Extinction Rebellion

[Raj]

31 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Refuse to buy Chinese goods.

 

6 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Jump off the nearest bridge. Less people, less pollution. Pretty simple stuff. 

 

Or fly to China/America and protest there. 

 So there you have it.

No tangible options are there?

Think again 

 

Edited 26 August 2021 by Raj

[leicsmac]

Incidentally and in the name of balance, the term "extinction" being used in this situational context is wildly overstating the matter - barring some incredibly unfortunate confluence of circumstances, climate change won't make humanity extinct by itself.

 

It could, however, put us in a situation where civilisation is set back hundreds of years, which might be better off avoided.

[WigstonWanderer]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Incidentally and in the name of balance, the term "extinction" being used in this situational context is wildly overstating the matter - barring some incredibly unfortunate confluence of circumstances, climate change won't make humanity extinct by itself.

 

It could, however, put us in a situation where civilisation is set back hundreds of years, which might be better off avoided.

Doesn’t the term extinction in this context refer to other species going extinct on our watch?

 

Also, if industrial society were to collapse, I can’t imagine how it would recover when all the easily available energy and other resources have already been consumed.

Edited 26 August 2021 by WigstonWanderer

[leicsmac]

Just now, WigstonWanderer said:

Doesn’t the term extinction in this context refer to other species going extinct on our watch?

Good question - I'm not sure.

 

We are certainly causing an extinction event of other species purely by ourselves and the effect we have on the climate is only one way that's happening.

[Innovindil]

32 minutes ago, Raj said:

 

 So there you have it.

No tangible options are there?

Think again 

 

More effective than blocking roads and pissing people off tbh. 

[The People's Hero]

If humans didn't exist, there would still be extinctions. That is evolution and survival of the fittest in action. These things are fluid.

[Raj]

7 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

More effective than blocking roads and pissing people off tbh. 

Really?

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

If humans didn't exist, there would still be extinctions. That is evolution and survival of the fittest in action. These things are fluid.

Of course, there have been five big ones and many more smaller ones in the known history of complex life on Earth.

 

It would just be nice if the next one didn't happen on humanity's watch and wasn't their responsibility.

 

 

[The People's Hero]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Of course, there have been five big ones and many more smaller ones in the known history of complex life on Earth.

 

It would just be nice if the next one didn't happen on humanity's watch and wasn't their responsibility.

 

 

Its not 'on our watch' though is it really. You could argue that attempts to save species are meddlesome and unnatural; since perhaps they are just no longer viable? 

 

Its a bigger issue than I'm capable than speaking on with any real insight but extinctions have happened forever without us. 

 

As for extinction rebellion, I think people would have more concern and sympathy for their cause, if we didn't all know that one person who is likely a member, never washes and is a complete holier-than-thou bellend.

[SecretPro]

11 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Its not 'on our watch' though is it really. You could argue that attempts to save species are meddlesome and unnatural; since perhaps they are just no longer viable? 

 

Its a bigger issue than I'm capable than speaking on with any real insight but extinctions have happened forever without us. 

 

As for extinction rebellion, I think people would have more concern and sympathy for their cause, if we didn't all know that one person who is likely a member, never washes and is a complete holier-than-thou bellend.

Fact of the matter is, the 6th mass extinction is completely caused by human hand. People really don't consider the consequence of extinctions. Extinction will always happen with evolution, but on a recoverable scale. Regardless, scientists agree that today's extinction rate is hundreds, or even thousands, of times higher than the natural baseline rate. Judging from the fossil record, the baseline extinction rate is about one species per every one million species per year; we are currently losing between 200 and 2,000 species every year and that directly affects us.

 

In the words of one of the all-time greats, Edward O Wilson "If all mankind were to disappear, the world would regenerate back to the rich state of equilibrium that existed ten thousand years ago. If insects were to vanish, the environment would collapse into chaos". Given invertebrate extinctions are currenlty the highest of the lot (Europe alone has lost upto 60-70% biodiversity in it's flying insects in the last 40 years, and prior to that who knows because we are already measuring on shifted base-lines and shifting baseline syndrome is a sickness that is used to under-estimate things these days) we are in real trouble.

 

Basically, if we did lose most of our invertebrates, humanity would be wiped out within 50 years. We are reaching a biodiveristy crisis point and people seem to forget that in all the talk of climate change, biodiversity loss/crisis is equally, if not even more dangerous.

Edited 26 August 2021 by SecretPro

[The People's Hero]

1 minute ago, SecretPro said:

Fact of the matter is, the 6th mass extinction is completely caused by human hand. People really don't consider the consequence of extinctions. Extinction will always happen with evolution, but on a recoverable scale. Regardless, scientists agree that today's extinction rate is hundreds, or even thousands, of times higher than the natural baseline rate. Judging from the fossil record, the baseline extinction rate is about one species per every one million species per year; we are currently losing between 200 and 2,000 species every year and that directly effects us.

