|
|
Post by maxplonk on Sept 22, 2023 16:17:18 GMT
Murdoch retires and this happens. Coincidence? |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 22, 2023 16:23:02 GMT
Murdoch retires and this happens. Coincidence? BBC program where does Murdoch come in🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Sept 22, 2023 17:16:36 GMT
Murdoch retires and this happens. Coincidence? BBC program where does Murdoch come in🤔 It could be that Rupert's influence extended much further than media ownership. Or it could be coincidence. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 22, 2023 17:29:30 GMT
But what if hydrogen becomes the thing. Or what if they refine the ICE vehicles to incredibly low emissions. And what happens when they perfect the battery tech and loads of poor sods have spuzzed 50k on a car that overnight becomes almost worthless. But this climate panic is near on forcing people to show their virtue. It got me and im a cynic. So your lets just go right now could result in billions wasted on shyte that becomes redundant. Patience. Kipling wrote a poem about this, keeping calm whilst those all around lose their minds. Summat like that anyway. I dunno chief 😕 I'm not looking at it as a panic button we need to press, I'm looking at it as an investment in the futures of our children and our children's children. We need to get ahead of the competition and be the hub for green technology. When you are leading the way you will adapt quicker and easier to any changes the future brings and more often than not it will be these companies that make that transition first as they reinvest into even better methods. Unfortunately we are in a race and it's not with the climate it's with other country's. When it comes to future technology everything is a race. From Nuclear weapons to landing on the moon, country's that wanted to be the first didn't slow down and take a chill pill, they went for it. Exactly, the less we do now, the harder and more expensive it is to do later. In fact, it makes it even less likely that anything at all will be done later for those precise reasons. "Sorry, everyone, we should've done all this ten years ago, but it was considered too much of an ask back then. It's twice as much of an ask now though. Shall we just forget it all and it's everyone for himself whatever happens?" Seems to be the order of the day. |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Sept 22, 2023 17:33:20 GMT
I'm not looking at it as a panic button we need to press, I'm looking at it as an investment in the futures of our children and our children's children. We need to get ahead of the competition and be the hub for green technology. When you are leading the way you will adapt quicker and easier to any changes the future brings and more often than not it will be these companies that make that transition first as they reinvest into even better methods. Unfortunately we are in a race and it's not with the climate it's with other country's. When it comes to future technology everything is a race. From Nuclear weapons to landing on the moon, country's that wanted to be the first didn't slow down and take a chill pill, they went for it. Exactly, the less we do now, the harder and more expensive it is to do later. In fact, it makes it even less likely that anything at all will be done later for those precise reasons. "Sorry, everyone, we should've done all this ten years ago, but it was considered too much of an ask back then. It's twice as much of an ask now though. Shall we just forget it all and it's everyone for himself whatever happens?" Seems to be the order of the day. The problem is that the uk is just a small percentage of the world population. It's like being the only person in your street to have solar panels, wind turbine, electric car, heat pump etc.. that's brilliant but if your neighbours aren't doing it makes little difference. When you look at Russia, China, India, Africa where there are much more people under regimes which maybe don't care as much, and the people are much poorer too. Will they make the changes? Now that doesn't mean we can use that as a cop out. I'm not saying that. But I wish we'd focus a bit more on dealing and living with climate change rather than just trying to slow it down. Slowing down requires everyone's buy in. Dealing with it and adapting doesn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 22, 2023 18:01:36 GMT
Exactly, the less we do now, the harder and more expensive it is to do later. In fact, it makes it even less likely that anything at all will be done later for those precise reasons. "Sorry, everyone, we should've done all this ten years ago, but it was considered too much of an ask back then. It's twice as much of an ask now though. Shall we just forget it all and it's everyone for himself whatever happens?" Seems to be the order of the day. The problem is that the uk is just a small percentage of the world population. It's like being the only person in your street to have solar panels, wind turbine, electric car, heat pump etc.. that's brilliant but if your neighbours aren't doing it makes little difference. When you look at Russia, China, India, Africa where there are much more people under regimes which maybe don't care as much, and the people are much poorer too. Will they make the changes? Now that doesn't mean we can use that as a cop out. I'm not saying that. But I wish we'd focus a bit more on dealing and living with climate change rather than just trying to slow it down. Slowing down requires everyone's buy in. Dealing with it and adapting doesn't. True. But lots of people used to smoke. Every one of them gave up individually, some earlier than others. "Net zero is the growth opportunity of the 21st century. Decarbonisation is a £100bn shot in the arm for business this decade. Phasing out fossil fuels will raise economic output by 2pc of GDP, reduce average fuel bills for household, lower the debt ratio by 23 percentage points as well as lifting British productivity, driving a clean tech export boom and cutting the trade deficit". Lefty, utopian fantasising? No, the government's own Skidmore report, issued just months ago. So, not only has Sunak set fire to efforts to tackle climate change in the name of chasing populist votes, he's also making the country worse off as a whole, which, just like Austerity has and just like Brexit is, will make life that much harder for people overall. |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Sept 22, 2023 18:14:49 GMT
The problem is that the uk is just a small percentage of the world population. It's like being the only person in your street to have solar panels, wind turbine, electric car, heat pump etc.. that's brilliant but if your neighbours aren't doing it makes little difference. When you look at Russia, China, India, Africa where there are much more people under regimes which maybe don't care as much, and the people are much poorer too. Will they make the changes? Now that doesn't mean we can use that as a cop out. I'm not saying that. But I wish we'd focus a bit more on dealing and living with climate change rather than just trying to slow it down. Slowing down requires everyone's buy in. Dealing with it and adapting doesn't. True. But lots of people used to smoke. Every one of them gave up individually, some earlier than others. "Net zero is the growth opportunity of the 21st century. Decarbonisation is a £100bn shot in the arm for business this decade. Phasing out fossil fuels will raise economic output by 2pc of GDP, reduce average fuel bills for household, lower the debt ratio by 23 percentage points as well as lifting British productivity, driving a clean tech export boom and cutting the trade deficit". Lefty, utopian fantasising? No, the government's own Skidmore report, issued just months ago. So, not only has Sunak set fire to efforts to tackle climate change in the name of chasing populist votes, he's also making the country worse off as a whole, which, just like Austerity has and just like Brexit is, will make life that much harder for people overall. Stopped putting lead in stuff including paint, stopped using asbestos, stopped chucking CFC's into the sky, probably many more. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 22, 2023 18:44:31 GMT
True. But lots of people used to smoke. Every one of them gave up individually, some earlier than others. "Net zero is the growth opportunity of the 21st century. Decarbonisation is a £100bn shot in the arm for business this decade. Phasing out fossil fuels will raise economic output by 2pc of GDP, reduce average fuel bills for household, lower the debt ratio by 23 percentage points as well as lifting British productivity, driving a clean tech export boom and cutting the trade deficit". Lefty, utopian fantasising? No, the government's own Skidmore report, issued just months ago. So, not only has Sunak set fire to efforts to tackle climate change in the name of chasing populist votes, he's also making the country worse off as a whole, which, just like Austerity has and just like Brexit is, will make life that much harder for people overall. Stopped putting lead in stuff including paint, stopped using asbestos, stopped chucking CFC's into the sky, probably many more. Indeed so. Futility is often self-imposed. |
|
|
|
Post by Gawa on Sept 22, 2023 19:48:21 GMT
The problem is that the uk is just a small percentage of the world population. It's like being the only person in your street to have solar panels, wind turbine, electric car, heat pump etc.. that's brilliant but if your neighbours aren't doing it makes little difference. When you look at Russia, China, India, Africa where there are much more people under regimes which maybe don't care as much, and the people are much poorer too. Will they make the changes? Now that doesn't mean we can use that as a cop out. I'm not saying that. But I wish we'd focus a bit more on dealing and living with climate change rather than just trying to slow it down. Slowing down requires everyone's buy in. Dealing with it and adapting doesn't. True. But lots of people used to smoke. Every one of them gave up individually, some earlier than others. "Net zero is the growth opportunity of the 21st century. Decarbonisation is a £100bn shot in the arm for business this decade. Phasing out fossil fuels will raise economic output by 2pc of GDP, reduce average fuel bills for household, lower the debt ratio by 23 percentage points as well as lifting British productivity, driving a clean tech export boom and cutting the trade deficit". Lefty, utopian fantasising? No, the government's own Skidmore report, issued just months ago. So, not only has Sunak set fire to efforts to tackle climate change in the name of chasing populist votes, he's also making the country worse off as a whole, which, just like Austerity has and just like Brexit is, will make life that much harder for people overall. I'm not sure if smoking is the best example because not everyone has given that up and it's something which impacts a singular individual more than others. So I think it's a bit different but understand why you've used it. I'm not standing here saying we should do nothing by the way. But I think getting ahead of the curve is good too. We should of course invest in mitigating climate change and taking steps. But what comes after mitigation? Living with and dealing with it. And I think this needs addressed too. It's all well and good having a heat pump to reduce our footprint. But in 10 years time when we're feeling the ill effects of a warm summer, I'll be looking on enviously at our American and European neighbours which have air conditioning while I'm sweating. The warmer climate for instance is contributing to the increase in toxic blue green algae in lakes and rivers. The largest fresh water lake in the uk which supplies drinking water is currently filled with this and its killing of the fish, wildlife and could potentially make drinking water dangerous. What are we doing to think about and address this? How are we going to tackle this every year seeing as warmer climate makes it occur more? And that's something which can affect our drinking water. Again heat pump and electrical vehicle great for mitigation, what about coping with the affects? We can't last long without drinking water... So again I'm not saying no to mitigation. I'm simply saying I wish there were more conversations in relation to coping and dealing with the effects. What about our roads and infrastructure? Will more extreme temperatures affect them, should we be doing more there? You're right that the green revolution may have stated and there's alot of investment opportunities and we may be slightly behind some other nations in some of these incentives. But the next big boom after that will be dealing with climate impact and thus its very sensible to start doing more in this area now too and get ahead of our neighbours now. |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 22, 2023 21:33:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Sept 22, 2023 22:38:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Sept 23, 2023 4:46:59 GMT
Shows what the tories really think of the North hope it leads to people waking up to their true agenda of gread and kickbacks Get this scum out don't let them steal an election register to vote and get voter id |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 23, 2023 6:12:57 GMT
True. But lots of people used to smoke. Every one of them gave up individually, some earlier than others. "Net zero is the growth opportunity of the 21st century. Decarbonisation is a £100bn shot in the arm for business this decade. Phasing out fossil fuels will raise economic output by 2pc of GDP, reduce average fuel bills for household, lower the debt ratio by 23 percentage points as well as lifting British productivity, driving a clean tech export boom and cutting the trade deficit". Lefty, utopian fantasising? No, the government's own Skidmore report, issued just months ago. So, not only has Sunak set fire to efforts to tackle climate change in the name of chasing populist votes, he's also making the country worse off as a whole, which, just like Austerity has and just like Brexit is, will make life that much harder for people overall. I'm not sure if smoking is the best example because not everyone has given that up and it's something which impacts a singular individual more than others. So I think it's a bit different but understand why you've used it. I'm not standing here saying we should do nothing by the way. But I think getting ahead of the curve is good too. We should of course invest in mitigating climate change and taking steps. But what comes after mitigation? Living with and dealing with it. And I think this needs addressed too. It's all well and good having a heat pump to reduce our footprint. But in 10 years time when we're feeling the ill effects of a warm summer, I'll be looking on enviously at our American and European neighbours which have air conditioning while I'm sweating. The warmer climate for instance is contributing to the increase in toxic blue green algae in lakes and rivers. The largest fresh water lake in the uk which supplies drinking water is currently filled with this and its killing of the fish, wildlife and could potentially make drinking water dangerous. What are we doing to think about and address this? How are we going to tackle this every year seeing as warmer climate makes it occur more? And that's something which can affect our drinking water. Again heat pump and electrical vehicle great for mitigation, what about coping with the affects? We can't last long without drinking water... So again I'm not saying no to mitigation. I'm simply saying I wish there were more conversations in relation to coping and dealing with the effects. What about our roads and infrastructure? Will more extreme temperatures affect them, should we be doing more there? You're right that the green revolution may have stated and there's alot of investment opportunities and we may be slightly behind some other nations in some of these incentives. But the next big boom after that will be dealing with climate impact and thus its very sensible to start doing more in this area now too and get ahead of our neighbours now. It's true that smoking directly affects a single individual's health but it also affects all of us in terms of having to deal with how you fund their treatment costs and the effect on the NHS, amongst other things. It also works in the sense that doing the right thing now prevents greater damage, cost and pain further down the line. You're right that not everyone has stopped. Not everyone will switch to an EV. Not everyone puts their litter in a bin. But the more people who do choose to do the right thing, the better it is for everybody. And less costly. Other than pushing the ban on new petrol and diesel cars back being the wrong thing to do, the other mistake the govt continues to make is to abdicate all its responsibility to the market. The market will solve everything seems to be its central ideology. The govt should be helping individuals more, not constantly bunging billions at industry so that it doesn't leave the UK because of Brexit. Imagine the help that the govt could be giving to people if it didn't have to constantly mediate against the shit that they've self-imposed by that costly mistake! "But the next big boom after that will be dealing with climate impact and thus its very sensible to start doing more in this area now too and get ahead of our neighbours now." Wouldn't disagree at all. Given the approach to the 2030 ban, how much confidence do you have in this govt that they'll lead committedly on what you're suggesting when that becomes imperative?! |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 9:01:15 GMT
I'm not sure if smoking is the best example because not everyone has given that up and it's something which impacts a singular individual more than others. So I think it's a bit different but understand why you've used it. I'm not standing here saying we should do nothing by the way. But I think getting ahead of the curve is good too. We should of course invest in mitigating climate change and taking steps. But what comes after mitigation? Living with and dealing with it. And I think this needs addressed too. It's all well and good having a heat pump to reduce our footprint. But in 10 years time when we're feeling the ill effects of a warm summer, I'll be looking on enviously at our American and European neighbours which have air conditioning while I'm sweating. The warmer climate for instance is contributing to the increase in toxic blue green algae in lakes and rivers. The largest fresh water lake in the uk which supplies drinking water is currently filled with this and its killing of the fish, wildlife and could potentially make drinking water dangerous. What are we doing to think about and address this? How are we going to tackle this every year seeing as warmer climate makes it occur more? And that's something which can affect our drinking water. Again heat pump and electrical vehicle great for mitigation, what about coping with the affects? We can't last long without drinking water... So again I'm not saying no to mitigation. I'm simply saying I wish there were more conversations in relation to coping and dealing with the effects. What about our roads and infrastructure? Will more extreme temperatures affect them, should we be doing more there? You're right that the green revolution may have stated and there's alot of investment opportunities and we may be slightly behind some other nations in some of these incentives. But the next big boom after that will be dealing with climate impact and thus its very sensible to start doing more in this area now too and get ahead of our neighbours now. It's true that smoking directly affects a single individual's health but it also affects all of us in terms of having to deal with how you fund their treatment costs and the effect on the NHS, amongst other things. It also works in the sense that doing the right thing now prevents greater damage, cost and pain further down the line. You're right that not everyone has stopped. Not everyone will switch to an EV. Not everyone puts their litter in a bin. But the more people who do choose to do the right thing, the better it is for everybody. And less costly. Other than pushing the ban on new petrol and diesel cars back being the wrong thing to do, the other mistake the govt continues to make is to abdicate all its responsibility to the market. The market will solve everything seems to be its central ideology. The govt should be helping individuals more, not constantly bunging billions at industry so that it doesn't leave the UK because of Brexit. Imagine the help that the govt could be giving to people if it didn't have to constantly mediate against the shit that they've self-imposed by that costly mistake! "But the next big boom after that will be dealing with climate impact and thus its very sensible to start doing more in this area now too and get ahead of our neighbours now." Wouldn't disagree at all. Given the approach to the 2030 ban, how much confidence do you have in this govt that they'll lead committedly on what you're suggesting when that becomes imperative?! What if it's all bullshit though, and how much is it going to affect the individual today. People like going on holiday and driving their cars at will and having cash on the hip. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 23, 2023 9:10:57 GMT
It's true that smoking directly affects a single individual's health but it also affects all of us in terms of having to deal with how you fund their treatment costs and the effect on the NHS, amongst other things. It also works in the sense that doing the right thing now prevents greater damage, cost and pain further down the line. You're right that not everyone has stopped. Not everyone will switch to an EV. Not everyone puts their litter in a bin. But the more people who do choose to do the right thing, the better it is for everybody. And less costly. Other than pushing the ban on new petrol and diesel cars back being the wrong thing to do, the other mistake the govt continues to make is to abdicate all its responsibility to the market. The market will solve everything seems to be its central ideology. The govt should be helping individuals more, not constantly bunging billions at industry so that it doesn't leave the UK because of Brexit. Imagine the help that the govt could be giving to people if it didn't have to constantly mediate against the shit that they've self-imposed by that costly mistake! "But the next big boom after that will be dealing with climate impact and thus its very sensible to start doing more in this area now too and get ahead of our neighbours now." Wouldn't disagree at all. Given the approach to the 2030 ban, how much confidence do you have in this govt that they'll lead committedly on what you're suggesting when that becomes imperative?! What if it's all bullshit though, and how much is it going to affect the individual today. People like going on holiday and driving their cars at will and having cash on the hip. If it's all "bullshit" then we've cleaned up the planet and will be living sustainably in a nice environment. Sounds pretty good. It no doubt will affect the individual today. Much less than it'll affect them in 15 years time. Unless, in fifteen years time, we take the same approach again and say, "sorry too expensive, what we'll do is just roll the dice and gamble that we throw a six and get away with it all". No-one really thinks that getting away with it is at all likely, apart from those who don't believe in science any more and/or are inclined to conspiracy theories and cite Covid as a reason for thinking like that. "People like going on holiday and driving their cars at will and having cash on the hip." Agreed, but that is a major contributor to the problem. I've always said that as soon as these things cost money and potential added inconvenience the public won't want it. No surprise there, why would you? And again, there's the smoking analogy...I like smoking, I don't want to have to stop, I won't have to pay for my treatment further down the line, why should I change? It's mainly for those reasons, and the apparently widespread belief amongst human beings that makes most people think that, for unexplained reasons, we're somehow exempt from the usual forces of nature that result in species going extinct, that we're fucked! |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 9:13:55 GMT
What if it's all bullshit though, and how much is it going to affect the individual today. People like going on holiday and driving their cars at will and having cash on the hip. If it's all "bullshit" then we've cleaned up the planet and will be living sustainably in a nice environment. Sounds pretty good. It no doubt will affect the individual today. Much less than it'll affect them in 15 years time. Unless, in fifteen years time, we take the same approach again and say, "sorry too expensive, what we'll do is just roll the dice and gamble that we throw a six and get away with it all". No-one really thinks that getting away with it is at all likely, apart from those who don't believe in science any more and/or are inclined to conspiracy theories and cite Covid as a reason for thinking like that. But do you seriously think the average family will be happy to sacrifice their fortnight in Majorca and have less money each month to spend on beer, take aways, fags and Netflix subscriptions? |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 23, 2023 9:17:07 GMT
If it's all "bullshit" then we've cleaned up the planet and will be living sustainably in a nice environment. Sounds pretty good. It no doubt will affect the individual today. Much less than it'll affect them in 15 years time. Unless, in fifteen years time, we take the same approach again and say, "sorry too expensive, what we'll do is just roll the dice and gamble that we throw a six and get away with it all". No-one really thinks that getting away with it is at all likely, apart from those who don't believe in science any more and/or are inclined to conspiracy theories and cite Covid as a reason for thinking like that. But do you seriously think the average family will be happy to sacrifice their fortnight in Majorca and have less money each month to spend on beer, take aways, fags and Netflix subscriptions? No. See my last comment above in my edited reply. |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 9:30:38 GMT
But do you seriously think the average family will be happy to sacrifice their fortnight in Majorca and have less money each month to spend on beer, take aways, fags and Netflix subscriptions? No. See my last comment above in my edited reply. Let's hope that the narrative is false then otherwise it's game over. The way science is communicated to the masses is piss poor, we need actual credible scientists to present their case if we want people to listen, take notice and above all else believe them. |
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Sept 23, 2023 13:24:27 GMT
Is there any thinking in this government about the future of the UK beyond the next election? Whatever people's thoughts on electric vehicles, home insulation is surely a logical step? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66900999Sunak showing himself to be a true Tory -the cost of everything and the value of nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 14:01:19 GMT
Is there any thinking in this government about the future of the UK beyond the next election? Whatever people's thoughts on electric vehicles, home insulation is surely a logical step? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66900999Sunak showing himself to be a true Tory -the cost of everything and the value of nothing. In the real world though cost IS important. If the government want to pay for it then fine whatever but I won't be paying for it out of my own pocket. Not when China and India don't give a fuck and politicians fly round in private jets. |
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Sept 23, 2023 14:27:27 GMT
Is there any thinking in this government about the future of the UK beyond the next election? Whatever people's thoughts on electric vehicles, home insulation is surely a logical step? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66900999Sunak showing himself to be a true Tory -the cost of everything and the value of nothing. In the real world though cost IS important. If the government want to pay for it then fine whatever but I won't be paying for it out of my own pocket. Not when China and India don't give a fuck and politicians fly round in private jets. But the thing is you are paying for not doing it out of your own pocket. And the worse climate change gets the more you will pay. |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 14:46:41 GMT
In the real world though cost IS important. If the government want to pay for it then fine whatever but I won't be paying for it out of my own pocket. Not when China and India don't give a fuck and politicians fly round in private jets. But the thing is you are paying for not doing it out of your own pocket. And the worse climate change gets the more you will pay. IF you believe in it of course which I'm not saying I don't. I'm split over wheather I believe it or not but plenty of folk don't. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 23, 2023 15:31:00 GMT
In the real world though cost IS important. If the government want to pay for it then fine whatever but I won't be paying for it out of my own pocket. Not when China and India don't give a fuck and politicians fly round in private jets. But the thing is you are paying for not doing it out of your own pocket. And the worse climate change gets the more you will pay. You may well be right but the cold hard facts are that a big percentage of families in this country are terrified first and foremost with putting food in their kids lunch boxes. Being coerced into spending thousands on heat pumps, ev cars and ever increased costs all over due to green issues is alien to them. They need to feed the kids. Buying a tesla is summat rich fuckers do. Most people are shit scared they can't afford to live or pay the rent. That's why most of the wankers you see at just stop oil protests are called Tarquin and their daddy drives a bloody Bentley. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 23, 2023 15:40:32 GMT
No. See my last comment above in my edited reply. Let's hope that the narrative is false then otherwise it's game over. The way science is communicated to the masses is piss poor, we need actual credible scientists to present their case if we want people to listen, take notice and above all else believe them. I doubt it'd make much difference to be honest. We've reached the point now where people will believe what they want to believe and everything else is dismissed as "fake news" or "the Establishment controlling the narrative or deliberately targeting contradictory voices" etc. Who would decide who is credible? David Attenborough for example. I think he's probably one of the most respected and credible figures out there...but hold on a second, he works for the BBC, he's probably been told to say climate change is real because that's their agenda and they are told what to do by their Tory management...and so it goes on and on. I can completely sympathise with those who'd rather say fuck it, I'll live my life how I want and take my chances. We've no divine right to exist as a species any more than dodos or passenger pigeons or great auks or any other species that is now extinct. At the very least, if you're going to adopt that approach, I think you should have the foresight and humility to draft a letter to your kids and grandkids explaining that you knew what climate change was but didn't care and chose to ignore the warnings and plough on regardless, with something of an apology too. Maybe explain that you wanted to help but it was too expensive or too big an ask or you felt it was pointless because you thought China wasn't doing anything. Then, if everything turns out fine, you can always destroy it, no harm done! And if it doesn't at least you've fessed up your stupidity. |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Sept 23, 2023 15:45:40 GMT
But the thing is you are paying for not doing it out of your own pocket. And the worse climate change gets the more you will pay. You may well be right but the cold hard facts are that a big percentage of families in this country are terrified first and foremost with putting food in their kids lunch boxes. Being coerced into spending thousands on heat pumps, ev cars and ever increased costs all over due to green issues is alien to them. They need to feed the kids. Buying a tesla is summat rich fuckers do. Most people are shit scared they can't afford to live or pay the rent. That's why most of the wankers you see at just stop oil protests are called Tarquin and their daddy drives a bloody Bentley. It's a good point. The govt could do way more for poorer people to help out re climate change. Way more. Unfortunately, that's not really their way. It's the market that has to sort it out. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Sept 23, 2023 15:53:38 GMT
Let's hope that the narrative is false then otherwise it's game over. The way science is communicated to the masses is piss poor, we need actual credible scientists to present their case if we want people to listen, take notice and above all else believe them. I doubt it'd make much difference to be honest. We've reached the point now where people will believe what they want to believe and everything else is dismissed as "fake news" or "the Establishment controlling the narrative or deliberately targeting contradictory voices" etc. Who would decide who is credible? David Attenborough for example. I think he's probably one of the most respected and credible figures out there...but hold on a second, he works for the BBC, he's probably been told to say climate change is real because that's their agenda and they are told what to do by their Tory management...and so it goes on and on. I can completely sympathise with those who'd rather say fuck it, I'll live my life how I want and take my chances. We've no divine right to exist as a species any more than dodos or passenger pigeons or great auks or any other species that is now extinct. At the very least, if you're going to adopt that approach, I think you should have the foresight and humility to draft a letter to your kids and grandkids explaining that you knew what climate change was but didn't care and chose to ignore the warnings and plough on regardless with something of an apology too. Maybe explain that you wanted to help but it was too expensive or too big an ask or you felt it was pointless because you thought China wasn't doing anything. Then, if everything turns out fine, you can always destroy it, no harm done! People will just stop having kids IF we get to this so called tipping point and all the boiling climate predictions are correct. Sadly there is a long history of climate related panics not coming to pass. Even after very clever scientists have predicted it and is was solid science. Boy who cried wolf syndrome. I like to take a calmer view. A guy called Michael Shellenberger has a fairly balanced view on it. And he was one of the 97% of scientists who agreed with the climate emergency. He still does. But since he's begun revealing flaws in their arguments he's suddenly becomen persona non grata. He's a conspiracy theorist they say. Its a common pattern and its quite concerning. Look him up and you'll see. |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 16:01:28 GMT
Let's hope that the narrative is false then otherwise it's game over. The way science is communicated to the masses is piss poor, we need actual credible scientists to present their case if we want people to listen, take notice and above all else believe them. I doubt it'd make much difference to be honest. We've reached the point now where people will believe what they want to believe and everything else is dismissed as "fake news" or "the Establishment controlling the narrative or deliberately targeting contradictory voices" etc. Who would decide who is credible? David Attenborough for example. I think he's probably one of the most respected and credible figures out there...but hold on a second, he works for the BBC, he's probably been told to say climate change is real because that's their agenda and they are told what to do by their Tory management...and so it goes on and on. I can completely sympathise with those who'd rather say fuck it, I'll live my life how I want and take my chances. We've no divine right to exist as a species any more than dodos or passenger pigeons or great auks or any other species that is now extinct. At the very least, if you're going to adopt that approach, I think you should have the foresight and humility to draft a letter to your kids and grandkids explaining that you knew what climate change was but didn't care and chose to ignore the warnings and plough on regardless with something of an apology too. Maybe explain that you wanted to help but it was too expensive or too big an ask or you felt it was pointless because you thought China wasn't doing anything. Then, if everything turns out fine, you can always destroy it, no harm done! Can't argue with any of that. |
|
|
|
Post by aureliuspotter on Sept 23, 2023 16:02:36 GMT
I doubt it'd make much difference to be honest. We've reached the point now where people will believe what they want to believe and everything else is dismissed as "fake news" or "the Establishment controlling the narrative or deliberately targeting contradictory voices" etc. Who would decide who is credible? David Attenborough for example. I think he's probably one of the most respected and credible figures out there...but hold on a second, he works for the BBC, he's probably been told to say climate change is real because that's their agenda and they are told what to do by their Tory management...and so it goes on and on. I can completely sympathise with those who'd rather say fuck it, I'll live my life how I want and take my chances. We've no divine right to exist as a species any more than dodos or passenger pigeons or great auks or any other species that is now extinct. At the very least, if you're going to adopt that approach, I think you should have the foresight and humility to draft a letter to your kids and grandkids explaining that you knew what climate change was but didn't care and chose to ignore the warnings and plough on regardless with something of an apology too. Maybe explain that you wanted to help but it was too expensive or too big an ask or you felt it was pointless because you thought China wasn't doing anything. Then, if everything turns out fine, you can always destroy it, no harm done! People will just stop having kids IF we get to this so called tipping point and all the boiling climate predictions are correct. Sadly there is a long history of climate related panics not coming to pass. Even after very clever scientists have predicted it and is was solid science. Boy who cried wolf syndrome. I like to take a calmer view. A guy called Michael Shellenberger has a fairly balanced view on it. And he was one of the 97% of scientists who agreed with the climate emergency. He still does. But since he's begun revealing flaws in their arguments he's suddenly becomen persona non grata. He's a conspiracy theorist they say. Its a common pattern and its quite concerning. Look him up and you'll see. Follow the money as they say. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Sept 23, 2023 16:03:06 GMT
Let's hope that the narrative is false then otherwise it's game over. The way science is communicated to the masses is piss poor, we need actual credible scientists to present their case if we want people to listen, take notice and above all else believe them. I doubt it'd make much difference to be honest. We've reached the point now where people will believe what they want to believe and everything else is dismissed as "fake news" or "the Establishment controlling the narrative or deliberately targeting contradictory voices" etc. Who would decide who is credible? David Attenborough for example. I think he's probably one of the most respected and credible figures out there...but hold on a second, he works for the BBC, he's probably been told to say climate change is real because that's their agenda and they are told what to do by their Tory management...and so it goes on and on. I can completely sympathise with those who'd rather say fuck it, I'll live my life how I want and take my chances. We've no divine right to exist as a species any more than dodos or passenger pigeons or great auks or any other species that is now extinct. At the very least, if you're going to adopt that approach, I think you should have the foresight and humility to draft a letter to your kids and grandkids explaining that you knew what climate change was but didn't care and chose to ignore the warnings and plough on regardless with something of an apology too. Maybe explain that you wanted to help but it was too expensive or too big an ask or you felt it was pointless because you thought China wasn't doing anything. Then, if everything turns out fine, you can always destroy it, no harm done! Splendid idea |
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Sept 23, 2023 16:10:19 GMT
But the thing is you are paying for not doing it out of your own pocket. And the worse climate change gets the more you will pay. You may well be right but the cold hard facts are that a big percentage of families in this country are terrified first and foremost with putting food in their kids lunch boxes. Being coerced into spending thousands on heat pumps, ev cars and ever increased costs all over due to green issues is alien to them. They need to feed the kids. Buying a tesla is summat rich fuckers do. Most people are shit scared they can't afford to live or pay the rent. That's why most of the wankers you see at just stop oil protests are called Tarquin and their daddy drives a bloody Bentley. And one of the big things terrifying families is the cost of heating homes. One way of reducing that is better insulated homes. That's why my point that the government scrapping the home energy efficiency workforce is a short-term saving that will cost families more. When energy prices soared in 2021/2 families needed the government to use taxpaying families' taxes to pay the energy companies to heat those inefficient homes. Surely it would make sense for the government to invest taxpayers' money into reducing taxpayers' energy use rather than boosting oil company profits next time prices soar? And that's regardless of whether carbon-related climate change is a thing or not. |
|
