Extinction Rebellion - I'm extremely sorry for the inconvenience

Lex-Man wrote:Most people in comments were saying she was a hypocrite and should practise what she preached.

The education system desperately needs to teach children about recognising fallacies in arguments and equip people with the ability to debate rationally. It's endlessly disheartening to see almost every important debate dominated by nonsensical discussion points. As humans we're seemingly predisposed to fall for a lot of these fallacies, but an honest popular democracy requires us to elevate our thinking above them.

Blue Eyes wrote:Actual Facebook post on this subject.

Why are these people not at work? and how did they arrive in London by Coachs/cars.if they wish to save the planet half the peop[ole in the world will; be out of work. If these people want to save this planet.please tell us HOW.

Sod the planet. We need jobs! Jobs for working!

Being slightly contrarion here, but there is a point that massive reduction in fossil fuel emissions in such a short time frame, would adversely hit the economy in such a way that you would probably see as almost as many poverty related deaths worldwide as would be caused by the climate emergency anyway. Except possibly in a shorter time frame.

There has to be some kind of balance to get the time frame for change right, with a switch over to electric or solar powered vehicles phased in, employment switching over to the new industry it creates etc.

The gloomy outlook is that I don't think any global government will be able to implement policy to get us there. I think it's far more likely they will just react to the climate emergency as it is happening. Which, if you think about it, is a situation we are probably already in.

Lex-Man wrote:There was a Metro article about Peirs Moron having a go at one of their organizers because she wouldn't confirm if she had a TV or not. Most people in comments were saying she was a hypocrite and should practise what she preached.

To be fair if we did get rid of all the tellys then nobody would have to see Piers Morgan again.

I hate Piers Morgan almost as much as I hate James Cordon!

Photek wrote:I hate Piers Morgan almost as much as I hate James Cordon!

Think we just discovered who wrote one of the reviews in Vermi's ongoing One Star Movie Reviews Quiz!

8. Did that just really happen? Rapping sparrows, incredibly cruel and crude animals, and more deliberate en-ger-lish signposting than you could shake a Harrods bag at. After the Yankification and turgid Williams soundtrack of BFG, us Brits have to take it up the rectum once again with this abomination of a film. Snide, cruel jokes from beginning to end including a horrific pig character that is guaranteed to scare the hell out of any 10 year old or below, I know they have to cater for the lowest common denominator to hit the big money but this is truly appalling. My tip: get all the old original swallows and amazons, railway children, BFG (Cosgrove's not Hollywood's), even Disney's Rescuers ... and save your children's brains before it's too late. God I hate James Corden!

Photek wrote:I hate Piers Morgan almost as much as I hate James Cordon!

I can understand why people would find Cordon annoying but he’s not even close to Morgan in the hate stakes.

Moggy wrote:

Photek wrote:I hate Piers Morgan almost as much as I hate James Cordon!

I can understand why people would find Cordon annoying but he’s not even close to Morgan in the hate stakes.

We should really wait until the Gavin & Stacey Christmas Special airs before deciding how much we all hate James Corden.

Oh!

Jenuall wrote:Oh!

arright jenuall what's going on arright

James Corden is annoying now but Gavin and Stacey was a great series.

Blue Eyes wrote:https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1188102/Extinction-Rebellion-protest-diesel-generator-London-camp-climate-change-environment?fbclid=IwAR0gRm1lCuRAf_7xjZmsoa3jaZKhYCeU3mTwoE8Rqi4jeuF7E18lMIAX_m4

oh dear.

Its one generator. Do they expect people to just magic electricity up?
We decided on going down the electricity route 100 years ago and to make it you need to either use weak methods of renewables or burn fuel.

twitter.com/Amelia_Womack/status/1181929193610862594

The police took one of the stages today

At about 11 minutes one police officer tries to nick another ex police officer and then backs down

Peter Crisp wrote:We can officially stop worrying about climate change everyone.

Vegan friendly space meat is here to solve all our earthly problems .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/49977898#

Awwww yeahhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Alpha Centauri style 'Beef Vats' then.

That game is actually a message from the future.

Plane returns to terminal as climate change protester is arrested on board

A plane has returned to the terminal of London City Airport after a climate change protester disrupted the flight, according to Sky sources.

Pictures show the protester being arrested by police before he was led off the plane.

The arrest comes as hundreds of demonstrators are attempting to shut down the airport in protest against the climate impact of flying.

Extinction Rebellion activists are beginning what they call a three-day "Hong Kong-style occupation of the terminal building".

twitter.com/wazzas/status/1182224960783372289

The protester can be heard telling an air hostess: "I don't wish to travel with you but I don't wish to get off."

He adds: "I'm extremely sorry for the inconvenience."

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/p ... -on-board/

I do struggle with the protests against air travel to be honest. With these sort of things you have to offer an alternative that people can use instead that can help the environment - switch to LED lightbulbs, buy an electric car, eat more Quorn etc, but there just aren't any alternatives to getting across the globe in a short space of time. People rely on air travel in a massive way, those that have relatives or work in other countries can't exactly just hop on a boat for 3 months to get to where they need to go, the world can't go backwards in that respect. Lots of destinations also depend exclusively on global tourism, you'd have to assume that there'd some serious detriment to the lives of people in places that need tourism to survive if we suddenly started putting people off flying for their holibobs.

Of course, if there's some argument to the contrary that I'm not aware of, please enlighten me!

Moggy wrote:

Photek wrote:I hate Piers Morgan almost as much as I hate James Cordon!

I can understand why people would find Cordon annoying but he’s not even close to Morgan in the hate stakes.

Agreed, James Cordon is FAR more annoying.

tbh, the problem with Cordon, apart from being a complete and utter pleb is that, for a time I couldn't get rid of the bastard, he was on adverts for insurance, that sporty show on Sky 1 and showing up on US TV.



I don't see Piers Morgan on TV cos he's a banana split.

Preezy wrote:I do struggle with the protests against air travel to be honest. With these sort of things you have to offer an alternative that people can use instead that can help the environment - switch to LED lightbulbs, buy an electric car, eat more Quorn etc, but there just aren't any alternatives to getting across the globe in a short space of time. People rely on air travel in a massive way, those that have relatives or work in other countries can't exactly just hop on a boat for 3 months to get to where they need to go, the world can't go backwards in that respect. Lots of destinations also depend exclusively on global tourism, you'd have to assume that there'd some serious detriment to the lives of people in places that need tourism to survive if we suddenly started putting people off flying for their holibobs.

Of course, if there's some argument to the contrary that I'm not aware of, please enlighten me!

Yeh we die. So swings and roundabouts I guess.

As a more serious answer, they are working on electric planes already but the technology isn't there yet. So we would have to stop flying until this technology was ready for market.

Assuming alternative infrastructure was in place and funded properly, there's no reason why flights couldn't be stopped when flying within the UK as well as to destinations across the continent (thanks Eurostar). At the absolute minimum we should be expanding capacity for more flights (I heard an argument that expanding Heathrow would help the environment because of less planes circling around waiting to land - which is logical - but we all know that's not going to be the reason behind an expansion of the airport)

We are already way way behind on keeping to our carbon budget (we used our 2019 allowance by around May of this year). If we expand any airport we would basically be admitting to the world that we don't plan on taking this seriously. If we ever did. The same for if HS2 is not stopped.

You are right, we can't go back. Air travel is as banal as taking the bus nowadays. What is worth pointing out is that air travel is a huge culprit of carbon emissions as such airlines and manufacturers should be looking at alternative fuel sources such as sustainable bio fuels.

Preezy wrote:I do struggle with the protests against air travel to be honest. With these sort of things you have to offer an alternative that people can use instead that can help the environment - switch to LED lightbulbs, buy an electric car, eat more Quorn etc, but there just aren't any alternatives to getting across the globe in a short space of time. People rely on air travel in a massive way, those that have relatives or work in other countries can't exactly just hop on a boat for 3 months to get to where they need to go, the world can't go backwards in that respect. Lots of destinations also depend exclusively on global tourism, you'd have to assume that there'd some serious detriment to the lives of people in places that need tourism to survive if we suddenly started putting people off flying for their holibobs.

Of course, if there's some argument to the contrary that I'm not aware of, please enlighten me!

London to Edinburgh, by train, costs about £150 and uses 24 kg of CO2 per passenger. By plane, the same journey costs £60 and uses 193 kg of CO2. [Prices from trainline/skyscanner and CO2 estimates from here]

That train journey uses 87% less CO2 but costs 250% more. The economics are fundamentally broken.

Most business travel is unnecessary. There is a wealth of remote presence and communications technologies that can replace most need for face-to-face meetings for people located apart. The carbon cost for sending some electrons halfway round the world rather than a person is almost incomparable. The only required change here is one in business culture to eliminate a significant proportion of flights.

Business travel accounts for a significant minority of flights but a disproportionately large share of carbon, as business and first class are much less energy efficient. Standard class only planes fare much better per person and is a change that can be easily made without any requirement to lessen number of flights. If you have to fly, fly standard class.

All combined, short haul flights can be replaced by much more efficient overland travel, business flights can be massively reduced, and the remaining flights can be made more efficient by eliminating non-standard class. On a personal level, everyone should seriously consider how many flights they take for holidays, as along with diet it's the only other significant change an individual can make. That doesn't mean eliminating air travel altogether, but reducing it certainly.

OrangeRKN wrote:They're using a diesel generator, therefore the movement is flawed (and climate change presumably a hoax altogether)

Bad choice relying on a diesel generator, it couldn't even stop Fukushima.

Relevant article in the news, apologies if this sounds incendiary, but with the greatest CO2 polluter being a Middle Eastern (national, I think?) company, how are we are to get a relatively unstable region (again apologies my understanding of the current political climate is unclear) to sign up when it's such a huge capital asset for those countries? Adding to the likes of India and China who are only growing massively in terms of population = workforce to this economical sector and industrial use of fossil fuels and petrochemicals in overseas/imported manufacturer(ed items).

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -emissions

Hey looks it's a ecological advocate playing devil's advocate? I'm so unbiased!

It's also interesting to look at fossel fuel's firms passive campaign of ignorance and dispelling climate science for the past 70+ years https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... s-timeline

I also read that the fossuel fuel industry has spent $200 billion dollars lobbying in the USA to restrict climate change leglisation.

And so my current opinion that, despite throwing way about 5% of my business output and recycling or re-using everything else, and recycling everything that is possible to recycle (thanks to my local council FINALLY accepting relatively basic things like plastic food trays and yoghurt pots, due to a third party processor - admittedly, no idea how much that costs, but I pay my CT), never owning a car or even using public transport when it would be sensible to do so and walking instead, the onus is mostly on this ferocious profit-driven industry to change or, at the very least, make more than cursory (i.e. massive, transformative, in what they can truly afford to do for their own future proceeds) investments in green energy they themselves can sell. It's this part that truly flummoxes me, the group that will benefit the most from leveraging green energy solutions is the energy providers themselves!!