Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted 1 hour ago
I like the idea of being a cohort
Forming a testudo
Throwing pilums at barbarians like Hector
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Launching yourself at me..oooer!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 15 minutes ago
Almost 25% of Britons are unwilling to change any key habits that would help tackle climate change, a poll for Sky News suggests.
The survey, conducted by YouGov, asked participants what they would be prepared to do in order to reduce the country's carbon emissions.
80% of respondents said they would not be willing to see increases in the price of overseas travel (the single most carbon-intensive consumer activity), and 87% said they would not accept higher costs for meat and other animal products.
23% of survey participants said they would not be prepared to support even one of the key changes proposed in the survey.
We just aren’t gonna get to where we need to be without intervention to regulate behaviour. Not even close.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good. Leave my facking food alone you facking commies. Seriously though why do you target pretty much the only 2 things a working class person has. Why target their diet and why target the poor family saving up to go on holiday for 5 years. There are a certain group of people mostly responsible for the overseas travel carbon and it's not families going on holiday once a year or once every 5 years.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2020/nov/17/people-cause-global-aviation-emissions-study-covid-19
How about business stop business trips around the world. We have proved Zoom works. Also food is a non-starter, we are omnivores, not herbivores, leave people's food alone. Fack me do you not look in the mirror sometimes and see how facking tyrannical you look trying to control what people eat?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not trying to control anyone, judge anyone or target anyone. I’ve just posted up some of the results of a survey and some statistical data, that’s all.
Aviation and food consumption are usually highlighted in these kind of behavioural discussions because between them they make up the bulk of annual CO2 emissions for many people.
Food consumption can be as much as 30% depending on diet, and if you take one intercontinental return flight per year, it can literally double your impact on the environment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OK and increasing the price of flights would help how? I've posted the link that 1% of people are responsible for 50% of flight emissions (and I'm guessing if you expand it to top 5% it would be something like 80%+). Money is not a barrier to them so it will barely make a dent as they will continue to take the same number of flights. Banning business trips would probably make more of a difference and you would have the added bonus of not causing a mental health crisis tsunami by poor people not being priced out of a holiday they have been saving for for years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t ban business trips. You would have to put a tax on them so high that even large corporations would limit them to absolutely essential travel only. That should solve the issue without completely curtailing travel rights.
Been saying for years (not for environmental reasons) that travelling for meetings in this day and age is completely stupid: waste of time, waste of money.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by NPEEE (U22521)
posted 34 seconds ago
Note that Starmer apologised for going to s Church with Christian views. Wonder of he will face the same clamour to apologise afyer visiting the religious buildings of other faiths with sane views.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing to see here
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Yeah, I agree with you completely on business flights. I’m sure that a huge proportion add little or nothing to productivity.
There’s still the inescapable need to curb individual carbon emissions too, though. The emissions associated with a seat on any given flight are absolute.
A return flight from London to San Francisco, for example, currently emits around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per person on the flight.
That’s more than half of the average of an adult living in Britain, and - on its own - about five times the size of where we need our annual CO2 emissions to be.
It’s circle and square stuff. One cannot go into the other.
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by renoog (U4449)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 minute ago
That's the problem you list "the average person" when we know the 1% are responsible for massively dragging the average up. Climate activists are big businesses best friend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I would imagine that global citizens' carbon footprints follow some kind of Pareto distribution. The biggest sacrifices need to be made at the top, the average Joe is probably well within their "allowance".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The average Joe in the developed world is a country mile outside where they need to be.
I’d encourage everyone to whack their data into a CO2 emissions calculator online and see what comes out
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the average Joe on a global scale is probably someone who lives a modest lifestyle in a developing Asian country.
I just used a basic online calculator and it came out at 3.59 tonnes p/a. So even as someone who is considered to be part of the 1% on a global scale, I am below the global average. I'll be generous and add in an intercontinental flight which I've not been able to take in covid times. That takes me up to about the global average. If I as a global 1%-er am at the global average, then that should tell you something about how much the top 0.1% or 0.01% are skewing the stats?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by NPEEE (U22521)
posted 2 minutes ago
I don't get why they spend an inordinate amount of 5ine targeting peoples food. Just seems class driven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s emissions driven.
