CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

“Conservationists often engage in environmentally harmful behaviors”

(18 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

  2. Frenchy
    Member

    Conservationists take fewer personal flights, do more to lower domestic energy use, recycle more, and eat less meat - but don't differ in how they travel to work, and own more pets than do economists or medics.

    That's fairly interesting.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  3. gembo
    Member

    Always good to quantify the extent of one's hypocrisy

    Posted 6 years ago #
  4. unhurt
    Member

    I feel like that headline should read, "Conservationists live in the same society as everyone else and thus engage in many of the same behaviours; we promise to stop indulging in this moralising clickbait gotcha-ism on pain of pain". Rar.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  5. MalkyB
    Member

    Do they define 'Conservationists'?

    Posted 6 years ago #
  6. gembo
    Member

    @malkyb they are the conservationists, writing in the journal Biological Conservation and pointing out they are not so conservational after all.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  7. minus six
    Member

    @conservatives

    urgent review of dangerous cycling

    am i doin it rite

    Posted 6 years ago #
  8. Klaxon
    Member

    'Many conservationists undertake environmentally harmful activities in their private lives such as flying and eating meat, while calling for people as a whole to reduce such behavior'

    This seems like a logical fallacy along the lines of saying 'food bank workers eat well at home' or 'charity fundraiser doesn't donate their full earnings to charity'

    There is a line one must draw when attempting to fix a systemic issue while still trying to live a wholesome life within the dysfunctional system

    Posted 6 years ago #
  9. gembo
    Member

    @klaxon

    Apparently you have to pay to get int Highgate cemetery now

    Philosophers have often sought to interpret the world, the point however is to change it.

    The article goes into detail about drawing the line you mention and can be summarised as Conservationists could do better.

    I like your food bank and charity workers examples. I can think of other examples of people who were community workers who lived in the community, that does give you some kudos. Gandhi did not look so well on a bowl of rice a day granted. On the flip, the current co-owner of a prominent vegetarian restaurant chain not vegetarian, the family just saw niche and got in early.(one of them was maybe veggie but the rest loved a steak)

    Posted 6 years ago #
  10. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    In other shock news some of the employees at the heart of the banking, finance and insurance industries are not committed capitalists.

    Philosophers have often sought to interpret the world, the point however is to change it.

    Ah, wise words @gembo-san, but remember the poor scientist labouring simply to describe it accurately and to make propositions about its nature which inevitably turn out to be false.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  11. gembo
    Member

    @iwrats, yes I like to think of myself as that poor (social) scientist. If you like You can ask me how to fix some educational issues, however, my answers are far too simple to be implemented what is needed is a complicated system to fudge it all.

    How many non-committed capitalists do you reckon?

    Also can you define the non-committed? The cynics, the idealists, the nihilists.

    Must check if Charlie nicked that quote from Proudhon

    Apparently Karl Marx, Eleven theses on Feuerbach

    Not read that one, but I bet it is a page turner

    Also slightly misremembered the quote but I am sticking with mine as what you often get with Carlos is that he is the only one to have come up with the right idea when he has just nicked it off someone else.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  12. neddie
    Member

    In other shock news some of the employees at the heart of the banking, finance and insurance industries are not committed capitalists.

    LOL

    We also have engineers who are anti-technology when at home.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  13. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    You can ask me how to fix some educational issues

    Alright then, how to fix some educational issues?

    [I favour outdoor lessons year-round and a final group wilderness survival exercise at age eighteen where failure simply leads to death.]

    Posted 6 years ago #
  14. gembo
    Member

    I am writing a short report from a pupil equity fund gig I was at Friday. The Heidie from an Edinburgh primary was On the money.

    I will cut and paste here Monday, if I can log on at work as have been moved desk by then yo a non-school server. Called restack ing.

    Things I won't say in my short report but will here (too simple even for my report)

    Everyone should just go to their catchment schools. This would instantly redistribute SIMD and abilities. Except at margins.

    Bit like my other hoary old chestnut we should all let our weans walk to school.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  15. crowriver
    Member

    "Everyone should just go to their catchment schools. This would instantly redistribute SIMD and abilities the homes of wealthier families to the catchments of the 'good' schools. "

    FTFY

    This happens already to some extent in Edinburgh as many school catchments are full. It would also increase the likelihood of those with the means sending their weans to private schools. It's a simple calculation - pay for a home in a more expensive area (e.g.. Marchmont/Morningside/Bruntsfield) or pay the school fees?

    For the avoidance of doubt, our children attend their catchment schools...

    "we should all let our weans walk to school."

    Absolutely.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  16. Stickman
    Member

    https://mobile.twitter.com/profscottthinks/status/911485291369783297

    "This week in Full Council we considered the risk of fees rising at private schools. The conflicts of interest were interesting. "

    Linked video worth watching

    Posted 6 years ago #
  17. gembo
    Member

    @crowriver

    I am not arguing for the catchment thing. That boat sailed long ago.

    Other things I could argue but I am not arguing are private schools are a way of getting jobs in Edinburgh

    And, one you may take issue with thAt again I am not arguing, faith schools are a bad idea and that all schools should be secular.

    I am not arguing for or against these, I will post my How to narrow the poverty gap thing later

    There is some full capacity in some catchments for sure such that even if you buy a house in bruntsfield and pay the £144k boroughmuir tax you are not guaranteed a place there. Shocka.

    However, there are lots of non-catchment children in lots of schools. Lots. So what I am arguing (not seriously as a proposal, but just on here) is that if everyone went to the school round the corner, they could walk and there would be a levelling of the SIMD. Even once you take the private schools out of the picture, Edinburgh still has the strongest link between poverty and attainment in Scotland.

    I am not proposing this at all, just noting that it would redistribute SIMD a bit.

    Posted 6 years ago #
  18. crowriver
    Member

    I won't comment on the faith schools thing except to say perhaps that's matter for individuals and their consciences... :-) Anyway non-faith schools are not strictly speaking secular, the official designation is "non-denominational" which is not the same thing...

    "private schools are a way of getting jobs in Edinburgh"

    Not arguing with that: one of my neighbours teaches at Watson's.

    My point was only that inevitably many (not all) parents will weigh up the financial cost/benefit to private schooling versus the cost/benefit of moving into the catchments for Boroughmuir, Royal High, Gillespie's etc.

    Catchments for many primary schools are full. 'Popular' secondaries are either full or very near capacity. So parental choice in Edinburgh is more limited than it first appears.

    "lots of non-catchment children in lots of schools. Lots. "

    Also true. There's a fair bit of moving around in my local area: lots of my son's former P7 classmates went to Leith Academy because they like playing football, for example. Others wanted to go with their friends. Only some of them lived in the LA catchment. My guess is these kids' parents were not agonising over Boroughmuir tax vs. Watson's fees.

    "if everyone went to the school round the corner, they could walk and there would be a levelling of the SIMD. "

    We also considered LA as it's an easier walk with no large busy roads to cross, compared to the ND catchment school. Son didn't want to go there though. He walks to school most days even though other parents remark it's "a bit of a long walk".

    Posted 6 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin