Way to go Greta

[stephen bennett]

I fear another Shirley Temple syndrome for her.

Is her ship called the Lollipop?

On another note, in all honesty, I find Sweden's stance as being the moral authority of the world rather vomit-inducing. About as believable as Switzerland or the US for that matter. I have issues with saints in general.

I think we outside give Sweden that role rather than the country itself. Compared to most it's great place, but it has problems as do all human societies.

But on a scale of Sweden to the US I know which I'd rather have.

Swedish kids are usually brought up to believe they have agency, so only half not-serious in what I said. She's certainly got politicians (and young people) sitting up and taking notice in a way that 50 years of 'conventional' environmental action has failed to do, so praise where praise is due.

Stephen

 

[Cheese]

[...]that isn’t leading to self-enrichment. I suspect this is why some find her actions puzzling.

There may well be some people thinking so, I don't know. By the way I don't find her actions puzzling, she may well be genuine (probably is). I just have issues with purposely made saints, and I still firmly believe there are other people who have their hands in her public image.

She's certainly got politicians (and young people) sitting up and taking notice in a way that 50 years of 'conventional' environmental action has failed to do, so praise where praise is due.

All right.

 

[Joe P]

Cheese,

I don't think Greta Thunberg is a saint, but she's making a difference, and a good one at that.

In a world where the Nigel Farages, Boris Johnsons, Donald Trumps, Mitch McConnells, Doug Fords (asshole premier in my province) among many others have much power, wealth and influence, it's refreshing that a 16-year-old girl is getting the world to finally take notice and, I hope, inspire action.

Joe

 

[Still]

istm it's mostly those who support the Farages/Johnsons/Trumps/McConnells and Fords that rail against Greta.

 

[jackbarron]

I don’t know. Many Fishies have issues with divinities, in the case of Greta Thunberg it’s OK apparently.

Nothing against her, but the phenomenon feels somewhat fishy to me (who is her boss ?)

She doesn't appear to have one and is interested in communicating scientific fact. Check out the extensive questioning of Greta by celebrities, politicians and civilians in The Observer/Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/culture...berg-you-ask-the-questions-see-us-as-a-threat

Last week The 1975 band put out a single with her talking about climate change. You can hear it on The National Student: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...hunberg-makes-musical-debut-on-the-1975-track

I personally think Thunberg is one of the most amazing teenagers to come along in my lifetime. Her message is very straighforward and is getting through all over the world, in part because she doesn't openly take political sides. Opec don't like her, but that's hardly surprising.

"Earlier this month Opec declared Thunberg, and with her the other young climate activists, the “greatest threat” to the fossil fuel industry. Thunberg tweeted them her thanks. “Our biggest compliment yet.” Hers is a voice totally unlike the world’s usual power-cacophony: clean, simple, inclusive, the voice of someone refusing to beguile. She talks ethics to politics without flinching. She cuts through the media white noise and political rabble-rousing to get to the essentials."

Climate change is the biggest issue facing the world. Greta Thunberg is asking us all to take action. It is the last thing we can leave to the politicians and their paid commentator lackeys.

There will be bigger demos all over the world. It's not surprising that more and more childern are getting involved. It's their future which is being cut short.

Jack

 

[mikemusic]

The boss had a frank exchange of views with a lady of pensionable age.
This lady stated we had done all we could possibly do for climate change. What right have these kids to criticize us ?
No, we have done bugger all and too many still haven't got the picture.

I'm still learning how to do it better. Supporting these kids is just one thing.

 

[Joe P]

Kate Marvel, a climate scientist at Columbia University and NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, makes a chilling point about what we may do to each other if the parts of the world become uninhabitable, leading to mass migrations.

It's not a far-fetched scenario of some climate model running on a computer. It's today's reality — some fishies spontaneously combusted last week and parts of India exceeded 50ºC this summer: https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/14/india/india-heat-wave-deaths-intl/index.html

From her article in Scientific American —

Many historical events have happened against a backdrop of natural climate change. Drought in the steppes east of Hungary pushed marauding Huns west and toppled the Roman empire. Volcanic activity suppressed crop yields in pre-revolutionary France, leading hungry, desperate peasants to take drastic action. But climate is almost never the only factor in human history. The Roman empire was overextended and tenuous, torn apart as much by infighting and poor governance as outside enemies. The French underclass starved under the policies imposed by the overclass.

We humans are not passively dragged along by temperatures and rainfall patterns. Climate change did not cause the fall of Cahokia any more than it forced northern Europeans to eat their pets and abandon their children. But the adversity brought by climate change caused societies to break apart, magnified pre-existing divisions, and made desperate people easy prey for dangerous people.

“The climate has changed before,” say people who want to minimize the scale of the current challenge. I have never understood how anyone could find this comforting. The natural climate changes that have shaped human history have almost always been smaller and more regionally contained than the large-scale human-caused change we are currently experiencing. And even these changes have provoked suffering, scapegoating, and the collapse of civilizations.

I am often asked what frightens me most about climate change, whether I lie awake at night thinking about ocean hypoxia or arctic permafrost or other feedback processes that could turn a bad thing into a catastrophe. I am scared of the physical changes that await us on a warming planet, but the most important feedback process is the least well understood. The scariest thing about climate change is what it will make us do to each other.
​

Joe

​

 

[Rockmeister]

It is amazing to be so committed and active at such an age tho. Most 16 yr old's need some prodding to get outta bed, let alone take on the world single handed.
Incidentally she didn't organise the yachting trip... it was offered to her, and a glance at the crew confirms my suspicion that stardom attracts hangers on, vultures and helpers in equal measure.
Good for her whatever. If she can embarrass governments worldwide, then GO GIRL.

 

[avole]

Exactly. there are some people who deserve all the accolades. She's one, obviously. She has given me some hope, as she has many. O.K.; it may be too late to save the planet from an uncomfortable and early end, but,at least, the next generations can experience the same wonder of living that we have.

Assuming,of course there are more like her in the world.

 

[Cheese]

No, we have done bugger all and too many still haven't got the picture.

Yes, but sadly kids who really agree to change their habits are a sight as rare as a middle-aged man who agrees to change his habits. I'm talking of consumerism here.

I mean, for improving things I don't see any other way than consuming less. Much less. The generation before us was better at that, and we are better at that than our kids. Our kids are better than us for a lot of other things, but we didn't do 'bugger all' when you look at the whole picture.

 

[Still]

Assuming,of course there are more like her in the world.

Yes, but sadly kids who really agree to change their habits are a sight as rare as a middle-aged man who agrees to change his habits. I'm talking of consumerism here.

I mean, for improving things I don't see any other way than consuming less. Much less. The generation before us was better at that, and we are better at that than our kids. Our kids are better than us for a lot of other things, but we didn't do 'bugger all' when you look at the whole picture.

If only there was some way we could help.

 

[Cheese]

If only there was some way we could help.

We are eager to read your constructive suggestions indeed. As usual.

 

[Still]

A town is being evacuated because parts of the wall of the nearby reservoir have collapsed in floods. The Toddbrook Reservoir dam, above Whaley Bridge in Derbyshire, was damaged following heavy rains. Police have told the town's 6,500 residents to gather at a local school and they will be evacuated from there.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-49189955

We are eager to read your constructive suggestions indeed. As usual.

We suspect you aren't genuinely interested. As usual.

 

[stephen bennett]

She must be doing something right as Murdoch is attacking her personally.

Stephen

 

[stephen bennett]

Yes, but sadly kids who really agree to change their habits are a sight as rare as a middle-aged man who agrees to change his habits. I'm talking of consumerism here.

I mean, for improving things I don't see any other way than consuming less. Much less. The generation before us was better at that, and we are better at that than our kids. Our kids are better than us for a lot of other things, but we didn't do 'bugger all' when you look at the whole picture.

I agree with consuming less. In some ways they are: most kids are happy with a just a phone. No TV. No DVDs. No books. Fewer drive cars as well and actively want low carbon infrastructure put in place. They aren’t wedded to the things we are.

I don’t recall us kids bunking off school to go on environmental demos, so I think there are more of them willing to become active now.

Stephen

 

[Rcook]

Why on earth (no pun intended) is anyone taking this ill-informed, unqualified young lady even slightly seriously? Especially world leaders who, frankly, should know far better. Her position/argument is completely emotional, no facts in it at all.
There is no 'climate crisis' or 'global warming'. Yes the climate changes, but it is very slowly, like over millenia, not a couple of decades, it cools and warms very slowly, mostly based on the temperature of the sea.
As for CO2 being responsible, that doesn't stand up to the slightest scientific scrutiny. The planet has been warmer in the past with lower CO2, and colder with much higher CO2 levels, long before the SUV (or even the motor car) was thought up. CO2 is actually at dangerously low levels at present - around 400ppm. Life on earth starts to die off at around 270ppm. CO2 is essential for life on the planet, it is therefore not a pollutant - nature doesn't work like that. Why do gardeners increase the level of CO2 to around 1500ppm in greenhouses? To speed up plant growth. This would be unlikely if CO2 was actually a pollutant.

Not a single one of the predicted 'disasters' that so-called 'climate change' (rebranded from 'global warming' in 2004 when it was discovered that the planet wasn't actually getting any warmer) has actually happened.
"The Arctic will be ice-free in summer by 2012" said Al Gore... turns out ice at both poles is increasing. Maldives disappearing under water by 2014? They are still there.

These celebrities and world leaders all go to these summits in jet aeroplanes, and get ferried around in huge limos while there. Does that not tell you that they KNOW it's a scam?

Lastly, I will leave you with this thought: Barack Obama and Al Gore have both bought beach front sea level properties. Why would they do that if sea levels were actually rising?

 

[JensenHealey]

That reminds me - I need to order some more popcorn!

