Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Wymsey

Extinction Rebellion

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Lewis Hamilton the next celebrity to tell us we need to change our lifestyle in order to reduce climate change and save the planet. 

 

No, this isn’t a joke, he actually said this. 

lol I've just read it, "we need to change to a vegan diet to save the planet" - lol

 

Tell you what we can also do Lewis, not buy a fleet of automobiles with our millions, run off to tax havens and own a private jet to fly to work burning fuel for 50 hours a week.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Lewis Hamilton the next celebrity to tell us we need to change our lifestyle in order to reduce climate change and save the planet. 

 

No, this isn’t a joke, he actually said this. 

 

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

lol I've just read it, "we need to change to a vegan diet to save the planet" - lol

 

Tell you what we can also do Lewis, not buy a fleet of automobiles with our millions, run off to tax havens and own a private jet to fly to work burning fuel for 50 hours a week.

:facepalm:Another distinct "Stop Helping Me" situation right there.

 

The whole situation really needs some kind of science communicator figure to come to the fore, break it down in detail for people and lay out the science as simply add possible and then say "here's what needs to be done, now hold your government accountable to get it done."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

:facepalm:Another distinct "Stop Helping Me" situation right there.

 

The whole situation really needs some kind of science communicator figure to come to the fore, break it down in detail for people and lay out the science as simply add possible and then say "here's what needs to be done, now hold your government accountable to get it done."

If you think Lewis Hamilton saying that is helping people, you are actively signing the death warrant of your cause. This is pure gaslighting.

Every day that goes by now I'm starting more and more to think this is actually nothing to do with climate change and more the rich wanting to enforce a lifestyle onto the poor, aided and abetted by those still believing the jet set and their ilk actually do care, it's not going to work this way - either we all sacrifice or none of us do. I'd rather extinction than go the Lewis Hamilton route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MattP said:

If you think Lewis Hamilton saying that is helping people, you are actively signing the death warrant of your cause. This is pure gaslighting.

Every day that goes by now I'm starting more and more to think this is actually nothing to do with climate change and more the rich wanting to enforce a lifestyle onto the poor, aided and abetted by those still believing the jet set and their ilk actually do care, it's not going to work this way - either we all sacrifice or none of us do. I'd rather extinction than go the Lewis Hamilton route.

No, it's the name of a trope, I quoted it a few pages back - talking about someone well meaning looking to add something to a cause but actually doing the opposite. Exactly as Lewis is doing here.

 

WRT the second paragraph, the whole point about this is that things should be able to change without people having to sacrifice anything in terms of actual lifestyle level - it's damn frustrating that message has been hijacked by neo-Luddites (I'm having to use that term so often) saying that we have to cut back drastically when it simply isn't true if it's all handled properly.

 

If I didn't know better, I'd start to think more and more that certain folks are *only* listening to the aforementioned neo-Luddites because I their arguments are fallacious and much easier to dismiss.

 

NB. Ask what ideology, rich or poor, means to the dead (or the dying). Oddly enough, they don't often have much to say about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And reposting this to lay out what exactly the current situation is:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49753680

 

Carping on about XR and the like makes for good low hanging fruit, but perhaps some discussion about what people would actually accept as a solution to this (if anything) might be nice?

Edited by leicsmac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

WRT the second paragraph, the whole point about this is that things should be able to change without people having to sacrifice anything in terms of actual lifestyle level - it's damn frustrating that message has been hijacked by neo-Luddites (I'm having to use that term so often) saying that we have to cut back drastically when it simply isn't true if it's all handled properly.

 

If I didn't know better, I'd start to think more and more that certain folks are *only* listening to the aforementioned neo-Luddites because I their arguments are fallacious and much easier to dismiss.

 

NB. Ask what ideology, rich or poor, means to the dead (or the dying). Oddly enough, they don't often have much to say about it.

You again seem to be assuming anyone who picks up on these people don't want to do anything - I fully accept the climate scientists at the UN who have set the target of 2050 to be carbon neutral and I'll do everything I can to help that.

I'm furious with the ER movement because I know how it ends up, we've got a man on TV today pretending to a Brocolli and now "animal rebeliion" starting up - I don't particulary want to be going to prison for beating up someone trying to stop me buying some meat.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And reposting this to lay out what exactly the current situation is:

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49753680

 

Carping on about XR and the like makes for good low hanging fruit, but perhaps some discussion about what people would actually accept as a solution to this (if anything) might be nice?

Anything thats:

 

Fair 

Universal

Proportionate to the perceived threat

 

The trouble is you will be hard pressed to find many (if any) solutions that tick all of those boxes. The most recent one I've seen banded around is a red meat tax, great in theory, like the Scottish drinking tax, it will undoubtedly lower the consumption, but aiming fire at those of lesser means will bring resentment and resistance. 

 

So you end up with a chicken and egg scenario, you need everyone together, but to get everyone together you need someone to lead the way.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, MattP said:

You again seem to be assuming anyone who picks up on these people don't want to do anything - I fully accept the climate scientists at the UN who have set the target of 2050 to be carbon neutral and I'll do everything I can to help that.

I'm furious with the ER movement because I know how it ends up, we've got a man on TV today pretending to a Brocolli and now "animal rebeliion" starting up - I don't particulary want to be going to prison for beating up someone trying to stop me buying some meat.

they could beat you to death with an onion and then eat the evidence, the perfect crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it's childish when you're almost 40 but I've got this weird psychological flaw, the more forcefully I'm told to do something the more I rebel, it started off by not rinsing my recycling, now I just lash most things in the green bin and leave fan heaters pumping out, out of pure pettiness!

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

No, it's the name of a trope, I quoted it a few pages back - talking about someone well meaning looking to add something to a cause but actually doing the opposite. Exactly as Lewis is doing here.

 

WRT the second paragraph, the whole point about this is that things should be able to change without people having to sacrifice anything in terms of actual lifestyle level - it's damn frustrating that message has been hijacked by neo-Luddites (I'm having to use that term so often) saying that we have to cut back drastically when it simply isn't true if it's all handled properly.

 

If I didn't know better, I'd start to think more and more that certain folks are *only* listening to the aforementioned neo-Luddites because I their arguments are fallacious and much easier to dismiss.

 

NB. Ask what ideology, rich or poor, means to the dead (or the dying). Oddly enough, they don't often have much to say about it.

 

Why people are so caught up in groupthink and herd behaviour?

 

Because they are bored as ****. And the activism feeds that emptiness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So ER fight against being redirected and protests broken up based on Section 14 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/14), which is perfectly legal?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/15/extinction-rebellion-protest-ban-chilling-assault-on-civil-rights

 

Hold a protest, get tolerated for a while out of courtesy, then make a fuss about getting arrested or removed because it infringes other peoples' rights... You couldn't make it up.

Edited by MC Prussian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MattP said:

IMG_20191016_085816.jpg

Classic GMB getting this twat on breakfast TV as an easy target for Morgan to yell at, rather than getting someone informed on the matter for a proper discussion.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RonnieTodger said:

Classic GMB getting this twat on breakfast TV as an easy target for Morgan to yell at, rather than getting someone informed on the matter for a proper discussion.

It's hard to find someone informed from that organised.

 

They've got Rupert Read who does a fairly decent job of it but aside from that they are in general totally useless, sending Zion Lights onto Andrew Neil showed that - if she's the second in command then extinction starts to look pretty attractive in comparison. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EastAnglianFox said:

Im at a loss as to why Extinction Rebellion are seen as the laughing stock of the country.

They did try and ask some serious questions, this was his response.

 

 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MattP said:

You again seem to be assuming anyone who picks up on these people don't want to do anything - I fully accept the climate scientists at the UN who have set the target of 2050 to be carbon neutral and I'll do everything I can to help that.

I'm furious with the ER movement because I know how it ends up, we've got a man on TV today pretending to a Brocolli and now "animal rebeliion" starting up - I don't particulary want to be going to prison for beating up someone trying to stop me buying some meat.

...hence my careful use of "If I didn't know any better" as a qualifier. Of course there is space for a more nuanced debate and thankfully it pops up even on here from time to time, but just as XR are perceived to be the empty vessels making the most noise on one side, the flat-out deniers and ignorers stepping up to the plate in response seem to be likewise the loudest and most heard on the other.

 

As I said above, the whole thing does desperately need a cooler scientific head who is able to break things down on TV for everyone to see and recognise.

 

 

4 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Anything thats:

 

Fair 

Universal

Proportionate to the perceived threat

 

The trouble is you will be hard pressed to find many (if any) solutions that tick all of those boxes. The most recent one I've seen banded around is a red meat tax, great in theory, like the Scottish drinking tax, it will undoubtedly lower the consumption, but aiming fire at those of lesser means will bring resentment and resistance. 

 

So you end up with a chicken and egg scenario, you need everyone together, but to get everyone together you need someone to lead the way.

 

Thank you for coming in with that.

 

I think fair and universal taxes to help continue to get renewable energy generation (and Gen III/IV fission), transportation and the like off the ground and into society are all three of those things. Restricting animal agriculture is a hot button issue because it's perceived to be "taking something away" (and has less emissions compared to either energy generation or transportation) so I actually wouldn't address that using government intervention for now; wait for synthesised meats to become more market-ready and then let the market do the job.