 

In the words of one of the all-time great, Edward O Wilson "If all mankind were to disappear, the world would regenerate back to the rich state of equilibrium that existed ten thousand years ago. If insects were to vanish, the environment would collapse into chaos". Given invertebrate extinctions are currnelty the highest of the lot (europe alone has lost upto 70% of it's flying insects in the last 40 years, and prior to that who knows because we are already measuring on shifted base-lines and shifting baseline syndrome is a sickness that is used to under-estimate things these days.

 

Basically, if we did lose most of our invertebrates, humanity would be wiped out within 50 years. We are reaching a biodiveristy crisis point and people seme to forget that in all the talk of climate change, biodiversity loss/crisis is equally, if not even more dangerous.

Save a SWAN, CHAIN yourself to a PICKET FENCE and smother yourself in MARMITE.

 

You can come up with your own, just replace the words in capitals.

 

Point is that none of this is being reversed. Its not happening. I don't doubt that what you say is spot on, but if the Governments of the world and the various very powerful lobbying organisations and environmental movements and charities can't get themselves sorted out and co-ordinated, then I'm not sure what Graeme from Hampshire who has 2 O-Levels and used to be a bus-driver but quit that in fury that he was using fossil fuels and now just jabbers on endlessly about veganism and the evils of soap is going to do about it.

 

If this rag-tag collection of half-wits, attention seekers, anarchists or whatever you want to call them are so on the money, then why are non of the Governments or organisations doing anything about it? It just seems so unlikely.

 

I also realise there will be decent, intelligent, clean people involved in the movement; they just don't present themselves at these 'protests'. 

[FOXYTALK]

They could raise awareness through alternative means. Annoying commuters probably won't help there cause. Their is no simple solution. It requires everyone to do their bit regardless of class, race, gender etc. Countries should be unified in a global effort to reduce emissions. FOC advertisements/PR would be a good start and reach a further demographic. 

[David Guiza]

52 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Jump off the nearest bridge. Less people, less pollution. Pretty simple stuff. 

 

Or fly to China/America and protest there. 

Appreciate (or at least hope) that you're being somewhat tongue in cheek with this, but it's a genuine issue that numerous people have. Not so much the contemplation of suicide part, but whether or not to bring children into a dying and overpopulated world. 

 

My wife and I are fairly sure we want kids in the next 5 or so years, but if we do we're almost certain that we only want one and the climate crisis is very much part of the reason why. The issue however is that the families that couldn't give a toss will continue to pop children out and then often those children become a carbon copy of their parents, as many offspring are in all classes and backgrounds, and then there are less people to 'fight the good fight' and the issue just gets worse as a result. 

 

As to what others have said; I completely understand why many get fed up with the hypocrisy of jet setting celebrities spouting about the environment, or people who look like a 70s George Harrison after being lost in the woods for a few weeks, but that doesn't make their point any less valid. I'd also argue that dismissing a cause that you understand is a real and genuine threat because you don't like some people on that side is a pretty silly standpoint. I would have turned my back on Leicester City years ago if I was put off by the unwashed and annoying. 

[SecretPro]

1 minute ago, The People's Hero said:

Save a SWAN, CHAIN yourself to a PICKET FENCE and smother yourself in MARMITE.

 

You can come up with your own, just replace the words in capitals.

 

Point is that none of this is being reversed. Its not happening. I don't doubt that what you say is spot on, but if the Governments of the world and the various very powerful lobbying organisations and environmental movements and charities can't get themselves sorted out and co-ordinated, then I'm not sure what Graeme from Hampshire who has 2 O-Levels and used to be a bus-driver but quit that in fury that he was using fossil fuels and now just jabbers on endlessly about veganism and the evils of soap is going to do about it.

 

If this rag-tag collection of half-wits, attention seekers, anarchists or whatever you want to call them are so on the money, then why are non of the Governments or organisations doing anything about it? It just seems so unlikely.

 

I also realise there will be decent, intelligent, clean people involved in the movement; they just don't present themselves at these 'protests'. 

I don't think anybody really needs to ask that question. Economy, Money, Greed, Vested Interests.

 

But if the little people don't start rocking the boat, then any inclination the powers-that-be have just doesn't exist as they prefer the status quo. Protest isn't a new thing, and it does work. See Civil Rights, Suffragetts etc.

[The People's Hero]

Just now, SecretPro said:

I don't think anybody really needs to ask that question. Economy, Money, Greed, Vested Interests.

 

But if the little people don't start rocking the boat, then any inclination the powers-that-be have just doesn't exist as they prefer the status quo. Protest isn't a new thing, and it does work. See Civil Rights, Suffragetts etc.

Yes, I remember the huge amount of action after the caused chaos in the capital last year, or the year before, or the year before that. I can't remember the specifics.

