Jump to content

COP26


Dead1

Recommended Posts

diesel-brothers-night-train-f450-lift-banner

 

That's typically a $45k truck here in the states (website says base F-250 XLT model with 6.7L diesel is $30k) so maybe $60 or $65k tops fully loaded with tow package, off road package and all the extras, $88k in AUD. But you said just under $200k that's $145k US that's fucking insane. I didn't pay that much for my house!

I was looking at the used 2018 GMC 4-door Sierras on the dealer's lot not too long ago (hard to even find a pickup with a regular old 2 door cab anymore, everyone wants the back seat) nothing too fancy, don't need a little dick special, just a 1500 and it has to be black. And they were priced in the $28k - $30k range. That seems reasonable to me. I don't care how nice it is I'm not paying $50k+ for a vehicle, forget about $150k.

GMC Sierra Elevation Edition is a dark take on a tough truck

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything is insane prices here but it's not as simple as just doing the dollar conversation and saying that's what it costs. We have higher wages, we have supposedly free health care, we have many things that increase costs here. I paid just over $60K to build the house I'm in 22 years ago. It's nothing fancy, 4 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, kitchen, living area, double garage under the roofline. Today to replace it with something similar is north of $200K.

Of course some of it is price gouging where they can but analysts constantly do the sums and when you work on percentages of wages versus product price etc we do come out higher but its not the same difference as just doing a dollar conversion. 

A mate of mine imported a 69 Fastback from the States a few years ago and just to get the thing on the boat it cost him over $30K. Then he had to pay quarantine duties, then port fees. The car only cost him about $10K but the car sitting in his driveway cost him over $50K. But in this country now that he's fully restored it that car will go for more than $100K. If I was to import an $88K truck from the US and do everything myself it would cost me more than $200K to get it in my driveway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/9/2021 at 4:20 PM, Dead1 said:

 

 

I have never believed every human life is precious.  But this planet is wonderous and it seems horrible to destroy the amazing diversity of creatures just so one parasitic species can keep binging on it.

 

 

I've also got a young daughter and want her life to be as good as mine....though I hope she doesn't have children because I fear for their future.

You told me there is not much that science cannot explain. There is evolutionary psychology, they figure that reality has no use case for survival and procreation. Biology does not evolve the ability to perceive reality. Consciousness only exists so that humans can interact well enough to gather resources for survival and procreation. Self awareness, space and time literally only exist in the animal brain. So what is wondrous about this world? A very high percentage of animals are eaten alive. How long can you stay high on beautiful scenery? The body see's living things and imagines the destruction of these things, realizes that it too will also die, your emotions and concerns about this imaginary climate apocalypse is anxiety about your own death. 

Human's are 100% nature, human's utilize energy, expecting humans to stop utilizing energy is delusional. Fossil fuels should be utilized by humans, this is obviously the purpose of humans. COP26 is for politicians to live it up, this is the purpose of politicians.  

When I was a kid there was this old man that hung around outside some shops down the road, he would walk up to people and tell them that the world was ending. Now I am an adult the Government and the Media relentlessly report that the world is ending. Keep on ignoring 50 years of failed catastrophic climate change predictions if that is your thing, personally I don't see anything to worry about. Clearly science cannot predict earths climate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/14/2021 at 7:20 AM, KillaKukumba said:

Everything is insane prices here but it's not as simple as just doing the dollar conversation and saying that's what it costs. We have higher wages, we have supposedly free health care, we have many things that increase costs here. I paid just over $60K to build the house I'm in 22 years ago. It's nothing fancy, 4 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, kitchen, living area, double garage under the roofline. Today to replace it with something similar is north of $200K.

Damn where are you living when a 4 bedroom 2 bathroom place is only $200K?

I paid $479,000 for a similar size house in a "dormitory/feeder" suburb in a small decayed industrial city with no jobs, shortages of medical services and major socio-economic issues etc.  House is 7 years old and literally falling apart - I've had to replace carpet, hot water cylinder, oven, dishwasher.  All the fittings in bathroom and toilets are coming out.  3 out of 4 inside taps were broken,  All the tiles in are coming unstuck.  Garage door is on its last legs and we have had to have it patched.   

I brought that because I couldn't afford a similar size house in this city which were $600,000+.  My old 3 bedroom, 1 bathroom place sold for $410,000 despite gutters, fences and garage doors falling apart and bathroom well in need of a renovation.  

I was looking at a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom place in town and it was $550,000 with moisture seeping through everywhere and rotten floors.  My wife literally caught the real estate agent patching up a bit of mouldy wall with a tin of paint.  Another was had floors sag as you walked on it - you weren't allowed to look outside and I suspect the foundations were stuffed - also $550,000.

 

And these houses are cheap relative to rest of country - Aussie median house price is $994,579

Note average Aussie median income is about $47,792 ($55,829 for men, $40,547 for women).

 

--------

 

As for profitability of public transport or other environmental issues.  It's the quest for profitability  that is the issue.  

 

But again Australians are averse to taxation, including taxation of the rich because many Australians think they are going to be rich (aspirational voters).  I know poor people who voted for Liberals because they didn't want to lose access to franking credits even though they owned no shares or had any superannuation (franking credits only affects those .

Chevron and Shell just came out with statements that they will never or probably never for Shell pay any resources taxes on the tax payer subsidised giant Gorgon gas project.  The voting public does not see this or the fact gas is bad for environment as an issue.

 

And then the irony that this massive gas project is built on what is meant to be a protected environmental reserve!

Australian society is one big consumer free ride binge designed to maximise consumption at the expense of not just the environment but social equality and public services.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2021 at 12:45 PM, GoatmasterGeneral said:

@Deadovic...

Was doing some reading and I was a little surprised to find that 90% of Aussies live in cities vs 82% in the US and just 56% in China. At a casual glance it really doesn't seem like public transportation would be such a difficult problem to solve with 90% of people living in the cities. Obviously all the bumpkins in any country will not be adequately serviced by mass transit but them yokels have their tractors and dual cab utes so they'll be alright

 

 

 

Aussies hate public transport unless it's a plane to Bali or Thailand or somewhere else they can get pissed cheaply.

In Australia SUVs are replacing small hatchbacks and medium sedans as preferred mode of suburban transport.

 

The single quickest growing category of transport in Australia pre-COVID is single user cars ie people driving themselves, not even carpooling with wife or kids or other colleagues. 

https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-08/Australian Infrastructure Audit 2019 - 5. Transport.pdf

Most men go for dual cab utes regardless of need. Nearly all my neighbours have them even though they work retail or in other services.  My best mate has one and he works in a juvenile detention facility! 

 

(I own a Mazda 3 though my wife has joined the SUV club as moving out of town meant we needed 2 cars instead of 1).

 

Before my wife decided she wanted a bigger house I used to walk into work and at times catch the bus (which was usually near empty despite being the one for workers finishing at 5 pm).

I actually costed up the bus when I moved into my new place (some 15 km out away from my place of work).  It was $97.80 a week for one person which is unaffordable especially as there's me, my wife and my kid.  In fact school drop off means we'd still need to run a car.

 

There used to be more buses and up to 1978 even passenger rail.  But the government washed its hands and promoted private car ownership which lazy Tasmanians adopted with eagerness.  Tasmanians get agitated if they have to walk even a small part of the journey and prefer to park right outside the destination they are going to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

200K is replacement value of the house, as $40K was the original build price of the house, the land was not included in my statement because land varies massively depending on region.

You are right about the median house price though, I hadn't looked in to it for a while and I misquoted in another thread because of that. The medium is only a figure however and doesn't explain things like property size, or house size and that's why I stated house only above.

