Challenge 1 - find an article like you'd find in the sun, the mail, the Express and the telegraph except out of a left wing paper. Guardian, and independent for example. If your POV has been proven then you'd see papers from across the political spectrum reporting it.
Challenge 2 - evidence your assertion that emergency services have been prevented by reporting examples of this. That means newspaper stories or TV news clips saying that. Ideally from media outlets across the political spectrum as in challenge 1.
Challenge 3 - I hope you realise a few anecdotes don't equate to evidence. You need patterns at least. If there's been a pattern of ambulances being stopped and people dying without a doubt there will be reports in news outlets. I've never seen any, have you?
As far as freedom of speech and protest goes, how do you determine too much? Is it time of protest, area covered / controlled by protesters or simply whether you agree with them? I suspect it's mostly the last factor that is some people's reason for complaining about ER.
Certainly it seems like bootfox is scratching around for arguments to cover for the simple fact he opposes environmental protest. Perhaps others are like that too. I think the big clue was the comment about climate change is disputed. The real truth is the only ones not agreeing with the theory are conspiracy nuts or vested interests. Even right wing scientists previously employed to discredit the theory now admit it's true. They've now moved on to argue that it's not as bad as it is. Basically climate change is true but we can live with it.
Good lad. That’s not quite a decent debate but there’s substance to it.
Challenge 1: the information is out there, I provided a quick google search, not to mention the independent news outlets and various YouTube channels.
Challenge 2: again, it’s out there. You want it, go find it. It’s been on various programmes and news outlets from This Morning to Sky News.
Challenge 3: there’s been both a direct and indirect impact on emergency service cover. As discussed earlier. I feel like I am repeating myself.
And again, It’s not about agreeing or disagreeing, it’s about following the proper and correct procedures so you don’t endanger or interrupt other people’s lives. You want to protest environmental issues,
On you go, fill your boots. But do it properly, and when you don’t do it properly and the public turn on you, don’t then have a go at the public. And don’t get a sad on when people call out your hypocrisy.
https://www.gov.uk/protests-and-marches-letting-the-police-know
“Under the Human Rights Act everybody has a freedom of expression and a freedom of thought and assembly. This means that everybody has a right to a peaceful
protest and no restrictions shall be placed on this unless it is in the interests of national security, public safety or for the prevention of disorder or crime.“
Public safety being a key phrase...
I won’t tell you how to live your life, so don’t tell me how to live mine, especially when ER can’t even live by the demands they want. Again, I refer you to the hypocritical use of diesel generators and products of petrochemicals and plastics.
And No it’s not climate change it’s just the “climate”.
And yea I think we can just agree to disagree and move on?
( as will how to make cabbage soup from a cabbage!) 