Animal agriculture and flying come up all of the time because they’re the two habits that sapiens has developed that just happen to be comfortably the most damaging to the environment.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
reason why we have such short guts is because during our evolution our diet changed to included cooked meats and veggies
it was the lower energy requirements of a large intestinal tract, and the decreased need for a very large jaws and chewing apparatus to deal with uncooked plants, that enabled humans to develop large brains
also large brains need alot of protein.....far more easily got from meat than plants
our meat eating enabled us to rule the world
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 8 minutes ago
Oh just got your point, I thought you were one of those revisionists who try to say humans were herbivores with a dodgy source like vegansrulekillallmeateaters.com saying we are not adapted to eat meat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I understand it, there have been three pretty big, pretty discrete leaps in the proportion of the diet made up by meat in sapiens’ (and the preceding Hominids’ ) diets.
1. Hunting superseding scavenging (chimps’ diets contain about 3% meat)
2. Animal husbandry post agricultural revolution
3. Industrial Revolution and wealth
We’re necessarily moving into an epoch of needs over wants, and various technologies, like lab grown meat, vitamin and mineral supplemental programs, etc. are going to help us with that.
NPE
I think another reason why we see flights and meat mentioned all of the time is that we have a ready and easily-implemented solution for both in the 21st century developed world, being abstinence.
We can (and need to) address and reduce the use of electricity and heating in the home, emission by road vehicles, plastic and concrete consumption, etc. too, but not to zero and not as cheaply or easily.
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted less than a minute ago
Yeah, I agree with you completely on business flights. I’m sure that a huge proportion add little or nothing to productivity.
There’s still the inescapable need to curb individual carbon emissions too, though. The emissions associated with a seat on any given flight are absolute.
A return flight from London to San Francisco, for example, currently emits around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per person on the flight.
That’s more than half of the average of an adult living in Britain, and - on its own - about five times the size of where we need our annual CO2 emissions to be.
It’s circle and square stuff. One cannot go into the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What were the other key changes out of interests. As I said am open to loads of other things, just don't touch my food and my one holiday to visit family within the continent per year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Banning the installation of gas boilers in homes
- Banning petrol/diesel cars
- New taxes on gas bills
- Building new nuclear power stations
- Banning new gas power stations
Full survey:
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gkct8b2i0l/Sky_ClimateChange_210331.pdf
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted less than a minute ago
Yeah, I agree with you completely on business flights. I’m sure that a huge proportion add little or nothing to productivity.
There’s still the inescapable need to curb individual carbon emissions too, though. The emissions associated with a seat on any given flight are absolute.
A return flight from London to San Francisco, for example, currently emits around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per person on the flight.
That’s more than half of the average of an adult living in Britain, and - on its own - about five times the size of where we need our annual CO2 emissions to be.
It’s circle and square stuff. One cannot go into the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What were the other key changes out of interests. As I said am open to loads of other things, just don't touch my food and my one holiday to visit family within the continent per year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Banning the installation of gas boilers in homes
- Banning petrol/diesel cars
- New taxes on gas bills
- Building new nuclear power stations
- Banning new gas power stations
Full survey:
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gkct8b2i0l/Sky_ClimateChange_210331.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, nothing there really that an individual can do, but yes we definitely should be switching to nuclear power to replace the other non-renewables.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Surprisingly, people seem much happier with the implementation of policy propositions which wouldn’t as immediately or obviously impact their pockets or lifestyles
comment by renoog (U4449)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 minute ago
That's the problem you list "the average person" when we know the 1% are responsible for massively dragging the average up. Climate activists are big businesses best friend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I would imagine that global citizens' carbon footprints follow some kind of Pareto distribution. The biggest sacrifices need to be made at the top, the average Joe is probably well within their "allowance".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they buy off-sets. Plant a tree, fly around the world.
meanwhile in Texas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdwOUnQGeTM
Sign in if you want to comment
Arguing w/strangers cause I'm lonely thread
Page 590 of 4863
591 | 592 | 593 | 594 | 595
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted 1 hour ago
I like the idea of being a cohort
Forming a testudo
Throwing pilums at barbarians like Hector
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Launching yourself at me..oooer!
