[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
random

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 425684)
Message
File  []
close
_106024950_052666919-1.jpg
425684425684425684
>> No. 425684 Anonymous
5th April 2019
Friday 11:36 pm
425684 spacer
Locked
So am I the only one who is getting a bit annoyed by this whole Greta Thunberg cult, or am I just too much of a cold hearted cynic that the world would be better off without?

I don't doubt the legitimate concern of her generation over climate change, after all it will fall to them to sort out the utter fucking mess that we have left the planet in, but all the awards that she is now being showered with are IMO just middle aged and old people's guilt over their own failure to save the planet's climate despite having had decades of prior warning, and who lost their way and succumbed to high carbon footprint consumerism somewhere between 1990s road protest villages and today's school runs in a 4x4. None of it feels sincere or genuine, it's more like, yeah, just take all these awards and shut the hell up already.

And parents whose children now protest every Friday or so are now engaging in pissing matches on twitter and Instagram to show off which one of their kids gets the most involved. As one commenter said, nothing good has ever come of a youth protest movement that was applauded by parents.
Expand all images.
>> No. 425686 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:23 am
425686 spacer
>I don't doubt the legitimate concern of her generation over climate change

How can they have any other, it's pumped into them from birth along with whatever else is flavour of the month. When some little kid starts talking in line with what the adults are saying, the approval is just that of how successful their conditioning has been on the younger generation. I'm not being funny but kids are pretty idiotic when it comes to the wider world (not that they can't be highly intuitive).

The cult being built up around her is just another cog in the propaganda machine, the same machine that trained her to say it in the first place.
>> No. 425687 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:29 am
425687 spacer
>>425686
You're so cool, thinking for yourself.
>> No. 425688 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:32 am
425688 spacer
>>425686

Read the IPCC report. This is not a fad, this is not propaganda, this is not conditioning, it is an irrefutable catastrophe. If we do not act now, young people will inherit a climate that is irreparably damaged and drastically more hostile to human life.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
>> No. 425689 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:33 am
425689 spacer
>>425687
If you think a little kid knows bugger all about the world other than what its been told, you're a moron
>> No. 425690 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:38 am
425690 spacer
>>425688
Flavour of the month or set in stone fact, it doesn't make a difference. I'm not being conspiratorial here, I don't care one way or the other but the narrative is being pushed and the girl is simply part of the narrative.
>> No. 425691 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:56 am
425691 spacer
>>425688

> and drastically more hostile to human life

Worth noting that this is mainly something that concerns our species. A planet that has bounced back from several global extinction events in its history will shake off the human impact to it without a problem no matter what we do to it. It is us who depend on global climate conditions remaining within a very narrow corridor of tolerable temperatures, rainfall, and sea levels and polar ice cap extension. And even just 15,000 years ago towards the end of the last ice age, the global climate would never have supported a human population of seven billion even with our current technology because it was far too cold. Conversely, during much of the Mesozoic, sea levels were tens of metres higher and there were probably no ice caps at all and global average temperature was in the mid-20s Celsius. Life was doing just fine with all that going on. And life will adapt eventually even to the very sudden climatic changes of the last 300 years. But human life and human existence and civilisation will be disrupted by a one-metre sea level rise or the Gulfstream dying down or widespread drought and soil erosion, and that is the point. In the greater scheme of things, it's about saving our own arses, while life itself in the long run, like I said, will be almost entirely unaffected on a time scale of millions of years.
>> No. 425692 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:57 am
425692 spacer
I have no idea who she is but then I don't own a tv so not being in tune with the zeitguiest isn't much of a revelation.

>>425686

I remember when I was young I used to get praise like I was a genius when I repeated back the opinions of adults around me. When I started to form ideas of my own suddenly I didn't know what I was talking about and was stupid. I presume this child is just doing that.

>>425689

I don't think most adults know much about the world other than what they have been told. When was the last time you performed a scientific experiment to verify a peer reviewed paper, charted the path of the planet's to confirm their course is consistent with going around the sun or visited a war zone to verify the situation on the ground.

Shifts of perspective are rare and most people are far too close minded to consider anything beyond the culture they grew up in and I doubt she has lived a varied enough life yet to update and review her beliefs.
>> No. 425693 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:07 am
425693 spacer
>>425690
>the narrative is being pushed
The idea that it's being pushed reveals a conspirational mindset. That may not be a specific conspiracy theory, but still. The line of self-interest is much less clear than with the converse argument: That we're going to be fine.

The next few decades are going to be incredibly grim and incredibly stupid if current trends continue unabated. If you want a vision of the future, imagine the crew of a destroyer livestreaming themselves flossing in front of a torpedoed refugee ship, forever.
>> No. 425694 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:11 am
425694 spacer
>>425692

>and I doubt she has lived a varied enough life yet to update and review her beliefs.

That's kind of asking a lot from a 16-year-old though.

I just read that she has Asperger's. Not sure what to really do with that information. She apparently said that without Aspergers, she would not have her dogged determination.
>> No. 425695 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:19 am
425695 spacer
>>425691

Quite when algie first stalked the the earth they poisoned and killed practically every living thing that had come before them by releasing a highly volatile corrosive chemical called oxygen. Once they finished polluting the sea they then fillies the atmosphere with it causing massive climate change that covered the entire surface of the earth with ice for several million years.

When plants came about they formed cellar structure that had never existed before that couldn't be chemically broken down and their dead matter covered the entire earth to a level several meters deep.

People who think we are capable of fucking up the earth as badly as they did and that life on earth won't adapt to carry on are quite presumptive about their significance.

It is also with mentioning the current sea level is in a geological sense absurdly low. The average sea level across most of the time we have been able to chart is about 100 meters higher than it is now. We are basically operating on the good fortune of the current location of Antarctica and presuming that to be the norm.
>> No. 425696 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:28 am
425696 spacer
>>425693

There is nothing conspiratorial about acknowledging that you get consensus in beliefs regardless of their validity.

I grew up in a time where food products were purposely fat free and you should avoid eating eggs that trend has entirely reversed. I have seen nuclear power switch from being the thing environmentalism was against to to something seriously considered for it's 'green' virtues.

No one is free from bias everyone has their beliefs it later turns out aren't true, and regularly the momentum is decades behind the cutting edge of knowledge.
>> No. 425697 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:28 am
425697 spacer
>>425695

Like I said, our species and our civilisation depend on conditions on this planet remaining within a very narrow corridor of parameters. While the Earth has looked radically different from the way it does now at different times in its history, and at least in the last 500 million years was never completely inhospitable to complex life. To life as such, it really does not matter in any way, shape, or form if sea levels are one, two, or even ten metres higher.
>> No. 425698 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:31 am
425698 spacer
>>425694

If it is asking a lot for a 16 year old then I don't think it is unreasonable to dismiss her opinion as not well thought out and popularist, and therefore no different to asking Russell Brand about his political views.
>> No. 425699 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:52 am
425699 spacer
>>425692
>I don't think most adults know much about the world other than what they have been told.

I don't disagree but I'll leave that judgement until I've heard what they have to say and how they say it. With a 16 year old, unless they're supernatural or are an 160iq savant I can say almost with certainty that they don't have a scooby doo.

>>425693
>The idea that it's being pushed reveals a conspirational mindset.
Not at all, we can call agree greens and exercise and fresh air are good things and not an plot to poison us but when some government agency comes up with an idea to promote that, or an advertising agency plasters a pair of wobbly tits next to can of coke with the suggestion that sipping a sickly brown syrup will have those badboys bouncing on your bonce, they're pushing that idea, that's the narrative.

There's certainly a lot of that going on from lots of sources, you can't turn around without getting a facefull of impending global disaster and the girl is a good avatar to promote that message, she's cute and a sperg and everyone can coo and pinch her cheek and nod along because she's saying what they were already thinking.

Now you're going to think i'm some cunt who wants to have the freedom to burn piles of tires next to a primary school.
The whole climate change thing as it stands in the west seems like a bit of a moot point really, i'm really all for eco fascism in a way but the way it's utilised is just as a means of control.
The yellow vests thing in France was a prime example, they used climate change to pile on more taxes on diesel drivers, while all the diesel cars in France pump out less pollution per year than a single large container ship loaded with crap sailing back and fourth between Shanghai and Marseilles.

It's a matter of scales, if the UK just stopped using all fossil fuels tomorrow, no coal power, no cars, no heavy industry, went back to some Arcadian agrarian existence or just disappeared into a black hole, it'd take just a year or so for China alone to make up that pollution shortfall with their own increased pollution output.

It's basically all pointless and not really about stopping climate change or it somewhat is and they just think it's also a great excuse to coerce and fuck you up the bum.
>> No. 425700 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 2:08 am
425700 spacer

bvkly.jpg
425700425700425700
>>425698

Nobody's opinion matters on questions of fact. Climate change is happening and it will have catastrophic effects on humanity unless we act urgently. I think this girl deserves some degree of praise for bringing attention to these facts, but it's ultimately irrelevant either way.

>>425699

China's CO2 emissions peaked in 2013. They are a global leader in renewable energy and buy more electric cars than the rest of the world combined. China emits about the same amount of CO2 as the US and the EU combined, but their population is almost twice as large and we've outsourced our most polluting manufacturing to China. They're doing the hard work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/09/business/china-hastens-the-world-toward-an-electric-car-future.html

Per-capita emissions in the west are dramatically higher than in the developing world; it is incumbent on us to take moral leadership and meet them in the middle rather than expecting them to bear the costs of CO2 abatement without enjoying any of the benefits. It is also incumbent on us to invest in the development of sustainable technologies.
>> No. 425702 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 3:18 am
425702 spacer
>>425700
>Nobody's opinion matters on questions of fact. Climate change is happening and it will have catastrophic effects on humanity unless we act urgently. I think this girl deserves some degree of praise for bringing attention to these facts, but it's ultimately irrelevant either way.

Firstly I don't think you know what facts are and how they relate to option and truth. Global warming is a 'fact' because it is the 'opinion' of a majority of climate change scientist that it is the 'truth'. It is entirely possible that the current models are wrong because of some additional factor not considered. Or one of the minority theories is true. What is in the popular arena as a 'fact is just a consensus of opinion and interpretation. Literally look at any 'fact' or theory that has been debunked that was once the forerunner to demonstrate this point.

Which brings on to the second and more important point. This girl is not an expert she has no professional reputation. She is just believing what she was told by someone else who was told by someone else.
Does she have a reasoned explanation for why the ice volume on Antarctica is currently growing and what that means to the predictions? Is she aware of the latest data at all? No she is not an expert and is therefore not a idea champion for any cause. I would much rather we listen to scientists directly then use the hunger games as an instruction manual for how to do politics. I would much rather that we live in a technocracy then we treat normal peoples opinions as mattering and informing policy on these things.
>> No. 425703 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 3:51 am
425703 spacer
>>425699
>The yellow vests thing in France was a prime example, they used climate change to pile on more taxes on diesel drivers, while all the diesel cars in France pump out less pollution per year than a single large container ship loaded with crap sailing back and fourth between Shanghai and Marseilles.
Honestly I'd say this is less part of the narrative, and more just because of our cack-handed political institutions
If we accept global warming is real and needs action to avoid or mitigate, but also have a current consensus on the role of the state, etc and few current environmental problems, we run into a problem pretty quickly: The consensus role of the state differs from the role the state has to take to be the primary actor against climate change. Politicians can't really consciously turn the state around or give it much more power in the market without a crisis to justify it, so they can only use existing powers. By the time the crisis that would justify expanded powers arrives, it will be too late. The existing powers can only do wanky things like impose petrol taxes, rather than something serious like throwing billions of pounds at developing environmentally friendly technologies and infrastructure. That may have been perfectly acceptable in our pre-1980s vision of the state, but it's no longer the done thing. (Except in defence procurement, har-har.)

So what's left is for the state to pray to god the private sector does it alone, which doesn't appear to be happening. So you get the spectacle of the government decrying global warming without actually taking radical action.
(That probably sounds like I'm pushing for a big lefty solution. I'm not, I've already basically accepted we're doing nothing. It's just to illustrate the kind of choice-problem faced. The same kind of thing probably happens inside companies. Shareholders want high returns and to be alive. Now if only every other shareholder would take lower returns, I could boost mine a bit in the short term...)
>> No. 425705 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 8:47 am
425705 spacer

C5GobeBWYAAXKER.jpg
425705425705425705
I think the debate should be reframed. Most people want to breathe clean air. Most people want to drink clean water. Most people don't want to drive animals to extinction. Most people do not want to fill the seas with plastic. The way the debate is framed at the moment it makes most people feel like helpless bystanders who can't make a difference rather than encouraging them to take their own little part.

An increasing number of people are eating meat alternatives and Quorn have found that this is largely driven by health concerns rather than not eating meat for ethical reasons. Rather than scaremongering or talking in vast terms that make people feel insignificant it needs to be framed in a way where people can see a direct and tangible positive change.

>>425688
>If we do not act now

>>425700
>unless we act urgently

I loathe language like this, but I think that may be because the type of people I've encountered IRL who use it tend to be rather clueless so they rely on vague and emotive platitudes that make them feel nice and fuzzy inside, despite the fact they're not really doing anything practical about the issue, because it "raises awareness" and they want to be able to take credit for doing their part when those actually being constructive manage to achieve something.
>> No. 425706 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 10:30 am
425706 spacer

climate-hoax.jpg
425706425706425706

>> No. 425707 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 10:43 am
425707 spacer

af908cb3d1143a404b1cfadfaf1e1b16ed5cb517a2d9b9e726.jpg
425707425707425707
>>425699

>The yellow vests thing in France was a prime example, they used climate change to pile on more taxes on diesel drivers, while all the diesel cars in France pump out less pollution per year than a single large container ship loaded with crap sailing back and fourth between Shanghai and Marseilles. 

Similarly, in Germany, the old debate of a speed limit on the famous Autobahns is being touted again at the moment as a simple and effective means of cutting back CO2 emission. There are estimates that a 130 kph/80 mph speed limit will reduce CO2 emission by two to three million tons a year over the current status where some 60 percent of German motorways are still unregulated. In the greater scheme of things though, that is not even a drop in the ocean, considering that the U.S. alone releases five billion tons a year into the atmosphere, and China twice that even.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

Luckily, ze Germans aren't easily swayed. When the debate unfolded again a couple of months ago, after years of dormancy, protest was fierce and the ruling coalition parties are mostly afraid to even touch the issue lest they incur the wrath of tens of millions of voters.

I've got close friends in Germany that I visit regularly, and driving on the Autobahn there is just a joy. Road discipline is incredible, and even at 110 mph, traffic runs efficiently and orderly in a way that only the Germans seem to be able to pull off. If ever there was a people who were meant to drive fast, it's truly the Germans.
>> No. 425708 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 11:51 am
425708 spacer
>>425706

Makes sense I too sacrifice goats to please the gods and bring about the rains, just in case.
>> No. 425709 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 11:59 am
425709 spacer
>>425702

>Firstly I don't think you know what facts are and how they relate to option and truth. Global warming is a 'fact' because it is the 'opinion' of a majority of climate change scientist that it is the 'truth'.

That's not how it works. The data says that atmospheric CO2 levels are rising well beyond usual trends. The data also says that global temperatures (particularly ocean temperatures) are rising well beyond usual trends, in a manner that is correlated with CO2 levels. The opinion of climate scientists isn't particularly relevant; there simply isn't any alternative explanation for the data that makes any mathematical sense. All of that data is in the public domain, as is a full explanation of how that data was gathered. It has been checked and re-checked and re-checked for methodological validity and nobody has found any significant errors. You're welcome to come up with your own explanation, but that explanation is only valid if it accounts for the full picture of evidence.

>why the ice volume on Antarctica is currently growing and what that means to the predictions?

That's not true. Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice, with a net result of rising sea levels. The rate of loss of land ice is accelerating. The total global glacier volume has fallen by about 18%.

https://skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-intermediate.htm

https://phys.org/news/2019-02-ice-volume-anew.html

>I would much rather we listen to scientists directly

But you aren't listening to scientists, nor (more importantly) are you basing your conclusions on the overall picture given by the best available data. You're cherry-picking data points and blatantly misinterpreting the process of science to support a specious argument.

>>425705

>it needs to be framed in a way where people can see a direct and tangible positive change.

I'm not sure how we can do that in any way that isn't blatantly deceptive. We're beyond the point of positive change - we're now in damage limitation territory. Things are going to get worse, the only question is whether they get a bit worse or catastrophically worse. Personally, I think the only emotionally appealing argument that is concordant with the evidence is something akin to the Blitz spirit - we're in the shit, but we might just get through it if we all pull together.

If we don't do something drastic now, Norfolk and the Netherlands will disappear, as will cities in the Pacific Rim with a total population of ~400m. If we don't seriously cut CO2 emissions, we're likely to see around a billion refugees due to drought and resource conflicts. It's pretty hard to put a positive spin on that.

>>425707

I think that focusing on per-country rather than per-capita emissions is a dangerous trap. China's population is more than that of Europe and North America combined. We can't reasonably expect that Chinese people should live like medieval peasants just because there's a lot of them. On a per-capita basis, China is doing pretty well, especially when you consider their level of economic development. The average Chinese person produces about half the CO2 emissions of the average American.

China still needs to cut their emissions, but it seems blatantly unfair to dump the responsibility solely on them. Why should they bother if we aren't even trying? It's like a billionaire saying that he shouldn't have to pay taxes because there's only one of him but loads of poor people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
>> No. 425710 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 12:04 pm
425710 spacer
I feel like a big issue is that our current way of life should have ended years ago, now people just don't want to let go of it but a lot needs to change to ensure our survival. Too many people are out there thinking "Nah it'll be fine they're just exaggerating it all", they'll only really care when it actually impacts them and by then it'll be too late.
>> No. 425711 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:37 pm
425711 spacer
>>425710
How has the dramatically high CO2 emission rate per capita of developing countries been derived?
>> No. 425712 Anonymous
6th April 2019
Saturday 1:41 pm
425712 spacer

i-cant-lie-to-you-about-your-chances-but-you-have-.jpg
425712425712425712
>>425709

>I think that focusing on per-country rather than per-capita emissions is a dangerous trap.

Then again, if you actually go by the per-capita chart at the top of that wikipedia article, suddenly you have Saudi Arabia and the Middle East with a per capita CO2 production that dwarfs that of many known notorious CO2 producing nations, while at the same time Saudi Arabia only has a population of 33 million or 0.7 percent of the entire world population. It's swings and roundabouts really with this kind of statistical climate data.

And China really only has a below average per capita CO2 footprint because despite decates of industrial growth, vast swaths of its population still live a largely agricultural lifestyle the way we did in the UK over 300 years ago. As industrial growth and progress will continue to spread, so will more and more Chinese peasants adopt technologies and lifestyles that will ramp up their per capita CO2 production.

I think we are fucked either way at this point. Our global civilisation depends on fossil fuels in a way that means that it will simply collapse if we stop producing CO2. And it's not just cars or factories, but also things like aviation or global shipping or the Internet itself.

The only way we can maintain levels of energy consumption that we need to sustain our civilisation will be to have working hydrogen fusion reactors in the future IMO. Once we've mastered the technology, a second or third generation fusion reactor could likely be made small enough to power anything from your entire home to a car or an aircraft. Considering that battery powered cars need rare earths and other minerals that simply don't exist in enough quantity globally to go fully electric, I think that is going to be the only viable option in the long-term future.

But with even the most optimistic projections not expecting working and commercially viable fusion reactors before the year 2050, it's kind of a safe bet to assume that we are just going to fuck up the Earth's climate even more in the mean time.
>> No. 425725 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 1:06 pm
425725 spacer

1024px-2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
425725425725425725
>>425709

>The opinion of climate scientists isn't particularly relevant; there simply isn't any alternative explanation for the data that makes any mathematical sense.

There was a time when data indicating climate change was more or less made up of statistical outliers, meaning measurements outside the norm but which could still by and large be explained by erratic fluctuations of the long-term climate. And then you also had certain fluctuations over a few thousand years since the last Ice Age, with the Atlantic Period (ca. 8000-5000 before present) being the warmest. Which, interestingly, had even higher temperatures than we see today. But what is very unique, and scientists know this from sea ice core samples and also from terrestrial sediments such as river beds and lake bottoms, is the pace at which temperatures are now rising. Before the Atlantic Period, there was the Boreal Period, also lasting around 2000 to 3000 years, which had a global climate similar to ours today, but the shift from Boreal to Atlantic was quite gradual and occurred within the space of around 500 to a thousand years. Whereas today's climate change has happened in a time period of less than 200 years. Even when considering that global warming was preceded by the Little Ice Age which lasted from ca. 1300 to 1850, the steep gradient of increase in temperatures that we have today is simply unseen in all of recorded climate history of the last ten thousand years.

When measurements and data start to leave the scope of your preceding statistical data, there is always a point where you can still think "This could go either way", and that's when scientists' opinions actually matter, because it will not be an open and shut case, yet. During the 1960s to 1980s, global warming was a theory that was being circulated increasingly among scientists, and there was data beginning to come in that was suggesting that climate change could be starting to happen. But when you look at the graph, it still could have gone either way at that time. By now though, fifty years on, you simply have no way of denying anymore that something extraordinary is going on, and something where indeed an individual scientist's personal opinion becomes largely irrelevant.
>> No. 425732 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 5:29 pm
425732 spacer
>>425725
It seems odd to imagine that anyone could take into account that there are billions of humans all producing various waste products in a closed system and think that it would all work itself out perpetually the way it is and be fine. Yet most people apparently do think that and have for a long time.
>> No. 425733 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:01 pm
425733 spacer
>>425732

Firstly it isn't a closed system there is that big ball of fire in the sky, along with the gases that escape the atmosphere and the things that crash into the earth and the times the earth quite literally throws up on itself.


>and think that it would all work itself out perpetually the way it is and be fine. Yet most people apparently do think that and have for a long time.

you are reasoning back to front from already knowing the conclusion, there would be no reason to assume that plants and algae wouldn't start thriving in a warmer CO2 rich environment and multiply in a way that compensates for the changes and therefore the system would naturally correct. After all that is what usually happens in a food chain when the food supply increases.
>> No. 425734 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:05 pm
425734 spacer
>>425733
>Firstly it isn't a closed system
It's a closed system in the ways that are relevant to the matter.
>you are reasoning back to front from already knowing the conclusion
I know the conclusion because it's observable in nature for me as it is for everyone else. Like when plants and algae multiply so much they choke ponds, killing all the other life in them.
>> No. 425735 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:09 pm
425735 spacer
>>425732

A lot of people just badly over-estimate the resilience of human civilisation, or under-estimate the human impacts. You see the same train of thought from many Brexiteers, e.g. "we survived the war so we can survive this" - true, but a lot of people didn't survive the war and pretty much everyone had a miserable time.
>> No. 425736 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:13 pm
425736 spacer
>>425733

Look, just read the IPCC report or fuck off. All the points you're raising have been thoroughly addressed by people infinitely more knowledgeable than me and I really can't be bothered re-hashing them for your benefit. You're confusing your own ignorance for a lack of evidence.

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
>> No. 425738 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:31 pm
425738 spacer
>>425736
And the IPCC can't ever be wrong!
>> No. 425739 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:59 pm
425739 spacer
>>425733

The earth can cope well enough no matter how much CO2 is in the air. Algae and plants and deep sea dwelling squids and so on will be just fine whether there's an ice age or an asteroid hits. Humans and the vast majority of land based animals, on the other hand, will more than likely be fucked.

We've built ourselves into a deep reliance on what is really a very fragile ecological-economy, and even before global warming starts causing serious trouble, we're rapidly out breeding what the capacity of the planet to supply us with resources. If we carry on at our current rate we'll be nothing more than an intriguing archaeological curiosity for the bird-people who rule the planet a billion years from now.
>> No. 425740 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 6:59 pm
425740 spacer
>>425738
You know better do you?
>> No. 425741 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 7:00 pm
425741 spacer
>>425733

>there would be no reason to assume that plants and algae wouldn't start thriving in a warmer CO2 rich environment and multiply in a way that compensates for the changes and therefore the system would naturally correct.

There are already some scientific findings that suggest that, provided that the ambient air has low levels of growth inhibiting pollutants, plants actually grow stronger and faster in an atmosphere with increased levels of CO2. So on a large enough time scale, if we stopped producing any CO2 from fossil and other fuels today, the excess carbon dioxide would be reabsorbed into the Earth's vegetation, and within geological timescales would then even be redeposited in the Earth's crust as new coal and crude oil.

The problem is that plants will simply not grow fast enough to catch all the CO2 that humans release. Especially with all the deforestation that tropical rainforests but also forests in temperate and arctic regions have seen in the last few decades. There are estimates that the Earth would need three million years to produce the quantity of crude oil that we burn every year globally.


>>425735

>A lot of people just badly over-estimate the resilience of human civilisation, or under-estimate the human impacts.

It depends on what you mean by resilience. Probably even in the worst case scenario of global warming, human civilisation will not be wiped out as such. You will always have pockets of surviving populations that live in relatively favourable conditions and will be able to sustain themselves. What seems a given though is that civilisation as we know it today will not be sustainable even in less-than-worst-case scenarios.

Either we really manage to turn things around for us, or we are going to need to go through another cataclysmic event like the Great Plague which wiped out almost half of Europe's population. At the time, it indeed had a positive effect on resource sustainability. In the early Middle Ages, Europe was actually overpopulated, at least with regards to agricultural technology and the ability to produce food for the people. Deforestation in many European countries was much higher than it is today, with nearly every speck of land used for agriculture, again, with the low agricultural yields of the time. And then when half the population was wiped out in the Great Plague, many fields lay fallow and after about a generation or two saw a widespread return of dense forests. Some even believe that the Little Ice Age was caused in part by a reduced human population and nature being able to recover from human activity.
>> No. 425742 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 7:18 pm
425742 spacer
>>425736

You misunderstand my position, I'm not arguing against global warming I'm arguing against the ignorance of concluding that the current position was the inevitable conclusion and how could anyone have ever thought differently.

It is kind of like saying “how could the people of the past be so dumb to not know X" for a long time there were very respectable scientific beliefs we were heading towards global freezing, or that current environmental factors were caused by the earth expanding we obviously now have more information which has led to the current scientific consensus.
>> No. 425745 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 10:55 pm
425745 spacer

4642.jpg
425745425745425745
>>425742

> I'm arguing against the ignorance of concluding that the current position was the inevitable conclusion and how could anyone have ever thought differently.

Except, they didn't think differently. The big oil companies knew very definitely through projections from their own scientists, from about the early 1980s or perhaps even earlier, that the CO2 that was being released by burning their products would lead to quite dramatic global warming:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings


>It is kind of like saying “how could the people of the past be so dumb to not know X" for a long time there were very respectable scientific beliefs we were heading towards global freezing

Again, this may have been commonly accepted pop science until the late 70s (my mum told me that she was indeed taught in geography in school that there would be another ice age in the not too distant future), but the accepted truth at least from about 1980 among a growing number of reputable scientists was that global warming was a more than likely consequence of fossil fuel consumption.

The oil industry's fault really is that it knew what was coming but did nothing, and if you read the Guardian article, spent millions over the following decades bribing politicians and lawmakers and blocking eco friendly laws and initiatives around the globe as they saw fit. In that respect, it's not entirely unlike the tobacco industry, which also knew for decades that their products were giving people cancer and spent years lobbying against anti-smoking laws, until it was left with no choice but to admit to the harmful effects of smoking from the 1960s and 70s onwards. The obvious problem being that while you can make a population healthier and undo a lot of the damage of smoking within just a few years by encouraging people to quit smoking, all the CO2 that we've already blown into the atmosphere is going to stay there for quite some time in the future, and our entire civilisation is so heavily dependent on fossil fuel now that we can't just go cold turkey now. Our alternative energy carriers are nowhere near as advanced and developed as they would have to be to replace oil and coal from one day to the next, which could also be seen as a direct consequence of oil companies both keeping the public uninformed and blocking eco friendly laws.

If it hadn't been both for the convenience, abundance and energy density of petrol and the industry's lobbying, it's not unlikely that the car industry would have spent the last 100 years perfecting electric energy and we would now have cars that could run 600 miles on a single charge, with batteries that could be topped up within minutes, and which would barely take up one corner of your boot.
>> No. 425748 Anonymous
9th April 2019
Tuesday 12:10 am
425748 spacer
>>425745


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=https://youtu.be/vTlYYlRN0LY[/yt]

The fact that Shell made a video like this speaks volumes. They've known for decades what they were doing, bit of a nail in the coffin for anthropomorphic climate change deniers when the energy companies themselves even admit to it.

This makes me sad in a very deep way.
>> No. 425750 Anonymous
9th April 2019
Tuesday 12:23 am
425750 spacer
I'm fascinated by how often modern-history trends towards the following story:
"We knew about the problem in the 1970s-80s, and there were several good solutions proposed, but they weren't used and now the hack-job solutions we used at the time are both too embedded to displace while also causing us an increasing amount of trouble."
From politics, to economics, to the climate and in several other fields, that same timeframe comes up. The 1960s are consistently too early, the 1990s consistently too late, but in the 1970s-80s everything of significance that ever was and ever will be was seemingly set in stone.

I quite like this piece: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html
While it's probably objectionably narrative for some, the note that oil companies did take the problem seriously for a while and consider alternative approaches for the future before deciding to break for propaganda and the status-quo is fascinating. Perhaps it was simply the path of least resistance once the fears of oil running out post-1973 had subsided into the 1980s oil-glut.
>> No. 425751 Anonymous
9th April 2019
Tuesday 12:26 am
425751 spacer
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/08042019/arctic-climate-change-temperature-permafrost-sea-ice-wildilfe-ecology-study

Ahh....Shit.
>> No. 425758 Anonymous
9th April 2019
Tuesday 11:33 am
425758 spacer
>>425750

There was still consensus among many scientists in the late 70s that a new ice age was imminent. And by and large, it seemed to make sense, because the 1970s saw a few very drastic winters, and the previous ice ages were known to have begun quite suddenly and within the space of a single human lifetime. More than that, the interglacial warm periods between two ice ages always lasted about 10,000 to 15,000 years, which was yet more reason to believe that we were due another ice age soon.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_861us8D9M

Climatologists now actually believe that we may well have altered the Earth's climate trajectory, and that by releasing all the greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, we have broken the natural cycle of ice ages and interglacial periods.

As the documentary says, even though it wrongly assumes another ice age - the problem is that our global civilisation depends on environmental parameters remaining within a quite narrow band. For life on Earth as such, things like a 70-metre sea level rise or higher temperatures or polarification in some regions of the globe are irrelevant. Biological life on the whole always prevails in some shape or form and has survived far bigger disasters.
>> No. 425913 Anonymous
14th April 2019
Sunday 11:25 pm
425913 spacer
https://youtu.be/_5_ZvHatBVY

This is quite scary, to be honest. It looks like Greta is being manipulated by somebody for some reasons.
>> No. 425914 Anonymous
14th April 2019
Sunday 11:46 pm
425914 spacer
>>425913
It looks like that because it benefits someone for it to look like that.
>> No. 425918 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 11:33 am
425918 spacer
>>425914

Probably a paedo.

She must be a wet dream for wronguns... looks like a ten year old, but is verifiably over the age of consent...
>> No. 425919 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 12:02 pm
425919 spacer
>>425918

... right.
>> No. 425920 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 12:40 pm
425920 spacer
>>425918

I guess.... if you have a thing for 'spergs...
>> No. 425921 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 12:57 pm
425921 spacer
>>425920
Nobody fucks kids for their personality.
>> No. 425922 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 1:46 pm
425922 spacer
>>425918
Paedomorphs. I was with one a couple of years ago, into her mid 20s but my mum saw her picture and was worried I was gonna be done for shagging a 14 year old. Felt weird and uncomfortable walking round with her. She was a grumpy cow to be around and not happy about looking how she does. I wasn't happy feeling like a carpetbagger but it was a brief and intense relationship.
>> No. 425923 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 2:03 pm
425923 spacer
>>425922

One of my female friends at uni was like that. She was 18, almost 19 when we first met, and she honestly looked like a 12-year-old. She was studying to be a primary school teacher, and the first time she went to visit a primary school as a student, some teachers at first glance almost thought she was one of the pupils.

Curiously, her boyfriend, now husband, that she also met around the same time was a mature student and ten years older than her, and he really looked like most 29-year-olds do, more or less. So when the two went out on dates together, occasionally they had people giving them bad or shocked looks in the street.
>> No. 425924 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 2:39 pm
425924 spacer
>>425921

>Nobody fucks kids for their personality

True enough. Most people barely even fuck other adults for that reason.
>> No. 425925 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 3:13 pm
425925 spacer
>>425913
No it doesn't.

Also what the hell are you oddballs talking about now?
>> No. 425932 Anonymous
15th April 2019
Monday 7:15 pm
425932 spacer
>>425925

> Also what the hell are you oddballs talking about now?


Spergs.

Just spergs.
>> No. 425944 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 5:12 pm
425944 spacer

D4XBuucWwAEQ9M_.jpg
425944425944425944
What do you lads make of them goings on what are happening in that London?
>> No. 425945 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 5:21 pm
425945 spacer
>>425944
Not sure how any one could be against the message, really.
>> No. 425946 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 5:23 pm
425946 spacer
>>425945

Their medium, on the other hand, is pretty obviously objectionable.
>> No. 425947 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 5:29 pm
425947 spacer
>>425946
It's difficult to know where to start with the problem with Extinction Rebellion. The only good thing about them, it seems, is their ability to mobilise a huge number of activists in a way previously unseen.
>> No. 425948 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 7:12 pm
425948 spacer
>>425944

Feckin Millennials.

I'm not sure the world will really be in good hands when their generation takes over.
>> No. 425953 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 8:23 pm
425953 spacer
>>425946
What alternative would you suggest?
>> No. 425954 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 8:26 pm
425954 spacer
>>425948
Because it's been so well-managed before?
>> No. 425955 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 8:55 pm
425955 spacer
>>425954

I'm not saying that we as Generation X have been managing it well.

But I doubt that a generation that breaks down in a crying fit whenever the Internet is down or when somebody uses gender insensitive language in a tweet can be trusted to go on to do great things.

We fucked up, in short, otherwise we wouldn't still be having all these environmental debates. But again, I don't see how this generation will do any better once it is settled down in its ways. You don't see many people with a mortgage and a Passat in the driveway taking time off their day job to go and protest, is what I am saying. And today's youngsters will end up no different.
>> No. 425956 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 9:14 pm
425956 spacer
>>425955
If a wholesale upheaval of the binary model of gender which has persisted in most human societies for millennia is not a 'great thing' then I'm not entirely sure would meet your definition.

Also your parents would definitely have spoken about how well they coped without multi-channel television/computer games/cassette tapes/the end of the Cold War etc. etc. so don't give me your hackneyed 'entitled kids' bullshit.
>> No. 425957 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 9:30 pm
425957 spacer
>>425956

>wholesale upheaval of the binary model of gender which has persisted in most human societies for millennia 

Take a minute to think about that again, lad.

>so don't give me your hackneyed 'entitled kids' bullshit.

It's not bullshit. I don't think there has ever been a generation with more entitlement issues than Millennials, which at the same time puts so little effort into actually deserving the things they feel entitled to.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXItLdGwLUY
>> No. 425958 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 9:32 pm
425958 spacer
>>425956
I can't tell whether or not this post is supposed to be a parody.
>> No. 425959 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 9:33 pm
425959 spacer
>>425956
>If a wholesale upheaval of the binary model of gender which has persisted in most human societies for millennia is not a 'great thing' then I'm not entirely sure would meet your definition.

I've read this several times and I still don't know what it's actually saying.
>> No. 425960 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 9:54 pm
425960 spacer
>>425959
It's saying the poster is a mental.
>> No. 425962 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 10:35 pm
425962 spacer
>>425959

That poster is either trolling very well, or completely full of shit. Non binary sexual behaviour has existed and was documented since the dawn of time.
>> No. 425963 Anonymous
17th April 2019
Wednesday 10:39 pm
425963 spacer
>>425962

>or completely full of shit.

Careful lad, kind of sounds like you are outshitting that poster.
>> No. 425964 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 1:03 am
425964 spacer

FTB-earnings.png
425964425964425964
>>425957
>Entitled.
All I want is a house at a price that doesn't fuck me without people calling me entitled for expecting to be able to afford basic shelter without swearing my life away.

Now stop blaming me and either go build some fucking houses or hurry up and die, other people need your house.
>> No. 425965 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 1:07 am
425965 spacer
>>425963

I am just hoping that he is either trolling or impossibly ignorant. People has been out of the binary model of gender from the dawn of time:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/berdache


Now it is being hyped and talked about "ad nauseam", but it was always there.
>> No. 425973 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 2:54 am
425973 spacer
>>425965

I believe a lot of people in the weird gender bubble think there's been some magnificent explosion in gender expression and free love, when in actuality outside of a few bubbles most people are happy enough in the gender binary and maybe there's a few more of the gays open about their life these days.

I mean good for you if you want to identify as something other than male but it's not really important is it.
>> No. 425979 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 7:56 am
425979 spacer
>>425964
Move to a part of the country that isn't London. Problem solved.
>> No. 425984 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 9:16 am
425984 spacer
>>425973

>when in actuality outside of a few bubbles most people are happy enough in the gender binary

This. Breaking up the "gender binary" is really only an issue for a small minority of the population, when the majority really couldn't give a toss. But gender studies and certain strands of fishing will have you believe that the exact opposite is true.
>> No. 425985 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 9:20 am
425985 spacer
>>425964

Well that should have bern a consideration at the end of the last housing bubble circa 2008-09. House prices don't always just rise, they oscillate in an upward long-term trend. And the next time the property market goes tits up, there will be another opportunity to buy an affordable house.
>> No. 426002 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 7:57 pm
426002 spacer
Various London XR encampments seem to be thriving as of about an hour ago. Internet grumps who like to whine about being potentially mildly inconvenienced don't seem to have had much of an impact. Protesters from quite a wide range of backgrounds though more people who can take time off easily than not because obviously that's going to happen with any sort of week day protest. I'll head back down tomorrow evening, stay over night perhaps.
>> No. 426003 Anonymous
18th April 2019
Thursday 8:03 pm
426003 spacer

Supply-and-demand-Equilibrium.jpg
426003426003426003
>>425985
>And the next time the property market goes tits up, there will be another opportunity to buy an affordable house.
It's almost as if you don't understand the reason why the market went tits up.
>> No. 426018 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 10:36 am
426018 spacer

>> No. 426019 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 10:41 am
426019 spacer
I just don't understand how people can observe and be aware of how our governing classes function and yet still genuinely believe they can cause them to change their ways by doing anything like this. It's already too late and nothing peaceful or of this relatively tiny magnitude will do anything to change the people in power who make too much money and are too old to care about the trajectory of our ecosystem.
>> No. 426020 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 10:50 am
426020 spacer
>>426019
“We are running out of time but there is still hope…” - Sir David Attenborough. Do you think he understands or nah?
>> No. 426021 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:25 am
426021 spacer
>>426020
Everyone campaigning to end climate change, by definition, either believes the planet can be saved or publicly claims the planet can be saved for other political means. And I don't mean to make the latter sound conspiracist - for instance if Attenborough genuinely thinks we are past the point of no return, maybe he just doesn't say so because he doesn't want society to panic and break down.
>> No. 426023 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:35 am
426023 spacer
>>426021
>Everyone campaigning to end climate change, by definition, either believes the planet can be saved or publicly claims the planet can be saved for other political means.
Neither of those sweeping generalisations apply to me, so you're wrong. No doubt there are other exceptions.
If Attenborough didn't want people to panic then maybe he wouldn't be so heavily involved in creating programs about climate change. That wouldn't make any sense at all.
>> No. 426024 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:58 am
426024 spacer

12451584-6938095-Dame_Emma_Thompson_was_at_the_Ext.jpg
426024426024426024
The problem with Extinction Rebellion is that they're not extreme enough. What they need to do is behave like absolute dickheads, preferably in London because that's far away from my house, so that once they've brought sufficient attention to the issue another group with actual broad appeal can then start to constructively address the issue with the powers that be.

Instead we've got flaccid cocks like Robin Boardman-Pattison or luvvies like Emma Thompson flying thousands of miles to join the demonstration, which consists of middle class people knitting, doing yoga and crying because they didn't disrupt any flights from Heathrow or because Jeremy Corbyn didn't want to eat any of the chocolates they brought for him. It's preaching to the choir. Too middle class. Too cosy. Too hypocritical. Too easily dismissed. If they don't arrange something for the next bank holiday weekend entitled "The Great Climate Cunt-Off" then it's clear they won't amount to much other than ego stroking.
>> No. 426025 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:14 pm
426025 spacer
>>426024
>Luvvies
Oh, hello, Noel Coward.
>> No. 426026 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:16 pm
426026 spacer
>>426021

The planet is fine, it's us that are in trouble. We (almost certainly) won't become extinct, but things will get decidedly unpleasant for us over the next century. polars will expand, storms will become more deadly, floods will become chronic and eventually low-lying areas will be consumed by the sea.

We have already irreparably altered the climate, but we can still limit the damage. If average ocean temperatures rise by one degree, the Norfolk Broads disappear under the waves. After two degrees, we lose most of the south coast. After four degrees, you'll be able to take a ferry from Cambridge to York. It's too late to save the Broads, but we can avoid the rest if we act swiftly.
>> No. 426027 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:22 pm
426027 spacer
>>426025
If someone is prepared to take a c. 5,400 mile flight from Los Angeles to London to join a demonstration on climate change, whilst showing sufficient lack of awareness that they can't even get the Extinction Rebellion egg timer logo the right way round on their dungarees, then it's safe to say they're rather pretentious and superficial.
>> No. 426030 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:33 pm
426030 spacer
>>426020

I too believe there is still time, but I don't believe we can actually convince or change our politics or corporate culture in time, and certainly not by camping on a bridge.

Every time I say this I'm accused of either denying climate change or just not caring, and it's very tiring. I care a lot, and it frustrates me that everything we're doing as a society is basically not helping. Buying a bamboo toothbrush or camping on a bridge is an infintessimally small drop in the ocean, but I genuinely don't believe we can actually change the course of world industry and leaders at this point. They demonstrably are fine with whats happening, and it'll take billions of coordinated people to change that - and that's not going to come from XR.
>> No. 426031 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:46 pm
426031 spacer
>>426027

People travelling from all over to come to a protest that they're not really invested in...sounds exactly like Dale Farm. That one was chock full of rentamob protesters who didn't give a shit about the cause, they were only up for a ruck.
>> No. 426032 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:51 pm
426032 spacer
>>426030

It's certainly not going to come from naysayers sitting around handwringing and coming up with reasons to do nothing at all on the Internet.
>> No. 426033 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 12:55 pm
426033 spacer
>>426032

This is the frustrating part. I'm saying outright I don't believe anything other than a coordination of billions would do anything, and you're still convincing yourself that a few thousand people out there are actually doing anything. The difference between what I'm doing right now and what XR are doing right now is absolutely negligible. Keep doing it if you want, I'm not saying you shouldn't, but I believe fully it is not helping at all.
>> No. 426034 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 1:03 pm
426034 spacer
XR really highlights that really only middle class people have the time and capability of worrying about climate change. Working class people might be fully aware of the damage being caused but they also have to work to live and can't particularly pay the premium for sustainable food and products, let alone afford time off work to protest. Even if those working class folk are aware of the problem and distressed by it, they are likely stuck working for one of the big polluters anyway, and unless we completely remake society to remove that issue then we will never have enough people on board to bring this damage to a stop. How do we do that? No fucking clue, I'm not sure we can. Vote Green Party.
>> No. 426035 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:03 pm
426035 spacer
Whatever happened to carbon taxes? Did the trading schemes just turn it into a nothing?
Asking people to use less energy while it's cheap and their neigbours still do - seems like asking a lot of the average citizen.
(That said, I've just taken the govenment's shilling to get an electric car, so maybe I'm more bribeable than most?)
>> No. 426036 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:04 pm
426036 spacer
>>426034

>really only middle class people have the time and capability of worrying about climate change.

Unfortunately, this is very true. And I wouldn't say that being aware of climate change and wanting to protest against it are an intellectual feat, which they are by no means, but it appears you have to have a certain level of education to want to take part in an anti-climate change movement.

Some countries are now debating the introduction of a carbon footprint tax, which would impose an additional tax on everything from petrol to an airplane flight or even consumer goods, but also groceries, based on the amount of CO2 production that they cause. This is all not a problem for middle class people who have a decent income and have choices in what they consume, but if you are poor and depend on cheap food from Lidl or Iceland, then that CO2 tax will take away much more of your income in relative terms than it will from people who are better off.
>> No. 426038 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:19 pm
426038 spacer
>>426036

I don't even think it's about the education, it's more about being financially and socially mobile enough to have a voice at all. All the 'bastards complaining about not being able to get to work on time' because of these protests are often just people who simply can't afford to get their pay docked for being late. I was well aware of climate change when I was in a minimum wage job, I just didn't have much opportunity to think about it or certainly do anything about it.

Telling these people they should be cycling to work or getting a bus is fine until you realise that might not be cost effective or time effective for them. A single mother can't afford the fancy dutch cargo bike that middle class people want everyone to take their kids to school in, nor do they always work jobs easily or economically accessible by greener public transport. Poor people need cheap petrol and mass produced food right now, that's unavoidable.

Besides all that, looking to individuals to make changes is, in my view, and I'm sure in actual fact, the wrong end of the wedge. I can start bringing my own paper bags to the shops but until factories stop pumping out billions of litres of pollution per second that's hardly going to do much.
>> No. 426039 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:41 pm
426039 spacer
They say the rainforest is decreasing, right? Wouldn't climate change rejuvinate it?
>> No. 426040 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:43 pm
426040 spacer

all this time ive been smoking harmless tobacco.jpg
426040426040426040
>The Government must tell the truth about the climate and wider ecological emergency, reverse inconsistent policies and work alongside the media to communicate with citizens.
>The Government must enact legally binding policy measures to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2025 and to reduce consumption levels.
>A national Citizens' assembly to oversee the changes, as part of creating a democracy fit for purpose.

I agree with Gove on this, Britain does care and we've done tremendous work in cleaning our act up. If anything we might be too cavalier in how we intend to be squeaky clean while engaging in post-Brexit international trade and decided the national grid doesn't need surplus capacity.

There's more to be done but if we're talking net zero in 6 years then really you're in space sunshade territory or even beyond. Go home.

>>426002
Do let us know in advance if any of your friends will be fucking with the underground tomorrow afternoon. I'm not snitching, I just have plans and would like to enjoy my Easter weekend.

You can be our man on the inside.

>>426034
If the working class is so shit then how can they afford to put on yellow vests and racially abuse civil servants all day?
>> No. 426041 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:46 pm
426041 spacer
>>426039
Not if the Brazilians keep chopping it down to farm cattle, no.
>> No. 426042 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:53 pm
426042 spacer
>>426038

>Besides all that, looking to individuals to make changes is, in my view, and I'm sure in actual fact, the wrong end of the wedge. I can start bringing my own paper bags to the shops but until factories stop pumping out billions of litres of pollution per second that's hardly going to do much.


Also, there is a lot of hypocrisy on behalf of the educated middle class who pretend to be all for saving the planet, but what I have personally witnessed numerous times was people pulling into a Lidl car park in their SUV and carrying a Bag For Life. No amount of Bags For Life anybody will ever own and use can make up for the fact that you choose to go grocery shopping in an SUV, and to a place that sells unsustainably produced, high carbon footprint groceries.

The newest culmination, although not entirely without good reason, is the new Swedish invention of flight shaming. In short, people who can be seen via their social media accounts undertaking frequent flights to far away locations are being criticised by online mobs for creating a large carbon footprint that way. I believe I've read that in some countries, a few local Green Party members have had to close down their social media accounts because of this. Talk about do as I say, don't do as I do.

And while it is true that modern aircraft have better fuel economy per person than a car if you convert the kerosene that is burned by that airplane into miles per gallon per person, naturally if you travel 20,000 miles to Australia and back just once, you will still have consumed more fuel than your car back home will use during two years of normal operation.
>> No. 426043 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 2:56 pm
426043 spacer
>>426039
Trees are natures dole-scum. There's a plan but it involves us having to cluster-bomb large sections of land with seeds so they can suck up all the carbon but which will cause it's own problems if having thorny bastards everywhere:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/04/invasive-mesquite-spreads-across-east-north-south-africa/
>> No. 426044 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 3:07 pm
426044 spacer
>>426040

>net zero by 2025

Net zero in 6 years? I'm in favour of green polices but that feels pie in the sky.
>> No. 426045 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 3:07 pm
426045 spacer
>>426040

>net zero by 2025

Net zero in 6 years? I'm in favour of green polices but that feels pie in the sky.
>> No. 426046 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 3:24 pm
426046 spacer
>>426044

>Net zero in 6 years? I'm in favour of green polices but that feels pie in the sky.

It's bullshit any way you look at it.

Just like that Vision Zero goal by the European Commission with which they seek to reduce traffic accident fatalities EU wide to zero, albeit by the year 2050 I think, and which mean that among other things, new cars from 2022 will have to have automatic speed limiters installed that effectively prevent you from breaking a posted speed limit by automatically reducing your engine power so you can not go significantly faster, unless it's for a few seconds at a time that you are overtaking somebody.

It would be nice to think that these kinds of lofty goals dreamt up by some out of touch politicians would be realistically attainable. But they aren't. And instead, we are all being made to feel bad for not meeting those goals, when in reality they were rather quite daftly formulated to begin with and are in their own way the modern equivalent to saying Let them eat cake.
>> No. 426047 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 4:05 pm
426047 spacer

12473392-6939681-image-m-17_1555673610190.jpg
426047426047426047
The Mail have published an article highlighting the discarded rubbish and number of single use plastics and disposable coffee cups used by the crusties.

>>426042
>The newest culmination, although not entirely without good reason, is the new Swedish invention of flight shaming. In short, people who can be seen via their social media accounts undertaking frequent flights to far away locations are being criticised by online mobs for creating a large carbon footprint that way. I believe I've read that in some countries, a few local Green Party members have had to close down their social media accounts because of this. Talk about do as I say, don't do as I do.

The person I know most vocal about climate change has been on yoga holidays to North America, Africa and Asia in recent years.
>> No. 426048 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 4:27 pm
426048 spacer
>>426047

>The person I know most vocal about climate change has been on yoga holidays to North America, Africa and Asia in recent years.

And let me guess, that person gets in a huff about you driving to work every day in your own car, and won't shut up about how you are killing the planet by using plastic bags.
>> No. 426051 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 6:08 pm
426051 spacer

this again.png
426051426051426051
>>426047
>The Mail have published an article highlighting the discarded rubbish and number of single use plastics and disposable coffee cups used by the crusties.
>> No. 426054 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:10 pm
426054 spacer
>>426051

The fact is though there are absolutely alternatives to those things. You can absolutely 100% participate in society right not without ever using a plastic bag or coffee cup, especially in London. Even I bring my own cup to Costa and I'm a fucking northerner.

It's just further evidence XR is one big self righteous party.
>> No. 426055 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:11 pm
426055 spacer
>>426045
The fact it feels pie in the sky (and I do share that feeling) is probably the reason we're going to boil the oceans away.
The quote that sticks with me is "We now find it easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism", because it gets pretty close to the issue. I'm not saying the solution is socialism. I don't think we're going to find a solution, but the quote quickly captures our inability to seriously imagine an alternative.
>> No. 426056 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:13 pm
426056 spacer
>>426047

The person I know most vocal about it (and constantly posting stuff from the scenes of crusties) is a professional cyclist that flies all over the world to race bikes. When she's not posting about sustainable socks she's posting pictures of her substantial air miles. I don't understand.
>> No. 426058 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:23 pm
426058 spacer
>>426054
I'm tired of this sort of petty grasping for apparent hypocrisy. I mean if they had a XR private jet then sure, that's just taking the piss. "You used the wrong bags!" is just wank though. Who cares? Did the man use the cup? God forbid.
>> No. 426059 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:32 pm
426059 spacer
>>426058

>Who cares?

Typically, the people who care about climate change do. Aren't they supposed to be wanting people to stop using one-use items derived from petrochemicals?
>> No. 426060 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:40 pm
426060 spacer
>>426047

Anyone who criticises air travel usually misses the critical detail that for miles travelled and the number of people serviced it is profoundly efficient in terms of carbon footprint. More so that say a local bus (only really a train or a fully laden coach have comparable ) It is just the sheer distance and neither are really a practical replacement. You might be able to catch the euro star a few hundred miles. But try traveling to say China on the train (which you could) and you'll noticed the not to subtle difference between them.
>> No. 426061 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:40 pm
426061 spacer
>>426047

Anyone who criticises air travel usually misses the critical detail that for miles travelled and the number of people serviced it is profoundly efficient in terms of carbon footprint. More so that say a local bus (only really a train or a fully laden coach have comparable ) It is just the sheer distance and neither are really a practical replacement. You might be able to catch the euro star a few hundred miles. But try traveling to say China on the train (which you could) and you'll noticed the not to subtle difference between them.
>> No. 426062 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 7:49 pm
426062 spacer
>>426059
One would hope the people who care about climate change would be smart enough to think on the systems level rather than appointing themselves the cup mutaween.
>> No. 426063 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 8:09 pm
426063 spacer
>>426062

And yet they reckon camping out on a bank holiday will save the environment.
>> No. 426064 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 8:10 pm
426064 spacer
>>426048
She actually travels a lot by car. She's very big on chastising others for materialism, such as buying an expensive watch, so will make a big point about things like how she was shopping for a car and then decided to get one for half the price she was originally looking for because spending big isn't everything... before splurging on a pair of Louboutin shoes.

When she's not talking about bollocks such as this she's sharing her wisdom on parenting and boasting about how advanced her children are for their age. She has never taken the children with her on a single yoga holiday.
>> No. 426067 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 9:07 pm
426067 spacer
>>426061

>for miles travelled and the number of people serviced it is profoundly efficient in terms of carbon footprint

No it isn't. Per passenger-kilometre, it generates significantly more CO2 emissions than any other mode of transport aside from a single driver in a supercar.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/media/infographics/co2-emissions-from-passenger-transport/view

It gets worse, because emissions at high altitude have a greater warming impact than emissions at sea level and CO2 isn't the only emission from aviation with a warming effect on the climate. We still don't fully understand the science, but there is a broad consensus that emissions from aviation cause 2-3 times more warming than an equivalent amount of CO2 emitted at sea level.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-challenge-tackling-aviations-non-co2-emissions
>> No. 426068 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 9:36 pm
426068 spacer
>>426067
Not arguing against the point, but is there anything that breaks down aircraft in more detail? The assumption of 88 passengers average per plane seems remarkably low. I'd doubt if that's even break even loadfactor for many airlines. Presumably the figure is being dragged right down by short flights.
>> No. 426070 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 9:50 pm
426070 spacer
>>426068

>>426068

>Presumably the figure is being dragged right down by short flights

That'd be my assumption too. There are a lot of domestic short hauls with small planes that will bring that down. Even just looking at my local airport for the last couple of hours, there's been three or four 70-odd seat Dash 8 for every 150-300 pax jet, and the former are rarely fully loaded mid-week.

I reckon yank city hoppers like Austin to Dallas are underpopulated and flown frequently, too.
>> No. 426071 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:30 pm
426071 spacer
>>426064
I guess if you don't like one of your coworkers we should just acidify the oceans and abandon green energy wholesale then, it's the only possibly conclusion to you having an annoying workmate who may or may not exist.
>> No. 426072 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:34 pm
426072 spacer
>>426061
I get the feeling that a lot of the professional whiners who complained about Emma Thompson flying to London might have missed a crucial detail about the commercial flight she took to get there. With or without her, that plane was going to fly anyway. The inefficiencies in flying are related to large shipments of fresh air being flown across a continent.

People are right to notice that action on the individual level is a marginal gain at best, but go ask Sir David Brailsford what he thinks of marginal gains.
>> No. 426073 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:48 pm
426073 spacer
>>426068

The average scheduled long-haul flight does about 114g/CO2e per passenger kilometre. An economy-only charter aircraft with near-100% occupancy can manage 68g/pkm. After applying a conservative 1.9x multiplier to account for altitude effects, the climate impact per mile is roughly equivalent to a single occupant in a large SUV. In the best case scenario, aviation is still pretty bad.

There's also the obvious fact that the speed of jet aviation allows people to rack up massive mileages without really noticing it. The sustainable limit is about 2,000kg/CO2e per person per year, which would be gobbled up by a transatlantic return flight. Driving 7,000 miles in a big car over the course of a year feels like a lot of travel, but a long weekend in New York sort of doesn't. It's really hard to see how jet aviation can possibly fit into a sustainable transport mix.

http://lipasto.vtt.fi/yksikkopaastot/henkiloliikennee/ilmaliikennee/ilmae.htm
>> No. 426074 Anonymous
19th April 2019
Friday 11:58 pm
426074 spacer
>>426060

>Anyone who criticises air travel usually misses the critical detail that for miles travelled and the number of people serviced it is profoundly efficient in terms of carbon footprint.

The point that you are missing though is that it's not a question about airplanes using less fuel per distance per person than your car, which they undoubtedly do, but that you choose to go to those far away destinations in the first place instead of spending your holiday somewhere closer. Even if you drive your car to the south of Spain, with two occupants and luggage, in total, you will have burned less fuel than you would on your round trip to Australia. Say you go to Gibraltar by car. Google Maps says that's about 1,475 miles from London. Let's assume your car gets 25 miles to the gallon, that means 118 gallons of fuel will be needed for the round trip.

If you take a plane to Australia and back, that's roughly 20,000 miles, and a Boeing 747 is said to get around 100 miles per gallon per person. That's 200 gallons of fuel burned on your round trip, per person. But if there are two people going to Gibraltar in your car, you will have consumed only 59 gallons per person. So your trip to Australia has used nearly three and a half times as much fuel as driving your car to Gibraltar and back.

So even if you argue that passenger airplanes are more fuel efficient than cars (you could also rightly say that flying to Gibraltar would use even less fuel per person), the problem is that too many people go on long-distance flights too often, mainly because commercial air travel has simply become too cheap. And part of the problem are all the no-frills airlines of the last 20 years. It may be all good fun to go on a stag do to Latvia for 100 quid round trip, but it just isn't an environmentally friendly business model, because it means air traffic as a whole has become too much. I remember we once flew to Alicante some 25 years ago, and the price per person round-trip for the tickets was around £300. As I said, 25 years ago. In today's money, that would probably be around £500. And people accepted that air travel was expensive, and that it meant that you could only afford it about once a year, and usually not much further afield than Alicante. A friend of my dad's used to fly to Los Angeles for business occasionally around the same time, and he always said something that it cost his employer £600 to £700 each time with British Airways.
>> No. 426076 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 8:10 am
426076 spacer
>>426072

Supply and demand m8. It's like buying a coat made out of panda fur and arguing "someone was going to make the coat anyway, so I might as well buy it". Passenger aviation is exceptionally sensitive to demand because of the very tight profit margins on most routes - a single-digit change in passenger numbers can be the difference between profit and loss on a scheduled flight.
>> No. 426077 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 11:16 am
426077 spacer
>>426076

Yes, but much like a hypothetical panda fur coat, commercial aviation can be unethical when it creates a strain on the environment. Our parents certainly didn't go on a £99 stag do to Latvia, and they probably didn't feel like they were missing out. And just because giant SUVs with piss poor gas mileage exist, does not make it ok for you to buy one.
>> No. 426078 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 2:50 pm
426078 spacer
Our obsession with moralising over individual consumption choices rather than realising what you really need to do is either take the choice out of people's hands entirely or radically alter the nature of the choice by jacking up the cost of making it is precisely why we deserve our hopefully impending extinction.
>> No. 426080 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 3:17 pm
426080 spacer
>>426074

Bear in mind that many (most) large commercial flights will also be shipping a fair amount of cargo along with passenger baggage - a lot of wide body passenger aircraft will also be shipping parcels, goods, livestock or even cars, so that will presumably have to be factored in to these calculations - it might be expensive per passenger, but perhaps if you calculated it by tonne of shipped goods as well it'd seem a bit better.

Your smaller 737 etc won't do any of that, maybe small amounts of express goods, but it's mostly just got room for the bags.
>> No. 426081 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 3:52 pm
426081 spacer
Air travel is just too cheap.

I don't like flying so I always look for train/bus alternatives, but my flight to Spain in August cost me £31 and taking a chain of trains would have been closer to £200.

Surely that £31 has to at least cover the extra fuel and taxes the airline would not have to pay if I was not in the plane... and if that is really only £31 pounds worth then the plane must be very fuel efficient.
>> No. 426082 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 4:07 pm
426082 spacer
>>426081

Aviation fuel is really cheap, because international law requires it to be tax-exempt.

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN00523.pdf
>> No. 426087 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 5:31 pm
426087 spacer
Replying to OP

Middle class eco loons can't brainwash rational people with their cultish diatribe so instead get children to do their bidding.
>> No. 426090 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 7:33 pm
426090 spacer
>>426087
If you want to reply to someone press the little number on their post, 1800 hundredslad. Did you pop a stamp on your monitor before posting that too?
>> No. 426091 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 10:34 pm
426091 spacer
>>426090

>If you want to reply to someone

Otherlad....
>> No. 426092 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 10:55 pm
426092 spacer
Doing XR stuff is has been pretty rewarding. Members of the public are almost all supportive, the only exceptions are the proper lads coming by drunk after dark looking for an argument.
I don't know how much will be left by the morning but I didn't expect it to last this long.
>> No. 426093 Anonymous
20th April 2019
Saturday 11:17 pm
426093 spacer
>>426087

>so instead get children to do their bidding.

Even if it's a child-faced 16-year-old sperg, it seems.

Fuckssake, I have seen 16-year-olds who looked twice as old as her. Must be the cold Swedish winters and tepid summers.
>> No. 426102 Anonymous
21st April 2019
Sunday 9:22 pm
426102 spacer
she's a bit of an ugly 16yo but i want to fuck her

why.jpg

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 426105 Anonymous
21st April 2019
Sunday 9:39 pm
426105 spacer
I'd change her climate IYKWIM
>> No. 426106 Anonymous
21st April 2019
Sunday 10:21 pm
426106 spacer
>>425684
If a girl with a face like that is perfectly legal then we need to look at raising the age of consent.
>> No. 426109 Anonymous
21st April 2019
Sunday 10:25 pm
426109 spacer
>>426106

I think we should start letting coppers eyeball it, like they do with public order offences and dangerous driving. If the copper reckons you're a paedo you should get done for it, regardless of her actual age.

Saying that a bus driver asked my missus for her under16 bus pass the other day. She's 30.
>> No. 426110 Anonymous
21st April 2019
Sunday 11:30 pm
426110 spacer
This thread's like pure carpet-bagger and /pol/fag astroturf, I swear.
>> No. 426112 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 12:11 am
426112 spacer
>>426109

You can already commit the offence of creating child pornography if your 18-year-old girlfriend looks substantially younger than her real age in the nude pictures you take of her.
>> No. 426113 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 5:37 am
426113 spacer
>>426112

you can marry and start a family with a 16yo, but take a photo of with her tits out and you'll be put on the sex offender register for making CP
>> No. 426114 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 8:30 am
426114 spacer
>>426113

That did always seem odd to me, I remember when you could at least see 16 year olds topless in magazines and that. If my mum's kept my Max Power magazines from that time then she's definitely hoarding cp in her attic.

I suppose there's an argument to be made about predatory porn companies and that. I'd probably have got my knob out for money at 16, though by 18 I might have thought twice.
>> No. 426116 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 11:54 am
426116 spacer
>>426113
I thought there was an exception for consensual images for personal use. As in, don't stick your girlfriend's nudes on Facebook for everyone to see. Mainly because it would be utterly bonkers, even by our government's standards, to say that a pair of 17yo lovers can't take intimate pictures of each other.
>> No. 426117 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 12:01 pm
426117 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/21/extinction-rebellion-london-protesters-offer-pause-climate-action
Greta talking to crowds in Marble Arch last night. You perv lads seem to have missed your opportunity.
>> No. 426118 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 12:30 pm
426118 spacer
>>426117


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c
>> No. 426120 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 1:22 pm
426120 spacer
>>426117

I'd change her climate IYKWIM.
>> No. 426122 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 1:57 pm
426122 spacer

2638.jpg
426122426122426122
>>426117
>> No. 426123 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 1:57 pm
426123 spacer

2638.jpg
426123426123426123
>>426120

> I'd change her climate IYKWIM.

That's enough out of you, paedolad.
>> No. 426124 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 1:58 pm
426124 spacer
Greta Thunberg = GREAT FUNBIRD
>> No. 426126 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 2:01 pm
426126 spacer
I want to email her and ask her what's her favourite position for solar panels
>> No. 426127 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 2:16 pm
426127 spacer

49465652_293331804661658_4734533175851337582_n.jpg
426127426127426127

>> No. 426128 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 2:24 pm
426128 spacer
>>426127

do all assburger girls look this young?

just asking.
>> No. 426129 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 2:25 pm
426129 spacer
>>426128
Nice 4chan-level post m9.
>> No. 426130 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 2:31 pm
426130 spacer
>>426123
Don't confuse enjoying some harmless IYKWIM action with the IYKWIM meaning, IYKWIM.
>> No. 426131 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 2:53 pm
426131 spacer
>>426129

As long as ge's not going to post Spurdo memes, he should be fine.
>> No. 426132 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 3:06 pm
426132 spacer
>>426128

>just asking.

Asking for a friend, you mean?
>> No. 426134 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 3:51 pm
426134 spacer
I used to work with a girl I suspect had aspergers (she was weird socially, had obsessions, and had an autistic brother).

While she could be very sweet in a childish sort of way, she didn't look any younger than you would expect.
>> No. 426135 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 4:02 pm
426135 spacer
>>426134
Damn.

IYKWIM.
>> No. 426136 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 4:17 pm
426136 spacer
>>426116

Kind of. Section 1A Protection of Children Act. It's very narrowly drawn, though.
>> No. 426138 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 4:28 pm
426138 spacer
>>426136

If you think I'm putting Protection of Children act into google then you're sorely mistaken. There have been more vans on my street already since I started watching Steve1989MREInfo.
>> No. 426139 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 4:31 pm
426139 spacer
>>426138
Put it into legislation.gov.uk or BAILII instead and they'll think you're a shot solicitor rather than a paedo.
>> No. 426142 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 4:36 pm
426142 spacer
>>426138

>If you think I'm putting Protection of Children act into google

Why would that be a bad thing to do? As a citizen, you have a right to inform yourself about the law. Just the same way you are free to google any kind of countermilitant daft woggery legislation without having to fear men in black suits and shades showing up on your doorstep.
>> No. 426145 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 6:35 pm
426145 spacer
>>426142
You're not fooling anyone, paedolad.
>> No. 426146 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 6:48 pm
426146 spacer
>>426142
From what I've read, MI5 don't turn up on your doorstep in black suits, they turn up dressed like a postman.
>> No. 426149 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 8:02 pm
426149 spacer
>>426145

Oh, and I'm not daft militant woglad because I look up antidaft militant wog legislation online?
>> No. 426151 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 11:07 pm
426151 spacer
>>426146

>they turn up dressed like a postman.

There is indeed something off about our postman here.
>> No. 426152 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 11:19 pm
426152 spacer
I spoke to the bloke in the white rabbit suit today (you can see him in the Pie video and a fair few newspapers). Really lovely guy, says he does it (standing around in a rabbit suit with placards encouraging people to be nice to one another) full time, just joined XR as he thought it was a good cause. Practising some sort of brand of radical altruism.

Marble Arch in the evening is full of music and dancing and lectures on climate science until 11pm. Four or five bands playing in different areas at any one time. The elderly dancing even. Kids running around playing, drawing stuff on the street with chalk. Adults doing that too. Free hot food, water, hot drinks, any litter dropped by tourists gets snapped up straight away.

More good stuff than I can do justice by only describing it. All the camps; Oxford Circus, Parliament Square, Waterloo Bridge and Marble Arch feel so different when they're traffic free. My brain doesn't want to accept that how they are when held by the protesters and how they are normally are the same physical locations.
>> No. 426153 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 11:30 pm
426153 spacer
>>426152
Nothing good ever happens in that London.
>> No. 426154 Anonymous
22nd April 2019
Monday 11:58 pm
426154 spacer
>>426153
I have noticed that my snot has been black since I've been out there on a daily basis.
>> No. 426155 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 1:57 am
426155 spacer
>>426154

Buy one of those anti-PM10 masks. The level of particulate in London is off the scale, it will shred your lungs in a few years.
>> No. 426156 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 9:10 am
426156 spacer
>>426155
They're not one size fits all, I'm guessing a cycle shop is the place to go to try some on?
>> No. 426157 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 10:20 am
426157 spacer
>>426156

Don't know, I bought mine on Amazon and it was one size fit all. I just had to cut it to size.
>> No. 426158 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 5:07 pm
426158 spacer
One of my coworkers told me today that she was in the crowd at Marble Arch when Greta was holding her speech.

My coworker being the kind of full of herself person that some guilty white middle class armchair environmentalists tend to be, listening to her going on about what a "brave young girl" Greta Thunberg is was really kind of painful.

You know, people who aren't content with the fact that they themselves have stopped using plastic bags and disposable plastic tableware and cups, but who will look at you like you are a failed human being when you come back from lunch with a plastic coffee cup.
>> No. 426159 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 5:20 pm
426159 spacer

c0t5HuM-_400x400.jpg
426159426159426159
I've been thinking about it, really thinking about it. I don't care if she's of age, I couldn't shag her. She looks too young and I'd feel like a proper dirty paedo.

Britfa making me contemplate the big issues, as ever.
>> No. 426161 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 5:22 pm
426161 spacer

mongol pro.png
426161426161426161
>>426159
She looks like a Finngol.
>> No. 426162 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 6:08 pm
426162 spacer
>>426159

Then again, if she maintains a healthy lifestyle, it will pay off for her from about her late 20s, when she will probably still be looking not a day older than 20.

How the sperg thing will play out for her in adulthood is a different consideration.
>> No. 426163 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 6:20 pm
426163 spacer
>>426162
I'm not prepared to feel like a sex offender by banging someone who looks like a child for the best part of 12 years on the off chance that eventually she'll look nubile.
>> No. 426164 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 7:10 pm
426164 spacer
>>426163

At 16, that's a reasonable point. But once she's in her early 20s, and looks 16-18ish, why not.
>> No. 426165 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 7:33 pm
426165 spacer
>>426164
If she's 16 now and looks 12 and it'll take her 12 years to look 20 then that's aging visually by 1 year for every 1½ actual year. If you're shagging a 16 year old as a fully grown adult then you're a wrong 'un so you ideally want her looking at least 18. For her to visually age by 6 years then that will take 9 actual years. I couldn't feel like a filthy child fucker for 9 years in the hope of an eventual payoff.
>> No. 426166 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 9:34 pm
426166 spacer

3500.jpg
426166426166426166
I miss the days when Ed Miliband was leader.
>> No. 426167 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 9:43 pm
426167 spacer
Who the fuck is greta thunberg
>> No. 426168 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 9:45 pm
426168 spacer
>>426167
Assburger carpet-bagger-snarer who's convinced a bunch of schoolkids that their bunking off has changed the world's mind about climate change.
>> No. 426169 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 9:49 pm
426169 spacer
>>426165

You are forgetting though that despite her juvenile looks in her early 20s, she will for all intents and purposes be a full adult.

Also, it happens occasionally that teenagers are late bloomers physically and then put in a somewhat sudden growth spurt in their mid to late teens. So what she will look like in her early 20s is anybody's guess really. Also, maturation and then aging isn't a linear process. They don't happen at a constant rate in your life.
>> No. 426170 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 10:13 pm
426170 spacer
Because of COURSE a thread about the anti-climate change movement would degenerate into whether .gs would fuck a 16 year old.

Never change.
>> No. 426171 Anonymous
23rd April 2019
Tuesday 10:49 pm
426171 spacer
If you'd sleep with Greta and you're old enough to post here, you're a paedo and I'll beat you with a large stick if you disagree.
>> No. 426172 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 3:24 am
426172 spacer
Climate Change impending apocalypse stuff aside, when the next round of protests happen you depressedlads should really attend. Just ask open questions of the veteran protesters and listen to what they have to say, they're so overwhelmingly positive people it's a healing experience to be around them.
>> No. 426173 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 3:51 am
426173 spacer
>>426172

Fucking hippie
>> No. 426174 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 5:21 am
426174 spacer
>>426172
How many underage overage girls are there?
>> No. 426176 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 10:30 am
426176 spacer
>>426171

>If you'd sleep with Greta and you're old enough to post here

What if you're 18 and therefore only two years older than her?

But yeah, if you are in any way past your late teens or very early 20s, you're a wrongun if you want to shag her.
>> No. 426178 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 10:53 am
426178 spacer
>>425688
I couldn't agree more we are heading an environmental disaster.
It annoys me the environmental movement won't come clean, by that I mean the only realistic way of dramatically reducing emissions is by prohibiting a lot of things the average person in the UK would see as a reduction in quality of life. How do you sell to the average person no flights to go on holiday, no/little personal transport, reduced access to fresh produce etc.
>> No. 426179 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 11:44 am
426179 spacer
>>426176
Even then, I'm not making exceptions on this. She looks like a wee'un and that's that.
>> No. 426181 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 12:08 pm
426181 spacer
>>426178
>How do you sell to the average person no flights to go on holiday, no/little personal transport, reduced access to fresh produce etc.
By helping them realise that not doing it now means not doing it later and everyone being dead as a result.
>> No. 426186 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 1:34 pm
426186 spacer
>>426178

> How do you sell to the average person no flights to go on holiday

It doesn't have to be no flights, ever. But when you look back at how people spent their holidays twenty years ago, it was kind of unheard of that you would go to the Caribbean for an Easter holiday and then again to the Canary Islands in summer and to New Zealand in winter, all in the same year. People usually went on one flight per year. If that.
>> No. 426188 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 1:41 pm
426188 spacer
>>426186
>People usually went on one flight per year.
Just gonna pre-empt the pedantry by saying obviously this poster means one flight there and one back.
>> No. 426192 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 1:42 pm
426192 spacer
>>426181

And how do you do that without causing mass denial as in general people enjoy the things that are harmful
On top of that how do we cope with the huge unemployment caused by the contraction of the auto, airline and other businesses.
I agree with You, I agree with science. My point is what is the environmental movement proposing to prevent this because until they can the present situation is unlikely to change. Denial and economic forces can't just be hand waved away
>> No. 426195 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 2:09 pm
426195 spacer
>>426192

I don't know, I don't speak for the entire environmental movement and am not omniscient. But the strides XR have made in the past week can't be dismissed either. Politicians on all sides are starting to take heed. Corbyn, William Hague, Diane Abbott, Ed Miliband, members of the Shadow Cabinet. Various showboating celebrities (pun intended) throwing their hats into the ring too. The conversation is shifting.
>> No. 426197 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 2:18 pm
426197 spacer
>>426192

>On top of that how do we cope with the huge unemployment caused by the contraction of the auto, airline and other businesses.


In the long run, people always find other employment.

What's going to be a bigger problem is people in certain third-world shitehole countries whose economy depends on foreign tourism by about 50 percent.

I went to Sri Lanka once, we stayed in a stunning beachfront hotel in Beruwala in the Southwest of the island, and there was a lad who was advertising motor boat rides up the local river there into the jungle. Really quite impressive wildlife, can highly recommend if you ever go to Sri Lanka. Anyway, he told us that his entire family of a wife and three kids depended on him earning an income from providing these kinds of boat rides to tourists. I think we paid around £20 per person for a four-hour ride and back, so you would guess that he earned about £100 a day. Which really isn't too shabby by Sri Lankan standards, but he told us that other than that, there were next to no alternative jobs available in the area that would have paid enough to raise his kids. His cousin ran a sightseeing tour service around the area with two tired old Mitsubishi microbuses, but that, too, was about the only work he was able to get.
>> No. 426198 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 2:53 pm
426198 spacer

Cartoon of the Day-Pedants' Revolt.jpg
426198426198426198
>>426188

Duly noted.
>> No. 426199 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 2:55 pm
426199 spacer
>>426195

Sorry if my post seemed like it was aimed at you, it wasn't but at the wider environmental movement
Afaik the wider movement has made great strides in highlighting the issues but seem short on solutions. Maybe I've missed those proposals.
And to answer another poster people do always find work, but selling change as the harbinger of huge unemployment just will not work
>> No. 426201 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 3:15 pm
426201 spacer
>>426197
>In the long run, people always find other employment.
There's no evidence for this right now. Indeed, there's mounting evidence that this trend is dead, and that displaced workers will by and large not find alternative work.
>> No. 426205 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 4:49 pm
426205 spacer
>>426201

Unemployment in the UK is at record lows; the main problem is a declining quality of low-skilled work due to casualisation. We've got a lot of "self-employed" Uber and Deliveroo drivers, a lot of zero-hours security guards and healthcare assistants, but a diminishing number of people with secure full-time jobs.

Greening the economy doesn't particularly change those economic factors and may actually be beneficial. Two-thirds of British workers are in the service industry. If manufactured goods become relatively more expensive, services become relatively more attractive to consumers. Getting a massage or a nice haircut is pretty much zero-carbon. Eating at a restaurant is usually less carbon-intensive than eating at home because of economies of scale. If we can't fly any more, that could create a lot of jobs in the domestic tourism industry.

IMO the most prevalent ecomyth is that greening the economy is a step backwards towards an idyllic agrarian past, when really it's a step into the unknown. A sustainable economy won't look like the past, because a lot of modern technologies are incredibly efficient and a lot of very ordinary products and activities have massive carbon footprints. It's really hard to gain an intuitive sense of what that sustainable future will look like unless you're used to accounting for things in kilograms of CO2.

We'll have electric cars and trains and buses, we'll still have all the latest gadgets, but we won't have Primark and we'll be mostly vegan. Nobody will have a wood stove, but most people will have a heat pump and underfloor heating. We'll all wear thermal vests in winter. We'll have a lot more high-rise development, because modern tower blocks are efficient to build, efficient to run and contribute towards higher urban density and lower transport emissions. We'll still have extensive international trade (because sea freight is unbelievably efficient), but international travel will be very unusual.

https://withouthotair.com/
>> No. 426213 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 11:05 pm
426213 spacer
>>426205

Well listen mate, that's going to be shit and I want to eat noodles under neon lights while wearing goggles and spend my evenings plugged into virtual reality. We're going to ship our air in from space.

I hope you never go into politics because I don't want the future to be shaped by men with vaginas. I want Blade Runner.
>> No. 426215 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 11:29 pm
426215 spacer
>>426213

It's not a choice between a cyberpunk future and saving the planet. We'll die before the first happens.
>> No. 426216 Anonymous
24th April 2019
Wednesday 11:39 pm
426216 spacer
>>426205

>but international travel will be very unusual. 

It will depend on the availability of alternatives to kerosene. I read the other day that there are already experiments with electrical planes, but the problem as yet is energy density. No electric batteries exist so far which can pound-for-pound release as much energy per weight unit as kerosene, and weight is much more crucial on a plane than in a car.

Someday in the future, planes might run on nuclear fusion. That would really provide airplanes with an abundant power source without a noteworthy CO2 footprint. Then again, a plane crash could then turn into a nuclear radiation hazard if the reactor ruptures during a crash.
>> No. 426217 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 12:41 am
426217 spacer
>>426216 we'll have alga-derived liquid Fuels, grown in Algeria and piped over. Air travel will be expensive but it's not going to stop. Electric batteries show no sign of competing with liquid fuels any time soon, so closed cycle liquid fuels seem like a same plan.
>> No. 426218 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 1:54 am
426218 spacer
>>426216

>Then again, a plane crash could then turn into a nuclear radiation hazard if the reactor ruptures during a crash.

Though this is a valid concern, the more prescient matter would be the complete redesign of your aircraft, airport, and operations.

As it stands the only thing that separates a passenger from a fuel vent or fuel tank is a guideline placed under the wing and a bit of plane body, respectively. Even small amounts of radioactive material transported on planes have to be stored quite far away from the cabin, and Dangerous Goods licensing is expensive and strict enough that many airlines don't even bother with it despite it being quite lucrative freight.

I'm also not sure how you 'fuel' a reactor and I understand it's not in the conventional sense, but currently planes are fuelled right alongside passenger boarding and airport fuel farms are secure, but not that secure. There'd be a lot of expensive and logistically troubling infrastructure involved in running a nuclear plane.

A plane-power sized bank of lithium batteries could cause a pretty impressive disaster in a crash in their own right, even if the weight issue could be solved - and the most direct solution to this without a huge breakthrough in tech would be longer runways, which is obviously very impractical.

I'm not sure there's a biofuel out there that's anywhere near as potent as kerosene. You could still use it, but you might expect to have to land three or four times to refuel to make it across the planet. That's the most realistic option, though I suspect it might still reduce the number of airlines operating and people travelling. That might sound like a good thing, but if the planes are green but still shrinking in use, that's not really good, and will affect quite a lot in terms of freight delivery, so international goods would slow right down.
>> No. 426219 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 3:30 am
426219 spacer
>>426215

You say we'll die, but let's be realistic. It'll be brown-eyed people in poor countries that die first. I'm not saying that as a racially provoking statement but a cynical, realist one. I'm confident that first world politicians and scientists will sit up and take notice by the time climate change has wiped out two thirds of the worlds human population, and that depopulation in itself will be massively beneficial for the environment. But let's make no bone's about it- It'll be poor people in poor countries who die for it, not us. We'll be able to wring our hands and talk about how terrible it is over our dinner parties and virtue signal on the internet about it the same as we always have.
>> No. 426220 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 4:04 am
426220 spacer
>>426219

We're going to be underwater before the starving kids in Africa, though. No amount of money or politics can save us from geography.
>> No. 426222 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 4:38 am
426222 spacer
>>426220

They're going to starve long before we're underwater, though. No amount of money or politics will save them from living in the fucking polar.
>> No. 426223 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 5:49 am
426223 spacer
>>426218 I'm not sure there's a biofuel out there that's anywhere near as potent as kerosene.

Kerosene's good, but it's not magical. Plenty of other liquid hydrocarbons will do for energy density, Kerosene's a sweet spot of cheap and the right consistency at the wide range of temperatures needed.
If we end up needing to burn lard, I don't think the tank and line heaters will be a showstopper - but those crazy chemists have ways of fixing this sort of thing. The lengths they go to to convert crude oil into the profitable fractions (petrol, diesel, kerosene and feedstocks for plastics and other goodies) while crapping out saleable amounts bitumen and bunker crude suggest that once we know what's needed, they'll do the same for whatever energy source we can find.
>> No. 426224 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 7:39 am
426224 spacer
>>426219
To use an inappropriate metaphor, climate change snowballs. You can't just stop doing bad things one day and expect it to stay exactly as it is at the time. If we wait for either the floods or all the brown-eyed people to die before we take action, it'll be too late for anyone.
>> No. 426225 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 8:05 am
426225 spacer
>>426223
>If we end up needing to burn lard

I can get behind using fatties as fuel.
>> No. 426226 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 8:05 am
426226 spacer
Besides which, the sea is already rising (have a look at the frequency of use of the Thames Barrier, increasing over time) and they're already facing starvation in East Africa, South Sudan and Yemen right now. Have you forgotten that last year the Arctic Circle was on fire? Canada has a smoke season now. This is not just some hippies asking you to feel sorry for a greasy duck or some vague abstract thing that's happening a long way away with no real impact on you, this is not a problem to deal with tomorrow.
>> No. 426229 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 10:13 am
426229 spacer
Lads, I suggest we all pull together and purchase some land in a country most likely to not be completely ravaged by natural disasters and such. Then we create a commune that will inevitably fall into chaos by day 3.
>> No. 426230 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 10:24 am
426230 spacer
>>426229
Lately you lot have been a mixture of boring, annoying and only too happy to leave sentences uncapitalised, as such I'm going to have to decline. I'm sorry your bumders paradise will lack my depressive meltdowns and weird hair, but I'm sure you'll manage.
>> No. 426231 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 11:07 am
426231 spacer
>>426230
problem?
>> No. 426232 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 12:10 pm
426232 spacer
>>426218

>As it stands the only thing that separates a passenger from a fuel vent or fuel tank is a guideline placed under the wing and a bit of plane body, respectively. Even small amounts of radioactive material transported on planes have to be stored quite far away from the cabin

Not much fuel is needed for hydrogen fusion though. I'm not sure if the size relations are really correct, but our physics teacher in school once told us that if mankind ever figures out nuclear fusion as an energy source, then the hydrogen atoms contained in one can of fizzy drink would be enough to power all of London for a month. So you can imagine how little would be needed for a round trip flight from London to Sydney. A commercial airplane would then probably need refuelling very rarely. And the radioactive waste from nuclear fusion is also far less hazardous than that from a standard modern-day fission reactor. And if airplane flight recorders can be built that survive a plane falling flat out of the sky from 10,000 metres, then surely a robust hydrogen fuel container can be constructed that can store about a litre of deuterium and tritium.

A Boeing 747 needs about 100 megawatts of turbine power at takeoff, which should not be a problem, there are electric motors now that can output nearly that much as a single engine. And even smaller fission reactors nowadays produce over ten times that. The question will really be, how small will you be able to build a 100 MW fusion reactor so that it will fit comfortably inside a commercial airplane.

And then the problem will be, how do you shield your plane's electronics against the gigantic magnetic field that is needed to keep plasma in place at 10 million degrees Celsius inside your reactor so that you maintain a continuous fusion process, when even a laptop's Bluetooth module these days needs to be switched off during a flight to prevent interference.
>> No. 426233 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 2:48 pm
426233 spacer
Before we all get a Mr Fusion (and fusion powered planes), but after Fusion stops pissing around and gets cheap and reliable, I'd expect to go through a stage of electric-almost- everything, and making fuels using electricity (and possibly heat) from reactors. Crack seawater, get hydrogen, crack CO2 from atmosphere, get carbon. Glom them together into liquid fuels and use unchanged infrastructure. (Suck CO2 out of the atmosphere and stick it into concrete - use it or bury it, while you're at it. Loads of things we can do if energy gets cheap.) These are also things that might be able to run bursty, using up excess renewables and storing energy that way.
If we can fly fusion engines - won't we likely squander some of that energy hopping into space for a faster flight? Use fusion heat to push reaction mass out the back, without bothering to burn it?
>> No. 426234 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 3:25 pm
426234 spacer
>>426230
>I'm sorry your bumders paradise will lack my depressive meltdowns and weird hair, but I'm sure you'll manage.

Caitlin Moran, is that you?
>> No. 426235 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 4:03 pm
426235 spacer
>>426233

>crack CO2 from atmosphere, get carbon

I think the only process that can do that reliably on an industrial scale at present is air separation, which involves cooling down purified ambient air to the respective condensation points of the gases contained in it, at which they become liquid or solid and can be collected at the bottom of your separation apparatus. Sublimation of CO2 into solid dry ice occurs at -78 celsius, and while that isn't as low as the boiling point of other gases like oxygen (-182 degrees), you are going to have to put energy into the cooling process, and that energy needs to come either from fossil or renewable fuels. It may even lead to more fossil fuel being consumed if air separation takes up too much capacity of the available renewable sources.

I read the other day that there is a Trillion Tree Campaign, which aims at planting a trillion trees worldwide because they can take up about ten years' worth of human CO2 production.

https://www.trilliontreecampaign.org

The problem with that is that the CO2 that is stored in those trees will not be removed from the atmosphere permanently, as trees will eventually die and the microorganisms consuming the dead trees will release the CO2 back into the atmosphere.

The only way to remove large quantities of CO2 from the atmosphere would be if we had similar biospheric conditions as in the Carboniferous Age, when trees produced cellulose for the first time, which fungi and microorganisms had not yet evolved to digest. The result was a gigantic global carbon sink, which gave us coal seams hundreds of metres thick throughout the length and breadth of the Earth's land mass. And it was mainly by burning up those carbon sinks in the last 250 years that we have caused global warming.

No technology in existence today will be able to redeposit carbon dioxide back into the Earth's crust on the kind of scale and in the kind of time frame that we would need to meaningfully offset our global CO2 production.
>> No. 426236 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 4:25 pm
426236 spacer
>>426235
CO2 falls out the side of processes where you're pulling other gases out of air - because you want Oxygen, Nitrogen , Xenon, whatever. You can either let it go, sell it to users or stuff it somewhere out of sight.
Only a maniac would collect soley CO2 that way using fossil fuels - my rambling assumed fusion had got cheapish.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_sequestration has a few ways to get rid of the stuff, and I'm sure I saw another great hope recently.
You're right that we've burned a fuckload of coal & oil, carefully accumulated over millions of years. Work I've seen does suggest that sequestration isn't futile, though.
Building structures out of trees (and burning the detritus for power / heat) will keep a fair amount locked up for a hundred years or so - and if structural plastics get expensive, demand for wood will go up where it can.
>> No. 426237 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 5:50 pm
426237 spacer
>>426236

>and if structural plastics get expensive, demand for wood will go up where it can

There is a company in the U.S. now which makes packaging materials from shredded corn stalks. They are filled into a mould and then incubated with a particular strain of fungus, which then forms a quite rigid structure that is similar in its properties to polyurethane hard foam. If I remember correctly, they were also looking into making building materials, e.g. heat insulation etc. from their corn stalk/fungus composite, but of course the question then still is how durable will it be before it deteriorates. Polyurethane insulation foam has a life expectancy of about 25 years depending on how much it is exposed to the elements, after which it can start to crumble into a powdery mess. So that's a kind of time frame that natural insulation materials will have to compete against.
>> No. 426241 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 7:33 pm
426241 spacer

main-qimg-a0e98eefbb27209fc6b48de96d581fa2.gif
426241426241426241
>>426232

Why wait for fusion in the distant future when you could have beautiful fission today?
Nuclear electric propulsion? Fuck that, whack a reactor in a plane and the coolant can also be the propellant. Skim a little heat off the side to power the rest of the aircraft. A model of efficiency. Perfectly safe radiation exposure for the crew and ground based persons whilst operating normally.
>> No. 426242 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 7:46 pm
426242 spacer
>>426241

>whilst operating normally

That's one heck of a caveat.
>> No. 426243 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 8:14 pm
426243 spacer
>>426241 It's lucky you don't need efficiency, since the 1400oF 'combustion' temperature is laughably far from a modern 1600oC engine. Not sure what heat transfer fluid you'd need to survive that, though.
Still, fun to think about. From a distance.
>> No. 426244 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 8:26 pm
426244 spacer
>>426241
Imagine a daft militant wog crashing one of those into a building. Have fun cleaning that up.
>> No. 426247 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 9:11 pm
426247 spacer
>>426244

Any crash with a fission powered airplane would be a miniature Fukushima. Even if the reactor remains largely intact after the impact, the coolant flow could be disrupted, and then the fission fuel will quickly heat up until there is a core meltdown and the reactor explodes on its own. So maybe you will survive the actual plane crash, but you will then die a slow painful death from radiation sickness.
>> No. 426248 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 10:35 pm
426248 spacer
>>426247
Even the best case scenario is the equivalent of a dirty bomb.
>> No. 426250 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 11:09 pm
426250 spacer
>>426243
Na cooled, too. Yum! I'm sure the SFP safety in local airports will be great, too.
>> No. 426251 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 11:24 pm
426251 spacer
>>426248

The Americans apparently had a research programme for nuclear powered military aircraft in the 1950s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Nuclear_Propulsion#Abandonment

It was not abandoned for the obvious reason of radiation hazards, but due to one billion dollars of public funding having disappeared into it with no tangible results:

>Kennedy wrote "15 years and about $1 billion have been devoted to the attempted development of a nuclear-powered aircraft; but the possibility of achieving a militarily useful aircraft in the foreseeable future is still very remote" in his statement officially ending the ANP on March 26, 1961.
>> No. 426252 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 11:33 pm
426252 spacer
>>426247

This is exactly why it'll never happen - even if we were able to contain it better than that, no airline would take the risk. There's a reason EasyJet etc don't carry any sort of dangerous goods in their hold - it's very, very expensive to certify your planes to carry them, and we're talking small amounts of flammable gas etc, let alone mounting a reactor to your fuselage.
>> No. 426253 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 11:35 pm
426253 spacer
Simple answer is to just not fly unless you have to. Why do you even want to go to Australia? It's a terrible place.
>> No. 426254 Anonymous
25th April 2019
Thursday 11:55 pm
426254 spacer
>>426253

>Why do you even want to go to Australia? It's a terrible place.

You could still go there the old way, on a prison sailing ship, with a travel time of a few months and about a 10 percent mortality rate among passengers.
>> No. 426256 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 12:06 am
426256 spacer
>>426254

Or take an intercontinental train to the East End of Asia and a short ride on a much nicer boat the remaining distance.
>> No. 426257 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 12:47 am
426257 spacer
>>426256

Apparently you can get to Singapore for less than the net cost of a flight in around seven weeks if you're prepared to do a bit of work along the way and happen to have a TV crew and a bunch of fixers on hand.
>> No. 426258 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 1:26 am
426258 spacer
>>426257

I'm guessing if people chose to go by train more than by flight then quicker, easier and cheaper options would appear.
Not that anyone really need travel anywhere for business reasons any more, the Internet's pretty good at that. If you want a holiday then an adventure's as good as a rest.
>> No. 426259 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 2:08 am
426259 spacer
It's a bit if a pipe dream kf mine to take the trans Siberian railway trip. I don't know how long it stops in each place though, or whether I'd get to look about and do touristy shit along the way.

Mostly it's because I find train travel to be really relaxing.
>> No. 426260 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 7:41 am
426260 spacer
>>426259

https://www.seat61.com/Trans-Siberian.htm
>> No. 426261 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 10:20 am
426261 spacer
>>426251
I find it mildly interesting how many things happened throughover 50-80s with lots of money spent and plenty of risk involved. Think this and the Apollo programmes. And something else I can't recall right now for shit.
Was it easier back then?
>> No. 426262 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 11:27 am
426262 spacer
>>426261
cold war, innit.
There were some downsides.
>> No. 426263 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 12:48 pm
426263 spacer
>>426262
>>426261

The West had a reputation to defend against thar evil Commies. The NASA space programmes were in that sense little more than a gigantic self marketing campaign.

Some people say that now that there no longer is a Communist Bloc, the West has lost the incentive to make itself appear as the better system. And so now you have things like mass surveillance of citizens and erosion of wealth, income and security among the common people, but it's not considered a big problem, because communism as an alternative that the people might choose if they were to revolt no longer exists for all intents and purposes.
>> No. 426265 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 2:05 pm
426265 spacer
>>426262
The cold war is only really part of the explanation. It's fascinating that our investment in this sort of thing really died off in the 70s and early 80s. In a rational world we'd have killed it all off after the collapse of the USSR, but we didn't. The end of the Apollo program could potentially be explained in part by Detente, but that wouldn't explain why we kept cutting once the cold war started to heat up again with the invasion of Svalbard.

The best (partial) explanation that I know of is that neoliberalism as a political project set about (somewhat unconsciously) to make capitalism seem like the only viable economic system. Between approaches that would make capitalism more viable, but leave open the option for an alternative (like continuing with investment in space, or having the stability of postwar social democracy, or not boiling the planet and killing everyone), or those that would make it less viable but seem like the only option available (like going into our current financialised bizarreconomy, where even 2008 couldn't kill it off. or doing nothing about climate change) we find history breaking for the latter every time. But that's much too abstract for my liking and doesn't really fit with the chronology that early in the 70s and 80s. It seems much more like an emergent property of the victory of neoliberalism, rather than something that was there from the very beginning.
>> No. 426266 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 3:22 pm
426266 spacer
>>426263

>The NASA space programmes were in that sense little more than a gigantic self marketing campaign.

Most of the space race had direct military applications. The Sputnik rocket was a lightly-modified R-7 ICBM; to this day, a significant number of satellites are launched using decommissioned Soviet ICBMs. The Space Shuttle was designed from the ground-up as a launch and retrieval platform for the KH-9 spy satellite; the Hubble telescope was built to the same dimensions, which provided a plausible cover story. A lot of the ground-based equipment you need for running a space programme works just as well for communicating with spy satellites, monitoring missile tests and so on. Having loads of civilian space activity makes it easier to conceal your military operations.

The same goes for nuclear power. Britain's first nuclear reactors were solely intended to produce plutonium for nuclear warheads; Sellafield was originally a Royal Ordnance Factory used for producing TNT during the second world war. Again, civilian nuclear power provides a useful cover story for nuclear weapons development, as we have seen most recently in Iran. If you have loads of nuclear power plants (and the associated industries supplying them), it's much easier to hide your nuclear weapons programme in plain sight.
>> No. 426267 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 5:10 pm
426267 spacer
>>426266
ISTR that Windscale 1 produced little if any power initially, meaning that it was effectively running at a massive loss.
>> No. 426268 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 5:35 pm
426268 spacer
>>426267
You can't put a price on weapons-grade Plutonium!
>> No. 426270 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 5:44 pm
426270 spacer
>>426267

The Windscale piles didn't even have generating turbines, they just made plutonium, steam and a shitload of high-grade waste. They could have used them to generate power, but they never bothered. Calder Hall (the second generation of reactors at the Sellafield site) was mainly designed to produce plutonium, but incidentally generated a modest amount of electricity.

The Sellafield site is now arguably the most dangerous nuclear waste facility on earth, largely because of the chaotic and half-arsed management of the Windscale project. They just dumped fuel rods and reactor components into open ponds, without even bothering to keep count. One of the reactors caught fire, cracked open and had to be encased in concrete. Back in the 80s when decommissioning started, BNFL ran ads in the local paper asking people to get in touch if they worked on Windscale; the record-keeping was so inadequate that asking ex-employees was deemed to be the best option for estimating how much waste had been produced and where it all went. We're not sure how long it'll take to clean up the mess, but the earliest estimate is some time in the 2040s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_Piles
>> No. 426271 Anonymous
26th April 2019
Friday 6:20 pm
426271 spacer
>>426266

I think it was some Greek or Roman philosopher who 2000 years ago said "War is the beginning of everything".

Even the Internet as we know it today and use it mainly for cunt offs on .gs started as the ARPANET, a U.S. Department of Defence project whose main purpose it was to provide a decentralised electronic communications infrastructure which would continue to function if one of its servers or nodes would be destroyed in a nuclear attack.
>> No. 426284 Anonymous
27th April 2019
Saturday 10:04 am
426284 spacer
>>426283
We heard you the first time, m7.
>> No. 426285 Anonymous
27th April 2019
Saturday 11:52 am
426285 spacer
>>426284
Back to /A/ for me.
>> No. 426309 Anonymous
28th April 2019
Sunday 11:05 pm
426309 spacer
>>426270

>The Sellafield site is now arguably the most dangerous nuclear waste facility on earth, largely because of the chaotic and half-arsed management of the Windscale project.

Also, near enough the entire Irish Sea has one of the highest levels of radioactive radiation of any salt water sea on Earth. It may not be so bad that it's a health hazard to swim in or consume seafood caught from it, and the coastal waters of Fukushima are probably far worse still, but it's all the result of Sellafield leaking radioactive material into the Irish Sea for half a century.
>> No. 426349 Anonymous
1st May 2019
Wednesday 9:29 pm
426349 spacer
I know you're all excited by game of thrones and the new sonic film but the government just declared a climate emergency.
That boy Owen Jones really gets into his speeches.
>> No. 426351 Anonymous
1st May 2019
Wednesday 10:30 pm
426351 spacer
>>426349
Lad, I know you feel compelled to sustain interest in this thread and covert others around to your way of thinking but praising Owen Jones really isn't the way to go about it.
>> No. 426352 Anonymous
1st May 2019
Wednesday 10:57 pm
426352 spacer
>>426351
I wasn't praising him as such. He does an interesting thing with his hands when he speaks. Looks a little familiar.
>> No. 426354 Anonymous
1st May 2019
Wednesday 11:40 pm
426354 spacer

breakingnews.jpg
426354426354426354
>>426349

>but the government just declared a climate emergency
>> No. 426355 Anonymous
1st May 2019
Wednesday 11:47 pm
426355 spacer
>>426354
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48126677
>> No. 426356 Anonymous
2nd May 2019
Thursday 12:31 am
426356 spacer
>>426355
Come on, Anon's already decided he's too smart to bother actually reading the news, he's even got a pertinent reaction image to show you how right he probably is.
>> No. 426357 Anonymous
2nd May 2019
Thursday 12:46 am
426357 spacer
>>426355

>This proposal, which demonstrates the will of the Commons on the issue but does not legally compel the government to act, was approved without a vote.

That seems a bit undemocratic.
>> No. 426358 Anonymous
2nd May 2019
Thursday 5:31 am
426358 spacer
>>426355
>Dozens of towns and cities across the UK have already declared "a climate emergency". There is no single definition of what that means but many local areas say they want to be carbon-neutral by 2030.

I wouldn't hold your breath on this one. It seems largely symbolic; a sign that politicians are shown to be doing something, hopping on the bandwagon without really committing to anything, to placate people whilst having enough wiggle room to do very little.

We're facing a social care crisis due to the aging population and the government have pledged to do something since they came into power in 2010. The Dilnot Commission published its report in July 2011 and whilst there has been a lot of noise about doing something it has largely been kicked into the long grass.
>> No. 426359 Anonymous
2nd May 2019
Thursday 8:36 am
426359 spacer
>>426357
It means literally nothing, so I wouldn't worry too much.
>> No. 426360 Anonymous
2nd May 2019
Thursday 8:40 am
426360 spacer
Reading the independent today, plenty of stories on climate emergency and Heathrow expansion being bad for the environment. All along side an article reviewing gas bbq's
>> No. 426361 Anonymous
2nd May 2019
Thursday 9:12 am
426361 spacer
>>426358
>I wouldn't hold your breath on this one. It seems largely symbolic; a sign that politicians are shown to be doing something,
I think everyone is aware of this; all the speeches given by MPs last night were sandwiched by activists reminding the crowd that it's "deeds not words" that count. If you look at XR's three stated demands this is only the first. What it does mean is that there's less wiggle room in environmental debates for deniers. When discussing whether or not a new runway or motorway should be built it is going to be helpful that this can be pointed to.
>> No. 426425 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 12:20 pm
426425 spacer
>>426361

>When discussing whether or not a new runway or motorway should be built

Sometimes that can alleviate traffic congestion though, and is actually something that saves CO2.
>> No. 426426 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 12:32 pm
426426 spacer
>>426425

Road building rarely has a long-term beneficial impact on congestion because of induced demand - the traffic moves more freely, so more people are inclined to use the road, until you're more-or-less back where you started. More intelligent road design (especially junction design) can meaningfully reduce congestion, but we really need a broader strategy encompassing public transport, flexible working and telecommuting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand
>> No. 426427 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 1:23 pm
426427 spacer
>>426426

I'm not sure anyone has every thought. Oh boy the airport has more runways I should fly more.
>> No. 426428 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 2:09 pm
426428 spacer
>>426427

>Oh boy the airport has more runways I should fly more.

Sure, but what about "oh, I can fly to x now? That's good, I'll do that" or "oh, the plane that flies to y is twice as big now so it's considerably cheaper? Yes please" or even "my commuter flight is three times as frequent? Maybe I could jump back on the weekends more easily/more often now!"
>> No. 426429 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 2:13 pm
426429 spacer
>>426427

Airport landing slots are a scarce and valuable commodity that contribute significantly to the cost of a flight - that's why low-cost carriers operate out of less busy second-tier airports. More runways means more landing slots, which means cheaper flights; it's basic economics that people are more inclined to buy flights if they cost less.
>> No. 426430 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 2:20 pm
426430 spacer
>>426427
Airlines certainly have. Passengers have also definitely thought "I wish I didn't have to travel all the way to $airport instead of $nearer-airport".

>>426426
There's a lot that can be learned about traffic flow from fluid dynamics. For all the shit that people threw at the M4 bus lane, it improved traffic flow by eliminating a merge in the middle of nowhere and instead putting the lane drop at a junction. Imagine a pipe suddenly being narrowed and water backing up at the bottleneck. Now imagine a run-off at the same place.

Contrast this with the M4 around Newport, especially westbound. You have local and long-distance traffic all trying to fit through two lanes and failing miserably. Further down at Port Talbot, traffic flow improved noticeably when one awkward slip road was closed during the peaks. At Newport, you have people using the back streets as rat runs, and generally getting through the area more quickly than actually using the motorway. The proposed relief road takes away the long-distance traffic from there, and puts traffic that should be on the motorway back on the motorway instead of on the streets.
>> No. 426431 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 4:19 pm
426431 spacer
This all got me thinking: will we see another era of sea transport?

Prototypes for electric jet engines exist, and I suppose for shorter flights we can have electrified prop planes, but with the ongoing issue of energy storage I'm not sure how far we'll get with them in the foreseeable future.

A big ship, however, has plenty of space to store electrical energy. I suppose either way, international transport is going to become a luxury few can afford once again, at least for a while.
>> No. 426432 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 4:35 pm
426432 spacer
>>426431
>This all got me thinking: will we see another era of sea transport?
Betteridge says no.

Part of the issue with key engines is that they rely on the combustion, so turning the blades by other means isn't going to cut it. Something like hydrogen might be more useful in that context, since you still get the propulsion but the by-product is water vapour rather than various oxides of carbon. To a lesser extent you could also power ship engines in much the same way as now using hydrogen. Given a ship has very little area for its volume, even moreso for larger vessels (square-cube and all that), photovoltaic cells aren't really going to cut it, and charging a ship-sized battery would surely take days on end.
>> No. 426433 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:10 pm
426433 spacer
>>426431

The modern era demands speed and excess so it's unlikely we'll see a return to ocean transport for passengers. You can't ask people to give up their cushy lifestyle now to save their fucking lives in a few years.

Anyway specifically with regards to ocean transport electric ships are a daft idea, they need too much energy.
What the ocean gives us instead is the one place where you can easily use the wind for direct propulsion. But the age of sail is long past in spite of the elegance of the solution (especially augmented with mechanical propulsion for when the weather is unfavourable).

I probably almost sound like a neo-luddite and I'm progressively finding fewer issues with a label like that.
>> No. 426434 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:18 pm
426434 spacer
>>426433
It takes around a week to cross the Atlantic by sea. A week there and a week back and you've already used up half your holidays without even doing anything over there.
>> No. 426435 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:20 pm
426435 spacer
>>426432
>charging a ship-sized battery would surely take days on end
Sure, but cruise ships and the like dock for days during tours anyway.

>Hydrogen
Hydrogen is a really nice solution once we can figure out how to get it in bulk at energy neutrality or better. I welcome the era of V20 12 litre displacement hydrogen combustion engines. Of course, hydrogen combustion happens at a much higher temperature and we need to store it under immense pressure, so there are those issues.

>>426433
>The modern era demands speed and excess
Eventually, not long from now, we will (functionally) run out of jet fuel. What I mean by functionally is that it will become prohibitively expensive. People will still want/need international travel, though.

>Sails

Maybe people will fuck them off now, but when needs must and all that.
>> No. 426436 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:37 pm
426436 spacer
>>426434

Well maybe traveling 1/3rd of the way across the globe for a couple of week's holiday just isn't sustainable. Ask most people from the planet and that would seem like an extravagant, unobtainable expense for the rich. We're just used to the excess.
>> No. 426437 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:42 pm
426437 spacer
>>426436
Maybe for two weeks holiday, but people will still need to travel internationally for business, family, etc. Plus, we are currently chugging through insane amounts of illegal red diesel for shipping anyway, surely we'll need a way around that.
>> No. 426438 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:47 pm
426438 spacer
>>426437

People have had family migrate across the world for long before air travel became convenient, and in a time before they could communicate instantly with video feeds from anywhere. People can keep in contact over distances without needing to meet frequently.
And I'm not saying to eliminate all air travel, just most of it. It's excessive at the moment. A lot of business could be conducted through the internet too if people would adapt.
>> No. 426439 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:48 pm
426439 spacer
>>426438
Of course, that's the point I'm making. There will still be transport, no matter how much we streamline everything.
>> No. 426440 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:50 pm
426440 spacer
>>426435

>Hydrogen

I think the more realistic development will be production of hydrocarbons from renewable sources, and by methods that won't infringe on arable land for food. That way you can use all the good old fashioned stuff without a net change in the carbon cycle of the planet.
>> No. 426441 Anonymous
5th May 2019
Sunday 5:58 pm
426441 spacer
>>426436
If the planet is fucked anyway, why not go all out and see it before it's gone?
>> No. 426453 Anonymous
6th May 2019
Monday 12:32 am
426453 spacer

Shamima-Begum-being-interviewed-by-Sky-News-in-Nor.jpg
426453426453426453
We should build windmills and stuff
>> No. 426455 Anonymous
6th May 2019
Monday 2:43 am
426455 spacer
>>426453
>SICK And VILE ISIS plot to Devalue YOUR PROPERTY with Twisted Green Energy Takeover
>> No. 426456 Anonymous
6th May 2019
Monday 10:01 pm
426456 spacer

bytheemperor.jpg
426456426456426456
>>426441

The incoming ecological collapse is the Emperor's will: when government will be forced to accept the fact that Terra is going to be uninhabitable soon, they will put their shit together and start funding proper space research, space propulsion and terraforming. First we will start building a series of massive platforms in LEO, then lunar habitats, then we'll start the process of terraforming Mars and moving all the heavy industries and research there. We are on the cusp of evolution for the human race, Greta is just a Warp spawned monster trying to distract humanity from its designated, manifest destiny as rightful rulers of the galaxy.
>> No. 426458 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:36 am
426458 spacer
>>426456
Just don't wake the dragon on Mars.
>> No. 426459 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:41 am
426459 spacer

Chaos_Star_Khorne.png
426459426459426459
>>426456

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE! TURBINES FOR THE WIND FARM!
>> No. 426467 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:54 pm
426467 spacer

Klima-Aktivistin-Greta-Thunberg-fuer-den-Friedensn.jpg
426467426467426467
Why do I keep thinking Greta Thunberg looks like a South Park character.
>> No. 426469 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 12:59 pm
426469 spacer

xYHGstTKNxkpB0BIhzBKRx7VOOvYpqASbM9L3WJ3ZhI.png
426469426469426469
>>426467
Real life Cartman.
>> No. 426470 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 1:16 pm
426470 spacer

154102e128bf20f7348192376172.gif
426470426470426470
>>426469

Normally the creators of South Park are on these things quite immediately. A pigtailed four and a half foot sperg girl like her travelling the globe with a political agenda is a South Park episode that just begs to be written if any episode ever did.
>> No. 426471 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 1:46 pm
426471 spacer
>>426467

Because you've watched so many cartoons that you relate better to them than real life.
>> No. 426488 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 7:12 pm
426488 spacer

cover.jpg
426488426488426488
>>426458

There is no such thing, you doubleheretic. The Noctis Labyrinthus is just closed for renovations. No void dragon there.
>> No. 426505 Anonymous ## Mod ##
7th May 2019
Tuesday 8:22 pm
426505 spacer
Enough of that.
>> No. 426506 Anonymous
7th May 2019
Tuesday 8:23 pm
426506 spacer
>>426471

>Because you've watched so many cartoons that you relate better to them than real life.

South Park usually hits the nail on the head though.
>> No. 426534 Anonymous
8th May 2019
Wednesday 4:41 pm
426534 spacer
>>426505

Enough of 40k or enough of the psudo noncing. I'm not trying to be confrontational. It is just unclear.
>> No. 426535 Anonymous
8th May 2019
Wednesday 5:14 pm
426535 spacer
>>426534

>It is just unclear.

You poor fool.
>> No. 426546 Anonymous
8th May 2019
Wednesday 6:25 pm
426546 spacer
>>426534
Both? I've seen those Games Workshop places, it's just nerdy kiddies and proper wrong'uns hanging about. And they wanted silly money for super glue that one time.
>> No. 426550 Anonymous
8th May 2019
Wednesday 6:54 pm
426550 spacer
>>426546

SUFFER NOT THE HERETIC TO LIVE!
>> No. 426551 Anonymous
8th May 2019
Wednesday 6:58 pm
426551 spacer
>>426546

>nerdy kiddies and proper wrong'uns

All of them undoubtedly virgins.
>> No. 426559 Anonymous
8th May 2019
Wednesday 11:51 pm
426559 spacer
>>426551

I mean a lot of people got into warhammer when they were nerdy virgins, grow into fairly respectable adults then find out it's still enjoyable as such.

I just started collecting (well, re-painting my old metal stuff) again because painting's really satisfying and the miniatures are mostly great, if fucking stupidly priced. I also love the setting in spite of the specific lore being a bit of a retconned fudged mess a lot of the time.
>> No. 426562 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 12:03 pm
426562 spacer
>>426559

Back then you could not enter a GW shop unless you were a complete weirdo with a 2+ permavirginity aura. Now there are a lot of normies in the game, the DOW games have turned 40K in something way more acceptable by the masses.
>> No. 426566 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 1:07 pm
426566 spacer
>>426559
>>426562

This is very true. I still don't go into the shops, and I've only had a handful of games, but I got into it again last year after nearly 18 years. I've restored my old Blood Angels and Necrons to their former glory, and I've found that when you're a grown man with a real job it's actually not as expensive as you think to get a box of dudes maybe once a month. It takes me that long to get around to painting them anyway.

You'd be surprised how many people have been saying it recently though. I think it's undergoing a very specific renaissance where people who used to play as teenage in the late 90s are reaching the age where they're settling down, and need something to spend their weekends doing instead of boozing and chasing tail. The game itself in its current edition is a conscious throwback to aspects of 2nd and 3rd ed.

It's a good time to be a Warhammer nerd, basically.
>> No. 426609 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 5:41 pm
426609 spacer

0_TCR_BRI_090519GlueMan1_1.jpg
426609426609426609
This is the moment a climate change protester tried to superglue himself to the doors of City Hall - but was stumped because they kept opening before he could get there.

University research fellow Dr Larch Maxey tried several times to approach the automatic doors of the headquarters of Bristol City Council, after covering his hands with superglue, but gave up when he couldn’t get to the doors fast enough before they opened.


https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/moment-activist-tried-superglue-himself-2850010

The video of the activist repeatedly failing to comprehend that he won't be able to glue himself to automatic doors because they keep opening as he gets near them is worth a watch. Nothing like an educated fool.
>> No. 426610 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 5:48 pm
426610 spacer
>>426609 He's prepared to inconvenience people by gluing himself to the doors, but won't stick his foot in there to stop them opening?
I'm confused, or missing the point, or something.
>> No. 426614 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 6:10 pm
426614 spacer
>>426610
A lot of people who are academically bright have incredibly low levels of common sense and practical know-how.
>> No. 426619 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 6:52 pm
426619 spacer
>>426609
I wish automatic doors were that responsive to me. Wherever I go I need to be practically touching my nose to them before they'll open, especially Asda, numerous Asdas at that.
>> No. 426623 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 7:45 pm
426623 spacer
>>426614

My brother once had all his engineer friends over to help him move. All of them were probably well capable of designing a washing machine motor on a drawing board, but when it came to actually physically moving a washing machine or a fridge from a second floor flat into the back of a Ford Transit, they were hopelessly out of their depth.
>> No. 426652 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 10:09 pm
426652 spacer
>>426619
Have you ever considered that you might be a ghost?
>> No. 426659 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 10:32 pm
426659 spacer
>>426652
Who are you replying to?
>> No. 426663 Anonymous
9th May 2019
Thursday 10:54 pm
426663 spacer
>>426619

Did you remember to switch your cloaking device off?

Does a number on me all the time.
>> No. 426954 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 10:53 am
426954 spacer

1.png
426954426954426954
As you read this, I'm sitting in a big container outside BP's HQ in London, blocking one of the main entrances to the building. Along with a team of climbers on the roof, and more people in containers like mine, we've shut down the building. This is one of the scariest things I've ever done, but I know it's the right thing.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2416614758619602
These lasses don't fuck about like.
>> No. 426955 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 10:55 am
426955 spacer
The containers, each weighing several tonnes, are being used to blockade all five entrances to prevent staff from entering BP’s offices in St James’s Square.

Two activists are encased in each of the five containers with enough provisions to last at least a week. Another 15 activists are occupying the top of the boxes after abseiling down the side of the building.

Greenpeace said it was carrying out the action because BP was behaving as if the climate emergency was not happening.

>> No. 426956 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 11:06 am
426956 spacer
>>426954
>>426955
Damn, I'm impressed. I wonder if there's some kind of protest tactics arms race going between Extinction Rebellion and Greenpeace now?
>> No. 426960 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 11:25 am
426960 spacer
>>426956
It's not each other that they're competing with.
>> No. 426962 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 11:43 am
426962 spacer
>>426960
Of course it is, they're playing Who can be bigger bunch of twats? together.
>> No. 426963 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 12:01 pm
426963 spacer
>>426960

It is. It's abundantly clear that nobody else is listening.
>> No. 426969 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 2:46 pm
426969 spacer
>>426955

>Two activists are encased in each of the five containers with enough provisions to last at least a week. Another 15 activists are occupying the top of the boxes after abseiling down the side of the building.

If that goes bad. I foresee it going very bad.
>> No. 426970 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 3:26 pm
426970 spacer
>>426969

A shipping container is luxury accommodation by eco-warrior standards. Some road protesters spent weeks in tunnels that the Viet Cong would have called a deathtrap.



https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/waca/pages/1191/attachments/original/1507710581/disco_daves_tunnelling_guide.pdf?1507710581
>> No. 426976 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 4:41 pm
426976 spacer
definitely would
>> No. 426983 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 6:11 pm
426983 spacer
>>426962
Sounds like you have them beaten hands down.
>> No. 426989 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 8:32 pm
426989 spacer
>>426970
Why have I never heard of sheriffs in England & Wales before?
>> No. 426990 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 8:49 pm
426990 spacer
>>426989
Most people don't need to deal with them, because they either don't owe or aren't owed enough money for them to get involved. Their proper title these days is High Court Enforcement Officers.
>> No. 426994 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 9:30 pm
426994 spacer

Legal-Sunday-Service-June-2016-HS-Somerset-Cornwal.jpg
426994426994426994
>>426990
Pretty sure those were called bailiffs in the compilation.

No, I mean this lot, who continue to exist.
>> No. 426995 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 9:36 pm
426995 spacer
>>426994
Bailiffs enforce judgments from the County Court.

I think those fancy-pants types are called High Sheriffs.
>> No. 426997 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 10:03 pm
426997 spacer
>>426994

High Sheriffs used to have responsibility for enforcing High Court writs until 2004, when that was transferred to the court itself. Naturally the lads and lasses with daft ruffs didn't go out dragging road protesters out of trees and seizing vans, they deputised it to their own bailiffs. They're still technically responsible for overseeing local elections, but that gets deputised to the returning officer.

We're British, we're obliged to have loads of archaic institutions that used to have a practical purpose but are now merely ceremonial. I imagine that in the far future, we'll send a frazzled-looking woman to Brussels every year to ask for an "Article 50 extension"; nobody in that part of China will have a clue what she's on about, but they'll give her a fancy bit of paper with a big wax seal because the tradition is cute.
>> No. 426998 Anonymous
20th May 2019
Monday 11:24 pm
426998 spacer
>>426997

>I imagine that in the far future, we'll send a frazzled-looking woman to Brussels every year to ask for an "Article 50 extension"

Audible mirth.

I mean, you're taking the piss but that really is how most of our wierd parliamentary traditions came to be, and it's daft enough that one day you'll sit with your head in your hands despairing how accurate of a prediction it was.
>> No. 427150 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 12:29 pm
427150 spacer
Looks like Sweden has grown tired of its poster child.

https://www.thelocal.se/20190528/europe-analysis-why-swedens-greens-are-happy-after-losing-big-in-eu-vote

>While its sister parties in Germany, France, Ireland, Denmark, Finland, Austria, and the UK made historic gains, the Swedish Green Party lost half of its four MEPs after its share of the vote plummeted from 15.2 percent to 11.4 percent.

I think I remember reading about political phaenomena like that, i.e. when the public believe that enough is being done about a political issue, they will actually vote for the party in fewer numbers that seems to be the most active on the issue.

Could be that Swedes think they've got the environmentall issues all taken care of for now (maybe also in part because they've got their little sperg girl touring the globe), and now other fields of politics seem more important.
>> No. 427151 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 1:05 pm
427151 spacer
>>427150

The Greens have done well more broadly, going from 50 to 69 seats in total. The EPP and S&D are 50 seats short of a majority for this parliament, so that gain is materially significant - the Greens have enough seats to make them a plausible junior partner in a grand coalition and they're probably the least phlegmatic choice.

The ECR and EFDD are a complete no-go, because they're dominated by the Tories and the Brexit Party and respectively; ENF and GUE are too mental to contemplate. S&D will be wary of a coalition with ALDE, because they were previously in coalition with the EPP and have enough seats to undermine S&D; it could also complicate the Brexit process, because Verhofstadt is the leader of ALDE.

The rise of the right isn't all that significant to the day-to-day workings of the EP, but the loss of the EPP/S&D majority and the rise of the Greens is.
>> No. 427155 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 3:27 pm
427155 spacer
>>427150
We'll see how they feel about it again later in the year if the forest fires start back up.
>> No. 427157 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 4:10 pm
427157 spacer
>>427155
But I thought they didn't have forest fires in Scandinavia because they rake the leaves or something.
>> No. 427158 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 4:11 pm
427158 spacer
>>427155

You can't wholely blame forest fires on global warming though. The problem is drought, and that can set a forest on fire at 30°C same as 20 degrees.

On that note, we went on holiday in central Sweden once, rented a country cabin on a lake there. Somewhere near Jonkoping. Froze our arses off in mid-July there because almost during the whole two weeks that we were there, it barely got above 15°C during the day. And the few days that we did have 23 to 25 degrees, we had to fight off myriads of mosquitoes and other biting insects.
>> No. 427166 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 9:52 pm
427166 spacer
Can someone please explain water to me? It's really blagging my head.

I get the water cycle and everything but where did water come from in the first place? Presumably our planet was just a barren rock and then one day water just appeared and continued amassing, possibly due to atmospheric conditions. Is the amount of water on our planet decreasing or increasing? If it is increasing then where is it coming from? If it is decreasing then where is it going? Presumably human intervention is making the water cycle more convoluted and longer, but the net result is that the cumulative amount of water on the planet, either physically water, vapour or in the ground, is somewhat constant?
>> No. 427168 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 10:10 pm
427168 spacer
>>427166
Ancient aliens lad. They brought the water from their space lake.
>> No. 427169 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 10:11 pm
427169 spacer
>>427166
>I get the water cycle and everything but where did water come from in the first place?

Scientists aren't 100% sure themselves.
It's thought that a lot of it came from comets, that there was a huge bombardment of comets in the early days of the planets formation and they bought all the water from the outer solar system.

The amount of water on the planet is very constant, there is a minuscule amount lost every year, as molecules that get high enough into the atmosphere can get stripped away into space by solar radiation.
There is also another aspect to the water cycle, where water gets dragged down into the crust by plate tectonics, and back into the atmosphere from volcanoes.
>> No. 427170 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 10:28 pm
427170 spacer
>>427158
What do you think causes drought?
>> No. 427171 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 10:28 pm
427171 spacer
>>427166

The amount of water on Earth is mostly constant, because water vapour is too dense to escape from the atmosphere.

We don't really know how water ended up on Earth, but it probably either arrived while the Earth was being formed in our sun's protoplanetary disk, or landed on comets from the Oort cloud. Where that water came from is a long story:


>> No. 427178 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 11:42 pm
427178 spacer
>>427171

>because water vapour is too dense to escape from the atmosphere

More than that, we have the Earth's magnetic field to tank for the fact that we still have water. The energetically charged particles of the solar wind are able to break up the water molecules in a planet's atmosphere into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen in particular as the lightest known element can then be blown off into space easily by the solar wind. The going theory is that that is what happened to Mars when its magnetic field disappeared following the cooling and solidification of its core. The very thin carbon dioxide atmosphere that Mars has today and which has only a few percent of the density of the Earth's atmosphere is thought to be the remainder of what used to be a mixture of various different gases like on Earth. Everything else was blown off into space, and carbon dioxide as a very stable molecule remained because the energy of the solar wind isn't enough to break up CO2 into its constituents.
>> No. 427179 Anonymous
28th May 2019
Tuesday 11:56 pm
427179 spacer
I don't understand how where water came from is any more of a mystery than where rocks came from. It's all just shit that's floating around in space and gets accumulated into large spheres called "planets" thanks to gravity. There's the same basic materials on Earth as there is in asteroids. We just have a particular mix of them which is no surprise as most planets seem to have different particular mixes.
>> No. 427183 Anonymous
29th May 2019
Wednesday 3:27 am
427183 spacer
>>427179

I actually causes offence in an online group when I dismissed an article posted which stated that the Earth got its water from the collision with another body which caused the moon to form- as if it's impossible for the Earth to have just accumulated water from comet impacts. I think they thought I was anti science because I don't automatically believe the latest pop-sci article I read.

Planet formation is an enormously complicated process really, and we just don't have enough data to say much with certainty about it. We have these fantastic models, but they keep getting called into question when we find new exoplanets. It's all very interesting.

Planets don't just accumulate from whatever shit's floating about. They also lose mass due to a variety of factors. For instance, planets can lose water through the photodisassociation of water to free hydrogen, which can be lost in the solar wind. Whether that happens can depend on its gravity and magnetic field.
>> No. 427224 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 1:34 am
427224 spacer
>>427183

I think the biggest mystery is how a planet at a distance from the Sun like ours was able to obtain enough water to cover 71% of the Earth's surface at an overall average depth of 3,800 metres.

The radiation pressure from the Sun blew almost all of the free water in the early Solar System to the outer parts of the system, as well as most gases, which is assumed to be why the gas giants like Jupiter or Saturn exist at a considerable distance from the Sun. So the question then is where the water really came from. The very early Earth very probably had no water at all while its naked rock surface was still cooling down. And as I said, it can't have come from the Earth's direct vicinity. So either the Earth was formed further out on the edges of the Solar System and was then somehow drawn into the inner zone where it is now, or some very large water-containing comets hit the Earth before the Sun could dissolve them like it usually does with comets that come closer to it.
>> No. 427228 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 9:36 am
427228 spacer
>https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/29/energy-department-molecules-freedom-fossil-fuel-rebranding
>Mark W Menezes, the US undersecretary of energy, bestowed a peculiar honorific on our continent’s natural resources, dubbing it “freedom gas”
>“Seventy-five years after liberating Europe from Nazi Germany occupation, the United States is again delivering a form of freedom to the European continent,” - Rick Perry

What I'm saying is we didn't fight hard enough during the American Revolutionary War.
>> No. 427229 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 9:56 am
427229 spacer
>>427228

That's a bit abstruse even for the Trump Administration.

Makes you wish back the old days when they just flat out bombed countries to bring them peace.
>> No. 427231 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 12:16 pm
427231 spacer
>>427228
There's this
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/juliana-versus-united-states-the-climate-change-lawsuit-that-could-stop-the-u-s-government-from-supporting-fossil-fuels-60-minutes/
though I'm not holding my breath for it.
>> No. 427234 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 12:50 pm
427234 spacer
>>427224
>>427183

Is it not more logical to just assume that the earth was mostly water to begin with? A giant ball of ice that accumulated more rock over time rather than the other way round.
>> No. 427236 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 2:28 pm
427236 spacer
>>427234
No.
>> No. 427237 Anonymous
30th May 2019
Thursday 2:52 pm
427237 spacer
Check out #noplant19 on twitter too.
>> No. 427245 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 1:50 pm
427245 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI
This guy talks about the deterioration of what could be Earths most fertile lands. He claims to have found a way to restore the land to its previous vigor, and how this can help reduce - if not significantly reverse - climate change.
This leads me to wonder; there is a fair display of vegans in the climate change crowd. Vegans want to reduce demand for meat. According to this video, doesn't it follow that vegans accelerate climate change?
>> No. 427246 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 3:14 pm
427246 spacer
>>427245
There are loads of people with big ideas going nowhere. It's mostly just clickbait.
>> No. 427247 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 3:50 pm
427247 spacer
>>427245

He's an obvious crank.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Savory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holistic_management_(agriculture)#Criticism
>> No. 427248 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 4:08 pm
427248 spacer
>>427245

Don't try getting people to actually think about the logical conclusions of their beliefs lad, it only leads to madness and frustration. Vegans, fisherfolk, religionists, libertarians... There are a lot of people out there convinced that their ideology is the one truth, who willingly ignore the negative repercussions that would quickly become evident if they were to get just exactly what they wished for.
>> No. 427249 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 4:24 pm
427249 spacer
>>427248

You sound like you're an absolute delight at parties.
>> No. 427250 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 5:26 pm
427250 spacer
>>427249
And you're a useless cunt.
>> No. 427251 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 5:34 pm
427251 spacer

Capture.png
427251427251427251
How is it that we as a species have less self control than bad algae?
>> No. 427252 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 5:54 pm
427252 spacer
>>427249

Someone has used that exact reply in another thread recently. There are only three of us so I'm willing to believe that was you too.

Don't use put downs more than once a year, mate, this board moves slowly enough we'll notice. In fact, even once a year is probably pushing it.
>> No. 427253 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 5:57 pm
427253 spacer
>>427245
>This leads me to wonder; there is a fair display of vegans in the climate change crowd. Vegans want to reduce demand for meat. According to this video, doesn't it follow that vegans accelerate climate change?
There are a lot of problems with our current meat industry. We need to see a big shift in use of land, we need to stop raising livestock on grain and processed feeds, stop cutting down rainforests to make space for livestock, and move all the livestock away from arable land.

To do so would mean moving virtually all cattle away from the Americas and Europe and into Africa and the middle east. I don't know if it is feasible to produce enough meat that way, but there would certainly be huge logistical difficulties in doing this, and meat would be more expensive.

>>427247
I think he is over-optimistic definitely.
However I don't see much evidence that there are any serious issues with what he is saying. The core of the criticism is firstly that his evidence is mainly anecdotal (which doesn't necessarily mean incorrect), and secondly other people have had poor success in replicating his results.
Both the first and second criticism can be countered by the fact that on the scales needed -hundreds or thousands of hectares, herds of livestock a thousand strong, and many unskilled labourers- it is virtually impossible to run the sort of closely controlled scientific study that the critics demand.
Anecdotal evidence is the best we're going to get.
>> No. 427254 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 6:14 pm
427254 spacer
>>427253

I don't buy vegans though. There's always something of a holier than thou air about them. At least the ones I know personally. They think they are the personified solution to the world's future problems, and look down on you the poor meat eating brute who hasn't seen the light. There tends to be something almost religious about them, and they tend to preach their faith that way to the unbelievers.
>> No. 427255 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 6:26 pm
427255 spacer

vegan.jpg
427255427255427255

>> No. 427257 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 6:40 pm
427257 spacer
I'd be fine with vegans, we're it not for the fact you cannot have a balanced diet without protein, and the amino acids which are specifically found in animal meat. It's fine if you want to chose a diet based on ethics alone, and make your life a massive pain in the arse to compensate for its nutritional shortcomings, but it's a bit rich to expect others to do the same when they could just... Eat some meat.

That's the part that bugs me more than anything. We should eat less meat and be more humane about how we farm it, but you literally need meat to fulfil your nutritional requirements and anyone who says otherwise is a fucking hippie liar.
>> No. 427258 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 6:41 pm
427258 spacer
>>427255

That cartoon is biased though. The vegans I know aren't like "Please become vegan, k thx bai", no, it's more like, "You're eating an animal's suffering every time you are having a steak".

All I can say is, I do catch and kill fishing. All these people who theorise about killing animals and how much suffering it causes them have very universally no idea how it feels to kill a creature for food. My favourite saying in that respect is that you don't fully appreciate life until you have killed a creature for food with your own hands. I have great respect for the idea that animals that we raise for food shouldn't have to suffer more than is absolutely necessary. But I know what it really means to kill an animal. For many of those theorising vegans, death is simply a theoretical concept.

Not sure if this makes any sense. In any case, I don't see a reason to go against my omnivore nature as a homo sapien. There are times when I really enjoy a vegetarian dish, but not as a matter of principle. You won't talk me out of having a full on steak with all the trimmings once or twice a week.
>> No. 427260 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 6:57 pm
427260 spacer

1423126575579.png
427260427260427260
>>427258

None of what you said means that animals aren't being hurt. Just that you prefer to hurt them yourself for selfish reasons. I'm not a vegan but there is so much vegan hate for them apparently being aloof or smug or evangelical and I've never met a vegan who's like that. It seems really fucking obvious that it's a lot of meat eaters who know they're doing something morally dubious and are shitting on vegans for showing them up by simply not doing it, regardless of what the vegans actually do or say.

I have never seen a vegan being rude to someone else about their choices. I see people being rude about vegans for theirs every day.
>> No. 427263 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 10:08 pm
427263 spacer
Vegans are, after all, people. Some of them are intolerable cunts and some of them are lovely. There's a large dose of confirmation bias at play whichever side you're on there.

Personally, I hate people who always turn up for work early. They don't say anything about it, they don't infringe on my right to show up precisely as the clock hits 9, and I'm doing nothing wrong by doing that. Yet somehow, I still feel like I look bad next to them. I loathe them for it. Can't they just stay the fuck in bed for another half hour like a normal person instead of making me look lazy when I'm doing nothing wrong?

Same deal with vegans.
>> No. 427264 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 10:30 pm
427264 spacer
>>427257
> I'd be fine with vegans, we're it not for the fact you cannot have a balanced diet without protein, and the amino acids which are specifically found in animal meat.

This is not true. Millions of people exist healthily on basically just beans and rice. Theta Grunberg does too and so should you.
>> No. 427265 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 10:44 pm
427265 spacer
>>427264

This is not true, these hypothetical people you speak of almost certainly eat eggs and dairy products at a minimum, as sustainable sources of protein. Free range eggs are not murder, which is where I lose truck with vegans- Vegetarian is a totally different and much less piss boiling thing. I've never heard of anyone hating vegetarians, just specifically vegans.

Then you have the ones who try to feed their dog a meat free diet, completing a circle of mental gymnastics and hypocrisy so intense I need a wank if I think about it for too long.
>> No. 427266 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 11:00 pm
427266 spacer

File
removed
>>427264

Are you trolling or just stupid? Greta looks like a 10 years old at 16, and those people subsisting on rice and beans eat low quality cheese and meats when they can afford it. Even Pajeets drink milk and eat cheese to get proteins and amino acids somehow.
>> No. 427267 Anonymous
31st May 2019
Friday 11:46 pm
427267 spacer
>>427260

One of my friends went vegan to the point they were intolerable to be around. Their Facebook feed was like a zoophile snuff collection awash with a sea of propaganda videos made alfers and peta that just made things up, they built up a cabal of friends who would reinforce the absurdity and cite 'natural news' like it was remotely reliable. Every time I met them felt like an attempt to convert me.

I obviously don't think that is normal and I'm sure there was something else going on that drove them to that (like the way alcoholism can be a symptom of an inability to cope). But my point is is those people do exist and exist at a rate to have personally affected me.

I'm not expecting you to take responsibility for or apologise for them like you were all part of some sort of club. Just acknowledge those people exist.
>> No. 427268 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 12:08 am
427268 spacer
It's only the obnoxious vegans draw attention to themselves. Like kids if you don't personally know any kids.
>> No. 427269 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 12:29 am
427269 spacer
ITT: people being irrationally narky about vegans because they've got fuck all else to do on a Friday night.
>> No. 427270 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 12:31 am
427270 spacer
>>427268

I have the same logic with fishing. Believeing men and women should be treated equally is so ubiquitous in our society that when someone feels the need to identify as one it sends alarm bells ringing.
>> No. 427271 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 12:33 am
427271 spacer
>>427269

I realise you are bitter because you put yourself through a tourturous diet routine, but there's really no reason to take it out on us.
>> No. 427272 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 12:37 am
427272 spacer
>>427265
"Rice and beans" is a bit of a meme, since the people who "choose" that diet (usually) do so for economic reasons who will happily add eggs and chicken to their diet as cheap treats. Adult dogs, funnily enough, can be fed vegan diets if you jump through enough ridiculous hoops; their source material is a scavanger like us humans. We do fine on relatively simple vegan diets once we're adults too, but children really do not (we're mammals, ffs). Feed your cat a vegan diet, though, and you're committing animal abuse worse than what you claim to abhor.
>> No. 427274 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 1:11 am
427274 spacer

410JjW1jIXL.jpg
427274427274427274
You know what gets me bothered? Soylent.
I could be all up on my modernist high horse getting smug about how the obvious solution to ethical and logistical problems around meat eating is scientifically synthesised fancy foods, but the fuckers have gone and ruined it by making meal replacements a gimmicky silicon-valley consumer product. We could've built something out of the Star Trek future if we hadn't decided to abandon that sort of thing 40 years ago, instead we've got this muck. Any future products with better meat replacement criteria are going to be just as unsatisfying. It's not enough to nail the technology, you've got to nail the branding and the culture and we've no hope of doing that.
For all it was supposed to be a bad place, least the future from Soylent Green wasn't as stupid, as disappointing, as anticlimactic as the present.
>> No. 427279 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 7:34 am
427279 spacer
>>427274

I hear you. Same thing with Huel, the British equivalent.

I really like the idea of something I can just chug down when I'm too busy or lazy or depressed to make real food. They could market it honestly in that way and it would be fine.

But instead it's marketed for hipster big city park jogger gym selfie health tosser types, catering fully to that whole smug sense of self-satisfaction and lifestyle egotism.
>> No. 427282 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 7:53 am
427282 spacer
>>427279 Aren't Aldi or some other tier-2 doing a knockoff yet?
Seems inevitable of there's any volume behind it.
Not sure I'd trust random China-sourced stuff on Amazon, though.
>> No. 427285 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 9:40 am
427285 spacer

air-ride-pro-self-balancing-hoverboard-wbackpack-b.jpg
427285427285427285
>>427274

Just like the Hoverboard. That idea has been completely perverted with a shit Chinese cheap plastic contraption which even in a not so strict sense couldn't be further from actually hovering in any way, shape, or form.

There is hope for the Power Loader though, and if done right, this could be a very useful piece of kit both for military and civilian uses -

https://www.google.com/amp/s/entertainment.ie/amp/cinema/movie-news/theres-a-real-life-version-of-the-power-loader-from-aliens-being-developed-235526/
>> No. 427288 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 10:08 am
427288 spacer

MZWwkog.jpg
427288427288427288
>>427284
Cosmo's gender bending is directly caused by speedrunning, not Soylent. Everybody knows this.
>> No. 427294 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 10:40 am
427294 spacer
>>427288

It is rather genuinely fascinating how the speedrunning thing so rapidly transformed into some kind of tranny cult.
>> No. 427298 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 11:16 am
427298 spacer
>>427294

>Young people with gender dysphoria have an elevated rate of Asperger syndrome, according to a new study.

>The researchers report, “Overall, 23.1% of patients (9 of 39) presenting with gender dysphoria had possible, likely, or very likely Asperger syndrome as measured by the Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic Scale (ASDS).”

https://www.autism.org/gender-dysphoria-autism/
>> No. 427299 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 12:18 pm
427299 spacer
>>427279
The marketing's a bit naff but I like Huel for the reason you mention. Can't be arsed making dinner? Huel's even less effort than popping over to the chicken shop. Running late in the morning? Takes less than 2 minutes to make, chug and rinse the shaker.

It's half way between perfume and cola ads. Be an aspirational paragliding trendy tech speed boating musically gorucking coifed beard sporting endurance influencer, all because of Huel! Load of tosh.
>> No. 427303 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 2:28 pm
427303 spacer
>>427299
What's wrong with a quick beans on toast? Or egg on toast? Or bacon sarnie. Fucking millenioomers.
>> No. 427306 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 6:26 pm
427306 spacer
>>427303

They all take many, many, many times longer than whacking some powder in a tub of water and shaking it up, and are vastly less healthy. Pretty fucking simple m62

And that's before you even consider the washing up you have to do after a conventional meal, no matter how simple.
>> No. 427307 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 6:46 pm
427307 spacer
>>427306
Yeah but you have to drink some cold bollocks. Sounds quite disheartening.
>> No. 427322 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 9:26 pm
427322 spacer
>>427307
Use warm water.
>> No. 427323 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 9:35 pm
427323 spacer
>>427322
So you have to boil a kettle now too? Wasting valuable minutes.
>> No. 427324 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 9:38 pm
427324 spacer
>>427323
Warm water, not boiling. Just use the hot tap.
>> No. 427325 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 9:41 pm
427325 spacer
>>427324
I'm not a total skank.
>> No. 427329 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 10:34 pm
427329 spacer
>>427324 Is piss about the right temperature? I have an optimisation you might like to try. Should save another minute or so.
>> No. 427330 Anonymous
1st June 2019
Saturday 10:35 pm
427330 spacer
>>427323
Save the planet, never use your kettle.
>> No. 427332 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 9:56 am
427332 spacer
>>427330
How will I make tea?
>> No. 427333 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 10:06 am
427333 spacer
>>427332
Lad, I think we can drop the pretence that we like and regularly drink tea when the fate of much of our habitat is at stake. There are probably no Americans left here to see the charade anyway.
>> No. 427334 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 10:27 am
427334 spacer
>>427333
Well is it OK to use the hot tap? That will taste just as good right?
>> No. 427339 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 2:14 pm
427339 spacer

s-l640.png
427339427339427339
>>427334

Optimal water temperature for tea brewing is 98°C. That's why the tea connaisseur will wait a few moments before pouring the hot water into the tea cup.

The heat contained in piss is also not from a green source, because it comes from your metabolism, which is fuelled by you eating meat and other things that consume and waste natural resources.

At least in mid-summer, you might try one of those solar water heater bags that camping shops sell. The catch is that they only heat water up to around 45°C, which means the inside of it will quickly become a complete germ farm unless you add water disinfectant, but which will then ruin the taste. Your water will probably have a strong PVC taste anyway coming from a bag like that.
>> No. 427340 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 2:32 pm
427340 spacer
>>427339
>The heat contained in piss is also not from a green source, because it comes from your metabolism, which is fuelled by you eating meat and other things that consume and waste natural resources.
By that logic, neither is most other renewable energy, since they require significant resource extraction to construct.
>> No. 427341 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 2:34 pm
427341 spacer
>>427339
I like that you didn't even bother to try and spell connoisseur properly. If anyone says they know how to spell it off the top of their head they are lying.
>> No. 427343 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 2:36 pm
427343 spacer
>>427341

Right. If you can't attack the message, attack the messenger.
>> No. 427347 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 3:06 pm
427347 spacer
>>427341
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/connaisseur
>> No. 427348 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 3:16 pm
427348 spacer
>>427339
Can I use my piss if I scavenge for nuts and grains in an ecofriendly manner?
>> No. 427356 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 5:10 pm
427356 spacer
>>427343
I'm not attacking him you moron.

>>427347
Oops. Never mind then.
>> No. 427358 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 5:48 pm
427358 spacer
>>427356

If my school French is anything to go by, then it comes from connaître, and thus any words derived from it should keep the word stem as it is in the verb form.
>> No. 427364 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 9:28 pm
427364 spacer
>>427358
It wasn't spelt like that in French when it made the jump to English.
>> No. 427366 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 10:22 pm
427366 spacer

AN344-Spelt-Grain-Flour-732x549-thumb.jpg
427366427366427366
>>427364

>spelt
>> No. 427367 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 10:42 pm
427367 spacer

amaranth-on-spoon-1296x728.jpg
427367427367427367
>>427366

>amaranth
>> No. 427369 Anonymous
2nd June 2019
Sunday 11:52 pm
427369 spacer

Greek-Einkorn-Salad-grains-2.jpg
427369427369427369
>>427367

Wheat best be moving on now.
>> No. 427372 Anonymous
3rd June 2019
Monday 3:32 am
427372 spacer
>>427364
It's been that way in French since Napoleon. Do keep up, Jacob.
>> No. 427392 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 12:21 am
427392 spacer
>Last October, Motherboard reported on scientific evidence that the UN’s summary report for government policymakers on climate change—whose findings were widely recognized as “devastating”—were in fact too optimistic.
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/597kpd/new-report-suggests-high-likelihood-of-human-civilization-coming-to-an-end-in-2050


https://riotimesonline.com/brazil-news/rio-politics/society/in-the-last-three-months-alone-pesticides-have-killed-some-500-million-bees-in-brazil/

https://www.wakingtimes.com/2016/11/21/not-just-bees-trees-dying-off-alarming-rate-little-public-attention
>> No. 427393 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 3:44 am
427393 spacer
>>427392
But Earth will have to give us an extension, because it needs is more than we need it.
>> No. 427395 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 10:48 am
427395 spacer
>>427392

Thirty years to go then.

Who wants to live forever.
>> No. 427396 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:08 am
427396 spacer
>>427395
We're not totally doomed, we just have to get our act together. That includes people who mean well but feel it's hopeless getting involved.
>> No. 427398 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:25 am
427398 spacer
>>427396

"Getting our act together" would essentially mean reverting to a lifestyle of the 1700s or perhaps even earlier.

Our lifestyle is fine. There's just too many people in the world living that lifestyle. We need to go back to having fewer people.
>> No. 427400 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:30 am
427400 spacer
>>427398
Thanks Malthus but no. Our lifestyle in the west has a carbon footprint many times larger than that of places with lots of people. Regardless, saying we have to go back to the 1700s is absurd.
>> No. 427401 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:34 am
427401 spacer
>>427400

>Regardless, saying we have to go back to the 1700s is absurd.

No, it isn't. If we want to really stop, or slow down considerably global warming, that's about what we will be looking at.
>> No. 427402 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:39 am
427402 spacer
>>427401
Eating less meat and not using personal cars isn't quite the same as the visions of Restoration England healthcare and living in turf housing that saying "We have to go back to the 1700s" conjures.
>> No. 427403 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:47 am
427403 spacer
>>427401
Given all the problems technological advancement has solved arguing the absurdist position that we ought to go back to living in the woods and being scared of goats is just stupid. But it seems like you're only doing this in order to paint climate change activists as naive for thinking otherwise, or as bonkers luddites who'd tear up civilisation as we know it, root and stem. Neither of these points rings particularly true.
>> No. 427404 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:48 am
427404 spacer
>>427402

>not using personal cars

Not likely though, is it.
>> No. 427405 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:49 am
427405 spacer
>>427404

Do you have anything other than defeatism to contribute?
>> No. 427414 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 2:18 pm
427414 spacer
>>427405

I'm not saying the idea is wrong. Just that I don't believe you can persuade enough people worldwide to stop using their cars.

A number of people certainly will if you ask them to, but unless you pass quite far-reaching laws globally, it's not goong to have a big effect.

You may say that banning CFCs from spray cans and fridges was a global success, and it was. But the difference was that it didn't require any behaviour changes at the end consumer level. Spray cans still exist same as refrigerators, only the technology inside them has changed. But switching to mass transportation and leaving the convenience of personal mobility behind is a whole different matter.
>> No. 427415 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 2:28 pm
427415 spacer
>>427403

Obvious example - smartphones. A smartphone is an incredibly useful device, but owning and using one for two years only produces about 60kg of CO2, which is about the same as half a tank of petrol. Given the choice, I know which I'd rather have.

Ground source heat pumps are the latest in sustainable heating technology. They work like a fridge in reverse, pumping heat out of the ground and into your house. Because they move heat rather than generate it, they have a typical efficiency of about 450% - for every kWh of electricity you feed in, you get 4.5kWh of heat in your house. You can run them off solar or wind power, so you can have a toasty warm house with zero net carbon emissions.

The idea of becoming sustainable by going backwards in time is simply nonsense. In some respects, we'll just have to put up with having less - there's no plausible way of running a jumbo jet on batteries right now, so we'll probably have to give up cheap foreign holidays and out-of-season fruit flown in from Kenya. In most cases though, we just need to be smarter about how we consume energy. We know how to make zero-carbon electricity at scale, we're well on target to getting our electricity grid down to zero carbon, so the question now is how to make everything electrically powered.
>> No. 427416 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 2:35 pm
427416 spacer
>>427414
>unless you pass quite far-reaching laws globally, it's not goong to have a big effect.
There's an obvious answer to this.
>But switching to mass transportation and leaving the convenience of personal mobility behind is a whole different matter.
Criminalising slavery inconvenienced a lot of people too.
>> No. 427417 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 2:40 pm
427417 spacer
>>427415 how to make everything electrically powered
I've been pondering this recently - it feels absurd to run an electrically heated hot water tank and then piss away a load of that energy pushing hot water through pipes to taps, leaving hot water in the pipes to cool, once you're done.
Electric hot tap boilers are shit, though. Bulky, obtrusive and not powerful enough. Surely they're not the future? Spent some time last week doing some maths and engineering, trying to come up with a less crappy solution. Seems to me that there'll be a bit of a market for such a thing in this brave new all electric world.
Or maybe we'll have solar heated hot water, and just top the tanks up with electricity when needed. Need quite big tanks for the required water & insulation, though, tricky to retrofit.
Tiny bore, heavily insulated hot water pipes? Just accept that the flow rate will be low - who needs lots of hot water in a hurry anyway?
>> No. 427419 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 2:47 pm
427419 spacer
>>427416

>Criminalising slavery inconvenienced a lot of people too.

So did the abolition of the death penalty.

While we're making unrelatable statements.

But for argument's sake, ending slavery inconvenienced only a small land owning elite particularly in the southern U.S.. And it increased the personal freedom of millions of freed slaves. Banning personal cars would have a much more profound and limiting effect on personal freedoms and everyday life as we know it.
>> No. 427423 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 3:16 pm
427423 spacer
>>427415

>Given the choice, I know which I'd rather have.

I'm presuming you mean you'd rather have the smartphone than your car, but I have to say the smartphone is a luxury I can very easily do without; without a method of personal transportation however my quality of life would be drastically worse.
>> No. 427424 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 3:16 pm
427424 spacer
>>427419
>Banning personal cars would have a much more profound and limiting effect on personal freedoms and everyday life as we know it.
Not doing it is going to have a much bigger effect on everything.
Again, do you have anything other than defeatism to contribute? I don't understand how you manage to make posts without giving up before you start typing.
>> No. 427428 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 3:39 pm
427428 spacer
>>427424

>I don't understand how you manage to make posts without giving up before you start typing.


I could tell you, but oh what's the point.

I'll get my coat.

Seriously though, I didn't mean to be a defeatist obtuse cunt here, I just wanted to point out that it's going to be very difficult to get a large enough number of people of the global population to give up certain habits and conveniences that they have grown accustomed to.

I personally find the idea fascinating to live in a zero-emission world someday, and it's a worthwhile goal to have for humanity as a whole.

I just doubt that we will get there in time. Humans tend to be fairly good at making responsible decisions on a personal level or a level concerning your kin or your clan or tribe, but we appear to be shit at making uniform behaviour changes on the scale of billions of people. Possibly because through much of our evolutionary history as a species, we lived in small tribes that did not require us to solve problems that affected our entire species as a whole. Having to juggle a dying planet and the interests of over seven billion people living on it just wasn't something cavemen had to spend much time pondering.
>> No. 427430 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 3:44 pm
427430 spacer
>>427428

Nobody's saying it'll be easy but it's really not helped by people whose first response when it's mentioned is to talk it down. I hope you'll consider the pragmatism of what you're saying next time.
>> No. 427431 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 3:47 pm
427431 spacer
>>427430

Noted.

And count me in whenever there are sensible efforts to actually make a difference and an impact. But that said, deep down, I just can't shake off my general pessimism about people in this world, I'm sorry.
>> No. 427433 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 4:16 pm
427433 spacer
>>427428

I think that the smoking ban provides a really useful example. Ireland was the first country in the world to impose an outright ban on smoking in workplaces and at the time, a lot of people thought it was a fool's errand. There were just too many smokers, too many rural pubs where nobody's going to give a fuck, not enough Gardai to enforce it. What nobody predicted was that there was a pent-up frustration with smoking and an eagerness to publicly shame anyone who flouted the ban; the authorities didn't need to do much in the way of enforcement, because shame was perfectly sufficient. Once Ireland had proved that it could be done, there was a domino effect of other countries following suit.

You could make a similar case about drink-driving over a longer timescale. Back in the 60s, it was perfectly acceptable to drive home after a night at the pub. By the early 70s, the authorities were encouraging people not to get completely pissed, but you'd still get a fair bit of sympathy if you got caught by the breathalyser. By the 90s, it became utterly shameful and only the most degenerate of piss-artists would admit to it.

I think it's entirely plausible that there could be a tipping point in public attitudes to climate change within the next couple of decades. As electric cars start to take off, owning a petrol car might become as unacceptable as sparking up a fag in a soft play centre. We might see posh people giving up flying in such numbers that foreign holidays become as deeply unfashionable as a week in Blackpool is now. We might see vegetarianism and veganism become the norm amongst young people, to the extent that all meat becomes as weirdly old-fashioned as tripe or liver and cheese becomes as chavvy as a turkey twizzler.

Pushing though a massive package of unpopular legislation is fairly improbable, but I think we underestimate the significance of fashions and social trends. I remember seeing newspaper articles in the mid-90s about this new thing called "internet dating", implicitly mocking these repulsive weirdos who couldn't meet anyone in real life. Now I see newspaper articles about how it's too hard to meet anyone in real life any more, because everyone is on Tinder and it's just weird to chat up a stranger in a bar. Society can change in radical ways without anyone really noticing.
>> No. 427434 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 4:23 pm
427434 spacer
>>427433
Sorted then.
>> No. 427435 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 4:44 pm
427435 spacer
>>427433

> I remember seeing newspaper articles in the mid-90s about this new thing called "internet dating", implicitly mocking these repulsive weirdos who couldn't meet anyone in real life.


One of my English teachers in school, before the Internet, was the classic case of a lonely heart bookworm. Personality wise the nicest and most caring (early middle aged) woman you could meet, but always had an air about her that she had missed the boat and that English literature was her place of solace. It then transpired at some point that she had put an ad in the paper looking for a romantic partner and husband. And some very rude lads then started making jokes about her. Myself not included, if you must ask.

Anyway, you're right in that social attitudes, not just in that respect, can change drastically within the space of a few decades. Finding a partner by any other means than socialising among your friends used to be seen as kind of dodgy and always made you look like a bit of a sad case. And now, as you said, look at things like Tinder or match.com.
>> No. 427437 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 5:53 pm
427437 spacer
>>427433

>owning a petrol car might become as unacceptable as sparking up a fag in a soft play centre

More like it will end up a burden on poor people who can only afford to buy a fifteen year old Astra for the school run, and have to pay excessive tax on top of it.

>We might see posh people giving up flying in such numbers that foreign holidays become as deeply unfashionable as a week in Blackpool is now.

More like us plebs will be forced to stay at home in the drizzle while only the genuinely rich get to go abroad, like the old days.

>We might see vegetarianism and veganism become the norm amongst young people, to the extent that all meat becomes as weirdly old-fashioned as tripe or liver and cheese becomes as chavvy as a turkey twizzler.

More like meat and cheese will become an expensive luxury chavs never get to eat.

I admire your optimism but I don't see these things happening as a conscious choice; and even if they do, the knock on economic effects will be to push those things out of the reach of ordinary folk. I feel like, as with a lot of things, it's all very well for your metropolitan hipster types to get behind it; but when Sandra from Scunthorpe works full time and has to feed her family of five on an Iceland budget, I doubt she has the realistic economic and time freedom to buy a load of veg and cook from fresh every single day, or get trendy free range organic foods that cost twice as much as their counterparts.

I'm not saying we shouldn't address these things, but I'm saying we need to do a lot of groundwork to make it possible and, well, desirable, instead of just shaming people for eating meat or having their own car and hoping peer pressure does the job. As it stands, just being able to care about climate change is a very middle class luxury.
>> No. 427438 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 5:55 pm
427438 spacer
>>427437
You can get cheap frozen veggie burgers, cheaper than getting chicken burgers or beef burgers. Veggie burgers and chips and beans - a meal that you could have for a pittance with minimal effort. Sandra could do well on a meat free diet.
>> No. 427439 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 5:59 pm
427439 spacer
>>427438

And her kids would grow up with nutritional deficiences we had thought eradicated in Victorian times.
>> No. 427440 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 6:07 pm
427440 spacer
>>427438
Thank-you, Mister Rees-Mogg.
>> No. 427441 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 6:33 pm
427441 spacer
>>427439

Just removing meat would be a big improvement in the British diet. We eat far more protein than we need, far too many calories and not enough vegetables. White bread and shit breakfast cereals are fortified with iron and B vitamins, so you don't need meat for that.

>>427437

>More like it will end up a burden on poor people who can only afford to buy a fifteen year old Astra for the school run, and have to pay excessive tax on top of it.

We're remarkably close to the point where leasing an electric car will be cheaper than owning a petrol car. It's already cheaper than buying new, but battery prices are falling rapidly. Electric cars have a phenomenally long working life because they have so few moving parts; the only routine maintenance they require is tyres and brake pads. Electricity is obviously much cheaper than petrol. By 2030, it's highly likely that every lamppost will have a built-in charging point and the cheap runabout of choice will be a tatty old Nissan Leaf or Renault Zoe.

I feel obliged to point out that hardly anyone actually needs a car for the school run - kids are perfectly capable of walking to school from a very young age, especially if the school operates a walking bus scheme. An old mountain bike or an electric moped is by far the cheapest way of getting to work.

>Sandra from Scunthorpe works full time and has to feed her family of five on an Iceland budget

I don't know when you last set foot in an Iceland, but I shop there regularly because they've got a brilliant own-brand vegan range. Maybe Sandra from Scunthorpe can just shop in a slightly different bit of Iceland? If she walks about eight feet from the turkey twizzlers, she'll find zesty bean quinoa and vegan chorizo slices.
>> No. 427442 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 6:46 pm
427442 spacer
>>427441 the only routine maintenance they require is tyres and brake pads

and battery packs. If electric cars are the runabout of the poor, they'll be eking out the last years of a failing battery they can't afford to replace. People will be stripping battery packs and combining the most-working cells into new packs, then trying to defeat whatever DRM-style protection the manufacturers have added.

Electricity is cheaper than fossil at the moment, but that's a bribe / oversight to drive uptake and give cheap motoring to the rich. As soon as it's mainstream, there'll be taxes, got to replace VED somehow. Probably charge by the mile or something, since it'll be tricky to police 'red electricity'.

(I've just ordered a leased e-golf, for reasons. There no way in hell I'd have bought one. Tables I was looking at suggested 25% residual value after 4 years. That's a bit grim for a £37K car. )
>> No. 427443 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 7:04 pm
427443 spacer
>>427437

>More like it will end up a burden on poor people who can only afford to buy a fifteen year old Astra for the school run, and have to pay excessive tax on top of it.

Much like smokers today. Poor people smoke in greater numbers than any other segment of the population. And yet, nobody would say that we need tobacco tax cuts for the poor.

Owning certain petrol cars will be a mark of wealth though. Anything with petrol that's got good potential as a collectible. Not everybody is going to have their E Type converted into an electric, like the one Harry drove off in on his wedding day. There will be those that will be willing and able to afford petrol prices four times higher than we have today.
>> No. 427444 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 7:11 pm
427444 spacer
>>427441

>I feel obliged to point out that hardly anyone actually needs a car for the school run - kids are perfectly capable of walking to school from a very young age, especially if the school operates a walking bus scheme.

This is still the norm in almost every country in mainland Europe that I have been to. In Italy, the Netherlands and Germany and other places, you see droves of schoolchildren, many of them younger than age ten, use public buses both in the morning and in the afternoon to get to school and back. Completely without parent supervision. I think I read something a while ago that the German Ministry of Transport even recommends that parents stop school runs altogether because they feel that children need to learn how to behave safely in traffic on their own.

The mind boggles.
>> No. 427445 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 7:32 pm
427445 spacer
>>427441

>I feel obliged to point out that hardly anyone actually needs a car for the school run - kids are perfectly capable of walking to school from a very young age, especially if the school operates a walking bus scheme. An old mountain bike or an electric moped is by far the cheapest way of getting to work.

Have you tried looking at the house prices anywhere near a school?

You're showing the kind of well intentioned middle class oversight that always fucks poor families over. Life is already hard when you're scraping to make ends meet, and you're dumping the majority of the burden on them without offering any real benefit.

When you're comfortable enough in life that you can do this sort of stuff as a little feel-good vanity project, it's a very different matter than having to because you can't afford to live the way you used to any more. That's just a kick in the teeth.
>> No. 427446 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 7:43 pm
427446 spacer
>>427445
You're right in principle, of course, but this same argument was used against recycling itself within relatively recent living memory.
>> No. 427447 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 7:45 pm
427447 spacer
>>427446
recycling (some things) is still a bloody awful idea. I wish people would stop fetishising it and proposing it as a solution to the world's ills.
>> No. 427448 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 7:56 pm
427448 spacer
>>427445
>Have you tried looking at the house prices anywhere near a school?
I live on a council estate and there are three or four schools almost in sight of each other. There are also buses.
>> No. 427449 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 8:02 pm
427449 spacer
>>427448

>I live on a council estate

That doesn't mean very much these days. The property market has gone utterly daft, even in the fabled North, where southerners would like to believe the streets are paved with affordable housing.

I would suggest that fixing that first would give poor people the economic freedom to live a more environmentally conscious lifestyle. When we've got that sorted we can maybe even take a look at period poverty.
>> No. 427450 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 8:16 pm
427450 spacer
>>427445

The houses near the schools round my way are as cheap as anywhere else, because the schools are shit. If you have kids and any amount of money, you do whatever it takes to get a house about six miles that way -> to get into the catchment area of the only non-shit school in the borough, which is massively over-subscribed.

Being poor is shit. Treating poor people like helpless waifs just adds to that shitness. Saying we should do nothing about climate change because poor people will bear the brunt is a double cop-out. It absolves you of responsibility for doing anything about climate change and it absolves you of responsibility for doing anything about poverty. It also strongly implies that poor people are too thick or too self-absorbed to give a shit about an existential threat to the human species, which is just bollocks.
>> No. 427451 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 10:24 pm
427451 spacer
>>427450

>It also strongly implies that poor people are too thick or too self-absorbed to give a shit about an existential threat to the human species, which is just bollocks.


They're not too thick or too self absorbed, they're simply too fucking skint.

Driving a 20-year-old run-down Vauxhall is still cheaper per month than bus passes for four people. If you're among the working poor, you get no bus pass discounts in the first place.

Short of just walking everywhere on foot or taking a bicycle, a conscious decision to reduce your carbon footprint is still often more expensive than what you are used to doing.

Also though, when you're really skint or working poor, the environment simply isn't on top of your priorities list. You worry about paying your rent and what sudden unforeseen expense could break your back that month.
>> No. 427452 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 10:38 pm
427452 spacer
>>427451
This condescending "oi, you can't appreciate how expensive it is to [do something about the environment]" bollocks is very tiresome.
>> No. 427453 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 10:56 pm
427453 spacer
>>427452

I don't think it's condescending, it's just true. Poor people don't have money and quite often (if they have families) don't have time, either. We can all put paper and cans in the right bin, but as said, sometimes a car is cheaper than public transport options, or more viable (lots of people do shift work when buses simply don't run) and not everyone has the time or money to seek alternative, environmentally friendly options.

I grew up poor, and suggesting that my mother do something like stop buying frozen food from Iceland because it's got a big carbon footprint would have been suggesting she stopped feeding her kids. If she'd not had a car, she couldn't have gone to work either. I'm sure she could have cycled there, but then all you're doing is wondering why exhausted single mothers who work two jobs are too lazy to give up the car.

When you're the working poor, there's a lot of things we treat as luxuries that are actually necessities, or perhaps the only luxury in their lives - but we've had the Big Telly discussion before.

Expecting the poor end of the world to be as conscious of the environment as a middle class person (or the fucking government) is insultingly stupid.
>> No. 427455 Anonymous
4th June 2019
Tuesday 11:16 pm
427455 spacer
>>427453

Thank you for validating my point. I don't understand how it is condescending to say poor people are too poor to save the environment. If you gave most of them a proper middle class existence and income, I'm pretty sure they would become just as environmentally conscious as the next person. But when you have to raise two kids on £1,500 a month, you will be occupied with much more immediate problems than the question whether your kids will have to grapple with three degrees global warming when they grow up.
>> No. 427456 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 12:52 am
427456 spacer
>>427453

This whole conversation has become distorted beyond reason. We started off on "we'll probably see big changes in environmental behaviour due to changing social attitudes rather than big policy changes", were rapidly derailed to "that's not going to happen, we'll just end up hiking the prices of everything and the poor will get battered" and now we're on a complete non-sequitur about fucking frozen food.

Nobody is saying that people should stop buying frozen food from Iceland. Someone suggested that poor people can't afford to be vegetarian because they're shopping on an Iceland budget, I said that Iceland actually have a very good vegan range (and strongly implied that the original commenter is talking out of his arse and is just being condescending) and now we're basically debating whether the liberal elite are trying to ban Kerry Katona.

Honestly, I don't mean to be a grumpy twat, but could everyone just go and read David MacKay's Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air? The vast majority of comments in this thread involve at least one serious misapprehension about sustainable energy and what we need to do to achieve it. Poor people already lead relatively green lifestyles because they consume less. The things that are going to make their lifestyles greener over the next few decades are mainly technological advances and will mainly save them money.

Nobody is suggesting that poor people should bear the brunt of decarbonisation. There's a strong correlation between income and CO2 emissions on both a national and global level. The stuff that posh people do to show off their environmental credentials is almost universally tokenistic bollocks; the stuff that they should be doing right now is mostly stuff that poor people already do because they're skint - live in the smallest house you can, drive as little as possible, don't fly, turn down your central heating, don't buy loads of stuff. If you're genuinely on the bones of your arse, you're pretty much off the hook.

There's some stuff that's environmentally beneficial but currently very expensive (switch to an electric car, get solar panels installed, get a GSHP), but it's getting cheaper very quickly and will become cheaper than the status quo within a decade or two. As it happens, council and housing association tenants are disproportionately likely to live in a home with rooftop solar panels and/or a GSHP, because social landlords have a lot of modern housing stock and it makes economic sense for them to make those kinds of long-term investments.

https://www.withouthotair.com/
>> No. 427457 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 2:45 am
427457 spacer
>>427456

Thank you.
I'd still argue that systemic, top-down change, particularly against things like the aviation and non-renewable fuel industries are more important than any of the things individuals can do.
>> No. 427458 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 3:01 am
427458 spacer
We put so much value on 'making an effort' to save the environment. What we really need is enforced social changes that make saving the environment the path of least resistance. It doesn't really matter if it hurts or not to make those changes, so long as the path of least resistance is to take the pain from doing so.

>>427433
The thing about drink driving and smoking was that the government cracked down on it first, then it became unfashionable. That isn't yet the case for flights or meat eating yet. Culture is generally downstream from economics. That's especially clear in the case of online dating. I wouldn't be so optimistic unless you can get some kind of cascading effect where a change in elite culture leads to a change in legislation, which changes the economics that govern wider society.

>>427447
It has always amused me that the waste management mantra is 'reduce, reuse, recycle' but the only thing that really captures the public imagination is recycling - all of the disposable consumption with none of the guilt.
>> No. 427459 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 7:01 am
427459 spacer

3y0WxGh.jpg
427459427459427459
>>427456
>I said that Iceland actually have a very good vegan range

£2 for two burgers. £2 for eight sausages. £2 for a pack of meatballs. £3.50 for a pack of chicken strips. £3.50 for their mince.

What kind of money do you think paupers have to spend on food? It's not that fucking much. Your middle class is showing.
>> No. 427460 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 7:18 am
427460 spacer
>>427450

>Saying we should do nothing about climate change because poor people will bear the brunt is a double cop-out.

It's a good job I never said anything remotely like that then, in't it mate?

What I did say is that there are a lot of things you aren't considering, because evidently you come from a background where those things are not immediately obvious to you. I don't hold that against you, even as a staunch socialist. I'm just pointing out that it's not as simple as you would like to think.

I said we do have to do something about this, but we first have to make it easier, more affordable, and less hassle for people who are already stretched thin and overworked.
>> No. 427461 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 8:43 am
427461 spacer
Am I being wildly optimistic, or are there going to be a shitload of jobs created by increasing energy costs?
Insulating homes is a biggie - has most of the easy stuff (actually filling in cavities and loft voids) been done yet? I know there have been bribes available to encourage it. There has to be a lot of housing stock where insulation is going to need to be internal or external cladding (and its replacement when it turns out to be appallingly flammable). Converting houses to electric heat and ditching the gas heating will be a vast amount of work, that doesn't look very automatable. Hell, even knocking down and rebuilding becomes possible if energy prices get really out of hand.
Also installation and maintenance of renewables - looks like a lot more labour required than maintaining the existing herd of fossil burners. All that polishing solar panels and replacing turbines every few years.
All this will get put on the price of energy, I'd imagine - but it looks like quite a few jobs for variously skilled people (and managers to fuck it up, of course).
>> No. 427462 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 8:46 am
427462 spacer
>>427461
As well as the energy side, if we're going to get serious about reducing waste, there's going to be a need for more hands & brains fiddling with the waste stream, sorting, binning and burning.
That strikes me as more likely to be replaced by automation in the short-mid term, though.
>> No. 427463 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 9:23 am
427463 spacer
>>427461
You're not wrong. This has been the case in places already making the switch.
>> No. 427464 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 9:33 am
427464 spacer
>>427461
What about the jobs lost if we can't compete with other countries where energy is cheaper?
>> No. 427465 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 9:43 am
427465 spacer
>>427464
That assumes that energy becomes more expensive due to tax, rather than oil price climbing (and everything else following).
Although it doesn't look like oil's going to climb enough to force all this, so it'd have to be taxes. Hmm.
What percentage of jobs depend heavily on energy input? If energy is cheap elsewhere, then I guess we'll buy it by proxy - fertilisers, half-finished goods and overseas cloud services? Keep doing stuff locally that makes sense.
>> No. 427466 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 9:45 am
427466 spacer
>>427464

We'll just have to make sure our local stuff is higher quality, purer, refined and craft made. It's fairly impractical to transport a lot of stored renewable energy long distances, iirc
>> No. 427467 Anonymous
5th June 2019
Wednesday 11:21 am
427467 spacer
>>427465

>That assumes that energy becomes more expensive due to tax, rather than oil price climbing (and everything else following).

Around eighty percent of the price fluctuation of things like crude oil or gas is due to speculation on global commodity markets. It makes oil go up or down in price based on political events and algorithmic trading computers. The spike in petrol prices that we have seen in recent weeks was mainly caused by such things as the political turmoil and uncertainty in Venezuela or Iran, and not by oscillations in supply and demand, although demand for petrol does increase traditionally during the warmer months of the Northern Hemisphere. Other fossil energy carriers undergo similar fluctuations, such as natural gas or coal.

To effectively control the price and the consumption of fossil energy sources, you would probably have to fix global market prices for them. But you might open a whole new can of worms with that and upset delicate balances of supply and demand. After all, we are not yet in a position where we can just stop using fossil fuels literally from one day to the next.

