Climate change protests

[Delayed 461]

1 minute ago, tinfoilhat said:

Because she'll be disappeared into a gulag if she pulls any of that in China?

I just find it a little hypocritical of her basically scolding world leaders, bringing about legal action against several countries but ignores the worst offender.

 

But I think the same of Harry and Meghan jetting around whilst telling everyone to cut carbon emissions. 

[ECCOnoob 1,020]

36 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

XR aren't occupy, they really aren't.

 

The science is known, it's out there, it's accepted by the majority of leading politicians and business leaders. What XR want them to do is greater action. Young Greta hasn't got the answers - she's said as much -  she just wants the grown ups to get their finger out.

So what exactly does the child and her fanatical supporters suggest they do to speed up the process?    We can all sit there shouting and finger pointing with no solutions of our own.   Labour have spent 9 years doing just that.  

 

I would like to know how XR's action are working towards speeding up the process.   Causing unnecessary disruption, damage, expense and use of public resources whilst at the same time disrupting the general public is hardly working towards "getting them to pull their finger out".

 

Raising awareness, marches, legitimate protest outside the relevant targeted organisation are fine.    Deliberate disruption, blockade, chaining and gluing oneself to trains or buses is totally different. 

Edited October 10, 2019 by ECCOnoob

[hauxwell 243]

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

We know that.   Its been news for decades.     The question is WHAT action?  

 

Getting in the way and causing major disruption to ordinary people going about their lives whilst at the same time being complete hypocrites and using the very companies and services that you are supposed to be protesting against achieves what exactly?

 

Action is tackling the governments and organisations who are in a position to do something about it.   Action is tackling the countires and government regimes who are the worst pollutors.   Action is working within and alongside said governments and organisations on a practical level to achieve what is necessary.  Action is proper education from an early age of the potential impact and steps to reduce it.   Action is proper education to the wider society and working WITH the public on a practical level. 

 

Action is NOT shouting, chanting, waving banners, dressing up and and generally getting in the way of and severely disruping people without any actual practical purpose.     It might be a surprise but that sort of moronic behavior is just the type of thing which will make the public actually turn against you and wiping out any chance of being accepted as credible.

 

Its a lesson the Occupy movement failed to grasp and ER are heading the same way.

 

 

A good post, I agree with you.

[tinfoilhat 11]

11 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

So what exactly does the child and her fanatical supporters suggest they do to speed up the process?    We can all sit there shouting and finger pointing with no solutions of our own.   Labour have spent 9 years doing just that.  

 

I would like to know how XR's action are working towards speeding up the process.   Causing unnecessary disruption, damage, expense and use of public resources whilst at the same time disrupting the general public is hardly working towards "getting them to pull their finger out".

 

Raising awareness, marches, legitimate protest outside the relevant targeted organisation are fine.    Deliberate disruption, blockade, chaining and gluing oneself to trains or buses is totally different. 

She isn't the grown up in the room, the grown ups are and I'd suggest some of the data she is trying to highlight is older than her.

 

She doesn't come with policy, policy makers do. Sadly her timing stinks as we have some truly awful leaders right around the globe. Large chunks of the media - as well illustrated on here - are climbing into her rather than the message. We could fly less, eat less meat, etc etc - look how well that's going down on this very forum.  People won't do that, literally to help themselves, because harry and Meghan got on a plane or young Greta looks a bit weird. 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

23 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I would like to know how XR's action are working towards speeding up the process.   Causing unnecessary disruption, damage, expense and use of public resources whilst at the same time disrupting the general public is hardly working towards "getting them to pull their finger out".. 

Actually it is.

 

After years of non-disruptive, largely ignored protest this issue has finally made it to the top of the global political agenda. This is largely due to groups like Extinction Rebellion upping the ante.

 

Good luck to them.

 

 

[ads36 214]

2 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

The question is WHAT action?  

there's loads that could be done, very easily.

 

*stop fracking - we need to leave fossil fuels in the ground.

*tax aviation fuel

*don't build the 3rd runway at heathrow - we need to fly less, not more.

*proceed with next-gen nuclear power (modular reactors - standardising design, and productionising refueling and decommisioning, massively reducing costs). the designs are more or less ready to go.

*prioritise and properly fund public and active travel. Trains should be cheaper than driving, even for families. Sheffield should have a network of safe cycle routes, right now it doesn't have 1 single route, never mind a network.

*restrict car use in cities with simple filters (bollards), strongly encouraging most journeys away from cars. look at the netherlands, they still love cars, but they have to go the long way round.  bikes/buses/trams/emergency services  can go direct A-B.

*plant trees 

*stop draining moorland - peat bogs are huge carbon sinks, at the moment they're largely drained for the benefit of sheep farming and grouse shooting

 

that's a few effective things for starters, and i'm just an amateur.

 

and that's before we start talking about rationing (?) things like flying, and meat.

 

all of the effective stuff needs to be top-down, there's lots of easy stuff to get us going, and we're doing none of it.

Edited October 10, 2019 by ads36

[tinfoilhat 11]

42 minutes ago, ads36 said:

there's loads that could be done, very easily.

 

*stop fracking - we need to leave fossil fuels in the ground.

*tax aviation fuel

*don't build the 3rd runway at heathrow - we need to fly less, not more.

*proceed with next-gen nuclear power (modular reactors - standardising design, and productionising refueling and decommisioning, massively reducing costs). the designs are more or less ready to go.

*prioritise and properly fund public and active travel. Trains should be cheaper than driving, even for families. Sheffield should have a network of safe cycle routes, right now it doesn't have 1 single route, never mind a network.

*restrict car use in cities with simple filters (bollards), strongly encouraging most journeys away from cars. look at the netherlands, they still love cars, but they have to go the long way round.  bikes/buses/trams/emergency services  can go direct A-B.

*plant trees 

*stop draining moorland - peat bogs are huge carbon sinks, at the moment they're largely drained for the benefit of sheep farming and grouse shooting

 

that's a few effective things for starters, and i'm just an amateur.

 

and that's before we start talking about rationing (?) things like flying, and meat.

 

all of the effective stuff needs to be top-down, there's lots of easy stuff to get us going, and we're doing none of it.

Top post.

 

I'll add incentives (tax breaks) to live within a mile of where you work AND you walk/cycle to work. Investment in a better e charging network.

 

I'm not one for banning things, but really, location,location location  needs to go. Finding people houses where it involves a 2 hour commute should not be a thing, let alone aspirational!

[TeaFan 10]

4 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

Action is working within and alongside said governments and organisations on a practical level to achieve what is necessary.  Action is proper education from an early age of the potential impact and steps to reduce it.   Action is proper education to the wider society and working WITH the public on a practical level.

 

 

It's not possible to work with people who aren't interested, and this government is not interested.

 

Pro-fracking, pro-airport expansion, not interested in imposing passivhaus standards on housebuilders, or insulation standards on landlords, banned onshore wind, not interested in tidal energy, set a date for banning sales of fossil vehicles which is after the point at which manufacturers will have stopped making them, pro-grouse moor vandalism, the list goes on. And it's because their focus is on Brexit and enabling wealthy people to have more money, not on addressing the most important issue of our time. In fact, it's turned out that conservative think tank The Institute for Economic Affairs, that has links to a lot of people in the current government, has been trying to undermine climate science for decades (though you acknowledge anthropogenic climate change has been a known reality for years). Therefore that leaves just direct action to attempt to focus the government's attention, by forcing them to take action. Just asking is a waste of time.

 

If there was widespread support for people going on strike from work to demand action that would be something else we could do, but thanks to anti-union laws we'd be at risk of being sacked unless enough people were up for it 

Edited October 10, 2019 by TeaFan

[iansheff 86]

Apparently BBC Broadcasting House is on lock down, one journalist said the protesters were not letting anyone in or out of the building and a BBC reporter said the building was "locked down".

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/extinction-rebellion-london-bbc-broadcasting-house-locked-down-by-protesters/ar-AAIBYpn?ocid=spartandhp

[ECCOnoob 1,020]

1 hour ago, iansheff said:

Apparently BBC Broadcasting House is on lock down, one journalist said the protesters were not letting anyone in or out of the building and a BBC reporter said the building was "locked down".

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/extinction-rebellion-london-bbc-broadcasting-house-locked-down-by-protesters/ar-AAIBYpn?ocid=spartandhp

They really are a bunch of morons.  

 

"Deadly silence" my backside.   There has been leading stories on the news for days.   It's been plastered all over social media, It's been plastered all over the newspapers.

 

Once again the protesters going for the easy target.   Typical cop out action because they have no balls to tackle the actual organisations in the actual countries which are the worst contributors to the the problem.

 

Our government is doing something. Our airlines are doing something. Our transport companies are doing something. Our local councils are doing something.

 

Time to move on to those who haven't done anything yet.  Try the far East or the United States just starters.

 

If these morons carry on much longer with their disruption to ordinary people going about their business - it will be the general public who will start doing something back.  A good quick fist to face.

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by ECCOnoob

[ads36 214]

18 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Our government is doing something. Our airlines are doing something. Our transport companies are doing something. Our local councils are doing something.

go on then, convince me with solid examples...

 

the bbc is ripe for a protest, insisting on wheeling out people like Lawson, to spout unchallenged nonsense like :

"during this past 10 years, if anything... average world temperature has slightly declined"

Edited October 11, 2019 by ads36

[ECCOnoob 1,020]

22 minutes ago, ads36 said:

go on then, convince me with solid examples...

 

the bbc is ripe for a protest, insisting on wheeling out people like Lawson, to spout unchallenged nonsense like :

"during this past 10 years, if anything... average world temperature has slightly declined"

The BBC has an remit for impartiality.      They are entitled to broadcast a range of opinion even if it doesn' t happen to support your own. 

 

I certainly would not say that such statement is unchallenged.   In fact statements just like that are subject to huge ongoing discussion.

 

A broadcaster is entitled to put people like Lawson on their screens just as much as Hallam or Rathor.   It gives balance. 

 

I feel like retching every time they put Nigel Fromage or Julia Hartley Wotsit on Question Time but like it or not they have just as much right to be there as Caroline Lucas or Shami Chakrabarti.    They are part of the political spectrum and have to be covered. 

 

I think its pretty obvious that ignoring a opposing view is just the sort of things we disapprove of in Russia, China and the Middle East.   Surely you dont think that's acceptable.  

 

Our side is right and everyone else is wrong doesn't really cut it.  

Edited October 11, 2019 by ECCOnoob