Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We shouldn’t look much past Lindsay Hoyle as next Speaker

135

Comments

  • Options
    Mr. Jonathan, she doesn't argue about science. Her arguments are overflowing with emotion.

    Take the action against a few countries she's begun. They don't include the US and China. At best, that's feeble.

    Consider the increased uptake in renewable energy. The Chinese adoption of solar which has led to economies of scale, significantly increasing the affordability of such tech. Or the predicted levelling off of global population. The widespread reduction in the West of plastic bag usage.

    And so on, and so on.

    Even if one is a global warming enthusiast, significant progress has been and is being made.

    Aiming at minor targets, such as considering plastic straw bans in the UK without tackling the massive plastic gushing down a handful of rivers in Asia, is ineffective. Sure, it makes the speaker feel righteous, but even if they get what they ask for it won't achieve their perceived desire.

    One might argue that having a PR sailing stunt with the boat then being sailed back by a crew flown in is more than a shade hypocritical too.

    Hell, I'm 'greener' than Thunberg or Prince Harry. And I manage to do it without lecturing everyone else with arguments dripping in guilt and soaked in despair.
  • Options
    Is there a market on when Johnson is replaced as Tory leader?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Haha just giving PB the underrepresented white van man view. Nice of you to oblige with the expected boilerplate insult 🤣
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    I don’t agree with Greta pitting one generation against another, but the points she makes about climate science are sound, it deserves urgent attention and she has achieved that in a fractious chaotic world. Few others could have achieved that. She did. This is a good thing that outweighs any downside.
  • Options
    F1: Leclerc looking good, once again.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,375

    Is there a market on when Johnson is replaced as Tory leader?

    There's one on betfair.

    He's about 3/1 to go this year.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,781
    (Bloody L, I agree with Malc. That's twice within 3 months.)
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,145
    edited September 2019
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    How many years do you think we have left to tackle the issue of global warming?
    I've been hearing that question for thirty years and been told that disaster was imminent throughout that period.

    And who is this 'we' ?

    If you want to help the environment then how about living withing your means, taxing imported tat from polluting countries, taxing foreign holidays and travel and opposing HS2, Heathrow expansion and the importation of millions of people.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Tabman said:

    Tabman said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
    hanged....
    Yes but you went to university...
    ...and a proppa Comprehensive
    Was it a former Sec Mod.?
    Yep. Was one of the first Comps in the country.

    (Although I only went there because we'd moved house. Before that I was at a Technical Grammar.)
    Other way round for me, Comprehensive before provincial Grammar . It was like leaving the white heat of technology for Tom Brown's schooldays.

    However fifty years on and that excellent vanguard Comprehensive is now a mediocre Acadamy. Underfunding, societal change or just lack of interest? Who knows?
    My ex sec mod comp has spawned reality TV stars in recent years. Oh the shame.

    The odd one did escape to great things from my era (jouroj, TV producer and NASA), but it was the 80s when well to do lefty parents were still prepared to stand by their principles
    Some of us still are.
    I saw your post a few days back. Sounds a very positive experience at your kids school.

    I have long thought that there is more to education than academic stuff, though of course that matters. Children need to have friends and contacts across the social spectrum if they are going to function well in adult life, rather than continue in some posh bubble, or a socially excluded one.

    Ditto it's important that friends are in the neighbourhood, rather than scattered far and wide and only seen at school. This is for the benefit both of the well off and the less well off. Lessons in humility and aspiration need that social mix.
    I wouldn't want to pretend the school is perfect or that we don't sometimes wonder if we're doing the right thing by our kids. But overall I share your views entirely. The education system expresses the kind of country we want to be in the future, and a system divided between the rich and the rest will produce a country in the same mould.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133
    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    They have a different opinion , why is it always them attacking. Why does Greta attack people more like. She will most likely be pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere than a small city whilst hypocritically talking mince about her childhood being ruined. Why does she not piss off to China, Russia and such like with her whining. As per usual , like Gore and others she is a hypocrite. Why not just do it all by video rather than flying all over the world complaining about flying. Just another over privileged twunk that thinks they can tell people what to do whilst doing the opposite themselves.
    Greta went by sea.
    One publicity stunt does not cover it unfortunately.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,862
    MattW said:

    Foxy said:

    The tories are a minority so they may not get to impose anyone. So the next question is whether the Corbyn Cult see a reason to elect Ms Harman.Besides they may need her for the GNU.

    I doubt very much that the Cult will vote for a Tory.

    Possibly one of the independent Tories...
    Lets have Dr Sarah, the MP for Independent Coffee Shops, and we can all emote together. Just like Extinction Rebellion.
    Dr Sarah has a few medical issues herself.

    https://twitter.com/sarahwollaston/status/1177859192838918146?s=19
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,083

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    TGOHF2 said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Ireland need a converted try to tie. 7 minutes to do it.....

    I can see a scenario in this group where scotland, if they lose to Japan and Samoa, fail to qualify automatically for the next world cup.
    .
    That's easy - you just replace Scotland with Georgia in the Six Nations, if they finish above 4th; otherwise, just revert to a 5 Nations.
    I did wonder if there should be a promotion/relegation playoff for the final spot of the 6-nations

    Of course there should be. The closed shop system is a sporting disgrace and an affront to competition. It only persists because the blazers prefer a trip to Rome every spring rather than roughing in in Tbilisi.
    regardless of whether they change entry to the 6 nations, they should definately play some (more) matches against the next tier nations
    Not good enough. Should be one up, one down every year. Georgia have won the European Championship several years running. How are they supposed to develop when they aren’t able to advance? Meanwhile Italy are annual wooden spoon fodder in the 6N.
    Cricket's seen the light; look at the progress Bangladesh and Afghanistan have made. Although it seems a some what dim and spluttering light sometimes. The last World Cup was almost designed to keep the aspiring counties at bay.
  • Options

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    TGOHF2 said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Ireland need a converted try to tie. 7 minutes to do it.....

    I can see a scenario in this group where scotland, if they lose to Japan and Samoa, fail to qualify automatically for the next world cup.
    Theoretically this is a good result for Scotland as it opens up the possibility of avoiding NZ in the next round. But more likely it consigns them to 3rd or 4th.
    The problem with Scotland finishing 4th is that they'd not automatically qualify for the next world cup which the qualification setup assumes will happen. (there is no method for the 6 nations to enter the qualifying)
    That's easy - you just replace Scotland with Georgia in the Six Nations, if they finish above 4th; otherwise, just revert to a 5 Nations.
    I did wonder if there should be a promotion/relegation playoff for the final spot of the 6-nations

    Of course there should be. The closed shop system is a sporting disgrace and an affront to competition. It only persists because the blazers prefer a trip to Rome every spring rather than roughing in in Tbilisi.
    regardless of whether they change entry to the 6 nations, they should definately play some (more) matches against the next tier nations
    Not good enough. Should be one up, one down every year. Georgia have won the European Championship several years running. How are they supposed to develop when they aren’t able to advance? Meanwhile Italy are annual wooden spoon fodder in the 6N.
    Indeed.

    But Georgia are a small, poor country at the other end of Europe while Italy are a big, rich country near to the others.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    Pulpstar said:

    Philip Larkin & Debee Ashby

    Larkin might have enjoyed reading about her.
  • Options
    F1: waiting for the markets to wake up. Doubt I'll be betting. Ferrari looking good. If there are long odds and each way goes to third I might look at Verstappen/Bottas.
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    How many years do you think we have left to tackle the issue of global warming?
    Space mirrors. Piece of piss. Spray a bit of sulphur dioxide out the back of planes and give everyone acid rain hats. White roofs for albedo. Get off the planet and build space infrastructure.
    What they will do instead is state control of your life, movement and home and blame every hot day on people driving more than their allotted mileage.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913

    Mr. Jonathan, she doesn't argue about science. Her arguments are overflowing with emotion.

    Take the action against a few countries she's begun. They don't include the US and China. At best, that's feeble.

    Consider the increased uptake in renewable energy. The Chinese adoption of solar which has led to economies of scale, significantly increasing the affordability of such tech. Or the predicted levelling off of global population. The widespread reduction in the West of plastic bag usage.

    And so on, and so on.

    Even if one is a global warming enthusiast, significant progress has been and is being made.

    Aiming at minor targets, such as considering plastic straw bans in the UK without tackling the massive plastic gushing down a handful of rivers in Asia, is ineffective. Sure, it makes the speaker feel righteous, but even if they get what they ask for it won't achieve their perceived desire.

    One might argue that having a PR sailing stunt with the boat then being sailed back by a crew flown in is more than a shade hypocritical too.

    Hell, I'm 'greener' than Thunberg or Prince Harry. And I manage to do it without lecturing everyone else with arguments dripping in guilt and soaked in despair.

    Your personal efforts to limit CO2 emissions are a good thing. People advocating that others adopt your behaviour is a good thing. The compliment one another. Good work.
  • Options
    Mr. Jonathan, you naughty sausage.

    Morris Dancer = so virtuous he's a saint without trying.

    Being serious, though, hectoring people and assuming morally superiority is both arrogant and off-putting.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,926
    edited September 2019
    Nice piece from David as usual.

    After the divisions of the Bercow era a sensible, down to earth. straight-talking northerner is exactly what Parliament needs.

    If MPs have got any sense they'll vote Hoyle... Which probably means we can expect Harman to become Speaker. :D
  • Options
    spudgfsh said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    That's not quite true.

    The young have an abundance of vision without the experience to know what is possible.

    The older have the experience of what is possible but have mostly lost the vision to make effective change.

    and we hate being lectured to by people who don't see any of the nuance.
    Indeed.
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    Nice piece from David as usual.

    After the divisions of the Bercow era a sensible, down to earth. straight-talking northerner is exactly what Parliament needs.

    If MPs have got any sense they'll vote Hoyle... Which probably means we can expect Harman to become Speaker. :D

    I hope not......Hoyle definitely the best candidate.....
  • Options
    dr_spyn said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Philip Larkin & Debee Ashby

    Larkin might have enjoyed reading about her.
    I see Ms Ashby started her career before PL's demise so they might have crossed over. I suspect despite his allegiance to words he may have enjoyed the pictures more though.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133
    Jonathan said:

    I don’t agree with Greta pitting one generation against another, but the points she makes about climate science are sound, it deserves urgent attention and she has achieved that in a fractious chaotic world. Few others could have achieved that. She did. This is a good thing that outweighs any downside.

    All I have heard her do is whine and say we are ruining the world and her childhood. The first any idiot already knows and the second is her own bag. Spoilt little brat.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,862

    Foxy said:

    Tabman said:

    Tabman said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Mr. Roger, I think my meaning's pretty clear in a thread about whether Hoyle might become the next Speaker.

    Just a joke (almost)

    (I was going to say people have been hung for saying that)
    hanged....
    Yes but you went to university...
    ...and a proppa Comprehensive
    Was it a former Sec Mod.?
    Yep. Was one of the first Comps in the country.

    (Although I only went there because we'd moved house. Before that I was at a Technical Grammar.)
    Other way round for me, Comprehensive before provincial Grammar . It was like leaving the white heat of technology for Tom Brown's schooldays.

    However fifty years on and that excellent vanguard Comprehensive is now a mediocre Acadamy. Underfunding, societal change or just lack of interest? Who knows?
    My ex sec mod comp has spawned reality TV stars in recent years. Oh the shame.

    The odd one did escape to great things from my era (jouroj, TV producer and NASA), but it was the 80s when well to do lefty parents were still prepared to stand by their principles
    Some of us still are.
    I saw your post a few days back. Sounds a very positive experience at your kids school.

    I have long thought that there is more to education than academic stuff, though of course that matters. Children need to have friends and contacts across the social spectrum if they are going to function well in adult life, rather than continue in some posh bubble, or a socially excluded one.

    Ditto it's important that friends are in the neighbourhood, rather than scattered far and wide and only seen at school. This is for the benefit both of the well off and the less well off. Lessons in humility and aspiration need that social mix.
    I wouldn't want to pretend the school is perfect or that we don't sometimes wonder if we're doing the right thing by our kids. But overall I share your views entirely. The education system expresses the kind of country we want to be in the future, and a system divided between the rich and the rest will produce a country in the same mould.
    I have long been interested professionally in my role as a medical educator in the "hidden curriculum", and think it very important in secondary education too.

    Teaching kids that they should be kept apart from their peers is intrinsically socially divisive.

  • Options
    OFFICIAL - We need them more than they need us.
    https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1177884628117577729?s=21
  • Options
    Its amusing how quickly some people move from bewailing not enough foreign holidays being taken to demanding action on carbon emissions.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133
    Jonathan said:

    Mr. Jonathan, she doesn't argue about science. Her arguments are overflowing with emotion.

    Take the action against a few countries she's begun. They don't include the US and China. At best, that's feeble.

    Consider the increased uptake in renewable energy. The Chinese adoption of solar which has led to economies of scale, significantly increasing the affordability of such tech. Or the predicted levelling off of global population. The widespread reduction in the West of plastic bag usage.

    And so on, and so on.

    Even if one is a global warming enthusiast, significant progress has been and is being made.

    Aiming at minor targets, such as considering plastic straw bans in the UK without tackling the massive plastic gushing down a handful of rivers in Asia, is ineffective. Sure, it makes the speaker feel righteous, but even if they get what they ask for it won't achieve their perceived desire.

    One might argue that having a PR sailing stunt with the boat then being sailed back by a crew flown in is more than a shade hypocritical too.

    Hell, I'm 'greener' than Thunberg or Prince Harry. And I manage to do it without lecturing everyone else with arguments dripping in guilt and soaked in despair.

    Your personal efforts to limit CO2 emissions are a good thing. People advocating that others adopt your behaviour is a good thing. The compliment one another. Good work.
    We don't need lectured at by a spoilt middle aged twunk though.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,862

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133
    MattW said:

    (Bloody L, I agree with Malc. That's twice within 3 months.)

    It is catching Matt, I am the voice of reason on here.
  • Options

    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claimimmunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    How many years do you think we have left to tackle the issue of global warming?
    I've been hearing that question for thirty years and been told that disaster was imminent throughout that period.

    And who is this 'we' ?

    If you want to help the environment then how about living withing your means, taxing imported tat from polluting countries, taxing foreign holidays and travel and opposing HS2, Heathrow expansion and the importation of millions of people.

    Everyone is a hypocrite. We agree. What’s the solution? Is global warming a hoax? Do we just ignore it? Does action need to be taken?

  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,040
    edited September 2019
    isam said:

    Didn't realise I was enraged.

    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    The honest answer to that question is "all of them". It's just that the annoying Greenie has a newscamera pointed at her.

    There are many criticisms that can be made of Greenism as a political ideology and I make many of them. But most of the insults levelled at her recently are ad hominem
  • Options
    EPGEPG Posts: 6,048
    The problems people have with Greta Thunberg as I hear them from people I know
    1. Greens reckon she offers no guidance out of the despair that leads people to her, understandably for her age since she is very young. They blame over-use of resources rather than corporations, and they don't think ideas like re-wilding are pertinent to global warming.
    2. She is in the top 1% of people who benefit on net from de-carbonisation, as most people do not have wealthy Scandinavian parents or friends with seaworthy yachts
    The obvious contrast to the guidance out of despair and the personal gain is Joan of Arc - but most child prophets through history are not as good as Joan so again it is understandable. I think Thunberg is a good pop culture figure but objectively she has caused zero de-carbonisation to date
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133

    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claimimmunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    How many years do you think we have left to tackle the issue of global warming?
    I've been hearing that question for thirty years and been told that disaster was imminent throughout that period.

    And who is this 'we' ?

    If you want to help the environment then how about living withing your means, taxing imported tat from polluting countries, taxing foreign holidays and travel and opposing HS2, Heathrow expansion and the importation of millions of people.

    Everyone is a hypocrite. We agree. What’s the solution? Is global warming a hoax? Do we just ignore it? Does action need to be taken?

    When the sun shines for consecutive days in Scotland I will start to believe it could be real
  • Options
    Jennifer makes Stormy Daniels look somewhat restrained & classy.

    https://twitter.com/kwr66/status/1177891092374663168?s=20
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133
    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    Didn't realise I was enraged.

    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    The honest answer to that question is "all of them". It's just that the annoying Greenie has a newscamera pointed at her.

    There are many criticisms that can be made of Greenism as a political ideology and I make many of them. But most of the insults levelled at her recently are ad hominem
    What is with using foreign languages so we do not understand your point
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Haha just giving PB the underrepresented white van man view. Nice of you to oblige with the expected boilerplate insult 🤣
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
  • Options
    spudgfsh said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    That's not quite true.

    The young have an abundance of vision without the experience to know what is possible.

    The older have the experience of what is possible but have mostly lost the vision to make effective change.

    and we hate being lectured to by people who don't see any of the nuance.

    People hate being challenged, it’s true. And we’re all hypocrites. But there does seem to be increasing evidence of a climate emergency. So what is the solution?

  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,862

    Its amusing how quickly some people move from bewailing not enough foreign holidays being taken to demanding action on carbon emissions.

    I have fairly consistently been an advocate of the Isle of Wight as the holiday par excellence.

    When have I ever complained about people not taking enough overseas holidays?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,926
    edited September 2019
    I don't really have a view on Greta one way or another but I do think its slightly odd that governments are taking policy advice from children and doomsday cult protesters.

    Decarbonization is going to happen (is happening) through technological advance and progress but it's got to be done at a sustainable rate so that we don't become the first generation in earths history to go backwards rather than forwards.

    If anything the doomsday hand-wringers just annoy the average person and probably make the drive towards decarbonization slightly harder and slower.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    edited September 2019
    My MP Dame Eleanor Laing is indeed a very good tip. If she knocks out Harman and the other Tory candidates she becomes the main female and main Tory candidate for speaker in a Parliament where there is a mood for a female Speaker and where the largest number of MPs are Tory. Remember too of the last 3 speakers 2 were Labour, Boothroyd and Martin and 1 was Tory in name only Bercow.

    Yougov did a poll of MPs earlier this month with Hoyle first on 35%, Laing second on 6% and Harman third on 5%
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/09/12/lindsay-hoyle-mps-favoured-candidate-next-speaker
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,133
    HYUFD said:

    My MP Dame Eleanor Laing is indeed a very good tip. If she knocks out Harman and the other Tory candidates she becomes the main female and main Tory candidate for speaker in a Parliament where there is a mood for a female Speaker and where the largest number of Mps are Tory. Remember too of the last 3 speakers 2 were Labour, Boothroyd and Martin and 1 was Tory in name only Bercow.

    That is all we need , a Panto Dame as speaker
  • Options
    DruttDrutt Posts: 1,093
    MattW said:

    isam said:

    My school gave the world Lord Nelson, Lord Ashcroft and Tim Westwood amongst others
    I mean Tim F ing Westwood. I could have had his locker!

    Mine gave us Michael Adebolajo
    Ken Clarke, Robin Leigh Pemberton, Geoff "the complete" Hoon Ed Balls, Ed Davey.

    Oh and D H Lawrence. And three more current MP-types I have hardly heard of - Piers Marchant, James Morris MP (did his mum like AA Milne?), Jonathon Bullock MEP.

    Davey is shaping up well as one of the more rational members of the Lib Dems.
    Lauda finem. Another ON! Hello.
  • Options


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?

    I have no idea. Personally I'm barely aware of her. Just a fun and interesting person having their time in the spotlight who we'll recall in nostalgia TV programmes about their era, like Cynthia Payne, Mary Whitehouse, Basil Brush etc..
  • Options
    Mr. Anabobazina, that does raise another legitimate criticism, not of Thunberg but some of her supporters.

    She's simultaneously a wise grown up to whom we ought listen, and a vulnerable child who cannot possibly be criticised.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    edited September 2019
    malcolmg said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    TGOHF2 said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Ireland need a converted try to tie. 7 minutes to do it.....

    I can see a scenario in this group where scotland, if they lose to Japan and Samoa, fail to qualify automatically for the next world cup.
    Theoretically this is a good result for Scotland as it opens up the possibility of avoiding NZ in the next round. But more likely it consigns them to 3rd or 4th.
    The problem with Scotland finishing 4th is that they'd not automatically qualify for the next world cup which the qualification setup assumes will happen. (there is no method for the 6 nations to enter the qualifying)
    That's easy - you just replace Scotland with Georgia in the Six Nations, if they finish above 4th; otherwise, just revert to a 5 Nations.
    I did wonder if there should be a promotion/relegation playoff for the final spot of the 6-nations

    Of course there should be. The closed shop system is a sporting disgrace and an affront to competition. It only persists because the blazers prefer a trip to Rome every spring rather than roughing in in Tbilisi.
    regardless of whether they change entry to the 6 nations, they should definately play some (more) matches against the next tier nations
    Not good enough. Should be one up, one down every year. Georgia have won the European Championship several years running. How are they supposed to develop when they aren’t able to advance? Meanwhile Italy are annual wooden spoon fodder in the 6N.
    Should have been done long time ago
    That was a wonderful game of rugby. Japan play the sport beautifully, which itself is more than enough reason to give them a slot in a Tier 1 competition.

    Right now Japan are at 9 in the rankings, ahead of Argentina at 10 and Italy at 14, and just behind Scotland.

    But should Japan be in the 6 Nations or the SH Championship?

    Frankly, the 6 Nations should be rushing to embrace another Northern Hemisphere side with great skills, lots of money, and a massive potential fan base. It would add lustre to the tournament, and exoticism - Japan v England in Kyoto every year! - and Japan would probably have a better chance than Italy of regularly beating the big teams, and becoming a big team. Plus it would be brilliant for world rugby.

    Do it! Banzai!
  • Options

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
    OMG the Indpendent is even worse than the Guardian.

    The big story in their travel section is about dog surfing in California.

    Followed by features on Qatar, Brazil and Austria.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/travel
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    edited September 2019
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    My MP Dame Eleanor Laing is indeed a very good tip. If she knocks out Harman and the other Tory candidates she becomes the main female and main Tory candidate for speaker in a Parliament where there is a mood for a female Speaker and where the largest number of Mps are Tory. Remember too of the last 3 speakers 2 were Labour, Boothroyd and Martin and 1 was Tory in name only Bercow.

    That is all we need , a Panto Dame as speaker
    Dame Eleanor maybe a Dame but she is no panto act, with a degree from Edinburgh University she is also a former lawyer. She would also be another Scottish speaker, being born and raised in Paisley
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,083
    HYUFD said:

    My MP Dame Eleanor Laing is indeed a very good tip. If she knocks out Harman and the other Tory candidates she becomes the main female and main Tory candidate for speaker in a Parliament where there is a mood for a female Speaker and where the largest number of MPs are Tory. Remember too of the last 3 speakers 2 were Labour, Boothroyd and Martin and 1 was Tory in name only Bercow.

    Yougov did a poll of MPs earlier this month with Hoyle first on 35%, Laing second on 6% and Harman third on 5%
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/09/12/lindsay-hoyle-mps-favoured-candidate-next-speaker

    Are we not close to the point where the Tories are not the largest Party? You can't throw people out then count them in!

    And Bercow was pretty far too the right not so long ago.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167

    Mr. Anabobazina, that does raise another legitimate criticism, not of Thunberg but some of her supporters.

    She's simultaneously a wise grown up to whom we ought listen, and a vulnerable child who cannot possibly be criticised.

    You poor dear. Counselling is available.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,040
    felix said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    She has entered the political arena and presumably is therefore up for debate. If not the solution is easy.
    I understand the argument that the political sphere is confrontational and if you can't cope with that you shouldn't be in it. But the marketplace of ideas is less efficient if the main method of criticism is ad hominem attacks.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187

    HYUFD said:

    My MP Dame Eleanor Laing is indeed a very good tip. If she knocks out Harman and the other Tory candidates she becomes the main female and main Tory candidate for speaker in a Parliament where there is a mood for a female Speaker and where the largest number of MPs are Tory. Remember too of the last 3 speakers 2 were Labour, Boothroyd and Martin and 1 was Tory in name only Bercow.

    Yougov did a poll of MPs earlier this month with Hoyle first on 35%, Laing second on 6% and Harman third on 5%
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/09/12/lindsay-hoyle-mps-favoured-candidate-next-speaker

    Are we not close to the point where the Tories are not the largest Party? You can't throw people out then count them in!

    And Bercow was pretty far too the right not so long ago.
    Amber Rudd no longer takes the Tory whip but in the Standard yesterday said she was speaking to Dame Eleanor about endorsing her as next Speaker
  • Options

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.

    Best just to do nothing then.

  • Options
    Quite the accusation from the former Chancellor. Potentially libellous - if untrue.
    https://twitter.com/robert___harris/status/1177846231772647424?s=21
  • Options

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.

    Best just to do nothing then.

    Well its certainly better than flying to California to watch dog surfing.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:



    Everyone is a hypocrite. We agree. What’s the solution? Is global warming a hoax? Do we just ignore it? Does action need to be taken?

    When the sun shines for consecutive days in Scotland I will start to believe it could be real
    It's not implausible that global warming could lead to an increase in cloudiness (More heat to redistribute, stronger surface winds, more evaporation, higher humidity, therefore more clouds) but there is no clear evidence either way, so your metric to judge whether global warming is happening is orthogonal to the issue and not useful.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,862

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
    None of those art trips require flying, indeed several are in Britain. The top Guardian travel items are places in Britain.


  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    at doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Haha just giving PB the underrepresented white van man view. Nice of you to oblige with the expected boilerplate insult 🤣
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
    Oh FFS guys please! It’s the frikking weekend you know! Go to a farmers market and mingle with real people 🤣🤣🤣🤣
  • Options
    Mr. Byronic, I quite agree. Japan should be in a top flight tournament.

    Mr. Anabobazina, *raises an eyebrow*

    If you spent as much time contemplating how to add to the quality of debate and making reasoned arguments as you do changing your name and posting replies that amount to "lol" the discussion threads might be more enlightened.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    They have a different opinion , why is it always them attacking. Why does Greta attack people more like. She will most likely be pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere than a small city whilst hypocritically talking mince about her childhood being ruined. Why does she not piss off to China, Russia and such like with her whining. As per usual , like Gore and others she is a hypocrite. Why not just do it all by video rather than flying all over the world complaining about flying. Just another over privileged twunk that thinks they can tell people what to do whilst doing the opposite themselves.
    Greta went by sea.
    One publicity stunt does not cover it unfortunately.
    Did she have a mini klargister on her boat..
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,375
    Climate Change -

    The core question is essentially a scientific matter. To what extent is the warming of the planet caused by human activity? And which human activity?

    What we should do about it - the cost/benefit analysis - this is highly political, but the core question, the starting point for the debate, is at heart scientific.

    It is interesting, therefore, that a person's politics seem to impact so heavily on whether they accept the broad scientific consensus on a scientific topic.

    People on the Left tend to not only accept it but embrace it with an enthusiasm which goes above and beyond. Those on the Right often do not accept it all. Despite being less than fully endowed with the relevant knowledge and expertise they will denounce what is objectively close to 100% certain as humbug.

    Why is this?

    My view is that it's because much of the mooted mitigation activity has a communal socialistic 'big state' and/or internationalist flavour. The sort of stuff that appeals to the Left and is anathema to the Right.
  • Options
    F1: no tip, but some significant off-track news:
    https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/09/russia-pre-qualifying-2019.html

    I do agree with the markets that Leclerc's likely to get pole, and Vettel/Hamilton to be right behind him.

    Slightly surprised Bottas/Verstappen don't have longer odds (they're only around 7.5 and 8.5, or so).
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,914
    Pulpstar said:


    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.

    This made me look at the CO2 equivalents per capita in more detail.

    Not surprisingly Canada is bad at 16.7 tonnes per capita, just trailing Australia at 17.2, USA with 17.2, so these three are pretty similar. (2014 Figures, the latest in the website below).

    A couple of things stand out for me. One is how bad many small states are. For the oil rich and filthy rich Gulf States this is maybe to be expected, but small countries like Luxembourg, Singapore and Trindad and Tobago(!) are all above Australia. I find this surprising. Bahrain is at a massive 73.1 tonnes, over four times that of Australia!

    The UK really has been making an effort. In 2008 it was 9.2 and had been in around this or a tad higher in the naughties, but then it drops steadily so that in 2014 it was 7.1. A reduction in over 20% in 6 years is quite impressive. In the same period Germany which likes to think of itself as a Green country has only dropped from 9.9 to 9.4 over that same period.

    Take a look at the source, it's interesting.
    http://www.tsp-data-portal.org/TOP-20-CO2-emitters-per-capita#tspQvChart
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014

    spudgfsh said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never heard anyone try and claim that a mass gathering of people results in a net reduction in carbon emissions. It is a patently absurd position. The protesters obviously felt it was worth it, as does Al Gore and his private jet, and they may be right, but that doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    That's not quite true.

    The young have an abundance of vision without the experience to know what is possible.

    The older have the experience of what is possible but have mostly lost the vision to make effective change.

    and we hate being lectured to by people who don't see any of the nuance.

    People hate being challenged, it’s true. And we’re all hypocrites. But there does seem to be increasing evidence of a climate emergency. So what is the solution?

    Fewer long haul flights?
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
    None of those art trips require flying, indeed several are in Britain. The top Guardian travel items are places in Britain.


    I understand it is also possible to travel through Europe by train.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Mr. Byronic, I quite agree. Japan should be in a top flight tournament.

    Mr. Anabobazina, *raises an eyebrow*

    If you spent as much time contemplating how to add to the quality of debate and making reasoned arguments as you do changing your name and posting replies that amount to "lol" the discussion threads might be more enlightened.

    Japan are also, inter alia, putting on a phenomenal world cup.

    470,000 fans have attended the first 12 games. 97% seats are sold for the entire tournament. Rugby is getting record TV stats in Japan (and not just in Japan team matches). The whole tournament is expected to earn $4bn.

    https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Rugby-World-Cup/Japan-catches-rugby-fever-in-first-week-of-World-Cup

    This is amazing.

    Rugby has a one off opportunity to expand the sport into the world's second biggest economy, and a major cultural power. If the game takes off in Japan it could spread to beery, punchy Korea, Taiwan, even China.

    Get Japan in the 6 Nations or the southern Championship NOW.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,416
    edited September 2019
    O/t this is my sons schools entry (in which he played a significant part) to an economics competition : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iZSnoHh7CO8&feature=youtu.be

    It contains an interview that he did with Chris Law who was very articulate and good enough to give up a fair bit of his time ( the extracts are edited down from nearly 15 minutes.) My son was quite impressed with him. He’s apparently huge.
  • Options
    TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584

    Mr. Anabobazina, that does raise another legitimate criticism, not of Thunberg but some of her supporters.

    She's simultaneously a wise grown up to whom we ought listen, and a vulnerable child who cannot possibly be criticised.

    You poor dear. Counselling is available.
    More than a whiff of noncery in some of the salivating Greta worship.

    https://twitter.com/fotoole/status/1177838899730747392?s=21
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900

    Quite the accusation from the former Chancellor. Potentially libellous - if untrue.

    Surely such an eminent figure would have sent his evidence to the police?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    edited September 2019

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
    None of those art trips require flying, indeed several are in Britain. The top Guardian travel items are places in Britain.


    I understand it is also possible to travel through Europe by train.

    Boats also work as a means of getting to mainland Europe.

  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167

    Mr. Byronic, I quite agree. Japan should be in a top flight tournament.

    Mr. Anabobazina, *raises an eyebrow*

    If you spent as much time contemplating how to add to the quality of debate and making reasoned arguments as you do changing your name and posting replies that amount to "lol" the discussion threads might be more enlightened.

    As I say, counselling is available. Good luck with it all.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    Is there a market on when Johnson is replaced as Tory leader?

    There's one on betfair.

    He's about 3/1 to go this year.
    Thanks. I'm with my dad who thinks he'll stand down if we don't leave by end of October or gets VONCed. I think he's wrong so might see if he wants to have the same bet at evens!

    Just arrived with him at Spurs' new ground where he has season tickets and a bit of corporate hospitality, my first time here.. Come on you Saints!!
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,375

    I have no idea. Personally I'm barely aware of her. Just a fun and interesting person having their time in the spotlight who we'll recall in nostalgia TV programmes about their era, like Cynthia Payne, Mary Whitehouse, Basil Brush etc..

    This is one of the oddest comments I've seen on here for quite some time.

    Basil Brush was a fun and interesting person?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187

    Quite the accusation from the former Chancellor. Potentially libellous - if untrue.
    https://twitter.com/robert___harris/status/1177846231772647424?s=21

    Boris does not want No Deal, if he won a majority at the next general election he would throw the DUP under a bus within 5 minutes and go for the Withdrawal Agreement with a NI only backstop and just remove the backstop for GB.

    However while the DUP hold the balance of power he has to say he will only go for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop in full or No Deal, ideologically though he is not Nigel Farage who really does support No Deal and opposes the Withdrawal Agreement outright, backstop or no backstop
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    George Thomas had been a very partisan Labour politician before becoming Speaker in 1976. In his new office,however, he was widely criticised by his former party for favouring the Tories - he certainly seemed to make life easy for the Executive. In 1997 he supported the Referendum Party.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014

    Mr. Byronic, I quite agree. Japan should be in a top flight tournament.

    Mr. Anabobazina, *raises an eyebrow*

    If you spent as much time contemplating how to add to the quality of debate and making reasoned arguments as you do changing your name and posting replies that amount to "lol" the discussion threads might be more enlightened.

    As I say, counselling is available. Good luck with it all.
    When all else fails, imply mental illness. Page 34 of the woke manifesto
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    at doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Haha just giving PB the underrepresented white van man view. Nice of you to oblige with the expected boilerplate insult 🤣
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
    Oh FFS guys please! It’s the frikking weekend you know! Go to a farmers market and mingle with real people 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    There is emergency counselling available on the weekend too. Best of luck with it.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    kinabalu said:

    I have no idea. Personally I'm barely aware of her. Just a fun and interesting person having their time in the spotlight who we'll recall in nostalgia TV programmes about their era, like Cynthia Payne, Mary Whitehouse, Basil Brush etc..

    This is one of the oddest comments I've seen on here for quite some time.

    Basil Brush was a fun and interesting person?
    Luckyguy is trolling you
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,375

    Thanks. I'm with my dad who thinks he'll stand down if we don't leave by end of October or gets VONCed. I think he's wrong so might see if he wants to have the same bet at evens!

    Just arrived with him at Spurs' new ground where he has season tickets and a bit of corporate hospitality, my first time here.. Come on you Saints!!

    Whoa steady on!

    Resign as PM, yes, that's got to be very possible, but NOT as Tory leader.
  • Options
    Mr. kinabalu, there's a lot of truth in your post, but more nuance worthy of addition.

    Consensus is one place to start. This, or at least a majority, is of critical importance in politics (hence voting), but irrelevant in science. A man who is wrong is wrong whether nobody or a million scientists agree with him. Gravity does not depend on popular support to exist.

    We have evidence from the past, such as Isaac Newton's view on light having a single property rather than the dual nature now considered accurate, where a wrong view has prevailed (in my example for centuries) because the orthodoxy would not brook the heretical nature of an alternative view.

    And that's a problem. Some global warming enthusiasts want the credibility of science and the dogma of religion, whereby scepticism (the bedrock upon which scientific thought is founded) is derided, ignored, or ruled illegitimate (cf Prince Harry's recent wibbling).

    That substantially diminishes my trust in those who beat their chest and proclaim "Science!" yet are unwilling to even remotely entertain another view, which is what someone with a sceptical, scientific mindset should do.

    There's also massive overlap between things we should do if global warming is false and if it is real. Solar panels, geothermal energy development, energy efficient technology, harnessing the power of the tides, and so on.

    Last but not least, there's an implication from some that climate change, to use the more recent term, is a strange and frightening thing. It isn't. It's natural and normal, and has always happened throughout the billions of years of Earth's history. The idea that climate stasis ever existed is nonsense. The question must be if human activity is altering things. The assumption this must be the case reminds me somewhat of Catholics centuries ago, whose view of mankind as the centre of the universe dominated thought and made it natural (and wrong) to assume the sun revolved around us. It doesn't.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,145
    edited September 2019
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
    None of those art trips require flying, indeed several are in Britain. The top Guardian travel items are places in Britain.


    No travel requires flying but I suspect that many going to see, for example, the Prado exhibition will be doing so.

    In any case even non-flying travel or travel within the same country contributes to carbon emissions.

    And while some of the travel items are about Britain they still have items on Japan, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Finland, Portugal, France, Spain, Italy and the USA among other countries

    But you are correct in that the Guardian doesn't plunge to the depths of reprehensibility that the 'California dog surfing' Independent does.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    at doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Haha just giving PB the underrepresented white van man view. Nice of you to oblige with the expected boilerplate insult 🤣
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
    Oh FFS guys please! It’s the frikking weekend you know! Go to a farmers market and mingle with real people 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    There is emergency counselling available on the weekend too. Best of luck with it.
    As I say, when all else fails, throw away the insincere reasonableness “oh ffs guys play nice” and imply mental illness... so boringly predictable
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    edited September 2019
    eristdoof said:

    Pulpstar said:


    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.

    This made me look at the CO2 equivalents per capita in more detail.

    Not surprisingly Canada is bad at 16.7 tonnes per capita, just trailing Australia at 17.2, USA with 17.2, so these three are pretty similar. (2014 Figures, the latest in the website below).

    A couple of things stand out for me. One is how bad many small states are. For the oil rich and filthy rich Gulf States this is maybe to be expected, but small countries like Luxembourg, Singapore and Trindad and Tobago(!) are all above Australia. I find this surprising. Bahrain is at a massive 73.1 tonnes, over four times that of Australia!

    The UK really has been making an effort. In 2008 it was 9.2 and had been in around this or a tad higher in the naughties, but then it drops steadily so that in 2014 it was 7.1. A reduction in over 20% in 6 years is quite impressive. In the same period Germany which likes to think of itself as a Green country has only dropped from 9.9 to 9.4 over that same period.

    Take a look at the source, it's interesting.
    http://www.tsp-data-portal.org/TOP-20-CO2-emitters-per-capita#tspQvChart
    Australia and Luxembourg emit more per capita than the US on that chart with Bahrain, Qatar and Singapore the worst emitters
  • Options
    isam said:

    spudgfsh said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.

    Look up “fixed travel time budget”.

    If the car owners in the crowd spent hours on their feet not driving anywhere there would have been a massive reduction in VMT, regardless how they travelled to and from the protest.

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Its fatigue of whiny brats predicting imminent disaster and demanding everyone else does what we want.

    We all have it to varying degrees.
    That's not quite true.

    The young have an abundance of vision without the experience to know what is possible.

    The older have the experience of what is possible but have mostly lost the vision to make effective change.

    and we hate being lectured to by people who don't see any of the nuance.

    People hate being challenged, it’s true. And we’re all hypocrites. But there does seem to be increasing evidence of a climate emergency. So what is the solution?

    Fewer long haul flights?

    Without doubt. I’ve certainly cut back on mine. But aeroplanes are a relatively small part of the equation. It’s cars and factory emissions that cause the biggest problems, along with environmental degradation. Our best hope from here is technology.

  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    Why is this?

    My view is that it's because much of the mooted mitigation activity has a communal socialistic 'big state' and/or internationalist flavour. The sort of stuff that appeals to the Left and is anathema to the Right.

    However you tackle climate change - whether by State intervention, or market-based methods - it necessarily involves the end of making profit from digging fossil fuels out of the ground.

    People on the right-wing have been played by special interests who want to make as much profit from digging up fossil fuels for as long as possible.

    There are plenty of different market mechanisms that they could have advocated to deal with this issue, but they took the easy way out and simply swallowed the left-bashing lines they were fed by special interests. Intellectually and morally bankrupt, but it's okay because bashing the lefties for the lolz is all that matters.

    It's pretty much the same thing with Brexit. No Deal will piss off Remainer lefties the most, so long-standing principles like the rule of law can be sacrificed on that altar.
  • Options
    Dr David Nicholl, the consultant neurologist who Jacob Rees-Mogg defamed in parliament (over yellowhammer) and then had to apologize to, has been selected to stand for the Lib dems in Bromsgrove. David is an extraordinary campaigner with a proven track record in a number of (non-political) campaigns with an utterly forensic brain and is widely admired in the medical profession.

    David wouldn't be doing this if he didn't think he could win, and a lot of NHS staff will go to the constituency to campaign for him. Could be somewhere (and someone) to watch if you like surprise results.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167
    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    TGOHF2 said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Ireland need a converted try to tie. 7 minutes to do it.....

    I can see a scenario in this group where scotland, if they lose to Japan and Samoa, fail to qualify automatically for the next world cup.
    Theoretically this is a good result for Scotland as it opens up the possibility of avoiding NZ in the next round. But more likely it consigns them to 3rd or 4th.
    The problem with Scotland finishing 4th is that they'd not automatically qualify for the next world cup which the qualification setup assumes will happen. (there is no method for the 6 nations to enter the qualifying)
    That's easy - you just replace Scotland with Georgia in the Six Nations, if they finish above 4th; otherwise, just revert to a 5 Nations.
    I did wonder if there should be a promotion/relegation playoff for the final spot of the 6-nations

    Of course there should be. The closed shop system is a sporting disgrace and an affront to competition. It only persists because the blazers prefer a trip to Rome every spring rather than roughing in in Tbilisi.
    regardless of whether they change entry to the 6 nations, they should definately play some (more) matches against the next tier nations
    .
    Should have been done long time ago
    That was a wonderful game of rugby. Japan play the sport beautifully, which itself is more than enough reason to give them a slot in a Tier 1 competition.

    Right now Japan are at 9 in the rankings, ahead of Argentina at 10 and Italy at 14, and just behind Scotland.

    But should Japan be in the 6 Nations or the SH Championship?

    Frankly, the 6 Nations should be rushing to embrace another Northern Hemisphere side with great skills, lots of money, and a massive potential fan base. It would add lustre to the tournament, and exoticism - Japan v England in Kyoto every year! - and Japan would probably have a better chance than Italy of regularly beating the big teams, and becoming a big team. Plus it would be brilliant for world rugby.

    Do it! Banzai!
    Well said. They should rebrand the European Championship as the Northern Championship and let Japan enter, alongside installing relegation and premonition from the despicable closed shop that is the 6N.

    I dare say Japan would get promoted within two seasons, max. And they would ignite the 6N while Italy get much needed practice against teams nearer their ability. Such as Romania.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    at doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
    Oh FFS guys please! It’s the frikking weekend you know! Go to a farmers market and mingle with real people 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    There is emergency counselling available on the weekend too. Best of luck with it.
    Nothing to do with mental illness you poor dear. I’m aware that you are triggered by Greta and am suggesting countermeasures to help you cope.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Why do people attack Greta?

    Nationalist Populists object for many reasons, but the psychological threat is of a popular worldwide movement that transcends the barriers that National Populists want to put between people.

    International action requires international institutions, and they feel threatened by these.
    She's a pin-up for people who have privileged lives and don't want to give up those privileges but feel guilty about it.
    These who dont want to give up their privileges don't seem to have posters of her!
    I'm right though.

    As an example here's the Guardian promoting art exhibitions in Europe:

    https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/jan/18/10-european-art-anniversaries-in-2019-exhibitions-bauhaus-leonardo

    and here's the Guardian travel section:

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/travel

    Isn't all of that reprehensible if climate change is such a big issue ?

    But there must be a demand for it from Guardian readers.
    None of those art trips require flying, indeed several are in Britain. The top Guardian travel items are places in Britain.


    No travel requires flying but I suspect that many going to see, for example, the Prado exhibition will be doing so.

    In any case even non-flying travel or travel within the same country contributes to carbon emissions.

    But you are correct in that the Guardian doesn't plunge to the depths of reprehensibility that the 'California dog surfing' Independent does.
    The Independent long ago gave up being a polemical and campaigning leftwing paper in the style of the Guardian.

    These days, apart from a dwindling handful of lesser-known columnists, it barely has a stance at all.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167

    Mr. kinabalu, there's a lot of truth in your post, but more nuance worthy of addition.

    Consensus is one place to start. This, or at least a majority, is of critical importance in politics (hence voting), but irrelevant in science. A man who is wrong is wrong whether nobody or a million scientists agree with him. Gravity does not depend on popular support to exist.

    We have evidence from the past, such as Isaac Newton's view on light having a single property rather than the dual nature now considered accurate, where a wrong view has prevailed (in my example for centuries) because the orthodoxy would not brook the heretical nature of an alternative view.

    And that's a problem. Some global warming enthusiasts want the credibility of science and the dogma of religion, whereby scepticism (the bedrock upon which scientific thought is founded) is derided, ignored, or ruled illegitimate (cf Prince Harry's recent wibbling).

    That substantially diminishes my trust in those who beat their chest and proclaim "Science!" yet are unwilling to even remotely entertain another view, which is what someone with a sceptical, scientific mindset should do.

    There's also massive overlap between things we should do if global warming is false and if it is real. Solar panels, geothermal energy development, energy efficient technology, harnessing the power of the tides, and so on.

    Last but not least, there's an implication from some that climate change, to use the more recent term, is a strange and frightening thing. It isn't. It's natural and normal, and has always happened throughout the billions of years of Earth's history. The idea that climate stasis ever existed is nonsense. The question must be if human activity is altering things. The assumption this must be the case reminds me somewhat of Catholics centuries ago, whose view of mankind as the centre of the universe dominated thought and made it natural (and wrong) to assume the sun revolved around us. It doesn't.

    A very long rambling way of explaining that you don’t like the idea of man made global warming so would rather ignore it.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014
    edited September 2019

    isam said:

    spudgfsh said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:


    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.

    Obligatory? No.

    Likely? Yes.


    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    Because closed roads never impact on drivers, causing them to greatly increase their carbon emissions as they grind along at two miles an hour on the clogged alternative routes.

    Do you even drive? Does DVLC keep the terminally stupid off the roads?
    He is not obviously wrong. I've never immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?


    We all have it to varying degrees.
    That's not quite true.

    The young have an abundance of vision without the experience to know what is possible.

    The older have the experience of what is possible but have mostly lost the vision to make effective change.

    and we hate being lectured to by people who don't see any of the nuance.

    People hate being challenged, it’s true. And we’re all hypocrites. But there does seem to be increasing evidence of a climate emergency. So what is the solution?

    Fewer long haul flights?

    Without doubt. I’ve certainly cut back on mine. But aeroplanes are a relatively small part of the equation. It’s cars and factory emissions that cause the biggest problems, along with environmental degradation. Our best hope from here is technology.

    You only have to take up cycling for a week or two to realise how unnecessary a lot of car journeys are.

    Travelling across the globe for work meetings in the age of video calls is crazy too, if we really believe air travel to be so bad for the environment.

    People are fat, lazy, inconsiderate and unhealthy, so it’s no surprise how they treat the planet
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    @Morris_Dancer That was a very interesting article you provided a few threads back, which I've only just read. Good to have something with a rather different take on events to everlasting undiluted Brexit!

    Now to read the latest thread header ....

    Good afternoon, everyone.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Quite the accusation from the former Chancellor. Potentially libellous - if untrue.
    https://twitter.com/robert___harris/status/1177846231772647424?s=21

    Boris does not want No Deal, if he won a majority at the next general election he would throw the DUP under a bus within 5 minutes and go for the Withdrawal Agreement with a NI only backstop and just remove the backstop for GB.

    However while the DUP hold the balance of power he has to say he will only go for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop in full or No Deal, ideologically though he is not Nigel Farage who really does support No Deal and opposes the Withdrawal Agreement outright, backstop or no backstop

    The DUP doesn’t hold the balance of power anymore. Johnson saw to that a few weeks ago.

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,014

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Canada's carbon footprint on a per person basis is fucking horrific tbh, She should have sued them before France.
    She did get a good turnout though.


    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1177670240563601410?s=19

    https://twitter.com/PaulBadertscher/status/1177622158715080704?s=19

    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    You're looking really very silly now. You made a quip that was a bit lame, but doubling down when you're obviously wrong is dumb.
    at doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
    Oh FFS guys please! It’s the frikking weekend you know! Go to a farmers market and mingle with real people 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    There is emergency counselling available on the weekend too. Best of luck with it.
    Nothing to do with mental illness you poor dear. I’m aware that you are triggered by Greta and am suggesting countermeasures to help you cope.
    Who says I’m triggered by her?
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,914
    Byronic said:

    malcolmg said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:

    spudgfsh said:


    The problem with Scotland finishing 4th is that they'd not automatically qualify for the next world cup which the qualification setup assumes will happen. (there is no method for the 6 nations to enter the qualifying)

    That's easy - you just replace Scotland with Georgia in the Six Nations, if they finish above 4th; otherwise, just revert to a 5 Nations.
    I did wonder if there should be a promotion/relegation playoff for the final spot of the 6-nations

    Of course there should be. The closed shop system is a sporting disgrace and an affront to competition. It only persists because the blazers prefer a trip to Rome every spring rather than roughing in in Tbilisi.
    regardless of whether they change entry to the 6 nations, they should definately play some (more) matches against the next tier nations
    Not good enough. Should be one up, one down every year. Georgia have won the European Championship several years running. How are they supposed to develop when they aren’t able to advance? Meanwhile Italy are annual wooden spoon fodder in the 6N.
    Should have been done long time ago
    That was a wonderful game of rugby. Japan play the sport beautifully, which itself is more than enough reason to give them a slot in a Tier 1 competition.

    Right now Japan are at 9 in the rankings, ahead of Argentina at 10 and Italy at 14, and just behind Scotland.

    But should Japan be in the 6 Nations or the SH Championship?

    Frankly, the 6 Nations should be rushing to embrace another Northern Hemisphere side with great skills, lots of money, and a massive potential fan base. It would add lustre to the tournament, and exoticism - Japan v England in Kyoto every year! - and Japan would probably have a better chance than Italy of regularly beating the big teams, and becoming a big team. Plus it would be brilliant for world rugby.

    Do it! Banzai!
    There was once an attempt at a Gridiron Football League (I think it was called the World League) which flopped in no little part because the teams had to fly over the atlantic and back every couple of weeks. I cannot see the current 6 Nations wanting to fly to Japan and back once a year, and Japan finding a home from home in Europe is not going to help build the fan base there.

    A Japanese tour of Europe every 2 years with 2 of the top 8 nations visiting Japan each year would be a more practical solution.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,862
    kinabalu said:

    I have no idea. Personally I'm barely aware of her. Just a fun and interesting person having their time in the spotlight who we'll recall in nostalgia TV programmes about their era, like Cynthia Payne, Mary Whitehouse, Basil Brush etc..

    This is one of the oddest comments I've seen on here for quite some time.

    Basil Brush was a fun and interesting person?
    franklyn said:

    Dr David Nicholl, the consultant neurologist who Jacob Rees-Mogg defamed in parliament (over yellowhammer) and then had to apologize to, has been selected to stand for the Lib dems in Bromsgrove. David is an extraordinary campaigner with a proven track record in a number of (non-political) campaigns with an utterly forensic brain and is widely admired in the medical profession.

    David wouldn't be doing this if he didn't think he could win, and a lot of NHS staff will go to the constituency to campaign for him. Could be somewhere (and someone) to watch if you like surprise results.

    Javid is pretty safe in Bromsgrove.

    While currently working as BoZo's gimp, he is the only senior Tory that might find a way forward.

    His speech may well be the most interesting one at Conference. The rest of the Cabinet will spout Cummings culture war cliches, but Javid has not gone completely over to the dark side it seems.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187

    HYUFD said:

    Quite the accusation from the former Chancellor. Potentially libellous - if untrue.
    https://twitter.com/robert___harris/status/1177846231772647424?s=21

    Boris does not want No Deal, if he won a majority at the next general election he would throw the DUP under a bus within 5 minutes and go for the Withdrawal Agreement with a NI only backstop and just remove the backstop for GB.

    However while the DUP hold the balance of power he has to say he will only go for the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop in full or No Deal, ideologically though he is not Nigel Farage who really does support No Deal and opposes the Withdrawal Agreement outright, backstop or no backstop

    The DUP doesn’t hold the balance of power anymore. Johnson saw to that a few weeks ago.

    They do in terms of passing the Withdrawal Agreement, as the Brady amendment showed the Withdrawal Agreement minus the backstop can pass with DUP support but the DUP will vote down the Withdrawal Agreement plus the backstop
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,167
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Foxy said:

    Noo said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Foxy said:
    I'm assuming all those people walked or cycled to the event. Because if they drove there.....
    ...then they wouldn’t be driving anywhere else.

    Idiot.
    Because, yes, it is obligtory for them to be driving in their cars when not out protesting about climate change.

    Idiot.
    Obligatory

    Idiot^2.

    Edit. Not to count the reduction in traffic caused by other people not driving because roads were closed for the protest.
    at doesn't give them immunity from sarcasm.
    You may need to contact the Greta helpline, though It seems very busy.

    https://twitter.com/abc730/status/1177177264779194368?s=19
    Didn't realise I was enraged.
    This is how people in my football team are seeing it


    What is it about Greta that upsets the middle aged white snowflakes?
    Poor snowflake wimps, triggered by a 16-year-old girl
    Oh FFS guys please! It’s the frikking weekend you know! Go to a farmers market and mingle with real people 🤣🤣🤣🤣
    There is emergency counselling available on the weekend too. Best of luck with it.
    Nothing to do with mental illness you poor dear. I’m aware that you are triggered by Greta and am suggesting countermeasures to help you cope.
    Who says I’m triggered by her?
    It was implied by your post comparing her to children in the developing world earlier. If you are not then apologies. And your post above about cycling and video calls is spot on.
This discussion has been closed.