The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[Otis]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

A solution that results in a halting of increase of global carbon emissions that will result in a global temperature increase of less than 2 degrees C compared with the 1850 baseline. I would prefer 1.5 but I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed.

 

To be honest, the agreements made at the previous COP meetings should be enough to attain this, it's that countries simply aren't sticking to the timeline.

So why the big fuss the Rishi isn't attending. Surely a delegate from our country could attend and confirm our previous commitment. Or even better over a Teams meeting to save on private jets etc.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Otis said:

So why the big fuss the Rishi isn't attending. Surely a delegate from our country could attend and confirm our previous commitment. Or even better over a Teams meeting to save on private jets etc.

....because of the second half of that sentence.

 

The current commitments aren't being adhered to and to rectify this, unfortunately appearances matter.

 

Believe me, I wish there was less talking and more doing.

 

NB. How did we gish gallop from the necessity of the agreements themselves to Sunak being present at them again - is the necessity of the agreement no longer in question, then? I thought your angle was that we don't need to address climate change because "there are bigger problems and anyway none of the bigger players are doing anything".

[Otis]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

....because of the second half of that sentence.

 

The current commitments aren't being adhered to and to rectify this, unfortunately appearances matter.

 

Believe me, I wish there was less talking and more doing.

 

NB. How did we gish gallop from the necessity of the agreements themselves to Sunak being present at them again - is the necessity of the agreement no longer in question, then? I thought your angle was that we don't need to address climate change because "there are bigger problems and anyway none of the bigger players are doing anything".

We do need to do something but not to the point where the population is considerably poorer. I don't think the people will accept that at this time because as stated most people have bigger personal economic problems. 

Accepted there needs to be a balance. 

I don't understand the screaming that Rishi must go. He really doesn't. 

I would really like to see all attendees travel by public transport, as the circus shown in recent years doesn't really show that anyone takes it seriously. 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Otis said:

We do need to do something but not to the point where the population is considerably poorer. I don't think the people will accept that at this time because as stated most people have bigger personal economic problems. 

Accepted there needs to be a balance. 

I don't understand the screaming that Rishi must go. He really doesn't. 

I would really like to see all attendees travel by public transport, as the circus shown in recent years doesn't really show that anyone takes it seriously. 

Of course there has to be a balance, but the fact is either the world pays now or it pays a great deal more later. That really should be the leading economic argument here.

 

I would certainly agree that it would be better if more were done without all the pomp and circumstance required.

[foxes1988]

It doesn't bother me too much if he goes or not. Hopefully he attends it all purely via video links.  Hopefully him not going isn't used or seen as a sign we aren't taking it seriously or that it doesn't embolden climate change skeptics.

 

Plenty see paying for hotels for asylum seekers as some massive issue but then say that climate change isn't a big issue in the grand scheme of things presently. When this is the biggest issue since ww2 or maybe much longer ago then that

[Mike Oxlong]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

....could you unpack this one for me a bit, please?

 

 

 

 

I’d read that the conference is being held in Sharm el Sheikh. If they fly someone will criticise them for doing so. 

A flippant comment as I’m not suggesting they shouldn’t go. 

[RobHawk]

I've said it before and I've said it again, Cameron had the chance to back renewable energy with the Severn barrage and Swansea tidal lagoon. Both required investment but would have been a huge step to our country being self reliant in regards to our energy needs and in a green and renewable manner. 

 

Instead he scraped those plans, refused the funding and concentrated on HS2 so that people can get to London 30minutes quicker. 

 

It was a stupid decision back then, with hindsight just a few years later, it ranks along side allowing the referendum as stupid decisions his government made. 

 

I remember saying at the time that he was probably the worst prime minister ever and the history books would not be kind to him. I stand by this statement but little did I know Johnson and truss would end up making him look semi competent. 

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, foxes1988 said:

It doesn't bother me too much if he goes or not. Hopefully he attends it all purely via video links.  Hopefully him not going isn't used or seen as a sign we aren't taking it seriously or that it doesn't embolden climate change skeptics.

