Greta Thunberg

[DUNCAN DONUTS]

Yes but by the time population stops increasing we probably have another 3 billion people.

We already have too many people living a Western style life that's causing climate change let alone however many more billions of people more.

Even if we thwart as of now the desertification and sea water level rising, climate change will get worse with more people but no one wants to be the one to tell people that they are not allowed too many kids.

I certainly don't

Sterilising the unemployed would put a dent in it

 

[Archers Road]

I'm not ****ing about either, I'd have no problem hunting fat people and eating them if I had to to survive.

Come and have a go, ya scrawny ****ing scarecrow.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

I'm not ****ing about either, I'd have no problem hunting fat people and eating them if I had to to survive.

In an apocalypse, there will be no fat people.

 

[Sucky]

Come and have a go, ya scrawny ****ing scarecrow.

Sorry I'm only stocking vegans at the moment

 

[Sucky]

In an apocalypse, there will be no fat people.

Do they dissappear? They'll be a good amount of stock for a long enough while to start my man meat farm.

 

[PINKIE]

Do tell?

Was just thinking I could start a commune with a farm for vegans and vegetarian peeps and let them grow and eat thier own food so they are nice and healthy.

Then sell them to cannibals as free-range organic human meat for a massive mark up.

If the **** hits the fan, initially people will fight each other for what resources are left. But when it runs out we’d pretty soon we’d realise that we’d have to work collectively to survive, so that would mean growing food, collecting water, firewood, hunting animals, growing crops to feed pigs, sheep etc. For those who survived we’d probably end up going back to a lifestyle similar to our ancestors before the industrial revolution. That’s worst case scenario of course.

In the immediate aftermath of some catastrophic climate event. I’d forage for food on the beach, and eat mussels, limpets, crabs, seaweed, fish etc. I’d also forage for berries and nuts etc. I know where there are springs locally so I’d get fresh water. I’d also hunt rabbits and foxes etc.

Basic tenants of survival are food, shelter and warmth. I reckon I’d have those pretty well covered.

 

[PINKIE]

Apparently the buttocks are the most tender part of human meat

Some cannibals consider the meat on the palms of your hands just by the knuckle as a real delicacy

 

[Sucky]

If the **** hits the fan, initially people will fight each other for what resources are left. But when it runs out we’d pretty soon we’d realise that we’d have to work collectively to survive, so that would mean growing food, collecting water, firewood, hunting animals, growing crops to feed pigs, sheep etc. For those who survived we’d probably end up going back to a lifestyle similar to our ancestors before the industrial revolution. That’s worst case scenario of course.

In the immediate aftermath of some catastrophic climate event. I’d forage for food on the beach, and eat mussels, limpets, crabs, seaweed, fish etc. I’d also forage for berries and nuts etc. I know where there are springs locally so I’d get fresh water. I’d also hunt rabbits and foxes etc.

Basic tenants of survival are food, shelter and warmth. I reckon I’d have those pretty well covered.

Mine sounds better and less gay tbh

 

[luvgonzo]

But isn't the fat the tastiest part of the meat?

Also when good is scarce it is a good energy provider

Fat is good and can be tasty but meat that has a high fat content needs long slow cooking or it's chewy and tough, I'm going to need to move around quickly in the apocalypse so cant be dealing with that so I'm flash frying lean meat. Once I've built my fortress, I'll farm the fat people knowing I have time but until then gotta go for the lean meat.

 

[Sucky]

Some cannibals consider the meat on the palms of your hands just by the knuckle as a real delicacy

Id eat that part of the women, wouldn't be able to eat the blokes hand cos the thought of them ****ing with it would put me off tbh.

I'm quite serious about that tbh

 

[PINKIE]

Id eat that part of the women, wouldn't be able to eat the blokes hand cos the thought of them ****ing with it would put me off tbh.

I'm quite serious about that tbh

 

[DUNCAN DONUTS]

If the **** hits the fan, initially people will fight each other for what resources are left. But when it runs out we’d pretty soon we’d realise that we’d have to work collectively to survive, so that would mean growing food, collecting water, firewood, hunting animals, growing crops to feed pigs, sheep etc. For those who survived we’d probably end up going back to a lifestyle similar to our ancestors before the industrial revolution. That’s worst case scenario of course.

In the immediate aftermath of some catastrophic climate event. I’d forage for food on the beach, and eat mussels, limpets, crabs, seaweed, fish etc. I’d also forage for berries and nuts etc. I know where there are springs locally so I’d get fresh water. I’d also hunt rabbits and foxes etc.

Basic tenants of survival are food, shelter and warmth. I reckon I’d have those pretty well covered.

If the **** hits the fan and it becomes every man for himself the EUROPEAN UNION army will march in round us all up and put us in concentration camps .

Sorry to burst your bubble

 

[Sucky]

If the **** hits the fan and it becomes every man for himself the EUROPEAN UNION army will march in round us all up and put us in concentration camps .

Sorry to burst your bubble

Fema wars, I'd just join Fema tbh

 

[PINKIE]

If the **** hits the fan and it becomes every man for himself the EUROPEAN UNION army will march in round us all up and put us in concentration camps .

Sorry to burst your bubble

Sure

 

[Looney Leftie]

Yes but by the time population stops increasing we probably have another 3 billion people.

We already have too many people living a Western style life that's causing climate change let alone however many more billions of people more.

Even if we thwart as of now the desertification and sea water level rising, climate change will get worse with more people but no one wants to be the one to tell people that they are not allowed too many kids.

I certainly don't

It's too late,
The CO2 and methane already in the atmosphere has a lag effect that means we still have another 1-2C already locked in. There wont be a thwarting of the changes.

You can tell people not to have as many kids, that's not the problem, it's how many survive and all nations as they have developed have been through the same process of too many kids surviving before the natural balance takes over and our birth rate decreases in response. It's why many countries in the west now have birth rates barely matching deaths and the population increase is driven by immigration.

One thing that gets me here is the issue with a western style of life, as if the only way to stop emitting GHG is to go back to the stone age. It's not, renewable energy and the kind of intense farming methods being used in the Netherlands show we can reduce our emissions to sustainable levels, reduce the land we need for food to manageable levels and prolong our civilisation though methods available today. We wont do this though because it requires a level of thought and planning that we wont do until it's too late.

 

[Archers Road]

We'll all be under water won't we? So unless you can build a boat, and catch fish, you're ****ed.

 

[BobbyD]

It's too late,
The CO2 and methane already in the atmosphere has a lag effect that means we still have another 1-2C already locked in. There wont be a thwarting of the changes.

You can tell people not to have as many kids, that's not the problem, it's how many survive and all nations as they have developed have been through the same process of too many kids surviving before the natural balance takes over and our birth rate decreases in response. It's why many countries in the west now have birth rates barely matching deaths and the population increase is driven by immigration.

One thing that gets me here is the issue with a western style of life, as if the only way to stop emitting GHG is to go back to the stone age. It's not, renewable energy and the kind of intense farming methods being used in the Netherlands show we can reduce our emissions to sustainable levels, reduce the land we need for food to manageable levels and prolong our civilisation though methods available today. We wont do this though because it requires a level of thought and planning that we wont do until it's too late.

Sorry mate i thought you were arguing something else.

In any case as you say we should make the transition as you say for future existence for when the significant impacts of climate change happen.

Still though you can't let the environment cater to our population growth as a means to stabilise the environment as this is why climate change has gone out of control.

 

[DUNCAN DONUTS]

Fema wars, I'd just join Fema tbh

I do like a nice uniform and boots

 

[Sucky]

It's too late,
The CO2 and methane already in the atmosphere has a lag effect that means we still have another 1-2C already locked in. There wont be a thwarting of the changes.

You can tell people not to have as many kids, that's not the problem, it's how many survive and all nations as they have developed have been through the same process of too many kids surviving before the natural balance takes over and our birth rate decreases in response. It's why many countries in the west now have birth rates barely matching deaths and the population increase is driven by immigration.

One thing that gets me here is the issue with a western style of life, as if the only way to stop emitting GHG is to go back to the stone age. It's not, renewable energy and the kind of intense farming methods being used in the Netherlands show we can reduce our emissions to sustainable levels, reduce the land we need for food to manageable levels and prolong our civilisation though methods available today. We wont do this though because it requires a level of thought and planning that we wont do until it's too late.

I think it's less to do with requiring a level of planning and thought and more to do with the hidden manopolies held by certain industries.

 

[PINKIE]

It's too late,
The CO2 and methane already in the atmosphere has a lag effect that means we still have another 1-2C already locked in. There wont be a thwarting of the changes.

You can tell people not to have as many kids, that's not the problem, it's how many survive and all nations as they have developed have been through the same process of too many kids surviving before the natural balance takes over and our birth rate decreases in response. It's why many countries in the west now have birth rates barely matching deaths and the population increase is driven by immigration.

One thing that gets me here is the issue with a western style of life, as if the only way to stop emitting GHG is to go back to the stone age. It's not, renewable energy and the kind of intense farming methods being used in the Netherlands show we can reduce our emissions to sustainable levels, reduce the land we need for food to manageable levels and prolong our civilisation though methods available today. We wont do this though because it requires a level of thought and planning that we wont do until it's too late.

Rewilding too. If we turn over 25% of our land in the U.K. to forest, peat bogs etc. Then we could meet our zero net carbon targets by 2030.

But this needs a global approach. At the moment we’re just cutting down forests and spewing out more CO2