Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

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

1…115116118120121…194

Comments

  • #5852
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    gozunda wrote: »
    That would be a fail I'm afraid...

    So where a tweet on gretas twitter account claims that she has said - 'listen to the scientists' even though she did not mention that in the recent UN speech (possibly her most important speech to date?) [/i]

    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.

    A - She didn't try to correct what she had previously said. She (rightly) did not feel a need to do so.

    B - If you have spoke at the US congress the week previously and told them that Apples are Oranges, and you talk at the UN then and do not specifically think that Apples are Bananas, people aren't going to think you believe they are. (apart from the version of Gozunda who exists in the world that analogy takes place)


  • #5853
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    moonage wrote: »
    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.

    IPCC report. 120 countries, 195 organisations, thousands of scientists.

    Have you got a similar body of work which supports your second paragraph?


  • #5854
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Tell me how wrote: »
    A - She didn't try to correct what she had previously said. She (rightly) did not feel a need to do so.B - If you have spoke at the US congress the week previously and told them that Apples are Oranges, and you talk at the UN then and do not specifically think that Apples are Bananas, people aren't going to think you believe they are. (apart from the version of Gozunda who exists in the world that analogy takes place)

    This is what you quoted.
    Tell me how wrote: »
    Her message.

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

    Except that is not the message in her UN speech - her most important opportunity to speak to date. It was not "again and again - listen to the scientists" by any means ...

    She refers once to science but only by way of scolding the adults that they have stolen her childhood etc. And how dare they!


  • #5855
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    gozunda wrote: »
    This is what you quoted.



    Except that is not the message in her UN speech. It was not "again and again - listen to the scientists" by any means ...

    She refers once to science but only by way of scolding the adults that they have stolen her childhood. And how dare they!

    Gozunda, no one, absolutely no one, is under any illusion about her message only yourself.

    Have you ever been in work project meetings where each week the Project Manager states the purpose of the project except one week, they just immediately cut loose and address people for repeatedly not delivering what they had promised to do, have delayed other elements of the job or are causing cost overrun. Let me tell you, no one walks out of that meeting thinking the purpose of the project has changed. They know a point was being hammered home that they needed to act and deliver.


  • #5856
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    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...
    Tell me how wrote: »
    IPCC report. 120 countries, 195 organisations, thousands of scientists.

    Have you got a similar body of work which supports your second paragraph?

    Much derp.


  • Advertisement
  • #5857
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    Much derp.

    A higher level of intelligence at play here obviously.


  • #5858
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    Tell me how wrote: »
    A higher level of intelligence at play here obviously.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=111457977&postcount=5537

    I suppose next you’re going to tell us all that the actual authors(the IPCC scientists) are lying about admitting that the report is flawed?


  • #5859
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Gozunda, no one, absolutely no one, is under any illusion about her message only yourself. Have you ever been in work project meetings where each week the Project Manager states the purpose of the project except one week, they just immediately cut loose and address people for repeatedly not delivering what they had promised to do, have delayed other elements of the job or are causing cost overrun. Let me tell you, no one walks out of that meeting thinking the purpose of the project has changed. They know a point was being hammered home that they needed to act and deliver.

    'Tell me how' - lots of people dont fawn over the teenagers every word as if those words are somehow holy. See this thread for example.

    Anyone can make a claim as to what they have said 'again and again' . Does not mean that they have..

    In that tweet - it is explicitly stated that greta's message is 'again and again, the same message. Listen to the scientists' That does not stand up to scrutiny. Tbh it's not difficult to work out.

    And yet you exhort everyone to hold these sayings of greta up as gospel - give us a break.

    It's clear that gretas PR machine are doing a whitewash job on her tantrum at the UN. Unfortunately for them - it doesn't wash at all.


  • #5860
    gormdubhgorm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,014 ✭✭✭✭gormdubhgorm


    Tell me how wrote: »

    Derp?

    https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/derp



    derp -
    EXCLAMATION
    informal
    Used as a substitute for speech regarded as meaningless or stupid, or to comment on a foolish or stupid action.

    ---

    That Father Dougal poster definitely 'listens to the scientists Southpark creators'

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2013/06/derp-meaning-origin.html

    "
    The origins of the word can be traced back to BASEketball, the 1998 film by South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone. KnowYourMeme, which catalogues this sort of thing, says this (semi-NSFW-ish) scene is the first recorded instance of derp.

