Extinction Rebellion

[henry d]

20 hours ago, Scully said:

😶 No, I mustn't. 

Doesn't alter the fact I'm not old enough...

[Scully]

5 hours ago, henry d said:

Doesn't alter the fact I'm not old enough...

Doesn't alter the fact that that is only a matter of time. 

[henry d]

Or the fact that I won't have a gun when that day comes.

[Gordon R]

Why are you persisting with this tasteless line of thinking?

[Scully]

16 minutes ago, henry d said:

Or the fact that I won't have a gun when that day comes.

I think you’re taking what I regarded as a tongue in cheek remark, far too seriously. 

If euthanasia is ever mooted as a serious method of population control, we would be in dire straits. 

[gustaff]

On 18/07/2019 at 13:49, welsh1 said:

Manpower is the simple answer,they need a couple of police for each arrest, they don't have the facilities to hold large amounts of people, so it's easier for them to contain in one place with a few dozen officers.

 

we have an army waiting for action use the resources they are only rentamob unemployed and college out of term time wasters fueled by misguided social media

[welsh1]

14 minutes ago, gustaff said:

we have an army waiting for action use the resources they are only rentamob unemployed and college out of term time wasters fueled by misguided social media

The Army are not there to deal with protesters, they are there to fight and protect the country.
 

[Vince Green]

2 minutes ago, welsh1 said:

The Army are not there to deal with protesters, they are there to fight and protect the country.
 

dead right, those days are long gone. Apart from the massively bad PR it would create I doubt any modern day senior officer would give the order.

[Pigeon Shredder.]

54 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Why are you persisting with this tasteless line of thinking?

Have you not picked up on his history for this kind of comment, will change the course of topics to suit his own agenda. 🤔

 

[gustaff]

On 24/07/2019 at 21:20, welsh1 said:

The Army are not there to deal with protesters, they are there to fight and protect the country.
 

nobody said fight but give numbers to support our inadaquate police force and give training for volatile situations

[welsh1]

1 hour ago, gustaff said:

nobody said fight but give numbers to support our inadaquate police force and give training for volatile situations

The military are well trained in riot control, we had many years on the streets of NI  to perfect it, but the military are trained in a more aggressive way , you do not want troops on the streets believe me.
 

[Newbie to this]

8 hours ago, welsh1 said:

but the military are trained in a more aggressive way

Maybe this is what is needed.

[Raja Clavata]

Playing DA a bit here but what would the real downside be of giving them what they want? As far as I can tell their demands in the UK are not that extreme, we're already half way there more or less, why not offer them a peoples assembly as requested on the proviso that they adjust their net carbon target timing to something a little more realistic than 2025...

[Gordon R]

Why not have yet another useless waste of taxpayers money? We have a Scottish Parliament, a Welsh one, an EU one. All drain money with little or nothing useful coming out in exchange.

They are not the full shilling. You can't negotiate with people who don't possess a brain cell between them. Why anyone would want to pacify these nutcases, instead of bringing the force of law to bear, is anyone's guess.

[Dogs]

These work shy balloons decided it was a good idea to deface a local building near us which sometime ago was renamed in honour of a local young lad who was killed in Afghanistan. They decided to spray paint there comments and ideas all over the front of the building in full view of the lads parents house  across the road, and then chained themselves to railings, whilst all this was going on a local "green party" councilor acted as a mouthpiece  (use of water cannon sprang to mind , )    should imagine water would be more of a deterent to these scroates. 

[wascal]

On 22/07/2019 at 10:37, henry d said:

If it was in europe/North American continent, then there would be a fortune thrown at it, but its "over there" so lets look the other way as there are far too many of them anyway?

Only natural !

It's been shown in various studies that as the distance (either pyhsical or social ) increases you care less about someone.

e.g. I would  lay down my life for family but really don't care about someone from another tribe 10 000 miles away

It works both ways as well .

Edited July 26, 2019 by wascal

[JohnfromUK]

18 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

why not offer them a peoples assembly

A Peoples Assembly to do what exactly?

• More bureaucracy?
• With what powers?  Advisory? 
• How are the 'people' selected?

It is (in my opinion) a bizarre and stupid idea.  More non productive people, more costs achieving probably nothing, more conflicts with other 'interested parties' more people sat around in dreaded 'meetings' full of hot air, more people travelling around in air travel at public cost on 'learning' and 'fact finding' missions, more civil servants to administer it, more 'assembly members' on expense accounts.

We already have an elected government; the nature of democracy is that not all will like 'which lot they are' or what they do ........ but that is democracy - and the opportunity to change them occurs regularly.

[Raja Clavata]

13 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

A Peoples Assembly to do what exactly?

• More bureaucracy?
• With what powers?  Advisory? 
• How are the 'people' selected?

It is (in my opinion) a bizarre and stupid idea.  More non productive people, more costs achieving probably nothing, more conflicts with other 'interested parties' more people sat around in dreaded 'meetings' full of hot air, more people travelling around in air travel at public cost on 'learning' and 'fact finding' missions, more civil servants to administer it, more 'assembly members' on expense accounts.

We already have an elected government; the nature of democracy is that not all will like 'which lot they are' or what they do ........ but that is democracy - and the opportunity to change them occurs regularly.

I just looked on their website to see what they are supposedly all about and it seems like two of their three demands in the UK have been met, so was just wondering. I would think taking them off the streets would be a good thing, giving them a forum would justify coming down really hard on anyone undertaking stunts like their current shenanigans.

https://rebellion.earth/the-truth/demands/

What I'm pretty sure about is branding them nutcases without brain cells isn't going to resolve anything and most likely contributes to us being where we are with them. Of course there are still people who deny any notion of climate change and / or that mankind's contributing to it and this brainless, lack of intelligence line seems to be their standard retort to anything or anyone with whom they hold differing views.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Raja Clavata
their not there

[JohnfromUK]

5 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I just looked on their website to see what they are supposedly all about and it seems like two of their three demands in the UK have been met, so was just wondering. I would think taking them off the streets would be a good thing, giving them a forum would justify coming down really hard on anyone undertaking stunts like their current shenanigans.

https://rebellion.earth/the-truth/demands/

What I'm pretty sure about is branding them nutcases without brain cells isn't going to resolve anything and most likely contributes to us being where we are with them. Of course there are still people who deny any notion of climate change and / or that mankind's contributing to it and this brainless, lack of intelligence line seems to be their standard retort to anything or anyone with whom they hold differing views.

The issue here is that we should not ever give in to their demands; the idea that anyone who creates sufficient noise/disruption/inconvenience will gain their demands is obviously wrong.  In my view giving in to minorities who shout loudly and or make threats (whether they be terrorists, blackmailers, kidnappers, violent, disruptive or lawbreaking protesters) is plain wrong and simply encourages others to follow their example.

Climate change is a global issue and needs tackling globally.   That will not be assisted by their 'citizens assembly'.  I did look at the link - and it simply left me thinking 'grow up' - you won't solve a global issue like this behaving like a load of naive children/student protesters.

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

The issue here is that we should not ever give in to their demands; the idea that anyone who creates sufficient noise/disruption/inconvenience will gain their demands is obviously wrong.  In my view giving in to minorities who shout loudly and or make threats (whether they be terrorists, blackmailers, kidnappers, violent, disruptive or lawbreaking protesters) is plain wrong and simply encourages others to follow their example.

Yes, I do of course get that and largely agree - I do wonder in this case though if they are only a minority in their action rather than their thinking.

Climate change is a global issue and needs tackling globally.   That will not be assisted by their 'citizens assembly'.  I did look at the link - and it simply left me thinking 'grow up' - you won't solve a global issue like this behaving like a load of naive children/student protesters.

I agree it needs tackling globally but that seems to be the crux of the problem - how on earth can it be tackled globally in practical terms. I believe they view that position as just dismissing the problem, burying our heads in the sand and ignoring it - knowing that the problem isn't going to go away but we'll be long gone before it really impacts "us". It could be argued to be equally naive / selfish?

 

[JohnfromUK]

13 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

how on earth can it be tackled globally in practical terms.

As has been pointed out previously - in the longer term, a reduced, stable human population living within the planet's sustainable capabilities.  This is the 'elephant in the room'.

In the shorter term, the biggest sources of climate change need to be addressed;

• Reduced carbon usage - the 'big' one here being home heating and transport - especially air transport
• Reduced CO2 production - predominantly from not burning fossil fuels except where essential.  This will involve more solar, wind and tidal energy capture
• A medium term goal to move to a more hydrogen based economy (rather than carbon) - hydrogen can be made from water using electricity.
• An immediate freeze/stop to removing carbon fixing - such as rainforrest, jungle etc.

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

As has been pointed out previously - in the longer term, a reduced, stable human population living within the planet's sustainable capabilities.  This is the 'elephant in the room'.

In the shorter term, the biggest sources of climate change need to be addressed;

• Reduced carbon usage - the 'big' one here being home heating and transport - especially air transport
• Reduced CO2 production - predominantly from not burning fossil fuels except where essential.  This will involve more solar, wind and tidal energy capture
• A medium term goal to move to a more hydrogen based economy (rather than carbon) - hydrogen can be made from water using electricity.
• An immediate freeze/stop to removing carbon fixing - such as rainforrest, jungle etc.

Agreed but I meant how does that get coordinated and put into action globally?

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Agreed but I meant how does that get coordinated and put into action globally?

That I cannot answer.  I am an engineer, retired, not a magician.

What I will say is that blocking streets in UK cities, flying drones over airports disrupting peoples holidays, etc., will NOT achieve it and simply wastes resources and puts the sort of people you really need to impress backs up.

[SpringDon]

16 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

Agreed but I meant how does that get coordinated and put into action globally?

How about individual responsibility? The only real power you have is your vote and where you spend your money. Nobody need to fly away  holidays or buy from amazon.

If enough people actually cared, palm oil based deforestation could be drastically reduced tomorrow by the majority to buy products containing palm oil. But they don’t and it won’t.

People have to be the change they want to see, it can’t be imposed from above. Paint won’t stick if the substrate isnt prepared even if that paint is green.

 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, SpringDon said:

How about individual responsibility? The only real power you have is your vote and where you spend your money. Nobody need to fly away  holidays or buy from amazon.

It does go along way.  I try and do that myself, in that I have not flown for holiday/leisure since 1987, and have not flown at all now for about 5 years.  I only do about 6000 car miles a year in total, and try and buy local or at least UK food produce.  I have a very efficient (gas) heating system and my house is as well insulated as possible within the constraints of being a listed building 400 years old in parts.  The internal winter temperature is also set very low by most peoples standards (which is in fact a big saving).  I have also in my life planted and keep several acres of woodland.

I do however use Amazon/delivery services (which may be not so bad for someone who lives in the sticks as it avoids personal car usage) and my cars are relatively thirsty (but old, have saved the impact of being recycled yet).