Guest 239

I'm really sorry hear what happened to your Grandma Skeeta, I really am, but what you mentioned is a wary conclusion compared to an unnecessary exaggeration. You mention that you distrust science and medicine because of what happened to your Grandma, but the equivalent comparison for Dreamworld would be distrusting all theme parks and rides forever no matter what because of what happened there. We all know that isn't case for industry, and it's the same for medicine. All medicine involves risk, but correlation is not causation. People survive cancer despite being told they're going to die, whilst others pass away from simple dental operations. We can calculate chance, but we can't calculate outcomes, and for the individual it's a roll of the dice. Just because something tragic happened to somebody close to you does not mean that it will happen to you ad nauseam into the future and the proven benefits of medicine and science should not be given disregard because of rare complications. When the Dreamworld incident occurred we didn't close down every theme park in country, just as we don't take every car off the road when there is a car accident. Risk and tragedy are unfortunately part of life, but thankfully they are rarer than the benefits. All of us here had a choice after the Dreamworld incident to never get on another theme park attraction again, but many of us decided against it because we figured the rare tragic event was not enough to stop us from enjoying the thrill and joy of theme parks. I won't try persuade you into anything, but this is your Dreamworld tragedy moment. Do you stay outside and observe from a distance with your perceived safety, or take the risk and re-enter the gates? I don't think it's that simple. Firstly you can only minimally influence the community if you're unelected so there is that to consider. Also making the vaccines compulsory would not be the right thing to do. People should still have a choice, just as you can't be forced to have a medical procedure without your consent, but people should be able to use the resources available to them to decide whether the procedure is right for them. Browsing credible sources shows that the risk with the vaccine is insanely low, but the medical officials and the government can't control those sources unfortunately. If somebody decides to explore non-credible sources, misinformation or agenda-based skepticism, then it is up to the person to decide whether that information is right for them and this gets muddled when merged with emotions and personal agenda.

One thing I find interesting about this whole debate is the overhyped value of the individual in what is fundamentally a community issue. I completely understand the stance of individuality and pondering the slippery slope of authoritarianism, but I know people personally who take the stance that they will never get vaccinated because they feel it devalues them as an individual. Modern society and culture is a communication through multiple avenues which determines what is best for the community. Almost all levels from government, health care works, business owners, workers, and consumers have decided through that communication that being vaccinated is the best option moving forward. It allows businesses to remain open, consumers the option to shop freely, workers the option to return to their office or place of work that may usually be unsafe, governments the option to relieve restrictions and control over its people, and our hospitals have the opportunity to relax their guard to the looming threat that is COVID. As a whole I value the concept of individualism, but its more nuanced than I feel most people understand when they decide to embrace it. Accepting the community stance does not devalue the individual, just as going against does not bolster it. Individualism is an expression of uniqueness, but there is nothing unique about the refusal of the community stance merely to embrace ones self. you're just taking the opposing community's stance, not your own individual one. The true individuals are the ones that did more than conform. They questioned the necessity of the vaccine, discovered it's benefits or problems and, perhaps despite personal fears, embraced the outcome that it's overall the best option for the community. You can be angry at the situation, you can despise the discourse, you can hate what the government has done during this time, but you can also come to the conclusion that the option presented is the best to get us back to a point where it's fair for the community. Questioning and curiosity are healthy and encouraged, but the outright denial or acceptance of any stance under the grounds of individualism is unhealthy.

Super exciting but my goodness that picture does my head in. The train is soaring off to the left, the track is floating overhead and the spinning carriage in floating on the scenery. It took me ages to figure out what I was looking at haha.

I'm not googling these. As I said earlier I was terrified of the vaccine and listened to as many podcast, research talks, videos, etc. from reputable sources that I could find to help me understand it. I even dabbled in some alternative views to see what the other side was saying but a vast, vast majority was just fundamentally wrong. I can safely say I'm not fearful of it anymore.

Not ragging on you mate, but just clearing up a couple things from above because there is a little bit that is wrong. The Australian Government's bet was actually on the AstraZeneca viral vector (protein based) vaccine first which uses a weakened virus containing the coronavirus spike protein. They didn't anticipate the potential blood clotting problem which is why it took so long to secure Pfizer/Moderna shipments. Talking to my friends in medicine there was just a ton of these vaccines going wasted because nobody was getting them. mRNA vaccines have been studied since 1970s. We got really lucky because scientists were already developing the vaccine for other coronaviruses at the time which allowed for the rapid development of the technology. They have been proven to be effective and safe in the long term with how they interact with the body. It's fundamentally impossible for them to have latent long term side effects as the mRNA messengers are disposed of quickly by the body through the liver - generally two weeks. It exploits a natural process of how our cells create proteins. The mRNA informs the muscle cell at the injection site to create the COVID spikes. It does this for a while until the adaptive immune system catches wind of the problem and then takes the cell to the lymph nodes to tear it apart. Once it does this it studies the components of the cell and discovers the COVID spikes where it creates a response attack for future use when exposed again. The vaccine uses primarily natural, body made resources which eventually die in the body are disposed of through liver and kidneys. The body does this constantly when creating proteins so it's not like it's doing something dangerous. History tells us that severe side effects are extremely rare but if something does happen it's usually within two months of the vaccine. It's been out for a lot longer than that and is in billions of people with minimal problems. Latent long-term problems over years just don't happen but was sparked as a fear from the 'vaccines cause autism' movement which was debunked after the scientist behind the movement was trying to scare the public on the MMR vaccine, patent their own vaccine and make millions off of it. Be careful with 'professional' sceptics because they often have an alternate agenda. 'Ps Get Degrees' is an expression used within university that you can just constantly pass and still get the same degree as everybody else which applies to scientists, doctors, etc. The real test of a doctors/scientists ability is their interaction with the professional world and if they're trying to garner skepticism and push their agenda without working in the field then I think it's a good show of how other scientists regard them. There is often a reason why they're not actively in the field. Regarding potential treatments and cures - Funding and supporting these takes time, just like the vaccines. I'm sure they're not sweeping them under the rug to fulfill their agenda, but they need to be researched and tested with the same scrutiny. There is a nice list here - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-drugs-treatments.html Also they are not preventative, they are treatments, which means that you have to get infected and be sick for these treatments to be useful. If treatment is necessary then the person will likely need to be hospitalized which puts pressure on our hospitals, nurses and doctors. It is better to prevent this in the first place with vaccines than to have thousands of people in hospitals receiving treatment. If our healthcare system is overwhelmed then that means that other preventable illnesses may not get the treatment they need. Prevention is FAR more effective than treatment. None of this is me trying to coerce or manipulate anybody, just clearing up facts. I completely and wholeheartedly sympathize with those who are scared, but I know people who try to come up with facts to support their fear which is not how facts work. Just being uneasy about the vaccine is fine, but coming to conclusion based off these emotions is dangerous for others.

Noise is an on-going battle between residents and attractions in Sydney. The Hills Tree Tops has been fighting a legal battle with residents because of noise since 2017. https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/hills-shire-times/adventure-with-less-noise/news-story/e288cd6fbc43ae24a86c9627826a2aaf People are entitled to peace, but honestly you can't expect that all the time in a city. When you shove millions of people into a small space you're going to get noise. The city also has a massive housing problem because of astronomical house prices which forces people into smaller, affordable housing so people are going to look for things to do outside of their homes. My general lack of sympathy towards the complaints comes from the fact that a lot of people making them are well-to-do. They have the luxury of space in their apartments/homes to enjoy and entertain which a vast majority of the city can't afford.

I want to be more human for a moment - I had a healthy dose of skepticism towards the vaccine when I got it back in August. I was one of the first people in my age bracket to get it and I was worried about what happens down the line? I felt we didn't have enough time to know and there was a lot of misinformation floating about that made me feel uncomfortable. But I went in and got the jab. Even afterwards I was scared, but in these situations I need to have an element of trust that the people in charge of these things know what they're doing. We place the similar trust into a lot of things. We trust that pilots can fly us overseas, that ride operators can safely get us from point A to point B, that the food we eat is not contaminated, that the cars we drive are built correctly, that the decisions made by our doctors are right for us, and that the buildings we work/live in are built soundly for us. I could have every research paper on the COVID vaccines under the sun and spend my life reading them, but I am not doctor. I am not a research scientist. Everything would be incomprehensible to me because it's not what I've dedicated my life to researching, so I place my trust in the people that have dedicated their lives into doing just that. It's scary because it's unknown. This is a healthy, human reaction. People get it on roller coasters. They cry, scream, faint and freak out because there is a part of them that is telling them they're in legitimate danger... but I'd imagine that almost every person here is passed this stage for theme park rides. We have researched them, we understand the physics and we know that rollercoasters and theme park attractions are fundamentally safe which no longer makes them scary. When our friends/family freak out we encourage them that the parks and rides are not only safe, but enjoyable! We can't all be experts in vaccines, but I implore everybody here to please listen to those experts. It's okay to be scared and afraid of this thing we may not understand, just as before you knew so much about theme park rides you were likely the same, but trust that the experts have it right here because no respectable scientist would dedicate their lives to producing something dangerous just as no respectable engineer would dedicate their career to building dangerous roller coasters.

