While You Were Sleeping

at | 91 Replies

Sarah Doherty tweetz:

“Last night, five XR [Extinction Rebellion] Ireland activists locked themselves to the gates of the Dail, resulting in their arrests. Twenty TDs were stuck inside until the early hours of the morning.

These activists had three demands:

– that the government enact the Climate Emergency Measures bill
– that the Shannon LNG project is ended
– that the government enact the recommendations of the Citizens Assembly on Climate Change

These people ranged from students to pensioners, and came from all over the country.

They were surrounded by friends, music, and love throughout 💚”

Extinction Rebellion protesters arrested after chaining themselves to Dáil (The Irish Times)

Extinction Rebellion Ireland

Previously: Penneys For Your Thoughts

Meanwhile, Across Dublin City

91 thoughts on “While You Were Sleeping

  1. Jeffrey

    So let me get this straight, 5 numpties dressed up and chain to a outdoor gate prevented people inside Dail Eireann to leave? Okkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkay,

    Reply
  2. Nullzero

    What do we want? “Carbons taxes for plebs”
    What do we not care about? “carbon credits for China and India that nullify any effect our carbon taxes in the West will ever have”.

    Reply
    1. Nigel

      What do we want? “Completely dishonest starw-man lies about what we want!”
      What do we not care about? “Completely dishonest straw-man lies about what we want!”
      Do you really not care about that? “Well, they all tend to blur together after a while.”
      Aren’t you typing that on a computer that uses energy? “Oh my God you’re right! You’ve proved climate change is a hoax!”
      If you’ll excuse me I’ll now go prove black is white and get eaten by tsetse flies. “Truly you are the real environmentalist!”

      Reply
      1. Nullzero

        What are you banging on about?

        How does a system that taxes people in some countries who are already making efforts to reduce their carbon emissions whilst simultaneously allowing the largest carbon polluters away with continuing to do what they’ve always done, do anything to change anything in any way?

        How you got on to climate change denial is anyone’s guess.

        You simply can’t expect anything to change when India and China can buy their way out of have to reduce their use of fossil fuels.

        This isn’t a strawman argument, this is fact. If you want to Bury your head in the sand and refuse to accept that, that’s on you. Indulge in as much cognitive dissonance as you wish.

        Reply
    1. Dr.Fart

      here it is! i found it. the absolute worst take on climate change on the internet. ive seen a lot but this one is perfectly dumb, it shows no understanding of anything and manages to do so in a mere two sentences.

      Reply
  3. newsjustin

    If they actually wanted to make a real, immediate and positive impact they’d “demand” something like that Moneypoint close sooner than 2025 and we stop burning peat for electricity today.

    Instead, the first two demands are show-offy but ultimately not effective in reducing ghg emissions and the 3rd demand is so vague to be utterly useless.

    Reply
    1. Nigel

      Environmentalists have been demanding that for a while, along with a long, long list of other things they ‘could be doing’ that they actually have been doing.

      Reply
    1. Clampers Outside

      Context… some of the nonsense spewed by Extinction Rebellion…

      – –

      97% of the people on the planet will be dead in a few decades… say Extinction Rebellion founders.

      – –

      Extinction Rebellion claimed…
      “billions will die”
      “millions of children will die”
      ….”in the next 10 to 20 years”

      – –

      Andrew Neil spoke with an Extinction Rebellion spokesperson about their scaremongering tactics that have left children crying at their protests because they think they’ll never see adulthood.

      – –

      Andrew Neil: “To reach your target aviation would come to an end”

      Extinction Rebellion spokesperson: “Possibly”.
      The spokesperson goes further on that.

      … there’s a lot of ‘fake news’ to this crowd

      Reply
      1. Clampers Outside

        My reason for posting their nonsense is that I believe there are better campaigning methods than “scaremongering” (which the spokesperson admitted they were doing) such as the approach recommended by Michael Taft last week in taking a “can do” approach to making a positive change. And he’s right.

        Reply
        1. Nigel

          No. People have been campaigning, informing, begging, pleading for decades about this and a host of other environmental issues, and, indeed making all sorts of positive changes wherever they can. Finally a movement arises that brings real attention to these issues, and now suddenly they’re ‘doing it wrong.’ Yes, that stuff you quoted is overstating things, but if you go to scientific sources, such as the recent UN report on the oceans, it’s too close to reality for comfort. Set this one spokesperson on a TV show against yeras and years of the oil inustry deliberately fundung climate change denialism, the murders of environmental activists all over the world, the astonishingly bad response by our own government, and your concerns are as wimpy as they are useless. Maybe listen to the people who’ve been at the coalface of this (as it were) for decades before lecturing them on what does and doesn’t work.

          Reply
          1. Clampers Outside

            Eh…. no Nigel. Watch the Andrew Neil interview with the spokesperson.

            Also, my point, as I made perfectly clear is that I do not believe the “exaggerate” tactic, which the spokesperson admits to doing, yet purports is backed by science, is the wrong approach, and will not convince those who are indifferent.

            In short, you don’t convince people by openly telling them lies, admitting they are lies, and yet then insisting the lies are backed by science.

            Again, I say ‘no’ to their fake news.

          2. some old queen

            Yes and people have been making wild claims for decades- none or little of which has happened. There is a hysterical bang of this ‘the end is nigh’ stuff- I agree with clamps- which worries me.

          3. Nullzero

            Nigel, you’re not making any reasonable points on this topic at all. “fair play to XR they’re doing great things” is just a ridiculous stance to take.

          4. Nigel

            I’m glad you’re standing up for honesty but it’s a bit weird after decades of corporate and government denialism and dismissal and downplaying you suddenly find this particular form of exaggeration so objectionable. I’d certainly prefer if people were more concise and careful about their predictions and have done their homework when they go on TV but I have no control over that. All I know is that they are right that this is an impending crisis and governments need to be taking it seriously and so does everybody else.

          5. Clampers Outside

            “it’s a bit weird after decades of corporate and government denialism and dismissal and downplaying you suddenly find this particular form of exaggeration so objectionable. ”

            You make too many assumptions about others and what they find objectionable in order to justify your position of backing a lie to fight a lie.

            Stop making assumptions. Stop backing lies regardless of the lies told by opposition as you only lower yourself to theirs.
            Demand truth, always, especially from those you wish to get behind, it’s that simple.

          6. Clampers Outside

            The spokesperson did do their homework. They then claimed that the admitted “scaremongering” is backed by science.

            They’re just telling lies, openly. Openly talking pure unadulterated claptrap.

          7. Nigel

            I’m not making assumptions, I’m gong by your comments. I’m not backing lies, I just don’t think one interview invalidates decades of research or is somehow equivalent to decades of lies.

            As for Andrew Neil, if he thinks people are poorly informed about clmate change, perhaps he should ask some questions about the role of the BBC and the media in that regard.

            “Fair play to XR they’re doing great things” is the only reasonable stance to take, even if some of their claims are open to correction.

          8. Nigel

            I mean, unless you actually think the effects of climate change are nothing to be scared of, it’s not reall ‘scaremongering’ is it?

          9. Clampers Outside

            We’re all going to die!

            Nah, not real scaremongering.

            Oh wait, I exaggerated, they said…

            97% are going to die!

            Nah, not real scaremongering at all, says Nigel

            ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          10. Termagant

            “Maybe listen to the people who’ve been at the coalface of this (as it were) for decades before lecturing them on what does and doesn’t work.”
            If what they were doing, which the likes of ER are doing now, worked then they wouldn’t have been doing it for decades Nige. A delusion doesn’t become true if you labour under it for long enough.

          11. Clampers Outside

            The delusion that scaremongering works to change attitudes of those indifferent to the issues.

            Here, let me say it as simply as possible.

            It doesn’t work.

          12. Nigel

            So, what, nobody, is going to die, or has already died, as a result of climate change and biodiversity loss and plastic pollution and a host of other environmental problems?

            Let mes start you off with one particular set of fatalities to contextualise your trenchant response to that one interview and some possibly exaggerated claims:

            https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/07/environmentalists-protestors-killed-violence-global-witness-report/

            Do you think your cringeworthy efforts at sarcasm are the type of positive “can do” approach you tell others to take?

          13. Clampers Outside

            Em… I’m not being sarcastic, for starters.

            And secondly, no one said no one has died.

            Asking your question, as you have done, to insinuate that that was said by the person you are arguing with is dishonest of you in your argumentation. An old tired tactic of yours pet, very old, and boring.

          14. Clampers Outside

            Well, I was being sarcastic…

            I took it you were addressing the points I outlined that the ER founders made.
            My mistake on the sarcasm bit, the rest still stands….

            Do carry on, as you were, I’m sure.

          15. Nigel

            If scaremongering doesn’t work, I guess environmental activists all over the world must be doing more than just scaremongering to finally bring these problems to world attention. Perhaps you caould also pass on this ‘scaremongering doesn’t work’ message to the people who responded to the car-sharing idea as if Eamon Ryan was personally threatening to shoot their kids and bring down civilisation or something. Thanks.

          16. Nigel

            So: people have died. People will die. The exact figures will always be speculative and unprovable until they’ve actually happened, but sonce we are in agreement that people have died and people will die, how is it not acceptable to say so? Is there any way to talk about past, present and future deaths that cannot be accused of scaremongering? Bearing in mind that human extinction is a definite possibility – what they’re exaggerating (I fervently hope it’s an exaggeration, anyway) is the timescale.

            (So, uh, is your ‘we’re all going to die!’ refrain not sarcasm, then?)

          17. Clampers Outside

            No one said it was not acceptable…. where do u pull these thoughts out of, your poopy place?

          18. Clampers Outside

            To your 2nd question: Yes, one can talk about them, in a realistic non scaremongering, ie exaggerated, manner.

          19. Nigel

            One last thing before I take a break: is saying that dirty air, dirty water, diminishing biodiversity and an increasingly unstable climate are really, really bad things scaremongering? Because the message really is that these are very, very bad things and a lot of work needs to be done about them and I’m not sure how to get the message across without underlining that these are really, really bad things. That’s not even the argument, actually, the argument is that everybody already knows these are really really bad things so why aren’t we doing more about them? Like right now while we still can? That could be scaremongering, I don’t know. IT’S STILL TRUE.

          20. Clampers Outside

            Talking about those things is possible without the “end of days” claptrap. That’s the point. You are responding to comments as if that were not my point. Why so disingenuous in your reading and responses would be a good one to ask yourself. Good lad.

          21. Nigel

            Sorry, last last thing, just to illustrate: 4.2 million deaths every year attributed to air pollution 4.2 MILLION. If anything we consistently underplay the importance of environmental issues and the devestating consequences of environmental destruction.
            https://www.who.int/airpollution/en/

          22. Clampers Outside

            Yep, those are real figs, unlike the ….97% of the world pop dead I. a few decades.

            You see the difference there, you know, between 4.2m v 7b… yeah, I hope you can.

          23. Clampers Outside

            “populations in low-income cities are the most impacted” and those are from “low to middle income countries”.

            Are you going to tell those poor countries to stop their industrialisation or what exactly is, say Extinction Rebellion and the like, planning to do to correct this issue while continuing an increase in the standard of living for these low and middle income countries?

            ( Quote from is also WHO – https://www.who.int/airpollution/data/cities-2016/en/ )

            My point?
            Rather than getting het up 8n exaggeration about how we’re all going to die, isn’t it better to look at the data and then discuss issues. This would be better than your attempt at “look 4.2m dead” and no attempt to look at data, don’t you think.

            – –

            May I ask, are you pro repatriation to poor countries by the industrialised countries, like Greta is?
            And if so, how does one reconcile a poor country trying to industrialise and raise the standard of living for its people with such a practice? It would be a contradiction, surely.

  4. V

    Now
    And I’m not a denier – well not a Trump level denier anyway
    but these Young ‘wans are on a hiding to nothing with this we’re all going to be dead insert the latest doomsday prediction;

    I’ve already told the teenager that there’s no point in me doing a will and leaving her anything if she’s going to be dead
    Or for investing in her education
    I might as well spend spend spend what I have on what time I’ve left

    And if it turns out to be false
    She can blame herself and her pals for being stuck with a penniless oul’wan
    Who probably won’t even have a medical card or be in a position to fund incontinence nappies

    So there

    besides, in fairness to Neil, how he kept a straight face is a mystery to me, even at the introduction
    Zion Lights

    c’mon lads

    Reply
      1. V

        You know the thing about always listening to advice
        Especially when tis free Clamps?

        Here;
        Forget grounding, banning WiFi and phone privileges and cutting out pocket money bhoy

        The best weapon to manage a teenager is the threat of being mortified by their parents
        And be shameless about it
        Like promising to wear nail varnish to a Parent Teacher meeting
        Or singing John Denver songs when their pals are around
        Cheering loudly from the sidelines
        Kinda stuff
        If it’s hard core kick up th _0le parenting – pretend they still believe in Santy

        And never
        NEVER
        Underestimate the destructive capabilities of the Horror’mones
        The flip of the switch on the kettle could see the release of a warning level colour coded storm that’ll pass over the gaff and leave ye dazed and confused

        And don’t trust the aftermath either

        I promise you
        And it doesn’t feel like that now
        But I promise you the day will come that you’ll wish ta’ jaysus that he could be a nine month old again

        And don’t assume the smell of BO is your own
        And Never give in and tidy up their room yourselves
        Even if they have to go to school in a dirty uniform and crusty socks

        Reply
  5. $hifty

    Define irony: a bunch of climate doomsday merchants blocking a couple of key traffic arteries in the city centre yesterday which meant anybody in a car or bus was forced to spend up to an hour extra shuffling around town in their diesel powered machines.

    Reply
        1. Nigel

          If there were less cars and more cyclists in the city, they’d have an easier time of it, too. Or more trains and buses.. So: better public transport and cycling infrastructure would make everyone’s lives easier!

          Reply
  6. millie vanilly strikes again

    I’ve missed these epic arguments of a Friday. I saw the comment count skyrocket, and I knew. I already knew.

    All is right with the world.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *