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

hetuzozaho wrote: »

...
I believe Greta is up for the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday (?)Details of the announcement - "The Nobel Peace Prize for 2019 will be announced at a press conference on Friday 11 October 11:00 am (CEST), at the Norwegian Nobel Institute, Henrik Ibsens gate 51, Oslo." (I've always in enjoyed my trips to Oslo)
That would be some achievement!
Will be keeping an ear out myself anyway.

Update on this: Re Nobel Peace Prize The award did not go to the teenager.

Thankfully it was awarded to a very worthy candidate

Nobel Peace Prize: Ethiopia PM Abiy Ahmed wins

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-50013273

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Ah fantastic for Abiy Ahmed. Cheers for that

A worthy winner.
Glad to see the award go to someone like that.

hetuzozaho wrote: »

What do you mean rise just the same? Rise just the same as the scientists who made things better for you, who are now asking for people to listen to science?

So the scientists made a mistake by making things better for me?

Science isn't something you 'listen' to. It's not dogma.

jimgoose wrote: »

Was she nominated? Was there talk of her getting it? For what - throwing a strop in front of the UN??

Yes was nominated.

For motivating millions of people to act calling for work to be done to help save the planets resources and ecosystems as much as possible.

And to answer your next question, what's that got to do with peace? You'll know if/when there's climate influenced conflict.

jimgoose wrote: »

You have no idea what my next question is, you presumptive person, you. And all I see is a slightly cringe-inducing stroppy teenager.

You haven't looked at the IPCC report from 8th October 2018 so have you?

jimgoose wrote: »

Yes, I saw it shortly after it came out. I'm not a climate-change skeptic y'know, I'm a Greta Thunberg skeptic.

Really, you believe climate change is a problem but have an issue with someone who has done more than any other individual to make calling for positive action a global protest lead conversation?

Why is that? Surely anyone advocating to mitigate a problem you agree exists is doing good.

How do you think those interested in protecting the climate and who feel we are not doing enough should proceed?

jimgoose wrote: »

I'm afraid you don't get to examine me, youngfella. Day-day now.

Ah yes, someone else perplexed at how discussion boards work.

Facebook is that way, 2nd door on your left.

Tell me how wrote: »

Really, you believe climate change is a problem but have an issue with someone who has done more than any other individual to make calling for positive action a global protest lead conversation?

Why is that? Surely anyone advocating to mitigate a problem you agree exists is doing good.How do you think those interested in protecting the climate and who feel we are not doing enough should proceed?

Its not what they (greta et al) are doing - rather it's how they are doing it.

A somone said more like a stroppy teenager / figure head bizarrely been given the the velvet glove treatment.

The main thing she has been shouting about since her debut about a year ago is that civilisation is going to end and the adults are to blame for her terrible life. Oh and school is a waste of time apparently. Not a great role model or advocate by any means tbh.

That some thought she had an asses roar of a chance of getting a nobel peace prize is ludicrous.

Just because some may think the sun shines out of her rearend does not mean that others are obliged to share the same opinion. And none of that denies climate change btw.

gozunda wrote: »

Its not what they (greta et al) are doing - rather it's how they are doing it.

A somone said more like a stroppy teenager / figure head bizarrely been given the the velvet glove treatment.

The main thing she has been shouting about since her debut about a year ago is that civilisation is going to end and the adults are to blame for her terrible life. Oh and school is a waste of time apparently. Not a great role model or advocate by any means tbh.

That some thought she had an asses roar of a chance of getting a nobel peace price is ludicrous.

Just because some may think the sun shines out of her rearend does not mean that others are obliged to share the same opinion. And none of that denies climate change btw.

i'm still amazed she's having such an affect on you guys...

all i got from it was " lads clean up your act it's starting to have a negative affect" ...and my answer is "ok"

gozunda wrote: »

So certainly there are non 'Koch' sources which are not credible either.

So this means you think Koch-linked sources are not credible? Well, it's good to finally have that one settled.

Tell me how wrote: »

I see you've pivoted back to thenot denying climate change again. That's good at least. Hope it lasts.
You hear what you want in terms of Greta. When did she say school is a waste of time?
Her protestations referring to the impact on civilisation are true, if no action is taken, but you are super annoyed because of her using 2030 as a line in the sand beyond which damage cannot be undone. So what if the timeframe is out, that's not the central part of her message. Why don't you pay attention to her most oft repeated statement 'Listen to the scientists'
Nobody is saying the sun shines out of her but I don't see why I or others should stand by and give some a free opportunity to denigrate her, her family, her health condition or anything else that has been said on this thread with no other motivation other than to complain bitterly.

Never did otherwise except in your rampant imagination. It's simply that- if it is not stated every single time you have a bizarre tendency to accuse others of being deniers or wtte.

For someone who quotes the teenager non-stop - you really do not seem to know much of she has said. I reckon you need to go back and watch / read some of her multiple rantings including those about school and studying and lots of the other crap she has came out with. Heres just one example:

"And why should I be studying for a future that soon will be no more, ...And what is the point of learning facts within the school system when the most important facts given by the finest science of that same school system clearly means nothing to our politicians and our society?"

https://www.ted.com/talks/greta_thunberg_school_strike_for_climate_save_the_world_by_changing_the_rules/transcript?language=en

And the fact is that even one of the IPCC scientists stood up and said that the whole 2030 doomsday thing is bull****. So it is quite obvious she has used her own beliefs in the end of civilisation to somehow justify her personal opinion that studying and school is a waste of time. And now that's being pushed in her bs fridaysforfuture campaign and unfortunately lapped up by other impressionable kids. And we wonder why Eco- anxiety as a medical condition is an real issue?

All that is simply pointing out what is true. Criticising all of it - is not 'denigrating' anyone. No one is 'annoyed' - rather many (including myself) are just telling it how it is. Sorry you dont like that

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

i'm still amazed she's having such an affect on you guys...all i got from it was " lads clean up your act it's starting to have a negative affect" ...and my answer is "ok"

It's a discussion on a thread. That ok with you?

Lol. You must not have been listening that day. But hey dont worry none of it matters - according to greta civilisation is going to end in 10 years 19 days and whatever number of hours. My answer is wtf?

nthclare wrote: »

Greta is like VERUKA SALT from Willy Wonka's chocolate factory...

Remember the original movie, well that's what Greta reminds me of.

VERUKA SALT

Played by Julie Dawn Cole in 1971, beautiful lady:

KyussB wrote: »

Soros is used as the go-to whataboutery tactic when people like the Koch's are mentioned: Instead of simply acknowledging that the Koch's are discreditable, Soros gets brought up (usually when there is zero connection to Soros in the entire discussion), to try and accuse people of hypocrisy.

It's ironic, because accusing people of hypocrisy like that - is an implicit admission that the sources you're backing are discreditable.

So as is the case with last two sources you provided? Glad we've cleared that up