Wild fires in BC Canada.

[paulrbarnard]

Suggest you read what I posted again and this time understand what I wrote and NOT what you think I wrote.

Actually I did, perhaps you didn’t…
In your original message you said you wife was “done”, so speeding. In your message before this you said she was below the limit and speeded because of the van and that the van was at the limit. If the van was at the limit why did your wife exceed the limit?
Totally inconsistent narrative to excuse your wife from speeding. She was speeding and she was caught. The fact there was a speed check there indicates in itself that it is a prime spot to milk the motorist with a “tax”. See what I did there?

 

[Adam W.]

Risks seem to be a bit more severe than that!
https://www.theccc.org.uk/what-is-climate-change/what-are-the-risks/
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/chris-packham-is-it-time-to-break-the-law

Perhaps, but short termism rules the day.

 

[Agent_zed]

Nor will "a balanced approach". It's like warfare, there may be no half measures.
All out stoppage as soon as possible seems to be the one essential option. We have no choice and it's very late already.

What is your timeframe you are suggesting? What are you stopping, all fossil fuels into or out of the UK?

 

[Jacob]

What is your timeframe you are suggesting? What are you stopping, all fossil fuels into or out of the UK?

Time frame a.s.a.p. To achieve this means some very positive action such as not opening oil/gas wells or rowing back on green agendas, as both parties seem to support.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/daily-brief/rishi-sunak-confirms-rollback-of-key-green-targets/https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ja...-starmer-mayor-north-tyne-green-climate-ulez/

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Unless the public are supportive of changes mandated to avoid dangerous climate change, the casualty would be democracy.

An analogy. The maximum speed attainable by a displacement hull is 1.4 x sq root of the waterline length. Note speed boats etc have a fundamentally different hull design..

We used to go canal cruising. Once a boat reaches its maximum hull speed it is all but futile trying to go faster - noise, vibration, pollution but no more speed. The bow wave and trough created means the boat is effectively trying to motor uphill.

Responding to climate change at a pace Jacob feels appropriate is (I suspect) like pushing the canal boat - the symptoms would be different but similarly non-productive.

Whilst many (perhaps even most) accept climate change is happening due to the actions of humanity, like me they seem unprepared to make significant sacrifices to avoid a prognosis that seems unrealistically negative.

The solution for the "climate activist" may be a coup, taking control and forcing through changes with which some/many do not agree and at a pace that most find unacceptable. Whether such a power grab cpould be sustained or encourage an equally beligerant response is open to debate.

 

[Cobbs]

Unless the public are supportive of changes mandated to avoid dangerous climate change, the casualty would be democracy.

An analogy. The maximum speed attainable by a displacement hull is 1.4 x sq root of the waterline length. Note speed boats etc have a fundamentally different hull design..

We used to go canal cruising. Once a boat reaches its maximum hull speed it is all but futile trying to go faster - noise, vibration, pollution but no more speed. The bow wave and trough created means the boat is effectively trying to motor uphill.

Responding to climate change at a pace Jacob feels appropriate is (I suspect) like pushing the canal boat - the symptoms would be different but similarly non-productive.

Whilst many (perhaps even most) accept climate change is happening due to the actions of humanity, like me they seem unprepared to make significant sacrifices to avoid a prognosis that seems unrealistically negative.

The solution for the "climate activist" may be a coup, taking control and forcing through changes with which some/many do not agree and at a pace that most find unacceptable. Whether such a power grab cpould be sustained or encourage an equally beligerant response is open to debate.

I think the public are broadly supportive, it's the old problem of entrenched private interests being in control of the political structures and dictating the way measures are - or more importantly, are not implemented. The recent opening up of new oil fields in the North Sea being a good example, with the majority of the British public being against it, along with the scientific community, but the people at the top accepting back-handers in some form or other to push it through.
I find it disappointing that you admit to not being prepared to even try...

 

[Jacob]

Unless the public are supportive of changes mandated to avoid dangerous climate change, the casualty would be democracy.

Some very basic misunderstanding of British Constitution here.
Whether or not they are supportive, the public will be the casualty of climate change if the right things are not done soon enough.
Why is the word "mandated" always being slipped into these arguments?
MPs are "mandated" to act on our behalf in our best interests, not merely to follow a predetermined programme, even less to follow public opinion. If that was the case we wouldn't need them anyway the civil service could just hold plebiscites. There'd be a lot of them if you wanted to replace Parliament, like several general elections a day throughout the year! That'd be fun!
Governments should act on expert opinion, not by opinion of the mob - that's what gave us the brexit fiasco!

.

 

[NickDReed]

Expert opinion

 

[Jacob]

Expert opinion

No, he is an idiiot. There are a lot of them about.

 

[NickDReed]

No, he is an idiiot. There are a lot of them about.

Facts remain facts even if you don't personally like them, or they don't support your opinion.

 

[Cobbs]

Expert opinion

For every one of him, you'll find a hundred well qualified people who disagree. I think it makes sense to follow the consensus, even while allowing for other opinions; I think football is a load of b0ll0cks, but it would seem I'm in the tiny minority, so maybe we shouldn't ban it...

 

[Jacob]

Facts remain facts even if you don't personally like them, or they don't support your opinion.

Untruths remain untruths even if you personally like them, or they support your opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scien... consensus is,and severity of global effects.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Nick, he only holds a physics doctorate from the M.I.T. so he obviously is not as qualified as Jacob to have an opinion.

 

[Jacob]

Nick, he only holds a physics doctorate from the M.I.T. so he obviously is not as qualified as Jacob to have an opinion.

He hasn't convinced his peer group of scientists, who are near 100% behind climate science.
Even idiiots can get qualifications - just look at the series of clowns who emerge from Oxford with PPE degrees!

 

[NickDReed]

You shall be asked to hand in your computers, mobile phones, cars, heated and insulated homes and modern conveniences at the entrance to your cave prior to beginning your hunter gatherer life.

All the best

 

[Phil Pascoe]

A PPE degree isn't quite the same thing as a physics doctorate.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

another "*****"

 

[Jacob]

You shall be asked to hand in your computers, mobile phones, cars, heated and insulated homes and modern conveniences at the entrance to your cave prior to beginning your hunter gatherer life.

All the best

Actually you could be part right on this, but many bits of technology have relatively low carbon footprint, but more importantly our knowledge of the world and how it works may make for a very different world.

 

[NickDReed]

Actually you could be part right on this, but many bits of technology have relatively low carbon footprint, but more importantly our knowledge of the world and how it works may make for a very different world.

Which bits of tech would you consider to have low carbon footprint?

 

[Jameshow]

Unless the public are supportive of changes mandated to avoid dangerous climate change, the casualty would be democracy.

An analogy. The maximum speed attainable by a displacement hull is 1.4 x sq root of the waterline length. Note speed boats etc have a fundamentally different hull design..

We used to go canal cruising. Once a boat reaches its maximum hull speed it is all but futile trying to go faster - noise, vibration, pollution but no more speed. The bow wave and trough created means the boat is effectively trying to motor uphill.

Responding to climate change at a pace Jacob feels appropriate is (I suspect) like pushing the canal boat - the symptoms would be different but similarly non-productive.

Whilst many (perhaps even most) accept climate change is happening due to the actions of humanity, like me they seem unprepared to make significant sacrifices to avoid a prognosis that seems unrealistically negative.

The solution for the "climate activist" may be a coup, taking control and forcing through changes with which some/many do not agree and at a pace that most find unacceptable. Whether such a power grab cpould be sustained or encourage an equally beligerant response is open to debate.

Agreed, the country can only move at the speed that it can maintain, re EV car take up infrastructure, green energy etc.

If we simply stop oil what about all the alied industries that depend on oil esp plastics.
Such as pharma / healthcare, clothing, chemical industries.

Who will they cope with a halting of oil? it's not like we can ban it like creosote!

We will still buy oil just from Russian, Saudi etc why not extract it here not to is to increase sea miles! Not to is simply virtue signalling to the environment lobby and to our own deficit!