Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

As everyone knows, I am a believer in man made global warming, we are heading towards desertification and worse. It is an issue and is happening in my opinion based on facts. However, Greta Thunberg is an incredibly unfortunate spokesperson for my side, her autism and behaviour isn't a good look. I have nothing against autistic kids we've had them on this board Darth Skywalker 0 springs to mind. To be honest I said the same about him, they have no life experience and at that age you feel strongly about things for a short time, you try ideas on, to see how they fit for you. The Elephant in the room is she may or may not be being used, she certainly shouldn't be a sacred cow and tbh, who wants to hear from a kid with issues that is loving the spotlight. Her views are right, but she is so wrong.

I disagree with all of the above, except for the sacred cow bit

i mean, let's be honest - you don't get to become the speaker on the UN and political spokesperson at 16 just because you try hard; it's obvious she's connected to people who are connected to people etc.

using children for this kind of thing is just disgusting and wrong, and is used for populist emotion-inducing dramas. as somebody who's totally supporting the fight against climate destruction, i'm really sad an autistic child is used by my side

Never seen/heard her speak, so can't comment.

In fact, I don't think I knew anything much about her until Trump tried to troll her and his cultist frothed up on command.

@ Bash, fair enough mate,
@GS, I think we are on the same page
@Rob, I just don't think she's all there tbh, Greta Thunberg condemns world leaders in emotional speech at UN

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/23/greta-thunberg-speech-un-2019-address?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy

She is DarthSkywalker0, Elimist etc on a global scale.

So you're saying she just needs to get laid to sort herself out...

#gotem

Originally posted by Robtard
So you're saying she just needs to get laid to sort herself out...

#gotem haha... not exactly, she's swedish and 16, I thought all swedish girls had lost it by then.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
haha... not exactly, she's swedish and 16, I thought all swedish girls had lost it by then. I haven't been to Sweden in a little while, get off my back.

How was Astner's butthole?

That little girl isn't the first little girl to do this.

There have been others and there will most definitely be more.

#Propaganda

Originally posted by gold slorg
i mean, let's be honest - you don't get to become the speaker on the UN and political spokesperson at 16 just because you try hard; it's obvious she's connected to people who are connected to people etc.

using children for this kind of thing is just disgusting and wrong, and is used for populist emotion-inducing dramas. as somebody who's totally supporting the fight against climate destruction, i'm really sad an autistic child is used by my side


Spot-on.

Originally posted by Robtard
Never seen/heard her speak, so can't comment.

In fact, I don't think I knew anything much about her until Trump tried to troll her and his cultist frothed up on command.


Heh.. nah, Trump didn't troll her... the petulant little brat trolled the world with her ignorance.


A sixteen year old kid shouldn't be speaking at the UN for Christ sake and she shouldn't be given such a huge platform to lecture the world on something she knows nothing about. Those things she was saying she didn't come up with on her own. Her parents or teachers or whatever put those crazy things in her impressionable little head. She's been indoctrinated, not educated.

She's passionate about environmentalism and has been given the opportunity to share her concerns about the future of the planet, as well as her grievances with both government and corporate lax environmental regulations, on the world stage. That's pretty f*cking admirable, especially for someone as young as she.

I'm more annoyed by childish adults who think their deity of choice will bless them with whatever they need, believe or act like natural resources are unlimited, don't give a f*ck about what they pass on to younger and future generations, and make time out of their mundane lives to mock a child for trying to make a positive impact on the world.

My problem is that implicitly we're supposed to take children such as her and the Parkland students seriously in politics... but we're not allowed to criticize them because they're just kids. It seems more like she's being used as a propaganda tool and shield from criticism.

Criticizing her arguments or the things she says is fine (so is criticizing people using her to emotionally manipulate the public), attacking a literal child like that retard Star is doing up there is dipshit redneck behavior.

Do you really believe they're her arguments rather than the arguments she's been given by the adults around her?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Do you really believe they're her arguments rather than the arguments she's been given by the adults around her? Go on

Originally posted by Emperordmb
My problem is that implicitly we're supposed to take children such as her and the Parkland students seriously in politics... but we're not allowed to criticize them because they're just kids. It seems more like she's being used as a propaganda tool and shield from criticism.

Or, they are invested in finding a solution and are using the amount of attention they're receiving in the moment to push for change. That doesn't mean they're right about everything, but the most important parts of their messages either cite research data from experts, or point to successful models.

The typical dismissals are pathetic.

For example:

Parkland survivors: ""

Murican A: "No! 2nd Amendment! Some bullshit about protection against criminals and a tyrannical government!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but that'll never work here. Our cultures are far too different, so we shouldn't try it at all."

Murican C: "I like guns! Guns are cool! I like guns and I feel really cool when I have a gun!"

Murican D: "Even if you take away guns, people will just find other shit to kill each other with. By the way, wasn't there a knife attack a couple of months ago?"

................

Greta Thunberg: ""

Murican A: "She's a puppet of the left! She's spreading propaganda and fear-mongering!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but I'll be dead by then, so I don't care."

Murican C: " I like meat! Meat is good! I like meat and I feel really good when I eat meat!"

Murican D: "That sounds inconvenient, so I'd rather not. By the way, where are her parents? Shouldn't she be in school?"

Originally posted by Emperordmb
My problem is that implicitly we're supposed to take children such as her and the Parkland students seriously in politics... but we're not allowed to criticize them because they're just kids. It seems more like she's being used as a propaganda tool and shield from criticism.


Bingo. And some of the same people who get upset over people criticizing the ignorant little brat are the same people who are perfectly fine with people attacking the mini-AOC girl simply because she pushes a different political view than theirs.

No, dude. There seems to be an embarrassingly large number of adults who are comfortable and content with insulting her intelligence, her appearance, her motivations, and even her mental health because they disagree with something she said or her stance on climate change in general. Many don't even bother to say why they disagree with her. It's enough for them to call her an annoying little b*tch or an autistic c*nt than to actually challenge what she is proposing.