 

Your last sentence is sadly spot on...again, hence the need for some kind of figurehead to be able to explain to people why these measures are important, why it won't actually hurt them, and why they should be implemented.

 

 

4 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Why people are so caught up in groupthink and herd behaviour?

 

Because they are bored as ****. And the activism feeds that emptiness.

TBH I think that times of stress tend to breed herd behaviour and groupthink more than times of boredom (boredom tends to result in more individual acting-out IMO), but that's me.

 

In any case, fast forward a few decades with a billion climate refugees all wanting to flee to somewhere that actually has a reasonable supply of potable water and the ability to grow crops and folks in the nations they're fleeing to might actually long for the times when they were bored.

Edited by leicsmac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, shade said:

I know it's childish when you're almost 40 but I've got this weird psychological flaw, the more forcefully I'm told to do something the more I rebel, it started off by not rinsing my recycling, now I just lash most things in the green bin and leave fan heaters pumping out, out of pure pettiness!

 

Hey look everybody we've got an edgy dude here!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

:facepalm:Another distinct "Stop Helping Me" situation right there.

 

The whole situation really needs some kind of science communicator figure to come to the fore, break it down in detail for people and lay out the science as simply add possible and then say "here's what needs to be done, now hold your government accountable to get it done."

As has already been said, climate change is an issue and we can all do more. If you think people like Lewis Hamilton, who flew his dog around the world to be with him because he was missing him, telling people how to live is going to make a difference then it's you who's missing the point.

 

As Matt says, all these celebs seem to want to live a certain lifestyle, while we all make sacrifices. It should be them making sacrifices to start with. If Lewis Hamilton said he was giving up motor racing and would now travel everywhere only by electric car and plane I would start to take him a lot more seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

As has already been said, climate change is an issue and we can all do more. If you think people like Lewis Hamilton, who flew his dog around the world to be with him because he was missing him, telling people how to live is going to make a difference then it's you who's missing the point.

 

As Matt says, all these celebs seem to want to live a certain lifestyle, while we all make sacrifices. It should be them making sacrifices to start with. If Lewis Hamilton said he was giving up motor racing and would now travel everywhere only by electric car and plane I would start to take him a lot more seriously.

 

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

No, it's the name of a trope, I quoted it a few pages back - talking about someone well meaning looking to add something to a cause but actually doing the opposite. Exactly as Lewis is doing here.

 

WRT the second paragraph, the whole point about this is that things should be able to change without people having to sacrifice anything in terms of actual lifestyle level - it's damn frustrating that message has been hijacked by neo-Luddites (I'm having to use that term so often) saying that we have to cut back drastically when it simply isn't true if it's all handled properly.

 

If I didn't know better, I'd start to think more and more that certain folks are *only* listening to the aforementioned neo-Luddites because I their arguments are fallacious and much easier to dismiss.

 

NB. Ask what ideology, rich or poor, means to the dead (or the dying). Oddly enough, they don't often have much to say about it.

 

I'm definitely not thinking that Lewis is helping out here, as borne out by the bolded in my reply to Matt.

 

For every celeb out there saying that we have to cut back, there's a scientist more familiar with the situation saying that if the right action is taken over the right amount of time, there is simply no need to. I do wish people would listen to the latter more than the former - though again, as above, both extremes in terms of the neo-Luddites and the deniers/ignorers are tending to make the most noise and therefore get the most attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

 

I'm definitely not thinking that Lewis is helping out here, as borne out by the bolded in my reply to Matt.

 

For every celeb out there saying that we have to cut back, there's a scientist more familiar with the situation saying that if the right action is taken over the right amount of time, there is simply no need to. I do wish people would listen to the latter more than the former - though again, as above, both extremes in terms of the neo-Luddites and the deniers/ignorers are tending to make the most noise and therefore get the most attention.

Yes I definitely agree there. On the whole something needs doing, but these celebs virtue signalling does nothing for the cause, especially not with the lifestyles that they lead. In my opinion the 2050 target that has been set should be aimed at and hopefully achieved.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

As has already been said, climate change is an issue and we can all do more. If you think people like Lewis Hamilton, who flew his dog around the world to be with him because he was missing him, telling people how to live is going to make a difference then it's you who's missing the point.

 

As Matt says, all these celebs seem to want to live a certain lifestyle, while we all make sacrifices. It should be them making sacrifices to start with. If Lewis Hamilton said he was giving up motor racing and would now travel everywhere only by electric car and plane I would start to take him a lot more seriously.

You totally missed the point of what @leicsmac was saying. He is actually saying the opposite.

Edited by WigstonWanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...