Humans Causing Climate Emergency

[jaybee]

1 hour ago, Slartibartfast said:

2 hours ago, jaybee said:

Really! are you another individual who sticks his nose in without bothering to read (at least what is on here re the debate) because quite obviously you are otherwise such puerile drivel would not dribble from yer hairy chops.  Just to make one very salient and truly incontrovertable point re a claim that wee Greta made in her video, This refers to all Nations reducing carbon emissions to zero NOW.  How exactly is that to be done whilst society and global economics continue?  It is pure and utter nonsense.

OK, can you post that again with some punctuation so I know what it is you are trying to say?

Shull has been posting lots of links to nonsense that has nothing to back it up. To be honest, they were that bad that I stopped looking at them, so there is a slight chance that something he posted later was relevant. I'll never know though, as he's now on ignore.

Can you show me something that oaky was supposed to argue against?

Aye, and if ye bend over a'll wipe yer erse tae. 

As fur punktuation or sperling, this is a forum for debate not a bleeding english exam

Not my problem you blocked Shull

Quite cl;early yer beard and hair are messing wi yer brain.........if you read what you have copied above which I posted earlier and can't see the point; well .............the only answer is tae get a fricken air cut and shave.

[jaybee]

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

This thread. 

This poster !!!  

[jaybee]

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Honestly, it's worth taking them off for a few minutes. The last page has been f**king spectacular.

All of them appear to have lost their shit. Jaybee and shull are screeching like chimps, Ricky has been sounding off with a completely bogus post about IOBS and Dickson has been exposed for what he is - a bitter guy who resents a 17 year old for achieving what he can only dream of.

It would appear that instead of responding to reasoned arguments you prefer to dissemble, bringing in all sorts of 'other issues' which generally point out how wonderfully astute you are in your representations of 'all and sundry' who dare to disagree with the GREAT OAKY. Nothing that I have posted in response to you could be considered in any way screeching, although the analogy with chimps screeching might well better apply to your good self running away like a wee lassie tae her mates when the big boys shouted at her. You are a disgrace with your hi-falauting postering and pretentiousness when in reality you are a bully who when challenged can't keep it up, if you prefer THAT analogy

[St.Ricky]

1 minute ago, cockles1987 said:

Folk need to earn respect.

 

There's two dicks on here that don't have any from myself and the thing they have in common is that they are liars.

 

You must tell me who they are. 

Go for it but be careful 

[St.Ricky]

59 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

1 hour ago, St.Ricky said:

You must tell me who they are. 
Go for it but be careful 

I don't must for anyone, especially not a liar.

LOL

 You are an exceptionally silly man. 

Are you wealthy

[St.Ricky]

23 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

Loaded, got millions hidden away to fund all my imaginary Ambassador parties.

 

LOL

You are funny you know. 

Unintentionally so.. But funny. 

Dream on. 

[antrin]

16 hours ago, jaybee said:

Really! are you another individual who sticks his nose in without bothering to read (at least what is on here re the debate) because quite obviously you are otherwise such puerile drivel would not dribble from yer hairy chops.  Just to make one very salient and truly incontrovertable point re a claim that wee Greta made in her video, This refers to all Nations reducing carbon emissions to zero NOW.  How exactly is that to be done whilst society and global economics continue?  It is pure and utter nonsense.

“Incontrovertible”?

i think not.

Her desire to see that carbon emissions are cut to zero now is the only sane way for our species to act.  We are killing ourselves.

even if we try to implement that aspiration NOW, it’ll not come to pass immediately.   For the sake of future generations and for there to be any (enjoyable/tolerable) future for animals and plants, a way of living that doesn’t destroy the air we breathe would be A VERY GOOD IDEA.  And should addressed now.

We seem to be taking Coronavirus seriously despite it wreaking economic and social havoc - what makes Coronavirus different from the destruction of our atmosphere?

This world will be fine for my dwindling, trivial existence.   Change for those yet to come has to start, “NOW”.

FOR EXAMPLE...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/03/outdoor-air-pollution-cuts-three-years-from-human-lifespan-study

 

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by antrin

[oaksoft]

15 hours ago, jaybee said:

It would appear that instead of responding to reasoned arguments you prefer to dissemble, bringing in all sorts of 'other issues' which generally point out how wonderfully astute you are in your representations of 'all and sundry' who dare to disagree with the GREAT OAKY. Nothing that I have posted in response to you could be considered in any way screeching, although the analogy with chimps screeching might well better apply to your good self running away like a wee lassie tae her mates when the big boys shouted at her. You are a disgrace with your hi-falauting postering and pretentiousness when in reality you are a bully who when challenged can't keep it up, if you prefer THAT analogy

Reasoned arguments. I'm sorry but 

[jaybee]

2 hours ago, antrin said:

19 hours ago, jaybee said:

Really! are you another individual who sticks his nose in without bothering to read (at least what is on here re the debate) because quite obviously you are otherwise such puerile drivel would not dribble from yer hairy chops.  Just to make one very salient and truly incontrovertable point re a claim that wee Greta made in her video, This refers to all Nations reducing carbon emissions to zero NOW.  How exactly is that to be done whilst society and global economics continue?  It is pure and utter nonsense.

“Incontrovertible”?

i think not.

Her desire to see that carbon emissions are cut to zero now is the only sane way for our species to act.  We are killing ourselves.

even if we try to implement that aspiration NOW, it’ll not come to pass immediately.   For the sake of future generations and for there to be any (enjoyable/tolerable) future for animals and plants, a way of living that doesn’t destroy the air we breathe would be A VERY GOOD IDEA.  And should addressed now.

We seem to be taking Coronavirus seriously despite it wreaking economic and social havoc - what makes Coronavirus different from the destruction of our atmosphere?

This world will be fine for my dwindling, trivial existence.   Change for those yet to come has to start, “NOW”.

FOR EXAMPLE...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/03/outdoor-air-pollution-cuts-three-years-from-human-lifespan-study

 

It is NOT her desire to stop carbon emissions it is her demand to cease NOW, which is as I stated nonsense. I do not subscribe to the global warming (caused exclusively by humans, particularly Westernised humans) although I will allow that yes people die early through atmospheric pollution, caused by economic / political rationales, however just how many have died in conflict through exactly those same rationales? Again I have no problem with the process of following a greener regime shall we say, but people really need to understand what IS greener and what just SEEMS greener (electric cars as an example are NOT cleaner or greener ......at the moment)(  although I do feel they will be eventually. I am ignoring your comment on coronavirus as it is irrelevant in the context of this debate.  And finally to counter your example 

HERE IS ANOTHER

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/rice-farming-climate-change-global-warming-india-nitrous-oxide-methane-a8531401.html

[antrin]

4 minutes ago, jaybee said:

 I am ignoring your comment on coronavirus as it is irrelevant in the context of this debate. 

I fully understand and can't say your response is wholly unexpected.    Ignoring it in much the same way you ignore reason and logic, when discussing religion.

Paradoxically the example you offer to "counter" my linked example actually substantiates mine.

Science (not religion) is offering up reason and logic to show where humanity is going destructively wrong so that we can explore ways in which to alter our actions for the good of humanity.

Greta is only one of millions of people who would like a lot more science applied rather than simply praying that it'll all turn out right in the end.

[jaybee]

31 minutes ago, antrin said:

43 minutes ago, jaybee said:

 I am ignoring your comment on coronavirus as it is irrelevant in the context of this debate. 

I fully understand and can't say your response is wholly unexpected.    Ignoring it in much the same way you ignore reason and logic, when discussing religion.

Paradoxically the example you offer to "counter" my linked example actually substantiates mine.

Science (not religion) is offering up reason and logic to show where humanity is going destructively wrong so that we can explore ways in which to alter our actions for the good of humanity.

Greta is only one of millions of people who would like a lot more science applied rather than simply praying that it'll all turn out right in the end.

