O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[Magpies1959]

UTM, I am not sure how you can know how concerned GB News are with the Royal Family, if you are not sure if they do have opposing views to the BBC etc.

[upthemaggies]

I smell projection. Or did the Chinese make you say it?

You're projecting "several thousand years" into the future and worrying about seeing the utopia you've been promised being cancelled by bad weather. Why not bang one out over your imaginary all-inclusive, diverse and fully vaccinated rainbow civilisation of 9023AD erecting a giant statue honouring your great sacrifice to make their lives possible whilst you're at it.

[upthemaggies]

UTM, I am not sure how you can know how concerned GB News are with the Royal Family, if you are not sure if they do have opposing views to the BBC etc.

I'm going by the website, I have them all bookmarked including the BBC and Guardian. Every time I look at GB News website, which is not every day admittedly, they seem to have something to do with Prince Harry at or near the top of the page. I did hear somebody say the other day though that whenever they put a video up about the royal family, the views go through the roof, so can't really blame them for giving people what they want. The complete opposite of the BBC who are now haemorrhaging viewers and listeners for trying to force feed the nation with its' BS.

[Mapperleypie]

Which eminent scientists, who have any sort of qualifications on the matter, think that global warming is in some way not contributed to with the burning of fossil fuels?

Please list them.

[Mapperleypie]

To BFP and Mapperley Pie, I personally don't know any 'Corbynistas' or 'Corbyn Lads', whatever they are. Apart from 'Boris' or Trump supporters, I don't know anyone dumb enough to tie their beliefs to any one particular person.

But with labelling like that, of socialists I guess, keep a look out for openings at GB News, or have a think about not making divisive slurs like that, if that direction doesn't appeal.

The socialist element of the Labour party are massively important & absolutely crucial to the movment as a whole.

If you have not noticed the people that are so tied to Corbyn that they are unhappy with the Labour party having a massive lead in the polls I suggest that you look harder. The Labour party are a broad church but there is certainly an element that are so tied to Corbyn in the same way that the Tories are tied to Johnson and can't see past that.

My personal view is that Corbyn was right in so many things but was wholly unelectable (twice). I want the Labour party to win power so we can help everyone in society and not just the few. This may mean that the party appeal to some centrist ideas for a while to win an election and do just that.

Something has to give and Labour cannot be seen as a left-wing protest vote. The Tories have lurched so far to the right that Labour need to hold a centre-left ground before the election to appeal to floating voters. After this if I do not see a decent shift I will be massively critical of Starmer et al. At the present moment in time the Tories need removing, they are not working on behalf of anyone but themselves and their rich donors.

[upthemaggies]

Which eminent scientists, who have any sort of qualifications on the matter, think that global warming is in some way not contributed to with the burning of fossil fuels?

"Some way" and "contributed" are very vague terms which aren't the real issue anyway. We are where we're at. Will doing anything about it make a difference? Will it make things worse? What are the trade offs and would it be worth it? How many people does it save, you could drive millions into greater poverty and death by taking climate action, why does your kids inheriting the Earth matter more than theirs does? When we talk about the environment we're talking about the entire planet, it's relationship with the sun, the solar system and the whole damned show. You're making a grand doomsday prediction about an extremely complex system when we can't even predict the weather accurately beyond 5 days.

[Jampie]

Will doing anything about it make a difference?

Yes

Will it make things worse?

No

What are the trade offs and would it be worth it?

The tradeoffs are we have to stop using fossil fuels. Most people will end up better off because natural energy sources are cheaper, electric cars are cheaper to run etc etc.

Some corporations will make less profit.

Yes it's worth it.

How many people does it save, you could drive millions into greater poverty and death by taking climate action, why does your kids inheriting the Earth matter more than theirs does?

Millions are being lifted from poverty every year, moving off fossil fuels will ensure this continues indefinitely. Or until we run out of people in poverty.

So your question is a false dichotomy.


Failing to do so risks catastrophic climate change that could lead to the entire human race returning to poverty. The survivors anyhow.

When we talk about the environment we're talking about the entire planet, it's relationship with the sun, the solar system and the whole damned show. You're making a grand doomsday prediction about an extremely complex system when we can't even predict the weather accurately beyond 5 days.

He isn't making a prediction, scientists have.

Climate is literally weather over time, and while predicting whether it will rain in Nottingham next Thursday is very difficult because that's one datapoint and could easily vary, predicting that the average temperature globally is going up by another degree in the next couple of decades is quite achievable and has been done. It's a matter of modelling the energy in vs. energy out of the system. In the last 50 years scientists have gotten quite good with these models.

[upthemaggies]

Yes




No



The tradeoffs are we have to stop using fossil fuels. Most people will end up better off because natural energy sources are cheaper, electric cars are cheaper to run etc etc.

Some corporations will make less profit.

Yes it's worth it.



Millions are being lifted from poverty every year, moving off fossil fuels will ensure this continues indefinitely. Or until we run out of people in poverty.

So your question is a false dichotomy.


Failing to do so risks catastrophic climate change that could lead to the entire human race returning to poverty. The survivors anyhow.




He isn't making a prediction, scientists have.

Climate is literally weather over time, and while predicting whether it will rain in Nottingham next Thursday is very difficult because that's one datapoint and could easily vary, predicting that the average temperature globally is going up by another degree in the next couple of decades is quite achievable and has been done. It's a matter of modelling the energy in vs. energy out of the system. In the last 50 years scientists have gotten quite good with these models.

As usual you're speaking with absolute certainty of a chaotic universe, as anybody indoctrinated by a cult will do. You have faith in "the science" and you will support more and more government interference and control of people's lives in order to achieve your insane objective, the subjugation of nature, the environment, human genes, you name it. This is fascism on stilts.

[the_anticlough]

The socialist element of the Labour party are massively important & absolutely crucial to the movment as a whole.

If you have not noticed the people that are so tied to Corbyn that they are unhappy with the Labour party having a massive lead in the polls I suggest that you look harder. The Labour party are a broad church but there is certainly an element that are so tied to Corbyn in the same way that the Tories are tied to Johnson and can't see past that.

My personal view is that Corbyn was right in so many things but was wholly unelectable (twice). I want the Labour party to win power so we can help everyone in society and not just the few. This may mean that the party appeal to some centrist ideas for a while to win an election and do just that.

Something has to give and Labour cannot be seen as a left-wing protest vote. The Tories have lurched so far to the right that Labour need to hold a centre-left ground before the election to appeal to floating voters. After this if I do not see a decent shift I will be massively critical of Starmer et al. At the present moment in time the Tories need removing, they are not working on behalf of anyone but themselves and their rich donors.

Good post. It's a strange situation though when imagining or anticipating being 'massively critical' at a certain point in the future.
I wonder if this is just one hypothetical or more of a gut feeling or considered projection.

Apart from all of that, we can be sure that the Tories will be removed - they even want themselves removed!
All they're set up to do is scheme and plunder, they couldn't actually govern to save their lives. Even they realise this all gets a bit too conspicuous after 15 years. It's like a compulsive criminal of some kind handing themselves in to the police for their own good. But they will fully expect to be back in situ before the decade's out. And history suggests that's likely to happen.

[PedroTheFisherman66]

Providing energy is more or less a monopoly! Dont be fooled that you will get cheaper energy. Once everything is in place for renewables dont think for one minute it will remain a cheaper option. The costs will spike to cover inflated dividends for its shareholders and off course R & D costs. I'm sure their will be a few more very valid reasons spouted out by the providers like the wind is very gusty or that the waves are breakers...!