By: tickfen
30/01/2007
6:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
tickfen Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| seems to me your main objective is to call anyone who does not agree with fools etc,,so i won`t bother answering any more of you pathetic posts. go get sunburned . |
|
By: trevorsteamboat
30/01/2007
6:07 pm Yahoo! Profile:
trevorsteamboat Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| 76% of Channnel 9 phone pollers cant be wrong. Thats at least 33 people.... |
|
By: forcegolf
30/01/2007
6:10 pm Yahoo! Profile:
forcegolf Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| When DLS has been tried, tested and proven in most of the world (including most of Australia) one must question the wisdom of those against. Their collective reasons are nothing more than an ignorant witch hunt. If you are opposed, show some real reasons and support them with facts, not silly playground rhetoric! |
|
By: trevorsteamboat
30/01/2007
8:05 pm Yahoo! Profile:
trevorsteamboat Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
forcegolf,
Would you be happier if those that oppose it back it up with facts like yours. Facts like "(daylight savings)has been tried,tested and proven in most of the world (including most of Australia") Wow. Im not bothered with it either way I just think its interesting that those that are for daylight savings back up their argument with "but everyone else is doing it, why cant we?" Couldnt that be considered "playground rhetoric". Slighty hypocritical perhaps?
"An ignorant witch hunt" Who exactly are they witch hunting and what exactly makes them ignorant? |
|
By: andonamouse
30/01/2007
11:29 pm Yahoo! Profile:
andonamouse Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Just imagine. After saving enough daylight up you can do what most of our pollies do. Bend over and let all that saved daylight shine outa your posterior..Ah well just a thought. |
|
By: forcegolf
31/01/2007
1:56 am Yahoo! Profile:
forcegolf Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Quite simple, none of the reason given to get rid of DLS are valid, they have been debunked many times over. It is still hard for one to understand why anybody would rather have a bigger part of their day dark. Have lived most of my life in the States and Europe with DLS and here without it, there is no contest, with DLS I can play golf or go to the beach during the week. Yes I could go to the beach in the morning but golf is out of the question and I love the extra time to relax out doors with daylight after work, not before it. As I said before, I think it is just a bunch of idiots just being bloody minded, there is no validity to their arguements |
|
By: paulfaycd
31/01/2007
7:24 am Yahoo! Profile:
paulfaycd Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
to .. forcegolf
with all the people that have written into this and others site against dls why can you see their side of the story ,
;they dont want it;.
now for the people who keep telling parents they need to put their children to bed at the same time because their is no extra hours of dl, could you please explain where the benefit is if we do everything at the same time,.
if the parents put thier children to bed at 7.30 normal time and rise say at 6 am then where is the benefit to people .they havent gained anything except making it harder to get the kids to bed .
it is a falasy that dls does anyhting except to give the few people in the cities more LEISURE TIME.
i see more amd more people on this site going against dls because it is a totaly useless thing that disrupts peoples lives for no benefit.
all those people that already start early will at the begining and end of the dls time loose working time in the mornings because it is to dark to start work .
and to all those people who stat work at 9 please get out of bed at 5 am and see what i am talking about .
i havend had anyone give any sound reasons for dls that would benefit me or the wider community.
it is purely a lifstyle thing, and why should most of the people have to change their lives so others can have more leisure time |
|
By: paulfaycd
31/01/2007
7:29 am Yahoo! Profile:
paulfaycd Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
well forcegolf you obviously dont have children .
you say you get time to play golf in the afternoon. wow that is fantastic hey . so why should people have to change their lives so you can play golf,
you are the exact sort of people i am talking about , you think you have the right to expect every one else to change so you can have more time to play golf.
so now what are the good reasons for dls you keep telling us about , because the reasone against it are because it is disruptive to peples lives. |
|
By: trevorsteamboat
31/01/2007
10:15 am Yahoo! Profile:
trevorsteamboat Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Im interested to know how many of the people who support daylight savings and extended trading (which i do) dont support the idea of drinking recycled sewerage. After all they do it in other countries, and thats the daylight savings supporters biggest argument. |
|
By: jaykaye_09
31/01/2007
10:17 am Yahoo! Profile:
jaykaye_09 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I support DLS, extended trading and using recycled water (as for drinking it, I would, and have, but I have a rain-water tank). |
|
By: jaykaye_09
31/01/2007
10:22 am Yahoo! Profile:
jaykaye_09 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
To be honest, I agree with you trevor. The use of DLS overseas is a useless argument - each country has a completely different way of love amongst many other factors eg. weather, sunlight etc.
I want DLS because, simply, I like it. I have said this before, but I was in Northbridge at 8:30 a few weeks back (Sunday), and it was full like I haven't seen it for a long while - that is one example.
I also think that DLS would be better if extended trading was implemented, allowing those who need to shop after work to do so in the light of day (as opposed to a "late-night" environment). |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
11:10 am Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Queensland Institute of Medical Research (QIMR) says the danger time for sun exposure (re skin cancer) is 10am to 3 pm EST, pretty much school hours.
By having DLS we are effectively sending kids home, apparently to play outside according to the pro side of the argument, DURING THE DANGER PERIOD (2pm).
Gee that would be good parenting.
As it is now, people's kids can play outside from three until about six o'clock - outside the "danger time". Then they come inside, wash up, have dinner, bath, read, homework etc.
3 HOURS OF OUTSIDE PLAY
Under DLS RESPONSIBLE parents would keep them out of the sun until this danger time is over - 4 pm EDST. Still gotta have the kids inside by 6pm to wash up, have dinner, bath, read, homework, etc.
2 HOURS OF OUTSIDE PLAY
So they are effectively LOSING an hour of this quality time that we would apparently gain.
How does this improve/increase quality family time and is the time spent reading with children in the evenings not just as enjoyable as time outside in the afternoon. All depends on your definition of "quality family time".
But back to the initial point, it is simple maths people. Work it out yourselves. Check out the QIMR website if you need confirmation on the danger time. |
|
By: trevorsteamboat
31/01/2007
11:41 am Yahoo! Profile:
trevorsteamboat Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| So your telling me Im putting my son at risk of skin cancer if I let him play outside after school, because its actually an hour earlier then usual? If i put sunscreen on him will it make a difference? Maybe Ill let him sit inside on his a$$ and play video games? (and child obesity is a bigger problem with kids in this country at the moment then skin cancer, no cream tubby kids can smear on themselves) |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
11:50 am Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Sun damage does not just refer to skin cancer but general skin damage later in life. Also greatly effects your eyes.
But yes if you want to put it the way you did then you would be putting your son at risk. Simply follow the slip slop slap thing and you should be right.
BUT are you going to put sun screen on him yourself when he is 15 years old and running around after school with his mates at cricket training? Of course you're not.
Stop looking at your personal situation , as it is NOW, only and look at the big picture and what your son will be doing in these times after school in the years to come when you aren't there to wipe his nose and kiss his bruises for him.
And I did not, and would not, suggest you let him play video games unless he has a litercy problem. There are heaps of things you could do inside for one hour until it is considered safe (according to QIMR) for him to go outside. Try reading a book together, build stuff with lego - whatever.
Just because they should not be outside does not detract from the quality of time you can spend with your child. |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
11:55 am Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Anyway trevor, my point was that under DLS there IS an increased risk to school aged children, well children in general, of sun light related ailments - no matter what the pro-DLS lobby tell you.
And let's face it, it is a poor parent who let's their child play outside between 3 & 6 under normal time without sunscreen, shirt and hat but the actual potential for damaging exposure DOES increase with DLS. |
|
By: freeschapelle07
31/01/2007
12:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
freeschapelle07 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Skin damage is preventable through sunscreen,glasses and proper covered clothing, as is skin cancer. Child obesity is preventable from getting kids to run their tubby a$$es around the block. Using the argument of daylight savings is detrimental to a childs health is a little low. When my sons 15 he will have to make his own choices, and if I bring him up right im sure he will make the right ones.
I wasnt a fan of daylight savings when it started but seeing my son play outside at 7.30pm at night after dinner makes me think that the benefits outway the negatives (like faded curtains and grumpy cows) |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
12:17 pm Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
How old is your son that he isn't having/had a bath by 7.30 pm.
Also I said that if the right measures are taken when you CAN physically ensure your child has the shirt, hat and sunscreen (oh and sunglasses) on then you are doing the right thing.
And I can tell you now, I was brought up very well too and by the time I was old enough to go down to the park with mates, play at friends houses on the weekend etc I was not putting on sunscreen (or renewing sunscreen every three hours) and wearing a hat when my parents weren't there.
Agree obesity is a problem yes but being 30years old and already having had three cancers removed myself, I would rather my children share time between indoors and out doors.
One of the greatest tragedies in society is the ever dropping standards of numeracy and literacy in the youth of Australia. By using the "I am fighting obesity" you are helping advance the "I am dumbing down Australia" line. There is very good reason for letting your kids play outside but also good reason for them to be reading some books, building with lego or something else mentally stimulating at 7.30 at night. |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
12:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
So as noted, I am not saying DLS is detrimental to kids health, I am saying in creases their chance, preventable as it is, of skin damage/cancer and eye damage.
And as for right choices, your name sake schapelle's parents probably thought they were bringing her up right.
I was a 15 year old boy once, as were many here, and hung around with other 15 year old boys. let me tell you right now, before your delusions get away from you, 15 year old's RARELY make the right choices. |
|
By: freeschapelle07
31/01/2007
12:37 pm Yahoo! Profile:
freeschapelle07 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| 15 year olds dont always make the right choices, but I think saying they rarely make the right choices is a little harsh. And skin cancer prevention is taught in kindergarten. |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
12:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Explain then the ever increasing number of skin cancers in people under 30 years old.
It is taught in kindergarten - under supervision.
It is pushed at home - under supervision.
It is NOT pushed by friends and associates - no supervision. |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
12:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| And trust me, rarely is not being harsh at all. |
|
By: trevorsteamboat
31/01/2007
1:24 pm Yahoo! Profile:
trevorsteamboat Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"explain then the ever increasing number of skin cancers in people under 30 years old"
Id say
1) lack of care by parents
2) lack of care in teenagers old enough to know better
3) the sun, via the hole in the ozone lower
Would you agree? Or do we still blame daylight saving? |
|
By: dreamweaverwa
31/01/2007
2:00 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dreamweaverwa Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I have been following both the DLS being debated within this Message Board which in my view has not been addressed well. Just pushing Pros and Cons
OK you DLS supporters get past the dribble and persuade me. My question; WHY is WA being subjected to this DLS after the people said NO on three occasions?
On sale is an extra hour of leisure time which we realistically understand to mean start and finish hour early at work. Of course it is not to follow the drum beat of the East wrapped up in that lame excuse of delay in goods being arranged and received. Where has our technology gone, its OK at home but not work? Oh please!!!! Maybe we should geo-sync all Australia to Sydney 24 / 7!!! That would give you DLS junkies a major high :-)
Still I am trying to understand which day we are to enjoy this? Depending on your occupation in life (or lack off), tell me how does this improve quality of living in summer? After working my butt off all day, stuck in traffic to and from work (and during) I should be thankful for an extra hour of light while resting in my A/C home?
Most weekends I am up with the sparrows and the clock time during the day is totally irrelevant (with a break in between depending how uncomfortable the weather is). At this point, I would hazard a guess this situation is not much different to others in society. As you can see, I am one of those anti-DLS who voted against it then and again now. Why is my body clock being messed with for the sake of one hour?
OK you DLS supporters the challenge is - tell me why we need it? Bluntly speaking, PUT UP, or SHUT UP and return to the East where you belong!! |
|
By: they_cant_tell_me
31/01/2007
2:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
they_cant_tell_me Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Show me verbatim where I blamed DLS.
I asked freeschapelle to explain why, if skin cancer education starts so early now days, why the increasing incidents in young people. If you want to link that question to a proportioning of blame to DLS go ahead but it is totally non-contextual and extremely foolish. |
|
By: freeschapelle07
31/01/2007
2:10 pm Yahoo! Profile:
freeschapelle07 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"my point is that under DLS there IS an increased risk to school aged children,well children in general,of sunlight related ailments"
With this in mind, have my comments been out of context? |
|
