| Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum. New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join The Arab League! If you're already a member please log in: |
| Climate Fun | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 28 2010, 12:23 AM (4,994 Views) | |
| The Eggman | Jun 1 2011, 01:55 PM Post #46 |
Tommy McLean
  ![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
Ha, excellent. Hallelujah. 
|
 |
 
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Jun 1 2011, 01:55 PM Post #47 |
Waldo Jeffers
|
Praise be to Google. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Jun 1 2011, 02:03 PM Post #48 |
Knitting with only one needle
|
Yes, so we take steps regardless. It's what steps that the issue. |
|
|
|
| The Eggman | Jun 1 2011, 02:06 PM Post #49 |
|
Tommy McLean
|
Indeed. So we take preventative steps, as well as steps for if/when the steps aren't enough. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Jun 1 2011, 04:45 PM Post #50 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
And were back to where we were before. We need to look at options, costs , benefits and desirability of the options and how to implement them. I think so far the options are all cut emissions, that needs to be done in comparison to other options, and desirability taking things as mentioned above like other current uses for money. But it's not, its presented as the obly desirable option, the only moral option, the only option that will work and the only scientific option. |
|
|
|
| Skeletor | Jun 1 2011, 11:17 PM Post #51 |
Most likely to be Ann Widdecombe
|
What happens when these gasses are released into space? I wonder if one option to consider is somehow catching all the gas, concentrating it and amalgamating it. Then taking it into space in a capsule and released, essentially using space as a dumping ground. A really unethical solution though |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Jun 2 2011, 08:14 AM Post #52 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
Carbon Capture? |
|
|
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Jun 2 2011, 11:15 AM Post #53 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
|
Eggs - to save Setenza's typing finger from more work, could I suggest you google Bjorn Lomborg. He's a pretty reasoned voice for prioritising what should or should not be done with regards to global warming. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg |
|
|
|
| The Eggman | Jun 2 2011, 12:39 PM Post #54 |
|
Tommy McLean
|
Sorry if I've misled anyone, but my argument wasn't really about the nitty-gritty of what should be done - simply that something should be done, instead of hoping Mummy Nature doesn't just f*ck us all off (or if she does, say 'hey-ho'). |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Jun 2 2011, 12:51 PM Post #55 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
Even if that something isn't cutting emmissions etc, but something else? And Oh, so mother nature needs a favor? Well, maybe she should have thought of that when she was besetting us with droughts and floods and poison monkeys. |
|
|
|
| The Eggman | Jun 2 2011, 02:37 PM Post #56 |
|
Tommy McLean
|
Even if |
|
|
|
| findus | Jun 2 2011, 04:59 PM Post #57 |
Jerry Kerr
|
Mother Nature has been f*cking us all of from the beginning of time, and will continue to do so until the end of time. Your relatively rich sheltered first-world life in a relatively extremely safe location environmentally has given you the perspective that comfort is the way shit should be. Sorry, but that's not the way things are or almost everywhere in the world, nor have they been since the beginning of time. Go and live in the Philippines for typhoon season, or India during the monsoon, Australia during extreme dry spells, Japan any time of the year, etc etc etc.... - people get the fcuk on with things despite the regular environmental dangers. |
|
|
|
| The Eggman | Jun 2 2011, 08:16 PM Post #58 |
|
Tommy McLean
|
Can you get away from the Mother Nature thing; it's silly. Some people don't get the f*ck on with things despite regular environmental dangers - because they die. You seem unable to grasp the simple argument: Do nothing, and continue living the way we've been living for the past 100 years (ie exploiting the planet as much without putting anything back), and have millions of people (more than would otherwise be the case) displaced and/or dead. Or do something (there are a variety of options) and lessen the impact (hence saving many lives). That isn't to say that environment catastrophes won't still happen. They will. But there will be less of them. Like introducing video evidence into football - it won't be able to definitively prove each incident, and it's not perfect, but it will improve the amount of right calls, even though there will still be some wrong calls. I have a different perspective on this from you, Findus. You only seem to care about the 'bigger picture', and that 'life will go on', whereas I care about the millions of people who will suffer because of it. If humanity can lessen the effects of natural disasters (chronic or immediate), then why shouldn't it? Rather than sit on our fat, 'rich sheltered first world' (yes, that does include you, Findus. Don't kid me on that you live in some kind of Far East ghetto) arses, avoiding any guilt because 'shit happens anyway'. It's an abrogation of self-responsibility, and it's a selfish, delusional perspective. |
|
|
|
| Alpha | Jun 3 2011, 09:03 AM Post #59 |
Craig Brewster
|
I have not read all the posts previous in detail. But I was interested to see on TV last week that our illustrious leaders touted the new air passenger tax as a "Green" policy to reduce air long haul air travel. Have now done a complete U turn and admitted it was just a way of them raising money. Pretty much the same has been done with road tax "its a green" thing ... which is based on the cars co2 emissions. What they seem to have ignored entirely it is down to how far you drive rather than what your car produces. Company car I used to have a 1.6 Diesel Ford focus produces 119g of co per km, I racked up about 50k miles a year or 9.5t of co2 ... the road tax for this car £20 a year. I also happened to have my own car as well which produces about 324g of co per km, which I did less than 5000 miles a year approx 2.6t of co2 a year, road tax for this £260 a year. So until the government stop treating "green" initiatives as cash cows we will not make any significant progress. |
|
|
|
| Setenza | Jun 3 2011, 01:49 PM Post #60 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
|
I have to question how many flights not be done as a result of the tax anyway, even if it is the aim. Can stop people who can't afford it flying if they want, but I don't think that it'd be prohibatively expensice. Just annoyingly more expensive that people would accept, like fuel duty. |
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Off Topic · Next Topic » |
4:38 PM Jul 13