Pray do tell, how coronavirus is relevant in a discussion re industrial pollution?  Likewise;  applying reason and logic to religion is a waste of time, you either got it or haven't, not too many people are going to change through reasoned debate.

My example was simply showing you that humans growing food to feed their families can have polluting effects also.  Should they just starve to help the rest of us?

Science can be helpful sometimes; but it can also become a crutch we get too used to leaning on.

Greta reminds me of those hellfire preachers of yesteryear; as an actress superb, if only she spoke sense instead of spouting the deliberative rhetoric that is clearly aimed at inflaming the situation................................not resolving it.

[antrin]

9 minutes ago, jaybee said:

Pray do tell, how coronavirus is relevant in a discussion re industrial pollution? 

I DID tell... but they seeing, see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand,  it seems.

You said, "This refers to all Nations reducing carbon emissions to zero NOW.  How exactly is that to be done whilst society and global economics continue?  It is pure and utter nonsense. "

I answered your question, "We seem to be taking Coronavirus seriously despite it wreaking economic and social havoc - what makes Coronavirus different from the destruction of our atmosphere?"

Then in your ineffable closed-mind style, you decided that my response should be ignored as it didn't fit how YOU thought the debate should be continued.(I suspect that was because you knew your arse had been handed on a plate.)

 

Governments are acting NOW with wide sweeping controls, cutbacks and that is impacting society and global economic life in order to mitigate the impact of a Human-impacting, transient virus-driven illness.  .  The same urgency must be taken NOW to stop a much more nefarious threat to the planet -  industrial pollution is actually killing all life on it.  Social and economic affairs are not worth a lot in a choking, dying world.

 

 

If I was religious, I might think that it's ok and I'll be fine in my next reincarnation or in an afterlife and so... wgaf about everyone else... but I'd prefer to  consider that when we knew what was coming down the track that we had taken action for the benefit of the coming generations. 

 

 

[antrin]

38 minutes ago, Dickson said:

So what have you given up Antrin? I am sure that if you feel strongly enough about the problems being caused to our environment that you will have done everything you could to minimise your personal emissions? 

I can't say, "I'm glad you asked..."     Unlike you, I've never been a (known) breeder, so I'm way ahead of you in the snippy "footprint on the world" stakes.

I have 2 allotments and a huge garden.  Still eating our own 2019's  spuds, butternut squash, onions, garlic, leeks, parsnips, carrots, chilli, parsley, and lots of greens... though I'll  be glad to move onto this year's crops, soon.   

So I make probably 95% of our cooking every meal from scratch and compost a huge amount.   Buy little by way of processed food, so there's little plastic or cardboard redundant packaging.  We have so little in our bins every week that one of my single neighbours just chucks his stuff in our bin, thus also saving a double pick-up by the bin men.

My sports are running and taking people up Scottish hills which depend more on my energy expenditure than that of a machine - and require no profligate  building of special venues.

As a Londoner (with my travelFreedom pass), I use public transport a helluva lot.

For a bit of my work, I drive a bus with tourists on it - thus reducing their carbon use.

However, in fact,  I do travel a lot.  And I have no NEED  to do so.

I fly hither and thither, up to Edinburgh or Inverness.  Drive down to Dorset or Cornwall.  Use Waitrose...  

Off to Lanzarote this week, Italy a fortnight or so later.  Did Nova Scotia last year - and places such as the Galapagos, California and Norway and Svalbard recently.  All because I can and because it interests me.  My wummin is talking this year about Easter Island and also Antarctica, but... meh...

If Governments seriously wanted such travel to stop, they wouldn't want to build new airports and more motorways, they could invest in efficient railways and other public transport .  I'd understand that and cut my cloth accordingly.

So, in fact, I DON'T personally care.  As I have already stated -  did you not read my recent posts here?  Just jumping in with incomplete, fragmented knowledge, as usual?  

As I pointed out in my initial post in this little flourish of the thread - this world will see me out.  I have no brood coming up to replicate me, that I need have concerns about. However, I know that this attitude is wrong and the morality is also.

