Gotta love Extinction Rebellion

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

and by dries up - you mean ends up in offshore tax havens

I think the penny is finally starting to drop with people. All the public money that has been printed via quantitative easing and bailouts. It's exited the system and resides in the tax havens of the super rich. The model only works if that money gets circulated into the local economy and stays there

The current proposed energy prize freeze is just a bailout of the energy companies, because the govt know that the whole system will collapse when millions simply can't afford to pay their bills. So rather than recirculate money back from the profiteers into our pockets (via a windfall tax) they are printing new money to give to the profiteers, that we have to somehow pay back over the next 20 years. It's madness

We’ll I was talking in simpler terms of people starting to wake up stop being consumers on steroids but you’ve taken a wider more current look ,

nothing like a good crash / crisis where people loose what they have , get in debt , find interest rates through the roof to keep us all good little desperate hamsters,

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by Archied

[Highgate]

8 hours ago, I am Ram said:

We had better hurry up with this global warming, we are due an ice age in the next 80,000-100,000 years. We have had five ice ages in 4.5 billion years, non man-made. I wonder who was to blame for warming us up from the last one, dinosaur farts maybe.

I think you've taken the debate a few steps backwards there.  There is nobody, anywhere, as far as I can tell, claiming that the climate doesn't change naturally over long periods. The question is can human also change it over shorter time periods? 

If you are genuinely interested in finding out about natural climate variation, look up Milankovitch cycles and go from there. 

[Archied]

4 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Where possible yes, although notice I was talking about re-wilding after agriculture was restructured with the introduction of lab meat (sounds delicious doesn't it? ?).  When you say bring refugees into the country, which country are you talking about?  Each country's situation is different. I'd certainly be in favour of bringing in as many refugees as possible from active war zones at least until it's safe to go back to their own country and rebuild. But your point about the constraints of housing and infrastructure are important too..

Culling population is obviously something I'd never advocate in any circumstances.  Hypothetically, trying to limit the global population may be something that would have to be attempted if the global population were to exceed our planet's capacity to produce food and water.  But that's not the position we find ourselves in.  Demographic models are predicting that the population will peak at less than 11 billion before the end of the century and then start falling.  I think with clean energies and better resource distribution, even the peak of 11 billion is manageable.  

 

I don't disagree with you about human greed being central to all our problems.  I'm saying we messed up the food chain and have taken most of the land for ourselves leaving little or nothing for other species, I mean what is that, if not a perfect demonstration of human greed?

I'd say we have another related problem though, namely short-termism. Thinking only of what's happen now and to hell with the future generations.  When you think about that's also a form of greed, wanting to use all the resources now as we please and not caring at all if we ruin the environment for those coming after us.  

As @Stive Pesley has already pointed out climate change and greed are also difficult to disentangle, but if we were to follow your advice and sort out all the self interest and corruption in our governments, financial sector and industry before then tackling climate change, it will be far, far too late to do anything about the climate.  Do you actually think we will be able to sort those issues out anytime soon?  They are not exactly new problems. 

Well again as with stive we are probably not too far apart at the core ,I just believe you’ve taken your eye off the ball , no crime as it’s what we are supposed to do , for me this current net zero drive is just more of the same ,it is built on consuming more with the con we are consuming better,

a bit of an analogy, im an alcoholic addict ,I got off the lot ( luck and hard work) I worked as a councillor with other addicts and I can’t tell you how many were diagnosed with mental health issues and believed they had mental health issues ,thing was they were still using ,, drink , puff , other stuff ,you would be astounded at the number who when they got properly clean for say 12 months found the mental health and emotional problems were if not always gone certainly much much more manageable and that’s what I see here more pills on top of what’s already a mess 

[Stive Pesley]

12 minutes ago, Archied said:

for me this current net zero drive is just more of the same ,it is built on consuming more with the con we are consuming better,

The problem is of course not the “net zero targets” themselves, but that they’re being used as excuses to postpone real action

[Highgate]

