mchughcb
Well-Known Member
Airbus A380 burns about 3 litres per 100km per passenger so more efficient than a single occupant prius.
Greta Thumberg Schools UN on Extinction
- Thread starter mchughcb
- Start date
Orion
Well-Known Member
Agree with you there, absolutely bonkers and somewhat contradictory to boot.
mchughcb
Well-Known Member
ileso
Well-Known Member
The romans did a lot of work in human population reduction. Why?
Lively bunch of people.
What has this got to do with the topic?
She might well be an angry teenager with some issues, but she has got the world talking about climate change and over population, hell, she even got us grumpy old barstewards to dedicate 329 posts and counting to the subject. Before she started her crusade the "adults" talked around the problems, politely debated them, argued black was white and wouldn't commit to what was needed to make a real difference. She has bought the problem into sharp focus and moved the conversation on in a few short months, changing the way the politicians are thinking about the measures that have to be taken and giving them the balls to openly discuss it.
We might not like her, we might object to a snotty teenager lecturing us about climate change, but we did nothing but blow hot air on the subject and we've made no difference. She is making a difference whether we like the way she's going about it or not. Good on her.
We might not like her, we might object to a snotty teenager lecturing us about climate change, but we did nothing but blow hot air on the subject and we've made no difference. She is making a difference whether we like the way she's going about it or not. Good on her.
The biggest problem in this world is that governments have too much power over the people. This power/control costs a lot of money meaning government must raise taxes to increase their power, secure their power & control. Future is secured by brainwashing the next generation. Hitler did the same. The absolutely last thing any government has, is an interest in environmental protection . Proof is that every decision under the name environment firstly increases taxes or income for government. I think it is too late to do anything positiv without firstly removing the power of many in charge. Poor old Greta is one of those brainwashed similar to Hitler youth. No facts no proper environmental protection, ideas or technologies will be able to stand up against this wall of lies. They are actually screaming to introduce taxes for CO2.... a harmless almost inert gas … the bubbly in your beer. Taxable CO2 emissions are great... every time we breath out we pay taxes... every animal we have breaths and can be taxed.... no more wood fire at home due to CO2 … replaced by electric heating in the future no matter what the environmental impact is. Electricity is control... control of taxes as well as making sure people are on the right track.
By the way if the trees we plant die, which they will after their time is up... will we be charged for CO2 tax because the tree creates CO2 when it rots....
edi
ps. Vulcanic eruption in Java this month supposedly launched more CO2 than we humans can save in 200 years..... will be very embarrassing to Greta if the world does not collapse now.
By the way if the trees we plant die, which they will after their time is up... will we be charged for CO2 tax because the tree creates CO2 when it rots....
edi
ps. Vulcanic eruption in Java this month supposedly launched more CO2 than we humans can save in 200 years..... will be very embarrassing to Greta if the world does not collapse now.
reloader54
Well-Known Member
and sales of super glue have increased, as has the bill for police and associated factors, courts,judges, etc, not forgetting the personal losses of those prevented from earning their living, repairing the damages caused directly by them,.
have they really united people or created a disdain by their actions. their "demands" are totally and ridiculously unattainable. and some of the individuals interviewed are just plain disturbed, I mean,, you want people to take you seriously you present facts at least speak clearly and open to reason, dressing up in a ridiculous outfit like a fool and insisting you're just "broccoli" is not really cutting it is it. and there are plenty more like that.
have they really united people or created a disdain by their actions. their "demands" are totally and ridiculously unattainable. and some of the individuals interviewed are just plain disturbed, I mean,, you want people to take you seriously you present facts at least speak clearly and open to reason, dressing up in a ridiculous outfit like a fool and insisting you're just "broccoli" is not really cutting it is it. and there are plenty more like that.
mchughcb
Well-Known Member
She talks about global warming. I have not heard her lecturing about over population and climate change. If she has, then please direct me to any direct quotes from her on this.
Donald Trump has talked about two things that he considers important, clean air and fresh drinking water. As do most governments. These are nothing to do with climate change or CO2. There is a reason the EPA has forced engines in California from Tier 1 to currently Tier 5 which is to reduce real pollutants like NOX which can have real effects on human health. Other US states and countries are following suit.
People are continual conflating the issues of climate change, global warming, anthropological CO2, anthropological climate change, over population, air quality and extinction of species.
Chasey
Well-Known Member
I agree the govt is extremely good at seazing on popular ideas and introducing tax designed to prevent what ever it is the "people" are concerned about this week. Tax is very necessary to keep the wheels turning but introducing tax is a vote looser so hiding it behind popular hate items like landlords, second homes, inheritance tax and green issues is a win win.
As for giving the "people" more power????? Id rather entrust the nuclear trigger to a 5 year old.
I presume you meant "continually confusing".
I'm not confused. World population has increased dramatically in the past 100 years world population has gone from under 2 billion to about 7.5 billion. At the same time our demand for power has increased dramatically, more heat in our homes, more travel, cars, planes, more industry, consumer goods etc. That fourfold increase in population combined with the increase in power demand simply means much greater emissions. It also means a much higher demand for food, so more cattle, more sheep, again, more emissions. Increased emissions of all sorts, CO2, methane, all the nasties from engines mean more pollution which degrades air quality and drives climate change.
Take us back to the 1920 world population and the demand decreases. If the world population keeps increasing we will have greater demand and more problems. At some point we will have a major issue. The problem we have is that world population growth drives economic growth and economic wealth. If the population decreased many countries couldn't make the books balance, including us. Increasing average population age means higher pension costs for governments, fewer people mean lower profits for businesses and decreasing share values. The Chinese a few years ago dropped their 1 child per family policy because they realised they needed more people to pay for the ageing population and drive the economy. Right for the Chinese economy short to medium term, wrong for the world long term.
The "solution" is pretty apocalyptic and will not be a popular one with governments or big business. At the end of the day they drive policy. Hence the polite discussions and lip service and no real meaningful action being taken by our leaders.
Chasey
Well-Known Member
Consumerism is much more of a problem than overpopulation right now. There will need to be a fundamental shift away from a monetarist society to something totally different like a world without money / power / profit as its driving force
Mad you say?
That's a small minded view
If you went back a meer 150 years and told people god would be insignificant in 150 years time and the vast majority of people would not follow a religion? you'd be told you were quite mad.
Such a world would be inconceivable to someone in the 1800s
Yet here we are with the vast majority of educated people not influenced by religion or a belief in a divine power.
We are programmed to believe the current world order is the one that will remain over time, but that's simply not true
I find it amusing that when people talk about population control for the survival of the planet, they think more along the lines of reduction in third world countries. In fact its the first world countries that are the problem. High birth rate poor countries have a small carbon footprint. Its the well fed well resourced top level westerners that need culling
Mad you say?
That's a small minded view
If you went back a meer 150 years and told people god would be insignificant in 150 years time and the vast majority of people would not follow a religion? you'd be told you were quite mad.
Such a world would be inconceivable to someone in the 1800s
Yet here we are with the vast majority of educated people not influenced by religion or a belief in a divine power.
We are programmed to believe the current world order is the one that will remain over time, but that's simply not true
I find it amusing that when people talk about population control for the survival of the planet, they think more along the lines of reduction in third world countries. In fact its the first world countries that are the problem. High birth rate poor countries have a small carbon footprint. Its the well fed well resourced top level westerners that need culling
...me next please
reloader54
Well-Known Member
note to self,,, must resist posting,,,
Birth control to manage the size of the population doesn't work. All that happens is you end up with an aging population increasingly dependent on healthcare, and not enough fit young people to take on the workload. A better policy would be compulsory euthanasia of the over 65s. But I don't suppose that's a very attractive option.
Similar threads
