|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 4, 2020 22:58:32 GMT
you're in a cult and have been brain washed, seek help. I'm a physicist who has worked in renewables. He's right. We're fucked. The Aussie govt are refusing to even countenance that climate change has anything to do with the country literally being on fire for 3 months. A country with almost the same land mass as the USA is on fire from coast to coast. Not sure that's correct it was mentioned that Australia are responsible for a minute % of the overall carbon footprint of the world and as such their "cleaning" would change nothing. Excuse the simplistic explanation but that's how I understand their stance, not denial more they dont contribute to the problem by a massive amount.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Jan 5, 2020 10:16:34 GMT
I'm a physicist who has worked in renewables. He's right. We're fucked. The Aussie govt are refusing to even countenance that climate change has anything to do with the country literally being on fire for 3 months. A country with almost the same land mass as the USA is on fire from coast to coast. Not sure that's correct it was mentioned that Australia are responsible for a minute % of the overall carbon footprint of the world and as such their "cleaning" would change nothing. Excuse the simplistic explanation but that's how I understand their stance, not denial more they dont contribute to the problem by a massive amount. In the early 70ies when I was a small kid, we were told at school that Australia had ozone layer problems by using a lot of freons, caused by hair spray, deodorants and burning refrigerators etc. So the problems they're now facing might not just have to do with this century. It's a slow process. It's like us in Scandinavia. If we face dreadful mother nature experiences closer to the next century, it might not have all to do with just what happens between 2080-2099.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 13:38:36 GMT
ONE of Nicole Kidman's houses in Oz has gone up in flames. Apparently this is the $6.5 million dollar one ! Nicole Kidman Cries on Red Carpet As Her Australian Home Is Lost in Bushfires link
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 13:39:58 GMT
I'm a physicist who has worked in renewables. He's right. We're fucked. The Aussie govt are refusing to even countenance that climate change has anything to do with the country literally being on fire for 3 months. A country with almost the same land mass as the USA is on fire from coast to coast. Not sure that's correct it was mentioned that Australia are responsible for a minute % of the overall carbon footprint of the world and as such their "cleaning" would change nothing. Excuse the simplistic explanation but that's how I understand their stance, not denial more they dont contribute to the problem by a massive amount. Every country needs to 'clean'. Australia produces almost the same amount of CO 2 per capita as the USA, 15.37 and 16.49 metric tonnes in 2014 respectively. Not even including international emissions such as trade routes and transport. Every nation pretty much needs to cut down! climateactiontracker.org/countries/australia/Add on to this that the wildfires have released over half of Australia's annual CO 2 emissions in the last 3 months on their own. We're barely on track for the Paris agreement, and that was insufficient in itself. Most climate targets don't take into account feedback loops from methane deposits in frozen ice, among other things, which will hugely speed up warming. This is what we need to do, and we're not even on target for a fraction of it. For reference, 2 oC rise would cause 50cm higher sea levels than in 2000, wheat production down by 16%, 98% of coral reefs at risk, interactive.carbonbrief.org/impacts-climate-change-one-point-five-degrees-two-degrees/?utm_source=web&utm_campaign=Redirect
|
|
|
Post by musik on Jan 5, 2020 14:42:12 GMT
Australia produces almost the same amount of CO 2 per capita as the USA, 15.37 and 16.49 metric tonnes in 2014 respectively. Add on to this that the wildfires have released over half of Australia's annual CO 2 emissions in the last 3 months on their own. We're barely on track for the Paris agreement, and that was insufficient in itself. I liked your post here, lilfraise. And as we all know it's better to start projects quickly to avoid time pressure. This goes for the environment as well. In Sweden thankfully we have Greta Thunberg. However, there is a movement growing here now. It has no name yet, but let's call it Anti-Greta. Idols might be Jeremy Clarkson and Meat Loaf? Anyway, a professor is endlessly repeating his message and hundreds of thousand of people seem hypnotized. He claims there have always been fires in Australia, it's nothing new under the sun there. And in total of the Earth altogether, there are less fires and deserts now than ever. Besides, many of the fires, if not all, are caused by the citizens themselves he says - it has nothing to do with climate changes. And he meets the argument the fires have released more than half of the annual CO2 emissions within just a quarter with - this is the answer, as we see Australia have no climate problems, since the "real" CO2 emissions aren't even half of it! But what's worst: he says "the CO2 in the air is SO much less than the oxygen itself, that we're no way near a disaster". To him and the followers it sounds as if as long as the CO2 exceeds the oxygen, we have no problem. But ... oxygen is 21,0% and Co2 0,04% in normal air. Btw, he doesn't give a shit about the Paris agreement, since he seems to think it's only an agreement among left globalists trying to construct a dictatorship, a one world government, a part of a plan. Because people aren't willing to change their habits, they will continue to follow his reasoning. It's convenient to take the plane ... That's almost even more frightening than the climate changes itself.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 15:32:27 GMT
Australia produces almost the same amount of CO 2 per capita as the USA, 15.37 and 16.49 metric tonnes in 2014 respectively. Add on to this that the wildfires have released over half of Australia's annual CO 2 emissions in the last 3 months on their own. We're barely on track for the Paris agreement, and that was insufficient in itself. I liked your post here, lilfraise. And as we all know it's better to start projects quickly to avoid time pressure. This goes for the environment as well. In Sweden thankfully we have Greta Thunberg. However, there is a movement growing here now. It has no name yet, but let's call it Anti-Greta. Idols might be Jeremy Clarkson and Meat Loaf? Anyway, a professor is endlessly repeating his message and hundreds of thousand of people seem hypnotized. He claims there have always been fires in Australia, it's nothing new under the sun there. And in total of the Earth altogether, there are less fires and deserts now than ever. Besides, many of the fires, if not all, are caused by the citizens themselves he says - it has nothing to do with climate changes. And he meets the argument the fires have released more than half of the annual CO2 emissions within just a quarter with - this is the answer, as we see Australia have no climate problems, since the "real" CO2 emissions aren't even half of it! But what's worst: he says "the CO2 in the air is SO much less than the oxygen itself, that we're no way near a disaster". To him and the followers it sounds as if as long as the CO2 exceeds the oxygen, we have no problem. But ... oxygen is 21,0% and Co2 0,04% in normal air. Btw, he doesn't give a shit about the Paris agreement, since he seems to think it's only an agreement among left globalists trying to construct a dictatorship, a one world government, a part of a plan. Because people aren't willing to change their habits, they will continue to follow his reasoning. It's convenient to take the plane ... That's almost even more frightening than the climate changes itself. There are two points at play there for me. 1- it's easier to believe that there is not inherent, terrifying danger and people would rather agree with that argument in spite of evidence. and 2 - it makes people feel clever to go against the grain and feel like they know more than climate scientists. Humanity is a spiteful, selfish species, and it will continue to shoot itself in the foot like this. Every election should be being fought currently basically solely on climate change. We have about 6 years of carbon budget left to have a majority chance of halting at 1.5 oC, yet it makes essentially a sideshow appearance in mainstream political discourse. And it's obvious, we'll get to 20 years from now, there will be fuel and water wars, there will be refugee crises like nothing we've seen, and people will continue to blame immigrants, 'natural cycles', and other such obvious scapegoats. The richest don't want to change their position by investing because they know that they can afford to stay largely safe of any climate issues.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Jan 5, 2020 15:47:54 GMT
I liked your post here, lilfraise. And as we all know it's better to start projects quickly to avoid time pressure. This goes for the environment as well. In Sweden thankfully we have Greta Thunberg. However, there is a movement growing here now. It has no name yet, but let's call it Anti-Greta. Idols might be Jeremy Clarkson and Meat Loaf? Anyway, a professor is endlessly repeating his message and hundreds of thousand of people seem hypnotized. He claims there have always been fires in Australia, it's nothing new under the sun there. And in total of the Earth altogether, there are less fires and deserts now than ever. Besides, many of the fires, if not all, are caused by the citizens themselves he says - it has nothing to do with climate changes. And he meets the argument the fires have released more than half of the annual CO2 emissions within just a quarter with - this is the answer, as we see Australia have no climate problems, since the "real" CO2 emissions aren't even half of it! But what's worst: he says "the CO2 in the air is SO much less than the oxygen itself, that we're no way near a disaster". To him and the followers it sounds as if as long as the CO2 exceeds the oxygen, we have no problem. But ... oxygen is 21,0% and Co2 0,04% in normal air. Btw, he doesn't give a shit about the Paris agreement, since he seems to think it's only an agreement among left globalists trying to construct a dictatorship, a one world government, a part of a plan. Because people aren't willing to change their habits, they will continue to follow his reasoning. It's convenient to take the plane ... That's almost even more frightening than the climate changes itself. There are two points at play there for me. 1- it's easier to believe that there is not inherent, terrifying danger and people would rather agree with that argument in spite of evidence. and 2 - it makes people feel clever to go against the grain and feel like they know more than climate scientists. Humanity is a spiteful, selfish species, and it will continue to shoot itself in the foot like this. Every election should be being fought currently basically solely on climate change. We have about 6 years of carbon budget left to have a majority chance of halting at 1.5 oC, yet it makes essentially a sideshow appearance in mainstream political discourse. And it's obvious, we'll get to 20 years from now, there will be fuel and water wars, there will be refugee crises like nothing we've seen, and people will continue to blame immigrants, 'natural cycles', and other such obvious scapegoats. The richest don't want to change their position by investing because they know that they can afford to stay largely safe of any climate issues. Why do you expect the rich to shoulder responsibility when the leaders of the global superpowers creating the problem are not interested, if you want to stop China building a coal fired power station every week stop buying their shit
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 16:07:59 GMT
There are two points at play there for me. 1- it's easier to believe that there is not inherent, terrifying danger and people would rather agree with that argument in spite of evidence. and 2 - it makes people feel clever to go against the grain and feel like they know more than climate scientists. Humanity is a spiteful, selfish species, and it will continue to shoot itself in the foot like this. Every election should be being fought currently basically solely on climate change. We have about 6 years of carbon budget left to have a majority chance of halting at 1.5 oC, yet it makes essentially a sideshow appearance in mainstream political discourse. And it's obvious, we'll get to 20 years from now, there will be fuel and water wars, there will be refugee crises like nothing we've seen, and people will continue to blame immigrants, 'natural cycles', and other such obvious scapegoats. The richest don't want to change their position by investing because they know that they can afford to stay largely safe of any climate issues. Why do you expect the rich to shoulder responsibility when the leaders of the global superpowers creating the problem are not interested, if you want to stop China building a coal fired power station every week stop buying their shit Because they are the ones who can do something about it. China should absolutely stop, and we need to actually do something to try and get them to. Part of the reason (the main reason) we are in this mess is because our society is based on policies of infinite growth in a finitely-resourced planet. The reason the rich should do something about it is because 100 companies are responsible for 71% of the emissions of the entire planet. It isn't you at home not recycling the bottles that causes this. It is the greed and fetish for 'growth' in high-earning companies that does the damage.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Jan 5, 2020 16:40:44 GMT
Why do you expect the rich to shoulder responsibility when the leaders of the global superpowers creating the problem are not interested, if you want to stop China building a coal fired power station every week stop buying their shit Because they are the ones who can do something about it. China should absolutely stop, and we need to actually do something to try and get them to. Part of the reason (the main reason) we are in this mess is because our society is based on policies of infinite growth in a finitely-resourced planet. The reason the rich should do something about it is because 100 companies are responsible for 71% of the emissions of the entire planet. It isn't you at home not recycling the bottles that causes this. It is the greed and fetish for 'growth' in high-earning companies that does the damage. Is it the 100 companies or the millions of customers who use their goods and services that are the problem
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 5, 2020 16:55:51 GMT
Not sure that's correct it was mentioned that Australia are responsible for a minute % of the overall carbon footprint of the world and as such their "cleaning" would change nothing. Excuse the simplistic explanation but that's how I understand their stance, not denial more they dont contribute to the problem by a massive amount. Every country needs to 'clean'. Australia produces almost the same amount of CO 2 per capita as the USA, 15.37 and 16.49 metric tonnes in 2014 respectively. Not even including international emissions such as trade routes and transport. Every nation pretty much needs to cut down! climateactiontracker.org/countries/australia/Add on to this that the wildfires have released over half of Australia's annual CO 2 emissions in the last 3 months on their own. We're barely on track for the Paris agreement, and that was insufficient in itself. Most climate targets don't take into account feedback loops from methane deposits in frozen ice, among other things, which will hugely speed up warming. This is what we need to do, and we're not even on target for a fraction of it. For reference, 2 oC rise would cause 50cm higher sea levels than in 2000, wheat production down by 16%, 98% of coral reefs at risk, interactive.carbonbrief.org/impacts-climate-change-one-point-five-degrees-two-degrees/?utm_source=web&utm_campaign=RedirectWhich is pretty much what I said if I've understood it correctly, per capita is the clue when all said and done they produce less than the US, China etc so even if Australia produced nothing it would make no difference globally. As for the fire it's hardly the same as coal fired power stations.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 17:58:53 GMT
Because they are the ones who can do something about it. China should absolutely stop, and we need to actually do something to try and get them to. Part of the reason (the main reason) we are in this mess is because our society is based on policies of infinite growth in a finitely-resourced planet. The reason the rich should do something about it is because 100 companies are responsible for 71% of the emissions of the entire planet. It isn't you at home not recycling the bottles that causes this. It is the greed and fetish for 'growth' in high-earning companies that does the damage. Is it the 100 companies or the millions of customers who use their goods and services that are the problem Well which is easier? Stop 100 companies from using so much CO 2 and fossil fuels, or make billions give up things that are on offer to them?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 18:08:16 GMT
Every country needs to 'clean'. Australia produces almost the same amount of CO 2 per capita as the USA, 15.37 and 16.49 metric tonnes in 2014 respectively. Not even including international emissions such as trade routes and transport. Every nation pretty much needs to cut down! climateactiontracker.org/countries/australia/Add on to this that the wildfires have released over half of Australia's annual CO 2 emissions in the last 3 months on their own. We're barely on track for the Paris agreement, and that was insufficient in itself. Most climate targets don't take into account feedback loops from methane deposits in frozen ice, among other things, which will hugely speed up warming. This is what we need to do, and we're not even on target for a fraction of it. For reference, 2 oC rise would cause 50cm higher sea levels than in 2000, wheat production down by 16%, 98% of coral reefs at risk, interactive.carbonbrief.org/impacts-climate-change-one-point-five-degrees-two-degrees/?utm_source=web&utm_campaign=RedirectWhich is pretty much what I said if I've understood it correctly, per capita is the clue when all said and done they produce less than the US, China etc so even if Australia produced nothing it would make no difference globally. As for the fire it's hardly the same as coal fired power stations. Oh well why bother trying then. The fire has given out 306million tons of CO 2 between August and December, and one 1500MW coal power station would release about 6 million tons of CO 2 over the course of a year. So in 4 months it has released the same amount of CO 2 into the atmosphere as about 150 coal power stations. China currently releases 10.4 billion tons of CO 2 per year. So this single fire has contributed another 3% of China's entire yearly emissions. China being the largest emitters on Earth. There is no 'oh well we do less than them', everyone has to stop. Every nation that releases even an ounce of CO 2 needs to stop. There is no half measure 'it'll be fine when china stop'. We have to convince China and the USA to stop, and we have to force our own governments and companies to stop.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 5, 2020 18:13:21 GMT
Which is pretty much what I said if I've understood it correctly, per capita is the clue when all said and done they produce less than the US, China etc so even if Australia produced nothing it would make no difference globally. As for the fire it's hardly the same as coal fired power stations. Oh well why bother trying then. The fire has given out 306million tons of CO 2 between August and December, and one 1500MW coal power station would release about 6 million tons of CO 2 over the course of a year. So in 4 months it has released the same amount of CO 2 into the atmosphere as about 150 coal power stations. China currently releases 10.4 billion tons of CO 2 per year. So this single fire has contributed another 3% of China's entire yearly emissions. China being the largest emitters on Earth. There is no 'oh well we do less than them', everyone has to stop. Every nation that releases even an ounce of CO 2 needs to stop. There is no half measure 'it'll be fine when china stop'. We have to convince China and the USA to stop, and we have to force our own governments and companies to stop. It's a natural disaster not deliberate is the point how much carbon does a volcano produce and should we tax Iceland, Indonesia or blame them for the smoke. As for trying dont moan at me for my one plastic bottle start with Pepsi etc again is the point. Target the right ones not the easy targets because it pisses folk off.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 18:28:17 GMT
Oh well why bother trying then. The fire has given out 306million tons of CO 2 between August and December, and one 1500MW coal power station would release about 6 million tons of CO 2 over the course of a year. So in 4 months it has released the same amount of CO 2 into the atmosphere as about 150 coal power stations. China currently releases 10.4 billion tons of CO 2 per year. So this single fire has contributed another 3% of China's entire yearly emissions. China being the largest emitters on Earth. There is no 'oh well we do less than them', everyone has to stop. Every nation that releases even an ounce of CO 2 needs to stop. There is no half measure 'it'll be fine when china stop'. We have to convince China and the USA to stop, and we have to force our own governments and companies to stop. It's a natural disaster not deliberate is the point how much carbon does a volcano produce and should we tax Iceland, Indonesia or blame them for the smoke. As for trying dont moan at me for my one plastic bottle start with Pepsi etc again is the point. Target the right ones not the easy targets because it pisses folk off. You do know that one of the effects of us pumping CO 2 into the atmosphere for 150 years is that it causes exactly this to happen? Longer heatwaves, more extreme weather, more wildfires? That's literally the reason more of these are happening and they're bigger and longer in duration than before. It is a natural occurrence of our own doing. I am exactly with you on the last point. 100 companies cause 70% of emissions globally, and they should absolutely be forced to stop. Hence why I stand with XR and the many calls for 'green new deals' across most left-leaning parties. We need to tell corporations who have caused exactly this issue to fix it, and you do that by making it more expensive for them not to.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 5, 2020 18:42:24 GMT
It's a natural disaster not deliberate is the point how much carbon does a volcano produce and should we tax Iceland, Indonesia or blame them for the smoke. As for trying dont moan at me for my one plastic bottle start with Pepsi etc again is the point. Target the right ones not the easy targets because it pisses folk off. You do know that one of the effects of us pumping CO 2 into the atmosphere for 150 years is that it causes exactly this to happen? Longer heatwaves, more extreme weather, more wildfires? That's literally the reason more of these are happening and they're bigger and longer in duration than before. It is a natural occurrence of our own doing. I am exactly with you on the last point. 100 companies cause 70% of emissions globally, and they should absolutely be forced to stop. Hence why I stand with XR and the many calls for 'green new deals' across most left-leaning parties. We need to tell corporations who have caused exactly this issue to fix it, and you do that by making it more expensive for them not to. Extinction rebellion as well meaning as their cause is are losing public opinion. Dont climb on a train roof and delay the "ordinary" worker dont stop traffic etc because sooner or later the people will start giving them a good hiding on a regular basis its already started as you know. It's totally wrong to castigate the people because they do their bit like I said target Mr Coal, Mr plastic. We all do our bit so leave "me" alone because the more climate folk moan and inconvenience me the less I care and the more likely I'll drag you ass off the roof and throw you in a skip.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 5, 2020 18:48:43 GMT
I hope that Boris has a serious look at the overseas aid budget. I don't know the details of it but it seems to me that..... a lot of people in NGOs and charities get good salaries that are unnecessary..and that's irrespective of any so called Political advantage of giving aid....That.... China, India and a few other countries are in a position to change their priorities to help themselves...and we should use some of it to help " emergency" disasters such as a result of Tsunamis, earthquakes and the catastrophe in Australia as far as possible.....and of course we should give those sleeping rough on our streets help. The budget needs a fresh modern look.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 19:32:42 GMT
You do know that one of the effects of us pumping CO 2 into the atmosphere for 150 years is that it causes exactly this to happen? Longer heatwaves, more extreme weather, more wildfires? That's literally the reason more of these are happening and they're bigger and longer in duration than before. It is a natural occurrence of our own doing. I am exactly with you on the last point. 100 companies cause 70% of emissions globally, and they should absolutely be forced to stop. Hence why I stand with XR and the many calls for 'green new deals' across most left-leaning parties. We need to tell corporations who have caused exactly this issue to fix it, and you do that by making it more expensive for them not to. Extinction rebellion as well meaning as their cause is are losing public opinion. Dont climb on a train roof and delay the "ordinary" worker dont stop traffic etc because sooner or later the people will start giving them a good hiding on a regular basis its already started as you know. It's totally wrong to castigate the people because they do their bit like I said target Mr Coal, Mr plastic. We all do our bit so leave "me" alone because the more climate folk moan and inconvenience me the less I care and the more likely I'll drag you ass off the roof and throw you in a skip. The point is that not enough is being done. They need to cause disruption to make the government and companies listen. We're stages away from riots and not-quite-so-peaceful protests. ER are doing exceptionally well to stay peaceful and friendly considering what is at stake.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 5, 2020 19:48:38 GMT
Extinction rebellion as well meaning as their cause is are losing public opinion. Dont climb on a train roof and delay the "ordinary" worker dont stop traffic etc because sooner or later the people will start giving them a good hiding on a regular basis its already started as you know. It's totally wrong to castigate the people because they do their bit like I said target Mr Coal, Mr plastic. We all do our bit so leave "me" alone because the more climate folk moan and inconvenience me the less I care and the more likely I'll drag you ass off the roof and throw you in a skip. The point is that not enough is being done. They need to cause disruption to make the government and companies listen. We're stages away from riots and not-quite-so-peaceful protests. ER are doing exceptionally well to stay peaceful and friendly considering what is at stake. Disruption is fine outside the plastic factory or the coal mine do you really think stopping trains or blocking traffic helps change minds?? It does it makes the ordinary person hate the protesters and the "cause" Mr billionaire plastic man dunna give two fucks and neither will the government. Its the wrong targets I'm afraid and it wont work in anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 21:48:05 GMT
The point is that not enough is being done. They need to cause disruption to make the government and companies listen. We're stages away from riots and not-quite-so-peaceful protests. ER are doing exceptionally well to stay peaceful and friendly considering what is at stake. Disruption is fine outside the plastic factory or the coal mine do you really think stopping trains or blocking traffic helps change minds?? It does it makes the ordinary person hate the protesters and the "cause" Mr billionaire plastic man dunna give two fucks and neither will the government. Its the wrong targets I'm afraid and it wont work in anyway. It's all targets, hence why they tend to be outside Shell/BP/Banks. But the point is to stop major cities in order to make governments take notice. The empty platitudes of the recent decade's governments across the world aren't enough.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 5, 2020 22:10:56 GMT
Disruption is fine outside the plastic factory or the coal mine do you really think stopping trains or blocking traffic helps change minds?? It does it makes the ordinary person hate the protesters and the "cause" Mr billionaire plastic man dunna give two fucks and neither will the government. Its the wrong targets I'm afraid and it wont work in anyway. It's all targets, hence why they tend to be outside Shell/BP/Banks. But the point is to stop major cities in order to make governments take notice. The empty platitudes of the recent decade's governments across the world aren't enough. That's why it's not working are you really suggesting violence is the next step and that they deserve credit for not doing so yet. Its unpopular and alienates the public and on that basis it will fail.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 22:14:39 GMT
It's all targets, hence why they tend to be outside Shell/BP/Banks. But the point is to stop major cities in order to make governments take notice. The empty platitudes of the recent decade's governments across the world aren't enough. That's why it's not working are you really suggesting violence is the next step and that they deserve credit for not doing so yet. Its unpopular and alienates the public and on that basis it will fail. Well what do we do next? Genuine question.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 5, 2020 22:21:01 GMT
That's why it's not working are you really suggesting violence is the next step and that they deserve credit for not doing so yet. Its unpopular and alienates the public and on that basis it will fail. Well what do we do next? Genuine question. Public disruption wont work lobbying is the only way. You start by pressure on business not people, glass instead of plastic is a start. I genuinely hate plastic but its everywhere so a few soap dodgers in the street pissing off commuters will not work. Maybe one of these rich caring types should invest in glass I dunno. I thought posting crisp bags back was a cracking idea maybe we should post plastic bottles etc back to the manufacturers. In Europe glass is way more prevalent and so it should be.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2020 23:13:57 GMT
Well what do we do next? Genuine question. Public disruption wont work lobbying is the only way. You start by pressure on business not people, glass instead of plastic is a start. I genuinely hate plastic but its everywhere so a few soap dodgers in the street pissing off commuters will not work. Maybe one of these rich caring types should invest in glass I dunno. I thought posting crisp bags back was a cracking idea maybe we should post plastic bottles etc back to the manufacturers. In Europe glass is way more prevalent and so it should be. How do you pressure business?
|
|
|
Post by musik on Jan 6, 2020 2:08:01 GMT
2020 has started just as bad as 2019 did. I remember, in 2019 after just 45 mins, three bad news.
In 2020 after half an hour three bad news, and one of them were "no more tax funded money to our swedish psychology telephone help lines that used to provide help for people w suicide thoughts, depression and other diseases". So now they will be closed down. Dreadful decision!
And now this shit, plus the conflict between the US and Iran.
As my mother said "don't they want to live in peace?"
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 6, 2020 9:35:46 GMT
Public disruption wont work lobbying is the only way. You start by pressure on business not people, glass instead of plastic is a start. I genuinely hate plastic but its everywhere so a few soap dodgers in the street pissing off commuters will not work. Maybe one of these rich caring types should invest in glass I dunno. I thought posting crisp bags back was a cracking idea maybe we should post plastic bottles etc back to the manufacturers. In Europe glass is way more prevalent and so it should be. How do you pressure business? Pickets at the gates, at the HQ etc, post them their plastic back as people did with Walkers. Dont buy from them just a few ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2020 11:00:32 GMT
Half a BILLION animals wiped out by the fires, let that sink in for a second.....
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jan 6, 2020 11:20:03 GMT
I spoke to a friend about the fires on earth the last decades. He said it has in general always been like this, but we haven't discussed Australia in particular. He says it has nothing to do with the environment. Rather forced and caused by too many people. I don't think so. So my question is: Has it always been like this? If no, are there any reliable reports he should read? In Australia it is so hot that a lot of the bush dries out and becomes like a tinderbox, for hundreds of years the locals carried out controlled burning to reduce risk of big fires and then government and environment(al)ists decided it wasnt a good idea..... Even after saying that most of the fires in australia are started by arson so any link to global warming seems tenuous. Someone should have had a word with Theresa after Grenfell and suggested climate change as the cause.
|
|
|
Post by yes on Jan 6, 2020 11:26:29 GMT
This is copied from a Tweet I saw earlier...
Are we fucked? Probably. If society made big inroads over the next couple of years to completely overhaul how we live then we may be ok. Can't see it though, it requires world leaders to work together, and to come away from this idea of nationalism that has swept the world in recent years.
China is a massive problem like some have said, the question is with their media being watched by the State, do they even know? I mean do we even know the extent??
Terrified for the world our kids are going to live in.
This is the Tweet:
Remember:
0.5°C safety 1.3°C irreversible feedbacks (now) 1.5°C severe danger 2°C extreme danger 2.5°C approaching hell 3°C horror 3.5°C death of organised society 4°C human survival in doubt 5°C extinction possible 6°C extinction likely 7°C current trajectory
Climate 'change'.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 6, 2020 11:36:59 GMT
This is copied from a Tweet I saw earlier... Are we fucked? Probably. If society made big inroads over the next couple of years to completely overhaul how we live then we may be ok. Can't see it though, it requires world leaders to work together, and to come away from this idea of nationalism that has swept the world in recent years. China is a massive problem like some have said, the question is with their media being watched by the State, do they even know? I mean do we even know the extent?? Terrified for the world our kids are going to live in. This is the Tweet: Remember: 0.5°C safety 1.3°C irreversible feedbacks (now) 1.5°C severe danger 2°C extreme danger 2.5°C approaching hell 3°C horror 3.5°C death of organised society 4°C human survival in doubt 5°C extinction possible 6°C extinction likely 7°C current trajectory Climate 'change'. You see that does not help it's just hysterical ifs and buts and makes me think they have not got a clue what's going to happen so they try to scare people.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jan 6, 2020 11:39:50 GMT
Half a BILLION animals wiped out by the fires, let that sink in for a second..... I'm assuming your counting ants etc in that number.
|
|