The Lurker

Genuinely torn on this one. I understand the economic benefit but suspect that it will only really benefit those in metropolitan centres to the detriment of those in smaller towns and rural areas. I think that the investment in regional public transport should be a priority at this time; recently I travelled from Bradford to Wakefield on the train. It was slow and uncomfortable; driving between the two at peak times is no better. I ought to add that the planned route goes through woods I used to play in as a kid so my opinion may be jaundiced.

I'll be very happy if it turns out to be wrong but I can't think of an example in modern science when so many scientist have proven to be wrong. It's a bit flippant but I do like this cartoon.

The world is getting hotter; this is caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions; we need to stop emitting greenhouse gasses. It's only complicated if you're looking for an excuse not to do anything.

I did; it makes it easy to avoid the issue doesn't it? Play the man, not the ball.

Better than been a plain old nutter.

Well done you; and I I know that sounds snarky but it's not meant to; I genuinely mean it. Unfortunately the problem will not be resolved purely by private individuals. Like you I do as much as I possibly can but I need help to do more; help that can only come from Government; I want to run my house on renewables but despite a decent family income we can't afford it. The pressure needs to be brought on all offenders, not just the worse. The 'old' western economies need to lead the way and demonstrate that it can be done

When? Where's your source?

Boris Johnson and the ERG lunatics it would seem.

That's project fear that is.

No; I just think your argument is bollocks and you're miss-understanding is evident. Do you really think that the vast majority of climate scientists are making this shit up? For what end? You chose to believe the shills who spout the oil company's propaganda because it means an easier life for you rather than the people who are actually qualified to give an opinion. I do not think that billions are going to die in short order but if significant action is not taken in short order then the resultant irreversible change in our climate will result in the the death of many, many people and significant harm for everyone else. Your thinking is lazy and selfish; I can understand that you don't want to make changes in your lifestyle; I don't want to either but I am because I want to be able to look my grandchildren in the eye when they ask me what I did to prevent the whole world going up in smoke.* *obviously with the exception of the current coastal regions that will be under water.

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/3/2019/09/SROCC_SPM_HeadlineStatements.pdf Extract from IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate; my bold. Enabling Conditions C4. Enabling climate resilience and sustainable development depends critically on urgent and ambitious emissions reductions coupled with coordinated sustained and increasingly ambitious adaptation actions (very high confidence). Key enablers for implementing effective responses to climate-related changes in the ocean and cryosphere include intensifying cooperation and coordination among governing authorities across spatial scales and planning horizons. Education and climate literacy, monitoring and forecasting, use of all available knowledge sources, sharing of data, information and knowledge, finance, addressing social vulnerability and equity, and institutional support are also essential. Such investments enable capacitybuilding, social learning, and participation in context-specific adaptation, as well as the negotiation of trade-offs and realisation of co-benefits in reducing short-term risks and building 6 long-term resilience and sustainability. (high confidence) This report reflects the state of science for ocean and cryosphere for low levels of global warming (1.5°C), as also assessed in earlier IPCC and IPBES reports. {1.1, 1.5, 1.8.3, 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.4, Figure 2.7, 2.5, 3.5.2, 3.5.4, 4.4, 5.2.2, Box 5.3, 5.4.2, 5.5.2, 6.4.3, 6.5.3, 6.8, 6.9, Cross-Chapter Box 9, Figure SPM.5}

From your own source. I do not wish to suggest that Greta is too young to understand the consequences of her actions, nor that the challenges she faces make her unsuitable to take a stand on political issues, or even to lead a global movement. No one who has heard her address world leaders in impeccable English can doubt that she is very intelligent. Ernman also stresses that her daughter has never felt better than during her campaign for the climate. Greta herself has said that realizing that she could do something about climate change has helped her recover.

See my recent post in the brexit thread.

Good come back mate; the Oxford Debating Society must really miss your contributions. I try to avoid getting personal on these forums but you really are a dick.

So you believe the journalist and not the man whose entire career has been dedicated to climate change? Have you personally read the IPCC report? Do you know who's right and who's wrong or is it just that JHB's opinion suites you because it offers an easy way out of making significant changes to your own lifestyle? Virtue signaling is a very lazy term and fits exactly into my points about ad hominem attacks; it's a term that attempts to ridicule ideas of altruism by suggesting that they're only undertaken for admiration; it is pseudo-intellectual language designed purely to camouflage selfishness. Attacking the motives of people who genuinely care and work to make lives better is a very cheap blow and demonstrates the weakness of your position. Technology will hopefully save us but not without dramatic and urgent cuts to our greenhouse gas emissions; steps that governments are not taking or not taking quickly enough.