Like Tree35Likes

Hong Kong to Japan over land/sea

Closed Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    31,231
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgoodkat:
    Yeah, not flying is totally doable in today's world. Let's just all go back to sailing 3 months to Europe, scurvy and all included.
    Has anyone said let's all stop flying? One person has said they are looking at trying sea to Japan not flying and you on about scurvy. As our alt-right friends would say, someone was triggered.
    Elegiaque likes this.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    6,729
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgoodkat:
    Yeah, not flying is totally doable in today's world. Let's just all go back to sailing 3 months to Europe, scurvy and all included.
    But that's the thing... instead of taking short, thoughtless breaks here and there, what if someone did take a 3 month break from their office life and sailed to Europe? How much more meaningful and memorable of an experience would that be? (The scurvy experience we can easily forego now.)

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    6,729
    Original Post Deleted
    That people are thoughtless creatures easily susceptible to marketing gimmicks?

    I think there are​ people doing this, and perhaps with more awareness more will do so... In Asia though, I don't know. I think Europeans appreciate their time more.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    11,806
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiaque:
    But that's the thing... instead of taking short, thoughtless breaks here and there, what if someone did take a 3 month break from their office life and sailed to Europe? How much more meaningful and memorable of an experience would that be? (The scurvy experience we can easily forego now.)
    I would like to do that personally. Done similar things in the past. But I'm weird. I think most people would hate it.

    Calling it more 'meaningful' and short trips 'thoughtless' is verging into dangerously preachy.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    位置位置位置
    Posts
    50,018

    Have no beef in the environmental argument of this trip, but I'd think that flying is more efficient in terms of time and carbon footprints.

    I'm of the belief that its best to get where you're going as quickly as possible and enjoy your down time. If a cruise ship is your destination then so be it, the stops it makes are the sideshow.

    If a place is your destination, then so be it, the mode of transport is the sideshow.

    Just saying this with no vested interest other than moderating this down a few notches.

    Last edited by shri; 11-05-2019 at 12:21 PM.
    Elegiaque and kimwy66 like this.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    31,231
    Quote Originally Posted by shri:
    Have no beef in the environmental aspect of this trip, but I'd think that flying is more efficient in terms of time and carbon footprints.

    I'm of the belief that its best to get where you're going as quickly as possible and enjoy your down time. If a cruise ship is your destination then so be it, the stops it makes are the sideshow.

    If a place is your destination, then so be it, the mode of transport is the sideshow.

    Just saying this with no vested interest other than moderating this down a few notches.
    Totally agree and I would always take the plane. However it was a simple enquiry about a decision that impacts on no one else. You just knew someone would dive in on the attack and as in the days of PDLM you had a strong idea who that would be.
    Elegiaque likes this.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wrong side of the door to hell
    Posts
    6,021
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/7...-cruising.html

    Whilst a ferry isn't a cruise ship, it is still not environmentally friendly, considerably less so than flying and that's not including the train / bus / taxis required. It's the same as the nuclear power versus renewables or organic vs modern farming discussion, people cling to unresearched views that give them warm environmental fuzzies while not realising that their chosen ideology is actually worse for the planet.


    TL : DR If you want to be environmentally friendly, stay home. If you must go, take a plane.
    HK_Katherine likes this.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wrong side of the door to hell
    Posts
    6,021
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    Totally agree and I would always take the plane. However it was a simple enquiry about a decision that impacts on no one else. You just knew someone would dive in on the attack and as in the days of PDLM you had a strong idea who that would be.
    It impacts the entire planet when people take ideological stands on things that require evidence and science to find a way forward. Continually pointing out where people's thinking is going to harm the planet is not an attack, it's desperation to try and get people to see the harm they are doing. We aren't here to give people a pat on the back when they are plain wrong, and adding to the disaster that is building globally.
    HK_Katherine likes this.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiaque:
    That people are thoughtless creatures easily susceptible to marketing gimmicks?

    I think there are​ people doing this, and perhaps with more awareness more will do so... In Asia though, I don't know. I think Europeans appreciate their time more.
    It's also a case of Europeans being afforded the financial wherewithal and holiday time to do so, not simply valuing their time more. In Korea, for example, it's common for locals to only have 8 days off a year, making it ridiculous to consider anything other than the fastest means. Holidays are so scarce that many flights return as red eye so people can eek out an extra day, going straight to work with their 6am arrival.

    All this to say, it requires an existing level of prosperity for a society to even start thinking in these terms. And arguably, the way we even got to a standard of living that can entertain the idea was already at the expense of everyone else. I agree, though, there's a culture side that can be fostered given where we now stand, even if it's a drop in the ocean, so can appreciate your attempt.
    Elegiaque and shri like this.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    31,231
    Quote Originally Posted by kimwy66:
    It impacts the entire planet when people take ideological stands on things that require evidence and science to find a way forward. Continually pointing out where people's thinking is going to harm the planet is not an attack, it's desperation to try and get people to see the harm they are doing. We aren't here to give people a pat on the back when they are plain wrong, and adding to the disaster that is building globally.
    In that overland/sea travel would actually be more harmful than flying? Probably agree though I don't have the numbers.

    However, the OP has made her position clear many times in terms of reducing travel so overall I don't see her ideas as negative.

    On the one hand one individual not flying will make no difference but on the other by going by sea she is causing harm.