Are there any tree huggers out there?

[Headbanger]

So why do you get up in the morning? Why keep living? And, if you don't mind a personal question, do you have kids?

hard wired to live life. If we weren't the human species would already have died out.

Same goes for ants. You going to ask them why thy get up each morning and set out to look for food?

I heard all about divinity
But angels don't turn me on
They say life's for livin' so live it
Find the Highway To Hell and lead on

[ElCoyote]

So why do you get out of bed in the morning then?


Or maybe my ideals don't neatly align with the national political parties (which change, anyway - look at the case of National, or Labour for that matter), and I pay more attention to local candidates and other tactical voting considerations.



Sounds like a plan. Except for the vodka.

PM me for a rendezvous but only if you think the Delerium Tremens won't be a problem. Sadly your ideology is flawed as your commitment to long term stability but isn't that the Communist way. Destabilise and divide. Comrade let me tell you that if you get my back against the wall...........Sayonara Comrade

[Balding Eagle]

As the initiator of this thread, I reckon it is probably time I posted a response. It certainly was my intention to toss the proverbial provocative pebble into the pond. The level of response has surprised me a little.

My reasons are many fold.

Firstly I wanted to find out how many of the biking community who are “green” are prepared to pay extra for their fuel and would accept a “carbon tax”. I note Rainman is prepared for all to pay taxes for their SUVs and the like but he does not say that he is prepared to pay any extra tax himself. Answer the question. If you are not prepared to pay extra for YOUR petrol for your bike, you are a hypocrite as petrol “carbon tax” should be paid on ALL petrol if you are a true believer. Are you prepared to put your money where your mouth is?

Secondly I personally don’t believe that there has been sufficient agreement amongst scientists for us to utterly accept that Global Warming is anthropogenic – ie manmade. That the earth is warming is probably a given but what is the cause and has this been proved scientifically and conclusively. (The flat earth belief was accepted as true science at the time.) Chris de Freitis (excuse spelling) as an associate professor at Auckland University is one who is certainly trying to tell us that the commonly accepted anthropogenic warming theory is crap and there are a few who have left the IPCC because they no longer believe. These are people educated in the ways of the atmosphere and should be listened to. The debate has not ended.

Thirdly I don’t like the Greens as a political party. I admit that my politics have more of a right lean to them but I have a solar water heater, I collect rain off my roof voluntarily for irrigation, I own a small cc car (and a bike of course) and I grow many of my own vegetables. Anyone seeing me would see me as a conservationist but I despise the Green Party and its politics. Sue Bradford doesn’t have a green bone in her body, she is a professional stirrer from wayback. Keith Locke started out in the Communist party and his beliefs have followed him. Nandor wanted to legalise hemp. Jeannette I suspect has her heart in the right place. My conservationist (green) measures would put most of the aforementioned to shame. And so the Green Party is a party of socialists hiding behind a conservationist veil. There is no reason why a true conservationist party has to be socialist.

Yes I believe that we have to be careful with our environment but while China, India and the US of A (to name but a few) are prepared to give Kyoto the proverbial finger then any attempt that we make by way of penalties for the use of carbon fuels will only hurt the people of NZ and will do diddly squat for the environment.

May the debate continue.

[Mikkel]

After reading this thread I'll respond thus: RAINMAN, ask yourself how many votes the Groans got last election, take a photo because as few as it was then it will be more than this upcoming election..

You ride a ZX7R - you can not possibly call green groan without somewhere along the line giving up your beliefs.

I would love to debate (verbally of course) this with you in person in the public bar of any hotel you wish to nominate, so long I would imagine as they serve vodka.

Solidarity comrade

Problem today is that most political debate has become a shit-flinging contest instead of a sober debate over a few shots of high-quality liquour!



As for NZ politics - this is a democrazy(SIC) like so many other democrazies... I see the two major parties (Labour and National) engaging in one shit-flinging contest after the other while they get NOTHING done.

I don't know much about what else there is to choose from - but at least the greens doesn't seem to engage in the shitflinging and still manage to have a significant influence upon what has happened in political circles (this is from watching the process for just over a year). If I was to vote tomorrow I'd throw my vote at the greens before even considering Labour or National - but I'd have to check what other parties are there though.

[rainman]

I note Rainman is prepared for all to pay taxes for their SUVs and the like but he does not say that he is prepared to pay any extra tax himself. Answer the question.

OK. As I said somewhere in the thread above, the Air NZ deal appears to be a marketing ploy, so in response to your original question:

"Are there any riders in the Biking community that would be prepared to pay more for their petrol to similarly ease their conscience?"

my answer would be no. Don't know where you get the idea I am "prepared for all to pay taxes for their SUVs and the like" as I've said no such thing. I would broadly support a balanced tax on emitters but the devil is in the details so don't think I'd sign up to just any plan that says "carbon tax" - and I'd balance the tax on the less desirable behaviour with a rebate on more desirable behaviour. I don't have a carbon neutral lifestyle, and don't know anyone who does, but I do strive to be as low impact as practical, irrespective of what China or anyone else does.

Secondly I personally don’t believe that there has been sufficient agreement amongst scientists for us to utterly accept that Global Warming is anthropogenic – ie manmade.

This is a cop-out. There is no absolute proof, and won't be - at the very least because there are clearly multiple factors involved, but mainly because the global ecosystem is a big thing for us little monkeys to understand. Still, intelligently managing risk is part of being a grown-up, and doing nothing is a choice. (I don't have any substantial religious beliefs, but if I could pick one it would be the concept of Karma).

Anyone seeing me would see me as a conservationist but I despise the Green Party and its politics.

Good on ya for the stuff you are doing. I agree there are elements within the Greens that are hard to agree with and people who are hard to like, but politics isn't about perfection, it's about who can get the results. If enviro issues are important to you, you should vote for a party that can help deliver good outcomes in this area.

[Rogue]

Wouldn't pay Air NZ a nob of goat sh#t
Global warming bull
If it were so why was the weather hotter in the 1940's?
Why has the worlds climate been up and down since weather has been recored?
Why was the highest recording of CO2 worldwide in the 1920's?
Ever consider where most of the world's weather readings are taken, airports which are now mostly built in. The surrounding buildings can raise the air temp by 10 deg C. And that there are now 25% less weather stations than 30years ago
This is just another Y2K scare ahh
Due to the 250cc 2 stroke changes coming I should be able to pick up a cheep RS250

[homer]

Wouldn't pay Air NZ a nob of goat sh#t
Global warming bull
If it were so why was the weather hotter in the 1940's?
Why has the worlds climate been up and down since weather has been recored?
Why was the highest recording of CO2 worldwide in the 1920's?
Ever consider where most of the world's weather readings are taken, airports which are now mostly built in. The surrounding buildings can raise the air temp by 10 deg C. And that there are now 25% less weather stations than 30years ago
This is just another Y2K scare ahh
Due to the 250cc 2 stroke changes coming I should be able to pick up a cheep RS250

Yep glad someone can see past the bs
exactly what i think
Its anothere lot of , if we keep telling you ,"well most will start to believe it "

[klingon]

Firstly I wanted to find out how many of the biking community who are “green” are prepared to pay extra for their fuel and would accept a “carbon tax”. I note Rainman is prepared for all to pay taxes for their SUVs and the like but he does not say that he is prepared to pay any extra tax himself. Answer the question. If you are not prepared to pay extra for YOUR petrol for your bike, you are a hypocrite as petrol “carbon tax” should be paid on ALL petrol if you are a true believer. Are you prepared to put your money where your mouth is?

There are two quite different issues here -
1) Would you be prepared to pay extra for your petrol to more closely reflect the true 'cost' of its production and consumption? - My answer is yes. Absolutely.

2) Is a carbon tax (in different versions as proposed by different groups) the right way to go about it? - My answer is I don't know. I am following the debate with interest and so far I haven't seen anything that appears to be the whole solution. I am prepared to consider different models and see what other countries are doing to find out what does and doesn't work in the real world.

Secondly I personally don’t believe that there has been sufficient agreement amongst scientists for us to utterly accept that Global Warming is anthropogenic – ie manmade... The debate has not ended...

I agree that we don't know everything about climate change. [I would rather call it "climate change" than "global warming" because it's too simplistic to think that the world is simply warming up. Things are much more complex than that.]

What scientists do seem to agree on is that a change in behaviour to reduce the 'probable' or 'possible' causes of climate change would be a very good idea. Whether for climate change reasons or other reasons, it would be really good if we reduced our reliance on fossil fuels, reduced all kinds of pollution and tried not to burn, chop or otherwise destroy vegetation any faster than we really need to. Isn't that just common sense?

