Straya!

[JimC]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

There will be some solid opposition when and if the bulldozers start rolling, I imagine...

[Hermit]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

There will be some solid opposition when and if the bulldozers start rolling, I imagine...

Perhaps. Now, people, as the old saying goes, are less concerned with maintaining their wage than their rage.

[pErvinalia]

Faark..

FireShot Screen Capture #010 - 'Facebook' - www_facebook_com.jpg (59.43 KiB) Viewed 7615 times

[mistermack]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

Me exaggerate? Bollocks. Millions of my friends will tell you I NEVER exaggerate.

But without bothering to go back and check, I believe that felling those 400,000 sq km will leave about one percent.
So not all that much of an exaggeration.

[Brian Peacock]

I just read somewhere that the Tasmanian government have passed a law allowing virtually all of the remaining virgin forest to be logged.

So the place that once had probably the world's tallest trees, will now have stumps.

Mind you, they have form. They paid to have the Tasmanian Tiger exterminated.

I was in Hobart once.


It was shut.

[Hermit]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

without bothering to go back and check, I believe that felling those 400,000 sq km will leave about one percent.
So not all that much of an exaggeration.

Maybe you should have checked. The 400,000 hectares (not square kilometres, by the way. Tasmania's total size is only 68,000km²) were added to a 800,000 hectare area that was put into protected mode earlier, and the total of that is only a fraction of the 3.2 million hectares of native forests covering the island. So, yeah, exaggeration+.

[pErvinalia]

Tasmania's forest size is a conspiracy brought to you by the same people who are behind the AGW conspiracy.

[JimC]

I just read somewhere that the Tasmanian government have passed a law allowing virtually all of the remaining virgin forest to be logged.

So the place that once had probably the world's tallest trees, will now have stumps.

Mind you, they have form. They paid to have the Tasmanian Tiger exterminated.

I was in Hobart once.


It was shut.

Check out this, and the joke might fall a little flat: https://mona.net.au

[pErvinalia]

Yeah, Hobart has change massively in the last decade or so.

[mistermack]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

without bothering to go back and check, I believe that felling those 400,000 sq km will leave about one percent.
So not all that much of an exaggeration.

Maybe you should have checked. The 400,000 hectares (not square kilometres, by the way. Tasmania's total size is only 68,000km²) were added to a 800,000 hectare area that was put into protected mode earlier, and the total of that is only a fraction of the 3.2 million hectares of native forests covering the island. So, yeah, exaggeration+.

I do apologise. I shouldn't rely on idiots for my facts.

[Hermit]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

without bothering to go back and check, I believe that felling those 400,000 sq km will leave about one percent.
So not all that much of an exaggeration.

Maybe you should have checked. The 400,000 hectares (not square kilometres, by the way. Tasmania's total size is only 68,000km²) were added to a 800,000 hectare area that was put into protected mode earlier, and the total of that is only a fraction of the 3.2 million hectares of native forests covering the island. So, yeah, exaggeration+.

I do apologise. I shouldn't rely on idiots for my facts.

Who did you rely on? A Facebook contact?

[mistermack]

Who did you rely on? A Facebook contact?

Cold.

[Hermit]

Someone who is not familiar with metric units, then, and has no idea about Tasmania. To everyone else it would be obvious that 400,000 hectares equals 4000 rather than 400,000 sq km, and that 400,000 sq km would only fit into Tasmania if the island were 6 times larger than it is, whereas 4000 sq km fits in 17 times over. You wouldn't even need a calculator to notice you're using the wrong units.

[mistermack]

Someone who is not familiar with metric units, then, and has no idea about Tasmania. To everyone else it would be obvious that 400,000 hectares equals 4000 rather than 400,000 sq km, and that 400,000 sq km would only fit into Tasmania if the island were 6 times larger than it is, whereas 4000 sq km fits in 17 times over. You wouldn't even need a calculator to notice you're using the wrong units.

You make oi larf.

[pErvinalia]

To be clear, Tasmania isn't clearfelling all old growth forest. MM must have got that news from the same site he gets his climate change conspiracy news.

MM loves to exaggerate, but the state government did repeal the Tasmanian Forest Agreement recently, in which 4000 square kilometres of native forests were set aside from harvesting for six years.

without bothering to go back and check, I believe that felling those 400,000 sq km will leave about one percent.
So not all that much of an exaggeration.

Maybe you should have checked. The 400,000 hectares (not square kilometres, by the way. Tasmania's total size is only 68,000km²) were added to a 800,000 hectare area that was put into protected mode earlier, and the total of that is only a fraction of the 3.2 million hectares of native forests covering the island. So, yeah, exaggeration+.

I do apologise. I shouldn't rely on idiots for my facts.

You do realise that 400,000 square kilometres is 1000 times larger than 4000 square kilometres, right? Right? .... Right?