But Eco-criminal-nick-smith needs a sacrificial cow…perhaps he should start walking on all fours?

(lol)

Enough of Smith for he is but a tawdry,shabby,candy floss side show.
But what is going on in the big tent, the circus,which is N.Z. politics.Is it a case of elephants in a china shop taking everyone for a ride or are they a coordinated trapeze act designed to beguile and elicit applause?

Which brings me to :
Lesson [2] Beware the hidden agenda.

Lackey Smith is telling us something if we will but look behind the facade.He does not know he is a lackey even though he is number 6.

When the constabulary come out to the ‘meetings’ you know that the clobbering machine has farted and grunted into action.

P.S. I wonder if those molasses drenched lasses got a thorough licking?

P.P.S. Should I sell my shares in B.P.?

Regards
Neil Henderson

Lesson (1) Beware of the articulate incompetent.

There were many Stars in the forum all trying to penetrate the murky way that blocked entry into the Smithsonian Institute ,but,and I am sure you will agree,the star of the road show had to be the way the Great Southern Man,tutored in the wild,oblivious to the entreaties of those who elected him,acted out the role of guard dog and rutting stag with superb skill.

P.S. I wonder if ‘they’ will apply the 90 day rule to M.P.’s

It was a insult to give a turn out of this size such a short hearing.

It is a puzzle that a cow in New Zealand can cause Anthropogenic Global Warming, but a cow in India does not. I applied for a research grant to sudy this question and was granted one.

First I examined the fact that NZ cows are Southern Hemisphere and Indian cows are Northern Hemisphere. Perhaps farts emerge clockwise instead of anti-clockwise? I soon dismissed this possibility because it is evident that cows in France also cause AGW and they are NH also.

Next to examine was the fact Indian cows are sacred, and maybe God allowed them to fart without causing AGW. To put this to the test, I contacted MAF and asked if I invited a Hindu priest to bless our cows, would they qualify for a dispensation from blame for AGW? I was given short shrift. Of course this does not mean the hypothesis is incorrect, just that it wouldn’t be accepted no matter how correct it was. Of course I can see that if our cows were blessed this way, that every country would be able to do it and governments would then be denied the right to tax cows.

Next line of enquiry was whether our cows are fenced in, and Indian cows have right of way everywhere. But it didn’t seem logical because they both eat grass and it wouldn’t make any difference where that grass came from, behind a fence or in the open. Wait a minute! This was an important point. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. So our grass must be greener than Indian grass? Sorry, this does not work because our cows always eat on this side of the fence where the grass is not greener.

My next line of enquiry was whether milking a cow to obtain food causes the flatulence from that cow to be of an AGW nature. At last, I am beginning to get a match of the theory to the facts. So in India, a cow’s milk is drunk by a calf as it is in NZ. But in NZ the cows are milked after the calf is weaned and maybe this extra milking causes the flatulence to contribute to AGW? The evidence on this theory was not clear cut, and at worst would mean our cows are only half AGW (the period after calf weaning and before winter drying off).

While it might look that I was coming to a dead end, there was mounting evidence from the research that both a NZ cow and an Indian cow actually contribute the same amount of farts, and therefore both warm the planet equally. The scientific difference is that the Indian cow contributes to global warming and the NZ cow does the same but this is associated with humans because humans drink the milk and milk products, and use the meat, offals and hide when the cow is replaced with a newer model. The Indian cow causes GW, while the NZ cow causes AGW.

The study then turned to whether the planet would be affected differently by having one less NZ cow or one less Indian cow? And there was little difference between the two options. Because this was so hard for the IPCC to choose one over the other, they checked their “Terms of Reference” and concluded their job was to prove the AGW theory. So they reached the conclusion that agriculture is bad because it serves the purpose of humans. My work did not reach this conclusion.

This study is in the process of peer review, and subject to its publication, I will be able to apply for a grant to do a follow up study. This relates to whether Indian cows also serve a human purpose by satisfying the need of humans to have sacred objects. If this was the case, then it would follow that Indian cows also contribute to AGW, which would please the Indian Government no end because the cows could be taxed. The people to pay would be all those who believed cows were sacred.

Alan Sutherland
July 2010

I found this one j.key@ministers.govt.nz and had the reply:
On behalf of the Prime Minister, Hon John Key, thank you for your email.
Please note that although email increases the speed of delivery, it may not be possible to provide you with the rapid response users of email may anticipate.
The fact that you have taken the time to write is appreciated. You can be assured that your views will be noted.
Yours sincerely

The Office of the Prime Minister