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

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

Greta is doing something productive. She is drawing attention to the issue on a global scale.
If you believe so much is wrong, why do you have a problem with someone doing what they can, trying to live by example and encouraging others to do the same.

A world wildlife report recently detailed the loss of animal numbers, largely because of human action. When are we going to say 'oh, let's do something.'? when it is in fact too late?

This thread has now developed in to a lot of people saying 'well yes, there's a problem', but at the same time decrying Greta for trying to promote action. Think about that, it really is bizarre.

Greta is evidently little more than a teenager scared by populist doomsday ideas such as her bizarre belief that civilisation is going to end in 10 years time. Those ideas are helping nothing.

'Loss of animal numbers '? I take it that is the same 'loss of animal numbers' which has been hijacked by extinction rebellion and similar such as greta et al?

The thing is that what's referred to as the 'sixth great extinction' has been ongoing for quite a while. And overpopulation and overconsumption has already been firmly targeted as the principal agent ...

Heres an article from 2017 - BG (before greta)

Scientists analysed both common and rare species and found billions of regional or local populations have been lost. They blame human overpopulation and overconsumption for the crisis ...

Nearly half of the 177 mammal species surveyed lost more than 80% of their distribution between 1900 and 2015

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/10/earths-sixth-mass-extinction-event-already-underway-scientists-warn

Why yes, there's a 'problem', but it has nothing to with gretas doomsday rantings. Bizarre that some think it does.

youknowitstrue

gozunda wrote: »

Greta is evidently little more than a teenager scared by populist doomsday ideas such as her bizarre belief that civilisation is going to end in 10 years time. Those ideas are helping nothing.

And overpopulation and overconsumption has already been firmly targeted as the principal agent ...

The best thing Greta and her followers could do is get their tubes tied/Vasectomy./s
Nothing will change as long as the west keeps feeding the naturally unsustainable population growth in certain African and Asian countries, the West can eliminate carbon emission completely and all go Vegan, wont matter a jot with families of 10 being the norm in certain African/Asian countries.
#savetheplanetdontdonatetocharities

Tell me how

gozunda wrote: »

Greta is evidently little more than a teenager scared by populist doomsday ideas such as her bizarre belief that civilisation is going to end in 10 years time. Those ideas are helping nothing.

......


The thing is that what's referred to as the 'sixth great extinction' has been ongoing for quite a while. And overpopulation and overconsumption has already been firmly targeted as the principal agent ...

Fair play to Greta for being a vegan so.

Now, did she say civilisation is going to end in 10 years, or that beyond that time the damage will be irreparable?
Big difference and I think you know the answer. I know you've been told it at least.

Hal3000

I don’t understand society anymore. Everything is so so fickle. We award Greta for the 10 minutes of Environmental work she has done and been involved in. We now totally ignore those who don’t seek the limelight and who have been campaigning and volunteering tirelessly to improve our communities for years. Why do we do this ? Because it’s easier, and we just love a good bandwagon. Well Mr Lord Mayor of Dublin just climbed all over one. What a shambles of an award.

Tell me how

Hal3000 wrote: »

I don’t understand society anymore. Everything is so so fickle. We award Greta for the 10 minutes of Environmental work she has done and been involved in, we ignore those who have been campaigning and volunteering tirelessly in our communities for years. Why ? Because we love a good bandwagon and the Lord Mayor just climbed all over one...

Well, given she's been at it every week for over a year and pretty much full time for the last few minutes, the 10 minutes is hardly accurate.

Also, she gets more attention because she has motivated people on a global scale.
It is very likely that there are a great many more acting at a local scale because of the awareness which she brought.

Hal3000

Tell me how wrote: »

Well, given she's been at it every week for over a year and pretty much full time for the last few minutes, the 10 minutes is hardly accurate.

Also, she gets more attention because she has motivated people on a global scale.
It is very likely that there are a great many more acting at a local scale because of the awareness which she brought.

Stuff had to be earned years back. Now a few posts on social media can get you a Nobel prize.

biko

Nigel Farage vs Extinction Rebellion protester Sarah Lunnon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vOxgzIeSt4

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

This is the key part "According to the media and statements from Michael Mann and his lawyer . ." What about Timothy Balls opinion? He was also awarded costs by the court which should be a strong indicator why Mann lost his case. I've been following this since its inception in 2011. This case was an attempt by Michael Mann and his lawyers using a technique known as strategic lawsuit against public participation against Timothy Ball.

Breaking: Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann




Mann lost his own case because of his own obstruction and has been ordered by the court to pay Tim Balls legal costs. You can read the judges opinion here. The judge took factors such as Mr. Balls age and the death of witnesses on Mr. Balls behalf into account in his dismissal, that was not the primary reason.


Michael Mann also has a case against Mark Steyn that has been dragging on for several years as well. He does not seem to be in a hurry to settle that one either. That will rumble on for a while as well.


Manns work is discredited because his Hockey Stick model wiped out both the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age, both of which were well documented in history, literature, art and science. His unwillingness to release his data and model so others could attempt to duplicate his results took this from the realm of science to mere political activity.

