Recent comments by: Brence
Agribuzz with David Leyonhjelm
We are indeed a lucky country . We have only one elected Liberal Democratic Party politician !! and virtually no chance of having a repeat.
Noosa - your repeating of your earlier comment will be seen by readers as indicating that you are just not interested
in any meaningful discussion of climate change . On this basis further dialogue with you would be a complete waste of our time.
Noosa - in the earlier comment I wrote "It would help readers if you provide some indication of the things you claim I am making up. We don't think you can". Your recent comment indicates that you won't tackle this matter.
Max - computer modelling had nothing to do with the YK2 scare. Further, scientists had no predictive role in that affair.
Noosa - It would help readers if you provide some indication of the things you claim I am making up . We don't think you can.
Noosa - your thesis that because natural factors have caused climate change in the past , anthropogenic greenhouse gas production cannot have any effect on climate . That thesis is without doubt absolutely illogical - you would be capable of doing better than that.
Frank and Albert - methinks I write too much so it is time to quit . Perhaps you should in the future use the correct science symbols for carbon and oxygen . Coincidentally you both use lower case symbols which most would know to be incorrect . It is CO2 not co2 .
Albert Einstein - readers will now accept that you are unable to concede that in certain circumstances CO2 is harmful despite the fact that there is abundant evidence for this . Further , readers could wonder about your grasp of farming practices when you write that just three nutrients are needed for plant growth - CO2, oxygen and hydrogen . Did you mean to ignore N, P, K, Ca ,Mg etc.etc.etc.
Unlike you, Albert Einstein , most readers would have understood that CO2 cannot be considered only in the context of climate change . it is used industrially and for cooling ( dry ice) in a range of social situations and it has killed on numerous occasions - people should not be misled to beleive that it is harmless.
Frank Blunt , you seem to have an obsession about the term pollutant . Most of us use the term greenhouse gases when considering climate change transactions , no need to drag in the term pollutant - you won't find it in any published science papers.
Re. CO2 and steam and greenhouse gases . Perhaps the picture is misleading because it does not show CO2. However , it does show the emission of water vapour which is the most power greenhouse gas . Google "Water vapour is the most powerful greenhouse gas". Frank Blunt - you write " Next they will want water classed as a pollutant". Who are they in that context . Be careful Bruce C , when you write that things like CO2 are harmless - CO2 , on the one hand is essential for life but on the other hand will kill you quickly if it present in the air at 7%or more.
Some people just need to accept that the Convoy of No Confidence was a fizzer. It was poorly supported by the rural community and the Australian Truckers Association would not participate. Many thousands of farmers with their trucks and cars live within an easy drive of Canberra but the overwhelming majority of them just gave the Convoy a miss - didn't even turn up to listen to the talks let alone take the truck. Most of them would have seen the exercise for what it was - a self- centred political event .
Bob Phelps writes that "Farmers are sharp people who can see a loser" . Equally, farmers are sharp people who can see a winner. Bob, you must be the last person left that fails to see that some 17 million farmers throughout the world use GM crops because it is to their advantage to do so .
Hi JD - if you are not into conspiracy theories you must be critical of the AGW science. You should learn a thing or 3 about science before attacking it . Don't use dislike of a proposal as an excuse to ignore the facts.
John Deere what is your current conspiracy theory ?
Would it be the similar to that of Dalby? Let the readers know.
Dalby please let readers know your current conspiracy theory so they can judge.
EJ, the patent rights for GM seeds etc only apply for 20 years - after that anyone is free to use them etc. like unpatented material . Already some GM seeds etc. are out of the 20 yr period . This is not a scary situation.
Can you ,merribee ,provide us some reliable authoritative source (eg scientific journal article)to support your scaremongering claims about the deleterious GM effects . You fail to acknowledge that in North America GM feeds have been given commercially to animals and birds for more than 20 yr and these effects have failed to appear there. Again, some farmers using GM may be going out of business but more are taking it up. Merribee , you should be ashamed of yourself for taking a cheap shot at the article’s author about his motivation. How noble you are by exploiting your anonymity!
Humphrey–you are spot on. Anyone with a genuine interest in hen welfare should be demanding research studies on the factors that are causing stress in these birds. We don’t know what they are and as you write the range system proponents and others are not interested in finding out. We need to know what the important stressors are . We can achieve this easily just by looking for the reasons why stress hormone levels are higher in some farms than in others even though they use the same form of housing . Available research shows that stress can be reduced in range systems.