Comments on: Naïve fanfare silenced by foot-in-mouth NIWA

By: Climate Conversation Group » NIWA’s review taking a hiding

Climate Conversation Group » NIWA’s review taking a hiding — Sat, 12 Feb 2011 09:37:58 +0000

[...] the fascinating thing is that, perhaps under the influence of the PR firm Network PR, NIWA’s CEO manages to magnify the Bureau of Meteorology’s magnificently mild mandate [...]

By: Quentin F

Quentin F — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 03:43:08 +0000

Its quite obvious that TVNZ just back most Gov propaganda regardless. Misusing the great myth of public opinion surveys, about as reliable as a 2 bob watch. (referring to the .5 vs .8 debacle)

By: Flipper

Flipper — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:56:06 +0000

‘morning Richard
The post should have read:

I dont want this to be a diversion, but when the Government announced changes to road rules/safety and associated matters for consideration around Xmas last, it also announced then, that further research into the .5 v .8 (breath/alcohol level) argument would probably be necessary.
(The main reason is that only one NZ fatal accident involving breath alcohol levels between .5 and .8 has been noted over the past few years. Foreign studies do NOT factor in other changes such as road improvements.)
It (neither Key nor Joyce) made NO commitment then, and did not do so subsequently, to change from the existing .8 to .5. The latest announcement simply confirms the previous statement.
It is the media (and “Citizens for Rowling” look-a-likes) that are campaigning for a “flip-flop”.

Would they showed as much commitment to the useless ETS.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:34:52 +0000

Hilarious, Flipper! Thanks.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:33:34 +0000

Whoops! If you’d like to try again, I’ll replace the original. Now I’d like to know what “changes and matters” were announced and what the .5 v .8 argument is. Thanks.

By: Flipper

Flipper — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:52:10 +0000

Richard re lamestream media.
Its “mine” – well it was. I think I pinched it from Marc Morano.
But, pursuant to Clause 1 of the Climate Realists Charter, it is also “yours”!

By: Flipper

Flipper — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:38:14 +0000

Apologies for bad send in last message — error here. Hope U can translate it

By: Flipper

Flipper — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:35:01 +0000

When the Government announced changes and matters for consaideration around Xmas last it also announced then, that research into the ./5 v .8 argument would probably be necessary. It made NO commitment then, and didx notgf do so szubszeq to change to .5. The lateszt announcement simply confirms tghe predvious statedmednt.
It is theds mediaz (and “cxitizens for Rowling” look-a-likes that areds campaigning for a “flip-flop”.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 21:59:22 +0000

“lamestream media” – I like it!

Forgive my ignorance, but what do you mean by “flip-flop on the .8 v .5 BAL” and what research caveat?

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 21:56:29 +0000

Yes, it’s as though the Parliament is just another public window, where the dressing must be attended to but not the substance. Only good men and women will notice the differences, and they are the only ones to care about the differences.