Attempting to destroy famous paintings because fossil fuels

China has about 1/3rd the energy consumption per capita as the US. US is 12,000 kWH per capita, China is 4,000 kWh, India is 800 kWh.

Ireland is 5,100 KwH per capita. It's not india that needs to clean up its act first. It's us.

https://www.worlddata.info/europe/ireland/energy-consumption.php

🤣🤣😂Remember 🤣 Its 🤣 Not me making a fool of you 😂 You are the one pretending to understand stuff that you do not have a clue about.

This is a very important issue - You and me may not suffer the most

but we have to think of people other than ourselves. Many more will suffer if we dont take the problem seriously

Thats better - at least when you are asking stupid questionns you arent copying and pasting extracts and pretending that you understand them.

I forwarded links to you previously to explain your questions - Did you read them?

Just give me the main thing that you do not understand - ok two things about the climate crisis (that the consensus of science agree is happening)

and I will forward you the relevent (reliable) information or summarise it and provide a link - Hows that?

Did you ever hear of a term or concept called 'less harmful'?

What do you think that means? In real terms.

To stick with the smoker analogy used earlier, do you think the Dr advising the 60 a day smoker with developing cancer would tell him there's no point cutting down to ten a day, or would he tell him that even 59 a day would be an improvement?

No one is suggesting that it is possible to move from a state of concern to an absolute perfect scenario, so stop trying to pretend such a thing exists and that that's all you are waiting for.

I'd be pissed if the Library of Alexandria had really been burned down because of a simple and unavoidable social grievance, so yeah.

Nobody bats an eyelid when Shell gets property damaged, they're faceless and worth hundreds of billions. That's true enough.

Art, etc. can be utterly irreplaceable, and utterly priceless. It can hurt to see it destroyed.

On the balance, climate activists would argue that the planet and the climate and the ecosystem equilibria are all irreplaceable and priceless.

Perhaps a few hundred years from now the only thing we will have left of old earth is the paintings of when it was blue and green. That would be apex tragedy. I'd trade all the works of art on earth to keep the earth alive.

Admittedly, we live in perhaps one of 'the dumbest timelines' and I'm not sure I have it in me to say most of these activists are truly the dumbest ones. Though I will say I cringe to see many of the humiliations they have brought upon themselves in the past few weeks. At least everyone is discussing the climate, and I think on the whole the world discourse has changed from 'are we causing this' to pressing forward and debating the agenda of making a green transition a reality, either way. Where I definitely detract from them is the idea that fossil fuels will be utterly banned or become a taboo technology etc. or any such consideration, there are far to many things produced and derived directly from the reaction of fuels (polymers, alloys, etc) that make up the built world.

The same guy who gives us the above, then gives us this

If you glue your head to anything, art or otherwise, you waive your right to be taken seriously.

How so? They did what they set out to do, get the topic on the news.

How about if you throw yourself in front of a horse, could that ever be taken seriously?

Nothing.

It's your post, you spent last night complaining about there not being enough context about a post that showed (amongst other things) the volume of ice disappearing in recent times.

Here, you post a link with no explanation or detail. Why do you expect others to do what you won't do?

To a point, or we need to burn them more sensibly. The crude is broken down into a lot of different things and none or few of those things can be produced in isolation, which is where your byproducts come by, like bunker fuel, etc.

The conundrum is if you want to produce lubricants, virgin plastics etc. you need a market for all the other products in the chain, etc. and most plastic sadly is not infinitely recyclable, the polymer chains break down.

In perpetuity it would be fine to run this process if there is sufficient a carbon sink for the waste. Forests etc. provide that. We exacerbated the problem though with explosive population growth and converting many natural forested areas into farmland and ranchland globally, which led to more demand for energy and cheap materials, etc.

Comparing Nelson Mandela and Rosa Parks to these tossers is an insult to these 2 great individuals .... they suffered real racism real hated real deprivation whereas these current vandals have it soft ... so soft they can go out and protest in a warped way instead of working ....