Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 
Send Topic Print
Sydney Harbour productivity (Read 14605 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #90 - Feb 5th, 2014 at 10:11pm
 
Quote:
So the colollary to that would be that anything sold in the shops would be OK/ no toxic risk.


I would expect it means they are less toxic, at least. I generally don't expect food I buy in the shops to poison me. I expect it to be fit for human consumption. I expect the government to ban the sale of food that is not fit for human consumption.

Quote:
It sound more like whats between you ears.


You made the point that the raw human feces in Sydney Harbour is diffuse. It is only fair I ask whether you know what that means.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #91 - Feb 6th, 2014 at 6:40am
 
] Quote:
So the colollary to that would be that anything sold in the shops would be OK/ no toxic risk.


I would expect it means they are less toxic, at least. I generally don't expect food I buy in the shops to poison me. I expect it to be fit for human consumption. I expect the government to ban the sale of food that is not fit for human consumption.

Then how come, by your reasoning, swordfish and marlin aren't banned. Instead there are guidlines (actually tighter than for many species from Sydney Harbour). How come the NSW Food Authority said that there are no know toxic effects from very low levels of dioxins. Why must you persist in reserecting this same moronic argument over and over again?

Quote:
It sound more like whats between you ears.


You made the point that the raw human feces in Sydney Harbour is diffuse. It is only fair I ask whether you know what that means.

It doesn't sound like you do. It means dilute, spread out in space and time. You said it was dumped out of sewage pipes straight into the Harbour.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #92 - Feb 6th, 2014 at 1:37pm
 
Quote:
Then how come, by your reasoning, swordfish and marlin aren't banned.


It's your story PJ. I have not seen any evidence about this. I don't eat much marlin and swordfish.

Quote:
How come the NSW Food Authority said that there are no know toxic effects from very low levels of dioxins.


Because they have not done studies where they deliberately inject people with dioxins to firmly establish "safe" levels. Obviously the government takes it seriously enough to label large areas as completely unfit for human consumption, ban commercial fishing in the entire harbour, and tell recreational fishermen to carefully monitor their intake so they don't poison themselves.

I have seen fishing shows where they catch fish in the harbour. I don't recall ever seeing warnings about toxic fish, or mention of the beneficial impact of raw human feces on fish populations.

Quote:
It doesn't sound like you do. It means dilute, spread out in space and time. You said it was dumped out of sewage pipes straight into the Harbour.


How is this different to my description - watered down diarrhea vs chunky bits spread out all over the place? Which way would you interpret "diffuse" in the context of raw human excrement feeding the bream in Sydney Harbour? Obviously all the currents are going to stir the human poo around.

Do you wash your boat down after putting it in the harbour?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 6th, 2014 at 1:45pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #93 - Feb 6th, 2014 at 4:07pm
 
[] Quote:
Then how come, by your reasoning, swordfish and marlin aren't banned.


It's your story PJ. I have not seen any evidence about this. I don't eat much marlin and swordfish.

Yes, but they are still for sale aren't they? It so rewarding debating you FD. I thought everyone knew about mercury contamination in these top of the food chain fish (you can also add sharks). A simple google would show that health authorities in just about every country have warnings and guidlines for consumption.   

Quote:
How come the NSW Food Authority said that there are no know toxic effects from very low levels of dioxins.


Because they have not done studies where they deliberately inject people with dioxins to firmly establish "safe" levels.

They haven't done it for unsafe levels either. They use other means, epidemiology, animal studies etc.
Obviously the government takes it seriously enough to label large areas as completely unfit for human consumption, ban commercial fishing in the entire harbour, and tell recreational fishermen to carefully monitor their intake so they don't poison themselves.

Yes but before you said any seafood from Sydney Harbour was unfit and no sane person wuold eat them.

I have seen fishing shows where they catch fish in the harbour. I don't recall ever seeing warnings about toxic fish, or mention of the beneficial impact of raw human feces on fish populations.

So whats your point? These shows are entertainment - not scientific.

Quote:
It doesn't sound like you do. It means dilute, spread out in space and time. You said it was dumped out of sewage pipes straight into the Harbour.


How is this different to my description - watered down diarrhea vs chunky bits spread out all over the place?

It's diliute, moron.

Which way would you interpret "diffuse" in the context of raw human excrement feeding the bream in Sydney Harbour?

It doesn't feed the bream, it may boost the bottom of the food chain, along with the urban runoff.


Obviously all the currents are going to stir the human poo around.

They don't stir it around, they flush it out.

Do you wash your boat down after putting it in the harbour?

Don't you know people swim in the Harbour. The EPA says that it is perfectly safe except under times after heavy rainfall ie high runoff.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #94 - Feb 6th, 2014 at 7:27pm
 
Quote:
Yes, but they are still for sale aren't they? It so rewarding debating you FD. I thought everyone knew about mercury contamination in these top of the food chain fish (you can also add sharks).


Sure, there is mercury in everything, and it accumulates up the food chain, but it takes a bit more than that to claim they are more toxic than fish from Sydney Harbour. That's a pretty high level of toxicity we are talking about.

Quote:
Yes but before you said any seafood from Sydney Harbour was unfit and no sane person wuold eat them.


I wouldn't eat it. You'd have to have a few screws loose to eat it from west of the bridge.

Quote:
So whats your point? These shows are entertainment - not scientific.


Perhaps the toxicity and sewage problems are more common knowledge in the area. I think it's only fair to warn people that the fish is not fit for human consumption.

Quote:
It's diliute, moron.


What's the difference between dilute, watered down, and spread out? BTW, you said diffuse before. Do you know what that means?

Quote:
It doesn't feed the bream, it may boost the bottom of the food chain, along with the urban runoff.


Bream love raw human feces. A mate of mine once jumped in at tangalooma to take a dump. We had been trying to catch the bream for a while - no luck. Yet they pretty much snout raped him trying to get to it before it had even come out. Needless to say, we didn't bother trying to catch the fish there. It was worse than Sydney Harbour after a light shower.

Quote:
They don't stir it around, they flush it out.


And back in again. Then out again. And so on. Like a mixmaster. A mixmaster of poo. Of course, most of it would get eaten by the bream before the first flush. I mean tide. Ironic that you use the term flush in the context of Sydney Harbour. Now I am starting to use flush in reference to the tides there.

Quote:
Don't you know people swim in the Harbour. The EPA says that it is perfectly safe except under times after heavy rainfall ie high runoff.


Because of all the poo?

Do you wash your boat down after putting it in the harbour?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #95 - Feb 6th, 2014 at 8:23pm
 
[] Quote:
Yes, but they are still for sale aren't they? It so rewarding debating you FD. I thought everyone knew about mercury contamination in these top of the food chain fish (you can also add sharks).


Sure, there is mercury in everything, and it accumulates up the food chain, but it takes a bit more than that to claim they are more toxic than fish from Sydney Harbour. That's a pretty high level of toxicity we are talking about.

I said that there are published guidlines that are more restictive than for Sydney Harbour fish.

Quote:
Yes but before you said any seafood from Sydney Harbour was unfit and no sane person wuold eat them.


I wouldn't eat it.

Am I supposed to think that you are an authority on the subject?

You'd have to have a few screws loose to eat it from west of the bridge.

Um, so isn't that why the authorities said you shouldn't?

Quote:
So whats your point? These shows are entertainment - not scientific.


Perhaps the toxicity and sewage problems are more common knowledge in the area. I think it's only fair to warn people that the fish is not fit for human consumption.

It's not established the sewage is a problem.

Quote:
It's diliute, moron.


What's the difference between dilute, watered down, and spread out? BTW, you said diffuse before. Do you know what that means?

You don't, given that you said it was dumped out of sewage pipes directly into the Harbour. Do you even know your own mind?

Quote:
It doesn't feed the bream, it may boost the bottom of the food chain, along with the urban runoff.


Bream love raw human feces. A mate of mine once jumped in at tangalooma to take a dump. We had been trying to catch the bream for a while - no luck. Yet they pretty much snout raped him trying to get to it before it had even come out. Needless to say, we didn't bother trying to catch the fish there. It was worse than Sydney Harbour after a light shower.

So I am supposed to go by that infantile gibberish instead of what the researchers said?

Quote:
They don't stir it around, they flush it out.


And back in again. Then out again. And so on. Like a mixmaster. A mixmaster of poo. Of course, most of it would get eaten by the bream before the first flush. I mean tide. Ironic that you use the term flush in the context of Sydney Harbour. Now I am starting to use flush in reference to the tides there.

The scientist's didn't think so. Do you ever think before you write crap? Don't you know that there are strong currents up and down the coast. 

Quote:
Don't you know people swim in the Harbour. The EPA says that it is perfectly safe except under times after heavy rainfall ie high runoff.


Because of all the poo?

No because of the high bacterial counts in stormwater. Tellingly they lift the warnings after a few days. What does this tell you about the tidal influence?

Do you wash your boat down after putting it in the harbour?

People swin in it moron.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #96 - Feb 6th, 2014 at 10:12pm
 
Quote:
I said that there are published guidlines that are more restictive than for Sydney Harbour fish.


That would not surprise me. If it is a generic guideline, it would have to cover all the places these fish might live, including the Gulf of Mexico for example. The Sydney Harbour guideline only has to cover Sydney Harbour.

Quote:
Um, so isn't that why the authorities said you shouldn't?


Correct. It is not fit for human consumption.

Quote:
It's not established the sewage is a problem.


Because they "flush" the harbour?

Quote:
You don't, given that you said it was dumped out of sewage pipes directly into the Harbour. Do you even know your own mind?


I asked you what it meant - is it like watered down diarrhea, or more like chunky bits scattered all over the place? You are the one who introduced the argument about it being diffuse. I took that to be a claim you knew what it meant. I happily admit I have no idea how chunky the poo in Sydney Harbour is.

Quote:
So I am supposed to go by that infantile gibberish instead of what the researchers said?


Do you understand what they said? Don't ask me to interpret it for you.

Quote:
No because of the high bacterial counts in stormwater. Tellingly they lift the warnings after a few days. What does this tell you about the tidal influence?


That the bream have eaten all the poo, and PJ has eaten the bream?

Quote:
People swin in it moron.


Pigs too eh? You just explained they are often told not to go near the water.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #97 - Feb 7th, 2014 at 3:54pm
 
] Quote:
I said that there are published guidlines that are more restictive than for Sydney Harbour fish.


That would not surprise me. If it is a generic guideline, it would have to cover all the places these fish might live, including the Gulf of Mexico for example. The Sydney Harbour guideline only has to cover Sydney Harbour.

The point is, they are not banned from the shops. You were quite happy to make a big deal about this in respect to Sydney Harbour.

Quote:
Um, so isn't that why the authorities said you shouldn't?


Correct. It is not fit for human consumption.

Now you decide to be reasonable. You spent pages trying to make out that ALL fish from Sydney Harbour are unfit.

Quote:
It's not established the sewage is a problem.


Because they "flush" the harbour?

Who is 'they'?

Quote:
You don't, given that you said it was dumped out of sewage pipes directly into the Harbour. Do you even know your own mind?


I asked you what it meant - is it like watered down diarrhea, or more like chunky bits scattered all over the place?

And I answered.

You are the one who introduced the argument about it being diffuse.

Thats what the scientists said.

I took that to be a claim you knew what it meant. I happily admit I have no idea how chunky the poo in Sydney Harbour is.

If you don't understand the word why don't you get a dictionary.

Quote:
So I am supposed to go by that infantile gibberish instead of what the researchers said?


Do you understand what they said? Don't ask me to interpret it for you.

Moron, you have just spent pages trying to misrepresent their statement, using arguments a 5 year old could see through.

Quote:
No because of the high bacterial counts in stormwater. Tellingly they lift the warnings after a few days. What does this tell you about the tidal influence?


That the bream have eaten all the poo, and PJ has eaten the bream?

What a moronic statement.

Quote:
People swim in it moron.


Pigs too eh? You just explained they are often told not to go near the water.

Where did I say it was often? I said only after periods of heavy rain. And why do they lift the wanings so soon after the massive amounts of runoff. Doesn't that tell you it is quickly cleared out by the tides (and presumably the same goes for sewer leaks)?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #98 - Feb 8th, 2014 at 9:39am
 
Quote:
The point is, they are not banned from the shops. You were quite happy to make a big deal about this in respect to Sydney Harbour.


That is probably because fish from Sydney Harbour are unfit for human consumption.

Quote:
Now you decide to be reasonable. You spent pages trying to make out that ALL fish from Sydney Harbour are unfit.


The fish west of the bridge are even more unfit.

Quote:
And I answered.


I must have missed that. You also never answered about whether you wash your boat after putting it in the harbour.

Quote:
If you don't understand the word why don't you get a dictionary.


The dictionary will give the entire range of meanings. It won't tell me how chunky the poo in Sydney Harbour is.

Quote:
Where did I say it was often? I said only after periods of heavy rain. And why do they lift the wanings so soon after the massive amounts of runoff. Doesn't that tell you it is quickly cleared out by the tides (and presumably the same goes for sewer leaks)?


Either that, or the bream eat it. It wouldn't fertilise the harbour if it didn't stick around. Flushing the poo out of Sydney Harbour would thin it out, but then someone might just flush their toilet again. If you could get everyone to flush their toilet just after high tide it might help - synchronise the flushing of the harbour with the flushing of the toilets.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #99 - Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:10pm
 
/98#98 date=1391816357] Quote:
The point is, they are not banned from the shops. You were quite happy to make a big deal about this in respect to Sydney Harbour.


That is probably because fish from Sydney Harbour are unfit for human consumption.

The why aren't apparently more toxic marlin, sharks and swordfish banned from shops?

Quote:
Now you decide to be reasonable. You spent pages trying to make out that ALL fish from Sydney Harbour are unfit.


The fish west of the bridge are even more unfit.

On what basis are the fish east of the bridge toxic. And please don't tell me again because they are banned in shops.

Quote:
And I answered.


I must have missed that. You also never answered about whether you wash your boat after putting it in the harbour.

Of cause I wash it, salt water is corrosive to trailers and other metal parts.

Quote:
If you don't understand the word why don't you get a dictionary.


The dictionary will give the entire range of meanings. It won't tell me how chunky the poo in Sydney Harbour is.

You have an unhealthy interest here.

Quote:
Where did I say it was often? I said only after periods of heavy rain. And why do they lift the wanings so soon after the massive amounts of runoff. Doesn't that tell you it is quickly cleared out by the tides (and presumably the same goes for sewer leaks)?


Either that, or the bream eat it. It wouldn't fertilise the harbour if it didn't stick around. Flushing the poo out of Sydney Harbour would thin it out,

They said it may fertilise the Harbour and they only said this in combination with the urban runoff.

but then someone might just flush their toilet again. If you could get everyone to flush their toilet just after high tide it might help - synchronise the flushing of the harbour with the flushing of the toilets.

Are you on drugs?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #100 - Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:53pm
 
Quote:
The why aren't apparently more toxic marlin, sharks and swordfish banned from shops?


I have underlined the relevant word for you. You figure it out.

Quote:
On what basis are the fish east of the bridge toxic. And please don't tell me again because they are banned in shops.


You know why they are banned. It is the same reason they are considered toxic - because of all the toxins.

Quote:
You have an unhealthy interest here.


I am not the one trying to defend toxic fish and trying to prove how great the fishing is because of all the raw human feces fertilising the harbour.

Quote:
They said it may fertilise the Harbour and they only said this in combination with the urban runoff.


So the raw human feces is diluted with other urban runoff? Like dog poo?

Quote:
Are you on drugs?


You are the one saying the poo doesn't matter because the harbour is flushed on a regular basis. By that reckoning you might as well eat what you find in a pub urinal.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1402
Gender: male
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #101 - Feb 8th, 2014 at 4:16pm
 
] Quote:
The why aren't apparently more toxic marlin, sharks and swordfish banned from shops?


I have underlined the relevant word for you. You figure it out.

I have already figured it out. It undermines your 'banned from shops = unfit for human consumption = end of story' argument.

Quote:
On what basis are the fish east of the bridge toxic. And please don't tell me again because they are banned in shops.


You know why they are banned. It is the same reason they are considered toxic - because of all the toxins.

And less toxic that fish like marlin swordfish and sharks which are not banned. And remeber the NSW Food Authority said that there are no known health effects from vey low levels of dioxins.

Quote:
You have an unhealthy interest here.


I am not the one trying to defend toxic fish and trying to prove how great the fishing is because of all the raw human feces fertilising the harbour.

Greedy reductionism.

Quote:
They said it may fertilise the Harbour and they only said this in combination with the urban runoff.


So the raw human feces  is diluted with other urban runoff? Like dog poo?

More like mega litres of fresh water which only hangs around for a few days.

Quote:
Are you on drugs?


You are the one saying the poo doesn't matter because the harbour is flushed on a regular basis. By that reckoning you might as well eat what you find in a pub urinal.

A sense of proportion is not one of your attribute is it pea brain?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 8th, 2014 at 6:52pm by pjb05 »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: Sydney Harbour productivity
Reply #102 - Sep 5th, 2014 at 6:00pm
 
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 
Send Topic Print