https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-carbon-emissions-in-... https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-

Meanwhile it's widely understood that all major fossil fuel-producing nations—including the United States, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, Canada, and Australia—have ambitious plans to increase production.

It's understanding on the part of the odd 70% that counts and good luck with that. Lectures from the West don't go down very well especially since most of these countries are committed to increasing their standard of living and that's necessarily linked to energy use.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/barnaby-joyce-auctions-lump-of-c...

Like this guy for example, right?

[My hunger strike could be deadly. But I am willing to risk that for climate action] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/27/hunger...

I can't quite tell if you're engaging in a non sequitur or moving the goalposts, but your comment doesn't make sense to me in context.

Correct, because anyone can say they’re on a hunger strike but it’s not possible to watch the guy 24/7 to see if he’s really following through.

He's willing to die over data models that have been predicting dire consequences in ten years, but they've been doing that for the last 30 years.

It's sad to think what that kind of commitment could have produced if it was directed at real problems.