Wasting the taxpayers money

[kalakoa]

quote:

---

What's next, the local state representatives and county council submit bills to bring about peace in Syria and driving the Russians out of the Ukraine?

---

They already waste time/money passing unenforceable bills about GMOs and marijuana, nothing new here, move along.

[TomK]

Opihikao,

quote:

---

Does this complaint hold weight? We shall see. JMO. Comments?

Complaint Filed Against Ruderman

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-H4BPTt...edit?pli=1

---

Although I agree with many of the claims made in the complaint, to me it seems somewhat amateurish. I don't know what standards are expected in such complaints, but the use of the terms "lying", "the big lie" and the use of multiple exclamation points comes across to me as a little unprofessional and a little too personal, and in that regard I'd be surprised if it was taken seriously, but I don't know how that particular system works.

[opihikao]

TomK, yes, Sir, the way it is written is perhaps a bit much, yet the substance of this complaint is clear. It seems no matter what elected officials do, it's akin to being disbarred if you're a lawyer. In our fine state, you almost have to kill someone to get reprimanded/disbarred/sanctioned/etc. (A bit dramatic, sorry, but trying to make a point.)

JMO.

[punaticbychoice]

@ opihikao 10:04:58
Or rock the boat, or be responsive to your constituents.
JMHO too.

[DaVinci]

Why do we have these politicians like Ruderman? Indeed, why? I'm fairly certain the reason has something to do with Russell garnering more votes than all the other candidates during the last election. That happy fact allows him to spend his time as he deems it best spent, on behalf of the people of Puna, and in doing so, he earns his meager pay. No, our tax dollars are not being wasted just because one senator pursues discourse that you don't happen to think is worthwhile. God, is he supposed to run his agenda by you first? Put you on speed dial so he can give a quick jingle whenever he gets an idea? Representative government is exactly that: representative. We send someone to the Senate that we, collectively, think represents our interests. We do that by voting. And if we, collectively, are divided, then that is (and ought to be) reflected in our representatives. Government is not supposed to be efficient. It is supposed to be an arena in which the will of the public can be established, as nearly and as fairly as possible, and if that will is disjointed and gridlocked, well then so be it. The greatest threat to Government at all levels in the 21st century is the influence of special interests. And aside from one truly ridiculous canard lofted at Russell suggesting that his anti-EGS stance has something to do with Big Oil possibly slipping checks into his waist coat on the sly (really?) I don't think Russell can be accused of catering to any special interest.

Also, can we make a rule that if you spell out an opinion you hold on a thread like this, once, that you should then just shut up and not repeat yourself nine hundred times? Russell is doing what he thinks is best. Disagree? Great. Say so... once. Hey, even if you have an overwhelming desire to toss out a non-sequitur about how fracking is such and so not to be confused with EGS (or whatever)... go crazy and lay it out for us... and then please shut up about it.

And if you guys all hate Russell so much, don't vote for him next time. But don't try to paint the Big Island with your one color brush. There are a lot of people here, and if some of them express a genuine fear of GMO or geothermal technology, please allow them the dignity of their convictions. As for me, although I have problems with corporate entities like Monsanto or PGV who use science to acquire profit and shun oversight and transparency, I do love science. Pure science. The kind that rushes happily toward endless testing and verification a hundred times over and ten ways to Sunday, world without end Amen. I love any human endeavor whose aim is, ultimately, to know more about the universe. But I don't think GMO efforts have been validated quite as thoroughly as the particle/wave duality of the photon or the warping of space-time. And I'm sure the good scientists working at Monsanto all have gold plated PhDs, but I'm not quite ready to put them in the same league as Albert Einstein.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by peteadams

Hawnjigs wrote: "PA, sorry, your question is irrelevant to my concerns about the biotech industry."

You're entitled to your concerns, whatever they may be. What we are discussing here is the implementation of laws that have not only no rational basis (as we understand rationality as having a scientific basis in the 21st century), but will stifle or prevent progress in agriculture and energy development on the Big Island.

steve1 wrote: "...it is always easy to find conflicting opinions on science expertise"

Sure. A recent survey of climate scientists found that about 5% were anthropogenic climate change deniers. You can find outliers in any field. But some scientists (and non-scientists) somewhere having conflicting opinions is very different from much larger consensus conclusions by academic scientists that are not only based on "big data" but also by well understood causative mechanisms that provide a rational basis for the consensus.

Preventing Big Island farmers from growing GMO crops, making criminals of them, and stifling or preventing geothermal development by sloppy lawmaking are not reasonable actions and have even larger consequences than just "wasting the taxpayers money."

Finally, nothing above prevents new scientific principles and new conclusions from emerging. Michaelson and Morley in 1890 spun scientists' heads by finding no evidence for the "aether" as the medium carrying light waves (as water is the medium for ocean waves). Einstein made scientists' heads spin by proposing that space and time are flexible, not fixed. Schroedinger made Einstein's head spin by proposing quantum mechanics. But all these radical (at the time) proposals have stood up to numerous empirical tests over many decades. GMO and geothermal are both relatively recent developments, but they too have been subjected to numerous validated tests within the much more sophisticated scientific environment of today. There is no rational reason to simply ban either of them.

---

[Guest]

sorry about the other post people.yet I want to address this BS bill I would like to share RJ. Hampton's take on this bill

Once upon a time there was two bill SB2940 and HB2359 they are dead now both are about banning Hydraulic fracturing. By my observation both were flawed. Now there is a bill that relates to Natural Resources. to be specific geothermal resources. and I noticed the Hydraulic fracturing bill is tagged on to SB2663 this is an anti- geothermal resources section that bans every hopeful solution to our small kind innovations for cooling and heating and small kind electrical needs. and another thing it will prohibit Hydraulic shearing which is a sheet metal term.

The part of the bill that states Hydraulic fracturing is also known as....
Hydraulic fracturing and Hydro-shearing are two related but very different techniques for creating a system of fractures in underground rock deposits.
Fracking or fracturing actually involves actual breaking of rocks. Hydro-shearing widens existing cracks in rock formations. that is a big difference.
Why ban a process that does not require gels or proppants. If it were to be used here it would not be producing fossil fuels but hot water heated by the hot rocks underground.

Hydro-fracturing has to do with water it is used to maintain water levels it is used to access clean drinking water. It is a well development process that involves injecting water under high pressure into a bedrock formation via the well. They ban this then what happens when a well is obstructed by silt or deposits will they be able to use hydro-fracturing equipment?

Hydro-fracking is a process invented by Halliburton and Schlumberger Messina Inc slick water hydraulic fracturing for natural gas extraction.

Hydro shearing works at lower pressure and without the fracking chemicals it uses non-toxic tracers shearing works by reducing friction on natural rock fractures.

I already covered Hydraulic shearing that has to do with cutting sheet metal!
Enhanced geothermal drilling no such animal the term is enhanced geothermal systems (EGS)
How can all of these words and processes be the same as Hydraulic fracturing
last but not least ask yourself is there a difference between pumping and drilling?
Reason why I ask is because Hydraulic fracturing is not a drilling operation it is a pumping operation to be specific get that chapter out of 2263. passing this bill with the language in this section will have the scientific and geological community laughing their collective asses off.
Respectfully
RJ Hampton


I look forward to Senator Ruderman's response Remember Senator two things.
1. Truth is a dangerous explosive!
2. Standing on a lie is like standing on an ice cube in the middle of the ocean sooner or later you will fall off. []

[kalakoa]

quote:

---

2. Standing on a lie is like standing on an ice cube in the middle of the ocean sooner or later you will fall off.

---

Unless that ice cube is made of enough money.

[Anxious Messiah]

So Sativa and RJ are now for geothermal and fracking?

Hmm, interesting change of position.