For the time being, it's probably still better to increase taxes on things like petrol or natural gas and subsidise renewable energy with the revenues. This makes alternatives more attractive, and is also an incentive to push the technology needed to create and deliver renewable energy.
>> No. 427568 Anonymous
11th June 2019
Tuesday 10:48 pm
427568 spacer
The protest about BP sponsorship of the Royal Opera screenings today was pretty funny. There was some guy introducing it live in Trafalgar Square with the intent of showing the excited crowd, but there were more protesters than actual audience for the thing. They had to keep adjusting the camera angle to try and crop out the protesters behind him but that wasn't possible so they just zoomed further and further in to his face.
>> No. 427575 Anonymous
12th June 2019
Wednesday 10:13 pm
427575 spacer

62539771_319822048957016_1499419142262882304_n.jpg
427575427575427575
Here's a photo that's surfaced of >>427568 but the whole thing's been a bit eclipsed by Radiohead releasing their hacked tape and donating the proceeds to XR.
>> No. 427576 Anonymous
12th June 2019
Wednesday 10:35 pm
427576 spacer
>>427568

>The protest about BP sponsorship of the Royal Opera screenings today was pretty funny.

Ah, mirth. Knee jerking millennials at it again.
>> No. 427585 Anonymous
13th June 2019
Thursday 9:59 am
427585 spacer

D8zfa3eWkAAZOhv.jpg
427585427585427585
>>427576
What?
>> No. 427587 Anonymous
13th June 2019
Thursday 4:07 pm
427587 spacer
>>427576
Yeah, I mean, what the hell does boypussy have to do with climate change? Let them celebrate Pride in peace for Goodness sake.
>> No. 427590 Anonymous
13th June 2019
Thursday 11:59 pm
427590 spacer
>>427587

Doesn't BP stand for British Pederasts?




I'll get my coat.
>> No. 427617 Anonymous
15th June 2019
Saturday 4:43 pm
427617 spacer
>>427585
It's more like 5 years now though. We're fucked, lads.
>> No. 427623 Anonymous
15th June 2019
Saturday 6:32 pm
427623 spacer
>It's more like 5 years now though. We're fucked, lads.

Yeah but at least it is different and isn't boring. I'd vote for climate change, Trump and Brexit.
>> No. 427624 Anonymous
15th June 2019
Saturday 7:55 pm
427624 spacer
>>427617

Depends whose estimation you believe. But don't worry! Theresa May's promised the Tories will save us by 2050, only twenty-five years too late.
>> No. 427625 Anonymous
15th June 2019
Saturday 8:40 pm
427625 spacer
>>427617

>It's more like 5 years now though. We're fucked, lads.

Five years, shmive years. I don't think you can honestly look at the state that the world around us is in today and come to the conclusion that we're not utterly massively fucked already. All we can do at this point is damage control.
>> No. 427720 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 2:56 pm
427720 spacer
Five days of protests ongoing in Edinburgh.
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/extinction-rebellion-edinburgh-protests-live-16442106

Mixed British and French protesters making themselves heard at the Cannes Lion Awards Festival today (too recent to be in the news). "The police came to us and told us there had never been a successful protest in sight of the festival before and they weren't going to allow one today" (paraphrased).
https://www.facebook.com/ExtinctionRebellion/videos/2345673482370125/
https://www.facebook.com/ExtinctionRebellion/videos/474094290054999/

Greenpeace still blocking BP's latest rig from reaching the drilling grounds, ten days in. "The stand-off between the two organisations is understood to have already cost BP more than £1.5 million."
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/highlands/1776959/bp-greenpeace/

Swarm roadblocks planned in Camden for later this afternoon.
http://camdennewjournal.com/article/extinction-rebellion-to-shut-down-camden-town

Large action planned at the Natural History Museum's annual awards dinner for the Petroleum Group of the Geological Society tomorrow afternoon.
https://rebellion.earth/2019/06/18/18-june-extinction-rebellion-meet-with-natural-history-museum-ahead-of-action/
>> No. 427721 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 3:57 pm
427721 spacer
Here's the top five Tories explaining to a child why they don't care enough about her future to bother doing anything meaningful about it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00067qs/our-next-prime-minister
Skip to 50 minutes in.
>> No. 427722 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 4:29 pm
427722 spacer
>>427721
>Here's the top five Tories explaining to a child why they don't care enough about her future to bother doing anything meaningful about it

Have you considered journalism as a profession? You have a knack for manipulative phrasing.
>> No. 427723 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 5:12 pm
427723 spacer
>>427722
I'd just listened to five Tories speak for ten minutes so I was picking up their speech patterns. Needless to say none of them answer her questions. Your bloke Rory in particular either didn't listen to what she said or deliberately misheard her.
>> No. 427727 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 5:50 pm
427727 spacer
>>427723
Message received, Tories hate children and don't care about their future. Gotcha Corbs.
>> No. 427728 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 5:52 pm
427728 spacer
>>427727
>Tories hate children and don't care about their future
Not an entirely unfair characterisation of their actual position.
>> No. 427729 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 5:53 pm
427729 spacer
>>427727
Corbyn hasn't committed to meaningful change yet either so if you're going to be black and white you'd be better off pretending I'm just against old white men. Picture my hypothetically colourful hair and facial piercings.
>> No. 427730 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 6:22 pm
427730 spacer
>>427729
I stand corrected: no politicians care about the future of children in the slightest except the ones you and your chums personally approve of. Best of luck on Fleet Street m8.
>> No. 427731 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 6:50 pm
427731 spacer
>>427730
Best get yourself to A&E for an emergency stickupthearsectomy.
>> No. 427733 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 8:33 pm
427733 spacer
>>427730
... yes, if we're judging them by their actions then that would be a fair conclusion.
>> No. 427746 Anonymous
19th June 2019
Wednesday 11:12 pm
427746 spacer

4yDPQrL.gif
427746427746427746
>>427730
>>427731
>>427733
>> No. 427752 Anonymous
20th June 2019
Thursday 12:15 am
427752 spacer
>>427746
It has occured to me lately that this place is basically Twitter for the chronically pretentious, but do me a favour and maintain the pretense, would you?
>> No. 427755 Anonymous
20th June 2019
Thursday 11:56 am
427755 spacer
>>427752

no worries m4t.
>> No. 427756 Anonymous
20th June 2019
Thursday 12:03 pm
427756 spacer
>>427752

How do I retweet on here?
>> No. 427757 Anonymous
20th June 2019
Thursday 12:06 pm
427757 spacer
>>427746
You're not coming off very well here.
>> No. 427779 Anonymous
20th June 2019
Thursday 11:37 pm
427779 spacer
Conservative MP Mark Field assaulted a Greenpeace activist today. Grabbed her by the throat as she was walking calmly past him. What a lovely man. Whatshisface got 150 hours unpaid work for throwing a milkshake at saville. What do you think Mark Field will get for this assault?
>> No. 427781 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:01 am
427781 spacer
Oh and the government is trying to pretend it's doing the citizen's assembly thing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48706352
but isn't really
https://rebellion.earth/2019/06/20/response-to-select-committees-announcing-a-citizens-assembly-have-we-achieved-our-third-demand/
>> No. 427782 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:21 am
427782 spacer
>>427781

Yeah, let's give legislative powers to schoolkids who want to ban petrol. I can see that working just fine.
>> No. 427783 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:24 am
427783 spacer
>>427779
Actually:
1. She was being a cunt
2. He ejected her from the building using a minimum of force


>> No. 427784 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:26 am
427784 spacer
>>427783

Fucking hell >>427779, what utterly shameless bullshit you spouted there. I never thought I'd side with a Tory over an activist but here we are.

Go fuck yourself for being so disingenuous.
>> No. 427785 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:33 am
427785 spacer
>>427779
I'm probably more adept at climbing a tree than somebody like you.
>> No. 427786 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 1:02 am
427786 spacer
>>427783
>>427784

Pardon?


What part of what I said is inaccurate?

>>427785
Ok
>> No. 427787 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 1:15 am
427787 spacer
>>427786

I'm going to go out on a limb and say we're going to need more than that 30 seconds of video.

By that I am asking, what happened previously that lead up to this point? You don't just jump up and throw a woman out just for walking past. If that is indeed what happened then fair enough, he was bang out of order, but I have an inkling that's not the whole story is it.
>> No. 427788 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 1:56 am
427788 spacer
>>427784

It's undoubtedly an offence of battery; the question is whether Field has a lawful defence. It's utterly implausible to believe that he feared immediate physical harm, particularly given the demeanour of the other attendees, so self defence is out. The protester was arguably engaged in aggravated trespass, but his use of force is both disproportionate and unnecessary for the prevention of that continued offence. He didn't ask her to leave, he didn't attempt to shepherd her out, he didn't wait for the police to deal with it.

I'm a conservative, I have no patience for these sorts of daft protest stunts, but two wrongs don't make a right. Field showed a disturbing lack of clear-headedness and restraint. He needlessly escalated what had until that point been a peaceful protest. If this video had involved a police officer rather than an MP, they would already be suspended pending an investigation. Police careers have been ended over less.

At a bare minimum, Field needs to be brought in for an interview under caution.
>> No. 427789 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 2:03 am
427789 spacer
>>427788

>It's utterly implausible to believe that he feared immediate physical harm, particularly given the demeanour of the other attendees, so self defence is out.

Not universally. Self defence depends on how a would-be victim subjectively perceives a threat in a given situation. If somebody points a toy gun at you that looks real enough that you can't rule out in the heat of the moment that it's an actual gun, then what you do to that person, within reason, to avert that threat is generally covered under self defence.
>> No. 427790 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 2:05 am
427790 spacer
>>427788

For the avoidance of doubt, this video from the same event shows appropriate uses of force. The rest of the protesters were removed by venue staff with a minimum of force, which is perfectly fine. What's not fine is shoving someone into a wall or grabbing them by the neck.


>> No. 427791 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 2:23 am
427791 spacer
>>427789

You're entirely right that it depends on the subjective perception of the situation, but nothing in Field's behaviour indicates that he believed he was at immediate risk of harm. Field grabbed the woman as she was walking past him; he had to physically contort himself to grab her and use a significant amount of force to prevent her from walking on. That strongly undermines a claim of self defence.

The perception of the situation is subjective, but the reasonableness of the force is judged objectively relative to that perceived threat. What threat could Field have perceived that make his actions reasonable? If he feared that she had a concealed weapon in her bag, why did he remove her from the building rather than attempt to remove the bag from her grasp? If he feared that he might be struck from behind as he was sitting, how does that justify grabbing her around the back of the neck after he has already taken physical control?

His behaviour as evidenced in the video simply does not accord with someone acting to protect themselves from violence.

It also bears stating that the burden of proof lies with Field - there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt that he has committed an offence and it is incumbent on him to prove that he had lawful justification.
>> No. 427792 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 6:47 am
427792 spacer
This is what I love about modern life. Everything can be analysed into ridiculously minute detail. Mountains can be made of molehills. Blame must always be apportioned. The calls for retribution and punishment must be severe.

As long as someone can be blamed and shamed all is right with the world, that's the important thing.
>> No. 427793 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 9:39 am
427793 spacer
>>427792
Fucking calm down, it was one lad being overdramatic. You're being just as bad in declaring this micro-event of a post to be the doom of society as we know it.
>> No. 427794 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 10:54 am
427794 spacer
Pretty sure claiming you thought a Greenpeace protester who wasn't paying you any attention is an armed and dangerous threat and in need of assaulting is the overdramatic thing here. It's interesting how quickly some people leap to his defence.
>> No. 427795 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:08 pm
427795 spacer
>>427791
His belief doesn't have to be objectively reasonable. You are allowed to neutralise a threat, so up to a point he can continue until he (subjectively) reasonably believes that she is no longer a threat. For all we know he might have been horribly confused after watching Killing Eve.

Then again some fash cunt got a bloke done for assault because he didn't like the milkshake that was thrown at him so who knows.
>> No. 427797 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:36 pm
427797 spacer
>>427795

Bit of a grey area, at the end of the day. Beating somebody to a pulp for pointing a knife at you isn't self defence anymore. Kicking the knife out of their hand and giving them a sprained wrist in the process still should be.

It technically hinges on reasonable force. And that then means that even if you thought that a toy gun that somebody was pointing at you was real, the amount of force you used had to be reasonable in defending yourself, and not excessive.
>> No. 427801 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:44 pm
427801 spacer
>>427797

I've always thought this was a bit dodgy. I've not been involved in much violence, but I know that if I did have to defend myself against an attacker, I wouldn't feel safe until they were on the ground and with a reasonable degree of certainty not getting back up to come after me when I leg it. But when you say it like that it sounds like I'd be going well beyond self defence.

Did you ever get that thing on the school bus where some tearaway chav would go around twatting people on the head with rolled up copies of Metro? You could yank it out of their hand but they'd just get a new one. You could push them away but they'd just try harder to annoy you then. The only actual solution was to give them a good smack around the jaw hard enough that they knew not to fuck with you any more.

Sage for neanderthal ramblings of a non-legal peon.
>> No. 427802 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 12:59 pm
427802 spacer

Capture.png
427802427802427802
>>427795
He's been suspended from his party, it's pretty clear that his retrospective "She's coming right at me!" was just vranyo.
>> No. 427803 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 1:09 pm
427803 spacer
>>427802

The fuck's trout farming about it? If anything people would give far less of a shit if it had been a bloke.
>> No. 427804 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 1:14 pm
427804 spacer
>>427803

Not a lot but it's an easy thing to be distracted by.
>> No. 427805 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 1:39 pm
427805 spacer
>>427801

>I wouldn't feel safe until they were on the ground and with a reasonable degree of certainty not getting back up to come after me when I leg it.

If you've actually been attacked (or you were pretty sure he was about to go for you), that's a perfectly reasonable level of force. If you keep whacking them after they're on the ground, it starts to get dicey in a hurry.

>Did you ever get that thing on the school bus where some tearaway chav would go around twatting people on the head with rolled up copies of Metro? You could yank it out of their hand but they'd just get a new one. You could push them away but they'd just try harder to annoy you then. The only actual solution was to give them a good smack around the jaw hard enough that they knew not to fuck with you any more.

That's very much borderline. Being whacked with a newspaper is likely to cause little more than "trifling or transient" injury; boxing someone in the jaw could cause real damage, especially if you knocked them out. At the very least, you'll be asked why you didn't just get off the bus.

>>427795

His belief doesn't have to be objectively reasonable, but the level of force has to be objectively proportional to the perceived threat. His actions simply aren't consistent with someone acting out of fear.
>> No. 427806 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 2:53 pm
427806 spacer
>>427805
>That's very much borderline. Being whacked with a newspaper is likely to cause little more than "trifling or transient" injury; boxing someone in the jaw could cause real damage, especially if you knocked them out. At the very least, you'll be asked why you didn't just get off the bus.

That's so miserable to read, trotting off with your tail between your legs?
If more people twatted the twat in their gabber, the twats might think twice about behaving like a twat in the first place.
(not the person you're replying to)
>> No. 427807 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 3:32 pm
427807 spacer
>>427806

A surprisingly large number of people die in tear-ups outside pubs and kebab shops. If you've got a decent hook, punching someone in the head is a shit lottery - they might get a fat lip, or they might end up dead or permanently disabled. Your head is a confined space full of major blood vessels and your brain is just a lump of fatty mush; through sheer bad luck, you can end up doing far worse damage than you would possibly expect.

Antisocial behaviour is a scourge, but we shouldn't be flippant about the consequences of violence. I would never question the right of people to defend themselves against violence, but there's a fine line between self-defence and retaliation. We can't build a civil society through incivility.
>> No. 427808 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 4:20 pm
427808 spacer
>>427805
>Did you ever get that thing on the school bus where some tearaway chav would go around twatting people on the head with rolled up copies of Metro?
Er... no? Where did you go to school?
>> No. 427809 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 4:43 pm
427809 spacer
>>427808

The North. Wasn't even that bad of a school.

Where did YOU go to school?
>> No. 427810 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 5:38 pm
427810 spacer
>>427809
King's Landing.
>> No. 427818 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 7:14 pm
427818 spacer
prediction: greta will pose nude for climate change when she turns 18

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 427819 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 8:05 pm
427819 spacer
>>427818

I'll join Extinction Rebellion if she does.
>> No. 427820 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 8:11 pm
427820 spacer
>>427819

i was just going to fap
>> No. 427823 Anonymous
21st June 2019
Friday 9:15 pm
427823 spacer
>>427819>>427820

Dirty, dirty bastards.
>> No. 427872 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 1:28 am
427872 spacer
>>427818

I'm not entirely sure she has the right genes to be a stunner when she is an adult. She will probably still look very childlike at 18, which means she will not be fapping material for me personally. And then by her late 20s look like a middle aged housewife before her time.
>> No. 427877 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 10:52 am
427877 spacer
>>427872
>I'm not entirely sure she has the right genes to be a stunner when she is an adult

she's a stunner now, you asshole
>> No. 427878 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 11:53 am
427878 spacer
>>427877
Not only is this post bad-weird but the grammar is shoddy and the slang is foreign.
>> No. 427879 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 12:03 pm
427879 spacer
>>427878
I've tried reporting him but the mods aren't interested.
>> No. 427880 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 12:16 pm
427880 spacer
I wonder if it's the same person going around picking fights with people over truly peculiar things. It has the same feel to it.

>>427714

>>426792
>> No. 427881 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 12:59 pm
427881 spacer
>>427880
Not unless they're roaming.
>> No. 427882 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 1:07 pm
427882 spacer
>>427881
>roaming

What do you call a rambling nun? A roaming Catholic.
>> No. 427886 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 4:33 pm
427886 spacer

bf6a03db2617de627ab632f4c61ef72d.jpg
427886427886427886
>>427877

Have a word, lad. She looks like a real-life South Park character.
>> No. 427889 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 6:01 pm
427889 spacer
>>427887

You're a boob.
>> No. 427892 Anonymous
23rd June 2019
Sunday 7:16 pm
427892 spacer
>>427882

What does one call rambling gypsies though?
>> No. 427916 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 1:16 am
427916 spacer
>>427892
It doesn't matter. Nothing you say will get them to shut up.
>> No. 427923 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 9:06 am
427923 spacer

_107503314_climatechange9.jpg
427923427923427923
Thousands of Ende Gelände protesters break through police lines to occupy a vast open face coal mine over the weekend. (Possibly tens of thousands of people involved but only some sitting in the mine, others blocking coal trains, distracting police, providing logistics and other things)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48734321


Meanwhile the temperature in parts of the Arctic reach 29C and the CO2 concentration in the air is 415ppm and climbing, the highest it has ever been while humans have existed as a species.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/it-was-84-degrees-near-the-arctic-ocean-this-weekend-as-carbon-dioxide-hit-its-highest-level-in-human-history/ar-AABlBAQ
>> No. 427931 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 11:17 am
427931 spacer

17q73x.jpg
427931427931427931
>>427923

>Meanwhile the temperature in parts of the Arctic reach 29C and the CO2 concentration in the air is 415ppm and climbing, the highest it has ever been while humans have existed as a species.


That's slightly disconcerting.

I guess it isn't much consolation that the Earth has been through much more sudden catastrophic events like the asteroid impact 65 million years ago and has bounced back.

Best to pack your rice then.
>> No. 427935 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 12:29 pm
427935 spacer
>>427931
More than slightly, Greenland's melting at a rate we didn't expect would happen for 70 years yet.
>> No. 427936 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 12:35 pm
427936 spacer
That and the ice in the Himalayas
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/himalayan-glaciers-melting/
which is not great news for the near-50% of India already suffering from drought to the point they're abandoning their towns.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/nearly-50-per-cent-of-india-currently-facing-drought-iit-gandhinagar-scientists/articleshow/68197824.cms
>> No. 427943 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 2:04 pm
427943 spacer
How fucked will we be anyway?
It's been dawning on me more and more that we're probably fucked and now I feel like I should do some background preparation, but I'm not sure how bad things are going to get. The two scenarios that seem most plausible are moving towards a food/electricity ration system with limited travel, but basically still living a lifestyle better than people did in the 50s or such severe damage to civilisation that basic survival skills will need to be known to not die or get killed.
That's quite a range of possibilities. The first entails trying to be a less picky eater, the latter probably involves displacing all of my hobbies even just to figure out what needs to be learned.
>> No. 427946 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 2:32 pm
427946 spacer
I think it will probably be fine.
>> No. 427947 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 2:52 pm
427947 spacer
>>427943
All the places that are starting to feel it now are where we get our food from. If we don't halt it soon there's going to be a multi breadbasket failure situation.
>> No. 427956 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 6:15 pm
427956 spacer
>>427947
>a multi breadbasket failure situation.

Combine that with an total toaster malfunction scenario and a collective kettle conflagration and we're well and truly fucked m8.
>> No. 427957 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 6:20 pm
427957 spacer
>>427956
Very witty.
https://www.bu.edu/pardee/files/2017/03/Multiple-Breadbasket-Failures-Pardee-Report.pdf
>> No. 427960 Anonymous
24th June 2019
Monday 7:02 pm
427960 spacer
>>427956
Better pack your rice before a pervasive and protracted paddy pandemic.
>> No. 428079 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 9:02 pm
428079 spacer
https://theecologist.org/2019/jun/25/mcdonnell-backs-extinction-rebellion-disruption
>John McDonnell has praised the efforts of Extinction Rebellion protesters who paralysed parts of London.
>The shadow chancellor said the "relatively minor disturbance" caused by the activists and the school student strikes movement had "definitely been worth it".

>Mr McDonnell launched an inquiry into the "shadow banking" sector as part of the effort to shift finance away from polluting industries.
>"I am setting up a review group to overview the financial system as it currently relates to the climate emergency, in terms of both: where and how it is causing or exacerbating the problem of climate change; and where and how it could be providing solutions to problems,"

>he also put forward a plan to legislate so that any company listed on the London Stock Exchange would be "required to contribute to tackling the climate change crisis" - with de-listing as a sanction.

Aiming for 2050 which is still way too late but it's progress.
>> No. 428080 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 9:04 pm
428080 spacer
>>428079
Yeah, that was almost 15 minutes ago.
>> No. 428082 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 10:05 pm
428082 spacer
>>427957
So by skipping to the conclusion, having gotten bored with the criteria itself going beyond climate change, we discover that you're just spouting alarmist nonsense:

>In our analysis of the challenge of responding to multiple breadbasket failures, there are many factors that are simply not known, or not known well enough to underpin effective policy and operational responses. The likelihood of such failures occurring due to extreme weather events, and the degree to which those probabilities might change as the climate system continues to shift, are major features that require much better quantification. The magnitude of the impact of recent extreme events on agricultural productivity can be documented on a case-by-case basis, but the underlying processes that determine the sensitivity of productivity to future and more persistent shocks is poorly modeled. The potential compensatory processes within the food system (e.g. how storage is used or the effectiveness of trade) are not well understood, and need much better quantification. The monitoring systems for the current food production system, analysis of the policy response options to price increases of different magnitudes, and the ability to simulate multiple future scenarios are crucial and will require significant investment.

As everything is unknown the two obvious policy choices are to do more research and invest in failure mitigation i.e. the way GMO crops are already being used to help the developing worlds farmers. Perhaps instead of being insufferable to ordinary Londoners you could go annoy the Green party?

>>428079
Don't be so pessimistic, with John McDonnell in charge we'll surely see the last of British industry!
>> No. 428083 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 10:10 pm
428083 spacer
>>428082
>So by skipping to the conclusion, having gotten bored with the criteria itself going beyond climate change, we discover that you're just spouting alarmist nonsense:
I linked that to show you what a breadbasket failure was, not to tell you what's going to cause it or what the response to it will be, because more recent informed opinions, this year rather than in 2017 when that was published, are that the increase in temperature massively increase the likelihood of it. You're selectively misinterpreting things for some reason.
>> No. 428084 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 10:30 pm
428084 spacer
Just to expand on the above, the actual "alarmist" points of view aren't that the food supply is going to be affected or that we'll have problems with fresh water or a rapid descent into fascism but that feedback loops will create a "hothouse earth"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/06/domino-effect-of-climate-events-could-push-earth-into-a-hothouse-state
which could fairly easily lead to the total collapse of civilisation and even human extinction
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-global-warming-end-human-civilisation-research-a8943531.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-climate-change-report-human-civilization-at-risk-extinction-by-2050-new-australian-climate/
The angry poster of >>428082 just seems to have an Overton window regarding the environment that's stuck somewhere in the 1950s.
>> No. 428086 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 11:17 pm
428086 spacer

Space flower.jpg
428086428086428086
>>428083
>because more recent informed opinions, this year rather than in 2017 when that was published, are that the increase in temperature massively increase the likelihood of it.

So why didn't you post that? Bollocks methinks.

And to clarify, I'm not him.

>>428084
There's more than one way to be alarmist you silly bugger. We're all going to starve and we're all going to melt are still alarmist even when only one was the plot to a good Twilight Zone episode.

The way you counter threats to food stability is the way we've always countered such threats which is taking advantage of the vast potential for productivity improvements, engineering better crops and better storage. Obviously they don't talk about that kind of thing in your citizens assembly though because it's not hip to have reasonable opinions when you can just screech for the fucking government to fix everything with a heavy hand.
>> No. 428087 Anonymous
26th June 2019
Wednesday 11:22 pm
428087 spacer
>>428086
>So why didn't you post that? Bollocks methinks.
I thought it was implicit to anyone with a brain.

>There's more than one way to be alarmist you silly bugger.
Yes, what's alarmist depends on your Overton window. Today's science or that of the 1950s.

>The way you counter threats to food stability is the way we've always countered such threats which is taking advantage of the vast potential for productivity improvements, engineering better crops and better storage.
Right. Because there are all these easy fixes for doing things cheaper and more efficiently that capitalism just doesn't bother with.
>> No. 428088 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 1:13 am
428088 spacer
>>428084
I've only just arrived to this cunt-off but feel obliged to point out that he's citing academic articles while you're linking to news websites which are pretty open about their ideological slant.
>> No. 428090 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 1:24 am
428090 spacer
>>428088
I haven't seen >>428082 link a single academic article
>> No. 428092 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 1:58 am
428092 spacer
>>428090
Oh never mind, it was quaoting an article in another post.

Mark my words, if there's any kind of global crop shortage the first place to go apeshit will be Egypt. If there's so much as a fluctuation in the price of wheat they inevitably have civil unrest. I don't see Coptic Christians surviving in that part of the world for another couple of generations.
>> No. 428093 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 2:34 am
428093 spacer
>>428087

>Right. Because there are all these easy fixes for doing things cheaper and more efficiently that capitalism just doesn't bother with.

I mean... Yeah, there probably are. We already know farmers have to use objectively inferior crops because Monsanto et all have essentially strong armed them into it.

I don't find it hard to believe capitalism is willing to stifle innovation for market dominance at all. Look at the pharmaceutical industry.
>> No. 428094 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:52 am
428094 spacer
>>428093
Yes. Know how you get them to unstifle them? By making people aware of the state of the climate. Alarming them.
>> No. 428096 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:58 am
428096 spacer
>>428088
I'm both linking to news articles from a broad range of news sources and to the occasional academic one. I could link to more academic sources if you like, I just didn't think they'd make interesting reading. The otherlad isn't linking to anything and seems to be arguing from a Randian or ancap perspective ("no more government restrictions! The market will save us!").
>> No. 428097 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 11:24 am
428097 spacer
>>428096

>from a Randian or ancap perspective ("no more government restrictions! The market will save us!").

Capitalism's only real answer to global warming and rising sea levels will be spotting business opportunities in a growing demand for dinghies.

The problem with capitalism is that without being tamed and reined in by institutions and a good bit of government regulation, it will eventually implode almost the same way as a communist economic system.
>> No. 428098 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 11:55 am
428098 spacer
>>428097
>The problem with capitalism is that without being tamed and reined in by institutions and a good bit of government regulation, it will eventually implode almost the same way as a communist economic system.
It'll be lucky to get that far if it keeps burning fossil fuels.
>> No. 428100 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 4:29 pm
428100 spacer
Honestly I find it interesting to think about markets rather than capitalism or socialism. Even if we all owned our workplaces it's possible to see ourselves in the same situation we find ourselves in now - i'd still put myself firmly on the side of owning our workplaces, but the way markets spare us from conscious decision making seems more interesting than ownership. If we take market advocates at their words, the market basically allocates scarce resources in the way we want. We then run into a philosophical question about what we actually want - the distinction is expressed preference ("i want to save the planet") vs revealed preference (taking no action.) The market reads off our revealed preference as our real one, and carries on as usual, letting us make the basically free individual consumption choices that we desire. The problem, of course, is that sooner or later earth becomes uninhabitable.

The horrible, inescapable truth of market society is that if it wants to live in the long term, you are going to have to restrict people's choices. Not in a small way, not in a little oh don't sell cigarettes to kids way, but in a very big and disruptive way. You don't have to tip all the way over into central planning, but people who have the money to pay for things are going to have to be told they simply cannot obtain those things. A new degree of scarcity would have to be imposed, based around carbon emissions rather than income. Revealed preference will never deliver this and even getting people to express that preference would be difficult. As a society, we are very comfortable with saying "You cannot have a private plane because you are poor". We are not yet so comfortable with "You cannot have a private plane for 10 years, no matter how much money you have, because the government says so."

An alternative route would be to seek to properly price in the environmental costs. I'm not sure this is actually realistically possible, but it's the route economists prefer. Possibly because it's the one with the least disruption, the weakest smell of central planning, the least interference. Of course, they've been saying this for decades and the marketplace of ideas seems to have revealed that it's not to their preference. Granted, the same is even more true of what I'm saying.
>> No. 428101 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:01 pm
428101 spacer
>>428100

>The horrible, inescapable truth of market society is that if it wants to live in the long term, you are going to have to restrict people's choices. Not in a small way, not in a little oh don't sell cigarettes to kids way, but in a very big and disruptive way. You don't have to tip all the way over into central planning, but people who have the money to pay for things are going to have to be told they simply cannot obtain those things.

That's one way in which markets need to be regulated in order to prevent the system from imploding into itself. Market radicalists still have a firm belief that the market knows best. And, to some extent, that statement isn't even fundamentally wrong. Market economies with rights to property, free enterprise, and by and large autonomy of their economic subjects have a habit of leading to a much more efficient use of resources and production factors than socialist or communist economies under central planning, because it is thought that in order to survive in a market economy, each economic subject, households and enterprises alike, but also governments, must make efficient use of their income and their assets and property. The imperative of personal or corporate efficiency will then somehow lead to overall efficiency and thus benefit the greater good of society.

Except, markets tend to not keep within their field of view the long-term impacts. Although mid- to long-term planning is essential, there tends to be a focus on the near-term income and profits of enterprises and households. Sustainability is not always a key issue. And industries like the car industry would go on producing combustion-engine cars until the last drop of oil would be drawn from the ground without government and global political efforts to phase out fossil fuels to protect the Earth's climate. Eventually, carmakers will have to switch to electric any way you look at it because there'd be no point producing a car that runs on an energy source that no longer exists. But the pace at which this switch occurs would be much slower without government and institutional pressure. It is rumoured, not just by conspiracy theorists, that carmakers have had ready-to-implement plans for efficient, low-cost electric motors and long-range batteries in their drawers for decades, but that they kept betting on combustion engines simply because petrol has been and still is a relatively affordable energy source and it enabled them to stick with a tried-and-true mature technology that required far less financial investment than a complete switch to electric cars.
>> No. 428102 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:31 pm
428102 spacer
I heard a bloke talking on the radio yesterday about how the emissions zone in London now means it costs his business an extra £8000 per week to run its fleet of vans. His alternatives are switching fully to electric vans (which simply aren't available in the quantities that would be demanded) or use a scrappage scheme to switch to newer vans.

This sounds a bit bonkers to me. Surely scrapping thousands of old vans and putting newer ones in their place is more wasteful and harmful to the environment and our natural resources? It's the same thing with phones ad computers. Why is everyone going on about how I need to stop eating meat when we'll still be churning out tons and tons of new steel and plastic tat? Surely we'd be much better off admitting that we've already got plenty of fucking cars and just stop making new ones, and instead keep the old ones going? Why aren't we pressuring Apple to make an iPhone that lasts more than a fucking year?

Why is that not even a part of this new surge of environmentalist movements? You'll never stand in the way of people's demand for plastic tat, but you can perfectly well tell paupers they're not allowed beef any more.
>> No. 428103 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:33 pm
428103 spacer
>>428100

>An alternative route would be to seek to properly price in the environmental costs. I'm not sure this is actually realistically possible, but it's the route economists prefer.

Remember acid rain? We just priced sulphur emissions properly and it went away. Carbon taxes could fix climate change astonishingly quickly, but we need the political will to set a realistic price on carbon.
>> No. 428104 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:34 pm
428104 spacer
>>428102
>Why is that not even a part of this new surge of environmentalist movements?
It is. They're of less immediate concern than single use plastics though.
>> No. 428105 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:34 pm
428105 spacer
>>428102

The London LEZ is about local air pollution rather than climate change. People with asthma and COPD are dying because of diesel fumes.
>> No. 428106 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:44 pm
428106 spacer
>>428105

Boy, I bet all that extra money the TFL ends up making will save thousands of asthmatics.
>> No. 428107 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 5:46 pm
428107 spacer
>>428106
If it reduces the number of cars on the road then yes, it will.
>> No. 428108 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:03 pm
428108 spacer
>>428107

Will it though? Who drives a diesel car in London on a daily basis anyway, you'd have to be barmy. It's only really businesses that are affected and the point is that without viable alternatives, most of them are simply going to have to eat the fees.

I'm not saying I want London to stay under a cloud of traffic pollution but this whole thing seems ham-fisted and insincere in its motive. Other cities are of course talking about putting in their own version so you can tell it's generating a healthy income.
>> No. 428110 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:09 pm
428110 spacer
>>428102 If the vans are anything other than shit, they'd be sold outside the LEZ (where the tailpipe emissions are less of an aissue, as the density's far lower) for far more than the scrappage. They'd displace some old shit van that did need scrapping because it was inefficient or getting to be a gross polluter.
We can take a lot more slightly smoky diesels out in the sticks before there's any effect.
A moratorium on new vehicle sales would be daft, you're not replacing almost-new with new, you're replacing old shitboxes with new and rather more efficient. Somewhat different from phones, where second hand is relatively rare.
>> No. 428111 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:20 pm
428111 spacer
>>428103
I'm not so sure it's that easy in practice once you account for Campbell's law type chicanery. I can imagine a world in which we price Carbon correctly, only to have companies shift to pumping out something even worse for the environment instead. You could then tax that too, but I suspect the market can remain a cunt longer than the earth can remain inhabitable.

I suppose I've also got a moral objection to the fashion in which the market won't enforce equality of sacrifice. For example if mass air travel ends/is curtailed severely, but private jets are used for leisure purposes by the ultra rich. I can see that being a problem when it comes to maintaining political support, but I suspect it's more of a personal hangup than an actual problem.
>> No. 428112 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:21 pm
428112 spacer
>>428108

I don't know but given that the sort of people who campaign for these things do tend to do their research, it probably does help.
>> No. 428113 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 6:24 pm
428113 spacer
>>428108
>Will it though?
The congestion charge caused a reduction of around 20% in its first five years. The initial LEZ will cover the same area, extending to everywhere inside the North and South Circulars in 2021.
>> No. 428126 Anonymous
27th June 2019
Thursday 10:01 pm
428126 spacer
I never deeply thought about it, but now that I have, I think I don't really care about the environment. Although, this is mainly driven by the hatred I have for humanity.
>> No. 428165 Anonymous
29th June 2019
Saturday 12:08 am
428165 spacer
>>428150

3... 2... 1...
>> No. 428218 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 10:15 am
428218 spacer
I just paid to help Rwandans use more efficient stoves so that I can feel less bad about the flight I am making this year.

It cost £11 for a return flight to Spain, which seems quite cheap really.

I then realised I still hadn't bought a birthday present for my brother, so I offset his flight to/from Thailand (£130 worth of CO2 used there). He is going to get an email saying how much CO2 his flights used, and I hope he feels very guilty about it.
>> No. 428220 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 10:38 am
428220 spacer
Hong Kong lad 2: This Time It's Las Palmas

In cinemas never!
>> No. 428221 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 11:16 am
428221 spacer
>>428218

You're the one no one wants to talk to at family gatherings I assume.
>> No. 428222 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 11:34 am
428222 spacer
>>428221
Alright, what you're doing is bullying, I was just poking fun.
>> No. 428223 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 11:35 am
428223 spacer
>>428218
>and I hope he feels very guilty about it

I don't think your brother will, but I find your attitude hilarious.
>> No. 428228 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 1:20 pm
428228 spacer
I tell everyone that I think the environment is important, but actually I hope it continues to derail, kills a lot of people and reduces the human population below 500 million people because frankly there's too many of us and we require balancing.
>> No. 428230 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 1:29 pm
428230 spacer
>>428228
Honestly while I don't want climate catastrophe to happen, the more time I spend online the more passive I get about it simply because it's a semi-sensible ending to the narrative of history. Society has become incredibly stupid as the internet has become a permanent fixture of life and my brain can't help but be drawn to a collapse simply because it makes more sense for the future to end with us going back to being cavemen than for it to end with dragon dildo reviews on the BBC to boost social media engagement/because one of the furries on the board of directors wanted to amuse his pals.
>> No. 428235 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 2:34 pm
428235 spacer

Screenshot-2019-02-08-at-17.14.56_56.jpg
428235428235428235
>>428228

>there's too many of us and we require balancing

The environment can comfortably sustain about 18 billion people if we're halfway sensible about how we use resources. The global birth rate is now declining and the UN forecasts that we will reach a peak global population of about 11 billion in 2100.

>>428230

The only way we're "going back" is if some mad dictator burns all the libraries and commits international genocide against engineers. Cellular network infrastructure is incredibly resilient, which is why developing countries have skipped over land-lines and gone straight to 4G. Your water, gas and electricity supplies are all far more fragile, as is the supply of goods to your local shops. More people in the world have a mobile phone than access to clean water; in rural African villages with no electricity supply, there's invariably a bloke with a bicycle and a car battery going around charging phones. During the Syrian civil war, Aleppo was shelled into a pile of rubble but maintained good mobile internet coverage.

In extremis, we're perfectly capable of jerry-rigging slow and unreliable but perfectly usable internet links out of surplus equipment. This isn't theoretical; when the sole fibre-optic link to Tonga was taken out by a ship's anchor earlier this year, engineers at the island's ISP scrounged up some old satellite equipment and got them back online within a matter of days.

The internet evolved out of ARPANET, a US military system which was designed to survive a Soviet nuclear strike. It's basically unkillable as long as you've got a handful of competent engineers and some means of generating a modest amount of electricity. Climate change is really going to fuck with people who live near the coast or anywhere hot, but the internet is going nowhere.
>> No. 428236 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 2:39 pm
428236 spacer
>>428230

All great advanced civilisations in history eventually collapsed. The Mesopotamians, Chinese dynasties, the Egyptians, the Greek city states, the Roman Empire. For various reasons, but they all did. So it'd only be fitting if our global civilisation suffers the same fate. Only that it's of course a question of the scale of magnitude.

What was believed to become the obvious end of our civilisation, i.e. global nuclear war, is less likely now than it was in the 1960s or again in the 1980s, and instead, we seem to have opted for a more slow and painful death. It's worth noting that we're still only in the beginning stages of the kind of climate change that is foretold by scientific models. Once much of Southern Europe, one of the continent's main origins of fruit and vegetables, will be too hot and dry to farm even with the most efficient artificial irrigation, then there are going to be real problems. At some point, even England and Central Europe could become too warm and dry to farm food staples like wheat and potatoes.

Maybe we should just take comfort in the fact that all civilisation collapses eventually left enough people alive to start anew. And that's probably what will happen the next time around as well. There will be catastrophic famines and wars over natural resources that will probably see the Earth's population drop by 25 to 40 percent. But the survivors will then have enough resources to divide up among themselves to live in prosperity again. If you look at all the mediaeval black death pandemics, once they had died down, it ushered in a period of great prosperity among the survivors that lasted for centuries. There are stories that entire tracts of farm land lay fallow simply because apart from not having enough people to farm them, there was no demand for the amounts of food that you could have grown on them. We think our forests disappeared with the population growth of the 1800s to 2000s, but in reality, before the plague pandemics, land was farmed much more extensively than for many centuries to come. Nature was truly allowed to take a breather when 40 percent of Europe's entire population was wiped out by the plague.

I'd love to be less of an apathetic cynic about it all, but beyond the odd bit of recycling and using public transportation as I do and supporting Fridays for Future in spirit, I'm afraid I don't see how you can not come to the conclusion that we're headed for another inevitable civilisation collapse.
>> No. 428238 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 3:21 pm
428238 spacer
>>428236
>All great advanced civilisations in history eventually collapsed. The Mesopotamians, Chinese dynasties, the Egyptians, the Greek city states, the Roman Empire. For various reasons, but they all did.

Not really though. Most of them were subsumed by other cultures, but they didn't "collapse" into nothing. Greece was a prosperous and highly urbanised area right through the middle ages, the Egyptians were Hellenised, then Romanised, but it remained a fertile land long after the Pharaohs had gone, the Romans lived on through the church and in the east and were frankly (get it!) a right load of sods anyway so I'm not sure how misty eyed I can get for the problems wrought upon the late empire.

The only times civilisations "collapse" is when another civilisation makes the especially uncivilised decision to make it do so. Alexander the Great and the Achaemenids, the Spanish and basically everyone in South America or the Romans and Carthage, but even then Alexander was becoming pretty Persian himself and plenty of Persian dysnasties ruled the area afterwards, South America has many indigenous communities and influences and Carthage, well, actually they might have been KO'd forever, but I don't see how the Chinese "collapsed" at all, they just became a republic, that hardly undoes thousands of years of culture, science and art.
>> No. 428239 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 3:25 pm
428239 spacer
Despite what I just said about all those civilisations I am a bit converned that the only significant English cities that will survive the flood are Stoke and Birmingham.
>> No. 428240 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 3:40 pm
428240 spacer
>>428235

>The environment can comfortably sustain about 18 billion people

Maybe you would be alright living in the slums of Mega City One but I think that would be far too many people and would necessitate that we destroy the natural environment and replace it with one of our own making.

Ideally we would be in the kind of situation where the biggest towns have a couple thousand people and it wasn't a matter of course that you could pop to the other side of the world in a day.
>> No. 428241 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 3:57 pm
428241 spacer
>>428235
What's the timeframe in this image and where can i find more?
>> No. 428242 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 3:57 pm
428242 spacer
The end of the Bronze Age saw a collapse in civilisation which Wikipedia says was caused by:

Loss of central authority
Depopulation
Loss of literacy
Disappearance of international trade
Local power struggles

Precipitated by large-scale migrations and technological advantages.

One could argue that we are part of the same civilisation as the Romans, Greeks et al because those empires never collapsed as such, merely transformed into newer models of nation. The Greek Dark Age was real, but the Dark Age was a rennescience myth. The loss of empire wasn't a collapse any more than the loss of our empire caused a collapse in our civilisation.

As for the survival of the Internet, if there is a general lack of literacy then it could be that in two generations the techniques to access the information would be lost. It's the height of folly to assume that we're too advanced to fail.
>> No. 428260 Anonymous
30th June 2019
Sunday 10:56 pm
428260 spacer
>>428240

Most of the planet is practically empty. Britain has a population density of 274 people per square km; if you've ever taken an intercity train, it should be fairly obvious that loads of Britain is very sparsely populated. Despite having a population of nearly 1.4 billion, China's population density is only 145 per square km, because it's fucking massive. In France it's 123, in the US it's 34, in Russia it's 9 and in Canada it's 4. If they had the same population density as us, Canada would have a population of 2.5 billion. There's loads of room if we just eat a bit less meat.

>>428241

You can play with an interactive map at the link below. It's hard to predict the timescales involved, because sea level rise is highly non-linear; melting of the polar ice caps and an increase in sea temperatures could release massive amounts of sequestered CO2 and methane, causing a runaway cycle of melting and warming.

Assuming we meet our CO2 reduction targets, the most likely scenario is a rise of around 1m by 2100, which would cause total inundation of some low-lying areas in the east of England and severe seasonal flooding elsewhere in the UK. The worst effects would be felt in places like Bangladesh, Vietnam, Nigeria and southern China which have major urban populations in river deltas; the combined effect of this flooding could displace around 300 million people. China could probably cope with the near-total loss of the Pearl River Delta megalopolis, but less developed countries may face political and economic collapse.

If we do nothing about climate change, we could expect to see a sea level rise of 7-9m by some point in the 2100s, which would have much more far-reaching effects. The image in my post above represents a 60m rise, which is the worst case of a runaway melt-warm-melt scenario leading to the total loss of the ice caps.

http://flood.firetree.net/
>> No. 428268 Anonymous
1st July 2019
Monday 12:37 am
428268 spacer
Frankly I'd prefer there to be half as many humans alive and we can all eat as much meat as we want, thanks. I don't very much see the point in there being 18 billion of us but we all have to be vegans and there's no such thing as air travel any more.

I know it's all subjective but I just really can't wrap my head around people's opinions sometimes. Humans are a fucking blight on this planet and the most straightforward solution to literally everything is if we stop breeding so fucking much.

Life is not inherently valuable, in fact it's pretty much meaningless. Think of my viewpoint as one of quality over quantity, perhaps.
>> No. 428269 Anonymous
1st July 2019
Monday 12:45 am
428269 spacer
>>428235
Looks like Ossett will be a hot beachside destination.
>> No. 428270 Anonymous
1st July 2019
Monday 1:16 am
428270 spacer
>>428260

>Most of the planet is practically empty

In terms of that we're not literally all standing on each other's feet across the globe, you're right. But if we're talking about the use of natural resources and how much land and space one person needs, or uses to sustain their existence, then we're pretty densely populated. Scientists assume that with our current agricultural technology and consumption of natural resources, we can feed and sustain the lives of no more than around 10 billion people, which is only 33 percent more than we have today, but it seems to be enough to push the Earth to the edge of what's possible.

I think I read somewhere that in most European countries, the inhabitants use around 1.5 Earths, meaning for their lifestyle to be sustainable at no expense to people in other regions of the world, we would need the natural resources of one and a half Earths in Britain, Germany or France.
>> No. 428271 Anonymous
1st July 2019
Monday 10:10 am
428271 spacer
>>428235
Mild disappointment that neither the maps of Inland nor the Ing Archipelago match up with that.

>>428241
That maps shows if all the ice on Earth melted which probably won't happen for a very long time if ever, though given how much faster Greenland's melting than we expected, may actually come about.
>> No. 428274 Anonymous
1st July 2019
Monday 12:39 pm
428274 spacer
>>428268

>Frankly I'd prefer there to be half as many humans alive and we can all eat as much meat as we want, thanks. I don't very much see the point in there being 18 billion of us but we all have to be vegans and there's no such thing as air travel any more.


It's a bit like having a £30K annual salary. It's a pretty comfortable place to be in if you're a single younglad living in a flat with no wife and kids, but try raising two sprogs off it and supporting a stay-at-home wife and paying off a mortgage.

If there were only one billion people on the planet as there were in the 1600s to 1700s, then most of them could drive a thirsty V8 SUV, go on holiday by plane five times a year, buy furniture made from tropical rainforest wood and eat shark fin soup every week, and leave the lights in their home on 24 hours a day and use a dozen plastic cups, and the environmental impact would be quite limited.
>> No. 428403 Anonymous
4th July 2019
Thursday 9:59 am
428403 spacer
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-news-latest-g20-climate-change-global-warming-us-japan-a8980156.html
>Donald Trump has again dismissed the need to tackle climate change by saying the US has the cleanest air and water “ever”.
welp
>> No. 428499 Anonymous
5th July 2019
Friday 11:26 am
428499 spacer
>>428403

Right. What's a bit of methane in your tap water.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8
>> No. 428502 Anonymous
5th July 2019
Friday 12:03 pm
428502 spacer
>>428499
I'm not sure if I need to point out why these videos are bullshit.
>> No. 428503 Anonymous
5th July 2019
Friday 12:35 pm
428503 spacer
>>428502
Nice try, big-fracking.
>> No. 428505 Anonymous
5th July 2019
Friday 12:58 pm
428505 spacer
>>428503
Is there small-fracking? Doesn't seem feasible to attempt to bore hundreds of meaters underground as cottage industry.
>> No. 428514 Anonymous
5th July 2019
Friday 5:04 pm
428514 spacer
>>428505

I come from a proud family of frackers that dates back to the time of Henry VIII. We built this country, you know.


I'll get my coat.
>> No. 428524 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 12:53 am
428524 spacer
>>428502

I as someone who has never seen one before today would like to know.
>> No. 428525 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 3:15 am
428525 spacer
>>428524

Groundwater often naturally contains some amount of dissolved natural gas, because it percolates through natural gas pockets in the surrounding geology. Many rural communities in America rely on water pumped from local boreholes rather than reservoirs; this water is largely untreated and often remains under pressure until it reaches your tap, so any dissolved gases will not have the opportunity to evaporate until it reaches your house.

Fracking ("hydraulic fracturing") uses highly pressurised water to force small pockets of gas out of rock formations, which allows us to extract large amounts of natural gas that would not be possible with conventional drilling techniques. For fairly obvious reasons, this increases the likelihood that dissolved natural gas will end up in the local water supply.

The videos aren't bullshit per se, but people often draw bullshit conclusions. Natural gas is mostly methane, which is entirely non-toxic. The amount of dissolved methane is almost never sufficient to cause an explosion or serious fire. It's obviously alarming if your taps occasionally belch out flammable gas, but that doesn't mean that the water is unsafe to drink or that you are being exposed to significant danger.

There just isn't any credible evidence that fracking poses a serious risk to neighbouring communities; the risks are certainly far lower than those posed by conventional coal mining. Natural gas isn't ideal as a fuel source (we really need to move to renewables), but it's a heck of a lot cleaner than coal and it's a useful stop-gap.
>> No. 428526 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 9:08 am
428526 spacer
>>428525
>There just isn't any credible evidence that fracking poses a serious risk to neighbouring communities

OK now I definitely know you are a fracking company shill.
>> No. 428527 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 10:07 am
428527 spacer
>>428526
So how many people have been killed or injured because of fracking then?
>> No. 428528 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:01 am
428528 spacer
>>428527
We'll all be killed by climate change caused by our reckless burning of fossil fuels!
>> No. 428529 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:06 am
428529 spacer
>>428527

Nobody was killed or injured in the first ten years of cigarettes or asbestos or painting radium onto watch faces, either.
>> No. 428530 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:06 am
428530 spacer
>>428528
You think you're being funny but that is a legitimate possibility.
>> No. 428531 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:16 am
428531 spacer
>>428529

>or painting radium onto watch faces

I think that was only a problem for the watchmaker who was exposed to it every day. Fluorescent radium paint was used a lot in watches when they were hand made a hundred years ago. But as the wearer of a radium watch, your risk of health effects was very low as the radium isotope that was used mainly emitted low-energy alpha and beta particles that don't penetrate much further than the skin even at direct contact.
>> No. 428532 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:19 am
428532 spacer
>>428531
How about painting lead onto faces?
>> No. 428533 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:25 am
428533 spacer
>>428531

That's precisely why I said 'painting radium onto watch faces' and not 'watch faces painted with radium'

The 'radium girls' who painted the dials would point the tip of their brushes with their mouth, leading to, quite often, necrosis of the jaw, amongst other things.

Some of them even painted their nails with it or mixed it into their makeup.
>> No. 428534 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 12:28 pm
428534 spacer
>>428533

Ignorance is bliss.

Bit like the arsenic paint in Victorian homes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy7iUoWi_-U

from about 06:25


Or lead ointments that were used to treat skin conditions. They were actually quite effective for sores and skin infections due to lead's toxicity to microbes like bacteria, but of course it also led to serious lead poisoning in the patient.
>> No. 428535 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 1:46 pm
428535 spacer

SuzannahLipscomb-NewCollege.jpg
428535428535428535
>>428534
Would pollinate.
>> No. 428536 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 2:48 pm
428536 spacer
>>428535
Hands off our women, bee lad.
>> No. 428537 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 3:32 pm
428537 spacer

v1TmznU.png
428537428537428537
>>428536
Buzz off. Women love a bit of honey.
>> No. 428538 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 4:17 pm
428538 spacer
Maybe it's just too much time spent around Scottish nationalists lamenting that North Sea oil was pissed up the wall, but even if Fracking is as good as the world's biggest fracking promoter says it is, I can't see why we should do it when energy prices are low, rather than waiting for everyone else to frack up the best of their stuff and then pop up offering our stuff at forty times the price.

I mean I guess there's the risk we move over to 100% renewable energy before that point and nobody needs our natural gas in that wonderful future, but on our current path until I see air traffic controllers taking measures to help airliners avoid flying pigs I don't really consider that a strong counterargument.
>> No. 428539 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 7:06 pm
428539 spacer
>>428538
>until I see air traffic controllers taking measures to help airliners avoid flying pigs I don't really consider that a strong counterargument.
Heathrow's planned third runway is having a bit of a worry over the climate change problems it'll have to deal with.
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/heathrow-third-runway-climate-change-protest-extinction-rebellion-environment-a8988301.html
>> No. 428540 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 8:33 pm
428540 spacer
>>428538
Fracking is just a massive bubble fuelled by investors being promised big returns (eventually).

>>428539
A third runway at Heathrow is a white elephant. It was an idea that made sense 20 years ago. But in the past 10 years the hub-airport model has flopped. All the money now is being made with efficient twin-engine aircraft doing direct flights between regional airports.
>> No. 428541 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 8:53 pm
428541 spacer
>>428540
>But in the past 10 years the hub-airport model has flopped. All the money now is being made with efficient twin-engine aircraft doing direct flights between regional airports.
And yet for some reason LHR is at capacity, airlines are flying planes empty just so they don't lose slots, some of which change hands for millions of dollars, meanwhile carriers are withdrawing point-to-point routes like nobody's business.
>> No. 428542 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 9:09 pm
428542 spacer
>>428541

>airlines are flying planes empty just so they don't lose slots

If that is the case, then why not issue penalties for empty flights that happen without good reason (test flights after substantial repairs etc). And be more flexible about slot policy so that airlines aren't forced to fly empty.
>> No. 428543 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 9:35 pm
428543 spacer
>>428542
Because money
>> No. 428544 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 9:56 pm
428544 spacer
>>428527
How many people have officially been killed or injured as a direct cause of air pollution?
>> No. 428545 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 10:21 pm
428545 spacer
>>428544

It's fake news, right?
>> No. 428546 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 10:45 pm
428546 spacer
>>428544
Something like 7 million people a year. Not to support fracking or anything but there are measurable numbers in this case.
>> No. 428548 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:09 pm
428548 spacer
>>428546

It's a moot point because the lion share of the hydrocarbons that are extracted from the ground with fracking end up being burned as fuel again, and will cause yet more pollution and illness in people.
>> No. 428549 Anonymous
6th July 2019
Saturday 11:48 pm
428549 spacer
>>428548

We're fracking for gas, which doesn't produce meaningful quantities of emissions that are harmful to human health. It still produces a whole bunch of CO2, but it's a lot less per kWh than coal or oil. In an ideal world we wouldn't burn any gas, but it's not an ideal world; we don't yet have the capacity to run our electricity grid on 100% renewables, we'd need a shitload more capacity if everyone got electric central heating, so gas is the least-worst option until the grid catches up.
>> No. 428579 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 6:39 pm
428579 spacer
>>428546
Nope, lad.

>Toxic levels of pollution leads annually to the early death of an estimated 7 million people, according to a new World Health Organization report.

>estimated
>> No. 428584 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 7:18 pm
428584 spacer
>>428579
>Gravity is only a theory
>> No. 428586 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 8:02 pm
428586 spacer
>>428579

Please tell me you're joking.
>> No. 428600 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 9:57 pm
428600 spacer
>>428579

'Estimated' also means it could be much higher. Generally, statisticians and epidemiologists tend to go with more conservative estimates.
>> No. 428606 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 10:19 pm
428606 spacer
>>428600
Completely agree. And yet despite what statisticians say no-one has 'air pollution' written on their death certificate in the same way no-one has 'fracking' written on it either.
>> No. 428608 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 10:24 pm
428608 spacer
>>428606
Nobody has "stupidity" written on their death certificate either.
>> No. 428612 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 11:39 pm
428612 spacer
>>428608
Or 'spaceship'. Or 'philosophy'. Or 'Wayne's World'.
>> No. 428613 Anonymous
7th July 2019
Sunday 11:59 pm
428613 spacer
>>428612
>Or 'spaceship'.
Pretty sure that's featured on at least half a dozen.

>Or 'philosophy'. Or 'Wayne's World'.
Unlike stupidity, neither of those things have killed anyone.
>> No. 428619 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 8:27 am
428619 spacer

75569-004-94C335A1.jpg
428619428619428619
>>428613
>> No. 428620 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 8:44 am
428620 spacer
>>428613

I'm sure at least one person must have crashed their car whilst singing along too enthusiastically to Bohemian Rapsody.
>> No. 428624 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 11:10 am
428624 spacer
>>428620

25 years ago maybe.
>> No. 428625 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 12:24 pm
428625 spacer
>>428624
What happened then? Wayne's world came out?
>> No. 428626 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 12:31 pm
428626 spacer
>>428625

A little earlier yet. I remember seeing it at the cinema in spring of 1992.

Yes, I'm that old.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN_VgVEZD0k
>> No. 428631 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 6:19 pm
428631 spacer
Retired jockey, 60, died when she fell onto an eco-friendly metal drinking straw which impaled her eye in a freak accident, inquest hear

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7224677/Retired-jockey-died-fell-eco-friendly-metal-drinking-straw.html

Fuck you, chickenlittlelad. I'm not giving up plastic if the alternative is getting impaled in the eye.
>> No. 428632 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 6:38 pm
428632 spacer
>>428631
>Retired
More like "coffin-dodging". Good riddance.
>> No. 428633 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 6:50 pm
428633 spacer
>>428631

>In the months leading up to her death, she had been drinking around half a litre of vodka a day, mixed with orange juice, from the mason jar cup, using the metal straws which were a birthday gift.


Know your limit.
>> No. 428636 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 9:03 pm
428636 spacer

hqdefault(3).jpg
428636428636428636
>>428633
>> No. 428638 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 10:07 pm
428638 spacer

plastic-river-philippines.jpg
428638428638428638
>>428631
>I'm not giving up plastic if the alternative is getting impaled in the eye.

The biggest objection to plastic environmentally seems to be that it ends up in the ocean from rivers, given that is simply not a thing we purposely do in the west we are by no means even close to being the the problem, it is estimated somewhere around 10,000kg a year ends up in the ocean from the Thames (mostly from women flushing their sanitary products), where as the developing world is just pouring rubbish into their rivers, both the Ganges and the Yangtze are dumping well over 100 000 000 kg a year each, with hundreds of rivers in the far east adding more to the ocean then the Thames does. It really doesn't matter what we do.
>> No. 428639 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 10:13 pm
428639 spacer
>>428638
don't we send our rubbish to them to dump wherever they please?
>> No. 428640 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 11:43 pm
428640 spacer
>>428638
Once climate change kills all the people around those rivers we'll be sorted.
>> No. 428641 Anonymous
8th July 2019
Monday 11:49 pm
428641 spacer
>>428639
Short answer no.

Long answer kind of. We pay for a lot of our plastic to be recycled aborad, the majority of it ends up doing just that within Europe, in the East people are willing to put up a front that they are going to recycle it and then don't.

The other dodgy issue is electronics which are required by law to be processed at the end of their life at the expense of manufacturers, which are sold 'second hand for parts' to places that look like the wastes in blade runner 2049.
>> No. 428642 Anonymous
9th July 2019
Tuesday 12:06 am
428642 spacer
>>428641

>The other dodgy issue is electronics which are required by law to be processed at the end of their life at the expense of manufacturers, which are sold 'second hand for parts' to places that look like the wastes in blade runner 2049.


Saw a documentary a while ago where they showed a place in some backwater sub-Saharan African country, where a big part of first-world electronic waste is shipeed and then just dumped in open-air dumps, things like old computers, televisions, or other electric appliances. The poorest of the poor then make a living there scouring through the heaps in search of a few grams of recyclable metals like copper or gold. Fires are common, both started accidentally and by people melting down plastics to get to the metal contained in the traces on circuit boards, releasing all manner of toxic fumes in the process.

Something to consider the next time you throw out your old TV. Even if you take it to a place that says it will recycle it, it could be that that's what they really mean by it. They'll ship it to Africa and let them sort it out.
>> No. 428646 Anonymous
9th July 2019
Tuesday 9:03 am
428646 spacer
>>428641
>Are we sending our rubbish to them to dump wherever they please?
>No. We're sending them our rubbish "to recycle" knowing that they will just dump it wherever they please.
Good news! We have deniability on paper and therefore aren't morally culpable!
>> No. 428652 Anonymous
9th July 2019
Tuesday 3:53 pm
428652 spacer
I'm reminded of Closed Loop, a company that claimed to be recycling TVs while actually just dumping them in warehouses, leaving a bunch of lead-filmed time bombs with screens that might explode in your face if you touch them the wrong way for the public to clean up after they went bust.
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/z4gv73/americas-television-graveyards

What a world.
>> No. 428653 Anonymous
9th July 2019
Tuesday 4:41 pm
428653 spacer
>>428652
How much do you think the founders managed to walk away with? Presumably with a lucrative business like that they were able to pay themselves handsomely.
>> No. 428685 Anonymous
10th July 2019
Wednesday 11:50 pm
428685 spacer

gt.jpg
428685428685428685

>> No. 428688 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 1:05 am
428688 spacer
>>428685
Yeah the girl with a learning disorder looks funny.
>David Attenborough: polluting planet may become as reviled as slavery
>Naturalist tells MPs radical action needed to tackle crisis but attitude of young people gives him hope
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jul/09/david-attenborough-young-people-give-me-hope-on-environment
>London will have a similar climate in three decades’ time to that of Barcelona today, according to research – but if that seems enticing, a warning: the change could be accompanied by severe drought.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/10/global-heating-london-similar-climate-barcelona-2050
>There's so much CO2 in the atmosphere that planting trees can no longer save us
https://www.businessinsider.com/so-much-co2-planting-trees-cant-save-us-2017-5
>'Completely Terrifying': Study Warns Carbon-Saturated Oceans Headed Toward Tipping Point That Could Unleash Mass Extinction Event
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/07/09/completely-terrifying-study-warns-carbon-saturated-oceans-headed-toward-tipping
>The algae epidemic suffocating the Caribbean has hit a scary milestone — the world's largest seaweed bloom now stretches from Africa to Mexico
https://amp.businessinsider.com/nasa-satellites-reveal-huge-algae-bloom-in-the-caribbean-2019-7
>> No. 428689 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 9:39 am
428689 spacer
>>428688

Okay, so;

London is going to collapse into the sea, and the new sea will be like the med.

That sea will be covered in brown seaweed, but eventually the carbon in the oceans will kill it all anyway.

This carbon ocean will rise and flood (possibly kill} brown-eyed people and southerners. However, northerners will be just fine because we live on mountains and are made of sterner stuff.

Its mostly the fault of the Chinese, Indians and Brazilians.

I think, therefore, all in all I'm on team climate change and am eagerly looking forward to billions of people being culled off by the planet. A sustainable human population is more something like 200 million so it will be nice and effective.
>> No. 428690 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 11:04 am
428690 spacer

ghent-altarpiece.jpg
428690428690428690
>>428688
I think it's 'cos she was raised Vegan.
She actually looks a lot like those medieval depictions of people, I assumed it was just the artistic style of the time but perhaps they were more faithful representations of people who'd grown up undernourished.
>> No. 428691 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 12:21 pm
428691 spacer
>>428690
I think it may be because she has aspergers and that can mean you habitually do different things with your facial muscles so your looks develop a bit differently. You're putting a lot of effort into making fun of the looks of a child with a learning disorder.
>> No. 428695 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 12:41 pm
428695 spacer
>>428691

I do have to question why we should do what a retard says, to be honest.
>> No. 428696 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 12:43 pm
428696 spacer
>>428695
Gosh, you're so BRILLIANT. You've pressed all my button, now I'm all upset. Excuse me, I need to go not-actually-give-a-shit in another thread. Goodbye.
>> No. 428697 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 12:55 pm
428697 spacer
>>428695
She's a puppet, really. She's been carefully managed and trained what to say by her parents. The message is valid, though.
>> No. 428699 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 1:09 pm
428699 spacer
>>428697
She's probably been given some training on talking to the media but it does seem like she got interested in the climate of her own accord.
>> No. 428700 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 1:19 pm
428700 spacer
>>428699
It seems rather coincidental that the first school strike was covered by the PR agency We Don’t Have Time and coincided with the launch of a book by her climate activist mother.
>> No. 428701 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 1:46 pm
428701 spacer
>>428691
I'm doing nothing of the sort.
I think its perfectly reasonable, she seems very child like for her age, physically and in ye olden days women similarly developed much later than modern people, due primarily to nutrition.
>> No. 428703 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 2:04 pm
428703 spacer
>>428700
She'd already had some attention for writing an essay on the climate prior to her strike. Also people protesting things generally contact the media ahead of time. That's fairly normal. Don't your parents take an interest in some of the same things as you?

>>428701
>"I'm not doing that!" he said as he did that
>> No. 428708 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 4:36 pm
428708 spacer
I liked that photo that was posted earlier because I thought it was charming and sweet, but not in a go-to-prison way.
>> No. 428710 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 6:27 pm
428710 spacer
>>428700

>It seems rather coincidental that the first school strike was covered by the PR agency We Don’t Have Time and coincided with the launch of a book by her climate activist mother.


You can't fault someone for proper adequate PR.

Without it, maybe all she would have been able to accomplish would have been to write angry diary entries rife with adolescent disgust at the ways of the world, and get suspended from her school with a few other sperg friend collaborators.

Asperger's should mean that you're also not clued into the world enough to kick off a PR campaign like this on your own (and fundamentally, that's all it is to her advisors who work in that industry - another PR project). You will lack an understanding and neurotypical grasp of mass psychology, which is instrumental in every conceivable kind of public relations project.

In that respect, it's kind of the wrong message for Asperger empowerment. You cannot normally do this on your own, as a sperg.
>> No. 428711 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 7:33 pm
428711 spacer
I think the point is, all that PR and backing somewhat cheapens the message. In the most cynical of ways, she's just being used as a public face, she's gone viral and everyone swallowed it hook line and sinker.

I mean I can't dispute that environmentalism is a good cause, but this whole thing... It's all so corporate and disingenuous. These are the same tactics behind shit like the Gillette controversy baiting. The people behind this aren't doing it because they believe they need to save the environment, they're doing it, predictably, to make money.
>> No. 428712 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 7:40 pm
428712 spacer
>>428711

But if what you're "selling" is the message that we need to act now to prevent catastrophic climate change, I can forgive the marketing. Seems important.
>> No. 428713 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 8:02 pm
428713 spacer
So...she's 16?

Right?
>> No. 428714 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 9:22 pm
428714 spacer
>>428711
>The people behind this aren't doing it because they believe they need to save the environment, they're doing it, predictably, to make money.
Citation needed
>> No. 428716 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 11:19 pm
428716 spacer

download.jpg
428716428716428716
>>428711 

In the end, it has been a success though. 

I don't think it's disingenuous at all to have enlisted PR experts who may also have major corporations as their clients, running PR for anything from petrol to cigarettes. 

The goal was to get the message across, and in the best way possible and with the biggest possible impact. So why not turn to people who do just that for a living. And they have succeeded at turning a nerdy child-faced teenager who's slightly special into a global environmental poster child.
>> No. 428717 Anonymous
11th July 2019
Thursday 11:46 pm
428717 spacer
>>428712
You don't want to sell the message though, you want people to take action. Everyone's got the message, they're just not doing anything with it. Even climate change deniers are aware the message has gotten out there.

>>428714
You're not going to find a citation. When people do things disingenuously, 90% of the time they're also being disingenuous to themselves. Very few people wake up in the morning thinking "Today I'm going to be a lying shit." Most people think "Oh hey, I can save the environment and make myself better off", or even just "I'm saving the environment" without any realisation that it also just so happens to bring them personal benefits (even if that benefit is feeling good about saving the environment) or - more importantly - that none of them are actually saving the environment because the effectiveness of their actions is dubious.

I'm not saying give up, mind you. Just that people really need to evaluate the effectiveness of their actions and take more effective actions.
>> No. 428736 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 1:13 am
428736 spacer

large.jpg
428736428736428736
>>428716
I did not expect Mrs Lindgren's work referenced here, but I can see where you draw the similarities from.
>> No. 428738 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 7:56 am
428738 spacer

pippi1.jpg
428738428738428738

>> No. 428740 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 11:53 am
428740 spacer

pli03468.jpg
428740428740428740
>>428736

Greta Thunberg looks like a mix between an Astrid Lindgren children's novel character and Aryan poster children.

Also, maybe planting trees is the answer to global warming:

https://www.google.de/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/09/planting-trees-planet-people-nature-climate-crisis-communities


I remenber being told in an ecology lecture at uni that it's assumed that part of the reason for the Little Ice Age from the 15th to 19th century was that after the Plague, when half of Europe's population perished, vast areas of land fell into disuse and forests were starting to grow again on it.

So we weither need to plant trillions of trees, or have another population cull which will produce that side effect naturally. A fully grown large tree can absorb up to 50 pounds of carbon a year and one ton in 40 years, and produce around 25 cubic feet of pure oxygen in a single day.
>> No. 428741 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 12:08 pm
428741 spacer
>>428740
Planting a lot of trees is nice but it's not going to be much help if we continue focusing on polluting "growth". It'll just slow the degradation a little.
>> No. 428742 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 12:14 pm
428742 spacer
>>428740
Will you shut the fuck about "population culls", you tiny dicked cretin. No one's committing genocide to stop climate change, so you can cease talking about it and shut the fuck up, you odious creep. And Thunberg is not "like Aryan poster children", just because she's a kid what a did a smile, and if you're about to draw any parallels between climate activism and Nazism you're probably thick enough to get a job as one of our nation's many right-wing outrage merchant columnists so I'd prefer you did that instead so your half-baked opinions don't appear on any website I care about.
>> No. 428743 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 12:32 pm
428743 spacer
>>428742
God m8, go outside and get some fresh air
>> No. 428744 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 12:32 pm
428744 spacer
>>428742
God m8, go outside and get some fresh air
>> No. 428745 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 12:39 pm
428745 spacer

575.jpg
428745428745428745
>>428743
Can't, it's too hot.
>> No. 428747 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 12:42 pm
428747 spacer
>>428745
Glass of cold tap water and a wank then.
t. Dogtor
>> No. 428749 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 1:27 pm
428749 spacer
>>428744>>428745>>428747
I've been outside plenty today. If anything I said was innaccurate then feel free. Maybe you should go outside, then just stay out there until you die of exposure.
>> No. 428752 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 1:44 pm
428752 spacer
>>428742

The idea that human overpopulation is an issue for our environmental impact isn't new or even particularly controversial. We are all just propelled by biological impulse to ignore it.

It's really the fundamental cause of the problem, but much like successive governments trying to sort the budget deficit, instead of addressing it directly we're pissing about at the edge telling people to eat less meat and fly less.

Let me ask you. Which one of us is a fascist when you're the one who believes human life is somehow inherently more valuable than any other creature on this planet?
>> No. 428753 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 2:00 pm
428753 spacer
>>428745

I like that comic. It hits the perfect notes.
>> No. 428754 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 2:00 pm
428754 spacer
>>428752
I never called you a fascist, I called you a tiny dicked cretin.
>> No. 428757 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 2:52 pm
428757 spacer
>>428754

> I called you a tiny dicked cretin.

No, you called me a tiny dicked cretin. I am >>428740 lad.

Also, fuckssake, get some perspective. All I did was post a picture of who I thought Greta Thunberg reminded me of. I wasn't trying to go all Godwin's Law here.

I was not trying to insinuate in any way that the newest environmentalist movement is in any way, shape, or form akin to fascism.

Also, if we understand humans as part of the global ecosystem and as just another species that has an impact on its environment, then clearly it's a valid statement to say that overpopulation is one of our main problems and that the Earth could do with fewer humans, at least if we continue our present-day lifestyle.

If it hadn't been for the Plague wiping out more than half of all Europeans, who back then constituted the relative majority of the Earth's population, then we likely would have encountered today's problems about a century sooner.

In the wild, species populations fluctuate naturally, and sometimes they collapse, usually after outsize population growth within a short amount of time. Nature has a way of always restoring equilibrium. It's us that refuse to play by nature's rules, but eventually we can't escape that basic principle either, try as we will. For our current lifestyle to be long-term sustainable, the Earth's ecosystem would only tolerate about a total population of two billion people, which is about what we had in the early 1900s if I'm not mistaken.

No use getting all red in the face, it's either going to be a radical change of lifestyle of our species, or go on like this and face near-extinction in the future, not just from environmental disasters, droughts, soil erosion and famine, but also because of the obvious elephant in the room of ever more war and possible nuclear holocaust in an ever-fiercer competition for resources and political spheres of influence.

The good news is that even all our nukes combined probably wouldn't destroy life on Earth itself, as previous natural disasters like the Chixculub impact have shown, from which nature recuperated with a vengeance after a few million years. Our civilisation would probably very nearly vanish after a global thermonuclear war, some estimates put the number of long-term survivors worldwide at no more than 100 million. But five million years on, which really isn't much in terms of the Earth's history, the Earth's ecosystems would probably be good as new, as if the 20th and 21st century of human overpopulation never happened.

I'm not being a cynic here. Just pointing out the implications of what are well-understood principles of species population dynamics in biology.
>> No. 428760 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 4:44 pm
428760 spacer
>>428740
>Plant trees

Nice try, big-Triffid. Photosynthesising life is booming at the moment with all the carbon and warmer temperatures rising efficiency. It'll hit a tipping point natch.

>>428741
>focusing on polluting "growth"

I hate this terminology and its Neo-Luddite connotations. The growth-pollution correlation is created when pressures force the rapid development of dirty (or poorly regulated) industry but which are themselves alleviated with growth. Classic example is China prioritising short-term job creation and wealth generation, even for marginal gain, as an essential component of regime stability but which is now being reversed in the East as the trinket and waste-dumping model is not conductive toward either outcome.

In our neck of the woods the supposed focus on growth that makes London air so poor is in actuality a symptom of piss-poor administration both locally and nationally (in lop-sided development towards the capital). This problem can be resolved by growth both in economic and technological development which is harmed by everyone having asthma etc.

>>428752
>>428757
>In the wild, species populations fluctuate naturally, and sometimes they collapse, usually after outsize population growth within a short amount of time. Nature has a way of always restoring equilibrium.

You're looking at it all backwards. Humanity has never been in equilibrium with nature and nor has anything else (elephants, bees, cyanobacteria) because "Nature" is a complex and highly chaotic web of relationships when seen from an appropriate scale. It doesn't have an equilibrium and the whole idea of one is inherently nonsense while living in a universe without thermal equilibrium.

We passed the point where population culls would solve carrying capacity long before we adopted agriculture (the biggest flaw of Unabomber thought) and truly began to radically shape our environment. Have a look at your own pop-science evidence again and ask yourself whether your solution creates equilibrium.
>> No. 428768 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 8:20 pm
428768 spacer
>>428760

>You're looking at it all backwards. Humanity has never been in equilibrium with nature

That's because humanity is on a much larger and longer trajectory than fox and rabbit populations in the Tundra somewhere. We have found a way as a species to largely disconnect ourselves from these axiomatic cycles and exist outside of them, but you could say that despite our intellectual prowess as a species, we cannot evade a kind of super cycle that we are on. Our global population may not oscillate considerably within the space of a few years, but the Plague wasn't the first disaster in history that decimated humans. Our population oscillations just happen to occur on much larger time scales.

It is estimated that somewhere around the tail end of the last Ice Age, due to prolonged cold waves in the Fertile Crescent, modern homo sapiens, not counting sub-Saharan African populations, was reduced by famine to about 20,000 individuals and was facing extinction. Which is also one reason why there is such enormous genetic uniformity in the gene pool of non-African humans. It's been said that there is more genetic spread between most breeds of dog than there is between ethnicities like Mideastern and Northern European.

And then of course the Plague that wiped out half of Europe.

So my argument stands that given enough time, nature always snaps back into equilibrium. It does so with foxes and rabbits, and it certainly affects us humans just the same way.
>> No. 428769 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 8:27 pm
428769 spacer
>>428767

>when she has an organism

Oh lad.

You remind me of my sexually repressed biology teacher in school who still lived with his mum at about age 35. One time, he began a year 11 practical lesson of microscopy with the words, "We're all going to see plenty of organisms today. Every single one of you will experience an organism that's going to make you feel like you've accomplished something today".

I think what he gave us to have a look at were pond water microorganisms. I think he had a jar with murky looking pond water that he said he had collected right that morning on the way to school.

Anyway, rumour had it that he was a lifelong virgin. None of the other teachers ever remembered seeing him with a woman other than his mother.
>> No. 428772 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 10:17 pm
428772 spacer

Annual-World-Population-since-10-thousand-BCE-for-.png
428772428772428772
>>428768
Come off it, Malthus. Your argument is now falling into a "because it happened then it will happen now" completely ignoring how we as a species have secured our dominance and been able to flourish through drought, disease (itself a condition of our success) and several climate events.

If there is to be some event in our future that will fuck us over royally it would have to be completely unprecedented and our remains would allow survivors, even if it's the sentient Octopus people, to quickly bounce back. There is no cyclical apocalypse at work and to claim one is coming reeks of Gaia nonsense.

>It does so with foxes and rabbits

No it doesn't. They do not live in a vacuum and their populations do not have an equilibrium over a grand-scale which is in constant flux due to environmental pressures and simple evolution. We are as much a part of this chaotic process as anything else and we like to delineate wild from our own through our very attempts at imposing order on the world.

What you've done is take a basic concept of predator-prey relations and assumed that if a rabbit developed some OP survival strategy it wouldn't eat you and everyone you've ever cared about. It would and its distant ancestors once crawled out a took over the world once the planet became inhospitable to dinosaurs.
>> No. 428774 Anonymous
13th July 2019
Saturday 11:52 pm
428774 spacer
>>428772

> completely ignoring how we as a species have secured our dominance and been able to flourish through drought, disease (itself a condition of our success) and several climate events.


No, not ignoring it.

Again, my argument was that human population fluctuations happen on much greater timescales than those of foxes and rabbits. But ultimately, as I have pointed out talking about the Pleistocene near-extinction and the Great Plague, our population fluctuates as well as a result of environmental conditions. We are not above nature. We may have stretched the limits, and continue to do so, of what are survivable habitats for us. But if you really look at it long-term, the Earth will not be able to sustain an infinite population. Eventually, a population crash is bound to occur for a variety of possible reasons.

Your fallacy is that you view the curve from the current point. Naturally, 200 million people less in the world, as after the Plague, wouldn't be a big dent in the global population. But back then, it was a sizeable chunk.

It's really a bit like the Bitcoin chart. People who lost a lot of money in 2018 often don't realise that such catastrophic downturns have happened before, on a much lower level, but with similar percentages.
>> No. 428775 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 1:52 am
428775 spacer
>>428760

>Nice try, big-Triffid. Photosynthesising life is booming at the moment with all the carbon and warmer temperatures

Big Tree probably doesn't want you to know that.
>> No. 428776 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 2:27 am
428776 spacer
>>428775
>Big Tree probably doesn't want you to know that.
I've got an axe and a box of matches, let it come at me.
>> No. 428777 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 9:36 am
428777 spacer

221177-509x339-Negative-effects-of-Deforestation.jpg
428777428777428777
So, quite honestly, I do buy the idea that there are too many people and we need less. Somebody predicted earlier that we can sustainably support up to 18 million people if we all go vegan and bike to work etc, and that's fair enough.

But that STILL has an impact on biodiversity and the natural environments of animals, surely. That's my problem with it all. I'm one of those big animal lover pools, and it seems to me that people are looking at this all purely in terms of CO2 and essentially human selves preservation.

Even if we do everything we can to live sustainably like these people want, we're still going to be hacking down rainforest by the kilometres every day, we're going to be transforming green land into housing developments, we're going to simply suffocate the spaces animals need to live. Animals don't have agriculture or efficiency. They need miles and miles of trees and fields.

Fuck humans to be honest. We're just being entirely selfish about it, the only reason people are starting to care now is because it's starting to become a realistic possibility that their house ends up underwater.
>> No. 428779 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 7:13 pm
428779 spacer
>>428777

Sustainability would mean that the Earth can sustain whatever lifestyle we lead as a global civilisation without suffering irreparable harm.

For example, if you look at fisheries (no, really, actual fisheries, not a word filter this time), there is such a thing as an annual amount of fish that you can take from the oceans each year without fish populations being pushed to a status of being at-risk or endangered. And you can cut down a certain amount of trees that will not affect the Earth's ecology very seriously.

So sustainability means that you only take and use natural resources to such an extent that they can recover on their own from you decimating them.

I happen to be Grancanarialad, and I keep up on local events there. The Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture of the Canaries just a few years ago issued a report that since the 1970s, commercially important fish species have declined by around 80 percent. For many years, the Canaries were famed for their sheer abundance of marine wildlife, but having done a bit of snorkelling there the last few years, I honestly have to say I saw fewer fish than in some places in the equally overfished Mediterranean.

This is not the fault of local Canarian artisan fishermen. They were able to live off their trade for centuries before the mid- to late 20th century. The number of commercially licenced fishermen has even decreased in the past few decades. But it is the fault of industrial, large-scale fishing vessels off the whole Northwest African coast.

Our techniques of industrial agriculture and fishing is the problem in this respect. But as these fishing vessels don't go out there for giggles but to feed an actual demand of fish for food, it means that we would either have to change our eating habits and eat fish only occasionally, or we would have to switch to whole other food sources. With their own ecologically unsustainable impacts.

It's really swings and roundabouts. What we do need is fewer people on the planet, consuming fewer resources.
>> No. 428781 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 10:56 pm
428781 spacer
>>428777
If we start killing people, the only people left are going to be the ones already causing the most problems.The ones already dying are the ones who contributed the least to the problem.
>> No. 428782 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 11:32 pm
428782 spacer
>>428781

You can't have your cake and eat it too, you know.

Either the Earth stays overpopulated as it is now, or we'll have a cull that leaves all the cunts in the global North in charge. As if they aren't in charge already.

Also though, a lot of the overpopulation nowadays is in the poorer regions of Southeast Asia. Those people may not all drive an SUV and fly to Majorca twice a year, more often than not, they live in corrugated iron huts in squalid conditions and barely have a carbon footprint at all. But on the other hand, their faeces and other waste pollute the environment even worse than in Birmingham. We in Britain afford ourselves the luxury of wastewater treatment before it's allowed to enter our rivers and ultimately the sea. People down in Southeast Asia, for want of a better word, pretty much shit and piss directly into their rivers and the ocean. And if you've got 164 million Bangladeshis pissing and shitting in the ocean every day, it's bound to have a bigger environmental effect than 67 million people in the UK having a bowel movement whose wastewater gets treated.

So in essence, in the greater scheme of things, the problem isn't whether you're a Global North rich cunt or a piss poor Bangladeshi who barely owns clothes on his back. There are simply too many of us any way you slice it.
>> No. 428783 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 11:56 pm
428783 spacer
>>428782

The earth is not overpopulated. I don't know how many times I can say this, but the planet can sustainably support about 18 billion people with our current level of technology if we do a few sensible things to curb our most wasteful activities. The global birth rate is now in decline and the maximum global population is forecast to be around 12 billion, so we've got about 50% spare capacity.

If you think that culling the darkies is OK as long as you get to keep having cheap package holidays, then at least be honest about it. The idea of "overpopulation" when we're well below carrying capacity really just translates to "my right to be wasteful is more important than someone else's right to exist".
>> No. 428784 Anonymous
14th July 2019
Sunday 11:57 pm
428784 spacer
>>428782
>Either the Earth stays overpopulated as it is now, or we'll have a cull that leaves all the cunts in the global North in charge.
Bloody Northerners.
>> No. 428785 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:07 am
428785 spacer
>>428784
It's about time someone had a go at the North.
>> No. 428786 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:14 am
428786 spacer
>>428782
>You can't have your cake and eat it too, you know.
>Either the Earth stays overpopulated as it is now, or we'll have a cull that leaves all the cunts in the global North in charge.
Yeah or maybe something other than eugenics and genocide might be an answer to the problem.
>> No. 428787 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:38 am
428787 spacer
>>428784

The Global North isn't necessarily the same as Morpeth.
>> No. 428788 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:45 am
428788 spacer
Has anyone considered the impact of leap years? I mean, the concept of a leap year has largely been unchanged since it was calculated by Hipparchus c. 127 BC.

How do we know that's accurate? If the number of days in a year isn't aligned with how long it takes the Earth to orbit the Sun then it would throw everything out of kilter. Have we ever left a marker and then seen if the Earth passes it again exactly one year later?
>> No. 428789 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 1:02 am
428789 spacer
>>428788

Generally, the Earth's rotation has very little to do with how long it takes to revolve around the Sun. It's coincidence that at present, one revolution takes about 365 and a quarter Earth days so that the Earth will be in the same position relative to the Sun again. At the beginning of the Mesozoic, one Earth day was only 21 hours long, meaning one year had about 417 days.
>> No. 428790 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 1:05 am
428790 spacer
>>428788
Given that climate change effects are happening significantly faster than we expected, it's probably not really helpful.
>> No. 428791 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 2:10 am
428791 spacer
>>428788

The leap year is off by 3 days every 400 years, to correct it only 1 in every 4 years that ends in '00' is a leap year, the year 2000 was the 1 in 4 that was.
>> No. 428792 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 2:35 am
428792 spacer
>>428791
Drop the leap days in 3200 and 6400 and we should be within a day of the "correct" date all the way until we hit five digits.
>> No. 428793 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 2:38 am
428793 spacer
>>428788
>Have we ever left a marker and then seen if the Earth passes it again exactly one year later?
The Earth's orbit around the Sun is a little wobbly, and then the Sun itself is kind of-sorta orbiting the galaxy's centre of gravity. It's difficult to figure out exactly what constitutes being in the same place.
>> No. 428794 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 2:55 am
428794 spacer
>>428793
To piggyback on this, if anyone's wondering how we actually know that we've actually gone round the sun, we can look at distant astronomical objects for reference since the sun itself has no landmarks.
>> No. 428797 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 3:05 am
428797 spacer
>>428793
>>428794

The easiest way to track one year is to track sunrises precisely. The sun will always rise in the same place as on the same date the year before. Although long-term celestial mechanics really make it much less straightforward than that. 

Even the old Egyptians had somewhat of a grasp on that concept, and aligned their pyramids and temples accordingly, although of course they had much less of an idea about what those objects in the sky really were.
>> No. 428801 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 10:03 am
428801 spacer

IMG-20190715-WA0002.jpg
428801428801428801
Mushroom.
>> No. 428802 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 10:31 am
428802 spacer
>>428801
I'd say that's a boat rather than a mushroom.
>> No. 428803 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 10:38 am
428803 spacer
>>428783

Are you just thick or intentionally ignorant?

I specifically asked you. How do you think those 18 billion people are going to "sustainably" support themselves? Feeding that number of people means we're going to have to farm every available acre of land. That means we're going to have an unimaginably vast impact on the spaces animal populations need to survive, more than we are now.

We might not be eating animals in your fantasy utopia of 18 billion vegans but what does that matter when half the planet is megacities and the other half is industrial soy farming. There will be no animals left either way.
>> No. 428805 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 11:21 am
428805 spacer
>>428803
Not if we engineer our food from nano-fungi grown in skyscraper labs. God you're thick.
>> No. 428806 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 11:28 am
428806 spacer
>>428805

I personally prefer eating steak.

The day they will tell me I can no longer have a steak will be the day that I will gladly make room for all the smug vegan cunts. Because life itself will no longer be worth living.
>> No. 428807 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:03 pm
428807 spacer
The adoration of steak is emblematic of this nation's love affair with underseasoned, overcooked, bland, shite. And before any bastard goes on about how "I like it done rare, thank you very much, so it isn't overcooked at all", that's just the decayed remains of your good taste trying to break through your fat head and extract an iota of flavour from the experience.
>> No. 428808 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:11 pm
428808 spacer
>>428802
Tomato tomato.
>> No. 428809 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 12:37 pm
428809 spacer

download-jpeg.jpg
428809428809428809
>>428807

>The adoration of steak is emblematic of this nation's love affair with underseasoned, overcooked, bland, shite. 

That's probably enough for now, Gordon.


> like it done rare

I'll bet some do.
>> No. 428810 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 1:06 pm
428810 spacer
>>428809
You prefer it red and raw no doubt
>> No. 428811 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 1:12 pm
428811 spacer
>>428810
Just like your mother's minge when I'm finished with it.
>> No. 428812 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 1:28 pm
428812 spacer
>>428811
Cool.

We were on the front page of the BBC website twice, earlier. "Mushrooms" in London, Bristol, Glasgow, Cardiff, Leeds and... a fifth city I forget which.
>> No. 428813 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 2:20 pm
428813 spacer
>>428812
>We
>> No. 428815 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 3:51 pm
428815 spacer
>>428807

You realise most people season their meat, don't you?

Even well done steak has a distinctive taste, it's just the texture that's awful.
>> No. 428816 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 4:02 pm
428816 spacer
>>428813
Yes, we.
>> No. 428817 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 4:22 pm
428817 spacer
>>428816
.gs?
>> No. 428818 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 4:25 pm
428818 spacer

long-term-cereal-yields-in-the-united-kingdom.png
428818428818428818
>>428803

>Feeding that number of people means we're going to have to farm every available acre of land.

Nope. We make enough food for 14 billion people right now, we just waste a large proportion of it. To cope with 18 billion people, we only need to increase our useable agricultural output by 28%, most of which can be achieved through improving efficiencies on farms in the developing world - there are hundreds of millions of hectares of arable land that are poorly managed using low-tech methods with commensurately lower yields. In 1900, a hectare of British arable land yielded about two tonnes of wheat; today it yields more than eight tonnes. Over the same period, maize yields in the US increased from less than 2t/ha to more than 12t/ha. That trend of increasing efficiency hasn't ended or even stalled; we're not sure what the limit is (especially if we really open the taps on genetic engineering), but we're fairly confident that we can still deliver double-digit percentage increases in yields even on the most efficiently farmed land.

We currently use about 50% of the earth's habitable land for agriculture, of which 73% is used for cattle grazing. The vast majority of that grazing land is improvable to arable land; by reducing our meat consumption, we could feed 18 billion people and increase the amount of wild land.

It's also worth noting that we don't need vast areas of land to maintain biodiversity, we just need well-managed land. Vast areas of South America have been turned into monocultures by intensive cattle grazing operations; they could produce more beef and have more rainforest by transitioning to more efficient feedlot operations.

https://ourworldindata.org/yields-and-land-use-in-agriculture
>> No. 428823 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 5:07 pm
428823 spacer
>>428817
I said we, not you.
>> No. 428824 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 5:22 pm
428824 spacer
>>428823
The royal we?
>> No. 428829 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 6:37 pm
428829 spacer
Yeee.
>> No. 428831 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 6:44 pm
428831 spacer

Dfl3LIsW0AImJZF.jpg
428831428831428831
>>428823
>>428824

Are you buggering this up, lad?
>> No. 428832 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 6:45 pm
428832 spacer
>>428831

Who's on first?
>> No. 428841 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 7:20 pm
428841 spacer
>>428812
I don't know, m7. Wrong time of year for mushrooms, those definitely look like boats to me.
>> No. 428842 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 7:32 pm
428842 spacer
>>428841
Took one of those boats once, great trip.
>> No. 428849 Anonymous
15th July 2019
Monday 11:51 pm
428849 spacer
>>428818

Thats all well and good, but why not do both? We can be more efficient AND have less people, then it's twice as better for the animals, and global warming will be a distant memory.
>> No. 428850 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 12:00 am
428850 spacer
>>428849

200 million global population in a technological hunter-gatherer culture, is basically perfect.
>> No. 428851 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 12:14 am
428851 spacer
Oh, good, the paleo-pillocks are here.
>> No. 428853 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 3:47 am
428853 spacer
>>428849

How do you propose that we reduce the population? The global birth rate is already at replacement; the only reason the population continues to grow is because of increasing life expectancies. We're already facing serious demographic problems because of the increasing proportion of the population that is elderly; any further reduction would push us towards a crisis.

If you're serious about reducing our resource use by reducing the population, there's only one sane answer - kill all the white people. The average white person uses the same amount of natural resources as eight brown-eyed people. Are you volunteering for The Quietus?
>> No. 428854 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 4:29 am
428854 spacer
>>428853
Not him, but I can think of 17 million people here and 60 million in the US that would make a good start.
>> No. 428855 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 7:09 am
428855 spacer
>>428854
I suppose the country would be a better place if you got rid of the whining Remainiacs and we were just left with the pragmatic people with a 'can do' attitude who actually get on with things.
>> No. 428856 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 8:20 am
428856 spacer
>>428855
Yes, that would be utopia. Jimmy would lead us (well, you, I'd be first against the wall) into a glorious future. Sorting it out as he goes along is his strong point. Certainly not repeatedly running away when things get tricky.

YBBTL
>> No. 428857 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 8:43 am
428857 spacer
>>428853

The entire population of Europe barely reaches 1bn. North America is about half that. The majority of the planet is either Indian or Chinese, to the extent that everyone else is a rounding error.

https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2.html

So yes it's mostly going to involve sterilising brown-eyed people, because they're the fucking problem. They might use less CO2 per capita but that's vastly outweighed by how fucking many of the cunts there are. As for the Yanks, nobody is surprised about them- But nobody will miss them after the culling, will they.

I don't see why you're making this about race, though. It really has nothing to do with it. It's about the environment; you're just one of those wierdo self-flagellating neo-lefties who wants any excuse to paint whitey as evil.
>> No. 428858 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 8:47 am
428858 spacer
>>428857

Perhaps address my first paragraph rather than going off on a teary about what you presume my politics are?
>> No. 428859 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 9:48 am
428859 spacer
>>428853 We're already facing serious demographic problems because of the increasing proportion of the population that is elderly; any further reduction would push us towards a crisis.

On one hand - crisis because jobs are being automated away.
On t'other hand - crisis because lack of young people to do jobs.
Two crises, or somewhat less?
(invest in arse-wiping-bot technology, since I can't imagine that all kids will want a career in the elderly maintenance field? That, or Dignitas-brand low-visit care homes.)
>> No. 428860 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:09 am
428860 spacer
>>428858

Well naturally part of the cull would be old people wouldn't it.

The demographic crisis is already a reason to control birthrates- And we need to rebalance the economy considerably to handle an aging population. You can't for even a minute suggest that just keeping on having an ever increasing population is a good solution for a problem like that, because it self evidently can't continue forever.
>> No. 428861 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:31 am
428861 spacer
Have you lads heard of the Renaissance? If you culled the global population then all that would happen is you'd concentrate the wealth in the survivors. You'd end up with people who are now in the third world becoming the global elite, spending their money on expensive flights, cars and massively increasing their carbon footprints.

Fucking hell, lads. Think it through and stop being such authoritarian climate fascists.
>> No. 428862 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:32 am
428862 spacer
>>428860

For fuck's sake mate. The population is not ever-increasing. The global birth rate is already at replacement. The population will temporarily continue to grow until about 2100 due to the longer life expectancies of people who have already been born, at which point it will start to naturally decline. Population growth self-evidently isn't continuing forever. We do not need mass sterilisation or a cull to achieve a sustainable level of population, because the global population is already sustainable.

You're not talking about the environment, you're talking about your own imagination. You're proposing a barbaric and unworkable solution to a problem that doesn't exist. For all the sense you're making, you might as well be speaking an invented language consisting only of vowels.

https://population.un.org/wpp/Publications/
>> No. 428863 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:36 am
428863 spacer
>>428862

No, I'd just like less smelly Indians and Chinks. And Yanks. And Brazilians. And French.

I'd like less people. I don't hold people in high esteem. I might be a barbaric Malthusian but you are naive and overly optimistic about the future of human progress. It simply won't pan out the way you're hoping it will.
>> No. 428864 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:43 am
428864 spacer
>>428863

Fewer.
>> No. 428865 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:58 am
428865 spacer
>>428863
If you find humanity so wanting, feel free to think of an alternative.
>> No. 428866 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 10:59 am
428866 spacer
>>428864
No. He wants them to be shorter. Shortarses need smaller clothes and tinier bellies so need fewer resources.
>> No. 428867 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 11:11 am
428867 spacer
>>428866
You jest, but when we start getting off this planet, us shortarses will pay less for the ride.
>> No. 428868 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 11:29 am
428868 spacer
>>428867
On RyanSpace, maybe.
>> No. 428869 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 11:32 am
428869 spacer
>>428867

Not true, airlines use a notional average weight for passengers (usually around 85kg for a bloke, 70kg for a woman and 32kg for a child, in case you wondered) and I can't see any space operations needing to change that system, if anything weight and balance matters much less on a rocket than a jet.

Unless airlines start weighing everyone at check in, then you might be right. It could happen.
>> No. 428870 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 11:52 am
428870 spacer
>>428869 Fatties / biggies take more of everything, and until resources are as cheap in space as they are down here, taking twice the oxygen, water, sewage, even if everything's mostly recycled, is going to have a cost. As soon as prices stop being set to rinse a few million out of the rich, I do expect there to be differentials.
If we get spaceable fusion plants before we get price pressure on spaceflight, it might not matter.
Even using Falcon9 pricing, it's $2700 per kg to get stuff to the ISS, and that's a short trip. It'll come down, sure, but an extra 50kg is likely to show up on your ticket price for a while yet.
>> No. 428871 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 11:54 am
428871 spacer
>>428869 if anything weight and balance matters much less on a rocket than a jet.

Yeah, Rocketry's known for its indifference to weight. China's space station was completely untroubled by the squidgy masses moving about within it.

wat?
>> No. 428875 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 1:16 pm
428875 spacer
>>428871
We put a lump on the Moon at the first time of asking. The main reason Buzz was second out was that he kept breaking the test rig every time they rehearsed it with him first.

>China's space station was completely untroubled by the squidgy masses moving about within it.
That's what you get for using cheap shit from China.
>> No. 428879 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 2:57 pm
428879 spacer
>>428865

I already have. It's called drastically reducing our population. Do keep up.
>> No. 428881 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 3:23 pm
428881 spacer
Can we just go full Logan's Run and do away with everyone over 70 or something?
>> No. 428882 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 3:29 pm
428882 spacer
>>428879
Genocide is not an alternative to humanity. I find your ignorant posturing immensely tiresome, please don't get back to me until you've moved on from it.
>> No. 428888 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 1:19 am
428888 spacer

images.jpg
428888428888428888
I was going to say let's just have a genocide lottery, but maybe a scoring system would be more useful. Nobody will miss most of the useless cunts who haven't lived an honest day in their lives and who are nothing but a deliberate drain on society.

The best and the brightest can stay, and a few right from the middle of society to keep genetic diversity, and you generally get points for such things as an education and career within your possibilities, an absence of a criminal record, and maybe a few extra points if you are involved in things like volunteer/charity work. And all the dregs from the bottom of the gene pool will get a fair warning to better themselves or they can go. It'll mean half of Birmingham gone and probably all of Nunthorpe, but that's the price you pay.
>> No. 428889 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 6:53 am
428889 spacer
>>428888
The deserving and the undeserving. How very Victorian.
>> No. 428890 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 8:28 am
428890 spacer
>>428882

It is though mate. I'm not sure why your sensibilities are so shocked here pal, it's just one way of reducing our impact on the environment. It's not the ONLY way of doing it but it's the way I'd prefer it to be done.

I never called for genocide anyway, I was only playing it up to annoy you, which clearly worked. In reality I'd prefer just a mass voluntary refusal to breed, but I'd probably go so far as a Cina-style child restriction if I was actually in charge.

Why do you want there to be so many people? Genuine question.
>> No. 428891 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 9:15 am
428891 spacer

8ubGFLt.gif
428891428891428891
>>428890

Genocide is on the one hand truly the most horrible thing that humans do to each other, but on the other hand, it has a proven track record.

Not sure it's going to fly with the Millennial generation, as a lot of them become apoplectic at the mere mention of the word.
>> No. 428892 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 12:22 pm
428892 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owI7DOeO_yg
>> No. 428903 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 8:55 pm
428903 spacer
If climate change means that we're going to be caught out by rising sea levels why don't we waste as much water as possible? I'm happy to do my part by leaving the taps running and constantly flushing the toilet. That'll teach the oceans who's boss.
>> No. 428906 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 9:45 pm
428906 spacer
>>428903
Yes lad, you've cracked it.
>> No. 428907 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 10:09 pm
428907 spacer
>>428903
You should hook up a hose pipe to one of the taps and leave that running. I think they use more water than the tap alone because they're the first thing to get banned in drought.
>> No. 428908 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 10:25 pm
428908 spacer
>>428903

That's a bit like when I try to explain to my mum the concept that the Earth doesn't get heavier because we've got about double the global population now compared to when she was born. Or that it also doesn't get heavier because of all the skyscrapers and cargo ships we build.
>> No. 428910 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 10:54 pm
428910 spacer
>>428908
We're actually losing mass due to light elements escaping, and the core using fuel.

As I recall, it's in the 10^-10% range per year, though.
>> No. 428911 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 11:25 pm
428911 spacer
>>428910

You'd also have to consider all the dust that deposits on the Earth from space though.

https://www.universetoday.com/94392/getting-a-handle-on-how-much-cosmic-dust-hits-earth/

Estimates vary wildly, but in terms of sheer weight of the Earth, it seems to be kind of a swings and roundabouts thing.

We're lucky we've got such a strong magnetic field around our planet, as it is believed that Mars lost its primordial atmosphere when its core cooled down and solidified, shutting down the magnetic field, which led to the solar wind being able to carry most lighter gases like oxygen and hydrogen off into space. Today, Mars has a super thin atmosphere of almost pure carbon dioxide.

The lack of an Earthlike magnetic field around Mars also limits the possibilities of terraforming on Mars like at the end of the original Total Recall movie. Over time, most of the oxygen and water vapour you will produce will always get carried off again.
>> No. 428915 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 12:38 am
428915 spacer
>>428911

That's why you drill down the core, then drop a thousand thermonuclear bombs on it. Just like a jumper cable on a car engine, it should get the core active again.
>> No. 428916 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 12:48 am
428916 spacer
BBC documentary on XR from last night.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p07fvjfs/extinction-rebellion-last-chance-to-save-the-world
Seems fairly for the whole thing with all of the usual reservations.
>> No. 428921 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 7:00 am
428921 spacer
>>428908
>the concept that the Earth doesn't get heavier because we've got about double the global population now compared to when she was born. Or that it also doesn't get heavier because of all the skyscrapers and cargo ships we build.

Are you sure? Isn't there some form of synergy involved whereby structures are heavier than their constituent parts? Also, what about fat people?
>> No. 428922 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 8:47 am
428922 spacer
>>428921

Conservation of mass, innit. We don't create mass when we grow (or get fat) we just move it from food to our bodies.
>> No. 428929 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 3:45 pm
428929 spacer
>>428922

How does the energy we receive from the Sun factor into that?

Mass and energy are essentially the same thing, aren't they? So the photons we get from the Sun should somehow affect the mass of a plant that grows using the light energy it receives from the Sun and therefore from space.

I know that photons by definition have no mass, but somehow, aren't they still elementary particles? They are absorbed by plant and animal life and are the basis of many metabolic processes, so that should have an effect somehow.
>> No. 428931 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 5:40 pm
428931 spacer
>>428929
In theory, true. The difference in mass is so small, however, it's essentially negligible.

For a change in mass of just 1 g, we'd need 0.001*(3E8^2) = 1E-3 * 9E16 = 9E13 or 90,000,000,000,000 J of energy to be converted to mass. Assuming an average solar radiation making it to the sea level of 1kW/m^2, over half the Earth's land surface (150,000,000 km^2 / 2 = 75E6 km^2 = 7.5E13m^2), we get a total available amount of mass in energy from the sun as (7.5E13*1E3)/9E13 = 833.3 grams/second, or 26,200 tons per year. This is, of course, assuming that literally every square inch of land is converting all of the sun's energy directly to mass at 100% efficiency. However, actual photosynthetic efficiency is in the <1% range for most plants, so let's say 262 tons/year, assuming 100% plant cover. Even with these very liberal assumptions, the amount of mass lost due to light elements escaping is in the range of 100,000 tons, making it essentially negligible.

This is some very bad science, but I'm bored and felt like doing some mental maffs.
>> No. 428934 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 10:30 pm
428934 spacer
>>428931

>an average solar radiation making it to the sea level of 1kW/m^2

That's really not the average, but the maximum that the location on Earth receives where the Sun is more or less at a perfect 90 degree angle at any given moment. The solar radiation received by a square metre everywhere else on the planet at the same time is E * sin (α), with α denoting the angle above the horizon at which the sun hits that spot. Also, the mean Solar Constant by convention is 1367 W/m², and what arrives at sea level after passing through the atmosphere is about 1025 W/m², again where the Sun is at 90 degrees.

In the south of England, for example, the maximum energy in watts per square metre that an open-air flat surface on a bright sunny day will ever receive on June 21 each year is about sin (90°+ 23°- 51°) * 1025 W/m², or 907 W/m².

So to get the global average of W/m² at any given point in time, you'd have to consider all of these things.

You'd probably also have to factor in the longer path through the atmosphere in a location like London or even the North Pole, but my trigonometry now fails me. Been a long day. But it's going to take little more than a handful of trigonometric equations.
>> No. 428935 Anonymous
18th July 2019
Thursday 10:57 pm
428935 spacer
>>428934
There must be an average figure per unit area for solar radiation. I used very ballpark values since the calculation was so hand-wavey anyway - it would require one big unbroken photosynthetic surface parallel to the ground, with no bits shadowing any other bits. It was mainly to prove that yes, while energy to mass conversion does happen, it's essentially negligible when compared to other sources.
>> No. 428940 Anonymous
19th July 2019
Friday 10:56 am
428940 spacer
>>428935

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_constant

>The Earth receives a total amount of radiation determined by its cross section (π·RE²), but as it rotates this energy is distributed across the entire surface area (4·π·RE²). Hence the average incoming solar radiation, taking into account the angle at which the rays strike and that at any one moment half the planet does not receive any solar radiation, is one-fourth the solar constant (approximately 340 W/m²). The amount reaching the Earth's surface (as insolation) is further reduced by atmospheric attenuation, which varies.
>> No. 428942 Anonymous
19th July 2019
Friday 12:51 pm
428942 spacer
>>428931
>>428934
>>428935
>>428940
If in doubt, use the standard approximation for any quantity that significantly dwarfs another - the fuckton.
>> No. 428944 Anonymous
19th July 2019
Friday 12:55 pm
428944 spacer
Bringing Bristol to a standstill so that hospital staff struggle to get to work, ambulances are delayed on emergencies and people miss the chance to say bye to dying relatives.

Extinction Rebellion really know how to get people on side.

>>428942
I believe the correct name is one metric fucktonne.
>> No. 428946 Anonymous
19th July 2019
Friday 1:22 pm
428946 spacer
>>428940
Okay, so we multiply that value (262 t) by 0.34 = 8.84t.
>> No. 429141 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 8:28 pm
429141 spacer
Pack your rice, lads.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49094575?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/clw2rl7ekd6t/uk-heatwaves&link_location=live-reporting-story

>Temperatures continue to soar around the UK as forecasters anticipate what could be the hottest day on record.

>The Met Office said the highest temperature reached so far on Wednesday was 33.7C at Cavendish in Suffolk.

>But it says southern and eastern England could see a record-breaking 39C (102.2F) on Thursday, beating the all-time high of 38.5C from 2003.

>Meanwhile, a body has been found after three people went missing in different parts of the River Thames on Tuesday.
>> No. 429142 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 8:33 pm
429142 spacer
>>429141
Why did they segue together those two stories? Are they implying the heat drove desparate people to seek refuge in the Thames?
>> No. 429143 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 8:51 pm
429143 spacer
>>429141
>Meanwhile, a body has been found after three people went missing in different parts of the River Thames on Tuesday.

I see the pusher has decided to come along to the protests.
>> No. 429144 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 9:22 pm
429144 spacer
>>429141
In 5 years time we're going to be in some serious problems.
>> No. 429145 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 10:07 pm
429145 spacer
>>429144

39 degrees in England tomorrow isn't a problem?

The Romans praised Britain for its shit weather gentle climate because it practically never got as hot in summer as it did near Rome. Many Roman soldiers liked the idea of getting posted to Britannia.
>> No. 429146 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 10:22 pm
429146 spacer
Greenpeace UK did a little attempt at blocking Boris's motorcade today. You'll probably see a piece about it in whatever paper or site you read.
It's curious how all their tweets about it are just drowning in replies from people wishing violent death on the activists.
>> No. 429147 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 10:32 pm
429147 spacer
>>429146
I don't understand this "the Chinese would shoot 'em!" mentality. Why do they care at all? Are people that sensitive about Johnson being slightly disrespected?
>> No. 429148 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 10:47 pm
429148 spacer

kanye-taylor-swift-feud.jpg
429148429148429148
>>429145
I'm not sure what your arguing with him about.

>>429147
You know full well it is a provocative act to disrupt the ritual transfer of power in a democracy. Regardless of what you think of our new PM hijacking it will outrage people.
>> No. 429149 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 10:50 pm
429149 spacer
>>429147
It's one of the go-to twitter responses to anyone who suggests we might do something about the environment here, from people who don't want to think about it.
>> No. 429150 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 10:58 pm
429150 spacer

ec2.png
429150429150429150
>>429147

I think it's just another way for some people to channel their baseline indignation at the world.
>> No. 429153 Anonymous
24th July 2019
Wednesday 11:44 pm
429153 spacer
>>429146
I often fantasise about politicians being normal decent human beings; like if Boris had said "stop the car, Her Majesty won't mind if I'm a little late, let me go and talk to these people and find out what they think is so important".
>> No. 429159 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 2:09 am
429159 spacer
>>429153

I think you're also fantasising about what a "normal decent human being" would do.

The other day a bloke nearly crashed into me because he was going too fast round a corner, and called me a knobhead. Obviously I shouted "fuck you" back at him. He proceeded to reverse round the corner and nearly hit somebody else just so he could shout "YOU WANNA SAY THAT AGAIN?!"

As bent and servile as they are, politicians actually do a pretty good job acting to a higher standard compared to the rest of society.
>> No. 429160 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 6:38 am
429160 spacer
>>429159
>politicians actually do a pretty good job acting to a higher standard compared to the rest of society.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read on here. Christ.
>> No. 429165 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 4:22 pm
429165 spacer
>>429160

Bit like saying the Nazis had standards when it came to following rules.
>> No. 429166 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 5:39 pm
429166 spacer

The_nihilist.jpg
429166429166429166
>>429165

At least it's an Ethos.

for the first time in using this site for around 10 years I was hit by the duplicate file filter, and had to (very cleverly) alter my image. I had no idea there was even a filter here.
>> No. 429168 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 6:32 pm
429168 spacer
>>429166

They were threatening castration, lad!


Ve coot off yor dshonzen
>> No. 429169 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 8:07 pm
429169 spacer

prescooooootpaaawnch.jpg
429169429169429169
>>429160
>>429165

You either misunderstood my point, or simply don't interact with the general public that much.

I'm not saying they're actually morally superior to most people. I'm saying that otherlad was too optimistic in his fantasy of anyone getting out and having a good old chat with the other group. What would have really happened is they'd just argue and call each other cunts- At least politicians have been well trained enough not to do that sort of thing.

Well. Most of them.
>> No. 429170 Anonymous
25th July 2019
Thursday 8:12 pm
429170 spacer
>>429169

>or simply don't interact with the general public that much.

Are you aware that you're on .gs right now?
>> No. 429194 Anonymous
26th July 2019
Friday 8:50 pm
429194 spacer
>Underwater glacial melting is happening up to 100 times faster than previously thought, a major study has found.
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/glacial-melting-climate-breakdown-sea-level-rise-study-a9021266.html
Welp.
I'm guessing this means the 1.5-2 C sea level rise predictions will be somewhat more and sooner than expected, especially if it accelerates with the feedback loops.
>> No. 429195 Anonymous
26th July 2019
Friday 8:54 pm
429195 spacer
>>429194
Mate they can't even forecast whether the very next day will be the hottest on record, much less twenty years from now. And as is typical of the climate lot, when the data doesn't match the prediction they just fudge it afterwards.
>> No. 429196 Anonymous
26th July 2019
Friday 8:58 pm
429196 spacer
>>429195
Previous, already terrifying models of climate change were based on the lower melt rate. I'm not sure what your point is exactly.
>> No. 429197 Anonymous
26th July 2019
Friday 11:05 pm
429197 spacer
>>429169
Well, Tony did tell John he needed to connect with voters.
>> No. 429200 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 1:53 am
429200 spacer

climate-bank-saved-57c800f35f9b5829f4375bcc.jpg
429200429200429200
>>429196

What also wasn't factored in for a long time were effects like the dissolution of methane hydrate on the seafloor as sea temperatures were going to rise. There are thought to exist gigantic deposits of the stuff at the bottom of continental shelfs in a few thousand metres of water depth. In its present form, it tends to be solid and with a consistency like water ice, due to the cold temperatures and enormous pressure at that depth, but rising deep sea temperatures could cause those deposits to melt and the methane to bubble up to the water surface and diffuse into the atmosphere.

This alone could fuel a runaway greenhouse effect, as methane is many times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2, and the melting methane hydrate would thus cause yet more methane hydrate to melt, and so on.

We're kind of really fucked at this point, just by looking at this year's and last year's improbable heatwaves. They're just a preview of what we are in for. Go on and keep riding buses and trains and cancel that holiday to New Zealand to shrink down your carbon footprint. It's commendable and everybody should do their part. I do anyway. But at this point, in the greater scheme of things, it could be too late already.
>> No. 429202 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 9:13 am
429202 spacer
>>429200
Yes, but fuck defeatism.
>> No. 429205 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 10:24 am
429205 spacer
>>429202
Cutting down on your carbon footprint is about a hundred times less defeatist than just saying "oh it's too late to change so let's just stick to business as usual."
>> No. 429206 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 10:27 am
429206 spacer
>>429205
Yes. I was agreeing with the general point.
>> No. 429209 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 11:58 am
429209 spacer

4642.jpg
429209429209429209
>>429205

It's just realism. The world isn't going to become a better place if we don't all do our part, that's a given. Nowhere in my post did I say, fuck it all, it's too late anyway.

But if you look at things like CO2 emission in conjunction with population growth, plus the fact that we have pretty much been bumbling about on the issue for 30 or 40 years against better knowledge, then it warrants the question if we're still going to be able to prevent our impending doom. If we are capable of it as a global society.

And I'm not talking about secret climate projections that Big Oil had in its drawers all along. At the very least since the global climate summit in Rio in 1992, the issue has been centre stage, and yet, CO2 emissions have risen drastically ever since, with no real sign of a worldwide decrease, despite efforts of wealthy nations like ours.
>> No. 429211 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 12:16 pm
429211 spacer
>>429209
>despite efforts of wealthy nations like ours.
Efforts like moving emission heavy industry to China while still making use of it and claiming it's no longer our fault?
>> No. 429214 Anonymous
27th July 2019
Saturday 12:43 pm
429214 spacer
>>429211

Nimbyism at its best, yes.
>> No. 429245 Anonymous
28th July 2019
Sunday 6:27 pm
429245 spacer
>>429209

>we don't all do our part

Except the people doing the damage are undoubtedly the wealthiest. Poor people save all their money for a new flat screen every ten years. They're not the ones throwing out tons of plastic crap every week and indulging the consumer capitalist market with its endless greed for new stuff.
>> No. 429247 Anonymous
28th July 2019
Sunday 7:02 pm
429247 spacer
>>429245

Wandering down my road I see freshly discarded plastic cars and houses for young kids every day so that's maybe not entirely true. Expensive alcohol doesn't come with ring pulls or in plastic bags. Rich people buy stuff already in glass bottles instead of pouring out their plastic ones into them. It is undeniably richer people who create far, far more than their fair share of emissions though.
>> No. 429250 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 1:03 am
429250 spacer
>>429247

>It is undeniably richer people who create far, far more than their fair share of emissions though.

Your demand for luxury goods usually rises with your income. From a certain level of personal wealth, you will almost inevitably buy a sports car or go to exotic locations by plane a few times a year. You will have a bigger house, maybe if you're really loaded even your own yacht or Lear jet. While some pauper in a council flat will have a carbon footprint that will almost be immeasurable by comparison.
>> No. 429253 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:25 am
429253 spacer
>>429250
Yes, but rich people tend to throw out less plastic crap. If mother takes little Fauntleroy out for a meal at The Lodge once a week and mam takes little Chesney out for a happy meal once a week, the latter pair will have more plastic crap to toss in the bin.
That doesn't take into account how much plastic there is behind the scenes in preparing the meals and plastic is a whole other arena to emissions, but without some solid data I'm not sure who really causes more plastic waste.
Arguably the CEO who picks the packaging for all these things and pushes for there to be disposable toys in kids meals is the worst offender.
>> No. 429254 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:30 am
429254 spacer
>>429253
>Yes, but rich people tend to throw out less plastic crap.

That's a LMAO from me, your analogy makes no sense either.
>> No. 429255 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:33 am
429255 spacer
>>429254
Clearly you've thought about what I said and come up with a sensible, well reasoned rebuttal to it.
>> No. 429256 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:39 am
429256 spacer
>>429255
You're not owed my time.
>> No. 429257 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:44 am
429257 spacer
>>429256
And nobody is obliged to take you seriously.
>> No. 429258 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 1:52 pm
429258 spacer
>>429257
I'd be deeply concerned if they were.
>> No. 429260 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 3:56 pm
429260 spacer
>>429253

Yes, rich people will certainly worry more about the environment, but they, too, will eat their first-class dinner on their flight to the Maldives off disposable plastic trays, and buy their water while there in plastic bottles. And pollute coral reefs with the chemicals in the sunscreen that they put on.

(my consolation about those rich cunts is always that in the first class up front, your chances of surviving a crash are the lowest inside the whole of the airplane)

Also, I wish I had a penny for all the times I saw some professional mum pull into Lidl in her Chelsea tractor and proudly sporting a Bag For Life like a fashion accessory, because, well, saving the Earth is hip, and all that.

One of the most basic assumptions of microeconomic theory in economics is that by and large, your consumption of pretty much anything and everything goes up with your income and/or personal wealth. Even for goods with are in relative terms environmentally friendly, but still add to your carbon footprint if consumed in greater quantities as allowed by your prosperity. Your demand for certain kinds of goods will go down with your increasing income (e.g. cheap processed food or cheap clothes), while demand for others will go up (gourmet food and brand-name or designer outfits), but you will still consume more, all things put together.

You will then probably have to duly weigh against that the effect of poor people not being able to afford latest-technology products like low-power consumption appliances and electronics, or newer cars with better emission standards. Also, highly processed cheap (frozen) foods which are more common among the poor will also add to their carbon footprint.

But on the whole, my personal opinion is that rich people's lifestyles and their cumulated carbon footprints have a much greater adverse effect on the environment than the millions of poor people who shop at Iceland, have an old washing machine and drive a 20-year-old Golf. For the eight or so tonnes of carbon dioxide that one return flight to the Maldives produces, you can probably run your dilapidated old Hotpoint for a decade once every day.
>> No. 429261 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 4:30 pm
429261 spacer
>>429260

Rich people might use more carbon per person, but there's exponentially more poor people.
>> No. 429262 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 4:56 pm
429262 spacer
>>429261
And poor people probably fart more.
>> No. 429263 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:01 pm
429263 spacer

DtuvmzBW0AE0jAU.jpg
429263429263429263
>>429261
>Rich people might use more carbon per person, but there's exponentially more poor people.
Not so many that their collective emissions outweigh the richest.
>> No. 429265 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:25 pm
429265 spacer
>>429263
Those poor people need to up their game.
>> No. 429266 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:32 pm
429266 spacer
>>429263

Lovely, I knew someone would turn up with a chart to prove my completely unsupported opinion eventually.

I mean it stands to reason, really, though. Your poor people might eat ready meals off plastic trays and drive a clapped out old diesel Astra. But Mr Middle Management and his wife more than likely have a petrol guzzling pretend 4x4 each. Poor families get their kids a bus pass to go to school, the well off take them in the Cayenne. Poor families might go abroad once a year to Benidorm, well off families go twice a year to the Caribbean.

Plain as daylight, rich people should be putting in more effort to reduce their carbon footprints, not trying to play the high and mighty "We've all got to do our bit!" act. Or, rather, it's true that we all have to do our bit; but rich people have a much bigger bit to do.
>> No. 429268 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:39 pm
429268 spacer
>>429266
You do understand that an average British salary is firmly in that top decile? You're talking about rich and poor Brits and therefore that world graph says nothing to advance your case.
>> No. 429269 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:44 pm
429269 spacer
>>429268

I mean it stands to reason, really, though. Your poor people might eat uncooked rice off the floor and drive a clapped out old donkey. But Mr Lower Management and his wife more than likely have an old diesel guzzling Astra. Poor families get their kids bits of rubber to use as shoes to go to school, the well off take them in buses. Poor families might take a day off once a year, well off families go once a year to Benidorm.
>> No. 429270 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:44 pm
429270 spacer
>>429268

You realise there are plenty of people in Britain who earn considerably less than the average British salary?
>> No. 429271 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:51 pm
429271 spacer
>>429269

All you're doing there though is making a sort of Luddite assertion that we should all revert to the lifestyle of pre-industrialised third world countries. It's pretty easy not to have a high carbon footprint when you don't have electricity in the first place and your national currency is phone top up cards.

I'm more than slightly suspicious the enthusiastic environmentalist middle class lot will pretty quickly rethink their position if it impacts on their need for the latest annual iPhone revision.
>> No. 429272 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 5:54 pm
429272 spacer
>>429271
I wasn't making any sort of assertion, just rewording what the other poster said to take it down a notch.
>I'm more than slightly suspicious the enthusiastic environmentalist middle class lot will pretty quickly rethink their position if it impacts on their need for the latest annual iPhone revision.
You think they'll suddenly decide fuck the climate, the children can starve and die, getting a new iPhone is more important?
>> No. 429274 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 7:03 pm
429274 spacer
>>429269

It all depends on your definition of well off.

A five-figure annual income per household, of whatever actual amount, to me doesn't constitute being well off. You may not be dowdy dolescum if you and your missus take home 80 grand a year combined, but you're also not well off. You're just about middle class. And yet, more than likely, you will take the sprogs to Tenerife once a year.
>> No. 429277 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 7:33 pm
429277 spacer
>>429271>>429272

A brand new iPhone results in about 60kg of carbon emissions, which is about the same as two kilos of beef mince, half a tank of petrol or three bags of firewood. Gadgets are a rounding error in terms of your carbon footprint.

There are fundamentally three issues we need to deal with - heating, eating and transport. Running a combi boiler for a flat produces about 1.5 tonnes of CO2 per year, up to about 3.5 tonnes for a 5 bedroom house. The average British diet produces about 3 tonnes of CO2; knock a tonne off that figure if you're vegetarian or two tonnes if you're vegan. Driving an average family hatchback for 1,000 miles produces about 200kg of CO2. A short-haul return flight produces about 400kg and a long-haul flight produces anywhere from one to two tonnes of CO2 equivalent warming.

A phone might be shiny and expensive, but it's a dinky little thing that requires minimal amounts of energy to manufacture and transport. Carbon dioxide isn't some weird ephemeral substance, it's just what happens when you burn stuff. We've efficiently disguised most of the stuff we burn - you don't see the bucketloads of fuel that you pour into your car at the petrol station, you don't see the vast quantities of gas piped into your house to run your central heating, you don't think about the fact that an aeroplane's wings are almost completely filled with fuel. If we're at all serious about abating climate change, we really need to think about all the ways that modern society is reliant on burning things.

https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/iphone/iPhone_XR_PER_sept2018.pdf

https://static.ewg.org/reports/2011/meateaters/pdf/methodology_ewg_meat_eaters_guide_to_health_and_climate_2011.pdf

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/co2-emission-fuels-d_1085.html
>> No. 429279 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 8:01 pm
429279 spacer
>>429277
So what's the solution for air travel? Clearly "don't do it" isn't even a remotely reasonable proposition. How is that lad supposed to take his regular week-long trips to Big Dog Island if he has to waste most of the week on the boat there and back?
>> No. 429280 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 8:26 pm
429280 spacer
>>429279
We just need to keep making iPhones until the batteries are good enough for solar aeroplanes.
>> No. 429281 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 8:57 pm
429281 spacer
>>429279

With current technology, the only solution is to fly a lot less. We can do sustainable heating with renewable electricity, we can make the food system mostly zero-carbon with enough investment and a vegan-ish diet, but we just don't have a satisfactory solution for zero-carbon aviation, nor do we have time to develop a solution. Mass aviation might come back in the future, but for now we need to tax the shit out of it or ration it.

We might say it's unfeasible, but the alternative is that many of our favourite holiday destinations end up underwater. We might just about be able to keep flying if we're super-extra-good about everything else, but that seems even more implausible.

The only vague glimmer of hope on the immediate horizon is atmospheric carbon capture and storage technology. We can't bank on it though, because the few pilot schemes we're running have struggled to scale up and are prohibitively expensive; we can just about suck up the carbon at a vaguely affordable price (~$200/tonne) but storage is a much harder problem.
>> No. 429282 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:42 pm
429282 spacer
>>429281
>we can just about suck up the carbon at a vaguely affordable price (~$200/tonne) but storage is a much harder problem
Got speaking to a passerby at the Waterloo camp who said his job was getting people to invest in carbon capture technology. He came back the next day, then the next. Then he marched with us up to Parliament Square. Nice bloke but it says something about how good such tech really is.
>> No. 429283 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 9:49 pm
429283 spacer
>>429281


>With current technology, the only solution is to fly a lot less.


It's going to come down to exactly this. No matter how fuel efficient today's jets are, and even if you disregard that there are plenty of airlines in second and third world countries still flying old bangers that have been in service since the 1970s, we simply fly too much. In the same way that five million cars that get 60 mpg each are still five million cars burning fossil fuel.

It's not the worst thing to happen, you know. With global warming now gaining accelerated momentum, even places like Blackpool might get 30 degrees and sunshine all summer long in the future. Our parents and grandparents certainly thought nothing of spending a two-week summer holiday in Weston, even going there by train, so why can't we do the same.

I happened to see an ad for flights to Majorca from Luton the other day from £23 one-way. That is not a good thing any way you look at it.

The only way to make flying eco friendly would be some sort of renewable energy source that can pack a similar punch as jet fuel. And while we would have the technology to build light, efficient electric jet engines, we are still decades away from batteries that have an energy to weight ratio in any way close to modern-day fossil jet fuel.
>> No. 429284 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 10:09 pm
429284 spacer
>>429281
>>429283
Right, but at the risk of repeating myself:
>Clearly "don't do it" isn't even a remotely reasonable proposition.

For city breaks, high-speed rail makes for a reasonable alternative, and with the vast majority of high-speed services relying on electric traction means that the emissions are tied to the energy mix used to power the grid. Take into account the faff at the airport and the need to turn up around three months before departure and the timing for a trip to somewhere like Paris or Berlin is something of a wash.

For longer trips, the alternative is spending days or even weeks on a ship. For most people, that simply isn't going to fly (pun not intended). For an awful lot of destinations, asking people not to fly or not to travel so frequently just isn't a reasonable or acceptable thing to ask of them.
>> No. 429285 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 10:36 pm
429285 spacer
>>429284

> For an awful lot of destinations, asking people not to fly or not to travel so frequently just isn't a reasonable or acceptable thing to ask of them.

Telling someone to run out into the street in their pyjamas the middle of the night isn't reasonable or acceptable, unless their house is on fire. We have a choice - radically reduce our consumption of fossil fuels, or permanently break the weather. Houses that currently flood once a decade will be washed into the sea. Countries that are currently blighted by drought will become uninhabitable polars. Hundreds of millions of people will become homeless; an increasing number of wars over water and arable land resources are near-inevitable. We have to get our heads around the fact that we are in the midst of a slow-motion disaster, akin in scale to the Second World War.
>> No. 429286 Anonymous
29th July 2019
Monday 10:45 pm
429286 spacer
>>429284

You're still missing the actual point. Which isn't how to get people on their five holidays a year in an eco friendly manner, but whether or not that kind of consumer behaviour should be encouraged or tolerated in the first place.

Are you really missing out if you don't go on that third trip to Ibiza during a given year? Or if you don't travel to New Zealand?

When I was a younglad, our family went on one summer holiday a year, and that was it. Usually in our trusty old 123-series Merc. And we never complained, even if we only got as far as Bordeaux and the Gironde estuary. Some years, we didn't go abroad at all, I remember my dad was out of work for a year once and we didn't have the money for anything more than a bank holiday weekend in Brighton.

It was the 1980s, mind. Before no-frills flights and £400 per person package holidays to Majorca.
>> No. 429287 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 12:26 am
429287 spacer
>>429285
>Telling someone to run out into the street in their pyjamas the middle of the night isn't reasonable or acceptable, unless their house is on fire.
Right, yet here you are, insisting that everyone run out into the street in their pyjamas in the middle of the night, every night, fire or not.
>> No. 429288 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 12:31 am
429288 spacer
>>429286
>Are you really missing out if you don't go on that third trip to Ibiza during a given year? Or if you don't travel to New Zealand?
Yes, otherwise they wouldn't happen in the first place.

Here's an exercise I'd like you to try. Go find a nice working-class family planning on where to go for the one holiday they've managed to take in two years, that they've worked hard to save for, and will provide a couple of weeks of relief from their miserable existence. Then tell them they can't have it. After all, they're in the top 10% globally, and part of the worst-offending group of all. Tell them they can't have their break from the ongoing shitshow that is life in the UK. Berate them on their 40-inch TV while you're there.

I'll have the ambulance wait outside for you.
>> No. 429289 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 12:38 am
429289 spacer
>>429287
>Right, yet here you are, insisting that everyone run out into the street in their pyjamas in the middle of the night, every night, fire or not.
There is a fire.
>> No. 429290 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:02 am
429290 spacer
>>429289
It's a pretty shitty house if it's catching fire every night, m9.
>> No. 429291 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 2:22 am
429291 spacer
>>429288

Will they be better off if most of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa up sticks and try to get into Europe? Will they be better off if the price of basic foods quadruples due to persistent crop failures? Will they be better off if China goes to war with Russia over the newly-thawed tundra in Siberia? Will they be better off if their house washes into the sea?

If you're arguing that someone else should shoulder the burden, then that's not workable - even the poor in Britain are emitting vastly more than any sustainable threshold. If you're arguing that climate change is inevitable because some people won't give up their holidays, then you'd better pack your rice.
>> No. 429292 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 3:16 am
429292 spacer
>>429291
>Will they be better off if most of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa up sticks and try to get into Europe? Will they be better off if the price of basic foods quadruples due to persistent crop failures? Will they be better off if China goes to war with Russia over the newly-thawed tundra in Siberia? Will they be better off if their house washes into the sea?
Who knows? Who cares? That's at least a decade after the holiday they're planning right now.

My argument is that "you can't have that" isn't an argument. We have what is now almost two generations that have had the rug pulled out from under them by their elders. Over the past few decades, people's life choices have been continually eroded, and the potential fruits of their labours stolen from them by people who have enjoyed the very same benefits. You propose to tell people who have put up with years and years of shit that because of the actions of others they now cannot have the occasional escape from said shit that said others have forced upon them.

Maybe someone could work on getting the rest of the P5 (plus India) to sort their shit out. We could make it a condition of these trade deals we're apparently in such a strong position to make. Conditions like when we send them things to recycle, they actually fucking recycle it. Then again, that all sounds like too much effort for those in a position to do anything about it.
>> No. 429294 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 8:53 am
429294 spacer
>>429292
>Will they be better off if their house washes into the sea?
>Who knows?
It's pretty obvious they won't.
>Who cares?
A growing number of people.
>> No. 429296 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 11:19 am
429296 spacer
>>429292

>Conditions like when we send them things to recycle, they actually fucking recycle it.

I'm pretty sure there are laws in effect already which expect those countries to recycle the waste we dump on them, no pun intended. I would guess they just don't do it because of corruption and governments not being on their toes quite the same way as your local council in the UK when you leave your wheelie bin out for too long.
>> No. 429298 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 11:35 am
429298 spacer
>>429290
It's just the one fire that hasn't been put out yet.

>>429288
>I'll have the ambulance wait outside for you.
Yes, we understand that you think people on lower incomes are too thick and violent to act in their own self-interests, but not everyone shares your Etonian classist opinions. Some of us think that they're too busy putting food on the table to find these things out themselves and that the media has been pretending it's not happening (see the BBC's reports on the heatwave featuring pictures of people enjoying themselves at the beach or in water parks). Hopefully the upcoming coordinated media campaign in the next few months will help fix this.
>> No. 429299 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 11:58 am
429299 spacer
>>429298
Mate, if you turned up at my place, told me my holiday was cancelled and shit-talked my telly, you'd be leaving in an ambulance.

>Some of us think that they're too busy putting food on the table to find these things out themselves
Typical Remoaner.
>> No. 429300 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 11:59 am
429300 spacer
>>429299
I hold out hope that not everyone is as thick and violent as you.
>> No. 429301 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 12:59 pm
429301 spacer
>>429300
Why? Were you planning on cancelling many people's holidays and/or making snide comments about their large tellies?
>> No. 429303 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:11 pm
429303 spacer
>>429272

>You think they'll suddenly decide fuck the climate, the children can starve and die, getting a new iPhone is more important?

Call me cynical, but yes, that's pretty much exactly what I think.

>80 grand a year combined, but you're also not well off

I don't know what planet you live on Tarquin but that's more than well off. The median household income in this country is something like £25,000.
>> No. 429305 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:36 pm
429305 spacer
>>429303
What exactly are we supposed to do with a spare £35k? You can barely even buy a car with that.
>> No. 429306 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:36 pm
429306 spacer
>>429303
According to the ONS, median disposable household income in 2018 was £28400. Median total individual income is £25k.
>> No. 429307 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:37 pm
429307 spacer
>>429303

No matter what we do at this point things are going to get worse by some degree, so I imagine the continuation of negative climate-related news might help people realise they don't really need so many of those things.

>>429301

Now you're just pretending to be thick.
>> No. 429308 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:42 pm
429308 spacer
>>429305
Take a luxury holiday to Big Dog Island or ten. Or take a day trip to That London on the train. Might need to book in advance if you're north of Watford to get under £35k though.
>> No. 429309 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 1:50 pm
429309 spacer
>>429303

>I don't know what planet you live on Tarquin but that's more than well off. The median household income in this country is something like £25,000.

But that then counts in all the paupers and working class people as well who have far less than that.

As I said, with 80K as a household, you are middle class. Not poor, very much granted, but if you've got two people working to earn that amount between them, you also aren't what most people would actually consider "well off". We then also have to ask if you have those 80K as a net income or before tax. Usually in OECD statistics, incomes are measured before tax, so based on the current UK income tax brackets, your actual take-home will be noticeably less than that, probably around £60K, which is £5K a month, with which you are still going to have to pay off your mortgage and all your other expenses including your kids and whatnot. It's still a comfortable place to be in income wise, and it should enable you to make the odd frivolous purchase on the side or go on a spontaneous weekend holiday to France, but you're still not well off as such.
>> No. 429310 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 2:01 pm
429310 spacer

9d03534e.png
429310429310429310
>>429306
Nice try for quoting the ONS but you didn't bother to understand their definitions.
>> No. 429311 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 2:02 pm
429311 spacer
>>429309
On the contrary, an £80k household income is very much in the "well off" category. If you choose to vote £2k a month on a mortgage millstone, that's your problem.
>> No. 429312 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 2:04 pm
429312 spacer
>>429311
>vote
*blow
>> No. 429319 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 10:19 pm
429319 spacer
>>429311

>£2k a month on a mortgage millstone

That's what a lot of people do these days though. Or near enough anyway. Have you looked at house prices lately? It's really silly buggers here in London now.

I live in a rented flat, but even that isn't fun anymore, if it ever was.
>> No. 429320 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 10:58 pm
429320 spacer
>>429319
If you choose to live in That London, that's your problem.
>> No. 429321 Anonymous
30th July 2019
Tuesday 11:19 pm
429321 spacer
>>429320

>That London

Lad.
>> No. 429322 Anonymous
31st July 2019
Wednesday 12:04 am
429322 spacer
>>429321
Wot m8?
>> No. 429323 Anonymous
31st July 2019
Wednesday 12:34 am
429323 spacer
>>429321
Found the That-Londoner.
>> No. 429324 Anonymous
31st July 2019
Wednesday 12:38 am
429324 spacer
>>429323

They can't take a joke in That London.
>> No. 429325 Anonymous
31st July 2019
Wednesday 2:36 am
429325 spacer
>>429322

You erd im! Ye imbread barbarian!

>>429324
M-eight If we wanted a joke we would have taken your mum when the farmer came to market to sell her.
>> No. 429326 Anonymous
31st July 2019
Wednesday 11:26 am
429326 spacer

5b7efd9619000014035027fd.jpg
429326429326429326
>>429325

Is Sarf London in da house, aight.
>> No. 429354 Anonymous
2nd August 2019
Friday 6:01 pm
429354 spacer
So here's some advance on the "educating everyday people" front.
>Various outlets will be committing to running one week of focused climate coverage, beginning 16th September and culminating on the 23rd September, the day of the landmark international Climate Action Summit hosted by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres in New York.
https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/world-joins-to-cover-climate/
https://www.cjr.org/watchdog/climate-crisis-media.php

In other news, Bolsonaro is just utterly fucking the Amazon with no end in sight
https://amazonwatch.org/news/2019/0801-as-the-brazilian-amazon-burns-indigenous-peoples-take-a-stand

Siberia is burning down
https://www.news24.com/World/News/watch-siberia-is-on-fire-an-area-almost-the-size-of-belgium-is-ravaged-20190801
https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/ywammg/over-15-thousand-square-miles-of-siberia-are-on-fire-and-its-a-global-ecological-catastrophe

and closer to home we're getting absurd floods up North.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-49189955#
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-49188929/north-west-flooding-biblical-in-poynton-cheshire
>> No. 429355 Anonymous
2nd August 2019
Friday 6:58 pm
429355 spacer

h2D25C4F2.jpg
429355429355429355
>>429354
>> No. 429356 Anonymous
2nd August 2019
Friday 7:54 pm
429356 spacer
>>429355
They'll have to man Hadrian's wall from the other side.
>> No. 429357 Anonymous
2nd August 2019
Friday 10:12 pm
429357 spacer
>>429356

Scotland will become slightly smaller too.
>> No. 429358 Anonymous
2nd August 2019
Friday 11:30 pm
429358 spacer
>>429357
It might lose a couple of Trump golf resorts, but otherwise it'll be fine.
>> No. 429359 Anonymous
3rd August 2019
Saturday 12:19 am
429359 spacer
>>429358

It's gonna be yuuge.
>> No. 429551 Anonymous
16th August 2019
Friday 9:16 am
429551 spacer
Pack your rice, lads.

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/08/video-the-north-atlantic-ocean-current-may-be-slowing/


>Video: The North Atlantic ocean current, which warms northern Europe, may be slowing

>“We are 50 to a hundred years ahead of schedule with the slowdown of this ocean circulation pattern, relative to the models,” according to Mann. “The more observations we get, the more sophisticated our models become, the more we’re learning that things can happen faster, and with a greater magnitude, than we predicted just years ago.”
>> No. 429558 Anonymous
16th August 2019
Friday 11:36 am
429558 spacer

ECAiQRPW4AEUGF0.jpg
429558429558429558
>>429551
>Yesterday: ‘boom in the US shale gas and oil may have ignited a significant global spike in methane emissions blamed for accelerating the pace of the climate crisis’

>https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/14/fracking-causing-rise-in-methane-emissions-study-finds

Today: @beisgovuk
>shale ‘could support our transition to net zero emissions by 2050’
>restarts fracking
>> No. 429559 Anonymous
16th August 2019
Friday 11:42 am
429559 spacer
>>429551
The middle class want us to be more like the Nordic nations. Now they can get super hygge.
>> No. 429561 Anonymous
16th August 2019
Friday 1:28 pm
429561 spacer
>>429559

Trump says he wants to buy Greenland. Maybe he can then use all the hot air from all his speeches to warm up that cool spot in the North Atlantic.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/15/donald-trump-greenland-purchase-denmark
>> No. 429601 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 12:30 pm
429601 spacer

arm.jpg
429601429601429601
So now the Animal Rights people are getting behind (or at least, beside) XR for October. This is... a lot of people.
>> No. 429602 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 12:34 pm
429602 spacer
>>429561
That's a fucking terrible joke. That's worse than the stuff they write for the MPs and journos who wash up on HIGNFY. It's made me so upset I'm taking the dogs for a walk.
>> No. 429603 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 12:35 pm
429603 spacer
Roger Hallam's interview on HardTalk is worth a watch.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0007p33/hardtalk-roger-hallam-cofounder-extinction-rebellion
there's a post-interview snippet here to follow it up
https://twitter.com/BBCHARDtalk/status/1161680117292249089
>> No. 429620 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 9:20 pm
429620 spacer
>>429601
Fuck sake. It's already going to be chaos with Brexit protesters and probably the taxis drivers starting up again, can't they just do this in November? Have a word with your commune for us.
>> No. 429621 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 10:12 pm
429621 spacer
>>429620
Given that the current estimate is now that we have to start making radical changes in 12 months, no, I don't think we can put it off.
>> No. 429622 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 11:02 pm
429622 spacer
>>429621
Why not do it early then. September should be nicer and you can make the message when our long-suffering politicians return from summer recess but just before they then go on conference season.

>the current estimate is now that we have to start making radical changes in 12 months

Is there space for logrolling in this alarmism? You can make an alliance with British farmers for example to demand some sort of climate cost to offset cheap imports of food. The people of vegan get their animal welfare, you get to disrupt international trade, farmers can put a premium on their produce.

In my case you can put the kettle on to save power.
>> No. 429623 Anonymous
18th August 2019
Sunday 11:24 pm
429623 spacer
>>429621
In that case, could you get it out of the way in the next couple of weeks so I don't have to put up with it when I've got a job to commute to?
>> No. 429625 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 12:21 am
429625 spacer
>>429622
You finding it alarming doesn't mean it's wrong.
>> No. 429626 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 1:58 am
429626 spacer
>>429625
That's what I told the congregation, but someone dialed 999 so I thought I'd better leave it.
>> No. 429627 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 2:23 am
429627 spacer
>>429626
The problem is that if you were a daft militant wog, you could have killed them all.
>> No. 429628 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 2:25 am
429628 spacer
This is the problem trying to have fun on the internet; other people trying to join in.
>> No. 429629 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 7:19 am
429629 spacer
>>429628
Much like real life.
>> No. 429636 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 10:31 am
429636 spacer
Am I the only one who thinks Greta is an irritating little do-gooder aspiefag who should be sat at home playing Roblox like other kids her age?
>> No. 429638 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 10:55 am
429638 spacer
>>429636

No, I kind of gravitate towards that opinion myself. Climate change itself is real and it's a real threat to our civilisation, but there's climate activism, and there's becoming a media circus whore because your parents are well connected to PR and advertising firms.

Greta Thunberg, besides her dogged determination that is a mark of Asperger's in and of itself, has very little to teach the world about actual climate change. That is the job of seasoned climatologists, not of a 16-year-old who reads National Geographic articles online after school every day.

I'm not saying there is no value at all in parading her around as a figurehead. If that is what it takes to get the attention of politicians and climate change skeptics, then so be it. But I still find her and her whole campaign just fucking annoying at this point.
>> No. 429642 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 12:15 pm
429642 spacer
>>429638

>Greta Thunberg, besides her dogged determination that is a mark of Asperger's in and of itself, has very little to teach the world about actual climate change.

She has plenty to teach, because most people still know the square root of fuck all about climate change. The most important facts don't need any great amount of expertise to communicate - the fact that this is an emergency, that a lot of people are going to die as a result of climate change, that we need to make radical changes in our lifestyles and economy to avert the worst damage and that the window of opportunity for meaningful action is very brief. If Thunberg can convince some people of those unpalatable facts, then more power to her.
>> No. 429649 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 1:23 pm
429649 spacer
>>429642

Again, not disagreeing with you on the fact that people need to be made aware of all those things.

I've just grown tired of Greta Thunberg, is all.
>> No. 429650 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 1:29 pm
429650 spacer
>>429649
Yeah well we heard you and others like you the first time i.e. nine hundred posts and four months ago.
>> No. 429652 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 1:53 pm
429652 spacer
>>429650

So we're the cunts for not being on board with the idea that you can't go wrong, and are on an unassailable moral high road with a 16-year-old, child-faced sperg as a poster child?
>> No. 429657 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 2:46 pm
429657 spacer
>>429652

Thunberg is not the issue. Climate change is the issue. We must not allow petty arguments about a child distract us from that issue; frankly, we should be quite ashamed that a child is doing a better job of pressing that issue than our elected representatives.
>> No. 429659 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 4:11 pm
429659 spacer
>>429657

> we should be quite ashamed that a child is doing a better job of pressing that issue than our elected representatives.

And that is exactly part of the whole marketing campaign. To make people feel guilty that way. You may say, whatever works, but the nit picking cunt in me just won't be satisfied with that.

Then again, you're not completely wrong that the adult generation are failing society in that respect. It kind of becomes understandable, but not forgivable in any way, when you look at the way that politicians and decision makers are constantly being lobbied and greased by all kinds of interest groups. And as a politician of one of the mainstream parties, it is especially difficult to refuse to toe the party line on the issue, that party line more often than not being precisely the result of different lobbying and economic interest groups weighing in on the issue who are in bed with those parties.
>> No. 429661 Anonymous
19th August 2019
Monday 5:23 pm
429661 spacer
>>429657
>Thunberg is not the issue. Climate change is the issue.
Put those goalposts down, lad.
>> No. 429748 Anonymous
21st August 2019
Wednesday 9:59 am
429748 spacer

_108307783_image1.jpg
429748429748429748
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49345912

Mourners have gathered in Iceland to commemorate the loss of Okjokull, which has died at the age of about 700.

The glacier was officially declared dead in 2014 when it was no longer thick enough to move.

What once was glacier has been reduced to a small patch of ice atop a volcano.

Prime Minister Katrin Jakobsdottir, Environment Minister Gudmundur Ingi Gudbrandsson and former Irish President Mary Robinson attended the ceremony.
>> No. 429808 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 12:33 pm
429808 spacer
Apparently the amazon rainforest is on fire.
>> No. 429811 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 3:40 pm
429811 spacer
>>429808

It was multiple deliberate acts. There is no apparent about it. A anti environmentalist leader just came to power and sacked everyone who remotely cared about environmental control and the farmers celebrated by burning the rain forests so that they could seize the land.
>> No. 429814 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 4:09 pm
429814 spacer
>>429808

> amazon rainforest

Blimey. I thought for a split second that that's some kind of new service that comes with your Amazon Prime subscription.
>> No. 429817 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 5:15 pm
429817 spacer
>>429811
The amazon has been burning for a long time.

The environmentalist movement of past decades was pretty successful in hugely limiting the trade of wood from trees felled in the rainforest.
This left the Brazilian people pretty pissed off, and instead of felling trees they all moved to growing palm oil and soybeans and raising cattle for beef. Which of course meant simply burning down vast swathes of rainforest.
It's somewhat worse this year because a lot of regulations have been cut back and powers stripped away from their environmental protection agency. But excluding the last year or two it's been on an upward trend for a long time anyway.
>> No. 429818 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 5:28 pm
429818 spacer
>>429817
None of which is a reason to be less alarmed by it, more that we should have been alarmed by it earlier.
>> No. 429819 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 6:57 pm
429819 spacer
>>429817
>>429818
To quote a certain immigrant expat:
>But while the depressingly familiar numbness that you may be currently feeling can help you handle the pain in the short term, in the long term it can actually be a real problem because unless something hurts as much as it’s supposed to, nothing gets done about it.

Basically, we've normalised the wanton destruction of our environment, and as a result we're fucked.
>> No. 429825 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 10:38 pm
429825 spacer
And yet, I can't help but feel it's a bit hypocritical for us, in first world nations with our heavy industry, who completely deforested our countries century or more ago, are trying to tell Brazil they're not allowed.

I mean yes it's horrible that the Amazon, the last real example of such biodiversity on the planet, is being destroyed. But you can see why it would fall on deaf ears of these farmers when we're telling them to stop doing what they see as putting food on the table. Just another example of the haves moralising over the have nots.

It's all fucked up.
>> No. 429826 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 11:09 pm
429826 spacer
>>429825

The question is indeed if we have a right to tell emerging third-world economies that they must not aspire to the same standard of living that we enjoy because it would be ecologically unsustainable.

"Do as I say, don't do as I do" has never been a very honest position to have. Despite all valid environmental considerations in this case.
>> No. 429827 Anonymous
24th August 2019
Saturday 11:55 pm
429827 spacer
>>429826
>emerging third-world economies

That reminds me. Someone I went to school with, who now lives in Australia and refers to Britain as "across the pond", keeps saying "third world problems" when she means "first world problems." Boils my piss it does.
>> No. 429828 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:11 am
429828 spacer
>>429825

I've got the price list from my timber merchant here and I've just scanned it for Brazilian species. £40 per cubic foot for ipe, £82.50 per cubic foot for marpleheart, £150 per cubic foot for genuine mahogany, £285 per cubic foot for santos rosewood.

I shudder to think of how much quality timber is going up in smoke as we speak. Is there an ethnic slur for Brazilians? Because I'd quite like to use one.
>> No. 429830 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:30 am
429830 spacer
>>429828

It's shocking isn't it. Just think of how many Gibson guitars could be made out of all that...
>> No. 429831 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:31 am
429831 spacer
>>429828

> Is there an ethnic slur for Brazilians?

South Americans are sometimes collectively referred to as jungle n*ggers.


.gs won't let you type out the N word, it results in an automatic ban, but you probably get my meaning.
>> No. 429832 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:38 am
429832 I hate these cunts too.
>>429828>>429830>>429831
Gosh, you kids are so BRILLIANT.
>> No. 429833 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:42 am
429833 spacer
>>429828
I'm not sure about a slur, but if you want to really annoy them just tell them Pele was shite and Messi is much better.
>> No. 429834 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:45 am
429834 spacer
>>429832

I think you'll find that my comment was actually a dry and witty retort about the nature of consumerism, and the priorities of first world citizens.

You must be thick.
>> No. 429835 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:56 am
429835 spacer
>>429825

I think it is immaterial to dredge up the past this is a situation where the very existence of human life on earth is at stake if they are allowed to achieve their goals. All of your riding your bike to work and having a reusable bottle will be quite immaterial if they succeed. The science says they will start a feed back loop that will turn the entire amazon into a polar before they even realise what they have done.

I dont think a unilateral declaration of war to set up environmental protection would be uncalled for if they dont pack it in soon.
>> No. 429836 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:58 am
429836 spacer
>>429834
I'll take two short planks of that there genuine mahogany you've got.
>> No. 429837 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:59 am
429837 spacer
>>429835
>word filter

Oh ah ha because eskimos worship The Great White Whale in their igloos and live in the polar
>> No. 429838 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 2:10 am
429838 spacer
>>429837

>because eskimos worship The Great White Whale in their igloos and live in the polar

They do though.

And fisherpersons will agree, even if you give them a bit of their own drugs. Even in Scunthorpe . cup of tea in a teapot maybe, but blame it on Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.
>> No. 429839 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 2:24 am
429839 spacer
>>429838

Christ.

I have to say this post left me thoroughly WITH NOTHING TO SAY BECAUSE I AM A CUNT!
>> No. 429842 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 2:42 am
429842 spacer
>>429839  

Lost for words just because of a few genuinely hilarious jokes? 
>> No. 429843 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 2:47 am
429843 spacer
>>429838

I have a bag of spuds, when did the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society worshiping The Great White Whale become acceptable around here.
>> No. 429847 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 12:07 pm
429847 spacer
>>429843


That's a question to ask Paul Joseph Watson lad.
>> No. 429849 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 12:29 pm
429849 spacer
>>429835
That is true. Hand-wringing about colonialism is a bit of a moot point if they kill all of us. It's not as though they'd have a lifestyle like our current one if that happens.
>> No. 429851 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 12:30 pm
429851 spacer
I say "they" as though we're not also contributing to/perpetuating the system that's giving them cause to do it.
>> No. 429857 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:18 pm
429857 spacer
>>429849

The problems that the Amazon faces are population growth and illegal logging. Worldwide, in regions where there is still rainforest, you also have the highest population growth. These people all need places to live. And you can't just put them all in tower blocks on the outskirts of Caracas or Rio de Janeiro. It's usually rural or semi-rural human populations that bonk like rabbits have the highest growth, and if a rainforest village or small town needs more space for new houses, they will just deforest another few acres.

Also, despite the obvious way that the rainforest is good for the planet and all human economic activity, there really isn't much economic value to be derived from an actual tract of rainforest. The handful of eco tourists that you can guide through it give you a tiny revenue compared to the market value of all the tropical wood on it. And relabelling that illegally logged wood and making it appear legit is still very easy in those countries. And once the forest is turned into arable land, you can grow cash crops on it or use it for cattle grazing and then sell the beef on the world market at a premium. All the growing population does need a source of income.

From the perspective of a poor labourer or a cattle farmer in the Amazon, our point that we tell them "please don't touch the rainforests because we here in the Global North don't want to have too much climate change" really isn't that convincing. Between that and having to put food on your family's table in a village five hours outside Manaus, we will always be the condescending Global Northerners telling them they can't have the same lifestyle as us. And in a way they're right to point out our hypocrisy, because some 2,000 years ago, people in Britain did the exact same things. Nearly all of Britain used to be covered by dense forest, until people decided they needed the wood for their buildings and fireplaces, and the land to grow crops and farm livestock on.
>> No. 429858 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:32 pm
429858 spacer
>>429851
>I say "they" as though we're not also contributing to/perpetuating the system that's giving them cause to do it.

We aren't and the system isn't. The reason they are burning the jungle down is that we all made a point of not buying the wood from it, the system is doing what it can to stop them by making the jungle unsellable. Yet they are still doubling down on stupidity out of greed.
>> No. 429859 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:36 pm
429859 spacer
>>429857

The Amazon can be (and is) legally logged. The high value hardwoods are slow-growing, but they can be sustainably managed through logging quotas, selective logging (grading a tree before it's logged and only taking it if it'll yield high-quality timber) and replanting programmes.

The problems of the Amazon are overwhelmingly of lawlessness and short-sighted governance. You don't need skilled foresters to just burn a tract of rainforest for cattle grazing. If you're a poacher just looking to turn a quick profit, you're not going to spend the time and effort to sustainably harvest timber - if you don't cut everything down, some other bugger will.

Some countries are doing a brilliant job of managing old-growth hardwood forests, because they understand that they're a golden goose. Brazil was for a brief period one of those countries, passing meaningful legislation and working internationally to protect the value of their timber resources.
>> No. 429860 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:37 pm
429860 spacer
>>429857

These are not poor helpless people doing this, farm owners lover to pretend they are the salt of the earth but they bloody aren't they are robber barons. It is just a convienat narative to sleep at night instead of facing the fact you are a cunt who is fucking the whole world over.
>> No. 429861 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 1:47 pm
429861 spacer
>>429860

>These are not poor helpless people doing this, farm owners lover to pretend they are the salt of the earth but they bloody aren't they are robber barons.

Not all farm owners are latifundios. As in many parts of the world, a farm can consist of ten cows and five chickens where the farmers live pretty much hand to mouth.
>> No. 429863 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 2:12 pm
429863 spacer
>>429858
If they're doubling down in a way that harms the jungle while also giving them profit, then that profit is still coming from the system.
>> No. 429881 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 9:21 pm
429881 spacer
>>429863

There is really very little as external forces we can do that isnt entirely invasive. Other then tell them we won't buy it to which their conclusion will be to burn more rain forests since they need to grow even more to make as much money as the used to.

The systematic problems aren't coming from outside but from within Brazil it self.

At the moment I am trying to assess if you are one of those left wing nutters that believes that all human failings are the result of a bad system we have designed as opposed to the result of people just being shitty. À la all that declining salmon populations bollocks.
>> No. 429885 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 10:25 pm
429885 spacer
>>429881

Eat less beef, buy more FSC-certified tropical hardwood.
>> No. 429886 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 10:25 pm
429886 spacer
>>429881

Right, right. Them burning more or less in order to appease external market forces obviously has nothing at all to do with anything outside Brazil. It's all because the farmers are shitty people. This is the big brain conclusion of someone who spends more time trying to figure out how to stereotype the person they're talking to than whether what they're saying makes any sense at all.
>> No. 429887 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 10:36 pm
429887 spacer
>>429886

>burning more or less in order to appease external market forces

Except that's not what they're doing.
>> No. 429888 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 10:58 pm
429888 spacer
>>429887

So their economy is entirely self-contained and they aren't exporting vast quantities of beef or soy?
>> No. 429889 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 11:38 pm
429889 spacer
>>429885
>Eat less beef
Get to fuck, lad. You can have my steak when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
>> No. 429890 Anonymous
25th August 2019
Sunday 11:47 pm
429890 spacer
>>429889
Killing you to stop you eating so much beef would be justifiably moral self defence at this point.
>> No. 429891 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 12:02 am
429891 spacer
>>429889

That's enough Big Steak propaganda for now, lad.
>> No. 429892 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 12:38 am
429892 spacer

thumbnail.jpg
429892429892429892
>>429891
I'm not with Big Steak. I just happen to like a big steak. Just look at it.
>> No. 429893 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 9:10 am
429893 spacer

green_lead_insert.jpg
429893429893429893
>>429857
>Global Northerners telling them they can't have the same lifestyle as us. And in a way they're right to point out our hypocrisy, because some 2,000 years ago, people in Britain did the exact same things. Nearly all of Britain used to be covered by dense forest, until people decided they needed the wood for their buildings and fireplaces, and the land to grow crops and farm livestock on.

There's more trees on the planet now than 20 years ago. If the Chinks and Indians can do it whilst massively increasing industrialisation and their demand for resources then why can't the Sudacas?
>> No. 429894 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 9:57 am
429894 spacer
>>429892

Medium rare is not my favourite. I always wonder how people can enjoy undercooked meat like that. I always get mine well done.
>> No. 429897 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 10:52 am
429897 spacer
>>429892
That looks terrible. I'd rather have some quality sausages or some chicken that someone bothered seasoning properly than that. Steak's so overrated, I don't get it at all.
>> No. 429903 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 12:20 pm
429903 spacer
>>429897

It looks like good proper steak, albeit undercooked, even if other people call it medium rare.

Wouldn't have chips with it though. That kind of devalues it.
>> No. 429908 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 12:56 pm
429908 spacer

3b2152bfff6251777f8cab3dc99205ae.jpg
429908429908429908
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/26/brazilian-warplanes-dump-water-on-amazon-fires-as-outcry-mounts

The Brazilian armed forces have been deployed, G7 countries are coordinating technical assistance, there have been mass protests in Brazil and countries are lending out their equipment to help. To top it off the Amazonian countries are raising the perspective on a conservation pact.

Looks like our officials saw a problem and they fixed it. Problem solved.

>>429894
>I always get mine well done.

Out of interest, is this how you do burgers as well?
>> No. 429916 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 1:27 pm
429916 spacer
>>429908

>Out of interest, is this how you do burgers as well?

I actually rarely eat burgers. I tend to avoid burger restaurants altogether and also don't normally do homemade burgers. I'm more into steaks and sausages really.
>> No. 429925 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 2:34 pm
429925 spacer
>>429916
I ask because I think it shows more in burgers than a good steak, due to the thickness and texture. You can get away with a little overdone steak but a burger needs a little pink in the middle for the juices and might explain why you shy away from them.

I have a theory that this explains the proliferation of over-complicated burgers. Your standard burger-joint either can't or isn't allowed to give you a good burger so they have to stuff everything and the kitchen sink into a brioche bun. It's madness. Now I won't get into patties but next time you're in Sainsbury's pick up their Butcher's Choice Beef Burgers along with white crusty rolls. Pan fry the patty for 4 minutes each side on medium heat and enjoy what might well be the best burger you've ever had.
>> No. 429929 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 2:50 pm
429929 spacer
>>429925

>and might explain why you shy away from them.


I think it's really more a matter of habit, but also, my parents never went to burger restaurants with us growing up. And my mum, who had, and still has very respectable cooking skills, never really cared much for homemade burgers either and thought of them as generally low-quality food.

My mum actually took a cooking class at the community centre when she got married. Many of her friends did. She's of that generation where being a capable housewife was still considered an asset.
>> No. 429931 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 3:02 pm
429931 spacer
>>429925

>I have a theory that this explains the proliferation of over-complicated burgers. Your standard burger-joint either can't or isn't allowed to give you a good burger so they have to stuff everything and the kitchen sink into a brioche bun.

This isn't just a theory, this is exactly what's happening. The only way to legally serve anything other than a well done burger involves a lot of jumping through hoops and, I'm my opinion, an absolutely batshit insane process they call 'sear and shave' wherein you have to cook the outside of the beef, cut the cooled bits off and then mince it, which is fucking stupid, wasteful, and expensive.

I don't agree with the idea that a well done burger is inherently a bad thing, you can certainly make a juicy, flavoursome burger at well done, but you do have to use good beef and high fat grinds.

The FSA do make more and more allowances as hygiene practices improve, but their stances really do reflect the historically poor culinary tastes of Britain. As far as I can work out it's still technically not legal to serve a medium rare steak in Scotland, somehow.

What I lament most though is that people will likely never come around to eating pork cooked at a lower temperature. It's just so much better with a bit of pink, but everyone things it's still unsafe to do so.
>> No. 429933 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 3:05 pm
429933 spacer
>>429931

>cut the cooled bits off

*cooked.

Can't be arsed to delete edit.
>> No. 429940 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 4:12 pm
429940 spacer

wfd19_EN.jpg
429940429940429940
>>429931
>As far as I can work out it's still technically not legal to serve a medium rare steak in Scotland, somehow.

It's FSS for Scotland who go a bit further on safety - the common example is Scots driving south of the border to pick up raw milk. At any rate, it definitely does look like a cultural hangover in terms of risk management that has caused arguably unnecessary regulation.
>> No. 429943 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 5:39 pm
429943 spacer

17703678-7395235-image-a-20_1566835352236.jpg
429943429943429943
What a timeline.
>> No. 429944 Anonymous
26th August 2019
Monday 5:45 pm
429944 spacer
>>429940

It's a bit overblown though. I think the Dutch, or was it the Germans, they eat raw minced pork on a bun. It's a popular lunch snack there.

Granted, I think they have to adhere to rigorous food safety standards to make that possible. Something about serving it within hours of the pig being slaughtered, and butchers having to discard unused minced meat intended for raw consumption at the end of that same day.
>> No. 429972 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:22 pm
429972 spacer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49500642

>Teenage environmental activist Greta Thunberg has arrived in New York after a 15-day, 3,000-mile (4,800km) voyage across the Atlantic.

>She will be participating in UN climate summits in New York City and Chile.

>The 16-year-old Swede sailed from Plymouth in the UK on a zero-emissions yacht in order to minimise the carbon footprint of her travel.

>"Our war on nature must end," she told reporters shortly after arriving on Wednesday.

>"I want to thank everyone... who is involved in this climate fight, because this is a fight across borders, across continents," she said.
>> No. 429973 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:27 pm
429973 spacer
>>429972
No mention of the carbon footprint for all the people who have to fly over to New York to bring the yacht back to Europe.
>> No. 429974 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:29 pm
429974 spacer
>>429973
The yacht crew were also on board, genius.
>> No. 429975 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:41 pm
429975 spacer
>>429974
>"We added the trip to New York very quickly to our plan, and as a result, two people have to fly to the US to bring the boat back," team manager Holly Cova told SPIEGEL. Overall, according to team information, four flights are required - and not six, how many media reported. Four flights would also have been incurred if Swedish climate activist Thunberg and her father had flown from Europe to the special climate summit in New York and back instead of sailing with the racing yacht "Malizia II".

https://spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/greta-thunberg-team-wehrt-sich-nach-pr-desaster-a-1282393.html

The yacht trip means that six long-haul flights are required, compared with four for if they'd simply flown there.
>> No. 429976 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:46 pm
429976 spacer
>>429973

Also no mention of the carbon footprint of manufacturing a boat like that.

I know I'm a nitpicking cunt, but something about this whole campaign just feels too glossy, too calculated. We're being fed this as one little adorable sperg's crusade against climate change denyers, but it's really more reminiscient of corporate-level PR in its extent and scale. With the same bland aftertaste which all corporate PR tends to leave.
>> No. 429977 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:49 pm
429977 spacer
>>429976
>one little adorable sperg

I'd turn your fucking head into jam if I had half the chance. Least I would if you didn't already have shit for brains.
>> No. 429978 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:51 pm
429978 spacer
>>429975
>The yacht trip means that six long-haul flights are required

>Overall, according to team information, four flights are required - and not six, how many media reported.
>> No. 429979 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 10:52 pm
429979 spacer
>>429976

What does your nit picking do to help make any sort of positive change whatsoever?
>> No. 429981 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 11:02 pm
429981 spacer
>>429977

Look, this isn't some sort of Make a Wish scheme. She doesn't have leukemia and this isn't a thing on her bucket list. Maybe a little less indignation at somebody doing the inevitable by playing devil's advocate. I'm a nitpicking cunt, but not a heartless one, you know.

Everything about this campaign is calculated to a T. Including the public image of Greta Thunberg herself. It can't be any other way. That doesn't mean she's constantly got somebody putting thumbs up or down off camera, just that certain people are a bit overly invested in milking this for all the PR gold that they can.

Is this all a bad thing? Well, if it gets people to act, then in summary, it probably isn't. Even I try to be green and do certain things that lower my carbon footprint, like take the bus or my bicycle to work, or avoid using too much plastic. But I'm sorry, while I agree that climate change is a big issue, I just can't bring myself to get behind this particular campaign. No matter how many people it mobilises, it's just too much bland corporate PR style for me.
>> No. 429982 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 11:04 pm
429982 spacer
>>429979
Yeah, who cares about attention to detail? We should gloss over things, particularly if they support matters I'm in favour of.
>> No. 429983 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 11:09 pm
429983 spacer
>>429982

Call it "attention to detail" if you like, what does it do to help make any sort of positive change? While you're raising your hackles and claiming you're just playing devil's advocate to be helpful and all your intentions are sound, you're also just repeating the exact same talking points as actual climate denialists and character assassins working for the oil industry. Nobody needs a devil's advocate when the devil's already advocating for himself.
>Even I try to be green and do certain things
As we've already been over in this thread, individual change is worthless at this point.
>it's just too much bland corporate PR style for me.
Right so fuck trying to make a difference if people are doing it in a way that isn't quite to your exact tastes.
>> No. 429984 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 11:10 pm
429984 spacer
>>429981
>It can't be any other way.
If you say so, luv.
>> No. 429985 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 11:10 pm
429985 spacer
>>429982

Again, I'm not against campaigning for climate change awareness. It's one of the most pressing issues that the Earth will face in the next 50 to 100 years.

But I reserve the right to call things the way I see them, and this particular campaign just aggravates me for various different reasons. Agree to disagree, and that. You know.
>> No. 429986 Anonymous
28th August 2019
Wednesday 11:13 pm
429986 spacer
>>429985
You're not against it, you're just amplifying the voices of people who are.
>> No. 429990 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 1:39 am
429990 spacer
>>429985

The world is literally on fire, but let's park that for a moment to discuss the real issue - how annoyed we are by an autistic teenager.
>> No. 429991 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 2:30 am
429991 spacer
>>429990
>The world is literally on fire
What are you doing whining on a shed enthusiast website? Call the fire bridage already.
>> No. 429992 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 6:53 am
429992 spacer
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning
We didn't start the fire
No we didn't light it
But we tried to fight it
>> No. 429993 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 8:31 am
429993 spacer
Not much chance of a fire here this morning, it's pretty much raining buckets.
>> No. 429995 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 9:03 am
429995 spacer
>>429991
Fire brigade isn't listening, more people are needed to tell at them.
>> No. 429999 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 12:14 pm
429999 spacer
>>429995
Why are you yelling at them? You're supposed to call 999.
>> No. 430000 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 12:28 pm
430000 spacer
>>429999

I'm not sure that my local fire brigade will respond to call-outs in Brazil.
>> No. 430001 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 12:39 pm
430001 spacer
>>430000
Slackers.
>> No. 430011 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 9:17 pm
430011 spacer
Nobody is mentioning the elephant in the room. Crypto alone is responsible for around 0.3-0.5% of global energy consumption. If Buttcoiners packed their shit in, it would be the equivalent of disconnecting the entirety of Austria. If you want working class folk to take their one holiday a year somewhere they don't have to fly, then you can stop buying drugs off the darknet and patronise your friendly neighborhood dealer instead.
>> No. 430013 Anonymous
29th August 2019
Thursday 11:22 pm
430013 spacer
>>430011
Who are you addressing exactly? Mining isn't much of a cottage industry any more, I doubt many of us here are running mining rigs still.
>> No. 430024 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 3:34 pm
430024 spacer
>>430013
I'd be amazed if anyone here is actively mining Bitcoin itself.
>> No. 430025 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 3:40 pm
430025 spacer
>>430024
I'd also be amazed if anyone here is actively burning the Amazon or piloting jet aircraft.
>> No. 430026 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 5:17 pm
430026 spacer
>>430025
You can't pin the fault on the pilot. He'd not be flying a pollution machine if you didn't buy so many tickets.
>> No. 430027 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 5:34 pm
430027 spacer
>>430026
Just like the fella running the crypto mining rig wouldn't be running it if you didn't use it so much.
>> No. 430028 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 5:42 pm
430028 spacer

greenhouse_DRUPAL_copyedited-01.png
430028430028430028
How many people are we going to be putting out of jobs when we kill the aviation industry then?

Pilots, cabin crew, airport staff, the poor buggers who work at duty free shops, the people who run those airport minibus services, not to mention the entire tourist trade that practically sustains a lot of developing countries...

And to think. You could just not have kids instead, and make more of a difference.
>> No. 430029 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 5:51 pm
430029 spacer
>>430028
Elon Musk has decreed that population collapse is one of the biggest threats facing humanity.
>> No. 430030 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 5:55 pm
430030 spacer
>>430029
That'll be because he has a vested interest. If the population of Elon Musk collapses from 1 to 0 then he's going to have a problem.
>> No. 430031 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 6:36 pm
430031 spacer
>>430028
So if I buy loads of transatlantic flight tickets but then avoid using them I'll have basically saved the planet, pretty much?
>> No. 430032 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 7:04 pm
430032 spacer
>>430028
An airbus 320 neo gets 77 passenger miles to the gallon. There is nothing wrong with planes. They are the most environmental way to travel the distances you expect them to travel, the difference being that we travel a lot further on them then we would ever on any other form of transport. Unless they upgrade the trans Siberian to a vacuum maglev there really is no alternative.
>> No. 430033 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 7:08 pm
430033 spacer
>>430032

Does that take into account the energy used by all the other logistics vehicles responsible for getting the flight ready? There are a lot of small vehicles whizzing around on that apron, and they all need refuelling too.
>> No. 430034 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 7:11 pm
430034 spacer
>>430032
>Unless they upgrade the trans Siberian to a vacuum maglev there really is no alternative.

