A couple of very simple and specific questions, Dazh because this is beginning to feel like your Brexit apologist stuff (or Starmer thread) and my memory isn't that bad.
What's your car?
What's your heating system?
Is your house anywhere near properly insulated because every house is "already insulated".
Walls beter than R=1.5? Because that's just an insulated cavity wall whereas R>3.5 is current standard.
Floor better than R = 3?
Johnx2 - did it not come over I was being facetious?
If you’re just talking about reducing number of babies born, that’s happening anyway, accelerating this trend is great but will take decades for impact and we don’t have that much time.
so will all the other steps folk are suggesting. My point is simple. We need to be doing everything not just picking the low hanging fruit. All possible steps taken now might just stave off the collapse. Just doing the easy stuff / tinkering around the edges / pretending we can continue with out current lifestyles mean the collapse is inevitable.
and my memory isn’t that bad.
And yet you don't provide any examples. I'm not engaging with any of your holier than thou "I'm more eco than you" nonsense until you can evidence your accusation that I argue against reducing people's carbon footprints. I"ve never done anything of the sort.
What I have argued though is that reducing individual's carbon footprints needs to be done at a macro-economic level implemented by governments. It's all very well slapping yourself on the back about how eco-friendly you are but your own contribution is irrelevant if the other 99% of the population don't have the means and/or the time to do the same.
Are you really proposing killing people on an industrial scale?
Johnx2 – did it not come over I was being facetious?
Ah, the ol' Edinburgh Defence, now you are claiming that you weren't really serious about killing all right-wingers, covid deniers, and climate change deniers, within a decade.
We need to be doing everything
reducing births will have at best marginal impact on the environment over decades and could have no impact at all depending on behaviour, at human cost of implementing something like China's one child policy. Watch the vid or check out the modelling on gapminder to understand the underlying population dynamics.
(I usually try not to make a point more than once on grounds that's enough to plant a seed with anyone marginally interested. Not sure why I came back to this one. Hey ho.)
And yet you don’t provide any examples.
And you don't answer simple questions, Dazh. 😉 Inconvenient thruths eh. 🙂
You've been posting on this forum for as long as I have, I could spend an afternoon linking your stuff, I've got better things to do and that would be negative use of the forum. I'll address one point because you could act on it and it would help both your finances and the environment. A quote from yourself (you asked for some).
I reckon some people will be keeping warm by burning down government buildings when the riots start. I’m currently paying £480 a month (increased from £250/month). God knows what it’s going to be in October/January, and there’s not a lot I can do to reduce consumption in the short term other than turrning the heating off for the winter.
Your home energy consumption is enormous, you monthly bill is higher than my yearly bill yet you claim "And BTW my entire house is already insulated". Your annual bill based on last Summer's bills was £5600 and you were anticpating it being higher in the Winter suggesting high heating bills. Insulate, it will pay for itself.
You've told us so much about yourself on this forum on various threads over the last 13 years that I'm really not hallucinating.
You always blame the governement. However, you can do more to reduce you own CO2 production than any government can.
Your home energy consumption is enormous
I've actually solved most of that problem by getting rid of the aga at great expense (which is what stopped me doing it earlier). As for the insulation, if you've been stalking me that much then you'll know I live in a grade II listed farmhouse. It's insulated as much as it can be, but stuff like cavity wall insulation isn't possible due to the 18 inch thick stone walls.
Your answer is basically spend x tens of thousands of pounds on fancy cars and eco-homes. It's very nice for you to have the means to do that but most other people don't, so maybe spare us the pious lectures?
if you’ve been stalking me
Dear me. You're one of the most visible people on the forum Dazh, one of half a dozen who dominate political threads and have an opinion on everything. It's not stalking it's shaking my head is dismay at the inconsistencies and remembering them. But I'll remain positive:
It’s insulated as much as it can be, but stuff like cavity wall insulation isn’t possible due to the 18 inch thick stone walls.
There are a lot of old buildings like that around here, insulating from the outside isn't a good option on walls without a damp -proof course so that's out. You're left with the inside and there are plenty of options. You don't say if the wall is plastered, lined, lath and plaster or exposed stone; there will be a variety of solutions in each case. Building a frame and then using natural fibre insulation with a breathable finishing product, often lime based is common. Ventilation and moisture control are important in old structures, even if you can't seal the building to modern standards a heat recovery mechanical ventilation system would no doubt save energy and avoid damp.
Oooh - he knows to call me TJ - presumably lurking for a while or a previously banned troll returning
I mean - its sad enough that many of us spend far too long on this forum debating stuff but to join just to post ignorant nonsense on the climate thread. ...............................................
*points and laughs*
Yes it's very strange that people would actually go to the (admittedly minor) effort of setting up an account just to post that sort of boring drivel. It suggests that the incel thing is probably projection.
People don't post that sort of thing just out of naive ignorance. It's deliberate stupidity, not something they can be helped out of.
I think we have a trolling winner here, some genuine novelty in that first post
BTW, was it your RS4 that pulled you out of your incel phase?
Nice how you dropped that in there
EDIT: RS6, I'm so sorry
I think one of the most tragic things is individuals choosing not to have children for the sake of the 'environment'. How did the human race end up here?
azku - I can only answer for me. I never had much of a drive to have kids. I knew climate change was happening 35+ years ago. I decided to minimise my environmental footprint and not having kids is the biggest thing a person can do to minimise their environmental footprint. I also did not want to be responsible for bringing another person into the world when I strongly believe that in 50 years from now environmental collapse will hugely degrade lifestyles and mega death is coming. Overpopulation is a key issue
How did we end up here? Capitalism
Also someone mentioned birds above have wings and can fly to other places, true, however those other places may not hold the correct habitat or provide the type of food that particular species require, eg a kingfisher is more or less stuck with clean rivers, streams or at a stretch canal waterways.
If they die out .. so what in the vaste scheme of things?
Are Kingfishers more important than stopping or mitigating climate change and tens or hundreds of millions of humans dying?
We need to take radical action to change our economies and lifestyles so we can live sustainably
What we need to do is mitigate climate change ASAP ... it doesn't matter if it's sustainable or not.
DOn’t know what other countries commitment are but the UK is 2050 isn’t it. That is 27 years time, do you really think that will stay at 2050 after another 7 or 8 governments have had a go at it.
It's the equivalent of being stuck on a submarine with 100 hours of air but refusing to use it "because it's not sustainable" whilst some fanatic promises to invent some new tech that will not only save everyone but be better at some point in the future.
TJagain
so will all the other steps folk are suggesting. My point is simple. We need to be doing everything not just picking the low hanging fruit. All possible steps taken now might just stave off the collapse. Just doing the easy stuff / tinkering around the edges / pretending we can continue with out current lifestyles mean the collapse is inevitable.
We need to be doing stuff that makes a difference...we need to kick off the nuclear reactors TOMORROW we need to make greenwashing illegal .. we need to make using terms like "sustainable" or "eco" in the same sentence as climate change carry custodial sentences with no internet access. We don't have time to do all the nice stuff and it's pointless in any case if climate change continues because there won't be anywhere for "the Kingfishers" (or whatever)
We aren't doing "the easy stuff" what we are doing is either what someone can make money from or some "wouldn't it be nice if we had the luxury of time and doing this the environmentally friendly way". Then the "wouldn't it be nice" crowd are trying to sabotage the realistic things we could do.
An example all rolled up is Richie flying by a private jet to go grant new exploration licenses and then saying "it's fine we are working on a sustainable jet fuel" ... but instead the green lobby are concerned about granting licenses to produce oil and gas as cleanly as possible... and we wouldn't even be in this position if we had kept up with fission technology.
Lots of animal and plant species die out every year (~600 in 2022) and nobody seems to care and the world moves on. I suppose when there are almost none left people may start to actually notice...
If birds die out they will probably be proceeded by the invertibrates and that will be follow by lack of polination of crops. Invertibrates are diappearing at an alarming rate and farming and gardening practices are doing little to improve the situation.
By the time the bulk of the population accept they need to do something and change there life style, I fear we will be up a creak without a paddle.
Sunack's latest back tracking shows the mainstream political parties are more interested in getting elected and filling their mates' pockets than the long term implications of the change in the climate.
I am 69 and won't feel the worst effects of this and I am doing my best, what's wrong with the rest of you who are younger with children?
I disagree. There is a definite and noticeable increase in insects around here again.
As Neil Oliver says “someone is lying”.
He was referring to our climate change overlords buying multi-million dollar beach front houses whilst telling us sea levels are set to rise 10ft.
But it’s true in so many areas of this debate.
Believing something bad is happening that demonstrably isn’t is seems to be like a curious right of passage into this depressing climate-cult.
Neil Oliver ? Really ?
kerley
Lots of animal and plant species die out every year (~600 in 2022) and nobody seems to care and the world moves on. I suppose when there are almost none left people may start to actually notice…
Lots of people do care but MOST people don't care if a specific species dies out compared to tens or hundreds of millions of human deaths.
However the other point is there is no point even trying to preserve species (if you think it's worthwhile) unless they have an ecosystem to live in and climate change is a major factor in that.
Bruce
If birds die out
Birds are not going to die out... they survived the K-T extinction... what will die out are specific species of birds and many of those will be due to us but many are just following evolution.
and that will be follow by lack of polination of crops
Neither of these is good but you have to decide between climate change in the next year or so ... or longer term environmental damage that will need to be cleaned up.
Climate change is about what we can do right now and the next 5-10 years or we are screwed either way.
Sunack’s latest back tracking shows the mainstream political parties are more interested in getting elected and filling their mates’ pockets than the long term implications of the change in the climate.
I don't think anyone is surprised by that... or needed him to fly to Scotland to prove it but it does demonstrate to his backers and the markets.
In the same way Greenpeace are still trying to excuse not using nuclear clearly demonstrating they don't give a toss about climate change either.
He was referring to our climate change overlords buying multi-million dollar beach front houses whilst telling us sea levels are set to rise 10ft.
Guess we're ingoring the super-rich buying their underground bunkers in New Zealand then
They started out innocuously and predictably enough. Bitcoin or ethereum? Virtual reality or augmented reality? Who will get quantum computing first, China or Google? Eventually, they edged into their real topic of concern: New Zealand or Alaska? Which region would be less affected by the coming climate crisis? It only got worse from there. Which was the greater threat: global warming or biological warfare? How long should one plan to be able to survive with no outside help? Should a shelter have its own air supply? What was the likelihood of groundwater contamination? Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system, and asked: “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?” The event. That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, solar storm, unstoppable virus, or malicious computer hack that takes everything down.
Insect populations have crashed by a huge amount. someone is lying yes - Oliver is. Its actually really obvious the crash in insect populations. 30 years ago after a drive in summer your car would be covered in insects. Now it is not
this is one of the things that there is zero doubt about
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/insects-dying-out-uk
As I said the other day- that’s simply not true this summer. I met a guy out photographing an insane display of butterflies the other day. He said it was the best year for decades.
I went to the beach last night- bike is covered again and I had to juggle riding with my fly stained visor down and with having it up and dodging an endless stream of moths 🤷🏻♂️
(And also- the “insect apocalypse” is another one of those conflated issues that is more land use than CC).
thats nothing like the splatter used to be and you are conflating single events with long term proven trends. Read the scientific papers and you will see
You are just being a denialist and it makes you look daft. The global crash in insect populations is not controversial - its proven.
🤣🤣🤣🤣 Shifting the goal posts there.
I used to have this debate all the time on twitter and have got loads of video’s of butterfly safaris round the estate here. 10min clips of me driving through swarms of them.
There, like here- I was told to ignore what I see and submit to the Armageddon cult 🤣
(Just like the people telling me shoot’s are bad for raptors when I can’t get out the garden without seeing a kestrel, buzzard, kite, sparrowhawk and having the Tawny Owl hooting at me 🤣 Let alone when I plough a game cover crop and have up to 70 kites and buzzards following me when, as a kid, a buzzard was a noteworthy sighting 🤣)
In fact it’s very often the same people 🤔
“Follow the science and ignore your eyes!”
As I say- insect decline *is real* in places where habitat management is still poor but is NOT a climate issue and the current take up of environmental stewardship options seems to be delivering a noticeable improvement. Along with things like uncut verges etc.
Again- it’s optimist V Pessimist and the latter is another entry requirement to Club Climate Cult.
I disagree. There is a definite and noticeable increase in insects around here again.
I am literally lol, and incredulous, at the spectacle of someone claiming that all the research into the decline in insect populations must be wrong because there are loads of them in their garden, or wherever they have happened to look.
Although I guess that there is nothing remotely funny about the issue.
how desperate do you have be to make your appeal to authority Neil Oliver! 😀
Just like the people telling me shoot’s are bad for raptors
1/3 of all scottish eagles are killed on grousemoors before their natural lifespan is up Hen harriers? much higher
Again - this is proven.
https://blogs.gov.scot/rural-environment/2020/08/13/action-on-raptor-persecution-and-wildlife-crime/
I think you are best ignored - climate change denialist and now pro shooting shill
You’re literally all making his point 🤣 It’s hilarious. “Tuh! Neil Oliver” whilst doing exactly what he’s describing 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I’m not a shill for anyone thanks. I saw my first wing tagged kite in 2004 and what a fantastic experience it was and now we have several pairs nesting here yet people on the internet are telling me what I do is ‘bad for the environment’.
