Extinction Rebellion Ireland

SeanW

Yurt! wrote: »

You realize it's possible to be located for an extended period of time in a place that's not Ireland right?

As previously stated, some people leave the parish, do jobs that weren't handed to them by their parents, and have insights and opinions that are colored by things other than being scared at the prospect of their subsidies being cut.

Only a naive eejit believes anything the Chinese Communist Party says about China. At one point, China was opening a new coal fired power plant every week and it probably still is.

All of China's environmental problems - and some of the worlds - are because of the PRCs own actions.

They have food insecurity with regards to seafood because they've overfished their own waters to the point where there is nothing left. That's partly why they're stealing maritime territory from all their neighbors and sending fishing boats into other countries waters. The air in their cities (and some cities in nearby countries) is vile and borderline unbreathable because they burn so much coal in factories and power plants and do not properly regulate diesel burning trucks etc. They have water security problems because they mismanage their water. They have food insecurity with regards to crops because they've contaminated much of their farmland with industrial pollutants etc. Their rivers are polluted because they pollute them. And the mismanagement of *everything* goes all the way from the top of the CCP to the people on the street.

And every problem is made so much worse by bribery and corruption.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYY1TjRigl8

So forgive us for questioning your knowledge of China.

Yurt2

None of the above is news to me. It varies according to province, but in general terms the central government is increasingly taking environmental issues more seriously.

Get to know a Chinese mainlainder and canvass their opinion on the environment, most are unhappy and the government knows this and people now make noises about polluting industry being placed in their community - displays of defiance that were unheard of 10 - 15 years ago.

I never made claims China is best in class with the environment or climate change. I merely made the claim it is an increasing item of concern for central authorities, who know it could be a source of destabilization. That's a verifiably true claim, and anyone who has spent significant time in country know it to be true.

I couldn't give a fiddlers what you think I know or don't know about China - I'll make the claim it far exceeds the knowledge of the other poster, who's opinions are sourced from the first 10 search results on Google.

Yurt2

And, as an aside, my time in China for what it's worth convinced me of the seriousness of climate-change and ecological abuse.

For that reason, I have a very low tolerance level for those that seek to minimize it's potential effects. Anyone who has been to heavily industrialized areas where North America and Europe exported their productive capacity to, wouldn't be so smug an complacent when you see what had been done to their rivers and air so we can enjoy cheap sh*te.

A lot of this low-end manufacturing is moving to Vietnam or Bangladesh, partly for labour expense reasons, and partly because the Chinese government doesn't want the environmental fallout anymore.

You don't have to like Thunberg or people with dreadlocks, but you don't have to be so relentlessly dumb to think this isn't a problem that needs urgent global political intervention on.

gozunda

SeanW wrote: »

Only a naive eejit believes anything the Chinese Communist Party says about China. At one point, China was opening a new coal fired power plant every week and it probably still is.All of China's environmental problems - and some of the worlds - are because of the PRCs own actions.
They have food insecurity with regards to seafood because they've overfished their own waters to the point where there is nothing left. That's partly why they're stealing maritime territory from all their neighbors and sending fishing boats into other countries waters. The air in their cities (and some cities in nearby countries) is vile and borderline unbreathable because they burn so much coal in factories and power plants and do not properly regulate diesel burning trucks etc. They have water security problems because they mismanage their water. They have food insecurity with regards to crops because they've contaminated much of their farmland with industrial pollutants etc. Their rivers are polluted because they pollute them. And the mismanagement of *everything* goes all the way from the top of the CCP to the people on the street.And every problem is made so much worse by bribery and corruption.

So forgive us for questioning your knowledge of China.

I agree with that tbh. A big part of Chinese culture is saving face. They seems now to be a contagious condition of some westerners as well with regard to pointing out what is wrong with movements such as xr.

The thing is information and research on what is happening in China is readily available to all and yet oddly some western pro Chinese factions chose to ignore it over state sponsored propaganda. Who would guess that some would chose to be so blind...

China is presenting itself as the savior of the environment. It has announced that it is going to become an ecological economy.

In the words of Xi Jinping himself: "China has become an important participant, contributor, and torchbearer in the global endeavor for ecological civilization".

This is just not believable. For decades China sacrificed its own environment and the global environment for economic growth. 
It is the largest air polluter in the world, accounting for almost 30% of greenhouse gasesIts water pollution is among the worst in the worldIt is responsible for nearly 30 per cent of the plastic pollution clogging the oceans and is conspicuously absent from the list of countries that have joined the UN Environment's #CleanSeas campaignIts relatively small supply of groundwater is being depleted and severely polluted at alarming ratesMore than 40% of its soil is degraded, increasing the risk of famines, forcing it to import more and more foodIt cut down half of its remaining forests between 1980 and 2000, causing widespread floods and a steady increase of desertsFor 25 years it did not pass any meaningful environmental protection laws while existing laws were poorly enforced. It only began to act because the situation had become so desperate that even its brainwashed people were becoming restless, being killed by air pollution at a rate of more than 1 million a year.

Although China is being forced into doing something about its ruined environment, this does not mean that it has suddenly turned into a devoted conservationist.

When the Chinese government says it's scrapping 100 coal-fired power stations, it does not mention that it won't stop private companies from building them. 

When it boasts that it has started massive reforestation it forgets to say that many of its grandiose, but ill-conceived, schemes have failed miserably, that most of the so-called reforestation means plantations with little or no ecological value and that it has boosted its imports of timber from other countries, often by illegal logging of mature, and ecologically valuable, forests.

Most telling of all is Xi's announcement that China is going to push ahead with its economic developments. That is impossible without grievous harm to the environment. In other words China is not really solving its environmental problems, but merely passing them on to the rest of the world. 

https://www.aftermathmag.org/chinafacts1.html

I guess everyone else must be wrong so...

Rechuchote

I'll leave you lads to chat.

Yurt2

gozunda wrote: »

I agree with that tbh. A big part of Chinese culture is saving face. They seems now to be a contagious condition of some westerners as well with regard to pointing out what is wrong with movements such as xr.

The thing is information and research on what is happening in China is readily available to all and yet oddly some western pro Chinese factions chose to ignore it over state sponsored propaganda. Who would guess that some would chose to be so blind...



https://www.aftermathmag.org/chinafacts1.html

I guess everyone else must be wrong so...

What exactly are you arguing for / against here? Nobody made the claim that China is not a huge polluter.

We got here because you made a bogus leap that environmentalists are hypocrites for buying renewable tech from China.

More crankery.

Baggly

Mod

Yurt, Gozunda has already said he won't respond to you, so accusing him of crankery is borderline trollish. I suggest you leave him to his beliefs as he is leaving you to yours, if you can't remain civil.

No more name calling or sniping. Final warning for ye.

Dakota Dan

Yurt! wrote: »

They're not 'so-called scientists' they are actual trained scientists, with PhDs from institutions you wouldn't be able to get in the gate to; not merely because of your bogus opinions, but because you blatantly don't accept the scientific method. There is overwhelming consensus from these people as to what is happening and the risks involved in continuing to produce and consume as we currently do.

This is a flat-out climate change denial post - and notably, it was liked by your restless comrade in stupidity. The only people being propagandized and brainwashed is your good self.

AH continues to surprise.

Who denies that the climate changes? Not me anyway.

Yurt2

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Who denies that the climate changes? Not me anyway.

You'll have to forgive me for filing you in the same drawer as climate change deniers when you call scientific professionals part of the broad consensus who warn of climate change as 'so-called scientists.'

gozunda

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Who denies that the climate changes? Not me anyway.

It's not like that the xr movement is actually based on the science of climate change anyway. The movement and its adherents make all kind of outrageous claims that bear no relation to what has been reported by the IPCC.

Tbh - It's more a movement based on hysteria which uses classic scare and fear tactics to gain popularity. A real doomsday cult if there was ever one imo. I find the whole lot particularly dishonest tbh.

Tar.Aldarion

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Who denies that the climate changes? Not me anyway.

And what about man-made, acceleration of climate change including
global warming such as that referenced on wiki?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

In the modern context the terms global warming and climate change are commonly used interchangeably,[6] but climate change includes both global warming and its effects, such as changes to precipitation and impacts that differ by region.[7][8] Many of the observed warming changes since the 1950s are unprecedented in the instrumental temperature record, and in historical and paleoclimate proxy records of climate change over thousands to millions of years.[2]

In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases.[270] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[271][272] In November 2017, a second warning to humanity signed by 15,364 scientists from 184 countries stated that "the current trajectory of potentially catastrophic climate change due to rising greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, deforestation, and agricultural production – particularly from farming ruminants for meat consumption" is "especially troubling".[273]

Dakota Dan

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

And what about man-made, acceleration of climate change including
global warming such as that referenced on wiki?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

Do you know what the main greenhouse gas is?

Tar.Aldarion

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Do you know what the main greenhouse gas is?

Yes, it's right there on the page I linked you. What's your answer to my question?

gozunda

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Do you know what the main greenhouse gas is?

Tbh you've got a good point.

Water Vapor

Water Vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, which is why it is addressed here first. However, changes in its concentration is also considered to be a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change, but as yet is still fairly poorly measured and understood.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/greenhouse-gases.php?section=watervapor

Surely as the most abundant greenhouse gas - these emissions should be targeted first and foremost.

Its funny I dont see any banners warning people of this fact about this. Why is that?

I get it that the climatic mechanics of this gas are poorly understood (like many other ghg's tbh) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't put a lot more resources into finding out what those processes are and reducing the cycle of excess H2O in the atmosphere tbh.

Strange you never see it mentioned at all....

WinnyThePoo

gozunda wrote: »

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Looks like we got another 'we should sit on our hands and do absolutely nothing' philosopher.

Do you understand that running around like an eejit and waving a banner is NOT doing "something"?

Is there a lack of critical faculties or just basic comprehension here?

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

You should take a leaf out of gozunda book. He was like passionate about doing absolutely nothing aswell. Though as we can he see from his last post. He believes the science and we need to act now.

Lol WinnyThePoo - I'm realy realy touched by your repeated solicitude - even if it could come across to some as a bit creepy...

However because I'm a nice guy - I will repeat once again just for you - because you're evidently just a cute little bear that likes honey ...

You waving a home made banner and going on a little March IS NOT DOING ANYTHING! Gerit? Understand? Capiche?

Please let me know if you need that explained in words with less syllables. You're welcome

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

I'm glad you trust the science. Yes I agree it is important to act now.

So glad that you now understand that the stupid protests run by extinction rebellion are indeed rubbish.

Let us know what you are doing to salve you conscience ok

Lol

The man who passionately believes in sitting doing absolutely nothing.
Hell your so into doing absolutely nothing you don't even read the articles you link which hilariously disagrees with you.

As you've shown yourself, the science disagrees with you.

Your emotional about an eleven year old. How insecure do you have to be to feel threatened about an eleven year old girl.


Keep sitting on your hands. Just expect to be ridiculed (even if most of it goes over your head )

Capiche.

Again you've shown yourself, the science agrees with Greta.

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

It's simple alright. A bit too simple and is just part of the usual alarmist arsenal of fear and scare. You're right similar have been used to lead masses of people rather similarly useless pathways in the past. And all manner of disasters may potentially befall us - however that does nor excuse us having to cover ourselves in sack cloth and in ashes.

I think if you check Ms Thungberg uses that phrase repeatedly. Not only does it uses the distressing imagery of someone's house on fire - it is as she says designed to make people feel fear and panic. Well that's just lovely....

The girl has been evidently reared on a diet of doomsday scenarios, has suffered from depression brought on by these beliefs and she now wants everyone to join her in a feast of the this. Eh no thanks all the same.

I'm sorry but the whole approach is bulk**** and the little more than rabble rousing and of absolutely no use to the solution of any of the worlds problems no matter what way you look at it.

The science says that without emissions reduction the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will exceed 1200ppm by 2100. Even without climate change, above 2000ppm is toxic to humans causing headaches and cognitive impairment. People everywhere in the world will be breathing toxic air every day for their whole life by the early decades of next century. Its the plot of a cliched horror movie

When you include climate change, that translates to about 5c of global warming, or 5 times more warming than we have already experienced.

If you understand the science, you should be alarmed, and if uou understand how little time we have to fix the problem, you should understand that there is a cause for panic and emergency measures to transition immediately away from CO2 emitting technology

Akrasia

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Here’s a good reply to the house on fire nonsense that I saw on YouTube.



No Greta it is never good to panic. Panic means to operate under the control of fear. If your house is on fire and you want to save it, first be sure you can do it without killing yourself. If you save the house and die the house will not do you much good. What you are trying to say is that it is important to act with a sense of urgency. In the case of climate change there is an entirely different paradigm at work. First show that there is global warming. second prove that it is not a cyclic uncontrollable act of orbiting bodies and effects of weather. Is the core of the earth slowing. Is solar activity the cause? are the planets closer to the sun also heating? See you just ran through the house yelling fire but the truth is your furnace is broken and it is just getting real hot. You are actually just a brainwashed adolescent who is doing what she thinks is right. You are listening to a bunch of so called scientist who want money to fund research so they can write papers to make money so they can fund research to write books. They have not told you that the earths core is slowing down. They have not told you that Mercury Mars and Venus are also warming. Greta! take a deep breath. and think for yourself. Think! Then act with knowledge, wisdom and understanding

Let me get this right... you get your information from the youtube comments section???????

That actually explains a lot.

Dakota Dan

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Yes, it's right there on the page I linked you. What's your answer to my question?

Yes it plays a very small part and as gozunda says the main gas never gets a mention but then again you can’t tax or blame clouds.

Dakota Dan

Akrasia wrote: »

Let me get this right... you get your information from the youtube comments section???????

That actually explains a lot.

You got it wrong, your little climate angel just so happens to have links to her pretend speeches to world leaders on YouTube.

gozunda

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

The man who passionately believes in sitting doing absolutely nothing.

No remember that's >your< mantra - no one else's. You may 'imagine' things about others but do at least try and understand that

'Running around and waving a banner isn't doing anything'

Nope none of the rest makes any sense - so not bothering tbh. But do keep telling yourself fairy tales about little pooh bears meeting goldilocks aka Ms Thunberg and I'm sure it will all be fine....

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Gozunda... I was just speaking to Gretna*. She's delighted your engaging in climate change. She's delighted your so emotional about the subject. Your the exact person she is doing this for. So she's delighted to represent you going forward, we all are , including her parents....

Mind yourself.

Ps I believe her first name is 'Greta' not 'Gretna' (sic) - That's a place in Scotland btw

Akrasia

Dakota Dan wrote: »

You got it wrong, your little climate angel just so happens to have links to her pretend speeches to world leaders on YouTube.

My little climate angel?

Were you quoting someone in your post or just quoting yourself? You didn't give any link to your quote.

It's mad when you tell people to think for themselves while talking absolute nonsense about global warming on Mars, Venus and Mercury.

There are mountains of evidence for climate change on Earth, which you don't believe, but you're more than happy to repeat lies you read on the internet about global warming on other planets.

Akrasia

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Yes it plays a very small part and as gozunda says the main gas never gets a mention but then again you can’t tax or blame clouds.

Water vapour is not a driver of climate, it is a feedback. You don't change the temperature of the air by adding water vapour to it, you can change the water vapour content of the air by changing the temperature of the air.

This is very basic stuff lads. If you're gonna have an opinion on climate change that contrasts with the considered expert opinion of the vast majority of publishing scientists in this field, you should at least learn the junior cert level science that would disprove your arguments

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

No remember that's >your< mantra - no one else's. You may 'imagine' things about others but do at least try and understand that

'Running around and waving a banner isn't doing anything'



Nope none of that makes any sense - so not bothering tbh. But do keep telling yourself fairy tales about little pooh bears meeting goldilocks aka Ms Thunberg and I'm sure it will all be fine....



Mind yourself.

Political action is required to mitigate climate change, Political protest is intended to influence politicians, and influence voters in upcoming elections. Political protests are the reason we're having this discussion right now, and the reason why the media devoted hours of time to climate change this week, and when the schoolkids walked out of class, and when people protested oil pipelines etc. They are all actions meant to provoke debate and influence policy.

If the next EU parliament makes Climate change a priority, that will be a huge benefit to the chances of preventing the worst consequences of climate change.

WinnyThePoo

gozunda wrote: »

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

The man who passionately believes in sitting doing absolutely nothing.

No remember that's >your< mantra - no one else's. You may 'imagine' things about others but do at least try and understand that

'Running around and waving a banner isn't doing anything'

Hell your so into doing absolutely nothing you don't even read the articles you link which hilariously disagrees with you.As you've shown yourself, the science disagrees with you.
Your emotional about an eleven year old. How insecure do you have to be to feel threatened about an eleven year old girl.Keep sitting on your hands.Just expect to be ridiculed (even if most of it goes over your headAgain you've shown yourself, the science agrees with Greta.

Nope none of that makes any sense - so not bothering tbh. But do keep telling yourself fairy tales about little pooh bears meeting goldilocks aka Ms Thunberg and I'm sure it will all be fine....

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Gozunda... I was just speaking to Gretna*. She's delighted your engaging in climate change. She's delighted your so emotional about the subject. Your the exact person she is doing this for. So she's delighted to represent you going forward, we all are , including her parents....

Mind yourself.

Ps I believe her first name is 'Greta' not 'Gretna' (sic) - That's a place in Scotland btw

You keep fighting the 'let's do absolutely nothing'. The links you provided directly disagree with your nonsense. I mean you could have read the link before posting it.

Again your going to ridiculed for spouting stupidity ( again I see most of the ridicule has went over your head:))

WinnyThePoo

gozunda wrote: »

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

The man who passionately believes in sitting doing absolutely nothing.

No remember that's >your< mantra - no one else's. You may 'imagine' things about others but do at least try and understand that

'Running around and waving a banner isn't doing anything'

Hell your so into doing absolutely nothing you don't even read the articles you link which hilariously disagrees with you.As you've shown yourself, the science disagrees with you.
Your emotional about an eleven year old. How insecure do you have to be to feel threatened about an eleven year old girl.Keep sitting on your hands.Just expect to be ridiculed (even if most of it goes over your headAgain you've shown yourself, the science agrees with Greta.

Nope none of that makes any sense - so not bothering tbh. But do keep telling yourself fairy tales about little pooh bears meeting goldilocks aka Ms Thunberg and I'm sure it will all be fine....

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Gozunda... I was just speaking to Gretna*. She's delighted your engaging in climate change. She's delighted your so emotional about the subject. Your the exact person she is doing this for. So she's delighted to represent you going forward, we all are , including her parents....

Mind yourself.

Ps I believe her first name is 'Greta' not 'Gretna' (sic) - That's a place in Scotland btw

You keep fighting the 'let's do absolutely nothing'. The links you provided directly disagree with your nonsense. I mean you could have read the link before posting it.

Again your going to ridiculed for spouting stupidity ( again I see most of the ridicule has went over your head:))

gozunda

Akrasia wrote: »

Political action is required to mitigate climate change, Political protest is intended to influence politicians, and influence voters in upcoming elections. Political protests are the reason we're having this discussion right now, and the reason why the media devoted hours of time to climate change this week, and when the schoolkids walked out of class, and when people protested oil pipelines etc. They are all actions meant to provoke debate and influence policy.

If the next EU parliament makes Climate change a priority, that will be a huge benefit to the chances of preventing the worst consequences of climate change.

Maybe so however - however that is far from the full story. The fact is this protest movement is based on hyperbole and misinformation. It is little better than a doomsday cult imo

Additionally people running around with placards and banners which bear no resemblence to any science is certainly not going to convince anyone as to the bonafides of this movement. Hence this discussion.

gozunda

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

You keep fighting the 'let's do absolutely nothing'. The links you provided directly disagree with your nonsense. I mean you could have read the link before posting it Again your going to ridiculed forspouting stupidityagain I see most of the ridicule has went over your head

You keep repeating the same nonsense. Ok this time put your money where your mouth is and link the comment where I have written "let's do absolutely nothing'".(sic)

Again as for the rest nothing you've said there makes any sense whatsoever. I can't help you with that or the fairy stories with ' Gretna' etc. So not bothering tbh. Thanks.

(Btw - you've you posted the same comment twice)

gozunda

Akrasia wrote: »

The science says that without emissions reduction the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will exceed 1200ppm by 2100. Even without climate change, above 2000ppm is toxic to humans causing headaches and cognitive impairment. People everywhere in the world will be breathing toxic air every day for their whole life by the early decades of next century. Its the plot of a cliched horror movieWhen you include climate change, that translates to about 5c of global warming, or 5 times more warming than we have already experienced.If you understand the science, you should be alarmed, and if uou understand how little time we have to fix the problem, you should understand that there is a cause for panic and emergency measures to transition immediately away from CO2 emitting technology

Thanks for that. It obviously took you some time and effort to type all that out. But seriously there was no need - I have read the IPCC report cover to cover.

And really not sure what any of that has got to do with Ms Thunberg and her use of hyperbole and doomsday scenarios for 2030 tbh.

This is Miss Thunberg

"Around the year 2030, 10 years 252 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control, that will most likely lead to the end of our civilisation as we know it."

This is what one of the scientists responsible for the IPCC report said.

Please stop saying something globally bad is going to happen in 2030. Bad stuff is already happening and every half a degree of warming matters, but the IPCC does not draw a “planetary boundary” at 1.5°C beyond which lie climate dragons.

And again an independent scientist

As much as climate scientists see the necessity for broad and immediate action to address global warming, they do not agree on an imminent point of no return.The (IPCC) panel “did not say we have 12 years left to save the world.”...

Theres very little need to say more as far as I'm concerned tbh.

gozunda

Akrasia wrote: »

Water vapour is not a driver of climate, it is a feedback. You don't change the temperature of the air by adding water vapour to it, you can change the water vapour content of the air by changing the temperature of the air.

This is very basic stuff lads. If you're gonna have an opinion on climate change that contrasts with the considered expert opinion of the vast majority of publishing scientists in this field, you should at least learn the junior cert level science that would disprove your arguments

I dont believe anyone has stated that here tbh.

However it remains that "Water vapour is ... recognized as being an important part of the global warming process. The water vapour feedback process is most likely responsible for a doubling of the greenhouse effect when compared to the addition of carbon dioxide on its own"

As with many of greenhouse gases much remains unknown as to the complex processes involved. And that being the case and we know that "feedback process is most likely responsible for a doubling of the greenhouse effect when compared to the addition of carbon dioxide on its own" then it would certainly warrant serious investment in research and investigation in order to explore how this can be mitigated.

Its still strange it's hardly ever mentioned tbh.

What reseach out there is conflicting tbh eg

"These findings show that stratospheric water vapour is an important driver of decadal global surface climate change."

https://public.wmo.int/en/resources/bulletin/observing-water-vapour

RollieFingers

Will all the protesters who were at the Extinction Rebellion in Dublin and taking pictures and videos of what they were doing to upload on social media be getting rid of the smartphones they used if they are so concerned about the environment? Research last year stated that smartphones and data centers are damaging to the environment and will have the biggest carbon footprint in the tech industry by 2040. Or is it just certain things they are protesting about being harmful to the environment?