Skype and VR headsets.
>> No. 430035 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 7:20 pm
430035 spacer
>>430032

Aviation has about twice the climate impact than you'd expect from fuel consumption alone, partly because emissions at high altitude have a greater warming potential and partly because contrails have a warming effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation#Climate_change
>> No. 430037 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 7:26 pm
430037 spacer
>>430032

>This axe is weighted very nicely for swinging. There is nothing wrong with axes. They are the safest thing to swing against the thin wooden hull of our boat. Unless you invent a special rubber-headed axe there really is no alternative.
>> No. 430038 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 8:12 pm
430038 spacer
>>430034

You go for your walks on Google earth don't you.
>> No. 430039 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 8:19 pm
430039 spacer
>>430038

I'm sure VRLad really gets his 4-pintas via street view. How do you even type with those fat wings, Jimbo?
>> No. 430040 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 9:02 pm
430040 spacer
>>430035

Airplanes have the big problem that no alternative fuel for the future exists. Even if most fully electric cars still have shit mileage compared to your old petrol banger, they're a proven concept and will in time replace petrol engines. But you couldn't make electric passenger planes go halfway around the world, or even to Scunthorpe, with today's electric energy storage technology. In its energy density, aviation fuel is almost infinitely more potent than even the most advanced battery system.
>> No. 430042 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 9:59 pm
430042 spacer
>>430040
Nah, we should be able to knock up something to replace JP-4 without wringing the juices out of orangutans. Might need tank heaters to start with, but plenty of ways to turn energy into usable hydrocarbons.
My bet's on magic algae, but there are other contenders.
>> No. 430043 Anonymous
30th August 2019
Friday 10:59 pm
430043 spacer
>>430042

I am aware of that, but I don't think you will be able to produce jet fuel in bulk that way in the foreseeable future. At least not in the kind of quantities needed to sustain today's level of global air traffic. Most of those processes are still in their experimental phase and years away from where you'd be able to upscale them to deliver the 279 billion litres of jet fuel a year, every year, that Google says were consumed worldwide in 2017.

Also, while it would mean less fossil CO2 would be released into the atmosphere, which is certainly a good thing, you'd still do all the other damage to the upper atmosphere that otherlad posted further up in this thread.
>> No. 430046 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 1:19 am
430046 spacer
Honest question, dunno if it's been asked in this thread before, but aren't the lithium batteries (and other electronics) that would be used in electric vehicles fucking terrible for the environment in and of themselves?

I get the feeling feel like it's a law of thermodynamics kind of deal. If we want to make stuff and go places, we're going to be doing something shitty to the sky either way. If we all switch to vegan cars in one go, the industrial CO2 output from current industries would be taken up again by the massive increase in demand in those industries, we're just changing where the carbon comes from.

It's like that troll physics meme picture with the guy pulling his cart along with a magnet on a long pole.
>> No. 430048 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 1:58 am
430048 spacer
>>430046

To truly generate enough energy for ten billion people in the future, we are going to have to switch to nuclear fusion either way. So that's the technology we have to develop. There is no real way around it. And it will produce far less harmful nuclear waste with far shorter half life of its radionuclides than nuclear fission.

My old physics teacher told us that if we'll ever figure out fusion and are able to control it reliably, then the hydrogen atoms contained in one can of fizzy drink will be more than enough to power all of London for a whole day.
>> No. 430049 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 3:09 am
430049 spacer
>>430048

No need for that I have a perpetual motion machine I knocked up the pro type for in my shed we'll be able to supply the whole world with them and a person site to site teleporter once we complete the Dyson sphere.

If you are going to make baseless assertions on unproven speclative bullshit at least go big.
>> No. 430050 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 7:23 am
430050 spacer

Electric-Car-Emissions.gif
430050430050430050
>>430046

>Honest question, dunno if it's been asked in this thread before, but aren't the lithium batteries (and other electronics) that would be used in electric vehicles fucking terrible for the environment in and of themselves?

The short answer is yes, the longer answer is that currently the lithium batteries are made in factories relying on coal/fossil power, and once they're in cars they're being charged by coal/fossil power too. An electric car costs more in carbon to build than a petrol car, and In a coal heavy country like Germany it apparently takes about ten years to 'break even' on the carbon footprint. HOWEVER, I don't think there's any country at all that still uses 100% fossil fuel for their power grid, and the increasing and inevitable shift towards cleaner or alternative energy will shorten that break even time considerably.

Simply put, though the manufacturing cost is higher, the running cost is lower. In cleaner countries that can harness a lot of hydro power for example, a petrol car is nearly indefensible even now, but we have a long way to go before the rest of the world catches up.

Saying all that, I don't know what the footprint of installing EV charge points all over the place looks like. That's surely costly.
>> No. 430051 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 8:00 am
430051 spacer
>>430050

The biggest obstacle to the widespread adoption of electric vehicles isn't so much the cars themselves, or the generating capacity of the grid. The problem is we need the smart grid to happen, i.e. cars charge slower or faster depending on the load on the grid, and a small portion of the battery can be reserved to feed back into the grid when needed.

The technology is there, but we're wasting billions on the botched roll-out of smart meters, instead of working on a more future-proofed solution.
>> No. 430052 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 8:45 am
430052 spacer
>>430050

It's worth pointing out a couple of things. Firstly, Tesla (and others) offer a complete package for sustainable driving - solar panels, a home battery system and an electric vehicle. Most homes have enough roof area to be completely self-sufficient for power, even with an EV charger and GSHP heating. Secondly, that home battery system is made from refurbished EV battery packs - an EV battery might be down to 60% of its original capacity after 300,000 miles, but it can still give another 10 or 15 years of useful service as a home battery. Once the pack is completely spent, it can be refurbished with new cells and the lithium in the old cells can be recycled. Thirdly, the next generation of EV chargers can play an important role in managing an all-renewable energy grid. One of the biggest obstacles to abandoning fossil fuels is grid storage capacity, because you have very limited control over how much electricity you generate at any given moment. By borrowing just a few percent of the battery capacity of your EV at times of high demand or low production, we could balance the electricity grid without needing to build huge hydroelectric dams or battery farms.

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/energy

https://www.ovoenergy.com/electric-cars/vehicle-to-grid-charger
>> No. 430054 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 8:53 am
430054 spacer
>>430052 Most homes have enough roof area to be completely self-sufficient for power, even with an EV charger and GSHP heating.

I'm guessing no cooking, showering and a lifestyle that's somewhat different to current ones, unless we're assuming an energy store that can be charged in summer and depleted in winter? (or 'storage is someone else's problem')

I've just ordered some solar systems for a 6W continuous load. 250W of solar panels and a 120Ah battery. That's not going to scale well to a household.
>> No. 430059 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 12:15 pm
430059 spacer
>>430052

Another problem is going to be that not everybody agrees we've got enough rare earth minerals on the planet to store all the electric energy we are going to need in the future. It could be that we run out ot some of them in a few decades, even if the rare earths contained in spent batteries are recycled.
>> No. 430066 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 2:57 pm
430066 spacer
>>430050
To add to your points, petrol cars are ~20% efficient, electric cars ~40%.
>> No. 430071 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 3:59 pm
430071 spacer

eabc693ef3ad2edb8cad04d9ecff92df.jpg
430071430071430071
>>430059

When you break it down to your actual body mass that is transported from A to B, petrol cars are only about 3 percent effective, depending on your body weight, the weight of your car, and of course such things as drag coefficients.

Over 95 percent of the energy released by a combustion engine either escapes as heat or is used to propel the car's own mass.

The only really efficient means of people transport in terms of unnecessary mass would be the kind of transportation tubes you see on Futurama. But then you would still have to ask how energy efficient that technology would be. How much of the (electrical) energy needed to operate those tubes is directly converted into the kinetic energy of a person being propelled down such a tube, etc.
>> No. 430074 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 5:47 pm
430074 spacer
Or we could just build sensibly sized residential areas, walk everywhere and have goods etc transported by solar powered drones like in the old days. If you need to go further than walking distance figure out a way to do it without harming the planet, not my problem.
>> No. 430075 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 6:03 pm
430075 spacer
>>430074
Or we could just continue as we are and you'll have to deal. Not my problem.
>> No. 430076 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 6:06 pm
430076 spacer
>>430075
>Let me travel long distances basically for no meaningful reason or I'll destroy your planet.
>> No. 430077 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 6:27 pm
430077 spacer
>>430074
>have goods etc transported by solar powered drones like in the old days.

This gave me a chuckle.

>If you need to go further than walking distance figure out a way to do it without harming the planet, not my problem.

So people shouldn't interact with distant cultures, we should all live in rural settings...Wait, where are we going with this?
>> No. 430080 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 9:05 pm
430080 spacer

>> No. 430081 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 9:34 pm
430081 spacer
>>430080
>It's too hard

Inspiring stuff from Cpt. Penis Washer.
>> No. 430084 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 9:59 pm
430084 spacer
>>430081
Best wordfilter ever.
>> No. 430085 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 10:39 pm
430085 spacer
We should've listened to Chris Rea thirty years ago.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToQhVV7WpLk
>> No. 430087 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 11:30 pm
430087 spacer
>>430081

Ad Hominem, so bitterful
>> No. 430088 Anonymous
31st August 2019
Saturday 11:44 pm
430088 spacer
>>430087
Your man is a cunt who sniffs his grandmother's pubes and has an almost Trump-like creepy relationship with his daughter. Anyone who listens to him is at least thick. Anyone who actually repeats anything he says or tries to get other people to listen to him is both thick and a cunt.
>> No. 430090 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 12:03 am
430090 spacer
>>430088

Such rage
>> No. 430091 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 12:23 am
430091 spacer
>>430090
Straight men who wear trousers are asking for gay men to notice their arses and try to force their penises into said arses. Anyone who disagrees with this assessment is an irrationally angry bumsore piece of shit. Why can't you just wear loose-fitting skirts like men used to in the old days before you started attention-seeking?
>> No. 430094 Anonymous ## Mod ##
1st September 2019
Sunday 2:14 am
430094 spacer
Stop that.
>> No. 430099 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 3:22 am
430099 spacer
I have never understood people’s grievance with Jordon Peterson. He seems to just be largely saying 'men have needs too, that aren't aligned with women’s needs and aren't being met'. If there is something more toxic to his rhetoric please correct me because I haven't come across it.

There seems to be a lot of people who like to have a sneer at the kind of person who needs the validation and self-empowerment he is trying to provide and I've never really understood why.
>> No. 430100 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 3:49 am
430100 spacer
>>430099
I think it's more that the toxic types think he's saying something more than he is.
>> No. 430102 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 4:05 am
430102 spacer
>>430100
That isn't much of an argument. Nazis loved Nietzsche. I don't blame him.

For all we know Jordon Peterson gives those 'toxic types' the healing and validation they need to get better, which is a good thing, no other cunt is, they just want to have a sneer at them.
>> No. 430103 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 4:32 am
430103 spacer
>>430102
>That isn't much of an argument.
To quote the cockwasher himself, I'm only making an observation. The toxic types think he's saying more than he is actually saying, and so the professionally offended brigade infer from this that that's what he's really saying.
>> No. 430104 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 7:57 am
430104 spacer
>>430099
He is an incredibly intelligent and good man.

But the way the left handles people like Peterson is basically just label him as a bad man who must be no-platformed, so you have all these people protesting against him who have never actually listened to anything he has to say beyond a few quotes taken out of context.

But there's another problem he has, a lot of shitty people in the alt-right and chronic masturbator communities who don't understand what he is talking about have made him into their figurehead.
>> No. 430106 Anonymous
1st September 2019
Sunday 8:19 am
430106 spacer
>>430104

I really have no problem with him being a figure head to chronic masturbatorls they are the sort who need him the most.
>> No. 430157 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 11:26 am
430157 spacer
>>430071 If you go back to where you came from, it's _all_ wasted energy. Just stay home and masturbate.
>> No. 430158 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 5:10 pm
430158 spacer

petersonreplace.jpg
430158430158430158
>>430104

Depends on what criteria you use, but I'm not sure I'd be so quick to credit Peterson as intelligent. If you look at his academic work, a lot of it amounts to absolute nonsense.

His social commentary can be quite dangerous, because his vague pronouncements and theories are open to many interpretations, and they're given a veneer of legitimacy due to his status. There's a strange social Darwinism and authoritarianism present in his thought, but it's always obscured just enough to give some wiggle room to avoid real criticism.

His self-help work is mostly very banal statements dressed up in grand language and theory.
>> No. 430159 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 5:44 pm
430159 spacer
>>430158

Most academics in the field of the psychology of myth sound a bit grandiose and specious in their reasoning. Joseph Campbell if you've ever watched him interviews or the power of myth if you don't accept his background sounds like a tinfoil magical thinking conspiratorial nutter. Truthiness comes with the field, like any other media analysis.

I don't think it is anymore truthiness then any of the critical theory family of beliefs but when you are committed to one and not the other and they are at odds with each other the flaws in the ones reasoning are obvious and not the other.

They are fields where projection is actively encouraged as long as it matches with your supervisors. He isn't qualified to be telling us how to live our lives but no one is. And I like the song he sings more than the one where people feel they can off hand dismiss any of my efforts or achievements or opinions because of my race and gender.
>> No. 430160 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 5:48 pm
430160 spacer

57426274_787568344976847_601571407448506368_n.jpg
430160430160430160
>>430104 >>430158

Re: 12 Rules For Life -

(i) It's not a self-help book as much as a broad guide to philosophy and general state-of-the-world address, but one inferior to shock literary hits of yesteryear in the genre like Straw Dogs by John Gray. The writing tone is very uneven with passages of clarity followed by turgid megalomaniac paragraphs of stodge. There are inconsistencies in worldview from chapter to chapter: he's telling to to stand up and hold the world on your shoulders one minute, then suggesting you aim low and start with the washing up and treat yourself to an espresso afterwards as a reward. Deep-rooted smalltown conservatism is at the heart of the book and he is especially old-fashioned on fidelity and on gender roles and parenting. He is good on the evils of fascism and to my surprise (and no doubt the equal surprise of leftist commentators who've condemned him without reading him) acknowledges Trump as a clear precursor of fascism. He is also effective and hard to argue with in his condemnations of Marxist utopian ideas, and gives concrete examples of the Khmer Rouge and the Soviet gulags, with special opprobrium reserved for Derrida. The disingenuous framing of his conservatism as objective classic liberalism becomes wearing and painfully obvious,however.

(ii) At one point he acknowledges that young women are now more promiscuous than young men, in defiance of his central thesis and centuries of the right way of doing things, yet instead of wondering if mores and the whole notion of gender are actually changing he simply says 'it's a tragedy'- presumably because they're not shagging him?

(iii) Not much humour or cheer in this book. "Pain (see suffering)" - from the index. His childhood in a freezing cultural wasteland in Alberta may well account for some of this. His marriage to his high school sweetheart accounts for the sexual conservatism. He shows a breadth of knowledge and quotes Dostoevsky, the Columbine killers, The Simpsons, Freud, the Tao, Disney films and Vedic literature well to illustrate generally downbeat views of life. The Christian content feels unwieldy and bolted-on in comparison: essentially he's a folksy Anton La Vey or a much more toned down and successful Boyd Rice.

(iv) There's a lot on his daughter, also a public figure, and her long triumph over her health problems. Very little about his son. So much of the book is like having the world's most annoying and overbearing dad ranting at you and it really would not surprise me at all if his son despises him.

(iii) The autobiographical segments are by far the most psychologically revealing (and best written) and explain why he has chosen to strive for the world stage despite really not having much new to tell people. He had a very close teenage friend called Chris who stayed true to the socialist ideals they shared and began to see any kind of competition in the world, from applying for jobs to chasing girls, as the same kind of colonialist excess they despised. Chris was also a rival for his wife's affections. He became bitter at his lack of worldly success, and killed himself at the age of 40. The persona of 'Jordan B Peterson' clearly followed as a kind of perverse tribute to his friend's memory. One subject not mentioned in a book which touches on almost everything else in the world: homosexuality.
>> No. 430161 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 6:35 pm
430161 spacer
>>430160

>(ii) At one point he acknowledges that young women are now more promiscuous than young men, in defiance of his central thesis and centuries of the right way of doing things, yet instead of wondering if mores and the whole notion of gender are actually changing he simply says 'it's a tragedy'- presumably because they're not shagging him?


I would presume because he thinks the old models of monogamy are the way to go and are necessary for sustaining society, but I am projecting onto him by doing that just as much as you are by thinking ‘it’s just cause they ain’t shagging him’, all be it less disingenuously of his overall principals. As much as he is made fun of for his lobsters comparison that seems suggestive of his point here.
>> No. 430162 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 8:55 pm
430162 spacer
>>430157
>If you go back to where you came from, it's _all_ wasted energy.
So, in short, racist and xenophobic sentiment is bad for the climate?
>> No. 430163 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 9:27 pm
430163 spacer
>>430160
>presumably because they're not shagging him?
I have no doubt at all he has to turn hot young women away very regularly and even the odd tranny.
>> No. 430164 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 9:56 pm
430164 spacer
>>430160
Your review is highly detailed and greatly amusing. Thank you.
>> No. 430165 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 10:03 pm
430165 spacer

tenor.gif
430165430165430165
Turns out it's not all gloom and doom.

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-english-birds-bunting-partridge-owls-a9090061.html

>Climate change has positive impact on most English birds, study finds
>> No. 430166 Anonymous
3rd September 2019
Tuesday 10:18 pm
430166 spacer
>>430165
It'll save on fake tan for sure.
>> No. 430228 Anonymous
5th September 2019
Thursday 11:51 am
430228 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Deaz3UN0rw
>> No. 430244 Anonymous
5th September 2019
Thursday 8:28 pm
430244 spacer
>>430228

http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/1982%20Exxon%20Primer%20on%20CO2%20Greenhouse%20Effect.pdf

We've had 40 years. Longer even, this is from after people have been doing the science. We're building a railway right into our own demise and refuse to stop.
>> No. 430245 Anonymous
5th September 2019
Thursday 8:45 pm
430245 spacer
>>430244
Yep.

>> No. 430330 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 12:24 pm
430330 spacer
The planet is going to be fine, really. Give it a few million years, and we will have been a blip on the screen, especially compared to other extinct classes of animals like the Dinosaurs. It'll be blind luck if some advanced alien species will even find remnants of us in the fossil record at all in 65 million years or thereabouts.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xDK2LgSeyk

The only ones we're impacting are ourselves. And the ethical question is, what kind of world do we want to leave behind for our descendants the next 100 to 300 years. They'll have it pretty rough if we continue our ways. So protecting the environment, although it may seem like an altruistic idea, is really one of the purest forms of self interest for us as a species.

Other than that, life on Earth has bounced back from much more serious extinction events which sometimes wiped out over 90 percent of all living species.
>> No. 430331 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 12:34 pm
430331 spacer
>>430330
Go and sit in the dunce corner with the other anti-natalists.
>> No. 430332 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 12:46 pm
430332 spacer
>>430331
They don't come across as anti-natalist to me, and you come across as not being able to make a real argument for anything.
>> No. 430337 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 3:05 pm
430337 spacer
>>430331

I'm not wrong though.
>> No. 430338 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 3:27 pm
430338 spacer

black science man.jpg
430338430338430338
>>430337
You're wrong if you think coming in with your BRILLIANT "Well ACTUALLY the PLANET will be fine" is warranted. See >>425691 >>425697 >>425739 >>426026
Everybody fucking knows that.
>> No. 430340 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 3:34 pm
430340 spacer
Hey everyone you're so stupid don't you realise that even if all higher life on Earth dies off the noumenal planet won't spontaneously cease to exist? So by extension you're all worrying over nothing, all human life dying doesn't matter to me. I'm so clever and original for pointing this out. I'm not wrong though.
>> No. 430341 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 3:55 pm
430341 spacer
>>430340

Personally I don't think humanity could really be wiped out at this point, just significantly reduced. There are enough places that for lack of a better term will improve with global warming. Personally I think north hemisphere would be fine and prosperous in that situation. Even if south America burns down its rain forests and east Asia fills the entire Pacific with plastic. I'll be investing in the Norwegian banana industry as soon as I can.
>> No. 430342 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 4:09 pm
430342 spacer
>>430338
In classic .gs fashion, I dispute the certainty that life will be fine without us. The increasing luminosity of the Sun alone will at some point render Earth devoid of life and I've seen numbers as low as 500 thousand years depending on when a runaway greenhouse event is caused.

Failing that, if we try our very hardest we could fuck over complex life enough that there isn't anything like us arising for 500 million years. That will be enough for the increasing solar luminosity to halt plate tectonics. I'm not racist but fuck Bird-People.
>> No. 430343 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 4:20 pm
430343 spacer
>>430341

Thinking that anywhere will improve is a dangerous train of thought. We're too reliant on the biosphere of our planet to hope that it can adapt in time to make northern norway a tropical nightmareland.

Now what people actually need to do is stop being scared of nuclear power. We got ourselves into a dangerous situation, we need the most effective way to mitigate it and nuclear is a proven technology, with room to develop and improve. Just hope someone can convince the government of this soon enough.
Germany closing their nuclear plants was the most reactionary and ill-thought-through course of action of the last decade, if you see what's replaced it it's certainly not green energy. They use so much coal. If people were more honest they'd call it out for being the disaster that it really is for carbon mitigation.
>> No. 430345 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 4:43 pm
430345 spacer
>>430343
>Just hope someone can convince the government of this soon enough.

Someone did and we're already getting royally licked out for it.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/13/hinkley-point-c-rising-costs-long-delays-power-station

I'm not convinced if I'm honest with you. Nuclear could work and combined with vertical farming we're extinction proof but it seems incredibly inefficient when we could just improve supergrids with a moderate investment in solar for additional capacity.

The French government is full of insufferable bell-ends who will use every trick to exert control like some parallel Russia but power stopping at borders is mad to think about.
>> No. 430346 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 5:02 pm
430346 spacer
>>430342

> The increasing luminosity of the Sun alone will at some point render Earth devoid of life and I've seen numbers as low as 500 thousand years depending on when a runaway greenhouse event is caused.

I think it's more 500 million years though. That's about the average amount of time that geoscientists seem to think the Earth has left to sustain the kind of complex and diverse life that is possible today.

Still a long time tough, as most complex life on Earth has developed only in the last 500-600 million years. Land animals as such have existed for less than that. Multicellular life also only appeared a billion years ago. From about 3bn to 1bn years BP, life on Earth consisted almost solely of single-cell bacterial ooze.
>> No. 430347 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 5:03 pm
430347 spacer
>>430345

I don't know what's going on with hinkley to be honest, it looks like a typical example of what's happening in the UK for the past couple of decades - other EU states exploiting our privatised infrastructure.
I need to read up on my nuclear history but I believe as a source of power and a matter of national security it's in the interests of the country to maintain our own nuclear power initiative. It's much more secure a power source than any fossil fuel, we obviously have advanced programs for military purposes for the submarine fleets...

I read recently about initiatives pushing small modular reactors so maybe that will bear fruit down the line and give us something domestic and more cost efficient. Sounds a lot like they'd be developed with knowledge coming off military developments.

There's also the inherent problem with renewables, if we're considering costs, that the more the market is saturated with renewable power the further energy costs increase due to intermittent generation and low capacity factors. A nice big international energy grid to balance this a bit would be nice but hey, good luck waiting for that.
>> No. 430348 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 5:07 pm
430348 spacer
>>430346 >>430347

I'm a big fan of the idea of decentralised solar power mind, it just seems like a great way to non-invasively increase our solar capacity.
>> No. 430349 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 5:12 pm
430349 spacer
>>430343

>Now what people actually need to do is stop being scared of nuclear power.

The problem isn't the realisation that nuclear power has a low carbon footprint and is therefore environmentally friendly, but how badly it can go wrong, and then have a more devastating effect on the environment than anything else. Just look at Chernobyl or Fukushima.

Germany took kind of a drastic approach, I think 60 percent of their electric energy still today is from nuclear power, and that's similar to the French I think. What they won't tell you is that Germany will become a net importer of electricity for a number of years until renewable energy technology has caught up. They will be using nearly as much nuclear power as they do today, only it will come from abroad.
>> No. 430350 Anonymous
8th September 2019
Sunday 5:35 pm
430350 spacer
>>430347
>I don't know what's going on with hinkley to be honest

To attract the appropriate levels of investment the UK Government negotiated an absurdly one-sided contract complete with a guaranteed energy price and UK responsibility for clean-up. To top it off we're tied to EDF as happens with all big infrastructure projects so they cannot be allowed to fail even when though they are absolutely taking the piss with a reactor design that isn't even finalised.

Of course we've been fucked over but the problem is much more fundamental. This size of a civil engineering project requires big upfront investments that are hard to materialise, overruns are a given and over-centralised grids are susceptible to massive blackouts when a point in the grid fails. Uniquely for nuclear power, there is also a considerable expertise gap that comes with commissioning over decades because people retire and others don't get into an industry without continual work (again a problem for EDF's balance sheet).

>A nice big international energy grid to balance this a bit would be nice but hey, good luck waiting for that.

It's not the only thing but simply the easiest on a technical scale. We can also look at smarter grids that weathered the solar eclipse a few years back and improved storage capacity with the notable feature of electric cars.


And good luck going through a massive commissioning cycle every few decades.
>> No. 430407 Anonymous
11th September 2019
Wednesday 11:47 pm
430407 spacer
I was asked to share this widely


I think the one in >>430245 is better though
>> No. 430409 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:04 am
430409 spacer
>>430407

>I was asked 


Exactly who asked you?
>> No. 430410 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:08 am
430410 spacer

screenshot taken at your mother oclock.png
430410430410430410
>>430409
>> No. 430411 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:32 am
430411 spacer
>>430407
>>430410
Lad, you're acting like a modernised version of someone's grandmother. Are both of our view counts going to get you some fanny or something?
>> No. 430412 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:34 am
430412 spacer
>>430411
They might help me finish this cross-stitch.
>> No. 430413 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:35 am
430413 spacer
>>430410
If they asked you to jump off a cliff, would you do that too?
>> No. 430415 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:43 am
430415 spacer
>>430413
Why, can you not differentiate between the two actions?
>> No. 430416 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:52 am
430416 spacer
>>430415
They require about the same level of critical thinking to figure out that they're not necessarily a good idea.
>> No. 430419 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 9:26 am
430419 spacer
>>430416
It would have been quicker to just say "no". Don't you ever get bored of doing the cynical and apathetic curmudgeon schtick?
>> No. 430420 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 10:03 am
430420 spacer
>>430419

I'm replying to this specifically to cockblock otherlad from posting "No."
>> No. 430421 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 10:31 am
430421 spacer
>>430420
Cheers.
>> No. 430426 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 12:05 pm
430426 spacer
>>430411

First the mumsnet drugs shit and now this. We need a normie cull. I call Normiefinder General.
>> No. 430429 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 1:32 pm
430429 spacer
>>430426

We could have a big red button you can click when you see a normie; it'd be shaped like a tendie and play a "REEE!" sound.
>> No. 430430 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 1:37 pm
430430 spacer
>>430429
What even is a tendie?
>> No. 430431 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 1:51 pm
430431 spacer
>>430430
I'm not sure, I just thought it was important you have some way to express yourself non-verbally.
>> No. 430432 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 2:40 pm
430432 spacer
>>430407

I googled it, they're apparently an American name for chicken nuggets.
>> No. 430434 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 3:47 pm
430434 spacer
>>430407

It kind of goes a tad too much against Big Everything.


Not that those protesters haven't got a point, but the idea that Big Everything impedes change and the common good of mankind shouldn't be a startling new revelation to anybody, is probably what I am trying to say.

Especially not on .gs.
>> No. 430435 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 4:23 pm
430435 spacer
>>430434

That's fair.
>> No. 430436 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 4:48 pm
430436 spacer
>>430435

Again, not saying I disagree with their principal points. We're really about as fucked as they say in that video.

But that clip just sounds like a pastiche of commonplace bullet points that have been widely known at least since Club of Rome days, and thrown in for good measure some "us against Big this and that" idea dropping, which you're forgiven for thinking comes from a place of 20something marxist edgelad chique.

Maybe you see the world with different eyes as a younglad when all of those ideas are still somewhat new to you, but once you've hit middle age, it just doesn't seem anymore like any of that is dangerous knowledge that THEY don't want you to have. You become a cynic, and when a movement comes along with that kind of rhethoric, however good its intentions may be, then it just sounds to you like yet another world revolution setting itself up to fail like all the others that came before it.
>> No. 430438 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 5:28 pm
430438 spacer
>>430436

That's just what THEY want you to think, after all.
>> No. 430439 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 5:46 pm
430439 spacer
>>430438

Shhh, that's dangerous knowledge, didn't you hear .
>> No. 430441 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:05 pm
430441 spacer
>>430436

Pointing out that powerful actors in the world are advancing climate change against the interests of the overwhelming majority of people is just a fact. Resisting those actors is not BRILLIANT or revolutionary, but a rational reaction if you value human life.

What sort of tone would you advocate, to draw in people like yourself?
>> No. 430443 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:28 pm
430443 spacer
>>430441
Frame it in terms of what people will be missing out on. If we can't solve this properly, then there'll be no more cheap holidays to Spain and no more steak or roast dinners. Also, we have to stop blaming consumers for the sins of those further up the supply chain. Markets are rather less free and rational than the Austrians would have you believe. For example, the electronic waste crisis is nothing to do with "consumer choice" and everything to do with the deliberate decision by manufacturers to pursue a policy of planned obsolescence. We have phones breaking through four digit price points yet only bring useful for about 18-24 months.
>> No. 430444 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:32 pm
430444 spacer
>>430443
>If we can't solve this properly, then there'll be no more cheap holidays to Spain and no more steak or roast dinners.

Condescendingly talking down to the masses always works!
>> No. 430445 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:39 pm
430445 spacer
>>430444

>Condescendingly talking down to the masses always works!


Relax, lad, I'm sure you'll still get to go to Large Canary Island. Just not four times a year.
>> No. 430446 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:43 pm
430446 spacer
>>430444
Putting things in terms people are going to understand is condescending now. What a time to be alive.
>> No. 430447 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:47 pm
430447 spacer
>>430445
Oh Boris.
>> No. 430448 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 6:48 pm
430448 spacer
>>430446
Do fuck off please. The working classes don't somehow think in terms of big TVs and holidays to the Costa Del Sol. They are worried about their futures, their families, their friends. Just like you.
>> No. 430449 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 7:01 pm
430449 spacer
>>430448
>just like you

I dunno lad, he sounds like a nihilist.
>> No. 430450 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 7:15 pm
430450 spacer
>>430447

I've been saying for some time, granted, not on here, that there should be a flight tax that is levied not at the fuel consumption or ticket price level, but at the individual taxpayer's level.

Say you've got a system where everybody has 5,000 flight miles free every year. That's enough to get you to most holiday destinations in the Mediterranean and back to Britain once. And then if you travel more than those 5,000 miles, every additional thousand miles will increase your overall personal income tax amount by 0.2 percent. That seems like a feasible amount that won't have people gathering into angry mobs, because for a 20 percent increase of your overall income tax, that way you'd still have to fly 100,000 miles a year, which most people probably won't do. If you're below the £12K personal allowance, you pay a reduced rate. A portion of that additional tax can then be reclaimed if you own things like a bus pass or a railcard, or if you can claim hardship like visiting a relative in another country who is in ill health or things like that.

The government keeps all your PNR records already anyway, and instead of keeping them for such bogus things as international militant daft woggery, it'd be easy for them to track how many miles you've flown in a particular year. The money raised from such a tax could then be used to fund renewable energy or environmental projects. And it would affect people justly and proportionally, meaning a more well to do person will pay higher flight tax on the same flight than a pauper.

You could probably extend that kind of tax scheme to cars, although that would require a much bigger mass surveillance effort than is already in place, which I would personally not like to see.
>> No. 430453 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 10:35 pm
430453 spacer
>>430450

We need the tax to be noticeable and we need it to hurt, because the entire point is to dis-incentivise people from flying. A tax that raises a ton of money but doesn't actually put people off is no good.

We charge a higher rate of VED on less-efficient cars because we want people to notice the extra cost and change their behaviour accordingly.

We have to stop flying; the question is how to achieve that goal in a hurry.
>> No. 430454 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 10:43 pm
430454 spacer
>>430453

There is an old school of thought that it won't really matter what kinds of crude oil consumption we ban, in the end, every last drop of it will eventually be used in other ways. And that we will merely slow down the rates of depletion of the world's oil deposits.
>> No. 430455 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 11:11 pm
430455 spacer
>>430448
Fine. Keep telling them about biodiversity loss, colony collapse syndrome, glacial extinction and polarification. I'm sure they'll get it eventually.
>> No. 430456 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 11:15 pm
430456 spacer
>>430455
People are trying to frame it in those terms. For example you know that cockney staple food, the common eel is 90% extinct? Though frankly talking about that feels like patronising condescension to me too.
>> No. 430457 Anonymous
12th September 2019
Thursday 11:24 pm
430457 spacer
I still don't understand why we can't just stop having kids instead. It's literally the most effective possible solution.
>> No. 430459 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 12:04 am
430459 spacer
>>430457
Because someone has to care for us (or cover the costs thereof) in our old age. A much better solution is to cull the over-70s, who are bigger drains on our resources than children. They're effectively dead weight anyway, so we might as well make it official.
>> No. 430460 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 12:21 am
430460 spacer
>>430456
Talk about condescension all you like, but the simple fact of the matter is that the general public are thick as pigshit. While the surveys underpinning this no longer ask people to explain their discrepancies, the last time it was asked the top answer was to the effect of "the numbers must be wrong".

Your average Briton is mostly wrong about everything. That almost certainly includes two out of the three of us. (I assume purps is the one that isn't an idiot.)
>> No. 430462 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 1:24 am
430462 spacer
>>430457

Something about genocide and eugenics is the usual trotted out answer.

Don't get me wrong those aren't ideal, but the alternative seems to be an equal opportunity die-off (of most of the poor on the planet anyway).

It really does boil down to scale eventually, our society doesn't function well with tons of old people either considering most old people aren't healthy enough to actually contribute much, so then governments have to worry about keeping the population growing to compensate for all the (not-quite)dead weight.
>> No. 430463 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 1:54 am
430463 spacer
>>430462

> Don't get me wrong those aren't ideal, but the alternative seems to be an equal opportunity die-off (of most of the poor on the planet anyway).

We could just, you know, burn less shit yeah?
>> No. 430464 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 3:01 am
430464 spacer
>>430463
You're almost as tiresome as the Br*x*t crowd.
>> No. 430465 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 9:13 am
430465 spacer
>>430459

>A much better solution is to cull the over-70s, who are bigger drains on our resources than children. They're effectively dead weight anyway

You'll end up eating your words when you turn 70 yourself.

And besides, the elderly serve an important function in helping to raise their children's children, and will continue to do so as people will have children later and later in the future.

Add to that the fact that old people will be much healthier, and today's generation of the elderly already is compared to previous generations, and you will have to admit that your opinion really isn't as tenable as you think.
>> No. 430466 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 10:18 am
430466 spacer
>>430465

Epidemiological studies have shown that those turning 70 in the 1990s and those turning 70 in the 2010s are absolutely different cohorts in terms of health. The 2010 group were fatter, but also more mobile, less likely to be disabled, had fewer and less severe hearing and vision impairments, and so on. We really do seem to be leading better lives.
>> No. 430467 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 11:05 am
430467 spacer
>>430466

There will be a significant rise in dementia though in the future. So you'll have people who may be in decent physical shape for their age, but they'll essentially have the intellect of a four year old.

https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/about-us/news-and-media/facts-media

>There are 850,000 people with dementia in the UK, with numbers set to rise to over 1 million by 2025. This will soar to 2 million by 2051.
>> No. 430468 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 11:08 am
430468 spacer
>>430467

Fair point. Though there is some promising research showing that Alzheimer's is related to diabetes (some even calling it type 3). It may be possible to bring dementia under control for some of the population.

Cancers seem like an inescapable biological ceiling in ageing at the moment.
>> No. 430469 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 11:26 am
430469 spacer
>>430465
>You'll end up eating your words when you turn 70 yourself.
At least I'd live that long. Anyway, we can repeal it by the time we get that old as an act of revenge for the intergenerational fuckery the boomers have pulled.
>> No. 430470 Anonymous
13th September 2019
Friday 11:33 am
430470 spacer
>>430468

>Cancers seem like an inescapable biological ceiling in ageing at the moment.

I think at a fundamental level, many cancers are due to the body's growing inability to kill off mutated cells in the body as you age. If you take lung cancer, for example, smoking produces mutated cells in your lungs and elsewhere throughout your smoking career, even at a young age, but most people smoke 20 or 30 years before they get lung cancer. When you're young, your body is simply much better at weeding out damaged cells before they can turn into cancer growths. And then as you age, smoking will have a much greater impact on your immune system as such, in addition to the immune system naturally becoming less robust.

The key to preventing cancer in an aging population in the future will be both healthy living and to prolong your body's own ability for cell and tissue repair. Maybe this will be possible through genetic engineering or gene therapy.

Also, one phaenomenon that has been observed in recent years is that late dads in particular tend to have more genetically robust offspring, because for reasons not yet fully understood, children of middle aged dads tend to have longer telomers on their cell chromosomes. As cells regenerate and divide in the body, these telomers in those cells become shorter. The longer your telomers, the more times your cells can regenerate, leaving those children with a potentially more robust genetic makeup that is more fit for longevity.

Not the same is true for late mums though. The chances of severe birth defects and other genetic damage in offspring rise steadily throughout a woman's thirties and beyond. While testicles degenerate with age just as ovaries do, a 40something man who has lived a healthy lifestyle still has a very high chance of fathering perfectly healthy children.
>> No. 430512 Anonymous
15th September 2019
Sunday 9:47 pm
430512 spacer
Looks like there will be no more winter sport in the future.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/09/12/could-global-warming-spell-demise-winter-sports-these-athletes-told-congress-thats-their-fear/?noredirect=on
>> No. 430514 Anonymous
15th September 2019
Sunday 10:30 pm
430514 spacer
>>430512
If anything's waking the septics up it's the loss of sports.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-most-americans-say-climate-change-should-be-addressed-now-2019-09-15/
>> No. 430515 Anonymous
15th September 2019
Sunday 11:29 pm
430515 spacer

media.media.5f8b4122-7f9d-4b30-beca-e944b5442950.o.jpg
430515430515430515
>>430514

Bad news for ARE Eddie as well.
>> No. 430516 Anonymous
16th September 2019
Monday 12:35 am
430516 spacer
>>430469
What did they do over here? I thought Rage Against The Boomers were only big in America.
>> No. 430518 Anonymous
16th September 2019
Monday 2:27 am
430518 spacer
>>430516

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pinch-Boomers-Childrens-Future-Should/dp/1848872321/

http://www.if.org.uk/research/
>> No. 430559 Anonymous
19th September 2019
Thursday 1:09 pm
430559 spacer
Greta Thunberg is nit autistic. She's actually a powerful unsanctioned psyker.

Her fury is the only realistic explanation for the fact it's currently scorchingly hot in late September.
>> No. 430580 Anonymous
19th September 2019
Thursday 9:22 pm
430580 spacer
would

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 430586 Anonymous
19th September 2019
Thursday 11:41 pm
430586 spacer
Big climate strike tomorrow. Police making funny noises about not allowing disruption. Could get a bit hairy.
>> No. 430588 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 1:43 am
430588 spacer
>>430586
Handbags.
>> No. 430591 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 9:37 am
430591 spacer

EE4DcJcVUAA_QFd.jpg
430591430591430591
>>430588
Yeah or something a bit less trivial. Here's Sydney earlier.
>> No. 430592 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 9:49 am
430592 spacer
I know someone off to the global climate strike. He's mainly going to try and pull.
>> No. 430593 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 10:07 am
430593 spacer

greta_thunberg_youtube_young_boy.png
430593430593430593
>>430592
>> No. 430594 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 10:08 am
430594 spacer
>>430592

Not everyone can be satisfied by staying at home wanking.
>> No. 430595 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 11:01 am
430595 spacer
>>430591

Impressive turnout.
>> No. 430596 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 4:54 pm
430596 spacer

EE6mddjUcAAUeQ0.jpg
430596430596430596
Area 51 raid > global climate strike.
>> No. 430600 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 9:14 pm
430600 spacer

1568997085459.jpg
430600430600430600
>>430596
It's not as though the US has a history of using nonsense around Area 51 to distract top lads from more important things happening. The NYC turnout was pretty impressive too.

>>430592
I found this in north Victoria Tower Gardens, he might be in luck.
>> No. 430601 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 9:21 pm
430601 spacer
>>430600
I think the Area 51 date may have been set before this protest. There would be interesting implications if The Man were able to disrupt protests by preemptively double-booking them.
>> No. 430602 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 9:27 pm
430602 spacer
>>430601

The Russkies have a habit of organising two opposing protests on the same day in the same place, just to start a brawl.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency#Rallies_and_protests_organized_by_IRA_in_the_United_States
>> No. 430605 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 9:32 pm
430605 spacer
>>430601
There are loads of memeshit events set all the time. The Man can easily encourage or discourage them as they see fit.

>>430602
Apparently there was a minor altercation with a Trump supporter who came out to start trouble. Gave the police an excuse to send their horses in and shake his hand. This is a second-hand retelling though, I don't know how accurate it is beyond that there were definitely police horses around.
>> No. 430610 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 10:46 pm
430610 spacer
>>430601
>>430602
What if all this "there is no planet B" stuff is the real distraction? It seems like UFO stories have really been ramping up lately.

Just you lads wait, come Monday there will be no stories at all about Area 51 but we're all going to wake up with sore arses and no recollection of what happened to all the beers in the fridge.
>> No. 430611 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 10:54 pm
430611 spacer
>>430610

> but we're all going to wake up with sore arses and no recollection of what happened to all the beers in the fridge.

Typical weekend in Manchester.
>> No. 430613 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 11:36 pm
430613 spacer
>>430610

There definitely aren't any aliens. If there were, we'd be seeing non-stop propaganda to prepare us for war against the spacewogs.
>> No. 430615 Anonymous
20th September 2019
Friday 11:52 pm
430615 spacer

5411adec44e7608f1c5f9f8d17c12208.jpg
430615430615430615
>>430613

Not if the aliens control Earth's governments to make sure nobody is aware of their existence.
>> No. 430616 Anonymous
21st September 2019
Saturday 11:24 am
430616 spacer
Ain't no planet X coming cuz ain't no space cuz ain't not globe earth.
>> No. 430630 Anonymous
21st September 2019
Saturday 8:06 pm
430630 spacer

EFAlPVYXUAAtdR3.jpg
430630430630430630

>> No. 430632 Anonymous
21st September 2019
Saturday 8:14 pm
430632 spacer
>>430630

Crossing the Atlantic on a sailboat must have been more gruelling than everybody thought.
>> No. 430633 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 12:51 am
430633 spacer
>>430632
Gosh, poor Merchant Navy Lad probably looks like an old tree.
>> No. 430639 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 4:15 pm
430639 spacer
>Climate change: Impacts 'accelerating' as leaders gather for UN talks
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49773869

>Hundreds of Australian academics declare support for climate rebellion
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/sep/20/we-declare-our-support-for-extinction-rebellion-an-open-letter-from-australias-academics
>> No. 430640 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 5:52 pm
430640 spacer
I totally support the climate protests, but the big problem we have is how do we actually switch from a fossil fuel based society? I'm typing this on a plastic keyboard, my dinner was brought to the shop's by petrol and diesel burning vehicles and a lot of men think eating chicken is a bit gay, let alone going totally vegetarian. Everything we do is polluting. I don't bring this up to be one of those "who cares lol and the Chinese won't listen so let's not bother" people, I'm genuinely curious as to how we're supposed to be stopping the climate crisis? It's all well and good reusing coffee cups, but I'm within earshot of the M6 and those lorries are still chugging down diesel from what I hear.
>> No. 430641 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 5:59 pm
430641 spacer
>>430640

Burn less shit or we're all fucked. Those trucks can go electric, as can your car and your central heating. Meat is mostly off the menu, cheap holidays are over, we need to use a lot less concrete and steel in construction, we need to stop air-freighting green beans from Kenya. It won't be pleasant, but the alternative is armageddon.
>> No. 430642 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 6:03 pm
430642 spacer
>>430641
>Meat is mostly off the menu, cheap holidays are over
He's after practical solutions, m8.
>> No. 430643 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 6:08 pm
430643 spacer
>>430641

Yeah but what if I just want to eat steaks and drive my Land Rover and don't really care if it means all the children suffer for it? We've all got to die sometime.
>> No. 430644 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 6:21 pm
430644 spacer
>>430642

Those are the practical solutions. People want mythical solutions that allow us to radically reduce our carbon emissions without radically altering our lifestyle. That's not an option - either we do the hard work, or the climate collapses.

You can keep your flame-grilled Whoppers, but we'll end up with a billion refugees due to flooding and polarification. You can keep your cheap package holidays, but we'll lose most of the east coast of England. Those are the choices we face. They aren't appealing choices, but they're the only choices on offer.
>> No. 430645 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 6:27 pm
430645 spacer
>>430640
Systemic change like the government, banks, universities and other institutions divesting from fossil fuel, banning fracking, putting actual taxes on flights/air fuel and removing or just lowering the disproportionate taxes that we have on solar energy. You can ban or tax single-use plastics or a whole range of other things that encourage people to return containers for reuse. You can increase tree cover and decrease concrete use, put more money into public transport and pedestrianise streets with various ways to encourage cycling. There's actually fucking loads of practical things the government can do about it and could have done about it if they didn't allow themselves to be the focus of lobbying by oil companies and other vested interests for the past thirty or forty years.

>>430643
Then go fuck yourself.
>> No. 430646 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:15 pm
430646 spacer
>>430644
>Those are the practical solutions.
We've been through this before. It is neither fair nor practical to ask an entire generation to forego the things their parents enjoyed as of right. Intergenerational theft is bad enough as it is. >>430645 has it right. If we had a government that weren't so fucking stingy with public goods we could have decent public transport and a solid electrified rail freight network, with last-mile delivery covered by EVs utilising flywheels and regenerative braking. We could have some serious research into clean coal to determine for once and for all that it doesn't really exist. We could make sure that when waste is sent for recycling it's actually fucking recycled, and not piled up in warehouses or dumped in landfill. We need to stop building shitty little boxes on the outskirts of town and selling them to a relatively wealthy landlord class, and build decent quality social housing in our cities rather than luxury apartments for Arab oil tycoons and Russian money launderers. The working classes are considerably more productive, and having them nearer where the jobs are reduces their need to travel. By contrast, the people that buy the luxury properties actively abstract value from the economy. Their consumption and their waste generate no useful byproduct.

Maybe there's something to this "eat the rich" idea after all.
>> No. 430647 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:23 pm
430647 spacer
>>430644

We can also just stop having as many bloody kids. Do I have to post the graph again?

You can drive ten land rovers for the carbon cost of one child.
>> No. 430650 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:42 pm
430650 spacer
>>430647
It's actually quite difficult to drive more than one land rover at any given time.
>> No. 430651 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:43 pm
430651 spacer
>>430646
>We've been through this before. It is neither fair nor practical to ask an entire generation to forego the things their parents enjoyed as of right. Intergenerational theft is bad enough as it is. >>430645 has it right.
Just to be clear I (645) was also suggesting measures that'd mean the things 644 was talking about were restricted. Taxes on fossil fuels will drive up the cost of imported beef, no more cheap flame-grilled whoppers or cheap package holidays.
>> No. 430652 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:47 pm
430652 spacer
>>430646

We have to do all of that stuff and a lot more besides, and we have to stop eating meat and flying. There isn't an a la carte option.

We really need to get down to net zero emissions, but two tonnes per person per year is the absolute maximum level that will avoid catastrophe within our lifetime. A meat-heavy diet is two tonnes per year. A return flight to Thailand is two tonnes. If you do either of those things, you've burned through the whole of your annual carbon allowance.

It might not be fair, you might not consider it practical, but it's inarguably true. There is no painless solution. Either we endure lower living standards, or we endure climate catastrophe. Those are your choices. Pick one. If you don't choose, you get catastrophe by default.
>> No. 430653 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:52 pm
430653 spacer
>Make climate fight 'sexy,' says Japan's new environment minister
>Japan’s new environment minister, Shinjiro Koizumi, pledged on Sunday to mobilise young people to push his coal-dependent country towards a low-carbon future by making the fight against climate change “sexy” and “fun.”
>“In politics there are so many issues, sometimes boring. On tackling such a big-scale issue like climate change, it’s got to be fun, it’s got to be cool. It’s got to be sexy too,” Koizumi told a news conference in New York.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-climate-change-un-japan/make-climate-fight-sexy-says-japans-new-environment-minister-idUKKBN1W70PS?il=0

I like this line of thought that revolution should be irresistible.

>>430640
We can offset climate change with new technology or when that fails we have the technology to brute force our problems. As an ultimate example, constructing a solar shade is possible (but very expensive) which the US government has been working on as a Plan B since 2004~.

Obviously that doesn't give carte blanche to be a total dickhead but as a species we're very good at turning things around once the cost is justified. There's no need to live your life like a penance and I suspect those advocating puritan solutions are using a sense of urgency to ram their politics in or acting out their inferiority complex.
>> No. 430654 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:55 pm
430654 spacer
>>430652
Not disagreeing in general but
>lower living standards
is a misnomer. It's only lower living standards if your measure of living standards is how much you get to consume. If you measure it by things like health, community and meaningful work then suddenly you're looking at a massive increase in living standards.
>> No. 430655 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 7:56 pm
430655 spacer

Humble_Ad.jpg
430655430655430655
>>430646

>We've been through this before. It is neither fair nor practical to ask an entire generation to forego the things their parents enjoyed as of right.

By that logic, we should just let our children enjoy cigarettes just the same way we did. Who are we to tell them not to smoke, if we enjoyed that right.

It's just as harmful in its own way. Having a fag probably won't make all the glaciers melt faster, but I'm sure you get my meaning.


>The working classes are considerably more productive, and having them nearer where the jobs are reduces their need to travel.

Our modern age of cheap mass travel (and personal travel by car) and capitalism in general have made it both possible and necessary that people travel a lot. If you look at people who commute into big cities like London or Liverpool, a lot of them go on 100-mile train rides round-trip every day. You can't just expect them to all move back into London or Liverpool, because they simply cannot afford it. So you'd have to provide affordable inner-city housing so that families on a double income won't have to live on a South London estate.

These aren't the extremes though. There was something on TV a few years ago about extreme commutes, and they had this doctor who worked at an upscale clinic for wealthy patients in Majorca, and she was a weekend commuter. Which meant that she flew from Britain to Majorca every Sunday night, and back home to her family the following Thursday night. She said that the pay was so good that even with up to five round-trip flights a month, she was making more money than she would have made at similar hospitals in the UK.
>> No. 430656 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:09 pm
430656 spacer
>>430652
>but it's inarguably true.
Resorting to the typical tactic around here, I see.
>> No. 430657 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:12 pm
430657 spacer
>>430653
So speaking of politics being rammed in:

>>430654
>>430655
Don't worry, lads. We'll abandon capitalism, get 'meaningful work' and then everything will be good forever.
>> No. 430659 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:15 pm
430659 spacer
>>430657
Glad you're focusing on the important issue here. We can all die if the alternative means you might not be a mindless drone in an office. David Graeber was wrong, everyone just lie down and wait to die.
>> No. 430660 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:17 pm
430660 spacer
>>430655
>By that logic, we should just let our children enjoy cigarettes just the same way we did. Who are we to tell them not to smoke, if we enjoyed that right.
No, that's not how that works at all. We're not forcing children not to smoke, they're choosing not to smoke.

>So you'd have to provide affordable inner-city housing so that families on a double income won't have to live on a South London estate.
Which is what I said, as you'd know if you'd read the post before reflexively responding to it.
>> No. 430661 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:24 pm
430661 spacer

Shoehorn.jpg
430661430661430661
>>430659
Here, you might find this more effective than your crowbar.
>> No. 430662 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:30 pm
430662 spacer
>>430656

I've linked to the IPCC report several times in this thread. If you doubt my conclusions, you're welcome to read it. Fairness or practicality has no bearing on how much warming gas is emitted by a jet aircraft or a cattle farm. The climate will not stop warming just because you think it's unfair. A tonne of CO2 is a tonne of CO2, regardless of our justifications for putting it into the atmosphere.

Do you want to eat much less meat and abandon jet aviation, or do you want Sheffield to become a port? Those are our choices. Pick one.
>> No. 430664 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:31 pm
430664 spacer
>>430653

Unfortunately a solar shade doesn't do anything about ocean acidification, which is an unavoidable problem with continued CO2 production.
>> No. 430665 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:34 pm
430665 spacer
>>430661
Suggesting the status quo continue is equally political to suggesting it changes. I'm just pre-empting the usual "but what about all the jobs that rely on overconsumption" schtick that you were about to get to.
>> No. 430666 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:39 pm
430666 spacer
>>430640

Were people all living in abject poverty in the past? No, they weren't. We need to look to the past for good ideas that we've abandoned, and for excesses that have crept into our lives and we've grown accustomed to. We can live better than we did in the past for a lower carbon footprint, we just need to put the brakes on our consumption that keeps increasing just because people figure out new things to sell us.

Personally I'd love some proper cycling infrastructure in our cities, it's such an ideal form of transportation - cheap, accessible, healthy, fun. Getting on a proper cycle route is an absolute joy when they crop up.

We also need to look at our diets. They were far less exotic and varied in the past, and maybe we just need to accept that's the way it has to be to be sustainable. We can source many more types of foods from the UK than we used to so it wouldn't be a complete loss of choice.
>> No. 430667 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:46 pm
430667 spacer
>>430660

> We're not forcing children not to smoke, they're choosing not to smoke.

And you have a choice as a young person if you want to pollute the atmosphere with CO2 or choose a more healthy lifestyle, in this case more healthy for the environment. Nobody is forcing your children to buy an SUV or go on three package holidays a year.
>> No. 430668 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:46 pm
430668 spacer
>>430654
By the conventional measure of living standards, they'd be lower. That is inarguably true.
>> No. 430669 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:49 pm
430669 spacer
>>430667
>And you have a choice as a young person if you want to pollute the atmosphere with CO2 or choose a more healthy lifestyle
If by "choice" you mean the bullshit definition of "choice" put forward by right-wing laissez-faire capitalists, then yes, they arguably have a choice.

>Nobody is forcing your children to buy an SUV or go on three package holidays a year.
But apparently some people in here want to force them not to do those things.
>> No. 430670 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:53 pm
430670 spacer
>>430667
Holy false equivalence, Batman!
>> No. 430671 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:57 pm
430671 spacer
>>430666

If you talk about the old times, you could also go back to making household items out of metal instead of plastic. I've got a colander-style pasta strainer made from enamelled steel which has been in our family for the better part of 25 years. It's indestructible, I think it came from Ikea back in the day. A plastic strainer probably wouldn't have lasted three years, after which we would have had to buy another one time and again and have the old one end up in a dump in sub-Saharan Africa somewhere. I've also got a rolling pin from my mum that has been in existence for as long as I can remember, it's made of some sort of durable wood, and save for some creaky ball bearings on it that I replaced once, it's good as new.

One reason why people used fewer natural resources in the old days was just that. They bought an item once, maybe paid a few quid more, but it was made out of durable or even natural materials, and it was handed down in their family.
>> No. 430672 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 8:58 pm
430672 spacer
>>430668
Depends if you're defining "conventional" as "traditional" or "ordinary". I know my granddad never got ipods for Christmas.

>>430667
>Nobody is forcing your children to buy an SUV or go on three package holidays a year.
Corporations arguably are, by use of advertising to create psychological states where you feel there's something wrong with you if you don't and to look down on others who don't. If you take a moment to step outside the bubble of daily life to realise that advertising is just extremely powerful and ubiquitous propaganda. Clearly it works.
>> No. 430673 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:01 pm
430673 spacer
>>430672
>Depends if you're defining "conventional" as "traditional" or "ordinary". I know my granddad never got ipods for Christmas.
n2 m7 dem economists won no wot it em
>> No. 430674 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:02 pm
430674 spacer
>>430669

>But apparently some people in here want to force them not to do those things.


"Force" is a strong word. But it can't hurt if you tell them to have a word with themselves. If we're talking actual environmental impact and not just arbitrary lifestyle choice, then neither an SUV nor three package holidays a year are in any way justifiable.


Also, on the one hand, you are ripping on

>right-wing laissez-faire capitalists

, but on the other hand, as I just said, in the same post, you complain about people forcing you not to consume certain goods. Goods that beyond argument make your CO2 footprint skyrocket.

So which is it, lad?
>> No. 430675 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:03 pm
430675 spacer
>>430673
>economists
See, that's the problem right there.
>> No. 430676 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:17 pm
430676 spacer
>>430674
>but on the other hand, as I just said, in the same post, you complain about people forcing you not to consume certain goods.
Right. Where's the inconsistency? When I say young people are choosing not to smoke, I mean exactly that. They're choosing. Nobody's forcing them, and nobody's holding a metaphorical gun to their head to influence the choice. They are freely and willingly making an active choice not to smoke. This is a very different proposition from the likes of people saying we need to stop flying and stop eating meat.
>> No. 430677 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:18 pm
430677 spacer
>>430672
Conventionally, living standards are defined as "the level of wealth, comfort, material goods, and necessities available". By that definition, it's indisputably lower.
>> No. 430678 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:21 pm
430678 spacer
>>430677
Right, so as you say: conventional living standards are chiefly concerned with consumerism and have almost nothing to do with health or happiness. Out of the four things you listed, necessities are the only one that actually matters.
>> No. 430679 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:24 pm
430679 spacer
I guess comfort does too at a push. Wealth and material goods are right out though. Those aren't living standards to aspire to.
>> No. 430680 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:28 pm
430680 spacer
>>430679
That's your opinion, and you're entitled to be wrong.
>> No. 430681 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:31 pm
430681 spacer
>>430680
You say that as though the same economic system of continually pushing for growth and accumulation of material wealth isn't exactly what's causing this problem in the first place. Conventional economics got us into this mess. Pretty clearly conventional economics, and you, are wrong.
>> No. 430682 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:33 pm
430682 spacer
>>430681
Comedy gold, m7.
>> No. 430683 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:38 pm
430683 spacer
>>430679
Everyone I've ever met who has aspired to having vast wealth and some bling has always been shallow as fuck, I've noticed. I don't get the appeal, especially after having recently moved house and doing multiple trips to the dump to throw away a bunch of bollocks that just took up space.

>>430682

Oh dear, lad.
>> No. 430684 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:42 pm
430684 spacer
>>430683
>Oh dear, lad.
No, you're right. The only two possibilities are wanting to be massively rich or going back to the stone age.
>> No. 430685 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:42 pm
430685 spacer
>>430684
>or going back to the stone age

You are the only one to have suggested that.
>> No. 430686 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:43 pm
430686 spacer
>>430682
You're saying you'd rather be rich and actively dying alone than poor with your health, friends and family.
>> No. 430687 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:44 pm
430687 spacer
>>430664
Worst comes to it we can dump iron into the ocean (triggering a bloom of plankton) but projects employing sea-grass to carbon sequester may prove equally happy with less potential side-effects. We're not dealing with magic problems, just ones that require the overwhelming ecological knowledge and resources our system of 'capitalism generally' has produced.

Assuming again that we somehow aren't able to solve our problems with technological development and have to go the brute-force route.

>>430665
>Suggesting the status quo continue is equally political to suggesting it changes

No it isn't and especially not when we're talking about replacing economic freedom with whatever snake oil you're using climate change to sell.

>>430683
You heard it here first everyone, having material wealth is bad. Take greed with the resultant progress it fuels and bin it.
>> No. 430688 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:46 pm
430688 spacer
>>430686
I'd rather be rich with health, friends and family, because those things aren't mutually exclusive. Also, we're all actively dying. Kind of comes with the territory of being something other than a tumour.
>> No. 430689 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:48 pm
430689 spacer
>>430685

You know that the "Autism" box isn't for indicating you have literal autism, right?
>> No. 430690 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:56 pm
430690 spacer
>>430688
>I'd rather be rich with health, friends and family, because those things aren't mutually exclusive
Tough, if the only barometer for quality of life is wealth then society will be geared in such a way that it only creates wealth. Everything else falls by the wayside.
>Also, we're all actively dying. Kind of comes with the territory of being something other than a tumour.
You know that the "Autism" box isn't for indicating you have literal autism, right?
>> No. 430691 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 9:58 pm
430691 spacer
>>430690
>Tough, if the only barometer for quality of life is wealth then society will be geared in such a way that it only creates wealth.
Right. So, given this isn't the case, we're good for things like comfort, right?
>> No. 430692 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:00 pm
430692 spacer
>>430691
Sure, if you want a soft downy bed in your McMansion to die in.
>> No. 430693 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:02 pm
430693 spacer
>>430692
If your friends and family aren't giving you comfort, you need new friends and family.
>> No. 430694 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:03 pm
430694 spacer
>>430693
You already made it quite clear those weren't important to you, why are you moving the goalposts now?
>> No. 430695 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:05 pm
430695 spacer
>>430694
>You already made it quite clear those weren't important to you[citation needed]
>> No. 430696 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:11 pm
430696 spacer
>>430695
See: This thread where when I was talking about friends and family you responded with classics such as "You're entitled to be wrong" and "Comedy gold m7".
>> No. 430697 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:12 pm
430697 spacer
>>430696
I'm afraid I'm going to have to call "[not in citation given]" on that.
>> No. 430698 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:30 pm
430698 spacer
>>430697
That's cool you keep arguing for the continuation of a system that's going to imminently cause globally widespread death and upheaval at the very minimum. Got to keep counting your coins as long as you possibly can.
>> No. 430699 Anonymous
22nd September 2019
Sunday 10:37 pm
430699 spacer
>>430698

Gone off your meds again, m7?
>> No. 430700 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 12:36 am
430700 spacer
>>430699

I'd say you're on the wrong side of history but history is written by the victors and climate deniers, the "it's just not practical", the "technology will save us at the last minute, I saw it in a movie" might win this. That's all a bit moot in the end as, if you do write history, there likely won't be anyone around to read it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j43XK0wzMd4
>> No. 430701 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 12:52 am
430701 spacer
>>430700

Definitely off your meds. Best call an ambulance before you hurt yourself on those edges.
>> No. 430702 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 1:08 am
430702 spacer
>>430701
I see you ran out of anything substantial to say a while ago. Maybe sleep on it, come back tomorrow.
>> No. 430703 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 1:50 am
430703 spacer
>>430702

We've been through this before. Make better posts and you'll get better replies.
>> No. 430704 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 2:12 am
430704 spacer
>>430700

Great video, and a great quote by Thunberg at the end:

"Until you start focusing on what needs to be done rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope."

That's the crux of it. We're like a bunch of people trapped inside a burning building, arguing about who should fetch a bucket of water. The bucket isn't enough to save us, it isn't anywhere near enough, but we still think that someone else should go and get it.
>> No. 430707 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 3:48 am
430707 spacer
>>430704
That seems a little optimistic to me. What is politically possible is an important consideration. It's the boundary between pragmatism and idealism. If what is needed lies beyond that, then it's all over and we've well and truly fucked it, and anything we do is merely delaying the already inevitable. In which case, we can all fly to the Big Dog Island for a massive platter of serrano, chorizo and salchichon, and all the albondigas de carne we can manage before flying back in time for tea, every day until the Tribulation.
>> No. 430708 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 4:05 am
430708 spacer
>>430707

> If what is needed lies beyond that, then it's all over and we've well and truly fucked it, and anything we do is merely delaying the already inevitable.

If the laws of physics and "political reality" conflict, maybe we should change the politics? If the electorate really does prefer armageddon to a bit of belt-tightening, then I suppose we all deserve to die.
>> No. 430709 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 9:57 am
430709 spacer

This-is-Fine-300x300.jpg
430709430709430709
>>430708

>If the electorate really does prefer armageddon to a bit of belt-tightening, then I suppose we all deserve to die.

We've known about the possibility of global warming, and witnessed its first so far still relatively minor effects, compared to the predictions for the next decades anyway, for the thick end of 40 years. And yet, people have continued their CO2 producing ways with abandon. Your guess is as good as anybody's.

There needs to be drastic change, and against the people's will, to make an impact and still avert and mitigate some of the foretold consequences of global warming. We really need a global eco dictatorship, because there will just be no appealing to people in sufficient numbers to change their behaviour voluntarily on a global scale.
>> No. 430710 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 10:21 am
430710 spacer
>>430709

I personally think this misinterprets public will and what's possible for an individual within a given set of circumstances. Someone may hate the impact their lifestyle has on the planet, but largely be unable to change it due to structural factors.

I don't think we need eco-dictatorship, but for those in power to make genuine structural changes that give people reasonable options. At the moment, our system for organising labour forces people into whatever work is available, and the market then offers them a Ford or a Toyota to get there. The fact that government and corporate power can't even invest in public transport (which isn't perfect) over private vehicles is a sign of how non-committal and profiteering we've been politically, and also how constrained our choices really are.

The idea that the market simply responds to the demands of consumers is deeply flawed, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone that's tried to deviate from what's in place even a little bit.
>> No. 430711 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 11:42 am
430711 spacer
i'll be dead in 20 years i don't give a shit
>> No. 430714 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 12:39 pm
430714 spacer

PRI_80045871.jpg
430714430714430714
To what extent is the appearance of climate change an affect of weather manipulation programs?

https://www.globalresearch.ca/weather-warfare-beware-the-us-military-s-experiments-with-climatic-warfare/7561

>The debate on climate change does not acknowledge the role of climatic warfare, namely the deliberate manipulation of climate for military use.
>HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction, capable of destabilising agricultural and ecological systems globally. Climatic warfare’ potentially threatens the future of humanity, but has casually been excluded from the reports for which the IPCC received the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 430715 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 12:53 pm
430715 spacer
>>430714

Read about this a while ago in a surprisingly mainstream mag. Not an expert but everyone with scientific credentials I've run it by say it's a red herring.
>> No. 430716 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 1:04 pm
430716 spacer
>>430714
The clue you're looking for is in the URL:
>globalresearch.ca

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch
>> No. 430717 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 1:05 pm
430717 spacer
>>430714

>In 2001, Chossudovsky founded the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), becoming its editor and director. Located in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, it describes itself as an "independent research and media organization" that provides "analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media".[20]

>The Centre for Research on Globalization promotes a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods.[26] It has reported that the 11 September attacks were a false flag attack planned by the CIA,[2] that the United States and its allies fund al-Qaeda and the Shamanismic State, and that sarin gas was not used in the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack, which globalresearch.ca articles characterized as a false flag operation orchestrated by daft militant wogs opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.[6][21] Other articles published on the site have asserted that the 7 July 2005 London bombings were perpetrated by the United States, Israel, and United Kingdom.[13] Chossudovsky has himself posted articles on the site which suggested that Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset, and accusing the United States, Israel and Britain of plotting to conquer the world.[13] The Centre has also promoted the Irish slavery myth, prompting a letter by more than 80 scholars debunking the myth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky

HAARP is a research project on long-range radio transmission, mainly intended to improve the performance of over-the-horizon radar systems and VLF communication for submarines. Conspiracy theorists have blamed it for everything from climate change to chronic fatigue syndrome, but there is no plausible mechanism by which a bunch of big radio transmitters could cause those effects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program
>> No. 430723 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 4:30 pm
430723 spacer
>>430714

That all is still relatively benign though as it goes.

Some of the more screwy alt-right, teach the controversy outfits don't mince words in denouncing climate change as a liberal media plot to promote socialism.
>> No. 430724 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:03 pm
430724 spacer
>>430723
>a liberal media plot to promote socialism
Wait, you mean it's not a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese for trade advantage?
>> No. 430725 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:10 pm
430725 spacer
>>430724

>Wait, you mean it's not a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese for trade advantage?

It may well be. They all hate our the Murrikins' freedom, y'know.
>> No. 430726 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:13 pm
430726 spacer
>>430717
>The Centre has also promoted the Irish slavery myth

What's that, then?
>> No. 430728 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:19 pm
430728 spacer
>>430726

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Ireland

>Gaelic raiders kidnapped and enslaved people from across the Irish Sea for two centuries after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire destabilised Roman Britain;[citation needed] their most famous victim was Saint Patrick.
>> No. 430729 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:19 pm
430729 spacer
>>430726

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth
>> No. 430730 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:35 pm
430730 spacer

58b5216fc83fc0168861858.png
430730430730430730
>>430723

They always like to point out it's a lefty, anti-capitalist conspiracy but I've not seen them address the fact that multiple oil corporations produced internal reports that accurately predicted the effects 40 years ago.
Unless the communists have been playing us all along.

The great thing is how Shell and Exxon etc. knew what they were causing but then promoted climate denialism because that was easier on the aul profit margin than actually not fucking the planet.
>> No. 430731 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:36 pm
430731 spacer
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1176151948304769025
>> No. 430732 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 5:57 pm
430732 spacer
>>430730

>They always like to point out it's a lefty, anti-capitalist conspiracy but I've not seen them address the fact that multiple oil corporations produced internal reports that accurately predicted the effects 40 years ago.


The tobacco industry did pretty much the same thing with cigarettes until the 1960s and 70s. It wasn't until the scientific medical evidence became insurmountable that they sheepishly conceded that smoking may not be a healthy choice. But I think you have yet to find a tobacco industry executive who will openly admit on live television that their products cause lung cancer and other fatal illnesses in one of every two long-term users.

And the similarities don't end there. Vaping may have been a godsend for an industry that has been ailing under increasingly tightening anti-smoking legislation around the world, but now there's new evidence that certain vaping liquids can cause new types of lung disease which aren't fully understood yet. The oil giants, on the other hand, will probably struggle to make money off alternative energy resources and green energy in the same way that they have with crude oil.

They're still a bit behind, but nonetheless on the same trajectory that the cigarette industry took when it praised its new light or low-tar cigarettes in the 80s. And you can expect the oil industry to continue to fund anything from pseudoscientific and slanted climate research to astroturf movements against tougher laws against CO2 production. At least until governments issue bans on fossil fuel use, in a similar way as they have implemented smoking bans. Sweden (?) is already halfway there, by wanting to ban new production cars with combustion engines from 2030.
>> No. 430733 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 6:30 pm
430733 spacer
>>430732

>ban new production cars with combustion engines from 2030

I like to see people taking the initiative and all but I'm not sure outright banning ICE vehicles is the way to go. The problem is the source of the fuel, rather than the technology. Liquid fuels are, from an energy and practicality standpoint, very useful and easy to work with compared to batteries. Currently at least.

Electric vehicles are excellent for short range transport though, personally I'd love to see more electric buses around. They make city centres much more tolerable without all the diesel noise pollution.
>> No. 430734 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 6:34 pm
430734 spacer

s950181773_583625634.jpg
430734430734430734
>>430709
>We really need a global eco dictatorship, because there will just be no appealing to people in sufficient numbers to change their behaviour voluntarily on a global scale.
>> No. 430735 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 6:40 pm
430735 spacer
>>430733

The problem is also that even the latest battery technologies tend to perform poorly in sub-freezing temperatures. And with Sweden's arctic winter weather, I'm not sure how exactly they want to address that.
>> No. 430736 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 6:49 pm
430736 spacer

Screenshot_2019-09-23 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Twitt.png
430736430736430736
>>430729
From this I went to the article about Holocaust Denial, which led me to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's page and then to his personal Twitter account. This is what I found.
>> No. 430738 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 7:02 pm
430738 spacer

160007502-56a1048a5f9b58eba4b6ae80.jpg
430738430738430738
>>430735

>The problem is also that even the latest battery technologies tend to perform poorly in sub-freezing temperatures. And with Sweden's arctic winter weather, I'm not sure how exactly they want to address that.

It's a solved problem. You plug your car in at night to charge and it automatically pre-heats the cabin and the battery in the morning. You start the day with a warm car and a full battery. The battery generates heat during use and will stay warm even in extreme conditions - battery overheating is one of the main limiting factors of EV performance and charging rate, so EV battery packs have quite sophisticated thermal management systems. If needed, the battery can re-heat itself using its own energy with minimal impact on range.

Scandinavians are used to plugging in their cars - in the northern regions, they use electric heaters to stop their engines from freezing solid overnight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_heater
>> No. 430741 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 8:17 pm
430741 spacer
>>430738
Electric cars are a white elephant, to a big extent.
The numbers just don't make sense. The CO2 savings through mileage alone aren't enough to save the plant even with huge investment in renewable energy. Even worse when you factor in the cost of manufacture. Plus you have to consider that there is a great deal of ecological damage being done by lithium and rare-earth mining. And then there is the enormous investment that would need to be put into the electrical grid to support a large switch to electric cars.

But on top of all that, there is a nearly insurmountable barrier to widespread adoption of electric cars that is mostly being ignored. Where do you plug the fucking things in in the first place?
Millions of people across the country are living in flats and terraces with no off-road parking. Many people with on-road parking aren't guaranteed that they will get a space outside their house when they get home from work. Many people with off-road parking are renting and have the barrier of having to install a charging point.
The people this will affect are more likely to be at the poorer end of society, they're probably a little more likely to be driving older more polluting cars already, they're much more likely to be living in houses which are poorly insulated and energy inefficient (ever lived in a 19th century terrace?).
Penalising oil-powered cars and subsidising electric cars is going to harm the poor and benefit the rich and do little to solve the problems it is being championed for.

The lions share of CO2 is coming from developing nations, developing nations with rapidly growing populations and unfathomably huge quantities of coal (and concrete). The best thing we can do to combat global warming is action in developing nations. Raise them out of poverty to cut population growth. Shrink the consumer goods markets instead of chasing continued growth. Invest in more efficient power generation technologies in developing countries (it doesn't have to be renewable, that's the thing. Relatively small improvements to the efficiency of fossil fuel based power generation in China and India would take an enormous chunk out of global CO2 emissions and this is a step that really dwarfs anything the west can do. Also it would help if China would stop its' practices of massive questionable infrastructure projects like empty ghost cities and entire islands being built in the south china sea.
>> No. 430742 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 8:52 pm
430742 spacer

264629.png
430742430742430742
>>430741
>> No. 430743 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 8:53 pm
430743 spacer

375px-Global_plug-in_car_sales_since_2011.png
430743430743430743
>>430741
>> No. 430744 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 8:54 pm
430744 spacer
We should all drive milk floats. They're electric.
>> No. 430745 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 8:56 pm
430745 spacer
>>430742

What we produce here in the UK would still be enough then to send ten DeLoreans back in time.
>> No. 430746 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 8:57 pm
430746 spacer
>>430744
You must be one of Pat Mustard's offspring.
>> No. 430748 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 9:11 pm
430748 spacer
>>430744
No way, can you imagine if everyone had a twirling orange light on their car? It'd be hell.
>> No. 430749 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 9:34 pm
430749 spacer

Pie-I-have-Eaten.jpg
430749430749430749
>>430743

All those charts really don't convey the demand for electrically powered cars that we will have in the future, and if that demand can possibly be met with the raw materials, rare earths in particular, that are available to us.


There are over a billion estimated cars on the planet at present, probably 90 percent of them still fully petrol powered. All of those would have to be replaced by electric cars. Or we're just going to have to say at some point in the future that not everybody (who can afford it) gets to have their own car in the first place.
>> No. 430753 Anonymous
23rd September 2019
Monday 10:58 pm
430753 spacer
>>430742>>430743
so what?

China still produces around half of it's electricity from coal. Solar is at 10% at most and realistic figures are probably much lower.
Its coal power plants are still fairly inefficient.

Passenger car sales in China last year are in the region of 23million. Europe was at 15 million, so China are doing better at % of electric cars out of the total but that's still 22million fossil fuel powered cars a year.

All that these two charts you've shared show, is that China is absolutely fucking huge.
>> No. 430757 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 2:59 am
430757 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmXOPrCr_F4

When me mam said I were autistic I thought she meant I were good at drawing.
>> No. 430758 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 7:48 am
430758 spacer
>>430757
Legs Akimbo never said anything about sociopaths did they?
>> No. 430759 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 9:52 am
430759 spacer
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2217418-greta-thunberg-you-have-stolen-my-childhood-with-your-empty-words/

>“This is all wrong. I shouldn’t be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean. Yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you. You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words.”


Frankly, love, you're laying it on a bit thick here. You grew up as a sheltered white Scandinavian middle class girl, who went on to be a global spokesperson for a protest movement and got to meet hundreds of the globe's most influential people. You ARE living a dream. Your lot in life was neither to be a Vietnamese child prostitute nor a rubbish dump dweller in Kenya. Those children have well and truly had their childhood stolen. And their dreams. Not you though.

You're fighting a just cause, and you are doing well at it. But have a word with your speech writer. And get some perspective.
>> No. 430762 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:15 am
430762 spacer
>>430759
Maybe listen to the speech, lad. That's exactly what she does talk about in her next breath. Same sentence.
>You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words, and yet, I'm one of the lucky ones. People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction.
If that helps you get some perspective.
Not that appealing to people to help those in third world countries has ever been a particularly powerful rhetorical device. Maybe you need to have a word with your speech writer.
>> No. 430763 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:18 am
430763 spacer
>>430762
Never let facts get in the way of a good shitpost.
>> No. 430766 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:57 am
430766 spacer
Whoa, did one of you modlads just delete and repost my post so it was replying to the reposted version of >>430762

This is some Matrix shit right here. Not gucci.
>> No. 430767 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:01 am
430767 spacer
>>430766
Just tidying up.
>> No. 430768 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:14 am
430768 spacer
>>430767

Moderators here have often banned people heavy handedly, but rarely have I seen active and deliberate interference with posts, even shitposts.

These are worrying times to be a britfa. Have we abandoned our British principles?
>> No. 430769 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:15 am
430769 spacer
>>430768
It's not unheard of for posts of broken links like that to be reordered so they make sense.
>> No. 430770 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 12:05 pm
430770 spacer
Good broad brush look at what countries are doing enough: https://climateactiontracker.org
>> No. 430772 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 2:04 pm
430772 spacer
>>430770

So basically the only countries that stick out as role models are Morocco including the Western Sahara Territory. An area altogether about five times the size of Britain with a total population of 35 million and a still largely agricultural level of development.

We're fucked.
>> No. 430774 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 4:08 pm
430774 spacer
>>430772
Yeah, I'm beginning to think we are. I posted >>430640 but nothing I read in the aftermath changed my mind much. It's all a bit April '45: "the V-weapons will save us! And Generalfeldmarschall Thunburg is rallying a new army from our youth!".

I don't mean to compare enviromentalism to Nazism, just that we're at the end of the line; the big, messy, hot line.
>> No. 430775 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 4:09 pm
430775 spacer
>>430774
>the big, messy, hot line
IKWYM
>> No. 430776 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 6:20 pm
430776 spacer
>>430775
OH EIGHT NINE ONE
>> No. 430780 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 7:43 pm
430780 spacer
>>430774

It's not all doom and gloom. What's evident from >>430772 is that all we have to do is kill off nearly half of Britain's population and revert to an agrarian society.

It could be done, you know.

But seriously, at some point, there evidently needs to be some sort of population control. I challenge anybody to come up with a solution otherwise. Even if we successfully decrease the average carbon footprint per person to levels not seen since the mid-1800s, there's still going to be the problem that there will simply be ever more of us. If things like medical and food science keep up, the planet could end up supporting up to 12 billion people. That's still around 60 percent more than the Earth's entire population today.
>> No. 430781 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 9:03 pm
430781 spacer

flagellants.png
430781430781430781
>>430780

That lad earlier in the thread insists eating vegan alone will give us enough spare carbon to support up to 18 billion.

This whole debate gets really weird as soon as you bring population control into it. It's the single most effective solution you can possibly propose and yet it's the thing people will resolutely and absolutely unconditionally refuse to even consider. They start arguing in bizarre circles where they dig out facts and figures to prove how many kids we can afford to have if we switched everything to solar energy; they lose sight of the fact that the goal is to reduce carbon and instead immediately start seeking to prove that we can pay for the carbon bill our unrestricted mass reproduction incurs. Of course, you'd be an absolute madman to point out that merely reducing the human population by a tiny fraction would offset entire nation's worth of industrial output, no matter how true it is. It's the one thing we simply can't do.

There's definitely a whiff of... Penitance about this modern twist on environmentalism. Practical and achievable solutions are not good enough, they must also bring us suffering, that we may repent. Guilty am I of aspiring to a technological future in which life is easier and more enjoyable... I cleanse myself with the diet of the celery, I purify myself with the fifteen mile round trip to work on a fold up bicycle. My salvation is my fifteen likes on Facebook about buying a re-usable cup at Starbucks.
>> No. 430782 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 9:06 pm
430782 spacer
>>430780
>>430781
The best available projections have human population stabilising around 10-11 billion.
>> No. 430785 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 9:20 pm
430785 spacer
>>430781
A lot of the figures for everyone going vegan are based on questionable statistics.

For example, the amount of resources required to feed cattle in this country is far lower than what is generally cited in these figures; they take extreme examples from America and extrapolate these as if they are commonplace. More land is used to grow wheat to feed racehorses in this country than in beef production.

There's also the little fact that around 75% of agricultural land in this country isn't arable so can only be used for livestock grazing.
>> No. 430786 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 9:33 pm
430786 spacer
>>430785
>75% of agricultural land in this country isn't arable so can only be used for livestock grazing.

But in the glorious vegan utopia we're going to need all that land to build our mud huts on so there wont be any room for livestock.
>> No. 430788 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 9:51 pm
430788 spacer
>>430781
Do you think we should stop immigration before we start gassing the elderly?
>> No. 430789 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:08 pm
430789 spacer
>>430781

The biggest threat to the environmental movement is idiots proposing veganism as a cure or only under socialism can climate change be combated
>> No. 430790 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:08 pm
430790 spacer
>>430781

The biggest threat to the environmental movement is idiots proposing veganism as a cure or only under socialism can climate change be combated
>> No. 430791 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:13 pm
430791 spacer
>>430788
No. Immigrants are productive. The ancients are simply stealing oxygen at this point.
>> No. 430792 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:16 pm
430792 spacer
>>430781

> It's the single most effective solution you can possibly propose and yet it's the thing people will resolutely and absolutely unconditionally refuse to even consider.

I don't see how forgoing another sprog in addition to the one or two you already have puts anywhere near the same limits on your personal freedom as telling you you can't drive an SUV or go to Magaluf twice a year. It's a simple thing everyone of us can do to prevent overpopulation, natural resources depletion, and excess greenhouse gas production.

The Earth's population remained quite stable at around 500 million (which was a number that the Earth could well tolerate without much of a problem) for centuries during the second millennium AD because out of the many children that families had back then, usually only one or two made it into adulthood and were able to have children of their own. Additionally, your average life expectancy was 40 to 60 years at best, at which point you stopped consuming natural resources and made way for the younger generations and their consumption. These days, you've got 65-year-olds driving SUVs and going on holiday four times a year while their adult children simultaneously pretty much do the same.

So in essence, what it takes is to kill off everyone over 60, and tell the younger generation that they can't have more than one or two children.
>> No. 430793 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:23 pm
430793 spacer
>>430792
You're basically telling people they can't have sex, which is probably worse than saying they can't go on holiday. Remember, condoms are deliberately not biodegradable.
>> No. 430794 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:45 pm
430794 spacer
I bet Greta ends up suiciding. Can feel it in my bones.
>> No. 430795 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 10:51 pm
430795 spacer
>>430794

I'm half expecting it all to turn dark and she steers XR into a horrifying dystopian suicide cult.

"It's the only way," she will say in her final speech. "Our future has been stolen from us already."

All the parents who bragged about their kids going on strike on social media, vicariously forecasting their own shipping through their pre-teen's morally righteous crusade, are forced to watch helplessly as a generation follows her footsteps in taking her own life.
>> No. 430796 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:14 pm
430796 spacer
>>430793

>You're basically telling people they can't have sex, which is probably worse than saying they can't go on holiday.

Neither would have much of an impact on me personally. But that's just me.

I think we're far enough advanced as a civilisation though that we could manage to supply the roughly four billion people on the planet who are of reproductive age with contraception. Requiring vasectomy or sterilisation by law after two kids would probably be pushing it a bit, let alone the logistics of it.

There's no denying that overpopulation is really the elephant in the room. If there were still only 500 million of us worldwide, they could be living the same resources wasting, CO2 producing lifestyle as the average person in the developed world today, and they'd still barely make a dent in the Earth's climate.

That said, I think some climate scientists have been able to correlate minor fluctuations in the Earth's climate of the last few thousand years with known variations in global human population. They even go as far as saying that the Mediaeval Warm Period could have been caused by human activity, mainly deforestation and extensive farming, and that the subsequent Little Ice Age was caused in part by a drastic decrease in population following the Black Death, which at its worst saw nearly 40 percent of Europe's population wiped out.

If all that is true, we're all the more fucked TBH. If less than 500 million people were able to kick off the Mediaeval Warm Period, which in some regions exceeded today's temperatures (there is evidence of widespread crop farming in southern Greenland from that time), then the 7.x billion we have today are well and truly capable of turning the whole planet into a scorching polar.
>> No. 430797 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:16 pm
430797 spacer
>>430794

She'll go into porn at 18, hit the wall at 20, dead by 25.
>> No. 430798 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:17 pm
430798 spacer
>>430796

>scorching polar

Even that might happen.
>> No. 430799 Anonymous
24th September 2019
Tuesday 11:31 pm
430799 spacer
>>430794

Honestly, I can see it happening. You hear stories all the time about child prodigies who were concert pianists or chess grandmasters by their early teens who ended up offing themselves before they even reach their twenties; in almost all cases, it turns out to be due to a lethal combination of excessive media attention and parents who were pushy to the point of child abuse.

Greta seems to be suffering from both of these things: her narcissist celebrity mother has no qualms about parading her round the world forcing her to parrot her apocalyptic "we're all doomed" narrative, and the media are lapping it all up, never giving her a moment of privacy. It's been disturbing watching her mannerisms and body language in her speeches in recent weeks, she's becoming extremely agitated and seems genuinely ill-equipped to deal with the kind of attention she is experiencing, and it's only a matter of time before she has a major autistic meltdown on stage or a mental breakdown of some sort. Of course, progressives will take no responsibility once this inevitably happens, and will simply move on to the next exploitable 'woke' kid to push their narrative.
>> No. 430800 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:00 am
430800 spacer
>>430793

Pedantic I know, but most condoms are biodegradable. They won't dissolve inside a fanny, but they're made of natural latex and will rapidly biodegrade in the hot and acidic conditions of landfill. Just don't flush them down the bog.
>> No. 430801 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:18 am
430801 spacer
>>430799
>You hear stories all the time about child prodigies who were concert pianists or chess grandmasters by their early teens who ended up offing themselves before they even reach their twenties
Yeah, totally. All the time.

I know you weren't being literal, but no grandmaster has ever died before the age of twenty, regardless of cause. About five died before hitting thirty though. Fun fact: not one of the female grandmasters has ever died.

So, back to Greta's autism..
>> No. 430802 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:49 am
430802 spacer
>>430801
>So, back to Greta's autism..
So, back to a distraction from the science...
>> No. 430806 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 11:39 am
430806 spacer
>>430799

>her narcissist celebrity mother has no qualms about parading her round the world forcing her to parrot her apocalyptic "we're all doomed" narrative, and the media are lapping it all up, never giving her a moment of privacy.


The price of fame.

What you can't deny is that Greta is at the centre of a media campaign that has been meticulously calculated to a T. She has the best and the brightest of the PR and advertising world working with her. But so far her family has probably failed to notice that those PR and ad agencies are just seeing her as another product they're trying to sell. And gain critical acclaim for their campaign, because acclaim and word-of-mouth are everything in the advertising world.

Spergfolk tend to be a bit more robust when it comes to the ins and outs of all that. Because they struggle to understand human interaction, a lot of that just eludes them and doesn't cause them emotional discomfort. But they, too, suffer when stimuli become too intense.

Difficult to predict where Greta will be in ten years. Even the biggest pop stars and youth idols have always worn off at some point. Maybe she'll be the head of Greenpeace Sweden or oversee climate change policy at the UN somewhere. But there'll almost inevitably be a point when she'll start fading from public view.
>> No. 430807 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:14 pm
430807 spacer

AAHLIXk.jpg
430807430807430807
There's no way she isn't going to have a full blown breakdown.
>> No. 430808 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:20 pm
430808 spacer
>>430807
Like the climate?
>> No. 430809 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:51 pm
430809 spacer

Greta-2.jpg
430809430809430809
>>430808
Global temperatures will go up a few degrees when she finally erupts.
>> No. 430810 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:53 pm
430810 spacer
>>430807
Someone giving an angry speech angrily at people she is angry with... looks angry.

Are you surprised that women can get angry? Might need to update your textbooks m9, hysteria hasn't been listed as a disorder for quite a few decades now.
>> No. 430811 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 12:58 pm
430811 spacer
>>430810
That's the thing. She's used to being fawned over and treated as a wunderkind. As soon as she starts meeting world leaders who aren't falling at her feet and wholeheartedly following what she says she cannot reconcile this and that's malfunctioning.
>> No. 430812 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 1:03 pm
430812 spacer
>>430811
Again, you're saying that when she speaks to people sympathetic to her cause she sounds friendlier, and when she speaks to people who have pissed her off she sounds angry.

I still don't see what your point is. It sounds like perfectly reasonable behaviour to me.
>> No. 430813 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 1:04 pm
430813 spacer
>>430811
Even if what you were saying weren't patently idiotic for obvious reasons, if you actually watch the video you'll see they clap and cheer every single thing she says.
>> No. 430814 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 1:10 pm
430814 spacer
>>430813

Which is precisely why she was so pissed off. She isn't some puppet being made to dance for the attention of the global media, she's a young woman sincerely fighting for a liveable future. She was justifiably angry about being lauded by the same world leaders who are responsible for the climate crisis. She doesn't want to be in the limelight, she would much rather be living a normal life, but someone has to speak out; her public profile is purely a symptom of the utter failure of adults to address the climate crisis.

This isn't a meltdown, it's a desperate plea for all those world leaders in front of her to fucking do something.


>> No. 430816 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 1:33 pm
430816 spacer
>>430814

But but but she must have had thousands of dollars spent on PR. How can I believe her when the Mercer Family Foundation, the Koch Brothers and other billionaires funding the CO2 Coalition have spent many times that on their own PR? It's much easier to just insult this child or claim she's an abused puppet with foetal alcohol syndrome like all the bots on twitter are doing.
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/attacks-on-greta-thunberg-come-from-a-coordinated-network-of-climate-change-deniers/ar-AAHJcXE
>> No. 430817 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 2:12 pm
430817 spacer
>>430814
But the only way to do that something is to drastically reduce the quality of life for most first worlders, and that is essentially unsellable to the public.
>> No. 430818 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 2:42 pm
430818 spacer
>>430817

Averting disaster is not necessarily dependant on decreasing quality of life, and polling shows that the public understand the importance of climate change.

There is almost certainly a spectrum of workable solutions there. In fact I think the only way you can come to your conclusion is if you take a very rigid set of assumptions; main one being that "quality of life" means "producing and consuming in exactly the same manner we do now".
>> No. 430819 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 3:48 pm
430819 spacer
>>430817
Turns out you are an idiot! The other guy was right.
>> No. 430820 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 3:53 pm
430820 spacer
>>430817

British people would have been better off in the short-term if they had surrendered to the Nazis in 1939. No rationing, no blitz, just an orderly transition of power. Most people think that fighting the Second World War was a noble sacrifice for the greater good of the nation and the world; we need to cultivate the same attitude to climate change. It's a hardship, yes, but a necessary hardship if we want our grandchildren to have decent and dignified lives.
>> No. 430821 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 4:35 pm
430821 spacer
>>430818

If Greta's grim prediction are true (and I happen to believe them) then the something to be done involves essentially banning non completely essential flights, curbing personal transport to again essential only and massively reducing new building works and thats just 3 off the top of my head
Electric cars still produce massive amounts of pollution in their construction. Carbon offsetting flights is pure head in sand stupidity and electric aircraft some hail as the future is very much in the future. The carbon foot print of building materials is huge.
To try and sell those three alone will produce from the public denial on a massive scale ably abetted by sensationalist media
>> No. 430823 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 8:16 pm
430823 spacer

_108823242_oilprice-nc.png
430823430823430823
Greta is going to get madder and madder until she flips and instructs her legions of supporters to attack processing facilities in Saudi Arabia with drones.

The resulting oil price increase will be a de-facto CO2 tax, which is basically what we need but would be impossible to get India and China to agree to.

Greta will then have to become an eco-fugitive, hiding out in allotments and growing hemp and tomatoes.
>> No. 430824 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 8:52 pm
430824 spacer
I mean it should be pretty obvious to the /boo/lads among us that she's either going to be bought and used as controlled opposition by Big Oil, or she and her handlers will turn up dead in a tragic yacht accident.
>> No. 430826 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 8:59 pm
430826 spacer

71564741_3063629276981944_4857374176576536576_n.jpg
430826430826430826
Simpsons predicting the future again.
>> No. 430827 Anonymous
25th September 2019
Wednesday 10:11 pm
430827 spacer
>>430823

>The resulting oil price increase will be a de-facto CO2 tax

No, it isn't, because it will end up in the coffers of the oil companies as profit, and only a fraction of it will be received by governments as corporate income tax.

We do need a tax that gives governments money to fund global warming mitigation measures.
>> No. 430831 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:00 am
430831 spacer
>>430826

I honestly think someone needs to just give Greta a fucking good slap
>> No. 430832 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 9:38 am
430832 spacer
>>430831
Why's that Julia Hartley-Brewer?
>> No. 430833 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 11:39 am
430833 spacer
>>430831
n1 m8. Conscientious, thoughtful and idealistic young people wont know wot hit em.

Going to go on a long digression here, but if I was her age in current year, I'd be absolutely terrified of the future. We learned about the rise of Fascism in History when I was her age, which seemed impossible to ever repeat itself in Europe to my eager young 90s mind (how could it, the EU was formed to cement ties between our nations and the UK was a founding member), but the current year parallels of the UK to 1920s and early 30s Germany are startling.

I think people forget why the EU was formed in the first place, or never bothered to learn is more likely. IIIWWers like to say that our Grandparents never fought in a war to be dictated to by Germans or by Brussels, but we weren't fighting the Germans really; we were fighting Fascism and now it might rear it's head here, wrapped in the Union Flag, under the guise of self-determination.

I speak to young people a lot during my volunteering work with the STEM ambassador program and Greta is inspiring them to learn about the world around them, she's a face they can relate to, so they can be armed with knowledge when they can eventually vote. A revolution is coming and I would not be at all surprised if, in the next few years, the Greens erode the Lib Dems to the point of collapse and start challenging Labour in their heartlands.
>> No. 430834 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 12:34 pm
430834 spacer
>>430833

>I think people forget why the EU was formed in the first place, or never bothered to learn is more likely. IIIWWers like to say that our Grandparents never fought in a war to be dictated to by Germans or by Brussels, but we weren't fighting the Germans really; we were fighting Fascism and now it might rear it's head here, wrapped in the Union Flag, under the guise of self-determination.


I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next person. But you're pushing it a bit here, l3d.
>> No. 430835 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 12:47 pm
430835 spacer
>>430833

The 18 year old lad who's just started at my work says Greta Thunberg is "well annoying."
>> No. 430836 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 1:04 pm
430836 spacer
>>430835

I also have anecdotes about inarticulate and thoughtless people.
>> No. 430837 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 1:10 pm
430837 spacer
>>430834
There is nothing tin-foil hatted about the path the Nazi Party travelled towards power, or the parallels that are now appearing in our parliamentary democracy.

Except in this case our own Govt is attacking and attempting to undermine the pillars which enshrine our democracy in the UK, instead of the opposition, namely Parliament and the rule of law. Turning the common voter against the very institutions that protect them from tyranny is how the Nazis managed to get elected, because anti-Semitism was rife after the Great Depression and trust for these institutions at an all time low, so limiting the rights of Jews within Germany was seen as a necessary evil by many Germans to get the strong economic policies The Nazis had promised and then, subsequently delivered aplomb, cementing their hold on the psyche of the German people. It didn't matter that the persecution of the Jews continued to escalate beyond all reason and logic; Germany was free.

Refugees, Lithuanian Nurses and Polish plumbers are the new Jews and vast swathes of gammon faced electoral roll poison will cheer in the streets in celebration in the event of a No-Deal IIIWW "Heil Boris! Heil Boris! A future for British Children..."

You'd have to be wilfully ignoring the writing on the wall not to see the similarities. Lets just hope something like, oh, I don't know, a sea change in political thinking among the young can stem this. If only the young had a charismatic figure to rally behind, someone who can articulate the knot they have in their stomach every time they watch the news.

Greta is that for them.
>> No. 430838 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 4:42 pm
430838 spacer
>>430837

While I disagree with BoJo's frankly lunatic like behaviour in trying to use procedures to get his own way I have to say that comparing it to the rise of fascism really rubs me up the wrong way.

Hitler's rise to power was a decade of arcane tricks and political shenanigans, preceded by quite a few books and rallies in which he made it very clear that he wanted absolute power in order to exterminate the Jews.

BoJo is quite simply trying to "get it done," the proverbial it here being IIIWW as the people decided that they want it according to the metrics of measurement we use. He's not merging the office of Queen and Prime Minister in order to give himself sole control of the army, he's not burning down the buildings of his political opponents to foment the appearance of civil war. He's not funneling money in to his own private army (just his mates' pockets but that's business as usual in politics today) and he's most certainly not the next Hitler because he tried it on a few times with parliament.

I think this kind of reactionary thinking might actually lead to the next Hitler getting through.
>> No. 430839 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 4:57 pm
430839 spacer
>>430838
Yeah, Johnson's not neo-Hitler, the bloke who follows Johnson will be neo-Hitler. Johnson's just a cynical careerists-cum-egomaniac unthinkingly laying the groundwork for a later dictatorship spawned out of a sense of rage and betrayal whipped up by his earlier far-right rhetoric.
>> No. 430840 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 5:17 pm
430840 spacer
People need to stop being alarmist reactionary pricks. There is a fable about a boy, a wolf, and the crying thereof. The message it conveys is apt.

It doesn't help anybody and actively undermines opposition because it's so easily dismissed. Have you lot learned nothing from the rise of Trump in Yank land? If anything calling him the next Hitler only made him more popular.

Fuck sake.
>> No. 430841 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 5:20 pm
430841 spacer
>>430838

Not that the rest of your points aren't valid or anything but
>He's not funneling money in to his own private army (just his mates' pockets
isn't really all that different if we consider the rise of private police forces like G4S and that the actual police are generally more concerned with protecting property than the people.
>> No. 430842 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 5:29 pm
430842 spacer
>>430840
I said he's the forerunner to a neo-Hitler, pay attention.

I really don't think it's an especially far-fetched idea. Once Third Nan kicks the bucket the popularity of the Big Hat Collective is going to decline, by how much I can't say. However, the type of person who wants "IIIWW at any cost" tends to have the temperament of a piranha with a bad headache and is big on calling out people who are "unelected" as such. I could see a future, as unlikely as I think it is, in which saville, or another like him, gets in to Parliament as the leader of populist party supporting an ailing Tory government and engineers the replacement of King Charles with himself as head of state or thereabouts. saville is only 55 I know, I assumed he was older too, anything could happen in the next ten years.
>> No. 430843 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 5:32 pm
430843 spacer
>>430841

To be fair if G4S is the Schutzstaffel of British fascism I don't think we have anything to fucking worry about.

Who will be the gestapo? Capita? If it takes them as long to arrest someone as it does to sort out a tax return we're laughing.
>> No. 430844 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 5:44 pm
430844 spacer
>>430843

Capita would go massively over-budget because someone misread a memo and they ended up making 6 million cartons of carbonated juice.
>> No. 430846 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 6:11 pm
430846 spacer
I think you have been watching too much of the Peaky Blinders with that nasty Oswald Moseley fellow in it. You're all getting rather over excited.

Sure you can draw parallels between the rise of Hitler and the modern right. You can also draw parallels betweenthe rises of Napoleon, or Stalin, or Mao, but nobody ever seems to. Angry people have been angry and populists have exploited it throughout history. Now, if Boris (or his successor) burn down Whitehall, you might have a point.

Neither Boris or anyone in his party are fascists. They're Neo-Liberals. Boris is one of the most neo-liberal neo-liberals ever to take power, and he serves only the free market. And do you know what? I'd argue that's worse. The market has no ideology. The market cannot be reasoned with.

There are two types of politician in that house today. Those whose wealthy mates have interests in Europe, and those whose wealthy mates have interests outside it. They either want the relative protectionism of the Eurozone, or they want the UK open to outside exploitation.

Trump in America is the same- He stands on a populist platform claiming o make America great again and oppose globalism, but his every action weakens America. He knows full well that isolationism is suicide for a power such as the USA.

And do you know who's behind it all? The China.
>> No. 430847 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 6:45 pm
430847 spacer
>>430846

>The China.

Found the neo-Hitler. Are you paying BoJo to lay the foundation for you or are you simply an opportunist?

You're right though, it is all the China.
>> No. 430850 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 7:58 pm
430850 spacer
>>430846

The problem with Trump is that he's someone who has gone from being a, ahem, businessman who barely had a clue how to run a business without going broke every few years without new cash injections from his cronies, to a President who has no fucking clue at all about politics.

He's a bit like your loudmouth uncle who says he'd straighten out the Premier League if he was a coach in just a few days, but you realistically wouldn't even trust him to ref an after work company game.
>> No. 430851 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:08 pm
430851 spacer
>>430850

I always assumed Trump's constant declarations of bankruptcy were something to do with a convoluted tax dodging scheme or some kind of money laundering system.

It boggles the mind to imagine that someone so wealthy, successful and powerful got there through pure luck. While I have no evidence to support my assumptions I'm confident that most apparent failures on Trump's part were beneficial for him at the time, pieces of some grand strategy. The equivalent of sacrificing one's queen for mate in 2. The ignorant peons among the crowd may guffaw at the grand master for making such a silly move, for being a grand buffoon, but surely even the most ignorant peon would change his tune as he witnessed the man he called a fool being crowned king?
>> No. 430852 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:14 pm
430852 spacer
>>430851
>being crowned king
That's checkers.
>> No. 430853 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:15 pm
430853 spacer

p-the-hitchhikers-guide-to-the-galaxy-sam-rockwell.jpg
430853430853430853
>>430851
>surely even the most ignorant peon would change his tune as he witnessed the man he called a fool being crowned king?
>> No. 430854 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:17 pm
430854 spacer
>>430846
I’ve never actually watched Peaky Blinders, but I got the ending spoiled for me and it seemed a bit odd.
>> No. 430856 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:30 pm
430856 spacer
>>430851

>I always assumed Trump's constant declarations of bankruptcy were something to do with a convoluted tax dodging scheme or some kind of money laundering system.



No; if you read up on it, it appears he really was a shit businessman.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/07/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html
>> No. 430858 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:45 pm
430858 spacer
>>430856

I'll give your link a read of course but my understanding of criminal behaviour is that getting caught is usually a bad idea and that in order to avoid being caught one must be clever in their criminal activity. My contention here is that any criminal activity, if it exists, would be so well hidden that it would be unlikely to surface except as a point of historical curiosity, discovered by a bored accounting student in a hundred years time through a mechanism so novel it revolutionises the study of accounting when it gets published.

Shoutout to futureaccountantlad. Top work ladm8. You should probably try to kiss a girl instead of going through 100 year old tax returns for giggles.
>> No. 430859 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 8:51 pm
430859 spacer
>>430858

>My contention here is that any criminal activity, if it exists, would be so well hidden that it would be unlikely to surface except as a point of historical curiosity

You're overestimating Trump. He's not some sort of financial acrobat who knew how to take the piss out of the IRS without them noticing. For the most part, he has always been a thick as pig shit egomaniac.
>> No. 430861 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 9:02 pm
430861 spacer
>>430859

It's entirely possible that I'm overestimating Trump. The trouble is I have no way of knowing whether he's a buffoon with connections and luck or a genius at man management and the luck to stumble upon just the right team of accountants to make billions while posting losses of $10bn to the IRS.

Without any certainty in this matter I choose to look at the outcomes. The man became President of the United States of America. That's a strong lean in to the "clever deceitful man" column for me. I'm certain that winning the Presidency can happen as a matter of luck and connections, but in this case I don't believe it went down like that.

I'm not saying whether I like, dislike, support or condemn Trump. My assessment is as close to objective as I can make it. I believe from your statements that you're in the anti-Trump camp so I want to remind you of something you already know. Never underestimate your enemies. It's easy to do so and provides a self congratulatory feeling without having to actually do anything, but he's the President of the free world. You are not.
>> No. 430862 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 9:11 pm
430862 spacer
>>430861
>he's the President of the free world
Is he though?
>> No. 430863 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 9:17 pm
430863 spacer
>>430862

President of the USA. Leader of the free world. You're bullying me for being bad at idioms and I do not like it.
>> No. 430865 Anonymous
26th September 2019
Thursday 9:45 pm
430865 spacer
>>430861

I get the feeling that especially in America, it's entirely possible to just brute force such things with enough money and powerful friends made on account of having said money. You can be as thick as you like but the pole is well and truly greased if you pay it to be, and that's likely cheaper than doing things honestly.

I doubt Trump is either. He's not thick- Intellectually yeah, but he's switched on enough to know who to make and stay friends with and where to put your cash to get results. He's far from a mastermind but his skills are probably exactly what you needed to navigate the state level beauraucracy of sleazy mid 80s New York, but he's clearly coming unravelled as the alleged most powerful man in the world.
>> No. 430872 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 2:20 am
430872 spacer
>>430865

Wealthy athletes tend to piss their money up the wall, because the skills they used to build their wealth are unrelated to the skills needed to keep that wealth.

Trump clearly did a phenomenal job of becoming president, but that's only very weakly related to the skills of being president. He understood that the US presidential race in the era of Fox News had basically become a long series of The Apprentice, but he doesn't have the first fucking clue how to run a government or negotiate a multilateral trade agreement.
>> No. 430873 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 2:20 am
430873 spacer
>>430861

>but he's the President of the free world.

Not my president.

I had no way of voting against or for him, ergo he can go sod himself because I never legitimated him to rule over me.

And just how free is this free world you're touting.
>> No. 430874 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 2:21 am
430874 spacer
>>430872

>He understood that the US presidential race in the era of Fox News had basically become a long series of The Apprentice, but he doesn't have the first fucking clue how to run a government or negotiate a multilateral trade agreement.

Very true.
>> No. 430878 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 10:04 am
430878 spacer
>>430865
>He's not thick- Intellectually yeah, but he's switched on enough to know who to make and stay friends with and where to put your cash to get results.

Interesting you say this, as he's gone bankrupt quite a few times, right?

Not saying that's not part of the game, for many people, but still worth pointing out.
>> No. 430879 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 10:06 am
430879 spacer
>>430873

Why on earth would you believe this has anything to do with you? My goodness, nobody cares if you personally voted for Trump. The man is the President, he has influence over all western nations. His decisions impact your life in a huge way.

Not my President indeed, you silly bloody sausage. Next you can tell me all about how the currency units in use today weren't chosen by you either ergo they have no relevance to you or impact on your life.

Listen chum, I'm super glad that you're interested in politics, it's healthy, but you need to reassess how you approach a conversation if you want to make that interest anything other than another badge on your Facebook profile.

Finally just gotta make a quick appeal, freedom isn't free, we all need to chip in $1.05. You can send yours by mail but I warn you, it will likely be placed under the direct control of the President of the USA and leader of the free world, Donald J. Trump.
>> No. 430880 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 10:32 am
430880 spacer
>>430879
Anyone affected by a decision should have a say in that decision. Every single person on the planet should be allowed to vote in the U.S elections.
>> No. 430881 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 10:40 am
430881 spacer
>>430880

That's just bloody silly.
>> No. 430883 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 11:50 am
430883 spacer
>>430880
Let me just ask the unborn foetus of my future child what they think of the next incumbent.
>> No. 430884 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 12:02 pm
430884 spacer
>>430881
So is letting some cunt you've never met and never will meet decide anything about how you should live your life, even if you did choose them but especially if you didn't.

>>430883
This is only stupid because it's impossible. Not because it wouldn't be a fairer state of affairs than now.
>> No. 430886 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 12:17 pm
430886 spacer
>>430884

The real politik issue about global elections for the leaders of nation states is their stuff is not our stuff. If the next American President decides to stop spending American money on policing global shipping lanes it's none of our business even though it will significantly impact our lives.

You seem to feel entitled to the status quo and any additional benefits to you, becoming the new status quo, but you refuse to accept that some decisions made by people in other countries about what they do with their own stuff is absolutely not something you are entitled to have a vote on. Opinions, yes, votes, no.

I'm sure your next solution will be to call for the globalisation of world governments. The answer to that is short, the abolition of nation states is the abolition of an organic protection from whatever ideology you despise. Imagine if Hitler had been elected Chancellor of the world instead of just Germany.
>> No. 430887 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 12:38 pm
430887 spacer
>>430886
That's a lot of words you're putting in my mouth. It's not about wanting things, it's about the fact that America can and will intervene in world affairs even if the world cries and begs them not to.

Asking someone to leave you alone is not comparable to asking them to do something for you. Not even close.
>> No. 430888 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 12:40 pm
430888 spacer
>>430887

If you don't like being bullied try lifting weights.
>> No. 430894 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 10:33 pm
430894 spacer
>>430888
Tell that to China in 20 years, prick.
>> No. 430895 Anonymous
27th September 2019
Friday 11:08 pm
430895 spacer
>>430894

别杀我! 那人是叛徒. 我会给你所有叛徒的名字!
>> No. 430899 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 10:01 am
430899 spacer
>>430894

You appear to have the wrong end of the stick m'lad. In 20 years time China will be strong, China will be the bully, it will be other countries that should lift weights to make themselves strong if they don't like being bullied by China.

To go back to our original point you seemed to be painting America as a bully, invading countries without permission and making them cry. My response is simple, either get strong enough to fight back against America or be invaded by America. The same is true for us, for all our wailing and gnashing of the teeth on a public level our government is thoroughly in bed with America's foreign oil policy, or was until fracking made the US an oil exporter. We're the bullies as much as America, but if we weren't then telling the bully to give us a say in who he bullies is dumb. Our only recourse would be to lift weights, i.e. get a bigger army in order to make our suggestions more likely to be accommodated by foreigners.
>> No. 430902 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 11:57 am
430902 spacer
>>430899
Not him but you're seriously oversimplifying international relations to push an edgelord fantasy. The other-end of realist theory is the international system US hegemony props up which most other states consent to and, until very recently, seriously effort was made to integrate China into. Institutions like the United Nations are central to this as are the fundamental tenants of international law such as non-intervention which the US is still paying for violating with the Iraq War.

This isn't some bizarre left-wing fantasy of us all becoming US citizens. You deal with bullies with your mates and enough balls to handle the odd sociopath. It's like that indie song that used to be on MTV2's 120 Minutes in the mid-2000s:

>> No. 430904 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 12:24 pm
430904 spacer
>>430902

You are correct of course, but ultimately all of those international laws are backed up by force.

Talking and cooperation are important, but the otherlad seems distressed that all the talking doesn't deter America from invading poor countries. My solution is that those poor countries beef up. Beefing up doesn't always mean more force, these countries could join international organisations, but they would have to give up significant parts of themselves to do so, surrounding oversight, jurisdiction, being forced to comply with spending rules etc. These are likely the reasons those countries haven't already joined.

My issue is not with the finer aspects of international law or the geopolitics of the situation, my issue is simply that giving non-Americans a vote on the next US President is retarded.
>> No. 430905 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 12:52 pm
430905 spacer
>>430904

>my issue is simply that giving non-Americans a vote on the next US President is retarded.

Was anyone saying otherwise?
>> No. 430906 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 12:53 pm
430906 spacer
>>430905

Yes.
>> No. 430908 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 1:09 pm
430908 spacer
>>430906

Only as a facetious way to point out why "president of the free world" was the wrong phrase, as far as I can tell.
>> No. 430909 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 1:15 pm
430909 spacer
>>430908

Oh well, these misunderstandings will happen on the internet. Have a great day mate.
>> No. 430910 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 3:15 pm
430910 spacer
All the climate strike-related social media groups are being flooded by climate denialist-emplyed bots and trolls right now*. I wanted to take a break from it so went to youtube and opened up some nostalgic electronic music. All the comments from the past year are the same dozen or so sentences posted randomly over and over.
Feels like the entire internet is just bots. There's no escape.



*It's easy to read this as paranoia but they've multiplied their efforts the past few days in a way that doesn't make sense organically with either the number of followers/reach any given post has or the opinion poll statistics. See https://www.sciencealert.com/do-not-feed-the-climate-trolls
>> No. 430912 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 3:38 pm
430912 spacer

1569408960512.jpg
430912430912430912
>>430910
>Perhaps the fact they all use the same language and the same memes is indicative of receiving talking points and funding from the fossil fuel industry

It's just imageboards being contrarian as usual, the memes are pretty transparent at this point. Ironically they are right to use the label trolls but nobody knows what the word means anymore.

>Feels like the entire internet is just bots. There's no escape.

I suggest you go outside and notice that everything in the real world is now owned by a multitude financial instruments known as the swarm that make split second automated decisions without any oversight.
>> No. 430913 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 4:00 pm
430913 spacer
>>430912
>It's just imageboards
Unless they've started being much better at opsec, it's not. This sort of deliberate mass manipulation by people with actual power and money rather than people on 4chan launching "raids" that continually break rules 1 & 2 has been happening on various online fronts for years now.
>> No. 430914 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 7:40 pm
430914 spacer
>>430912
>It's just imageboards being contrarian as usual

Have you missed the past 4 years where people are being actively targetted and for lack of a better word "weaponised" on image boards? And no this isn't tinfoil hat theories, NEETs were designated as a group that can help further any cause if pulled in the right direction. Honestly it's been incredibly effective and it would be impressive if it wasn't so fucked, but it's still beyond me that people actively want to see humanity burn.

>>430913
4chan in particular, but also 8chan to an extent, has been the target of an effective campaign and still is (which you can go and see for yourself) but to their credit a fair few users, outside of /pol at least, have realised which posts are blatant propaganda/pysops.
>> No. 430915 Anonymous
28th September 2019
Saturday 7:52 pm
430915 spacer
>>430914

Sure. It's not "just" imageboards though. There are them, being psyop'd and there are also actual troll farms and all sorts of weird psy warfare going on.
I'm slightly disappointed how little retaliation, even in terms of just making bots that respond to them, I've seen from those (and those who side with those) being targeted. Just articles explaining that it's happening.
>> No. 430920 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 9:29 am
430920 spacer
>>430914

Yeah, if you go to any even vaguely political Reddit you'll see the same thing. Some subreddits even have a disclaimer at the top warning posters that they are heavily compromised by disinformation and agitators.

You really can't believe anything you read online these days. I think this is partly why people have turned away from concrete real world politics, and instead turned to the comparatively abstract kind of politics around gender, race, and identity.
>> No. 430925 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 4:50 pm
430925 spacer
Don't forget Twitter! You're never more than two clicks from delusion so strong it's indistinguishable from paid trolling, or vice versa, on Twitter. I'd go into details but I'm cooking sausages.
>> No. 430926 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 5:10 pm
430926 spacer
>>430925

>I'm cooking sausages.

Unless they're vegan, vegetarian or insect sausages you're stealing are Greta's childhood there ladm8.
>> No. 430927 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 5:41 pm
430927 spacer
>>430926

Do you feel good making fun of an autistic child with legitimate fears about her future?
>> No. 430928 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 5:42 pm
430928 spacer

snapshotimagehandler_1499359259.jpg
430928430928430928
>>430926
I like the Beyond Meat products, but I just paid five pounds for two sausages and am regretting it.
>> No. 430929 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 5:42 pm
430929 spacer
>>430927
Do you feel virtuous reducing a public figure advancing her political philosophy to her age and disability?
>> No. 430930 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 5:45 pm
430930 spacer
>>430929

Being a public figure advancing her political philosophy isn't mutually exclusive with being an autistic child with legitimate fears about her future who you're making fun of.
>> No. 430935 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 6:27 pm
430935 spacer
>>430930
Oh, you do think so. Could have fooled me.
>> No. 430936 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 6:30 pm
430936 spacer
>>430927

I never feel good. That's why I'm so resentful of autistic children with potentially legitimate fears about their future who latch on to an ideology and milk it for money, fame and power.

I could do that. I could be a twat in public and make other people care about things I only care about because I'm bored with my life. But I don't. And it kills me. I'll content myself with lampooning 16 year olds who think they know everything because of their autism thank you very much.
>> No. 430937 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 6:39 pm
430937 spacer
>>430936

How sad.
>> No. 430963 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 11:33 pm
430963 spacer
>>430936

>milk it for money, fame and power

Do you really think that's what she's doing? Utterly mental. I don't care about climate change very much at all (sorry), but even I can see she's not in it for the money, what the fuck are you on mate.
>> No. 430964 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 11:39 pm
430964 spacer
Wow lads I can't take the sheer amount of teenlad edginess in this thread. You're making me root for extinction so these stupid cunt offs end.
>> No. 430966 Anonymous
29th September 2019
Sunday 11:54 pm
430966 spacer
>>430964
>You're making me root for extinction
>the sheer amount of teenlad edginess
>> No. 430968 Anonymous
30th September 2019
Monday 2:22 am
430968 spacer
Can we ban fascist crap and focus on saving the planet please?

How silly on a scale of 1-10 is filling rockets with seawater and then just shooting it into space? I know we still need to fix the temperature issue but at least it might buy us some time (and if so how much roughly?)
>> No. 430969 Anonymous
30th September 2019
Monday 2:44 am
430969 spacer
>>430968

Burning all that rocket fuel would just further accelerate climate change.

Probably the least mental option is to fire a load of dust into the atmosphere (possibly using nuclear weapons) which would make the sky dimmer and bring down global temperatures. This wouldn't do anything to affect ocean acidification so the fish will all still die, but it might stop the ice caps from melting.

It's technically possible to capture CO2 out of the atmosphere, but it costs a fortune and we don't really know what we'd do with all of the captured carbon.
>> No. 430970 Anonymous
30th September 2019
Monday 12:04 pm
430970 spacer
>>430968
I think some people don't quite realise what they're spouting is fascist and just think they're on to something nobody's thought of.

To your other question:
https://news.yahoo.com/bill-gates-backing-plan-to-stop-climate-change-by-blocking-out-the-sun-183601437.html
>> No. 430971 Anonymous
30th September 2019
Monday 1:28 pm
430971 spacer
>>430963

The money comes later as a consolation when she realises she's no longer a dominant public figure. Right now she's riding the wave of publicity but when there's a small war in the middle east she'll be off the telly and all the world leaders will be too busy to see her.
>> No. 430972 Anonymous
30th September 2019
Monday 1:31 pm
430972 spacer
>>430971

A small war in the middle east over oil or migration from drought, you mean?
>> No. 430989 Anonymous
1st October 2019
Tuesday 4:15 pm
430989 spacer
>>430969

>It's technically possible to capture CO2 out of the atmosphere, but it costs a fortune and we don't really know what we'd do with all of the captured carbon.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/07/how-to-erase-100-years-carbon-emissions-plant-trees/


The logistics of reforesting an area the size of the U.S. may seem daunting, but it's really a cost effective and affordable option. You also wouldn't really have to find a use for the captured carbon. And it can be done decentralised and locally wherever there is enough open unused space.

You could also start some sort of "Plant a Tree for the Climate" campaign, in which every person plants at least one tree in their back garden. Being the smug, attention-hungry cunts that most ordinary people are, you could turn it into a social media campaign where everybody gets to post a picture of themselves planting said tree. And thus raise awareness on the issue as a whole.

The problem is going to be that one tree alone will only capture a few dozen pounds of carbon (dioxide) from the atmosphere in a given year, of course much less so in its first few years, so one single tree isn't going to offset your annual trip to New Zealand or your BMW X5.

A fully grown deciduous tree does produce nearly a cubic metre of pure oxygen a day though.
>> No. 430991 Anonymous
1st October 2019
Tuesday 6:44 pm
430991 spacer
Isn't photosynthesising algae far more efficient at processing CO2 into oxygen than trees?

Couldn't we build massive artificial forests made up of thousands of algae shelves? Just let the wind blow through them and nature would do it's good work. I'm sure it would require a lot of surface area, but wouldn't it be a worthwhile trade off to sacrifice some chunks of open land or coastal seabed for wind farms providing clean energy, and algae farms for atmospheric cleaning?

I think if we combine that with a bit of the old Icelandic volcano mojo, we'd make some decent progress.

Also, I was reading an article earlier about how cities, due to their denser geographic layout, are much more carbon efficient than rural areas. The produce more CO2 in absolute terms, but less per capita.I think there might be something to be said for bringing back that old 50s/60s utopian ideal and getting more people into more efficient, denser housing.

(I'm still bitter about the middle class shipping forecasters here. If they want me to give up holidays and a nice steak, they can fucking well give up their chealsea tractor and come live in a shoebox of a flat and walk to work like I do. We've all got to do our bit.)
>> No. 430992 Anonymous
1st October 2019
Tuesday 6:55 pm
430992 spacer
>>430991
Fairly sure that most algae is free-floating and that bit about shelves is unrealistic but yes the fundamental basis of what you're saying isn't crazy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization
however
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization#Ecological_issues
>> No. 431001 Anonymous
1st October 2019
Tuesday 10:57 pm
431001 spacer
>>430991

>Couldn't we build massive artificial forests made up of thousands of algae shelves? 

The added benefit of new vast natural forests would be that you will create new habitats for pixies large numbers of animal and plant species that have been endangered by human deforestation in the last 200 years. I'm not sure wolves or lynx will take to your algae shelf installations the same way as to new forests.

The more we get into vertical and urban farming, the less we'll need to maintain treeless open fields that only serve the purpose of feeding our species.

Forest vegetation is also better at absorbing solar thermal radiation than open fields, which can have an additional cooling effect on the microclimate in the vicinity of a forest.
>> No. 431003 Anonymous
1st October 2019
Tuesday 11:13 pm
431003 spacer
>>430989
>but it's really a cost effective and affordable option.

but its not a time effective solution, trees hoover up a mountain of co2 over a lifetime not the 7 years we've got left to prevent catastrophic climate change.
>> No. 431004 Anonymous
1st October 2019
Tuesday 11:49 pm
431004 spacer
>>431001
>The more we get into vertical and urban farming, the less we'll need to maintain treeless open fields that only serve the purpose of feeding our species.

My understanding is that, as revolutionary as vertical farming is, you need bucket loads of power to make it work as you're taking free sunlight out of the equation. This ultimately ends with produce being simply unaffordable.

>I'm not sure wolves or lynx will take to your algae shelf installations the same way as to new forests.

Not him but the algae option is cheaper and has a myriad of applications such as a technically environmentally friendly fuel.

>>431003
Just plant bamboo and import a load of pandas to keep it from going too crazy. Or genetically modify fast growing trees but accidentally get it wrong and then the subsequent tree-people civilisation will be able to handle their own emissions.
>> No. 431005 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 4:48 am
431005 spacer
>>430991

> I think there might be something to be said for bringing back that old 50s/60s utopian ideal and getting more people into more efficient, denser housing.

Yeah let's get that whole mouse utopia feel going on to really get us into the funk of living in a decaying society.
>> No. 431008 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 1:07 pm
431008 spacer
>>431005

Having lived in both a flat and a house, I prefer the flat. It was better insulated, cheaper to run and had no garden to look after.

The problem is that most of our housing stock is shit (flats included). Poor noise insulation and small windows and rooms is sadly normal. Flats that have been converted from big houses on the cheap by flippers are particularly bad, in my experience. Properly built flats do exist, but it is difficult to find them -- it is not possible to filter Rightmove by quality of noise insulation.
>> No. 431012 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 6:13 pm
431012 spacer
>>431005

If done well, tower blocks are actually very energy efficient. They use less space, the flats in them have fewer exterior walls, and you can equip them with central heating and hot water. The larger a boiler, the more energy efficient it tends to be. And a few other things can also be pooled better, like waste disposal.

Wouldn't want to move into one locally here though.
>> No. 431015 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 7:32 pm
431015 spacer
>>431012

Aren't they noisy and claustrophobic? I can't imagine living with people above, below, and either side of me.
>> No. 431016 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 8:34 pm
431016 spacer
>>431015

A well built flat is typically quite quiet. I lived in a complex that was equal parts young professionals and students, and I really couldn't hear anything unless they were literally in the corridor outside the flat.

A badly built flat will transfer any and all noise through the floors and walls, though. I suppose you get what you pay for, the quiet flat was rather expensive. I did always enjoy living there, I need more space for my shite than any apartment can offer, but I really like the cosy feeling of a little one or two bed flat, and the air of luxury a balcony brings to the whole affair.
>> No. 431017 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 8:50 pm
431017 spacer
We could just flatten the whole bloody country, level it with concrete and build modular grids of 40 part flats, 30 part industry, 20 part commercial and 10 part recreational. Charge extra for housing in areas with over 50% green recreation.

While we're at it we could divide society up in to 5 tiers, alpha through epsilon with station assigned at birth based on which Bokanovsky group you're hatched in.
>> No. 431018 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 9:27 pm
431018 spacer
>>431017
Did they even have money in BNW? I don't recall it being mentioned.
>> No. 431019 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 9:42 pm
431019 spacer
>>431018

They must have done, one of the central themes was pavlovian training for toddlers in lower castes to discourage the love of nature by eleolctrocuting them when they played with flowers. This was because there was no money in nature. The recreation the world controllers provided was expensive, and I remember one concept that particularly resonated, each new game, electro-tower-golf or whatever had to be at least as complicated as the most complicated game currently on the market so that it could be more expensive.

Another central theme was the constantly repeated phrase "ending is better than mending." People would throw out clothes with a small nick in them to buy new ones, this was pretty unheard of in the 1930s according to my baseless preconceived notions of the era but BNW made it sensible by portraying it as a way to drive the economy.

I think you're right that money itself was never mentioned, the currency unit was never specified and no numerical values were given for a loaf of bread or a helicopter, but the constant themes to do with economy make me certain that some form of money was indeed used.

That does raise interesting questions though, the epsilon semi morons for instance might have simply had food, water, clothing, housing, transport, tickets to the feelies etc provided for them. The way they're portrayed makes it hard to imagine them handling their own money. It's possible that they were paid solely in soma tablets with the deltas providing the majority of low brow economic force and the gammas and up doing the middle class economic stuff re: recreation.

I'll be reading BNW Revisited soon so I'll pop a post in this thread if any of this is clarified.
>> No. 431022 Anonymous
2nd October 2019
Wednesday 11:58 pm
431022 spacer
>>431016

Flats have a terrible reputation in this country, because we threw up so many cheap tower blocks to deal with the post-war housing crisis; because they were of such poor quality, by the early 70s they had become dumping grounds for undesirables.

As you say, you get what you pay for - a good flat is far quieter and more efficient than a bad house. Right now though, I'd settle for crap if we'd just bloody build some housing.
>> No. 431023 Anonymous
3rd October 2019
Thursday 4:46 pm
431023 spacer

skynews-extinction-rebellion_4793987.jpg
431023431023431023
What a comedy farce:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-49921669

I don't think using a high-pressure firehose on a historic building, much less on the entrance, is a clever idea.
>> No. 431024 Anonymous
3rd October 2019
Thursday 4:59 pm
431024 spacer
>>431023
You should have posted the photo that also includes the huge cloud of acrid black smoke emanating from the exhaust that threatened to engulf the end of life fire engine.
>> No. 431025 Anonymous
3rd October 2019
Thursday 5:23 pm
431025 spacer
>>431023
Can we turn the Stroud valleys into a reservoir and put these crusties underwater for good already? The resulting hydroelectric power would provide more of a positive impact to renewable energy than all of their rush hour traffic jams.

I really wish the Stop Ecocide lot weren't lumped in with XR. They have some compelling arguments with actual legal basis behind them. Polly Higgins' death took the wind out of their sails a bit though so I doubt much more will come of that.
>> No. 431029 Anonymous
3rd October 2019
Thursday 6:33 pm
431029 spacer
>>431025
It's a lot of the same people so I'm not sure how you think that would work. Putting ecocide into law wouldn't do much for cutting emissions either.
>> No. 431034 Anonymous
3rd October 2019
Thursday 8:19 pm
431034 spacer
>>431023
It was very funny. But why don't you think the HM Treasury building can't put up with a few minutes of hose water? It was refurbished in 2002 with plastic window frames and of course it's been getting rained on for a hundred years.
>> No. 431036 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 12:24 am
431036 spacer

vaguely famous people.jpg
431036431036431036
Look, celebrity endorsement. The skinny gay guy who presented that show you all like tweeted that he'd be down next week too.
I imagine you feel as nonplussed about celebrities as I do but I'm posting this anyway for posterity.
>> No. 431037 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 12:29 am
431037 spacer

skinny gay guy who who hosted that show you all li.png
431037431037431037
>The skinny gay guy who presented that show you all like
Simon Amstell. From Never mind the Buzzcocks. That's the kiddy.
>> No. 431038 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 6:42 am
431038 spacer
>>431036
Makes sense that Cumberbatch is there; he's at least 30% reptile.
>> No. 431039 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 10:02 am
431039 spacer
I'm giving up leavened bread to reduce my carbon footprint.
>> No. 431040 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 10:14 am
431040 spacer
>>431039
If you give up being so salty then you can use less fresh water too.
>> No. 431044 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 2:05 pm
431044 spacer
>>431040
What are you on about m8, I'm just trying to do my bit. I've cut down on porridge too, to reduce my farting.
>> No. 431046 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 2:33 pm
431046 spacer
>>431044
If you still don't understand the difference between personal change and systemic change after having it explained multiple times then there's not much point in trying to explain it again.
>> No. 431049 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 5:08 pm
431049 spacer
Does Extinction Rebellion have a race problem?

It was a sunny day in July and environmental activists had blocked the Strand with a big blue boat.

“Live from the royal courts of justice,” Extinction Rebellion London wrote. “It has been announced that all protesters arrested during the April rebellion will be prosecuted. We are asking the police and legal system to concentrate on issues such as knife crime, and not non-violent protesters who are trying to save our planet.”

For those with ears tuned to hear it, the dogwhistle sounded clear. Stop bothering us non-violent protesters; focus instead on those frightening inner-city neighbourhoods, where black children carry knives.

“It was feeding into a racist narrative,” says Guppi Bola, an activist with the Wretched of the Earth, an environmental group that focuses on black, brown and indigenous voices. “When those kinds of things come up, then of course you are not going to feel welcome.”

In less than a year, Extinction Rebellion (XR) has established itself as one of the UK’s highest-profile environmental campaign groups. Its mass civil disobedience protests have helped raise concern over green issues to a record high. But from the start XR has faced questions over its ability to reach out to diverse communities. Some critics go further, suggesting its tactics, its framing of key issues and a series of communications missteps show a carelessness around issues of race – or even institutional dolphin rape.

As climate anxiety increases, XR says it has listened to the criticisms and is prepared to make changes in order to reach as many people as possible. But why is the movement so white? Why is that a problem? And what can be done to change it?

XR’s lack of diversity is not unique to the wider environmental movement – a “white middle-class ghetto”, in the words of one NGO chief, with research in 2017 finding the “environment profession” – including workers at green NGOs – was the second least diverse of all sectors in the UK, after farming.


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/04/extinction-rebellion-race-climate-crisis-inequality

Pretty damning stuff. Let's face it, XRlad is primarily interested in keeping Britain white.
>> No. 431052 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 5:32 pm
431052 spacer
>>431049

It's worked for destroying every other movement that threatens the status quo within recent memory, so I'm not at all surprised to see this tactic turned on XR.

Take note of this nexttime you ridicule me for saying identity politics is a divide and conquer strategy by the elite, otherlad.
>> No. 431054 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 5:51 pm
431054 spacer
>>431049

What a scummy title from the Grauniad, if they had any integrity or pragmatism they could've just lead into a less accusatory debate about why the browns are disengaged from things like this and maybe had look at other groups that are under represented e.g. working class people. Fucking identity politics should have been left with the empire where it belonged.
>> No. 431056 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 6:06 pm
431056 spacer
>>431049
I briefly met Daze Aghaji a couple of months ago. Bright lass.
The second half of the article's pretty positive, if you bother to read that far.
>> No. 431057 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 6:14 pm
431057 spacer
>>431049
>focus instead on those frightening inner-city neighbourhoods, where black children carry knives
What a racist reporter, assuming that knife crime is exclusively a black thing.
>> No. 431058 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 6:31 pm
431058 spacer
>>431057
It's a whole damned-if-you-do thing. XR's racist for doing stuff that minorities don't want to do, XR would be racist for not encouraging people with privilege to use it to benefit others. Someone is going to find a hole to pick eventually.
>> No. 431059 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 6:48 pm
431059 spacer
>>431052
If I remember correctly, there's a CIA guide on using identity politics to disrupt movements as it turned out to be a far more effective tactic than they'd ever hoped it would be.

>>431054
>Grauniad
>integrity or pragmatism

The Snowden leaks were about seven years ago and the Graun are still trying to dine out on a reputation based on that despite the fact the quality of their output has nosedived massively since then.

As a side note, I've had to work with a couple of Guardian journalists in a professional capacity. Their level of knowledge about the specialism they supposedly cover was shockingly low, to the point the absolute basics had to be explained to them. They had the right kind of accent, presumably also the right kind of public school background, though.
>> No. 431061 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 8:52 pm
431061 spacer
>>431059

>If I remember correctly, there's a CIA guide on using identity politics to disrupt movements as it turned out to be a far more effective tactic than they'd ever hoped it would be.

I remember a lad posting about it a while ago, seemingly from first hand experience, relating to the Occupy movement and how they crumbled the leadership from within by seeding conflict over inclusiveness of LGBT and ethnic groups.

If anyone has a link or book recommendation to solid further reading on this kind of subject, I'd be incredibly interested.
>> No. 431063 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 10:13 pm
431063 spacer

tate.jpg
431063431063431063
Here it comes...
>> No. 431064 Anonymous
4th October 2019
Friday 10:59 pm
431064 spacer
>>431061
Not that, but I remember reading this which I found mildly interesting. (PDF link at bottom of the link)

http://destructables.org/destructable/freedom-fighters-manual-cia-pamphlet-dropped-over-nicaragua-1983
>> No. 431074 Anonymous
5th October 2019
Saturday 1:01 pm
431074 spacer
>>431061

Also, see this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

>COINTELPRO tactics are still used to this day and have been alleged to include discrediting targets through psychological warfare; smearing individuals and groups using forged documents and by planting false reports in the media; harassment; wrongful imprisonment; and illegal violence, including assassination. The FBI's stated motivation was "protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order"
>> No. 431082 Anonymous
5th October 2019
Saturday 5:51 pm
431082 spacer
Ah here we go. I said it looked like Trump was trying to normalise his behaviour, Tucker Carlson is now helping that goal.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-tucker-carlson-fox-news-biden-ukraine-phone-call-impeachment-a9143956.html

Tucker is a complete puppet. This appears to be a move to sway the people who are on the fence about the impeachment talk. He's spinning it while saying it can't be spun.
>> No. 431083 Anonymous
5th October 2019
Saturday 5:51 pm
431083 spacer
Police tactics now include confiscating pita bread and large pink pillows. Damn them!
>> No. 431086 Anonymous
5th October 2019
Saturday 8:18 pm
431086 spacer
>>431083
> confiscating pita bread
Well rightly so - Yeast is a significant producer of CO2. Those that truly care about the environment are eating tortillas or roti.
>> No. 431095 Anonymous
6th October 2019
Sunday 12:20 am
431095 spacer
>>431086

>Yeast is a significant producer of CO2

Unless you develop a strain of yeast that feeds on coal or crude oil, yeast only consumes sugar that is the result of relatively recent metabolic activity of plants. It's like burning wood from your back garden in your fireplace. it isn't the real issue.
>> No. 431096 Anonymous
6th October 2019
Sunday 7:32 am
431096 spacer
>>431095

Domestic wood burning accounts for as much as 31% of particulate production in London - including twice as much PM2.5 as all traffic, and has been shown to increase pollution in other modern European cities. A wood burning stove, the only legal method of domestic wood burning in most of London, produces more particulate pollution in an hour than a diesel lorry.
>> No. 431107 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 1:47 am
431107 spacer
>>431096

>A wood burning stove, the only legal method of domestic wood burning in most of London, produces more particulate pollution in an hour than a diesel lorry.

They've regulated it here so that an open-style livingroom fireplace can only be operated once a month. I think. My parents have one in their house, but they never really use it anymore anyway. Too much work getting it clean again the next day.
>> No. 431109 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 3:40 am
431109 spacer
>>431096

Well that makes me feel shit about my wood-fired Franco Manco pizza.
>> No. 431114 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 6:30 pm
431114 spacer
>>431109

Still better for the environment than frozen pizza, it seems.

https://thefootinfood.weebly.com/carbon-footprint.html

>After researching CO2 emissions of various food types we found out that the average Grandiosa pizza emits over 290 kg of carbon dioxide. Our research evaluated the CO2 emissions for the foods production, travel, packaging and preservation and these were the final results. The food production alone accounted for only 4.16 kg of CO2 (1.42%), refrigeration produced roughly 200 kg of CO2 (68.7%), Transportation made up 53.1 kg (18.2%) and packaging finished it off with 33.77 kg of CO2 and 11.6% of the total amount.
>> No. 431115 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 8:17 pm
431115 spacer
>>431114

Those numbers seem way too high.

290kg is over a 1000 miles in an average car... does freezing a single £2 pizza really take that much energy?
>> No. 431116 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 9:09 pm
431116 spacer
>>431115
Freezing requires substantial energy input, not least because it involves overcoming a temperature gradient. Assuming it is frozen down to -20, that's going to require releasing about 80-100kJ of heat for a 500g pizza, and to get that release you need to put energy in to make it happen. You then need to actively remove that heat, which requires more energy input. In your freezer at home, this is achieved by pumping coolant through a heat exchange loop to dissipate the heat out the back. The only way you're going to cut down the emissions in that process realistically is by greening the grid. We have some impressive tidal ranges in this country, so I've no idea why we haven't been pushing that harder.
>> No. 431117 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 9:14 pm
431117 spacer
>>431114

There's no way in the world that packaging for a frozen pizza produces 33kg of CO2. Cardboard produces about 1kg/CO2 per kg, PE film produces about 2.7kg/CO2 per kg, so the worst-case for typical pizza packaging is about 50 grams, including the outer carton. I'd like to see a source for that data that isn't a Weebly website by an anonymous author.

http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Carbon_Methodology_-_Nov_2010_V101.f1571b4f.10324.pdf
>> No. 431118 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 9:49 pm
431118 spacer
>>431116 'substantial' - kind of.

You get 0.367kg of CO2 per kWh you pull from the grid*
200kg of CO2 implies 545kWh to freeze a single pizza.
At 13p per kWh, that's an energy cost of £70.84 per pizza.
Big Fridge is clearly subsidising your pizza, as is big transport and big farming.

That, or the numbers you quoted are utter toss and regurgitated by the credulous.


* https://www.confusedaboutenergy.co.uk/index.php/climate-and-the-environment/142-global-warming/751-carbon-emissions-per-kwh-for-various-fuels)
>> No. 431119 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 10:09 pm
431119 spacer
>>431118
>the numbers you quoted
Have we got to go through this whole "anonymous" thing again?
>> No. 431120 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 10:34 pm
431120 spacer
>>431119

Does it even matter in the context, unless you're personally offended by being mildly and wrongfully told off on a shed enthusiast's bbs?
>> No. 431121 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 11:13 pm
431121 spacer
>>431120
I don't know whether you've noticed, but we have impossibly high standards around here. Be thankful a ban didn't get handed out for that stray bracket.
>> No. 431122 Anonymous
7th October 2019
Monday 11:17 pm
431122 spacer

ExtinctionRebellionWestminster0710H-15.jpg
431122431122431122
Just shy of 300 arrests so far. I saw Daisy Lowe but I didn't know who she was before yesterday so I mostly ignored her.
>> No. 431123 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 3:18 am
431123 spacer
I'm not sure what particular food has caused it, but I'm emitting some delightfully satisfying farts right now. CH4 is even worse than CO2, you know. The planet won't know what's hit it.
>> No. 431124 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 9:12 am
431124 spacer
>>431123
https://metro.co.uk/2014/11/13/why-are-these-people-burying-their-heads-in-the-sand-literally-4947112/
>> No. 431125 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 9:34 am
431125 spacer
>>431121
Ah, fuck. Sorry about the bracket.
You is plural.
>> No. 431128 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 12:29 pm
431128 spacer
>>431122

>Daisy Lowe

Me neither.
>> No. 431130 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 12:59 pm
431130 spacer
>>431128

I can't remember who she is or what she looks like, but the name rings a bell - I'm pretty sure I knocked one out to a video of her dancing in her underwear, way back in a time before porn had made me entirely incapable of becoming aroused by anything other than hardcore german sadomasochism.
>> No. 431134 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 4:01 pm
431134 spacer
it's a boy
>> No. 431135 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 4:30 pm
431135 spacer
>>431134
Still would.
>> No. 431138 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 5:08 pm
431138 spacer

getting the word.jpg
431138431138431138
>>431135
>> No. 431146 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 7:57 pm
431146 spacer
>>431130
Just one?

https://vimeo.com/12280336
>> No. 431147 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 8:03 pm
431147 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcHIcX3YP50
>> No. 431154 Anonymous
8th October 2019
Tuesday 11:29 pm
431154 spacer
>>431128
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7540859/amp/Model-Daisy-Lowe-backs-Extinction-Rebellion-climate-change-group-prepares-major-London-disruption.html
>> No. 431159 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 12:44 am
431159 spacer

157057434460.png
431159431159431159
Saw Simon Amstell today. I said "Hi!", he said "Hi, how are you?" "Fine, thanks for coming down!" "No, thank you for coming down!" so I gather he's as awkward in person as he claims to be. He's also a lot shorter than I expected.
>> No. 431160 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 9:47 am
431160 spacer
>>431159
What's with all the red and white bints? I'm guessing it's attention seeking.
>> No. 431161 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 10:44 am
431161 spacer
>>431160
>attention seeking
That would rather be the point of a protest, yes.
>> No. 431162 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 11:06 am
431162 spacer
>>431161
I know that, but the whole red and white thing seems like a pure ego trip.
>> No. 431163 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 11:15 am
431163 spacer
>>431160
I shit you not, they're as close as we're likely to get to a militant wing of the living statue performance "art" profession - they even call themselves the Red Brigade. I dread to think how the people of Bristol are coping with these pillars of the community absent from their streets.
>> No. 431164 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 11:20 am
431164 spacer
>>431162
Okay, Calvin, back in your coffin.
>> No. 431165 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 11:28 am
431165 spacer
>>431162
Name some of them then. Without looking them up first. They're not even all women.
They represent blood of "the species", I don't know if that's supposed to be the human species or the animal species we're driving extinct that is being and will be spilled, but I imagine it's both. They get people to stop, look and ask questions which is the point.
>> No. 431166 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 12:32 pm
431166 spacer
>>431165
>They get people to stop, look and ask questions which is the point.

"Why have those twats dressed up like a gigantic menstruation?"
>> No. 431167 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 12:37 pm
431167 spacer
Gosh, you're so BRILLIANT.
>> No. 431171 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 5:36 pm
431171 spacer
I find it continually endearing that there's one Brightonlad here who always gets unmistakably bumsore that nobody takes his pretentious hipster art degree mate's antics seriously. They did look daft, mate. I'm sure it all sounded really poignant and romantic in the meetings, but regular people don't think about things like that. It's okay.

The thing is it would have been poignant if they'd all turned up and, symbolically, slashed their own wrists in front of that copper. That would have got some attention, it would have been more meaningful. Blood of the species, you know? But they didn't do anything like that, they just showed up in red, and they probably think they're dead special for having such an impact.
>> No. 431174 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 6:16 pm
431174 spacer
How much have these protests reduced our carbon footprint by then?
>> No. 431176 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:01 pm
431176 spacer
>>431171

You can't pretend to speak for "regular people".
>> No. 431177 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:14 pm
431177 spacer
>>431174

That's a blatantly disingenuous question.
>> No. 431178 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:16 pm
431178 spacer
>>431177
Your mum's a blatantly disingenuous question, m7.
>> No. 431180 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:43 pm
431180 spacer

FWxgvOIyAFsfDBMPcO8rYxxsxlwYShhzeEJvvz7Thyo.jpg
431180431180431180
<3
>> No. 431181 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:44 pm
431181 spacer
>>431177

I mean obviously I'm taking the piss, but the question is valid - has this actually done anything?
>> No. 431182 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:55 pm
431182 spacer
>>431181
>actually done anything?

No - but it lets the people involved feel like they are doing something.
>> No. 431183 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 7:55 pm
431183 spacer
>>431181
Well don't underestimate the combined power of en-masse virtue signal. I assume the climate is almost solved now.
>> No. 431184 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 8:08 pm
431184 spacer
>>431183
As we saw in 2016, one should never underestimate the power of stupid people in sufficiently large numbers, not least because in sufficiently large numbers any group of people becomes stupid.
>> No. 431185 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 9:43 pm
431185 spacer
>>431180

I predict that this picture will become subject to a slew of massively insensitive meme captions.
>> No. 431186 Anonymous
9th October 2019
Wednesday 10:33 pm
431186 spacer
>>431181

Effects of mass protests are difficult to quantify, and it's hard to know whether the effect was negative or positive until after the fact. I agree some tactics can be wrong and actually turn the public against a particular cause, but time will tell if that's the case here.

There's no doubt mass movements spur important social changes, though -- and it may be one of our only tools when government and private power reach a consensus amongst themselves despite public opinion (which I believe is happening here with climate change).

It's not a direct comparison at all, but I keep thinking about the Iraq war when people question whether protests do anything. We invaded Iraq, but we now have pretty reliable accounts that the government was shaken by turnouts for the protests, and Geoff Hoon told Donald Rumsfeld that the UK may need to withdraw support for the invasion on what's become known as "wobbly Tuesday". Protests may have tempered, and almost prevented, a devastating military invasion in which hundreds of thousands (or into the millions, according to Physicians for Social Responsibility) have died.
>> No. 431195 Anonymous
10th October 2019
Thursday 12:40 am
431195 spacer

958d4148-83ec-48fe-bf5e-d992bcfee69f.jpg
431195431195431195
>>431181
The Government and most local government bodies have declared climate emergencies, some of them have even started doing things about it. A number of large, climate-unfriendly projects have been delayed or started to waver. In Ipsos MORI polls in 2013, 59% said the planet was ‘heading for disaster’. This year it’s gone up to 78%. Interest in veganism has doubled (though in fairness it was on the incline anyway). Theresa May paid lip service by pledging carbon neutral by 2050, the Labour party is scrambling to win back the Green votes that have had a huge upsurge, winning them multiple seats. Numerous institutions of various sorts have declared they're divesting from fossil fuels. Plus a bunch of other things I could find out if I googled for it but it's late.
Obviously you're going to quibble and say there's no way to prove any of this is directly related to XR but then obviously there's no way to prove any particular one thing is the result of protests, so why are you even asking?
>> No. 431201 Anonymous
10th October 2019
Thursday 10:12 am
431201 spacer
>>431195

>Obviously you're going to quibble and say there's no way to prove any of this is directly related to XR

Not really. If this stuff happened after XR started making headlines, that's good enough for me to give it to them.
>> No. 431202 Anonymous
10th October 2019
Thursday 10:29 am
431202 spacer
>>431201
Parliament declared the climate emergency something like six days after the end of the April protests.
>> No. 431211 Anonymous
10th October 2019
Thursday 8:25 pm
431211 spacer

PANews_P-9d1bae71-d82c-4102-bcaf-41cbc710b549_I1.jpg
431211431211431211
Just found this -

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/jun/04/carbon-footprint-beer

>Too much beer can add to your footprint as well as your waistline – especially if it's imported


Bloody foreigners and their beers, eh.
>> No. 431212 Anonymous
10th October 2019
Thursday 10:52 pm
431212 spacer
>>431211

Importing something adds to your carbon footprint? Groundbreaking stuff.
>> No. 431213 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 12:11 am
431213 spacer
>>431212

Made me choke on my New Zealand strawberries.
>> No. 431215 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 8:35 am
431215 spacer

qed.jpg
431215431215431215
These are interesting.
https://metro.co.uk/2019/10/10/blind-man-climbs-ba-plane-extinction-rebellion-airport-takeover-10895765/
See how far away most of those photos were taken from? People were arrested without warning just for filming while on City Airport property.
https://twitter.com/LivvyDoherty/status/1182242830720360448

I know at least some of you have wonky bones or something and might find this relevant:
https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/anger-as-police-confiscate-extinction-rebellion-accessible-toilets-ramps-and-wheelchairs/ (pic related)
>> No. 431216 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 9:19 am
431216 spacer
>>431215
What I've noticed from all this is that not a single Met police officer is clean shaven these days. I get that they look like a bag of shit in those jackets anyway but it's not Svalbard.

>I know at least some of you have wonky bones or something and might find this relevant:

London is already wheelchair accessible, all the wooden ramps you've put out on the sides of roads are a health hazard if anything. Now, as someone who lives in Westminster, would you kindly fuck off and stop playing your bongo drums and horns in St James's Park where you're upsetting the birds. The Parakeets no less who aren't native so you're also all 'orrible racists.
>> No. 431217 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 9:21 am
431217 spacer
>>431216
>all the wooden ramps you've put out on the sides of roads are a health hazard if anything
Sort of a moot point if you're confiscating people's wheelchairs.
>> No. 431218 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 9:27 am
431218 spacer
>>431216
> Now, as someone who lives in Westminster

There's two of us?
>> No. 431219 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 9:39 am
431219 spacer
>>431218
At least three while the protests continue. Come down to Trafalgar Square, you can argue with the protesters like the rest of the clearly mentally ill people who like to shout nonsense at night.
>> No. 431220 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 10:12 am
431220 spacer
>>431215

>See how far away most of those photos were taken from? People were arrested without warning just for filming while on City Airport property.

You're not really supposed to film airport ground work, and you're definitely not supposed to film while a security incident is ongoing. I know everyone involved knew it was just a crusty trying to make a point, but when someone climbs on top of a plane, everyone on the ground is trained to assume the worst.

I suppose that doesn't really justify being arrested for filming it though, but your options for filming are to either be on the ramp at the airport with your phone out (not permitted due to fuel vapours) or on the other side of the fence (far away by design)
>> No. 431225 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 12:27 pm
431225 spacer
>>431220
>on the ramp at the airport with your phone out (not permitted due to fuel vapours)
Wasn't the whole phone and fuel thing debunked about two decades ago?
>> No. 431231 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 4:37 pm
431231 spacer
>>431225

Only scientifically, not politically. It's like how the NHS still recommends avoiding eggs if you have high cholesterol despite the last 20 years of research showing that eggs are actually good for cholesterol levels. For laws and policies, the truth is irrelevant, liability is king and nobody can be arsed to take the mobile thing through the relevant channels to get all those signs at petrol stations removed.

Big Mobile just doesn't have the sway it used to.

The egg thing is a little more complicated than I implied, so don't go getting any ideas from my post fatlad. Do what the doctor tells you.
>> No. 431233 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 7:57 pm
431233 spacer
>>431220
>when someone climbs on top of a plane
When has that ever happened before?
>> No. 431235 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 10:10 pm
431235 spacer
how can we run out of water when we can just grow more watermelon
>> No. 431240 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 11:11 pm
431240 spacer
>>431225

Almost certainly, but it's still enforced. The official line I think is just no phone calls, but many airports won't even tolerate a selfie. Though there's not many airports left that aren't using jetbridges for just about every flight.

Kerosene vapour does have a shockingly low ignition temperature, though. Typically if someone sparks a tab up near a plane they're arrested, or at the very least, no longer travelling on the plane.
>> No. 431241 Anonymous
11th October 2019
Friday 11:12 pm
431241 spacer
>>431233

That might not have happened before, but any case of a member of the public being somewhere they're not supposed to be is a huge deal, be it on top of a plane or on the wrong side of a door.
>> No. 431242 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 12:43 am
431242 spacer
I saw this kid out there the other day and wondered why he looked familiar. He probably gets a lot of people staring like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBCxbfBSmDo
There's an older guy I've seen around a lot who I'm certain is an actor or comedian. Quite tall, thick set, bald, thick glasses, prominent nose, bald.
Celebrity spotting aside I'm exhausted and it's only week one.
>> No. 431244 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:21 am
431244 spacer

IMG.jpg
431244431244431244
Over 1,200 arrests in London as of last night, 930 more globally.

A slightly distraught middle-aged lady was giving out these little bundles of home made vegan sweets to everyone who was locked-on. Admittedly it looks a bit tatty now but it was in my bag outdoors overnight.
>> No. 431245 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 12:56 pm
431245 spacer
>>431201

Correlation is not causation, you dumb arse.


>> No. 431246 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 1:24 pm
431246 spacer
>>431245

You're thick as fuck if you don't understand the context here.
>> No. 431247 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 2:16 pm
431247 spacer
>>431245

They only had one independent variable data point too. The statistical analysis on display here has just been shocking all round.
>> No. 431254 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 4:06 pm
431254 spacer
>>431246

Yeah, I know that there are many Greta worshippers here. A Greta fanboy will not give a fuck about logic or anything else, as long as he spreads "awareness"
>> No. 431255 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 4:17 pm
431255 spacer
>>431254
If you chat shit, expect to be corrected.
>> No. 431256 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 4:46 pm
431256 spacer
>>431255

I understand that there is no effective difference between people that really worship Greta and XR, and those that are just taking the piss. It's like trying to understand if Assigned Male is a troll webcomic or not.
>> No. 431260 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 6:54 pm
431260 spacer
I still do not understand how there are people out there, and at least one in this thread, who seem to genuinely hate a child and the idea of children trying to secure a better future for themselves and the world. Absolutely baffling and it just outs you as cunts, what on Earth do they think they're gaining?
>> No. 431261 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 6:58 pm
431261 spacer
>>431260

Would you like to try explaining your point(s) without resorting to hiding behind a child in order to make your stance unassailable?
>> No. 431262 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 6:59 pm
431262 spacer
>>431260
>genuinely hate a child

Mate, have you ever spend time around a child? They're little shits.
>> No. 431264 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 7:45 pm
431264 spacer
>>431261
He's not hiding behind a child or children who want a habitable future, someone being critical of Greta brought her up in the first place. Both in this part of the conversation and the entire thread.
>> No. 431265 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 7:51 pm
431265 spacer
>>431264

I'm sorry, are we discussing an issue of global import or whether some bloke on a shed enthusiast BBS respects the viewpoint of a child?

If the former please discuss without using a child as a shield, if the latter I'm unfortunately washing my hair for the duration of this conversation.
>> No. 431266 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 8:16 pm
431266 spacer
>>431264
This. I think we've had an BRILLIANT troll in this thread for some time now.

>>431265
Jesus mate I bet you're a right laugh at parties, have a word with yourself.
>> No. 431267 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 8:18 pm
431267 spacer
>>431266

I'm glad to hear the end of the world is a party for you.
>> No. 431268 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 9:11 pm
431268 spacer

>> No. 431269 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 9:16 pm
431269 spacer
>>431267
Thanks for that completely meaningless retort. Really showed us with that one.
>> No. 431275 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 9:45 pm
431275 spacer

>> No. 431276 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 9:47 pm
431276 spacer
>>431269

~The end of the world is a joke for me.
-Climate traitor.

Your child god would be disappointed.
>> No. 431277 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 9:51 pm
431277 spacer
>>431276
I see we've reached the point in the conversation where you just lazily say things that half-amounted to points earlier on but no longer relate to what's actually happening.
>> No. 431278 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:00 pm
431278 spacer
>>431277

I see we're at the point in the conversation where you conflate the viewpoints of your current interlocutor with the viewpoints of an anonmyous poster you may or may not have been conversing with earlier in the thread.

Your child god would approve.
>> No. 431279 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:02 pm
431279 spacer
>>431278
Wrong, but that is what you're doing.
>> No. 431280 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:10 pm
431280 spacer
>>431279

Wrong, but it is what you're doing.
>> No. 431283 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:13 pm
431283 spacer
>>431281

Too many Stella without a wife to beat tonight ladm8?
>> No. 431284 Anonymous ## Mod ##
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:17 pm
431284 spacer

yeah no.png
431284431284431284
>>431281
It's not though, is it?
>> No. 431285 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:21 pm
431285 spacer
>>431284

I appreciate the support but is mod visibility wise in this thread? Cunts will be involved in cunt offs wherever they are, if you stick your own neck out it's distracting from their own cuntery.

Feel free to delete this post.
>> No. 431289 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:36 pm
431289 spacer
>>431285
Not-samefagging to try and weasel out of an argument is just as egregious as samefagging.
>> No. 431291 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:43 pm
431291 spacer
Nobody can be arsed with this anymore. I'm going for a walk.
>> No. 431292 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 10:49 pm
431292 spacer
>>431291
Wear a jacket it's cold out.

And don't menace any women!
>> No. 431293 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 11:19 pm
431293 spacer

bild_sas_17.jpg
431293431293431293
Last time I heard the CRW lads love getting dressed up and going out for a disco.
>> No. 431294 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 11:30 pm
431294 spacer
>>431291

Regen is good. You've done a lot of arguing in this thread for the good. Don't feel you have to keep it up indefinitely.
>> No. 431295 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 11:49 pm
431295 spacer
For what it's worth, I think are Greta and the XR lot have maybe overdone it in too short space of time. I think people were all over it three months ago but by now they're getting sick of hearing it. I'm seeing the snarky, smarmy dismissive opinions get more popular as the initial wave of importance and consternation wears off.

I very much hope this whole fiasco won't be another fart lost in a breeze, but I think it's in danger of becoming that. There's a lot of things going on in the world. The yellow jacket lot are still at it in France. The worldwide population of gamers are now fighting in solidarity with Hong Kong. Trump's finally gone fully off the fucking rocker.

You know what I felt pretty bleak about the world around 2014-15 or so, jesus. It's only ever going to keep getting worse isn't it. The state of the world itself is giving me legitimate bloody anxiety to be honest. That can't be right surely. Is it just overload because there's no way to escape it nowadays? There's nit just TV and radio and news to avoid any more, but this stuff feels like it's directly beamed into my brain nowadays, and I can't get away from it.

I reckon I may as well take up smoking again. Could just do with a nice fag staring out of the kitchen window to be honest. Simple pleasure.

Mind you I bet they're terrible for my carbon footprint.
>> No. 431296 Anonymous
12th October 2019
Saturday 11:52 pm
431296 spacer
>>431295
cool, you're over hearing about climate change. you can just safely ignore it then, it can wait until you're ready to hear about it again.
>> No. 431297 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:01 am
431297 spacer
>>431296

This is why nobody likes you lot.
>> No. 431298 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:03 am
431298 spacer
>>431296

I just think it's depressing that you lot still have hope.
>> No. 431299 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:07 am
431299 spacer
>>431295
>You know what I felt pretty bleak about the world around 2014-15

Oh, to renew those halcyon days... I do tend to err on the side of caution when it comes to seeing the past as better than what it really was, but in this instance I do think you have a point. I don't remember feeling like I was a grunt in the great information war everytime I was online back then, perhaps it was ignorance, or maybe the fear, uncertainty and doubt truly is mounting for good reason. I think I'd have gone utterly off my rocker by now if I was plugged into social media in a big way too.

>>431296
That really wasn't the point he was making, ecolad.
>> No. 431300 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:24 am
431300 spacer

23014732_SX540_.jpg
431300431300431300
>>431296

>cool, you're over hearing about climate change. you can just safely ignore it then

Most things in life do go away all on their own if you just pay them no mind, don't you know. We'll just ignore global temperatures back down. That'll work. Ignorance is still the only true bliss.
>> No. 431305 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 1:52 am
431305 spacer
Greta should come to saville Town near Dewsbury. Stand up in the community centres. Tell the bearded men OMG DEADED
>> No. 431306 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 2:06 am
431306 spacer
>>431300

Camping out and eating vegan sweets in London is doing exactly as much to change the situation as I am by ignoring it.
>> No. 431307 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 3:12 am
431307 spacer
>>431306

Right. That's Greta's whole message. Camp out and eat vegan sweets.
>> No. 431309 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 3:16 am
431309 spacer
>>431307

It's not are Greta's fault that the message is twisted. No need to bully her here.
>> No. 431310 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 3:31 am
431310 spacer
>>431307

Tell that to XR then mate?
>> No. 431311 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 7:09 am
431311 spacer
Fucking hell, XRlad. You didn't tell us that you'd be able to claim up to £300 per week in expenses from them for protesting. Kept that hit quiet.
>> No. 431312 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 8:49 am
431312 spacer
>>431306
Do I have to explain the point of protesting for the millionth time? No one thinks dressing up as the "Red Brigade" and getting collared en masse is going to suck CO2 from the air and put solar panels on roofs, but it draws attention from the populace, the media and government, which increases the likelihood of whatever you're protesting about staying at the top of the agenda and therefore the odds someone will do something about it.
>> No. 431313 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 9:34 am
431313 spacer
Is it just me or is there one lad in this thread who seems to be repeatedly grasping the wrong end of the stick? Or he's just trying to be BRILLIANT and failing.
>> No. 431314 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 11:19 am
431314 spacer
>>431313
Probably the resident yank lad, worried his burgers are going to be taken away.
>> No. 431317 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 11:43 am
431317 spacer
>>431312
But protesters can generally be safely ignored in such relatively small numbers. It's just fringe weirdos.
>> No. 431321 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:06 pm
431321 spacer

Safely ignored in small numbers my arse.jpg
431321431321431321
>>431317

Except it isn't and you'd know that if you weren't actively in denial.

>more than 100 healthcare professionals joined the sixth day of climate change protests
>Doctors, nurses and medical students were among those demonstrating at Jubilee Gardens
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/extinction-rebellion-protests-activists-hold-faux-funeral-procession-as-arrests-top-total-from-april-a4260126.html

>Saturday's protest, organised by the environmental group Extinction Rebellion, drew at least 20,000 people, including representatives from women's movements, student groups and trade unions.
>Many actors, musicians and politicians have taken part in the civil disobedience campaign.
>Kevin Treweeks, grand secretary of Plymouth in Unison, a trade union in the south-west of England, called on more workers' groups to join the movement.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/uk-climate-activists-hold-funeral-procession-planet-191012183408672.html
This is despite the fact that it was raining the entire time.

As for being "safely ignored":
>Up to 100 police officers are being deployed from Scotland to London next week to assist with the Extinction Rebellion protests.
>Met Police chief Cressida Dick said the force had been "stretched" by the protests
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-50029194
Which conveniently doesn't mention the extra police drafted in right from the start from Devon, Cornwall, Gloucestershire, Kent, Surrey, Wales and all sorts of other places.

>As of 17:30hrs on Saturday, 12 October, there have been 1,307 arrests in connection with the ongoing Extinction Rebellion protests across London.
>> No. 431324 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:15 pm
431324 spacer

fringe weirdo with a medical phd.jpg
431324431324431324
Here's Reuters on it too;
>More than 300 scientists have endorsed a civil disobedience campaign aimed at forcing governments to take rapid action to tackle climate change, warning that failure could inflict “incalculable human suffering.”
>In a joint declaration, climate scientists, physicists, biologists, engineers and others from at least 20 countries broke with the caution traditionally associated with academia to side with peaceful protesters courting arrest from Amsterdam to Melbourne.
>Other signatories included several scientists who contributed to the U.N.-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-climate-change-scientists/scientists-endorse-mass-civil-disobedience-to-force-climate-action-idUKKBN1WS01F
>> No. 431326 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:28 pm
431326 spacer
>>431317
But they aren't being ignored, they're on the news all the time and people are talking about XR day in, day out, like you are right now. Stop trying so hard to be contrary.
>> No. 431327 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:40 pm
431327 spacer
I got flipped off by a hipster on a bicycle for honking at him yesterday when he crossed the road right in front of me out of nowhere on his bike. With no pedestrian or bicycle crossing in sight.

It wasn't just the middle finger, but the expression on his face of moral superiority because I was driving a climate polluting, space consuming automobile, and he was so much better than me because he was riding a bike.

Not saying cars aren't bad for the environment, especially my old banger, but I refuse to let hipster cumshites get away with feeling superior to me that way.
>> No. 431328 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:44 pm
431328 spacer
>>431327
Did you read all that from his expression?
>> No. 431329 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 12:46 pm
431329 spacer
>>431327
A contender for the most Poe's Law poty
>> No. 431330 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 1:02 pm
431330 spacer
>>431328

It's a particular facial expression that any non-sperg should be able to read and identify correctly.
>> No. 431331 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 1:04 pm
431331 spacer
>>431330
You had someone read it for you? Think they might be having you on.
>> No. 431334 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 2:19 pm
431334 spacer
>>431327
Have mercy, it's about the only way he can feel superior to anybody.
>> No. 431335 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 2:45 pm
431335 spacer
>>431327
Cool story bro.
>> No. 431337 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 7:50 pm
431337 spacer
It's curious that the BBC isn't reporting on last weeks actions directly at all. Just that thing about the Scottish police officers. You'd think the longest large-scale occupation of London since Occupy (if not longer) would be "in the public interest". I know they're receiving enough complaints about the lack of coverage continually that their complaints switchboard keeps crashing (both the online one and their phones).
Would I be paranoid if I thought there was something fishy about it?
>> No. 431338 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 8:23 pm
431338 spacer
>>431337

Are you suggesting some kind of conspiracy in which powerful people do favours for other powerful people to the detriment of the public? What utter piddle and tosh.
>> No. 431339 Anonymous
13th October 2019
Sunday 8:52 pm
431339 spacer
>>431311
I see you read the Daily Mail.
https://rebellion.earth/2019/10/13/read-all-about-it-response-to-mail-on-sunday-as-1000s-come-together-for-life-on-earth/
>> No. 431343 Anonymous
14th October 2019
Monday 2:04 pm
431343 spacer

giphy.gif
431343431343431343
>>431339

Daily Mail pointing fingers.

Shocker.
>> No. 431344 Anonymous
14th October 2019
Monday 3:50 pm
431344 spacer
>>431337

It's been shown very conclusively (maybe some of the strongest evidence you can find in the social sciences) that media coverage of events is heavily influenced by ownership, advertising, complicity and collaboration among media circles, mudslinging/flak, and political ideologies that target a common enemy. I'd highly recommend reading Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky and Herman for this.

The BBC is a state broadcasting agency. Despite its editorial guidelines for impartiality, it cannot reach that standard by virtue of its organisational structure -- it may not be dependent on advertisers, and relies on public funds, but there is still very close relationships between government, private companies, and the BBC.

Remember that the Iraq war protest in London in February 2003 is regarded by some as he largest in British history. A couple of months later the BBC aired this gushing report on the news at 10:


>> No. 431345 Anonymous
14th October 2019
Monday 4:53 pm
431345 spacer
>>431344
>The BBC is a state broadcasting agency.

Honestly think I might have explained why this is wrong more times than I've explained the purpose of protest.
>> No. 431346 Anonymous
14th October 2019
Monday 4:56 pm
431346 spacer
>>431344
>The BBC is a state broadcasting agency. Despite its editorial guidelines for impartiality, it cannot reach that standard by virtue of its organisational structure -- it may not be dependent on advertisers, and relies on public funds, but there is still very close relationships between government, private companies, and the BBC.
Yes, the BBC is reliant on public funds, and as we've seen the Government can retaliate for things it doesn't like through its funding streams (see: World Service, S4C, over-75s, etc.), but that argument is a bit beyond the pale.
>> No. 431348 Anonymous
14th October 2019
Monday 10:38 pm
431348 spacer
Absolute shitshow from the police doing a lot of illegal things today. Breaching human rights. No, I can't be bothered to argue with you pedantic-technicality-bootlickerlad.
>> No. 431349 Anonymous
15th October 2019
Tuesday 12:14 am
431349 spacer
>>431348
>Absolute shitshow from the police doing a lot of illegal things today.
In other words, "policing as usual".
>> No. 431351 Anonymous
15th October 2019
Tuesday 8:49 am
431351 spacer
>>431349
Granted, but they're doing it to people who know their rights and can afford lawyers.
>> No. 431355 Anonymous
15th October 2019
Tuesday 1:55 pm
431355 spacer
>>431351
It's like they say, all are equal before the law. It doesn't matter who you are, coppers gonna cop.
>> No. 431375 Anonymous
15th October 2019
Tuesday 10:02 pm
431375 spacer

UZtFF35_d.jpg
431375431375431375
Well done, hippies. You've gone and made Lewis Hamilton suicidal. Nice one.
>> No. 431376 Anonymous
15th October 2019
Tuesday 11:03 pm
431376 spacer
>>431375
I was tempted to say his "damned agriculture, polluting by a means my employers aren't invested in" message was more cynical that it might appear, but I checked and Mercedes do indeed sell farming vehicles.

I guess he's off to Formula MemE next year.
>> No. 431378 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 12:17 am
431378 spacer
>>431375

What's the carbon footprint of a Formula 1 car then?
>> No. 431379 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 12:27 am
431379 spacer
>>431378
About one F1 car's worth.
>> No. 431382 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 4:56 am
431382 spacer
>>431355
It doesn't seem like the cops know they're breaching human rights, from their point of view they're just doing what they're told and comparing notes about how unusual ("a solicitor!" "I got a nun!") the people they're arresting are. They're not bad people, they're just some of them a bit blinkered about what's actually going on.

My arresting officer tried to empathise with me by talking about how he didn't like how sometimes traffic fumes smelled bad. As though that's the issue. In his defence, he also was bursting for a piss for hours or was off his face on modafinil, boy could hardly stand still. He was less than half way through a 12 hour shift, his friends were on 16 and 18 hour ones.
>> No. 431383 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 7:01 am
431383 spacer
>>431376
>I guess he's off to Formula MemE next year.

I think he's just having a massive sulk because his teammate won the last race; he's a bit of a drama queen when things don't go his way.
>> No. 431385 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 7:53 am
431385 spacer
>>431382

>He was less than half way through a 12 hour shift, his friends were on 16 and 18 hour ones.

The fact that you seem shocked that someone might be doing a 12 (or 18) hour shift, and that officers find novelty in arresting the sort of people protesting says everything, really. I hope you know that. It's not impressive that solicitors or celebrities can join in the protests, it's confirmation that they have much more freedom than the rest of us, than the people working in the polluting industries you're railing against. If you think a bit harder about why you find it notable a copper has a twelve hour shift, you might start to work out why he seemed "blinkered to what's actually going on" and why others aren't paying that much attention to this crisis as you expect them to.
>> No. 431388 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 1:25 pm
431388 spacer
>>431382
Ah so they're just following orders.
>> No. 431389 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 1:29 pm
431389 spacer
>>431388

Difficult to do 'owt else when you're on 12-18 hour shifts.

Still, they knew what they were getting in to when they joined the police, there's no real dress up on "oppress your fellow citizens on behalf of the rich in exchange for money."

Being ignorant of the current political situation doesn't excuse them, as they're so fond of saying, ignorance is no defence in law.
>> No. 431390 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 1:41 pm
431390 spacer
>>431389
>Still, they knew what they were getting in to when they joined the police
Did they? Is "oppress the poor" how the police are portrayed in mainstream culture, or is that just a left-wing analysis? Ask a ten year old who wants to be a police officer when they grow up why, and "to uphold the supreme authority of the state" is not going to be the answer.
>> No. 431392 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 1:46 pm
431392 spacer
>>431390

So I can't dislike a 30 year old man because his 10 year old self made a major life choice that he just never got around to reassessing?

[X] Whine mate.
>> No. 431393 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 2:52 pm
431393 spacer
>>431388
I've checked and the Nuremberg Defence is valid so long as they don't know the orders are in breach of human rights. Enough of a fuss has been made about this since yesterday that they'd be hard pressed to prove they don't know any more.

>>431385
I'm not shocked at all, I was just remarking on what I saw and heard. Much like the lad who thought he could read a cyclists mind from a brief facial expression, that's all shit you've invented in your head.
>> No. 431394 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 4:31 pm
431394 spacer
>>431389

One the one hand, it does take a certain type of person to join the police. On the other hand, I'm sure there are plenty of idealistic types who honestly believe they're joining up to make the world a safer place. After all, they are usually pretty thick.
>> No. 431396 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 5:47 pm
431396 spacer
>>431378
FWIW the FIA purchase carbon credits to offset all the track sessions and globetrotting and have done for over 20 years. That just leaves the small question of teams' R&D activities.
>> No. 431398 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 6:53 pm
431398 spacer
>>431396

What does that actually do though?
>> No. 431405 Anonymous
16th October 2019
Wednesday 8:26 pm
431405 spacer
>>431398
Mainly make Bernie and Max feel better about themselves. I imagine their successors haven't stopped due to the bad PR that would go with it.
>> No. 431504 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 2:35 pm
431504 spacer

3500.jpg
431504431504431504
When I look at Extinction Rebellion, all I see is white faces. That has to change

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/19/extinction-rebellion-white-faces-diversity

This is at least the fourth opinion piece I've seen on the Graun recently along these lines. There was also something else in addition to these which dwelled on the scene of the white middle class protestor on top of the train angrily kicking at the working class black man trying to drag him down because he had to get to work.
>> No. 431506 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 2:48 pm
431506 spacer
>>431504
Typical idpol divisionary shit.
Read this instead.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/climate-change-refugees-siberia-permafrost-melt-a9146616.html
>> No. 431507 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 2:49 pm
431507 spacer
>>431504
It's almost as if they don't want people who have the privilege of being able to protest (and potentially get arrested) taking part in the protests.
>> No. 431508 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 3:40 pm
431508 spacer
>>431504
>>white middle class protestor on top of the train angrily kicking at the working class black man trying to drag him down because he had to get to work.

That's the essence of XR.

>>431312
Please explain, is this lad taking the piss or is just thick as pigshit? I simply cannot tell, sorry.
>> No. 431509 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 4:02 pm
431509 spacer
>>431508

>Please explain, is this lad taking the piss or is just thick as pigshit? I simply cannot tell, sorry.

Hang on a cotton picking minute, are you genuinely unable to grasp the concept that forcing someone to think about something makes them think about it?
>> No. 431510 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 4:21 pm
431510 spacer
>>431509

If it doesn't work on him then it's not going to work on other people who outsource their thinking to the daily mail either.
>> No. 431511 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 4:24 pm
431511 spacer

retarded.jpg
431511431511431511
>>431509

Shut the fuck up, 'mong. Making people think about something will not solve the problem, unless you are one of those dumb cunts that believe in "the secret" crap.
>> No. 431512 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 4:27 pm
431512 spacer
>>431511
On the contrary, making them think about the problem is an absolute prerequisite for solving it.
>> No. 431513 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 4:43 pm
431513 spacer
>>431511>>431508
Are you being deliberately obtuse? I explained in >>431312 the practical results of protest quite clearly. You're the only one inferring any psychic mumbo jumbo. I wasn't even really sticking up for XR, it's just an explaination of how protest works. For example in the US conservatives formed the Tea Party movement, spent years campaigning and marching on the basis that their head of state wasn't enough of a brainless tosser and in the end it paid off because they convinced enough people that was what the country needed. That's how raising awareness works, it's not a Jedi mind trick, it's just publicity.
>> No. 431514 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 4:50 pm
431514 spacer
>>431513
But if you come across as a bunch of dicks, people won't care.
>> No. 431515 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 5:08 pm
431515 spacer
>>431514
You say that but, as with beauty, dickishness is in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure a lot of people in Hong Kong think the anti-Beijing demonstrators think they're dicks, but the demonstrators see themselves as the only feasible means by which Hong Kong can cling onto autonomy. Most people thought Suffragettes weren't just dicks but genuinely mental when they started their protesting, but in the end they got their way and only internet edgelords think it's a problem these days. Obviously you have to find a balance between civil disobedience and destroying public goodwill, but I think it's clear that XR are in this for the long haul and are having to figure this balance out as they go. Their reaction to the train incident has seemingly been one of contrition, which is no mean feat given the footage looked like something out of Left 4 Dead. I'm sure they have their own internet edgelords who want the attackers thrown into a Black Hole of Calcutta style compost bin, but Twitter warriors aren't my concern.
>> No. 431516 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 5:29 pm
431516 spacer
>>431511

I happen to disagree with XR's goals. I, for one, do not want to eat locust burgers and travel by solar powered bikes. I enjoy modern comforts like central heating and mind numbing entertainment perfectly designed to deliver dopamine in a mathematically timed fashion to ensure maximum addiction satisfaction. I am aware that XR is incredibly effective in raising support for its cause simply because all of those working people dragging middle class men off trains and lynching them are going to go home and talk about "them nutters wot stopped the trains."

In any average individual's circle of acquaintances one of them among the ten or twenty is going to be an environmental nutjob and will explain with fear inducing words about why we're all going to die in seven days if we don't stop ordering takeaways and playing Candy Crush right the fuck now.

If only 1 in 5 of these normal working people take any notice of their friends that's 20% of the working class who are now moderate climate change nutters. That's a significant voting bloc. Politicians will ride this wave of support in to new draconian climate change policies while the average working person gets to act like a right smug cunt in front of their mates because they proper love maggotloaf and wormbread, until eventually nobody can enjoy a cheeky KFC anymore because all these smug cunts who despise themselves for eating insects but pretend to like it for social validation take the piss out of meat eaters.

All because XR raised enough awareness to make idiots like you talk about it.
>> No. 431517 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 5:31 pm
431517 spacer
>>431515

Dickishness might be in the eye of the beholder, but you did just equate XR to HK freedom fighters and Suffragettes.
>> No. 431518 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 5:37 pm
431518 spacer
>>431517
So has Corbyn, Peter Hain and some Irish woman who has something to do with the UN, I read the article but forgot who she was.
There's this too:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p076b4x5
As the poster you're replying to said in the post you're replying to, people were also shitty at the time about the Suffragettes, about Gandhi and about the Civil Rights movement in the US. This sort of mock outrage - "How dare you compare yourself to someone else who behaved similarly in the past!?" - is rapidly sounding more and more absurd.
>> No. 431522 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:12 pm
431522 spacer
>>431518

I'm not outraged, not even mockingly. I just know a knob when I see one.
>> No. 431523 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:19 pm
431523 spacer
>>431522

Does it get annoying reflexively shouting KNOB ALERT every time you pass a mirror? Your superpower is a curse mate.
>> No. 431524 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:21 pm
431524 spacer
>>431523

Fucking hell, my post was low effort and shite, but this response is something else. You could have reduced your carbon footprint slightly if you'd just gone with 'no u'
>> No. 431525 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:26 pm
431525 spacer
>>431524

By attacking me over my carbon footprint you're attacking are Greta. She's 16 and mildly autistic. Does it make you feel good to bully a small child?
>> No. 431526 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:30 pm
431526 spacer

1258247468034.png
431526431526431526
>>431525
>> No. 431527 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:30 pm
431527 spacer
>>431525

>Does it make you feel good to bully a small child?

I didn't know that's what I was doing, but obviously, yes - that's why people become bullies.
>> No. 431528 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:45 pm
431528 spacer
>>431517
Only in the sense that they're all controversial protesters. The Wehrmacht and the British Army both use tanks, it doesn't mean I'm saying they're entirely alike one another because I draw comparisons.
>> No. 431529 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 7:18 pm
431529 spacer
>>431516

You're criticising XR on the basis of
lazy stereotypes about environmental activists, downright nasty assumptions about the intelligence of the public, and the prospect that it might actually succeed.

The only valid concern you bring up is that the movement might be co-opted, but if history is anything to go by, that doesn't happen because the movement goes too far; it's because they don't go far enough. As I understand it, climate change groups are virtually always part of a broad coalition of social groups that are anti-authoritarian.

Climate change is an existential threat. I'm willing to give XR the benefit of the doubt for that reason.
>> No. 431530 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 8:23 pm
431530 spacer
>>431529

>lazy stereotypes about environmental activists
While you're right that most stereotypes do indeed come from fact I don't think anyone can dispute the fact that environmental types want us all to eat locust burgers because of how bad animal husbandry is for the environment.

>downright nasty assumptions about the intelligence of the public
But people are thick. It's a fact of life. If people weren't thick why would XR need to blockade trains to get people to care about the damage they're doing to the environment?

>and the prospect that it might actually succeed
Yes, I don't want to eat locust burgers. I enjoy beef. Let's use a smaller scale analogy for climate change, if we keep eating beef burgers (beef burgers) then we'll get fat (destroy the environment) and have a heart attack at 50 (melting ice caps). If we replace beef burgers with salad (locust burgers) we'll live another 40 years, but we'll just spend 90 years eating locust burgers. Death at 50 after a life of eating nothing but beef burgers is preferable to 90 years of torture eating locust burgers.
>> No. 431531 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 8:28 pm
431531 spacer
>>431530
That's a really terrible analogy.
>> No. 431532 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 8:29 pm
431532 spacer
>>431531

Your face is a terrible analogy.
>> No. 431533 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 8:39 pm
431533 spacer
A 1,540 post cunt-off is kind of impressive.
>> No. 431535 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 9:55 pm
431535 spacer
>>431533

These things are only impressive until someone mentions them. Can you imagine some mong running around Empire era Britain screaming "haha look at all the tea we drink lads let's invade China for the tea lmao"? It would make the whole thing much less impressive and the participants much less likely to drink so much tea they have to invade an entire country to further their addiction.
>> No. 431536 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 10:02 pm
431536 spacer
>>431535
Yeah. It'd be terrible if this thread stopped going around in the same circles every week.
>> No. 431537 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 10:09 pm
431537 spacer
>>431536

I agree. Have you heard about that XR lot then? I hear they're dressing up in red to represent the blood of the species or something insane like that.
>> No. 431538 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 10:33 pm
431538 spacer
>>431537
I think it's to do with them menstruating, because they're all massive vaginas.
>> No. 431539 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 10:40 pm
431539 spacer
Gosh, you're so BRILLIANT.
>> No. 431543 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:31 am
431543 spacer

nintchdbpict000282746536.jpg
431543431543431543
>>431539

>Gosh, you're so BRILLIANT.
>> No. 431546 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:41 am
431546 spacer
>>431543

You're a bit early with the image discussion m8.

I find it continually endearing that there's one Brightonlad here who always gets unmistakably bumsore that nobody takes his pretentious hipster art degree mate's antics seriously. They did look daft, mate. I'm sure it all sounded really poignant and romantic in the meetings, but regular people don't think about things like that. It's okay.

The thing is it would have been poignant if they'd all turned up and, symbolically, slashed their own wrists in front of that copper. That would have got some attention, it would have been more meaningful. Blood of the species, you know? But they didn't do anything like that, they just showed up in red, and they probably think they're dead special for having such an impact.
>> No. 431550 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 10:13 am
431550 spacer
Just a heads up but I'm sure there are others who are aware, there is a concerted effort online to discredit the XR/any climate related rebellion so do keep that in mind. Crazy times.
>> No. 431551 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 10:16 am
431551 spacer
>>431550
I think they're doing it just fine by themselves, to be honest.
>> No. 431552 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 10:19 am
431552 spacer
>>431543
Foreigner spotted.
>> No. 431553 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 10:24 am
431553 spacer
>>431551
And you know this from things you've witnessed in person and not through the media?
>> No. 431554 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 10:27 am
431554 spacer

Furious-Susanna-Reid-loses-rag-with-idiot-proteste.jpg
431554431554431554
>>431553
Yes.
>> No. 431555 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 10:52 am
431555 spacer

serveimage.jpg
431555431555431555
>>431554
Attaching an image of the person Piers Morgan invited onto his show knowing it would manipulate people into taking his side is very appropriate.
>> No. 431556 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 11:01 am
431556 spacer
>>431554>>431555
Wasn't he just there to take the piss out of Morgan? Morgan doesn't take jounralism seriously so why should Broccoli Lad tak him seriously?
>> No. 431557 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 11:05 am
431557 spacer
>>431556
I won't venture to know the mind of a broccoli who begs to be eaten.
>> No. 431560 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 12:50 pm
431560 spacer
>>431557
Right, but enough about Piers ...
>> No. 431561 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 12:52 pm
431561 spacer
>>431560
I was referring to the one who looks like broccoli, not gammon.
>> No. 431562 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:03 pm
431562 spacer
It's as simple as this.

>moving speeches by autistic teenage poster child

Aww, that's so heatbreaking. We have to do something about the environment! The poor children!

>blockading public transport and pissing off half a city

Okay fuck these guys, I'm tired of this shit now. Let's burn down every tree.

I've never witnessed a movement go from such popular support to such public derision so quickly. Clearly all the PR marketing people behind Are Greta had the week off when the protests were planned.
>> No. 431564 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:16 pm
431564 spacer
>>431562
Our way of life has to change a lot. People don't like change. Nobody's going to be really on board until it starts directly impacting them, but by then it will be even later to do anything. So unfortunately the majority of people are stubborn idiots and will lead to our downfall.
>> No. 431565 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:38 pm
431565 spacer
>>431562

It's not all bad. Your man on the Clapham Omnibus might be fuming still and the one lad on here who seems to have a congenital issue with protesters might be weeing himself with joy but
https://www.hsj.co.uk/comment/the-bedpan-extinction-rebellion-reaches-the-nhs/7026146.article
https://twitter.com/neilhimself/status/1185595855493062658 (see the replies)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/20/extinction-rebels-have-noble-casue-what-they-dont-need-is-tactical-stupidity
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/extinction-rebellion-protests-green-party-coleader-jonathan-bartley-and-climate-activist-george-a4263361.html
One overblown gaffe isn't going to stop it and there's still plenty of support. The hard push on divisionary tactics in the last couple of days shows it's still scaring various corporate/government interests. This sort of thing is to be expected.
>> No. 431566 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:50 pm
431566 spacer
>>431565
>The hard push on divisionary tactics in the last couple of days shows it's still scaring various corporate/government interests

If you wanted to scare corporate interests wouldn't it be better to, say, blockade Shell rather than stopping ordinary people from getting to work and paramedics from being able to respond to emergencies?
>> No. 431568 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:55 pm
431568 spacer
>>431562

I'm not convinced it is as simple as that.

Climate change activism, despite its urgency, is still a deeply unpopular cause among a lot of private interests and their colleagues in government. It's a movement that directly challenges the status quo for several powerful and wealthy industries.

My suspicion is that people in these industries are deeply shaken by the XR movement and its demands -- in particular the Citizen's Assembly part. There has been a pronounced effort on the part of kowtowing journalists to play up what happened on the tube in an effort to look at anything but the real issue: the overwhelmingly popular and rational effort to bring attention to a genuine threat.

One of the more sickening propaganda efforts I've read tried to portray the incident as 'middle-class posers versus honest hardworking people', as though it wasn't the working class that are going to suffer the most if we don't make an immediate effort to mitigate climate change.

What happened on the tube was pretty mild considering the scale of the protests. The organisers at XR have even expressed their regret that it happened -- but that won't be enough.

Expect the "XR are needlessly disruptive and an enemy of the real people" narrative to continue as a deliberate attempt to deflect attention from what matters.
>> No. 431569 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:56 pm
431569 spacer
>>431566

Apparently not, as Greenpeace have been doing that for decades. Two of Greenpeace UK's most recent tweets mention XR in a positive light, incidentally. All since the tube thing.
>> No. 431570 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 5:07 pm
431570 spacer
>>431569

Pieces of shit stick together
>> No. 431571 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 5:30 pm
431571 spacer
>>431570

I see you've reset your router. I don't think it was worth the effort.
>> No. 431572 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 5:31 pm
431572 spacer
>>431570
Lol.

Bloody Greenpeace, protecting whales and shit. Where do they get off?!
>> No. 431574 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 5:56 pm
431574 spacer
>>431568

I don't necessarily disagree with you mate.

It's just that you don't exactly win supporters by inconveniencing masses of people who are already, for the most part, doing what they can to support your goals. Working class and poor people aren't the problem- If you're poor or working class, you already live close to work and commute in an environmentally friendly way. You already eat hardly any red meat. You're not chucking out tons of plastic. You simply can't afford to be the problem.

Despite all that, you find yourself bearing the brunt of the righteous environmental fury. From the perspective of a working class person trying to get to work on time, it's hard not to feel like those protesters must be a bunch of out-of-touch student pricks.

Believe me I'm the first to believe in a good old fashioned media conspiracy, but XR don't need one. They are just shooting themselves in the foot.
>> No. 431578 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:06 pm
431578 spacer
>>431574
I'm as poor as a working man gets and I eat red meat with every meal.
>> No. 431579 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:09 pm
431579 spacer
>>431578
Even dessert?
>> No. 431580 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:15 pm
431580 spacer
>>431579
Never heard of black pudding ?
>> No. 431581 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:23 pm
431581 spacer
>>431579
Never heard of bacon ice cream?!
>> No. 431585 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 12:47 am
431585 spacer
>>431580
You're a madman, you have to be stopped.

>>431581
No one believes me, but when adding salt to our sweets went mainstream, I think that was the beginning of the end.
>> No. 431587 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 8:34 am
431587 spacer
I love how the XR idiots went into full damage control mode. Now everyone that did stupid stuff was either a fringe extremist or somebody acting against the will of the commune. Maybe they really thought that they were going to win people’s hearts and minds by stopping commuters from going to work?
>> No. 431588 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 8:52 am
431588 spacer
>>431587
We get it, lad, you don't like XR. Please come back when you've got something new to add.
>> No. 431591 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 12:44 pm
431591 spacer
>>431588
I've noticed that at least some of the people who are being very anti-XR, not just the ones posting image macros, haven't posted anything in any other threads (at least as far back as Sentry shows). So some users are coming here solely to shitpost in this thread.
>> No. 431592 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 12:51 pm
431592 spacer
>>431591
We're a bunch of grumpy shed enthusiasts. What exactly do they think they're going to achieve here?
>> No. 431593 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 12:53 pm
431593 spacer
>>431591
The alternatives are posting in here, posting in the weekend thread, posting in the weekday thread or posting in the tranny thread.

They're not exactly spoiled for choice.
>> No. 431594 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 12:54 pm
431594 spacer
>>431592
Fuck knows but we're evidently on someone's list.
>> No. 431601 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 2:43 pm
431601 spacer
>>431594

Reddit has also been thoroughly astroturfed with shit memes about Greta.
>> No. 431602 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 2:56 pm
431602 spacer
>>431601

That's less surprising. Same goes for YouTube and imgur. It feels nice to be included.
>> No. 431605 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 5:44 pm
431605 spacer
>>431591

My VPN might be shitting up the Sentry's reliability to be fair.

Got to stop the Chinese ministry of propaganda finding out how many of their films I've been torrenting and freely distributing in true communist spirit.

Places like Reddit and The Other Place are astroturfing central but I doubt we're really attracting much attention. There's just a few lads here who really don't like being told they have to go vegan.
>> No. 431606 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 5:55 pm
431606 spacer
>>431594
>we're evidently on someone's list

Lad, this is a small imageboard of Canary Island enthusiasts. The only conspiracy here is why this thread keeps getting mysteriously bumped despite the lack of interest and debate.
>> No. 431607 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 5:59 pm
431607 spacer
>>431591

I am serious, I'd like to understand what their plan is. Until now, they only managed to alienate people that would have supported them. Maybe they are trying to scare off the "man of the street" and to attract violent fanatics? I heard about some fringe groups doing this, but they were NOT ecowarriors.
>> No. 431610 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 6:08 pm
431610 spacer
>>431607
The "man on the street" isn't necessarily as against them as the media and astroturf you're reading portrays. Some are even outright suppotive. The "man on the street" is neither homogeneous nor stupid.

>>431606
Probably just a coincidence the obvious otherplacelads turned up around the same time as the obvious astroturf on other sites then.
>> No. 431612 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 6:20 pm
431612 spacer
>>431610

The average voter supports nationalising the railways, supports bringing back the death penalty, opposes higher taxes but supports wealth redistribution. The man on the street is a fucking nutter.
>> No. 431613 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 6:23 pm
431613 spacer
>>431612
I'd be happy with all of those things. Legalise drugs and prostitutes, while you're at it.
>> No. 431614 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 6:44 pm
431614 spacer
>>431613
Prostitutes are legal.
>> No. 431616 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 7:18 pm
431616 spacer
>>431614
Not if they're successful.
>> No. 431617 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 7:32 pm
431617 spacer
>>431612

>supports bringing back the death penalty

If what you read about opinion polls is actually true, opposition against a return to the death penalty is disturbingly slim, with some polls suggesting that only just over a third of people in Britain firmly oppose the death penalty.

What's even more disturbing is that support for the death penalty was around 75% as recent as the early- to mid-1980s.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822
>> No. 431618 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 7:37 pm
431618 spacer
>>431617
What's disturbing about supporting the death penalty? It'd do wonders for the rate of reoffending.
>> No. 431620 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 7:51 pm
431620 spacer
>>431618

Castration would do wonders to prevent deadbeat dads and child support lawsuits.
>> No. 431628 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 9:15 pm
431628 spacer
>>431612
That may be but they've all got kids. Some of them with multiple partners.
>> No. 431659 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 8:22 pm
431659 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCxPOqwCr1I

Pack your rice for 2020, lads.
>> No. 431661 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 8:35 pm
431661 spacer
>>431617
I miss elitism. Now we just have cronyism, which isn't the same. Idiots sometimes need to be told what to do, or else they stick their fingers in deep fat friers or take selfies on crumbling chalk cliff edges.
>> No. 431662 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 8:52 pm
431662 spacer
>>431661
People in large numbers tend to stupidity. Our only hope is to thin the herd. Thankfully the Brexocaust should make a pretty big dent in the numbers.
>> No. 431663 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 9:11 pm
431663 spacer

73045341_2676642535691041_1311212240833085440_n.jpg
431663431663431663
>>431662
>the Brexocaust
>> No. 431665 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 9:35 pm
431665 spacer
>>431663
What a truly fantastic image.
>> No. 431667 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 9:54 pm
431667 spacer
>>431663
>"Anon, how come you aren't on Facebook?"
>> No. 431672 Anonymous
23rd October 2019
Wednesday 5:12 am
431672 spacer
>>431667
I clicked a while ago that Facebook is absolutely fine as long as you don't interact with other people on it.

If you use it solely for looking at pages such as Angry People in Local Newspapers, Viz, The Daily Mash, Four Finger Discount, Simpsons Pictures That I Gone and Done, etc., then it is great. The moment you start seeing posts made by other people it falls apart.
>> No. 431674 Anonymous
23rd October 2019
Wednesday 11:16 am
431674 spacer
You can hear that guy yelling "Stop IIIWW" twice during this which isn't about IIIWW at all.

Does he just follow BBC news crews around?
I don't even own a TV ?t=491
>> No. 431675 Anonymous
23rd October 2019
Wednesday 11:35 am
431675 spacer
>>431674
He's not always shouting it at the news, sometimes it's at the MPs themselves and I'm sure he has other quarries besides.
>> No. 431726 Anonymous
24th October 2019
Thursday 10:27 pm
431726 spacer

VLjj7yYKTP4w7YF7cyg8G4-10000-100.jpg
431726431726431726

>> No. 431727 Anonymous
24th October 2019
Thursday 10:49 pm
431727 spacer
>>431726
What?
>> No. 431728 Anonymous
24th October 2019
Thursday 10:52 pm
431728 spacer
>>431727
If I remember correctly it's a reconstruction of Robert the Bruce's head. Fuck knows why otherlad posted it.
>> No. 431742 Anonymous
26th October 2019
Saturday 1:31 pm
431742 spacer

73072582_10220831898251212_1998949526987079680_o.jpg
431742431742431742
Facebook includes Breitbart in new 'high quality' news tab

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/25/facebook-breitbart-news-tab-alt-right

I guess it makes sense for Facebook to promote right wing news.
>> No. 431744 Anonymous
26th October 2019
Saturday 3:25 pm
431744 spacer
>>431742
I'm sure all the 52 year old Second World War veterans giving that photo a "like" felt very smug.
>> No. 431745 Anonymous
26th October 2019
Saturday 3:27 pm
431745 spacer

4529a6bfd3a1d5c16a1aa282b098f0f2.jpg
431745431745431745
>>431742

Breitbart has its own bag of issues.
>> No. 431772 Anonymous
27th October 2019
Sunday 11:58 am
431772 spacer

AOC's pretty great.
>> No. 431794 Anonymous
28th October 2019
Monday 2:53 pm
431794 spacer

3500.jpg
431794431794431794
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/23/exxon-climate-change-fossil-fuels-disinformation

>By polluting the information landscape, these companies misrepresented the safety of their product and denied the public their right to be accurately informed.

>Big oil is not the only industry to do so. Big tobacco is a famous case, but asbestos and lead industries have done it too. These days, campaigns by soda companies to contest sugar science and by the NFL to distort the science on concussions use similar tactics. The campaigns all run a similar playbook: they cite fake experts, place impossible demands on the science, cherry-pick data, impugn the integrity of individual scientists and the scientific process, and appeal to conspiracy theories. They leave the public with the perpetual impression that there are lots of unresolved questions, and that scientists are not to be trusted.


Why, oh why, did nobody warn us.
>> No. 431801 Anonymous
29th October 2019
Tuesday 12:02 am
431801 spacer
I'm curious what reaction this video will get from you lot.

>> No. 431804 Anonymous
29th October 2019
Tuesday 1:02 am
431804 spacer
>>431801
Are you actually trying to astroturf us?
>> No. 431805 Anonymous
29th October 2019
Tuesday 1:27 am
431805 spacer
>>431801
I'm not even going to watch it, based on my severe thumbnail-judgementalism.
>> No. 431810 Anonymous
29th October 2019
Tuesday 9:47 am
431810 spacer
>>431801

I skipped to one part where she was saying "we're out of time already" or thereabouts.
This somehow lead in to a part on the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and how men can't cry. Great.
>> No. 431906 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 3:07 pm
431906 spacer

moderate cuts.png
431906431906431906
>Subsea permafrost thaws faster than previously thought, Russian scientists say.
https://siberiantimes.com/other/others/news/first-pictures-and-video-of-the-largest-methane-fountain-so-far-discovered-in-the-arctic-ocean/

>new research shows that some 150 million people are now living on land that will be below the high-tide line by midcentury.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/29/climate/coastal-cities-underwater.html
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/10/30/horrifying-new-research-shows-rising-sea-levels-could-wipe-out-major-cities-displace
https://coastal.climatecentral.org/map/8/0.1845/51.8149/?theme=sea_level_rise&map_type=coastal_dem_comparison&elevation_model=coastal_dem&forecast_year=2050&pathway=rcp45&percentile=p50&return_level=return_level_1&slr_model=kopp_2014

>Insects are going extinct in DROVES: Study finds almost half of all species died out in the last decade - and humans are to blame
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7635865/Insects-going-extinct-DROVES-Study-finds-species-decreased-one-past-decade.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50226367

>Scientists reveal how the fossil fuel industry misled the public about climate change
https://phys.org/news/2019-10-scientists-reveal-fossil-fuel-industry.html
>> No. 431909 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 5:32 pm
431909 spacer
>>431906

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/08/26/windscreen-phenomenon-car-no-longer-covered-dead-insects/

>But the fall in numbers of bugs in Britain has now reached such a troubling extent that even motorists are noticing that their windscreens are clear of squashed flies, gnats, moths and wasps.

>Where a trip in high summer would once have necessitated taking a squeegee to the front window, now the glass is largely clear, drivers are reporting.


I vaguely remember reading that the French TGV high-speed train has encountered the same phaenomenon in the last few years. Until a few years ago, after 300-500 miles at high speed, the whole front of the locomotive would always be completely caked with insects, but these days, that problem has largely disappeared.

Can't find the article now.
>> No. 431910 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 5:47 pm
431910 spacer
>>431909
I ride a motorbike and have done for the past twenty years - can confirm much the same phenomenon. Hardly ever get bugs on lights/helmet visor, used to get loads. Not good.
>> No. 431912 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 6:58 pm
431912 spacer
>>431909

Well that's weird, I was actually thinking about this a few weeks ago and just assumed that I'd been imagining it as a kid or something.
>> No. 431922 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 11:43 am
431922 spacer

downloadjpeg.jpg
431922431922431922
>>431910
>> No. 431939 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 5:45 pm
431939 spacer

map.png
431939431939431939
>Climate crisis: 11,000 scientists warn of ‘untold suffering’
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/05/climate-crisis-11000-scientists-warn-of-untold-suffering
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-emergency-scientists-emissions-letter-climate-change-a9185786.html
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biz088/5610806


>“It’s difficult to see how we could accommodate a billion people or even half of that,” he says. “There will be a rich minority of people who survive with modern lifestyles, no doubt, but it will be a turbulent, conflict-ridden world.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/18/climate-crisis-heat-is-on-global-heating-four-degrees-2100-change-way-we-live

>North Sea oil industry’s £6.8 billion plan to breach climate targets
https://theferret.scot/north-sea-oil-investment-climate-targets/
https://www.thenational.scot/news/18010981.north-sea-oil-projects-breach-paris-agreement-climate-targets/
>> No. 431940 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 6:44 pm
431940 spacer
>>431939

>There will be a rich minority of people who survive with modern lifestyles, no doubt, but it will be a turbulent, conflict-ridden world

Best to be part of that minority then.

Time to play the lottery again.
>> No. 431941 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 6:48 pm
431941 spacer
>>431939

Can't fucking wait for Mad Max to happen.
>> No. 431951 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 11:04 pm
431951 spacer
>>431939

>North Sea oil industry’s £6.8 billion plan to breach climate targets

Really not saying they should, but how else are you going to provide the amount of energy that our present-day civilisation needs. As it stands, and for the next five or so years at least, it will be impossible to stay on the same level of modern convenience with alternative energy sources.

And that's the big dilemma. You can make people buy electric cars, but all the solar panels, all the wind parks, and what-have-you, simply aren't capable of providing enough energy even to maintain such things as a major city's bus or underground train network. Let alone the 2.5 million cars that are licenced in Greater London, as I read the other day. Yes, there's nuclear energy, but it undoubtedly comes with just as serious environmental risks.

Eventually, we will do well to keep phasing out fossil fuels, whether you cite pressing climate concerns or simply availability, but unless we want to throw ourselves back to a mid-1700s lifestyle from one day to the next, fossil fuels will have a stay of execution.

It's a bit damned if you do, damned if you don't.
>> No. 431953 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 11:30 pm
431953 spacer
>>431951
I feel like there's a wealth of information you're lacking. Some of which is in the post you're responding to.
>> No. 431954 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 12:01 am
431954 spacer
>>431951

>just as serious environmental risks

In absolutely no conceivable way is nuclear waste or contamination on the same level as destroying the ecosystem of an entire planet.
That rhetoric needs to get fucked. Climate change isn't a problem that we can tackle with modern economics and pissing around worrying about costs which is why we're gloriously royally going to fucking die.
>> No. 431955 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 12:03 am
431955 spacer
>>431951

Honestly, a mid-1700s lifestyle with some food security and modern drugs sounds grand.
>> No. 431957 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 10:36 am
431957 spacer
Not directly climate related but may have interesting repercussions:
>Extinction Rebellion has won a High Court challenge against the Metropolitan Police over a London-wide ban on protests.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50316561
>Hundreds of Extinction Rebellion protesters may now sue the Metropolitan police for unlawful arrest after the high court quashed an order banning the group’s protests in London last month.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/06/police-ban-on-extinction-rebellion-protests-ruled-illegal-by-high-court
That includes me. What do you think lads, should I sue the Met?
>> No. 431961 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 4:49 pm
431961 spacer
>>431954

>In absolutely no conceivable way is nuclear waste or contamination on the same level as destroying the ecosystem of an entire planet.

If we completely substituted all the energy derived from fossil fuels with nuclear power, we would need about three times as many nuclear power stations as we have now across the globe. Not all of them would fail catastrophically like Chernobyl or Fukushima, that's a given, but radioactive contamination can affect ecosystems almost as negatively as global warming. And the risk would be much greater with three times as many nuclear power plants. A reactor disaster mainly has effects locally, but as we saw with Chernobyl, some of the radioactive material can be blown many thousand miles in all directions.

No matter how you do the maths, our current level, and especially our future level of energy consumption is unsustainable with or without fossil fuels. No amount of renewable energy will be enough to maintain our growing energy demand. Our only hope in the long run is nuclear fusion. It would indeed create an abundance of energy that would sustain a population of ten billion people for millions of years, and a reactor failure would be much less serious, because about the only thing that would happen is that the fusion chain reaction shuts down. The radioactive waste from nuclear fusion is thought to have a half life of only about 60 years, compared to some very nasty radionuclides from the Chernobyl disaster that will still be with us for hundreds of years. And it will also be much less radioactive than the spent fuel rods of conventional fission reactor designs.
>> No. 431962 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 5:10 pm
431962 spacer
>>431957 If you were simply standing in the street with a poster and chanting about the end of the world, then yes.
If you glued yourself to a train, that is still illegal and you should be prosecuted.
Banning a group from protesting was not legal but committing crimes as part of a protest is not legal either.
>> No. 431963 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 5:14 pm
431963 spacer
>>431962

>If you glued yourself to a train, that is still illegal and you should be prosecuted.

Darwin Awards undoubtedly get a bad rap these days.
>> No. 431964 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 5:18 pm
431964 spacer
>>431962
No shit Sherlock.
>> No. 431965 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 5:46 pm
431965 spacer
>>431964 I'm just trying to stop a situation where He/Her/you(?) end up bringing further police attention to possible crimes that would be otherwise forgotten. If they are part of the anti-public transport socialist doomsday cult they probably aren't too bright in the first place.
>> No. 431966 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 5:48 pm
431966 spacer
>>431961

3x as many deaths and ecological damage caused by nuclear power plant failures in all time is still orders of magnitude less than the deaths and ecological damage caused by coal alone in a single year.
>> No. 431967 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 6:03 pm
431967 spacer
>>431965
That's a reasonable point.
>> No. 431969 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 8:18 pm
431969 spacer
>>431966

Just don't say nobody warned you when your three-eyed, two-headed children are born.
>> No. 431970 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 9:10 pm
431970 spacer
>>431965
>doomsday cult
Doomsday cults are generally quite accepting of the end times, as opposed to XR who appear to be going all out to prevent them.
>> No. 432092 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 6:56 pm
432092 spacer

1412935992983.jpg
432092432092432092
>>431970

True doomsday cults welcome the end of the world. Their usual philosophy is that they think their members are the chosen ones who are destined to survive it, unlike the whole rest of humankind.

Ironically, a lot of them then commit mass suicide.
>> No. 432095 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 8:25 pm
432095 spacer
>>431966

Nuclear has the lowest death rate per TWh of any energy source, including renewables.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

Also coal is a bit radioactive, so a coal power plant emits more radiation than a nuclear power plant.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
>> No. 432101 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 11:42 pm
432101 spacer
>Veneto regional council, which is located on Venice's Grand Canal, was flooded for the first time in its history on Tuesday night -- just after it rejected measures to combat climate change.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/14/europe/veneto-council-climate-change-floods-trnd-intl-scli/index.html
>> No. 432104 Anonymous
16th November 2019
Saturday 1:09 pm
432104 spacer
Catechism will be updated to include ecological sins says Pope Francis who yesterday called on the international community to recognize Ecocide as “fifth category of crime against peace”
https://cnstopstories.com/2019/11/15/catechism-will-be-updated-to-include-ecological-sins-pope-says/
Could have some interesting repercussions in certain places.
>> No. 432111 Anonymous
16th November 2019
Saturday 8:38 pm
432111 spacer
>>432110
And you think this might help reduce CO2 levels?
>> No. 432112 Anonymous
16th November 2019
Saturday 9:03 pm
432112 spacer
>>432111

I've posted this in the wrong thread. Sorry.
>> No. 432142 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 11:25 pm
432142 spacer
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/18/lakes-climate-change-ticking-time-bomb-warn-scientists/

>Freshwater lakes have been identified as a potential “ticking time bomb” amid fears greenhouse gases contained in the water could double as a result of climate change, scientists have warned.

>A University of Cambridge study found that after adding to the amount of plant matter in the water, a consequence of warmer temperatures, the amount of methane and carbon dioxide increases by an average of 1.5 to 2.7 times.
>> No. 432229 Anonymous
27th November 2019
Wednesday 5:48 pm
432229 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/27/charges-dropped-against-more-than-100-extinction-rebellion-protesters
What are the ethics of suing the police?
>> No. 432230 Anonymous
27th November 2019
Wednesday 6:00 pm
432230 spacer
>>432229
Absolutely do it, all the time, every day. The people responsible for supposedly upholding the law should be impeccable. In practice they are just another gang operating with omerta and deserve it every time they are strung through the courts for e.g. arresting peaceful protesters.
>> No. 432232 Anonymous
27th November 2019
Wednesday 9:36 pm
432232 spacer
>>432230
The solicitors are offering a no win no fee thing. How much effort is it?
>> No. 432233 Anonymous
28th November 2019
Thursday 12:08 am
432233 spacer
>>432229

In Germany it's legal to punch the police when they try to arrest you. They say that wanting to be free is a natural desire so it shouldn't be punished.
>> No. 432234 Anonymous
28th November 2019
Thursday 1:05 am
432234 spacer
>>432233
I don't know if it's ever been decided that resisting arrest is legal, but it's certainly been established that escaping from prison is not a crime. On the other hand, it's only the escape that's not a crime, and the clock on your sentence stops running the moment you do it. It is apparently not unknown for theft to be charged as a last resort, since the prison uniform remains prison property.
>> No. 432236 Anonymous
28th November 2019
Thursday 1:57 am
432236 spacer
>>432233

I used to know the exactly fine for pissing on a Dutch cop. Its tragic the things one forgets. I was going to stamp "PISS ON A COP TOKEN" on a bunch of 50/100 Euro notes for a mate's stag do, but we never did it.
>> No. 432249 Anonymous
28th November 2019
Thursday 6:33 pm
432249 spacer

maxresdefault.jpg
432249432249432249
>>432236

>I was going to stamp "PISS ON A COP TOKEN" on a bunch of 50/100 Euro notes for a mate's stag do
>> No. 432284 Anonymous
29th November 2019
Friday 8:43 pm
432284 spacer
>>432236
Is it the same cost to piss on a female cop? Might be cheaper than a prostitute. Might be better looking too!
>> No. 432322 Anonymous
30th November 2019
Saturday 9:50 pm
432322 spacer
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-clarkson-greta-thunberg-car-show_uk_5dde473fe4b0d50f3299a8f5
>Jeremy Clarkson has labelled Greta Thunberg an “idiot” and blamed the climate activist for “killing” the car show.
>Speaking to The Sun, he said: “Everyone I know under 25 isn’t the slightest bit interested in cars – Greta Thunberg has killed the car show.
>While Jeremy acknowledged global warming is “very definitely a thing”, the former Top Gear host claimed Greta’s approach is all wrong.
>“She’s an idiot,” he said.
>His co-host Richard Hammond agreed, saying: “I hate to say it, but I think Jeremy is right.
>> No. 432323 Anonymous
30th November 2019
Saturday 10:18 pm
432323 spacer

f10.gif
432323432323432323
>>432322

>His co-host Richard Hammond agreed, saying: “I hate to say it, but I think Jeremy is right.


That's slightly peculiar, as Hammond was always the most sensible one of the lot.

No surprise though on Jeremy Clarkson's statement. Just a massive dickhead being a massive dickhead.
>> No. 432325 Anonymous
30th November 2019
Saturday 10:36 pm
432325 spacer
>>432323
Pretty much everything I know about Top Gear comes from headline news about offensive remarks and Stewart Lee's stand-up routine, so is my understanding that Hammond is just as much of a shit as Clarkson not accurate?
>> No. 432328 Anonymous
30th November 2019
Saturday 11:20 pm
432328 spacer
>>432325
Definitely not. Clarkson is very much the bellend's bellend.
>> No. 432329 Anonymous
30th November 2019
Saturday 11:33 pm
432329 spacer
>>432322

They're just old blokes who don't speak to young people enough to know that they still like cars. There's loads of under 25s at my work that are into cars and seem to enjoy my grandad stories of the nuggets I've ran over the years. I can think of about ten younguns that build/mod/work on their own cars or drive 'car person' cars, and that's just at work.

Not that it matters, even if it were true, it takes a special kind of mentalist to bemoan a decline in car culture in this climate.
>> No. 432332 Anonymous
30th November 2019
Saturday 11:53 pm
432332 spacer
>>432329

You wonder what would have happened if Clarkson hadn't gone apeshit on that one catering service employee.

Would they still be doing Top Gear? Or would they by now have been replaced anyway?
>> No. 432339 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 1:06 am
432339 spacer
>>432332

I think dark forces wanted rid of Top Gear because it represented the worst of "laddish", masculine, white bloke indulgence; but couldn't square up a valid reason to axe a show that was far and away one of the BBC's biggest earners.

Jez was provoked. He's a bellend, no disputing it, but cutting the program was a contrivance they needed an excuse for.
>> No. 432340 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 1:08 am
432340 spacer
>>432339

>Jez was provoked.

You reckon the BBC told Top Gear's producer to provoke Clarkson so the show he produces got cancelled?
>> No. 432342 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 1:15 am
432342 spacer
>>432340

Well, yes. After more than a decade of working with the cunt I'm sure they were well aware how easy it'd be to wind him up.

He was one of the highest paid in the BBC iirc.
>> No. 432343 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 1:39 am
432343 spacer
>>432342

Why continue making the show post jezza then?
>> No. 432344 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 2:14 am
432344 spacer
>>431909
I'm late to this party, but if insects are all dying then why do I get plagued with the bastards every summer? Every where I go, every shop every beer garden, they are not only numerous but distraction enough to put you off.

What's going on in the Forth Valley that makes it a haven for wildlife, that other places don't have?
>> No. 432347 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 3:41 am
432347 spacer
I didn't really care about the environment, but these cunts have turned me into an accelerationist. Now, I can't wait for everything to die, and maybe HAIL SKYNET. Maybe if I were richer, I could start giving a shit.
>> No. 432348 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 6:14 am
432348 spacer
>>432347

If anything, you should care more in your position. The richer you are, the longer you can afford to protect yourself from climate change. It's the poorest in society that will suffer first and foremost. This is pattern is playing out globally, already.
>> No. 432352 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 12:02 pm
432352 spacer
>>432347
There's nothing stopping you from killing yourself right now.
>> No. 432353 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 12:13 pm
432353 spacer
>>432352
Not him, but read the last line he wrote please and wake up.
>> No. 432354 Anonymous
1st December 2019
Sunday 12:58 pm
432354 spacer
>>432353
Why? If he wants to be richer he can move to China with Nick Land and be relatively much better off.
>> No. 432365 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 12:25 am
432365 spacer
>>432348
>If anything, you should care more in your position. The richer you are, the longer you can afford to protect yourself from climate change.
I guess poorer in your sentence means third world level poverty. As in, living on a dollar a day or however they measure it now. In that sense, we aren't poor at all...

Anyway, it is starting to get a bit annoying. I get the feeling that climate change has become a bit of weird "personal responsibility" type thing, when really it should be a communal responsibility (like socialised health care), and policy driven. Maybe I am a bit of a commie and want a big state to police everything, but hell will freeze over before I start cycling to work and dodging all those fucking mums' and their sprogs being dropped off at school.

>>432352
How would that help?
>> No. 432366 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 12:45 am
432366 spacer
>>432365

Climate change is mostly about personal choices, because industries with high emissions only exist because of consumer demand. BA don't burn millions of tonnes of jet fuel just for the hell of it, they do it because people buy tickets for their planes. The government can coerce us to make the right choices, but the effect on our lifestyles will ultimately be the same.
>> No. 432367 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 1:14 am
432367 spacer
>>432366
I disagree. Slavery would not have ended if it were just a "personal choice" whether you wanted to buy a person or not.
>> No. 432368 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 1:51 am
432368 spacer
>>432365

Not him, but he doesn't mean third world. He means the vast majority of people, those who need to work to pay bills, couldn't move to the middle of a different country at the drop of a hat, relies on infrastructure, public services, that sort of thing.
>> No. 432369 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 4:39 am
432369 spacer
>>432367
Slavery hasn't ended, it's just been outsourced to China.

I wish I could trade all my cheap Chinese elecronics for a couple of Chinese slaves.
>> No. 432370 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 7:25 am
432370 spacer
>>432368

Exactly that.

>>432366

Wholeheartedly disagree, and I put it to you that the idea that "the market" just follows consumer demand is a myth. For one, BA only exist due to massive government subsidy. If market forces were allowed to operate totally unconstrained, then the aerospace industry -- and many other high tech industries -- would cease to be, at least in their current form.

Think to your own experience, also. How many times have you been in a city with such poor public transport infrastructure that you're forced to take a taxi or rent your own car? "The market" is clearly unable to provide a suitable alternative to private transport here, even though there's almost always demand for it in densely populated areas. The real world is full of examples where markets have absolutely failed to meet existing demand, even for goods like basic utilities.

I remember once watching the CEO of Ryanair claim that people must want stand-up flights, because there's a "market" for it. No comment on stagnating wages, or purchasing power, or how advertising guides consumer desires, or any of the other factors that might push someone to take that option. Just the confident certainty that people must want a lack of space, comfort, and dignity because they'll buy it. That this also happens to be a profitable way to offer cheap flights doesn't enter the conversation. Just because people will buy it, doesn't mean it's what they want.

Saying "the market" just follows demand ignores the context in which consumer decisions are made, and that context is largely due to the rules of the game set down by governments.
>> No. 432380 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 10:54 am
432380 spacer
>>432370
There's been a huge surge in posts internet-wide trying to push the idea it's the consumer's fault over the past week. Nobody was dumb enough to think it then suddenly everyone seems to be. It's beyond suspicious.
>> No. 432381 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 11:25 am
432381 spacer
>>432365
>I get the feeling that climate change has become a bit of weird "personal responsibility" type thing, when really it should be a communal responsibility (like socialised health care), and policy driven.
That's exactly the point most of the climate activists are making. We're not having a go at you for putting the wrong colour plastic in the recycling bin, buying sandwiches that come in a plastic box or taking cheap flights. It's irrelevant as so much of what should be recycled is just shipped off to a dump in Asia, there are no sandwiches that aren't wrapped in plastic and aviation fuel is tax exempt. System change, not climate change.
>> No. 432382 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 11:26 am
432382 spacer
>>432380

>Nobody was dumb enough to think it

This isn't true, people have been buying bamboo toothbrushes and cars full of carbon-expensive heavy metals that they plug into the national grid for years.
>> No. 432383 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 11:33 am
432383 spacer
>>432382
That's true but it's the result of ambient greenwash/consumer blaming over the years. In the past week or so there's been a big push from somewhere trying to reinforce the idea. I'm not saying that lad's being paid to post on behalf of oil companies but if he isn't then he's doing it for free, as they say.
>> No. 432384 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 12:10 pm
432384 spacer
>>432370

>Wholeheartedly disagree, and I put it to you that the idea that "the market" just follows consumer demand is a myth.

In the end, you can't sell products at a profit for which there isn't a critical mass of demand. Because that's what you need to break even on your cost side. And even if that demand is as yet unarticulated and only latent in consumers, it doesn't mean that they don't want your product and you as the morally corrupt supplier entice the innocent consumer into buying £50 plane tickets to Majorca.

In the airline industry in particular, there was the theory of the "explosion price", a term that was used in airline management in the early 1990s to describe the idea that if you lowered the price for a ticket below a certain threshold, the market would just explode on the demand side and you would still be able to turn a profit through economies of scale.

It was also the birth of budget airlines because they were much more flexible in reducing cost (per unit) than European airline giants like BA, Air France, KLM, or Lufthansa. The budget airlines realised that there were going to be enough so-called price buyers, who really only wanted to get to Majorca cheaply, and didn't care about a free hot lunch on board. And further cost could be reduced through wet leases instead of actually owning the planes, which meant far less tied-up capital.

Where you're not wrong is that part of a country's economic policy should be to discourage the overconsumption of goods that have a harmful effect on society's long-term welfare. We've seen some of that put into action with an import ban on certain unsustainably logged tropical woods or endangered animal species, or a ban on leaded fuel, or on the other hand road tax cuts for electric cars. These probably would not have come about on the own volition of the industries involved, because on an industry's cost side, polluting the environment usually tends to be cheaper than taking care to protect it.
>> No. 432387 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 2:30 pm
432387 spacer
>>432384

You've given a breakdown of how budget airlines can exist in Europe from a very narrow view without addressing any of my points.

>In the end, you can't sell products at a profit for which there isn't a critical mass of demand. Because that's what you need to break even on your cost side

I'll say it again: BA would not exist without state subsidies, nor the aerospace industry as a whole. The way that you've defined "profit" ignores this part of the equation, as economists typically do.

As for unarticulated, latent demands, the idea that profit seeking private companies are the best judges of what these demands even are, let alone how to fulfill them, is ludicrous. I used a couple of generic examples of this kind of market failure in my earlier post, but there are almost too many real world instances to point out.

As a broad comment, in wealthier countries it tends to be failure to meet demand in transportation and health/social services, and in poorer countries it tends to be failure to meet demand in both those things and basic utilities like water. If you really want I can pull up a few defining examples.
>> No. 432388 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 2:40 pm
432388 spacer
>>432387


>I'll say it again: BA would not exist without state subsidies, nor the aerospace industry as a whole

There would probably be less air traffic and fewer people flying in the first place if there were no subsidies at all, that is true.

On the other hand, ready international mobility as such is not something that is universally bad or which only produces negative effects. It can also have positive effects on society's welfare as a whole. The downside of course is that 99 percent of all traffic, both air and land or sea based, still runs on fossil fuel. But the general idea of personal mobility is something that governments are right to subsidise.


>the idea that profit seeking private companies are the best judges of what these demands even are, let alone how to fulfill them, is ludicrous

Then why do companies spend billions on trend scouting to make sure they'll be part of the "next big thing"?

And still nobody says they're the best judges of it. Other entities might know even better what consumers want. But those companies that don't continue to be right most of the time about developing trends in consumer preference usually go bankrupt over time or at least don't turn a meaningful profit. So in summary, you could say that most household names of big commercial companies by and large always know pretty well what consumers want and need.
>> No. 432389 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 3:00 pm
432389 spacer
"the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it. We need to dismantle them all." - Greta Thunberg

"The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn't originally a climate thing at all. Do you guys think of it as a climate thing? Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing." - Saikat Chakrabarti, Author of The Green New Deal
>> No. 432392 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 4:21 pm
432392 spacer
>>432389

>Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it.


Not wanting to be an oldlad cunt here, but those are big words for a 16-year-old. Even if she has a point, which is still debatable, I'm not entirely sure how you can blame global warming on dolphin rape.
>> No. 432394 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 4:29 pm
432394 spacer
>>432392
I've been using Filipinos as kindling and nothing is going to stop that.
>> No. 432405 Anonymous
2nd December 2019
Monday 11:06 pm
432405 spacer
>>432383
I don't get it... Are you saying that I am some sort of paid Russian shill for not buying into the whole "the world is burning because your milk comes in a plastic jug" rubbish?

I know our society is very individualistic, but I get the feeling that in years gone by, this sort of thing would have been fixed top-down style.
>> No. 432406 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 12:26 am
432406 spacer
>>432392

Leave her to it for a few years, she'll probably turn out alright. Most of the tedious "it's all the mean old white men's fault" types I've ever known eventually realise what dicks they sound and evolve into decent, sensible adult socialists, when they realise the one common demoninator in all of it is the good old fashioned Benjamins.
>> No. 432408 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 12:32 am
432408 spacer
>>432392
>Even if she has a point, which is still debatable
Which part do you think is debatable? Global warming or that it's caused by capitalism, i.e. corporations?

>>432405
Not you, t'other lad. There's a big greenwash push from various vested interests, most recently they've doubled down on the whole "the world is burning because you bought milk in a plastic jug" rubbish as opposed to "the world is burning because oil companies have lobbied politicians to deliberately create an economy where they can profit from selling fuel for delivering milk and using the lower quality oil to make plastic bottles they can sell you the milk in and this same sort of fuckery going on at all levels imaginable to increase their profit margin".

I feel like this is going to be read as just paranoid ranting but it's pretty much laid out explicitly like that in Hugh Fearnley Whitshisname's documentary on plastic waste.
>> No. 432409 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 12:41 am
432409 spacer
>>432408
In that sense, I agree. I don't normally care too much about these sorts of things - but the weird push to make it my fault (consumers) really boiled my piss.
>> No. 432410 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 12:44 am
432410 spacer
>>432409
It's a tried and tested method
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2006/05/origins-anti-litter-campaigns/
>> No. 432415 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 12:03 pm
432415 spacer
>>432408

>Which part do you think is debatable? Global warming or that it's caused by capitalism, i.e. corporations?


Now, now. Don't get your jammies in a twist just yet. Global warming is real. I just think it's bullshit to blame global warming on Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, colonialism, dolphin rape, or other undesirable words along that line. And I also don't believe that a privileged uppper middle class girl from third- and fourth-wave fisherperson Sweden has any call framing herself as a victim of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

Greta Thunberg obviously wants to be taken seriously like an adult before her time. Fine. More power to her. But that also means she is going to have to face scrutiny like an adult and doesn't get to ride on some sort of childish cuteness factor.
>> No. 432416 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 12:06 pm
432416 spacer
>>432415

You don't see how the industrial revolution that was fuelled by colonialism has anything to do with the amount of carbon in the air? Are we currently facing the same problems resulting from it as the global south is?
>> No. 432418 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 1:00 pm
432418 spacer
>>432416

Colonialism may have been the basis of the British textile industry, which was the first industry to become mechanised on a vast scale and was dependent on cotton from the Colonies, but if you take the coal and steel or the oil industry, those really had not a whole lot to do with colonialism and have been the biggest polluters all the way into our age. Coal and iron ore were plentiful under our feet in Britain and the rest of Europe, and you can't really say the Middle East was a colony at the time when the oil boom started in the early 1900s.

My disappointment with Greta Thunberg in this respect is that she naively throws a smorgasbord of tired-out taboo words at the climate crisis, of which I doubt she has the full grasp to really understand what they mean. That isn't to say that dolphin rape or colonialism shouldn't rightly be taboo words, and concepts that are irreconcilable with a tolerant, inclusive modern world.

I'm not against climate protest. We should be thankful that enough people are engaging in it to make global leaders listen up. But I also reserve the right to maintain my critical thinking capabilities.
>> No. 432419 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 1:19 pm
432419 spacer
>>432418

>I'm not against climate protest

It sounds like you are. What words do you think Greta uses that she doesn't understand?
>> No. 432420 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 1:49 pm
432420 spacer
>>432419

>It sounds like you are.

I can assure you I am not.


>What words do you think Greta uses that she doesn't understand?

I am not saying she doesn't understand the concepts of dolphin rape, colonialism, or capitalism as such. You would think that any 16-year-old who has paid attention in school and watches the news will have an idea of what they mean. Just that she probably doesn't realise that it's a tall order to blame them for the climate crisis in a way that will stick, be irrefutably plausible, and then have the support of even the most critical observers. And I'm hardly Greta's harshest critic out there.


Getting away from Greta for a bit, by the way, it's not like socialism had a good track record of protecting the environment. Capitalism may be all about exploiting natural resources for the benefit of a few, and if governments don't step in, until those resources are irreversibly exhausted. But socialism's key flaw, as has been proven by nearly every socialist system that ever was, is an inefficiency of resource use. And that is another way you can hurt the environment, and how socialist systems have hurt the environment. By not understanding the value of using natural resources sparingly and efficiently. Love or hate capitalism, and there are plenty of reasons to hate it, but one thing it gets right, by and large, and exceptions notwithstanding, is an efficient use of resources.

Now you could say that most socialist countries collapsed in the 80s to early 90s, when environmental consciousness wasn't such a big thing on the whole as it is today. And technology has made quantum leaps in the last 30 years. But I went to Cuba a few years ago, and they had a state-owned cement factory there near Santiago, I believe, and within about a 300-metre radius all around that cement factory, the entire landscape was covered in an almost snowlike, pale white crust. Not only must the cement factory have lost tonnes of cement raw material that way every year by not ensuring that all of it stayed within the production process, but it had a very visible devastating effect on the environment, and you could see that bushes and trees and other vegetation had died under that crust. And nobody seemed bothered by it.
>> No. 432421 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 3:22 pm
432421 spacer
>>432418

Right, and the largely European-style government composed of mestizo descendants of colonists in Brazil razing the Amazon against the wishes of the fully indigenous people is either not a climate change issue or not a colonialism issue then I imagine.

It's possible that Greta is just throwing out a smorgasbord of buzzwords that she doesn't understand due to being ill-informed about climate change. It is possible. The alternative possibility is that you are. I know she's only a teenager but which of you has better access and exposure to the information?
>> No. 432423 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 3:55 pm
432423 spacer
>>432421

Look, my whole point is, if your movement's message is going to be divisive, confrontational and accusing towards those that need to be convinced and won over the most, then naturally there is going to be a backlash. And as much as I think Jeremy Clarkson is a fucking bellend, he has a point in that he is reluctant to be fully on board with anti-climate change protest because at least its more radical voices blame the likes of him for all that is wrong with the world today. But it's not just Clarkson's fault for being an intransignent dinosaur, which he is, but it's an opportunity lost on the part of climate change activists to make this a truly unified movement by everybody, for everybody.


Can't believe you're making me side with Jeremy Clarkson. It feels very wrong. But I guess .gs still has a habit of bringing out the worst in people.
>> No. 432425 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 4:30 pm
432425 spacer
>>432423
>I guess .gs still has a habit of bringing out the worst

Do you work in marketing?

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
>> No. 432426 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 5:14 pm
432426 spacer
>>432423

What you're forgetting though is that for decades now the environmentalist message has been, or has at least attempted to be, inclusive and unified. But when that message is ignored entirely, as it has been, they perhaps you lose interest in pandering to everyone.
>> No. 432427 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 6:09 pm
432427 spacer
>>432423
>as much as I think Jeremy Clarkson is a fucking bellend, he has a point in that he is reluctant to be fully on board with anti-climate change protest because at least its more radical voices blame the likes of him for all that is wrong with the world today
Ah yes, the old "I'd like to help save the planet including myself but I don't like the way some other people are going about it so I'm going to do nothing instead".
>it's an opportunity lost on the part of climate change activists to make this a truly unified movement by everybody, for everybody.
I see endless "constructive" criticisms like this. By "like this" I don't mean the same content - some suggest the polar opposite. If you don't like how it's being done, get out there and do it your way. Otherwise stop trying to be a back seat driver. You're not doing anything constructive, you're just working on an opportunity to feel smug when things don't work out for other people.
>> No. 432428 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 6:13 pm
432428 spacer
>>432421

What has climate change got to do with people deciding to burn down trees?

It's environmental vandalism, but it's nothing to do with climate change. The climate changing thanks to greenhouse gas and the intentional destruction of the Amazon by humans are completely unrelated issues. Even the carbon reduction potential of the lost trees is statistically insignificant.

It's not global warming that set the Amazon on fire. It's not the heat from all the trees on fire in Brazil that's melting the ice caps. They are different things and you are getting mixed up.

Sorry, just wanted to be a pedant about that. Carry on.
>> No. 432430 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 6:22 pm
432430 spacer
>>432428

Trees sequester carbon. They take it out of the air and keep it in solid forms. When the Amazon is burned down, the land is turned over to farming. Mostly cattle and soy, which is then used to feed the cattle, as well as foreign cattle. Those cattle create methane, which is a far more potent (though shorter lasting) greenhouse gas than CO2.
>> No. 432431 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:00 pm
432431 spacer

greta.png
432431432431432431
Marketinglad, how would you convince regular working class Joes that environmentalism isn't merely the preserve of bored rich people who want to feel good about themselves?
>> No. 432432 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:14 pm
432432 spacer
>>432431

My expertise in in sales and account management, which isn't necessarily the same as being a marketinglad. But oh well.

One axiom of successful selling, for what it's worth, is to make people feel that they will be better off having bought what you have to offer. They must not feel ripped off afterwards, they must not get the feeling that they don't want to buy from you in the future. And most of all, they have to feel like you aren't pressuring them into a sale. Even if it isn't true, and even if you've given it your best salesperson spiel, they must have the feeling that they arrived at the conclusion themselves that they want your product.

Parts of the anti climate change movement, however are behaving more like "BUY OR FUCKING PRODUCT OR EVERYBODY WILL FUCKING DIE AND IT WILL BE YOUR FAULT".

Also, don't insult your customers. And if it is old white men whose attitudes you want changed, don't make it look like yet another vehicle for fisherpersons so that they can agree with each other once more how horrible old white men are.


Make of all that what you will. The current approach clearly isn't working effectively enough to sway the opinions of people in power who want the status quo to continue. And if there really isn't time left as you say, then a march through the institutions potentially taking decades isn't going to be your plan B.
>> No. 432433 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:26 pm
432433 spacer
>>432432

Okay now can you rephrase that in actionable steps rather than just vague general statements?
>> No. 432435 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:32 pm
432435 spacer
>>432431

I don't understand how having money changes the argument, particularly when an Eames is considerably more environmentally friendly than almost any other chair, due to them being made one at a time by a bloke in a room.

I hate to delve into suppositions but I'd bet a great deal of money that if they were sitting on an Ikea chair they'd be criticised for using mass market furniture too.

I think people just need to admit they don't really care if the world dies in a hundred years and they want to enjoy their petrol car and plastic luxury goods now. I'm perfectly willing to admit this without resorting to making myself feel less guilty about it by calling a prominent and ultimately well meaning young lady annoying or rich or clueless.
>> No. 432436 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:38 pm
432436 spacer
>>432433

OK then.

Instead of "STOP STEALING OUR FUTURE, YOU BASTARDS", go with something like "We are your children and we need your help to be able to enjoy the same intact environment as you did. We'll all be better off saving the planet, even you in your wizened old age. If not for yourself, then do it for us, your own flesh and blood. There isn't much time left, so hurry and set a good example for us. Come on now, this is your chance to shine".

That might sound horribly bland, but as I said, the current approach only generates opposition from those that need to be swayed. All that's happening now is that all these movements are causing fierce opposition from whoever they attack. You've still got the oil industry spending billions on PR to teach the controversy, you've got right-wing think tanks engaging in character assassination against Greta Thunberg.

It's the same with all the Paul Joseph Watson movements in the U.S. preceding the accident of democracy that was the election of Donald Trump. They were all so sure of their self-perceived moral superiority that it just completely didn't occur to them that there would be a critical mass of people who begged to differ and exercised whatever democratic rights they had to express their dissent.
>> No. 432437 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:39 pm
432437 spacer
>>432436

>We are your children and we need your help to be able to enjoy the same intact environment as you did

Isn't that what they've been saying for about 50 years?
>> No. 432438 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:45 pm
432438 spacer
>>432436

Came here to say >>432437
>> No. 432439 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:52 pm
432439 spacer
>>432437

In 60 years we'll have Greta up on stage somewhere screaming "HOW DARE YOU?" for "stealing her entire life" while normal human life carries on around her bizarre cargo-climate cult.

And fuck it, if I'm wrong so much the better. Fuck saving the planet let's get some climate change accelerationism going on. Fifty years just isn't fast enough. Let's turn this green marble into a fucking giant dustbowl in twenty, or even ten. Now that's change I can fucking believe in.
>> No. 432440 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 8:54 pm
432440 spacer
>>432439

Do you not believe in climate change? I am fully apathetic towards it but I'm not daft enough to deny it's happening.
>> No. 432441 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:01 pm
432441 spacer
>>432439

I'm not sure you understand what a cargo cult is.
>> No. 432442 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:02 pm
432442 spacer
>>432440

I believe in climate change but I'm open minded as to the degree that it's man-made and to the degree that it's caused by increasing levels of co2.

I'm also somewhat sceptical as to what we can do about it without essentially reversing the entirely 20th century. Basically to have any real impact on anything we'd have to all go back to eating local produce and stop getting on aeroplanes.

We could probably get away with hybrid vehicles (or pure electric if someone cracks the clean electricity barrier) for longer trips but urban areas would have to be largely pedestrianised and public transport massively improved.

>>432441

It's where a rich annoying swede makes a golum of Al Gore in the hopes that the sky gods stop being angry.
>> No. 432443 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:08 pm
432443 spacer
>>432442

Right, so you're just massively ill-informed.
>> No. 432445 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:13 pm
432445 spacer
>>432443

Greta tier rebuttal there teenladm8. Apologies for stealing your childhood, I'm off to drive the five minutes to the supermarket and buy nothing but imported food and then fail to recycle any of the packaging.
>> No. 432446 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:17 pm
432446 spacer
>>432445

No really, the "I don't believe it's man made or caused by CO2" is theory neighbours with Flat Earth. The whole "YEAH WELL I'M GOING TO GO DRIVE MY CAR AND NOT RECYCLE AND EAT LOADS OF MEAT HOW'D YOU LIKE THAT?!?" thing is really not as clever or cutting as you think it is.
>> No. 432447 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:21 pm
432447 spacer
>>432446
Better that than pretend to care and still remain totally ineffectual at solving the problem.
>> No. 432448 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:23 pm
432448 spacer
>>432447

How would you know how effective it is? Clearly you haven't got the slightest idea of what's going on.
>> No. 432449 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:36 pm
432449 spacer
>>432446

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z-dCLZtwYg

Dunno lad. The earth has been going through cycles of warming and cooling long before we ever bothered evolving from shrews. I'm really more concerned about the North Atlantic garbage patch than I am about co2 levels, but to each his own.

As >>432447 reminds me, no one really has a concrete solution to the co2 problem. If the greenhouse effect of high co2 levels is really what's sending us to hell in a handbasket then I don't think anyone's going to do anything, the tipping point (in terms of educating people early enough to get actual adoption in place) was probably passed long before anyone noticed a problem.

Modern, industrial, life is going to fuck the planet no matter what you do, whether it's from the petrol in your car or from all the pollution caused from the mining of the lithium for your electric car's battery. Unless we go back to a 19th century mode of living we're not changing anything.

PS: The video I (hopefully) embedded was made in 1996. We're still not dead.
>> No. 432450 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:37 pm
432450 spacer
>>432448
So you're telling me that flying across the world multiple times a year while professing to care deeply about climate change is an effective mitigation strategy? Clearly you don't care to even consider what I might have been saying and just want to preach from on high. Enjoy yourself.
>> No. 432451 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:40 pm
432451 spacer
What people seem to be terrified to talk about, even the likes of Greta and her cult:
People are going to die. There will be famines and floods and wars and the population of humans is going to crash within the next 50-100 years, this seems pretty much inevitable by now.

Climate change will do a lot of damage, but equally there is little real prospect that we can avoid halting the gravy-train of growth and prosperity that we've been riding on since industrial times.

The popular talk of "cutting emissions by xxxx in order to limit temperature rise to zdegC" is utterly abstract and meaningless to the vast majority of people on the planet.
We should be warning people instead that there is a real prospect of global famines in the next few decades even in wealthy countries.

Electric cars are a token gesture with little meaningful impact. The real changes we should be making are stopping global population growth. More efficient agriculture less reliant on energy-intensive fertilisation. Remove as much coal electricity generation as possible and replacing it with efficient gas generators as a stop-gap. These changes represent carbon savings an order of magnitude above the impact of electric transit.
>> No. 432452 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:42 pm
432452 spacer
>>432442

>I'm also somewhat sceptical as to what we can do about it without essentially reversing the entirely 20th century.

It's worth actually taking a look at life in the early 20th century to realise the enormity of that. Cars were a novelty item that only the well to do could afford. Many homes still didn't have electricity. They had no electrical household appliances, no washing machines, no fridges. Supermarkets didn't exist, nor did we have a lot of imported foods like we do now. People went places by train, bicycle, or horse-drawn carriage. Only the really posh could afford a passage on an ocean liner to go to far-flung places like the United States. A journey to New Zealand took over a month just to get there. Commercial flight in terms of a means of mass transportation was non-existent and remained the preserve of a wealthy few all the way into the 1950s.

But also, most crucially, the total global population in 1900 was 1.6 billion. A billion and a half humans were very obviously using fewer natural resources than we do now, and that doesn't even factor in the above mentioned absence of modern conveniences. So in essence, to really replicate life at the turn of the last century, we are going to have to kill off 78 percent of the global population, stop using cars, planes, and fossil fuel powered ships. We will also have to go back to getting our groceries from the corner shop down the street and growing a lot of it ourselves in our back gardens. Meat in particular will only be a once in a while thing for most people.
>> No. 432453 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:45 pm
432453 spacer
>>432449
>Dunno lad. The earth has been going through cycles of warming and cooling long before we ever bothered evolving from shrews.
Yes the climate has always been changing, but changes of the degree that we're predicting on the scale of several decades to a hundred years, shows some pretty good correlations to mass extinctions.
>> No. 432454 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:55 pm
432454 spacer
>>432453

>Yes the climate has always been changing, but changes of the degree that we're predicting on the scale of several decades to a hundred years, shows some pretty good correlations to mass extinctions.

The problem is that our human civilisation is very fragile and depends on a quite narrow band of parameters in terms of living conditions that are needed for us to sustain ourselves and our current level of global human development.

It's really utterly irrelevant for nature itself if sea levels rise by five metres. In between ice ages, sea levels sometimes varied by as many as 70 metres in relatively short time periods. It is thought that vast areas of the Great Barrier Reef died when the last Ice Age was over and sea levels rose by dozens of metres from previous levels and thus left the reef's corals without enough sunlight. And yet, the Great Barrier Reef survived, although sea levels may have risen by as much as 10 centimetres a year.

The planet has been through mass extinctions thousands of times worse than what we are doing to it now. Nothing we can ever do will kill off life on Earth completely. Not even a global thermonuclear war, as the Chixculub impact is believed to have released thousands of times more energy than all of Earth's nuclear arsenal combined, and yet, after a few million years, nature bounced back.

Protecting the environment and its biodiversity is something that very arguably has great intrinsic value for its own sake. But the primary reason why we need to be doing it is to ensure the survival of our own civilisation.
>> No. 432455 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 9:58 pm
432455 spacer
>>432451
> The real changes we should be making are stopping global population growth.

I've been saying it for while. Fuck it, Bill Hicks was saying it in the 80s "stop your fucking rutting for five minutes while we figure out this food/air deal". Of course, that's just not going to happen. Reproduction is a natural human function and no amount of logic is going to beat a however many millions of years of hormonal evolution.

>>432453

All this has happened before, all this will happen again. Let's hope the next dominant species doesn't discover electricity or petroleum.
>> No. 432456 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 10:09 pm
432456 spacer
>>432455

>Let's hope the next dominant species doesn't discover electricity or petroleum


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silurian_(Doctor_Who)
>> No. 432457 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:33 pm
432457 spacer

800.png
432457432457432457
>>432450
Flights? Who exactly are you talking about? You seem to be picking and choosing various individuals to snipe at without specifying which so you can use that as a way to damn everyone who's trying harder than you.

>>432449
>The earth has been going through cycles of warming and cooling long before we ever bothered evolving from shrews.
Yeah, CO2 levels fluctuate too. Check out this completely natural increase in CO2 that's absolutely in line with the past.
Here's a page from NASA explaining the detail.
https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/
I mean there was probably more CO2 around in the Hadean era so obviously we'll be fine if that happens. The Earth had a different atmosphere before we evolved so we must be able to live in any variation on them. Logic, that.
>> No. 432458 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:40 pm
432458 spacer
>>432455

The global birth rate is at or below replacement. The population is growing because life expectancies have increased. With the current birth rate and life expectancy, the global population will peak in around 2100 before entering a steady decline. If the birth rate falls any lower, all developed countries will face total economic collapse well before 2100, because they will have more retirees than working-age people.

"Stopping global population growth" is at best an obsolete solution based on birth rates from half a century ago. In 2019, it only constitutes a meaningful solution if we take it to mean "culling the elderly". I'm not sure if replacing the state pension with mandatory euthanasia will be a big vote-winner.
>> No. 432459 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:40 pm
432459 spacer
>>432457

> If fossil-fuel burning continues at a business-as-usual rate, such that humanity exhausts the reserves over the next few centuries, CO2 will continue to rise to levels of order of 1500 ppm. The atmosphere would then not return to pre-industrial levels even tens of thousands of years into the future.

So "if" we happen not to WW3 ourselves into extinction or fight each other to death over dwindling fresh water supplies "for the next few centuries" then we face the possibility of co2 levels not returning to pre-industrial levels for a few tens of thousands of years after we wipe ourselves out?

I for one am quaking in my boots.

If this kind of data is what you're getting in a tizz about then you're an utter buffoon. Humanity will be long gone well before "the next few centuries".
>> No. 432460 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:43 pm
432460 spacer
>>432458

I wonder what the relative carbon footprint of a pensioner is compared to their grandchildren.
>> No. 432461 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:50 pm
432461 spacer
>>432459

>I for one am quaking in my boots.

No, you're in denial. We aren't going to wipe ourselves out, because we're hard as fucking nails - humans can survive anywhere from the Sahara polar to the high arctic. We don't have enough nuclear weapons to render the planet uninhabitable even if we were really trying, nor is there any possible event that would eradicate our drinking water supply.

We will be here for the next few centuries and well beyond that; the question is what kind of world we're leaving for future generations. Will we leave them a decent world, or will they eke out a meagre existence in the ruins of our excesses?

Secular apocalyticism is fundamentally no different from the religious sort - if you act as if we're all doomed anyway, then you don't have to address any problem seriously. The end is not nigh, humanity does have a future, so we'd better figure out what we want that future to look like.
>> No. 432462 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:52 pm
432462 spacer
>>432451
>>432455
>The real changes we should be making are stopping global population growth
How?
Actually explain how you think that could be done.
Will it be sterilization under threat of violence or are you thinking of a more sci-fi brand of super-villainy, say an engineered virus that renders most women infertile?
>> No. 432463 Anonymous
3rd December 2019
Tuesday 11:56 pm
432463 spacer

13524_2010_4_Fig5_HTML.gif
432463432463432463
>>432460

According to this paper, per-capita CO2 emissions peak just before retirement, with a slight decline after that.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13524-010-0004-1
>> No. 432464 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:10 am
432464 spacer
>>432459
>If this kind of data is what you're getting in a tizz about then you're an utter buffoon.
A buffoon in better company than you mate.

>> No. 432465 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:14 am
432465 spacer
>>432461

Without even considering the more likely doomsday scenarios such as drug-resistant disease, I honestly believe a nuclear war would wipe humanity out. Without urban centres, government assistance, healthcare, infrastructure, etc, most survivors would die out through disease and lack of sanitation (that's before we even ponder the fallout effect on fresh water supplies, "nuclear winter" effect on crop growth, etc, etc).

To be fair, ladm8, we'll probably be wiped out by the effects of bee colony collapse before long.

Confusingly, according to >>432453 we're already close to co2 levels associated with mass extinctions (I do suppose we're susceptable to them, unless one subscribes to a particularly solipsistic anthropic principal).

Finally I find this >>432457 graph confusing. If the population is going to drop (and thus our net carbon footprint along with it) in ~2100, then on what possible model will we keep burning fossil fuels at the same rate for "the next few centuries"?
>> No. 432466 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:15 am
432466 spacer
>>432464

Rather my current company than a buffoon who watches television news, m80.
>> No. 432467 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:17 am
432467 spacer
>>432462

Fuck knows, but the leveling off of population growth suggested to arise in the future by some people is an unsustainable number driven by unsustainable agriculture and unsustainable energy practices. The human population is outrageously unsustainable, it only appears that it isn't because the timescales are too long for people to feel a sense of urgency.
>> No. 432468 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:20 am
432468 spacer
>>432465
If the richest 10% of the population are responsible for almost half of the total carbon emissions and the poorest half are responsible for less than 10% of emissions, why would you assume population size has any meaningful correlation to the total carbon footprint?

Not that we can keep burning fossil fuels at the same rate for the next few centuries, there isn't enough of them left. We've only got 50 odd years of gas and oil left, twice that of coal at the current rate, not taking the increasing consumption of them into account.
>> No. 432469 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:21 am
432469 spacer
>>432466

Yes, the TOP GLOBEHEAD MEMES Facebook group is so much more reliable a news source.
>> No. 432470 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:22 am
432470 spacer
>>432462

It won't happen. Unsustainable population growth will continue unabated until some massive levelling event kicks in be it famine, drought, war, or disease. With some luck we might even get a meteor.
>> No. 432471 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:27 am
432471 spacer
>>432468

> Not that we can keep burning fossil fuels at the same rate for the next few centuries, there isn't enough of them left. We've only got 50 odd years of gas and oil left, twice that of coal at the current rate, not taking the increasing consumption of them into account.

So you're saying the NASA page previously linked is sensationalistic fantasy?

>>432469

Yeah you thick cunt, Television and Facebook are the only two sources of information on earth. Have a word.
>> No. 432472 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:35 am
432472 spacer
>>432431
Jesus... That's... That's what I think climate change really is, to be honest.
>> No. 432473 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:42 am
432473 spacer
What the fuck have I done? This cunt-off is too long to read.

Also, it is apparent that some of you are accelerationist but just don't know it yet. Come, brothers, join the right side. Join the light. Be enlightened (This statement is copyrighted and can't be used by marketinglad or you will hear for us.)
>> No. 432474 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:48 am
432474 spacer
>>432473

Let us all be enlightened by the gas lamps and coal fires of accelerationism!
>> No. 432475 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 1:36 am
432475 spacer
>>432474
Indeed, here's to 2mpg and rich people getting beheaded (MI5 - please recruit me, I have no morals).
>> No. 432476 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 1:53 am
432476 spacer
>>432465

>If the population is going to drop (and thus our net carbon footprint along with it) in ~2100, then on what possible model will we keep burning fossil fuels at the same rate for "the next few centuries"?

Because people around the world are getting richer at a phenomenal rate. The global average rate of emissions is about 5 tonnes/person/year, but there's a truly vast range, from under 0.1 tonnes in much of sub-Saharan Africa to over 20 tonnes in the UAE.

You don't have to be rich rich to have a first-world climate impact. Billions of people in China, India, Latin America and North Africa are entering the global middle-class. Their parents or grandparents might have been peasant farmers, but they've got a flat with air-conditioning, eat meat with every meal and are saving up to buy a car. If we have any hope of persuading these people to curb their consumption, we in the rich world need to act now, otherwise we'll just get bogged down in hypocrisy and tit-for-tat.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC

>>432468

>We've only got 50 odd years of gas and oil left

Not any more. Technology to exploit unconventional oil and gas reserves have massively increased the amount of fossil fuels that can be economically extracted. For every barrel of conventional oil that's still in the ground, there are at least three barrels of oil shale, oil sands and tight oil. We now know how to get that stuff out of the ground, it's economically viable at $70-$90/barrel and unfortunately it's much more carbon-intensive than conventional oil due to the more difficult extraction and refining processes.

>>432470

>Unsustainable population growth will continue unabated

Unsustainable population growth has already stopped. The number of people being born is just barely enough to replace the number of people who die and the birth rate is continuing to decline. The population will continue to grow until about 2100, because the people who have already been born are expected to live long and healthy lives. Once today's children reach old age, the global population will start to decline. If you're proposing that we kill off some people just so that there are more resources to go around, may I humbly suggest that you volunteer to go first.
>> No. 432477 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 2:00 am
432477 spacer
>>432476
>You don't have to be rich rich to have a first-world climate impact.
Imagine telling a Brazilian that he can't burn down his forest to become rich like you, while you are rich because of the same antics he is pulling now.

What are you going to do? Pay him to not burn down the forest to get rich so that he can drive a 4x4 too?
>> No. 432481 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:16 pm
432481 spacer
>>432477
> Imagine telling a Brazilian that he can't burn down his forest to become rich like you, while you are rich because of the same antics he is pulling now.

Even with the current devaluation of the Real, anyone in Brazil with enough land to be worth deforesting probably already has a net worth greater than anyone on this board.

But yes, honestly, even though it's a slightly different topic; deforesting rainforest land to grow soy beans for three years before the soil turns to polar because it's not arable land and was never meant to be farmed is actually going to be an environmental catastrophe that we will see in our lifetimes.
>> No. 432482 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:23 pm
432482 spacer
>>432477
Imagine telling an indigenous person who lives in the forest that it needs to be burned down so someone else can farm it and if he objects or makes a fuss he'll be murdered.
>> No. 432483 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:26 pm
432483 spacer
>>432477
>Imagine telling a Brazilian that he can't burn down his forest to become rich like you, while you are rich because of the same antics he is pulling now.
Gone off your meds again, lad?
>> No. 432485 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 12:50 pm
432485 spacer
>>432476

>The number of people being born is just barely enough to replace the number of people who die and the birth rate is continuing to decline

It kind of sounds wrong, at least for developing countries. They have been growing pretty steeply just in the last 30 years or so, and much of the increase from five to seven billion people is on them.

And it's not enough to lower birth rates to the replacement rate. Seven billion people will be just as unsustainable for the planet in twenty years as they are now. We really need a global one-child policy. And people's ecological conscience needs to shift from being focused on zero-emission cars and not using any more plastic bags and going on only one holiday a year, to having fewer children, especially in a developed country. We are going to have to frame the issue in terms of a person's lifetime carbon footprint, and the CO2 you can save by just having one child.
>> No. 432487 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 5:27 pm
432487 spacer
>>432485

>It kind of sounds wrong, at least for developing countries.

Don't take my word for it, look at the data. In 1960, the average woman had five children; today it's 2.4 and falling fast. The very poorest countries still have fertility rates of >5, but most developed countries are now well below replacement.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN
>> No. 432488 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 5:54 pm
432488 spacer
>>432487

If you scroll far enough back in this thread you'll find a string of posts where I was arguing in favour of population control and people were arguing against me because it's racist due to falling most heavily on the poorest (and therefore brownest) countries.

I'd argue that we don't just need "below replacement", we need to slash the global population by at least a third. It would solve more economic problems than it causes; it's only ever framed as causing problem by people who have a vested interest in maintaining the pyramid scheme we call an economy at present.
>> No. 432489 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 6:04 pm
432489 spacer
>>432488

If the richest 10% of the population are responsible for almost half of the total carbon emissions and the poorest half are responsible for less than 10% of emissions, when you slash the population by a third (and it's inevitably going to be the poor who you're mass murdering) all you've done is reduce emissions by 6.6% which is nowhere near enough.
>> No. 432491 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 6:37 pm
432491 spacer
>>432489

That misses the point lad. Those countries aren't going to stay third world wastelands with no running water forever, they're going to industrialise. Those millions of poor brown kids will start to take up more carbon themselves as the West stops eating all our own cake.

brown-eyed people don't pollute as much because they don't have any stuff, but if everything goes well, they're going to have stuff in the future, and indeed they deserve to have stuff just like we have had all these years. So there need to be less of them as well as less of us.

I think a lot of this climate talk essentially follows a similar pattern to what the baby boomer generation has taken in Western countries- Living through the time of most generous socialist policy in history and then change your mind when it's someone else's turn. Poor countries have the advantage that when they do industrialise, they can do it in greener and cleaner ways; but as consumerism ramps up in their economies they will take up more carbon. As a westerner living through times of unprecedented decadence, we don't have the moral high ground to tell them they can't do that too.

Therefore, population control is the only sensible solution. Mitigating the damage by reducing our burden, not by taking away all the nice things from people who never had the opportunity to experience them.

>when you slash the population by a third (and it's inevitably going to be the poor who you're mass murdering)

What part of limiting birth rates is murder? Are you a pro-life Christian or are you just deliberately misrepresenting my position to try and frame me as a racist who wants to genocide Africans?

Please explain by what logic you inferred that information.
>> No. 432493 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 7:05 pm
432493 spacer
>>432491
I inferred it from the fact that we don't have time to wait around for there to be fewer people in the next generation to cause less emissions, it would have to decrease now. If you're just suggesting equally pointless forced birth control, i.e. eugenics then it's a bit rich that from that you're accusing others of being selfish.
It would be much more effective to ramp down the consumerism of the top ten percent who are creating almost fifty percent of the emissions and to not encourage others to emulate their former position. You can start with yourself by realising that "having stuff" in of itself does not equate to quality of life and isn't inherently desirable.

I can see what you think you're saying but all I'm hearing is "No, don't regulate my SUV, if you do that you'll have to regulate the hypothetical SUVs of poorer people too and that's just selfish of you. We need to sterilise them instead, maybe a softer way of doing it but we really need to disincentivise people from having families, especially in places where having families is the only way to ensure you have adequate care in your old age".
>> No. 432494 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 7:14 pm
432494 spacer
>>432493

>You can start with yourself by realising that "having stuff" in of itself does not equate to quality of life and isn't inherently desirable.

This is the part where arguing with strangers on anonymous imageboards can be amusing, because if you were aware what type of person you've just said that to you'd piss yourself.

Anyway, it's all well and good to deliver the message that consumerism is pretty bad for the environment but it's still going to be supremely rich coming from us, in our first world country, towards third world countries when they inevitably reach that stage of development.

And they will reach that stage of development, because even our mutual friend Marx reckoned a transition through industrialisation and consumerism are necessary steps in the development of an economy. Evidence throughout history would tend to agree, and just more pragmatically, even if we do persuade people to stop buying all the plastic and burning coal in their gardens, they're still bloody well going to want an iPhone. That horse has well and truly bolted and blown the stable door somewhere into low orbit.
>> No. 432495 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 7:30 pm
432495 spacer
So rich nations are allowed to naturally reach a point where birthrates go down, but the Africans and Asians need to be castrated to stop them having babies? Don't they have a right to develop their societies and naturally reach the point where birthrates go down? Or are they just animals that need to be culled every now and again?
>> No. 432496 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 7:33 pm
432496 spacer
>>432495

>Don't they have a right to develop their societies and naturally reach the point where birthrates go down?

Well not according to you they won't, no, because that would cause an awful lot of pollution.
>> No. 432497 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 7:39 pm
432497 spacer

v-logo.png
432497432497432497
>>432495

I'd suggest we all just kill ourselves, but what will happen when all the carbon stored in our big fat bodies is released, en-masse, into the atmosphere?

Carbonogeddon!
>> No. 432498 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 7:54 pm
432498 spacer
>>432497
We're only about 18% carbon so it would be more than balanced out by the immediate reduction in carbon emissions released by daily life and the amount of plants that would be able to grow without our interfering/harvesting/weeding.

>>432494
>it's still going to be supremely rich coming from us, in our first world country, towards third world countries when they inevitably reach that stage of development.
Not if we've also stopped being so consumerist first and stop pushing consumerist propaganda at them, not half as rich as it'll be to start insisting they don't have children. I think it's fair to say most people, possibly misguidedly for various reasons, would prefer to have children than iPhones. What pressure Apple have to spend billions on in advertising to create want is done for free in regards to children by most people's mothers.
>> No. 432499 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:03 pm
432499 spacer
I'm beginning to genuinely think that there's a few people deliberately flushing out productive posts about collective action against climate change with market rhetoric and "accelerationism".

Accelerationism is either nihilistic if you just want everything to end, or deeply unethical and stupid if you think it will somehow "shock" us into going the other direction. History shows that the kind of economic pressures, natural disasters and breakdown of infrastructure that will come from unchecked climate change will affect the majority of the population -- starting with the poorest and working its way up. This is a position not worth talking about if you have any regard for human life (including your own).
>> No. 432500 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:21 pm
432500 spacer
>>432488

> I was arguing in favour of population control and people were arguing against me because it's racist due to falling most heavily on the poorest (and therefore brownest) countries


That may be, but here in the Western world, we will likely face a different set of problems.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXSz0bA9CiE


>>432494

>Anyway, it's all well and good to deliver the message that consumerism is pretty bad for the environment but it's still going to be supremely rich coming from us, in our first world country, towards third world countries when they inevitably reach that stage of development.

That's indeed an ethical problem. On the other hand, countries and economies that are just now developing are said to often skip a few steps when catching up to us, especially the heavy industry stage that Europe was in from about the 1850s to 1970s. A few economies in sub-Saharan Africa have gone from almost entirely agricultural societies straight to service sector-dominated economic systems within one generation. If we keep moving the goalposts of what constitutes a modern Western economy, which developing countries will then aspire to, then maybe the example of modernity that they will emulate from us can be one of sustainability, low CO2 emission and low resource consumption. They don't inevitably have to make the same mistakes that we did.

But generally speaking, I think a deliberate reduction of the global population will be the only way forward. If that's going to be by killing off billions or by implementing a global one-child policy should then be subject to debate.
>> No. 432501 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:28 pm
432501 spacer
>>432500
>But generally speaking, I think a deliberate reduction of the global population will be the only way forward. If that's going to be by killing off billions or by implementing a global one-child policy should then be subject to debate.

Hans Rosling presented some pretty good arguments that the world will not exceed 11 billion people that might be worth looking at. Whether 11 billion is also too many is another subject.
>> No. 432503 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:44 pm
432503 spacer
>>432499

> I'm beginning to genuinely think that there's a few people deliberately flushing out productive posts about collective action against climate change

Because these "collective actions against climate change" are a load of bollocks with zero chance of working. We either need to de-industrialise, globally, or we need population control.

Nothing else is going to work. You can't change the fact that people are selfish pricks who think that rules apply to everyone else but them. Everyone wants to be the one chap who eats meat, who drives his car places where he can walk, who has two kids, and three foreign holidays a year. No amount of gurning children whinging about carbon footprints is going to convince someone to basically become a 19th century peasant.
>> No. 432504 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:46 pm
432504 spacer

>> No. 432506 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:51 pm
432506 spacer
>>432503
>You can't change the fact that...
Aren't those things you just listed individual actions against climate change as opposed to collective ones, which would be de-industrialisation (or population control, if you own a tiki torch)?
>> No. 432507 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:52 pm
432507 spacer
>>432501

> Whether 11 billion is also too many is another subject

I don't think you can in any way argue that the Earth isn't already greatly overpopulated with 7.5 billion or whatever the current figure is. Nothing about our current existence is sustainable. We're burning an amount of oil every year that would take the Earth three million years to recreate. Even if we stopped all deforestation today, it would take thousands of years for all of it to grow back as densely as it once was. There are estimates that it would still take another 50,000 years to reabsorb all the CO2 back out of the atmosphere that we've blown into it since the beginning of industrialisation. None of this will improve if the global population increases from 7.5 to 11 billion.

Altogether, globally, we are consuming 1.7 times the natural resources that the Earth can recreate every year.

https://www.footprintnetwork.org/our-work/ecological-footprint/

>The world’s ecological deficit is referred to as global ecological overshoot. Since the 1970s, humanity has been in ecological overshoot, with annual demand on resources exceeding what Earth can regenerate each year. Today humanity uses the equivalent of 1.75 Earths to provide the resources we use and absorb our waste. This means it now takes the Earth one year and eight months to regenerate what we use in a year. We use more ecological resources and services than nature can regenerate through overfishing, overharvesting forests, and emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than forests can sequester.
>> No. 432508 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 8:57 pm
432508 spacer
>>432503

You've completely mischaracterised the problem and what climate activism aims for. You also have a pessimistic view of human nature that I just don't think is true, and I actually think your post sort of proves it.

Think of it this way: consumer choice is an extremely limited way to address climate change. The fact that many people still try, though, is a sign that people want to do something but are not being given the opportunity to really influence things that matter. I've said in an earlier post that this desire to do something can be channeled in lots of different ways; it's not surprising that a consumerist society will find consumerist solutions and favour them heavily over more effective approaches.

It will make some small difference if enough people do it, but ultimately climate activism argues for systemic change -- not in the sense of returning to pre-industrial society, but in pushing for accountability for activities which damage the environment. Right now we live in a world where our economic system relegates climate to an "externality". Collective movements have the potential to put pressure on governments (and in turn, on private power) to introduce more regulation, fund research and development into better technology, change our infrastructure, and so on.

One of the most interesting aspects of Extinction Rebellion is that it's clearly aware of this -- the protests are not just about specific environmental demands, but one of their "big three" is having a citizen's assembly on climate issues, i.e. giving the general public more of a say in an issue that will (is) directly affecting them.
>> No. 432509 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:00 pm
432509 spacer
>>432504

That stand up special is from 1992. Nearly 28 years ago. It was a time when many of the general public were only just beginning to understand what was going to be ahead. Nobody, save for climate scientists, had a full grasp of the problems we would face three decades later. And George Carlin knew he was still going to have a large enough audience who would laugh about his jokes belittling climate change doomsayers.

As much as I've always loved George Carlin for his style of humour, he would probably be booed off the stage today and have droves of angry Twitter mobs against him.
>> No. 432510 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:04 pm
432510 spacer
>>432508

>not in the sense of returning to pre-industrial society, but in pushing for accountability for activities which damage the environment

You're still missing the valid point though that some have tried to make here, which is that reverting to pre-industrial emission levels is going to be the only thing that will save us. But all the energy efficiency and recycling in the world isn't going to make it happen if we've got ten billion people living on the planet.
>> No. 432511 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:06 pm
432511 spacer
>>432504

I love Carlin as much as anyone, but the point is a bit trite now. Climate activism doesn't argue that the world is ending, it argues that organised human society is threatened by it -- and that's also worth protecting.

>>432507

I'm not arguing with you, but I will say that I am cautious about putting "overpopulation" at the top of the list of concerns above, say, systemic change, or proper representation of people's concerns about climate change in government and trade, or properly taking into account the environment in how we order our industries.

Something about the subject of population control brings out the most awful and unproductive Darwinian arguments. Not saying that's what you're doing, but to be honest, I think if you choose to place your efforts anywhere it should be in the movements that will empower people and make a change, rather than one which may lead to authoritarian measures.
>> No. 432512 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:07 pm
432512 spacer
>>432507
>I don't think you can in any way argue that the Earth isn't already greatly overpopulated with 7.5 billion
You absolutely can as we throw away a third all food that's currently produced so by that metric we could easily feed ten billion, then there's the fact that if you switch a meat based diet for a plant based one, the amount of cropland required goes down by a factor of 20. That gives us a figure of 200 billion which is obviously silly as there'd be no way to house that many people let alone the emissions created by their heating or travel or other various sundries and logistics. So I'm not going to argue that we could realistically feed 200 billion people but if for some weird reason we decided to optimise everything for sustainable human production, we could definitely cope with a lot more than a measly 7.5 billion of us.
>> No. 432513 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:16 pm
432513 spacer
>>432512

You're still insinuating that the majority of the people will act accordingly and responsibly, and really stop eating meat and throwing away food or using plastic bags if you tell them to.

Just look at what's been happening with SUVs. It's been a known fact for 50 years that they are a big waste of petrol. And yet, in the face of accelerated global warming, they've been the fastest growing segment for car manufacturers in the last decade.

You may think I'm being arrogant, but the majority of people (and that doesn't mean your university-educated, double-income Prius drivers who enjoy smelling their own farts) are thick as pig shit when it comes to saving the planet, and will only comply with all your advice at gunpoint.
>> No. 432514 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:35 pm
432514 spacer
>>432513

Whether people buy SUVs is not necessarily a measure of whether they care about the environment. When asked the question directly, a majority of people strongly agree the world faces a "climate emergency": https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/18/climate-crisis-seen-as-most-important-issue-by-public-poll-shows

The fact people still buy and use certain goods in a society overwhelmingly geared towards the production, marketing and sale of such goods shouldn't be surprising. That people care about the environment seems pretty clear.
>> No. 432515 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 9:39 pm
432515 spacer
>>432513
I wasn't insinuating anything, I was just being pedantic for the sake of an opportunity to do some paper napkin maths.
>> No. 432516 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 10:36 pm
432516 spacer
>>432499
Well, depends really... What does "collective action" mean to you? I used to be a massive commiebastard. So, I would just love it if we had a top-down approach, such as outright banning certain things by BIG GOVERNMENT. Slavery was banned, and sure it caused a few market issues, but in the long-run, it was a good choice. If that can't be done - if I am being blamed for not having hummus on a carrot stick and not voting with "my wallet," then everything can go to hell. In that sense, yes, I like accelerationism.

You got cunts like this going round making arguments like:

Bikson said she cared deeply about the environment and that she “did her bit” but concluded, to further groans: “It’s all about us, there is no such thing as government. Government is just people."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/03/no-great-escape-tory-scales-fence-and-bins-to-exit-climate-hustings-lewes

This isn't even an isolated incident. Everywhere I go, it is the same message. The world is dying because I flush too much. No, massive industries are not at fault, no way. It is the consumer who is at fault.

So, fuck it all to hell.
>> No. 432517 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 11:47 pm
432517 spacer
>>432516
>Slavery was banned, and sure it caused a few market issues, but in the long-run, it was a good choice.

You're missing a step from the process, though: why did governments move to ban slavery? There was a lot of popular activism, from Anglican priests turned abolitionists to full blown slave rebellions in other countries. Government banned slavery because of popular pressure.

Many socially progressive movements follow a similar template.
>> No. 432518 Anonymous
4th December 2019
Wednesday 11:47 pm
432518 spacer
>>432516

Many people who say "it's a systemic problem" really mean "it's someone else's problem". If we're going to meaningfully address climate change, our lifestyles are just going to get worse in a lot of ways. There's no magic wand that will allow us to drive big cars and go on foreign holidays and eat loads of meat while achieving net-zero emissions. Those massive industries produce a lot of pollution because they make and transport the cars and petrol and fridge-freezers and turkey twizzlers that we buy; if they stop producing that pollution, we stop getting that stuff.

Systemic solutions only have a chance if most of the electorate is willing to do their bit, in the sense of accepting worse living standards. How many people would actually vote for a party that proposed banning passenger aviation? How many would vote for a party that wants to ration petrol? We can't implement top-down changes in a democracy without the consent of the electorate, so the first step is persuading a lot of people that a) the problem is real and b) the hardships of fixing it aren't as bad as the hardships of ignoring it.
>> No. 432519 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 12:01 am
432519 spacer
>>432518
I'm all for less materialism, but doesn't the developing world rely on our materialism in their quest to be as materialistic as us? What happens to the gorillions of our de facto slaves factory workers when we cut the symbiotic cord?

"Sorry fellas, we reached the peak level of prosperity this planet will allow and decided it wasn't worth the ecological damage. Trust us, that level of prosperity just wasn't worth it. Good luck in your next jobs!"
>> No. 432520 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 12:07 am
432520 spacer
>>432518

That's not to mention the unemployment that would come about from massively cutting back on our sheer production of stuff. The economy that has driven us to the point of development we're at today largely requires us making tons of crap.

I think all of this exposes one of the things that's often left out when talking politics. We are all more or less at the mercy of a giant, inconceivably complex system which has existed for thousands of years, gradually building momentum. We know what some of the levers do, but there are also buttons and switches we've never dared to tamper with.
>> No. 432521 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 12:07 am
432521 spacer
>>432518
>If we're going to meaningfully address climate change, our lifestyles are just going to get worse in a lot of ways

This really is an open question, for a number of reasons. You're ignoring the immense wastefulness of the current system, up to and including spending untold amounts of money on creating entirely unnecessary wants, let alone unnecessary products. It really is an unknown just how radically we could change our infrastructure if we took the amount of R&D being ploughed into socially irrelevant but profitable pursuits and redirected it. This is partly the premise of the "Green New Deal" in the US.

>We can't implement top-down changes in a democracy without the consent of the electorate, so the first step is persuading a lot of people that a) the problem is real and b) the hardships of fixing it aren't as bad as the hardships of ignoring it.

You've confused me with this, because again, polling shows most people are very much aware of climate change, and agree that it's an emergency.

In fact I think you've reversed this entire issue: the sticking point is not with the public, here. It is with government and private power that have interests in, and/or make immense amounts of money from, the status quo. Hence why the activism pushing for systemic change is so important -- that's what it means, getting government to listen to the public.
>> No. 432522 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 1:05 am
432522 spacer
>>432521

>This really is an open question, for a number of reasons.

It really isn't, because of basic chemistry.

Ruminants like cows and sheep produce large quantities of methane as an unavoidable part of their digestive process. Methane is 25x more potent as a warming gas than CO2. There are some feed tricks that can slightly reduce methane production, but ruminants simply cannot digest food without making methane. That means we'll have to eat a lot less beef, a lot less lamb and a lot less dairy; there are perfectly adequate dietary substitutes for those products, but the vast majority of people substantially prefer beef to TVP and cow milk to soya milk. Maybe we'll develop bioengineered substitutes that are basically indistinguishable, but we don't have time to wait for that technology - we have to cut back now.

Producing steel unavoidably requires burning coke, because the difference between iron and steel is the addition of carbon. We can build more efficient blast furnaces, we can use alternative energy sources for most of the heating, but steel manufacturing is inescapably carbon-intensive, so we need to make a lot less steel.

Portland cement is the fundamental component of concrete, plaster and mortar. Some of the CO2 emitted from the production of Portland cement is from heating and transportation, but most of it comes from the chemical reaction of converting CaCO3 into CaO. For every molecule of lime, you unavoidably produce one molecule of CO2. We have some substitutes for Portland cement in some applications, but they're all more expensive and less durable.

I could go on for days about this, but suffice it to say that we face a very long list of very hard problems, for which the only reasonable answer right now is "consume less". Maybe we develop a whole tranche of technologies by 2050 that make the whole transition to zero-carbon completely painless, maybe we figure out cold fusion, maybe God comes down from heaven and slurps up all of the CO2, but we have to act on the assumption that none of that will pan out.

>Hence why the activism pushing for systemic change is so important -- that's what it means, getting government to listen to the public.

But the public want a fantasy. They purport to care about climate change, but they aren't willing to countenance the realities of addressing it. Corporations don't pollute for shits and giggles, they pollute as a side-effect of providing us with goods and services. You might want to stop climate change, but that doesn't matter in the least - the question is what you're prepared to give up to achieve that aim. As I asked before, how many people would vote for a party that wants to ban passenger aviation? How many would vote for a party that wants to ration petrol and meat?
>> No. 432523 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 2:15 am
432523 spacer
>>432522
>>432521
It's funny how you both can be in the same thread as a dude who doesn't even understand the fucking basics of how trees work.
>> No. 432524 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 8:47 am
432524 spacer
>>432522

Brian just erased my whole post, so I'll provide a much shorter version.

>we face a very long list of very hard problems, for which the only reasonable answer right now is "consume less".

This is exactly what I'm saying, right now we live at a time when our basic science and engineering is actually going increasingly in the wrong direction. Research is being funded increasingly by private companies with short-term gains in mind.

You even propose potential solutions in your post. It's amazing that these exist at all in a world where this kind of R&D is dramatically underfunded. Historically we have shown that hard problems can be solved in a matter of years with a kind of massive state-funding model. This is the unknown.

>but we have to act on the assumption that none of that will pan out.

This is where I agree with you, we can't rely on technology to bail us out. Some of the big geoengineering projects are deeply misguided.

>Corporations don't pollute for shits and giggles, they pollute as a side-effect of providing us with goods and services.

Corporations pollute in the pursuit of profit and shareholder investment. I'm not being facetious, they are sometimes allowed to collapse if they fail to do so. The consumer and product are at best secondary concerns, and the environment doesn't rank at all. This is what they are, structurally. This is one of the systemic changes that can be made.

>You might want to stop climate change, but that doesn't matter in the least - the question is what you're prepared to give up to achieve that aim.

You're taking a dishonest approach, here. You're assuming the beliefs of the public, even with direct evidence to the contrary. You're assuming their behaviours wouldn't change, even when we live in a system that actively discourages them from changing, and doesn't provide alternatives. You're saying the public won't follow through on their beliefs, even as there's a movement toward giving the public greater decision making power over an area where government and corporate power has obviously failed. The only way you can come to your conclusion is if you assume that the current structure of government and corporate power must always exist, which is why your only allowance for change is voting.

The only way to tell what people really want and are willing to do is to give them more democratic control over this area.
>> No. 432525 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 9:42 am
432525 spacer
>>432524

>It's amazing that these exist at all in a world where this kind of R&D is dramatically underfunded.

The Chinese are currently spending more than the rest of the world combined on renewable energy R&D. We've reaped some benefits from that - cheaper solar panels, cheaper wind turbines, cheaper and better LED light bulbs - but it's a drop in the ocean, relatively speaking. Unless we're lucky enough to solve sustained nuclear fusion by 2050, R&D can only hope to offer small, incremental improvements that won't meaningfully offset the vast increase in global energy demand.

>You're assuming their behaviours wouldn't change, even when we live in a system that actively discourages them from changing, and doesn't provide alternatives

Right now, the only alternative that really counts is less. Don't buy that steak, don't take that flight, turn down your heating. The government can help to some extent, but there are no painless fixes. Either people can choose to consume less or the government can force them to consume less, but we have to consume less.

Ultra-efficient eco homes consume very little energy, but building a house emits the thick end of 100 tonnes of carbon and takes many decades to pay off, so it doesn't help all that much in hitting net zero by 2050. Train travel isn't actually that much more sustainable than driving an efficient car when you factor in the massive amount of infrastructure involved. Building an electric car produces something in the region of 20 tonnes of CO2, so the payoff versus a second-hand Ford Fiesta is at least 10 years. The most efficient form of long-distance travel by some margin is a coach, but I don't know anyone who'll get on a Megabus if they have any other option. The only truly sustainable journey is the journey that you don't take.

We might like to imagine that we can de-carbonise our current lifestyle simply by using better technology, but the numbers just don't add up. We have to get used to the idea that acting on climate change necessarily means living much humbler lifestyles.

>You're assuming the beliefs of the public, even with direct evidence to the contrary.

For the next week, make a point of asking people "Would you vote for a political party that wanted to ration petrol and meat in order to help the environment?". You may find the experience rather educational.
>> No. 432526 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 10:58 am
432526 spacer
>>432525
>The Chinese are currently spending more than the rest of the world combined on renewable energy R&D.

China operates under the same economic and political constraints I'm describing in other nations. Despite what they call themselves, they actually have something resembling state vapitalism. So the same critique applies, they may invest more than other nations, but not anywhere near as much as they could.

Adding to that, imagine what is possible if the rest of the world, especially the world's wealthiest nation, the U.S., were also pressured to change in such a way.

>For the next week, make a point of asking people "Would you vote for a political party that wanted to ration petrol and meat in order to help the environment?". You may find the experience rather educational.

This wouldn't really achieve anything. Vox pop interviews are an extremely unreliable way of gauging public sentiment about anything, not to mention you ignored the rest of my post where I'm saying that a top-down solution is not desirable here. It's a loaded question, you're presenting this hypothetical political party as the only possibility. That is plainly wrong.
>> No. 432528 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 11:15 am
432528 spacer
This thread is starting to take a long time to load. Maybe we should start a new eco debate thread here in /b/.
>> No. 432529 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 11:18 am
432529 spacer
>>432525

Everything you're saying only agrees with the idea we need to reduce the global population.

When you say "consume less" it's really not as simple as just buying less steak, taking less flights. As other lads have alluded to, the entire economy we live in is built on this vast and labyrinthine house of cards, where the wheels are kept turning by the money keeping on flowing.

Obviously I agree that we need systemic change, but even then the funding from taxation it will take to invest in that change relies on money coming from the very industries and consumer trades we need to, essentially, all but eliminate. We stop taking flights and the aviation industry collapses, there are millions of people unemployed, we need to get them into new jobs and doing that needs money. Now repeat that for steel, meat farming, construction, transport... Very quickly you're looking at wiping out all the biggest sectors of employment and revenue.

What I'm trying to articulate, probably not very well, is that it's all too interconnected to just scrap it all. We would face a very real prospect of not just failing to address the problem, but making it worse, if we try to radically shift the direction our entire global economy operates in, without also easing the burden of actual people who exist within that economy. We would put ourselves back a hundred years in progress and then, because we've shrunk the economy so much, we'd lack the economic power to invest in better alternatives to rebuild. The thing is humans are not a hivemind- Whatever government system you believe in or whatever your left right alignment, you have to on some level realise that to some extent, the only thing giving human civilisation any illusion of coherent cooperation is the tide of economic necessity.

I'm not saying it because I still want my big SUV and fancy gadgets so all the Africans need to be neutered. I'm saying it because I genuinely believe it's the only practical way to de-escalate the crisis without also plunging society into anarchy.
>> No. 432530 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 11:42 am
432530 spacer
>>432529
>the only thing giving human civilisation any illusion of coherent cooperation is the tide of economic necessity.

I don't think this is true. We have a number of institutions that are based on other values like dignity and fairness. Our health service brings about a tremendous amount of solidarity for good reason, as one example.

Other than that, I get what you're saying, the transition would of course have to be carefully thought out. I'm curious to know what you'd make of things like the Green New Deal, then?
>> No. 432533 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 12:14 pm
432533 spacer
>>432529

I'm really not sure why so many people here balk at the idea of population reduction.

When you look at the last 30 years, a time during which the general public became fully aware of the problems we will be facing in the future, our CO2 emissions per person have increased, people still buy big thirsty cars, and they actually go on more holidays per year and to further-flung destinations than they did in 1990.

You are just simply not going to be able to count on ten billion people having enough swarm intelligence to collectively avoid behaviours that are damaging to the environment, and to a great enough extent that it will halt global warming or even reverse it. Unless you turn the entire planet into a ruthlessly enforced eco dictatorship.

Why is it such a bad thing to tell people they can only have one child. We can't have our cake and eat it too, i.e. make no concessions at all if we want to avoid said eco dictatorship. Reducing the global population back to four billion or thereabouts would hugely ease the stress to global ecosystems. The commonly held belief is that the human population became unsustainable in the 1960s to 70s, which was when we hit the four billion mark. Granted, we will not be able to just go back to four billion people over night, unless there's a global nuclear war of course. But even a decrease from 7.5 to 5 billion would probably still have a noticeable effect, especially if more money is devoted to energy efficiency research.

Also, the discrepancy between people saying they want to do more for the environment and actually doing something for it is down to the well-studied Bradley effect, and its underlying so-called social desirability bias. When interviewed, most people will want to appear like decent human beings and will give answers that are socially desirable, but don't necessarily reflect what they actually think. So if you ask most people "Would you be willing to sacrifice parts of your lifestyle in order to save the environment?", then most people will emphatically answer "yes". But you shouldn't be surprised if those same people then go on to buy an SUV and go on two holidays to the Caribbean a year.
>> No. 432534 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 12:53 pm
432534 spacer
>>432528
Why the fuck would you want to read more than the last 50 posts? It's just bickering and going around in circles ad nauseum.
>> No. 432535 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 12:57 pm
432535 spacer
>>432534

Some people reply to posts that are about ten or twelve posts up in the thread. Especially when there's heated debate in a thread and loads of people post at the same time, it can get hard to follow.
>> No. 432536 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 2:07 pm
432536 spacer
>>432533

We're now going around in circles.

Social desirability bias may affect people's answers to some degree, yes, but what they do is affected by what the market offers (something inherently undemocratic as it's controlled by what is most profitable to private companies), and the influence of advetsiing (hundreds of billions in USD, globally).
>> No. 432538 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 5:23 pm
432538 spacer
>>432535
You can read these through the view last 50 posts function. Christ, lad. Please don't tell me that every time a post isn't one of the five most recent ones made, which are the only ones viewable from the main page, you've been opening the entire thread, scrolling past hundreds of posts and witnessing the discussion retreading the same circles over and over again before deciding to continue the cycle yet again.
>> No. 432539 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 6:08 pm
432539 spacer
>>432538

I was honestly unaware of the "Last 50 posts" option up until this point. This changes everything.


>>432536

>but what they do is affected by what the market offers (something inherently undemocratic as it's controlled by what is most profitable to private companies), and the influence of advetsiing (hundreds of billions in USD, globally)

Even if the saying goes that a good ad man can sell a fridge to an eskimo, realistically, and on a broad enough scale, you are not going to sell people a meaningful quantity of things they simply have no desire for, either articulated or latent. Some more wide-eyed economists who believe in their own profession too unshakably will even say that free capitalist markets are the ultimate form of democracy, where banknotes become ballots and you directly vote with your money which products are made and which aren't. Which is a bit daft, but you can't deny the power of popular demand when it comes to deciding where an economy's resources become allocated. Simply put, if your product is shit and doesn't offer enough utility to enough people, then no ad campaign in the world will change that.

But I agree that our debate has reached kind of a dead end. Not because we're going round in circles, but because some people too adamantly stand by views that aren't a good approximation of reality, and will not see the other side.
>> No. 432540 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 7:28 pm
432540 spacer
>>432539
>Which is a bit daft, but you can't deny the power of popular demand when it comes to deciding where an economy's resources become allocated.

That's not how resources are allocated now. As I've tried to point out before, certain industries are massively subsidised.

>Not because we're going round in circles, but because some people too adamantly stand by views that aren't a good approximation of reality, and will not see the other side.

My views are based in the institutional reality of our current system and our best estimates of how public sentiment fits into that. I agreed with you on many points about the technological challenge. If I were presented with evidence rather than rhetoric and cynical assumptions derived from facts like "people still buy SUVs," I'd change my mind.

I think the main thing I'd like to get across is deciding how we should consume less, where we have to, should be placed more in the hands of the public rather than a few with other institutionally imposed interest.

If nothing else, this thread has at least allowed me to hone some of these points.
>> No. 432542 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 10:56 pm
432542 spacer
Here's a good article even if you don't like the whole html 2.0 thing
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-06/how-climate-change-has-impacted-your-life/11766018
Just general stuff. Focused on Australia but still enlightening, not alarmist.
>> No. 432543 Anonymous
5th December 2019
Thursday 11:24 pm
432543 spacer
>>432542

Quintessentially, unless you reach your statistical life expectancy in the next 15 years or so, we're all going to be arsefucked.
>> No. 432545 Anonymous
6th December 2019
Friday 12:22 pm
432545 spacer

map_700p.jpg
432545432545432545
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming

>Climate change doubters have a favorite target: climate models. They claim that computer simulations conducted decades ago didn’t accurately predict current warming, so the public should be wary of the predictive power of newer models. Now, the most sweeping evaluation of these older models—some half a century old—shows most of them were indeed accurate.

>“How much warming we are having today is pretty much right on where models have predicted,” says the study’s lead author, Zeke Hausfather, a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley.
>> No. 432567 Anonymous
6th December 2019
Friday 10:29 pm
432567 spacer

0ee56132-5e8b-4867-993a-60c8c28f2965_screenshot.jpg
432567432567432567
>>432543

>we're all going to be arsefucked
>> No. 432570 Anonymous
6th December 2019
Friday 11:25 pm
432570 spacer
>>432543

>we're all going to be arsefucked.

Silver linings, eh?
>> No. 432576 Anonymous
7th December 2019
Saturday 12:02 pm
432576 spacer
>>432533
>I'm really not sure why so many people here balk at the idea of population reduction.
Are you actually fucking special?
>> No. 432584 Anonymous
7th December 2019
Saturday 2:52 pm
432584 spacer
>>432576

The implication may be that population control is tyrannical, inherently impossible to implement is a fair and just way or just straight up going to be another holocaust but I'd reckon the death toll and cost in suffering will be higher by the time we have a bounce back off the thermodynamic limits of our current level of consumption.
>> No. 432585 Anonymous
7th December 2019
Saturday 3:14 pm
432585 spacer
>>432584

Lebensraum.
>> No. 432592 Anonymous
7th December 2019
Saturday 5:57 pm
432592 spacer
>>432576

Clearly he is. The rest of us just inherently understand the utter selfishness of the human urge to reproduce.

Same reason nobody adopts or buys a second hand car any more.
>> No. 432633 Anonymous
8th December 2019
Sunday 10:03 pm
432633 spacer
>>432584

>but I'd reckon the death toll and cost in suffering will be higher by the time we have a bounce back off the thermodynamic limits of our current level of consumption


This. There is going to be very serious and widespread human suffering if we just continue to overpopulate the Earth. Thirty or forty years into global warming, obviously, appealing to people's common sense hasn't worked. And I doubt it will work in the future to a satisfying degree that makes no other drastic-appearing measures necessary. There will be famines, pandemics, barren polars, and wars over basic resources that will make life on Earth a nightmare for many. On the other hand, if all those people are never born in the first place, then it also means they won't suffer. And the planet and its ecosystems will not suffer as much either.

I'm really not sure why that is such an outrageous proposal here. It will affect nobody's standard of living, in fact, many people's standard of living will be higher if they have fewer children.
>> No. 432634 Anonymous
8th December 2019
Sunday 10:40 pm
432634 spacer
>>432633
>I'm really not sure why that is such an outrageous proposal here. It will affect nobody's standard of living, in fact, many people's standard of living will be higher if they have fewer children.
Here's the point that has been repeated many, many times in this thread: Having fewer people will not bring down emissions significantly because the people you still have will consume more and create more emissions using that left over wealth. A billion Chinese and Indian peasants here and there won't make anything like as much difference as the Forbes 500 list being prevented from using their industries in polluting ways.
>> No. 432638 Anonymous
8th December 2019
Sunday 11:02 pm
432638 spacer
>>432635

How are they going to be living present day first world standards if our industries are no longer acting in polluting ways?

>Also you're a prick for not mentioning something that wasn't part of the conversation at this point and I hadn't even mentioned either
How does preventing those industries from acting in such polluting ways not also help address ecocide? It's part of the same agenda that doesn't involve going around forcing dirt poor brown women to not have kids, or to undergo dangerous abortions.
>Lets solve the climate and ecological crisis using eugenics that primarily endanger poor women and ethnic minorities and not by altering my own lifestyle in any way, you're being selfish.
>> No. 432639 Anonymous
8th December 2019
Sunday 11:05 pm
432639 spacer
>>432634

Except it will, you're just being a purposely obtuse thick cunt by this point. Limiting population benefits everyone in the long run and within the context of its benefits for the environment, there is no argument against it. There is no emergency quick fix to turn the climate round over night, even if we all go vegan and ground every flight tomorrow.

African villagers with solar power and no running water barely have a carbon footprint now, but in 50 years time when they all have smartphones, they will. Especially when we reach the point of global economic balance that many of these developing nations reach present day first world standards of living. India and China are rapidly moving towards that point, to the extent that you can interpret the current crisis in Western politics as a direct side effect of the looming change in power balance.

At the end of the day we don't just have our impact on global warming to think about, and if you're only interested in addressing that problem out of simple human self interest then you're a fucking prick. Even when we live sustainably, we still have a massive negative impact on ecosystems wildlife depends on. The number of species that have gone extinct and are endangered thanks to humans, completely regardless of climate change, is abhorrent on its own.

>>432637

Stop moving the goalposts. Nobody is on about going around ripping out brown women's babies with coat hangers. What we could do instead is give out birth control and educate them on the benefits of having fewer children. For those in developing countries, having fewer children will allow them to lead a higher standard of living, I can't get my head around why you think that would be a bad thing.

Deleted and reposted because I forgot a sentence, and now you've made me look like a tit. You tit.
>> No. 432640 Anonymous
8th December 2019
Sunday 11:08 pm
432640 spacer
>>432639
That's not going to work because for most of them, having more kids is actually beneficial. They're not doing it for shits and giggles.
>> No. 432642 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 12:38 am
432642 spacer
>>432640

Beneficial how? Because half of them will die anyway? Beneficial because they can put them to work?

How is having more mouths to feed ever beneficial in countries where famine is a genuine worry? It's not, and claiming it is only means you're willing to ignore other fundamental issues we should be addressing.
>> No. 432643 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 12:49 am
432643 spacer
>>432642

>Beneficial because they can put them to work?

Yes.

>How is having more mouths to feed ever beneficial in countries where famine is a genuine worry?

Because you can put them to work.
>> No. 432644 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 2:08 am
432644 spacer
>>432639
>African villagers with solar power and no running water barely have a carbon footprint now, but in 50 years time when they all have smartphones, they will

It's astonishing how dated our perceptions of Africa can be. Go to Ghana, everyone and their mum has a smartphone.
>> No. 432647 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 9:31 am
432647 spacer

Kenya.png
432647432647432647
>>432644

Buying a top-of-the-range smartphone and using it for two years emits less than 100kg of CO2. Using a second-hand phone emits less than 5kg of CO2 per year. The average British person emits about 6,500kg of CO2 per year.

We're all fucked because the debate about climate has absolutely no basis in reality.

Also:

>432639

>Stop moving the goalposts. Nobody is on about going around ripping out brown women's babies with coat hangers. What we could do instead is give out birth control and educate them on the benefits of having fewer children.

See the graph m8.
>> No. 432648 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 9:49 am
432648 spacer
>>432644
It sounds more like your perception of smartphones is dated. They're not expensive given us consumer pigs have thrown out many generations of them at this point. Homeless people have them.
>> No. 432656 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 5:51 pm
432656 spacer
People consume goods and services. No matter how eco friendly those goods and services are going to be, it's going to be virtually impossible to offer and perform goods and services without producing CO2. Moreover, food and other natural goods consume natural resources and agricultural space. Even if we move everything into indoor vertical farming and everybody becomes a vegetarian, we've got a new problem in providing all the energy to grow the food indoors that we normally get from the sun for free in open-air farming. Even the best energy transfer systems to use renewable energy are nowhere near as efficient as direct sunlight.

Technical products work the same way, and especially the advancements in battery technology and other high-tech materials mean that our global demand for natural resources will hit a wall that will be insurmountable. We won't be able to build the world of the future just using carbon nanofibres.


These are cause and effect axioms that no manner of eco friendly production will be able to render null and void. The fewer people we have on the planet, the fewer consumers of goods and services we will have. And even if you pass the most draconian laws commanding major corporations to produce more eco friendly, they will still produce CO2.

I still stand by what I keep saying. If we don't do something about the rising global population, no manner of other measures will save us.
>> No. 432657 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 5:57 pm
432657 spacer
Is Africans with smartphones the hot new "can't be poor if you've got a flatscreen TV"?
>> No. 432658 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 6:48 pm
432658 spacer
>>432656
You "stand by it" even though you've just come up with some new reasons for it after your previous ones were shown to be nonsense, and clearly haven't based them on any actual numbers, just what you reckon. This is shortly after you accused someone else of moving goalposts.
>> No. 432659 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 6:53 pm
432659 spacer
>>432656
>Even if we move everything into indoor vertical farming and everybody becomes a vegetarian, we've got a new problem in providing all the energy to grow the food indoors that we normally get from the sun for free in open-air farming.

Another thing poorly understood by most people is just how much energy modern intensive farming methods use. Production alone of ammonia for fertiliser represents a whole 1% of global CO2 output. What's more, K and P sources are mostly through mining and are quite energy intensive to process and transport.
>> No. 432660 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 7:49 pm
432660 spacer
>>432656 Even the best energy transfer systems to use renewable energy are nowhere near as efficient as direct sunlight.

This may not be always be the case. Plants are fussy about the frequency of light that they can use , so there's gain to be had if you can turn all frequencies of sunlight into electricity, then turn that back into red & blue that plants want, at the right intensity and times.
Solar cells and LEDs aren't yet efficient enough for this to be a net gain, I think, but we're not far off.

Fertilisers are indeed energy intensive. Dumping (variously treated) crap on the fields, not so much. I imagine we'll also see more and more reliance on natural nitrogen fixing as energy prices go up, since energy's such a major cost in that.
>> No. 432661 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 8:12 pm
432661 spacer
>>432658

It was me that accused someone of moving goalposts, not him; and my arguments were substantially more solid as evidenced by the fact nobody has refuted them. The best anyone has managed is to try and conflate the idea of universal, equally implemented population control with ethnic cleansing.
>> No. 432662 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 8:20 pm
432662 spacer
>>432661
It's almost as though that's because that's exactly what would happen in practise.
>> No. 432663 Anonymous
9th December 2019
Monday 9:17 pm
432663 spacer
>>432659

>Production alone of ammonia for fertiliser represents a whole 1% of global CO2 output. What's more, K and P sources are mostly through mining and are quite energy intensive to process and transport

Yes, but you would have to do the same if you moved all farming indoors. Ergo, fewer people eating food still means less strain on natural resources.


>>432660

>so there's gain to be had if you can turn all frequencies of sunlight into electricity, then turn that back into red & blue that plants want, at the right intensity and times.

While modern solar cells can turn almost all wavelengths of visible light into electricity, from red to violet, they only have around 20 to 22 percent efficiency. And then you'll still have energy loss while turning your electric energy into red and blue light, as even the best modern LEDs, in turn, only operate at 50% efficiency. Granted, you could probably capture some of the heat from the LEDs (which is where the other 50% of the energy go that your LEDs consume) and make it directly available to the plants, but you see where we're going with this. In terms of light energy delivery, nothing is as yet more efficient as direct sunlight.


>>432662

> because that's exactly what would happen in practise

Either have genocide now, or let the poor die from starvation on their own in the future.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owI7DOeO_yg
>> No. 432693 Anonymous
11th December 2019
Wednesday 1:35 am
432693 spacer
>>432656
M8 i don't bloody think our economies that demand constant growth would allow that!
>> No. 432702 Anonymous
11th December 2019
Wednesday 8:19 pm
432702 spacer
>>432693

> our economies that demand constant growth

That's indeed a problem. Because for over 200 years, we have pretty much financed today's consumption with tomorrow's growth in consumption. Today's consumer credit is based on the hope that you will be able to make enough money to pay it back tomorrow. Every commercial/corporate investment is made on the tacit, or not so tacit understanding that the market you are investing in has growth potential and will give you therefore a positive return on your investment.

It's easy to forget that economies didn't always grow throughout human history. Especially in pre-modern societies dominated by land-owning aristocracy and gentry, growth as we understand it was never really observed as such. Sometimes for centuries, landed families would just constantly live off the profits their land yielded, and pay their serfs sparsely. And because the global population hovered around 500 million people pretty much for most of the second millennium A.D., there was also no need to increase production or economic output, which is what economic growth is, in the simplest of terms.

It was really only since the beginning of industrialisation that economic growth became an almost self-perpetuating endless cycle, of course with frequent dips and oscillations. But the notion that constant long-term growth is always a given is part of the reason why we're now faced with dying ecosystems and global warming.

I'm not saying there can't be eco-friendly growth. A lot of tech industries have generated considerable wealth and returns on investment in the last few decades by investing in environmentally friendly and zero-emission new technologies, which are still growing massively. But in the end, unless the growth in those industries is enough to outpace the growth in polluting industries and the demand for their products, we will just continue to pollute the environment at still-increasing rates.
>> No. 432705 Anonymous
11th December 2019
Wednesday 8:46 pm
432705 spacer

78939192_209079283425911_3456906045510624714_n.jpg
432705432705432705

>> No. 432706 Anonymous
11th December 2019
Wednesday 8:49 pm
432706 spacer
>>432705

Not the least bit surprising, undeniably a significant figure this year.
>> No. 432708 Anonymous
11th December 2019
Wednesday 9:56 pm
432708 spacer
>>432702


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZYgozCTfKc
>> No. 432712 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 6:54 am
432712 spacer
I heard Greta on the radio yesterday. She always sounds like a whinge, such a drama queen.
>> No. 432714 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 9:07 am
432714 spacer
>>432712

You don't reckon it has to do with the dramatic situation we're in with climate change?
>> No. 432715 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 9:18 am
432715 spacer
>>432714
It's about everything I've heard her say. She could make ordering a takeaway sound like the most intense event ever.
>> No. 432716 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 9:54 am
432716 spacer
>>432715

As long as she doesn't accuse takeawaylad on the phone of stealing her childhood for taking too long to complete the order, I'd say more power to her.
>> No. 432717 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 10:15 am
432717 spacer
Honestly I felt like starting a mass protest movement and giving an impassioned speech to the UN when the chicken and mushroom pizza I ordered was chicken tikka the other week.
>> No. 432718 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 10:20 am
432718 spacer
>>432715

Climate change is a threat to organised human life. If there is anything someone can justifiably sound urgent about, it's that.

There's a tendency to think being cynical makes you sound smart, but often you come off sounding thick as fuck.
>> No. 432719 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 10:37 am
432719 spacer
>>432718

>There's a tendency to think being cynical makes you sound smart, but often you come off sounding thick as fuck.

Good on you. You've captured the essence of .gs in one succinct statement.
>> No. 432720 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 10:39 am
432720 spacer
>>432718
I think it was just lazy bait.
>> No. 432721 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 11:07 am
432721 spacer
>>432718
Yes, but you don't have to be on edge all of the fucking time. She wasn't even on about climate change on the clip on the radio but she still sounded like it was a matter of life and death.
>> No. 432723 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 12:02 pm
432723 spacer
>>432721
What was she on about, then? I find it hard to believe she was invited on the radio to talk about, y'know, the Vengaboys or something.
>> No. 432725 Anonymous
12th December 2019
Thursday 12:17 pm
432725 spacer
>>432723
I can't remember. It was a clip about something but it definitely wasn't about climate change.

Fucking hell, lad. Saying Greta is a bit of a whinge doesn't mean I'm denying climate change. Lighten up.
>> No. 432772 Anonymous
14th December 2019
Saturday 7:58 pm
432772 spacer
>>432725
I'm not saying you are, I just thought you might have misheard or misremembered, for the aforementioned reason.
>> No. 432956 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 4:38 pm
432956 spacer

serveimage.jpg
432956432956432956
Australia's had the three hottest days on record in the past week.
96 flood warnings in place across the UK last night, multiple big landslips disrupting the railways yesterday and today.
Oxygen bars are becoming more popular and https://www.airinum.com/pages/lookbook is a thing.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/19/2019-wasnt-just-protests-and-fleabag-it-was-the-year-a-climate-truth-bomb-dropped
>> No. 432957 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 5:15 pm
432957 spacer

maxresdefault.jpg
432957432957432957
>>432956


Pack your rice then.

And your wellies.
>> No. 432959 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 5:46 pm
432959 spacer
>>432957
That is quite unironically a good idea at this point.
>> No. 432960 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 6:17 pm
432960 spacer
>>432957
>>432959

I have a tendency to use wellies at this time of year just because I'm a struggling student NHSLad and I don't have a single pair of shoes where the soles don't let water in. They're only £10 from Screwfix, and they've lasted me more than the ten miles each that both of my (£20) pairs of Primark polar boots saw before falling apart.
>> No. 432961 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 6:18 pm
432961 spacer
>>432960

Also, why the hell is "pudding boots" wordfiltered?
>> No. 432962 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 6:21 pm
432962 spacer
>>432961
It's not. Why would there be pudding boots?
>> No. 432973 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 10:18 pm
432973 spacer
>>432961
>>432962

Please tell me that dessert is word-filtered to pudding.
>> No. 432974 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 10:19 pm
432974 spacer
>>432973

Well, that was disappointing.
>> No. 432975 Anonymous
21st December 2019
Saturday 11:34 pm
432975 spacer
>>432974

My guess would be dessert with one S is the filter.
>> No. 432979 Anonymous
22nd December 2019
Sunday 1:50 pm
432979 spacer
>>432975
I'd like to polar this thread right about now.
>> No. 432980 Anonymous
22nd December 2019
Sunday 2:43 pm
432980 spacer
>>432979
u wot m8.
>> No. 432987 Anonymous
22nd December 2019
Sunday 8:18 pm
432987 spacer
>>432975

My guess was that he originally got polar boots filtered to polar boots, then tried typo'd it to dessert boots, which got humorously filtered to pudding boots. But in retrospect apparently he was using 'pudding' to bypass the polar wordfilter because he doesn't know the difference between polar and dessert.

Oh boy this post is going to be a mess of filters.
>> No. 432990 Anonymous
22nd December 2019
Sunday 10:02 pm
432990 spacer
My own guess is that it has something to do with Shamanismic extremists and some sort of polar The Great Whale Hunt.
>> No. 433088 Anonymous
27th December 2019
Friday 2:13 pm
433088 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/27/revealed-microplastic-pollution-is-raining-down-on-city-dwellers
It's snowing!
>> No. 433099 Anonymous
27th December 2019
Friday 10:40 pm
433099 spacer
>>433088

>The health impacts of breathing or consuming the tiny plastic particles are unknown, and experts say urgent research is needed to assess the risks.


I doubt it's going to be as bad as the asbestos scare of the 1980s though. Asbestos was dangerous because its tiny sharp and jagged fibres caused micro scarring of the pulmonary alveoli, which could in the end lead to COPD and lung cancer.

Microplastic particles will likely not be as bad, they will be slightly bigger, and should mainly get caught in the mucous membranes of the respiratory epithelium, like most ambient dust you breathe in.
>> No. 433101 Anonymous
27th December 2019
Friday 10:49 pm
433101 spacer
Don't👏pretend👏to👏be👏entitled👏to👏financial👏compensation👏if👏you👏or👏a👏loved👏one👏hasn't👏even👏been👏diagnosed👏with👏mesothelioma.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 433102 Anonymous
27th December 2019
Friday 10:58 pm
433102 spacer
>>433101

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesothelioma

>or the sac surrounding the testis may be affected.

That's disturbing.
>> No. 433107 Anonymous
28th December 2019
Saturday 6:06 pm
433107 spacer
>>433101

How do you do those clappy hands?
>> No. 433109 Anonymous
28th December 2019
Saturday 6:12 pm
433109 spacer
>>433107

👌
>> No. 433111 Anonymous
28th December 2019
Saturday 6:29 pm
433111 spacer
>>433107
Windows + .
>> No. 433112 Anonymous
28th December 2019
Saturday 7:58 pm
433112 spacer
>>433107
UTF8 lad.

❤️


>> No. 433150 Anonymous
29th December 2019
Sunday 4:55 pm
433150 spacer
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2019/2020-global-temperature-forecast


>The series of warmest years began in 2015; the first year when global temperatures exceeded 1.0 °C above the pre-industrial period (1850-1900).

>The warmest year on record was in 2016, when significant El Niño-related warming in the tropical Pacific boosted the global temperature. 2020 is projected to be another very warm year, but this time without a strong El Niño signal.

>The Met Office forecasts the global average temperature for 2020 to be between 0.99 °C and 1.23 °C - with a central estimate of 1.11 °C - above the pre-industrial average period from 1850–1900. Since 1850, 2016 was the warmest year on record with a central estimate of 1.16 °C above the same baseline.


Pack your rice, lads. Because you will soon be able to grow your own in your back garden.
>> No. 433272 Anonymous
1st January 2020
Wednesday 10:26 am
433272 spacer
>>433150 Because you will soon be able to grow your own in your back garden.

Hmm, I'd thought seawater was death to most crops, but it seems not. Fenland rice paddies here we come, once the sea level ges up a bit more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_tolerance_to_seawater
>> No. 433304 Anonymous
1st January 2020
Wednesday 11:40 pm
433304 spacer
https://www.newsweek.com/record-hit-ice-melt-antarctica-day-climate-emergency-1479326
>The record in recent decades for the highest level of ice to melt in Antarctica in one day was reached on Christmas Eve, data suggests.

>Around 15 percent of the continent's surface melted on Monday
>> No. 433325 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 7:39 pm
433325 spacer
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50971446

Western Norway is experiencing a rare heatwave for early January, at a time when temperatures should normally be below freezing.

The highest temperature of 19C (66F) - more than 25C above the monthly average - was measured in the village of Sunndalsora.

This makes it Norway's warmest January day since records began.
>> No. 433326 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 7:42 pm
433326 spacer

191230104608-australia-bushfires-satellite-1226-ex.jpg
433326433326433326
I assume what's happening in Australia has got enough airtime that it doesn't really need linking on here.
>> No. 433327 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 7:45 pm
433327 spacer
Really wish the above air travellers would keep their climate guilt to themselves.
>> No. 433329 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 7:49 pm
433329 spacer

ok.jpg
433329433329433329
>>433327
>> No. 433330 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:10 pm
433330 spacer
>>433325


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejorQVy3m8E
>> No. 433331 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:13 pm
433331 spacer
>>433329
Fuck off mate.
>> No. 433332 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:19 pm
433332 spacer

no u.jpg
433332433332433332
>>433331

Have you considered that we might be legitimately worried for good reasons and that "keep [your] climate guilt to [yourself]" just comes across as a bit silly?
>> No. 433333 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:28 pm
433333 spacer
>>433332
Like how murderers get worried when the police are closing in. Cry me a river.
>> No. 433335 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:31 pm
433335 spacer
>>433333
> Cry me a river.
That will make rising sea levels even worse!
>> No. 433338 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:41 pm
433338 spacer
>>433335

Also, no more drops in the ocean, while we are at it.

Seriously though, people who still think climate change is just a big faff about nothing can safely be called thick as pig shit by now.
>> No. 433339 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 8:54 pm
433339 spacer
>>433333
Your angle is the weirdest attempt to shoot the messenger I've ever seen.
>> No. 433342 Anonymous
2nd January 2020
Thursday 10:04 pm
433342 spacer

screenshot.jpg
433342433342433342
> "I just saved your house from burning down to the ground, mayt"

> "Get a job already, you dolescum mug!"
>> No. 433346 Anonymous
3rd January 2020
Friday 2:47 am
433346 spacer
>>433333

Australia is on fire. One of the firefighters was killed when a fire tornado rolled over a ten ton fire truck. Indonesia are packing up their capital city and moving it inland, because it will sink completely by 2050.

We've broken the fucking weather.
>> No. 433348 Anonymous
3rd January 2020
Friday 8:00 am
433348 spacer
>>433346
Actually my carbon footprint has always been below the world average which for someone in the UK is pretty damn good. You broke the weather and now people are dying on the daily you've decided to take your secondary school geography lessons seriously. I don't think I can muster much of a shit anymore.
>> No. 433349 Anonymous
3rd January 2020
Friday 9:20 am
433349 spacer
>>433348
Nobody's trying to blame you personally lad. Are you complaining in the politics thread that actually you don't vote so everyone should stop talking about politics? Whinging in the resting actors thread that you're not a brewer so shut up about alcoholism?
>> No. 433351 Anonymous
3rd January 2020
Friday 10:54 am
433351 spacer

>> No. 433382 Anonymous
3rd January 2020
Friday 8:29 pm
433382 spacer
>>433351

You're only going to add to the problem if you watch that clip, apparently.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90346595/the-internets-youtube-habit-has-the-carbon-footprint-of-a-small-city
>> No. 433395 Anonymous
3rd January 2020
Friday 9:45 pm
433395 spacer
>>433382

We're adding to the problem by simply breathing but not substantially. This is why people advocate system change over individual change as it's the systems that create the majority of the difficulties.
>> No. 433406 Anonymous
4th January 2020
Saturday 12:34 am
433406 spacer

6.-GettyImages-513682525-677074b.jpg
433406433406433406
Hopefully science can ignite a volcano, then all the weird climate change people can throw themselves in. I'd bulldoze those fuckers up the hill if Elon Musk can invent a lava proof tractor.
>> No. 433425 Anonymous
4th January 2020
Saturday 9:14 am
433425 spacer
>>433406
Why?
>> No. 433430 Anonymous
4th January 2020
Saturday 7:23 pm
433430 spacer
>>433425
He'd need to protect himself from the heat radiating from the lava.
>> No. 433483 Anonymous
7th January 2020
Tuesday 2:51 pm
433483 spacer
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0666-7
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1038/s41558-019-0666-7
>Climate change now detectable from any single day of weather at global scale
>> No. 433586 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 9:05 am
433586 spacer

mediadc_brightspotcdn_com.jpg
433586433586433586
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/06/trump-administration-environmental-review-regulations

>The Trump administration is set to unveil new regulations which would limit the types of projects like highways and pipelines that require environmental review and no longer require federal agencies to weigh their climate impacts, sources familiar with the plan said.

>The proposed overhaul will update how federal agencies implement the bedrock National Environmental Policy Act (Nepa), a law meant to ensure the government protects the environment when reviewing or making decisions about major projects, from building roads and bridges, cutting forests, expanding broadband to approving interstate pipelines such as the Keystone XL.

>The White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is expected to announce that federal agencies will not be required to consider cumulative climate crisis impacts when considering federal projects, said two people familiar with the CEQ rule-making.
>> No. 433589 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 9:31 am
433589 spacer
>Bots and trolls spread false arson claims in Australian fires ‘disinformation campaign’
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/08/twitter-bots-trolls-australian-bushfires-social-media-disinformation-campaign-false-claims
Somewhat unsurprisingly various troll farms are going into overdrive to push the "this is normal except for arsonists" angle.
>> No. 433591 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 10:54 am
433591 spacer
>>433589

The arson angle is irrelevant. Even if people are starting fires, which bots or no bots I don't doubt because people are awful, the simple fact is the conditions for the fires to nurture themselves and spread have been created by and are sustained by climate change.
>> No. 433592 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 11:21 am
433592 spacer
>>433591
Yes of course but that doesn't stop it from being repeated endlessly.
>> No. 433593 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 12:49 pm
433593 spacer
>>433591
This is a terrible debating strategy. You can't give ground to an absurdist claim about eco-arsonists and then say "it doesn't matter". You have to reject the make-'em-ups and bollocks outright.
>> No. 433595 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 1:06 pm
433595 spacer
>>433593

I didn't realise discussions were about winning.
>> No. 433601 Anonymous
9th January 2020
Thursday 2:57 pm
433601 spacer
>>433595
Sign of a loser right there.
>> No. 433618 Anonymous
10th January 2020
Friday 12:25 am
433618 spacer
>>433595

Are you a Millennial?
>> No. 433682 Anonymous
10th January 2020
Friday 8:25 pm
433682 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/xr-extinction-rebellion-listed-extremist-ideology-police-prevent-scheme-guidance

>Counter-militant daft woggery police placed the non-violent group Extinction Rebellion (XR) on a list of extremist ideologies that should be reported to the authorities running the Prevent programme, which aims to catch those at risk of committing atrocities, the Guardian has learned.

>The climate emergency campaign group was included in a 12-page guide produced by counter-militant daft woggery police in the south-east titled Safeguarding young people and adults from ideological extremism, which is marked as “official”.
>> No. 433683 Anonymous
10th January 2020
Friday 8:26 pm
433683 spacer
>>433682
The important part of the article which you seem to have missed is that they're saying it was a mistake and they're trying to recall all the copies they sent out.
>> No. 433684 Anonymous
10th January 2020
Friday 8:29 pm
433684 spacer
>>433683

It's not my fault though if otherlad can't be arsed to click on the link to read the full story.
>> No. 433805 Anonymous
17th January 2020
Friday 3:43 pm
433805 spacer
>Last week, police said documents ... that listed the environmental protest group Extinction Rebellion (XR) alongside far-right extremists and The Great Whale Huntists were a local error.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/17/greenpeace-included-with-neo-nazis-on-uk-counter-terror-list
>But the list of groups viewed as a potential concern contained in the new 24-page document includes Extinction Rebellion. It also includes Greenpeace – among whose supporters are Dame Judi Dench, Stephen Fry, Gillian Anderson and Joanna Lumley – and the ocean pollution campaigners Sea Shepherd, whose supporters include Sean Connery and Pierce Brosnan. Also included is Stop the Badger Cull, which is backed by Sir Brian May, the Queen guitarist.
>> No. 433806 Anonymous
17th January 2020
Friday 4:09 pm
433806 spacer
>>433805
Yup, definitely a "mistake".
>> No. 433807 Anonymous
17th January 2020
Friday 4:18 pm
433807 spacer
>>433806
It's interesting how ideologically inconsistent this policeman is

It's a proportionate response to break the law to enforce the law because the law is sacrosanct and we should make more laws to make it so we can enforce the law more, no matter what the morality is.
>> No. 433811 Anonymous
17th January 2020
Friday 6:38 pm
433811 spacer
>>433806

A "mistake" they've been repeating for several decades with just about every environmentalist, pacifist, socialist and animal rights organisation in Britain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Public_Order_Intelligence_Unit
>> No. 433867 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 3:11 am
433867 spacer
I see Greta Thunberg as a challenge, more than anything. Here is a woman who, in every single aspect, is absolutely revolting - her exterior AND her personality - yet I can't help but wonder what it would be like to plunge balls-deep into her repeatedly.

That's right. Balls-deep. With no protection.

I won't lie, I'm extraordinarily hard while typing this. I want to grab this... thing... and that's what Greta Thunberg is, let's not delude ourselves, a "thing"... by the hips and ram mercilessly in and out of her quivering, malformed cunt with the force of a gladiatorial chariot, while she makes stupid faces and contorts orgasmically, unable to control her bodily reactions even if she wanted to.

I would erupt violently inside that corrupt and corrupting womb as though the entire fate of humanity depended on my seed penetrating the foul walls of one of her ovaries, the electrical fusion from this coupling creating the Antichrist, as our combined, guttural, Chewbacca-like roars shattered glass and walls alike around us, the house toppling down while we lay there in a filthy, disgusting mess.

Yeah. I reckon Greta Thunberg does it for me.
>> No. 433868 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 3:53 am
433868 spacer
>>433867
I really hope this is a copypasta you nicked and you didn’t stay up all night trying to “perfect” it.
>> No. 433869 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 3:54 am
433869 spacer
>>433867

How dare you?
>> No. 433870 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 4:13 am
433870 spacer
>>433811

I don't really understand why it should come as a surprise they listed them or any other group of activists - police do not really take well to people who form impromptu or large gatherings in urban centres, especially when they're disruptive or cause the police to actually have to do some work.

The fact that we have the right to do this sort of activism is never going to get in the way of the police acting like we shouldn't.
>> No. 433873 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 10:52 am
433873 spacer

XR .jpg
433873433873433873
>>431504
Reminded me of this. Had me howling at the time.
>> No. 433874 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 10:59 am
433874 spacer
>>433873
Why?
>> No. 433877 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 12:46 pm
433877 spacer
>By 2050, under an RCP 8.5 scenario, the number of people living in areas with a nonzero chance of lethal heat waves would rise from zero today to between 700 million and 1.2 billion
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability/our-insights/climate-risk-and-response-physical-hazards-and-socioeconomic-impacts
>> No. 433879 Anonymous
22nd January 2020
Wednesday 12:53 pm
433879 spacer
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/you-can-t-make-this-stuff-up-bhp-says-australian-bushfires-hurting-coal-production
>Mining giant BHP has said Australia's horror bushfire season is taking a toll on its coal production.
lmao
>> No. 433904 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 4:03 pm
433904 spacer
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2230525-our-current-food-system-can-feed-only-3-4-billion-people-sustainably/

"One big caveat is that the team assumes that the planet won’t warm by more than 1.5°C."

No need for climate crypto-fascism, nature will do the dolphin rape for us eventually.
>> No. 433908 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:00 pm
433908 spacer
I'm eating steak a few times a week now, just in case we're not allowed in future and only allowed to eat bug sandwiches.
>> No. 433911 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:23 pm
433911 spacer

Untitled.png
433911433911433911
>>433908

That's cool you're in good company.
>> No. 433912 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:29 pm
433912 spacer
>>433911

You're doing that thing again where you conflate Americans who do X behaviour with British people who do X behaviour. The reasoning behind it and the presentation of the information is completely different and to people who understand the point you just look like a knob.

I, for one, will be eating steaks all next week and then beans on toast for the next fortnight because of broken Britain.
>> No. 433913 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:32 pm
433913 spacer
>>433912

Is it though?
>> No. 433914 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:34 pm
433914 spacer
>>433913

Why?
>> No. 433915 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:37 pm
433915 spacer
>>433914

Why can't I conflate a Brit who's talking about eating steak in some tediously predictable attempt to upset people who take issue with that with an American who's doing exactly the same thing for the same reasons?
>> No. 433916 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:41 pm
433916 spacer
>>433915

>doing exactly the same thing for the same reasons?

We need to revive that old BNP policy of offering people £50,000 to voluntarily repatriate themselves but only until you go back to America.
>> No. 433917 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:46 pm
433917 spacer
>>433916

Great, thanks for that really logical rebuttal.
>> No. 433918 Anonymous
23rd January 2020
Thursday 9:46 pm
433918 spacer
>>433917

Haha you said butt.
>> No. 433924 Anonymous
24th January 2020
Friday 8:08 am
433924 spacer
HS2's sounding like it's fucked in the South at least. Curious what the lads who've been living on the site are going to do now, I'm pretty sure some of them are technically homeless.
>> No. 433927 Anonymous
24th January 2020
Friday 6:12 pm
433927 spacer
>>433924
Well I read they're more likely to cancel the Northern bit, its higher ROI notwithstanding.
>> No. 433928 Anonymous
24th January 2020
Friday 6:18 pm
433928 spacer
>>433927

I have such a fucking hard-on for the Blue Shite fucking over the North and proving once and for all that the Tories do not give a single fuck about poor people. Maybe next time Labour destroys itself with laplander-loving or mental trannyism the backbone of this country, the working classes will vote for decent alternatives like The Monster Raving Loony Party or Count Binface.

Yes, I see the irony in hoping the poor get fucked to prove a point, but it's irrelevant. Trends are what matter, not people. It just so happens that this trend will help these people in the future. The poor (and the middle class, but they're not relevant here) are too thick to understand this which is why we have a permanent government class.
>> No. 433930 Anonymous
24th January 2020
Friday 10:19 pm
433930 spacer

83318260_824507007977267_6113943962274234368_o.jpg
433930433930433930

>> No. 433934 Anonymous
24th January 2020
Friday 10:54 pm
433934 spacer
>>433930

I don't think she's Andrew's type.

I'd take my daughter to Pizza Express, IYKWIM
>> No. 433970 Anonymous
27th January 2020
Monday 9:41 pm
433970 spacer
>>433934

>I'd take my daughter to Pizza Express, IYKWIM

Oh, the one in Woking? Yeah, I remember that one.
>> No. 434290 Anonymous
11th February 2020
Tuesday 9:54 pm
434290 spacer
https://twitter.com/ClimateBen/status/1227178851530428416
Good thread to read through if you're bored.
>> No. 434293 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 3:35 am
434293 spacer
>>434290

Cool thanks now I have to go through my coping mechanisms again. This fucking joke of a winter was already enough to make me feel distinctly uneasy :(
>> No. 434294 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 6:24 am
434294 spacer

Untitled.png
434294434294434294
>>434293

That Twitter thread lacks any meaningful citations, but having read the IPCC report in full I can tell you that he's describing a worst-worst case scenario, well outside what the vast majority of scientists think is even vaguely plausible. I don't mean to downplay the impacts of climate change, but most of what he's saying will happen soon might happen by 2100 if we do literally nothing and we're particularly unlucky in how the climate reacts.

It's pretty clear that the author doesn't understand climate change or particularly care about it, he's just scaremongering to push a political agenda. Many of the threats he's describing aren't realistic and most of the solutions he's proposing either wouldn't work or are simply irrelevant to the problem at hand.

Climate change is a real and pressing threat, but we really don't want to revert to tired old apocalyptic scaremongering. The planet isn't actually under threat - we are. The worst case scenario for climate change is well within the bounds of normal temperature ranges on a geological timescale, but it's well beyond the range that can support 7 billion people living in any reasonable degree of comfort. The global ecosystem can and will adapt to severe climate change, but human civilization can't. Going "back to nature" and "living in harmony with mother earth" means that most of the people who are alive today will die miserable, squalid deaths; If you don't want to be one of them, we need to adapt and overcome rather than regressing to an imagined ideal.

It might please some people to fantasise about overthrowing capitalism and replacing it with "climate justice" (whatever that means), but the only system capable of delivering the change we need in the time we have available is the full productive might of capitalism. We need China's immense industrial capacity to deliver mind-bending volumes of solar panels and batteries, we need Silicon Valley's tremendous pace of innovation to deliver smart grid technology, we need colossal amounts of capital to invest in new nuclear generation capacity. We need awareness, we need political will, but we also need the kind of logistical genius and industrial might that allowed China to build a hospital in 10 days.
>> No. 434295 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 7:56 am
434295 spacer
>>434294
>most of what he's saying will happen soon might happen by 2100 if we do literally nothing and we're particularly unlucky in how the climate reacts.
Not really, sorry. You're basing your stance on the IPCC report but the IPCC models don't match what we're actually seeing happening, which is significantly faster warming and ecological breakdown.
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9393jd/climate-change-predictions-have-suddenly-gone-catastrophic-this-is-why
Do read the whole article before calling it scaremongering as it does try to mitigate that.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/07/alaskan-glaciers-melting-faster-than-previously-thought/
He's basing what he's saying on information and models generated post-IPCC report, you're out of date.
>> No. 434298 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 10:17 am
434298 spacer
>>434295

>Do read the whole article before calling it scaremongering as it does try to mitigate that.

Scaremongering would be far too mild a word.

There is some evidence to suggest that the climate could be slightly more sensitive than we thought, but not to a statistically significant extent and within the range of uncertainty of previous model analyses.

Read the cited papers if you don't believe me, they literally say that their revision to previous estimates is statistically insignificant.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL085782

https://www.earth-syst-dynam-discuss.net/esd-2019-86/

Anyone who interprets that to mean that "Climate Change Predictions Have Suddenly Gone Catastrophic" has a somewhat tenuous grasp on reality.

The second article is about a study of one tidewater glacier. That's not representative of the Arctic or Antarctic ice caps which are a completely different kind of ice and it has no bearing on our level of confidence in sea ice modelling. It's one data point out of hundreds of thousands of data points that will be incorporated in IPCC AR6.

IPCC Assessment Reports are produced on a relatively slow schedule, because that's how long it takes to draw meaningful conclusions from vast amounts of data. If significant new data caused a meaningful change to the scientific consensus before the conclusion of the current Assessment Report cycle, it would be published in a supplementary or special report. We had two special reports last year and one in 2018. The next IPCC session is the week after next, but I'm not expecting the panel to produce a special report entitled "OH FUCK LADS, PACK YOUR RICE".

[spoilers]Fucking journos can get fucked.[/spoiler]
>> No. 434299 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 10:30 am
434299 spacer
>>434294

>but we also need the kind of logistical genius and industrial might that allowed China to build a hospital in 10 days.

Maybe, but can we not have China make our planet saving solar panels in 10 days? I want to stop the inevitable, not delay it by a couple of years until the Chinese cement gives way.

>>434295

While I accept that climate change is real I'm dubious about the understanding and ability of half the climate scientists who claim to understand climate change. I'm even more dubious about a guy who uses twitter to make lists, and I'm even more fucking dubious about a vice article. Get your head screwed on mate.

The best way to look at it is this, do you live in an area which will be in the first 50% of people to die from climate change? If so, move. If not, someone will invent a solution by the time it gets to you.
>> No. 434301 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 10:53 am
434301 spacer
>>434298
The IPCC report is known to be a conservative estimate that doesn't take a number of things into account. I'm sure it's fine to just assume the best case scenario, Scott Morrison style.

>>434299
Cool, so scientists are an iffy source of information, people who aggregate the data on twitter are dubious but you, an anonymous poster on britfags, are definitely worth listening to.
>> No. 434302 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 10:57 am
434302 spacer
>>434301

>so scientists are an iffy source of information

Now now lad, that's not quite what I said is it?
>> No. 434304 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 11:44 am
434304 spacer
>>434302
You also said
>do you live in an area which will be in the first 50% of people to die from climate change? If so, move. If not, someone will invent a solution by the time it gets to you.
Which is a funny way of saying "I'm a psychopath".
>> No. 434305 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 11:48 am
434305 spacer
>>434304

If I'm a psychopath for not worrying about victims of a tragedy yet to happen, what does that make you for being able to sleep at night when this is happening as we speak?

https://www.trtworld.com/africa/militants-kill-at-least-30-in-nigeria-s-troubled-borno-33669

>Militants killed at least 30 people and abducted women and children in a raid in northeast Nigeria's restive Borno state, a regional government spokesman said on Monday.

>The militants stormed in on trucks mounted with heavy weapons, killing, burning and looting before kidnapping women and children, state government spokesman Ahmad Abdurrahman Bundi said.
>> No. 434308 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 12:03 pm
434308 spacer
>>434305

That desperate attempt at tu quoque aside; it's not "yet to happen", people are already dying because of climate change.
>> No. 434309 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 12:04 pm
434309 spacer
>>434308

My psychopathic dubiousness has once again reared its ugly head.
>> No. 434310 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 12:08 pm
434310 spacer
>>434301

>The IPCC report is known to be a conservative estimate that doesn't take a number of things into account.

The IPCC report is a 4,852 page synthesis of everything we know about climate change. If you were daft enough to print it out, it'd weigh nearly two stone. It includes a very broad range of possible scenarios, from "we fix it and everything is basically fine" to "something totally unexpected happens and we're all fucked". In IPCC jargon they're called Representative Concentration Pathways, each of which examines a range of possible outcomes based on a range of possible CO2 trajectories.

RCP 8.5 covers a scenario in which we just go fucking bonkers and burn everything, massively increasing our carbon emissions above any previous trend. The range of temperature increase by 2100 for RCP 8.5 is 2.6°C to 4.8°C, depending on which climate sensitivity model you pick. The outcomes described in that Twitter thread are representative of what we'd expect to happen by 2100 if we have warming at or above that 4.8°C upper bound. That's what I meant by "worst-worst case".
>> No. 434314 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 1:09 pm
434314 spacer

bushfires.jpg
434314434314434314
>>434310

I hope you're right.

>>434309

You can just look it up, it's not difficult. But I predict you'll continue to be sceptical.
https://theconversation.com/humans-are-hardwired-to-dismiss-facts-that-dont-fit-their-worldview-127168
>> No. 434316 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 1:20 pm
434316 spacer
>>434314

Assuming you want the words in your article to be as good as your own I can respond. If you prove to me with expert consensus that the atomic weight of hydrogen is 1 I might accept it because it's a very simple, provable fact. If you want to convince me of a socio-political phenomenon with multiple causes and different impacts based on various factors including my own perception and feeling then no, I'm not going to just accept the word of experts because the one narrow area of study they study is improved by the concept they're touting.

I'm sure you were trying to make a glib point about climate change but your article is more about why normal people shouldn't be allowed to have any political opinion unless it's expect approved than climate change, even though it does mention climate change. I'm not sure if you think I'm denying climate change or if you just want to be a smug cunt regardless of what I say but you really need to find some kind of inner strength so you don't turn in to a teary puddle every time someone on the other side of the world dies of arson, you seem fine when black Africans are burned alive by humans, supposedly with compassion, why can't you apply that to climate change deaths?
>> No. 434319 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 1:30 pm
434319 spacer
>>434316

If you only "might" accept expert consensus that the atomic weight of hydrogen is 1 then I'm not sure why anything else that comes out of your mouth should be considered any more rational than that of a flat earther. This 2008-era YouTube radical scepticism that you've adopted is just an abstract comfort blanket.
>> No. 434320 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 1:32 pm
434320 spacer
>>434319

Is English not your first language then?
>> No. 434321 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 1:34 pm
434321 spacer
>>434320

It is, I was just being polite and not drawing attention to the multiple sentences in your post that don't make any sense.
>> No. 434342 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 11:28 am
434342 spacer

greta-wig.png
434342434342434342
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Horror-Shop-Greta-Wig/dp/B082Q2C7B2/

>Greta Wig
>Dress up with the braid wig as Greta and make sure the party climate is perfect

>You can't wait to appear at the next Halloween party as Greta Thunberg and swing your hips to your "How dare you" remix? All you need is that not-so-climate neutral Greta wig! As accessories for funny pop culture costumes, the two braids are ideal because they are the trademark of the well-known climate activist. What are you waitin' for? Grab your bike, cycle to the next costume party and strike with a vegan drink for the perfect party climate!


That's really disturbing.
>> No. 434343 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 11:37 am
434343 spacer
>>434342

I assume it is a wig they already had that they figured they could make money by building an association, because as a general rule people don't have enough imagination to think of a costume themselves.
>> No. 434345 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 4:38 pm
434345 spacer
>>434343

Well somebody must be buying them, because when I posted that link at noon today, they still had a few of them in stock, and now they don't.

Go on, otherlad, admit it. You bought all the rest of them this afternoon.
>> No. 434349 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 5:20 pm
434349 spacer
>>434345

I definitely didn't order one and immediately start scouring Adultwork for petite, moon-faced escorts. Nope.
>> No. 434351 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 6:03 pm
434351 spacer
>>434349

Well that's my next pay packet fucked before I even get it. Cheers lad.
>> No. 434353 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 6:20 pm
434353 spacer
>>434349

>and immediately start scouring Adultwork for petite, moon-faced escorts

SSD of the day, lad.
>> No. 434357 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 11:44 am
434357 spacer

toolate.png
434357434357434357
Well, collapse is happening. Some sea life is already starting to die off, we're seeing stronger storms more regularly, the worst swarm of locust is currently swarming through Africa and parts of the Middle East. This summer's going to be fucked too, more ticks, more mosquitoes. Is there really any hope when so many people and governments absolutely refuse to believe anything's happening? Just seems like we're on our way out at this rate and even if we changed everything tomorrow, we'd still be getting the effects from at least the past 10 years.
>> No. 434360 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 12:35 pm
434360 spacer
>>434357
>This summer's going to be fucked too, more ticks, more mosquitoes.
I've been thinking to put up a bat box. Won't help with ticks but they're not usually an issue here anyway.
>> No. 434361 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 12:45 pm
434361 spacer
>>434357
What've you done there is assume that everyone follows your belief that carbon dioxide is a problem.
>> No. 434362 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 12:48 pm
434362 spacer
>>434361
I would love to hear your opposing argument to science.
>> No. 434363 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 1:11 pm
434363 spacer
>>434361
>Is there really any hope when so many people and governments absolutely refuse to believe anything's happening?
>What've you done there is assume that everyone follows your belief
>> No. 434364 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 1:15 pm
434364 spacer

760859B3-8F0F-4244-A488-2297297CF06D.jpg
434364434364434364
>>434357

Boy. Cry. Wolf.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 434365 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 1:20 pm
434365 spacer
>>434364
I wish more people would out themselves as morons like this, it makes things a lot easier.
>> No. 434366 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 1:31 pm
434366 spacer
>>434342
>That's really disturbing.
The're a particular vein of spiteful mockery aimed at that girl that really is profoundly unpleasant. If you want to engage with the topic and argue against the prevailing scientific consensus then stand up and say your piece, but don't resort to bullying a child, for fuck's sake.
>> No. 434368 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 1:35 pm
434368 spacer
>>434365
It is a profoundly stupid post.
>> No. 434369 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:02 pm
434369 spacer
>>434365
>>434368

Do forgive me for not understanding how to fit in with you two but could you please explain why it's a bad post? The guy posted a picture of defunct claims about climate change, most of which are likely real, and made a short explanatory post about why he was posting the image, i.e. everything you're saying has been said before. When you say X is happening now, people said that 10 years ago, and 10 years before that, when you say people don't care it's precisely because we were all supposed to be dead by now anyway. At least that's my understanding of the post, maybe I'm just not seeing something you two see, if you could explain what that is I'd be forever grateful, I keep finding myself on the wrong side of intelligence dismissing posts like the two of yours but I've never understood why, perhaps with your help we can analyse this guy's post and I can understand why you two are better than me and I can fit in. I appreciate the help you're going to give me.
>> No. 434370 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:06 pm
434370 spacer
>>434366

If she's old enough to make herself a public figure she's old enough to get mocked by capitalism.
>> No. 434371 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:20 pm
434371 spacer
>>434370

Still missing the point entirely, I see.

"she DESERVES it for trying to HELP"
>> No. 434372 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:22 pm
434372 spacer
>>434371

What? No. Nobody deserves anything, from the nice car to the substance abuse problem you have, the word deserve is a narrow mindset through which the ignorant view life. Greta made herself a public figure. Someone can make money by mocking her. Someone will mock her to make money because she is a public figure. She made herself a public figure.
>> No. 434373 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:29 pm
434373 spacer
>>434369
I can respond to you but it will take a considerable amount of my time, I'm willing to do it when I have said time, but honestly, are you actually going to read the days worth of material I'm going to reference? Do you have any interest in actually understanding the subject matter? A basic course or going back to GCSE science may be a better start for you, as you could literally start anywhere if you were that interested in understanding exactly why this is such a huge issue. I'm willing to hold your hand through this but honestly it shouldn't be needed at this stage, I can't see any excuse to be this ignorant anymore and your post comes off as disingenuous, but that could just be the utter lack of faith I have in humanity at this point.
>> No. 434374 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:36 pm
434374 Don't care, didn't ask, plus you're an otherlad.
>>434372
>Nobody deserves anything
What a miserable sentiment.
>> No. 434376 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:38 pm
434376 spacer

beijing-pollution-smog-vs-clean-air-700x376.png
434376434376434376
>>434369

>When you say X is happening now, people said that 10 years ago, and 10 years before that, when you say people don't care it's precisely because we were all supposed to be dead by now anyway.

There is a very big difference between "what some bloke reckoned once" and "the unanimous consensus of literally every scientific organisation in the world, including the American Association of Petroleum Geologists". Logically, the argument makes as much sense as saying "I know you all think I'll die if I jump off this high-rise building, but the weather forecast is wrong sometimes so you're obviously all full of shit".

Nearly everything mentioned in that image has never been more than a fringe opinion and some are massive distortions or outright fabrications. The scientific consensus on climate change isn't an educated guess by a handful of people, it's the result of thousands of scientists doing billions of dollars worth of research over the course of decades. No prediction is ever infallible, but we're very, very confident that a whole bunch of seriously bad stuff is already happening as a direct result of rising CO2 levels. The small degree of uncertainty about those predictions cuts both ways - it's possible that climate change will happen more slowly and have milder impacts than we predict, but it's equally likely that it'll happen faster and have worse impacts.

A few of those examples were entirely reasonable predictions at the time, until we did something to change the future. "Urban citizens will require gas masks by 1985" would have come true in the US if it wasn't for massive legislative efforts to control air pollution; it's true now in China and India, where the average air quality is worse for you than 20 fags a day and the government regularly advises people to remain indoors due to potentially lethal levels of air pollution. Acid rain really was an environmental crisis that was making large areas of agricultural land unusable; it was fixed thanks to international cooperation and hugely expensive technological development to limit SO2 and NOx emissions.
>> No. 434377 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:38 pm
434377 spacer
>>434373

I understand and agree with you that climate change is bad. I'm simply asking why you were so dismissive of the guy who made a valid point without actually disagreeing with climate change.

I'd like to suggest a perspective change, maybe the guy was agreeing with you but pointing out why your words fall on deaf ears. If the poster in question had added another few words such as "you're right and you have a massive cock but this list is why nobody believes in climate change" would you have replied at all? I suppose my question is really why are you so certain your beliefs are being attacked when the post itself was absolutely neutral but happened to contain an argument you usually see as belonging to "the other side"?

Let's assume the poster was actually saying that your argument only resonates with the converted because of the list he posted. What do you say?
>> No. 434378 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:42 pm
434378 spacer
>>434376

That's the kind of response I appreciate from people who know their stuff. It really is easy to get in to the mindset of calling people bumders rather than addressing their arguments, but thanks to your effort I'm now in a position to disagree with people like the poster who you earlier called a bumder when I come across them in the real world. Thanks.
>> No. 434380 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 3:00 pm
434380 spacer
Www.europereloaded.com/george-soros-is-backing-climate-activist-greta-thunberg
>> No. 434381 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 3:06 pm
434381 spacer
>>434380

A prominent environmental activist has worked with an organisation that is funded in part by a prominent environmental philanthropist? I am shocked, shocked to my very core. Soon you'll be telling me that Battersea Dogs Home receive money from dog owners.
>> No. 434382 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 3:08 pm
434382 spacer
>>434369
You could start by actually reading the boy who cried wolf and seeing what happens at the end. Then separately have the dawning realisation that a random selection of claims about the climate and about peak oil for some reason have very little to do with current science and there's no one "boy" who has claimed them all. You may as well shout "boy who cried wolf!" at people who say the Earth is an oblate spheroid, with your evidence being that other people have said it's a perfect sphere, flat, the centre of the galaxy, the centre of the universe and also there are some ants in Africa as big as lions. It's utterly and profoundly idiotic.
>> No. 434383 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 3:10 pm
434383 spacer
>>434380
I really should start my own shite-rag website where I can type up my opinion as utter fact and make bank off of the ad revenue from conspiracy theorists clicking it.
>> No. 434399 Anonymous
15th February 2020
Saturday 7:15 pm
434399 spacer
>>434364

It's actually true that without human intervention, we quite likely would have been on track for another ice age.

Even in the 80s, there were still scientists that maintained that the Pleistocene wasn't really over, and that we had really just been experiencing another interglacial warm period like the Eemian, around 130,000 to 115,000 years before present, which was then followed by the Devensian ice age that lasted from 115,000 bp to around 11,500 bp.

From around 2.5 mya, the end of the Tertiary, for reasons including very long-term variations in the Earth's elliptical path around the Sun, there has been a steady succession of interchanging ice ages and warm periods, known as the Pleistocene, and there is no astronomical or climatological evidence to suggest that without humans, this cycle would not have continued as before. And with interglacial warm periods having lasted anywhere between 10,000 and 15,000 years in the past, it would have been entirely reasonable to expect the first minute signs of global cooling quite soon.

What's become pretty much irrefutable consensus in climatology is that we've now swerved out of that natural succession due to human activity. Even the best climate models in the world, running on billions of dollars worth of state of the art computer hardware, are simply unable to come to a different conclusion.

I think I read somewhere a while ago that the next Ice Age will quite likely come regardless, but that with our levels of CO2 emission, we've put it off and changed the natural timeline by as much as 50,000 years. And that's only if we actually start reducing our emissions by a large chunk in a very small amount of time. All the CO2 will then be washed out of the atmosphere again by rain and be reabsorbed into plants, but even if we completely stopped producing CO2, we would be more or less stuck with the current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere for about 1,000 years.
>> No. 434480 Anonymous
17th February 2020
Monday 7:29 pm
434480 spacer

EQ_nRbGXsAAEhnq.jpg
434480434480434480
DIG UP LAWNS. FIGHT THE POWER.
>> No. 434481 Anonymous
17th February 2020
Monday 8:11 pm
434481 spacer
>>434480
They've got a point, you have to try quite hard to miss it. Hopefully trinity won't lay more turf and something other than a monoculture will grow.
>> No. 434482 Anonymous
17th February 2020
Monday 8:17 pm
434482 spacer

EQ_nR8IW4AU2yfZ.jpg
434482434482434482
>>434481
They're clearly doing it as a gesture of solidarity with the moles.
>> No. 434483 Anonymous
17th February 2020
Monday 8:20 pm
434483 spacer
>>434482

Geezer at the back can't remember where he buried his stash, but he's persuaded a load of lefties to help him dig for it.
>> No. 434484 Anonymous
17th February 2020
Monday 8:21 pm
434484 spacer
>>434482
It'll certainly aerate the soil which is beneficial to moles and worms.
>> No. 434487 Anonymous
17th February 2020
Monday 8:52 pm
434487 spacer
>>434480
>🐝4

Release the hounds.
>> No. 434502 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 4:01 pm
434502 spacer
>>434482

I always found the chainning yourself to things to be weird bratty form of protests, it assumes a submissive position. You are hoping that the other party notices you and cares.

There is a bunch of mildly cruel things you could do in this situation, to the person, but as I say they are bratty so secretly want that.

Ultimately it is winter and storm season, so if you pretend you haven't noticed them after a while they'll get bored and cold and just leave feeling silly.
>> No. 434503 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 5:10 pm
434503 spacer
>>434502

"Bratty" in the sense that if they don't safely remove you, in most lock-on situations, you might die. For example if you're in the road or up a tree marked for felling or on mining equipment, that sort of thing. I suppose putting your life on the line might come across as "bratty" to some armchair critics.
>> No. 434504 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 5:21 pm
434504 spacer
>>434502
"Bratty", who the fuck talks like this?
>> No. 434505 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 5:28 pm
434505 spacer
>>434504

I understood his point and I don't think bratty is a sufficiently American word to cause a scene over. I'm not going to give him oral pleasure with my mouth because of his use of the word bratty, but it's not a damnable offence either. You're being a mong.
>> No. 434517 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 9:08 pm
434517 spacer
>>434502

I saw something on TV a while ago where a protester chained himself to an active train track. Something about anti-nuclear power protests in France or something.

Kind of poorly thought out. Apparently there weren't many trains going that way on that day, so luckily he wasn't turned into minced meat by one, but they had to close down that section of the line and had to bring out a diesel generator and an industrial-grade angle grinder to get him off.

I'm not sure how the French handle such things, but imagine the kind of money they'll charge you for obstructing train traffic and tying up (no pun intended) rescue personnel like that. And that's on top of probably violating several laws and having to pay the fines that that sort of thing carries.

There is an old saying that in his mind, an idealist breaks through the thickest walls unharmed, but that he crumbles at the gentle breeze of reality.
>> No. 434519 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 10:06 pm
434519 spacer
>>434517

>Kind of poorly thought out.

Reckless, but effective - one dingbat with a bicycle lock managed to cause huge disruption. The anti-road protestors of the 90s relied heavily on such tactics.


>> No. 434520 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 10:31 pm
434520 spacer
>>434504

The BDSM community mostly. Which is what I was alluding to. ask the person tied to a tree, they'll know exactly what it means. but they will reply "you mean I've been a naughty little girl daddy? I'm sowwy"
>> No. 434522 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 10:40 pm
434522 spacer
>>434519

I skimmed through the highlight was the Judges statement about 7:45 after they did their grand standing in court.

>"you have been quick to snatch the matyrs crown, I think you'll find it uncomfortable head gear."

and then he gave them all 28 days.
>> No. 434524 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 11:09 pm
434524 spacer
>>434519>>434522
It's a good line from the judge.

As a fellow eco warrior, but also someone who is very local to the area they are talking about - I feel sorry for how misguided they were. Of all the wrongs to right in the world, the M3 (or the M11, which is where Swampy came from, about the same time) is probably not it. The worst kind of tokenism.
>> No. 434525 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 11:27 pm
434525 spacer
>>434524

It was a more innocent time.
>> No. 434526 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 11:29 pm
434526 spacer
>>434524

Thatcher's plans were mental though. She practically wanted to turn Britain into one continuous dual carriageway.
>> No. 434527 Anonymous
18th February 2020
Tuesday 11:41 pm
434527 spacer
>>434526
> turn Britain into one continuous dual carriageway.
The dream!
>> No. 434528 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 12:24 am
434528 spacer
>>434526

I can't help but wonder what this country would be like if we'd ever actually finished building the roads, mind you.
>> No. 434529 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 1:54 am
434529 spacer
>>434528
One giant 24-lane oblong dectuple-sexagintasextuple roundabout stretching from Mousehole to Aberdeen, featuring a curious bulge towards Wales with exits onto feeder A-roads for any city that has more than 150k residents and consolation prize B-Roads for those with 100K, which split up into whatever the local council can manage; of course, most opted for concentric roundabouts with little regards for existing infracstructure, homes or heritage sites. Everything else has to make do with dirt tracks to learn their lesson about living in a poor peoples place, but at least those folk can now get jobs at the mandatory petrol stations that have been installed at regular intervals to keep the nation floating in motion lotion.
>> No. 434530 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 2:27 am
434530 spacer
>>434529

You might be the next Hitler, Mao or Thatcher but I'm dreamily drifting in and out of day dreams at your words, I want you to be my leader.
>> No. 434537 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 12:42 pm
434537 spacer

AHViewingAutobahn2.jpg
434537434537434537
>>434530

Hitler did invent the Autobahn motorway.

Goes to show that you really need a ruthless totalitarian regime to take on such monumental civil engineering projects. Just look at the Three Gorges Dam in China in our time.
>> No. 434540 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 1:24 pm
434540 spacer
>>434537
Why are you posting images of Nazi propaganda with atrocious run-on sentences?
>> No. 434541 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 1:33 pm
434541 spacer
>>434540
Someone has to.
>> No. 434542 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 1:37 pm
434542 spacer
>>434540

I think my mentioning of the Nazis being a "ruthlessly totalitarian" regime sufficiently clarified that I was being ironic, and not in support of any such regime.

Also, the irony in the picture's caption seemed glaring enough that nobody would mistake it for an actual statement of opinion. Even just calling him an "artist" pushes it, let's face it.
>> No. 434549 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 5:13 pm
434549 spacer

motorway.jpg
434549434549434549
I can't wait until they double fuel duty to cut CO2 emissions. Traffic will go back to 1990s levels.
>> No. 434553 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 7:11 pm
434553 spacer

price-petrol-uk.png
434553434553434553
>>434549

>Traffic will go back to 1990s levels

I wonder. Adjusted for inflation, petrol was actually cheaper in the 90s than it is today, but we've still seen a considerable increase in traffic in the last 30 years. And elasticity of demand for fuel based on its price has historically been low, meaning even steep price increases usually caused relatively minor decreases in demand. Otherwise, we wouldn't have had the 30-percent increase in road traffic since the 90s that we've seen in the UK alone.

And for as long as electric cars don't have the same kind of practicality as petrol-powered cars, people will still want to drive petrol cars even if you double the price for fuel. The problem is that current battery technology still doesn't allow you to top up energy as quickly as with petrol, you still have considerably less range, and there's also the problem that the planet simply doesn't have enough raw materials to power over a billion cars worldwide with batteries. Rare earths really are somewhat rare, at least there aren't enough for our battery demands.

Samsung hope to have a groundbreaking new battery technology for phones and devices ready within the next one or two years, which will be based on graphene ions. Graphene is basically carbon, of which there is a vast abundance on Earth, and it promises to charge up a laptop battery within 15 minutes from empty, and will have about a similar, if not better energy density than current Li-ion batteries. So if you eventually scale graphene ion technology up to 400-volt car batteries, you could finally have electric cars that can compete with petrol cars in terms of recharging convenience and fuel range.
>> No. 434554 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 7:33 pm
434554 spacer
>>434553
>Otherwise, we wouldn't have had the 30-percent increase in road traffic since the 90s that we've seen in the UK alone.

From a quick audit of my street most households have more than one car, sometimes three. In 1990 my parents only had one car, a Ford Orion, which was the norm for the street I grew up on.
>> No. 434555 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 7:50 pm
434555 spacer
>>434554

A doubling of the cars in your household doesn't necessarily mean twice the traffic though. Because logically you can only drive one car at a time. If you've got two cars where your parent's generation only had one, you will probably still go do the weekend grocery shopping together in one car, and you probably won't go visit your parents with both cars. A lot of people nowadays also take public transportation to work every morning where they used to drive their own cars back then. Because there is too much traffic in town and you'll struggle to get to work on time, or just don't want to put up with the hassle of stop and go traffic.

What has increased in the last 30 years is morning (and afternoon) school runs. Probably also has to do with stranger danger panic and helicopter parenting and mothers' pissing matches and what-have-you, anyway, I think I read that the percentage of schoolchildren who walk or ride their bike or a bus to school has decreeased by something like 80 percent.



tl;dr: It's them soccer mums what's causing all thar extra traffic. And women's magazines encouraging them with school run outfit style guides. What the fuck do you need a special outfit for just to needlessly drive your snot-nosed sprogs to school. When all you'll do when they're dropped off is go back home and watch daytime TV.
>> No. 434562 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 8:33 pm
434562 spacer
>>434555

When I walk to the train station I go past a secondary school. Every morning there are queues of mums dropping off their kids and gassing them with the fumes from their cars.

School buses are not a thing here, apparently.
>> No. 434566 Anonymous
19th February 2020
Wednesday 8:44 pm
434566 spacer
>>434562

There's a whole sort-of-eco-activist subculture of mums campaigning and lobbying against other mums doing that. I went to my local MP's talk on climate change and something like 70% of the people were mums there to complain about that.
>> No. 434583 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 2:23 am
434583 spacer
>>434549
>>434553
I keep telling this to people but nobody seems to listen:

Trying to price people out of driving won't work. You'll just make them bitter and resentful at having to do it. They'll either be resentful at having to fork out so much money to drive, or they'll be resentful at having to put up with the piss-poor public transport disguised as a viable alternative.

We need to stop trying to disincentivise driving an ICE, and actually fucking incentivising the alternatives. Provide better and cheaper public transport. Provide better facilities for EVs. The main reason I have to rent a car to visit family is because transport cutbacks have meant that the perfectly viable home visits I did at uni are now infeasible.
>> No. 434584 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 4:22 am
434584 spacer
>>434555

I have noticed the school run thing too. When I were a lad, we'd walk to school - my first school was quite literally at the bottom of our street, and middle school was about 15 minutes walk away, and high school I took a bike or the free bus, and that was the norm. You'd see maybe two or three kids get into cars at the end of the day, but even then not every day.

I don't know what's changed, potentially larger catchment areas, or just increased national laziness, but in the 15-20 years since I've been to school it's become insane.
>> No. 434585 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 5:56 am
434585 spacer
>>434584
I think it's a bit of everything.

There's a woman down my street who regularly drives her son to school despite the fact you can actually see the school from her house. It's literally walking to the end of our street, going past four or five houses and then about 400ft on the main road and you're there but she'd rather try and park opposite it. She drives a Range Rover Evoque on finance, how could you tell?

That said, I regularly drop my daughter off to school in a morning. It's on my way to work and she's not at the same school as her sister so it wouldn't be possible to walk them both at the same time. We're going to get her to walk when she's a little bit older, but my main concern is cars near her school as many parents drive and park like absolute lunatics. I nearly had someone drive into me outside a secondary school not too long ago because they pulled up opposite it to drop their kid off and then decided to set off again without indicating or checking if it was clear; the fat cunt was looking at me like it was my fault.
>> No. 434591 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:23 am
434591 spacer
>>434585
There's no point is possessing an Evoque if you're not going to show it off.
>> No. 434593 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:50 am
434593 spacer
>>434591
She also uses to get McDonald's drive through in her pyjamas.
>> No. 434594 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:55 am
434594 spacer
>>434593
Does she have a body worth showing off?
>> No. 434595 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:58 am
434595 spacer
>>434594
She looks like a slightly slimmer Gemma Collins. Always shouting at her kids, too.
>> No. 434596 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:11 am
434596 spacer
>>434595
Yeah, she should have the decency to dress with some dignity. Horrible woman.
>> No. 434597 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:40 am
434597 spacer
>>434585

I wonder what would happen if the issue of school runs really turned into a hands-on environmental debate. I think a lot of mums in particular would struggle to cope with the fact that it's no longer acceptable.
>> No. 434609 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 7:47 pm
434609 spacer
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/454143-greta-thunberg-receives-normandys-first-freedom-prize-donates-prize

>Thunberg said that she will donate the prize money from the award, 25,000 euros, to four groups working for climate justice.

Outrageous, I thought she was clearly just doing this to get rich, at least that's what all the old blokes down the pub keep telling me anyway.
>> No. 434610 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 8:20 pm
434610 spacer
>>434609
She's working the long con.
>> No. 434611 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:07 pm
434611 spacer
>>434609

Her family's already pretty loaded. No idea why they're manipulating their daughter into this whole charade but it's not for a paltry 25 grand.
>> No. 434612 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:27 pm
434612 spacer
>>434611

>No idea why they're manipulating their daughter into this whole charade

Maybe they aren't? Just throwing it out there.
>> No. 434613 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:28 pm
434613 spacer
>>434611
And we've come full circle.
>> No. 434614 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 9:58 pm
434614 spacer
>>434611
>manipulating their daughter into this whole charade

There speaks a person who has never had a teenage daughter, autistic or not.
>> No. 434615 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:09 pm
434615 spacer
>>434614

Not sure what you're implying but teenagers are extremely manipulable.
>> No. 434616 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:28 pm
434616 spacer

5d94b98e625ac908a911cb00.jpg
434616434616434616
>>434609
I just don't get the big deal about her. She started skipping school on a Friday and she's lauded into this massive figurehead.

Meanwhile there's people like Boyan Slat who are actually doing something worthwhile that you hear fuck all about.
>> No. 434617 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:36 pm
434617 spacer
>>434611

>Her family's already pretty loaded

In any case, I think I read somewhere that they belong to the well-connected upper middle class. Which goes some way explaining how ARE Greta very quickly earned the support of some of Sweden's top advertising and PR firms. This did not solely come about from a sperg girl ranting on social media about people's ignorance about climate change.

Difficult to tell though with Swedes. In their society, any kind of ostentation is generally frowned upon. Like most Scandinavian countries, which tend to be much more collectivist than Britain. If you ever find yourself complaining about the British tax system, it's worth looking over to our distant cousins across the North Sea. They absolutely tax the fuck out of everything.
>> No. 434618 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:38 pm
434618 spacer
They're definitely back, there's too much cuntery these past couple of days for some of them not to be back. It's always the same stuff too.
>> No. 434621 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 10:59 pm
434621 spacer
>>434615

>Not sure what you're implying but teenagers are extremely manipulable.

Even so, teenagers from about age 16 have been shown in psychological studies to have better judgement skills than many sexagenarians. And yet, the Murrikins allowed Trump to take office.

Teenagers may not have the benefit of decades of life experience, but a good number of them are really pretty switched on once they're that age. And not being set in your ways like a middle aged adult also has its advantages. Most revolutions have been started by a country's young people.
>> No. 434622 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 11:05 pm
434622 spacer
>>434618
>It's always the same stuff too.

Eugenics and hippies?
>> No. 434624 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 11:17 pm
434624 spacer
>>434622

>Eugenics and hippies


How do those two mix?
>> No. 434625 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 11:21 pm
434625 spacer
>>434624
Well that's all there seems to have been cuntery about recently, unless I've missed summat.
>> No. 434626 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 11:28 pm
434626 spacer
>>434625

Where did you see eugenics being discussed, besides Hitler unfairly being called an artist?
>> No. 434627 Anonymous
20th February 2020
Thursday 11:48 pm
434627 spacer
>>434626
That thread on /pol/ after it was in the news about that wonk hired by Cummings, which wasn't in any way a distraction from the government's piss-poor response to flooding.
>> No. 434631 Anonymous
21st February 2020
Friday 12:47 am
434631 spacer
>>434621

>And yet, the Murrikins allowed Trump to take office.

Trump is no different from any other President in form or in function. The perceived difference comes from the amount of hatred in society today, especially among people who claim to be morally pure. This hatred manifests as attacks on a bloke who is no more racist than Reagan or Bush simply because we live in a time where the idea of impeaching someone because you don't like them is acceptable as long as the attacker is on the side of the self-perceived morally pure.
>> No. 434640 Anonymous
21st February 2020
Friday 10:24 am
434640 spacer
>>434631

>simply because we live in a time where the idea of impeaching someone because you don't like them is acceptable as long as the attacker is on the side of the self-perceived morally pure

In all fairness, Trump did jeopardise the national interests and security of the U.S. with his close ties to the Russian government. All Clinton had done when the Republicans attempted to impeach him was that he had a slightly overweight intern nosh him off in the Oval Office.
>> No. 434641 Anonymous
21st February 2020
Friday 11:27 am
434641 spacer
>>434640

Maybe I'm being a bit thick but I'm not certain how anything I'm aware of regarding hypothesised Russian ties constitutes jeopardising the national interests and security of the U.S. The sanctions Obama imposed on Russia as a response to the invasion of the Crimean region were pure political theatre done to drum up public support for a return to the bygone era where Russians were the bad guy in every 80s action movie. Diplomatic relations between the two nations up to that point were in line with the post-war idea of world peace, progressing well and gave us a startlingly hopeful vision of the future. Then Putin pulled a Bush and invaded a foreign country for natural resources, but because he didn't forge a dossier about WMDs or allow a daft militant wog attack to happen first he was the bad guy despite having done nothing more than the exact same thing as us, the good guys.

The context here is important, because I looked through the wikipedia page on the links between Trump's associates and Russia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Links_between_Trump_associates_and_Russian_officials to refresh my memory to make sure I wasn't about to give an awfully ignorant or naive response. Looking through this list almost every supposed link I can see is simply nothing more than business as usual with absurd policies nobody ever follows being used to prosecute and persecute people who haven't actually done anything out of the ordinary. Let's take an example, Michael Flynn. According to the linked wikipedia Page Flynn committed the outrageous crime of not asking permission from the government before being paid a large sum of money by a foreign "government" (Russia Today). Let's be realistic, do you believe anyone ever obtains permission from two different government departments before delivering speeches in foreign countries, or is it merely one of those formalities more honoured in the breach than in the observance? Do you believe if a different person in the same position under Hillary Clinton had done the same thing they would have been investigated for it? Nobody ever followed that practice. It's akin to jaywalking in the U.S., if you get fined for it either the cop is having a really bad day or you really upset him somehow. Another charge against Flynn is having discussed Obama's sanctions with an equivalent Russian official on the day Obama announced the sanctions, to the uneducated this sounds like the fall of Rome, but in reality it's how government functions, theatre with one hand and backdoor deals with the other. It wouldn't be surprising if Flynn discussed the sanctions with his opposite number on the express order of Obama.

If you genuinely believe any of the behaviour the morally righteous brigade are pursuing today is abnormal you're just flat out wrong. Clinton may have been the first President to be charged with getting a presumably unsatisfactory blowjob from an intern, but he certainly wasn't the first to have done it. Let's hope this rather more malicious but perfectly analogous attack doesn't land Trump in the shit, because if the Democrats get back in the Americans are going to war with Russia.
>> No. 434649 Anonymous
21st February 2020
Friday 1:31 pm
434649 spacer
>>434641

>because if the Democrats get back in the Americans are going to war with Russia.

There is plenty of reason to believe that Hillary Clinton as President would have brought us much closer to war with Russia by this time than we already might be. Don't let her liberal fisherperson and women's rights sub-agenda fool you, she is a dyed in the wool neocon hawk, and would have had no qualms escalating the situation to levels last seen in the Cuban missile crisis. Possibly even beyond that.

Trump is a clueless geriatric dickhead with no idea how to properly be a country's head of state, but luckily for us, that's about all the bad that there is to say about him. He is quite simply incompetent. And in its own way, that is actually still better than a seasoned senior politician dead set on another 1980s-style game of nuclear chicken.
>> No. 434719 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 12:05 pm
434719 spacer
https://earther.gizmodo.com/a-quarter-of-all-climate-tweets-come-from-bots-and-they-1841839822

>A Quarter of All Climate Tweets Come From Bots—and They're More Likely to Peddle Denial

>Bots, on average, had a 0.5 percent greater chance of tweeting about denialist research. And overall, bots accounted for a quarter of all climate tweets.

Is the goal to just stop any and all climate research and environmental development? If so, why? Do these people genuinely not understand science or do they just want to wipe out the human race/destabalise the planet?
>> No. 434720 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 12:12 pm
434720 spacer
>>434719

>If so, why?

Money.
>> No. 434723 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 12:27 pm
434723 spacer
>>434719
>0.5 percent greater chance
On in others words "our research was a complete and utter waste of time".
>> No. 434724 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 12:45 pm
434724 spacer
>>434723

0.5 percent should still fall within a typical error margin of scientific studies. So the study is inconclusive at best in that respect.

If bots accounted for 25 percent of all climate tweets, then that's still remarkable and what exactly they tweet deserves scrutiny, because it still opens up a great possibility of misinformation.
>> No. 434725 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 1:15 pm
434725 spacer
>>434719

Luckily, Twitter doesn't affect the real world in the slightest. Only the twats who use it think it does.

I was thinking the other day about how someone should make short film. It'd be called The Revolution or something, about some vegan hipster sat on Twitter when the #revolutionishappenning starts trending, and they get their balaclava and molotovs together and charge out into the streets to join in the armed intersectional black LGBT uprising they are convinced is going on outside. The punchline is them being looked at like a wierdo by a load of old people on the bus as life continues peacefully.

>Do these people genuinely not understand science

There are very fewer people than most would like to admit who can really claim to, and most of them don't waste their time posting shite on the internet.
>> No. 434726 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 1:36 pm
434726 spacer
>>434720
What good does all the money in the world do when you're on top a pile of ashes?
>> No. 434727 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 1:39 pm
434727 spacer
>>434725

>There are very fewer people than most would like to admit who can really claim to

Also, not saying this is true for Britain, but there is widespread disdain, or even resentment for science in countries like the U.S., which after all still accounts for 25 percent of the world's energy consumption. And it's not just bible thumpers who hate science because they feel it attempts to disprove the existence of their god, but also average people, a lot of whom have been exposed to a science-hostile environment and fed things like "teach the controversy" long enough that they just aren't equipped to make an informed decision to agree that science, in this case climate science, is near enough correctly predicting the coming climate catastrophe.
>> No. 434728 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 1:39 pm
434728 spacer
>>434720

Are you implying there's some sort of vast global conspiracy to change the opinions of millions of people on the climate change issue?

If that's what you're saying, you're absolutely right. Now if only people would believe this kind of behaviour exists in other facets of life.
>> No. 434730 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 1:44 pm
434730 spacer
>>434727
The social engineering in the US that has churned out people arguing against things that would benefit them is truly astounding, it's both impressive and tragic, but there has definitely been a concerted effort to make things this way.
>> No. 434733 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 1:54 pm
434733 spacer
>>434725
>most of them don't waste their time posting shite on the internet.
Shows how much you know.
>> No. 434735 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 2:04 pm
434735 spacer
>>434730

Just think of the scores of blue-collar workers who voted for Trump. They were THE most likely demographic to get fucked over by Trump as President, and yet, he enjoyed very widespread support among them.

The concerted effort of social engineering actually occurred. From the 1970s, and in Reagan-era America in particular, public broadcasting was continuously defunded, many independent news outlets were forced to shut down as a consequence, and what you had left were major commercial television stations and other news outlets, which were profit minded and focused on giving the people what they appeared to want. Which was dumbed down local news, international news being reduced to jumbled assortments of sound bites and headlines out of context, and a generally simplistic approach to public opinion and how to influence it.

Donald Trump didn't cause any of what we now bemoan, he is just the culmination and the logical consequence of decades of intellectual malnutrition of an entire country.
>> No. 434737 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 2:47 pm
434737 spacer
>>434735

>They [blue collar workers] were THE most likely demographic to get fucked over by Trump as President, and yet, he enjoyed very widespread support among them.

This is either false or you accidentally mislabelled the type of workers you were talking about. The pervasive myth that blue collar workers are getting fucked by Trump is perpetuated by people who deliberately mislabel everyone who works outside of an office as blue collar. Americans who work in the service industry, retail and fast food mainly are indeed getting fucked by Trump's refusal to continue the trend of enacting laws which facilitate the forced adoption of Obama era policies on business owners. Employers won't give retail workers 40 hour work weeks because they'd have to pay out much more on expensive medical insurance for the employees if they did. I'm sure if a Democrat were in power they would force business owners to employ people differently with legislation. While that doesn't sound awful you have to remember America is not properly governed, when we think of the government legislating to protect worker rights we think of a decently robust system which upsets all parties involved equally, which means it's rather fair. It's not the same in America. The trend is quite different in actual blue collar work, there are more jobs with real hours and the pay has risen in real terms, not only risen but risen faster than it did under Obama.

If you want an example check out this article which attempts to admonish Trump with half truths and gently whispered lies. In it the author jumps straight in without a hint or irony or self awareness.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2020/02/05/trumps-state-of-the-union-declared-were-in-a-blue-collar-boom-workers-dont-agree/

>Our team traveled to Indianapolis, the Bay Area, the Washington, D.C. region, and Buffalo, N.Y.
Not exactly the kind of places blue collar workers are found.

>We interviewed dozens of low-income and blue-collar workers: cashiers, fast food workers, stock clerks, receptionists, retail workers, gas station staff, baristas, bookkeepers, and more.
Unless the "and more" at the end of that sentence was chosen to make me look like an arsehole for calling the author a bit confused about her own area of research she didn't actually interview any blue collar workers at all, and she didn't interview them in the places Trump's policies have been designed to impact. Most of the actual blue collar workers are in the flyover states, not Washington, New York and the cleverly hidden California, also known to Americans as Commiefornia, described here as "the Bay Area."

This next article is much more accurate, you can tell because it cites government statistics. While I'm sure we all have things to say about government statistics I'm confident if these were misleading there would have been a very public scandal about the whole affair, if the Bureau of Labour Statistics is getting away with falsehoods in such a politically charged environment I'd question the effectiveness of Democrats in government.

https://issuesinsights.com/2019/05/13/blue-collar-jobs-trump-economy/

In it you will see wage and job number comparisons which I believe clearly show that blue collar workers under Trump are much better off than they were under Obama. I was mildly pleased in a strange, good for him kind of way when I read this part of the article.

>[i]The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the labor market is so tight that manufacturers are now “shift scheduling, investing in amenities for workers or offering more flex time, companies believe that treating blue-collar workers more like white-collar counterparts may convince them to sign on or stick around.”[i]

I haven't really discussed the fate of service workers (not blue collar) under Trump, the issue here has been either yourself accidentally conflating blue collar and service workers or incredibly ditzy commentariat type people deliberately conflating the two in order to sew confusion about life in America for years, resulting in people like yourself accepting their constant assertions as truth. If you did mean service industry workers I'm happy to have an entirely different discussion on that point.
>> No. 434738 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 2:49 pm
434738 spacer
>>434726

Simple. The world won't be ashes for considerable time to come, even at the very worst of all global climate estimate coming true. Being rich is still going to be a very comfortable life for the next hundred or two years at the minimum, after which it's going to be akin to being a vault dweller in Fallout. So why should they give a fuck?

Being rich puts you outside the realms of all conventional morality, because our ideas of morality are essentially all rooted in collectivism. I've heard people argue humans are inherently selfish, but that's bollocks, most of our behaviours are rooted in some level of reciprocal benefit. After a certain level of wealth however, your priorities become so disconnected from the rest of society that you're just not truly part of it any more. You're above it. It no longer matters.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what's wrong with this mindset. But why do you think people like Elon Musk put all their money into shit like SpaceX instead of something more philanthropic? At his level of wealth, the rest of us are nothing more than cockroaches he would happily allow to burn, while he escapes into the cosmos.
>> No. 434743 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 3:07 pm
434743 spacer
>>434737
>https://issuesinsights.com/
>We are unapologetically pro free market and for a limited federal government.
Paragons of journalistic impartiality, clearly.
>> No. 434744 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 3:18 pm
434744 spacer
>>434743

I agree, it's all too rare when journalists honestly and openly declare their interests these days.
>> No. 434746 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 3:30 pm
434746 spacer
>>434744
Do you think that they'd admit it if Trump's free-market, small government policies were actually having a harmful impact on blue-collar workers?
>> No. 434747 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 3:33 pm
434747 spacer
>>434728

I am one of the sad people who see this shit everywhere. One day my people and I will be allowed to wear our tinfoil hats outside and that will be the day the world tips in our favour.
>> No. 434748 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 3:34 pm
434748 spacer
>>434746

Probably not, so if your alternate reality hypothetical scenario was reality they wouldn't have been able to publish the article where they use government statistics to prove the opposite of your alternate reality hypothetical scenario would they?
>> No. 434751 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 3:46 pm
434751 spacer
>>434746

It's a strange contradiction with Trump though, because he's free market and classically American conservative at home; but that includes quite a high level of protectionism, and he wants rid of all the illegals, which you would have thought does benefit these mythical blue collar workers.

It's got parallels IMO with how we can see Brexit showing early signs of benefiting the lowest earners in this country. If anything you would have thought such a rigidly free-market country like America would benefit more from that level of protectionism, because they've never built in the level of cushioning our welfare state provides. We've got a buffer zone of sorts, whereas the effects of market conditions go straight to the source with American workers.

I don't have any numbers or anything so I'd be interesting to hear someone's thoughts on this.
>> No. 434755 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 4:06 pm
434755 spacer
>>434751

One subtle difference between the UK and America is how the individual is expected to provide for himself when he gets in to his twilight years. There's a strong emphasis on building your own pensions and savings throughout your career which is one of the reasons their wages seem so massively inflated compared to ours even when adjusted for currency conversion. An American semi-skilled or skilled manual labourer can earn a good wedge more in real terms compared to a UK labourer in an equivalent profession, but that extra 25% is going straight in to a savings account, a pension and paying for medical insurance. Also guns.

When Americans become unemployed in middle age they can often comfortably live on their savings account for a good few years if they have to, though they will enjoy significantly fewer Corona Cruises in their coffin dodging phase. There's actually a disturbing set of headlines on the circuit at the minute about some large percentage of millennials not having savings, to you and me that just sounds like a personal problem, but it's not. As you correctly pointed out the welfare provision in America is poor which is one reason so many permanent welfare recipients turn to crime to supplement their income. The lack of savings on the part of millennials is a ticking time bomb of a societal problem, when we have another recession or depression many of them are going to regret their snarky tweets about how a $3 coffee a day isn't making them poor, but the people who will regret it even more are the people less impacted by the depression who either have to support these penniless millennials or endure the rise in crime, drug use, vandalism and increased twitter activity that comes with not increasing the welfare provision in America. Of course, the aforementioned permanent welfare recipients will have to see their welfare payments increase too or it would be racist. You'll also see a move away from the SNAP/EBT cards they use which we tried to roll out here, they can only buy certain groceries in certain supermarkets with them. Thankfully our rollout of a similar system was shot down by everyone with half a brain cell.

It's rather startling to think that the "poor" in America can often have hundreds of thousands of dollars in the bank, not the trailer trash obviously but the average Joes of America can quite rightly have nothing and still put money away, pretending the money isn't there. That's why it's not uncommon for largeish (4 figure) transactions to be done with cash/card rather than credit in America. Obviously it's not an every day thing but you wouldn't catch an average American trying to get finance on a shite car, he'll just whack down the 5 grand and walk out with a new 20 year old vehicle.
>> No. 434756 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 4:08 pm
434756 spacer
>>434748
I object to this sentence, not because of the content, but because of the absolutely fucked verbiage.
>> No. 434757 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 4:11 pm
434757 spacer
>>434756

I'm on your side on this one. The whole thing sounded much better in my head as I was typing it out.
>> No. 434760 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 4:34 pm
434760 spacer
>>434755

I've always wondered why american wages were usually about 50-70% higher than UK wages but the healthcare and pension costs do explain that.

That said, now that the NHS is circling the gutter and the government pension pot is well and truly shot, where does that leave us in our land of "£50k a year makes you middle class" mindset?
>> No. 434761 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 4:37 pm
434761 spacer
>>434760
IIRC Americans tend to have a longer working week than here, especially with unpaid overtime, it's frowned upon to actually use your annual leave entitlement and many don't get paid if they can't make it in to work because they're sick.
>> No. 434762 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 4:42 pm
434762 spacer
>>434761

Yep. I work for an american employer at the moment and I get 15 days total annual leave (which only starts accruing when you've been with the company for three months), public holidays are essentially ignored, and there are no sick days. If you're sick you need to either use a PTO (holiday leave day) or stay at home and work remotely ( I work remotely anyway ).

The upside is that I'm raking in just under $200k. The downside is everything else.
>> No. 434763 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:01 pm
434763 spacer
>>434761

I've always been WITH NOTHING TO SAY BECAUSE I AM A CUNT by the lack of workers rights they just put up with in the States, to say it's meant to be the land of the free. They're treated like slaves even in the "good" jobs.

I remember being mates with a Yank bird on MSN back in the day, and talking to her about her job opened my eyes to the fact shit I took for granted then like an hour's lunch (remember when that was a thing?) or statutory sick pay were just non-existent.
>> No. 434764 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:02 pm
434764 spacer
>>434762

So basically, the higher pay is compensation for having fuck all worker's rights, and for having loads more out-of-pocket expenses than in Britain. Which means it comes out about even. In Britain, you make less money, but you've got the NHS and the benefits system if you fall on hard times. Government benefits in the U.S., from all I've heard, are almost literally just a handful of dollars a week in the best case.

The meagre number of paid leave days would personally be a negative for me about working in the U.S. I value the ability to fuck off to Greece or Italy for two weeks in summer without having to explain myself to anybody. What I've noticed in the U.S. is that there is much less of a package holiday culture. You meet people who will proudly tell you that they "haven't taken a day off in ten years". If somebody here at home told me something like that, I'd probably tell them to get their head examined. Instead though, there is a lot of emphasis in the U.S. on weekend holidaying. People put an entire holiday into two and a half days and will think nothing of travelling 500 miles by car for it.
>> No. 434768 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:14 pm
434768 spacer
>>434764
What does handful mean? Under the right circumstances you can definitely get $450/week unemployment benefits in some states. That seems more generous than here.
>> No. 434769 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:15 pm
434769 spacer
>>434763

>lack of workers rights they just put up with in the States, to say it's meant to be the land of the free.


If you've got money, then it is, by and large.

If you really don't have money, you're buggered.


On the other hand, personal money management is also a skill that isn't as honed and widespread among average people as it is here. Typical American families, from what I saw over there, have a much higer "bleed" of expenses that really aren't necessary. People tend to eat out loads more, they will fill up their shopping carts at the grocery store with litle thought about what they actually need at home, and they engage a lot more in retail therapy just because they can, and they max out their credit cards and then moan that they pay 20 percent interest on their exhausted $10,000 credit card limit.

Then again, their whole culture plays fast and loose with personal finances in a way that we can't fully grasp here. Just clicking through the TV ad breaks there, you are bombarded with used car ads that tell you you can get a $40,000 pickup truck at zero-percent financing, no questions asked, bad credit not a problem. "Come on down and take one home today" seems to be sort of the mantra of car salesmanship over there. Like you're going out to buy a packet of crisps. So it's no surprise that nobody gives much thought to the fact what kind of a serious commitment a $40K consumer loan really is. And there is an entire repossession industry that thrives on that fact and makes hefty commissions off towing cars back out of people's driveways when a loan goes tits up.
>> No. 434770 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:17 pm
434770 spacer
>>434764
> In Britain, you make less money, but you've got the NHS and the benefits system if you fall on hard times.

Except you don't. Our government bleeds your savings dry before offering you a penny in benefits.
>> No. 434771 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:18 pm
434771 spacer
>>434768

Those have got to be some pretty exceptional circumstances, like those tabloid families earning £24k a year here.

Also this thread has just reminded me I've missed the deadline to buy extra annual leave this year, so I'm going to have to put up with the usual 28 days like some sort of peasant. Fuck.

I'm still tempted to book 5 weeks off all in one go around July/July-ish though.
>> No. 434772 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:19 pm
434772 spacer
>>434763
Having a fair few US friends over the years and going over to visit them opened my eyes a lot too, especially when one of them had a child. It's insane, especially the time off thing, yet I imagine the higher ups see it as the greatest thing in the world that American employees can often be relied upon to work against their own self interest. There are some very poor people over there who will fight against universal healthcare and the like, regardless that a significant percentage are one illness/hospital trip away from bankruptcy. I've known quite a few who will actively avoid going to see a doctor for anything in the same way they will never take time off work.
>> No. 434773 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:23 pm
434773 spacer
>>434771

>Those have got to be some pretty exceptional circumstances

I would asssume that $450 is for a family with numerous children and both parents out of work. Which then comes to around $1800 a month, i.e. £1400. Try feeding a family of four with that kind of budget, keeping in mind that that still doesn't cover things like health insurance, or your mortgage payments, or school supplies and lunch money for your kids.
>> No. 434774 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:26 pm
434774 spacer
>>434772

At least in the technology area a lot of companies in the US have four weeks paternity leave which beats the shit out of anything (western) europe offers.

Companies I've had experience with offer subsidised breakfasts, lunches an dinners that out compete anything the local town offers and even have dental vans three times a week while medical insurance covers your entire family.

Obviously as a foreign contractor I don't get any of these benefits but I do get to pay 40% of my income to an incompetent government who can't even run a a health or pension service.

Endless mirth.
>> No. 434775 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:28 pm
434775 spacer
>>434772

I had this debate with one of my American friends. She said she was against UK- or European-style universal healthcare, because it would mean that America would lose its standing as the world leader in medical treatment and research. I then asked her, what if you get sick, will that top-notch American medial treatment cover you? And she said no, she'd personally never be able to afford it, but that it was still good knowing it existed.

I'm not sure I see even the slightest logic in that.
>> No. 434776 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:31 pm
434776 spacer
>>434764
>You meet people who will proudly tell you that they "haven't taken a day off in ten years".

Five years ago the BBC ran a story about how 25% of Americans receive no paid leave whatsoever and 40% don't use their full annual leave entitlement; I believe the average was taking 9 out of 15 days. Even for unpaid leave you had to give a lot of advance notice and there was no guarantee you'd get it. At the time a lot of the comments from Seppos were about how they love money and how it proves they're hardworking and not lazy.
>> No. 434777 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:31 pm
434777 spacer
>>434772

>I imagine the higher ups see it as the greatest thing in the world that American employees can often be relied upon to work against their own self interest

Naturally. This is a salient point, too.

People often wonder what causes such a large proportion of nutjobs conspiracy guff coming from America. In my view, it's because that's what fills the void left by the lack of class consciousness. If you dig into the whole illuminati/NWO thing, it's really just a low-brow analogue of basic Marxist theory, struggling to take shape because the people trying to articulate it have been raised on Fox News propaganda in the middle of the cold war.

Many of the things we would call conspiracies are not conspiracies at all, if you consider them merely as the rich acting in their own class self-interest. It's not some over-arching evil plan, it's just capital doing as it always has; but for someone who genuinely believes in the "American Dream", it's nearly impossible to reconcile.
>> No. 434778 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:34 pm
434778 spacer
>>434775
>I'm not sure I see even the slightest logic in that.

It's genuinely mad. There's now people in the US saying, like when Trump got elected, that they'll leave the country if Bernie gets elected. Alright, so where are they going to go in the world that DOESN'T have universal healthcare and is a first world country? The mind boggles.
>> No. 434780 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 5:41 pm
434780 spacer

k9j86eqs2wg41.jpg
434780434780434780
>>434778
It's just the biggest hissy fit. Nobody I know who threatened to leave the country over Brexit actually followed through with it.
>> No. 434782 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 6:25 pm
434782 spacer
>>434774
I got 6 weeks paternity leave when my daughter was born. I split it up, into doing a month off and once myself and mrs were settled in I went back for 2 weeks almost part time, to make sure everything was ticking over. Then had 2 more full weeks and another 2 weeks of my holiday on top.

>>434776
I love money and consumerism. There's something about just pulling a sickie to spend a day in your pants wanking and playing video games. Out of the 5 days paid sick leave I can get, I will pull 2 or 3 sickies a year. I even plan out what days where I won't need to be in the office for anything important. As far as the company concerned I just have occasional flare ups of IBS. Although in my case it stands for Irritated By Shit. It's never Fridays or Mondays though and i can still be reached by phone if it get desperate.
>> No. 434783 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 7:52 pm
434783 spacer
>>434764
> In Britain, you make less money, but you've got the NHS and the benefits system if you fall on hard times. Government benefits in the U.S., from all I've heard, are almost literally just a handful of dollars a week in the best case.

Being in Britain but working for an american employer means that ou earn the higher money but still have to spaff 40% of it towards a broken healthcare system and a Ponzi pension pot I'll never see.

I'm not particularly chuffed about it either. TBH I'd rather live in the states and have the company pay my health insurance and top up my 401k.
>> No. 434786 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 8:23 pm
434786 spacer
>>434783

So why don't you?

Once you discover you still don't like it because you have to pay 20% towards a government that basically spends it on nothing but tanks, you can give being a freeman of the land a try.
>> No. 434787 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 8:24 pm
434787 spacer
>>434783

>towards a broken healthcare system

I'm kind of tired of people like you moaning about the NHS. It is still one of the best universal healthcare systems in the world, and it ensures that you get free or at least affordable treatment for nearly any disease known to man.

The alternative is that private health insurance companies will kick you out in the U.S. after you've had an expensive to treat illness. And many people, because they have inadequate or no health insurance, end up with massive medical bills that take them years to pay off. You could then argue that it's a pure numbers game, and that the rates to pay off your medical bills come out even against the higher taxes you pay in the UK to enable the NHS to exist. But there is such a thing as medical bankruptcy in the U.S., where people have to declare bankruptcy because they can no longer pay off past medical bills, e.g. when they lose their job. Also, many people in the U.S. lose their health insurance when they lose their job. And if you then get sick, your medical expenses out of pocket can be the final nail in the coffin.

Americans will often tell you that you're only really free if you're also free to fail. The amazing thing is, getting back to what we said earlier about social engineering, that even people who have failed catastrophically in their own lives with little hope of things changing for them still believe that that's a valid statement.
>> No. 434788 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 8:30 pm
434788 spacer
>>434787
For a supposedly developed country, isn't America the absolute worst in this regard? There have to be insurance-based systems that work better than theirs does.
>> No. 434791 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 9:16 pm
434791 spacer
>>434787
Like anything thats 70 years old the NHS isn't going to without it's weird idiosyncrasies. Whilst definitely not broken it definitely needs a good overhaul. Saying that all that it's far better than the septic system of fuck the poor.

A little over 3 years ago my wife almost died due to an ectopic pregnancy, she first thought it was a slightly heavier than usual period with cramps. To make a long story short after she collapsed due to blood loss and got rushed to the hospital. 2 Surgeries and a week in hospital later she's fine. Also my daughter will be daughter will be 2 in a couple of months.

If the same thing happened in the States, after Insurance pays some of it we would be practically bankrupt paying for it.
>> No. 434792 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 9:18 pm
434792 spacer
>>434791
How much have you had to drink?
>> No. 434793 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 9:22 pm
434793 spacer
>>434792
On my 4th whiskey.
>> No. 434794 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 9:22 pm
434794 spacer
>>434788
Germany?
>> No. 434796 Anonymous
22nd February 2020
Saturday 11:00 pm
434796 spacer
>>434794

The health insurance industry is highly regulated in Germany though. Basic health insurance under which you get treatment for free similar to the NHS is provided by private insurance corporations which get a percentage of your monthly pay, but what they can and can't do is greatly limited by a whole host of laws and regulations, so it actually resembles more a system like the NHS.
>> No. 434798 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:30 am
434798 spacer
>>434796

So it's the best of both worlds?

Thorough regulation is what the US system needs I think. It's not fundamentally that it's private that it's shit, it's that it has complete freedom and power over itself, so it exists more as the retail end of various pharma and insurance companies, than anything resembling healthcare.

It's like the opposite problem of the trains here. That's a system totally unsuited to being private and needs to be centralised to operate effectively, with the private companies just mooching off whatever they can. Whereas US medical care is too efficient for pure profit mongering and doesn't need the government at all to keep rolling over massive incomes, so the government desperately needs to step in and crack down.
>> No. 434799 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 5:47 am
434799 spacer
>>434787

>Americans will often tell you that you're only really free if you're also free to fail. The amazing thing is, getting back to what we said earlier about social engineering, that even people who have failed catastrophically in their own lives with little hope of things changing for them still believe that that's a valid statement.

Perhaps the true feat of social engineering would be getting people to turn their back on their philosophy just because they're having a bad time in life. You're the worst type of spineless weasel I've ever come across.
>> No. 434801 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 9:25 am
434801 spacer
>>434788

>For a supposedly developed country, isn't America the absolute worst in this regard?

Yes. Our debate about healthcare has become completely bankrupt, because we only ever compare our system to an exceptionally awful outlier.

Compared to equivalent heathcare systems in other developed countries, the NHS is pretty mediocre. It's exceptionally cost-efficient, but it's also quite bad at keeping people alive, which you'd think would be a fairly important aim of any healthcare system. Pretty much every developed country bar the US provides universal healthcare, but we're the only country that thinks we're special for doing it.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-international-comparisons

&list=PLkfBg8ML-gIngk82SUbTp6Og_KkYfJ6oF
>> No. 434804 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 11:57 am
434804 spacer
>>434799
Usually when you are proven wrong, in a catastrophic manner like bankruptcy in a country with no safety net, the desired outcome is that you say "oh shit, I was wrong" and then come to the conclusion "maybe we should provide a safety net so that people like me don't get completely fucked over". You're an inarticulate stoat, the ugliest mustelid imaginable.
>> No. 434805 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:01 pm
434805 spacer
>>434804

It depends really. If you believe people are not much better than the animals they might say "oh, this system didn't work for me therefore I should tear it all down" rather than accepting that they failed but the system itself is pretty good for most people in society. Some of us believe that humans should hold themselves to a higher standard than "is this working for me in this moment" but each to his own I suppose.
>> No. 434806 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:18 pm
434806 spacer
>>434805

I can only imagine this is a lack of imagination or callousness on your part. Even a cursory glance at the U.S. health system reveals endless stories of people paying extortionate medical fees for circumstances which are absolutely no fault of their own.

We provide a safety net because physical health is irreplaceable and very easy lost. I am hugely grateful I don't lead a life where I could be stuck in a massive amount of debt because of a bad fall, or a careless driver, or cancer, etc..

I actually think many Americans see the error in their system, too. According to Gallup, the percentage of people polled who believe their healthcare system has "major problems" or "is in a state of crisis" has increased from 49% in 2001 to around 70% in 2018: https://news.gallup.com/poll/245873/seven-maintain-negative-view-healthcare-system.aspx

The American CDC has also been reporting a three year rolling decrease in life expectancy for certain groups in the U.S., particularly middle-aged working class white males, though it's said this is due to an increase in drug use and suicide: https://www.pnas.org/content/112/49/15078

Worth noting that's has been a slight uptick at the beginning of this year, but a decline in life expectancy in a country with as many advantages as the U.S. is obscene.
>> No. 434807 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:21 pm
434807 spacer
>>434799

>You're the worst type of spineless weasel I've ever come across.

Now, now. And again, what good does the statement do you that you're "only really free if you're also free to fail" if you are among the ones that have failed, and like I said, without hope for things getting better?

It's all too easy to say something like that when you are riding high and prospering. My impression is that it's just a complacent, self-righteous phrase said by the rich, which really means "Don't expect me to help out the poor, they deserve to be where they are".

America was founded on Calvinist principles. Calvinism, in a nutshell, is the idea that it's determined at birth if you will go to heaven when you die or not, but that God won't tell you beforehand. It's a big secret. And so the way to find out if you're among the chosen ones after all is to work as hard in your life as you can, and if you are then blessed with material wealth as a result of your hard work, it is a good indication that God looks favourably on you and that you are among his chosen ones to go to heaven. Work itself then assumes intrinsic value, because it pleases God and will show you if you are a chosen one.

This explains much of the material and financial wealth that the U.S. was able to amass in the last 300 years (besides being lucky enough to colonise a continent with vast unspoilt natural resources), but the principle has also been perverted by those in the U.S. who now have loads of money, in that the American Dream is still being dangled like a carrot, but it just isn't realistic for the vast majority of people who work their arses off to maintain even a modest middle class standard of living, and for those that fall through the cracks and end up poor, and possibly homeless. Which is then your own fault because you didn't try hard enough.
>> No. 434809 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:39 pm
434809 spacer
>>434806

Your statement about the circumstances being no fault of their own is a bit double barrelled, the insinuation on the face of it is nobody can help falling sick which is true, but the other implication is there was nothing they could have done to prevent the extortionate medical fees which is simply untrue, they could have had insurance which has been fairly commonplace for a while, it's just that the current generation has opted to forgo insurance in favour of complaining about needing insurance in the hopes their gamble pays off and no future generations need insurance. One point these types of people always make is the disproportionately high cost of the itemised billing compared to the real cost of the service, it's no secret that American medical bills are around 10x what should be paid for the service. This is because insurance companies negotiate medical bills down to about a tenth of the price, the inflation of the bill itself is probably because insurance companies would attempt to negotiate even reasonable bills. Whether it was intentional or not the effect is that insurance is essentially a necessity in America today. It's not a hidden fact people use to shout got ya at cancer patients, it's fairly well known that you're gambling by not having health insurance in America, yet people choose to do it anyway. It would be the equivalent of giving tax refunds on NHS contributions here and then allowing people to either use the refund to buy insurance or gamble on not getting ill and keep the money. America is very much about choice, but Americans don't get to choose to not set up their safety net and then complain about other people not having set the net up for them.

Your point about life expectancy is irritating for a whole host of reasons, the most obnoxious of which (because of the prevalence of the sentiment in all aspects of life today) is that constant growth is not only possible, but that not having constant growth is bad. Everything expands and contracts, if your system is constantly growing there's some funny business going on. Earlier you accused me of being callous and you're right, life expectancy for the purposes of impartial and reasonable discussion can only be done callously. It does not bring me any pleasure to say this and were I unable to cast off my societal cloak I would not be unable to say this but sometimes life expectancy can, will and must go down. Over time the average will rise and the oscillation will move around a higher average as we develop better drugs and techniques, but a single downtick does not mean the sky is falling. It means circumstances are varied and this has been a particularly bad year for deaths in people below the average age of death for one reason or another. Next year might be bad, so might the one after that, then we might see a rise in life expectancy and so on. If the system is outputting a higher average every single year we're not in a stable position and we need to look at various aspects of our society and rush some mass changes to deal with the consequences of bizarre and frankly unwanted growth. You, being so uncallous must realise that the harm caused by a constant year on year rise in life expectancy would cause serious hardship for many vulnerable groups in society, not least the old people who are sitting in care homes in their vegetative state with longer and longer wait times on getting their dirty nappies changed because we're ploughing the old folk homes full of more and more old people while pretending nothing is changing despite our year on year growth growing yearly.
>> No. 434810 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:48 pm
434810 spacer
>>434807

I can't comment on the religious aspect of your post but my implication isn't that the American system is good, merely that trying your hand at the system, failing, then declaring the system broken because of your own failure is petulant and spineless at best. If some middle class wanker with 3 cars and an 8 figure savings account wants to try his hand at bringing communism to the U.S.A. I say go for it, if a bedsit Trotskyite screams about eating the rich because he dropped out of high school and now can't get a job I'm less impressed.

The American system is bad, but that's not the point at issue. The point is how declaring death to America because you personally failed at the American dream is just fucking puerile and the people who enable, nay, encourage such petty revenge based thinking are even worse than the losers who couldn't cut it in the first place.
>> No. 434811 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:49 pm
434811 spacer
>>434809

What's true enough is that many Americans just aren't very good at personal finances and personal money management. Like I said, the temptations of high-limit credit cards and zero-percent financing on $40K cars and other pitfalls of consumer culture are many, and loads of people just play fast and loose with their personal finances until they hit a wall.

I'm generally against paternalistic systems of government that make choices for you and tell you to do things that you don't necessarily see the wisdom of, but I think health insurance is one of those areas where a country's government needs to make sure people have it. As we are seeing in the U.S., the ensuing financial risks, and health risks you take on by deciding not to have health insurance because you are free to choose not to, are so great that the government has a responsibility to protect people from poor life choices.

Again, not in all aspects of your personal life, if any. But because poor health potentially has such a negative effect on your entire life, both in terms of finances and quality of life, the government is right to make sure you pay into the system, which will then also be there to help you when you become ill.
>> No. 434812 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 12:51 pm
434812 spacer
>>434809
>Americans don't get to choose to not set up their safety net and then complain about other people not having set the net up for them.
No, many of them don't get to choose to set up a safety net at all, and it is these people who suffer grossly so that the better-off can make grandiloquent statements about the importance of personal choice and responsibility. And here you are, toeing the line. I don't know where you fit into it, and I'm not trying to shame you personally, but honestly, defending a morally bankrupt system is itself a morally bankrupt activity.
>> No. 434813 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:01 pm
434813 spacer
>>434811

I agree that the best way to handle the problem is complicated, I'm not sure enough in my own assessment of the situation to say whether forced payments to public healthcare are objectively good. I think one huge underlying principle which impacts one's stance on the matter is one's tendency towards either the good of the individual or the good of the collective, and I think America is very much geared towards the good of the individual. Is that changing in modern times? It certainly appears so, but then it's hard to say whether the opponents of individual responsibility for one's healthcare are a growing force which will sweep the nation or if they're just a very vocal minority of very silly people. I suppose time will tell at the ballot box.

>>434812

There's a certain level of underclass where you're just born to suffer, that's a very different group to the group previously mentioned. I have no problem with these people smashing the system, in fact I have no problem with the people who had a chance but failed deciding to smash the system either. What I do have a problem with, and it's really my only point despite all these paragraphs, is people taking advantage of emotionally vulnerable people who have recently failed at life and encouraging them to smash the system because they were unable to play well. It's the revolutionary equivalent of a rebound fuck, your Marxists are only there because they just got out of a bad relationship. That makes you a bad person.
>> No. 434814 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:04 pm
434814 spacer
You know, I'm actually not sure which ones are more deluded. The morons who think the American system genuinely gives everyone a fair shot at success and that failure is an indicator of personal shortcomings; or the wokies banging on about microaggressions and cultural appropriation and how it's a tragedy that there are no black people in the Oscars.

Truly everybody in the modern world has the mind worms, don't they.
>> No. 434815 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:07 pm
434815 spacer

atheists.png
434815434815434815
>>434814
>> No. 434816 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:09 pm
434816 spacer
>>434815

Personally I find people who use webcomics to take the piss out of smug faux-centrist fence sitters more annoying than the base two groups at issue and the smug faux-centrist fence sitter deriding them both.
>> No. 434817 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:12 pm
434817 spacer
>>434815

The problem lies in the pervasive division between one or the other.

There's a Noam Chomsky quite about how the best way to control a debate is to present it as a binary choice between two alternatives, with no acknowledgement that anything else is possible.

But yes, Mr Smartarse XKCD poster. You got me.
>> No. 434818 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 1:23 pm
434818 spacer
>>434816
Well personally I find.. ad infinitum.
>> No. 434819 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 2:15 pm
434819 spacer
>>434815
This comic has always bothered me. It's a succinct and successful critique of the "South Park take", where someone sits on the fence being rude about both sides without ever putting any skin in the game to receive their due criticism back. But there are also many, many topics where two opposing sides are either both wrong or both cunts, and for a while back there it seemed like any time anyone who pointed that out got this comic in response.

(And that's leaving aside the lack of self-awareness in the comic itself, which I'd guess is more down to brevity rather than imagination, but even so.)
>> No. 434820 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 2:22 pm
434820 spacer
>>434819
It's easier to drag everybody down to the same level you're playing on so you can criticise them rather than admit there's a slight chance of yourself being wrong, then you don't have to change your argument or improve the debate at all. The important thing is to belittle someones belief so that you win, because it's all winning or losing now.
>> No. 434821 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 2:25 pm
434821 spacer
>>434809

Many people become bankrupt with medical fees despite having insurance. This is especially true for cancer, which requires repeated expensive treatments:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/14/health-insurance-medical-bankruptcy-debt
There is absolutely nothing double barrelled about my statement in that context. I even specified cancer as one of the reasons in my post.
>> No. 434822 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 2:57 pm
434822 spacer
>>434821

Yes, that really is inexcusable. It goes back to America being a dog eat dog country, insurers can and will fuck you even if you have cancer. Your article doesn't detail the exact nature of how Susanne LeClair got fucked 12 years ago but it does mention some important points about the case, she had healthcare provided by her employer rather than investigating and choosing her own policy and she mistakenly went to a hospital which was not covered by her insurer. While nobody should have additional stress placed on them during times of crisis, especially with cancer, that's how the American system works. You are required to be familiar with your own health insurance policy and act accordingly. These horror stories are based on two facts, the fact that insurers are cunts and the fact that people are ignorant of their own health insurance policies.

Regarding my first point, insurers in America seem to have a "let's give it a go" attitude towards attempting to not pay out, this article suggests that the appeals procedure is a very poorly constructed wall which protects against the general population being paid what they're owed by their insurance providers. Should people have to go through this when they have fucking cancer? No. But that's how America works.

https://www.verywellhealth.com/things-know-health-insurance-for-cancer-513996

>The good news is that the denial is not a case of "end-all, be-all"—you can fight the decision. You would be surprised how many denials are reversed.

I feel like we're both in unfamiliar territory here so I don't want to go too much further down this rabbit hole, the number of acronyms and types of payment involved in the American medical insurance world is bizarre, frustrating and in dire need of reform. I had to look up exactly what a copay was at first, I assumed it was a monthly premium and was shocked when I mistakenly believed she was paying $300 a month to not have her cancer covered. I was wrong, copay is basically an excess, but for every time you visit a hospital or doctor. My overall belief is that if the American system is fine for most people then the people it's supposedly failing must be making some mistakes themselves, a system doesn't just magically work for some people but not others. It's likely that a lot of people are not familiar with their healthcare policy or do the equivalent of buying a 3rd party fire and theft policy but because it has healthcare in the title assume they're comprehensively insured universally.

If your argument is that we should help thick people beat cancer I agree, but since we're not in America we already do that. If I were an American I might have a very different attitude, as I would have been raised with very different values. The Americans seem to place a lot of value on doing your own research rather than just assuming someone else will fix your lack of effort for you and I'm not wholly inclined to disagree with them, I'm just not so fanatical about their world view as to want to import it here.

As an aside I'm curious about this point.

>There is absolutely nothing double barrelled about my statement in that context.

I very clearly laid out my reasoning, that the statement "through no fault of their own" can be taken in two ways depending on how you read it. Can you explain more clearly why you disagree with that assessment?
>> No. 434823 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 3:15 pm
434823 spacer
>>434822
>These horror stories are based on two facts, the fact that insurers are cunts and the fact that people are ignorant of their own health insurance policies.
>But that's how America works.
But that doesn't have to be how America works. There doesn't need to be a colossal meta-structure of exploitative middlemen hovering over public healthcare, and it doesn't make sense logically or morally for that to be the case. Defeatist statements about current actualities are meaningless, especially when practical and affordable solutions are staring you in the face, via almost every other developed country in the world.
>> No. 434824 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 3:21 pm
434824 spacer
>>434822
>I very clearly laid out my reasoning, that the statement "through no fault of their own" can be taken in two ways depending on how you read it. Can you explain more clearly why you disagree with that assessment?

I did that through example. The U.S. system is one which creates instances where people cannot be realistically held accountable for their medical bankruptcy. There's plenty of information on this, both quantitative and qualitative.

Frankly, your post was rambling, and it seems that you are totally ignorant of the realities of U.S. healthcare (and have the cheek to lump me in saying that we're both out of our depth). I just addressed your first point about people "taking a gamble by not having healthcare", with the very obvious fact that many people go bankrupt even with insurance.

You should also be aware that about half the population of the U.S. gets their medical insurance through their employer, in a country that openly encourages wage suppression through a certain controlled level of unemployment as an economic strategy.

You go on to talk about why you find the CDC stats "irritating", which I don't have the time or patience to get through, but the broader point I am making is that the economic and health systems are arranged in a way in the U.S. that poses a devastating risk for the individual. That you'd say the point of the NHS is to "stop thick people getting cancer" shows a level of contempt for the public I'm not going to bother dealing with. I have a feeling that no number of studies or stats showing that this is a systemic problem rather than an individual failing will get through to you, because you must just be innately smarter or more careful than those "thick people who get cancer".
>> No. 434827 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 3:34 pm
434827 spacer
>>434824

Who hurt you?
>> No. 434839 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 7:35 pm
434839 spacer
You know what, this thread makes me wonder- When we assess the supposed meritocracy of the United States from a British perspective, are we perhaps judging a little too harshly the relative ease of social mobility? We have a very rigid class structure, but that's built on the fact we can be stuck in a dead end job even if we are well educated and successful; if you can't or won't, for whatever reason, uproot your life and go where the jobs are, you're fucked, and it's a stark contrast between our "well off" places and our shit ones.

In America however, could it plausibly be the case that because everyone is so thick, that it's actually easier to climb the ladder? I almost spat out my drink when you said "America is based on doing more of your own research", but actually there might be something to that. America is a country where they don't mind leaving thickos to be thick and wallow in their own muck; whereas we have strived for centuries to make sure we have a reasonably low background level of retardation. Even our lowliest chavs have at least had a decent education, for the most part- At least compared to America, where they're happy to allow you to be the proverbial paste-eater well into adulthood.
>> No. 434844 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 7:58 pm
434844 spacer
>>434839

People often talk about a poverty of aspiration in the UK, and they're right. We don't aspire to be more than we were born, the aspirational here aspire to be the best they can be with respect to their birth.

The poverty of aspiration in America is different, if we had trailer parks here (not gyppos) those aspirational trailer trash would at least aspire to be the best lower class they can be in a British cultural system. Their aspiration is different, it's all or nothing, it's "I will be trailer trash for life or I will be Eminem." Aspiration in America is about changing class, usually forcefully (forcefully meaning big, explosive, zero to hero) whereas aspiration in Britain is being a plumber who gets all the plumbing qualifications so he can be a middle manager in a plumbing company, so his kids can become doctors or something.

In British culture our corporations (insurance companies) are kept in line, ironically, by the tabloid press. Consider an alternate reality scenario where the UK had an American style insurance system and some 40 year old mum of 4 got fucked by the insurance company because she bought 3rd party fire and theft insurance. The headlines for weeks would be "Company Name Nightmare" with the mum of 4 being prominently interviewed and displayed on the centre page detailing her misery at the hands of the insurance company while she had cancer despite having the "OmniPlatinum Apex Health Coverage Package." There would be fucking murder in the press, it would go to court and a judge in a silly wig would deliver a scalding scold to the company representative, you know the kind, "you misled this woman in to believing she had full health insurance coverage with a flashy name while conspiring to deprive her of the care she thought she was paying for in her hour of need." The kind of shit insurance companies pull in America would never fly here because we care about each other and our legal system is very much based on the slightly below average denominator. Our consumer regulation is perfect because it doesn't cater to thickos or high fliers, it goes for the slightly below average denominator and ensures that companies have to be fairly honest in their marketing practices.

In America the slightly below average, i.e. a good 25% of people get fucked, because they get lumped in with the thickos, and as long as the thickos aren't bothering their betters they get left to their own devices and Judge Judy. A single IQ point makes a huge difference in the percentage of a population setting aside a day and getting familiar with their health insurance policy. That single IQ point encompasses a double digit percentage of the American population.

For further consideration, we're an island of ~70m, America has a population of ~300m. Our landmass is probably about the size of an average state, of which they have 50. Their school system quite simply cannot be as robust as ours because of the way delegation of power works. Their welfare system cannot be as robust as our because of how the delegation of power works. And so on ad nauseam. We can ensure that minimum standards are in fact minimum standards, the Americans are not so lucky.
>> No. 434851 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 10:25 pm
434851 spacer
>>434844

I was more just thinking in the direction that like, the thicker your average person is, the easier it would be for a person of relatively normal or above average intelligence to rise above them.

Whereas in a compassionate system like ours with all our equal opportunities and help putting people's feet on the ladder (to an extent) there's simply tougher competition.

I'd still say our system is better (I would say that considering I'm a dyed in the wool commie) but it's an angle I'd not considered before. The lack of compassion for others is in no small part due to the fact others are directly in competition with you, and you want them to be as easy to beat as possible considering.
>> No. 434858 Anonymous
23rd February 2020
Sunday 11:38 pm
434858 spacer
>>434844
>For further consideration, we're an island of ~70m, America has a population of ~300m. Our landmass is probably about the size of an average state, of which they have 50. Their school system quite simply cannot be as robust as ours because of the way delegation of power works. Their welfare system cannot be as robust as our because of how the delegation of power works. And so on ad nauseam. We can ensure that minimum standards are in fact minimum standards, the Americans are not so lucky.
Why not? Each of those average states is run by a state government, there's no reason they can't do just as good a job as ours does, or can potentially do. There's no reason a federal government can't delegate enough power to the states to let them run themselves properly. There might be reasons they don't, but those aren't reasons they can't.
>> No. 434862 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 12:51 am
434862 spacer
>>434858

The 40% tax bracket in the UK starts at £50,001. The 40% tax bracket in the U.S.A. does not start. Unless my source is incomplete in which case it starts somewhere above $510,301.

To answer your question more honestly consider a hierarchical structure. At the top there is 1 guy, A.

A delegates 10 regions to 10 people, 10B.

Each B delegates 1 area to 10 people, 10C.

So far we have
1A
10B
10C
Each C delegates being a headmaster to 10 people, D.
For every Minister for Education we have 10,000 headmasters.

Now let's go to America.

A delegates 10 regions to 10 people, 10B.

Each B delegates 1 area to 10 people, 10C.

Each C delegates 1 school to 10 people, 10D.

So far we have
1A
10B
10C
10D
Each D deleates being a principal to 10 people, E.
For every Secretary of Education we have 100,000 principals.

Do you understand how failure, incompetence and malpractice might be better hidden under the second scenario or do I need to explain that?
>> No. 434863 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 2:20 am
434863 spacer
>>434858
The division of power in the US is bottom-up, not top-down. It's not for the federal government to delegate power to the states, the Constitution delegates power to the federal government using a "conferred power" model. Anything not specifically granted to the federal government is a matter for the states.
>> No. 434864 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 6:42 am
434864 spacer
>>434863

Yeah maybe until 1865.
>> No. 434869 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 3:10 pm
434869 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/18/bees-may-struggle-in-winds-caused-by-global-warming-study-finds


>A hardworking honey bee might feel aggrieved to be tricked into a garden shed to feed from a fake flower. Worse, she is blasted by a cheap household fan. And then timed to see how many fake flowers she can visit in 90 seconds.

>But the honey bees’ tormentors are trying to help them: their ordeal is a controlled experiment that reveals how high wind speeds significantly reduce the efficiency of their foraging.


You need to stop doing that, shedlad.
>> No. 434870 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 5:13 pm
434870 spacer
>>434869
>she
Are drones female? Aren't they sexless or something?
>> No. 434873 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 7:31 pm
434873 spacer
>>434870

Only ladybugs are female.
>> No. 434876 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 7:41 pm
434876 spacer
>>434869
> shedlad

I've been seriously thinking about bees for quite a long time. Perfectly compatible with the eco-shed lifestyle.
>> No. 434881 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 8:03 pm
434881 spacer
>>434876

My aunt has bees. The honey they produce is quite delicious, but it must be fucking annoying living next to a person who keeps bees in their back garden. Her hives are right adjacent to her neighbour's garden, and she says he's fine with them, but I know I would be livid if my neighbour decided one day that he'd try his hand at apiculture.
>> No. 434882 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 8:10 pm
434882 spacer
>>434869
This reads like nothing but a mad sciencelads excuse to monumentally piss off bees and then unleash them on the locals. I was getting angry enough this morning when the wind kept smacking my umbrella into my head.
>> No. 434930 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 7:54 pm
434930 spacer

maxresdefault.jpg
434930434930434930
The so-called 'anti-Greta' is 19 years old but looks more like she's 14/15. Greta also looks a fair bit younger than she actually is. Is this all some sort of closet carpet-bagger plot?
>> No. 434931 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 8:06 pm
434931 spacer
>>434930
All righties do is complain about Thunberg being a paid shill, so they paid their own shill as a comeback? I can’t stand these obstinate dicks.
>> No. 434932 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 8:09 pm
434932 spacer
>>434930

No, it's propaganda from the same people that brought you "second hand smoke isn't bad for you".
>> No. 434933 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 8:21 pm
434933 spacer
>>434930

Sort of, maybe. Probably not. Naomi Seibt was probably chosen as the front of the anti-alarmism movement because she looks similar to Greta Thunberg while being more attractive. A lot of people make assumptions and process feelings based on appearance. Both girls have similar things going on, small frames, elongated necks compared to average, narrow facial features compared to average, rounder cheeks compared to average, and while both have average noses both of their noses are about the same. Choosing a frontman who looks similar to the opposing frontman ensures that the speakers are judged by the public on the content, quality and marketing of their message rather than appearance. As a loose example see the Nixon/Kennedy debates in which Nixon received better reception than Kennedy among radio listeners but the reverse was true among TV viewers. The commonly accepted reason for this is not simply demographic differences between radio and TV audiences, I assume they accounted for that, it is that Nixon had sweat on his lip on the TV and looked like a liar. Now that we've headed off any debate on whether appearance is relevant to how the public or most individuals receive a message let's move on to the carpet-bagger aspect.

I don't believe Greta was chosen as the frontman of the alarmism movement for directly carpet-baggery reasons, rather I believe it's a more insidious carpet-bagger-like plot to "empower" young adults across the world. Teenagers are notoriously stupid, especially in groups and therefore easy to manipulate. Over the last few decades the worth of a teenager's opinion in politics has gone from "aww ain't that cute" to "this teenager's opinion on this issue is as important as this 50 year old's opinion who has worked in the relevant industry all his life." The age of having your opinion taken seriously has dropped and dropped and dropped, when Greta came to the stage at 15 we were beginning to treat 18 year olds as well educated, well read, well travelled men with good ideas, I vaguely remember something about Scotland wanting to let 16 year olds vote back in Indyref too, or was it the general elections as well? Greta's arrival and subsequent actions focused on making middle teenagers a viable political force, you'll notice that they and Greta aren't actually tasked with thinking though, because the teenagers would quickly loose interest when they realised they lacked knowledge and had no idea what to actually do, instead Greta and these teenagers demand that someone do something. I actually remember one video in which Greta says "we are not here to provide solutions we are here to demand solutions" but I can't find it now so I'm probably lying. The sheer power of this movement, the ability to make middle teenagers strike and demand that someone do something to change an issue is one that should not be underestimated. There's virtually no dropoff from the group as none of the teenagers can be challenged from outside, they're not actually saying anything other than such and such situation must be changed and that position is right now one that can't really be argued against. I'm sure the issue of the day will be similarly unimpeachable in the future too. These middle teenagers aren't actually challenged themselves, in fact they love the anarchy, it's a day off school to be in the sun with friends, and there's no authority figure saying "stop being a little shit and get back in school," in fact, all the authority figures are praising you. I'm not able to say there's definitely no sexual carpet-bagger agenda going on, the machinations of the people who think they rule the world are a mystery to me, what I am able to say is we're definitely mindfucking our kids and no good will come of it.
>> No. 434934 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 8:53 pm
434934 spacer
>>434933
>Greta's arrival and subsequent actions focused on making middle teenagers a viable political force, you'll notice that they and Greta aren't actually tasked with thinking though, because the teenagers would quickly loose interest when they realised they lacked knowledge and had no idea what to actually do, instead Greta and these teenagers demand that someone do something.

You see it a fair bit in the Guardian, particularly opinion pieces by the likes of Jones or Toynbee. "I have identified the problem of x, someone else should come up with a meaningful solution to it." It works a charm on people with low mental and emotional maturity.
>> No. 434935 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:01 pm
434935 spacer
>>434934

There are plenty of possible solutions to this particular problem, it's simply that people aren't acting on them. The issue is that if you start actually trying to get people to do one in particular then you get dismissed as a shill for whatever that thing is, or just given excuses that relate to that one method. You can absolutely see this on twitter threads about ER; they're accused of being green industry shills, capitalists, communists, anarchists or basically whatever the commenter's specific bugbear is.
>> No. 434936 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:10 pm
434936 spacer
>>434935

I'm sure Dr. Leech Leechington, owner of the biggest leech farm in Europe got called mean names when he found and marketed the cure for all medical maladies in the middle age, but the man kept at it and now we don't have cancer anymore. I'm sure his descendants are billionaires too. I think we're reaching the stage at which we have raised enough awareness of climate change now, perhaps we should move on to deciding on a course of action. We can do it in some kind of avant-garde nouveau democraco-noir fashion to avoid accusations of shilling for Big CO2 Absorbing Coffee Filters if we must. Maybe an app with Greta's face on the icon forcefully downloaded on to all iPads which allow anyone under 12 to vote on which method to use to fix the death sphere we have created.
>> No. 434937 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:11 pm
434937 spacer
>>434936

Why are you so bitter?
>> No. 434938 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:14 pm
434938 spacer
>>434937

I'm just a small and petty man who never achieved anything of note.
>> No. 434939 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:17 pm
434939 spacer
>>434938

Keep it to yourself then.
>> No. 434940 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:20 pm
434940 spacer
>>434939

Hiding my bitterness when discussing how everyone but me is a retard would be a notable achievement, so while I am eager to fulfil your request I find myself in a situation where my only available option is to tell you to fuck off. Fuck off.
>> No. 434941 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:43 pm
434941 spacer
I dropped out of school when I was about Greta's age.

10 years later I'm a millionaire because I inherited money, two thirds of all wealth is inherited, anyone who pretends working is the best way to make money is either an idiot or straight up lying to you. Smash the system!
>> No. 434942 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:44 pm
434942 spacer
>>434940

Okay, you keep dong that really smart thing of being an unpleasant misanthrope.
>> No. 434943 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 9:49 pm
434943 spacer
>>434942

It's not smart and I don't enjoy it, I'm just pumping words I barely understand in to concepts in an attempt to be funny. I'm not sure why I can't wallow in my own self pity in peace. Perhaps you yourself are bitter about something only your expression of it is to be mean on the internet when someone says something in a way you don't like rather than even attempting to be funny.
>> No. 434944 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:04 pm
434944 spacer
>>434943

If you want to wallow in your own self pity in peace, stop bringing it into conversations with other people.
>> No. 434945 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:06 pm
434945 spacer
>>434944

Oh, next time you ask why I'm so bitter I'll just call you a poofter then.
>> No. 434946 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:11 pm
434946 spacer
>>434941
Can I pre-inherit some of your money?
>> No. 434947 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:13 pm
434947 spacer
>>434945

I wouldn't have asked if you weren't already doing it.
>> No. 434948 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:14 pm
434948 spacer
>>434947

That sounds like a you problem.
>> No. 434949 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:15 pm
434949 spacer
>>434948

It's not.
>> No. 434950 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 10:18 pm
434950 spacer
>>434949

Well it's certainly not bothering me.
>> No. 434953 Anonymous
26th February 2020
Wednesday 11:02 pm
434953 spacer
>>434930
>>434932

It's always very slightly worrying when the words "German" and "propaganda" pop up together in a debate.

Not sure where I am really going with that remark though.

So the Jerries are all paedos then?

Wasn't Fritzl Austrian?
>> No. 434957 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 1:48 am
434957 spacer
>>434953
> Wasn't Fritzl Austrian?

Indeed, making him possibly the second most famous Austrian bad guy.
>> No. 434959 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 7:25 am
434959 spacer
>>434957
Hitler was German and Fritzl is Australian.
>> No. 434960 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 7:29 am
434960 spacer
>>434957
Who actually is the most famous German bad guy?
>> No. 434962 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 8:37 am
434962 spacer
>>434960
Mengele?
>> No. 434963 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 8:44 am
434963 spacer
>>434960

Hans Gruber.
>> No. 434964 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 12:22 pm
434964 spacer
>>434960

Boris Becker
>> No. 434965 Anonymous
27th February 2020
Thursday 3:47 pm
434965 spacer
>>434964

Frank Farian.




(bit niche, I know)
>> No. 434982 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:25 am
434982 spacer

File
removed
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/greta-thunberg-xsite-energy-sexual-image-1.5478561

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 434984 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:33 am
434984 spacer
>>434982

Could you please remove this.
>> No. 434985 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:00 pm
434985 spacer
>>434984
There's one poster who keeps posting sexualised images of Greta in this thread, keeps switching IP to get around his bans. He's being doing it for months now; similar behaviour to the paedophile who likes to post in /lab/.
>> No. 434986 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:23 pm
434986 spacer
>>434985
Can we at least secure a ruling now that in ten months this'll be acceptable?
>> No. 434987 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:29 pm
434987 spacer
>>434985

Let's just move on then.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1248999/prince-harry-news-duke-sussex-meghan-markle-climate-change-canada-justin-trudeau

>PRINCE HARRY has been warned that he risks alienating many Canadians and igniting public anger if he aggressively pushes his climate change agenda in his new North American home.
>> No. 434988 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:43 pm
434988 spacer
>>434987

I guess it's convenient for the Wet'suwet'en not to count as Canadians in that context.
>> No. 434989 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:44 pm
434989 spacer
>>434987

>Prince Harry warned against ALIENATING Canadians with climate change campaign

The Canadians are already pretty alien to be fair.
>> No. 434990 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:45 pm
434990 spacer
>>434986

No because fuck that poster.
>> No. 434991 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:48 pm
434991 spacer
>>434990

Is /b/ in /sfw/?
>> No. 434992 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:50 pm
434992 spacer
>>434991
Everything apart from /A/ and the porn boards fall under /sfw/.
>> No. 434993 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 12:55 pm
434993 spacer
>>434992

Then it's not an issue about that specific poster, in fact it's not an issue at all. Nothing that could get you sacked if your boss sees it over your shoulder.
>> No. 434996 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 1:45 pm
434996 spacer

e28409d7aade1cee596847f8513675a8.jpg
434996434996434996
>>434989

>The Canadians are already pretty alien to be fair.

I like a girl who says "aboot".
>> No. 434998 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 1:48 pm
434998 spacer
>>434996
Google associates this image with the search term "cocaine so much cocaine".
>> No. 434999 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 1:51 pm
434999 spacer
>>434996

They only say aboot because they all lost their front teeth during hockey related bar brawls.
>> No. 435000 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 1:55 pm
435000 spacer
>>434998

Really? All I typed into google was "Canadians funny".
>> No. 435001 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 1:57 pm
435001 spacer
>>435000
I'm talking about if you search using the image itself.
>> No. 435004 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 4:22 pm
435004 spacer
>The Canadians are already pretty alien to be fair.
Most of them seem nice enough but the nastiest cunt I ever had the misfortune of meeting was Canadian; every utterance was a provocation, no topic too small for a confrontation. I have this suspicion that over there you're expected to be nice, and if you aren't, it's pretty tempting to just go the opposite direction entirely. Sort of a "fuck it, I'm not going to fit in, so I'm going to reject this principle completely" kind of thing.
>> No. 435005 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 4:34 pm
435005 spacer
Them trying to scare Harry off joining with the climate movement is pretty laughable considering.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/28/canada-pipeline-protests-climate-indigenous-rights Trudeau probably doesn't like the idea at all.
>> No. 435006 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 5:36 pm
435006 spacer
>>435005

Quite frankly I do not give a single shit what Trudeau likes and doesn't like. The man is a disgusting caricature of a Prime Minister and shouldn't have command of a book club, let alone a legislature, police force and army.
>> No. 435007 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:09 pm
435007 spacer
>>435006
I think NZ is the only place in the anglosphere where that doesn't describe the head of state.
>> No. 435008 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:12 pm
435008 spacer
>>435007

Doesn't NZ have that horse faced bitch who weaponised the Christchurch massacre before the bodies were even cold by using it to drum up support for gun grabbing?
>> No. 435009 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:20 pm
435009 spacer
>>435008
She did the right thing, yes.
>> No. 435010 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:20 pm
435010 spacer
>>435008

That's the opposite of weaponising.
>> No. 435011 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:23 pm
435011 spacer
>>435009
>>435010

And this class is what we call the "expressed symptoms" of turn of the millennium brainwashing.
>> No. 435012 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:27 pm
435012 spacer
>>435011

You're right, I have been brainwashed to think that guns should be controlled.
>> No. 435013 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:31 pm
435013 spacer

norknuke.jpg
435013435013435013
>>435012>>435011
Only the workers should be armed. This is fact.
>> No. 435014 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 6:41 pm
435014 spacer
>>435012

Well it depends really, I was a knob in my rush to use the word brainwashing. Are societal values really brainwashing? There's no doubt that had you grown up in the same place just a century ago the idea of not having access to guns would be so bizarrely alien as to be unthinkable and anyone trying to legislate against them would be a danger to society in your mind, but I don't think we can call either case brainwashing.

Maybe societal engineering? It's not the same as social engineering despite the similar names, I mean changing the opinions of a critical mass of individuals in society to make a societal norm acceptable or unacceptable depending on what you're going for.
>> No. 435016 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:08 pm
435016 spacer
>>435014

I grew up with guns, have had a firearms license in the past and still shoot at my grandparent's place occasionally. I still think the UK has the right idea when it comes to guns. Though I genuinely do believe in the ideology that citizens should be able to overthrow a government at will, I think actually believing this is possible or an actual option in any modern developed country is fucking mental, and I personally can't wait for Americans to try it and get them and their AR-15s fucking vaporised by the army. Not because I'm a bootlicker, far from it, just because it'll be funny.
>> No. 435017 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:10 pm
435017 spacer
>>435014
I don't know what you're attempting there. It reads like sophistry to me.

Let's go with statistics instead. It's too soon to say what effect NZ's new gun control laws have had on crime, but Australia instituted similar reforms and a buyback scheme in the late 90s, in response to the same kind of attack. Since then there's been an 80% reduction in firearm suicides (with no reciprocal increase in non-firearm suicides) and a 35-50% reduction in firearm homicides. ("Do Gun Buybacks Save Lives? Evidence from Panel Data", Leigh, Neill, 2012.)

You seemed to be suggesting that "gun grabbing" is morally reprehensible. If you think that's accurate, perhaps you could explain what has been sacrificed that is so much more important than the lives that have been saved by sensible gun control?
>> No. 435018 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:13 pm
435018 spacer
>>435011

There have been over 20 separate instances of four or more people being shot in the U.S. in February of this year alone.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

"Brainwashed" doesn't mean "holding a popular opinion", or "holding an opinion I don't agree with".
>> No. 435019 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:28 pm
435019 spacer
>>435016

I think the premise isn't about winning or losing, it's about having a fighting chance. If you're being shot at by a madman in a supermarket with all the exits barred and I offer you a knife are you going to call me a mentalist for trying?

>>435017

I'm not a fan of using statistics to argue, it ignores everything but what it measures. Talking about a lower crime rate is pure sophistry in that it implies that reducing crime increases quality of life regardless of how that crime rate is reduced. It also enables racists, if we decide that reducing crime is a pathway to utopia we see the crime by ethnicity crew come out of the woodwork.

Gun grabbing is as morally reprehensible as Imperialism, as one inevitably leads to the other. The day will come when our lands are invaded by an army from foreign shores, the army can only be in so many places at once. You will submit to the invading force or you will die. Our army may well eventually repel the invasion but millions of us will be subject to the whims of the invaders during the years of fighting, with many of us dying, more than would have done if we had weapons. It's ironic that you talk about saving lives from guns, especially by suicide but then talk about how important it is to save lives, I put it to you that armed men who go on rampages with guns do it because their lives were so poor due to our concern with saving numerical lives rather than saving real lives. Here's one for you, you come across a guy on a bridge about to jump, you manage to talk him down. You saved his life numerically. He goes back to his bedsit and sits alone wanking all day, forced to endure this existence, they put a net up on the bridge so his only means of escape is gone. Have you done a good thing?
>> No. 435020 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:28 pm
435020 spacer
>>435016
> Though I genuinely do believe in the ideology that citizens should be able to overthrow a government at will, I think actually believing this is possible or an actual option in any modern developed country is fucking mental

To be fair you can take over the British government by appearing on HIGNFY a few times and acting like a bit of a fop.
>> No. 435021 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:29 pm
435021 spacer
>>435018

No, but it does mean you're unwilling to consider arguments that disagree with your opinion. The way you stated your point as a de facto settler of any argument is what makes you brainwashed.
>> No. 435022 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:32 pm
435022 spacer
>>435017

> Since then there's been an 80% reduction in firearm suicides (with no reciprocal increase in non-firearm suicides) and a 35-50% reduction in firearm homicides. ("Do Gun Buybacks Save Lives? Evidence from Panel Data", Leigh, Neill, 2012.)

Countries without guns don't have gun violence. Shocker.

Whereas in Murrika, people are advocating for guns in public buildings and even schools, because, you know, there could be somebody coming in with a gun.

Bit like saying a smoker should keep smoking when he gets cancer, to deprive the tumours growing in his lungs of oxygen.
>> No. 435023 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:33 pm
435023 spacer
>>435022

>Bit like saying a smoker should keep smoking when he gets cancer, to deprive the tumours growing in his lungs of oxygen.

Lol!
>> No. 435024 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:43 pm
435024 spacer
>>435019
>The day will come when
This is just a load of masturbatory, incoherent wank. Lets break it down.
>You will submit to the invading force or you will die
Yes, in as much as we currently submit to the regime we do have, or die.
>us will be subject to the whims of the invaders during the years of fighting, with many of us dying
See above.
>more than would have done if we had weapons
This seems to be some weird idea that militaries don't prioritise killing armed and hostile targets over unarmed civilians. Have stockpile, receive drone strike. Yes civilians get killed too by-the-by but you're generally less likely to be dead collateral than dead if you're a threat. All of this however is completely irrelevant as in wartime where we've been under threat of invasion the government historically arms the populace itself. They hand out plastic explosives and train people in asymmetric warfare and industrial sabotage. You'd know this of course if you weren't talking out of your arse.
>I put it to you that armed men who go on rampages with guns do it because their lives were so poor due to our concern with saving numerical lives rather than saving real lives
It is possible to save both. You'd better hope they do put up that net because the mental gymnastics you're doing to try and justify your opinion are out of control.
>> No. 435025 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:51 pm
435025 spacer
>>435024

>This is just a load of masturbatory, incoherent wank. Lets break it down.
Let's*

>Yes, in as much as we currently submit to the regime we do have, or die.
Oh, I thought we lived under a social contract with public opinion being fairly powerful in deciding what the government can and can't do invalidating the need for armed revolution. See the lack of new runway at Heathrow.

>See above.
Oh, I suppose we did give the subjugated people "representation" and "government" after a while of occupying them, but it usually took decades of rapacious occupation before anything like that happened.

>This seems to be some weird idea that militaries don't prioritise killing armed and hostile targets over unarmed civilians. Have stockpile, receive drone strike. Yes civilians get killed too by-the-by but you're generally less likely to be dead collateral than dead if you're a threat. All of this however is completely irrelevant as in wartime where we've been under threat of invasion the government historically arms the populace itself. They hand out plastic explosives and train people in asymmetric warfare and industrial sabotage. You'd know this of course if you weren't talking out of your arse.
I meant those of us that would fight the Norks you carpet-bagger. Obviously you'll be fine, you'll suck any old master's cock as long as they're the most powerful in your life at that moment. As I recall people used their personal arms in WWII with (bad) plastic explosive being supplied in the event of tanks. Interestingly people use arguments like this about our police force as well, but up until the 60s coppers just used their personal revolvers on patrol. It was only in the 60s we passed a law prohibiting police officers using non-force-issued weapons.

>It is possible to save both. You'd better hope they do put up that net because the mental gymnastics you're doing to try and justify your opinion are out of control.
My favourite part of your part of the debate was how you answered the actual question. So I guess I didn't have a favourite part. carpet-bagger.
>> No. 435026 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:52 pm
435026 spacer
>>435024

>It is possible to save both. You'd better hope they do put up that net because the mental gymnastics you're doing to try and justify your opinion are out of control.

Careful, he might have a gun.

Rich Hall once said something like, "Americans love their guns - and it's important to keep people with guns happy. Because they have guns".
>> No. 435027 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 7:53 pm
435027 spacer
>>435019
>It also enables racists, if we decide that reducing crime is a pathway to utopia we see the crime by ethnicity crew come out of the woodwork.
"If we use statistics incorrectly, it might be bad", that's true, well done mate.

>Here's one for you, you come across a guy on a bridge about to jump, you manage to talk him down. You saved his life numerically. He goes back to his bedsit and sits alone wanking all day, forced to endure this existence, they put a net up on the bridge so his only means of escape is gone. Have you done a good thing?
You've never looked into suicide statistics, have you? Most people who survive go on to lead reasonably normal lives - and most don't try again. I'll defend anyone's right to self-determination, but the worst thing you can do is make it instant and painless. Like, for instance, broadly permitting a device that enables suicide in the home and has an 85% mortality rate at such. Any idea what I might be referring to?

>I'm a one-man army poised to overthrow a nation-state oppressor
Absolute dribbling yanklad toss. For shame.
>> No. 435028 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:01 pm
435028 spacer
>>435027

>"If we use statistics incorrectly, it might be bad", that's true, well done mate.
Yes, so please don't attempt to use statistics incorrectly again.

>You've never looked into suicide statistics, have you? Most people who survive go on to lead reasonably normal lives - and most don't try again. I'll defend anyone's right to self-determination, but the worst thing you can do is make it instant and painless. Like, for instance, broadly permitting a device that enables suicide in the home and has an 85% mortality rate at such. Any idea what I might be referring to?
Is it a toaster in a bath? I'm glad that most people go on to live normal, happy(?) lives, I'm not certain that justifies the suffering of the remaining few percent just because you've given in to fear though.

>Absolute dribbling yanklad toss. For shame.
There's a misquote attributed to a famous Japanese Admiral on invading America, truncated it's
>invading America is impossible, there's a rifle behind every blade of grass.
It's loosely based on a real quote from a different, less murdered Japanese Admiral,
>You are right,' he told the Americans. 'We did indeed know much about your preparedness. We knew that probably every second home in your country contained firearms. We knew that your country actually had state championships for private citizens shooting military rifles. We were not fools to set foot in such quicksand.
While your name calling wounded me I take solace in the fact that these blokes probably know more about war than you.
>> No. 435029 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:03 pm
435029 spacer
>>435025
>Oh, I thought we lived under a social contract with public opinion being fairly powerful in deciding what the government can and can't do invalidating the need for armed revolution. See the lack of new runway at Heathrow.
You still just get on with your daily life instead of getting all het up about revolution wet dreams.
>I suppose we did give the subjugated people "representation" and "government" after a while of occupying them, but it usually took decades of rapacious occupation before anything like that happened.
Again, they mainly just get on with their daily lives.
>I meant those of us that would fight the Norks you carpet-bagger.
You're missing the point that if the invading force believes the entire population to be armed or potentially armed then they will be in a position where they have to kill people for the slightest excuse. This machismo is what gets children killed.
>homoerotic imagery
What a surprise, the person who's into guns is also homophobic. I don't know if you've noticed but you didn't choose your "master", everybody did by voting which is to say nobody did because nobody's in a position to. Except maybe Murdoch. We're already sucking cock we didn't choose, as you put it.
>My favourite part of your part of the debate
I don't particularly feel like having an extended debate about hedonistic utilitarianism because I know that it's irresolvable. It tells me a lot about you that you think bringing it up is some sort of last word in this conversation.
>> No. 435030 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:03 pm
435030 spacer
>>435027

>You've never looked into suicide statistics, have you? Most people who survive go on to lead reasonably normal lives - and most don't try again.

Suicides are often a snap decision. Unless you're really mentally ill. I knew a lad who was a clinical schizophrenic and went through several suicide attempts before succeeding, and he kept saying that living with the voices in his head was so torturous that he'd rather not be alive at all. He was on some pretty heavy medication for a while, but he eventually stopped taking it because the side effects were almost equally horrible.

Anyway, my point is, many people who want to take their lives are perfectly sane, but they're faced with some sort of situation where they just don't see a way out and don't see how they can go on living. And to then be there for someone in whatever way, shape, or form, can make the difference between them killing themselves that night or just going to bed and living to see another day the next morning.
>> No. 435031 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:09 pm
435031 spacer
>>435029

>You still just get on with your daily life instead of getting all het up about revolution wet dreams.
Yes there's some give and take, sometimes the government wins, sometimes we do, but if it ever got skewed in their favour we would be very interested in those guns you hate.

>Again, they mainly just get on with their daily lives.
Fuck me you're pathetic.

>You're missing the point that if the invading force believes the entire population to be armed or potentially armed then they will be in a position where they have to kill people for the slightest excuse. This machismo is what gets children killed.
First it makes them more hesitant to invade in the first place. Second if your enemy is so evil as to murder children because some men might have guns why the fuck are you personally willing to work for their war economy you evil pathetic fuck?

>What a surprise, the person who's into guns is also homophobic. I don't know if you've noticed but you didn't choose your "master", everybody did by voting which is to say nobody did because nobody's in a position to. Except maybe Murdoch. We're already sucking cock we didn't choose, as you put it.
I'm not sure what's homophobic about sucking cock. Maybe you're a pucker LGBTQ warrior but some of us are post sexuality mate. Should I have said licking the fanny of any mistress? It doesn't have the same weight of tradition. The government are not our masters in the sense that their thugs patrol the streets and force us to comply with their rules... Er... Well the rules are reasonable and we have power over their rules. Look at the (minor) backlash the police got for marking XR domestic daft militant wogs recently. Do you think that would have happened under a foreign occupation or would they have just shot people for mentioning it?

>I don't particularly feel like having an extended debate about hedonistic utilitarianism because I know that it's irresolvable. It tells me a lot about you that you think bringing it up is some sort of last word in this conversation.
Last word? I was hoping to go all night darling.
>> No. 435032 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:10 pm
435032 spacer
>>435028
RCD will trip if you try and electrocute yourself these days. Bloody nanny state. It's like you can't even top yourself without the government trying to stop you!

I look forward to you repelling Beijing's rapacious advances with your great-grandad's pistol from 1923, by the way. It would be an excellent, and exceeding prompt, way to go. Perhaps this puts your peculiar obsession with suicide into perspective.
>> No. 435033 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:13 pm
435033 spacer
>>435032

Do you hate jews? Because what you're advocating, submission, would have gotten many more jews killed by that naughty Hitler bloke. The resistance movements in Poland and France in particular were remarkably successful. One of them daft Frenchies even got quite famous off the back of it, Charles De Gaulle his name was. Made his name topping Krauts with a bike pump gun during the occupation of his country. What he wouldn't have given for an AK.
>> No. 435034 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:15 pm
435034 spacer
>The government are not our masters
>you evil pathetic fuck?
RISE UP, .GS!

THROW OFF YOUR SHACKLES

LEAVE THE, ER, house, hmm. Let's not get carried away now
>> No. 435035 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:17 pm
435035 spacer
>>435034

>The government are not our masters
>The foreign invaders in the streets are our masters!

RISE UP REBECCA LONG-BAILEYITES AND WE'LL SHOW DAFT BORRIS WHAT'S WHAT WHEN WE WELCOME THE NORKS IN TO OUR HOMES!
>> No. 435036 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:19 pm
435036 spacer
>>435033
>Made his name topping Krauts with a bike pump gun
That's me sorted come the PRC invasion then. I'll be a hero!
>> No. 435037 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:21 pm
435037 spacer
>>435036

No it was an actual gun that looked like a bike pump you knob. Don't go giving the Kung-Fu Crew bike pump hickeys in an attempt to emulate a Frenchman.
>> No. 435038 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:33 pm
435038 spacer
>Norks
There are few nations on this planet less likely to invade the UK than North Korea.

I wonder if this whole weird fantasy of yours came from playing that Homefront videogame. You've never heard of it? Oh.

>you carpet-bagger
I've seen the same dull wit rolling out this insult in a good few threads this last month. Do us a favour and change it up, the same thing over and over gets boring.
>> No. 435039 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:36 pm
435039 spacer
>>435038

I fucking loved Homefront you carpet-bagger. Now tell me, is this discussion about geopolitics or about gun control? If it's about geopolitics I'm happy to write a thesis or two for you on present and emerging threats which you will just write off as alternative reality piddle and tosh, but as far as I'm aware it's about gun control so I'm just using the place holder bad guy regardless or realism.

Is your descent in to "but the joke word you used isn't likely" indicative of your inability to continue the discussion without potentially infringing your beliefs? carpet-bagger.
>> No. 435040 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:37 pm
435040 spacer
>>435033

The Germans certainly weren't going to submit themselves.

They gave 16 year old boys fucking anti-tank rocket launchers in the final days of the war when Hitler ordered adolescents to take part in the Volks Sturm.
>> No. 435041 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:52 pm
435041 spacer
>carpet-bagger
Quite ironic that the Yank interloper is using a Yank term originally used to describe an interloper.
>> No. 435042 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:53 pm
435042 spacer
>>435041

It's a word filter you ultracarpet-bagger
>> No. 435043 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:54 pm
435043 spacer
>>435041

>That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.
George Orwell, famous for not being a Yank.
>> No. 435044 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:56 pm
435044 spacer
>>435019

>If you're being shot at by a madman in a supermarket

The chances of that happening in the UK are astonishingly low due to gun control.

>and I offer you a knife are you going to call me a mentalist for trying?

Probably. The phase "bringing a knife to a gun fight" is popular for a reason.
>> No. 435045 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:59 pm
435045 spacer
>>435043
What does Orwell have to do with the term "carpet-bagger"?
>> No. 435046 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 8:59 pm
435046 spacer
>>435044

>The chances of that happening in the UK are astonishingly low due to gun control.

Not for long m80.

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/us-starts-pulling-out-troops-as-peace-deal-with-taliban-is-signed/news-story/c818458352e1c9a7db1cd987b364dc5e
>> No. 435047 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:00 pm
435047 spacer
>>435045

Well he wasn't a Yank and he said the same thing as the person you're accusing of being a Yank, albeit more succinctly.
>> No. 435048 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:04 pm
435048 spacer
>>435046

How will this affect the Firearms and Violent Crime Reduction acts in the UK?
>> No. 435049 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:08 pm
435049 spacer
>>435048

Oh I don't know. Maybe ask again in 2022 when all the daft militant wogs have AKs instead of knives and cars and I'll explain it then.
>> No. 435050 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:11 pm
435050 spacer
>>435021

I didn't say or even imply that was the be all and end all of the argument. I just brought up evidence you failed to respond to.
>> No. 435051 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:12 pm
435051 spacer
>>435050

The appropriate response was actually brought up organically in this thread but I'll state it again, maybe if people had better lives they wouldn't go on mass shooting sprees. Now I know that sounds crazy but hear me out, people didn't used to go on mass shooting sprees despite having the same or more access to guns, so something changed, and it wasn't the accessibility of guns.
>> No. 435052 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:20 pm
435052 spacer
>>435049

Could you explain to me which law is changing that would allow that to happen?

It sounds like it'd be a lot easier for a daft militant wog to get an automatic weapon in, say, the USA, for some reason. Can't think why, just feels like it, you know?
>> No. 435053 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:21 pm
435053 spacer
>>435049
I guess I'll bite. Why do you think ter­ror­ists are going to get AKs in 2022?
>> No. 435054 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:26 pm
435054 spacer
>>435044
> The chances of that happening in the UK are astonishingly low due to gun control.

The UK is one of the few nations on earth where gun control can work (see also: New Zealand, Australia, Japan etc) because we're an island nation with a (relatively) astonishingly effective customs and excise.

Gun control has never worked in a country with large and porous borders.
>> No. 435055 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:34 pm
435055 spacer
>>435052
>>435053

Oh excuse me, I just assumed that since cocaine was illegal here and it's built abroad nobody would be able to get it. *snort*
>> No. 435056 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:42 pm
435056 spacer
>>435055

There's not much gun violence in this country, don't know if you've noticed.

Last school shooting was Dunblane, care to guess why?
>> No. 435057 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:46 pm
435057 spacer
>>435056
But laws don't ever have any discernible effect, you ca-ca-carpet bagger! *snort*
>> No. 435058 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 9:54 pm
435058 spacer
>>435056

Let's imagine there's a criminal gang (The Taliban) with the means and resources (a country) to smuggle cargo in to the UK and they share an interest with a small group of non-representative minorities of minorities within the UK (daft militant wogs).

Do they A) smuggle guns to said people or B) not smuggle guns to said people?
>> No. 435059 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:14 pm
435059 spacer
>>435058

You still haven't explained how that is any more likely or easier now than it has been for the last twenty or so years.
>> No. 435060 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:15 pm
435060 spacer
>>435058

B, given that it hasn't happened. Or A, but customs catch them.
>> No. 435061 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:21 pm
435061 spacer
>>435059
>>435060

I did! https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/us-starts-pulling-out-troops-as-peace-deal-with-taliban-is-signed/news-story/c818458352e1c9a7db1cd987b364dc5e
>> No. 435062 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:30 pm
435062 spacer
>>43505
>people didn't used to go on mass shooting sprees despite having the same or more access to guns,
The turning point you're looking for is 22 May 1977 in Cincinnati, when the NRA got Momentum'd.

You know that thing they like to say about a good guy with a gun? You'd think that would mean gun ownership would correlate with gun murders. After all, more good guys with guns, more bad guys with guns stopped. Turns out there's no correlation. There's also no significant correlation with state politics either. There is a correlation between guns and gun deaths (more guns, more deaths), but when you take out the suicides and accidents to leave just murders, the line's almost horizontal.

Of course, it would be great to see the CDC or any research institution dig deeper into this. Unfortunately, to do it justice would require public money, and thanks to NRA lobbying that would be illegal.
>> No. 435063 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:31 pm
435063 spacer
>>435060
Were you not around for the Manchester Arena bombing? Well, turns out the rest of the UK was taken over by the Taliban shortly afterwards. Even brave patriots, wielding the firearms of their deceased great-grand-parents, weren't enough to stem the inexorable te­rro­rist tide.

I mean. Literally any day now. That sky's falling in. That's if the coronavirus doesn't kill us all first, and god knows >>435061 has been trying to warn us about that too. Haven't you mate.
>> No. 435064 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:50 pm
435064 spacer
>>435063

What's coronavirus?
>> No. 435065 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 10:51 pm
435065 spacer
>>435058
I'll take C) thanks to the Doughnut Squad, Five are there to break it up and prevent them from being able to collect their package before it gets intercepted.

The problem with your argument is that you're focusing on the wrong end of the pipeline. During the 1970s/80s the IRA more or less owned the cargo terminal at Shannon, and were able to get all kinds of things around customs by simply "encouraging" people to look the other way while they liberated packages before customs got to see them. Initially they used it for guns and money, and later drugs.
>> No. 435066 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:00 pm
435066 spacer
>>435065

To be fair a lot of Ireland was sympathetic to the IRA and to this day most republicans would happily slit the throats of the unionists and reunite the original 32 counties if given a moment's opportunity.

It always surprises people not from the UK and Ireland that the IRA were able to arm themselves so well until you explain the political nuance of the situation.
>> No. 435067 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:09 pm
435067 spacer
>>435065

The mysterious they are using speedboats to deliver drugs along the coast now. I'm not sure how much the SS can be relied upon to police the entire coastline if said speedboats were used to smuggle guns instead.

As I said though we're at least a couple of years away from this happening assuming a full speed US retreat from polaristan and almost immediate takeover of the country by the Taliban and some bright spark immediately coming up with the idea of sending weapons to the UK for the The Great Whale Hunt.

>>435063

Fun fact, when the US goes to war they end up using a lot more guns than they actually need, from loss to breakage to arming the wrong people by accident, their arms manufacturers make a much higher than projected profit each and every single time. Do you know where the Bataclan daft militant wogs got their guns? Or the countless other daft militant wogs in mainland Europe who used guns in the last 8 years? The Balkans. Do you know why? Because when the wars there ended there were shitloads of guns left over, and to this day people are trying to sell them. Do you think the weapons in Svalbard just disappear when the US leaves? What do you think is going to happen to those guns? Who do you think is in control of those guns when the US leaves?

I know this is all piddle and tosh because thinking about what might happen in 2022 is nothing more than alternate reality fiction, so here's a Time article saying what I just said for you to disagree with.

Have at it you mentally impaired chimp.

https://time.com/how-europes-daft militant wogs-get-their-guns/
>> No. 435068 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:20 pm
435068 spacer
>>435067
>Have at it you mentally impaired chimp.
>Page not found
Bravo.
>> No. 435069 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:23 pm
435069 spacer
>>435068

It's the word filter. There's nothing I can do about it. You're a smart boy, you can sort it out yourself.
>> No. 435070 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:50 pm
435070 spacer
>>435069
Have you tried an AK? I hear you can't walk down the street without tripping over a Taliban stockpile these days.
>> No. 435071 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:55 pm
435071 spacer
>>435070

I'm not sure where in this thread you read that. Are you currently under the influence of psychoactive drugs?
>> No. 435072 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:55 pm
435072 spacer
>>435070
You say that now but come 2022 you won't be able to move in Sainsbury's for the AK-47s. Time magazine told me so.
>> No. 435073 Anonymous
29th February 2020
Saturday 11:58 pm
435073 spacer
>>435072

I don't think daft militant wogs shop in Sainsbury's. They're more the Asda or Aldi sort.
>> No. 435074 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 12:32 am
435074 spacer
>>435073
Which is why they'll go to Sainsbury's to beat the profiling.
>> No. 435075 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 12:33 am
435075 spacer
>>435074

Have you ever seen a darkie in Sainsbury's?
>> No. 435076 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 12:57 am
435076 spacer
>>435075
It's alright, security will have a bunch of AKs by then too. That'll make sure everyone will be safe, like.
>> No. 435077 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 1:13 am
435077 spacer
>>435076

I'm not sure what security has to do with it, I'm saying a darkie avoiding profiling by going to Sainsbury's is going to arouse more suspicion than just doing normal darkie stuff. If I see a darkie legging it through the city centre at midnight with a Kalashnikov it doesn't even trigger a response, if I see a darkie in Sainsbury's you bet your cellulite ridden arse I'm calling the popo, defenders of humanity, to report the suspicious behaviour.
>> No. 435078 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 1:28 pm
435078 spacer

_111089478_china_trop_2020056.png.jpg
435078435078435078
Looks like the OMFG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE coronavirus pandemic has its good sides. Air pollution over China has decreased drastically as a consequence of reduced industrial production:


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51691967

>Satellite images have shown a dramatic decline in pollution levels over China, which is "at least partly" due to an economic slowdown prompted by the coronavirus, US space agency Nasa says.

>Nasa maps show falling levels of nitrogen dioxide this year.

>It comes amid record declines in China's factory activity as manufacturers stop work in a bid to contain coronavirus.
>> No. 435079 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 1:35 pm
435079 spacer
>>435078
WHERE WILL I GET MY CHEAP ELECTRONICS NOW
>> No. 435080 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 3:52 pm
435080 spacer
>>435079
You all laughed at me for hoarding electronic crap. I'm pretty sure I've got a lifetime's worth. RS232 cables and dial-up modems are going to be gold dust in a few months. I'm a genius, me.
>> No. 435081 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 4:25 pm
435081 spacer
I'm just worried about getting hold of some 3 and 4 way PVC pipe fittings to be able to build my tomato house.
>> No. 435088 Anonymous
1st March 2020
Sunday 6:13 pm
435088 spacer
>>435080

>RS232 cables and dial-up modems are going to be gold dust in a few months

Unless you're LGR's Clint Basinger, no, not really.
>> No. 435105 Anonymous
4th March 2020
Wednesday 8:46 pm
435105 spacer

25539940-8073933-image-a-18_1583346212658.jpg
435105435105435105
When me mam said I were autistic I thought she meant I were good at drawing.
>> No. 435106 Anonymous
4th March 2020
Wednesday 10:02 pm
435106 spacer
>>435105

Why does this vaguely look like a stranger danger PSA with one's eyes half closed.
>> No. 435119 Anonymous
5th March 2020
Thursday 6:25 pm
435119 spacer
>>435106

When I squint, it looks like Macaulay Culkin hiding a bone-on in front of John Oliver.
>> No. 435121 Anonymous
5th March 2020
Thursday 8:20 pm
435121 spacer
>>435105
>>John Major offers invisible bottle of Buckfast to sceptical Glaswegian junkie bairn (colorised, c. 1993)
>> No. 435122 Anonymous
5th March 2020
Thursday 8:49 pm
435122 spacer
>>435121

Mirth.
>> No. 435124 Anonymous
6th March 2020
Friday 2:27 pm
435124 spacer
Better get in all your beach holidays while you still can.

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/disappearing-beaches-climate-change-could-wipe-out-half-world-s-n1150841

>Half of the world’s beaches could disappear by the end of this century as a result of climate change-induced coastal erosion and rising seas, according to a study published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change.
>> No. 435189 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 5:35 pm
435189 spacer

ic8vhoawsfl41.jpg
435189435189435189
Posted without comment.
>> No. 435190 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 5:41 pm
435190 spacer
>>435189

Bloody daft militant wogs.

Would, would, would, would, would, would, would not, would, would, would not, would.
>> No. 435192 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 5:50 pm
435192 spacer
>>435190
Second, third and fourth from the left. First, second and fourth from the right.
>> No. 435193 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 6:13 pm
435193 spacer
>>435189
Did that woman really get 'rape' stencilled across her chest? Whoa.
>> No. 435194 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 6:33 pm
435194 spacer
>>435189
If this is what happens at climate protests then I definitely owe "I go to climate protests" lad an apology.
>> No. 435195 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 6:34 pm
435195 spacer
>>435189
I do question the logic of blocking a road on a Sunday afternoon.

There's something about normal(ish) people that does it for me - Gives it an intimate realism I guess.
>> No. 435196 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 6:43 pm
435196 spacer
>>435189

So what exactly is climate inequality when it's at home? Is global warming sexist now?

Actually nah that makes sense. All the women I know are always moaning about being cold.
>> No. 435197 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 6:43 pm
435197 spacer
>>435195

I don't think they were particularly bothered about the blocking of the road, it's one bridge out of about six. They just wanted to draw attention to how much worse climate breakdown is for women on women's day in a particularly attention-grabbing female way.
>> No. 435198 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 6:46 pm
435198 spacer
>>435196

Here's some copy pasta you could have found if you weren't so self assured that you know better:
>🌍 70% of the people living below the poverty line in the world are women. Extreme weather events and climate and ecological breakdown have a greater impact on poorer and more vulnerable communities.

>🌾 Women in the global south are more likely to be responsible for tasks such as gathering and producing food, collecting water and sourcing fuel. These tasks are getting harder in the current climate crisis

>💔 As communities are displaced due to floods, fires and droughts women are extremely vulnerable to sexual and physical assault as resulting climate refugees.

>🚫 Women who take action to protect their land from destruction are also often targeted with sexual violence as a result.

and a twitter thread by Vanessa Nakata, a Ugandan climate activist:
https://twitter.com/vanessa_vash/status/1236592900559048705
>> No. 435200 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 7:06 pm
435200 spacer
>>435198

Sorry, but I just find all this kind of stuff exceptionally tedious and I don't give a shit. Am I supposed to care more than I already do because it affects women? Am I supposed to rush out to more urgently buy an electric car I can't afford because is adversely affects a group that makes up 50% of the global population?

I already do what I can to curtail my carbon footprint for the sensible reasons all of us should be doing so. But I'm hardly in the most privileged of groups myself and all it does is piss me off when somebody tries to hijack an important global issue by going on about the poor oppressed womeeeeen.

I'm what has been called a class reductionist, and to be honest, I'm too old to care about the Twitter nutters who would say I'm a shitlord because of it. It just bores the fucking tits off me.
>> No. 435202 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 7:22 pm
435202 spacer
>>435200
You're a particularly thick sociopath if you're still demanding that people explain empathy to you on every front where it's relevant.

>when somebody tries to hijack an important global issue by going on about the poor oppressed womeeeeen.
It's international women's day, if anything they're hijacking that for the climate.
>> No. 435203 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 7:23 pm
435203 spacer
As an ardent fisherperson who cares deeply about the plight of women in another fucking hemisphere for some reason I want to join in on this protest. Is it too late to head down there and whip my knob out for the cause?
>> No. 435205 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 7:46 pm
435205 spacer
>>435203

I think these womxn would probably not appreciate you doing that.

And you'd probably get arrested, bet this lot didn't. actual maritime issues in action, that.
>> No. 435207 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 7:51 pm
435207 spacer
>>435205

It's wymxrn. Fuck me you're the kind of knuckle dragger who would beat his wymxrn if you weren't so unfuckable. This is a female planet now, get over it.

#solidaritywithwomenwhocarrywaterjarsontheirheadsjustlikeus
>> No. 435208 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 7:52 pm
435208 spacer
>>435202

No, I just don't think the Ugandan women who have to walk 30 miles with a big jug of water on their head or whatever, are exactly falling over themselves in gratitude for the brave actions of the middle class women who got their tits out on London Bridge.
>> No. 435209 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:07 pm
435209 spacer
>>435208

The few that are aware of it are grateful that someone gives a shit and is making some sort of an effort. I'm not sure how that's really relevant though, the point of making someone else's life better isn't to gain their gratitude.
>> No. 435210 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:08 pm
435210 spacer
>>435209

Then what's the point of making someone's life better?
>> No. 435211 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:12 pm
435211 spacer
>>435210

It's an end in itself.
>> No. 435212 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:15 pm
435212 spacer
>>435211

It's good that achieving that goal makes you feel good, but if I'm going to do work for someone else I need money or good feeling too, just the same as you. Unfortunately achieving that goal doesn't make me feel good like it makes you feel good, so if I'm going to work to improve the lives of other people I need their gratitude or payment.
>> No. 435213 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:18 pm
435213 spacer
>>435212

Yes like I said; sociopath.
>> No. 435214 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:20 pm
435214 spacer
>>435213

Oh, well that's rather mean. Sociopaths have feelings too you know. Though I'm not entirely convinced I am a sociopath, 20 years ago my sentiment was the default state of most people, this modern hyper pretence of caring is relatively new.
>> No. 435215 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:22 pm
435215 spacer
>>435214

How disingenuous.
>> No. 435216 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:23 pm
435216 spacer
>>435215

I know you are but what am I?
>> No. 435217 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:29 pm
435217 spacer
>>435209

I'm going to rearrange parts of our conversation and see if you have a eureka moment without me having to spell it out.

>the point of making someone else's life better isn't to gain their gratitude
>falling over themselves in gratitude for the brave actions of the middle class women who got their tits out on London Bridge
>The few that are aware of it are grateful
>got their tits out on London Bridge
>making someone else's life better
>> No. 435219 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 8:59 pm
435219 spacer
>>435217

Getting their tits out has made our day better?
>> No. 435221 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 9:18 pm
435221 spacer
>>435217
You came for the tits, stayed for the tits and are resolute not to think about anything else?
>> No. 435222 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 9:20 pm
435222 spacer
>>435198
>🌍 70% of the people living below the poverty line in the world are women. Extreme weather events and climate and ecological breakdown have a greater impact on poorer and more vulnerable communities.

That's a zombie statistic and more of the usual bollocks.
>> No. 435223 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 9:27 pm
435223 spacer
>>435210
>what's the point of making someone's life better?
Audible mirth. Never change, .gs, you glorious misanthropic bastards.
>> No. 435225 Anonymous
8th March 2020
Sunday 11:20 pm
435225 spacer
>>435223
Fucking BRILLIANT in here innit.
>> No. 435226 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 12:33 am
435226 spacer
>>435202

Now that the female mod's had the decency to kill herself I wish the rest of you would fuck off too.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 435227 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 1:09 am
435227 spacer
>>435226
Mind the edge here lads, he's going all in.
>> No. 435228 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 1:25 am
435228 spacer
>>435222

>🌍 70% of the people living below the poverty line in the world are women. Extreme weather events and climate and ecological breakdown have a greater impact on poorer and more vulnerable communities.


Something about this vaguely seems like junk science. You're saying the climate catastrophe affects poor and vulnerable communities more. Fine. What you're not telling us is if those women really also make up 70 percent of the poor and vulnerable communities. With a global gender distribution of roughly 51 percent women and 49 percent men, which should also by and large hold true for those "poor and vulnerable" communities, it isn't tidy statistical science to then say that because women make up 70 percent of the world's poor, they also make up the majority of persons in those poor and vulnerable communities affected by climate change.
>> No. 435231 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 7:30 am
435231 spacer
>>435228

It doesn't say that, but I can see how it might be misleading if you're actively looking for things to nitpick.
>> No. 435241 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 6:12 pm
435241 spacer
>>435231

>110% of domestic abuse victims are wymxn.
>That doesn't sound quite right...
>Oh shut up, it might be a bit misleading if you're trying to nitpick but the general principle is the important part you wymxn hater.
>> No. 435242 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 7:00 pm
435242 spacer
Right so we've all agreed the bints getting their jubblies out on a bridge weren't actually improving anybody's lives and thoroughly discredited daft intersectionalist lad's nonsense.

What do we think about the big moves made by Russia and Saudia Arabia on oil pricing? Bad news for the environment, surely. Imagine all the poor people who will be able to take advantage of cheaper petrol to drive their old, pollutive cars for recreational purposes. What an absolute travesty.

But in the bigger picture, is there something afoot here? Is demand for oil falling and forcing these company's hands? What does it mean for the sea levels?
>> No. 435244 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 7:20 pm
435244 spacer
>>435231

All I said was that it wasn't tidy statistical science.

If you've got a shit poor community in a South African jungle somewhere, then naturally they are all going to be affected indiscriminately if a flash flood from an outsize rain event caused by climate change washes away their entire village of corrugated iron huts. If you assume an almost even gender distribution of 51-49 as I said above, then that leaves men and women about evenly affected. At least in that village.
>> No. 435246 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 7:41 pm
435246 spacer
>>435244

>If you assume an almost even gender distribution of 51-49 as I said above, then that leaves men and women about evenly affected. At least in that village.

Which is why the 70% figure isn't just a potentially misleading figure if you're nitpicking, it's junk science, a dodgy statistic and flat out wrong.
>> No. 435247 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 7:52 pm
435247 spacer
>>435244>>435246
Women, especially women in poor developing countries, generally possess significantly less wealth than their male contemporaries. In the example given, surviving the flood is just the first step. If they're permanently displaced, then they need new accommodation elsewhere, so they need money. In desperate situations like this, material wealth decides who lives and who dies.
>> No. 435248 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 7:58 pm
435248 spacer
>>435246

> it's junk science, a dodgy statistic and flat out wrong.

It's untidy.

There's still a difference between untidy and dodgy or "flat out wrong".

The assumed equation here is "70 percent of the world's poor are women. Because the poor are more affected by natural disasters, that also means that women suffer more from natural disasters".

That's a bit like saying, cars have wheels, and because most people on the planet get around on a bicycle*, which also has wheels, that also means that cars are bicycles.



* Google says there are around two billion bicycles on the planet, compared to just over a billion cars
>> No. 435250 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 8:03 pm
435250 spacer
>>435247

> In desperate situations like this, material wealth decides who lives and who dies.

These people don't just have savings in their bank account that enable them to start over. The really poor live hand to mouth there, surviving on a few quid that they get cash-in-hand from working odd jobs. If their corrugated iron hut gets washed down a river, that is their entire livelyhood gone.
>> No. 435251 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 8:52 pm
435251 spacer
>>435247
>>435248
>>435250

So you're saying that if I go to a poor area all the women will be isolated lonely spinsters with 2.33 of them per man because all the rich men have fucked off without taking a woman with them to safety? Fuck it lads, I'm off to a poor part of Uganda with £500 and some sheet metal. Wish me luck!
>> No. 435252 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 8:57 pm
435252 spacer
>>435251

Let's be honest, this is just getting overwhelmingly ableist too. Think about how hard all those .33 women have it.
>> No. 435253 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 9:10 pm
435253 spacer
>>435252

I dunno, I imagine life with just the middle third of a woman would be much less of a headache.
>> No. 435254 Anonymous
9th March 2020
Monday 10:32 pm
435254 spacer
>>435253

Is that you, Peterboroughlad?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-33034823
>> No. 435257 Anonymous
10th March 2020
Tuesday 8:52 am
435257 spacer
>>435242
>What do we think about the big moves made by Russia and Saudia Arabia on oil pricing?

It's squarely aimed at stopping the likes of shale gas getting a footing. Eliminate the competition and then drive your prices up.
>> No. 435260 Anonymous
10th March 2020
Tuesday 9:48 am
435260 spacer

07182013_Putin_Blofeld_article.jpg
435260435260435260
>>435257

>stopping the likes of shale gas getting a footing. Eliminate the competition and then drive your prices up


Crafty old bugger, that Putin.
>> No. 435269 Anonymous
10th March 2020
Tuesday 6:43 pm
435269 spacer
>>435257
Exactly this - what's the point of running a cartel otherwise.
>> No. 435270 Anonymous
10th March 2020
Tuesday 6:59 pm
435270 spacer
Shale gas and shale oil are a massive bubble that have been ready to burst for a long time now.
Prices crashed from near record highs back in 2014 when the increasing growth of fracking pushed the US to being a net oil exporter rather than importer. Ever since then fracking has been supported by many billions in dollars of investments and loans, all on the promise that sooner or later oil demand would pick up and they'd be back to the good old days of $140 barrels again. At recent prices most operations have been just breaking even but not providing a return on the investments.
Then another problem has crept up over time, the speed you get get oil out of a fracked well drops very quickly every year, but also as the oil production slows the amount of gas produced increases. This has meant that as a lot of wells drilled years ago have matured they've suddenly had a massive glut of natural gas flood the market, or simply get flared off or vented into the air.

Even before corona the days of US fracking were numbered, Russia is just dealing the killing blow.
>> No. 435271 Anonymous
10th March 2020
Tuesday 7:17 pm
435271 spacer
>>435270
Hedge funds added $462 million to their short positions on US oil and gas companies in February. The sector does look pretty fucked.
>> No. 435292 Anonymous
13th March 2020
Friday 1:41 pm
435292 spacer
>>435271

Around eighty percent of the crude oil commodity price is pure speculation, and the price moves are the result of big financial players betting on increases and decreases on the global market.
>> No. 435306 Anonymous
13th March 2020
Friday 9:40 pm
435306 spacer
>>435247
>Women, especially women in poor developing countries, generally possess significantly less wealth than their male contemporaries

Use yer noggin. The bottom % of the world's poor are children regardless of gender and it's not even close.

>>435257
Hello time-traveller from 2009. Put everything in bitcoin.

The issue is that demand has collapsed while there's also a supply glut. Normally, OPEC+ will cut production to stabilise prices but to achieve this members must coordinate, Saudi Arabia demanded that Russia cut down their market share and Russia told them to fuck off. Russia has now said they would like to talk but Saudi Arabia is just waiting for them to crack.

>>435270
Fracking "bursts" periodically - in fact you can go through news articles on the matter roughly every 2 years. When commodity prices fall you see rigs shutdown as they start to become unprofitable. When prices rise again rigs are turned back on.
>> No. 435360 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 8:02 pm
435360 spacer
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/13/climate-advocates-hit-political-turbulence-127649


>Climate change advocates face a Category 5 political, financial and economic storm thanks to coronavirus. A month ago, CEOs couldn’t stop talking about their sustainability plans and green investments and activists were gloating about a global movement for Green Deals. Today, the European Union is postponing climate law debates, the Fridays for Future protests are heading online, and carbon-intensive industries from aviation to oil are looking for bailouts.


That's slightly disconcerting.
>> No. 435361 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 8:05 pm
435361 spacer
>>435360

Wait until you hear about all the empty jets that are flying.
>> No. 435362 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 8:06 pm
435362 spacer
>>435361

Haven't the airports been talking about relaxing those rules on flight slots?
>> No. 435365 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 8:20 pm
435365 spacer
>>435362

They have, but the proposal has not been put into effect as of yet. I imagine it's coming very soon, and the proposal is to waive slot 'use it or lose it' rules until July. At the moment there are still flights operating the outbounds from lockdown countries, but this still requires an empty plane to fly over there in the first place. There will also certainly be empty planes flying both ways.

The freeze until July will likely keep most airlines alive, that's a huge help, but even domestic and flights to countries that are still open are very much underbooked. The aviation busy season is basically from now, and this will be a devastating summer for the industry - certainly not a bad thing for the environment though.

We'll likely see some more airlines/travel agents go under soon. My bet would be TUI first. The rest might well weather it, though even the most filled coffers in the industry couldn't sustain more than eight months of few to zero commercial flights.
>> No. 435366 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 8:36 pm
435366 spacer
>>435365

It doesn't make sense to let any normally profitable airlines or travel agents go bust because of this. The large payments will of course be larger than paying the dole to all the pilots, stewards, ground crew, HR personnel, mechanics, planners etc by letting the companies go bust but the long term implication of liquidity is selling all our British owned aircraft for pennies. If that happens we'll lose long term tax revenue on British companies being dissolved with all their aircraft bought by bored oil oligarchs or something, the resulting replacement services presumably being based in the country of the new owners.

It's not politically feasible to bail out the airlines but it might be an idea for the assets to be bought by the government when the companies dissolve and resold to the best match at cost plus fees when airlines become a viable business again. Worst case scenario we melt them down and turn them in to ventilators.

It's not just the aircraft either, there will be a lot of expensive equipment being flogged if airlines go bust, possibly land too. The worst outcome will be brain drain if we let our airlines go bust and other countries don't, our best may well just fuck off to Germany or something if we don't put measures in place to stop them.

This might be one of the most historically impactful crises of the last 75 years. Getting it wrong relegates us to a second tier country with catastrophic results for the lives of ordinary people, getting it right earns no praise at all because nobody realises how bad it could be and the best result is the status quo. I don't envy the politicians today.
>> No. 435373 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 9:46 pm
435373 spacer
>>435365

>My bet would be TUI first

What's going to break TUI's neck is also that it's heavily invested in the cruise business, and operates a whole fleet of cruise ships under its own name and management. They're already calling the coronavirus pandemic "the 9/11 of the cruise industry".

There is likely going to be a big shakeout across many industries that are in one way or another dependent on international travel and freedom of movement. The tourism and hotel industry could well be in for its worst year since WWII. You had things like the oil crisis in the 70s or 9/11 or the Lehman/financial crisis, but even with that, you always had people who were willing and able to go on a package holiday. But now, even the ones that would still like to go can't go because there are no flights going in the first place, or their country of origin or destination is on lockdown.


>>435366

>This might be one of the most historically impactful crises of the last 75 years.

Honestly, because every single aspect of public life has been crippled and will continue to find itself crippled in way never before seen, this could end up being even worse than the 1929 Wall Street crash. The speed at which stock markets worldwide are losing value is already unprecedented in history. And that is only the beginning. It will put banks under pressure and with that, you endanger the liquidity of entire sectors of the economy. And then there's both the supply shock from factories closing down and the demand shock from consumers.

I'm not normally a doomsayer, but we're really up shit creek without toilet paper this time. And what we saw last night and today, i.e. markets almost entirely unimpressed by the Fed essentially cutting interest rates back to zero, is a harbinger of very horrible things still to come. All the quantitative easing, all the interest rate cuts, nothing is working. We are pretty much fucked.
>> No. 435376 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 11:19 pm
435376 spacer
>>435366

>British owned aircraft

While everything else you say is entirely spot on, almost no airlines own all of their planes, they're leased in one form or another, usually from foreign companies. They'll own some, but not all. In my experience most of them have the telltale 'owned by' plaque on them somewhere.

That doesn't make the situation any less fucked, just worth pointing out that the airlines aren't nearly as liquid as many assume.
>> No. 435378 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 11:39 pm
435378 spacer
>>435376

What I found interesting about that one Boeing 737-MAX crash was that an airline in some backwater dirt poor third-world country like Ethopia was able to operate a brand new plane. About ten or twenty years ago, I remember reading that many African airlines didn't have clearance to land in Europe, or even fly over European airspace due to massive safety concerns as a result of old and poorly serviced planes. I guess a lot has changed in that respect. I would guess that you now have international investment conglomerates financing the lease of tip-top new planes in those traditionally money-strapped countries. Or something like that. I mean, there is a market, and probably one with more growth than trying to eke out an existence as the umpteenth European no-frills package holiday airline.
>> No. 435379 Anonymous
16th March 2020
Monday 11:58 pm
435379 spacer
>>435378

A lot of planes in those sorts of situations are wet leased, meaning the crew is also provided by the lessor. There's a lot of "airlines" you've never heard of that you might well have technically flown with without ever knowing. And you're right in thinking that tracing the actual owner of a plane is the corporate version of genealogy. Aviation rules are strict and also vary wildly over the world, so operating flights internationally becomes part shell game and part jenga.

When tommy cook went under, I was told they only owned two aircraft outright. The rest were leased or operated by Condor or Titan or fuck knows who else.
>> No. 435380 Anonymous
17th March 2020
Tuesday 1:32 am
435380 spacer
>>435379

I flew Thomas Cook the last time a few years ago, and the plane they had that day looked downright frightening. It could have been a good 25 years old and probably saw heavy daily use during that time. The outer shell panels looked positively tired, at least as far as a layperson was able to tell, and the plane's liveries had been painted over slipshodly three or four times, so that you could still see them underneath the Thomas Cook logo which was also starting to peel off. The interior was also in an appalling state, the only thing that wasn't frayed and banged up was some new vinyl backrest covers that had obviously been thrown on recently.

I was honestly dumbfounded that a plane like that was permitted to even fly, and a relatively long flight to Crete.
>> No. 435382 Anonymous
17th March 2020
Tuesday 2:54 am
435382 spacer
>>435380

25 years old isn't shocking at all for a passenger aircraft - I'd guess the average age of the uk's combined fleet is probably hovering around 20.

Other than the airframe and interior, it's a bit of a ship of thesus thing - any and all parts of the propulsion and avionics will be replaced either as routine or because they failed, and because of the rigorous airworthiness checks they will almost always fail on the ground. I'd be surprised if the bulk of the engines on the plane you flew on were older than five or six years. Imagine a car engine that is serviced weekly, with an oil change every day. Even then, mechanically, jet engines aren't really as complex or prone to damaging themselves as car engines.

Interior shabbiness and paintwork, obviously has no bearing on how well a plane flies. Outer panels are routinely banged up, birdstrikes, ground handling damage, and so on, but there are limits to the depth or size of dents before they become a risk - and then are replaced, adding to the patchwork appearance. If the dent is small enough, it's there forever. Too expensive to worry about cosmetics like that.

Planes are checked visually by pilots, ground handling staff, and engineers before and after every single flight, aircraft systems are checked, engineers are scheduled to routinely check and maintain common failure risks, and of course the captain simply isn't going to fly a plane he's not happy with - he's going to die if it crashes, too. Despite their shoddy appearance, these planes are exceptionally safe.

The part you have to worry about is that a britfa.g is involved with the flight operation of these aircraft.
>> No. 435392 Anonymous
17th March 2020
Tuesday 1:11 pm
435392 spacer
>>435378
I work for the company that owned/financed one of the 737-MAX that went down. Your view of African airlines is quite out-dated, and yes, they have access to banks that can lease them a brand new plane (and all the maintenance that goes with it).

What will become really interesting in the next six months is how many companies can't make their repayments on planes anymore. At that point, once the repossessions start, instead of a bank I'll probably be working for an airline...

>>435382
>The part you have to worry about is that a britfa.g is involved with the flight operation of these aircraft.

This actually gives me great comfort ladm9.
>> No. 435397 Anonymous
17th March 2020
Tuesday 3:22 pm
435397 spacer
>>435392
>Your view of African airlines is quite out-dated

I did acknowledge that things have apparently changed, but I'm still pretty sure that that was a fact until about 10 to 15 years ago.


It would only make sense to invest in emerging markets like that, as I also said, because your growth and profit margins aren't going to be in the no-frills price war in Europe. By and large, market growth usually always translates into profit growth for suppliers operating in that market.
>> No. 435398 Anonymous
17th March 2020
Tuesday 3:39 pm
435398 spacer
>>435380
I'd sooner ride on something that looks a bit shagged out than a new model's maiden flight. Especially if it's Boeing.
>> No. 435400 Anonymous
17th March 2020
Tuesday 3:46 pm
435400 spacer
>>435398


> Especially if it's Boeing.

Didn't they farm out a lot of their coding for various control units to underpaid coders in India with doubtful qualifications?

Which is btw why many low-end modern appliances and gadgets are shit. Not because they are mechanically inferior, but because you had somebody with a liberal arts degree slap together a few libraries and code snippets off the Internet. All to save barely a quid of cost per unit on the finished product.
>> No. 435467 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 7:14 pm
435467 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/mar/19/greenland-ice-melt-sea-level-rise-climate-crisis
>Greenland's melting ice raised global sea level by 2.2mm in two months
>> No. 435468 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 7:15 pm
435468 spacer
>>435467

NOT BEING FUNNY MATE YEAH BUT GREENLAND DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT HAS MUCH ICE. CALL ME WHEN ICELAND IS MELTING YEAH?
>> No. 435470 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 7:45 pm
435470 spacer
>>435467

I think we're sort of busy right now staving off the dry cough zombie apocalypse. Get back to us this summer when it's 38 degrees again.
>> No. 435471 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 7:55 pm
435471 spacer
>>435470
The problem is that the lack of aerosols being released into the atmosphere means there's less global dimming, so the lockdown from the virus itself is (likely) going to cause even greater global warming.
>> No. 435472 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 8:01 pm
435472 spacer
>>435471
Extra short term heating, but the CO2 not going into the atmosphere is still probably better in the long term.
The situation is also made more complicated by the fact that the loss in global dimming probably has a bigger impact over land, however this could actually drive increased convection leading to more rainfall in equatorial regions which would also be good.
>> No. 435473 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 8:03 pm
435473 spacer
>>435471

Well if we can't go to the Med this summer, cos tourism gone tits up and that, we might as well at least get another summer in Britain that feels like being in Majorca.
>> No. 435474 Anonymous
19th March 2020
Thursday 8:15 pm
435474 spacer
>>435472

That would be good, I think people are just concerned that this will cause a Blue Ocean Event, triggering irreversible feedback.
That said, if that's going to happen then it's going to happen eventually whatever we do so I don't really know what to think.
>> No. 435532 Anonymous
21st March 2020
Saturday 7:23 pm
435532 spacer
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/coronavirus-air-pollution-co2-reduce-update-spread-a9411011.html

>Levels of air pollution in some cities and regions have reduced significantly as coronavirus stops people from constantly travelling to work or abroad.

>According to the BBC, researchers in New York said early studies have seen carbon monoxide, mainly produced by cars, decrease sharply by nearly 50 per cent compared with 2019.

>CO2 emissions, which contribute to climate change by warming the planet, have also seen a decline in recent days.


We need more viruses.
>> No. 435533 Anonymous
21st March 2020
Saturday 7:35 pm
435533 spacer
>>435532
>CO2 emissions, which contribute to climate change by warming the planet, have also seen a decline in recent days.

It's certainly been a bit nippy this past week and due to get worse. Is this going to be like a couple years ago where all we got hammered with snow in March?
>> No. 435541 Anonymous
21st March 2020
Saturday 7:56 pm
435541 spacer
>>435533
It's been a lovely sunny day but really cold - a bit of snow now is all we need.
>> No. 435545 Anonymous
21st March 2020
Saturday 8:52 pm
435545 spacer
>>435533
Looking like we might get some snow showers towards next weekend as the high pressure gives way to some strong winds from the northeast, but probably nothing substantial and it will be very short lived if there is.
>> No. 435643 Anonymous
25th March 2020
Wednesday 10:55 pm
435643 spacer
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238364-greta-thunberg-says-she-may-have-had-covid-19-and-has-self-isolated/


Finally, her PR people have thought of something.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 435644 Anonymous
25th March 2020
Wednesday 11:07 pm
435644 spacer
>>435643
I had a response to this but I can't be bothered to type it out. Fuck off.
>> No. 435647 Anonymous
26th March 2020
Thursday 12:20 am
435647 spacer
>>435644

Modsontheblob.
>> No. 435648 Anonymous
26th March 2020
Thursday 12:27 am
435648 spacer
>>435643
> The movement behind the walkouts, Fridays for Future, has told strikers to conduct protests virtually due to the pandemic, which Thunberg said was a collective decision taken at an emergency remote meeting.

How do you do a virtual strike against school while in lockdown? Do you actively go outside or do you just put on a very stern face indeed and livestream yourself playing videogames (because you were doing your schoolwork at home the rest of the week, honest).

It's all such total nonsense at this point. Utter tosh.
>> No. 435649 Anonymous
26th March 2020
Thursday 12:29 am
435649 spacer
>>435648

>How do you do a virtual strike against school while in lockdown?

Pretty obvious and easy to do if your school is doing virtual lessons.
>> No. 435650 Anonymous
26th March 2020
Thursday 12:42 am
435650 spacer
>>435649

Jesus wept, does that actually happen? I thought everyone was home-schooling (or watching Loose Women and Love Island while pretending to anyway). Well that's me well telt anyway. Good luck to them.
>> No. 435651 Anonymous
26th March 2020
Thursday 12:43 am
435651 spacer
Some genuinely good news for a change:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/25/global-efforts-on-ozone-help-reverse-southern-jet-stream-damage

>The new paper, published in the journal Nature, shows that the Montreal protocol has paused the southward movement of the jet stream since the turn of the century and may even be starting to reverse it as the ozone hole begins to close. Last September, satellite images revealed the ozone hole annual peak had shrunk to 16.4m sq km, the smallest extent since 1982.
>> No. 437481 Anonymous
17th June 2020
Wednesday 3:10 pm
437481 spacer
https://jembendell.com/2020/06/15/climate-science-and-collapse-warnings-lost-in-the-wind/
>> No. 437482 Anonymous
17th June 2020
Wednesday 3:15 pm
437482 spacer
>>437481
Bumping a thread after several months with a link and no comment. POTY.
>> No. 437483 Anonymous
17th June 2020
Wednesday 3:40 pm
437483 spacer
>>437482
Cool.
>> No. 437510 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 2:31 am
437510 spacer
Apparently there's a soil nutrient crisis in the future without serious intervention in farming around the world. Due to intensive monocropping.

Now I'm not one of them 'boffins' or 'experts' but isn't fucking crop rotation one of the foundations of a sustainable agricultural system. Unfortunately it's less profitable.

They say you more right wing as you age but all I seem to be developing is a belief that capitalism is retarded.
>> No. 437511 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 3:15 am
437511 spacer

what plants crave.png
437511437511437511
>>437510

Don't worry m8, I've got just the thing.
>> No. 437514 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:47 am
437514 spacer
>>437510 The nasty EU mandates 3-crop (at least) rotation, but we'll be free of those shackles soon.
They're so evil that they allowed flooded out farmers to relax it to 2 this year, since you can't force crops into impossible conditions and bankrupting farmers is generally bad, but yeah, fuck the EU.
Sunlit uplands ahoy.
>> No. 437518 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:37 am
437518 spacer
>>437510
I'm less concerned about this than other things as we do know how to fix that, it's just that it's not economical to do yet. It's a bit of a moot point as without a major redesign our ag industry can't feed us all currently. Deep adaptation people are starting to look for solutions to both these problems.
>> No. 437519 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:59 am
437519 spacer
>>437518 we can fix it, but it's quite expensive (anything done on such a gigantic scale is expensive, and there's quite a bit of land to cover).
If sea level rises remove a lot of the fens from agriculture, UK farming is going to lose a lot of easily farmable area. It's not the first thing we need to worry about, but it's on the list and a biggie.
>> No. 437526 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 1:43 pm
437526 spacer
>>437518

I've been looking at this deep adaptation stuff and it seems very reasonable.
Food and water shortages aren't an imaginary threat in a country as densely populated as ours even in a fairly benign climate change scenario, but as soon as you mention anything to do with immigration or population the terminally unimaginative immediately jump to climate fascism.

Even national geographic are doing pieces on the UK water supply now.
www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conservation/uks-looming-water-crisis/
>> No. 437529 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 4:29 pm
437529 spacer
>>437526
Still seems like bollocks. When I was kid hosepipe bans were virtually every year. These days it's rare.
>> No. 437530 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 5:14 pm
437530 spacer
>>437529 Wasn't the water network a lot less cross-connected years back, so a local drought meant hosepipe bans rather than sucking off the north / Wales a bit harder?

I've started building water storage, on the assumption that we'll keep having wet season, dry season. The 2500l tank I installed filled in just under an hour earlier this week (Takes 1 inch of rain to fill). And then it overflowed, because I have't got round to finishing it. Fucksake. Still, got another 10,000l of storage coming which should help soak up future surges.
>> No. 437531 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:21 pm
437531 spacer
>>437529

The Greater London Authority's own figures expect London to have water supply problems by 2025 and "serious shortages" by 2050. Maybe we'll be even better again at redistributing our water from around the country by then but the country itself still only has a limited amount of fresh water stored, a certain rate of it coming in and, much like the rest of the world, is using it up increasingly faster.

Just to pre-empt the eugenicists; this has more to do with a single t-shirt from Primark using three years worth of drinking water, or a pair of jeans using ten, to produce than it does the total population size.
>> No. 437532 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:21 pm
437532 spacer
2040 not 2050, pardon the typo.
>> No. 437533 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:28 pm
437533 spacer
>>437531

But the thing is the UK currently doesn't have very water intensive agriculture, water supply problems for London are due to the growth mindset. The Primark quip isn't exactly relevant here.
>> No. 437534 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:29 pm
437534 spacer
>>437530

The reduction in hose pipe bans is mainly because we've got better at finding and fixing leaks - we used to lose the majority of fresh water in the distribution network.

We've been talking about building a national water grid for decades, but we've been managing fine up until now with local improvements in efficiency and management. There's a valid case for a big north-south pipeline to redistribute water from the wetter north to the drier and more densely populated south, but it's politically tricky for obvious reasons.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17078727
>> No. 437535 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:46 pm
437535 spacer
>>437531

>Just to pre-empt the eugenicists; this has more to do with a single t-shirt from Primark using three years worth of drinking water, or a pair of jeans using ten, to produce than it does the total population size.

Surely the greater the population size the more Primark jeans people will be wearing though.

Unless the current environmentalist message has updated to involve nudism, in which case I might be able to get behind it.
>> No. 437536 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 7:48 pm
437536 spacer
>>437531

More people = more T-shirts and more pairs of jeans. So it’s still very much relevant. Sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable.
>> No. 437541 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:18 pm
437541 spacer
>>437536
>>437535
You can just not buy multiple pairs of jeans from Primark. There's this thing called the fashion industry which functions as a sort of planned obsolescence for how people think about their clothes, maybe you've heard of it?
>> No. 437542 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:22 pm
437542 spacer
>>437541

Even if we do one pair of jeans per person, one more person = one pair of jeans. That's just maths, have you heard of that?
>> No. 437544 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:27 pm
437544 spacer
>>437542

If we did one pair of jeans per person then we'd have plenty of water to go around. You can figure that out using maths. How many pairs of jeans have you owned in your life? How many were thrown away despite still being usable, or because they had damage that would be trivial to repair?
>> No. 437545 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:29 pm
437545 spacer
>>437544

I'm not sure what you're really getting at here, to make it clear my post >>437542 was a response meant to illuminate that the post >>437541 was not in any way a rebuttal to the idea that more people = more jeans.
>> No. 437546 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:37 pm
437546 spacer
>>437544

So essentially you’re so uncomfortable with the notion that there are legitimate arguments against uncontrolled immigration that you’ve gone full reductio ad absurdum in order to avoid them? Nice one.
>> No. 437547 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:39 pm
437547 spacer
>>437546

What on earth does immigration have to do with total population? Nobody's growing cotton to make jeans out of in this country.
Here's an article about it https://conservationinaclick.com/2020/06/19/science-consumerism-environmental-crisis/
>> No. 437548 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:45 pm
437548 spacer
I think it's clear that more people means more consumption but the initial discussion was about national water supply problems, not externalised water supply problems caused by our own overconsumption.

I have thoughts about immigration as a whole but I need time to figure out how to put them to words.
One thing that's always WITH NOTHING TO SAY BECAUSE I AM A CUNT me is that in the longer term immigration is touted as a solution to a stagnating and aging population - as if we can just endlessly shove that problem down the tracks, as with so many others.
>> No. 437550 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:47 pm
437550 spacer
>>437549

Nobody said the UK's total population, it should be fucking obvious I'd moved past that when I mentioned global trends and growing cotton you stupid prick.
>> No. 437551 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:49 pm
437551 spacer
>>437548

Exfuckingactly. More people = more demand. For water as it is with schools, hospitals, housing and everything else. That’s reality. But don’t worry, if anyone points out that demonstrable fact we’ll just shout “racist” at them until they go away.
>> No. 437553 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:52 pm
437553 spacer
>>437551

I love how your preferred solution to something that could be solved by simply less overconsumption is immediately eugenics. No wonder you're getting sick of people calling you racist.
>> No. 437554 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:54 pm
437554 spacer
>>437553

I love how your preferred solution to reality is avoiding it. You must be sick of being called a mentalist.
>> No. 437555 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 8:56 pm
437555 spacer
>>437553

Eugenics and population planning are surely different things.
>> No. 437556 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:07 pm
437556 spacer
>>437555

There's not a lot of point in getting into that when neither will solve the issues this thread is about. As has been explained (almost certainly to you) multiple times, using diagrams and links to scientific studies, decreasing the total population won't decrease consumption by any significant amount.
What you're saying won't work unless you also reduce consumption, which would be enough on its own.
>> No. 437560 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:13 pm
437560 spacer
>>437556

Did you notice the streets during the first weeks of lockdown? They were empty. Because people stayed at home. Which meant less cars on the roads. Which meant less petrol being bought. WHICH MEANT LESS CONSUMPTION you fecking mentalist, because less people were consuming. Which is why they’re called consumers, by the way. Because they consume. The economy is going through the floor at the moment because of less consumption.
>> No. 437561 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:16 pm
437561 spacer
>>437560
Good, fuck the economy. Business as usual is the problem.
You've gone to a party and eaten 70% of the cake then pointed your chubby red finger at the 9 other people in the room who ate the remaining 30% between them, yelling;
"IT'S ALL THE FAULT OF YOU BROWNS AND YOU POORS IF YOU JUST HAD FEWER CHILDREN THERE'D BE MORE CAKE TO GO AROUND".
>> No. 437562 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:17 pm
437562 spacer
>>437556

I think we've seen enough already to know that people just won't decrease consumption of their own accord. Either way we'll be forcing controls on the population, the only difference is at what stage of their lives.
>> No. 437563 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:18 pm
437563 spacer
>>437561

I don't know why you assume that "we need less people" means "we need less brown-eyed people".

Kill one baby per race, I don't fucking care.
>> No. 437564 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:25 pm
437564 spacer
>>437562

Why not just force controls on waste and overconsumption? That'll have an impact now and not in a generation's time.

>>437563

Eugenics and population control always primarily impact the poorest as the rich can buy their way out of it, guess what demographic the poorest are? I mean, you'd know this obviously because you wouldn't just go spouting off support of eugenics without actually thinking about it, right?
>> No. 437565 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:33 pm
437565 spacer
>>437560

That's because the economy is broken. We have the technology and land to feed and provide water for our population, but not the political or economic will to change the flow of money and produce to a more sustainable model.

Capitalism is touted as being having 'won' by many by elevating more people out of poverty than any other economic system but that's only ever considering the positive end benefits of it - not the unsustainable practices driving it. Before we had oil it was slavery and labour exploitation.
Now, with oil, it's compelled us to consume ourselves into a retarded crisis when a life that is merely more comfortable and secure than ever before in history is attainable, but slightly less alluring than what we have now.
>> No. 437566 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:37 pm
437566 spacer
>>437564

>always primarily impact the poorest as the rich can buy their way out of it, guess what demographic the poorest are?

You're arguing the downfalls of a system that doesn't exist yet. Just do a non transferable raffle.
>> No. 437567 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:42 pm
437567 spacer
>>437561

The UK population would be in decline if it weren’t for uncontrolled immigration. And I’ve seen plenty of white people living hand to mouth on council estates to see that the poorest demographic is overwhelmingly white
>> No. 437568 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 9:45 pm
437568 spacer
>>437561

And if you think the answer is to adopt a political system that has killed millions and has failed in every country that’s ever adopted it, you probably need to update your politics from the sixth form common room level.
>> No. 437569 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:07 pm
437569 spacer
>>437566
Eugenics and population control have definitely been tried before.

>>437567
I didn't say anything about the UK population. Although the way the current system's set up, people on council estates do have a massive carbon footprint relative to people in poorer countries despite often having equal or sometimes even worse health and living conditions.

>>437568
At no point have I suggested we all be communists, I'm just saying you're a fat cunt who's eating all the cake.
>> No. 437570 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:11 pm
437570 spacer
>>437569

Shame those poorer countries are pumping out shedloads of carbon in dirty industry and coal fired power stations that more than eclipse that then, Stalinlad. And that the UK has gone further on climate emissions than nearly any country. Facts are strange in your world aren’t they?
>> No. 437573 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:33 pm
437573 spacer
>>437570

Oh ladmate.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/25/uks-creative-carbon-accounting-breaches-climate-deal-say-critics
>This article is more than 1 year old.
Maybe if you stopped stuffing your face with cake you'd have time to catch up?
>> No. 437574 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:40 pm
437574 spacer
>>437569

>Although the way the current system's set up, people on council estates do have a massive carbon footprint relative to people in poorer countries

That must really tick off the middle class and the wealthy when they drive past those estates in their SUVs, on the way to the airport for their third holiday that year.


>>437570

>Shame those poorer countries are pumping out shedloads of carbon in dirty industry and coal fired power stations that more than eclipse that then, Stalinlad

Worth noting that oftentimes, those industries are subsidiaries of first-world industrial companies that have moved their dirty production processes or environmentally hazardous raw material mining to backwater third-world countries, where governments are bribed to maintain lax environmental standards and to just very generally not give a fuck.
>> No. 437575 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:43 pm
437575 spacer
>>437570

Classic. A Guardian link. Better than Pravda, I suppose, but not by much. As per: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions
we’re 1% and falling. Clearly, I must now self-flagellate myself through the streets whilst chanting the name of Greta-fucking-Thunberg. I can see quite a few poorer countries on that list, can you? You know, the very point of your argument.
>> No. 437576 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:47 pm
437576 spacer
>>437574

A good point, well made. But if the tables were turned, there’s no doubt there’d be Nigerian oil derricks off the coast of Eastern Scotland. People are people.
>> No. 437577 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 10:54 pm
437577 spacer
>>437575

a) being 13th out of 195 isn't exactly something to be proud of
b) that data doesn't include the embodied carbon of imports, which massively inflates China's figures because they make all of our stuff
>> No. 437579 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:02 pm
437579 spacer
>>437577

You don’t seem to be proud of any part of your country, nor capable of admitting that anything your country has done or doing is admirable. 13th isn’t great but it isn’t horrendous either. It’s 1%. Should we be doing more? Absolutely. Have we already done shitloads? Demonstrably. Defending China on climate change is like defending Pol Pot on human rights. You’d have liked him, he killed millions as well.
>> No. 437580 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:15 pm
437580 spacer
>>437569

>At no point have I suggested we all be communists

Why not?

It's the only way to achieve your goals, if you think the free market is ever going to tell people "Actually, no, we've had enough nice things now. It's time we all learned to live a little bit less materialistically." then you're even more of a naive bellend than you sound.

Secondly, we should also implement population reduction as well as consume less and becoming communist. Because fuck you. There's already too many of us. I don't want there to be more of us regardless of global warming. I want there to be space on this earth for other creatures to exist and thrive, instead of us taking up all the space like some kind of speciesist manifest fucking destiny.

Humans are not special. Theoretically we can safely sustain 18 billion humans before we reach the absolute limit of resources, providing everyone goes vegan, stays inside their entire lives, and gives up burning things for fun. But why even go that far? Why? Genuinely why? Why do there need to be more of us?

Why do there need to be more of us? Why is that so important? Why?

Why?
>> No. 437584 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:33 pm
437584 spacer
>>437580

>Secondly, we should also implement population reduction as well as consume less and becoming communist

Communist countries have tended to have less consumerism because their economic systems were too shit and inefficient to produce the same kind of output in the same kind of quality as market economies. And the West was then branded as decadent because people could buy Golf GTIs, Nakamichi tape decks, and Motorola brick phones on a whim if they had the cash.

Non-consumerism isn't the result of communism being a morally superior economic system where people have seen the error of their consumerist ways, but of the communist system having to brainwash its citizens that consumerism is decadent, to mask its own systemic failure to satisfy the needs of its people.
>> No. 437586 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:45 pm
437586 spacer
>>437580

>It's the only way to achieve your goals, if you think the free market is ever going to tell people "Actually, no, we've had enough nice things now. It's time we all learned to live a little bit less materialistically." then you're even more of a naive bellend than you sound.

Remember acid rain? Back in the 80s, we were worried that it was going to destroy all the crops and kill us all. You don't hear about it any more, because we fixed it. With capitalism. We priced the emissions of sulphur dioxide in proportion to the damage caused by acid rain, so we could compensate all the farmers who had their soil fucked. Everyone figured out pretty damned quickly that it was cheaper to curb your SO2 emissions than pay the tax.

We can do the same with carbon - don't fight the market, use the market. Set the correct price for carbon and either we'll avert climate change or we'll make enough money in tax to terraform Mars.

>Why do there need to be more of us?

Are you volunteering to take one for the team and off yourself? There's your answer.
>> No. 437587 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:46 pm
437587 spacer
>>437586

>Are you volunteering to take one for the team and off yourself? There's your answer.

Are you thick or have you just ran out of ways to call people racist for thinking there's too many people?
>> No. 437589 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:56 pm
437589 spacer
>>437586
>>437587

I think you are both talking at cross-purposes. Crazy, I know, four people on here on the same time. Communism is not the answer. Killing millions is not the answer. But, ironically and if not addressed, and for everything I’ve just said, there may be a time when we will need to adopt the Chinese-inspired one child policy. Because population growth is unsustainable, overwhelming within developing countries. I remember being shocked when the world population grew to 6 billion. We’re now barrelling toward 8 billion.
>> No. 437590 Anonymous
19th June 2020
Friday 11:58 pm
437590 spacer
And you’re right, we should seek market solutions. But, unfortunately, as we’ve seen during this pandemic, governments tend to overrule market forces and seek their own alternatives. With the inherent inertia and delay that that comes with.
>> No. 437591 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:03 am
437591 spacer
>>437589

>there may be a time when we will need to adopt the Chinese-inspired one child policy

I don't know about anyone else, but this is what I meant when I said population planning. I'm not sure why otherlad(s?) took that to mean genocide/eugenics.
>> No. 437592 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:06 am
437592 spacer
>>437587

The birth rate in every developed country and most developing countries is below the replacement rate; in those countries with a birth rate above replacement, it is rapidly falling. The population is not growing because too many people are being born, but because life expectancy has massively increased.

The global population will not exceed 11 billion and is likely to peak at around 9 billion. We are already struggling to cope with the ageing population and if the birth rate falls any lower then Western economies will start collapsing under the burden of the elderly. We need to maintain the balance between healthy young workers and sick old pensioners, otherwise we will be unable to provide the essentials of a decent life.

Reducing the birth rate even further would be catastrophic. The only way to meaningfully reduce the population without forcing people into squalid poverty is by killing people who are already alive. Will you volunteer to go first?

https://data.oecd.org/pop/fertility-rates.htm
>> No. 437595 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:11 am
437595 spacer
>>437592

That’s very interesting and you’re absolutely right, by 2100 we’re only expected to be at a world population of 10 billion, from a quick google. I thought that it was exponential, probably given my bias of growing up going from 6 to nearly 8.
>> No. 437596 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:13 am
437596 spacer
>>437589

>Chinese-inspired one child policy

China abolished the one child policy in 2015, because ageing is now a far bigger problem than overpopulation.

https://yaleglobalhealthreview.com/2016/09/25/saying-goodbye-to-chinas-one-child-policy-and-aging-population/
>> No. 437598 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:14 am
437598 spacer
>>437592

I still think we can cope with this overpopulated country losing 10 million through natural wastage though before we consider controlled immigration.
>> No. 437599 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:15 am
437599 spacer
>>437592

>Will you volunteer to go first?

Not necessarily, but I'll take the crystal implanted in my hand. 80 seems reasonable.
>> No. 437600 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:17 am
437600 spacer
>>437592

>Will you volunteer to go first?

Give me roughly another 10-15 years and I'll happily go then, yeah. I've always said I'm going to off myself before I get too old, I just really don't fancy waiting around for death. I'll go on my terms.

What you're arguing there is that we need a solution to the imbalance of an ageing population, not a justification for population growth. Suppose the life expectancy doesn't stop increasing? What if there's some miracle tech in another hundred years to defeat ageing even?

In any event, it's clearly more ethical to bump off the oldies first.
>> No. 437601 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:19 am
437601 spacer
>>437591

There is a scene in Aliens (1986) where one of the characters says they joined the armed forces because it's easier to get a permit to have a child that way. Maybe you should only get to have children if you fulfil certain criteria. I don't see military service as a valid criteria, but I think a case could be made for other things that such a permit could depend on.

Not sure though how you could enforce it and actually keep certain parts of the population from procreating like mutts.
>> No. 437603 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:24 am
437603 spacer
>>437592

>if the birth rate falls any lower then Western economies will start collapsing under the burden of the elderly.

That's all well and good; but if we're going to have to shift the economy radically away from its present form anyway to reduce consumption, is that even still relevant? What you're saying is we need more people because in order to support the increasing number of old people, we have to keep making and buying and selling more stuff. But the entire point is we need to stop making and buying and selling so much stuff.
>> No. 437604 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:26 am
437604 spacer
>>437601

This is the old “if you have kids you should take a test, after all you need a license to drive” argument, though. Shit parents usually have shit kids, but some are remarkable and make the world a better place. If we were to implement a one child policy, and otherlad has shown that we probably don’t (although otherotherlad has a good point about enhancements in life expectancy which may throw a spanner in the works) it would be fairer overall.
>> No. 437605 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:26 am
437605 spacer
>>437601

>There is a scene in Aliens (1986)

You are mistaken, actually it was in Robocop (1987)
>> No. 437608 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:43 am
437608 spacer
>>437603

>But the entire point is we need to stop making and buying and selling so much stuff.

The amount of stuff is much less important than the type of stuff. The carbon footprint of a packet of green beans can be anything from 0.2kg to 20kg depending on whether they're locally sourced or air-freighted from Kenya. The most efficient cotton farming and production methods consume 95% less water than the industry average.

We already have the technology to make vast efficiency improvements in almost every field of life, but oil prices are too low for much of it to be worthwhile. Some of this stuff is happening anyway - UK electricity generation is now almost completely coal-free, because it's being priced out of the market by renewables.

About the only thing we definitely can't have is jet aviation, beef and lamb; pretty much everything else can be made low- or zero-carbon with the right technology and the right economic incentives. We can probably still have beef and lamb if you don't mind lab-grown meat.
>> No. 437609 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:43 am
437609 spacer
>>437604

Maybe there should be a scoring system. As grim and dystopian as China's new social scoring scheme is, the idea that certain things could be made easier if you have a certain score of relevant traits and behaviours really isn't absurd. China has just gone overboard in that a low social score can even mean you're not eligible for a job promotion or to take time off to go on holiday.

We've all accepted that everybody has a credit score which rewards certain behaviours that have to do with finances, and punishes other behaviours. Why not think that that could also be made to apply to you getting to be a parent.

It's already a reality when you adopt a child. You are given rigorous screening and you are evaluated in-depth as to whether you can be trusted to be an adoptive parent. They mainly want to know that you're not some violent paedo alcoholic dolescum, but it's a rudimentary scoring system nonetheless.
>> No. 437610 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:46 am
437610 spacer
>>437609

Go on then, starter for ten: which traits give you positive or negative points?
>> No. 437611 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 1:22 am
437611 spacer
This is stupid.

We are just about 70 million. We are out numbered. Badly. We colonised the rest of the world, and fought them off, because we had the bodies and the tech to do it. We NEED more Brits, and I say this as a BAME Brit. We need more of us, white, black, purple, it doesn't matter. So long as we have more of us, and we can mitigate the effects of climate change. We will rule this piece of shit planet, and reach the stars. Limiting our potential will bring about our downfall.

Look at the bigger picture. Literally half the world population is Chinese, Indians, and Africans. It is a competition to outlast everyone else, and if our little island decides to drop down to a "sustainable" 10 million, then might as well turn off you computer now and drink a gallon of whisky.
>> No. 437612 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 1:38 am
437612 spacer
>>437611

Obvious troll is obvious. We don’t need British Empire Mk2. We should, as your teacher used to tell you in Yr7, set an example to others and be in our best behaviour. And we didn’t conquer the world because we had more men. We mostly achieved it through diplomacy and how we were viewed by the peoples we conquered as an enlightened nation worthy of entering into a semi-official conglomerate.
>> No. 437613 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 2:39 am
437613 spacer
>>437610

Good traits: service to the community, selfless acts, indulging the surviving old people by listening to their stories, very good cake baking.

Bad traits : murder, public defecation, going ten miles an hour under the limit every time you pass a speed camera.

Instant execution: Asking cocky questions on the internet in a way that implies you already know the answer is going to be amusingly wrong.
>> No. 437614 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 2:41 am
437614 spacer
>>437613

Actually I suppose murder wouldn't be as much of an issue.
>> No. 437615 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 2:45 am
437615 spacer
>>437608

What about reforestation? Do we have the ability to rebuild what we've done to the various habitats and ecosystems around the world? I don't mind where my meat comes from, if I'll eat a battery farmed chicken why on earth would I mind a lab grown one.

My main worry is that we'll eventually "save" the environment in an entirely cynical and self serving way, and just carry on expanding and expanding our own sphere. The planet won't turn into an inhospitable polar, but what little of the Amazon was left will be coast to coast soy farms or some shit. Animals will be novelties for zoos, not something you can go and see just by having a walk in the countryside.
>> No. 437630 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 12:55 pm
437630 spacer
China certainly doesn't do half measures with its social credit system:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System#Implications

>Mugshots of blacklisted individuals are sometimes displayed on large LED screens on buildings, or shown before the movie in movie theaters.

Maybe we could implement the public display of mugshots of people who are a burden on the system by having too many kids. Instead of giving them their own TV format like "16 Kids and Counting".
>> No. 437634 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 1:28 pm
437634 spacer
>>437630
>Mugshots of blacklisted individuals are sometimes displayed on large LED screens on buildings, or shown before the movie in movie theaters.

They should do this here but just for people who treat cinemas like it's their own front room.
>> No. 437640 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 6:52 pm
437640 spacer
>>437634

I have always hated cinemas, not just at the moment where going to one seems almost entirely unfeasible. I just can't enjoy a film the same way when I'm sat in a theatre with up to a few hundred complete strangers.

There was a cinema around where I grew up that had a few smaller rooms for films that had peaked in demand, and so if you waited a few weeks or a month or two after it first came out, you could enjoy the film, admittedly on a much smaller screen, but with much fewer other people. Sometimes if you were lucky, there were not even twenty of you altogether. So if you then went to see the film with a few of your mates on a Saturday night, it was a cosy feeling almost like watching it in someone's livingroom.

Of course this was before large 40'' or even 50'' TVs were even available for home use. Nowadays, they have made an evening at the cinema even less desirable for me.
>> No. 437641 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 7:16 pm
437641 spacer
>>437640

I have enjoyed the cinema much more in recent years, now that hardly anyone goes to them. Going to see something in the middle of the day and there being no more than maybe ten other people in there with you, and often none at all, makes for a fantastic experience.
>> No. 437642 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 7:41 pm
437642 spacer
>>437641

Same. I like the cinema more these days because it's a bit of a night out, you go on a Friday or Saturday afternoon, have a meal beforehand, pick something there won't be loads of people at for a late night showing, call at the 24 hour Asda for some beers and snacks on the way back.

It's all the little bits you don't get at home, like walking out into the mostly empty car park at half past midnight, playing a few shit arcade games while you wait, and so on.

It's all very well and good having a massive telly at home, which I naturally do, but I think now we have everything we could possibly want at home (and what little we don't can be there the next day thanks to Amazon) there's a lot to be said for just getting out of the house and doing something for its own sake.

Maybe it's just my time spent with psychedelic drugs speaking but a change of scenery alone does you the world of good sometimes, even if you're basically doing the same thing when you get there.
>> No. 437643 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 7:59 pm
437643 spacer

odeon-hull.jpg
437643437643437643
>>437641
>often none at all, makes for a fantastic experience

When I was 16 I'd regularly go to the local Odeon, which at the time was Hull's fourth best cinema, with my girlfriend because we'd frequently have the screening all to ourselves. I jizzed an ungodly amount in that building.
>> No. 437646 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 9:22 pm
437646 spacer

1n7C2KFoqDLhZCcMiUro67ujXpm43Qi9S4I9hxzAA-c.png
437646437646437646
>>437643

>When I was 16
>> No. 437650 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 10:15 pm
437650 spacer
>>437646
It's Hull, lad. Consistently near the top of the teenage pregnancy tables. What are you supposed to do when you're 16, want to get your end away but can't do it at home? Spaffing in an unpopular Odeon seems like a safe bet.
>> No. 437651 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 10:17 pm
437651 spacer
>>437641

I love this too, I actually don't mind it being busy but I fucking seethe at people who get their phone out or make loads of noise.

I know it's a common truism but these people enrage me. If you can't not check your phone for two hours or speak go sit ina fucking pub or stay home.
>> No. 437652 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 10:19 pm
437652 spacer
>>437651
Also one of my best memories is a mate coming to visit my hometown shortly after graduation and we were searching for jobs and decided to take a break and it cost a fiver to go to see a film and I tihnk we saw Macbeth.
>> No. 437660 Anonymous
20th June 2020
Saturday 11:38 pm
437660 spacer
>>437650

M7 nothing more says romance than getting wanked off by a teenlass in the dark on the back row.

Some get a kink out of it.
>> No. 437662 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 12:19 am
437662 spacer

C8hQZRkXkAEH3NF.jpg
437662437662437662
>>437660
I didn't like this because I worry for others viewing experience. Movie dates in general just aren't for me, I seem to always get asked what's happening and other nonsense which implicates me in their crimes.

If I was making an afterlife I'd make everyone have their own one populated with many versions of themselves (some will be a different gender). It'll be hell for some just because they're rude cunts who will now have to put up with their own bullshit for an eternity. Probably a Twilight Zone episode in there and not one of those shit new ones.
>> No. 437676 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 11:53 am
437676 spacer
>>437662

>Movie dates in general just aren't for me, I seem to always get asked what's happening and other nonsense

Then stop dating thick lasses.
>> No. 437677 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 12:39 pm
437677 spacer
>>437662

Oh fug, an entire world populated by angry autistic loners? That would be paradise, at least for me. I would be finally left alone with myself and not be forced to endure other people's bullshit.
>> No. 437679 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 3:13 pm
437679 spacer
>>437662

I too would be very happy to live in a me-world, it'd be so fucking peaceful and certainly no hassle. And if there was girl versions of me then the sex would be on tap, I am a slag.
>> No. 437680 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 3:23 pm
437680 spacer

shat.jpg
437680437680437680
>>437679
I tried one of those gender swap apps and I'd definitely do female me.
>> No. 437685 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 7:25 pm
437685 spacer

1 -HGoyX0qgAqAO96gnNKYsg.jpg
437685437685437685
>>437680
>> No. 437686 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 7:58 pm
437686 spacer
>>437680

My bassoon is confused.
>> No. 437687 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 8:03 pm
437687 spacer
>>437686

It's all those clarky-cats.
>> No. 437689 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 8:39 pm
437689 spacer

Good mini-documentary.
>> No. 437690 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 9:02 pm
437690 spacer

Webbcropped.jpg
437690437690437690
>>437685
>> No. 437691 Anonymous
21st June 2020
Sunday 9:16 pm
437691 spacer
>>437690

Would.


>> No. 437727 Anonymous
23rd June 2020
Tuesday 9:39 pm
437727 spacer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-53138178

>Rather than benefiting the environment, large-scale tree planting may do the opposite, two new studies have found.

>One paper says that financial incentives to plant trees can backfire and reduce biodiversity with little impact on carbon emissions.

>A separate project found that the amount of carbon that new forests can absorb may be overestimated.


We can't win, can we.
>> No. 437728 Anonymous
23rd June 2020
Tuesday 9:44 pm
437728 spacer
>>437727
It's a deliberately misleading headline; new, properly biodiverse forests are good. Not as great as not cutting down old growth forests *cough*HS2*cough* would be but they're still a positive. It's just that the planting schemes have been poorly legislated leading to people just... getting grants to plant monocultures for wood production or even to cut down existing woodland and plant on it again. It reminds me of the problems with production under communism people always point out.
>> No. 437729 Anonymous
23rd June 2020
Tuesday 10:13 pm
437729 spacer
>>437728
I think we desperately need a tax of some sort for cutting down trees.
Take it out of the hands of local councils, no more bureaucracy or planning committees so no more developers taking councillors out for lunch followed by them oh so conveniently deciding to vote through the application to chop down a whole forest.
Just impose a punitive tax, yes you can cut down that 200 year oak tree to build a house, but expect a bill off HMRC for £10,000.

Obviously you'd need a few exceptions, like a tree within so many metres of a house, or a tree threatening damage to existing infrastructure etc. But it would be so much simpler to police and much more effective than what we have now.
>> No. 437730 Anonymous
23rd June 2020
Tuesday 10:15 pm
437730 spacer
>>437729

There are some laws like that
https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/blog/2018/05/felling-trees-without-permission/
but they need expanding and strengthening like you say.
>> No. 437731 Anonymous
23rd June 2020
Tuesday 10:17 pm
437731 spacer
>>437727

I've told you before but I keep getting called a mentalist.

- Algae tower farms.

- Execute anyone over 65.

- Lab grown meat.

I might sound like a fascist but I'm just being realistic. My solutions would actually work. More liberal solutions won't just not work, they'll never happen in the first place.
>> No. 437751 Anonymous
24th June 2020
Wednesday 11:06 am
437751 spacer
>>437729

Many local councils already have tree preservation orders that forbid you to cut down or even trim trees if those trees are deemed valuable to the environment.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tree-preservation-orders-and-trees-in-conservation-areas#tree-preservation-orders--general
>> No. 437754 Anonymous
24th June 2020
Wednesday 11:36 am
437754 spacer
>>437731
Lab grown meat's on its way and the only real obstacle is cattle industry propaganda when they start to perceive it as a threat. Aside from the Logan's Run bit that sounds fine. Thing is, if we could persuade enough voters to agree to it, it would be a hell of a lot easier to get them to agree to less extreme measures which would be just as good.
>> No. 437759 Anonymous
24th June 2020
Wednesday 1:19 pm
437759 spacer
>>437754
I predict that lab grown meat will probably be fine for stuff like mince and burgers and chicken nuggets, and less fine for steaks and when the muscle needs to have been worked to get the right flavour and texture.
>> No. 437760 Anonymous
24th June 2020
Wednesday 1:27 pm
437760 spacer
>>437759

It's probanly going to be a bit like surimi. Fine for budget pizza or seafood salad, but will never completely replace actual crab meat to the discerning gourmet.
>> No. 437762 Anonymous
24th June 2020
Wednesday 1:48 pm
437762 spacer
>>437731
You forgot forced sterilization
>> No. 437995 Anonymous
20th July 2020
Monday 9:03 pm
437995 spacer

Neat.
>> No. 437997 Anonymous
21st July 2020
Tuesday 9:58 am
437997 spacer
>>437995
Hysterical puppet with foetal alcohol syndrome.
>> No. 437998 Anonymous
21st July 2020
Tuesday 11:04 am
437998 spacer
>>437997
Iffun you say so lad.
>> No. 438392 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 10:15 pm
438392 spacer

31743222-8609333-Protesters_lay_on_the_drenched_st.jpg
438392438392438392
"We've been starved of attention. Feed our egos!"
>> No. 438393 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 10:16 pm
438393 spacer
>>438392

"This is the only reason I can imagine doing this myself, therefore anyone else doing it must be doing it for that reason".
>> No. 438394 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 10:32 pm
438394 spacer
>>438392
Reminded me of this.

I need attention let me debase myself


>> No. 438396 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 10:46 pm
438396 spacer
>>438394
>>438392
If you think the protesters are just attention seeking, why don't you talk about the thing they were protesting about instead of talking about them?
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/extinction-rebellion-activists-pour-fake-blood-on-trafalgar-square_uk_5f2fda0bc5b6e96a22b3d2bf
>> No. 438397 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 10:49 pm
438397 spacer
Here's another article about the "attention seeking" action carried out by the anonymously-made-up and masked protesters to mark the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1320606/Extinction-Rebellion-london-news-protest-Trafalgar-Square-brazil-latest-demonstration
>> No. 438398 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 11:20 pm
438398 spacer
>>438396
>>438397
Not him but this is a hijacking of an issue that is much more complex and global than the Amazon rainforest. Very few people will see this and think about indigenous societies or the unbelievable poverty and threat of extinction they face. They're not going to look up indigenous societies or the modern slavery that goes on in South America. Nor does this protest recognise frictions between indigenous peoples lifestyles and conservation - the most notable examples being the hunting of polar bears and whales.

Just a bunch of loud white middle class people who don't give a shit. Today I watched a bit of the mini-documentary series 'Chiefs' after I'd finished the War of 1812. My conclusion is that Americans are utter cunts and the War of 1812 should never have ended without an independent Michigan state.
>> No. 438400 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 11:28 pm
438400 spacer

img.jpg
438400438400438400
Better article.
https://metro.co.uk/2020/08/09/extinction-rebellion-protesters-cover-trafalgar-square-fake-blood-13104937

>>438398
>this is a hijacking of an issue that is much more complex and global than the Amazon rainforest. Very few people will see this and think about indigenous societies or the unbelievable poverty and threat of extinction they face
They will if they read the articles and see how it was done in conjunction with the Articulation of Indigenous Peoples of Brazil (APIB) and the Internationalist Solidarity Network. Or just sit at home, wanking into their cynicism.
>> No. 438402 Anonymous
9th August 2020
Sunday 11:59 pm
438402 spacer
>>438400
>Internationalist Solidarity Network

That was a fun little search. So you lads decided to 'forge' a solidarity network to coordinate the fuzzy-wuzzies and co-opt indigenous rights? How embarrassing.
>> No. 438403 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 12:03 am
438403 spacer
>>438402

Who are you quoting?
>> No. 438404 Anonymous
10th August 2020
Monday 12:11 am
438404 spacer
>>438402
Nothing more embarrassing than younglads like yourself doing impressions of their racist granddad's by saying shite like "fuzzy-wuzzies". And what's been co-opted if this was done in coordination with indgenous groups? You're chatting pure shit, m8.
>> No. 438709 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 4:42 pm
438709 spacer
https://vimeo.com/sashasnow/thetroublemakerxr
Documentary about XR, some key-ish figures and climate change that's free to watch for the next 72 hours. I don't really know how I feel about it.
>> No. 438710 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 6:09 pm
438710 spacer
>>438709
I don't really feel that I've learned anything for having watched it, nor left inclined to pick up their torch.
The least I was expecting was a map or something showing where in the world is estimated to be under water and when.
>> No. 438711 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 6:21 pm
438711 spacer
>>438710
It felt more like some sort of advertisement for going out and protesting is what I got out of it.
>> No. 438712 Anonymous
25th August 2020
Tuesday 6:32 pm
438712 spacer
>>438710
Hallam does say near the start he's not going to try to convince you of that. If you want to see that then the information is out there, it's not difficult to find.
Here's one though I think it may be out of date given how much faster Greenland is melting relative to the projections when it was made.
https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/
>> No. 438726 Anonymous
29th August 2020
Saturday 10:10 pm
438726 spacer

The version hosted on XR's page (linked) is full of people being supportive of Clare, the one on TalkRadio's page is full of people talking about how terrible she is. I'm curious what you make of it, as more neutral parties.
>> No. 438727 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 12:38 am
438727 spacer
>>438726
I got 4 minutes in but it's just too idiots flapping their mouths. I'm sure Clare got lots of pats on the back for sticking it to the Tories and saving the nurses, the shock-jock got his finger-pointing in and defended Boris which is what his audience wants.

Nice game you can play. Now if you'd kindly not graffiti hourglasses all over the city and make everyone's lives harder next week that would be swell.
>> No. 438728 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 12:47 am
438728 spacer
>>438727
Okay well good job being the third idiot but that's not what I asked.
>> No. 438729 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 6:11 am
438729 spacer
>>438728

It's exactly whst you asked.
>> No. 438730 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 7:55 am
438730 spacer
>>438727
I made it three minutes in. It's just tedious bickering.
>> No. 438731 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 8:29 am
438731 spacer
>>438729
Fairly sure I asked you to watch it then give an opinion, not to just make up your own version of what happened. But I can see you're well entrenched in your beliefs.
>> No. 438732 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 9:46 am
438732 spacer
>>438726

I've never heard of either of these cunts, so I'm assuming they're the kind of people you'll only know if you're too deeply invested in middle class hobby politics.
>> No. 438733 Anonymous
30th August 2020
Sunday 9:47 am
438733 spacer
>>438731

How is "they're both bullshitting cunts" not an opinion? Is it because you don't like it because we accidentally insulted both sides instead of validating your own beliefs?
>> No. 438787 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:40 am
438787 spacer

EhIiDO5XgAAOn4T.jpg
438787438787438787
XR have effectively blocked most if not all of Murdoch's papers from being printed in this country this morning.
>> No. 438788 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:01 am
438788 spacer
>>438787

I admire the irony of writing "free the truth" whilst censoring something.

I'm sure this goes down great in the Anarchist HQ, but the optics from the outside is one of contempt if it didn't affect them and one of resentful tedium if it did.
>> No. 438789 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:15 am
438789 spacer
>>438788
>I admire the irony of writing "free the truth" whilst censoring something.

Unfortunately many leftists seem to be of the belief that if you don't agree with something but are unable to convince people around to you way of thinking the solution is to silence them rather than working on your argument.
>> No. 438790 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:40 am
438790 spacer
>>438788

Not at all, this seems to be roundly perceived as a positive thing by all non-bitter cunts. Most people are aware on some level that all those newspapers are owned by the same few people, doing their thing to flood the zone with shit, as Bannon puts it. It's largely the same as what happened to 4chan, the loudest, most angry people censor everyone else by shouting the loudest. Though in this case it's the richest, not the angriest. People don't listen to reason, so "working on your argument" is pointless, as you well know.
>> No. 438791 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 10:11 am
438791 spacer
>>438789

Is your solution to have a rational discussion at a national propaganda scheme? How is that going to work?
>> No. 438794 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 11:50 am
438794 spacer
>>438790
>Not at all, this seems to be roundly perceived as a positive thing by all non-bitter cunts.

[citation needed]

They must be getting desperate for a scene after the week of nothing and are now lashing out at the press. Must be depressing in the camp if they still only got a sidestory because the world has more important thing to deal with right now.
>> No. 438795 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 11:51 am
438795 spacer
>>438794
>the world has more important thing to deal with right now
It really doesn't.
>> No. 438796 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 11:58 am
438796 spacer
>>438795
There are 875,156 people that would think otherwise were they still alive.
>> No. 438797 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 12:04 pm
438797 spacer
>>438796
Are you genuinely unable to see beyond the end of your nose or are you just pretending?
>a 2018 report from the World Health Organisation, which predicted that between 2030 and 2050, global warming would cause an additional 250,000 deaths per year from heat stress, malnutrition, malaria and diarrhoea. But Misha Coleman, one of the report’s authors, stressed that deaths were already occurring.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health

>A 2017 report in the journal Nature predicted that by 2100, 75% of people around the world would be exposed to heatwaves extreme enough to kill.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3322?proof=trueJul
>> No. 438798 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 12:08 pm
438798 spacer
>>438796

Well there are about another 7 billion who should care about climate change m8. It's not difficult maths, yet you are probably entirely unable to comprehend the gulf between those numbers.

I'm no fan of the little Swedish bitch nor her army of smug vegan tossers, but if we had our priorities straight covid would be the side story. At very least- We can all agree being a cunt to Murdoch is almost automatically a net positive
>> No. 438799 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 12:14 pm
438799 spacer
>>438797
So this year coronavirus has already killed more than 3x as many people as a catastrophic global warming scenario - even including knock-on stuff like malaria and malnutrition? Maybe you would have more luck committing vandalism and stopping people going to work to force the government to come up with a vaccination scheme.
>> No. 438800 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 12:52 pm
438800 spacer
>>438798
That's fine with me.

>>438799
In what parallel universe is 875,156 three times more than either 5,000,000 or 75% of the world's population?
>> No. 438801 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 1:45 pm
438801 spacer
>>438800

>In what parallel universe is 875,156 three times more than either 5,000,000 or 75% of the world's population?


If this is the level of coherence you are offering I think XR needs to cancel you next.
>> No. 438802 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 2:05 pm
438802 spacer
>>438801
>between 2030 and 2050, global warming would cause an additional 250,000 deaths per year
That's twenty years so 20x 250,000 is 5,000,000. Obviously it wouldn't stop there, it'll just carry on an keep getting worse.
>by 2100, 75% of people around the world would be exposed to heatwaves extreme enough to kill.

>So this year coronavirus has already killed more than 3x as many people [875,156] as a catastrophic global warming scenario
This isn't a "catastrophic" scenario, either. This is pretty close to baseline and doesn't take into account the speed at which we're now observing it to happen.
>> No. 438804 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 2:48 pm
438804 spacer
>>438788
Very droll, but when the thing that's being censored is the famously dishonest British press it rather loses its sting. It's quite easy to see how you free the truth by stripping back lies. (Isn't that what the whole fake news whinge was about? If you allow people to read actual out-and-out lies, the half truths can't compete... better shut down the fake news sites.)

>>438789
The idea that politics is decided by rational argument is farcical. The idea that any group that wants political change should stick to strategies that don't work instead of adopting new ones that might rub against abstract principles but do work is even more farcical.
>> No. 438805 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 3:04 pm
438805 spacer
>>438804
>The idea that any group that wants political change should stick to strategies that don't work instead of adopting new ones that might rub against abstract principles but do work is even more farcical.

Yeah, I liked it when silencing people made the issues go away instead of causing them to bubble under and erupt in the form of Trump and Brexit.
>> No. 438806 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 3:08 pm
438806 spacer
>>438805

Too true! So lucky that this will actually silence these papers for good, instead of just being a one-off thing designed to get people talking about it.
>> No. 438807 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 3:13 pm
438807 spacer
>>438806
You mean people who support them say what a good idea it is whilst those who don't support them say what a bad idea it is? As demonstrated by this thread, what a worthwhile discussion!
>> No. 438808 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 3:17 pm
438808 spacer
>>438805

You kean the silence where there was little actual silence and it was just the Murdoch press gaslighting people into thinking they were being silenced while banging on about it constantly?

Now, the Graun and Their Lot did no good shouting racist at everything until they were (and still are) black in the face, but therein lies the point. It's a false dichotomy.

I'll say that again: this is a false dichotomy.
>> No. 438809 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 3:24 pm
438809 spacer
>>438807

Looks to me as though a fair few people have gotten off the fence. Not you, you clearly were on the other side to begin with.
>> No. 438810 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 4:15 pm
438810 spacer
>>438805
Which specific opinions were silenced leading to Trump and Brexit?
>> No. 438817 Anonymous
6th September 2020
Sunday 10:12 am
438817 spacer
This is fun: yesterday the Council of Europe issued a media freedom alert or warning or something over the Tories treatment of journalists.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/press-freedom-uk-government-council-europe-alert-boris-johnson-priti-patel-a9706741.html
>> No. 438822 Anonymous
6th September 2020
Sunday 2:22 pm
438822 spacer
>>438817
>The Council of Europe's media freedom alert says the journalist at Declassified UK was denied a response to a question about the war in Yemen after being asked “What sort of angle have you taken on the war in Yemen?” and then later told by a press officer at the department that “we no longer deal with your publication”.

Sounds like this was an oddbod from the MoD Squad, not "The Tories".
>> No. 438823 Anonymous
6th September 2020
Sunday 3:39 pm
438823 spacer
>>438822

I must have got it mixed up with Boris excluding reporters from The Mirror, Independent, Huffington Post, PoliticsHome and refusing to appear on radio 4's Today, Newsnight, the Andrew Neil interview, GMB, the C4 election debate and C4 news.
>> No. 438847 Anonymous
7th September 2020
Monday 1:54 pm
438847 spacer

EhTb5BQXkAEwP0n.jpg
438847438847438847
Won't somebody save the free press from these thugs?
>> No. 438895 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 12:35 pm
438895 spacer
Here's an email addressed to that shock jock in the video above.
Preface:
>But I want to draw your attention to something that happened today. The Times ran a good article on research by University College London & University of Bremen that shows we are heading for the ‘Hothouse Earth’ scenario of perhaps 16C of global heating over the next couple of centuries. But The Sun editorial was in full attack mode – criticising XR for exaggerating the threat. Dan Wootton, the Sun editor, said that XR are “extreme Marxists” who “intend to demolish capitalism, impose veganism on the entire population and take us back to Victorian times.” He argues that the blockade of the printworks was: “Most likely because our journalism is based on facts and scientific evidence, not dangerous and unproven rhetoric designed to provoke terror in young people.”
>After I stopped laughing I sent the email below to Dan Wootton. He and I exchanged emails earlier in the year in connection with a planned demo at News Corp HQ (which I had to postpone due to the Covid lockdown). See: -

dan.wootton@the-sun.co.uk
Subject: Extinction Rebellion article today and the planned demo at the HQ of News Corp.
Hi Dan,
We exchanged emails earlier in the year when I wrote to all your journalists explaining why I was in the process of organising a demo at the News Corp HQ. Sadly Covid 19 ended that, but it is something I will organise when we are through the worst of the pandemic.
I will add that for the last month I have been buying The Sun and The Times every day, informing Extinction Rebellion (XR) of your output.
I totally understand why you want to lash out, as you did today in your column, but there is something far more important to you than XR, far more important than your role as editor and, since you may have forgotten, I will remind you - the most important thing in your life is the youngest members of your family.
I ask that you look at The Times today (Page 14) and note that your family is now on a trajectory for perhaps 16C of global heating. The Times warns we are heading for the "Hothouse Earth" scenario. At just 4C of heating, what the world's scientists expect by 2100, your family will struggle to find sufficient food.
I ask that you also look at Page 26 of The Sun on Sunday article of 6 September. You will see Sir David Attenborough warning you about food security for the youngest members of your family (and all families).
I ask you to now look at three links that your readers won't want you to censor.
Here you will see that Prof Sir David King is asked if XR is exaggerating when it warns billions of people could be killed by climate breakdown. You will see that he confirms billions could indeed be killed. See:

This link is to NOAA, a huge mainstream American scientific body, which warns it has revised its forecast for when the ice-free Arctic Ocean will occur. It has brought forward the projection from the 2060's to the year 2034, warning it might be sooner. That is the most powerful 'Tipping Point' you will live through. You will then witness a much faster rate of global heating. White sea ice currently reflects 90% of the Sun's energy back into space, when the ice has gone, open ocean appears black from space and absorbs 94% of the Sun's energy. See:
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/arctic-ice-study
I can only appeal to you to put the youngest members of your family first, the youngest members of all your readers first, and stop censoring the most frightening news.
David Attenborough's warning about the food supply should be on your front page tomorrow. David King's warning of billions of deaths this century should be on your Sunday front page. From then onwards you should produce daily reports for your readers on Page 3 (a prominent place) explaining what the main climate feedbacks are and how they are accelerating, how the carbon sinks are in retreat, what the risks are of runaway climate change and why the UN Secretary General was right to try to warn your readers that we now face "a direct existential threat". See:
http://webtv.un.org/watch/ant%C3%B3nio-guterres-secretary-general-delivers-speech-on-climate-change-and-his-vision-for-the-2019-climate-change-summit/5833142929001/
One day soon your readers are going know you censored news that would determine whether the youngest members of their families suffered terribly and, when they do, they will know XR was wholly justified in trying to stop you from suppressing crucial news.
Regards.
Jon Fuller
>> No. 438896 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 12:46 pm
438896 spacer
>>438895
tl;dr.
>> No. 438897 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 1:22 pm
438897 spacer
>>438895
>I totally understand why you want to lash out, as you did today in your column, but there is something far more important to you than XR, far more important than your role as editor and, since you may have forgotten, I will remind you - the most important thing in your life is the youngest members of your family.

What kind of mentalist thinks that is a good idea? Has it ever worked? Looking at his article he is entirely right in pointing out XR blocked a publication from the very David Attenborough cited:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12605999/extinction-rebellion-chaos-newspaper-printing-presses-protest/

Meanwhile if you glanced at BBC news yesterday you would see the bigger story is your former spokeswoman calling out the movement as the usual green bullshit that outright lies and cannot be trusted:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54103163
>> No. 438898 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 1:51 pm
438898 spacer
>>438897
And yet you trust the word of someone named Zion Lights.
>> No. 438899 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 2:11 pm
438899 spacer
>>438895
They're such sanctimonious pricks.
>> No. 438900 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 2:31 pm
438900 spacer
>>438899

Sanctimonious, but largely correct.
>> No. 438901 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 2:34 pm
438901 spacer
>>438898
What's her name got to do with it?
>> No. 438902 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 3:28 pm
438902 spacer
>>438901
Zion Lights.
>> No. 438903 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 3:30 pm
438903 spacer
>>438902
I don't get what you mean. You'll have to explain it to me.
>> No. 438904 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 3:37 pm
438904 spacer
>>438903
Let me get my mates Perfect Dark and Spider Jerusalem on the phone, they'll do a better job.
>> No. 438905 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 3:49 pm
438905 spacer
>>438897
Personally I think the "bigger story" is the floods in Asia and the wildfires in the US. It's funny how hard you try to misdirect attention.
>> No. 438906 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 4:00 pm
438906 spacer
>>438905
Why wasn't that brought up instead of the initial "gotcha" against Dan Wootton?
>> No. 438907 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 4:05 pm
438907 spacer

Ehn88dzXYAAZzCE.jpg
438907438907438907
>>438906
Why did he not bring up unrelated things when responding to specific things said by Wootton? I don't know, maybe because there are too many to count.
>"gotcha"
No, mate. No. Give it up.
>> No. 438908 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 4:06 pm
438908 spacer
>>438905

Wild fires in the US isn't really news it is a natural part of the west coast eco system, all be it a dramatic one. Treating it like it is somehow an environmental disaster (like you are implying) is the epitome of the Naive green not knowing what they are taking about troupe.
>> No. 438909 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 4:10 pm
438909 spacer
>>438908
I'd use the word "exacerbate" in explaining this to you, but while the regular users of this board would understand what that means, I suspect you don't.
>> No. 438910 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 4:28 pm
438910 spacer
>>438908
Wildfires in California have been getting progressively worse since the Native Americans were banned from setting controlled fires; it's led to forests getting thicker and there being far more vegetation to fuel large scale fires. They've started to reintroduce it, but only on a very small scale.
>> No. 438911 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 5:14 pm
438911 spacer

EhkE9h9UYAAaMmM.png
438911438911438911
>>438910
I'm sure that California having had the hottest temperature ever reliably recorded in the world, earlier in the year has nothing to do with it either.
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/national-climate-202008
>> No. 438912 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 7:02 pm
438912 spacer
>>438911
He might have a point, I don't know about California but there was a lot of talk about the same thing happening in Australia with indigenous areas suffering significantly less damage and fire services wanting to learn more from them.
>> No. 438913 Anonymous
11th September 2020
Friday 8:28 pm
438913 spacer
>>438912
They suffered less damage than elsewhere but more damage than they would have before it got hotter and drier.
>> No. 438917 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 2:07 am
438917 spacer
>>438911

It has nominal effect as a trigger. The very eco system there wants those fires to happen every summer it had been happening for a million years until humans turned up and stopped it.


There are plants there that their entire lifecycle is built around either catching fire deliberately, or being able to withstand a certain level of fire, now imagine instead of those fires happening annually, preventing those fire from starting for a hundred years what do you think would happen when a hundred years of plants that want to catch fire have built up, when they eventually are able to catch fire?
>> No. 438918 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 7:22 am
438918 spacer
>>438917
Yes mate, the annual wildfires are getting worse due to them not happening for hundreds of years and the local government slowly reintroducing the indigenous practices of controlled burns. That's why the same places burning this year are worse than last year and last year worse than the year before that.
>> No. 438919 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 7:47 am
438919 spacer
>>438917
Here's a nice article that quotes the governor of California:
>“This is a climate damn emergency. This is real,” Newsom said in a briefing Friday from a fire zone in Butte County, surrounded by charred trees shrouded in smoke.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-11/smoke-blanketed-u-s-west-suffers-worst-air-quality-in-the-world?sref=Ih2p2ggW
>“We are preparing for a mass fatality incident based on what we know and the number of structures that have been lost,” said Andrew Phelps, director of the Oregon Office of Emergency Management. About 40,000 people have been evacuated from their homes and around 500,000 residents are under evacuation notice in the state.

>Newsom said the string of calamities striking the West Coast -- record heat waves, massive fires, smoke-filled skies blotting out the sun -- were exactly the kinds of problems long forecast by climate scientists, only they’re happening sooner than expected.
I'm sure you'll want to keep prevaricating though.
>> No. 438920 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:36 am
438920 spacer
>>438919

well Gavin Newsom and Andrew Phelps complete lack of credentials as climatologists and ecologists certainly convinced me. Next time you should quote Bono and Sting too.
>> No. 438921 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:39 am
438921 spacer
>>438918
>That's why the same places burning this year are worse than last year

The fires are in the same Regions. Not the exact same spots.
>> No. 438922 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:49 am
438922 spacer
>>438920
I'm sure your qualifications make you far more knowledgeable on the subject than the men employed to deal with this situation and their scientific advisers.
>> No. 438923 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:51 am
438923 spacer
>>438918

"This forrest sets fire every year, but things next to it burn more not because the fire burned more intensly from more fuel, but because the air was that the air was 26 degrees this year instead of 25.6!
the Fires burning at 300+ degrees having more fuel than it should is trivial next to a half degree of air temperature."

Do you even listen to yourself.

I'm not even disputing global warming which is what you are trying to turn this into, what I am disputing is your complete lack of understanding of the California ecosystem.
>> No. 438924 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:54 am
438924 spacer
>>438923
You're not disputing my understanding of it, you're disputing the Governor of California and his scientific adviser's understanding of it.
>> No. 438925 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:54 am
438925 spacer
>>438922

American politicians are well regarded for their respect of the scientific position and complete lack of popularist posturing.
>> No. 438926 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 9:59 am
438926 spacer
>>438925
I see. So you've given up "climate change is fake" and moved your goalposts to "climate change is real but any of the second-order effects of it, they're not because of it, they're from something else I read about on facebook and rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk". While you're at it, you've forgotten to blame antifa arsonists.
>> No. 438927 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 10:16 am
438927 spacer
>>438923
Half a degree does not make any difference at the time of the fire but that's not what's being said.
What matters is that half a degree higher temperatures on average over several months is enough to have an impact on the amount of dead and dry tinder available to fuel a fire.
>> No. 438928 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 10:19 am
438928 spacer
>>438924

I think I'm on your side lad but you can't be fucking using an american politician's statements as fact these days. It just doesn't work.
>> No. 438931 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 10:26 am
438931 spacer
>>438928

Granted, but I'm not sure our boiled frog friend over there is going to listen to any sort of reason.
>> No. 438932 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 10:36 am
438932 spacer
>>438926

I haven't changed my position at all you said something very stupid implying California wild fires were proof of a global warming apocalypse to someone else. I simply pointed out they weren't then you had a teary for multiple posts.
>> No. 438933 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 11:01 am
438933 spacer
>>438932

I brought it up as an example of natural disasters exacerbated by climate change, then I was challenged on it by someone who doesn't know the difference between "trope" and "troupe", what the word "albeit" is, or how to use capital letters in a sentence.
>> No. 438934 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 1:03 pm
438934 spacer
>>438923
>"This forrest sets fire every year, but things next to it burn more not because the fire burned more intensly from more fuel, but because the air was that the air was 26 degrees this year instead of 25.6!"

The air temperature is precisely what provides more fuel. Higher air temperatures dry out vegetation much more efficiently, providing more readily combustible material.

>Since the early 1970s, California's annual wildfire extent increased fivefold, punctuated by extremely large and destructive wildfires in 2017 and 2018. This trend was mainly due to an eightfold increase in summertime forest‐fire area and was very likely driven by drying of fuels promoted by human‐induced warming. Warming effects were also apparent in the fall by enhancing the odds that fuels are dry when strong fall wind events occur. The ability of dry fuels to promote large fires is nonlinear, which has allowed warming to become increasingly impactful. Human‐caused warming has already significantly enhanced wildfire activity in California, particularly in the forests of the Sierra Nevada and North Coast, and will likely continue to do so in the coming decades.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2019EF001210
>> No. 438937 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 3:38 pm
438937 spacer
>>438934
Thank you.
>> No. 438943 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 7:49 pm
438943 spacer
History shows again and again,
How nature points out the folly of maaaan.
Godzilla!

I feel like the Yanks have had this coming really. Shame, because I had friends over there, but fuck 'em.
>> No. 438944 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 8:39 pm
438944 spacer
It wouldn't surprise me that the California wildfires were caused by eco nazis saying you can't cut firebreaks because the trees give us air stuff and some beetles will die in agony. Just like what happened in Australia. But yes global warming did it.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 438945 Anonymous
12th September 2020
Saturday 8:41 pm
438945 spacer
>>438926
>While you're at it, you've forgotten to blame antifa arsonists.

>>438944

Ha.
>> No. 438958 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 12:12 pm
438958 spacer
There's a good summary of it a little way into this article:
>Global heating also causes earlier spring snow melt and increases the likelihood of drought, making extremely dry soil and fuel conditions more likely. Drought and heat, in turn, stress trees, making them susceptible to attacks from beetles whose populations are less suppressed by warmer winters. Hundreds of millions of dead, dried-out trees throughout the western United States don’t just burn more easily, they explode.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-09-12/climate-change-wildfires-california-oregon-heat
>> No. 438959 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 12:40 pm
438959 spacer
>>438944
It was started by a smoke machine at a gender reveal party. American's are only ever the victims of their own stupidity.
>> No. 438960 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 2:07 pm
438960 spacer
>>438959
Despite the coverage and memes, that party only caused a tiny fraction of the wildfires. The existence of gender-reveal parties is still grounds for America to be burned to the ground, mind.
>> No. 438961 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 2:25 pm
438961 spacer
>>438959

>American's
>stupidity

Go to your room and think about what you've done.
>> No. 438966 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 5:22 pm
438966 spacer
>>438959
Here's a handy map
https://www.latimes.com/wildfires-map/
>The most recent fire is the Bullfrog fire, which started today.
>The largest active fire is the August Complex fire, which has burned 877,477 acres so far. It started on Aug. 16 and is 28% contained.
>> No. 438968 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 6:22 pm
438968 spacer
The cause of these wildfires is the longest con in history and the largest IRL shitpost every concocted.

The vast majority of the woodland currently on fire, 1000s of acres, is Australian Eucalyptus. In the 1920s the Australians conned the Californian lumber industry into investing in a species of tree that takes ~100 years to mature, most going bust in the process. A tree that is toxic to pretty much all but the Koala, because it excretes a toxic sap. A sap that is also highly unstable and highly flammable. A tree that is currently wild in Southern California and densely packed in areas.

The only saving grace is that there would have been less wild life in these areas, because they avoid them, but otherwise it's a complete and utter disaster that has been brewing for a century. They should have been chopped down and replaced with a native tree a long time ago.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 438969 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 6:36 pm
438969 spacer
>>438968
That's weird considering the fires extend as far south as San Diego and well into Canada in the north. It's almost as though you're spreading yet another bullshit story.
>> No. 438970 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 7:14 pm
438970 spacer
>>438968
Who's paying you lad?
>> No. 438971 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 7:15 pm
438971 spacer

wildfire-map.jpg
438971438971438971
>>438969

There's also substantial wildfire activity on the other side of the Rockies. Everything is on fire because we broke the weather.
>> No. 438972 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 7:21 pm
438972 spacer
>>438970
I'm a bit confused by what
>the largest IRL shitpost every concocted
is supposed to mean.
>> No. 438973 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 8:13 pm
438973 spacer
>>438968
Eucalyptus is a particularly flammable tree, but so are California's native pines. It also doesn't comprise most, let alone a "vast majority" of the woodland currently on fire, and it doesn't take anything near 100 years to mature: it's a popular species in timber plantations because most of its growing is done within a decade of planting. You are not going to find some weird factoid that makes climate change a non-factor here.

Also, eucalyptus sap is not "excreted", sap is essentially a tree's blood not excrement.
>> No. 438976 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 11:03 pm
438976 spacer
>>438968

This post brought to you by 4chan /pol/'s community outreach program.
>> No. 438977 Anonymous
13th September 2020
Sunday 11:08 pm
438977 spacer
>>438976
You're right. It is quite remarkable what people choose to believe. A simple google for "eucalyptus maturity period" and it's there in stark terms on numerous sites. Eucalyptus is well-known as a very fast growing tree.

https://www.ambientbp.com/blog/7-facts-eucalyptus-trees

This also explains why Q is becoming such a big thing. People actually want to believe far-fetched shit.
>> No. 438978 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 12:17 am
438978 spacer
>>438977
I don't believe it, if I had posted it in /lab/ it would have warranted a ban, but voicing a disingenuous position with the intention of mocking it later only to come back to a ban for it is a damning indictment of how parody is well and truly dead in a post Trump world.
>> No. 438979 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 1:05 am
438979 spacer
>>438978

>parody is well and truly dead in a post Trump world.

I've pondered on this. I have experienced occasions where I'll express what I would consider to be self-evidently daft and satirically extreme positions, in a Brass Eye kind of deadpan but ridiculous manner, and having people instead just assume I'm an actual lunatic. Groups of the Graun reading middle class liberal persuasion usually, so just who you'd expect poking fun at the climate-deniers and popular nationalists to go down well with- But they either don't recognise it, taking things too seriously, or the premise of my mockery is flawed because it's not ridiculous enough to come off as parody.

I think there's a bit of both at play. Because we do live in quite dark times with some really quite poor characters in positions of power, perhaps people are a bit more cagey and sensitive about the subject. Perhaps it's just not funny, because we are living through something not that far removed from the joke. But perhaps some people are just a bit humourless, and kind of touchy, when it comes to that kind of subject- The type of people who are emotionally invested and call everything fascist. If they take the whole business so seriously they'll unfriend people off social media and what have you over it, for them it's probably just not a joking matter, regardless of your intention.

In text form it's hard to discern tone sometimes, but considering the sort of place this is I at least inferred your post wasn't to be taken entirely at face value as someone from /pol/ getting lost and spewing nonsense. Not sure where I was going with this post overall but I can't be the only one who's noticed this. People are just very quick to assume genuine cases of uncritical, entirely non-self aware /pol/tards are everywhere. Truth be told I don't even think there are very many of those on /pol/ itself.
>> No. 438980 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 1:36 am
438980 spacer
>>438979
It was supposed to stir the pot a bit, but the same thing that adversely impacts other platforms such as rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk is that if the sub isn't stated from the outset to be dedicated entirely to parody and satire then people can't tell the difference. That birthed the /s tag, but .gs has always been smarter in that regard when I've made posts like that.

I think we've maybe just become fat and coddled in our comfy .gs chair, internet crypto-gammons who see wrongthink around every corner and behind every door. You're probably right in that this is an issue too close to people's hearts, but sometimes the internet is a place where you find refuge in laughter, sometimes with or sometimes at something, and that's it and isn't just arguing with *actual* eucalyptus professors on a British shed enthusiast Usenet group all the way down.
>> No. 438982 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 1:46 am
438982 spacer
>>438978
>I was only pretending to be stupid
>> No. 438983 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 2:36 am
438983 spacer
>>438982
If by "pretending to be stupid" you mean arguing from a disingenuous position so well that it was mistaken for something the other place's /pol/ would post by a bunch of lads who really should know better then it's not stupid, simply a well crafted straw man, unless your implication is that I do actually believe what I wrote and that I'm only saying I don't to save face?

This isn't even the first time we've had this discussion lads, I quite often argue from one PoV in one thread and from the opposite PoV in another, mainly because it's fun to do so and forces me to think differently than I normally would for a time and in the other direction also because I think challenging your own ideas to see if they hold up to scrutiny is healthy.
>> No. 438984 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 3:04 am
438984 spacer
>>438982

This line of reasoning doesn't work, because people on the internet don't simply realise they were wrong and then try to save face by saying it's a joke. That would mean admitting to having been wrong. People on the internet will never, ever, on any account, change their minds, especially not because of something trivial like evidence.
>> No. 438985 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 7:43 am
438985 spacer
>>438979

>the premise of my mockery is flawed because it's not ridiculous enough to come off as parody

That's the problem with 2020 - nothing is ridiculous enough to clearly be parody. The prime minister bragged about shaking hands with people who had a deadly infectious disease, shortly before ending up in intensive care with that disease. The president of the United States publicly mocked a disabled man. Just a few days ago, a Tory minister told Parliament that the government plans to break international law "in a specific and limited way". It's genuinely a possibility that Trump won the election solely because 4chan thought it would be funny.

A lot of people have always been humourless and overly-literal, but the line between parody and reality has been well and truly obliterated. If we gave out the benefit of the doubt as freely as we used to, every conversation would descend into a bunfight involving genuine nutters or Russian disinformation operatives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
>> No. 438986 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 8:40 am
438986 spacer
>>438983
Your joke didn't land, that's fine, you don't need to be so defensive.
>> No. 438987 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 8:52 am
438987 spacer
>>438986
I lied about trees and that's why Trump won!!
>> No. 438988 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 9:22 am
438988 spacer
>>438987
Mate.
>> No. 438989 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 10:24 am
438989 spacer

26D2793C-FFC7-4D1E-A867-0F1FC6D735D1.jpg
438989438989438989
>>438983
> If by "pretending to be stupid" you mean arguing from a disingenuous position so well that it was mistaken for something the other place's /pol/ would post by a bunch of lads who really should know better then it's not stupid, simply a well crafted straw man

You aren’t arguing well from a disingenuous position, you’re posting silly bollocks that morons the other place believe and correctly being treated as an imbecile.
>> No. 438990 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 11:43 am
438990 spacer
>>438983
>I think challenging your own ideas to see if they hold up to scrutiny is healthy.

But what you posted wasn't even a challenge to any idea, it was just utter bullshit and the opposite of healthy. You weren't really joking were you lad.
>> No. 438991 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 12:54 pm
438991 spacer
>>438986
That post was quite clearly an example of the former and not the latter, lad. There is even a paragraph in there, have we all forgotten how they work as well as how to have a laugh at Taxi driver talking points?

If I seem defensive it's because that's the first time I've been banned in 6 years and it's not like I don't have a track record of making daft posts.

>>438989

I was repeating pretty much word for word what a taxi driver told me was the cause of the wildfires. I didn't realise it was a /pol/ talking point until you all told me. Maybe we wouldn't see /pol/ behind every door if people stopped exposing themselves to their lunacy.
>> No. 438992 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 1:08 pm
438992 spacer
>>438991
/pol/ was behind this particular door, you can hardly accuse others of seeing it where it isn't in this case.
>> No. 438994 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 1:19 pm
438994 spacer
>>438992
Fair, but at the same time we can't assume every bit of daft shite posted here is an example of alt-right crepes. I, for one, don't even like nutella.
>> No. 439022 Anonymous
14th September 2020
Monday 11:49 pm
439022 spacer

>> No. 439023 Anonymous
15th September 2020
Tuesday 12:03 am
439023 spacer
>>439022
I'm getting very strong Brass Eye vibes from this.
>> No. 439065 Anonymous
16th September 2020
Wednesday 9:01 pm
439065 spacer
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/15/business/media/wildfires-conservative-media.html

>Rush Limbaugh told millions of his radio listeners to set aside any suggestion that climate change was the culprit for the frightening spate of wildfires ravaging California and the Pacific Northwest.

>“Man-made global warming is not a scientific certainty; it cannot be proven, nor has it ever been,” Mr. Limbaugh declared on his Friday show, disregarding the mountains of empirical evidence to the contrary. He then pivoted to a popular right-wing talking point: that policies meant to curtail climate change are, in fact, an assault on freedom.


At least his ilk are always predictable. No surprises with them.

Also worth noting that one of his popular nicknames around the web is Lush Rimjob.
>> No. 439066 Anonymous
16th September 2020
Wednesday 9:30 pm
439066 spacer
>>439065
I'm curious how conscious of the lies people like him are aware they're telling. Presumably the people at the high corporate level of oil companies who commission climate-change denial are, but how far down does it go? Are the journalists who prop it up genuinely deluded? I don't know how people manage to push the lies when they're not rich enough to think they'll be able to buy a bunker in the Arctic Circle.
>> No. 439067 Anonymous
16th September 2020
Wednesday 9:44 pm
439067 spacer
>>439066

I feel like it's sort of an ignorance is bliss situation. If you're caught up in politics and the like I suspect it's pretty easy to internalise the idea that there are no genuine, hard truths, only narratives that can be shaped to fit the party line; and that the only real difference is which party's narrative wins. The problem is where this bumps up against something which is very demonstrably a real, hard truth, and they're still telling themselves (and everybody else) it's wrong because that's what they're used to doing when something conflicts with their interests.

I don't think many people beyond your actual anti-vaxxer, chemtrail, flat earth types are thick enough to genuinely think it's all a myth. But the ones who most vociferously deny it are more in the kind of denial a long-term smoker is. Even if they logically know it'll kill them one day, there's enough of a seam of doubt and self-aggrandisement to think they'll escape its most harmful effects.

Of course this is only made worse when a lot of these people are already in their 50s and 60s and can so easily put it out of mind because they'll be dead by the time it starts to REALLY bite anyway.
>> No. 439068 Anonymous
16th September 2020
Wednesday 10:25 pm
439068 spacer
>Extinction Rebellion 'go floppy' when arrested, complains senior Met officer

>Protesters’ arrest tactic is a ‘pain in the neck’, Sir Stephen House tells committee hearing

>House said: “If they could just behave like sensible adults. It is a flipping nuisance. And I think the majority of the public would look at that and go: ‘For goodness sake, you’ve made your point. You’ve been arrested, the police are treating you perfectly fairly, just get on with it.’”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/16/extinction-rebellion-go-floppy-when-arrested-complains-senior-met-officer

This one is just funny.
>> No. 439069 Anonymous
16th September 2020
Wednesday 11:15 pm
439069 spacer
>>439068
"Stop being obstructive" plead police to protestors whose sole purpose is to be obstructive. And how has a senior officer of the Met never come across non-violent protestors going limp before? The whole story is utterly bizarre.
>> No. 439127 Anonymous
18th September 2020
Friday 1:22 pm
439127 spacer

Merchants_of_DOUBT.jpg
439127439127439127
>>439066

It's hard to gauge the personal beliefs of people like this, or to what extent they're playing the game, but as for "how deep it goes" on a collective level there's strong institutional pressures with interesting roots based in business (obviously) and cold war politics.
>> No. 439150 Anonymous
19th September 2020
Saturday 11:42 am
439150 spacer

41598_2016_Article_BFsrep32450_Fig1_1.jpg
439150439150439150
>>439127

I think the main strategy has been to teach the controversy. This is an approach that has worked in various fields especially in American politics. From gun control to sex education, creationism, and indeed climate change.

Statistical data has a habit of containing noise. Trends often only become visible when a point cloud wavering around an average is significantly broken to the upside or downside. A freakishly hot few days of summer one year are a statistical outlier on their own, they do not indicate a trend of global warming on the whole. It is only when these events become significantly more frequent that you can really argue the case for a new trend, i.e. in this case global warming.

In the early days of data that was maybe, maybe not indicating climate change, you could to some extent still get away with arguing that it was probably just a concatenation of statistical outliers, or an oscillation within a long-term trend. And that's when teach-the-controversy looked significantly less dodgy than it does today.

For example, summer sea surface temperatures in the Mediterranean have risen since the early 1980s, but until about 20 years ago, they were really only coming back from a multi-decade decrease that had started in the 1940s, and they weren't breaking the last long-term maximum of the late 1930s. So it just seemed to fall within a long-term trend of naturally occuring fluctuation which could be observed all the way back to the 1800s. But if you now look at the trend of those sea temperatures since the year 2000, it's impossible to miss that there has been a robust and steady increase that is unlike any long-term occasional maximum of the last 160 years.

More info: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep32450
>> No. 439165 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 12:48 am
439165 spacer
>>439150

Ladm3 can you give a graph as per your example, over a period of 10 thousand years. Explain why there were hill forts in places such as the summit of Ingleborough when the climate was much warmer and why the Romans found Northumbria a great place to cultivate grapes. Or why the Vikings left Greenland.
>> No. 439168 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 1:11 am
439168 spacer
>>439165
I think there's one in this video

>> No. 439169 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 1:18 am
439169 spacer
>>439165
>Explain why there were hill forts in places such as the summit of Ingleborough when the climate was much warmer and why the Romans found Northumbria a great place to cultivate grapes. Or why the Vikings left Greenland.
Because we were on the tail end of an interglacial period heading into a glacial one, until the industrial revolution started.
>> No. 439175 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 4:31 am
439175 spacer
>>439169

Sounds like it's a good job we stopped the coming ice age, that would have been a disaster!
>> No. 439176 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 7:32 am
439176 spacer
>>439175
Not really, it would happen nice and sedately at a pace most of the biosphere can adapt to.
>> No. 439178 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 10:13 am
439178 I am confusion
I've been using https://sealevel.climatecentral.org/maps/ to check water level rises, potential imigration and that kind of thing with regard to climate change. Projections for 2100 show far less sinking than I imagined - Areas of Thailand, Vietnam. Bangladesh looks like it'll be badly hit.

As a whole It doesn't look that severe.
Am I missing something? Perhaps not apriciating the scale? Maybe those Bangladeshis can't move north because land is inhospitable? Maybe the areas of Iraq happen to hold vast oil reserves? Will refugees from the Nehterlands demand autonomy in Germany or whereever they go, forcing a change in national bounderies? Are these models even trustworthy?

I guess many factors should be considered like the climate overall, weather effects, impacts to current econoomies etc, but this is all way over my head and it feels as though there's little else worth doing than peeking up from the sand every now and then when it gets a little wet.
>> No. 439179 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 10:28 am
439179 spacer

2050.png
439179439179439179
>>439178
You don't think this by 2050 is drastic or were you expecting something out of the 1995 action film Waterworld?
>many factors should be considered
Yes. Water levels rising are hardly catastrophic compared to other effects not shown on that map; such as the equator and beyond becoming uninhabitably hot (see the web-bulb effect - Iraq came close to that hot this year, India last year), the knock-on polarification of areas as far as the north of France (and the same distance south of the equator) and the increasingly chaotic weather patterns this all results in, making growing food anywhere a gamble. A few too many days of storms or droughts in the wrong regions at the same time and there's nothing to import from anywhere. We're already seeing the rumblings of war over fresh water too; the clash at the Indian-Chinese border seems to be at least partly motivated by access to the aquifers there as their usual sources of water, snow melt from the mountains, isn't being replenished.
>> No. 439180 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 10:29 am
439180 spacer
>polarification
Word filter for the opposite.
>> No. 439181 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 10:35 am
439181 spacer
And how could I forget the acidification of the oceans, caused by the excess CO2? This kills sealife which we either use for food or produce oxygen - not to mention just the plain wrongness of killing everything that lives in the sea.
>> No. 439183 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 11:19 am
439183 spacer
>>439178

>As a whole It doesn't look that severe

It doesn't, because it's not. Under the worst case scenario the most we've got to lose is Skegness and a chunk of East Yorkshire, and I'm sure you'll agree that's really no big loss. Fuck you Humbersidelad.

However- History doesn't end in 2100, and flooding is not the only problem that will come with climate change. The fact it doesn't look that severe is why politicians are able to keep kicking the can down the line, and make environmentalists look like hysterical loons (which they don't help themselves with either to be fair), but the longer we keep ignoring it the worse it's going to get.

Eventually we will reach a point where we've ignored it too long and there isn't enough time to rectify the situation before we've fucked it, like leaving a uni dissertation until a fortnight before it's due.
>> No. 439185 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 11:24 am
439185 spacer
>>439183
>Eventually we will reach a point where we've ignored it too long and there isn't enough time to rectify the situation before we've fucked it, like leaving a uni dissertation until a fortnight before it's due.
We already have. Most of the environmentalist focus has gone from stopping it to just mitigating the worst of it because we're already at 1.3 degrees higher.
>> No. 439186 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 11:25 am
439186 spacer
>>439179
Looks quite nice actually: Blackpool sounds much more pleasant as an island, Chester used to be quite powerhouse in Roman Britain before it's rivers silted up and Peterborough would have some much needed character with a seafront.

The Dutch plan to dam up the North Sea needs to be stopped.

>> No. 439187 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 11:44 am
439187 spacer
>>439178

"Areas of Thailand and Vietnam" is something of an understatement - with 3ft of sea level rise, most of Bangkok and Ho Chi Minh city just disappear. Imagine the political and economic consequences if half of London just fell into the sea.

The consequences of climate change are just about manageable if the international community acts in a united and humane way. If we fall short of that, we're likely to see an unprecedented wave of disorder as old disputes are exacerbated and new grievances created. Countries that can't afford to rebuild will fall into chaos and countries that can afford it will neglect their poorest and most vulnerable.

Remember the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans? For many parts of the world, that'll become the new normal.




>> No. 439188 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 11:58 am
439188 spacer

5f60fdd557b7da001ee11c11.jpg
439188439188439188
>>439187
Speaking of Katrina, so far this year we've already broke most of the records surrounding hurricanes and tropical storms. Many of which were set in 2005, the year of Katrina.
We've had more named storms this year up to the current date, than ever before in recorded history. We've had so many so early that it's also very probable that the record for most storms in a single year will be broken.
We've just had a hurricane-like storm hit Greece, not known previously until 1995, and looking to become more common as the Mediterranean sea is getting warmer.
>> No. 439189 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 12:04 pm
439189 spacer
>>439187
>The consequences of climate change are just about manageable if the international community acts in a united and humane way

This is why we're fucked.
>> No. 439192 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 1:38 pm
439192 spacer
>>439169

>Because we were on the tail end of an interglacial period heading into a glacial one, until the industrial revolution started

There was indeed a period called the Little Ice Age that lasted until about 1850. But it's not entirely certain if it was just a natural fluctuation of temperatures within an interglacial, or if we really would have been at the start of a new full-on glacial period without industrialisation and increased use of land and resources by humans.

In any case, I think climatologists now say that we've put off the next ice age by about 50,000 years. Meaning, even if we stopped all emissions of greenhouse gases today, the Earth would need that long to get rid of enough of them from its atmosphere so that there could actually be a new ice age.
>> No. 439195 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 3:48 pm
439195 spacer

global cycle.png
439195439195439195
>>439192
>But it's not entirely certain if it was just a natural fluctuation of temperatures within an interglacial, or if we really would have been at the start of a new full-on glacial period
I suppose there's an outside chance this smooth fluctuation up and down could suddenly act out for no reason at all.

Image source: https://colinmathers.com/2020/08/23/the-climate-crisis-has-not-gone-away/
>> No. 439196 Anonymous
20th September 2020
Sunday 4:52 pm
439196 spacer
>>439195

The consensus among climatologists is that the models they have nowadays, which are infinitely complex and are being run on some of the world's most powerful computers, cannot explain the increase in global temperatures from within the climate models themselves. Simply put, the scope of the climate variables they are working with does not allow for the kind of resulting outsize temperature trends that we are seeing now. You only get the values we are increasingly experiencing in our time when you introduce an anthropogenic element in your equations.
>> No. 439200 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 12:05 am
439200 spacer
>>439196

Are you trying to say that the climate models don't already presume anthropogenic climate change? Because they do.
>> No. 439202 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 12:33 am
439202 spacer
>>439200

They are factoring in human CO2 release. It's not like they aren't. Again, what I said was that our weather the last few years can't be explained by nature alone anymore.
>> No. 439204 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 3:41 am
439204 spacer
>>439202
Why doesn't "nature" include you? Fucking twatty humans. I'm gonna enjoy this.

I swear I'm not an alien, mods.
>> No. 439205 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 9:23 am
439205 spacer
>>439204
It can do, if you're playing philosophy semantics, but in this case it's helpful to make the distinction.
>> No. 439206 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 10:13 am
439206 spacer
>>439204

When you are done being a cunt, think about what you said, and that the human element of those climate models as it applies here is basically defined by our production of greenhouse gases and the overuse of land and other natural resources in the last 200 years.

Humans have been around for longer than the current interglacial period has lasted, and have probably always had a slight impact on the global climate, but we used to be in harmony and equilibrium with nature. The natural resources we used had a chance to recover and grow back. It is only since about the early to mid-20th century that our exploitation of the planet's resources is no longer sustainable. And that is where those climate models come in and where climatologists argue that the spike in temperatures in recent decades can no longer be explained by natural climate fluctuations, but is the result of human activity.

It's not helpful to say that we are part of nature, too. Yes, if you add the human factor to climate models, then it explains global warming perfectly. But that is then completely missing the point.
>> No. 439207 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 10:47 am
439207 spacer
>>439206
We simply need to release a virus into the wild to reduce population to pre industrial levels.
>> No. 439208 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 11:51 am
439208 spacer
>>439206
>we used to be in harmony and equilibrium with nature

There is no harmony or equilibrium in nature you absolutely berk. Focusing on humans we absolutely have had a catastrophic impact on environs as soon as we turned up including in Britain where the forest disappeared.

That means that you can't just roll the clock back to pre-industrial society, Ted Kaczynski.
>> No. 439209 Anonymous
21st September 2020
Monday 12:13 pm
439209 spacer
>>439207
>World's richest 1% cause double CO2 emissions of poorest 50%, says Oxfam
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/21/worlds-richest-1-cause-double-co2-emissions-of-poorest-50-says-oxfam
>> No. 439301 Anonymous
28th September 2020
Monday 4:46 pm
439301 spacer
>Greenpeace vows to continue building boulder protection of marine reserve
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/greenpeace-vows-continue-building-boulder-132306796.html
So the government has done fuckall to stop illegal trawling of this marine reserve - the only thing that's drawn a peep out of them is when Greenpeace started dropping in rocks to snag the trawler's nets, they "formally requested" Greenpeace stop doing that. Incredible.
>> No. 439312 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 1:13 am
439312 spacer
>>439209
Why aren't we eating them already?
>> No. 439313 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 2:09 am
439313 spacer
>>439312
The global 1% includes anyone who makes about 75 grand, give or take, so that probably includes your GP and local headmaster, not to mention cheflad - to the guillotine with him! I'd be more interested to know the effect of those a couple of deciles further up, the sort who think nothing of flying in a private jet every weekend. Buying and operating a superyacht must be equivalent to a large town in a developing country at least.
>> No. 439314 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 2:23 am
439314 spacer
>>439313
Start at the top and work your way down.
>> No. 439334 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 7:23 pm
439334 spacer
>>439313
Where do I sit globally, on my average twenty-something-K wage?
>> No. 439335 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 7:26 pm
439335 spacer
>>439334
https://howrichami.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i?income=25000&countryCode=GBR&household%5Badults%5D=1&household%5Bchildren%5D=0
>> No. 439336 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 7:30 pm
439336 spacer
>>439335
I've no idea if this data is more or less reliable than Oxfam's, but apparently a salary of 40k officially puts you in the 1%.
>> No. 439337 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 7:50 pm
439337 spacer
>>439335>>439336
I think there is something on gov.uk which is more specific to the UK - the bands are obviously higher than compared to the rest of the world.
>> No. 439338 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 7:55 pm
439338 spacer
>>439335
I don't really buy this. It is silly to tell someone on bennies here that they are in the global 5% and should be grateful. Makes me think it's a silly hamfisted message that Bezos would like his workers to believe and not look to make our own society fairer. Just for the sake of some fucking nets for some Congolese child somewhere.

Fits in with all the silliness of middle and working class people being told to be more green while the rich own private jets. The silliness of our government trying to call environmental activities, basically daft militant wogs, and this sort of nonsense >>439301.

All very silly.
>> No. 439339 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 8:35 pm
439339 spacer
>>439338
There was another % calculator I clicked on first that didn't have any of the charity gubbins but it didn't seem to be working.
>> No. 439340 Anonymous
30th September 2020
Wednesday 8:37 pm
439340 spacer
>>439338
>>439335

What you have to keep in mind is that it's not a linear scale, and when you get to the top end of the scale, the curve has nearly doubled back on itself.

So you're in the top 5% if you're on £25k? Fair enough, kids in Mozambique don't even have clean water. But to be in the 1%? Doctors, lawyers, other general middle class jobs, who to be fair are wealthy, but they're still not exactly calling the shots and meaningfully in charge of anything.

Then you get to the very top with the 0.1%, which is people like you mention, your Bezoses and Gateses. It really doesn't sound like a big jump does it? That's going from a percent, to the top tenth of that percent- But the gulf is almost incomprehensibly vast. You go from a doctor who owns an Audi and goes on holiday twice a year, to men who command entire economies in their own right. Men who have so much money they could afford to buy entire African nations.

It's all a matter of perspective.

And you're right, it's a bit daft to call out people who are technically globally wealthy if they happen to live in a country/city with very high costs of living. They have no choice in the matter because that kind of poverty keeps you trapped wherever you happen to be, and while they might have access to clean water, universal healthcare and a roof over their head, that doesn't mean it isn't an intolerably bleak existence at times, and they are most certainly not complicit in environmental harm, because at that level you really don't have autonomy over your decisions. You have to buy whatever is cheap.
>> No. 441917 Anonymous
29th January 2021
Friday 7:52 pm
441917 spacer

ac-graphic-tunnel-eco-activists-euston-v3.jpg
441917441917441917
Swampy, Larch and some others are hiding out in a tunnel they dug in Euston.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/29/tipping-point-why-swampy-thinks-hs2-tunnel-protest-can-change-climate-fight
The HS2 people and their bailiffs have said that the protesters are inexperienced and don't know what they're doing, which is dangerous. While driving heavy machinery in the vicinity above their heads.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/g5bk89/anti-hs2-tunnel-protesters-euston-london
The bailiff who safely evicted Swampy from similar tunnels in 1996 said earlier today that the HS2 bailiffs don't know what they're doing and are inexperienced, which is dangerous.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/extinction-rebellion-activists-ordered-to-leave-hs2-tunnel-for-their-own-safety-hgzsnkq6q
>> No. 441918 Anonymous
29th January 2021
Friday 8:52 pm
441918 spacer
>>441917

>The bailiff who safely evicted Swampy from similar tunnels in 1996 said earlier today that the HS2 bailiffs don't know what they're doing and are inexperienced, which is dangerous.

He's absolutely right. His company is the only one in Britain with a proven track record of safely removing protesters from deep tunnels. Faulding has a CV that rivals Jason Bourne, his team are mostly drawn from special forces regiments and they conduct themselves with a commensurate level of discipline and professionalism.

NET/HCEG are very much the cheap and cheerless option for when you want people shifted in a hurry and don't care about the optics; their usual work is turfing out squatters and travellers and they aren't renowned for their subtlety.

As an interesting side note, Peter Faulding was also the main expert witness in the Gareth Williams inquest.

https://www.specialistgroupinternational.com/protestor-removal/

The idea that a team led by Swampy are inexperienced is totally laughable. From what I've seen, the tunnelling work at Euston is first rate - it's probably the deepest and most sophisticated protest tunnel ever dug in Britain, it certainly has the greatest number of occupants and this situation could go very badly wrong.
>> No. 441919 Anonymous
29th January 2021
Friday 8:55 pm
441919 spacer
>>441918
The statement he gave on the BBC earlier doesn't mince words.
https://twitter.com/bearwitness2019/status/1355252616557703171
>> No. 441920 Anonymous
29th January 2021
Friday 11:25 pm
441920 spacer
>>441918
>this situation could go very badly wrong

They could spread covid for a start like some NIMBY badgers. Flush them out with a Lana Del Ray album on a string.

Established firm tears into cheaper rival shocker!
>> No. 441921 Anonymous
29th January 2021
Friday 11:37 pm
441921 spacer
>protest tunnels

This is something that's just been patched in, surely. It's mad enough that I should have heard about protest tunnels at some point in the last thirty years, but I haven't. Are there other notable, relatively recent uses of protest tunnels?
>> No. 441922 Anonymous
29th January 2021
Friday 11:55 pm
441922 spacer
>>441921
If you read any of the articles talking about the HS2 protest they will probably mention that Swampy's famous for his 1990s tunnel protests. Famously POWs used it to protest being captured in wars too, back when wars were proper.
>> No. 441923 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 12:08 am
441923 spacer
>>441922

Fair, but I don't want to give any of those websites clicks.
>> No. 441924 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 12:12 am
441924 spacer
>>441921 >>441922
It's not the first time >>441918 has made this post on this site.
>> No. 441925 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 3:32 am
441925 spacer
>>441924

I mean, not that post verbatim, but I've certainly talked a lot about protest tunnels over the years.

>>441921

If you're interested, Disco Dave wrote the book on the subject. There has been a major protest tunnel at least every couple of years since the first at Newbury in 1996, but protest sites tend to get less media attention these days. I suspect that the Euston camp have been getting a lot of attention because a) there's fuck all else happening, b) it's easy for London-based journalists to get to and c) middle-class people care about HS2.

Frankly I think it's a bit weird that self-professed environmentalists are protesting the construction of sustainable public transport, but whatever.

https://underminers.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/disco_daves_tunnelling_guide_pdf_version_kf.pdf
>> No. 441926 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 4:15 am
441926 spacer
>>441925

This is how I know it's been patched in, I spend a lot of time on here and I don't recall protest tunnels ever coming up. This is a definite Mugabe Effect situation.

Cheers for the info though, it'll make some nice bedtime reading.
>> No. 441927 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 8:35 am
441927 spacer
>>441925
>Frankly I think it's a bit weird that self-professed environmentalists are protesting the construction of sustainable public transport, but whatever.

The majority of people especially the environmentalists definitely want a better rail network.
The root of the opposition lies in the fact that many of the decisions on the route are quite bizarre in their own right, completely ignoring many possibly cheaper and less destructive options for a new north-south route. Secondly the whole scheme is quite clearly designed to meet the niche needs of mostly wealthy people travelling to and from London and will really have a minimal impact on the overcrowding on other routes.
>> No. 441928 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 9:38 am
441928 spacer
>>441925

It's also getting attention as the police fined one of the barristers for being there to give legal advice. Similarly to
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/journalist-photographer-asylum-camp-napier-barracks-andy-aitchison-b1794907.html
>> No. 441930 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 10:58 am
441930 spacer
The Americans have a saying for what these tunnel protestors are doing. "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
>> No. 441931 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 6:34 pm
441931 spacer
>>441930
They have another saying too; "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything."
>> No. 441932 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 7:42 pm
441932 spacer
>>441931
Quite, and clearly these protestors have fallen for something since they pretty obviously don't stand for anything.
>> No. 441933 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 7:50 pm
441933 spacer
>>441932
I think you mean "In the playground they have a saying, 'I know you are but what am I?'"
>> No. 441934 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 7:52 pm
441934 spacer
>>441933
Go on then, lad. Explain to us all what these people are standing for. Clearly they're not there to support environmentalism, otherwise they wouldn't be protesting the greenest infrastructure project we've ever undertaken by destroying a green space.
>> No. 441936 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 8:01 pm
441936 spacer
>>441934
It's not though. You're just lying.
>> No. 441937 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 9:06 pm
441937 spacer
>>441936
And you're a paedo who rams iPhones up babies' fannies.
>> No. 441938 Anonymous
30th January 2021
Saturday 9:44 pm
441938 spacer
>>441937
IT WAS JUST A JOKE, GEESH.
>> No. 441939 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 12:01 am
441939 spacer
>>441934
>the greenest infrastructure project we've ever undertaken
Citation needed.
>> No. 441940 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 1:01 am
441940 spacer
>>441934
>the greenest infrastructure project we've ever undertaken by destroying a green space.
Tallest dwarf. The government's opening a new coal mine in Cumbria so don't act as if they give a single shit about the environment. The amount of people who need to commute from the North down to London is tiny and if the government was that arsed about infrastructure in the North we wouldn't have had Pacer trains operating out of Manchester Picadily until earlier this winter, ergo we must conclude HS2 is a vanity project without peer, to do otherwise is to reject reality.
>> No. 441941 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 1:02 am
441941 spacer
>>441940
Whatever you say, Packham. Now don't you have another domestic flight to catch?
>> No. 441942 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 1:03 am
441942 spacer
>>441941
What?
>> No. 441945 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 8:26 am
441945 spacer
>>441942
I think it's the "I'm being censored for posting pictures of Greta" lad. It has that same bitter vibe.
>> No. 441946 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 8:54 am
441946 spacer
>>441940
The coal mine project does have a face saving argument to be fair: The coal will go to places in Britain that are going to be burning coal regardless, leading to an emission saving from shipping in the coal from abroad.
>> No. 441947 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 9:32 am
441947 spacer
>>441946
So they're admitting those emissions count towards ours now?
>> No. 441948 Anonymous
31st January 2021
Sunday 10:18 am
441948 spacer
>>441946

It's a peculiar sort of Tory government that wants to open an unprofitable coal mine to help prop up unprofitable steel mills that are only in business because of a sweetheart deal with the railways. It'd be a bit much for the Callaghan government. Did ARE MAGGIE die in vain?
>> No. 441974 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 11:20 am
441974 spacer
>>441948
Fortunately for them, there is no party in opposition.
>> No. 442483 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 6:54 pm
442483 spacer
>Climate crisis hitting 'worst case scenario', warns Environment Agency head
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/23/climate-crisis-hitting-worst-case-scenarios-warns-environment-agency-head
>Warning that this is not “science fiction”, Sir James Bevan said on Tuesday that in recent years several of the “reasonable worst case scenarios” had happened in the UK, with more extreme weather and flooding. And he urged politicians to take action to reduce emissions and adapt to the “inevitable” impacts of the climate emergency.
>“Much higher sea levels will take out most of the world’s cities, displace millions, and make much of the rest of our land surface uninhabitable or unusable,” Bevan told the annual conference of the Association of British Insurers. “Much more extreme weather will kill more people through drought, flooding, wildfires and heatwaves than most wars have.
>> No. 442485 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:03 pm
442485 spacer
>>442483

For context, Sir James Bevan is a former British diplomat who served a posting in D.R. Congo. He is not the sort of man who is easily panicked or prone to hyperbole.
>> No. 442486 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:14 pm
442486 spacer
>>441948
Given that it will not be state run, or state owned, or anything like that, how does the "Tory government open an unprofitable coal mine"?

What a fucking mess, it's a good thing, let it happen you whiny cunt.
>> No. 442488 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:17 pm
442488 spacer
>>442485
> For context, Sir James Bevan is a former British diplomat who served a posting in D.R. Congo. He is not the sort of man who is easily panicked or prone to hyperbole.
Well that clearly qualifies him to discuss climate change.
>> No. 442489 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:25 pm
442489 spacer
>>442483
The majority of the general public will never understand, nor care, hell a good 50% of people can't figure out masks or viruses. The predictions we can make right now with the data at hand are terrifying and our predictions have always been off, it's often much worse. A lot of people will suffer, a lot will die, and by then the prevailing attitude will be "Well we can't do anything about it now."

At least we can enjoy the ride down.
>> No. 442492 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:37 pm
442492 spacer
>>442488
Everyone knows you go to Doctor Congo if you want to learn about climate change.
>> No. 442493 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:37 pm
442493 spacer
>>442483

>“Much higher sea levels will take out most of the world’s cities, displace millions, and make much of the rest of our land surface uninhabitable or unusable,” Bevan told the annual conference of the Association of British Insurers. “Much more extreme weather will kill more people through drought, flooding, wildfires and heatwaves than most wars have

Earlier up in the thread someone posted an interactive map thing showing the areas that would flood under various prediction models of sea level change. I played around with it for a while as did, I'm sure, many of you; what I noticed is that even under absolute worst case predictions, we lose a bit of Holland and most of Humberside.

Now, I'm not a climate denialist or anti-vaxxer or any such thing, but when people come out with statements like this, where are they coming from? Is it some kind of new worst case scenario that's even worse than the worst case scenario we already thought was the worst case scenario? Or is it mostly just hyperbole to draw attention to the seriousness of the matter?

Because this is the thing. While it is very serious indeed, most of the people with the power to actually do anything about it quite clearly consider Hull and Amsterdam to be acceptable losses, and if you were in their position you probably would too. In fact you probably already do, even if you live there.
>> No. 442494 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:47 pm
442494 spacer
>>442493
If only it was just the sea level rising that's the concern.
>> No. 442495 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:53 pm
442495 spacer
>>442489
Maybe not, but insurance companies do. The article is (tenuously) good news, if you were already aware of the extent of the climate crisis. People with money in position to make influential decisions are being made to listen.
>> No. 442496 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:55 pm
442496 spacer
>>442493

Right there in the part you quoted, it doesn't say "we'll lose a bit of Humberside", it says
>“Much more extreme weather will kill more people through drought, flooding, wildfires and heatwaves than most wars have"
This is what's called "a clue".
>> No. 442497 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 7:56 pm
442497 spacer
>>442493
I live in the fens, so if sea level rises far enough to put my house in the sea, do I get to keep the land, and can build a New Sealand on stilts? Or does the land get taken off me because one can't own bits of the seabed?
I always fancied living by the sea when I'm old. Could yet happen.
>> No. 442500 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 8:08 pm
442500 spacer
>>442492
He just wants to trick us into giving him all the Um Bongo.

>>442495
It just means insurance companies will raise premiums in climate change impacted areas. Probably big money in climate change modelling these days.
>> No. 442504 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 8:27 pm
442504 spacer
>>442500

That's probably true but they do have ties to investments too.
>> No. 442506 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 8:33 pm
442506 spacer
>>442493

Britain isn't particularly flat. If you look around the world, you'll see a number of vast megacities built on river deltas - about 200 million Chinese people live within a couple of metres of sea level, another couple of hundred million Indians and practically the entire population of Bangladesh.

The capital cities of Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia are severely threatened by climate change - the Malaysians have already started the process of moving their capital out of Jakarta. even in a fairly conservative scenario we'll lose most of the European sea ports we rely on. That's not Armageddon, but it's going to be unimaginably expensive and disruptive to deal with.

The bigger concern is the increase in extreme weather events. Sea levels will rise, but we'll also see a massive increase in extreme rainfall, creating a secondary zone of places that are technically above water but effectively uninhabitable due to the frequency and severity of flooding. Freak weather events like the storms of '87 will become routine, creating an ongoing toll of infrastructure damage, disruption and deaths.
>> No. 442507 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 8:37 pm
442507 spacer
>>442506

I think even beyond that. It's easy to dismiss freak weather events as just temporary things. Some people die, others are on the move, it sucks but it's not apocalyptic.
What is apocalyptic is what this does to food supplies. You can't move fields. There are a limited number of places worldwide that export the majority of foodstuffs and they're all at risk. When the food supply chain breaks down, everything else does too. Same goes for our dwindling fresh-water supplies.


Only tangentially related but here's Chomsky talking last night.

>> No. 442508 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 8:37 pm
442508 spacer
>>442506
>the Malaysians have already started the process of moving their capital out of Jakarta
The Indonesians will be pleased.
>> No. 442509 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 9:17 pm
442509 spacer
>>442507
>Same goes for our dwindling fresh-water supplies.

This is the biggie. We are completely destroying the ocean and that only hastens everything else. As you say about supply chains too, ships are already struggling due to more extreme weather at sea making it harder to import/export, and that's happening right now.
>> No. 442510 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 9:22 pm
442510 spacer
>>442507

Saddam Hussein is looking rough these days.

>>442508

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

I just googled "differences between Malaysia and Indonesia" and nobody seems to know. Indonesians are povvos and they've got slightly different styles of Batik, apparently. Malaysia has a Grand Prix? Answers on a postcard etc.
>> No. 442513 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 10:08 pm
442513 spacer
What kind of giga-pleb doesn't know about the Sepang Grand Prix? Moron.
>> No. 442514 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 11:12 pm
442514 spacer
>>442507

> Same goes for our dwindling fresh-water supplies.

I think the problem is more going to be their uneven distribution. Places like Central and especially Southeastern Europe are at risk of massive prolonged droughts, and we've seen some of it already, whereas the rise in sea
temperatures will mean far more evaporation which will be dumped down somewhere a thousand miles downwind in absolutely torrential rainfalls. This is going to be true especially for many areas in the Tropics.

And then in Britain, you will increasingly see years with both immense rain and then drought, all during the same vegetation period.

None of it is good. An absence of rainwater will make crop farming very difficult for obvious reasons, but extreme rainfall can wash away and denude soils, or rot crops, and thus equally make the production of food staples increasingly difficult.
>> No. 442515 Anonymous
23rd February 2021
Tuesday 11:58 pm
442515 spacer
>>442513

F1 is dull as piss and you know it. I haven't followed the formula for years, but let me guess what the news is: Hamilton won the Drivers Championship, Mercedes won the Constructors, Ferrari are moaning about the engine regulations because they want a "red cars get an extra 100hp" rule, one of the backmarker teams went tits-up because their headline sponsor turned out to be a Nigerian prince, there's some kind of cost control regulation that makes absolutely no difference and Red Bull have sacked another driver. Am I close?
>> No. 442645 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 10:33 am
442645 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/27/climatologist-michael-e-mann-doomism-climate-crisis-interview
Good article from the point of view that it's not too late and that people who think it is are just giving up, which is what various petrostate oligarchs want you to do.
>> No. 442646 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 4:20 pm
442646 spacer
>>442645

Then again the plebs who write for the guardian seem to think that if a few middle class white people do more recycling and eat less meat we can somehow tip the balance against the machinations of globalised industry so it's probably not worth listening to anything they have to say on the subject.
>> No. 442647 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 4:23 pm
442647 spacer
>>442646

That's great but Michael Mann doesn't write for The Guardian, that link goes to something known as an "interview".
>> No. 442648 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 5:35 pm
442648 spacer
>>442647

Then you (or whoever) should post links to a more serious platform. The guardian has been nothing but an utter milquetoast embarrassment for the last fifteen years.
>> No. 442651 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 6:28 pm
442651 spacer
>>442648

Why don't you suggest one, seppo?
>> No. 442652 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 6:36 pm
442652 spacer
>>442648

Do you need me to copy and paste the interview to pastebin so next time you can read it before giving your opinion on it?
>> No. 442653 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 6:41 pm
442653 spacer
>>442651

Your "everyone who disagrees with me is an X" attitude is at least 100% more American than I am. Also "seppo" is a terrible contraction of "septic"; it always makes me think of "separatist" rather than "septic tank". Even "Sherman" is a better minor slur for our transatlantic inbred cousins.
>> No. 442654 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 6:45 pm
442654 spacer
>>442652

Archive.is would be fine. Thanks.

Although if he's not giving interviews to more serious scientific publications that you can link to it really probably isn't my (or anybody else's) time to be frank. Once you hit that level of banality you might as well just flick on the BBC and watch some Brian Cox style vox pop drivel written for room temperature IQ types who can't find the remote at the end of the One Show.

Sage.
>> No. 442655 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 6:46 pm
442655 spacer
>>442653
Woah, woah, woah, woah, woah. Call out that lad for seeing Americans everywhere as much as you like, but don't go complaining about the word Seppo.
>> No. 442657 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 7:11 pm
442657 spacer
>>442653

If you would simply stop perpetuating their repellent lexicon, you wouldn't have to complain, would you?
>> No. 442658 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 7:50 pm
442658 spacer
>>442654
What exactly would the point of him giving interviews to "more serious scientific publications" be, when he's trying to address a wider audience and not just scientists? You're just doing a sour grapes routine now.
>> No. 442835 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 8:45 am
442835 spacer
Lads, I have to say this is a rare case where I don't particularly care if it is an Americanism. 'Milquetoast' is an excellent word and it deserves a place in our dictionary. Hats off to the Yanks for inventing it.
>> No. 442836 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 8:59 am
442836 spacer
>>442835
I, for one, quite enjoy a nice piece of hot buttered milktoast.
>> No. 442837 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 9:39 am
442837 spacer
>>442835

It's shite and it looks vaguely French. We have enough words like that already.
>> No. 442838 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 9:47 am
442838 spacer
>>442835

I prefer the yiddish term "nebbish", but I think it's quite telling that neither term is widely used in British English.
>> No. 442839 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 9:52 am
442839 spacer
>>442837
"Vague" is a French loanword.
>> No. 442840 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 10:00 am
442840 spacer
>>442839

And it's in common use because it's easier to drop into general conversation than something such as "nebulous". What's wrong with using "coward" or "wimp", besides missing out on the opportunity to be a smug cunt?
>> No. 442847 Anonymous
17th March 2021
Wednesday 6:01 am
442847 spacer
>>442840

>What's wrong with using "coward" or "wimp"

They don't quite convey the same meaning. "Milquetoast" or "nebbish" imply both cowardice and more general ineffectualness and lack of conviction.

The real joy of the English language is the huge expressive power that comes with our mongrel vocabulary. Whatever you're trying to say, there are likely a dozen different synonyms drawn from many different cultures, all with subtle shades of meaning. When we borrow words, we also borrow ways of seeing the world.
>> No. 442849 Anonymous
17th March 2021
Wednesday 9:26 am
442849 spacer
>>442847

I've personally always read "milquetoast" as bland and perhaps passive, rather than cowardly.
>> No. 442899 Anonymous
27th March 2021
Saturday 8:06 am
442899 spacer
>>442847
"Spineless" and "pushover" are a couple of other good terms in that sphere. "Lily livered" & "fainthearted" spring to mind also, lots of different anatomy to choose from. "Lily livered" is a Shakespeare original.
>> No. 443068 Anonymous
6th April 2021
Tuesday 9:00 pm
443068 spacer
https://newsroom.northumbria.ac.uk/pressreleases/evidence-of-antarctic-glaciers-tipping-point-confirmed-for-first-time-3087059

>Researchers have confirmed for the first time that Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica could cross tipping points, leading to a rapid and irreversible retreat which would have significant consequences for global sea level.

>Pine Island Glacier is a region of fast-flowing ice draining an area of West Antarctica approximately two thirds the size of the UK. The glacier is a particular cause for concern as it is losing more ice than any other glacier in Antarctica.

>Currently, Pine Island Glacier together with its neighbouring Thwaites glacier are responsible for about 10% of the ongoing increase in global sea level.


Pack your wellies, lads.

No, really, you're going to need them this time.
>> No. 443069 Anonymous
6th April 2021
Tuesday 9:11 pm
443069 spacer
>>443068
Blue Ocean soon. Things will get a lot worse before they might get better, but none of this is new and people still won't care.
>> No. 443070 Anonymous
6th April 2021
Tuesday 9:20 pm
443070 spacer
>>443069
Meanwhile everyone's wittering about how quirky of Britain it is that we had such hot weather followed by snow in the space of a week.
>> No. 443071 Anonymous
6th April 2021
Tuesday 9:27 pm
443071 spacer
>>443068
>Currently, Pine Island Glacier together with its neighbouring Thwaites glacier are responsible for about 10% of the ongoing increase in global sea level.

Good riddance I say. Let's get the hair dryers out!
>> No. 443077 Anonymous
7th April 2021
Wednesday 11:44 am
443077 spacer
>>443071

Indeed. We must ban glaciers.

If we outlaw glaciers, only outlaws will have glaciers.
>> No. 443078 Anonymous
7th April 2021
Wednesday 12:41 pm
443078 spacer
>>443068
Even the most doom saying predictions of sea level rise leave me above sea level, if the map predictions are to be believed.

I, for one, welcome my new seafront property.
>> No. 443079 Anonymous
7th April 2021
Wednesday 12:44 pm
443079 spacer
>>443078

And your new neighbours?
>> No. 443080 Anonymous
7th April 2021
Wednesday 1:26 pm
443080 spacer

4f4c15d11cefa205286d69e33516d190.jpg
443080443080443080
>>443078

>I, for one, welcome my new seafront property.


Not all places are going to be equally hit, that's true.

I hope places like Brighton and Blackpool will get submerged entirely though.
>> No. 443310 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 1:27 pm
443310 spacer
Do you really care about the planet if your milk doesn't come from cows fed with ethically sourced organic seaweed?

https://www.theguardian.com/food/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/can-you-drink-milk-and-stay-ethical-im-desperate-to-work-out-how
>> No. 443314 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 2:08 pm
443314 spacer
>>443310

With out exageration, stopping cows from farting would do more to save us from global warming than if we banned cars tomorrow.
>> No. 443315 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 2:18 pm
443315 spacer
>>443314
Giving cows seaweed is toxic to them. It seems counterintuitive to poison a species for our benefit.
>> No. 443316 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 2:47 pm
443316 spacer
>>443315

My understanding was, some seaweed was poisionous to them not all, which is a very different concept.
>> No. 443317 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 2:53 pm
443317 spacer
>>443310
>Friends lose patience with my eco-anxiety: the responsibility, they say, lies with states and corporations, not us
Yes. Should be the end of her article. None of the problems she states are her fault. The seaweed milk should come in a glass bottle. The seaweed milk should come in single pints. The corner shop should stock seaweed milk. The council should recycle the oat milk packaging. She should be agitating for this shit instead of being filled with self-loathing.
>> No. 443318 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 2:55 pm
443318 spacer
>>443316
It's bromoform in the seaweed identified to reduce methane, asparagopsis taxiformis, that has been identified as potentially toxic to cows.
>> No. 443320 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 3:31 pm
443320 spacer
>>44331
>potentially

'potentially' in this context doesn't seem like a good enough justification. I assume the cows aren't falling over dead soon after they are given this stuff and seem to be to the casual observer living full normal cow lives.
>> No. 443321 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 3:52 pm
443321 spacer

Untitled.jpg
443321443321443321
>>443320
>'potentially' in this context doesn't seem like a good enough justification.

Who hurt you?
>> No. 443322 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 4:00 pm
443322 spacer
>>443317

>The seaweed milk should come in a glass bottle.

The environmental benefit of re-usable glass bottles is really marginal. They require much more energy to manufacture than plastic bottles and further energy is consumed by transporting and washing the used bottles. Glass bottles only win out if the re-use rate is substantially higher and/or the energy use is substantially lower than the current industry average. PET bottles are remarkably efficient if the bottles are recycled, but the best option might actually be Tetra-Pak cartons depending on how you interpret the data.

FWIW, I think that the panic over plastics is largely unwarranted and based mainly on the visibility of discarded plastics rather than the actual impact on the environment. We know that atmospheric CO2 is having truly catastrophic effects, but the evidence for substantial harms due to plastic pollution is really very weak beyond the obvious factor of larger marine animals becoming entangled in discarded fishing gear. I keep seeing people freak out about OMG THERE ARE MICROPLASTICS EVERYWHERE, but we don't really have any good evidence to suggest that microplastics are harmful to human health or have seriously negative impacts on the marine ecosystem.

https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/UNEP_PLASTIC-BOTTLES-REPORT_29-JUNE-2020_final-low-res.pdf

https://digital.detritusjournal.com/articles/in-press/life-cycle-assessment-of-beverage-packaging/368

https://ourworldindata.org/plastic-pollution#how-does-plastic-impact-wildlife-and-human-health
>> No. 443323 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 4:02 pm
443323 spacer
>>443321

No one. It just seems like spurious bullshit, Aspartamine might be cancerous (even though multiple sudies have shown it not to be), bread might be bad for you (even though we have eaten it for generation and have started living to a hundred despite eating it), it is the worst kind of fear of the unknown reasoning when there is no proof at all that it is dangerous to them.
>> No. 443324 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 4:12 pm
443324 spacer
>>443322
>I keep seeing people freak out about OMG THERE ARE MICROPLASTICS EVERYWHERE, but we don't really have any good evidence to suggest that microplastics are harmful to human health or have seriously negative impacts on the marine ecosystem.


There is scientific inquiry into certain plastics affecting hormone levels in people, it is considered one of the probable causes of the obesity epidemic.
>> No. 443325 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 7:02 pm
443325 spacer
>>443322
>I keep seeing people freak out about OMG THERE ARE MICROPLASTICS EVERYWHERE, but we don't really have any good evidence to suggest that microplastics are harmful to human health or have seriously negative impacts on the marine ecosystem.

In the same way as we kept using asbestos and leaded petrol for decades after we knew there was a problem. Microplastics are orders of magnitude less harmful than those but evidence is slowly building up of the wide range of potential harms they can cause.
We're kind of fucked if we do nothing for 30 years and then entire ocean food chains collapse, not to mention the possibility of widespread health problems caused by increased ingestion of microplastics exposing us to more toxins and carcinogens.
>> No. 443326 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 7:39 pm
443326 spacer
>>443325
>In the same way as we kept using asbestos and <s>leaded</s> petrol for decades after we knew there was a problem.
>> No. 443369 Anonymous
16th April 2021
Friday 1:37 pm
443369 spacer
>>443325

>Microplastics are orders of magnitude less harmful than those but evidence is slowly building up of the wide range of potential harms they can cause.

There's still a difference in particle size between microplastics and nanoplastics. Microplastics are considered to be anything that's 5mm or smaller. A 5mm microplastic particle can cause serious harm to wildlife, because a handful of them can obstruct the digestive tract especially in smaller animals, and lead to great suffering and premature death. Nanoplastics, on the other hand, are particles that are about 1000 nm or less. They behave in a much different way and are generally excreted harmlessly by a life form that ingests them. But they're not without problems, especially from the chemical compounds they can release into an organism as they break down further.

Eventually, on a long-enough timescale, almost all plastic waste and microplastics will degrade into nanoplastics. So if we stopped producing plastic waste today and stopped throwing it in the oceans, most of it would degrade into nanoplastics and then disappear within about 1000 years. And the larger chunks of plastic that end up on an ocean floor somewhere a few miles deep at near-freezing temperature would probably also eventually be covered up by sediment.

The Earth still has self-cleaning capabilities. We just have to stop inundating the environment with plastic waste and give it enough time to get rid of it on its own. A thousand years is nothing for a planet like ours, but we as a species don't have that long to tackle the problem.
>> No. 443411 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 10:24 am
443411 spacer
>>443322
>I keep seeing people freak out about OMG THERE ARE MICROPLASTICS EVERYWHERE, but we don't really have any good evidence to suggest that microplastics are harmful to human health or have seriously negative impacts on the marine ecosystem.
It's not very well studied yet but these articles suggest the evidence is there.
>Microplastics found to alter shape of and de-cluster human lung cells
https://newatlas.com/science/microplastics-alter-shape-de-cluster-human-lung-cells/
>Microplastics found to cause aneurysms, reproductive changes in fish
https://newatlas.com/environment/microplastics-aneurysms-reproductive-changes-fish/
>Study finds microplastics can impair hermit crabs' shell selection
https://newatlas.com/environment/study-microplastics-hermit-crabs-shell-selection
>Study shows nanoplastics can build up in plants and stunt their growth
https://newatlas.com/environment/study-nanoplastics-plants-stunt-growth/
>BPA-like chemicals likely causing "alarming" damage to brain cells
https://newatlas.com/science/bpa-chemicals-plasticizers-damage-brain-cells/
What qualifies as
>good evidence
is a fairly obvious moving goalpost, however.
>> No. 443549 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 5:20 pm
443549 spacer
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56927010

>German climate change law violates rights, court rules

>But the German Constitutional Court said on Thursday that current measures "violate the freedoms of the complainants, some of whom are still very young" because they delay too much of the action needed to reach the Paris targets until after 2030.

>"In order to achieve this, the reductions still required after 2030 will have to be achieved more urgently and at short notice," it said.

>Should Germany use up most of its permitted CO2 emissions by this time, future generations could face a "serious loss of freedom".

>"Virtually any freedom is potentially affected by these future emission reduction obligations, because almost all areas of human life are still associated with the emission of greenhouse gases and are therefore threatened by drastic restrictions after 2030," the court said.

Pretty bold decision. Really putting the finger on the problem.
>> No. 443550 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 5:34 pm
443550 spacer

399b6702-a625-4c8f-bad6-489c1a1ebb54.jpg
443550443550443550
>>443549

Not quite on the same scale but from earlier this week:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/extinction-rebellion-activists-cleared-despite-having-no-defence-6bvbs3zw0
Six climate protesters who were being tried for vandalising Shell's HQ in London were cleared of any wrongdoing despite the judge telling the jury they were categorically guilty.

Here's a semi-related collage from yesterday. It overlapped with the latest Kill the Bill protest so didn't get much media attention.
>> No. 443551 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 5:37 pm
443551 spacer

KtB02052021.jpg
443551443551443551
Unrelated photos from the Kill the Bill protest yesterday.
>> No. 443552 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 6:15 pm
443552 spacer
>>443550

On the one hand, it looks like the physical damage to Shell HQ was very limited in the first place. This would not have been a serious criminal offence, any way you were looking at it.

But on the other hand, what are you saying with a verdict like that. Will you have the right to just randomly go into a service station and vandalise it, and possibly assault the lad behind the till because his employer pollutes the Earth? Can you drag somebody out of a combustion engine car at an intersection and do the same to them because they're part of the problem?

One of my mates at school had a dad with a quite expensive S class Mercedes, and one morning, there was human excrement on the bonnet, and somebody had written something like "Rich people are shit" on it with a permanent marker. I mean, the damage was effectively zero, after a good clean and polish anyway, but I don't think that's the right way to protest against unequal wealth distribution.
>> No. 443553 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 6:20 pm
443553 spacer
>>443552
>it looks like the physical damage to Shell HQ was very limited in the first place
Cost of £15,000 apparently. The broken windows last week were valued at £160,000.

>But on the other hand, what are you saying with a verdict like that. Will you have the right to just randomly go into a service station and vandalise it, and possibly assault the lad behind the till because his employer pollutes the Earth? Can you drag somebody out of a combustion engine car at an intersection and do the same to them because they're part of the problem?
No, obviously not. What absurd hyperbole.

>I don't think that's the right way to protest against unequal wealth distribution
Too right. Hilarious as it is, it didn't go far enough to actually address the issue.
>> No. 443554 Anonymous
2nd May 2021
Sunday 6:31 pm
443554 spacer
>>443552
>I mean, the damage was effectively zero, after a good clean and polish anyway, but I don't think that's the right way to protest against unequal wealth distribution.
Indeed. Slashing the tyres would have made far more sense; more costly, more menacing, not so debased.

As for the earlier part of your post I don't see how this case set any new precedent. If a jury doesn't want to convict someone then they don't have to, and whilst I can't think of any examples off the top of my head this can't be the first time a jury has sided with a more sympathetic defendant over the prosecution, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
>> No. 443913 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 2:50 pm
443913 spacer
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/shell-trial-verdict-netherlands-emissions-b1854266.html
>Shell forced to slash global emissions after landmark court ruling

https://news.sky.com/story/shell-ordered-to-reduce-emissions-by-45-by-2030-in-landmark-ruling-12317324
>Shell ordered to reduce emissions by 45% by 2030 in landmark ruling
>> No. 444440 Anonymous
11th June 2021
Friday 12:59 pm
444440 spacer
>Records of Priti Patel’s contact with police over XR protest deleted in ‘IT glitch’, court hears
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/xr-printworks-protest-priti-patel-police-b1864046.html
This is a joke. The Hertfordshire Police chief has destroyed evidence to protect Priti Patel.
>> No. 444442 Anonymous
11th June 2021
Friday 1:05 pm
444442 spacer
>>444440
She probably sent him images of her RIGHT PRIME ARSE to make him do her bidding.
>> No. 445530 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 1:07 pm
445530 spacer

Graphic.png
445530445530445530
>Major climate changes inevitable and irreversible – IPCC’s starkest warning yet
>Report warns temperatures likely to rise by more than 1.5C bringing widespread extreme weather
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/09/humans-have-caused-unprecedented-and-irreversible-change-to-climate-scientists-warn

>Human activity is changing the Earth’s climate in ways “unprecedented” in thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, with some of the changes now inevitable and “irreversible”, climate scientists have warned.

>Within the next two decades, temperatures are likely to rise by more than 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, breaching the ambition of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, and bringing widespread devastation and extreme weather.

>Only rapid and drastic reductions in greenhouse gases in this decade can prevent such climate breakdown, with every fraction of a degree of further heating likely to compound the accelerating effects, according to the International Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading authority on climate science

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-i/
>> No. 445531 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 1:47 pm
445531 spacer
>>445530
The same people bitching about the dangers of coronavirus did this.
>> No. 445533 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 2:16 pm
445533 spacer
>>445531
Did what? Climate change?
>> No. 445534 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 2:17 pm
445534 spacer
>>445533
Yep.
>> No. 445536 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 3:28 pm
445536 spacer
>>445530
They say this every few months. At what point do we just give up and boil ourselves to death?
>> No. 445538 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 3:34 pm
445538 spacer
>>445536
>They say this every few months.
The IPCC has only put out 13 reports since being founded in 1988 so that would be difficult.
>> No. 445539 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 3:36 pm
445539 spacer
>>445536
Probably now. I don't want to be a defeatist about this, but the message has been consistent for decades and things are going to get a lot worse a lot sooner than predicted, which we're already seeing. Of course there's still hope, but it relies on governments and big companies doing the right thing, as well as a gigantic change to our way of life which I have little hope in the majority of people adopting/adapting to, especially after we've seen how people have reacted throughout this pandemic. We all know what needs to happen, but as usual the selfish morons of the world will fight us on it and hold us back as much as possible.

I would start enjoying the life you have now as much as possible because even if we do make progress with climate change we've already passed points we cannot come back from. Things are going to change whether people like it or not.
>> No. 445540 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 3:36 pm
445540 spacer
>>445538
They need to work harder. This exact story is definitely in the news every few months, whoever writes the reports.
>> No. 445541 Anonymous
9th August 2021
Monday 3:39 pm
445541 spacer
>>445539
>there's still hope, but it relies on people pushing governments and big companies into doing the right thing
Fixed that for you.
>> No. 445590 Anonymous
12th August 2021
Thursday 9:49 pm
445590 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/12/greenhouse-gas-emissions-must-peak-within-4-years-says-leaked-un-report
>Greenhouse gas emissions must peak within 4 years, says leaked UN report
>Group of scientists release draft IPCC report as they fear it will be watered down by governments

>The leak is from the forthcoming third part of the landmark report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the first part of which was published on Monday, warning of unprecedented changes to the climate, some of them irreversible.
>Part three is not scheduled to be released before next March, but a small group of scientists decided to leak the draft
>Bordera told the Guardian that the leak reflected the concern of some of those involved in drawing up the document that their conclusions could be watered down before publication in 2022
>> No. 445591 Anonymous
12th August 2021
Thursday 10:02 pm
445591 spacer
If you want my advice, buy a boat.

https://www.apolloduck.co.uk/
>> No. 445593 Anonymous
12th August 2021
Thursday 10:09 pm
445593 spacer
>>445591

An inflatable or some other small boat for use in emergencies may be a sensible investment if you live in an area at flood-risk but anything more than that's a fantasy money-sink. You'd be better off weatherproofing your home and finding off-grid ways to supplement your diet.

Or pressuring the government to take action.
>> No. 446299 Anonymous
19th September 2021
Sunday 7:24 pm
446299 spacer

>> No. 446301 Anonymous
19th September 2021
Sunday 7:48 pm
446301 spacer
>>446299
I don't even care about climate change, but I am loving this. I might join in if they start taking the piss more and make everyone angry.
>> No. 446302 Anonymous
19th September 2021
Sunday 9:48 pm
446302 spacer
>>446299
Is it just me or does it sound at times like he's getting a cheeky blowie?
>> No. 446327 Anonymous
20th September 2021
Monday 6:40 pm
446327 spacer
>>446299

Ah yes of course: "You have the right to protest as long as it's not heard or seen by anyone outside the protest"
>> No. 446335 Anonymous
21st September 2021
Tuesday 12:27 pm
446335 spacer
>>446299
"How many people are in your group, who makes the decisions about where to protest"

Is he working for the cops? Glad the activist was smart enough to ignore those questions.
>> No. 446337 Anonymous
21st September 2021
Tuesday 12:50 pm
446337 spacer
>>446335

That, but the interviewer should have done the research beforehand which would have given him the insights that a) the number of people "in" the group not only fluctuates but also isn't bureaucratic enough for there to be a definitive in/not-in and b) decisions are come to as a group. They're just bloody stupid questions.
>> No. 446374 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 11:32 am
446374 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zpTIrx6uAA
>> No. 446375 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 12:00 pm
446375 spacer
>>446374
Twats. I am really enjoying this. I hope they up the ante and block more roads.
>> No. 446376 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 12:57 pm
446376 spacer
>>446374
He was shaking and going a bit pale before it even started. No wonder he stormed off, he needed a poo.
>> No. 446377 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 1:00 pm
446377 spacer
>>446337

>They're just bloody stupid questions.

The point isn't to have intelligent conversation about this, it's to simply paint their actions as wrong. I wonder when they'll realise the people who care about the climate are in a minority, the majority just don't care.
>> No. 446378 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 1:03 pm
446378 spacer
>>446377
They're protesting about insulation, not the climate.
>> No. 446379 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 2:22 pm
446379 spacer
>>446374
That guy is completely out of his depth and intensely unlikable.
>> No. 446380 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 2:39 pm
446380 spacer
>>446379
Leave him alone. He's never been the same since Judy got banned from the telly.
>> No. 446381 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 2:49 pm
446381 spacer
>>446374
Dawn Neesom can fucking do one. What fucking accidents has she been involved in that she's had to break the news to families? She's spent her entire career in tabloid journalism, if she's ever done that she absolutely wasn't in a position to be doing it.
>> No. 446383 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 3:39 pm
446383 spacer
>>446379
Liam's a really nice bloke in person, it's not surprising if he's not coping well under that sort of directed personal attack while under the stress of what he's spent the past couple of weeks doing. How are you supposed to respond to accusations of hypocrisy for something like that? He's not even being hypocritical, it's just something that looks a bit like hypocrisy if you squint and are being intentionally obtuse about it.

>>446377
>the people who care about the climate are in a minority, the majority just don't care.
That's demonstrably untrue
https://www.statista.com/statistics/426733/united-kingdom-uk-concern-about-climate-change/
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/27/un-global-climate-poll-peoples-voice-is-clear-they-want-action
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/18/what-the-world-thinks-about-climate-change-in-7-charts/
It's just that the "don't care" and "actively in denial" tend to dominate the conversation.
>> No. 446384 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 3:40 pm
446384 spacer
>>446383
Does he like his footy and his ale?
>> No. 446385 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 3:49 pm
446385 spacer
>>446384
I think he has bigger concerns at the moment, you'll have to find someone else to hang out with.
>> No. 446392 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 7:24 pm
446392 spacer

35lqnh5xrfb51[1].png
446392446392446392
>>446383
I don't like those polls. It should ask real questions such as - "Do you care about climate change that you would happily change your way of life and perhaps inconvenience yourself?"

I am pretty sure that would be a no. It is pretty easy saying you care about something.
>> No. 446393 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 7:26 pm
446393 spacer
>>446392
>I don't like those polls.
I refer you to your attached image.
>> No. 446394 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 7:52 pm
446394 spacer
>>446393

I think >>446392 lad has a point though.

It's all well and good saying you want to protect the environment, but if you really get down to how drastically the lifestyles of practically every single person on the planet (or at least in a developed country like ours) need to change, then I'm not sure most of them will stand by their commitment.
>> No. 446395 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 8:02 pm
446395 spacer
>>446394

Why is it always down to an individual commitment? Why do we never talk about infrastructure?
>> No. 446396 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 8:06 pm
446396 spacer
>>446395

Wouldn't the change in infrastructure drastically alter our individual lifestyles?
>> No. 446400 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 8:27 pm
446400 spacer
Only for the poor. And they don't really matter as long as their rioting doesn't burn anything important.
>> No. 446401 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 8:30 pm
446401 spacer
>>446394

People are capable of standing by all sorts of things when they understand they need to and stop listening to media that's encouraging them to act like short-sighted children.
>> No. 446402 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 9:41 pm
446402 spacer
>>446395
Well... If those polls are anything to go by, then these "individuals" who care about climate change would have been out protesting and not voting for red or blue. Maybe the Greens would have been in power.

>>446401
I doubt that is the case. Nothing will happen unless it gets so bad that a majority of people start facing issues like food shortages, flooding, heat-waves, etc. But by then it is too late.
>> No. 446403 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:13 pm
446403 spacer
>>446379
I know that Richard is a right cunt, why do they keep giving him TV shows to present.
>> No. 446404 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:15 pm
446404 spacer
>>446395
Because once the cat got out the bag on climate change, the oil and gas industry switched to using propaganda to shift the blame and responsibility onto individuals.
>> No. 446405 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:15 pm
446405 spacer
>>446402
Could already be too late but that's not a reasonable excuse not to try.
>> No. 446406 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:25 pm
446406 spacer
>>446374
It honestly makes me so fucking angry watching shows like this.
They're not there to debate, they're not there to listen to this persons views.
They're not just going into that studio with an agenda, they're going in with a carefully choreographed script to corner him into a certain line of argument to make him look bad and once the times up they change the tone and start talking over him to intentionally make him upset to the point where he walked out.

Fair play to him, he stuck to his message, he tried to be reasonable, then they sank to the level of calling him fascist for protesting against a populist government.
>> No. 446407 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:30 pm
446407 spacer
>>446383
Otherlad is right on him being completely out of his depth then innit. Why can't you ecolads seem to find a good spokesman?

He was shaking before the interview even started and tried some old bullshit tactic of calling someone smart. He knew what he was getting into with daytime television and annoying commuters - the slut.

>>446403
Granny-magnet.
>> No. 446408 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:36 pm
446408 spacer
>>446407
I think he did alright in some of the earlier interviews but he must be knackered. I don't know, finding a good talker is hard. For all the accusations of "you're just trying to get your name on the news" pretty much everyone actively dislikes the spotlight. With good reason too, every red-top in the country digging through your bins and harassing your neighbours. There's no compensation, just a target on your back.
>> No. 446409 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:46 pm
446409 spacer
Incidentally, the protesters have now been assaulted multiple times resulting in at least one broken bone that I'm aware of.
>> No. 446410 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 10:55 pm
446410 spacer
>>446395

Brief summary:

The three main sources of CO2 emissions come from heating, eating and transport. The government is doing a lot of stuff to decarbonise our infrastructure, there's a lot more they could be doing, but if we want to abate climate change we'll have to live with some pretty big changes to our lifestyles.

Heating can be done 100% sustainably using renewable electricity, ground-source heat pumps and well-insulated housing. This is one of the primary areas where the government need to be doing more - we need stricter standards on new builds, a faster transition away from gas boilers and much more investment in insulation.

Our food-related emissions are dominated by meat, dairy and air-freighted fresh vegetables. There's not really anything the government can do here, because there's no viable technology to decarbonise those foods. We have to drastically cut down on our consumption of those foods; all the government can do is cajole or coerce us to do it. We do need to replace all gas cookers, which is a role for government.

Transport is mostly being fixed by electrification and we're making excellent progress on that, but there's no technology on the horizon to decarbonise air travel. The entire aviation industry has to go. The government should stop subsidising aviation, I think they should tax or legislate it out of existence, but that'll need a public who are willing to forgo air travel for the foreseeable future.

The other stuff that people worry about either isn't important or is in the process of being fixed by technology. Single-use plastics aren't really relevant to climate change and the high emissions of big corporations are overwhelmingly in the service of the above three markets. Manufacturing is already mostly electric or rapidly transitioning to electric power and the national grid is moving to 100% renewables pretty much as fast as is feasible. There's some stuff that people don't worry about that really is a problem (most notably portland cement), but that's mostly a matter for scientists and engineers.
>> No. 446411 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 11:25 pm
446411 spacer
>>446409
Good.
>> No. 446412 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 11:28 pm
446412 spacer
>>446411
Hopefully they block the road next time while you are stuck in a car with no heating in the middle of February.
>> No. 446413 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 11:33 pm
446413 spacer
>>446410

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiw6_JakZFc
>> No. 446414 Anonymous
22nd September 2021
Wednesday 11:58 pm
446414 spacer
>>446408
Well if he's knackered then you rotate him, maybe twin him with an old biddie for certain interview audiences. Pretty basic PR stuff for a group whose whole thing is really about PR but who all I see from this are spokespeople who fuck up again and again because they become hysterical.

>>446410
>Transport is mostly being fixed by electrification and we're making excellent progress on that, but there's no technology on the horizon to decarbonise air travel. The entire aviation industry has to go. The government should stop subsidising aviation, I think they should tax or legislate it out of existence, but that'll need a public who are willing to forgo air travel for the foreseeable future.

You're fooling nobody, Big Cruise.

>>446412
Didn't you people learn from the last time you messed with commuters?

I think you should be like the 'RA and call any protests in beforehand so those of us needing to put food on the table can work from home in advance. You'll still annoy the capitalists and some people who still have to come in but you'll be less liable to have an angry mob descend upon you. Doubly so if on such a hot summer day you are also handing out choc ices.

Or at least let us know.
>> No. 446415 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 12:28 am
446415 spacer
>>446410

>and air-freighted fresh vegetables. There's not really anything the government can do here, because there's no viable technology to decarbonise those foods. We have to drastically cut down on our consumption of those foods

But if you tell people they can't have fresh grapes and mangoes in February, there will be a riot.


>but there's no technology on the horizon to decarbonise air travel. The entire aviation industry has to go

Not strictly true. There have been studies to evaluate alternative propulsion technologies in lieu of kerosene jet engines, and one of the most exciting new approaches is the idea of using plasma jet engines, which run on electricity and hot air. Simply put, a plasma engine uses electrically generated intense microwaves to ionise ambient air which is forced into the engine (much like today's turbofan setups), and that ionised air then shoots out the back of the engine as a super heated plasma jet, again not dissimilar to existing kerosene engines.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/plasma-jet

You will probably still have the problem of having to carry your electric energy with you on the plane in batteries that won't have the same energy density as kerosene for many years to come, but from what the article suggests, those plasma engines could be considerably more efficient in converting energy into thrust than today's kerosene-powered engines.

Converting current airplanes to plasma jet propulsion will probably be much more difficult than just bolting new engines to the wings and swapping the fuel tanks out for batteries, but who knows. In any case, if plasma jet engines are the answer, it will probably still take decades before they become widespread. So in the mean time we might actually have to curtail air traffic after all.
>> No. 446416 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 12:55 am
446416 spacer
>>446414

>Doubly so if on such a hot summer day you are also handing out choc ices.

I was at the G8 protests in 2005. It had been roasting hot all week, which had contributed to something of a carnival atmosphere. I was woken up on Thursday morning by a bit of a commotion. Hundreds of coppers, most of them armed, had suddenly arrived and established a cordon around our campsite. Apparently there had been some sort of daft militant wog attack in London and the old bill weren't in any mood to piss about with a load of hippies. The mood suddenly became very BRILLIANT and the message was clearly "you've had your fun, but we've got real problems to deal with now so pack it in or you're getting a kicking".

Not knowing what else to do, I found a way through the cordon, went across the road to Morrisons and bought as many ice lollies as I could carry. On my way back to camp, I offered them out to everyone I passed - in that heat they weren't going to last for long and they were gratefully received.

I offered them to the cops as well, as a gesture of goodwill from across the lines. I don't know if it was policy, but there were no takers. Some refused politely, some ignored me, but this one group in full tactical kit stared me down. They had no insignia on their uniforms, I've no idea if they were SO19 or Them or whatever, but that look has haunted me ever since.

I've been in lairy situations over the years, I've been arrested more times than I can remember and taken my fair share of kickings. It was just a look, the everyday kind of hard stare that says "piss off or I'll do you", but it was utterly without emotion, a chilling sort of nonchalance that I have rarely encountered before or since. In a different context, I have no doubt that those lads would have shot me without batting an eyelid.

You get used to weird stuff when you're a semi-professional protester, the tapped phones and the black helicopters and the blokes with long lenses hiding in the bushes, you get used to laws being bent and broken by the authorities, you get used to the constant paranoia of being surveilled and infiltrated. That look though, that was something else.
>> No. 446417 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 1:31 am
446417 spacer
>>446414
>I think you should be like the 'RA and call any protests in beforehand
That would be amazing. Imagine calling in and stating that there will be a protest on the M25 in a few hours, and nobody knows exactly where, and everyone avoids it. Imagine just a fake call, and you clear out the motorway for the day.
>> No. 446418 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 1:34 am
446418 spacer
>>446417
No one would care. No one has the experience to take it seriously or would even be aware of the "announcement".
>> No. 446419 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 1:44 am
446419 spacer
>>446417
> Imagine just a fake call, and you clear out the motorway for the day.

I'd like some of what you're smoking.
>> No. 446420 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:02 am
446420 spacer
>>446418
Well, you could tell us. I don't want to have get up early and get dressed to head into the office and then have to deal with some bongo-enrichers on the way to work. Not when I could be working from home.
>> No. 446421 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:02 am
446421 spacer
>>446419
Given the current government position they can either go full Conservatism (and it looks like they are) or add at least a pinch of the Lib opinion. I hope they go for the latter and ease up, but BJ is not known for easing up in public so I won't hold my breath and tend my garden instead.
>> No. 446422 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:39 am
446422 spacer
>>446419
I would announce it. Do a massive protest and shut down multiple motorways. Announce again a few days later and never turn up, and see if it clears the motorways. Would be a nice experiment.

[sp]sensimilla[/sp]
>> No. 446423 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 7:24 am
446423 spacer
>>446422
You can't really do that, to fake a big protest you'd have to convince all the police informants it was going to happen which means telling all the people who'd turn up that it will happen. If you try to cancel at the last minute some people will turn up anyway and everyone will be less likely to make the effort next time in case it's another division.
>> No. 446424 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 10:37 am
446424 spacer
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58657887

>Boris Johnson: Humanity is reaching a turning point on climate change

>A climate summit of world leaders in 40 days' time will be the "turning point for humanity", PM Boris Johnson has said in a speech to the United Nations.

>He warned that global temperature rises were already inevitable, but called on his fellow leaders to commit to major changes to curb further warming.

>Four areas needed tackling - "coal, cars, cash and trees", he said.

>Countries must take responsibility for "the destruction we are inflicting, not just upon our planet but ourselves".

>"It's time for humanity to grow up," he added ahead of the UK hosting the COP26 summit in Glasgow.
>> No. 446425 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 11:16 am
446425 spacer
>>446424

You may as well post the output from a Markov chain based text generator for all the relevance it has on anything.
>> No. 446426 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 11:30 am
446426 spacer
>>446425

Shocker. Politicians throwing around empty buzzword phrases.
>> No. 446427 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 12:43 pm
446427 spacer
>>446426

Why did you post it then?
>> No. 446428 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 2:43 pm
446428 spacer
>>446427

Maybe to illustrate that BoJo mainly drops phrases which (he hopes) will make him look like he's tackling climate change. When it's really just the same old populism, this time with a green veneer.
>> No. 446429 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 3:02 pm
446429 spacer
>>446428
I don't understand this comparison to populism. Would you expand on that?
>> No. 446432 Anonymous
23rd September 2021
Thursday 7:33 pm
446432 spacer
>>446429

I guess in Boris Johnson's case, it often comes down to a faux "We the People" stance, coupled with simplistic, punchy political messages (see above) that are meant to have broad mass appeal for their own sake but not necessarily to actually advance the kind of agenda that they claim to promote.

Also, we can't pretend that there hasn't been a debate as to whether BoJo is a populist. He and his inner circle may deny it, but a certain number of people, including political pundits, definitely think he is.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-populist-hammond-rudd-b1807396.html
>> No. 446437 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 1:06 am
446437 spacer
>>446429

THREE
WORD
SLOGANS

FUCK
ALL
PROGRESS

There you go!
>> No. 446441 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 8:52 am
446441 spacer
>>446437

TAKE BACK CONTROL
POLES GO HOME
THREE DAY WEEK
STRING 'EM UP
EAT THE POOR
>> No. 446442 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 10:32 am
446442 spacer
>>446428

Then I'm not really sure why it's relevant to the conversation.
>> No. 446443 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 11:46 am
446443 spacer
>Port of Dover: Arrests made as Insulate Britain blocks port

>Seventeen people have been arrested as climate activists blocked the Port of Dover, causing queues of vehicles attempting to cross the Channel. Insulate Britain, which has brought chaos on the M25 five times in the past fortnight, said more than 40 people gathered at Dover.

>The port - Europe's busiest ferry terminal - said passengers should take extra time for their journeys. The protest began about 08.20 BST and was cleared by police two hours later. Kent Police said the protest had caused "traffic disruption in Dover", with queues forming on the A20 and the A2, approaching the port.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-58676610

12 years ago I used to work at place cold-calling people to sell cavity wall and loft insulation. Little did I know I'd been radicalised in a plot to undermine the nations food security and ban prawn sandwiches.
>> No. 446445 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 1:29 pm
446445 spacer
How long do you think until we get proper climate daft militant wogs? You know, with bombs.
>> No. 446446 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 1:32 pm
446446 spacer
>>446443
I know they're annoying a lot of people, but generally, I think they're doing a decent job with this protest. They're asking for us all to be given something for free by either private landlords or the government. If they can keep doing this, eventually the non-protestors will ask for this too, and the government actually listen to those people.
>> No. 446449 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 1:41 pm
446449 spacer
>>446446
Have you seen the level of insulation they're campaigning for? Assuming it's not appallingly flammable or toxic, I'd be tempted. Then again, I've not even got cavity walls, so some kind of insulation would be an improvement.
We're going to have to far better insulated if we're going to go to electric heating, UK houses are, I guess, substantially based on a history where coal was cheap and plentiful.
I can't get too bent out of shape about this direct action stuff. They feel strongly, they're right, and our government is a shambles. From their blurb, we need to be insulating houses to this level at a rate of 1.5 per second.
>> No. 446450 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 2:08 pm
446450 spacer
>>446445

If you watch some of the interviews with Clare Farrell in the run-up to last month's protests it's fairly clear that she's spent a lot of energy arguing other people out of outright violence.
>> No. 446452 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 2:13 pm
446452 spacer
>>446445
Sounds like the start of a Bond film - the evil Professor Misanthropy provoking a US-China war to destroy all the factories. Or maybe those eco-warriors in Call to Power turning cities into parks.



>>446446
Having sold cavity wall and loft insulation I can tell you the job is already done as much as possible because it's such low-hanging fruit. The Brown Government gave generous grants which were snapped up and peoples houses were utterly fucked by cavity wall due to slap-dash or simply unviable installation jobs.

Don't worry, I won't let that stop you being utter cunts to an already straining supply chain. Hopefully some lorry drivers will soon hang them from the lampposts.
>> No. 446453 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 2:23 pm
446453 spacer
>>446452
>Having sold cavity wall and loft insulation I can tell you the job is already done as much as possible
It's weird how your anecdotal evidence is contradicted by all the available facts and figures.

>>446449
>From their blurb, we need to be insulating houses to this level at a rate of 1.5 per second.
Per minute.
>> No. 446455 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 2:51 pm
446455 spacer
>>446453
They're campaigning to go far further than cavity wall & loft stuff. Thick external cladding, solar panels and storage, air circulation and heat recovery. The kind of stuff that's actually needed, rather than bare minimum lip service that will leave houses unable to be heated by electricity.
Of course, getting an industry to do this is impossible, except in weird places like the Netherlands.

Sorry about the minutes/seconds fuckup, I've become what I hate. I blame the plague, which is why I'm loitering here not doing actual work.
>> No. 446462 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 5:47 pm
446462 spacer
I rent, and while I've been living here the energy certificate expired and the landlord had to get a new one.
The windows in this house are so old that all the frames are warped and they don't shut properly so in the winter to stop the draughts I have to stuff tissue in around all the windows. On top of that the double glazing seals have gone so they steam up on the inside which hugely reduces the insulation of them.

The inspector basically just shrugged at this and says all he can do is measure the thickness of the glazing and tick the box.

I know there's some flooring panels down in the loft that never had any insulation put in when the house was built, but again the inspector is just there to measure what they can see.

Other problem is it's possible to over-insulate the loft because there are water tanks up there, and insulating between the rafters is much more expensive than insulating the floor.

Heating my living room is an absolute pain in winter because it's got an open-plan staircase dead in the middle of it, and the only radiator is under-sized and right at the foot of the stairs so it barely heats the room at all while upstairs gets very hot, leaving me no choice but to have a fan heater running in the front room. But again this is the sort of thing that the energy certificate doesn't account for at all.

This is just some of the reasons why housing stock in this country is so atrocious and expensive to heat, and the government is talking about spending billions on white elephant air source heat pumps and banning even efficient modern gas boilers before fixing these problems?
>> No. 446463 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 5:53 pm
446463 spacer
>>446462 got an open-plan staircase dead in the middle of it,

Ah, fucking hell. Is there any way at all you can block that with drapes? Obviously depends on the layout, but with a gaping chimney between floors, you're basically fucked. Time to invest in heated blankets and scrooge gloves? (heated blankets are nice, though, if you're just sitting watching telly or something)
>> No. 446464 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 7:22 pm
446464 spacer
>>446453
>It's weird how your anecdotal evidence is contradicted by all the available facts and figures.

Oh goody, I've got to argue with this fucking zealot again. Even in the days of the coalition the Green Deal didn't work - it was a farce despite the government covering homeowners and continues to be one.

The saga of low-hanging fruit matches what we have with energy meters, it's been lazy fix policy for over a decade. It's cheap, the building industry loves it and you can stick it in a flyer to flash green credentials. In this case cavity wall has ended up harming homeowners with issues of damp, structural issues and other ilk to the degree that it wouldn't surprise me if insulate Britain is run by cowboy builders. Homeowners can easily access insulation - they just don't because of risk, it's not some happy smiley free-shit from the government, people choose not to get it.

Although I'm sure some left-wing intellectual blocking a motorway has thought things through and not just been swept up in the emotive groupthink of his small group of fellow travellers.

>>446455
Solar panels and the like already have grant policy. In fact Big Energy dole out the bennies for certain groups to have renovation work done in this area, there role as national champions being an extension of government at this stage.
>> No. 446467 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 9:23 pm
446467 spacer
>>446464

I'm not arguing with you, you're arguing with the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, the Energy Efficiency Infrastructure group, the Construction Leadership Council, the Federation of Master Builders,the government’s own Climate Change Committee and the Institution of Engineering and Technology.

You're just an ordinary bloke insisting on the veracity of his own anecdotal evidence against all the relevant experts and their reports.
It's someone else who's the zealot though, right?
>> No. 446468 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 9:54 pm
446468 spacer
>>446467
>I'm not arguing with you, you're arguing with the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, the Energy Efficiency Infrastructure group, the Construction Leadership Council, the Federation of Master Builders,the government’s own Climate Change Committee and the Institution of Engineering and Technology.

No, I'm arguing with you. Dickhead.
>> No. 446469 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 10:24 pm
446469 spacer
>>446468
When you've finished turning into a corn-cob will you prefer to be grilled and eaten with butter or tinned as sweetcorn?
>> No. 446470 Anonymous
24th September 2021
Friday 11:16 pm
446470 spacer
>>446464

> In this case cavity wall has ended up harming homeowners with issues of damp, structural issues and other ilk

Don't blame insulation for your former employer's shoddy workmanship. Installing insulation without causing damp problems is trivial if you use a proper vapour control system. Retrofitters tend to fuck it up because they don't treat the building envelope as a holistic system.

One of the most basic issues is that we have some of the oldest housing stock in the world. The legal maximum thermal conductivity for the external walls of a new build is 0.18W/m²K, which is quite easy to achieve with modern products and methods. A typical uninsulated cavity wall has conductivity of around 1.6W/m²K and a good retrofit cavity wall insulation system will achieve ~0.5W/m²K.

Take a lovely old Victorian house, retrofit a really high-quality cavity wall insulation system and you're still losing about 2.5x more heat through the walls than the shittiest of Barratt new builds. A lot of people are (justifiably) wary of new builds because of cost-cutting and poor workmanship, but retrofitting will only get you so far. We need to build massive amounts of new stock that's designed to be efficient from the ground up. Given our chronic shortage of housing, you'll kill two birds with one stone - three if you plan those new housing developments around sustainable transport.
>> No. 446471 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 12:09 am
446471 spacer
>>446470
>We need to build massive amounts of new stock that's designed to be efficient from the ground up. Given our chronic shortage of housing, you'll kill two birds with one stone - three if you plan those new housing developments around sustainable transport.

How does that approach relate with this?

>Climate change: Construction companies told to stop knocking down buildings
>....The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) estimates that 35% of the lifecycle carbon from a typical office development is emitted before the building is even opened. The figure for residential premises is 51%.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58667328
>> No. 446472 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 12:15 am
446472 spacer
>>446470
>Don't blame insulation for your former employer's shoddy workmanship. Installing insulation without causing damp problems is trivial if you use a proper vapour control system. Retrofitters tend to fuck it up because they don't treat the building envelope as a holistic system.

Let's be honest here some homes should not have cavity walls insulation installed for a range of factors, exposed brickwork and holes in the wall will both cause damp but even something as environmental as propensity for wind driven rain can give you a bad day. For workmanship the major problem 10 years ago was inaccurate measurement of the cavity causing homes to morph into abstract art.

It's also not just old homes that are a problem either, your new build ecohome can also have issues with damp due to insulation methods. Combined it's not just that these things pose an quantitative problem but people will avoid installation or purchase for worry over risk. So rather than straining an already floundering supply system to harass the government these people should maybe be shitting in peoples letterboxes and doing guerrilla installations.

>We need to build massive amounts of new stock that's designed to be efficient from the ground up

Best of luck with that but the new housing stock isn't going to get rid of old homes problem either. Not least as nobody is going to choose to live in Milton Keynes 2 no matter how many solar powered trains it gets.
>> No. 446473 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 1:59 am
446473 spacer

gd-1024x576.jpg
446473446473446473
The answer, of course, is geodesic dome homes made of bioceramic.
>> No. 446474 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:30 am
446474 spacer
>>446473 There had better be some solution to the fact they're basically greenhouses..
>> No. 446475 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 2:51 pm
446475 spacer
>>446474
Per Buckminster Fuller, the dome shape does a fair amount of the work with regards to efficiency on climate control. That particular company advertise that the bioceramic they use is a wonder material, but then openly admit that they haven't developed it yet.

One of the headlines my browser has been force-feeding me recently is relevant here. Some scientists at Purdue have made the whitest paint on record. White enough that it's reflectance, coupled with its emittance, mean that it has a net negative thermal uptake in sunlight. They've obviously only made a small amount of it, but they extrapolated that a 1,000 sq ft roof painted with the stuff would have a total cooling power of 10 kW, which is more than most home air conditioners.
>> No. 446476 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 5:17 pm
446476 spacer
>>446475
How is white more reflective than a mirror?
>> No. 446477 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 5:36 pm
446477 spacer
>>446476
Whiter than white is a wild oversimplification. It was a really freaky metamaterial, reflects sunlight wavelengths very well, but lets IR through to be beamed into space. Tricky to do both simultaneoulsy, easy enough to do one or t'other.
https://physicsworld.com/a/new-metamaterial-enhances-natural-cooling-without-power-input/
>> No. 446481 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:21 pm
446481 spacer
>>446476
>>446477
I did oversimplify. This stuff I saw is a similar concept, except designed to have high emissivity in the infrared such that it starts "glowing" in the IR more effectively once it starts getting warm.

https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2021/Q3/purdue-record-for-the-whitest-paint-appears-in-latest-edition-of-guinness-world-records.html

It's really quite fascinating.
>> No. 446482 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:24 pm
446482 spacer
>>446481

Isn't it also going to be pointless for cooling homes if it gets dirty? At least, significantly less effective.
>> No. 446483 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:32 pm
446483 spacer
>>446482
Absolutely, though I don't think that should be enough to put us off. If their extrapolation of the cooling power is accurate, that's a hefty load of passive cooling.

Another thing is that emissivity is a surface property, it may be the case that you only get that high IR output if you have an extremely smooth surface. This would obviously mean that you can't just go to B&Q for a tin of it and a brush and go to work, and also means that it would probably require a frequent refresh in places that get a lot of rain. It could be coupled with something like >>446477 as a protective coating, even, that also acts like an IR window.

>>446476
The answer is that it's not, but they've selectively bolstered the reflectivity where it counts. Let me see if I can find the paper, and whether it's actually more reflective than polished metal in the UV.
>> No. 446484 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:47 pm
446484 spacer
>>446483

I'm now curious if it's possible to make a reflective paint, perhaps a transparent suspension that has pigment in it which clings to the surface with the transparent part left on the side facing the air.
I don't know anything about mirrors.
>> No. 446485 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:55 pm
446485 spacer
>>446473

Having built a geodesic dome, there's a basic problem in that a) building materials come in rectangular sheets and b) everything is at a fiddly compound angle. It takes bloody ages to build and you end up with a huge pile of useless offcuts.

Building a comfortable and incredibly efficient home really isn't rocket science, it just costs money. Install a loop for a GSHP during the earthworks, use expanded concrete blocks, stick 200mm of 0.34 glass fibre slabs in the wall cavities, use a properly insulated suspended floor, wrap the outside in a breather membrane, wrap the inside in a VCL, use an air-to-air heat exchanger. Every homebuilder in the country knows how to do it, they're just not incentivised to do it because it's mostly invisible to buyers and the building regs aren't all that strict.

Part of the problem is that buyers and homeowners just aren't informed about what to look for and how to live in a properly efficient house. Some housing associations have been installing really good GSHP systems, then getting complaints that they're expensive to run; the tenants either hadn't been told or didn't understand that heat pumps need to be left running constantly at a steady temperature.

During summer, most people use their windows the wrong way around - you'll be cooler if you keep the windows closed during the day and open them at night.

>>446484

All the major glass manufacturers offer low-emissivity glass, which is designed to be maximally clear to visible light and maximally opaque to UV and IR. It's usually a very thin metallic coating.
>> No. 446486 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 7:57 pm
446486 spacer
>>446484
Just a paint and topcoat, lad.
>> No. 446487 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 8:01 pm
446487 spacer
>>446476
>>446477
>>446481
It's like how spacesuits are white instead of shiny. They need to reflect heat from outside but they also need to be a material able to emit heat produced by the meatbag inside. The ISS is somewhat shiny but it uses complex radiators ammonia/water circulation etc. Space suits also have stuff going on but shush.

This is all quite retarded though as we live in an atmosphere so your primary methods of heat transport are conduction and convection i.e. air circulation, air also being a shitty heat conductor so if you let stuffy air in you need to move it. By all means a black house may be noticeably more toasty but I don't expect a white house to magically give you air conditioning style effects unless you're actually up on the roof or looking to hang out in the attic smoking weed.

Correct me if I'm wrong of course but I still think you'd be better off buying a better designed house. Even one that is larger or simply has trees providing shade.
>> No. 446488 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 8:29 pm
446488 spacer
>>446487
There's an episode of Mythbusters I was referred to recently where they checked whether reflective screens on your car windshield work to keep the inside cooler. None of my colleagues here bother with it, but from my time in a much much hotter climate I knew it to be a lifesaver. I don't remember whether it was Fahrenheit or proper units, but either way they measured a 10 degree lowering of temperature when using a screen. That's substantial, and that's just a flimsy sheet with a kind-of shiny coating. (Admittedly in a car, not a house)

As to whether it's going to provide air-conditioning level of climate control, half of the answer there is probably that people should learn to not expect that, at least in their homes. There was a piece on NPR over here on the wrong side of the pond recently when Europe was having heatwaves, and they were focusing on Germans in Berlin whose only option was to go to the local fountain to feel a bit cooler, and who seemed to universally despise the American concept of air-con in every building, even going as far as to say they they get poorly every time they visit the US from either temperature fluctuations between indoors and out, or just the recirculated air.

I'm curious what you and the other constructionlad think of these early concepts of 3D printed homes.
>> No. 446490 Anonymous
25th September 2021
Saturday 9:11 pm
446490 spacer
>>446487
>you'd be better off buying a better designed house. Even one that is larger
booooooooooo rub it in you bastard
>> No. 446491 Anonymous
26th September 2021
Sunday 12:39 am
446491 spacer
>>446490

That's what your mum says when I spunk on her back.
>> No. 446499 Anonymous
26th September 2021
Sunday 8:10 pm
446499 spacer
>>446488 early concepts of 3D printed homes.

They're early. Horribly energy intensive, the ones using extruded concrete are using too much, and concrete's not ideal. They need to add bricks / breeze blocks to get costs and performance better.
Also, the insertion of facilities all looks really ad-hoc and rushed and manual.
However, give it time. Thing is, it's up against pre-fab, where whole walls will be trucked in, with all services pre-fitted. Bolt them up, join the services, fill the gaps and test for compliance. If walls can be fabbed in factories, they'll be so much better than those thrown up by shit builders.
It's interesting times, but I bet progress will be slow. Expect the current horrors to continue for a while yet.
>> No. 446500 Anonymous
26th September 2021
Sunday 8:35 pm
446500 spacer

cascading-climate-risks-national-international-ins.png
446500446500446500
The Chatham House report is quite interesting.
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/09/climate-change-risk-assessment-2021
>> No. 446509 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 9:48 am
446509 spacer

orange.png
446509446509446509
Christ, the police are rudgwicksteamshow.co.ukors now.
>> No. 446510 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 9:49 am
446510 spacer
>>446509

For some reason it kept recommending me their sub, weird one that.
>> No. 446577 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 11:35 pm
446577 spacer

unnamed.png
446577446577446577
Ecolads, why don't you start complaining about people needing dishwashers in this country?

It's more environmentally friendly in energy and water use, saves money and the woman's time, washes at a much higher temperature improving hygiene and a smart dishwasher can be programmed to wash at a time when energy use is lower (i.e. during the day or at night). I think the main impediment to uptake in Britain is likely to be initial cost including the installation fee so it's ripe for a government grant. I bet Pierce Morgan has a dishwasher as well so he won't give you any guff for it.
>> No. 446578 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 11:40 pm
446578 spacer
>>446577
There are people without dishwashers?
>> No. 446579 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 11:47 pm
446579 spacer
>>446578
There are people without cookers who could just about afford a microwave. There are people who have cookers but cannot afford pots to cook with because they need to pay for all manner of things. There are people who cannot afford fuck all because what they make goes on feeding their kids, keeping gas and lecky meter fed and maybe putting a quid or two aside in case something breaks.

A dishwasher is more efficient in the same way that Vime's Boot Theory applies to footwear.
>> No. 446580 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 11:48 pm
446580 spacer
>>446578
I have only lived in a house with a dishwasher once in my entire life which was a student house where it was broken so I couldn't use it. Although I also grew up in a home without central heating so make of that what you will.

Only 49% of homes in Britain have a dishwasher.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/289151/household-dishwashing-in-the-uk/
>> No. 446581 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 11:50 pm
446581 spacer
>>446579
>There are people who have cookers but cannot afford pots to cook with because they need to pay for all manner of things

You fucking what?
>> No. 446582 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 12:15 am
446582 spacer
>>446580
>Only 49%

Not sure 49% qualifies for an "only".

I'm more interested in why a slimline dishwasher uses more water/heat than a full size one - seems strange.
>> No. 446583 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 12:53 am
446583 spacer
>>446582
Economies of scale, same as handwashing, I assume. I live alone and I literally only own one full-sized plate. In the event of a sex visitor that I had to feed, she could have the proper plate and I'd use the small plate. However, this has never happened because I am too sexy to draw women into my dingy flat. It would be idiotic for me to own a dishwasher and you won't convince me otherwise. I assume I'd need to buy ten times as many pans and then only wash them 1/10 as often for this graph to make sense for me.
>> No. 446585 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 1:35 am
446585 spacer
The other thing with dishwashers is that they're shit, so you end up having to pre-rinse everything anyway.
>> No. 446586 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 4:04 am
446586 spacer
>>446585
Use a cycle that includes a pre-wash and throw some powder in the door.

Oh, and use powder, not fancy tabs. Much cheaper and more efficient once you figure out how much you need.
>> No. 446587 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 9:16 am
446587 spacer
>>446577
Probably because they're not environmentally friendly. How the fuck do you manage to use 9 litres of water washing up three pans and two plates? And using water as hot as the dish washer gets? You'd lose all the skin on your hands, never mind the electricity bill.

According to the website you got that from, a website expressly for the purpose of selling you things
>we estimate that you can wash around two standard meal sets with one washing-up bowl (average capacity of nine litres) before you’d need to empty the water and fill it again.
this is bollocks.

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2020/09/which-research-reveals-how-little-water-dishwashers-use-compared-to-hand-washing/
>> No. 446588 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 1:19 pm
446588 spacer
>>446587
Well look who's in the pocket of Big Water and Big Washing Up Liquid, lads.
>> No. 446590 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 5:06 pm
446590 spacer
>>446587
Well now I don't know how to feel. I've travelled around 500 miles on a plane in 30 years, so that's got to be worth something, but I turn the tap on to help me piss (though I often don't flush, assuming I'm not pissing in the bathroom sink) and my washing up method is stacking everything in the kitchen sink and leaving it for an hour or so. I'm sure my sink holds more than 12 litres but then I've got a good few litres of plates and all in there to net that off, but then I drain the water and have leave the cold tap on lightly while scrubbing. Is that bad?
>> No. 446592 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 5:17 pm
446592 spacer
>>446590
Most of what you said is bad.
>> No. 446593 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 5:23 pm
446593 spacer
>>446590
Just sounds like an incredibly inefficient way of doing the washing up. Waiting until the sink fills, waiting, waiting while it drains enough to rinse in. Pointless.
Compared to the amount of clean water used in construction and the textile industry, both of which use a planned obsolescence model, this is all irrelevant really.
>> No. 446594 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 5:46 pm
446594 spacer
>>446592
The sink pissing is at the very least environmentally friendly.

>>446593
It takes me about 10 minutes for a full sink. It's long enough for the hot+soap to dislodge most of the crap, too quick for the oil and grease to get everywhere. Then just a quick scrub and it's all done. There's little work in stacking things. I do it because it's bloody quick.
>> No. 446595 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 5:54 pm
446595 spacer
>>446594
10 minutes plus the hour. It takes me about five. If there's anything that actually would benefit from soaking you just fill it (the pan) up enough to cover the bits that matter and leave it to one side. That way you don't have a sink full of dirty dishes a full quarter of your waking day.
>> No. 446596 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 7:04 pm
446596 spacer
>>446595
No, the hour I'm doing other things which I enjoy. It takes me ten minutes of activity, and is in fact faster, because the dishes are fundamentally easier to clean once everything is loosened, and were you to do your dishes thoroughly soaked, vs unsoaked, it would obviously be quicker. I can't take you seriously because unless your point is that you're faster at rubbing a sponge in circles than me, the time saving is very much there, for you would be able to do this even faster were your dishes soaked for an hour in hot water and dish soap.

One may also opt to leave the dishes in a stack **on the side** as they accrue, leaving the sink free for other none-pissing related activities. Or employ a dual sink for this purpose, provided you have enough space.

>a full quarter of your waking day.
>10 minutes plus the hour.

This must be very embarrassing for you.
>> No. 446597 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 7:15 pm
446597 spacer
>>446596

Three meals a day is three times an hour and ten minutes. A waking day is roughly 12 hours. That's four threes. The rest of what you're saying is just as well thought out.
>> No. 446598 Anonymous
30th September 2021
Thursday 7:24 pm
446598 spacer
>>446597
Because I use a whole dining set's worth of crockery and cutlery for each meal.
>> No. 446606 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 2:24 am
446606 spacer

gretchen thunderburp loev chinks.jpg
446606446606446606
Greta Thunberg Brands Britain as One of the Biggest ‘Climate Villains’

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2021/09/30/greta-thunberg-brands-britain-one-of-the-biggest-climate-villains/
>> No. 446608 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 6:45 am
446608 spacer
>>446606
Wait, so Mail links are blocked but fucking Breitbart is absolutely fine?
>> No. 446610 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 10:15 am
446610 spacer
>>446608
Nobody regularly posts breitbart so it hadn't come up.
>> No. 446614 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 11:02 am
446614 spacer

greta_china.jpg
446614446614446614
>>446606

https://twitter.com/gretathunberg/status/1390676195352719364

Literally all I did was type into Google "Greta criticises China", and this is what came up as one of the top search results.

It's disturbing that fake news mills like Breitbart still get away with this sort of thing.
>> No. 446616 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 11:17 am
446616 spacer

2993.jpg
446616446616446616
Speaking of Greta, they had a thing about her at the weekend which incorporated a photoshoot where she had fake oil dripping down her head. I don't know if it's her autism or what, but she'd make a terrifyingly convincing humanoid. I could see her in one of the Terminator films.
>> No. 446617 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 11:24 am
446617 spacer
>>446616

Do you ever look at a cube and think to yourself "Wow, that cube would make a terrifyingly convincing cuboid"? She is a humanoid. So are you.
>> No. 446618 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 11:30 am
446618 spacer
>>446616

https://genesiustimes.com/confirmed-greta-is-cyborg-sent-back-in-time-to-kill-off-humanity/

>CONFIRMED: Greta is cyborg sent back in time to kill off humanity
>> No. 446620 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 11:38 am
446620 spacer

1487.jpg
446620446620446620
>>446617
Nah, I don't think you know what a humanoid is.

If you've ever read Second Variety by Philip K. Dick then you'd know Greta would be spot on to play one of the killer humanoid children.
>> No. 446622 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 11:59 am
446622 spacer

humanoid definition.png
446622446622446622
>>446620

You're confused.
>> No. 446623 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 12:13 pm
446623 spacer

GretaMoonOven.jpg
446623446623446623
>>446622
No u
>> No. 446626 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 12:17 pm
446626 spacer
>>446623

Now read the second sentence in the screencap you posted. Humanoid just means human-shaped. This applies to humans just as much as it does The Wounded Soldier, David and Klaus - not that PKD ever refers to them as that. You're thinking of "android".
>> No. 446627 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 12:22 pm
446627 spacer
>>446626
An android is literally a humanoid robot. You're correct, but I'm also correct.

Greta could pass for a robot, let's leave it at that.
>> No. 446628 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 12:24 pm
446628 spacer
>>446627

Right, an android is a human-shaped robot.
>> No. 446629 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 12:27 pm
446629 spacer
>>446628
There we go. Now you're getting it 😀.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 446636 Anonymous
1st October 2021
Friday 4:08 pm
446636 spacer
>>446628
I thought it was a phone.
>> No. 446665 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 5:13 pm
446665 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGTPSqI7Iuo

Having a paramedic drag you off the road so an ambulance can get through. Brilliant optics for the crusties.
>> No. 446666 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 5:23 pm
446666 spacer
>>446628
>>446627

Android means "resembling a man", while gynoid is for things that look like a woman. In Greta's case neither apply, she looks like a crude doll.
>> No. 446667 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 5:51 pm
446667 spacer
>>446666

"Resembling a man" meaning bipedal, two arms, a head. Things can be both android and gynoid, including dolls which are explicitly intended to resemble humans. If you're going to make a post purely to take a cheap shot at someone at least don't couch it in utterly idiotic logic.
>> No. 446670 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 7:38 pm
446670 spacer
>>446665
It gets worse.

>Frustration at the road blocks led to confrontations with drivers. In a video shared by LBC one woman cried as she pleaded with protesters, telling them she needed to get to her sick mother. “She’s in the ambulance, she’s going to the hospital in Canterbury, do you think I’m stupid?” she says. “I need to go to the hospital, please let me pass. This isn’t OK ... How can you be so selfish?”

>Responding to the video, Insulate Britain released a statement saying: “We share the frustration of the people being delayed on the roads today. Does our government know what to do? The disorder on the roads today suggests otherwise. The Insulate Britain protests could end immediately, the government has a choice: make a meaningful statement that we can trust on insulating our homes, or make the decision to imprison those people who are more scared of the destruction of their country than they are of fines or a six-month sentence.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/04/drivers-clash-with-insulate-britain-activists-blocking-three-london-roads

Northern Irish Fleg protests all over again.
>> No. 446671 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 8:25 pm
446671 spacer
>>446670
Any particular reason they're not targeting the Tory conference?
>> No. 446672 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 8:34 pm
446672 spacer
>>446671
The police have already closed many of the adjacent roads for security.
>> No. 446674 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 9:22 pm
446674 spacer
>>446671
There are other people doing that but you don't hear about them.
>> No. 446675 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 9:45 pm
446675 spacer
>>446674
They aren't really doing any inconveniencing (thanks to the police), so it really isn't a protest by any standard.
>> No. 446678 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 10:28 pm
446678 spacer
>>446675

That's the only valid sort of protesting these days.
>> No. 446682 Anonymous
4th October 2021
Monday 11:15 pm
446682 spacer
>>446671
The Tory conference is basically already doing that to most of central Manchester and that bit of Manchester next door that insists on pretending it's not Manchester.
>> No. 446685 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 12:05 am
446685 spacer

sectoid.png
446685446685446685
>>446670

First, you are grasping at straws.
Second, she looks like a Sectoid from the first Xcom game.


>>446671

Because they know that they would get the beating of their life if they attempted to do so.
>> No. 446690 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 9:32 am
446690 spacer
>>446685

Would you agree that your Sectoid (or even a doll of one) is in fact humanoid, or are you a fucking idiot?
>> No. 446692 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 12:57 pm
446692 spacer
>>446690
No, it's sectoid. I don't think you should be imposing your geocentric aesthetic standards to alien creatures. Vile behaviour.
>> No. 446693 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 1:04 pm
446693 spacer
I think they're pretty brave, because if 'members of the public' are demonstrating they are prepared to lay hands on them, there's no limit to where that anger can go. Eventually some nutcase motorist is going to lose his rag and turn one of them into tomato purée.
>> No. 446694 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 1:17 pm
446694 spacer
>>446693
I'd say it's more stubbornness than anything. It isn't going to help matters that the founder of Insulate Britain has come out and said, after the scenes yesterday, he would block an ambulance from getting a dying patient to the hospital.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/extinction-rebellion-founder-admits-would-25136898
>> No. 446696 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 2:08 pm
446696 spacer
>>446694

Roger is a contentious figure and doesn't speak for everyone despite how the media may present it or what he says. He's also not the "founder" of IB as far as I'm aware. It doesn't look as though that article is saying that either. He's one of about a dozen founders of XR.
>> No. 446697 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 2:52 pm
446697 spacer
>>446693
>I think they're pretty brave

Is this the right word to use, maybe naïve or stubborn or even "twats".

>>446696
Odd how many bad apples seem to be sitting in the road at the minute. Almost like he's more representative of a culture and attitude to other people.
>> No. 446698 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 2:56 pm
446698 spacer
>>446696

>He's one of about a dozen founders of XR.

What are the other 11 like?
>> No. 446699 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 3:18 pm
446699 spacer
I have to say that the way the media has turned on them instantly, my conspiracy-sense is tingling enormously. Someone said he's willing to allow, and even encourage, the deaths of the people whose support he is simultaneously seeking. That's a hell of a headline, but if reporters haven't heard similar attitudes at the Conservative Party conference in the past week, then they haven't been listening hard enough. So why should I care that a powerless hippie thinks this?
>> No. 446700 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 3:39 pm
446700 spacer
>>446699

It's not conspiracy. I'm not sure how many more academic studies we need to convince people of media bias, but the media is systematically portraying XR in an unfavourable light compared with other political interests. The reasons for this should be absolutely obvious given what media is, as an institution.
>> No. 446701 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 3:57 pm
446701 spacer
>>446699

Oil companies buy a lot of newspaper adverts. It's not conscious bias, it's just an instinctive sense of "don't bite the hand that feeds". Attacking the powerless is usually a safe option.
>> No. 446704 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 4:11 pm
446704 spacer
>>446697

It's astonishing that even after you saw the other poster get called out for not having read the article before commenting on it, you didn't bother to read it before commenting on it either.

>>446698

Less keen on the spotlight.
>> No. 446705 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 4:18 pm
446705 spacer
>>446704
>even after you saw the other poster get called out for not having read the article before commenting on it

I muddled up XR and Insulate Britain, that doesn't mean I didn't read the article before I posted it.

This relatively recent obsession on the internet with "calling people out" sure is strange.
>> No. 446708 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 4:25 pm
446708 spacer
>>446705

Pointing out that someone has a fundamental misunderstanding of what they're talking about is generally relevant to the conversation. Trying to reframe that as some sort of cancel culture thing is pretty weasely.
>> No. 446709 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 4:27 pm
446709 spacer
>>446708
I've no idea what the fuck you're on about now, lad, but whatever you say.
>> No. 446713 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 6:06 pm
446713 spacer
>>446704
Re-read what I wrote you thick twat. I'm implying he is representative of a culture of bad apples. Unless you're instead about to claim that IB and XR aren't like hand and glove.

>>446708
Doesn't seem like the first time you've had people call you out for this, huh. Out of interest, do you post on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk much?
>> No. 446714 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 7:17 pm
446714 spacer
Surely if people really wanted to Insulate Britain they'd block the channel tunnel.
>> No. 446715 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 8:55 pm
446715 spacer
>>446713

How many times do I need to read the sentence
>Odd how many bad apples seem to be sitting in the road at the minute.
to make it say something other? Both XR and IB are right, you repeating the same irrelevant bollocks as rageclick talk show hosts doesn't change that.
>> No. 446716 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 9:10 pm
446716 spacer
Mixed feelings from me. I really didn't like the XR cunts, but I feel less antipathy towards these IB lot.

Maybe it's because they're pissing people off so much more effectively, whole-heartedly, and I respect that, whereas the XR stuff was always quite performative when you really got down to it. It was loud and annoying but didn't actually do much of consequence.

Their goals overlap considerably, but I don't know enough about IB to know if they're environmentalists or just wish their heating bill was cheaper. Yet judging by the tone of the media coverage and the discourse I've heard around it, I'm tempted to say XR was an establishment, middle class, media darling approved message; whereas this lot are a left-field breakout group nobody expected. They all had their eye off the ball on covid and the collapsing global supply chains, and accidentally let a bit of grassroots activism get through.

Still though. If you'd block an ambulance carrying a dying patient, you really might as well just drop the pretence of peaceful activism and start chucking petrol bombs. You're already well past the point of being able to remain on your high horse.
>> No. 446717 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 9:34 pm
446717 spacer
>>446715
>Both XR and IB are right

No they're not. For starters, XR sounds like a radio station that 'only plays the greatest hits of the 80s, 90 and 2000s' and IB just reminds me of irritable bowel. Neither of which you want to encounter on the way to work.

If you block an ambulance you're a cunt is what I'm saying. That and XR has already proven that these groups aren't suggesting workable policy that keeps the lights on and the country fed. They might doom-monger and express a pathological misanthropy but what they don't do is suggest workable policy and listen to what the other side tells them.
>> No. 446718 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 9:48 pm
446718 spacer
>>446717

This. People (XR people) complain about fatalism, but I don't really see how "I'll glue myself to the road/block ambulances to stop this" is any less doommongering.
>> No. 446719 Anonymous
5th October 2021
Tuesday 10:31 pm
446719 spacer
>>446717
Insulating houses in Britain sounds like a workable policy.

What I don't understand is - wouldn't better insulation make homes basically ovens in the summer? Doesn't sound good with all the climate change stuff about to happen.
>> No. 446720 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 12:03 am
446720 spacer
>>446719
>Insulating houses in Britain sounds like a workable policy.

It was, 20 years ago. The grants on offer from the likes of last years Green Homes Grant or even going back to schemes in the days of Labour have put money and effort on the issue.

The low hanging fruit is gone. Bunging more money this way (over the 2bn committed last year alone) is a recipe for yet more con-artists and some very toasty high-rise leaseholders/renters. Understandably there's now instead uptake and suitability issues.

>What I don't understand is - wouldn't better insulation make homes basically ovens in the summer? Doesn't sound good with all the climate change stuff about to happen

It can work both ways like your thermos. Although it could be a laugh to make someone's home hotter than the outside environment in the middle of summer and lock all their windows and doors I guess.
>> No. 446721 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 12:24 am
446721 spacer
>>446719

>wouldn't better insulation make homes basically ovens in the summer?

A properly designed low-energy house will keep heat in during the winter, but it'll also keep heat out during the summer. Low-emissivity glazing and shutters will block most of the radiant heat from the sun, so you're not stuck in a greenhouse. Heat pump systems have the advantage of being able to run in both directions (moving heat in or out of the house), so you get air conditioning as a freebie. Mechanical Ventilation with Heat Recovery systems work to provide fresh air in winter without blowing in a cold draught, but the heat recovery can be bypassed in summer to provide cool air. Well-insulated houses need less energy to heat, but also less energy to cool.

A badly designed low-energy house will be roasting in the summer, but the same can be true of a badly designed house that's also draughty and cold in the winter. New blocks of flats with overheating problems are often described as "over-insulated" or "airtight", but the problem is usually badly-designed district heating systems and overcrowding.

https://www.katedeselincourt.co.uk/overheating-how-can-we-avoid-it-article-from-green-building/
>> No. 446722 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 1:06 am
446722 spacer
>>446721
>it'll also keep heat out during the summer
So there's more heat outside, making outdoors even hotter? IT'S A SCAM
>> No. 446723 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 3:59 am
446723 spacer
>>446721
So it doesn't just stop at insulation - you would need heat pumps and more? Sounds like a big ask.
>> No. 446724 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:37 am
446724 spacer
>>446716
>I don't know enough about IB to know if they're environmentalists or just wish their heating bill was cheaper

One of those leading IB protests LARPs as a brickie whilst being a landlord of six or seven poorly insulated properties that he wants the government to pay to sort out.

https://metro.co.uk/2021/09/23/m25-hippy-crite-owns-1000000-property-empire-with-poor-insulation-15303995/

I'd say the difference between IB and XR seems to boil down to numbers. IB don't have the numbers that XR had so they're going for maximum inconvenience instead, but it's backfiring. Nobody is talking about people dying from poorly insulated properties, they're instead talking about how much they're a bunch of knobheads for blocking in ambulances. They've turned most of the public against them, so the most likely outcome now is going to be the government introducing stricter laws about protesting to appease this.
>> No. 446725 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:46 am
446725 spacer
>>446724

>a landlord of six or seven poorly insulated properties that he wants the government to pay to sort out.

I see. In that case hanging is not good enough, I sentence them all to be run over slowly by ambulance.
>> No. 446726 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:55 am
446726 spacer
>>446725

They are still right, though. About 15% of the UK's emissions come from housing, sorting out our insulation is the biggest and cheapest difference that we can make to reducing our emissions. That's on top of the eight to nine thousand people who die annually from fuel poverty.
>> No. 446728 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 8:11 am
446728 spacer

FA8j6ZbWUAUnh1q.jpg
446728446728446728
>>446726
Can you not see the hypocrisy of a landlord with a seven figure property portfolio leaving his tenants in cold homes, despite the fact he's also a tradesman who could probably arrange it cheaply, because he doesn't want to pay for it?

Insulating homes is important, that isn't being disputed. However, Insulate Britain have done a cracking job of turning most people against them and the message has now largely been lost. If I was to put ony my tinfoil hat I'd say they were controlled opposition who have the aim of turning the public against environmental campaigners and being justification for more draconian powers.
>> No. 446730 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 8:25 am
446730 spacer
>>446726

Yes, but instead of paying for it for them, we should be putting laws in place that make landlords liable for properties failing to meet adequate insulation standards.

Perhaps we could even make the offense punishable by asset forfeiture. Like how the CPS take your kids off you if you don't look after them, we can take homes off landlords who neglect them. Bring the social housing stocks back up without having to go full Mao on the parasitic bastards.
>> No. 446731 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 8:30 am
446731 spacer
>>446728

I can, but that doesn't mean the larger point is wrong, as you agree. There are at least a hundred people regularly involved, The Sun is going to be able to dig up something that looks like hypocrisy, that's their whole job. It's irrelevant and knowingly letting yourself be distracted by it is what they want.

As for the second part that same accusation was levelled at XR, in fact it's levelled at any protest group at all that makes waves. It's saying that nobody should ever protest (effectively) because doing that gives the government an excuse to take away the right to do it. If the only way to preserve freedom of speech is to say nothing then you don't have it in the first place. Again, the ire is being directed at the protesters rather than the government who are at fault.
>> No. 446732 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 8:31 am
446732 spacer
>>446730

I think you'd struggle against the landlord lobby getting that through but I'd absolutely support that.
>> No. 446733 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 8:50 am
446733 spacer
>>446731
>Again, the ire is being directed at the protesters rather than the government who are at fault.

You're almost getting it, you just need to connect the dots. The reason the ire is being directed at the protestors is because, unsurprisingly, the general public don't agree with blocking roads and refusing to let ambulances through.

IB are not making waves. The message has been completely lost. All they've done is turn people against them. The reason they seem like controlled opposition is because it would be extremely difficult for a group to intentionally fuck up a campaign as much as IB are.

I think you're a little bit blinkered, you seem to be very much of the mindset of "I agree that homes should be properly insulated, therefore anything IB do in support of this message is right. If you don't agree with the actions of IB then this means you're against homes being properly insulated."
>> No. 446734 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 9:04 am
446734 spacer
>>446733

>I think you're a little bit blinkered, you seem to be very much of the mindset of
That's interesting as that post you're replying to includes a response to your concerns about the tactics while directly acknowledging that you agree with the insulation.

I'm sure if you asked the general public they wouldn't agree with eight-to-nine-thousand people dying every year of fuel poverty either. That's something orders of magnitude worse. Or with the far longer blockages caused by flooding this morning and yesterday. But they're not outraged about either. Obviously it's not the tactics that are causing the upset.

You lot are usually entirely aware of how media influences the perception of these things, in this case you seem to be refusing to admit it could work on you.
>> No. 446735 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 9:17 am
446735 spacer
>>446734
The media is a handy scapegoat for when things don't go the way someone wants it to.

"If it wasn't for the media people would be on our side and against the paramedic dragging protestors off the street so his ambulance could get through and against that tearful woman who was blocked from visiting her frail elderly mother. That's the only reason people aren't on our side."
>> No. 446736 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 9:29 am
446736 spacer
>>446735

Given that there was no blocked ambulance yet you believe there was one, yes.
>> No. 446737 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 9:41 am
446737 spacer

0_Protest-7.jpg
446737446737446737
>>446736
Was the paramedic an actor in a costume? If there wasn't an ambulance being blocked in then why was someone heard saying "there’s an ambulance, you stupid prick, get out of the road" to the protestors?
>> No. 446738 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 9:58 am
446738 spacer
>>446737

I saw someone in a paramedic uniform yesterday, driving down the road in a normal car. Paramedics being people who, like most people, put on their clothes before going to work and only take them off after getting home. I'm guessing the person talking made the same mistake as you. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a protest move out of the way for an ambulance only for it to turn out to be a rumour. IB have a blue light policy, same as XR.

Still, you're focusing on some small incidents that were amplified by media (and social media of people with the same agenda) while completely dismissing the actual deaths I mentioned earlier. Yes, you're right, there's no easily available footage of people wailing distressed at the deaths of their relatives in all the road accidents that happened yesterday or those who'll die of fuel poverty. Your entire argument against the idea that media amplifies things in particular ways is "Look at these massively amplified examples!".
>> No. 446739 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 10:16 am
446739 spacer
>>446738

>Paramedics being people who, like most people, put on their clothes before going to work and only take them off after getting home

I don't have a horse in this race but you're casually displaying that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about here. You don't see surgeons on the tube in their scrubs do you. Do you think I wear my labcoat for the commute? Paramedic gear is half uniform, half PPE. If it gets covered in blood they don't just take it home and stick it in the washing machine, you berk.

You might see nurses or dentist's receptionists outside of work in their uniform, but in a lot of roles you're explicitly not allowed to do that and you get changed at work. One of the things that stood out to me when I embarked on my career in the health service was how there are always proper gym-style changing rooms with a shower and what have you, not just the naff little cloakrooms like they have in ordinary offices etc.
>> No. 446741 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 10:24 am
446741 spacer
>>446739

I went to university with paramedics and they absolutely took their uniforms home. More to the point, so did the one I just mentioned seeing yesterday.
>> No. 446742 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 10:42 am
446742 spacer
It's an unsympathetic case to use as an example, but it always sticks out to me how we assign blame in these situations.
If the government immediately folded and went "yeah, alright then, we'll announce an insulation scheme in the next budget" then the road would be unblocked just as surely as if the protestors just gave up and buggered off. But you'll never see uninvolved people instinctively put that case forward, that it's the government's fault for not acting, it's always the protestors fault for acting. It's always the person who deviates from the status quo who's seen as being in the wrong. Or perhaps always the people who've got less power who're seen as being in the wrong.
(The basic model stands out much better in Labour disputes - if an employer provokes a strike with unreasonable behaviour it's typically still the strikers who get the blame for disrupting people's lives.)

I wonder if there's a pretty universal instinct at play here, or if it's just the specific way we do things at the moment and somewhere out there there's a historical precedent for people instinctively blaming the powerful or those who try to maintain the status quo.
>> No. 446743 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 10:51 am
446743 spacer
I think we're basically fucked as long as breaking a few eggs to make an omelette which will save many more eggs in future is considered immoral or evil.
>> No. 446744 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 11:10 am
446744 spacer
>>446723

It's a big job, but the alternative is that the east coast of England moves about fifty miles to the west. Even if climate change wasn't an issue, it's an investment that would pay for itself within a couple of decades. Given that interest rates are at record lows and fuel prices might stay sky-high for the foreseeable future, it's a bit of a no-brainer.
>> No. 446745 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 11:22 am
446745 spacer
>>446742

I think everyone has a bit of an innate aversion to the psychology of blackmail, which is essentially what this kind of action is, that tells them first and foremost that giving in to demands without negotiation is categorically off the table. I think that part of the mental process happens before people have even consciously processed what the demands actually are. Assuming we (the hypothetical individual in this scenario) aren't complete pushover wet wipes, I'd say we learn this quite intuitively and instinctively over the course of our lives as we learn to negotiate relationship issues and employment offers etc.

Knowing that that's a kind of instinctual framing device our brains will automatically fit things into makes it much easier for the media, which is typically run by poeple with an interest in maintaining the status quo, to slant things even further in that direction, and goad us into thinking of the protestors/strikes/activists etc as unreasonable people making forcible demands of us.

Other monke is trying to extort us out of our bananas, and we're not dumb monke. We are smart monke and see through his trickery. We're not giving him any of our bananas. We're going to hit him with this big rock.
>> No. 446747 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 11:49 am
446747 spacer
>>446745

I find it interesting that so many working people now see the government as us and protesters as them. When I was younger, it was definitely the other way around, at least in the circles I moved in - the government were assumed to be bastards and anyone protesting automatically got the benefit of the doubt, even if the cause wasn't particularly popular.

I suppose back then the miner's strike was still fresh in the memory for a lot of people, so there was an understanding that naturally created solidarity.
>> No. 446751 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 1:13 pm
446751 spacer
>>446694

There is nothing more dangerous than a dickhead that believes he is saving humanity with his actions. Probably he thinks of himself as a Captain Harlock
>> No. 446754 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 1:20 pm
446754 spacer
Pretty sure XR let ambulances through when they were blocking Westminster Bridge. Are IB really not doing that?
>> No. 446755 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 1:27 pm
446755 spacer
>>446751
>There is nothing more dangerous than a dickhead that believes he is saving humanity with his actions.
Except for the people who managed to prevent all these examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls
>Probably he thinks of himself as a Captain Harlock
As far as I know he's not a weeb who'd understand that reference without looking it up.
>> No. 446756 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 1:38 pm
446756 spacer
>>446754

They claim they are and have footage of them doing it on more than one occasion*. There's just also footage where someone in a paramedic uniform is seen dragging them off the road, though no ambulance is visible in the traffic**. There's one verified case of a reporter claiming someone has died due to the protests but the person in question actually having died in 2019.

*https://twitter.com/InsulateLove/status/1445430793397063683
https://twitter.com/InsulateLove/status/1445430959327879171

**https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1444967088448282625

https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1445682366836404227

But again, this is still a distraction from the 8,000 more deaths actually doing what they ask would prevent. Every year.
>> No. 446758 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 1:59 pm
446758 spacer
>>446755

non sequitur.
>> No. 446765 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 6:04 pm
446765 spacer

DcRgjnkWkAIjkGh.jpg
446765446765446765
>>446726
They're not and this has been addressed. You're just repeating placards at this point.

>>446728
To make life more interesting I sometimes imagine the 'Lab voters' column represents Labradors who vote and why they feel they way they do.

>>446730
We already have regulation to this effect and Grenfell even happened because the landlord used cheap insulation that the government had certified.

>>446736
You literally have spokemen confirming that, yes, they would also block an ambulance. Oh but I'm sure it's all a conspiracy isn't it.
>> No. 446766 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 6:09 pm
446766 spacer
>>446765
>They're not and this has been addressed.
The Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, the Energy Efficiency Infrastructure group, the Construction Leadership Council, the Federation of Master Builders,the government’s own Climate Change Committee and the Institution of Engineering and Technology all disagree with you.

>You literally have spokemen confirming that, yes, they would also block an ambulance. Oh but I'm sure it's all a conspiracy isn't it.
Statement from IB saying they don't and won't do that:
https://twitter.com/InsulateLove/status/1445430793397063683
Statement from XR saying they don't and won't do that:
https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2021/10/05/5th-october-statement/

tl;dr You're wrong and you're a grotesquely ugly freak.
>> No. 446768 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 6:19 pm
446768 spacer
>>446766
>The Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, the Energy Efficiency Infrastructure group, the Construction Leadership Council, the Federation of Master Builders,the government’s own Climate Change Committee and the Institution of Engineering and Technology all disagree with you.

I've still not seen an argument from you. This is low-hanging fruit that has repeatedly been plucked at by generous grants from multiple governments. It's not a issue of grants, insulation is affordable.

>Statement from

Oh dear, if only I had some sort of quote already made in the thread.

tl;dr you're just some tired cheerleader who refuses to engage like your pals with practical solutions. It's all just a game for you isn't it, Darren.
>> No. 446769 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 6:28 pm
446769 spacer
>>446768

There's no argument from me necessary. Every body of qualified people says it needs doing and it's not being done. Those are the facts - it doesn't matter if it's affordable if it's still not happening. The government making it happen is a practical solution. It is in their power. Neither the protesters nor myself can insulate everyone's home for them. I reiterate, you're wrong, etc.
>> No. 446770 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 6:49 pm
446770 spacer
>>446768

>It's not a issue of grants, insulation is affordable.

Mickey mouse insulation is cheap; doing a proper job of it is expensive, especially for older houses. If you're aiming for a U-value of below 0.2 - worse than the minimum standard for new builds - you might be looking at the thick end of £50,000 for solid wall insulation and a new roof. That's before we get into the really serious kit like GSHPs and MVHRs. That investment will pay back in the long term, but most people a) don't understand the options available and b) aren't willing to remortgage to make their home properly efficient. It's an obvious role for government.

More than a third of British households are in rented accommodation and we have no legislation addressing their insulation needs.
>> No. 446771 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:02 pm
446771 spacer
>>446765

>Grenfell even happened because the landlord used cheap insulation that the government had certified

The government didn't certify it. Builders are required to comply with building regulations, but checking for compliance is the responsibility of the builder. The British Board of Agrément (an independent non-profit) certify building materials as being compliant with building regulations when used in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.

The manufacturers of the cladding system used on Grenfell intentionally misled the BBA as to the fire safety of their products, manipulating testing methods and withholding test data. The BBA failed to act when concerns about those materials were raised and made errors in some certificates. The installer of the cladding system made serious mistakes in how they specified and installed the system. The building owners chose architects who lacked the necessary skills and experience to oversee such a project.

The whole thing is a clusterfuck, but the problem isn't a lack of regulations or the wrong regulations - it's a lack of funding to make sure that those regulations are actually complied with.
>> No. 446772 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:29 pm
446772 spacer
>>446769
>There's no argument from me necessary

Yeah, that's how it works with you people isn't it. Hope you get the RATM to number 1 or whatever it is you people are doing at the minute.

>>446770
>but most people a) don't understand the options available and b) aren't willing to remortgage to make their home properly efficient. It's an obvious role for government.

I think we can more point to the problems exposed by last year's green deal and why it went wrong. It's the application process for grants, the backend nonsense. If you can give poor people 10k upfront and work with tradesmen, big energy etc. then it's not such a big deal but that's complicated.
https://www.homebuilding.co.uk/advice/green-homes-grant-what-is-it

Oh fucking hell, Rishi is going to relaunch the scheme at the end of the month and IB are going to declare victory aren't they?

>More than a third of British households are in rented accommodation and we have no legislation addressing their insulation needs.

Yes there is. A home must have a minimum standard of insulation before it goes on the rental market i.e. MEES etc.
>> No. 446773 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:32 pm
446773 spacer
>>446772

>Yeah, that's how it works with you people isn't it. Hope you get the RATM to number 1 or whatever it is you people are doing at the minute.

Okay thanks for that rebuttal to the points I made. You're doing a great job.

So just to summarise, you agree that
1) It needs to be done
2) It can be done ("low hanging fruit")
3) It isn't being done

But the protesters who are saying
1) It needs to be done
2) It can be done
3) It isn't being done
Are wrong. Christ.
>> No. 446774 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 7:33 pm
446774 spacer
>>446771
Does the government set building regulations?
Did the government indicate who would certify?

>The whole thing is a clusterfuck

Yes. Fortunately we've all learnt our lesson and nobody has ever came out with outlandish proposals to 'insulate Britain' again. The end.
>> No. 446775 Anonymous
6th October 2021
Wednesday 8:38 pm
446775 spacer

epc.png
446775446775446775
>>446770
> we have no legislation addressing their insulation needs.

That is not completely true.

Currently rental properties must have an EPC rating of at least E, but there is noise about that changing to C from 2025 (https://www.lettingaproperty.com/landlord/blog/epc-certificates-2021/).

I am renting a 230-year-old stone cottage with an EPC rating of D, and according to the report (see left) it will cost at least £4000 to reach a C rating.
>> No. 446779 Anonymous
7th October 2021
Thursday 3:05 pm
446779 spacer
>>446771

So landlords are even worse wankers than we think they are.

Just extending right to buy to private rentals would go a long way to preventing these parasites ruining lives
>> No. 446790 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 10:51 am
446790 spacer
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/can_you_confirm_if_an_ambulance?nocache=incoming-1892768#incoming-1892768
FOI request shows that no ambulances were blocked on the day people keep claiming they were.

>By way of advice and assistance, please note that there were no reports
of any incidents noted under the category “Transport delays” in our
incident reporting system, DATIX, occurring on Monday 4^th October 2021.

>There were also no delays noted with the Duty Incident Delivery Manager(IDM)
>> No. 446791 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 11:11 am
446791 spacer
>>446790

Why should we trust the word of the government?
>> No. 446792 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 11:20 am
446792 spacer
>>446790
So the paramedic was an actor, like the redhead at that Sarah Everard protest?
>> No. 446795 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 12:12 pm
446795 spacer
>>446792
Something about her makes me irrationally annoyed. I know she wasn't just there in her capacity as an actor, but it's the idea that she very likely absolutely fucking loved the attention, but then you'd never catch her admitting it unless you were a close mate. I also don't like Essex accents but that's just me.
>> No. 446796 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 12:14 pm
446796 spacer
>>446795
She's still milking it for as much as it's worth.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/06/fifty-police-officers-contacted-woman-arrested-at-sarah-everard-vigil-on-tinder
>> No. 446799 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 12:26 pm
446799 spacer
>>446791

Is the London Ambulance Service NHS Trust the government?
>> No. 446801 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 12:34 pm
446801 spacer
>>446796
Yeah, that's where I saw her most recently as well.

Don't you have to swipe on people to talk to them? Wouldn't she have had to swipe on these people with "I'm a policeman" in their bio and wearing police kit in their pictures?
>> No. 446802 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 1:16 pm
446802 spacer
>>446801
You can see who liked you if you get a paid profile. Although I find the idea that the security services hack tinder so they can give protesters a good seeing to a bit suspect, you'd never get a business case approved for Netflix.

Although I'm not saying a fair bit of shagging between protesters and police doesn't go on. Just that as a bloke I swipe profiles without thinking and then decide to message who I like.
>> No. 446803 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 1:26 pm
446803 spacer
>>446802

There's a "Share profile" button too so you can send it to your mates. Her side of the story holds up despite all the people whose instant reaction is to imply she's lying.

If they're actually police working in a concerted effort to intimidate her or if they're just some random trolls, or even just one, is less clear.
>> No. 446804 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 1:28 pm
446804 spacer
>>446802
I reckon one officer stumbled across her profile by chance and decided to share it with his police chums on something like WhatsApp. Either that or she's wildly exaggerating. I've no idea if police officers, security guards too as she's included them to inflate the numbers, tend to use a shot of themselves in uniform as their dating profile pictures.
>> No. 446805 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 3:21 pm
446805 spacer
>>446804

>I've no idea if police officers, security guards too as she's included them to inflate the numbers, tend to use a shot of themselves in uniform as their dating profile pictures.

Police officers aren't supposed to, but everyone does it because the uniform is a fanny magnet.
>> No. 446806 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 3:43 pm
446806 spacer
>>446804
>I reckon one officer stumbled across her profile by chance and decided to share it with his police chums
That exactly the implication, I'm not sure where you lot are getting the idea she thinks it was hacked by them. It's no less targeted harassment if so.
>> No. 446809 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 4:23 pm
446809 spacer
>>446803
It's not that I don't believe her, I just thought she had to swipe as well to talk to them. Is she just complaining that men who are police officers have swiped on her, an attractive redhead?

>Her side of the story holds up despite all the people whose instant reaction is to imply she's lying.
Calm down.

>>446806
>I'm not sure where you lot are getting the idea she thinks it was hacked by them
I'm not either, where did that come from?
>> No. 446810 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 4:40 pm
446810 spacer
>>446803
Yeah but nobody uses the share button and doing it sounds like complete bollocks. What, is her profile picture of her in the newspaper getting manhandled by police? Do you not think she might be jumping to conclusions here?
>> No. 446814 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 4:53 pm
446814 spacer
>>446809

>Is she just complaining that men who are police officers have swiped on her, an attractive redhead?
Can you just read the article then you wouldn't have to keep asking stupid questions?
>> No. 446815 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 4:55 pm
446815 spacer
>>446810
Do you often get large numbers of men in uniform swiping right on you?
>> No. 446819 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 5:23 pm
446819 spacer
>>446815
I'd say the largest group of likes I get is from medical professionals, unless my GP has been talking about my cock I doubt there's a conspiracy at work. Anyway, her evidence would be to go to tinder and reveal the grand conspiracy to shag the fishing out of her given the claim she's making.
>> No. 446820 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 5:58 pm
446820 spacer
>>446819

I do too. I thought it might have been something about me, attracting those who feel compelled to look after the weak and vulnerable, but the more I think about it, the more obvious it is that it's probably just that nurses and the like find it harder to meet people in other contexts, what with the shift work and all.
>> No. 446821 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 6:21 pm
446821 spacer
>>446814
Don't be a daft cunt. It was clearly incredulous, because that is precisely what she's complaining about. You can't select who you arrive on on tinder, unless it's changed more in the last few years. There's nothing to indicate that she isn't milking this for exposure, which is a completely rational thing to do considering her profession, so if there is really nothing more to the complaint than "Police officers aren't specifically avoiding swiping on my tinder profile", then she's likely in this for her own interests.

>>446815
Do you often get large numbers of anyone swiping on you? I don't think anyone in this thread has experience as a fit girl on tinder unless they've been roleplaying.
>> No. 446822 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 6:22 pm
446822 spacer
>>446815
She's an attractive woman in London on Tinder. It's likely hundreds of men swipe right on her every day, so for all we know it's the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon in action. It could be sheer hubris on her part to assume that people can identify her as the woman from the protest based on her Tinder profile, although she does seem narcissistic enough to have it as a profile picture; her Twitter account has a picture of it pinned.
>> No. 446825 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 6:58 pm
446825 spacer
>>446820
I don't know about that, my other groups are probably teachers and PhD students with nurses being largely absent. There's a kind of woman who likes me and I have to accept that my relationships have a forbidden mother-son vibe to them, I just have to accept it.
>> No. 446829 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 11:46 pm
446829 spacer
>>446825

It's overwhelmingly nurses that match with me, and occasionally doctors and general care workers. The remainder is HR and admin types. It's at the point where I'm primed to find someone with a different job more attractive, just because I can't stand to have another conversation about shift patterns.
>> No. 446830 Anonymous
9th October 2021
Saturday 11:49 pm
446830 spacer
>>446822

It could be anything but what she says it is, apparently. Not that she'd know about her usual tinder matches as well as you do, of course.
>> No. 446831 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 12:26 am
446831 spacer
>>446830
You don't seem to understand. I believe her when she says she's had police offers swipe her profile. But that's absolutely not newsworthy, and if she feels intimidated by that then it's her problem. As has been pointed out, firstly she's assuming they all know exactly who she is, and then also that they are not only not avoiding swiping on her for respect of her boundaries (how is anyone meant to know not to swipe her), but also when they are swiping on her, it's with the prime intent of making her feel uncomfortable.

