"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 21:45:22 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 13:59:22 UTC+1, Bod wrote:
On 13/04/2015 13:01, whisky-dave wrote:
On Sunday, 12 April 2015 21:50:27 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 10/04/2015 14:28, whisky-dave wrote:
I often wondered why they don't build larger cities or enlarge the
existing ones it's not like there's not enough space, if you can
build on a desert in navada [sic] why not AUS, same goes with audi
dubai [sic].

Nevada is running on "fossil water" - coming out of underground
aquifers. Which will be empty soon. Plus most of the Colorado
river,
which doesn't even get to the sea any more.

Abu Dhabi does a lot of distillation... but then, they have the oil
for
the power.

Andy

Are you sure it's distillation ?
you're not talking about roger sheep's private still are you ;-)
I thought Aus was planning on a Desalination plant, very expensive
and
uses a lot of power too, and using solar panels and heating up salt
to
store the energy as heat rather than in batteries.

Desalination plants have already been built in Oz and are on standby
should they ever need them. That's forward thinking, IMO.

I wonder how much it cost to keep something like that on standby.

A hell of a lot the way they have chosen to do that.

Wonder why they didn't choose a differnt way.

Because they were as stupid as you.

if they don't need it why have it, and if
they aren't using it much then why not ?

Its used in times of drought when there isn't
enough water coming from the sky, stupid.

What do you mean not enough water coming
from the sky, there was enough ~50 years ago.

Wrong, as always. There was in fact an equally severe drought in the past.

Now what would happen if you had more immigration perhaps 300,000 ariving
each year,

We aren't that stupid.

would that require more water for them to drink and live

Depends on where they end up.

or would the sky produce more water ?

Even you aren't actually THAT stupid.

If immigration is good for the economyy

It obviously is.

then why not take on all the immigrants
around the world and make a fortune,

That's that america did.

Australia has the space far more than the UK has.

You quite sure you aren't one of those rocket scientist terminal ****wits ?

You yuorself have said you build houses

One house, actually.

so you too could make a fortune building houses for them.

We aren't actually stupid enough to let drunks like you come here.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 14 April 2015 09:02:54 UTC+1, Tony Bryer wrote:
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 04:55:10 -0700 (PDT) Whisky-dave wrote :
It proves that 93% didn't want to get fined so put a cross in the
box so they didn't get fined.

You don't have to actually do that, just turn up, thus the quaintly
described 'informal vote'

So voting isn't compulsory after all,

No one said it was.

turning up is compulsory.

Nope.

On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:33:46 +0100, Bod wrote:

Not much use when it hasn't rained for 3 years and the reservois have
all run dry. It makes sense to be prepared for the worst. Parts of Oz
have been close to using them before.

Was out there (VIC & TAS) for a few years at the turn of the century so I know
what things can be like out there. Friends of mine just escaped the fires in
ACT in 2003, got to within 100 metres or so from their home the winds changed
and the fire had nowhere to go and ran out of fuel.
--

On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:37:05 +0100, Syd Rumpo wrote:

On 13/04/2015 22:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

snip

2/. The wiki is infested with green trolls and any climate change
related article is heavily biased

This is probably more your thing...

http://www.conservapedia.com/Global_warming


"Antarctica shows little warming, and many areas to the East (right) are almost
cooling"

almost cooling! LOL

--

On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 02:48:50 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 13 April 2015 17:45:35 UTC+1, The Other Mike wrote:

Energy costs

and E=MC^2 yep we know.


Water out of the sky stored in reservoirs and rationed/priced to ensure only
essential usage is cheaper and genuinely more sustainable.

yes we know that too.

Many times you have to state the totally bleeding obvious to get the point
across

--

On Tuesday, 14 April 2015 11:20:16 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 21:45:22 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 13:59:22 UTC+1, Bod wrote:
On 13/04/2015 13:01, whisky-dave wrote:
On Sunday, 12 April 2015 21:50:27 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 10/04/2015 14:28, whisky-dave wrote:
I often wondered why they don't build larger cities or enlarge the
existing ones it's not like there's not enough space, if you can
build on a desert in navada [sic] why not AUS, same goes with audi
dubai [sic].

Nevada is running on "fossil water" - coming out of underground
aquifers. Which will be empty soon. Plus most of the Colorado
river,
which doesn't even get to the sea any more.

Abu Dhabi does a lot of distillation... but then, they have the oil
for
the power.

Andy

Are you sure it's distillation ?
you're not talking about roger sheep's private still are you ;-)
I thought Aus was planning on a Desalination plant, very expensive
and
uses a lot of power too, and using solar panels and heating up salt
to
store the energy as heat rather than in batteries.

Desalination plants have already been built in Oz and are on standby
should they ever need them. That's forward thinking, IMO.

I wonder how much it cost to keep something like that on standby.

A hell of a lot the way they have chosen to do that.

Wonder why they didn't choose a differnt way.

Because they were as stupid as you.

if they don't need it why have it, and if
they aren't using it much then why not ?

Its used in times of drought when there isn't
enough water coming from the sky, stupid.

What do you mean not enough water coming
from the sky, there was enough ~50 years ago.

Wrong, as always. There was in fact an equally severe drought in the past.

So there'e no change in the amount of water coming from the sky then is there stupid.


Now what would happen if you had more immigration perhaps 300,000 ariving
each year,

We aren't that stupid.

You don't want the economy of AUS to improve, I thought immigration was good for teh economy.



or would the sky produce more water ?

Even you aren't actually THAT stupid.

The sky doesn't produce water stupid.



If immigration is good for the economyy

It obviously is.

So why not increase immigration in AUS.
Why through out all those working illegally.



Australia has the space far more than the UK has.

You quite sure you aren't one of those rocket scientist terminal ****wits ?

No I'm the sort of person that looks at the land mass of the UK and of AUS and see the AUS as having more space on it's island than the UK does.

On Tuesday, 14 April 2015 12:13:21 UTC+1, The Other Mike wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 02:48:50 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Monday, 13 April 2015 17:45:35 UTC+1, The Other Mike wrote:

Energy costs

and E=MC^2 yep we know.


Water out of the sky stored in reservoirs and rationed/priced to ensure only
essential usage is cheaper and genuinely more sustainable.

yes we know that too.

Many times you have to state the totally bleeding obvious to get the point
across

--

Yes with Roger sheep you have to.
He now thinks that our soggy little island has more space on it than AUS.

On 14/04/2015 12:13, The Other Mike wrote:
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:33:46 +0100, Bod wrote:

Not much use when it hasn't rained for 3 years and the reservois have
all run dry. It makes sense to be prepared for the worst. Parts of Oz
have been close to using them before.

Was out there (VIC & TAS) for a few years at the turn of the century so I know
what things can be like out there. Friends of mine just escaped the fires in
ACT in 2003, got to within 100 metres or so from their home the winds changed
and the fire had nowhere to go and ran out of fuel.

Indeed, it's a country of weather extremes.

On 14/04/2015 10:24, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Bod
wrote:

On 14/04/2015 09:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Tony Bryer
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:26:40 +0100 Harryagain wrote :
IME you can get most of the above there.
A lot of Oz ilike 1950s Britain. Time warp.

It's a boring place.
Except for the wildlife, there's better of everything nearer to the
UK.

I moved here precisely to get away from the conservation mentality of
Twickenham, exchanging it for a city where one tower after another
goes up. IOW I've exchanged the 19C for the 21C. Anything but boring.

No, you've exchanged it for the 1960s. Here, we are busy blowing those
towers up.

And building even higher ones.
All of our relations in NSW and Adelaide have swimming pools and enjoy
a brilliant life. They would not even consider coming back to the UK.
Life expectancy in Oz is amongst the highest in the world.

I don't want a swimming pool, thanks.

I'm not offering you one ;-)

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 14 April 2015 11:20:16 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 21:45:22 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 13:59:22 UTC+1, Bod wrote:
On 13/04/2015 13:01, whisky-dave wrote:
On Sunday, 12 April 2015 21:50:27 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 10/04/2015 14:28, whisky-dave wrote:
I often wondered why they don't build larger cities or enlarge
the
existing ones it's not like there's not enough space, if you
can
build on a desert in navada [sic] why not AUS, same goes with
audi
dubai [sic].

Nevada is running on "fossil water" - coming out of underground
aquifers. Which will be empty soon. Plus most of the Colorado
river,
which doesn't even get to the sea any more.

Abu Dhabi does a lot of distillation... but then, they have the
oil
for
the power.

Andy

Are you sure it's distillation ?
you're not talking about roger sheep's private still are you ;-)
I thought Aus was planning on a Desalination plant, very
expensive
and
uses a lot of power too, and using solar panels and heating up
salt
to
store the energy as heat rather than in batteries.

Desalination plants have already been built in Oz and are on
standby
should they ever need them. That's forward thinking, IMO.

I wonder how much it cost to keep something like that on standby.

A hell of a lot the way they have chosen to do that.

Wonder why they didn't choose a differnt way.

Because they were as stupid as you.

if they don't need it why have it, and if
they aren't using it much then why not ?

Its used in times of drought when there isn't
enough water coming from the sky, stupid.

What do you mean not enough water coming
from the sky, there was enough ~50 years ago.

Wrong, as always. There was in fact an equally severe drought in the
past.

So there'e no change in the amount of water coming from the sky then is
there stupid.

Clearly there wasn't enough ~50 years ago, ****wit.

Now what would happen if you had more immigration perhaps 300,000
ariving
each year,

We aren't that stupid.

You don't want the economy of AUS to improve,

Its improved fine with an immigration rate that is twice what yours is.

I thought immigration was good for teh economy.

Depends on how much of it there is.

or would the sky produce more water ?

Even you aren't actually THAT stupid.

The sky doesn't produce water stupid.



If immigration is good for the economyy

It obviously is.

So why not increase immigration in AUS.

Because we already have twice the immigration rate you lot do, stupid.

Why through out all those working illegally.

Because we decide who we will allow to come here
when FAR more want to come here than we have
decided is an appropriate immigration rate.

Australia has the space far more than the UK has.

You quite sure you aren't one of those rocket scientist terminal ****wits
?

No I'm the sort of person that looks at the land mass of the UK and of
AUS and see the AUS as having more space on it's island than the UK does.

I don't believe that a drunk can do that.

On Tuesday, 14 April 2015 21:15:56 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 14 April 2015 11:20:16 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 21:45:22 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 13 April 2015 13:59:22 UTC+1, Bod wrote:
On 13/04/2015 13:01, whisky-dave wrote:
On Sunday, 12 April 2015 21:50:27 UTC+1, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 10/04/2015 14:28, whisky-dave wrote:
I often wondered why they don't build larger cities or enlarge
the
existing ones it's not like there's not enough space, if you
can
build on a desert in navada [sic] why not AUS, same goes with
audi
dubai [sic].

Nevada is running on "fossil water" - coming out of underground
aquifers. Which will be empty soon. Plus most of the Colorado
river,
which doesn't even get to the sea any more.

Abu Dhabi does a lot of distillation... but then, they have the
oil
for
the power.

Andy

Are you sure it's distillation ?
you're not talking about roger sheep's private still are you ;-)
I thought Aus was planning on a Desalination plant, very
expensive
and
uses a lot of power too, and using solar panels and heating up
salt
to
store the energy as heat rather than in batteries.

Desalination plants have already been built in Oz and are on
standby
should they ever need them. That's forward thinking, IMO.

I wonder how much it cost to keep something like that on standby.

A hell of a lot the way they have chosen to do that.

Wonder why they didn't choose a differnt way.

Because they were as stupid as you.

if they don't need it why have it, and if
they aren't using it much then why not ?

Its used in times of drought when there isn't
enough water coming from the sky, stupid.

What do you mean not enough water coming
from the sky, there was enough ~50 years ago.

Wrong, as always. There was in fact an equally severe drought in the
past.

So there'e no change in the amount of water coming from the sky then is
there stupid.

Clearly there wasn't enough ~50 years ago, ****wit.

why wasn't there enough, enough for who ?


Now what would happen if you had more immigration perhaps 300,000
ariving
each year,

We aren't that stupid.

You don't want the economy of AUS to improve,

Its improved fine with an immigration rate that is twice what yours is.

only twice ?, AUS is 31 times the size of the UK with a third of the numkber of people.


I thought immigration was good for teh economy.

Depends on how much of it there is.

Wow you're finally begining to realise.

So why not increase immigration in AUS.

Because we already have twice the immigration rate you lot do, stupid.

Why is that a probl;em surely the higher the rate the better for the economy ?


Why through out all those working illegally.

Because we decide who we will allow to come here
when FAR more want to come here than we have
decided is an appropriate immigration rate.

So yuo do see the value in contolling immigratiohn even when you say it's good for the economy how does that work with an 'appropriate immigration rate'


Australia has the space far more than the UK has.

You quite sure you aren't one of those rocket scientist terminal ****wits
?

No I'm the sort of person that looks at the land mass of the UK and of
AUS and see the AUS as having more space on it's island than the UK does.

I don't believe that a drunk can do that.

Show's you how impressive your thinking ability is then doesn't it.