This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Climate Change Activists
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 EverybodyDannsNow  SE19 18 Aug 23 12.16pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Nicely sums up the issue. I assume this was turned down by the Welsh Labour government so the nasty Tories can't be blamed this time. Everybody wants renewable energy as long as you don't build anything near them or impact the views / environment. My message to the Green, pick a bloody solution you're against everything and for nothing. The reason it was turned down is literally written in the article - we don't need to invent one. There's definitely some truth in the bit in bold, but that's no different from those claiming they support environmental causes but refuse to make any sort of lifestyle change, a la ULEZ. I've said on this thread previously, societally it feels like we haven't really come to terms with the scale of change required in terms of how we live.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| steeleye20 Croydon 18 Aug 23 12.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
From the Met Office what jet streams are including how they can produce cool wet summers.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
ASCPFC  Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 18 Aug 23 12.51pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
From the Met Office what jet streams are including how they can produce cool wet summers.
I always have a jet stream after a couple of lagers.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  18 Aug 23 1.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
I always have a jet stream after a couple of lagers. Me too but these days the ratio is the other way round.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| YT Oxford 18 Aug 23 2.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
The reason it was turned down is literally written in the article - we don't need to invent one. There's definitely some truth in the bit in bold, but that's no different from those claiming they support environmental causes but refuse to make any sort of lifestyle change, a la ULEZ. I've said on this thread previously, societally it feels like we haven't really come to terms with the scale of change required in terms of how we live.
Most people I know - and that goes right across the social spectrum - don't actually care that much. They rail against being lectured and they have little or no regard for authority and very much a shrug of the shoulders attitude. Edited by YT (18 Aug 2023 3.18pm)
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 18 Aug 23 3.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by YT
Most people I know - and that goes right across the social spectrum - don't actually care that much. They rail against being lectured and they have no little or no regard for authority and very much a shrug if the shoulders attitude. Yeah, that’s my point, although I’d speculate it’s not that diverse a spectrum politically if none of them care. There is a fairly broad demographic of people who think their right to convenience trumps the need to do anything that might help environmentally, despite the overwhelming warnings from the scientific community that something needs to change. They generally justify such behaviour by claiming it’s only the method of the protest, or the lecturing, which they have an issue with really, but funny enough nothing ever seems to meet their criteria to actually change their behaviour.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| YT Oxford 18 Aug 23 3.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Yeah, that’s my point, although I’d speculate it’s not that diverse a spectrum politically if none of them care. There is a fairly broad demographic of people who think their right to convenience trumps the need to do anything that might help environmentally, despite the overwhelming warnings from the scientific community that something needs to change. They generally justify such behaviour by claiming it’s only the method of the protest, or the lecturing, which they have an issue with really, but funny enough nothing ever seems to meet their criteria to actually change their behaviour. So you've somehow managed to yet again insinuate (basically) that Tories are to blame. Regarding the people I was referring to, you couldn't be wider of the mark.
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 18 Aug 23 3.36pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by YT
So you've somehow managed to yet again insinuate (basically) that Tories are to blame. Regarding the people I was referring to, you couldn't be wider of the mark. I haven’t blamed anyone specifically, but if the shoe fits…
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Nicholas91  The Democratic Republic of Kent 18 Aug 23 3.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Yeah, that’s my point, although I’d speculate it’s not that diverse a spectrum politically if none of them care. There is a fairly broad demographic of people who think their right to convenience trumps the need to do anything that might help environmentally, despite the overwhelming warnings from the scientific community that something needs to change. They generally justify such behaviour by claiming it’s only the method of the protest, or the lecturing, which they have an issue with really, but funny enough nothing ever seems to meet their criteria to actually change their behaviour. That seems an odd way to look at it, without dismissing the point completely. From what I've seen and attitudes I have been exposed to, which are of course only going to represent a very small portion of the whole society, the somewhat dispassionate stance of many on the environment is a reaction to either weak, contrasting or ambiguous information presented. Throw in conspiracy theories and misinformation peddling loud mouths decrying the whole thing and you have a barrel of nonsense. We can also add in that which falls under the banner of 'lecturing' and a few self-righteous unemployables who hijack the cause to disrupt people's lives and what you have is any semblance of coherence and leadership for the issue becoming unidentifiable and it being associated on both sides with malcontents. I would say it's general ignorance or lack of faith in the narrative coupled with the absence of a clear plan of action that has people less inclined to pay it any attention. It all seems completed siloed and existent in pockets. Also, using London as an example, the association of this with a weasel mayor who'll extort money out of you during a CoL crisis for the slightest infringement on a box junction, when it may not even be your fault, and failures blocking traffic with banners, all you'll have left is an antagonistic sentiment towards the whole thing from the average person. I'm not for the complete centralisation of power over an issue but I think here it is missing but necessary. Clear leadership, clear narrative and clear strategy. People's lives are multi-faceted and riddles with issues, expecting everyone to devote all their research and resources into the environment is unrealistic if not unjustified. I don't think it's people just wanting to keep their lifestyle even if the consequences are catastrophic.
Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
The groover  Danbury 18 Aug 23 3.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Whilst population growth is undeniably a massive factor, it's far from the only one, and the idea that nothing can change unless that does is demonstrably untrue. You're also doing exactly what you're accusing others of - focusing on one thing within a broad, complex topic with many variables and factors. There are many campaigns and movements tackling deforestation, forest fires and pretty much every other climate-related issue - the fossil fuels stuff is only so prominent in conversation currently because the protests have made it so... the protests that don't achieve anything that is. Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely some difficult conversations around overpopulation on the horizon, but I don't think it's a golden bullet that solves the problem overnight, and there are plenty of wins we can achieve more easily in the meantime. So you highlight one thing and say i'm doing exactly what i'm saying others are doing and focusing on one thing when the rest of my final sentence lists other things that need addressing............. Very strange. However, population growth is being ignored. Less people equals less live stock, less agriculture, houses, transport, clothing etc etc. ergo, less CO2, less methane. So kind of like a golden bullet then. All of the other things need addressing though and quickly. But restricting people to two kids now would have a very quick result. Cutting CO2 emissions is p***ing in the wind. The UK could stop all GHG emissions tomorrow and it would have hardly any effect. Not with the likes of China, India and the USA out there. People also forget that with melting permafrost natural release of methane and CO2 increases dramatically.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| YT Oxford 18 Aug 23 3.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
I haven’t blamed anyone specifically, but if the shoe fits… Then you haven't got a clue what you are talking about, my friend. You need to get out more (or just get out) and meet some real people.
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 18 Aug 23 4.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Nicholas91
That seems an odd way to look at it, without dismissing the point completely. From what I've seen and attitudes I have been exposed to, which are of course only going to represent a very small portion of the whole society, the somewhat dispassionate stance of many on the environment is a reaction to either weak, contrasting or ambiguous information presented. Throw in conspiracy theories and misinformation peddling loud mouths decrying the whole thing and you have a barrel of nonsense. We can also add in that which falls under the banner of 'lecturing' and a few self-righteous unemployables who hijack the cause to disrupt people's lives and what you have is any semblance of coherence and leadership for the issue becoming unidentifiable and it being associated on both sides with malcontents. I would say it's general ignorance or lack of faith in the narrative coupled with the absence of a clear plan of action that has people less inclined to pay it any attention. It all seems completed siloed and existent in pockets. Also, using London as an example, the association of this with a weasel mayor who'll extort money out of you during a CoL crisis for the slightest infringement on a box junction, when it may not even be your fault, and failures blocking traffic with banners, all you'll have left is an antagonistic sentiment towards the whole thing from the average person. I'm not for the complete centralisation of power over an issue but I think here it is missing but necessary. Clear leadership, clear narrative and clear strategy. People's lives are multi-faceted and riddles with issues, expecting everyone to devote all their research and resources into the environment is unrealistic if not unjustified. I don't think it's people just wanting to keep their lifestyle even if the consequences are catastrophic. That’s a great post, firstly - the first paragraph is spot on in terms of the fringes taking over the conversation, worded far better than I could manage. I think the narrative and indeed strategy from the environmental groups is pretty straightforward and they have highlighted some fairly specific policies that they are campaigning for. There is pretty much uniform opinion from the scientific community on where we’re at and where we’re heading. I think we’re at a stage now where we can say the consequences are catastrophic, and yet there’s still a huge percentage of people unwilling to change - we obviously view their reasons for that differently, but to me it is starting to feel like however the message is sent, some people just don’t want to hear it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.