1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Extinction Rebellion terrorism

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Aquamarina1234, Jun 1, 2019.

  1. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    Except Trump ducked, although The Economist says, this week, that more Americans are leaning towards AGW and some states are looking to the Paris Agreement despite Trump.
     
  2. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    A meaningless reply. We have examples of my point with the IRA, PLO, Baader Meinhof, Red Brigades.
     
  3. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    I've given this a lot of thought... issue is all of these things are small fry. They won't make the necessary difference.

    This piece sums up the problem:

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opini...tion-more-than-single-acts-column/1275965001/

    Target the corporate polluters ... tax them... and yes it'll mean consumers have to pay more but then new corporations will come along that will not pollute, not pay the taxes and therefore be cheaper.

    Stop big media players like the BBC sending large parties of commentators off to foreign climes to report on massive sporting events. Use video feed or local on-the-ground reporting.

    Tax CO2 heavy power and industry and subsidise green power initiatives

    But most importantly we need to be encouraging a gradual reduction in population. We've engineered an economy that requires an every growing consumer base to sustain itself. And one that welcomes people into it to become high Carbon Footprint consumers. We need to stop that.
     
  4. blue451

    blue451 Senior commenter

    We are still too focussed on best case scenarios. It's very unlikely to be that easy.

    But god forbid any of us should have to change our reckless, unsustainable lifestyles. Let's pretend it's not really that bad and then we can continue to pretend that it' all up to corporations and developing nations to make the sacrifices.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/envir...GR5PusK1K0BIqU8SdPy8CITALo#Echobox=1559658155

     
    Scintillant likes this.
  5. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    The decline in fertility rates is exactly that. Education and development do it.

    Of course systemic change is needed, but the idea that nothing else is worth doing just lets people carry on their high carbon lifestyles. And without people making changes and acting as examples, there won't be much push for any action at the wider level. Just look at the apathy and excuses given on here for not changing lifestyles.
     
  6. CheeseMongler

    CheeseMongler Lead commenter

    Reminds me of this clip from Frankie Boyle's New World Order;

    Now I'm aware that I'm out of my depth with respect to economics but it has always struck me as a bit of false logic that things will always get better, a principle that economic policies appear to depend on.
     
  7. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide

    I find it hard to believe that one of the top 3 issues that need to be addressed to stop a climate emergency is how many commentators the BBC sends to report on overseas sporting events.

    Do you have an example in mind?
     
    FrankWolley likes this.
  8. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    They frequently send reporters out of the studio to interview reporters about what they had been sent out to report on. C4 do it as well. Big issue in America so John (Jon?) Snow gets sent over to interview people including the C4 reporter Kylie Morris. Sporting events need people to comment, expert commenters to help, commenters to do links and introductions and experts to discuss what happened. This is to improve the experience of the viewing public.
     
  9. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide


    Yes, I know. Everyone can do something to reduce their environmental impact of course, I'm questioning whether travel to sports events by BBC (and other media) is really a significant contributor to climate change, up there with "CO2 heavy power and industry". Seems rather unlikely but maybe someone has the data to demonstrate it.
     
    Scintillant likes this.
  10. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    But there's more to it. Why do we need discussions before, analysis after and 'today at' features which all involve energy use? The companies do it to avoid losing out to other companies that do it and then things escalate to do it better.
     
  11. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide

    Because viewers want to hear it maybe?

    I don't see how not doing that would save anything. TV companies wouldn't turn off the network transmitters for an hour if they didn't do the post-match analysis. They show something else instead!
     
  12. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    Indeed, but I think live broadcasting involves more energy use than broadcasting something already made. We could reduce the number of channels with their support needs.
     
  13. FrankWolley

    FrankWolley Star commenter


    If you want to watch repeats, I think you'll find a fair number of channels which satisfy your tastes...Maybe start with 'Dave':D

    Personally I prefer new programmes, ones I haven't seen before, and expect to be offered them whilst there is a hefty licence fee to be paid! ;)
     
  14. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    You are part of the problem, Frank.
     
  15. blue451

    blue451 Senior commenter

    But blocking roads and shutting airports? Hell, no!

    [​IMG]
     
  16. sodalime

    sodalime Lead commenter

    Sorry, Lan, I've not visited this thread for a while.
    Human behaviour influences human behaviour.
    We need to do both - the small fry and the big stuff - both courses of action feed into each other.
     
  17. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    I missed the bit where I said it was a top 3 issue...

    Oh wait ... I didn't.
     
  18. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    I never argued for such equivalency.
     
  19. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide

    Oh yes you did - you listed 3 targets (I've added the numbers and underlined the polluter for clarity, your text otherwise unchanged). Why list those 3 if you didn't think they were the important three?

     
  20. blue451

    blue451 Senior commenter

Share This Page