A few Bible quotes about deceivers.
I seem to remember Chris 249 supporting the lies of the last 3 years yet no word of remorse from him.
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
But test everything; hold fast what is good.
A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.
So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
A few Bible quotes about deceivers.
I seem to remember Chris 249 supporting the lies of the last 3 years yet no word of remorse from him.
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
But test everything; hold fast what is good.
A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.
So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.
So you must be religious then, as you fling your religion against someone else.
BUT you do realise, that in your quotes, you could actually be one of the false prophets, or a false witness? Just because you are reading and writing these quotes does not mean that you get to decide who is who.
Correct, but i am not the one who has pedaled the proven monstrous lies of the last 3 years.
Lies that have hurt hundreds of thousands of people in Australia.
My sister sent me a few (today's) photos of our family house in Croatia.
I spent the first 30 years of my life there not remembering sea flooding streets like this.
So it may not be a big problem for people living 5kms from the sea, but it is a problem for coastal communities.
On the other hand, one can beach start in front of the house 
1/3 of Cervantes' Thirsty Point parking was washed away last spring. We used to park and rig up for the Cervantes Windsurf Challenge there. We had to move to Hansen Bay plato, which is also eroding
Occasional flooding that recedes is not sea level rise.
The Swan River has not risen in the 43 years i have been in Perth and i am certain in the next 43 years it will not have risen a millimeter.
The ruling elite buy increasingly expensive property on the coast and are indifferent to the claims of sea level rise.
Most short of the Extinction Rebellion crowd know it is all lies.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Occasional flooding that recedes is not sea level rise.
The Swan River has not risen in the 43 years i have been in Perth and i am certain in the next 43 years it will not have risen a millimeter.
The ruling elite buy increasingly expensive property on the coast and are indifferent to the claims of sea level rise.
Most short of the Extinction Rebellion crowd know it is all lies.
How's that global cooling in Perth thing working out for you?
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
..
A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.
Oh dear, things are not going to end well for you when your imaginary sky god finds out about the stories you've been telling down here on Earth.
Society is splitting in three.
You have the Extinction Rebellion crowd who believe the earth is warming to the point of destruction causing the sea to rise 
About 80 per cent of Australians who live near the coast could be the target of rising sea levels, which were predicted in a Climate Council report in 2014.
Climate change: NSW, VIC and QLD suburbs that will be affected by rising sea levels | news.com.au - Australia's leading news site
Coastal towns under water lol.
You have increasing numbers of truthers or CT to yourself who have not fallen for the BS especially after the lies of the last 3 years.
Then you have the third group who smell a rat but are still influenced by their stories on the MSM.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Correct, but i am not the one who has pedaled the proven monstrous lies of the last 3 years.
Lies that have hurt hundreds of thousands of people in Australia.
This is how religious wars start. Someone makes up some crap about whoever they believe in, claim the other people are bad, and off it goes. For people that seem to believe in an all-seeing/all-knowing deity, they seem to take these things very personally and get angry on behalf of god.
Is it your job to get angry on behalf of god? Why? He should be seeing and controlling everything, so why is it your job to be a police officer and dish out judgements?
It's not. It's just a way to make yourself feel better by making judgements on others.
If you really believed in God, you would sit back and accept that he has made a choice.
Select to expand quoteImax1 said..
^^^^
spaghetti is not real , potato bake is the only answer.
Can Potato Bake fly?
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..Imax1 said..
^^^^
spaghetti is not real , potato bake is the only answer.
Can Potato Bake fly?
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Occasional flooding that recedes is not sea level rise.
The Swan River has not risen in the 43 years i have been in Perth and i am certain in the next 43 years it will not have risen a millimeter.
The ruling elite buy increasingly expensive property on the coast and are indifferent to the claims of sea level rise.
Most short of the Extinction Rebellion crowd know it is all lies.
"there is none so blind as those that do not wish to see"
My favourite pithy quote applys well here.
Im no christian, but accept that there is plenty of wisdom in holy books, the Torah,the koran, or the bible.
Not my beef, but you are showing a complete lack of understanding of sea level rise.
Firstly the sea is not static nor even, some place experience 6m tides some less than 1m. This empirical phenomenon shows how the fluid body moves in an uneven way. This is referred to as ocean dynamics. Sea level rises are not a static or constant thing rather extreme and occasional events. El Nino and La Nina affect sea levels, as does monsoon for instance. Southern Ireland (Cork to be exact) parts of France Portugal Spain are right now suffering very bad flooding due to storm surge and documented sea level rises. Farmers are loosing land to the sea, loosing both stock and tillage. Holland has had to beef up it's Dykes in recent times as a defence to sea rises. Likewise many parts of the Pacific are loosing low lying outer reef islands to a rising sea.
We are lucky in Australia we suffer very little coastal inundation. Collaroy in Sydney here has bourn the brunt of sea level rises locally and necessitated the building of a massive ugly sea wall that looks like WW2 fortifications. Hardly an 'indifference by the ruling elite' rather a necessary action to a very real and measurable change.
The second factor is the unevenness of the earths gravity field. The core of the earth being a fluid (mantle being to a large degree fluid iron) is constantly in motion, and changing density, therefore affecting its mass and by definition its gravitational force. The earths crust is actually very thin, if the earth was the size of an average apple the earths crust measured from its extremes would be only as thin a half the apple skin. This also affects how gravity changes depending on where on earth you are. The differences are very small but have a massive influence on tides, and water levels.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Occasional flooding that recedes is not sea level rise.
The Swan River has not risen in the 43 years i have been in Perth and i am certain in the next 43 years it will not have risen a millimeter.
The ruling elite buy increasingly expensive property on the coast and are indifferent to the claims of sea level rise.
Most short of the Extinction Rebellion crowd know it is all lies.
What's your evidence???
I'm involved in measuring a local beach and it is changing.
Interesting ABC article the other day :
www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-05/bengello-beach-longest-sand-monitoring-study/103057228
They measured Bengello throughout the intense La Nina storm period of 1974 to 1976, when the equivalent of 12 concrete trucks' worth of sand was removed from every metre strip of the beach.
Over the next six years, they noted that the beach regained the sand it had lost during the 70s.
Professor Thom said storms had made the biggest impact on the beach. Yet, in a paper released this year, after 50 years of the study, he said the main lesson from tracking Bengello was its natural resilience. "There's been really no change over all that time in terms of the amount of sand and the position of the beach," he said.
"With storms, the sand goes offshore but the sand comes back again.
"Bengello showed us how sand can recover. Nature is the best healer. He said it was important not to interfere with nature unnecessarily.
"We have remarkably resilient beaches," he said.
"But we can interfere with that resilience if we put structures in place that cause loss of that sand."
I assume "a concrete truck's worth" is 5 to 7 cubic metres.
Normal size agi-trucks in Aus hold 5 to 7m3 depending.
Then again the sand content of concrete is say 30%, so the "equivalent of 12 concrete trucks worth of sand" could be any where from 84m3/lin m of beach to 18 m3/lin m of beach.
Pretty sure Prof. Thom doesn't use the universal measure of conrete-truck-equivalent when assessing sand volumes. Only at the ABC.....
www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-21/surfers-bemoan-flattest-winter-swell-since-1988-nsw-south-coast/102992396
Now this is a crisis.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
Even if they could see them, wouldn't it be more interesting to see than just a static horizon?
No
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..
Occasional flooding that recedes is not sea level rise.
The Swan River has not risen in the 43 years i have been in Perth and i am certain in the next 43 years it will not have risen a millimeter.
The ruling elite buy increasingly expensive property on the coast and are indifferent to the claims of sea level rise.
Most short of the Extinction Rebellion crowd know it is all lies.
Man...the facts don't work for you.
Must be the Extinction Rebelion pumping up the sea water over the bank...
No one is going to build no wind farms at sea off Oz east coast.
