Warning issued for fog for tonight and tomorrow for Leinster and Munster with risk of freezing fog also. pic.twitter.com/gfsYtp3m9q
— Carlow Weather (@CarlowWeather) January 12, 2022
Freezing fog.
Damn you, climate change.
Sponsored Link
Everything. As It Happens.
Freezing Fog, eh? Here you go. It will be Mayhem!
https://youtu.be/hxMvA6b7syk?t=54
At least its not a John Carpenter fog. That fog was bad news (albeit with a great score [though I preferred that of Escape From New York, which is really something!] )
The Fog is way better than Halloween, I’ve always said so, I’ve had bar fights over it.*
*(I have not had bar fights over it.)
I cannot argue with you there. Notwithstanding your disposition to bar brawling.
I feel it is important now for everyone to take a step back, and listen to a piece from JC. Finely tuned ears will note that The Fall reworked this into Systematic Abuse!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xvqxnBLDao
That is all.
For this, much thanks.
If it’s Boiling Fog, I tend to stay indoors for that one.
For any JC fans, I recommend the Lost Themes albums he has released in recent years with his son.
James Herbert’s book the Fog is even better. He was such a popular writer in the 1980’s. Rats, Lair, The Jonah, etc. We passed them around a group of about 6 of us as it was the 80’s and we were all skint all the time. Hence all the reading., and being on first name terms will all the local librarians and second hand bookshop staff, and spending most Saturdays going from one record shop to another but only being able to buy one LP a month.
Good Times….
Never really loved James Herbert that much, though some of his books were good. For British horror, i preferred Ramsey Campbell and Clive Barker when he came along.
Without libraries, the 70s and 80s would have been a lot grimmer.
The country will be closed down by the usual met red warning just like the last one
‘Damn you, climate change.’
The last seven years have been the warmest on record, but sure, it’s all a plot.
Damn climate change. We never had freezing fog before 2014.
If you don’t know how climate change works, just say so, stop trying to bluff.
Says the guy who posts something about warming on an article about freezing. Any excuse eh? What next? Mist over the hills – global warming? Antarctica sea ice growing – damn global warming?
Again, if you don’t know how climate change works, just ask. There’s nothing more insipidly stupid than a ‘it’s cold outside, climate change must be a hoax’ take.
He has neither the time nor the crayons to explain it you.
‘There’s nothing more insipidly stupid than a ‘it’s cold outside, climate change must be a hoax’ take.’ Says the guy whose original post did just a ‘it’s cold outside, global warming must be happening’ take’. . At least you know yourself.
As for Truthy Fruthy – ROFL. The man of the multi-guise with nothing to say.
‘It’s cold outside climate change is happening’ happens to be true, though, which is the important thing, no? And inspired by Bodger’s ‘damn climate change’ snark, so hardly out of the blue.
As you are wont to point out then – ‘There’s nothing more insipidly stupid than a ‘it’s cold outside, global warming must be happening’ take’
The truth and a lie are the same, are they? Explains a lot about you.
The only explanation in this thread is that you produce a label or comment on a poster, and don’t know where to turn when that label; is turned back on you. Duck and dive, divert etc. etc. Live with it.
And of course –
As you are wont to point out then – ‘There’s nothing more insipidly stupid than a ‘it’s cold outside, global warming must be happening’ take’
The only relevant explanation or label is that one is true, the other is not, the rest is you tying yourself in a knot. If you see both as equally insipidly stupid, that says everything about you.
The determination to stop the climate changing, well, you just have to admire the ambition of such quixotic souls.
Unfortunately, the reality is that this seeming tilt @ windmills (& solar panels) leads us straight into eugenics, population culls & genocide because there is no possible way to reduce atmospheric CO2, any more than we currently are, without reducing the planetary population. Drastically.
The facts & the figures make this utterly undeniable, no amount of prayer to St Greta of Thunberg can change this.
Either propose a cull or learn to adapt, which is after all, the ability that put us in this, admittedly sticky, situation in the first place.
‘there is no possible way to reduce atmospheric CO2, any more than we currently are, without reducing the planetary population.’
Completely, utterly and categorically untrue. Fossil fuel propaganda. Their willingness to ubrn the planet for profits is already evident, why wouldn’t they be willing to put it about that poor people need to be killed off en masse so that they can stay rich and powerful?
‘Either propose a cull or learn to adapt,’
People occcasionally call me a doom-merchant, but this is the real message of hate and despair.
‘Completely, utterly and categorically untrue.’
I don’t think you understood K. Cavan’s post.
I’m pretty sure I did, but feel free to have a go at some exegesis.
Well, if you write ‘Completely, utterly and categorically untrue.’
and then reckon you understood it, enjoy your world of ignorance.
You wrote it, you prove what you wrote.
God forbid you should try to make an actual point for once.
The actual ‘possible way’ is to drastically reduce fossil fuel consumption.
Which is the point you’re not getting. We’ve come so far now that, no matter what any green initiative is promoted, population increases increase the requirement for fossil fuel consumption.
In 2010 we had 6.9bn of a world population. Now we have 7.9bn and rising. That extra 1bn require transport, electricity, food (cow farts) and that increases the pressure on fossil fuels to provide that. Green initiatives won’t make up the shortfall. Green, Electric, Cars? – Mad pricing.
The green initiative should be to make them cheaper than diesel/petrol to buy in the first place, and to have a comparable distance on a charge, and also to have a ultra quick charge (Minutes) But no – the only green initiative as regards cost is to tax diesel and petrol without any other inducement to change to electric.
Why isn’t it being done? Because Governments need the Excise Duty and Taxes on Fossil Fuels. And Green Parties are in governments.
So we’re so far down the road of the necessity of fossil fuels to perform the required functions, and also there is a dependence on them to raise finance for governments that K. Cavan’s post is on the button.
Now – maybe you can outline where you see real possibilities for change? K. Cavan used the word ‘Reality’ so if you could keep your answer into the confines of reality it’s be good.
Without speaking for you, Nigel, I’ll reiterate Extinction Rebellion’s suggestion: Wind & Solar. The fact is these are non-runners in terms of supplying enough power & they are dirty, in terms of the massive amounts of non-recyclable plastics they send to landfill. There is enough Cadmium to replace all the cars we have right now, what then? Neither can that technology be scaled up to trucks, the batteries become too heavy. It’s childish to whine & accuse without offering alternatives.
What’s going on right now is that The West is being forced to shiver or pay pointless carbon taxes to wasteful governments, who’ll fritter away the money. That is not a solution, so what is?
You might like to gaze down on me from your high horse, Nigel, I’m sure it gives you a feeling of moral superiority but it’s just grandstanding bullcrap. Nobody wants to wipe out humanity, we need to adapt to an INEVITABLE situation not wave stupid plastic placards at a ruling elite who profess support for anything that doesn’t stop their insane accumulation of pointless, obscene wealth.
Within a decade of it’s genesis, the Ecological Movement was taken over by the political left, to use as a weapon against Capitalism & it’s now a sick joke, controlled, not by climate scientists but by dogmatic, hysterical Marxists, they are just another part of the problem.
‘Now – maybe you can outline where you see real possibilities for change?’
I see the possiblilty for change everywhere. I also see people and interests blocking it at various levels, some of which you’ve identified, but also including yourself and K Cavan. But that’s not the question here. K Cavan proposed a population cull as the only alternative to doing nothing. Why is a population cull seen as possible, but ending fossil fuel consumption is not? One is an ethical horror, a genocidal crime, the other is something that will wipe out profits for fossil fuel companies and change the way people behave and live, and not for the worse, either. Why do you and K Cavan see global murder as the only possible solutiion to a problem that is not being caused by the global population?
It’s a false alternative, a fake binary. ‘We have to cull the global population or do nothing/adapt.’ That’s what I categorically reject.
You tried dodging answering the question though haven’t you Nigel. Just generalisations. ‘I see possibilities for change everywhere’. Really? It doesn’t cut it i’m afraid.
Given what K.Cavan and I have written, where do you see these possibilities to change enough to replace fossil fuels? Remember the word ‘reality’ now.
BTW i never mentioned global murder, did I? Try duck, dive and divert, but produce your solutions instead of ducking, diving and diversion. By what, and how, exactly do you propose replacing fossil fuels? Remember ‘reality’ now.
‘BTW i never mentioned global murder, did I?’
What do you think a population cull will consist of, exactly?
I think all fossil fuel subsidies should end. Encourage electric vehicles but prioritise investment in public transport, impose congestion charges in cities – exceptions for the disabled where appropraite. Insulate all houses, insulation standards raised on all new builds. Low-rise high density construction of homes in urban areas. Windmills on every home or in every garden, powering the homes, selling surplus to the grid. Revamp agircultural subsidies to reduce the national herd, increase food production, increase biodiversity, protect hedgerows, end sitka plantations, replace with native species. Plant on high ground, end hill grazing to reduce flooding, restore wetlands and bogs.
Massive international investment in projects on the scale of the Manhattan Project or the moon shot only with the aim of developing clean, efficient sources of energy.
Ban all disposable plastics.
Carbon taxes at the source ie corporations.
That’s just a few. There are a million more.
They’re all better alternatives than popultion culls.
I didn’t mention cull either.
I did say though that you have a problem understanding what K.Cavan wrote. That’s quite plain because the la la cuddly land of what you are saying will never happen. It’s gone beyond that. Population will keep increasing. Fossil fuel usage will continue increasing. The reason is the reality that big business will win always. That’s the point you either don’t understand or don’t want to understand.
‘I didn’t mention cull either.’
But K Cavan did, and yet you claim to understand what he said.
‘That’s the point you either don’t understand or don’t want to understand.’
You can give up on changing things for the better if you want. It’s certainly not going to happen if everyone thinks the same as you. Thank goodness they don’t. What’s the point in all your sniping at Irish politicians if it isn’t because things could and should be done better?
Exactly. I didn’t mention cull. There was a lot more in K.Cavan post. I understood the points he was making.
The point, and you’re in denial of it, is the fossil fuel rollercoaster won’t stop. You can have all the warm cuddly visions you like. Facing facts is missing.
‘ What’s the point in all your sniping at Irish politicians if it isn’t because things could and should be done better?’
The things that can be done better with changing politicians are things like housing, homelessness, poverty, sops to the likes of dinny and mccourt etc. etc. where the politicians can do it. They haven’t the means nor the hunger to stand up to the fossil fuel companies. No matter who you have in government there will always need to be a fossil fuel tax intake required.
‘There was a lot more in K.Cavan post’
If you thought so, you should have responded to it instead of trying to police my response. You still haven’t actually said what it is, mind.
‘Facing facts is missing.’
I’m sorry you’ve given up. The consequences of going along with your surrender will be pretty bad. It’s really the only game in town at this point.
‘where the politicians can do it’
Politicians can certainly do most of the things I’ve listed. If they can stand up to vulture funds they can stand up to fossil fuel.
‘there will always need to be a fossil fuel tax intake required.’
There will until someone stops it.
Good man Nigel. Duck, distract, Divert, avoid. Accuse people of saying something they didn’t. Pick a phrase and try move the conversation to suit your own flawed conceptions of reality. You reckon that politicians are standing up to vulture funds? Really?
Your problem is the inability to understand. Your answers therefore are usually defensive and childish mostly. Isn’t it time you embraced the realities of life?
‘Duck, distract, Divert, avoid.’
I don’t think those words mean what you think they mean.
‘we need to adapt to an INEVITABLE situation’
It’s not inevitable. It’s just profit-driven wealth accumulation that is being allowed to happen at the expense of untold suffering.
Ditto, Mr Clax, though “Fluke” is a more heartwarming tale that survived the adolescent desire to be scared out of your wits.
Does anyone else see that England is farting in the image?
If you need an expert on odd stuff that looks like a country, particularly Ireland, then Bodger is the man for you …
Charger has yet to become a man.