Student strike for climate change
Discussion
Which of course not one of the resident alarmists does. durbster said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
On a lighter note, it would be interesting to listen in on conversations between parents and their children over the matter of this strike for climate change, with parents saying we really support the stance you are taking. Consequently we will no longer be driving you to school/college/uni/ mates houses etc.
You will need to remember that you will have to start getting up earlier in order to get these places in time, (by walking and using public transport.) Also In order for you to get up in time, we will be removing the TV you have in your bedroom, so that you can get to bed early.
Since emissions production coming from global computer use is greater than that coming from global aviation, we will restrict your time on the computer to just enough to do your academic work, so that will be another way of helping the planet, not forgetting the energy use and emissions coming from mobile phone use must also be restricted, by limiting the time you are allowed to spend on the phone.
To really make it count you can forget holidays to other places, that require the use of an airliner. Those concerts you like going to are fine, but you will have to make your own way there, carrying whatever you think you will need to make it all fun, and don't litter the place up with all your bottles, rubbish and tents when you leave, Got to protect the countryside you know!
I'm going to try some amateur psychology here. You will need to remember that you will have to start getting up earlier in order to get these places in time, (by walking and using public transport.) Also In order for you to get up in time, we will be removing the TV you have in your bedroom, so that you can get to bed early.
Since emissions production coming from global computer use is greater than that coming from global aviation, we will restrict your time on the computer to just enough to do your academic work, so that will be another way of helping the planet, not forgetting the energy use and emissions coming from mobile phone use must also be restricted, by limiting the time you are allowed to spend on the phone.
To really make it count you can forget holidays to other places, that require the use of an airliner. Those concerts you like going to are fine, but you will have to make your own way there, carrying whatever you think you will need to make it all fun, and don't litter the place up with all your bottles, rubbish and tents when you leave, Got to protect the countryside you know!
This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
Pan Pan Pan said:
Since emissions production coming from global computer use is greater than that coming from global aviation, we will restrict your time on the computer to just enough to do your academic work, so that will be another way of helping the planet, not forgetting the energy use and emissions coming from mobile phone use must also be restricted, by limiting the time you are allowed to spend on the phone.
Reference?The following article suggests that data server use is very close to that of global air transport emissions, but you've clearly said greater.
Not all data server use is for personal use such as social media and communications. It underpins our entire society and includes research and infrastructure.
More importantly, that power can be developed from alternative resources and major data centers are often located in cold countries like Sweden, Iceland and Norway. All of which also have relatively low carbon grids.
The energy wasted on bitcoin mining however is an absolute travesty.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/2...
durbster said:
I'm going to try some amateur psychology here.
This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
I think the issue is that these kids are demanding we do more to solve this problem yet we are already committed by law to cutting CO2 emissions by 80%. The law was drafted by a former director of Friends of the Earth so I would guess it strikes a reasonable balance between what can be done and what is fantasy. This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
The kids however seem to know better which is fine and if an 80% cut by 2050 is insufficient for them then we can certainly do more but the kids need to understand exactly what that will entail.
Baby Shark doo doo doo doo said:
I do like the idea that humans can "solve climate change". I think we should start small, though. Perhaps we could begin by solving cancer, or elephant poaching, or politicians, and work our way up from there.
jurbie said:
I think the issue is that these kids are demanding we do more to solve this problem yet we are already committed by law to cutting CO2 emissions by 80%. The law was drafted by a former director of Friends of the Earth so I would guess it strikes a reasonable balance between what can be done and what is fantasy.
The kids however seem to know better which is fine and if an 80% cut by 2050 is insufficient for them then we can certainly do more but the kids need to understand exactly what that will entail.
let them bash on, as soon as they start getting limited power supply to charge their i phones they will about face.The kids however seem to know better which is fine and if an 80% cut by 2050 is insufficient for them then we can certainly do more but the kids need to understand exactly what that will entail.
jurbie said:
durbster said:
I'm going to try some amateur psychology here.
This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
I think the issue is that these kids are demanding we do more to solve this problem yet we are already committed by law to cutting CO2 emissions by 80%. The law was drafted by a former director of Friends of the Earth so I would guess it strikes a reasonable balance between what can be done and what is fantasy. This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
The kids however seem to know better which is fine and if an 80% cut by 2050 is insufficient for them then we can certainly do more but the kids need to understand exactly what that will entail.
I do think the protests are a response to Trump and others in power who proudly hold the disastrous traits of being both uninformed and unwilling to learn, and by extension all those who endorse such people. This growing anti-science sentiment is making any goals look far less likely to be met.
Randy Winkman said:
durbster said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
On a lighter note, it would be interesting to listen in on conversations between parents and their children over the matter of this strike for climate change, with parents saying we really support the stance you are taking. Consequently we will no longer be driving you to school/college/uni/ mates houses etc.
You will need to remember that you will have to start getting up earlier in order to get these places in time, (by walking and using public transport.) Also In order for you to get up in time, we will be removing the TV you have in your bedroom, so that you can get to bed early.
Since emissions production coming from global computer use is greater than that coming from global aviation, we will restrict your time on the computer to just enough to do your academic work, so that will be another way of helping the planet, not forgetting the energy use and emissions coming from mobile phone use must also be restricted, by limiting the time you are allowed to spend on the phone.
To really make it count you can forget holidays to other places, that require the use of an airliner. Those concerts you like going to are fine, but you will have to make your own way there, carrying whatever you think you will need to make it all fun, and don't litter the place up with all your bottles, rubbish and tents when you leave, Got to protect the countryside you know!
I'm going to try some amateur psychology here. You will need to remember that you will have to start getting up earlier in order to get these places in time, (by walking and using public transport.) Also In order for you to get up in time, we will be removing the TV you have in your bedroom, so that you can get to bed early.
Since emissions production coming from global computer use is greater than that coming from global aviation, we will restrict your time on the computer to just enough to do your academic work, so that will be another way of helping the planet, not forgetting the energy use and emissions coming from mobile phone use must also be restricted, by limiting the time you are allowed to spend on the phone.
To really make it count you can forget holidays to other places, that require the use of an airliner. Those concerts you like going to are fine, but you will have to make your own way there, carrying whatever you think you will need to make it all fun, and don't litter the place up with all your bottles, rubbish and tents when you leave, Got to protect the countryside you know!
This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
Can you assure us all that all those `students' marching for climate change will do their bit, and stop asking to be driven to school. college, uni, concerts etc. they will not ask to be allowed to go on jet airliners to warm and exotic places for their holidays. They will not want new clothes, trainers, or the latest electronic gadgets, they will stop using the electricity consuming tv.s, computers and sound systems in their room, and in fact they will turn the heating in their rooms off, to save even more energy. As someone has correctly pointed out, the message was in fact practice what you preach, and if people cannot do that, then they are just do what I say but not what I actually do, hypocrites.
durbster said:
I'm going to try some amateur psychology here.
This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
Funny how people can see the same thing so differently. The point he made was accurate, yet you call it ridiculous just because it suits your position. Logic fail.This response is how your mind helps you cope with the overwhelming scale of the problem. You are creating a scenario so ridiculous so you don't have to confront the issue. Nothing can be done, therefore I don't have to worry about it.
durbster said:
Thankfully you're not in a position of responsibility and the reality is we can deal with the problem, at least in some way. We have the technology and it is improving all the time.
Now we do a reversal, and I see that statement as ridiculous.durbster said:
The main obstacle is the fact that there are corporate interests with a lot of influence and power that would prefer that not to happen, which is why this relatively straightforward issue has become a battleground in which people have become convinced that they are emotionally attached to coal, and are therefore prepared to fight for it.
Straightforward issues don't become battlegrounds. The colossal global warming gravy train of vested interests is what you appear to be blind to, yet you can so easily see fossil fuel interests. Rose tinted spectacles.deeps said:
Straightforward issues don't become battlegrounds. The colossal global warming gravy train of vested interests is what you appear to be blind to, yet you can so easily see fossil fuel interests. Rose tinted spectacles.
I've no idea what the "colossal global warming gravy train" is, other than a way of packaging up your agenda into a handy phrase that you can demonise, but the fossil fuel industry is still significantly larger than any alternative. Something like 20 times larger than the green energy sector as far as a quick google suggests.Carbon Brief said:
Each of the world’s top four oil and gas firms is on its own larger than the entire $220 billion stock market value of the clean energy sector, BNEF reports. The 275 listed coal firms are worth $233 billion.
According to this: https://www.carbonbrief.org/why-fossil-fuel-divest...durbster said:
deeps said:
Straightforward issues don't become battlegrounds. The colossal global warming gravy train of vested interests is what you appear to be blind to, yet you can so easily see fossil fuel interests. Rose tinted spectacles.
I've no idea what the "colossal global warming gravy train" is, other than a way of packaging up your agenda into a handy phrase that you can demonise, but the fossil fuel industry is still significantly larger than any alternative. Something like 20 times larger than the green energy sector as far as a quick google suggests.Carbon Brief said:
Each of the world’s top four oil and gas firms is on its own larger than the entire $220 billion stock market value of the clean energy sector, BNEF reports. The 275 listed coal firms are worth $233 billion.
According to this: https://www.carbonbrief.org/why-fossil-fuel-divest...Same old. Nothing has changed. Activism towing the uninformed along to miss a day's education they clearly need.
"Climate strike proves educators are indoctrinating students"
"Suffer the Striking Children – A Tale of Activism, Indoctrination and Mob Rule"
"Educational Malpractice on a Massive Scale: The Exploitation and Indoctrination of Children"
Here's the last one.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/educational-malpract...
.
"Climate strike proves educators are indoctrinating students"
"Suffer the Striking Children – A Tale of Activism, Indoctrination and Mob Rule"
"Educational Malpractice on a Massive Scale: The Exploitation and Indoctrination of Children"
Here's the last one.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/educational-malpract...
.
durbster said:
deeps said:
I actually believe you. You have no idea what the colossal global warming gravy train is, and herein lies the problem.
I'm going to guess it's a comically implausible conspiracy theory that only the critically gullible would believe.Do you think government due diligence will be sufficient to weed out those just chasing the money?
Do you understand that this is more than just the energy sector? It's about consultants, PR, advertising, education, carbon trading, carbon sequestration schemes. The list goes on.
Do you think governments will actually care where the money goes, after all it's not their money and it's probably better to say you've spent a billion on carbon reduction schemes then half a billion on actual projects that will deliver the promised return?
Do you think this might be self perpetuating? Government has money to give away, more people want that money or get concerned their own source will dry up so ever more catastrophic predictions are made. New areas of leveraging money out of the government are thought up like for instance getting school kids to go on strike in a very well publicized campaign.
Unless you have absolute faith in the competence of government and the kindness of strangers then you don't need an elaborate conspiracy theory to work out there will be a lot of shysters coming up with all manner of schemes to get their hands on that free money.
turbobloke said:
Same old. Nothing has changed. Activism towing the uninformed along to miss a day's education they clearly need.
"Climate strike proves educators are indoctrinating students"
"Suffer the Striking Children – A Tale of Activism, Indoctrination and Mob Rule"
"Educational Malpractice on a Massive Scale: The Exploitation and Indoctrination of Children"
Here's the last one.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/educational-malpract...
.
"The Epoch Times"? New to me but very interesting to read about it on Wiki."Climate strike proves educators are indoctrinating students"
"Suffer the Striking Children – A Tale of Activism, Indoctrination and Mob Rule"
"Educational Malpractice on a Massive Scale: The Exploitation and Indoctrination of Children"
Here's the last one.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/educational-malpract...
.
"In recent years, the newspaper's German edition has aligned with the German far right and the U.S. edition has favored the Trump administration"
"It also often publishes Pseudoscience including but not limited to UFOs and chemtrails in a section titled "Beyond Science". The section includes such articles as "12 Million-Year-Old Vehicle Tracks", Sumerian spaceships, hype over meditation and near-death experience."
"The paper has published articles questioning the validity of widely accepted scientific results such as evolution and climate change."
A lot of people are well aware of the reality of what's going on. Believers will still believe, faith being impervious to objective empirical evidence.
There's plenty of this about.
"Using Children to Shill for Bad Science: The Sham of the Children’s 'Climate Strike' ”
"Classroom Forecast: Miseducated with a High Chance of Indoctrination"
"Rise of youth climate activism fuels alarm over exploitation"
The child exploitation units USA-Europe really ought to get a grip on this.
There's plenty of this about.
"Using Children to Shill for Bad Science: The Sham of the Children’s 'Climate Strike' ”
"Classroom Forecast: Miseducated with a High Chance of Indoctrination"
"Rise of youth climate activism fuels alarm over exploitation"
The child exploitation units USA-Europe really ought to get a grip on this.
I've said it before - the UK produces 1% of global emissions and falling per year. We could stop producing CO2 emissions entirely and it would do the square root of f
k all for climate change (even according to worst case IPCC scenarios).
Mitigation has failed (Kyoto and Paris - not that there's much mitigation in Paris more money redistribution) . Only logical path is adaptation - so spend money on a secure hardened energy supply (nuclear and coal with back up from gas) - shore up sea defenses and better plans and better civil engineering for flooding. Anything else is pie in the sky illogical thinking.
Send the kids back to class to do the maths.
The pro-remain lobby keep telling us how little importance the UK has on the world stage so stop wasting money on doomed to failure virtue signalling.
k all for climate change (even according to worst case IPCC scenarios). Mitigation has failed (Kyoto and Paris - not that there's much mitigation in Paris more money redistribution) . Only logical path is adaptation - so spend money on a secure hardened energy supply (nuclear and coal with back up from gas) - shore up sea defenses and better plans and better civil engineering for flooding. Anything else is pie in the sky illogical thinking.
Send the kids back to class to do the maths.
The pro-remain lobby keep telling us how little importance the UK has on the world stage so stop wasting money on doomed to failure virtue signalling.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff