Extinction Rebellion Ireland

Micky 32

20Cent wrote: »

The president doesn't because he is an idiot. But individual states are making regulations and working on it.

Whether he's an idiot or not i have seen more idiocity in ER. He doesn't go around walking like a constipated zombie moaning and groaning. The president knows his people won't tolerate climate action. Americans love their freedom too much. You only think he's an idiot because he doesn't agree with you.

weldoninhio

20Cent wrote: »

The person who you don't know said something might have to happen. I'm convinced, throw out the whole body of scientific research right now.

Here she is. Zion Lights is her name. Idiot by profession, I believe.

https://youtu.be/H3kJwQBZOkM

theguzman

Blazer wrote: »

IT won't make much difference if Ireland the UK and basically the rest of Europe went zero carbon by 2025 when China power producers want to build another 300-500 coal powered stations by 2030.
We're just pissing in the wind with China and India.

This is racist thinking according to Extinction Rebellion. Yes we are all humans and share the planet but you cannot deny that some countries have a worse environmental record than others.

Micky 32

20Cent wrote: »

Nope you are interpreting it that way to make smart remarks that's all.

So what's the difference between offsetting carbon and zero carbon? I'm not making smart remarks you are just defending ER to make them look like less idiots.

Micky 32

weldoninhio wrote: »

Here she is. Zion Lights is her name. Idiot by profession, I believe.

https://youtu.be/H3kJwQBZOkM

:D:P

20Cent

Micky 32 wrote: »

So what's the difference between offsetting carbon and zero carbon? I'm not making smart remarks you are just defending ER to make them look like less idiots.

You don't even know the basics, not enough to even take part in the discussion. Maybe go look it up and get back to us.

Micky 32

20Cent wrote: »

You don't even know the basics, not enough to even take part in the discussion. Maybe go look it up and get back to us.

What? Are you for real? That's it avoid answering my question.

20Cent

Micky 32 wrote: »

Whether he's an idiot or not i have seen more idiocity in ER. He doesn't go around walking like a constipated zombie moaning and groaning. The president knows his people won't tolerate climate action. Americans love their freedom too much. You only think he's an idiot because he doesn't agree with you.

No he really is an idiot.
Anyone who can't see that is one also.

Micky 32

20Cent wrote: »

No he really is an idiot.
Anyone who can't see that is one also.

I don't care if he is or not, but he's not stupid enough to upset his own people by restricting their freedoms.

20Cent

There should be a short quiz at the start of threads that people have to pass to show they know the bare minimum about what is being discussed. Would save a lot of time from the spoofers.

Micky 32

20Cent wrote: »

There should be a short quiz at the start of threads that people have to pass to show they know the bare minimum about what is being discussed. Would save a lot of time from the spoofers.

You are the biggest spoofer here without a doubt. You can't even explain to me the difference between offsetting carbon vs zero carbon.

cnocbui

20Cent wrote: »

There should be a short quiz at the start of threads that people have to pass to show they know the bare minimum about what is being discussed. Would save a lot of time from the spoofers.

Here's my contribution to the proposed quiz:

What proportion of the greenhouse effect is attributable to anthropogenic CO2 emissions?

SafeSurfer

20Cent wrote: »

Micky 32 wrote: »

Tell me this then, what does zero carbon mean by 2025? So you are saying zero carbon can be achieved with all the planes still in the sky?

You know carbon can be offset?

Carbon offsetting has been widely discredited and has been abandoned by many former advocates. It will not play a significant role in any ambition to become net zero carbon by 2025.

Edgware

Micky 32 wrote: »

You are the biggest spoofer here without a doubt. You can't even explain to me the difference between offsetting carbon vs zero carbon.

Reminds me of the lads at the Union meeting.

Never mind the retrospection what about the back pay?

Micky 32

Micky 32 wrote: »

Stop twisting words , you are a spoofer. Offsetting carbon and zero carbon are 2 completely different things. Zero carbon can only be achieved by stop burning fossil fuels which would include cars, planes, home heating.

Micky, zero carbon refers to zero *net* carbon.
Even trees produce oxygen during the day and carbon dioxide at night. We need them to. Without carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to heat the planet, life on earth would be impossible.

The point is to stop carbon output from tracking upwards beyond safe levels, and above that point, no additional carbon. Hence the word net.

You seem to be confusing offsets with governments trading their credits and such things, which is one, but only one, very narrow use of the term. Zero carbon is about offsetting and reducing carbon in the first place, through a mixture of new, cleaner technologies, reafforestation, seriously curtailing emissions, or using dirty fuels but using technology (which already exists) to clean the emissions before they enter the atmosphere

A lot of people seem to think that carbon neutrality means going back to hunter-gatherer times, and no serious person is proposing anything like that. Offsetting and neutrality are inextricably bound up in one another

gmisk

Is this thing over in Dublin yet? Just need to know if I am gonna be able to get home without any bother after work tomorrow

PennyWiseClown

I think the crusty wasters will be at it anorther week, you can smell the unwashed fanny from the M50

is_that_so

gmisk wrote: »

Is this thing over in Dublin yet? Just need to know if I am gonna be able to get home without any bother after work tomorrow

Think it was just last week.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/extinction-rebellion-plans-arrestable-events-in-dublin-1.4042555

With the yellow rain warning they'd be washed out this week.

Micky 32

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Micky, zero carbon refers to zero *net* carbon.
Even trees produce oxygen during the day and carbon dioxide at night. We need them to. Without carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to heat the planet, life on earth would be impossible.

The point is to stop carbon output from tracking upwards beyond safe levels, and above that point, no additional carbon. Hence the word net.

You seem to be confusing offsets with governments trading their credits and such things, which is one, but only one, very narrow use of the term. Zero carbon is about offsetting and reducing carbon in the first place, through a mixture of new, cleaner technologies, reafforestation, seriously curtailing emissions, or using dirty fuels but using technology (which already exists) to clean the emissions before they enter the atmosphere

A lot of people seem to think that carbon neutrality means going back to hunter-gatherer times, and no serious person is proposing anything like that. Offsetting and neutrality are inextricably bound up in one another

I'm not confusing anything with governments, i'm talking about ER. They want flight travel ceased by 2025 "if needs be", that's what i was reffering to. At least you are giving more constructive replies than some on here.

lleti

Hope the crusties calendars are free, hong kong protests coming up.

gozunda

reg114 wrote: »

I was there too. Forget about the pot smokers for a second. I think their intentions are good. Ireland has per capita the 47th highest carbon footprint out of 210 countries. Every individual in Ireland has burned vastly more carbon than your average Chinese person or Indian. Yes there are more people living in those countries but Irish people cannot shrug their shoulders and point in the direction of the far East. Plus, look around your home, most of the items you have purchased down through the years, from cars to clothes to pcs were made in the far east. Irish people forget they are customers of the Chinese and Indians.Whether you like it or not, global warming is happening and you are contributing to it, so is practically every other nation. It's a collective responsibility where we need to change our patterns of consumerism, change how we commute and modify our economic model that has worshipped capitalism at the expense of the climate. And before people jump down my throat citing socialist or communist sabre rattling, I would say you're way off the mark. I'm simply calling for us to become more self sufficient, not relying on other countries to produce the latest gadgets we think we need to satisfy some innate desire to have something shiny and new.

You need to look at the data unequivocally. The facts are that China and India and the number one and third highest emitters of greenhouse gases in the world. China has higher per capita emissions than the EU average. And yet China is being permitted to continue to build coal powered energy stations under existing climate agreements for the next 50 years. How the fuk does that work?

The only reason Ireland has higher Carbon emissions than a number of other EU countries is simply down to the fact that those emissions are due to the offshoring of agriculture exports. We produce bigh quality foodstufs and other EU member benefit from us doing that in terms of their own carbon emissions. Now the EU is planning to further this bizarre policy with the Brazilian Mercosur deal.

However foodstuffs and other goods being produced in those countries which do not observe proper environmental or welfare standards should not be excused as being allowable simply because production costs are prohibitive here for those very reasons. The 'pot smokers' you refer to need to aknowledge this and cop themselves on.

Edgware

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Micky, zero carbon refers to zero *net* carbon.
Even trees produce oxygen during the day and carbon dioxide at night. We need them to. Without carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to heat the planet, life on earth would be impossible.

The point is to stop carbon output from tracking upwards beyond safe levels, and above that point, no additional carbon. Hence the word net.

You seem to be confusing offsets with governments trading their credits and such things, which is one, but only one, very narrow use of the term. Zero carbon is about offsetting and reducing carbon in the first place, through a mixture of new, cleaner technologies, reafforestation, seriously curtailing emissions, or using dirty fuels but using technology (which already exists) to clean the emissions before they enter the atmosphere

A lot of people seem to think that carbon neutrality means going back to hunter-gatherer times, and no serious person is proposing anything like that. Offsetting and neutrality are inextricably bound up in one another

What about the emissions your Ma is responsible for?

milehip

gmisk wrote: »

Is this thing over in Dublin yet? Just need to know if I am gonna be able to get home without any bother after work tomorrow

The site at Merrion Sq was being struck at 6pm this evening,

gozunda

milehip wrote: »

The site at Merrion Sq was being struck at 6pm this evening,

Struck by what ? Missiles? That said very wet weather incoming. Couldn't have the crusties there being discombobulated tbh.

20Cent

Crusty hippy Mark Carney says companies that don't move to zero emissions will be bankrupted and 20,000,000,000,000 dollars will be wiped out of the world economy. (He is the governor of the Bank Of England).


400 ignorant climate alarmists sign a declaration supporting ER. (climate scientists, physicists, biologists, engineers and others from at least 20 countries including contributors to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)

gozunda

20Cent wrote: »

Crusty hippy Mark Carney says companies that don't move to zero emissions will be bankrupted and 20,000,000,000,000 dollars will be wiped out of the world economy. (He is the governor of the Bank Of England).400 ignorant climate alarmists sign a declaration supporting ER. (climate scientists, physicists, biologists, engineers and others from at least 20 countries including contributors to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)

Zero emissions = no transport, no agriculture, no manufacturing, no industrial production

No nappies, no plastics, no mobile devices, no foodstuffs, no vehicles, no medical devices ...

For sure modern civilisation and the world economy will be well and truely fuked ...

A whole 400 'climate alarmist' people on a planet with over 7 billion people allegedly sign a piece of paper and wow I'm immediately convinced! Beam me up scotty ...

Btw none of that denies climate change - rather simply points out the absurdity of extinction rebellion and its various supporters ...

Franz Von Peppercorn II

gozunda wrote: »

Zero emissions = no transport, no agriculture, no manufacturing, no industrial production

No nappies, no plastics, no mobile devices, no foodstuffs, no vehicles, no medical devices ...

No. It means using low or zero emission technology to produce all that.

For sure modern civilisation and the world economy will be well and truely fuked ...

A whole 400 'climate alarmist' people on a planet with over 7 billion people allegedly sign a piece of paper and wow I'm immediately convinced! Beam me up scotty ...

I don’t think science is democratic.

Btw none of that denies climate change - rather simply points out the absurdity of extinction rebellion and its various supporters ...

They are far more stick than carrot, I grant you that.

gozunda

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

No. It means using low or zero emission technology to produce all that.

Nope. Wrong. Poster referred to zero emissions. Simply replying to that.

I don’t think science is democratic.

Extinction rebellion is certainly not scientific nor democratic for sure.

They are far more stick than carrot, I grant you that.

Fair enough. However I would suggest more fairy stories than reality...

20Cent

gozunda wrote: »

Nope. Wrong. Poster referred to zero emissions. Simply replying to that.



Extinction rebellion is certainly not scientific nor democratic for sure.



Fair enough. However I would suggest more fairy stories than reality...

Zero emissions means that offsetting other emissions, not living in a cave eating grass.

blinding

Will One be allowed to Fart ?