More importantly, I don't need to be a practising ascetic before bawheids and blowhards can decide whether or not I am permitted to pontificate on this or any subject. 

 

 

I hope this helps?

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by antrin

[oaksoft]

6 hours ago, antrin said:

I have 2 allotments and a huge garden.  Still eating our own 2019's  spuds, butternut squash, onions, garlic, leeks, parsnips, carrots, chilli, parsley, and lots of greens... though I'll  be glad to move onto this year's crops, soon.   

So I make probably 95% of our cooking every meal from scratch and compost a huge amount.   Buy little by way of processed food, so there's little plastic or cardboard redundant packaging.  We have so little in our bins every week that one of my single neighbours just chucks his stuff in our bin, thus also saving a double pick-up by the bin men.

My sports are running and taking people up Scottish hills which depend more on my energy expenditure than that of a machine - and require no profligate  building of special venues.

As a Londoner (with my travelFreedom pass), I use public transport a helluva lot.

For a bit of my work, I drive a bus with tourists on it - thus reducing their carbon use.

However, in fact,  I do travel a lot.  And I have no NEED  to do so.

I fly hither and thither, up to Edinburgh or Inverness.  Drive down to Dorset or Cornwall.  Use Waitrose...  

Off to Lanzarote this week, Italy a fortnight or so later.  Did Nova Scotia last year - and places such as the Galapagos, California and Norway and Svalbard recently.  All because I can and because it interests me.  My wummin is talking this year about Easter Island and also Antarctica, but... meh...

If Governments seriously wanted such travel to stop, they wouldn't want to build new airports and more motorways, they could invest in efficient railways and other public transport .  I'd understand that and cut my cloth accordingly.

So, in fact, I DON'T personally care.  As I have already stated -  did you not read my recent posts here?  Just jumping in with incomplete, fragmented knowledge, as usual?  

As I pointed out in my initial post in this little flourish of the thread - this world will see me out.  I have no brood coming up to replicate me, that I need have concerns about. However, I know that this attitude is wrong and the morality is also.

More importantly, I don't need to be a practising ascetic before bawheids and blowhards can decide whether or not I am permitted to pontificate on this or any subject. 

 

 

I hope this helps?

 

I have to say, that is a fantastic post.

Fair play for your honesty about not personally caring.

I agree that you don't have to justify your opinions by your actions. The two are separate.

It's an interesting read though.

I do have kids but I have no interest in having grandchildren so my personal skin in the game ends there.

I do like the overall idea of humans leaving as little behind as possible.

Our "contribution" to all this is to reduce our consumption of everything other than food and heating to practically zero. And I do mean zero. I have the exact same wardrobe I had 12 years ago and one coat which is hanging for dear life. We have not changed any furniture in the house for nearly 15 years. The walls and floorings are all unchanged for more than a decade. We do have quite a few cars but we rarely venture anywhere with them. It suits us to live this way but I wouldn't be preachy about others living differently.

The only problem I have with the main debate are the endless personal attacks on a 17 year old by predominantly old white misogynistic men.

Edited March 4, 2020 by oaksoft

[jaybee]

9 hours ago, antrin said:

10 hours ago, jaybee said:

Pray do tell, how coronavirus is relevant in a discussion re industrial pollution? 

I DID tell... but they seeing, see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand,  it seems.

You said, "This refers to all Nations reducing carbon emissions to zero NOW.  How exactly is that to be done whilst society and global economics continue?  It is pure and utter nonsense. "

I answered your question, "We seem to be taking Coronavirus seriously despite it wreaking economic and social havoc - what makes Coronavirus different from the destruction of our atmosphere?"

Then in your ineffable closed-mind style, you decided that my response should be ignored as it didn't fit how YOU thought the debate should be continued.(I suspect that was because you knew your arse had been handed on a plate.)

 

Governments are acting NOW with wide sweeping controls, cutbacks and that is impacting society and global economic life in order to mitigate the impact of a Human-impacting, transient virus-driven illness.  .  The same urgency must be taken NOW to stop a much more nefarious threat to the planet -  industrial pollution is actually killing all life on it.  Social and economic affairs are not worth a lot in a choking, dying world.

 

 

If I was religious, I might think that it's ok and I'll be fine in my next reincarnation or in an afterlife and so... wgaf about everyone else... but I'd prefer to  consider that when we knew what was coming down the track that we had taken action for the benefit of the coming generations. 

 

These explanations might work n YOUR world but they don't do much in mine

[jaybee]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

The only problem I have with the main debate are the endless personal attacks on a 17 year old by predominantly old white misogynistic men.

Do you REALLY not see the point regarding wee Greta? I mean I do not expect you to agree, no problem with that; everyone being entitled to their own view, BUT if you don't see the point then there really is no point debating with you because you are in effect a DUNDRHEID. 

[antrin]

7 hours ago, jaybee said:

These explanations might work n YOUR world but they don't do much in mine

I know.

Christ on a bike!

 

i said as much in my post that you quoted.   You have a closed mind.  Your arse is on a plate, cooked and going cold....

 

”Then in your ineffable closed-mind style, you decided that my response should be ignored as it didn't fit how YOU thought the debate should be continued.(I suspect that was because you knew your arse had been handed on a plate.)”

[Guest TPAFKATS]

I wasn't pontificating, just asking. I could have directed my question at anyone but I chose you. I hadn't read back beyond my first post - so no I wasn't aware you didn't care.  
I'm not a climate change denier. I believe the climate has always changed and I have no doubt that it would be changing regardless of what we do or don't do in our time on the planet. However I like to keep a neat, tidy and clean house, and by extension I would like to see our streets free of litter, and I'd like to breathe air that is clean and unpolluted. I am also deeply sceptical of the motives of political groups like Extinction Rebellion and I don't think Greta Thunberg has said anything enlightening on the subject at all. 
I've worked in the energy sector since I was 16 years old. I've worked on projects building the drilling ships / platforms and oil rigs that extract the fossil fuels that have brought in huge tax revenues over the years to the Scottish and UK economy and which are being blamed for polluting the planet. I've worked on projects at Grangemouth that enabled those large oil refineries to generate greater profits and tax revenues by making use of waste products from the refining process to create plastic pellets use to make - amongst many other things - plastic bags, straws and ear buds. 
Over the last 15 years I've seen my job evolve  into working for companies whose sole objective is to improve energy efficiency, reducing energy bills - and by extension the carbon footprint - of many multinational companies and of business places in both the private and public sector in the UK, Germany, France and now Italy. Yet despite huge success in what we are doing in the industrial sector we still see massive increases in energy consumption driven primarily by the insatiable demand for more and more consumer goods, items and services from the non industrial market. 
As people plug in their mobile phones, laptops, chargers, routers, TV boxes, and stream content from provides like IPTV, Netflix, Amazon, Apple and Disney they seem utterly oblivious to the fact that the National Grid is struggling to meet demand on a daily basis. People are fooled by the appearance of these stupid wind turbines believing that they are the solution to ever growing demand and of environmental groups claims that on a handful of days per year we can produce enough renewable energy - which includes the burning of wood chips imported from across the Atlantic, including from the deforestation of the Amazon - to supply the domestic market only. We've got mugs amongst us who believe that when they sign up to pay more for "green energy" that the grid somehow splits electricity into a green and a not so green channel depending on which energy company or package you've decided to pay your bills to. And they seem utterly oblivious to the fact that the only way we'd be able to meet the increased electrical demand that would be caused by 32.5 million car owners switching to electric vehicles would be if we built several more nuclear power stations to meet the demand. 
Well done on your self sustainability Antrin. You won't get any hypocritical criticism for me for your travel. When I fly to Hawai'i again this year for my holiday I'll be doing so with no guilt whatsoever knowing the part I've played all year in reducing energy emissions. I wonder just how many of these "environmentalists" on here have made any sacrifices at all. 

Apologies for quoting such a long post, but in the interests if accuracy I just wanted to point out that the oil and gas sector hasn't brought in "huge tax revenues over the years for the Scottish economy". All tax revenues have gone to the UK economy. That is now changing, slightly, however holyrood parliament will only have control over around 30% of tax.
Any benefit given back to Scotland over the decades has been at the behest of whatever government was in power at Westminster at the time.
I'm sure you know this and it was an oversight.

[jaybee]

3 hours ago, antrin said:

I know.

Christ on a bike!

 

i said as much in my post that you quoted.   You have a closed mind.  Your arse is on a plate, cooked and going cold....

 

”Then in your ineffable closed-mind style, you decided that my response should be ignored as it didn't fit how YOU thought the debate should be continued.(I suspect that was because you knew your arse had been handed on a plate.)”

Your style seems to be to constantly repeat yourself; whilst avoiding answering or explaining the nonsensical statements you make, ergo obfuscate, prevaricate and prefabricate are the order of the day in YOUR world.  Might you be an alias of Faraway man because your style is very familier, another weeeeeeeeeeeee wanker.

[antrin]

1 hour ago, jaybee said:

Your style seems to be to constantly repeat yourself; whilst avoiding answering or explaining the nonsensical statements you make, ergo obfuscate, prevaricate and prefabricate are the order of the day in YOUR world.  Might you be an alias of Faraway man because your style is very familier, another weeeeeeeeeeeee wanker.

My posts on this thread have had to be somewhat repetitive, precisely to get you to read the posts as you stated you have ignored the points I made.

Thus obfuscation, prevarication and prefabrication like the quoted post, here - are evidently YOUR style - as anyone who has read the dire thread will fully understand.

 

You have a closed mind.  You are a lost cause.

[oaksoft]

11 hours ago, jaybee said:

Do you REALLY not see the point regarding wee Greta? I mean I do not expect you to agree, no problem with that; everyone being entitled to their own view, BUT if you don't see the point then there really is no point debating with you because you are in effect a DUNDRHEID. 

 

1 hour ago, jaybee said:

Your style seems to be to constantly repeat yourself; whilst avoiding answering or explaining the nonsensical statements you make, ergo obfuscate, prevaricate and prefabricate are the order of the day in YOUR world.  Might you be an alias of Faraway man because your style is very familier, another weeeeeeeeeeeee wanker.

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not interested in any sort of discussion with someone who posts like that.

[faraway saint]

9 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

 

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not interested in any sort of discussion with someone who posts like that.

Hence why I've had him on ignore for ages.

Soon runs out if normal words then repeats drivel until you're forced to submit. 

[antrin]

11 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

 

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not interested in any sort of discussion with someone who posts like that.

I'm actually a little sad.

I'd genuinely hoped for some rational discussion and debate, some intellectual pushback..

It's so simply head in the sand...  

[jaybee]

30 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

 

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not interested in any sort of discussion with someone who posts like that.

GOOD, then simply stop responding to me or making negative comments about something I post and NOT expecting me to reply

 

20 minutes ago, antrin said:

33 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

 

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not interested in any sort of discussion with someone who posts like that.

I'm actually a little sad.

I'd genuinely hoped for some rational discussion and debate, some intellectual pushback..

It's so simply head in the sand...  

The problem with certain individuals obvious lack of intellect, is that those who have a degree of intellect; use it to argue, explain and enlighten those other individuals who are .....................lacking, and do NOT simply re-post the same and add an emojo or two for effect.

[antrin]

11 minutes ago, jaybee said:

The problem with certain individuals obvious lack of intellect, is that those who have a degree of intellect; use it to argue, explain and enlighten those other individuals who are .....................lacking, and do NOT simply re-post the same and add an emojo or two for effect.

Nope. Incomprehensible.

This not English - as I understand it.  Sorry.  Does not compute.

 

 

Also I have never added pix of an electric bike(or even two electric bikes) for effect, or otherwise.