Extinction Rebelion roadrage

[Bellow]

Apart from one of the hardline protesters that was interviewed on Sky News yesterday , she travelled all the way from Norway just to put her point across.

Her return journeys carbon footprint ,in order to protest, was probably larger than most commuters over the last few days. If she swam and walked to get here i will apologies but i doubt that very much.

Double standards ????

Kenny

My post was very tongue in cheek but yours reminds me of what I've noticed before when an entire camera crew traipse (using just about every form of fossil fuel burning transportation known to man) to some delicate threatened wilderness to tell us that it's delicate and threatened. Lead by example please.

People I have known though that are passionate about a cause do walk the talk.

Maybe the truest measure of the threat climate change poses is the very wealthiest buying bolt holes in the likes of New Zealand away from the worst that will occur. My opinion FWIW is that we either tackle climate change head on (yes, that involves making personal sacrifices) or get used to the idea of mass migration on a scale that hasn't been seen since WW2. We in the first world have a choice. Not so for others who's lives will be more than inconvenienced.

 

[st13phil]

Maybe the truest measure of the threat climate change poses is the very wealthiest buying bolt holes in the likes of New Zealand away from the worst that will occur. My opinion FWIW is that we either tackle climate change head on (yes, that involves making personal sacrifices) or get used to the idea of mass migration on a scale that hasn't been seen since WW2. We in the first world have a choice. Not so for others who's lives will be more than inconvenienced.

FWIW, my view is that climate change is happening. Fact. Another salient fact is that the climate has always changed, so it would be an odd state of affairs if it weren't.

My view is also that while there is some degree of correlation between rises in certain elements of human activity and the change of climate, causation links are far from clear. On that basis it is insanity of the highest order to make knee-jerk changes to what we humans do and to expect it to have a guaranteed outcome in a guaranteed timescale. For me, this is one of the big lies of the AGW climate change proponents.

So, actually, the more sensible thing to do is to plan how we're going to deal with the consequences of climate change and put in place mitigating actions now, rather than to expend all our resources on decarbonising, etc. which may or may not affect the global climate over some indeterminate future period.

And for the avoidance of doubt, that doesn't mean that I subscribe to the notion that we (as the human race) can continue to pollute our environment in the future in the way we have in the past with impunity. Just that the notion we can somehow change the global climate in a way that suits us in the short term by doing something different today is a foolish strategy.

 

[Bellow]

FWIW, my view is that climate change is happening. Fact. Another salient fact is that the climate has always changed, so it would be an odd state of affairs if it weren't.

My view is also that while there is some degree of correlation between rises in certain elements of human activity and the change of climate, causation links are far from clear. On that basis it is insanity of the highest order to make knee-jerk changes to what we humans do and to expect it to have a guaranteed outcome in a guaranteed timescale. For me, this is one of the big lies of the AGW climate change proponents.

So, actually, the more sensible thing to do is to plan how we're going to deal with the consequences of climate change and put in place mitigating actions now, rather than to expend all our resources on decarbonising, etc. which may or may not affect the global climate over some indeterminate future period.

And for the avoidance of doubt, that doesn't mean that I subscribe to the notion that we (as the human race) can continue to pollute our environment in the future in the way we have in the past with impunity. Just that the notion we can somehow change the global climate in a way that suits us in the short term by doing something different today is a foolish strategy.

I only disagree with the above on scale and timescale. Making renewables work for example, is just too obviously worthwhile to not engage with it with gusto. Changing some of our behaviours at the personal level wouldn't really hurt either - and can begin today.

So, actually, the more sensible thing to do is to plan how we're going to deal with the consequences of climate change and put in place mitigating actions now, rather than to expend all our resources on decarbonising, etc. which may or may not affect the global climate over some indeterminate future period.

The above however is going to be harder than complete decarbonisation. The world as it stands and where it's heading, is so opposed to immigration and helping in any real way people who are going to be worst affected. Those who stand to lose will know this. They won't be sitting around waiting for us to do nothing. Right now, there are more votes to be had in opposing foreign aid than for increasing it. That trend is not going to suddenly halt or reverse.

 

[tbourner]

while there is some degree of correlation between rises in certain elements of human activity and the change of climate, causation links are far from clear.

Unless you ask every expert on the subject.

 

[Dryce]

Unless you ask every expert on the subject.

There's a reason for this.

If you are an academic researcher you don't get much of a career or research money out of disputing the commonly accepted academic wisdom.

So you tend to find so called acknowledged experts available to ask on the subject don't have much diversity in terms of viewpoint.

Now that doesn't mean they are wrong - but the instiutional bias of the system means that the opinions and 'expertise' aren't quite as challenged or objective as they really should be.

If your standing is based on being the author (or more likely co-author) of a much referenced series of papers in properly respected publications then you do not want that standing challenged - it's what gives you status and leverage.

 

[tbourner]

That is, quite frankly, a load of tosh.

 

[Dryce]

That is, quite frankly, a load of tosh.

LOL.

After a wide ranging study of mice who respond to my posts I can surmise that you either:

(a) are an academic who has bought into the system
(b) or don't know any academics
(c) blinkered

Your choice .......

 

[st13phil]

Unless you ask every expert on the subject.

So where do you fit on @Dryce's list?

Much of academia has prostituted itself on the altar of climate change, and the zeal with which those who challenge the - paid for - new orthodoxy are denounced smacks too much of cult for my liking. Some of the “science” I’ve seen posing as “incontrovertible proof” of AGW is, to be kind, so full of holes that it whistles when the wind blows. When I hear the ludicrous statement that “the science of AGW is settled” I weep.

 

[tbourner]

I'm not getting involved in a ridiculous discussion with conspiracy theorists.

 

[Dryce]

I'm not getting involved in a ridiculous discussion with conspiracy theorists.

You'll have to find some first.

And once found make sure you only have serious discussions with them.

 

[Scooby_Doo]

how do the protestors get time off work to protest ???

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[a111r]

how do the protestors get time off work to protest ???

I suppose they book some annual leave?

Their call for 'zero carbon transport emissions by 2025' is plainly very silly. The 'eco warrior' crowd have a 'less than scientific' mindset.

 

[AltonAnt]

I did have to laugh at the black cab driver moaning on the news. He must have forgotten the multiple times they brought central London to a standstill with their 'protests'.

 

[SpoonJar]

Now Emma Thompson has flown in from America to join then. I bet the majority of these scumbags drive and the middle class ones among them probably own Range Rovers and take multiple holidays a year. All hypocrites these people.

The last ice age was a major change in climate. Was that man made?.

 

[Deleted member 6183]

I prefer not to label people as scum because they have different views to me.

 

[Bellow]

Apparently, children born this year will have to reduce their carbon footprint by 90% compared to that of their grandparents if the temp reduction target is to be met.
That is going to be pretty tough on them. Unless we think that it wont be that bad, they wont miss anything. Which begs the question - if reducing carbon footprint is easy and pain free, why don't we all do it and make it a bit easier for the next generation?

 

[GLK]

They ought to get together and block a next volcano eruption with their bodies.
After all, an average one produces more emissions, than a few year's worth of all the cars on the planet.

 

[st13phil]

Apparently, children born this year will have to reduce their carbon footprint by 90% compared to that of their grandparents if the temp reduction target is to be met.

It's statements such as that (and I know you're just repeating what some "worthy" has stated) which really boils my p*ss.

There is absolutely no way that anyone can predict that sort of thing with that sort of accuracy. Human knowledge of how climate works is rudimentary at best, there's no "control sample" to test hypothesis against, and there is a huge amount that science does not understand about the drivers of climatic events and effects, yet organisations such as the IPCC continue to publish their rubbish doomsday predictions that have proven to be at least an order of magnitude wrong in the past.

Worse still, scientifically illiterate politicians amplify the problem by ascribing degrees of accuracy to broad estimates, the scientific community fails to give the health warnings about their analysis that they really should, and all of a sudden we get this sort of unverifiable nonsense driving policy.

We really are in a mad world.

 

[kid-jensen]

You're quite right, I'll send my Stranglers Fan Club membership card back in shame.....