[Crabcakes]

It’s a pretty simple choice. You can hear about it now, because now is when we desperately need people to understand what is happening and to keep the pressure on industry and governments to change. Or you can not hear about it now, see it all but disappear from news cycles and social media, and then hear about it later when wars start over crop failures and mass refugee migration, your cousin in Australia dies of heatstroke after yet another unprecedented heatwave, your mum’s house in a town that’s nowhere near the usual flood plain floods after record-breaking river levels and rainfall, the prices of all your food goes up because there’s less grown etc etc.

If you think Brexit affects everything, then this is that tenfold and on steroids.

[Crabcakes]

Or to put it another way. You need to drive for work. If you don’t work, your family and you starve. Your car develops an annoying rattle that is slowly getting louder. You can pay to fix the car, which will be expensive and awkward in the short term, or you can ignore it and turn the radio up. It *might* be that the problem will somehow sort itself out - you’re not a mechanic, you don’t know. But all your mates who have some mechanical knowledge say you should probably sort it. All except a few who are used car salesmen and would prefer to force you into a very long term, very high interest loan for a replacement car.

But regardless, blotting out the noise, getting angry at the noise and demanding less noise doesn’t solve the problem.

[Cyclist]

This is exactly what I said upthread. Mr angry told us he's on minimum wage. He told us he's worried about paying the bills, feeding his kids. He might even be worrying about being made homeless. But none of this counts for anything, does it. You, who come across as someone who is financially comfortable, are telling him his very real and immediate concerns count for nothing. He shouldn't worry about having his electricity cut off, or sending his kids to school hungry. That's just trivial unimportant crap. No, he should be worrying about what *you* tell him to worry about - *that's* what's really important in his life. It is this lecturing that causes resentment and make people kick back against it. And it is a fucking ugly thing to see. Just accept that some people are much worse off than you are, and have other, very real and more immediate concerns in their lives.

[Samanfur]

I saw this nonsense doing the round on Twitter at the weekend.

My f-i-l shared that at the weekend, along with a pile of other inaccurate guff or contextless photos explaining why the young people were wrong and/or hypocritical, and the obligatory accusatory poppy meme that was debunked two years ago.

[Crabcakes]

This is exactly what I said upthread. Mr angry told us he's on minimum wage. He told us he's worried about paying the bills, feeding his kids. He might even be worrying about being made homeless. But none of this counts for anything, does it. You, who come across as someone who is financially comfortable, are telling him his very real and immediate concerns count for nothing. He shouldn't worry about having his electricity cut off, or sending his kids to school hungry. That's just trivial unimportant crap. No, he should be worrying about what *you* tell him to worry about - *that's* what's really important in his life. It is this lecturing that causes resentment and make people kick back against it. And it is a fucking ugly thing to see. Just accept that some people are much worse off than you are, and have other, very real and more immediate concerns in their lives.

That is precisely not what I'm saying. His concerns are entirely real, and valid, and genuine...and *every single one of them* will be made worse by the effects of unchecked climate change, and this is in the short term, not decades away and/or only affecting a far-off country.

I don't expect him or anyone to decamp to a protest site and live in a tent, or stop feeding his kids in favour of a greenpeace sub. But actively saying "I don't want to hear it, people don't like being told what to do" gives ammunition to the deniers, the vested interests and the ghouls who see the opportunity to profit from damage control rather than prevention, and push back against measures that could see climate change held in check and incentives come in to make people's lives better - and I don't mean more billions for Elon Musk from people buying Teslas. I mean investment in renewables making energy prices more stable and ultimately cheaper. Electric cars plummeting in price so that within 5 years average families will be able to afford cars no more expensive than the ones they'd buy anyway for work that they can charge at home and save huge sums on petrol. More sustainable food sources so that prices don't rocket for staples in a weekly shop every time there's an unexpectedly wet growing season.

It's precisely people like MAM who - if they believe the science (and to be honest I'm not sure he does, given he's said he's sceptical about the impact of humanity's actions on climate change) - need to call out their mates when they say it's utter bollocks. Yes it's a fucking pain in the arse, as I'm sure fighting against racism is a pain in the arse, or sexism, or homophobia, or worker's rights, or tobacco control, or the ozone layer, or any other good cause that needs to hit critical mass.

No one likes being told what to do. But that's not the same as being asked to believe something with evidence to support it, and understanding how that relates to you, and that's what's being refused - people's gut feeling that it's a lot of made-up bollocks is being given equal weight to decades of painstaking, detailed research, and that is absolute bullshit. A person could change *nothing* about their daily life other than just not saying "you know what, I reckon it's all made up by scientists" and that alone would be a help. Thinking about it costs nothing. You don't have to be an ally or an activist. But for christ's sake, don't deliberately make it worse.

[Cyclist]

And this is exactly what big corporations and certain governments want us to do - fight among ourselves while they carry on with business as usual.

A few (thousand) people changing their minds and 'buying' human activity makes it worse won't make the blindest bit of difference while #BigCo continues to pump millions of tonnes of shite into the atmosphere. Somehow, the onus for saving the planet has been shifted to us. We get shouted at for not being green enough while governments and the big polluters get away with dragging their heels and doing as little as they possibly can. Leave the human activity sceptics alone, they're not the *real* problem here.

[Crabcakes]

And this is exactly what big corporations and certain governments want us to do - fight among ourselves while they carry on with business as usual.

A few (thousand) people changing their minds and 'buying' human activity makes it worse won't make the blindest bit of difference while #BigCo continues to pump millions of tonnes of shite into the atmosphere. Somehow, the onus for saving the planet has been shifted to us. We get shouted at for not being green enough while governments and the big polluters get away with dragging their heels and doing as little as they possibly can. Leave the human activity sceptics alone, they're not the *real* problem here.

I entirely agree big corps and govts (well, some govts) would like us to fight, but that's exactly why I think it's so important to keep the information coming and keep it consistent - and that means emphasising how disastrous not acting is, even if it is uncomfortable listening. This *is* something that can be influenced bottom-upwards that can benefit the least well off, and not fighting isn't going to change business or government unless that lack of fighting is because everyone is pushing in the same direction.

I know what you mean when you say the onus is shifted to us, but it's not one way - it's a cycle. If ordinary people become concerned about a cause, government and business have to become concerned too or lose power and influence to people who do show concern.

I know I've mentioned it already, but electric cars is the obvious one. Car makers aren't suddenly making their whole ranges electric just because a few more well off people now own Teslas. They're doing it because the demand is there from ordinary people. They want cheaper and cleaner vehicles. This is changing at a phenomenal rate, and now spreading to other related fields such as public transport and even aircraft. Or another example is plant-based food. Yes, it was mainly tiresome hippies and the like for years, but now plant-based food is not only becoming as good but better and crucially *cheaper*, as well as having the benefits of a lower carbon footprint, no cruelty and so on.

Governments and industry do often do as little as they possibly can - but what they *do* have to do is increasingly substantial, and that's because they have to stay in step with public opinion. Some would doubtless do less if they could, and the way that will happen is if they can point to - for example - big groups of human activity sceptics and say "well we don't need to chase their vote or custom". It's all about building and sustaining momentum to bring about change. You, on your own doing your recycling, won't make a difference. You and 9999 other people in your area all doing that won't make a difference. That 10000 people voting for a local official who stands on a platform of reducing waste and climate change awareness as opposed to someone being backed by a local factory with limited anti-pollution measures does make a difference, even if the first guy wins by a single vote.

[Nigredo]

My issue on this point is not so much the subject itself but more the way that it is being force fed constantly.

To me, it is part of the disconnect between the political liberal elite and the rest of the population. Out here, in scroteland, where I live, a lot of people think that this is either;

1, Made up manufactured bollocks

2, An element of a problem but massively exaggerated (my opinion)

3, A gigantic scam to control the minds of the masses and/or get money out of people

What do you think is the exaggeration and to what purpose is it done? Does it tie into points 1 and 3?

EDIT: I clarify that I'm still making a good faith attempt to understand your position and I'm not trying to "gotcha" you.

For what it's worth, I find the dates set by the pork haystack for the banning of new gas boilers and ICE vehicles to be rushed and not entirely thought out. I concede that the dates are probably advised by climatologists but it's a hell of a short window to actually get the infrastructure set up to support these shifts (both on a local and national grid level). Heat pumps might not become as affordable as boilers for decades yet and I'm still awaiting the design updates that will cease a homeowner to rip up part of their property to install one.

An immediate change to the legislation of new builds (like with the control of asbestos regulations in 1999) is probably better for all concerned rather than strong arming folk into financially ruinous upgrades.

[Boiler]

On the radio this morning: dire shortage of mechanics qualified to work on EVs - especially the high voltage side. (thinks: hmmm, I could do that)

I am led to believe (BICBW) the fire brigade won't go near crashed EVs with The Jaws Of Life until a specialist has attended to isolate the battery supply.

[Bones McCoy]

On the radio this morning: dire shortage of mechanics qualified to work on EVs - especially the high voltage side. (thinks: hmmm, I could do that)

I am led to believe (BICBW) the fire brigade won't go near crashed EVs with The Jaws Of Life until a specialist has attended to isolate the battery supply.

Things like this serve to remind us that few technical advances are 100% improvements.
There is often a downside, one that we can shrug and ignore, or set out finest minds toward mitigation.

Thinking about electric cars:
* Whole new fuelling infrastructure.
* Challenges of range.
* Whole different set of components for disposal.
* Retraining servicing staff.
* Different precautious at accident sites.

[The Weeping Angel]

If you want to follow someone on twitter who knows what they're talking about on Climate Change then I can recommend James Murray editor of Business Green.

https://twitter.com/James_BG

[Boiler]

I had to smile when I saw this:



The reason being many years ago I worked with a bloke called Ron, who drove a Morris Traveller with an "Atomkraft? Nein Danke" sticker in one of the windows...

[Cyclist]

The first two big news items after COP 26 finished?

Johnson scraps a railway line and a giant polluting petrochemical company decides to move to the UK.



I think I'll buy shares in a boatyard that specialises in building houseboats.

[Boiler]

This could either go in the Covid fucknuggets thread or here, but... it specifically covers the Telegram group The White Rose.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-59255165

Anti-lockdown and anti-vaccine Telegram groups, which once focused exclusively on the pandemic, are now injecting the climate change debate with the same conspiratorial narratives they use to explain the pandemic.

The posts go far beyond political criticism and debate - they're full of incorrect information, fake stories and pseudoscience.

According to researchers at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a think tank that researches global disinformation trends, some anti-lockdown groups have become polluted by misleading posts about climate change being overplayed, or even a so-called "hoax" designed to control people.

[kreuzberger]

I presume that they have taken their name from the Geschwister Scholl. Fucking disgraceful.

[Boiler]

On the stickers I've seen in the bogs at work they brand themselves "The New White Rose" (my bold).

I have absolutely no doubt their name comes from who you mentioned, K.

[Bones McCoy]

I presume that they have taken their name from the Geschwister Scholl. Fucking disgraceful.

Maybe this "white rose" is solidarity with the race-baiters at Yorkshire CC.


Rabbie Burns knew, Burns was solid Lancashire.
O my Luve is like a red, red rose
That’s newly sprung in June;
(A reference to the first round of County Championships - obvs).

[kreuzberger]

Well, it's a theory.

[Samanfur]

On the stickers I've seen in the bogs at work they brand themselves "The New White Rose" (my bold).

I have absolutely no doubt their name comes from who you mentioned, K.

That's a new development. It's been a while since I've seen anything of theirs around here, but they were just using The White Rose then.

[Bones McCoy]

Well, it's a theory.

So is evolution; but when I look at the departing board of Yorkshire CC, I have my doubts about that.