Climate Change Poll! Another Kimbers Poll!

[Dave Eds]

2 hours ago, C8RKH said:

But if you allow the human population to continue to breed at current rates 

There's a vaccine for that.... 

[Barrykearley]

12 hours ago, C8RKH said:

But if you allow the human population to continue to breed at current rates then non of the above will make a difference. Everywhere you look people defer to "convenient" or palatable arguments instead of addressing the real problem. Too many people making too many more people.

Did you just recommend a forced sterilisation campaign for German car drivers 😳

[Greg | ValetPro]

14 hours ago, C8RKH said:

But if you allow the human population to continue to breed at current rates then non of the above will make a difference. Everywhere you look people defer to "convenient" or palatable arguments instead of addressing the real problem. Too many people making too many more people.

It's a bit like saying we can fix the refugee's being overcrowded on the boat by giving them a bigger boat. Think about that for a minute and what would happen....

Agreed,  Population Growth is the biggest issue we have. Do you think there is a realistic way or reducing the population?  You would first need the world working together. How do you do that without a world crisis? 

[C8RKH]

First thing is we rescind all the Health & Safety laws and precautions across the world and let the stupid people do part of the job for us

Then everyone get's the chance to have a maximum of 2 kids (regardless of how many partners, marriages, etc they have!) - mandatory sterilisation after the confirmed second pregnancy for men (obviously the man would not be pregnant) and after the second birth for women - at least it will give us the chance to use up any extra COVID vaccines lying around 

If you've not had the kids at 40, then you get mandatory sterilised anyway.

One rule. For all. Regardless of wealth etc or where you are. If you break it, then you die via a humane injection.  Simples.  (yes, I know, but if you know the rules...............)

Added benefit would be a reduction in babies killed each year because of being the "wrong" sex - don't get me started on how anyone could ever do that....

I would also restrict households to one pet (i.e. dog, cat, horse/pony etc). These pets still need feeding etc and the resources used for that is huge.

Might not be popular I guess, but you either want to address the fundamental issue and cure the patient, or you just want to prolong the inevitable suffering.

I'm sure there are a lot of PC arguments for why my suggestions above are not palatable, but next time you watch the MSF, OXFAM, etc adverts with malnourished kids in distress, kids walking miles to collect water that animals have spent that morning washing and pissing in etc, then remember this is the future outcome for the majority of the population if we do not take action. They are suffering in a large part due to our exploitation of their resources, or our excessive consumption.

Sometimes, to save the patient you need to do drastic things do you not? 

[Barrykearley]

5 hours ago, C8RKH said:

Then everyone get's the chance to have a maximum of 2 kids (regardless of how many partners, marriages, etc they have!) - mandatory sterilisation after the confirmed second pregnancy for men (obviously the man would not be pregnant)

Ummm https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R79yYo2aOZs

[yeller77]

5 hours ago, C8RKH said:

I would also restrict households to one pet (i.e. dog, cat, horse/pony etc). These pets still need feeding etc and the resources used for that is huge.

Ok now you've gone too far, my dog Joey only produces prodigious amounts of gas when I've fed him too much bacon. Besides, tough times do take drastic measures. It's time to go after some of the most abusive CO2 producers on the planet: home brewers! The yeast is the real beast! Who's with me?!??

 

Thought not.

[Bibs]

So the planet is being led to destruction by CO2 and now we're not having turkey for Christmas as there's no CO2. 

I smell a rat. Just saying. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58615784

[Barrykearley]

They do indeed knock em unconscious with CO2 - not halal ones though - they just get slaughtered the barbaric way. 
 

The CO2 is just in the wrong place that’s all - a bit like the BBCs priorities.

[Kimbers]

On 20/09/2021 at 20:08, Barrykearley said:

The CO2 is just in the wrong place that’s all - a bit like the BBCs priorities.

But surely when they use it the gas dissipates into the atmosphere adding to the Co2?

[C8RKH]

1 minute ago, Kimbers said:

But surely when they use it the gas dissipates into the atmosphere adding to the Co2?

A global ban on all carbonated drinks would not be out of order. We don't actually need carbonated drinks.

Natural fermentation to create "bubbles", then fair enough.

[windymiller]

 

[windymiller]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/weather/topstories/south-pole-froze-over-in-coldest-winter-on-record/ar-AAPacmx?li=AAnZ9Ug

[LotusLeftLotusRight]

The neighbour’s cherry trees started flowering in January and the daffodils opposite are already starting to bloom on 2 February.

More general info here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60220661

 

[windymiller]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/are-electric-cars-the-new-diesel-scandal-waiting-to-happen/ar-AATxAda?li=AAnZ9Ug

[windymiller]

so with the new push from Nigel Farage on the net zero conundrum and the EU needing to find alternatives to russia on oil and gas will the green agenda now slip back does one think ?? 

[Bibs]

 Poland, we're looking at you! 

https://app.electricitymaps.com/map

[madmax]

Apparently the earth's atmosphere is made up of many things and yet the dreaded CO2 accounts for only 0.04 percent of what's out there.

Doesn't sound a lot to me and of course everything that's green, trees, fruit and veg thrive on what little there is. 

There is perhaps an argument to suggest that if it's reduced too much, our greenery will just die and then we're fooked another way.

Who knows, I mean, really knows?

[C8RKH]

That argument is already being played out @madmax with one view claiming that an uptake in co2 will help increase some agri food yields!

[drdoom]

I've recently seen a report which quantifies human sourced CO2 emissions over the past century in graphic trems and that was striking in its scope.

[ramjet]

I don't know why the climate change protesters are so worried at the moment?

If Putin keeps up his crap and things go nuclear, a bunch of different places would be stuffed within an hour, the whole planet could be stuffed in 12 months so it just won't matter with starvation getting everyone else after about 2 years, from the info that I can find.

Even if you have a fallout shelter, unless you are set up to last at least who knows how long underground. That info I can't find.

The idea of the atmosphere catching alight was posited in Oppenheimer. They were only talking about 1 nuclear bomb. If it all goes pear shaped, we are talking about thousands of bombs with most of those being larger than the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. I wonder what would happen then? How much air can be superheated without an atmospheric fire becoming a possibility?

I need a different hobby. This one is just sad.

[LotusLeftLotusRight]

When I was growing up during the height of the Cold War, I remember the owners of a posh house near Leicester racecourse having a large prefabricated fall-out shelter craned into a hole deep underneath their garden. It even made the local newspaper. Can you imagine the masses descending on that property if it was all going nuclear? I guess the house and its shelter are still there, so it would be quite a desirable property nowadays.

[Bibs]

[Kimbers]

You know what gets me about these "Experts" on Climate change is the way they twist figures and "knowledge" to suit their own agenda.

Listening to Radio 5 live today I actually rage quit and put radio 2 on because of a Climate activist/professor who.... well, you make up your own mind.

Radio Presenter - why is it that we haven't had any onshore wind farms built in the last 12 months

So called specialist - well that's the Govts fault for making the planning permission so difficult and not pushing the technology

Presenter - but isn't it because people don't want wind farms near their houses or spoiling areas of natural beauty? 

Specialist - Well actually in recent surveys 80% of all people said they support more power generation on wind and solar

Presenter - But thats not answering the question, 80% say they support it but not near their houses or protected areas.

Specialist - no your wrong 80% of all people support it.

Presenter then moved on. 

It was plainly obvious she was twisting the surveys to support her own agenda which was to cut planning permission rules allowing people to complain about having huge wind farms on land.

Why do we need them on land when only a tiny % of the offshore space has been used up?

I won't even go into her comment on "Everyone will buy an EV because the public support them 100%"

Presenter said "Aren't they too expensive to run and there's not enough infrastructure?"

Specialist - There are 52,000 charging points that's more than enough

ME screaming at the radio: THATS 52,000 charges an hour at maximum, and only if you are close to them! You need millions!

[C8RKH]

@kimbers this shows how deluded they are. 

 

[Frickin_idiot]

I suspect that a lot of the hysteria from academics regarding climate change is linked to the way in which research grants are allocated. I have no faith in the integrity of climate reports.