 

Plenty see paying for hotels for asylum seekers as some massive issue but then say that climate change isn't a big issue in the grand scheme of things presently. When this is the biggest issue since ww2 or maybe much longer ago then that

In terms of world changing events and percentage of people in the world directly affected, it is at least as big as WWII and has the potential to be as big at the Toba Catastrophe 70000 years ago or perhaps the beginning of the last interglacial period 10000 years ago - the last time humanity suffered an event that made the world as inhospitable as what we're seeing now might. In terms of potential present events that have anything above a vague possibility of occuring, only a global nuclear war comes close.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Mike Oxlong said:

I’d read that the conference is being held in Sharm el Sheikh. If they fly someone will criticise them for doing so. 

A flippant comment as I’m not suggesting they shouldn’t go. 

Ah, I see, thank you!

 

2 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

I've said it before and I've said it again, Cameron had the chance to back renewable energy with the Severn barrage and Swansea tidal lagoon. Both required investment but would have been a huge step to our country being self reliant in regards to our energy needs and in a green and renewable manner. 

 

Instead he scraped those plans, refused the funding and concentrated on HS2 so that people can get to London 30minutes quicker. 

 

It was a stupid decision back then, with hindsight just a few years later, it ranks along side allowing the referendum as stupid decisions his government made. 

 

I remember saying at the time that he was probably the worst prime minister ever and the history books would not be kind to him. I stand by this statement but little did I know Johnson and truss would end up making him look semi competent. 

Cameron made several decisions that if viewed with any foresight at all were utterly terrible.

[Claridge]

Only way to stop it is to let it happen, world is massively over-populated, but the idea that countries are going to make radical decisions to stop it is sixth form politics i'm afraid

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Claridge said:

Only way to stop it is to let it happen, world is massively over-populated, but the idea that countries are going to make radical decisions to stop it is sixth form politics i'm afraid

Spoken like someone who knows (or thinks) they won't be in the firing line when the time comes and so that the deaths of other people in other places don't matter.

 

Treating the death and suffering of tens of millions (at best) people as a foregone conclusion is barbarous. If that's "grown up" politics as opposed to "sixth form" politics, then everyone who advocates for it deserves the same fate as those they believe make the world "over-populated".

[grobyfox1990]

20 minutes ago, Claridge said:

Only way to stop it is to let it happen, world is massively over-populated, but the idea that countries are going to make radical decisions to stop it is sixth form politics i'm afraid

You may be joking but I recall hearing of a scenario analysis whereby we scrap this dump of a planet and set up shop elsewhere. Obvs only the useful (rich) people of the world will be allowed in. We are clearly overpopulated, not helped by nations like ours consuming far more than we need to

 

Imo sunak should absolutely be at COP 27. I get it’s the statement on 17/11 and that is a huge fiscal event. But C27 will be geared towards development finance, if we’re not at the table and serious we could leave a lot of opportunity for British companies behind 

[Claridge]

31 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Spoken like someone who knows (or thinks) they won't be in the firing line when the time comes and so that the deaths of other people in other places don't matter.

 

Treating the death and suffering of tens of millions (at best) people as a foregone conclusion is barbarous. If that's "grown up" politics as opposed to "sixth form" politics, then everyone who advocates for it deserves the same fate as those they believe make the world "over-populated".

I don't advocate it, I wish they would do something, but I don't think there is any chance they will. The arguments sound great when talking about them, but they just won't happen

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Claridge said:

I don't advocate it, I wish they would do something, but I don't think there is any chance they will. The arguments sound great when talking about them, but they just won't happen

Fair enough, I was hoping it might be apathy rather than what is tantamount to straight-up sociopathy.

 

I can certainly understand the lack of faith given current track record, but at the same time I'm not going to treat that dreadful outcome as a certainty until there's absolutely no chance it would be otherwise. Preventing that future is worth fighting for.

[Dahnsouff]

3 hours ago, Otis said:

So why the big fuss the Rishi isn't attending. Surely a delegate from our country could attend and confirm our previous commitment. Or even better over a Teams meeting to save on private jets etc.

Because the most important thing is to keep this in the headlights, to stop this issue disappearing beneath the sheer weight of ‘local’ issues, and you do that not with civil servants doing their job (which ultimately should be what does solve it) because at this point we don’t have this cast iron direction, so we still need all the symbols, all the iconic statements, the spin, we can make. Having the PM amongst every other world leader we can garner helps this. 

[Fazzer 7]

3 hours ago, Otis said:

We do need to do something but not to the point where the population is considerably poorer. I don't think the people will accept that at this time because as stated most people have bigger personal economic problems. 

Accepted there needs to be a balance. 

I don't understand the screaming that Rishi must go. He really doesn't. 

I would really like to see all attendees travel by public transport, as the circus shown in recent years doesn't really show that anyone takes it seriously. 

Spot on. Will there be a Chinese delegation there. Oh wait, they’re locked down again in many cities. 

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, grobyfox1990 said:

You may be joking but I recall hearing of a scenario analysis whereby we scrap this dump of a planet and set up shop elsewhere. Obvs only the useful (rich) people of the world will be allowed in. We are clearly overpopulated, not helped by nations like ours consuming far more than we need to

 

Imo sunak should absolutely be at COP 27. I get it’s the statement on 17/11 and that is a huge fiscal event. But C27 will be geared towards development finance, if we’re not at the table and serious we could leave a lot of opportunity for British companies behind 

Exactly. Can’t believe how short sighted the view not to be on board with it is - this is the next development area of the world - directly affecting British businesses 

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Spot on. Will there be a Chinese delegation there. Oh wait, they’re locked down again in many cities. 

  "China supports Egypt in hosting a successful COP27. We look forward to working with all parties to build COP27 into a conference in the theme of 'implementation' and the highlights of adaptation and funding, which are of the greatest concern to developing countries," Li Gao, general director of the Department of Climate Change with the Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE) of China, said at a Thursday press conference."

 

So, yes.

 

As an aside, how many times must it be said on here that even if the Chinese were doing nothing (which they're not), engaging them in a mutual race to the bottom end isn't really a good idea? This is hardly rocket science, or even thermodynamics, it's simple causality. Warming up the same debunked arguments isn't going to make them any more palatable.

[Legend_in_blue]

 

Well worth a listen.  

[Parafox]

4 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Spot on. Will there be a Chinese delegation there. Oh wait, they’re locked down again in many cities. 

Without transposing this to another thread or derailing this one, a thought occurred to me. Are these lockdowns really necessary or is it a form state control?

[WigstonWanderer]

9 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Without transposing this to another thread or derailing this one, a thought occurred to me. Are these lockdowns really necessary or is it a form state control?

I assume that they don’t have any confidence in their vaccine

[Fazzer 7]

9 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Without transposing this to another thread or derailing this one, a thought occurred to me. Are these lockdowns really necessary or is it a form state control?

Obviously the latter in China’s case. 

[Parafox]

7 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Obviously the latter in China’s case. 

I was referring directly to China. 

 

9 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I assume that they don’t have any confidence in their vaccine

What leads you to assume that?

[WigstonWanderer]

8 minutes ago, Parafox said:

I was referring directly to China. 

 

What leads you to assume that?

These constant lockdowns can’t be good for the Chinese economy. If their vaccine was as effective as the western ones have been, they could surely open up. They have no chance of keeping it out entirely, so lockdowns will go on indefinitely.

[Parafox]

4 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

These constant lockdowns can’t be good for the Chinese economy. If their vaccine was as effective as the western ones have been, they could surely open up. They have no chance of keeping it out entirely, so lockdowns will go on indefinitely.

So, China doesn't have the same vaccines as the West? Didn't know that.

[Soup]

Just now, Parafox said:

So, China doesn't have the same vaccines as the West? Didn't know that.

There are literally tens of millions of Pfizer vaccines going begging across Europe, India and the US. Maybe there's a deal to be done before they go in to landfill.