More proof that enviromentalism is morphing into a nihilistic death cult.

Pa ElGrande

FTA69 wrote: »

It was 20 degrees in Antarctica yesterday.

Antarctica is a mighty big continent so that is not true for the entire landmass. If you want a clearer picture on the Antarctica peninsula for over a decade it has experienced cooling temperatures driven by natural variability and if you read the Guardian article beyond the headlines the reason is given which is a phenomenon called föhn winds which is a pleasant effect that occasionally occur in the British Isles and they are experienced elsewhere in Anatartica. If you want more technical details about a previous incident read here.

Renwick said higher temperatures in the region tended to coincide with strong northwesterly winds moving down mountain slopes – a feature of the weather patterns around Esperanza in recent days.

source

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

The media reports have nothing to do with science, as usual this is another fragment of propaganda being waved in the Climate Emergency/Climate Change/Global Warming war on the public.

Urethral Buttercup

I'm presuming there is a level of irony to her work. That it is intended to contribute to the conversation on a meta level. People misunderstand postmodernism all of the time. Or maybe she is full of chite. Not going to read the book to find out.

Jimmy Garlic

Excellent article from back in the day when real journalists still worked for the Guardian...


Brendan O'Neill
""Environmentalists have bastardised science as a gospel truth, which can be used to correct man's sinful behaviour. Science has traditionally remained always open to question, to ongoing falsification. Yet the science on climate change, we are told, is final and you deny its truth at your peril. Some green campaigners even wave placards saying "The scientists have spoken", a new secular version of "This is the word of the Lord".

In taking on the crumbling Christian churches or the last gasps of Islamic radicalism, the new atheists are attacking only the old, hollowed-out institutions of religion. They seem blind to the fact that backward religious sensibilities are being rehabilitated through the cause of environmentalism.""

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/jul/03/environmentalismthenewdeathcult

nthclare

MakingMovies2 wrote: »

What has she said that's so wrong? We're hurtling towards disaster we're overpopulated and over consuming the planet to death. Drastic change needs to be made

Just like the time we'd be all microwaved by the hole in the ozone layer and the moving statues of the blessed virgin were dancing at every crossroads and cul-de-sac in Ireland.

Anyone who advocates drastic change or the reset button should put in the nearest asylum and forgotten about...

Starting with the climate goblin

jaxxx

As ever, humanity's arrogance is in full effect.

LLMMLL

Wow some people have bad reading comprehension. She's a professor at a university in Cambridge, not a professor at Cambridge University.

creditcarder

MakingMovies2 wrote: »

So if it was an old white man who was dressed up in a suit you wouldn't mind the message... Figures I guess

It's interesting how you equate proffesionalism with white males :P

Will I Am Not

If her message was in a suicide note I’d take more notice. All these people that call for the end of the human race tend to be still living...

RobbingBandit

How's Gomez doing these days Mrs Addams

alastair

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Excellent article from back in the day when real journalists still worked for the Guardian...


Brendan O'Neill
""Environmentalists have bastardised science as a gospel truth, which can be used to correct man's sinful behaviour. Science has traditionally remained always open to question, to ongoing falsification. Yet the science on climate change, we are told, is final and you deny its truth at your peril. Some green campaigners even wave placards saying "The scientists have spoken", a new secular version of "This is the word of the Lord".

In taking on the crumbling Christian churches or the last gasps of Islamic radicalism, the new atheists are attacking only the old, hollowed-out institutions of religion. They seem blind to the fact that backward religious sensibilities are being rehabilitated through the cause of environmentalism.""

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/jul/03/environmentalismthenewdeathcult

That’s not journalism - it’s an op-ed piece by an intentionally anti-science advocate. Nobody has ever claimed that ‘the science on climate change is final’. There is, however, a scientific consensus as to how we have arrived at where we are, and plenty of scientific responses to dealing with the problems that this involves. Brendan O’Neill would rather you stick your head in the sand and hope that future technologies offer a greater capital-friendly solution to the problems he can no longer deny. That’s simply kicking the can down the road.

Jimmy Garlic

Will I Am Not wrote: »

If her message was in a suicide note I’d take more notice. All these people that call for the end of the human race tend to be still living...

They should lead by example.

kevcos

Her Professor title should be regarded as the academic equivalent of an "Engineer" a drain cleaning company would send around to clear a blocked toilet.

MakingMovies2

Plant A Tree wrote: »

Ok but don't blame the whites, we're the minority. You've got billions of Africans and Asians who are reproducing at an unsustainable rate.

Well no because the average whitey consumes and pollutes far more that anyone from Africa or Asia. Thanks to centuries spent raping and pillaging their resources for ourselves.

MakingMovies2

Plant A Tree wrote: »

Ok but don't blame the whites, we're the minority. You've got billions of Africans and Asians who are reproducing at an unsustainable rate.

Well no because the average whitey consumes and pollutes far more that anyone from Africa or Asia. Thanks to centuries spent raping and pillaging their resources for ourselves.

Jimmy Garlic

alastair wrote: »

That’s not journalism - it’s an op-ed piece by an intentionally anti-science advocate. Nobody has ever claimed that ‘the science on climate change is final’. There is, however, a scientific consensus as to how we have arrived at where we are, and plenty of scientific responses to dealing with the problems that this involves. Brendan O’Neill would rather you stick your head in the sand and hope that future technologies offer a greater capital-friendly solution to the problems he can no longer deny. That’s simply kicking the can down the road.

Brendan O'Neill is an old skool journalist unhindered by the need to be ultra politically correct at all times as is the case now at the Guardian. As for being "capital friendly", wouldn't say Brendan is a capitalist considering he edited the communist parties newsletter in the UK if I remember correctly. His article is on the mark, spot on.

MakingMovies2

creditcarder wrote: »

It's interesting how you equate proffesionalism with white males :P

No I'm saying the poster would find it more palatable if a white old man said it rather than a younger woman. The words make sense if you read slower.

alastair

nthclare wrote: »

Just like the time we'd be all microwaved by the hole in the ozone layer and the moving statues of the blessed virgin were dancing at every crossroads and cul-de-sac in Ireland.

Anyone who advocates drastic change or the reset button should put in the nearest asylum and forgotten about...

Starting with the climate goblin

She’s not a climate scientist, academic, or expert. Her field is ethics. She’s proposing a notion that humans should consider that they don’t have any intrinsic ethical right to a higher place in a hierarchy of life than any other life. It might not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s an argument based on ethical considerations, not scientific ones.

nthclare

I know an old pagan who recons the extreme left and social justice warriors etc are extremely dangerous.
He said he wouldn't be surprised if they end up like lemmings and jump ship.

Anyone who's going around talking about climate apocalypse and end times etc are in need of a fong up the hole.

I remember the 80's and the fear of the Russians, the oncoming Ice age, yes Iceage.
And people were afraid of statues.

By the way its the extreme North of the south Pole Antarctica that's experiencing the heatwave.
Not the whole place.

It happens here too we get high temperatures.

circadian

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Humanity should die off. According to professor Patricia McCormack and outlined in her book The Ahuman Manifesto. The inference is that white men should be first in line for the cull, of course, followed by heterosexuals and able bodied people. Hard to believe that nihilistic whack jobs like Patricia are being taken seriously, but they are...

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-professor-thinks-should-human-17684215

Who's taking her seriously? I don't see the mainstream movement of environmentalism adopting these ideas and theories. She's a complete fringe element and it's purely philosophical.

Sure you just get outraged anyway, and anyone with even a sniff of an environmental belief is clearly advocating for this.

Sweet jesus.

alastair

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Brendan O'Neill is an old skool journalist unhindered by the need to be ultra politically correct at all times as is the case now at the Guardian. As for being "capital friendly", wouldn't say Brendan is a capitalist considering he edited the communist parties newsletter in the UK if I remember correctly. His article is on the mark, spot on.

He’s not a journalist. He’s a columnist. Important distinction.

He used to be a communist, but he’s done a 360 and is very much in the the libertarian free-market mode a good while now.

nthclare

alastair wrote: »

She’s not a climate scientist, academic, or expert. Her field is ethics. She’s proposing a notion that humans should consider that they don’t have any intrinsic ethical right to a higher place in a hierarchy of life than any other life. It might not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s an argument based on ethical considerations, not scientific ones.

John Moriarty gave a lecture on that years ago its called Prometheus and the dolphin.

Check it out on YouTube

John Moriarty Prometheus and the dolphin

MakingMovies2

Plant A Tree wrote: »

Well they can be grateful to the whites for providing the technology and medical advances that allowed the population boom.

The extra billion Africans that will be born by 2050? What will they live on?

I think they'd be more grateful if we never bothered them in the first place

endainoz

nthclare wrote: »

Just like the time we'd be all microwaved by the hole in the ozone layer and the moving statues of the blessed virgin were dancing at every crossroads and cul-de-sac in Ireland.

Anyone who advocates drastic change or the reset button should put in the nearest asylum and forgotten about...

Starting with the climate goblin

CFCs got banned, that was a drastic change in terms of what happened with the ozone layer.

circadian

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Cambridge is supposed to be the second best university in the UK after Oxford in rankings. The fact that they employed a homage to Marilyn Manson that wants humanity to perish is worrying. No offense to Marilyn Manson btw, he is sane in comparison.

Has nothing to do with the University of Cambridge. She's an academic who lives in Cambridge, not an academic at the University of Cambridge.

MakingMovies2

Plant A Tree wrote: »

Whingeing about the white man is not going to solve overpopulation in Africa.

I'm sure your solution is quite the doozy. I'm sure Hitler would be proud. Let's hear it great one

CtevenSrowder

alastair wrote: »

She’s not a climate scientist, academic, or expert. Her field is ethics. She’s proposing a notion that humans should consider that they don’t have any intrinsic ethical right to a higher place in a hierarchy of life than any other life. It might not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s an argument based on ethical considerations, not scientific ones.

And she's a great example of why the social sciences are an absolute heap of complete and utter scutter.

kevcos

nthclare wrote: »

I know an old pagan who recons the extreme left and social justice warriors etc are extremely dangerous.
He said he wouldn't be surprised if they end up like lemmings and jump ship.

Anyone who's going around talking about climate apocalypse and end times etc are in need of a fong up the hole.

I remember the 80's and the fear of the Russians, the oncoming Ice age, yes Iceage.
And people were afraid of statues.

By the way its the extreme North of the south Pole Antarctica that's experiencing the heatwave.
Not the whole place.

It happens here too we get high temperatures.

Plus +1 to this.
Not so long ago all the worlds best educated and most scientific minds were in agreement that the world was flat and placed at the centre of the universe. And at the time all observations were interpreted to supported these theories.

joe40

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Humanity should die off. According to professor Patricia McCormack and outlined in her book The Ahuman Manifesto. The inference is that white men should be first in line for the cull, of course, followed by heterosexuals and able bodied people. Hard to believe that nihilistic whack jobs like Patricia are being taken seriously, but they are...

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-professor-thinks-should-human-17684215

Some obscure writer, writing some obscure book proves nothing about mainstream environmentalism

fiona_b

I agree with her. For the environment to survive, we need to be extinct. I don't know of any other way. *goes to read the article*

EDIT: The article, apart from the halt of reproduction, doesn't suggest how we should be extinct, so I'm going to read the book.. but we just need to evaporate forever.. for nature to survive, for planet to survive.

Fred Cryton

Human extinction is the logical conclusion of the Green ideology. They need negative economic growth (ie a recession) to get their cherished carbon reductions. A 100% carbon reduction from humans ( ie human extinction) is just the logical outcome when we follow the reasoning that the planet is more important than anything else, including human life, standard of living and civilization.