flybyknight

watching this is the industry i would love to work in.

give the bloke a chance to make Australia look good in the eyes of world leaders and...... he talks about the GP co-payment. the shovel put it well..... "in 50 years time, our children, & our children's children will look back and say 'did we do enough about the GP co-payment' beautiful.

I guess this highlights what's wrong with the Australian democratic system. We enforce the vote, meaning the unwashed masses with no interest in politics read the paper believe it and vote in this embarrassing buffoon to speak for us all. Legal rigging of elections, pretty clever really.

sure it'll be fine, they are generally looking for plant / bio stuff. i'd be tempted to transport it on its side with the sockets USB's video etc (ergo motherboard) at the bottom. this should result in less stress and strain transmitted through the slots during movement. i'd also remove the hard drive, put in in a caddy (less than £15 at computer store) and bring that in my hand luggage. obviously backup too. pack the backup and the main drive in separate pieces of hand luggage. you can usually take a case, a piece of hand luggage AND a laptop bag on most international flights. that way in the remote possibility the worst happens, you pretty much still have your pc

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-29552557 or those who study in Norfolk evidently. seems like a perfectly good idea to save water personally. just silly to waste a couple of gallons of water, then jump in the shower to waste a load more.

Exactly what I was getting at many thanks for the clarification, next time I'll be more clear myself :wink:

my biggest gripe is how housing has been built for a country where fuel is so cheap it's almost free. problem is, fuel is becoming a bigger and bigger chunk of peoples income and the housing stock is; well it is what it is! this lack of foresight is going to become very real very fast, fuel poverty isn't something most aussies have heard of, yet alone experienced. it's gonna be interesting!

go careful that magnetron will make a mess of you, i was cringing when you said you can see it arcing, out of all the home appliances to strip to fix, this is the one you should leave well alone. the baffle plate is likely to be the small plate at the top side of the inside of the cooking area. full of holes, it's designed to scatter the radiation. it can usually be removed with a single screw. be super careful, and if this doesn't fix it i would heavily recommend you dig no deeper. I wouldn't want my family around an appliance that could potentially be damaging them.

the standards appear to be optional. as such if someone is building a house with the intention of renting it out, it will be a hardened tent. the problem is most builders will build even the most expensive houses to only a slightly better standard, as it's the way we have always done it. i would recommend you look into the passive house standard, it costs more to build but critically it's tested once its built. it cannot be signed off at the planning stage like the standard 6* build. http://passivehouseaustralia.org/what-is-passive-house/

the denier crew speak volumes in their absence.

here's a good one, sooooo you think you are not a product of the media you consume? The Strange Relationship Between Global Warming Denial and…Speaking English Climate denial isn't a worldwide delusion. It's a distinctly Anglophone one. Rupert Murdoch and David Koch, photographed shortly after speaking English to one another Here in the United States, we fret a lot about global warming denial. Not only is it a dangerous delusion, it's an incredibly prevalent one. Depending on your survey instrument of choice, we regularly learn that substantial minorities of Americans deny, or are skeptical of, the science of climate change. The global picture, however, is quite different. For instance, recently the UK-based market research firm Ipsos MORI released its "Global Trends 2014" report, which included a number of survey questions on the environment asked across 20 countries. (h/t Leo Hickman). And when it came to climate change, the result was very telling: Ipsos MORI Global Trends, 2014 Note that these results are not perfectly comparable across countries, because the data were gathered online, and Ipsos MORI cautions that for developing countries like India and China, "the results should be viewed as representative of a more affluent and 'connected' population." Nonetheless, some pretty significant patterns are apparent. Perhaps most notably: Not only is the United States clearly the worst in its climate denial, but Great Britain and Australia are second and third worst, respectively. Canada, meanwhile, is the seventh worst. What do these four nations have in common? They all speak the language of Shakespeare. Why would that be? After all, presumably there is nothing about English, in and of itself, that predisposes you to climate change denial. Words and phrases like "doubt," "natural causes," "climate models," and other skeptic mots are readily available in other languages. So what's the real cause? One possible answer is that it's all about the political ideologies prevalent in these four countries. The US climate change counter movement is comprised of 91 separate organizations, with annual funding, collectively, of "just over $900 million." And they all speak English. "I do not find these results surprising," says Riley Dunlap, a sociologist at Oklahoma State University who has extensively studied the climate denial movement. "It's the countries where neo-liberalism is most hegemonic and with strong neo-liberal regimes (both in power and lurking on the sidelines to retake power) that have bred the most active denial campaigns—US, UK, Australia and now Canada. And the messages employed by these campaigns filter via the media and political elites to the public, especially the ideologically receptive portions." (Neoliberalism is an economic philosophy centered on the importance of free markets and broadly opposed to big government interventions.) Indeed, the English language media in three of these four countries are linked together by a single individual: Rupert Murdoch. An apparent climate skeptic orlukewarmer, Murdoch is the chairman of News Corp and 21st Century Fox. (You can watch him express his climate views here.) Some of the media outlets subsumed by the two conglomerates that he heads are responsible for quite a lot of English language climate skepticism and denial. In the US, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal lead the way; research shows that Fox watching increases distrust of climate scientists. (You can also catch Fox Newsin Canada.) In Australia, a recent study found that slightly under a third of climate-related articles in 10 top Australian newspapers "did not accept" the scientific consensus on climate change, and that News Corp papers—the Australian, theHerald Sun, and the Daily Telegraph—were particular hotbeds of skepticism. "TheAustralian represents climate science as matter of opinion or debate rather than as a field for inquiry and investigation like all scientific fields," noted the study. And then there's the UK. A 2010 academic study found that while News Corp outlets in this country from 1997 to 2007 did not produce as much strident climate skepticism as did their counterparts in the US and Australia, "the Sun newspaper offered a place for scornful skeptics on its opinion pages as did The Times andSunday Times to a lesser extent." (There are also other outlets in the UK, such as the Daily Mail, that feature plenty of skepticism but aren't owned by News Corp.) Thus, while there may not be anything inherent to the English language that impels climate denial, the fact that English language media are such a major source of that denial may in effect create a language barrier. And media aren't the only reason that denialist arguments are more readily available in the English language. There's also the Anglophone nations' concentration of climate "skeptic" think tanks, which provide the arguments and rationalizations necessary to feed this anti-science position. According to a study in Climatic Changeearlier this year, the US is home to 91 different organizations (think tanks, advocacy groups, and trade associations) that collectively comprise a "climate change counter-movement." The annual funding of these organizations, collectively, is "just over $900 million." That is a truly massive amount of English-speaking climate "skeptic" activity, and while the study was limited to the US, it is hard to imagine that anything comparable exists in non-English speaking countries. Ben Page, the chief executive of Ipsos MORI (which released the data) adds another possible causative factor behind the survey's results, noting that environmental concern is very high in China today, due to the omnipresent conditions ofenvironmental pollution. By contrast, that's not a part of your everyday experience in England or Australia. "In many surveys in China, environment is the top concern," Page comments. "In contrast, in the west, it's a long way down the list behind the economy and crime." Whatever the precise concatenation of causes, the evidence seems clear. We English speakers have a special problem when it comes to understanding and accepting climate science. In language, we're Anglophones; but in climate science, we're a bunch of Anglophonies. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/07/climate-denial-us-uk-australia-canada-english

