KEVINRBECK MOSAIC PORTAL WEB NETWORK
KEVINRBECK MOSAIC PORTAL WEB NETWORK |
|
IMPORTANT
every portal page uses scripting to update content.
So turn your active content on.
|
| |
| Brendan Nelson, may be a bumbling liberal leader but essentially he is right in trying to preach caution and block labor's moves. Rudd's team are the sheep, following the latest fad, at the front of the (crack pot) pack who will blindly run over the cliff taking the gullible voters with them. It is now imperative, as never before, that those with the capacity to resist, and block, engage Kevin Rudd and the labor government, the Greens and the greenies, and ideologs, in a war of attrition like no other ever seen in the nation before. This is not about politics and simple resistance or activism. This is about survival economically and socially, defying the efforts, and actions, of people who colllectively have never created anything. They are theorists and academics. politicians of zeal and ideology whose beliefs, and passions, are extremely dangerous. Out to save a world that does not need saving. They are not experts, in any shape or form, and they have never accurately predicted anything. They have at their disposal a public service, detached from reality, commissioned to serve. This public service is imbued with the code of serving the government of the day without question. They serve Ministers whose backgrounds, experiences and credentials, are not diverzse and congisant of the peril to whihc they are takin g us. We must draw on our own experiences and resources to resist, block and if necessary destroy their resolve and strategies. If the Rudd labor government spends a million or more on advertising their view points about the ETS (carbon reduction) then they should also fund counter opinions in the interest of the nation. |
About governments, corporations, people and events, research and ideas |
 Use effective communication techniques |
Click Here |
With the release of the green paper today you will no doubt pursue recalcitrants who back the doom philosophy of that evil element – carbon. The reference I gave you this morning presents a better approach to reducing the carbon excesses, viz. Ibbotson’s “Newcastle Protocol” instead of “Emissions Trading”, if in fact this is what you may want to do. You will also realise now, (after reading selected parts of Ibbotson), that anthropogenic CO2 is not even significant in global warming, particularly when you put water vapour into the equation. The experts do not want to talk about this because it is uncontrollable, (non-anthropogenic), and there are no easily available government funds to support the academics and scientists in R&D in this field. To give you a snapshot of the specious nature and uselessness of this whole exercise I suggest you read some of the papers of Gary Novack. Click Here The public is really being hoodwinked and the pollies are sure to strut their stuff in their inimitable and puerile fashion. Do your homework and your platform will be technically unassailable.... Keith |
 |
|
In Austraklia the debate about climate change has been hijacked by powerful interests that have access to media, resources, parliaments, bureaucracies, business, money and spin shapers. The Australian government lead by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has embraced Kyoto and ably assisted by his senior Minister for Water and Climate, Senator Penny Wong and Minister for the Environment, Peter Garrett, is engaged in not only shaping the policy by the Green Paper issued today but also the knowledge and awareness of the community. The Greens party, lead by the charismatic environmental campiagner, Senator Bob Brown have long championed the rod and birch approach to policy and the fantasy of ethereal solutions such as base load solar power. carbon sequestration is embraced as a panacea along with a myriad of other technological innovations among them clean coal. The Greens find the latter an anathema. The labor Party has embraced an Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) with a carbon cap and a market permit system underpinned by regulation, control and government funds. If it gets up it will be unique in the world. However it will not be here in 2010. This adoption of an ETS market model is consistent with the economic theories, and writings, of senior labor figures such as Minister Lindsay Tanner. Treasurer Wayne Swan also embraces an ETS though it is unlikely that he has the same level of economic understanding as does Lindsay Tanner and Professor Garnaut, yet he manages the powerful Treasury portfolio. He is fond of homilies suhc as shop around for a dufferent bank when interest rates go up, buy home brand and spot specials in supermarkets and carry a calculator. The Prime Minister engaged Professor Ross Garnaut, an economist and former diplomat, to research and develop a propositions and options recommendation paper. Modelling, and other core economic and social studies will be carried out by Treasury under his Ministry. Unfortunately the record of the federal Treasury on forecasting is not good. There will be modelling from the Australian Productivity Commission, the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and other interested agencies such as the Department of Environment and a myriad of external aacdemic, think tanks and industry interests as wel as the dooms dayers and freaks. On the government side this will primarily be a manged public relations exercise with an ETS appended. It is not expected that the Opposition Leader in the Australian Parliament, Dr. Brendan Nelson, and the liberal and national party state leaders, will add all that much value. Dr. Nelson is absorbed with the minutae. he is focused on petrol and a $A0.05 cents reduction per litre, as his foundation argument and action plan. This would deliver the tremendous amount of $A2.00 to $A5.00 a tank depending on whether you are driving a two wheeled dinky thing or a full blown armoured cruiser. Some may buy the Prime Minister's subsidised hybrid car in 2010 which will be out of date or ignore his luxury tax on cliamte freindly cars and spend big. All of this in a society where a great number of people spend a $A100 per week on booze and can forego a drink to pay the igher price without Brendan's magic bullet $o.05cents per litre. In a society where even the lowest income households may have a plasma television and gadget household, and persoanl telecommunications device, rivalling their mortgage. All of this in a society of dodgy under funded public transport wheer it exists among other feats of mediocrity by state governments. The two most referred authorities, in the Australian media, are Professor Ross Garnaut and Professor Warwick McKibbin. They are listed above in the source links. But what of John Ibbotson, and the Lighthouses? John Ibbotson has written a rather layman's view of the whole issue of climate change proposing a radical, and far simpler, approach. There is no ETS in his proposition. His publication is "Planning Ahead for Future Generations". It proposes a Newcastle Protocol based on three core elements: A greenhouse extraction tax at the point of mining A World Energy Bank A World energy Standards Body. I personally do not believe that Australia will have a functional Emission Trading Scheme ready to go in 2010. The legislative drafters, and lawyers, are methodical, slow and the whole thing is very very complicated. It will be a voluminous set rivalling the Australian Taxation Acts. The politics is fraught with quicksand and bog holes. The vested interests are vast, the bureaucracy and the federation is cumbersome and fragmented with its own vested interests agendas, and ideologies, and the nay sayers and game players are well resourced and skilled at dissembling and barrier erection. There is no evidence that the Prime Minister's closest advisers in his office even know the identities of all of the game players, their motivations and capabilities. The Liberal Party under its federal, and state leadership, has no discernible platform or coherent and consistent policy. Brendan Nelson will likely play devil's advocate, spoiler, sometimes ignorant, with disruption and short term reactionary tactics until stability is achieved after his removal as federal leader. The state liberal and national leaders will similarly assist. The minority Senators in the Australian parliament are not experienced in such complexities, are under resourced and yet will be able to exercise enormous influence since they may control the passage of legislation. Everything wil be refrred to committees in the Upper House Senate Chamber. The Victorian Labor Party and government have a significant amount to risk and possibly lose with the bulk of energy being produced by brown coal mines and power stations and heavy manufacturing energy guzzlers such as aluminium plus Victorian Premier ohn Brumby's ill conceived salt water environmentally nasty, desalination plant. Then there is Premier Iemma's misfortune, and slide from power, trying to sell his state owned energy assets, in am ajor banking and redit crisis world. NSW has lots of black coal mines. In Queensland there are also lots of black coal mines. There are nasty gas conversion plants are over looked when proponents prattle on about using ever more natural gas for energy generation. There is a jingle - song that goes "Life is but a dream ... sweet heart." (Kevin R Beck) |
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|  |
| Experts are everywhere. Governments and corporations use them, the media, public and private entities. They inhabit universities. They inhabit disciplines. There are a number of prime experts that are driving government policy, thinking and response. Governmment economists (in Treasury and in Finance and Administration) and theorists engaged in climate change and carbon trading. So are they really expert? Philip Tetlock, a psychologist with a Phd from Yale has spent much of his time at the Universities of California, Berkely and Ohio. What makes him unique in the world of academic research is that he has produced a seminal and intensive study of the world of experts, of all types, and assessed whether they are any better at their activity than a novice such as me (KEVINRBECK). Philip has published his research in "Expert Political Judgement: How good is it? How can we know? (Princeton University Press). His research translates to any society and this case I have compared it to how things work in Australia. The Australian Financial Review published an excellent synopsis (Friday 25 November, 2005, Review 3) of his research in an article written by Paul Monk, who is co-founder of Austhink Consulting and author of "Thunder from the silent zone: rethinking China". Tetlock's work can be applied to the unflinching claims of the Howard government for its Workplace Relations Reforms, justification of war in Iraq, economic policy, investment in R&D and other pet projects and its ideological pursuit of dross. Similarly it can be used to debunk economic forecasts, political analysis and a host of other "crystal ball" style pronouncements that are used to sell services, dress up stories and drive home points. The research exposes the human tendency to rely on an expert, particularly one with a job that suits and a title to go without. The history of their performance and other traits are never considered nor remembered. He says that "experts are attempting to do with confidence what they demonstrably cannot do very well at all. They make lots of money and kudos from dubious forecasts without ultimate accountability. They are well suited to being politicians particularly Ministers in Australia's governments and consultants and advisers in Australia's top tier companies and public sector enterprises. They are partisan, rarely admit error or they will give a dozen explanations as to how they got it wrong. Governments, shareholders and businesses lose billions year after year but continue to draw on their services. Monk quotes Tetlock, "we keep running into ideological impasses rooted in each side insisting on being the only judge of its own beliefs and forecasts". Does that have resonance, or sound familiar, in your workplace, communities, in political rhetoric and justification, on television and everywhere? Tetlock found that experts on their home turf made neither better-calibrated nor more discriminating forecasts than did dilettante trespassers. Monk says that Telock found that it made virtually no difference whether participants had doctorates, whether they were economists, political scientists, journalists or historians, whether they had policy experience or access to classified information, or whether they had logged many or few years of experience in their chosen line of work. There was no correlation between ideology and accuracy of judgement or precision of forecasting. The experts tended not to adjust their beliefs when the evidence came in but to rationalise or outright deny their errors. Is that familiar too? Seems our politicians have this gene. The dominant danger he concluded was hubris closed mindedness, dismissing dissonant possibilities too quickly. Resistance is fierce particularly from those with grand reputations but humble track records. Tetlock did find that exacting research using scientific and other proven techniques based on solid empirical evidence and statistical analysis and checking, using large volumes of data and input over time did impact on the accuracy and quality. This is the intrinsic objective of the design of the Mosaic Portal.  Political, corporate, social and economic |
 
Privacy Statement, Uses and Motivation |
MOSAIC PORTAL SITE MAP
 | The specific category pages of the Mosaic Portal includes the latest news about your work, profession, hobby or interests and lots of other relevant stuff? Eliminate the tiresome irrelevancies of a general web search by using the specific categories of the Mosaic Portal and let the Mosaic Portal bring it to you |
A deep extended index of subjects and subtopics where the research, and search, has been done to find
sites with news, articles and resources about your work, study, family, lifestyle, interests, hobbies, entertainment, beliefs, and more
|
