The Nice People Thread, No.16: A Universe of Niceness.

Cakeguts

The thing that annoys me about XR are two things really.


1 I have absolutely no idea what they are trying to achieve. The last time I heard anything, what they said was that they wanted the government to tell the truth about climate change. I personally have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Since then I have paid absolutely no attention to anything they have said at all.



2 The only attention I pay to climate change is to look forward to it getting warmer again hopefully as warm as it used to be 1000 years ago. I am much more concerned about pollution and antibiotic resistance than it getting a bit warmer again.



I do think though that the BBC is flogging a dead horse by having articles about XR every day for about the last month. I also wasn't that keen on how the BBC glorified people getting arrested I thought that was irresponsible just as I think people taking their children on XR marches where people are intending on getting arrested is also irresponsible.



I have stopped looking at the BBC website/watching the BBC news now because to keep banging on about climate change, nutrician deficient vegan diets that include a lot of imported food and how bad British farming is for the enviroment has started to get a bit boring. I still can't understand how importing foods from abroad by aircraft can possibly be better for the environment than buying something that has been produced locally? The quality of the research on any of these subjects has also been just awful with lots of wrong information being reported as fact.



The ITV news is much better researched and much less full of the warped opinions of their reporters and more importantly it doesn't contain any articles or news on XR.

GDB2222

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49349566

Climate change: Should you fly, drive or take the train?

Cakeguts

GDB2222 wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49349566

Climate change: Should you fly, drive or take the train?

The only thing I would say about this is that because the source is the BBC news it is likely to be wrong.



One of the problems with the BBC news reports on anything to do with climate change is that it is often very badly researched and only the opinion of the journalist but it is written to make it look like fact.



I remember the BBC coming up with the perfect environmental diet and in the public comments at the bottom someone who was a nutritionist pointed out the diet was so deficient that anyone who ate it would get ill.



There have been a lot more examples of this since usually connected to climate change but sometimes connected to other subjects and the amount of information that they print which is completely wrong is staggering. As so much of what they report contains wrong information you can't really rely on the accuracy of any of it.



I remember a BBC news article recently about freehold houses posted on the Discuss house prices board which was causing great amusement because so much of it was wrong.



It is interesting because other people I know have been complaining for about a year about the inaccuracy of the BBC reporting and they were all changing to other news providers.

silvercar

Equally, stripping out a reasonable percentage of the 100 flat bed seats a certain operator has in a Boeing 747 and replacing these with standard economy/premium economy will mean that a) more people will be able to fly on fewer flights and b) the price of the Business seats will rise between the city pairs those particular aircraft fly, encouraging greener travel.

Airlines make more money from premium class travel. Strip those away and economy prices will have to rise.

We are very guilty when it comes to our travel, we use reward flights in premium classes and OH in particular takes longer routes and extra journeys to save on costs.

GDB2222

Cakeguts wrote: »

The only thing I would say about this is that because the source is the BBC news it is likely to be wrong.



One of the problems with the BBC news reports on anything to do with climate change is that it is often very badly researched and only the opinion of the journalist but it is written to make it look like fact.



I remember the BBC coming up with the perfect environmental diet and in the public comments at the bottom someone who was a nutritionist pointed out the diet was so deficient that anyone who ate it would get ill.



There have been a lot more examples of this since usually connected to climate change but sometimes connected to other subjects and the amount of information that they print which is completely wrong is staggering. As so much of what they report contains wrong information you can't really rely on the accuracy of any of it.



I remember a BBC news article recently about freehold houses posted on the Discuss house prices board which was causing great amusement because so much of it was wrong.



It is interesting because other people I know have been complaining for about a year about the inaccuracy of the BBC reporting and they were all changing to other news providers.

I’m a bit confused by your comments. The BBC graphic clearly states that their source is this publication.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2019

It’s a large spreadsheet produced by two government departments collaborating. Are you saying that the BBC have misunderstood, and picked the wrong figures from that? Or you think that the BEIS and DEFRA figures are wrong in some way? It would be helpful to see your detailed analysis, if you don’t mind providing it, please.

Cakeguts

GDB2222 wrote: »

I’m a bit confused by your comments. The BBC graphic clearly states that their source is this publication.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2019

It’s a large spreadsheet produced by two government departments collaborating. Are you saying that the BBC have misunderstood, and picked the wrong figures from that? Or you think that the BEIS and DEFRA figures are wrong in some way? It would be helpful to see your detailed analysis, if you don’t mind providing it, please.

I have no idea I just don't trust the BBC news site to reliably reproduce anything that they have got from somewhere else because their reporters don't a) check that anything they have written is correct or b) do any form of detailed research.



The source of your information was BBC news and they got it from the government source. At the moment the BBC news site seems to be in possession of a distortion machine. Anything that has been through the BBC news distortion machine is likely to be inaccurate. That is why I commented on the fact that it was likely to be wrong. Not because the original was wrong but because it had come off the BBC news site where most of the information is riddled with inaccuracies.

GDB2222

I have spot-checked a couple of the BBC's figures, and those agree 100% with the source.

You could check it yourself very easily, just by viewing the spreadsheet.

Incidentally, even if you are a climate change sceptic, surely a comparison of emissions between different modes of transport is not controversial? Not many people would argue with the proposition that a coach with lots of people on board is more fuel efficient than a car with just one.

PasturesNew

I have no recollection of going out trick/treating aged under 10. It is possible mum arranged for us to go out with her to 2-3 houses within a few doors of ours... if so, only once. It "wasn't a thing".

And, you have to ask ... if kids are out with parents door knocking, who is at their house answering the door so the house doesn't get egged?

Post-10 we definitely never went out, nor ever received any knockers.

I think, in past years, it was probably a few people/villages might've done a little something, but the Internet made out "everybody" does it, so more do it now, or are seen to be doing it... although, reading, most still don't in reality.

It has therefore also become more of a "thing for nuisance teens to do" in some areas.

Around this time of year, too, there are always newspaper reports of arson by fireworks, with deaths dotted about here and there. Fireworks are worse than trick/treaters as at least with T/T you only have to hide behind the sofa for 3-4 hours with the lights out on one specific night.

2008: https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/4362922.three-teenagers-punished-for-manslaughter-of-93-year-old-yuen-har-ho/
2009: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/8706195.stm
2017: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/dad-dies-after-lit-firework-11482176

michaels

Trick or treat is huge locally. Onlyy houses with decorations and lights on are deemed to be taking part. Youngest kids go with parents as soon as it gets dark. Slightly olders go with parents near at the same time teenagers go in groups about 7-9 but many ha e taken their decs down by then.

New thing this year, some houses have had decs up for a few weeks. What is that about?!

Cakeguts

OK update on the firework situation and I am sorry to say it isn't good news.


The council rang. The EU directive on fireworks says that all fireworks sold in the UK are safe. That sounds good doesn't it?



Today I picked up out of the road some more bits of plastic. One of them weighed 47grams. The other weighed 61grams. These have come from a rocket and fell from that rocket onto the public highway. The 61gram one would have caused injury and it would have broken the windscreen of a car driving at the time. In my area it is not not safe to either drive or walk when people are using fireworks because of the danger of heavy pieces of plastic falling out of the sky. These fireworks should not have been used in a private garden in a built up area they were only suitable for use on somewhere like a playing field where they could keep people away from the fallout area.



Next stop our MP although I am not hopeful because he is one of the useless MPs in the country.