Normal Island

[mudsticks]

[ I suspect the pedantry has started - which is your role in matters legal, do please carry on! ]

So to be clear - has "worthiness of cause" never influenced the outcome of a UK court case?

Plenty of times that 'worthiness of cause' has affected outcome yes.

This is just one.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-63519487

Committing a 'crime' to prevent a worser one happening, or acting out of conscience has been admissable on several occasions.

 

[Ian H]

It has nothing to do with GB News or Greenpeace really.

The thrust of the argument was go protest China.

Targeting the most polluting country in the world makes some sense.

But while we're at it, we may as well include India, America, Japan and the Commies.

For the size of the country, China is actually doing considerably better than the USA. Per head of population the Middle-Eastern oil producers are among the worst. Canada and Australia are surprisingly poor as well. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

 

[mudsticks]

For the size of the country, China is actually doing considerably better than the USA. Per head of population the Middle-Eastern oil producers are among the worst. Canada and Australia are surprisingly poor as well. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

And the whole 'Whatabout China' thing that not so smart GBeebies Boy thought was a resounding gotcha, is in fact irrelevant to this protest anyhow.

This was a Greenpeace protest in the UK about what a UK Prime minister has done to promote his own fiscal interests, and those of his cronies, whilst sticking two fingers up to any attempt to reduce fossil fuel exploitation in this country.

We all need to do something, and those countries who are richest and most able need to be doing the most.

And before long that investment will pay off with better insulated houses, less pollution both GHGs and others, lower energy prices if we invest properly in renewables, better public transport and lots of other potential environmental, health, and social benefits too, if we get it right.

Why have we taken so long??

Because of the vested financial interest of a few.

A few like Mr Sunak, and his family, already over resourced well beyond the needs of any human on the planet.

 

[Pale Rider]

And the whole 'Whatabout China' thing that not so smart GBeebies Boy thought was a resounding gotcha,

Another wrong assertion.

It is obvious to me the most polluting countries need to do the most to reduce pollution if we are to have any overall impact.

 

[Mr Celine]

For the size of the country, China is actually doing considerably better than the USA. Per head of population the Middle-Eastern oil producers are among the worst. Canada and Australia are surprisingly poor as well. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/

We've already told him that but he keeps going on about China and India.

Either his comprehension skills are not as good as he tells us they are or perhaps he is more of a racist than he thinks he is.

 

[newfhouse]

Either his comprehension skills are not as good as he tells us they are or perhaps he is more of a racist than he thinks he is.

Those traits are not mutually exclusive.

 

[mudsticks]

Another wrong assertion.

It is obvious to me the most polluting countries need to do the most to reduce pollution if we are to have any overall impact.

Every highly polluting country and industry needs to work to reduce their emissions, and that's been the case for decades.

But that wasn't GBeebies Boys angle was it?

He was trying to make out that Greenpeace shouldn't have done their protest against Sunak giving new drilling licences in the North Sea 'Because China'.

After having had a few goes at other feeble reasons.

Even though Greenpeace do operate in China too.


Right leaning tabloidese journos have, at the behest of their lords and paymasters, been rubbishing the idea that climate change needs tackling seriously (or even exists) for decades.

They've been complicit in the damage done.

To see the likes of them now going
"But wHat aBout CHina?" to Greenpeace, who have been working on all this for decades is utterly ridiculous.

 

[matticus]

We've already told him that but he keeps going on about China and India.

Either his comprehension skills are not as good as he tells us they are or perhaps he is more of a racist than he thinks he is.

Those traits are not mutually exclusive.

Oh please get a fu_king grip! Stop the pathetic progressive willy-waving - better still, logoff Cyclechat and have a circle-jerk, the two of you. Once you've got it out of your system, try to have a grown-up discussion about the environment.

