No, and you clearly don’t understand how communication works.
Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed?
- Thread starter Matthew Best
- Start date
- Status
No, and you clearly don’t understand how communication works.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Beyond silly.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
At age 16 you did not know how either. Probably most people on this planet do not know how.
Is dad/manager there for decoration or can he not figure it out either?
Sent from my SM-J111M using Tapatalk
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist Pronouns: He/Him
There's also the small matter that freighters are one of the most tremendously polluting forms of transport on the planet, so it's unlikely she'd want to use that method anyway.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
theprestige did not ask about her dad. I expect her dad could figure it out if it was deemed a suitable method of transportation. Why would he think it is suitable?
No idea
I'm not her.
I'm still waiting for a decent reason why she can't video conference in on a giant TV
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Of course you have no idea. You are just asking inane questions.
There is no reason why she can’t video conference. Why are you waiting for someone to explain why she can’t.
Not apparently
Someone has kindly worked it out for the options
https://qz.com/1741155/greta-thunbergs-options-for-crossing-the-atlantic-again/
Without the blurbs you also could have
Last edited:
Thermal
August Member
*glances at thread title*
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist Pronouns: He/Him
Okay, going a couple of links in, I encounter this:
The Wired article also points out that if someone as famous as Thunberg took a cargo ship, a lot of other people might realise that it's possible and want to emulate her, and the shipping companies would race to get dedicated passenger-fitted ships into operation, and honestly, I can't see a downside to that given the emission-to-weight ratio of a ship that size. Cargo ships fitted for passengers could carry way more people than aircraft can and would be cheaper. The only downside is that they take much longer to arrive.
So yeah, maybe taking a cargo ship is a pretty good idea after all.
So it's efficient because it's such a huge stonking ship. Capacity on cargo ships is measured in Twenty-foot Equivalent Units (TEU) which is a space capacity rather than weight, because the weight depends on the cargo being carried - 1 TEU of lead pipes is going to be heavier than 1 TEU of down pillows. So it's not easy to calculate how many grams of CO2 a given ship will emit on a typical voyage. However, since a cargo ship can carry up to 21,000 TEU and travel many thousands of kilometres, it adds up. And this is all information that I did not know before looking it up on Wikipedia, so thanks for that.
The Wired article also points out that if someone as famous as Thunberg took a cargo ship, a lot of other people might realise that it's possible and want to emulate her, and the shipping companies would race to get dedicated passenger-fitted ships into operation, and honestly, I can't see a downside to that given the emission-to-weight ratio of a ship that size. Cargo ships fitted for passengers could carry way more people than aircraft can and would be cheaper. The only downside is that they take much longer to arrive.
So yeah, maybe taking a cargo ship is a pretty good idea after all.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist Pronouns: He/Him
Which is derived from a statement by a right-wing shock jock, who, as I pointed out early in the thread, isn't Australia's Alex Jones, but you can see his house from there. Andrew Bolt is the kind of commentator where if you find yourself in agreement with him, you should really be rethinking your life choices.
Last edited:
Thermal
August Member
Agreed. But while I can understand some thread drift, I'm not sure why so many posters seem surprised that the focus tends to be on Greta herself. Title and all.
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
When the specifics are framed as necessary and inseparable from the decision, I would agree.
Where the situation can be generalized as "not using one form of travel when alternative, less-impactful means are available", who owned the sailboat, or even whether it was a sailboat, doesn't matter - because now you're also talking about things like using light rail and bicycling rather than calling a Uber.
Because the mods removed about a swathe of about 56 posts as off topic that didn't focus on Greta?
That might be part of it. At a guess and that.
In countries where this available and/or practical
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
Sort of obvious, but yeah.
Yeah it is obvious, but there are a lot of countries where this is how it is, including most of NZ and Aus.
Sorry, not meaning you, but sometimes when you speak to people about climate change it can seem a bit "Just do this", like because they happen to have a decent public transport system and live in the city where everything is within biking distance, they seem to come across as every one does.
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
Hence the caveat "when alternative, less-impactful means are available".
I don't surmise there's really anyone who doesn't realize that you can only take light rail when you live in a city that as light rail, and so on.
Thunberg herself probably will not have access to a sailboat every single time she is invited to a transatlantic event. Of course during those times, when there is no alternative available, she will probably need to fly. It goes without saying that she will be endlessly taunted by her obsessive anti-fans for doing so. However, this one time, she did happen to have the option available; so, it was the correct thing to do to take it.
I don't surmise there's really anyone who doesn't realize that you can only take light rail when you live in a city that as light rail, and so on.
Thunberg herself probably will not have access to a sailboat every single time she is invited to a transatlantic event. Of course during those times, when there is no alternative available, she will probably need to fly. It goes without saying that she will be endlessly taunted by her obsessive anti-fans for doing so. However, this one time, she did happen to have the option available; so, it was the correct thing to do to take it.
Last edited:
Assuming she and her entourage didn't know about the other flights which it would cause.
Of which I have severe doubts is credible.
But no proof, so maybe
- Status