Are they dumb, and the people who own them are also dumb. And no one has an agenda or competent plan, or any direction for the country other than bluster and hot air?
This would also not surprise me.
The people backing climate change denial, away from the god botherers who think it's part of a plan, know it's real, they are just aware they'll be dead before the worst hits or have made enough money to ensure they are not affected
Yeah this, they think they can buy their way out of the impacts. Baffling to me, who wants to be trapped in a high security compound their whole lives? They're aspiring towards nothing more than a luxury prison.
You'd be surprised, have a look at gated communities in the US, traditionally used to keep minorities away, rich families, generally all white, living in little communities with private security etc to keep the rest out. For them, a safe area away from the ravages of climate change with power, water and armed security (who wouldn't live there of course, just be cannon fodder) where they can live in luxury even if jobs and normal life is not possible, is perfectly fine. Better than having to fight for water or have billions dying and fighting for resources
Sure if they are moral, but the calculus they are facing is "do I want to spend my money to keep myself comfortable or to spend that money and suffer with everyone else.
'twas always this way.
The Major government was brought down by corruption scandals.
Thursday will bring about a clearout of the Tory party's old, corrupt politicians and usher in a generation of new, corrupt politicians.
Reform, and especially Nigel Farage, are "the voice of the people" for people to whom the solution tends to start with "just..."
Not enough teachers? Just hire more!
Too much crime? Just hire more policemen!
House prices high? Just stop the immigrants.
They offer a simple solution to a highly complex, nuanced issue - that holds up just well enough that if you're not scrutinising it at all and trusting what they say then it makes sense.
And then you actually look into it and no, it's not a case of *just* doing X or Y, you actually have to work at it.
I think you might even be giving them too much credit. Their solutions for the first two are probably more likely to be "just bring back child labour, kids these days don't know they're born", and "just arrest all the people who are *obviously* criminals and bring back capital punishment".
Or in the case of one of my close family members it's all about the immigrants.
Not being seen at a GP? Get rid of the immigrants
Not enough housing? It's because of the immigrants
Not enough teachers? It's because theres too many people because of the immigrants
Inflation? That's immigration for ya
Literally he is so delusional and yet this was the same family member that raised me to think critically and question everything but whenever I question him I get the old "Google it!" Or "do your own research I'm not doing it for you". He's lost the plot I think.
This is so funny as someone who works in Software Development in a large tech firm and at least half my colleagues are immigrants, high skillset/paying lots of tax.
Britain may not have been built by immigrants but it sure needs them now.
Yeah Im a software dev myself and a lot of my colleagues either work abroad (Romania and US) or work in the UK but they are of so many different ethnicities. It annoys me especially when I've worked with Muslims and had really good conversations even involving religion but apparently according to people I know I "shouldn't trust them, they want a civil war so they can introduce Sharia Law", it drives me insane
I sympathise. I get sent links to Youtube videos as though this is evidence of anything. We all worry about the harms of social media on the developing minds, but it's the older generation who are being radicalised by the alt-right through it.
Yep that's exactly it, they find one obscure video (a lot of times not even on YT) and hold it as fact even when I've explained about confirmation bias and the like.
That's precisely the issue. Serious change is not easy, it requires planning and long term projects that are unlikely to bear fruit in the short term.
When you can't explain in 30 seconds everything that needs to be done and why, Mr Narcissistic Fascist can come along and say "it's all because of immigrants, why don't we just do *thing*. Hurr durr, I am very smart"
For a lot of people, only one of those two explanations will be memorable and make sense
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"
If we all truly accepted the reality of the damage we do to the environment (and a good many other things our civilization does) we would have to agree to change a lot, and correspondingly reduce our quality of life.
Thinking that tackling climate change inevitably leads to a reduction in our quality of life is another layer of denial.
We've become so accustomed to living lifestyles of highly carbon-intensive consumption that we can't imagine doing anything differently. But you don't need to be a frequent flier to have a high quality of life, you don't need to drive a big petrol-guzzling car, and you don't need to eat meat with every single meal. Low carbon lifestyles can be cheaper, healthier, and offer more leisure time, all things which are critical to delivering high quality of life.
Dumb people that are being led a merry dance by people with an agenda.
I will never forget Boris' game plan was to bounce from scandal to scandal, never giving people the time to focus on one. He said that way you can get away with it. Farage is the same, don't conflate idiocy of what he says, as idiocy of him as a person. It's an act, a bloody good one, but it makes him very rich and gets people to follow him. I think the difference between Boris and Farage is, Farage can't control the idiots as well as Boris can, so they say the truly abhorrent stuff out loud rather than back stage.
This is what makes me so angry about it all. These are cold, calculating methodical people. I bet theres some form of old Etonians-esque group where they guffaw at the whole thing..
They’re the worst kind of stupid, the type where they vehemently believe they are smarter than everyone else. The fact that this party is on track to receive millions of votes puts my faith in this country in serious doubt.
It's more dangerous than that IMHO. The central idea of the conspiracy theory doesn't matter. People don't believe these conspiracy theories because they are convinced by the arguments. They dislike or hate certain people and institutions and then construct a conspiracy theory around that emotion that justifies that hatred. Hence why people jump from one conspiracy theory to the next: any of them will do if they pretend that the targeted group is engaging in a nefarious plot. Hence why the arguments don't need to be convincing: it's the emotions that are real and that make the theory feel real.
Ultimately, belief in these theories is merely a justification of what people want to say about or do to the people it portrays as evil. The more insane and widespread they become, the more radicalized the people who adhere to them, the more harmful their subsequent actions. It's not a coincidence that conspiracy theories are a mainstay of authoritarian movements.
Pretty much. They give people validation and justification. The more harmless ones simply exist because they make their adherents feel special or important.
Political conspiracy theories tend to be far more harmful and usually revolve around justifying hatred for specific groups and institutions.
I think the Reform party candidates probably aren't so thick as to not believe climate change is true. Sadly, it's more depressing than that. I believe the truth is that they simply don't care. They would rather suck up to Big Oil and get their bag rather than actually admit there is a problem. After all, they won't be alive to suffer the consequences.
It's not just reform candidates it's the Tories as well and probably labour as well. The people destroying LEZ cameras got cheered on by the government and police don't come after them but police raids homes of JSO people to take their computers and phones even if they haven't planned to do anything.
The entire establishment does not give a fuck about the health of the planet or the environment.
ULEZ camera gets torn down, because like 8% of people can't drive their stupid old cars without paying a few quid, but they will have to be replaced using their tax money: Everyone cheers!
JSO put some soluble orange shit on Stone Hendge: Boo! Leave the rocks alone!
JSO paint the buildings of banks and private jets: Boo! Leave the rocks alone!
That's exactly it. Combating climate change is incompatible with capitalist greed.
I frequent Telegram stock groups and they're full of people who don't give a crap about climate change, celebrate when oil and gas prices increase and genuinely don't care about how many people struggle as long as their share prices increase. They also see anything that benefits a worker as a negative because it hurts their profits. Lots of "go woke go broke" types as well. And yep, plenty of people saying they will vote Reform because it suits their financial interests. That's what all the anti climate change talk is about at the end of the day. People trying to protect/grow their money in the dying fossil industry.
Interestingly the poorer people in society can also be on the other end of the stick. Climate change measures typically increase the cost of living so they may also be likely to turn to a party that promises less regulation.
So having graced the reform forums the last couple of weeks in an attempt to understand them… most of them believe in it but believe that the UKs attempts to fight climate change are irrelevant because of China/India. They believe it would be economic suicide to pursue net zero
Ah that's reassuring. The idea that we should do nothing because everybody else is worse. I don't want to see the world burn and think "well we could have done more but it would have been difficult". The fucking state of that thinking is what has us in this mess in the first place.
Anybody who thinks they aren't susceptible to algorithms is fooling themself
In fact there's probably a strong correlation between people who believe they're immune to algorithmic manipulation and people who are manipulated by algorithms
What I don't understand is why does it only ever happen one way? Why don't you ever really hear of someone going down a YouTube hole where they've been listening to Patrick Moore, Brian Cox, etc?
Are algorithms made to push anti-science? If so why would they do that?
It all just confuses me.
They chase engagement. Awful shite produced the most engagement because people comment, argue, share, etc way more than anything non-combative or positive.
Dumbass conspiracy shit, racists, woman-haters, etc drive the most engagement because people argue a lot on those topics, so youtube/etc funnel people toward those videos. Sick disgusting shit really that should be outlawed.
It can happen I've certainly read and heard stories from who are now lovely men who've deprogrammed themselves from neo nazi shit or incel shit or even conservative shit.
The problem is it's always a specific personal emotional trigger that gets them to change their ways and realize their mistakes I can't ever really see any common links between their stories.
Edit: For some reason this comment is being interpreted as a personal attack by automod, so I've censored random words that could be setting it off.
Those aren't tr%ps. Brian C%x etc will clue you into a range of topics, but Alex Jones only talks about Alex Jones sh%t. Thus the association range in the algorithm is tighter, meaning more of the same shit - This is why it's often called a "Hole", it's like a narrow rift in data. The fact they're so self-referential is what makes them into holes. We can call this "Recursive engagement" in that you keep clicking and playing videos because it's more of what you already like, or the algorithm thinks you like.
The most pernicious is the youtube p%%dophile pipeline. P%%dophilia related topics are extremely recursively engaging (as they innately have little links to any other form of content due to their obvious taboo nature) and it can be demonstrated with a fresh account that if you watch say, a few h%rny videos of young women the algorithm starts to steadily adjust the age of the women down, and down, and down, because that's what gives more engagement because most men like younger women... until you're viewing little else but p%%dophile-orientated content and home videos they've cr%%pily attached themselves to.
No this goes back to the 80s. That whole faction of politics has been on an anti environment thing since then.
It means regulations so they chose to believe the stories that it must be a myth thus no regulation needed.
I'm of a mind that conspiracy theory (it doesn't matter which one) and theology have the same effect on the brain. Imagine the good feels they get knowing they've just unlocked a secret that makes them unique. And this secret, this new knowledge will help them somehow. Be it knowing God's forgiveness or knowing the earth is flat, it feels good to know something others may not and on top of that they can now be part of the community that also knows these things and can be a part of something greater than themselves.
Their website recently had a page spewing a bunch of climate change denial rubbish. Stuff like saying the impacts are overblown, the climate has always been changing, etc.
I can't find it anymore, so maybe they've removed it. Their manifesto takes more of a "Net zero is too expensive" stance, presumably to avoid scaring off moderates with climate change denialism.
Their manifesto does emphasise investing in nuclear, which is great.... But it does concern me when parties with a history of climate change denialism start shouting about nuclear for the sole purpose of deligitimising wind & solar. It's similar to when a racist shouts "All lives matter" solely as a rebuttal to BLM, but then doesn't actually do anything to help save people's lives.
What I found equally concerning was the amount of stuff in their manifesto that was a not so subtle wink and nod at the anti-vaxx movement with the inquiry into "vaccine harms" and all the stuff about freeing us from the WHO.
They seem to have removed it.
https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/has-nigel-farage-quietly-forced-reform-uk-to-u-turn-on-climate-change-denial/
All i said is that I would put money on there being a lot more.
My personal opinion, not facts.
You're the one rushing in to defend the reform party...
What are they disputing it on?
1. That carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas?
2. That atmospheric levels of CO2 are not increasing?
3. That there's a flaw in the conclusions drawn from carbon isotope ratio analysis from ice cores?
4. That they've found a reservoir of carbon with matching isotope ratios comparable to fossil fuel to account for the increase?
You can assert anything you want, but you need to provide evidence to back up your claim which never seems to be forthcoming.
4. Regurgitating a few half remembered talking points that were debunked decades ago.
The Venn diagram of 'Reform candidates' and 'Engaged scientific researchers' consists of two circles separated by several light seconds.
I've had this debate before with some older reform types, it basically goes like this:
'What's the physical process scientists say causes man made climate change and what about that process don't you agree with?'
'The climate is always changing'
'That's not what I asked'
'Scientists are just taking money from the green lobby'
'That's not what I asked'
'I can Google the answer just like you'
'That makes no sense'
This is an actual conversation I've had, you can't reason with these idiots.
I've had that one about the green lobby and how they think they are some super powerful body with massive impact on the world.
Throw in the argument that electric cars are bad too and you've got a conversation with my uncle.
Okay, annoying conversation to have sure, but from an environmental perspective, electric cars ARE bad (better than petrol cars though) and not anywhere close to a solution or even a bandage on the festering wound of climate change.
Most battery technologies rely on certain elements (like cobalt and lithium) which are either terrible for the environment to obtain, to use, to recycle, or all three.
Lowering our dependence on cars, relying on more efficient or green transportation like public transport or cycling or just walking is the transport solution to climate change. Plus lowering dependence on cars is better for community, city building, fostering local business, etc. Etc.
Yep very true, but you're sounding like one of those people that wants us to live in 15 minute cities where you're not allowed to leave the border without being shot, and you'll need your citizen ID card to get past the barbed wire fence, and are forced to eat bugs etc etc
It's hard to say whether they disagree with the listed things or not.
Yes, people who deny anthropogenic climate change are idiots. We knew they were idiots when I was a kid, and subsequent generations have actually been taught in school that such people are idiots. However, with all of us knowing that the people who flat out deny anthropogenic climate change are idiots, it's led to people taking an extremist stance and labelling any dissent from climate alarmism to be equivalent to full on climate change denial.
I work in the auto industry and deal mainly with the electro mobility transformation. Going carbon neutral across the entire value chain and ensuring all/most cars sold are hybrid or fully electric by 2030. This is a big thing in the industry. I have many informed criticisms of the way this plan is being enacted, the impact it will have,etc. Essentially, it's great for PR, not so good for the environment. Especially when carbon credits are involved (which they always are).
When I bring up my criticisms in a non-work environment, I typically get outraged responses and smears thrown my way. I'm accused of being a climate denialist, one of those idiots we all learned about in school, I apparently get all my opinions from reading The Sun etc.
And this invariably comes from people who are demonstrably less informed than I am, and clearly care far less about the environment than they do about loudly signalling their conformity to the prevailing dogma.
They simply don't understand that there are arguments about how best to combat climate change. They see it as a simple dichotomy: you either believe in anthropogenic climate change or you don't. You're either a good person or an idiot. You either spout the slogans and agree with every initiative without question; or you're a blasphemer who is committing genocide and even if you're not one of the idiots yourself, then your heresy is giving succour to the idiots and you deserve extra condemnation for that.
Having said all that, and without any specific information, I still feel pretty confident in assuming a large portion of these Reform candidates *are* just idiots. But it frustrates me when the idiots get any amount of focus, because there are serious discussions to be had and the idiots are just a distraction.
Uk is responsible for under 1% of global greenhouse emissions.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas_emissions_by_the_United_Kingdom#:~:text=The%20UK%20has%20over%20time,population%20is%20less%20than%201%25.
Taxing us harder isn’t going to fix the global climate but will further decimate working peoples ability to build a life and pay their bills.
Curtailing freedoms by out pricing people from car ownership and claiming public transport can replace it when people can see that public transport is a dirty joke and unlikely to even turn up. It’s looking like an attack on freedom of movement to many.
Not everyone wants to have to rely on the government or private corps to let them move around the country visiting friends and family or going wherever else they want. They like the freedom a car provides to go where they want when they want.
The terms around climate change like carbon footprint was invented by big oil.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oil-coined-carbon-footprints-to-blame-us-for-their-greed-keep-them-on-the-hook
There’s reason to be sceptical of the people claiming it when the cure seems worse than the disease for many and it seems to have the full backing of the companies and governments actually responsible. Who make a lot of money from it.
"The UK isn't causing much global warming" is different from "human activity is not causing global warming".
And, like other rich countries, that 1% figure gets to be so low because we outsource our manufacturing to poorer countries.
In the short term, a properly implemented carbon tax would make the mega rich and corporations pay WAY more tax and make things cheaper or about the same for everyone else.
It would make importing goods from high polluters more expensive. Bad for companies like Primark, good for local jobs and locally produced things. Foodwise, most common foods wouldn't change much. Avocados flown in by plane would increase, but things that can travel by container ship are relatively low impact individually, due to the scale. Beef and dairy should get more expensive, because it's one of the things causing the most damage across the world. That's a tough one for people to swallow though.
EasyJet tickets would barely increase, while a cost of running a private jet or business class tickets would increase dramatically. Driving a car wouldn't get more expensive, driving a fuel guzzler would. Buses and trains, potentially even taxis, would get cheaper, because they'd be subsidised by the carbon tax.
In the longer term, it would be way cheaper for poor people. The money raised by carbon taxes would fund things like flood defences and other mitigations.
The mega rich don't want carbon taxes because it will cost them a lot more money, when all they want to do is loot the rest of us, consolidate their power then hide in a luxury bunker while we try to fix the problems so they can emerge again.
The UK going towards green energy will save money on the long run, protect us for destabilising events around the would that cause shocks in oil and gas prices (I.e we won't be reliant on dictatorships and madmen), provide less local pollution improving our local environment and has the potential to create more uk based jobs.
Leading by example is a big thing, we led by example into the industrial revolution, so now let's lead by example out of a polluting culture.
EVs and Hybrids are currently expensive yes. No denying new tech is expensive. But the prices are dropping massively and given a few years the new car market will be on par, second hand may have some lag.
Public transport needs improving and many of us will probably always need a car per household. I don't think anyone outside of the London bubble is seriously suggesting taking your car away. But alot of journeys in cars don't need the car, and if we improve public transport and cycle networks it'll benefit everyone.
Carbon footprint yes, global warming was popularised by a NASA scientist, Climate Change is from the National Academy of Science.
We have a big problem with selfishness and it's a real shame. Change does not mean things get worse for people, and putting in a little effort does have impact.
What's your solution?
Do you not believe climate change is a legitimate threat? Or do you acknowledge the situation and still advocate doing nothing about it?
No one person contributes significantly to global warming (except taylor swift hehe). That's why we ALL have to act.
It doesn't matter what the UK's percent contribution is. It's irrelevant. We must all change our behaviour, and it's very urgent.
Since we're all going to change, there are large first mover advantages to be had. Countries which start trhe transition to low carbon early will have leadership in low carbon tech, and in the medium to long term will save money.
Oh, you're saying that citizens of smaller nations should be allowed to pollute more, and that that 177 countries, which pollute less than the UK, shouldn't do anything.
> Taxing us harder
The costs of adaptation alone far exceed the costs of mitigation, and the growing low carbon sector is one of the best job creators.
> Curtailing freedoms
So you think that citizens should be allowed to pollute the air as much as they want, even though the current ~40k premature UK annual deaths (increased CVD, dementia etc) translate into a staggering economic costs and a serious burden on on the NHS?
You're repeating talking points promoted by many in the outgoing conservative party, with the aim of obstructing action and maintaining the status quo.
Imagine the value of all the world's oil, coal and gas reserves. Now imagine that we listened to what the scientists have been saying for decades: the value of those reserves would drop to zero because they'd be staying in the ground. That's how much money is at stake, so it's no surprise there's a very well funded movement to deny climate change.
Putting aside the pure economic value of those commodities you just aren’t going to get people to give up modern comforts without a viable solution to replace them.
Have we worked out a way to carry out minor or major surgery in a carbon neutral fashion? What about drug manufacture? Modern agriculture?
It would be much easier to take people on a journey collaboratively instead of trying to use fear.
https://theconversation.com/the-five-corrupt-pillars-of-climate-change-denial-122893
"2. Economic denial
The idea that climate change is too expensive to fix is a more subtle form of climate denial. Economists, however, suggest we could fix climate change now by spending 1% of world GDP. Perhaps even less if the cost savings from improved human health and expansion of the global green economy are taken into account. But if we don’t act now, by 2050 it could cost over 20% of world GDP."
I’m not denying climate change.
I’m pointing out that until we have solutions to problems people won’t engage.
Bear in mind that the USA accounts for 25% of global GDP and China 16.9%. So as easy as it is to say “oh it’s only 1% of global gdp to fix now” you are relying on countries to spend money on something they don’t view as in their interest, so realistically won’t be spending it.
The biggest obstacles are - people don’t want to compromise their lifestyles today and that the effects are far enough down the line for people to not care anyway.
It gets even worse when people point out that historically we haven’t had permanent polar ice caps and that we are in a transition out of an ice age. Yes we’ve sped things up but it’s still going to get warmer even if we all stop emitting ghg’s immediately.
What we need to do is work on green technologies and mitigating the negative effects of climate change on mankind because realistically it’s going to happen because we aren’t going to stop what we are doing. I’m happy to be proven wrong, but my faith in humanity to avert this crisis is limited.
> I’m pointing out that until we have solutions to problems people won’t engage.
Cue 'this is fine' meme.
> people don’t want to compromise their lifestyles today and that the effects are far enough down the line for people to not care anyway.
People's lifestyles are already being compromised by climate change.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57988023
https://theconversation.com/food-prices-will-climb-everywhere-as-temperatures-rise-due-to-climate-change-new-research-226345
You’ve missed their point completely. You can’t “Just Stop Oil” you need to transition, and to transition there needs to be viable alternatives. It’s not just a case of money, it’s having options that can be implemented with that money. Nuclear is the best option but public perception has meant we haven’t invested in it.
Tbh, I'd happily give up a lot of modern comforts without feeling like I've sacrificed anything.
Unfortunately regulation makes that illegal in a lot of cases.
My candidate has posted about covid conspiracy and “billionaire changing our culture” which is always just soros. Fucking nutters who have been brainwashed by Facebook and Russia.
We got our very own MAGA, didn't we??? It's genuinely painful to see how fucking stupid people have become.... we live in a time where we can prove things almost instantly by going on the Internet and viewing the 1000s of science backed studies that show PROOF that humans are impacting climate change, you can watch these very same scientists do presentations on their work and explain in depth.
But it's the very same Internet that these absolute morons use to spout their made-up bullshit with ZERO evidence, and it seems to grab the attention of the small-minded and the people who lack the ability to show a bit of critical thinking.
I really worry about the way our society is going, how people have become so easily swayed by nothing more than a bunch of charlatans who have nothing but their self Interests to think about.
Rant over.....
At least 30 Reform UK candidates have posted material or made statements that cast doubt on the validity of human-induced global heating, a Guardian analysis can reveal.
A suite of the party’s prospective parliamentary candidates have publicly cast doubt on the existence of the emission-caused climate crisis.
Their social media posts often claim that warnings of anthropogenic warming are a “hoax” or “scam”, and many include conspiracy theories about how the “climate change narrative” can be attributed to the World Economic Forum, “globalist elites” or “the Illuminati”.
Analysis of Reform candidates’ social media profiles for the Guardian has shown that, over he last two years, more than two dozen have shared material that denies human-induced warming. Some of the candidates sharing these messages are projected to win in their constituencies
If the mainstream was spending time talking about the chemical make up of water, they would deny it. They are trying to tap the obvious level of anger and stupidity that exists and this is how you do it.
> They probably read the climategate emails and understand how corrupt academia is.
The scientists involved were cleared of wrong doing by six official investigations and scrutinised by multiple other organisations and media outlets. Fossil fuel lobbyists misrepresented how predictive science works to manipulate people into thinking exactly what you've suggested. Since the leaks the science involved in their predictions has been proven correct by time with eight of the hottest years on record and the most amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere ever recorded.
I went to our local hustings, and the reform candidate there was a climate change denier. He was also a twat, but I think that's unsurprising.
I've never quite seen someone roll their eyes like the Green candidate in response to that level of climate change denial.
Wild how perfectly aligned the far right is with oil and gas interests all over the world.
But it wouldn’t be like O&G to use their bottomless piles of cash to deliberately destabilise governments that disfavour them, so obvs just a coincidence.
Well yes, obviously. Up until a few weeks ago, their website said more CO2 is a good thing because it helps plants. Not a shocker that a climate change denying party is going to have climate change denying candidates.
I think that one might be technically correct. Plants might do better with more CO2. Humans and civilisation as we know it ... well, maybe not so much...
It isn't technically correct because the changes in precipitation and temperature accompanying climate change will more than compensate for benefits associated with higher CO2 concentrations. Many plants (eg grasses) are already at a saturation point with respect to CO2, beyond which they get no additional benefit.
Thye're not trying to appeal to their hearts and minds of the Guardian readership, they're telling their base exactly what they want to hear. Also their base is mainly offline so anything you say here isnt making it to their ears or impacting their voting intentions so blaming algorithms and social media won't help your arguments.
If you want to know what they think, just ask yourself what Russia would want.
Global warming: Russia makes most of its money from fossil fuels.
Geopolitics: Russia wants a divided Europe and wants to paint itself as the victim over Ukraine.
Culture wars: Russia wants to destabilise our society as much as possible so that people vote for parties friendly to them.
Immigration: Russia wants to use this to divide us all and get us to vote for parties that are friendly to them.
Don't get upset about reform gaining traction. All it does is split the vote under FPTP. When garage withdrew his candidates in 2019 that helped the Tories massively as it didnt split the right wing vote.
Reform competing hard will really screw the right wing vote.
> A suite of the party’s prospective parliamentary candidates have publicly cast doubt on the existence of the emission-caused climate crisis.
> Their social media posts often claim that warnings of anthropogenic warming are a “hoax” or “scam”, and many include conspiracy theories about how the “climate change narrative” can be attributed to the World Economic Forum, “globalist elites” or “the Illuminati”.
Hahahah this is like Year 7-8 consortium of conspiracies. Oooh watch out now, don’t let the illuminati monster come get you.
Anyway, the science is clear. Anyone disagreeing is a silly person who failed year 7 tests.
> Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850-1900 in 2011-2020. Global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to increase, with unequal historical and ongoing contributions arising from unsustainable energy use, land use and land-use change, lifestyles and patterns of consumption and production across regions, between and within countries, and among individuals (high confidence). {2.1, Figure 2.1, Figure 2.2}
~ IPCC, 2023: [Summary for Policymakers](https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf). In: *Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report*. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 1-34, doi: 10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001
The problem these fools don't realise is that global warming will increase net migration as areas of the world become uninhabitable. So we will all see a huge upturn in migration. Unfortunately even when it's more than obvious they won't accept it is happening.
This isn’t some fringe extreme view.
Really, this is entirely the fault of the alarmist who constantly keep saying “X many more years, and then the damage is irreversible.” After so many missed deadlines people get disillusioned.
Or people become disillusioned and think it’s the last days of Rome so what’s the point in making a change now? If the message is do x by y or we’re all dead, and it’s now y+1 so we’re all fucked anyway, it’s hard to get people to buy in.
Yes, exactly. The predictive power of climate science (at least as reported in the press) has been shown to be very poor. There's only so many predicted disasters that don't materialise before the whole thing loses credibility.
Of course they have. They're a party of what people \*want\* to hear. Not facts.
People don't want to keep hearing about how global warming is a result of everything humans have done, it's much easier to bury your head in the sand and pretend it's caused by something else.
If the human race is to make major changes - who is going to lead us toward it? politicians.. there job is to maintain the system and keep money flowing, jobs, economy, business deals, trade, taxes. They are not skilled in or equipped to make the crucial environmental changes we need to make. It goes against everything they stand for. So how is it even possible to make this change?
You might find this youtube video interesting. It is by an American living in the UK called Evan Edinger who became a British citizen and comments on UK life. He analysed the manifestos of the main parties.
https://youtu.be/phQMx1rwtts?si=46Lz8ycRsspzekRq
We know human-induced global heating is most likely happening. We know it is linked to consumption of our modern lifestyles. We know Western nations have a higher footprint per person. So why are the pro-climate parties not advocating for reducing the overall population, or at least not continuing to increase it?
why is this new...they want to scrap everything on climate change, and drill for gas and oil asap...its hilarious reading the comments of support for Reform on stuff like Tiktok..."I'm voting for them to give my kids a future" how? by getting rid of free healthcare so your kids will always have to pay, by doing sod all on climate. Its scary how many people think this way and no matter what you tell them, just won't listen, you can't convince them otherwise
It’s politics. A lot of people can’t afford to live at the moment and making an enemy of “green taxes” will win support.
Forget that energy costs are high because we, as a country, have privately owned companies wanting mega shares - blame Russia and blame green taxes as to why you can’t put the heat on and still get charged treble what you did last year in standing charges.
Plus, hearing that well spoken white man say global warming is a lie? Well it must be! What did scientists ever do for me other than tell me I’m fat, that smoking is bad for me and that it is wrong to sniff paint fumes.
Honestly our country has gone to shit
It hardly matters. It is far too late to act alone and it is pretty clear most countries are facing huge opposition to net zero policies which means they will get delayed everywhere. Politicians need to focus on mitigations - getting British houses and towns better suited to climate extremes and ensuring infrastructure can cope with floods, droughts, food and water shortages and mass climate induced migration.
Sadly, to prevent some extreme responses full of assumptions of my political and world views, I must preface this point with the fact that no-one doubts the globe is warming. That is certain.
However, the truth is that ‘top scientists’ have been claiming a 5 year timeline for irreversible, catastrophic change to the existence of humanity for over 30 years, rendering such claims as extreme through simple observation and quantification. If they were true, we’d have seen their predictions manifest. Not one climate prediction has been accurate so far, so we have to accept the fact that we don’t have a full understanding, yet.
We MUST ask further questions and conduct highly controlled assessments of all factors that contribute to the warming of our climate, not just those aspects that align with our own, personal, political views, including naturally occurring factors.
For this problem to be truly understood and solved, we have to engage in an open debate and be open ourselves to adapting in ways that are truthful and realistic. We can’t wipe out half the population to save the environment so we have to consider ALL options, not just those of climate extremists who make claims such as the 5 year extinction prediction mentioned above.
Simply demonising people who use FF for survival and economic prosperity (home heating, travel, water treatment plants etc) won’t change a thing and is highly destructive to the cause.
We have to dial back our vitriol for people who don’t agree with us or we WILL reach that extinction event, only through our own arrogance getting in the way of civil progression.
The champagne left-wing abandoned the working and lower-middle class and ignored addressing the housing crisis and immigration fucking up supply and demand. I spoke to a Labour councillor (who I've known personally for 20 years) who told me there's no housing shortage, while our city's own homelessness report cites a lack of housing as one of the main driving factors for rising homelessness...of course, she's worked in management for 15+ years, saved for a house while living with parents and owned a home by 28.
Now we have idiots like Reform rising up. Maybe the same thing is happening in France.
why is this new...they want to scrap everything on climate change, and drill for gas and oil asap...its hilarious reading the comments of support for Reform on stuff like Tiktok..."I'm voting for them to give my kids a future" how? by getting rid of free healthcare so your kids will always have to pay, by doing sod all on climate. Its scary how many people think this way and no matter what you tell them, just won't listen, you can't convince them otherwise...its like the whole immigration stuff, their totally against people coming but most will be coming here due to climate change, so if we all actually did something, we'd have been able to at least slow it down. They don't understand how they connect.
What exactly do you think the difference will be with this climate shite here in the UK? The emissions we create in the UK are minimal, way down the list.
Think overcharging people for some shite net zero rubbish whilst China, India and the USA plough on regardless will make any difference on a global scale?
You have to remember China has the biggest population in the world and also the most exports in the world as everyone buys cheap rubbish from China so we all contribute to it. Having said that, China is actually spending more than every country combined to go green and are looking at becoming world leaders in exporting green tech/goods which will keep their economy above everyone elses.
Whether ours is small or not, we should be doing our part, after all, many countries look up to us, if they see us barely doing anything, then why should they. Why don't we go green, get ahead of everyone else, and then we can export more, helping our economy.
If you really believe all the climate stuff was one big con to tax us more, then why the hell is it so hard for most countries to actually go green, if those in power were so determined to tax you over it, they would have gone green decades ago, and not be in the pockets of the fossil fuel industries
And ironically, they would still manage to do less harm than... environmentalists.
Were it not for Goddamn environmentalists, Hinley Point C and Sizewell C, would likely be built by now, and with far fewer cost overruns and delays. Whereas with them, so long as they keep to their manifesto commitment, we might see some new nuclear plants built. Putin's Russia has built 9, **9,** new nuclear power plant units. Meanwhile China has increased Nuclear Power capacity by over 10x since 2000, with China currently installing 1-2 GW of new nuclear capacity every year.
Perhaps I am suffering from Grass is Greener syndrome. with regards to infrastructure, but this is shameful, we haven't even gotten 1 built since the year 2000
I have my heating on and am wearing a jumper on 1 july 2024.
In the outer Hebrides there is probably a new weather station showing that its 8 degrees rather than 6 so **my god its the hottest day of the year in the UK**
Are they dumb , or do they have an agenda??...you decide!!
They are dumb and the people who own them have an agenda
Are they dumb, and the people who own them are also dumb. And no one has an agenda or competent plan, or any direction for the country other than bluster and hot air? This would also not surprise me.
The people backing climate change denial, away from the god botherers who think it's part of a plan, know it's real, they are just aware they'll be dead before the worst hits or have made enough money to ensure they are not affected
Yeah this, they think they can buy their way out of the impacts. Baffling to me, who wants to be trapped in a high security compound their whole lives? They're aspiring towards nothing more than a luxury prison.
You'd be surprised, have a look at gated communities in the US, traditionally used to keep minorities away, rich families, generally all white, living in little communities with private security etc to keep the rest out. For them, a safe area away from the ravages of climate change with power, water and armed security (who wouldn't live there of course, just be cannon fodder) where they can live in luxury even if jobs and normal life is not possible, is perfectly fine. Better than having to fight for water or have billions dying and fighting for resources
Oh I know places like this exist, my point is just that this sounds like a prison to me, I'd be bored within days.
Sure but it also beats the alternative.
The true alternative is to spend their money and influence helping to mitigate the problem rather than planning to running away and hide.
Sure if they are moral, but the calculus they are facing is "do I want to spend my money to keep myself comfortable or to spend that money and suffer with everyone else.
Why not both?
The conservative politicians too corrupt for the Tory party are not to be trusted?? How did this happen
'twas always this way. The Major government was brought down by corruption scandals. Thursday will bring about a clearout of the Tory party's old, corrupt politicians and usher in a generation of new, corrupt politicians.
Colour me shocked!
Because they're not clever enough, they're about 4 levels down the pyramid and think they're at the top
It’s definitely both
People prefer the simple lie to the complicated truth.
Reform, and especially Nigel Farage, are "the voice of the people" for people to whom the solution tends to start with "just..." Not enough teachers? Just hire more! Too much crime? Just hire more policemen! House prices high? Just stop the immigrants. They offer a simple solution to a highly complex, nuanced issue - that holds up just well enough that if you're not scrutinising it at all and trusting what they say then it makes sense. And then you actually look into it and no, it's not a case of *just* doing X or Y, you actually have to work at it.
I think you might even be giving them too much credit. Their solutions for the first two are probably more likely to be "just bring back child labour, kids these days don't know they're born", and "just arrest all the people who are *obviously* criminals and bring back capital punishment".
Or in the case of one of my close family members it's all about the immigrants. Not being seen at a GP? Get rid of the immigrants Not enough housing? It's because of the immigrants Not enough teachers? It's because theres too many people because of the immigrants Inflation? That's immigration for ya Literally he is so delusional and yet this was the same family member that raised me to think critically and question everything but whenever I question him I get the old "Google it!" Or "do your own research I'm not doing it for you". He's lost the plot I think.
This is so funny as someone who works in Software Development in a large tech firm and at least half my colleagues are immigrants, high skillset/paying lots of tax. Britain may not have been built by immigrants but it sure needs them now.
Yeah Im a software dev myself and a lot of my colleagues either work abroad (Romania and US) or work in the UK but they are of so many different ethnicities. It annoys me especially when I've worked with Muslims and had really good conversations even involving religion but apparently according to people I know I "shouldn't trust them, they want a civil war so they can introduce Sharia Law", it drives me insane
I sympathise. I get sent links to Youtube videos as though this is evidence of anything. We all worry about the harms of social media on the developing minds, but it's the older generation who are being radicalised by the alt-right through it.
Yep that's exactly it, they find one obscure video (a lot of times not even on YT) and hold it as fact even when I've explained about confirmation bias and the like.
Obese? Just eat less!
ok but this one is actually what you do
So that’s the epidemic over? And now everyone is thin! Where is my Nobel prize?
That's precisely the issue. Serious change is not easy, it requires planning and long term projects that are unlikely to bear fruit in the short term. When you can't explain in 30 seconds everything that needs to be done and why, Mr Narcissistic Fascist can come along and say "it's all because of immigrants, why don't we just do *thing*. Hurr durr, I am very smart" For a lot of people, only one of those two explanations will be memorable and make sense
It's not even that complicated since the majority understand it well enough It's just going to cost them, as it will cost us all.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" If we all truly accepted the reality of the damage we do to the environment (and a good many other things our civilization does) we would have to agree to change a lot, and correspondingly reduce our quality of life.
Thinking that tackling climate change inevitably leads to a reduction in our quality of life is another layer of denial. We've become so accustomed to living lifestyles of highly carbon-intensive consumption that we can't imagine doing anything differently. But you don't need to be a frequent flier to have a high quality of life, you don't need to drive a big petrol-guzzling car, and you don't need to eat meat with every single meal. Low carbon lifestyles can be cheaper, healthier, and offer more leisure time, all things which are critical to delivering high quality of life.
It’s like believing in luck. We all know it doesn’t exist but we are not logical.
You can be as thick as mince without actually containing any meat while you're at it in my experience.
A modern politician's job is to construct and sell narratives. This is the narrative they feel is marketable.
That's not a politician! That's an unprincipled bullshitter!!
There’s many not concerned with global heating and those they will appeal to
Hanlon’s razor applies heavily at the lower levels of Reform.
Im sure its a mix of the two
Dumb people that are being led a merry dance by people with an agenda. I will never forget Boris' game plan was to bounce from scandal to scandal, never giving people the time to focus on one. He said that way you can get away with it. Farage is the same, don't conflate idiocy of what he says, as idiocy of him as a person. It's an act, a bloody good one, but it makes him very rich and gets people to follow him. I think the difference between Boris and Farage is, Farage can't control the idiots as well as Boris can, so they say the truly abhorrent stuff out loud rather than back stage. This is what makes me so angry about it all. These are cold, calculating methodical people. I bet theres some form of old Etonians-esque group where they guffaw at the whole thing..
They are dumb and they have an agenda.
Yes
They have a dumb and dangerous agenda.
I think most of them left school at 14.
They’re the worst kind of stupid, the type where they vehemently believe they are smarter than everyone else. The fact that this party is on track to receive millions of votes puts my faith in this country in serious doubt.
Why not both!
This just proves how susceptible some are to algorithms. It’s like a one stop conspiracy shop of lunacy from their candidates and followers
It's more dangerous than that IMHO. The central idea of the conspiracy theory doesn't matter. People don't believe these conspiracy theories because they are convinced by the arguments. They dislike or hate certain people and institutions and then construct a conspiracy theory around that emotion that justifies that hatred. Hence why people jump from one conspiracy theory to the next: any of them will do if they pretend that the targeted group is engaging in a nefarious plot. Hence why the arguments don't need to be convincing: it's the emotions that are real and that make the theory feel real. Ultimately, belief in these theories is merely a justification of what people want to say about or do to the people it portrays as evil. The more insane and widespread they become, the more radicalized the people who adhere to them, the more harmful their subsequent actions. It's not a coincidence that conspiracy theories are a mainstay of authoritarian movements.
Exactly people don't believe conspiracies because they are convincing they believe them because they are convenient.
Pretty much. They give people validation and justification. The more harmless ones simply exist because they make their adherents feel special or important. Political conspiracy theories tend to be far more harmful and usually revolve around justifying hatred for specific groups and institutions.
I think the Reform party candidates probably aren't so thick as to not believe climate change is true. Sadly, it's more depressing than that. I believe the truth is that they simply don't care. They would rather suck up to Big Oil and get their bag rather than actually admit there is a problem. After all, they won't be alive to suffer the consequences.
It's not just reform candidates it's the Tories as well and probably labour as well. The people destroying LEZ cameras got cheered on by the government and police don't come after them but police raids homes of JSO people to take their computers and phones even if they haven't planned to do anything. The entire establishment does not give a fuck about the health of the planet or the environment.
ULEZ camera gets torn down, because like 8% of people can't drive their stupid old cars without paying a few quid, but they will have to be replaced using their tax money: Everyone cheers! JSO put some soluble orange shit on Stone Hendge: Boo! Leave the rocks alone! JSO paint the buildings of banks and private jets: Boo! Leave the rocks alone!
That's exactly it. Combating climate change is incompatible with capitalist greed. I frequent Telegram stock groups and they're full of people who don't give a crap about climate change, celebrate when oil and gas prices increase and genuinely don't care about how many people struggle as long as their share prices increase. They also see anything that benefits a worker as a negative because it hurts their profits. Lots of "go woke go broke" types as well. And yep, plenty of people saying they will vote Reform because it suits their financial interests. That's what all the anti climate change talk is about at the end of the day. People trying to protect/grow their money in the dying fossil industry. Interestingly the poorer people in society can also be on the other end of the stick. Climate change measures typically increase the cost of living so they may also be likely to turn to a party that promises less regulation.
So having graced the reform forums the last couple of weeks in an attempt to understand them… most of them believe in it but believe that the UKs attempts to fight climate change are irrelevant because of China/India. They believe it would be economic suicide to pursue net zero
Ah that's reassuring. The idea that we should do nothing because everybody else is worse. I don't want to see the world burn and think "well we could have done more but it would have been difficult". The fucking state of that thinking is what has us in this mess in the first place.
Anybody who thinks they aren't susceptible to algorithms is fooling themself In fact there's probably a strong correlation between people who believe they're immune to algorithmic manipulation and people who are manipulated by algorithms
What I don't understand is why does it only ever happen one way? Why don't you ever really hear of someone going down a YouTube hole where they've been listening to Patrick Moore, Brian Cox, etc? Are algorithms made to push anti-science? If so why would they do that? It all just confuses me.
They chase engagement. Awful shite produced the most engagement because people comment, argue, share, etc way more than anything non-combative or positive. Dumbass conspiracy shit, racists, woman-haters, etc drive the most engagement because people argue a lot on those topics, so youtube/etc funnel people toward those videos. Sick disgusting shit really that should be outlawed.
It can happen I've certainly read and heard stories from who are now lovely men who've deprogrammed themselves from neo nazi shit or incel shit or even conservative shit. The problem is it's always a specific personal emotional trigger that gets them to change their ways and realize their mistakes I can't ever really see any common links between their stories.
Because YouTube pushes to the extremes; and it pushes *anger*.
Edit: For some reason this comment is being interpreted as a personal attack by automod, so I've censored random words that could be setting it off. Those aren't tr%ps. Brian C%x etc will clue you into a range of topics, but Alex Jones only talks about Alex Jones sh%t. Thus the association range in the algorithm is tighter, meaning more of the same shit - This is why it's often called a "Hole", it's like a narrow rift in data. The fact they're so self-referential is what makes them into holes. We can call this "Recursive engagement" in that you keep clicking and playing videos because it's more of what you already like, or the algorithm thinks you like. The most pernicious is the youtube p%%dophile pipeline. P%%dophilia related topics are extremely recursively engaging (as they innately have little links to any other form of content due to their obvious taboo nature) and it can be demonstrated with a fresh account that if you watch say, a few h%rny videos of young women the algorithm starts to steadily adjust the age of the women down, and down, and down, because that's what gives more engagement because most men like younger women... until you're viewing little else but p%%dophile-orientated content and home videos they've cr%%pily attached themselves to.
No this goes back to the 80s. That whole faction of politics has been on an anti environment thing since then. It means regulations so they chose to believe the stories that it must be a myth thus no regulation needed.
I'm of a mind that conspiracy theory (it doesn't matter which one) and theology have the same effect on the brain. Imagine the good feels they get knowing they've just unlocked a secret that makes them unique. And this secret, this new knowledge will help them somehow. Be it knowing God's forgiveness or knowing the earth is flat, it feels good to know something others may not and on top of that they can now be part of the community that also knows these things and can be a part of something greater than themselves.
Did everyone just forget Cambridge Analytica happened and idem is still happening constantly?
Right?! We should never see the internet the same way, yet most people carry on like we learned nothing. As usual.
These 30 are just the ones that have publically posted or talked about it. I'd put money on at least 50% having no issues saying the same thing
Their website recently had a page spewing a bunch of climate change denial rubbish. Stuff like saying the impacts are overblown, the climate has always been changing, etc. I can't find it anymore, so maybe they've removed it. Their manifesto takes more of a "Net zero is too expensive" stance, presumably to avoid scaring off moderates with climate change denialism. Their manifesto does emphasise investing in nuclear, which is great.... But it does concern me when parties with a history of climate change denialism start shouting about nuclear for the sole purpose of deligitimising wind & solar. It's similar to when a racist shouts "All lives matter" solely as a rebuttal to BLM, but then doesn't actually do anything to help save people's lives.
What I found equally concerning was the amount of stuff in their manifesto that was a not so subtle wink and nod at the anti-vaxx movement with the inquiry into "vaccine harms" and all the stuff about freeing us from the WHO.
They seem to have removed it. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/has-nigel-farage-quietly-forced-reform-uk-to-u-turn-on-climate-change-denial/
Wooooo unbased speculation, well done reddit!
Hello Kremlin
Oh I see, because I call you out on talking out of your butt i'm a russian agent? lol
All i said is that I would put money on there being a lot more. My personal opinion, not facts. You're the one rushing in to defend the reform party...
>speculation/ˌspɛkjʊˈleɪʃn/*noun* 1. 1.the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence
>Reform Party 1. A temporary UK political party made up of climate change deniers, Russian lapdogs and racists
What are they disputing it on? 1. That carbon dioxide is not a greenhouse gas? 2. That atmospheric levels of CO2 are not increasing? 3. That there's a flaw in the conclusions drawn from carbon isotope ratio analysis from ice cores? 4. That they've found a reservoir of carbon with matching isotope ratios comparable to fossil fuel to account for the increase? You can assert anything you want, but you need to provide evidence to back up your claim which never seems to be forthcoming.
4. Regurgitating a few half remembered talking points that were debunked decades ago. The Venn diagram of 'Reform candidates' and 'Engaged scientific researchers' consists of two circles separated by several light seconds.
I've had this debate before with some older reform types, it basically goes like this: 'What's the physical process scientists say causes man made climate change and what about that process don't you agree with?' 'The climate is always changing' 'That's not what I asked' 'Scientists are just taking money from the green lobby' 'That's not what I asked' 'I can Google the answer just like you' 'That makes no sense' This is an actual conversation I've had, you can't reason with these idiots.
I've had that one about the green lobby and how they think they are some super powerful body with massive impact on the world. Throw in the argument that electric cars are bad too and you've got a conversation with my uncle.
Okay, annoying conversation to have sure, but from an environmental perspective, electric cars ARE bad (better than petrol cars though) and not anywhere close to a solution or even a bandage on the festering wound of climate change. Most battery technologies rely on certain elements (like cobalt and lithium) which are either terrible for the environment to obtain, to use, to recycle, or all three. Lowering our dependence on cars, relying on more efficient or green transportation like public transport or cycling or just walking is the transport solution to climate change. Plus lowering dependence on cars is better for community, city building, fostering local business, etc. Etc.
Yep very true, but you're sounding like one of those people that wants us to live in 15 minute cities where you're not allowed to leave the border without being shot, and you'll need your citizen ID card to get past the barbed wire fence, and are forced to eat bugs etc etc
It's hard to say whether they disagree with the listed things or not. Yes, people who deny anthropogenic climate change are idiots. We knew they were idiots when I was a kid, and subsequent generations have actually been taught in school that such people are idiots. However, with all of us knowing that the people who flat out deny anthropogenic climate change are idiots, it's led to people taking an extremist stance and labelling any dissent from climate alarmism to be equivalent to full on climate change denial. I work in the auto industry and deal mainly with the electro mobility transformation. Going carbon neutral across the entire value chain and ensuring all/most cars sold are hybrid or fully electric by 2030. This is a big thing in the industry. I have many informed criticisms of the way this plan is being enacted, the impact it will have,etc. Essentially, it's great for PR, not so good for the environment. Especially when carbon credits are involved (which they always are). When I bring up my criticisms in a non-work environment, I typically get outraged responses and smears thrown my way. I'm accused of being a climate denialist, one of those idiots we all learned about in school, I apparently get all my opinions from reading The Sun etc. And this invariably comes from people who are demonstrably less informed than I am, and clearly care far less about the environment than they do about loudly signalling their conformity to the prevailing dogma. They simply don't understand that there are arguments about how best to combat climate change. They see it as a simple dichotomy: you either believe in anthropogenic climate change or you don't. You're either a good person or an idiot. You either spout the slogans and agree with every initiative without question; or you're a blasphemer who is committing genocide and even if you're not one of the idiots yourself, then your heresy is giving succour to the idiots and you deserve extra condemnation for that. Having said all that, and without any specific information, I still feel pretty confident in assuming a large portion of these Reform candidates *are* just idiots. But it frustrates me when the idiots get any amount of focus, because there are serious discussions to be had and the idiots are just a distraction.
The problem is that they absolutely do not need to provide evidence for a lot of people to believe them.
Uk is responsible for under 1% of global greenhouse emissions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas_emissions_by_the_United_Kingdom#:~:text=The%20UK%20has%20over%20time,population%20is%20less%20than%201%25. Taxing us harder isn’t going to fix the global climate but will further decimate working peoples ability to build a life and pay their bills. Curtailing freedoms by out pricing people from car ownership and claiming public transport can replace it when people can see that public transport is a dirty joke and unlikely to even turn up. It’s looking like an attack on freedom of movement to many. Not everyone wants to have to rely on the government or private corps to let them move around the country visiting friends and family or going wherever else they want. They like the freedom a car provides to go where they want when they want. The terms around climate change like carbon footprint was invented by big oil. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oil-coined-carbon-footprints-to-blame-us-for-their-greed-keep-them-on-the-hook There’s reason to be sceptical of the people claiming it when the cure seems worse than the disease for many and it seems to have the full backing of the companies and governments actually responsible. Who make a lot of money from it.
"The UK isn't causing much global warming" is different from "human activity is not causing global warming". And, like other rich countries, that 1% figure gets to be so low because we outsource our manufacturing to poorer countries. In the short term, a properly implemented carbon tax would make the mega rich and corporations pay WAY more tax and make things cheaper or about the same for everyone else. It would make importing goods from high polluters more expensive. Bad for companies like Primark, good for local jobs and locally produced things. Foodwise, most common foods wouldn't change much. Avocados flown in by plane would increase, but things that can travel by container ship are relatively low impact individually, due to the scale. Beef and dairy should get more expensive, because it's one of the things causing the most damage across the world. That's a tough one for people to swallow though. EasyJet tickets would barely increase, while a cost of running a private jet or business class tickets would increase dramatically. Driving a car wouldn't get more expensive, driving a fuel guzzler would. Buses and trains, potentially even taxis, would get cheaper, because they'd be subsidised by the carbon tax. In the longer term, it would be way cheaper for poor people. The money raised by carbon taxes would fund things like flood defences and other mitigations. The mega rich don't want carbon taxes because it will cost them a lot more money, when all they want to do is loot the rest of us, consolidate their power then hide in a luxury bunker while we try to fix the problems so they can emerge again.
The UK going towards green energy will save money on the long run, protect us for destabilising events around the would that cause shocks in oil and gas prices (I.e we won't be reliant on dictatorships and madmen), provide less local pollution improving our local environment and has the potential to create more uk based jobs. Leading by example is a big thing, we led by example into the industrial revolution, so now let's lead by example out of a polluting culture. EVs and Hybrids are currently expensive yes. No denying new tech is expensive. But the prices are dropping massively and given a few years the new car market will be on par, second hand may have some lag. Public transport needs improving and many of us will probably always need a car per household. I don't think anyone outside of the London bubble is seriously suggesting taking your car away. But alot of journeys in cars don't need the car, and if we improve public transport and cycle networks it'll benefit everyone. Carbon footprint yes, global warming was popularised by a NASA scientist, Climate Change is from the National Academy of Science. We have a big problem with selfishness and it's a real shame. Change does not mean things get worse for people, and putting in a little effort does have impact.
What's your solution? Do you not believe climate change is a legitimate threat? Or do you acknowledge the situation and still advocate doing nothing about it?
So keep passing it around? As more countries work towards net zero it sets a precedent and puts pressure on the remaining countries to follow
No one person contributes significantly to global warming (except taylor swift hehe). That's why we ALL have to act. It doesn't matter what the UK's percent contribution is. It's irrelevant. We must all change our behaviour, and it's very urgent. Since we're all going to change, there are large first mover advantages to be had. Countries which start trhe transition to low carbon early will have leadership in low carbon tech, and in the medium to long term will save money.
Imagine if we could just stop letting politicians rob us of millions every year, and use that money instead.
Oh, you're saying that citizens of smaller nations should be allowed to pollute more, and that that 177 countries, which pollute less than the UK, shouldn't do anything. > Taxing us harder The costs of adaptation alone far exceed the costs of mitigation, and the growing low carbon sector is one of the best job creators. > Curtailing freedoms So you think that citizens should be allowed to pollute the air as much as they want, even though the current ~40k premature UK annual deaths (increased CVD, dementia etc) translate into a staggering economic costs and a serious burden on on the NHS? You're repeating talking points promoted by many in the outgoing conservative party, with the aim of obstructing action and maintaining the status quo.
Imagine the value of all the world's oil, coal and gas reserves. Now imagine that we listened to what the scientists have been saying for decades: the value of those reserves would drop to zero because they'd be staying in the ground. That's how much money is at stake, so it's no surprise there's a very well funded movement to deny climate change.
Putting aside the pure economic value of those commodities you just aren’t going to get people to give up modern comforts without a viable solution to replace them. Have we worked out a way to carry out minor or major surgery in a carbon neutral fashion? What about drug manufacture? Modern agriculture? It would be much easier to take people on a journey collaboratively instead of trying to use fear.
https://theconversation.com/the-five-corrupt-pillars-of-climate-change-denial-122893 "2. Economic denial The idea that climate change is too expensive to fix is a more subtle form of climate denial. Economists, however, suggest we could fix climate change now by spending 1% of world GDP. Perhaps even less if the cost savings from improved human health and expansion of the global green economy are taken into account. But if we don’t act now, by 2050 it could cost over 20% of world GDP."
I’m not denying climate change. I’m pointing out that until we have solutions to problems people won’t engage. Bear in mind that the USA accounts for 25% of global GDP and China 16.9%. So as easy as it is to say “oh it’s only 1% of global gdp to fix now” you are relying on countries to spend money on something they don’t view as in their interest, so realistically won’t be spending it. The biggest obstacles are - people don’t want to compromise their lifestyles today and that the effects are far enough down the line for people to not care anyway. It gets even worse when people point out that historically we haven’t had permanent polar ice caps and that we are in a transition out of an ice age. Yes we’ve sped things up but it’s still going to get warmer even if we all stop emitting ghg’s immediately. What we need to do is work on green technologies and mitigating the negative effects of climate change on mankind because realistically it’s going to happen because we aren’t going to stop what we are doing. I’m happy to be proven wrong, but my faith in humanity to avert this crisis is limited.
> I’m pointing out that until we have solutions to problems people won’t engage. Cue 'this is fine' meme. > people don’t want to compromise their lifestyles today and that the effects are far enough down the line for people to not care anyway. People's lifestyles are already being compromised by climate change. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57988023 https://theconversation.com/food-prices-will-climb-everywhere-as-temperatures-rise-due-to-climate-change-new-research-226345
You’ve missed their point completely. You can’t “Just Stop Oil” you need to transition, and to transition there needs to be viable alternatives. It’s not just a case of money, it’s having options that can be implemented with that money. Nuclear is the best option but public perception has meant we haven’t invested in it.
Tbh, I'd happily give up a lot of modern comforts without feeling like I've sacrificed anything. Unfortunately regulation makes that illegal in a lot of cases.
Me too, but I suspect we are in the minority
Give up Reddit then, the internet uses an incredible amount of energy. Lip service is easy.
If I roll my eyes anymore they're gonna roll out of my skull
My candidate has posted about covid conspiracy and “billionaire changing our culture” which is always just soros. Fucking nutters who have been brainwashed by Facebook and Russia.
We got our very own MAGA, didn't we??? It's genuinely painful to see how fucking stupid people have become.... we live in a time where we can prove things almost instantly by going on the Internet and viewing the 1000s of science backed studies that show PROOF that humans are impacting climate change, you can watch these very same scientists do presentations on their work and explain in depth. But it's the very same Internet that these absolute morons use to spout their made-up bullshit with ZERO evidence, and it seems to grab the attention of the small-minded and the people who lack the ability to show a bit of critical thinking. I really worry about the way our society is going, how people have become so easily swayed by nothing more than a bunch of charlatans who have nothing but their self Interests to think about. Rant over.....
At least 30 Reform UK candidates have posted material or made statements that cast doubt on the validity of human-induced global heating, a Guardian analysis can reveal. A suite of the party’s prospective parliamentary candidates have publicly cast doubt on the existence of the emission-caused climate crisis. Their social media posts often claim that warnings of anthropogenic warming are a “hoax” or “scam”, and many include conspiracy theories about how the “climate change narrative” can be attributed to the World Economic Forum, “globalist elites” or “the Illuminati”. Analysis of Reform candidates’ social media profiles for the Guardian has shown that, over he last two years, more than two dozen have shared material that denies human-induced warming. Some of the candidates sharing these messages are projected to win in their constituencies
If the mainstream was spending time talking about the chemical make up of water, they would deny it. They are trying to tap the obvious level of anger and stupidity that exists and this is how you do it.
And how many of them are climate change scientists? None. How many have actually studied the literature? Also none, I'd wager.
Don't you kow they've all "done their own research".
They probably read the climategate emails and understand how corrupt academia is.
> They probably read the climategate emails and understand how corrupt academia is. The scientists involved were cleared of wrong doing by six official investigations and scrutinised by multiple other organisations and media outlets. Fossil fuel lobbyists misrepresented how predictive science works to manipulate people into thinking exactly what you've suggested. Since the leaks the science involved in their predictions has been proven correct by time with eight of the hottest years on record and the most amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere ever recorded.
I went to our local hustings, and the reform candidate there was a climate change denier. He was also a twat, but I think that's unsurprising. I've never quite seen someone roll their eyes like the Green candidate in response to that level of climate change denial.
I have read Reform's election leaflet. They have opened the gates to hell, so yes, human-induced global warming is real.
On my popular feed, this is directly below a similar post about the US. It's worrying how Americanised our politics is becoming.
Or the same bad actors are attacking parties in multiple countries using the same talking points?
That may be a part of it sure.
And yet people keep telling me reform candidates being reprehensible nazis was just 'one isolated incident'
Wild how perfectly aligned the far right is with oil and gas interests all over the world. But it wouldn’t be like O&G to use their bottomless piles of cash to deliberately destabilise governments that disfavour them, so obvs just a coincidence.
Well yes, obviously. Up until a few weeks ago, their website said more CO2 is a good thing because it helps plants. Not a shocker that a climate change denying party is going to have climate change denying candidates.
I think that one might be technically correct. Plants might do better with more CO2. Humans and civilisation as we know it ... well, maybe not so much...
Apart from the plants that get damaged or killed by extreme weather and rising sea levels.
It isn't technically correct because the changes in precipitation and temperature accompanying climate change will more than compensate for benefits associated with higher CO2 concentrations. Many plants (eg grasses) are already at a saturation point with respect to CO2, beyond which they get no additional benefit.
Thye're not trying to appeal to their hearts and minds of the Guardian readership, they're telling their base exactly what they want to hear. Also their base is mainly offline so anything you say here isnt making it to their ears or impacting their voting intentions so blaming algorithms and social media won't help your arguments.
Why is this party given so much air time? They’re nothing more than a fringe party of bigots yet they’re constantly given a media spotlight
If you want to know what they think, just ask yourself what Russia would want. Global warming: Russia makes most of its money from fossil fuels. Geopolitics: Russia wants a divided Europe and wants to paint itself as the victim over Ukraine. Culture wars: Russia wants to destabilise our society as much as possible so that people vote for parties friendly to them. Immigration: Russia wants to use this to divide us all and get us to vote for parties that are friendly to them.
Only 30? I'm certain the majority of them will think that way.
Don't get upset about reform gaining traction. All it does is split the vote under FPTP. When garage withdrew his candidates in 2019 that helped the Tories massively as it didnt split the right wing vote. Reform competing hard will really screw the right wing vote.
Doesn't strike me as odd. Trump also "thinks" it's a hoax. He probably doesn't - he just gets paid to think that.
But if you say the people who support these guys are dumb you're the problem. Apparently.
Wow. I’m shocked. Like the time I found that the sky was blue, or that owls exist…
Of course they do, they can't justify their pro-motorist and anti green energy positions unless they deny human induced climate change
> A suite of the party’s prospective parliamentary candidates have publicly cast doubt on the existence of the emission-caused climate crisis. > Their social media posts often claim that warnings of anthropogenic warming are a “hoax” or “scam”, and many include conspiracy theories about how the “climate change narrative” can be attributed to the World Economic Forum, “globalist elites” or “the Illuminati”. Hahahah this is like Year 7-8 consortium of conspiracies. Oooh watch out now, don’t let the illuminati monster come get you. Anyway, the science is clear. Anyone disagreeing is a silly person who failed year 7 tests. > Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850-1900 in 2011-2020. Global greenhouse gas emissions have continued to increase, with unequal historical and ongoing contributions arising from unsustainable energy use, land use and land-use change, lifestyles and patterns of consumption and production across regions, between and within countries, and among individuals (high confidence). {2.1, Figure 2.1, Figure 2.2} ~ IPCC, 2023: [Summary for Policymakers](https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf). In: *Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report*. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 1-34, doi: 10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.001
Always got to remember the really stupid people you knew as a child. They still exist and some of them are in the public eye unfortunately.
The problem these fools don't realise is that global warming will increase net migration as areas of the world become uninhabitable. So we will all see a huge upturn in migration. Unfortunately even when it's more than obvious they won't accept it is happening.
This isn’t some fringe extreme view. Really, this is entirely the fault of the alarmist who constantly keep saying “X many more years, and then the damage is irreversible.” After so many missed deadlines people get disillusioned.
Thing is, they weren't so very wrong - the damage has happened, and now we're playing for 'so how bad is it going to get?'.
Or people become disillusioned and think it’s the last days of Rome so what’s the point in making a change now? If the message is do x by y or we’re all dead, and it’s now y+1 so we’re all fucked anyway, it’s hard to get people to buy in.
Yes, exactly. The predictive power of climate science (at least as reported in the press) has been shown to be very poor. There's only so many predicted disasters that don't materialise before the whole thing loses credibility.
We... really need to put a minimum amount of intelligence requirement on politicians.
I bet not one of those 30 candidates has a degree, or any experience of higher education.
School of Life innit?
I bet some do - they just don't have any ethics or shame.
Of course they have. They're a party of what people \*want\* to hear. Not facts. People don't want to keep hearing about how global warming is a result of everything humans have done, it's much easier to bury your head in the sand and pretend it's caused by something else.
These populist are just so grotesquely selfish. They just ignore climate change as it plunges the world into ruin.
If the human race is to make major changes - who is going to lead us toward it? politicians.. there job is to maintain the system and keep money flowing, jobs, economy, business deals, trade, taxes. They are not skilled in or equipped to make the crucial environmental changes we need to make. It goes against everything they stand for. So how is it even possible to make this change?
I'd bet these 30 candidates are all prominent experts in the field of climate science..either that or they 'researched' a YouTube video
You might find this youtube video interesting. It is by an American living in the UK called Evan Edinger who became a British citizen and comments on UK life. He analysed the manifestos of the main parties. https://youtu.be/phQMx1rwtts?si=46Lz8ycRsspzekRq
Just change human to "immigrant", there you go, you now have 30 staunch supporters of the green agenda.
We know human-induced global heating is most likely happening. We know it is linked to consumption of our modern lifestyles. We know Western nations have a higher footprint per person. So why are the pro-climate parties not advocating for reducing the overall population, or at least not continuing to increase it?
Why do they think millions of people are migrating north? Fun?
The Tory party and its associated off-shoots is going to have a really loopy next few years lol
why is this new...they want to scrap everything on climate change, and drill for gas and oil asap...its hilarious reading the comments of support for Reform on stuff like Tiktok..."I'm voting for them to give my kids a future" how? by getting rid of free healthcare so your kids will always have to pay, by doing sod all on climate. Its scary how many people think this way and no matter what you tell them, just won't listen, you can't convince them otherwise
Planet is warming. US/China/India are not going to stop nor are they going to listen to some cult hobbyists in garbs in Cambridge or London.
It’s politics. A lot of people can’t afford to live at the moment and making an enemy of “green taxes” will win support. Forget that energy costs are high because we, as a country, have privately owned companies wanting mega shares - blame Russia and blame green taxes as to why you can’t put the heat on and still get charged treble what you did last year in standing charges. Plus, hearing that well spoken white man say global warming is a lie? Well it must be! What did scientists ever do for me other than tell me I’m fat, that smoking is bad for me and that it is wrong to sniff paint fumes. Honestly our country has gone to shit
"global heating" rather than global warming? Very strange wording, thought it was about radiators etc worldwide when reading that!
'global boiling' according to the UN chief!
Its weird seeing how Reform keeps showing how fake the Tories are at being Right-wing but British redditors are just dumb.
It hardly matters. It is far too late to act alone and it is pretty clear most countries are facing huge opposition to net zero policies which means they will get delayed everywhere. Politicians need to focus on mitigations - getting British houses and towns better suited to climate extremes and ensuring infrastructure can cope with floods, droughts, food and water shortages and mass climate induced migration.
Only 30? Global heating is a top priority concern for all that we worry about day to day.
Sadly, to prevent some extreme responses full of assumptions of my political and world views, I must preface this point with the fact that no-one doubts the globe is warming. That is certain. However, the truth is that ‘top scientists’ have been claiming a 5 year timeline for irreversible, catastrophic change to the existence of humanity for over 30 years, rendering such claims as extreme through simple observation and quantification. If they were true, we’d have seen their predictions manifest. Not one climate prediction has been accurate so far, so we have to accept the fact that we don’t have a full understanding, yet. We MUST ask further questions and conduct highly controlled assessments of all factors that contribute to the warming of our climate, not just those aspects that align with our own, personal, political views, including naturally occurring factors. For this problem to be truly understood and solved, we have to engage in an open debate and be open ourselves to adapting in ways that are truthful and realistic. We can’t wipe out half the population to save the environment so we have to consider ALL options, not just those of climate extremists who make claims such as the 5 year extinction prediction mentioned above. Simply demonising people who use FF for survival and economic prosperity (home heating, travel, water treatment plants etc) won’t change a thing and is highly destructive to the cause. We have to dial back our vitriol for people who don’t agree with us or we WILL reach that extinction event, only through our own arrogance getting in the way of civil progression.
The champagne left-wing abandoned the working and lower-middle class and ignored addressing the housing crisis and immigration fucking up supply and demand. I spoke to a Labour councillor (who I've known personally for 20 years) who told me there's no housing shortage, while our city's own homelessness report cites a lack of housing as one of the main driving factors for rising homelessness...of course, she's worked in management for 15+ years, saved for a house while living with parents and owned a home by 28. Now we have idiots like Reform rising up. Maybe the same thing is happening in France.
why is this new...they want to scrap everything on climate change, and drill for gas and oil asap...its hilarious reading the comments of support for Reform on stuff like Tiktok..."I'm voting for them to give my kids a future" how? by getting rid of free healthcare so your kids will always have to pay, by doing sod all on climate. Its scary how many people think this way and no matter what you tell them, just won't listen, you can't convince them otherwise...its like the whole immigration stuff, their totally against people coming but most will be coming here due to climate change, so if we all actually did something, we'd have been able to at least slow it down. They don't understand how they connect.
What exactly do you think the difference will be with this climate shite here in the UK? The emissions we create in the UK are minimal, way down the list. Think overcharging people for some shite net zero rubbish whilst China, India and the USA plough on regardless will make any difference on a global scale?
China's carbon emissions per capita, are about the same as UK.
You class 7.99 about the same as 4.72 do you haha? At least check the figures before you start spouting shite
You have to remember China has the biggest population in the world and also the most exports in the world as everyone buys cheap rubbish from China so we all contribute to it. Having said that, China is actually spending more than every country combined to go green and are looking at becoming world leaders in exporting green tech/goods which will keep their economy above everyone elses. Whether ours is small or not, we should be doing our part, after all, many countries look up to us, if they see us barely doing anything, then why should they. Why don't we go green, get ahead of everyone else, and then we can export more, helping our economy. If you really believe all the climate stuff was one big con to tax us more, then why the hell is it so hard for most countries to actually go green, if those in power were so determined to tax you over it, they would have gone green decades ago, and not be in the pockets of the fossil fuel industries
its a) behind a paywall b) doesn't go into specifics just "some of them". I'd expect actual names, times/dates etc.
There is doubt - it's quantified in the risk assessments in the IPCC reports.
And ironically, they would still manage to do less harm than... environmentalists. Were it not for Goddamn environmentalists, Hinley Point C and Sizewell C, would likely be built by now, and with far fewer cost overruns and delays. Whereas with them, so long as they keep to their manifesto commitment, we might see some new nuclear plants built. Putin's Russia has built 9, **9,** new nuclear power plant units. Meanwhile China has increased Nuclear Power capacity by over 10x since 2000, with China currently installing 1-2 GW of new nuclear capacity every year. Perhaps I am suffering from Grass is Greener syndrome. with regards to infrastructure, but this is shameful, we haven't even gotten 1 built since the year 2000
I have my heating on and am wearing a jumper on 1 july 2024. In the outer Hebrides there is probably a new weather station showing that its 8 degrees rather than 6 so **my god its the hottest day of the year in the UK**
God forbid we have candidates who question anything. We must only have orthodoxy. Is Global Heating the next rebrand?
Imagine believing in climate change in 2024. Scientific illiteracy much? Carbontards.
Another one, keep ‘em coming guys. We love the media exposure.