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

Wanderer78

Fan of Netflix wrote:

Problem is Fianna Fail might make a coalition with them and give Eamon Ryan power again. They only need 5 or 6 seats. Hopefully by next May people will be sick of their BS again.

You're gonna be very upset next year then

Thelonious Monk

Fan of Netflix wrote: »

I can't tell if it's a girl or a boy. I can't tell if it's American or Irish. Probably gender neutral. If thats the future of this country we're ****ed

So youre giving me sh*t over living in a council estate and you cant stand kids nowadays who talk different. What type of people are you able to tolerate?

Rockbeast2

The tide has turned.

The lies are exposed.

To paraphrase leo vampire: Let's reduce our carbon emissions by increasing the population by (at least 20%)...??

How does that work exactly?

* I note for the record that the vampire one has no children.

MrMusician18

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You're gonna be very upset next year then

The green wave that was talked up by the IT/RTE at the euro elections turned out to be nothing more than a ripple.

I'd be hugely surprised if they make great gains. When people see that their policy is effectively taking away the nice things in life, they will be seen as the true party of austerity (in the Puritan sense).

Who genuinely is going to vote for a party that means they will no longer be able to afford a holiday?

Wanderer78

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The green wave that was talked up by the IT/RTE at the euro elections turned out to be nothing more than a ripple.

I'd be hugely surprised if they make great gains. When people see that their policy is effectively taking away the nice things in life, they will be seen as the true party of austerity (in the Puritan sense).

Who genuinely is going to vote for a party that means they will no longer be able to afford a holiday?

largely disagree, the green wave is here to stay, but the votes maybe not turn up in parties such as the green party, its interesting to watch major parties such as ff and fg scramble to address this, and their polices are becoming more green. the green wave is actually working by influencing the direction of all political parties, i personally think major parties such as ff and fg will always play a significant role in irish politics, but smaller parties such as the greens will continuously try influence them, with reasonable success in some cases.

ive always places the greens at the higher end of my ballot paper, because i believe in what they believe in, but i would disagree with some of their polices, strongly sometimes

Micky 32

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The green wave that was talked up by the IT/RTE at the euro elections turned out to be nothing more than a ripple.

I'd be hugely surprised if they make great gains. When people see that their policy is effectively taking away the nice things in life, they will be seen as the true party of austerity (in the Puritan sense).

Who genuinely is going to vote for a party that means they will no longer be able to afford a holiday?

But didn't a load of green councillors get voted in though?

Pa ElGrande

For the person that asked it depends on which temperature dataset you want to use but if you go with the HADCRUT dataset then it's 0.3 C rise over 20 years and only 1 C over the pre-industrial era and if you are worried about floods and droughts there continues to "be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale."

Floods and Droughts

There continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale over the instrumental record. There is high confidence that past floods larger than those recorded since 1900 have occurred during the past five centuries in northern and central Europe, western Mediterranean region, and eastern Asia. There is medium confidence that modern large floods are comparable to or surpass historical floods in magnitude and/or frequency in the Near East, India and central North America. {2.6.2, 5.5.5}Compelling arguments both for and against significant increases in the land area affected by drought and/or dryness since the mid-20th century have resulted in a low confidence assessment of observed and attributable large-scale trends. This is due primarily to a lack and quality of direct observations, dependencies of inferred trends on the index choice, geographical inconsistencies in the trends and difficulties in distinguishing decadal scale variability from long term trends. On millennial time scales, there is high confidence that proxy information provides evidence of droughts of greater magnitude and longer duration than observed during the 20th century in many regions. There is medium confidence that more megadroughts occurred in monsoon Asia and wetter conditions prevailed in arid Central Asia and the South American monsoon region during the Little Ice Age (1450 to 1850) compared to the Medieval Climate Anomaly (950 to 1250). {2.6.2, 5.5.4, 5.5.5, 10.6.1}

source

And tidal gauge data sea levels were rising at a similar rate in the early 20th century, so there is no evidence of acceleration, as the IPCC admitted in AR5 when back in 1992 they were experting 5mm per annum it has not happened.

It is very likely that the mean rate of global averaged sea level rise was 1.7 [1.5 to 1.9] mm yr–1 between 1901 and 2010, 2.0 [1.7 to 2.3] mm yr–1 between 1971 and 2010, and 3.2 [2.8 to 3.6] mm yr–1 between 1993 and 2010. Tide-gauge and satellite altimeter data are consistent regarding the higher rate of the latter period. It is likely that similarly high rates occurred between 1920 and 1950. {3.7}


source

So if you listen to the scientists the reality is that the world’s climate is not becoming more extreme, nor is it changing faster than expected. And it certainly is not "scary".

Rockbeast2

I earn quite a bit over 50k a year.

Why did a certain City Council outbid me when the 1-bed apartment I've been renting/living in for 6 years went up for sale?

The "Council Person" actually brought 4 MEN ( from Nigeria - yeah, yeah, yeah, not a racist, have black friends, etc.) into my apartment upon a viewing and asked what they would like to be changed...

It's a 1-bed apartment
Why are my taxes being used to outbid me?
Refugees from Nigeria?
Those 4 lads will never work.
I have the viewing on camera, with clear audio, so sue me and be damned.

Pa ElGrande

Rockbeast2 wrote: »

I earn . . .

Start your own topic this is not that thread.

KyussB

The majority of the main posters here claiming there are no solutions, are the same ones who were dismissing solutions presented to them, as 'Communism!' earlier.

These are the same people, who would see Capitalism self-destruct through gradual climate change.

Many of these people are Libertarians who have retooled their rhetoric, against climate change - several of the posters in this thread have been citing Libertarian/oil-oligarch think tanks and all.

Jimmy Garlic

Micky 32 wrote: »

But didn't a load of green councillors get voted in though?

Exaggerated way beyond belief. A party that was basically wiped out nearly a decade ago gained a handfull of council seats in the usual areas they haunt, ie middle class suburbs. The "green wave" was purely pr spin peddled by the Irish media, where real journalism is rarer than unicorns.

jimmynokia

JMMCapital wrote: »

She’s a great little girl bless her.

She is nothing but a puppet on a string told what to say backed by certain media only a few have called out on her antics and have a real approach on it.

whisky_galore

Micky 32 wrote: »

But didn't a load of green councillors get voted in though?

Can you quantify 'a load'?

Is it like 'a hape'?

Rockbeast2

* Sorry, PalGrande :-(

I do respect your posts. Sorry for venting in wrong place.

Pa ElGrande

KyussB wrote: »

The majority of the main posters here claiming there are no solutions, are the same ones who were dismissing solutions presented to them, as 'Communism!' earlier.

These are the same people, who would see Capitalism self-destruct through gradual climate change.

Many of these people are Libertarians who have retooled their rhetoric, against climate change - several of the posters in this thread have been citing Libertarian/oil-oligarch think tanks and all.

They actually quoted from the socialists that wrote the green new deal and it is endorsed by the communist party of America.

Capitalism is not a system of government and your linking it with climate change clearly demonstrates your agenda where feasibility is being replaced by ideology, and anybody that pushes back on your extremism and expresses common sense are labelled as an enemy of the environment, a denier and someone who needs to be morally punished.

MrMusician18

KyussB wrote: »

The majority of the main posters here claiming there are no solutions, are the same ones who were dismissing solutions presented to them, as 'Communism!' earlier.

These are the same people, who would see Capitalism self-destruct through gradual climate change.

Many of these people are Libertarians who have retooled their rhetoric, against climate change - several of the posters in this thread have been citing Libertarian/oil-oligarch think tanks and all.

What are the solutions? because I'd like to hear them.
Every solution I've seen involved reducing living standards, be that either through taxation and/or the introduction of new more expensive technologies. The alternative is to shrink the human population, which brings it's own problems.

There is no solution that allows for carbon reduction whilst at the same time elevating or even maintaining living standards.

Thelonious Monk

MrMusician - how do you expect living standards to stay the same without messing up the whole planet or are you happy to be on that trajectory?

Pa ElGrande

The yellow vests protests are still ongoing you remember the ones sparked by trying to eliminate worker access to fossil fuels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwKtVo5whVY

Thelonious Monk

And living standards shouldnt be measured on materials and consumption or GDP. Sometimes less is more and you cant buy happiness.

BarryD2

Wanderer78 wrote: »

ive always places the greens at the higher end of my ballot paper, because i believe in what they believe in, but i would disagree with some of their polices, strongly sometimes

That's about it, I canvassed for them once but would have disagreed when they went into government. Since then, it seems to me they've aligned themselves even closer to the urban vote. I think they view rural Ireland as an inconvenience to live in and/or a nice place to holiday in, a place to populate with industrial wind machines, battery and solar farms to power the city lifestyle.

Thelonious Monk

Barry, city people use less energy and resources than rural folk, think about it

MrMusician18

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

MrMusician - how do you expect living standards to stay the same without messing up the whole planet or are you happy to be on that trajectory?

I don't. What I do expect is some honesty from those that want change. The change they want is fewer foreign holidays and less consumption in general. For others, not themselves.

The mad thing though is that these people can voluntarily consume less if they actually believed in their message. Taxes aren't required to stop you going skiing at Easter, or that cheeky city break to Amsterdam. Is this really about creating a barrier to stopping the less well off enjoying the things that the upper middle class and beyond have long enjoyed?

I'm all for action on this, but there is no way this can be done without it being regressive, at least not with our current/near horizon technology.

BarryD2

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Barry, city people use less energy and resources than rural folk, think about it

Rural folk manage carbon sinks, personally I've about half the land behind our house planted in trees, absorbing urban dwellers carbon. But will I get any credit for that? Like hell, we'll just pay more in carbon taxes on fuel that we need to get around with due to the absence of any public transport and shrinking services.

What we'll see as this rolls forward is an increasing divide between urban & rural dwellers. The state is supposed to be fair & equitable to all, let's hope so.

SafeSurfer

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

MrMusician - how do you expect living standards to stay the same without messing up the whole planet or are you happy to be on that trajectory?

Malthus thought the same about population growth. That everyone would eventually starve. Living standards have been increasing for billions of people for decades.

We aren’t “destroying everything” as you claimed earlier. We are using resources to improve our lot. Yes we can do that more efficiently and in a way that better protects our environment.

MrMusician18

Micky 32 wrote: »

But didn't a load of green councillors get voted in though?

Let's be honest here. There was a 4% swing to the greens bring their national vote to 5.5%. Their vote was largely concentrated in upper middle class districts so this facilitated them picking up the bottom seats generally.

Since the majority of Dail constituencies are much more diverse 3 and 4 seaters, they will need to concentrate their urban support to successfully pick up 2-3 seats. The greens might make up a small part of a coalition, and if they do, they'll again be used as the lightening rod for unpopular policies.

4% swing, green wave me bollix

Thelonious Monk

We are destroying everything. Look at loss of natural habitat around the world and the pollution in rivers and oceans, including our own back yard.

Thelonious Monk

BarryD2 wrote: »

Rural folk manage carbon sinks, personally I've about half the land behind our house planted in trees, absorbing urban dwellers carbon. But will I get any credit for that? Like hell, we'll just pay more in carbon taxes on fuel that we need to get around with due to the absence of any public transport and shrinking services.

What we'll see as this rolls forward is an increasing divide between urban & rural dwellers. The state is supposed to be fair & equitable to all, let's hope so.

Thats great Barry fair play. And yes some kind of subsidies should be given to people like you to encourage this kind of thing.

Wanderer78

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Let's be honest here. There was a 4% swing to the greens bring their national vote to 5.5%. Their vote was largely concentrated in upper middle class districts so this facilitated them picking up the bottom seats generally.

Since the majority of Dail constituencies are much more diverse 3 and 4 seaters, they will need to concentrate their urban support to successfully pick up 2-3 seats. The greens might make up a small part of a coalition, and if they do, they'll again be used as the lightening rod for unpopular policies.

4% swing, green wave me bollix

keep a close eye on how the other parties react to this movement, theyre already reacting!

SafeSurfer

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

We are destroying everything. Look at loss of natural habitat around the world and the pollution in rivers and oceans, including our own back yard.

Loss of habitat for animals but increase in habitat for humans. Does the new green deal address population control?
I didn’t see any placards at the marches yesterday calling for fewer people please.

Tell me how

MrMusician18 wrote: »

What are the solutions? because I'd like to hear them.
Every solution I've seen involved reducing living standards, be that either through taxation and/or the introduction of new more expensive technologies. The alternative is to shrink the human population, which brings it's own problems.

There is no solution that allows for carbon reduction whilst at the same time elevating or even maintaining living standards.

I gave you one example around car use last night that helps the situation and doesn't necessarily mean a reduction in quality of life.

Or how about, we ban disposable coffee cups, that'll help the environment and people can use reusable ones.

Or how about if manufacturers were obliged to make devices which could be repaired. Less would be unnecessarily discarded meaning less new ones having to be produced.