Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Labor, Liberal, Greens, Democrats? Here's the place to discuss.

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 12:34 pm

am Bays wrote:
Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:There are also a lot of people who aren't convinced of the human impacts towards climate change.
If you say you are sceptical about the human impacts, you get called a climate denier and the left will paint you out to be some crackpot that doesn't see the climate is changing. (equally the right will do this on other issues).
So instead of having a healthy discussion about the human impact of climate change, you get to a point where no-one discusses it in a meaningful way. The left put out more and more absurd predictions, trying to grab attention, and the right ignore it (both the issue, and the chatter from the left).

Opinion polls ask people what they think about various issues, and knowing it doesn't mean anything, people just say the socially acceptable answer, the polls predict a labor victory as a result. But when push comes to shove, and people are in the ballot box, they are able to vote the way they actually feel, without being judged for their vote.
Scientific consensus isn't a left/right issue. You either accept the scientific consensus or willingly oppose it for ideological purposes.


Thanks for proving Traders point Q.

He has a raised a question about "the Quiet Australians/The forgotten people" however you want to describe them, wanting to have an honest debate about a range of issues and then someone questions them for having a valid queries and perspectives on those issues and they are called ideologues and this is what you should think. You either accept it or willing oppose it, there's no middle ground. The result on Saturday proves that the vast majority of Australians want to discuss the middle ground.

Quite rightly the silent Australians get sick of being told "this is what you should think cause we know better than you" and so turn the middle finger up at those who they perceive are putting them down for wanting to have a valid debate. This is why Labor didn't do as well as it hoped on the weekend

Similarly there are those on the right of politics who do the same (All Muslims are evil) and quite rightly they got the finger shown to them too, anyone seen Fraser A?


There's no middle ground on the scientific consensus. You either accept the science or oppose it for ideological reasons.

To be fair, the left ideologically oppose scientific consensus when it suits them too - the anti-gmo and anti-glyphosate zealots
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby am Bays » Mon May 20, 2019 12:39 pm

nuggety goodness wrote:Just had this sent to me by a mate...
IMG_2662.jpg


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk


Sorry NG your post highights one of the problem with society at the minute people can post sh!t on Bookface and people re-circulate it and opinions get taken as fact. yes it's supposed to be a p!sstake I get that.

I watched the ABC all night and that is not how it went. they were quite balanced. Yes some of the pundits allowed their views to come through for both sides of the political divide but at no stage did anyone on the ABC coverage say the "voters are dumb", "lets have a re-election", "it's Newscorps fault".

The political bullsh!t on Facebook is astounding and not funny. It gives that 1% of the population on either side of the political divide the opportunity espouse hatetred, bullsh!t and down-right lies.
Last edited by am Bays on Mon May 20, 2019 2:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Let that be a lesson to you Port, no one beats the Bays five times in a row in a GF and gets away with it!!!
User avatar
am Bays
Coach
 
 
Posts: 18498
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: The back bar at Lennies
Has liked: 162 times
Been liked: 1804 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 12:40 pm

am Bays wrote:
nuggety goodness wrote:Just had this sent to me by a mate...
IMG_2662.jpg


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk


Sorry NG you post highights one of the problem with society at the minute people can post sh!t on Bookface and people re-circulate it and opinions get taken as fact. yes it's supposed to be a p!sstake but unfo

I watched the ABC all night and that is not how it went. they were quiet balanced. Yes some of the pundits allowed their views to come through for both sides of the political divide but at no stage did anyone on the ABC coverage say the "voters are dumb", "lets have a re-election", "it's Newscorps fault".

The political bullsh!t on Facebook is astounding and not funny.

I
Great call
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 12:41 pm

Q. wrote:
am Bays wrote:
Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:There are also a lot of people who aren't convinced of the human impacts towards climate change.
If you say you are sceptical about the human impacts, you get called a climate denier and the left will paint you out to be some crackpot that doesn't see the climate is changing. (equally the right will do this on other issues).
So instead of having a healthy discussion about the human impact of climate change, you get to a point where no-one discusses it in a meaningful way. The left put out more and more absurd predictions, trying to grab attention, and the right ignore it (both the issue, and the chatter from the left).

Opinion polls ask people what they think about various issues, and knowing it doesn't mean anything, people just say the socially acceptable answer, the polls predict a labor victory as a result. But when push comes to shove, and people are in the ballot box, they are able to vote the way they actually feel, without being judged for their vote.
Scientific consensus isn't a left/right issue. You either accept the scientific consensus or willingly oppose it for ideological purposes.


Thanks for proving Traders point Q.

He has a raised a question about "the Quiet Australians/The forgotten people" however you want to describe them, wanting to have an honest debate about a range of issues and then someone questions them for having a valid queries and perspectives on those issues and they are called ideologues and this is what you should think. You either accept it or willing oppose it, there's no middle ground. The result on Saturday proves that the vast majority of Australians want to discuss the middle ground.

Quite rightly the silent Australians get sick of being told "this is what you should think cause we know better than you" and so turn the middle finger up at those who they perceive are putting them down for wanting to have a valid debate. This is why Labor didn't do as well as it hoped on the weekend

Similarly there are those on the right of politics who do the same (All Muslims are evil) and quite rightly they got the finger shown to them too, anyone seen Fraser A?


There's no middle ground on the scientific consensus. You either accept the science or oppose it for ideological reasons.

To be fair, the left ideologically oppose scientific consensus when it suits them too - the anti-gmo and anti-glyphosate zealots
You can throw in the anti live export nuts in there was well
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Trader » Mon May 20, 2019 1:06 pm

am Bays wrote:
Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:So instead of having a healthy discussion about the human impact of climate change, you get to a point where no-one discusses it in a meaningful way. The left put out more and more absurd predictions, trying to grab attention, and the right ignore it (both the issue, and the chatter from the left).
Scientific consensus isn't a left/right issue. You either accept the scientific consensus or willingly oppose it for ideological purposes.


Thanks for proving Traders point Q.


Like clockwork wasn't it!

Q. wrote:There's no middle ground on the scientific consensus. You either accept the science or oppose it for ideological reasons.


I can post this image, it's alarming:
Image

Conclusion:
The temp is climbing rapidly, and that coincides with the industrial revolution, humans are killing the planet.

However, I can then also post the following:
Image
{Note the above is from GreenAction.org; so it's not some right-wing denial campaign}

That shows temperature variations of up to 12 degrees long before humans were stuffing around with the planet.

So my question remains, does the 1 degree climb in the last 100 years coinciding with the industrial revolution, really mean anything? Is it the alarming situation Al Gore wants you to believe? Or is it something the earth has done on its own time and time again, to a much larger magnitude (up to 12x).

If you have an answer, I'd be keen to hear it.
I can dig through thousands and thousands of various research papers, each choosing a different time period, showing different temperate changes, and putting a different perspective on the answer, but if you have a simple, clear and concise answer to the above (ie: is there a bigger cycle at play here), that would be great.

Q. wrote:You can throw in the anti live export nuts in there was well


Very true. There were a lot of people put off by the vegan activists who thought it was appropriate to "invade" farmer's and shut down the middle of Melbourne.
That said, there was a swing to the left in Victoria, so those most directly affected might not have hated it as much as those that saw it on the news from afar!
We might see some more city shut downs in the future!
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby RB » Mon May 20, 2019 1:21 pm

Trader wrote:So my question remains, does the 1 degree climb in the last 100 years coinciding with the industrial revolution, really mean anything?

Yes.
R.I.P. the SANFL 1877 - 2013
User avatar
RB
Coach
 
Posts: 5628
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:45 pm
Has liked: 759 times
Been liked: 1073 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Jimmy_041 » Mon May 20, 2019 2:34 pm

nuggety goodness wrote:Just had this sent to me by a mate...
IMG_2662.jpg


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk


Nailed it. I cant believe how Shorten is getting the blame for not being able to sell crap policy.
By all means, blame him if he drove it despite objections, but Bowen, Keneally and Wong were there up to their sanctimonious eyeballs.

Hasn't Kenealley just been an inspiration for Australian politics
User avatar
Jimmy_041
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13981
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:30 pm
Has liked: 718 times
Been liked: 1071 times
Grassroots Team: Prince Alfred OC

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 3:58 pm

Trader wrote:
am Bays wrote:
Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:So instead of having a healthy discussion about the human impact of climate change, you get to a point where no-one discusses it in a meaningful way. The left put out more and more absurd predictions, trying to grab attention, and the right ignore it (both the issue, and the chatter from the left).
Scientific consensus isn't a left/right issue. You either accept the scientific consensus or willingly oppose it for ideological purposes.


Thanks for proving Traders point Q.


Like clockwork wasn't it!

Q. wrote:There's no middle ground on the scientific consensus. You either accept the science or oppose it for ideological reasons.


I can post this image, it's alarming:
Image

Conclusion:
The temp is climbing rapidly, and that coincides with the industrial revolution, humans are killing the planet.

However, I can then also post the following:
Image
{Note the above is from GreenAction.org; so it's not some right-wing denial campaign}

That shows temperature variations of up to 12 degrees long before humans were stuffing around with the planet.

So my question remains, does the 1 degree climb in the last 100 years coinciding with the industrial revolution, really mean anything? Is it the alarming situation Al Gore wants you to believe? Or is it something the earth has done on its own time and time again, to a much larger magnitude (up to 12x).

If you have an answer, I'd be keen to hear it.
I can dig through thousands and thousands of various research papers, each choosing a different time period, showing different temperate changes, and putting a different perspective on the answer, but if you have a simple, clear and concise answer to the above (ie: is there a bigger cycle at play here), that would be great.


The scientific consensus is that "the current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia"
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 4:12 pm

Would you suggest having a healthy debate with an anti-vaxxer on whether vaccines cause autism and hold off getting your own kids vaccinated until you've assessed whether their feelpinion has merit, or do you just trust the science and get your kids vaccinated? Yeah, you trust the science and take action.
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Jimmy_041 » Mon May 20, 2019 4:23 pm

I am not a climate change denier.

What I do not support is the destruction of Australian industry / jobs when we can make eff-all difference and those that can; do nothing.
It's like saying Little Johnny's vote in Hobart will decide the election result.

We make up about 1% of the problem. And where will all of that industry go when it is too expensive to operate here? China, India, Indonesia etc etc etc - the worst polluters doing eff-all about it.

And coal is not the only source of the problem. Let's kill all the cows whilst we're there. That'll please the tree huggers and the vegans all in one.
We should also drain the oceans and concrete in the volcanos

Image

Funny how the lefties are totally against nuclear

Image

Their way or the highway

I have an alternative strategy - lets plant millions of extra trees. That should please everyone.
User avatar
Jimmy_041
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13981
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 5:30 pm
Has liked: 718 times
Been liked: 1071 times
Grassroots Team: Prince Alfred OC

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Trader » Mon May 20, 2019 4:44 pm

Q. wrote:The scientific consensus is that "the current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia"


Thank you. So we can say with confidence the current warming is human caused.

Now, the earth has previously repaired itself and reversed the temperature changes, of up to 12 degrees, why can't it do so this time, especially when the 'current warming' is only 1 degree?

Also, and I'm loathed to ask 2 independent questions, but here goes, why does CO2 levels and temperature correlate extremely well for 450,000 years, but we now have CO2 levels 'off the charts', but temperature hasn't followed suit?
As CO2 levels move between 200 and 300 ppm, the temperature has followed in the 12 degree band. So why now, when CO2 has exceeded 400, haven't we seen a 12 degree jump in temp? Why is it only 1 degree?

Q. wrote:Would you suggest having a healthy debate with an anti-vaxxer on whether vaccines cause autism and hold off getting your own kids vaccinated until you've assessed whether their feelpinion has merit, or do you just trust the science and get your kids vaccinated? Yeah, you trust the science and take action.


The vaccine debate:
Huge positive (ie: not getting diseased) with a substantial likelihood (ie: 99% confidence of success). vs Mildly bad outcome (autism) with a very low likelihood (almost zero).

By contrast, the proposed climate policies are essentially higher taxes (wealth redistribution) and unreliable power supply. These are what I would consider to be bigger negatives, and considerably more likely than the draw backs of vaccination. As for the positives? Some would say at 400ppm we have already gone too far and are doomed so it doesn't even matter...
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 4:50 pm

Trader wrote:
Q. wrote:The scientific consensus is that "the current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia"


Thank you. So we can say with confidence the current warming is human caused.

Now, the earth has previously repaired itself and reversed the temperature changes, of up to 12 degrees, why can't it do so this time, especially when the 'current warming' is only 1 degree?

Also, and I'm loathed to ask 2 independent questions, but here goes, why does CO2 levels and temperature correlate extremely well for 450,000 years, but we now have CO2 levels 'off the charts', but temperature hasn't followed suit?
As CO2 levels move between 200 and 300 ppm, the temperature has followed in the 12 degree band. So why now, when CO2 has exceeded 400, haven't we seen a 12 degree jump in temp? Why is it only 1 degree?


Warming is proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 4:53 pm

Trader wrote:
Q. wrote:Would you suggest having a healthy debate with an anti-vaxxer on whether vaccines cause autism and hold off getting your own kids vaccinated until you've assessed whether their feelpinion has merit, or do you just trust the science and get your kids vaccinated? Yeah, you trust the science and take action.


The vaccine debate:
Huge positive (ie: not getting diseased) with a substantial likelihood (ie: 99% confidence of success). vs Mildly bad outcome (autism) with a very low likelihood (almost zero).

By contrast, the proposed climate policies are essentially higher taxes (wealth redistribution) FALSE and unreliable power supply FALSE. These are what I would consider to be bigger negatives, and considerably more likely than the draw backs of vaccination. As for the positives? Some would say at 400ppm we have already gone too far and are doomed so it doesn't even matter...FALSE
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Trader » Mon May 20, 2019 4:55 pm

Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:
Q. wrote:The scientific consensus is that "the current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) to be the result of human activity since the mid-20th century and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia"


Thank you. So we can say with confidence the current warming is human caused.

Now, the earth has previously repaired itself and reversed the temperature changes, of up to 12 degrees, why can't it do so this time, especially when the 'current warming' is only 1 degree?

Also, and I'm loathed to ask 2 independent questions, but here goes, why does CO2 levels and temperature correlate extremely well for 450,000 years, but we now have CO2 levels 'off the charts', but temperature hasn't followed suit?
As CO2 levels move between 200 and 300 ppm, the temperature has followed in the 12 degree band. So why now, when CO2 has exceeded 400, haven't we seen a 12 degree jump in temp? Why is it only 1 degree?


Warming is proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented over decades to millennia


decades to millennia, sounds impressive, but it's not.
The rate in the last 100 years is higher than it's been in the last 1000 years. well given the graph that tracks temperature and CO2 to establish the relationship is based over 450,000 years. the last 1000 years is a drop in the (rising) ocean.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Trader » Mon May 20, 2019 4:57 pm

Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:
Q. wrote:Would you suggest having a healthy debate with an anti-vaxxer on whether vaccines cause autism and hold off getting your own kids vaccinated until you've assessed whether their feelpinion has merit, or do you just trust the science and get your kids vaccinated? Yeah, you trust the science and take action.


The vaccine debate:
Huge positive (ie: not getting diseased) with a substantial likelihood (ie: 99% confidence of success). vs Mildly bad outcome (autism) with a very low likelihood (almost zero).

By contrast, the proposed climate policies are essentially higher taxes (wealth redistribution) FALSE and unreliable power supply FALSE. These are what I would consider to be bigger negatives, and considerably more likely than the draw backs of vaccination. As for the positives? Some would say at 400ppm we have already gone too far and are doomed so it doesn't even matter...FALSE


A carbon tax isn't a tax?
Wind and solar power can provide a stable base load?

C'mon mate, if we are going to have a discussion you need to remain somewhere near reality.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 5:04 pm

Jimmy_041 wrote:I am not a climate change denier.

What I do not support is the destruction of Australian industry / jobs when we can make eff-all difference and those that can; do nothing.
It's like saying Little Johnny's vote in Hobart will decide the election result.

We make up about 1% of the problem. And where will all of that industry go when it is too expensive to operate here? China, India, Indonesia etc etc etc - the worst polluters doing eff-all about it.

And coal is not the only source of the problem. Let's kill all the cows whilst we're there. That'll please the tree huggers and the vegans all in one.
We should also drain the oceans and concrete in the volcanos

Image

Funny how the lefties are totally against nuclear

Image

Their way or the highway

I have an alternative strategy - lets plant millions of extra trees. That should please everyone.


It's like saying, don't bother voting because it doesn't make a difference.

Fossil fuels are literally the source of the problem. The role of livestock in contributing to global warming is way overplayed by vegan activists.

The nuclear analysis has been done to death. Nuclear is high cost and the pay off occurs over a long time period. Ie. would drive the cost of electricity higher in Aus and is no longer an economically viable option given the advancement of other technology.
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 5:14 pm

Trader wrote:
Q. wrote:
Trader wrote:
Q. wrote:Would you suggest having a healthy debate with an anti-vaxxer on whether vaccines cause autism and hold off getting your own kids vaccinated until you've assessed whether their feelpinion has merit, or do you just trust the science and get your kids vaccinated? Yeah, you trust the science and take action.


The vaccine debate:
Huge positive (ie: not getting diseased) with a substantial likelihood (ie: 99% confidence of success). vs Mildly bad outcome (autism) with a very low likelihood (almost zero).

By contrast, the proposed climate policies are essentially higher taxes (wealth redistribution) FALSE and unreliable power supply FALSE. These are what I would consider to be bigger negatives, and considerably more likely than the draw backs of vaccination. As for the positives? Some would say at 400ppm we have already gone too far and are doomed so it doesn't even matter...FALSE


A carbon tax isn't a tax?
Wind and solar power can provide a stable base load?

C'mon mate, if we are going to have a discussion you need to remain somewhere near reality.


You're asking me to remain in reality when you're trying to argue against the work of thousands of climate scientists? Are you even a scientist? You have obvious ideological opposition and it would be a waste of time discussing science with you.
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Trader » Mon May 20, 2019 5:26 pm

Asking questions is not arguing against something, it is trying to gain a greater understanding of it.

No, I am not a scientist, but many scientists will tell you questioning assumptions is one of the most important things you can do.

I have opposition to the policy, and based on the weekend's results, it would seem I'm not alone.
Danny Southern telling Plugga he's fat, I'd like to see that!
User avatar
Trader
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Has liked: 60 times
Been liked: 794 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby mighty_tiger_79 » Mon May 20, 2019 5:27 pm

Bill didnt like questions in the campaign either

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Matty Wade is a star and deserves more respect from the forum family!
User avatar
mighty_tiger_79
Coach
 
Posts: 56642
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 7:29 pm
Location: at the TAB
Has liked: 11805 times
Been liked: 3581 times

Re: Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

Postby Q. » Mon May 20, 2019 5:39 pm

Trader wrote:Asking questions is not arguing against something, it is trying to gain a greater understanding of it.

No, I am not a scientist, but many scientists will tell you questioning assumptions is one of the most important things you can do.

I have opposition to the policy, and based on the weekend's results, it would seem I'm not alone.


Apologies. I'm fed up with with the anti-science attitudes that pervade society in general now (albeit I mostly am sick of the anti-GMO "Monsanto bad!" crowd at the moment). Any sense of it quickly hits a nerve.
User avatar
Q.
Coach
 
 
Posts: 22019
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:16 pm
Location: El Dorado
Has liked: 970 times
Been liked: 2396 times
Grassroots Team: Houghton Districts

PreviousNext

Board index   General Talk  Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |