Open Forum – Saturday

3 March 2018

Forum

This post is open to anyone to comment on any topic that isn’t spam, illegal or offensive. All Your NZ posts are open but this one is for you to raise topics that interest you. 

If providing opinions on or summaries of other information also provide a link to that information. Bloggers are welcome to summarise and link to their posts.

Comments worth more exposure may be repeated as posts.Comments from other forums can be repeated here, cut and paste is fine.

Your NZ is a mostly political and social issues blog but not limited to that, and views from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome. Some ground rules:

  • If possible support arguments, news, points or opinions with links to sources and facts.
  • Please don’t post anything illegal, potentially defamatory or abusive.

FIRST TIME COMMENTERS: Due to abuse by a few first comments under any ID will park in moderation until released (as soon as possible but it can sometimes take a while).

Sometimes comments will go into moderation or spam automatically due to mistyped ID, too many links (>4), or trigger text or other at risk criteria.

Free speech is an important principle here but some people who might pose a risk to the site will have to keep going through moderation due to abuses by a small number of malicious people.

Next Post

108 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  March 3, 2018

    Finally it’s official: plants created mud.
    https://www.sciencenews.org/article/early-land-plants-led-rise-mud

    Can we now please bury DoC and Greenies’ worship of our environmental destructors, mangroves, while falsely laying the blame on human activities for turning our pristine estuaries into dead mud ponds.

    • robertguyton

       /  March 3, 2018

      Good grief! The stupid runs deep!

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  March 3, 2018

        Another topic on which you have an opinion but no clues, Robert. Up here we walk amongst it every day and see the truth.

        • robertguyton

           /  March 3, 2018

          No clues, Alan? About estuaries? Hmmm. I could cite my 14 year chairmanship of the Riverton Estuary Care Society Inc. or my role on the Southland Regional Council where estuaries feature highly in our work, the fact that I live beside the Jacob’s River estuary, the several newspaper articles that have contained my views on estuary health or coverage of the estuary festivals I’ve organised here in Riverton to promote awareness of estuaries…but no, you’re doubtless correct with your claim…

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  March 3, 2018

            The subject is mangroves and mud, Robert. Your experience with them is?

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              Is it? You didn’t make that clear. I thought the subject was estuaries. Your slight of “DoC” and “greenies” probably muddies the waters. Had you introduced the topic sensibly, it would have been clearer what it was you wanted to belly-ache about.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              Suggest reading comprehension lessons for you, Robert.

            • Griff

               /  March 3, 2018

              Alan .
              Mangroves are a symptom of silt from land runoff.
              Not a cause.
              In case you did not know .
              Posting a paper pointing out early plants created mud then claiming that this means doc is ignoring ecology is gibberingly vacant nonsense

              Llife evolved from early plants.
              Ecology
              The branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings.

              With out the changes such plants have created over time there would be no ecology to save.

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              What Griff said. Tree-haters such as Alan and Gezza really annoy me.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              You are just wrong, Griff. Mangrove seeds establish themselves at the lower edge of the tidal range on sandy beaches and then feed algae and produce and trap silt as they colonise back towards the shore. Before long they have converted the entire sandy beach into a muddy wasteland.

              DoC have been advocates for sanctifying this destruction. They deserve all the condemnation they get.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              @Robert, more idiocy from you. I walk my coastal track between my forest and the mangrove swamp and note the former is full of life and the swamp is silent, rotting and dead.

            • Gezza

               /  March 3, 2018

              I don’t hate trees Robert, don’t be a dork. I love the forest. It’s just noticeable how the mangroves up North have completely choked off some once pretty little inlets. They’d have looked gorgeous 40 or 50 years when the native forest had extended down the hills all the way right to the water’s edge. I can understand why some people seek approval to eradicate them locally.

            • Gezza

               /  March 3, 2018

              *40 or 50 years ago

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      This is the sort of fatuous drivel being pushed on our school kids by ignorant environmentalists and their bureaucracy supporting the protection and spread of mangroves:
      https://www.nrc.govt.nz/For-Schools/School-information-packs/Mangroves/

      • Gezza

         /  March 3, 2018

        Horrible things. They’re choking the estuaries.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  March 3, 2018

          Yes, they feed algae which creates mud which kills shellfish and the fish and birdlife that depended on them and clear water. Eventually the estuaries just build and block up and revert to land.

          • robertguyton

             /  March 3, 2018

            So…natural process then? What’s unnatural (arguably) or at least more destructive, is the removal of forest cover, straightening of water ways and agriculture – there are your ‘estuary busters’ right there!

          • robertguyton

             /  March 3, 2018

            Algae “create mud”?
            Your first post claims plants create mud – are you confusing yourself here, Alan? What was the point of your link? How does it support your claims about mangroves?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              There is a limit to my tolerance of your thickness, Robert. My first post shows plants create mud and that the early plants that did so were forms of algae. Mangrove research shows the mangrove plants create algae blooms with their rotting plant material and this again creates mud.

              If you are going to comment, read the material you are commenting on properly.

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              Alan. There’s a limit to your tolerance?
              Colour me surprised !!
              You present as very intolerant – fair comment?
              Plants create mud – ho hum. Rain creates mud – are you railing against…rain??… maybe you whakapapa back to Canute…??
              Your link describes mud as being created, pre-plants, by natural processes such as …rain. Are you a rain-hater as well??
              Get a grip, Alan!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              The resulting fractions showed the median mud content was about 1 percent before around 458 million years ago. At that point, the mud content steadily increased over about the next 100 million years or so to reach a median of about 26 percent in outcrops dated 359 million to 299 million years old, McMahon and Davies report in the March 2 Science.

              That steady upsurge suggests that neither cyclical nor episodic forces — such as glacial-interglacial changes or tectonic events — could have driven the increase in muddiness. Instead, plants are the likeliest culprit. A primitive group of rootless plants called bryophytes, which includes modern mosses and liverworts, had likely become common by about 458 million years ago. Rooted plants further increased the mud content when they arose and began to spread around 430 million years ago, eventually forming great forests about 382 million years ago.

              It’s lucky I’m tolerant and patient, Robert.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  March 3, 2018

          Protecting mangroves has been one of the most stupid things the environmental movement have done here.

          • robertguyton

             /  March 3, 2018

            More stupid than farming’s removal of forests? Really???

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              Much more stupid. Farming’s removal of forests is the reason you exist.

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              “Farming’s removal of forests is the reason you exist.”
              So very, very wrong, Alan.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              So little you know, Robert. And so much of that little is wrong.

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              “So little” I know, Alan?
              Sweet!’ You’re debating with a know-nothing!
              Piece of cake then!
              Let’s see, estuaries – all good?
              Alan?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              I’m not debating you, I’m educating you, Robert. Call it a civic duty.

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              You are “educating ” me, Alan?
              So… Brash of you!

              (Oh dear!)

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              Patient rather than brash, Robert. I’m not sure your retention is any better than your comprehension which is pretty abysmal.

        • robertguyton

           /  March 3, 2018

          School kids?

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  March 3, 2018

            Yet another comprehension failure, Robert. Look at the link. As for the idiots that uptick your stupidity …

    • Gezza

       /  March 3, 2018

      Doesn’t anybody want to know about the PM’s modest new digs? 🙁
      Do I have to wait for Katie to report on moving day? 😳

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  March 3, 2018

        Nope. The lady got a pay rise so no problem managing a bigger mortgage. Just hope she’s not claiming an apartment in Welly as well.

      • I couldn’t give a toss. I do care that we’ve had to fork out to buy the house next door to harbour her security detail. That is a new thing. Key’s detail managed in a caravan. That she has made such a big deal of her personal life and where she lived ( Press there for Baby announcement and seemingly endless lovey, dovey, fishy Clarke and me stories ) has probably sets them up as more of a target for every kidnapping nutter out there. Hence the perma security house. Never heard the like

        • robertguyton

           /  March 3, 2018

          Fair oozing bitter envy, that comment!

          • Envy! Maybe to anyone with a narrow little life it might feel like that. Try, does not like socialists, doesn’t like reality tv or vacuous virtue signalling PMs installed by equally vacuous minor Party leaders with a Messiah complex.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 3, 2018

              I am unimpressed that the house next door has been bought for them by us. I bet that its price didn’t come into the affordable housing category, either. How much security do they need ? This isn’t the US where leaders are assasinated with monotonous regularity and any nutter can have a gun.

              A granny flat would have done, surely rather than a very expensive house.

              I saw a magazine headline about the first date; how twee. I don’t read that sort of magazine, of course, so will never know.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  March 3, 2018

              What about the house on the other side and the one/s behind ? We may as well buy those as well.

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              “nyone with a narrow little life”
              Mine is a “narrow little life”?
              Care to expand, traveller?

  2. robertguyton

     /  March 3, 2018

    Cam Slater’s getting feisty on it! Sounds like he’s gonna blow!

    “Bill English always gets people to do his dirty work for him. The whispering campaigns in caucus against Maurice Williamson and Judith Collins are two of the nastiest underhanded things he instigated. Against Maurice Williamson for calling for the boil to be lanced after the 2002 debacle that English presided over and against Judith because she is way smarter than Bill. He is not the compassionate man he likes to portray himself as. He is as dirty, if not more dirty, than any other politician you care to mention.

    The attacks on Todd Barclay show that. That was all orchestrated and run out of the leader’s office. Poor Todd Barclay didn’t know what hit him. He was actually a popular MP and doing a good job. But, the old guard wanted him rinsed and so they set about undermining him with false complaints to police, whispering campaigns and the enlistment of former staff of Bill English

    John Key stood in parliament and exclaimed, when in opposition, that Working for Families was communism by stealth. He was right then. However, upon gaining power he set about not unravelling the communism by stealth but, rather, proudly extending it. The sycophants lapped it up. John Key could do no wrong, John Key could walk on water, John Key is the man. You’d think his shit didn’t stink either from the abject sycophancy and cult of personality that surrounded what was ultimately a very vain, conceited and self-centred man.

    For years I have stayed silent about what went on behind the scenes after Dirty Politics. As I remain and those traitorous cowards in National resign I will start telling the truth when they can no longer hide behind parliamentary privilege. There are many stories to tell and many MPs who will shudder in shame at their behaviour.”

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      Defamation lawyers are ordering in the champagne.

      • Good job too. Slater is such a Maurice and Judith loyalist he can’t see the forest for the trees.
        Isn’t there a mangrove to hug instead of repeating this caveman RG ?

        • robertguyton

           /  March 3, 2018

          Not if Alan and Gezza have their way, there won’t be. Cam’s played a pivotal part in National Party politics, traveller – show him some respect! He’s still a live wire.

          • You’re very misguided. His father once was chairman or whatever they call it of the Nats It’s the ultimate feather in his cap and the pinnacle of the Slater dynastic success. Cameron believes his father was the be all and end all of all that was great about the Party. The bitterness he feels is out of context entirely. My father was subjected to a political rolling too. Who in politics isn’t, I’m sure you know people you or they consider to have suffered indignity at the hand of others. In one way or another nine of us escape unscathed. Mostly we choose to forgive, move on, learn and flourish or we become a victim. Sadly for Slater he cannot move on and view the Party as a constantly changing organism. He’s stuck in his own construct where Maurice and Judith and his Dad run the show and he appears on the Huddle and the Panel and we all admire him.

            Slater is guided by anger, and he is motivated by bitterness and deep disappointment – mostly in hmself I suspect. He hasn’t the financial or emotional stability, he hasn’t the the resources, discipline, restraint or the contacts to be a sought after political commentator. If you read the following you may see why he can’t and that is why men of purpose, men of integrity and those who have a far less juvenile and self-centred response to life’s disappointments have rather shaped National. He is a man who has sat on the sidelines throwing ping pong balls and screaming.

            I used to pity him for the biased and bigoted manner in which he was hacked and then his words were manipulated to fit Hager’s end game. After several years of him failing to move on, failing to heed court warnings I came to realise if it wasn’t Hager’s hit it’d be something else and he’d still be the bitter man he is. I think this exchange is very telling.

            https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/03/reader-emails-respond/

            • “nine of us escape unscathed” equals “ most of us…..”

            • robertguyton

               /  March 3, 2018

              He and John Key were bosom-buddies! Had Key poor judgement? Or was he exploiting an insecure person? Either way, shameful!

            • You show your innocence and that the scope of the world you inhabit knows nothing about political machinations.He was never bosom buddies with anyone, much less a wealthy, internationally successful extrovert like Key. Slater is often depressed, he’s clinicallly diagnosed. He’s also tends to keep to himself. He started a blog. When he was on message he was tolerated

            • Blazer

               /  March 3, 2018

              Slater had Key’s private number…did you and the other cafe patrons?

    • unitedtribes2

       /  March 3, 2018

      Cam has been holdings his grudge’s for as long as mangroves have been holding the mud

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  March 3, 2018

        Trav, he must be one of those people who imagine that everyone they know is their friend. Everyone well-known, that is.

        I know a woman like this. X is a ‘personal friend’, which means that X is an acquaintance.

        • As you asked, you tend to the ithat was established in Dirty Politics. He ran for cover as he was fair bullshitting about the extent about his relationships. He occasionally talked to Jason Ede. EOS.

  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  March 3, 2018

    A “luke-warmer” simple model prediction of global warming:

    It will be interesting to see how reality pans out.
    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2018/02/warming-to-2100-a-lukewarmer-scenario/

    (Cue Griff/alarmist standard ad hominem attack on Spencer. Please ignore.)

    • High Flying Duck

       /  March 3, 2018

      This comment was interesting:

      “Of course, this whole exercise assumes that, without humans, the climate system would have had no temperature trend between 1765-2100. That is basically the IPCC assumption — that the climate system is in long-term energy equilibrium, not only at the top-of atmosphere, but in terms of changes in ocean vertical circulation whcih can warm the surface and atmosphere without any TOA radiative forcing.

      I don’t really believe the “climate stasis” assumption, because I believe the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age were real, and that some portion of recent warming has been natural. In that case, the model climate sensitivity would be lower, and the model warming by 2100 would be even less.

      What would cause warming as we came out of the Little Ice Age? You don’t need any external forcing (e.g. the Sun) to accomplish it, although I know that’s a popular theory. My bet (but who knows?) is a change in ocean circulation, possibly accompanied by a somewhat different cloud regime. We already know that El Nino/La Nino represents a bifurcation in how the climate system wants to behave on interannual time scales. Why not multi-century time scale bifurcations in the deep ocean circulation? This possibility is simply swept under the rug by the IPCC.”

      Interesting read.

    • Griff

       /  March 3, 2018

      1 How to fit an elephant
      John von Neumann famously said

      With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.

      By this he meant that one should not be impressed when a complex model fits a data set well. With enough parameters, you can fit any data set.

      It turns out you can literally fit an elephant with four parameters if you allow the parameters to be complex numbers.

      Count the parameters he “tuned” matey……

      2
      ENSO
      El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is an irregularly periodic variation in winds and sea surface temperatures over the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean, affecting climate of much of the tropics and subtropics. The warming phase of the sea temperature is known as El Niño and the cooling phase as La Niña.

      An Osculation is not a forcing.
      Enso is neutral over a long enough time span.
      PDO is the longer osculation between periods with more El Nino and more La Niña.
      osculation over decades .

      You just posted total nonsense curve fitting Alan.

      That’s without mentioning your source being a religious nutbar who is a creationist as well as being in denial of climate change because he believes god would not let us change his planet

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  March 3, 2018

        An oscillation is a short term forcing relevant to fitting short term data.

        Thanks for vindicating my prediction of your ad hominem attack. Ignored as it deserves other than adding to contempt for its author.

        • Griff

           /  March 3, 2018

          I have pointed out before Alan .
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
          Non-fallacious reasoning
          When a statement is challenged by making an ad hominem attack on its author, it is important to draw a distinction between whether the statement in question was an argument or a statement of fact (testimony). In the latter case the issues of the credibility of the person making the statement may be crucial

          Roy Spencer because of his religious views is not a credible source for science .
          His views on science are heavily tainted by his religion .
          This can be proven …

          What is the length of the curve fitting you just linked to ?

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  March 3, 2018

            I invite anyone to compare Spencer’s blog posts with Griff’s comments and make their own judgements as to character as I do.

            Spencer is fitting his model to the observed monthly average global surface temperatures (HadCRUT4). As such, short term oscillations and forcings are significant.

            It would be helpful to actually read and comprehend the links before rushing to your pre-ordained dismissal, Griff.

            • Griff

               /  March 3, 2018

              Again slowly Alan
              Dr Roy Spencer uses four variables that he tuned to the past temperature data.
              Giving four variables you can make an elephant .
              It is nothing but blatant curve fitting.

              ENSO is not a forcing it is merely the movement of energy around the pacific ocean
              In one phase the trades pile warm water up in the western pacific
              In the other the trades relax and the warm water floods back towards the east.
              The total energy in the system remains the same .
              That is why all the pause nonsense you in denial whittered about for years was so stupid .
              Sooner or later that heat buried in the western pacific was going to come back and effect surface temps.
              It did………Hence 2015, 2016, 2017 made 1997, 1998 look cold.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              All climate models use assumed and fitted variables, Griff. Given the complexity of the monthly series, four estimated variables is not excessive. Ocean circulation patterns affect cloud, wind and precipitation and therefore can act as forcings.

            • Griff

               /  March 3, 2018

              Ocean circulation patterns affect cloud, wind and precipitation and therefore can act as forcings.

              Climate Forcing

              Climate forcings are a major cause of climate change. A climate forcing is any influence on climate that originates from outside the climate system itself. The climate system includes the oceans, land surface, cryosphere, biosphere, and atmosphere.

              Examples of external forcings include:

              Surface reflectivity (albedo)
              Human induced changes in greenhouse gases
              Atmospheric aerosols (volcanic sulfates, industrial output)

              These examples all influence the balance of energy entering and leaving the Earth system. These types of forcings are often referred to as radiative forcing and can be quantified in units of the extra energy in watts per meter squared (W m-2) entering the Earth near the top of the atmosphere (TOA).

              Not all climate changes are caused by climate forcings, however. Climate is intrinsically variable and can change even if there is no external forcing. An unforced change would be some kind of natural shift like an El Nino. El Nino events tend to cause atmospheric warming because they are transporting heat from the ocean back into the atmosphere. This happens even though there is no change in solar output or other external forcing.
              ENSO does not effect the total energy in the system.
              it is an oscillation that effects the location of that energy.

              Cloud feedbacks are probably positive .
              http://science.sciencemag.org/content/325/5939/460

              His more recent argument is based in part on Richard Lindzen’s research on cloud feedback. Spencer claims that climate sensitivity is being vastly overestimated because clouds will have a much higher negative net feedback than current estimates. Cloud feedbacks are a favorite topic of deniers due to the fact that there is less literature on the subject than other areas global warming, allowing them to thump the uncertainty tactic continuously. Spencer’s arguments for the feedbacks themselves, however, are full of statistical tomfoolery, fiddling with math, and heaps of equivocation.[7][8] He then heaps more bullshit on top of this, shoehorning in the old canards about the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the El Niňo Southern Oscillation (ENSO). And voila, global warming isn’t a problem! Of course, PDO is an oscillation, not a trend, and so cannot account for the current trend of warming.[9]

              https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer

              So Alan
              A simple model based on nothing but curve fitting.
              vrs a very complex model based mostly on physics that makes assumptions in the areas we are not sure of.
              You of course back Spencer model just because it tells you what you want to hear
              Me I go with the 97% not a 3% fringe god whacking nut who has a long history of such rubbish including his core work being corrected by others repeatedly all corrections being towards more warming .
              http://www.nature.com/news/1998/980820/full/news980820-1.html

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              Anyone who thinks cloud forcings are positive has never lived in the tropics, Griff. And one component of them is indeed reflectivity.

              Time will tell whether your ad hominem alarmists have any legs to stand on. For the moment, monthly global temperatures are heading down again as per both UAH and RSS.

              I find Spencer interesting, informative and refreshingly free of the vile bile from his opponents that you and your like revel in. I retain an open mind on the subject and weigh facts much more heavily than speculation.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              Incidentally: A simple model based on nothing but curve fitting …

              What on earth do you think a trend analysis is?

            • Griff

               /  March 3, 2018

              Are you thick Alan?
              See comment one
              With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.

              On you liking the massage Roy “god whacker” Spencer puts out
              not surprising as that is his reasoning for his bullshit.
              To quote Mr Spencer

              “I view my job a little like a legislator, supported by the taxpayer, to protect the interests of the taxpayer and to minimize the role of government.”

              That’s not science that’s politics.
              https://thinkprogress.org/roy-spencer-i-view-my-job-a-little-like-a-legislator-supported-by-the-taxpayer-to-protect-the-3bb169c8bc9/

              Meantime
              Climate change is happening.
              The uk is freezing while the arctic is having an unprecedented heat wave.
              The us norhteast coast is drowning due to a second 100 year event this year.
              https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/bomb-noreaster-bringing-major-flooding-damaging-winds
              Climate change is becoming obvious in the real world making peploe like you look stupid.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  March 3, 2018

              Spare us the fatuous, ignorant drivel, Griff. Here is a list of the adjustable parameters in the climate models you espouse:
              https://www.climateprediction.net/climate-science/glossary/parameters/
              An order of magnitude more than Spencer.

              And the data set Spencer is matching with his model contains monthly data points for 120+ years. That’s more than 1440 data points so the degrees of freedom in the analysis are substantial. Your elephant quote is just silly in this context.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  March 3, 2018

        And BOOM – the ad hom attack on a fairly well respected and awarded climate scientist exactly as predicted.

        Perhaps you should compare your peer reviewed works on Negative cloud feedback; Cloud formation; and Temperature change and energy loss to space with your own?

        and his NASA exceptional scientific achievement medal?
        or American Meteorological Society special award for his works on global temperatures?

        Or perhaps you could come up with a coherent argument against his work instead of resorting to “religious nutbar” because he has investigated intelligent design and found it plausible.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      Just to annoy Griff a bit more, Anthony Watts is celebrating victory in a very long campaign for surface data quality:
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/03/02/alarmists-throw-in-the-towel-on-poor-quality-surface-temperature-data-pitch-for-a-new-global-climate-reference-network/

      Here’s a major challenge, Griff. See if you can reply without abuse, insults or ad hominem attacks.

      • Griff

         /  March 3, 2018

        WUWT
        ROFL
        Really Alan
        A whacko site and you don’t want me to laugh at you

        WUWT
        Hows wattys paper going?
        You know the one he was talking up in 2012
        That proved the reliability of the temperature record.
        Alan in case you did not notice there are five different surface temperature series that closely match .
        BEST even uses its own data and methods.
        They get the same result .
        RSS get the same result from the satellite data.
        The only outlying one is UHA version 6.3
        They have a very slightly lower result .
        You are a crank mate .I have wasted enough band width on you for a while.
        See you all in a few weeks .

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  March 3, 2018

        Failed as expected. On all three criteria. Typical Griff.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      A good principle, but why quarterly? I would have thought at least weekly more appropriate. As we’ve discussed before Government systems should be designed for transparency rather than secrecy as at present.

    • robertguyton

       /  March 3, 2018

      Again, The Greens lead the way. They’ll be called out by all and sundry, but they’ll continue to work for honesty and integrity in politics and a genuine working relationship with the natural world, something the other parties haven’t much of a clue about. As the old saying goes, “follow the hippies”.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  March 3, 2018

        And if there’s a little bit of welfare fraud and genocide apologism along they way, so be it!

      • Virtue signalling fluff. I’ve got a handle on Golriz the Defender and her morals don’t align with mine. Collectively they have no integrity. Where to even start

        Post a record of their daily appts and I’ll be impressed. Once every three months is contrived and easy to manipulate

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  March 3, 2018

          Every DAY ? Who’d want to read it ?

      • . As the old saying goes, “follow the hippies”

        Lol

        • Griff

           /  March 3, 2018

          They look more like a mob of trumpies than hippys .

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  March 3, 2018

            They do to me, too. Hippies don’t dress like that.

        • robertguyton

           /  March 3, 2018

          Those people rushing into the hole – do they look like hippies , traveller?
          Or do they look like… you?

          • robertguyton

             /  March 3, 2018

            “Lol”, trav?
            Oh dear! Oh dear, oh dear!

  4. lurcher1948

     /  March 3, 2018

    BLOCKHEADED red neck politicians think they crack the whip supporting the sellers of death the company moves to a brighter smarter state and says UP YOU THICK HONKEY gun loving freaks with little dicks,GOOD ONE DELTA
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/delta-nra-statement_us_5a998ff8e4b0479c02520e6a

  5. Gezza

     /  March 3, 2018

    Humanity Star should be visible tonite from 9.01 pm to 9.07 pm travelling SSW to NNW.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      Too cloudy here I expect. A shower right now.

      • Gezza

         /  March 3, 2018

        It passed over to the East around 7 last nite but Welly’s skies were completely grey at the time.

        Tonite our Western sky’s intermittently clear but there’s heaps of altocumulus & altostratus up there heading South I think. Seems to be getting thicker, dammit.

        It’s over Gabon in Africa at the moment.
        8.30 pm

      • Gezza

         /  March 3, 2018

        Speed: 7.603 km/s – it’s motoring along. Be over Antartica shortly, then us.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  March 3, 2018

          No chance here. Complete cloud cover.

          • Gezza

             /  March 3, 2018

            Might be lucky here. Bright stars are visible through clear patches, just gone twilight. Should be able to spot it as it tracks thru those. Heading outside with fingers crossed.

          • Gezza

             /  March 3, 2018

            Nope. Nothing. Passed too far West of the North Island maybe. Tracked over Fiordland out over the Tasman. Hard to find info on best time to see it.

  6. robertguyton

     /  March 3, 2018

    “Are you thick Alan?”
    Question de jour.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      Not in question for you,Robert?

      • robertguyton

         /  March 3, 2018

        Nope. For you, Alan.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  March 3, 2018

          I’m happy for others to judge both, Robert.

  7. lurcher1948

     /  March 3, 2018

    Dont upset farrars nutters YOU GET TERMINATED,BUT THEN you can get 500 posts of recycled rubbish, by morons
    Steve42
    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Hey don’t derail all the knee-jerk outrage from the rent-a-mob commenters by pointing out facts!!!!

    This is not the forum for reasoned argument. As the downvotes and responses will show. 😉

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 39 LOG IN TO REPLY REPORTMARCH 3, 2018 7:49AM

  8. Gezza

     /  March 3, 2018

    Not the highest level of maturity evident today.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  March 3, 2018

      What do you expect with Robert and Griff working the shift?