Off Topic

Eco Party- 6 June

71 replies · 5,888 views
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:

wait, if i get people to believe in global warming, CHACHING!! i'll be rich! WHAT THE f**k HAS BIOFUEL GOT TO DO WITH IT OIL'S RUNNING OUT FFS IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING OR NOT IT'S A FINITE RESOURCE
 
But it's not.
 
There are places all over the world....like USA and Canada for example.


um, so there's more...BUT IT'S INFINITE!! wow, that's amazing -the world would have to be infinitely large, but hey, it must be!
 
And won't run out for 100's or even thousands of years.....
 
By which time bio-fuels will (hopefully) need much less crop to run or there may be an entirely different resource that we run our vehicles with....


we've only just started using oil a lot in the last couple of hundred years, and the consumption is rising like my penis in the morning...especially when you factor in China's insane economic growth...petrol's $2 a litre, people wouldn't have predicted that until recently..i don't see how there's so much oil left, and even if there was, you'd have to drill up most of Alaska and Canada and that would pretty much suck...and even then, 1000s of years?? oil used to be living matter...it's not the whole of the earth's mantle

I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:
Pure Genius wrote:
yomcat wrote:
Bio fuels add piss all to the problem.
 
Piss all is too much....


someone obviously has an agenda...oh wait, you only have an agenda if you make up global warming to get rich...wish i made up global warming! like Al Gore!
 
I don't deny I have an agenda....
 
However my agenda is based on what I believe is right and wrong, not the bottom line.


Oh THE BOTTOM LINE! NOT THE ONE THAT OIL COMPANIES/CORPORATIONS USE? THE ONES THAT HIPPIES USE! DAMN RICH HIPPIES AND THEIR BOTTOM LINE!
 

1) I believe, like you, that fuel companies are overpricing bastards that have massive profit margins....
 
2) I'm not saying that It's your average every day "hippie" (for use of a better word :P). I'm saying it's the likes of Al Gore and Govts. who make truck loads of cash off this.


then why oh why is the US stalling on environmental agreements and protocols? COS THEY DON'T LIKE MAKING  MONEY???
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Lonegunmen wrote:
Apparently their is a big oil field in northern Canada that is so big it puts most others to shame but access to it in such an isolated  environment is stalling oil companies attempts to go for it.
[/QUOTE]

The Alberta Oil Sands. The problem with that is in the extraction. I don't know the specifics, but it's not a perfect solution.

Can't comment on Stewart Island as I've yet to hear of it myself.

The USA one is Alaska, in a national park. The problem with that is the massive environmental impact that will destroy much of Alaska's natural ecosystems - with it, killing of several species (including doing much damage to Bush's favourite endanger the Polar Bear), the effect it has on indigenous populations, and the effect on the tourist dollar. Whether Alaska is a viable option or not depends mostly on peoples values - some people value what we'd need to sacrifice to get oil out of Alaska, others don't. Hence the kerfuffle their.

[QUOTE=Lonegunmen]
As for the Al Gore doco, the scientific community are almost evenly divided on that argument. And yes, profiteering from this documentary is being done by various groups.


Yeah, that happens with everything unfortunately. The movie is a good introduction, but not perfect.



PG - Good on you for looking at both sides of the story. Most skeptics tend to just be in denial, but it's good to see someone willing to look up the facts. I don't agree with your conclusions myself, but can't say you're just being ignorant
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

how now, brown cow
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

But the $2 a litre is because of it being in "conflict zones" not because of diminishing stocks...

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

i don't get how as soon as anyone concerned with the environment profits from their deeds is suddenly the devil...OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY OFF STUFF THAT'S HOW THE WORLD WORKS..just cos you care about the environment doesn't make you a saint...it's just HEAPS better than not caring about it, that's all....why do people want to see their environment crappy? i bet most of the haters have tidy houses..maybe i should go and take a dump on their living room carpets..i mean, the smell won't COMPLETELY ruin the house, so it'll be fine...
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Pure Genius wrote:

But the $2 a litre is because of it being in "conflict zones" not because of diminishing stocks...



that didn't answer my question.. i want to know the US government is lagging when it comes to environment issues and agreements, if environmental groups are making all the money - why don't they jump at the chance? the US loves making money, they are one of the most  economically laissez faire countries in the world
Cosimo2008-06-04 19:46:56
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:

i don't get how as soon as anyone concerned with the environment profits from their deeds is suddenly the devil...OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY OFF STUFF THAT'S HOW THE WORLD WORKS..just cos you care about the environment doesn't make you a saint...it's just HEAPS better than not caring about it, that's all....why do people want to see their environment crappy? i bet most of the haters have tidy houses..maybe i should go and take a dump on their living room carpets..i mean, the smell won't COMPLETELY ruin the house, so it'll be fine...
 
Like I said I have no problem looking after my enviroment. However I don't think "carbon emmisions" damage my enviroment so why am I getting taxed because of them?
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I hear petrol is so expensive not because so much of the oil suppliers but the greedy bastard speculators who have shares in said oil companies.
Proud to have attended the first 175 Consecutive "Home" Wellington Phoenix "A League" Games !!

The Ruf, The Ruf, The Ruf is on Fire!!

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:

i don't get how as soon as anyone concerned with the environment profits from their deeds is suddenly the devil...OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY OFF STUFF THAT'S HOW THE WORLD WORKS..just cos you care about the environment doesn't make you a saint...it's just HEAPS better than not caring about it, that's all....why do people want to see their environment crappy? i bet most of the haters have tidy houses..maybe i should go and take a dump on their living room carpets..i mean, the smell won't COMPLETELY ruin the house, so it'll be fine...
 
Like I said I have no problem looking after my enviroment. However I don't think "carbon emmisions" damage my enviroment so why am I getting taxed because of them?


how much are you getting taxed, you're 16?!
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:
Pure Genius wrote:

But the $2 a litre is because of it being in "conflict zones" not because of diminishing stocks...



that didn't answer my question.. i want to know the US government is lagging when it comes to environment issues and agreements, if environmental groups are making all the money - why don't they jump at the chance? the US loves making money, they are one of the most  economically laissez faire countries in the world
 
Maybe George Bush has a concience - Yea Right.
 
Tbh I can't answer your question - Cosimo 1. Me 0.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:

i don't get how as soon as anyone concerned with the environment profits from their deeds is suddenly the devil...OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY OFF STUFF THAT'S HOW THE WORLD WORKS..just cos you care about the environment doesn't make you a saint...it's just HEAPS better than not caring about it, that's all....why do people want to see their environment crappy? i bet most of the haters have tidy houses..maybe i should go and take a dump on their living room carpets..i mean, the smell won't COMPLETELY ruin the house, so it'll be fine...
 
Like I said I have no problem looking after my enviroment. However I don't think "carbon emmisions" damage my enviroment so why am I getting taxed because of them?


how much are you getting taxed, you're 16?!
 
When I say "I", I mean NZer's in general, and my being a NZer.....
 
Hope that clears things up, makes perfect sense in my head
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Pure Genius wrote:
Cosimo wrote:

i don't get how as soon as anyone concerned with the environment profits from their deeds is suddenly the devil...OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE MAKING MONEY OFF STUFF THAT'S HOW THE WORLD WORKS..just cos you care about the environment doesn't make you a saint...it's just HEAPS better than not caring about it, that's all....why do people want to see their environment crappy? i bet most of the haters have tidy houses..maybe i should go and take a dump on their living room carpets..i mean, the smell won't COMPLETELY ruin the house, so it'll be fine...
 
Like I said I have no problem looking after my enviroment. However I don't think "carbon emmisions" damage my enviroment so why am I getting taxed because of them?


if you sit in a garage with all the doors shut and turn the car on, eventually you will die because of the carbon monoxide...the earth's atmosphere isn't infinite,and it's a closed space, so carbon emmissions HAVE to damage it, at least a little (the amount is contentious, certainly)
Cosimo2008-06-04 19:59:33
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

that was fun, thanks dude. I'm gonna have some dinner.
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Awesome- thanks guys

The greenie in me should care about the debate but the cynical event organiser in me just says thanks for keeping the topic at the top

Tickets are now at 500 a great number two days out-




Salmon swim upstream

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Glad I could help.

Actualy I'm not :P
 
But ahwell
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

The programme baldly trashed that bottom-line assumption that mankind's modern activities are exacerbating, and possibly causing, a perilous degree of climate change, and produced a slew of seeming experts who claimed to offer proof that it was absolute pants.

Who among us is competent to judge their lines of argument? Add to that the undisputed fact there has been some backsliding in the wake of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and, just for a while there on Sunday night, the now-orthodox notion of climate change seemed a little unreliable.

However, for this reviewer, as I suspect for most, a combination of practised bullsh*t-detecting antennae and plain common sense weighed in in good time to prevent this clever, slick programme having its evil way with us permanently.

For a start, it's common sense that churning through natural resources, polluting the environment and emitting vaulting quantities of carbon and other substances is not a good idea. You won't find any scientist telling you that these activities are doing the planet any good. Second, the programme went way too far. It's plain the scientific orthodoxy has agreed we should worry about and combat climate change.

The experts in Swindle were the dissenters - a vigorous and persuasive minority - but nevertheless the minority. Finally, this was just too much of a hard sell. Swindle is just too big a word to swallow.

The points that dissenting scientists made about the reasons for the majority consensus were troubling, but not definitive. They said it was all about gaining research money.

But surely all the researchers cannot be so venal and corrupt? The Swindle experts also testified to political connivance in the global warming pretence. This was ultimately unconvincing.

Whatever your inclinations on the subject, the global warming believers won the after-match debate, gushing forth facts and explanations more fluently and credibly than the lead denier, broadcaster Leighton Smith.

Of the three scientists, who we have to assume are beyond being swayed by matters of faith and preference, and who only go by proven facts, two agreed global warming was not a swindle, and one dissented.

None of which got us any further. But perhaps that's exactly the point.

I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
It is very healthy that there is debate within the scientific community, nevertheless the weight of evidence seems to lie extra-ordinarily in favour of those that advance the perilous nature of CC and tipping point etc.

What troubles me is that the vocal minority get so much exposure from a media looking to sell copy (hence my sidestep of the above programme, so graciously reviewed by yourself!).
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

that was Jane Clifton's review in stuff.co.nz
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4573510a10.html

Wumbo, where were you today ?


The Christchurch City Council has ordered the destruction of six trees along City Mall on World Environment Day.

The trees were removed early this morning from an area between Colombo Street and the Bridge of Remembrance as work progresses on Project City Mall.

Concerned residents, who contacted The Press to report the destruction, said it made a mockery of the idea of sustainability on what was World Environment Day.  

The Christchurch City Council said the trees were identified for removal either because they were in decline or because their root systems would be affected by the construction of a new service lane planned for the area.

Project director Sean Whitaker said removal of the trees would also open up the mall to create a clear view of the Bridge of Remembrance.

New Zealand has been chosen to host this year's World Environment Day, which was aimed at raising awareness around the wiorld about climate change.


How's my driving? - Whine here

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Hard News wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4573510a10.html

Wumbo, where were you today ?


The Christchurch City Council has ordered the destruction of six trees along City Mall on World Environment Day.

The trees were removed early this morning from an area between Colombo Street and the Bridge of Remembrance as work progresses on Project City Mall.

Concerned residents, who contacted The Press to report the destruction, said it made a mockery of the idea of sustainability on what was World Environment Day.  

The Christchurch City Council said the trees were identified for removal either because they were in decline or because their root systems would be affected by the construction of a new service lane planned for the area.

Project director Sean Whitaker said removal of the trees would also open up the mall to create a clear view of the Bridge of Remembrance.

New Zealand has been chosen to host this year's World Environment Day, which was aimed at raising awareness around the wiorld about climate change.


 
I know, the tree's your talking about, there right by outside dad's office.
 
The Service Lane is kinda stupid, one of the things that makes city mall an attractive place to go to is that it is vehicle free, although it won't be a problem as long as they restrict the hours service vehicles are allowed into the "mall"
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:
  
Like I said I have no problem looking after my enviroment. However I don't think "carbon emmisions" damage my enviroment so why am I getting taxed because of them?
[/QUOTE]

if you sit in a garage with all the doors shut and turn the car on, eventually you will die because of the carbon monoxide...the earth's atmosphere isn't infinite,and it's a closed space, so carbon emmissions HAVE to damage it, at least a little (the amount is contentious, certainly)
 
Not necessarily true, with the hole in the Ozone layer getting bigger we have a nice vent for all these so called "emmissions"

Queenslander 3x a year.

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
theprof wrote:
Cosimo wrote:
  
Like I said I have no problem looking after my enviroment. However I don't think "carbon emmisions" damage my enviroment so why am I getting taxed because of them?
[/QUOTE]

if you sit in a garage with all the doors shut and turn the car on, eventually you will die because of the carbon monoxide...the earth's atmosphere isn't infinite,and it's a closed space, so carbon emmissions HAVE to damage it, at least a little (the amount is contentious, certainly)
 
Not necessarily true, with the hole in the Ozone layer getting bigger we have a nice vent for all these so called "emmissions"


It's far more likely we'll all die of boredom first
E + R + O

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Hard News wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4573510a10.html

Wumbo, where were you today ?


The Christchurch City Council has ordered the destruction of six trees along City Mall on World Environment Day.

The trees were removed early this morning from an area between Colombo Street and the Bridge of Remembrance as work progresses on Project City Mall.

Concerned residents, who contacted The Press to report the destruction, said it made a mockery of the idea of sustainability on what was World Environment Day.  

The Christchurch City Council said the trees were identified for removal either because they were in decline or because their root systems would be affected by the construction of a new service lane planned for the area.

Project director Sean Whitaker said removal of the trees would also open up the mall to create a clear view of the Bridge of Remembrance.

New Zealand has been chosen to host this year's World Environment Day, which was aimed at raising awareness around the wiorld about climate change.




great sense of timing- probably using them as ornaments for their own eco party-LOL

World Environemt Day was well covered in all press and media- didn't mean much to me as my event is tomorrow-on deck from 0700-0200 on Saturday morning- and nthena game of footie to play!

Salmon swim upstream

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
The debate's been great guys, probably part of the reason around putting on a programme of events like this is to generate argument and discussion- not everyone has the same opinion, and heresy is not punished by burning at the stake anymore- keep the debate going but im going to remind everyone why is started this post-
to promote the:

ECO PARTY
FRIDAY 6 JUNE
8 � 11PM, DOORS OPEN FROM 7PM
WELLINGTON TOWN HALL
FREE- TICKETS from TICKETEK at the MFC
Join comedian MCs Derek Flores and Woody Tuhiwai in a celebration of World Environment Day with top class folk and rock from Ryan Prebble (Black Seeds, Fly my Pretties Spartacus R), Samuel Flynn Scott (The Phoenix Foundation) and the Bunnies on Ponies, and tree-shaking funk from the Open Souls Soundsystem, and a stunning visual environment from DNATION VJ�s

Ticket 'sales' today were about 150, meaning that one day out we have about 600 people coming along- so thanks to YF for allowing the use of the forum to promote events and happenigns- and thanks to the YF members who PM"d me for tickets- thanks also to Bevan, Cosimo and Pure Genius for a great verbal stoush-

Salmon swim upstream

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Good luck with the function. As you say, we all have different opinions on life. Have fun at the event.
Proud to have attended the first 175 Consecutive "Home" Wellington Phoenix "A League" Games !!

The Ruf, The Ruf, The Ruf is on Fire!!

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

yeah good luck! i''l be at home drinking my own urine and trying to keep my mud house warm with my homemade solar panels made out of stuff i found at the dump
I like tautologies because I like them.
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Cosimo wrote:

yeah good luck! i''l be at home drinking my own urine and trying to keep my mud house warm with my homemade solar panels made out of stuff i found at the dump

Well someones got to!

Salmon swim upstream

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Eco Party was pretty good, huge numbers, lots of activity in the lobby with a good amount of quality displays. Music was okay, the emcee's unfortunately were pretty bad but that didn't stop it from being a good evening robbwatson2008-06-09 12:35:05
Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
robbwatson wrote:
Eco Party was pretty good, huge numbers, lots of activity in the lobby with a good amount of quality displays. Music was okay, the emcee's unfortunately were pretty bad but that didn't stop it from being a good evening


thanks for coming down Robb, i saw you in the foyer and gave you a fever nod (like a secret handshake or something- see community directory thread)

official figure is 1100+   a much bigger crowd than i expected

Bands were all good especially Ryan Prebble and Open Souls- interesting comment about MC's- i liked em, but they did seem to go on a bit too long with the improv stuff.

any other feverites make it down?

Salmon swim upstream

Permalink Permalink
almost 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Still not sure I believe in global warming.  Believing in it as a religion just turns me off.  I can just remember global cooling in the 1970s.
Either way, having fun with the kids building a solar oven, they didn't want to cook a meal but insisted we bake a cake.
Permalink Permalink