Nov 9, 2019, 1:49 pm
Last edit by: JDiver
The Carbon Conscious Travel forum has been launched and can be found here: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/carb...us-travel-769/
Carbon Conscious Travel [forum now open - see inside]
Jul 9, 2019, 3:15 pm
#31
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Naples, Fla.
Programs: Southwest Zone C, Howard Johnson Platinum, Costco Business Member, Uber Diamond
Posts: 42
This is a travel blog. It should not be about a pseudo science political argument. Man made global warming is only a theory as it has never been proven one way or the other. I can provide a plethora of citations both ways to illustrate this, but I will not go into this on a travel site. Stick to travel related topics.
Jul 9, 2019, 5:00 pm
#32
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,141
I would say 100% yes, I'd be interested to participate in the discussions myself.
However, you'll need to be _very_ careful about moderating that forum - as evidenced by this thread alone. There's no point of opening a sub-forum if the discussion is going to immediately devolve into people jumping with their takes about how 'climate change isn't man made!!!' or 'increased CO2 emissions are good, actually'.
However, you'll need to be _very_ careful about moderating that forum - as evidenced by this thread alone. There's no point of opening a sub-forum if the discussion is going to immediately devolve into people jumping with their takes about how 'climate change isn't man made!!!' or 'increased CO2 emissions are good, actually'.
Jul 9, 2019, 5:08 pm
#33
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: SEA, ORD, SFO
Programs: AS MVPG 75K, AA PLT, DL GM, SPG GLD, Hyatt GLD, SPG GLD
Posts: 202
That's a great idea since it's obviously coming to the travel sector.
Anyone who opposes it because it's "political" is the same kind of person who could rationalize opposing vaccinations because they're somehow "political".
=> In fact, they're the only ones actually trying to make it political. Ignore these types who oppose basic science, and want to insert FUD.
<redacted>
Anyone who opposes it because it's "political" is the same kind of person who could rationalize opposing vaccinations because they're somehow "political".
=> In fact, they're the only ones actually trying to make it political. Ignore these types who oppose basic science, and want to insert FUD.
<redacted>
Last edited by JDiver; Jul 10, 2019 at 12:56 am Reason: Overly personalized comment removed
Jul 9, 2019, 5:39 pm
#34
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,003
The environmental movement is the biggest fraud to hit society since the Atkins diet.
We don't need a forum for either subject.
We don't need a forum for either subject.
Jul 9, 2019, 5:58 pm
#35
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Kelowna Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, HHonors Diamond, BonVoy Gold, AAdvantage, IHG Priority Club, BA EC, AS MVP
Posts: 110
Unfortunately 'climate change' is not basic science. As the planet we live on has passed through major and minor ice ages over the centuries there is no direct evidence that we are in a 'climate crisis'.
But groupthink rears its lovely head and "we all know that climate change due to mankind and CO2 is the culprit" which unfortunately cannot be proven as the models keep demonstrating that they are flawed. Henny penny and the sky is falling.
One thing is clear - we are approaching 10 Billion inhabitants in a world that probably could safely (and carbon friendly) support 4 Billion. Shut down 6 Billion wood fires and the amount of carbon in the atmosphere would drop significantly.
This is not the venue for a climate change war.
But groupthink rears its lovely head and "we all know that climate change due to mankind and CO2 is the culprit" which unfortunately cannot be proven as the models keep demonstrating that they are flawed. Henny penny and the sky is falling.
One thing is clear - we are approaching 10 Billion inhabitants in a world that probably could safely (and carbon friendly) support 4 Billion. Shut down 6 Billion wood fires and the amount of carbon in the atmosphere would drop significantly.
This is not the venue for a climate change war.
Jul 9, 2019, 6:27 pm
#36
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,141
One last comment:
I don't understand why people are arguing this isn't a venue to discuss about "climate change war". The sheer idiocy of denying human-caused climate change in 2019 aside, you just... don't have to participate in the discussions? Not every discussion requires your voice! In fact, very frequently it's better off without it!
It's gonna be a separate forum, for people who are interested in the subject - and FT already has plenty of those! I don't see anybody calling for getting rid of the "Premium Fare Deals" forum just because they only fly in economy.
There's no denying that our hobby (specifically) and transportation and travel industries (generally) contributes a great amount to the CO2 emissions and there's absolutely no reason to not have a dedicated subforum to discuss the impact and how to minimize it [1]. The connection between FT and why would people want to talk about it is clear.
[1]: Unless it turns out nobody actually has anything to say - then sure, shut it down down the line.
I don't understand why people are arguing this isn't a venue to discuss about "climate change war". The sheer idiocy of denying human-caused climate change in 2019 aside, you just... don't have to participate in the discussions? Not every discussion requires your voice! In fact, very frequently it's better off without it!
It's gonna be a separate forum, for people who are interested in the subject - and FT already has plenty of those! I don't see anybody calling for getting rid of the "Premium Fare Deals" forum just because they only fly in economy.
There's no denying that our hobby (specifically) and transportation and travel industries (generally) contributes a great amount to the CO2 emissions and there's absolutely no reason to not have a dedicated subforum to discuss the impact and how to minimize it [1]. The connection between FT and why would people want to talk about it is clear.
[1]: Unless it turns out nobody actually has anything to say - then sure, shut it down down the line.
Jul 9, 2019, 7:34 pm
#37
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: St Petersburg, FL, USA
Posts: 2,253
Wait - FT is looking into creating a forum that is, by its very nature, anti-travel? Give it a shot and see how that turns out for you.
Jul 9, 2019, 11:23 pm
#38
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Here’s an interesting article that includes the different views held regarding this issue on both sides of the Atlantic, as well as the difference in travel conditions.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/trave...and-chance-us/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/trave...and-chance-us/
Jul 10, 2019, 2:56 am
#39
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: HEL
Programs: *G, used to be with TK but left due to their corruption and political ties
Posts: 4,406
This is a travel blog. It should not be about a pseudo science political argument. Man made global warming is only a theory as it has never been proven one way or the other. I can provide a plethora of citations both ways to illustrate this, but I will not go into this on a travel site. Stick to travel related topics.
Jul 10, 2019, 3:28 am
#40
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: United Platinum,1M miler; Alaska OneWorld Sapphire
Posts: 39
I support creating the forum, as long as it is a forum for discussing how to reduce my impact as a traveler (Carbon emissions but also trash and other environmental impacts). Discussions of whether climate change is human-caused or not should be banned. Here are some questions I would like to discuss in such a forum:
(a) Are carbon offsets actually effective? (e.g., how long is carbon sequestered by planting a tree? Clearly not forever.)
(b) Is anyone auditing the claims of airlines, cruise lines, and hotels about their environmental impacts?
(c) Are green fuels actually green?
(d) What is the carbon footprint of different modes of travel, different aircraft, etc? What is the carbon footprint of infrastructure investments (e.g., building a new high-speed train must involve a huge amount of concrete).
(a) Are carbon offsets actually effective? (e.g., how long is carbon sequestered by planting a tree? Clearly not forever.)
(b) Is anyone auditing the claims of airlines, cruise lines, and hotels about their environmental impacts?
(c) Are green fuels actually green?
(d) What is the carbon footprint of different modes of travel, different aircraft, etc? What is the carbon footprint of infrastructure investments (e.g., building a new high-speed train must involve a huge amount of concrete).
Jul 10, 2019, 7:35 am
#41
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: PHL
Programs: Chivas, Tequila, Good Beer
Posts: 615
It did not do any good to ESPN to become politically charged and divisive. FT will do well to stay true to its core and leave this topic completly out. They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions... the comments on this thread are just the beggining and it ain't looking good.
I guess the moderators and forum owners have to decide if the "juice is worth the squeeze".
I guess the moderators and forum owners have to decide if the "juice is worth the squeeze".
Jul 10, 2019, 7:58 am
#42
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: RDU
Posts: 5,240
Let the mods do their job just like they do in any other forum.
Jul 10, 2019, 9:02 am
#43
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,449
There's no denying that our hobby (specifically) and transportation and travel industries (generally) contributes a great amount to the CO2 emissions and there's absolutely no reason to not have a dedicated subforum to discuss the impact and how to minimize it [1]. The connection between FT and why would people want to talk about it is clear.
[1]: Unless it turns out nobody actually has anything to say - then sure, shut it down down the line.
[1]: Unless it turns out nobody actually has anything to say - then sure, shut it down down the line.
Colour me unconvinced FT needs another special interest forum and on this topic which is fraught with intractable topic tangents as divorcing the practical day-to-day user matters from the larger geopolitical and scientific concerns is far easier said than done.
Jul 10, 2019, 10:06 am
#44
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: RDU
Posts: 5,240
Let's say someone doesn't even think there is climate change. So why should they care if other people discuss it? Do they have something to prove or not prove?
Jul 10, 2019, 10:15 am
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 18,018
This is a travel blog. It should not be about a pseudo science political argument. Man made global warming is only a theory as it has never been proven one way or the other. I can provide a plethora of citations both ways to illustrate this, but I will not go into this on a travel site. Stick to travel related topics.
Best to stick to travel related topics and not push carbon company talking points.