Also in the news

[urban.spaceman]

23 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Nope, they don't. They choose to for the most ignominious of reasons - money.

 

I'm not defending Corbyn, I'm pointing out that it is not more worthy of news than when all the other lying, self-serving hypocrites do it.

I do agree, and I’m certainly not comfortable with our dealings with the many regimes around the world. I’d argue that as Corbyn is now the leader of the opposition he IS more worthy of scrutiny than anyone else. Especially when more and more questionable behaviour and links keep coming out. 

[Carl the Llama]

3 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

I do agree, and I’m certainly not comfortable with our dealings with the many regimes around the world. I’d argue that as Corbyn is now the leader of the opposition he IS more worthy of scrutiny than anyone else. Especially when more and more questionable behaviour and links keep coming out. 

Moreso than the incumbent? 

[Dr The Singh]

7 hours ago, Buce said:

 

Nope, they don't. They choose to for the most ignominious of reasons - money.

 

I'm not defending Corbyn, I'm pointing out that it is not more worthy of news than when all the other lying, self-serving hypocrites do it.

It's a slow news day, Corbyn bashing is now applicable

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48081314

 

Fracking is only any good if the alternatives are worse - like classic oil, coal and gas extraction. Those are not the only alternatives.

[Buce]

 

Poll says "Two-thirds of people in the UK recognise there is a climate emergency and 76% say that they would cast their vote differently to protect the planet."

 

That's directly due to the Extinction Rebellion protests bringing the issue into the public arena.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/30/two-thirds-of-britons-agree-planet-is-in-a-climate-emergency

[Alf Bentley]

31 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Poll says "Two-thirds of people in the UK recognise there is a climate emergency and 76% say that they would cast their vote differently to protect the planet."

 

That's directly due to the Extinction Rebellion protests bringing the issue into the public arena.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/30/two-thirds-of-britons-agree-planet-is-in-a-climate-emergency

 

Interesting - and good that the issue is getting more attention.

 

Yet there has been no noticeable surge for the Greens in electoral polls. Would be interesting now to see one of those polls that asks people which issues are most important to them - to see whether climate change has moved up, or if issues like the economy, Brexit, tax/spend, health, education & immigration still dominate....

 

Part of me suspects that a lot of people answering that poll are giving "the right answer" to show that they are nice, caring people. After all, who wouldn't cast their vote differently to protect the planet?

Progress but not as much progress as that poll finding suggests? 

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Interesting - and good that the issue is getting more attention.

 

Yet there has been no noticeable surge for the Greens in electoral polls. Would be interesting now to see one of those polls that asks people which issues are most important to them - to see whether climate change has moved up, or if issues like the economy, Brexit, tax/spend, health, education & immigration still dominate....

 

Part of me suspects that a lot of people answering that poll are giving "the right answer" to show that they are nice, caring people. After all, who wouldn't cast their vote differently to protect the planet?

Progress but not as much progress as that poll finding suggests? 

 

At the very least it will give the bigger parties a reason - even if it isn't an altruistic one - to take climate change more seriously.

[Kopfkino]

11 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Yet there has been no noticeable surge for the Greens in electoral polls. Would be interesting now to see one of those polls that asks people which issues are most important to them - to see whether climate change has moved up, or if issues like the economy, Brexit, tax/spend, health, education & immigration still dominate....

 

Part of me suspects that a lot of people answering that poll are giving "the right answer" to show that they are nice, caring people. After all, who wouldn't cast their vote differently to protect the planet?

Progress but not as much progress as that poll finding suggests? 

The polling report itself doesn't show what the question, in fact it isn't available anywhere. I wonder why? Could it possibly be that it was very leading?

 

"All this bad stuff, do you agree that this is an emergency" And people are like shit yeah emergency. 

 

Can't wait for the Leave % on this Brexit poll

"The Germans are using the EU, the Euro and the EU to take over Europe, we must escape from this by leaving the EU, Agree?" 

 

Tbh the poll is terrible - 78% support a meat tax but 39% oppose, an impressive result I must say.

 

But what we do know is that people do care about the environment hence its ascent in voter priorities to be above housing and education, not far behind immigration, whilst its the second most important issue for U25s, only behind Brexit. The reason I'd suggest the Greens don't get more of the vote is partly electoral system and partly because its base is very narrow in the type of person it attracts whom are concentrated in places like Brighton, Oxford and Cambridge which drags the whole party towards appeasing those people's other priorities rather than being closer to a universal Green movement as in Germany.

[Alf Bentley]

6 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

At the very least it will give the bigger parties a reason - even if it isn't an altruistic one - to take climate change more seriously.

 

Hopefully so, but maybe only if they are convinced that climate change really does matter a lot to voters - and that voters are prepared to accept some of the costs and lifestyle changes implicit in making it a serious priority.

 

Political power is obtained and retained through short-term popularity. Whereas tackling climate change involves long-term action and long-term benefits....and often actions that are unpopular in the short-term.

 

I can imagine the bigger parties making the odd gesture, but are they prepared to take the risk of major, potentially unpopular initiatives: measures to discourage air flights or car use & encourage public transport, even greater investment in renewable energy schemes, discouraging red meat consumption and long-distance food imports etc? Electorally, that's very high-risk unless they're confident that enough voters are prepared to accept a bit of pain as well as telling pollsters that they're nice people....

 

The rapid rise of Farage's Brexit Party in the polls shows that strong support for a cause can switch votes quickly....yet the recent high profile of climate change doesn't seem to have had an equivalent impact.

 

I hope you're right and it does have an impact - either through greater support for parties that already make it a priority or through major parties making it a higher priority. 

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Hopefully so, but maybe only if they are convinced that climate change really does matter a lot to voters - and that voters are prepared to accept some of the costs and lifestyle changes implicit in making it a serious priority.

 

Political power is obtained and retained through short-term popularity. Whereas tackling climate change involves long-term action and long-term benefits....and often actions that are unpopular in the short-term.

 

I can imagine the bigger parties making the odd gesture, but are they prepared to take the risk of major, potentially unpopular initiatives: measures to discourage air flights or car use & encourage public transport, even greater investment in renewable energy schemes, discouraging red meat consumption and long-distance food imports etc? Electorally, that's very high-risk unless they're confident that enough voters are prepared to accept a bit of pain as well as telling pollsters that they're nice people....

 

The rapid rise of Farage's Brexit Party in the polls shows that strong support for a cause can switch votes quickly....yet the recent high profile of climate change doesn't seem to have had an equivalent impact.

 

I hope you're right and it does have an impact - either through greater support for parties that already make it a priority or through major parties making it a higher priority. 

This is all true - just how short-termism could prove to be very problematic.

 

The situation is, as always, the same, regardless of whatever some humans think - either pay now to help mitigate or defend against the problem (unpopular as it may be), or pay, much, much more - maybe everything - later to a much more unforgiving entity.

 

The choice is stark, the clock is ticking, and the price we would have to pay now to help keeps on going up as time goes by.

[Guest MattP]

9 hours ago, Buce said:

Poll says "Two-thirds of people in the UK recognise there is a climate emergency and 76% say that they would cast their vote differently to protect the planet."

 

That's directly due to the Extinction Rebellion protests bringing the issue into the public arena.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/30/two-thirds-of-britons-agree-planet-is-in-a-climate-emergency

Leaving aside how ridiculous some of that polling is - where is the evidence it's "directly" due to the extinction protests?

 

I'd say things like David Attenborough's documentaries have done more than anything over the last few years.

[yorkie1999]

We know the climate is changing and these people can protest as much as they like but if the Chinese and Americans ain’t listening, nothing will change. All that will happen in this country is the government will just increase taxes on bbq briquettes and Coca Cola bottles. How in a million years is that going to stop the yanks from increasing their coal usage by 50% over the next year as sanctioned by trump or the Chinese from consuming 1.2 BILLION tons of iron ore to produce all their steel products, which is probably more in one year than we used throughout the entire history of our industrial revolution.  The answer....it’s not and the sooner people start to realise this the sooner the problem can be addressed and people will stop conning themselves as to what can be done to slow global warming down. 

Edited 30 April 2019 by yorkie1999

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

We know the climate is changing and these people can protest as much as they like but if the Chinese and Americans ain’t listening, nothing will change. All that will happen in this country is the government will just increase taxes on bbq briquettes and Coca Cola bottles. How in a million years is that going to stop the yanks from increasing their coal usage by 50% over the next year as sanctioned by trump or the Chinese from consuming 1.2 BILLION tons of iron ore to produce all their steel products, which is probably more in one year than we used throughout the entire history of our industrial revolution.  The answer....it’s not and the sooner people start to realise this the sooner the problem can be addressed and people will stop conning themselves as to what can be done to slow global warming down. 

No disagreement that the footprint of the Chinese and the US vastly outstrips that of the UK, but two things:

 

- firstly, what they do is going to affect us anyway; the effects of what is happening now will be global

- secondly, with that known, what can be done about that? It's fine talking about the problem, but it's time to talk about the solution, too.

[Wymsey]

Free cash machines are on the decline.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48107372

[MC Prussian]

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

No disagreement that the footprint of the Chinese and the US vastly outstrips that of the UK, but two things:

 

- firstly, what they do is going to affect us anyway; the effects of what is happening now will be global

- secondly, with that known, what can be done about that? It's fine talking about the problem, but it's time to talk about the solution, too.

Well, as far as the ozone layer is concerned, it looks as if we're finally making progress.

https://phys.org/news/2018-11-earth-ozone-layer.html

 

So, it isn't all as bad as you're trying to make out. Not a big fan of the climate change hysteria.

 

Technological progress and a shift in consumer culture will do the rest.

As much as China or the US are leading the way in using up natural resources, the least we can do is continue walking on a more ecologial path.

They will get there eventually.

[Strokes]

1 hour ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Free cash machines are on the decline.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48107372

Nobody uses cash these days really.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

Nobody uses cash these days really.

 

I do.

 

I had my brakes and MOT done yesterday, and they only take cash.

[yorkie1999]

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

No disagreement that the footprint of the Chinese and the US vastly outstrips that of the UK, but two things:

 

- firstly, what they do is going to affect us anyway; the effects of what is happening now will be global

- secondly, with that known, what can be done about that? It's fine talking about the problem, but it's time to talk about the solution, too.

But we're not talking about the real problem though are we. World leaders and people in power who are actually interested in reducing carbon emissions etc should be forcing the chinese and americans to drastically reduce their industrial output by embargoes and vastly increased import duties to force them to reduce their output , but they won't, a) because they can't and b) because they're too scared of the consequences. They're just paying lip service to their voters. It's all very well and good a bunch of school kids going on strike or a bunch of hippies gluing themselves to the streets of london and making everyone aware of a problem that everyone already knows is a problem but do the Chinese actually give 2 shits about that. 

[leicsmac]

22 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Well, as far as the ozone layer is concerned, it looks as if we're finally making progress.

https://phys.org/news/2018-11-earth-ozone-layer.html

 

So, it isn't all as bad as you're trying to make out. Not a big fan of the climate change hysteria.

 

Technological progress and a shift in consumer culture will do the rest.

As much as China or the US are leading the way in using up natural resources, the least we can do is continue walking on a more ecologial path.

They will get there eventually.

The release of CFCs being reasonable for ozone layer depletion and other emissions being responsible for climate change being two completely different matters notwithstanding, the exact reason action to repair the ozone layer was so successful was that legislation was passed that *everyone* stuck to regarding getting rid of CFCs - exactly what is *not* happening now wrt climate change.

