Do we really understand what our greed will do to the Reef.? Does it matter?

it'll be sad reading my friend.

Almost everything you see on the planet today that is of great concern is caused by the Corporatised Capitalist model that has enslaved the world

Economists actually believe that ECONOMIC growth is unbounded and infinite is scope.

They somehow categorise all of the earths resources as infinite

They then superimpose this INSANE notion that the only thing that matters is maximising SHORT TERM PROFITS

the mess we witness now is a result of this moronic exploitative short term neurosis of the corporative mentality

The Earth is sick because humans are sick

Chimp_Logic wrote on May 1^st, 2013 at 12:23am:

Yes, but pure commercial turnover and therefore the ability to repay would explain this wouldn't it!??!

All they're interested in, surely, is infinite dreams of mathematical exponential growth and therefore only regulation can solve the problem.

Banks aren't supposed to have a heart as far as I know- they are one of those things called public companies that simply calculate profitability on behalf of global investors!

I've dived the barrier reef a few times over the years, each time less impressive than the last.

But what to do? Move it south?

I seriously doubt that anything can be done. The economic downturn is the best thing that could've happened for the environment, but that's not going to be nearly enough.

For the average punter, the best that we can probably do is to cut down personal usage of everything as much as possible.
..Not that I think that will ultimately do a whole lot of good either. They'll just keep importing consumers until the entire world becomes an overcrowded 4th world wasteland.

Now for a positive spin....

..I just thought of one. It might not happen in my lifetime.

I have to say  ..

I'm sad at the lack of interest by posters on this forum.... of THIS issue.

On a small sample...?? 

YEP  WE   ....   get that...  ???

Emma wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 12:15am:


Yes that ant can move the rubber tree plant.

So you go ahead and shift all of that mining machinery off of Cape York.
Jeez,..people jump up and down about a piddly carbon tax and you want to dismantle the entire mining industry?
Get your head out of the clouds girl. You are not being rational at all.

Emma wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 12:57am:


So there you go again.
I haven't done hundreds and hundreds of dives because I hate the underwater environment and have no respect for it you know.
I've also attended protest dives during the deepening of the Melbourne shipping channel which I think helped to minimise damage to an extent.

It's all very well to have a goal, but there must be some semblance of rationality within attaining that goal.

The world would need a new Hitler to the power of 1000 to stop the capitalist juggernaut, and even if this were possible, it would cause the death of billions.
So you may as well have the goal of tap dancing upon the waters of an undiscovered barrier reef on Mars.

So Amadd... your answer to the question posed by the topic

is  YES.   

It's too hard....  boo hoo.

Billions of deaths because we choose to protect the Great Barrier Reef..??? 

YOU need to  GET REAL,, no..???

Semantics aside cambell newman will prolly give the big miners permission and policy to destroy the reef.

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 9:22am:


What exactly is wrong with what i said?

SOB

Chimp_Logic wrote on Apr 30^th, 2013 at 11:53pm:


Was looking forward to the link for this...got one?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 10:58am:


I take it the only thing wrong with it is that you dont like that i said it then.

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 11:10am:


And you wonder why you arent taken seriously

SOB

The GBR is vast and most of it is a long way offshore. Could someone please explain how some port development could affect it in any significant way?

There are lots of dangers to the reef, including natural variances in weather patterns.

One of the bigger dangers is the crown of thorns starfish, which is a natural inhabitant of the reef, but has grown to damaging numbers as they feed on the coral polyps and have very few natural predators.

The reason for it's current abundance is said to be largely due to the increase of algae (that they also feed on) caused by agricultural runoff.
Although the reef is a long way offshore in parts, the crown of thorns will eventually spread in large numbers throughout the entire reef.

Of course this isn't the only danger. Just a couple of degrees rise in water temperature will wipe out most of the reef.
Then there's shipping traffic, oil spill threats, tourism, overfishing, etc.

Supposedly, the crown of thorns is a Japanese delicacy, so maybe we can swap them a few tons of starfish for some whales?

miketrees wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 8:21pm:


Yeah. "The giant triton" has an attractive shell, but it is now protected from collectors. Unfortunately it doesn't survive very well amidst human activity like the crown of thorns does.

pjb05 wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 5:04pm:


are you serious with this question? pj's..??

do you have any interest in the Great Barrier Reef...  or is it just another acronym  ... ?  GBR.. 

Emma wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 11:11pm:

     

Amadd wrote on May 3^rd, 2013 at 12:27am:


ah !!    friend Amadd...

in answer... No  ... I started this thread because i genuinely believe that our governments are treating it like it doesn't exist. !!That it has no 'value', which is patently ridiculous.!!
Massive increases in large shipping will result if these Ports,  and adjacent coal  etc resources are further exploited for economic gain.
You perceive no risk from this??
Poisonous run-off from agricultural and mining activity is  a non-event..???

WHY DO I NEED to explain this to you. ?? 

You say you know of dive spots on the Reef...  well how will you feel when they are smothered, dying under an oil spill,  or ripped up by some giant chinese container ship..??

Why are you threatened by my raising of this issue,..??

Hey .. I cannot 'dive' on the Barrier Reef..or find  'places'...  the ONLY time I visited the Reef , was on my honeymoon.

Dunk Island...  20 yrs ago
It was marvellous... and I snorkelled on the Reef... I saw a giant groper, being fed from the toes of a crewman, offering the bait by hanging over the side  ... to Ulysses... 

Sadly.. yrs later ,  some c*nt killed Ulysses   one of a pair of giant gropers...
... the same mindset that sees the Reef as a major shipping highway for our filthy exports.

WHY DO I NEED TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU IF YOU SAY YOU KNOW THE REEF AND LOVE DIVING THERE.?




 

miketrees wrote on May 2^nd, 2013 at 8:01pm:


We dont need it for diving - we need it for the ecology.

SOB

oooooh    lucky you...enjoy 

Emma wrote on May 6^th, 2013 at 2:13am:


Well misty didnt help

Thing is - the question isnt in the media. Any media. Just shows they all have the same agendas. Cambell newman willl pass legislation while nobody reports it and it will be done.

SOB

As far as I know the biggest factor by a long shot causing reef bleaching, is global warming. It's causing reefs all over the world to die and there's not much we can do about it. The war against fish is won and much of their homeland has been made desert. It's likely that all jungles will cease to be in the near future and lions ,tigers, rhinos etc will soon go the way of the dinosaurs.

I've made my existence tied to the Siberian tiger, when the last one has gone I wont want to live here anymore. 

Throw another capitalist bastard on the barbie.



Purrrfect

Amadd?? 

You lecture me on  'economic hardship'?? you'd have no idea of my life... 
another ignoramus who thinks they know everything.

Emma wrote on May 6^th, 2013 at 11:06pm:


Yes of course it's sooooo hard for you Emma. Nobody would even understand.
Grow a pair biatch.

If you can't do it yourself, then stop bloody pointing the finger at those who you want to do it for you. Grow up!

you know something Amadd??? 
.
I have absolutely no idea why you object , personally, to my posts on this topic... 

Clearly I have offended you.. but your curious demands add nothing to the story.....   

so..??  expres yourself more ably pls..  else stfu... ,
you know??

...I'm not offended per se', but I see a simple lack of understanding and a lack of balls to do anything that hasn't been tried 1000 times before you.
It all falls down when sacrifice without recognition is involved.

Let's face it, you require that recognition because you are human too.
Whatever angle you take, you cannot get around the fact that you are human too.....Amadd

Hey Amadd,  I'm only a demi-goddess... 
Not Diana...  YET.

The bottom line is that you want recognition. And so do I. I want recognition for explaining to you that you want recognition for something you will not care about beyond your lifetime.

You don't understand that you really don't care that much at all.

Yep,  thought provoking par excellence

It makes me think you are nutso...  crazy in the coconut.. 

away with the wackos and fairies..dancing in the fairy ring..

dreaming of Allah's paradise ..where you get to rape all the virgins you like...

seriously delusional  ...in other words......   

Amadd wrote on May 7^th, 2013 at 12:27am:

If you hate western idiots then why are you trying to mimic them?

 

You can't win: 

The real stuff was when the reef was still alive about 10-15yrs ago. Even then it was too late, but now it's far too late. The so-so reef is half dead already and not much hope of saving the rest no matter what is done.

Of course controlling the crown of thorns, restricting shipping, tourism and all new developments wouldn't hurt, but further temperature rise seems inevitable unless the world's population ceased to exist tomorrow.

So use half of everything for no applause and watch half of Africa and India being imported here to appease company profits. Then watch them being as wasteful as your neighbour, because after all, Australians are one of the world's largest per capita energy users.

But yes I still try to use less energy, as do many people.
It's not a matter of "I don't care" or "it's all too hard" as has been accused of me. It's a matter of, "IMO, try as we may, the machine cannot be stopped or recreated enough to save what's left of the reef and keep the economy as well. If the reef stops dying, it probably won't be due to 10% of the population halving their carbon footprint or 80% of the population pointing to everybody else to do something.

It's a matter of,

"IMO, try as we may, the machine cannot be stopped or recreated enough to save what's left of the reef and keep the economy as well.

If the reef stops dying, it probably won't be due to 10% of the population halving their carbon footprint or 80% of the population pointing to everybody else to do something.


[/quote]

Amadd...???  like many I don't think you are really clued in to the consequences we face..

'....... recreated enough to save what's left of the reef and keep the economy as well.'

ITS NOT..... EITHER/OR  .....  not a choice.... 

ITS NEITHER....  SURELY.!!!  ?????

but why lay your neck on the block... waiting for the blade...??

good for you...

I also use minimal power and common resources.. and am working to improve on that. 
It may be insignificant in the whole bigger picture ..who can say? .. I know it is not a hardship as of now...  and the  longer we improve our behaviour ..the greater the chance for better outcomes.
The Earth has amazing regenerative powers...  we really display our hubris by thinking we can permanently damage her..  but we can certainly make things very hard for ourselves in the wash-up.

Most people who are able to recognise the need, do make efforts to lessen their 'foot print'..
..sadly this doesn't apply to corporations or governments, for the most part.  Those that do, should be rewarded with patronage.

You imply I am just 'talkin' .. not walkin'...  why pick on me for standing up for what I consider important?. 
You don't know me Amadd.. so perhaps I'm just a name for a generic class you envisage.

How about you make a Poll on this  ??
There are many opportunities for you to proceed.

I don't castigate people for favouring planet over profit.

To me..it seems the only sensible next step for humans to take.

Emma wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 7:45pm:


My point was that it's easy to say that you favour the environment over profits, but not so simple to do.

Yes I could start a poll and ask people if they'd give up all animal products in the hope of saving the reef.
I could also go further and ask if they'd give up all agricultural products.
I could also ask if they'd forego an education for their children or medical treatment for a sick child or parent if were to be too much strain on the environment.
..Or I could ask if they'd be happy with no new Infrastructures or upkeep on the existing. ..The list goes on.

The uproar over the carbon tax alone should be enough of an indication as to how serious our nation's people really are about making a difference to the environment. It's all well and good as long as it doesn't have the potential to hit the wallet.

Unfortunately, it's the very poor nations who are the world's most environmentally friendly per capita...not by any specific choice of course. And not many of us here would honestly agree to live under those types of hardships if we have the choice either.

I'm not castigating people over being well intended. I'm glad that you started this thread in the hope that one or two might see that they really aren't all that prepared to give up their lifestyle (which stems from company profits) for the environment.

The world economy is already in dire trouble, IMO more because we've been saturated with products that are cluttering, unnecessary and becoming obsolete than any real thought for the environment.

As well as the exponential growth thing being proven a furphy, it's also up to us to personally do our bit to further cut demand.
I try to cut demand in full expectation that it's going to impact on me in later years barring some massive advances in renewable energy production.
Most other people, especially from other nations, will be putting their heads on the chopping block far more than me if they want to endeavour to help the environment.

yeah   

Amadd wrote on May 10^th, 2013 at 12:38am:


No, that's a non-sequitur.

