NZDF General discussion thread

John Newman said:
True, for the moment at least.

But let’s wait and see what happens here in Oz if Comrade Wong, Albo, etc, and the rest of the Left of the Left end up with the keys to the Kingdom.

Let’s see what happens over the next three years.
Click to expand...
I forgot this is a safe space to discuss australian politics....

@Gryphinator

Pithy one liners are unnecessary. Your current posting style needs to change noting the comments in relation to the RAN thread. Mods attempt to keep the discussion on track, not an easy task. You obvious ire toward the Mods does not help.

Alexsa
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For a perspective on our trade with China, the largest majority of our trade is in Milk Products. The largest global trader of Milk Products in the world is Fonterra, they have over 30% of the global market for exports. There is no other country that could easily replace NZ milk in the Chinese market. Other countries would need to increase their production and build the capability to sell in China, both of which are not easy or cheap. Companies that use milk products to make other products spend a lot of time optimising their manufacturing operations for the raw products that are used, to switch a supplier is a major hassle.
If another country did supply China we would just fill the gap that the other supplier created. Fonterra has a lot of flexibility. It is not as simple as going to the shop and buying a different brand of baked beans.
 
John Newman said:
True, for the moment at least.

But let’s wait and see what happens here in Oz if Comrade Wong, Albo, etc, and the rest of the Left of the Left end up with the keys to the Kingdom.

Let’s see what happens over the next three years.
Click to expand...
That's really low, John and untrue. You know we have strong bipartisan support on defence. Playing cheap politics. Very disappointed in you, thought you were better than that. You seem to have forgotten who led Australia through WWII.
 
There's already more than enough complaining about NZ labour on this thread. We don't need to start bagging aust politicians too. Moderator comments have already been made re this on the Australian threads.
 
This thread is for NZDF related topics not Aussie politics. Next poster who posts in any Kiwi thread about Aussie politics gets an instant ban.
 
Given the PRC history of fishing fleet led expansion, what happens when the Solomon Islands-based fishing fleet starts to aggressively expand into NZ and Australian controlled seas.
History has been fishing boats, then coast guard then PLAN
 
Posted the here as climate change was identified as an area of concern for the NZDF

www.rnz.co.nz

Sea levels rising twice as fast as thought in New Zealand

Explosive new data shows the sea level is rising twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, massively reducing the amount of time authorities have to respond.
www.rnz.co.nz www.rnz.co.nz

Explosive new data shows the sea level is rising twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, massively reducing the amount of time authorities have to respond.
Click to expand...

TLDR; Recent modeling by NZ scientists shows sea level rise could be twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, meaning many communities and key infrastructure face inundation within ten years, far sooner than previously expected
 
Boardgamer88 said:
Posted the here as climate change was identified as an area of concern for the NZDF

www.rnz.co.nz

Sea levels rising twice as fast as thought in New Zealand

Explosive new data shows the sea level is rising twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, massively reducing the amount of time authorities have to respond.
www.rnz.co.nz www.rnz.co.nz



TLDR; Recent modeling by NZ scientists shows sea level rise could be twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, meaning many communities and key infrastructure face inundation within ten years, far sooner than previously expected
Click to expand...
Very first glance says it looks like most of it is a significant refinement of estimates of isostatic rebound (land going up/down dependent on changes to ice or lake coverage) rather than big changes to sea level rise projections. Also, wondering which future climate model (or average across multiple CMIP6 series models) they're using... Not clear from the website. Could be the NZ Earth System Model (15-20km resolution round NZ) but that's got some issues with a fresh water imbalance driving long-term model drift in SSH (I'm using NZESM as lateral boundary forcing on some future climate downscaling stuff I'm doing at the moment... Was bloody annoying to blunder across it, but adequately resolved now).
 
Boardgamer88 said:
Posted the here as climate change was identified as an area of concern for the NZDF

www.rnz.co.nz

Sea levels rising twice as fast as thought in New Zealand

Explosive new data shows the sea level is rising twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, massively reducing the amount of time authorities have to respond.
www.rnz.co.nz www.rnz.co.nz



TLDR; Recent modeling by NZ scientists shows sea level rise could be twice as fast as previously thought in some parts of Aotearoa, meaning many communities and key infrastructure face inundation within ten years, far sooner than previously expected
Click to expand...
Really! I always check records obtained by measured data, not some climate catastophists assumptions
From the link, which shows recorded mean sea level events, it appears that not much has changed over the last century.
Yes, there is a very small increasing trend but nothing to cause the bs panic in your post.
www.haurakigulfweather.com

King Tide historical events | Hauraki Gulf Weather

www.haurakigulfweather.com www.haurakigulfweather.com
.
 
This forum places a lot of emphasis on subject specialists.
you know, blue tags = those with subject specialties expertise.
if an issue is perhaps counter-intuitive, well we pay respect to those with subject knowledge as guidanice.

except if you’re a climate scientist, apparently.
if a climate scientist had a blue tag, would ppl actually listen to them, even if it seemed counter-intuitive or inconvenient?
every single scientific institution in the nation accepts it. - so perhaps we should listen to actual subject specialists even if they aren’t here with a blue tag.

to link this to NZDF, the NZDF, ADF, UK MOD, US Dept of Defense all accept climate change as a profound reality challenge.
perhaps we should try an not second guess them?

@Wombat000

Excuse the long comment but the suggestion that something must be accepted because it comes from a particular 'expert' (including def pros I might add) is not supportable and is not how this forum works.

I understand your point and agree that professional experience, education and training is only relevant to the matters related to matters covered by that experience, education and training. The is true for the defence pros on this site and they are open to correction where the facts differ (no person is infallible)

However, your post seems to suggest that those defence pro's who commented on the the sea height issues had no right to do so. I agree there is very strong evidence that mankinds' impact on the environment is a very serious challenge. As an example CO2 absorption by the oceans in itself if a massive issues noting the potential impact on biomass and that science is very solid.

Ocean acidification – Australian Antarctic Program (antarctica.gov.au)

However, looking at the comments made I note they did not dispute the reality of the impact of mankind on the environment rather questioned the suggestion of sea level change based on observation. I suggest your tone was unnecessary in this respect.

I would observe that a past darling of climate change science in Australia (Tim Flannery) made dire predictions that never eventuated (and this did nothing for the cause of climate change)... The link below is an interesting read and touches on the need be carefully nuance messages noting the science is not without some uncertainty ...

Tim Flannery’s Latest Climate Triumph – Quadrant Online

So even some experts draw unsupportable conclusions noting there are scientists in many fields who oppose generally accepted principals. All science needs to be challenged to ensure the conclusions are supportable and this is a rigorous and robust approach.

Again I am not suggesting that there is no impact on the environment (clearly there is) but folk are allowed to comment on such situations (blue tag or not) where the observations are inconsistent with predictions or modelling.

alexsa
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wombat000 said:
This forum places a lot of emphasis on subject specialists.
you know, blue tags = those with subject specialties expertise.
if an issue is perhaps counter-intuitive, well we pay respect to those with subject knowledge as guidanice.

except if you’re a climate scientist, apparently.
if a climate scientist had a blue tag, would ppl actually listen to them, even if it seemed counter-intuitive or inconvenient?
every single scientific institution in the nation accepts it. - so perhaps we should listen to actual subject specialists even if they aren’t here with a blue tag.

to link this to NZDF, the NZDF, ADF, UK MOD, US Dept of Defense all accept climate change as a profound reality challenge.
perhaps we should try an not second guess them?
Click to expand...

At the risk of indulging in politics, once upon a time the 'blue tags' of the 19th century also supported the purchase of Army commissions, and it was a civilian, Lord Cardwell, who had an indirect link with the Treaty of Waitangi, who forced a change to that centuries old practice and forced though other valuable changes in the British army. Was he right or wrong to do so? Cardwell wasn't a soldier , never had been one, should he have butted out of the armies internal organisation, something he was 'not qualified' to comment on?

Subject specialists do get it wrong, they are but human and prone to the same faults as everyone else, so just because someone has letters before or after their name should never ever mean they are beyond question or reproach from those outside of their field or their profession.
 
Re climate change.
It's like a war. It may not happen but we should be ready... right?

Climate catastophists and geopolitical catastophists - same thing really
 
kiwi in exile said:
our mutual friend Ron Mark on TVNZ Q and A
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/shows/q-and-a/clips/ron-mark-nz-should-do-more-to-back-ukraine

enjoy
Click to expand...
My respect just grows for that man. A once in a generation Defence Minister, whom worked hard because he loved the job and gave a monkeys about NZDF personnel. It’s a shame he didn’t get another term to bed in the spending boosts amongst other things.

(Even marginally for Jack Tame who’s time on Q&A has done him good.)
 
spoz said:
Further to Assail’s point, albeit not an NZ example, my understanding is that high water springs at Ft Dennison are in almost exactly the same range they were a century ago.
Click to expand...
The sea level in an enclosed harbor is not indicative as to what is happening around Australia in general as the level is controlled by what can flow in and out at any one time. the sea level around Australia has been rising at around 2.1mm per year for the last 50 years.
https://coastadapt.com.au/climate-c...ralian-region#:~:text=Sea levels are rising g
 
Rob c said:
The sea level in an enclosed harbor is not indicative as to what is happening around Australia in general as the level is controlled by what can flow in and out at any one time. the sea level around Australia has been rising at around 2.1mm per year for the last 50 years.
https://coastadapt.com.au/climate-change-and-sea-level-rise-australian-region#:~:text=Sea levels are rising g
Click to expand...
I look at long term time lapse photos of receding glaciers …if the melt isn’t in the oceans where is it?
 
John Fedup said:
I look at long term time lapse photos of receding glaciers …if the melt isn’t in the oceans where is it?
Click to expand...

I would imagine that at least some of the meltwater collects locally, either by increasing the local groundwater/raising the water table, or else in localized increases in humidity. It is also likely that while the changes might only be slight, there is a real possibility that even minute variations could trigger significant impacts. The more frequent formation of large or extreme weather cells comes to mind. An area might not experience a greater # of overall storms, but it might be quite possible for those which do form to be larger and/or more damaging than they had been historically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top