Topic: Climate Emergency is already here. How much worse it gets is still up to us (?)

[24/7]

On the other side of the ledger. Next time someone has a dozen almonds think of the 144 litres of waters used to produce them.

https://www.truthordrought.com/almond-milk-myths

Selected highlight:

"Some other comparisons (Sources: UN Food and Agriculture Organization and the USDA):

A quarter pound of almonds takes 75 gallons of water to produce, and Americans eat an average of 2 pounds of almonds per year. That's 600 gallons of water per year per person in almonds.

Comparatively, Americans eat an average of 72 pounds of red meat per year, which consumes 133,560 gallons of water per year per person.

Poultry takes “just” 61% as much water as red meat to produce an equivalent amount."

Sadly, Barry, what this serves to confirm is that 'whataboutism?' is an ineffective means of argument. A stand-alone stat is meaningless unless it's put into context by way of real-terms comparison.

[Alan_X]

Exactly.  Some real luddites around (in terms of thinking, not technology), including one or two mods.

If you're referring to me and my comments then please re-read what I said. veganism is not the answer to anything. It's a belief system not science-based.

Reduction in meat-eating is a good thing but a balanced food production system that makes the best use of all land is the optimum for food production. Some land, especially in less-developed countries, is of no use as agrarian land and raising animals provides meat protein and valuable dairy foods.

Vegetarianism is fine but veganism is a fad created in the nineteenth century by anti-science extremists who also believed in things like water therapy instead of medicine.

[24/7]

Vegetarianism is fine but veganism is a fad created in the nineteenth century by anti-science extremists who also believed in things like water therapy instead of medicine.

Definitely getting back to you on that one, Alan. Seems unfair to tarnish the entire vegan movement with a brush made two centuries ago. Remember, the KKK was first invented by the Democratic Party. Things change.

[Nobby Reserve]

Still baffles me why people in the developed nations still insist on eating meat now that we no longer need to.

Because it's delicious.

I can't imagine a main meal without meat.

[Chakan]

Still baffles me why people in the developed nations still insist on eating meat now that we no longer need to.

I guess it's an addiction

If god didn't want us to eat meat he wouldn't have made them so yummy.

[Garrus]

Because it's delicious.

I can't imagine a main meal without meat.

When the rest of the world aspires for every main meal with meat it's definitely going to be a problem.

[lobsterboy]

That's the issue. Meat shouldn't be on the main meal every day. It wouldn't be our natural diet. It would be consumed occasionally and was. Meat is fine in smaller quantities but we've been "educated" by powerful lobbies to believe we should eat it with every meal.

[Jm55]

If you're referring to me and my comments then please re-read what I said. veganism is not the answer to anything. It's a belief system not science-based.

Reduction in meat-eating is a good thing but a balanced food production system that makes the best use of all land is the optimum for food production. Some land, especially in less-developed countries, is of no use as agrarian land and raising animals provides meat protein and valuable dairy foods.

Vegetarianism is fine but veganism is a fad created in the nineteenth century by anti-science extremists who also believed in things like water therapy instead of medicine.

To be fair there’s pretty decent reasons for not eating dairy;

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/voices/dairy-industry-animal-rights-cow-treatment-milk-production-a8554196.html%3famp

I do myself, although I’ve massively cut down on it, and I do eat meat, albeit only once or twice a week these days as I can’t afford the organic stuff every night and some research I’ve done into the practices involved in supermarket meat production has made me never want to eat it again.

As I say, i’m not vegan but to label a whole lifestyle choice as a fad when there’s legitimate factual reasons not to eat dairy seems a touch harsh.

[thejbs]

If god didn't want us to eat meat he wouldn't have made them so yummy.

That’s not how god works. All the enjoyable stuff is temptation that you’re supposed to avoid. It’s all a test.

[CraigDS]

I see these climate terrorists are blocking motorways again and endangering the lives of normal every day folk.

[Clint Eastwood]

I see these climate terrorists are blocking motorways again and endangering the lives of normal every day folk.

Seen the story about the guy rushing his mother to hospital with a suspected stroke getting stuck for hours.

I absolutely despise these people. It doesn't matter how much I agree with their 'message', when they do stuff like this it really irks me. It's counterproductive when they're trapping people on motorways, making them miss work, prevent them from going home to rest, and even worse - put people at risk. You lose support doing stuff like that.

They don't get it either, they aren't arsed.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

They don't get it either, they aren't arsed.

It's actually the majority of people in this country who don't get or aren't arsed.

Currently we're heading for absolute hell and a lot quicker than people may think.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

I see these climate terrorists are blocking motorways again and endangering the lives of normal every day folk.

 

Climate terrorists?

surely fishing here

[Clint Eastwood]

It's actually the majority of people in this country who don't get or aren't arsed.

Currently we're heading for absolute hell and a lot quicker than people may think.

You don't think it's wrong to block motorways and leave ordinary people sat there for hours?

[Elmo!]

I see these climate terrorists are blocking motorways again and endangering the lives of normal every day folk.

I've not been following this closely, but have they used violence or the threat of violence?

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

You don't think it's wrong to block motorways and leave ordinary people sat there for hours?

No i don't

people need to wake up

[CheshireDave]

All they’ve achieved is caused criminal damage by pouring a load of blue paint onto the road and I imagine turned the majority of the public against them.

What happens when an emergency service vehicle needs to use that part of the motorway to get to their destination? Do they move?

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

I've not been following this closely, but have they used violence or the threat of violence?

Of course not

[BarryCrocker]

Seen the story about the guy rushing his mother to hospital with a suspected stroke getting stuck for hours.

I absolutely despise these people. It doesn't matter how much I agree with their 'message', when they do stuff like this it really irks me. It's counterproductive when they're trapping people on motorways, making them miss work, prevent them from going home to rest, and even worse - put people at risk. You lose support doing stuff like that.

They don't get it either, they aren't arsed.

You don't get supporters by pissing them off.

Unless you're Everton.

[Clint Eastwood]

Of course not

There are better ways to go about things. You seem to have the same mentality as the people sat in the road. Your response to my initial post is exactly what they'd say to everything.

"I can't get to work and I'll lose my job/money if I'm late"
"But this is a big issue"

"My mother is having a stroke, and she'll be permanently paralysed if she doesn't get to the hospital on time"
"People need to wake up"

If you're happy to be sat in traffic for hours, then congratulations, because all of the issues that come with it do not apply to you.

Extinction Rebellion lost all public support for the stuff they did despite campaigning for issues I imagine you are passionate about. So, if you think Insulate Britain are doing the right thing, I can't help you.

[Elmo!]

There are better ways to go about things. You seem to have the same mentality as the people sat in the road. Your response to my initial post is exactly what they'd say to everything.

"I can't get to work and I'll lose my job/money if I'm late"
"But this is a big issue"

"My mother is having a stroke, and she'll be permanently paralysed if she doesn't get to the hospital on time"
"People need to wake up"

If you're happy to be sat in traffic for hours, then congratulations, because all of the issues that come with it do not apply to you.

Extinction Rebellion lost all public support for the stuff they did despite campaigning for issues I imagine you are passionate about. So, if you think Insulate Britain are doing the right thing, I can't help you.

My question that SDDL responded to was just in regards to the use of the word terrorist, not whether the actions they are taking are helpful or not.

[CraigDS]

Using the CPS’s definition of terrorism I’d 100% class them as terrorists.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

[Red-Soldier]

Using the CPS’s definition of terrorism I’d 100% class them as terrorists.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

Patel agrees with you.

[CraigDS]

Patel agrees with you.

I couldn’t careless what she thinks personally, but I think what these lot are doing is massively endangering the public and is fucking idiotic.

I actually agree with their concerns too.

[Elmo!]

Using the CPS’s definition of terrorism I’d 100% class them as terrorists.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism

That's a broader definition than what I remembered and I can see the argument that it might fit.

However, though they obviously did endanger a life in this instance, I don't think that was their intent - even if it was reckless.

[Nobby Reserve]

There are better ways to go about things. You seem to have the same mentality as the people sat in the road. Your response to my initial post is exactly what they'd say to everything.

"I can't get to work and I'll lose my job/money if I'm late"
"But this is a big issue"

"My mother is having a stroke, and she'll be permanently paralysed if she doesn't get to the hospital on time"
"People need to wake up"

If you're happy to be sat in traffic for hours, then congratulations, because all of the issues that come with it do not apply to you.

Extinction Rebellion lost all public support for the stuff they did despite campaigning for issues I imagine you are passionate about. So, if you think Insulate Britain are doing the right thing, I can't help you.

I'm not supporting the disruption of the lives of thousands of ordinary people, but they have tried targeted action - picketing/invading the offices of scumbag corporations, protesting at banks who fund fossil fuel companies, gluing themselves to the Tory 'battlebus',  crashing that Tory/finance sector black tie bash at Mansion House, etc.

Didn't work.

[El Lobo]

It's actually the majority of people in this country who don't get or aren't arsed.

Currently we're heading for absolute hell and a lot quicker than people may think.

Its not like you to make sweeping generalisations about 'this country'

[CraigDS]

That's a broader definition than what I remembered and I can see the argument that it might fit.

However, though they obviously did endanger a life in this instance, I don't think that was their intent - even if it was reckless.

I mean it may not have been their intent but it was quite an obvious outcome from their actions so not sure it is an excuse.

[Elmo!]

I mean it may not have been their intent but it was quite an obvious outcome from their actions so not sure it is an excuse.

I just mean the fact that wasn't the intent would mean it isn't really terrorism.

Loads of people endanger lives all the time through recklessness or incompetence but that doesn't make them terrorists.

[CraigDS]

I just mean the fact that wasn't the intent would mean it isn't really terrorism.

Loads of people endanger lives all the time through recklessness or incompetence but that doesn't make them terrorists.

Most of the time they aren’t preplanned actions though. This is a coordinated attack on the motorway network whichever way you want to look at it. 

The action is deliberate aimed to block the motorway and whilst they may feel their outcome of this is to raise awareness the quite obvious other outcome is that it endangers lives.

Really don’t think hiding behind the fact it isn’t their aim is much defence.

[Elmo!]

Most of the time they aren’t preplanned actions though. This is a coordinated attack on the motorway network whichever way you want to look at it. 

The action is deliberate aimed to block the motorway and whilst they may feel their outcome of this is to raise awareness the quite obvious other outcome is that it endangers lives.

Really don’t think hiding behind the fact it isn’t their aim is much defence.

Their intent is to cause disruption though, not endanger lives. I'm not getting into the ins and outs of whether it is justified or not. I'm just talking about whether it qualifies as terrorism.

[CraigDS]

Their intent is to cause disruption though, not endanger lives. I'm not getting into the ins and outs of whether it is justified or not. I'm just talking about whether it qualifies as terrorism.

I’d imagine someone calling in a fake bomb scare is to cause distribution too - I’d still class it as terrorism.

Fact is it’s not some weird outcome that lives are being endangered by this, it’s an obvious outcome. That’s why it is for me.

[CheshireDave]

How come it took 6 hours for the police to move the protesters anyway?

Is it not illegal to sit in the middle of a motorway?

[gazzalfc]

Is it not illegal to sit in the middle of a motorway?

Yes. Yes it is

Highways Act 1980

Penalty for wilful obstruction

(1)If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding £50.

(2)A constable may arrest without warrant any person whom he sees committing an offence against this section.

Worst thing is that the Met police (I label them Met police because they should not be classed as a class of law enforcement) are either arresting then de-arresting them or arresting and then bailing without restrictions so they just end up back blocking the roads within 24 hours. Plus a £50 fine isn't really going to hurt them in the pocket

[gazzalfc]

But it does save them talking about the gas companies that are about to go bust due to skyrocketing energy costs.

Anyone on a variable rate gas plan should try and get onto a fixed rate tariff ASAP.

[Elmo!]

I’d imagine someone calling in a fake bomb scare is to cause distribution too - I’d still class it as terrorism.

Fact is it’s not some weird outcome that lives are being endangered by this, it’s an obvious outcome. That’s why it is for me.

Well yeah that comes under intimidation and/or threats.

[Nobby Reserve]

But it does save them talking about the gas companies that are about to go bust due to skyrocketing energy costs.

Anyone on a variable rate gas plan should try and get onto a fixed rate tariff ASAP.

Some well-known comparison sites have suspended their comparison service for energy.

[CraigDS]

Well yeah that comes under intimidation and/or threats.

but it's just their intention to disrupt...

[Elmo!]

but it's just their intention to disrupt...

That's not in the CPS definition though apart from for electronic systems.

[CraigDS]

That's not in the CPS definition though apart from for electronic systems.

Well the CPS does not define if there has to be intent to endanger lives or not, just that the act does in fact endanger lives.

So under the law as I read it, they could consider an act of forcing a motorway closed and endangering the lives of the public who are using it as a terrorist act, even if endangering said lives was not their "intent".

As said, ringing a bomb hoax in does not mean you have the intent on actually endangering lives, it could be for the reason as you said, to "cause disruption", however just like this it could be considered a terrorism act because it did in fact endanger lives and did so to "advance a political, religious, racial or ideological cause".

For me, this group know 100% that they are endangering lives, I mean they'd ALL need to be absolutely brain dead not to know that, but they have individually and collectively decided that the amount they are endangering, or the amount of people who may or may not be hurt due to their actions, is not enough to put them off their act.