• mipadaitu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      68
      ·
      6 months ago

      They didn’t destroy anything, the paint can be removed without ruining the site, and they brought more visibility than sitting around with signs.

      I don’t have a problem with this.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        52
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m not sure visibility is really what we need at this point. Is there anyone left on Earth that doesn’t know about it? I think what we need instead is political mobilization and coalition-building to increase our political clout and ultimately win elections and create legislation.

        • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          70
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah I think awareness where they ruin yachts and private planes is better than destroying common cultural heritage. Wtf

          • eksb@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            They probably know that if they put corn starch on Stonehenge they’ll be in jail for a few days and get community service, but if they put spray paint on a billionaire’s yacht, they’d get shot.

            • Windex007@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              27
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              Well the top comment was “fuck these people” so if the goal was to build broad public support it is having the opposite effect.

              Alternatively, EVERYONE is cheering for those fucking Orcas, so… Imagine being dumber than a whale.

            • neonred@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              “It will go away, no harm done” is your stance? Well, there is harm done, if not only on the societies feeling of sanity and security. What was the purpose of that action? To seed shock and “ruffle some feathers”, sow disbalance under the coat of “shaking sleeping people up”.

              “No harm done”? Well, then let me waterboard you, hit you, hit your wife and children. The blue specks will go away, no harm done. Your psychological effects? They will go away, seek therapy. You’re still less affected people than the society.

              Of course this was sarcasm. But think about what stance you just took and reflect.

              • notabot@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                What was the purpose of that action? To seed shock and “ruffle some feathers”, sow disbalance under the coat of “shaking sleeping people up”.

                A goal at which it has singularly failed. There’ll be a bit of noise in the papers for a day or two, Stonehenge will be cleaned off with “No harm done” and life will move on with no useful change.

                Their stunts were effective the first time or two, but now are largely ignored or even just cause irritation.

                If they, indeed we, want to change the trajectory of human caused climate damage we need to build bridges at the community level and bring people together to force the hand of the political class. These stunts don’t do that, they just give ammunition to those who seek to prevent positive change.

          • ThePyroPython@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Ah but you see then JustStopOil’s millionaire founder might have his expensive toys damaged then.

          • underscore_
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Maybe it’s that this is a better a metaphor for the destruction of the common cultural heritage of the environment? Not many people can relate to or are inconvenienced by a very expensive private boat sinking.

        • KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Apparently everyone still doesn’t get how serious it is if they get worked up over paint on Stonehenge more than over the climate catastrophy.

          • Iheartcheese@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Imagine they spray painted your car and then somebody said why are you mad about your car when the environment is fucked.

            • KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              6 months ago

              I don’t have a car.
              And took a job that pays less than other offers, cause it’s within bicycle distance from my home, which I chose cause it’s in a bike-friendly area.
              I know the impact is low, but at least I’m not part of the problem. I don’t think I could cut down on my CO2 any more while still living in society.

              • Iheartcheese@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                6 months ago

                Okay imagine somebody vandalized your bike and then said you shouldn’t be complaining when the environment is fucked.

                • KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I really don’t understand what point you’re trying to make here.
                  They don’t vandalize the property of private citizens.
                  Their critics say they should (spray paint private jets instead of rocks).

                  This is more like “what if someone vandalized the scenic rock formation I can see from my bedroom window”.
                  And if they spray painted a message about fightng the climate catastrophy on it, I’d love it.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            The assumption that people think problems need to be solved is just that, an assumption. Conservatives believe in tradition, where problems do not get fixed. Fixing problems = bad, because fixes are changes from tradition.

            Most people are somewhere on a scale between conservative and progressive though. But you certainly don’t want to just assume most people want things fixed, it’s unfortunately just not true. It’s just projecting progressive personality traits onto people that have less of them for whatever reason.

            So no, not apparently. It’s much, much worse than simple ignorance.

        • polonius-rex@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          people are aware of it in the sense that it’s a thing that vaguely exists on the horizon

          if society doesn’t want to be melted by climate change, that demonstrably isn’t going to be enough to stop it

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’m not so sure. That was probably true before the past decade of record breaking heat waves, intensifying storms, etc.

            Now it’s a variety of other problems, from not giving a fuck and hoping god raptures them before then, to having other priorities like the economy and thinking technical solutions will fix it, to not believing it’s human-caused, etc. It’s political hurdles now, convincing people of the importance of helpful measures, as opposed to simply trying to remind them of the problem.

        • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          The amount of people justifying calling it global warming is still is kinda shocking to be honest. The ignorance is probably why people are still bringing kt to light.

          Theres people in the comments saying it causes warming and that’s why they call it that……

          • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The amount of people justifying calling it global warming is still is kinda shocking to be honest.

            I was told for decades by activists and global leaders it was global warming. For example, An Inconvenient Truth says global warming dozens of times. Are you now telling me those people were wrong?

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Yes, it’s propaganda lmfao. Wow.

              The term warming is used to detract from the truth, this is shocking how few people understand this simple concept used to create propaganda. And the public perpetuates it.

              It’s been climate change for decades as well, you’re just eating into the politics like most people here.

          • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            You are right. Sort of, climate crisis would be more appropriate. The word ‘warming’ is not concerning enough, if at all, and doesn’t convey the actual gravity of the current situation very well.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I don’t think that there is any purpose to “bringing visibility” to global warming in 2024. Effectively everyone is already aware of global warming and has been for some time.

        The issue isn’t awareness, but disagreement over the weight to put on policies to mitigate it. And I don’t expect that doing stuff like this is going to change people’s positions on that weight.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s less about visibility that it’s happening, but that it’s not properly fought.

        • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          If this isnt going to change anyones opinions, then why the outrage? We’re all fucked anyways, so let them be upset.

          More people tone policing these activists than are upset about the very possible end of our species.

        • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The fact that you’re using the wrong term just shows that yeah, it kinda does need more visibility I guess.

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              It’s not global warming though, it’s climate change because it causes extremes at both ends. It’s extremely important to stop perpetuating the wrong term.

              Maybe the one that needs to grow up is the ones not educating themselves on what the correct terms are and how it’s not just “warming”…? Yeah…

              • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Global warming is still a correct term because the globe is warming.

                Some areas aren’t getting warmer. But the globe is. Hence global warming, not everywhere without exception warming.

                We only moved on to saying climate change because some morons were pushing the same bullshit view that you are - iF gLoBaL wARmiNg iS ReAL hOw CoMe XYZ pLacE wAs CoLdEr tHiS yEaR???4

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  iF gLoBaL wARmiNg iS ReAL hOw CoMe XYZ pLacE wAs CoLdEr tHiS yEaR???4

                  Funnily enough, that’s exactly why we no longer use warming, since people need to continually explain that no, it’s just warming since when that’s the word that’s used, it’s used to intentionally detract from the other side.

                  We seem to agree that it causes extremes at both ends, it just seems like it’s a bunch of dinosaurs in this thread that can’t comprehend they were taught the incorrect term.

                  When someone says global warming it’s a litmus test, you bring up the extremes at both ends and they give you a blank stare.

                  Since they literally think it’s only warming since it’s a stupid fucking term…… it’s kinda like how politics used marijuana as a term instead of the correct cannabis term. It’s fucking propaganda lmfao. Keep perpetuating this shit though.

                  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    Yes, that’s what I said. We generally say climate change now because people have idiotic takes like yours and (puzzlingly) don’t appear to understand that global warming means warming of the globe.

                    We had to change the language used because people like you can’t parse basic English or apply the smallest amount of thought to the phrase.

                    Global warming isn’t an incorrect term in the slightest. It describes the warming of the globe, which is exactly what’s happening.

          • kbal@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            What “wrong term”? Global warming? Because The Guardian prefers to call it “global heating”? Or am I missing something, because that complaint would be amazingly petty.

            Anyway it’s not about bringing visibility to global warming to make people aware that it’s going on. It’s about making a statement. That statement, as I understand it, is “Climate change! Wake the fuck up and do something about it, people!” I don’t know if anything will sufficiently get that message through, but it’s understandable that they want to try, and painting Stonehenge orange (reportedly in a non-toxic water-soluble paint that will wash away in the rain) seems like a somewhat effective way to get the attention of the news media.

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Climate change, the article literally only uses that term… it’s quite a simple but very important distinction.

              It’s climate change since it causes extremes at both ends.

              Your ignorance isn’t an excuse.

              • kbal@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Yes, the phenomenom under discussion is climate change. Specifically, it’s that change which is a result of the anthropogenic net radiative forcing that increasingly puts more energy into the global climate system, making it less predictable, more dangerous in various ways, and generally warmer, a.k.a. “global warming.”

                It’s not a religion. Correct spelling of the magic incantations does not matter. Calling it global warming, like Al Gore did, in casual conversation is fine.

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  and generally warmer, a.k.a. “global warming.”

                  Incorrect, it also make colder temperatures colder, it’s not “generally”, one way or the other.

                  See, the wrong shit IS STILL being perpetuated, and the wrong term only exacerbates it. Case in point, your ignorant comment that explains it wrong lmfao.

                  Calling it global warming just shows your ignorance to the issue and your explanation proves it, it’s causes extremes at both ends, not “generally warming” like your ignorant ass is claiming lmfao.

                  Edit, I see people still love to eat and perpetuate propaganda eh? Correct people incorrectly and call it “warming” lmfao. All shows is your ignorance and how asinine you are, and it’s why it works, the public does the work for them… fucking yeesh.

                  • Teppichbrand@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    The earth is getting warmer, which brings chaos to a complex system. The result is extreme weather, sometimes cold and wet. But it is getting warmer on a global scale. In fact, it was never as hot in human history as as it is right now in 2024.

                  • kbal@fedia.io
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    What a weird misconception to have. I wonder where you got it from.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        While it’s not damaged and will just wash off in the rain, they shouldn’t be doing this to irrelevant monuments. It’s getting nobody on your side.

          • warm@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            6 months ago

            Stonehenge is a monument built thousands of years ago, way before humans started mass polluting the Earth, how is it relevant to climate change?

            • illi@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Oh, I completely misunderstood your comment. Thought you were saying Stonehenge is irrelevant just in general which would be crazy to me

            • kbal@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              6 months ago

              It’s relevant to climate change in that it was recently used by Just Stop Oil activists to draw attention to their cause. I guess one could also say that the sudden violent transformation of ancient stones that have stood largely unchanged for thousands of years is symbolically appropriate.

          • warm@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            6 months ago

            A monument built thousands and thousands of years ago has no correlation to current day pollution/climate change. I think you missed the context. They should be targeting polluters or protectors of polluters, not an innocent heritage site.

      • illi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I know “there is no bad press” but more people will think “fuck those guys” than “maybe environment does need saving” upon reading these news.

        Also just because they were responsible about their dick move doesn’t mean everybody will be. Or something happens that causes long term damage by accident.

        I care for environment greatly but I’d slap these people as long as I could lift my hands and then some.

      • PhreakyByNature@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        Doesn’t matter. It’s a protected site and there’s protected species living on the stones. So they should be prosecuted on two counts at least. It’s illegal. If I’d have shot a protester for being a cunt I’d be prosecuted.