  No it isn't..

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 10^th, 2013 at 4:20am:


What part of "No" didn't you understand?

Yes Emma is a feminist. Do you really need to be told that?

Just because Emma is female and a feminist, it doesn't stand true that all women are feminists and there is a requirement to be a feminist in order to post something about the barrier reef.



Here's an example of a statement which has agreeable logic:

Emma is a female and a feminist.
All feminists are hypocrites.
Emma is a hypocrite.

In this statement, the logic follows, regardless of any requirement for a hypocrite to be a feminist or female, or indeed any requirement for a feminist to be female.
The only assertion made in that example is that feminists are hypocrites.

The short answer I gave you was "No, it's a non-sequitur", because the logic you used was false.

Quote:


Well thankyou for realising that there are far more emissions involved in a so-called environmentally friendly lifestyle than meets the eye.
A more detailed estimation of our personal carbon footprints can be done here:
http://www.carbonneutral.com.au/

..Then there's our indirect emissions to be added.

When comparing our per capita emissions here in Australia to a poor country such as India, it's pretty daunting to think of what we would really need to sacrifice in order to achieve their levels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_c...

Amadd wrote on May 10^th, 2013 at 5:06pm:


And yet you say all feminists are hypocrites?

As for my logic - you were the one calling her a feminist and making out it was because she wants to save the reef.

SOB

bump???

Amadd wrote on May 11^th, 2013 at 10:30am:


We can tell those companies that are wrecking the reef to go around it for less profit.

SOB

As I said,  that was one example...  ... the easiest... 

Your point is taken, however....
I agree that there are many fools who undo any good their protests may achieve, through their own actions , supposedly to make a difference. 

Is that IRONY or what.??

Stupidity and ignorance  ??and/or mis-directed good intentions..? 
Perhaps some value remains from their actions though...  not sufficient to off set their life-style, but something.
Raising awareness of the issues, to wider audiences is a step in the right direction,  and some folk need to be led...  as they say... A journey begins with the first step..... ,

 

I do agree it's too late....   BUT....
I believe ..if I'm going down,  I'm going down fighting.!!
I do fight...  in several different ways,  and I am just one person.  Just one person ...
I do my best 

Amadd wrote on May 13^th, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Glad you get it RP.

bump

no updated op..? no pov to push,,??

guess I'm doing good then .. yeah..??  

proof of the lie of Amadd's declaration........

" Nobody in this country is realistically going to offset their carbon footprint, and without a bit of fun, nobody will have much incentive to do so".

given up dude.??  not worth the effort...?

IF you saw what I see every day,.....   you wouldn't feel that way.

you'd keep on trying....

Quote:


Then give it me and I'll make sure nobody develops it.

Emma wrote on May 13^th, 2013 at 11:03pm:


The creek is useless if someone upstream pollutes it.

SOB

Nature has an historical habit of expunging species like the Human Species

We don't have much time left

Emma wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 2:03am:


...this attitude has contributed greatly to the mess that we are in at the moment. You cannot offend your own brethren

Unfortunately the sociopaths, psychopaths and lunatics have always been in the corridors of power.

These corridors are commonly known today as corporations - the most fascist Un-democratic instrument of tyranny invented by the homosapien infection of the planet.

Even the silver backs are meditating, but I fear that their efforts will be in vein - especially from the confines of their corporate zoological dungeons

   

you are a cack Amadd...   

Emma wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 9:48pm:


A poll sample size of 10 implies that very little statistically significant conclusions can be drawn from the results

common sense overrides this deficiency anyway

Emma wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 11:17pm:


actually common sense is in abundance - sadly those that run the circus are corporatized clown puppets.

THey value short term profit, greed, exploitation etc above everything else that is decent in human existence

NB: the official CO2 concentration in the earths atmosphere has hit the 400 ppmv level for the first time in many millions of years.

And the response from Humanity?

MORE Carbon Emissions