The Environment

Originally posted by Jon B
just seems a little shortsighted to say that the impact we have is not a major factor in the changing climate.

That is the majority view, and it is an increasing majority. As it happens, it is also my view. But there are other views. Anything by Pat Michaels will give a good presentation of the alternative view. His work has been criticised as CATO is funded by oil companies and the Bush admin (oil again in effect). However, to me this is a pretty weak criticism - after all, with the generally held views today where else would he get his funding, Greenpeace? He is a Dr, certainly an expert, and definitely worth a read (if only so you can demolish his arguments!)

Originally posted by Jon B


And sadly 51% coudn't give a toss (at the moment)

Rome wasn't destroyed in a day (actually it was, but let's not let the facts get in the way!). I bet 2 years ago it would have been 95% And the 51% may be right of course.

I think the 51% could actually give a toss, but then whats the point of making a bad smell in one room and using the air freshener in another.

My company has planted a tree for every client we have dealt with for the last 60 years, apparantly thats good for the environment, seems it was before Global Warming was ever discussed. Forgot to mention just after the ice age scare there was the Acid Rain scare, I am starting to think a lot of this is about saving power than using less power to save the planet. remember the "save it" campaigns, again before GW was ever discussed.

[HighFlyer]

Originally posted by Jon B

And sadly 51% coudn't give a toss (at the moment)

I wasnt going to get involved in this debate, but, this comment isnt entirely accurate.

51% (now 50%) voted "I will continue to fly whatever the environmental effect". Not blaming MarkJ here, but i think that statement is open to interpretation.

I have not voted in this poll, but if i did, that is probably what i would have picked. Why? Is it because i dont care about our planet? No, not at all. I think that what the human race is doing to itself and its home is appalling, and yes we are killing our planet, but, i dont think that flying is the chief cause of pollution (its not, it accounts for around 4% of al carbon emissions).

So, those who are voting that they'll keep flying aren't in the "I dont give a toss" pool, i think its more accurate to say that they, like me, do not think they should stop flying (and living and working) and start paying more taxes as a solution to the problem.

Thanks,
Sarah

Originally posted by easygoingeezer

Originally posted by Jon B
Phew that's OK then, I will sleep much better now that I know the majority of you think this is not an issue directly accountable to the human race and the way we live today. [:w]

If just one of the people who have commented so far were writing from a position of expertese in this field and not just whinging about taxation and the effects on their cash flow then it might have some basis for a constructive debate. Sadly that's not the case.

***disclaimer*** Not of course claimimg that I am an expert either

As for HIV / Aids, Well GJ is right. Until it starts impacting on the lives of middle / upper class society in the developed nations then treatment will remain underfunded.... A very sad reflection on the way we treat fellow human beings.

Jon B

When did this Guilt culture start.

Businesses make a profit ... bad businesses thats nasty
People prosper. Bad nasty people
People drive to work..Bad nasty people
People throw their rubbish away...bad nasty people
People go on holiday, bad nasty people.
People have central heating and actually use it..bad nasty people.

yada yada yada.

I am sick and tired of the constant Fear trip, Guilt trip scenario, which is generally foisted upon us by other people who have become comfortable in life and have nothing better to do than be sanctimonious.

A little simplistic but what the hey....

you could add
Businesses make a profit.... and do nothing to clear up after themselves Re Union Carbide.....bad nasty business

People prosper.... Oh only in developed nations whilst others starve and die.... hell yes bad nasty people

yada yada yada

Bill Hicks once quipped that the Human Race was 'Just a Virus with shoes'. Sadly he may just be right

Jon B

I agree with you totally. Your last post is simplistic.

The "Hockey-Stick" graph plots three curves:
Predicted temperature including volcanic and sunspot activity
Predicted temperature including volcanic and sunspot activity as well as human influences.
Actual temperature

The second and third are pretty close while the first gives a much lower prediction of temperature than we have today.

While I don't think we should blindly follow what the media and ploiticians say, I do feel pretty strongly about climate change and its effects. However, I do not think we should be making huge lifestyle changes, rather cutting down on wastage and really unnecessary emissions. As I've said before, I do not buy into the claims that aviation is going to be the death of us all.

VS.

Its not simplistic at all, its true, and whilst your other posts where valid discussions, that last one smacked as argument for argument sake and put down for put downs sake.

Without profit how can problems be rectified. The UK and its people are the most generous of all the western countries when it comes to
helping out the poorer people of this world and those that need help when disaster strikes. It was normal people just like us that made the £1 million donation the government made to the Tsunami victims look like chicken feed.

Isn't it a bit simplistic to say GW can be stopped/prevented via Tax as opposed to fuel that doesn't make CO2 emmisions?

Originally posted by easygoingeezer
Its not simplistic at all, its true, and whilst your other posts where valid discussions, that last one smacked as argument for argument sake and put down for put downs sake.

Without profit how can problems be rectified. The UK and its people are the most generous of all the western countries when it comes to
helping out the poorer people of this world and those that need help when disaster strikes. It was normal people just like us that made the £1 million donation the government made to the Tsunami victims look like chicken feed.

Not at all meant as a put down, but to claim that business makes a profit etc etc should not be looked at in more depth is only ignoring the fact that profit for profits sake is in fact something to be guilty about, especially when it sometimes has devastating impacts upon fellow human beings - again I use Union Carbide as an example

Jon B

Originally posted by Jon B
profit for profits sake is in fact something to be guilty about,

Don't see why that should necessarily be the case. But it has nothing to do with the environment, so suggest we don't go into the social economics of capitalism here.

Originally posted by Bean Counter

Originally posted by Jon B
profit for profits sake is in fact something to be guilty about,

Don't see why that should necessarily be the case. But it has nothing to do with the environment, so suggest we don't go into the social economics of capitalism here.

True I was unaware that the Capitalism/socialism thing was goin on here or was creeping in.

My comments not simplistic at all were more aimed at ordinary working people, sucessful people and small businesses being constantly made to feel guilty and afraid of something that must be taxed either on a national or local level or a fine attached. Big business it seems are largly exempt from the debate as usually the extra taxes and or fines are passed on to everyone else.

[Decker]

I suspect crossed threads EGG - no one is suggesting you are simplistic.

Ppersonnally I think GW is just a natural cycle of the Earth's life although I am sure we could all do more to recycle and reduce waste.
Hydrogen power has got to be the way forward but too many people are making money from Fossil fuels and the Goverments are raking in billions from taxes.
Anyone else for the bandwagon[ii]

Iain

[Decker]

Light clicks on in head.... GW = Global Warming NOT President Bush!

That's right. TC Jnr is for President Bush. Although part of one of easygoinggeezer's messages reads really well if you were to think GW stands for TC Jnr:

"Isn't it a bit simplistic to say GW can be stopped/prevented via Tax" (quoting easygoinggeexer)

[Darren Wheeler]

Using taxation to stop travelling by air will never work for the usual reason. Those who can afford to travel will continue and those who just fly for say, 2 weeks in Florida with the kids visiting Mickey etc. won't.

If flying is made just too expensive to use, what next?

Ban transatlantic liners? OK, who wants to go back to the "Golden Age" of travel when Liverpool to New York took a week, icebergs permitting?
Ban trains? You remove Diesel-Electric but electric-only still have a carbon footprint
Ban cars? Bring back the horse and coach/cart. It takes 5 days to do London-Bristol.

Any new fuel will take years and billions of £/$'s to develop to the point it can provide energy powerful enough to move a 747 sized aircraft 5000 mile to NYC. Who will pay?


Had a long day in the office so off to take my tablets and lie down in a darkened room

The taxes are made to indirectly stop global warming by causing people to stop spending so much money on the materials and the services that contribute to GW. So while I agree it can be seen as a bit off, you have to realize that the government simply saying "stop doing this, or stop using that" wouldn't be as effective.

I also was thinking about the original poll, and realized that technically it's better to continue flying, because empty planes are more harmful than full planes when you talk about emissions per person. It isn't until governments regulate processes that are harmful that emissions can be fought.