That's not criticizing a child's ideas, that's just straight up venom. If they said the shit they were talking about her in person or online to her face, it would qualify as harrassment, if not child abuse.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Or, they are invested in finding a solution and are using the amount of attention they're receiving in the moment to push for change. That doesn't mean they're right about everything, but the most important parts of their messages either cite research data from experts, or point to successful models.

The typical dismissals are pathetic.

For example:

Parkland survivors: ""

Murican A: "No! 2nd Amendment! Some bullshit about protection against criminals and a tyrannical government!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but that'll never work here. Our cultures are far too different, so we shouldn't try it at all."

Murican C: "I like guns! Guns are cool! I like guns and I feel really cool when I have a gun!"

Murican D: "Even if you take away guns, people will just find other shit to kill each other with. By the way, wasn't there a knife attack a couple of months ago?"

................

Greta Thunberg: ""

Murican A: "She's a puppet of the left! She's spreading propaganda and fear-mongering!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but I'll be dead by then, so I don't care."

Murican C: " I like meat! Meat is good! I like meat and I feel really good when I eat meat!"

Murican D: "That sounds inconvenient, so I'd rather not. By the way, where are her parents? Shouldn't she be in school?"

Maybe if they stuck to facts they wouldn't be called out for propaganda?

Just look at the Parkland kids and the bullshit talking points they spewed. Brian Stelter openly admitted to allowing them to lie on his program, admitted he didn't push back.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
No, dude. There seems to be an embarrassingly large number of adults who are comfortable and content with insulting her intelligence, her appearance, her motivations, and even her mental health because they disagree with something she said or her stance on climate change in general. Many don't even bother to say why they disagree with her. It's enough for them to call her an annoying little b*tch or an autistic c*nt than to actually challenge what she is proposing.

That's not criticizing a child's ideas, that's just straight up venom. If they said the shit they were talking about her in person or online to her face, it would qualify as harrassment, if not child abuse. I think comparing Greta to the Parkland Survivors is a false comparison EA. The group has directly and indirectly suffered first hand acute trauma that will formulate there opinions, they have a stake, they have an understanding, they have a loss. Greta may have an understanding of climate data, she may have an awareness of what the future will bring but her behaviours are neither those of a normal adolescent or adult, they are extreme in an irrational way filtered by her autism and her lack of comprehension of how others behave and almost zero emotional intelligence cheapen a message, which would not be cheap when coming from an adult who has some social skills. She is a propaganda mouthpiece and a silly choice for one.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think comparing Greta to the Parkland Survivors is a false comparison EA. The group has directly and indirectly suffered first hand acute trauma that will formulate there opinions, they have a stake, they have an understanding, they have a loss. Greta may have an understanding of climate data, she may have an awareness of what the future will bring but her behaviours are neither those of a normal adolescent or adult, they are extreme in an irrational way filtered by her autism and her lack of comprehension of how others behave and almost zero emotional intelligence cheapen a message, which would not be cheap when coming from an adult who has some social skills. She is a propaganda mouthpiece and a silly choice for one.

Dude no, they have an understanding of tragedy yes. They do not have an understanding of firearms because their tragedy involved firearms.

Hiding in a closet in a school while someone shoots at other kids doesn't magically grant you firearm knowledge.

Just like if I witnessed a close friend get hit by a car and killed I wouldn't suddenly be able to repair car engines the next day nor would I be some expect on car safety.

When a conservative speaks strongly about something he or she is just "overreacting" or is "angry"/"triggered" but when a leftist or a kid who is pushing leftist ideas does it they are "being passionate".


I guarantee if myself or any other conservative was strongly defending the 2nd amendment or the basic inherent right to life of unborn children lefties would not be calling it "being passionate" lol.

I'm just waiting for her to sail a boat over to China and talk to them about climate change.

lmao

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think comparing Greta to the Parkland Survivors is a false comparison EA. The group has directly and indirectly suffered first hand acute trauma that will formulate there opinions, they have a stake, they have an understanding, they have a loss. Greta may have an understanding of climate data, she may have an awareness of what the future will bring but her behaviours are neither those of a normal adolescent or adult, they are extreme in an irrational way filtered by her autism and her lack of comprehension of how others behave and almost zero emotional intelligence cheapen a message, which would not be cheap when coming from an adult who has some social skills. She is a propaganda mouthpiece and a silly choice for one.

I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other.

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other.

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades.

This kinda reminds me of the whole NFL kneeling thing. The cause they were kneeling for got overshadowed massively by the questions of if it was offensive to kneel, etc.

Greta's rants aren't winning over anyone who already wasn't on her side. And the attention she is getting from those not on her side is not of the sort that is leading to meaningful dialogue about climate change.

And she is trying to shame ANYONE who uses a plane. I mean, cuz hey f*ck you if you're an airline pilot. Learn to code?

Originally posted by Surtur
Maybe if they stuck to facts they wouldn't be called out for propaganda?

Just look at the Parkland kids and the bullshit talking points they spewed. Brian Stelter openly admitted to allowing them to lie on his program, admitted he didn't push back.
They survived a mass shooting in which several classmates and school staff were killed. I'd hardly call their support for tougher gun laws propaganda.

Again, that doesn't mean everything they say is right, but in their case, they got a lot of needless and nasty shit for sharing their opinions.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
They survived a mass shooting in which several classmates and school staff were killed. I'd hardly call their support for tougher gun laws propaganda.

Again, that doesn't mean everything they say is right, but in their case, they got a lot of needless and nasty shit for sharing their opinions.

Support for tougher gun laws wasn't the propaganda, the propaganda was pushing lies about guns in order to garner support for tougher gun laws.

And again: the shit they got came from the *lies* lol. Or at least that was the reason for the majority of the shit they got. It's like the female ghostbusters movie, sure some small percentage of folk shit on it just cuz they were sexist and it had women, but the vast majority was valid criticism cuz it was dog shit.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other. I missed DMB's post all becomes clear now.

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades. That's her core message and I agree totally it is better coming from members of the Scientific Community, for me she is being used in the same way the silly MAGA hat boy was used by the right.

Originally posted by Surtur
This kinda reminds me of the whole NFL kneeling thing. The cause they were kneeling for got overshadowed massively by the questions of if it was offensive to kneel, etc.

Greta's rants aren't winning over anyone who already wasn't on her side. And the attention she is getting from those not on her side is not of the sort that is leading to meaningful dialogue about climate change.

And she is trying to shame ANYONE who uses a plane. I mean, cuz hey f*ck you if you're an airline pilot. Learn to code?

Definitely with you on your first two paragraphs, but you lost me on the third, Surt.

I think at that point it is up to the adults to recognize the need for things like planes in the modern world, but to also acknowledge and accept that we should be doing much more to produce clean energy and regulate industrial waste, then demand our governments to take action while making a more conscious effort to reduce our own footprint.

Instead, a great deal of the responses to her pleas and protests are pretty much, "F*ck you, autistic b*tch! I ain't changing shit! I like my truck!"

I think it's pathetic, and it'll be that kind of shitty attitude that'll inevitably doom our species, assuming a comet doesn't do it first.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Definitely with you on your first two paragraphs, but you lost me on the third, Surt.

I think at that point it is up to the adults to recognize the need for things like planes in the modern world, but to also acknowledge and accept that we should be doing much more to produce clean energy and regulate industrial waste, then demand our governments to take action while making a more conscious effort to reduce our own footprint.

Instead, a great deal of the responses to her pleas and protests are pretty much, "F*ck you, autistic b*tch! I ain't changing shit! I like my truck!"

I think it's pathetic, and it'll be that kind of shitty attitude that'll inevitably doom our species, assuming a comet doesn't do it first. Agree totally, also agree with Surt on his first two paragraphs.

Originally posted by Surtur
Support for tougher gun laws wasn't the propaganda, the propaganda was pushing lies about guns in order to garner support for tougher gun laws.

And again: the shit they got came from the *lies* lol. Or at least that was the reason for the majority of the shit they got. It's like the female ghostbusters movie, sure some small percentage of folk shit on it just cuz they were sexist and it had women, but the vast majority was valid criticism cuz it was dog shit.
I'm not familiar with it. What did they lie about?

She may be a temporary 'propagandist' symbol (and frankly, I have no problem with that, especially considering the ethics and behavior of the opposition). Or, she may be the embryonic presence of a genuine, dominant force for the future. Only time will tell. After all, all great leaders were children once. For the moment though, let her do her thing. I don't agree that it hurts the cause; one could equally say she's an inspiration (given the focus of most children). If people make fun of her or dismiss her, that's saying a lot more about the opposition than about Greta.

Even bears avoid fights with wolverines.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
That's her core message and I agree totally it is better coming from members of the Scientific Community, for me she is being used in the same way the silly MAGA hat boy was used by the right. Originally posted by Putinbot1
Agree totally, also agree with Surt on his first two paragraphs.
I suppose politicians and media figures have their own agendas behind their invitations to let her speak at these events thise on the left must give her a platform to appeal to the audience's sympathy, while those on the right see it as an opportunity to attack her position on climate change and undermine her movement.

I think it would probably matter more to her to see widespread environmental action implemented by governments and industry than any individual environmentalist purity.

I'm sure she'd love it if the world's focus shifted from her to the Scientific Community, and could rest assured real and significant changes were taking place.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I'm not familiar with it. What did they lie about?

You may or may not remember that in the aftermath we had folk going "this is the 18th school shooting this year!". Some of the people pushing that lie were the Parkland kids. The issue is the list used things like...cops chase a criminal onto school grounds and shoot him or...a student goes into a bathroom and kills himself with a gun.

Oh those technically are shootings that happened at schools, but alas we all know in this context when someone is saying "school shooting" they are talking about Parkland type situations.

Then there was "it's easier to buy a gun than it is cough medicine". Which isn't true.

Also they(and others) pushed a story about how a guy was able to buy an AR-15 in 5 minutes with no gun(never happened).

And of course we had CNN's Brian Stelter admitting to not correcting David Hogg when he said stuff that wasn't factual about guns.

Originally posted by Surtur
You may or may not remember that in the aftermath we had folk going "this is the 18th school shooting this year!". Some of the people pushing that lie were the Parkland kids. The issue is the list used things like...cops chase a criminal onto school grounds and shoot him or...a student goes into a bathroom and kills himself with a gun.

Oh those technically are shootings that happened at schools, but alas we all know in this context when someone is saying "school shooting" they are talking about Parkland type situations.

Then there was "it's easier to buy a gun than it is cough medicine". Which isn't true.

Also they(and others) pushed a story about how a guy was able to buy an AR-15 in 5 minutes with no gun(never happened).

And of course we had CNN's Brian Stelter admitting to not correcting David Hogg when he said stuff that wasn't factual about guns. So throw away comments make them liars. Do better Surt.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Definitely with you on your first two paragraphs, but you lost me on the third, Surt.

I think at that point it is up to the adults to recognize the need for things like planes in the modern world, but to also acknowledge and accept that we should be doing much more to produce clean energy and regulate industrial waste, then demand our governments to take action while making a more conscious effort to reduce our own footprint.

Instead, a great deal of the responses to her pleas and protests are pretty much, "F*ck you, autistic b*tch! I ain't changing shit! I like my truck!"

I think it's pathetic, and it'll be that kind of shitty attitude that'll inevitably doom our species, assuming a comet doesn't do it first.

We can say more should be done without shaming everyone who flies on a plane. You alienate people who do not deserve it. The guy flying to Europe on business instead of taking a sail boat there doesn't need to be shamed.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
So throw away comments make them liars. Do better Surt.

Saying something that isn't true and has already been debunked makes them liars. And even beyond that it takes a special kind of person to say it's harder to buy cough medicine than a gun.

And please, folk call Trump a liar all the time over throw away comments.

x49P_ZGeWq8

Her unhinged rants are gonna get called out. It doesn't matter what your cause is if you sound unhinged.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
x49P_ZGeWq8 the thing is she doesn't act like an adult. Her message is on point, using her for its delivery isn't.

Originally posted by Surtur
Her unhinged rants are gonna get called out. It doesn't matter what your cause is if you sound unhinged. I agree 100% ha, better you never thought you'd read that.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
the thing is she doesn't act like an adult. Her message is on point, using her for its delivery isn't.

I think part of the appeal of using her is any criticism can be deflected with "but you're going after this poor poor child!".

It's "won't someone think of the children" on steroids.

And speaking of kids I say teach them about climate change in the classroom instead of letting them take off school to protest about it. The kids can protest on the weekend if they need to protest.

Originally posted by Surtur
I think part of the appeal of using her is any criticism can be deflected with "but you're going after this poor poor child!".

It's "won't someone think of the children" on steroids.

And speaking of kids I say teach them about climate change in the classroom instead of letting them take off school to protest about it. The kids can protest on the weekend if they need to protest. Again I agree mate, well this is a rare day and speaking of steroids, I need to go up the gym now. It's Saturday morning sesh time.

And now there is talk of giving her the nobel peace prize, which will just exacerbate criticism because she just doesn't deserve it. Not for unhinged rants.

Originally posted by Surtur
We can say more should be done without shaming everyone who flies on a plane. You alienate people who do not deserve it. The guy flying to Europe on business instead of taking a sail boat there doesn't need to be shamed.
True, and that is a legitimate criticism of one of her arguments. I think planes are necessary means of transportation in the modern world, and I do not agree we should stop flying. However, rather than dismissing her completely, I think it's a good idea to aggressively look for ways to make all forms of transportation as fuel-efficient as possible, and powering them with clean renewable energy where possible.

Originally posted by Surtur
I think part of the appeal of using her is any criticism can be deflected with "but you're going after this poor poor child!".

It's "won't someone think of the children" on steroids.

And speaking of kids I say teach them about climate change in the classroom instead of letting them take off school to protest about it. The kids can protest on the weekend if they need to protest.
I don't think she would've captured Sweden's attention, much less the world's, if she had tried to squeeze protesting in between school and home life.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
the thing is she doesn't act like an adult. Her message is on point, using her for its delivery isn't.
That's fair enough. I've seen a few clips of her addressing politicians and an interview or two with media personalities. She doesn't strike me as childish, though. A bit naive and idealistic in her youth and inexperience at times, but she seems much more mature than most teenagers I knew growing up. Certainly more than the adult children calling her names.

AY_S7n3jkkU

Originally posted by Surtur
And now there is talk of giving her the nobel peace prize, which will just exacerbate criticism because she just doesn't deserve it. Not for unhinged rants.


I think I'm gonna throw up.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Or, they are invested in finding a solution and are using the amount of attention they're receiving in the moment to push for change. That doesn't mean they're right about everything, but the most important parts of their messages either cite research data from experts, or point to successful models.

The typical dismissals are pathetic.

For example:

Parkland survivors: ""

Murican A: "No! 2nd Amendment! Some bullshit about protection against criminals and a tyrannical government!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but that'll never work here. Our cultures are far too different, so we shouldn't try it at all."

Murican C: "I like guns! Guns are cool! I like guns and I feel really cool when I have a gun!"

Murican D: "Even if you take away guns, people will just find other shit to kill each other with. By the way, wasn't there a knife attack a couple of months ago?"

................

Greta Thunberg: ""

Murican A: "She's a puppet of the left! She's spreading propaganda and fear-mongering!"

Murican B: "Well, maybe, but I'll be dead by then, so I don't care."

Murican C: " I like meat! Meat is good! I like meat and I feel really good when I eat meat!"

Murican D: "That sounds inconvenient, so I'd rather not. By the way, where are her parents? Shouldn't she be in school?"

My personal favourite is "climate change is a scam because people are making money from it"

Great logic. Is malaria a scam too because drug companies make millions from that? What about electricity? Think of the trillions different energy and tech companies have made from that.

Fact is, even if you don't think climate change is man made, climate change IS happening. And the only species on the planet capable of doing anything about it is us. So either there needs to be enormous investment in trying to slow down, stop and reverse climate change. Which means huge investment in nuclear energy and a relatively quick move away from fossil fuels as well as carbon capture and other greenhouse gas capture technology.

Or a huge investment to mitigate the effects of climate change. Which means massive coastal flood defences. Increasing building strength to cope with stronger winds. Global investment in desalination to secure fresh water supplies. Huge increases in genetic engineering of crops to grow more from less land as well as making them grow in less favourable conditions.

Either way money will need to be spent and therefore made. Why not lead the way and be the country who's citizens benefit from the R&D investment and the commercial benefits of selling the technology to the rest of the world.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I only used the Parkland kids after DMB mentioned them to compare the kinds of reactions they got with the kind Greta is getting now, not to actually compare them with each other.

Frankly, I'd rather see members of the scientific community talk about climate change with as much passion as she does, but people don't listen to them, and it shows. They tend to look burned out and dumbfounded by the fact that there are millions of people who either don't believe in climate change or just plain don't give a f*ck about it because they'll be dead before the shit really hits the fan.

Greta's core message is for everyone to treat them as the authorities they are and to take seriously their research data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades.

That core message "data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades." has itself been around for decades.

The date of the f*cking keeps being pushed back.

Whether true or scam, breaking the grip the oil barons have on the world is a good thing.

I'm all for innovation in both energy and recycling technology.

Originally posted by Silent Master
That core message "data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades." has itself been around for decades.

The date of the f*cking keeps being pushed back.


Bingo. I've lost count of how many times the climate alarmists in the past have made doomsday predictions that by a certain year the world would end by flooding or some other nonsense that never came true.

When you bring this up though the brainwashed climate alarmists of today just ignore it or downplay it and keep repeating the same or very similar "the world is gonna end soon!" bullshit lol.


Oh leftists...

Originally posted by Silent Master
I'm all for innovation in both energy and recycling technology.




Right. As I typed up a lot in the other thread, man-made global warming is speeding up a thousand year warming cycle into a 200 year warming cycle.


And as was pointed out by the boffins years ago, it is too late. We already did too much "warming." We should focus on longevity and pollution, now. Clean up the environment, eliminate pollution. For humans and animals. Wasting trillions on this carbon nonsense only hurts us from being able to focus on pollution and improvement.

Decades from now, we will look back at this time and scoff at the arrogance of humans, thinking we had the power to both drastically improve and degrade the climate. We will mock our ancestors misguided focus on climate and wonder why pollution wasn't at the top of the list (something that tangibly harms humans and animals alike).

At the very least our deserts are greening from the all excess CO₂.

Originally posted by dadudemon



Right. As I typed up a lot in the other thread, man-made global warming is speeding up a thousand year warming cycle into a 200 year warming cycle.


And as was pointed out by the boffins years ago, it is too late. We already did too much "warming." We should focus on longevity and pollution, now. Clean up the environment, eliminate pollution. For humans and animals. Wasting trillions on this carbon nonsense only hurts us from being able to focus on pollution and improvement.

Decades from now, we will look back at this time and scoff at the arrogance of humans, thinking we had the power to both drastically improve and degrade the climate. We will mock our ancestors misguided focus on climate and wonder why pollution wasn't at the top of the list (something that tangibly harms humans and animals alike).

You do know the average family, with a 3 bedroom house, 2 cars and 2 kids carbon foot print is nothing to a rich individual right?

Matter of facts, it is the rich and powerful that lectures the middle and low class about doing our parts to help the environment, then turn around and get in their private jets, or go in their private mansions.

Originally posted by Silent Master
That core message "data which strongly suggests the world will be f*cked in a matter of decades." has itself been around for decades.

The date of the f*cking keeps being pushed back.

F*ck the timelines, the outcomes are the same.

Originally posted by SquallX
You do know the average family, with a 3 bedroom house, 2 cars and 2 kids carbon foot print is nothing to a rich individual right?

Matter of facts, it is the rich and powerful that lectures the middle and low class about doing our parts to help the environment, then turn around and get in their private jets, or go in their private mansions.


The rich need those private jets, to fly in those underage minor's, for their parties in their private mansions with other rich and powerful friends.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
F*ck the timelines, the outcomes are the same.

Timelines matter as that helps you prioritize where to allocate resources.

Originally posted by Astner
At the very least our deserts are greening from the all excess CO₂. The problem with that for large scale farming is water is a limiting factor and macro and micro-nutrients are higly limited. The envitomenet itself is hard to till and often shifting. A bit of a red herring tbh.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
The problem with that for large scale farming is water is a limiting factor and macro and micro-nutrients are higly limited. The envitomenet itself is hard to till and often shifting. A bit of a red herring tbh.

I hate to disagree but you're wrong in the most basic of ways.

Mormons went through this when they moved west due to persecutation. They had to turn desert into arable farmland. And they did.

And it is not something new to humans.

It is called "Desert Greening."

Here's a great start to see all the methods of desert greening:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_greening



The primary obstacle for desert greening is just water. Piping, distribution, reclamation, etc.



Also, "tilling" desert land that has been properly setup with a water system is no different than anywhere else. If our American ancestors could do it in the Appalachian Highlands where the ground was very rocky and it was cold, desert is a piece of cake with water.



Let me sum up: your entire point is wrong in every regard. Every last idea in your post is wrong...as long as you solve the water problem (which is extremely simple for major farming companies).


Edit - Astner is right, it's not even remotely close to a red herring, and global warming will be a net benefit to humans. Global pollution will not be, however.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I hate to disagree but you're wrong in the most basic of ways.

Mormons went through this when they moved west due to persecutation. They had to turn desert into arable farmland. And they did.

And it is not something new to humans.

It is called "Desert Greening."

Here's a great start to see all the methods of desert greening:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_greening



The primary obstacle for desert greening is just water. Piping, distribution, reclamation, etc.



Also, "tilling" desert land that has been properly setup with a water system is no different than anywhere else. If our American ancestors could do it in the Appalachian Highlands where the ground was very rocky and it was cold, desert is a piece of cake with water.



Let me sum up: your entire point is wrong in every regard. Every last idea in your post is wrong...as long as you solve the water problem (which is extremely simple for major farming companies).


Edit - Astner is right, it's not even remotely close to a red herring, and global warming will be a net benefit to humans. Global pollution will not be, however. Going to disagree as someone who's lived in Royadh. Not all deserts are equal.

Originally posted by gold slorg
i mean, let's be honest - you don't get to become the speaker on the UN and political spokesperson at 16 just because you try hard; it's obvious she's connected to people who are connected to people etc.

using children for this kind of thing is just disgusting and wrong, and is used for populist emotion-inducing dramas. as somebody who's totally supporting the fight against climate destruction, i'm really sad an autistic child is used by my side

She's being funded by the liberal billionaire, George Soros. A Holocaust survivor who abandoned his Jewish religion and his people to be the Nazi's play thing.
His claim to fame is he "broke" the Bank of England, instantly making him a billionaire.

Yes I agree. It's disgusting to see the Democrats take advantage of an autistic child who suffers from Asperger's and ADHD, even to go as far as use her as a spokesperson for "global warming".
Climate change is real, but "global warming" is not. In fact, the icecaps in the North and South Poles as well as Antarctica are starting to thicken, outpacing its melting rate.

EDIT:
PS: The Earth will heal itself. It has outlived many calamities and climate changes and tectonic shifting, etc. The Earth has lived for billions of years. Humans are nothing but microbes compared to the Earth. We will all die from climate change, or a meteor, or alien invasion. The Earth will remain the same for billions of years more.

This made me lol:

https://twitter.com/WholesomeOldOne/status/1178047738463870977

The hilarious thing about all silver linings is most countries in Africa for example are not industrialised enough to satisfactorily work the land they have.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This made me lol:

https://twitter.com/WholesomeOldOne/status/1178047738463870977

Especially these days...who comes to young people for "hope"? Weren't young people eating tide pods not too long ago?

Also her rants and accent make her come off like she's auditioning for the role of an eco-terrorist in a future Bond film.

She is barking mad tbh. She is like the Star Wars kids we had here on steroids, done nothing, been nowhere, know everything. Despite her message being something I agree with, she is a terrible spokesman and no one listens to her message the just see a kid ranting.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Going to disagree as someone who's lived in Royadh. Not all deserts are equal.

I agree with this statement but also to add global warming is nothing compared to our pollution problem. This is something I've stated in the past, ruining our water with pollution is the "planet killer." Global warming is just the chocolate poured over our shit sunday

Originally posted by snowdragon
I agree with this statement but also to add global warming is nothing compared to our pollution problem. This is something I've stated in the past, ruining our water with pollution is the "planet killer." Global warming is just the chocolate poured over our shit sunday I don't disagree when you find plastic it the ice caps...

https://www.theonion.com/nation-perplexed-by-16-year-old-who-doesn-t-want-world-1838374925

Originally posted by BackFire
https://www.theonion.com/nation-perplexed-by-16-year-old-who-doesn-t-want-world-1838374925

We're more perplexed over a 16 yr. olds very public mental breakdown being used as propaganda by adults with fully developed brains.

Originally posted by Surtur
We're more perplexed over a 16 yr. olds very public mental breakdown being used as propaganda by adults with fully developed brains. True enough but the onion was funny

It was funny and yet also not funny in the sense that some actually believe that narrative lol. Some believe that the issue with Greta people have is with her goal and not with how she is going about achieving that goal.

Even the president of France was like "chill girl". And jesus going after places like France boggles the mind when there are bigger fish to fry. When does she set sail for China?

Originally posted by Surtur
It was funny and yet also not funny in the sense that some actually believe that narrative lol. Some believe that the issue with Greta people have is with her goal and not with how she is going about achieving that goal. He also did this...



Even the president of France was like "chill girl". And jesus going after places like France boggles the mind when there are bigger fish to fry. When does she set sail for China? I don't like Jeremy Clarkson but he wrote a hilarious assassination of Thunberg. It was one of those times someone writes exactly what your thinking. He also did this https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/entertainment/2019/09/be-a-good-girl-shut-up-top-gear-s-jeremy-clarkson-unleashes-on-greta-thunberg.html

I know people have attacked her for being white too lol. The left loves to munch on its own.

Trigger warning, Tim Pool:

Greta Thunberg Under Fire From Far left For Being WHITE, It Was Only A Matter Of Time

i8A1iTExlhU

Originally posted by Surtur
I know people have attacked her for being white too lol. The left loves to munch on its own. she's not a left or right thing Surt, many on the right are environmentalists. She's a ludicrous thing. People will try and make it left and right and some will see it as that.

cPF-0rrTefs

What do you guys think.

Originally posted by SquallX
cPF-0rrTefs

What do you guys think.

You can see the shame in their faces wash over them as he goes on.

They weren't told that "green policy" benefits mostly rich people and harms mostly poor people.

They aren't told that pollution of all kinds is the much larger threat (10-1000 times more harmful to live and humans, depending on the pollution type). They aren't told that nuclear is a wonderful option (they are told it is scary and bad) for energy.

So the climate changes. So what? It was bound to change this drastically in less than 200 years. We were told the oceans would rise 18 feet in 30 years in the 90s: didn't happen. Rose a few inches.

Seems like we should kill all "carbon" related funding and focus it all on medical breakthroughs and pollution reduction. Let's see some more virtue signaling about cheap pharmaceuticals that save poor people. Instagram post and brag about that shit.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You can see the shame in their faces wash over them as he goes on.

They weren't told that "green policy" benefits mostly rich people and harms mostly poor people.

They aren't told that pollution of all kinds is the much larger threat (10-1000 times more harmful to live and humans, depending on the pollution type). They aren't told that nuclear is a wonderful option (they are told it is scary and bad) for energy.

So the climate changes. So what? It was bound to change this drastically in less than 200 years. We were told the oceans would rise 18 feet in 30 years in the 90s: didn't happen. Rose a few inches.

Seems like we should kill all "carbon" related funding and focus it all on medical breakthroughs and pollution reduction. Let's see some more virtue signaling about cheap pharmaceuticals that save poor people. Instagram post and brag about that shit. These are extreme examples you're giving DDM. A lot of more reasonable things have happened.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You can see the shame in their faces wash over them as he goes on.

They weren't told that "green policy" benefits mostly rich people and harms mostly poor people.

They aren't told that pollution of all kinds is the much larger threat (10-1000 times more harmful to live and humans, depending on the pollution type). They aren't told that nuclear is a wonderful option (they are told it is scary and bad) for energy.

So the climate changes. So what? It was bound to change this drastically in less than 200 years. We were told the oceans would rise 18 feet in 30 years in the 90s: didn't happen. Rose a few inches.

Seems like we should kill all "carbon" related funding and focus it all on medical breakthroughs and pollution reduction. Let's see some more virtue signaling about cheap pharmaceuticals that save poor people. Instagram post and brag about that shit.

I like the part where he spoke about Africa wanting to use coal, yet Europeans says no, yet those same Europeans forgets it was coal burning that elect them to the juggernaut they are in the 21st century.

But the best part was China and the Paris accord, and how useless the accord was. China would have gotten a giant blank check to do as they please, while the rest of the pays them.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
She's passionate about environmentalism and has been given the opportunity to share her concerns about the future of the planet, as well as her grievances with both government and corporate lax environmental regulations, on the world stage. That's pretty f*cking admirable, especially for someone as young as she.

I'm more annoyed by childish adults who think their deity of choice will bless them with whatever they need, believe or act like natural resources are unlimited, don't give a f*ck about what they pass on to younger and future generations, and make time out of their mundane lives to mock a child for trying to make a positive impact on the world.

Are you referring to the "It's God's planet, so I'm not worried!" types? Those people are pathetic.

If you really believe that, then why believe God's just going to play your janitor when it comes to pollution.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
she's not a left or right thing Surt, many on the right are environmentalists. She's a ludicrous thing. People will try and make it left and right and some will see it as that.


Bullshit it's not a left or right thing. Sure, there are a great many of us on the right who actually care about the environment (I think clean air and water are very important) but it's the left that is always pushing this hysteria nonsense that the world is facing impending doom if we don't do something about "man-made" climate change (which used to be called "global warming" before the ones pushing that garbage was shown the planet was actually getting cooler).


It's not about the climate, it's about power and control. The elites who're pushing the "the world is gonna end soon if we don't do something!!" BS and brainwashing/scaring children with it want to control people's lives by telling them what they can and can't eat, how they are allowed to travel, whether or not they can be allowed to use air conditioners, and similar shit. It's a scam to make themselves rich is all it is.


I'm so glad Trump pulled us out of that climate agreement BS. It's one of the best things he's done for this country so far (and he's done a lot of good things for it; certainly a hell of a lot more than Obama's ass ever did in 8 years that's for damn sure).

The left is the side embracing her and putting her up on a pedestal. This will be a left and right thing until she ceases being used for propaganda purposes.

Originally posted by Surtur
The left is the side embracing her and putting her up on a pedestal. This will be a left and right thing until she ceases being used for propaganda purposes.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
she's not a left or right thing Surt, many on the right are environmentalists. She's a ludicrous thing. People will try and make it left and right and some will see it as that.

They love pushing the 'Us Vs Them' narrative whenever they can. Pollution affects us all though, they should know that.

It's like they believe their political beliefs will somehow shield them from poor air quality.

Willful ignorance doesn't suit you Rob. Do better next time.

Originally posted by Robtard
They love pushing the 'Us Vs Them' narrative whenever they can. Pollution affects us all though, they should know that.

It's like they believe their political beliefs will somehow shield them from poor air quality.

And the left screaming and outright giving us false information is okay to you?

Look at the second vid I posted for evidence of the left going so far as to try and discredit the man from publishing.

LOL@ the hypocrisy of wittle robbie. "Us" vs. "them" is something everyone on his side (the left) constantly thinks; "us" being him and his lefty brethren all of whom hate Trump and "them" being everyone who supports our great president.

Originally posted by SquallX
And the left screaming and outright giving us false information is okay to you?

Look at the second vid I posted for evidence of the left going so far as to try and discredit the man from publishing.

No. False information is wrong regardless of sides. Having less pollution and clean water/air shouldn't be a Right Vs Left thing.

Then again, it's all a "Chinese Hoax!" so who cares...

The left vs right thing comes from using mentally ill teens for propaganda purposes. It does not come from the issue of pollution.

The climate and pollution concerns debate didn't get political-sides and Us vs Them just now because of this girl, sport. It's been like this for a long time. But you had to try I guess.

Nobody even said she is the one who made it political though lol.

You just implied it; here is the post:

Originally posted by Surtur
The left vs right thing comes from using mentally ill teens for propaganda purposes. It does not come from the issue of pollution.

Lol wow. You're gonna act like that wasn't in reference to this specific situation? Gotcha. Good stuff.

Originally posted by Robtard
Are you referring to the "It's God's planet, so I'm not worried!" types? Those people are pathetic.

That's also anti-Christian as it directly contradicts Christ's teachings. They don't get the "Stewards" mantle that all humans are supposed to carry.

We are stewards of this earth, all the life on it, and this entire universe until we discover Mormon aliens on other planets. Then we share the stewardship with them.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's also anti-Christian as it directly contradicts Christ's teachings. They don't get the "Stewards" mantle that all humans are supposed to carry.

We are stewards of this earth, all the life on it, and this entire universe until we discover Mormon aliens on other planets. Then we share the stewardship with them.

You should tell these people that, cos the ones who spew that view tend to label themselves are Christians.

Your whacky Mormon views aside , I had a similar chat with an extreme Right Christian years ago. He said the Earth was a gift from God as well and we could do whatever with it, so I told him it's poor practice to destroy a beautiful gift you've been gifted, we do a disservice to God in doing so. He go angrier and said I didn't know what I was talking about.

Originally posted by Robtard
You should tell these people that, cos the ones who spew that view tend to label themselves are Christians.

Your whacky Mormon views aside , I had a similar chat with an extreme Right Christian years ago. He said the Earth was a gift from God as well and we could do whatever with it, so I told him it's poor practice to destroy a beautiful gift you've been gifted, we do a disservice to God in doing so. He go angrier and said I didn't know what I was talking about.

He's clearly wrong and doesn't know what's in his own bible.

Originally posted by steverules_2
Robtard is a well known rapist

-Rob 3:17

Originally posted by Robtard
The hell are you on now?

You're the one that claimed no false information is wrong regardless of side.

To be fair Rob put a period after "No".

Originally posted by SquallX
You're the one that claimed no false information is wrong regardless of side.

Incorrect. You misread what I said.

Greta Thunberg threads read just like the Gillette ad thread. A problem is presented and there is a call for action to hold ourselves and others accountable to change a harmful behavior or activity, and people get offended because they don't want to be told what to do, even if the proposed changes are positive ones.

The level of outrage is f*cking ridiculous, and seems to come mostly from the type of people who call others delicate snowflakes.

Just look at this shit. I really hope it's a fake, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's not.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Greta Thunberg threads read just like the Gillette ad thread. A problem is presented and there is a call for action to hold ourselves and others accountable to change a harmful behavior or activity, and people get offended because they don't want to be told what to do, even if the proposed changes are positive ones.

The level of outrage is f*cking ridiculous, and seems to come mostly from the type of people who call others delicate snowflakes.

Just look at this shit. I really hope it's a fake, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's not.

Both instances show it's all about *how* you deliver a message. A teenager having a mental breakdown being used as a tool of propaganda is perhaps not the way to go.

Imagine being outraged that other people are outraged.

He's mad as hell that other people aren't gonna take it anymore and he's not gonna take it anymore.

I have licked hearing certain loony lefties trying to Climate Change Excuse how we are coming out of an Ice Age and thus the World will tend to Heat Up and Dry Out because of that as shown in the Geological Records.

I have heard it that We are Coming Out of it Too Fast.


Lol. Climate Change Loonies.

Originally posted by Surtur
Both instances show it's all about *how* you deliver a message. A teenager having a mental breakdown being used as a tool of propaganda is perhaps not the way to go.
Perhaps, yet I think it is more than a bit careless to focus more on a rather benign delivery than the message itself.

Instead of asking themselves if perhaps they or others they know somehow contribute to the raised issue and if there is anything they could personally do to contribute to the solution, these people become incredibly pissed off because they don't like how it was presented or feel personally attacked for doing the kind of shit that was said to contribute to the problem.

It's easier to have those knee-jerk reactions and talk shit than taking a moment to reflect and making any necessary changes, though, I guess.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Imagine being outraged that other people are outraged. Originally posted by Surtur
He's mad as hell that other people aren't gonna take it anymore and he's not gonna take it anymore.
I won't be sharing a recording of me destroying my own property or constructing a death scene of anyone in particular I disagree with any time soon.

No, you'll just share your outrage via posts.

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, you'll just share your outrage via posts.

I don't think my outrage is on the level of outrage I'm outraged about.

True, they're outraged over someone pushing a political agenda, while you're outraged about outrage.

Originally posted by Silent Master
True, they're outraged over someone pushing a political agenda, while you're outraged about outrage.

Right now, I'm outraged with your oversimplification of my outrage, as well as with your superficial outrage over my outrage over the illogical Super Saiyan outrage found in this thread, the Gillette ad thread, and Colin Kaepernick threads.

Wow, so now you're outraged that I don't understand the nuances of your outrage.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Wow, so now you're outraged that I don't understand the nuances of your outrage.
Indeed. What was subtle about my outrage?

I don't know, hence my comment about not understanding the nuances past you being outraged that other people were outraged.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I don't know, hence my comment about not understanding the nuances past you being outraged that other people were outraged.

I thought I outlined it pretty well throughout this thread and the Gillette thread, and possibly the Kaepernick threads if I did post on the ones on KMC.

In short, I think this is another case in which a party presents a legitimate issue and asks society to work toward a solution. Many of those who oppose them are dwelling on the delivery rather than focusing on the message, or distort the message entirely. They get pissed off and either actively contribute to the problem or accept it as an inevitability, rather than admit there is a problem and that we can and should be doing more individually and as a society to correct it.

If people are reacting to the delivery rather than the message, then the delivery needs to be changed as it obviously failed.

Originally posted by Silent Master
If people are reacting to the delivery rather than the message, then the delivery needs to be changed as it obviously failed.
Or, they could focus on the message in spite of whatever issues they took with the delivery.

If you want people to do something and the delivery is what is stopping them, then complain to the people making the delivery.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
I thought I outlined it pretty well throughout this thread and the Gillette thread, and possibly the Kaepernick threads if I did post on the ones on KMC.

In short, I think this is another case in which a party presents a legitimate issue and asks society to work toward a solution. Many of those who oppose them are dwelling on the delivery rather than focusing on the message, or distort the message entirely. They get pissed off and either actively contribute to the problem or accept it as an inevitability, rather than admit there is a problem and that we can and should be doing more individually and as a society to correct it.


Whether the message is valid at all is a legitimate contention.

Originally posted by cdtm
Whether the message is valid at all is a legitimate contention.

That we should listen to the scientific community and implement ways to reduce emissions (and pollution in general) that are detrimental to our health, damage ecosystems, and contribute to climate change?

How so?

People tend to dismiss what highly unstable people say, if she wants to get her message across, she should start acting sane.

Originally posted by Silent Master
People tend to dismiss what highly unstable people say, if she wants to get her message across, she should start acting sane.
If that's the excuse you want to run with, so be it.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
If that's the excuse you want to run with, so be it.

What part do you disagree with?

Originally posted by Silent Master
What part do you disagree with?
The parts where you continue to piss and moan about her delivery and depict her as some sort of unstable lunatic because she became emotional during a speech she gave as excuses to ignore her message.

https://time.com/5693356/iowa-science-teacher-greta-thunberg-facebook-comment/

Originally posted by Putinbot1
https://time.com/5693356/iowa-science-teacher-greta-thunberg-facebook-comment/
What the f*ck is wrong with people?

Awful.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
The parts where you continue to piss and moan about her delivery and depict her as some sort of unstable lunatic because she became emotional during a speech she gave as excuses to ignore her message.

Seeing as even you say that she "became emotional" during the speech. sounds more like you're getting mad that I was correct and just can't bring yourself to admit it.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
https://time.com/5693356/iowa-science-teacher-greta-thunberg-facebook-comment/

What a loser.


Someone should go to town on his nutsack like a speedbag.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Seeing as even you say that she "became emotional" during the speech. sounds more like you're getting mad that I was correct and just can't bring yourself to admit it.
Correct about what? What else has she done for you to suggest she's unstable and insane?