Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)

[wc98]

gadgetmac said:

London424 said:

Thought this was an interesting article.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-4726...

I’m sure I saw something about this a few days ago elsewhere but yes, there is definitely an issue with machine learning at the moment

won't be an issue for climate science. none of it is reproducible and they have no testable hypothesis.

[wc98]

hairykrishna said:

Getting a job like that involves spending a lot of years being paid badly as a PhD student and a post doc. In this case he probably also had/has to spend rather a lot of time living in the arctic. Nobody takes on a scientific academic career because it's easy and pays lots.

Edited by hairykrishna on Monday 18th February 12:37

it's usually the thicker kids of the great and the good with a trust fund to see them through the hard times that gravitate toward the natural sciences. never fails to amaze me how many of the marine biologists that secure tenure completed long stays in places like the caribbean for their phd. tough life.

[wc98]

gadgetmac said:

It plays well to his acolytes if they think he's the one coming up with it.

As you say, Deeps has been doing it too but at least he wasn't changing the text subtly to hide its origin.

anyone that actually follows the topic will be more than aware of the steyn/mann case. how long it has been running and the significance of it in the big scheme of things so it is highly unlikely anyone with half a clue on the subject, ie not you or stovey, will think tb is claiming the statement as his own. that mann appears friendless due to the lack of support from colleagues should tell people how low his stock has dropped.

[wc98]

gadgetmac said:

It's trolling and spamming plain and simple. Others have been removed from this thread for less.

pot meet kettle !

[Randy Winkman]

chrispmartha said:

gadgetmac said:

chrispmartha said:

El stovey said:

hairykrishna said:

turbobloke said:

Bill Gates Slams Unreliable Wind & Solar

‘Let’s Quit Jerking Around With Renewables & Batteries’

https://stopthesethings.com/2019/02/18/bill-gates-...

Given that an English Lit graduate was good enough as an architect for the Climate Change Act, a Harvard drop-out philanthropist entrepreneur must surely be an expert among experts on unreliables.

Surely the wrong thread for this? Pull some Bill Gates quotes out of context and make it look like he thinks renewables are a bad idea. The man's pushing billions into energy generation/storage startups.

“The long-term threat [of climate change] is so serious that the world needs to move much more aggressively — right now — to develop energy sources that are cheaper, can deliver on demand, and emit zero carbon dioxide.”

Straight from the horses mouth. He thinks our current rate of renewable adoption is much too slow. He also wants to tackle the other 75% of CO2 production as quickly as possible.

Unsurprisingly, It’s a complete misrepresentation of gates and his views.

I'm actually starting to think TB is actually just taking the mick now, either that or he has no self awareness whatsoever.

At least he's not tried to pass it off as his own words this time.

It's trolling and spamming plain and simple. Others have been removed from this thread for less.

On the other hand he does provide a service, linking to these weird websites usually gives a good giggle.

"We're not here to debate the wind industry, we're here to DESTROY it"

:-)

Just to keep this bit of the thread going with a

[turbobloke]

Another viewpoint on the USA Green Daft Deal.

On 13 February 2019 Tucker Carlson said:

The Green New Deal is a religious document. It punishes America for the sins of its prosperity. The only atonement it offers is turning over full control of the entire U.S. economy to the Democratic Party. That's the indulgence they require. They are using moral blackmail to get it, of course, they are theocrats and they always do.

Nothing new then. Is that you, Albert G?

[gadgetmac]

wc98 said:

gadgetmac said:

It plays well to his acolytes if they think he's the one coming up with it.

As you say, Deeps has been doing it too but at least he wasn't changing the text subtly to hide its origin.

anyone that actually follows the topic will be more than aware of the steyn/mann case. how long it has been running and the significance of it in the big scheme of things so it is highly unlikely anyone with half a clue on the subject, ie not you or stovey, will think tb is claiming the statement as his own. that mann appears friendless due to the lack of support from colleagues should tell people how low his stock has dropped.

Your fawning knows no bounds.

[anonymous-user]

wc98 said:

gadgetmac said:

It plays well to his acolytes if they think he's the one coming up with it.

As you say, Deeps has been doing it too but at least he wasn't changing the text subtly to hide its origin.

anyone that actually follows the topic will be more than aware of the steyn/mann case. how long it has been running and the significance of it in the big scheme of things so it is highly unlikely anyone with half a clue on the subject, ie not you or stovey, will think tb is claiming the statement as his own. that mann appears friendless due to the lack of support from colleagues should tell people how low his stock has dropped.

TB copied an article from wattsupwiththat and changed the wording to make it look like he wrote it himself.

How are you defending it with this nonsense?

[gadgetmac]

Randy Winkman said:

chrispmartha said:

gadgetmac said:

chrispmartha said:

El stovey said:

hairykrishna said:

turbobloke said:

Bill Gates Slams Unreliable Wind & Solar

‘Let’s Quit Jerking Around With Renewables & Batteries’

https://stopthesethings.com/2019/02/18/bill-gates-...

Given that an English Lit graduate was good enough as an architect for the Climate Change Act, a Harvard drop-out philanthropist entrepreneur must surely be an expert among experts on unreliables.

Surely the wrong thread for this? Pull some Bill Gates quotes out of context and make it look like he thinks renewables are a bad idea. The man's pushing billions into energy generation/storage startups.

“The long-term threat [of climate change] is so serious that the world needs to move much more aggressively — right now — to develop energy sources that are cheaper, can deliver on demand, and emit zero carbon dioxide.”

Straight from the horses mouth. He thinks our current rate of renewable adoption is much too slow. He also wants to tackle the other 75% of CO2 production as quickly as possible.

Unsurprisingly, It’s a complete misrepresentation of gates and his views.

I'm actually starting to think TB is actually just taking the mick now, either that or he has no self awareness whatsoever.

At least he's not tried to pass it off as his own words this time.

It's trolling and spamming plain and simple. Others have been removed from this thread for less.

On the other hand he does provide a service, linking to these weird websites usually gives a good giggle.

"We're not here to debate the wind industry, we're here to DESTROY it"

:-)

Just to keep this bit of the thread going with a

You're going to need more posts as wc98 is posting like a maniac to draw the conversation away from the Bill Gates and the Covert Copying scandal engulfing TB.

[anonymous-user]

gadgetmac said:

You're going to need more posts as wc98 is posting like a maniac to draw the conversation away from the Bill Gates and the Covert Copying scandal engulfing TB.

It’s funny isn’t it?

TB clearly plagiarised a blog article, passing it of as his own then misrepresented Bill Gates in the space of a few posts and wc98 is trying to cover it up for him.

[turbobloke]

For translation if you have time, if you don't: "the planet is greening and climate tipping points are unscientific nonsense".

https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/2019/02/02/12-ik...

Which we knew anyway and will be reminded of at the tipping point due next Wednesday at 4pm - 'made up like all the others'.

[Pan Pan Pan]

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If anyone want a glimpse at what is allegedly causing the planets climate to change, we need only walk over and take a look in the nearest mirror.
With global population increasing at rates between 286 and 347 thousand net new humans per DAY, using up the planets resources and turning them into emissions faster and faster. We are only bringing forward the time when the planet cannot sustain our colossal numbers any more.
Or do people believe the planet and its recourses are actually infinite?
We must save the planet for our children they say, as they pop yet another disposable nappy in the bin, after which and producing emissions at ever increasing ratesh they take the children a few mile to school in their multi litre 4WD sprog panzers, whilst buying them the latest resource consuming electrical goods for their delight and delectation.

You post this same thing every couple of months.

And it still has little relevance to the thread.

You are correct I do post something like this every now and again, to try to get those who bash on about MMGW, to remember the fact that these emissions are (to use their own mantra) apparently coming from `man',

Yes but it is not some startling revelation that shocks everyone. It's pretty bloody obvious that a growing population will consume more resources.

But what's your point? Are you proposing a cull? Are you proposing banning 4WD cars or disposable nappies? Are you proposing children should be home-schooled? Are you saying we should stop selling and buying electrical products?

Why do believers immediately assume a cull is being proposed? Once any person arrives on the planet, they should have the same rights as anyone else. The key is keeping the salami in the underpants in the first place. People who have not been conceived / born don't know that they have not been conceived / born, and don't therefore feel they are missing out on anything.,
As for all those Striking for the Climate kids, lets see how many are up for a strike on a Saturday or a Sunday when they don't have to be in school, but wanting to do their `own' things, and not surprise!, surprise! on a Friday during term time.
Let us point out to them that emissions from computer use exceed those attributed to global aviation, so no more foreign holidays, and no more unrestricted computer use. Let us make it clear that instead of being transported to school in a massive 4x4, they will now have to walk to and from school, to, wait for it! help save the planet.!
I have no time whatsoever for those who bleat on about saving the planet, but who then hypocritically carry on doing things or using all the things that are contributing to the already massive and growing resource take up of all kinds, and the resultant emissions that they allege are destroying the planet.
Is it that they expect someone `else' to stop doing the things, or using the things that contribute to the increasing take up of the planets resources, and emissions, but don't feel that they should give up anything that they like having, or doing? Those that bleat on about climate change, but who churn out kids, disposable nappies, who want have to have the latest electronic fripperies for their kids and themselves, who still like jetting off to Disneyworld for a short break with the kids, who want their dwellings heated in winter and kept cool in summer, who waste huge amounts of food, because little Dwayne has discovered he doesn't like chicken nuggets any more.
Every program which takes families back to a less energy intensive, less wasteful way of life are despised by the very kids who want to save the planet, but don't want to lose any of the things that make their lives so convenient and comfortable now. As an example try taking their mobile phones off them, and see how much they scream. F*cking hypocrites.

[gadgetmac]

El stovey said:

gadgetmac said:

You're going to need more posts as wc98 is posting like a maniac to draw the conversation away from the Bill Gates and the Covert Copying scandal engulfing TB.

It’s funny isn’t it?

TB clearly plagiarised a blog article, passing it of as his own then misrepresented Bill Gates in the space of a few posts and wc98 is trying to cover it up for him.

He likes to run interference for TB when things aren't going well for his mentor.

[turbobloke]

BBC Backtracking On IPPR’s Fake Extreme Weather Claims

Listen at the link.

Click

"On Tuesday, Today programme listeners woke up to the news that the think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research, had new statistics that showed the scale of the damage we humans are doing to the planet. It said that since 2005, the number of floods across the world has increased by 15 times, extreme temperature events by 20 times, and wildfires seven-fold. However, the IPPR soon corrected that date to 1950, blaming a ‘typo’, but climate change researcher and author of Six Degrees Mark Lynas tells Tim Harford why he thinks the IPPR’s numbers are still wrong."

[Randy Winkman]

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If anyone want a glimpse at what is allegedly causing the planets climate to change, we need only walk over and take a look in the nearest mirror.
With global population increasing at rates between 286 and 347 thousand net new humans per DAY, using up the planets resources and turning them into emissions faster and faster. We are only bringing forward the time when the planet cannot sustain our colossal numbers any more.
Or do people believe the planet and its recourses are actually infinite?
We must save the planet for our children they say, as they pop yet another disposable nappy in the bin, after which and producing emissions at ever increasing ratesh they take the children a few mile to school in their multi litre 4WD sprog panzers, whilst buying them the latest resource consuming electrical goods for their delight and delectation.

You post this same thing every couple of months.

And it still has little relevance to the thread.

You are correct I do post something like this every now and again, to try to get those who bash on about MMGW, to remember the fact that these emissions are (to use their own mantra) apparently coming from `man',

Yes but it is not some startling revelation that shocks everyone. It's pretty bloody obvious that a growing population will consume more resources.

But what's your point? Are you proposing a cull? Are you proposing banning 4WD cars or disposable nappies? Are you proposing children should be home-schooled? Are you saying we should stop selling and buying electrical products?

Why do believers immediately assume a cull is being proposed? Once any person arrives on the planet, they should have the same rights as anyone else. The key is keeping the salami in the underpants in the first place. People who have not been conceived / born don't know that they have not been conceived / born, and don't therefore feel they are missing out on anything.,
As for all those Striking for the Climate kids, lets see how many are up for a strike on a Saturday or a Sunday when they don't have to be in school, but wanting to do their `own' things, and not surprise!, surprise! on a Friday during term time.
Let us point out to them that emissions from computer use exceed those attributed to global aviation, so no more foreign holidays, and no more unrestricted computer use. Let us make it clear that instead of being transported to school in a massive 4x4, they will now have to walk to and from school, to, wait for it! help save the planet.!
I have no time whatsoever for those who bleat on about saving the planet, but who then hypocritically carry on doing things or using all the things that are contributing to the already massive and growing resource take up of all kinds, and the resultant emissions that they allege are destroying the planet.
Is it that they expect someone `else' to stop doing the things, or using the things that contribute to the increasing take up of the planets resources, and emissions, but don't feel that they should give up anything that they like having, or doing? Those that bleat on about climate change, but who churn out kids, disposable nappies, who want have to have the latest electronic fripperies for their kids and themselves, who still like jetting off to Disneyworld for a short break with the kids, who want their dwellings heated in winter and kept cool in summer, who waste huge amounts of food, because little Dwayne has discovered he doesn't like chicken nuggets any more.
Every program which takes families back to a less energy intensive, less wasteful way of life are despised by the very kids who want to save the planet, but don't want to lose any of the things that make their lives so convenient and comfortable now. As an example try taking their mobile phones off them, and see how much they scream. F*cking hypocrites.

"Hypocrites"? As I said on the striking kids thread, there seem to be so many people who somehow know all about what what other individuals think and how they behave. How do they know so much about these people? I don't understand.

[turbobloke]

Memo to politicians: read Duvat 2019: A global assessment of atoll island platform changes over the past decades. This summary is easily found at CO2 Science.

---

Over the past few years, multiple research teams have examined the vulnerability of atoll islands to sea level rise, including Duvat et al. (2017), Duvat and Pillet (2017), Purkis et al. (2016), Testut et al. (2016), Ford and Kench (2016), Ford and Kench (2015), Kench et al. (2015), Biribo and Woodroffe (2013), Ford (2013), Rankey (2011), Dunne et al. (2012), Ford (2012) and Webb and Kench (2010). The latest to do so is Duvat (2019), who conducted a review of the existing literature to compile the largest single database assessing atoll island stability. And what did the new review reveal?

In all, 35 atolls and 852 islands were examined in the study, allowing for a quantitative analysis of land area change for a subset of 30 atolls and 709 islands. That analysis revealed a global trend of island land area persistence. More specifically, Duvat reports that "29 atolls exhibited a stable land area, while one (South Tarawa, Kiribati) increased in size." Of the 709 islands in these 30 atolls, 518 (73.1%) were stable, 110 (15.5%) increased in size, and 81 (11.4%) decreased in area. Thus, a total of 88.6% of all islands examined were either stable or increased in size.

Other key information presented by Duvat was the finding that island behavior correlates with island size. In this regard, the author reports that the smallest islands (< 5 ha) exhibited the highest variability in land area change. Larger islands were more stable (see Figure 1), as Duvat notes that "all of the islands larger than 10 ha experienced either stability (209/234 islands, that is, 89.32%) or expansion (25/234 islands, that is, 10.68%)." For islands under 10 ha in size, 65% experienced stability (no change), 17.9% expanded and 17.1% contracted.

Duvat writes that her work "confirms that over the past decades to century, atoll islands exhibited no widespread sign of physical destabilization by sea-level rise".

[Pan Pan Pan]

Randy Winkman said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If anyone want a glimpse at what is allegedly causing the planets climate to change, we need only walk over and take a look in the nearest mirror.
With global population increasing at rates between 286 and 347 thousand net new humans per DAY, using up the planets resources and turning them into emissions faster and faster. We are only bringing forward the time when the planet cannot sustain our colossal numbers any more.
Or do people believe the planet and its recourses are actually infinite?
We must save the planet for our children they say, as they pop yet another disposable nappy in the bin, after which and producing emissions at ever increasing ratesh they take the children a few mile to school in their multi litre 4WD sprog panzers, whilst buying them the latest resource consuming electrical goods for their delight and delectation.

You post this same thing every couple of months.

And it still has little relevance to the thread.

You are correct I do post something like this every now and again, to try to get those who bash on about MMGW, to remember the fact that these emissions are (to use their own mantra) apparently coming from `man',

Yes but it is not some startling revelation that shocks everyone. It's pretty bloody obvious that a growing population will consume more resources.

But what's your point? Are you proposing a cull? Are you proposing banning 4WD cars or disposable nappies? Are you proposing children should be home-schooled? Are you saying we should stop selling and buying electrical products?

Why do believers immediately assume a cull is being proposed? Once any person arrives on the planet, they should have the same rights as anyone else. The key is keeping the salami in the underpants in the first place. People who have not been conceived / born don't know that they have not been conceived / born, and don't therefore feel they are missing out on anything.,
As for all those Striking for the Climate kids, lets see how many are up for a strike on a Saturday or a Sunday when they don't have to be in school, but wanting to do their `own' things, and not surprise!, surprise! on a Friday during term time.
Let us point out to them that emissions from computer use exceed those attributed to global aviation, so no more foreign holidays, and no more unrestricted computer use. Let us make it clear that instead of being transported to school in a massive 4x4, they will now have to walk to and from school, to, wait for it! help save the planet.!
I have no time whatsoever for those who bleat on about saving the planet, but who then hypocritically carry on doing things or using all the things that are contributing to the already massive and growing resource take up of all kinds, and the resultant emissions that they allege are destroying the planet.
Is it that they expect someone `else' to stop doing the things, or using the things that contribute to the increasing take up of the planets resources, and emissions, but don't feel that they should give up anything that they like having, or doing? Those that bleat on about climate change, but who churn out kids, disposable nappies, who want have to have the latest electronic fripperies for their kids and themselves, who still like jetting off to Disneyworld for a short break with the kids, who want their dwellings heated in winter and kept cool in summer, who waste huge amounts of food, because little Dwayne has discovered he doesn't like chicken nuggets any more.
Every program which takes families back to a less energy intensive, less wasteful way of life are despised by the very kids who want to save the planet, but don't want to lose any of the things that make their lives so convenient and comfortable now. As an example try taking their mobile phones off them, and see how much they scream. F*cking hypocrites.

"Hypocrites"? As I said on the striking kids thread, there seem to be so many people who somehow know all about what what other individuals think and how they behave. How do they know so much about these people? I don't understand.

Hopefully you will prevent yourself from being seen as a hypocrite by taking your computer down to the recycling centre (walking there and back, of course) thus saving the planet from a little bit of human caused global warming. Consequently we would say an electronic good bye now, since by helping to save the planet in this way, you will no longer be able to.
P.s this suggestion is no more silly than those who propose a cull should be undertaken, when the problems caused by the burgeoning human population are pointed out.

[hairykrishna]

wc98 said:

it's usually the thicker kids of the great and the good with a trust fund to see them through the hard times that gravitate toward the natural sciences. .

Not my experience in physics. I find that, strangely enough, it's people who are really interested in physics who stay on for PhD's and postdocs and just accept the fact that they're going to make less than in some other careers.

[Randy Winkman]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Randy Winkman said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If anyone want a glimpse at what is allegedly causing the planets climate to change, we need only walk over and take a look in the nearest mirror.
With global population increasing at rates between 286 and 347 thousand net new humans per DAY, using up the planets resources and turning them into emissions faster and faster. We are only bringing forward the time when the planet cannot sustain our colossal numbers any more.
Or do people believe the planet and its recourses are actually infinite?
We must save the planet for our children they say, as they pop yet another disposable nappy in the bin, after which and producing emissions at ever increasing ratesh they take the children a few mile to school in their multi litre 4WD sprog panzers, whilst buying them the latest resource consuming electrical goods for their delight and delectation.

You post this same thing every couple of months.

And it still has little relevance to the thread.

You are correct I do post something like this every now and again, to try to get those who bash on about MMGW, to remember the fact that these emissions are (to use their own mantra) apparently coming from `man',

Yes but it is not some startling revelation that shocks everyone. It's pretty bloody obvious that a growing population will consume more resources.

But what's your point? Are you proposing a cull? Are you proposing banning 4WD cars or disposable nappies? Are you proposing children should be home-schooled? Are you saying we should stop selling and buying electrical products?

Why do believers immediately assume a cull is being proposed? Once any person arrives on the planet, they should have the same rights as anyone else. The key is keeping the salami in the underpants in the first place. People who have not been conceived / born don't know that they have not been conceived / born, and don't therefore feel they are missing out on anything.,
As for all those Striking for the Climate kids, lets see how many are up for a strike on a Saturday or a Sunday when they don't have to be in school, but wanting to do their `own' things, and not surprise!, surprise! on a Friday during term time.
Let us point out to them that emissions from computer use exceed those attributed to global aviation, so no more foreign holidays, and no more unrestricted computer use. Let us make it clear that instead of being transported to school in a massive 4x4, they will now have to walk to and from school, to, wait for it! help save the planet.!
I have no time whatsoever for those who bleat on about saving the planet, but who then hypocritically carry on doing things or using all the things that are contributing to the already massive and growing resource take up of all kinds, and the resultant emissions that they allege are destroying the planet.
Is it that they expect someone `else' to stop doing the things, or using the things that contribute to the increasing take up of the planets resources, and emissions, but don't feel that they should give up anything that they like having, or doing? Those that bleat on about climate change, but who churn out kids, disposable nappies, who want have to have the latest electronic fripperies for their kids and themselves, who still like jetting off to Disneyworld for a short break with the kids, who want their dwellings heated in winter and kept cool in summer, who waste huge amounts of food, because little Dwayne has discovered he doesn't like chicken nuggets any more.
Every program which takes families back to a less energy intensive, less wasteful way of life are despised by the very kids who want to save the planet, but don't want to lose any of the things that make their lives so convenient and comfortable now. As an example try taking their mobile phones off them, and see how much they scream. F*cking hypocrites.

"Hypocrites"? As I said on the striking kids thread, there seem to be so many people who somehow know all about what what other individuals think and how they behave. How do they know so much about these people? I don't understand.

Hopefully you will prevent yourself from being seen as a hypocrite by taking your computer down to the recycling centre (walking there and back, of course) thus saving the planet from a little bit of human caused global warming. Consequently we would say an electronic good bye now, since by helping to save the planet in this way, you will no longer be able to.
P.s this suggestion is no more silly than those who propose a cull should be undertaken, when the problems caused by the burgeoning human population are pointed out.

Silly is certainly the right word.

[Pan Pan Pan]

Randy Winkman said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

Randy Winkman said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

durbster said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If anyone want a glimpse at what is allegedly causing the planets climate to change, we need only walk over and take a look in the nearest mirror.
With global population increasing at rates between 286 and 347 thousand net new humans per DAY, using up the planets resources and turning them into emissions faster and faster. We are only bringing forward the time when the planet cannot sustain our colossal numbers any more.
Or do people believe the planet and its recourses are actually infinite?
We must save the planet for our children they say, as they pop yet another disposable nappy in the bin, after which and producing emissions at ever increasing ratesh they take the children a few mile to school in their multi litre 4WD sprog panzers, whilst buying them the latest resource consuming electrical goods for their delight and delectation.

You post this same thing every couple of months.

And it still has little relevance to the thread.

You are correct I do post something like this every now and again, to try to get those who bash on about MMGW, to remember the fact that these emissions are (to use their own mantra) apparently coming from `man',

Yes but it is not some startling revelation that shocks everyone. It's pretty bloody obvious that a growing population will consume more resources.

But what's your point? Are you proposing a cull? Are you proposing banning 4WD cars or disposable nappies? Are you proposing children should be home-schooled? Are you saying we should stop selling and buying electrical products?

Why do believers immediately assume a cull is being proposed? Once any person arrives on the planet, they should have the same rights as anyone else. The key is keeping the salami in the underpants in the first place. People who have not been conceived / born don't know that they have not been conceived / born, and don't therefore feel they are missing out on anything.,
As for all those Striking for the Climate kids, lets see how many are up for a strike on a Saturday or a Sunday when they don't have to be in school, but wanting to do their `own' things, and not surprise!, surprise! on a Friday during term time.
Let us point out to them that emissions from computer use exceed those attributed to global aviation, so no more foreign holidays, and no more unrestricted computer use. Let us make it clear that instead of being transported to school in a massive 4x4, they will now have to walk to and from school, to, wait for it! help save the planet.!
I have no time whatsoever for those who bleat on about saving the planet, but who then hypocritically carry on doing things or using all the things that are contributing to the already massive and growing resource take up of all kinds, and the resultant emissions that they allege are destroying the planet.
Is it that they expect someone `else' to stop doing the things, or using the things that contribute to the increasing take up of the planets resources, and emissions, but don't feel that they should give up anything that they like having, or doing? Those that bleat on about climate change, but who churn out kids, disposable nappies, who want have to have the latest electronic fripperies for their kids and themselves, who still like jetting off to Disneyworld for a short break with the kids, who want their dwellings heated in winter and kept cool in summer, who waste huge amounts of food, because little Dwayne has discovered he doesn't like chicken nuggets any more.
Every program which takes families back to a less energy intensive, less wasteful way of life are despised by the very kids who want to save the planet, but don't want to lose any of the things that make their lives so convenient and comfortable now. As an example try taking their mobile phones off them, and see how much they scream. F*cking hypocrites.

"Hypocrites"? As I said on the striking kids thread, there seem to be so many people who somehow know all about what what other individuals think and how they behave. How do they know so much about these people? I don't understand.

Hopefully you will prevent yourself from being seen as a hypocrite by taking your computer down to the recycling centre (walking there and back, of course) thus saving the planet from a little bit of human caused global warming. Consequently we would say an electronic good bye now, since by helping to save the planet in this way, you will no longer be able to.
P.s this suggestion is no more silly than those who propose a cull should be undertaken, when the problems caused by the burgeoning human population are pointed out.

Silly is certainly the right word.

Agreed, I still think hypocrite is much more accurate though, don't you?