It is a distraction while everyone gets robbed and made half poorer.
Be rich. Windsurf.
A man and a dog went missing from a helicopter that crashed right next to my camp at night.
A finless dolphin came up the other day as I was blasting, thought it might have been the bloke.
If I hit the submerged helicopter even the fang fin will be in trouble.
If aliens want to build offshore wind farms, and the people don't want it, then there is buckleys of changing that when they couldn't even resist 'the great toilet paper zombie stampede of 2020'
There is too much division for smooth sailing, yes? No? Remember?
There is some fear too.
How a windsurfer fears any past / future illusion when they spend so much time in the moment flying, I don't understand.
I have the Flying Spaghetti Monster teaching me to gybe. I will fear not - to lean forward next sail.
If the fan ever starts to blow again.
It was summer in spring, now it is autumn coming into summer.
The world is tripping right now - ride the gusts.
Select to expand quoteBrampk8 said..
I work in the offshorebwind industry, and have been doing so for more than 15 years overseas. I am not directly associated with the offshore wind farm in the illawara, nor the ones near Newcastle.
Happy to answer any questions or discuss concerns to the extend I am knowledgeable, as long as we keep it friendly.
Interesting to have your view on things. The thread here is, let us say, wide ranging.
My start position is that any new technology takes time to be sorted. EVs are a case in point. With offshore wind farms I don't know whether they still qualify as an infant technology or not. I seem to remember that some of the early ones are being retired? Is that more to do with the maritime environment or is it just what they do?
I see no point in arguing about climate change. The insurance underwriters have already factored it into their premiums. We could argue that they are just going with peoples beliefs. But more likely as world populations grow, our exposure as humans also grows. Although we do have more data than any time in history, so we should be able to dodge those bullets.
So a question then is once say wind turbines are set off shore, is that a situation we can retrieve at reasonable cost if later we come up with better solutions for our energy. We have to anyway because there are more of us and we run on electricity.
It the above seems like a ramble, it is because it is a ramble. There are no definite answers, just uncertainty to manage.
Going back to off shore wind turbines, that management includes I would think of whole of life costing. Including decommissioning. The offshore oil and gas industry would have a lot of experience on which we can draw?
Select to expand quoteMobZ said..
No one is going to build no wind farms at sea off Oz east coast.
It is a distraction while everyone gets robbed and made half poorer.
Be rich. Windsurf.
A man and a dog went missing from a helicopter that crashed right next to my camp at night.
A finless dolphin came up the other day as I was blasting, thought it might have been the bloke.
If I hit the submerged helicopter even the fang fin will be in trouble.
If aliens want to build offshore wind farms, and the people don't want it, then there is buckleys of changing that when they couldn't even resist 'the great toilet paper zombie stampede of 2020'
There is too much division for smooth sailing, yes? No? Remember?
There is some fear too.
How a windsurfer fears any past / future illusion when they spend so much time in the moment flying, I don't understand.
I have the Flying Spaghetti Monster teaching me to gybe. I will fear not - to lean forward next sail.
If the fan ever starts to blow again.
It was summer in spring, now it is autumn coming into summer.
The world is tripping right now - ride the gusts.
I want some of whatever you have had!!!!
Select to expand quoteRango said..Chris 249 said..Rango said..
www.drive.com.au/news/electric-car-cargo-ship-fire-safety-concerns/
Insurance companies are recognising the risk.Even if ignition source is unknown.
Maybe tow them on a barge or carry them on a tipping deck and dump them overboard.
Wrong. Let's count the ways;
1- The International Union of Maritime Insurance has carried out a study on EVs in ships. It states"The number of BEV fires is currently lower than that of ICEV fires (relative to the total number of vehicles)." (my emphasis). The report also dismissed other myths about EVs. As the famous insurance outfit Lloyds says "no fire onboard a ro-ro or PCTC has been proven to have been caused by a factory-new EV".
So there is is NO ro-ro or car carrier fires proven to be caused by new evs. NONE. Why would the insurers be lying about this? They would make more money by talking up the risk so they could raise premiums.
