Plastic bags, climate change, renewable energy,

pharmaboy

Eats Squid
extinction of species is very general and should be considered seperate from climate change.

Humans have changed the environment, we have deforested, polluted etc - the vast number of possible extinctions i read about occur due to loss of habitat, and that loss is direct as opposed to indirect. EG, look at the great barrier reef - often brought up as the great loss of climate change, yet the more obvious direct effects of runoff of soil and fertilizers/pesticides have probably done more damage to this point.

this is important, because groups like the extinction rebellion end up like Gaea believing radicals for whom an ant is just as valuable as a human and thus see humans as a blight on planet earth. With that belief, the follow up involves cessation of technology and development: doomsdayers.

Climate change definately attracts doomsdayers, but if you are on the side of doing something and preventing climate change from worsening, then you need to enrol the rest of humanity in your quest - that means keeping climate change seperate from plastic bags in the oceans and fertilizers and over fishing changing the oceans.

Now a peaceful gathering in the centre of Sydney of a million people for action on climate change - THAT would cause almost immediate policy change.
 

hifiandmtb

Sphincter beanie
look at the great barrier reef - often brought up as the great loss of climate change, yet the more obvious direct effects of runoff of soil and fertilizers/pesticides have probably done more damage to this point.
What proof have you got for your "probably more damage" statement? Keen to hear it.

When I do research, I find evidence such as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_threats_to_the_Great_Barrier_Reef#cite_note-Outlook-9

According to the GBRMPA in 2014, the most significant threat to the status of the Great Barrier Reef is climate change, due to the consequential rise of sea temperatures, gradual ocean acidification and an increase in the number of "intense weather events".[9] Hughes writes of "the demonstrable failure of the state and Commonwealth" to address the issue of climate change in his August 2014 article.[10] Furthermore, a temperature rise of between two and three degrees Celsius would result in 97% of the Great Barrier Reef being bleached every year.[54]
The redirection of efforts into managing runoff are noble but disrespect the CC issue. They are a way of saying "hey we are doing something & something has to be better than nothing" *

*brought to you by the Murdoch empire, we love emitting CO2
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
What proof have you got for your "probably more damage" statement? Keen to hear it.

When I do research, I find evidence such as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_threats_to_the_Great_Barrier_Reef#cite_note-Outlook-9



The redirection of efforts into managing runoff are noble but disrespect the CC issue. They are a way of saying "hey we are doing something & something has to be better than nothing" *

*brought to you by the Murdoch empire, we love emitting CO2
With help from the IPA (who bankrolled Peter Ridd in suing the uni that sacked him), and assorted other idiots like Bolt, Nova, Watts, etc etc.
 

Freediver

I can go full Karen
extinction of species is very general and should be considered seperate from climate change.

Humans have changed the environment, we have deforested, polluted etc - the vast number of possible extinctions i read about occur due to loss of habitat, and that loss is direct as opposed to indirect. EG, look at the great barrier reef - often brought up as the great loss of climate change, yet the more obvious direct effects of runoff of soil and fertilizers/pesticides have probably done more damage to this point.

this is important, because groups like the extinction rebellion end up like Gaea believing radicals for whom an ant is just as valuable as a human and thus see humans as a blight on planet earth. With that belief, the follow up involves cessation of technology and development: doomsdayers.

Climate change definately attracts doomsdayers, but if you are on the side of doing something and preventing climate change from worsening, then you need to enrol the rest of humanity in your quest - that means keeping climate change seperate from plastic bags in the oceans and fertilizers and over fishing changing the oceans.

Now a peaceful gathering in the centre of Sydney of a million people for action on climate change - THAT would cause almost immediate policy change.
Even if a species is already on the edge and climate is only a factor in its demise it doesn't make it separate from climate change.

Your barrier reef example is a bit poor as well, run off is devastating on inshore reefs but as you get out wider its impact is non existent. On the offshore reefs climate change is having a measured impact.

Don't give me this cessation of tech crap, burning coal is ignoring newer, better and now cheaper technologies. Using less energy generally requires higher tech eg. LED emitters compared to filament globes. Solar panels over boilers.

Get your ideas from someone other than Murdoch.

And one last edited point, it's only conservative journos and politicians lumping plastic bags in the oceans and fertilizers and over fishing in with climate change.
 
Last edited:

John U

MTB Precision
The planet Is running over the redline
  • too many people
  • too much waste
  • too much consumption
  • too much destruction of the environment
Humans are part of the planets ecosystem, not separate from it.
All of the above combined will result in a number of outcomes, more energy in the atmosphere, more species becoming extinct, more extreme weather events. If it continues it’ll lead to mass displacement due to lack of water, and worse.
Agree though, it’s not climate change alone.
 

bear the bear

Is a real bear
I didn't know where to post this.
Serious question, do these people actually exist? I have yet to meet someone spouting this bullshit. Maybe I need to get out more???
 

pharmaboy

Eats Squid
The HSR conspiracy is one of the highlights this year for facebook - much laughs, untill someone you know goes and shares it - then you start to worry a bit.....
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
The HSR conspiracy is one of the highlights this year for facebook - much laughs, untill someone you know goes and shares it - then you start to worry a bit.....
It’s a good test for culling your friends. Mind you, had a riding buddy for ages who was into Chem trails, silver healing whatever was wrong with you, and was all about CC being a hoax. We go on really well once we agreed to stay off some topics!
 

Calvin27

Eats Squid
It’s a good test for culling your friends. Mind you, had a riding buddy for ages who was into Chem trails, silver healing whatever was wrong with you, and was all about CC being a hoax. We go on really well once we agreed to stay off some topics!
I don't mind the wacky conspiracy theorist mates. I can't hack rusted on voters though. The <insert blue/red/green> can do no wrong mentality doesn't gel with me.
 

pink poodle

気が狂っている男
I had a gf that was into that silver healing bullshit. You know it was what kept the wealthy of old healthy...Fuck me! She pissed a lot of cash away on that type of stuff. Never call their naturopath a witch doctor.

While high speed rail might be good, I doubt it will ever arrive. Australians simply won't pay the price of tickets. I caught a Shinkansen from Tokyo to Nagano a few days ago (about 250km) and the ticket price was about $120.00. the reality of price should be enough to silence this kind of whack.




...and while flying is so much cheaper!
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
Shinkansen a much cooler way to travel though... And easier.

My pipe dream is a high speed train between the major cities with car carrying capacity. Drive to Yass, drive onto the train, sit at the bar for a few hours and drive off in the Melbourne CBD...
 
Top