Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Most misleading viral tweet of the moment
  • Malvern Rider
    Free Member

    This utter beller:

    It makes it sound as if 100 companies are solely responsible for 71% of emissions. As if we have little to nothing to do with them, yet we have everything to do with them

    It makes it sound as if our lifestyles aren’t crucially important. What he doesn’t tell us is that these 100 entities are linked to 71% of human activity-related greenhouse gas emissions, since all 100 are fossil fuel producers.

    This is how memes are often so misleading as to give the exact opposite message.

    The true message is:

    Current projections for decarbonization of energy, combined with business-as-usual projections of growth in demand for goods and services, are incompatible with the rapid reduction in emissions necessary to meet Paris and national climate targets. Seventy-two percent of global greenhouse gas emissions come from household or “lifestyle” consumption, including mobility, diet, and housing

    https://www.wri.org/climate/expert-perspective/changing-behavior-help-meet-long-term-climate-targets

    sc-xc
    Full Member

    Thanks for your in depth analysis.

    Malvern Rider
    Free Member

    ^ Sorry for the delay, updated/edited now. (Was referring to notes before edit)

    Am literally seething. Frothing mad. Typical response to his twittering of tossdom:

    https://twitter.com/JonnaChissus/status/1305208030720528384

    don’t have a twitter account but want to rip his tweet a new one

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    maccruiskeen
    Full Member

    or maybe

    Just 100 companies profit from the Seventy-two percent of global greenhouse gas emissions which  come from household consumption, including mobility, diet, and housing

    They don’t cause it, we do. They just take the money.

    But the whole point being made is broken. If greenhouse gas emissions globally were halved.. all things being equal 100 corporations would be ‘reponsible’ for them. If, universally, all emissions were doubled – same thing.

    If a million corporations were jointly responsible for 72 percent of emissions…. then it’s still the same level of emissions.

    Malvern Rider
    Free Member

    They don’t cause it, we do. They just take the money.

    Yes.

    And, I now want to see how he plans to ‘punch up(wards)’?

    Is he going to drive to the local fuel pump and punch it whilst refilling?

    Maybe take a piss on a styrofoam cup he used for that coffee?

    Wait, was that why people drove their cars and vans 100s of miles just to shit in their McBoxes on a beach during the last notlockdown? They were really just sending a message to The 100!

    batfink
    Free Member

    Weeeeeeeeeeell….. looking at the list, there’s a hell of a lot of coal on there.

    Not sure consumer-power alone is enough to move countries away from coal to renewables – would require government/global mandates to do so – being generous, perhaps that’s what he meant.

    grum
    Free Member

    They don’t cause it, we do. They just take the money.

    Fossil fuel industries have spent billions lobbying governments, weakening legislation, producing biased studies etc, in order to maintain their dominance. Not sure you can blame ‘us’ for that.

    Malvern Rider
    Free Member

    Not sure consumer-power alone is enough to move countries away from coal to renewables – would require government/global mandates to do so –.

    Completely agree

    being generous, perhaps that’s what he meant

    Possibly. Probably. Swift must be spinning in his grave like an electric drill of late. Again:

    Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late; the jest is over, and the tale hath had its effect

    Yet

    Not sure you can blame ‘us’ for that.

    As consumers we are (for the most) part shockingly poor at:

    1. Remaining informed
    2. Holding feet to the fire (even at the worst of times)
    3. Making connections

    Once noses are in the trough all bets are off as we half-heartedly wait for some benevolent dictator to curb our appetite while we moan about ‘nannying’ and then continue to vote in more wreckers on the back of some half-arsed conspiracy which favours continuity of status quo.

    jimfrandisco
    Free Member

    Funnily enough I was having this conversation yesterday.
    Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t it a way of saying that although these corporations are simply reacting to what the consumer wants/uses and that we’re all culpable, it’s important to tackle the corporations as they have great power/ability to affect top down change on a much larger scale?

    So, for want of a basic analogy, if the carbon is from coal that is being burnt because we all use too much electricity, targeting the handful of main power providers to move from coal to renewable has a much quicker and wider sweeping impact than just getting us to all use less power?

    Is that what he (the tweeter) is trying to say? While it’s not the single solution, surely there’s logic in that?

    To clarify, I’m not arguing anyone’s point just trying to understand if there’s any logic in it.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

The topic ‘Most misleading viral tweet of the moment’ is closed to new replies.