Hunky Monster wrote: » Where does Greta think the batteries come from in her Tesla? And who eats canned beans in their car. Disgusting.
Hunky Monster wrote: » Where does Greta think the batteries come from in her Tesla?
Micky 32 wrote: » With all them beans she’ll produce more greenhouse gasses than cows!
Micky 32 wrote: » Oh dear :-/https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r8SyoRwV_To&feature=youtu.be
Tell me how wrote: » Oh. My. God. This.... this changes everything. I mean, what was she thinking. I feel so let down, and lied to and Oh, my God, I can't even........... Not! A - Is she expected to survive on thin air? B - She is just off a boat, do people think that she has full equipment to cook and store food with her? C - Do you really think that this undermines her message? D - Is it actually her car (or the car she travelled in)? I know the video maker went out looking for a scoop to undermine her, I wouldn't be surprised if we found out that she hadn't been anywhere near the car.
Hunky Monster wrote: » Ah fake news I get you.
Hector Savage wrote: » I saw her in Madrid last week, asked a question should these young people change their OWN lives and habits . She brushed it aside and basically said - Protest more, bring more awareness. This cult has nothing to do with actual change, they just want anarchy, they want idiots supergluing themselves to the road - which only alienates people. She had the chance to tell her supporters to walk more, use electronics less, stop changing your phone ever x months .... but no, let the social media likes campaign continue .....
Micky 32 wrote: » I couldn’t be arsed to read over the sh*te again. Some say she has autism and you and others say aspergers. Would you like me to edit my posts to suit you? I don’t know much about the girl as i have said in a previous post. Oh seeing we are getting a lesson on reading posts i do remember you not reading my posts very well and me having to correct you. Before replying please read the post properly before replying, thank you.
DublinWriter wrote: » I just don't understand why people are obsessing on the messenger, rather than the message. If she triggers you personally, then you need to go for a long walk and have a chat with yourself.
Fr_Dougal wrote: » Her childhood. We stolded it.
weldoninhio wrote: » Can you explain “triggers”? I’ve seen it throughout the thread. Triggered this, triggers that. Can’t people hold a differing opinion without being triggered? Is saying triggered just a succinct way of saying holds a different opinion to me??
weldoninhio wrote: » The attached sums Greta up. Spoilt little rich kid.,
DublinWriter wrote: » I just don't understand why people are obsessing on the messenger, rather than the message.
Deleted User wrote: » more than that. being triggered is a serious PTSD response reaction when something sends you back into that distress state to use it as the mocking, contemptuous slap in the manner weve seen throughout this thread demonstrates either enormous ignorance, appalling lack of empathy or offensive callousness but its ok, because they are the good guys transparent as **** imo, as is the rest of their nasty behaviour to anyone asking the wrong questions
Deleted User wrote: » reported this post for triggering content
Tell me how wrote: » What about the way this poster used it? We are way down the rabbit hole when posters who spend a lot of their time talking about snowflake liberals are now perplexed by it being suggested they appear triggered.
Countries are finding clever ways around having to take real action. Like double-counting emissions reductions and moving their emissions overseas and walking back on their promises to increase ambition or refusing to pay for solutions or loss of damage. This has to stop. “What we need is real drastic emission cuts at the source but of course, just reducing emissions is not enough. Our greenhouse gas emissions has to stop. To stay below 1.5 degrees. We need to keep the carbon in the ground. Only setting up distant dates and saying things which give the impression of the action is underway will most likely do more harm than good because the changes required are still nowhere in sight. “The politics needed does not exist today despite what you might hear from world leaders. And I still believe that the biggest danger is not inaction. The real danger is when politicians and CEOs are making it look like real action is happening when in fact almost nothing is being done apart from clever accounting and creative PR.
Ireland has a notorious and long-established record, encapsulated in emission figures that don’t lie. The latest Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) figures confirm the trend; we are on a trajectory of rising emissions with no indication of when it will be stopped and put into reverse – in spite of commitments made on the global stage to do so. If that continues, our emissions in 2020 will be higher than they were in 2005. The target we agreed with the EU was to reduce them by 20 per cent. Put another way, our emissions in 2020 will therefore be 25 per cent higher than the target we agreed.
Ireland is not on track to meet binding renewable energy targets or emissions reduction targets for 2020. The possibility of fines frequently arises, but carbon credits can be purchased to meet compliance with both emissions and renewable energy targets. The latter is the likely course we will take. Existing estimated costs for purchasing compliance for these combined targets range from a total of €230 million to €610 million.In the case of emissions failures, the cost could be several hundred million euro.
Tell me how wrote: » D - Is it actually her car (or the car she travelled in)? .
Tell me how wrote: » Given how she is travelling, is it really feasible to think she will not have to use less ideal practices on occasion.
Micky 32 wrote: » If she can’t practice what she preaches she shouldn’t have travelled.
Tell me how wrote: » Get out of here with that nonsense. Do you think people working in climate saving industries walk to work every morning? Take some time, and try and look at the bigger picture. Do you think that the 16 year old in the car was responsible for all decisions on selecting food provisions?
Tell me how wrote: » Do you think that the 16 year old in the car was responsible for all decisions on selecting food provisions?
Micky 32 wrote: » The only nonsense here is the bs you’re typing. Yes the bigger picture is she’s a hypocrite, she just looking to be in the spot light and behind closed doors doing what most teenagers do. She drinks out of water bottles just like the ones you lectured me about..
Micky 32 wrote: » Are you saying she isn’t capable of choosing her own food?
Tell me how wrote: » Sigh. Again, I didn't lecture you. I pointed out that you could save money and do more for the environment by using a refillable container. You acknowledged the fact that you hadn't realised it. Trying to suggest that a child who has just sailed across the Atlantic is a hypocrite for being in a car with convenience bottles of waters is grasping at straws. You seem intent in having an argument. I'm off out now, you'll have to find someone else to annoy. Have good one.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
