Extinction people

[London Wanderer]

9 hours ago, bolty58 said:

You must be confusing with some of the fucking weirdo's you must meet on those marches pal.

Still, such a comment does alert us to the kind of mind we are dealing with eh?

I look forward to the day when you chain yourself to a tree after a hearty mung bean and tofu breakfast you sick puppy.

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. 

Edited September 22, 2019 by London Wanderer

[London Wanderer]

5 hours ago, boltondiver said:

You said that the Govt were doing "Jack shit"

Rejection of technologies;

From the Climate Strike website

https://www.peoplesdemands.org/#read-the-demands-section

Now, I'm not an expert, but it seems to be saying to reject nuclear, "technofixes", biofuel, carbon capture, "smart agriculture" as well as anything market-led or corporate.

Then outlines some wishy-washy stuff about local, indigenous etc.

Which is, prbably, fine and authentic (albeit from "The People's Demands; not on my behalf, thanks)

So, we have millions of kids around the world generally supporting a "good thing", but which is clearly a cynical left wing ideology underneath.

 

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

 

Edited September 22, 2019 by London Wanderer

[Guest]

1 hour ago, London Wanderer said:

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

 

I think that reasonable people, hopefully like You and I, can have a discourse to help get to some truths, so I'll take a look at that soon.

Edited September 22, 2019 by boltondiver

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Does it matter if a climate change denier gives someone's campaign some money? (Whoever it was)

As long as a government does the right thing that's what matters.

We'd all like governments/corporations to do more, but it has to work both ways.

If you get the chance, ask your fellow members how many times they've used planes in the last year.

Not seeking to be judgemental, but there is plenty we can all do without being forced. Whether folk will do...

[London Wanderer]

2 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Does it matter if a climate change denier gives someone's campaign some money? (Whoever it was)

As long as a government does the right thing that's what matters.

We'd all like governments/corporations to do more, but it has to work both ways.

If you get the chance, ask your fellow members how many times they've used planes in the last year.

Not seeking to be judgemental, but there is plenty we can all do without being forced. Whether folk will do...

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. 

Edited September 22, 2019 by London Wanderer

[Tonge moor green jacket]

If you're not asking individuals to change, then the alternative needs to be very good. 

Wouldn't bother me if legislation toughens up significantly, but governments aren't going to do that if it means they lose power, or not gain it if in opposition.

Fundamentally, our food production isn't sustainable. Massive reduction in air freighted food would be needed for example, and a change from fossil fuel powered agriculture; fine by me but you need a complete rethink throughout society about attitudes towards food, choice and availability, wastage etc.

Major education required and it will take a long time to get everyone on board.

Similar with industry, things seem to be made with finite lifespan, often with no repairability, or cheaper to dispose of and buy new.

A lot to change. Folk can help create that by what they buy and by lobbying industry and politicians in a proper manner.

[kent_white]

I was reading yesterday that the current human population of the planet is 7.3 billion. By 2050 it's predicted to reach 9.7 billion. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I was reading yesterday that the current human population of the planet is 7.3 billion. By 2050 it's predicted to reach 9.7 billion. 

This always interests me

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2009-04-20/peak-people-interrelationship-between-population-growth-and-energy-resources/

 

[Zico]

I'll buy an electric car when the price comes down

Bit pricey at the moment

[Tonge moor green jacket]

16 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

I'll buy an electric car when the price comes down

Bit pricey at the moment

Major debate at the moment over just how recyclable batteries are, and the impact on the environment of their manufacturer.

[London Wanderer]

1 hour ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

If you're not asking individuals to change, then the alternative needs to be very good. 

Wouldn't bother me if legislation toughens up significantly, but governments aren't going to do that if it means they lose power, or not gain it if in opposition.

Fundamentally, our food production isn't sustainable. Massive reduction in air freighted food would be needed for example, and a change from fossil fuel powered agriculture; fine by me but you need a complete rethink throughout society about attitudes towards food, choice and availability, wastage etc.

Major education required and it will take a long time to get everyone on board.

Similar with industry, things seem to be made with finite lifespan, often with no repairability, or cheaper to dispose of and buy new.

A lot to change. Folk can help create that by what they buy and by lobbying industry and politicians in a proper manner.

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.

Edited September 22, 2019 by London Wanderer

[kent_white]

I also think it's a strange phenomenon that the people who argue for less immigration are often the same people who drag their heels on climate change.

If you think refugee/asylum seeker/economic migrant numbers are a problem now - you're in for one hell of a shock in about 20 years.

We're in the relative calm before the storm now. 

[kent_white]

35 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

This always interests me

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2009-04-20/peak-people-interrelationship-between-population-growth-and-energy-resources/

 

Just wait until we build a dyson sphere!

Yeah - I think it's feasible that energy surplus leads to population increases. I thought we were about 50-100 years off depleting fossil fuels?

Let's just hope we can master nuclear fusion before then.

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Just wait until we build a dyson sphere!

Yeah - I think it's feasible that energy surplus leads to population increases. I thought we were about 50-100 years off depleting fossil fuels?

Let's just hope we can master nuclear fusion before then.

Or find one or more other planets to infest!

[kent_white]

2 hours ago, boltondiver said:

Or find one or more other planets to infest!

I think we'll be long gone before we ever develop the technology to get us to another inhabitable planet. 

If indeed it's even possible.

Makes sense to look after this one a bit better.

[Zico]

58 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I think we'll be long gone before we ever develop the technology to get us to another inhabitable planet. 

If indeed it's even possible.

I doubt it, but that's for another thread

[Tonge moor green jacket]

3 hours ago, kent_white said:

I also think it's a strange phenomenon that the people who argue for less immigration are often the same people who drag their heels on climate change.

If you think refugee/asylum seeker/economic migrant numbers are a problem now - you're in for one hell of a shock in about 20 years.

We're in the relative calm before the storm now. 

Is that definitely true, or just fits a perceived profile.

For me, reducing migration is part of environmental protection.

Anyway; I've just watched "decoding the weather machine" part 2.

Missed the first part, but I suggest everyone finds it and watches it.

Bloody fascinating, illustrates the realities, but isn't doom and gloom- in fact a lot to be positive about.

It's stuff like this we need to be teaching in schools, and getting industry behind.

Cracking stuff. It was on PBS America.

[kent_white]

4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Is that definitely true, or just fits a perceived profile.

For me, reducing migration is part of environmental protection.

Anyway; I've just watched "decoding the weather machine" part 2.

Missed the first part, but I suggest everyone finds it and watches it.

Bloody fascinating, illustrates the realities, but isn't doom and gloom- in fact a lot to be positive about.

It's stuff like this we need to be teaching in schools, and getting industry behind.

Cracking stuff. It was on PBS America.

I'll have to watch it. Some positive news would be welcome. I can't see much of it from where I'm looking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49773869

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, kent_white said:

I think we'll be long gone before we ever develop the technology to get us to another inhabitable planet. 

If indeed it's even possible.

Makes sense to look after this one a bit better.

Totally agree

[gonzo]

48 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

I doubt it, but that's for another thread

I reckon there’s a whole waterworld of life under the ice on Jupiter’s moon titan. 

We could send immigrants there to live in submarines. 

[frank_spencer]

1 hour ago, gonzo said:

I reckon there’s a whole waterworld of life under the ice on Jupiter’s moon titan. 

We could send immigrants there to live in submarines. 

But then we'd have to deal with Thanos

[bolty58]

16 hours ago, London Wanderer said:

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. 

Some normality then. That is a comfort.

Now then, just to slightly burst your bubble when it comes to me - myself and the missus have been on board with recycling, water saving, solar power etc. for over two decades. Eat meat but generally do everything possible to nurture, embrace and sustain wildlife. We have already committed when retirement comes around to assist a local dog pound and a local donkey sanctuary in our two places of post retirement abode.The missus takes it too far in my view when she 'rescues' pancake roadkill rabbits and gives them a decent burial but each to their own I suppose. Her heart is most definitely in the right place.

The 'ten year olds' bollocks was raised by you and never mentioned by me. Not like a yoghourt knitter like you to exaggerate and sensationalise but I suppose with the current company you are apparently keeping............

My problem is with (mainly left wing) rent-a-mob protestor wankers who latch on to anything where they can look stupid with their ROYGBIV hair, shout the loudest and generally make an utter cunt of themselves in disrupting the normal daily routines of good citizens lawfully going about their everyday business.  They then claim the moral high ground in a transparent attempt to attach their 'movement' to the cause in the hope of garnering votes simply as a way of getting the chance to apply by stealth their outmoded doctrine on the rest of us by duping gullible types in to giving their side of politics their votes. The Greens have always been communists masquerading as environmentalists and the red rags have been taking note.

So, the one's I want to see baton charged, water cannoned and tasered are these despicable fooktards - not snot nosed minors who should be at fucking school and on detention for not being there.

You already knew this.

 

Edited September 23, 2019 by bolty58

[London Wanderer]

10 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Some normality then. That is a comfort.

Now then, just to slightly burst your bubble when it comes to me - myself and the missus have been on board with recycling, water saving, solar power etc. for over two decades. Eat meat but generally do everything possible to nurture, embrace and sustain wildlife. We have already committed when retirement comes around to assist a local dog pound and a local donkey sanctuary in our two places of post retirement abode.The missus takes it too far in my view when she 'rescues' pancake roadkill rabbits and gives them a decent burial but each to their own I suppose. Her heart is most definitely in the right place.

The 'ten year olds' bollocks was raised by you and never mentioned by me. Not like a yoghourt knitter like you to exaggerate and sensationalise but I suppose with the current company you are apparently keeping............

My problem is with (mainly left wing) rent-a-mob protestor wankers who latch on to anything where they can look stupid with their ROYGBIV hair, shout the loudest and generally make an utter cunt of themselves in disrupting the normal daily routines of good citizens lawfully going about their everyday business.  They then claim the moral high ground in a transparent attempt to attach their 'movement' to the cause in the hope of garnering votes simply as a way of getting the chance to apply by stealth their outmoded doctrine on the rest of us by duping gullible types in to giving their side of politics their votes. The Greens have always been communists masquerading as environmentalists and the red rags have been taking note.

So, the one's I want to see baton charged, water cannoned and tasered are these despicable fooktards - not snot nosed minors who should be at fucking school and on detention for not being there.

You already knew this.

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. 

Edited September 23, 2019 by London Wanderer

[Tonge moor green jacket]

16 hours ago, kent_white said:

I'll have to watch it. Some positive news would be welcome. I can't see much of it from where I'm looking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49773869

 

Do watch it; technologies now becoming available that will allow co2 to be used and converted into all sorts of materials and even foodstuffs!

Just watch out for the Chinese stealing others' research and hard work though.

[MalcolmW]

43 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Do watch it; technologies now becoming available that will allow co2 to be used and converted into all sorts of materials and even foodstuffs!

Just watch out for the Chinese stealing others' research and hard work though.

I recommend you read about the rise and fall of W French Anderson. A classic case of Chinese deception and woeful police work in the USA.