“Of course the government will claim that it was their policies that have resulted in the Australian economy doing so well,” writes Sinclair Davidson.

The outright abuse of intellectual process this thinking represents only influences intellectual lightweights or intellectual deficient liberal supporters.

The accepted honest intellectual process to reveal the truth is to be engaged before and after thus enabling honest claims to the true meaning.

The dishonest will claim after an event that a cause and effect claim is not true simply because it’s convenient .

If one (the Rudd Govt) set up to take an action to effect the future to become A (a desirable positive outcome) and declares that expected outcome (A) will occur as a result of the action, with fingers crossed, and avoid outcome B, at a time when everyone (both those with one and those opposed to one) are clearly of a mind that the only future to be contemplated is the opposite to A, ie B a future that is an extremely negative and an undesirable outcome AND then the action indeed produces A it becomes an extremely devious and intellectually dishonest claim to make that “of course the (Rudd) Govt would claim they affected the future to become A.

Are there any educated, intellegently capable people left.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=will-electric-cars-wreck-the-grid&sc=WR_20090818

But Howes does not challenge a single point of fact in my original Crikey piece (www.crikey.com.au/2009/08/19/paul-howes-u-propaganda-is-radioactive). Instead he offers ridiculous ad hominen and straw man attacks.

Howes claims that I accused him of repeatedly lying. I did no such thing. I said he appears to know next to nothing about uranium mining and nuclear power and provided considerable evidence in support of that view - evidence which Howes does not challenge.

Howes says that, unlike me, he believes “working people and their representatives have a right to speak out on matters of public importance”. Needless to say, I never suggested otherwise.

Howes falsely claims that ‘Just about every scenario, forecast and projection of future world electricity demand foresees an increase in demand for nuclear power’. But my original Crikey piece provided a web-link to many reports which map out clean energy futures without recourse to nuclear power. (www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/issues/clean-energy)

Howes accuses me of having an ‘ultra leftist belief system’. This contrasts with Howes - he gave up social justice and environmental activism to become, in his words, a “committed democrat”. Which led him naturally to the right-wing of the NSW Labor/labour machine!

Jim Green
Friends of the Earth