Our listeners send in thoughtful questions, and we dive into them without preparation or prior review. This way, our responses stay spontaneous and authentic. Today’s questions come from Bradford and Port Carlisle—two communities in Northern England with rich histories and unique local perspectives.

Andrew, from Bradford, England sent us this - “Are we too focused on Net Zero etc? Why don’t we drill our own oil, instead of importing and sustaining economies elsewhere? Aren’t we at risk of falling behind?”

William highlights that oil extraction requires years of infrastructure development, making it unsuitable for immediate energy needs. He advocates prioritizing renewables, arguing fossil fuel dependence risks long-term disadvantage.

Stuart counters that relying on foreign technology, such as Danish wind turbines, could weaken the UK’s energy independence unless domestic innovation is fostered.

William stresses planning for the next century, pointing to offshore wind as a strategic investment given Britain’s coastal geography.

Stuart notes some politicians dismiss net zero as “net stupid,” while William observes that short electoral cycles often hinder long-term policy, urging a broader vision beyond four- to five-year terms.

Steven, from Port Carlisle, England sent in this question - “Charlie Kirk’s killing. Are those who say that his death was about a man exercising his right to free speech and saying what he wants, leaving us to think more deeply about our own views right? Or are others who discuss other contributing factors right? Religion, Debate, Guns, Antagonism, Politics, Division, Conspiracies, For and Against, Disquiet etc etc etc”.

Stuart reflects on whether Charlie Kirk’s death stemmed from free speech or political division, concluding multiple influences were at play. He argues that freedom of speech is not absolute, noting the individual involved was both intellectual and religious, and sees the event as a symptom of wider societal fractures in America. Stuart admits limited engagement with Kirk’s content, focusing instead on psychology and body language to assess truthfulness.

William, aware of Kirk’s presence online, suspects his approach was designed to provoke reactions and generate revenue. He cautions that expressing opinions can trigger extreme consequences, though he did not follow Kirk closely.

Stuart proposes examining what freedom of speech truly means, distinguishing between genuine restrictions and social politeness, and questioning whether a universal definition exists.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

We’re a veteran podcast, two surprise listener questions per episode, zero prep—cold takes, hot chaos.

Ryszard, from Bydgoszcz, Poland offers up the first question - ”How did life evolve from nonliving matter?”

Stuart feels after eons of cosmic boredom, water shows up, algae crash the party, oxygen gatecrashes, and then life takes a billion-year nap before evolution finally stumbles in. He squints at the universe and asks, “What nudged that first awkward step?”

William shrugs, points to Earth’s comfy orbit, a clingy Moon that keeps our tilt polite, and Jupiter—the hulking bouncer—scooping up space junk. Together they made a cozy stage for chemistry to improvise, even if the opening line remains a mystery.

Dmitry, from Novosibirsk, Russia has set todays second listener question - “The poor in the UK seem to hate poor immigrants, yet it's the rich taking the money the world over. Divide and concur, yes? Interestingly, many people who don’t like migrants heading to the UK are supporters of your royal family, who many say are immigrants, don’t work, and have a suspect pedophile amongst them!l”

William jokes that the tabloids seem less like news outlets and more like fear factories run by mystery billionaires with a fondness for stirring the pot.

Stuart suggests that many struggling Brits oddly resent struggling immigrants—because that’s the script they’ve been handed—while the real resource-hoarders are sipping champagne in mansions. With a smirk, Stuart notes the irony that some of the loudest anti-immigrant voices wave flags for the royals, who, if you trace the family tree, are basically the original foreign imports.

William adds that the word “immigrant” is a blunt instrument, lumping everyone from his EU-born wife to refugees into one box, while “expat” magically makes Brits abroad sound like glamorous adventurers—even when they’re just in Spain refusing to learn “hola.” He points out that the loudest anti-immigrant towns often have no immigrants at all, yet still bought into Farage’s “breaking point” drama.

Stuart suggests imagining Dmitry’s outsider lens, while William advises popping the bubble and sampling news beyond the usual echo chamber.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

Trigger warning, this episode includes a discussion around a sensitive topic that you might find distressing. Listener discretion is very much encouraged.

Criticism of the Catholic church, the concept of existence, and whether infinity is real. They are the three big topics for this episode of The People’s Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast, the place where you the listener send in questions for co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman’ Mabbutt and William Mankelow to discuss, dissect, deliberate, sometimes dispute, but very rarely debate, even though that word is in the podcast’s title!

The first question for this episode comes from Ryszard in Bydgoszcz, Poland - ”If everyone in the world suddenly forgot you existed, did you ever truly exist?”

William notes that countless people have lived and died, and that thousands more are dying at this very moment. Many of them pass without anyone knowing or remembering them.

Stuart considers whether a person truly exists if everyone forgets them. He notes that actions and thoughts create ripples that persist regardless of memory. Reflecting on identity, he suggests “you” may be an illusion, with the soul merely electrical brain activity, meaning existence could be just a consequence of the bodily functions. He concludes the question remains fundamentally uncertain.

William’s action: He reflects on mortality by considering two types of death: the physical death of oneself, and the death of the last person who remembers you. He encourages using this perspective to guide actions in life, aiming to leave a positive influence and be remembered meaningfully. Through the podcast, he and Stuart model this by addressing big issues and challenging listeners to think deeply.

Stuart’s action: whether being unacknowledged or forgotten diminishes a person’s impact, and what the nature of “you” truly is. He struggles with the idea of existence tied to memory and suggests it may be possible to be remembered without truly existing. His focus is on examining the concept of self.

The second question for this episode comes from Zbigniew in Chorzów, Poland - ”Is infinity real, or is it a mental construct?”

William considers the limits of human knowledge about the universe. He notes that the universe’s accelerating expansion and the finite speed of light prevent us from fully knowing its size. Despite observing distant regions with telescopes like Hubble and James Webb, much remains beyond our reach.  We never really know if infinity is real. This could all be a simulation.

Stuart examines the concept of infinity, suggesting it may or may not be real. He emphasizes that what is certain is that our understanding of it is a human mental construct, shaped by our interpretation of what infinity might or might not be.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Should we shift to electric in all motor sports? Are we too sensitive these days?

These are the two big questions your co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman’ Mabbutt and William Mankelow discuss in today’s episode of The People’s Countryside Environmental Debate Podcast.

On this podcast we never see the questions before we press record. They are presented to us on the spot, often challenging and always unexpected. We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

Our first of two listener questions for today’s episode comes from Elodie, Brittany, France - “Do you think that all forms of current motor racing, including motorcycle racing, develop into and be replaced by electric versions in the pursuit of environmental sustainability?”

Stuart states he has no objection to electric racing and sees it as an interesting experiment, noting that Formula One already uses hybrids. He argues though, that introducing electric or hybrid alternatives would likely draw a different, and maybe even new audience, with only some current fans switching over, as they can feel something is being lost from their experience, and not being replaced or enhanced within the electric versions.

William questions whether using finite resources to power motorsport is justified at all, noting that fuels like methanol likely still come from oil.

Stuart feels that with few young fans being attracted to some of these current sporting models anyway, they must become more interactive and engaging too. Removing the visceral experience as you are with electric versions, makes it even less attractive to some people, so electrification is not enough on its own.

The second listener question comes from Paul, Queensland, Australia - “Is it wrong for comedians to laugh and ridicule the disabled, vegans and environmentalists? Are we too sensitive these days? Is something not funny because we don’t like the person telling it or is the essence funny whatever?”

William states that people can be overly sensitive, treating feeling offended as more significant than it actually is. He observes that if someone is offended, then they are simply experiencing that feeling, nothing more.

Stuart questions whether laughing or using humour is inherently wrong, noting that humour can highlight the absurdity of situations rather than ridicule people. He illustrates this with a café incident where he joked about not being able to “run away” in his wheelchair, showing that humor can simply acknowledge reality, without mocking anyone.

William explains that he challenges his own bias by listening to favourite musicians as if they are new to him and approaching unfamiliar musicians as if he already knows their work. He applies the same mindset to comedians he dislikes, giving them fair attention to see whether it is the material or his own bias shaping his reaction.

During this conversation, William mentions a stand up routine by British comedian Peter Kay talking about the British TV series Crimewatch, here a link to that video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPsu-PCubvs

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

We sit here bravely tackling listener questions hurled at us from every corner of the globe — completely unprepared and slightly afraid. We don’t see them until we hit record, which explains a lot. As for Grzegorz’s name, William took one look and noped out like a man dodging a spelling bee in Polish. He respects names too much to turn them into interpretive dance.

Paul, from Queensland, Australia places the first question for discussion today- “Nothing is morally right or morally wrong. Right, wrong and morality don’t even exist in some people's eyes. The world is not just meaningless, but also absurd. What do you think?”

William kicks things off by declaring humans are the cosmic equivalent of a plot twist no one saw coming — absurd creatures who somehow made it this far despite centuries of questionable decisions and poor impulse control.

Stuart zooms out and says, “Nope, it’s all absurd,” pointing to algae that spent two billion years evolving and making oxygen like the world’s slowest intern. William agrees, but finds beauty in the chaos — Earth’s lucky lottery of moon tilts, Jupiter’s debris vacuuming, and rotational chill make life both ridiculous and miraculous.

Stuart questions morality itself, wondering if it’s just a group project we all pretend to understand.

William, meanwhile, marvels at humanity’s obsession with upgrades, even though we’re all headed for the same existential exit — suggesting we cherish the people who make the absurdity worthwhile.

Grzegorz, from Opole, Poland sets the next question- “Is Reform UK really a political party outside of the UK establishment?”

William shuts it down with a firm “No. End of episode,” like a man refusing to debate whether water is wet.

Stuart’s intrigued that the question came from someone outside the UK — or maybe just someone pretending to be exotic while living in Croydon. He agrees: Reform UK isn’t some rebellious outsider, no matter how many pub speeches say otherwise.

William adds, noting Farage is basically the Hogwarts head boy of the establishment — all robes, no magic. He vents that Farage is a walking cartoon of privilege, somewhere between a monocle and a Boris Johnson impersonator. Starmer, he concedes, has made some eyebrow-raising moves, but at least he doesn’t look like he was grown in a Westminster petri dish.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.
Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Welcome back to another episode of Greenwashed & Unhinged — the podcast where we pretend to care about the planet while blindly stumbling through your questions like eco-conscious toddlers in a philosophy seminar.

Before we dive in, a heartfelt shoutout to our beloved listener Hannen Beith. Hannen, darling, pull your finger out and send us a question. We know you’re lurking. Contribute or be composted.

Elodie, from Brittany, France sets the first question today - “Does absolute power corrupt absolutely?”

Stuart muses that human power corrupts faster than compost rots in July—unless wielded by a unicorn of selflessness. He compares it to gravity: powerful, universal, and blissfully unaware of politics.

William argues corruption is a human invention, like spreadsheets or reality TV. Together, they liken it all to gardening: no plant is evil unless it takes over. So, when in charge, don’t believe your own hype—listen twice as much as you talk. Nature does, and it hasn’t tried to run for office.

Debs, from Didcot, Oxfordshire, England set the second of today's questions - “Someone from Thames Water, when talking about the potential new Oxfordshire reservoir, said, “we need to focus on identifying and moving the wildlife out of the way”, that shows a distinct lack of understanding of mitigating ones environmental impact”.

Stuart fondly recalls the time builders lovingly flattened an ancient wildflower meadow for six months, then heroically promised to fix it with a sprinkle of generic grass seed — because clearly, green equals biodiversity. He reminds us that ecosystems aren’t IKEA furniture: you can’t just relocate wildlife and expect it to “assemble itself.”

William adds that animals aren’t invading cities — we built over their homes and now call them “urban” like it’s a lifestyle choice.

Stuart, ever the diplomat, declares his tulip rights while denying nature any.

William defends the underdogs — foxes, pigeons, crows — nature’s misunderstood freeloaders. Moral of the story? Think long-term. Or at least longer than six months.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

If you want the go to experts, that's not us, you've come to the wrong podcast. This is however the podcast where co-hosts Stuart ‘The Wildman’ Mabbutt and William Mankelow, discuss questions sent in by you the listeners.

The first of the two listener questions for today’s episode comes in the form of this epic enquiry from Bronwen, in Atlanta, Georgia, USA - “Does hardship make our species stronger?”

William tentatively starts out by saying that hardship does make our species stronger.

Stuart feels it does too, but it's not necessarily what makes us stronger. Instead, it’s the whole package of experience that helps us along.

Stuart explains that hardship depends on mindset; for him, it’s simply something to endure, and move through, rather than dwell on as good or bad.

William notes that people often dwell too much on such things; he feels tired after two days of physical work, but views it not as a hardship, rather as a natural consequence of effort.

Off the back of Bronwen’s question Stuart comes up with the following action:  drill down into the words you use in your daily vocabulary.

William, not wanting to feel left out, comes up with this action: He reflects on how people in the UK often label weather as good or bad, though he believes it is simply a matter of mindset. He tries to view weather neutrally, whether wet, hot, or dry, and focuses instead on preparing for it. He suggests this perspective can be applied more broadly to life.

The second question for this episode, which really got Stuart and William thinking, comes from Paul, in Queensland, Australia - “Is it more important to help yourself, help your family, help your society, or help the world?”

Stuart emphasizes that change begins with one's self; one cannot change anything else without first changing themselves. He likens the self to an umbrella, with various aspects extending in different directions, none more important than the others.

William agrees with the umbrella metaphor, noting that if you can manage yourself, you can help others. He also believes that small, thoughtful actions in everyday life can make a significant difference.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

We like to give you an ad free experience. We also like our audience to be relatively small and engaged, we’re not after numbers.

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside

Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities

This is the podcast where  listeners send questions for us to conversate around, and although not always to do with the environment, we always try to bring an action back to the that in some way.  We're not the go-to experts. We're the go-to guys who are willing to explore things cold, and change our minds as we go through.

The first listener question comes from Unity, in Paddock Wood, Kent, England - “Do you guys feel overwhelmed by the mass migration into and across Europe? Many react when cultures collide in these situations. We don’t think about the countries these migrants are leaving behind, as often it can be the brightest and the best that are leaving out of desperation, heading for beacons of better lives. Though there may also be darker reasons too. Those left behind can include the weak, who have no support. We need to support these countries as they rebuild and manage the drivers that lead to others leaving. This is just the start of modern mass migration”.

William sees it as Unity states in her question, that it is only the start of a mass migration.

Stuart reflects on how migration often involves the most capable individuals, leaving their countries out of desperation, sometimes leaving behind those with fewer resources or who need support.

William observes that society is increasingly building metaphorical walls between cultures, fostering unnecessary division and misunderstanding.

Stuart feels we are millennia away from being anything but the tribal animal we are.

William’s environmental action: he encourages taking practical, manageable steps toward addressing the climate crisis. When feeling overwhelmed by its scale, he believes it’s important to break the challenge into smaller, achievable actions.

Stuart highlights the importance of empathy ,and self-awareness in everyday interactions. He suggests that when someone feels irritated by another person—say, on a bus—it’s worth remembering that the other person is human too and not necessarily a total c***!

The second question comes from Estefania, in Jalisco, Mexico - “Does talking about death, speak it into existence? Is that why some cultures don’t discuss it?”

Stuart believes that talking about death doesn’t bring it into existence—it’s a reality that already exists.

William argues that avoiding talk of death stems from superstition and taboo rather than reason. He compares it to the idea of “tempting fate” by mentioning the weather—pointing out that words don’t influence these events in his opinion.

Stuart feels that many cultures have just got into the habit of not talking about death, and this has turned into a taboo.

William believes it’s important to talk openly about death from an early age. He feels that understanding death as a natural part of life helps people accept it, regardless of their personal beliefs.

William’s action is to remember that everything eventually ends. He sees this not as morbid, but as a reminder to appreciate the present.

Stuart’s action: to  filter out the stuff that doesn't matter and you'll begin to realize very little does matter. It's all a distraction.

What do you make of this discussion? Do you have a question that you'd like us to discuss? Let us know by sending an email to ⁠thepeoplescountryside@gmail.com

This podcast's overall themes are nature, philosophy, climate, the human condition, sustainability, and social justice.

Help us to spread the impact of the podcast by sharing this link with 5 friends podfollow.com/ThePeoplesCountrysideEnvironmentalDebatePodcast , support our work through Patreon patreon.com/thepeoplescountryside⁠. Find out all about the podcast via this one simple link: linktr.ee/thepeoplescountryside
Sign the Petition - Improve The Oxfordshire Countryside Accessibility For All Disabilities And Abilities: change.org/ImproveTheOxfordshireCountrysideAccessibilityForAllDisabilitiesAndAbilities