Advertisement

Kangaroo Protesters – Their opinions in their own words

I went out to the Lawson Naval Base this afternoon to have a chat with and video the protesters that have set up a vigil outside the main gate.I allowed the people I spoke with to express their opinions in their own words without the usual editing that occurs when a media grab is taken for either TV or Radio news.  You can make up your own opinion after watching the video HERE 

Please login to post your comments
204 Responses to
Kangaroo Protesters – Their opinions in their own words
el 12:08 pm
25 May 08
#121

el said :

What is the chances of you admitting my point is valid though?

Buckleys, sunshine. Happy for you bash out another 30 or 40 replies though. Interesting you class folks that disagree with you as ‘morons’. Pretty good way to lose an argument right there. See Thumper’s response for why your point isn’t valid.

I think it’s far more plausible (there’s that word again!) that ‘you’ are actually a nicely written Javascript that autoreplies with the similar/same block of text every few hours or upon seeing that the comment count has gone up.

tap 12:25 pm
25 May 08
#122

Danman: Well you did make me look smarter. If thats the best you’ve got then really I have it all over you don’t i?

Thumper:

Of course I gave my answers to them, doesn’t mean people can’t give different answers, I will scrutinise them. If they hold water then good for me, Ill have learned something. If not then god for me, I was right all this time.

1. So its plausible, thank you. You could tell me why you think its unlikely?
2. So its plausible, thank you. You could tell me why you think its unlikely?
3. Your answer didn’t make sense. If you were trying to say that it is plausible the government could have waited, of course it is. But i was asking why they shouldn’t have waited, given the plausibilty of 1 and 2.
4. You misunderstood the question. Why do you think this has gone on too long? as in why should it no go a bit longer?

(Saying the reason the government has taken too long, is because the government has taken too long is some pretty faulty logic)

Well thats a mighty grudging response, but probably the best im going to get. At least I know you know that im right, and deliberately misinterpreting the questions is all you’ve got.

Spideydog: Fine don’t bother, or do. At this point im very confident my point is correct. I doubt very much anyone will be able to give any actual reasons why its wrong.

tap 12:26 pm
25 May 08
#123

El: Pathetic, sunshine.

And yeah i saw thumpers response for why my point is valid.

el 12:27 pm
25 May 08
#124

el said :

I think it’s far more plausible (there’s that word again!) that ‘you’ are actually a nicely written Javascript that autoreplies with the similar/same block of text every few hours or upon seeing that the comment count has gone up.

I told you so!

tap 12:29 pm
25 May 08
#125

I think you are a moron because you should have either given a legitimate reason why im wrong, or realised that im not wrong. My opinion is correct, its reasons are good (or else surely, someone would have given legitamte reasons why its not). You are either a moron for not picking up on that, or a moron for picking up on it but not changing your opinion.

el 12:37 pm
25 May 08
#126

I disagree with your OPINION tap, nothing more. Having an opinion that differs from yours doesn’t make me a moron (and funnily enough, there seems to be quite a few people here that disagree with you).

You sound like an extremely unhinged individual.

tap 12:39 pm
25 May 08
#127

Yes it does if you have no reasons to disagree with it. What are your reasons for disagreeing? if you have a reasonless opinion, that does make you a moron (on the particular subject you hold an ignorant opinion on anyway).

el 12:45 pm
25 May 08
#128

I’ve answered your questions. You don’t like the answer? Fine. Suggest you take a step back before you go around calling people morons (is this something you do in real life? If so, I’d love to see it)

Spideydog 12:56 pm
25 May 08
#129

M8, every answer given to you is either wrong or “they” have misinterpreted the question. No answer given to you is “valid” unless it agree’s with yours. That is why I don’t bother. I’ve covered this ground with you before.

You are a self opinionated person that will twist comments to your favour from thier intially intended meaning.

No logical or intelligent “discussion” can be had with you, in my opinion.

el 12:58 pm
25 May 08
#130

1. How is it likely that rich animal libertarians such as Irwin etc will chip in?

2. How is it likely that the money will be raised?

3. Is it likely that the government will wait a little longer to see if the protestors can raise the money?

4. I’m right, you’re wrong. OMGWTFBBQthisreallyworks!!1!!1@2@@!2@exclamationmark!!!

tap 12:58 pm
25 May 08
#131

Which comment has your answers?

el 12:59 pm
25 May 08
#132

Spideydog: Link

tap 1:07 pm
25 May 08
#133

1. The Irwin clan are already on record saying they disagree with the 3.5m estimate, they are on record being against the culling, they are on record for donating money to animal causes in the past. However I never used the word likely, I said plausible.
2. Ill cut and paste again shall I? Again, I used the word plausible, rather than likely, because I am careful with hypotheticals: More on the plausability of raising the money: People from other countries view the kangaroo in a similar way to how we would view the elephant or moose, exotic and entirely rad. A campaign around the world of something along the lines of ‘Donate a dollar to save skippy from a bullet to the head’ could certainly have yielded results. I know I would donate to save gorillas from the same fate.
3. No its not. It is unlikely. What im saying is that they should, not will.
4. Erm. Not a question.

Spideydog: Fine don’t bother, or do. At this point im very confident my point is correct. I doubt very much anyone will be able to give any actual reasons why its wrong.

el 1:11 pm
25 May 08
#134

Tap: Thumper said these things were plausible, but unlikely, which I agree with.

Can you please tell us why you think these things are likely?

tap 1:13 pm
25 May 08
#135

El: Link

Spideydog 1:14 pm
25 May 08
#136

el said :

Spideydog: Link

Roger that.

Tap: Gorillas are endangered. Kangaroos are not. Every time you post you assist proving my point.

Spideydog 1:16 pm
25 May 08
#137

el said :

Tap: Thumper said these things were plausible, but unlikely, which I agree with.

Can you please tell us why you think these things are likely?

But they are apparently not “answers”

tap 1:17 pm
25 May 08
#138

No thats fine, you agree that its plausible, good enough. I have no reasons to think it is likely, just as I have no reasons to think it is unlikely.

So we agreed on the plausibility. Are we also agreed that the govenernment could have waited? And ill go out on a limb and ask if we are agreed the government should have waited? It would have been a decision that answered more peoples concerns than going ahead straight away with the culling?

tap 1:19 pm
25 May 08
#139

Spideydog: Read the answers for yourself, you’ll see what im talking about. Or not, if you’re not bothering.

tap 1:21 pm
25 May 08
#140

Spideydog: I wasn’t talking about them being endangered, or not endangered, just that they are exotic and entirely rad.

tap 1:23 pm
25 May 08
#141

Oh, my link didn’t work. It was to a site about ignorance. ah well.

Thumper 1:31 pm
25 May 08
#142

I’ll bite

1. So its plausible, thank you. You could tell me why you think its unlikely?

Because no-one came through with any money.

2. So its plausible, thank you. You could tell me why you think its unlikely?

See question one.

3. Your answer didn’t make sense. If you were trying to say that it is plausible the government could have waited, of course it is. But i was asking why they shouldn’t have waited, given the plausibilty of 1 and 2.

It makes perfect sense, unlike just about everything you have written.

4. You misunderstood the question. Why do you think this has gone on too long? as in why should it no go a bit longer?

No, I didn’t misunderstand the question. I said that I don’t know. And as such I suggested that you FOI and find out why. Care to put your money where your mouth is and FOI the government?

Be sure to let us know the results.

Nothing more.

Spideydog 1:33 pm
25 May 08
#143

tap said :

Spideydog: Read the answers for yourself, you’ll see what im talking about. Or not, if you’re not bothering.

Well done tap. In one sentance you have single handedly proven the very point I was making. Going on your quote above, I allegedly haven’t read the answers, because if I had of, the only logical correct opinion, is agreeance with yours?

Danman 1:43 pm
25 May 08
#144

Tap, Ill keep fishing as long as you keep biting… Why would a fisherman move to another place when the fishing is so good here – and lets face it, you never disappoint…

If God did not want us to kill the Kangaroos he would have made them look like trees or something… who cares, they are vermin anyway….

Anyone who think otherwise should really put their thoughts into action, otherwise you are just another armchair expert.

that’s all I have to say…and my last input into this thread….poseur

el 1:51 pm
25 May 08
#145

So we’ve agreed it’s unlikely then? Excellent. Glad you’ve seen some sense.

John Lennon FTW.

tap 2:09 pm
25 May 08
#146

Thumper: 1 and 2: This is my point. They didn’t have the chance to raise the money. There was only about a week inbetween the anouncement that the trial relocation plan was dumped (due to expense), and the culling started. The government should have waited. They didn’t even offer up the option that if the protestors could raise the money they would go with the trial relocation.

3. The original question: 3. Why shouldn’t the government have waited a little longer to see if the protestors could raise the money?

your answer: 3. see 1 [your answer to one was: Plausible but unlikely] and 2 [your answer to two was: Plausible but unlikely], also, it has gone on for way to long now. So do you mean its plausible but unlikely that the government shouldn’t have waited? Again I say your answer doesn’t make sense, I didn’t ask whether the government would wait, which i agree is plausible but unlikely. I was asking for a reason that they shouldn’t wait. ie the government shouldn’t have waited to see if the protestors could raise the money because x. (and please dont let the reason be because the kangaroos would have starved, because you and I have already covered that)

4. Ok fine you don’t why we couldn’t wait. A rational person would take the knowledge that there is no reason (that we know of) not to wait and make the logical conclusion that then: We could have waited.

Spideydog: I hoped you didn’t read it, meaning there was the possibility you are capable of basic comprehension.

Danman: Nothing you said is relevant to my point.

tap 2:11 pm
25 May 08
#147

El: Yes of course, I never argued that. What ive been saying (and reasoning) is that we should have.

el 2:17 pm
25 May 08
#148

Why?

tap 2:26 pm
25 May 08
#149

El: Lol. ok.

The government should have waited because then more people would have been pleased with the decision compared with the amount that were pleased by the culling going ahead straight away. Most people who were against the trial relocation going ahead, were of the opinion that it was too costly, there are even a fair few people of the opinion that if the relocation were cheaper it would have been preferable to culling. The protestors paying for the trial relocation (or the difference between what the culling cost and what the relocation would cost) would have satisfied both these groups. A win win situation really.

el 2:30 pm
25 May 08
#150

el said :

The government should have waited because then more people would have been pleased with the decision compared with the amount that were pleased by the culling going ahead straight away.

How so? Where is this documented? And since when do the Govt care about people being pleased with their decisions?

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement
The-RiotACT.com Newsletter Sign Up

Images of Canberra

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.