Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

MikeNovack
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2025 1:17 pm

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by MikeNovack »

Ignore
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 29301
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Immanuel Can »

MikeNovack wrote: Sun May 24, 2026 3:11 pmIgnore
So...no answer.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun May 24, 2026 6:13 pm
MikeNovack wrote: Sun May 24, 2026 3:11 pmIgnore
So...no answer.
Some more about this new, topical offshoot.
Ignorare means, not to know.
Ignorare is the common root of both ignore … and ignorance.

The known and unknown can both be ignored.

- When the known is ignored then a preconception is being ignored, and there can be good reasons for that.
- Curiosity bridges the separation between the known and the unknown, which is why non-human curious cats need nine lives.
- Although, cats who jump off cliffs have a natural sense of both their limitations and capacity for landing on their feet (or rather, their little paws) while pancaking to slow the descent. Woe to the fat cat in this situation who remembers himself as a leaper.

Looks like Ignoring Climate Alarmism is becoming fashionable for Big Media, too.
That Climate is no longer headline news can be conveniently ignored, too.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 9131
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Walker wrote: Mon May 25, 2026 8:30 am Looks like Ignoring Climate Alarmism is becoming fashionable for Big Media, too.
That Climate is no longer headline news can be conveniently ignored, too.
Your news source - now restricted to "American Thinker" and "Patriot Memes" so far as I can tell - might not be telling you what's going on, but the rest of the world is paying attention still. Especially seeing as there's a heat dome over Europe and North Africa right now causing
BBC wrote: UK records hottest ever May day as temperature climbs to 34.8C in west London

It's been a record-breaking day for temperatures across much of the UK today.
The first came before the sun was even up, with a provisional new May high for the overnight temperature - 19.C in Kenley, Greater London.
Early this morning our weather team predicted a "bonkers" day - they knew the record for hottest May day would be broken "easily".
And sure enough, the old record - 32.8C, set in May 1922 - was equalled around midday.

But the temperature kept rising, with the previous May record broken by a full 2C after a high of 34.8C was measured at Kew Gardens, west London, late in the afternoon.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c1w24llvj48t
Meanwhile in France Le Monde broadens that picture:
Le Monde wrote: Heat dome over Europe scorches UK, France, Spain
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/a ... 9_114.html

Temperatures hit record highs for May in the United Kingdom and France on Monday, May 25, as forecasters warned of a prolonged period of extreme heat across Europe throughout the week. A so-called "heat dome" of warm air from northern Africa trapped under a high-pressure system over western Europe is behind the high temperatures not usually seen until high summer.

Temperatures in Spain were expected to peak later this week at 38°C, while parts of Italy imposed restrictions on working outdoors. In the UK, the Met Office weather agency said it was the hottest May day on record, with temperatures hitting 34.8°C at Kew Gardens, southwest London – a full two degrees above the previous high. "This heat would be exceptional in the UK even in mid-summer, let alone May," it said on X.

Scientists say human-induced climate change is making extreme weather events like heatwaves, droughts and floods more intense, resulting in temperature records being broken more frequently.
You should learn to see beyond the end of your own nose.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Mon May 25, 2026 8:00 pm
The weather is a popular topic.
Most folks follow the weather.
Folks also follow the hair-brained predictions of Climate Alarmists, over decades.

Extremes became the Foundation of The Scam.
This is just so environmentally unethical.

When folks wise up, the reckoning begins.

Climate Science’s Biggest Shift In Decades: IPCC’s RCP8.5 Is Officially Dead
https://climatechangedispatch.com/rcp85 ... scenarios/

Biggest shift in decades.
The scam is gonna cause some bitter clinging to the old lies.

Polar bears must be happy at the rate they're thriving.
For the locals, the increase in numbers is probably hard to ignore.

It would be ironic if all the doom and gloom, changes ... Save The Polar Bears to ... Shoot those damn devils!
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 9131
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by FlashDangerpants »

There we have the real reason why people familiar with this site don't especially want a dedicated section for environmental ethics. The Alt-right can outspam everyone else, and are absolutely mad. You would make it worse than the gender sub, which ought to be quietly closed and just deleted.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Tue May 26, 2026 6:34 am There we have the real reason why people familiar with this site don't especially want a dedicated section for environmental ethics. The Alt-right can outspam everyone else, and are absolutely mad. You would make it worse than the gender sub, which ought to be quietly closed and just deleted.
No need for your hysterics.

In short, the United Nations is scaling back the scare tactics of the quasi-science called climate change, (which is actually a political movement), because time is crumbling the old lies ...
... and common sense folks are simply reporting the news, and the news is about the quasiness of the cult.

De Nile is not just a river in Africa, it's a state of mind. :lol:

Yes, the climate does change. Funny, there's a saying not said much anymore ... as changeable as the weather. It's just the way things are. You too can change, and get on the right side of truth. Quit that old Climate Cult.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Tue May 26, 2026 6:34 ama dedicated section for environmental ethics.
Environmental ethics is fine.

It's ethical to point out charlatans.

The climate change cult is unethical, and trying to make it ethical is putting lipstick on a pig.

*

Question:
“Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtHZn5X5bXM

Answer:
We are The Quasies who know that betting the neighbor’s farm on quasi-science shouts virtue to the choir, as we cling to our extremism.

*

Since becoming the Cult-King, he has discovered hundreds of millions of reasons to sincerely believe in the cult.

Our savior, to lead us from iniquity.
https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th/id/OIP.rl5Y ... 5&o=7&rm=3
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Mon May 25, 2026 8:00 pm You should learn to see beyond the end of your own nose.
What's beyond that substantial proboscis is the objectivity of The Right, which is so-named for an obvious reason.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 9131
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Not sure why you needed to do so many replies all to say nothing. But you always were a weird old dude.

In the meantime, the hottest May days on Record in both the UK and in Ireland.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41850912.html
Irish Examiner wrote: Record-breaking May temperature set with mercury reaching 28.6C in Shannon

The record temperature for May was broken on Monday, as the mercury reached 28.6C at Shannon Airport.

Met Éireann said it could be even warmer in some areas on Tuesday, with temperatures set to climb as high as 28C across Munster.

The previous hottest May day ever recorded in Ireland was 28.4C, which was recorded on May 31, 1997, in Ardfert, Co Kerry, and was equalled at Oak Park in Co Carlow on Monday as the country saw sweltering conditions.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Tue May 26, 2026 4:16 pm
That's not a climate report.
That's a weather report.

Weather reports can be wrong, week to week.
Betting someone else's farm on a hundred-year prediction?

Priceless propaganda for control.
Weird, and stupid.
Folks are catching on.
The UN is catching on.

Since you don't care for explanations, then take note of the conclusion, which is ...

... you've been bamboozeled, and you liked it.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Tue May 26, 2026 4:16 pm
Even more locally, we've had a lot of rain lately.
Farmers are happier than when it's dry.
Sometimes it rains, sometimes it's dry.
Sometimes it rains the most ever, and sometimes it's drier than the wit of a Brit.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

Folks ask if you believe in Climate Change the way folks ask if you believe in Jesus.
It's a way of saying ... Are you on the Climate Change team?
It's a way of assuming so much ... without saying anything.

The factual point to consider: (which makes it the pertinent point for response)
The United Nations has scaled back the panic level of climate predictions.


Consideration, and evidentiary commentary:
However, other than some localized clinging to weather reports, Big Media yawns. To acknowledge the scam is to acknowledge that the BM was performing the subjective art of slanted reporting in order to follow the narrative of the Climate Messiah (see the above portrait.)

Settled science indeed. The climate science scam consists of computer modeling the most extreme possibilities imaginable far into the future, based on suspicious data, then using current weather reports for support. It's the science of GIGO, garbage in and garbage out, and the art of narrating the garbage out for political and financial advantage. It's also a way of economic churning doctored up as climate-faith doctrine ... yikes.

It just shows the worship gene** at work. Despite rationality, if folks don't have God they still need to worship ... Climate Change.

That's called a totalitarian fantasy come true, because it's been so effective.

The Judgment:
Climate Belief with OPM (other peoples money*) is just so environmentally unethical.

*the socialist way
** the worship gene is a metaphor for a primary, innate characteristic activated by secondary conditions.
MikeNovack
Posts: 1008
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2025 1:17 pm

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by MikeNovack »

Walker wrote: Tue May 26, 2026 11:51 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: Tue May 26, 2026 6:34 am There we have the real reason why people familiar with this site don't especially want a dedicated section for environmental ethics. The Alt-right can outspam everyone else, and are absolutely mad. You would make it worse than the gender sub, which ought to be quietly closed and just deleted.
No need for your hysterics.
But need for orderliness in threads.

Walker, fine for you to argue religious truth vs political truth vs scientific truth. I'll give you first crack at picking a title for that thread.

But THIS thread has a question that presupposes the environmental crisis is real. Feel free to argue otherwise, but in a thread where THAT would be the question, not in this thread.
Walker
Posts: 17083
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Environmental Ethics -- fair share for the non-human?

Post by Walker »

MikeNovack wrote: Wed May 27, 2026 2:52 pm
:thumbsup:

Ok.
Post Reply