Reminder: we're in this together - us, the Russkies, chinky-chonks, raghead oil barons, Labour voters and/or socialists, spear-chuckers, people living on islands with just turtles for company, even the Welsh.
Generally europeans have done as much for C02 release as the Chinese. The latter have accelerated since the 60s (which is about when they started exporting their stuff to us, and in return polluting their own front rooms); if they don't get on top of renewables they COULD undo any good us yooropeans do. But they ARE pushing renewables, so there's hope.
Meanwhile lots of poor countries are shat on by all of us in the consumer spiral; India puts out more CO2 than the UK - surprise surprise, there's a billion of them!

Someone else can do the heroes/villains analysis for the rest of the globe, it's all more of the same ...

 

[multitool]

Generally europeans have done as much for C02 release as the Chinese. The latter have accelerated since the 60s (which is about when they started exporting their stuff to us, and in return polluting their own front rooms);

The US had a trade ban with China until late 70's, matticus. Trade was mostly western heavy plant going INTO China. The big exports didn't really take off until 1990s.

The salient point is that climate change is not just about who is polluting now, it's about cumulative pollution, and on that basis US wins hands down, but the UK also is up there.

Then there is the argument that if China is polluting via industry and the goods are being exported for foreign consumption then it is the foreign (IE. Western) lifestyles that need to change.

 

[Deleted member 121]

There is the issue. We are free to mindlessly consume tat and the capitalists and business leaders are happy with this. Manufacturing dominant countries such as China are just filling the void in the market. It's alright us telling China to stop polluting but it's the rich consumer nations that are the driving force behind it.

 

[matticus]

The US had a trade ban with China until late 70's, matticus. Trade was mostly western heavy plant going INTO China. The big exports didn't really take off until 1990s.

OK, you got me - I'm no expert on the history of international trade. Far from it ...

 

[winjim]

 

[multitool]

OK, you got me - I'm no expert on the history of international trade. Far from it ...

Neither am I, but I do have a memory.

Which is flawed. it's was '72 under Nixon. But I don't think trade was fully normalised until around about 2000...which is about when the real explosion in Chinese exports started.

 

[mudsticks]

We've already told him that but he keeps going on about China and India.

Either his comprehension skills are not as good as he tells us they are or perhaps he is more of a racist than he thinks he is.

It's the same old same old denial and blame shifting stuff that gone on for years.

Not wanting to take responsibility for our own part in this, not wanting to recognise that we all need to work on it together.

I hold populist press at least partially responsible for this.
Owned and controlled as they are by rich proprietors who profit from highly polluting industries - putting out denialist and or diminishing articles for years - to rubbish good science, and to rubbish those trying to get something done .

Oh please get a fu_king grip! Stop the pathetic progressive willy-waving - better still, logoff Cyclechat and have a circle-jerk, the two of you. Once you've got it out of your system, try to have a grown-up discussion about the environment.

Reminder: we're in this together - us, the Russkies, chinky-chonks, raghead oil barons, Labour voters and/or socialists, spear-chuckers, people living on islands with just turtles for company, even the Welsh.
Generally europeans have done as much for C02 release as the Chinese. The latter have accelerated since the 60s (which is about when they started exporting their stuff to us, and in return polluting their own front rooms); if they don't get on top of renewables they COULD undo any good us yooropeans do. But they ARE pushing renewables, so there's hope.
Meanwhile lots of poor countries are shat on by all of us in the consumer spiral; India puts out more CO2 than the UK - surprise surprise, there's a billion of them!

Someone else can do the heroes/villains analysis for the rest of the globe, it's all more of the same ...

Don't forget this is 'Normal Island' 👍🏼

Not the climate change or JSO thread .

 

[Ian H]

Another wrong assertion.

It is obvious to me the most polluting countries need to do the most to reduce pollution if we are to have any overall impact.

You seem to be saying that countries which pollute more simply because they are larger should do more than smaller countries (which may pollute more per capita but overall have less effect simply because of their size).

So Canada for example can pollute as much as it wants because its population is a tiny fraction of China's.

The flaw in that argument is that small countries together add up to a substantial percentage of the world population.