Toni Lavis,

Normally, you'd be correct about taking each argument on its own merits. In the case of Greenpeace, however, we're dealing with a bunch of congenital liars whose motivation is invariably ideological. The starting point for any issue they are involved in is that they have zero credibility because they lie for political advantage.

nicknamenick,

You seem to have a lot of difficulty dealing with facts, which, to your fevered imagination, become "weak declarations". The facts as I stated them - including an expose of the lies of Greenpeace and the federal environment agency - were documented in the Productivity Commission's Inquiry Report No. 38, Waste Management, published on 20 October 2006. That's another fact. Deal with it.

You also leave an oily trail as you slide from a discussion of the lies and misrepresenations of Greenpeace and the federal environment agency, to your fantasy about fake moon landings.

What a knob.

Has anyone looked at the UN's MARPOL requirements? This required ships at sea to chop up waste into small particles before disposal into the ocean. Any plastic in that waste is also chopped up. Note that MARPOL requires that no plastic is disposed of in this way - like that is going to happen.

I wonder then why there are so many small plastic particles floating around?

I also wonder how plastic shopping bags find their way to the ocean in sufficient numbers to make any measurable impact? Note that the federal environment departments report on plastic bags suggests some 80 million bags are littered each year, but there is no data to support that number - it has simply been invented - the author of the report was a previous Greenpeace activist, so had little difficulty inventing data.

Meanwhile a Greenpeace UK spokesperson stated that they did not believe plastic shopping bags were a problem. Go figure.