That's mental. I believe her, because she's milking this as much as she can. Sometimes you have to call a bint a bint.
>> No. 446832 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 12:34 am
446832 spacer

>> No. 446834 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 9:19 am
446834 spacer
>>446831
No mate, I can see what you're getting at, it's just daft.
>firstly she's assuming they all know exactly who she is
How is this a serious point? Yes, the majority of police officers are going to know who she is. They're just as involved with the news and social media as anyone else.
>(how is anyone meant to know not to swipe her)
By not having aspergers. Basic common sense, common decency. When someone's clearly going to be afraid of you, don't approach them.
>also when they are swiping on her, it's with the prime intent of making her feel uncomfortable.
"I only slapped her arse as a joke, everyone thought it was funny, I don't know why HR have to be dragged into this".


>that's absolutely not newsworthy
I agree, but that's the journalist's decision.
>> No. 446835 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 9:30 am
446835 spacer
>>446834

I don't fucking know who the fuck you two are on about, and I don't see how if I was a copper it would be any different. If anything being a copper would mean I'm even more of a dense ignorant twat than I already am.

Stop being such a bloody simp. I hate to use that word but it's appropriate here. She's a woman, and if you've ever had a lassm8 let you go on her tinder, you will know that literally every single man you swipe will be a match. Having coppers match her on tinder is not noteworthy in any way shape or form.

At the most generous I can possibly be, and giving the benefit of the doubt as to her good faith (which I sincerely doubt), the apparent assumption here is a paranoid "why is that van parked on my street" kind of stoner delusion, where the answer is: because the owner of the van lives on your street.

You're only standing up for her because oh no the poor precious women who must be valiantly defended on the internet. You are a sexist. The worst kind of sexist. You're practically on part with early 2010s PUAs except you think you're actually the goodie.
>> No. 446836 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 9:35 am
446836 spacer
>>446832
That's hilarious, but I can't believe their algorithm doesn't detect someone who swipes right on everything. Probably a bit more difficult to detect them doing it with a wiener, I agree.
>> No. 446837 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 9:52 am
446837 spacer
>>446835

>I don't see how if I was a copper it would be any different. If anything being a copper would mean I'm even more of a dense ignorant twat than I already am.
If your colleagues had their faces in the national news for weeks on end because they all beat up a woman, there were internal and external investigations because of it and your boss was facing calls for resignation over it, even you would be aware of that and the circumstances.

>(which I sincerely doubt)
This is exactly the point. Multiple, contradictory and entirely unsubstantiated reasons being given to doubt her raised in this thread. You're not even capable of admitting it might be true without qualifying it with doubt. These aren't reasonable doubts, they're making assumptions and inferences based on people not understanding how Tinder works and what you personally believe her inbox looks like. Maybe she is just being paranoid, but when someone who's previously been victimised by a particular group which already has form and motivation to bother her more, reaching to come up with all sorts of petty reasons to disbelieve them is stupid. She's not the one with a report calling her "institutionally corrupt".

>Rah rah rah it's YOU who is the sexist
No, this is coming from a place of distrusting the police more than anything. I don't think I'd get on with her as a person.
>> No. 446838 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:12 am
446838 spacer
>>446837

>No, this is coming from a place of distrusting the police more than anything. I don't think I'd get on with her as a person.

Well fair enough, but even so, you're really bending over backwards to feign ignorance about how tinder works in order to have a sound argument. The reality is most men are just swiping right without a second thought, they've swiped before they have even visually processed the image they are looking at. I'm pretty sure anyone who has used Tinder can relate to the feeling of swiping on somebody you know, and only realising what you've done after you did it.

I'm not saying any of this to defend the police, and as I said I don't even know who this lass is, I just think it's really stretching it to say that a Tinder like is deliberate harassment no matter who you are.
>> No. 446839 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:19 am
446839 spacer
>>446838

I'm not feigning ignorance about it, just that if she says the number of people wearing their police uniforms giving her likes is suspect then I'm not going to instantly start trying to come up with reasons why she must be wrong or lying. It's her inbox, she'd know better than us.
She could be wrong, but that shop shutter could be less than 26 years old and nobody was posting about how it was probably replaced in the middle of the night five years ago.
>> No. 446840 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 11:37 am
446840 spacer
Usually the general consensus on here is that coppers are bastards and you can't trust them, but if a woman says she has a problem with them then she's making it up for attention?
>> No. 446841 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:02 pm
446841 spacer
>>446840
This place has longstanding issues with women. The boards can be completely dead but if the opportunity to have a pop at women comes up people start insidiously creeping out of the woodwork.
>> No. 446842 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:04 pm
446842 spacer
>>446840

I'm not questioning the claim that she got a lot of swipes from police officers and security guards, but the idea that it's targeted harassment just isn't plausible. Tinder chooses who to show you, not the other way around, so these men didn't seek out Stevenson. Most men swipe right on just about everyone without thinking, so an attractive young woman will be liked by close to 100% of people who see their profile. Unless her profile picture was that photo that was in the papers, most coppers simply wouldn't have made the connection in the split second between seeing a photo of an attractive woman and swiping right.

If someone went to a speed dating night and claimed that they were being harassed because people kept trying to chat them up, we wouldn't give that claim much credence because that's literally the point. It's entirely plausible that Tinder's algorithm inadvertently showed her profile to an unusually large proportion of coppers because the poor little dimwitted AI thought "you spend a lot of time around coppers so you must really like them", but the idea that this was a deliberate intimidation campaign just doesn't fit with the facts.
>> No. 446843 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:17 pm
446843 spacer
>>446842
>Tinder chooses who to show you, not the other way around, so these men didn't seek out Stevenson.
As it says in the article and has been repeated in this thread, there is a share profile option.
>> No. 446844 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:28 pm
446844 spacer
>>446840
It's generally pretty even. Also I'm not sure how it skews, but I imagine we have roughly the same amount of people posting from London as from the rest of the UK, so probably a bit of bias against the met as they're one of the worst forces by reputation, but then all the others seem to be a lot better.

>>446841
You're right there, possibly for the same reason so many of our posters are clearly sperglords or suicidally depressed or actors in perpetual rest. I think it does get well tempered though, see the emo mainthread discussion on fisherpersons and how that got addressed.

It seems unavoidable - this is a community of mainly middle aged, weird men who obsess over pedantry and have an active thread with hundreds of posts of Carol Vorderman. And I wouldn't want to change that for the world. I'd absolutely not object to more women, but they'd have to behave 'like us' as such, which women generally don't do. Neither do men, but it's even rarer with women. Also there's the idea that people here will regularly pretend to be other posters to further piss someone off (potentially themselves). We're just a weird bunch of cunts.

>>446835
>No mate, I can see what you're getting at, it's just daft.
I'm not saying anything categorically - she'd need to provide some evidence to back up her claim, because this is very arguably entirely in her head, and we've not seen what she's seen.
>By not having aspergers. Basic common sense, common decency. When someone's clearly going to be afraid of you, don't approach them.
So now lack of common sense from your swiper when guessing whether or not you want to be swiped on tinder by them is a reason to feel harassed? How are they do know she's clearly to be afraid of them unless she's specifically stated it? How do they know it's definitely her? We'd need to see her tinder.

>>446837
>Multiple, contradictory and entirely unsubstantiated
Multiple yeah, but contradictory and unsubstantiated?

1) Tinder is opt-in for communication.
2) You cannot choose whose profile you come across.
3) Men swipe on everything.
4) Policemen are men.
5) None of these police officers have made any contact with her.
6) Her income is directly tied to her public profile and exposure.

Reasonable Assumptions:

1) She was not paying attention to the number of coppers swiping her before.
2) It's not immediately obvious from her profile that it's "that redhead". We need to actually see her tinder because it's possible she's actually got that photo as her profile in which case then I would probably be a bit more on your side of things.
3) There is not a conspiracy among the police to harass this woman via swiping on her tinder profile when it comes up that one time for each officer.
4) She has not specifically stated on her profile, or on any platform which one would reasonably be expected to be aware of, that she doesn't want to be swiped by cops on her tinder.
5) There are no more police swiping her after the incident than there were before. She is an attractive redhead in London, she would have been an instant swipe for male cops before.
6) The otherlad calling you the worst kind of sexist and is perhaps proof in point of what we're saying - with nowt else to go on, he's assumed your motive based on his own bias, despite you having a reasonable doubt extraneous to those biases.

>>446839
It's not coming up with reasons she's wrong, again (I think) no-one has said she's lying about cops swiping on her. It's just that it's a non-issue and without any evidence, there's no way of distinguishing it from normal activity. People are notoriously prone to confirmation bias, and so I need to actually see the data. And there will be data on this, so until it's produced I'm going to agree that she shouldn't feel harassed, but I'm going to doubt she is being actively targeted *on tinder*.

It's not about women, it's not about cops, it's just about "This story sounds a bit bollocks because x y z". That's it, it's not about any of the factions at all, this is about autists looking into stories in far more detail than they warrant.

>>446839
Because that shutter wasn't arguably doing their little bit to stoke a culture war for the sake of their own exposure.
>> No. 446845 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:34 pm
446845 spacer
>>446843
Oh, ffs. I didn't parse this properly before - so you can literally point someone at a particular profile. I really don't want to be taken in bad faith, I genuinely missed that. I'll acknowledge that's clearly a means by which it could have happened, but simply because a door exists, it doesn't mean it's being used.

If she wasn't an actress, if she wasn't recreating her arrest pose in tiktok videos, if she wasn't going with the Guardian photographer to get her posing next to the memorial, if she hadn't been quite clearly using this to her own benefit, I'd have more sympathy. But I wouldn't be any more inclined to believe that she is correct about being specifically targeted.
>> No. 446846 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:40 pm
446846 spacer

1_vordermanJPG.jpg
446846446846446846
>>446844
>an active thread with hundreds of posts of Carol Vorderman

I've knocked that on the head now. Vorders made a video talking about 9/11 and I just found it so self absorbed that I've finally reached my limit with her. She's still posting pictures of her body like it's going out of fashion, though.
>> No. 446847 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:51 pm
446847 spacer
>>446846
Is that on her onlyfans or something? Can't see it on twitter and the only thing Google brings up for 'Carol Vorderman 9/11' is some wanking manual disguised as a key stage two maths book.
>> No. 446848 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 1:57 pm
446848 spacer
>>446847
She posted it on Instagram about a month ago, but it looks like she's since deleted it.
>> No. 446849 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 3:23 pm
446849 spacer
>>446844
>mainly middle aged
?
>> No. 446850 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 4:23 pm
446850 spacer
>>446844
>this is a community of mainly middle aged, weird men who obsess over pedantry and have an active thread with hundreds of posts of Carol Vorderman. And I wouldn't want to change that for the world.

In the Vorderman stakes we are rank amateurs, 176 pages of Vorderman can be found here - https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/carol-vorderman.289884/
>> No. 446851 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 4:37 pm
446851 spacer
>>446845

Depends what you mean by specifically targeted. If it's the case that fifty cops happened to individually come across her profile and think it was appropriate to try and contact her, even to just sincerely tell her how sorry they were about it and that they're on her side, that's incredibly inappropriate and unprofessional. Maybe some of them swiped her completely unknowingly. But that doesn't seem very likely.
>> No. 446852 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 6:15 pm
446852 spacer
>>446836
>I can't believe their algorithm doesn't detect someone who swipes right on everything

It does and you get shadowbanned for it. The trick is to not swipe for a week, the algorithm freaks out and you can get 2-3 matches from being top of the deck.

>>446851
>But that doesn't seem very likely.

Yes it does. This is basic Occam's razor.

Plus she's a thespian so it's in her nature to be a useless drama queen with a chip in her shoulder about the boys keeping us safe.
>> No. 446857 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:23 pm
446857 spacer
>>446841

This place dies not have "longstanding issues with women", it's just a mostly male space which are few and far between nowadays. It's a safe space, of tou will, in which men feel safe to speak frankly about their experiences with women. Naturally a lot of those experiences are going to be negative, that's just human life for you.

You don't go on mumsnet or r/fisherfolk and complain about how they're always moaning about men. I don't we have any genuine John Wayne Gacy types here, so it's fine.
>> No. 446858 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:36 pm
446858 spacer
>>446857
Of all the serial killers you could have chosen John Wayne Gacy had the fewest "problems with women".
>> No. 446859 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:40 pm
446859 spacer
>>446852

The most simple explanation is that some police shared it around with other cops, not that all this other shit you're bending over backwards to imply.
>> No. 446860 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:41 pm
446860 spacer
>>446858

I don't actually know who any of em are to be honest, my missus just always has those true crime docs on.
>> No. 446861 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:43 pm
446861 spacer

David-Cameron-laughs.jpg
446861446861446861
>>446857
>This place dies not have "longstanding issues with women"
>> No. 446862 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:57 pm
446862 spacer
I read that BBC story about Patsy Stevenson getting targeted harassment by police officers on Tinder and I wondered how it could be possible if you have to swipe right for someone to talk to you.

Then I saw she had tweeted that she paid for Tinder Gold and could see who had liked her, and they hadn't contacted her but fifty of them had showed up in her list all at once in uniform, and I thought "oh, OK then".

Then I come here, and see some of you just automatically assume she's a mental bint and it's all in her head. Fucking hell lads? Have a word with yourselves.
>> No. 446863 Anonymous
10th October 2021
Sunday 10:57 pm
446863 spacer
>>446860
Well, for the record his problem was teenage boys.

If we have any teenageboykillerlads here please stop, you aren't preventing climate change or whatever this thread's about now and the mods can't even fix the YouTube embed problem so there's no way they'll handle a murder investigation.
>> No. 446865 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:23 am
446865 spacer
>>446862
I couldn't find it on the BBC article but on twitter where she clarified it. Which seems odd as she's directly quoted as saying that she was contacted but now it's that she used tinder gold to look at her matches. My what webs some people spin.

She's also whinging that an ambulance siren startled her and some bloke laughed at her for it.
>> No. 446866 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 1:38 am
446866 spacer
>>446862

The seed of don't was sewn by the fact she's changed her story, or the press have reported it wrongly and then changed their story, whichever the case may be. Either way something doesn't add up.

It's not just that we all instantly want to think t worst of her because hurr wimmin, no matter how much better it makes you feel about yourself to think that.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 446867 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 7:48 am
446867 spacer
>>446866
"Something doesn't add up". Fuck me you're right this is the scandal of the century. Woodward and Bernstein you lot are.

Isn't it possible that what she says happened happened, and the press just didn't report it very well? Why this conspiracy bullshit? Why so difficult to give her the benefit of the doubt?
>> No. 446868 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 8:04 am
446868 spacer
>>446867
>Isn't it possible that what she says happened happened, and the press just didn't report it very well?

The post you're replying to (>>446866) already lists that as one of the possibilities.
>> No. 446869 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 8:05 am
446869 spacer
>>446867
>Why this conspiracy bullshit? Why so difficult to give her the benefit of the doubt?

Because she's a woman. Well worth a 50+ post discussion
>> No. 446872 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 11:00 am
446872 spacer
Brainwormlad, are you a prophet?

>>446867
>Why so difficult to give her the benefit of the doubt?

1) Her career is directly related to her exposure.
2) She's already attempted to milk her connection to the protest for exposure on tiktok.
3) She went to the Guardian about some of the people on her tinder being policemen.

None of these things are to do with her being a woman. In fact all of this would have been perfectly normal discussion had we been talking about a man. But because certain people are anticipating that this particular scrutiny is motivated by her gender rather than anything else, they're directing the topic towards gender and away from anything of substance, successfully culminating in bollocks posts like this:

>"Something doesn't add up". Fuck me you're right this is the scandal of the century. Woodward and Bernstein you lot are.

It boils my piss seeing such a transparent and obvious attempt at deflection go unchallenged. Because it's not the scandal of the century, they can't point out some perceived incongruity and discuss it?

>>446869
I think I can fairly state that if she had been a man, the sentiment of 'This story sounds a complete non-issue and a molehill if that' would have flown by without challenge. But because she's a woman, despite that not being the founding basis of any of the reasoning raised so far, it's gone on because some morons are so ready to be polarised they're practically inviting it by immediately jumping in to challenge imagined biases and distract from simply saying "This sounds like nowt".

Again, I don't think anyone is calling her a liar in this thread, just that it's tilting at windmills.
>> No. 446873 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 11:17 am
446873 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6Zv4ysgb3A
>> No. 446874 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 11:19 am
446874 spacer
>>446872
>1) Her career is directly related to her exposure.
No it isn't, that's pure conjecture. As it stands, her imdb shows no acting credits either before or after the vigil. That's not a career and it's done nothing for it. The fact she put "acting" as something she's interested in doing on a profile somewhere means nothing. You're directly adjacent to the people claiming it means she's a crisis actor.
>2) She's already attempted to milk her connection to the protest for exposure on tiktok.
Young person uses social media to discuss life experiences shocker.
>3) She went to the Guardian about some of the people on her tinder being policemen.
She did not, the BBC went to her for a follow-up interview after the Couzen's verdict and this was one of the things she mentioned in the course of it.

So far the brainworms have said
1) She must have swiped right on the police to see they'd swiped her (wrong)
2) She was saying they hacked tinder (one of you made that up entirely)
3) There's no way to share profiles with people (wrong again)
4) Police don't wear their uniforms on tinder profiles (also wrong)
5) We know what her inbox looks like better than she does because she's a woman and has red hair (no)
6) There's no way to share profiles with people (still wrong)
7) She's doing it for exposure for her career (demonstrably no causal connection)
8) She uses social media (so do you)
9) She's the one initiating contact with journalists (wrong and stupid)

What's your next hypothesis? Come on, reach further.
>> No. 446875 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 11:22 am
446875 spacer

The Yorkshire troubles.png
446875446875446875
>>446866
>think t worst of her
>(A good day to you Sir!)

Wor otherlad banned fer Yorkshireism?
>> No. 446876 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 11:33 am
446876 spacer
>>446874
>The fact she put "acting" as something she's interested in doing on a profile somewhere means nothing. You're directly adjacent to the people claiming it means she's a crisis actor.
https://www.castingnow.co.uk/patsy-stevenson
Dead link now but people who don't have an interest in making money from acting tend not to create casting profiles. What does she do for money? I'm all ears if she's got a career and has no ambition in the media, but if she can benefit materially from this then I am immediately more inclined to view her with suspicion.

Claiming she is an intentional crisis actor is not the same as claiming she is a fortunate person exploiting a situation in their favour. They are very different thing and you're simply exposing your own biases by being so ready to conflate these things for the sake of a gotcha. Don't be stupid.

>She did not, the BBC went to her for a follow-up interview after the Couzen's verdict and this was one of the things she mentioned in the course of it.
Thanks. This is what's called a 'conversation' wherein we share information. You're getting it now mate, it's not all about tripping people up and gotchas, I appreciate that information. It would have been great if you could have presented it like that before, but unfortunately you were too bogged down in your clapbacks.

>Young person uses social media to discuss life experiences shocker.
That's a reason. It doesn't preclude someone from judgement though. You're giving her a lot of good faith here, and wondering why people are doing the opposite?

You're also clearly conversing in bad faith here, as you're referencing things which have been addressed already and agreed on, such as 'there being no way to share tinder profiles'. While everyone else was figuring out that we all have used tinder at different times, and updating the others on the fact that this feature exists, you have ignored that in favour of bringing up bollocks we've already gone past PURELY to drag things back to the quagmire in which you wallow.

You can leave this conversation mate, you're actively dragging it down. The crux is that people are suspicious of her story, and you're bending over backwards to conject that she's sincere and correct, while calling out people who are conjecting in the opposite direction. No-one gets that level of trust on here, unless on a whim.
>> No. 446877 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 11:44 am
446877 spacer
>>446876
>What does she do for money?
Why don't you look it up? She's a physics student, or was at the time of the vigil.
>They are very different thing
They are, but you feel the same "gotcha" as the people claiming that when you see someone claim that she's an actor.
>I appreciate that information. It would have been great if you could have presented it like that before
It would have been great if you'd read the Guardian article you brought up where it says that.
>you're bending over backwards to conject
It's pretty clear you've come into this with your mind already made up and are just looking for excuses to support it.
>You're giving her a lot of good faith here, and wondering why people are doing the opposite?
I'm not wondering anything.
>> No. 446878 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:15 pm
446878 spacer
Tinder profiles can be shared. Do you think it could just be some police lads whatsapp group sharing her profile: "hey look this is that protestor, wonder if she's up for it".
>> No. 446879 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:20 pm
446879 spacer
>>446877
>Why don't you look it up? She's a physics student, or was at the time of the vigil.
Because you're willing to do it for me.
>They are, but you feel the same "gotcha" as the people claiming that when you see someone claim that she's an actor.
Then maybe acknowledge that they are before you invite someone else to remind you that you're talking amongst mildly intelligent and should approach them as such.
>It would have been great if you'd read the Guardian article you brought up where it says that.
I did, and I didn't understand what that part meant. Thankfully some other posters on here weren't intent on 'Winning' this discussion and were happy to point out the misunderstanding.

They were willing to explain, instead of repeatedly bringing up the same misunderstanding several posts after it has already been clearly resolved.

>I'm not wondering anything.
It's pretty clear you've come into this with your mind already made up and are just looking for excuses to support it.

Ooh, stinger.
>> No. 446880 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:21 pm
446880 spacer
Fuck me, this place really does wake up when there's an opportunity to argue about the intentions of a woman, doesn't it?!
>> No. 446881 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:23 pm
446881 spacer
>>446879

Maybe stop expressing strong opinions on things you know you don't understand?
>> No. 446883 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:30 pm
446883 spacer
>>446880
>Fuck me, this place really does wake up when there's an opportunity to argue about the intentions of a woman, doesn't it?!
It's more the pushback I don't get. A conversation about a man would never have had this amount of the shipping forecast.

>>446881
It's pretty clear you've come into this with your mind already made up and are just looking for excuses to support it.
>> No. 446884 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:31 pm
446884 spacer
>>446883

Go accuse the Huddersfield shop shutter of lying about its age for attention and monetary gain.
>> No. 446885 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:38 pm
446885 spacer
>>446884
Okay. Now what? In my opinion the shutter is milking it for exposure.
>> No. 446886 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:42 pm
446886 spacer
Strange, no-one's come charging in to defend the shutter. Maybe calling the shutter an exposure whore didn't trigger anyone for some strange, unknowable reason. How thoroughly bizarre. I'm going to go listen to the shipping forecast and see if the feedback has stopped.
>> No. 446887 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 12:56 pm
446887 spacer
>>446886

Why would anyone defend it when you're clearly being facetious?
>> No. 446888 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 1:53 pm
446888 spacer
>>446883

>A conversation about a man would never have had this amount of the shipping forecast

True. Didn't someone claim Andy Murray was lying for attention/further his career this week, and nobody rushed to his defence.
>> No. 446889 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 3:00 pm
446889 spacer
>>446888
I don’t know what you virgins are arguing about itt, but I was right about that and I will cut down any man who claims otherwise.
>> No. 446890 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 4:56 pm
446890 spacer
>>446884

I am actually fairly sure people did call bullshit on that story in that very thread, so I'm not sure what your point is here. If I'm remembering right (and I remember everything that happens on this site, near enough) several lads questioned why 26 years was a noteworthy age for a shutter and why that was significant, suggesting the business owners had made it up for attention, and so on; which is actually pretty much exactly what started off this shitshow regarding Tinder.
>> No. 446893 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 5:47 pm
446893 spacer
>>446874
You seem to have gone quite quiet.
>> No. 446896 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 6:14 pm
446896 spacer
>>446872

>Brainwormlad, are you a prophet?

I distinctly remember talking about all this as far back as 2012ish, and only now are people beginning to heed my word.
>> No. 446900 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 7:08 pm
446900 spacer
>>446890

Same as with the articles, you can very easily look at it right now and see that's not accurate.

>>446893

What?
>> No. 446901 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 7:21 pm
446901 spacer

dotgeeess.png
446901446901446901
>>446900

>Same as with the articles, you can very easily look at it right now and see that's not accurate.

But it is though. Look, I'll even save you the effort of actually browsing over, this is probably ~20 posts in.
>> No. 446902 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 7:23 pm
446902 spacer
>>446901

I don't see anything about
>suggesting the business owners had made it up for attention, and so on
Just questions about how you'd verify it.
>> No. 446903 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 7:31 pm
446903 spacer
>>446902
Read between the lines.
>> No. 446904 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 7:34 pm
446904 spacer
>>446903

I'm not really in the mood to play make-believe.
>> No. 446905 Anonymous
11th October 2021
Monday 8:22 pm
446905 spacer
>>446904
It's pretty clear you've come into this with your mind already made up and are just looking for excuses to support it.
>> No. 446956 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 5:52 pm
446956 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/mar/28/shanna-swan-fertility-reproduction-count-down
According to this lady, the massive decline in fertility is because of all the plastic everywhere.
We just can't seem to stop poisoning ourselves, can we?
>> No. 446957 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 5:55 pm
446957 spacer
>>446956

Literally anything but the worsening material conditions of the people due to widening inequality, wage stagnation, increase in cost of living etc.

I keep seeing people citing concern about the environment as being the reason Millenials aren't breeding. It's not, it's money you utter fuckwits.
>> No. 446958 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 6:11 pm
446958 spacer
>>446957

It's money as well, but
>It’s not that simple. When a colleague and I looked at the change in impaired fecundity [the ability to have children] we were surprised to see younger women had experienced a bigger increase than older age groups. This suggests that something besides ageing and delayed childbearing is affecting fertility.

>Moreover, there’s compelling evidence that the risk of miscarriage has been rising among women of all ages.
>> No. 446959 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 6:26 pm
446959 spacer
>>446957

I'm usually all about the class reductionism but the plastic thing is real too, lad. It's definitely impacting the ecosystem.

Besides breeding less won't do the human species any harm, it's not like there aren't plenty of us already; and being poor as dirt doesn't stop people in developing countries having loads of kids. If anything wealth has an inverse effect on the rates of reproduction.
>> No. 446960 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 6:29 pm
446960 spacer
>>446957

The people at the bottom end of that have more children, not fewer.
>> No. 446994 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 8:09 am
446994 spacer
>>446960
people at the bottom end of society who already have a council flat tend to go on to have a lot of children because they have nothing else to do or are too thick to avoid it.

The middle of society is having far fewer children and those that are tend to be having children later and later in life because they want a decent house and car and other things first.
>> No. 446995 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 8:32 am
446995 spacer
>>446994

The "bottom end" of that is way, way fucking lower than council flat povvos.

Incidentally the only people who have proper actual council flats nowadays are rarely the type of person you associate with the stereotype. Most of the chavs you're thinking of are on the DSS and all that money is just disappearing into the pockets of private landlords, instead of handily back to the government where it used to.

Don't ask me why this country is so obsessed with own-goals like that, but it's the only way our politics can be summarised.
>> No. 447015 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 6:28 pm
447015 spacer
>>446959
>Besides breeding less won't do the human species any harm

Yes it does. It's not just the burden of an aging population that is going to kneecap much of the planet, people innovate or otherwise expand the raw power of human society to do things. I get that environmentalism goes hand-in-hand with viewing humanity as pond-scum but it's not true.

>>446994
For some reason I still think this is still explained in terms of breeding strategy. Middle income upwards have less children because they're highly likely to survive into adulthood and therefore it makes sense to maximise their opportunities with more resources. Not least as economic prosperity is tied to urbanisation and families need space. This conveniently slots into the fall in traditional values where one's success was attached to having lots of children. This is all not just a European thing either, Africa now has sharp divides between urbanised centres and rural populations.

There's talk of Sweden reversing a fertility trap by giving generous support to having children. Paternity leave, daycare etc. But this fell again thanks to the financial crisis. There's also that manager in America who started to pay his workers a decent living wage which caused a sharp spike in births (and general wellbeing) but otherlad was quick to post a twitter account 'debunking' his largess made by some carpet-bagger reeing about how all work needs to be banned.
>> No. 447018 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 7:10 pm
447018 spacer
>>447015

All work does need to be banned but that doesn't contradict the rest.
>> No. 447023 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 8:32 pm
447023 spacer
>>447018
Well, think about it, beyond being a blatant hit-piece against the manager does it unmake the data? High-wages made the workers arrive on time (because California), be more productive and loyal, satisfied and from a wider society standpoint they could afford to fulfil a basic biological function and also spend time with their kids.

There's an ice cubes chance to hell of ever seeing other companies capping wages to provide a decent standard of living for the janitor but it doesn't discredit that ameliorating wage stagnation over the past 50 years wouldn't fix a lot of the problem with our society. Although it would probably have more inflation.
>> No. 447025 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 9:02 pm
447025 spacer
>>447015
>There's also that manager in America who started to pay his workers a decent living wage which caused a sharp spike in births
Is this the rapey bloke that concocted the "pay everyone all the money" as a way to get rid of people who had actually done the work in building the business without paying them off?
>> No. 447030 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 9:47 pm
447030 spacer
>>447015
>people innovate or otherwise expand the raw power of human society to do things
It's interesting that you're taking a purely online-dating mindset to this, and asserting that "people innovate, ergo more people means more chance of innovation". Surely you can entertain that if most of the population weren't busy trying to not die of debt, the same result could be reached?
>> No. 447032 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 10:25 pm
447032 spacer
>>447030
Lad, we're trying not to die of debt right now. The aging population will also make sure of that on a national level.
>> No. 447035 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 1:54 am
447035 spacer
>>447032

The problem there is not with the number of taxpayers, but with the fact we've built the entire economy on a house of cards.

I don't know whether people who parrot this line are wilfully ignorant or just incredibly short sighted, but even a child can see how it's a cycle that only digs us deeper the further we carry on with it. It's exactly the same as taking out a loan to pay off another loan.
>> No. 447037 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 2:31 am
447037 spacer
>>447035
No, people are valuable resource and a great ingredient to solve the challenges of climate change. You can whinge about maximising the use of the people we have with a magic wand but we objectively live in a universe deficient in people and where they provide all sorts of benefits.

As this is the designated environmentalist dumping ground I'll point out that humanity has done a great job in a matter of a few decades in entirely reworking how we think of man's place in the environment. We've got a great future ahead with space, a bucket of options for future power that are attainable and every industry is having waves of changes from how we farm to how teach. A child wouldn't agree with you because a child isn't a bitter pessimist that hates humanity.
>> No. 447039 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 2:41 am
447039 spacer
>>447037

>we objectively live in a universe deficient in people

Unfortunately we only live in one incomprehensibly tiny part of that universe. This statement is only true in the same way the Kowloon walled city existed in a China deficient in people.

>humanity has done a great job in a matter of a few decades in entirely reworking how we think of man's place in the environment

... I'm sorry but what? Would you mind telling me which alternate timeline you came from, so I can move there? We are very much still on a collision course with complete environmental breakdown, all we have done is shuffle the responsibility around.

Mankind's approach to environmentalism has largely been like when your mam used to tell you to clean your room and you'd just shove everything in one corner or under the bed.
>> No. 447040 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 2:49 am
447040 spacer
>>447037

You did a great job entirely sidestepping the actual argument there lad.

You don't have to hate humanity to understand that we can't perpetually rely on increasing population to pay pensions, that's pretty simple. I don't think it even had anything to do with the environment.
>> No. 447041 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 3:13 am
447041 spacer
I'm always impressed by how these arguments play out. What ought to be a fairly dry conversation about the availability of capital and labour, the efficiency with which one can substitute for the other, and how each choice impacts on living standards and so on often takes on the tones of a churchie and a youtube athiest arguing about birth control.
>> No. 447042 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 3:29 am
447042 spacer
>>447035

>The problem there is not with the number of taxpayers, but with the fact we've built the entire economy on a house of cards.

Exactly this. We have a generation who voted for successive governments who promised them more in pension benefits than they ever paid in tax. I don't know if they were honestly fooled or thought they were in on the con, but fulfilling those promises will condemn several generations to crippling debt.

The idea that we should structure the next two centuries of our society around the petulant demands of a single generation is a moral outrage, akin to intergenerational debt bondage. If people in the developing world were having extra children to pay off the debts of their great-grandparents, we'd immediately recognise it as a horrendous injustice. The only reason we don't see that injustice in our own situation is the fact that the government and media are run by and for the beneficiaries of it.
>> No. 447044 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 4:53 am
447044 spacer
>>447042
The really pernicious part is that state pensions aren't necessarily the biggest issue. My recollection is that our state pension isn't great by first world standards. The nightmare really begins when you remember that pension funds are deeply invested in all the other dysfunctional parts of the economy, leaving you in the sort of situation where you can't just pop the house price bubble because if you do that it won't just be unsympathetic spivs who deserve to go under, it'll also take down your gran because half of her income comes from grandad's workplace pension scheme which is deeply tied up in banks lending to buy to let shysters. More directly there's a quiet trade off between retirees and workers on wages: if workers want higher wages, companies have to eat lower profits, and those profits go to shareholders, i.e. pension funds and eventually pensioners.

The direct transfer from taxpayers to state pensioners is easy to keep track of and makes the trade-offs involved clear enough at election time - the private sector stuff on the other hand is much more opaque and tied up in all kinds of other questions about the power of companies, unions, state interference in the market, global competitiveness, etc.
>> No. 447078 Anonymous
18th October 2021
Monday 6:47 pm
447078 spacer
>>447039
>... I'm sorry but what? Would you mind telling me which alternate timeline you came from, so I can move there? We are very much still on a collision course with complete environmental breakdown, all we have done is shuffle the responsibility around.

We've gone from throwing rubbish into the local environment on the assumption that its a limitless void to one where environmentalism is even a thing. The output of our efforts have ranged from CFCs to even cutting carbon emissions. To say that humanity hasn't made a comprehensive leap on our place in the universe in a very short space of time is ridiculous, it's historically illiterate of even the 1970s.

>>447040
You need a stable or at a minimum a stable yet declining population to maintain a pension system. For a look at how insane that is the replacement rate is 3 children for a couple - how many of families with 3 children do you know? Is it more than the self-absorbed narcissists you know who are skating by a superficial life of cats and fandom?

I know consumerism thrives on an atomised society of individuals who hate themselves and lack any sense of meaning but it's fucked up. People can't even own a home anymore.

>>447042
The alternative is the elderly living in crippling poverty. We decided as a society sometime in the Neolithic that old people have a social value, then found that society should guarantee a minimum standard for a lifetime of work.
>> No. 447082 Anonymous
18th October 2021
Monday 7:10 pm
447082 spacer
>>447078

>People can't even own a home anymore.

Now you're starting to get it. How many people can afford a house, let alone a house as well as three kids?

>We decided as a society sometime in the Neolithic that old people have a social value

Bollocks, in those days you didn't live long enough to be old in the same way we do today. In Japan they used to carry their old people into the woods and leave them to die instead of being a burden on the group.
>> No. 447083 Anonymous
18th October 2021
Monday 8:12 pm
447083 spacer
>>447082
Which means there's something systematically wrong, not that having children is wrong. Children even provide prosperity and security for both the parents and wider society.

>Bollocks, in those days you didn't live long enough to be old in the same way we do today. In Japan they used to carry their old people into the woods and leave them to die instead of being a burden on the group.

Yeah nah. Grandparents have value, they are killed by their families even today but we kill all sorts of people. Only a bad grandson could come up with such an argument.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-evolution-of-grandparents-2012-12-07/
>> No. 447084 Anonymous
18th October 2021
Monday 8:32 pm
447084 spacer
>>447083

Neither does it mean that having more children will magically fix the situation, genius. This isn't rocket science.
>> No. 447090 Anonymous
18th October 2021
Monday 10:58 pm
447090 spacer
>>447078

>We decided as a society sometime in the Neolithic that old people have a social value, then found that society should guarantee a minimum standard for a lifetime of work.

Until 1908, any old person who didn't have the means to support themselves only had recourse to the workhouse. Between 1911 and 1975, there was a clear contributions-based system - you paid your National Insurance contributions into a collective pot that would eventually fund your state pension.

That system was intentionally changed by the people who are currently or just about to retire. Rather than providing for their own retirement, they chose to cut their taxes, increase public spending and let someone else worry about how to fund their pensions. We are that someone else, as is everyone who will be born during this century.

The elderly and soon-to-be-elderly chose in their youth to abandon a system that guaranteed their future security and gambled their futures on our goodwill. It was their decision, re-iterated under both Labour and Conservative governments. It was their choice to sell the family silver and eat the seedcorn.

If your grandparents ran up massive debts to spend on frivolous luxuries, would you expect to be burdened with that debt after their death? Would you consider it fair that you should be doomed to poverty because of their profligacy? Would you humbly accept that burden as your social duty? That's the situation our society is in now.

A 67-year-old who has never worked a day in their life is entitled to three times more cash from the welfare system than an 18-year-old who grew up in care and is trying to get through college. That's not justice, it's intergenerational robbery.
>> No. 447093 Anonymous
18th October 2021
Monday 11:44 pm
447093 spacer
>>447090
Luckily, we have brave heroes of the people like Michael Parkinson doing those adverts to redress the balance. We can all play our part; just offer them a free Parker pen and they'll fall for any old shit.
>> No. 447094 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 12:10 am
447094 spacer
>>447090
>That system was intentionally changed by the people who are currently or just about to retire. Rather than providing for their own retirement, they chose to cut their taxes, increase public spending and let someone else worry about how to fund their pensions. We are that someone else, as is everyone who will be born during this century.

Come off it, lad. Let's not play this intergenerational game like we're in the comments section of buzzfeed. Getting mad at the old is a trap to divide people and avoid the realisation that in actuality the old put a fuck load into the world we now live in but got shafted like we're being. The elderly get bennies because they need to live and despite your railing against the New Poor Law it isn't the totality of humanity, it's a poorly implemented policy from 1834.

And we're now at the age where those meddling kids are starting to blame us for everything wrong in the world and we can see our own parents trying to balance their meagre pensions. Do you really want some Gen-Z fresh off a youtube binge mumble some vague nonsense about how he doesn't have cat-girls because you invaded Iraq?
>> No. 447095 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 12:31 am
447095 spacer
>>447090
I'm not a fan of this line of argument. Reading it getting as something like "cut state pensions and bugger the elderly, they should've known it was an irresponsible system anyway." It strikes me as deeply unfair: the mistakes of the 1970s, 80s, 90s didn't just take the form of a (not all that generous) pension system. The people who're doing really well out of selling the family silver and scoffing the seed corn won't care half as much for their state pension as they do for their buy to let empire of ex-council flats and their share portfolio kickstarted by some underpriced former nationalised utilities. You can cut state pensions to nothing, but not even cats live often enough for you to claw back the tax they saved going from the 70p top rate to a 30p top rate.
Rather than kicking every retiree including those who've had a shit life and can expect little more than a cold and lonely death, why not take a more targeted direction and go after the people who really did benefit from the successive bad decisions which fucked the rest of us, old and young alike?
>> No. 447097 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 12:50 am
447097 spacer
>>447094

>the old put a fuck load into the world we now live in

They took far more than they gave. That's the crux of it - they are the only generation for whom that can be said. If you don't believe that, then you don't understand how much debt we're in, how badly the pension system is underfunded, how much money was transferred from young to old via the housing market and how costly our delay in responding to climate change will be.

If someone started getting their state pension this year, they were about 25 years old when Thatcher first got elected. Clement Atlee has been dead for 54 years. Think about that for a moment. The current cohort of old people didn't build the post-war consensus, but they did dismantle it for their own benefit.
>> No. 447098 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 1:16 am
447098 spacer
>>447095

It's all academic because demographics mean that the old dominate at the ballot box, but I'm arguing for a much broader approach to intergenerational fairness. Intergenerational unfairness is so ubiquitous in our political system that we have become blind to it.

We need to build our way out of the housing crisis, bring down the ratio of house prices to wages to pre-1990s levels and accept that millions older people will see their retirement income collapse as a result; not just because of buy-to-let investors, but because of the huge proportion of pension funds that are ultimately invested in residential property.

Old people have rigged the economy to their benefit, but there's an incredibly obvious way to stop the resultant inequalities from being perpetuated across the generations - inheritance tax. Raise the rate, lower the tax-free threshold and get rid of the loopholes that allow estates to be passed on to "charitable trusts".

Remove age discrimination from the welfare system. It's patently unfair that people under 25 get a lower rate of Universal Credit and it's equally unfair that older people get the incredibly generous Pension Credit. Remove the distinction between Attendance Allowance and PIP. Extend the Winter Fuel Payment to everyone on means-tested benefits or abolish it - same for the concessionary bus pass, the free TV license and all the other age-discriminatory benefits.

Reform the regressive Council Tax system. Successive attempts to tax the real value of a property have failed solely because some older people with very valuable homes will be forced to downsize, imposing disproportionate costs on the rest of us.

Remove the National Insurance exemption for people above retirement age. It's just income tax by another name, it has been for a long time, so it's clearly unfair that old people get to pay less of it.

Impose a retroactive corporate carbon tax, to recoup some of the immense costs of dealing with climate change from the immense profits of oil companies. This will massively reduce the value of those companies, with a knock-on effect on pension funds that are heavily invested in fossil fuels. Tough tits.

I could go on, but it's well past my bedtime.
>> No. 447104 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 7:54 am
447104 spacer
Europe is a strange place.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI81yqgRWGc
>> No. 447105 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 8:41 am
447105 spacer
>>447094

>Do you really want some Gen-Z fresh off a youtube binge mumble some vague nonsense about how he doesn't have cat-girls because you invaded Iraq?

He'll get both barrels if he tries this. My generation invented the catgirls he's so fond of. I went through all those years of downloading my hentai and furry porn from Limewire so we could build a better internet for future generations, and this is how they thank us? These kids these days don't realise how easy they have it, going to e621 and having every fetish under the sun labelled under a handy keyword. Scrolling through Rudgewick on their phablet and having smut beamed directly into their retinas. It's a different world, and what do they do? Play Fortnite on fucking Twitch for a living?

I tell you fucking what. You lot stop your pissing contest, because I've got it sorted. We'll pay for the pensions by putting a 90p tax rate on streamers and YouTubers.
>> No. 447120 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 1:25 pm
447120 spacer
>>447105
>90p
I hate this way of writing tax. I know you mean 'in the pound', but why not just say 90%? What's the point of saying it in pence?
>> No. 447126 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 2:44 pm
447126 spacer
>>447120
To make it sound like less. It annoys me too. I never understood why everyone thought 50p tax was such big news back when it was, maybe 14 years ago (?). I just thought, "Great, here's a tenner; see you in 20 years." I'll admit I was a student then so didn't really understand it, but that's the only reason I can think of why they'd do it. Although I think some newspapers can't type the % symbol, and it annoys me even more to see the Daily Telegraph forced to type 90pc for a percentage because they can't operate a keyboard.
>> No. 447130 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 3:18 pm
447130 spacer
>>447126
>the Daily Telegraph forced to type 90pc
Christ, they really are the worst newspaper in the nation. The DM are sickos of the highest order, but there's something truly pathetic about The Telegraph.
>> No. 447135 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 7:36 pm
447135 spacer

122934872_3737593919607686_7322717059779509237_n.jpg
447135447135447135
She could ride her car over me any day, IYKWIM.
>> No. 447136 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 7:42 pm
447136 spacer
>>447135
I know .gs well enough to assume you're talking about the lunchlady behind the counter.
>> No. 447137 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 7:48 pm
447137 spacer
>>447136
>lunchlady

What the actual fuck is this?
>> No. 447138 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 10:31 pm
447138 spacer
>>447135
Why has nobody thought to point out the optics of a white protester stopping a black child from going to school during black history month? It sounds like such an open goal to get my article in the front of a tabloid newspaper.
>> No. 447139 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 11:05 pm
447139 spacer

49374139-10108051-Ms_Speid_started_a_food_business.jpg
447139447139447139
>>447138
Everyone is too preoccupied with how thicc his mum is.
>> No. 447140 Anonymous
19th October 2021
Tuesday 11:17 pm
447140 spacer
>>447139

Fucking hell. She's everything vorderman wishes she was.
>> No. 447141 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:26 am
447141 spacer
Where can I read more about this story? I have no idea what you're talking about. Is this lady a member of Insulate Britain? If so, is it too late to join Insulate Britain?
>> No. 447142 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:26 am
447142 spacer

shelz.jpg
447142447142447142
>>447139

Ooof.
>> No. 447143 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:34 am
447143 spacer

E_LciOjWEAULKYD.jpg
447143447143447143
>>447141

She ran over some Insulate Britain protesters because her lad was late for school.

In other news, the XR bird with the big tits is apparently on OnlyFans.
>> No. 447145 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 1:43 am
447145 spacer
>>447143
Shame about her arse.
>> No. 447147 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 2:40 am
447147 spacer
The intent is not to wind people up with this, but why should I give a toss about what the weather will be like in 100+ years? Why does anyone?
>> No. 447150 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 6:36 am
447150 spacer
>>447147

I'm with you entirely, but we're supposed to care about future generations.

We might be the last generation not to habitually live to be over a hundred, so I suppose with every generation it gets a bit more about self preservation. But yeah,
"a society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit" is supposed to be why we should care. I do not, fuck the people who outlive me entirely.
>> No. 447151 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 7:12 am
447151 spacer
>>447138
>stopping a black child from going to school during black history month

Do we have black history month because we're aping Americans? I can see why they have it because of their history but not why we'd have it but not also, say, Asian history month. Likewise, I remember going on holiday last year and whenever I was driving Radio 2 was constantly promoting a week dedicated to black music and celebrating black voices but I can't recall them going to the same effort for, say, South American music. I don't understand why so-called diversity and tolerance seems to squarely focus on black people whilst ignoring other ethnicities.

>>447143
>In other news, the XR bird with the big tits is apparently on OnlyFans.

Her tits are disgusting. The way they don't jiggle in the slightest when she moves is uncanny valley territory. Too plastic. I guess it makes sense for her to have a fairly large kitchen.
>> No. 447152 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 7:19 am
447152 spacer
>>447143

I can't find her, I really wanted to have a righteous wank this morning.
>> No. 447153 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 8:43 am
447153 spacer

Marsden-Moor-fire-1024x768.jpg
447153447153447153
>>447147
>The intent is not to wind people up with this, but why should I give a toss about what the weather will be like in 100+ years? Why does anyone?

We're already seeing the effects of climate change now. It will get worse if we don't radically change course, but we don't have to wait that long to suffer from increased flooding (across northern and central Europe), droughts / crop failure (across southern Europe), occurrence of wildfires, disrupted supplies of food and other commodities, as well as the pressure to support people displaced from more tropical climates.

These models from the IPCC and Climate Action Tracker show what I mean: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/oct/14/climate-change-happening-now-stats-graphs-maps-cop26
>> No. 447155 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 8:55 am
447155 spacer

E_WJv7gXIAQ2vLA.jpg
447155447155447155
>>447152
Apparently she's taken it down but I think there are leaks available. Anyway, she regularly posts her Christmas puds on Twitter.
>> No. 447156 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 9:26 am
447156 spacer
>>447155

I was going to object to this being on /sfw/, but to be honest, it doesn't even look like she's naked.
>> No. 447157 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 9:28 am
447157 spacer
>>447147
It's something that non-socio/psychopaths do, mate. Caring about other people.
>> No. 447158 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 9:42 am
447158 spacer

At0PMYsCIAAPAyS.jpg
447158447158447158
>>447156
It looks like she's been to the joke shop and done a Gazza.
>> No. 447159 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 9:46 am
447159 spacer
>>447155

It looks like she's wearing one of those rubber tit chests lads wear for stag dos. I bet those things have about the same feel in your hand as a memory foam mattress.

I don't know, I must just be spoiled because my missus has massive natural jugs, and I can comfortably fit all four fingers in the overhang to warm up if my hands are cold. It doesn't look at all convincing if they just pop out like a gel mousemat wrist rest.
>> No. 447160 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 9:51 am
447160 spacer
>>447159
There's a video of her dancing during the XR protests and her tits don't move whatsoever.
>> No. 447161 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 10:43 am
447161 spacer

image_2021-10-20_113834.png
447161447161447161
>>447153

Sorry to be such a stick-in-the-mud, lads, but I don't really want my post about actual present effects of climate change to be completely lost to a discussion about the merits and flaws of fake wabs.

Pictures are from the Marsden Moor fire in April 2021, which most reports trace back to a barbecue, but it's the bigger swings in weather between high precipitation and longer dry periods caused by climate change create conditions which make wildfires both more likely and more destructive when they do happen.

Climate change is real and we are seeing its effects in the UK, in the present. It is a virtual certainty you will be affected by it, to some degree, in your lifetime.
>> No. 447162 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 10:46 am
447162 spacer
>>447161
Are they using vacuums on their backs to suck up the fire?
>> No. 447163 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 11:16 am
447163 spacer
>>447162
They are using the vacuums to create a vacuum so that the fire can't burn.
>> No. 447164 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:20 pm
447164 spacer
>>447155
You can see how her sweat travels.

Fair fucks if she had manky tits originally but honestly women need to grasp that men praise the essence of titness. If she had some normal tits we'd still be slobbering like dogs and if she'd be more than a one-trick pony she might still have a career.

>>447161
If you're going to go offtopic and talk about the environment you could at least talk about the Net-Zero strategy. Those mini-reactors and the state subsidy is going to lead to fisty-cuff with Germany and Austria at Euratom.

>>447162
They're actually flamethrowers. And when those planes drop water on forest fires they're really dropping petrol. It's all a conspiracy, lads.
>> No. 447165 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:27 pm
447165 spacer
>>447164
I think the issue isn't that she's had a boob job, it's that she's increased them so much they look completely unnatural.

I bet it'd be weird if you were shagging a lass and her tits were completely static instead of slapping about.
>> No. 447166 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:43 pm
447166 spacer
>>447147
There are different levels of caring. It is right and just to care about the environment in the same way that we care about starving Africans, or rape victims, or even your own personal mental wellbeing. Obviously I won't get anything out of it and I don't need to give a shit about you at all, but what kind of society would it be if we were all like that?

Regarding fake booby lady: the important thing is that she herself is happy. I was never going to get my hands on dem titties anyway, so my preference is less important than her self-esteem. As long as she doesn't become a role model and make other women get grim plastic tits too, she can live her life however she wants. Nobody is complaining about that tennis player who got breast reduction surgery so she'd be better at tennis, even though that really was a crime against bosmos.
>> No. 447167 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 12:49 pm
447167 spacer
>>447166
>Nobody is complaining about that tennis player who got breast reduction surgery so she'd be better at tennis, even though that really was a crime against bosmos.

We certainly did, lad. I'd look through the tennis threads on /spo/ but that would mean looking at Laura Robson's potentially underage cameltoe and scrolling through the cunt-off of whether it's acceptable to use ape-like fists when talking about the Williams sisters.
>> No. 447168 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 1:47 pm
447168 spacer
>>447161
This thread is quite interesting
https://mobile.twitter.com/chappersmk/status/1450744288812404737
Someone in the civil service seems to have understood the problem with air traffic but the govt paper on it was unpublished after being up for a while.
>> No. 447170 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 1:54 pm
447170 spacer
>>447166
>There are different levels of caring. It is right and just to care about the environment in the same way that we care about starving Africans, or rape victims, or even your own personal mental wellbeing. Obviously I won't get anything out of it and I don't need to give a shit about you at all, but what kind of society would it be if we were all like that?

At this point, there is reason to care about climate change even from a purely selfish point of view. It can be hard to model exactly how individual lives will be affected and over what timespan, but the factors I mention in >>447153 will surely touch upon most if not all those living in the UK -- and it will be in a very real material way, nothing to do with feelings of guilt or whatever else.
>> No. 447174 Anonymous
20th October 2021
Wednesday 4:54 pm
447174 spacer
>>447168

Here's an article about it so "no twitter threads!" lad can read about it without having an aneurysm:
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/airports-aviation-government-deletes-document-b1941877.html
>> No. 447356 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 8:10 am
447356 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0_Ty38JcgI
>> No. 447357 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 8:32 am
447357 spacer
>>447356

Media are really quite open about hating public demonstration, but to lead with that story is a bit transparent even for them.
>> No. 447358 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 12:04 pm
447358 spacer
>>447357
https://twitter.com/ClareHymer/status/1452948034220867595
>> No. 447359 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 12:09 pm
447359 spacer
>>447357
Don't know what you're on about, that's honestly quite a bit more endearing than filming them being cunts.
>> No. 447360 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 12:50 pm
447360 spacer
>>447359
I think he's just a bit touchy. If it was any other group he'd find it funny and take the piss, but because it's his beloved eco-crusties he can't take a joke.
>> No. 447361 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:07 pm
447361 spacer
>>447360
Still haven't got the hang of this whole "anonymous posting" thing, have you?
>> No. 447362 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:10 pm
447362 spacer
>>447361
It's always the same lad. Every time something is posted about climate protestors that's ripe for taking the piss out of he gets all touchy and thinks it's all part of a global conspiracy rather than, say, thinking it's funny that someone has glued their face to the road. It happens without fail.
>> No. 447363 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:21 pm
447363 spacer
>>447362
See >>447361
>> No. 447364 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:26 pm
447364 spacer
>>447363
See >>447362.
>> No. 447365 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:41 pm
447365 spacer
I'm a different person, and I also think it's transparently partisan the way the media is aggressively anti-protests. Gluing your face to the road is pretty hilarious, though.
>> No. 447366 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:57 pm
447366 spacer
I am surely not the first to say this but OP image looks like Greta doing stand-up. She's even got a brick wall behind her.
>> No. 447367 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 2:50 pm
447367 spacer
>>447362

As far as I remember, I've not complained that people post these links. If anything, I like that it gets me thinking about what makes it into the news and what doesn't. I also don't think there needs to be a global conspiracy to have coverage slanted toward discrediting and dismissing protesters.

If I am dour about it, it's because we don't get much coverage of the sane and articulate protesters. This bloke arguably turned himself into a punchline with a silly stunt, but what sort of discussion does a headline like this bring about? "Haha yeah that's funny", then what?
>> No. 447368 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 3:25 pm
447368 spacer
>>447366

Walking bassline gradually intensifies

So... So... What do you call a polar bear after the ice caps have melted due to human pollution by carbon emissions and the resulting climate change gradually warming global temperatures?

A bear!

The crowd jeers over a half hearted rimshot
>> No. 447369 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 3:54 pm
447369 spacer
>>447358
This is gold.
>> No. 447390 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 11:51 am
447390 spacer

neverright.png
447390447390447390
>>447358
He's doubling down on it, classic.
>> No. 447391 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 12:39 pm
447391 spacer
>>447358
>>447390
I can't stand how disingenuous the right is. Just endless, unserious, tomfoolery. It's not "classic", he's the kind of bastard who'd have spent the Dark Ages complaining about all those manuscripts the monks are writing instead of doing "proper work". He doesn't have ideas or beliefs, it's just a shark-like instinct for contrarian nonsense.
>> No. 447395 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 4:02 pm
447395 spacer
>>447390
Last year I worked a bit with my partner's dad, and he always had TalkRadio on. Mike Graham's show was called "The Independent Republic Of Mike Graham", and he said it was "the home of common sense". I think he was mad about transpeople for existing, and schools being woke for teaching about the ills of the British empire. He seemed particularly odious, even as far as right wing grifters go.
>> No. 447405 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 5:29 pm
447405 spacer
>>447369
https://newsthump.com/2021/10/27/man-who-crept-into-mike-grahams-garden-to-replace-small-lump-of-concrete-with-slightly-larger-one-every-time-it-rained-nominated-for-turner-prize/
>> No. 447424 Anonymous
28th October 2021
Thursday 9:25 pm
447424 spacer

wut.jpg
447424447424447424
>>447391

Funny you should say that, this image courtesy of someone that constantly calls me a tankie because I will occasionally suggest that 'capitalism is a bad idea'. I'm guessing tankie as a word is just doing the rounds in some political meme circles.
>> No. 447433 Anonymous
29th October 2021
Friday 4:41 pm
447433 spacer
Extended actual interview with Cameron:


>>447424
I'm still not sure what you're getting at this that.
>> No. 447459 Anonymous
30th October 2021
Saturday 1:31 pm
447459 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/30/capitalism-is-killing-the-planet-its-time-to-stop-buying-into-our-own-destruction
Good article from Monbiot.
>> No. 447483 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 7:56 pm
447483 spacer

greta-thunberg-denounces-world-leaders-for-whateve.jpg
447483447483447483
She's gotta have a liver condition or something. She looks like she's wearing a Bo Selecta mask.
>> No. 447484 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:08 pm
447484 spacer
>>447483
What the actual fuck are you talking about?

I get that she's obnoxious, and maybe you don't like her message. The way her face fucking looks? Have a word with yourself.
>> No. 447485 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:13 pm
447485 spacer
>>447484
Compare it to the picture of her in the OP. Her face has swollen up and it's got an off yellowy-orange hue to it. She looks ill.
>> No. 447486 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:23 pm
447486 spacer
>>447485
It's called "ageing".
>> No. 447487 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:26 pm
447487 spacer
>>447486
Nah, she still looks like a child. Having your face swell up and having your skin look jaundiced isn't part of the aging process from turning 16 to 18.
>> No. 447488 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:32 pm
447488 spacer
>>447483
I think your monitors broke mate. Or have you got f.lux turned up?
>> No. 447489 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:38 pm
447489 spacer
>>447485
Maybe you can't afford a decent monitor. She looks fine.
>> No. 447490 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 8:44 pm
447490 spacer
>>447484
I bet you've got a stupid face.
>> No. 447491 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 9:09 pm
447491 spacer
>>447483
>>447485
>>447487
I don't know if you've been to Scandinavia at all, but the women either mature to be scandalously good-looking, or wholesome moon-faces.
>> No. 447492 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 9:12 pm
447492 spacer
>>447485

I don't think that's the point otherlad was making. The preoccupation with her face just seems like a bit of a lazy way to dismiss or belittle her.
>> No. 447493 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 9:58 pm
447493 spacer
>>447483
I'm sat next to one of the people in that photo right now. Not Greta obviously.
>> No. 447494 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 10:00 pm
447494 spacer
>>447493
Please let them go. I know you feel strongly about the congestion charge, but this isn't right.
>> No. 447495 Anonymous
1st November 2021
Monday 10:12 pm
447495 spacer
>>447494
Right.
>> No. 447503 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 1:25 am
447503 spacer
>>447491
>scandalously good-looking

It might the result of a debilitating case of yellow-fever but I don't understand this at all, Finns and Danes are much better looking. Swedes paint themselves like oompa-loompas and lack eyebrows while Norwegians have the potato heads one can expect from a mountain people - they both slowly turn into leather handbags.

>>447493
Describe the smell to us. All this bollocks in the news but I've not once had it described.
>> No. 447510 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 11:49 am
447510 spacer
>>447503
>Describe the smell to us. All this bollocks in the news but I've not once had it described.
Definite notes of hammers in there.
>> No. 447511 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 11:56 am
447511 spacer
>>447503
Some of the younger protesters wear a bit too much perfume, the crusties mostly smell of cigarettes and the older people are too tightly bundled in warm clothes for any smells to escape. Haven't smelled weed once since I got here. The two overriding smells of Glasgow are the fresh air, which is fucking lovely, and some parts of town smell like burned toffee, at least they did yesterday. Right now on West Campbell Street I can just smell that air, car fumes and the sun drying the morning's moisture from my wool coat.
>> No. 447512 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 12:01 pm
447512 spacer
>>447503
>It might the result of a debilitating case of yellow-fever but I don't understand this at all, Finns and Danes are much better looking. Swedes paint themselves like oompa-loompas and lack eyebrows while Norwegians have the potato heads one can expect from a mountain people - they both slowly turn into leather handbags.

Good thing you're not talking about Somalis, or you would have caught a right telling off from our resident forecaster.
>> No. 447524 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 2:59 pm
447524 spacer
>>447512
Because dolphin rape against Scandinavians hasn't been a problem since 1100AD, you big paedophile.
>> No. 447525 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 3:05 pm
447525 spacer

Untitled.png
447525447525447525
>>447511
>Some of the younger protesters wear a bit too much perfume
>Haven't smelled weed once since I got here

Bloody kids these days - it makes me sick.

What do the protesters feel like? Not the kids, obviously, but if you play along we could turn this into a text adventure in Glasgow.
>> No. 447526 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 3:08 pm
447526 spacer
>>447512
You can't be racist to normal people. It's like how you don't make fun of cripples but instead they get their own Maltesers advert describing their sex lives.
>> No. 447527 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 3:11 pm
447527 spacer

Eql7jC9XEAQBLDr.jpg_large.jpg
447527447527447527
>>447503
>It might the result of a debilitating case of yellow-fever but I don't understand this at all, Finns and Danes are much better looking. Swedes paint themselves like oompa-loompas and lack eyebrows while Norwegians have the potato heads one can expect from a mountain people - they both slowly turn into leather handbags.

Most Finns have a hint of Genghis Khan about them.
>> No. 447529 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 3:27 pm
447529 spacer
>>447526
This is unironically what these people think though, isn't it? They're white so they're alright. It's fucking mental, and the only two ways around it are going fully into it, and calling everyone out on everything that could be not-explicitly-positive. or just acknowledge that making irreverent comments about a Norwegian and a Somali is the exact same thing unless you think that one of them is lesser than the other and needs to be protected.
>> No. 447532 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 3:56 pm
447532 spacer
>>447459

Good on Monbiot for putting this out there, though I have to say he's a bit late to the party by the standard of many British writers.
>> No. 447534 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 4:16 pm
447534 spacer
>>447525
Soft & warm, by virtue of the thick clothing mostly. The women feel a bit frail or skinny when hugged too but that's normal for people with that diet who aren't bulking.
>> No. 447535 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 4:23 pm
447535 spacer
>>447534
>Look around
>> No. 447536 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 4:23 pm
447536 spacer
>>447459
His argument is vague and poor, especially when it comes to dismissing things like carbon taxes.

In summary, the climate doesn't matter and is just a vehicle for my favourite politics. Quelle surprise.
>> No. 447537 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 4:32 pm
447537 spacer
>>447535
You see some nice stone old buildings.
>> No. 447538 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 4:36 pm
447538 spacer
>>447537
>walk downhill
>enter first shop
>> No. 447539 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 4:43 pm
447539 spacer
>>447538
You're on a bus because you have somewhere to be. Let me look up what's happening tomorrow and I'll do this properly then.
>> No. 447540 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 5:35 pm
447540 spacer
>>447459

As an engineer, I fundamentally disagree with his basic premise.

The only way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time. Net zero seems utterly implausible to non-engineers without some sort of revolution, but to engineers it's just an incredibly large number of fairly straightforward optimisation problems. We don't have a fix for jet aviation, we're uncertain about meat, but for everything else we have a fully costed transition plan. We know how to do it, we're in the process of doing it, we're only limited by how much money we're willing to throw at it.

"Put a man on the moon" seemed like an impossible fantasy in the late 1950s, but the Yanks threw the full weight of their economic might at it, solving the tens of thousands of smaller problems that added up to one big challenge.

We know how to build houses that produce more energy than they consume. We've built them, we've tested them, they work. In the long run, they work out cheaper than some Barratt shitbox with wonky eaves and nowhere to keep your hoover. The government could borrow the money to build millions of them at interest rates substantially below the rate of inflation, sell them or rent them at below market rates and make a generous profit.

When the government isn't doing a thing that would help fix climate change, create hundreds of thousands of jobs and ultimately make money for the exchequer, you need a better explanation than "something something capitalism". This isn't some fundamental structural problem with our economic system, it's just a crap government with no brains and no ambition.
>> No. 447541 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 5:51 pm
447541 spacer
>>447540

As an engineer, you're probably not taking into account all the interrelated problems of various sorts of pollution and destruction on the biosphere. Just balancing the carbon input/output won't save us.
>> No. 447542 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 5:56 pm
447542 spacer
>>447541
They don't teach engineers the complicated stuff like that.
>> No. 447544 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 7:08 pm
447544 spacer
>>447541

>you're probably not taking into account all the interrelated problems of various sorts of pollution and destruction on the biosphere

I am, they just don't matter very much.

People freak out about plastic pollution because it's very visible, but the impacts on the ecosystem are negligible - plastic gets everywhere because it's very durable, but it doesn't do much of anything because it's very inert. Some turtles will snuff it because they're too stupid to know the difference between food and bits of old fishing rope, but the oceans are still basically fine with a shitload of plastic in them.

70% of Britain's forests were lost during the last millennium. Very few people are freaking out about that "ecological crisis", because it's obviously fine. Lots of habitat was lost, lots of species were pushed to the brink of extinction, but Britain is still perfectly habitable. Same goes for the Amazon or whatever other ecosystem people might be worrying about; it's hard luck to whichever species go extinct, but the rest of us will be fine.

Climate change of more than a couple of degrees is the one thing that we can't really just adapt around. Somewhere around the four degree mark, oceans get so acidic that they can't sustain invertebrate life any more, the food web collapses and everything dies. Somewhere around the four degree mark, a chain reaction of melt-methane-melt will completely destroy both polar ice caps, raise the sea levels by a couple of metres and totally wipe out dozens of cities and a couple of countries.

Climate change will do more damage to the ecosystem of Chernobyl than the Chernobyl disaster, even in a fairly moderate scenario. Everything but climate change is a practical non-issue, put forward by special-interest groups, people who don't understand the scale of the problem or people using climate change as a lever to advance their own particular ideology.
>> No. 447545 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 7:22 pm
447545 spacer
>>447544
>Everything but climate change is a practical non-issue, put forward by special-interest groups, people who don't understand the scale of the problem or people using climate change as a lever to advance their own particular ideology.
Funny, those are the same arguments that have been used for inaction on climate change. I know for a fact you're wrong in the case of soil health so what possible credibility can you then have on any other similar problem? You're claiming to be a bigger expert in multiple fields than multiple experts are in their own specialities. That and your claim that solving climate change is simple for you, sounds a bit like you're just talking out of your ego-sized arse.
>> No. 447546 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 9:07 pm
447546 spacer
>>447545

>I know for a fact you're wrong in the case of soil health

The biggest threat to soil health by a very large margin is climate change. The damage done by the carbon we've already emitted has permanently changed the balance of many soils and aquifers, to the extent that "healthy" now means something very different - restoring soil is no longer enough, we need to adapt it for climate change. Millions of hectares of arable land will inevitably become polar even if we hit all of our emissions targets ahead of schedule. Improving soil health will help mitigate climate change a little bit because healthy soil sequesters carbon, but it's a fraction of a percent of impact.

The EU Soil Health and Food Mission has the goal of restoring 75% of soil in the EU to good health by 2030. The budgeted cost of this is approximately 0.004% of the cost of meeting their emissions targets.

This is what I mean when I talk about practical non-issues. Any environmental issue you could possibly think of is totally, utterly dominated by climate change, both in terms of impacts and in the cost of remediation and/or mitigation. Worrying about anything else is like worrying about a dusty mantlepiece when your kitchen is on fire - dusting your mantlepiece is a hell of a lot easier than fixing your kitchen, but it won't matter one jot unless you put the fire out now.

You don't have to believe me and I don't want you to believe me, I want you to read the IPCC AR5 WGII and WGIII reports. These documents summarise everything we knew as of 2014 about the impacts of climate change and the options for adaptation and mitigation. I will warn you that these reports are several thousand pages of nightmare fuel.
>> No. 447547 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 9:27 pm
447547 spacer
>>447545
Not him but he does make a rather obvious point, accidentally geoengineering the entire planet is several orders of magnitude above other problems and problems such as soil degradation are fed by it. Humanity has made leaps and bounds on both problems and in soil it's obviously been worked on for a long time with products like terra preta and what are now uneconomic methods to artificial soil.

I don't really see how Not-Capitalism will solve these problems. It's just watermelon thinking.
>> No. 447548 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 10:01 pm
447548 spacer
>>447544
>>447546
What can I, as a useless berk, do to effect this to even the tiniest degree? Stop eating meat? Slash the tyres of every 4x4 I see? Enact psychic genocide on the Alpha Draconians?
>> No. 447549 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 10:03 pm
447549 spacer
>>447546
Yes that's reasonable, I was just snapping out of tiredness.
>> No. 447551 Anonymous
2nd November 2021
Tuesday 11:50 pm
447551 spacer
>>447548
Nothing. Contrary to what Pokemon 2000 taught us, the power of one is not particularly great.
Or if that's too bleak: vote Green and find Lugia.
>> No. 447552 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 7:54 am
447552 spacer
>>447548

You can:
- Support XR and its related organisations, either by volunteering or donation
- Speak to others that you know to value your opinion about climate change as an issue
- If you're more of an "engineer" and go by metrics, consider direct donations to carbon offset projects like 8 Billion Trees
>> No. 447553 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 8:07 am
447553 spacer
>>447459

I think another thing that might have made Monbiot's article more convincing is actually naming names. The Guardian have reported in the past about Richard Heede's work at the Climate Accountability Institute, which identifies the world's greatest CO2 emitting companies. The finding was that 20 firms account for about 1/3 of emissions: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/09/revealed-20-firms-third-carbon-emissions

The question is, to what degree are these companies really separable from our economic system? Surely these companies exist and are profitable in part because our state-capitalist system has built the infrastructure for, and rewards, this kind of petrol production/use?

If that is true, how far outside of the current economic system would we have to step in order to have a meaningful enough impact to stop climate change?
>> No. 447554 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 8:08 am
447554 spacer
>>447552
What do XR spend the donations on?
>> No. 447555 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 8:22 am
447555 spacer
>>447551
Was about to say 'what's Lugia' and hesitated because it might be one of those Ligma jokes.
>> No. 447556 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 8:27 am
447556 spacer
>>447554

From their website: https://rebellion.global/donate/
>Donations support the work of the XR Global Support team in facilitating the flow of resources to local groups while strengthening our communications and tech infrastructure that allow for safe and secure activist engagement on renewable-energy run platforms.

>Donations are also transparently distributed to XR groups around the world in the form of seed grants, especially in countries where fundraising efforts are a challenge. The aim is to empower these groups to become self-sustaining and support the rebellion’s strategic goals through seed grants.

There may be more info available if you contact them.
>> No. 447558 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 9:08 am
447558 spacer
>>447556
Does that mean it's mainly to fund their protesting?
>> No. 447559 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 9:34 am
447559 spacer
>>447558

Their main purpose is to be a political pressure group, and their main means to do that is by non-violent protest, so yes. As it says, the funds go toward making sure groups can communicate with eachother globally and to ensure people are safe to go out and protest.
>> No. 447560 Anonymous
3rd November 2021
Wednesday 9:56 am
447560 spacer
>>447554
To translate what the other lad said, a small amount of money goes to maintaining the MatterMost platform, some gets spent on food when necessary (though often the Hare Krsns help there for donations), some goes on hiring vehicles to transport infrastructure, there's also the cost of storing infrastructure and renting space for making large scale artworks in (these are often subsidised or done as part of other projects to lower the cost too) and then there's the costs of banner making and building the huge roadblocks. All labour is crowdsourced but you can't get the joints and cables for tensegrity structures for free. There's a smaller "marketing" cost too, for posters, stickers and flyers.
>> No. 447639 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 9:25 am
447639 spacer

foto_no_exif.jpg
447639447639447639
Here's a photo of yesterday's crowd from the stage at the finish. I was stood next to Lily Cole for a bit and thought about asking for a picture but I know she's too skinny for you lot.
>> No. 447640 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 9:32 am
447640 spacer
>>447639
What's with all the Palestinian flags?
>> No. 447642 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 2:41 pm
447642 spacer
>>447640
I think Palestinian flags just materialise at any large gatherings or marches. Little known law of physics. Enough people chanting and waving flags in a certain area and a proportional number of Palestinian flags will appear.
There were lots of Sudanese flags too which are almost identical. That lot were chanting "Who are we? Sudanese" which is fine and helpful even but also "Stop the military coup in Sudan" which is far too long for a chant and came out as a bit of a jumble of words.
>> No. 447643 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 2:43 pm
447643 spacer
>>447642
The real test of how effective a protest is is whether the bellends turn out with Israeli flags. When that happens, you know someone's taking notice.
>> No. 447644 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 3:08 pm
447644 spacer
>>447642
I think you need to balance it out with some patriotic flags. Perhaps not National Action but maybe something like a bulldog riding in an electric car painted with the Union Jack or something.

You crusties are missing a trick by not making these events more inclusive. I look at these pictures and what I see is students, retired teachers and assorted soap dodgers. You need to make it so it's your patriotic duty to care about the environment; that's what being a proud Brit should be about. I want you to attract people who care more about Britain than the fucking Sudanese coup. Make it like Last Night of the Proms, but maybe less middle class.
>> No. 447645 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 3:18 pm
447645 spacer
>>447644
You want us to wave the Union Flag in Scotland?
You're not wrong in general. I think that's the vibe Insulate Britain were going for. If only they'd put the flag on their banners not just the name and colours. Drivers would feel a bit daft attacking someone holding the flag. I'll see if I can suggest it to them.
>> No. 447646 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 3:29 pm
447646 spacer
>>447645
>You want us to wave the Union Flag in Scotland?

Yep. Despite the best efforts of Wee Jimmy the porridgewogs never voted to leave the union, so you should ideally be representative of both sides. Otherwise you look a bit insular.

Have you thought about getting some former soldiers involved an in prominent positions? They're always top of the pile for the "we need to look after our own" brigade so would go a long way.
>> No. 447647 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 3:37 pm
447647 spacer
>>447646
>Otherwise you look a bit insular.
Amongst other things, the old-people-and-crusties look is fairly essential for keeping our connection to the wider global movement. The minute we go nationalist, we lose that. There could be some sort of balance but it's not found yet.
We do have ex-military in prominent roles. They usually turn up in their berets.
>> No. 447649 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 5:28 pm
447649 spacer
>>447644

The problem you've got here is that you've entirely misread the situation. Probably 75% of the people involved in this kind of thing, whether they'd admit it or not, are more concerned with shipping their forecasts than they are with saving the world.

If environmentalism ever became a populist, mainstream cause with support from a demographic as broad as Gaz in the high-vis as well as Ethel the maungy pensioner who writes to BBC Points of View, they'd immediately have to heel face turn and start burning tyres in their own back gardens.
>> No. 447650 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 5:52 pm
447650 spacer
>>447647
>Amongst other things, the old-people-and-crusties look is fairly essential for keeping our connection to the wider global movement

Sounds like you're advertising Mars bars to stoners here.

I expect you'll encounter an usual amount of resistance about any Union flags though. The SNP and Scottish Conservatives have done a great job of turning the flag into a symbol of right-wing extremism in the eyes of Scots to the point that it's effectively marginalised in any non-silly protest and will get people arguing with you.
>> No. 447651 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 6:14 pm
447651 spacer
>>447650
Yes, that was my objection.

>>447649
Yes mate I'm sure you know about it in far more depth than me from where you are.
>> No. 447714 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 7:12 am
447714 spacer

_121528434_sign.jpg
447714447714447714
>Climate activists say they have deflated tyres on "luxury" vehicles parked in Glasgow, to raise awareness of carbon emissions during COP26. A number of SUVs in the city's upmarket West End were left with flyers that branded them a "climate violation".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-59254298

Wait, when did we start using SUV in this country? I thought that was a Septic term.
>> No. 447715 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 8:05 am
447715 spacer
>>447714

>Wait, when did we start using SUV in this country?

Ages ago. There's now an entire category of "crossover SUVs" like the Nissan Juke, which don't even pretend to have off-road capabilities but are just hatchbacks with high rooflines and bulbous wheel arches.
>> No. 447720 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 11:50 am
447720 spacer
>>447714
I'm more amused that someone would target such cars given that even in Glasgow you're not at all connected in the same way cities in England are. Outside of Edinburgh-Glasgow city centres you absolutely will hit provincial roads and rough conditions so it makes me wonder what part of Surrey these climate activists have come from.

Maybe I'm just daft though.
>> No. 447721 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 12:20 pm
447721 spacer

FD8xIc1XEAUEXMp.jpg
447721447721447721
>>447720

Benefit of the doubt, they were probably going for the vehicles of those attending the conference.
https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-joe-bidens-motorcade-during-climate-summit-leaves-people-WITH NOTHING TO SAY BECAUSE I AM A CUNT-20211101
https://tnc.news/2021/11/02/glasgow-locals-attendees-complain-of-cop26-delegates-leaving-their-cars-idling/
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/watch-delegates-slammed-for-leaving-cars-running-at-cop26-summit-299530/
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ten-hypocritical-moments-cop26-climate_uk_617fb011e4b09314321a5fe4
The idea that Biden's car is going to be left unattended seems like wishful thinking to me but then "It's electric and sometimes it's harder to get up hills without it" isn't much consolation to a parent grieving their child.
>> No. 447723 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 12:28 pm
447723 spacer

20200117_200427-1024x768-1.jpg
447723447723447723
>>447720
Apparently Tyred of SUVs are an offshoot group from Glasgow Calls Out Polluters. A quick Google suggests they're eternal students and similar other sheltered people.
>> No. 447725 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 12:31 pm
447725 spacer
>>447723

What a cutting criticism, fellow obscure imageboard poster in the year 2021.
>> No. 447727 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 12:42 pm
447727 spacer
>>447725
It's not a criticism. It's right there on their website that Glasgow Calls Out Polluters was formed by Divest Strathclyde, which was created by Glasgow University students pushing for the Strathclyde Pension Fund to divest from fossil fuels.

It's a bunch of students going around what they see as a posh area of Glasgow letting down tyres to stick it to the man.
>> No. 447729 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 12:46 pm
447729 spacer

121192_0.jpg
447729447729447729
>>447727

>It's not a criticism.
>It's a bunch of students going around what they see as a posh area of Glasgow letting down tyres to stick it to the man.
>> No. 447731 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:06 pm
447731 spacer
>>447721
>"It's electric and sometimes it's harder to get up hills without it" isn't much consolation to a parent grieving their child.

I don't know what you're on about but Glasgow absolutely does have some beastly hills even in the city itself. Normally the ones that you end up having to walk up pissed while manhandling a kabab in the early hours.

>>447725
I'd have you know that .gs is an exclusive community of sexy individuals who must work to maintain the standards of the rest of society.
>> No. 447734 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:18 pm
447734 spacer
>>447729
How would you describe it then?

https://www.scotsman.com/news/crime/cop26-car-tyres-of-glasgow-mum-were-punctured-by-climate-activists-3454790
>> No. 447736 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:33 pm
447736 spacer
Clueless twat status of the protestors aside, are they really more clueless than the clueless twats who complain, the clueless twats who report on it, or the clueless twats who get elected to act clueless because that's what clueless twat voters want? Cluelessness and twattery are not enough to make someone the enemy. They are our hideously annoying allies, and must be supported as such.
>> No. 447738 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:37 pm
447738 spacer
>>447736
I'd say that "people on my side can do no wrong" is a bit a worrying position to take. If someone is misguided they should be shepherded rather than blindly defended just because they're on your team.
>> No. 447739 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:56 pm
447739 spacer
>>447731
I don't really see a correlation between there being hills and a car needing to be massive. The protesters were up and down those exact same hills with one bloke pulling a soundsystem on a rickshaw.
https://www.motorbiscuit.com/american-trucks-suvs-almost-bigger-world-war-ii-tanks/
>> No. 447740 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 2:49 pm
447740 spacer
>>447739
Nor do I but otherlad chose to ignore the pharmacist actually needing to drive to Aberfoyle which is a tiny village in the middle of a national park and brought up something about murdering children.

And what happened to your choose-your-own-adventure game we were going to play. All talk you environmentalist lot.
>> No. 447741 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 3:22 pm
447741 spacer

Aberfoyle.jpg
447741447741447741
I for one think we should introduce the sort of regulations Japan has on cars, but in a typically fucked up and inconvenient British way.
You'll drive a 660cc microbox with seats in the boot and you'll like it, and if you don't like that you can pay eyewatering tax rates and struggle to find parking space because all the parking spaces have been designed for the microboxes. Oh, and they'll often have British build quality, naturally.

>>447740
Now call me a nutter, but it seems to me people were driving to Aberfoyle long before we started importing 90 ton yank tanks and that it's an entirely reasonable assumption that they could continue that practice if they wanted to.
>> No. 447742 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 3:31 pm
447742 spacer
>>447740

I didn't have the time or energy to spend a day standing on streetcorners refreshing the page waiting for someone to tell me to kick a homeless person or whatever it is you had planned. Sorry to let you all down.
>> No. 447746 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 6:12 pm
447746 spacer

maxresdefault.jpg
447746447746447746
>>447740

The Fiat Panda 4x4 is a better off-roader than the vast majority of SUVs, but that's really academic - as >>447741 suggests, the roads to Aberfoyle are perfectly satisfactory.
>> No. 447751 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 6:50 pm
447751 spacer
>>447741
I've been saying for years that for a good chunk of the population, modern kei cars would be ideal. I'm not sure why more of them aren't marketed here, considering people buy Aygos and Pug 107s etc. I suppose small cars here are perceived to be starter cars, and the way people upgrade every three years on pcp is just silly.

I might have a big scary SUV, but it was built in 2007 and I don't plan to replace it, ever if possible. I don't know if that balances out the extra emissions but I suspect it does. I'm thinking of swapping the motor for a petrol with LPG too, I wonder if those deflater lads were looking for gas filler ports or not.
>> No. 447752 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 6:55 pm
447752 spacer

HondaNOne-2020RS-103.jpg
447752447752447752
>>447751

I mean look at this, the Honda N one. Why can't we get this? Why when we do get kei cars buikt for the UK market, they double the displacement and put a 1.3 in? A modern 660 can easily keep up with motorway traffic.
>> No. 447755 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 7:02 pm
447755 spacer
>>447752

A turbocharged 1 litre engine running at 3000rpm is more efficient than a 660cc engine that's banging off the limiter. Kei cars are cute, but they're also compromised to fit into Japan's odd regulatory regime. The Japanese manage to wring an acceptable amount of torque from a tiny engine with CVTs, but Westerners hate the one-note engine noise.
>> No. 447756 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 7:22 pm
447756 spacer
>>447751

It's still statistically horrendous for road accidents that result in death but yes, the carbon footprint of making a new car is significant compared to the amount they actually emit. Just looking at some very vague figures, a new car can be (up to) 35 tonnes of CO21 whereas you'd have to drive 23,000 miles in the average car to emit 12.7 tonnes2. A sustainable personal carbon budget might be something like 3 tonnes a year3.

1https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car
2https://www.pawprint.eco/eco-blog/average-carbon-footprint-uk
3https://bettermeetsreality.com/what-is-a-sustainable-carbon-footprint-per-person-to-aim-for/ (mixed sources in page.

Now I'm going to hit Submit and see how badly I fucked up these tags.
>> No. 447757 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 7:33 pm
447757 spacer
>>447755

I did sort of exclusively mean turbo 660cc's, but you're not wrong.
>> No. 447785 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 10:25 am
447785 spacer

>> No. 447786 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 10:51 am
447786 spacer
>>447752
Don't much care for kei cars because they are built for city travel, but a Suzuki "Jimny" is a fine workhorse. Shame it's discontinued, and not much chance it'll turn into a beloved thing since it just fucking works and doesn't usually need working on.
>> No. 447787 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 10:54 am
447787 spacer

FEG4TMBVgAInTfG.jpg
447787447787447787
>>447786
>> No. 447788 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 11:15 am
447788 spacer
>>447787
We are absolutely buggered.
>> No. 447789 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 11:21 am
447789 spacer
Are we actually aiming for 1.5°C? I'm under the impression, which I've pulled out of my arse, where it's one of those negotiation strategies where you say you want, say, £35,000 but you originally go in with a higher demand of £40,000 so you can compromise down from that rather than down from what you actually want.
>> No. 447790 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 11:23 am
447790 spacer
>>447789
It's not. 1.5°C is already catastrophic.
>> No. 447791 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 11:26 am
447791 spacer
>>447790
Why didn't they aim for lower then? The art of the deal.
>> No. 447792 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 11:29 am
447792 spacer
>>447791
Complex reasons to do with the intersection of science and politics, presumably. I'm guessing the scientists were saying we needed stasis to begin with and the 1.5°C was what the politicians first came up with as "reasonable".
>> No. 447793 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 12:12 pm
447793 spacer
>>447791

It's too late to aim lower. We've already seen about 1°C of warming. Unless we just pull the plug on human activity and stop burning things effective immediately (which would lead to hundreds of millions of deaths), 1.5°C is the best we can manage. We'll still have a lot of impacts from that level of warming, but it's a level we can cope with; beyond 1.5°C, those impacts become increasingly difficult to mitigate.

The IPCC have done a series of papers on the 1.5 degree target, what that world will look like and how we can get there. The rhetoric of "keep 1.5 alive" should give you a clue as to the realistic chances of that target - it's an aspiration, not an expectation. Going beyond 1.5°C is a very bad thing, but we're not sure that we could stay below 1.5°C even if everyone is 100% committed.

https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
>> No. 447794 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 12:25 pm
447794 spacer
>>447793
If we know it's unlikely why aren't we doing more adaptations to what the future world is going to be like? Reclaiming land like the Dutch. Putting buildings on stilts. Having bendy buildings that can withstand earthquakes like the Japs.
>> No. 447795 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 12:31 pm
447795 spacer
>>447794

We need a shitload of adaptations even at 1.5. The rhetoric of "stopping climate change" is really quite misleading, because we've already changed the climate; this is now a damage limitation exercise.
>> No. 447796 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 1:03 pm
447796 spacer
>>447794

>If we know it's unlikely why aren't we doing more adaptations to what the future world is going to be like?

Because our society is not equipped to deal with this, changing the economic and consumption habits of late stage capitalism™ in a way that is compatible with climate goals just isn't possible, not due to a lack of the technology or resources, but due to the way those resources are controlled through wealth and our economy. See: oil execs at COP26.

For a more relatable example, I work in a small company that manufactures baked foods. Due to the way the global economy works it is somehow profitable to produce incredibly normal, everyday bakery products and sell them to the United States because marketing and making money trumps any sort of logical food distribution system.
Not that I'm completely against fun but the way global supply chains work is neither logical, efficient nor resilient if you look at it from a basic resource and energy standpoint. But it is efficient if you look at it from a cheap-labour-and-profit standpoint. Grumble.
>> No. 447797 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 1:06 pm
447797 spacer
>>447794
Same reason we haven't done anything to prevent it happening: the money and resources are being funnelled to the rich.
>> No. 447798 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 1:06 pm
447798 spacer
>>447794
Go on then. Get Barratt Homes to chuck in some sandbags and stilts for your new-build home when you buy one with the profits you make from filling in the Severn estuary.

The real problem is that the government will only do what the people, who are thick, demand of them. And the people don't want huge changes. They say they do, but if I get Greater Manchester Police kicking my door down to throw my steak in the bin, I will vote to stop that as soon as I get the chance. Ideally, we'd get the big polluter companies to stop making massive profits from Armageddon, but they have entire departments that receive millions to preserve their ability to do that. They also pay the government large amounts to not step on their toes.

The big dream, which I'm sure everyone can agree on, is for 40% of the world to drop dead, but for neither I nor anybody I know to be among that 40%. But we all know different people, so that's not feasible either. You selfish bastards.
>> No. 447799 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 1:13 pm
447799 spacer
>>447798
That would only really be effective it were the top 40% and then the remaining 60 didn't immediately step in to take up where they left off.
>> No. 447801 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 2:24 pm
447801 spacer
>>447798

>The real problem is that the government will only do what the people, who are thick, demand of them.

Are you sure?
>> No. 447802 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 2:30 pm
447802 spacer
>>447799

Even if the top 40% of the global population died off and even if the remaining 60% kept their consumption static, we'd still miss 1.5. "Keeping 1.5 alive" means zero emissions by 2050. India is poor as fuck, but they're still emitting just shy of two tonnes per year each.
>> No. 447804 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 2:51 pm
447804 spacer
>>447801

The public want radical action to solve climate change, as long as it doesn't affect their lifestyles in any meaningful way.

People on the left like to say "big business are the main source of emissions", but big business isn't just burning shit for their own amusement. They would go zero-carbon in a heartbeat if it was the most profitable option. We could make it the most profitable option through our consumer choices, but we haven't; we could make it the most profitable option through the ballot box, but we won't.

There's a legitimate argument that corruption and cronyism is responsible for our outdated and inefficient housing stock, but most of the other big sources of emissions can only be solved with policies that are massively unpopular.

We need to stop eating meat and dairy, we need to stop flying entirely, we need to travel much less domestically and we need to buy less stuff. None of that is negotiable and none of that has a clever technological solution. There is absolutely nothing that big business can do to make the lifestyle of the average British person even remotely sustainable; we have to change the way we live.

We should be slapping massive carbon taxes on business, but that would result in politically catastrophic increases in the prices of the things we consume. Taxing the arse off oil companies only works to reduce our emissions if it makes petrol so expensive that no-one can afford it. Taxing the arse off airlines only works to reduce our emissions if they go bankrupt and everyone has to stop flying.

The public demand action, but that's not enough. We have to reach a point of accepting quite a lot of pain now to prevent even worse pain in the near-future. That requires a change in mass consciousness akin to the prohibition of drink driving or the introduction of the smoking ban; previously normal behaviours have to become shameful.

We haven't got a lot of time to make that transition. 2050 sounds like the far future, but it really isn't; I can remember what I was doing thirty years ago and it doesn't seem like all that far in the past. Try to imagine a 30-year timeline for practically all food to become vegan and you start to understand the scale of the task.
>> No. 447806 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 3:08 pm
447806 spacer

PBF066-Turtle_City.png
447806447806447806
>>447804
That sounds like a case of making the alternative viable, accessible and cheap.

If you want people to ditch fossil fuels then you need to make renewables more attractive. Most people I've spoken with about electric cars are holding off because they're concerned about battery range, the lack of charging points and how long it'd take to charge up on the road, plus they're convinced if they hold off for a few years the technology will massively improve.

If you want people to give up meat then you need to improve the plant based options. The latter are nowhere near as cheap and, as the thread on /nom/ proves, most of them are a bit shit.
>> No. 447809 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 3:54 pm
447809 spacer
>>447806
Vegetables are cheap and accessible already. A huge number of these things that are an issue aren't just because consumers want them; they want them because they're heavily advertised and pushed by lobbyists. Same goes for a lot of plastic packaging; oil byproducts too shitty to make into fuels that have been normalised for us as "necessary". They're not even actually cheap to produce most of the time: fuel is heavily subsidised.
>> No. 447812 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 4:15 pm
447812 spacer
>>447809
Yeah, but you can't replace a bacon butty with a few slices of carrot.
>> No. 447814 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 4:23 pm
447814 spacer
>>447804
>We could make it the most profitable option through our consumer choices, but we haven't
I know it's tangential to your point but: This is an all but impossible task of human co-ordination. There's a reason that BP went out and started pushing the idea of the individual carbon footprint: because when you make it an individual problem instead of a structural one you can eschew structural solutions and instead push the idea that you're contributing to convincing people to change their individual choices, safe in the knowledge that most people won't because most of our choices are barely conscious.

If politicians were willing to show the same sort of disregard for public opinion (some call it leadership) that they showed in the 1980s and 1990s when imposing economic reform we could easily ram through a pile of climate legislation. Have both parties agree on the broad brush stuff (or have one break down into infighting) as generally happened in that decade and you're perfectly fine. Furthermore the trend towards making the problem a matter for individuals could probably be exploited - blame people for the fact the taxes are so high. If other people would just have consumed less, the tax would be lower... If only people had bought more oil, BP wouldn't have collapsed... we can't be blamed for market decisions just because we caused them.
Then my social engineer kicks in: I bet you could slash how much material goods people are able to consume if you gave them much greater amounts of leisure time and a way to fill it. I'm not convinced the government would lose an election for banning Funko Pops, all but abolishing cars and making a stake bake cost a tenner if it also introduced a 25 hour work week, free classes in the creative skill of your choice, and functional public transport. This would of course make life at the treasury hell, but by this stage you're surely moving from accounting in pounds to accounting in carbon emissions anyway.
>> No. 447815 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 4:29 pm
447815 spacer
>>447812
I can't remember the last time I had a particular craving for a bacon butty. The only times I've considered getting one recently were when I've seen adverts for them on the side of Greggs or equivalent.
>> No. 447824 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 8:28 pm
447824 spacer
>>447806

>That sounds like a case of making the alternative viable, accessible and cheap.

In many of these cases, the only meaningful alternative is "nothing".

If we just swap our petrol cars for electric cars, we're still fucked. It takes too much carbon to build them, the factories that make them, the infrastructure that charges them and the roads they drive on. We need to travel by more sustainable means, but we also need to travel less. We might eventually create a utopia where everyone can travel as much as they like, but we certainly won't do it by 2050.

Air travel isn't particularly inefficient, but it allows people to travel thousands of miles in a day. We certainly don't have a zero-carbon substitute for jet fuel and we don't really have a zero-carbon means of rapidly transporting people long distances. High-speed electric rail seems like a zero-carbon option until you do the maths on just how much concrete and steel is involved.

We might figure out how to make a zero-carbon food that tastes just like meat, but we might not. The climate isn't going to say "oh, sorry, I'll stop getting hotter because you haven't invented tasty facon".

The idea of "making the alternative viable" is a pipe dream, it's an excuse for inaction. The scientists and engineers are double busy trying to invent and improve low-carbon technologies, but we're going to have to accept some amount of hardship. The clock is ticking and we just don't have time to wait.

>>447809

>Same goes for a lot of plastic packaging

Most plastic packaging reduces the overall carbon footprint of the product. It takes about 500x more CO2 to grow and transport a cucumber than it does to wrap it in polythene; that layer of polythene increases the shelf life by a factor of ten and dramatically reduces the amount of waste from farm to plate. Plastic packaging isn't free, but manufacturers use it to protect their products in transit and reduce waste.

A wooden fork has a higher carbon footprint than a plastic fork. A plastic milk carton has a lower carbon footprint than a re-usable bottle. Shipping a washing machine from Guangzhou to Liverpool emits less carbon than transporting it on a lorry from Liverpool to Leeds. Our intuitions about carbon are worse than useless, because a vague idea of "green" has dragged lots of intangible values into what should be a quantitative task. The climate doesn't care whether something is local, natural or organic, it just reacts to CO2, methane and NOx.
>> No. 447826 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 8:39 pm
447826 spacer
>>447824

All that stuff about plastic packaging extending shelf life seems moot to me given the distances things are shipped when they need to be grown and consumed locally for any of the rest to make sense.
>> No. 447830 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 9:24 pm
447830 spacer
>>447824

>We might figure out how to make a zero-carbon food that tastes just like meat, but we might not. The climate isn't going to say "oh, sorry, I'll stop getting hotter because you haven't invented tasty facon".

By the same token, the overwhelming majority of the human species isn't going to say "Oh, sorry, I'll just stop eating the type of food I'm naturally designed to because the weather is going to get a bit nasty in a hundred year's time." The people who are going to have to endure hardship are the people who have no other choice in the matter. The people who can avoid that hardship are going to take steps to ensure they do so.

Most people are not even going to make an excuse for inaction. They're either the type of people who have so little money or power that there's effectively no impact they can make, while the people who can afford it are going to offload the problem on somebody else like they always do. When the time comes to it we're all going to point fingers at each other and go "But YOU were supposed to stop eating meat!" and "YOU were supposed to stop burning tyres!", while the water fills up around our ears.

Everything you say is true, but unfortunately it's not a compelling case for tougher climate action where we all give up modern life and go back to subsistence farming and living on mixed berries and nuts. It's just a sobering explanation of exactly why this species isn't going to make it through the great filter of environmental destruction.
>> No. 447832 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 9:59 pm
447832 spacer
>>447830
>Oh, sorry, I'll just stop eating the type of food I'm naturally designed to
I'm all for eating meat but very cognizant of the fact most of us are eating many many times more meat than we really need to for our health.
>> No. 447833 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 10:01 pm
447833 spacer
>>447814
>I know it's tangential to your point but: This is an all but impossible task of human co-ordination. There's a reason that BP went out and started pushing the idea of the individual carbon footprint: because when you make it an individual problem instead of a structural one you can eschew structural solutions and instead push the idea that you're contributing to convincing people to change their individual choices, safe in the knowledge that most people won't because most of our choices are barely conscious.

This lad has already said what I've wanted to say. I get despondent when it comes to talking about climate change because we're so thoroughly indoctrinated to think of it as a result of our personal consumer choices rather than our entire system of production and logistics.

We can't avert climate change through personal sacrifice any more than we can will a public transport system into existence by choosing to buy the right brand of car. Like most things that lead to meaningful and lasting change, it requires collective effort, political will, proper regulation, a load of public resources. It boggles the mind that we're so gullible as to judge eachother for washing clothes above thirty degrees while just blithely accepting the legal and economic incentive structure for a company like BP.
>> No. 447834 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 11:08 pm
447834 spacer
>>447830
>the overwhelming majority of the human species isn't going to say "Oh, sorry, I'll just stop eating the type of food I'm naturally designed to because the weather is going to get a bit nasty in a hundred year's time." The people who are going to have to endure hardship are the people who have no other choice in the matter. The people who can avoid that hardship are going to take steps to ensure they do so.
The weather is already getting nasty. We're looking at the next ten years, not hundred.
>> No. 447839 Anonymous
15th November 2021
Monday 6:11 am
447839 spacer
>>447830

>It's just a sobering explanation of exactly why this species isn't going to make it through the great filter of environmental destruction.

We are going to make it; Armageddon narratives are just a comforting fiction. Most of us aren't going to die, we're just going to have to live with the mess we've made.

>we all give up modern life and go back to subsistence farming and living on mixed berries and nuts

We can't go back to subsistence farming, because a) there isn't enough land and b) the damage we've already done will make farming more difficult and crop failures more likely. We have to invent a new kind of modern life that doesn't involve burning stuff.

>>447833

>Like most things that lead to meaningful and lasting change, it requires collective effort, political will, proper regulation, a load of public resources

The point I've been trying to make is that meaningful and lasting change requires us all to accept a significant degree of hardship. If we can't persuade people that it's a sacrifice worth making, we won't get political action.
>> No. 447840 Anonymous
15th November 2021
Monday 9:06 am
447840 spacer
>>447839
>The point I've been trying to make is that meaningful and lasting change requires us all to accept a significant degree of hardship. If we can't persuade people that it's a sacrifice worth making, we won't get political action.

I disagree. I think you're getting the causal chain reversed, here. Lots of political action can and does occur in spite of public will; war and austerity for example. Yet if anything, the public seem more concerned than government with climate change. How this translates to the degree of hardship they're (we're) willing to put up with is impossible to tell, because government is barely serious about acting on the problem, and is desperate for the public to continue consuming as normal with small adjustments.
>> No. 447854 Anonymous
15th November 2021
Monday 7:07 pm
447854 spacer
>>447839

>We are going to make it; Armageddon narratives are just a comforting fiction. Most of us aren't going to die, we're just going to have to live with the mess we've made.

Yes, and that's why most people are perfectly content to do fuck all about it. Most people simply don't comprehend the long term damage we're doing, and when the near-term consequences are explained to them it just doesn't sound like that big of a deal. But in the end it will wipe us out if we carry on this way.

>We can't go back to subsistence farming, because a) there isn't enough land and b) the damage we've already done will make farming more difficult and crop failures more likely. We have to invent a new kind of modern life that doesn't involve burning stuff.

I think the point went over your head a bit here.

You sound like you're just committed to the same kind of doomerism as the rest of us, you just want to be more of a smart arse about it.
>> No. 447861 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 12:59 am
447861 spacer
>>447839
Having to convince individual voters that they want hardship still strikes me as wrongheaded. Perhaps we're a bit late for it, but what you really need is to capture state power and just impose hardship on people. If you can throw in a bit of a sweetener, so much the better* It doesn't take long looking at the opinion polls on most issues to figure out that the opinions of the public aren't all that important in considering what politicians actually do. No, what's needed is less Green #LabourDoorstep and more Green Mont Pelerin Society.

*At the risk of being a bit hippie about it: Cutting the working week is really growing on me as the means of doing this. The practicality of ramming it through our present economic structure may be suspect but I can see the outline of the kind of societal change that tends to baffle opposition parties. Imagine if the cut in available consumer tat and the hike in the cost of living was compensated by slashing the working week with no nominal pay cut. People would have years to get used to all those changes before the next election, while any opposition running on "But remember meat though?" would be stuck with the cold hard fact that to go back to killing the planet you're going to have your hours hiked without a pay rise and have your life radically shaken up for the second or third time in a decade.
>> No. 447864 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 10:13 am
447864 spacer
>>447861 Cutting the working week is really growing on me as the means of doing this.

I'd love this, but how?
(some) people already work several jobs and all hours - give them an extra day and they're not going to spend it gardening. Or do the proles get to continue their flat out fight for survival, and the fortunate get three day weekends? I guess that could work, the proles would still be too busy to riot.
>> No. 447865 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 10:24 am
447865 spacer
>>447861
>Having to convince individual voters that they want hardship still strikes me as wrongheaded. Perhaps we're a bit late for it, but what you really need is to capture state power and just impose hardship on people.

I've never understood the obsession people have with Machiavellian ends-justify-the-means type approaches. It's just as easy to imagine that repressive government action would have nastier repercussions down the line, as they often have historically.

There's a load of steps that could be potentially taken without severe, undemocratic hardship. Why not pressure state power to seriously commit to figuring out the necessary hardships after economic restructuring, to impose only these necessary hardships, and then to distribute them equitably throughout the population? Hard-won gains like this are why we don't shove kids down mines to work anymore, and progress can be rapid depending on the intensity of public demand.
>> No. 447866 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 11:24 am
447866 spacer
>>447865

>There's a load of steps that could be potentially taken without severe, undemocratic hardship.

We're taking all of those steps pretty much as quickly as the technology allows. They don't cause any hardship, because they substitute a dirty and inefficient technology with a clean technology that will ultimately save money in the long run. For example, most of our electricity already comes from zero-carbon sources, not because of any grand government strategy but because wind is cheaper than coal.

The hardships have already been explained in this thread; they're the things that we don't know how to decarbonise. We can't fly any more, we can't eat nearly as much meat and dairy, and we need to travel a lot less. Those things contribute a very large proportion of our carbon emissions, we have to pretty much eliminate them by 2050 to stand a chance of "keeping 1.5 alive" and there are no technological fixes in the pipeline.

A zero-carbon Britain doesn't really look any different except for those three things. Heat pumps are a straight swap for gas boilers, renewable generation has already replaced most of our coal and gas power stations, heavy industry and even shipping is rapidly decarbonising. The UK's carbon emissions have more than halved over the last 20 years and nobody has really noticed any difference.

The non-negotiable bottom line is that your life can go on nearly as normal but you can't have foreign holidays, bacon butties or a long commute. That's the sticking point, that's the hard sell to the public. If we can't persuade or coerce people into that, then we're in real trouble even if we get everything else right.
>> No. 447867 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 12:18 pm
447867 spacer
>>447866

Can still have foreign holidays, they just have to be done by train or sailing ship - both of which are far more interesting adventures than getting into a metal tube to transport you to a beach chair where you burn yourself for a week, frankly.
>> No. 447868 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 12:26 pm
447868 spacer
>>447866
>We're taking all of those steps pretty much as quickly as the technology allows.

I don't think you're right here. What about basic, low-hanging fruit like properly insulating buildings? What about replacing energy infrastructure with renewables, which we've barely scratched the surface of? What about even just scaling back the massive subsidies to oil, coal, and gas?

There's also a shocking lack of imagination for alternative infrastructure in your post. Long commutes may be perfectly possible with enough investment in public transportation like trains. Foreign flights to exotic islands may be prohibited, but there's no reason a high-speed train couldn't take you pretty far into mainland Europe. I think we could live with a decent bacon substitute.

>If we can't persuade or coerce people into that, then we're in real trouble even if we get everything else right.

We're not even close to getting everything else right, and a lot of that stuff is entirely outside the sphere of individual consumer choice.
>> No. 447869 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 2:46 pm
447869 spacer
>>447865
For me it comes purely from historical precedent, the number of people you've got to co-ordinate, and audience: We don't send kids down the mines anymore, that's true and it's wonderful, but unambiguous gains like that came about in large part due to pressure from the trade union movement and we absolutely obliterated that decades ago under the leadership of people who'd been reading the output of the Mont Pelerin obsessives. (They also, funnily enough, took a dim view on sending adults down mines.)
Rebuilding union power, or organising similar autonomous organisations which are actually capable of putting pressure on the government would be a difficult, long-term task even with a supportive government and even before remembering they'd have to advocate to be worse off, not better off. A small group of determined obsessives focused purely on getting their ideas into policymaking circles rather than convincing the general public is simply has far fewer moving parts to organise, provided you can scrape up the cash.

Then there's the matter of audience: environmentalists and the like tend to like the idea of people power, of organising a big group of individuals to do something or whatever. I don't want to knock that too much, I couldn't get tens of thousands of people to go to a protest, but the government can and does just ignore them. Underscoring just how undemocratically much of the recent status quo came about seems like it opens up a second front to continuing 50 or so years of hope for democratic rejuvenation, community power and all the rest of it. It's not so much ends-justify-the-means as presenting what I believe may be the most effective means to achieve certain ends, like a volunteer civil servant.
>> No. 447870 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 7:18 pm
447870 spacer
>>447798
The sad truth is that 40% of the worlds population is inevitably going to drop dead over the next few decades.
There will be wars, famine, or a general collapse of society caused by attempts to stop climate change. Or there will be wars, famine or a general collapse of society caused directly by climate change.
>> No. 447871 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 7:36 pm
447871 spacer
>>447866
>Heat pumps are a straight swap for gas boilers,
Heat pumps are not nearly as great as a lot of people are making out.
For them to work well you need a super insulated house, to the point of being airtight with a heat exchanger ventilation system to be added. The bigger problems are that with a big enough uptake of them it puts a huge amount of extra demand for electricity onto the grid and we're not adding enough extra capacity quick enough, even before all the extra demand from charging electric cars that will be added.
All the hype around heat pumps at the moment basically amounts to printing money for the small number of big companies who make them.
We should be fitting heat-pumps almost exclusively to new-builds for the time being, instead we should put as much money as possible into subsidising insulation, solar-pv and solar water heating.

>The UK's carbon emissions have more than halved over the last 20 years and nobody has really noticed any difference.
Thanks in a very large part due to UK production of steel plummeting and being replaced by imports, with most other industries following the same trend.
>> No. 447878 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 8:56 pm
447878 spacer
>>447869
>They also, funnily enough, took a dim view on sending adults down mines.
>even before remembering they'd have to advocate to be worse off, not better off.
Your post has given me some intriguing thought experiments, possibly deliberately. Is there anyone who stands to be better off from everyone going green than they would be if we just ignored the environment? Obviously everyone after a while, but who would be better off tomorrow if we did everything the beardies asked? Is there such a group? Vegans would get to feel extra smug as I try to fry a woodlouse rather than eat their gay vegetables, but they'd still be banned from travelling to London to protest about things. Uncontacted tribes in the Amazon rainforest would benefit, but you can't really build a case for helping them like you could for children in coal mines. People in the Amazon who have cars and Wrangler jeans would just lose their jobs. Is there anyone that green policies would immediately benefit, and with no downside at all? If so, who, and how can we frame the debate around them?
>> No. 447879 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 10:07 pm
447879 spacer
>>447878
>but who would be better off tomorrow if we did everything the beardies asked? Is there such a group?
Aside from the immediate and on-going benefits of less pollution, less plastic in our bodies, cheaper energy/heating bills, lower disaster insurance, safer jobs for all the manual/skilled labourers in the energy industry, the mental health benefits of being somewhere greener?
>> No. 447880 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 10:59 pm
447880 spacer
>>447879
Yes. Aside from the benefits, there will be downsides (no steak, no pineapples in January, no driving anywhere, lots of jobs disappearing). Is there anyone for whom none of the downsides apply?
>> No. 447881 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 11:24 pm
447881 spacer
>>447866
>you can't have foreign holidays, bacon butties
Nope. Not happening. These are non-negotiable, as in cold dead hands non-negotiable.
>> No. 447882 Anonymous
16th November 2021
Tuesday 11:44 pm
447882 spacer
>>447880

Elon Musk?

>>447881

Precisely.
>> No. 447888 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 11:05 am
447888 spacer

FEVTbuYVgAMXjGj.jpg
447888447888447888
Nothing about it on the BBC home page but pretty much the entire city of Vancouver got fucked by floods yesterday. I'm not sure how extensive it is because I don't know enough about Canadian cities.
>> No. 447889 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 11:12 am
447889 spacer
>>447888
That road junction looks very vaginal. What is the proper fanny equivalent word for phallic?
>> No. 447890 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 11:16 am
447890 spacer
>>447889
Yonic?
>> No. 447891 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 11:16 am
447891 spacer
>>447889
Cunty?
>> No. 447893 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 11:47 am
447893 spacer
>>447889

Vulvic.

Still or sparkling?
>> No. 447894 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 12:04 pm
447894 spacer

crusty.jpg
447894447894447894

>> No. 447897 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 12:48 pm
447897 spacer
>>447894

You can read the transcripts of their statements to the court if you like:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CX7EjSiQfnIu3hXSFRlL7F0RhiV-rFtQBCYEY41oZ4s/
>> No. 447899 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 1:05 pm
447899 spacer
>>447894
Wouldn't fancy being that last bloke's lawyer.
>> No. 447900 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 1:14 pm
447900 spacer
>>447899
I don't think they used lawyers.
>> No. 447902 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 1:20 pm
447902 spacer
They should have glued themselves to the courtroom.
>> No. 447903 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 1:25 pm
447903 spacer
>>447902
They have done in the past.
https://www.rt.com/uk/523443-extinction-rebellion-glue-court-case/
>> No. 447904 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 1:47 pm
447904 spacer
>>447888

At least the go kart track is safe.
>> No. 447907 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 1:56 pm
447907 spacer
>>447904

Thought you were talking about the M25 for a moment there.
>> No. 447908 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 2:59 pm
447908 spacer
>>447888

This is really disturbing. Are there any websites that are dedicated to just recording climate-change related weather events and proper coverage of it?
>> No. 447909 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 3:08 pm
447909 spacer
>>447908
See

http://britfa.gs/b/res/425684.html
>> No. 447910 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 3:14 pm
447910 spacer
>>447908

I don't know and I don't think I'd want to, that would drive you rapidly into depression.
>> No. 447912 Anonymous
17th November 2021
Wednesday 4:32 pm
447912 spacer

FERakroWUAAgwaz.png
447912447912447912
>>447908
With some clarification, the whole city isn't flooded, just large parts of the suburbs. But the city itself is temporarily an island, at least the roads in and out are gone.
https://twitter.com/bmay/status/1460732704715071491
>> No. 447942 Anonymous
18th November 2021
Thursday 7:15 pm
447942 spacer
I really love massive, American, petrol guzzling cars. I can't believe I used to protest about climate change when I was in uni. Lately, I find myself not really caring anymore. Did I go through the five stages of grief? I think I did. I have accepted it now.

Good luck lads.
>> No. 447943 Anonymous
18th November 2021
Thursday 8:23 pm
447943 spacer

This is quite worth watching. Everything the woman in red says is just garbage.
>> No. 447944 Anonymous
18th November 2021
Thursday 8:47 pm
447944 spacer
>>447943
She's on the Jeremy Vine Show, formerly The Wright Stuff, on Channel 5 quite a lot as well. She's like that right-wing black woman they have sometimes; she goes on these programmes to represent the viewpoints of reactionaries who don't want to think about politics at all, but for some reason still watch political debates like this. She's basically thick for a living.
>> No. 447945 Anonymous
18th November 2021
Thursday 8:56 pm
447945 spacer
>>447944
>she goes on these programmes to represent the viewpoints of reactionaries who don't want to think about politics at all
That was the impression I got. She's just reciting the usual meaningless objections with no particular logic but a patronising smile.
>> No. 447946 Anonymous
18th November 2021
Thursday 9:13 pm
447946 spacer
>>447943
I'm not going to watch it, because I get enough bullshit beamed directly into my brain already and poor bloody Monbiot, I can't watch him suffer, not with all the shit he's got going on. It would break my heart. However, I wanted to see what the red woman's day job was and -
>Dawn Neesom... was the editor of the Daily Star newspaper, having been promoted to the post in December 2003, but at the end of February 2018 she left the post.
So "journalist" is over egging the pudding somewhat and having her debate George is bordering on the inhumane.

>>447944
People occasionally talk about how to motivate non-voters, but what we really need to do is demotivate the kind of voter you touched on. We, the collective politics freaks, have been hoisted by our own pitards by insisting people should "care about this sort of thing", without considering what the end result might be.
>> No. 447948 Anonymous
18th November 2021
Thursday 9:20 pm
447948 spacer
>>447946
To George's credit he doesn't really engage with her talking points much, he just says what he wants to say. In the last few seconds after the guests have been cut off though, the reactions of the hosts are ... they almost get it. Almost.
>> No. 447953 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 10:54 am
447953 spacer
https://twitter.com/fox_sheldon/status/1461464712667930631
Miami flooded yesterday. Not as deep or catastrophic but with all the bright lights it's very pretty.
>> No. 447954 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 11:07 am
447954 spacer
>>447888>>447953
Are we supposed to care about climate change because it's affecting North America?

It reminds me of America expecting the world to sit up and listen about BLM because of George Floyd. The planet does not revolve around them.
>> No. 447956 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 11:25 am
447956 spacer

ruislip-manor3.png
447956447956447956
>>447954

No you prat. That's just where it's most noticeably happening today yet not being widely reported. I sympathise with being sick of that sort of septic attitude but it's not what's happening here.
>> No. 447957 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 11:36 am
447957 spacer
>>447956
It's heavily localised flash flooding after a spot of rain, it's extremely minor news.

You've got to be careful when you find yourself in a bubble, lad. I remember when I used to knock about with some people heavily into the LGBT and they'd work themselves up over a bit of news, like Die Antwoord being transphobic or the sexual. Abuse allegations surrounding PWR BTTM, and they'd act like it was a major piece of news that everyone should be aware of when the reality was that their bubble had made them hypersensitive to this sort of thing and this would then be amplified whilst for the overwhelming majority of people it's trivial.
>> No. 447958 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 11:46 am
447958 spacer
>>447957

So worked up about it that my only comment was "it's very pretty". Thing is, the delusion that it's trivial because you're in the habit of treating everything in the news or social dialogue with equal weight and scepticism, as though nothing reported can be anything more than a passing event with no wider import, is the problem.
>> No. 447959 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 11:48 am
447959 spacer
>>447953

Without wanting to sound reactionary, it's hard to tell if flooding in places like Miami means anything at all. A lot of cities on the coastal regions of the States couldn't be in worse locations, geographically speaking, if you tried; but they are, because in the old days it was the easiest place for ships to get to. New Orleans is a good example, part of the reason it was fucked so completely by Katrina is that most of the city is a good 20 feet below sea level- When it's right next to the sea.
>> No. 447960 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 11:50 am
447960 spacer
>>447959

That's a fair comment but it's still interlinked; floods worsened and more frequent.
>> No. 447961 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:08 pm
447961 spacer
>>447960
You're being a bit of a prat here. I get that XR is trying to step up its game but you ought to be careful with the whole freak weather event = climate change in action, at best it makes you look disingenuous and at worse one of those sorts reading Rapture Ready.

Also the news doesn't really report freak weather events because they're not exactly uncommon on a global level and never have been. They might be becoming more common but that's more of an aggregate story for a slow news day. Autism box ticked because this thread is now well over 3k posts of autistic meltdown.
>> No. 447962 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:16 pm
447962 spacer

chart from the met office.png
447962447962447962
>>447961

If you say so mate.
>> No. 447963 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:23 pm
447963 spacer
>>447962
You can't link every extreme weather event to climate change, what you've posted is aggregated data. It's retarded to try to link every event and betrays the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
>> No. 447964 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:27 pm
447964 spacer
>>447963
He wasn’t trying to debate you, he was politely telling you to piss off.
>> No. 447965 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:27 pm
447965 spacer

cd00283948bd17cde5c92b01c8f460c8.jpg
447965447965447965
>>447963
>> No. 447966 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:39 pm
447966 spacer

sew.jpg
447966447966447966
>>447957
>It's heavily localised flash flooding after a spot of rain, it's extremely minor news.

I'm not really sure that's the case. It seems like more and more places are succumbing to flash floods these days.
In the South, we've had large expendatures on flood defenses and just recently saw raw sewage overflow into the seas and rivers, due to maximum capacity of our water management systems.

This is undoubtedly due to extreme weather events, which appear to be happening all over the world. Check social medias; there's word of flooding across India, there was that German village last year and again recently, not to mention all the other shit i'm forgetting about.

Unless it's just the media bias reporting because 'climate change is so hot right now', It feels like a major problem of our time which is much easier to ignore now and hope it goes away by itself. Unfortunately I must know that's not the case as I've been having sleepless nights about for the past few weeks as the autumn takes hold.
>> No. 447967 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 3:56 pm
447967 spacer
>>447963
It's not retarded, it's basic political strategy. I believe the concept is called the policy window, for which the archetypal example of abuse is the 9/11 > Iraq connection. 9/11 created the opening to seriously discuss the invasion of Iraq, even though there was no proper link between the two and the connection they did make was laughably tenuous.
You get this all the time. The event draws widespread public attention while creating an opportunity to define what the problem is, then you can define your solution to the problem. (Think recently to how the murder of an MP lead to talking about legislation about online abuse. Define the problem as "MPs being mistreated" and then you can define the solution as "stop people swearing at me on Twitter", even though that wouldn't have stopped the original incident.)

Now obviously in the case of climate change it's not that bad, there is actually a connection there. It's easier to illustrate with examples of tenuous policy connections but it only stands to reason that if your political aim is to make governments fight climate change or to just raise the issue on the political agenda, and if there is actually something of a causative link between the two (in general if "not proven" for the specific event), you'll take the opportunity the weather has provided you to talk about climate change - I mean for god's sake the alternative is quite literally "talking about the weather."
>> No. 447968 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 5:11 pm
447968 spacer
>>447964
What makes you think I was trying to convince greta-lad? I'm doing this to collect my BP paycheque.

>>447967
It's retarded in this instance because climate science is both fickle and requires trustworthy data. Saying x = y is something climate change sceptics do whenever there's a cold-snap and in the context of climate alarmism just makes you sound like one of those people looking for signs of the apocalypse in the bible.

I get what he's trying to do, although why he does it on an arse-pissing forum is anyone's guess, but that doesn't mean it works.
>> No. 447971 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 5:27 pm
447971 spacer
>>447968
Perhaps I am drawing my appalling cynicism too far but this feels rather like a cop out. Like responding to a post complaining that an austerity budget is probably going to hurt growth with "actually, we'll have to wait for academic analysis to know what the effect will be." It's hard not to get the impression the actual aim here is an intellectualised version of telling people to just not talk about it, since it's not like someone's going to come back in 2 or 10 years and go "oh look, they did a research paper (several? outright consensus?) that said actually it probably was down to an atypical weather pattern ultimately made much more likely by planetary temperature increases after all..." so we can have a proper "scientific" debate.

But of course, an equally cynical read on what i've just said is that I've just moved to the next level of over-intellectualising telling people to be quiet. It's cynicism all the way down.
>> No. 447972 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 5:28 pm
447972 spacer
>>447968
>Saying x = y
Nobody did this, it's just a reference to one of the extreme weather events that are worsening and increasing in frequency.

>climate alarmism
Climate scientists have consistently understated the risks in the past, mostly because of people accusing them of alarmism for reporting the actual facts.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/opinion/sunday/science-climate-change.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/10/23/the-biggest-threat-to-climate-science-comes-from-climate-advocates/

>I'm doing this to collect my BP paycheque.
If you have to resort to implying other people are pushing conspiracy theories that nobody has even come close to then you've already lost the argument.
>> No. 447976 Anonymous
19th November 2021
Friday 8:32 pm
447976 spacer
>>447966
They've had absolutely catastrophic flooding in China recently, a whole city got flooded there over summer, resulting in a 4km road tunnel get flooded (after which the army got drafted in to pull the thousands of cars of rush hour traffic out of the tunnel and announced an official death toll of about a dozen). China is also in a massive crisis right now because they suffered such severe flooding that a large portion of their coal production halted due to mines flooding.
>> No. 447980 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 8:53 am
447980 spacer
>Single-use plastics such as plates, cutlery and polystyrene cups could be banned in England as ministers launch a public consultation on the issue.

>Environment Secretary George Eustice said it was "time we left our throwaway culture behind once and for all". Separately, wet wipes, tobacco filters and sachets will be also examined.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59357222

Ruddy eco-crusties want your sachets now.
>> No. 447981 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 9:13 am
447981 spacer
>>447980

More a case of "Government want tiny lip-service to look like they're making an effort" than eco-crusties I think.
>> No. 447982 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 9:29 am
447982 spacer
>>447981

It barely even counts as lip service. A lifecycle analysis by the Environment Agency found that paper carrier bags had triple the carbon footprint of plastic bags, regardless of whether either type of bag is recycled. Re-useable coffee cups only have a marginally better carbon footprint than disposable cups due to the energy involved in washing them; the overwhelming majority of the carbon footprint of a cup of coffee is from the coffee and milk.

Plastic packaging is ubiquitous because it's incredibly efficient. We can see plastic waste, but we can't see carbon dioxide.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/291023/scho0711buan-e-e.pdf

https://www.oregon.gov/deq/FilterDocs/PEF-Coffee-FullReport.pdf
>> No. 447983 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 10:31 am
447983 spacer
>>447982

As I understand it, the need to cut down on plastics is a distinct issue to reducing carbon emissions. Plastics would ultimately be harmful to the biosphere in the long term regardless if they were carbon neutral.

That said, shit like sauce sachets and carrier bags were never the problem. It's just always the case that the government will target something ineffectual where the main impact is on the convenience of people's everyday life, instead of something effective like the services and industries where plastic waste is truly rampant.

I often shudder to think how much plastic waste we generate at work (NHSlab lad) because all the glassware pipettes and dishes etc you'd have in a traditional lab are all disposable plastics now. And recycling is out of the question too, since it's biohazardous waste.
>> No. 447984 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 10:39 am
447984 spacer
>>447983
I think you've posted similar sentiments before but honestly it just seems the same as making exceptions for disabled people to have plastic straws or similar; it's a necessity and could easily be dealt with through recycling if we had our priorities in order. It can't realistically be anything like the scale of consumerist waste anyway. Is it possible it just seems excessive because you're so close to it?
>> No. 447985 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 2:40 pm
447985 spacer
>>447983

Plastic waste is entirely harmless if disposed of properly and still doesn't do all that much damage if it's just dumped in the sea. I've read dozens, possibly hundreds of papers on microplastics but I haven't seen any evidence that they're actually significantly harmful. The most credible argument I've seen is that plastics in the environment can absorb and aggregate other pollutants, but a) that's still just a hypothesis and b) if that's the case then plastics are really a secondary issue.

In the developed world, the vast majority of plastic pollution is discarded fishing gear. Leakage from landfills or deliberate dumping of waste is very much a developing world problem and it's not something we can fix through domestic action. Most household plastic items found in the sea came from containers that had fallen off ships.

https://www.sapea.info/wp-content/uploads/report.pdf
>> No. 447986 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 5:28 pm
447986 spacer
>>447985
>Leakage from landfills or deliberate dumping of waste is very much a developing world problem
In fairness, isn't this because most first world waste management strategies are basically to send it to the third world? I vaguely remember there being a big thing where China suddenly told everyone to fuck off and stop sending them plastic to "recycle" cheaply (namely:recycle into landfill while allowing western waste management companies to go "look, we're recycling!") because they weren't poor enough for it to be worth it anymore.
>> No. 447988 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 8:11 pm
447988 spacer
>>447986

Partly, but most of it comes from urban areas with lots of waterways and no municipal waste services. The problem is compounded by a lack of clean tap water, which massively increases their reliance on single-use water bottles.

The export of plastic waste is a weird political thing. Our government imposes a landfill tax of £96.70 per tonne. There's no real environmental rationale other than "landfill bad, recycling good".

Some plastics (particularly HDPE and clear PET) are easy and economical to recycle, but a lot of other plastics aren't, especially plastics mixed with other materials. These are more common than you might think - crisp packets, for example, are lined with a very thin layer of aluminium that makes them impermeable to air but makes the plastic impractical to recycle.

Well-managed landfill (i.e. practically all landfill in Europe) has essentially no environmental impact. There's a barrier liner to prevent toxic liquid from leaking out, there are catch ponds in case that fails and there's a methane capture system. Once the landfill is filled, capped and the land above it reclaimed, you wouldn't know it had ever been there.

Waste management companies saw a very straightforward business problem. They had tonnes and tonnes of plastic waste that was completely uneconomical to recycle and expensive to landfill domestically, so they paid someone in a less-regulated country to take it off their hands. For whatever reason, our government didn't do anything of substance to intervene, despite how obvious the ruse was.

There is another option if landfill doesn't appeal - waste-to-energy with carbon capture. Plastic is basically solid oil and will produce almost nothing but water and CO2 if burned at a sufficiently high temperature. Stick a carbon capture system on the chimney, use the heat to spin a turbine and you're producing zero-carbon electricity from plastic waste. Carbon capture is an expensive technology, but it would work out significantly cheaper per tonne than the landfill tax.
>> No. 447990 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 10:39 pm
447990 spacer
15 years ago, I kept a plastic bag from a shop because it was meant to biodegrade within two years, and I wanted to see if it did. Then I forgot to check it, but I trust the bag's claims enough to not bother trying to look for it. So why can't all bags be like that? Surely there have been developments in plastic technology since 2006 (it might have been 2007 to be honest, but the point still stands), so if anything, biodegradable plastic should be more useful in more situations now than ever before. You could probably make biodegradable medical pipettes too, and I'm certain you could make biodegradable single-use straws. And it would solve a huge amount of plastic problems all in one stroke. Even if biodegrading plastics emit carbon dioxide somehow, it would be a piece of piss to plant a lot of trees nearby, or even to just dump all the plastic in the woods somewhere.

I accept that you probably couldn't manufacture a biodegradable TV or smartphone or windscreen wiper, but people seem to have stopped putting it forward as a suggestion. Is it cost? Because the cost issue is easy to fix; just invent a new green tax for all the non-biodegradable plastics and tell anyone who disagrees to eat shit. We'd all get to keep using plastic, and any plastic more than a few years old would magically get rid of itself. What am I missing here?
>> No. 447991 Anonymous
20th November 2021
Saturday 11:15 pm
447991 spacer
>>447990

They only biodegrade under really specific conditions. Think of it like paper, but worse. Paper biodegrades really rapidly but if it's in your house will last longer than you. I think you've missed the point about carbon storage that >>447988 made.

You could definitely make a biodegradable windscreen wiper.
>> No. 447992 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 12:42 am
447992 spacer
>>447988

This all sounds great but for one thing, it all hinges on that carbon capture. How effective is it really? I know a utopian sounding too-good-to-be-true miracle tech when I see one and carbon capture definitely seems like it.

I've got an idea. Why don't we stitch all the leftover plastic bags together into giant balloons, fill them with C02, and then let them float off into space? Two birds in one stone, and it creates jobs.
>> No. 447993 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 1:25 am
447993 spacer
>>447992

>How effective is it really?

It's relatively expensive (~£90/tonne) which makes it non-viable if you're burning coal, but it starts to make economic sense if you're burning waste that people will pay you to get rid of.

Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands all have operational waste-to-energy facilities with carbon capture. The CO2 is liquefied and sold for industrial and agricultural use.
>> No. 448003 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 4:34 pm
448003 spacer
>>447992
> I've got an idea. Why don't we stitch all the leftover plastic bags together into giant balloons, fill them with C02, and then let them float off into space? Two birds in one stone, and it creates jobs.

CO2 is heavier than air, so the plastic balloons would hang around on the ground like discarded dog poo bags.
>> No. 448004 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 4:35 pm
448004 spacer
>>448003
Then the council should provide CO2 waste bins. Problem sorted.
>> No. 448008 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 9:01 pm
448008 spacer
>>448003

If it's heavier than air, how come it fucks up the atmosphere so much? Shouldn't we all be suffocating in a blanket of carbon dioxide by now?

Still, we could just make it into a hot CO2 balloon so that it floats. And since it's entire purpose is getting rid of all the CO2, we can burn as much fossil fuel as we want to accomplish it.
>> No. 448010 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 9:45 pm
448010 spacer

underwater.png
448010448010448010
>>448008 coastal.climatecentral.org/map/9/0.4584/52.9348/

says I'm going underwater by 2030, but then nothing gets any worse for a few decades. What's up with that? I don't think there's a massive wall around the fens. yet.
>> No. 448011 Anonymous
21st November 2021
Sunday 10:22 pm
448011 spacer
>>448010

I can't say I'll miss places like Boston or Grimsby.
>> No. 448015 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 12:02 am
448015 spacer
>>448010
Time to invest in beautiful seafront property in Peterborough!
>> No. 448047 Anonymous
24th November 2021
Wednesday 2:20 am
448047 spacer
>>448010
Why is most of Africa safe, even with 10 metre rise?
>> No. 448050 Anonymous
24th November 2021
Wednesday 10:16 am
448050 spacer
>>448047

The polar soaks it all up.

I came up with an idea a bit ago where we could just pump all the extra sea water into the middle of polars like the Sahara and Atacama. Make them into more lively places, maybe nice places to go on holiday.

Two birds, one stone. And it creates jobs.
>> No. 448055 Anonymous
24th November 2021
Wednesday 1:23 pm
448055 spacer
>>448050
Personally, I'm looking forward to sunny beaches where the sun doesn't set for a week in Northern Alaska.
>> No. 448056 Anonymous
24th November 2021
Wednesday 1:47 pm
448056 spacer
>>448055
Enjoy your megamosquitos.

I do like the 'flood the polars' plan, though. What would really happen? And re-flood the Aral sea while you're at it. Plenty of solar power to run some massive pumps.
>> No. 448066 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 9:59 am
448066 spacer

whatif.png
448066448066448066
There were rumblings of potential threats of violence early in the year but they got quieter after a while. Post-COP26 they seem to be back and much louder now. Interesting times.
>> No. 448067 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 1:07 pm
448067 spacer
Explain to me why anyone gives a fuck about some flooding that will happen when you're dead?
>> No. 448068 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 2:29 pm
448068 spacer
>>448067
No.
>> No. 448069 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 2:46 pm
448069 spacer
>>448067
Childrens future, etc.
>> No. 448070 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 3:34 pm
448070 spacer
>>448067
Genuinely amazed if you can't figure this one out at all.
>> No. 448071 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 3:36 pm
448071 spacer
>>448070
He's just being cool.
>> No. 448077 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 10:32 pm
448077 spacer
>>448067
Honestly, I don't really care too.
>> No. 448079 Anonymous
26th November 2021
Friday 3:51 am
448079 spacer
I'm not sure there's any point caring about the climate anymore now that we're all going to die from the apocalypse plague anyway.
>> No. 448080 Anonymous
26th November 2021
Friday 9:17 am
448080 spacer

Liam from IB taking calls live on LBC for some reason.
>> No. 448081 Anonymous
26th November 2021
Friday 9:19 am
448081 spacer

image_2021-11-26_101517.png
448081448081448081
>>448067>>448077>>448079

I sometimes look back over this thread and it genuinely seems like there's at least one poster whose sole job it is to make low effort posts about not caring. It always happens to be just enough single sentence posts to knock the last genuine climate change related story off the front page of /*/ and /sfw/.

I don't know who needs to be told again, but climate change is already happening. It's not a case of "a load of floods happening after you're dead". Those floods are happening now and you may well be affected. You have probably been affected indirectly already. If you intend to remain alive for more than a decade or two, climate change is increasing the chance that you are more severely affected (by logistical interruptions or crop failure in other areas of the world) and/or directly experience an event. This article details some of the IPCC findings on what we should expect from this moment on in Europe: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/oct/14/climate-change-happening-now-stats-graphs-maps-cop26
>> No. 448082 Anonymous
26th November 2021
Friday 9:24 am
448082 spacer
>>448081
Whenever a thread reaches a certain size it starts to go round in circles. The evangelist christian korean youtuber thread on /news/ will be the same four or five talking points in a continuous loop.
>> No. 448088 Anonymous
26th November 2021
Friday 11:07 am
448088 spacer

FFHNYQ6WUAIovKd.jpg
448088448088448088
XR's blocking the Amazon supply chain at various places in the Netherlands, Germany and UK for Black Friday; by chance GMB and TUC also declared strikes today at some of the same locations so we get some lovely images like this of one strike with the others in the background.
>> No. 448173 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 6:03 pm
448173 spacer

>> No. 448174 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 6:12 pm
448174 spacer
>>448173
Not clicking. Piss off. Same joke for ten years, I can't believe the cheek of this waster.
>> No. 448175 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 6:29 pm
448175 spacer
>>448173

This bloke and Kunt and the Gang are interchangeable in my mind.
>> No. 448177 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 6:47 pm
448177 spacer
>>448174

It's not all that joke in this one, it's broader than that. But understandable if you prefer not to.
>> No. 448184 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 8:32 pm
448184 spacer
>>448174

What's the joke? I've only watched a couple of his videos, and he just seems like a bloke who spends a bit too long hammering an obvious point.
>> No. 448198 Anonymous
3rd December 2021
Friday 10:26 am
448198 spacer
>>448184

It seems the format changed a bit for this one, but the character would usually feature in shorter videos as a news reporter that goes on impassioned rants at his production crew about what he was "really" reporting on, then the videos would end with him quickly recomposing himself and delivering a typical dry and restrained BBC style report as the camera fades out.

I suppose the comedy was in feeling like you're seeing something you shouldn't, where a normally composed, neutral figure goes wildly out of character. It was a fine format for satire, but as >>448174 says, maybe it had its limits.

In his defense, we have other longer-running and even more tedious comedy characters in British culture.
>> No. 448199 Anonymous
3rd December 2021
Friday 11:23 am
448199 spacer
>>448174
I've never encountered this man before so I'm not yet shied. It's fairly on the nose and there's a few instances of what others have described as his shtick ('Network' style candid rants but Funny), but it's great watching them get Caroline Lucas in on it. Greater still if she's genuinely unaware and her impassioned speech was off the cuff. Though I imagine there's some complicity on her part since she waited around after the frog-fucking comments.
>> No. 448200 Anonymous
3rd December 2021
Friday 12:54 pm
448200 spacer
>>448199

I'm fairly sure that the people involved (Lucas, Monbiot, Miliband) are complicit in the act.
>> No. 448202 Anonymous
3rd December 2021
Friday 1:40 pm
448202 spacer
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/02/us/montana-wildfire-drought.html
Wildfires currently due to heat and drought in a place that usually has snow from November until Spring. More unrelated "weather not climate" no doubt.
>“We’re looking at conditions we haven’t seen for a thousand years in Montana and probably longer in terms of the drought,” she said. “Temperatures are exceeding what we have seen for the last 11,000 years.”
>> No. 448235 Anonymous
6th December 2021
Monday 1:06 pm
448235 spacer
>>448199
>Greater still if she's genuinely unaware and her impassioned speech was off the cuff
What? You really think any of his guests aren't aware of the premise? I'm sure Lucas meant every word she said but it was definitely 'scripted'.
>> No. 448347 Anonymous
12th December 2021
Sunday 8:37 pm
448347 spacer

foglod.png
448347448347448347
>Continuing heavy rainfall has caused widespread flooding across Australia’s east coast after two women died when their cars were swept away in Brisbane
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/dec/10/weather-warning-nsw-woman-dies-in-floods-as-severe-thunderstorms-batter-sydney-and-queensland
>Ever since warnings of severe thunderstorms were issued by the Oudstrhoon municipality, several homes have been destroyed and families were displaced after strong winds, heavy rain and widespread flooding continued to wreak havoc.
https://www.thesouthafrican.com/lifestyle/breaking-flash-flood-oudsthoorn-december-2021-woman-watch-video/
>Intense Storms Cause Flooding, Bridge Collapse in Western Greece
https://greekreporter.com/2021/12/12/storms-flooding-bridge-collapse-greece/
>Dozens of flood warnings have been issued across the UK, while communities in the North East and Scotland continue their recovery from the catastrophic effects of Storm Arwen. Around 1,000 properties remain without power after Storm Barra swept across the country.
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-12-08/floods-forecast-across-the-uk-as-storm-barra-brings-ice-wind-and-rain
>Tornadoes Leave Trail of Devastation Across Six States, With Scores Dead
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/12/11/us/tornadoes-midwest-south
>Reports of an oncoming blizzard in the Aloha State have made headlines worldwide, and now, Hawaii residents are bracing themselves for potentially devastating flash floods.
https://www.greenmatters.com/p/hawaii-flooding-december-2021

Quiet month.
>> No. 448402 Anonymous
15th December 2021
Wednesday 8:08 pm
448402 spacer
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/antarctic-ice-giving-way-last-change-avoid-climate-change-catastrophe-1353960
The Thwaites Glacier is near collapse. That's pretty bad.
>likely to break apart within the next five to 10 years. The future of the entire Glacier is becoming increasingly uncertain. Sea levels could rise by over 60cm if it is lost.
>> No. 448565 Anonymous
26th December 2021
Sunday 7:22 pm
448565 spacer

pricks.png
448565448565448565
>>425684
Suppliers to government contracts should show videos in standard definition rather than HD to help fight climate change, ministers have said.

Possibly the stupidest shit I have ever read.
>> No. 448570 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 10:58 am
448570 spacer
>>448565
Why? Computer and video processing (I've heard) demands a lot of power. It could make sense to cut that down as part of the publics contribution toward greater enery efficiency.

I'm wondering if there's a security aspect to consider - a person would presumably be less able to detect deepfakes and edited images on lower res displays, for example.
>> No. 448571 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 11:09 am
448571 spacer
>>448570
I'm all for energy efficiency, obviously, I'd like to see their workings though. There are millions of examples of waste on the internet, I just don't believe turning off HD video is relevant or useful.

I mean compare that, to how much data is transferred/wasted every time Call of Duty ships some 90Gb update.
>> No. 448572 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 12:42 pm
448572 spacer
>>448570
If the info being communicated is really classified enough that you have to check you're not talking to a deepfake, I'm sure there are ways to check. Do a 360 turn on camera, wave your hands in front of your face, I dunno.
>> No. 448574 Anonymous
27th December 2021
Monday 1:06 pm
448574 spacer
>>448572

I was going to say they're probably not talking about classified stuff over zoom, but then I remembered it's the government.
>> No. 448632 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 12:17 am
448632 spacer
>>448574

The gubment don't run Zoom
>> No. 448634 Anonymous
30th December 2021
Thursday 12:37 am
448634 spacer
>>448632

I know?
>> No. 449805 Anonymous
22nd February 2022
Tuesday 10:29 pm
449805 spacer

SEI_89431309.jpg
449805449805449805
>Morrisons says it will become the first UK supermarket to sell its own brand milk in ‘carbon neutral cartons’.

>The supermarket claims the new Tetra Pak packaging will save an initial 100 tonnes of plastic a year, alongside another 678 tonnes by switching its own label juice to the same system. Milk bottles are one of the biggest users of plastic packaging in the UK – and account for around 10% of all plastic currently used – but supermarkets have long struggled to find a more sustainable and cost-effective alternative.

>Eventually, Morrisons hopes to move all of its fresh milk into the Tetra Paks, which it says has been independently verified as a ‘better sustainable packaging option’.

https://The Metro is owned by the Daily Mail./2022/02/22/morrisons-to-ditch-plastic-bottles-and-sell-milk-in-carbon-neutral-packaging-16150089/

I can't put Tetra Pak in my recycling bin, so that'd mean more waste going to landfill.
>> No. 449806 Anonymous
22nd February 2022
Tuesday 11:43 pm
449806 spacer
>>449805
Bring on the Canadian style milk in a plastic bag.
>> No. 449807 Anonymous
23rd February 2022
Wednesday 1:08 am
449807 spacer
>>449805

>I can't put Tetra Pak in my recycling bin

Really? We can put them in ours, and I live in the pre-industrial North.
>> No. 449808 Anonymous
23rd February 2022
Wednesday 7:03 am
449808 spacer

Layers-of-a-Tetra-Pak-Carton.jpg
449808449808449808
>>449807
As it stands, around 65% of councils will accept Tetra Pak in the household recycle bins and around 90% have at least one site in their area where you can drop them off. In my area there's a few supermarkets with bottle banks and cardboard bins where I can also drop off Tetra Paks but that's it.

Tetra Paks have been historically difficult to recycle due to the thin layers of cardboard, aluminium and plastic. Unlike with plastic or glass bottles, a Tetra Pak will be broken down into low quality paper or polymer for buildin materials rather than actually being converted into new containers; there is no cyclical loop, you keep having to cut down trees and the like to make new ones as you can't reuse the old ones for this. Many councils don't like recycling Tetra Pak because it's more costly and there is little demand for the end product, so there's no value for them; there are councils out there telling their residents it's not sustainable to recycle it and they should put it in the bin instead because it'd have a much better environmental impact chucking it in the bin and it being used to generate electricity in an incinerator.

To this end, Tetra Pak have been imcentivising councils to take their products and also helping out firms dedicated to recycling them, as specialised companies are the ones who can make it financially viable to deal with them.
>> No. 449809 Anonymous
23rd February 2022
Wednesday 11:06 am
449809 spacer
>>449806
Sainsbury's did that a few years ago, can't I with a free plastic jug which you put the bag in, bag is then pierced and milk can be poured. They discontinued bagged milk in less than a month. Guess it never took off.
>> No. 449810 Anonymous
23rd February 2022
Wednesday 4:30 pm
449810 spacer
>>449809
It turns out we're not like those crazy Torontonians who buy bagged milk in multipacks.
>> No. 449849 Anonymous
1st March 2022
Tuesday 7:25 am
449849 spacer

2000.jpg
449849449849449849
>UN climate report: 'Atlast of human suffering' worse, bigger
https://apnews.com/article/climate-science-europe-united-nations-weather-8d5e277660f7125ffdab7a833d9856a3
>Deadly with extreme weather now, climate change is about to get so much worse
>The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report said Monday if human-caused global warming isn’t limited to just another couple tenths of a degree, an Earth now struck regularly by deadly heat, fires, floods and drought in future decades will degrade in 127 ways with some being “potentially irreversible.”
>> No. 449850 Anonymous
1st March 2022
Tuesday 4:51 pm
449850 spacer
>>449849
I still think there're weather manipulation technologies invloved for covert war/mainpulation purposes. That's not to say climate change insn't a thing, mind, only that it would provide a good cover for such activity.
>> No. 449889 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 3:56 am
449889 spacer

fatso.png
449889449889449889
gretchen has gained a lot of weight recently, she now has a double chin
>> No. 449890 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 7:48 am
449890 spacer
>>449889

What's that symbol on her cap? She isn't suddenly gender fluid, is she?
>> No. 449891 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 7:51 am
449891 spacer
>>449890
She's on the spectrum and everyone knows speccy cunts get obsessed with gender bending.
>> No. 449892 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 8:52 am
449892 spacer
>>449889
>>449891
Hope you get bladder cancer.
>> No. 449894 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 10:33 am
449894 spacer
>>449892
You're upset she's not fit any more?
>> No. 449895 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 10:42 am
449895 spacer

p0cfx4m8fex5.png
449895449895449895
>>449889

That's not a double chin.


>>449894

Ironic, innit. Now that she's legal, she's turning into a munter. Paedolad can't win.
>> No. 449908 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 5:47 pm
449908 spacer

snapshot20090101062148.jpg
449908449908449908
>>449899
>> No. 449912 Anonymous
6th March 2022
Sunday 9:41 pm
449912 spacer

FNL0Y2yUUAAyzus.jpg
449912449912449912
The US appears to have record cold on the Western side and record heat on the East.

Incidentally whole towns are being submerged in New South Wales but that's not really in any news outside of the place.
>> No. 449914 Anonymous
7th March 2022
Monday 6:34 pm
449914 spacer
Oh no, I missed all the deleted posts.

>>449912
It happens every year. It isn't news any more. I guess the news bit would be why those cunts keep living in those places when they know what happens every year.
>> No. 449915 Anonymous
7th March 2022
Monday 6:43 pm
449915 spacer
>>449914

>I guess the news bit would be why those cunts keep living in those places when they know what happens every year


I guess the Murrikins are much more fatalistic in that respect. The ones I've met anyway. They even accept the fact that they'll lose everything if their house gets destroyed by flooding, wildfire or a tornado, because practically nobody has home insurance. Granted, insurance as such is expensive to begin with in the U.S., especially in known natural disaster areas. But Americans just don't seem to give as much thought to preparing for the worst as we do here in Britain. Loads of them still don't even have proper car insurance.
>> No. 449916 Anonymous
7th March 2022
Monday 6:44 pm
449916 spacer
>>449914
It's normally vice versa though. California normally sees forest fires whilst the North East is under a foot of snow,
>> No. 449917 Anonymous
7th March 2022
Monday 6:48 pm
449917 spacer
>>449915
>>449916
Sounds like a third world country, but to be fair, I only get insurance when it is legally required (vehicle insurance), otherwise, I don't bother with it. But my statement was more aimed at the Aussies.
>> No. 449918 Anonymous
7th March 2022
Monday 7:06 pm
449918 spacer
>>449917

>but to be fair, I only get insurance when it is legally required (vehicle insurance), otherwise, I don't bother with it

I live in a rented flat and I have tenants insurance. Not really required, but a friend recommended it to me. It took care of the water damage in his flat when he fell asleep on the sofa for half an hour while his bathtub was overflowing.
>> No. 449919 Anonymous
7th March 2022
Monday 7:07 pm
449919 spacer
>>449914

They're not usually this bad, nor are the fires in Argentine that have been going the past month, or as common in coastal areas. "It happens every year" is just frog boiling talk. At least in real life the frogs actually do something about it.
https://twitter.com/Gab_H_R/status/1500663362627280898
>> No. 449920 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 12:30 am
449920 spacer
>>449918
Add up all you spent on the insurance so far? Has it paid off?

>>449919
I forgot I was in a Greta Thunberg thread. My bad. Carry on. Yes, yes Australians are getting flood when they should have done something about it years ago considering they actually don't care about Global Warming.
>> No. 449922 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 10:10 am
449922 spacer
>>449920

>Add up all you spent on the insurance so far? Has it paid off?

I pay around 170 quid a year, it includes contents insurance and tenants liability, and I've lived here for five years, so we're looking at something like £850. Nobody has broken into my flat and nicked my stuff, and I also haven't caused any damage to the landlord's property. But say if I fall asleep on the couch like my friend and bathwater gets everywhere, then it's probably going to cost much more than 850 quid to fix it.

As with anything, it's a game of probabilities. You pay a smallish amount each year to protect yourself against much more substantial liabilities or loss of your own property. You can apply that to car insurance as well. The hundreds or maybe even over a thousand quid you pay each year are nothing compared to the kind of damage you can do to somebody else's property or even their health if you have an accident.
>> No. 449923 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 10:47 am
449923 spacer
>>449922
Why are you explaining insurance as if the concept is foreign to anyone here? What would be interesting to know is the percentage of people for whom it is profitable. Your exact line of reasoning could be used to argue in favour of playing the lottery. It's the specific probabilities that allow one to make an informed and meaningful choice and decidedly not stories of what happened to your mate.

Burglary was your top worry. Police recorded 267,000 burglaries last year with an average value of £2856. If we ballpark with 28 million households you're likely to go 100 years without falling victim (and likely longer because it's a crime in terminal decline) and to hedge your risk you'll shell out some twenty grand in that time.

It seems like saving money and earning a return rather than lining the pockets of insurance salesmen and shareholders is worth exploring.

Surely there's a smart tap you can buy if you're not confident in your ability to operate a manual one.
>> No. 449924 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 11:25 am
449924 spacer
>>449923

> If we ballpark with 28 million households you're likely to go 100 years without falling victim (and likely longer because it's a crime in terminal decline)

But then it's almost like being in a plane crash. Your risk of that is a few million to one, and even a serious incident during a flight is something many people will never experience, so it's not normally even worth thinking about. But that doesn't help you if you're on the one plane that goes down and everybody on board gets killed.

I see my tenants insurance as peace of mind that I'll be covered in the unlikely event that somebody breaks into my flat or I do something incredibly silly that damages the building's structure. 170 quid is a lot of money, but it's still worth it to me.

It's not even really likely that my flat will be broken into, as I'm on the third floor, and it's mostly ground-floor flats that are affected due to ease of access. They explained to me that breaking into a higher-up flat usually adds another level of complexity to a burglary because you will have to get in through the entrance and risk being seen by people, whereas you can just smash a window or pry open a frame to get into a ground floor flat. But still, I won't have to worry about it.
>> No. 449925 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 11:29 am
449925 spacer
>>449924
How thoroughly have you read your policy? I bet if you negligently damage the structure of your building/carry out work you're unqualified to do the insurance company will kick liability straight back to you.
>> No. 449926 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 12:03 pm
449926 spacer
>>449925

It covers accidental damage, and that includes negligence. I know that because I specifically asked for it when I signed. One reason why it's 170 quid a year, but you can't put a price on your own stupidity.
>> No. 449928 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 12:27 pm
449928 spacer
>>449926
Well if the salesperson said you're covered that's definitely not because you neglected to ask the question in precisely the right way and there's obviously no exemption they can use.

I'm looking at Direct Line's terms for their "highest level of cover" that "includes automatically" "accidental damage cover for those unexpected mishaps".

Of course, they "do not cover any loss or damage caused by faulty, inadequate or defective:

b) design, specifications, workmanship, repair, renovation,
remodelling, grading, compaction;
c) materials used in repair, construction, renovation or remodelling;
d) maintenance of part or all of any property, whether on or off
the home."
>> No. 449929 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 12:57 pm
449929 spacer
>>449923
I like to imagine this post was typed by someone in a stripy jumper and a mask, sitting next to a big bag with a dollar sign on it. Let the man insure himself; if anything he'll replace the stuff and you can rob him again.
>> No. 449930 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 1:19 pm
449930 spacer
>>449929
Nobody wants to steal his daft painted figurines.
>> No. 449931 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 1:35 pm
449931 spacer

cumulative rainfall.png
449931449931449931
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/mar/08/sydney-floods-nsw-evacuation-orders-flood-manly-dam-spills-roseville-bridge-inundated-road-closures-flooding
>Sydney itself has had its wettest start to any year, with 821.6mm as of Tuesday morning, well ahead of the nearest rival period in 1956, a Weatherzone meteorologist said. By Tuesday evening, the tally had risen by another 41mm.
So... not remotely the normal level of flooding/rainfall.
>Sydney floods: two found dead, roads inundated, homes and suburbs across the city swamped
Streets become rivers amid shocking deluge as Manly Dam spills and Roseville bridge flooded, with evacuation orders covering more than a dozen suburbs

>Tens of thousands of Sydney residents have been forced from their homes as floods unleashed carnage across Australia’s largest city and claimed the lives of a mother and son.

>Australia’s death toll from the east coast floods rose to 21 on Tuesday as a massive stretch of the New South Wales coast endured dangerous winds and heavy rains, causing landslides and wild surf conditions as the second east coast low in a week moved in.

>About 50,000 people were told to leave their homes across NSW including 40,000 residents in more than a dozen Sydney suburbs including the northern beaches.
>> No. 449932 Anonymous
8th March 2022
Tuesday 1:55 pm
449932 spacer
>>449928

I'm with Admiral and it says in their terms and conditions for my insurance that "accidental damage" to a landlord's property is covered. They also define "accidental damage" in their policy book as "sudden, unexpected and visible loss or damage which has not been caused deliberately."

There will almost always be negligence involved, like when you kick a football through a window. A good basic definition of negligence in UK law is this:

>Any act or omission which falls short of a standard to be expected of “the reasonable man.” For a claim in negligence to succeed, it is necessary to establish that a duty of care was owed by the defendant to the claimant, that the duty was breached, that the claimant's loss was caused by the breach of duty and that the loss fell within the defendant's scope of duty and was a foreseeable consequence of the breach of duty.

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/0-107-6876

It gets a little murky at that point, but if I remember the one or two law lectures I had at uni, "foreseeable" is a matter of degree when it comes to liability. It usually means that there is a reasonable but not always deterninistic possibility that doing A will lead to B, which you didn't even have to be aware of while you caused the damage. What matters is reasonable causality. And for the most part, it only starts to become gross negligence or even a deliberate act when doing A will lead to B with such invariable certainty that any reasonable person would have anticipated it and realistically couldn't have missed it.

Something like fitting a new natural gas boiler to your flat although you are in no way qualified or formally trained to do so probably constitutes gross negligence if something then goes wrong and your flat blows up.
>> No. 450074 Anonymous
19th March 2022
Saturday 4:17 pm
450074 spacer
>Arctic, Antarctica See Freakish Extreme Heat At Same Time
>Parts of Antarctica are more than 70 degrees warmer than average. Areas of the Arctic are more than 50 degrees warmer.

>Earth’s poles are undergoing simultaneous freakish extreme heat with parts of Antarctica more than 70 degrees (40 degrees Celsius) warmer than average and areas of the Arctic more than 50 degrees (30 degrees Celsius) warmer than average.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/earth-poles-freak-heat_n_6235c953e4b0c727d47eca4b
>> No. 450120 Anonymous
20th March 2022
Sunday 5:50 pm
450120 spacer

FOPcowEVIAIR1OL.jpg
450120450120450120
Simultaneous heat waves affect Arctic and Antarctic. Antarctic temperature is a record, and Antarctic sea ice (summer) was a record low. More evidence to suggest that the planet has entered a climate state that humans have never experienced.
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/antarctica-arctic-undergo-simultaneous-freakish-extreme-heat-rcna20747
>> No. 450160 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 10:41 am
450160 spacer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-60829623
170 wildfires in Teaxs, 100,000 acres burned so far.
>> No. 450161 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 12:54 pm
450161 spacer
>>450160
I don't know why we're talking about cutting fuel duty. We need to hold an annual lottery in which 10% of the population irrevocably loses their driving license.
>> No. 450162 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:12 pm
450162 spacer
>>450161

And what if you suddenly find yourself among those 10 percent?

You were more fun when you were slagging off OAPs, lad.
>> No. 450163 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:15 pm
450163 spacer
>>450162

I for one don't even have a driving license.
>> No. 450164 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:29 pm
450164 spacer
>>450162
You stop driving cars. Get a job closer to home. You start lobbying for better public transport (though with skyrocketing demand you'll not need to try too hard).

What do you mean, what happens? You live like >>450163 does.
>> No. 450165 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:35 pm
450165 spacer
>>450164

>Get a job closer to home.

Yes, the simplest part of the plan.
>> No. 450166 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:44 pm
450166 spacer
>>450165
It would certainly be simpler for you to wait for your home to be swallowed by the sea and let your descendants worry about where they shall find work.
>> No. 450167 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:45 pm
450167 spacer

please-dont-tell-anyone-how-i-live.png
450167450167450167
>>450164
>> No. 450168 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 1:57 pm
450168 spacer
>>450166

My commute to work isn't the fucking problem, bootlicker.
>> No. 450169 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 2:23 pm
450169 spacer
>>450168

Whose boot? The government's? Industry's?
>> No. 450170 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 2:25 pm
450170 spacer
>>450169

Both?
>> No. 450171 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 2:33 pm
450171 spacer
>>450170

10% of the population fewer driving annually would be quite significant but you're right, it would be better to aim higher at bigger polluters.
>> No. 450173 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 2:50 pm
450173 spacer
>>450168
Why are you traffic?
>> No. 450175 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 2:58 pm
450175 spacer
>>450173

Because of the government's boot on my neck that means that I have to work to not starve to death. And the industry boot that means I am expected to arrive at work early in the morning, before the buses start, without delay, or I lose my job and starve to death. And the work I have to do, to live, is contributing more co2 to the air in one day than I will in several lifetimes. I could stop working for them, couldn't I. And what, get a job in the Tesco's down the road? I could save so much fuel burning that way, I could walk into work, right past the customer car park, the delivery lorries, and the plastic wrapped fruit. Truly, my personal choices will have saved the planet.

How much control over this situation do I truly have?
>> No. 450176 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:11 pm
450176 spacer
>>450175
>I could stop working for them, couldn't I. And what, get a job in the Tesco's down the road?
Because the only jobs that exist are the shitty one you have and working in Tesco.

You're basically arguing "no ethical consumption under capitalism" and trying to use it as a free pass. It means that you can't get things delivered without someone in the chain being underpaid. It doesn't mean "I'm nobody so fuck everyone else".
>> No. 450177 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:18 pm
450177 spacer
>>450176

The only job within walking distance of my house is that Tesco. Maybe I could work from home, but that won't pay much more than Tesco.

Should I move?

Genuinely what am I supposed to do.
>> No. 450178 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:19 pm
450178 spacer
>>450176

>You're basically arguing "no ethical consumption under capitalism"

It's almost as if that's the problem.
>> No. 450179 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:23 pm
450179 spacer
>>450178
It's almost as if you can't read.
>> No. 450180 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:24 pm
450180 spacer
>>450179
>>450178
Okay, you both agree there is a problem. Rather than arguing about the degree to which it's personal fault for not working from home or Tesco or whatever, because you both understand it's a systemic issue, what could be done instead?
>> No. 450181 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:32 pm
450181 spacer
>>450180

The government should stop big corporations from polluting, without having any significant impact on our way of life. They should provide Realistic Solutions to Climate Change™ rather than just blaming everything on people emitting carbon.
>> No. 450182 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:33 pm
450182 spacer
>>450180
There is no "instead". It's going to require both personal and systemic changes.
>> No. 450183 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 3:49 pm
450183 spacer
>>450181

How do we go about making that happen?

>>450182

It does, but people don't respond well to the personal being demanded of them when they can see the equally (or more) important systemic changes not happening.
>> No. 450184 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:06 pm
450184 spacer
>>450164

>You stop driving cars. Get a job closer to home. You start lobbying for better public transport (though with skyrocketing demand you'll not need to try too hard).

And more often than not, you become an absolute bigot about it.


>>450181

>The government should stop big corporations from polluting, without having any significant impact on our way of life.

This is not feasible in the near future. Even with the transformation to green energy and green industry well under way, so far there is still no way of scaling pilot projects up to almost eight billion people on the planet.

We're in a remarkable transitional period in human history, at the end of which we will for the first time not be using fossil and/or carbon-producing energy at all, but it's still a long way off until the entire planet becomes effectively carbon neutral. Until then, temperatures will continue to rise and pollution will go on despite our best efforts.

Even carbon neutrality isn't going to stop global warming dead in its tracks, mind. To do that, we will have to become carbon negative. And that's going to take more than a Billion Tree Campaign, although it's a good start. We're pretty much going to have to revert every square foot of land that isn't used for housing, agriculture or industry to woodlands.
>> No. 450185 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:06 pm
450185 spacer
>>450183
You seem to be making an awful lot of fuss to justify being traffic rather than figuring out how you might make your life better.
>> No. 450186 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:11 pm
450186 spacer
>>450185

I'm not that person, I'm just trying to find a better use of both your energy than bickering about it. Someone who's helped stop some systemic harms will be more inclined to stop their own personal ones too.
>> No. 450187 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:25 pm
450187 spacer
>>450185

My life is great, it's just not ecologically ethical.
>> No. 450188 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:29 pm
450188 spacer
>>450180

A revolution. But I do not believe that's possible; we are too used to our way of life to act until it is far, far to late.

I'm not trying to be a climate defeatist, I'm just being realistic. I don't think this justifies any negative impact I might still have on the situation, merely that mine will always be negligible compared to industry.
>> No. 450189 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:35 pm
450189 spacer
>>450188

All defeatists think they're being realistic, that's sort of what it means to be one. Of course they're usually proved right when they use it as a reason not to try.
>> No. 450190 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:47 pm
450190 spacer
>>450189

What am I supposed to try?
>> No. 450191 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:52 pm
450191 spacer
>>450190

I'm sure you can think of something.
>> No. 450192 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:54 pm
450192 spacer
>>450189

I think you're being a bit unfair to realists, lad.

There's a thin line between weighing the odds in a reasonable way, and saying, fuck it, it's no use anyway.

We are pretty fucked at this point with climate change, and a lot of what is being proposed could well be too little, too late. Or it just won't have a critical mass of people doing their part to support it.

To acknowledge that isn't defeatism.
>> No. 450193 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 4:57 pm
450193 spacer
>>450190

Buy a bicycle. Eat less meat. Wear a jumper and turn down the thermostat. Avoid long-haul flights. Top up your loft insulation and get your boiler serviced. Write to your MP.
>> No. 450196 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 5:14 pm
450196 spacer
>>450192

You can acknowledge it's highly unlikely and still try. In the words of one of the Spitting Image puppets; it always seems impossible until it's done. I'm sure your imagination can come up with other things to do than emailing your useless MP and leaving it at that.
>> No. 450198 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 5:16 pm
450198 spacer
>>450193

I own two bicycles, I'm a pescatarian, I have solar heating panels, my passport hasn't been valid for about a decade. I still need to drive to work though, or else I'm looking at reducing my income by about 60%. I don't see what my MP can do for me so long as their money comes from the people who want/need carbon to keep flowing, but let's assume I vote for people who might be different.

But why does any of that matter? all we're doing now is having a dick measuring contest. I just think it's fucking grim that us, on the very bottom of the barrel, are encouraged to give up beef an keep our houses cold, while our paymasters can use our sacrifices as a loophole to keep burning the world for money.

To be told that this viewpoint is selfish is, you could imagine, quite insulting.
>> No. 450200 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 5:58 pm
450200 spacer
>>450198

Maybe you'll have an alternate solution but it seems we have to focus on movement building to take the power away from the people who want the carbon to keep flowing. I don't think people in your position are being selfish but it does seem like there's a sort of learned helplessness around, an inculcated presupposition that the system can't be changed for the better. It's not true. It just starts with enough people deciding, or realising that.
>> No. 450201 Anonymous
23rd March 2022
Wednesday 8:30 pm
450201 spacer
The fuck am I reading. It's like if Jacob Rees Mogg became an environmentalist.

Fucking pish. I'm glad you've figured out a way to be quite sure you've solved it and it's everyone else who's thick, you must feel very good about yourself, but fuck off. We need to get the corpos to sort their shit out and that's about all there is to it. If nobody does that were all fucked no matter what.
>> No. 450216 Anonymous
24th March 2022
Thursday 1:29 pm
450216 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/24/microplastics-found-in-human-blood-for-first-time
Microplastics found in blood now. They're already in various organs and newborn children so I'm not sure how else they would have got there but I suppose this is good to know.
>> No. 450218 Anonymous
24th March 2022
Thursday 3:35 pm
450218 spacer
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-23/climate-change-threatens-china-s-crop-yield-food-security
No wheat harvest from Ukraine or Russia this year and now
>China Faces Worst Crop Conditions Ever Due to Climate Change
>The country’s agriculture minister said last year’s record-breaking floods have created “big difficulties” with food production
too
>> No. 450223 Anonymous
25th March 2022
Friday 9:56 am
450223 spacer
Satellite data shows entire Conger ice shelf has collapsed in Antarctica
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/25/satellite-data-shows-entire-conger-ice-shelf-has-collapsed-in-antarctica
>Nasa scientist says complete collapse of ice shelf as big as Rome during unusually high temperatures is ‘sign of what might be coming’
>> No. 450234 Anonymous
25th March 2022
Friday 8:48 pm
450234 spacer
>>450218
>Drought is in effect over 73% of U.S. winter wheat areas as of mid-March 2022, almost triple the drought coverage in 2021.
https://www.dtnpf.com/agriculture/web/ag/blogs/ag-weather-forum/blog-post/2022/03/23/early-spring-drought-review-us-grain
>> No. 450324 Anonymous
1st April 2022
Friday 8:26 pm
450324 spacer

ChrisJerrey_01042022_Hythe-9760 copy.jpg
450324450324450324
>Just Stop Oil protests: Terminal operations suspended and arrests made
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-60951403

An oil company has temporarily stopped operations at four fuel terminals amid a series of co-ordinated protests.

ExxonMobil UK, one of the country's largest privately-owned underground oil pipeline distribution networks, said it had shut down four of its sites.

Campaign groups Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion said they had blocked 10 "critical" sites including Birmingham, London and Southampton.
>> No. 450325 Anonymous
1st April 2022
Friday 8:34 pm
450325 spacer
>>450324
If I were a /boo/lad I might say that this is a blatant conspiracy to justify wide-reaching government powers through useful idiots. I've been living in disbelief all day that this bollocks has gotten so blind to how things will be viewed outside a small circle of extremists.
>> No. 450327 Anonymous
1st April 2022
Friday 9:04 pm
450327 spacer
>>450325
More fool you.
>> No. 450328 Anonymous
1st April 2022
Friday 10:33 pm
450328 spacer
>>450327
It's the day people are waking up to higher energy bills and the realisation that it's going to squeeze them even harder at the tills. What next, will ER attempt to release notorious paedophiles from prison and kill peoples pets?
>> No. 450332 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 9:28 am
450332 spacer
>>450328

https://news.sky.com/story/will-a-move-to-renewables-save-us-money-on-our-energy-bills-12579135
>> No. 450336 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 1:57 pm
450336 spacer
>>450332
>Figures seen by Sky News suggest that the cost of producing energy from wind will be less than half the cost from gas this year, falling to a quarter in 2023.

Can you think of a reason why that might be? Or why the public might be pissed off?
>> No. 450337 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 2:13 pm
450337 spacer
>>450336

The public aren't particularly upset about the latest actions so your whole point is pretty much a pointless hypothetical. You're getting angry about something that hasn't happened. Even the GB news presenters gave one of the truck surfers a soft interview. You're being more reactionary than GB news.
>> No. 450339 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 2:20 pm
450339 spacer
>>450337
You're the one watching GB new ladm8. It's pretty clear even from last years Insulation protest that everyone hates you and you're just giving the Government an excuse to enact stricter and stricter laws, which they're justified in doing because you're threatening energy security.
>> No. 450340 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 2:20 pm
450340 spacer
>>450336

Onshore wind and solar was cheaper than gas before the recent price spikes.

This crisis is entirely the fault of governments failing to invest in sustainable generation and energy efficiency. Back in 2008, we could have leveraged record-low interest rates to start a green energy revolution. We could have insulated every home, replaced every gas boiler with a heat pump, built a fleet of new nuclear reactors and put an EV charging point on every corner. It would have created hundreds of thousands of good jobs, it would have totally freed us from our reliance on imported energy and it would already have paid for itself. We didn't, because of a short-sighted and ideological culture of austerity.

People should be angry, but they should be most angry at David Cameron and his cronies. It didn't have to be like this.
>> No. 450342 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 2:32 pm
450342 spacer

muh timing.png
450342450342450342
>>450339

Insulate Britain were right though, weren't they? Especially in light of this. It's curious you claim to care that the government might enact stricter protesting laws considering you're arguing that people shouldn't protest. Are you planning on getting off your fat arse and doing some at some vague point in the future or is this just something you haven't actually thought through? "Nobody do it in case it gets banned" is silly. About as silly as your pearl clutching about energy security when following the current course will lead to mass death and ecocide. It doesn't seem to have gotten through your skull that the climate crisis isn't just a vanity project, it's far more important than your personal imaginary outrage and doesn't stop just because your brief attention span moved on with the news cycle.

You're just another predictable voice echoing the same "Not right now!" sentiment as always comes up.
>> No. 450347 Anonymous
2nd April 2022
Saturday 4:30 pm
450347 spacer
>>450340
Part of being in government now is dealing with the society you have, not the society you wish you had. You're absolutely right that the Conservative Party should be chased into remote sheds in the mountains like the Khmer Rouge were, and that they should never be elected ever again, but the other part of being in government now is appealing to the electorate you have, not an electorate that actually understands anything at all.
>> No. 450400 Anonymous
4th April 2022
Monday 5:55 pm
450400 spacer

FPgpXpXXMAADHwK.jpg
450400450400450400
The extreme cold following such a warm snap the other week has caused huge agricultural problems across Europe. This is still ongoing.

The latest part of the IPCC report came out today, saying global emissions need to peak in 2025 and fall 43% below 2019 levels by 2030.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2022/04/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_PressRelease_English.pdf
>In the scenarios we assessed, limiting warming to around 1.5°C (2.7°F) requires global greenhouse gas emissions to peak before 2025 at the latest, and be reduced by 43% by 2030; at the same time, methane would also need to be reduced by about a third. Even if we do this, it is almost inevitable that we will temporarily exceed this temperature threshold but could return to below it by the end of the century.
Here's the BBC report on it https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60984663 you can find it linked on their home page below the article about Dot Cotton dying.

"Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals, but the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels." Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General.

The UK is set to approve licenses for 40 new fossil fuel projects. Jacob Rees-Mogg has said that the government wants "every last drop" of oil and gas to be extracted from the North Sea.
>> No. 450401 Anonymous
4th April 2022
Monday 5:56 pm
450401 spacer
>>450400
The UN secretary general, António Guterres, said some governments and businesses were “lying” in claiming to be on track for 1.5C. In a strongly worded rebuke, he warned:
>“Some government and business leaders are saying one thing – but doing another. Simply put, they are lying. And the results will be catastrophic.”
>> No. 450413 Anonymous
4th April 2022
Monday 9:43 pm
450413 spacer
>>450347
What Labour governments never understand is that smart governments use their power to alter the electorate. If Thatcher should get credit for anything, it's how effectively she understood that. When privatising industries, she didn't just sell them to rich Americans, she sold them cheaply to the voters - who, as shareholders, were now more likely to vote Tory.
Labour thinks that since it has to move right to take power, it can't move left to retain it - even when a "left" move can be justified purely out of self interest. If council housing tenants tend to vote Labour only an insane Labour government would fail to build more council houses. Sometimes Labour gets it perfectly backwards, like when they ran all of those adverts about catching benefit thieves. They did nothing to make voters think Labour was tougher on scroungers than the Tories, but did help to undercut sympathy for people on benefits meaning the Tories had a freer hand to kick them in the teeth without even having to run their own anti-scrounger ads.

