• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Somehow the new perspective seems even sillier than the old one.

Silly: I don't know how to manage my own travel.

Sillier: None of my millions of fans seem to be helping.

Silliest: The Spanish government says they'll help!
 
theprestige said:
Somehow the new perspective seems even sillier than the old one.

Silly: I don't know how to manage my own travel.

Sillier: None of my millions of fans seem to be helping.

Silliest: The Spanish government says they'll help!
Click to expand...

Well yes this does seem silly. Entirely because you made Up each statement. It seems to be so hard for you to criticize things that Thunberg actually says and does that you actually have to invent things.
 
Steve said:
Well yes this does seem silly. Entirely because you made Up each statement. It seems to be so hard for you to criticize things that Thunberg actually says and does that you actually have to invent things.
Click to expand...

Well, Thermal's surmise about the fans isn't really from Thunberg. You got me there. And the first statement is more of an inference from her reaction to the COP25 move.

But the third is true. The Spanish government really did offer to help. Which is pretty silly. Especially if she can manage her own travel arrangements.
 
Killary lost a tear about Greta's struggle to camouflage "Big Brother" with "Little Sister" who is watching you:

Breitbart said:
[...] “It’s been fascinating to watch how scared a lot of grown up male leaders are of this young 16-year-old girl who speaks up about the threat of climate change,” Clinton said in London. “She is a young women, so the idea that she is standing up and speaking out as effectively as she has just rattles all of the paradigms that people still live with.”

Clinton pointed to what she called, “ancient DNA imprinting” that determines “‘This is what women are supposed to do and this is what they are supposed to look like’ and you are not supposed to be so pushy and aggressive … it is maddening how much that still operates.”

Elsewhere in the discussion, Clinton said she had “always admired Britain”even if the current state of politics confuses her.

She added: “I am, as a great admirer, concerned because I can’t make sense of what is happening.” she also said she found the same bafflement with U.S. politics.

“In my own country as well. I don’t understand it…. It’s hard to figure out exactly where you’re headed.” [...]
Click to expand...


Britain? Que?
 
Come on Steve, we are all waiting for the evidence that Breitbart misrepresented Killary's inane comments. Can't be that hard as you came up with your "source critique" three minutes after my post. You must have had previous evidence, right, as you sure aren't just wasting our time with automatic responses to trigger words I deliberately build in, right?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Are you really incapable of checking if what Breitbart laid into her ugly criminal mouth is what she really said? If so, why are you thinking your "opinion" is something to be shared on the internet?
Click to expand...

Don’t care. I will never waste my time following up Breitbart. Now, if you give me the same info from a source that is known to be reliable I may be mildly interested.

Anyway, it’s my internet and I will do what I like with it. My opinions are always spot on just like Breitbart’s (and yours). :D
 
Steve said:
Don’t care. I will never waste my time following up Breitbart. Now, if you give me the same info from a source that is known to be reliable I may be mildly interested.
Click to expand...


But that isn't something I would want to do. Your completely unaware trigger post serves my evil agenda, and as long as you post nonsense while so obviously not doing your own thinking (refusing obviously true information because you are conditioned to reject the source) in plain view of real Skeptics, I win.
 
arthwollipot said:
How do you know she has not actually been doing that?
Click to expand...

She can't have

She would need a phone

Phones cause climate change

Probably doesn't let her dad own one either, which is probably why he can't ring

We found that the relative emissions share of smartphones is expected to grow from four per cent in 2010 to 11 per cent by 2020, dwarfing the individual contributions of PCs, laptops and computer displays.

In absolute values, emissions caused by smartphones will jump from 17 to 125 megatons of CO2 equivalent per year (Mt-CO2e/yr) in that time span, or a 730 per cent growth.

The lion’s share of this footprint (85 to 95 per cent) will be caused not by the use of the device, but rather by its production. That includes, in addition to the manufacturing energy, the energy for material mining for gold and the so-called rare-earth elements like yttrium, lanthanium and several others that today are almost exclusively available only from China.
Click to expand...
 
arthwollipot said:
If Breitbart claimed that the sky was blue, I'd fact-check it.
Click to expand...


Obvious lie because in that case your post would show us that Killary was quoted incorrectly instead of adding more partisan dust.

Prove that you fact-checked what Breitbart said according to me and found that it was wrong. If you can't, what the hell is your post meant to be other than a self-indictment?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Obvious lie because in that case your post would show us that Killary was quoted incorrectly instead of adding more partisan dust.

Prove that you fact-checked what Breitbart said according to me and found that it was wrong. If you can't, what the hell is your post meant to be other than a self-indictment?
Click to expand...
I never said I did fact-check it. I don't give a **** what lies that rag tells. I will never trust it as a source. If it gets something right, it's purely by accident and I'm sure they'll issue a correction.
 
arthwollipot said:
I never said I did fact-check it. I don't give a **** what lies that rag tells. I will never trust it as a source. If it gets something right, it's purely by accident and I'm sure they'll issue a correction.
Click to expand...


Ah, ok, you only would fact-check Breitbart if it would literally claim that the sky is blue. In all other cases you would just assume that they are wrong, and even in this case you chose to insert your opinion into you refuse to fact-check. Understood. Your problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom