Climate code red

[clubchamp98]

It’s not a conspiracy as such. It’s vested interests opaquely funding media outlets that peddle disinformation as a way of diluting the discussion.
It’s been done before with the smoking lobby. It’s been widely reported on regarding the Oil and Gas industry.
All they need to do is persuade a small amount that the science is debatable. Then we spend the next 10 years discussing whether Climate Change is real rather than what needs to be done….

Oh, and FWIW, the solution to the car industry isn’t just electric cars. It’s stopping people using a car at all. WFH, trains, buses etc are the actual solution.

I think the COVID pandemic has put a nail in the coffin of public transport.
Anyone who can afford a car will still have one.

 

[SocketRocket]

It’s not a conspiracy as such. It’s vested interests opaquely funding media outlets that peddle disinformation as a way of diluting the discussion.
It’s been done before with the smoking lobby. It’s been widely reported on regarding the Oil and Gas industry.
All they need to do is persuade a small amount that the science is debatable. Then we spend the next 10 years discussing whether Climate Change is real rather than what needs to be done….

Oh, and FWIW, the solution to the car industry isn’t just electric cars. It’s stopping people using a car at all. WFH, trains, buses etc are the actual solution.

I didn't comment on the car industry.

 

[funkycoldmedina]

It’s not a conspiracy as such. It’s vested interests opaquely funding media outlets that peddle disinformation as a way of diluting the discussion.
It’s been done before with the smoking lobby. It’s been widely reported on regarding the Oil and Gas industry.
All they need to do is persuade a small amount that the science is debatable. Then we spend the next 10 years discussing whether Climate Change is real rather than what needs to be done….

Oh, and FWIW, the solution to the car industry isn’t just electric cars. It’s stopping people using a car at all. WFH, trains, buses etc are the actual solution.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000l7q1
This is a great series of podcasts on just that very subject. The blueprint was started by a US PR firm for tobacco and has been rolled out ever since.

 

[bluewolf]

I didn't comment on the car industry.

It was a general comment as part of the wider discussion

 

[Foxholer]

...
Oh, and FWIW, the solution to the car industry isn’t just electric cars. It’s stopping people using a car at all. WFH, trains, buses etc are the actual solution.

The practicality of cars is such that complete elimination of them is 99.9999% impossible! Making them considerably less harmful to the environment can certainly be done though. And making them electric is not the 'final' solution as a considerable amount of the electricity production is from environmentally harmful methods. BMW tried to produce Hydrogen fueled vehicles (where 'waste/exhaust' is water), but never succeeded sufficiently for them be commercially viable. I believe it's still an option though.

 

[Crumplezone]

I agree, there are few global problems that wouldn't be improved by a big reduction in Homo Sapiens.

Reducing birth rates seems like by far the simplest and cheapest solution to massively reducing excessive global consumption. For some reason though, we don't seem to be allowed to talk about it. Even though it would be easily achievable without forcing anyone to do anything. Better education and improved access to contraception would be an excellent start.

 

[bluewolf]

Reducing birth rates seems like by far the simplest and cheapest solution to massively reducing excessive global consumption. For some reason though, we don't seem to be allowed to talk about it. Even though it would be easily achievable without forcing anyone to do anything. Better education and improved access to contraception would be an excellent start.

Because significantly reducing populations, both locally and globally would most likely result in either a never ending worldwide recession, and/or possibly the collapse of most financial institutions globally.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Because significantly reducing populations, both locally and globally would most likely result in either a never ending worldwide recession, and/or possibly the collapse of most financial institutions globally.

Ah well. Best carry on as we are then.

 

[bluewolf]

Ah well. Best carry on as we are then.

That’s the decision that some will make, yes.

 

[Foxholer]

Trees represent nearly all the biomass of our planet...

Well, about 80%; certainly 'most' but a bit of an exaggeration, imo, to say 'nearly all'. FWIW, bacteria are the next largest category.

This idea is completely wrong. Politicians as custodians of our planet - don't make me laugh.

Totally agree - and that's the reason why making progress on 'protecting the environment' is so tediously slow!

Trees are there for an ecological purpose to help ensure our survival.

That's probably simply badly worded but, taken as written, their 'purpose' isn't to help endure our survival (that would mean they were specifically crerated to do so)..it's the fact that they do what they do that allows us to survive!

An even more inconvenient truth is global population and for some reason it's never discussed in the media.

Agreed - though it has certainly been 'discussed'; simply not so actively.

Covid itself would not have flourished had numbers been much less.
The link between Covid and climate change.

There have been pandemics when numbers were much less. Not all 'global' simply because our ability to travel/transport has increased so much!
I'm not aware of any link between (the existence or spread of) Covid and climate change. Though apparently climate change has (pretty understandably) slowed during the pandemic.

An awkward truth lies still beyond. It is not Darwinian to vaccinate against a virus. It merely stores up an even bigger problem for the future.
The reason we are here today is because evolution is based upon unimaginable cruelty and suffering from the past.

H'mm. I disagree with most of this rant!

It is believed that 99% of species from the past are now extinct. By our actions we are accelerating towards the demise of ourselves.

But I totally agree with this!
The sooner politicians also agree and find a way to stop/reverse it the better! It really does have to start with their acceptance of the problem!

 

[SocketRocket]

Because significantly reducing populations, both locally and globally would most likely result in either a never ending worldwide recession, and/or possibly the collapse of most financial institutions globally.

I think you base that assumption on demand remaining high and production low. If the population is smaller then demand should also be lower thus creating fiscal equilibrium.

 

[bluewolf]

I think you base that assumption on demand remaining high and production low. If the population is smaller then demand should also be lower thus creating fiscal equilibrium.

It’s not a supply/demand equation (IMO). It’s a function of a system that requires an ever increasing amount of debt to maintain itself. It’ll fall over long before any equilibrium is reached.

 

[SocketRocket]

It’s not a supply/demand equation (IMO). It’s a function of a system that requires an ever increasing amount of debt to maintain itself. It’ll fall over long before any equilibrium is reached.

It can't fall over, what ever happens then market forces will apply. It's very much a demand and supply system. I can't understand how you fail to accept a country with a smaller population can't function well, many small populations manage very well, it's the huge populations that use poverty to prop up their economies.

 

[Hobbit]

It can't fall over, what ever happens then market forces will apply. It's very much a demand and supply system. I can't understand how you fail to accept a country with a smaller population can't function well, many small populations manage very well, it's the huge populations that use poverty to prop up their economies.

If a debt is X, requiring Y to service the debt and Y becomes Y - W how is the debt serviced?

Debt repayments can be rescheduled, and QE applied but if every country is doing the same the banks will suffer.

 

[patricks148]

Guys let's not let this one go the same way as some of the political threads agree to disagree and move on, excepting some have a different opinion.

 

[SocketRocket]

If a debt is X, requiring Y to service the debt and Y becomes Y - W how is the debt serviced?

Debt repayments can be rescheduled, and QE applied but if every country is doing the same the banks will suffer.

I don't believe anyone has suggested debts don't need servicing, debt is a means to make money from people wanting to borrow, its scalable. Why would a smaller population make any difference.

 

[SocketRocket]

Guys let's not let this one go the same way as some of the political threads agree to disagree and move on, excepting some have a different opinion.

Are you suggesting the subject shouldn't be debated, surely that's what a Forum exists for as long as the discussion is civilised.

 

[patricks148]

Are you suggesting the subject shouldn't be debated, surely that's what a Forum exists for as long as the discussion is civilised.

I'm suggesting you keep it civil and except that you won't always agree with others rather than it decend in to bickering.

 

[bluewolf]

It can't fall over, what ever happens then market forces will apply. It's very much a demand and supply system. I can't understand how you fail to accept a country with a smaller population can't function well, many small populations manage very well, it's the huge populations that use poverty to prop up their economies.

Smaller populations can manage perfectly fine. Unless they were once significantly larger populations. You’re not making a reasonable comparison. You’re attempting to compare a smaller population to another, larger one. The comparison should be a smaller population to itself 20 years earlier when it was significantly larger.

Your description of a manageable, scalable economy also presupposes that the start point is under control and stable. I think it would be incredibly generous to consider most Western economies as stable over the last 20 years. If we take the EU as an example, then it would take an act of almost world record cognitive dissonance from some quarters to claim that the EU was a stable economy whilst simultaneously being so unstable as to require an immediate distancing from it by the UK (Apologies to the Mods for referencing the B word).

As per Patrick’s request, I’ll refrain from continuing down this pathway. It was fun though ?

 

[Hobbit]

I don't believe anyone has suggested debts don't need servicing, debt is a means to make money from people wanting to borrow, its scalable. Why would a smaller population make any difference.

Smaller population = less tax revenue. And govts don’t sell a product. Recession sees more people needing support, and from less people paying tax. Businesses can scale back but social services would need more.