Greta and the aristocrat sail the high seas to save the planet.

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

Way to many ifs and conditional pretexts in that to be in any way logical.

Yeah I reckon the daft idea of free money economies has been repeated many may times in this thread and it still makes absolute no sense whatsoever. The same didn't work in Cuba and it didn't work in North Korea either. But there we are ..

It’s not ‘free money’ to borrow now to invest in something that will save much more money and generate wealth in the future.

Climate change will cause oceans to rise and flood some of the most valuable land and infrastructure on this planet. Where will the ‘free money’ come from to offset these trillions of dollars worth of losses?

jackboy

Akrasia wrote: »

Locally yes, and entire civilizations were completely destroyed when that happened. Now it’s different. It’s global climate change to a climate state that has not been seen on earth for more than 3 million years ago ( before humans existed)

Not locally, it was global climate change that destroyed civilizations in the past many times. This is the nature of the planet and we cannot stop it.

Akrasia

jackboy wrote: »

Not locally, it was global climate change that destroyed civilizations in the past many times. This is the nature of the planet and we cannot stop it.

Which civilization and what global climate event destroyed it?

biko

Atlantis











I jest

gozunda

Akrasia wrote: »

If you are declaring with certainty that a ‘green new deal’ won’t work, you are presenting yourself as someone with the required knowledge to make such an evaluation, So using that knowledge you should be able to tell us what we would need to do that would work ( unless you’re saying that reducing anthropogenic GHGs is actually impossible (which it clearly isn’t because for about a million years humans managed to live without altering the chemistry of the atmosphere and oceans)

Lots of presumptions there lol 'unless you're saying & etc!. What I said about the green new deal - is that it's a crock of crap and I stand over that. But no simply pointing out that an idea or theory like the GND does not stand up to scrutiny - does not require that anyone has to come up with another magical solution. Yup this is a discussion board and funnily enough things get discussed and held up to scrutiny. Afaik that requires no specific qualifications or obligations one way or the other. If you dont like what someone says - then do feel free to discuss the comments. If you don't want to engage with that then - hey that's where we're at!

gozunda

Akrasia wrote: »

No this is a thread intended for a bunch of politically motivated adults to collectively shout abuse at a well meaning 16 year old girl. If it wasn’t on the topic of climate change it would have been locked months ago

"Politically motivated" lol. Ah would you get away that tripe. The thread is a tongue in cheek look at the gretas travels across the world. That has already been clarified. Sure things gone a bit daft at times - but hey thats seems the way things go. Dont like that no?.

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

Lots of presumptions there lol 'unless you're saying & etc!. What I said about the green new deal - is that it's a crock of crap and I stand over that. But no simply pointing out that an idea or theory like the GND does not stand up to scrutiny - does not require that anyone has to come up with another magical solution. Yup this is a discussion board and funnily enough things get discussed and held up to scrutiny. Afaik that requires no specific qualifications or obligations one way or the other. If you dont like what someone says - then do feel free to discuss the comments. If you don't want to engage with that then - hey that's where we're at!

Part of a discussion is sharing opinions and ideas.
You cannot name a single action to tackle climate change that you actually support, so effectively you oppose all kinds of action on climate change.

gozunda

Akrasia wrote: »

Part of a discussion is sharing opinions and ideas. You cannot name a single action to tackle climate change that you actually support, so effectively you oppose all kinds of action on climate change.

Incorrect.

Certainly sharing opinions and ideas are indeed part of a discussion. In this instance the idea that green new deal doesn't stand up has been widely opined.

As for the deranged idea that those on a thread about gretas travels across the globe must provide solutions to climate change is risable. And your logic that anyone who fails to agree with that proposition are in effect deniers is hilarious.

drunkmonkey

Akrasia wrote: »

Part of a discussion is sharing opinions and ideas.
You cannot name a single action to tackle climate change that you actually support, so effectively you oppose all kinds of action on climate change.

I'm all for anything that makes Ireland warmer. If you think Ireland should get colder well then our opinions differ.
Plenty of people here are in support of a warmer Ireland.

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

Certainly sharing opinions and ideas are indeed part of a discussion. In this instance the idea that green new deal doesn't stand up has been widely opined.

As for the deranged idea that those on a thread about gretas travels across the globe must provide solutions to climate change is risable. And your logic that anyone who fails to agree with that proposition are in effect deniers is hilarious.

It’s not just ‘that proposition’,
You don’t agree with any proposition to tackle climate change. You may or may not be denying climate change, but by criticizing all proposals to tackle it without putting forward any credible alternative, you are in exactly the same camp as the climate change deniers

Akrasia

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm all for anything that makes Ireland warmer. If you think Ireland should get colder well then our opinions differ.
Plenty of people here are in support of a warmer Ireland.

What are you talking about?
Iif the Gulf Stream shuts down due to melting ice from Greenland, Ireland could get much colder

Ireland does very well from our temperate mild climate. Destabilizing it in either direction is not in our interests

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

"Politically motivated" lol. Ah would you get away that tripe. The thread is a tongue in cheek look at the gretas travels across the world. That has already been clarified. Sure things gone a bit daft at times - but hey thats seems the way things go. Dont like that no?.

Of course it’s politically motivated. The only reason Greta has any interest is because she is advocating action on climate change. She is praised by some people who support action on climate change and vilified by some of those who don’t.

And it’s not a lighthearted thread, it’s a sinister one.

gozunda

Solutions for Klimatet Change
Greta would agree!

Change! #237

Tell me how

^^^^^^

Do you really want to go down this route?

gozunda

^^^^ You mean some proper tongue in cheek humour instead?

Sure!

NIMAN

What do we think about this story from France, with protesters stopping Amazon lorries leaving their distribution centres with goods?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50598575

Adding to climate change, of course they are. Is it rampant consumerism? Again probably yes.

But Amazon are only delivering what the public has ordered. Maybe the protesters should focus on trying to persuade the public not to buy so much stuff?

Surely if you ordered something and it didn't come, you'd soon lose sympathy for the protests?

Tuisceanch

NIMAN wrote: »

What do we think about this story from France, with protesters stopping Amazon lorries leaving their distribution centres with goods?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50598575

Adding to climate change, of course they are. Is it rampant consumerism? Again probably yes.

But Amazon are only delivering what the public has ordered. Maybe the protesters should focus on trying to persuade the public not to buy so much stuff?

Surely if you ordered something and it didn't come, you'd soon lose sympathy for the protests?

Well my first reaction without having even read the link was that this sort of action is probably necessary, because if we are to realistic about meaningful,effective change then we have to look at reducing demand. That's my opinion.

However,I currently have an Amazon Order in transit and so I would be pissed off if it was delayed so might be obliged to temporarily suspend my support before resuming once my parcel had been delivered, avowing never to use its services again until another book took my fancy, which i couldn't find in Easons or was too expensive.

Gynoid

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Well my first reaction without having even read the link was that this sort of action is probably necessary, because if we are to realistic about meaningful,effective change then we have to look at reducing demand.

Why stop at Amazon? Or, if they stop at Amazon the protesters are ideologically inconsistent. Which is in fact what they are anyway, well off people with many foreign trips in their past when 80% of the world have never been on a plane.
So they should protest supermarkets to stop bananas, coffee, scallions, peppers, cereals, sauces, tea, wines, pretty much most of the contents of the shops being supplied as most of it is freighted from abroad and many of them from abusive situations. They should picket appliance and technology shops because ditto plus the dreadful mining of rare elements. They should protest outside furniture shops, in fact is there a single shop they should not picket?
They are going to have their sustainably produced vegan shoe soles worn away to nothing..

Tuisceanch

Gynoid wrote: »

Why stop at Amazon? Or, if they stop at Amazon the protesters are ideologically inconsistent. Which is in fact what they are anyway, well off people with many foreign trips in their past when 80% of the world have never been on a plane.
So they should protest supermarkets to stop bananas, coffee, scallions, peppers, cereals, sauces, tea, wines, pretty much most of the contents of the shops being supplied as most of it is freighted from abroad and many of them from abusive situations. They should picket appliance and technology shops because ditto plus the dreadful mining of rare elements. They should protest outside furniture shops, in fact is there a single shop they should not picket?
They are going to have their sustainably produced vegan shoe soles worn away to nothing..

Well Black Friday is symbolic of mass consumerism so a protest directed against it would attract mass media attention which would be the objective. I wouldn't have known anything about it otherwise.

I,personally,would be reluctant to instruct activists how they should or should not strategise as I have no involvement with any groups or expertise in the area, so they might not be inclined to listen to me. In fact they might tell me to f*** off.

From a logical perspective if we want to curb our emissions then part of that approach probably needs to consider reducing consumption,although that means rethinking our current economic orthodoxy. However I don't have much economic expertise so i'll leave it to more qualified people on the thread to comment on the details and its feasibility.

Tuisceanch

gozunda wrote: »

You forgot the rampant imaginations of a kid which makes for a good story Lol but I reckon you're getting a bit heavy on the old metaphysics there. Nah for sure just a bit of tongue in cheek humour . But theres defintly something about Dorothy and Gretas ability to get from A to B ... :pac:

It's certainly rich in potential if one has a penchant for writing short stories. I'm thinking at having a crack at it myself. Of course there was nothing particularly original about my allegorical allusion, as a much touted interpretation of 'The Wizard of Oz',although disavowed by the author,was that it was an allegory for the 1896 US Presidential Election. I'll include the link here for your interest as I don't want to be accused of attempting to transform the thread into literary corner.

https://www.lawliberty.org/2018/10/26/the-wizard-of-oz-as-an-allegory-for-the-1896-presidential-election/

The Coinage Act of 1873 ended the U.S. mint’s legally-authorized practice of converting silver bullion into legal tender at no cost. The “free silver” slogan referred to the price the mint would charge to convert bullion into coins: free coinage. Prior to this, except for the Civil War, the U.S. had a bimetallic monetary standard, coining both silver and gold at a fixed exchange rate.

The most pertinent difference between the book and the film is, in the book, the slippers/shoes Dorothy gets from the Wicked Witch of the East are silver, not ruby. So Dorothy journies clad in silver shoes on the yellow brick (gold) road, to the Land of Oz (“ounce,” of gold or silver). Both silver and gold take her there. Bimetallism.

On her way to the Land of Oz, Dorothy picks up her electoral coalition. First, the Scarecrow, representing western farmers.

Next, the Tin Man (or Tin Woodman). The working class man, once a true human, is now just a cog in the industrial machine.

The Cowardly Lion, then, was William Jennings Bryan himself. Capable of a great roar—his speeches were legendary—alas, to mix metaphors, he was all bark and no bite.

Gynoid

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Well Black Friday is symbolic of mass consumerism so a protest directed against it would attract mass media attention which would be the objective. I wouldn't have known anything about it otherwise.

I,personally,would be reluctant to instruct activists how they should or should not strategise as I have no involvement with any groups or expertise in the area, so they might not be inclined to listen to me. In fact they might tell me to f*** off.

From a logical perspective if we want to curb our emissions then part of that approach probably needs to consider reducing consumption,although that means rethinking our current economic orthodoxy. However I don't have much economic expertise so i'll leave it to more qualified people on the thread to comment on the details and its feasibility.

Ah. What you illustrate in your response is tacit support for a mix of meritocracy and technocracy - you circumvent all opinions on any matters which do not fall within your narrowly specialised domain of expertise, leaving decisions on everything else to those who have been scientifically educated in precisely that demarcated area. Because that elite ''know best''.
I don't like either meritocrcay or technocracy - they are essentially authoritarian and right wing rulership by selected (as opposed to elected) elites. I allow myself to have opinions as part of the unwashed demos in a democracy.

Tuisceanch

Gynoid wrote: »

Ah. What you illustrate in your response is tacit support for a mix of meritocracy and technocracy - you circumvent all opinions on any matters which do not fall within your narrowly specialised domain of expertise, leaving decisions on everything else to those who have been scientifically educated in precisely that demarcated area. Because that elite ''know best''.
I don't like either meritocrcay or technocracy - they are essentially authoritarian and right wing rulership by selected (as opposed to elected) elites. I allow myself to have opinions as part of the unwashed demos in a democracy.

No it's just that most people here don't like long posts and my original post was to remark on the fact that we are all guilty of hypocrisy.I only replied to you out of politeness without expressing any political opinion but just pointing out some blindingly obvious insights as to the reality of activism i.e. its purpose is to raise awareness by the most effective means possible. Since i'm not engaged or have any experience of social media campaigns it is rational for me to presume that I would not have any credibility with them if I was to advise them on their strategy.

Actually I'm not so ignorant of economic theory, and in particular neo-liberalism, as I have already had some discussion about that subject and neo-keynesian with another poster, who has been studying the subject for 10 years. I find discussions with people like that informative and it also allows me to test my own understanding. For me that is the great benefit of sites like this.

Unfortunately reasoned and intelligent voices like down tend to get drowned out by the more presumptive, anti-intellectual and argumentative style of posting which yours is an example of.

Hence I tend not to pay much attention to those posts as nothing particularly useful entails from such exchanges but since I hadn't talked to you beforehand it seemed reasonable to see at least what you had to say. On reflection I wish I hadn't as I don't have much time for arrogant people. I had my fill of them working in the Financial Services industry.

Gynoid

Tuisceanch wrote: »

No it's just that most people here don't like long posts and my original post was to remark on the fact that we are all guilty of hypocrisy.I only replied to you out of politeness without expressing any political opinion but just pointing out some blindingly obvious insights as to the reality of activism i.e. its purpose is to raise awareness by the most effective means possible. Since i'm not engaged or have any experience of social media campaigns it is rational for me to presume that I would not have any credibility with them if I was to advise them on their strategy.

Actually I'm not so ignorant of economic theory, and in particular neo-liberalism, as I have already had some discussion about that subject and neo-keynesian with another poster, who has been studying the subject for 10 years. I find discussions with people like that informative and it also allows me to test my own understanding. For me that is the great benefit of sites like this.

Unfortunately reasoned and intelligent voices like down tend to get drowned out by the more presumptive, anti-intellectual and argumentative style of posting which yours is an example of.

Hence I tend not to pay much attention to those posts as nothing particularly useful entails from such exchanges but since I hadn't talked to you beforehand it seemed reasonable to see at least what you had to say. On reflection I wish I hadn't as I don't have much time for arrogant people. I had my fill of them working in the Financial Services industry.

Okay. Ad hominen. It is an approach, I suppose.

Tuisceanch

Gynoid wrote: »

Okay. Ad hominen. It is an approach, I suppose.

Its early morning here in Dublin so chill your beans bro. I see your adopting one of the ploys from the standard playbook you people are so fond of, deluded by your thinking that nobody can see through you. You'll probably regret,as you get older, that you didn't try to engage more constructively with people as you might have learned something that was useful to you. So are you clear now that I have no further interest in talking to you or do you want to try out another of your ploys?

Gynoid

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Its early morning here in Dublin so chill your beans bro. I see your adopting one of the ploys from the standard playbook you people are so fond of, deluded by your thinking that nobody can see through you. You'll probably regret,as you get older, that you didn't try to engage more constructively with people as you might have learned something that was useful to you. So are you clear now that I have no further interest in talking to you or do you want to try out another of your ploys?

Sistah. Older sistah, bro.
Have a nice morning. I have the whole house cleaned.....woohoo!!!

Akrasia

gozunda wrote: »

Solutions for Klimatet Change
Greta would agree!

Change! #237

So you think a green new deal is stupid and won’t work but you do support Anarcho-primitivism ??

I didn’t realize you were so radical. It will be hard for you to spread this message without using the internet or transport but I wish you the best

Akrasia

biko wrote: »

Judith Curry was a Scientist, she is now a shill who doesn’t publish anymore, and rather than ‘getting zero media’ attention, she is constantly on various tv and radio stations providing ‘balance’, has her own podcast, blog and website that has been flinging misinformation across the internet for years

Akrasia

Akrasia wrote: »

Which civilization and what global climate event destroyed it?

Still waiting for this btw

gozunda

Gynoid wrote: »

Why stop at Amazon? Or, if they stop at Amazon the protesters are ideologically inconsistent. Which is in fact what they are anyway, well off people with many foreign trips in their past when 80% of the world have never been on a plane.
So they should protest supermarkets to stop bananas, coffee, scallions, peppers, cereals, sauces, tea, wines, pretty much most of the contents of the shops being supplied as most of it is freighted from abroad and many of them from abusive situations. They should picket appliance and technology shops because ditto plus the dreadful mining of rare elements. They should protest outside furniture shops, in fact is there a single shop they should not picket?
They are going to have their sustainably produced vegan shoe soles worn away to nothing..

I'd agree but as greta shows us we must all eat as well no?

jackboy

Akrasia wrote: »

Still waiting for this btw

There have been many many civilizations pressured and destroyed by climate change. This includes civilizations all over the world such as America, the Middle East and Asia like the Indus.

Then we have events like the ice age. Do you think the current climate change that we are experiencing will be worse than an ice age?