Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Climate change

Airborne_Again wrote:

More like a figure of speech — “…we’re like…”

unfortunately that’s how she speaks.

The BBC thinks it’s 18 months to do something or we’re all doomed. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48964736

Mind you in 06 Al Gore said we had 10 years before we reached the point of no return

Airborne_Again wrote:

Her mother is not a “pop star or contestant”. She is an opera singer and not one of the most well known ones. She did participate in the Eurovision Song Contest once, 10 years ago.

Sorry I should have said musical arts type.

Airborne_Again wrote:

She doesn’t have any mental illnesses. She has Aspergers syndrome, which is not an “illness”.

I thought Aspergers was defined as a mental illness. Perhaps you’d prefer mental disorder.

Airborne_Again wrote:

But what you write just proves my point. Your “criticism” of Greta Thunberg is nothing more than attempts to undermine her credibility by attacks or her person.

OK. At the UN Climate change summit she was asked for a message to world leaders and Donald Trump. She was also asked if she thought it was time President Trump would respond to what she had to say.

She went silent, asked for the question to be repeated. Looked around for someone to answer for her or tell her what to say, then responded with “I think what we want to send is. uhm, the message we want to send is to say that we have had enough and uh anyone else want to answer that question? I can’t speak on behalf of everyone”

Which appears to be what she’s trying to do most of the time. That whole piece to me looked as if she was really looking for someone to tell her what to say or at least provide a script.

She has encouraged children to skip school to go out and protest. I would argue it’s far better for children to get a good education than go out striking.

Off_Field wrote:

I thought Aspergers was defined as a mental illness. Perhaps you’d prefer mental disorder.

It’s not a question of what I prefer. It’s a question of what the terms mean. Particularly as “mental illness” carries negative connotations.

Which appears to be what she’s trying to do most of the time. That whole piece to me looked as if she was really looking for someone to tell her what to say or at least provide a script.

So she isn’t on top of the game 100% of the time? Who is?

She has encouraged children to skip school to go out and protest. I would argue it’s far better for children to get a good education than go out striking.

Not if you want to raise awareness. Activism is precisely what it takes.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Off_Field wrote:

That whole piece to me looked as if she was really looking for someone to tell her what to say or at least provide a script.

The wee lassie is a pawn in a much bigger game. She is being used by Soros, Bono, The Gates family, et al to drive much larger global agendas to facilitate multi national financial institutions. Have a look at this

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2019/09/28/gretas-soros-connections/

Edited to add……nothing is ever as it seems

Last Edited by BeechBaby at 29 Sep 13:22
Fly safe. I want this thing to land l...
EGPF Glasgow

Airborne_Again wrote:

It’s not a question of what I prefer. It’s a question of what the terms mean. Particularly as “mental illness” carries negative connotations.

The fact is she does have a mental condition. You take that negatively if you wish. also selective mutism and ocd. I think it’s a shame that her parents indulged her and push fed her fears (her mother apparently gave up her operatic career because she insisted they become vegan and stop flying). She’s a spoiled child and these discussions would be far better to have with educated adults.

Airborne_Again wrote:

So she isn’t on top of the game 100% of the time? Who is?

Not being able to answer a very simple question I wouldn’t say was not just being not quite at the top of their game. I only raised the specific example as you were not happy with my more general comments about her lack of ability other than seeming to be heavily scripted.

Airborne_Again wrote:

Not if you want to raise awareness. Activism is precisely what it takes.

I don’t know anyone who isn’t aware that climate change is being pushed as an absolute major issue. It’s consistently in the headlines, on news, etc.

It’d be great if people could look at a full spectrum of research and make a decision. but it’s far easier for people to join a screaming mob and go disrupt airports and people trying to go to work.

Last Edited by Off_Field at 29 Sep 14:52

Hockey fans, you should probably read this:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bombshell/

Mind you, this formed a significant basis for the great alarm.

All this talk of Greta is playing the man, not the ball and entirely counter productive.

Andreas IOM

I agree, but the problem is putting out children is trying to put feelings ahead of facts which to continue the rugby analogy is obstruction. Also counter productive.

alioth wrote:

All this talk of Greta is playing the man, not the ball and entirely counter productive.

Actually, this is exactly the problem. The Eco-warriors are doing EXACTLY this, they have pushed forward a child to garner sympathy support and any criticism can be pooh poohed with “you are picking on a child, why would you pick on an innocent child”…as opposed to answering the criticism with facts.

alioth wrote:

All this talk of Greta is playing the man, not the ball and entirely counter productive.

Absolutely, but this is always the strategy. Confuse, obfuscate, distract will always be more productive than acknowledging and acting on the problem. ‘Solar flares’, ‘sunspots’, ‘something to do with El Nino’, ‘only 97%, not 100% of climate scientists agree’ etc etc. ’Let’s not be rash, keep the status quo, and not do anything until we’re really sure’.

The same tactics are or have been used countless times, the tobacco industry vs health dangers of smoking being just one.

116 posts on this topic now. Wonder how many there would have been if instead of a girl in a boat, a middle aged bloke had taken a BA flight to Washington?

DavidJ wrote:

Confuse, obfuscate, distract will always be more productive than acknowledging and acting on the problem

Well yes, that’s how politics is typically done. The best example I can think of in this regard, on this topic, is the disingenuous way in which sea level rise is claimed by people who should be ashamed of themselves to be the result of man’s fossil fuel consumption. In fact sea level change has been continuous since reliable measurements were started some time in the 19th century, the mid-20th century onward increase in fossil fuel consumption resulting from population growth and rising worldwide living standards did not create the issue at all, and there was no dramatic acceleration either. It’s a fairly tenuous argument to say that man has had any effect at all on sea level rise.

The confusion created by obfuscating that issue in support of climate religion is distracting people from continuing the rise of living standards for the poor, and preventing them from understanding that energy/capita is not the enemy of mankind – handled properly it is the opposite. Affordable, available energy plus (very importantly) ending political corruption is actually the solution. Both factors in the end lead to a viable economy, security and thereby reduced population by choice.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 29 Sep 17:19
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top