|
Post by daveu on Sept 29, 2019 10:39:33 GMT
I was in a foul mood. But however you spin it, she's wrong to condemn past generations. Hindsight is s wonderful thing. Maybe if the could have seen what it would lead to, the industrial Revolution might not have happened. How do we know that measures we take now to combat global warming won't have adverse effects in the future. You can only affect the times you live in and hope you don't destroy the future. But you can never know that what you do today won't cause some future disaster, however well intentioned. No one set out to destroy the environment so for some schoolkid with no experience of the world to condemn entire generations is wrong. So are you saying past generations have not caused the problem we are in? The reality is that she has every right to condemn today's older people. The science on this has been there for several decades and been swept under the carpet or denied. You were condemning today's youth for the things they have and the way they act. Who provided those things and taught them this? Do you have more phones etc etc etc The main point to remember is that each thing we do helps. That could be avoiding a car journey, eating a little less meat, not buying an extra TV etc etc. If millions or even billions of people improve slightly then the outlook improves. Completely missing the point as usual. No one set out to harm the environment. And as I said, who can predict the effects of what we do now, however well intentioned. We may with enough effort slow down or halt global warming, but cannot predict what other effects we may cause by our actions. That's why it's ridiculous to blame previous generations. You might as well blame the caveman who invented the wheel, or the bloke who discovered that dead animals taste better cooked. Humans will always try to improve their lives according to the knowledge available but while we now know about global warming we cannot possibly predict the side effects of trying to combat it. We can only try to affect our world as we know it at the time and hope nothing we do causes problems in the future.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 10:45:45 GMT
Exactly! That last para is spot on. So as soon as India and China do their bit, I will join in. In the meantime there is no point, apart from virtue signalling. And so the cycle goes on and nothing changes. Their not doing it so why should I? If that's what the prevailing attitude of humanity will be we have no hope. Don't understimate virtue signalling. Why can't we start at home? If we looked at progress through history we would never have achieved anything if we didn't do something because others won't. With climate change everything makes a difference. We all count. Unless someone like you cares a lot a lot won't change.
|
|
|
Post by nws on Sept 29, 2019 22:30:32 GMT
So are you saying past generations have not caused the problem we are in? The reality is that she has every right to condemn today's older people. The science on this has been there for several decades and been swept under the carpet or denied. You were condemning today's youth for the things they have and the way they act. Who provided those things and taught them this? Do you have more phones etc etc etc The main point to remember is that each thing we do helps. That could be avoiding a car journey, eating a little less meat, not buying an extra TV etc etc. If millions or even billions of people improve slightly then the outlook improves. Completely missing the point as usual. No one set out to harm the environment. And as I said, who can predict the effects of what we do now, however well intentioned. We may with enough effort slow down or halt global warming, but cannot predict what other effects we may cause by our actions. That's why it's ridiculous to blame previous generations. You might as well blame the caveman who invented the wheel, or the bloke who discovered that dead animals taste better cooked. Humans will always try to improve their lives according to the knowledge available but while we now know about global warming we cannot possibly predict the side effects of trying to combat it. We can only try to affect our world as we know it at the time and hope nothing we do causes problems in the future. So previous generations caused the problem but it is ridiculous to blame for what they did because they didn't mean it (you'd do well as a defence lawyer). On the 'we didn't know guv' defence I guess you will concede that our generation is culpable because we very much did know.
|
|
|
Post by nws on Sept 29, 2019 22:34:03 GMT
Exactly! That last para is spot on. So as soon as India and China do their bit, I will join in. In the meantime there is no point, apart from virtue signalling. So your argument is that I should not bother with anything and thus make the problem worse because others may or may not be doing things. How was his last paragraph spot on. The science on global warming has been known for decades now and we have done nothing. It's a bit sad that you have used the lazy virtue signalling argument. Well...I say argument but it's not really. It's the sort of fatuous nonsense someone like Dominic Cummings would use. China is a world leader in renewable btw although it's use of coal is the problem. It turns out that India is quite good and on track to achieve its 2 degree targets as per the Paris agreement. climateactiontracker.org/countries/india/Now we have established that China is doing something and India is doing quite a lot when can we expect your plans to be outlined.
|
|
|
Post by headstone on Oct 1, 2019 9:11:33 GMT
Exactly! That last para is spot on. So as soon as India and China do their bit, I will join in. In the meantime there is no point, apart from virtue signalling. And so the cycle goes on and nothing changes. Their not doing it so why should I? If that's what the prevailing attitude of humanity will be we have no hope. Don't understimate virtue signalling. Why can't we start at home? If we looked at progress through history we would never have achieved anything if we didn't do something because others won't. With climate change everything makes a difference. We all count. Unless someone like you cares a lot a lot won't change. I have little time left on this Earth, so it will outlast me! But I do have life experience and understand the realities. Greta Thunberg is 16, and doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by 61666 on Oct 1, 2019 10:06:07 GMT
Meanwhile, evidence on the BBC news web pages show that a large proportion of the newly trumpeted funding from Foris Buck is going to Tory held, marginal seats. Clever strategy, proof that they only help their own kind, or a bit of both?
|
|
|
Post by daveu on Oct 1, 2019 10:26:01 GMT
Meanwhile, evidence on the BBC news web pages show that a large proportion of the newly trumpeted funding from Foris Buck is going to Tory held, marginal seats. Clever strategy, proof that they only help their own kind, or a bit of both? No different to what all parties do to be honest. It's why politics in this country is such a shambles. All parties are more interested in buying votes than solving problems.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 14:25:44 GMT
And so the cycle goes on and nothing changes. Their not doing it so why should I? If that's what the prevailing attitude of humanity will be we have no hope. Don't understimate virtue signalling. Why can't we start at home? If we looked at progress through history we would never have achieved anything if we didn't do something because others won't. With climate change everything makes a difference. We all count. Unless someone like you cares a lot a lot won't change. I have little time left on this Earth, so it will outlast me! But I do have life experience and understand the realities. Greta Thunberg is 16, and doesn't. The reality is your decendants if you have them will pay the price for yours and everyone else's inaction / sod it attitude
|
|
|
Post by nws on Oct 1, 2019 16:39:00 GMT
I have little time left on this Earth, so it will outlast me! But I do have life experience and understand the realities. Greta Thunberg is 16, and doesn't. The reality is your decendants if you have them will pay the price for yours and everyone else's inaction / sod it attitude Notice how I provided some facts so he avoided answering me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 19:11:44 GMT
The reality is your decendants if you have them will pay the price for yours and everyone else's inaction / sod it attitude Notice how I provided some facts so he avoided answering me Sadly these days facts are just inconveniences to be ignored in this age of alternate realities and unicorns
|
|
|
Post by 61666 on Oct 1, 2019 21:09:44 GMT
Indeed, Elvis lives! Under the Genco Stand. Clearly. The latter of course political crap speak, so may not actually be true. Allegedly.
|
|
|
Post by 61666 on Oct 2, 2019 12:08:02 GMT
Much bluster, but little substance from Foris Buck to his faithful today, which am sure they all thought was wonderful. Not saying other party conferences are any better, but fine words butter no parsnips.
|
|
|
Post by Better things to do in life on Oct 2, 2019 17:05:51 GMT
Meanwhile, evidence on the BBC news web pages show that a large proportion of the newly trumpeted funding from Foris Buck is going to Tory held, marginal seats. Clever strategy, proof that they only help their own kind, or a bit of both? No different to what all parties do to be honest. It's why politics in this country is such a shambles. All parties are more interested in buying votes than solving problems. Errr, DaveU, isn't that what this so called parliamentary democracy is all about - i.e. MP's needing us to vote for them? Or are you suggesting that this rogue Parliament full of rebellious MP's shouldn't even bother with having to seek election, or seek votes from the people, and that we all give up voting and just trust them to do the "right" thing, (like mess up Brexit at every available opportunity, because they know better than those who voted Leave). Given that they also refused to submit themselves to a General Election, clearly they prefer to exist, and act, as an unelected, undemocratic body divorced from the will, and the votes of the people. Is that what you are suggesting, Comrade DaveU? With Chairman Bercow as unelected PM? At least Comrade Corbyn would be happy in a Totalitarian Dictatorship.
|
|
|
Post by Better things to do in life on Oct 2, 2019 17:07:45 GMT
Much bluster, but little substance from Foris Buck to his faithful today, which am sure they all thought was wonderful. Not saying other party conferences are any better, but fine words butter no parsnips. Come on, though, even you must have has a smile at the thought of Bercow eating a Kangaroos Testicle in the House. Most of the time he looks like he's eating one anyway.
|
|
|
Post by daveu on Oct 2, 2019 17:31:53 GMT
No different to what all parties do to be honest. It's why politics in this country is such a shambles. All parties are more interested in buying votes than solving problems. Errr, DaveU, isn't that what this so called parliamentary democracy is all about - i.e. MP's needing us to vote for them? Or are you suggesting that this rogue Parliament full of rebellious MP's shouldn't even bother with having to seek election, or seek votes from the people, and that we all give up voting and just trust them to do the "right" thing, (like mess up Brexit at every available opportunity, because they know better than those who voted Leave). Given that they also refused to submit themselves to a General Election, clearly they prefer to exist, and act, as an unelected, undemocratic body divorced from the will, and the votes of the people. Is that what you are suggesting, Comrade DaveU? With Chairman Bercow as unelected PM? At least Comrade Corbyn would be happy in a Totalitarian Dictatorship. I would rather they targeted funding, aid, whatever, where it's needed, not where it will win them votes. Still, why bother arguing with a closed mind.
|
|