• 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.
lionking said:
You are the only one saying this. Greta is not.
Click to expand...

Whatever


You know full well a lot of the UN is saying 10 and a fair few scientists say 8


The ones Greta urges people to listen to.

It might help if with her preaching she could recommend non nutty ones
 
cullennz said:
Whatever


You know full well a lot of the UN is saying 10 and a fair few scientists say 8


The ones Greta urges people to listen to.

It might help if with her preaching she could recommend non nutty ones
Click to expand...


There is about 10 years to take real actions to prevent catastophic events. Catastrophic means many fatalaties. Don't shoot the messenger. Don't be surprised if the younger people who will have to live with the results are going to raise hell. So far the actions have been benign. The current fires in Australia are costing far more than any inconvenience caused by protests.
 
72 pages in, and still going over (and over and over and over...)the same things that were cleared up by page 3. If anyone is reading this in the future and wonders why we couldn't get enough of a mandate to get governments and the fuel/manufacturing industries to work diligently on the climate change problem, this thread is a great example.
 
cullennz said:
Meanwhile let's tell vulnerable young people it is 8 years or they die
Click to expand...

Really, it's down to a "Think about the children" argument? If governments and industry had thought about the children we wouldn't be in this predicament. Hell, if parents had thought about the children they would have done something sooner. The upcoming generation is the one going to have to deal with climate change so why shouldn't they be told about it?

Hopefully, when the **** hits the fan, they sacrifice the older generation and save the younger.
 
cullennz said:
Mind you in 8 years you might get to say I told you so and the world stops working.

Everything dies and weirdo religious types say Armageddon is happening,

And the odd Nostradamus weirdo trying to join links that used to be the twin towers, and before that the two royals
Click to expand...

And weirdo climate denier types say they knew it all along and tried to warn us.

If you listen to the science and do something about it, Cullenz, and Greta turns out to be wrong, the worst you get is a cleaner planet. If she's right, maybe we can do something to mitigate the results. There really is no down side to doing something about it.
 
lionking said:
At least one person in this very thread doubts the extent of future warming and thinks it will arrive far more slowly than scientists predict.
Click to expand...
Just one?

And how will being reminded that attacking Thunberg doesn't make climate change go away, change that persons way of thinking?

Giordano seems to think they are addressing the same juvenile audience that Greta lectures, on benign things that they need to be reminded of.
 
lionking said:
You are the only one saying this. Greta is not.
Click to expand...

cullennz said:
Whatever
Click to expand...

The thread in a nutshell. Make up lies about Thunberg. Criticize her based on the lies. And then show complete indifference when the lies are proven.

I have absolutely no idea what the liars in this thread are hoping to accomplish, unless they are looking to show us all evidence of their own moral bankruptcy.

The op asks if Ms Thunberg is “disturbed”. No evidence of this has been provided in this thread. There is definite evidence in this thread that some posters here are obsessed with finding fault with Thunberg and do belong in that category.
 
Steve said:
The thread in a nutshell. Make up lies about Thunberg. Criticize her based on the lies. And then show complete indifference when the lies are proven.

I have absolutely no idea what the liars in this thread are hoping to accomplish, unless they are looking to show us all evidence of their own moral bankruptcy.

The op asks if Ms Thunberg is “disturbed”. No evidence of this has been provided in this thread. There is definite evidence in this thread that some posters here are obsessed with finding fault with Thunberg and do belong in that category.
Click to expand...

Au contraire. Her own words show that she is quite disturbed about the climate and inaction she perceives. And rightfully so.

I would opine that the thread is more about how much we value talk over action. Several of us here have a short fusefor virtue signalling shows. Greta (inadvertently) is the current poster child for the endless gum-flapping that passes for discussion.

Note please that this thread rolls on, while a similar thread sits dormant. That shows pretty clearly, I think, what the subject is and is not, here.
 
Thermal said:
Au contraire. Her own words show that she is quite disturbed about the climate and inaction she perceives. And rightfully so.

I would opine that the thread is more about how much we value talk over action. Several of us here have a short fusefor virtue signalling shows. Greta (inadvertently) is the current poster child for the endless gum-flapping that passes for discussion.

Note please that this thread rolls on, while a similar thread sits dormant. That shows pretty clearly, I think, what the subject is and is not, here.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/nov/09/doomism-new-tactic-fossil-fuel-lobby


Yeah, about that.

Mann told the Observer that although flat rejection of global warming was becoming increasingly hard to maintain in the face of mounting evidence, this did not mean climate change deniers were giving up the fight.
“First of all, there is an attempt being made by them to deflect attention away from finding policy solutions to global warming towards promoting individual behaviour changes that affect people’s diets, travel choices and other personal behaviour,” said Mann. “This is a deflection campaign and a lot of well-meaning people have been taken in by it.”
Click to expand...


Greta is on the right track to be pushing for policy change.
 
Thermal said:
Au contraire. Her own words show that she is quite disturbed about the climate and inaction she perceives. And rightfully so.

I would opine that the thread is more about how much we value talk over action. Several of us here have a short fusefor virtue signalling shows. Greta (inadvertently) is the current poster child for the endless gum-flapping that passes for discussion.

Note please that this thread rolls on, while a similar thread sits dormant. That shows pretty clearly, I think, what the subject is and is not, here.
Click to expand...

Don’t pretend to be naive about the plain meaning of “disturbed” in the op. It is spelled out quite clearly.

I have no real issue with your opinion here. I do not agree with it but it is valid, and honest. unfortunately there are a number of posters here who are not so honest. If those posters would stick to criticizing things she has actually done I would be fine with that.
 
Stout said:
I'll bet that guy has a lot of frequent flier miles racked up. No wonder he's against people adjusting their lifestyle. No fossil fuels for you poor people.
Click to expand...
Where did he say he's against it? He is not "that guy", he is one of the bravest climate scientists out there who has had to endure decades of vilification, humiliation and death threats.

He even seems to know you.
 
Last edited:
True! He is against shifting the focus from what really matters:

From the same article:
“We should also be aware how the forces of denial are exploiting the lifestyle change movement to get their supporters to argue with each other. It takes pressure off attempts to regulate the fossil fuel industry. This approach is a softer form of denial and in many ways it is more pernicious.”
Click to expand...
 
Yep, we can regulate the industry, make oil really expensive. Poor people, they can go hang, freeze in their houses because even if you triple the price of fuel, the rich will still be able to afford their week in Fiji.

People leading carbon rich lifestyles will say anything. Anything against the idea of reducing demand in order to preserve their lifestyles.

They're going to have to pry my propane patios heaters out of my cold dead hands.
 
Steve said:
Don’t pretend to be naive about the plain meaning of “disturbed” in the op. It is spelled out quite clearly.
Click to expand...

I'm not pretending anything; just a bit of equivocation meant sympathetically to her.

I have no real issue with your opinion here. I do not agree with it but it is valid, and honest. unfortunately there are a number of posters here who are not so honest. If those posters would stick to criticizing things she has actually done I would be fine with that.
Click to expand...

As an aside, thanks for this. We all get caught up in arguments and seeing agendas that aren't intended. Does a brother good to see a polite disagreement once in a while.
 
Last edited:
Stout said:
Yep, we can regulate the industry, make oil really expensive. Poor people, they can go hang, freeze in their houses because even if you triple the price of fuel, the rich will still be able to afford their week in Fiji.

People leading carbon rich lifestyles will say anything. Anything against the idea of reducing demand in order to preserve their lifestyles.

They're going to have to pry my propane patios heaters out of my cold dead hands.
Click to expand...
Yes, a post that is exactly as Mann predicted.
 
a_unique_person said:
Yes, a post that is exactly as Mann predicted.
Click to expand...

Here, I'll simplify things a little and explain just what it is that I'm doing here.

I need you to think of oil as meth.

What I'm doing is running a D.A.R.E program to try to keep people off on meth (oil). to prevent them from getting too deeply entangled that they won't be able to back out and end up either dead or in the clutches of the DEA.

You don't object to trying to keep kids off of drugs do you ?

I know it's too late for most of you Greataphiles, I can see it in your posts but it's your kids, your grand children I'm thinking about and it doesn't do them any good to be raised in a drug house.
 
Stout said:
Here, I'll simplify things a little and explain just what it is that I'm doing here.

I need you to think of oil as meth.

What I'm doing is running a D.A.R.E program to try to keep people off on meth (oil). to prevent them from getting too deeply entangled that they won't be able to back out and end up either dead or in the clutches of the DEA.

You don't object to trying to keep kids off of drugs do you ?

I know it's too late for most of you Greataphiles, I can see it in your posts but it's your kids, your grand children I'm thinking about and it doesn't do them any good to be raised in a drug house.
Click to expand...

Ms Thunberg and yourself have a common goal, but you have spent many posts disparaging her message. Her message is being heard by many thousands of people. Yours by around ten. Thunberg appears to be far and away the more effective communicator.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom