*What on earth is that sensless rambling all about ?*
individual

Allow me to enlighten you and perhaps we are all capable to learn.

If for eg- the surf life savers & state Governments had the brains to have trained - learnt- be taught about the ocean from our aboriginal people beaches would have been a hell of a lot safer.

50 60 70 years ago when the aboriginal people were used more for spotters for fishermen & holiday makers were coming the councils fishermen etc used to also pay them to judge the waters. The same flags were used butt with one difference. About every two hours even calm surfs change. They can see a rip before its there. Predict where to flags should be moved to. Up and down those flags would go from one hole to another. At times they were just moved 20 meters- other times 20 30 40 etc.

Living at one property i nagged the council for years to get some of these old timers and LEARN. Watching people being pulled up of the water + a few deaths while they leave the flags in the same place-

If anybody would know about tides changes animals plants its them
Trouble is our idiot pen pushers wont listen and say things like=

*What on earth is that sensless rambling all about ?*

Kerryanne,
You're right that the people have known the tidal factors for a long time & that is what my rambling is all about. We have so many people who know yet we consult with ignorant academic experts at great cost to everyone & in many instances at an even greater social cost to society. Just the one example of rising sea level & low islands. Does it really require spending millions of dollars to find out that the only alternative is to move off such an island ?
They had that sense 70 years ago for crying out loud. Yet despite the fact that people left so long ago our bureaucrats see it fit to keep pouring millions into those places. Like one bureaucrat said to me recently, I'll be retired before the sea level rises. That's what I am rambling on about, that selfish, idiotic attitude. This attitude is prevalent throughout our massively oversized bureaucracy. The saddest part is that the main culprit for this situation, the ALP is still getting support for this insanity.
This is only a tiny example, just think back of pink bats, school halls, the floods etc etc. Add to the list at your leasure. Do we really want more of this ? Really ? Or ist time to start thinking of of others not on the bandwagon but fellow citizens nevertheless who deserve better. Don't come back & say I'm against all academics & bureaucrats. I'm not. I'm only against the countless incompetent hangers-on ones.

Dear Individual,

Obviously the Opposition leader has decided to maximise his advantage on "economic management" by invoking the "Howard Golden Age," and avoid commiting himself to anything substantive on economic policy in the here and now. As a political tactic it's clearly designed to keep the focus on the government and to change the subject without addressing the questions posed about savings and of course to maintain the constant election freenzy Mr Abbott likes to conjure up. All smoke and mirrors really.

The politicians of both the Coalition and the ALP have performed well at what they've set out to do. Both need to hold the centre, for without middle Australia, each is done for. Both are redistributive parties. The Coalition wants the growing inequality of income, wealth and power distribution to keep going. The ALP want to tone it down a bit. The Coalition is made up of AGW denialists and hence the home insulation scheme to them was a total waste of money. The ALP endorses AGW and its home insulation scheme was by and large successful but it was naively managed and rorted to buggery by the sort of "entrepreneurial" cowboys who are Abbott's natural constituency.

Human activities, the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation are triggering changes in the global climate. We may not see some of those changes in our lifetime - but that's no excuse to do nothing about it for future generations and this planet. Taking action on climate change is the right thing to do. It's the right thing for our economy, for jobs, and for the environment. Not only is putting a price on pollution critically important to our children's future - it's about ensuring a healthy environment to live in and new high skill jobs for their work. You don't have to believe in any of this but please at least respect the opinions of those who don't agree with
you.

*Don't come back & say I'm against all academics & bureaucrats. I'm not. I'm only against the countless incompetent hangers-on ones.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 19 July 2011 6:31:41 AM*

Dear Individual

o I wont come back and say that. What I will say is give me the chance to walk in there and toss 99% of them out and I would be there in a heart beat. I agree with you 100% about the waste. Its worse than people know. At least even if it costs millions again some are at last taking the advise of the elders- that was my point.

We are so arrogant. I had the privilege of learning as a kid how they read the tides- well seeing it first hand. I have forgotten a lot but i am still see danger before people drown. I got so angry one-day watching these idiots with there flags up a few meters from the resorts pulling people out of the surf IDIOTS.
If they have moved the flags 50 meters there was no rips.
Got into a argument- called the council- got the head guy ringing me saying they were experts. Told him to get his/ their life savers up north and LEARN from the older aboriginals before it was too late.
They still have the flags in the same place each day- outside the resorts - never move them
Typical of Councils and Government.
So we agree on Howard and ALP neither being the answer. That is why I posted that link
Did you read it?
Cheer

So, let's see if we can work the question/s to which individual wants answers, on the basis of the brief literature review and anecdotal evidence available.

Firstly, individual is aware of anecdotal evidence of inundation 70 years ago leading to a mass exodus of government officials and residents from an unnamed island community in the Torres Strait. According to him, presumably government bureaucrats authorised rebuilding on the same site, despite being aware that it is below recorded maximum high tide.

Alternatively, it might be sea level rising due to AGW, so the bureaucrats are stupid to rebuild anywhere on the island/s and should just abandon them.

It seems to me that there's a couple of questions that emanate from that brief summary that individual needs to answer before we can proceed sensibly, rather than along the generalised bureaucrat and academic bashing track that some would like to take us.

Firstly, which island is it that he's talking about, or is it some or all of them?

Secondly, if it's a general trend across the Torres Strait Islands, wouldn't that be a very strong indicator of sea level rise as predicted by AGW models?

Thirdly, if all of that's true, has he thought about the implications of what he's suggesting? How would he suggest going about depriving people of their land and communities, and where does he think they might go? What about the implications for all low-lying coastal communities in Australia?

Wouldn't it be sensible to start planning for it, based on the best available evidence?

Once we get some constructive answers to those questions, then we can start looking for who to blame, IMHO.

Morganzola,
There are some things you need to give some thought up front. When sea level rises it doesn't rise in some places & not others. The only other cause being subsiding land which is possibly due the collapse of cavities created by removing natural gas & oil. Then there is tectonic shifting of plates which is unlikely caused by man.
There was a mass evacuation from Saibai Island in 1947 due to flooding. You have to expect that in a mangrove swamp. 150 people may not sound like a mass but when the population is 170-200 then it is a mass. Bureaucrats only ever stayed there not resided.
Your'e partly right about the bureaucrats but corruption is also involved. Sea levels haven't reached the heights in recent years that were reached 50-70 years ago so I'd guess sea level is not rising. Depriving people of land is not an option if the sea level is rising, there simply is no choice. Yes, start planning for a possible rise in sea level by cutting back/ceasing to build on coastal low land. Lastly, from personal experience I'd also suggest that experts who do not reside in an area should not be the planners for that area. The past has shown that most stuff-ups in planning are due to consultants who have no other interest than making a quick buck at the expense of the communities they leave in their incompetent wake.