Sg_plumber asked: How come pretty much everybody (at least on TV) always forgets to mention that yes, the climate crisis is fuelling these extreme weather events?
Jonathan Watts: I agree. This is not just exasperating, it is frightening. The climate and nature crises are the greatest threats humanity has faced, yet many media organisations downplay or ignore it. Social media is even worse, propagating misinformation and distracting people from the root cause of the problem (petrochemical companies, big agriculture and every rising emissions of greenhouse gases). The Guardian is able to devote much of its resources to covering these topics because it does not have an owner and because our readers make very clear that they want a big share of their contributions to go to this topic.
So the self-selecting staff are in – as happens with groupthink – an ever faster purity spiral.
Cutting fossil fuel pollution is indeed a fundamental solution, and it must be accompanied by a never-ending list of other adaptation measures. I would argue our coverage is pretty good at including both bits. Every article I’ve written on wildfires this summer has included rising temperatures and land abandonment.
But land abandonment is not driven by fossil fuel companies, is it?
Gold-Loan3142 asked: How do we challenge the mainstream ‘“perpetual growth” economics that infuses almost all discussion of the economy?
Jonathan: You have touched on one of the core issues. The obsession with endless GDP growth on a finite planet can only end in tears. The only question is when. There have been numerous academic challenges to this and alternatives, such as Kate Raworth’s Doughnut Economics and Bill McKibben’s Economics as if the World Mattered. There are also some very interesting studies and books on degrowth by the likes of Jason Hickell and many others.
Signing up to every fucking nutter out there isn;t going to help either.
If I can stray outside my journalist role, I have long believed that what the world needs is not just economic degrowth but ecological regrowth. We need a system of trade, currency, taxation, incentives that rewards countries and companies for restoring the world’s battered ecosystems.
And now you’re arguing to add more value – more economic growth, by definition.
The key is to do this while never letting the petro-companies off the hook. They have tried in the past to convince people that the responsibility for the climate crisis lies with individual consumers. That was why they pushed the idea of carbon calculators. But the real blame lies with them. Most of the big oil companies are expanding production and making record profits.
Those bastard oil companies, eh?
The real concern is that these fools consider themselves the adults in the room. Rather than the kiddies fooled by a charlatan like Hickel.
“…because our readers make very clear that they want a big share of their contributions to go to this topic”
And they all wear hair shirts, are vegan and cycle everywhere?
No hair shirts, all their clothing is
plasticvegan, darling. They probably are vegan, subsisting on avocados flown in from South America. And they probably do cycle everywhere. Or use public transport (taxis — pace Ken Livingston — and scheduled flights are both public transport).But they care and that’s what matters.
And they alone can see…”the root cause of the problem (petrochemical companies, big agriculture and every rising emissions of greenhouse gases).”
Leftoids love their root causes.
The bastards won’t even let us enjoy a nice sunny summer in peace.
Can you be vegan without petrochemicals?
With difficulty!
It is debatable whether using pigshit as a fertiliser is permissible but compost must be allowable; everything has to be carried to your field/allotment by hand as bicycles use lubricating oil and normal tyres for bicycles or wheelbarrows involve petrochemicals.
No-one ever tells us whether the vitamin and mineral supplements needed by vegetarians (and even more by vegans) use petrochemicals …
Are vegans allowed to wear leather shoes/sandals or must they wear wooden clogs?
They should look at pre-Columbian America, sub-Saharan Africa, a huge chunk of the world, really, to see what its like to live without the wheel and axle.
I presume you mean Pre-Columbian America *and* sub-Saharan Africa not post-Columbian sub-Saharan Africa
Vegans aren’t permitted to wear or use any leather. Hence car seats covered in ‘vegan leather’, or ‘plastic’ as we used to call it.
ICI, BASF, Norsk Hydro and Monsanto saved billions from stasrvation
That’s the problem.
Entirely independently from the demand from consumers of course.
Marvellous. A global set-aside policy.
And a highly grift-prone one too. Any policy that reserves a market from competition creates funds to be captured.
The problem started when they stopped locking lunatics up and let them walk freely amongst us fueled by a cocktail of psychoactive drugs. They even have online support groups like that chaired by Watts the Fucks.
Mechanized agriculture and the synthetic fertilizers needed to make it work allow this planet to support 8 billion people. Without them it drops to about 1.6 billion. Pretty much all of that mechanization runs on diesel fuel, so until you address that you are talking about killing off 6.4 billion people. That’s the crisis. They/we won’t go quietly.
Maybe they’ll develop some sort of virus.
Yeah, but evidently they can’t even do that properly. It’s Fauci’s greatest failure.
These cunts want the population back to 1.6 billion. which includes them, natch. And the people who make the things they want. Every else can FOAD.
They know this. And they know it will affect the ‘BiPOC’ parts of the world most – the most racist people you know are the ones that vociferously ‘fight’ racism. And its always in ways the inevitably make things worse for the people they are ‘helping’.
And as Thomas Sowell points out, quite a few of the people they’re “helping” know this, and wish the liberal whiteys would just fuck off and leave them alone rather than grinding them into the dirt with their virtue.
But then, if you’re a white knight on a white charger you can’t do much to boast about (or grift on) if there’s no-one to save, can you?
Narcissistic cunts.
I thought the IPCC dropped the most catastrophic prediction, RCP8.5, because it was implausible.
That’s evidence, dear boy. These cunts don’t do evidence. They’re trying to out-scream the IPCC.
In my previously mentioned fantasy where I get to ask the questions, I would ask those people what the world they envisage will be like. It’s always about what is wicked and has to go rather than what will replace it. Once every pissant single-issue nutcase has its way, what is left? Could they even agree on what biscuits to order for the meetings?
Gluten and nut-free, natch. Also no sugar, or artificial sweeteners, and definitely no butter or eggs. No chocolate. So just a little pile of flour, then.
Cornflour… (gluten free). 🙂
Is mais grown in Northern Europe actually used for mais flour? I’ve an idea it isn’t. We use a lot of it but none of it is European. It may not suitable for grinding for flour.
The EU chose to subsidise oil made from European maize because Canola was cheaper.
Hardly the the answer to the question. The field opposite my place in Flanders had a mais crop on it. I snagged some when it looked right to try on the cob. Well sort of. But it really wasn’t corn on the cob, flavour or consistancy. There are a lot of cultivars of mais. What’s used for tacos is a particular one, for instance. I believe that one needs Mexico, Colombia, VZ etc
Most European maize is either oil or cattle feed.
If you paused to think …
I am not an expert on “cornflour” (maize flour) but I frequently encounter fields of maize when out on a walk.
EU subsidises oil from EU-grown maize (I think this predates Greece’s accession to the EU) so varieties of maize that optimise oil-production will be selected in preference to those optimising the production of “cornflour”.
Over here, corn used for food is nixtalized. If you rely on it for a large part of your diet and you don’t do that you get nutritional deficiencies (pellegra). And its the process that changes the masa to allow it to form a dough.
All vegetarians get nutritional deficiencies – that is why all “Health Food” shops have racks of vitamin and mineral supplements.
[I occasionally go into one because the Crank’s recipe for Carob Cake is worth the brief traumatisation]
“The obsession with endless GDP growth on a finite planet can only end in tears.”. Mmm OK. So given that growth will kill the planet and we have finite resources that means a cull of certain folk. That is always the end result for the left.
My objection is that they want to cull us, not them!!
I’m always comforted by the fact that the people who cry about me killing the planet are the same people who tell me that Fred the plumber can grow a cervix just to show he’s really a girlie. Then I know their understanding of “the science”…
I asked Grok this: Given how many modern products, including medical products are derived from fossil fuels, how many would die in one month if all fossil fuel products were banned?
His / her / its’ answer:
“No precise number exists—this is an extreme hypothetical with no controlled experiments—but a sudden, total ban on all fossil fuel products (oil, gas, coal, and everything derived from them) would cause catastrophic disruption and very large numbers of deaths within a month, likely in the tens to hundreds of millions globally, scaling toward billions over longer periods if sustained.
Oh yes, we really need to stop using fossil fuels don’t we……..
I asked Grok this: Given how many modern products, including medical products are derived from fossil fuels, how many would die in one month if all fossil fuel products were banned?
The answer:
“No precise number exists—this is an extreme hypothetical with no controlled experiments—but a sudden, total ban on all fossil fuel products (oil, gas, coal, and everything derived from them) would cause catastrophic disruption and very large numbers of deaths within a month, likely in the tens to hundreds of millions globally, scaling toward billions over longer periods if sustained.
Oh yes, we really need to stop using fossil fuels don’t we……..
I asked Grok this: Given how many modern products, including medical products are derived from fossil fuels, how many would die in one month if all fossil fuel products were banned?
I asked Grok ‘Given how many modern products, including medical products are derived from fossil fuels, how many would die in one month if all fossil fuel products were banned’?
The answer:
“No precise number exists—this is an extreme hypothetical with no controlled experiments—but a sudden, total ban on all fossil fuel products (oil, gas, coal, and everything derived from them) would cause catastrophic disruption and very large numbers of deaths within a month, likely in the tens to hundreds of millions globally, scaling toward billions over longer periods if sustained.
Oh yes, we really need to stop using fossil fuels don’t we……..
I asked Grok how many would die in a month if all fossil fuels were banned.
The answer:
“No precise number exists—this is an extreme hypothetical with no controlled experiments—but a sudden, total ban on all fossil fuel products (oil, gas, coal, and everything derived from them) would cause catastrophic disruption and very large numbers of deaths within a month, likely in the tens to hundreds of millions globally, scaling toward billions over longer periods if sustained.
Oh yes, we really need to stop using fossil fuels don’t we……..
Can’t we lock them up for their own protection?
Too costly. There are cheaper solutions, which Islamists know and will apply when the time is right.
I asked Grok what would happen in a month if all fossil fuels were banned.
The answer:
“No precise number exists—this is an extreme hypothetical with no controlled experiments—but a sudden, total ban on all fossil fuel products (oil, gas, coal, and everything derived from them) would cause catastrophic disruption and very large numbers of deaths within a month, likely in the tens to hundreds of millions globally, scaling toward billions over longer periods if sustained.
Oh yes, we really need to stop using fossil fuels don’t we……..
“Comment is unacceptable” is coming up when I try to post, so i’ll do it in a couple of hits.
1.I asked Grok what would happen in a month if all fossil fuels were banned.
“it does not have an owner”
Well, except The Scott Trust LTD.
Oh dear, you’ve just triggered Jim 😉
One wonders how being owned by a trust can be construed into not having an owner. Perhaps he meant a single owner.
So it is run by a committee. That’s a big fooking help.
“When everyone is responsible, no one is responsible.”
Look at their pictures. Two utter cunts. It’s all you need to know, really.
It seems that the Earth gets 20-30,000 tons of cosmic material every year. So it’s not finite. Crisis averted, communism not required.
Forgets?
People who put content on TV know that they are dependent on an audience. Yapping about ‘climate crisis’ is a direct path to losing said audience. They can’t afford decadence.
“One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.” George Orwell
Guardian is distilling its audience down to intelligentsia. They risk curing Gell-Mann Amnesia.
OT, but while we’re discussing these fools, this excellent piece by Gareth Roberts on the fantasist “Professor” Jason Arday contains this immortal line:
It has served up a moment of unavoidable clarity in which the nonsense of progressivism stands exposed like the imperial scrotum.
My take on it from a couple of days ago and the more I learn the more I’m convinced about it
It would appear you can be appointed to a Cambridge chair with significantly less scrutiny than Tesco would apply to the appointment of a shelf-stacker.
Because they *want to believe* and are less willing to check than Fox.
Test
Tried posting this but I keep getting invalid this and that error messages.
I asked AI how many would die in a month of fossil fuels being banned.
The answer:
No precise number exists—this is an extreme hypothetical with no controlled experiments—but a sudden, total ban on all fossil fuel products (oil, gas, coal, and everything derived from them) would cause catastrophic disruption and very large numbers of deaths within a month, likely in the tens to hundreds of millions globally, scaling toward billions over longer periods if sustained.
Yup. That’s the plan. But you’ll notice that fools like the two gargoyles pictured won’t have prepped for it, or have the skills to survive, or even be in a place where one might.
They have about as much foresight as people who cover themselves in tattoos.
It’s way worse as it rules out mechanized agriculture, heavy road transport and marine transportation. Little food and what there is can’t be transported in bulk.
Subsistence farmers would be fine apart from the starving hordes leaving the cities and eating their livestock and seed crop which means they starve the next year.
With no fossil fuel, mining and ore transport is gone too so the way out is very very hard as you can’t build the electric tractors you need. And 80% of electricity generation is gone so even if you do go electric charging is a problem.
Mere details, dear boy, when you have a planet to save.
If ‘they’ are going to do this, I’d say we should adopt Deployable Energy’s Unity™ microreactor immediately.
“Climate” is the expression given to a retrospective averaging of weather data over very long periods – thousands of years. There is no single “climate” for the whole planet except in general terms, ice-age, tropical age, inter-glacial period. Earth has multiple, diverse climate zones and sub-zones, which do not all change in unison.
Since any change in “climate” is caused by long-term change in weather behaviour, it cannot be the cause of any change in weather, or it would be the cause of its own change.
Since “climate” and any change can only be noted in retrospect from recorded data, and since “climate” is not a tangible phenomenon, it cannot be observed or any change observed in real time.
“Climate” is the expression given to a retrospective averaging of weather data over very long periods – thousands of years.
Minor nits:
“Averaging” is not the only statistical tool.
Modern climate evaluations are generally based on 30 years data.
I have been unable to find any climate zone that has changed in a century. When we get the teleological assertions of caused by climate change, rational discussion should end with one question: Name one.
Next year may well bring an unpleasantly cool summer. If it does no doubt the media will be quick to tell us that it is merely weather and not to be confused with climate . Alternatively if it gets really cold they could go for climate change bringing us uncommonly cold spells too,
We already have that. Its called a ‘free market’. The problem for these people is that you have to be *really, really, really, rich* before you start caring about those things. Once you do then the normal market mechanism will get you there.
But the problem isn’t that there is no mechanism – the problem is, as it usually is, humans are humans and want what humans want, not what a small group of ‘elite’ think they should want.
These people think they are capable of running the world. But examples like this show they’re so stupid they don’t even know they’re too stupid to be able to run the world.
While you swelter in the heat,I am being very careful not to slip on the ice whilst walking the dog.We have just experienced an icy blast straight from Antarctica and temperatures have been well below freezing. In about 6 months time the process will be reversed and the heat pump will be going to give me cool air and you will be turning up the heating .I must be old fashioned I just call it weather.
The Guardian is owned by the Scott Trust. Which has a board. New directors are selected by the existing ones.
Yeah, it has an owner. Which is rather more incestuous than other papers.
It’s not a business; it’s a hobby.