examinator,
I do wish you would or could explain what you are on about.

UOG does the same and I simply can't be bothered to try and decipher what either of you are trying to say.

Was not composition part of your english learning at school?

BANJO

Whilst I haven't been here for a while, it seems to me that OUG's writing and associations continue to improve, and EXAMINATOR I imagine would be recognised as being from amongst the learned by most.

I speak something of 4 languages and I don't have a problem with "colourful script" as to me it adds to the richness and diversity of the OLO garden and I learn a little more each time I try to understand the written emanation of those with a slightly different consciousness to my own.

To the contrary, I have a general disdain for people who want to impress their own narrow mindedness on others by demanding they adhere to one strict form of written discourse or another .. yada yada ..

Some of U may recall the recent court case involving
Senator Bob Brown? (Green Browny)

In defence of the EARTH and more specifically 3 distinct endangered species, he demonstrated with his legal team to the Federal Court that contrary to the law they were not being protected and was subsequently convincingly victorious in shutting down the defilers.

In the aftermath, that vile little man j.howard, who some may recall as the individual who authorised the indefinate locking up of children without trial or detention, in combination with the then Tasmanian premier, changed the regional forestry agreement to state that notwithstanding the science to the contrary, that the 3 species in question were actually being protected. (What a sick joke!)

Then in accordance with some idiotic legal precedent set down by some mongrel pom in that place east of Ireland, south of Scotland and over the sea from Bretony more than 100 yrs ago, the case was appealed and retried pursuant to the new and current law. (So much for the checks and balances of the judiciary in this tin pot legal system.)

Whilst one noteable high court judge protested, Bob was rolled by a system which just makes it up as it goes along and which is also clearly capable of penalising individuals harshly with draconian retrospective laws.

Some of you may care to note that there was little definitive coverage on the significance of this abominable turn of events.

The solution - vote for anyone other than the blue, the red or their stooges.

(The full text of these cases can be found on www.austlii.edu.au)

Opiniated2

I’m rather intrigued as to your purpose here, all of your previous posts (leastways those I cared to look-up in a two minute search) have seemed to be about criticising theistic thinking.

To now find you spouting lines lines like:
“If this planet was given to us by GOD why are we so arrogant, greedy and selfish not to realise what we have done and are doing?

If there is such a thing as Mother Earth... she is groaning under the pain of what mankind has done.”

Makes me think there is an end here that doesn’t at first reveal itself – or, is that just me being overly suspicious?

Banjo,
My apologies perhaps I assumed too much.

You said >>Over population is the basic cause of most problems of pollution. That is the problem that needs tackling first. <<

“Execute those who don't help improve the world (that's a plus)..
Corporations act responsibly as opposed to legally close those that don't. (that a double plus)
Population control.( all these less people = population control and that meets your l criteria... a real plus)
those left all working to improve the world... ah nirvana
OLO would become positive (no one left to argue that's a real plus [?])
What could go wrong ? (joke there boys and girls) :-)

A whimsical piece of good natured satirical...nonsense

My original post simply answers the question.
People excuse their lack of action by making excuses as per the list. Including denial etc.
Most of which fail any reasonable logic test.
I also suggested people in general tend to operate on the “out of sight out of mind process”.
I went on to say that some people on OLO tend to see objective, provable observation as judgemental and or lecturing. Neither of these are necessarily true. In reality their discomfort is a case of 'if the cap fits' i.e. they have difficulty facing their own short comings and attack to cover that with emotional attacks on the observer.
A bit like the speeder who gets pinged despite the fact they were speeding they salve their injured pride by redistributing the blame with excuses like “the police were hiding “, “I was keeping up with the other traffic” (it was their fault).

In context “I'm too busy”, “examinator (and others). is judging/pontificating ” are simply applying the same (unnecessary) aggressive ego salve .

Some people tend to avoid effort/perceived sacrifices by making excuses for ignoring the flip side of a “right”...a responsibility, then get upset if it is mirrored back to them..

Dream on
Thank you.
Any perceptions of me being “more learned …..” is not my self perception,

Dear Opinionated2,

"Patience has to be a virtue for those seeking
change," so wrote Tor Hundloe in his book,
"From Buddha to Bono: Seeking sustainability."

Hundloe writes: "The threat of human-induced climate
change, accepted as a genuine and very serious
threat as a consequence of the Stern Report released
in October 2006...has the potential to change
attitudes worldwide, and hence make it easier for
our conservative (in the sense of being hesitant to
change) economists to act according to the laws and
understanding of their science..."

Hundloe also adds however that, "the form of pollution
tax we call a carbon tax is not, by itself, the
solution to climate change..."

Hundloe explains that: "Environmental taxes are not
the only solution... there is another solution...
That is to assign property rights to the environment..."

He says,"Imagine for a moment that you have a right, which
cannot be taken from you willingly, to clean air, clean
water and a carbon neutral society, and a society based on
trust...We presently have certain rights with regard to our
piece of land and a house on it. A range of legal remedies
exist if these rights are threatened. So there would be if
there was a 'bill of rights' for nature's goods and services.
Whether legislated rights, pollution taxes or simply caps
(as we arelikely to have with carbon dioxide
emissions), economists have the means to ensure we have a
world within which a reasonable number of humans and
other animals can have a goos sustainable life..."

Hundloe does not put all the responsibility on the economists,
he simply addresses them because they are the most powerful
profession today. The responsiblity or as he puts it -
the guardians of the three major disciplies (which combined to
form the new sustainability science - ecology, economics, and
ethics) have a special duty thrust upon them today.
They have to ensure that those participating in these fields
apply the accumulated knowledge in their respective fields...

We can only hope and trust that our world leaders will start
taking notice of the vast army of experts