Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action  (Read 163621 times)

Phoenix

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #800 on: June 26, 2020, 06:21:55 PM »
A major sporting venue in the US has been named Climate Pledge Arena

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/25/amazon-wins-naming-rights-to-new-seattle-stadium-climate-pledge-arena.html

Amazon has bought the naming rights to downtown Seattle’s arena which will house a new NHL (National Hockey League) team and the Women’s National Basketball Association’s Seattle Storm, the company announced Thursday.

The KeyArena will now be renamed to Climate Pledge Arena, in reference to Amazon’s ambitious climate plan, which was first unveiled by CEO Jeff Bezos last September. Financial terms of the deal weren’t disclosed. An Amazon spokesperson declined to comment.

The 18,100-seat arena will build on the Climate Pledge’s focus on sustainability and carbon neutrality. Amazon said it will be the first net zero carbon certified arena in the world, generate zero waste from operations and events and will be powered with 100% renewable electricity. It will also use reclaimed rainwater in the ice system to “create the greenest ice in the NHL.”

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2354
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1131
  • Likes Given: 978
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #801 on: June 26, 2020, 07:04:28 PM »
So a rather elaborate Amazon advert.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 803
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #802 on: June 26, 2020, 07:19:22 PM »
But a rather nice “in your face” pronouncement to sports fans.  Who, I’m guessing, are not the most climate-aware population.  ;)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Phoenix

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #803 on: June 26, 2020, 07:40:29 PM »
So a rather elaborate Amazon advert.

Why so negative? This is a good thing. Climate awareness is going mainstream.

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #804 on: June 26, 2020, 07:47:26 PM »
This is a good thing. Climate awareness is going mainstream.

Climate awareness is not where it belongs i.e. the governments of the world.

This is greenwashing, hence inherently not a good thing.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 803
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #805 on: June 26, 2020, 07:52:46 PM »
This is a good thing. Climate awareness is going mainstream.

Climate awareness is not where it belongs i.e. the governments of the world.

This is greenwashing, hence inherently not a good thing.

But if more people are convinced the threat is real and needs to be tackled, then governments are more likely to enable legislation that does so (because even if they don’t personally believe it, they want to get re-elected).  And it simply improves the odds that any elected official will believe that way.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #806 on: June 26, 2020, 08:01:03 PM »
Dude could buy some lobbyists - would have way more impact. But this happens behind closed doors, not suited as a greenwashing campaign.

Phoenix

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #807 on: June 26, 2020, 09:03:48 PM »
We're in a war and human civilization hangs in the balance. I'm going to celebrate the little victories like this and Tuesday's Democratic primary results along the way.

The cavalry is coming. Perhaps too late. Perhaps not.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9059
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3561
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #808 on: June 27, 2020, 08:47:48 PM »
3 climate scientists have just published a paper in which they say consensus science has bottled it.

A factor of two: how the mitigation plans of ‘climate progressive’ nations fall far short of Paris-compliant pathways
Quote
ABSTRACT
The Paris Agreement establishes an international covenant to reduce emissions in line with holding the increase in temperature to ‘well below 2°C … and to pursue … 1.5°C.’ Global modelling studies have repeatedly concluded that such commitments can be delivered through technocratic adjustments to contemporary society, principally price mechanisms driving technical change. However, as emissions have continued to rise, so these models have come to increasingly rely on the extensive deployment of highly speculative negative emissions technologies (NETs). Moreover, in determining the mitigation challenges for industrialized nations, scant regard is paid to the language and spirit of equity enshrined in the Paris Agreement. If, instead, the mitigation agenda of ‘developed country Parties’ is determined without reliance on planetary scale NETs and with genuine regard for equity and ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’, the necessary rates of mitigation increase markedly. This is evident even when considering the UK and Sweden, two nations at the forefront of developing ‘progressive’ climate change legislation and with clear emissions pathways and/or quantitative carbon budgets. In both cases, the carbon budgets underpinning mitigation policy are halved, the immediate mitigation rate is increased to over 10% per annum, and the time to deliver a fully decarbonized energy system is brought forward to 2035-40. Such a challenging mitigation agenda implies profound changes to many facets of industrialized economies. This conclusion is not drawn from political ideology, but rather is a direct consequence of the international community’s obligations under the Paris Agreement and the small and rapidly dwindling global carbon budget.

Key Policy Insights

Without a belief in the successful deployment of planetary scale negative emissions technologies, double-digit annual mitigation rates are required of developed countries, from 2020, if they are to align their policies with the Paris Agreement’s temperature commitments and principles of equity.

Paris-compliant carbon budgets for developed countries imply full decarbonization of energy by 2035-40, necessitating a scale of change in physical infrastructure reminiscent of the post-Second World War Marshall Plan. This brings issues of values, measures of prosperity and socio-economic inequality to the fore.

The stringency of Paris-compliant pathways severely limits the opportunity for inter-sectoral emissions trading. Consequently aviation, as with all sectors, will need to identify policies to reduce emissions to zero, directly or through the use of zero carbon fuels.

The UK and Swedish governments’ emissions pathways imply a carbon budget of at least a factor of two greater than their fair contribution to delivering on the Paris Agreement’s 1.5-2°C commitment.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2020.1728209?scroll=top&needAccess=true

And here are extracts from a Guardian article that is even more forthright. One conclusion seems to be "it's the rich wot gets the pleasure, its the poor wot gets the blame".

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/26/leading-scientist-criticises-uk-over-its-climate-record
Government climate advisers running scared of change, says leading scientist
Rapid transformation needed, Kevin Anderson says, particularly in lifestyles of rich

Quote
“Academics have done an excellent job in understanding and communicating climate science, but the same cannot be said in relation to reducing emissions,” said Anderson. “Here we have collectively denied the necessary scale of mitigation, running scared of calling for fundamental changes to both our energy system and the lifestyles of high-energy users. Our paper brings this failure into sharp focus.”

Shortly after the study was published, Anderson posted a warning on Twitter about what he described as a cosy consensus between senior academics, journalists and government scientists, who were unwilling to publicly acknowledge the urgent system-level transformation required to tackle the climate crisis.

He said: “Many senior academics, senior policymakers, basically the great and good of the climate world have decided that it is unhelpful to rock the status quo boat and therefore choose to work within that political paradigm – they’ll push it as hard as they think it can go, but they repeatedly step back from questioning the paradigm itself.”

Anderson said too many models for tackling climate change relied on “unproven technologies far in the future”, such as carbon capture and storage. “Perhaps we’ll be lucky and they will work at huge planetary scale – but it’s one hell of a gamble.”

He said the models also ignored the fact that it was the lifestyles of a relatively wealthy few that gave rise to the lion’s share of emissions.

“Globally the wealthiest 10% are responsible for half of all emissions, the wealthiest 20% for 70% of emissions. If regulations forced the top 10% to cut their emissions to the level of the average EU citizen, and the other 90% made no change in their lifestyles, that would still cut total emissions by a third.

“If we were serious about this crisis we could do this in a year – if we were really serious we could do it in a month, but we are not and our emissions just keep rising.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/26/leading-scientist-criticises-uk-over-its-climate-record
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9059
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3561
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #809 on: June 28, 2020, 01:28:58 PM »
"skepticalscience" has spotted an article describing how Facebook seems to have joined the Climate Science Denial Business

Zuckerberg is scum. Fact or opinion?

https://www.skepticalscience.com/2020-SkS-Weekly-News-Roundup_26.html
Facebook creates fact-checking exemption for climate deniers
Facebook is "aiding and abetting the spread of climate misinformation,” said Robert Brulle, an environmental sociologist at Drexel University.

& here is the link to the full article..
https://heated.world/p/facebook-creates-fact-checking-exemption
Facebook creates fact-checking exemption for climate deniers
Quote
Facebook is "aiding and abetting the spread of climate misinformation,” said Robert Brulle, an environmental sociologist at Drexel University. “They have become the vehicle for climate misinformation, and thus should be held partially responsible for a lack of action on climate change.”

Brulle was reacting to Facebook's recent decision, made at the request of climate science deniers, to create a giant loophole in its fact-checking program. Last year, Facebook partnered with an organization, Science Feedback, that would bring in teams of Ph.D. climate scientists to evaluate the accuracy of viral content. It was an important expansion of the company's third-party fact-checking program.

But now Facebook has reportedly decided to allow its staffers to overrule the climate scientists and make any climate disinformation ineligible for fact-checking by deeming it "opinion."

The organization that requested the change, the CO2 Coalition, is celebrating, E&E news reported on Monday. The group, which has close ties to the fossil fuel industry, says its views on climate change are increasingly ignored by the mainstream media. Now it plans to use Facebook to aggressively push climate misinformation on the public—without having to worry about fact checks from climate scientists.

How it all started
A column published in the Washington Examiner in August 2019 claimed that "climate models" were a "failure" that predicted exponentially more warming of the earth than has occurred. The piece, co-authored by notorious climate science denier Pat Michaels, was quickly shared more than 2,000 times on Facebook.

There was just one issue: It wasn't true.

This is exactly the kind of mess that Facebook's network of independent fact-checkers is supposed to solve. In May 2019, Facebook partnered with Science Feedback, a site dedicated to explaining "why information is or is not consistent with the science." Science Feedback's process is extremely rigorous. Each piece has multiple reviewers, and each reviewer "holds a Ph.D. and has recently published articles in top-tier peer-reviewed science journals."

Five scientists reviewed the Washington Examiner article for Science Feedback. The scientists identified a number of problems with the piece: "false factual assertions, cherry-picking datasets that support their point, failing to account for uncertainties in those datasets, and failing to assess the performance of climate models in an objective and rigorous manner." The article was rated "false" by Science Feedback and logged in Facebook's system.

That should have been the end of the story. The Washington Examiner article should have had a warning overlaid each time it was shared on Facebook, and its distribution on Facebook should have been dramatically reduced.

But that's not what happened.

Instead, an organization affiliated with Michaels, the CO2 Coalition, wrote Zuckerberg and complained about Science Feedback's rating. Among other things, the coalition claims that Science Feedback's analysis amounted to "simple differences of opinion." The coalition asked Zuckerberg to "remove Facebook’s censorship, labeling, and restrictions on this article."

Amazingly, it worked. In September, Facebook removed the false rating, overruling the judgment of Science Feedback. According to the Wall Street Journal, Facebook found that the misinformation about climate models was an "opinion" and, therefore, not eligible for fact-checking.

Now, the CO2 Coalition has announced its intention to exploit this loophole to spread climate misinformation on Facebook.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

be cause

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 591
  • Likes Given: 450
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #810 on: June 28, 2020, 01:47:38 PM »
' Zuckerberg is scum ' .. my train of thought yesterday included the option of going back in time and changing the world of today .. I chose to help avoid Zuckerberg being . b.c.
2007 + 5 = 2012 + 4 = 2016 + 3 = 2019 + 2 = 2021 
 (phew)

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 562
  • Likes Given: 263
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #811 on: June 28, 2020, 02:53:08 PM »
bc:
At least that is more original than asasinating Hitler.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

The Walrus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 618
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #812 on: June 28, 2020, 03:32:13 PM »
Anyone that gets their scientific information from Facebook, deserves what they get. 

be cause

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1373
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 591
  • Likes Given: 450
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #813 on: June 28, 2020, 04:50:20 PM »
Anyone that gets their scientific information from Facebook, deserves what they get.


sadly , that seems to be most of my friends on facebook .. before , they used to show discernment , now they are parrots and trumpettes ..

and I certainly wouldn't want the moderator's job ..
2007 + 5 = 2012 + 4 = 2016 + 3 = 2019 + 2 = 2021 
 (phew)

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9059
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3561
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #814 on: June 28, 2020, 09:38:45 PM »
Perhaps we need a vote.

Zuckerg is scum.  -  Yes or NO.

But hang on, should the order be "No or Yes", or should the question be "Is Zuckerberg Scum" ?

Anyway, voting is so yesterday. So no vote.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

igs

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #815 on: June 28, 2020, 10:38:03 PM »
Zuckerg is scum.  -  Yes or NO.

Let's say someone steals a product, later makes billions of profit with it, later compensates the original owner with a fraction of PAST profits and continues to make billions for who knows how many years to come and get away with it.

THAT's Z'berg and it includes the answer to the Y/N question, a clear YES !

Phoenix

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #816 on: June 30, 2020, 03:18:30 AM »
The US Democratic Party is releasing their climate plan via the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/29/democrats-climate-crisis-carbon-emissions

Article Highlights:

538-page report (a lot to read)

Cut net US greenhouse gas emissions by 37% below 2010 levels in 2030, and 88% below 2010 levels in 2050. The remaining 12% of emissions cuts would have to come from hard-to-decarbonize sectors, including heavy-duty truck transportation, industry and agriculture.

Net-zero electricity by 2040.

Net-zero new buildings by 2030.

100% zero-emitting new vehicles to be sold by 2035.

Doubling funding for public transit.

End tax incentives for fossil fuel companies.

RealityCheck

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #817 on: June 30, 2020, 10:51:12 PM »
In a major boost to climate change acceptance, Ireland's new Government includes the Green Party. The programme agrees to reduce CO2 emissions by 7 percent per annum on average, over the next 10 years. Pity their term is only 5 years 🙄

What the Greens need to do to make their mark in Government (via @IrishTimes) https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/what-the-greens-need-to-do-to-make-their-mark-in-government-1.4290951
Sic transit gloria mundi


kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2354
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1131
  • Likes Given: 978
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #819 on: July 05, 2020, 07:34:04 PM »
Nice article. Shows that we should also put limits on corporations (personal wealth limits are not enough). Lots of low hanging fruit too if we only had different politicians.

Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Phoenix

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #820 on: July 09, 2020, 03:05:55 AM »
Denmark trying to make it illegal for their government to fail to achieve interim goals on climate.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200706-the-law-that-could-make-climate-change-illegal

The Danish law has several safeguards to this end. Every year, the government will need to find a majority parliamentary approval of its global and national climate strategies. “The government will be held to account every year by the parliament,” says Dan Jørgensen, Denmark’s climate and energy minister. “If you’re not on track, the parliament can say, ‘Well, sorry, you’re not on track so you don’t get a majority.’ In theory, that will lead to a government having to step down.”

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #821 on: July 19, 2020, 12:48:02 PM »
It's been 124 years since Arrhenius published calculations showing increased CO2 would raise the temperature by 4+ °C. 124 years we've had to act. O n e h u n d r e d t w e n t y f o u r years!

On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground

Link >> https://zenodo.org/record/1431217#.XxM6USgzY2x

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 803
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #822 on: July 19, 2020, 06:57:00 PM »
It's been 124 years since Arrhenius published calculations showing increased CO2 would raise the temperature by 4+ °C. 124 years we've had to act. O n e h u n d r e d t w e n t y f o u r years!

On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground

Link >> https://zenodo.org/record/1431217#.XxM6USgzY2x

Well, it took longer than that for us to accept Copernicus’ finding that the earth revolved around the sun — which didn’t even require upending the way we lived.  CO2 and heat being a threat to survival will soon be impossible to ignore.  And we’re overdue for a cycle of scientific renaissance, after the recent years of anti-science, ignorance and isolationism.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2354
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1131
  • Likes Given: 978
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #823 on: July 19, 2020, 07:12:41 PM »
But that was a different time (and a different problem).

Oil companies have known about the problem since the fifties so that is 70 years of ignoring a problem/funding propaganda.

And if oil companies can work it out then so could a government.

Since there is a case to be made that 1C was the max temp increase that was save we really should step up our efforts.

see short version of 1c max here:
.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9059
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3561
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #824 on: July 19, 2020, 08:43:16 PM »
It's been 124 years since Arrhenius published calculations showing increased CO2 would raise the temperature by 4+ °C. 124 years we've had to act. O n e h u n d r e d t w e n t y f o u r years!

On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground

Link >> https://zenodo.org/record/1431217#.XxM6USgzY2x

Well, it took longer than that for us to accept Copernicus’ finding that the earth revolved around the sun — which didn’t even require upending the way we lived.  CO2 and heat being a threat to survival will soon be impossible to ignore.  And we’re overdue for a cycle of scientific renaissance, after the recent years of anti-science, ignorance and isolationism.
Apparently that was not true - at least in the Vatican. But since the ideology demanded that man was at the centre of the Universe.......
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2354
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1131
  • Likes Given: 978
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #825 on: July 19, 2020, 08:57:20 PM »
PSA: The 15th or 16th centuries don´t really relate to What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 803
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #826 on: September 13, 2020, 11:41:22 PM »
Bill McKibben: "I think it's fair to say the message is starting to sink in. One wishes it hadn't taken this much time and this much trauma”
https://mobile.twitter.com/billmckibben/status/1305126838788911104
Image below.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 803
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #827 on: September 18, 2020, 08:03:55 PM »
Five States Have Filed Climate Change Lawsuits, Seeking Damages From Big Oil and Gas
Quote
Connecticut and Delaware have joined a growing list of states, cities and counties that have filed climate change lawsuits against the fossil fuel industry, claiming oil and gas companies knew their products caused sea level rise and stronger hurricanes and willfully misled the public about those and other dangers related to global warming.

Connecticut's lawsuit, filed Monday, named ExxonMobil as a sole defendant, while the lawsuit filed on Friday by Delaware named 31 fossil fuel companies and trade groups. They joined Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Minnesota as states that have filed such litigation. ...
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/14092020/climate-change-lawsuit-connecticut-deleware
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Iain

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 162
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 47
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #828 on: Today at 04:53:32 AM »
New worldwide Poll on climate change concern and need for action:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54208995

"If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants." Isaac Newton

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2354
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1131
  • Likes Given: 978
Re: What's New in Climate Change Acceptance and Action
« Reply #829 on: Today at 01:17:05 PM »
Quote
But respondents had very different attitudes to the level of urgency required to tackle the problem.

Big majorities in poorer countries strongly agreed with tackling climate change with the same vigour as Covid-19.

However in richer nations, the support for rapid action was far more muted.

...

Japan, Sweden, Australia, the US and UK all have less than 45% of respondents strongly agreeing with urgent action.

In Kenya, Mexico, Argentina, Turkey and Nigeria the figure was well above 70% in all of them
.

The richer countries are also big the historical emitters and since they mostly got rich by centuries of exploitation we really have a moral obligation to lead the way in the energy transition and to help out the poorer countries.

In reality we are worrying about ´our growth´ while ignoring the already accrueing economic damages.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.