MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Men and Climate Change

Filed under: General — Downunder @ 10:34 am Fri 15th March 2019

The news is too distressing today, and it’s Friday.

And then I saw this, in relation to our ‘children’s climate change protest’:

John McLeod



Maybe it’s time 16 yr olds got the vote. They are informed and it’s their future. We haven’t done that well.

The merchant of doom.

‘We’ … us men? The collective civilization of the world?

Who is it exactly, that hasn’t done that well?

To give this some perspective, this father is relating to his daughters.

My Y12 and Y10 Wellington High School daughters are off to climate change march today.

I am not sure whether to be totally bemused or confused by this thought traveling through the Twittersphere. The idea that we we should throw our hands up in horror admit to some sort of failure and invest power in the adolescent minds of society.

Help me out here. How many people actually think like this?

Is it just fathers with daughters who feel they can no longer object to the female voice?

Do some fathers feel like the sacraficial lambs for the ‘sins of the fathers’ or is this the death of adult male opinion according to the myths of politicians.

Malign our past and seize the future and fuck all the scientists, soldiers and servants of progress that got us this far.

Is this what you tell your children?


  1. This seems to be a political theme floating around Wellington and the current political driver.

    The past was a failure, therefore we have to do this and if you disagree you’re stuck in the past. Be interested to know if anyone else is seeing this used to shut down debate.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Sun 17th March 2019 @ 3:22 pm

  2. Yes, let’s put children in charge of the country’s decisions. The protesting children from pre-school to secondary school ages undoubtedly understand climate science sufficiently to have absolute certainty about what should be done. However, how many of them will refuse to be driven to and from school, clubs and social events in petrol or diesel powered vehicles? Indeed, most were probably transported to the protests in such vehicles. Still, it’s positive that people of all ages think and learn about the world’s issues.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sun 17th March 2019 @ 11:01 pm

  3. This is absolutely appalling.
    I was an ex-pat child in China when the Cultural Revolution reached it’s peak. For those that don’t know, this is when the Communist Party made sure all the army and the children were “…informed and it’s their future”. The Party even gave them all a Little Red Book so that they were fully informed. The children then outed their wrong thinking parents and teachers to the authorities. Millions suffered and as far as I know there has never been an accurate count of the many, many thousands who were tortured and executed.

    A country under the rule of ideologically brainwashed children is one of the most terrifying things I have ever witnessed. And we were safe foreign observers, who could leave any time. Imagine how it was for the Chinese.

    Children must be at school by law during school hours.
    These children, their parents and teachers, the media and anyone assisting them have failed in their legal schooling responsibilities. They are truant and should have that on their school record.

    Children are welcome to protest and speak their mind in the weekend or their holidays. That is what I did as a teenager. I may have been ill informed and blind to the grey areas on topics but at least I was attending school and learning how to be informed, during school hours.

    Children are not at all well informed. Least of all about the endless shades of grey and complex contradictory facts of political topics. It is a massive disservice to lead children to think they are. In fact the current generations’ lack of critical thinking skills appears to be worse than the previous generation, not better.

    Do you think any of them are consciously aware that the climate has always changed? Often rapidly.

    They should be in class learning how to pick apart all the claims on every side on this topic. THAT would be a skill they will need.

    This isn’t a climate change protest, it is a failure to educate children on a massive scale. At the very least it is an embarrassment.

    Comment by Vman — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 4:12 pm

  4. During the past century there have been several volcanic events which have each vented more CO2 than humans have generated in total. Lake Taupo erupting could destroy the entire north island of NZ and send the planet into a nuclear winter for decades.

    In addition we appear to be entering a Maunder Minimum – related to solar activity – which will significantly lower temperatures for many decades as occurs at approximately 500 year intervals. This has been the source of regular mini ice ages throughout history. We are due and the almost complete absence of sunspots in recent years indicate it to be a certainty in the next few decades.

    “Global warming” disappeared from the rhetoric a while ago to be replaced with “climate change”. The strategies being offered, however, remain the same. I have little doubt that when the cooling really sets in those same pundits will try to take credit.

    Comment by gwallan — Wed 20th March 2019 @ 4:16 pm

  5. THanks Gwallan,

    Just part of a cycle and a series of cyclical events…
    People want to make a lot out of it but the Sahara was once a lush garden.
    Most of the deserts around the world were lush gardens.
    But men, instead of focusing on fellow men to improve and rightfully empower each and every person to reach their true human potential, woud rather spend millions and if not billions in applying topical solutions to problems they cannot understand.

    The environment is truly important as the mother.BUt any effort trying to address a symptom rather than a root cause is likely to create horrible side effects.

    Comment by JustCurious — Fri 22nd March 2019 @ 11:40 am


    I don’t think the author, likes farmers.
    Or properly sees there predicament.

    I do have a poem I wrote in the past.
    That’s relevant to her comment.
    “A storm is coming”

    When the wind blows.
    Hear screams of nature.
    Trees taking deep breaths.
    When the wind blows
    Water rippling unrelenting.
    Waves on the shore.
    Shield yourself from the sand.
    Blown up in your eyes.
    When the wind blows.
    More danger for someone.
    Hurricane danger somewhere.
    When the wind blows.
    Hear screams of nature.
    Trees taking deep breaths.
    When the wind blows.
    Man has to answer.
    The screams of nature.
    Trees taking deep breaths.
    When the wind blows.


    So I will pretend to be the town dwellers.
    Packed in like sardines.
    Pot plants, a desperate last resort, to life.

    Even it’s building.
    Permanently on, waiting for its masters commands.
    Keeping time, a slow trickle, of energy.

    In time the human will use megawatts.
    Roofed, and concreted.
    A jungle, with no carbon absorbed.

    Even the simple apple, the destined polluter.
    Eaten and processed, by the human.
    It’s number ones, and twos.
    Again it’s energy, breathed out.
    As carbon dioxide.

    It’s plastics, it’s cars, roads.
    Rubbish tips, and poisoned creeks.
    It’s urban sprawl, and loneliness.


    Farmers are no more innocent, or guilty.
    Than the city dweller.
    All the requirements for change.
    Are placed on farmers.
    The must do things.
    With there own land.

    What must the city dweller, do with there land.

    Must they provide there own electricity.
    With wind and solar power.

    Must they have the bare minimum.
    Of pot plants.

    To absorb, the city dwellers.
    Waste carbon.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 25th July 2021 @ 10:35 am

  7. This is a good idea

    For us older people.
    We remember milk bottles.
    Now with your re-usable shopping bag.
    You will take your re-usable milk bottle.

    Technically if you had a dispensary.
    With all the milk options.
    With standard sized bottles.
    Small and large.
    You can have all the options.
    Then charged for at the counter.

    The hard part is paying.
    Volume is decided by the bottle size.
    But the till operator.
    What type of milk was it.
    How can that be decided fast.

    The bottle has it own bar code.
    Log it in at the dispensary.
    Get your milk.
    The computer knows the price.
    The till operator just scans, or even self checkout.

    Problem solved.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 27th September 2021 @ 9:22 pm

  8. Soon there will be so many humans, with there needs.
    That water may run out.
    With many places on earth having problems.

    So an argument about creating water.

    Where the river meets the sea, you put a pump.
    It could be wind, even solar powered.
    Let’s say the pump can push water 100m higher.
    So a pipe way up the river, where its put back in the river.

    If you returned all the rivers water, it’s flow would double.
    You could then start pump two.
    Quadrupling flow in the river.
    Eventually the river couldn’t keep up.
    The water inevitably released to the sea.

    Humans could play god with the river.
    Dictating flow, to its own blueprint of nature.
    The rivers volume of water, also a reservoir.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Tue 26th October 2021 @ 2:52 pm

  9. We’ve been using desalination plants for centuries.

    Pakistan has a nuclear plant to deal with its water shortages.

    The lowering water table in places like Indian has been a major problem for over 20 years.

    We’ve outgrown our water resources in many places like the California River Valley but it happened in the Nile Delta too. In the worst of times the Egyptians ate their children to survive.

    I’m sure we’ll manage.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Tue 26th October 2021 @ 7:07 pm

  10. We live in a nation, with plenty of water.
    Some nations have genuine problems.
    Building a nuclear reactor, sounds desperate.
    I live next to one of the worst examples.
    You would not drink the water.
    The lake has a do not go in the water sign.

    In the above example, the water is polluted.
    So the water intercepted at the ocean.
    Should be put on farms, replacing pumping groundwater for irrigation.
    A better water table supports the river.
    The pollution, now fertiliser, and irrigation.

    Even dealing with sewage, can change.
    Going from wet systems, with ponds.
    To dry systems, creating fertiliser.
    Many rivers would welcome that change.

    In the dairy industry, the same could happen.
    Effluent dried into a manure, sold on, or used on the farm.
    Better than adding good water to it, so it can be irrigated.

    Climate change, and overpopulation, are serious issues.
    Some resort to desperate fixes.
    Some nations dam the river, for themselves to use.
    They can even start shooting at each other.
    Over water.

    In our case, it’s the health of the rivers that’s the problem.
    Us taking to much, resulting in a failing system.
    How do we take the same, but have a more healthy river.
    Using water stored during high rain events, vs from the river in summer.
    An obvious solution.

    I don’t see defeat, in regards to our rivers, and lakes.
    Opposite to what seems government policy.
    Innovative investments in water should be supported.
    The risk taker, helped to get the projects started.

    Even fast tracked based on actual positive outcomes.
    A farmer may agree to taking 1 million litres less in water from the ground.
    If he gets 2 million litres from the new water project.

    It has a positive outcome.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Tue 26th October 2021 @ 10:12 pm

  11. So they have a thing called COP26.
    The planets human population, is likely wondering what happened with 1 to 25.
    And with valid scepticism, also think number 26 will be the same.

    Even the pope, is calling for a radical rethink.

    What would those radical decisions be.
    Would hundreds of nations all comply.

    One subject religion is in conflict with is breeding.
    Humans have become very efficient at it.
    Government forced to cram people, into ever smaller spaces.
    Every extra human using there own oxygen, and create there own carbon footprint.
    There own waste, consumer goods, and rubbish.
    The global birth rate above 2.0 per woman.

    Soon even cutting emissions, won’t keep up with population.
    More and more will be needed.
    More and more land used by humans.
    More and more energy required.
    More and more vehicles, roads, and concrete.

    Making humans reach 2.0 per woman, would be radical.
    Go forth and multiply would be over.
    And end of an age, for religion.

    Who then is making the radical decisions.
    Is it one, the politicians are willing to make.
    They have already had 25 chances.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 31st October 2021 @ 9:06 am

  12. So this is my local lake.

    In 1965, the lake level was lowered by one metre as part of flood control on the Waikato River plains, significantly affecting the natural hydrology.

    Essentially you had a much deeper lake that would seasonally flush itself out.
    Diary only a part of land use, that is now the lakes catchment.
    Large areas, have no animals, only cropping.
    Inevitably the lake was going to fail.
    Dairy, or no dairy, the lake will eventually silt up, dying.
    The battle lost, with pest species.
    It is no longer a natural lake.

    Because it’s an ecological basket case, you could start again.
    Area’s dredged, and put back onto the land.
    Or used to build more small islands, creating bird breeding habitat.
    The lake made deeper.
    A huge lake, with potential for aquaculture, to help pay for things.
    Even harvesting its bugs, could be an industry.
    All those nutrients, and life’s building blocks recycled, as fertiliser.

    The lake is also affected by a whole township.

    In July, it emerged that for three years Waikato District Council allowed non-compliant wastewater, contaminated with phosphorus, nitrogen and E.coli, to be discharged into the lake.

    That’s bureaucratic speak for poo like substances.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 31st October 2021 @ 1:57 pm

  13. It’s an old opencast mine that has filled up with water.

    At best you might call it an artificial lake apart from someone’s mess.

    So where did the name come from.

    My guess would be that it might have been Lake Puketireni and there’s been a spelling amendment.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 1st November 2021 @ 6:23 am

  14. So it looks on the surface, that nothing has been done.
    The solution, faking performance, by buying credits.
    Imagine doing a test, but pay others to pretend to be you.
    So is government efforts real, or fake.

    It’s pretty obvious change is the car fleet, going to EV.
    The government, taxing ICE cars, subsidies EV.
    So it is trying, and will take many long years.

    Taking cars from people, is not a solution.
    Not politicly.

    There is continuous criticism of cows.
    I’m not sure what the cow did wrong.
    Another animal, dreamed dangerous.
    It must be exterminated.

    Actually the methane argument is interesting.
    If every cow creates so much methane.
    And methane has a lifespan in the atmosphere, about 12 years.
    Then methane will inherently stabilise.
    Not actually adding to global warming.
    Should we exterminate animals for human, wrongs.
    Methane has increased 10% in 20 years.
    What then of humans using natural gas, ever increasing.
    What % is not burnt, but lost, adding to the atmosphere.

    Carbon Dioxide is a different story, the real problem.
    With a much greater, lifespan.
    And ever climbing percentages of the atmosphere.
    It to will stabilise, to mankind’s pollution.
    That’s not going to happen, with increasing emissions.

    As the NZ example shows.
    The intent is good.
    But the solution used, is absorbing emissions.
    Not actually, reducing emissions.
    Or with outcomes like EV, that will take decades.

    Did anyone commit to new Geothermal energy.
    Where are those billion dollar decisions.
    Instead of a fossil fuel solution.
    Offset with 3rd world land, mono-cultured into forestry.

    Big problems, need game changing things.
    The energy sector, needs infrastructure change.
    Even in NZ.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 5th November 2021 @ 8:32 am

  15. Hypocrisy is not a solution.
    Is the solution even rational.

    Notice it didn’t say, ban palm oil products.
    City dwellers, the consumer, the voter.
    NZ just the purchaser of a waste product.
    NZ can’t tell other nations what to do with there land.
    Greenpeace should try in those nations, for change.
    You can restrict supply, strictly to established sources.
    Not supporting deforestation, or illegal land use.
    Greenpeace can try, and even ban PKE in NZ.

    What to do with the PKE if NZ doesn’t buy it.
    The price will drop, until someone else buys it.
    The problem not fixed.

    If transportation is no longer allowed.
    Should they build a PKE mountain, of waste.
    Start factory, animal farming, themselves.
    Again the problem not fixed.

    The aim less animals.
    A Greenpeace policy.

    Isn’t it strange, if you farm plants.
    You create food for animals.
    The better at it you get, you need more animals.
    Humans in there billions, growing, demanding.
    The product not sanctioned.
    The voter happy.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 5th November 2021 @ 9:52 am

  16. How then does one make change, if it’s stopped.
    This is near where I live, so have received the proposal myself.

    I like these projects, as they still allow animal life.
    And the water still hits the ground, creating life.
    An important thing to preserve, with land.
    Not that they don’t also belong elsewhere, like on top of factory’s.
    And it makes economic sense, to make it on that piece of land.
    So if not there, then where.
    If not my view ruined, then whose view ruined.
    It’s actually hidden away, so few will ever see it.

    Similar to the lake next door, from the lookout.
    Hidden from view, so most never see it.
    The satellite picture, on a benign soup green day.
    The view stands out more, on the toxic pink days.

    What magical right, do I have over what I see.

    One must ask, what can be done on ones land.
    Is the pine forest pictured, the picturesque image.
    Is the look of one thing, better than the other.
    Is the construction for grapes, or kiwifruit wrong.

    Time will certainly be wasted, deciding on this wise investment.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 30th December 2021 @ 5:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar