Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Australia

AU R18+ Rating Plans Put On Hold Due To "Interest Groups" 139

Posted by Soulskill
from the grasping-at-straws dept.
Dexter Herbivore writes "Australian gamers are yet again left disappointed by their government's response to a lack of an R18+ rating for games. Gamespot reports that Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor has blamed 'interest groups' for swamping the public consultation with pro-R18+ submissions. From the article: 'A strong response from gamer groups in the Australian Federal Government's R18+ public consultation has led Censorship Ministers to claim that more views from the community are needed before a decision into the introduction of an R18+ classification for video games can be reached.'" Reader UgLyPuNk adds that support for the new rating is coming from unexpected places.

Comment: Re:Are climate researchers.... (Score 1) 641

by Gandalf_Greyhame (#31978236) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

So, unable to dispute the simple evidence placed before you, you resort once again to name calling. Truly this must be the mark of a superior intelligence.

Anyway, its been fun, but unless you are able to refute what has been said (that means provide evidence that I am indeed wrong, not simple name calling) than I fear that our conversation must come to an end.

Funny thing is, it is people like yourself who make me question the global climate change issue as it is obvious that you believe with a religious fervor. That and the fact that they have oversold it.

Simple timeline, all with the exact same data:

1970s: The evidence shows that since the turn of the century global temperatures have been steadily decreasing and the world is heading towards an ice-age

1980s-1990s: The evidence shows that since the turn of the century global temperatures have been steadily increasing and we are heading towards disaster. The polar caps are melting

2000-Current: Global climate is changing. The polar caps are getting thicker and this is because of temperatures increasing.

This is all using the same data. Yes, scientific models change over time, but I still can't help but feel that they are playing poker and telling the everyone that they are holding 2 aces in their hand when there are 3 of them on the table.

Comment: Re:Are climate researchers.... (Score 1) 641

by Gandalf_Greyhame (#31974016) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/met/READER/temp_html/maat.html go there and tell me that there is no missing data. Truly you have been drinking the kool-aid and have succumbed to the church of climatology if you can see no missing data. This is not uncommon, and if (as I stated earlier) you looked at the other stations, you will see even more missing data points.

LOOK before you speak

Comment: Re:Are climate researchers.... (Score 1) 641

by Gandalf_Greyhame (#31965716) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

I have yet to finish reading through it all (to be honest I only just started and started with the antarctica.ac.uk link) and I would like to bring to your attention the missing data sets contained therein. Actually there are only a couple of stations that have recent figures at all, and of those that do have recent figures (within the past decade) they are missing a number of monthly, and even yearly, figures.

Perhaps I am an idiot. I will admit that. But with your help I now have a much greater ability to form my own opinion on the subject.

Missing data sets are still a worry however.

Comment: Re:Are climate researchers.... (Score 1) 641

by Gandalf_Greyhame (#31964002) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

Yes, I forgot the persuasive power of abuse. Clearly your intelligence is unparalleled and should not be questioned. So, where pray tell is the raw data? if you can find me a link to the raw unaltered data then I retract my statement

A liar? Nothing that I wrote there is a lie unless you can, as stated above, produce the raw unaltered data.

I will admit, and concede that both sides of the debate (yeah, this is supposed to be a debate, not merely an abuse session) stand to profit. The oil companies, etc. can expect to profit from the status quo, and the "OMFG THE WORLD IS GONNA END" crowd are profiting from scaremongering.

Yes I know that this too will be modded down, because it has become apparent that actual thought is discouraged on Slashdot these days and we must follow the herd mentality.

Comment: Re:Are climate researchers.... (Score 2, Interesting) 641

by Gandalf_Greyhame (#31963294) Attached to: Climate Researchers Fight Back

Yet the media is not reporting on the raw data as the raw data was deleted. Instead the data that is being reported on has been altered to fit the model*. Without having the raw data to fall back on and reassess the model it throws doubt upon the entire theory, at least in those who are able to think for themselves. If the original raw data was still available then the theory could be proven or dis-proven. As it currently stands we merely have 2 sides yelling at one another calling the other group a bunch of morons.

Personally I am a bit skeptical of the man made climate change theory. My skepticism comes from the lack of raw data and if I am completely honest, a bit of conspiracy-theory-tin-foiled-hattedness. As they say, "follow the money." Who is it that is profiting from the climate change argument? Simple answer: climate change scientists. The same climate change scientists who deleted the raw data.

* How much it has been altered is unknown. Perhaps it is only a little, perhaps it is a lot.

Programmers do it bit by bit.

Working...