There is a difference between being told not to get a certain vaccine under health advice, and not any vaccine regardless of health advice.

You agree to the terms of condition for the duration of your pass, not just when you purchased it. Don't open pandoras box because the same thing you're arguing for could be used against you. Imagine if the parks turned around and forced you to pay $25 more whenever they added a new attraction because you signed up to the pass when they had 20 attractions, but now they have 21 and it's unfair for them.

But they're not closing the parks due to COVID, they are being required to ensure that their patrons are vaccinated. The resources involved in extending passes solely for those who can't come because they aren't double-vaxxed just wouldn't be worth it. You'd need to allocate customer service agents, IT resources, and WebDev. You would also need to figure out a way to ensure that those coming into the park aren't those with extensions as that would directly impact revenue from pass renewals. There are also too many variables. What do you do if somebody extends their pass because they're not vaxxed but then they get vaxxed? It's too messy. Anything that they do would be in good faith, but it's not required.

You keep saying this but I'm sorry mate, it's a paper thin argument. You agree to the following when you purchase a pass.

Isn't making the choice to not get vaccinated bad faith towards the business though? Seems unfair for them to have to accommodate for people who have decided not to meet the entry requirements.

Spicy opinion incoming but I would imagine that there is no reason why they have to give refunds. People who have medical exemptions are given the same options as those who are vaccinated so that rules out discrimination. There is a freedom of choice, but Theme parks don't need to accommodate to your refunds if you move to a different state, so why should they provide a refund if you choose not to get vaccinated?

Village, Dreamworld and Luna Park are all doing a huge amount of hiring at the moment. I'd imagine it's got nothing to do with non-vax lay-offs, but that their accountants have given the greenlight to allocate more funds to resources now that there is more confidence in the tourism sector with international travel reopening, vaccine rates rising and national borders being relaxed.

I'm not saying add them at the exact same time because that would be silly. What I suggest is that if they want a cycle of sort than at least make sure that there are things in the works whilst their other properties are just kind of existing. When Movie World got it's additions of Doomsday and DC Rivals, Sea World remained largely untouched. It got minor additions, the sort that is expected in the industry to maintain the standard, but from 2015 the park wouldn't see anything to make up for the closures of Sea Viper and Vikings Revenge until 2020. We know that something is coming for Movie World to replace Arkham but with no solid announcements or plans I wouldn't be surprised if it takes a long time for this to come to fruition. I just think they need to squeeze the gap between announcements and additions a bit because it's all lagging a bit. I never mentioned that they weren't maintaining the parks so I'm confused as to where this came from. I know about the WWF Boat and Road Runner projects and I appreciate that they cost money but praising a business for maintenance is like getting a round of applause for taking your car in for a service. It's not a novelty. It's expected. As you mentioned a lot of what they are doing is long overdue and I'm just saying that they really need to squeeze that gap. As I said I'm more than happy for them to increase the price exponentially but I wont buy it year after year if they continue to rest on their laurels.

I'd be happy for them to dramatically increase their annual pass prices if they stopped treating their theme parks like a single entity. The 'one at a time' mentality behind how they improve their theme parks really leaves more to be desired especially now that the Gold Coast basically has a net-loss of theme park attractions because we can't build rides quick enough to counter the early days where most parks were adding new big additions annually. Now that they've got the private investment firm behind them they really need to make sure that all of their parks are constantly being improved otherwise it's going to 6-8 years before Sea World gets touched after New Atlantis.

Sorry folks - No announcement to get excited about but I thought it's been a while since we've had a good hypothetical! Let's say tomorrow Australia and Disney announce that they're opening up an Australian Pavilion at Epcot; what would be your blue sky scenario? A couple of things to start: The 'Weenie' for the land can remain like the original concept with the Opera House. It's an icon that many people recognize as distinctly Australian and would serve as a nice waterfront restaurant around World Showcase Lagoon. This way we can draw people to the Pavilion. In my eyes the land would be split in two by a river. - One side would be dedicated to the bush and Indigenous culture with the other one reflecting rural Australian towns. For the bush side you could have it as a combination between the nature trails at Animal Kingdom and Corroboree at Dreamworld. Wandering through 'the bush' you can learn about and see native wildlife, Indigenous culture and the natural disasters like bush fires, drought, etc. Disney could organize the animal care in collaboration with an organization like Australia Zoo to ensure that the native animals are adequately cared for but it also provides a cross-promotional opportunity. In terms of Indigenous representation as a young white dude I'm probably not the best person to touch on this but I'd imagine they'd assemble a 'council' of sorts to ensure that Indigenous culture as a whole is fairly represented. - I feel across the river it'd be great to have a rural Australian town. It is essential that it has a pub. This is my mood board for the area: The lands ride - A slow moving boat ride. The idea I have for this attraction is that you enter a cave at the back of the land. It's dark and quiet but in the distance through the cue you can hear sounds reflecting native Australian wildlife and the sounds of traditional Indigenous instruments. Then you board a boat which takes you through a dark cave. A voice over guides you towards the roof where it's illuminated showing cave paintings. The voice over continues telling the story of early Australia until it the cave paintings come alive and begin to move. You then exit the cave into a dark show building simulating night time. The river is surrounded by bush and through the trees you can see a Corroboree happening which is where the sounds from the cave where coming from. As you continue down the river you can see animatronics of Australia's diverse night wild life until you hear a crack of lightning and using projections and effects the forest begins to burst into flame showing the devasting effects of bushfires. The light ramps up until you are now outside and the river separating the two parts of the land is actually the track which the boat ride follows. You get a unique view of the land before you re-enter the cave and more things happen before departing back into the land. These are just my rough ideas to get the discussion going. What would you like to see in a land representing Australia overseas?

Just as god intended. Isn't this because of the new certification rules? From what I know the certification is only valid for 12 months and then the ride needs to be re-certified after that. I could be wrong though.

Sorry, I wasn't factoring in ride closures at this stage because I was more making the argument for people travelling interstate/intrastate to visit the parks over December/January. Plus how dare you call Shockwave decent. Shockwave is awful. For a fair comparison right now at Movie World Road Runner, Justice League, Scooby-Doo and Wild West falls are closed. Down at Sea World Jet Rescue is closed with Vortex tailing behind its reopening for closure. Also at Wet'n'Wild Surfrider is closed. However it's normal for a lot of parks to have rides down before the peak season because checking the schedule nearly everything is opened come mid-December.

Whilst I agree that increased ticket prices are the way to go to secure a more quality experience, this is some strange strategic timing especially considering the New Atlantis delay and the Steel Taipan opening right around the corner. For a family of four locals to visit the Village parks with annual passes it'll cost them $756 for entry with no discounts, and for non locals its $996. For a family of four to visit the Dreamworld + White Water World with annual passes it'll cost them $476 for entry with no discounts. I guess it really depends on what you're after, but at Dreamworld you can get animals, a water park, decent rides and Steel Taipan with an additional $250-500 to play with. A family could easily eat like a king, grab souvenirs or add some extra nights to their accommodation with that money. I know that some will argue that the value proposition is still in Village's hand, but it's going to be really hard to drag people away from the theme park with a brand new launched roller coaster which is cheaper, has animals, and a water park connected to it. I'm interested to see how this holiday season pans out!

https://www.instagram.com/stories/lunaparksydney/2694226524437815870/?utm_source=ig_story_item_share&utm_medium=copy_link Sledgehammer is now up and running! Looks like a really fun ride!

A lot of theme parks are going down this route and I hate it. My biggest gripe is that it seems to eliminate the human factor of navigation using landmarks to get around. Most people will plot a mental path in their mind and use prominent features on the map to determine whether they're going the right way but with this 3D blob and some of the other parks hyper-real isometric monstrosities it makes it really hard for the lay person to get around. Its why if you look at Disney park maps they're not accurate to scale, but they have large exaggerated features that you would naturally use as a point of reference when navigating the park and there is a lot of contrast between what is a walkway and what is not. This may not be a problem in smaller parks as eventually you'll get to where you need to go, but once you to scale up it becomes a nightmare especially with Australian park hours being very limited. I just feel a lot of parks have fixed something that ain't broke, and broken it in the process.

Beyond special events I agree that Luna Park almost never needs overflow lines. I've been there multiple times on a weekend and almost everything is a one or two cycle wait. Maybe the new rides will change that, but I think they can be cut some slack for not accommodating for something that has never been a necessity in the past.

Cheers for the update Richard! A lot of that is really good to hear and I'm excited that the big vertical garden is going ahead. I agree that it would be fantastic if it was real as I don't think a fake garden would age well in the GC sun but we will wait and see. Thanks for keeping us in the loop mate. Look forward to more updates in the future.