Managed to catch this tag number last year and phoned it in. Came all the way from Dorset!
It’s beyond parody really. And so similar to everything else in the culture wars.
I agree that the collapse in insects is primarily land use driven, rather than climate and ecological collapse is probably the bigger existential threat than climate over the long term but to claim a slight increase in bug splatter this year compared to other recent years is very much shifting baseline syndrome in practice. You might have a few more insects than last year but it will still be significantly less than decades ago. It is also likely a localised issue, to argue otherwise goes against a large body of scientific work based on multi decade observations in the field. A good example is there have been a nationally reported decline in number of house and sand martins, swallows and swifts this year and more sightings further north, that is driven by the decrease in insects for them to eat.
Anecdotally for me, who suffers badly from insect bites but spend a lot of time in reedbeds and woods, i have had far fewer bites this year
Yawn
the plural of anecdote is not evidence
But the ‘shifting baseline’ needs to account for the extra human population too.
With the extra pressure on farms to feed humans- there’s not going to be the volume of fallow land that there was to support the same biomass of insect.
That’s where extra co2 helps- we’re now growing more on less acerage than ever before. Allowing land to be re-spared for nature.
Farming harder and more intensely where it’s profitable and land sparing where it isn’t is the way to a sustainable future.
That ecosystems allowed to exist can recover still- illustrates how climate is not the problem.
Yawn
the plural of anecdote is not evidence
Oh this is brilliant 🤣🤣 👏🏻 👏🏻
So glad I posted the Oliver link now 🤣🤣🤣
“There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.”
I’ll keep trusting the truth I see with my own pair of these for now I think 👀
Bruce - thanks for being so much more articulate than I.
Every insect, bird, mammal, fish and amphibian has its place on this planet and is needed in its true environment (not invasive species). Without these creatures (we are not in charge of nature, we need to be part of it) we are doomed.
crosshair - in my own small wildlife garden I have done everything possible to help nature, it's full of all the creatures you see plenty of. Our adjoined neighbours have very few if any, they have paved their garden, she pours disinfectant over every morning before collecting the dog dirt, they do very little to help with climate change, in fact I doubt they even know it exists. What I'm trying to say is yes your patch is doing quite well, as are a few other areas, but that is not the case for most of the country.
Every child born in the western world needs, nappies that take decades to decompose, plastic tat from China,various pieces of equipment, food, clean water and fresh air, clothes, all of these things are going to be harder to get hold of. I am not against people have children, but it should not be a decision taken lightly.
Good for you @bunnyhop 👏🏻
But it’s important to describe what you are illustrating accurately.
It’s actually the real pressing issue- the huge disconnect most people have with nature.
But that’s not “Climate change”. It’s abuse and neglect of our natural world.
That the latter is getting lumped in with the former tells me all I need to know- that Climate Change is propaganda to suit an agenda, piggy backing on *real* problems.
Always curious about Neil Oliver. He's like the modern day David Icke. Does he serioulsy believe all this stuff and think he's had some sort of revelation or insight that no one else has, or is he (and Icke before him) simply exploiting his celebrity to carve out a career where he can monetise the paranoia and fear of a significant minority of the population?
When he first came on the scene I thought he was a nutter but comparing what he says there for example, V the quite frankly bat s**t crazy assertions being made in this thread- I think he’s on the right side of history.
After all, we now know there was certainly more truth in everything he said about Covid than there was in the propaganda FB, Twitter and YouTube were “allowing” us to see- let alone the BBC and Sky!!
I think he’s on the right side of history.
that Climate Change is propaganda to suit an agenda
Ah, so most of the worlds climatologist are the thought police for the Illuminati/Jewish New World order?
"I used to think he was a nutter, then he said some things I agreed with, hes ok now"
we now know there was certainly more truth in everything he said about Covid than there was in the propaganda FB, Twitter and YouTube were “allowing” us to see- let alone the BBC and Sky!!
I don't know why I engage but this is simply not true. Oliver is a covid denialist, climate change denialist and has zero credibility
Its just he tells you and others like you what yo want to hear
With that:
Don't feed the troll
No- I pretty much always agreed with him, I just thought he was odd. Now I think he was just exasperated to breaking point by all the doublespeak luvvies he had to work with over the years 🤣
we’re now growing more on less acerage than ever before.
Nationally and globally, has that not been driven by increased inputs such as larger fossil fuel derived fertiliser use rather than additional CO2, there isn't the same increase in biomass production in non agricultural land, so CO2 can't be the main driver of higher yield although does contribute
