Asperger's is not a health condition, more of a (neuro) diversity condition that fits within life's rich pageant, often some of its behavioural aspects can be mistaken for OCD, the anxiety experienced can often be associated with differing perceptual filtering e.g. noise / sounds. However Chris Packham is another example of a person with Asperger's who is a campaigning environmentalist who people do not question his stance
Maybe the wrong word but it does affect their actions. You should go see some farmers and their forums, they hate him.
I'm sure some farmers do hate him as what he campaigns for affects their income / crop / pest control methods. However time will tell whether what people campaign for is important / significant for wider society. With hindsight we can see how our local head scarf revolutionaries saved lives and changed standards, however at the time this was not recognised or appreciated by the many
She's a 16 year old girl who would rather spend her youth campaigning about the future world she and other kids have to grow up in than sat at home on an iPad watching Youtubers. What do people want from her? On this thread I've seen so many strawman arguments it's like a ****ing scarecrow's AGM. Why hasn't she had a pop at China? She's 16. She's currently shouting down the US, I'm sure as one of the biggest pollutants on Earth, China is on her to do list. But wait, she was speaking at the UN, where all the nations are, so she doesn't have to. And this thing about her having Asperger's, why is that suddenly being highlighted? If you're talking about that, even with the best of intentions, you're sidestepping the argument. Her parents haven't pushed her into this, they've supported and encouraged her, but not forced her into anything. She's done this off her own back, which is all the more impressive given her age and everything else shes had to overcome. Any issues surrounding her health are moot, they don't detract from the message she is sending out, a message arrogantly ignored by people with the power to do something about it. If we'd all done a bit more in years gone by, she wouldn't even be speaking about it. But we didn't, and now lots of people are getting annoyed at kids skipping school to join her cause. Well, tough **** to those people. Climate change has always been going on and has had no limelight, but now thanks to this wonderful person, more and more people are aware of the problems we face if we don't act. I honestly couldn't be prouder of our younger generation, those are the people that are going to support us in our later years, be thankful they give a ****.
I'm not a climate change denier by any definition, far from it, but I just wonder how much people understand about the implications of the demands being made, and how much they're prepared to personally sacrifice. Current farming methods play havoc with the ecosystem in many ways, not just the climate change issues, but nitrates, ammonia etc, and the rest of the chain to the consumer also contributes, so with the changes, there will be a lot less choice of what food is available, and it will be more expensive. Personal travel will be reduced, as will the ability to take foreign holidays. The cleaning up of the production process for many things we take for granted, will have a global impact, possibly felt the hardest in the poorest regions of the planet and they will need resources and international efforts to protect them. The economy will be hit hard, with lower production and higher costs so less available for pensions etc. For many of the consequences of implementing the extreme measures needed there's a model, as history shows us what life was like in the pre-industrial era. Now I don't mind paying that price, but how many advocating that something must be done have considered the full implications and would accept them for their children?
You have to weigh up what's more important, money or the planet we live on. As GT said, it shouldn't have come to this, but that'll be the choice faced. Personally, I think the Earth is more than worth any hardship we'd have to go through. Giving up a little for our children is the best thing we could possibly do, isn't it? Who cares if we have to make a little sacrifice?
I try and try and try to get my kids to put away their lap tops and turn off the lights when they leave a room, but will they? will they ****ers like.
We'd actually be pretty much forcing the coming generations to give it up. It's hardly a 'little' sacrifice either. Now I'm prepared to go with it, I just wonder how many advocates for change have fully considered the implications.
You should get some of those green timers to add to your system. They're cheap enough as they don't enforce such strict emission standards, but the little plastic things take a while to get here on the rusty old oil burning slow boat from China, but at least you'd be doing your bit.
But the younger generations aren't causing the problem. Green solutions cost money and countries would rather take the environmental hit than shell out for green methods. That's where the problem lies. Telling little Johnny he can't have an iPhone 10 isn't going to change much if the country it comes from is going to continue producing them in a way that's damaging the planet. I took a vote in my classroom yesterday, only two children said they wouldn't want to go meat free for a week, and one of them said it was because their parents wouldn't let them . I think sometimes we underestimate just far children are willing to go for a cause. Children can only speak the truth because they see things objectively, it's when they're exposed to the bias of adults that they start to take sides.
You seem to be arguing against a point I didn't make, and ignoring the one I did make, and there's a fair bit in what you did post I would dispute, but not on here.
You said we'd be forcing younger generations to make a change, but evidently, they don't have to be forced to do anything, they've done nearly all of this off their own backs. Any road down, the message is getting out there that we need to do something about climate change and after decades of ignoring it, that's a good thing.
They haven't done it off their own backs. As a generation they're a bigger drain on the environment than any that came before. You've still ignored the actual point I made in favour of your soap box, so I'm not sure why you bothered replying to my post.
Not convinced on this meat is bad for the environment but it is an easy target and vigorously promoted by big business. Flying accounts for 2.5% of all carbon dioxide emissions, and yet nothing seems to be happening to reduce that other than offering those who can afford it carbon offsetting. For example when Harry and Megan took a 12 seater plane to the south of France (?) it kicked off a bit in the news and then Elton John payed the offset. About a 100 quid yippee the world is saved. Is that it? increasing the cost will just prevent the poor from travelling while the rich just get on with it. Also it's estimated that only 6% of the world population has ever flown, plenty of scope for that to increase.