2 - The ship you linked to was NOT destroyed by fire as was claimed and as I asked about. It was brought into dock, unloaded and returned to the owners. The report of the investigation into the cause has NOT been released.
3- Claims about EVs being the cause ignore the fact that fossil fuel cars also cause similar incidents;
* In July 2023, two firefighters died when the ro-ro car carrier Grande Costa D'Avorio burned and sank with NO EVs on board.
* a diesel car is said to be the cause of the October 10 fire in a London carpark that burned 1500 cars and injured firemen.
* In June 2020 the car carrier Hoegh Xiamen burned and was lost after a PETROL car's battery caught fire;
* In June 2015 the ro-ro Courage burned and was destroyed after a fire caused by a PETROL car's ABS system.
* In 2017 the ro-ro Honour burned and was severely damaged after a fire caused by the starter solenoid of an INTERNAL COMBUSTION car.
* In May 2019 the ro-ro Grande Europa burned and sank after a fire blamed on an INTERNAL COMBUSTION car's battery.
When top names in insurance point out that there is NO evidence of a higher risk when EVs are being transported then why claim that they do? Even the link you used did NOT say that there was any proof that the fire had been caused by an EV. There still isn't.
You cannot logically rely on a second hand source that does NOT say that an EV caused the fire as proof that an EV caused the fire. You can, however, do proper research and look up the official 700 page report of the NTSB into the Hoegh Xiamen fire, for example, and see that it was caused by a petrol vehicle.
Did'nt say an EV caused the fire .You're wrong.
You were replying to a post about ships being destroyed by fires caused by EVs so it was reasonable to think that's what you were posting about. And most of the sources I referred to are primary sources, not some journo's claims.
Select to expand quotePcdefender said..Chris 249 said..Maddlad said..
All i know is that i was told in the 70s that we'd all be underwater from the polar icecaps melting by now, and yet my house thats 10 miles from the coast is still not a waterfront property, so i feel like I've been lied to. When am i getting my waterfront property you lieing bastards!!
Who told you that? There's a lot of BS about what was said.
Anyone who does not agree with Chris 249 and the MSM is a liar.
More lies. Many good and honest people disagree with me on many aspects of life, like religion, politics, and what board to sail. The fact that other people disagree with me is fine when they use reason and logic or even just emotion.
You are something else. You are a liar. The reason that I refer to the lie you peddled about 1500 scientists signing a paper is that it also shows how utterly scared and gullible you are. Anyone with an ounce of nous or the ability to do their own research could have just looked at the paper you referred to and seen that most of those signing it were not scientists as you claimed.
Anyone with an ounce of self-respect or integrity would have admitted that their claim that the paper was signed by 1500 scientists was wrong, and that would have been no big deal. We all make mistakes or get carried away. That's fine.
What makes you such a coward is that even when a person as gullible as you must have known that you lied, you lacked the simple honesty and courage to admit it. Instead you just double down and lie more and more. That is absolutely pathetic.
The other weird thing is that you are so naive and so gullible. Anyone with any shred of common sense would have looked at the paper you claimed had been signed by 1500 scientists and checked to see if it really was. But being a follower, a sheep and simply a gullible sucker you obviously didn't bother to check up. You just swallowed the line you were fed.
Oh, and none of what I say about use is as insulting as what you say about scientists and others so I have every reason to use such terms.
Select to expand quotesegler said..
Electric cars are not selling in the USA. The car manufacturers are having to re-think their strategy. This has been big in the news.
The reason is pretty clear. Unlike Europe, where you can cross 5 international borders in an afternoon, the USA (like Australia) has wide open distances with chargers few and far between. EVs don't work in this scenario. The CEO of Ford made a long drive cross-country in an EV and reported on the experience. He said it was not good.
My daughter bought the long-range version of the Tesla Model Y. She sold it 7 months later because it would not deliver the advertised range. Not even close. 250 miles is not 400 miles.
They are fine for city driving, but not cross-country. You see Teslas all over the streets of Seattle, but you rarely see one on the freeway between Seattle and Spokane. If you drive an EV in the California central valley, you are driving a diesel.
I hear from plenty of EV users in the Australian countryside who are finding their EVs DO actually work in typical drives like the one from Sydney to Brisbane. They change the way they do their trips but none of them complain about it. While they are a minority they are also more experienced than most of the naysayers. And of course most drivers don't do long distance drives very often.
The Ford CEO also said that his company was working to bring in more chargers. This is new tech so it's not going to be everywhere all at once. The same applied to ICE cars when they started out. Heck, when the first bicycles arrived they had to get government to pave the roads. A lot of new tech requires new infrastructure just like the internet we are now using.
Just as Australians use bigger cars than Europeans (on average) there can't really be any doubt that there's an enormous cultural effect in choosing cars. Some of the reasons Americans and Australians give for driving big cars are pretty laughable; on an international amateur boatbuilding forum the topic came up and many people from the USA said they had to drive big SUVs to carry their boatbuilding gear like sheets of ply - but of course the Euros carry the same sheets of ply, just like I do on a Subaru Forester. Many "reasons" are just excuses for culture and marketing.
Yes, it's well known that Tesla lied about advertised range. The fact that one EV maker lied in its advertising is not, of course, an indictment of EVs just as the fact that VW lied about the mileage of their IC cars is an indictment of IC cars.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
More lies. Many good and honest people disagree with me on many aspects of life, like religion, politics, and what board to sail. The fact that other people disagree with me is fine when they use reason and logic or even just emotion.
You are something else. You are a liar. The reason that I refer to the lie you peddled about 1500 scientists signing a paper is that it also shows how utterly scared and gullible you are. Anyone with an ounce of nous or the ability to do their own research could have just looked at the paper you referred to and seen that most of those signing it were not scientists as you claimed.
Anyone with an ounce of self-respect or integrity would have admitted that their claim that the paper was signed by 1500 scientists was wrong, and that would have been no big deal. We all make mistakes or get carried away. That's fine.
What makes you such a coward is that even when a person as gullible as you must have known that you lied, you lacked the simple honesty and courage to admit it. Instead you just double down and lie more and more. That is absolutely pathetic.
The other weird thing is that you are so naive and so gullible. Anyone with any shred of common sense would have looked at the paper you claimed had been signed by 1500 scientists and checked to see if it really was. But being a follower, a sheep and simply a gullible sucker you obviously didn't bother to check up. You just swallowed the line you were fed.
Oh, and none of what I say about use is as insulting as what you say about scientists and others so I have every reason to use such terms.
There is some wisdom here.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said
More lies. Many good and honest people disagree with me on many aspects of life, like religion, politics, and what board to sail. The fact that other people disagree with me is fine when they use reason and logic or even just emotion.
You are something else. You are a liar. The reason that I refer to the lie you peddled about 1500 scientists signing a paper is that it also shows how utterly scared and gullible you are. Anyone with an ounce of nous or the ability to do their own research could have just looked at the paper you referred to and seen that most of those signing it were not scientists as you claimed.
Anyone with an ounce of self-respect or integrity would have admitted that their claim that the paper was signed by 1500 scientists was wrong, and that would have been no big deal. We all make mistakes or get carried away. That's fine.
What makes you such a coward is that even when a person as gullible as you must have known that you lied, you lacked the simple honesty and courage to admit it. Instead you just double down and lie more and more. That is absolutely pathetic.
The other weird thing is that you are so naive and so gullible. Anyone with any shred of common sense would have looked at the paper you claimed had been signed by 1500 scientists and checked to see if it really was. But being a follower, a sheep and simply a gullible sucker you obviously didn't bother to check up. You just swallowed the line you were fed.
Oh, and none of what I say about use is as insulting as what you say about scientists and others so I have every reason to use such terms.
Disgusting level of abuse - next level.
From no doubt a staunch atheist.
So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.
