Student strike for climate change
Discussion
deeen said:
Next week: kids protest against tides. Another natural phenomenon that's been happening for millions of years before humans were here, and will continue for millions of years after we've gone. But why won't the government DO something???
Something must be done!!! And for the next headteacher INSET day, planning lessons on how to bang wheeliebin lids to scare away the sky dragon in any forthcoming eclipse. Guaranteed to work every time. Students will be impressed for once (if it smells it's chemistry, if it wiggles it's biology, if it doesn't work it's physics). After all, it's neither arrogant nor foolish to believe truly that human power is superior to forces of nature.Come to think of it, it's pretty bloody short-sighted, isn't it? Talk about being careful what you wish for.
Govt.: Scientists are feeding back to us about this thing they've found called climate change. Could come in handy for the odd spot of dubious expediency. Let's start using the stuff to manipulate schoolkids.
Schoolkids: Climate change! Whinge, moan! Do something to stop old people killing us or we'll thcweam and thcweam and thcweam!
Govt.: Sounds like the kids want some more restrictive legislation. Sho' thang!
So legislation is introduced to restrict what people can and can't do, possibly with regards to vehicle use and energy consumption - stuff that those silly old adults have to worry about. But one day the schoolkids will be older, and they're going to have to bend to the same yoke that they tried to put on their parents and grandparents.
I really can't see what all the fuss is about. I mean, so what if the ice caps are melting? We've addressed short-sightedness, let's look at long-sightedness. It doesn't matter if we all die in 100 years time because the whole planet has been consumed by seawater, or if we survive another 4½ million years to be consumed by the sun, or if you subscribe to the Book of Revelation. One day, humanity is going to come to an end. All that we've worked to preserve will be lost forever, to everyone. By all means, we most certainly should preserve existing things for future generations on the earth, but let's not con ourselves into thinking we can live forever.
Everyone reading this is going to die. Everyone and eventually the planet itself will cease to be. We only have a short time on this planet - why spend it b
hing and whining? Why not have as much fun as we possibly can and to hell with the consequences. Because dead is dead. It doesn't matter if the fifth generation from now never gets the chance to be born - what matters is that we've got a chance to live and we should make the most of it. Imagine some alien scholars writing a history of the human race and concluding: "humanity wiped itself out because it was having too much fun." How cool is that?
Nothing is forever. Enjoy it while you can.
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings;
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Govt.: Scientists are feeding back to us about this thing they've found called climate change. Could come in handy for the odd spot of dubious expediency. Let's start using the stuff to manipulate schoolkids.
Schoolkids: Climate change! Whinge, moan! Do something to stop old people killing us or we'll thcweam and thcweam and thcweam!
Govt.: Sounds like the kids want some more restrictive legislation. Sho' thang!
So legislation is introduced to restrict what people can and can't do, possibly with regards to vehicle use and energy consumption - stuff that those silly old adults have to worry about. But one day the schoolkids will be older, and they're going to have to bend to the same yoke that they tried to put on their parents and grandparents.
I really can't see what all the fuss is about. I mean, so what if the ice caps are melting? We've addressed short-sightedness, let's look at long-sightedness. It doesn't matter if we all die in 100 years time because the whole planet has been consumed by seawater, or if we survive another 4½ million years to be consumed by the sun, or if you subscribe to the Book of Revelation. One day, humanity is going to come to an end. All that we've worked to preserve will be lost forever, to everyone. By all means, we most certainly should preserve existing things for future generations on the earth, but let's not con ourselves into thinking we can live forever.
Everyone reading this is going to die. Everyone and eventually the planet itself will cease to be. We only have a short time on this planet - why spend it b
hing and whining? Why not have as much fun as we possibly can and to hell with the consequences. Because dead is dead. It doesn't matter if the fifth generation from now never gets the chance to be born - what matters is that we've got a chance to live and we should make the most of it. Imagine some alien scholars writing a history of the human race and concluding: "humanity wiped itself out because it was having too much fun." How cool is that?Nothing is forever. Enjoy it while you can.
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings;
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Edited by MrBrianNorris on Saturday 16th February 21:48
turbobloke said:
Randy Winkman said:
rxe said:
durbster said:
Which is more likely to get the attention of the government and media, and therefore instigate action?
- a person saying they are not going to go on holiday this year
- a person joining a large protest in London
Blaming the school kids is clearly just trying to shirk responsibility.
Instigate action? Or actually do something?- a person saying they are not going to go on holiday this year
- a person joining a large protest in London
Blaming the school kids is clearly just trying to shirk responsibility.
If a material number of kids decided that they didn’t want to fly anywhere on holiday it would have a huge impact. BA and EasyJet would be in the crapper, and it would be a protest worthy of note.
Instead they’ll go and protest, whine at somebeody else to do something, then half of them will be flying off somewhere this half term.
Then once out of school the brainwashing washes off.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FTS2tdmyYM
girls don't like boys, girls like cars and money Tut Tut etc.
Kids know what snow is, it's not a rare and exciting event.
ninepoint2 said:
Coolbanana said:
The idiocy expressed on this Thread is very amusing in terms of what is expected from children. Similarly those in denial of Climate Change - when a 'round' Earth was first proposed, it took a long time for it to become mainstream and accepted as true fact, the same is happening now with Climate Change, those who have limited understanding deny it and look silly. 
FFS you mean as well as the Earth getting much warmer it's round as well...we are all doomed I tell you, doomed 
Nobody ever disputed that the world is round.
The point is that it is not spherical.
A lot were out shouting, "fk Theresa May."
https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/109646194...
This isn't any sort of coordinated protest about climate change that transcends individual countries' party politics.
k Theresa May." https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/109646194...
This isn't any sort of coordinated protest about climate change that transcends individual countries' party politics.
deeen said:
Next week: kids protest against tides. Another natural phenomenon that's been happening for millions of years before humans were here, and will continue for millions of years after we've gone. But why won't the government DO something???
Yeah, governments totally have never done anything about the tide...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Barrier
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiff_Bay_Barrag...
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/funding-f...
I suspect you contact your nearest double glazing specialist, your head is so far up your arse you're blind to the facts around you.
Evanivitch said:
deeen said:
Next week: kids protest against tides. Another natural phenomenon that's been happening for millions of years before humans were here, and will continue for millions of years after we've gone. But why won't the government DO something???
Yeah, governments totally have never done anything about the tide...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_Barrier
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiff_Bay_Barrag...
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/funding-f...
I suspect you contact your nearest double glazing specialist, your head is so far up your arse you're blind to the facts around you.
Wiki:
“The origin of the scheme dates back to a visit by the Secretary of State for Wales Nicholas Edwards Conservative MP for Pembrokeshire to the largely-derelict Cardiff docklands in the early 1980s. An avid opera enthusiast, Edwards envisaged a scheme to revitalise the area incorporating new homes, shops, restaurants and, as a centrepiece, an opera house at the waterside. However the tidal nature of Cardiff Bay, exposing extensive mudflats save for two hours either side of high water, was seen as aesthetically unappealing.”
Arguably your other two points are convenience projects to facilitate easier lives. Both are fighting natural processes that have existed for hundreds if not thousands of years.
REALIST123 said:
To be fair the Cardiff Bay Barrage was only built for tourist/cosmetic reasons, not out of any necessity.
I'm well aware of that, which is my main bugbear about the Swansea Lagoon being deemed uneconomical. Cardiff 'lagoon' doesn't even produce electricity!- Snip*
I wouldn't consider the Thames Barrage a convenience project. Without it large areas of the Thames valley would be flooded during seasonal hi tide and storms. Without that protection there would be less land available for the growth of London.
Blakewater said:
A lot were out shouting, "fk Theresa May."
https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/109646194...
This isn't any sort of coordinated protest about climate change that transcends individual countries' party politics.
Weaponising kids to push your agenda, nice.k Theresa May." https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/109646194...
This isn't any sort of coordinated protest about climate change that transcends individual countries' party politics.
It's a dangerous path to take, but when you're desperate for your version of the world, it's easy to justify brainwashing children.
Kids, in general, are a bit silly and immature. They typically have no interest in politics and they certainly wouldn't have much of an understanding about how things actually work in the real world, so it would be interesting to know who is spoon feeding them and how deep it goes.
irocfan said:
Slagathore said:
Weaponising kids to push your agenda, nice.
indeed - something that the nazis and soviets were very keen on. If teachers are being overtly political (right or left) as part of their classes they should be sacked
As it's against the rules to display partisan material in a polling station, the police were called. The presiding officer then told the school's site manager to cover up the posters...which isn't the point, their creation and display is the point.
Indoctrination is nothing new in primary schools, less common in secondaries. I've spent a lot of time on-site working with charitable education trusts and see this type of partisan 'teaching' frequently. It's only ever one-way (see above) and primary schools in particular are full of emotive climate hype.
Lentilist said:
Who says a lot of these kids aren't going vegan? There's been a significant increase in veganism in the UK in recent year, and I don't think it's unreasonable to state it's not the PH demographic driving it. Plenty of people making lifestyle changes due to environmental concerns, yet this place generally has a ready made put down or pithy remark as to why it's pointless and/or stupid, and why anyone voicing such concerns is uneducated and/or has been brainwashed by whoever is the political bogeyman du jour of this parish (EU, Corbyn, IPCC etc.), and none of it matters anyway because China. Also curious how protest and direct action by students is deemed useless and a political stunt, and they're all just a bunch of moaners who should sort their own probelms out, yet stick a yellow vest on a protester and this place faps itself into revolutionary fervour about the overthrow of the political establishment.
Ouch! So true.
Slagathore said:
Weaponising kids to push your agenda, nice.
It's a dangerous path to take, but when you're desperate for your version of the world, it's easy to justify brainwashing children.
Kids, in general, are a bit silly and immature. They typically have no interest in politics and they certainly wouldn't have much of an understanding about how things actually work in the real world, so it would be interesting to know who is spoon feeding them and how deep it goes.
That's based on the antiquated idea that kids don't have access to information.It's a dangerous path to take, but when you're desperate for your version of the world, it's easy to justify brainwashing children.
Kids, in general, are a bit silly and immature. They typically have no interest in politics and they certainly wouldn't have much of an understanding about how things actually work in the real world, so it would be interesting to know who is spoon feeding them and how deep it goes.
Kids today have access to more information, facts, lies and opinions than ever before. They can read university research papers, a wide variety of press, blogs and Pistonheads and build their own opinions. They're not dependent on what parents and teachers choose to tell them.
Evanivitch said:
That's based on the antiquated idea that kids don't have access to information.
Kids today have access to more information, facts, lies and opinions than ever before. They can read university research papers, a wide variety of press, blogs and Pistonheads and build their own opinions. They're not dependent on what parents and teachers choose to tell them.
No, it's based on what teenagers are generally interested in, and politics ain't it.Kids today have access to more information, facts, lies and opinions than ever before. They can read university research papers, a wide variety of press, blogs and Pistonheads and build their own opinions. They're not dependent on what parents and teachers choose to tell them.
What if a kid is shown some conspiracy theory breakdown of 9/11 and told the American government were to blame. A convincing and well made Youtube video could have real consequences for the future of how that child starts to think and behave if they believe.
The problem is that there is too much propaganda out there, from extreme left/right wing establishments, all the bulls
t surrounding 'influencers' etc. Kids are really being mislead on many, many things. And a lot of them might not have the intelligence or maturity to question everything they see, the real problem is that at their age, they aren't really expected to either. Kids are naive and vulnerable. Christ, even some adults are f
king stupid.All those kids chanting that - stop one of them and ask them why they are saying it and I bet you none of them would give a credible answer. If it was an anti-brexit demonstration, crack on, she has been awful organising that, but at a climate change protest? What particular policies do they have issues with, what specifically is May's fault when it comes to climate change/global warming etc?
The point I was getting at with my earlier post about Labour wanting to lower the voting age is that it's quite obvious to see what the interest is in trying to get kids involved in 'politics' is. And it's not about teaching them from a neutral position, it's about propaganda and teaching them one side of the story.
It's a sneaky, desperate tactic that I really can't see any positives for. And it goes both ways, it's not just about desperate lefties trying to brainwash kids, I'd include right-wing, religion etc.
Slagathore said:
No, it's based on what teenagers are generally interested in, and politics ain't it.
That's rubbish. The majority of teenagers don't actively participate in politics because British democracy excludes them. They can pay tax at 16 and join the army, but they can't vote. That's absurd. When there have been genuine policy discussion that has impacted younger voters there have been increased turnouts.Slagathore said:
What if a kid is shown some conspiracy theory breakdown of 9/11 and told the American government were to blame. A convincing and well made Youtube video could have real consequences for the future of how that child starts to think and behave if they believe.
Then they can Google it, find a well respected news source or even a Wikipedia article and obtain a different statement.Slagathore said:
All those kids chanting that - stop one of them and ask them why they are saying it and I bet you none of them would give a credible answer. If it was an anti-brexit demonstration, crack on, she has been awful organising that, but at a climate change protest? What particular policies do they have issues with, what specifically is May's fault when it comes to climate change/global warming etc?
Removal of the solar subsidy, failure to support the tidal lagoon, failure to get a successful nuclear energy deal, personal support to fracking, failure to act on localised pollution. It's not a short list.I'm pro-fracking and pro-Nuclear, but you can see why a few environmental type would have reason to complain about her policies.
Slagathore said:
The point I was getting at with my earlier post about Labour wanting to lower the voting age is that it's quite obvious to see what the interest is in trying to get kids involved in 'politics' is. And it's not about teaching them from a neutral position, it's about propaganda and teaching them one side of the story.
It's a sneaky, desperate tactic that I really can't see any positives for. And it goes both ways, it's not just about desperate lefties trying to brainwash kids, I'd include right-wing, religion etc.
As I've said, they can pay tax and join the army at 16. Why should they be required to pay taxes and die for their country but not vote for the policies that see those taxes spent and go into armed conflict?It's a sneaky, desperate tactic that I really can't see any positives for. And it goes both ways, it's not just about desperate lefties trying to brainwash kids, I'd include right-wing, religion etc.
Evanivitch said:
As I've said, they can pay tax and join the army at 16. Why should they be required to pay taxes and die for their country but not vote for the policies that see those taxes spent and go into armed conflict?
You can join the armed forces at 16, but you cannot be sent to a combat zone. At that age you also aren't trusted to drink without a meal, smoke, get a tattoo, buy fireworks get married, drive, take out a loan or credit card, get a mortgage, buy knives, use a tanning bed, watch violent films or pornography. So given they aren't seen as trustworthy enough to make an independent choice on any of those matters, why should voting be different?Russian Troll Bot said:
You can join the armed forces at 16, but you cannot be sent to a combat zone. At that age you also aren't trusted to drink without a meal, smoke, get a tattoo, buy fireworks get married, drive, take out a loan or credit card, get a mortgage, buy knives, use a tanning bed, watch violent films or pornography. So given they aren't seen as trustworthy enough to make an independent choice on any of those matters, why should voting be different?
Joining the army at 16 means you cannot leave until you are 22 years old except under extreme circumstances (I don't like it isn't a valid excuse)..You're confusing what they're allowed to be sold with what they are allowed to do.
There is no law that makes it illegal for them to drink, smoke, hold a knife, use a private tanning bed, watch a violent film, watch pornography, use a shotgun or fire a legal firearm at the age of 16.
I've not quoted it all because if I try to quote it just gives one bit of your reply and I can't be assed to format it properly.
"Removal of the solar subsidy, failure to support the tidal lagoon, failure to get a successful nuclear energy deal, personal support to fracking, failure to act on localised pollution. It's not a short list."
That's what you know. Not necessarily what the brainwashed kids know.
I'd actually support the voting age being upped to 21.
I know this is Pistonheads and everyone is amazingly smart and educated, but I suspect if you asked most honest people what they were like at 16, they'd be in agreement that, whilst they thought they knew it all, they were actually pretty fickle and easily manipulated.
I would have voted, but it wouldn't have been based out of an educated view on politics, it would have been, probably, for whoever my parents voted for.
Now imagine that in this day and age, it would be the same or whoever their favourite teacher was voting for, or celebrity endorsed etc anyone with any sort of influence over them could play a part in the outcome of an election. Or imagine Daddy's a Conservative, I'll rebel against him and vote Labout or Lib Dem etc.
It's really not hard to see that their choice will have little to do with polictics or what is actually best for the country.
Now bear in mind lots of kids live on social media, it's no coincidence there's a link between mental health issues and social media use. Imagine them being able to vote and how easy it would be influence them with advertising and propaganda.
https://www.socialmediatoday.com/social-networks/f...
I think I've posted that before, but it seem appropriate again.
It actually really puts the responsibility on us in shaping government policies and the future of this country, not weaponising children to further your agenda.
"Removal of the solar subsidy, failure to support the tidal lagoon, failure to get a successful nuclear energy deal, personal support to fracking, failure to act on localised pollution. It's not a short list."
That's what you know. Not necessarily what the brainwashed kids know.
I'd actually support the voting age being upped to 21.
I know this is Pistonheads and everyone is amazingly smart and educated, but I suspect if you asked most honest people what they were like at 16, they'd be in agreement that, whilst they thought they knew it all, they were actually pretty fickle and easily manipulated.
I would have voted, but it wouldn't have been based out of an educated view on politics, it would have been, probably, for whoever my parents voted for.
Now imagine that in this day and age, it would be the same or whoever their favourite teacher was voting for, or celebrity endorsed etc anyone with any sort of influence over them could play a part in the outcome of an election. Or imagine Daddy's a Conservative, I'll rebel against him and vote Labout or Lib Dem etc.
It's really not hard to see that their choice will have little to do with polictics or what is actually best for the country.
Now bear in mind lots of kids live on social media, it's no coincidence there's a link between mental health issues and social media use. Imagine them being able to vote and how easy it would be influence them with advertising and propaganda.
https://www.socialmediatoday.com/social-networks/f...
I think I've posted that before, but it seem appropriate again.
It actually really puts the responsibility on us in shaping government policies and the future of this country, not weaponising children to further your agenda.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff