Wednesday, September 12, 2018

In which nattering "Ned" offers the pond new hope and a chance to speak in climate science denying tongues with Ron ...


Being deeply conservative and positively suburban, the pond values traditions and continuity …but began to wonder if its hunger for normal times could possibly embrace a wild-eyed flourish of optimism from nattering "Ned" …

Yes, it seems "Ned" is ripe for conversion, and speaking in tongues, with the hope of a rapture just around the corner, or perhaps no later than May next year ...


Indeed, indeed, let the speaking in tongues begin, let the baptismal rites outlined by the infallible Pope - more Pope here - begin …


The pond can't remember if it ran that 'toon before, but no matter, the more the honey flows over that budget cap from 2014, the more the pond's eyes will glaze with contentment ...


Hallelujah, we're all in Elmer Gantry's revival tent, feeling the love … or as Cathy Wilcox put it, with more Wilcox here


Of course your tent-spieling holy roller needs someone who wants to believe, and nattering "Ned" has been mired for so long in unhealthy gloom and despair at the thought of being surrounded by unionists and the rich being made to give up their wealth in an ugly display of envy, that he's ripe for conversion and true belief, and if it comes to it, every Sunday spent speaking in tongues ...


Ah the unions, 666, the anti-Christ, a Royal Commission and a dagger to the heart, yet still they lurch out of their coffins to hunt for blood, and thank the long absent lord there's absolutely no cynicism or tokenism abroad in the land …


A skirt, a skirt, my premiership for a skirt …

And now for a dose of climate science denialism, and the pond found it an easy choice to make ...



Everyone knows and loves Lloydie's expert ability to raise saucy doubts and fears, but the pond likes to encourage Ron of the north …

Who else but Ron could explain how uncertainty is bliss and joy? How confusion and chaos is to be preferred over suburban orderliness, and tidy minds doing tidy things …

Certainty? Madness …

Uncertainty? Pure physics …

In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle (also known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle) is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, known as complementary variables, such as position x and momentum p, can be known. (Greg Hunters go here).

And so to the uncertainty-loving Ron ...



Now it goes without saying that Ron is an expert climate science denialist, but the pond does love running through some of Ron's greatest hits, even if it means a trip to the cursed Daily Grail … (though the clip is also at the Graudian here).


Ron left no stone unturned in his quest for understanding … (New Matilida here)


And Ron's been at it for a long time, way back in 2009 he was leading the way, as in Fairfax here

National Party senator Ron Boswell repeatedly clashed with some of Australia's leading climate scientists yesterday, accusing them of living in "a Pollyanna world" and putting jobs in jeopardy by calling for deep cuts to the country's greenhouse gas emissions. "Jobs are on the line," Senator Boswell said. "You've got to be practical".

Practical Ron, but then he went too far for the pond …



Actually Ron you could make it up.

The pond is a carnivore, it's not some shrinking tofu-devouring greenie … (though it does confess to ducking into Iku every so often for one of their excellent rice balls or other snacks) …

The pond loves 'roo meat. It's lean and with an excellent taste, and by most expert reckonings, it's a much healthier form of meat-eating than sheep or beef …

It's true that it doesn't score an entirely clean bill of health, but then neither does lamb or beef, and it's also true that the pond never thought it would be quoting Choice, here ...

According to Professor Kerin O'Dea, an expert in nutrition at the University of South Australia, there's no reason to doubt kangaroo being a healthy red meat. "It is very lean, a good source of protein and a very good source of iron and zinc," she says. One of the healthiest properties of kangaroo meat is its low fat content, coming in at less than 2%. "There is no visible fat on kangaroo meat, and the fat it does have is mostly polyunsaturated. Lamb and beef, on the other hand, are much higher in visible and saturated fat," O'Dea says. But before you go loading up on kangaroo, be aware it hasn't received a completely clean bill of health. In 2013, researchers found that L-carnitine, a compound found in all red meat but which is highest in kangaroo, was associated with the build-up of arterial plaque, which may lead to cardiovascular disease, heart attacks and strokes. As with all red meat, O'Dea says kangaroo meat should be consumed in moderation. Current Australian dietary guidelines recommend a maximum of 455 grams of lean red meat per week.

Well yes, but a moderate diet of 'roo seems the way forward, and there's nothing like Thai-style stirred 'roo to stir the pond's mouth … and then comes the kicker ...

Want to reduce your carbon footprint without giving up red meat? Kangaroo could be your answer. Cows and sheep belch out large amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Kangaroos, on the other hand, produce very little of it. So switching to kangaroo can help ease your carbon-conscience. Kangaroos also have less impact on the land compared to cattle and sheep, according to Dr Rosie Cooney from the University of NSW "Kangaroos have a much lower environmental impact in terms of water used," she says. "Cattle and sheep also have hard hooves, which causes land degradation and increases soil erosion." But the environmental benefits of eating kangaroo only apply if you substitute it for the beef or lamb you already consume. Tacking it on to your existing red meat consumption is of little benefit.

You see Ron? You knocking 'roo-eating puts you in the same company as vegans, PETA, Animal Liberation and Voiceless …

Have you ever wondered where your climate science denialism might lead you? Have you ever wondered if your slagging off of the noble 'roo, by far the best adapted supplier of protein down under, might make you something of a luddite and a Bambi-lover?

