leicsmac

Nor do I, for pretty much the same reason - if their purpose is to get public opinion in favour of the action they want then what they are doing now is totally counterproductive. It's reasonably obvious that negative reinforcement of that type (as opposed to positive) is only really effective when you have much more power than they do. But, at the same time, like you, I think the current positive reinforcement alternatives that are happening are not effective enough and are too slow, so I'm buggered to think what would be effective either, short of a bunch of the guys storming a nuclear launch control centre, getting the launch codes and holding the world to ransom for the next few decades.

If the point here is that other entities and individuals with more power share the lions share of the responsibility, then I agree. However for me the best way (and possibly the only way that is truly effective over time) to hold those powerful entities to account in a democratic society is through individuals leading with their vote and their wallet, if they can.

I think I get where you're driving at here mate, but I'm not 100% certain, so would you elaborate if you wish to?

Korean ladies ruling the roost in archery as always, then.

Without a doubt. It has recovered from comparable events before. But it would be a truly sad thing to have that be the legacy of our species, and if things go sideways and anyone is left, I would hope they hold everyone who either wouldn't bother or thought it was an "inevitability" in the lowest, lowest possible contempt - and if any of those people were left, hold them accountable in the harshest possible way.

There are far too many people not taking it seriously enough, yes. But one way or another, there needs to be a way for enough people with the power to act to take it seriously. Otherwise we're simply accepting at best the deaths of hundreds of millions of and at worst the downfall of human civilisation itself on a timeline in our own lifetime as a fait accompli. Which is, needless to say, unacceptable to anyone with a conscience.

You are doing the right things, yes. In addition, more indirect action would work - if you can, lobby your MP and vote to push along green projects in Parliament, and to get foreign policy priorities for pushing other nations to do the same. Again, it may seem small, but lots of people doing the same would have an effect. Additionally, people are talking about difficult refugee issues on the AITN thread now - climate change will make that an order of magnitude, several orders of magnitude, worse. Do the people worried about such issues really want that? Do they really feel it would be a morally acceptable time to close things up and watch hundreds of millions of people die? Would that death toll (and that's the lowest estimate) really have no indirect or direct effect on the UK anyway? Unless one is a sadist who is OK with the thought of a vast amount of "foreigners" dying, then doing what one can to allay this issue before it gets to a truly consequential stage should be a priority for anyone concerned about immigration policy.

Sadly not a new phenomenon that. Good day for GB so far though.

Exactly so. Also, people have no idea just how complex (and sensitive to disruption) the mechanics of civilisation are. As a species, we're just a weeks worth of missed meals from Mad Max.

It is. But the day folks give up is the day that we truly are screwed. So don't.

Water, for drinking and crop providence, will become a massive flash point in the near future unless measures are taken. People think there is a refugee crisis now... imagine a billion plus people in equatorial regions who will no longer have sources of food and potable water. And that might be just the start of the upheaval. As per above, we as a species have the power to solve these problems. So do what we can to ensure that we do.

Glad to hear from you guys. Tbf China are beginning to turn things around (last year they installed more solar panels than the USA has done over its entire history), but other places like India and Russia need to step up, rapidly. We do need to try, all of us, and I wish people would become more involved and view this as a priority issue and do what they can (involvement in the policymaking process regarding it, for instance) wherever they can, because it's the only way we might avoid a very dark future. People need to fight the good fight, rather than fatalistic acceptance of bad times to come, because that outlook only guarantees such an outcome. I do agree with you about the acts of JSO being counterproductive. It really doesn't help. But rather than talk about that, I wish people would talk about what would work. That's pretty astute, yes. But everyone does need to fight the good fight, as per above. It would be deeply sad to be remembered by what remains of humanity as the ones who destroyed pretty much everything that came before them. Do what you can, where you can. No matter how small.

...I would again invite @Kisnorbo fox, @Babylon and @Trav Le Bleu, as well as other interested parties in the actions of rather ridiculous protesters, here to discuss the nature of the problem as well as the solution, rather than just a bunch of idiots making noise mostly for the sake of self-gratification. Always good to talk about this problem - it is rather big.

Exactly this. And oddly enough, I don't hear much from people disparaging these people (rightfully so) on what would work in terms of averting the catastrophe that is coming. Perhaps that might be a better topic of conversation?

Mosquitoes. The only species on this planet where I would advocate for total eradication, and with good reason.

That will almost certainly be a massive problem, yes. But then I just hope we're ready for novel diseases too, as well as whatever else the natural world has to test us with.

Fair enough. My own point in return is, as above, to be wary of underestimating acts of nature and that perhaps some people should take what it can do in the future a bit more seriously than they did with Covid, because the next time such complacency might come with a much, much stiffer penalty.

... and there has also been lots of reasonable back and forth on the topic here. Thankfully, this particular shot across the bows of our civilisation from the natural world was one that, thanks to hard work and some luck, we managed to deal with enough that we can have this kind of discussion on this platform about it afterwards. The next one might be a larger, more accurate shot.

Might be some spillover into the SciTech and CC thread if that happens. Not sure if that's a good or a bad thing.

If I'm being hypercritical, 59.03 to win gold is a time that Peaty would best in his sleep four years ago and beat handily in his heat and semifinal. But after all he's gone through this past year or two, silver isn't bad.

Fair enough. My own thoughts on the topic is that while that last sentence is well meaning, it ends with a world where no one is invalidated but no one is right, and on certain topics where swift and unified action is a necessity, such as more than one scientific issue, that leads nowhere good.

82 the target in the end, and Stokes exercising captains prerogative to open and do the job himself.

@MarshallForEngland and @Kisnorbo fox... If I may, the problem with the occlusion of opinion and fact that goes on often via the Internet is that people not only apply it to issues like the one in the AITN thread, but also to matters like the ones expressed above. That has obvious and well documented negative consequences when it is applied to democratic policy on science. What, exactly, I wonder, is the solution there? Or should we even bother to fix it at all?

Yeah, looks like it, but perhaps they will stagger to something a little over 100. Really shouldn't be a problem chase.

Also Ireland just beat Zimbabwe in their solo Test