    But derp found greater traction once Parker and Stone introduced a new character on South Park in 1999. In the episode “The Succubus,” the beloved Chef is replaced by Mr. Derp in the school cafeteria, who carries a hammer and hits himself in the head, yelling “Derp!” while falling on the ground. Real highbrow comedy."

    Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.



  • #5861
    drunkmonkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,578 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Gozunda, no one, absolutely no one, is under any illusion about her message only yourself.

    In the game of messages she ranks right up there with a Potato.


  • Advertisement
  • #5862
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    Think it's been clear from before the UN Speech. Unite Behind the Science.

    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1174383423265357825

    Go Greta!


  • #5863
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    gormdubhgorm wrote: »
    https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/derp



    derp -
    EXCLAMATION
    informal
    Used as a substitute for speech regarded as meaningless or stupid, or to comment on a foolish or stupid action.

    ---

    That Father Dougal poster definitely 'listens to the scientists Southpark creators'

    http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2013/06/derp-meaning-origin.html

    "
    The origins of the word can be traced back to BASEketball, the 1998 film by South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone. KnowYourMeme, which catalogues this sort of thing, says this (semi-NSFW-ish) scene is the first recorded instance of derp.

    But derp found greater traction once Parker and Stone introduced a new character on South Park in 1999. In the episode “The Succubus,” the beloved Chef is replaced by Mr. Derp in the school cafeteria, who carries a hammer and hits himself in the head, yelling “Derp!” while falling on the ground. Real highbrow comedy."

    I know what it means, it was rhetorical placement given the post which I was responding to.


  • #5864
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    In the game of messages she ranks right up there with a Potato.

    Well, yes, if;
    • Potatoes are frequently invited to the EU, House of Commons, Congress and the UN to speak about their message.
    • They encourage over 10M people to join them in marching worldwide.
    • They are nominated for a Nobel prize.


  • #5865
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    gozunda wrote: »
    'Tell me now' - lots of people dont fawn over the teenagers every word as if those words are somehow holy. See this thread for example.

    Anyone can make a claim as to what they have said 'again and again' . Does not mean that they have..

    In that tweet - it is explicitly stated that greta's message is 'again and again, the same message. Listen to the scientists' That does not stand up to scrutiny. Tbh it's not difficult to work out.

    And yet you exhort everyone to hold these sayings of greta up as gospel - give us a break.

    It's clear that gretas PR machine are doing a whitewash job on her tantrum at the UN. Unfortunately for them- it doesn't wash at all.

    Why do you hate her?
    Your argument is routed in nothing but that fact I'm sure at this point.

    I don't exhort anyone to do anything other than not to twist reality to support their narrative. If there was any ambiguity about Greta's message, many of the vocal naysayers would be drawing attention to that (whether are Brendan O'Neil, Katie Hopkins, Jeremy Clarkson, Piers Morgan or any of the other bastions of social awareness) but they are not. You are. You alone.

    Nice word play on my name there, I'll let you off without the (sic) on this one. ;) Very clever.


  • #5866
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    hetuzozaho wrote: »
    Think it's been clear from before the UN Speech. Unite Behind the Science.
    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1174383423265357825 Go Greta!

    Greta goes places alright. Just not sure that she knows exactly where....

    What you are saying is that the claim made about the 'same message' 'again and again' in gretas tweet referred to by 'Tell me how' is wrong yes?

    Whatever the message she previously gave - she has not given 'the same message' 'again and again' - as a cursory check of the UN speech will clearly show.

    A bit of creative greta PR going on there methinks ...


  • #5867
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    gozunda wrote: »
    Greta goes places alright. Just not sure that she knows exactly where....

    What you are saying is that the claim made about the 'same message' 'again and again' in gretas tweet referred to by 'Tell me how' is wrong yes?

    Whatever the message she previously gave - she has not given 'the same message' 'again and again' - as a cursory check of the UN speech will clearly show.

    A bit of creative greta PR going on there methinks ...

    No I was just saying I've felt the message was clear. Maybe wasn't, but you're up to speed now anyway. Now let's #uniteBehindTheScience together Gozunda! You in?


  • #5868
    moonage
    Registered Users Posts: 855 ✭✭✭moonage


    I agree with Greta when she says: "Listen to the scientists!"

    But the type of scientists to listen to are independent ones, who are free of financial and political conflicts of interest, preferably who are not members of governmental organizations linked to th UN.

    Then we are more likely to find that the climate crisis/emergency/catastrophe is bolloxology.


  • #5869
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Tell me how wrote: »
    Why do you hate her?Your argument is routed in nothing but that fact I'm sure at this point. I don't exhort anyone to do anything other than not to twist reality to support their narrative. If there was any ambiguity about Greta's message, many of the vocal naysayers would be drawing attention to that (whether are Brendan O'Neil, Katie Hopkins, Jeremy Clarkson, Piers Morgan or any of the other bastions of social awareness) but they are not. You are. You alone.
    Nice word play on my name there, I'll let you off without the (sic) on this one. ;) Very clever.

    Lol. I'm sorry that was a typo on your name. My apologies.

    As to your often thrown accusation as to 'why people hate her' or wtte - whenever anyone points out the huge inconsistencies in the PR machine which is the greta circus - it comes across as a very transparant and silly attempt to try and shut down any valid criticism by leveling an accusation of people 'hating her' :rolleyes:

    With that logic - does that mean you 'hate' all those whose words or actions dont stand up to scrutiny ? Why would you do that? Doesn't make sense does it.

    If gretas 'message' is supposedly so unambiguous - then why does the tweet have to keep on insisting that 'listen to the scientists' is the 'same message' again and again'? Odd that!

    But you are correct - my argument is indeed is 'rooted' in fact as my thoughts do not deal in emotive speculation. Btw I'll let you off without the (sic) on 'routed' this time. Your faulty logic not so ...


  • #5870
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    moonage wrote: »
    I agree with Greta when she says: "Listen to the scientists!"

    But the type of scientists to listen to are independent ones, who are free of financial and political conflicts of interest, preferably who are not members of governmental organizations linked to th UN.

    Then we are more likely to find that the climate crisis/emergency/catastrophe is bolloxology.

    When your Dr prescribes medication to you, do you ignore his advice or the work of the scientists who have developed it because the thought that it could help your issue is bolloxology?

    Even in that scenario, you'd still have some wingnuts saying there is no need to take it and you should just drink carrot juice or something? But, the majority of people trust the scientific process which lead to the medication being developed, and given the increase in life expectancy over the last 50 years, they are right to do so.


  • #5871
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    hetuzozaho wrote: »
    No I was just saying I've felt the message was clear. Maybe wasn't, but you're up to speed now anyway. Now let's #uniteBehindTheScience together Gozunda! You in?

    Nope as detailed in her UN speech "her message" was oddly different

    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...

    But no I'm not with you on gretas science of doomsdayism for sure - where civilisations supposedly ends in 10 years, so many months and so many days . But hey who's counting? I'll leave that for you ok ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #5872
    moonage
    Registered Users Posts: 855 ✭✭✭moonage


    Tell me how wrote: »
    When your Dr prescribes medication to you, do you ignore his advice or the work of the scientists who have developed it because the thought that it could help your issue is bolloxology?

    My doctor prescribed statins for me. I ignored his advice and told him I wouldn't touch them with a bargepole. After much research I concluded that they were nasty little drugs with hardly any benefit.


  • #5873
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    gozunda wrote: »
    Nope as detailed in her UN speech "her message" was oddly different

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



    But no I'm not with you on gretas science of doomsdayism for sure - where civilisations supposedly ends in 10 years, so many months and so many days . But hey who's counting? I'll leave that for you ok ;)

    Ah your not into the science. That's cool. I misunderstood.


  • #5874
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    hetuzozaho wrote: »
    Ah your not into the science. That's cool. I misunderstood.

    Ahh no dont be so hard on yourself - I'd say you just misread - but no bother. As stated I'm not into greta's doomsdayism (that's not science btw) about the end of civilisation arising from the teenagers unfounded fears. But I dont need to tell you as you know that already.


  • #5875
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    moonage wrote: »
    My doctor prescribed statins for me. I ignored his advice and told him I wouldn't touch them with a bargepole. After much research I concluded that they were nasty little drugs with hardly any benefit.

    Sure just save yourself the €50 next time and don't go to him at all.
    Damn Dr, trying to keep a patient alive.


  • #5876
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    gozunda wrote: »
    Ahh no dont be so hard on yourself - I'd say you just misread - but no bother. As stated I'm not into greta's doomsdayism about the end of civilisation arising from the teenagers unfounded fears. But I dont need to tell you as you know that already.

    For sure! Good stuff.


  • #5877
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    May have been posted but quite an interesting article

    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1183798182754435072

    Fair play.


  • #5878
    JJayoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Is a bit daft people freaking out about a climate meltdown in 10 years when at this very moment there are millions of people who don't have access to clean water/education. Children dying because their mothers are forced to use water from a stagnant pond.

    In regards to the actual climate, multiple legit sources estimating that the planet will be able to be 95% renewable energy by 2050.

    The speech which Greta delivered declared that if we continue as current, then in 10 years we will have reached a tipping point.

    But the reality is that renewables have become as cheap as 'dirty' energy and that is even without any subsidies.

    Renewable energy investment is increasing at incredible levels, take France for example, they are already planning to decommission 4 of their nuclear power plants by 2028 as they expect renewable energy to take its place.

    The UK will be bringing the world's largest offshore wind farm online in 2020 supplying energy for 1 million homes. There new nuclear power plant at hinkley will be operational by 2025 supplying energy for 6 million homes. They are also currently auctioning off sea bed area for the expansion off more offshore. Add in solar farms which are only beginning to take off in the UK and you can see that progress is being made.

    And this progress is fueled by the economic benefits of going with renewables. This economic benefit is essential and the reason that China gets branded as leading the way for renewable energy.

    The world will go green in energy production because it makes sense financially. This combined with a greening off the planet, which is already happening, should make the main point that Gretta/scientists are saying = that if we were to stay at current levels, 2019, we would be in big trouble in 10 years time = null and void. This isnt me trying to put Greta or her message down, but more a reality check to all the doom and gloom that the media love whip into a frenzy.

    Huge progress is being made unfortunately positive stories do not sell as well as doom.and gloom.


    This has to be one of the more creative solutions I have seen, working on the same principle as Hydro pumped storage.

    "Energy Vault's consists of an almost 400-foot tall, six-armed crane with custom-built concrete blocks weighing almost 35 metric tons each. As solar or wind energy is siphoned into an Energy Vault tower, an A.I. directs the concrete blocks to rise up. Then, according to the company's website, the blocks are "returned to the ground and the kinetic energy generated from the falling brick is turned back into electricity."

    That kinetic energy then turns a motor, which passes through an inverter, sending the energy back into the grid. Energy Vault claims the process had a "round-trip efficiency between 80 to 90 [percent]."

    Makes sense but the visuals are so bizzare, but this company has received enormous finding despite being only 2 years old.

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


  • #5879
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    hetuzozaho wrote: »
    May have been posted but quite an interesting article
    https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1183798182754435072
    Fair play.

    Indeed ;)

    Re gretas UN speech ...
    How did you prepare the speech? 

    – I started to think about the content of the speech around midsummer. That the message should be ”How dare you?”. To blame and shame the rulers. Then I did what I always do, I postponed thinking about it. So I started writing it a few days before the speech. 


  • #5880
    KyussB
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    JJayoo wrote: »
    Is a bit daft people freaking out about a climate meltdown in 10 years when at this very moment there are millions of people who don't have access to clean water/education. Children dying because their mothers are forced to use water from a stagnant pond.

    In regards to the actual climate, multiple legit sources estimating that the planet will be able to be 95% renewable energy by 2050.

    The speech which Greta delivered declared that if we continue as current, then in 10 years we will have reached a tipping point.

    But the reality is that renewables have become as cheap as 'dirty' energy and that is even without any subsidies.

    Renewable energy investment is increasing at incredible levels, take France for example, they are already planning to decommission 4 of their nuclear power plants by 2028 as they expect renewable energy to take its place.

    The UK will be bringing the world's largest offshore wind farm online in 2020 supplying energy for 1 million homes. There new nuclear power plant at hinkley will be operational by 2025 supplying energy for 6 million homes. They are also currently auctioning off sea bed area for the expansion off more offshore. Add in solar farms which are only beginning to take off in the UK and you can see that progress is being made.

    And this progress is fueled by the economic benefits of going with renewables. This economic benefit is essential and the reason that China gets branded as leading the way for renewable energy.

    The world will go green in energy production because it makes sense financially. This combined with a greening off the planet, which is already happening, should make the main point that Gretta/scientists are saying = that if we were to stay at current levels, 2019, we would be in big trouble in 10 years time = null and void. This isnt me trying to put Greta or her message down, but more a reality check to all the doom and gloom that the media love whip into a frenzy.

