|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:03:52 GMT
What mystifies me is why are the daft fuckers destroying the very grass that helps to absorb co2 Thus realsing it in to the atmosphere The final time I say this. The entire point of ER is that individual actions are not the problem. Cutting up a bit of a lawn makes no difference. Building a lorry park does.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:06:34 GMT
Do as I say not as I do ay Lilfraise there is a word for that Hypocrisy young man, by using the products of these evil polluters you are helping to fund the pollution they are causing. One can live within a society and still believe it needs improving. What are you doing actively to improve it ?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 17, 2020 20:06:57 GMT
If they are so bothered why don't they put their XR T-shirts on, go to Nantgarw, Hereford, York etc and help the poor bastards clear the shit out of their houses left by the floods? That would be a brilliant publicity stunt Clayton, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Feb 17, 2020 20:09:25 GMT
If they are so bothered why don't they put their XR T-shirts on, go to Nantgarw, Hereford, York etc and help the poor bastards clear the shit out of their houses left by the floods? Why don't you?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:11:57 GMT
What mystifies me is why are the daft fuckers destroying the very grass that helps to absorb co2 Thus realsing it in to the atmosphere The final time I say this. The entire point of ER is that individual actions are not the problem. Cutting up a bit of a lawn makes no difference. Building a lorry park does. Is the individual building the hypothetical lorry park any more responsible than thousands of idiots digging up grass ?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:13:05 GMT
If they are so bothered why don't they put their XR T-shirts on, go to Nantgarw, Hereford, York etc and help the poor bastards clear the shit out of their houses left by the floods? Why don't you? Why don't all of you's
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:17:55 GMT
The final time I say this. The entire point of ER is that individual actions are not the problem. Cutting up a bit of a lawn makes no difference. Building a lorry park does. Is the individual building the hypothetical lorry park any more responsible than thousands of idiots digging up grass ? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 17, 2020 20:18:03 GMT
What mystifies me is why are the daft fuckers destroying the very grass that helps to absorb co2 Thus realsing it in to the atmosphere The final time I say this. The entire point of ER is that individual actions are not the problem. Cutting up a bit of a lawn makes no difference. Building a lorry park does. So the point of ER is to highlight global warming by adding to it Wouldn't they be better digging a few holes in tarmac and plant a few trees
|
|
|
Post by vokeswagen on Feb 17, 2020 20:22:43 GMT
Why don't you? Why don't all of you's Why do you bother blocking me if you're going to read my posts anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:23:43 GMT
One can live within a society and still believe it needs improving. What are you doing actively to improve it ? I have protested with ER. I vote for environmentally-proactive political parties. I work at a school that has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2030 and am part of the team working to make that happen, although I believe it should be 2025 personally. I have lowered my consumption of red meat. I have worked previously in solar energy as part of my time at university, designing PV cells and working on analysis of current outputs. I bought a new car last year that was more fuel-efficient than my previous car, and it was second-hand, which actually has a far bigger impact than you'd think! I buy food products that are sourced locally as much as possible. I recycle as most do. A lot of people do the same as me and a lot do far more, the point being that my impact is far lower than that of an entire multinational.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:25:30 GMT
The final time I say this. The entire point of ER is that individual actions are not the problem. Cutting up a bit of a lawn makes no difference. Building a lorry park does. So the point of ER is to highlight global warming by adding to it Wouldn't they be better digging a few holes in tarmac and plant a few trees It adds nothing, clearing a piece of grass that size. Not in any way a noticeable amount of CO2 added. They do plant trees actually, and the march I attended included a mass tree planting, which was then removed by police.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:29:17 GMT
So the point of ER is to highlight global warming by adding to it Wouldn't they be better digging a few holes in tarmac and plant a few trees It adds nothing, clearing a piece of grass that size. Not in any way a noticeable amount of CO2 added. They do plant trees actually, and the march I attended included a mass tree planting, which was then removed by police. Were you helping Jeremy he has a lot of trees to plant well he would have done.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:31:21 GMT
Is the individual building the hypothetical lorry park any more responsible than thousands of idiots digging up grass ? Yes. Why he's an individual ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:31:44 GMT
It adds nothing, clearing a piece of grass that size. Not in any way a noticeable amount of CO2 added. They do plant trees actually, and the march I attended included a mass tree planting, which was then removed by police. Were you helping Jeremy he has a lot of trees to plant well he would have done. I don't know what that means.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:32:43 GMT
It's a company backed by trinity college. But it isn't about whether it's one person or not. It's how much they pollute. And the average person in the UK buying a car, driving, flying etc has nothing on the top 100 companies like Shell, BP, Exxon etc.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:33:35 GMT
What are you doing actively to improve it ? I have protested with ER. I vote for environmentally-proactive political parties. I work at a school that has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2030 and am part of the team working to make that happen, although I believe it should be 2025 personally. I have lowered my consumption of red meat. I have worked previously in solar energy as part of my time at university, designing PV cells and working on analysis of current outputs. I bought a new car last year that was more fuel-efficient than my previous car, and it was second-hand, which actually has a far bigger impact than you'd think! I buy food products that are sourced locally as much as possible. I recycle as most do. A lot of people do the same as me and a lot do far more, the point being that my impact is far lower than that of an entire multinational. Well done every little helps as in the same way everyone polluting adds to the problem simple.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:35:16 GMT
I have protested with ER. I vote for environmentally-proactive political parties. I work at a school that has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2030 and am part of the team working to make that happen, although I believe it should be 2025 personally. I have lowered my consumption of red meat. I have worked previously in solar energy as part of my time at university, designing PV cells and working on analysis of current outputs. I bought a new car last year that was more fuel-efficient than my previous car, and it was second-hand, which actually has a far bigger impact than you'd think! I buy food products that are sourced locally as much as possible. I recycle as most do. A lot of people do the same as me and a lot do far more, the point being that my impact is far lower than that of an entire multinational. Well done every little helps as in the same way everyone polluting adds to the problem simple. Every little doesn't really help though, because every little I do makes no difference to almost all emissions on earth which are caused by large companies, who will continue to do so unless forced to change. You won't stop individuals buying cars, but you might force companies to build them more sustainably or stop lying about emissions in tests if you regulate them properly.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 20:37:02 GMT
It's a company backed by trinity college. But it isn't about whether it's one person or not. It's how much they pollute. And the average person in the UK buying a car, driving, flying etc has nothing on the top 100 companies like Shell, BP, Exxon etc. Really so millions of individuals the likes of me and you buying their products and using them is not adding to pollution
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 20:40:11 GMT
It's a company backed by trinity college. But it isn't about whether it's one person or not. It's how much they pollute. And the average person in the UK buying a car, driving, flying etc has nothing on the top 100 companies like Shell, BP, Exxon etc. Really so millions of individuals the likes of me and you buying their products and using them is not adding to pollution people will not stop buying the products, so the companies have to be regulated. The companies knowingly mis-sell their products, and openly engage in activities dangerous for the environment.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 17, 2020 20:41:12 GMT
I think that Population matters are saying that people in developing countries are still having too many births....the reasons may be lack of development( they are not blaming them and they recognise at the moment they are not the major consumers)....as I understand it. Indeed in more developed countries the birthrate has decreased and longevity increased....the victim of our own success. ............ I think...I don't claim to know...nor know the solutions.....I just think that there are too many people on the planet for it to be sustainable...perhaps an obvious, useless piece of information.....but it might be the elephant in the room They are wrong. Check this brilliant video (appreciate it is a long one - but it addresses this point and several other misplaced preconceptions about the developing world) As far as I can see Partick the video is agreeing 100% with Population Matters about the concern that we should have about population growth and its impact , particularly since 1800. In the opening 7 minutes it talks about" huge migrations", "soaring skyscrapers", " ravenous appetites", " huge slums". For me in the global world, the developing world will try to migrate to the developed...and consume more....and I don't blame them for that. The video uses Dakkar and Bangladesh as examples of vastly overpopulated cities. Specifically on your point about misconceptions...the example given in the video whereby the strong women leaders in the communities are using contraception , wanting to only have two children and this improvement correlates with a better standard of living and greater longevity is EXACTLY what Population Concern IS SAYING as a strategy to halt/ reduce population growth ..the video refers to a " cultural shift by families" ( Funnily enough I have also read studies whereby inroads have been made against FGM only when the strong WOMEN leaders in those communities were convinced that it was wrong.....it has also been my argument that within the Muslim community in the UK Progress will only be made against extremism when the leaders WITHIN those communities take the lead) Partick in my opinion if you read the bullet points of the strategy of PM that I've posted it exactly reflects the optimism of the video...WOMEN leaders, Family Planning, Smaller families, Better quality of life. ...the video exemplifies the possible success of Population Matters' approach....if we could implement it there would be reason for hope. I shall look at it again in small detail but I certainly disagree with you that PM are wrong. I'm not sure that it addresses the real issues of Sustainability which are NOT about the survival of Mankind( should that now be 'Personkind'?)....but about the survival of the planet....in my simplistic way of looking at it......we have now become aware of the damage to the oceans particularly through plastics....this is a problem both in the developed and developing world ( it isnt a competition between the two)...but it stands to sense....more people = more plastics...particularly when we are talking BILLIONS more in a relatively short period of time. LIKEWISE Rainforests. POPULATION growth is a concern.
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Feb 17, 2020 20:42:41 GMT
If they are so bothered why don't they put their XR T-shirts on, go to Nantgarw, Hereford, York etc and help the poor bastards clear the shit out of their houses left by the floods? Why don't you? Because by time I get there you will have gone and done it all
|
|
|
Post by heyzeus on Feb 17, 2020 20:43:24 GMT
Really so millions of individuals the likes of me and you buying their products and using them is not adding to pollution people will not stop buying the products, so the companies have to be regulated. The companies knowingly mis-sell their products, and openly engage in activities dangerous for the environment. I don't know why you're bothering mate. Carps thinks climate change is a Muslim conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 21:26:58 GMT
In bigger news, amazing if true! About f**king time!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Feb 17, 2020 21:32:45 GMT
They are wrong. Check this brilliant video (appreciate it is a long one - but it addresses this point and several other misplaced preconceptions about the developing world) As far as I can see Partick the video is agreeing 100% with Population Matters about the concern that we should have about population growth and its impact , particularly since 1800. In the opening 7 minutes it talks about" huge migrations", "soaring skyscrapers", " ravenous appetites", " huge slums". For me in the global world, the developing world will try to migrate to the developed...and consume more....and I don't blame them for that. The video uses Dakkar and Bangladesh as examples of vastly overpopulated cities. Specifically on your point about misconceptions...the example given in the video whereby the strong women leaders in the communities are using contraception , wanting to only have two children and this improvement correlates with a better standard of living and greater longevity is EXACTLY what Population Concern IS SAYING as a strategy to halt/ reduce population growth ..the video refers to a " cultural shift by families" ( Funnily enough I have also read studies whereby inroads have been made against FGM only when the strong WOMEN leaders in those communities were convinced that it was wrong.....it has also been my argument that within the Muslim community in the UK Progress will only be made against extremism when the leaders WITHIN those communities take the lead) Partick in my opinion if you read the bullet points of the strategy of PM that I've posted it exactly reflects the optimism of the video...WOMEN leaders, Family Planning, Smaller families, Better quality of life. ...the video exemplifies the possible success of Population Matters' approach....if we could implement it there would be reason for hope. I shall look at it again in small detail but I certainly disagree with you that PM are wrong. I'm not sure that it addresses the real issues of Sustainability which are NOT about the survival of Mankind( should that now be 'Personkind'?)....but about the survival of the planet....in my simplistic way of looking at it......we have now become aware of the damage to the oceans particularly through plastics....this is a problem both in the developed and developing world ( it isnt a competition between the two)...but it stands to sense....more people = more plastics...particularly when we are talking BILLIONS more in a relatively short period of time. LIKEWISE Rainforests. POPULATION growth is a concern. Interesting what different folk take from the same material. My main take was the notion that population growth is fuelled by large families in developing countries is wrong. Increased life expectancy is the driver as a consequence of increased child mortality and folk living longer. The other thing that struck me is that the period of exponential growth has passed and growth going forward is slow and possibly even go down. The real challenge we face is if people in developing countries end up with similar behaviours as us in the advanced economies. Well, that’s how I see it! If you do believe population growth needs addressing, then you need to address the major causes which is not birth rate as mentioned above. Meaning we need more people to die than currently do. And seeing as, the song goes, that children are our future I reckon that means we would have to have a cull of old folk.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 21:36:20 GMT
It's a company backed by trinity college. But it isn't about whether it's one person or not. It's how much they pollute. And the average person in the UK buying a car, driving, flying etc has nothing on the top 100 companies like Shell, BP, Exxon etc. Where do you stand on building on Green Belt/Field sites to supply the ever growing population in the Uk ? supply and demand or pollution ?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 21:41:11 GMT
It's a company backed by trinity college. But it isn't about whether it's one person or not. It's how much they pollute. And the average person in the UK buying a car, driving, flying etc has nothing on the top 100 companies like Shell, BP, Exxon etc. Where do you stand on building on Green Belt/Field sites to supply the ever growing population in the Uk ? supply and demand or pollution ? I don't know to be honest, I haven't looked much into it or heard much about it.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 17, 2020 21:46:32 GMT
Where do you stand on building on Green Belt/Field sites to supply the ever growing population in the Uk ? supply and demand or pollution ? I don't know to be honest, I haven't looked much into it or heard much about it. I suggest you do it will certainly ruin more green space than the odd lorry park.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 21:50:13 GMT
I don't know to be honest, I haven't looked much into it or heard much about it. I suggest you do it will certainly ruin more green space than the odd lorry park. Thanks for the suggestion.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 17, 2020 21:56:55 GMT
As far as I can see Partick the video is agreeing 100% with Population Matters about the concern that we should have about population growth and its impact , particularly since 1800. In the opening 7 minutes it talks about" huge migrations", "soaring skyscrapers", " ravenous appetites", " huge slums". For me in the global world, the developing world will try to migrate to the developed...and consume more....and I don't blame them for that. The video uses Dakkar and Bangladesh as examples of vastly overpopulated cities. Specifically on your point about misconceptions...the example given in the video whereby the strong women leaders in the communities are using contraception , wanting to only have two children and this improvement correlates with a better standard of living and greater longevity is EXACTLY what Population Concern IS SAYING as a strategy to halt/ reduce population growth ..the video refers to a " cultural shift by families" ( Funnily enough I have also read studies whereby inroads have been made against FGM only when the strong WOMEN leaders in those communities were convinced that it was wrong.....it has also been my argument that within the Muslim community in the UK Progress will only be made against extremism when the leaders WITHIN those communities take the lead) Partick in my opinion if you read the bullet points of the strategy of PM that I've posted it exactly reflects the optimism of the video...WOMEN leaders, Family Planning, Smaller families, Better quality of life. ...the video exemplifies the possible success of Population Matters' approach....if we could implement it there would be reason for hope. I shall look at it again in small detail but I certainly disagree with you that PM are wrong. I'm not sure that it addresses the real issues of Sustainability which are NOT about the survival of Mankind( should that now be 'Personkind'?)....but about the survival of the planet....in my simplistic way of looking at it......we have now become aware of the damage to the oceans particularly through plastics....this is a problem both in the developed and developing world ( it isnt a competition between the two)...but it stands to sense....more people = more plastics...particularly when we are talking BILLIONS more in a relatively short period of time. LIKEWISE Rainforests. POPULATION growth is a concern. Interesting what different folk take from the same material. My main take was the notion that population growth is fuelled by large families in developing countries is wrong. Increased life expectancy is the driver as a consequence of increased child mortality and folk living longer. The other thing that struck me is that the period of exponential growth has passed and growth going forward is slow and possibly even go down. The real challenge we face is if people in developing countries end up with similar behaviours as us in the advanced economies. Well, that’s how I see it! If you do believe population growth needs addressing, then you need to address the major causes which is not birth rate as mentioned above. Meaning we need more people to die than currently do. And seeing as, the song goes, that children are our future I reckon that means we would have to have a cull of old folk. I've no real.idea how to address it..except to say that those strategies advocated by Population Concern are the EXACT ones of good practice used in the video as good examples but they are not universally adopted.I think that the video offers 3 " projections" on degrees of optimism. I don't think anyone is advocating a cull but it seems that the wealthier people become, the longer they live, the less children they tend to have....not as a sequential consequence but there is a correlation. I think that the "succesful " examples in the video are exactly what Population Matters are saying. But surely it is not just about trying to maintain a high human population it is also about trying to change/ reduce consumption/ lifestyle....I've never said that I'm against that ( it's absolutely and unambiguously clear that we need to do something about plastic usage for example, the evidence in the oceans is undeniable) but I think I am making a simple( to me) point...more people= more impact on the planet. I don't think that we should miss the point that it certainly isn't just about humans. Sustainability is about the earth itself and all the life it supports. And because the developing world consumes less per person compared to the west, I don't think that we should ignore the population growth there....because in the global future they are bound to want to migrate to the west or to find other ways to join the party and to consume....I don't think that we can blame them for that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 23:39:36 GMT
So the point of ER is to highlight global warming by adding to it Wouldn't they be better digging a few holes in tarmac and plant a few trees It adds nothing, clearing a piece of grass that size. Not in any way a noticeable amount of CO2 added. They do plant trees actually, and the march I attended included a mass tree planting, which was then removed by police. Is there anything to be said for another mass- tree planting?
|
|