26 minutes ago, Archied said:

Well again as with stive we are probably not too far apart at the core ,I just believe you’ve taken your eye off the ball , no crime as it’s what we are supposed to do , for me this current net zero drive is just more of the same ,it is built on consuming more with the con we are consuming better,

a bit of an analogy, im an alcoholic addict ,I got off the lot ( luck and hard work) I worked as a councillor with other addicts and I can’t tell you how many were diagnosed with mental health issues and believed they had mental health issues ,thing was they were still using ,, drink , puff , other stuff ,you would be astounded at the number who when they got properly clean for say 12 months found the mental health and emotional problems were if not always gone certainly much much more manageable and that’s what I see here more pills on top of what’s already a mess 

I think we also fundamentally disagree about nature and extent of the climate change problem.  I see climate change as a human made wrecking ball coming our way, if we don't act fast to mitigate the worst effects. It's clear that you think that's being alarmist.  However I believe  the physics underpinning climate change are extremely difficult to dispute. I don't see it as simply a manufactured pretext for the greedy to enrich themselves further, although I do admit some people use it as an opportunity to do so...as they do with everything else. 

Well done on beating the booze. Very impressive. 

[maxjam]

The biggest problem I have with climate change is the media who in turn fuel the extremism.  

Most ordinary people know that we are changing our planet at a rapid rate and we could do things to slow or reverse the change.  We might disagree on severity, timescales and the practicality of imposing changes faster than we're ready for them (current fuel crisis!) but as has been mentioned already big business has already jumped onto the bandwagon which creates scepticism.

Sane, rational and investigative journalism died a long time ago and the partisan media is one of the biggest factors in shaping peoples opinions and beliefs leading to the fracturing of society.  Nuanced conversations are slowly dying out, you're either completely for something or you're a fascist, racist, banned from social media etc. 

Conversations around climate change will follow the same trajectory as politics and covid whereby only one narrative is approved and all other conversation is silenced and other respectable dissenting voices reduced to 'crackpots' in their field. 

Whilst CNN is now under new ownership and getting rid of the more partisan hosts the recent Project Veritas sting showed how they profited from covid and how they expect to do the same from climate change.  Bad news sells after all. 

 

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

I think we also fundamentally disagree about nature and extent of the climate change problem.  I see climate change as a human made wrecking ball coming our way, if we don't act fast to mitigate the worst effects. It's clear that you think that's being alarmist.  However I believe  the physics underpinning climate change are extremely difficult to dispute. I don't see it as simply a manufactured pretext for the greedy to enrich themselves further, although I do admit some people use it as an opportunity to do so...as they do with everything else. 

Well done on beating the booze. Very impressive. 

Yep we differ on where we believe we are at this point and what course is even realistic in the world we live in without massive change of attitude to life which I just do not see happening , even more so given the do as I say not as I do from the top and the drivers ??‍♂️

Edited September 7, 2022 by Archied

[Stive Pesley]

40 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Conversations around climate change will follow the same trajectory as politics and covid whereby only one narrative is approved and all other conversation is silenced

I think it's even more subtle than that. They actively plan to report in such a way that it just looks like this is what is happening. Because stoking that tension is what drives their revenue

Think about it - if they really did have an agenda to make everyone blindly agree that what is being reported is correct, there is no revenue stream there. No clicks from the "Loonie Lefts" furiously arguing with the "Right Wing Nutjobs". They go out of business

So to have people convinced that there is a media "conspiracy" to push one side and silence the other is actually the aim. Not to actually do it (note that the guy in the video you posted doesn't mention anything about narratives - just that they will push climate change as the new thing to get everyone riled)

The media don't have any interest in either side being "the truth".

For as long as people are duped into thinking there is a conspiracy in here somewhere it'll never get better

 

[I am Ram]

2 hours ago, Highgate said:

I think you've taken the debate a few steps backwards there.  There is nobody, anywhere, as far as I can tell, claiming that the climate doesn't change naturally over long periods. The question is can human also change it over shorter time periods? 

If you are genuinely interested in finding out about natural climate variation, look up Milankovitch cycles and go from there. 

A few steps backwards, 'How dare you !!!' 

[GboroRam]

10 hours ago, Archied said:

 

climate change is not the main threat to us ,, greed is and always has been and it’s accelerating as the greedy are getting far more rich and powerful,

Dare I get into this conversation? 

Greed is the catalyst that is fuelling the climate disaster. If there is an expensive option to research cleaner, greener energy, and a cheaper option to keep using polluting fossil fuels, any business trying to do the right thing is at a disadvantage. 

The same goes for ethical food production. The higher welfare methods come at a premium, but the low cost methods of intensive farming will always be a tempting, easy alternative. 

And the poor consumer, already squeezed by a very difficult economy, has the option to buy expensive or cheap. When you're buying on a budget, sometimes the affordable option is not in line with the ethical/climate friendly/"right" option. 

We are bombarded with messages telling us that we need to buy the latest TV, the latest phone, the newest games consoles. Our entire economy is built on the unending churn of wastefulness - to the point that obsolescence is built in by design in most new purchases. And lives are reduced to monotony so people feel the need to buy a dining table, a new sofa or a new summer wardrobe - the whole of the media tell us our style is no longer in, and we need to modernise, replace, spend money. It's the rat race that we all are told we need to participate in, otherwise the economy will decline and our standard of living will crash. 

The greed is by design. It's not a flaw, it's the horrific beauty of the system. 

[cstand]

33 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Dare I get into this conversation? 

Greed is the catalyst that is fuelling the climate disaster. If there is an expensive option to research cleaner, greener energy, and a cheaper option to keep using polluting fossil fuels, any business trying to do the right thing is at a disadvantage. 

The same goes for ethical food production. The higher welfare methods come at a premium, but the low cost methods of intensive farming will always be a tempting, easy alternative. 

And the poor consumer, already squeezed by a very difficult economy, has the option to buy expensive or cheap. When you're buying on a budget, sometimes the affordable option is not in line with the ethical/climate friendly/"right" option. 

We are bombarded with messages telling us that we need to buy the latest TV, the latest phone, the newest games consoles. Our entire economy is built on the unending churn of wastefulness - to the point that obsolescence is built in by design in most new purchases. And lives are reduced to monotony so people feel the need to buy a dining table, a new sofa or a new summer wardrobe - the whole of the media tell us our style is no longer in, and we need to modernise, replace, spend money. It's the rat race that we all are told we need to participate in, otherwise the economy will decline and our standard of living will crash. 

The greed is by design. It's not a flaw, it's the horrific beauty of the system. 

I have done the complete opposite never bought the latest gadget car or TV, never wasted food, good cheap food is always achievable just needs more time and effort, also always saved money in the good times ready for the bad times.

It’s called good old fashioned values unfortunately these values have been eroded over the years.

There many projects being trialled by many companies for cheap eco friendly  energy and fuel  but people are too busy wanting to believe any activist  than actually doing there own research.
 

[Archied]

57 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Dare I get into this conversation? 

Greed is the catalyst that is fuelling the climate disaster. If there is an expensive option to research cleaner, greener energy, and a cheaper option to keep using polluting fossil fuels, any business trying to do the right thing is at a disadvantage. 

The same goes for ethical food production. The higher welfare methods come at a premium, but the low cost methods of intensive farming will always be a tempting, easy alternative. 

And the poor consumer, already squeezed by a very difficult economy, has the option to buy expensive or cheap. When you're buying on a budget, sometimes the affordable option is not in line with the ethical/climate friendly/"right" option. 

We are bombarded with messages telling us that we need to buy the latest TV, the latest phone, the newest games consoles. Our entire economy is built on the unending churn of wastefulness - to the point that obsolescence is built in by design in most new purchases. And lives are reduced to monotony so people feel the need to buy a dining table, a new sofa or a new summer wardrobe - the whole of the media tell us our style is no longer in, and we need to modernise, replace, spend money. It's the rat race that we all are told we need to participate in, otherwise the economy will decline and our standard of living will crash. 

