Attempting to destroy famous paintings because fossil fuels

You keep commenting - its not about the issues- why did they vandalise the paintings.............

as though I hadnt explained in detail to you how it all fits together in two previous posts - you are the troll .

how old are you?

SO, trolling it is. Why did I comment? Give you the chance to explain yourself.

I appreciate your honesty, but as it's not debate you're here for, I'm out.

So there you have it, a TD praising, advocating and encouraging criminal acts…criminal damage as a way to raise awareness on certain issues.

precisely why voters should fling them with gusto onto the scrap heap of the political landscape at the next opportunity..

But that argument makes no sense. You say they are doing it to "cause a fuss", fair enough, but they are vandalising and physically attacking historical works of culture and art that have no bearing or association to the problem that they want to address. Those pieces of art have nothing to do with the actual problem of modern day environmental disaster. Their creators had nothing to do with the problem, unless you can tell me different? While at the same time, there are countless modern and righteous avenues of attack these activists could target, but they chose or are shepherded not to. Go attack the modern day companies that cause the actual modern day damage, you would have far more support. Attacking historical masterpiece works of art is just trying to lump your argument into the countless historical pieces of filth that attacked art and culture in the past, the Islamic State being the most high profile and recent filthy entity that did so. How does that help your cause? Because it doesn't.

By the ‘logic’ being espoused by some there is a neighbour with an older car that lets say isn’t exactly environmentally friendly. . Should I go fûck paint all over it, film it, make said act viral… and expect no legal or any consequences… ‘because, the environment’…

artwork ?

cars ?

attack hospitals ? They consume copious volumes of energy ! ⚠️

Bollocks

Educate yourself ...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Apocalypse-Never-Environmental-Alarmism-Hurts/dp/0063001691/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=apocalypse+never&qid=1666905581&qu=eyJxc2MiOiIyLjI1IiwicXNhIjoiMS45NSIsInFzcCI6IjIuMDgifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=apocal%2Caps%2C117&sr=8-1

First off - No art was damaged can we get that straight.

You may be correct it may be better if there is a direct connection - however it is far far more important to grab headlines in order to get people talking and hopefully effect change - so if there is not an obvious connection that does not mean it was unsuccessfull - remember the point was to draw attention to the issue and so it doesnt have to be directly connected to be successfull.

Many people are talking about what happened - many are pearl clutching and "outraged" at the damage to the glass but many more especially younger people are asking and being told why the protesters felt that they needed to do this and realising that we could be all in the shxt

I think that your suggestions may have merrit and more protest actions directly at Shell and the likes would be usefull .

However I would be reluctant to criticise this action (from my armchair) as these people are (unlike me and you) actually doing something and it appears to me that they have been very effective - remembering that the point of the protest was to draw attention - not to strike a blow against Shell (they have billions)

also remember - no art damnaged

They are again not the same as the Islamic state who went out to destroy ancient artifacts where as these people used these art pieces to draw attent to a very very importany cause without damaging the art - using soup on glass and such.

They hate themselves. Look at the state of them.

Just saw a video of the cops in England asking XR lunatics that were blocking a road did they want any water, or snacks ?

Then an ambulance comes along and they say to them "It's up to you whether you want to let the ambulance pass?" !!!

WHAT ?????????

wtf is wrong with the UK police?

Is there a scientific consunsus that we are rendering the earth uninhabitable due in large part to our over use of fossil fuels?

and that in order to reduce this imminent disaster we need to urgently (without delay) reduce and stop burning fossil fuels?

according to the consensus of science ?

Thats a very good point - The pearl clutchers are outraged about the glass covering "the Sunflowers" painting

but seemingly couldnt give a toss that real sunflowers are going extinct.

I respectfully suggest that you have been drinking the tainted coolaid that I was describing in my previous post

(have you found who funds them yet)

Your first questions are easily answered using some mainstream research

heres a link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_crisis

(stick to the proovably untainted mainstream research for the truth)

"The zero carbon unrealistic approach will just tax people into poverty"

Where are you getting this from since any move towards renewables will save us money

since renewables is the cheapest way to make electricity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source (again a compilation of reliable research)

Id love to know what you mean by this "climate alarmism too often leads to polices that while are well intentioned crowd out much more effective ways of helping people." and hear a couple of the more effective ways you speak of

(assuming that this isnt just a line you coppied and pasted from somewhere that sounded clever)

"30 years of climate policy have failed to rein in temperature rises or reduce carbon intensity" I am going to assume that you are not stupid and realise that during the "30 years of climate policy" we were still using fossil fuels and suggest that because we have not yet managed to reduce our use of fossil fuels this is not a reason to throw the towel in?????

"All the well meaning personal actions undertaken in the rich world, like buying EVs or becoming vegetarian are just gestures." so we should just give up ?is that it? screw the earth screw future generations? Yes?

"Far more importantly the Paris agreement has put us collectively on a pathway to incurring massive costs, especially for the poorest with **** all climate" Im sorry this is propaganda straight from shell - what they mean is that the Paris agreement has cost them money - remembering that renewables is the cheapest way to make electricity.

"Three decades of the same broken approach , politicians lurching from one climate summit to the next, with the extremists urging them to make even more ridiculous promises." This I agree with it is time for more direct action - am I to conclude that you support the protesters as well so?

Perfect example of an intellect of average green party voter.

"climate denier" they flung at anyone who does not subscribe to their cult is the absolute proof that for the most of the time they have no clue what they talk about. I have yet to see anyone who "deny climate" 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Heres an interesting article that may shed some light on why the protesters did what they did

for some people.

(Warning : No glass in front of paintings was damaged in the making of this article)