Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by jdobbin

  1. Look, if you are unable to understand the difference between the scientific evidence supporting the link between tabacco and cancer which has been observed millions of times and a hypothetical link between CO2 and global temperature which has never been observed then you don't understand science. There is a huge difference and that matters when it comes to making policy decisions.

    Look, if you can't understand that the people you cite are professional naysayers and still throw doubt on tobacco among other things, I don't know that you get where they are coming from.

  2. Any policy that include targets for CO2 reductions is a waste of money and resources. Saving energy can be justified for its own sake and does not need an imaginary CO2 threat to justify.

    Guess you should tell that to Harper next time you post here. Carbon copy each message you write.

    Idle speculation for which there is zero evidence. If it had any merit then we should have seen a huge release of methane 10000 years ago when then temps were at least a 1 degC higher than today.

    Gee. I thought El Nino is just 'weather'? It take a lot more than a couple warm years to get the recent temperature trends back in line with the climate model predictions.

    Once again tell Harper all about it. He doesn't seem to to be listening to you since he is still pursuing a carbon reduction program.

  3. You love the irrelevant comparisons.

    And you love blathering on warming raising the same doubts that the smoking lobby still makes today.

    The link between tabacco and cancer is supported by millions of independent test subjects that voluntarily exposed themselves to tobacco. That gives us a rock solid statistical basis for a link even if some percentage the test subjects never develop cancer. Nothing close to that kind of evidence exists for AGW since we don't have even one real test subject that would allow us to test for the causal link.

    And yet people still use "might", "could" and "possibly" about the dangers.

    We also know the effects of cancer invariably bad since we have seen it happen millions of times. AGW is just some hypothetical event predicted by a computer model that could easily be good as well as bad.

    And some people still raise hypotheticals on smoking. Some of them in fact are also some of the same people you have cited in global warming as I have pointed out to you before.

    People who try to claim there is some sort of comparison between science supporting the tobacco/cancer link and AGW simply demonstrate that they do not understand science.

    Think I pointed that out to you about some of the people you cited on global warming to no avail.

  4. How about instead? The trouble with CO2 is there are no alternatives that can provide the energy we need at cost that we can afford. What this means is any anti-CO2 policy will fail and the only question is how much money will be wasted while posturing politicians pretend to do something.

    Like Harper with his carbon capture in Alberta and ethanol?

    It is all the wrong policies if the aim is to get more clean energy. Might have been better to build a high powered lines from Manitoba to Ontario and Saskatchewan.

    I think even investing in the LED street lights that the Halifax company is so good could save a ton of energy and unlike the sodium lights, they last 20 years and actually make the streets brighter and safer. Heck, you could even say it was a crime fighting venture.

    I still think thermal is the way to go as it is the cleanest and once installed, the cheapest to run.

    Even if you don't believe in warming, these are things that make sense, make us less dependent on oil and save money.

    Methane is a different story since the capture and disposal of the gas actually produces energy (unlike CO2 which has limited industrial value). Since studies say it may represent as much as 1/2 of the GHG problem it would make sense to focus exclusively on methane for now and revist the CO2 issue in 20-30 years after we have had a chance to further develop non CO2-emitting sources of energy.

    If you can capture methane in the north, it might be worth something. Less ice cover means more ground exposed and more methane released which begets more warming and more ground exposed.

    As far as CO2 goes, we will see if the change back to El Nino in ocean currents makes for hotter temperatures again. The last el nino ended in 2007.

  5. The poll question that should be asked is "Do you trust the information given by the gun registry?"

    If 100% of the respondents say "no" then it's useless. If anyone says "yes" then it has been endangering the lives of officers.

    I'm sure the right wing would love to ask leading questions just as they did with the Wheat Board.

    This has nothing to do with right wing, centre or left wing. Common sense isn't exclusive to the right wing.

    The try to do it right rather drawing connclusions before asking a series of questions.

    Why? Because you could figure out that since criminals hadn't registered their handguns in 70 years that it would be unlikely they'd register their long guns?

    Because I believed there was a better way than a central registry.

    It's like spending $25 million a year studying whether or not pigs could fly if they had wings. Criminals don't register their guns. Pigs don't have wings. Done.

    Think I'd like to actually hear police views on the issue.

    There are police associations and officers that have gone on record condemning the registry. That should speak volumes. Ask the chiefs' association if they train their officers to trust the registry?

    And yet we see more police saying the support the registry. That should speak volumes too.

    It's accessed automatically.

    Because it is a tool for the police to do their job.

    If you want to keep the registry, figure out a plan to maintain it based upon its annual revenues. Really all you have to do is go to those involved and say "if you can't do it for this much, we will be ending the registry." I'm sure those involved in the milking will find a way.

    That's not what the Tories are doing. They are just trying to kill the program slowly.

    In the end, if they don't get a majority, the program will be back in force. It would be better if they tried to find out how and why it is used and if there is a better way. I don't think they will do that.

  6. And all of this is predicated on the "fact" that carbon dioxide is killing our planet......and if we listen to the zeolots, we have already reached or will soon reach a tipping point whereby mankind will never be able to recover.

    I am reminded of the tobacco industry saying that there was no link to health issues and smoking. I can imagine that some people probably still think that way.

    In any event, it isn't just CO2 that causes warming. Methane has to be looked at as well.

  7. Apparently, you've never watched question period before this week. The party in power almost never actually answers the questions. That's especially true when it comes to the current government.

    The shouting down with sexist comments is pretty new.

    The federal government isn't in charge of everything in Canada. It stands to reason that they don't deserve blame for everything in Canada, especially when it involves cross jurisdictional matters. I don't think the majority of Canadians see the chaos that you're currently so focused on.

    The Feds are responsible for the vaccine, not the provinces. If it is a supply issue, it is in their domain.

    If you think that a federal government doesn't take heat in a pandemic then you forget what the reaction was during SARs. The Liberal government rightfully took its lumps.

  8. Except that is exactly the case here. Now the involved parties have to look at ways to stop further problems from occurring.

    Perhaps if the Tories didn't treat it as a joke in Parliament, it would be a start.

    The Liberals aren't (and shouldn't be) in government. The only thing that they can be blamed for is grasping at straws. Look up Rick Mercer's Liberal GPS for a good demonstration of the current state of the Federal Liberal Party.

    The chaos happening now is going to have people question who is in charge. Your answer seems to be no one, everyone. The Tories wanted to be in charge, well, live up to the job. It is chaos out there and someone has to take responsibility for it. And all we get from the Tories is heckling.

  9. Why does the buck have to stop in one place when it's quite plain to see that mistakes were made at many levels..that includes the manufacturer, all levels of government and the public. There is almost never a single cause to anything.

    The no one is to blame, everyone is to blame is probably not going to wash with continued chaos in terms of supply and when vaccines start over again.

    Obviously not. With the current shape of the Liberals, I doubt they could manage a single vaccine clinic.

    Ah, there is the blame the Liberals tactic I've been expecting.

  10. Oh yes, not I'm spouting Tory talking points. Priceless.

    Blaming the manufacturer for the delay even though the production line stoppage was government ordered is what the Tories are doing.

    You want to blame Harper and the Conservatives. That's what this is all about. If they had rolled it out faster than other countries, you would be questioning that. If it had cost $0.03 more than in other countries, you would have questioned that. The reality is that PHAC is running the show and their doctors are making most of the decisions. They've been taking the safe approach to ensure that no one is put in danger. Not every evil in the world is caused by Conservatives.

    You want to apologize for the Tory ordered change in the production line that has caused the shortage. That's what this is about.

    They were asked questions about this which they have heckled the Opposition about and now they are left scratching their heads about the shortage.

    It seems this is the best Liberals can do...and that's why we need to be shown that we're wrong. Our slogan is We Can Do Better. I seriously doubt that if this is the best that we can come up with.

    It seems you will continue to believe that the manufacturer somehow failed even though you insist no blame is being set. Or have you forgotten the sexist heckling every time Bennett asked a question about the vaccine?

  11. No, you seem to think it means something different. It very clearly says that there were other causes and it very clearly says that it's GSK that informed the government of the causes. Even if the government made the change, they aren't the producer. They're the consumer, and their supplier obviously didn't plan well enough for possible changes and unexpected situations.

    This is where the blame seems to be directed at the manufacturer. It seems to be the Tory talking point.

    I do take it you read the CP report tonight on the delay, right? Or are they confused?

    Really, there's probably nowhere to lay blame here. We're doing a pretty good job of getting the vaccine out, there's simply been a hiccup that is causing a delay.

    It is literally chaos in terms of delivery. The production line was late to start compared to other countries and mid-stream the government ordered a change to the vaccine. Shutting down a production line causes delays and there were questions about the changes in Parliament for some time and they just end up getting shouted down.

  12. I don't real blame anyone, but I do see who it is that can't deliver. You seem to be the one who wants to find blame.

    But who ordered the production line stopped to restart on the re-jigged vaccine? The government did.

    Try watching the National from 3:00 to 3:45 minutes. You'll see that A) GSK informed the government, and B ) the change in production isn't the only cause of delay.

    I have watched it three times and you seem to think it means something different.

    According to the CBC website, it is the main reason for the delay.

  13. That's certainly what was said on The National. You can go watch it if you'd like.

    I did. And that is why I say you wrong and I have shown you the CP story on that which you also seem to ignore. It was also talked about on Politics today about how the order came from the Feds to change production midstream.


    On Thursday, federal and provincial health officials said fewer doses of H1N1 vaccine are expected next week because the vaccine manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline, has a single production line. The company had to stop producing adjuvanted vaccines to make the non-adjuvant type for pregnant women.

    You blame the manufacturer even though they were ordered by the government to change production.

  14. Not that it will make a difference to your partisan view on this but...

    I have read this and the order still came from the Feds to interrupt production to start production elsewhere. The government had been asked about possible delays but all they do is heckle and make sexist comments.

    You need to remember that the feds are one of three players in pandemic planning. Provinces and municipalities committed some errors in rolling out the vaccines. You also need to take into account that the public was spooked by the death of two youngsters which led to a run on the clinics by high risk groups and healthy Canadians. But I know you're much more attuned to Bob Rae's message that Conservatives are killing and will be killing citizens.

    The supply of the vaccine is not controlled by the provinces. It is the Feds that ordered it and changed production midway through. I realize that the talking points are to blame the manufacturer and refuse to answer questions in Parliament about using sexist comments but it is getting a little ridiculous.

  15. The next logical question is did the company advise the government that in order to produce the non-adjuvant vaccine, the production of the regular vaccine would be interrupted for a significant length of time?

    I suppose if you want to blame the company for this that would be the route to go.

    To his credit, Layton didn't politicize the recent deaths of the two youngsters. He said Canadians have to pull together to meet this challenge. Too bad Liberals are only interested in laying blame and further inflaming a worried public.

    Too bad the Tories heckled and refused to answer questions over the last weeks as noted on both CTV and CBC about the vaccine. Looks like they wanted to politicize this with juvenile activities.

  16. According to the National, it was GSK that told the government there would be a supply problem. They couldn't deliver, just as I thought.

    Actually, that is not what was said. They said that the government ordered a change in the vaccine mid-stream and that has caused the delay. Go back and watch again because this is what the story is:


    The slowdown is due to the fact that Canada asked GSK to make special batches of the vaccine for pregnant women and that required switching over the production line, and then switching back.

    So are you still blaming the company for following the government's instructions?

  17. Why can't they stop it? Canadian soldiers are under strict orders not to comment on the Afghanistan mission to the press! That was in the media last week. All they have to do is to tell rank and file cops that if they are caught giving their opinions it will cost them their jobs. You could still have a "secret" poll, of course. How can they know that an individual cop answered a random phone call? Still, the fear would be there. Also, they could disparage any such poll as biased, without fear of any contradiction from those actually polled.

    Think a secret poll is just that. Secret. Unless you are thinking the police will tap in to find out how the vote went and punish cops accordingly.

    And I am NOT saying that the chiefs are afraid for their jobs! I'm saying that chiefs are political animals themselves. From a Machiavellian POV, it is in their interest to keep any tool they get, no matter how expensive or ineffective. The cost is borne by taxes, which are not their concern. As far as effectiveness, even a blunt axe is better than nothing. Much better for them to champion the registry. Later they can try to have it improved into something useful

    All I hear is the right wing shouting to end the program.

    I didn't support it to start with but I'll be darned if I don't find out if it is indeed useful to the police. I just don't believe police chiefs are afraid for their job and supporting the program to keep those jobs.

    Meanwhile, nice segue! You're very good at that! Again, now how about explaining how you can deny the logic of how the registry is useless when a cop has to call on a door...

    The police access the registry all the time. The Tories are the ones trying to dismantle the program or make it useless.

  18. Jdobbin, it's very unlikely that police chiefs and their superiors would ever allow such a poll. The chiefs are involved in the political aspects of the registry. Frontline cops face real world situations.

    I don't see how they can stop it.

    It is like thinking the Canadian Wheat Board could stop polling their members on the end of the Wheat Board. They couldn't do it.

    I'm surprised you're fighting this argument. The fact that the registry is useless to let a cop know he's calling at a house that may contain a firearm is only common sense! There are really only two possibilities. Either the registry may be taken as gospel about the situation or it can't. If you're going to continue supporting it then you must be taking the position that a cop CAN accept the registry report as true!

    I'm surprised you are taking the angle that the chiefs are only saying what they are saying for fear of their jobs.

  • Create New...