Discussion in 'Parramatta Eels' started by Gronk, Dec 10, 2018.
What you call manipulation I call nature. Of course the Lion would. Your response does give me pause for thought though. I'm a big believer that humans are just like any other mammal and shouldn't hold ourselves above them in the way we go about our day to day lives.
I believe that humans are out of step with nature though. We are trying to bend nature to our own will. The act of doing so IMO will be the cessation of nature itself on this planet, eventually and prematurely.. If you're ok with that, you're part of the problem. IMO.
I'm not religious.
If there is a problem then simply being human makes you part of it, so welcome to the club mate.
Every species on earth shapes it's environment, we aren't unique in that.
I'm too tired to do this all night but the long and the short of it is basically that we are an incredibly successful evolutionary story and, right now, we're out of sync with our environment. Nothing about our behaviour will change and that's nature. We will propagate our species as we are designed to do.
The question is what external force will restore that balance? At times in our history we've been shaped by that external force and we will be again
Because we have become greedy. We want it all and we want it now. We have gone from a society (probably couldn't call it that but it will do) that co existed with our provider (Earth) in a sustainable way to one that is now on a course of consuming the available resources to the point that those resources will eventually be unavailable or beyond the affordability of most. Don't worry Gaz. You'll always be able to afford it in your lifetime so why should you give a f**k?
I don't have the time to get into all that tonight either but I agree to a large extent.
I just find it repugnant what we as a modern society are doing to this planet without giving it so much as a second thought. It churns my stomach.
We were never in harmony with nature. For tens of thousands of years nature made human life nasty, brutish and short. And unlike other animals we were smart enough to realise how horrific our existence was. This is where religion came from. Religion enabled us to form large and complex enough societies that we were able to specialise enough to develop advanced (for animals) technology to make life a bit less shit.
Anyway, the majority of scientists don't agree with the catastrophe you're pushing any more than they agree that there's no climate problem. The future is still going to be great for a lot of people. In fact the future is already here, as William Gibson said. It's just not evenly distributed.
Are you implying that religion has an ulterior motive? I think I remember you saying you're religious so maybe not. I think it's just in any beings aware enough to wonder about their existence, religion would follow. And obviously religion has had its benefits as well as its drawbacks. Did we just discuss this?
I saw a firey interviewed on this subject, he showed that they have to get something like 12 agencies/organisations approval prior to doing just one burn off, they said its just not worth it as by the time they get approval its winter
sorry, but how can a minority dictate ?
that is not logical, sure they may be able to speak on behalf of their policies and push their case but they certainly cant dictate without a majority
Factcheck: Is there really a green conspiracy to stop bushfire hazard reduction?
A former NSW fire and rescue commissioner, Greg Mullins, has written this week that the hotter and drier conditions, and the higher fire danger ratings, were preventing agencies from carrying out prescribed burning.
He said: “Blaming ‘greenies’ for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.”
Its about influencing behind the scenes.
I can only go on my experiences working in Industry and dealing with Minister's offices and Ministers. A large portion of what I deal with is a result of what NGOs have been lobbying Ministers for. Don't underestimate how well funded and powerful these groups are.
This is particularly true of Labour governments. They often get in to power off the back of green preferences. They also have strong left factions that are very sympathetic to green causes. Take QLD's Deputy Premier for instance. If she isn't flying the flag for issues of importance to the inner city green voters she will lose her seat.
Yeah. That's f**ked.
We really know how to make the rules complicated for seemingly simple tasks.
I don't believe there is a conspiracy, but I think they are part of the problem. The main problem is the lack of leadership within Government. They don't have the courage to set clear direction for fear of upsetting some people.
well you're obviously closer to than I am but she did greenlinght Adani pretty quick although that may have been to save here arse immediately after Shorten lost the unlosable
I get that they can lobby the Labour party but its still the labour making the decisions as to whether to support the greens or not, and as for their influence, all I can say is thank god as that's what give us balance
The thing there is that ultimately it's government that makes and implements these kinds of decisions. And it's telling that despite there being different flavours of government across the east coast, over many years, that the same or very similar regimes have been reached.
Blaming the Greens from within government is simply abdicating responsibility for the things they, as a government are responsible for.
The Greens are just the dog under the table being blamed for the smell. Even if they are dropping the odd one, it's worth remembering exactly who let them inside in the first place.
Green light Adani quickly? Those merkins were working with Government on approvals for 7-8 years! Meanwhile comparative sized met coal projects went approved unnoticed.
Love them or loathe them but no-one can say that their project was green lighted. It was a political football and everyone was playing parraball!
Don't disagree with any of that.
Sometimes you get a situation where a small group holds the balance of power. It's actually very common in politics, where one party fails to get a true majority and needs to rely on some minor party to give them the numbers.
Separate names with a comma.