Politics

[Gemmill 44879]

Renton blatantly wants his kids to be walking around in gas masks.

[Happy Face 29]

Should people not fly?

 

No, they shouldn't.  Carbon emission targets require us to go back to a 1970s level of flying, importing/exporting, driving, manufacturing etc.

 

[Dr Gloom 21923]

Because Gatwick isn't a hub.

so what? other major cities survive without one 

[Dr Gloom 21923]

...plus gatwick would have cost an estimated £5bn rather than £17bn heathrow is set to cost. are the benefits to the uk economy really so great to outweigh the greater expenditure and the noise and pollution londoners are set to suffer?

[Renton 21625]

No, they shouldn't. Carbon emission targets require us to go back to a 1970s level of flying, importing/exporting, driving, manufacturing etc.

 

Look at the holiday thread to see the problem with that. You've fairly recently gone to the States haven't you? Rayvin has travelled to the far east frequently.

 

The hypocrisy here is ridiculous tbh. None of us are going to stop flying so we're going to have to accept climate change is not going to stop. Just don't be a hypocrite about it.

[Gemmill 44879]

Is it really hypocritical if you take one or two return flights a year? Same as people have going back decades?

 

The problem is the population increase brought about by you breeders.

[Rayvin 5223]

Look at the holiday thread to see the problem with that. You've fairly recently gone to the States haven't you? Rayvin has travelled to the far east frequently.

 

The hypocrisy here is ridiculous tbh. None of us are going to stop flying so we're going to have to accept climate change is not going to stop. Just don't be a hypocrite about it.

 

 

We're fucked. Short termism it is.

[Dr Gloom 21923]

Is it really hypocritical if you take one or two return flights a year? Same as people have going back decades?

 

The problem is the population increase brought about by you breeders.

 

the population problem is the biggest looming crisis the human race faces tbh. 

[Rayvin 5223]

Is it really hypocritical if you take one or two return flights a year? Same as people have going back decades?

 

The problem is the population increase brought about by you breeders.

 

I haven't actually flown anywhere this year (have flown twice in the past 5 years) but a couple of flights per annum sounds ok to me. In truth though, I'd be happy to work to some government mandated level if it assisted with combatting climate change.

 

Agree on population increase, although I have the impression that this may be a self correcting issue due to our lack of long term planning.

[Gemmill 44879]

Aye exactly. So tell your kids that it ends with them. No more kids for you and they are to go through their lives childless.

 

I've already decided that the Gemmill sexiness curse dies with me.

[Gemmill 44879]

I'm cheering for the national obesity crisis. It's our only hope.

[Happy Face 29]

Look at the holiday thread to see the problem with that. You've fairly recently gone to the States haven't you? Rayvin has travelled to the far east frequently.

 

The hypocrisy here is ridiculous tbh. None of us are going to stop flying so we're going to have to accept climate change is not going to stop. Just don't be a hypocrite about it.

 

I've not flown anywhere in 4 years.  I can count my hands the number of international return flights I've taken in my life.  That's irrelevant though.  i don't believe in people sorting through their own recycling or choosing to buy more economic cars if they want to any more than I believe individuals should collectively choose not to fly where the government gives them that choice.

 

All environmentally harmful activity should be inhibited by government policy.  Not exacerbated by giving millions of people the option to understand the implication of what they're doing..

[Happy Face 29]

Aye exactly. So tell your kids that it ends with them. No more kids for you and they are to go through their lives childless.

 

I've already decided that the Gemmill sexiness curse dies with me.

 

Isn't population growth being driven by people living longer rather than breeding more?  I thought we were all having fewer kids.

 

If you had an environmental bone in your body you'd go to see Kevorkian at 50.

[Rayvin 5223]

Aye exactly. So tell your kids that it ends with them. No more kids for you and they are to go through their lives childless.

 

I've already decided that the Gemmill sexiness curse dies with me.

 

The question though, is why either you or I should care, given that we have no intention to have kids. Just eternal givers, I suppose

 

 

Isn't population growth being driven by people living longer rather than breeding more?  I thought we were all having fewer kids.

 

If you had an environmental bone in your body you'd go to see Kevorkian at 50.

 

Is that true universally? Birth rates aren't the problem, it's longevity? I know that's the issue here, is it now global?