As I said about Ball before:

Dr. Ball is the one who began suing other people, and lost the case. Then when he got sued for defamation, the judge let him off, because the article he wrote was so discreditable to himself, that the average person was unlikely to believe his claims - thus they didn't meet the criteria of being defamotory (i.e. basically being such an obvious and massive bullshitter, and having a reputation as such, bizarrely transformed his claims from defamatory, to not-defamatory). In the latest case, Ball's defamatory writing was retracted and an apoloy issued, but because the court case ran so long, there was no judgement on the defamation, and it was struck out with costs awarded to Ball, due to the delays.

The guy is a serial bullshitter - with a reputation as such.

He completely lacks any credibility.

The hockey stick graph was a non-issue, down to wide margins of error - multiple different independent datasets, compiled by different people, replicated very similar temperature findings - it's a non-issue among scientists, only propagandists/doubt-peddlers go on about it still.

Tell me how

Hal3000 wrote: »

Stuff had to be earned years back. Now a few posts on social media can get you a Nobel prize.

She has a year put in to her demonstrations.
She didn't win the Nobel Prize.

If you were around in the 50's, you'd probably have been complaining that Rosa Parks was getting a lot of attention for just sitting on her ar*e.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

Fair play to Greta for being a vegan so. Now, did she say civilisation is going to end in 10 years, or that beyond that time the damage will be irreparable?Big difference and I think you know the answer. I know you've been told it at least.

Lol. And yet the same kid and others are blathering on about the sixth mass extinction as if it has just been discovered by climate alarmists!

Greta is certainly no better than anyone else claiming to live in a manner which helps reduce the use of scare resources. Something she evidently needs to learn about imo.

Re the end of civilisation - this is what the teenager has been claiming

Around the year 2030, 10 years 252 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control, that will most likely lead to the end of our civilisation as we know it"

This been highlighted as complete bolloxology by one of the IPCC scientists.

Please stop saying something globally bad is going to happen in 2030. Bad stuff is already happening and every half a degree of warming matters, but the IPCC does not draw a “planetary boundary” at 1.5°C beyond which lie climate dragons.

Even a cursory reading of the IPCC report will back this up. But bizarrely you know that already

Tell me how

gozunda wrote: »

Lol. And yet the same kid and others are blathering on about the sixth mass extinction as if it has just been discovered by climate alarmists!

Greta is certainly no better than anyone else claiming to live in a manner which helps reduce the use of scare resources. Something she evidently needs to learn about...

Re the end of civilisation - this is what the teenager has been claiming



This been highlighted as complete bolloxology by one if the IPCC scientists.



Even a cursory reading of the IPCC report will backs this up. But bizarrely you know that already

You're now posting quotes from her which undermine your earlier posts.
Keep going.

Hal3000

Tell me how wrote: »

She has a year put in to her demonstrations.
She didn't win the Nobel Prize.

If you were around in the 50's, you'd probably have been complaining that Rosa Parks was getting a lot of attention for just sitting on her ar*e.

Oh sorry a year... my mistake. She totally deserves it now.

Tell me how

biko wrote: »

Nigel Farage vs Extinction Rebellion protester Sarah Lunnon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vOxgzIeSt4

Did you actually watch/listen to that?

Nigel was simply coming out with the same rhetoric which we have seen on this thread. Very interesting where she asked him to come and meet climate scientists and he refused to say he would meet, unless there are scientists representing both sides. She correctly pointed out that there aren't many scientists on his side but he's thinking is that if we get 1 scientist from either side, at least we can pretend it's a 50/50 argument. It isn't.

Also, his comment on planting loads of trees was interesting. This is a guy who suggested that the whole of northern UK is sitting on a goldmine of natural gas and should carry out wholesale fracking and here he is lamenting that the environment is different to what it was in the past.

It was funny when he had to question the purpose of the extinction rebellion but agreed with her that the reason she is on the show is because the rebellion has created awareness leading to her being invited on.

Reading the comments on it were not too dissimilar to reading this thread. Lot's of blase statements without any consideration of reality.

Oh, not to mention, Nigel Farage........ hardly a bastion of society and advocate for common good.

Thanks for posting it, it said a lot.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

You're now posting quotes from her which undermine your earlier posts. Keep going.

You're Funny . Exact same quotes from greta etc as previous. But hey you also know that.

rafatoni

Has Veruca Salt got her golden egg yet?

JJayoo

Tell me how wrote: »

She has a year put in to her demonstrations.
She didn't win the Nobel Prize.

If you were around in the 50's, you'd probably have been complaining that Rosa Parks was getting a lot of attention for just sitting on her ar*e.

That's some comparison.....

Tell me how

JJayoo wrote: »

That's some comparison.....

You think people saw Rosa in that light in 1955?
I am 100% sure that many of the personalities railing against Greta here would have been lined up to rant about her not knowing her place.

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Keep in mind the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) are a committee they are not experts on climate and their remit is ONLY to report on climate change that can be attributed to humans, meaning there is bias in their reports.

The shoddy methods and antics of the IPCC process are described in the book The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World's Top Climate Expert. I am registered as a reviewer for Working Group I of the future IPCC AR6 reports and you can be too. You have until the 13th December if you want to get in on working group II.

I had to agree to this

Oh look, a book from another bullshit artist with ties to Koch-funded think tanks - who has penchant for pretending that issues, long since settled by climate scientists, are still current...

If the IPCC's review process is so open, that even a propagandist like yourself can get on the review working group - then that's just an argument in favour of their openness to being critiqued - I'm sure they'll make short work of your review contributions...

You are going to contribute to the review, right? Seeing as you have so much to offer them with your 'expertise'...

KyussB

Tell me how wrote: »

Seems to me to be more like a plan to undermine future reports.

'Sure anyone can have an impact on what goes in to that, I even signed up and I know nothing about the science'.

Well played.

Yea it's like his implied aim of undermining such a document is meant to make his - already blatantly propagandistic - posting in this thread more credible somehow, rather than just showing/confirming a penchant for fraudulent/deceitful behaviour...

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

You are basing your claim on consensus rather than science. You should also be aware that the so called 97% consensus has been discredited these are the list of papers that John Cook (an activist behind the website skepticalscience) used, and of the of the 11,944 abstracts that Cook et al examined, only 64 claimed explicitly that humans are the main cause of global warming. NASA have been asked to remove that claim.

Oh look, a writer associated with Koch-funded think tank, and another link from a Koch-funded think-tank - both think tanks having zero credibility in anything, having a many decades long history of deceit...

It's the typical whack-a-mole propaganda tactic from Libertarians: Consistently presenting sources who don't have any scientific credibility, but have oodles of notoriety for being associated with propagandists.

SafeSurfer

Tell me how wrote: »

You think people saw Rosa in that light in 1955?
I am 100% sure that many of the personalities railing against Greta here would have been lined up to rant about her not knowing her place.

So those who are sceptical about the sudden climate panic are “deniers” in the same vein as those who deny the Holocaust ever happened and now you are “100% sure”, not 97% sure, but “100.% sure” that if current posters were alive 70 years ago you would know how they felt about the issues of the day in the 1950s?

And you wonder why people are sceptical?

KyussB

If you want to see a true example of 'greenwashing', and a green energy scheme demanding mountains of cynicism, the biomass industry is the one to look at:
https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/10/14/the-great-biomass-boondoggle/

TLDR - burning forests for fuel, with opaque supply chains that include wood from protected forests, and counting this as zero-carbon 'renewable' energy, despite both increasing carbon emissions and reducing carbon sinkage from forests.

A genuine massive scam, worsening emissions and attracting significant government subsidies - and a major issue even with EU policy...

Tell me how

SafeSurfer wrote: »

So those who are sceptical about the sudden climate panic are “deniers” in the same vein as those who deny the Holocaust ever happened and now you are “100% sure”, not 97% sure, but “100.% sure” that if current posters were alive 70 years ago you would know how they felt about the issues of the day in the 1950s?

And you wonder why people are sceptical?

Ever hear the phrase, 'if someone shows you who they are, believe them'?

Within the last page or so one poster implied the climate issue can never be fixed because of the family planning practices of people in Africa.

A number of other posters are very heavily involved on threads relating to immigration, asylum seekers and Mr Trump, all the time exhibiting a consistency in their view point. So yeah, I am 100% sure they would not have been supportive of Rosa in 1955.

And lets be clear, because I know what the next post would likely be, I said certain posters, not all posters, certain posters.

And, if you think me having an opinion which may be wrong (I am human after all), validates peoples scepticism on the climate, then again, that just shows you (or they) don't understand how science works.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

You think people saw Rosa in that light in 1955?
I am 100% sure that many of the personalities railing against Greta here would have been lined up to rant about her not knowing her place.

I note you do not like other posters simply showing what greta is claiming is rubbish and has little to do with what the scientists are saying and that her travels in the US and elsewhere amount to little more than a hypocritical PR stunt. Greta does not need thrown underneath the bus - the greta fanclub seems to have done that fairly spectacularly themselves

Gaoth Laidir

Who is this Rosa?

Tell me how

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Who is this Rosa?

Don't worry about it.

gozunda

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Who is this Rosa?

I think Tmh is bizarrely referencing Rosa Parks who helped highlight and bring an end to discrimination and segregation during the civil rights era in the US.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks

Quite hilarious that a wealthy kid from a privileged background could be held in comparison. We know greta thinks her childhood was stolen by all the adults but seriously?

JJayoo

gozunda wrote: »

I think Tmh is bizarrely referencing Rosa Parks who helped highlight and bring an end to discrimination and segregation during the civil rights era in the US.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks

Quite hilarious that a wealthy kid from a privileged background could be held in comparison. We know greta thinks her childhood was stolen by all the adults but seriously?

Ya like how does that even pop into a person's head.

Straight onto the ignore list.

Gaoth Laidir

Just in case Greta's reading this, don't worry, the Arctic has not lost any sea ice in the past decade. The trend has been flat, the flattest of the satellite era. I think you maybe forgot to mention it.

Gaoth Laidir

Tell me how wrote: »

Don't worry about it.

I wasn't worried, I was just wondering who she was.