Kindergarten crap class - if you want to clear up science questions invite scientists

What a waste of time qanda is - too many polys and not enough scientists means Tony Jones is incompetent .
Tony Jones doesn't realise that unless he puts someone other than Flannery in the science seat not only he is not credible . -all lthose young questioners who squeezed through his carefuly designed defence and then the whole country will finally realise that the Flannery file is fulla holes .One day soon The king maker Jones will be wearing no clothes.
Mike Kelly got away with talking a whole lotta crap  about "science dangers "and noone there to pull him up . '
what a waste of time the program is ..............and the kids watching knew it best !

If only the ABC was really independent

People like Katter wouldn't have to wait for decades to be heard . Would he be right to get everything he wants ? Probably not , but to blast him as though everything he does/ requests  in this period will be to demonstrate that reporters control the ABC and not those who would seek to represent the people - as he does .  

Look how well those 3 have focused first on the parliamentary problems - what Australian won't celebrate that in history ?.The softies in both parties will be mad that they can't work together well enough to achieve that  , but our ABC is not reporting that !
The coverage of the Vic Premier saying how wonderfully well the emergency services were working on the floods ( so soon after they whitewashed their incompetence over the fires ) and reporters reporting themselves ( and not the people - the Wimmera river won't create any unusual problems yet they tell us that !) was the most blatant bit of ho hum dum dum I' ve seen in years.

Qandary fuels the Population Paranoia

Guilt and blind prejudice were the elephants in the room. That's why,  apart from a  few unexpected moments when guilt and fear wasn't being passed around (the man next to Flannery who talked about real economic matters ) the heavenly and emotional focus of the depressingly ignorant and deterministic dogmatists never hit the ground .

  

Fear prevents people really facing the issues and there was no facing of the issues last night( The water and infrastructure challenges are known,  but the club of mere description think they needs more information. before they ever make a decision - HOW PREDICTABLE  .
There was no facing of the issues amongst most of the consensus driven wanderers on qandaries typically constrained conversational paradigms ( lots of "no talk "issues ) .


What an absolute disgrace that our ABC, instead of hosing down the fire in Sydney,  pours fuel on it ( and they want us to believe commercial TV is bad) 
What a disgrace that the hangers on like Brown and Flannery use their guru like status among the glazed over googleyed to play the blind prejudice card as well.  Watch the pied pipers  change their tune again!   
The water and infrastructure challenges are known . 
 Woosy Tony Burke couldn't say so  and Tony Jones, to be generous,  couldn't see the antidote to the overwhelming air of pessimism  in the room .
None either could tell poor dick smith that his drama was rich with false intuition over his the favoured driver - Nature Mr Smith does keep on growing ( we are going to grow so much more carbon that we are going to have to bury it !) 
Key optimistic direction questions were being ignored because the chief fearmongers Bob and Tim can't cope with the real eco  issues. Naturally they can cope with a simple argument based on nature - who doesn't among all those who help drive this stupid prejudiced preoccupation about population. 
Bob and Tim would clearly  bog us down in bureaucracy .Who would vote for such stupid panic merchants and even changing agenda speculators  ? 
Who did not notice that  the famous chameleon Bob changed direction when that the thoughtful Perera reminded the audience they had completely lost heart on this issue .
 From saying the population issue was urgent, he went to the population issue could best be planned . Bob would say anything to get a few more votes ? So much for nailing the greens down in the real world ! 

Qanda should be worried

 Tweets are more interesting than the feeds to the screen . If the ABC were serious the bottom of the screen would be seen - not in line with what the producers prefer .What did we think of julia ? Here 
I

Conclusion - No consensus No idea

Qanda
Julia Gillard is right about one thing ( would have set the other girls on the panel straight , me thinks)- there is no consensus,  and talk of mandate by Wong is wrong - ( should you need a real basic reason - for no other reason than she's not sure what she'd use the tax for!.)
The boys ( none more than Tony who has stood by while she tried to talk herself out of trouble on many long nights of noknives on Lateline) knew that Wong was again wandering over the territory .( and no substance -just more  technology of tax talk)
I can't see why anyone would vote Labor when Penny and Christine can get so emotional about a subject and not get down the tin tacks of nailing the solutions ( Take Christine Milne throwing the dead cat trick of "forests" and "tiny presumably helpless marsupials"  into the ring )
Why would anyone follow them both (hand in hand now )  into taxing us to the hilt .....to do what .....they don't even know themselves ? Christine , for example would get us to plant a tree and lock up a forest ,  but like the myopic green she is,  she would n't know what's best to with it  once it grew . Neither indeed would Penny - where is all her careless talk of sequestration ? )
Stop talking , take a bex and lie down for a while.

Hitch VS The very Kitch

Jennifer Byrne wasn't the only one surprised by her Book club guest Christopher Hitchens. He was supposed to be a member of the congregation and therefore " quite safe" to take the lectern  at ABCCHURCH-infact he's seen to be "one of the latest and greatest" -
But he said things that surprised us.
Jennifer  was even worried  . She called him a racist !
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised - he's often been a leading theologian  at the home of the reactionaries
Even though I've always see him as a reactionary,  and therefore a chameleon of sorts , I was quite surprised just how much Hitchens allowed himself to be painted , on that program , as a reactionary.( not normally a good look for an old lefty) That trivial tirade  of renaming famous books "2days in the life of ...."

Perhaps he 's also just being true to his word about being a chameleon?
Maybe his next book will be
" What the modern woman is missing out on "
-(Imagine Jennifers blood pressure and Hitchen's  fortune  ) Subtitled " A review of women in the Abrahamic tradition " -Hitchens  would be smart enough to print the book,  but not the byline ;  would the leader of Kitch -Jennifer ? )
On the whole,  as far as reactionaries go,  Hitchens was streets ahead of Jennifer.

I too could be rich writing the book I have just started today with the above title . Remember you heard it first on Blogger. Copyright EA

.

Qanda can be very entertaining when it is not so controlled

Virginia may not welcome another stint on qanda but we all will . Unlike the controlling Jones , she let the discussion happen . Mind you, after last week,  no leader could keep order over what was on the publics mind over Julia .
Looking deeper into this nonsense of Shortens about thinking deeply, its only a week since Rudd ran all over O'Brien - "lighten up mate !". And Shorten  wants us to think they are thinking deeply to stop talking to sustainable carbon and talk about sustainable population . Its toxic and so is new labor's focus !

The ABC want us to believe they are objective, let alone funny - the paradox for the pedants in church is why Barnaby was so funny and why the Gillard defenders were so serious  and so clearly desperate enough to go personal- completely losing it with the audience as the lack of tweets ( published) so clearly demonstrated.
John Clarke was very funny before he got a badge from the school of meredescription - maybe there is too much limiting of free speech at the ABC? Not possible ?

Outsiders and Insiders on Quanda

It would be interesting to know , as it always is in human dilemma discussions( brief health and education care discussions)  what J R Saul and Lionel ( Outsiders on the left from the Americas)  would say about Australains all on the right. What do they really think ? How well are we Aussies are ready for the future .
The great Australian stupor . I have no doubt they would say -you have much that you can be proud of - but do you appreciate it ?

The guests all seemed to share one great concern;
Why is Labor so inept and why do left thinking people retreat to "concerns about the truth" ( that woman over there named Dorothy)  when such reactionary pedantry clearly pushes them back into kindergarten class.  
WE've gone soft on the disciplines of learning and thinking.That was the big issue and like the big issues do on Qaunda it gets lost in tonys desire to move on ---as if questions can be answered in just a few moments .
While Tonys contributions were some of his best ,the prgram needs an alternate leader. Bout time someone else had a go, just so the very talk about knowing  people "being cut off "( SAUL's concern)  doesn't apply to the ABC directly . If the ABC can't do something about that,  its credibility on truth is at stake .Audiences would be surprised at how much further we would get after an hour - rather than the wanderings now too common .

Cricket on qanda - One jolly good show chaps

Another round of the best on the Test at the ABC ( qanda) More here

Science Ed in trouble -Forget blue skies, we're under a cloud right now

LATELINE
Penny Hackett (CSIRO chief ) presumably doesn't disagree that science is increasingly politicized;  its just that she isn't the person to say so,     nor is she the person to prescribe the way out .
Ticky did a good job with some good questions but no answers came
" I don't know of any dissent,  except we do whatever we do to a very high standard " might just go down as political not scientific.
More on the dilemma of science education here
Penny Sackett was completely out of her depth on the critical question of why kids don't want to do science...  and lets not do a U turn  to Jeff and think its just about money .  As one who had a great career in science , I know that MOST of the great careers of independance in applied env science are just plainly no longer on offer.

Yes Ticky,  in areas i know these dull edged attempts by CRC and quangos  to FOCUS  but they often only  add to the confusion , they duplicate and their role is dubiuos because they interfere with good information flow .( questions and answers ).
 Great to see the ABC taking the issue seriously.
 Realistically,  the debate needs an ongoing forum to be effective.

Oh dear we are not sure what we are anymore

Conservatives or progressives . The discussion on qanda tonight pushed the limits in a good way . For too long the left have characterized the right and the right ,the left and w'eve all gone home happy with old prejudices. What emerged from the welcome honesty was a recognition that we ignore the areas of  agreement with members of each others congregations at the peril of the power for good; at the peril of powerlessness . More ere 

I am not fanatical - but You are !

ABC news SUNDAY of the world conference of Atheists in Melbourne this week made for lively controversy in the news . We want this . We are concerned about that ; about them!. What though are we to make of the media correction attempt dominating the report( "I'm not vehement, am I?" ) Paraphrasing Richard Hawkins .Looked more like a talk about others than about AFA; looked more like denial too.

More too of this ABC disease about quoting " what scientists say " to say what you as a non scientist want to say?
To believe too much in tying up the loose ends of scientific study is to risk ignoring too many loose ends.
To paraphrase again "Why do we have to use symbols and metaphors ,Why can't we just be long winded and completely greek - believing only in what we can see from , dare I mention it - mere rhetoric .We know you used the word "science" but if you want to talk "philosophy of science",  talk some more about the range of scientific studies ( including psychology ) to be credible .
Take Dawkins denial of  "aggression". Does he not have adrenalin flowing in his veins ? Sound sustainability scientists accept the role of aggression, and are not in simple denial about it.
Richard Dawkins is less convincing than he thinks because he doesn't appear to be aware of what he's doing . Sure you can make money like Dan Brown questioning everything and "having a go" . React to a trend . We rebels ALL agree that words are powerful , but never let us stop using them, carefully to stop mere predjudice and panic ( more the basis for real concern in the public mind about "religions',say with regard to Islam )
If you going just destroy the temple you are only half doing the job .Whats the point of trying to kill all those people - all the elephants in the room . More effective it is to try to remember whose actually in there and why , and then you won't just end up with a lot of splinters and offending the scientists in there by wearing their badge so carelessly ( Are you promoting the science of evolution(ANS) or the philosophy of evolutionary determinism (ED)- viva la difference) Who really is being reactive here ? Whose the worry -the radicals or the moderates?
Most of us observing rebels share AFA's concern about the dangers of "institutional religion" BUT are asking " are you in denial about being religious yourself" .( science of the mind rather suggests we all are" religious") \Its easier to deal with a problem, if you admit you are part of it .
On the convincing stakes, having Peter Singer as second fiddle is not very convincing.; Surely the man has spent more time chasing reactionary trams than any old greeks we know .

Giving the "primitive" Christians a sporting chance

Qandas lineup on Monday night reminded me of the scene at some coluseum in the 2nd century.

Emperor Julian, to this day, would be wondering why he couldn't kill em all- and their wacky ideas.

Not sure that our modern ABCTV program setup supported the suggestion that this program was somehow a evolutionary improvement on that old theatre( why always the polys and spin mercahnts when we are trying to talk a bit deeper- its dumb!)

However I have got to hand to Tony . He asked a good question. They say the traditional world view of the west means democracy is possible because of the good in some ABC jounos,BUT neccesary because its not always so when they are in control of the gate. Do we allow the truth to pass unhindered. Applies to all of us .
Jones made the simple but important point that " sacrifice" is noble - isn't it?
Tony Jones tried to reign in the diatribe of verbosity that came forth as a response to a quite reasonable intellectual question. When the grand promoter of reasonableness refused to answer the Muslims big and sound question about the value of words without a sense of God in the picture , many of could see him playing politics or religion on the question of reasonableness.
Never were , or will The elephants in the room agree that Dawkins can so easily dismiss the people who sit in the pews and clap at congregations of atheists (egtake just the atheistic worldview leaders in our century)
To say that aetheists believe in nothing in particular and that gives them freedom to believe in whatever they choose, means thay may rank lower than Flanders in the woosy and unthinking stakes .
"My nasty word is bigger and more nasty than your nasty word!"
The struggle indeed is about evil, but are we really talking to it, or around it .

Sledging is not a problem at the ABC

Except at some of your late night parties. Why does ABC management think its good to put them to air ?QANDA
Tony's attempt to embarrass the outsider to his well controlled party lineup backfired; The other guests enjoyed the freedom of an honest discussion too much and the required level of "sophistication "( Lindsays new cover word )was not shown by the host. Exploring rumor and innuendo using Barnaby honesty left Australians in no doubt about the hosts qualification for office , as well as how little hard ammunition the left have to play with .
Barnaby's succinct and competent explanation of just how any decent treasurer would review foreign investment blew away the shallow window dressing and small talk that too closely interested Mr Jones. Tony's failure to recognize the answer as "a good one" wasn't missed by many in the Australian audience, I am sure . Every body gets nicely dressed up for this ABCchurch publicity series but the cloth is getting a bit frayed at the edges .
Maybe the men at the party needed a bit of a reality check too as the women directed traffic to the hidden issues of the day . Pushy people are being allowed to push their agendas into our homes men - so where are the men in charge ?( thinking up sophisticated answers that include include "inclined to see this as pretty appalling" )
I saw a man behaving like a mouse on the TV tonight . A father who quoted the opinion of a 15YO's as authorative - his own 15YO. Lindsay claims to lead the households of the country but is he up to it? ( http://ecomia.blogspot.com ). Melinda Tankard Reist was onto something melinda points to the noisy in charge problem at the bottom but was their a problem with the childrenincharge at the top?


The positions of the parties were made clear - Labor let's everyone do what they like, so these non governors have no choice but to let the economy and the moral life of the country run itself . From the $900 gift to letting our daughters fall for crap . The people are sick of sophisticated excuses for not treading on people's rights!
Please , you silent ones out there -speak up!
Melinda also made the point that not enough is being done to prevent the selling of prostitution paradigms to children . Like Polpot and Idi Amin the "natural instincts" of men are used by the unscrupulous to motivate the innocent. Where was the chief dad who cared enough to agnowledge that the unscrupulous outside the home, now use the natural instinct argument to provide a natural excuse for the innocent rebellious teenager who has more hormone control than mind or experience control to guide them .Someone lost their tongue or their ability to use it

Whats stopping us acting - fear of acting like ogres ( i am sure the parents on the panel knew every well that was part of the job - at least at home)
Whose problem is the lack of awareness?- our daughters or the woosy fathers who allow only the women to act like ogres ?

Tony Jones late night parties are a scream

Thanks for letting Joe Hockey show up the shallow and pathetic focus of those who think they know something about numbers .The program was clearly good promotion of the Opposition, and as Joe says - the people will hopefully see past the mud slinging . Shocking waste of time is Lateline and Jones

ABCTV -does it follow or lead?

7:30 report on Lord M tour
Typically The ABc were so busy finding fault with the oppositions campaign that they failed to make a dent in the really big question
Why all the interest in Lord M ?

is it That we don't trust polys ? that we don't trust the ABC?
That ABC/ left still have a cringe mentality when it comes to taking seriuosly our own experts .( after all the biggest credibility crunch on ETS was over the way the left fell for some american politician and businessman .

The young bucks from the talk the talk tax shelters were right in what they said but they didn't answer 1 decent question ( conspiracy theories are for the birds ?)Paid to talk the talk cummon! - : Lord M answered quite a few ( well done ABC).

The answer is complex, but one thing is for sure - the ABC is not giving its audience something to think about, so they have to get out of their chairs to find someone who does !

7:30 report ; More hype than light

Matt Peacocks attempt to tell us his own story using experts of his own choice is not good enough . What i saw on the first night was all over the place running simple monistic scaremongering stuff across a wide range of "should be dealt with singly issues " . I Don't watch 7;30 report much ; will watch it less .

What thinking person still watches the ABC ?

It used to be that only quick fix commercial news reports came from polys and people happy to stand infront of camera and complain ; It used to be that only quick fix commercial news reporters used more emotion than fact in their reports.
It used to be that OBJECTIVE reports of persons on how to help were used to DRIVE an effective response .
Is THE ABC is so moribund that it does everything the way others do it
I won't be watching the ABC on Haiti because there is more emotion and personal stuff than any thinking and caring person can stomach. I'm not informed , I'm dragged around like a wet hanky - such caring is crap

I 've listened to ABC Tv reports of the Haiti disaster and thought - i don't know WHO to give money to - Where was the report of damage , the aerial survey ,the outline of the governments and others plans .Agency reports

ITs worse : when have we ever seen a decent documentary on the ABC ?
SBS clearly lead in objective cuurent affairs - their news is better , and they simply let people talk .

ABCTV have no HOT DOCS ( their excellent series on universal health care tonight)- - only COLD and predictable CHAIRMAN types who expect everyone to move on when they think its important to do so .

Perhaps those in charge think the ABC audience is as cynical and selfcentred as so many now seem to be.

Either way the ABC potential for niche management is fast eroding .