Never mind, here's a couple of cartoons …




6 comments:

  1. Ned of the Kellys: "Morrison ... rejects the idea of taxing some people more to tax other people less."

    Oh hooray ! ScoMo is going to remove any and all forms of progressive taxation: we'll have just one tax, a level, single rate per capita* tax ! No company tax (taxing the owners and shareholders more than others), no capital gains tax (ditto) and everybody will get the same, non means tested benefits.

    That'll work to perfection, won't it.

    * It would have to be 'per capita' wouldn't it - if it was an income tax, it would take more tax from those who earn more, and we can't have that. So, something like $10,000 per annum per person, fixed and level. Dunno what to do about GST though - those who buy more and/or more expensive items currently pay more tax and we can't have that either. Maybe the best idea is to just kill any form of sales tax, including GST and have the 'per capita' as the onne and only fair form of taxation.

    Ronnie the Bos well: "...the only certainty of a carbon tax would have been loss of manufacturing"

    Oh wau, I wonder what Ronnie would call the closure of Ford, GMH and Toyota and the associated parts and components manufacturers then ? A gain of manufacturing ? And what about the imminent closure of Whyalla's Arrium, saved only by an Indian billionaire who will install $1billion (at least) worth of non-dispatchable, non-guaranteeable, irregular renewable energy ?

    "The pond loves 'roo meat. It's lean and with an excellent taste".

    Oh dear, you've done it now, DP. I was hoping to pass over without ever having consumed one of our country's mascots, but after that recommendation, I might just have to waver on that determination. "Thai-style stirred" you reckon ?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Though I've never had it this way, I reckon shabu-shabu style roo would be cracking. The key is not to kill it twice - it should never be pushed past medium-rare (some would have it so blue that it could hop off the plate).

    There are ethical and health considerations with the industry and its product, but then, the reflective carnivore faces those with any serving of sweet, sweet muscle tissue.

    Fun fact - studies indicate high levels of meat consumption are correlated with lower scores for openness to new experience, high social dominance orientation and right wing authoritarianism. So if you eat roo, don't eat too much, or the reptiles might start seeming not-so-loony. I know Donald Trump eats a fuck ton of meat, and I'm pretty sure Ron Boswell does too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If we all start eating kangaroos meat, will there be any of them left ?

      I wouldn't want to have to move on to wallaby, platypus, echidna or wombat (especially not hairy-nosed ones). Emus maybe ?

      On the other hand, we could all go on the diet prescribed by that dvckheaded American pretender, Jordan Peterson: beef (and only beef, no sneaking any kangaroo in there), salt and water. After all, what's a little scurvy amongst mates ?

      Delete
  3. By the way:
    ...technology-neutral tender of new baseload energy...
    1. Talk about poisoning the fucking well - say "technology neutral" and then specify a requirement that favours one technology.
    2. Baseload is so 20th century...the increasing deployment of rooftop solar is pushing the demand for power in the middle of the day lower every year. And even phasing out FIT's won't reduce the pace of deployment because the ROI compared to buying all your power from shysters and pan-handlers is getting better every year. Since base-load, by definition, corresponds to the minimum demand over a given period, the demand for base-load power in 2033 (ie, at the end of the 15 year period specified) will be fall so low that even existing plant will oversupply the market, meaning any producer freshly committing to that path will have a stranded asset on their hands. And they know it, which is why AGL, Alinta, Origin et al aren't all putting up their hands saying "oooh, pick me!"

    Conclusion: Ron Boswell is a moron. But hey, he'd given ample evidence of that on many occasions in the past.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yair, those of us who are not so young remember "baseload" from the pre-Kennett days when the SECV supplied all our electricity from the big coal-fired plants at Yallourn. The thing is, of course, that it takes quite a bit of time to vary the output of big coal-fired generators, so they can't be 'turned off' overnight.

      Which led to that wonderful idea: cheap "off peak" (ie midnight to about 6:00am) electricity. My house was built in 1956 and there's still a very large water tank up in the space between the ceiling and roof which used to hold water that was heated by off peak electricty - hasn't been used in years (we have gas hot water now), but too expensive to bother removing. And if you had a big family, and ran out of hot water during the day, then too effing bad.

      But of course renewables can supply "baseload" if we go for CSP (Concentrated Solar Power or 'solar thermal') which we are starting to do, finally (long after a successful molten salt CSP demonstrated its practicality in Spain). South Australia (in the lead still) is building a large (150MW) CSP in Port Augusta for instance.
      See: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-14/solar-thermal-power-plant-announcement-for-port-augusta/8804628

      But yes, Ron Boswell is a fine example of that local native, the all-Australian dingbat.

      Delete
  4. "In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle (also known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle) ..."

    We'll make a physicist of you yet, DP. Yep, if you know where something is very precisely, you just can't know how it's travelling. And if you know precisely how energetic something is, you can't know when it is.

    Fortunately, of course, our capacity to measure quantum properties is not "infinitely" precise, so just because we can see a photon coming, we can still know enough to dodge it :-)

    But, butt DP, now we may need to move on to N D Mermin's great pronouncement: there is explanation (ie we have equations that tell us how things will appear to behave) and we have descriptions (ie how things really 'behave'). And the trouble is, we can only ever have explanations because we simply can't detect reality. So it goes.

    But quantum physics is a truly great 'explanation', isn't it ?

    ReplyDelete

Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.