For instance the house in Melbourne that sold this weekend for $17M was only on about 4 acres, but it was a huge house in an affluent suburb. The last property we purchased was 140 acres (it's actually bigger than that because it's very hilly and acreage of property is measured on a flat plane) and it cost us $1.4M. The house on the property is a run down farm house with almost no liveability attributed to it, but as a property the house and land isn't worth $1.4M the dirt is, the house is worth nothing and will be bulldozed eventually.

 

Of course the quest for profitability is an issue. It has to be an issue. If you cannot make a profit running a business it is pointless. No business in the world wants to operate at zero profit, that's just stupid. How the hell is it fair that a bus company, for example, runs their services and only breaks even, while the owner of the business who has out laid a small fortune isn't also allowed to make his yearly wage? Everyone needs profit to survive. Sure there is obscene profits in some businesses but whether it's a worker killing hours at Macca's, or a businessman in his his high rise building pushing numbers around, or a business owner everyone should be entitled to make a profit.

We also have to accept that city life and country life are different. The idea that cars be used as car pooling, again only generally works in larger populated areas so the average figures quoted, by all sources, are unrealistic. Car pooling and public transport are good idea, where they are possible, but in less populated areas they just aren't practical. Buses can't run at a time to suit everyone, in many areas they can't even afford to run one bus an hour because two passengers, even in a 12 seater, does not pay the bills.

It's always easy to find someone to blame, it's harder to see all sides of the same story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KillaKukumba said:

Of course the quest for profitability is an issue. It has to be an issue. If you cannot make a profit running a business it is pointless. No business in the world wants to operate at zero profit, that's just stupid. How the hell is it fair that a bus company, for example, runs their services and only breaks even, while the owner of the business who has out laid a small fortune isn't also allowed to make his yearly wage? Everyone needs profit to survive. Sure there is obscene profits in some businesses but whether it's a worker killing hours at Macca's, or a businessman in his his high rise building pushing numbers around, or a business owner everyone should be entitled to make a profit.

We also have to accept that city life and country life are different. The idea that cars be used as car pooling, again only generally works in larger populated areas so the average figures quoted, by all sources, are unrealistic. Car pooling and public transport are good idea, where they are possible, but in less populated areas they just aren't practical. Buses can't run at a time to suit everyone, in many areas they can't even afford to run one bus an hour because two passengers, even in a 12 seater, does not pay the bills.

It's always easy to find someone to blame, it's harder to see all sides of the same story.

Y'see I am a near socialist.  I am happy with government running all essential utilities and services.  Leave private enterprise for nonessential things and then heavily regulate it.

Even arch capitalist Adam Smith wrote about the government controlling public goods such as education in Wealth of Nations.

 

My point is people in cities aren't car pooling or anything and people in cities are living unsustainable lives.  So are country [people - I knew a guy who travelled 80 km to work as an insurance broker every day because he wanted a hobby farm.  My best mate travels 60 km to his work because he wants to live in upmarket semi-urban areas and not near his work which is in a rural area.  In another job he used to fly 3 times a week to Melbourne.

My other best friend lived in Tasmania, would fly to Western Australia and then work on ships there!  Another two guys I know live in Hobart but work in Launceston 250 kms away.

 

And technological contraptions - everyone I know has multiple TVs, a mobile phone, a laptop and a tablet and sometimes also a work phone and a desktop PC and landline phone.   All made using fossil fuels and given Australia's general reliance on fossil fuels, powered by coal (at least in Tassie it's hydro).

Whole system is based on environmental unsustainability.  Australian way of life is an environmental atrocity.

 

 

So thanks to last minute intervention by India COP26 ended up diluting its goals.  Instead of keeping temperatures to 1.5% or even 2%, it's now on schedule to only rise by 2.4% (instead of 2.7% pre COP26) assuming countries adhere to their limited pledges.

 

COP26 President, Alok Sharma was near in tears in his last announcement.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2021/nov/14/i-am-deeply-sorry-alok-sharma-fights-back-tears-as-watered-down-cop26-deal-agreed-video

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While selling things like power, gas and water off to the highest bidder was never Australia's shining moment the government's themselves have proven why we can't trust them to run such services continuously. The first thing any new government does when they gain power in this country is set about changing things. They dump all the stuff they don't like from the previous government and they rename all the good stuff so it looks like they came up with it. This always leads to government cut backs, whether it's staffing or services. 12 months after cutting back either that section of government is under preforming and they need to spend millions on making it work.

We've also proven over that last 18 months that government led anything is this country is doomed given the fact that none of the governments can agree with each other and they only selectively agree with the federal government. We'd never sustain one government one country and we can't sustain what we have when the shit really hits the fan. I don't think it's a case of it shouldn't be done, I think it's a case of it can't be done, not in this climate with these leaders.

 

The whole world loves their technology contraptions, rely on their technology contraptions, all for different reasons. I think the argument is kind of moot considering that new tech creates so many more possibilities in this world. And sure, much of it is made with yesterdays technology, but the hundreds of thousands of solar panels, the wind farms and the battery technology to store the power produced are also mostly made from the same old tech.

But even this new green technology is not entirely friendly to the environment. Large batteries for houses have a 10-15 year life span, but the product can't be recycled safely. Solar panels have a 20 year life span before they become unsuitable for use, and recycling them is not and easy option. Japan was an early adapter of solar panels but in about 2015 they realised they were going to have to replace millions of panels throughout the country because they were coming to end of life. There was no safe way to recycle panels and many of them couldn't be reused. They have since created some great inroads into recycling parts of the panel that couldn't be before but it's taken half a decade and last time I looked was still not good for large scale panels.

I think it's great to go green, we should all aspire to it, but not without thinking about the future we are creating. The coal industry has been looking into ways of cleaner burning for multiple decades, maybe it wont ever happen, but they have had huge advances over the years. Instead of just jumping on all new technology today because it's better than what we have we should be looking at the long term effects or we risk doing exactly what we did before, using a product until it's too late.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KK, hence my opinion that nothing will change.  The planet will end up a dead and inhospitable desert  but humans will survive living underground sucking the life out of everything.

No one wants to compromise.  It's a myth.  

 

The only solution to the problem of us is to end us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KillaKukumba said:

I have more faith than that.

There are open minded people in this world and they will prolong life even for those that don't think it's possible.

 

I think COP26 proved that any faith in human "goodness" or even "rationality" or even "choosing long term survival over short term profits" is a delusion.

And little people can't do anything because they don't want to and in any case democracy long stopped being plugged into what people want let alone pseudo democracies like India or authoritarian places like China and Russia.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok remove faith and call it hope. Being negative and saying we have no choice or no future sucks. I'd much prefer to look at the future as anything possible. I don't take the side of the doomsayers and I don't take the side of the donothings so I'm certainly not going to sit back and just assume we're all fucked.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So humans look at the world and anthropomorphize it, then become afraid that it is going to die, desiring that it would live forever, but despair that it is on the verge of destruction, so they wish that humans would disappear so that the world that isn't alive, that exists only in the brains of humans, that human's only imagine exists, can survive. 

All this so that everything not human can carry on eating everything to keep everything going, which would lead to the evolution of a new intelligent animal that utilizes energy and allegedly causes a climate apocalypse. Never mind that natural climate change orders of magnitude greater than anything they are talking about happen all the time. If humans abandon energy now the ultimate catastrophe is still guaranteed to end all problems forever eventually. 

I guess there is also a desire for death in all of this to. Better to never have been. Non existence prevents all suffering. What human goodness, rationality and long term survival even look like? A philosophical transformation of the media, stop talking to everyone like they are babies, promote anti-natalism, slash health expenditure, provide only euthanasia for the sick and injured. Financial incentive for sterilization and assisted suicide for everyone who chooses non existence for the greater good. Ban babies, forced abortions, shoot children. Is this human goodness, rationality and long term survival? 

Pol Pot demonstrated that it is possible to walk populations away from technology and back into the stone age. What is with these lockdowns and vaccinations? Wouldn't the plague reduce demand for deadly energy? How is Sweden's carbon footprint? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JonoBlade said:

Says it all really. And then they applaud him for essentially telling them they failed. Same way they applaud Heavy Greta for yelling at them.

 

Yep and the mainstream media calls the thing a success.  

 

The Conversation was even praising that they merely mentioned coal.  Basically expectations are non existent so anything is viewed as a success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The media has been calling it a success?

All I've heard them talk about is the failures, the countries that failed to do anything and the words some countries changed to make things sound better. The media has been more doom and gloom about this meeting of the minds since before it started than the internet has. I haven't heard any outlet, with any sort of credibility, actually claim the thing was a success. There has been moments of positivity but not success.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, KillaKukumba said:

The media has been calling it a success?

All I've heard them talk about is the failures, the countries that failed to do anything and the words some countries changed to make things sound better. The media has been more doom and gloom about this meeting of the minds since before it started than the internet has. I haven't heard any outlet, with any sort of credibility, actually claim the thing was a success. There has been moments of positivity but not success.

 

Depends on the media.  Right wing media like Australian Financial Review, Australian but also Conversation have been trying to make it a success and some others have been trying to pick out the good things  (kind of like saying at least some of the Titanic passengers survived).

 

 

Here's how fucked Australian planning is - suburbs with no greenery, little or no public transport, no schools, no employment (hence workers have to drive longer to places of work).

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/16/ultimately-uninhabitable-western-sydneys-legacy-of-planning-failure

 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/15/a-broken-dream-the-walkable-melbourne

 

Note some of it is being driven by consumers - they want big giant houses and no yards.  

The houses themselves are designed to consume resources - inefficient heating/cooling due to placement, lack of vegetation in yards (more use of air conditioning),  issues with flooding yards due to lack of area to disperse water (so you use more resources to put in more complicated drainage than was required with older blocks).

 

I've spoken to a couple of town planners over last year.  One was an ex-town planner and ran a dog kennel.  They said they really had no influence on anything and were frustrated and stopped.

 

I spoke to another one a couple of weeks ago at a birthday party.  I said that would be an interesting job to design new suburbs etc,  She said they did no real town planning -  their only concern was for checking that applications complied with  state legislation.

Even sewerage isn't really taken into consideration - the water treatment plants are not upgraded despite whole new towns being built (like Legana in Launceston).

Town planning is now really just property developers doing as they please.

 

They did it better in the 1950 and 1960s.

Indeed here in Tasmania Hobart's traffic infrastructure was last expanded in 1960s when they built the Brooker Highway!  Launceston last had a major highway upgrade in early 1990s though that didn't even meet the needs back then including for an additional bridge across the Tamar, a bypass for heavy freight (planned in 1970s but never completed to this day)  and it didn't fix most of the issues regarding congestion.

 

So little wonder Australia struggles with environmental sustainability - the whole society and economy is predicated on a permanent property boom, reducing government spending on infrastructure and consumption of fossil fuels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One town does not a country make.

It's easy to cherry pick things and suggest that the whole country is that way because the newspaper article said it is. There are plenty of towns in every state making efforts towards sustainability. There are towns moving towards carbon reduction. There are towns looking towards zero emissions.

The way you paint the picture you are making out that all Australian's are responsible for killing this world, even the Murdoch press isn't that dramatic with their bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975

1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)

1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985

1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable

1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish

1970s: Killer Bees

1970: Ice Age By 2000

1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980

1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030

1972: New Ice Age By 2070

1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast

1974: Another Ice Age?

1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life

1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent

1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend

1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s

1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs

1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)

1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000

1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)

2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is

2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy

2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024

2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018

2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013

2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World

2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’

2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014

2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015

2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’

1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide

1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources

1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years

1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years

1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s

1980: Peak Oil In 2000

1996: Peak Oil in 2020

2002: Peak Oil in 2010

2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015

How does anyone even still care about apocalyptic reporting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 10 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 2 replies
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...