Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Climate Change - a poll  

412 members have voted

  1. 1. Climate Change is....

    • Not Real
      34
    • Real - Human influenced
      296
    • Real - Just Nature
      82


Recommended Posts

Posted
17 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And what damage will more and more record breaking intensity Ninos do to come?

There is evidence that each record breaking Nino we’ve seen over the past forty years has raised the global temperature base state. 

so we could be looking at av global temps being a half degree or so higher 2028 onwards. Where we see the rises concentrated, that could easily be 2c across a period 

 

 

  • Like 3
Posted
7 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

There is evidence that each record breaking Nino we’ve seen over the past forty years has raised the global temperature base state. 

so we could be looking at av global temps being a half degree or so higher 2028 onwards. Where we see the rises concentrated, that could easily be 2c across a period 

 

 

... which will lead to all sorts of fun and games in terms of consequences. 

 

Welcome to the future, huh?

Posted

Maybe we should run a sweepstake on exactly when all the people that leave laughing emojis over any climate change stories will suddenly realise it's been true all along. It will happen, there will be a point where it's 25° on Xmas day or something and the penny will drop. We witnessed a Pompeii level event in Nepal only a fortnight-ish ago caused entirely by glacial retreat. How many more do we need to see and how much closer to home do they need to get before recognition hits the hold outs in the face? And what will their reaction be to the political leaders and media that fed them the climate change denial lies? 

Posted
8 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Maybe we should run a sweepstake on exactly when all the people that leave laughing emojis over any climate change stories will suddenly realise it's been true all along. It will happen, there will be a point where it's 25° on Xmas day or something and the penny will drop. We witnessed a Pompeii level event in Nepal only a fortnight-ish ago caused entirely by glacial retreat. How many more do we need to see and how much closer to home do they need to get before recognition hits the hold outs in the face? And what will their reaction be to the political leaders and media that fed them the climate change denial lies? 

Unfortunately, for at least some, that day will only come when it directly, and grossly, affects them and those closest to them. And, more significantly, by that time, every single person on this earth will also be along for the ride.

 

Therefore, on this matter, it's better to use the majority that already exists as deftly as possible, both to get things done and to politically marginalise those who would see those things not done. 

 

Keep stating scientific truths and consequences, by all means, but also know that there comes a point where such actions serve no purpose and it's much more fruitful to the future to simply ignore and marginalise, however possible. 

 

Posted
On 09/09/2026 at 18:15, Foxdiamond said:

Not sure if to post here or the Unpopular Opinions. People really need to reduce flying. 

I am becoming increasingly conscious of this. This is the hardest individual action for me. I love travelling, and I want to do more of it. If someone said that I could either never get on a plane again or never eat meat again, the decision would be so easy for me. I'd never eat meat again. 

 

One simple thing I'd happily promise to never do again is to fly internally within the UK. Admittedly, I've only done this twice (Birmingham to Edinburgh and back, and Edinburgh to Glasgow and back) but I go to Scotland often for work and most of the time I drive or get the train depending on how much equipment I have to take with me. In all honesty, it probably doesn't take that much longer for me to get to Glasgow from mine via train than getting from my house to Birmingham Airport and flying to Glasgow, yet the environmental impact of flying is substantially greater. 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, BenTheFox said:

I am becoming increasingly conscious of this. This is the hardest individual action for me. I love travelling, and I want to do more of it. If someone said that I could either never get on a plane again or never eat meat again, the decision would be so easy for me. I'd never eat meat again. 

 

One simple thing I'd happily promise to never do again is to fly internally within the UK. Admittedly, I've only done this twice (Birmingham to Edinburgh and back, and Edinburgh to Glasgow and back) but I go to Scotland often for work and most of the time I drive or get the train depending on how much equipment I have to take with me. In all honesty, it probably doesn't take that much longer for me to get to Glasgow from mine via train than getting from my house to Birmingham Airport and flying to Glasgow, yet the environmental impact of flying is substantially greater. 

 

If only train fares were not so expensive 

Posted
3 hours ago, BenTheFox said:

I am becoming increasingly conscious of this. This is the hardest individual action for me. I love travelling, and I want to do more of it. If someone said that I could either never get on a plane again or never eat meat again, the decision would be so easy for me. I'd never eat meat again. 

 

One simple thing I'd happily promise to never do again is to fly internally within the UK. Admittedly, I've only done this twice (Birmingham to Edinburgh and back, and Edinburgh to Glasgow and back) but I go to Scotland often for work and most of the time I drive or get the train depending on how much equipment I have to take with me. In all honesty, it probably doesn't take that much longer for me to get to Glasgow from mine via train than getting from my house to Birmingham Airport and flying to Glasgow, yet the environmental impact of flying is substantially greater. 

 

I can understand the feeling of struggle here - both animal agriculture and various forms of transportation have a high carbon footprint. 

 

However, they both still do pale in comparison to energy generation, and so while an individual should be conscientious about them, that same individual does much more for the future of life on the Earth by voting for and encouraging backing of a government that will ensure carbon neutral methods of generation both in a country and across the world, rather than stopping flying or eating meat. 

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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...