'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK

by eddie Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:42 pm

First topic message reminder :

“As students we don’t have the vote, and it is really unfair because this is going to impact on us the most. It is our future,”
Evie Baldwin, 15, from north London

Thousands of young people take time out of school to join protests across the country

Some wore school uniform, with ties askew in St Trinian’s fashion, others donned face paint, sparkly jackets and DM boots. The youngest clutched a parent’s hand as people gathered in the sunshine in Parliament Square in London, a few metres from the politicians they say are letting down a generation.

They carried homemade placards, with slogans full of humour, passion and hope that the voices of thousands of children and young people would be heard.

“March now – or swim later”, “I’ve seen smarter cabinets in Ikea” and “denial is not a policy” read the banners, as chants for action on climate change grew and strengthened with the passing hours into a deafening roar. “What do we want? Climate action! When do we want it? Now!”

Across the UK it was a day for thousands who are not normally heard, as children took time out of their lessons to attend the strike.

'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK - Page 2 5d98ba10

Much more on link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/15/children-climate-inaction-protests-uk

Good for them! cheers

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 4:52 pm

Now Maddog, I certainly do not agree with this child's political beliefs. She comes from the very leftist side of politics, but her point on politicians not acting is inherantly true.

Its also true, that the future of this planet does lie within the hands of world leaders

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 4:54 pm

This is like what the Hitler youth did.

They brainwashed their into believing something that wasn't true

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 4:59 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:This is like what the Hitler youth did.

They brainwashed their into believing something that wasn't true

The Hitler youth were brainwashed with racial hatred and racial superiority.
So much so, many willingly gave their lives like Jihadists do today.

What hatred is being taught here with climate change?

Yet again a dumbfuckwitted false equivalency by you

Not only that, you think teaching science, is brainwashing?

Science looks skeptically at its own methods and theories. In fact it constantly does this

Why is it you cannot even look skeptically at your own beliefs?

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:10 pm

Thor wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

climate deniers??

you know who else uses language like that???

religious fanatics

I dont see any climate fanatics do you?

Religious fanatics held power and used this to commit violence

False and quite frankly dumbfuckwitted equivalency

You're a climate fanatic

You're unwilling to accept any other viewpoint but your own, and want other to accept your view point whether they want to or not.

If anyone questions your climate change religion you get angry and call them "deniers"

Change climate change for Islam and deniers for blasphemy/apostates and you have ISIS

You're an atheist because you think God is man made and there is no proof he exists and yet you're willing to blindly believe in climate change despite no evidence existing to suggest it is anything other than a man made money making scheme designed to make corrupt politicians richer.

You're the savage throwing the virgin into the volcano to try prevent it from erupting.

Climate change is cyclical and natural, if the world didn't heat up naturally we would still be stuck in an ice age, how else do you think the ice age ended?? And that was thousands of years before industrialisation.

And what about the madness of cows farting???

How can cows (naturally occurring animals) farting (a natural bodily function) be destroying nature??

You're all a bunch of lunatics

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:15 pm

Thor wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:This is like what the Hitler youth did.

They brainwashed their into believing something that wasn't true

The Hitler youth were brainwashed with racial hatred and racial superiority.
So much so, many willingly gave their lives like Jihadists do today.

What hatred is being taught here with climate change?

Yet again a dumbfuckwitted false equivalency by you

Not only that, you think teaching science, is brainwashing?

Science looks skeptically at its own methods and theories. In fact it constantly does this

Why is it you cannot even look skeptically at your own beliefs?

Exactly

They were BRAINWASHED.

I do examine my own beliefs, I think that humans industry can have an effect on the environment, dumping chemical will poison the river

Bruning loads and loads of coal will cause a smog and pollute the air.

But those are localised events that can be solved locally, they zero impact on the wider global climate

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:20 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:

I dont see any climate fanatics do you?

Religious fanatics held power and used this to commit violence

False and quite frankly dumbfuckwitted equivalency

You're a climate fanatic
Thor wrote:Your words and views, not mine

You're unwilling to accept any other viewpoint but your own, and want other to accept your view point whether they want to or not.
Thor wrote:What view point? We are talking about science here and yes I have read other views from the few scientist deniers

What I have done is looked at the data

If anyone questions your climate change religion you get angry and call them "deniers"
Thor wrote:Really, where have I been angry?

Change climate change for Islam and deniers for blasphemy/apostates and you have ISIS
Thor wrote:Not seeing anyone bringing any blasphemy laws on climate change and there is a main reason for this. We allow people to hold any belief they like. Jst like yours being a climate change denier

You're an atheist because you think God is man made and there is no proof he exists and yet you're willing to blindly believe in climate change despite no evidence existing to suggest it is anything other than a man made money making scheme designed to make corrupt politicians richer.

Thor wrote:I am anathiest who once believed in God and saw that the religions are to me man made. I cannot disprove there is a god, but clearly see the Abrahamic deity is quite barbaric and uses fear in order for people to follow him. So I looked critically at the texts, which is far removed from looking at scientific data. Which your reaoning could be applied to you.
Why have you not looked skeptically at your own beliefs inGod
Why have you not even looked at the countless scientific data on climate change?

You're the savage throwing the virgin into the volcano to try prevent it from erupting.
Thor wrote:Your words and views, not mine

Climate change is cyclical and natural, if the world didn't heat up naturally we would still be stuck in an ice age, how else do you think the ice age ended?? And that was thousands of years before industrialisation.
Thor wrote:Climate change is natural and everyone that saw global warming was a diaster for the planet. It saw mass extinctions. This time, its humans causing this global warming. So if it has caused mass extinctions in the past and you then believe its simple a cycle. What would bhe the harm in trying to prevent that?

And what about the madness of cows farting???
Thor wrote:Its major problem and part of the warming

How can cows (naturally occurring animals) farting (a natural bodily function) be destroying nature??
Thor wrote:Well because we have upset the balance of predators and prey with cattle. To the point we have domesticated them. To vast numbers. As hunter gatheres or nomadic lifestyles only killed what they needed to eat. Civilization has upset this balance in nature

You're all a bunch of lunatics

It seems you are the one hateful here, and claiming scientists and experts are lunatics

Not based off any scientific thinking yourself, but off your own poor beliefs

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:24 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:

The Hitler youth were brainwashed with racial hatred and racial superiority.
So much so, many willingly gave their lives like Jihadists do today.

What hatred is being taught here with climate change?

Yet again a dumbfuckwitted false equivalency by you

Not only that, you think teaching science, is brainwashing?

Science looks skeptically at its own methods and theories. In fact it constantly does this

Why is it you cannot even look skeptically at your own beliefs?

Exactly

They were BRAINWASHED.

I do examine my own beliefs, I think that humans industry can have an effect on the environment, dumping chemical will poison the river

Bruning loads and loads of coal will cause a smog and pollute the air.

But those are localised events that can be solved locally, they zero impact on the wider global climate

Do you?

Have you looked critically at the scientific data?

If you had you would look beyond local problems and global problems caused by humans

I even looked critically at my once religious beliefs

i came to see religions were man made

You certainly have not, as how is yours right and all the rest wrong?

This is evident or if this god exist from the Abrahamic religion, it is inherantly evil

I cannot disprove whether a god exists, but if one does. It clearly has no care for humans and why would it?

Have you ever considered that if there was one, we are merely lab rats to an experiment of a big bang and whether life can take hold

Such supreme intelligence would be devoid of human emotions

This what you cannot grasp

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:29 pm

Here is the Christian climate change Scientist for you againSmelly, to help dumb down the science for you to Understand.

Laughing

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:55 pm

Thor wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

Exactly

They were BRAINWASHED.

I do examine my own beliefs, I think that humans industry can have an effect on the environment, dumping chemical will poison the river

Bruning loads and loads of coal will cause a smog and pollute the air.

But those are localised events that can be solved locally, they zero impact on the wider global climate

Do you?

Have you looked critically at the scientific data?

If you had you would look beyond local problems and global problems caused by humans

I even looked critically at my once religious beliefs

i came to see religions were man made

You certainly have not, as how is yours right and all the rest wrong?

This is evident or if this god exist from the Abrahamic religion, it is inherantly evil

I cannot disprove whether a god exists, but if one does. It clearly has no care for humans and why would it?

Have you ever considered that if there was one, we are merely lab rats to an experiment of a big bang and whether life can take hold

Such supreme intelligence would be devoid of human emotions

This what you cannot grasp

There is plenty of scientific evidence against climate change.

Plenty of scientists say its nonsense, if science is supposed to be the be all and end all then do some agree and some dont

No scientist disagress that gravity is real or that 1+1=2

You're a fanatic who for some bizzare reason Wants climate change to be linked to man made activity so that you can send the world back to some new dark ages where everyone lives in a mudhut wearing hessian clothing with no electricity no running water no industry no farming no medicine or any kind of modern amenities.

If that's the lifestyle you want to live, then move to africa, there are plenty of places there where you can live like a medieval peasant

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:56 pm

Thor wrote:Here is the Christian climate change Scientist for you againSmelly, to help dumb down the science for you to Understand.

And I'm sure he got a nice pay check for reading his script

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:01 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:

Do you?

Have you looked critically at the scientific data?

If you had you would look beyond local problems and global problems caused by humans

I even looked critically at my once religious beliefs

i came to see religions were man made

You certainly have not, as how is yours right and all the rest wrong?

This is evident or if this god exist from the Abrahamic religion, it is inherantly evil

I cannot disprove whether a god exists, but if one does. It clearly has no care for humans and why would it?

Have you ever considered that if there was one, we are merely lab rats to an experiment of a big bang and whether life can take hold

Such supreme intelligence would be devoid of human emotions

This what you cannot grasp

There is plenty of scientific evidence against climate change.

Plenty of scientists say its nonsense, if science is supposed to be the be all and end all then do some agree and some dont

No scientist disagress that gravity is real or that 1+1=2

You're a fanatic who for some bizzare reason Wants climate change to be linked to man made activity so that you can send the world back to some new dark ages where everyone lives in a mudhut wearing hessian clothing with no electricity no running water no industry no farming no medicine or any kind of modern amenities.

If that's the lifestyle you want to live, then move to africa, there are plenty of places there where you can live like a medieval peasant

Is there plenty of evidence

The vast majority clearly disagree and the evidence backs their position

I have looked at the evidence by the climate denier scientists who funnily enough tend to be in the pay of fossel fuel companies

How is it fanatical to be open to scientific data and facts on this?

There is clear evidence we have been pumping countless CO2 into the workd and where denier scientists have made claims. On furture whether predictions. None of them have come to be true

Funny that

Nobody is calling for the world to go back to some medival time, though your mindset is clearly medival

I am clearly going to call you cathy newman from now on

As making poor claims to things I have not said, makes you a cathy clone

Fancy that, you b eing like a feminist

Laughing

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:02 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:Here is the Christian climate change Scientist for you againSmelly, to help dumb down the science for you to Understand.

And I'm sure he got a nice pay check for reading his script

Indeed he is reading off a script by climate deniers

What more importantly did you understand about the science she spoke of?

by Victorismyhero Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:02 pm

Well, with my woodland I'll bet I'm carbon neutral.......and probably gaining someone else's carbon credits too. (Be nice if I could cash em in)

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:03 pm

Lord Foul wrote:Well, with my woodland I'll bet I'm carbon neutral.......and probably gaining someone else's carbon credits too. (Be nice if I could cash em in)

I think there should be such incentives for people like yourself mate

Maybe smelly thinks you are being medieval by the lifestyle you have chosen living most of the time at these woods?

Who knows

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:33 pm

Thor wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:Well, with my woodland I'll bet I'm carbon neutral.......and probably gaining someone else's carbon credits too. (Be nice if I could cash em in)

I think there should be such incentives for people like yourself mate

Maybe smelly thinks you are being medieval by the lifestyle you have chosen living most of the time at these woods?

Who knows

What I think is that if people like you were forced to pay 70% climate change taxes you would suddenly change your mind about the whole thing.

What I think is that you don't really believe in man made climate change but choose to do so because its "cool and trendy"

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:37 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:

I think there should be such incentives for people like yourself mate

Maybe smelly thinks you are being medieval by the lifestyle you have chosen living most of the time at these woods?

Who knows

What I think is that if people like you were forced to pay 70% climate change taxes you would suddenly change your mind about the whole thing.

What I think is that you don't really believe in man made climate change but choose to do so because its "cool and trendy"

I can afford to pay 70% tax, and would do so if required

However to me, such a high rate of tax is self defeating

I am not a socialist after all.

So you are equating two differen ideas here

One where some have a socialist mind set on having people pay higher taxes. As throwing money at a problem, does not solve the problem. If you do not use methods to combat climate change itself

Why would it be cool and trendy to understand science?

I would call that common sense

I think we have to take some long hard looks at what we can do to actually combat climate change

You need to stop being cathy newman making really dumb assumptions Cathy.

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:42 pm

Okay some simple points for you to answer smelly

Do you believe climate change is happening, even if you believe its simple a cycle?

Do you think this climate change has the potential to be disastrous for the planet?

Do you understand past claimte changes have resulted in mass extinctions?

If you believe the above, what is the harm in trying to then combat climate change. When to do nothing leads to potential disaster?

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:06 pm

Thor wrote:Okay some simple points for you to answer smelly

Do you believe climate change is happening, even if you believe its simple a cycle?

Do you think this climate change has the potential to be disastrous for the planet?

Do you understand past claimte changes have resulted in mass extinctions?

If you believe the above, what is the harm in trying to then combat climate change. When to do nothing leads to potential disaster?

*sigh*

yes i believe climate change is a NATURAL and ONGOING cyclical event

no i dont believe that the planet has in the last 10 years decided life just isnt worth living and has chosen to commit suicide through its own natural functions

no i dont believe that climate change can or has result in mass extinction because climate change occurs over centuries so each generation only ever experiences the climatic conditions specific to their lifespan and will never ever be able to compare it to what came before because humans dont live for thousnads of years, mass extinction is cause by sudden castrohpic events.................. like brexit

i dont believe there is any point in trying to combat climate change because it would be like trying to prevent a hurricane or stop rain from falling, the planet will go through its nature cycle and there is nothing humans can do to stop it.

if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet.

by here is the thing, you wont convince me because you shy away from questions like

why does al gore have a beach front property?? if the people who cliam to believe in this stuff the most arent concerned enough about it to live a lifestyle that reflects their beliefs then why should i live a lifestyle that reflects their beliefs??

if mans industry is responsible the earth heating up what caused the earth the heat up during the last ice age, bringing the last ice age to an end??

you will simply ignore the question because the second you admit that the has gone though cycles of cooling and heating up many times druing its lifespan your entire "man is responsible" argumnet goes out the window

its funny , youre like the christian creationists who think the earth is only 2000 years old, you believe that the earth heating up now is the first time its ever done it.

youre off your rocker

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:09 pm

Thor wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

What I think is that if people like you were forced to pay 70% climate change taxes you would suddenly change your mind about the whole thing.

What I think is that you don't really believe in man made climate change but choose to do so because its "cool and trendy"

I can afford to pay 70% tax, and would do so if required

However to me, such a high rate of tax is self defeating

I am not a socialist after all.

So you are equating two differen ideas here

One where some have a socialist mind set on having people pay higher taxes. As throwing money at a problem, does not solve the problem. If you do not use methods to combat climate change itself

Why would it be cool and trendy to understand science?

I would call that common sense

I think we have to take some long hard looks at what we can do to actually combat climate change

You need to stop being cathy newman making really dumb assumptions Cathy.

are you paying 70% to help combat climate change??

if not why not, dont you believe its important enough??

see?? if you truly believed in climate chnage you would be volunteering to pay 70% for combatting climate change, but you arent soooooooooooooooo..................................i guess thats the end of that

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:20 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:Okay some simple points for you to answer smelly

Do you believe climate change is happening, even if you believe its simple a cycle?

Do you think this climate change has the potential to be disastrous for the planet?

Do you understand past claimte changes have resulted in mass extinctions?

If you believe the above, what is the harm in trying to then combat climate change. When to do nothing leads to potential disaster?

*sigh*

yes i believe climate change is a NATURAL and ONGOING cyclical event
Thor wrote: Everyone knows that climate change is a natural cycle. The point is humans are creating this. Which was not even my point.
was it?

no i dont believe that the planet has in the last 10 years decided life just isnt worth living and has chosen to commit suicide through its own natural functions
Thor wrote: The planet? The planet would continue to life on, life within that planet would die enmass. If tempretures reach a point where life becomes unsustainable

no i dont believe that climate change can or has result in mass extinction because climate change occurs over centuries so each generation only ever experiences the climatic conditions specific to their lifespan and will never ever be able to compare it to what came before because humans dont live for thousnads of years, mass extinction is cause by sudden castrohpic events.................. like brexit
Thor wrote:You dont believe it can, even though clamate change in the past has caused mass extinctions?

Come again?

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-biggest-mass-extinction-global-ocean.html

May I suggest you look again at the data and how close we are to a turning point on global warming and how it will if on its current path by 2100, caus devastation to this planet. That will cause many other spiralling effects

i dont believe there is any point in trying to combat climate change because it would be like trying to prevent a hurricane or stop rain from falling, the planet will go through its nature cycle and there is nothing humans can do to stop it.
Thor wrote: Really? You dont think CO2 levels have any effect on the climate and that we cannot do anything about them?
Who is also to say we would not be able to develope the technology to create even rain or prevent hurricanes?

You really are behind the time when it comes to science as being able to formulate rain, is very much possible

if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet.
Thor wrote:Cathy Newman alert, as where did I say I wanted to?
I said it was impractiable and throwing money to bad, if the view is not to actually combat climate change

by here is the thing, you wont convince me because you shy away from questions like
Thor wrote: I am not worried about convincing you, as you are insignificant to bring about change. What matters is that the world leaders take on board the data and facts around how humans are causing warming to have increased dramatically, in such a short space of time

youre off your rocker

Now here is the difference between me and you

I am always open to the possibility I can be wrong

You though as shown by the above are closeminded

If I am wrong on climate change and we have acted to try and prevent this, with more effective methods that are cost effective. What harm will have been done if I am wrong?

None, other than we would helped make the environment cleaner

You on the other hand are closeminded to the possible reality, that you could be wrong.

Where if you are wrong, you will then sit there pondering why you never listened to others who spend their lifetime studying climate

Go figure

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:22 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:

I can afford to pay 70% tax, and would do so if required

However to me, such a high rate of tax is self defeating

I am not a socialist after all.

So you are equating two differen ideas here

One where some have a socialist mind set on having people pay higher taxes. As throwing money at a problem, does not solve the problem. If you do not use methods to combat climate change itself

Why would it be cool and trendy to understand science?

I would call that common sense

I think we have to take some long hard looks at what we can do to actually combat climate change

You need to stop being cathy newman making really dumb assumptions Cathy.

are you paying 70% to help combat climate change??

if not why not, dont you believe its important enough??

see?? if you truly believed in climate chnage you would be volunteering to pay 70% for combatting climate change, but you arent soooooooooooooooo..................................i guess thats the end of that

Why would I pay 70% in tax, when I know it would not go to combating climate change

So why would I be volunteering money to tax, when it would not go on combating climate change?

Again where did I say I wanted to?

Never did. Did I Cathy?

I said i would if I had to

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:35 pm

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:37 pm

Thor wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

*sigh*

yes i believe climate change is a NATURAL and ONGOING cyclical event

no i dont believe that the planet has in the last 10 years decided life just isnt worth living and has chosen to commit suicide through its own natural functions

no i dont believe that climate change can or has result in mass extinction because climate change occurs over centuries so each generation only ever experiences the climatic conditions specific to their lifespan and will never ever be able to compare it to what came before because humans dont live for thousnads of years, mass extinction is cause by sudden castrohpic events.................. like brexit

i dont believe there is any point in trying to combat climate change because it would be like trying to prevent a hurricane or stop rain from falling, the planet will go through its nature cycle and there is nothing humans can do to stop it.

if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet.

by here is the thing, you wont convince me because you shy away from questions like

youre off your rocker

Now here is the difference between me and you

I am always open to the possibility I can be wrong

You though as shown by the above are closeminded

If I am wrong on climate change and we have acted to try and prevent this, with more effective methods that are cost effective. What harm will have been done if I am wrong?

None, other than we would helped make the environment cleaner

You on the other hand are closeminded to the possible reality, that you could be wrong.

Where if you are wrong, you will then sit there pondering why you never listened to others who spend their lifetime studying climate

Go figure

believe whatever you want,you do anyway

bottom line is that those who preach the loudest are the worst ones for practising what they preach

the earth has gone through cooling and heating stages long before industrialisation

you wont engage on these points and instead just preach the narrative.

im not interested in narrative, ive heard the screeching all before its not impressive or convincing.

youre all batshit crazy, now just accept that you have failed to convince me, youre wrong and im not going to stop saying so just because it hurts your feelings

if youre so convinced then like i said there are plenty of places in africa where you can go live a dark ages peasants lifestyle if thats what you want.

if you arent willing to set an example, if you arent willing to demostrate that you believe in your own ideology why should i believe you?? but nevermind if the world leaders do what you want then you WILL be living that peasant lifestyle you seem to think is so appealing.

you WILL be paying 70% of your taxes

you WILL be living and freezing to death in a mudhut with no electricy

you WILL be walking everywhere.

you WONT be flying abroad to go on holiday.

all i can say is thank god for trump and him pulling out of that paris agreement farce, he has probaly saved western civilisation by doing that

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:47 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:
Thor wrote:

Now here is the difference between me and you

I am always open to the possibility I can be wrong

You though as shown by the above are closeminded

If I am wrong on climate change and we have acted to try and prevent this, with more effective methods that are cost effective. What harm will have been done if I am wrong?

None, other than we would helped make the environment cleaner

You on the other hand are closeminded to the possible reality, that you could be wrong.

Where if you are wrong, you will then sit there pondering why you never listened to others who spend their lifetime studying climate

Go figure

believe whatever you want,you do anyway

'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK - Page 2 C11

So like i said you are completely closeminded and its not my job to convince you and you continue to be Cathy make false assumptions about things I have not said. Where you keep regurgitating the same points. How many times I have had to point out the tax part and again you show how you even ignore what I have said. Its like you are trying to hope I trip up, which shows its you struggling here, not me.

People closeminded are this way

That is you

Its why you are not open to the possibility that your religion is wrong

Its why you are not open to the possibility you are wrong here

Its you holding the dogmatic position on religion and climate change

I am open to the possibility of being wrong here.

The difference here is that the existance of life is not at stake, of me being wrong

It is, if you are wrong

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:57 pm

Thor wrote:

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:07 pm

Now I have made my points and shown even why people like you smelly dont believe in scientific data and consensus. On humans causing climate change. Instead I had to deal with an immature argument on me going to Africa and Tax, in some infantile attempt to hope I would slip up. When it never happened, you consigned yourself to being constantly Cathy Newman and calling scientists and myself lunatics. Simple because your emotional side of your brain is denying your rational brain the ability to think for itself.

Hey ho

Enjoyed the chat, no more needed to be said by me on this to you. Others can see and decide for themselves.

Have a good evening

Laughing

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:43 pm

Thor wrote:Now I have made my points and shown even why people like you smelly dont believe in scientific data and consensus. On humans causing climate change. Instead I had to deal with an immature argument on me going to Africa and Tax, in some infantile attempt to hope I would slip up. When it never happened, you consigned yourself to being constantly Cathy Newman and calling scientists and myself lunatics. Simple because your emotional side of your brain is denying your rational brain the ability to think for itself.

Hey ho

Enjoyed the chat, no more needed to be said by me on this to you. Others can see and decide for themselves.

Have a good evening

you havent made any points

youve posted some youtube videos because you dont understand the points which is why YOU cant argue from YOUR point of view on the issue. Its the same reason i wont bother engaging you because all you ever respond with is a youtube video made by someone else

youre like all those illiterate Muslims in africa listening to their imams and believeing every word that comes out of thier mouth without question, never read the qur'an but know all about it from someone else

thats what we call hearsay.

my friends uncles cousins next door neighbour once heard from his bin man that climate change is real, so becasue i trust my friend i also believe climate change is real

the naivety boggles the mind

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 9:00 pm

Oh dear

The videos I posted were never for your benefit

One was for people to understand why you are a denier

The other was to show people the scientific consensus on humans being the cause of climate change today.

You would have known this if you watched them, that they were about

Hey ho

I know plenty and as seen, you are acting like a child unable to debate something "you" clearly do not understand and the reason

You are closeminded and dogmatic

As you even tried to claim scientific data as comparable to Imans teaching religious beliefs.

Priceless dumbfuckwittery on your part again

What was posted is backed up by data through a scientifi consensus. Which like dogmatic religious believers you wish to deny scientific data and consensus.

You wont even consider the possibility of being wrong here

I have easily reasoned why its you not being open, failing to even challenege your own beliefs here. As that is what they are, beliefs. Not backed by science.

Now I am going to leave you to sulk. As you acting like an angry little boy, not getting his own way

Laughing

by Guest Sat Feb 16, 2019 9:30 pm

Thor wrote:Oh dear

The videos I posted were never for your benefit

One was for people to understand why you are a denier

The other was to show people the scientific consensus on humans being the cause of climate change today.

You would have known this if you watched them, that they were about

Hey ho

I know plenty and as seen, you are acting like a child unable to debate something "you" clearly do not understand and the reason

You are closeminded and dogmatic

As you even tried to claim scientific data as comparable to Imans teaching religious beliefs.

Priceless dumbfuckwittery on your part again

What was posted is backed up by data through a scientifi consensus. Which like dogmatic religious believers you wish to deny scientific data and consensus.

You wont even consider the possibility of being wrong here

I have easily reasoned why its you not being open, failing to even challenege your own beliefs here. As that is what they are, beliefs. Not backed by science.

Now I am going to leave you to sulk. As you acting like an angry little boy, not getting his own way

getting my own way??

sulking??

what the hell are you on about??

i dont believe in man climate change, why on earth would i be sulking over a fairytale that i know doesnt even exist??

youre the one getting upset about climate change, it doesnt matter to me if you want to lose sleep over it

i sleep soundly at night, i dont get caught up in the mass hysteria and worry about turning on my central heating cause it harms the environment, i dont inconvenience myself or impovish myself by trying to be green and carbon neutral.

i dont give 2 fucks about my "carbon footprint" or how much co2 my log burner is chugging out, i have no intention of getting an eletric car any time soon.

my one concession is that i just about recycle and thats only because it doesnt inconvenience me

youre the eco crusader on a misson not me

if you want to fuss and worry about it, thats your problem not mine, no skin off my nose.

can you understand that i simply dont give a shit about something that doesnt exist

by 'Wolfie Sat Feb 16, 2019 11:27 pm

'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK - Page 2 3489511464

What we can tell about Smelly from his OTT monologue on climate change :

* He is anti-science, and anti-evidence;

* Despite 300 years of clearly seen evidence, he refuses to believe that mankind's increasingly negative activities (i.e. land clearing, deforrestation, heavy pollution, esp. infernal combustion engines and coal-fired power stations, intensive agricultural systems..) can in any way be affecting the planet;

* By referring to climate change as "fairytales", and then fallaciously claiming that it doesn't exist, Smelly is claiming some kind of god-like superiority over all of those who are experiencing it first hand -- farmers, foresters, gardeners, 'first responder' emergency workers -- especially firefighters, Pacific Islanders, meteorologists, the Pentagon, as well as over 96% of the world's scientists (i.e. those not owned by oil and mining companies..).

* Even though Smelly is hiding away in his mum's basement over there in England and never venturing outside into any actual weather, apparently he still knows what is going on with all of these non-existent droughts, bushfires, floods and unseasonable storms around Australia, the Americas, S.E. Asia -- there are no expanding deserts in northern Africa, or rampant illegal deforrestation around the Pacific and in Brazil..

* In Smelly's warped little alternative universe, all of this is simply some kind of lie being spun by greenies and commies to destroy his beloved oil and mining corporations. In essence, Smelly is also accusing Ben, veya, Quill, as well as myself, of being rampant liars, through his denials of what others are experiencing first hand..

* Smelly' then claims that he sleeps soundly at night, tucked up in the deep, dark, dank mouldy recesses of his mum's council house basement, proud of the damage that his beloved corporate masters are doing to this world..

Smelly' obviously doesn't care about the environment, mankind in general or the future of this planet -- he just wants to hide away from the S. African army over there in England, cheering on his corporatist heroes (as they achieve what he couldn't manage in his army days..), as he goes about his usual smartarse trolling and cyber-bullying misanthropic activities... 'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK - Page 2 2086560741

'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK - Page 2 2086560741

by Eilzel Sun Feb 17, 2019 12:47 am

Smelly, you do actually understand that no one, not even AOC, is asking for people to pay 70% of their income in taxes, don't you?

Tell me you do. Tell me you aren't THAT stupid Laughing

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:50 am

Eilzel wrote:Smelly, you do actually understand that no one, not even AOC, is asking for people to pay 70% of their income in taxes, don't you?

Tell me you do. Tell me you aren't THAT stupid

hell no im not THAT stupid

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is right. A 70% tax on the rich makes sense

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has continued to show her power to steer the national political conversation. In an interview, Ocasio-Cortez suggested offhandedly that income above $10m may need to be taxed up to 70%, especially if we are going to get serious about halting climate change. Her idea instantly sparked indignant replies from the right. Grover Norquist compared it to slavery. National Review’s Brian Riedl called it “completely destructive”. Steve Scalise said she wanted to “take away 70% of your income and give it to leftist fantasy programs”.

Many critics attempt to confuse people over what Ocasio-Cortez said. Just to be clear: she said that when people earn $10m, the 10 millionth dollar and above should be taxed at a high rate. So unless you earn $10m, she’s not talking about “your” income. These are marginal tax rates, though the Republican party loves to trick people by conflating taxes that apply solely to the unfathomably rich with taxes that apply to ordinary workers.

In fact, Ocasio-Cortez didn’t even specifically say what she wanted the US tax rate to be: she said that “sometimes you see” a 70% tax on multi-multimillionaires. And that’s true: Sweden has a 70% top tax rate and consistently remains near the top of the Global Innovation Index. She pointed to the fact that across the world, in many successful social democratic countries, high earners pay more than they do in the United States. That’s a fact, and it should make people wary of talking points about how destructive any attempt to fund critical programs would be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-70-percent-tax-rich

lol and you cant even accuse me of using fake news (even thogh the gaurdian IS fake news )

by Eilzel Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:04 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Eilzel wrote:Smelly, you do actually understand that no one, not even AOC, is asking for people to pay 70% of their income in taxes, don't you?

Tell me you do. Tell me you aren't THAT stupid

hell no im not THAT stupid

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is right. A 70% tax on the rich makes sense

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has continued to show her power to steer the national political conversation. In an interview, Ocasio-Cortez suggested offhandedly that income above $10m may need to be taxed up to 70%, especially if we are going to get serious about halting climate change. Her idea instantly sparked indignant replies from the right. Grover Norquist compared it to slavery. National Review’s Brian Riedl called it “completely destructive”. Steve Scalise said she wanted to “take away 70% of your income and give it to leftist fantasy programs”.

Many critics attempt to confuse people over what Ocasio-Cortez said. Just to be clear: she said that when people earn $10m, the 10 millionth dollar and above should be taxed at a high rate. So unless you earn $10m, she’s not talking about “your” income. These are marginal tax rates, though the Republican party loves to trick people by conflating taxes that apply solely to the unfathomably rich with taxes that apply to ordinary workers.

In fact, Ocasio-Cortez didn’t even specifically say what she wanted the US tax rate to be: she said that “sometimes you see” a 70% tax on multi-multimillionaires. And that’s true: Sweden has a 70% top tax rate and consistently remains near the top of the Global Innovation Index. She pointed to the fact that across the world, in many successful social democratic countries, high earners pay more than they do in the United States. That’s a fact, and it should make people wary of talking points about how destructive any attempt to fund critical programs would be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-70-percent-tax-rich

lol and you cant even accuse me of using fake news (even thogh the gaurdian IS fake news )

So you can stop with pointless comments like:

"if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet."

and,

"You ready to give the govt 70% of your taxes??"

then, can't you Smile

Because obviously not one person ever suggested that. Which you knew even before you found that Guardian article, of course Wink

PS: the common joke-name is 'the Grauniad' I believe.

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:06 am

Eilzel wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

hell no im not THAT stupid

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is right. A 70% tax on the rich makes sense

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has continued to show her power to steer the national political conversation. In an interview, Ocasio-Cortez suggested offhandedly that income above $10m may need to be taxed up to 70%, especially if we are going to get serious about halting climate change. Her idea instantly sparked indignant replies from the right. Grover Norquist compared it to slavery. National Review’s Brian Riedl called it “completely destructive”. Steve Scalise said she wanted to “take away 70% of your income and give it to leftist fantasy programs”.

Many critics attempt to confuse people over what Ocasio-Cortez said. Just to be clear: she said that when people earn $10m, the 10 millionth dollar and above should be taxed at a high rate. So unless you earn $10m, she’s not talking about “your” income. These are marginal tax rates, though the Republican party loves to trick people by conflating taxes that apply solely to the unfathomably rich with taxes that apply to ordinary workers.

In fact, Ocasio-Cortez didn’t even specifically say what she wanted the US tax rate to be: she said that “sometimes you see” a 70% tax on multi-multimillionaires. And that’s true: Sweden has a 70% top tax rate and consistently remains near the top of the Global Innovation Index. She pointed to the fact that across the world, in many successful social democratic countries, high earners pay more than they do in the United States. That’s a fact, and it should make people wary of talking points about how destructive any attempt to fund critical programs would be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-70-percent-tax-rich

lol and you cant even accuse me of using fake news (even thogh the gaurdian IS fake news )

So you can stop with pointless comments like:

"if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet."

and,

"You ready to give the govt 70% of your taxes??"

then, can't you

Because obviously not one person ever suggested that. Which you knew even before you found that Guardian article, of course

PS: the common joke-name is 'the Grauniad' I believe.

So smelly was basing this off one Democrat, as if its now Democratic policy, which its not and yet I am British?

One moment

'It is our future': children call time on climate inaction in UK - Page 2 3489511464

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:10 am

This really shows up the absurdity of smelly;s arguments. That if someone proposes a policy for climate change, then everyone concerned with climate change. Has to agree to their views and policies for this?

Its about as guilt by association idiocy as it gets.

I never knew I had to match tax proposals by a political party member not in this country.

lol!

by Eilzel Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:13 am

Thor wrote:This really shows up the absurdity of smelly;s arguments. That if someone proposes a policy for climate change, then everyone concerned with climate change. Has to agree to their views and policies for this?

Its about as guilt by association idiocy as it gets.

I never knew I had to match tax proposals by a political party member not in this country.

Yeah, no threat of this in Britain whatsoever.

In fact, AOC (much as I like her) is the fringe of the Democratic Party.

And even still, her proposal is a million miles from - "let's tax everyone 70%!" Laughing

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:19 am

Eilzel wrote:
Thor wrote:This really shows up the absurdity of smelly;s arguments. That if someone proposes a policy for climate change, then everyone concerned with climate change. Has to agree to their views and policies for this?

Its about as guilt by association idiocy as it gets.

I never knew I had to match tax proposals by a political party member not in this country.

Yeah, no threat of this in Britain whatsoever.

In fact, AOC (much as I like her) is the fringe of the Democratic Party.

And even still, her proposal is a million miles from - "let's tax everyone 70%!"

I think I upset his thinking when I said I would pay this amount if required to and it left him befuddled. Its why he went down this ridiculous path of stupidity.

Laughing

I mean did you see that not once did he say that he could possible be wrong and he claimed I am the lunatic. This also coming from the person who is not open to the possiblility his religion might be wrong?

This is someone utterly closeminded and a sheep

Laughing

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:19 am

Eilzel wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

hell no im not THAT stupid

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is right. A 70% tax on the rich makes sense

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has continued to show her power to steer the national political conversation. In an interview, Ocasio-Cortez suggested offhandedly that income above $10m may need to be taxed up to 70%, especially if we are going to get serious about halting climate change. Her idea instantly sparked indignant replies from the right. Grover Norquist compared it to slavery. National Review’s Brian Riedl called it “completely destructive”. Steve Scalise said she wanted to “take away 70% of your income and give it to leftist fantasy programs”.

Many critics attempt to confuse people over what Ocasio-Cortez said. Just to be clear: she said that when people earn $10m, the 10 millionth dollar and above should be taxed at a high rate. So unless you earn $10m, she’s not talking about “your” income. These are marginal tax rates, though the Republican party loves to trick people by conflating taxes that apply solely to the unfathomably rich with taxes that apply to ordinary workers.

In fact, Ocasio-Cortez didn’t even specifically say what she wanted the US tax rate to be: she said that “sometimes you see” a 70% tax on multi-multimillionaires. And that’s true: Sweden has a 70% top tax rate and consistently remains near the top of the Global Innovation Index. She pointed to the fact that across the world, in many successful social democratic countries, high earners pay more than they do in the United States. That’s a fact, and it should make people wary of talking points about how destructive any attempt to fund critical programs would be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-70-percent-tax-rich

lol and you cant even accuse me of using fake news (even thogh the gaurdian IS fake news )

So you can stop with pointless comments like:

"if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet."

and,

"You ready to give the govt 70% of your taxes??"

then, can't you

Because obviously not one person ever suggested that. Which you knew even before you found that Guardian article, of course

PS: the common joke-name is 'the Grauniad' I believe.

didnt take you long to start dictating to me what i can and cannot say

i take it youre using your official position as speaker to order me to stop making comments like that ortherwise its in the sin bin with me eh??

i know how authortarian everyone is around here, stick with a winning formula i say

hell all i came back for was to rub ben and quills noses in the fact that there is no collusion, but they both appear to be to far into trump derangment syndorme to provide me with any amusement, its like beating an autistic kid at a spelling bee

see you all in 2020 when trump wins re-election

if its any consolation, you were right, i wasnt banned

i was censored

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:22 am

Paranoia alert

How is Eizel dictating what you can or cannot say?

Did he issue a warning to you?

No

He simple said this as a poster, because your point was a lie and utterly stupid, in regards to points you made to me. Posters say this all the time in debate when someone is making a false assuption, basically a lie

Are you going to run away and sulk now until the next Presidential election?

I was right, you acting like a baby now having the hump ha ha

Laughing

by Eilzel Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:23 am

smelly-bandit wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
smelly-bandit wrote:

hell no im not THAT stupid

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is right. A 70% tax on the rich makes sense

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has continued to show her power to steer the national political conversation. In an interview, Ocasio-Cortez suggested offhandedly that income above $10m may need to be taxed up to 70%, especially if we are going to get serious about halting climate change. Her idea instantly sparked indignant replies from the right. Grover Norquist compared it to slavery. National Review’s Brian Riedl called it “completely destructive”. Steve Scalise said she wanted to “take away 70% of your income and give it to leftist fantasy programs”.

Many critics attempt to confuse people over what Ocasio-Cortez said. Just to be clear: she said that when people earn $10m, the 10 millionth dollar and above should be taxed at a high rate. So unless you earn $10m, she’s not talking about “your” income. These are marginal tax rates, though the Republican party loves to trick people by conflating taxes that apply solely to the unfathomably rich with taxes that apply to ordinary workers.

In fact, Ocasio-Cortez didn’t even specifically say what she wanted the US tax rate to be: she said that “sometimes you see” a 70% tax on multi-multimillionaires. And that’s true: Sweden has a 70% top tax rate and consistently remains near the top of the Global Innovation Index. She pointed to the fact that across the world, in many successful social democratic countries, high earners pay more than they do in the United States. That’s a fact, and it should make people wary of talking points about how destructive any attempt to fund critical programs would be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-70-percent-tax-rich

lol and you cant even accuse me of using fake news (even thogh the gaurdian IS fake news )

So you can stop with pointless comments like:

"if you want to pay 70% of your taxes to make people like al gore rich so they can by beach front properties despite despite insisting water levels are rising, or listen to the likes of dicaprio preaching about climate change as he flies around in a private jet."

and,

"You ready to give the govt 70% of your taxes??"

then, can't you

Because obviously not one person ever suggested that. Which you knew even before you found that Guardian article, of course

PS: the common joke-name is 'the Grauniad' I believe.

didnt take you long to start dictating to me what i can and cannot say

i take it youre using your official position as speaker to order me to stop making comments like that ortherwise its in the sin bin with me eh??

i know how authortarian everyone is around here, stick with a winning formula i say

hell all i came back for was to rub ben and quills noses in the fact that there is no collusion, but they both appear to be to far into trump derangment syndorme to provide me with any amusement, its like beating an autistic kid at a spelling bee

see you all in 2020 when trump wins re-election

if its any consolation, you were right, i wasnt banned

i was censored

Certainly not dictating anything - it's a figure speech you little whinger Laughing

If you want to carry on saying things that make you look an ass that's your call. I was just trying to help Wink

by Eilzel Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:23 am

Thor wrote:Paranoia alert

How is Eizel dictating what you can or cannot say?

Did he issue a warning to you?

No

He simple said this as a poster, because your point was a lie and utterly stupid, in regards to points you made to me. Posters say this all the time in debate when someone is making a false assuption, basically a lie

Are you going to run away and sulk now until the next Presidential election?

I was right, you acting like a baby now having the hump ha ha

He's embarrassed, I guess Razz

by Guest Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:26 am

Eilzel wrote:
Thor wrote:Paranoia alert

How is Eizel dictating what you can or cannot say?

Did he issue a warning to you?

No

He simple said this as a poster, because your point was a lie and utterly stupid, in regards to points you made to me. Posters say this all the time in debate when someone is making a false assuption, basically a lie

Are you going to run away and sulk now until the next Presidential election?

I was right, you acting like a baby now having the hump ha ha

He's embarrassed, I guess

He actually has loggged off and ran away Razz

Hilarious

Well that was a brief visit by smelly, I guess we ill have to wait until 2020, if of course Trump wins that is. As that is what he claims he will return now

Man alive smelly is paranoid and all because he got taken to task for making really stupid points

Hope he calms down and comes back

by Eilzel Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:27 am

Thor wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
Thor wrote:Paranoia alert

How is Eizel dictating what you can or cannot say?

Did he issue a warning to you?

No

He simple said this as a poster, because your point was a lie and utterly stupid, in regards to points you made to me. Posters say this all the time in debate when someone is making a false assuption, basically a lie

Are you going to run away and sulk now until the next Presidential election?

I was right, you acting like a baby now having the hump ha ha

He's embarrassed, I guess

He actually has loggged off and ran away

Hilarious

Well that was a brief visit by smelly, I guess we ill have to wait until 2020, if of course Trump wins that is. As that is what he claims he will return now

Man alive smelly is paranoid and all because he got taken to task for making really stupid points

Hope he calms down and comes back

Me too, can always do with a new argument lol

I think he really didn't understand the 70% tax Embarassed

by Victorismyhero Sun Feb 17, 2019 12:24 pm

I just wish that they would come up with a reasonably priced electric vehicle with a 400 mile range that could tow a reasonable wieght...Id swap asap, but there is no way Im paying 70+ thousand for the present crap.

by Andy Sun Feb 17, 2019 12:46 pm

I think Smelly will spend his time canvassing for Gerard Batten and Tommy Yaxley Lennon Hitler Robinson's extremist UKIP Party

by Lurker Sun Feb 17, 2019 1:00 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:This is like what the Hitler youth did.

They brainwashed their into believing something that wasn't true

Is there anything good on this planet that you believe in? You are a complete lost soul with no purpose. You are a sad POS.

by 'Wolfie Sun Feb 17, 2019 1:17 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I just wish that they would come up with a reasonably priced electric vehicle with a 400 mile range that could tow a reasonable wieght...Id swap asap, but there is no way Im paying 70+ thousand for the present crap.

Bring on the 'Hydrogen Cell' battery systems...

They should give similar range to a regular petrol or diesel vehicle -- much better than the expensive-but-limited range Lithium cells -- and not reliant on a diminishing resource (i.e. Lithium).

Hydrogen cells will also help make electric motors more viable for long range trucks and buses, rather than being currently limited to town-and-city use.

by Original Quill Sun Feb 17, 2019 4:10 pm

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:I just wish that they would come up with a reasonably priced electric vehicle with a 400 mile range that could tow a reasonable wieght...Id swap asap, but there is no way Im paying 70+ thousand for the present crap.

Bring on the 'Hydrogen Cell' battery systems...

They should give similar range to a regular petrol or diesel vehicle -- much better than the expensive-but-limited range Lithium cells -- and not reliant on a diminishing resource (i.e. Lithium).

Hydrogen cells will also help make electric motors more viable for long range trucks and buses, rather than being currently limited to town-and-city use.

My sentiments, exactly.

by The Devil, You Know Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:37 pm

I do love the fact that so many of the placards they were waving had socialist workers party at the top.
One leftist on twitter claimed that was because they are so often left around.
these kids were encouraged to truant by left wing teachers, I wonder how they would have reacted if they had wanted to go on a pro brexit march.

But it will be great to see these kids abandoning their parents chelsea tractors for getting to school and ditching their iphones built with slave labour in china, ditching the half term hols flying to switzerland for a spot of skiing. Or doesn't their activism stretch that far?

by The Devil, You Know Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:39 pm

eddie wrote:
Jules wrote:Greta Thunberg is a smart kid. A descendant of a top scientist and climate change activist. She started this school-skipping movement and whether or not you agree with her politics she's certainly very driven.

I agree! And I love to see these young adults making a stand. It gives me hope.

so with exams a month or 2 away you think the best use of their time is a politically motivated march. No one would object to them making a protest but perhaps the weekend would have been a better time, not the last friday before half term hols.

by Sponsored content