nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Jimmy Garlic

Climate saint Greta Trunburg is settling sail for UN climate talks in New York to demand that governments socially engineer and tax the little people into oblivion to save the planet. Accompanied by her film maker father who lives vicariously through her, a filthy rich aristocrat from Monaco and some German bloke the trip will no doubt vastly increase the wattage of her halo before she lectures us all about impending climate Armageddon in New York. Hopefully snaps from the trip will make it into Hello! Magazine.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Pa ElGrande

Tell me how wrote: »

For those still confused about Greta's message.

Greta is a school drop out who gets her science from her mother and the Swedish equivalent of the Guardian. Her lack of education has meant she
does not understand the science behind her chosen subject of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. How dare she preach to us like that.

Thelonious Monk

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

How dare she preach to us like that.

It's a 16 year old kid, if it's bothering you and your mates on this thread it's because you're all obsessed with her. I know nothing about her except she wants politicians to listen to scientists. Fair enough Greta, I don't need to go reading about her parents or how long she's off school for.

jimgoose

Tell me how wrote: »

...Look at Trumps big Tax cuts, they massively benefited the already wealthy. There needs to be an acknowledgement that this is creating a big problem and is the root cause of a lot of other issues.

Hah! By capping the previously unlimited SALT (State And Local Tax) deduction at $10,000 at the end of 2017, the orange bollox effectively increased some people's income tax rate by as much as 15%. The deduction was to be eliminated altogether, were it not for Senator Susan Collins of Maine digging her heels in.

Pa ElGrande

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's a 16 year old kid, if it's bothering you and your mates on this thread it's because you're all obsessed with her. I know nothing about her except she wants politicians to listen to scientists. Fair enough Greta, I don't need to go reading about her parents or how long she's off school for.

She is not a kid, she is a young adult, daughter of an actor and opera singer both with experience of public performance and both politically correct climate activists. Greta is part of an orchestrated campaign, her actions are not spontaneous and she has nothing to say outside the script she is given. She is a propaganda instrument for the UN Youth Climate Summit held in September this year. She has now served her purpose and she should concentrate on her future career and will likely follow her parents trade as an actress. For the UN the campaign failed to raise revenue and importantly she was ignored by the president of the United States. For those who ask why she is not in China and India staring down their leaders, the United States is where the money is when the political system is in their favour.

If Greta wants to continue in politics then she will have to learn that her days of acting as a human shield to deflect criticism of others are coming to an end and she will have to learn to negotiate instead of scowling at world leaders. In January she will be 17 years old and hopefully a bit wiser.

United Nations so cash-strapped staff could go unpaid in November, warns Secretary General

Funding the United Nations: What Impact Do U.S. Contributions Have on UN Agencies and Programs?

There is another problem that ties Greta, her supporters and the extinction rebellion together and that is the science versus religion debate. Science is a quest for understanding based on a primacy of reason empiricism and evidence and is constantly being revised as newer information comes to the fore. If Greta had been around in the 1970s, listening to the scientists would have meant global cooling was going to doom mankind.

Instead Greta and her followers understanding are driven by ideology and religion and they use science as a deflection, we know this because the documents Greta points to does not support her and others claims of impending Thermageddon. Their understanding derives from what is deemed to be revealed truth, which is unethical even to question (how dare you). Reason and evidence are subordinated to a supporting role that’s restricted to selected examples that accord with belief. I am also aware that some skeptics tend to do this as well.

The people who use Greta as their shield aim not to discover truth, since catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is accepted to be known with absolute certainty, but rather to defend such belief from any questioning and to maintain it without change or doubt, regardless of any and all reason and evidence that does not support it.

In that regard Climatology has become a new religion that uses the
imprimatur of the UN intergovernmental panel on climate change reports to derive its authority.

gozunda

It is curious that no criticism of the teenager is permitted according to her various followers. This even despite the teenager in her most recent outing at the UN - going off into a tantrum and blaming all the adults in the room for stealing her childhood, future and throwing all the toys out of the pram. She says she should be in school. Yes greta - you should be in school and not bringing science into disrepute with that type of rubbish.

Thankfully the Swedes aren't as delicate about the whole thing ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1Bnpd9RbdM

sk8erboii

Jesus. Imagine posting all this bile about a teenager every single day of the week. Extinction Rebellion protestors arent the unemployed nuisance in this debate it seems.

gozunda

sk8erboii wrote: »

Jesus. Imagine posting all this bile about a teenager every single day of the week. Extinction Rebellion protestors arent the unemployed nuisance in this debate it seems.

Meh. It's a discussion - on a thread - in a forum.But I would suggest that as a foil to the mindless parroting about greta says this that or the other - then such pointy stick throwing is a part of the usual daft replies. But if you are saying that you are an "unemployed nuisance" by contributing - that's a bit hard for sure ...

JJayoo

"Around three-quarters of US coal production is now more expensive than solar and wind energy in providing electricity to American households, according to a new study."

“Even without major policy shift we will continue to see coal retire pretty rapidly,” said Mike O’Boyle, the co-author of the report for Energy Innovation, a renewables analysis firm. “Our analysis shows that we can move a lot faster to replace coal with wind and solar. The fact that so much coal could be retired right now shows we are off the pace.”

"By 2025 the picture becomes even clearer, with nearly the entire US coal system out-competed on cost by wind and solar, even when factoring in the construction of new wind turbines and solar panels"

"According to the organisation’s database, over 75% of the onshore wind and 80% of the solar PV capacity due to be commissioned next year will produce power at lower prices than the cheapest new coal, oil or natural gas options. “Crucially, they are set to do so without financial assistance,” it noted."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2019/05/29/renewable-energy-costs-tumble/

It makes economic sense to move to greener energy production, nothing to do with protests or Greta or speeches.

Dr. Bre

Moan of Arc more like...

sk8erboii

gozunda wrote: »

Meh. It's a discussion - on a thread - in a forum.But I would suggest that as a foil to the mindless parroting about greta says this that or the other - then such pointy stick throwing is a part of the usual daft replies. But if you are saying that you are an "unemployed nuisance" by contributing - that's a bit hard on yourself for sure ...

Every single day its the exact same posters making the exact same posts. I really hope theyre getting paid to do this otherwise, its just sad pathological behavior.

Dont start with the cringy zingers though. I can tell its old people humor. Never funny

gozunda

sk8erboii wrote: »

Every single day its the exact same posters making the exact same posts. I really hope theyre getting paid to do this otherwise, its just sad pathological behavior.Dont start with the cringy zingers though. I can tell its old people humor. Never funny

Is it that (like greta) - the 'old people' you keep on harping on about - destroyed your childhood as well? But yes looking at many of the 'greta is great' or wtte type contributions- that certainly would be true. You could of course provide us with the wisdom of youth and not just throw the pointy sticks you know

hetuzozaho

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Moan of Arc more like...

Tell me how

gozunda wrote: »

It is curious that no criticism of the teenager is permitted according to her various followers. This even despite the teenager in her most recent outing at the UN - going off into a tantrum and blaming all the adults in the room for steeling her childhood, future and throwing all the toys out of the pram. She says she should be in school. Yes greta - you should be in school and not bringing science into disrepute with that type of rubbish.

Thankfully the Swedes aren't as delicate

This reads like someone who is posting in the thread for the first time.

No criticism is allowed -
Tantrum -
Not being in school -

All the weak, deflecting strawman arguments.
And now using a comedic video as a riposte.

You've nothing to offer to of any substance. You are literally gone back to step 1 and are once again just repeating points that are irrelevant.

begsbyOnaTrain

Tell me how wrote: »

This reads like someone who is posting in the thread for the first time.

You who have stolen my hopes and dreams... You come to us young people new thread posters for hope - how dare you

Tell me how

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

She is not a kid, she is a young adult, daughter of an actor and opera singer both with experience of public performance and both politically correct climate activists. Greta is part of an orchestrated campaign, her actions are not spontaneous and she has nothing to say outside the script she is given. She is a propaganda instrument for the UN Youth Climate Summit held in September this year. She has now served her purpose and she should concentrate on her future career and will likely follow her parents trade as an actress. For the UN the campaign failed to raise revenue and importantly she was ignored by the president of the United States. For those who ask why she is not in China and India staring down their leaders, the United States is where the money is when the political system is in their favour.

If Greta wants to continue in politics then she will have to learn that her days of acting as a human shield to deflect criticism of others are coming to an end and she will have to learn to negotiate instead of scowling at world leaders. In January she will be 17 years old and hopefully a bit wiser.

United Nations so cash-strapped staff could go unpaid in November, warns Secretary General

Funding the United Nations: What Impact Do U.S. Contributions Have on UN Agencies and Programs?

There is another problem that ties Greta, her supporters and the extinction rebellion together and that is the science versus religion debate. Science is a quest for understanding based on a primacy of reason empiricism and evidence and is constantly being revised as newer information comes to the fore. If Greta had been around in the 1970s, listening to the scientists would have meant global cooling was going to doom mankind.

Instead Greta and her followers understanding are driven by ideology and religion and they use science as a deflection, we know this because the documents Greta points to does not support her and others claims of impending Thermageddon. Their understanding derives from what is deemed to be revealed truth, which is unethical even to question (how dare you). Reason and evidence are subordinated to a supporting role that’s restricted to selected examples that accord with belief. I am also aware that some skeptics tend to do this as well.

The people who use Greta as their shield aim not to discover truth, since catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is accepted to be known with absolute certainty, but rather to defend such belief from any questioning and to maintain it without change or doubt, regardless of any and all reason and evidence that does not support it.

In that regard Climatology has become a new religion that uses the
imprimatur of the UN intergovernmental panel on climate change reports to derive its authority.

This reads like the draft of a movie screenplay. Reality is only touched on to provide reference points for the arc of the story.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

This reads like someone who is posting in the thread for the first time.No criticism is allowed -Tantrum -
Not being in school - All the weak, deflecting strawman arguments.And now using a comedic video as a riposte.You've nothing to offer to of any substance. You are literally gone back to step 1 and are once again just repeating points that are irrelevant.

The reply certainly has all the attributes of preschool logic for sure.

Bizarre that anytime anyone makes a point - they are told by the few that you can't criticise a 'child' or wtte. And yes the UN appearance was little better than a tantrum. And yes the teenager should be in school. Sorry if you do not like others pointing that out.

I believe it was one of the boards admins way back who posted that the thread opened as tongue in cheek humour. And as shown in that video - even the Swedes can appreciate the humour of a privileged teenager lecturing adults on how her childhood yada yada has been destroyed.

Look we get it - you heart greta. That said it doesn't mean we all have to share such rather inexplicable heroine worship. But there we go ..

gozunda

Tell me how wrote:

This reads like someone who is posting in the thread for the first time.

Tell me how wrote: »

This reads like the draft of a movie screenplay. ..

# No criticism allowed eh?

Media critic? Short on inspiration? Lol

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Greta is a school drop out who gets her science from her mother and the Swedish equivalent of the Guardian. Her lack of education has meant she
does not understand the science behind her chosen subject of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. How dare she preach to us like that.

You get your 'science' from proven propagandists, many of which peddled denialism about the dangers of smoking for years - you are worse than lacking in education, you are mis-educated and have a penchant for parroting propaganda, and have zero concept of sources having conflicts of interest that are fatal to their intellectual credibility.

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

There is another problem that ties Greta, her supporters and the extinction rebellion together and that is the science versus religion debate. Science is a quest for understanding based on a primacy of reason empiricism and evidence and is constantly being revised as newer information comes to the fore. If Greta had been around in the 1970s, listening to the scientists would have meant global cooling was going to doom mankind.

Proving my point above - I notice you deliberately left out the second page of the document:
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/2017-11-01064212_shadow.png

George J. Kukla was yet another person linked to Koch-funded think-tanks, and was a well known climate change denier.

You don't give a shit about science, reason, empiricism or evidence - you're citing propagandists in almost every post - linked to people/institutions that are expressly known for being anti-science, using maliciously faulty reasoning, disregarding empiricism, and fabricating 'evidence'.

Tell me how

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Greta is a school drop out who gets her science from her mother and the Swedish equivalent of the Guardian. Her lack of education has meant she
does not understand the science behind her chosen subject of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. How dare she preach to us like that.

Her message.

“Again and again, the same message. Listen to the scientists, listen to the scientists. Listen to the scientists!“

Her 'lack of education' has no bearing on the merit of her message.
It's surprising how you find it difficult to understand.

Fr_Dougal

People still banging on about the non-peer reviewed flawed IPCC report? Yeah?

It’s the equivalent of picking a report by a flat earther and constantly using it as evidence.

But it’s in the report, derp.

The report is flawed, the scientists have even admitted it.

But it’s in the report, derp derp.

It’s not peer reviewed.

But it’s in the report, derp derp derp.

Do you have any other evidence?

But the report derp, derp.

Okaaaay then...

Tell me how

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

People still banging on about the non-peer reviewed flawed IPCC report? Yeah?

It’s the equivalent of picking a report by a flat earther and constantly using it as evidence.

But it’s in the report, derp.

The report is flawed, the scientists have even admitted it.

But it’s in the report, derp derp.

It’s not peer reviewed.

But it’s in the report, derp derp derp.

Do you have any other evidence?

But the report derp, derp.

Okaaaay then...

So, where do you go to for information you trust?
What parts of the report are false? Links please.

Derp?

gozunda

A transcript - gretas 'message' from the 'How Dare You' speech at the UN Climate Action Summit:

"My message is that we'll be watching you. This is all wrong. I shouldn't be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean. Yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you!

"You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words...

Rest of the speech here

So nope "listen to the scientists" not there. Odd.

One reference to science

"For more than 30 years, the science has been crystal clear. How dare you continue to look away and come here saying that you're doing enough, when the politics and solutions needed are still nowhere in sight.

Yup - needs to go back to school for sure ...

Fr_Dougal

Tell me how wrote: »

So, where do you go to for information you trust?
What parts of the report are false? Links please.

Derp?

Look back on my posts in this thread, I don’t have that many. I have already posted links.

Tell me how

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Look back on my posts in this thread, I don’t have that many. I have already posted links.

Doesn't work like that. I'll go off and review and then you'll come back and tell me 'Oh not that one'.
Present your evidence to your post above or we can assume you can't stand over it.

Tell me how

Weak.

You must be one of the few who cannot grasp it even though she has been so clear.

Yesterdays tweet below. It's concise, clear and consistent.

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1183798182754435072?s=19

Fr_Dougal

Tell me how wrote: »

Doesn't work like that. I'll go off and review and then you'll come back and tell me 'Oh not that one'.
Present your evidence to your post above or we can assume you can't stand over it.

I have already presented my evidence, I had quoted the authors of the IPCC report who admitted that the evidence is flawed. Go to the main page of this forum, click on the number of posts, there you will see my username and the number of posts that I have on this thread. Click on that and you will see all of my posts here, including the website and reports that I have referenced.

Tell me how

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

I have already presented my evidence, I had quoted the authors of the IPCC report who admitted that the evidence is flawed. Go to the main page of this forum, click on the number of posts, there you will see my username and the number of posts that I have on this thread. Click on that and you will see all of my posts here, including the website and reports that I have referenced.

So, no link then.....

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

Weak.You must be one of the few who cannot grasp it even though she has been so clear. Yesterdays tweet below. It's concise, clear and consistent.
https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1183798182754435072?s=19

That would be a fail I'm afraid...

"Again and again? So where a tweet on gretas twitter account claims that she has said - 'listen to the scientists' 'again and again' even though she did not mention that in the recent UN speech (possibly her most important opportunity to speak to date no ?)

It's all a bit odd surely? Let's say I can write a tweet tomorrow claiming that my message has always been 'Apples are oranges' but what I actually said was 'How dare you - Apples are actually bananas' and then that proves I'm being clear? Grand so. Glad we cleared that up.

moonage

Tell me how wrote: »

Her message.

“Again and again, the same message. Listen to the scientists, listen to the scientists. Listen to the scientists!“

Scientists disagree strongly about the impacts of the burning of fossil fuels on global warming. There is no survey or study showing “consensus” on the most important scientific issues, despite frequent claims by to the contrary.

The UN's IPCC's reports have to be taken with a large pinch of salt because of financial and political conflicts of interest. It is agenda driven. Instead of arriving at a conclusion, it starts with a position and cherrypicks evidence that backs up its apocalyptic views.