Greta and the aristocrat sail the high seas to save the planet.

jackboy

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Her quote of the leaders are behaving as children rings true as I scroll through Trump's tweets in my twitter feed. I'm sure we can all agree with her on that anyway.

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1182745590007861248

Another speech with nothing of substance. The child behind her fidgeting and yawning during her speech said it all. Boring and meaningless waffle.

splinter65

Blueshoe wrote: »

Is it time to give 14 or 15 year olds and up the right to vote? They seem to be leading the way on climate change

Where does your 14 year old stand on Brexit and the budget? Improving our health services? Education? Any solid suggestions on solving the housing issue?

splinter65

jackboy wrote: »

Another speech with nothing of substance. The child behind her fidgeting and yawning during her speech said it all. Boring and meaningless waffle.

It’s all blah blah blah. Exactly as you would expect from any other boring self obsessed 16 year old.

padd b1975

Blueshoe wrote: »

Is it time to give 14 or 15 year olds and up the right to vote? They seem to be leading the way on climate change

No.

I think we need to let children enjoy their all too brief childhood.

Skylinehead

padd b1975 wrote: »

No.

I think we need to let children enjoy their all too brief childhood.

Let's be honest, you don't give a shit about her childhood.

Tell me how

splinter65 wrote: »

No it’s not. Lots of people who are parents themselves have watched footage of this child in which she appears to be very distressed and/or under severe pressure and struggling.
It’s no secret that the child has learning difficulties.
It’s totally fair comment to say that her parents putting her in the position of exacerbating her difficulties in this way is not the best parenting.
If you have allowed yourself to become so emotionally involved in the Greta Thunberg story that you feel that any criticism of her or her parents is hurting you personally then you’ll have to deal with that.
You can’t stop other people from expressing legitimately held opinions on this matter or any other.

People can express any opinion they want, doesn't mean it can't be challenged by anyone who disagrees.

Which is it, 'not the best parenting' or 'subjecting her to child abuse'?

Also, if you have allowed yourself to get to a position where any advocacy for climate change makes you feel inferior or threatened, you should explore those emotions for their root cause rather than wishing she would stop.

Eric Cartman

I see the left is turning on itself again, their favourite country norway has moved from socialist paradise to evil filthy oil exporter who vites in secret to stop 16 year olds getting nobel prizes....

padd b1975

Skylinehead wrote: »

Let's be honest, you don't give a shit about her childhood.

How can I give a sh1t about something that no longer exists thanks to her parents?

Tell me how

splinter65 wrote: »

Where does your 14 year old stand on Brexit and the budget? Improving our health services? Education? Any solid suggestions on solving the housing issue?

If you were paying attention to the news, you'd see a lot of people as young as 14 have a problem with Brexit given how actions of a certain group of people will influence the world the 14 year olds end up living in while those who decided what that world would be like are no longer around. Very similar to the conversation on the climate in fact.

splinter65 wrote: »

It’s all blah blah blah. Exactly as you would expect from any other boring self obsessed 16 year old.

Apart from the 10M following her protest example, speaking to leading political organisations and winning awards for doing so.
She is literally the opposite of self-obsessed given all her focus is on the environment.
Ok, she is a very different quality of orator to, say, Donald Trump or Boris Johnson but that is only another feather in her cap isn't it.

jackboy

Tell me how wrote: »

Ok, she is a very different quality of orator to, say, Donald Trump or Boris Johnson but that is only another feather in her cap isn't it.

You are being a bit selective with your comparisons there. She is well able to deliver a speech. There is a clear issue with the content of her speeches though. Most of her speeches have no significant content. She has over done this now and it has become really boring.

splinter65

Tell me how wrote: »

People can express any opinion they want, doesn't mean it can't be challenged by anyone who disagrees.

Which is it, 'not the best parenting' or 'subjecting her to child abuse'?

Also, if you have allowed yourself to get to a position where any advocacy for climate change makes you feel inferior or threatened, you should explore those emotions for their root cause rather than wishing she would stop.

The first sentence of this response reflects perfectly the hypocrisy of the left.
Once again demonstrating that you want to be allowed to disagree with me and other posters but any criticsim of the Thunberg party manifesto is to be met with virtual howls of protest.
Here for example my critiscm of the Thunbergs and Extinction Rebellion is framed as my being in denial of climate change to the point where I feel “inferior and threatened”.
Where do you pull this **** out of? Of course there’s climate change?!? I just don’t agree that it’s an emergency as the science doesn’t bear that out, and I certainly don’t agree with the pointless baseless scaremongering amongst young kids by a child whose parents have no hesitation in exploiting her quite serious issues.

Tell me how

jackboy wrote: »

You are being a bit selective with your comparisons there. She is well able to deliver a speech. There is a clear issue with the content of her speeches though. Most of her speeches have no significant content. She has over done this now and it has become really boring.

'We are damaging the environment.
We need to act.
Listen to the scientists.'

She's not trying to entertain people and if people are considering her message in such a manner, the only thing it can mean is they aren't capable of understanding the discussion.

Tell me how

splinter65 wrote: »

The first sentence of this response reflects perfectly the hypocrisy of the left.
Once again demonstrating that you want to be allowed to disagree with me and other posters but any criticsim of the Thunberg party manifesto is to be met with virtual howls of protest.
Here for example my critiscm of the Thunbergs and Extinction Rebellion is framed as my being in denial of climate change to the point where I feel “inferior and threatened”.
Where do you pull this **** out of? Of course there’s climate change?!? I just don’t agree that it’s an emergency as the science doesn’t bear that out, and I certainly don’t agree with the pointless baseless scaremongering amongst young kids by a child whose parents have no hesitation in exploiting her quite serious issues.

IPCC report, 195 organisations, 120 countries, thousands of scientists says there is a problem. What comparable scientific body says there isn't?

Tell me how

Interesting thread here on the 'evidence' countering Greta's position. (Spoiler - It's wrong)

https://twitter.com/marktigheST/status/1183025831360258050

splinter65

Tell me how wrote: »

'We are damaging the environment.
We need to act.
Listen to the scientists.'

She's not trying to entertain people and if people are considering her message in such a manner, the only thing it can mean is they aren't capable of understanding the discussion.

You don’t see at all that this is almost counterproductive to your aims in the way that it is already nothing more then a tedious boring chant being delivered in a robotic monotone by an equally tedious petulant child?

Tell me how

splinter65 wrote: »

You don’t see at all that this is almost counterproductive to your aims in the way that it is already nothing more then a tedious boring chant being delivered in a robotic monotone by an equally tedious petulant child?

Oh so now she is not expressive enough? Maybe she should put some emotion in to her speeches.........

jackboy

Tell me how wrote: »

'We are damaging the environment.
We need to act.
Listen to the scientists.'

She's not trying to entertain people and if people are considering her message in such a manner, the only thing it can mean is they aren't capable of understanding the discussion.

So you couldn’t find one significant thing that she has said in her speeches and then claim that others can’t understand the discussion. Greta is not taking part in a discussion. As I said, she says nothing significant. It is getting boring.

The Greta phenomenon may be getting close to burning out. She will then be dropped by all her supporters.

Tell me how

jackboy wrote: »

So you couldn’t find one significant thing that she has said in her speeches and then claim that others can’t understand the discussion. Greta is not taking part in a discussion. As I said, she says nothing significant. It is getting boring.

The Greta phenomenon may be getting close to burning out. She will then be dropped by all her supporters.

If you don't see her simple message as significant, I don't know what to say to you about that.

It was significant enough for the HoC, US congress, EU, and UN to invite her to speak about it.

jackboy

Tell me how wrote: »

If you don't see her simple message as significant, I don't know what to say to you about that.

It was significant enough for the HoC, US congress, EU, and UN to invite her to speak about it.

There is no message. Which is exactly why she was allowed to speak in those places.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

...Apart from the 10M following her protest example, speaking to leading political organisations and winning awards for doing so.She is literally the opposite of self-obsessed given all her focus is on the environment. Ok, she is a very different quality of orator to, say, Donald Trump or Boris Johnson but that is only another feather in her cap isn't it.

Look we get it - you think greta is the new divine light

The fact is the actual numbers of kids skipping school and deciding to bunk off for the day or others who fall for the same spiel has bugger all to do with the validity of these protests.

Mao Tse Tung led an army of half a million people including many naive adolescents on the Long March in 1934-5. This was at least partially achieved through a process of misinformation and rhetoric - not much different from the rubbish being spouted about the end of civilisation and that kids have no future etc etc. Interestingly the Long March has been used by the Chinese as propaganda to justify Mao's Revolution. Much like what others are attempting to do in using the protests to justify greta's call for revolution which have fek all to do with actual climate change.

As to rest of greta's 'oration' - it is quite evident comparing her interviews and speeches that many of those speeches are being written for her. Greta certainly does not come across as a fountain of knowledge or insight. She is simply a teenager reared on doomsday nature documentaries and stories which she implicitly believes despite the science saying otherwise.

But hey as suggested let's all pander to the fears of this teenager and encourage the spreading of this extreme eco-anxiety to other impressionable kids and even those adults who should know better. Eitherway none of it - is any feather in anyones cap.

splinter65

Tell me how wrote: »

Oh so now she is not expressive enough? Maybe she should put some emotion in to her speeches.........

I’m sure the Thunbergs are grateful to you for your impassioned emotionally charged defense of their daughter in the face of such unfair critiscm when it’s clear that we should all just step meekly into line behind their “message” and not ask too many difficult questions about their motives....

hetuzozaho

Just seeing some of the crowds in Denver yesterday-ish.

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1182721870778589184

Go Greta!

splinter65

Tell me how wrote: »

Interesting thread here on the 'evidence' countering Greta's position. (Spoiler - It's wrong)

https://twitter.com/marktigheST/status/1183025831360258050

Has the number of people dying from natural disasters dropped by 95% in 100 years or not.
Spoiler: the leader of Extinction Rebellion agrees that it has.

gozunda

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Just seeing some of the crowds in Denver yesterday-ish.

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1182721870778589184
Go Greta!

Go where exactly?

hetuzozaho

gozunda wrote: »

Go where exactly?

Santiago!

gozunda

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Santiago!

For someone who avowes the need for lowering carbon footprints - she sure seems to be getting around. Of course she could be getting there by Donkey but I sincerely doubt it.

Same old do as I say - not as I do :rolleyes:

joseywhales

Ahh school strikes, remember the time we striked from school(which is a free service we are provided with) because the school was closed too often due the teacher strikes, a very confusing time.

joseywhales

gozunda wrote: »

For someone who avowes the need for lowering carbon footprints - she sure seems to be getting around. Of course she could be getting there by Donkey but I sincerely doubt it.

Same old do as I say - not as I do :rolleyes:

Jesus how many years were you going to wait with your little knife for her to take a flight?

statesaver

gozunda wrote: »

Go where exactly?

China and India i would of thought.

hetuzozaho

gozunda wrote: »

For someone who avowes the need for lowering carbon footprints - she sure seems to be getting around. Of course she could be getting there by Donkey but I sincerely doubt it.

Same old do as I say - not as I do :rolleyes:

Haha I guess so!