Tell me how wrote: » SafeSurfer wrote: » So the message she has related is a. I want you to panic. b. I don’t want you to listen to me, listen to the scientists. Is there a possibility that these institutions of power want to whip up the fear and panic peddled by Greta so they can persuade people that the increase in their power and control over people’s freedom is necessary? Do you not think that it is unusual within a 12 months of starting a campaign a child is being invited to address parliaments and the UN, without any expertise or solutions? Only offering emotion and calling upon those present to panic?Do you not contemplate for a moment that she is being manipulated in order to manipulate you? Absolutely not. I'm not foolish enough to believe every word which comes out of a politicians mouth, I mean, look at those in the UK saying they are fighting for the common man while hedging bets that the pound will collapse in the event of a No Deal Brexit. Or Trump saying he is going to drain the swamp. Or Irish ministers saying they have heard the demand from people for green action and then signing oil exploration deals a few days later. But, Greta has used those institutions to get her message out there. Now, they cannot say they didn't hear her and while it doesn't mean they will automatically act, it does mean they have acknowledged that there is a problem. Would you think she'd be better off sitting on her hands and saying there is no point?
SafeSurfer wrote: » So the message she has related is a. I want you to panic. b. I don’t want you to listen to me, listen to the scientists. Is there a possibility that these institutions of power want to whip up the fear and panic peddled by Greta so they can persuade people that the increase in their power and control over people’s freedom is necessary? Do you not think that it is unusual within a 12 months of starting a campaign a child is being invited to address parliaments and the UN, without any expertise or solutions? Only offering emotion and calling upon those present to panic?Do you not contemplate for a moment that she is being manipulated in order to manipulate you?
SafeSurfer wrote: » No I think her marketing campaign has been phenomenal. If I had books to sell rather than solutions to offer I would follow her lead. I thought it was particularly ironic to see the number of children carrying posters bearing the legend “the emperor has no clothes”. Because I think this emperor has no clothes apart from an expertly selected PR wardrobe.Personally I have always been very environmentally conscious and abhor wasteful use of resources but I believe the demonization of carbon is irrational. Seeking to reduce carbon emissions over the next 30 years to the level they were when warming was already occurring is even more irrational. In my opinion.
Veritas Libertas wrote: » I don't think acknowledgement of the problem to be the problem. I think the problem is dumping all that co2 and methane into the atmosphere by the 7.53billion of us and our subsidiaries. We need a fix that doesn't ask people to starve. We have a few potential technological fixes in the pipeline already. As another poster pointed out, in 1894 The Times reported “In 50 years, every street in London will be buried under nine feet of manure.” because of the sheer number of horses needed to get people around. Who could have imagined cars would have saved the environment at the time. I would prefer those millions of students were advised to take up STEM fields by Greta and actually help solve the problem.
Tell me how wrote: » SafeSurfer wrote: » No I think her marketing campaign has been phenomenal. If I had books to sell rather than solutions to offer I would follow her lead. I thought it was particularly ironic to see the number of children carrying posters bearing the legend “the emperor has no clothes”. Because I think this emperor has no clothes apart from an expertly selected PR wardrobe.Personally I have always been very environmentally conscious and abhor wasteful use of resources but I believe the demonization of carbon is irrational. Seeking to reduce carbon emissions over the next 30 years to the level they were when warming was already occurring is even more irrational. In my opinion. I find that hard to believe as I do think if you were conscious you would be supportive of her efforts instead of trying to undermine them.
SafeSurfer wrote: » Do you think everybody who is concerned for the environment and the future well being of our planet has to buy in to the Private Fraser ramblings of a teenager?
Tell me how wrote: » The Swedish Parliament, The EU Parliament, the UK Parliament, the US congress, the UN are not in the habit of inviting screaming misguided children mirroring Private Fraser to speak to them.
Tell me how wrote: » So you and Greta are on the same page. Given that, why do you have a problem with her?
Veritas Libertas wrote: » Where did I say I had a problem with her? She's a child.I'm annoyed that she is being co-opted and led to believe that she's actually doing something worthwhile. I'm annoyed that the same people that got Soph banned are encouraging Greta.
Tell me how wrote: » First bold part, she is not being co-opted,
Tell me how wrote: » First bold part, she is not being co-opted, she is doing something worthwhile.
Second bold part, had to check out Soph (hadn't heard of her) she published a video threatening LGBT people and as a consequence was removed from Youtube. Thats on her.
Woodsie1 wrote: » How in the fcuk could you know that? You cant,youre full of sh1t.
Deleted User wrote: » oh i dont see how you could think that. you must have meant the opposite oh i dont see how you could think that. you must have meant the opposite. ^^^ this is you in this thread
Tell me how wrote: » Just repeating your point that you think it is BS, doesn't make it so and therefore it is obviously difficult to figure out or accept for you for some reason.Here is someone who has motivated the aforementioned world renowned policy and government organisations to invite her to speak and motivated the largest globally coordinated march in the history of the planet and you can't understand it. And now your response is that someone who thinks she deserves praise for what she has done is a groupie? Really? Lot of groupies out there so.
gozunda wrote: » Just pointing out what is obvious. Sorry that doesn't suit. She has 'motivated world policy'? Does she also now dictate to the IPCC UN etc? She is an invitee to these conferences btw. Just one of many - amongst many others. But who has the power here - government organisations or greta? Does greta have any relevant qualifications of expertise in what she is pontificating about? No she does not. She is simply misguided teenager who for some reason believes the end of civilisation will happen in 10 years 3 months ... And what is strange is that apparently no one has got through to her and she is still spouting the same deranged alarmism. With the effect we have kids on these various marches believing inexplicably what she is saying and bunking of school and believing her 'fear' and 'panic'. People need to take the wool from their eyes on this. She is not the new messiah btw. She is simply a kid screaming unfounded alarmism - but bizarrely all the adults in the room seem to be afraid to point that out some strange reason.
Wanderer78 wrote: » say wha! actually,say wha to all of the above!
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."
gozunda wrote: » Yeah 'wha' indeed. This taken from one of her many speeches. She has repeated this many times and we have now have kids on marches shouting out that the world is going to end. It has been debunked btw by no less than an IOCC scientist. Ms Thunberg: :rolleyes:
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » Drop the faux outrage. The wackier cults get the more extreme are the things they do. People are already getting themselves sterlised in the name of climate change, only a matter of time before they start commiting suicide.
Tell me how wrote: » Woodsie1 wrote: » How in the fcuk could you know that? You cant,youre full of sh1t. I'm sorry, but what makes you think she is? She started on her own, has consistently had the same message, and consistently strikes in the same way. There is no doubt but that others are using the increased focus on climate conversation to get their message out (why wouldn't they) but that does not mean she has been co-opted. Be real. Is it envy or jealousy that a 16 year old can have been so influential or what is that has so many (on this thread) so aggrieved by her?
Deleted User wrote: » Greta is the David Icke of her generation.
cfuserkildare wrote: » Would anyone have taken any notice if Greta was Not Autistic? Would her parents have pushed they're agendas on her if she wasn't on the Spectrum?
drunkmonkey wrote: » Her minder is the youth ambassador for Bono's one foundation. Luisa-Marie Neubauer
Wanderer78 wrote: » and?
drunkmonkey wrote: » She's a puppet on a string.
gozunda wrote: » Just pointing out what is obvious. Sorry that doesn't suit. She has 'motivated world policy'? Does she also now dictate to the IPCC UN etc? She is an invitee to these conferences btw. Just one of many - amongst many others. But who has the power here - government organisations or greta? Her 'message' seriously? She is pushing alarmism with 'fear' and 'panic'. You even claim "She cannot fix everything" . No - she can't fix anything. Does greta have any relevant qualifications of expertise in what she is pontificating about? No she does not. She is simply misguided teenager who for some reason believes the end of civilisation will happen in 10 years 3 months ... And what is strange is that apparently no one has got through to her and she is still spouting the same deranged alarmism. With the effect we have kids on these various marches believing inexplicably what she is saying and bunking of school and believing her 'fear' and 'panic'. People need to take the wool from their eyes on this. She is not the new messiah btw. She is simply a kid screaming unfounded alarmism - but bizarrely all the adults in the room seem to be afraid to point that out some strange reason and are following her mutterings blindly
Wanderer78 wrote: » we clearly interpret that completely differently, its clearly obvious that this means we re probably gonna surpass an irreversible tipping point in the 12 years, id imagine most adults realise this is what is meant by that statement from the ipcc
gozunda wrote: » Its not me interpreting tyst btw. Its the adults carry banners stating '12 years left to save the world's and kids shouting that the world is going to end or wtte. The IPCC do not mention 'tipping points' in their report btw.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
