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

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

So they are working off of literally thousands of peer reviewed studies about the compounded effects of radiative forcing, backed by by dozens of models and decades of observations and you have "sure it'll be grand".

Fine so, we should just carry on as is, so long as it doesn't cause poor Cartman to be annoyed by the stupid scientists and their stupid science.

Jesus wept.

the 12 year point of no return is massively up for debate , you have decided that me saying climate alarmism needs to be curtailed is 'ahh sure be grand'

until we start getting asia and africa to do anything, europe is just pissing into the wind and going to make me pay for it.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the 12 year point of no return is massively up for debate , you have decided that me saying climate alarmism needs to be curtailed is 'ahh sure be grand'

until we start getting asia and africa to do anything, europe is just pissing into the wind and going to make me pay for it.

Ah the auld pass the buck and blame everything on everyone else. Sure why should I stop battering the wife when the neighbors are still at it?

Akrasia

Orderofchaos wrote: »

Interesting video.

Is a video full of misinformation interesting? I suppose it can be, but not for the same reasons you find it interesting. Just because a YouTuber says something does not make it true, and you can very easily distort true ‘facts’ to paint a picture that is totally unrepresentative of the full picture

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Ah the auld pass the buck and blame everything on everyone else. Sure why should I stop battering the wife when the neighbors are still at it?

the only problem is (and we'll use your analogy) is europe has the EU looking in the window telling us that using a mean tone with the wife is shameful, meanwhile ignoring the MMA fighter neighbour going 6 rounds without gloves on his wife.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the only problem is (and we'll use your analogy) is europe has the EU looking in the window telling us that using a mean tone with the wife is shameful, meanwhile ignoring the MMA fighter neighbour going 6 rounds without gloves on his wife.

Ah yeah, everyone else and the EUSSR. That's who we should blame.

Akrasia

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the 12 year point of no return is massively up for debate , you have decided that me saying climate alarmism needs to be curtailed is 'ahh sure be grand'

until we start getting asia and africa to do anything, europe is just pissing into the wind and going to make me pay for it.

Climate change is cumulative damage. It’s like mercury poisoning. A little bit is bad for you but the more you ingest, the worse it is. At what point was the mad hatter ‘beyond the point of no return’?

One eyed Jack

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Well sorry for the patronising tone. Im serious. Its just there is s much ignorance out there and it is quite galling how much venom is thrown towards a 16 year old just because people dont like to hear what she says.

I'm not going to be like her from tomorrow. Still going to be driving to work. But I do realise she is doing a very important thing and it takes a lot of courage and a lot of spirit to do what she does.

I get the frustration, but ignorance has never been overcome by displaying contempt for the people who don’t share your point of view. It only makes people who disagree with your perspective more determined to perceive you as untrustworthy and become skeptical of your motives.

Greta is coming in for criticism because the adults promoting her have chosen to make her the face of their campaign. The adults who put Greta in that position are responsible for her welfare. It’s they who are responsible for allowing a child to imagine she could have that sort of influence which she very clearly does not have. It’s unfortunate for the child that the adults around her have chosen to put her in the firing line for their own gain.

joe40 wrote: »

Seriously, is that how sensitive some people have got. A message may be important, but if not delivered in the right "tone" it won't be accepted.
If you accept climate change is an issue with drastic consequences, the tone of any message should be the least of your problems.
And young people are accused of been "snowflakes".

People have always been that sensitive, no matter what the issue is. Both sides clamouring for the high moral ground can use the opportunity to claim anyone who disagrees with their perspective is ignorant and doesn’t care and all the rest of it. Don’t tell me that’s about the science of anything only human behaviour.

I don’t accept that climate change is an issue with drastic consequences, that’s essentially the message being conveyed. I think it’s irrational at this point to form such conclusions. I accept that the earths climate is changing, I accept that those changes are being accelerated by human interaction with the environment. I don’t accept that the consequences of human interaction with the environment will lead to drastic consequences for either the environment or for humans. That’s the nuance that’s missing in the “just listen to the scientists” refrain.

I’ve listened to scientists, I’ve listened to many scientists, and that’s precisely why I’m not panicking or fearful of the effects of human interaction on the environment or on the earths climate. If I only listened to scientists who predicted drastic consequences for humanity or the earth, then I might be given to panic, but that reaction wouldn’t just be illogical, it would be completely irrational, and still wouldn’t address the actual issues. To borrow from Greta’s analogy who wants politicians to panic like their house is on fire - completely losing the run of themselves and panicking isn’t going to be helpful to anyone in that scenario.

Treason Season wrote: »

Is it true that she's advocating for the reduction of India and China to pre-industrial levels of development?

Is it true that she wants to see Africa's population reduced to approximately 4 million?

well it would do a hell of a lot more for the environment than taxing europeans.

Treason Season wrote: »

Is it true that she's advocating for the reduction of India and China to pre-industrial levels of development?

Is it true that she wants to see Africa's population reduced to approximately 4 million?

Thats your first post?

And yes its true. Thats her position. Why that doesnt make all the right wingers happy god only knows...

paleoperson

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Thats your first post?

And yes its true. Thats her position. Why that doesnt make all the right wingers happy god only knows...

Who cares what "her position" is, like she doesn't get to have a "position". A position is for politicians or experts in the field with decades of experience. A well-known celebrity taking a "position" on such things is tenuous enough, she's literally a random 16 year old girl, like literally. It's idiocracy at its finest.

It's not about left and right. "Leftists think this while right-wingers think that" - everyone is different.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Greta is coming in for criticism because the adults promoting her have chosen to make her the face of their campaign. The adults who put Greta in that position are responsible for her welfare. It’s they who are responsible for allowing a child to imagine she could have that sort of influence which she very clearly does not have. It’s unfortunate for the child that the adults around her have chosen to put her in the firing line for their own gain.

Are you saying she is just a puppet who couldn't possibly come up with this all by herself? I dare say for al little 16 old schoolgirl she got quite a bit of traction. I wouldn't call that no influence at all. She certainly has more than I do.

lalababa

We've being taking a massive **** on the planet (including ourselves) for the last 150yrs. And it's only getting worse. Only in the last 20yrs have the majority of the mainstream scientists began to circle the wagons, and this is still against a capitalist short term gain culture.

paleoperson wrote: »

Who cares what "her position" is, like she doesn't get to have a "position". A position is for politicians or experts in the field with decades of experience. A well-known celebrity taking a "position" on such things is tenuous enough, she's literally a random 16 year old girl, like literally. It's idiocracy at its finest.

It's not about left and right. "Leftists think this while right-wingers think that" - everyone is different.

For a person who doesnt get to have position she is doing quite well on the recognition front. I dare say better than you and me and millions of others.

And she doesnt need to be an expert. All she needs to do is gather what the experts and even the politicians themselves say and have said for over twenty years and then have promised to change because they themselves said it is necessary to change. And to that she just needs to add the fact that nothing has changed. And her mandate is in fact her low age. She has to live with the consequences much longer than we do.

I think she very much has a position and its quite a strong one too.

SafeSurfer

CalamariFritti wrote: »

paleoperson wrote: »

Who cares what "her position" is, like she doesn't get to have a "position". A position is for politicians or experts in the field with decades of experience. A well-known celebrity taking a "position" on such things is tenuous enough, she's literally a random 16 year old girl, like literally. It's idiocracy at its finest.

It's not about left and right. "Leftists think this while right-wingers think that" - everyone is different.

For a person who doesnt get to have position she is doing quite well on the recognition front. I dare say better than you and me and millions of others.

I think it’s fair to say if an adult was advocating a reduction of the continent of Africa’s population to 4 million they wouldn’t be entertained and lauded by the UN and western politicians and African representatives might take issue with the position also.

The whole carbon taxation agenda is a scam. Individuals will be taxed on the carbon they produce but I will not receive any allowance never mind income from the carbon I sequester from the 300 acres of forestry I own. There is no justice or equality in this if we are all to be treated equally and apply the polluter pats principle. The state penalized me for the carbon I create but rewards itself for the carbon I absorb. Start by treating people fairly.

Where in the name of Christ are people pulling this population of Africa reduced to 4 million lie from?

You lunatics can't even pretend to not be idiots at this stage.

One eyed Jack

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Are you saying she is just a puppet who couldn't possibly come up with this all by herself? I dare say for al little 16 old schoolgirl she got quite a bit of traction. I wouldn't call that no influence at all. She certainly has more than I do.

I’m saying she’s being used as a puppet. She has come up with these ideas because the adults around her, instead of reassuring her that her fears are unfounded, have only fed her fears. It’s no wonder she is the way she is. The adults around her are responsible for Greta feeling the way she does. The reason she’s got the traction she has is because of the adults around her putting her in the position she’s in. The traction she has gained didn’t appear out of nowhere. Her school friends had no interest in her cause for example when she suggested a school strike to them. It would have stopped there had the adults in her life not chosen to use her fears to their advantage. Greta still has no influence, it’s the adults who are using her to promote their message have all the influence over her message and how it is conveyed.

You have far more influence over any children in your life than Greta will ever have. They don’t need you to perform any grandiose gestures that put the focus on one individual. They need to be able to see that their contributions are just as important as Greta’s. I have no interest in heaping praise on Greta because she is just one child. I’d sooner recognise the contributions of children at a more local level. That’s where it counts. Even climate change campaigners themselves will tell you that, while they swan around the globe prosletysing about people’s lack of action. They’ve been doing it since I was a child with the Greenpeace ship!

Campaigns like this tend to run out of steam fairly quickly, as they can’t sustain their momentum. Meanwhile smaller and local initiatives will carry on because they can be directly influenced without being overshadowed by campaigners with simplistic messages trying to instill fear in young people rather than inspire them.

gozunda

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Where in the name of Christ are people pulling this population of Africa reduced to 4 million lie from?
You lunatics can't even pretend to not be idiots at this stage.

Again and again the reduction of the discussion to extreme personalisation with insult 'lunatics' and 'idiots' (plural) . :rolleyes:

A sure indicator that a small number of those doing the most screaming have no valid argument and cannot debate the issues logically or in a civilised way.

But hey what's new. You have just removed yourself from the discussion. Well done ...

gozunda wrote: »

Again and again the reduction of the discussion to extreme personalisation with insult 'lunatics' and 'idiots'. :rolleyes:

A sure indicator that a small number of those doing the most screaming have no valid argument and cannot debate the issues logically or in a civilised way.

But hey what's new. You have just removed yourself from the discussion. Well done ...

Are the weird PMs going to start again now?

I'd prefer if they didn't. Xoxox

Anyone trying to claim a 16 hear old girl is calling for the genocide of approximately 1,212,000,000 Africans as a way of fighting climate change is, absolutely, a f*cking lunatic.

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Anyone trying to claim a 16 hear old girl is calling for the genocide of approximately 1,212,000,000 Africans as a way of fighting climate change is, absolutely, a f*cking lunatic.

True, but so is anyone claiming banning europeans using plastic straws or taxing us more will fight climate change. Threads mad on the lunacy. The worst part is, the africa genocide would help, just nobody is suggesting it because its wrong for so many reasons.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

True, but so is anyone claiming banning europeans using plastic straws or taxing us more will fight climate change. Threads mad on the lunacy. The worst part is, the africa genocide would help, just nobody is suggesting it because its wrong for so many reasons.

No it ****ing wouldn't. Do you have any idea what the total contributions of global GHG are from the entire continent of Africa are?

Per-capita Africa produces 6.6% of the Co2 the US does.

gozunda

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Are the weird PMs going to start again now?I'd prefer if they didn't. Xoxox

Why? Who's being telling you porkies or are you going to just continue attacking those you don't agree with. Strange how its always the same bull**** crap that is trotted out... :rolleyes:

The crap just gets more stupid everyday for sure ...

'll just leave this here as apparently the level of discussion is now in the sewer But hey what's new?

gozunda wrote: »

Why? Who's being telling you porkies or are you going to just continue attacking those you don't agree wit? But hey what's new lol. Strange how its always the same bull**** crap that is trotted out... :rolleyes:

The crap just gets more stupid everyday for sure ...

So you don't send weird PMs go people after they call out your blatant lies and misstruths in posts?

And I don't have one in my inbox?

Ok then.
Maybe it wasn't you, maybe it was your alternate personality.