Jump to content
BANGKOK
webfact

Teenager Thunberg angrily tells U.N. climate summit 'you have stolen my dreams'

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Which is why even today, I believe that that tobacco smoking is not hazardous to your health. Because all those researchers who found differently depend on the medical industrial complex to make tobacco the villain. They'd be out of jobs if they ever tried to publish the truth.

 Was that satire?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canuckamuck said:

 Was that satire?

Well when some posters make comments like this:

 

"Yes, we should only pay attention to people making a living off of publishing papers on global warming. The people benefiting are the only ones to be trusted.
I would liken it to tobacco companies doing studies on the heath hazards of smoking."
 
I can understand why you might need to ask.
  •  
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

Identity politics is a large part of the ongoing problem with attempting to get sensible action on climate change, which is what Greta is attempting to do.

 

It is therefore quite germane to the topic at issue - if you don't want to engage with it, then don't.

How about introducing some credible science to back your arguments?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Orton Rd said:

How dare you!

can't tell if you statement is sarcastic or not. if it is not. how dare i what ? 

 

how dare i ask a legitimate question ? 

 

where is all the money coming from for this whirlwind tour the young lady is on ? 

 

it's always about the money i'm afraid. that is the life humans have developed and it is not going away any time soon. well for 12 more years anyways. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Oh, you think those 500 plus people are actually representative of the scientific community? Maybe you've got some polling data to support your contention? In fact, from the polling data I've seen, the only scientists that have a high level of doubt about the role CO2 plays in global warming are  geologists working for the fossil fuel industry.

Geology covers much of Earth's carbon cycle. Climatologists only take an intro course in geology. 

 

Meteorologists also have more doubt. They are experts on water in the atmosphere. The role of H2O as a powerful greenhouse gas is poorly understood (NASA various sources), thus their scepticism.

 

Biologists are masters of life's carbon cycle. (greening and sequestration come to mind). Then there are oceanographers and ocean chemists. In truth, Climate involves almost every branch of physical science, the foundations of which are owned by chemists and physicists.  Climatologists are the worker bees.

 

If I want the truth, I would survey all involved scientists. The climatologist may have the same prejudice you ascribe to geologists.

Edited by rabas
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sillyfool said:

can't tell if you statement is sarcastic or not. if it is not. how dare i what ? 

 

how dare i ask a legitimate question ? 

 

where is all the money coming from for this whirlwind tour the young lady is on ? 

 

it's always about the money i'm afraid. that is the life humans have developed and it is not going away any time soon. well for 12 more years anyways. 

Greta's main handler is a German lady named Luisa-Marie Neubauer. She is a member of an organisation called ONE campaign, set up in the early 2000s by Bill Gates and someone called "Bono", probably a Brazilian or Indonesian, having only one name, like Neymar, or Romario.

 

Another funder of ONE foundation is alleged to be George Soros, which has caused some conspiracy theorists to go berserk about Greta being a stalking horse for a world government and so on. Too much is being made of this, in my estimation.

 

Either way, her caravan is not short of money, but it is equally likely that the groups she is speaking to (with the exception of the Pope, perhaps) are happy to pay for their chance to kiss the hem of her corduroys.

 

I don't think her precise funding is important - there's clearly plenty of money sloshing around somewhere.

 

If you're interested in this subject, a persistent blogger has written a long 6-part series called 

The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg – for Consent: The Political Economy of the Non-Profit Industrial Complex

 

http://www.theartofannihilation.com/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-the-political-economy-of-the-non-profit-industrial-complex/

 

 

Edited by RickBradford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greta you have succeeded beyond what I expected just look at this thread everyone is certainly talking that’s how things get going good job girl help it up!!

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face it, almost every parent of a teenage daughter hears "You have totally ruined my life" on a regular basis.  My niece recently ranted in that vein on being refused permission to go to a sleepover at a friend's house where the parents were known to be away

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

Well, it's less of an argument than an informed opinion. The point is sociological, and I don't think that large-scale studies have been conducted on that precise point.

 

What data there is strongly suggests the following attitudes:

 

* Most people in the West are concerned about the climate, and would like to see action taken to minimize damage. A YouGov/Guardian poll from May showed that the proportion of climate "deniers" was very low - about 4% in the UK, 8% in Australia, and 13% in the US.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/07/us-hotbed-climate-change-denial-international-poll

 

* Most people in the West are heartily sick of political correctness, which is the hallmark of identity politics. A poll published late last year called "Hidden Tribes: A Study of America’s Polarized Landscape", showed that 80% of people agreed with the statement that "political correctness is a problem in our country."

 

https://hiddentribes.us/pdf/hidden_tribes_report.pdf

 

Ergo, by merging climate change with identity politics, the movement merely gains a whole new set of opponents; people who generally support action on climate, but who are not prepared to adopt the shibboleths of radical race and gender activists.

 

Now, you may regard that as credible science or you may not, but at the very least, it is a strong indication that climate activists would be well advised to keep their distance from the SJW/PC/identity politics types.

Ergo by dragging the off topic ‘identify politics’ into the discussion you can create a distraction from the lack of science backing up your arguments.

 

The thread has absolutely nothing to do with race or gender activism.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, canuckamuck said:

It is safe to say that Greta and her family aren't clipping coupons and trying on second hand shoes at value village.

What ever possessed you to post such a sad indictment of yourself?

 

It says absolutely nothing about Greta and her family but a great deal about you, none of which is complimentary.

 

 

Edited by Chomper Higgot
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rabas said:

Geology covers much of Earth's carbon cycle. Climatologists only take an intro course in geology. 

 

Meteorologists also have more doubt. They are experts on water in the atmosphere. The role of H2O as a powerful greenhouse gas is poorly understood (NASA various sources), thus their scepticism.

 

Biologists are masters of life's carbon cycle. (greening and sequestration come to mind). Then there are oceanographers and ocean chemists. In truth, Climate involves almost every branch of physical science, the foundations of which are owned by chemists and physicists.  Climatologists are the worker bees.

 

If I want the truth, I would survey all involved scientists. The climatologist may have the same prejudice you ascribe to geologists.

Explain the term:

 

’Geology covers much of the Earth’s carbon cycle’?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...