• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Darat said:
Yeah you got the likes of David Attenborough saying the same thing. He was even given millions of pounds to make TV shows in which he told people about how little time we have to alleviate the worse predictions.
Click to expand...

Why would Attenborough be given money to make a nature program, do you think Darat?
 
Last edited:
cullennz said:
Which would cancel out Lionking's "her movement"

And it isn't feeble at all

"But some of the kids who went on strike today are really scared.

I heard a young person on the radio this morning saying billions of people are going to die by 2050

That’s ridiculous. Do we actually believe billions of people are going to die because of climate change in 31 years because of climate change"

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air...climate-change-frenzy-is-terrifying-children/
Click to expand...

You cite a talk back radio host?

Feeble indeed.
 
a_unique_person said:
When I was growing up I was taught I was going to burn in hell forever if I didn't do what Jesus wanted. We have been terrifying kids for millennia with **** like that.
Click to expand...

The difference now, of course, is that kids are being told the truth by Thunberg and others.
 
8enotto said:
So instead of school strikes get those kids into more school to become the generation that stops the damage, intelligently. Teach them to become the scientists and engineers that make an eco friendly future.

If the political systems if now can't or won't, those of the future can and should once they have the technology to replace what we use now.
Click to expand...


We seem to be teaching them that there is no point in becoming scientists or engineers because they won't be listened to.

They are trying to teach their elders to listen to scientists and engineers.

Poor chumps. Like that's gonna happen. They should just shut up and sign up for their mountain of student debt.

How else is anyone going to make money off of them?
 
Tolls said:
"scaring children"?

That's pretty feeble.

They're no more scared than we were back in the day.
And it's not as if she's the only source of GW information being consumed by kids.
Click to expand...


a_unique_person said:
When I was growing up I was taught I was going to burn in hell forever if I didn't do what Jesus wanted. We have been terrifying kids for millennia with **** like that.
Click to expand...


That, and if Jesus didn't get us then the a-bombs would.

Of course, that wasn't coming from other kids, that was coming from our government and our teachers, who were giving us lessons ... in class ... on how to stick our head between our legs and kiss our asses goodbye when the warning sirens went off.

While our parents were thumbing through ads in mainstream periodicals for stuff to buy to fit out home fallout shelters.

From the most common children's prayer of the era?

"... If I should die before I wake ..."​
 
Last edited:
Skeptical Greg said:
How long would make a difference to Thunberg's generation..


What would you consider measurable?

You were the one commenting on the crisis of increased flooding.

How soon will reducing CO2 emissions reduce the risk of increased flooding?
Click to expand...

Read the IPCC reports, they have information on expected impacts for a range of CO2 emission scenarios.
 
cullennz said:
Yes

The climate change movement has been going on since they were calling it global warming.
Click to expand...

FYI both those terms have been in use a long time. If you’ve noticed “climate change” more often it means you are a victim or right wing media spin. In the late 90’s right wing focus groups showed people found “climate change” to be a less threatening term than “global warming” so right wing politicians and media were encouraged to stop using the latter and use the latter instead.
 
lionking said:
Or in a few years they can cast their votes.



But you know this. I find it amusing the panic that has been generated at the thought of millions of passionate, active young people voting to reduce carbon emissions.
Click to expand...
Okay, cool. Thunberg is 14 16 years old. Say her audience is about the same. Assuming a voting age of 18, these votes will start coming online in about two years. How soon after that do you think we'll start seeing am impact on climate change policy? And how soon after that do you think we'll start seeing an impact on climate change itself?
 
lomiller said:
Probably not soon. There are far to many right wing wack-a-doodles trying block and/or delay meaningful actions to reduce emissions.
Click to expand...
One of the criticisms of the celebration of Thunberg is that she's being celebrated for preaching to the choir. If the goal is to convert the people you're dependent on on for the change you need, then Thunberg is basically a no-op.
 
dann said:
They will have to do away with a system based on lobbying, campaign funds, raising millions of dollars, i.e. with a system where people with money buy the policies they want implemented and the 'think tanks' that legitimate those policies:

'I want to be able to buy what's best, screw the rest. Who cares about the rising sea levels? I have a yacht!'
Click to expand...
You sound even more pessimistic about their chances than I am!

How long do you think it will be, before they accomplish the task you describe?
 
dann said:
Ask the Koch brothers, the fossil fuel industry, the car industry.









Generations don't get anybody into any mess. Generations don't decide anything. Capitalism does, as long as we let it. The generation of the Koch brothers doesn't influence the decisions they make. Their investments (i.e. capital) do.
Click to expand...
That seems like an unnecessary distinction.
 
theprestige said:
Nobody is celebrating him as a brave campaigner, leading a Children's Crusade and making a real difference, either.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I wonder what his views on Greta are.

https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/...-the-facts-bbc-documentary-on-global-warming/

Attenborough praises her action along with others across the world in the BBC film, saying that “there’s a message for all of us in the voices of these young people. It is after all their generation who will inherit this dangerous legacy.”

The documentary is set to lay out the scientific evidence of global warming and the risks that climate change poses across the world, with Attenborough stating that “we are facing a man-made disaster on a global scale.”

“In the 20 years since I first started talking about the impact of climate change on our world, conditions have changed far faster than I ever imagined,” Attenborough says. “It may sound frightening, but the scientific evidence is that if we have not taken dramatic action within the next decade, we could face irreversible damage to the natural world, and the collapse of our societies.”
Click to expand...

It looks like he's celebrating her though. Because of his extensive experience and firsthand knowledge of the natural world he must know what he's talking about. Right?


Edit: It seems he must have experience of being a 'scared' 16 year old as well, just as is claimed for the climate protestors. He grew up during the Second World War and was a member of the Home Guard (for those who don't know, the Home Guard were national defense volunteers. Trained as a defense of last-resort against a possible German invasion). Being 'scared' didn't seem to do him any harm.
 
Last edited:
a_unique_person said:
She's a kid and she has a right to know what is being done to the world she lives in and speak or about it. But you do accept she is doing the same thing as Attenborough.

David Attenborough agrees there is one decade to act decisively. If you want to ask more about this go to the final warming thread. You don't seem to get it.
Click to expand...

Others saying roughly the same thing include Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox and Stephen Hawking.

Should Greta be grouped together with these people? Actually, yes. None of them are climate scientists, but this isn’t a climate science question, it comes down to basic science literacy. The people doing active research and actively publishing climate science are alarmed at where we are heading if we do nothing, this is an indisputable fact at this point. If you are scientifically literate in climate research then you will likely share this sentiment, if you are illiterate you may find yourself throwing around accusations of “alarmist”.

cullennz said:
She maybe saying similar things, but Attenborough has a huge a amount of life and career in the field experience, while it appears to me anyway that she is being manipulated.
Click to expand...

Again, it’s a question of scientific literacy. Attenborough is not a climate scientist; rather he is simply reflecting what is in the scientific literature. Greta is likewise reflecting the climate science literature. Personally I don’t need to use either of them as a primary source of information, this doesn’t mean that communicating science to the public is an irrelevant role, and there is no reason to think Greta can’t be just as capable of that as people like Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox or Carl Sagan.

Deep down, the wack-a-doodle right thinks so as well or they would not be nearly as focused on attacking the messenger as they are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom