Almost all of the coal power stations in Australia that have been decommissioned in recent years were commissioned over 40 years ago and the few exceptions were generally low output. So the suggestion that ‘greenies forced them to close’ is questionable, as is the suggestion that problems now (due to high gas prices and various maintenance/disaster recovery issues) would necessarily have been averted ‘if only the old coal power stations were kept’, despite inefficiency and on-going maintenance requirements due to their age. But rather than relying on coal, Australia really should be taking advantage of nuclear power anyway.
Posts by Jeffro
-
23Aussies closed all the coal power plants...now we have blackouts no electricity!
by Witness 007 inso we have been "green" blowing up all our coal power plants now they are saying we are like north korea...expect regular power blackouts.
who is running this show?.
-
-
-
23
Aussies closed all the coal power plants...now we have blackouts no electricity!
by Witness 007 inso we have been "green" blowing up all our coal power plants now they are saying we are like north korea...expect regular power blackouts.
who is running this show?.
-
-
Jeffro
Rivergang:
I never claimed that they had all closed - talk about the "Straw Man" argument!.
The subject of this thread makes the claim. I responded to that claim. You said I was wrong, and you were wrong about that. And you still haven’t provided any evidence that any others were since decommissioned.
Now, if you’re talking about plants that aren’t generating for other reasons (such as gas power plants due to rising gas prices, which is actually at the core of the current issues), that would not be relevant to what I said.
-
23
Aussies closed all the coal power plants...now we have blackouts no electricity!
by Witness 007 inso we have been "green" blowing up all our coal power plants now they are saying we are like north korea...expect regular power blackouts.
who is running this show?.
-
-
Jeffro
So I’m sure you’ll be along shortly with a verifiable list showing they’ve all since closed 😂
The list includes scheduled closures. If all (or a significant number of) the others had actually also closed since, I’m pretty sure you would have mentioned those rather than just claiming ‘the old list is irrelevant’.
-
23
Aussies closed all the coal power plants...now we have blackouts no electricity!
by Witness 007 inso we have been "green" blowing up all our coal power plants now they are saying we are like north korea...expect regular power blackouts.
who is running this show?.
-
-
Jeffro
Rivergang:
That list of coal-fired Australian power stations was the case when published - but that was six years ago
That sounds like it’s meant to prove some kind of point. But all it shows is that there are more than 20 coal power plants still operating in Australia (taking into account the two that were since decommissioned according to the schedule that was in place during the tenure of the previous government), confirming that the alarmist topic heading is indeed false. It appears that one scheduled for decommissioning this year has sparked the ‘outrage’ that they’re ‘all’ being closed. 🤦♂️
Even then, nine coal-fired plants had already been de-commissioned in the six year period prior to that,
So… coal plants have actually closed at a significantly lower rate in the last 6 years than in the 6 years prior.
-
23
Aussies closed all the coal power plants...now we have blackouts no electricity!
by Witness 007 inso we have been "green" blowing up all our coal power plants now they are saying we are like north korea...expect regular power blackouts.
who is running this show?.
-
-
Jeffro
Nope.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Jeffro
Disillusioned JW:
I realize that someone before Porphyry might have said that f'irst person to introduce the idea that Daniel was not a work of the 6th century but was written much later in the time of the Seleucids in the 2nd century', but Porphyry is the earliest known person to mention that claim.
It may be the case that Porphyry is the earliest known extant source (or possibly just the most well known early source) for recognising the time Daniel was actually written, but that fact is less important than 'scholar' tries to make out. 'scholar' attempted the fallacious argument that Porphyry is invalidated because he was a 'critic of Christianity'. Outside of pandering to religious superstitions, texts that identify specific events that actually happened (such as references in Daniel that are widely acknowledged to refer to specific events in the Seleucid period) are routinely recognised as being written after the events. It is fallacious to pretend that 'maybe it really is prophecy' when there is actually no evidence to believe that such is even possible let alone likely.
But the Roman kingdom was in existence prior to 180 B.C.E. Not only that, but Rome defeated Antiochus III the Great (the Seleucid king) in the Roman–Seleucid War of 192 B.C.E. – 188 B.C.E. Furthermore, Antiochus III was the father of Antiochus IV Epiphanes!
I had responded to your earlier suggestion that "the Roman Empire and its dissolution seem to well fit the Daniel chapter 2". The fact that Rome existed prior to the writing of Daniel does not justify that claim.
I even think it is possible that the biblical prophets might have used a meditative practice which enhanced the power of their subconscious mind to detect patterns world events, and then present the conclusions to heir conscious mind - even in visions. Because I think such might be possible I have even tried do such myself.
Sometimes people imagine things, and sometimes things they imagine might even turn out to be correct to varying degrees. Some people are futurists as a profession. It isn't evidence of anything 'mystical', and whilst introspection might help people to focus their thoughts, it isn't some 'special subconscious awareness of the universe'.
Even if only two verses in Daniel specifically say they are about a future kingdom of God, that doesn't mean the story they are about isn't also about a proclaimed future kingdom of God.
Most of the parts of Daniel that mention God's kingdom (or sovereignty) at all express that God is sovereign without any need for it to be 'established' in the future. 'scholar' echoes the Watch Tower Society's claim that "Time and again, the Bible book of Daniel develops a central theme. It keeps pointing forward to the establishment of God’s Kingdom under the rulership of his Son, Jesus." (The Watchtower, 1 October 2014, page 11). That claim is expressly false, not only because of the obvious fact that Daniel never mentions Jesus, but also because Daniel does not 'keep pointing' to a future establishment of God's kingdom. The two verses of Daniel (2:44 and 7:14) that refer to a future kingdom are from paired sections of the chiastic structure of chapters 2 to 7, and it would be surprising if that idea was not expressed twice in that structure. But it is not the book's 'main theme'.
I tried to see if there were Jewish commentaries which say such, but Jewish commentaries are far less numerous in the USA than Christian commentaries are.
Jews consider Daniel to be part of the Writings, not the Prophets, which explains why they are less concerned about providing esoteric interpretations, especially involving 'our day'. The fact that there are relatively few Jewish analyses of Daniel is actually another clue that Jews closer to the time, just as now, did not consider its content 'prophetic'.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Jeffro
Disillusioned JW:
Page 747 of the book says something which scholar would likely appreciate. There the book says the following. "The principle idea of the book is the ultimate triumph of the kingdom of God
It isn’t particularly surprising that a (quite dated) Christian commentary provides a Christian interpretation that agrees with other Christian interpretations of Daniel (noting that not all Christian denominations ascribe the significance of Daniel to ‘our day’). Daniel was not written by or for Christians. Rather, Christians reinterpreted the text to fit their own beliefs. To the extent that Daniel is about ‘triumph of God’s kingdom’, it is still in relation to what the Jews expected to happen shortly after the rededication of the temple in 165 BCE, and nothing to do with ‘our day’. But it remains the case that only two verses of Daniel actually refer to a future kingdom of God.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Jeffro
(Last reply was in a hurry. More accurately, the legs and feet in Daniel chapter 2 refer to the Macedonian and Seleucid periods.)
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Jeffro
Disillusioned JW:
The only reservation I have about those words is that the Roman Empire and its dissolution seem to well fit the Daniel chapter 2 in regards to the description of the iron legs and of feet of the image.
People like to retrofit any number of things that ‘seem to well fit’ vague writings, including to the present, but it is an established fact that Daniel was definitely written prior to the Roman period, and there is no basis for deferring to magical thinking. The ‘iron legs’ definitely refer actually to the Seleucid period.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Jeffro
Disillusioned JW:
scholar is correct in saying that 'Porphyry was the first person to introduce the idea that Daniel was not a work of the 6th century but was written much later in the time of the Seleucids in the 2nd century".
Actually, he’s quite incorrect. Porphyry is a known early source for considering interpretations of Daniel by Christians, but not ‘the first person to introduce the idea’. Obviously the original author of the work knew when the work was first written, along with any number of other Jewish sources that may now be lost.
No sources prior to the mid-second century BCE reference Daniel (no, not even Ezekiel, who actually refers to the Ugaritic Danel among two other ancient non-Jews) and it was introduced later than the closure of the ‘Prophets’. Proponents of an earlier writing of Daniel must appeal to magical thinking to ‘explain’ the obvious reference to the Seleucid period.