drunkmonkey wrote: » 1million people waiting to see a consultant and we're worried about it maybe getting a little warmer in Athlone in a few hundred years. The more this crap goes on the closer our Trump moment comes and I'll welcome it. It's time to drain the swamp.
Mebuntu wrote: » The more I think about it, Governments and the likes of the UN should not be giving credence to the crazy rantings of a child by giving her access to address them. The hypocritical part is that they all know she's talking hysterical nonsense but all are terrified to say it in public.
joe40 wrote: » The IPCC reports and the opinions of the world's climate scientists are non ambiguous, climate change is a major problem facing the world. If people don't want to accept that fine, but using a 16 year old as your reason is cowardly.Climate change is either a problem or its not, individuals have to choose their position. Greta Thurberg is ultimately a sideshow and should not be a major influence either way.The consensus of scientific opinion should be.
:"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."
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.
Tell me how wrote: » Yeah, Peter Casey did well in his last elections didn't he.
SafeSurfer wrote: » Is it possible Greta Thunberg is doing more harm than good to the climate change debate?
sabat wrote: » Getting very off-topic here but (a) are fossil fuels infinite? (b) is it a good idea to tear open the planet and burn it?
Tell me how wrote: » So, if I understand you correctly, the EU, the UN, US congress, UK Parliament, amongst others are too terrified to not allow Greta to speak. Terrified of who should they not allow her to do so can I ask?
is_that_so wrote: » I think the point is that they are not comfortable commenting on it it all in public. She can say what she likes.
Capra wrote: » I'm beginning to think Greta Thunberg is a plant by ExxonMobil or Shell. I've never before seen anyone as unlikeable put forward as the spokesperson of a campaign. I watched he 5 minute speech there and it was awful. She is a horrible little tramp. How could anyone who isn't already on her side be expected to like her? Nasty, humourless, angry, etc. These are not traits that win people over to your side of the argument.
Tell me how wrote: » Same question, why wouldn't they be comfortable?
Capra wrote: » She is a horrible little tramp.
is_that_so wrote: » Facing down a child's opinion in public is not a winner for any adult. You just look like a bully. Usually letting them blow it off is the best approach.
NSAman wrote: » What time is that sail boat due to leave back to Sweden?
Tell me how wrote: » That's a weak argument, they didn't need to invite her if they didn't want to. They could have just ignored her should they have disagreed, you're suggesting that this very significant organisations are so afraid of her message, that they invited her in to their meetings to speak? Doesn't make sense.
1800_Ladladlad wrote: » Trump got up and left 10 minutes in :pac::D I don't blame him.
is_that_so wrote: » In fairness she has not chosen to be the head of anything. Others have done that. The school strike idea did capture the imagination of kids and that's a good thing in its own right in the sense that it may produce a generation more mindful of the need to change. But there are no guarantees of that either.
Tell me how wrote: » After analytically determining the merits of the argument no doubt.
splinter65 wrote: » All that’s happened is that lots of ordinarily anxious teenagers are now gripped with an irrational fear not seen since the end of the Cold War.
NSAman wrote: » Doesn’t need that much brainpower to be honest...;) UN = BS
is_that_so wrote: » I don't doubt her sincerity but I do doubt the motives of some of those latching onto her crusade. This latest event is laudable in that it's absolutely consistent with her beliefs but still a gimmick in the real world.
Tell me how wrote: » NSAman wrote: » Doesn’t need that much brainpower to be honest...;) UN = BS Really? And who do you think are trusted institutions which exist in western society today?
realitykeeper wrote: » Greta is very strong on this point, repeating time and again that she and other activists do not want praise or admiration, just action. I do not see her actions as a gimmick. She travels by sea (including freight ships) and not by air.
