Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Shoot The Messenger?
Is this a chance for those want to ignore climate change to switch the narrative?
https:/
Rather than focusing on the environment, and what we’re doing to it, we can fire shots at Emma Thomson.
It reminds me of certain people who complained of the 5p charge for supermarket shopping bags, claiming it was a ‘stealth tax’ - meanwhile in in the oceans...
https:/
Rather than focusing on the environment, and what we’re doing to it, we can fire shots at Emma Thomson.
It reminds me of certain people who complained of the 5p charge for supermarket shopping bags, claiming it was a ‘stealth tax’ - meanwhile in in the oceans...
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Why are we not using the hugely strong really sensible paper bags we have here in the UK instead of paid for plastic ***? Lazy entitled people will just be so lazy they pay for them and then sling them like they've always done, paying 10p for a bag is not a deterrent it IS just a stealth tax. Ban the bloody things we don't need them.
Sorry, didn't do that very well. Here's a better link.
https:/
https:/
They might have a higher carbon footrpint to produce and be slightly less likely to be reused a lot (we reuse ours til they fall apart though) but they don't clog up the oceans. Sometimes you can't cure all things with one manoeuvre, and this I think is one of those instances. You can either have a lighter carbon footprint or less plastic and I'd choose less plastic every time.x
Not only a hypocrite with regard to choice of travel either!
//Onlookers claim the multi-millionaire activist also drank Laurent-Perrier champagne and dined on beef carpaccio – even though cattle farming is also a major contributor to greenhouse gasses.
Dame Emma has also previously called on people to eat less meat in the name of ‘preserving the planet’.
Cows produce methane – which is 23 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide – while clearing forests for pasture and to grow feed for livestock also drives global warming.//
Perhaps she thought the plebs, who she would have
do as she says and not do as she does, would not find her tucking in behind the curtained cabin of the priveleged elite.
Yes it is easy to call her a hypocrite because that is what she is. IMO
//Onlookers claim the multi-millionaire activist also drank Laurent-Perrier champagne and dined on beef carpaccio – even though cattle farming is also a major contributor to greenhouse gasses.
Dame Emma has also previously called on people to eat less meat in the name of ‘preserving the planet’.
Cows produce methane – which is 23 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide – while clearing forests for pasture and to grow feed for livestock also drives global warming.//
Perhaps she thought the plebs, who she would have
do as she says and not do as she does, would not find her tucking in behind the curtained cabin of the priveleged elite.
Yes it is easy to call her a hypocrite because that is what she is. IMO
Shoot The Messenger?
Yes that is an easy target for those want to ignore the climate changing, those who want to distract us from it, and those who like the Daily Mail want to sell copy from it.
sp, the climate changing is just one aspect of our environmental problems, and governments, scientists, the people and the global financiers are all necessary to achieve solutions.
The older members may remember the 'ozone depletion' scare of the 1980's, so serious that a UN Treaty ( Montreal Protocol ) was ratified by every UN member in 1987; they still don't know if that solved the problem, but speculate " As a result of the international agreement, the ozone hole in Antarctica is slowly recovering.[4] Climate projections indicate that the ozone layer will return to 1980 levels between 2050 and 2070."
https:/
Yes that is an easy target for those want to ignore the climate changing, those who want to distract us from it, and those who like the Daily Mail want to sell copy from it.
sp, the climate changing is just one aspect of our environmental problems, and governments, scientists, the people and the global financiers are all necessary to achieve solutions.
The older members may remember the 'ozone depletion' scare of the 1980's, so serious that a UN Treaty ( Montreal Protocol ) was ratified by every UN member in 1987; they still don't know if that solved the problem, but speculate " As a result of the international agreement, the ozone hole in Antarctica is slowly recovering.[4] Climate projections indicate that the ozone layer will return to 1980 levels between 2050 and 2070."
https:/
Two things strike me.
1) The carbon wasted is high, but not proportionately that much higher than travelling in economy class. With the cost of her ticket, she could be contributing more to government coffers to tackle emvironmental issues, although that would clearly require some commitment on their part; and
2) Whoever took the photograph presumably also flew first class (I would never have such a clear view from my seat). By alleging hypocrisy, is the intended message that it is fine for people who don't give a fig for the environment to fly first class but unacceptable for those who care?
1) The carbon wasted is high, but not proportionately that much higher than travelling in economy class. With the cost of her ticket, she could be contributing more to government coffers to tackle emvironmental issues, although that would clearly require some commitment on their part; and
2) Whoever took the photograph presumably also flew first class (I would never have such a clear view from my seat). By alleging hypocrisy, is the intended message that it is fine for people who don't give a fig for the environment to fly first class but unacceptable for those who care?
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles86 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles142 mins ago
ChatterBank183 mins ago
ChatterBank190 mins ago