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 15 minutes ago
Almost 25% of Britons are unwilling to change any key habits that would help tackle climate change, a poll for Sky News suggests.
The survey, conducted by YouGov, asked participants what they would be prepared to do in order to reduce the country's carbon emissions.
80% of respondents said they would not be willing to see increases in the price of overseas travel (the single most carbon-intensive consumer activity), and 87% said they would not accept higher costs for meat and other animal products.
23% of survey participants said they would not be prepared to support even one of the key changes proposed in the survey.
We just aren’t gonna get to where we need to be without intervention to regulate behaviour. Not even close.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good. Leave my facking food alone you facking commies. Seriously though why do you target pretty much the only 2 things a working class person has. Why target their diet and why target the poor family saving up to go on holiday for 5 years. There are a certain group of people mostly responsible for the overseas travel carbon and it's not families going on holiday once a year or once every 5 years.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2020/nov/17/people-cause-global-aviation-emissions-study-covid-19
How about business stop business trips around the world. We have proved Zoom works. Also food is a non-starter, we are omnivores, not herbivores, leave people's food alone. Fack me do you not look in the mirror sometimes and see how facking tyrannical you look trying to control what people eat?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not trying to control anyone, judge anyone or target anyone. I’ve just posted up some of the results of a survey and some statistical data, that’s all.
Aviation and food consumption are usually highlighted in these kind of behavioural discussions because between them they make up the bulk of annual CO2 emissions for many people.
Food consumption can be as much as 30% depending on diet, and if you take one intercontinental return flight per year, it can literally double your impact on the environment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OK and increasing the price of flights would help how? I've posted the link that 1% of people are responsible for 50% of flight emissions (and I'm guessing if you expand it to top 5% it would be something like 80%+). Money is not a barrier to them so it will barely make a dent as they will continue to take the same number of flights. Banning business trips would probably make more of a difference and you would have the added bonus of not causing a mental health crisis tsunami by poor people not being priced out of a holiday they have been saving for for years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t ban business trips. You would have to put a tax on them so high that even large corporations would limit them to absolutely essential travel only. That should solve the issue without completely curtailing travel rights.
Been saying for years (not for environmental reasons) that travelling for meetings in this day and age is completely stupid: waste of time, waste of money.
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
comment by NPEEE (U22521)
posted 34 seconds ago
Note that Starmer apologised for going to s Church with Christian views. Wonder of he will face the same clamour to apologise afyer visiting the religious buildings of other faiths with sane views.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing to see here
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Yeah, I agree with you completely on business flights. I’m sure that a huge proportion add little or nothing to productivity.
There’s still the inescapable need to curb individual carbon emissions too, though. The emissions associated with a seat on any given flight are absolute.
A return flight from London to San Francisco, for example, currently emits around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per person on the flight.
That’s more than half of the average of an adult living in Britain, and - on its own - about five times the size of where we need our annual CO2 emissions to be.
It’s circle and square stuff. One cannot go into the other.
posted on 7/4/21
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by renoog (U4449)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 minute ago
That's the problem you list "the average person" when we know the 1% are responsible for massively dragging the average up. Climate activists are big businesses best friend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I would imagine that global citizens' carbon footprints follow some kind of Pareto distribution. The biggest sacrifices need to be made at the top, the average Joe is probably well within their "allowance".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The average Joe in the developed world is a country mile outside where they need to be.
I’d encourage everyone to whack their data into a CO2 emissions calculator online and see what comes out
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But the average Joe on a global scale is probably someone who lives a modest lifestyle in a developing Asian country.
I just used a basic online calculator and it came out at 3.59 tonnes p/a. So even as someone who is considered to be part of the 1% on a global scale, I am below the global average. I'll be generous and add in an intercontinental flight which I've not been able to take in covid times. That takes me up to about the global average. If I as a global 1%-er am at the global average, then that should tell you something about how much the top 0.1% or 0.01% are skewing the stats?
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
comment by NPEEE (U22521)
posted 2 minutes ago
I don't get why they spend an inordinate amount of 5ine targeting peoples food. Just seems class driven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s emissions driven.
Animal agriculture and flying come up all of the time because they’re the two habits that sapiens has developed that just happen to be comfortably the most damaging to the environment.
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
reason why we have such short guts is because during our evolution our diet changed to included cooked meats and veggies
it was the lower energy requirements of a large intestinal tract, and the decreased need for a very large jaws and chewing apparatus to deal with uncooked plants, that enabled humans to develop large brains
also large brains need alot of protein.....far more easily got from meat than plants
our meat eating enabled us to rule the world
posted on 7/4/21
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 8 minutes ago
Oh just got your point, I thought you were one of those revisionists who try to say humans were herbivores with a dodgy source like vegansrulekillallmeateaters.com saying we are not adapted to eat meat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I understand it, there have been three pretty big, pretty discrete leaps in the proportion of the diet made up by meat in sapiens’ (and the preceding Hominids’ ) diets.
1. Hunting superseding scavenging (chimps’ diets contain about 3% meat)
2. Animal husbandry post agricultural revolution
3. Industrial Revolution and wealth
We’re necessarily moving into an epoch of needs over wants, and various technologies, like lab grown meat, vitamin and mineral supplemental programs, etc. are going to help us with that.
NPE
I think another reason why we see flights and meat mentioned all of the time is that we have a ready and easily-implemented solution for both in the 21st century developed world, being abstinence.
We can (and need to) address and reduce the use of electricity and heating in the home, emission by road vehicles, plastic and concrete consumption, etc. too, but not to zero and not as cheaply or easily.
posted on 7/4/21
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted less than a minute ago
Yeah, I agree with you completely on business flights. I’m sure that a huge proportion add little or nothing to productivity.
There’s still the inescapable need to curb individual carbon emissions too, though. The emissions associated with a seat on any given flight are absolute.
A return flight from London to San Francisco, for example, currently emits around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per person on the flight.
That’s more than half of the average of an adult living in Britain, and - on its own - about five times the size of where we need our annual CO2 emissions to be.
It’s circle and square stuff. One cannot go into the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What were the other key changes out of interests. As I said am open to loads of other things, just don't touch my food and my one holiday to visit family within the continent per year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Banning the installation of gas boilers in homes
- Banning petrol/diesel cars
- New taxes on gas bills
- Building new nuclear power stations
- Banning new gas power stations
Full survey:
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gkct8b2i0l/Sky_ClimateChange_210331.pdf
posted on 7/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/4/21
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by rosso - he hands you a nickel, and he hands you a dime, and he asks you with a grin if you're havin' a good time (U17054)
posted less than a minute ago
Yeah, I agree with you completely on business flights. I’m sure that a huge proportion add little or nothing to productivity.
There’s still the inescapable need to curb individual carbon emissions too, though. The emissions associated with a seat on any given flight are absolute.
A return flight from London to San Francisco, for example, currently emits around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per person on the flight.
That’s more than half of the average of an adult living in Britain, and - on its own - about five times the size of where we need our annual CO2 emissions to be.
It’s circle and square stuff. One cannot go into the other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What were the other key changes out of interests. As I said am open to loads of other things, just don't touch my food and my one holiday to visit family within the continent per year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Banning the installation of gas boilers in homes
- Banning petrol/diesel cars
- New taxes on gas bills
- Building new nuclear power stations
- Banning new gas power stations
Full survey:
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gkct8b2i0l/Sky_ClimateChange_210331.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, nothing there really that an individual can do, but yes we definitely should be switching to nuclear power to replace the other non-renewables.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Surprisingly, people seem much happier with the implementation of policy propositions which wouldn’t as immediately or obviously impact their pockets or lifestyles
posted on 7/4/21
comment by renoog (U4449)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 minute ago
That's the problem you list "the average person" when we know the 1% are responsible for massively dragging the average up. Climate activists are big businesses best friend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I would imagine that global citizens' carbon footprints follow some kind of Pareto distribution. The biggest sacrifices need to be made at the top, the average Joe is probably well within their "allowance".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But they buy off-sets. Plant a tree, fly around the world.
posted on 7/4/21
meanwhile in Texas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdwOUnQGeTM
Page 590 of 4863
591 | 592 | 593 | 594 | 595