 

[Bob McC]

Why on earth (no pun intended) is anyone taking this ill-informed, unqualified young lady even slightly seriously? Especially world leaders who, frankly, should know far better. Her position/argument is completely emotional, no facts in it at all.
There is no 'climate crisis' or 'global warming'. Yes the climate changes, but it is very slowly, like over millenia, not a couple of decades, it cools and warms very slowly, mostly based on the temperature of the sea.
As for CO2 being responsible, that doesn't stand up to the slightest scientific scrutiny. The planet has been warmer in the past with lower CO2, and colder with much higher CO2 levels, long before the SUV (or even the motor car) was thought up. CO2 is actually at dangerously low levels at present - around 400ppm. Life on earth starts to die off at around 270ppm. CO2 is essential for life on the planet, it is therefore not a pollutant - nature doesn't work like that. Why do gardeners increase the level of CO2 to around 1500ppm in greenhouses? To speed up plant growth. This would be unlikely if CO2 was actually a pollutant.

Not a single one of the predicted 'disasters' that so-called 'climate change' (rebranded from 'global warming' in 2004 when it was discovered that the planet wasn't actually getting any warmer) has actually happened.
"The Arctic will be ice-free in summer by 2012" said Al Gore... turns out ice at both poles is increasing. Maldives disappearing under water by 2014? They are still there.

These celebrities and world leaders all go to these summits in jet aeroplanes, and get ferried around in huge limos while there. Does that not tell you that they KNOW it's a scam?

Lastly, I will leave you with this thought: Barack Obama and Al Gore have both bought beach front sea level properties. Why would they do that if sea levels were actually rising?

FFS!

 

[Still]

Why on earth (no pun intended) is anyone taking this ill-informed, unqualified young lady even slightly seriously? Especially world leaders who, frankly, should know far better. Her position/argument is completely emotional, no facts in it at all.
There is no 'climate crisis' or 'global warming'. Yes the climate changes, but it is very slowly, like over millenia, not a couple of decades, it cools and warms very slowly, mostly based on the temperature of the sea.
As for CO2 being responsible, that doesn't stand up to the slightest scientific scrutiny. The planet has been warmer in the past with lower CO2, and colder with much higher CO2 levels, long before the SUV (or even the motor car) was thought up. CO2 is actually at dangerously low levels at present - around 400ppm. Life on earth starts to die off at around 270ppm. CO2 is essential for life on the planet, it is therefore not a pollutant - nature doesn't work like that. Why do gardeners increase the level of CO2 to around 1500ppm in greenhouses? To speed up plant growth. This would be unlikely if CO2 was actually a pollutant.

Not a single one of the predicted 'disasters' that so-called 'climate change' (rebranded from 'global warming' in 2004 when it was discovered that the planet wasn't actually getting any warmer) has actually happened.
"The Arctic will be ice-free in summer by 2012" said Al Gore... turns out ice at both poles is increasing. Maldives disappearing under water by 2014? They are still there.

These celebrities and world leaders all go to these summits in jet aeroplanes, and get ferried around in huge limos while there. Does that not tell you that they KNOW it's a scam?

Lastly, I will leave you with this thought: Barack Obama and Al Gore have both bought beach front sea level properties. Why would they do that if sea levels were actually rising?

This is aka circling the drain.

 

[ff1d1l]

Why on earth (no pun intended) is anyone taking this ill-informed, unqualified young lady even slightly seriously? Especially world leaders who, frankly, should know far better. Her position/argument is completely emotional, no facts in it at all.
There is no 'climate crisis' or 'global warming'. Yes the climate changes, but it is very slowly, like over millenia, not a couple of decades, it cools and warms very slowly, mostly based on the temperature of the sea.
As for CO2 being responsible, that doesn't stand up to the slightest scientific scrutiny. The planet has been warmer in the past with lower CO2, and colder with much higher CO2 levels, long before the SUV (or even the motor car) was thought up. CO2 is actually at dangerously low levels at present - around 400ppm. Life on earth starts to die off at around 270ppm. CO2 is essential for life on the planet, it is therefore not a pollutant - nature doesn't work like that. Why do gardeners increase the level of CO2 to around 1500ppm in greenhouses? To speed up plant growth. This would be unlikely if CO2 was actually a pollutant.

Not a single one of the predicted 'disasters' that so-called 'climate change' (rebranded from 'global warming' in 2004 when it was discovered that the planet wasn't actually getting any warmer) has actually happened.
"The Arctic will be ice-free in summer by 2012" said Al Gore... turns out ice at both poles is increasing. Maldives disappearing under water by 2014? They are still there.

These celebrities and world leaders all go to these summits in jet aeroplanes, and get ferried around in huge limos while there. Does that not tell you that they KNOW it's a scam?

Lastly, I will leave you with this thought: Barack Obama and Al Gore have both bought beach front sea level properties. Why would they do that if sea levels were actually rising?

Top to bottom tossfest.
And so surprising from one who has no previous form whatsoever.