Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » 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.
Thargor wrote: » Oh look who's back pretending the plastic bag/straw/cutlery ban hasnt been explained to him very slowly and carefully in 200 of these threads before. You see Eric, and concentrate now, nobody is suggesting reducing single use plastic will solve our problems, nobody is suggesting that planting a few trees will solve all our problems, nobody is suggesting that preventing the destruction of peat bogs will solve all our problems. Nobody is suggesting that some 16 year olds publicity campaign thats got you so excited is going to solve all our problems and on and on and on. This is the tricky bit now, are you ready? You have to take all the minor benefits from all these thousands of initiatives and add them together, I know its hard but you have to try, because zooming in on one singular issue like banning plastic straws and claiming thats all the lefties are doing to save the planet makes you look a bit thick you see?
Eric Cartman wrote: » And how about I explain to you, that dealing with the all the bigger problems in africa / asia / south america first will add up to a lot more, then tackle the US power generation emissions, Europe has done so much for the environment, theres nothing left to do to us that isnt punative to normal living, whereas getting the indians to stop ruining rivers with plastic is a tangible step.
Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » Why do you keep conflating environmental damage with climate damage? They aren't the same thing. Stop.
MarquisDeSad wrote: » I wouldn't bother with himself. See his previous interactions with Akrasia. Never wants to discuss the topic on hand.. Just picks on words and whinges about them. Best throw on ignore. Your not alone about the PMs. Plenty others have received weird ones from himself aswell.
Thargor wrote: » And why can he not get it in his skull that its not an either/or choice? We need to do everything across the board...
Blueshoe wrote: » The real elephant in the room World population predictions: By 2070, the bulk of the world's population growth is predicted to take place in Africa: of the additional 2.4 billion people projected between 2015 and 2050, 1.3 billion will be added in Africa, 0.9 billion in Asia and only 0.2 billion in the rest of the world.
Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » The entire continent of Africa currently produces far less than 10% (current approximations are below 5%) of all emissions. Unless their population is going to hit 10 billion your demented concern is extremely misplaced. And there are ways to slow the population growth in Africa, like canceling debts, stopping one-sided "tide aid" scams from the global north, and allowing African countries to invest in education and development instead of having their resources stolen on a massive scale by a handful of massive corporations. But nobody wants to talk about that. Just faux concern about potential population growth in continent that contributes least, by multiples, to climate change.
MarquisDeSad wrote: » Subcomandante Marcos wrote: » 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. I wouldn't bother with himself. See his previous interactions with Akrasia. Never wants to discuss the topic on hand.. Just picks on words and whinges about them. Best throw on ignore. Your not alone about the PMs. Plenty others have received weird ones from himself aswell.
SafeSurfer wrote: » “Never wants to discuss the topic on (sic) hand” That’s a bit rich from someone who claimed I copied and pasted a post half a dozen times rather than discuss the issue. Sad.
Blueshoe wrote: » That figure will naturally keep going higher. Especially if African countries become developed. There would be massive infrastructure projects and energy needs coupled with a population boom. Carbon out the Ying Yang. Meanwhile Ireland produces 0.13% of global emissions. The elephant is still in the room
MarquisDeSad wrote: » SafeSurfer wrote: » “Never wants to discuss the topic on (sic) hand” That’s a bit rich from someone who claimed I copied and pasted a post half a dozen times rather than discuss the issue. Sad. So where did you copy and paste that nonsense from?.
SafeSurfer wrote: » Clever boy.
MarquisDeSad wrote: » Not as clever as your copy and past skillz.
SafeSurfer wrote: » Which you claim with no evidence. But hey what’s new. If this is your level of debate I can see why you are so impressed by teenagers.
Hal3000 wrote: » I’m a bit late to this post, but here are my thoughts. There are activists championing causes for years now who get little or no coverage for their efforts. Along comes a young kid screaming at Governments and the media see a much more interesting angle than say the crusty 50 year old environmentalist. That’s why she’s popular, she’s done very little in the way of hard work in activist circles. That’s not her fault as she’s young, but in environmental circles she’s known as a token activist at this moment. The media will tire of her soon and then we will see the real Greta and if her dedication can continue when she’s not in the limelight or getting huge credit anymore. Remember the activist is not the person who says we should clean the beach, the activist is the person who cleans it.
Pa ElGrande wrote: » This angry kid campaign is from Greenpeace 12 years ago. . .The alarmists love to use children, and fill their little heads with scary predictions.
Hal3000 wrote: » I’m a bit late to this post, but here are my thoughts. There are activists championing causes for years now who get little or no coverage for their efforts. Along comes a young kid screaming at Governments and the media see a much more interesting angle than say the crusty 50 year old environmentalist.
Hal3000 wrote: » I’m a bit late to this post, but here are my thoughts. There are activists championing causes for years now who get little or no coverage for their efforts. Along comes a young kid screaming at Governments and the media see a much more interesting angle than say the crusty 50 year old environmentalist. That’s why she’s popular, she’s done very little in the way of hard work in activist circles as opposed to someone who has been volunteering for 15 years on these issues. That’s not her fault as she’s young, but in environmental circles she’s still only known as a token activist at this moment. The media will tire of her soon and then we will see the real Greta and if her dedication can continue when she’s not in the limelight or getting huge credit anymore. Remember the activist is not the person who says we should clean the beach, the activist is the person who cleans it.
paleoperson wrote: » You'd think they could at least have picked someone who had done something notable. Out of the tens of millions of young people in europe, what about the ones who have won science competitions and broken ground in many different ways. Malwala (whatever her name is) had a freaking bullet shot to her head while she was speaking up for female rights. And everyone was behind her at first. But after a while even she started getting tiresome, to me anyway. It seemed like they were just bringing her on for the sake of it and promote her book. This Greta thing is just dumb.
MarquisDeSad wrote: » What level of debate. I made it clear I wasn't going to debate you on your 'nwo' nonsense. As I said I'm just disappointed you couldn't even be original with it. Funny, almost comedic but not your own work.
Tell me how wrote: » She's a vegan, she's trying to minimize her carbon footprint. She's doing as much as any 16 year old could be expected to do. What more do you expect?
Hal3000 wrote: » For the media to latch on to someone who’s actually done years of environmental activism or say a scientist who can speak with academic credibility? You’re right she’s only 16 so I don’t agree she should be a spokesperson for climate change and tell me how to live my life. In my book such a title is earned by endless / selfless years of dedication to a cause and not by being young or by how many followers you have on social media. Plus all this so called high level activism, you think Governments really care about her ? Oh no here comes Greta, better change those policies lads. I’m sure Trump is shi**ing it. She’d be much better off making a difference on the ground or in her community with actual tangible results. Mobilizing communities and direction action is how you make a difference. Imagine 8 billion people did that ? Also constant posting on Insta sailing and sailing a boat to America ? Sorry but I can’t see any tangible improvements to the environment by doing that. Social media is hollow, people comment, share, like and do fu*k all so I don’t actually get what she’s trying to do ?
gozunda wrote: » I do hope greta at least understands that the $10 million dollar sailboat - the hull of which is made from Carbon Fibre which is, in turn, made from petroleum is not recyclable. Added to the fact that the some crew of the boat will have to fly back. Crazy stunt at best ... This kind of thing is now popping up on Twitter...
Tell me how wrote: » 1.4M students joined her on a dedicated strike last March. That's quite a lot of awareness raised. (If you're going to say everyone knows about climate change anyway, you'll find plenty people on this thread who say they don't think it's happening)
Hal3000 wrote: » They protested ? How much waste was generated ? What action was achieved by these protests ? Awareness isn’t worth sh*t anymore.
