huge experiment and it's taken quite a long time to convince me that it's worthwhile.
-
Yeah what did happen to Afghanistan? And Bin Laden, for that matter. Western involvement there is starting to look like the old colonial days when no one back home even knew or cared what was going on. Real Heart of Darkness stuff, entering into the conflict-zone Third World must be like falling down a rabbit hole for anyone crazy enough to want to. I hope we don't find that our special forces are all AWOL and gone bush, sending back just enough ivory, ooops I mean captives, to keep the folks back home from wanting to come down and check it out. The Horror.
-
The far right are stupid to attack the science of climate change. If they do it the least bit honestly, they're only going to find that the overwhelming majority of evidence is FOR humans affecting climate. The real questions, their real points of leverage are "Should anything be done about it?" and "What can be done about it?". These are the political/moral questions.
There is definitely a case to answer about whether NZ being the only country to do anything about it is sensible. Even if the majority of countries are doing something, but the major polluters are not, there's still a case to answer.
The question of what to do about climate change is even more open. It doesn't seem to me that the world economy is the least bit geared to actually fix the problem, since 'growth' is the primary factor in capitalism, and growth always necessitates more resource usage.
I do feel that if anything is going to save humanity on this score, it will be technology rather than our ability to organize ourselves, since we have a proven track record in technology, and a proven track record of failure in any self organization that involves self-sacrifice. But I would love to be proven wrong on this, and certainly putting brakes on growth won't screw the system.
-
I don't think it's entirely against public interests to allow a drunk on TV. If they're fully prepared to get drunk for such a big event, what's wrong with us knowing that? Furthermore the guy says that it wasn't the drink talking anyway. Maybe it wasn't, and maybe that is how his brain does actually work.
I think Hide likes the name of the SMART car, and the environmental friendliness is probably taking second fiddle to the fuel economy in his mind. I don't want to even think about it's relationship to his whanger. The whole "big car = small dick" seems to come more from the small car fraternities than the big dick ones. The only thing I think can safely be said is that changing the size of your car will definitely not give your wife 'more lasting s@t1sf@ct10n' or you 'huge volume'.
-
Key is very wise to include the Maori Party in his coalition. Where in the past parties have been held to ransom by the bare majority they got with the minor parties, now the parties can be played off against each other. National will call the shots.
There is a flipside. National can also be safely held accountable. They can't point the finger at their partners to show why they did various things.
They're still on honeymoon. I'm waiting for the first 'private sector review' to hit a department that does things the public generally cares a great deal about. I'll be totally amazed if there isn't a culture clash that can be heard from the other side of the world.
I'm not surprised that climate change is on the table, as ACT's first act of Utu against their nemesis, the Greens. I have a funny feeling that 9 years of Labour-Greens will have left substantial institutional knowledge about the science of climate change that may stand as a massive barrier to ideological cherry-picking of science to suit ACT. We shall see, interesting times.
-
So is this the official Friday Fun thread? In that case ...
New Zealand's election: the view from wingnut world
LOL that was great, just what I needed to cheer me up from my sickbed.
-
I can certainly remember getting shitcanned all round on Kiwiblog 3 years ago for saying that the Winston arrangement was not farcical or an assault on democracy. DPF pitched in heartily.
But I'd much rather they 'saw the error of their ways' than insisted on being wrong. If this keeps happening then the transition to National will be totally painless.
-
On another note, why does the NZ Herald give Cameron Slater the time of day?
Because they want to appear to be aware of the blogosphere, whilst at the same time turning everyone off it.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 928 929 930 931 932 … 1066 Older→ First