The greed is by design. It's not a flaw, it's the horrific beauty of the system. 

Actually this topic has morphed into a refreshing conversation, if only it could spread to the wider population, imagine a world where we could agree, disagree and find middle ground ,it seems like along time since it’s been like that

[cstand]

4 minutes ago, Archied said:

Actually this topic has morphed into a refreshing conversation, if only it could spread to the wider population, imagine a world where we could agree, disagree and find middle ground ,it seems like along time since it’s been like that

I never listen to people who state you are either with us or against us. 

When this madness stops the world will be a better place.
 

 

[Archied]

1 minute ago, cstand said:

I never listen to people who state you are either with us or against us. 

When this madness stops the world will be a better place.
 

 

Yea it’s like the old divide and rule has been refined to spectacular levels

[GboroRam]

41 minutes ago, cstand said:

I have done the complete opposite never bought the latest gadget car or TV, never wasted food, good cheap food is always achievable just needs more time and effort, also always saved money in the good times ready for the bad times.

It’s called good old fashioned values unfortunately these values have been eroded over the years.

There many projects being trialled by many companies for cheap eco friendly  energy and fuel  but people are too busy wanting to believe any activist  than actually doing there own research.
 

But think what the result would be if everyone refused to play the game. We all stayed watching old CRT tellies, playing with a whip and top, sitting on a 1980s chintz sofa. 

Profit is driven by more and more buying. Its not in any companies' interest to sell you something that lasts. Better to sell something they know you will have to replace in a few years. 

Waste is greed and greed is profit, and profit is the god we sacrifice everything to. 

[cstand]

21 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

But think what the result would be if everyone refused to play the game. We all stayed watching old CRT tellies, playing with a whip and top, sitting on a 1980s chintz sofa. 

Profit is driven by more and more buying. Its not in any companies' interest to sell you something that lasts. Better to sell something they know you will have to replace in a few years. 

Waste is greed and greed is profit, and profit is the god we sacrifice everything to. 

The change in electronic goods is good because most are now more energy efficient.

Profit is always better than tax payer bail out.

No society will ever have the perfect solution to every problem.

Going forward for a greener future it needs to be a collaboration between private enterprise, government and universities.

I find the engineer very useful.

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/content/news?query=&itemsPerPage=12&page=2

 

Hydrogen train

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/content/news/refuelling-system-inaugurated-on-hydrogen-train-line

 

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/content/news/uk-s-first-hydrogen-train-makes-mainline-debut

Edited September 7, 2022 by cstand

[Stive Pesley]

14 hours ago, cstand said:

I have done the complete opposite never bought the latest gadget car or TV, never wasted food, good cheap food is always achievable just needs more time and effort, also always saved money in the good times ready for the bad times.

I'm much the same - I have zero interest in cars (as in I don't fetishize them, or see them as a status symobol like a lot of people) so I've always saved up and bought cheap runarounds that do what I need. Get me from A to B. They usually last a good 10 years or more

When the last one died, I was shocked at how much the market had changed. I was made to feel like an idiot for actually wanting to buy a bottom of the range car outright. "Why not get a 3 year lease deal on this new expensive gadget laden beast, sir?"

My gut feeling is that this has been driven by a prolonged period of historic low interest rates to a large degree. Intrigued to see what happens to this model as interest rates shoot up to combat inflation.

[cstand]

Their UK tour bus is not electric it’s diesel 

 

[ariotofmyown]

Good times....

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/08/pakistan-floods-climate-crisis

[cstand]

My wife watched a program about smog in the 50s makes you appreciate the work done over the years to improve air quality in this country.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/smog-kills-thousands-in-england

Burning poor quality coal because we had sell our good coal to pay off the war debt.

Our final debt payment was in 2006.

End of the 2nd world war debt was 21 Billion our current debt 19 Billion.

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by cstand