 

It all gets clouded anyway as you have the royal family and the lovely GRETA mouthing off about it telling all us normal folk what to do and then jumping on a jet somewhere and presumably feasting on a penguin or whatever is endangered this week.

[The People's Hero]

Also, **** swans. I hope they are the next to go.

 

And then wasps.

[yorkie1999]

12 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Yes, I remember the huge amount of action after the caused chaos in the capital last year, or the year before, or the year before that. I can't remember the specifics.

 

It all gets clouded anyway as you have the royal family and the lovely GRETA mouthing off about it telling all us normal folk what to do and then jumping on a jet somewhere and presumably feasting on a penguin or whatever is endangered this week.

Something we all need to do before the ice melts and there’s nowhere for them to live and the planet is over run by homeless penguins

[Benguin]

36 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Of course, there have been five big ones and many more smaller ones in the known history of complex life on Earth.

 

It would just be nice if the next one didn't happen on humanity's watch and wasn't their responsibility.

 

 

What do you mean by "on humanities watch?"

 

Are you saying there is some transcendent reason that elevates us above the rest of the animal kingdom? 

[The People's Hero]

4 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Something we all need to do before the ice melts and there’s nowhere for them to live and the planet is over run by homeless penguins

And thus KFP was born. 

[ealingfox]

40 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Its not 'on our watch' though is it really. You could argue that attempts to save species are meddlesome and unnatural; since perhaps they are just no longer viable? 

 

Its a bigger issue than I'm capable than speaking on with any real insight but extinctions have happened forever without us. 

 

As for extinction rebellion, I think people would have more concern and sympathy for their cause, if we didn't all know that one person who is likely a member, never washes and is a complete holier-than-thou bellend.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Species_made_extinct_by_human_activities

 

I assume you are suggesting all human activity is natural and species that have disappeared because of hunting or because their habitat has been destroyed were not viable, regardless of how preventable it was?

[ealingfox]

Just now, The People's Hero said:

Bloody hell, I'm saying nothing of the sort.

 

I didn't manually strangle every last one of the Madeiran Scops Owls. I didn't poison every single Caucasian Wisent. I didn't go all the way to Hamlyn to learn the bloody pipe/flute whatever and lead the whole global population of Cebu Wharty Pigs off a cliff to their tragic (but quite impressive) demise. I didn't kill even a single O'ahu nukupu'u and frankly, I wouldn't have known where to look for one or how to ask? Were they ever even real? The one I have to hold my hands up to is the Laughing Owl; well who's laughing now, buddy? (Its me. I'm laughing)

 

Maybe some would have gone extinct anyway. Maybe we saved some that might otherwise have gone. 

 

I can't remember what we're arguing about now? Was it penguins?

 

So how is it not on humanity's watch if its directly attributable to human activity?

[The People's Hero]

Just now, ealingfox said:

 

So how is it not on humanity's watch if its directly attributable to human activity?

I don't know. Maybe it was my day on watch and I took my eyes off the ball. Its understandable; I need to find a way to franchise my new fried food operation.

 

Maybe, just maybe, no one cared enough about those Chatham bellbirds? Perhaps there were humans dying at the time? Maybe war or famine? Maybe people just had jobs to go to and mortgages to pay.

 

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

 

Out of interest though; what are you doing directly to save currently endangered species? And what have you done in the past to single-handedly save any? 

 

The cape lions will never forgive us (and that includes you).

[leicsmac]

58 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Its not 'on our watch' though is it really. You could argue that attempts to save species are meddlesome and unnatural; since perhaps they are just no longer viable? 

 

Its a bigger issue than I'm capable than speaking on with any real insight but extinctions have happened forever without us. 

 

As for extinction rebellion, I think people would have more concern and sympathy for their cause, if we didn't all know that one person who is likely a member, never washes and is a complete holier-than-thou bellend.

You could certainly argue that and it would be correct, but personally I'd rather humanity be able to defend itself and the species on this planet against the vagaries of nature rather than meekly submitting to them.

 

Perhaps it's a losing cause (on a timeline of hundreds of millions of years, it certainly is). But that's by no means certain, so let's do our part to rage against the dying of the light rather than fatalistically and nihilistically accepting it.

 

That's the way I see it, anyway; ones mileage may vary.

[leicsmac]

27 minutes ago, Benguin said:

What do you mean by "on humanities watch?"

 

Are you saying there is some transcendent reason that elevates us above the rest of the animal kingdom? 

No, I just mean that by our knowledge and application of technology we are better prepared to defend against nature than other members of the animal kingdom. How that came about can easily be attributed to the random element of evolution.

[JonnyBoy]

15 hours ago, Claridge said:

Bunch of middle class prats

 

i can smell Lush and green powder from here.

 

Wouldn't even say middle class, usually people who have nothing better to do.. why aren't these people working? 

 

has anyone seen the video of them with the broccoli, pathetic