a447a

I think we have covered this topic pretty comprehensively and our views are well known to each other. I love to exchange ideas with people and I'm aware that we can't always agree 100% with one another. That's life. Thanks for the opportunity to discuss it with you.

"If this is true for young people then it has to be true for people of any age. Including, of course, the readers of this forum. Everyone should turn off his computer right now." No, not at all. Only if they decide to preach to us. Surely they then have an obligation to act in such a way as to remain true to their convictions. But of course that's way too difficult for most - phones/computers etc are not just used for vital information; they are also a great source of entertainment - so if you can't make that sacrifice, then don't. Up to you. But please, stop telling me that I should make certain sacrifices when you grant yourself an exemption. That's all I'm saying. "if it's true for young people it's true for all." No, it's only true for those who are preaching to us. Others can do what they want. And I don't see what age has to do with it. I'm not suggesting people go back to the stone age. We agreed, I thought, that "when possible" was the standard. "Dalai Lama. Massive carbon footprint. Frequent flier with entourage. Now he has to be silent on climate change? Pope Francis - the same. Silencing him now are we? All the scientists who are endlessly fighting to raise awareness." As I have already said, travelling across the ocean by yacht is impractical. It goes straight back to "when possible". It's not possible. "...go to conferences where there might be water in plastic bottle." If they are attending a conference on climate change then I wouldn't expect to see plastic bottles! I leave a very heavy carbon footorint as I've been flying since I was a very young child. And I've just returned from an overseas trip. So I wouldn't dream of getting on my high horse and telling someone they shouldn't fly. By your reasoning, a vegan activist who fiercely criticises people for eating meat could, theoretically, drop into McDonald's for a hamburger if there were no other restaurant open. I would have thought the honest thing to do would be to go hungry for a while to remain faithful to his/her ideals. If that's too difficult then grab a burger but quit preaching. Our disagreement on this issue seems to revolve around just how strictly activists should stick to their principles and reflect their beliefs in their behaviour. I set the bar very high and think that the louder someone protests the bigger sacrifice they should be willing to make.

The font size is determined by the Note app on my ipad. I just copied and pasted. But I prefer the larger font anyway. It's easier to see when I can't be bothered going to look good my glasses.

No, we are still well and truly on the rails, as it is those "darn kids" who are following her and it is to them that she is appealing to take action against climate change. They are an intrinsic part of the Greta Thunberg story. As for vegans, I couldn't care less what people eat - that's none of my business. It only becomes my business when they storm into a BBQ restaurant and harangue customers, all the while happily parading around in leather Doc Martens. And I don't think people should go back to basics, spinning their own yarn to make clothes or growing all their own food. That would be impractical -as impractical as say, travelling abroad by boat rather than flying would be. I'm also not saying they can't use their phones at all. I'm simply saying that if they want to use them for entertainment, please stop talking about the need to save the environment, as by using your phone for such purposes you are adding to greenhouse gases. Make up your mind. Stuck to your principles and if you find that to hard, then stop preaching and telling others how to live their lives. It should never be a case of "do as I say, not as I do." As for hating Greta, again I couldn't care less about her. I couldn't possibly hate someone I don't know and who I'll never get to meet. She is, and will always be, a total stranger. I do hate the hypocrisy of some activists, like Greta (or her minders) but it's nothing personal. As for Greta being voted Time's Person of the Year and that magazine deciding "she is not the horrible creature it seems some people want to say she is", they also voted Hitler Person of the Year. The award has nothing at all to do with the winner 's perceived virtue; it recognises the influence, good or bad, that person has had on others. I'm just saying that I hate the blatant hypocrisy and the dishonesty her minders have demonstrated. I think that staged photo on the German train did a lot to dent her credibility. Guys, we are never going to agree on Greta, so let's just agree to disagree. But thank god we can have a civilised discussion here without descending into nasty insults.

DivineMadman wrote: "So you're saying that people who advocate for climate change CAN NEVER BE IN THE PRESENCE OF PLASTIC BOTTLES." Yes - if they tell us they are passionate about the environment and alternatives are available. They are supposed to be setting the example, afterall. Glass is 100% recyclable. She (or rather, her parents because I don't really blame her for any of this) is no better than those vegans wearing leather shoes. Their excuse was that they bought them before they became vegans and they didn't want to throw them away! She insisted on sailing, not flying, but presumably did not insist that no plastic be brought aboard. It's a bit like those school kids who went on strike every Friday. After the strike mum probably picked them up in her petrol driven car and they immediately reached for their phones. Those phones are charged using electricity produced mainly from coal-powered plants. They don't seem to have a problem with that and are apparently not willing to give up their phones to save the environment they are seemingly so passionate about. "The point is to minimize the use when possible" "when possible" is the important expression here. Do you really think those "woke" ( how I hate that word!) kids only use their devices in an emergency? That they don't go on instagram, Facebook etc and do not play video games? Commitment to a cause requires sacrifices and those kids who refuse to give up their devices should remain quiet. "Do you know for a fact that she or her team didn't do anything to offset the carbon costs? " No, I don't but if they did I think we would have heard about it well and truly by now. "I bet sometimes she may sit in the car with the engine running." I would have thought that she would show her commitment to the environment by driving an electric vehicle. Then she could keep the engine running all day long. Oh, and let's not forget her attempt at deception when she posted that staged photo of herself sitting on the floor of the train, glancing wistfully into the distance. A sad young girl all alone of a train in a foreign country. Poor Greta. But unfortunately for her the facts soon came out. She deliberately omitted to mention that she had been given a seat in first class where her entourage were already sitting. Oops! And what about all that luggage just for one person? Goodness knows how much water and detergent would be needed to wash all those clothes! She has recently admitted that despite her activism she had achieved nothing. But I disagree. She has managed to scare the shit out of countless young people with her unscientific assertion that the world as we know it will end and there will be a mass extinction of specues - all this in as little as 15 years. This is untrue. How dare she!

There have not been any more posts on the topic so I guess it might have reached its end. So I'll quickly post a reply to DM and leave it at that. No one is pictured throwing anything. Greta is just shown sitting in front of a plastic bottle, illustrating her breathtaking hypocrisy. What she didn't tell us is that the boat had a diesel engine downstairs for when there was no wind. She also forgot to mention that in order for her to travel "green", the 2 sailors who took her to New York caught a plane back home and 2 more flew in to take her home. So 4 flights instead of 1. BTW, I'm a strong believer in climate change I'm sitting here watching my country burn.

Water comes in plastic bottles all over the world. Thailand is no exception. I presume it has a lot to do with the cost. There are other containers which are more environmentally friendly. I imagine they are not confined to land and can also be used on sail boats.

I've just returned from a trip to Japan where the tap water is actually quite delicious. And perfectly safe. It is the only country in Asia where I don't bother with bottled water. I believe Singapore's tap water is fine, but when I think of where it comes from I can't bring myself to drink it. The bottom line is, when I'm away I don't want to take any chances. I don't want to ruin my holiday when I can buy a bottle of clear, pure water from 7/11 for 10 baht. Like the vegan protesters in the mall in Perth who wear leather shoes! Lol

I wouldn't bother too much about what Greta thinks about bottled water.

Apparently, mooks are designed to give females pleasure, not guys. I bottomed for a handsome Cambodian hunk who worked at BBB in Pattaya. He had a mook and I was a bit reluctant to go through with it, but I didn't notice anything different. I always check to see if a guy has a mook or silicone. Mooks are not an exclusively Thai phenomenon. Yakuza in Japan used to put a ring of real pearls under the glans.

Good for you! We are never too old to accept new challenges, IMHO. Do you speak Thai? If not, are you planning on learning it once you get there?

Wasn't there talk at one time about legalizing gay marriage in Vietnam?

Go and meet the Japanese!

I was a student in Tokyo when the pubic hair debate started back in the 70's. Japanese censors went into panic mode when Playboy magazine first started showing it. Housewives were employed at the warehouse in Yokohama to black-out the offending hair with permanent markers. But it didn't take long for everyone to realize that the ink could easily be removed with some kind of nail polish remover. So the housewives were armed with needles which they used to scratch away the hair. At the time the Japanese laws against pornography prohibited nakedness which showed genitals, but local publishers got around this by having the girls wear see-through panties. Problem solved. So now, not only was pubic hair clearly visible, but the genitals themselves. There was a lot of inconsistency in the law. At the gay movie theater I frequented in Ueno, they could show arseholes, balls and squirting cum - great for the bukkake scenes. But the cocks were pixelated. But there were plenty of real cocks to enjoy and the fuck shows took place in the aisles!

When guys come to my room they almost always take the chance to charge their phones. (I have an iPhone and a Samsung.) I refuse to have my photo taken but on a couple of occasions in restaurants I've noticed the guy go to take a photo of the food but then quickly lift the phone up to get me in the picture. I think they want our photo on their phone for future reference - to remind themselves who we are when we next contact them.