Open mike 29/12/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 29th, 2015 - 36 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

36 comments on “Open mike 29/12/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bill 1
    29 December 2015 at 10:35 am

    Don’t think I’ve ever been in a position to submit the first comment on a day’s ‘Open Mike’.

    Better make it a good one.

  2. Once was Tim 2
    29 December 2015 at 10:38 am

    Check out the comments section on this:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/travel-troubles/75495648/jetstar-denies-upgrade-to-injured-australian-television-reporter

    Is it just a bunch of smart arses who HAVE to say something, or have we really become such a mean spirited I I I; me me me; can’t-have-someone-getting more-than-me kind of society? Does it make them feel tough or something? It certainly explains bene-bashing and the ‘do-the-crime-do-the-time’ type bullshit. Admittedly Stuff isn’t a medium for the sharpest knives in the drawer but it seems there’s a lot of the feral about.

    • Jilly Bee 2.1
      29 December 2015 at 11:53 am

      OWT – I notice that both Stuff and NZME just love putting the boot into Jetstar. Yes, they have their glitches at times, like all airlines – Air New Zealand isn’t exactly immune to the odd blip. I’ve flown Jetstar several times to Wellington and Christchurch when I was working and had no problems.

      • Muttonbird 2.1.1
        29 December 2015 at 8:09 pm

        I’ve noticed the increasing number of trivial and negative stories on Jetstar’s service lately since their move into regional NZ. I wonder if the Dirty Politics model is being employed more widely by corporates and media now that they know it works.

        As for Air New Zealand’s blips, Jetstar hasn’t flown 250 people into the side of an Antarctic mountain, and thus has a far better safety record, so that’s something isn’t it?

      • Once waa Tim 2.1.2
        29 December 2015 at 10:22 pm

        Malaysia Airlines is also a target as you’ve no doubt seen yesterday: how to spin something that should be commended into something designed to denigrate.
        (A pilot actually deigns to question a plane’s heading that he thinks doesn’t fit with the fight plan he was familiar with – thank Christ he did!) Or maybe that should that be: ‘thank John Key, Our master, commentator on all things We hold dear, and in whose image We should all aspire to).

        I was more interested though in the majority of complaints from a number of total egg roles so willing to put the boot in – not just to Jetstar, but also the women (who should just damn well know her place – so what if she has an ego the size of a bus and has a sense of entitlement).

        Ew dem people eh!!! They must just be “haters”!

      • Whateva next 2.1.3
        29 December 2015 at 11:26 pm

        I have had far more cancelled flights with pretty poor explanations from Air NZ over the years than Jetstar. I am weary of the constant rhetoric around how wonderful Air NZ are, and how bad Jetsar are, with no evidence or objectivity.
        Recently a friend was very suddenly diagnosed with terminal cancer and Air NZ wanted to charge a vast fee to transfer her tickets to Sydney to her son and partner for a show which was her birthday present, I went right off them.

  3. Draco T Bastard 3
    29 December 2015 at 11:16 am

    Here’s How Many People Fatally Overdosed On Marijuana Last Year
    The rate has held steady from previous years.

    With marijuana now legal in some form throughout 23 states, the number of Americans who fatally overdosed on the drug last year was significant:

    The rate of absolutely zero deaths from a marijuana overdose remained steady from last year, according to figures released this month by the Centers for Disease Control. But while Americans aren’t dying as a result of marijuana overdoses, the same can’t be said for a range of other substances, both legal and illicit.

    I would assume that the results would be the same if a similar study was carried out in NZ.

    • Gangnam Style 3.1
      29 December 2015 at 11:29 am

      Pot deaths are trending zero yet drug testing is skyrocketting, I wonder who makes more money, the drug dealers or the drug testers. The whole South Island has one company providing ever more businesses with drug testing equipment, whereas the ‘impairment test’ is actually free (walk in a straight line touching nose saying the alphabet backwards) they would rather opt for the $1000 test. Who would walk away from a fool & his money. We are ruled by eggs.

      • weka 3.1.1
        29 December 2015 at 12:22 pm

        Not sure I’d want someone piloting a plane I was flying in to be given the all clear on the basis of walking in a straight line and saying the alphabet backwards. Some cannabis users can hold themselves together pretty well while stoned if they have to, but that doesn’t mean they’re not impaired for certain tasks (including risk assessment).

        I do agree there are problems with testing for cannabis, but let’s not go to the other extreme and say that there isn’t an issue.

        Testing will pick up users.

        • sabine 3.1.1.1
          29 December 2015 at 12:40 pm

          i think that alcohol is a more available drug to pilots and a more used drug by pilots at least according to some friends of mine who were working the Coffee Tea or Me Trollies for many many years on various Air Companies. Also the use of uppers and downers to manage sleep isses on long haul flights and such.
          But that’s prolly not what is tested for.

          But you are right, be afraid of the one that smoked a joint 6 weeks ago. Cause Users.

          • weka 3.1.1.1.1
            29 December 2015 at 2:34 pm

            If you think that’s what I said you are a complete moran. Sorry, can’t be bothered today with people who are too stupid to know how to have an intelligent conversation.

            • sabine 3.1.1.1.1.1
              29 December 2015 at 4:26 pm

              why thanks for the compliments.

              but drug tests do not show ‘users’ – and it clearly depends on what you or anyone else would consider a user, i.e. a glass a wine once a week is as much a user as someone who drinks a bottle or two every night, they show use. They are not the same. And in many cases they don’t even show use, as many harder drugs don’t show after a few hours while thc may even show after several weeks of use, but are no indication of that same person having had a smoke in the last day or so.

