A little truth for a change.

[Dee J]

The most amazing one is the 15 minute cities - a concept that essentially says ‘wouldn’t it be good if most people could walk to the shops’ that has somehow been sold to those with slightly boiled heads as ‘the WEF/Bill Gates/George Soros are going to fine-imprison you for leaving your house/designated local area’
Often they’ll try and convince you by telling you to wake up/open your eyes/stop being sheeple.
Which is ironic.

Love the idea of 15 minute towns. I live in one. 15 minutes walk gets me to shops, GP, cinema, theatre, library, waterside park and out to country walks, and to a bus and train station too. It's an old-style market town that's not dead yet.
But the transition to 15 minute cities is harder. A city I spend some time in for University is aiming towards the 15 minute target, but with usual council and planning mismanagement. No investment in local services, but with an anti-driving ethos. So, reduced places for private cars, limited traffic flows, punative parking charges etc. But no new GP surgeries, no rate relief for local shops, flaky bus service etc. Even for a woke hippy greeny like me it does rather read as 'all stick, no carrot'. I can empathise with the anti feeling in this context.

 

[Jacob]

The problem is capitalism is driven by greed.

It’s going to be very painful

Hey Robin you are sounding a bit like a socialist!
I'm a bit easier on "capitalism" - it's just a way of getting things done, but it's up to society to make sure these things are done in the public interest, with fair wages, distribution of profits, high levels of tax to support public services etc. etc

 

[John Brown]

No, I don't think so. The people made the government aware of their feelings on a whole raft of issues including the cost to the UK for belonging to an increasingly poorer club, the control of the UK by EU, immigration and border control, trade restrictions outside of the EU.

Sadly, Brexit came the pandemic, which muddied the waters and took away the clear financial benefits which, after completing our finacial responsibilities in the EU, would have left us better off sooner. The world economy worsened and foreign workers went home to look after their families which overshadowed the last 4 years.

We are in a time when many factors are pulling on the purse-strings in ways we didn't imagine in 2016. Get those issues sorted and global prosperity will return and the benefits of Brexit will begin to emerge. As it stands today, my share portfolio is still rising, and I use that as an indication of my own situation and of those generally.

I wasn't duped. I was smart enough to know the potential benefits and voted accordingly. Give the nation some credibility.

Well let us know when you identify the actual benefits. I believe the markets are doing well right now, in America also. Probably got nothing to do with Brexit. Immigration from the EU is down, immigration from outside the EU is up.

 

[Jacob]

..... with an anti-driving ethos. So, reduced places for private cars, limited traffic flows, punative parking charges etc.

Sounds good. This is the future, this brief era of unlimited personal mechanised transport is coming to an end. Public transport is the alternative, or Shank's pony/bicycle.

 

[Dee J]

It wasn't a mistake. It was a democratic decision made by the electorate. I suppose Remainers still smart at the reality.

Indeed I do. To know that's the way the vote went made me feel even more disconnected from the UK... a Brexit voting, Conservative voting UK doesn't feel like home. . If I could have found a way I could afford to leave before the barriers went up, I would have done. Equally anybody I know who has a second passport option has taken that up..Sadly I don't have that choice.

 

[Dee J]

Sounds good. This is the future, this brief era of unlimited personal mechanised transport is coming to an end. Public transport is the alternative, or Shank's pony/bicycle.

I don't think the destination of a well resourced 15 minute city is wrong, as I clearly said. Just that I'm not surprised that the mismanaged route to get there might not achieve universal support.

 

[Keith Cocker]

No, I don't think so. The people made the government aware of their feelings on a whole raft of issues including the cost to the UK for belonging to an increasingly poorer club, the control of the UK by EU, immigration and border control, trade restrictions outside of the EU.

Sadly, Brexit came the pandemic, which muddied the waters and took away the clear financial benefits which, after completing our finacial responsibilities in the EU, would have left us better off sooner. The world economy worsened and foreign workers went home to look after their families which overshadowed the last 4 years.

We are in a time when many factors are pulling on the purse-strings in ways we didn't imagine in 2016. Get those issues sorted and global prosperity will return and the benefits of Brexit will begin to emerge. As it stands today, my share portfolio is still rising, and I use that as an indication of my own situation and of those generally.

I wasn't duped. I was smart enough to know the potential benefits and voted accordingly. Give the nation some credibility.

Ah yes! Damn pesky Covid! And Putin too of course. It would all have gone swimmingly otherwise. But wait! All other EU countries experienced those factor too and they seem to be doing better than us. Funny old world int it? Enjoy your Brexit benefits when they eventually arrive.

 

[RobinBHM]

So, are you ignoring the science that is categoric that water vapour absorbs infa red to the same extent as CO2 and is classified as a greenhouse gas. So, you prefer to pick on CO2, at a concentration of 0.04% rather than water vapour which is 0.4%? Just 10 times more water vapour…..and that has no effect?

"science is categoric that water vapour absorbs infra red to the same extent as co2 and is classified as a greenhouse gas"

the devil is in the detail, it might absorb infra red at the same rate but:

1) Co2 mixes well all the way up to 50 kilometres

2) while water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas in our atmosphere, it has “windows” that allow some of the infrared energy to escape without being absorbed. In addition, water vapor is concentrated lower in the atmosphere

3) The higher the greenhouse gas, the more effective it is at trapping heat from the Earth’s surface.

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/30/co2-drives-global-warming/

 

[John Brown]

Just try suggesting that there are only two genders, or that men in dresses shouldn’t be allowed in women spaces to see how quickly in almost any profession your going to find yourself unemployed and possible visited by plod. Now, biology and psychology science in this arena has been thrown out of the window. If you want to cut off your arm most countries treat you for a mental illness of body dysmorphia, but if it’s your ****, then society celebrates your intuition and would like to ensure kiddies can do it too.

Please don’t suggest science cannot be corrupted by an insane idea.

I struggle to understand why some of you seem to be obsessed by the gender issue.
I'm just grateful that I was lucky enough to grow up with no doubts about my sexuality or gender. I imagine, however that it can be a living hell for those who do.

 

[RobinBHM]

Hey Robin you are sounding a bit like a socialist!
I'm a bit easier on "capitalism" - it's just a way of getting things done, but it's up to society to make sure these things are done in the public interest, with fair wages, distribution of profits, high levels of tax to support public services etc. etc

the problem is that the natural order of human civilisation is that the most ambitious, the most narcissistic, the most power hungry will always rise to the top.

Capitalism emulates the natural world of survival of the fittest, its how we are wired.

the problem with socialism, marxism and communism is they want an egalitarian society so we all share equally.........but those systems have no checks and balances to prevent the power hungry from taking control and suppressing everybody else.


I fully support the ideals of socialism, I dont support the political drive towards it.


one thing that is far more important is that countries with weak political systems like FPTP have far lower living standards and far higher wealth inequality compared to the best political systems using some form of PR. The UK is a poor country with a few very rich people.........thats not good.

I am not making a political point here, just a philosophical one, I dont want to get this thread blocked.

its relevant to climate change because capitalism and stopping climate change are incompatible

 

[RobinBHM]

I struggle to understand why some of you seem to be obsessed by the gender issue.
I'm just grateful that I was lucky enough to grow up with no doubts about my sexuality or gender. I imagine, however that it can be a living hell for those who do.

there is somebody a few doors up from me, who has changed from a man to a woman -at least in appearance.

I see her walking up to the local shop -it must take so much courage to do that, I feel awfully for those people who go through it because they were born in the wrong body

I dont like the aggressive trans lobby nor do I like politics turning it into a culture war to divide us..........lets just all have a bit of compassion for people who dont want to be the gender of the biological body they are born with.

 

[RobinBHM]

It was also a tremendous example of how democracy can be manipulated
and abused.

democracy can only exist with an informed electorate and a media that can hold people to account

we have neither

 

[Keith Cocker]

democracy can only exist with an informed electorate and a media that can hold people to account

we have neither

Robin. Can I applaud you for your last three posts in this thread. Clear, insightful , cogent and kind.

 

[Cobbs]

You might if you had no vehicle, no public transport and no livelihood out there in the countryside.

I lived in a town for a long time, hated it. I do live in the countryside with no vehicle, and no public transport, though I do have a living. Luckily, the missis has a car, but if she hadn't, I'd get a bike. I just hate having no space around me and people in the way - god, I hate people...

 

[RobinBHM]

Robin. Can I applaud you for your last three posts in this thread. Clear, insightful , cogent and kind.

Thank you, that’s much appreciated.

It is a very interesting thread which sadly is on the edge of getting locked and I’m trying to write posts that avoid politics or the B word.

It would be nice to keep the thread going and remain polite

 

[Yorkieguy]

Much talk on here about 'democracy'.

It brings to mind Herman Goering's quote at Nuremburg:

It was about going to war, but replace 'war' with 'Covid-19' (lockdown etc), Brexit, 'climate crisis' 'net zero' or whatever, and people can be brought to heel. They then denounce others who aren't 'on message' and do the government's work for them.

Quote:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

Unquote.

(Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials)

 

[ey_tony]

Here's a simple question for all you Global Warming, Greta loving enthusiasts.

If you were a 'scientist' whatever that means and disagreed with the so called consensus opinion of the other so called scientists, would you speak out or would you just bite your tongue knowing full well that to do so would effectively be an end to your career, which it effectively would be given that so many of these so called consensus scientists are dependent upon government funding for their livelihoods.

I'd argue that irrespective of whether correct or not, the consensus opinion is like a religion which is infallible. There is absolutely no allowance for dissent and anyone disagreeing must be destroyed.
You have to be very careful when accepting the word of so called cotemporary scientists. For instance when Alfred Wegener proposed the theory of continental drift back in the early 20th Century he was poo pooed by the consensus peer scientists who mocked him. It wasn't until the 1960s that he was proved correct and is now accepted as fact proving the consensus opinion of that time was completely wrong so treat each argument with suspicion before accepting it as correct.

Also how does one explain the deliberate suppression of facts in Mann's 1998 Hockey Stick analogy used to explain the so called rise in global temperatures since the industrial period took off, therefore influencing the IPCC? He and his compadres conveniently left out the Medieval Warming Period and The Little Ice Age all based on a tree ring study of a single tree which would have completely changed the argument.

We always hear about how much the temperature has risen since the 1860s when records began properly but the scientists conveniently forget to point out that the Little Ice Age only ended around the 1860s so it wouldn't be out of sync to expect that there would be a temperature rise from about that time irrespective putting it all down to industrialisation. It is also the whole basis for net zero and the 2 degree figure which must not be crossed today.

The fact is that temperatures certainly in the Northern Hemisphere have been rising over the past 20,000 years since the last ice age ended. Here in the UK, there was no North Sea until just over 8,000 years ago. Up to that point we were part of the European land mass and not a series of islands as the UK is today. Up to 20,000 years ago there was ice up to 2 miles thick resting on the UK, evidence for this are the raised beaches due to isostatic adjustment which can be found.
The climate according to geological records has never been stable and we are in one of a series of interglacial stages so temperatures will fluctuate.

Now before the usual mob wheels out the climate denier label for me, let me point out that I am in no way a climate denier or disagree that anthropogenic production of so called greenhouse gasses is not impacting on our climate but it's the use of flawed data and research with which I disagree.
I do have an Hons degree in geophysics and geology and have studied the effects of GW for over 30 years so I perhaps understand a little more than the average punter so to speak.

The fact is that GW is a huge worldwide business. There's something like 30,000 or more 'scientists' whose incomes from government grants etc are dependent on proving GW is anthropogenic in origin so one would do well to be very circumspect when accepting the 'facts' as put out by so called scientists and should be scrutinised carefully.
These facts will have huge impacts in the years to come.

 

[DrPhill]

Love the idea of 15 minute towns. I live in one. 15 minutes walk gets me to shops, GP, cinema, theatre, library, waterside park and out to country walks, and to a bus and train station too. It's an old-style market town that's not dead yet.
But the transition to 15 minute cities is harder. A city I spend some time in for University is aiming towards the 15 minute target, but with usual council and planning mismanagement. No investment in local services, but with an anti-driving ethos. So, reduced places for private cars, limited traffic flows, punative parking charges etc. But no new GP surgeries, no rate relief for local shops, flaky bus service etc. Even for a woke hippy greeny like me it does rather read as 'all stick, no carrot'. I can empathise with the anti feeling in this context.

So do I, I wonder if we are both in the same town (Newton Abbot)

 

[selectortone]

I dont like the aggressive trans lobby nor do I like politics turning it into a culture war to divide us..........lets just all have a bit of compassion for people who dont want to be the gender of the biological body they are born with.

Well said.

 

[DrPhill]

If you were a 'scientist' whatever that means and disagreed with the so called consensus opinion of the other so called scientists, would you speak out or would you just bite your tongue knowing full well that to do so would effectively be an end to your career

Look up 'False Dichotomy'
A scientist will not face end-of-career for having a different view if they can show the evidence that supports the view. Informed scientific debate happens and when the evidence for one position outweighs another scientists are happy to change their position if needed.
A scientist who ignores counter evidence and/or fakes data to support their position will be found out and suffer career limitation. I was a scientist once (for about 15 years). I have seen this process in action.
If you truly disbelieve anthropogenic climate change despite the evidence then there is plenty of funding available from the likes of Shell, Exon and their friends.