London Wanderer

Are you Barry from North Shields?

I definitely used to think climate activists were a bunch of hysterical nutters. The stark warnings were there from the scientific community 30 years ago but people with money in fossil fuels did a great job of covering it up as 'alarmist'. If only we had made some sort of change back then, we would be in a very different situation. I do admit, my prediction of 30 years was daft as you can't make an accurate prediction on this. It will be different for people based on wealth and where you live in the world. However, the situation is worse than many people understand it to be and the warnings that scientists are giving us are incredibly alarming. A lot of this is set to happen in our lifetimes and many are saying things could seriously start to go to shit in 20 years. There are many different variables with ecological collapse but I'll try and highlight some of most pressing. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/24/uk-30-40-years-away-eradication-soil-fertility-warns-michael-gove There is a high risk that we will be unable to grow food in some of the most fertile parts of this country, if we continue to farm in an unsustainable and monocrop way. https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/1/19/16908402/global-warming-2-degrees-climate-change- IPCC report explains if we hit 2 degrees of warming we risk losing all our pollinating insects- that could affect one third of all our crops worldwide. This could easily lead to resource wars. Our current trajectory is taking us to 3 degrees of warming, there is a lot of evidence to say the consequences of hitting 3 degrees will be devastating https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/597kpd/new-report-suggests-high-likelihood-of-human-civilisation-coming-to-an-end-in-2050 Australian scientific thinktank argues that climate change is a serious to threat that could lead to the collapse of civilisation by 2050. Their argument is heavily backed up by the warnings from the IPCC report. Important to note that all these scenarios are based on us carrying on with business as usual. There are the solutions out there to prevent the worst effects of climate change and keep us below 1.5 degrees. What we need to do now is to adopt them. The truth is alarming and I think that's a good thing. If it alienates you into not doing anything then so be it. A recent poll across 8 countries put the climate crisis as the number 1 issue over migration and terrorism. I would argue this as proof that the 'alarmist' warnings coming from the scientific community are engaging people, not alienating them.

That's one of the biggest challenges and why the education side is so important. It's going to take monumental effort. But when people really understand the consequences of not agreeing to the changes, they may reluctantly hop on board. People will always stay apathetic on some things but we don't need everybody to get shit done. I think you make a good point about parties risking facing backlash if they haven't got people on board. I just hope that there can be laws in place within the next five years that bind politicians and industry to our targets. Then all parties are on a level playing field. I'll have a look at the documentary when I get chance. The whole rewilding thing can definitely be one of the plus sides to improving folks health, well-being and communities.

I appreciate you reading it Bolty ad I'm glad we agree on the thrust. I only went to a meeting and on a climate strike march. I haven't made my mind up on the Extincion Rebellion 'works vs alienation' thing. Though I'm not going to deny, it clearly alienates a significant amount of people. Most of what I do on this is in schools and I think I'll be sticking to that. I come from this from an ecological point, not a political one, and I really hope that nomatter anyones political leanings on this thread that they pressure their local MPs to treat this with the seriousness it deserves. Because they are currently failing us all on this. You would think that about the courts after today mate I'll look up the sledgehammer wit.

This kind of campaign would have saved us 30 years ago but it won't be enough now. Of course we need mass education on this. I'm a primary teacher 3 days a week and on my days off I do workshops in schools on exactly the kind of change you've been talking about. I also encourage schools to take on projects around what they can do to make their school carbon neutral. Spreading the message of change is important, but if we only rely on people making conscious decisions not to buy certain things then we are screwed. I'm not dismissing what your saying, just stating that there is not the time. As I said before, no business should be putting anything before the consumer that isn't carbon neutral and is zero waste. Give all businesses a 10 year deadline to meet this with reduction targets within that period. Educate consumers in the meantime. We also need to engage the public and civil service in a massive project of rewilding and restoration. Sounds like tree hugger talk I know, but scientists have said reducing emissions to net zero will not be enough and trees are currently the most effective form of carbon capture technology we have. I highly reccommed this video mate- It is a year long NASA timelapse of C02 emissions (the red clouds). Look at what happens to those emissions in the Northern Hemispere during the summer months when the trees and plants are in full bloom. We need a trillion more to give us a chance! Get the army on it! The alternatives to not addressing these issues now are truly horrific and the UK will certainly not be immune.

I've been saying exactly this in my previous posts on this thread. Couldn't agree with you more Cheese. Which is why I support a peaceful climate justice movement to pressure governments into this change. I think it's probably too late, but I haven't given up hope just yet. Each 00.01 degrees of warming we prevent saves millions of lives. I have the utmost respect for what Greta has done and the people she has inspired. Of course it doesn't make a difference if she flies back considering what she has achieved, I was just curious. But no doubt some middle aged bloke will pipe up and criticise her. Some people don't like to be made to question their own life choices, so rather than address the issue rationally, they choose to get involved in childish playground bullying. You even see it on this thread. It's much easier to call someone a workshy wanker than it is to face up to the fact we won't have food on our plates in 30 years.

She did get very shouty and it was a bit cringy to watch. Though she has been clear that she wasn't sailing there because of her carbon footprint. It was more to make a point and raise the issue around flying. I woud say it worked. The aviation industry completely avoided any scrutiny or targetting in the Paris Agreement. How the fuck is she getting back?

Interesting new approach by the UN at the climate summit. https://www.ft.com/content/1902158a-d994-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17 Japan, Australia, US, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and South Africa all blocked from speaking. Although China and India have been allowed in. All seems a bit chaotic to me. But if we can get half of those countries on side within the next five years then the others will have nowhere left to hide. The tide is turning for the likes of Trump and Bolsanaro. Inaction on this is one thing, but the politicians who actively made things worse will join the monsters of history.

I actually didn't know this. The converstation had taken a clear turn to the school children on strike and my post was about the huge numbers protesting in Australia. So I genuinely thought you were refering to those police tactics being used on the young demonstrators. However, it's pretty clear now that you weren't. So I apologise for making that assumption. I didn't have you down as a bad person Bolty, or one who didn't care about the environment. I have plenty of family and friends with similar views to yourself on 'the left'. I'm certainly not one to fall out with people over those views or treat them any differently to my other friends. I do however draw the line at white supremacists, religious fanatics and militant vegans. My politics are pretty simple: 1. I'm fucking sick of how much division there is and the politicians on both sides who spread it for their own short term gains. 2. I'm bloody terrified about the impending collapse of our climate. Whilst I jumped to an assumption about your viewpoints, you've done exactly the same about me and the 'people' I associate with. I came on this thread for exactly that reason. In my first post I pointed out that people were just playing on stereotypes that didn't reflect the reality. Now I'll be the first to acknowledge that Manchester does breed a stranger group of protestors than other places in the UK. Whilst all these stereotypes were reflective of the climate justice movement 10/20 years ago, they really aren't now. I will be the first to accept there are 'wierdos' in the movement but now it's becoming mainstream you are seeing a much more diverse bunch of citizens. As I said in my first post, I went to a meeting because I had read the IPCC report, heard the UN and WHO warnings and read/ watched videos on a host of reliable climate science papers. All this information was pointing to a very real possibility of the parents of today possibly watching their own children die before they do. I was sick of a political system (left and right) that didn't acknowledge this and continued to contribute to the crisis. I was also really nervous going to the meeting and the kinds of people I would meet there. I thought they would just be too militant for me. Turns out my own stereotypes were wrong. As everyone introduced themselves, they all looked pretty fresh, they were all in employment and they were all scared for their future. I would criticise anybody who wanted to taser and baton charge climate protestors. And if you only wanted to do it to the wierdos, then who the hell decides which ones to taser and which ones not to? Do you give the coppers special goggles to distinguish the 'yogurt weaver' from the 'concerned mother'? This kind of militant policing doesn't have a history of working on peaceful protestors. On October 7th you are going to see a variety of people from grannies to nurses, to drealocked hippies to civil servants locking themselves to things in London to highlight the situation we are in and the need for action. For me, the debate on this thread should be around whether that kind of protest works, or whether it alienates people? Not about whether or not we should fucking taser them. Luckily, most people have stuck to the rational debate. If this kind of disruption angers you, then justice should be found in the courts, not violence.

Pretty much agree with everything in there. It's not that we shouldn't ask individuals to change. Or that we don't need major education. It's just that it won't save us. Maybe if we acknowledged the warnings 30 years ago but now there isn't time. We need the immediate implementation of the legislation (linked to everything you just said) as part of the climate emergency. We also need people to know the truth. Society won't collapse if people have to adapt to changes. It will if those changes aren't made by the people in power.

I would say it matters. I think if you want governments to do more, you have to ask why they aren't doing enough in the first place. I'm not coming from a 'left wing' viewpoint on this topic, as both sides are to blame, but the Conservatives get a lot of their funding from doners with vested interests in fossil fuels. I believe there is a direct link between them not taking enough action and the people who support them and lobby within the party. I haven't flown in three years and I rarely eat beef or milk... but that doesn't make my opinions any more valid than someone who ate beef for tea and flew last week. And it doesn't give me the right to judge anyone who does. I still consume all sorts of crap that causes damage, it's impossible not to. Blaming each other for exisiting in the world we live in seems pointless but I have to admit, there is nothing that pisses me off more than a vegan moaning about lack of choice on an aeroplane menu. Asking individuals to change won't save us. I applaud people who do make a change, no matter how small, but buying oat milk and a bamboo toothbrush will achieve fuck all. And often it's only the most priveledged who can afford to do it. We need legally binding legislation that forces all companies and corporations to do what they do in a sustainable way. By sustainable I mean carbon neutral and zero waste. Sounds bonkers but the solutions are genuninely out there. As I said before, I think the overall response on this thread is mainly positive. And like BoltonDiver said, it's about creating a discourse. Definitely one that doesn't alienate the public.

I did indeed say "Jack Shit". You're right, it was lazy and it doesn't reflect that the government is doing something. But I still believe that the amount of inaction they are taking on this matter is criminal and they are doing nowhere near enough. We've known about the true severity of the situation we are in for years now and we still subsidise fossil fuels more than green solutions and are behind on the Paris targets. Even Johnson's recent election campaign received significant funding from a climate change denier. Thanks for the source, that's the first I've seen of these 'people demands' but I wouldn't say if they were a a reflection of the environmental movement. It's not even clear who wrote them. I'm certainly no expert either, but I've been looking a lot into it since I was horrified by the IPCC report. There are certainly elements of the climate justice movement who think we need to stop nuclear and not invest in carbon capture technology. But you can't expect a global movement of millions to agree on everything. I think we should invest in these things but let's remember that carbon capture doesn't even exist yet. There are vitally important things we can be doing now, urgently advised by the scientific community, that our government is blindly ignoring. The best form of current carbon capture that works is planting trees, rewilding native pete bogs and heather. Yet are government has been carrying out the largest deforestation project since WW2 in building HS2. We are making things worse, not better, and until we change that the protests will only grow larger. It's not a consipracy to overthrow capitalism, rather a movement to prevent the collapse of civilization. As for corporate inteference. I think companies like Eon, BP and Shell should be excluded from climate conferences until they provide legally binding proof that will be moving away from fossil fuels in the next 10 years. These are the same companies who lobbied against climate change science 30 years ago when we had more time to turn things around. The companies and corporations offering sustainable business models and clean energy should be welcomed, as they are part of the solution. I'll leave a video that I think explains my point much better. It's aimed at the world as a whole but much of it applies to our own government's policies. I doubt many people will like either of the people in this video or the newspaper source. But whether you like or hate them, I think the points they have to make are of huge importance, particularly around reforestation. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2019/sep/19/greta-thunberg-and-george-monbiot-make-short-film-on-solutions-to-the-climate-crisis-video

Bolty, when you express an urge to baton charge, water canon and then taser ten year olds... expect some sort of response. I couldn't be arsed actually responding with a rational argument as to why that viewpoint is fucked, as it seemed a bit a lost on you. So I opted for the non PC humour instead. I hate to dissapoint you but I'm not really willing to be arrested and I prefer an egg buttie for breakfast.

Agreed. They need to be inclusive or they will fail and alienate people. Wouldn't it be great if it was a cause that didn't divide people? I don't usually share that belief either, but maybe I've felt strangely more hopeful since I've been engaging with it. Although the rational part of my head still thinks we're screwed. I do wonder though, if people really understand that shit is seriously about to hit the fan in their own lifetime, if they will be willing to make the changes? We also don't need the average joe to agree. We just need enough people to make the government bring in the legislation. The rest of the population will be too apathetic to act away from a keyboard. Choice A- Carry on like we are and face war, famine and civilization collapse within this century. Choice B- Citizens are made to adpat to significant lifestyle changes through the implementation of new legislation on businesses and corporations. I go for Choice B. And I think what people don't realise is choice B isn't all that bad. You still get to watch footy with a pint, you still get to sit down to family meal and you still get your holidays. The only things that change is what you consume and how you consume it.

I thought you were the kind of bloke who got off on seeing 10 year olds sprayed with a giant hose

For me there isn't an option B, and when people really understand the path we are heading down, they will support it. There is prosperity and growth in a Green New Deal. If we don't act or we sit on the fence on some things then civilization collapses. That's the choice we are faced with. The next step of the Paris Agreement has to be to collectively sanction those who don't meet their targets. And let's not forget we're still not on target to meet them.

Can you find me where in their demands /manifesto it says that? It's the complete oppposite of what I've read and heard. Also be aware, it's an autonomous movement, with plenty of nutters, but one persons view in it does not represent the movement. I know about the off shore wind farms and wind investment. My argument is that we are doing nowhere near enough, Not that we aren't doing anything.

I know! Amazing ey, I'm starting to get excited. Have a good one !

Here's why I think it's a shite argument bud, and a defeatist one. We are 10th in the world for CO2 emissions and for a country our size that's shocking. We also spend the most on fossil fuel subsidies than any other EU country, that tells me we matter. China and India don't emit more because they have big population, they emit more because they are providing resources for the 6 billion others on the planet. That said, they still need to do more and manage their populations, so I see your point. But if the rest of the globe refuse to support them, they will stop. The climate justice movement is a global one. We need to get our own house in order first but we also need to work with other countries or we are screwed. But we matter and we can make ourselves matter. This nation could do something amazing. All it takes is one country to do it right to trigger the change worldwide. Let's face it, every nation wants a solution, nobody wants us to become extinct. All it takes is one pioneer in green energy or carbon capturing technology to make that happen. Our government is doing jack shit to make that happen by giving our taxes to subside the wrong companies. So until they do, people will be out on the streets.

Three hundred thousand out on the streets in Sydney. Hundreds of thousands in Melbourne. Incredible stuff. I think the cycnical old Aussie video is brilliant. It shows us he's losing, because when they 've nothing left to argue they revert to stereotypes and name calling. Directed at kids! What a brave geeza. It doesn't take a genius to realise that those children on the streets are actually campaigning for us to limit and stop everything he took the piss out of them for in the video. But let him have his rant in the name of humour. We all use fossil fuels, in everything we do, it's a world built on fossil fuels. Climate justice protests are about the urgency of transitioning from that. Blaming them for existing in a fossil fuel society seems pretty lame to me. And there is another shite argument that's circulating. It's the "well China is worse than us" and "until Brazil and India change then everything we do is pointless". Really? If that's something you believe then maybe try having a walk around your house. Look at where your tech is made, look at where your clothes are made, look at where most of your food comes from. All those things use vast amounts of fossil fuels. If you think the country that imports it all is not just as responsible as the country that makes it, then you're living on cloud cuckoo land. The UK is clearly not "way ahead of the game". A green new deal would provide hundreds of thousands of jobs for people in this country to produce energy, food, technology and clothing locally. Which would in turn have a massive impact on reducing the emissions produced by countries like China. Apologies to Bolty personally in advance for writing another essay, I did try my best to limit this one.

Aw well that is shame now isn't it. Now there's a grand title... I have to say, Sadiq looks a bit to squeaky clean for that role. I look forward to welcoming you to the great unwashed when shit really hits the fan. Don't worry, I'll let you have a go on my solar shower, there's HGH in there. Here's something for you m'dear. I thought you might appreciate the gentle American voice narrating rather than my brutally boring essays. You're probably more of a visual learner.

Christ it took me a long time to get this. I'm having a slow Saturday. Boris loves his water canons. You might be in luck.

Course... I'm always trying to shorten my arguments, more than a paragraph is enough to put anyone off. Failed terribly on this thread. Human Growth Hormone?

Aye, me too.

Agreed. Brexit (shit I said it) is a needle in the haystack compared to this. Let's hope we can all get on with voting/campaigning for this kind of economy to materialise asap.