If Brown had delivered an explosion of Green spending as >>450340 described (hopefully using contracts with comically high modification/termination costs, like the aircraft carriers), one of the possible outcomes would be the creation of a green lobby that demands even more spending, which would probably be more sympathetic to Labour, and which would get even the Tories talking about the environment. Even if Labour still loses 2010 on the deficit, it might well win 2015 on the environment if that's an election issue.
>> No. 450466 Anonymous
6th April 2022
Wednesday 11:34 pm
450466 spacer

FOTAGqkXEAgraOm.jpg
450466450466450466
Around 1,500 scientists (including NASA climate scientists) in 25 countries risked arrest protesting today, hundreds actually being arrested.
>> No. 450493 Anonymous
7th April 2022
Thursday 4:29 pm
450493 spacer
Journalists allegedly being advised by the government not to report on the current climate protests for "national security" reasons.
>> No. 450494 Anonymous
7th April 2022
Thursday 4:39 pm
450494 spacer
>>450493
>allegedly
>> No. 450495 Anonymous
7th April 2022
Thursday 4:53 pm
450495 spacer
>>450493
Ah, yes, good to see the word "allegedly" being used as a load-bearing member.
>> No. 450497 Anonymous
7th April 2022
Thursday 6:23 pm
450497 spacer
>>450494
>>450495
Well, a claim like that would surely require a source. It sounds so ridiculously absurd that while I am happy to believe it anyway, I want a full news article to laugh over that says the same thing.
>> No. 450499 Anonymous
7th April 2022
Thursday 6:31 pm
450499 spacer
>>450497

That claim is probably bullshit, but there is an official system by which the government can politely request that the media not report on a particular story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSMA-Notice
>> No. 450502 Anonymous
7th April 2022
Thursday 7:28 pm
450502 spacer
I thought that might bring out the reactionaries.
>> No. 450552 Anonymous
9th April 2022
Saturday 8:03 pm
450552 spacer
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/oxford-circus-extinction-rebellion-london-regent-street-hyde-park-b2054641.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/extinction-rebellion-oxford-street-ben-mitchell-london-government-b993485.html
https://news.sky.com/story/climate-change-extinction-rebellion-activists-block-central-london-roads-in-protest-over-fossil-fuels-12586314
Three articles which seem to be pretty much the same. All severely underreporting the numbers, the crowd in the road was about 10 minutes long. The Socialist Worker estimates 10,000
https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/xr-activists-stage-oxford-circus-sit-in-on-first-day-of-climate-rebellion/
which is generous, but it was definitely in the thousands. Far bigger than the previous couple which makes sense, as people have seen the latest IPCC report.
>> No. 450553 Anonymous
9th April 2022
Saturday 8:06 pm
450553 spacer
>>450552
JSO's actions are still ongoing, separately:


a few news outlets are starting to put together the empty petrol stations with that now.
>> No. 450567 Anonymous
9th April 2022
Saturday 10:19 pm
450567 spacer
>>450552

The Guardian has given their late in the day estimate as "several thousand"
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/09/extinction-rebellion-xr-climate-protesters-march-london-hyde-park
Here's a timelapse https://imgur.com/C4xg1vV
>> No. 450656 Anonymous
14th April 2022
Thursday 10:37 pm
450656 spacer

>> No. 450664 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 2:40 am
450664 spacer
Thank you for the petrol crisis.
>> No. 450665 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 7:28 am
450665 spacer
>>450664

Thank Putin, you daft cunt.
>> No. 450672 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 12:26 pm
450672 spacer
>>450665
Why, what did he do? You're obviously not talking about invading Ukraine because every idiot knows that was way after most of the price rises, so what did Putin do?
>> No. 450673 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 12:29 pm
450673 spacer
>>450665
I didn't know Putin was a climate activist blocking oil refineries.
>> No. 450674 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 1:09 pm
450674 spacer
>>450664
Thank YOU for the annual floods we get now.
>> No. 450677 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 2:35 pm
450677 spacer
>>450664
>>450665
>>450672
>>450673
I think these are the worst takes I've seen here in a while, you're mad at completely the wrong people.
>> No. 450679 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 3:43 pm
450679 spacer
Are you lot actually falling for ANY reason for inflated fuel prices other than profiteering from oil companies?
>> No. 450694 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 8:42 pm
450694 spacer
>>450679

The oil company's profits represent about 1% of the price you pay at the forecourt. If all the world's oil companies decided overnight to become charities, you wouldn't even notice the difference.

>>450672

The invasion started on the 24th of February, but the buildup of Russian troops started in March of last year. The market price reflects both the current situation and the anticipated risks. The Just Stop Oil protests have had a negligible effect on supply and don't pose a meaningful future risk.

The main drivers of oil prices are (in this order) the Ukraine situation, the post-COVID recovery in energy demand and the increasing instability in Saudi Arabia.
>> No. 450698 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 9:59 pm
450698 spacer
>>450694
>>450677
It really isn't just about the price. It is also about the shortages caused by the climate lot, and the long lines to fill up around where I live. I doubt Putin and his ongoing war suddenly created a shortage now.

Not to mention that the profiteering cunts will just increase the price again to "stop" the panic buying bastards again. So yes, thank you for the petrol crisis. Cunts. Go block the parliament or something.
>> No. 450702 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 10:42 pm
450702 spacer
>>450698
Look lad, Putin is not only evil, but is actually the source of all evil in the world. Why can't you just get onboard.
>> No. 450704 Anonymous
15th April 2022
Friday 11:16 pm
450704 spacer
>>450694
>The main drivers of oil prices are (in this order) the Ukraine situation, the post-COVID recovery in energy demand and the increasing instability in Saudi Arabia.

Nah. The energy crunch has been known since about the pandemic started, in fact I distinctly remember Caspian Report talking about it during COP26 that reported on a global energy crisis and it building on the existing transition to green energy.


Of course if you can't grasp that Just Stop Oil can impact local UK supplies then you probably won't understand that it's ultimately it's stupid.
>> No. 450712 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 2:15 am
450712 spacer
>>450694
>If all the world's oil companies decided overnight to become charities, you wouldn't even notice the difference.
Surely that's more of a function of how centralised the oil industry is, the way markets work, and accounting quirks, rather than a reflection of "actual" production costs?
For illustration sake: Imagine that Britain could only use North Sea oil now nationalised and run by the Ministry of Oil, which has a legal obligation to break even - not profit - and which is forbidden from exporting any oil. If they sold the oil at the cost of extraction it's hard to see a reason for the price to fluctuate with international events. The entirety of Russia or Saudi Arabia or anywhere else with a good oil supply sinking into the sea shouldn't pose a single issue for British oil extracted by British workers in British waters, nor would a big spike in demand for Oil in China pose any competition to British consumers. The problem the Ministry would face would be how to ration supplies without using the price mechanism, since we don't produce enough to meet all our domestic needs.
(Though I'd be curious if the ministry could use accounting tricks to say: "We sold a barrel of oil worth £100 at £50, so we made a £50 loss" rather than "We got a barrel of oil at a cost of £50 worth of labour+maintenance+etc, then sold it for £50, so we broke even, the international price is irrelevant.")

I assume the textbook answer here is that if anyone was to sell oil on a cost-plus basis as above, some intermediary would immediately buy up all their production and then sell it for huge profits at the real market price.
>> No. 450713 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 2:41 am
450713 spacer
>>450698

The shortages are completely uncorrelated with the scale and location of the protests. Some areas that aren't supplied by the affected terminals are seeing shortages, while some areas that are supplied by the blockaded terminals aren't. The Staines terminal only supplies aviation fuel to Heathrow and is completely irrelevant to supplies of road fuel, but the local market doesn't seem to know that.

Supposed supply issues are just demand issues, as was the case last year - people see a queue and join it. If everyone in the country turned on their kettle at the same time we'd have blackouts, but that's not an electricity shortage. The tabloids are blaming protesters for a problem that the tabloids have created.
>> No. 450722 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 10:52 am
450722 spacer
We had actual shortages of aviation fuel due to protests a couple of weeks ago, and likely will this week too. Even as someone who works for an airline, I'd agree that out of all the fuel users in the world, aviation is probably the most logical industry to protest (second to cruise ships, they use an insane amount of heavy oil)

However, due to the nature of how planes work, if there's a shortage of fuel locally, we'll simply load up on extra fuel abroad, or position empty planes from other bases that have excess fuel stock.

So in essence, the protest might cost an airline one or two percent extra in operating costs, which the customer will ultimately absorb, but the real effect is that we actually end up flying empty planes across the network, and all of our live flights are significantly less efficient as they're taking on as much fuel as physically possible at destination. I hope fuel activists know this - I assume their cause is more about wider awareness than actually disruption of the industy, but if not, someone really should tell them.

Fag paper maths, but the protest related shortages meant for my planes at least we burned about 20% more fuel in a day than would be typical.
>> No. 450734 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 3:21 pm
450734 spacer
>>450712
Sort of.
A big problem with oil and gas that isn't widely talked about is the cost of new vs old wells, in that almost all the big easily accessible reserves were drilled decades ago, most of those are still producing oil at a very low cost like in the middle east, but we have to constantly drill new reserves to keep up with demand, so right now oil companies are in a debt-fuelled cycle of drilling smaller and more difficult wells that run out faster and faster. And hence estimates of the potential of oil fields are systematically over-optimistic in order to get investment to drill. Often those wells have turned out to be uneconomical over their lifespans, the owners have gone bankrupt (but are usually only shell companies anyway) and default on the debt, but that hasn't mattered because the vast majority of that investment ultimately came off the back of government bonds during the time of QE and low investment rates.
>> No. 450736 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 3:31 pm
450736 spacer
That reminds me actually, what happened with the big trigger protest in Canada? Putin sort of stole their thunder didn't he. What we're they protesting about again?
>> No. 450737 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 3:32 pm
450737 spacer
>>450736

*trucker and were.

Fucking autocorrelation
>> No. 450738 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 3:49 pm
450738 spacer
>>450736
They were protesting about covid restrictions.
Incidentally, Russia has vast propaganda networks and botnets, a few months back they were geared towards spreading misinformation and inciting anger related to the topic of covid, after the invasion they've completely redirected all their networks towards the war effort.
That's a big part of the reason why people aren't talking about covid now, the vast majority of the bullshit in their social media feeds stopped literally overnight.
>> No. 450751 Anonymous
16th April 2022
Saturday 8:07 pm
450751 spacer
>>450738
I'm seeing a lot less mental posts and misinformation since this all kicked off. Wonder why.
>> No. 450761 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 12:00 am
450761 spacer
>>450751

The weather is getting nicer, we've been outside more.
>> No. 450767 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 12:27 pm
450767 spacer

Marble Arch.jpg
450767450767450767
This was still up as of this morning.
>> No. 450768 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 12:27 pm
450768 spacer

FQiCeieWQAQP6Fw.jpg
450768450768450768
Can't be many people get to see Marble Arch from this angle.
>> No. 450769 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 12:54 pm
450769 spacer
>>450736
>>450738
Trudeau brought in emergency powers and police violently suppressed the demonstrations, the leaders bank accounts were frozen before they were arrested and Canadian police are combing through CCTV footage to catch more people. A similar thing happened in New Zealand at one point and it wasn't really reported them either.

Funnily enough the Truckers pointed out that axe-wielding protestors attacked guards and workers on a pipeline and nothing was done (how many people heard about that?) Just as >>450767, >>450768 is fine because it broadly fits with a middle class establishment narrative.
>> No. 450770 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 1:02 pm
450770 spacer
>>450769

What a lot of rubbish. Ecological activists are routinely attacked by the press in Western countries and murdered in countries where it's easier to get away with. The whole "middle class establishment narrative" angle is lifted directly from that same press I just mentioned. Never mind. If you're getting worked up about how MAGA truckers should be treated fairly relative to ecological protesters then you really don't seem to have understood the urgency or extent of the situation we're in, just obsessing over meaningless culture war nonsense.
>> No. 450774 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 1:43 pm
450774 spacer
>>450769

I think the actions of the Canadian government cracking down on those protesters should be rightly condemned by anyone with an interest in freedom of speech, demonstration rights, and so on; but as is often the case instead we just saw a lot of people excusing it because they were on the away team.

As a leftist I didn't necessarily support their goals, but what was actually quite heartening to see about it was a worker's movement gaining traction and demonstrating in a peaceful yet highly effective manner. But as we saw, the government was willing to essentially dispense with any notion of civil liberties in order to tackle them. It just shows us you're allowed to protest, as long as your protest is utterly toothless and can be safely ignored.

People have this terminally short-sighted habit of turning blind eye to harsh crackdowns as long as it happens to the other side, without the penny dropping that exactly the same will happen to them when the shoe is on the other foot.

This is probably the thing I hate the most about modern politics, and it goes to show exactly why identity politics, the culture war, and the intense polarisation over it is so important to the ruling class.

Petrol protesters can fuck off though, I still need to get to fucking work you cock ends. I get the point, but they need to do something that actually harms the oil companies, or rather, their investors; not ordinary people.
>> No. 450775 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 1:52 pm
450775 spacer
>>450774

>they need to do something that actually harms the oil companies, or rather, their investors; not ordinary people

How exactly do you imagine that working? So long as "ordinary people" continue to rely on cars then anything that interferes with oil companies is going to impact them too. This whole attitude seems to be from a strange magical place where oil companies can be made to disappear but you can still refuel your car at the petrol pump.
>> No. 450776 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 2:09 pm
450776 spacer
>>450775

How about they start a petition for the government to give everybody a free electric car then, because I sure as fuck can't afford one, so I can't get myself off the black stuff with all the best will in the world.

This is only compounded by the cost of living- In order to live somewhere affordable, I have to settle for it being further away from work, meaning bike or public transport commute gets less and less viable. I'd have to pay £3-400 more a month to live close enough to work I can walk/bike it, £200 a month more in rent to live near a train station (plus the cost of railcards etc), or I can live out in the middle of nowhere and spend £60 a month on petrol (plus the cost of maintaining my car.)

It's all well and good to say "well what do YOU suggest then" but that doesn't change the fact what they're doing right now is already ineffective, as well as a pain in the arse for every other cunt who's just trying to get on with life.
>> No. 450777 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 2:16 pm
450777 spacer
>>450775

It's the old "realistic solutions" argument - people want to help the environment, but obviously anything that actually involves changing their lifestyle is unrealistic. My car isn't the problem, the problem is the oil companies. My holiday isn't the problem, it's the airlines.

It doesn't matter who you blame, it doesn't matter who takes responsibility, either we stop burning stuff or we all burn together. Hurting oil companies counts for nothing if the petrol keeps flowing.
>> No. 450779 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 2:38 pm
450779 spacer
>>450776

>How about they start a petition for the government to give everybody a free electric car then

That'd cost a minimum of £500bn. We could do it if we killed all the pensioners or something.
>> No. 450780 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 2:44 pm
450780 spacer
>>450776

How about you campaign for better public transport and cycle lanes?
>> No. 450781 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 2:45 pm
450781 spacer
>>450779
The Chinese tried that in 2019, sharing their useful weapon with the rest of the world in early 2020. They even teamed up with Bill Gates to inject everyone with experimental mind-control poisons, and it still barely had any effect. Pensioners are surprisingly hard to kill.
>> No. 450783 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 3:06 pm
450783 spacer
>>450780
And teleportation research.
>> No. 450784 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 3:57 pm
450784 spacer
>>450780

Because public transport is shit and nobody likes it no matter how good you make it. Environmentalists will never make headway while they labour under the assumption anybody but them would be happy giving up the freedom of the automobile.

I like trains, trains are great, but buses can suck my dick, honestly. I don't care how often they come, how efficient the routes are, they're always shit. But trains get you a long way in a very reasonable time and they're much more comfortable.

The trouble is it's simply not at all practical to have a train station in every village, even if we could expand on the rail network without it costing billions upon billions and taking thirty years before ending up cutting half.

You all also ignored my point about the cost of living, so you know. Deflect it to be "people just don't want to change their lifestyles!" but that's untrue and dishonest, and you know it is. People are plenty willing to, within a reasonable extent; it's just that they don't get a stiffy over riding a tram like you do.

You have to meet people in the middle, which is something our government is very reluctant to do; and if environmentalists had sense they'd be spending their time and money on lobbying to get the government doing that instead of performative publicity shite that just pisses people off.
>> No. 450785 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:09 pm
450785 spacer
>>450784

You're still acting like this is some sort of concession you're being asked for out of the goodness of your heart that you might deign to give if the protesters just ask in the exact right way. It's not. You're arguing with physics.
>> No. 450786 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:25 pm
450786 spacer
Amazing. I drove 20 miles to fill up my tank. Thanks climate cunts. When will this bollocks end? Lock them all up already.
>> No. 450787 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:30 pm
450787 spacer
>>450785

I'm not arguing with anything. I'm stating reality. It's your job to change people's minds about it, and you're clearly doing a shite job of it.

It's reminiscent of the Brexit thing. Calling people racist until you're blue in the face never helped, but it's all the Remain side seemed capable of. Never entering a true dialogue, and in the end, we're all suffering for it; because they were too stubborn to attempt to build a bridge.

It's all well and good being right (as you certainly are); but politics isn't about being right. Persuading people isn't about being right. It's about winning them over, and just repeatedly reiterating how right you are doesn't do that.
>> No. 450788 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:34 pm
450788 spacer
>>450787

The protests aren't just "stating that they're right over and over", they have demonstrably done more to raise awareness of the issue than any amount of political lobbying or people listening to those who've made the same arguments as you're making right now over the past few decades. If you're so certain you have a better way, get on with it, because it's just as much your job as mine.
>> No. 450789 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:43 pm
450789 spacer
>>450788

>they have demonstrably done more to raise awareness of the issue

If by that you mean actively pissing people off and turning them against your side, sure.

>hurr if you think you can do better

That's literally never a valid argument lad, stop it. I already coughed on as many pensioners as I could during the bends epidemic, do you want me to start burning down care homes too?
>> No. 450790 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:45 pm
450790 spacer
>>450788
>The protests aren't just "stating that they're right over and over"

What if this thread is part of the protests?
>> No. 450791 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:46 pm
450791 spacer
>>450784
If you have a car, you get gouged on insurance, you get gouged on petrol prices, you are legally required to take your car to a known charlatan who will rob you in exchange for an MOT so you can legally drive the car you already own, and on those occasions where you do actually drive somewhere, you have to pay for parking. They actually charge you to stop driving. You're being ripped off at every single stage. You're a mug and the governments and the oil companies are all laughing at you, right now, today.

How's that for an argument? It's certainly enough to stop me driving. I have the licence but haven't driven in over a decade.
>> No. 450792 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:51 pm
450792 spacer
>>450789

>If by that you mean actively pissing people off and turning them against your side, sure.

The "side" is "people who are worried about the state of the planet" and that number has radically increased causally as the protests have. I know what you're saying sounds great when some talk radio bloke tells you it with nobody to challenge him but it's provably false.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/426733/united-kingdom-uk-concern-about-climate-change/
https://www.undp.org/press-releases/worlds-largest-survey-public-opinion-climate-change-majority-people-call-wide

>That's literally never a valid argument lad, stop it.
Prove it.
>> No. 450793 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 4:57 pm
450793 spacer
>>450784
>I don't care how often they come, how efficient the routes are, they're always shit.
Buses are frequently shit because they're constantly stuck in traffic. They'd be massively less shit if the traffic decided to not be traffic and use the bus instead.
>> No. 450794 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 5:15 pm
450794 spacer
>>450791

It would be a grand argument, I mean it really would, if I hadn't already established in the previous post, that the amount I'm being ripped off by Big Car is still less than the amount I'd be getting ripped off by Big Landlord to live somewhere more easily commutable.

I've done he maths on this lad, it's cheaper for me to drive. That financial incentive is the number one driving factor in my, and a great deal of other people's, decision making.

I think part of the reason it's hard for environmentalist types to get this is because they've never lived anywhere other than places like London or Greater Manchester where the balance tips much more toward public transport and owning a car is a net drain rather than a necessity.
>> No. 450795 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 5:27 pm
450795 spacer
>>450794
>I think part of the reason it's hard for environmentalist types to get this is because they've never lived anywhere other than places like London or Greater Manchester
I'm curious where you got this totally insane stereotype from because it's too obviously wrong even for the red rags.
>> No. 450798 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 7:19 pm
450798 spacer
>>450795

It's not though.

Liking public transport is a symptom of a comfortable middle class upbringing and a sign of privilege. There, I said it, I was trying to avoid it but I just can't skirt around the elephant in the room any longer.
>> No. 450799 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 7:39 pm
450799 spacer
>>450798
>Liking public transport is a symptom of a comfortable middle class upbringing and a sign of privilege.
That's not how that works, m25.
>> No. 450802 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 8:18 pm
450802 spacer
>>450795
I've lived in both, and rural living is fucking abysmal, but improves a fair bit if you have a car. 90% of city-dwellers could get rid of their cars and still have an easier life than people who live in the countryside. However, most people nowadays live in cities. That's why they're cities. Small towns are debatable.
>> No. 450804 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:04 pm
450804 spacer

DOWOzR3WkAEW8jF.jpg
450804450804450804
>>450802
>still have an easier life than people who live in the countryside

How many countryside folk have to travel for a fucking hour to go 4 miles tomorrow? I'll have to in London. I may walk it if the sun promises to not melt me on the way to a first date.
>> No. 450805 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:14 pm
450805 spacer
>>450804
They have to go much further, and public transport is much less frequent. You can cycle four miles in 20 minutes in a city. You can also do that in the countryside too, of course, but then you're just halfway down some A-road with a national speed limit and no pavement and nowhere near your destination.
>> No. 450807 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:20 pm
450807 spacer
Only posh upper-middle class sanctimonious left-wing tossers care about "the climate crisis", and amusingly they seem to think that interrupting football matches, slashing car tyres, blocking roads and bridges and stopping the "plebs" from getting to work or taking their kids to school will make them care about it, too. "Oh, we're interrupting your vulgar football game to *educate* you about this issue we're obsessed with, because we're better than you and we need to tell you what to think about things, and if you dare to disagree with us then you're a *science denier".

And then these people wonder why Labour never win elections anymore and why the filthy lower class chavs are voting Tory.
>> No. 450809 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:50 pm
450809 spacer
>>450807
I didn't realise we had Toby Young posting here. In retrospect it would explain a lot of the bollocks he spouts.
>> No. 450810 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:55 pm
450810 spacer
>>450804
I'm in a provincial city, and can do 3 miles in about 20 minutes by bus or train. If it's taking you an hour to do 4 miles in London and you're not walking, you're doing something wrong.
>> No. 450811 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:58 pm
450811 spacer
>>450809

I'm going to buy a nice Jag XJS 5.3L V12 I've had my eye on on eBay, start the engine and leave it running on idle all day while livestreaming it belching black smoke into the air, and I'll post the link to it on here just to make you people seethe, because it makes me happy.



Oh, and
>> No. 450812 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 9:59 pm
450812 spacer
>>450810
Or maybe public transport can be shite if your journey doesn't align with a popular/direct route.
>> No. 450813 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 10:05 pm
450813 spacer
>>450807
I've got a completely different read on it. It's not about convincing people. Politics is almost never about convincing people. The opinion polls are full of things the public are convinced of that aren't going to happen, and history is full of governments ramming through things that nobody wants because they're the ones with power.
The practical part of the tactic of blocking the roads is to give yourself a little bit of power. To answer the key question that most posturing politics-types don't ask before making a "demand" - namely: what will you do if the demand is refused? what leverage do you have that gives you the power to make a demand?
You always see it overlooked - "Communists demand an end to the war..." - but what're the communists going to do if the government doesn't end the war? Nothing. It's an empty demand. Climate protestors, on the other hand, can answer: We are going to block the road network.

I don't think the people on the protests necessarily see it this way, even protesters prefer the idea that what they do is shout a demand into the aether and someone up there listens to them, but it seems like a much more useful model when looking at the situation practically.
>> No. 450814 Anonymous
17th April 2022
Sunday 10:32 pm
450814 spacer
>>450812

This is undoubtedly a big part of the problem. Fundamentally, by its nature, public transport is good at getting a lot of people into a centralised location. That's where it works best, when it's serving the neighbouring suburbs and villages and funnelling all the commuters into a town.

Where it starts to fall apart is in areas with no central location people are going to be reliably in/out of; and secondly, in the kinds of town where jobs and industry are on their arse, so nobody who lives in or around it is actually commuting to it.

Wakefield is a great example, the only people commuting to Wakefield are the hospital staff, local council workers, and the pigs. Everyone else is fucking off out of it to Leeds, Sheffield, or one of the random industrial estates dotted around those parts. So even without the drastic cuts there have been lately, public transport was a bit of a clusterfuck, it was a web of bus routes that tried to hit as many destinations as possible on their way round, and consequently they got nowhere quickly. It's got great rail links of course, but you need to be able to get to the stations, which means you've got to live near the middle of town. It's a totally reverse dynamic of what is ideal for public transport.

Personally, I think we need some outside the box thinking for a new network of transportation that doesn't rely on road or rail.
>> No. 450818 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 12:05 am
450818 spacer
>>450814

>Wakefield is a great example

U wot m7, there's gentlemen moving along from Mirfield that believe it's ok to have sex with your cousin as long as she is in puberty and you are married. I don't think people with 16th century proclivities care about climate. It's not in their book.
>> No. 450819 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 12:07 am
450819 spacer
>>450818
Give it a fucking rest or fuck off back to the other place.
>> No. 450820 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 12:12 am
450820 spacer
>>450814
>some outside the box thinking for a new network of transportation that doesn't rely on road or rail.
I saw a documentary a few years ago from which I inferred that David Cameron and George Osborne planned exactly this. Nowhere Oop North gets any investment, because the economy would be better off if everyone lived in the same place. If London had 60 million people in it, there'd be almost no poor people in the rest of the country. Who needs trains from Cardiff to Birmingham when everyone lives in London? There's also some economic thing which says economies thrive more when they are concentrated in one place. It sounds mad, but you can't deny that if they were planning this, it would look exactly how things looked back then.
>> No. 450821 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 12:31 am
450821 spacer
>>450820
Surely if they were actually planning it, they'd have had the sense to start building some new tower flats to accommodate all the people flocking to London?
(I suppose, like all grand British plans, they might've planned it without thinking it through.)
>> No. 450822 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 12:33 am
450822 spacer
>>450819

>the other place

No fucking clue m7 about the other place

I'd recommend surat al-nisah 4:23 that gives implicit rights from god to marry your cousin

Also Sahih al-Bukhari hadith 5134

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 450823 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 1:41 am
450823 spacer
This thread is utter bollocks. Can we just delete it and never speak of it again?
>> No. 450824 Anonymous
18th April 2022
Monday 1:47 am
450824 spacer
>>450822

Just so we're clear this was banned for piss poor grammar rather than any short sighted criticism of a religion.
>> No. 450862 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 10:47 am
450862 spacer
I was thinking.

As far as I remember from geography lessons, the earth is full of lava, which as I understand it gets quite hot. We could use that to evaporate steam to drive a turbine.

I guess it would take some investment to dig down, but this lava stuff is everywhere as far as I can tell. It's underneath you right now. You could have a magma power plant in your back garden.

What's the technical roadblock stopping us doing this? Or is it just Big Power fucking us over like always?
>> No. 450867 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 11:54 am
450867 spacer
>>450862
You don't have to dig down as far as magma to get cheap, clean geothermal energy but yes it suffers from the same lack of subsidies and investment as other renewables.
>> No. 450869 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 12:05 pm
450869 spacer
>>450862

Iceland get most of their energy from geothermal sources.

>>450867

It's worse than that - the planning system is actively hostile to renewables. It's easier to get planning permission for a waste incinerator than a wind farm, which is just bonkers.
>> No. 450870 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 12:41 pm
450870 spacer
>>450862

>What's the technical roadblock stopping us doing this?

Getting geothermal energy "from lava" is only feasible where it's relatively close to the surface. This is the case along fault lines like in Iceland, but not in geologically inactive regions of the world like Britain. There are efforts here to harness geothermal energy anyway, but so far it's not a large industry and it's generally limited to a few experimental and research projects.

In most regions of the world, you have a geothermal gradient of about 2-3 degrees celsius per 100 metres of depth within the Earth's crust. This means that you'll have to drill several hundred metres into solid rock in order to extract a reasonable amount of thermal energy, usually by running pipes with water or other heat-absorbing liquids through the warm rock. And on the way up, you'll have losses because the cold surrounding rock will draw heat energy out of your liquid again.
>> No. 450871 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 12:49 pm
450871 spacer
>>450870

While they're not quite getting heat from the magma, ground source heat pumps that work perfectly well even in geologically inactive regions have existed in usable forms since the mid 1800s.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/740491/heat-pumps-in-operation-uk/
>> No. 450872 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 12:57 pm
450872 spacer
>>450870

So why don't we just drill deeper? It's just digging, how hard can it be. Get down far enough it's at least 100 degrees and bob's your uncle.

I've heard about this heatpipe stuff but it's not quite as radical as what I'm proposing. I mean take the big turbines we normally burn coal and oil to power, but just send them underground to run off the infinite free heat. It's like all these boffin engineers have never played Minecraft.

I'm fairly sure the oil industry already drills hundreds of metres to get at that dinosaur juice. There must be transferable technology.
>> No. 450874 Anonymous
19th April 2022
Tuesday 1:08 pm
450874 spacer
>>450872

We don't really need to go much deeper. In many places in this country (about 25% of the housing stock), existent abandoned coal mines are deep enough to use for geothermal energy.
>> No. 450895 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 11:04 am
450895 spacer
A while ago someone in this thread asked for a site with round-ups of climate news, this one seems to do that https://climateandeconomy.com/2022/04/20/20th-april-2022-todays-round-up-of-climate-news/
This month covering record lows of Antarctic ice, Russian wildfires double the size of last year, the drought in Alaska, cold in British Columbia, wildfires in the Pacific North West, drought and wildfires in Kansas, also Utah and Colorado, a wall of fire in Arizona, record heat in Mexico, retreating glaciers in Chile, the floods following wildfires in Argentina, the world's biggest carbon removal machine freezing over in Iceland, vinyards in Norway, floods in Burkino Faso and South Africa, wildfires in Turkey, drought and polarification in Iraq and Iran, heatwaves in India, deforestation in Papua New Guinea and finally river/groundwater pollution and shrinking in general.
>> No. 450896 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 4:31 pm
450896 spacer
>>450895

I am still around and am very grateful. I'll even consider chucking them a bit of money on their Patreon for the effort, because these kind of roundups seem curiously hard to come by.
>> No. 450897 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 7:47 pm
450897 spacer
>>450896

Are you using it for stock predictions or something? I suspect some of the reason it's unusual is that it'll take a toll on your mental health to be consistently scouring for the latest horrible stuff.
>> No. 450898 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 8:13 pm
450898 spacer
>>450897

That's a strange take. If anything I think the seriousness of the climate situation would warrant more extensive coverage. If the news about climate change matched the urgency and scale of the situation, it should really be the top story every day. It's more disturbing to me that it is not.
>> No. 450899 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 8:35 pm
450899 spacer
>>450897
Yes, it's easier to sign up to the death cult and continue driving cars if you remain purposefully ignorant.
>> No. 450900 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 8:43 pm
450900 spacer
>>450897
>I suspect some of the reason it's unusual is that it'll take a toll on your mental health to be consistently scouring for the latest horrible stuff.

Some people make a hobby out of it.
https://www.raptureready.com/category/rapture-ready-news/
>> No. 450901 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 8:47 pm
450901 spacer
>>450900

Those ones actually want it to happen.
>> No. 450902 Anonymous
20th April 2022
Wednesday 11:12 pm
450902 spacer
>>450897
When Covid first started I was practically watching the rolling feed from waking to sleeping, the first couple of weeks as everything shut down and collapsed, I had to stop because it was making me want to top myself.
>> No. 450903 Anonymous
21st April 2022
Thursday 8:54 am
450903 spacer
>>450898
Sorry lad, some of the other posters made me cynical.
>> No. 450913 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 12:19 am
450913 spacer

Untitled.jpg
450913450913450913
FT made a new game where you have to save the planet from climate change, can you beat my 1.6 score?
https://ig.ft.com/climate-game/
>> No. 450914 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 12:35 am
450914 spacer

Opera Snapshot_2022-04-22_003341_ig.ft.com.png
450914450914450914
>>450913
No, I cannot. I actually scored 1.61 degrees, so maybe you think you beat me but honestly I disagree. And we're both worse at this than I would have expected.
>> No. 450915 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 12:52 am
450915 spacer
>>450914
That's a decent choose yoru own adventure. But it falls quite a bit short of being a good one.
>> No. 450916 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 1:35 am
450916 spacer
>>450914
I just invested in technology and didn't fall for the tricks of Mr Methane. I bet I could've done better if I'd not disregarded the goal of climate change mitigation for making a planet of happy gardeners. It's bollocks that you get bonuses for equality which implicit means shafting your largest benefactors and I bet the health badge is all about banning meat.
>> No. 450917 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 2:57 am
450917 spacer

1.47c.png
450917450917450917
>>450913
I got myself sacked the first time for not doing any mitigation work, but after that I was alright. I think I'd've done better if I hadn't hoarded points by skipping requiring every vehicle be electric by 2050, but I was in a huff that there wasn't a "just tell people to walk" option.
>> No. 450918 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 3:47 am
450918 spacer
>>450913

I got 1.57, but it was also entirely bullshit, as it suddenly started giving me answers that cost 45 points near the end. I assume that's the point, but fuck whoever designed it.

I'm glad I made everyone have to eat insects though.
>> No. 450919 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 7:15 am
450919 spacer
I got sacked for running out of points by the last question. Only got told off for trying to improve agricultural efficiency rather than forcing veganism on people.
>> No. 450920 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 7:53 am
450920 spacer

glob.png
450920450920450920
>>450918
>eat insects
Quite disappointing that there is no Soylent Green option.
>> No. 450923 Anonymous
22nd April 2022
Friday 1:54 pm
450923 spacer
>>450916
>I bet the health badge is all about banning meat
Wrong.

I got 1.42.
>> No. 450965 Anonymous
23rd April 2022
Saturday 11:43 pm
450965 spacer

FRDS9xmVkAA5uaf.jpg
450965450965450965
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-person-sets-themselves-fire/
>Man dies after setting himself on fire in front of the Supreme Court, police say
Weirdly the article doesn't report why he set himself on fire or what he might have been trying to draw attention to.
>> No. 450967 Anonymous
23rd April 2022
Saturday 11:48 pm
450967 spacer
>>450965
Incidentally, over here, a man called Angus Rose just ended his hunger strike three days ago, not eating with the demand that MPs be properly briefed on the climate crisis. It took them 37 days.
>> No. 450969 Anonymous
24th April 2022
Sunday 12:19 am
450969 spacer
>>450965
We wouldn't want to get the young people fired up.
>> No. 451104 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 1:26 pm
451104 spacer
JSO ongoing. These poll results seem too good to be true though.
>According to new polling, the proportion of people in the UK who said they were likely to engage in some form of climate action increased from 8.7% to 11.3% in the first three weeks of their campaign, equivalent to about 1.7 million adults. Climate action included talking to friends and family about the climate crisis, contacting their MP about climate issues or attending a legal protest.

>Results also showed that 58% of UK adults supported the demands of Just Stop Oil, with only 23% against and 19% neutral. However, only 18% supported the group itself.
18% of adults supporting them?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/28/just-stop-oil-protesters-sabotage-petrol-pumps-on-m25-motorway
>> No. 451105 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 5:30 pm
451105 spacer

Capture.png
451105451105451105
>Just Stop Oil protesters sabotage petrol pumps on M25 motorway

>Environmental activists say action is ‘significant escalation’ in campaign against fuel distribution in England

Amazing. Just amazing. Absolute morons.
>> No. 451106 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 5:42 pm
451106 spacer
>>451105

You and @Shirley8794359 agree on that point but if you actually look at the evidence instead of going on your murdoch, knee-jerk reaction, what they're doing is working.
https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/uk-news/protests-demonstrations-environment-extinction-rebellion-b2065896.html
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/28/just-stop-oil-protesters-sabotage-petrol-pumps-on-m25-motorway
>> No. 451109 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 6:19 pm
451109 spacer
>>451106
It's weird - why didn't Insulate Britain get traction?
with comedy energy prices coming next winter, a bit of insulation might not go amiss.
>> No. 451110 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 6:27 pm
451110 spacer
>>451109

The media successfully did a hit-job to make them look like the Drunken Racists of environmental activists. They had aims that were too achievable and concrete to be tolerated, unlike the wishy washy non-specific shite of XR et all, which is totally harmless to the establishment and thus can be permitted.
>> No. 451111 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 6:27 pm
451111 spacer
>>451109
They did.
>Insulate Britain success: Brits say insulation is best way to curb Russian gas use
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/insulate-britain-success-brits-say-insulation-is-best-way-to-curb-russian-gas-use-318544/
>> No. 451112 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 7:24 pm
451112 spacer
>>451111>>451105
Thing is, a lot of folk seem to agree with the idea, but these bellends just go about it exactly the wrong way.
>> No. 451113 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 7:32 pm
451113 spacer
>>451112
Despite all the evidence to the contrary; if you say so mate.
>> No. 451114 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 7:51 pm
451114 spacer
>>451112

"The wrong way" is always the way that might actually result in change. "The right way" is whatever people in power can comfortably ignore.
>> No. 451115 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 7:54 pm
451115 spacer
>>451114
This. I've heard it said that people in power want things handled through "the proper channels" because they can control "the proper channels".
>> No. 451116 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 10:06 pm
451116 spacer
>>451112
I think this is the survey mentioned in the previous articles.
>Recent YouGov polling suggests that protests by Just Stop Oil increased the number of people in the UK willing to take climate action.

>Three nationally representative surveys (see notes to editors for the full survey and additional results) of over 2,000 adults in the UK were conducted on Tuesday, March 29th, before the major protests against oil infrastructure began, Saturday 9th of April and Tuesday 19th of April. Results show that three weeks after the Just Stop Oil protests began, the number of people who were likely to talk with friends and family about climate change, contact their MP about climate issues and attend a legal protest about climate change had risen by a statistically significant amount.

>The number of people saying that they were likely to engage in some form of climate action over the next 12 months increased from 8.7% to 11.3% over a 3-week period, equivalent to approximately 1.7 million adults in the UK.

>Results also showed that 58% of UK adults support the demands of Just Stop Oil, with only 23% against and 19% neutral. Just Stop Oil is demanding that “the government immediately halt all future licensing and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK.”

>Dr Ben Kenward, Senior Lecturer in Psychology at Oxford Brookes University, who assisted with the research, said “We don’t know for sure what caused the increase during this period, but the fact that 63% of the population has now heard about Just Stop Oil suggests it might be a factor. Further, this shows it isn't the case that these protests backfired by causing a large negative reaction in the population."

>James Ozden, Director of Social Change Lab, said “We’ve heard many people speculating that the disruptive protests utilised by Just Stop Oil were damaging to the climate movement. Our survey results don’t support this, finding no loss in support for key climate policies, and instead, we find that the likelihood of the UK public taking various forms of climate action has increased in the same period.”

https://www.socialchangelab.org/survey

It's quite interesting.
>> No. 451124 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 11:15 pm
451124 spacer

Just listen to that silly fat cunt.
>> No. 451127 Anonymous
28th April 2022
Thursday 11:43 pm
451127 spacer
>>451124

Mike "PLEASE LET ME GO BACK ON THE RADIO" Parry. He'd be a tragic figure if he wasn't such an arsehole.


>> No. 451131 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 12:17 am
451131 spacer
>>451127
Is that his name? I watch the Jeremy Vine Show for a few minutes every morning before work, before I change the channel after deciding everyone on there is an imbecile. He's on it all the time, and I have genuinely always thought he was Bill Kenwright.

He is a cock. He's not quite on the same level as Carol Malone and Dawn Neesom, who are also always on it, but he's pretty close. I don't know why they fill the programme with such utterly irredeemable retards.
>> No. 451132 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 12:19 am
451132 spacer
>>451131
As far as I'm aware, everything that Jeremy Vine does is filled with contrarian arseholes who make for "lively" debates and talking points.
>> No. 451133 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 12:32 am
451133 spacer
>>451132
They do also get Owen Jones on there sometimes, who is also an unbearable twat but at least his Lively™ positions oppose the establishment instead of these smirking tossers who are all, universally, the only person brave enough not to kneel for footballers and speak up in defence of the poor oppressed Conservative Party.
>> No. 451134 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 12:34 am
451134 spacer
>>451133
They have Ash Sarkar on his radio show fairly often. I'd her pegged as one of those Owen Jones types who tend to talk out of their arse, but it turns out she actually seems to know what she's on about and can back up what she's saying.
>> No. 451135 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 12:34 am
451135 spacer
>>451133
>only person brave enough not to kneel for footballers and speak up in defence of the poor oppressed Conservative Party.
I phrased that poorly. They're the only person brave enough not to kneel for footballers, and they're also the only person brave enough to speak up in defence of Boris.
>> No. 451136 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 1:14 am
451136 spacer
>>451131

I've only heard of him because he got into some sort of bizarre feud with Iain Lee.

>>451132

It's a safe strategy if you need to churn out a load of Content. Book a load of professional contrarians who can instantly muster up a strong opinion on anything, are willing to throw a tantrum but know exactly where the line is between lively debate and an OFCOM investigation.
>> No. 451137 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 9:17 am
451137 spacer
>>451136

It was weird how he went from "It's called weather!" to claiming not to be a climate denier; plus the presenter trying to nudge the two younger people into responding to his anti-democratic "I paid more taxes so I get more say" stance. It does strike me as someone putting forward garbage on purpose to bait people into an argument for the sake of it.
>> No. 451139 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 10:13 am
451139 spacer
>>451137

>It does strike me as someone putting forward garbage on purpose to bait people into an argument for the sake of it.

This is exactly how what we call "the culture war" (a term I don't like but the most commonly understood description) works, from both sides. It's all about just filling the airwaves, columns and people's brains with meaningless chaff so that nobody can ever knuckle down to a proper conversation about whatever the issue behind the smokescreen actually is.
>> No. 451140 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 10:22 am
451140 spacer
>>451137
>It does strike me as someone putting forward garbage on purpose to bait people into an argument for the sake of it.

That's been Jeremy Vine's modus operandi for as long as I can remember. Even when it's just him on his radio show talking with an expert on a subject matter he'll occasionally play devil's advocate and throw in some contrary dissenting bollocks, like he's trying to catch them out for no real reason.

Then again, he seems to spend his spare time uploading footage of him cycling around London getting into confrontations with pedestrians, drivers and other cyclists. I think he just feeds off conflict. Maybe he's just desperate for attention because his parents always preferred Tim.

They need to take him, and Steve Wright, off air. BBC Radio seem to keep making mistakes in recent years.
>> No. 451141 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 10:27 am
451141 spacer
>>451139
>both sides
I don't think you're saying otherwise but want to establish that in this case, the protester is absolutely not doing that, and in fact is trying to put forward that actual issue.
>> No. 451142 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 4:03 pm
451142 spacer
>>451141
Maybe, but he's then exploited as being the nutter, that the other side can disagree with.
>> No. 451143 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 4:26 pm
451143 spacer
>>451141

Yeah I wasn't talking about any specific case, just the bit that I quoted about

>putting forward garbage on purpose to bait people into an argument

By "both sides" I meant the "left" and "right" (i.e the side that likes [thing] and wants to promote it versus the side that things it's disgusting and wants it banned) of whatever issue in particular is at the centre of it.
>> No. 451144 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 4:48 pm
451144 spacer
>>451143

Then something has flipped for the dynamic to be presented this way on TV.
>> No. 451153 Anonymous
29th April 2022
Friday 9:41 pm
451153 spacer
>>451151

I bet you 10 pounds that you're straight off another imageboard and the same twat that posted >>451147.
>> No. 451404 Anonymous
11th May 2022
Wednesday 8:10 pm
451404 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2022/may/11/fossil-fuel-carbon-bombs-climate-breakdown-oil-gas

>The fossil fuel industry’s short-term expansion plans involve the start of oil and gas projects that will produce greenhouse gases equivalent to a decade of CO2 emissions from China, the world’s biggest polluter.
>These plans include 195 carbon bombs, gigantic oil and gas projects that would each result in at least a billion tonnes of CO2 emissions over their lifetimes, in total equivalent to about 18 years of current global CO2 emissions. About 60% of these have already started pumping.
>The dozen biggest oil companies are on track to spend $103m a day for the rest of the decade exploiting new fields of oil and gas that cannot be burned if global heating is to be limited to well under 2C.
>The Middle East and Russia often attract the most attention in relation to future oil and gas production but the US, Canada and Australia are among the countries with the biggest expansion plans and the highest number of carbon bombs. The US, Canada and Australia also give some of the world’s biggest subsidies for fossil fuels per capita.

The IPCC states carbon emissions must fall by half by 2030 to preserve the chance of a liveable future, yet they show no sign of declining.

Experts have been warning since at least 2011 that most of the world’s fossil fuel reserves could not be burned without causing catastrophic global heating.

In 2015, a high-profile analysis found that to limit global temperature below 2C, half of known oil reserves and a third of gas had to stay in the ground, along with 80% of coal.

>An updated scientific analysis found the proportion of fossil fuel reserves that would need to stay in the ground for 1.5C jumped to 60% for oil and gas and 90% for coal, while the UN warned that planned fossil fuel production “vastly exceeds” the limit needed for 1.5C.
>> No. 451406 Anonymous
11th May 2022
Wednesday 9:09 pm
451406 spacer
>>451404
This is great: https://twitter.com/JustStop_Oil/status/1524411969566089217
The TV presenters ask the weathergirl for her opinion on what the protester told them about the climate crisis, then completely ignore her to go straight to the old gotcha journalism when she agrees with him.
>> No. 451412 Anonymous
11th May 2022
Wednesday 10:59 pm
451412 spacer
>>451404
>yet they show no sign of declining

Emission growth has declined over time and will soon start falling outside of the pandemic. 4C won't happen. Whinging about gas plans just misses that new fields have come online as a result of the energy crunch and strategic change.
>> No. 451414 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 1:19 am
451414 spacer
>>451412

You know better than them, no doubt.
>> No. 451436 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 7:18 pm
451436 spacer
Lads just had a thought about this 'windscreen splatter' test for insect populations in the UK - are we seeing 60% fewer bugs on windshields because we're killing the planet or because cars are more aerodynamic now?

I have no doubt bugs are less ubiquitous than the blissful ignorance of the 90's, but random people seem to still be reporting that they're encountering a lot of bug corpses on their front windscreen so I suspect some of it is due to them driving shitty bangers.
>> No. 451437 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 7:41 pm
451437 spacer
>>451436
If https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/12/car-splatometer-tests-reveal-huge-decline-number-insects is to be trusted older cars actually hit fewer insects since their unaerodynamic shape moves more air out of the way, throwing the insects out of the car's path.
>> No. 451449 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 2:06 am
451449 spacer
>>451436
>are we seeing 60% fewer bugs on windshields because
>we
You should use "they" in that context unless you're one the researchers. Including yourself in that context is claiming credit for work you haven't performed, which is intellectual property theft.
>> No. 451455 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 3:46 pm
451455 spacer
The other headlines news today
1 Permafrost ablaze with wildfires in Siberia
2 Wildfires on furious pace in California
3 France in unprecedented drought
4 Queensland faces another flood emergency as Australia prepares to vote
5 Climate change doubled risk of South Africa floods
>> No. 451456 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 5:47 pm
451456 spacer
>>451449

If they're submitting their bug splatter report to the researchers, they're involved.
>> No. 451527 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 10:00 am
451527 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/17/shut-down-fossil-fuel-production-sites-early-to-avoid-climate-chaos-says-study
Nearly half of existing fossil fuel production sites need to be shut down early if global heating is to be limited to 1.5C, the internationally agreed goal for avoiding climate catastrophe, according to a new scientific study.
>> No. 451528 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 10:56 am
451528 spacer
>>451527


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpEDSvaP_-8
>> No. 451539 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 1:17 pm
451539 spacer
https://bylinetimes.com/2022/05/17/global-banks-privately-prepare-for-dangerous-levels-of-imminent-civil-unrest-in-western-homelands/
>Global banks and investment firms are bracing themselves for an “unprecedented” upsurge in civil unrest in the US, UK and Europe as energy and food price spikes are set to drive costs of living to astronomical levels
>> No. 451540 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 1:27 pm
451540 spacer
>>451539

>> No. 451541 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 1:31 pm
451541 spacer
>>451539
I've often wondered: at what point do you just say fuck it and impose rationing to maintain social stability?
Perhaps keep market prices for commercial users, resource allocation through pricing and all that, but I suspect you'd get far more unrest if 20% of the public couldn't afford electricity for 100% of the week than you would if 100% of the public had to take power cuts for 20% of the week no matter how much they were willing to pay.
>> No. 451543 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 2:07 pm
451543 spacer

Kamkwambas scrap generator.jpg
451543451543451543
>>451539
I don't know if I should pack some rice or simply embrace the process. It'll feel bad to continue watching The Depp/Heard trial instead of walking up to Tesco, but at the same time I've always wanted to experience true poverty - it seems as though that's the best way to achieve spiritual growth and actually come to your senses, to yourself.

The recent changed to protest laws and police powers are starting to make sense now in view of a bigger picture. How long has this been known and why wasn't it better publicised? Or have I simply not been looking?
>> No. 451544 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 2:14 pm
451544 spacer
>>451541
Once you've lost control, generally.

We're all fucked anyway. There's no unclaimed/unowned land, so despite the thousands of different groups who would be much happier and much better off finding their own place to set up a community, we have everyone trapped together fighting over the same shite in these very similar systems which, barring some massive catastrophe or rebellion, won't change in any significant way.

Wealth disparity is growing, fossil fuel usage isn't slowing down. If we do manage to make it to Mars in the next few decades then why would that be any different? It'll be company towns and living to survive/careful moderation of resources and any sort of non-neo-feudal society will fail to form because how on mars could it when the only people rich enough to enable this have complete control?

And just try fucking rebelling - Hong Kong fielded 1/3 of the entire city and barely got anything done. How the fuck are you meant to protest effectively in the west when you're living paycheck to paycheck spread out hundreds of miles? You're not, it's practically designed as such.

It's vexing. We have the resources and knowledge and ability to reduce suffering and live somewhat sustainably and allow most people in the world to pray at their particular church as such, but we can't solve problems because of an apparently infinite number of reasons, mostly boiling down to too few people having too much power.

We need city states back. Maybe. The farmer needs to be able to take time off work to travel to the city and place his black or white stone in the designated area, and to feel like their vote matters.

We haven't evolved beyond geography or the importance of locality, we've just got a shoddy safety net enabling us to operate outside those constraints, but it doesn't work as well as it needs to.

Fuck, I'm so angry and so impotent.
>> No. 451545 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 2:19 pm
451545 spacer
>>451543
>The recent changed to protest laws and police powers are starting to make sense now in view of a bigger picture. How long has this been known and why wasn't it better publicised? Or have I simply not been looking?

I think people seem to underestimate that most countries will engage in protectionism to look after their own first.

India was the second largest producer of wheat and they've been affected by a heatwave so they've banned exports so they have enough food in their country, likewise Indonesia banned the export of palm oil because domestic prices were rising too high after the invasion of Ukraine and due to the poor harvest of other crops used to make edible oils. That'll have a knock-on effect on biofuels.
>> No. 451546 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 2:25 pm
451546 spacer

abc0e91e-3199-4dd9-a997-fea74e1e.png
451546451546451546
>>451539
>The rising trend did not begin 15 years ago. It, too, is part of a much longer rising trend in political violence which began to especially accelerate since the 1970s, which is when the global economy first entered a stage of ecological ‘overshoot’.

Yeah but no, we're not at the level of violence and disorder of the 1970s. We're not even close. The economy is preparing for conditions that are reminiscent of the 1970s which if you wanted to be a hippie-doomer about it marked the decline of the Post-War consensus and post-industrialisation.

>>451541
We know exactly what will happen because we've lived through an energy crunch before, factories go into 4-day weeks and bullshit products like playmobile come out to address shortages in plastics. Hopefully our return to bell-bottoms will also mean orgies and pornographic movies with plots and not the 1976 Heatwave.
>> No. 451547 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 2:56 pm
451547 spacer
Bust always comes before the boom though, right lads?

When things spiral out of control in the current economy, investors and entrepreneurs will be forced to find a new avenue of work. The more reliable solar, wind, tidal and geothermal start to look compared to the increasing volatility of fossil fuels and other non-renewables, surely they will eventually have to make the jump.

Big social change is coming, however, that I am sure of. The actions we need to take are simply not possible under the present international neo-liberal capitalist system. I remember there being a lot of doomsaying about globalisation a decade or two ago, how it's all the illuminati and NWO trying to take our freedoms, but the future of humanity's prosperity and safety almost certainly lies, by necessity, with some form of global unipolar order.

I predict we will see something quite new, not quite socialism, not quite capitalism, but with a much stronger grip on international rule and regulation.
>> No. 451558 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 5:37 pm
451558 spacer
>>451547
I'm not trying to be unnecessarily doomer when I say this, but
>Bust always comes before the boom though, right lads?
... sort of? Tell that to the Romans, what was their boom? And things don't have to cycle. It can just deteriorate forever.
>> No. 451561 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 6:03 pm
451561 spacer
>>451558

That's a matter of perspective. A human lifespan is pretty short. Roman civilisation didn't really collapse, it just stopped being Roman. Things got worse, but there has never been a real end of the world. The so called "bronze age collapse" was really just an extended period of migration, regime change and upheaval.

Germany is still there today, and we still buy products from a lot of the same companies that were kicking about back during the Nazi days. The government collapsed but the majority of the country just took down all the banners, went "Gott, sei dank ist das vorbei" and carried on.

Civilisations don't collapse, only governments.
>> No. 451564 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 6:14 pm
451564 spacer
>>451561
>Civilisations don't collapse, only governments.

This is demonstrably untrue.
>> No. 451569 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 9:32 pm
451569 spacer
>>451558
>... sort of? Tell that to the Romans, what was their boom?

They had multiple and by the end in the West it was really shit to be Roman. Not all that different to what came after and in some ways worse with heredity jobs and a special bounty hunter to therefore catch runaway bureaucrats.

But on the whole humanity has improved over time, it has peaks and troughs but it's an upward trajectory.
>> No. 451573 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 10:45 pm
451573 spacer
>>451564

The only genuine example I can think of is something like the Easter Islanders. All other collapses throughout history have really just been transitions or mergers.
>> No. 451576 Anonymous
17th May 2022
Tuesday 11:17 pm
451576 spacer
>>451573

Native Americans. They had a relatively advanced and urbanised civilisation, but reverted to nomadism after the introduction of infectious diseases by European explorers. They weren't wiped out, but the risk of disease caused a mass exodus from major settlements and made trading extremely risky. Their civilisation collapsed long before Europeans started rounding them up into reservations.
>> No. 451605 Anonymous
19th May 2022
Thursday 11:27 pm
451605 spacer

basmati rice looter.jpg
451605451605451605
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/05/19/the-coming-food-catastrophe
China, the largest wheat producer, has said that, after rains delayed planting last year, this crop may be its worst-ever. Now, in addition to the extreme temperatures in India, the world’s second-largest producer, a lack of rain threatens to sap yields in other breadbaskets, from America’s wheat belt to the Beauce region of France. The Horn of Africa is being ravaged by its worst drought in four decades.
>> No. 451609 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 1:11 am
451609 spacer
>>451605
I'm telling you lads, give this a read >>/lit/7396.
>> No. 451610 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 6:14 am
451610 spacer
>>451609
I bought it after you posted! It's next on my list.
>> No. 451611 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 7:51 am
451611 spacer
>>451605
This is going to very suddenly kick us in the arse isn't it?
>> No. 451612 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 7:58 am
451612 spacer
>>451611
Depends how much you like eating. Best to start doomsday prepping, although doing so will contribute to shortages.
>> No. 451613 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 8:52 am
451613 spacer

US_Corn_in_Ethanol.jpg
451613451613451613
>>451576
You're thinking of the Mound Builders only they continued through the Natchez despite mortality as high as 90%. I know the point you're trying to make but if you're having to go to something so devastating it's really not doing your argument any favours - yes I suppose if everyone dies then a civilisation ends.

But I'd still add that Native American civilization didn't really end, it changed and blended and morphed in the circumstances of an alien environment to the degree that the local cultures forgot they once lived in a world without horses.

>>451611
We're fine despite the stories of Britney being pushed over the edge by the price of fish fingers, British households spend less than the OECD average on food and as the Economist fails to point out directly it's more of a policy question given just how much food is produced globally. If the US wanted to it could just start bombing the Middle East with corn instead of turning it into ethanol.

The world deliberately overproduces food, it's just a question of how that food ends up in bellies.
>> No. 451614 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 9:33 am
451614 spacer
>>451613
>the Economist fails to point out directly it's more of a policy question given just how much food is produced globally. If the US wanted to it could just start bombing the Middle East with corn instead of turning it into ethanol.
Are the US military known for pausing their military industrial complex's profitability in order to feed foreigners?
>> No. 451617 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 12:38 pm
451617 spacer

Untitled.png
451617451617451617
>>451614
Is the US corn lobby known for filling every orifice with corn?
>> No. 451618 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 12:45 pm
451618 spacer
>>451617

You haven't answered the question.
>> No. 451619 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 1:11 pm
451619 spacer
>>451618
They're not mutually exclusive.
>> No. 451620 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 1:18 pm
451620 spacer
>>451619
>If the US wanted to it could just start bombing the Middle East with corn instead of turning it into ethanol.
>> No. 451635 Anonymous
20th May 2022
Friday 7:46 pm
451635 spacer
>>451617
When I first moved here I thought I'd treat myself to a fry-up, only to find that all of the sausage and the bacon (which is cut the wrong way anyway) has corn syrup in.
>> No. 451685 Anonymous
23rd May 2022
Monday 7:44 pm
451685 spacer
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-61519111

>HSBC has reportedly suspended a senior executive who accused central bankers and other officials of exaggerating the financial risks of climate change.

>Last week, Stuart Kirk, a leader in the bank's responsible investing team, said: "There's always some nut job telling me about the end of the world."

>Later in the presentation, he said: "Who cares if Miami is six metres underwater in 100 years? Amsterdam has been six metres underwater for ages and that's a really nice place."


On the contrary, I found Amsterdam to be a bit anticlimactic. Maybe I just picked a bad time when I was there, but it was absolutely riddled with American college kids and backpackers who couldn't handle their booze. Or their cannabis.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Google says Amsterdam is only two metres below sea level.
>> No. 451692 Anonymous
24th May 2022
Tuesday 1:11 pm
451692 spacer
Clive Lewis has implied in Parliament that the government/corporations are criminals for what they're doing on the climate crisis. This echoes what the greens have been saying, I believe.
>> No. 451725 Anonymous
27th May 2022
Friday 6:38 pm
451725 spacer
>An Israeli study published on Thursday found that climate change is already causing a “considerable intensification” of winter storms in the Southern Hemisphere to a level not anticipated until 2080.

>The study published by the Weizmann Institute of Science in the Nature Climate Change journal is part of an effort by scientists around the world to use 30 massive, intricate computer networks to better model and predict climate change.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-study-climate-change-already-causing-storm-levels-only-expected-in-2080/

>In a sign of how bad the water crisis has gotten for the Southwest, Lake Mead is already running well below what last year's projections suggested, even in its worst-case scenario. In August, the bureau predicted the reservoir would most likely be at 1,059 feet at the end of this month, and 1,057 feet at worst.
>It's now around 1,049 feet.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/us/lake-mead-water-level-low-projection-climate/index.html

>NZ King Salmon to close farms due to rising sea temperatures
>[New Zealand]'s largest salmon producer says it is being forced to close farms and let go of staff due to warmer water temperatures brought on by climate change.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/467842/nz-king-salmon-to-close-farms-due-to-rising-sea-temperatures
>> No. 451744 Anonymous
28th May 2022
Saturday 3:36 pm
451744 spacer
I know that weather is not climate, but why is it still not properly summery yet? We're just a few weeks from the longest day of the year and it still only feels like spring. This is bullshit. I wish I hadn't burnt all those tyres and dropped all that Agent Orange on the Brazilian rainforest now. I might either put a jumper on or close my windows, and this is the worst injustice since OJ.
>> No. 451746 Anonymous
28th May 2022
Saturday 3:38 pm
451746 spacer
>>451744

It's a normal spring, we've just had a lot of unseasonably warm springs in recent years.
>> No. 451747 Anonymous
28th May 2022
Saturday 5:03 pm
451747 spacer
>>451744

I feel like British seasons have permanently shifted. The last few years it's only got properly warm into June and July, but stays warm until nearly October. The winter is more like November to March. Remember we keep getting snow in like April.
>> No. 451749 Anonymous
28th May 2022
Saturday 5:31 pm
451749 spacer
>>451744
You absolute rotter. The last time someone (you?) complained about it not being summery enough on here we had a month long heatwave where we all fucking melted and the nation only got some decent sleep once the rains came. I'm holding you personally responsible for the coming humidity and all the bullshit XR nonsense I'll have to put up with from this thread and protestors when the heat comes.

And it doesn't get properly summer until the July much like how it's not properly winter until January/February. It takes time for the planet to heat up.
>> No. 451752 Anonymous
28th May 2022
Saturday 5:46 pm
451752 spacer
>>451749
I've been quite humid for at least two weeks now.
>> No. 451760 Anonymous
29th May 2022
Sunday 12:54 pm
451760 spacer
>>451747

Colder spring seasons in Europe are actually in line with global climate change projections. That whole bit about arctic glaciers and sea ice melting and thus slowing down the conveyor belt of the Gulf Stream. The end of it could be the Gulf Stream seizing up almost entirely, which would make our climate more similar to southern and central Canada.

I was in Chicago in springtime once 30 years ago, where they had pretty chilly weather of around 45 °F, and the friend we were visiting told us that cold spells like that were not unheard of in the region well into late April or even early May. Because there exists no significant mountain barrier between the Midwestern U.S. and Canada all the way to the North Pole, cold air masses from the Canadian Arctic frequently travel down the latitudes to the Upper Midwest unhindered. These weather patterns are only offset and pushed back when the continental U.S. heats up in the months between June and August.

So my guess is that that could be in store for us as well. Less warm air blowing from the direction of the Gulf Stream could make it easier for polar air masses to linger in western Europe for longer in spring.


Also, found this today:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp-WiNXH6hI
>> No. 451761 Anonymous
29th May 2022
Sunday 4:03 pm
451761 spacer
This could be total bullshit, not sure, but I read once that the UK is quite well placed to deal with climate change. What with being an incredibly mild climate to begin with, things won't get too wild. Unlike say, the middle east, where lots of people will have to get used to 50c+.
>> No. 451763 Anonymous
29th May 2022
Sunday 4:32 pm
451763 spacer
>>451761
It'll be a bastard for sanctions on Russia, though, once Siberia becomes warm and inhabitable. China might seize a massive chunk of it in anticipation, and then we'll really be in the shit have to learn Mandarin.
>> No. 451767 Anonymous
29th May 2022
Sunday 4:43 pm
451767 spacer
>>451761
It would be "fine" if all that happened was that it got slightly warmer, but as >>451760 points out it's likely to get nastily cold here, as well as things like storms and floods and droughts happening worse and more often. Which will be a problem for us directly if we ever start growing our own food, instead of relying on imports from countries where the impact will be significantly worse.
>> No. 451768 Anonymous
29th May 2022
Sunday 4:47 pm
451768 spacer
>>451761
My understanding is that if it weren't for the Gulf Stream we'd have a very western Russian kind of climate, which is very bad when you consider the thousands of years we've spent not having that type of climate.

>>451763
Once Siberia becomes warm and habitable the world's basically fucked anyway. And I don't really see how building Slavic Milton Keyns in northern Perm is going to be much of a boon regardless.
>> No. 451769 Anonymous
29th May 2022
Sunday 4:56 pm
451769 spacer
I did some leafleting for Just Stop Oil today, had one very angry women follow me around yelling about how I was a daft militant wog spreading fear of a hoax, so billionaires can invest in renewables. Her (young adult) son just watched looking quite uncomfortable. Younger people should really be allowed to impose restrictions on the amount of time their parents spend on Facebook.
>> No. 451784 Anonymous
30th May 2022
Monday 12:32 am
451784 spacer
>>451768

>Once Siberia becomes warm and habitable the world's basically fucked anyway

Not least because there's thought to be millions of tons of greenhouse gases trapped in the permafrost soil that could be released once it thaws.

An even bigger headache is the whole methane hydrate thing. It's a form of solidified methane that can only exist on ocean floors under extreme pressure and near-freezing temperatures, and seems to be quite abundant in deep seas. If and when oceans become just a bit warmer than they are now, it could cause the methane that's trapped in it to be released into the atmosphere on a large scale.
>> No. 451785 Anonymous
30th May 2022
Monday 8:41 am
451785 spacer
>>451784
Doesn't sound like permafrost if it's gonna thaw.
>> No. 451786 Anonymous
30th May 2022
Monday 8:58 am
451786 spacer
>>451784

>could be released
It's already being released, slowly for now. They picked up signs of it starting in 2020.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/oct/27/sleeping-giant-arctic-methane-deposits-starting-to-release-scientists-find
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/methane-arctic-seabed-greenhouse-gas-emissions-climate-siberian-shelf-study-expedition-b1396150.html
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/02/climate-crisis-siberian-heatwave-led-to-new-methane-emissions-study-says
>> No. 451787 Anonymous
30th May 2022
Monday 10:35 am
451787 spacer

EqcipBWXIAA-NA5.jpg
451787451787451787
>>451785
>> No. 451926 Anonymous
7th June 2022
Tuesday 5:50 pm
451926 spacer
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/french-italian-farmers-count-cost-storms-drought-2022-06-06/
>Farms across France were hit by heavy hail and fierce storms over the weekend, the National Farmers' Union Federation (FNSEA) said on Monday, while their counterparts in Italy warned of the impact of drought on crop yields.

>Hail, strong winds and torrential rain caused damage in nearly 65 departments of France, affecting wheat as well as fruit crops and vineyards, the FNSEA said in a statement.

>"The damage is very significant, with some farms seeing 100% of their crop affected," the statement said.
>> No. 451927 Anonymous
7th June 2022
Tuesday 10:34 pm
451927 spacer
>>451926
Isn't really intense hail exactly what happened in 1815/16? As a side effect of Tambora blowing off.
>> No. 451931 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 5:30 pm
451931 spacer

FUviApJWIAIh1vx.jpg
451931451931451931
Weather conditions have caused a chilli shortage so no more Sriracha for a while.

>>451927

Looks like it, why?
>> No. 451935 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 10:32 pm
451935 spacer
>>451931
It just seems a bad omen for our civilisation to be so closely mirroring the immediate aftermath of a generation of bloodletting. Especially one that led to another generation of political and social stagnation. Omens don't mean much of course, but it nevertheless makes it difficult to get one's hopes up.
>> No. 451936 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 10:36 pm
451936 spacer
>>451935
Intense and unpredictable weather is a fairly reasonable omen of famine.
>> No. 451937 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 11:55 pm
451937 spacer
>>451936
Yes, I'm aware of that. What I'm doing is drawing a semi-historical parallel from this one event in which we, like the men and women of the early-1800s, lurched gracefully from many years of depressing shit into even more years of depressing shit. I'm not speaking in purely mechanical terms, hence my use of the word "omen", because it's all very ominous, isn't it?
>> No. 451998 Anonymous
14th June 2022
Tuesday 9:34 am
451998 spacer
The US had five simultaneous climate events yesterday; a flash-flood in Yellowstons, a derecho (a destructive, fast-moving storm) in the Midwest at 80mph, wildfires fanned by high winds in Arizona and New Mexico, wildfires in Alaska, and a heatwave in Texas.

And Mexico City had what looks like a foot of hail.
>> No. 451999 Anonymous
14th June 2022
Tuesday 10:33 am
451999 spacer
>>451931

I've still got loads of dried chili peppers from last year's bumper crop where I had eight plants that were doing very well. I'm prepared.
>> No. 452000 Anonymous
14th June 2022
Tuesday 3:32 pm
452000 spacer
>>451999
Prepared to become a millionaire.
>> No. 452018 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 9:03 pm
452018 spacer
>New data reveals extraordinary global heating in the Arctic
Temperatures in the Barents Sea region are ‘off the scale’ and may affect extreme weather in the US and Europe
>New data has revealed extraordinary rates of global heating in the Arctic, up to seven times faster than the global average.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/15/new-data-reveals-extraordinary-global-heating-in-the-arctic
>> No. 452019 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 9:39 pm
452019 spacer
So do we reckon it'll be a slow gradual change that we only realise looking back, or will one day we have some sort of massive catastrophe?
>> No. 452021 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 9:56 pm
452021 spacer
>>452019

I think some people have already realised.
>> No. 452022 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 9:59 pm
452022 spacer
>>452019

Most tipping point scenarios assume that once a certain tipping point has been reached, changes then occur somewhat suddenly. If the Gulf Stream collapses, for example, it could be a matter of just two or three years before Britain and much of Europe would have a climate like in southern Canada, on whose latitude we actually are, which would especially mean we'd very suddenly have much harsher winters than we are used to.
>> No. 452023 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 10:00 pm
452023 spacer
Incidentally, the "Think tank" Policy Exchange that pushed for the new anti-protest laws after failing to have XR categorised as daft militant wogs was (no surprise here) been revealed to be funded by an oil company, ExxonMobil.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/policing-bill-policy-exchange-exxonmobil-lobbying/

This article about Patel taking 100k from an oil firm has probably been posted before but here it is again.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/01/priti-patel-accepts-100000-donation-from-firm-run-by-oil-trader-pierre-andurand
>> No. 452024 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 10:18 pm
452024 spacer
>>452022
>which would especially mean we'd very suddenly have much harsher winters than we are used to
THE DREAM
>> No. 452025 Anonymous
15th June 2022
Wednesday 10:27 pm
452025 spacer
>>452023
>This article about Patel taking 100k from an oil firm has probably been posted before but here it is again.
To think that for 100k we could have bought her a ticket on a plane to Rwanda and "convinced" Border Force to refuse her entry.
>> No. 452032 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 2:53 am
452032 spacer
>>452022

The Gulf Stream is likely to become unstable before it collapses entirely, so we could have rapid fluctuations between normal British winter weather and Scandinavian cold. I expect that those extreme freeze-thaw cycles would be a bit of a pain in the arse.
>> No. 452033 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 9:21 am
452033 spacer
>>452032

They'll make it pretty much impossible to grow food.
>> No. 452034 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 9:48 am
452034 spacer

FVW5mVrWQAAhWVj.jpg
452034452034452034
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-hatches-plan-to-insulate-britons-against-winter-bills-vg7xdjg3h
Boris Johnson hatches plan to insulate Britons against winter bills
>during one meeting a No 10 official suggested it could be called “insulate Britain”.
>It was rejected when someone pointed out that it was the same name as the environmental campaign group that has caused widespread disruption.
>> No. 452035 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 10:02 am
452035 spacer
>>452034

>It may now be called the "Great British Insulation Scheme", but there are concerns about whether it will apply in devolved administrations.

No wonder that Armando Iannucci thinks that a new series of The Thick of It would be futile. We're living in a slapstickocracy.
>> No. 452036 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 10:13 am
452036 spacer
>>452033
welcome to the algae farms of North Africa. You like algae and algae derived ethanol, yeah?
I'm currently trying to plant fruit trees for the next 20 years. Go hotter, go colder, or just plant something that'll be good for 5 years and hope? Who the fuck can tell? Wouldn't want to have to bet the farm on anything. Probably would just grow spuds until it was too difficult - at least most crops are only a one or two year cycle.
>> No. 452037 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 10:18 am
452037 spacer
>>452036

Crickets are the new beef m8. Get into it.
>> No. 452038 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 10:23 am
452038 spacer
>>452036
These dweebs seem to cope growing produce through Wisconsin winters (same latitude as Toronto) in a heated Greenhouse:

and this lad's figured out hydroponic potatoes:
&list=PLJjStljbec8Vw8tGxckS7KTuRn3Z3CGMh&index=4
Complementing them with LED grow lights wouldn't be cheap to set up but it's better than starving.
>> No. 452042 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 12:08 pm
452042 spacer
>>452038

I thought about building my own greenhouse, but realistically, I'd have to cut down two 50-year-old maple trees that block the sunlight, because that's where the only spot in the garden is where there would be space to build one.

Not sure if there are tree preservation orders in this area, but it seems a bit wasteful to cut down such beautiful trees just for a smug suburban hipster project. And they've probably done more for the environment by absorbing fifty years worth of carbon from the air than I'll ever be able to do by building my own greenhouse.
>> No. 452044 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 12:27 pm
452044 spacer
>>452038

That sort of malarkey is pretty daft. Polytunnels are great, but if you're going to run heaters and LED lights then you're going to need to get the energy from somewhere. The cheapest option is solar, but do you know what's even cheaper than that? Just letting the plants see sunlight.

A field of wheat or a polytunnel full of tomatoes is basically a big solar energy array, only you're using plant growth to store the energy in the form of carbohydrates. Plants are reasonably efficient at this and adding several stages of conversion losses certainly won't improve that efficiency. The basic issue is that we've become used to very cheap energy in the form of fossil fuels and haven't quite come to terms with what the world will look like when we've blown our energy inheritance.

There's no reason why we should starve because our food system is rife with waste, but we're going to have to think very carefully about how we use energy.
>> No. 452046 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 1:14 pm
452046 spacer
>>452042
Greenhouses don'r necessarily need or want full, unfettered sunlight. (Deciduous) Trees are somewhat handy - they reduce the light less when there's less of it. Maples will leaf up a bit earlier than you'd like, but unless they're completely overshadowing it. Don't rule out a greenhouse. They're quite fun.
>> No. 452048 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 2:42 pm
452048 spacer
>>452042
Also, cutting down big trees and then using the wood is a large part of the point of planting trees to soak up carbon. Get your chopper out.
Of course, if you like them, leave them, and fuck the environment. But be aware that the bigger they are, the more annoying they are to eventually fell.
>> No. 452049 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 3:04 pm
452049 spacer
>>452048
The bigger they are, the more CO2 they're absorbing as they go. Cutting them down wouldn't really help even if you are storing the carbon temporarily as building materials.
>> No. 452050 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 3:23 pm
452050 spacer
>>452049
Is that true? More, younger trees add more mass faster.
https://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/ppa/2001/anwar/
sort of says so, and it's (one of the reasons) why you grow coppiced stuff for firewood if you can.
Locking up captured carbon as building wood for, say, 50 years, and using the space for more trees is going to do more for carbon capture than just letting the existing trees grow, and much more so if you then let them fall and rot (which doesn't seem likely in this case)
>> No. 452053 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 4:25 pm
452053 spacer
>>452050
Yes it's true.
https://theecologist.org/2014/jan/28/big-old-trees-grow-faster-absorb-more-carbon
It's why planting loads of new trees isn't as useful as simply not cutting old forest down. That and the irreplaceable biodiversity and habitat loss that would also cause.
>> No. 452054 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 6:54 pm
452054 spacer
>>452053 from that:
""Native forests, in terms of their value as carbon storage, significantly outweigh their value as pulp and timber. "

huh? timber counts as carbon storage... Cut the tree down, keep and use the timber, which also avoids you using some concrete if you do things right. Sure, you crap out some bark and pulp that will go round again.
As for the biodiversity embodied in a couple of maples, fuck'em. Try not to drop them during bird nesting season though, because tweetles are nice.

That paper just says that a little replacement tree doesn't take up as much carbon as an ancient tree. Well, yes. But, among the many reasons I don't want us to fell all the ancient forests, that's one of the most specious reasons.
>> No. 452055 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 7:03 pm
452055 spacer
>>452054

A fully grown tree will sequester over 20 kilos of CO2 a year. That's 20kg more, every year. If you cut it down, it stops doing that. If you replace it with a sapling, that sapling will sequester about 0.1 kilos of CO2 a year.
>> No. 452056 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 7:32 pm
452056 spacer
>>452055
So don't plant a single sapling, all lonely in the space a massive tree used to take. Plant a load in the same space and coppice them. Have the aforementioned greenhouse in a little clearing.
I'm not arguing for cutting down all trees and replacing them, one for one, with saplings, and I don't think many people are, unless it's to harvest and replenish a commercial forest. But wood's a good building material and we should use more of it and less concrete / brick.
Your saplings will, in time, become proper trees. Pack them in to start with, thin them out and burn them (for energy, not just for a laugh). Grow things inbetween them until they're big, or coppice them and keep pulling the carbon out as firewood. If you just let all trees grow forever, they fall, rot and dump troubling amounts of methane - you're worse off than you would have been felling them for useful wood and replacing.
Again - don't abuse the ancient, interesting or otherwise precious stuff, but not all trees are untouchably sacred. They're a useful, carbon-sequestering, crop. The more the merrier.
My house is surrounded by trees, from >100yo apples, to previous-owner bastarding out of control leylandii, to woodland and orchards. I do have skin in this game. Not many people would accuse me of wantonly dropping trees, but I've done a fair few and have a wood pile that I'm using instead of oil or gas. I'm also planting.
>> No. 452057 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 7:53 pm
452057 spacer
>>452056

Or just fuck off trees and farm algae, which is hundreds of times more effective at capturing and sequestering carbon. Algae farms aren't pretty though, so they can't be good for the environment.

Seriously, algae and cyanobacteria fucking love CO2. They'll thrive in atmospheres with levels of CO2 that'll kill most trees. It's a triple whammy - the right species can absorb CO2, filter water and produce nitrogen-rich fertiliser with almost no energy input.

We need to hurry up and embrace the weird dystopian future, because it's happening whether we like it or not.

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/60/9/685/237929
>> No. 452058 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 8:13 pm
452058 spacer
>>452057
wow, it's normally just me banging on about algae on here. If it's two out of the three of us, maybe the time for slime is nigh. If we can just get investorlad to fund us, we're sorted.
>> No. 452059 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 9:42 pm
452059 spacer
>>452058

I was similarly surprised that there was such a lively debate on whether or not I should cut down those two maple trees in the back garden here.

What I can say is that the trees, not just those two maples but also the other trees out back, get trimmed with a handsaw or in some cases a chainsaw every so often, and any branch that has a diameter worth bothering about gets cut into handy little pieces as firewood for the livingroom fireplace. As far as firewood, you can't get any more locally sourced than that.

Fully chopping down those maple trees would probably give me five years worth of excellent firewood (I've found that maple burns with a big bright flame, but in contrast to birch it then actually lasts a while). It's slightly tempting, but I think I really prefer looking at those trees everytime I gaze out over the garden. Old trees to me just have a certain kind of dignity.
>> No. 452060 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 9:48 pm
452060 spacer
>>452056

We can certainly preserve old growth forests while also using commercial forests for building materials.

>>452059

Burning the wood is just immediately re-releasing the carbon back into the atmosphere.
>> No. 452061 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 10:11 pm
452061 spacer
>>452060

>Burning the wood is just immediately re-releasing the carbon back into the atmosphere.

Now you tell me. But even so, I'm only releasing the same CO2 back into the air as those trees absorbed. And the wood didn't have to be carted around by a lorry or in the boot of my car.

One thing that's essential though in preveting soot and fine particles is to allow your freshly cut wood to dry. We keep ours stacked in the boiler room in the basement, which has warm and dry air year-round, and depending on the tree species, you'll have to allow 18 to 24 months for it to dry before it's ready to use.
>> No. 452062 Anonymous
16th June 2022
Thursday 10:56 pm
452062 spacer
>>452057

See this is just plain getting the issues mixed up. The reason we need to save the trees isn't because of CO2 and it never was.

We need to save the trees because of their importance in ecosystems and maintaining biodiversity- Allowing those systems to be damaged has massive knock on effects for shit like pollination and soil fertility and the water cycle later down the line, which inevitably come back to bite us in the arse. So you should care about it even if you're not a great big animal loving softy like me. It's not quite irreversible damage, but it may as well be, because it takes generations to build back up again once it's done.

Algae tower farms for cleaning up the greenhouse gasses, and diverse forests (not just monocultures made for harvesting) for sorting out the ecosystem, and a solar farm the size of Texas in the Sahara for energy.
>> No. 452063 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 12:14 am
452063 spacer
>>452060 Burning the wood is just immediately re-releasing the carbon back into the atmosphere.

while hopefully making space for more wood to grow, and feeding the recent carbon cycle, not digging up stuff that's been tucked away for millions of years. Reduce still wins, but if I'm going to burn something other than deuterium to heat my house, I vote for sensibly produced biomass. I keep wondering if I should grow a few acres of miscanthus, get the cycle down to one year.
>> No. 452064 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 1:29 am
452064 spacer
>>452063

>but if I'm going to burn something other than deuterium to heat my house

When controlled fusion technology actually exists, it will be the biggest game changer since cavemen discovered fire. The deuterium contained in a litre of water would probably be enough to heat a four-bedroom home for decades. And cars with a fusion reactor like in Back To The Future would never need refuelling over their lifetime.
>> No. 452066 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 10:51 am
452066 spacer
>>452062
You don't get far enough on this for me; trees are rubbish at carbon capture. They're look good because you can theoretically just plant them and they take care of the rest but it takes thousands of years for the results we want. In reality the job is essentially solar panels + carbon sequestration, team that with space-based solar (or like otherlad go the fusion route) so you can let some real men do it and you'll be much better equipped to make a difference.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, owls.
>> No. 452067 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 11:03 am
452067 spacer
>>452066

Forests have a direct cooling effect on your local climate because they store water and evaporate it. And over large contiguous forests, that evaporation will then form clouds and rain off over that forest again. On a big enough scale, forests can directly impact global temperatures that way. So it's not just about capturing carbon.

Forests or parks also have a beneficial effect on local air quality, not just because of the oxygen they release but also because they are able to comb fine dust particles out of the air.


So yeah. Plant a tree some time.
>> No. 452069 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 11:29 am
452069 spacer
>>452067
We're not talking about humidity though are we. Putting clouds of water vapour in the atmosphere is an owlish conspiracy to flood the dens of shrews and quite obviously acts as a significant greenhouse gas on a global scale.

It still stands that planting trees is a pipedream solution to climate change that looks good on paper but isn't actually a solution.
>> No. 452071 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 11:44 am
452071 spacer
>>452069


>and quite obviously acts as a significant greenhouse gas on a global scale.

Yes, but it's a natural greenhouse gas that is supposed to be there. Also, as over 70 percent of the Earth's surface is ocean, large parts of the Earth's atmosphere directly above it as well as costal regions are saturated with water vapor. What planting more forests does do is prevent rising land temperatures in less than humid or even arid areas, because as I said the water evaporation by forests has a direct cooling effect.
>> No. 452073 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 1:32 pm
452073 spacer
>>452066
>In reality the job is essentially solar panels + carbon sequestration, team that with space-based solar
Carbon capture plants generally put out more carbon than they capture. Space-based solar is no better than a pipe-dream at this point. These are just Elon Musk level technofix uselessness that may never come to fruition. We can stop burning the Amazon and we can and do seed new forests. These both help with the ecological crisis which is equally if not more important than the greenhouse gas problem.
>> No. 452076 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 2:40 pm
452076 spacer
>>452073

Carbon capture absolutely works, it's just relatively expensive at the moment. Long-term sequestration isn't a solved problem, but there are a lot of promising options, with mineralisation being top of the list.

We can't just carry on emitting carbon on the assumption that someone else will sort it out, but reforestation isn't a magic bullet either - there simply isn't enough land available for it to really move the needle and that land has a lot of other important uses.

I don't necessarily disagree with arguments about the benefits of reforestation for biodiversity and soil health, but getting down to net zero is a much more urgent priority. We have viable technologies at reasonable costs to massively reduce our emissions, but it just hasn't been politically prioritised. The current energy crisis is a huge setback, but it illustrates the importance of getting away from fossil fuels and the benefits we could have enjoyed if we'd made it a priority sooner. There's no technical or economic reason why we couldn't have already created a society with no gas boilers, no gas power stations and no internal combustion vehicles, we just punted it down the road because of short-term political thinking.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211467X14000716
>> No. 452081 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 3:52 pm
452081 spacer
>>452076

>there simply isn't enough land available for it to really move the needle and that land has a lot of other important uses.

Not strictly true. If we use agricultural resources more efficiently, we could free up loads of space for other uses such as forests, both old and new.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-12-15/no-more-hunger-how-to-feed-everyone-on-earth-with-just-the-land-we-have


Additionally, I'd be in favour of active population control. In the face of deteriorating and dwindling natural resources, we cannot simply act like it's everyone's right to put as many children into the world as they please. Unless we really become super efficient with our use of natural resources, every large family only contributes to the problem. China's one-child policy may have failed, but that doesn't mean the idea itself is wong. Maybe make it a two-child policy, as many more people would be on board with it. It would have little impact in first-world countries, but that isn't where today's population pressure is in the first place.
>> No. 452082 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 3:54 pm
452082 spacer
>>452076

>there simply isn't enough land available for it to really move the needle and that land has a lot of other important uses.

Not strictly true. If we use agricultural resources more efficiently, we could free up loads of space for other uses such as forests, both old and new.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-12-15/no-more-hunger-how-to-feed-everyone-on-earth-with-just-the-land-we-have


Additionally, I'd be in favour of active population control. In the face of deteriorating and dwindling natural resources, we cannot simply act like it's everyone's right to put as many children into the world as they please. Unless we really become super efficient with our use of natural resources, every large family only contributes to the problem. China's one-child policy may have failed, but that doesn't mean the idea itself is wong. Maybe make it a two-child policy, as many more people would be on board with it. It would have little impact in first-world countries, but that isn't where today's population pressure is in the first place.
>> No. 452083 Anonymous
17th June 2022
Friday 3:56 pm
452083 spacer
>>452081
I'm sure I recall reading that the most effective way of controlling how many kids people have is to set up an effective state pension system. You don't need coercion, you've just got to set things up so that people aren't worrying about who'll look after them when they're old or crippled - then they'll usually decide for themselves that they'd rather do something other than raising kids when they're not at work.
>> No. 452097 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 4:13 pm
452097 spacer
>>452083

Many third-world countries that have the highest population growth in our time have incredibly corrupt public finances as it is. I'm not saying you're fundamentally wrong, but I doubt that you could set up a state pension and retirement system the same way Britain and much of Europe have it.

There's an old saying that children are the wealth of the poor. Maybe if we find a way to improve socioeconomic disparity in those countries, then families will start to have fewer children. It's happened before, actually also in Britain, as a result of industrialisation. Another proven way of decreasing high birth rates is often to imrove women's education. Wherever women are offered perspectives for their lives that go beyond being obedient baby machines during what could be their economically productive years, it improves both their personal situation and often that of their entire family, as that family will have higher income and will end up with fewer mouths to feed as women pursue professional careeers instead of serial motherhood.
>> No. 452098 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 4:40 pm
452098 spacer
>>452082

The world is already close to "peak child", with the global fertility rate at or below the replacement rate. Middle-income countries like Mexico, Vietnam and Brazil are already well below replacement and the fertility rate is dropping rapidly in almost every country in the world. The only reason the population will continue to grow in future decades is that people born recently have higher life expectancies than previous generations. We expect the global population to peak at around 9 billion no later than 2100, before going into indefinite long-term decline.

Pretty much all developed countries are facing an impending demographic crisis. In Britain, we expect that by 2050, 25% of the population to be aged over 65. We already have more pensioners than children. That creates an immense socioeconomic burden, as a shrinking population of working-age people are expected to care for a growing population of retired, elderly and infirm people. The increasing cost of health, social care and welfare benefits is driven almost entirely by the over 65s and is the primary reason for stagnant living standards since 2008; growth in the economy is rapidly swallowed up by the needs of the old. This crisis is already spreading to middle-income countries and will inevitably reach low-income countries within a few decades.

"Population control" has always been a slightly iffy idea, but it's particularly iffy given our current age demographics. If you want to put it into practice, you have two realistic options - accept that the next few generations of children will effectively act as slave labour for their parents and grandparents, or have a cull of the elderly. In a democracy where the old outnumber the young, option B is never going to happen.

Africa is the only continent with significant population growth, but that rate is significantly slowing and it isn't a significant driver of resource pressure due to the extremely low consumption of most Africans. The average Nigerian produces 10 times less CO2 than the average Briton; countries like Uganda, Chad and Rwanda produce 50x less CO2 per capita. Consumption of other resources like land, water, energy and mineral resources are closely correlated to CO2 emissions.
>> No. 452099 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 5:22 pm
452099 spacer
>>452073
>>452081
>Space-based solar is no better than a pipe-dream at this point
>Additionally, I'd be in favour of active population control

Go on lad, tell us how you really feel about humanity.
>> No. 452100 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 5:52 pm
452100 spacer
>>452099

Why is population control such a bad word.

Everybody agrees that people as a whole need to consume fewer natural resources, especially of the non-renewable kind, but nobody seems to want to say out loud that one way of doing that is to have fewer people in the first place.
>> No. 452101 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 6:01 pm
452101 spacer
>>452100
>Why is population control such a bad word.
Because it has a space in it.
>> No. 452103 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 6:52 pm
452103 spacer
>>452100
dolphin rape - since it just a dog whistle for "too many Africans and Asians are having kids." With regards to climate change, the problem is the developed world. So maybe killing their populations is the "good" kind of population control.
>> No. 452104 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 7:13 pm
452104 spacer
>>452100
Because fundamentally more people is a good thing and only an utter tyrant would seek to control a persons reproduction. You can't accept that humanity can improve our own lot and you seem to have a poor grasp of what Space Based Solar actually entails so you clasp this nonsense without thinking about what you're saying.

We're not all the Irish Malthus.

>Everybody agrees that people as a whole need to consume fewer natural resources

Not really. To go back to power we have enormous and practically limitless sources that will fundamentally change our relationship to matters like carbon emissions, fresh water, food production etc. etc. It's not some advanced science doohickey and certainly a lot less so woo than the policy demands you get from this thread.
>> No. 452106 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 7:50 pm
452106 spacer
>>452104

>Because fundamentally more people is a good thing

Is it? I don't think so.
>> No. 452108 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 8:20 pm
452108 spacer
>>452106
More economic prosperity, more scientific discoveries, more people who are good at absolutely anything it's possible to be good at, more wealth for you, more sexy ladies looking to bounce on your dick. The list of advantages just goes on and on.

If people didn't harm the environment, and we had room for them all, there would be no downside at all. Unfortunately, that's quite a big "if". But nevertheless, it's a recognised school of thought.
>> No. 452110 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 9:19 pm
452110 spacer
>>452108

>More economic prosperity, more scientific discoveries, more people who are good at absolutely anything it's possible to be good at

We've cranked out 7.8 billion of us as it stands, and our track record is pretty shit as a whole, the few good things we've achieved notwithstanding. What can nine billion people possibly accomplish that 7.8 billion couldn't do.
>> No. 452111 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 9:27 pm
452111 spacer
I've always though quality is preferable to quantity in any regard, I can think of very few cases where more flat out equals better. Not even money, because as we can all appreciate in the current situation, more very frequently means less when it comes to money.

The problem with people who want to see the human population expand limitlessly is that they refuse to grapple with the fact there is a limit. It's absolutely immaterial what that limit is- It could be ten billion, it could be a hundred billion, but there definitely is one. We will reach it eventually, and we will have to grapple with it when the time comes.

The line of thinking that more people is more wealth and more clever people and so on is just pure fantasy as far as I can reason. People don't just come out as geniuses automatically, they have to be taught and learn; wealth doesn't just spontaneously arise out of nowhere, it comes as a result of productive economic activity, and no matter whether you're a Marxist or a Milton Friedman follower that economic activity can always ultimately be traced back to resource usage- Unless we live in a complete sci-fi utopia, where solar energy is directly converted into matter, it's just cloud cuckoo land talk.

The only perspective you can see more people always being a good thing is if you're the personal embodiment of capital and you view more people as more cheap labour. The real world starkly demonstrates this. China and India have the world's biggest populations, and that's exactly why they are the world's sweatshop. Nobody wants the entire species to be that. It's also complete bollocks to accuse anyone mindful of population of being a crypto-racist. If never heard more of a poor faith argument. I suspect it goes hand in hand with my previous point- The same people saying that are the people who want billions of disposable Chinese worker drones making their shiny gadgets for a pittance, to maintain the current global status quo, instead of those countries being as wealthy and advanced as us.

If you scroll back up this thread we've had this exact argument probably four times over, by the way.

To change things up a bit I'll leave you with someone who, when I think about it, has been incredibly influential and formative of my views since I was an BRILLIANT teenlad. Between him, George Carlin, and being made to do the play "An Inspector Calls" in GCSE English, you can probably trace the roots of every single one of my political/ethical values.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkmbIAhoWrQ?t=2954
>> No. 452115 Anonymous
18th June 2022
Saturday 10:06 pm
452115 spacer
>>452114

Bald Hitchens is fucking terrifying.
>> No. 452118 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 9:57 am
452118 spacer
>>452110

If you think that we should reduce the population, you're welcome to volunteer yourself.

>>452111

>The same people saying that are the people who want billions of disposable Chinese worker drones making their shiny gadgets for a pittance, to maintain the current global status quo, instead of those countries being as wealthy and advanced as us.

The pandemic has slightly knocked things off course, but China has seen far faster increases in living standards than the west. Chinese factory workers certainly don't see themselves as "disposable worker drones", they see themselves as people who are saving up to buy a house or a car or a business and build a better life for themselves and their families. They aren't trapped in a cycle of wage slavery, they're working hard to build a nest egg before moving on to something better. I say this based on the fact that I speak Mandarin, I've spent a lot of time in Shenzhen (the world's factory, not the world's sweatshop) and I've got a lot of current and former Chinese factory workers in my WeChat contacts.

I've talked about this before, but it's impossible to fully describe the buzz of Shenzhen. Everything is happening at 200mph, everyone you meet has got fifteen different hustles on the go, everyone is chasing a better future and everyone knows that a better future is within their reach. The Chinese aren't stuck in a dreadful malaise of weak productivity and stagnant living standards; they're optimists with good reason to be optimistic.

People like me don't go to Shenzhen because we want to exploit cheap labour, we go there because they have skills and infrastructure that the west can only dream of. A prototype that'd take four months to build in Britain takes four days in Shenzhen. Things just happen in Shenzhen and the rush is better than any drug.


>> No. 452119 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 10:41 am
452119 spacer
>>452118

>People like me don't go to Shenzhen because we want to exploit cheap labour, we go there because they have skills and infrastructure that the west can only dream of.

I sometimes order electronic components for my Arduino projects direct from China, and it appears that a lot of the manufacturers of these parts are in Shenzen. They used to mainly do knock offs of Adafruit or Sparkfun components that were one generation behind, but now they have for all intents and purposes closed the gap and are on near-enoug equal footing. What blows my mind is that some of those Chinese breakout circuit boards will sell for £3 including p&p from China. You can realistically only do that and turn a profit if your cost per unit is almost impossibly low and you're doing absolutely huge volume compared to having stuff like that manufactured elsewhere. Adafruit prides itself in designing and making all their products in Canada and the U.S., which often means that they cost three or four times what similar items from China will go for. They still have a slight leading edge in that their drivers and documentation tend to be a little better, but it's nothing you can't figure out with a bit of digging on the Internet.
>> No. 452120 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 1:21 pm
452120 spacer
>>452118

>If you think that we should reduce the population, you're welcome to volunteer yourself.

You are aware that anyone taking that position has already likely decided not to have kids, therefore fulfilled their own moral standards? All you are doing here is misrepresenting their position as desiring some kind of genogide, rather than not reproducing as much.

>Chinese factory workers certainly don't see themselves as "disposable worker drones", they see themselves as people who are saving up to buy a house or a car or a business and build a better life for themselves and their families.

>The Chinese aren't stuck in a dreadful malaise of weak productivity and stagnant living standards; they're optimists with good reason to be optimistic.

Right, yeah, I suppose that explains why they have to put suicide nets up in the factories then. It's all the optimism. I wonder how optimistic the Tesla workers who were forced to live in the factory feel about the "better things" they're moving on to.

See, I can make a trite predictable comeback that doesn't enagage with the substance of the argument too. Except mine has a valid point.
>> No. 452121 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 1:35 pm
452121 spacer
>>452118

It's fascinating how you've managed to make China sound exactly like a real life corporatist cyberpunk dystopia, yet remain convinced it's a good thing.

I suspect otherlad is entirely correct that you're part of the segment of society whose business interests and therefore continued wealth depends on the availibility of cheap labour, ergo continued population growth.
>> No. 452122 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 1:49 pm
452122 spacer
>>452121
I dunno; he made it sound pretty nice to me. Imagine living in a country which is getting better every day, instead of here where everything is perpetually one step removed from fine and nothing ever gets any better. Obviously I'd still rather live here because I don't want to live in a tower block with 800 families, and also I don't speak Chinese. But many of us stay behind at work to help out with something, or go above and beyond in the workplace occasionally for whatever reason. Not even out of corporate climbing, just out of pride in what we do. Imagine if that was actually rewarded when we did it. I'd work a whole lot harder in this country if the link between effort and reward hadn't been completely eroded.
>> No. 452124 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 2:22 pm
452124 spacer
>>452122

>Imagine if that was actually rewarded when we did it.

Therein lies the rub. What he described is basically exactly what the "American Dream" was to early 20th century migrants. It sounds pleasantly aspirational, but you can only believe in it as long as you don't engage with the truth that it can't possibly come true for everybody. I mean, everyone having "fifteen hustles on the go" doesn't sound like a place everything's going swiimmingly to me. It sounds more like a place where economic conditions are precarious and the competition is cut-throat.

You also have to keep in mind the relativity of the situation- The poorer your base level of standard of living, the easier it is to improve. It's easier to lift people out of mud huts with no running water and into tower blocks, than it is to elevate the same people from tower blocks to nice detached suburban houses with two cars on the drive (or whatever you want to consider the signifier of advancement). The GDP growth in developing countries is often painted as some sort of economic miracle, but what's really happening is they're making the equivalent advances of industrialisation this country went through 200 years ago. It's low hanging fruit. By the time they reach the same stage we are at, the growth will slow down and stagnate for them, too, as long as they rely on the same kind of market liberal economic principles we have.

The problem we have in the west is that we reached that stage a generation ago, but there was no decisive vision on where to go next, nor the political will to do anything besides maintain the status quo and subside by skimming off the fat. China will be very interesting to watch over the next few years, because it knows very well that it has conflicting interests between being the world's factory, and growing the wealth of its average citizens. It has seen the mistakes made by liberal capitalist countries, but for the time being it is ultimately still following in their footsteps. Maybe they will find a way to have their cake and eat it, who knows.
>> No. 452126 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 3:16 pm
452126 spacer
>>452120

>Right, yeah, I suppose that explains why they have to put suicide nets up in the factories then.

The suicide rate in Chinese factories is lower than the population as a whole and lower than any US state. The nets are there purely because of prejudiced and innumerate reporting on Foxconn.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/media-gets-its-facts-wrong-working-at-foxconn-significantly-cuts-suicide-risk/

https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-and-dell-investigating-the-foxconn-working-conditions-2010-5

>>452124

>Therein lies the rub. What he described is basically exactly what the "American Dream" was to early 20th century migrants. It sounds pleasantly aspirational, but you can only believe in it as long as you don't engage with the truth that it can't possibly come true for everybody. I mean, everyone having "fifteen hustles on the go" doesn't sound like a place everything's going swiimmingly to me. It sounds more like a place where economic conditions are precarious and the competition is cut-throat.

The thing is that it is working for pretty much everyone. Wages have been rising by 8 to 10% per year for the last three decades. People aren't hustling because they're desperate, they're hustling because a) they're in a sustained boom with massive amounts of opportunity, b) they see clear rewards for that hustling and c) post-'87 China has a strong culture of entrepreneurism and self-improvement.

It's totally realistic for someone to spend two or three years in a factory and come away with a life-changing amount of money in the bank - enough to buy a business or put down a good deposit on an apartment, enough to gain a decent foothold in the middle class. If I had that option as a younger person, I would have bitten your hand off.

https://www.china-briefing.com/news/wage-growth-in-china-2020-how-to-read-the-numbers-region-industry-trends/
>> No. 452127 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 3:36 pm
452127 spacer
Is there any way to succinctly capture that people have had to run faster just to stay on the spot?
What i'm thinking of as a sort of example is the way they've made the dole more and more conditional over the years. In one phase, real wages were still growing if you were in work - so you get rising living standards, but secretly the minimum effort you need to make to live is climbing. Then you get the financial crisis, and that minimum effort keeps climbing - jobs are harder to find and you're way more likely to be arbitrarily sanctioned if you don't find one, but wages stagnate.
Maybe you can bring in zero hour contracts and so on as well - say you're a part time worker, which you could've been in the past. But since you're expected to be available at relatively short notice and have to budget accounting for not having steady hours and so on rather than always knowing you're doing 9-5 3 days a week, you actually wind up working much harder to support a similar material lifestyle.

It seems like the sort of thing that'd have a huge effect on quality of life without necessarily showing up in economic statistics. Even if you don't want to doss about, it's surely psychologically easier to work if you tell yourself you're doing it because you want to, rather than purely because your job makes you want to kill yourself marginally less than the Jobcentre does.
>> No. 452128 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 3:54 pm
452128 spacer
>>452124
>What he described is basically exactly what the "American Dream" was to early 20th century migrants.
It sounds more like the 1950s/1960s baby boom to me. So it probably will turn to shit at some point.

>>452126
I don't particularly trust your sources, first of all. Secondly:
>Wages have been rising by 8 to 10% per year for the last three decades.
>It's totally realistic for someone to spend two or three years in a factory and come away with a life-changing amount of money in the bank
They don't get paid more than us. Let's say you make £10/hour in Shenzhen, to make the maths easy. And let's be generous and increase wages by 10% a year. If you got paid £10/hour this year,
£11/hour next year, and £12.10 the year after that, I don't think that money would be life-changing.
>> No. 452129 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 3:54 pm
452129 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/15/new-data-reveals-extraordinary-global-heating-in-the-arctic
New data has revealed extraordinary rates of global heating in the Arctic, up to seven times faster than the global average.
>> No. 452131 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 4:27 pm
452131 spacer
>>452110
>our track record is pretty shit as a whole

Seems like we've done pretty fucking well for ourselves in comparison competition. What has a Jellyfish ever done other than be natures screensaver and sting random things? How quickly have we been able to evolve and entirely change how we live in what is really the blink of an eye? I mean we're evidently still stuck on Malthusian arguments from hundreds of years ago but otherwise.

>>452111
>The problem with people who want to see the human population expand limitlessly is that they refuse to grapple with the fact there is a limit. It's absolutely immaterial what that limit is- It could be ten billion, it could be a hundred billion, but there definitely is one. We will reach it eventually, and we will have to grapple with it when the time comes.

Or we'll blow right through whatever limit. It's only getting more obvious that humanity will be able to number in multiples of trillions once we start building orbital colonies and exploiting the resources of the solar system. We'll do it because actually people are fucking great.

>If you scroll back up this thread we've had this exact argument probably four times over, by the way.

Yes it's weird how often the tired argument comes up from hardcore 'environmentalists' that the solution is to have a whole lot less people. Almost like the whole bloody thing is a cynical
ploy by western edgelords who take comedy routines from the 90s as gospel.

>>452124
The problem in the west is more the nihilist defeatism you espouse where everything just gets worse despite all evidence to the contrary.
>> No. 452132 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 5:03 pm
452132 spacer
>>452131

>exploiting the resources of the solar system

That's a long, long, long fucking way off, mate. The issue at hand is whether we can sustain civilisation long enough to make it to that point. Once we get off Earth and have other planets and asteroids and what have you, none of it really matters- But you have to understand just how purely sci-fi that concept is compared with our current technological capability.

The timescales involved just don't match up. Humanity's ability to explore space is in such a fledgling stage we don't know what extent it will become viable or useful in future, and while it's nice to be optimistic about it, there are valid, scientific reasons to doubt if it is even actually possible. For a start we have to solve the problem of how to efficiently get things into orbit- It doesn't matter how many resources you can mine on Mars, or even just the moon, if it costs more than it's worth to actually launch crews up there and ship the stuff back here. There's at least another several hundred years to go where missions into space are going to be purely the pursuit of scientists and a few lucky billionaires.

Space travel becoming a normal thing is generations and generations away. Ecological damage bringing our numbers down by force, whether you like it or not, is not.

This is the part that I don't get. You think it's unthinkable for people to have less kids, but you're happy as larry for us to continue down a path where millions, billions even, will die because of a lack of food and drinking water, because you're too busy telling yourself a lullaby about how some magic space technology will just come along and fix everything. You're a fucking idiot.
>> No. 452136 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 8:20 pm
452136 spacer

FVUp2BTWYAILOP3.png
452136452136452136
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ocean-oil-slick-map-reveals-enough-greasy-patches-to-cover-france-mdash-twice/
Oil spills currently cover 4% of the 139 million square miles of ocean on the planet. Not counting any that are less than a few city blocks wide.

Here's a still from a French weather presenter in 2014 doing a "How hot it'll be in 2050" presentation to raise awareness of climate change; it happens to be about as hot as it currently is in France this week.
>> No. 452137 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 10:20 pm
452137 spacer
>>452136

>Here's a still from a French weather presenter in 2014 doing a "How hot it'll be in 2050" presentation to raise awareness of climate change; it happens to be about as hot as it currently is in France this week.

That still doesn't mean there can't be 40 degrees in Paris on August 18, 2050. You know, on a cooler day.
>> No. 452138 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 11:09 pm
452138 spacer
>>452132
>But you have to understand just how purely sci-fi that concept is compared with our current technological capability.

Congratulations on missing the thread. We'll be fine, Space-Based Solar isn't really advanced technology at all but a question of infrastructure and one every space power is now invested in because the power by cost output is such that we could really run carbon capture, vertical farms or whatever else.

You can't seem to accept everything will be fine despite all evidence that humanity curves up and that having kids is great. Instead you want to create some backwards dystopia of a dying humanity to back up how you feel as a depressed hippy.

>For a start we have to solve the problem of how to efficiently get things into orbit- It doesn't matter how many resources you can mine on Mars, or even just the moon, if it costs more than it's worth to actually launch crews up there and ship the stuff back here. There's at least another several hundred years to go where missions into space are going to be purely the pursuit of scientists and a few lucky billionaires.

Not really, launch cost has collapsed with Falcon 9 and will collapse again once Starship is doing regular launches. That's a fact. Even without bringing resources up it's relatively simple to manufacture cheap mirrors on the lunar surface.
>> No. 452139 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 11:29 pm
452139 spacer
>>452138

>launch cost has collapsed

>A Falcon 9 launch will cost $67 million, up from $62 million, and a Falcon Heavy launch will now run $97 million, up from $90 million

$97 million, is that all? Fuck the petrol prices then, with overheads that cheap we'll all be commuting via SpaceX this time next year.

You really haven't the faintest fucking clue what you're on about have you. That's $97m to launch one rocket with a tiny payload. You're talking about harvesting resources from space, colonising space, and all the logistics that will require.

>Falcon 9 can lift payloads of up to 22,800 kilograms (50,300 lb) to low Earth orbit (LEO), 8,300 kg (18,300 lb) to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) when expended, and 5,500 kg (12,100 lb) to GTO when the first stage is recovered, in a cargo shroud offering 145 cubic meters of volume.

You can fit one fifth of a JCB digger in that weight limit. I don't think that's quite going to get an interplanetary mining operation off the ground, nor is it going to send much food to your orbital colonies.

Come and join the real world lad. This stuff will happen, but it won't happen for another several decades, if not centuries. Catastrophic climate change is right around the corner, you're going to be seeing the effects every year that passes from now on. We don't have the luxury of waiting for utopian technology to sort it out.
>> No. 452140 Anonymous
19th June 2022
Sunday 11:32 pm
452140 spacer
>>452139

Wait, no, read my numbers backwards. You could fit as many as five diggers in there.

Red Faction here we come.
>> No. 452141 Anonymous
20th June 2022
Monday 12:09 am
452141 spacer
>>452139
>it won't happen for another several decades
We might have built a railway to Manchester by then.
>> No. 452142 Anonymous
20th June 2022
Monday 12:25 am
452142 spacer

launch-cost-chart.jpg
452142452142452142
>>452139
You're not only not doing the figures right but you're also missing that we don't need JCBs in space to change the world we're living in. For example Spaceforge is operating out an industrial site in Cardiff but they're due to launch the UK's first domestically launched satellite this year:
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/content/in-depth/out-of-this-world-how-welsh-firm-space-forge-plans-to-take-manufacturing-off-planet/

They're focusing on space manufacture explicitly to save the planet by delivering materials from the low-gravity vacuum that either deliver efficiencies in the order to magnitude greater than what we make on Earth or alloys we can't make at all - think cutting the energy loss of semiconductors in half. The level of applications that are opening up is mindboggling now that the upfront costs of space are falling.
>> No. 452143 Anonymous
20th June 2022
Monday 12:39 am
452143 spacer
https://news.sky.com/story/at-least-59-people-dead-in-bangladesh-and-india-after-floods-leave-millions-stranded-12636586

>Dozens of people have died and millions of homes are underwater following huge floods in north-eastern India and Bangladesh.

>While floods in Bangladesh are regular, experts say climate change is increasing their frequency, ferocity and unpredictability.
>> No. 452147 Anonymous
20th June 2022
Monday 1:56 am
452147 spacer
>>452142

Space manufacture still means sending the stuff up to space to manufacture with. The simple fact of the matter is, and the most utopian minded scientists you can read agree, space simply does not become commercially viable for anything besides modest satellites and probes until we find a way to get shit up there that doesn't just rely on strapping it to the back of massive fireworks.

You're going to feel like a right tit in 40 years when it turns out all Musk wanted to do after all was corner the market on launching satellites cheaply and all this sci-fi shite was just PR. I mean, who knows, maybe if we weren't relying on private enterprise to do it and kept up with publicly funded space programs we might already have made more progress on it; but we're not, so it requires investment. And that requires it to be able to turn a profit.
>> No. 452149 Anonymous
20th June 2022
Monday 10:43 pm
452149 spacer
>>452147
>The simple fact of the matter is, and the most utopian minded scientists you can read agree, space simply does not become commercially viable for anything besides modest satellites and probes until we find a way to get shit up there that doesn't just rely on strapping it to the back of massive fireworks.

No. Do you not understand how important radically more efficient semiconductors are? Do you think that trace amount of gold in your laptop is to make it feel a bit fancy?

It's all going to be fine, lads. Don't let a Negative Nancy tell you that you can't have kids.
>> No. 452150 Anonymous
20th June 2022
Monday 10:47 pm
452150 spacer
>>452149

Do you not understand how important drinking water is?
>> No. 452152 Anonymous
21st June 2022
Tuesday 8:09 pm
452152 spacer
https://news.sky.com/story/hundreds-of-thousands-evacuated-in-china-after-severe-flooding-12637899
The heaviest rainfall since the 1960s in provinces across southern China have forced many from their homes and destroyed thousands of hectares of crops.
>> No. 452154 Anonymous
21st June 2022
Tuesday 9:23 pm
452154 spacer
>>452152
I love these climate crisis news. Although it isn't happening as fast as I would have liked it.
>> No. 452155 Anonymous
21st June 2022
Tuesday 9:35 pm
452155 spacer

dd1a7f6b683be72b1c6e60e6c99b772a--moodboard-vile.jpg
452155452155452155
>>452154

That's the spirit, lad.
>> No. 452182 Anonymous
25th June 2022
Saturday 2:05 pm
452182 spacer

IMG_20220625_133330175_1.jpg
452182452182452182
Bloody hell! As a cyclist, I don't spend much time at petrol stations. I may be poor, but at least I'm also annoying and everyone hates me. But I saw this sign stuck to one just now. Do Shell have special protection, or do all petrol stations have these signs? It strikes me as pretty outrageous if the right to protest is infringed, but only in the case of one specific global corporation that gives money to the government.
>> No. 452186 Anonymous
25th June 2022
Saturday 3:06 pm
452186 spacer
>>452182

You have a right to protest, but you don't have the right to trespass or commit criminal damage. As much as I support the aims of the protesters (I for one don't even own a car etc), I can't dispute the soundness of the legal reasoning.

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2022/1215.html
>> No. 452188 Anonymous
25th June 2022
Saturday 3:59 pm
452188 spacer
The injunction doesn't say you cannot protest. It says you cannot do things that are already on a very shaky legal footing regardless.

This is pretty standard counter-protest strategy and I don't think corruption or even above-board lobbying/donations enter into it.
>> No. 452247 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 12:06 am
452247 spacer
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/scientists-agree-on-man-made-climate-change-more-than-people-think
Europeans Badly Underestimate Scientists’ Agreement on Climate Change
A survey of people in six countries found they guessed the level of scientific consensus on climate change to be much lower than it actually is.


No surprise the UK is the worst.
>> No. 452248 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 12:13 am
452248 spacer
>>452247
Don't listen our Negative Nancy, lads. The UK only yesterday signed up for a new Earth Observation satellite to better understand the changing climate and deliver policy to support mitigation. You can still have sex.

>UK-built Forum satellite will measure greenhouse effect

>A spacecraft measuring Earth's warming 'greenhouse' effect in its greatest ever detail will be built in the UK. The Forum satellite will be assembled by aerospace giant Airbus at its factory in Stevenage.

>It will monitor far-infrared radiation coming up from our planet's surface. It's this particular type of light that makes molecules of gases such as carbon dioxide and water vapour vibrate, leading to a heating of the atmosphere - a key aspect of climate change. Forum is an Earth observation mission of the European Space Agency (ESA). Its procurement contract with Airbus is worth €160m (£140m).

>The paperwork was signed at the House of Commons on Monday night in the presence of Minister for Science, Research and Innovation George Freeman. He described Forum as another brilliant Esa project that played to UK strengths in climate change studies and satellite manufacturing.

>"Capturing Earth observation data and developing a whole series of applications from it - we're very good at all that stuff. So, I think we're poised for a very exciting time," he told his audience. Forum is an acronym that stands for Far-infrared Outgoing Radiation Understanding and Monitoring. The near-one-tonne satellite is expected to be launched on a Vega rocket in 2027.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61970370
>> No. 452251 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 9:45 am
452251 spacer
>>452248

None of that really makes sense as a response to the previous post.
>> No. 452254 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 11:48 am
452254 spacer
>>452251

Don't mind him, he's just become addicted to snortning big fat lines of space copium.
>> No. 452255 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 3:11 pm
452255 spacer
>>452254
I'm well aware of copium, but if you're going to be snorting lines, surely copecaine is the way forward?
>> No. 452256 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 3:53 pm
452256 spacer
>>452254
Positive news winds otherlad up as it stop him being a miserable misanthrope. You'll notice the trend of the thread being filled with reporting on unusual climate events like some fucking judgement day preacher.
>> No. 452257 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 4:22 pm
452257 spacer
>>452256

There's plenty of good news, look at this huge new carbon capture plant they're opening in Iceland.
https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/06/28/mammoth-new-air-capture-plant-will-suck-up-36000-tonnes-of-co2-per-year-in-iceland
It can eat a whole thirty-six seconds worth of carbon emissions, every year.
>> No. 452264 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 6:05 pm
452264 spacer
>>452257

What's the point, it's not even in space.
>> No. 452265 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 6:59 pm
452265 spacer
>>452264

Everything is in space.
>> No. 452266 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 7:23 pm
452266 spacer
>>452257

Don't do it such a disservice like that, that's a whole one millionth of a percent of total global emissions. Millions are big numbers therefore this is good.
>> No. 452267 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 7:31 pm
452267 spacer
>>452266

Only 875,999 more plants on the same scale and they'll be able to keep us at net zero, assuming we don't increase the rate we're adding CO2 to the atmosphere since the year those numbers were recorded.
>> No. 452268 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 8:02 pm
452268 spacer
>>452266 >>452267
Surely one of you is innumerate.
>> No. 452270 Anonymous
30th June 2022
Thursday 11:20 pm
452270 spacer
>>452268

I've made a huge mistake.
I meant one ten-thousandth of one percent.
>> No. 452276 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 12:15 am
452276 spacer
>>452270
It's okay, mental health issues are known to impact your concentration.

>If you find yourself feeling hopeless whenever you think or read about climate change, don’t worry: There’s a scientific explanation.

>It’s called climate anxiety, and it’s a real mental health condition that can take time to address, according to Portland, Oregon-based environmental psychologist Thomas Doherty. At the Aspen Ideas Festival in Aspen, Colorado, on Monday, Doherty spoke about the “learning curve” it takes to combat the anxiety, or even despair, stemming from climate change.

>Doherty, who specializes in the intersection of psychology and environmental science, said he often tells clients to try and take a step back from those feelings of hopelessness, which can mean “pulling off of the media, going outside, doing stress reduction, all of these kinds of things.” He also noted that part of coping means taking the time to accept that as a single person, you can only do so much. “I think the key in coping is making sure that we don’t get stuck on certain feelings, but really growing all of the feelings, which is a process and it takes practice,” he said.

>Both the United Nations and the American Psychological Association (APA) have found that humans are increasingly at risk of climate change-induced mental health issues. According to the APA, climate anxiety can manifest in people who respond to the news of climate change developments with “negative emotions including fear, anger, feelings of powerlessness, or exhaustion.” Those feelings aren’t uncommon: In 2021, a global study found that 45% of people between the ages of 16 and 25 said climate anxiety was affecting their daily lives. The Climate Psychology Alliance even offers a directory of “climate-aware” therapists.

>Doherty argued that those negative emotions aren’t inherently bad, because “we should be able to feel all of our emotions” in a healthy way. Sometimes, he said, it’s helpful to talk through your feelings with other people — whether you’re feeling upset about the environment or charged up about your ability to help. “Sometimes, we’re going to be ... feeling good and feeling inspired,” he said. “One of the biggest dangers is being alone in the process, because when we’re alone, there’s no one to help us in the down cycle.”

>Doherty also noted that climate anxiety can be heightened by the sheer volume of negative news on the subject. That’s where people like Alaina Wood — a sustainability scientist, and one of Doherty’s fellow Aspen panelists — come in. Wood is popular on TikTok, where her 300,000-plus followers tune in to hear her list off the latest positive climate developments or outlooks — like scientists recently discovering an enzyme that breaks down environment-damaging plastics in under 24 hours.

>At Aspen, Wood said she tries to focus on positives to help viewers address their own climate anxiety, and that it’ll take optimism to mobilize enough people to make a real difference against climate change. She too struggles with climate anxiety, she said, and usually follows a simple process to cope. “I log off my phone,” Wood said. “I take time to go out in nature, whether that’s in my backyard or in the mountains, and just unwind. And take a second to remind myself why I care, why I’m feeling that way.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/30/climate-change-anxiety-is-real-expert-advice-on-what-to-do-about-it.html

Ecolad is crying for help, he only needs you to listen.
>> No. 452279 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 12:40 am
452279 spacer
>>452276
What's the scientific explanation for loving all the bad news and genuinely getting happy that we will cook the earth soon?
>> No. 452280 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 12:41 am
452280 spacer
The US Supreme Court has ruled that laws to limit greenhouse gas emissions are unconstitutional: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62000742

Maybe Donald Trump really was playing 4D chess this whole time? The Supreme Court is just ruling that everything he ever wanted was totally right.
>> No. 452285 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 1:35 am
452285 spacer
>>452280

What the fuck is going on with the US Supreme Court? They're proper on one lately.
>> No. 452286 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 2:18 am
452286 spacer
>>452280
Oh, well. We had a go, Monbiot and the lad who kept necro-bumping this thread especially did themselves proud, but we've ultimately bollocksed the planet to the point of no return. We could give space colonisation a go, but with no way of growing decent amounts of food and that whole "your bones are now rice cakes" problem still unsolvable, I don't fancy our chances. If the cetaceans survive to become the dominant species on Earth I hope they'll find it within their gigantic cardiovascular systems to forgive us.
>> No. 452287 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 2:33 am
452287 spacer
>>452286
But can we still yeet Elon Musk to Mars and "forget" to do the course corrections?
>> No. 452291 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 8:05 am
452291 spacer
>>452280

I hate to be the lad who keeps defending the supreme court, but that's not actually true. They ruled that the Clean Air Act doesn't give the Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate carbon, so Congress would have to pass legislation to grant those powers. They passed a very similar ruling in 2016.

The US should definitely be doing more to reduce their emissions, but I can't really argue with the principle that regulators should operate within the mandate given to them by legislation. The American political system is hopelessly broken, but the Democrats have become far too comfortable with the idea of using the judiciary to pursue a policy agenda against the will of Congress.
>> No. 452292 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 11:06 am
452292 spacer
>>452291
You are of course right, but I don't think the states that have huge coal and oil industries will ever vote against them. The Supreme Court is ruling that we should let democracy decide, and that sounds great, but it's always a bit of a fiddle. If the whole country opposes it except for the states that rely on it, do we let the whole country vote or just those states? Both could arguably be "the correct way to do democracy", but the outcomes would be total opposites.

It also strikes me as very frustrating how Congress is too divided to pass these environmental laws, so the Democrats won't get their way and everything works out in favour of the Republicans, but Congress was just as divided under Donald Trump and everything still favoured the Republicans and not the Democrats. It really is an abysmal system.
>> No. 452293 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 11:25 am
452293 spacer
>>452292

Majority opinion isn't always what's best. Some things are better not left to the democratic process alone, because it can lead to results that are less than ideal.

Depending on where you stand on Brexit, arguably it came with a very high price of freedom, and among other things it has fuelled a new independence movement in Scotland.

Likewise, a bit more drastically, 54 percent in the UK said in 2021 that they would be in support of reinstating the death penalty. In that poll, the question was if they would support the death penalty for daft militant wogs, but once we'd set a precedent for government discretion to take a criminal's life, the door would be open for expanding that punishment to other offences as well.
>> No. 452294 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 11:37 am
452294 spacer
>>452293
Not to mention this government's eagerness to label anyone who disagrees with them as a daft militant wog.
>> No. 452299 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 3:07 pm
452299 spacer
>>452292

>Congress was just as divided under Donald Trump and everything still favoured the Republicans and not the Democrats.

Eh, not really. Trump was determined to abolish the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), but couldn't get it through Congress. It was challenged in the Supreme Court three times but repeatedly found to be constitutional. For all the panic when Trump was elected, he couldn't actually do anything particularly terrible.

The fundamental strength and fundamental weakness of the American political system is that it's effectively a vetocracy - it's much easier to prevent change than to instigate it. The mechanisms that made the ACA very difficult to implement also make it difficult to rescind. American public opinion is bitterly divided, but it has been bitterly divided since the Civil War; the basic objective of their political system is to prevent a re-match.

>>452293

That's why we've got representative democracy. The death penalty might be reasonably popular in polls, but it's not a manifesto issue because the strength of support is much less than the strength of opposition. Parliament's job isn't to act as a simple proxy for public opinion, but to represent the interests of their constituents as a whole; that layer of abstraction is what distinguishes democracy from mob rule. The Swiss have a system much closer to direct democracy, but referendums have a pretty poor track record in this country and there are good reasons why we usually avoid them.
>> No. 452301 Anonymous
1st July 2022
Friday 3:56 pm
452301 spacer
>>452299

> Parliament's job isn't to act as a simple proxy for public opinion, but to represent the interests of their constituents as a whole; that layer of abstraction is what distinguishes democracy from mob rule.

And respecting that idea is also where politicians can set themselves apart from populism and demagoguery.
>> No. 452354 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 8:51 am
452354 spacer
Bit damp in Sydney at the mo
>> No. 452369 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 6:10 pm
452369 spacer
>>452354

New Zealand had a bout of bad weather about two to three weeks ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/13/new-zealand-records-100000-lightning-strikes-in-week-of-storms

>While South Island ski field operators are celebrating some of the best June snow conditions in memory, many people are cleaning up or hunkering down due to wild storms.

Kind of a relief to know there's still places you can go skiing despite global warming. Let's all piss a year's worth of personal carbon footprint up the wall and go there.
>> No. 452370 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 6:49 pm
452370 spacer
>>452369

Could just pop over to the Hispanic peninsula for a light tan.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/04/spain-and-portugal-suffering-driest-climate-for-1200-years-research-shows
>> No. 452378 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 8:59 pm
452378 spacer

Almeria.jpg
452378452378452378
>>452370

>Spain also is the world’s biggest producer of olives and a major source of grapes, oranges, tomatoes and other produce.

A lot of it is grown in the Almería region, which supplies the whole of northern Europe and to some extent the UK with fresh produce year-round from bell peppers to tomatoes and cucumbers. Crops there aren't immediately dependent on rainfall as most of them are grown in greenhouses and under translucent plastic tarpaulin. But they do require insane amounts of freshwater which comes from local reservoirs.

Seriously, if you've ever been to that corner of Spain, it's absolutely insane because looking down from the mountains, it's just a vast sea of tarp that covers the ground as far as the eye can see. There's nothing like it anywhere else.

All the light grey stuff you see in related picture around the town of El Ejido is pretty much all plastic.
>> No. 452379 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 9:17 pm
452379 spacer
>>452378
>A lot of it is grown in the Almería region, which supplies the whole of northern Europe and to some extent the UK with fresh produce year-round from bell peppers to tomatoes and cucumbers.
Well that's a great idea.

This sort of thing is why I can't take daft militant wogs seriously either. A little bit of planning and they could do so much damage it's unreal, but instead they're like "yeah, let's kill some kids coming home from a concert". Lazy bastards, the lot of them.
>> No. 452380 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 9:45 pm
452380 spacer
>>452379

>A little bit of planning and they could do so much damage it's unreal, but instead they're like "yeah, let's kill some kids coming home from a concert".

You can just imagine the crying fit when Tasmin from Slough can no longer treat her dinner party guests to mozzarella cherry tomato salad. Not at 99p a packet anyway.
>> No. 452381 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 9:59 pm
452381 spacer
>>452380
I have to be honest I don't recognise your stereotype of the tomato loving, socialable, Sloughite. Is this supposed to be a class thing or what? I'm pretty sure everyone eats tomatoes. That's why targeting foods like tomatoes and peppers would be so damaging. Onions too, but as they grow beneath ground you couldn't just run over them in a killdozer or burn their greenhouses.

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for destroying the supply of Europe's fresh produce. It's just one of those mental things I think about like "how would I defend this cafe from a platoon of German stormtroopers, assuming I had a squad of armed men at my disposal?" and "when the aliens come which family members can I protect?".
>> No. 452382 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 10:15 pm
452382 spacer
>>452380

Anyone who makes insalata Caprese with cherry tomatoes deserves a terrible, agonising death.
>> No. 452383 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 10:44 pm
452383 spacer
>>452381

It was reaching a bit, I'll give you that.

I just wanted to make a semi-funny remark that $randomperson from $randomtown would be slightly incovenienced in a first-world problems kind of way if Spanish cherry tomatoes came into short supply.

Granted, you can do more with tomatoes than turn them into a Marie Claire dinner recipe. But I seem to remember that most tinned, pureed and otherwise processed tomatoes actually come more from Italy.

Fine, so you'd have to disrupt tomato production in Italy, not in Almería. Swings and roundabouts.
>> No. 452384 Anonymous
4th July 2022
Monday 11:44 pm
452384 spacer
>>452383

>you'd have to disrupt tomato production in Italy
Guess what.


>> No. 452385 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 10:47 am
452385 spacer
>'Sand battery' could solve green energy's big problem

>Finnish researchers have installed the world's first fully working "sand battery" which can store green power for months at a time. The developers say this could solve the problem of year-round supply, a major issue for green energy. Using low-grade sand, the device is charged up with heat made from cheap electricity from solar or wind. The sand stores the heat at around 500C, which can then warm homes in winter when energy is more expensive.
>Other research groups, such as the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory are actively looking at sand as a viable form of battery for green power. But the Finns are the first with a working, commercial system, that so far is performing well, according to the man who's invested in the system. "It's really simple, but we liked the idea of trying something new, to be the first in the world to do something like this," said Pekka Passi, the managing director of the Vatajankoski power plant.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61996520

All it took was an understanding of breast technology.
>> No. 452386 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 11:15 am
452386 spacer
>>452385
First oil, now sand. Why is it always stuff that Saudi Arabia has a lot of?
>> No. 452387 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 11:45 am
452387 spacer
>>452386
God's chosen people, innit. Wait until you hear abut how they can convert sunlight to electricity, the jammy bastards.
Enjoy your temperate climate and fertile soil while you can.
>> No. 452389 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 3:36 pm
452389 spacer
>>452387

Guess we're going to have to speed up our fusion reactor research to maintain any kind of edge on them in the future.

https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/business/fusion-economic-report/

>A prototype fusion energy plant could bring huge economic benefits to the region - potentially generating more than £1b in gross value added (GVA), an economic report has concluded.

>If the proposed site to host the plant near Goole in East Yorkshire is given the go-ahead by the Government, it could also create more than 8,000 jobs during the manufacture and construction of the prototype power plant.
>> No. 452390 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 4:21 pm
452390 spacer
>>452389
Turns out that nearly a year ago we had a report that found UK space based solar power both technically and economically feasible too. One would've thought it would be bigger news with our greenlads.
https://www.fnc.co.uk/discover-frazer-nash/news/frazer-nash-report-for-uk-government-shows-feasibility-of-space-solar-power/
>> No. 452391 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 4:57 pm
452391 spacer
>>452389

That's nice. Though in fairness we could have just gone all in on nuclear, and as long as we put the stations in East Yorkshire it would be totally risk free. The place already makes Chernobyl look welcoming.

>>452390

One day you'll post something that actually exists. Points for effort though m8.
>> No. 452392 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 7:49 pm
452392 spacer
>>452391

Also, the wind from any nuclear incident would blow over the open North Sea. Maybe Norway would catch some of it, but not many people live there anyway.
>> No. 452393 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 6:32 am
452393 spacer
>>452391
City of Culture 2017, mate, you're just jealous.
>> No. 452419 Anonymous
8th July 2022
Friday 10:02 pm
452419 spacer
https://www.theweathernetwork.com/en/news/climate/impacts/new-ozone-hole-found-over-tropics-is-7-times-bigger-than-antarctic-hole
URL's self explanatory.
>> No. 452434 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 9:54 pm
452434 spacer
https://thetyee.ca/News/2022/07/07/Carbon-Capture-No-Fix-Big-Oil-Known-Decades/

>‘Carbon Capture’ Is No Fix. Big Oil’s Known for Decades
What a surprise.

... the climate solution that Kenney and executives touted in the U.S. Capitol — known as carbon capture and storage — has a major disqualifying flaw. It may be technically feasible to bury oilsands emissions, but it is also prohibitively expensive, so much so that the technology doesn’t “appear to be economic” and would “achieve a relatively minor impact in reducing CO2 emissions.”

That blunt assessment didn’t come from an environmental group, but rather from a company leading the current carbon capture and storage effort: Imperial Oil.
>> No. 452436 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 10:40 pm
452436 spacer
>>452434

But what if- hear me out here- What if it was in space?
>> No. 452437 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 10:46 pm
452437 spacer
>Wine production boom expected as climate crisis recreates Champagne conditions in UK, study predicts
Britain could start growing Sauvignon Blanc, Riesling and Semillon grapes as the climate crisis transforms regions to resemble conditions in famous wine regions such as Champagne and Baden.

>The wine industry has already grown 400% from 761 to 3,800 hectares between 2004 and 2021, the paper found, driven in part by pollution from human activity that has warmed the planet.
https://news.sky.com/story/wine-production-boom-expected-as-climate-crisis-recreates-champagne-conditions-in-uk-study-predicts-12647632

This is going to be a fantastic century for Britain.

>>452434
>It may be technically feasible to bury oilsands emissions, but it is also prohibitively expensive, so much so that the technology doesn’t “appear to be economic” and would “achieve a relatively minor impact in reducing CO2 emissions.”

You're really reporting the news here, lad. Certainly nobody here would've talked about solving the energy problem before.

>But the organization predicts a steep price tag. Deploying carbon capture and storage in the oilsands could cost $2.5 billion per year. This massive investment would shave off only 20 million tonnes per year of emissions by 2030 from an industry that annually emits 70 million tonnes.

That's actually quite a big impact for technology that hasn't seen significant rollout. There's even an emerging industry in the UK that is developing on tiny government grants:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/projects-developing-innovative-carbon-removal-tech-benefit-from-over-54-million-government-funding
>> No. 452438 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 10:57 pm
452438 spacer
>>452434

True, but the Yanks are starting from a baseline of ridiculously cheap energy. CCS was never going to allow us to carry on as usual, only the most transparent of Big Oil shills were ever pretending otherwise, but it's potentially very useful as a means of decarbonising stuff that's inherently difficult to decarbonise.

Cement manufacturing produces massive carbon emissions, partly because of the energy inputs but also because of the inherent chemistry of the process. We can run a cement kiln on sustainable electricity, but that kiln is still going to puke out massive amounts of carbon. All the known alternatives to cement are either much more expensive, much worse or both, so CCS is an ideal technical solution.

The message I keep trying to hammer home is that doing everything still isn't enough. We're past the point of being able to prevent climate change, but every tonne of carbon we can keep out of the atmosphere will limit the damage. We need to stop flying, we need to stop eating beef, we need to completely transition away from fossil fuels, we need CCS and we need a bunch of technologies that don't exist yet.

Advocating for CCS doesn't give you permission to keep burning oil, but that applies to everything. Doing your recycling doesn't give you permission to drive an SUV, going vegan doesn't give you permission to fly twice a year. We have to do everything and it still won't be enough.
>> No. 452440 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 11:19 pm
452440 spacer
>>452438
>We're past the point of being able to prevent climate change
If that's the case, we might as well accept that and just enjoy life while it lasts.

If not flying and not eating beef isn't going to materially change anything, then if you don't mind I'm just going to carry on flying and eating beef.
>> No. 452441 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 11:30 pm
452441 spacer
>>452440

>We're past the point of being able to prevent climate change, but every tonne of carbon we can keep out of the atmosphere will limit the damage.

Every extra tonne of CO2 means more floods, more droughts, more famines, more wars. Don't be a climate Chamberlain, be a climate Churchill.
>> No. 452442 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 11:39 pm
452442 spacer
>>452441
I recently heard about how the Australian opposition was trying a hit job on their new PM because he was out of the country while parts of Sydney and Brisbane got flooded for the third time in a year.

Tell me, what is the threat of "more floods" supposed to mean to those people? You're already telling them they can't have "fewer floods".

>Don't be a climate Chamberlain, be a climate Churchill.
Churchill starved the Bengal so we could still have rice.
>> No. 452443 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:01 am
452443 spacer
>>452438

The thing is more people than you'd probably ever like to learn the figures on probably already do think "fuck it, the damage is done, might as well just make the best of it". Humanity's collective response is akin to an apathetic long term smoker who knows it's bad for them and knows they're likely to die early from it, but dispassionately calculates that the pain of giving up after 40 years would be more of a detriment to their happiness than living for a few more years is worth. "You've gorra die er summat", my dad always says.

This is why even though I'm more or less on your side and you're probably right, nobody's going to listen to you, and I don't blame them. Life is hard enough for most people without feeling guilty they're not a solar powered vegan cyclist. Lots of people can't afford to go abroad in the first place so that's not a luxury they're missing out on, but I won't be the one to tell them they can't treat themselves to a roast beef dinner on a Sunday either when some breifcase cunt can undo their entire life's worth of sensible eco-friendly choices just by going on 5-6 business trips a year.

I don't see way around it without some quite draconian measures, but here's what I'd do. I'd give everybody (individual and copanies, but especially companies) a carbon budget. You're allowed to do whatever you want, but you've got a limited amount of carbon you're allowed to contribute. If you have kids or several pets you basically can't do anything because they already use up all of your budget. If you're a vegan cyclist and you have one kid you might be able to squeeze in an annual flight. If you walk to work and recycle and don't have kids you can eat all the beef you like. People are incentivised to choose low carbon alternatives the same way you're incentivised to choose Smartprice garlic bread because it's only 17p.
>> No. 452444 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:35 am
452444 spacer
>>452443
They've tried doing that for companies, and it doesn't really work. You can even buy carbon credits as an investment if you want, according to the words that I searched for. Also, based on what this other guy is saying, your CO2 budget will buy you precisely fuck all. You won't be able to save up for a flight to Australia; you can walk to work every day, planting trees all the while, and it won't even earn you a burger because the hospital needs a new oxygen tank. And, of course, as soon as any political party promises to just abandon all those rules, they will be instantly elected.

Thinking of it politically, I wonder how quickly it would take to un-change the climate. If the entire planet became carbon-negative tomorrow, and we all emitted breath and nothing else, could the benevolent despots who imposed this on us then point to a lower increase in global temperatures after one year? How about after five years? How long would the lockdown have to be before we could have a bonfire again?
>> No. 452445 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:53 am
452445 spacer
>>452444

>They've tried doing that for companies, and it doesn't really work. You can even buy carbon credits as an investment if you want, according to the words that I searched for.

Yeah, of course it doesn't work when you do it as a blatantly corrupt cover scheme for some dodgy financial product because you're a bent politician taking back handers from anyone and everyone.

I'm talking about when I'm President Earth and it's public hanging for anti-revolutionary traitors. There will be no offsetting, the only offsetting will be if they pay huge sums (far in excess of their taxes and calculated specifically to eat all their profits) directly to the government, which will in turn spend it on buying poor people expensive luxury goods. Not for the purpose of economic redistribution, just purely to offend rich people, making them watch benefit scum chavs drive Bentleys.

Anyway. That's the thing, if you want to be absolutist about it, what you are asking is essentially for an entire generation to just give their future up. A generation who's primary source of anger is the fact they already feel like they had their future robbed by their grandparent's generation.

No honestly, really, considering all the ethics of the situation? I just think depopulation is the only viable solution, and I don't give a fuck if that ponce who's obsessed with breeding gets his bollocks in a twist about it. Monkey brain can't tolerate the idea of not spaffing his dead end genetics up some other ape, boo hoo. If we just indiscriminately kill (or at least sterilise) every other person on planet earth and then we can all have fun guilt free.
>> No. 452446 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:55 am
452446 spacer
>>452444
>Thinking of it politically, I wonder how quickly it would take to un-change the climate. If the entire planet became carbon-negative tomorrow, and we all emitted breath and nothing else, could the benevolent despots who imposed this on us then point to a lower increase in global temperatures after one year? How about after five years? How long would the lockdown have to be before we could have a bonfire again?
This is a good point. People are prepared to put up with a lot temporarily. The more temporary it is, the more they're prepared to put up with. We told people they needed to stay inside for a few weeks, and they did it. On the other hand, the "temporary" liquid ban has now been in place for over 15 years. People are only going to be prepared to take these sort of drastic measures if they can either see a benefit or an end.
>> No. 452447 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 9:32 am
452447 spacer
>>452444

Methane, which is one of the most prevalent and strongest greenhouse gases, takes about 12 years to leave the atmosphere. As a benevolent dictator that might be a good starting point, it's temporary but you'll also see things get significantly worse until that point, then, hopefully, see enough improvements at the end of it to justify it continuing. Or at least that we'd have gotten entrenched in greenhouse-friendly practises by then and wouldn't really need to keep a ban.

Of course if insects continue to decline at the rate they are, it won't matter to us anyway.
>> No. 452448 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 10:59 am
452448 spacer
>>452447
If the world is running out of insects, I can provide plenty. They all swarm in every time I open any of my windows. Just say how many flies you need, and what kind, and I can sort you out.
>> No. 452449 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:18 pm
452449 spacer
>>452448

It's odd that people seem to have started to grasp the difference between local weather and climate, but are still struggling with the difference between the number of flies in their own garden and global insect levels.
>> No. 452450 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 1:09 pm
452450 spacer
>>452449
It's odd that people doubt how many of the fuckers have started showing up. We're talking hundreds. I'm starting to worry if a neighbour has died.
>> No. 452451 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 1:15 pm
452451 spacer
>>452450

> I'm starting to worry if a neighbour has died.

https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/elderly-woman-dead-for-at-least-a-week-before-she-was-discovered/
>> No. 452452 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 4:42 pm
452452 spacer

FXUU6MEWAAEs3Ps.jpg
452452452452452452
A lot of people angry at the "nanny state" warning them about potential 43°temperatures are going to end up with skin cancer.
>> No. 452453 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 4:50 pm
452453 spacer
>>452452

>> No. 452454 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 5:09 pm
452454 spacer

vintage-tractor-and-baler-BRJ2FT-1576106264.jpg
452454452454452454
>>452453
It's not like we get a choice. Nice and sweaty yesterday, in my greenhouse-onna-diesel engine. Same again next weekend, super.
Still, I figure that if this doesn't kill me, I'm damn near immortal for another year.
>> No. 452455 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 5:34 pm
452455 spacer
>>452452
It's not truly hot until they switch to Fahrenheit. That's when you've got a real heatwave. When it goes from 28 degrees, to 29 the next day, to motherfucking 93, that's how you know it's really summer.
>> No. 452456 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 5:55 pm
452456 spacer

main-qimg-91ed540477abb030125eff937eb5cd43-pjlq.jpg
452456452456452456
>>452455

Low-hanging tabloid fruit, as always.


(For reference - 81°F is 27.22 °C. Who the fuck calls that a heatwave, either in Fahrenheit or Centigrade. Not everybody lives in the Outer Hebrides.)
>> No. 452457 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 6:37 pm
452457 spacer
>>452456
They've discussed the definition of a heatwave on the weather on TV. It's a heatwave if you get three consecutive days of temperatures above a certain level, which is different depending on where in the country you are, and therefore they don't bother to say what those magic numbers actually are. It sounds like rubbish to me, although Spain has started naming its heatwaves so they can keep better records of what the climate is doing. The Spanish are currently experiencing Heatwave Zoe.
>> No. 452458 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 6:39 pm
452458 spacer
>>452456
The real crime is using Fahrenheit in God's own country.
>> No. 452459 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 7:27 pm
452459 spacer

thresholds.png
452459452459452459
>>452457

It's not a secret what they are but it's probably not great use of airtime to be reading out a list of locations and numbers. They were probably discussing it as they increased the threshold by 1 degree this year, to reflect the fact that what was once unusually hot, now isn't.
>> No. 452460 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 7:31 pm
452460 spacer
>>452459

I've been saying this all week and nobody's listened to me. Bloody southerners getting everything as usual, and moaning about it.

Tory Britain.
>> No. 452461 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 7:36 pm
452461 spacer

FXZw4CLWIAAtHOa.jpg
452461452461452461
>>452455
>It's not truly hot until they switch to Fahrenheit.
Here you go. Fahrenheit and "nanny state" rhetoric.
>> No. 452462 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 7:50 pm
452462 spacer
>>452461

Bloody taxpyer-funded officials, caring about the risk of heatstroke. Get down those fucking potato mines and work for your ha'pennies you uppity little oiks.
>> No. 452463 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 8:26 pm
452463 spacer
>>452462

I say let them eat cake.
>> No. 452464 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 8:37 pm
452464 spacer

temperatures.jpg
452464452464452464
>>452459

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1033560/average-periodic-temperatures-united-kingdom/


9.6 degrees sounds pretty cold, but I guess if you actually calculate it as the average of all weather stations across the UK during a whole year, then it sort of seems plausible.
>> No. 452465 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 9:06 pm
452465 spacer

Daily-Star-8.jpg
452465452465452465
>>452461
I don't know why people pay for such one-sided partisan outrage when they can have good, honest journalism from the journalists at the Daily Star, who want to play outside just like normal people do.
>> No. 452466 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 10:24 pm
452466 spacer
>>452465

I've always found it puzzling why the Sun and the Mail are so popular when you have the Star. It's certainly the rag of the people. The last one to give in to woke spoilsports about page 3 it should be noted.
>> No. 452468 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 11:23 pm
452468 spacer
>>452448
Get some magnetic door screens like I did in the other thread.

>>452465
>"tongue of fire"

Sign me up.

The 41 degrees worries me as my fan is reading it as 31 degree in my flat. By my fagpacket calculations that means when it hits 40 it will be 47 inside, I might actually die.
>> No. 452482 Anonymous
12th July 2022
Tuesday 7:38 pm
452482 spacer

FXclraBXkAAb2SS.jpg
452482452482452482
Slightly less confusingly than the definition of a heatwave we have the concept of "tropical nights" where it stays over 20 degrees all night. So three places had that last night, in particular Sheffield had the UK's highest minimum night temperature ever.
>> No. 452483 Anonymous
12th July 2022
Tuesday 7:38 pm
452483 spacer
>>452482
Forgot the link; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-62137027
>> No. 452487 Anonymous
12th July 2022
Tuesday 7:54 pm
452487 spacer
Here's what Spain looks like at 43 degrees
https://twitter.com/ExtremaduraON/status/1546526489163743233
Takes a moment to realise this was filmed during the day.
>> No. 452500 Anonymous
13th July 2022
Wednesday 12:06 am
452500 spacer
>>452487
Fire burns way hotter than 43 degrees you silly goose.
>> No. 452501 Anonymous
13th July 2022
Wednesday 12:33 am
452501 spacer
>>452487
This is why I have a mini ITX PC. Throw it in a sports bag and I'm hot to trot. Sorry, poor choice of words.
>> No. 452505 Anonymous
13th July 2022
Wednesday 10:16 am
452505 spacer
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/north-west-ambulance-critical-incident-24466674
>The warm weather has encouraged 'respiratory illnesses' as people are being seen stuck outside A&Es in ambulances
The heatwave has added more pressure to the ambulance services. Bit moot at this point, as I understand it.
>> No. 452512 Anonymous
14th July 2022
Thursday 10:23 am
452512 spacer
https://twitter.com/MeteoExpress/status/1547210600169758723
Wildfires in the Gironde department, SW France. Smoke visible from 35km away.
>> No. 452557 Anonymous
16th July 2022
Saturday 4:33 pm
452557 spacer

FXxv4qSUsAACq45.jpg
452557452557452557
Over 59°C was measured on the soil surface in Spain and 48°C in the south of France.
>> No. 452558 Anonymous
16th July 2022
Saturday 10:44 pm
452558 spacer
>>452557

I lived in Africa it was fokken hot boet

Now I see fotneks with braiifleis and i think

Fokken doos
>> No. 452570 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 4:17 am
452570 spacer
>>452558
Why does googling 'fotneks' just return this website? I assume it's an Afrikaans word of some kind. I swear Google search gets worse every year, I used to be able to find all sorts of obscure things but now it's just garbage.
>> No. 452576 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 8:46 am
452576 spacer
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/07/17/Spain-heat-death-toll350/7181658063083/

350 dead in Spain (ongoing, not just now). They have better infrastructure for heat than us but it is a lot hotter there.
>> No. 452577 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 8:57 am
452577 spacer
>>452576
If it's anything like covid it'll primarily be the elderly and vulnerable, so it's doing society a favour in the grand scheme of things.
>> No. 452580 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 9:12 am
452580 spacer
>>452577

Hoping that legions of demented Tory voters spend today standing outside staring at the sun to celebrate their superiority over the Sun #SummerOf1976

Special shout out to all the wankers having BBQs today, because the best thing to do when it's hot as fuck is light a fire.
>> No. 452583 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 9:21 am
452583 spacer
>>452580

Just hope they aren't registered to do postal votes from the skin cancer ward.
>> No. 452604 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 2:40 pm
452604 spacer

headlines.jpg
452604452604452604
Humanity faces ‘collective suicide’ over climate crisis, warns UN chief.
António Guterres tells governments ‘half of humanity is in danger zone’, as countries battle extreme heat
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/18/humanity-faces-collective-suicide-over-climate-crisis-warns-un-chief

Pictured is ~50 headlines from around the globe. Mainly about France and Spain but of course the good British papers have headlines about how hot it is here, with pictures of the beach, or Boris.
>> No. 452631 Anonymous
18th July 2022
Monday 7:31 pm
452631 spacer
https://goodlawproject.org/news/we-won-net-zero
The Good Law Project sued the government for their Net Zero plan being a load of shite and won. I didn't mean to keep bumping this thread all day but there's a lot of relevant stuff.
>> No. 452717 Anonymous
22nd July 2022
Friday 8:11 am
452717 spacer
>>452631

I don't know how many lads are posting, but please don't stop bumping this thread. It's been genuinely informative for me.
>> No. 452727 Anonymous
23rd July 2022
Saturday 5:34 pm
452727 spacer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62225696
Article from today covering how the oil industry set out to sow doubt in the public about climate change.
>> No. 452733 Anonymous
23rd July 2022
Saturday 11:11 pm
452733 spacer
>>452727
Sounds like an XR plot to paint useful industry as the bad guys.
>> No. 452743 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 4:33 am
452743 spacer
>>452733 >>452736 >>452738

It takes a special kind of mental gymnastics to defend the oil industry when multiple corporations independently came up with their own climate models that predicted exactly what they've done to the planet.
>> No. 452751 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 3:57 pm
452751 spacer
>>452743

Cigarette companies had known internally for a long time about the damage that smoking does to a person.

The MO always seems to be, right, now that we know our product is harmful, let's pay PR agencies millions to let the public believe otherwise.

Capitalism at its finest.

Reminds me also of the Ford Pinto scandal in the early 70s where Ford calculated that it was cheaper to pay out compensation to people who got injured by their car bursting into flames from even a gentle rear-end collision, instead of recalling all Pintos and spending $20 per car (in early 70s money) to weld in a crash guard to keep the petrol tank from rupturing.
>> No. 452752 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 4:20 pm
452752 spacer
>>452751

They knew leaded petrol was toxic for years, if not since the very beginning, but lobbied heavily to keep it out of the public eye. The bloke who invented it became seriously ill, as did most of the workers in the early refineries, but too much money was on the table to let a little thing like that stop it. Money is always at the root of these things. The profit motive is blind, so it just as often (more often, arguably) leads to psychotic harm as it does to social good.

Philosophically, it's hard to truly call it evil, but I would say it's worse than evil. It's the insidious kind of undirected, headless harm that rises purely as a consequence of the system in place. It's not like with Nazi death camps where you can ask "were the guys pulling the levers on the gas chambers truly culpable or were they just following orders", it's just that there was no ethical oversight here to begin with. The people responsible were driven not by any desire to do harm but simply by profit motive, and the harm they caused was just collateral damage they had no incentive to care about.
>> No. 452753 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 4:25 pm
452753 spacer
>>452752
>Philosophically, it's hard to truly call it evil, but I would say it's worse than evil.
You seem to be echoing the same sentiments as Noam Chomsky does here.

>> No. 452754 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 5:03 pm
452754 spacer
>>452752

>where you can ask "were the guys pulling the levers on the gas chambers truly culpable or were they just following orders"

Most staff at the concentration camps were specially recruited and selected because of their likelihood of being willing culprits. Often, they were young and ruthless, career-minded SS officers with aspirations of being somebody important after the Endsieg.

So to answer your question, yes, they were culpable because almost without exception, they were the kind of person who lived, breathed and shat Third Reich ideology.

>but too much money was on the table to let a little thing like that stop it. Money is always at the root of these things. The profit motive is blind

I saw something a while ago about the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. George Soros almost single-handedly exacerbated it by betting heavily against East Asian currencies, which, if you could move the kind of money that's available to somebody like him, made the situation much worse and further devalued their currencies against the U.S. Dollar, when most foreign private and public loans were kept in Dollars.

George Soros at one point during that crisis said to reporters in front of rolling cameras that his obligation was toward his investors who were expecting him to turn a profit, and that he couldn't afford to consider the effects his currency speculation had on small business owners and regular people in Asia who could no longer pay back their loans.

Never doubt that people like Soros are absolute fucking evil.
>> No. 452759 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 6:05 pm
452759 spacer
>>452754

Soros only won that bet because he was right - those currencies were overvalued, those economies were overburdened with debt and the market didn't realise it. He might have hastened the emergence of the crisis, but he didn't cause the underlying factors that created the conditions for an inevitable crisis.

Soros is an easy target for anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, he's an easy scapegoat for the leaders of mismanaged economies, but it's just not possible to make sustained profits from artificially creating economic crises. The market is far from perfectly rational, but it isn't that dumb. I can try to convince the world that Facebook is actually worthless, I can leverage massive amounts of money to short their stock, but I'm going to lose every time because Facebook obviously isn't worthless.
>> No. 452760 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 6:35 pm
452760 spacer
>>452759

It's still the mindset that counts.

If you almost literally say fuck it, making my investors who are already well to do another few million is more important than a small business employing twenty people in South Korea which goes tits up because it can no longer serve its loans, then you're a pretty shit human being.

It's true that one person even commanding the biggest hedge fund on the planet usually cannot bring an entire country to its knees. Although I think that has happened somewhere as well with some smaller country. But to say that betting on currency devaluation is fair game because the currency was overvalued to begin with offers a non-solution to a problem that was created in the first place by the global financial sector.

It seems to be an inherent trait of capitalism to create bubbles and then see those bubbles burst again in periodic cycles. But to just shrug it off like that is a bit cynical.
>> No. 452762 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 7:09 pm
452762 spacer
>>452760

>It seems to be an inherent trait of capitalism to create bubbles and then see those bubbles burst again in periodic cycles.

It's a trait of political leaders to create the appearance of economic growth when they can't create actual economic growth. Fiddle the exchange rate, load up on debt, inflate an asset bubble. Sure, the house of cards will eventually come crashing down, but you'll probably have retired by then. Boom-and-bust is a political phenomenon, not an economic law.

Economies that aren't built on lies are practically unexploitable by speculators. There's no hidden information, the pricing is accurate, so there's no speculative opportunity. The problem is that most politicians are happy to lie to the electorate and most electorates are happy to be lied to. Financial institutions are often complicit in that lying, but it's a two-way street between government and the markets. Governments aren't powerless in the face of an omnipotent financial system, they just choose to make a pact with the devil for short-term political gain.

Nobody forced the Greek government to borrow all that money, nobody forced them to fraudulently misreport economic data, nobody forced them to run massive deficits and be massively corrupt. They blame the Troika, they blame bankers, but they brought it all on themselves. Maybe it was wrong for Germany to lend them all that money, but if you lie about your income on your mortgage application you can hardly complain when you fall behind on your repayments and your house gets repossessed. Maybe the terms of the bailout were punitive, but they would never have needed that bailout if they hadn't built the appearance of an economic boom on a very wobbly tower of lies. The Greeks voted in successive buy-now-pay-later governments over several decades and acted like the victims of a global conspiracy when it came time to pay later.
>> No. 452763 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 7:27 pm
452763 spacer
>>452762

>Governments aren't powerless in the face of an omnipotent financial system, they just choose to make a pact with the devil for short-term political gain.

The two go hand in hand, lad, don't try and pretend it's just the evil politicos leading the saintly good natured financiers down a path of lies and corruption. Financial actors are up to their eyeballs in dodgy deals and bribery with politicians in order to ensure the government allows the exploitable conditions to perpetuate. They both profit off it and are happy to continue the symbiosis through spirals of boom and bust, because it never comes back on either of them, only the average working people and taxpayers.

>Economies that aren't built on lies

lol
>> No. 452764 Anonymous
24th July 2022
Sunday 7:48 pm
452764 spacer
>>452762

>Nobody forced the Greek government to borrow all that money, nobody forced them to fraudulently misreport economic data,

Not quite true. Deutsche Bank were instrumental in bringing Greece into the Eurozone, because they had large loans out to both the Greek state and to private companies that were all valued in German Marks. A Euro without Greece would have put Deutsche Bank's loans in jeopardy because the Drachma probably would have dropped considerably against the Euro within days. It was Deutsche Bank themselves who helped the Greek government cook the books on all the criteria they had to meet, but realistically couldn't, especially in terms of sovereign debt and deficit.


As far as economic growth in general, I still remember one of my first-semester economics lectures. The professor said, any economy can only generate so much yield in a given time period. If you expect to get more, then at some point you'll just be robbing Peter to pay Paul. Or in other words, if your personal yield (read: return on investment) is far greater than that, then somebody else must be losing money. And even if you are in a growth industry that far outpaces your country's GDP, it will not do so forever, as growth markets, too, have a tendency to see diminishing returns in the long run. You could even see losses at some point when your product is replaced by someone else's competing product.

Another thing is that there's a school of thought that politicians are political entrepreneurs, and that they offer a product in a not dissimilar way to a company or manufacturer. Where a manufacturer wants to maximise profit, they seek to maximise votes, and the way to do that is to have a platform or stance that wins those votes.

Where I'm trying to go with that tangent is that politicians promising you jobs, opportunity and growth don't necessarily do so because they will put all their effort into it, but because it's something a critical mass of people want to hear. And then when they're up for reelection and things didn'turn out that way, then it's just Politics 101 to blame it on this, that, and the other.
>> No. 452772 Anonymous
25th July 2022
Monday 10:56 pm
452772 spacer
Regarding Starmer's position on it, here's a thread about economic growth
https://twitter.com/ClimateBen/status/1551666111837605888
I'm far too tired to summarise it for you beyond "degrowth is essential to our survival". This is a separate problem to emissions and whether or not they'll make the planet uninhabitable - different asteroid, same root causes.
>> No. 452775 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 1:46 am
452775 spacer
>>452762
>Nobody forced the Greek government to borrow all that money, nobody forced them to fraudulently misreport economic data, nobody forced them to run massive deficits and be massively corrupt.
None of these things would be anywhere near as big a problem as they would've been if the Euro wasn't fundamentally the worst designed currency since Burma decided to demonetise everything that didn't have an '8' in it on the advice of a numerologist. A monetary union without a fiscal union, like a gun designed such that it can only be held in the roof of your own mouth and which is motion activated by human breathing.
>> No. 452777 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 6:43 am
452777 spacer
>>452772
>The critique of capitalism is thin however with a ghastly focus on pop______n

He actually censored the word 'population'? Has it escaped his notice that the population of the 'developing' world has exploded over the past half a century while the white population has remained stable? Some people really are capable of filtering out any truth they don't like hearing.
>> No. 452780 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 8:26 am
452780 spacer
https://www.ft.com/content/44a3f8de-1e1f-4cae-a1fd-b197452c2ec9
Review of the BBC's Big Oil Vs The World, which is worth watching for more context on the propaganda/media manipulation that's been going on.
>> No. 452811 Anonymous
27th July 2022
Wednesday 10:29 am
452811 spacer

FYqQOzRX0AES75g.jpg
452811452811452811
Here's a map of recent major fires in Europe. It could do with some dates (I think it's safe to assume they're all this summer) and previous years to compare to.
>> No. 452812 Anonymous
27th July 2022
Wednesday 10:37 am
452812 spacer
>>452811
Sounds like we need to cut the forests down for our own safety.
>> No. 452823 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 2:10 am
452823 spacer
Some good news for a change.

https://theoceancleanup.com/updates/first-100000-kg-removed-from-the-great-pacific-garbage-patch/

>First 100,000 KG Removed From the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

>Since deployment in August 2021, System 002 (or “Jenny”) has now collected 101,353 kg of plastic over 45 extractions, sweeping an area of ocean of over 3000km2 – comparable to the size of Luxembourg or Rhode Island.
>> No. 452824 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 2:39 am
452824 spacer
>>452823
>3000km2 – comparable to the size of Luxembourg or Rhode Island
Or, in proper British units, about 1/6 of a Wales.
>> No. 452825 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 9:05 am
452825 spacer
>>452823

I liked the video where one of them tried to help you visualise how much 100,000 Kg of plastic is by showing you how much 10KG weighs then telling you to picture 10,000x that.

Not helpful.
>> No. 452827 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 9:21 am
452827 spacer
>>452825
>448 posts and 321 images omitted
100,000 kg is about the weight of two fatties threads.

Three if they've been sticking to the diet.
>> No. 452829 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 10:33 am
452829 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/27/leaked-us-leaked-power-companies-spending-profits-stop-clean-energy

A Democratic state senator was proposing a law that could cut into Florida Power & Light’s (FPL) profits. Landlords would be able to sell cheap rooftop solar power directly to their tenants – bypassing FPL and its monopoly on electricity.

“I want you to make his life a living hell … seriously,” FPL’s CEO Eric Silagy wrote in a 2019 email to two of his vice-presidents about state Senator José Javier Rodríguez, who proposed the legislation.

Rodríguez was ousted from office in the next election. Matrix employees spent heavily on political advertisements for a candidate with the same last name as Rodríguez, who split the vote. That candidate later admitted he was bribed to run.

>capitalism
>> No. 452830 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 10:34 am
452830 spacer
This year Earth Overshoot Day is two days earlier than last year and several weeks sooner than 2020, when it was marked on August 22.

"From January 1 to July 28, humanity has used as much from nature as the planet can renew in the entire year,"
https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/2022/07/28/earth-overshoot-day-weve-already-used-up-this-years-resources/
>> No. 452831 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 10:35 am
452831 spacer
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/27/big-falls-in-crop-yields-across-europe-feared-due-to-heatwaves

From Spain to Hungary, output of staples such as corn forecast to fall by up to 9%, adding to impact of Ukraine war on food security
>> No. 452832 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 10:38 am
452832 spacer
More positively, the Americans seem to have wavered in their policies for whatever reason.

Manchin has agreed to some sort of wealth tax for investing in renewables:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/manchin-schumer-climate-deal_n_62e1a677e4b07f83766bafbb
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/27/manchin-schumer-deal-climate-change-00048371

Biden announces a plan to plant a billion trees (not much of a solution to anything but better than nothing, I guess)
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/3573711-biden-administration-announces-plans-to-plant-one-billion-trees/

and this report seems a bit over-optimistic about limiting warming to 1.5 if we keep building renewables.
https://fastsolarpermitservices.com/solar-news/new-report-shows-that-solar-and-wind-power-can-reduce-global-warming-to-1-5c/
>> No. 452833 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 11:37 am
452833 spacer
>>452832

>Biden announces a plan to plant a billion trees (not much of a solution to anything but better than nothing, I guess)

A billion trees isn't, but it's a start.

We would probably need several trillion trees to make an impact on the global climate that way, which is indeed easier said than done, because even one trillion trees means over 125,000 trees for every human on the planet.
>> No. 452834 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 11:44 am
452834 spacer
Isn't something like moss, algae or seaweed meant to be better than trees anyway?
>> No. 452835 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 11:52 am
452835 spacer
>>452834

Algae is, yes, but it's harder to explain that you're making an effort to prevent ocean acidification as part of a snappy, attention getting press-conference.
Organisations do a lot of tree planting because it's good PR, then they don't bother watering or taking care of them in any way, so they just die in the first summer.
>> No. 452843 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 2:50 pm
452843 spacer
>>452835

>Organisations do a lot of tree planting because it's good PR, then they don't bother watering or taking care of them in any way, so they just die in the first summer

That is a problem when you are reforesting dry areas. Fully grown old forests have the capacity to store water and moisture all on their own, but to convert barren or stripped land back into a self-sustaining moist ecosystem which retains its own water means you'll first have to spend years, possibly decades irrigating the area artificially. That water needs to come from somewhere.

That makes it an approach which is feasible in countries with enough water and precipitation like Britain, where you probably won't even have to irrigate artificially, but it's very difficult to reclaim polars that way, where freshwater is a scarce resource in the first place and where human populations depend on it for their own sustinance. Which is why polarification is such a serious environmental problem.
>> No. 452844 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 2:52 pm
452844 spacer
>>452843

>polarification

Right. Well then.
>> No. 452964 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 9:30 am
452964 spacer
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/ireland-2030-51-percent-climate
Ireland, which has historically lagged behind other European nations in tackling climate change, has set a course to slash emissions by 51 percent by 2030.

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/us-green-hydrogen-would-become-worlds-cheapest-form-of-h2-under-tax-credit-plan-in-new-manchin-approved-bill/2-1-1268259
US green hydrogen would become world's cheapest form of H2 under tax-credit plan in new Manchin-approved bill

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/29/ships-must-slow-down-to-save-endangered-whales-us-govt-says
Ships must slow down to save endangered whales, US gov’t says
Proposed rules would force more ships to slow down off US east coast to avoid striking North Atlantic right whales.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/31/drought-water-queues-uk-hosepipe-ban-compulsory-metering Act now on water or face emergency queues on the streets, UK warned
Hosepipe ban and compulsory water metering needed, say advisers, as nation braces for drought

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/07/us-regulators-will-certify-first-small-nuclear-reactor-design/
US regulators will certify first small nuclear reactor design
NuScale will get the final approval nearly six years after starting the process.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/las-vegas-declares-emergency-50-days-clean-water/story?id=87623219
Las Vegas, NM declares emergency, with less than 50 days of clean water supply left

https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/3539703-no-miracle-tech-needed-how-to-switch-to-renewables-now-and-lower-costs-doing-it/ No miracle tech needed: How to switch to renewables now and lower costs doing it

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gas-boilers-to-be-banned-in-new-homes-by-2024-8r0r5glxv
Gas boilers will be banned from new-build homes in Scotland by 2024

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/07/29/onions-carrots-will-smaller-heatwave-shoppers-told/
Onions and carrots will be smaller after heatwave, shoppers told
Farmers warn extremely dry and hot weather in the UK will add to food price inflation

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/hosepipe-ban-millions-of-brits-face-hefty-fine/
Almost a million households across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight will be subject to a hosepipe ban by Southern Water - who was the first to impose the ban.
The water company said the crackdown, which will come into effect on Friday, is required after dangerously low river levels.

https://theintercept.com/2022/07/30/blue-hydrogen-climate-oil-and-gas/ The oil and gas industry’s plan to convince the world to switch from natural gas to hydrogen made from natural gas is being upended by an unexpected cause: economics.
In Europe, green hydrogen is now cheaper than liquefied natural gas. And oil and gas companies, in turn, are increasingly investing in green hydrogen instead of using methane to produce blue hydrogen.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-08-10/climate-change-lawsuits-oil-companies-state-courts
Oil and gas companies are desperate to stop the wave of lawsuits seeking to hold them financially responsible for their role in climate change. Should these suits get to trial, their executives would have to testify about whether they knowingly misled the public about the climate threat posed by their products going back to the 1970s.

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/england-people-met-office-defra-nfu-b2131545.html People urged to reduce unnecessary water use as England faces drought
Officials held a meeting on Tuesday to discuss the situation as forecasters say several more dry weeks are expected.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-62381000
Plans to extend the runway at an airport will go ahead as an attempt to appeal a court's decision has failed.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/27072022/wildfire-pollution-may-play-a-surprising-role-in-the-fate-of-arctic-sea-ice/
Smoke brightens Arctic clouds, perhaps slowing ice loss, but the ice is still dwindling, which can further intensify wildfires in an unexpected feedback loop.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62380728
Warning winter energy bills to rise by more than expected
"However, while the rise in forecasts for October and January is a pressing concern, it is not only the level - but the duration - of the rises that makes these new forecasts so devastating," he said. "Given the current level of the wholesale price, this level of household energy bills currently shows little sign of abating into 2024.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62382624
BP reports huge profits as energy bills soar

Celebrity corner:
https://novaramedia.com/2022/07/22/private-jet-use-shows-why-we-must-abolish-billionaires/ Private Jet Use Shows Why We Must Abolish Billionaires
1% of people cause 50% of aviation emissions. It has to stop.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/kylies-17-minute-flight-has-nothing-on-the-170-trips-taylor-swifts-private-jets-took-this-year-1390083/
Kylie’s 17-Minute Flight Has Nothing on the 170 Trips Taylor Swift’s Private Jets Took This Year
>> No. 452965 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 10:42 am
452965 spacer
>>452964

>Kylie’s 17-Minute Flight Has Nothing on the 170 Trips Taylor Swift’s Private Jets Took This Year


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfWlot6h_JM


Also though, please stop referring to Kylie Jenner as just "Kylie". That gets confusing for us oldlads, who will always only associate that name with Kylie Minogue.
>> No. 452967 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 11:11 am
452967 spacer
>>452964
>Las Vegas, NM
Phew. For a second there I thought all these horror stories were true.
>> No. 452976 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 7:24 pm
452976 spacer

Talk that is currently live (started at 1900).
Speakers:
Jeremy Corbyn is Jeremy Corbyn.
Chantelle Lunt is a prominent anti-racist, fisherperson and human rights activist and educator, and co-founder of the Kill the Bill Coalition and Merseyside Black Lives Matter Alliance.
Lee Jasper is a London politician and race relations activist, co-founder of Operation Black Vote / BARAC UK / Blaksox, and former senior policy advisor to the Mayor of London.
Bill McGuire is a Professor Emeritus of Geophysical and Climate Hazards, University College London. He is a broadcaster, writer, and activist.
Zoe Cohen is a climate activist, educator and spokesperson, and has worked with Extinction Rebellion, Insulate Britain, and now Just Stop Oil.
Kerry Abel has worked in the trade union movement for twenty years and works on the Future of Rail project as an Organiser for TSSA to make the case for skilled workers for a well-funded, green future of public transport.
Chris Packham is a renowned naturalist, television presenter, writer, photographer, conservationist, campaigner and filmmaker, perhaps most famous for his presentation of BBC's Springwatch, Autumnwatch and Winterwatch series. Please share this event with your contacts and any followings you have. The Climate Crisis will have unimaginably severe impacts on everyone, and therefore we need everybody on board.

Kicked off with "We're going to blockade Westminster every day from October 1st. They can't arrest all of us." so a bold start.
>> No. 452977 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 7:30 pm
452977 spacer
>>452976

Didn't trim the text properly, sorry. Rushing.
>> No. 452981 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 8:00 pm
452981 spacer
>>452977
This place is so fast paced I could see why you'd want to rush.
>> No. 452982 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 8:17 pm
452982 spacer
>>452976

Two politicos, two idpol ghouls, one grifter, and two people who actually know what they're on about regarding the climate and nature and that.

Also we're not allowed to like Corbyn any more, he's a Russian asset.
>> No. 452983 Anonymous
2nd August 2022
Tuesday 8:24 pm
452983 spacer
>>452982

"I will admit that nihilism and despair are very attractive—sexy, even, considering also they’re the affects that all too easily signify “intellectual sophistication” in the Anthropocene. Embracing cynicism and hopelessness allows you both to look tough, as if you have the backbone to face devastating truths about global warming, and to take yourself off the hook of the duty to work toward resolving the crisis."
https://kenyonreview.org/journal/july-aug-2022/selections/genevieve-guenther/
>> No. 453026 Anonymous
3rd August 2022
Wednesday 10:48 pm
453026 spacer
>>452983

Piss off. I'd bet good money I've got a smaller carbon dick length than you.
>> No. 453032 Anonymous
4th August 2022
Thursday 8:46 am
453032 spacer
'Our fields shouldn't be full of solar panels': Truss vows to crackdown on renewables development.
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4054209/fields-shouldnt-solar-panels-truss-vows-crackdown-renewables-development
>> No. 453040 Anonymous
4th August 2022
Thursday 3:10 pm
453040 spacer
>>453032

God, she really is thick as pork mince.
>> No. 453041 Anonymous
4th August 2022
Thursday 3:15 pm
453041 spacer
>>453040
I have to assume there's a 'get Truss to say the daftest thing' game going on here among her team. First one to get her to reference spacewombles wins.
She just gives the impression that whe was dropped on her hrad a lot as a kid.
>> No. 453237 Anonymous
14th August 2022
Sunday 3:45 am
453237 spacer
Dear Sir,
We are certified and authorized mandate that facilitate the supply of oil and gas products to end buyers and consumers, we are a company ​ well experienced in the supply of ​ Petroleum products. ​We represent ​ major OIL REFINERIES here in the Russian Federation, we help buyers meet their various requirements and needs.

​We also work with several genuine tank storage company in Rotterdam and Houston which have the capacity to store any amount of your goods in good storage condition .

We can supply you ​ D6 , D2 , Jet A1 , JP54 , LNG, LPG , LCO , PETCOKE ​ , MAZUT, BITUMEN , AUTOMOTIVE
GAS OIL ​ , ​ EN590 , BASE OIL , EXPORT BLEND CRUDE, GASOLINE ​ , DIESEL ULTRA-LOW SULPHUR , ESPO.
​On CIF ASWP, TTO, FOB and TANK TO ​ VESSEL Basis.
​All products are available for immediate supply. If you are interested in buying any of these products, kindly get back to me with your (LOI). A reply will keep me ahead of our business and I would be expecting one as well.​

Regards,
Boris Bocharov
ООО ТТК Транзит
Website:https://tllcoilgastrading.ru
>> No. 453238 Anonymous
14th August 2022
Sunday 5:02 am
453238 spacer
>>453237

In twenty years time, this post will be on display in a museum, juxtaposed with a video of Vladimir Putin saying that the sanctions aren't harming Russia.
>> No. 453240 Anonymous
14th August 2022
Sunday 9:55 am
453240 spacer
Thread continues >>453189

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password