SafeSurfer wrote: » For generations after the night of the big wind cottages were built at the bottom of hills and in the most sheltered places that could be found. You have no evidence that the incidents you cite can be attributed solely to climate change so a new found fear of climate change following being the victim of a storm would seem misplaced.
Tell me how wrote: » Veritas Libertas wrote: » How does she square that sentence with this one? "You have stolen my dreams and my childhood" Is it that hard to figure out. 'You have stolen my dreams and my childhood through your allowance to use the planet without concern for sustainability or the needs of future generations. You should have developed technological solutions or enacted legislation to ensure that the destructive use of the earths natural resources only occurred as a last resort. But you didn't, now, as a result we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.' If you are looking for a link to where she said those exact words or else you are discounting the whole point, then, it is clear that you are not going to admit that her message has been easy to understand where it came from and what she is looking for.
Veritas Libertas wrote: » How does she square that sentence with this one? "You have stolen my dreams and my childhood"
'You have stolen my dreams and my childhood through your allowance to use the planet without concern for sustainability or the needs of future generations. You should have developed technological solutions or enacted legislation to ensure that the destructive use of the earths natural resources only occurred as a last resort. But you didn't, now, as a result we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.'
SafeSurfer wrote: » Where do future technological solutions come from? They are created by using the resources available to us today. Lithium for electric cars will continue to be mined by diesel burning machinery for decades to come. Even now in 2019 the government is purchasing hybrid buses reliant on fossil fuels. Thunbergs message reminds me of the old punk t-shirt. “Be Reasonable. Demand The Impossible”. Even if we had immediately moved to decarbonise 30 years ago we would be even close by now.
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » Climate saint Greta Trunburg is settling sail for UN climate talks in New York to demand that governments socially engineer and tax the little people into oblivion to save the planet. Accompanied by her film maker father who lives vicariously through her, a filthy rich aristocrat from Monaco and some German bloke the trip will no doubt vastly increase the wattage of her halo before she lectures us all about impending climate Armageddon in New York. Hopefully snaps from the trip will make it into Hello! Magazine.
Tell me how wrote: » SafeSurfer wrote: » Where do future technological solutions come from? They are created by using the resources available to us today. Lithium for electric cars will continue to be mined by diesel burning machinery for decades to come. Even now in 2019 the government is purchasing hybrid buses reliant on fossil fuels. Thunbergs message reminds me of the old punk t-shirt. “Be Reasonable. Demand The Impossible”. Even if we had immediately moved to decarbonise 30 years ago we would be even close by now. That sounds like someone saying everything has already been invented. Where would we be if technologists, scientists and entrepreneurs had had such an approach throughout human history? Maybe it is as much about governmental strategy and policy. Look at Amsterdam and it's cycling infrastructure. Imagine if every city had to prioritise cycling and public transport ahead of cars. Would that not make a difference without need for inventions? What if government strategy decreed that every product must last a minimum of 20 years, must be possible to be upgraded while in use, and spare parts and instructions were to be available. Would that not make a difference?
Tell me how wrote: » That sounds like someone saying everything has already been invented. Where would we be if technologists, scientists and entrepreneurs had had such an approach throughout human history? Maybe it is as much about governmental strategy and policy. Look at Amsterdam and it's cycling infrastructure. Imagine if every city had to prioritise cycling and public transport ahead of cars. Would that not make a difference without need for inventions? What if government strategy decreed that every product must last a minimum of 20 years, must be possible to be upgraded while in use, and spare parts and instructions were to be available. Would that not make a difference?
windy shepard henderson wrote: » I was wondering who her financiall backer was, no 12 year old is let within a mile of the place in the un
windy shepard henderson wrote: » How about next week we have a 14 year old girl from Saudi Arabia talk about human rights in her country
windy shepard henderson wrote: » Climates change time moves on, weather patterns change, eco systems change its a part of life, the way this thing is played out with a teenage actress is a joke
windy shepard henderson wrote: » Amsterdam has a completely different terrain to Ireland, even climate, this country isn't suite to cycling for example Holland is, you can't copy a country like that here
Tell me how wrote: » Greta is 16 and has spoken at the UN, EU, US congress, UK HoC having been invited to each location. Malala Yousafzai spoke at the UN about the trouble with human, educational and female rights in Afghanistan in 2013 Several thousand scientists disagree with you.
Tell me how wrote: » Not with that attitude. There is absolutely no reason why cycling infrastructure in Galway, Limerick, Dublin should not aim to mimic what has been done in dutch cities. None of those cities could be considered mountainous and even Cork wouldn't be beyond feasible. [/IMG]
windy shepard henderson wrote: » Come on, the last category 5 hurricane we got was in 1837 The hottest temperature was recorded in 1845 West and North clare was hit with a tsunami as a result of a Portuguese earthquake in the late 1890s To me that's climate change, we are both from the same neck of the woods if one of them events happened today everyone would be talking up the end of the world
Tell me how wrote: » What if government strategy decreed that every product must last a minimum of 20 years, must be possible to be upgraded while in use, and spare parts and instructions were to be available. Would that not make a difference?
Veritas Libertas wrote: » What if we as people demanded products based on their lifetimes and utility, rather than the colour and the shape? I'm sure everyone could get on board with making planned obsolescence illegal, why not start there.
Tell me how wrote: » The argument of 'form versus function' is an old one. Our society is focused on form and so we have many variations of every product type with each one vying for our attention. Changing this through legislation would impact on manufacturing, design, marketing, printing, shipping and sales and many would say a government is trying to put people out of work in order to enforce this and that they are influencing on the free market which is sacrosanct to big business.
Veritas Libertas wrote: » I think you completely missed my point. I'm saying we can also change the system by us as consumers demanding products that have better function. Why do you insist in advocating for top to bottom change(governments decreeing things) which leads to anger,bitterness and resentment. Instead you could advocate for bottom to top change(us demanding better function) which leads to a nicer place for everybody. The capitalist way.
Tell me how wrote: » Because there is ample evidence that bottom to top happens too piecemeal and inconsistently to make a difference. Not using free issue plastic bags from shops and not smoking in the workplace, both very sensible ideas, both needed legislation before they were successfully implemented.
Two of the most important considerations for the eco footprint of a bag (or any other item) are whether we reuse it and, if so, how many times. An exhaustive Environment Agency (U.K.) report from 2011 found that paper bags must be reused at least three times to negate their higher climate-warming potential (compared with that of plastic bags). A cotton bag would have to be reused 131 times to break even with a plastic bag, in terms of the climate impact of producing each bag. Of course, plastics can be reused as well — they just don’t look as trendy.
Tell me how wrote: » That story supports Greta's argument.'Unless things change, there's going to be a major problem.' Things changed with the take up of the automobile. We are back to the 'Unless things change' stage again, Greta is saying the new solutions do not yet exist, we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.
Tell me how wrote: » Is it that hard to figure out. *You have stolen my dreams and my childhood through your allowance to use the planet without concern for sustainability or the needs of future generations. You should have developed technological solutions or enacted legislation to ensure that the destructive use of the earths natural resources only occurred as a last resort. But you didn't, now, as a result we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.' If you are looking for a link to where she said those exact words or else you are discounting the whole point, then, it is clear that you are not going to admit that her message has been easy to understand where it came from and what she is looking for.
*You have stolen my dreams and my childhood through your allowance to use the planet without concern for sustainability or the needs of future generations. You should have developed technological solutions or enacted legislation to ensure that the destructive use of the earths natural resources only occurred as a last resort. But you didn't, now, as a result we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.'
SafeSurfer wrote: » Arguably the most severe weather event in recent Irish history was the Night of the Big Wind in 1839. Was that due to climate change also?
weldoninhio wrote: » https://www.irelandsown.ie/the-big-snow-of-1947/ We got it bad in 1947 too.
KyussB wrote: » SafeSurfer wrote: » Where do future technological solutions come from? They are created by using the resources available to us today. Lithium for electric cars will continue to be mined by diesel burning machinery for decades to come. Even now in 2019 the government is purchasing hybrid buses reliant on fossil fuels. Thunbergs message reminds me of the old punk t-shirt. “Be Reasonable. Demand The Impossible”. Even if we had immediately moved to decarbonise 30 years ago we would be even close by now. Or countries worldide can fund Green New Deal style Research & Development projects - Manhattan-Project type efforts (at a couple magnitiudes greater scale) to rapidly develop the new technologies needed, to reduce reliance on rare earths through substitution, and minimize the carbon cost of producing the materials needed and developing the infrastructure needed, for minimizing carbon emissions. Massive government funding, through gigantic New Deal style jobs programs - and with a large chunk of it based on R&D - being able to rapidly develop the needed technologies within the decade. You only have ideological objections to this - you don't have any actual arguments against it.
lleti wrote: » That clip of Greta getting usurped by Trump at the UN is still brilliant. Looked like she was about to start crying. Anyways, once a recession comes all this climate nonsense will be forgotten about as people will be more concerned about putting food on the table.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Yeah, it's great to see The Donald in action. My hero. And I'm very reassured now. The depth and breadth of scientific fact offered by deniers here is overwhelming. Goddam dumbass, climate change warmunist scientists lying through their teeth for reasons.
