What about all the doge coin elon pumped
Last edited by RTHKI (2022-07-30 09:15:43)
People like Taylor Swift are irrelevant outliers, and she's running a business which people can choose to contribute to or not.uziq wrote:
the public figure with the highest carbon footprint in the last year is … taylor swift.
don’t you go to those big silly stadium gigs with international touring pop artists? you’re propping up this behaviour? private jets all around the world? can’t you listen to that stuff at home?
If one stadium full of people decided to cut their annual air travel by one flight, or her fanbase turned their thermostat down 0.1C either would be a far more significant impact - thats how small individual actions on a large scale actually have an effect.
But yeah, one person is careless so that gives you and Larssen and Ken the right to be profligate and wasteful and still claim to be concerned about the environment.
Fuck Israel
Airliners are running businesses which people can choose to contribute to or not. Why does Taylor Swift get your shield, but they do not?
Why are you on about people being "wasteful" with an occasional flight when you live in the air-conditioned, car-hogging suburbs of polluting, mass-meat producing Australia? Coal exports in your country are forecast to break records, (easily) topping $100 bil. LOL. The people you're selling coal to can choose to contribute to, or not. You live in a literal glass fortress when it comes to picking apart anyone's carbon footprint here.
Why are you on about people being "wasteful" with an occasional flight when you live in the air-conditioned, car-hogging suburbs of polluting, mass-meat producing Australia? Coal exports in your country are forecast to break records, (easily) topping $100 bil. LOL. The people you're selling coal to can choose to contribute to, or not. You live in a literal glass fortress when it comes to picking apart anyone's carbon footprint here.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2022-07-30 19:22:19)
they’re not irrelevant outliers. 10% of the population contribute 90% of emissions.Dilbert_X wrote:
People like Taylor Swift are irrelevant outliers, and she's running a business which people can choose to contribute to or not.uziq wrote:
the public figure with the highest carbon footprint in the last year is … taylor swift.
don’t you go to those big silly stadium gigs with international touring pop artists? you’re propping up this behaviour? private jets all around the world? can’t you listen to that stuff at home?
If one stadium full of people decided to cut their annual air travel by one flight, or her fanbase turned their thermostat down 0.1C either would be a far more significant impact - thats how small individual actions on a large scale actually have an effect.
But yeah, one person is careless so that gives you and Larssen and Ken the right to be profligate and wasteful and still claim to be concerned about the environment.
looks like your frivolous desire to look at light shows featuring scantily clad teenagers, shipped in on a private jet, is seriously harmful to the environment. and i would call that absolutely ‘non-essential’.
don’t you realise that permanently closed borders for covid and your new green regime would mean that you could never see an international touring artist again? make u think, simp.
why is going to a lady gaga concert more important than larssen visiting one of his close friends?
Last edited by uziq (2022-07-30 22:56:12)
The world has become a better place for the fact that people can travel so easily these days. Improving public transport infrastructure and making short distance flights redundant, good idea - but it's ridiculous to get mad over the fact that people aren't constrained to their immediate cultural surroundings and like to take long distance flights every once in a while. Doing so is a good thing. I wish there's a future where every individual can decide to travel anywhere they like. It's incredibly important to our own and collective development to experience societies, cultures and communities elsewhere. Not only that, I believe ease of travel also historically correlates to societies' intellectual and economic development.
Doesn't mean you should go and fly all over the planet every other week, but average people flying even half a dozen times a year shouldn't be an issue. It's also necessary for those who are in long distance relationships or who have family in other countries.
Most importantly: passenger flights still have comparatively little impact on global warming compared to energy production, industry and the transport sector as a whole. Aviation in its entirety is like 2% of global emissions ffs.
Doesn't mean you should go and fly all over the planet every other week, but average people flying even half a dozen times a year shouldn't be an issue. It's also necessary for those who are in long distance relationships or who have family in other countries.
Most importantly: passenger flights still have comparatively little impact on global warming compared to energy production, industry and the transport sector as a whole. Aviation in its entirety is like 2% of global emissions ffs.
Generous reminder that dilbert once ordered a spring that went on a lengthy tour.
I went to an airshow today and thought about all the pollution transporting 60 aircraft there created.
Not really, Chinese and Russians have been travelling for decades now, are they any less insular or deranged or nationalistic?Larssen wrote:
The world has become a better place for the fact that people can travel so easily these days.
Americans have been the parody tourists from the beginning - same question
Ahahahahahaha - you're as transparent as this fish.average people flying even half a dozen times a year shouldn't be an issue.
What you mean is you should be free to fly six times every year.
The world average is 0.6 flights per capita, are you really saying global air traffic should increase ten-fold?
Only one country in the world averages more than 6 flights per year per capita and thats Iceland.
Are you really saying everyone in the world should aspire to that?
Even Americans only average 2 flights per year, are you saying every person in the world should do 3x the flying of Americans?
Wow.
Maye you should quit and study philosophy.
Fuck Israel
i wouldn't agree that every person should be taking half-a-dozen flights a year. that's an exaggeratedly high number and representative only of very select demographics: the international business class (who should shoulder the vast amount of blame for the current state-of-affairs) or the young, mobile yuppie type who has the spending money and time to take 6 weekend breaks a year. that's definitely not the everyman.
i tend to think most short-distance flights could be replaced with high-speed rail. rail is even sometimes a more engaging and comfortable way to travel. if i've got the time to spare, i've got no problem taking a train for 1-2 days and reading a book or seeing some sights, as opposed to taking the flight option. i would frequently get a bus/train for 5–6 hours to visit my friends in the north of the UK as opposed to, say, just flying to manchester or glasgow in an hour or two.
i find it hard to chagrin your average working-class prole going away on their one package holiday every 1–2 years, though. not when you've got taylor swift jetting into sydney or adelaide to gyrate on a stage for losers like you, playing a different city/country/continent for 160 days of the year.
i tend to think most short-distance flights could be replaced with high-speed rail. rail is even sometimes a more engaging and comfortable way to travel. if i've got the time to spare, i've got no problem taking a train for 1-2 days and reading a book or seeing some sights, as opposed to taking the flight option. i would frequently get a bus/train for 5–6 hours to visit my friends in the north of the UK as opposed to, say, just flying to manchester or glasgow in an hour or two.
i find it hard to chagrin your average working-class prole going away on their one package holiday every 1–2 years, though. not when you've got taylor swift jetting into sydney or adelaide to gyrate on a stage for losers like you, playing a different city/country/continent for 160 days of the year.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-01 03:12:26)
Taylor Swift is one person.
Larssen's plan for 7.6 billion people to take 6+ flights a year would be hilarious if it weren't so stupid.
Larssen's plan for 7.6 billion people to take 6+ flights a year would be hilarious if it weren't so stupid.
Fuck Israel
"Average of 2" sounds a bit misleading. Plenty here can barely afford to drive to work or buy food to eat. Certainly not taking 2 flights a year, let alone 2 flights a decade. If someone finally managed to save for one European vacation in their lifetime, I wouldn't feel too put out if someone shaming them for it got punched in the nose.
Average means not everyone does it, thats how maths works, amazing.
Fuck Israel
again, your reasoning is faulty. the top percentile of people are responsible for 90% of air and transport emissions.Dilbert_X wrote:
Taylor Swift is one person.
Larssen's plan for 7.6 billion people to take 6+ flights a year would be hilarious if it weren't so stupid.
just like you don't like being criticised for your 'modest' fuel consumption, driving your car every day to work for your entire working life when apparently your use is 'below average', your average holiday-goer who takes one flight every year doesn't like being shamed for it when the private jet class are taking 1 hour flights to skip traffic congestion in LA. this isn't complicated.
the super-rich and celebrity class also have the fame, money and connections to actually effect real change. instead they spend their time generating a glossy and aspirational instagram brand, in which the wasteful private jet is seen as the ne plus ultra of 'cool'. great job! turns out you partake in and sponsor a dumb and planet-destroying culture. what's worse? 'partying' or international touring artists on private jets? lol. you endlessly make excuses for yourself.
One touring artist on a private jet literally does not compare to 7.6 billion taking Larssen's 6+ flights a year.
My car use is consistently below average, in most first world countries the average person does twice the miles I do.
Typically I've lived ~10km from where I've worked, sometimes less.
Now grizzle at Dauntless for driving a gas-guzzler through London.
My car use is consistently below average, in most first world countries the average person does twice the miles I do.
Typically I've lived ~10km from where I've worked, sometimes less.
Now grizzle at Dauntless for driving a gas-guzzler through London.
Fuck Israel
erm, you are comparing the present state-of-affairs, in which a tiny global elite literally are burning the planet to death ... to, erm, a hypothetical spitballed figure that someone produced in an absentminded moment on an internet forum, and which isn't the reality at all?
hello? are you stupid?
dauntless has an electric vehicle, derp.
i've never needed a car to commute to work.
hello? are you stupid?
dauntless has an electric vehicle, derp.
you act like this is a justification for driving a personal vehicle for your whole life ... when in fact it's the total opposite. short journeys are ideal for public transport commuting. that's literally the best-use scenario for buses and trains in an urban or suburban environment. instead, you've opted to take your little personally sealed pollutant machine everywhere, to suit your own personal comfort, nothing more. i am quite sure you could have found a better mode of transportation for short-distance commutes.Typically I've lived ~10km from where I've worked, sometimes less.
i've never needed a car to commute to work.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-01 03:40:41)
Um no, its literally your average schlub burning the planet to death.
Dauntless does now, he didn't for a loooong time.
Why doesn't he get a bus?
Lets look at Larssen's round trip to New York
~50 tonnes of fuel - each way - thats 100 tonnes total.
than I used
100 tonnes/300 passengers - 330l of fuel per passenger. For one long weekend of partying Larssen burned more fuel than I use in four months of commuting to a productive job.
Dauntless does now, he didn't for a loooong time.
Why doesn't he get a bus?
Lets look at Larssen's round trip to New York
~50 tonnes of fuel - each way - thats 100 tonnes total.
than I used
100 tonnes/300 passengers - 330l of fuel per passenger. For one long weekend of partying Larssen burned more fuel than I use in four months of commuting to a productive job.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2022-08-01 03:47:38)
Fuck Israel
Dilbert, you don't really have any high horse to sit on when it comes to statistics. You've proven over the course of many years that they don't really matter to you.Dilbert_X wrote:
Average means not everyone does it, thats how maths works, amazing.
Misleading and lying with numbers is an artform. Somebody can say "the average American flies two times a year" with the implication being that "Americans are flying two times a year," when the reality is not that. I don't have the usual BTS pdfs in front of me right now but I'm fairly certain I've read the average said to be <2, with a large chunk of American adults having never even set foot on an airplane. In general, person-miles of travel is proportional to household income and there's no reason for me to suspect it's any different with flight distances and/or counts. All without taking into account all the different reasons for flight and travel (work, school, recreation, business, and so on).
Mobility right now is strongly tied to freedom, but it costs money not everyone has.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2022-08-01 03:49:13)
so what? larssen likely uses public transport to get to work each day, or a cycle/walking, or a combination thereof. that's the pattern for most europeans who live and work in cities.Dilbert_X wrote:
Um no, its literally your average schlub burning the planet to death.
Dauntless does now, he didn't for a loooong time.
Why doesn't he get a bus?
Lets look at Larssen's round trip to New York
~50 tonnes of fuel - each way - thats 100 tonnes total.
than I used
100 tonnes/300 passengers - 330l of fuel per passenger. For one long weekend of partying Larssen burned more fuel than I use in four months of commuting to a productive job.
look at his flight as an offset against your 'unnecessary' personal vehicle use. the majority of people on the planet manage to make it to their 'productive' jobs without driving a car, my guy. your pattern of living, in the american/australian suburban mould, is entirely aberrant and an outlier in this.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-01 03:50:58)
2% of global pollution is aviation related. I wrote I took 3 return flights per year. 2 medium distance, 1 long haul. I also am free to take as many flights as I want. The global passenger flight business being almost completely shut down in 2020 barely dented global emissions.Dilbert_X wrote:
Not really, Chinese and Russians have been travelling for decades now, are they any less insular or deranged or nationalistic?Larssen wrote:
The world has become a better place for the fact that people can travel so easily these days.
Americans have been the parody tourists from the beginning - same questionAhahahahahaha - you're as transparent as this fish.average people flying even half a dozen times a year shouldn't be an issue.
What you mean is you should be free to fly six times every year.
The world average is 0.6 flights per capita, are you really saying global air traffic should increase ten-fold?
Only one country in the world averages more than 6 flights per year per capita and thats Iceland.
Are you really saying everyone in the world should aspire to that?
Even Americans only average 2 flights per year, are you saying every person in the world should do 3x the flying of Americans?
Wow.
Maye you should quit and study philosophy.
It's not at all possible for global flying to increase tenfold. The point is moreso that travel's a great thing. It's also an obvious continuing trend that people are moving about more than ever. I see your isolationist attitude and climate beliefs align perfectly well, surprise surprise. Everyone should be grounded and have a hard time moving anywhere.
The fuck philosophy got to do with this? You can't even manage basic reading comprehension, don't go around thinking you have anything of value to say on the topic of the humanities - least of all philosophy.
As for my travel habits: I don't own a car and 95% of my travel is public transport or bikes. I sometimes share a ride. Even for work we usually book high speed rail for most places in Europe.
Last edited by Larssen (2022-08-01 10:31:58)
dilber'ts whole clan relocated internationally several times in his lifetime, in pursuit of their own economic self-interest (and daddy's career).It's also an obvious continuing trend that people are moving about more than ever. I see your isolationist attitude and climate beliefs align perfect
this undoubtedly puts their air miles and carbon emissions in the top 5% of any human being alive on this planet right now. i mean, really, how many back-and-forth planes has his family taken between australia-UK since they relocated? i am sure none of them have ever visited the homeland since, or entertained any visits from relatives or friends. practically napoleon on st helena, is dilbert.
could you imagine an african's or latin american's perspective on his own travel? a family unit that relocated (at least) from the UK to the gulf states to australia in short order? there aren't many human beings alive on this planet, consuming and emitting, who have that sort of travel under their belts.
of course he's isolationist after being the fruit of a thoroughly internationalist upbringing.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-01 11:06:44)
Um no, relocating every 4-8 years? Fewer air miles than the average moron uses going to benidorm or magaluf.
None whatsoever.how many back-and-forth planes has his family taken between australia-UK since they relocated
Fuck Israel
HowLarssen wrote:
The point is moreso that travel's a great thing.
Fuck Israel
your average british working family goes on a 'resort' holiday to the costa del sol maybe once a year or once every 2 years.Um no, relocating every 4-8 years? Fewer air miles than the average moron uses going to benidorm or magaluf.
what's the distance from london to magaluf?
what's the distance from london to australia?
how many package holidays would it take to relocate once to australia?
come on, math-brain.
i find it frankly amazing how much scorn you pour on average families using international flights when you've burned a decade's worth of the british gammon's benidorm air miles yourself and thought nothing of it.
Last edited by uziq (2022-08-02 03:42:15)
"LMAO"Dilbert_X wrote:
HowLarssen wrote:
The point is moreso that travel's a great thing.