 

If you think the current complaints are hysteria then fair enough, I think the current data regarding carbon dioxide and temperature increases speaks for itself and the reply is that your own stance, as well of that of many others, is complacent in the extreme and indicative of an attitude willing to gamble with the future because the present is comfortable.

 

Perhaps you're right and they will get there in their own time, but pardon me if I'm not willing to bet the future of human civilisation on that being the case.

 

7 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

But we're not talking about the real problem though are we. World leaders and people in power who are actually interested in reducing carbon emissions etc should be forcing the chinese and americans to drastically reduce their industrial output by embargoes and vastly increased import duties to force them to reduce their output , but they won't, a) because they can't and b) because they're too scared of the consequences. They're just paying lip service to their voters. It's all very well and good a bunch of school kids going on strike or a bunch of hippies gluing themselves to the streets of london and making everyone aware of a problem that everyone already knows is a problem but do the Chinese actually give 2 shits about that. 

Right, once again, the problem is there. But what is the solution? How can the big players be talked around to give two shits about the future?

 

I haven't got an answer to that one tbh.

[yorkie1999]

26 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Well, as far as the ozone layer is concerned, it looks as if we're finally making progress.

https://phys.org/news/2018-11-earth-ozone-layer.html

 

So, it isn't all as bad as you're trying to make out. Not a big fan of the climate change hysteria.

 

Technological progress and a shift in consumer culture will do the rest.

As much as China or the US are leading the way in using up natural resources, the least we can do is continue walking on a more ecologial path.

They will get there eventually.

Could have been our excessive use of cfc's but i think the hole in the ozane layer was more likely caused by testing things like the Tsar bomb directly in the middle of the earths ozone layer. Can of hair spray or one of these babies going off and they blame the hairspray. Bit of a coincidence isn't it.

 

[yorkie1999]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

The release of CFCs being reasonable for ozone layer depletion and other emissions being responsible for climate change being two completely different matters notwithstanding, the exact reason action to repair the ozone layer was so successful was that legislation was passed that *everyone* stuck to regarding getting rid of CFCs - exactly what is *not* happening now wrt climate change.

 

If you think the current complaints are hysteria then fair enough, I think the current data regarding carbon dioxide and temperature increases speaks for itself and the reply is that your own stance, as well of that of many others, is complacent in the extreme and indicative of an attitude willing to gamble with the future because the present is comfortable.

 

Perhaps you're right and they will get there in their own time, but pardon me if I'm not willing to bet the future of human civilisation on that being the case.

 

Right, once again, the problem is there. But what is the solution? How can the big players be talked around to give two shits about the future?

 

I haven't got an answer to that one tbh.

Well for a start, the rest of the world could refuse to buy chinese or american goods, refuse to sell them any raw materials and ban all their citizens from entering countries that are committed to reducing pollution. 

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Well for a start, the rest of the world could refuse to buy chinese or american goods, refuse to sell them any raw materials and ban all their citizens from entering countries that are committed to reducing pollution. 

 

Ostracise them?

 

I actually like that idea.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Well for a start, the rest of the world could refuse to buy chinese or american goods, refuse to sell them any raw materials and ban all their citizens from entering countries that are committed to reducing pollution. 

 

3 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Ostracise them?

 

I actually like that idea.

As much as the idealist in me would love to see that - seriously, it would make my day - the cynic in me thinks that they are too big to do something like that effectively. Damn shame.

[yorkie1999]

19 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Ostracise them?

 

I actually like that idea.

Have a word with corbyn then, he's a man that's umping on the bandwagon at the moment to increase his popularity, a man that represents a party that was set up to basically represent the rights and interests of an industrial nations workers.

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Have a word with corbyn then, he's a man that's umping on the bandwagon at the moment to increase his popularity, a man that represents a party that was set up to basically represent the rights and interests of an industrial nations workers.

 

I dispute the premise that we are an industrial nation. 

 

That woman put paid to that.