This Stone Henge Outrage

“in a few hundred years we’ll be on Mars, we will have created technology far beyond where we are now,”

Who will be on Mars? The richest 0.01% from whichever nations win the war over any planet that is the 2nd earth option, would be my guess. Desperate times and expensive plans from commercial outfits.

Mars looks grim anyway, I’d rather be a poor subsistence farmer living in a shack on earth.

Oh dear, again, i am on about how we will advance as a species, Mars won’t be a rich peoples hideaway, i’m on about us advancing across the piece.

A hundred years ago to now, the advancements we’ve made in technology, farming, medicine, etc, etc is amazing, imagine what will be around in another 100 years, that’s what will help us as a species against climate change and so on, rather than a few pensioners and students throwing orange paint on things.

I don’t much care about if we advance as a species or not. I care about if we survive as individuals, families, social groups. I care about myself, my family, my friends having enough to eat.

I’m not disagreeing with you particularly but isn’t that selfish? How far will you go? Us advanced western nations can move to underground airconditioned cities with every amenity we need so we can live in comfort and who cares if a few other nations burn up or sink? Can we invade other nations to get the resources we need so that “myself, my family, my friends have enough to eat”

Philosophically, this thought has troubled me recently. I know my kids, and potentially my health is good enough that I’ll know my grandkids. With life expectancies but also people having families later (counter to each other) I might even know my great grandkids. And I’ll want good things for them, as you have said above.

But that covers maybe another 150 years? Beyond that – am I that bothered? Whatever happens to people I never met won’t affect me personally, even if they are genetically related. And as for a few extinct rare and exotic species of plants and animals – well, you should have evolved faster and outcompeted me.

[for avoidance of doubt – a thought piece, not a held belief]

“A hundred years ago to now, the advancements we’ve made in technology, farming, medicine, etc, etc is amazing, imagine what will be around in another 100 years, that’s what will help us as a species against climate change and so on, rather than a few pensioners and students throwing orange paint on things.”

Because we’ve done so well in this area over the last 30 or so years? And we have loads of time to figure it out still? Excuse my cynicism but..

And I expect more was spent in the last 80yrs on tech for the cold war and atomic weapons than projects that benefit the environment or people as a whole.

I hope you’re right but I’d not be very confident. I’m not surprised people get angry and want to do something, anything.

Just Stop oil are  just hissing folk off.

Well, they’re determined to play the role of pantomime villain…boo! Hiss!

Someone above said that they’ve got the newspapers frothing and good on them. The problem with that is that getting the newspapers frothing, or getting a hashtag trending, or putting Carbon Awareness Week on your email signature doesn’t actually achieve anything.

A hundred years ago to now, the advancements we’ve made in technology, farming, medicine, etc, etc is amazing, imagine what will be around in another 100 years,

Pretty much all the CO2 emitted in the whole of that period.

that’s what will help us as a species against climate change and so on,

Wrong, all the gains we’ve made will be eradicated by climate change. Welcome to the Cretaceous, you wouldn’t want to live there even if you could.

Wrong, all the gains we’ve made will be eradicated by climate change. Welcome to the Cretaceous, you wouldn’t want to live there even if you could.

We’ve already emitted enough CO2 to get to Miocene climatic conditions and there’s enough fosil fuels to get us to the Cretaceous. By that time life will be a real chore even if humans are still around because you’ll feel fatigued and sleepy from the CO2 quite apart from all the other crap in the atmosphere if the oceans start to turn over. The asteroid theory for the extinction of the dinosaurs is all very well but the dinosaurs had already been descimated by climatic change due to volcanic CO2 long before the asteroid impacted.

We’re going the way of the the dinosaurs, taking most other species with us and are still unwilling to Stop Oil.

I zero scaled that graph.  Not to make any particular point, it’s still a worrying trend, I just hate graphs presented like that.

As for the OP,

When I first saw the stunt reported on TV, my immediate thought was “what a set of absolute bellends.”  I know now that the orange stuff was harmless but only because of this thread.  I wonder how many other viewers had the same reaction.

I’ve been to Stonehenge.  It was, ahem, a monumental disappointment, you might as well look at it on TV.  Avebury is a far better day trip, you can get somewhere near it and everything.  It’s still not right to be vandalising anything though, and “someone else did it first” is no excuse.  The Tower of London has graffiti etched into it by former prisoners but you’d likely become one yourself if you added to it today.

I zero scaled that graph.

Is zero CO2 significant in some way?  I could imagine it might be useful to have the y axis start at some historical CO2 minimum, but is that zero, within sensible limits?

My first reaction was- What a shower of idiots –
Of course JSO are correct in saying that much greater damage is being done day in day out and the avenues of peaceful protest are becoming more restricted year after year. I think JSO have overestimated the public attention span on this though. Many people will just be thinking JSO sprayed orange stuff all over Stonehenge

I was on about how we will advance as a species, not that we will be running away from Earth, in a few hundred years we’ll be on Mars, we will have created technology far beyond where we are now, that is the belief of scientists, rather than we will be wiped out because of climate change or another disaster, which is a much smaller chance.

Tell me you voted for musk and his $53 billion payout without telling me you voted for musk and his $53 billion payout

Is zero CO2 significant in some way?  I could imagine it might be useful to have the y axis start at some historical CO2 minimum, but is that zero, within sensible limits?

I have absolutely no idea.  Perhaps not, it’s not an area I know much about.  But it shows the delta in a clearer (arguably less disingenuous) manner than a 45 degree line, it’s easier to visualise what the graph is showing.

Eg, an increase of 100ppm over 60 years would be a considerably different proposition if the normal level was 10ppm, or if it was 100,000.  The former I assume would be utterly catastrophic, the latter little more than a rounding error.  But presented as above, both would be the same graph.

Tell me you voted for musk and his $53 billion payout without telling me you voted for musk and his $53 billion payout

Of course, with my vast shares portfolios in tesla i tipped the vote in Musk’s favour.

Perhaps not, it’s not an area I know much about.  But it shows the delta in a clearer (arguably less disingenuous) manner than a 45 degree line, it’s easier to visualise what the graph is showing.

So by this logic the weather forecast should show temperature graphs referred to absolute zero?

Yes – I am being argumentative for the sake of it. Sorry.

Eg, an increase of 100ppm over 60 years would be a considerably different proposition if the normal level was 10ppm, or if it was 100,000.  The former I assume would be utterly catastrophic, the latter little more than a rounding error.  But presented as above, both would be the same graph.

I get your point but as long as the axes are labelled, there’s no issue. The risk of ‘your’ graph is that the 100,000 -> 100,100 graph is basically a horizontal line and wouldn’t show any variations in year to year for example.

Just Stop Orange

So by this logic the weather forecast should show temperature graphs referred to absolute zero?

By that logic, yes. I’d prefer clearly labelled ranges with ranges that cover the valid set of values

A bugbear of mine….cricket bowling speeds. An average fast bowler is 85mph. Bowl at 90mph and that’s express pace. But it’s only 5mph, barely a 5% difference?

No – because the slowest bowlers are about 50-55mph. And absolute absolute express is maybe 95. So the acual range from slowest to fastest is 40mph and so that 5mph difference between an average pace bowler and a proper quick is more like 10-15%

Yes that’s what I was trying to say. I don’t know what level CO2 corresponds to “slow bowler” but I don’t see why it should be zero.

Most people won’t read the graph that closely and the authors risk being accused of tinkering with the visuals to over state their point.

If you’ve zero scaled the vertical axis could you take the horizontal axis back to properly preindustrial levels of CO2 please, Cougar, say 280.

The mention of absolute zero is an intersting point which leads us to where are the 140 ppm extra we’ve already emitted going to take us. + 3-4°C seems likely from the geological record once the ice has reached the appropriate level. That corresponds to a 5-25m sea level rise. And that’s if we completely stop fossil fuel use tomorrow.

https://www.futura-sciences.com/planete/actualites/climatologie-taux-actuel-co2-atmosphere-terrestre-meme-quil-y-1-million-annees-19695/

My browser finds stuff in French I’m sure you’ll find key words to google in there.

The graph axis thing could go either way really. When you zero it it looks pretty minor, almost like part of a natural cycle. Wonder who would prefer that version?

As Ed suggests, it would be far better to plot it back to pre-industrial times and even better to plot back further so see the gradient on natural cycles (not asking you to do that).

My browser finds stuff in French I’m sure you’ll find key words to google in there.

CO2 is a meme? 🤨

😉

Here you go,

NASA : Co2 increase since Industrial Revolution and from 800,000 years to today, grab a towel…..we’re f****d

So by this logic the weather forecast should show temperature graphs referred to absolute zero?

It’s not really a direct comparison. A temperature scale is essentially arbitrary, it’s an artificial numbering scheme.

Yes – I am being argumentative for the sake of it. Sorry.

Feel free. I would. 😁

it would be far better to plot it back to pre-industrial times

I didn’t check, but I assumed the graph starts at when the station monitoring went live.

In any case, I didn’t mean to derail the thread.  Like I say, I only edited it out of curiosity because non-zero graphs make my teeth itch.

The graph is showing the data that exist from that source. If you put an acre of white space in a plot in scientific paper by choosing axes that didn’t reasonably reflect the range of data the editor would just tell you not to be so silly and plot it properly.

Maybe climate change is a problem, maybe it isn’t. I’m personally of the opinion that we’re all doomed; I live 8m above sea level, my eldest son’s house is even lower than that.

But that isn’t an excuse to go round defacing public monuments just because you feel angry and can’t be bothered to go through the democratic process. That’s a route to a rapid end to the civil society (maybe that’s what they want, I don’t know).

All depends what the aim of the graph is.  If trying to shut up the idiots saying it is just a change that happens as climates always changes then it would be beneficial to show say 1800 – current.  Okay that would not be white space, just a more useful graph in many cases.

“I live 8m above sea level, my eldest son’s house is even lower than that.”

Just plot sea level on a graph that starts at the centre of the earth. Problem solved.

FFS

Those data didn’t exist in 1800. That’s the famous graph of observed CO2 from Mauna Loa, started by Keeling in the 1950s.

With my SQA markers hat on Edukator gets 4marks Cougar only 3.

The data range should occupy at least 50% of the graph. (That’s my wordage not the SQAs).

But that isn’t an excuse to go round defacing public monuments just because you feel angry and can’t be bothered to go through the democratic process.

its not about anger, it’s about the failure of what you call “the democratic process “ which has (democratically? I think not) favoured the oil companies. What should people do? Start up their own multinational giants to compete on lobbying?

Defacing stonehenge isn’t really my cup of tea, but neither is tone policing. It’s a big world out there and no-one has a monopoly on “the correct way to raise a concern”. People are allowed to differ in their approaches and opinions. Besides, plotting scientific graphs hasn’t really got us very far over the last 5 years. (OK, that may be too negative, we’ve actually taken significant strides in decarbonising our power sources, but only travelled a small part of the journey so far).

JSO have always been careful, as far as I can tell, to avoid lasting damage in their stunts.

“in a few hundred years we’ll be on Mars, we will have created technology far beyond where we are now,

We still will run int6o the inevitability of physics and the vast amounts of energy needed to put and maintain people on mars.  Its not going to happen at all.  Physical limits are physical limits

FFS

Those data didn’t exist in 1800.

Okay, calm down.  I wasn’t aware of that and just asking for more data which now I know doesn’t exist in your rather shit way of saying it.  Pity though as would be useful to have as a wider perspective.

Uri Geller now claiming that the aliens who built stonehenge will now invade the UK as retaliation………………..

Defacing stonehenge isn’t really my cup of tea, but neither is tone policing. It’s a big world out there and no-one has a monopoly on “the correct way to raise a concern”.

“Don’t vandalise ancient UNESCO sites” is hardly engaging in respectability politics.

On the day two JSO protestors were jailed for the Van Gogh Sunflowers incident in 2022, another 3 JSO protestor repeat it, why, i’ve no clue, it’s as if they want some of their members to be handed custodial sentences and in jail to be some type of martyr?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c243v5m0r0lo

why, i’ve no clue

Lucky for them you are doing exactly what they want even without understanding. :)

Back in the good ‘ol days of direct action, confronting directly those responsible for the issues, as Greenpeace used to do, by driving Zodiacs in front of whaling ships, protestors were prepared to actually put themselves at risk, by having the courage of their convictions.
What are these JSO protesters putting at risk, what courage are they showing by vandalism of a work of art that has nothing to do with the subject of their protests?