And we're back lol http://junkee.com/looking-for-some-media-bias-heres-the-premier-of-new-south-wales-starring-in-an-ad-for-the-daily-telegraph/43132

Ok time for a little on subject light relief http://www.theshovel.com.au/2014/10/14/fax-machines-are-our-future-says-abbott/

Oooooooooh, I might have another one....http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/absolutely-ridiculous-joe-hockey-denies-australia-is-dirtiest-greenhouse-gas-emitter-in-oecd-20141014-115q9g.html

thats good not close, but close enough to use as a defence if anyone ever suggests the way it really is. it's like testing planes at area 51, the locals are already discredited. awesome!

My guess would be lobbyists. This isn't such a strange thing, most higher government panels in the US require large amounts of cash to even sit at the table, why should things be so different here? For a capitalist country, letting those who are successful in business effectively run the country can only be a good thing. It starts to unravel somewhat when the same people are rowing against the tide, as in Australia.

This tony abbott thing..... it's diverting in itself. yes the man is a buffoon, im sure this is a deliberate move, so everyone has a target. the point is a damn robot with no name could be in charge. what i have a problem with is THE POLICIES not the man! I think it's important to seperate the two, other than a couple of sound-bites, everything that has been recently done to harm this beautiful (and it is beautiful) country has been done by THIS GOVERNMENT not the clown hanging out of the sunroof waving. I will try in future to focus more clearly, I don't want to give the wrong impression that this is one guy. "they wrote letters to the fairfax press mocking him" the uneducated probably wrote to the murdoch press too lol oh and as for the shirtfronting, hopefully it's away from the media and I can get tickets. I wouldn't pay much for them though, I wouldn't want to be disappointed.

not strictly true, he ruled with fear and unease, pretty much the same tools our leaders use now. and... to not speak of something through fear of reprisal of offense is when inequality is allowed to take root.

your right, one of them was a politician with the power and finesse to convince the electorate that invading countries and having a race of people lower than them was the 'norm' have you known a politician since with such a golden tongue and such power? most of the nazi party thought they were the good guys. in comparison our tony probably needs help to tie his own laces. jesus, the bloke needs a war to get a budget through! please don't confuse this and think i like hitler, i'm just open minded enough to know he must have been a great politician, to do what he did.

i'm still trying to work out what's going on myself.

welcome to the thread, i've just searched a couple of other threads for the reference to you lol did you know you didn't know who we knew you should know?

this is the big problem though, yes they use loads, but they are moving in a direction away from coal. this will take time but it's happening, whether you believe in global warming or not the world (for the most part) is agreeing on doing something about it. this as you have said will hurt Australia, so why are we not moving to adjust to mitigate the pain. our leaders seem to be digging the country in deeper, throwing all the chips into a tanking stock instead of diversifying.

this tax china have recently announced on crap coal from Australia, do you think the boy abbott will impose a tit-for-tat tax on their solar panels? it would be a win win for the coal boys

the funny thing is, from an environmental perspective i'm not even sure it matters anymore. the rest of the world is already moving on, large investment groups, (some Australian) are realizing coal is a dangerous asset, with a likelihood to be stranded. the die hard capitalists that run our world don't care for the planet, but money...... now things are changing. the bigger risk to Australia is isolation, i suppose we can be a secular nation with Australian businesses only selling to Australians with a shite international standing, but is that really what we want?

Harpo you bugger, got there before me! oh well, i guess i should read the news earlier!