ALTRAV,

For your information:

The Reserve Bank of Australia is a body corporate
wholly owned by the Commonwealth of Australia.
It derives its functions and powers from the
Reserve Bank Act 1959.

In Rothschild's day, before banking regulations and
antitrust laws existed, it was indeed possible for
small groups to gain controlling interests in
enough financial institutions that it could be
argued that they "controlled" a nation's money
supply. Today that is no longer the case.

The claim that the Rothschilds own half the world's
wealth and the notion that anyone could "control
the world's finances" is ludicrous.

There is no longer any such thing as a monolithic House
of Rothschild - that theory is more than 100 years old.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Yes mate I did high school genetics too.

We both know that when I raised mitochondrial DNA as an “aside” solely in the context of showing that DNA was not the sole arbiter of heredity. I recognised your lack of comprehension and tried to assist but to no avail.

I have gone back over my posts and at no point did I get a single thing wrong. Of course if you wanted to plainly state your case then I am prepared to listen but you certainly haven't yet.

You also claimed; “Don't lie the quote was: "the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual's pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago." “

That is just one of the other quotes not that mine were incorrect or inaccurate you clown. Have I got you that tied up in knots that you have to resort to this kind of bulldust? Either get better at putting your case or get over it and stop. There really is no need for this kind of underhanded crap.

Dear mhaze,

Still banging on are we? Here you go.

In 1938 Guy Stewart Callendar an English engineer looked at the temperature rises sine the turn of the century and compared them to a rise in CO2. He predicted a doubling of CO2 would result in a 2C rise in temperature. His work spurred a lot of research into the greenhouse effect and its implications for future global temperatures.

There was indeed a dropping of daily maximum temperatures during the 50s through to the 70s however there nighttime minimums continued to increase. The explanation of course turned out to be solar dimming caused by the increase in aerosol pollutants as the result of increased manufacturing. These caused less sunlight reaching the earth therefore lower daily maximums but did not impact the nighttime temperatures Once better pollution controls were instituted the masking diminished and the underlying daytime warming was evident.

And another couple.

"Salmon may lose the ability to smell danger as carbon emissions rise University of Washington". Note the MAY in all these bits of garbage.

Here is another, "Southwest forest trees may grow much slower in the 21st century".

This one they ignore the greening of the planet, [even the Sahara is greening around the edges], due to the increase in CO2, or the huge growth of flora that supported the dinosaurs, when CO2 was double today, & the planet was wetter.

Interestingly none of the warmest have commented on all these way out claims. Of course it is hard to get in a comment before some real science shoots this rot down.

There is NO carbon being emitted - it is carbon dioxide.

The following link might help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_footprint

Hasbeen,

It would have been helpful before your pocking fun at
the salmon you would have given us the big picture
of ocean acidification and the fact that this was
changing the water's chemistry - therefore the
possibility of what could happen to salmon is indeed
real.

Why didn't you give us the link - so that we could
make up our own minds - or doesn't that suit your
agenda?

Here's the link:

http://www.washington.edu/news/2018/12/18/salmon-may-lose-the-ability-to-smell-danger-as-carbon-emissions-rise/

And here's another link you conveniently left out:

http://phys.org/news/2018-12-southwest-forest-trees-slow-21st.html