The Climate Crisis

[Axholme Lion]

A sobering video on YouTube entitled “Earth at 2° hotter will be horrific. Now here’s what 4° will look like. | David Wallace-Wells”

Interesting reference within it to the destabilisation of politics in Europe relating to refugees and migration from places like Syria. The author of the video suggests climate change would force 100’s of millions if not more people to vacate equatorial regions as they would simply become too hot to live in. He cites brexit being a by product of recent migration ( his words not mine). And claims that migration could be exponentially  worse if the earth climate continues to heat up only by a few degrees.
And we may see this as soon as 2050.

Well they can't come here. We can't build more housing as where would the water soak away to. Full up. Next.

[normal rules]

If just a tenth of what he speculates comes to fruition, we ain’t sen nothing yet.
Circa 1 million refugees has caused instability across all of mainland Europe and the uk. Multiply that by just 10, which is very very easy given his modelling, add into that less habitable land available due to sea level rises. It makes for an interesting future for our children and children’s children.

[Metalmicky]

Well the leader of the free world is on board.....

[normal rules]

I wonder if the yanks will ever ban the sale of new gas guzzlers. .?
They don’t really do small engined cars do they?

[normal rules]

I see Sicily has recorded Europe’s highest ever temp of 48.8 c. Smashing the previous record set in Athens in 1977.
I can’t imagine what this must be like. I’ve been in Southern Spain with Air temps of 40 c when it’s uncomfortable to breathe in air that warm. Another 9 degrees on top must be pretty rough.

[River Don]

Well the leader of the free world is on board.....

This goes to the heart of the dilemma cheap oil means economic growth, expensive oil is still a massive drag on economic growth.

For politicians the answer is always go for growth.

[drfchound]

Well the leader of the free world is on board.....

This goes to the heart of the dilemma cheap oil means economic growth, expensive oil is still a massive drag on economic growth.

For politicians the answer is always go for growth.

Would that be all politicians RD.

[sha66y]

I see Sicily has recorded Europe’s highest ever temp of 48.8 c. Smashing the previous record set in Athens in 1977.
I can’t imagine what this must be like. I’ve been in Southern Spain with Air temps of 40 c when it’s uncomfortable to breathe in air that warm. Another 9 degrees on top must be pretty rough.

High temperatures in the Saudi lowlands ( Riyadh) are around 48C during the long summer, however in the high ground ( Taif) it’s about 41C ….104-106f but seems a lot cooler because of the altitude…

Perhaps the Muslim world should start looking after there brothers and sisters and not just watch them migrate towards the infidels in the west….

[normal rules]

I see Sicily has recorded Europe’s highest ever temp of 48.8 c. Smashing the previous record set in Athens in 1977.
I can’t imagine what this must be like. I’ve been in Southern Spain with Air temps of 40 c when it’s uncomfortable to breathe in air that warm. Another 9 degrees on top must be pretty rough.

High temperatures in the Saudi lowlands ( Riyadh) are around 48C during the long summer, however in the high ground ( Taif) it’s about 41C ….104-106f but seems a lot cooler because of the altitude…

Perhaps the Muslim world should start looking after there brothers and sisters and not just watch them migrate towards the infidels in the west….

Let’s hope so. As of last year the population of the 17 country Middle East region was 456 million. If it gets too hot for even them and just 1 % of them migrate North to cooler climes, that’s a 4.5 million person problem. If 10% decide it’s time to migrate, that the population of Spain.

[River Don]

Well the leader of the free world is on board.....

This goes to the heart of the dilemma cheap oil means economic growth, expensive oil is still a massive drag on economic growth.

For politicians the answer is always go for growth.

Would that be all politicians RD.

I can't think of any politicians who don't target growth.

[selby]

 Well,it looks like heat, no food, no clean water or sanitation and a few bombs chucked about doesn't stop them breading.

[drfchound]

Well the leader of the free world is on board.....

This goes to the heart of the dilemma cheap oil means economic growth, expensive oil is still a massive drag on economic growth.

For politicians the answer is always go for growth.

Would that be all politicians RD.

I can't think of any politicians who don't target growth.

Some posters on here would certainly disagree with that mate.

[River Don]

Well the leader of the free world is on board.....

This goes to the heart of the dilemma cheap oil means economic growth, expensive oil is still a massive drag on economic growth.

For politicians the answer is always go for growth.

Would that be all politicians RD.

I can't think of any politicians who don't target growth.

Some posters on here would certainly disagree with that mate.

Well the only politicians who might think different will be Greens but even they don't say they don't believe in growth.

I'd be surprised anyone is going to disagree.

[normal rules]

Well,it looks like heat, no food, no clean water or sanitation and a few bombs chucked about doesn't stop them breading.

I’m assuming you mean breeding, as opposed to mixing flour and water?

[BillyStubbsTears]

RD.
A word pal. Hound, for some reason, is having one of his "Who? Me?" attacks and having a pop at me. You are wasting your breath.

[River Don]

Yes

Anyway

According to this estimate we have just four years left to act.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/12/greenhouse-gas-emissions-must-peak-within-4-years-says-leaked-un-report


This at a time when apparently Bidens government is urging Saudis to release a load of cheap oil on to the market.

[drfchound]

RD.
A word pal. Hound, for some reason, is having one of his "Who? Me?" attacks and having a pop at me. You are wasting your breath.

Rubbish BST and you know it.
I have only, in your words, havd a pop at you, because of your totally abhorrent comment about drug dealing being a minor crime.


My comment on this thread includes numerous posters who might argue to suggest that those nasty Tory politicians might be more interested in themselves rather than growth.

It isn’t all about you.

[ravenrover]

Well,it looks like heat, no food, no clean water or sanitation and a few bombs chucked about doesn't stop them breading.

I didn't know there were many Warburtons in The Middle East they're all interbread

[BillyStubbsTears]

RD.
A word pal. Hound, for some reason, is having one of his "Who? Me?" attacks and having a pop at me. You are wasting your breath.

Rubbish BST and you know it.
I have only, in your words, havd a pop at you, because of your totally abhorrent comment about drug dealing being a minor crime.


My comment on this thread includes numerous posters who might argue to suggest that those nasty Tory politicians might be more interested in themselves rather than growth.

It isn’t all about you.

Aye, like I said "Who? Me?" mode.

As for my abhorrent comment, you and your mate BB have not once sat down and considered the context or in fact the very words I said.

My point about it being "minor" was connected to the sort of sentences it attracts. It was making a point about the gross disproportionately of deporting someone brought up in this country whose only crime was  committed at 17 and deemed worthy of seven months inside.

I shouldn't be surprised at your insistence, always, of ignoring the whole bloody point in your crusade to stick the boot in. But I regularly am.

[Bentley Bullet]

I see you've managed to con one of your disciples into believing your attempt at backtracking on your absurd comment already!

Strange though that your claims of your statement being misrepresented in context won't disgust you enough to show empathy towards any Tory MP's whose statements you will misrepresent in the context in future.

[normal rules]

Yes

Anyway

According to this estimate we have just four years left to act.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/12/greenhouse-gas-emissions-must-peak-within-4-years-says-leaked-un-report


This at a time when apparently Bidens government is urging Saudis to release a load of cheap oil on to the market.

I reckon we are past the point of no return. As has been alluded to, all this talk and the Americans are applying pressure for oil to be cheaper.
It will be damage limitation and learning how to survive over the coming hundreds of years. And while none of us on here will live to see the outcomes, it’s a sobering thought.
Still, in a few tens of thousands of years there will be another ice age and the world will reset itself. Whether humans will last that long remains to be seen.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I see you've managed to con one of your disciples into believing your attempt at backtracking on your absurd comment already!

Strange though that your claims of your statement being misrepresented in context won't disgust you enough to show empathy towards any Tory MP's whose statements you will misrepresent in the context in future.

I'm not backtracking anything. I agree that drug dealing should result in prison sentences. I further believe that the legal system treats that as a minor imprisonable offence, compared to offences of say, sexual assault or other serious violence. I also believe that it is grossly disproportionate to illegally attempt to deport someone who has lived in the UK for 90% of his life and served a 7 month sentence for a crime committed when he was 17. I note that both Johnson, and Gove when admitting their own criminal behaviour as young men, claimed that we should give young people who make mistakes a chance to pull themselves round. I fully support that idea although I don't get why that applies to them personally and not the people they are trying to illegally deport.

If you have issues with any of that, feel free to respond on the relevant thread. If not, take a bit of advice and belt up before you make yourself look even more stupidly vindictive.

[Bentley Bullet]

The maximum sentences for intent to supply drugs are:

up to life in prison, an unlimited fine or both for a Class A drug
up to 14 years in prison, an unlimited fine or both for a Class B or Class C drug

[BillyStubbsTears]

Yes but in the specific case I'm referring to, we are not talking about an offence anywhere near the top end of that scale. Which is why the lad was given a 15 month stretch, of which he served 7 months.

So the question remains. Do YOU think it is disproportionate in that case (given that the lad had been in the UK since he was a bairn, given that this was his one and only offence, given that he committed it when he was 17, given that he'd kept his nose clean for several years after getting out of nick) to try to deport him? Even before you get the point that Patel was breaking her own law in deporting him, and was only stopped from doing so because of pro bono work by lawyers.

Do YOU think that is wrong. If you DO, what the f**k are you arguing about. If you don't you need to spend a bit of time examining your conscience.

[Bentley Bullet]

Tell me more. What is this lads name and when was he deported?

[drfchound]

Yes but in the specific case I'm referring to, we are not talking about an offence anywhere near the top end of that scale. Which is why the lad was given a 15 month stretch, of which he served 7 months.

So the question remains. Do YOU think it is disproportionate in that case (given that the lad had been in the UK since he was a bairn, given that this was his one and only offence, given that he committed it when he was 17, given that he'd kept his nose clean for several years after getting out of nick) to try to deport him? Even before you get the point that Patel was breaking her own law in deporting him, and was only stopped from doing so because of pro bono work by lawyers.

Do YOU think that is wrong. If you DO, what the f**k are you arguing about. If you don't you need to spend a bit of time examining your conscience.

You are doing what you do best BST, changing the narrative to suit your case.
In your original post about this you said that SOME of the people due to be deported were for crimes as little as drug dealing.
You have now changed that to one individual person in an attempt turn the argument round.
No surprise there then.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Tell me more. What is this lads name and when was he deported?

Tajay Thompson. Look him up. And here's a couple of corrections from me.

1) He came to the UK at 5 years old, not 2 as I said before.
2) Ha was convicted at 17 of possession with intent to supply class A drugs, not class C as I'd said before. The prison sentence was as  I said, 15 months, 7 served.

He wasn't deported in the end. Pro bono lawyers secured his release from the deportation scheme at the 11th hour. Patel responded by putting out a spiteful Home Office video noting that she was fighting against "activist lawyers". That in an atmosphere where the police were breaking up online pans to physically assault some of the lawyers.

The lad was released i 2016 and to kept his nose clean until he was arrested in 2020 and told he was being deported for the crime that he'd already served time for.

And although I really SHOULDN'T have to say this, I clearly do when you get going. I am NOT belittling class A drug dealing. I hate it and I'm happy to see both dealers and those who provide the market for them do the time they deserve.

While you are at it, look into a few other cases that the psychopath in the Home Office wanted to deport. Here's one. You can find plenty more at your leisure.

Reshawn Davis. 30 years old. Lived in the UK since he was 11. Arrested and told he would be deported in 10 days, for a crime he committed 10 years previously, for which he served 2 months, and for which it would now not be legal to prosecute him ("Joint enterprises"). Committed no crimes since leaving prison. Has a 6 year long marriage and a kid.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Yes but in the specific case I'm referring to, we are not talking about an offence anywhere near the top end of that scale. Which is why the lad was given a 15 month stretch, of which he served 7 months.

So the question remains. Do YOU think it is disproportionate in that case (given that the lad had been in the UK since he was a bairn, given that this was his one and only offence, given that he committed it when he was 17, given that he'd kept his nose clean for several years after getting out of nick) to try to deport him? Even before you get the point that Patel was breaking her own law in deporting him, and was only stopped from doing so because of pro bono work by lawyers.

Do YOU think that is wrong. If you DO, what the f**k are you arguing about. If you don't you need to spend a bit of time examining your conscience.

You are doing what you do best BST, changing the narrative to suit your case.
In your original post about this you said that SOME of the people due to be deported were for crimes as little as drug dealing.
You have now changed that to one individual person in an attempt turn the argument round.
No surprise there then.

Hound

I tell you what, how about you stop asking me to wipe your arse, and go an look up some of the information yourself.

There are PLENTY of examples of people being arrested for deportation after conviction for drug dealing. Tajay Thompson's case is the most striking, given that he came to the UK as a kid, committed the crime at 17 and kept his nose clean for 4 years after that until Patel decided that she wanted him out. You don't seem to give a f**k about that so I'm not really sure what else I can do to persuade you. Perhaps you can step down from your snide insinuations of bad faith in what I'm posting (which you usually drag up at some point) and go and look up the information yourself. And then come back and tell us what YOU think, eh?

[drfchound]

Yes but in the specific case I'm referring to, we are not talking about an offence anywhere near the top end of that scale. Which is why the lad was given a 15 month stretch, of which he served 7 months.

So the question remains. Do YOU think it is disproportionate in that case (given that the lad had been in the UK since he was a bairn, given that this was his one and only offence, given that he committed it when he was 17, given that he'd kept his nose clean for several years after getting out of nick) to try to deport him? Even before you get the point that Patel was breaking her own law in deporting him, and was only stopped from doing so because of pro bono work by lawyers.

Do YOU think that is wrong. If you DO, what the f**k are you arguing about. If you don't you need to spend a bit of time examining your conscience.

You are doing what you do best BST, changing the narrative to suit your case.
In your original post about this you said that SOME of the people due to be deported were for crimes as little as drug dealing.
You have now changed that to one individual person in an attempt turn the argument round.
No surprise there then.

Hound

I tell you what, how about you stop asking me to wipe your arse, and go an look up some of the information yourself.

There are PLENTY of examples of people being arrested for deportation after conviction for drug dealing. Tajay Thompson's case is the most striking, given that he came to the UK as a kid, committed the crime at 17 and kept his nose clean for 4 years after that until Patel decided that she wanted him out. You don't seem to give a f**k about that so I'm not really sure what else I can do to persuade you. Perhaps you can step down from your snide insinuations of bad faith in what I'm posting (which you usually drag up at some point) and go and look up the information yourself. And then come back and tell us what YOU think, eh?

BST, I don’t want you anywhere near my arse thank you.
I also don’t give a monkeys about looking up the information on who was to be deported and in reality I don’t need to because you will be doing it anyway.
In simple terms, just so that you fully understand, I am only debating the facts that you clearly originally suggested that drug dealing was a minor crime and it has taken you a day to admit that it actually isn’t.
And secondly that you have changed your little rant from saying that some of the people were set to be deported and today have changed your narrative to one individual to back your silly claim up.
Now will you stop trolling my posts, as you were constantly doing before your “holiday”.
There’s a good lad.

[Bentley Bullet]

BST, where did you get your original (flawed) figures from, and why should I accept your new 'corrected' story as gospel? Besides that, even if your amended story is true, don't you think his sentence was somewhat lenient compared to the fate he would have been dealt in some other countries?