Thirdly I don’t like the Greens as a political party. ... There is no reason why a true conservationist party has to be socialist...

The charter of the Green Party has four equal parts:
Ecological Wisdom
Social Responsibility
Appropriate Decision-making
Non-Violence

It sounds to me like you wish they would just keep the first one and ignore the other three. That would be very boring.

Personally I like Nandor - as a biker, a politician and a human being. If I ever see him zooming around on his Yamaha I will happily wave at him, just like I wave at any other biker.

[homer]

As the initiator of this thread, I reckon it is probably time I posted a response. It certainly was my intention to toss the proverbial provocative pebble into the pond. The level of response has surprised me a little.

My reasons are many fold.

Firstly I wanted to find out how many of the biking community who are “green” are prepared to pay extra for their fuel and would accept a “carbon tax”. I note Rainman is prepared for all to pay taxes for their SUVs and the like but he does not say that he is prepared to pay any extra tax himself. Answer the question. If you are not prepared to pay extra for YOUR petrol for your bike, you are a hypocrite as petrol “carbon tax” should be paid on ALL petrol if you are a true believer. Are you prepared to put your money where your mouth is?

Secondly I personally don’t believe that there has been sufficient agreement amongst scientists for us to utterly accept that Global Warming is anthropogenic – ie manmade. That the earth is warming is probably a given but what is the cause and has this been proved scientifically and conclusively. (The flat earth belief was accepted as true science at the time.) Chris de Freitis (excuse spelling) as an associate professor at Auckland University is one who is certainly trying to tell us that the commonly accepted anthropogenic warming theory is crap and there are a few who have left the IPCC because they no longer believe. These are people educated in the ways of the atmosphere and should be listened to. The debate has not ended.

Thirdly I don’t like the Greens as a political party. I admit that my politics have more of a right lean to them but I have a solar water heater, I collect rain off my roof voluntarily for irrigation, I own a small cc car (and a bike of course) and I grow many of my own vegetables. Anyone seeing me would see me as a conservationist but I despise the Green Party and its politics. Sue Bradford doesn’t have a green bone in her body, she is a professional stirrer from wayback. Keith Locke started out in the Communist party and his beliefs have followed him. Nandor wanted to legalise hemp. Jeannette I suspect has her heart in the right place. My conservationist (green) measures would put most of the aforementioned to shame. And so the Green Party is a party of socialists hiding behind a conservationist veil. There is no reason why a true conservationist party has to be socialist.

Yes I believe that we have to be careful with our environment but while China, India and the US of A (to name but a few) are prepared to give Kyoto the proverbial finger then any attempt that we make by way of penalties for the use of carbon fuels will only hurt the people of NZ and will do diddly squat for the environment.

May the debate continue.

Well its quite simple
the world was covered by water .......once .....mmmmm
maybe its just the fact that mountains are growing , thats how the sea shells get at the top of mountains ?
and after all glaciers are retreating arnt they ?
and, the ice is melting ?
just more BS
it happens , been happening for years
maybe theres an ice age coming
after all you only need a 2 deg decrease on the avg temp to get one
so if its say a 2 deg rise , what then

dont get sucked in to it , the politicans know that we wont be around to know any diff .

What if we lived till say the year 2120.

HaHa I told you so

[madandy]

Would the 'hippies' 'tree huggers' and the like in here state what they have done in the last few years to benefit our environment please?
Real actions, rather than simply supporting a notion or flogging the dead horse that is social conscience.

[Steam]

Would the 'hippies' 'tree huggers' and the like in here state what they have done in the last few years to benefit our environment please?
Real actions, rather than simply supporting a notion or flogging the dead horse that is social conscience.

I'm trying to think of a reason I should explain and justify my lifestyle to you.
Nope, can't think of one.
Maybe someone else is happy to have their habits and life pried into. Not me.

[madandy]

I'm trying to think of a reason I should explain and justify my lifestyle to you.
Nope, can't think of one.
Maybe someone else is happy to have their habits and life pried into. Not me.

I'm not asking you to justify your lifestyle or tell us about your habits or personal life.
I simply asked for an example of something significant you and others may have done to help Earth.
I manage an ecologically significant 43hectares of low lying harbour frontage land on Tauranga Harbour. Cleaning up and preserving the ecosystem is of great importance to me.

[Steam]

I'm not asking you to justify your lifestyle or tell us about your habits or personal life.
I simply asked for an example of something significant you and others may have done to help Earth.
I manage an ecologically significant 43hectares of low lying harbour frontage land on Tauranga Harbour. Cleaning up and preserving the ecosystem is of great importance to me.

Oh! Impressive. Sorry, I thought you were just going to use it as an excuse for greenie-bashing.

[bikemike]

Personally I like Nandor - as a biker, a politician and a human being. If I ever see him zooming around on his Yamaha I will happily wave at him, just like I wave at any other biker.

And I hear Russel used to be a biker too.

It's interesting reading this thread that there seems to be a general understanding that Labour or National are teams that sing from the same hymn sheet, but that the Greens are a rag tag bunch of hippies and commies. Blinkers on.

As a biker (pretty large bike too though at 45 to 60 mpg much more economical than my car - soon to be sold!) I find myself in a quandary. Over 25 years part of my identity has become the fact that I ride a bike, as I guess it is for many here. It would be hard to give it up, a bit like cutting off an arm.

At the moment, funding my riding and my conscience consists of selling the car, and bicycling more. As far as transport is concerned that's what I can do for now.

However, in light of the increasing demand for oil, the diminishing supply thereof, and to my mind convincing argument in favour of anthropogenic CO2, I am also aware that my decisions and any debates I may take part in are moot. There's a lot more crap than a debate about carbon credits/trading coming our way and justifying riding a bike is getting harder in the truest, absolutist sense.

Still, in the real world, for now, it is better than running a car :-)

Regarding the comments on 'proof' and 'consensus' these are straw men in this debate. In maths there is proof, in all else there is empiricism. Science is not a democracy nor a consensus. The most useful hypotheses win out, so we shall see!

For the record, I vote Green for the fundamental rightness of their charter, intention, effort and results. I am not a commie nor a hippie, and do not in anyway agree with everything they say or support. They are however the only party that currently puts the security of our environment first. Politics is demeaned by partisanship, so my disagreement on some Green points is for me and other Greens not an indicator of flip-flopping or lack of conviction or weather cocking or whatever else you want to call it - it's about sticking with the rational assessment of the best, or least worst option when compared to our ideals.

Biofuels are a disaster and I despair at the current support they have. When they can be produced from waste with a net benefit to the environment and a net gain in EROEI then I will support those fuels - but cropping agricultural land as an alternative to oil should be avoided here at all costs.

I thought everyone knew that Priuses are for celebrities, not Greenies?

The price of fuel will keep going up, on balance. Does it matter to you whether the increase is from more government tax, extra carbon tax, speculation, terrorism and piracy, lack of supply, pollution tax or anything else? When fuel was 92 cents per litre in 2000 did you ever think you would be prepared to pay 1.999 per litre in 2008? Over your dead body was it....?

Steam, did you read Heinberg's muse on Organics? Very good.

[Balding Eagle]

There are a good few of you who have put up good arguments in favour of the Greens. As I said in an earlier post - I am a conservationist at heart and don't like wastage. That being said, I would like to reply to a couple of posts.

Rainman - I have misquoted you and I apologise for that. You say that my stance on requiring proof is a cop out. I disagree. Science is fact; not opinion as you will agree. All I want is [I]sufficient[I] proof and while respected scientists are disagreeing you are not going to get me into the fold.

Klingon - You say that the Green charter has the following equal principles:

Ecological Wisdom
Social Responsibility
Appropriate Decision-making (What does that mean?)
Non-Violence

So why don't they call themselves the "Non-violent, ecologically wise, socially responsible appropriate decision makers"? They call themselves the Green party because they want everyone to see them as conservationists rather than socialist pacifists.

Right now, this country has bigger issues to deal with. It is a shame that the Greens could not take one of their charter principles and turn it around a little. Why not turn social responsibility into personal responsibility? I agree with helping out those that are less able to fend for themselves but receiving that assistance should require some responsibility from those receiving the assistance. As long as we pay people to sit on their arses and do nothing, they will continue to sit on their arses and do nothing.

So all in all I see that none of you who are followers of the "Green" mantra are prepared to pay extra for your fuel in the way of carbon tax. That is honest, pragmatic but hypocritical as you should all be using the bus. Is climate change here? - yes but it has been several times in our past history. Is it anthropogenic? I am yet to be convinced.