    Huge progress is being made unfortunately positive stories do not sell as well as doom.and gloom.


    This has to be one of the more creative solutions I have seen, working on the same principle as Hydro pumped storage.

    "Energy Vault's consists of an almost 400-foot tall, six-armed crane with custom-built concrete blocks weighing almost 35 metric tons each. As solar or wind energy is siphoned into an Energy Vault tower, an A.I. directs the concrete blocks to rise up. Then, according to the company's website, the blocks are "returned to the ground and the kinetic energy generated from the falling brick is turned back into electricity."

    That kinetic energy then turns a motor, which passes through an inverter, sending the energy back into the grid. Energy Vault claims the process had a "round-trip efficiency between 80 to 90 [percent]."

    Makes sense but the visuals are so bizzare, but this company has received enormous finding despite being only 2 years old.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2bkZbKeUmQ
    (fixed video link)

    I agree with you about having an optimistic view of the development of renewable technology - and I think that instead of waiting for 2050, we have the ability to meet or even exceed those same renewable targets by 2030.

    It's simply a matter of scale: Private industry is limited by profit margins, which inhibit the scale of rolling out renewables. Governments are not limited by profit margins, and can roll out renewables at least an order of magnitude or two faster - and do a lot more besides that, too.

    There's a consensus among scientists that we are already past the point of avoiding costs (real economic costs) from the effects of climate change - that we are already at a point of 'damage control' rather than prevention - so the faster we act to eliminate carbon emissions (and even reverse them...), the better off we'll be, economically.


  • Advertisement
  • #5881
    NIMAN
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,410 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN




  • #5882
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    I see Shane Balkowitsch has taken a couple of wet plate portraits of her during her trip to Standing Rock. As an avid photography fan I love his work.

    Really cool.

    https://petapixel.com/2019/10/15/a-wet-plate-portrait-of-greta-thunberg/


  • #5883
    JJayoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    NIMAN wrote: »

    It did seem very bizarre.

    I remember seeing on the late late show years ago a piece on hydro storage and a survey had been commissioned by a German company to look for suitable sites within Ireland and they had identified 6/7 excellent sites, but nothing was ever done about the findings. These sites are still in place and with the advances in renewables maybe they could become an option?

    Although I have never been a fan of turbines. I have been around far too many and the amount of crushed stone that goes into making roads for this turbines is unimaginable


  • #5884
    blueshade
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 428 ✭✭blueshade


    gozunda wrote: »
    Nope as detailed in her UN speech "her message" was oddly different

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



    But no I'm not with you on gretas science of doomsdayism for sure - where civilisations supposedly ends in 10 years, so many months and so many days . But hey who's counting? I'll leave that for you ok ;)

    In fairness to Moan of Ark, I think she might have gone off script and had a meltdown when she was upstaged by Trump's unscheduled visit. That mental tantrum was the first nail in her coffin. Well, on the bright side, when the world has had enough of Greta, or she's bouncing off the walls in an asylum somewhere, her father is already trotting the younger sister around the circuit trying to pimp her for a singing career, so they've got a spare when the attention runs out, because make no mistake about it, this is all about Mommy and Daddy living vicariously through their kids.


  • #5885
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    hetuzozaho wrote: »
    I see Shane Balkowitsch has taken a couple of wet plate portraits of her during her trip to Standing Rock. As an avid photography fan I love his work.
    Really cool.
    https://petapixel.com/2019/10/15/a-wet-plate-portrait-of-greta-thunberg/

    The making of greta thunberg eh?

    I would agree - lovely photographs but seriously it looks little more than a continuation of great greta PR campaign
    ‘if I can get 15 minutes, we could immortalize greta in the historic photographic process of silver on glass ...this picture would outlast all other photographs ever taken of her or will ever be taken of her.


    :rolleyes:

    I really do wonder who is funding the ongoing PR campaign. She's not paying for it herself for sure. Looks like this one was possibly free - but I'd warrant the photographer has made a sweet copyright deal no doubt.

    As for this campaign and the presence of photographers at opportune moments:

    The trip across the Atlantic accompanied by a professional film maker / photographer, photos of greta 'alone' on the New York subway. Photographs and video of greta at TED talks and various conferences nearing with celebrities and so it goes on to this latest stunt painting greta as akin to a spiritual guide amongst native American Indian people and so on it goes. All funded and organised by who I wonder?

    The evidence is that she is being heavily promoted as the poster child of climate alarmism - but perhaps even more importantly as a child human shield to silence any criticism. Lovely photographs- but you can't argue with a lovely photograph can you?


  • #5886
    hetuzozaho
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭hetuzozaho


    gozunda wrote: »

    I would agree - lovely photographs

    Yes! Glad you enjoyed! I had a look through his other work. Fascinating, the process etc. albeit I'm a bit of photography addict so may not be for everyone!


  • Advertisement
  • #5887
    Pa ElGrande
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,655 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    There was a summary of a poll today in todays Irish Times that claimed climate change was a most serious issue for 55% of those polled, however most don't want to do anything that costs them money and believe the government should prioritise other services. Going along the lines of what we already discussed in this thread, this is primarily an urban upper middle class concern with those on lower incomes and in rural areas less concerned about it. Sinn Fein voters tended to be the most persistent to it among political parties, this is not surprising and I suspect falls along income lines.


    Meanwhile in the Netherlands the same urban/rural divide is apparent.
    Last year you didn’t hear anything about nitrogen, and now suddenly it’s a mortal question,” farmer Micha Bouwer of the Farmers Defence Force told state broadcaster NOS. “These are all people in the city who have two plants on their balcony and say ‘nature is suffering’.”

    source


    https://twitter.com/Paploo968/status/1184395846210805761/


    So now we have the situation with middle and upper class extinction rebellion demonstrators clogging up cities demanding more of the very thing farmers in the places like the Netherlands (and soon other countries) are protesting against.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • #5888
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Pa ElGrande wrote: »
    There was a summary of a poll today in todays Irish Times that claimed climate change was a most serious issue for 55% of those polled, however most don't want to do anything that costs them money and believe the government should prioritise other services. Going along the lines of what we already discussed in this thread, this is primarily an urban upper middle class concern with those on lower incomes and in rural areas less concerned about it. Sinn Fein voters tended to be the most persistent to it among political parties, this is not surprising and I suspect falls along income lines.

    You missed the point that 55% said that they are okay with reducing their standard of living in order to help tackle climate change.

    The 2 questions relating to money were
    Are you okay with the price of oil, gas, petrol and diesel increasing to help tackle climate change
    44% said Yes, 48% No, hardly a definitive result which also doesn't explore their reasons for saying No (such as, many people do not have alternatives to using fuel and so it is unfair to put the pressure on them without an alternative)
    The Government should spend more money on tackling climate change and less money on public services
    This is a completely loaded question, who is going to accept reducing spending on services such as education, policing and healthcare when there is so much evidence that those sectors are suffering issues associated with funding questions.

    I think it's a pretty safe bet that if that poll had been carried out over 12 months ago, the results would have been much less in favour of action to help the environment. Greta has played a significant part in the move towards agreeing the need for and wanting to see action.


  • #5889
    JJayoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Was replacing posts in a fence on commanage land. Six foot post every 4 yards. 15km fence = 16395 yards = 4100 posts....

    Got me thinking about how many hundreds of millions of posts much currently be propping up fences around the country and how each post is essentially a unit of stored carbon.

    These posts are always taken from smaller trees that are removed from forestry during thinning, branches and bark are left on the ground and the rest of the tree is cut into posts.

    I could imagine if the total amount of wood in all these posts could be added up it would possibly equal more carbon storage than the largest forest currently in the country.

    So next time you see a green field with no trees take a look at all those posts that are keeping all their carbon locked up.


  • #5890
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    JJayoo wrote: »
    Was replacing posts in a fence on commanage land. Six foot post every 4 yards. 15km fence = 16395 yards = 4100 posts....

    Got me thinking about how many hundreds of millions of posts much currently be propping up fences around the country and how each post is essentially a unit of stored carbon.

    These posts are always taken from smaller trees that are removed from forestry during thinning, branches and bark are left on the ground and the rest of the tree is cut into posts.

    I could imagine if the total amount of wood in all these posts could be added up it would possibly equal more carbon storage than the largest forest currently in the country.

    So next time you see a green field with no trees take a look at all those posts that are keeping all their carbon locked up.

    That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

    A - I seriously doubt the volume of posts is equal to the largest forest.
    B - If the posts had been left as trees, they would be actively sucking carbon from the air.
    C - How much carbon was released in the manufacturing process to make the posts.


  • #5891
    JJayoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭JJayoo


    Tell me how wrote: »
    That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

    A - I seriously doubt the volume of posts is equal to the largest forest.
    B - If the posts had been left as trees, they would be actively sucking carbon from the air.
    C - How much carbon was released in the manufacturing process to make the posts.

    A) few hundred million posts, each being replaced every 10 years would add up.

    B) The only reason the trees were planted in the first place is because the previous crop was already felled, and when this forestry is all cut out it will be replanted. Continous supply of young fast growing trees will soak up far more CO2 than a mature forest.

    These trees also have to be cut out because foresty is planted incredibly densely to force the trees to grow straight up in the search of light. If you didn't thin the forest you would be lelt with a right bollox of a forest.

    C)foresty is thinned usually by a single machine that can cut the tree, leaving stump and roots in the ground, it then cuts off all the branches and bark leaving it on ground. Then all that has to happen is that the lengths of timber are cut to correct length and a small cut is taken off the top of one side to point it.


  • Advertisement
  • #5892
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Tell me how wrote: »
    This is a completely loaded question, who is going to accept reducing spending on services such as education, policing and healthcare when there is so much evidence that those sectors are suffering issues associated with funding questions.

    I think it's a pretty safe bet that if that poll had been carried out over 12 months ago, the results would have been much less in favour of action to help the environment. Greta has played a significant part in the move towards agreeing the need for and wanting to see action.

    I'm not the only one with an issue with that survey question.

    https://twitter.com/OConnorOisin/status/1184385000583696385?s=19

    Also,

    https://twitter.com/SwiftJoan/status/1184488531915345920?s=19


  • #5893
    Blueshoe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    How much is Greta charging per appearance?
    She seems to be attending events around the world. Big fat carbon footprint


  • #5894
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Blueshoe wrote: »
    How much is Greta charging per appearance?
    She seems to be attending events around the world. Big fat carbon footprint

    The level of intelligence in this debate is astonishing at times.


  • #5895
    Blueshoe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    Tell me how wrote: »
    The level of intelligence in this debate is astonishing at times.

    Do you know how much?


  • #5896
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    blueshade wrote: »
    In fairness to Moan of Ark, I think she might have gone off script and had a meltdown when she was upstaged by Trump's unscheduled visit. That mental tantrum was the first nail in her coffin. Well, on the bright side, when the world has had enough of Greta, or she's bouncing off the walls in an asylum somewhere, her father is already trotting the younger sister around the circuit trying to pimp her for a singing career, so they've got a spare when the attention runs out, because make no mistake about it, this is all about Mommy and Daddy living vicariously through their kids.

    No chance she went off script. Have you seen any of the videos where she is asked a question and doesn’t have a prepared answer?? She’s literally a puppet on a string


  • #5897
    Gaoth Laidir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    I see Lewis Hamilton is jumping on the bandwagon too. Complaining about everyone else while he flies all over the world to races and his stupid fashion events. Oh, and he's also ambassador for the Petronas oil company.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/formula-1/2019/10/15/lewis-hamilton-sparks-concern-social-media-post-stating-feel/amp/#aoh=15712951021692&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s


  • #5898
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    No chance she went off script. Have you seen any of the videos where she is asked a question and doesn’t have a prepared answer?? She’s literally a puppet on a string

    She's. 16.

    What level of knowledge and ability to think quickly and articulate do you think the average 16 year old has in their second language.


  • #5899
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Tell me how wrote: »
    She's. 16.

    What level of knowledge and ability to think quickly and articulate do you think the average 16 year old has in their second language.

    She literally can’t answer any questions. None. Without a script. She’s a child actor. Quick to put on the rage when the script calls for it. Without a script she is just an ignorant child.


  • #5900
    Blueshoe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    Tell me how wrote: »
    She's. 16.

    What level of knowledge and ability to think quickly and articulate do you think the average 16 year old has in their second language.

    Zero by the looks of it. She has a speech writing team. Her job is to look pïssed off and slightly confused.


  • #5901
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,493 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    She literally can’t answer any questions. None. Without a script. She’s a child actor. Quick to put on the rage when the script calls for it. Without a script she is just an ignorant child.

    Sorry, but that is just some fantasy you're clinging to.
    It has no basis in the reality of what age has said or done over the last year.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement