Greta and the aristocrat sail the high seas to save the planet.

archer22

SafeSurfer wrote: »

“A bizarre combination of weather systems coinciding. That’s not what’s happening with the modern storms!”

So what is happening with modern storms?

You ask in your previous post “will the primitives still be howling for Greta’s blood?”

Over 4,500 posts in, has anyone here called for Greta’s blood?

Well I haven't read them all as it's too wearisome, but I only had to go to page 2 post 30 to find one.

The amount of evil bile and online bullying this girl has been getting, not just here but almost everywhere online has been shocking and disturbing and that it seems to coming from grown adults makes it even more disturbing.

SafeSurfer

archer22 wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

“A bizarre combination of weather systems coinciding. That’s not what’s happening with the modern storms!”

So what is happening with modern storms?

You ask in your previous post “will the primitives still be howling for Greta’s blood?”

Over 4,500 posts in, has anyone here called for Greta’s blood?

Well I haven't read them all as it's too wearisome, but I only had to go to page 2 post 30 to find one.

The amount of evil bile and online bullying this girl has been getting, not just here but almost everywhere online has been shocking and disturbing and that it seems to coming from grown adults makes it even more disturbing.

You are right. It’s inexcusable.

Tony EH

archer22 wrote: »

The amount of evil bile and online bullying this girl has been getting, not just here but almost everywhere online has been shocking and disturbing and that it seems to coming from grown adults makes it even more disturbing.

It is genuinely incredible, no matter where one stands on the salient issue.


The fear and loathing is astonishing.

gozunda

archer22 wrote: »

Well I haven't read them all as it's too wearisome, but I only had to go to page 2 post 30 to find one.The amount of evil bile and online bullying this girl has been getting, not just here but almost everywhere online has been shocking and disturbing and that it seems to coming from grown adults makes it even more disturbing.

The thing is there is little if any of that type of comment in this thread. You're not the first here to repeat the mantra regarding 'grown adults" etc etc - suffice to say it's been trotted out repeatedly. Those voicing any criticisms on here have been variously alluded to as having paedophile interests, being primitive and on we go...

The fact is the main concerns I see discussed are the circus surrounding this trip and various concerns regarding this type of PR campaign.

I would suggest what is also concerning is 'grown adults' placing a teenager on a pedestal and refusing to listen to any criticism whatsoever on those issues. Here that is much more serious and disturbing state of affairs imo.

SafeSurfer

Tony EH wrote: »

archer22 wrote: »

The amount of evil bile and online bullying this girl has been getting, not just here but almost everywhere online has been shocking and disturbing and that it seems to coming from grown adults makes it even more disturbing.

It is genuinely incredible, no matter where one stands on the salient issue.


The fear and loathing is astonishing.

The loathing of Thunberg is astonishing. However the fear expressed by Thunberg is also astonishing. Fear and panic that is seeping into the consciousness of children around the world.

I honestly fear an increasing eco doom based nihilism. I also don’t think that future waves of eco terrorism are unimaginable either given the increasing hero worship of unabomber Theodore Kaczynski.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/the-unabomber-ted-kaczynski-new-generation-of-acolytes.html

Tony EH

SafeSurfer wrote: »

However the fear expressed by Thunberg is also astonishing.

It's absolutely nothing compared to the fear of a kid's simple message to world leaders at a UN summit.

SafeSurfer

Tony EH wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

However the fear expressed by Thunberg is also astonishing.

It's absolutely nothing compared to the fear of a kid's simple message to world leaders at a UN summit.

I don’t think it’s fear of her message. It is fear that she is a tool in manipulating people into participating in a revolution that we would rather not be part of and are skeptical of the need for.

Veritas Libertas

Tony EH wrote: »

It's absolutely nothing compared to the fear of a kid's simple message to world leaders at a UN summit.

You do love things that are simple, I have noticed.

archer22

SafeSurfer wrote: »

The loathing of Thunberg is astonishing. However the fear expressed by Thunberg is also astonishing. Fear and panic that is seeping into the consciousness of children around the world.

I honestly fear an increasing eco doom based nihilism. I also don’t think that future waves of eco terrorism are unimaginable either given the increasing hero worship of unabomber Theodore Kaczynski.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/the-unabomber-ted-kaczynski-new-generation-of-acolytes.html

All she is doing is asking governments to listen to the scientists...and if you live in lowlying areas of the world you wouldn't need Greta to make you fearful...that fear is already there, and well justified

Tell me how

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I don’t think it’s fear of her message. It is fear that she is a tool in manipulating people into participating in a revolution that we would rather not be part of and are skeptical of the need for.

How many 'revolutions' are supported with extensive scientific evidence.

The conversation from the naysayers is continually ignoring the absolute overwhelming evidence, such as it exists, is on the side calling for change.

And as for the post a while ago saying that people may laugh in 200 years at us now getting concerned, will they laugh more at those that used evidence or those that denied its existence.

Because if it's the latter, society is going to take quite the turn.

SafeSurfer

archer22 wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

The loathing of Thunberg is astonishing. However the fear expressed by Thunberg is also astonishing. Fear and panic that is seeping into the consciousness of children around the world.

I honestly fear an increasing eco doom based nihilism. I also don’t think that future waves of eco terrorism are unimaginable either given the increasing hero worship of unabomber Theodore Kaczynski.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/the-unabomber-ted-kaczynski-new-generation-of-acolytes.html

All she is doing is asking governments to listen to the scientists...and if you live in lowlying areas of the world you wouldn't need Greta to make you fearful...that fear is already there, and well justified

You can argue that but you know that’s not all she is doing. She is asking elected leaders to panic. To feel the fear she feels every day which has been debilitating. While making these calls on others to feel fear and panic she has had more exposure than perhaps anybody of her age in the history of civilization. Think about that for a moment.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

How many 'revolutions' are supported with extensive scientific evidence.

The conversation from the naysayers is continually ignoring the absolute overwhelming evidence, such as it exists, is on the side calling for change.

And as for the post a while ago saying that people may laugh in 200 years at us now getting concerned, will they laugh more at those that used evidence or those that denied its existence.

Because if it's the latter, society is going to take quite the turn.

There will be nobody laughing in 200 years.

Tell me how

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You can argue that but you know that’s not all she is doing. She is asking elected leaders to panic. To feel the fear she feels every day which has been debilitating. While making these calls on others to feel fear and panic she has had more exposure than perhaps anybody of her age in the history of civilization. Think about that for a moment.

Is that your issue? With the tone she is using? That is the definition of splitting hairs. How about the message that something needs to be done has been in the news, for many many years, and yet, sufficient action has yet to be taken. Does that not warrant escalating the narrative to try to provoke meaningful action.

In all walks of life, we hear people use terms which literally might be out of place without correction, Greta is one of the ones whose choice of words, is probably closest to being accurate and yet she is being micro-analysed to determine saying 'panic' is excessive. Think about that for a moment.

SafeSurfer

Tell me how wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I don’t think it’s fear of her message. It is fear that she is a tool in manipulating people into participating in a revolution that we would rather not be part of and are skeptical of the need for.

How many 'revolutions' are supported with extensive scientific evidence.

The conversation from the naysayers is continually ignoring the absolute overwhelming evidence, such as it exists, is on the side calling for change.

And as for the post a while ago saying that people may laugh in 200 years at us now getting concerned, will they laugh more at those that used evidence or those that denied its existence.

Because if it's the latter, society is going to take quite the turn.

Presenting facts does not mean that people will rush to join a revolution. All the facts showed that a small number of people, the 1%, controlled a hugely disproportionate amount of global wealth. The Occupy Wallstreet Movement spread internationally and grew in number among pledges of not leaving until the revolution occurred. How many are on Wall Street or Dame Street now?

Facts are no guarantee of support or success.

People are naturally conservative. People do not like change except for people with little to lose from a revolution of the current system. Hence large support amongst the idealistic young and much more scepticism from those who stand to lose most in a revolution.

SafeSurfer

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Tell me how wrote: »

How many 'revolutions' are supported with extensive scientific evidence.

The conversation from the naysayers is continually ignoring the absolute overwhelming evidence, such as it exists, is on the side calling for change.

And as for the post a while ago saying that people may laugh in 200 years at us now getting concerned, will they laugh more at those that used evidence or those that denied its existence.

Because if it's the latter, society is going to take quite the turn.

There will be nobody laughing in 200 years.

Neither of us can know for sure but I am convinced that laughter will still ring out among the streets and corridors of whatever civilization exists in 2219.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

Is that your issue? With the tone she is using? That is the definition of splitting hairs. How about the message that something needs to be done has been in the news, for many many years, and yet, sufficient action has yet to be taken. Does that not warrant escalating the narrative to try to provoke meaningful action. In all walks of life, we hear people use terms which literally might be out of place without correction, Greta is one of the ones whose choice of words, is probably closest to being accurate and yet she is being micro-analysed to determine saying 'panic' is excessive. Think about that for a moment.

Incorrect. No one is micro-analysing anything nor referring to her 'tone'. As detailed previously - there are number of major red flags which have been identified in her commentaries. These are valid criticisms and have been detailed by many and not just those on this forum. If anyone wishes to continue to deny or ignore that - that of course is their choice. However it neither makes that the correct one by default or by any stretch of the imagination.

archer22

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You can argue that but you know that’s not all she is doing. She is asking elected leaders to panic. To feel the fear she feels every day which has been debilitating. While making these calls on others to feel fear and panic she has had more exposure than perhaps anybody of her age in the history of civilization. Think about that for a moment.

I don't know why people keep harping on about her age an intelligent committed person is an intelligent committed person regardless of their age.

As a side note to that, bear in mind another teenage girl Joan of Arc is one of France's national heroines....so dismissing someone solely on the grounds of being a teenage girl is not really a MENSA class idea, to put it mildly.

SafeSurfer

Tell me how wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You can argue that but you know that’s not all she is doing. She is asking elected leaders to panic. To feel the fear she feels every day which has been debilitating. While making these calls on others to feel fear and panic she has had more exposure than perhaps anybody of her age in the history of civilization. Think about that for a moment.

Is that your issue? With the tone she is using? That is the definition of splitting hairs. How about the message that something needs to be done has been in the news, for many many years, and yet, sufficient action has yet to be taken. Does that not warrant escalating the narrative to try to provoke meaningful action.

In all walks of life, we hear people use terms which literally might be out of place without correction, Greta is one of the ones whose choice of words, is probably closest to being accurate and yet she is being micro-analysed to determine saying 'panic' is excessive. Think about that for a moment.

I have thought about it. Deeply. I don’t believe a messenger whose message is demanding leaders panic should be entertained.

If the opinions of a child tormented by fears of nuclear Armageddon were entertained by world leaders during the Cold War, say during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Where would we be?

Would that “escalate the narrative” enough for you or should cooler heads prevail?

Veritas Libertas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There will be nobody laughing in 200 years.

The Times (London), in 1894, declared “In 50 years, every street in London will be buried under nine feet of manure,”. This became known as the “Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894″
What was once thought to be an insurmountable threat to humanity’s existence vanished in little over a decade and the entire incident is now a barely remembered footnote in human history

It is an analogy for supposedly insuperable extrapolated problems being rendered moot by the introduction of new technologies.

SafeSurfer

archer22 wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

You can argue that but you know that’s not all she is doing. She is asking elected leaders to panic. To feel the fear she feels every day which has been debilitating. While making these calls on others to feel fear and panic she has had more exposure than perhaps anybody of her age in the history of civilization. Think about that for a moment.

I don't know why people keep harping on about her age an intelligent committed person is an intelligent committed person regardless of their age.

As a side note to that, bear in mind another teenage girl Joan of Arc is one of France's national heroines....so dismissing someone solely on the grounds of being a teenage girl is not really a MENSA class idea, to put it mildly.

I am not dismissing her solely on the grounds of being a teenage girl. Just yet another strawman.

I only referred to her age to make the point that nobody of her age has had the exposure to bring her message of fear and panic to so many other children.
The things I was afraid of as a child are no longer the things I am afraid of.

Tell me how

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

The Times (London), in 1894, declared “In 50 years, every street in London will be buried under nine feet of manure,”. This became known as the “Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894″
What was once thought to be an insurmountable threat to humanity’s existence vanished in little over a decade and the entire incident is now a barely remembered footnote in human history

It is an analogy for supposedly insuperable extrapolated problems being rendered moot by the introduction of new technologies.

That story supports Greta's argument.

'Unless things change, there's going to be a major problem.' Things changed with the take up of the automobile.

We are back to the 'Unless things change' stage again, Greta is saying the new solutions do not yet exist, we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.

archer22

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am not dismissing her solely on the grounds of being a teenage girl. Just yet another strawman.

I only referred to her age to make the point that nobody of her age has had the exposure to bring her message of fear and panic to so many other children.
The things I was afraid of as a child are no longer the things I am afraid of.

Well would a teenager from Tacloban city in the Philippines or recently the Bahamas have enough experience of the effects of climate change for you to listen to.

Plenty of them are afraid of things now that they were not previously afraid of.

Hell I have not only seen traumatised children and adults there, but even traumatised Dogs!

Veritas Libertas

Tell me how wrote: »

We are back to the 'Unless things change' stage again, Greta is saying the new solutions do not yet exist, we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.

How does she square that sentence with this one? "You have stolen my dreams and my childhood"

SafeSurfer

Tell me how wrote: »

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

The Times (London), in 1894, declared “In 50 years, every street in London will be buried under nine feet of manure,”. This became known as the “Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894″
What was once thought to be an insurmountable threat to humanity’s existence vanished in little over a decade and the entire incident is now a barely remembered footnote in human history

It is an analogy for supposedly insuperable extrapolated problems being rendered moot by the introduction of new technologies.

That story supports Greta's argument.

'Unless things change, there's going to be a major problem.' Things changed with the take up of the automobile.

We are back to the 'Unless things change' stage again, Greta is saying the new solutions do not yet exist, we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.

No such Times article exists. But to follow the analogy with carbon, the solution being presented is to ban horses now.

SafeSurfer

archer22 wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am not dismissing her solely on the grounds of being a teenage girl. Just yet another strawman.

I only referred to her age to make the point that nobody of her age has had the exposure to bring her message of fear and panic to so many other children.
The things I was afraid of as a child are no longer the things I am afraid of.

Well would a teenager from Tacloban city in the Philippines or recently the Bahamas have enough experience of the effects of climate change for you to listen to.

Plenty of them are afraid of things now that they were not previously afraid of.

Hell I have not only seen traumatised children and adults there, but even traumatised Dogs!

For generations after the night of the big wind cottages were built at the bottom of hills and in the most sheltered places that could be found.

You have no evidence that the incidents you cite can be attributed solely to climate change so a new found fear of climate change following being the victim of a storm would seem misplaced.

Tell me how

SafeSurfer wrote: »

No such Times article exists. But to follow the analogy with carbon, the solution being presented is to ban horses now.

There is no solution being presented. What is being presented is a statement of the problem, an acknowledgement of the source of the problem and a call for action.

I think the IPCC report could adequately take the place of the Times article in terms of spurring action (not that cars were taken up because the Times said there was a problem).

Veritas Libertas

SafeSurfer wrote: »

No such Times article exists. But to follow the analogy with carbon, the solution being presented is to ban horses now.

Not only that, but we must work on a macroscopic level to remove horses from our society.

SafeSurfer

Tell me how wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

No such Times article exists. But to follow the analogy with carbon, the solution being presented is to ban horses now.

There is no solution being presented. What is being presented is a statement of the problem, an acknowledgement of the source of the problem and a call for action.

I think the IPCC report could adequately take the place of the Times article in terms of spurring action (not that cars were taken up because the Times said there was a problem).

“Politicians must aim for zero hunger as well as zero emissions. They must reject false solutions that divert land away from growing food and into producing crops and trees for energy and carbon capture.”

Zero emissions sounds like zero horses to me.

Tell me how

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

How does she square that sentence with this one? "You have stolen my dreams and my childhood"

Is it that hard to figure out.

'You have stolen my dreams and my childhood through your allowance to use the planet without concern for sustainability or the needs of future generations. You should have developed technological solutions or enacted legislation to ensure that the destructive use of the earths natural resources only occurred as a last resort. But you didn't, now, as a result we need to support science to create and introduce them on a massive scale.'

If you are looking for a link to where she said those exact words or else you are discounting the whole point, then, it is clear that you are not going to admit that her message has been easy to understand where it came from and what she is looking for.

Tell me how

SafeSurfer wrote: »

“Politicians must aim for zero hunger as well as zero emissions. They must reject false solutions that divert land away from growing food and into producing crops and trees for energy and carbon capture.”

Zero emissions sounds like zero horses to me.

Nett zero does not equate to zero full stop....