leicsmac

I can certainly understand the frustration faced when people think anecdotes trump scientific data And if a worker is at least mostly as productive while doing so, an employer should offer that right IMO.

Really. I mean, is there anyone with a modicum of awareness of the topic who doesn't know where that train of thought terminates?

This. And as if productivity by itself without considering how the welfare of workers affects it is the sole (or even most important) arbiter of the success of a business anyway.

On his daughters’ response, [Sunak] said it was “absolutely wrong” to describe what he was doing as “watering down” climate targets. “Our commitment to net zero… remains.” Again, prove it quantitatively rather than just saying it as if it's true, please. NB. At least he's overstepped the NIMBY's and scrapped the ban on onshore wind farms and is (slowly) starting the ball rolling on fission plants.

Yeah, it's an obvious ploy for the upcoming election. It's ridiculous and counterproductive for the reasons stated earlier in this thread, of course.

If its any consolation, the laws of thermodynamics will see right through it. And punish it.

Vested interests making too much off renting office space.

I'm curious, is the opinion here that both the sharp increase in carbon emissions since the start of the real industrial revolution and the commensurate increase in global average temperature alongside it is (mostly) coincidental and natural, then?

I have no reason to doubt your observations regarding the heating industry and what they think of the targets that were set and how unrealistic they think they are - and they should know. However, the big thing is that the Earth may well not offer the UK (or everywhere else) the time for a more "realistic" transition. And it has the casting vote, if what it can do in terms of flooding, drought, famine and general misery (as well as the very human response when things get tough) is anything to go by. Solutions need to be applied, rapidly, and both industry and government need to work together to get them to be effective. NB. Sunak says that these changes will not have an effect on the UK achieving net zero carbon emissions by the set targets. I'd like him to explain and prove this quantitatively rather than offering soundbites.

I can see where you're coming from here, but quite frankly the softly-softly approach has been tried by the scientific community for the last three decades (at least) and what we have to show for it is where we are - not enough. So people in the know are beginning to get a little bit frayed, and are beginning to frame things in terms of accountability if things go wrong as well as what can be done to stop them from getting to that stage. I'd agree that the latter framing would be nicer, but once again: where has nice got us to up until now? Of course, the stick rather than the carrot may not produce the required action either, but I can certainly understand why people who have been pointing out a clear and obvious threat to human civilisation for a very long time are, as it is beginning to make itself felt in earnest, losing patience. NB. The contributions of human industrial activity from the early to mid 1800's to the present day have had a massively significant effect on carbon concentrations in the atmosphere and commensurate average temperature increase. The specific policies might well be viewed to be nonsensical. The issue they seek to address, and more importantly the consequences of not taking it seriously, most certainly isn't. Folks might want to parse the difference.

picardfacepalm.gif

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66854670 Climate change made the storm that devastated the Libyan city of Derna, killing thousands of people, up to 50 times more likely, experts say. Up to 50% more rain had fallen as a result of human-caused greenhouse-gas emissions, climate scientists at the World Weather Attribution group found. Great time for the current UK administration to roll back their pledges to address climate change, huh?

Democracy is the best form of government other than all the others that have been tried, but on very certain topics (bolded and italicised for emphasis) some peoples opinions (based on facts and expertise) are not only more worthy, but perhaps critical to the future. I say again: democracy is better than any other form of rule yet tried, but it does have weaknesses and one or two of them could be very large and critical ones.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66852329 Drivers have been warned of rising fuel costs after global oil prices surged to their highest level for 10 months. Brent crude, a benchmark for prices, breached $95 a barrel on Tuesday amid predictions of shorter supplies. It came as the International Energy Agency (IEA) said a decision by Saudi Arabia and Russia to cut production could cause a "significant supply shortfall" by the end of this year. The sooner the world is less reliant on this substance across the board, the better - economically, politically, and environmentally.

As other people have said, perhaps that is the exact reason - plus the easy money from those looking to satisfy their confirmation bias - that he has reinvented himself as conspiracy grifter in the first place.

These tech crime stories are invariably fascinating. And it's true that the flaw that allows most of the criminals to get in tends to be human, not technological.

Well, that's a proper deflected-off-the-strikers-arse-into-the-corner score, but England will take it.

This game has been really lacking in quality tbh.

Great result!

If Fiji don't win this it's going to haunt them for eternity.

I play a bit on chess.com, think there was a topic for this in gen chat but it's not been touched in a while. Like Zear0 I used to play a lot more seriously but now just online correspondence games. Also splurged on one of the Square Off boards where the pieces move by themselves. Gimmicky but cool.

... and the aviation and other transport industries need to clean up more. But, again, the biggest elephant in the room is power generation and that's the priority issue.

Or perhaps she isn't a neo-Luddite, but rather wants solutions that don't condemn us all while maintaining our current quality of life.

Yeah, this. The idea of someone being innocent until proven guilty is an important one in law and long should it remain, however that doesn't mean it should also apply to societal judgement all the time, especially in cases like sexual assault where the conviction rate is so low and therefore some people are pretty likely getting away with horrible crimes. Someone shouldn't be punished by the law unless a very high burden of proof is met - but what other people think about it all, they should be free to think, and judge, themselves. Rightly or wrongly.

Nah, all a "hoax" or nothing to worry about, apparently.