This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Maggot Bromley 10 Mar 20 3.41pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Thank you. So Cryrst was wrong, and only about 12,000 people died in 1937.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Maggot Bromley 10 Mar 20 3.44pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
A more measured response to Extinction Rebellion these scientists do not think it is possible to be carbon neutral by 2050 let alone earlier without damaging our economy. As I said in an earlier post let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Edited by Badger11 (10 Mar 2020 3.05pm) We can't save the planet, it costs too much
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 10 Mar 20 3.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Maggot
Thank you. So Cryrst was wrong, and only about 12,000 people died in 1937. While I wouldn't say 'number of deaths' is strictly relevant due to technological and infrastructure improvements since earlier last century I would say that you did kind of ignore what that graph was saying.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Speronilover69 8=D~~ Horsham 10 Mar 20 4.06pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Maggot
We can't save the planet, it costs too much
Edited by Speronilover69 8=D~~ (10 Mar 2020 4.07pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 10 Mar 20 4.07pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC
I agree with the UK point from a purely technical outcome - but in order to change things you also have to commit yourself for others to follow and take you seriously. I’m not sure you could expect any of the big polluting nations to listen to us, or anyone else if we weren’t at least trying to practice what we preached. Several small steps are better than none. And yes, there’s loads of VS going on but that’s just par for the course - nothing ever happens fast unless someone takes a massive s*** on the doorstep. At the moment the gut is starting to rumble. Also I got bored of the man made/natural cycle/accelerated cycle/made up/not made up roundabout of arguments a while ago. It distracts from the real issue - just stop polluting. Sorry I missed this due to my enjoyably pointless troll wars with 'progressive inc'. Personally I don't think wearing a hair-shirt is going to make any difference to the attitude of China or indeed India. They aren't.....how shall we put this....'pro Greta'. I'm not in favour of economically hamstringing ourselves as some sort of 'environmental Jesus on the cross' example that will get laughed at. If you are genuinely serious about reducing pollution then get that sterilization needle out for the third world.....because that's where all the pollution growth is going to come from...as rapid population and GDP growth continue. The Europeans are the only sados not having enough kids to replace themselves......Yet all these wackos are virtue signaling at us. Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Mar 2020 4.08pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Maggot Bromley 10 Mar 20 5.43pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Are you serious? Even if we ignore the horrific, eugenic nature of this suggestion. The poorest people in the 3rd world have the smallest carbon footprints, especially compared to us wealthy westerners. They don't drive or fly and use hardly any electricity.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 10 Mar 20 5.58pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Maggot
Are you serious? Even if we ignore the horrific, eugenic nature of this suggestion. The poorest people in the 3rd world have the smallest carbon footprints, especially compared to us wealthy westerners. They don't drive or fly and use hardly any electricity. You aren't serious about tackling pollution then. Also, rather irritatingly you don't seem to have read the post properly. The third world is rapidly developing...Both in population and GDP and hence emissions...that's where all the extra pollution is going to come from....that and other non European sources and certainly not Europe, where the population rate is decreasing. Eugenics has nothing whatsoever to do with it....Indeed, explain what you mean? Plus you ignored the point about the graph. Edited by Stirlingsays (10 Mar 2020 6.12pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 10 Mar 20 7.23pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Maggot
Thank you. So Cryrst was wrong, and only about 12,000 people died in 1937. Oh dear.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 10 Mar 20 7.23pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Fanx ted
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Maggot Bromley 10 Mar 20 8.38pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by cryrst
Oh dear.
As pointed out elsewhere advances in technology and healthcare mean that fortunately the death tolls are now lower. Can you please provide evidence for your claims about arctic ice increasing. The amount of snowfall is irrelevant. I refer again to my temperature graph as you ignored it previously. Edited by Maggot (10 Mar 2020 8.46pm) Attachment: GlobalAverage_2018.png (264.33Kb)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Maggot Bromley 10 Mar 20 8.48pm | |
---|---|
In the not so distant future, people will look at climate change deniers in the same light as Holocaust deniers.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
SavoyTruffle 10 Mar 20 9.55pm | |
---|---|
The only reason this exists as any type of debate topic is because the wealthiest industry in human history has spent billions of dollars to spread disinformation in the hope of maintaining their profits. Oil and gas companies such as ExxonMobil were tracking the effects of CO2 in the atmosphere and climate modelling as early as 1970s and on repeated occasion their own research was showing the damage their industry was having. You can read about it above. They then spent insane amounts of money on lobbying politicians and the media to lie and block climate legislation. If you deny the effects of climate change you are simply doing the bidding of the fossil fuel industry, only difference is you the sucker not getting paid like the politicians and talking heads on TV.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.