Cycling for a brighter sustainable future on the NSW North Coast?

Over the years I have heard many Yamba residents, who happen to enjoy cycling, express concerns over the fact that the only road between their town and Maclean is nigh on impassable for two-wheeled traffic and, that Yamba might as well be an island when it comes to bicycle travel.

People who enjoy a long brisk walk rarely proceed even as far as Yamba bridge due to the uncomfortable proximity of vehicular traffic.

If for no other reason than a collective lower carbon footprint, NSW North Coast local government should be actively pursuing linking its small towns via designated cycle lanes, when these same towns are within easy reach of the recreational cyclist.

The immediate spin-offs would possibly be first expressed as an increased exchange of disposable income between towns and higher tourists traffic (something Northern Rivers towns tirelessly work towards achieving).

Cycle track

IT'S time that a cycle track and walking path were constructed between Yamba and Maclean.

The Maclean to Yamba road is always busy throughout the year for work, school and other traffic - and especially at peak tourist times. Walkers and recreational cyclists in Yamba take their lives in their hands if they venture past the Oyster Channel bridge.

Increasing numbers of people cycle for recreation and fitness. We are urged to look after our health and fitness by walking.

Let's see Clarence Valley Council get on and provide this much needed infrastructure.

S SCHMOLKE, Yamba.

[The Daily Examiner, letter to the editor, 29 December 2009]

Cycling

FULL praise to Sue Schmolke for raising the issue of cycle paths in Yamba and Maclean.

Not that long ago I had to leave my car at Maclean for repairs, and because I had been a cyclist over many years I decided to take my bike with me and ride home to Yamba.

The trip back was a delight, but I am afraid to say there were parts of the road where I couldn't get off and I heard cars being slowed down as they inched their way past me.

Suffice to say, I won't be doing this again, but it seems such a shame in these days when most of us should be exercising more.

I am sure we have all seen small family groups arriving in Yamba with vans or trailers. More often than not there are bikes somewhere on the load.

This alone must give some credence to what Sue Schmolke is saying.

This comment is not intended as criticism of our council. In many ways their outlook has been marvellous with quite a few cycleways already in existence.

What is needed, however, are more ways of keeping cyclists of all ages, particularly children, out of harm's way.

More or better cycleways, plus attention to the verges on existing roads, can only add to the success that is Yamba and Maclean.

ALLAN TOWNSEND, Yamba.

[The Daily Examiner, letter to the editor,16 January 2010]

How much notice is the blogosphere taking of Rudd and Abbott at the start of 2010?

There was probably some method in the Mad Monk's verbal incontenience during the last few weeks - without it he may not have come close to keping pace with a prime minister who was being talked about even when he was going low profile during the parliamentary break.
This curve compares the popularity of queries tony abbott and kevin rudd in the blogosphere. Two terms closely related during some time period have similar looking popularity curves in that time interval, and hence these curves can be used to analyze relation between two topics. *


* BlogScope is an analysis and visualization tool for blogosphere which is being developed as part of a research project at the University of Toronto. It is currently tracking over 40.99 million blogs with 1116.38 million posts. BlogScope can assist the user in discovering interesting information from these millions of blogs via a set of numerous unique features including popularity curves, identification of information bursts, related terms, and geographical search

Just how seriously should we take those conspiracy theorists and should government be concerned?

Conspiracy theories have probably been around since humankind began to congregate in large numbers, but there is little doubt that the Internet has allowed the genre to flourish and endure as never before.
So much so that academic papers are now written on the subject.

Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light. [Sunstein, Cass R. and Vermeule, Adrian, Conspiracy Theories (January 15, 2008), Harvard Public Law Working Papers,SSRN abstract] Download full paper here.

What the authors are politely implying is that conspiracy theorists are often credulous and ignorant. What they appear to be advocating is intervention on extremist websites and fora, by salting these venues with government-approved alternative explanations either openly or anonymously.

But should government be encouraged to act in a surreptitious manner?
Will anonymous debate by government agencies only confuse the legitimacy/strength of any response to a social or political issue, no matter how far out that response may become?
Aren't the crooked debating techniques which government already frequently employs (along with the PR firms it sometimes hires to assist) enough of a burden in any public debate?
Are conspiracy theories generally so destructive that they warrant government action by way of blogosphere black-ops?

Some false conspiracies manifest as rather vaguely held beliefs like this one found at Agmates Community Site:
Communists now control the executive branch of the US government. They completely control the Secretariat of the UN. They tried to deal with Lord Monckton at Copenhagen.
They control many bureaucracies in Australia including CSIRO. This is not a good situation. It is time for action! It is time for the silent majority to stand up.

While others are more elaborate constructions such as the enduring threat of Illuminati world domination by 'lizard' people. This classic example was found at Educate-Yourself:
There is a worldwide conspiracy being orchestrated by an extremely powerful and influential group of genetically-related individuals (at least at the highest echelons) which include many of the world's wealthiest people, top political leaders, and corporate elite, as well as members of the so-called Black Nobility of Europe (dominated by the British Crown) whose goal is to create a One World (fascist) Government, stripped of nationalistic and regional boundaries, that is obedient to their agenda. Their intention is to effect complete and total control over every human being on the planet and to dramatically reduce the world's population by 5.5 Billion people. While the name New World Order is a term frequently used today when referring to this group, it's more useful to identify the principal organizations, institutions, and individuals who make up this vast interlocking spiderweb of elite conspirators.....

Some potential conspiracies register on the news cycle and then fade away:
Is information warfare to blame for the damage to underwater internet cables that has interrupted internet service to millions of people in India and Egypt, or is it just a series of accidents?

Yet others are elaborate constructions, such as alternative explanations for the collapse of the World Trade Towers in New York found within the broad church which is the 9/11 Truth Movement:
In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, and can be tested scientifically, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government. [Jones, SE (2006) "Why indeed did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?",Journal of 9/11 Studies]

A few can be said to have had widespread mainstream media dissemination, such as the al Fayed assertion that his son and Princess Diana were murdered. A belief which saw cause of death open to debate for a number of years until a much-delayed formal inquest.

More than one conspiracy theory appears to have had a strong political impact.
The 9/11 theories and the "there is no man-made global warming' view would have to fall into this category. The former because so many individuals in Muslim countries appear to believe that Islamic extremists were not involved in the attack and the latter because it has given conservative politicians and polluting industries an excuse to either ignore or sideline the issue of catastrophic climate change.

This is an early example of The Myth of Global Warming:
The SwindleThe Great Global Warming Swindle
Sea Levels Not Rising Except In The Lies of the IPCC
Solar Cycles, Not CO2 Determine Climate Global Climate Explained (If you Want To Worry)
Suspend Disaster The Myth Of Global Warming
A Load Of Hot Air Climate Change Hysteria is Costing Us
The Ice Age Cometh The Real Danger Of An Ice Age
Global Warming Messy Models, Decent Data, and Pointless Policy
Hot Politics Doctoring Of Reports By UN Experts
Cool Climate The Absurdity Of Trying To Control Climate
A Pagan Fantasy The Effect Of Accepting Popular Paranoia As Truth

With what is possibly the largest modern anti-science set of beliefs, the Global Warming Conspiracy, developing a loose but increasingly sophisticated organizational structure, its claims becoming even more brazen and its media coverage almost guaranteed, I suspect that the real question politicians are privately asking each other is "Will this false {insert name} conspiracy theory change voter intention and will this be to my advantage?"

I expect that during the Australian federal and state election campaigns in 2010 voters will have to keep a wary eye on the origins of all forms of information, because I cannot see any political party resisting the urge to secretly insert its own brand of misinformation into the online political debate through a multitude of "Stan of Wagga Wagga", "Cheryl at Toongabbie", Marge from Moonee Ponds" and "Bruce via Brisbane" false persona or the mainstream media forego the urge to foster its own political pets with a plethora of unsupported "unnamed sources".

Abbott won't rule out putting a nuclear power station on a headland near you

Now that headline's a bit rich I know {slaps own hand}.
It may have been the meaning of the words the Federal Leader of the Opposition strung together in a radio interview aired on ABC News Radio early last Friday morning, but it was obviously not what Tony Abbott wanted to convey to the Australian electorate as he began his pursuit of the 'green vote'.
The fact that I posted the headline is a good indication of the level of faith I place in Abbott's sudden discovery that he is a "practical environmentalist" committed to a green country and economy.
His vision for Australia is a frightening mixture of naivity and old, limited solutions based on an idea that the environmental problems can be somehow kept seperate from the issue of climate change and an historical failure to assign a direct economic cost to pollution by industry.
It was hard to keep a straight face when I realised that his Murray-Darling solution would require the country to mark time for the entire first term he was in office and already vested interest have signalled opposition to his plan - as happened when the Coalition last mooted a similar plan.
As for his saying that he wouldn't vigorously pursue nuclear energy production if he became prime minister - I won't even pretend that I don't consider this a whopping political lie by a deliberately deceitful pollie.
The man changes his public policy positions more times than he changes his shirt, but I suspect that his private goals haven't altered much over the years because his support for nuclear options surfaces fairly regularly in media releases.
There are only moral barbarians found on that racetrack to The Lodge these days.
Possum has a handle on the size of the Coalition's credibility problem.



















One of Possum's graphs over at his post "Abbott's Green Army" which tell the story.