Extinction Rebellion

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Burnley Ace
Posts: 3525
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
Been Liked: 651 times
Has Liked: 2879 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Burnley Ace » Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:34 pm

Reckoner wrote:They are protesting in the UK because they are from the UK. I agree it needs countries like China, but the only pressure that can have any effect on China is from governments like the UK, and the UK government will only act if they think it is in their own interests because of domestic opinion.
Yes the Chinese government has a long history of listening to the U.K, as has India and the USA. Domestic opinion seems to be that the uK gov is doing more than any other G20 country, we all pay extra for green energy, ER are unrealistic with their demands and it needs a world solution

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by AndrewJB » Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:34 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:An unorganised group with no finance eh.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/p ... 64301.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Do you think lawyers, a baroness, and a newspaper columnist wouldn’t join a protest unless they were paid?

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:38 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Do you think lawyers, a baroness, and a newspaper columnist wouldn’t join a protest unless they were paid?
Never met a lawyer that works for free.
ER have some big money backers.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by AndrewJB » Thu Oct 17, 2019 9:44 pm

The vast majority of XR people seem to disagree with the station protests, and the people who did it were definitely not protesting against public transport. It’ll take concerted action by governments to avoid a dramatic “point of no return” where the earth could be in for tens of millennia or altered climate. Consider Venus: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2475/nasa ... habitable/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; it’s an extreme example, but it shows that once the balance is tipped, things can change in big ways.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:01 pm

AndrewJB wrote:The vast majority of XR people seem to disagree with the station protests, and the people who did it were definitely not protesting against public transport. It’ll take concerted action by governments to avoid a dramatic “point of no return” where the earth could be in for tens of millennia or altered climate. Consider Venus: https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2475/nasa ... habitable/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; it’s an extreme example, but it shows that once the balance is tipped, things can change in big ways.
So real question??

What do you think you could change to improve the environment??

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:04 pm

Me I picked up twenty acorns and have put them in a seed tray.
Will plant them as seedlings next year.

Easy to do for anyone.

tim_noone
Posts: 17108
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 4384 times
Has Liked: 15117 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by tim_noone » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:26 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Me I picked up twenty acorns and have put them in a seed tray.
Will plant them as seedlings next year.

Easy to do for anyone.
Is that you swampy?

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:49 pm

Well I try to do my bit.
Most people do **** all but claim to be the ultimate environmentalist.

I go around planting fruit shrubs so. It’s can feed on them.


You may mock but what are you doing??????

dougcollins
Posts: 6601
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:23 am
Been Liked: 1780 times
Has Liked: 1777 times
Location: Yarkshire

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by dougcollins » Thu Oct 17, 2019 11:04 pm

Eating your fruit?

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by aggi » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:10 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:Never met a lawyer that works for free.
ER have some big money backers.
It's so common that there's an actual phrase for it, pro bono.
These 2 users liked this post: ZizkovClaret Rileybobs

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:15 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:Never met a lawyer that works for free.
ER have some big money backers.

2 question.

1) Who are these "big money backers?
and
2) Why is their funding more important than the argument they're making?

0) The number of answers i expect

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Rowls » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:21 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:So real question??
What do you think you could change to improve the environment??
I switched from pencils to pens to cut down my carbon footprint.

I no longer sketch in charcoal either for the same reason and I do my level best not to fart too much.

I always buy products from one of the many businesses who like to talk about what they're doing to help the environment. Especially if there's a polar bear or a smiling "ethnic" child somewhere in their publicity.

"Yeah, but these are only little things Rowls" you might say to yourself but I truly believe these little things make a big difference. I like to think that every time I hold a fart in it helps save a polar bear somewhere.

OK, so levels of breeding polar bears are at record highs but it's not unfeasible that these beasts will all plop into the melted ocean and we'll sizzle to death in the not too distant future.

I always go with the scientific consensus and it definitely says that we have only 12 months or less to all stop farting immediately.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:28 am

Good satire has an element of truth to it. But when you're stupid and don't understand what the scientific consensus says, and then try to make satire based on your stupid and wrong understanding, then the satire just comes out as additional stupidity.

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10088
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4161 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:29 am

Someones latest ban is up it seems
This user liked this post: Murger

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:39 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Someones latest ban is up it seems
On this account, yes.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:43 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:2 question.

1) Who are these "big money backers?
and
2) Why is their funding more important than the argument they're making?

0) The number of answers i expect
Apparently they have 2.4 million in their coffers. These people protesting are being fed info to get them to do damage to areas that they should be supporting.

Even they admitted a massive own goal disrupting electric public transport, supposed to the future.

I suggest their not to bright.

I also don’t believe there arguments to be fair.

One expert (ha ha) that I watched said they were missing the major world issue, that’s population growth. He said it was projected to grow by 3 billion ( don’t remember the time scale) and that was the biggest issue facing the earth. The problem was lack of contraception in the third world where the growth is happening.

Anything you do will be cancelled out by this growth.

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Rowls » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:45 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Good satire has an element of truth to it. But when you're stupid and don't understand what the scientific consensus says, and then try to make satire based on your stupid and wrong understanding, then the satire just comes out as additional stupidity.
No stars ** ** ** **

Only "stupid".

I must try harder.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:46 am

Rowls wrote:I switched from pencils to pens to cut down my carbon footprint.

I no longer sketch in charcoal either for the same reason and I do my level best not to fart too much.

I always buy products from one of the many businesses who like to talk about what they're doing to help the environment. Especially if there's a polar bear or a smiling "ethnic" child somewhere in their publicity.

"Yeah, but these are only little things Rowls" you might say to yourself but I truly believe these little things make a big difference. I like to think that every time I hold a fart in it helps save a polar bear somewhere.

OK, so levels of breeding polar bears are at record highs but it's not unfeasible that these beasts will all plop into the melted ocean and we'll sizzle to death in the not too distant future.

I always go with the scientific consensus and it definitely says that we have only 12 months or less to all stop farting immediately.

To be fair that says it all.

Most people just don’t give a rats arse.

Most people will change nothing, it’s just how it is.

Because it’s someone else’s problem.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:54 am

Lowbankclaret wrote:Apparently they have 2.4 million in their coffers. These people protesting are being fed info to get them to do damage to areas that they should be supporting.

Even they admitted a massive own goal disrupting electric public transport, supposed to the future.

I suggest their not to bright.

I also don’t believe there arguments to be fair.

One expert (ha ha) that I watched said they were missing the major world issue, that’s population growth. He said it was projected to grow by 3 billion ( don’t remember the time scale) and that was the biggest issue facing the earth. The problem was lack of contraception in the third world where the growth is happening.

Anything you do will be cancelled out by this growth.
Ah yes. The old population growth bullshit.

Look, i've had that argument before on here. I've explained how it's bullshit, and it took me quite a while to explain it. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it again. Long story short - there's **** all you can do about population growth without genocide, and we're not going to do genocide. And there's plenty we can do despite population growth. The "expert" you chose to listen to is full of ****, you know they're full of **** because why else would you mock them, and yet you're still peddling their bullshit. Why? Because you just don't care that it's bullshit. You're only interested in arguing against people you don't like.

I'm willing to spend the time helping you understand why you're wrong, but you first have to demonstrate at least a little bit of good faith, and a little bit of interest in being right.

CaptainKirk
Posts: 1058
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:19 pm
Been Liked: 385 times
Has Liked: 16 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by CaptainKirk » Fri Oct 18, 2019 12:34 pm

I suggest their not to bright.

Now that is funny!
Sorry, couldn't resist that!
This user liked this post: evensteadiereddie

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 12:50 pm

CaptainKirk wrote:I suggest their not to bright.

Now that is funny!
Sorry, couldn't resist that!
Yes your right that is funny, I should prove read and correct.

Herts Clarets
Posts: 3937
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:18 pm
Been Liked: 1754 times
Has Liked: 469 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Herts Clarets » Fri Oct 18, 2019 12:52 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Ah yes. The old population growth bullshit.

Look, i've had that argument before on here. I've explained how it's bullshit, and it took me quite a while to explain it. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it again. Long story short - there's **** all you can do about population growth without genocide, and we're not going to do genocide. And there's plenty we can do despite population growth. The "expert" you chose to listen to is full of ****, you know they're full of **** because why else would you mock them, and yet you're still peddling their bullshit. Why? Because you just don't care that it's bullshit. You're only interested in arguing against people you don't like.

I'm willing to spend the time helping you understand why you're wrong, but you first have to demonstrate at least a little bit of good faith, and a little bit of interest in being right.
Population growth means:

Increased demand for water
Increased demand for food
Increase in creation of pollution
Increased energy consumption
Increase in creation of greenhouse gases (if they are still known as that)

To dismiss this as "bullshit" shows an astounding level of naivety and ignorance, which given the poster I should have expected.
These 2 users liked this post: Holtyclaret LeadBelly

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 12:53 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Ah yes. The old population growth bullshit.

Look, i've had that argument before on here. I've explained how it's bullshit, and it took me quite a while to explain it. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it again. Long story short - there's **** all you can do about population growth without genocide, and we're not going to do genocide. And there's plenty we can do despite population growth. The "expert" you chose to listen to is full of ****, you know they're full of **** because why else would you mock them, and yet you're still peddling their bullshit. Why? Because you just don't care that it's bullshit. You're only interested in arguing against people you don't like.

I'm willing to spend the time helping you understand why you're wrong, but you first have to demonstrate at least a little bit of good faith, and a little bit of interest in being right.
So are you saying the growth rate is true but we cannot do anything about it??

Also are you saying it will have impact on the environment??


By the way, I think we need to do thinks to help the environment.

I am trying to some small things, however some of the things going on are just bullsh1t.

Nissan Leaf with its zero emissions badge. A joke.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Yes your right that is funny, I should prove read and correct.

See did it again.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by dsr » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:17 pm

Herts Clarets wrote:Population growth means:

Increased demand for water
Increased demand for food
Increase in creation of pollution
Increased energy consumption
Increase in creation of greenhouse gases (if they are still known as that)

To dismiss this as "[deleted]" shows an astounding level of naivety and ignorance, which given the poster I should have expected.
Water isn't a problem (the other four things could be).

For one thing, the seas are full of water, and desalination can already be done. Getting it to the centre of continents is also possible - they do it with oil, they can do it with water. And for another thing, it doesn't matter what you do with water - drink it, cook with it, pour it on the fields, wash with it, flush it down the toilet, whatever - it still remains water, and will ultimately go round the system and end up back in the sea. Not only plentiful, but also infinitely recycled - even by accident.

Herts Clarets
Posts: 3937
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:18 pm
Been Liked: 1754 times
Has Liked: 469 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Herts Clarets » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:27 pm

dsr wrote:Water isn't a problem (the other four things could be).

For one thing, the seas are full of water, and desalination can already be done. Getting it to the centre of continents is also possible - they do it with oil, they can do it with water. And for another thing, it doesn't matter what you do with water - drink it, cook with it, pour it on the fields, wash with it, flush it down the toilet, whatever - it still remains water, and will ultimately go round the system and end up back in the sea. Not only plentiful, but also infinitely recycled - even by accident.
Increased demand for water. Increased demand for energy to purify, desalinate, transport to areas needing water. All a draw on resources.

And if getting water to the centre of continents is possible, why are their droughts in central Africa that lead to the deaths of thousands? If it was that easy to get clean water there, surely it would be done. You are also going to have conflict between land for people to live on and land to grow food on. Sure there is loads of unoccupied land, however it is unoccupied for a reason - lack of water, infertile land etc. people will want to live in an area where food can be grown.

NottsClaret
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
Been Liked: 2590 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by NottsClaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:33 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Long story short - there's **** all you can do about population growth without genocide, and we're not going to do genocide.
You don't need genocide, just reproduce a bit less. All 8 billion people alive today are going to to die one way or t'other. If we could reign in making more humans quite so readily, it'd sort itself out before we've fetched all the bags out of the sea.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by dsr » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:35 pm

Herts Clarets wrote:Increased demand for water. Increased demand for energy to purify, desalinate, transport to areas needing water. All a draw on resources.

And if getting water to the centre of continents is possible, why are their droughts in central Africa that lead to the deaths of thousands? If it was that easy to get clean water there, surely it would be done. You are also going to have conflict between land for people to live on and land to grow food on. Sure there is loads of unoccupied land, however it is unoccupied for a reason - lack of water, infertile land etc. people will want to live in an area where food can be grown.
Why are there droughts in Central Africa? Money. We even have droughts in this country where water is rationed, and that's in a place where there is plenty of money. No-one is willing to pay for the water to reach Central Africa at present. (Not saying there will be enough for large scale irrigation, but certainly enough to prevent thirst.

If there is loads of water to drink, people won't care about wanting to live where food can be grown. Five million people live in Phoenix, Arizona.

Technologically, desalination is getting more efficient. Nanotechnology (it's hoped) might well make it very cheap to do.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:36 pm

Herts Clarets wrote:Population growth means:

Increased demand for water
Increased demand for food
Increase in creation of pollution
Increased energy consumption
Increase in creation of greenhouse gases (if they are still known as that)

To dismiss this as "bullshit" shows an astounding level of naivety and ignorance, which given the poster I should have expected.
Yes, genius. I ******* know all that. The argument that population growth means nothing can be done without tackling population growth IS bullshit, for two reason. 1) because the only way to tackle population growth is genocide, which we're not going to do, and 2) we don't need to tackle population growth to stop being reliant on fossil fuels.

I find it impossible to believe you're unaware of those facts which means your post is low-effort bullshit aimed not at providing actual content but instead at garnering support from ******* morons who don't want us to do anything about climate change.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by dsr » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:39 pm

NottsClaret wrote:You don't need genocide, just reproduce a bit less. All 8 billion people alive today are going to to die one way or t'other. If we could reign in making more humans quite so readily, it'd sort itself out before we've fetched all the bags out of the sea.
Eventually, people will reproduce less. I don't know what the population will be before we get there, though!

Why do poor people have lots of children? There are other factors, of course, but two of the biggest are: 1 - in poor countries where old age pensions are negligible or non-existent, you need children to look after you when you get too old to work. 2 - in poor countries where health care is poor and death rates are high, you need lots of children to try and ensure some of them survive.

As the rich part of the world has demonstrated, once people realise they don't need children to live in old age, and that they have universal expectation that their children will survive, then the birth rate will drop.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:40 pm

dsr wrote:Water isn't a problem (the other four things could be).

For one thing, the seas are full of water, and desalination can already be done. Getting it to the centre of continents is also possible - they do it with oil, they can do it with water. And for another thing, it doesn't matter what you do with water - drink it, cook with it, pour it on the fields, wash with it, flush it down the toilet, whatever - it still remains water, and will ultimately go round the system and end up back in the sea. Not only plentiful, but also infinitely recycled - even by accident.

To say water is not a problem is either incorrect or we have been duped for the last 30-40 years with campaigns asking for money to dig wells for Africa.

I do often wonder how after so long and so much money raised, sure they have enough wells to provide water, but the campaigns are still ongoing.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:52 pm

NottsClaret wrote:You don't need genocide, just reproduce a bit less. All 8 billion people alive today are going to to die one way or t'other. If we could reign in making more humans quite so readily, it'd sort itself out before we've fetched all the bags out of the sea.
And you people think i'm naive. How are you going to have people reproduce less? We're already close to falling below replacement rate of reproduction in the west, and the people reproducing the most aren't the ones causing the climate to boil our planet.

Reproduction isn't the only cause of population growth. Fewer people dying is a bigger "problem". So how are you going to tackle that? Are you going to deny healthcare to certain people? Are you going to deliberately reduce life expectancy? How do you achieve that in a humane, moral way?

So how do we do it? Do we deliberately let the sick die? Do we kill off the disabled? Do we conduct genetic tests to determine who is allowed to procreate to ensure that only the genetically strongest of our human race reproduce?

Or do we just switch to solar energy, wind energy or other renewable energies to boil our kettles and drive our cars?

Which option are you more comfortable with? I really, really hope it's not the genocidal option, but i can't be sure right now.
Last edited by Imploding Turtle on Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 1:53 pm

For me if I was driving ER.

I would several clear actions normal people could get behind, and yes protest. But absolutely keep the public onside.

I would point to celebrity chefs campaign on rod and line caught Tuna, at the time every supermarket started to stock it but most have stopped and can only find it at Aldi. If I cannot buy line caught I simply don’t buy it anymore.

So run your campaign on specifics people can do, the power of the buying publics money is massive.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:00 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:And you people think i'm naive. How are you going to have people reproduce less? We're already close to falling below replacement rate of reproduction in the west, and the people reproducing the most aren't the ones causing the climate to boil our planet.

Reproduction isn't the only cause of population growth. Fewer people dying is a bigger "problem". So how are you going to tackle that? Are you going to deny healthcare to certain people? Are you going to deliberately reduce life expectancy? How do you achieve that in a humane, moral way?

So how do we do it? Do we deliberately let the sick die? Do we kill off the disabled? Do we conduct genetic tests to determine who is allowed to procreate to ensure that only the genetically strongest of our human race reproduce?

Or do we just switch to solar energy, wind energy or other renewable energies to boil our kettles and drive our cars?

Which option are you more comfortable with? I really, really hope it's not the genocidal option, but i can't be sure right now.
Your just being a bit sensationalist here.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting killing people.

As you say the west isn’t the real problem. It’s population is either static or reducing.

Countries that can not afford contraception are the ones who are needing to do deforestation and land clearance.

I would suggest doing something about supplying cheap or free contraception.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:08 pm

I have said many times we need to improve renewable energy efficiency.

The UK is probably ahead in energy production from renewables, I think I heard at one point this year we produced just over half by renewable sources.

But surely this issue is so much bigger and more than renewable energies.

All this stuff about eating less meat, eating more veggies. Etc

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:09 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Your just being a bit sensationalist here.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting killing people.

As you say the west isn’t the real problem. It’s population is either static or reducing.

Countries that can not afford contraception are the ones who are needing to do deforestation and land clearance.

I would suggest doing something about supplying cheap or free contraception.
lol. The Venn diagram of those who oppose foreign aid and those who oppose doing anything about climate change is, i imagine, almost a circle.

But that aside, i will repeat this one more ******* time. Population growth isn't the problem. Increased CO2 emissions are the problem. We can have population growth without increased CO2 emissions. It's obviously far, far easier to phase out fossil fuels than to reduce the population of the entire ******* planet.

Anyway, let's pretend we did provide those countries that can't afford contraception with condoms and pills and whatnot to reduce their birthrate (a form of genocide, but whatever), please name for me the countries that both cannot afford their own contraceptive, and are such a major cause of CO2 emissions that reducing their population has a bigger effect on preventing warming than just simply phasing out fossil fuels? Uganda? Congo? Who?

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by dsr » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:14 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:To say water is not a problem is either incorrect or we have been duped for the last 30-40 years with campaigns asking for money to dig wells for Africa.

I do often wonder how after so long and so much money raised, sure they have enough wells to provide water, but the campaigns are still ongoing.
To clarify, there is lots of water around for all the world's needs, and there always will be because it can't be used up.

There are problems about getting the water to the right place. These problems have a technological solution but the no-one is currently willing to spend the money.

NottsClaret
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
Been Liked: 2590 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by NottsClaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:15 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:And you people think i'm naive. How are you going to have people reproduce less? We're already close to falling below replacement rate of reproduction in the west, and the people reproducing the most aren't the ones causing the climate to boil our planet.

Reproduction isn't the only cause of population growth. Fewer people dying is a bigger "problem". So how are you going to tackle that? Are you going to deny healthcare to certain people? Are you going to deliberately reduce life expectancy? How do you achieve that in a humane, moral way?

So how do we do it? Do we deliberately let the sick die? Do we kill off the disabled? Do we conduct genetic tests to determine who is allowed to procreate to ensure that only the genetically strongest of our human race reproduce?

Or do we just switch to solar energy, wind energy or other renewable energies to boil our kettles and drive our cars?

Which option are you more comfortable with? I really, really hope it's not the genocidal option, but i can't be sure right now.
Blimey, you've really come back full Turtle today. I know you've been missing the confrontation for a month or whatever it's been, but why not ease your way back in.

The problem really isn't people dying, this idea you have about killing people off and genetic testing is weird. 100 years from right now the population is 0 if we stopped reproducing today. That's all I'm saying. The planet would be saved, the polar bears will be cold again and we'll have trees growing on deserted highways.

I don't have the answer, nobody does. But getting people to reproduce less might be more achievable than getting everyone to stop using cars and burning oil, because that isn't happening anyway until we've sucked the last drop of carbon out of a rock.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by AndrewJB » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:16 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:So real question??

What do you think you could change to improve the environment??
The government has to move it forward, and the government has to push it forward globally too. We did it before when faced with a hole in the ozone, and we can do it again.

Individually it’s possible to consider the impact our lives have on the environment, and make small changes, that might lead to bigger changes further on. The first step is being aware.

Personally, I cut flying in 2009 from sometimes six return flights in a year to one (fewer than one per year averaged out over the decade since). I’ve always cycled since I moved here, so that wasn’t a big problem, but power usage, and waste had a lot of scope for improvement. Now the house has a robust recycling set up - nearly all food waste goes into the garden, and the bin is filled with unrecyclable plastics now. It’s not about living in the forest and eating only berries.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:30 pm

NottsClaret wrote:
I don't have the answer, nobody does. But getting people to reproduce less might be more achievable than getting everyone to stop using cars and burning oil, because that isn't happening anyway until we've sucked the last drop of carbon out of a rock.

This is, i think, the dumbest thing i've ever been posted on the internet.

Clearly what i'm arguing is that everyone stop using cars. Clearly that's something i've advocated. Clearly that's something that all of us on the "hey, maybe we shouldn't burn so much fossil fuel" side of the argument is saying. "EVERYONE STOP USING CARS!" Yep. Clearly.

This is why i lose my patience with people like you. It doesn't matter what i say. It doesn't matter that i've only said that we should move from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. You ******* people will still read "everyone stop using cars and burning oil".
because that isn't happening anyway until we've sucked the last drop of carbon out of a rock
Do you even realise what you're saying with this statement? You're saying that it is easier to convince over 7 billion people to reproduce less than it is to convince some of those 7 billion people to vote for politicians who aren't owned by a few oil, gas and coal companies. Your implied belief is that it's easier to convince billions of people to suppress a biological imperative than it is to convince them to switch to cheaper, cleaner energy sources.

I've never considered you an idiot but I think you need to sit down and think carefully about just how stupid that statement of yours is.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:47 pm

dsr wrote:To clarify, there is lots of water around for all the world's needs, and there always will be because it can't be used up.

There are problems about getting the water to the right place. These problems have a technological solution but the no-one is currently willing to spend the money.
It's more than just that they're not willing to spend money on, it's that they specifically want to keep poor countries poor and keeping them in drought helps with that. The rich countries could easily solve the water crises around the world by funding desalination plants and pipelines, but that would be to the detriment of those rich countries. Not just the immediate monetary costs but also the costs to the their economies when those once poor, drought-ridden countries grow their economies and become less desperate.

For decades we've raped these countries for their natural resources, and drought, famine and poverty has helped us do that. It's helped keep these countries away from democracy, or in weak democracies that allows our corporations to cheaply enter by bribing dictators and key politicians in order to take their resources for next to nothing. Essentially this is why many oil-rich countries are not rich countries, or democracies. It's a side of our version of capitalism that rich capitalist countries like ours likes to pretend doesn't exist, and yet it's pretty easy to understand. The reason our energy is fairly cheap is because we buy it for cheap from countries who oppress millions of people so that their leaders can personally be enriched by us buying their resources for cheap. If China, Russia, the middle east, all of Africa were all democracies we wouldn't be anywhere near as rich as we are. So our governments and corporations will only ever pay lip-service to the idea of them becoming democracies. They'll never be proactive about ending a famine or a drought unless either it benefits us economically, or if they're shamed into doing it by public pressure (because they want to keep their jobs).

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 6962
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2145 times
Has Liked: 3063 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:56 pm

i fly up to 10 times a year, living abroad, but i dont drive, my main public transport methods are electric, and i have no kids.

Think im doing my bit

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:57 pm

AndrewJB wrote:The government has to move it forward, and the government has to push it forward globally too. We did it before when faced with a hole in the ozone, and we can do it again.

Individually it’s possible to consider the impact our lives have on the environment, and make small changes, that might lead to bigger changes further on. The first step is being aware.

Personally, I cut flying in 2009 from sometimes six return flights in a year to one (fewer than one per year averaged out over the decade since). I’ve always cycled since I moved here, so that wasn’t a big problem, but power usage, and waste had a lot of scope for improvement. Now the house has a robust recycling set up - nearly all food waste goes into the garden, and the bin is filled with unrecyclable plastics now. It’s not about living in the forest and eating only berries.

Thank you a sensible answer.

I just think if people were given solid ideas backed by well supported info.

A lot of the public would change its habits.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:59 pm

ZizkovClaret wrote:i fly up to 10 times a year, living abroad, but i dont drive, my main public transport methods are electric, and i have no kids.

Think im doing my bit
Well your adding to population decline, you need to have 2 kids! To replace the two that created you.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:59 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote: I just think if people were given solid ideas backed by well supported info.
A lot of the public would change its habits.
The last 20 years disproves that. The public are ******* morons who are so lazy that they choose to believe easily debunked bullshit because they don't want to change their habits.

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 6962
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2145 times
Has Liked: 3063 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:00 pm

Lowbankclaret wrote:Well your adding to population decline, you need to have 2 kids! To replace the two that created you.
Nah, the world doesn't need another me. My sibling, aka the less defective model already has 2 kids.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:05 pm

ZizkovClaret wrote:i fly up to 10 times a year, living abroad, but i dont drive, my main public transport methods are electric, and i have no kids.

Think im doing my bit

No one cares how much you fly, or how little you drive, except frivolous morons who want to use it against you. The most important tool you have is your vote. You can fly every day if you want but if you vote for politicians who take climate change seriously then you're doing your bit.

The reverse is also true. If you're a tree-loving hippy who only eat home-grown kale and lives up a tree but vote for politicians who won't do anything about climate change then you're a bigger problem than the guy who flies every day but votes for the Green party.

NottsClaret
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
Been Liked: 2590 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by NottsClaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:08 pm

Have you been drinking Turtle? I can't even work out what you're trying to say today. Honestly.

It's been a fairly wild, incoherent return on here from you, but still good to have you back nonetheless.

BennyD
Posts: 3603
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:10 am
Been Liked: 1338 times
Has Liked: 757 times
Location: Nantwich

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by BennyD » Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:12 pm

I don’t use public transport and I’m waiting for one of these idiots to glue himself to the roof of my car. I’d be interested to see at what speed Superglue gives up its grip. However, I bet said protester would be a dam sight more interested than me.

Lowbankclaret
Posts: 6571
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:42 pm
Been Liked: 1233 times
Has Liked: 56 times

Re: Extinction Rebellion

Post by Lowbankclaret » Fri Oct 18, 2019 3:30 pm

NottsClaret wrote:Have you been drinking Turtle? I can't even work out what you're trying to say today. Honestly.

It's been a fairly wild, incoherent return on here from you, but still good to have you back nonetheless.

I agree, he does seem a little strange.

Could be blood sugars, hope he is not diabetic. High sugar levels can do that.

Post Reply