The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Pacific left struggling in UN climate negotiations > Comments

Pacific left struggling in UN climate negotiations : Comments

By Jayden Holmes, published 9/12/2011

Pacific Islands are again underrepresented in international climate negotiations.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
I disagree, KenH.

>>But not all opinions are equal. Those based entirely on ideology, cant and sentiment are pretty much worthless. It follows that an editor should favour contributions which are based on validated facts, evidence and logic.<<

You are asking the editor to do exactly what you profess to be unhappy about - playing favourites.

For myself, I'd much prefer to be able to hear the opinion - however well-founded or otherwise - of anyone with an opinion to share. It performs one of two services: either adds weight to your own convictions on the topic, thanks to the fragility of the ideas expressed, or it gives you cause to doubt, and think more deeply.

Either, I would have thought, is sufficient justification for publishing both Monckton's and the students' opinions in the same forum.
Posted by Pericles, Sunday, 11 December 2011 10:23:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles I too like looking at others opinions. That is when those expressing them, are expressing a real opinion, with some thought behind it.

This requires some knowledge, some study, & the maturity to evaluate the evidence they have discovered.

I am always turned off by some fool reporter asking a kid what they think of something, just as I would be if they asked the family pet.

No these students are not pets, they are also not mature. Any regurgitation of stories they have been fed, may have a place in a students mag, but have no place here.

I don't come here to listen to children displaying the results of their brainwashing, by a bunch of leftist university professors, who have, for some years, been very good at displaying their inability to understand anything involving more than a couple of syllables, themselves.
Posted by Hasbeen, Sunday, 11 December 2011 10:45:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Not at all, Pericles

If one of these "students" can produce an article which is factual, verifiable, logical and well written, then go ahead, publish it.

But they do not. The submission and publication of three articles of dubious quality on the one day is clear evidence that they are part of a concerted effort to dominate OLO - because they know OLO is a soft touch.

How many of them would submit anything if they had not been freeloading in Durban?

The same editorial criteria should be applied to each and every article submitted, especially those which are unsolicited.

You imply, I think, that every opinion is worth seeing and therefore that every contribution should be published. With the greatest respect, that is simply not so. Life's too short.

Do you think that newspapers publish every letter to the editor? I'll let you in on a secret: they do not. The letters editor will apply his judgment on the basis of content, logic, written expression and balance (that is, the balance of pro and contra opinion). The editor does not want to appear one-sided, nor to bore his readers through repetition. At least that's the way it should work.

There are circumstances where discrimination is a good thing. The editing process is one of them.
Posted by KenH, Sunday, 11 December 2011 11:23:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author makes a legitimate point, and it is this which needs to be addressed, and not his age or status as a uni student.

The Pacific Islands deserve to have a decent hearing at any conference affecting them, and climate change is just such a concern, particularly when it is clear that the major developed and developing nations have every intention of railroading the whole affair in their favour. The fault in the whole conference setup is the overstuffed delegations from the major nations. It is certain that a few good representatives would be able to achieve far more, if they were first given a mandate by their government and people. But the big boys just have to throw their weight around, and intimidate the smaller nations, just because they can. Aus should be pitching-in and assisting in representing the interests of our smaller neighbours, and so really should be the U.S. We'll believe it when we see it.

Did our government ask us what we would like the conference to achieve, or at least inform us of their proposals so that we could form an opinion or make an input? Fat chance. Policy on the run, as usual.
Posted by Saltpetre, Monday, 12 December 2011 12:53:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Island states all over the world are a microcosm of large nations. IE monkey see, monkey do!

The eternal Free Market syndrome is at play.

Its The Easter Island syndrome:

Overpopulation--> use up all cheap energy resources + destroy environmental climate barriers(wetlands,mangroves,forests) & replace them with fragile/vulnerable & PROFITABLE populous structures that create elitist WEALTH.

--> wait for the next NATURAL weather cycle to kill some of the vulnerable people

--> NEVER take responsibility & blame everyone else who you think can pay to get you back on your enviro-destroying track

--> When those you blame tell you to suck it up (after their young Liberals and Labourals have cut their teeth on the issue) YOU migrate to somewhere where you can do it all over again while all the really vulnerable islanders just conveniently DIE in a lifeless environment.

This is why a false, or at best irrelevant scientific theory, AGW, is so convenient. It diverts attention from the ELITE wealth accumulators, blames & taxes the poor and weak and sets the stage for a major global CULL of human civilisation when OIL runs out circa 2030 when 2/3 of human populations will be deemed irrelevant and past their use by date.

After the CULL what about Climate change & AGW?

Well with 2/3 of the 'A' in AGW gone, even the AGW scientists, who will be the first irrelevancies to be exterminated btw, would agree that the climate change problem had been solved!
Posted by KAEP, Monday, 12 December 2011 5:26:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is the real worry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zyklon_B

According to Rudolf Höss, commandant of Auschwitz, bunker 1 held 800 people, and bunker 2 held 1,200.[27] Once the chamber was full, the doors were screwed shut and solid pellets of Zyklon B were dropped into the chambers through vents in the side walls, releasing the cyanide gas. Those inside died within 20 minutes; the speed of death depended on how close the inmate was standing to a gas vent, according to Höss, who estimated that about one third of the victims died immediately.[28][29] Johann Kremer, an SS doctor who oversaw the gassings, testified that: "Shouting and screaming of the victims could be heard through the opening and it was clear that they fought for their lives."[30] When they were removed, if the chamber had been very congested, as they often were, the victims were found half-squatting, their skin colored pink with red and green spots, some foaming at the mouth or bleeding from the ears."

It beggars belief that given that we live under the FREE MARKET god where many people have declared themselves TOO IMPORTANT TO FAIL, and that some nations PRINT money to buy goods from poorer nations, that AGW and Climate Change scientists still have any credibility.

Yes, there are significant warning signs for the next 20 years.

BUT THEY HAVE absolutely NOTHING .... to do with climate!
Posted by KAEP, Monday, 12 December 2011 6:00:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy