Redfox8

I'll 2nd what hexagon said about going to a library or similar place. Trying to work around other people who are working helps to focus the mind and reduce distractions. If you can go to a library, this may be a good place to set up better practices, e.g. thoses others have suggested, first, then set up a work-only zone at home you can transfer that feeling of focus and work to.

I wonder if the packets were drawn to look like they're watching the people!

Indeed, in terms of sudden impact and method of impact, no they are very different, and climate change probably won't go so far as to make the human race extinct, at least not for a very long time. However, whether or not it will be catastrophic for the human race within the next 100-200 years no-one can accurately predict, given we do not know how much we'll do to stop it before it's too late (bare in mind that some scientists already believe the tipping point beyond which we can no longer stop it is well upon us).

As mentioned, the collapse of farming may well undermine any efforts to stop climate change given the big knock on negative impact on the world economy. Though that could also save us as there'd be a sudden massive drop in fossil fuel use and carbon emissions in such a scenario. There's a lot of variables, but a catastrophic collapse is definitely a possibility. I think the human race is capable of saving itself from this, but capitalism and the corporate economy I fear stand in its way.

I think that depends on how you define 'civilisation'. My inclination is that most people would say civilisation has ended if life is drastically different to how they perceive their life/world they live in. Think 'civilisation as we know it' rather than a dictionary definition.

However, I disagree that it's not an existentisl threat, if only on the basis of possible crop failiures on a massive scale (reduced crop yields are a global issue already). Don't underestimate the impact of food shortages on everything else, we in the west have become accustomed to easy access to food.

We have price caps in the UK. They're not perfect but they have stopped us from paying a lot more than we would have this past year. And the UK is definitely no (did you mean to say?) utopia. Or do you think a price cap to protect consumers is something from a distopia?

Why do you think that I'm being willfully ignorant and not trying to learn? (Maybe using the phrase 'cant buy' is too informal/misleading). Can we not learn through discussion of our beleifs/understandings/theories etc? I have stated why I don't think there are infinite coexisting universes, discuss or not as you please.

Also, disrespectful? What on earth are you talking about? How have I been disrespectful to anyone?

I can't buy into the idea of multiverses. Sure there's an infinite possible variants but not an actual infinite number of co-existing possibilities. At what point us it decided that another varient is created? Also try tying that into the theory that there's no actual thing as free will due to predetermined particle interactions.

Jeff, leave it will you?!

No problem, we all have slightly different ways of describing things!

I stand corrected! At least in terms of the commodity price. A product made from a raw material can become relativly cheaper through mass production or bulk buying. Also factor in weight re transport costs etc. I've always had the impression that it had a good value, if not mega pricey, at least in a way that made it unfavourable for uses like this.

Don't worry, lead isn't that toxic. It takes a lot more exposure than the occasional handling to get heavy metal poisoning from it. But yes, odd to use lead as a weight (or put a weight in, perhaps it's a heat-sink?) it's fairly expensive. It could be a lead alloy which makes it more malleable, though a small peice of pure lead like that I'd expect to be easily bendable, but not compressable like clay.