NewMan1982 wrote: » Where would one find info on what Gretas team is predicting what will happen and when? Preferably an article not overly scientific
Thelonious Monk wrote: » I own my own house in the d5 Ghetto. My parents live in Spain. I’ll go for a beer with you guys if you want. I’m in Switzerland now for work drunk af though. I flew here Greta hates that jaz, flights and ****.
KyussB wrote: » Amazing how one-sided the 'skepticism' is, from these posters...
A MODEST PROPOSAL For preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick. by Dr. Jonathan Swiftsource
Enough is Enough! wrote: » It's sad to see a young obsessed with the end of the world. She should be enjoying her youth.
NIMAN wrote: » Started to listen to this video, which was linked to the last one above.This guy is apparently the founder of Extinction Rebellion, and at 3:50 he says "we are facing mass starvation in the next 10 years, social collapse and the possible extinction of the human race"I'll have what he's smoking. He really does sound like a total loon. I hope this guy is still alive in 20yrs and is brought back on to TV to answer why the planet and all us are still alive.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HyaxctatdA
NIMAN wrote: » . . . I'll have what he's smoking. He really does sound like a total loon. I hope this guy is still alive in 20yrs and is brought back on to TV to answer why the planet and all us are still alive. . . . .
Thelonious Monk wrote: » It amazes me how afraid you all are of having less money and lower standard of living. That is essential for a cleaner earth. How would you ever have survived in harder times in the past? And you call us pink haired folk snowflakes... Bring on massive carbon taxes and less money and stuff for everyone I say, if only to annoy the right wing loonies in this thread.
Aegir wrote: » There’s no toilet on the boat. How is crapping in the sea good for the environment?
Geuze wrote: » When you read this, you wonder are all our efforts in vain:https://www.railwaygazette.com/news/1-800-km-menghua-coal-railway-opens/54741.article 200,000,000 tonnes of coal............
Pa ElGrande wrote: » China has positioned itself as a global leader on climate action its already implementing the Green new deal building modern infrastructure, switching to gas (made from coal) and planting trees and the Paris Accord allows them to keep increasing their consumption until 2030 by which time Greta tells us we are doomed. Yes, you did read that right environmental activists have hailed China as the world’s de facto “leader” on fighting global warming despite both they and India increasing their coal consumption.
jim-mcdee wrote: » Can understand the thinking of the climate deniers really it's human nature to deny what's not in front of your face. They will deny it until the costal towns start getting flooded. Until crops start to fail due to supporting ecosystem collapse. Then they will start to panic. The earth took millions of years to evolve and balance itself. You can't chop down most of the world's forest and also release co2 in massive amounts in a relatively short timeframe and expect the world to carry on as normal. What we do today does not have immediate effect. It will take many years for the environment to adjust. I think our best chance is technology that will remove co2 from the environment because I believe most of the damage is already done and we are now on a delayed feedback.
lleti wrote: » The problem with people like you is that you think the way things are now are the way things always have been and always should be. Take a look at the Azure window - a rock in Malta that collapsed due to erosion, a natural thing. The Sahara wasn't always a desert. Ireland wasn't always green.
jim-mcdee wrote: » . . . . I think our best chance is technology that will remove co2 from the environment because I believe most of the damage is already done and we are now on a delayed feedback.
The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve. This is true even of the pious brethren who carry the gospel to foreign parts..H. L. Mencken
KyussB wrote: » ^^ This poster has been citing oil-funded think tanks throughout the thread - when he says 'research', 'skepticism', and 'empirical data' - translate that as propaganda, denialism, and 'data gathered with a predefined conclusion in mind' - especially given he doesn't cite anything, and doubly so when he does cite something (in 90% of posts it's easily revealed to be linked to fossil fuel interests, or otherwise be bullshit/misleading).
Much of the distance between rational and objective scientific inquiry and research guided by activism needs derives from the noble cause fallacy in which no matter how perverse the methods, they can be justified as long as they serve a noble purpose and as long as the researcher’s goals are noble. That the cause of climate activism is noble is firmly established by their stated goal of saving the planet. It implies that to be critical of climate science is to be opposed to saving the planet and therefore in some way endangering the planet, the biota, and all things natural and organic. In this way, the noble cause fallacy is also useful in vilifying and discrediting critics and skeptics with holocaust language as “climate change deniers” with the implication that they stand in the way of the good scientists who are trying to save the planet.source
KyussB wrote: » This poster has been citing oil-funded think tanks throughout the thread - when he says 'research', 'skepticism', and 'empirical data' - translate that as propaganda, denialism, and 'data gathered with a predefined conclusion in mind' - especially given he doesn't cite anything, and doubly so when he does cite something (in 90% of posts it's easily revealed to be linked to fossil fuel interests, or otherwise be bullshit/misleading).
KyussB wrote: » This poster regularly cites Libertarian think-tanks funded by the Koch family i.e. by oil oligarchs - now he is citing white-supremacist YouTube channels...None of this gives people opposing efforts at arresting climate change, and deriding such efforts as 'Communism', any pause though - most of them in this thread are happily backslapping with this poster.
KyussB wrote: » ...The people who support self-destruction while claiming to be Capitalists, are not Capitalists - how could they be Capitalist while supporting the self-destruction of that system? They are supporters of Oligarchy at any cost. They'll use whatever ideology is most favourable for the day, to achieve that. Typically this is something closer to Anarcho-Capitalism/Libertarianism - just like all the think-tanks you lot are fellating - which is a form of Capitalism which is nothing like what we see in the real world, it's a deliberately extreme/unachievable form of Capitalism, that happens to be very useful to Oil Oligarchs.
KyussB wrote: It's well researched and out in the open, ffs ::If you're not Anarcho-Capitalists/Libertarians - why the **** are you all citing Libertarian think-tanks, funded by notorious Oil Oligarchs? ..You're oblivious - wilfully so, most likely, whenever something agrees with your views.
Snickers Man wrote: » I don't want to listen to Greta. I want to listen to the scientists. SHE is not the issue. Climate change is. You know: like she says herself.... And that's all that needs to be said about the remarkable Ms Thunberg.
gozunda wrote: » Agreed greta is not the 'issue', however the same individual and her travels are the topic of the thread. And as has been pointed out 'the remarkable Ms Thunberg' is evidently not listening to the scientists and instead is spouting something rather different. Read the thread if you are in any doubt and thats the discussion.
Snickers Man wrote: » Shan't! Look if people want to engage in a circle jerk about what a teenager says, then off you go. That, after all, is what sites like Boards.ie are for. But don't flatter anyone that it is a major topic of importance. I am not going to waste an ounce of emotional or intellectual energy discussing whether she is a pawn of the "international left" or the "liberal elite" or "in the pay of George Soros" or any other paranoid trope in which people of a certain mindset like to indulge their fantasies. I fully recognise that this is probably an "off topic" comment for this thread and might even result in an infraction (wouldn't be my first) so I will disappear from this discussion and not re-emerge. A thread of equal importance to this one might be a discussion of the hairs on my scrotum. (Might just start one too, you never know what sort of weirdo......)As for climate change itself? Now that IS an important issue.
Snickers Man wrote: » I don't want to listen to Greta. I want to listen to the scientists.