Edited October 25, 2016 by Rayvin

[Gemmill 44879]

Isn't population growth being driven by people living longer rather than breeding more? I thought we were all having fewer kids.

 

If you had an environmental bone in your body you'd go to see Kevorkian at 50.

The planet needs me, HF.

 

I don't know whether people are having fewer kids on average, but if there's more people having fewer kids on average, you end up with more people. Exponential innit.

[Happy Face 29]

The question though, is why either you or I should care, given that we have no intention to have kids. Just eternal givers, I suppose

 

 

 

Is that true universally? Birth rates aren't the problem, it's longevity? I know that's the issue here, is it now global?

 

As I understand it when child mortality improves in a country birth rates fall.  So in the UK, while we were knocking out about a million kids a year in the mid 60s, it's dropped under 700k in the noughties.

 

In African nations where birth rates still remain quite high there are larger drops to follow.

 

In places like China where the limitations on birth numbers are being eased, then there will be growth.

 

In all of these countries though, longevity is a bigger problem in terms of overpopulation though.  It only increases wherever you are and as cures for Cancer and that come along it'll worsen.

 

The antibiotic failures might see the reset button pressed for a while mind.

[Alex 35082]

Worst excuse for not having kids ever btw

[Rayvin 5223]

As I understand it when child mortality improves in a country birth rates fall.  So in the UK, while we were knocking out about a million kids a year in the mid 60s, it's dropped under 700k in the noughties.

 

In African nations where birth rates still remain quite high there are larger drops to follow.

 

In places like China where the limitations on birth numbers are being eased, then there will be growth.

 

In all of these countries though, longevity is a bigger problem in terms of overpopulation though.  It only increases wherever you are and as cures for Cancer and that come along it'll worsen.

 

The antibiotic failures might see the reset button pressed for a while mind.

 

 

That's damning if true. There's little to nothing we can do about that except what, selective breeding? Because surely you'd reach a point where not everyone could be allowed to breed.

 

Or we colonise Mars or something. Bizarre to think that the killer of humanity will end up being it's own success at surviving.

 

Worst excuse for not having kids ever btw

 

I'm saving the world, dammit

 

Edited October 25, 2016 by Rayvin

[Happy Face 29]

That's damning if true. There's little to nothing we can do about that except what, selective breeding? Because surely you'd reach a point where not everyone could be allowed to breed.

 

Or we colonise Mars or something. Bizarre to think that the killer of humanity will end up being it's own success at surviving.

 

 

Whey the earth will be consumed by the sun expanding sooner or later, so we might as well work on colonising distant planets as soon as possible.  we need to reach another solar system before that happens if we're going to make it long term.  Otherwise we're all toast, whether we take holidays or not.

[ewerk 30610]

Air travel contributes about 2% of all human caused CO2 emissions.

 

Dry your eyes and careful getting down off those high horses.

[Rayvin 5223]

Whey the earth will be consumed by the sun expanding sooner or later, so we might as well work on colonising distant planets as soon as possible.  we need to reach another solar system before that happens if we're going to make it long term.  Otherwise we're all toast, whether we take holidays or not.

 

I think if we survive long enough, we'd manage that before the Sun goes.

 

Imagine how weird that would be though, for our homeworld to be annihilated and for us to go on.

[Alex 35082]

Had a discussion once, if you could call it that, on another forum with this proper frootloop. Like Wolfy if he was a Nazi basically. He was all for terraforming Mars. I did point out that it was somewhat at odds with his assertion that humans had no impact on climate change. He had about 15 kids.

[Alex 35082]

I think if we survive long enough, we'd manage that before the Sun goes.

 

Imagine how weird that would be though, for our homeworld to be annihilated and for us to go on.

Someone needs to make spindizzies a reality

[Rayvin 5223]

Air travel contributes about 2% of all human caused CO2 emissions.

 

Dry your eyes and careful getting down off those high horses.

 

You're right. We can get it to a solid 5% I'm sure. Just need more runways. I'm assuming we're in agreement now that it is short termism though? When compared to the threat of climate change, that is?

[Rayvin 5223]

Someone needs to make spindizzies a reality

 

I googled this and it's some kind of gas powered car. I don't understand