              AS i said, friends of mine who worked in the industry considered the use of cocaine, amphetamines, alcohol and prescription drugs a bigger problem then weed. Yet weed is the most commonly searched and identified drug as the thc stays so long in the system.
              .
              Again thanks for the compliments, i hope your day gets better.

              • weka …
                29 December 2015 at 4:53 pm

                Interesting, but still nothing to do with what I said in my comment. Go read it again if you want to have a conversation. If you want to pontificate on your own topic, feel free to do that without misrepresenting what I say.

        • millsy 3.1.1.2
          29 December 2015 at 1:20 pm

          Too bad there is no test for fatigue or personal worries…

      • BobInAkl 3.1.2
        29 December 2015 at 12:27 pm

        Is being able to say the alphabet backwards a common thing? I can’t do it smoothly in any state, have to keep running it forward in my head and then repeating for each five or six letters, takes ages, is that a fail? I could probably practice and get it right but who’d bother doing that? Feels a bit like it is designed as a setup.

  4. johnm 4
    29 December 2015 at 11:59 am

    Why WWIII Is On The Horizon — Paul Craig Roberts

    ” The staggering unipolar power that history has given to Washington has to be protected at all costs. In 1992 top Pentagon official Undersecretary Paul Wolfowitz penned the Wolfowitz Doctrine, which became the basis for Washington’s foreign policy.

    The Wolfowitz Doctrine states that the “first objective” of American foreign and military policy is “to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat [to US unilateral action] on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.” (A “hostile power” is a country sufficiently strong to have a foreign policy independent from Washington’s.) ”

    http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/12/28/why-wwiii-is-on-the-horizon-paul-craig-roberts/

    and: http://thedailycoin.org/?p=55858

  5. rawshark-yeshe 5
    29 December 2015 at 1:37 pm

    Knighthood for Lynton Crosby … I can’t find a bucket big enough for how this makes me feel. Yuk. Cartoon covers it tho .. and comments are acerbic !

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2015/dec/28/ben-jennings-on-lynton-crosbys-knighthood-cartoon

  6. One Two 6
    29 December 2015 at 2:21 pm

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4171591.stm

    They have reached the disturbing conclusion that the amount of solar energy reaching the Earth’s surface has been gradually falling

    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35109198

    They have been looking for a reason why the total amount of solar radiation reaching the surface has been increasing over time

    • Draco T Bastard 6.1
      29 December 2015 at 3:59 pm

      That second one seems to be reaching for something that’s not there. At the very least I’d need to see actual measurements of solar radiation reaching the surface showing trends before even contemplating such a hypothesis.

      • One Two 6.1.1
        29 December 2015 at 5:33 pm

        The first article gave no actual measurements of solar radiation reaching the surface, either

        • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1
          29 December 2015 at 6:53 pm

          True, but it’s reasonably easy to find articles with the information about Global Dimming. They even point out that increases in sunlight on the surface has occurred as nations around the world have cleaned up their industrial processes and put in minimum standards for cars:

          Wild et al., using measurements over land, report brightening since 1990,[13][32][33] and Pinker et al.[34] found that slight dimming continued over land while brightening occurred over the ocean.[35] Hence, over the land surface, Wild et al. and Pinker et al. disagree. A 2007 NASA sponsored satellite-based study sheds light on the puzzling observations by other scientists that the amount of sunlight reaching Earth’s surface had been steadily declining in recent decades, began to reverse around 1990. This switch from a “global dimming” trend to a “brightening” trend happened just as global aerosol levels started to decline.[31][36]

          It is likely that at least some of this change, particularly over Europe, is due to decreases in airborne pollution. Most governments of developed nations have taken steps to reduce aerosols released into the atmosphere, which helps reduce global dimming.

          His hypothesis hinges around the idea that pollution is increasing the amount of light reaching the Earth’s surface. This sounds like bollocks to me as the scattering effect of particulates in the air should result in less light getting to the surface as at least some of that scattered light will be reflected back into space.

          As I say, he seems to be reaching for something that isn’t there. Personally though, I’ll wait for the peer-reviewed study to come out before passing judgement. In fact, I’d say that this shouldn’t have been reported upon at all as it gets people, such as yourself, jumping to the wrong conclusions.

          • One Two 6.1.1.1.1
            29 December 2015 at 7:33 pm

            Personally though, I’ll wait for the peer-reviewed study to come out before passing judgement

            I wouldn’t hold your breath for a peer review, and besides the PR process is unequivocally broken

            In fact, I’d say that this shouldn’t have been reported upon at all as it gets people, such as yourself, jumping to the wrong conclusions.

            It was reported because it is a nonsense distraction article which in many aspects contradicts the dimming article, which was itself a distraction

            See how many contradictions you can identify between the two articles

            I have various conclusions, but gave nothing of them in the two comments above, so I’ll offer one to you…

            Humanity is being deceived on a 360° radius

            • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1.1.1
              29 December 2015 at 10:18 pm

              I wouldn’t hold your breath for a peer review, and besides the PR process is unequivocally broken

              I wasn’t as I doubt if it’ll get beyond the hypothesis stage. Peer review may not be perfect but it’s better than pretty much anything else.

              It was reported because it is a nonsense distraction article which in many aspects contradicts the dimming article, which was itself a distraction

              Dimming isn’t a distraction. There’s decades of research gone into it. That said, yes I believe that the new one is a distraction – IMO, it’s purpose is to try and refute ACC by claiming that it’s driven by the sun.

              Humanity is being deceived on a 360° radius

              That I can agree with. It’s why no scientific stuff should be published until it’s been peer reviewed.