Do you guys have any questions for gen z?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I will have a long set of questions on which is the most environmentally responsible age group of students for you and others of all age groups to answer based on my experiences and what my generation (war baby) did and what all generations since have done.

I can't comment on the US but here in Aus the current crop of year 11/12 students are taught that they are the most environmentally aware/perfect students ever and that the baby boomers were the worst ever.

After I finish my group of questions I think most will agree that these students have it completely and totally backward and that this is in part due to the improvements in technology that have happened in the last 70 odd years and in part due to a visible (to us older people) drop in education with too much emphasis on what we believe to be the wrong priorities.
 
Venomstick121 asked a serious question so here is a quick part one of my questioneer regarding all age groups.

Which group of year 11/12 students below is/was more environmentally responsible.

The war babies who walked or rode a bike to school if they lived less than 5miles (8km) from school or school bus stop (that was what anyone who lived in my area had to do and who never owned a car until they left school and kept driving to a minumum into their 20s because fuel was so expensive.)

The baby boomers who did similar getting to school but probably owned a car sooner.

The un-named generation born 1950 to 1965 ??

Generation X – born 1965-1980 who ??

Millennials – born 1981-1996 who ??

Generation Z – born 1996-2012 who drive their own car to school (never car pooling) spouting pollution out the exhaust, heat from the radiator and transmission and exhaust and brakes etc and who also drive their own car, without car pooling or using public transport, to large city rallies to rail against the baby boomers who are and were so environmentally disastrous while they are the great environmental warriors.
 
Last edited:
while I think the answer would be millennials and gen-z due to our findings and research on global warming and the such, I believe all generations are equally environmentally irresponsible but in different ways. Gen-Z has electric cars with their lithium batteries and the ocean, millennials have aerosol cans and the hole in the ozone, gen-x had a large explosion of cars being available. Un-named littered a lot with examples such as the one commercial with the native American highway commercial.
 
Post war, world famines were virtually eliminated by fossil fuel generated fertilisers, tractors and trucks. I have yet to see that mentioned in "research".
 

I can only speak for myself, but use of carpools or taking the bus was still exceedingly common among the Gen Z crowd. I recall, in my own experience, driving with 4-5 other kids down to the regional airport, near which the school was located. Pretty much everyone grouped up together to get to and from school, and several of us volunteered at the same spot after classes were out, so we'd often drive back home together after our work finished up at 9pm.

That doesn't mean everyone carpooled or bused...there was also Vlad who drove an outrageously-expensive Bentley and vainly tried to show it off to all the other students. No one particularly liked Vlad...
 
pbehn said:
Post war, world famines were virtually eliminated by fossil fuel generated fertilisers, tractors and trucks. I have yet to see that mentioned in "research".
Click to expand...
And solutions are always sought in the West. Never in... well lets say India. Havent seen Greta in Dehli. Nor anywere there. And that are just the places big steps could be made. With simple means.
Strangely enough those countries are a terra incognito. The polute the hell out of the world but mums the word. Never mind the birth rate they applaude but barely can feed.
Glue your hands to Rajpath road.. if not you are just acting.
 

When I was a kid I saw a documentary that said "half the people who have ever lived are alive today". As far as I know, that is still true, something else never mentioned in "research". Magically, whenever a chart is produced the projection is that the increase is at its worst, with no evidence at all.
 

Good point, and people now live longer because of less wars and better health care.

Something else never mentioned in "research" and that everyone ignores that is related to that graph of yours.

In 1957, the International Geophysical Year, our science class of 13 year old students had to do an experiment to determine how much heat the human body produced.

You need to understand that all our age group had grown up on food rationing until the late 40's early 1950 so were far smaller that modern children of the same age.

For a very brief overview of the basics of rationing see Rationing of food and clothing during the Second World War | Australian War Memorial. You also need to understand that rationing continued well after the war even though farms returned to full production within months (and even produced more than pre war because vehicles that were rare prewar were suddenly available ex military at almost give away prices and many farmers bought tanks to use as tractors or for land clearing).

One reason for the continued rationing was so as to be able to send food to the war torn areas of Europe as aid and another was to earn export income to pay down the debt from purchasing weapons from the US and UK.

The experiment my class did was we put three students (the smallest, the largest and a mid sized one) in large cardboard boxes with thermometers poked through a small hole to measure the internal temperature. We then "sealed" the boxes and timed how long it took for the temperature in the box to climb a set amount before opening the boxes.

From the volume of the box and the time taken for the temperature to rise we then worked out how much heat energy each student was emitting. We did not correct for the volume lost that was taken up by the student.

Comparing results it was evident that the temperature rise was directly related to body mass and that the heat emitted by the AVERAGE student was almost as much as the heat theoretically emitted by a 100watt incandescent light bulb. To "prove" the case we sealed a 100watt bulb in one of the boxes and found that this was actually a fraction less heat than the average student produced.

This naturally means that one factor which is never discussed in global warming is the amount of heat emitted by humans and other warm blooded creatures.

We have gone from less than 3 billion people to 8 billion people in that time and average body weights have massively increased for all age groups. Don't believe me? Look at the induction records for ww2 military personnel and compare their weights with modern peoples weights.

Just from the mass of humanity mankind alone are emitting somewhere around four to five times the body heat that was emitted in 1957. Likewise there are far more cattle and other food animals to feed these people etc etc though this is minutely offset by the reduction in the number of horses.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Do You Remember?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Thumpalumpacus
S
Best Approach for Prototyping with Arduino?
Replies
4
Views
390
Wurger
How did you get into Aviation?
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Peter Gunn
The Next Time That You Find Yourself In Stockholm....
Replies
1
Views
509
Gnomey
The god awful thing you wont build. Because reasons
Replies
0
Views
439
Snautzer01
Menu
Log in
Register