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

Pa ElGrande

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

So we are all in agreement now that it's all a publicity stunt being fronted by a mentally disabled teenager

You can't class her as mentally disabled since she can function adequately in society, her impairment compared with "neuro-typical" young adults of the same age means she is more vulnerable to this confusion than others and she is being taken advantage of by adults for their own ends while disregarding her development towards becoming a grown up adult.

Since we know this is part of a series of publicity stunts to generate headlines for a UN conference in September it is likely she will be allowed to fade into the background when she is no longer useful to them, they are beginning to realise that her apocalyptic visions are damaging their cause so that may be sooner that her parents realise. Hopefully she will get to live a life of her own without the weight of the world on her shoulders.

Thelonious Monk

The level of nastiness towards this girl is seriously shocking on this thread. Get a life you f*cking losers.

ednwireland

see shes getting less coverage in the irish media (dropping down the order) press probably getting bored with the story now.

mind you boris might have something to do with that and the fact that we are moving out of the silly season stories.

hetuzozaho

ednwireland wrote: »

see shes getting less coverage in the irish media (dropping down the order) press probably getting bored with the story now.

mind you boris might have something to do with that and the fact that we are moving out of the silly season stories.

May be due to the fact that they have arrived.

Podge_irl

gozunda wrote: »

Indeed. I think it's hilarious considering the UNs problem with basic figures and the photo detailing the17 boats sent out by them ...

Just in case it gets deleted from Twitter - here it is for posterity.

You mean the picture of the clearly numbered boats with boat number 17 right in your face in the picture? :rolleyes:

Never mind counting, whoever thinks that is funny has issues with just recognising numbers.

gozunda

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Nah, it's about a new breed of climate change doubters (not deniers) who are pissed off with what they perceive as "hysteria" about climate change inserting their various views/narratives, with a few real deniers piggybacking. No issues, people are entitled to their opinions.All I say is thank god we didn't have the internet when the Ozone hysteria kicked off

Dohhjoe - pointing out the flaws in something does not make anyone a 'denier' a 'doubter' or even a witch in old money - god forbid. It doesn't even make them 'pissed off' (sic)

Imo the real concern lies with the reality of a populist climate movement which allows absolutely no questioning of anything they say, no highlighting of evident extremism and absolutely no criticism of anything and especially the use of a figurehead child prophet. This is what is trurly deeply worrying about this current wave of hysteria.

gozunda

Podge_irl wrote: »

You mean the picture of the clearly numbered boats with boat number 17 right in your face in the picture? :rolleyes:Never mind counting, whoever thinks that is funny has issues with just recognising numbers.

You really are late to the party Podge. But yes just because the number 17 appears - it does not follow that there are 17 boats in the photo now does it? Maybe you should go back to school as well

The point is the photo is a good spoof on the UN feking up their figures once again. Dont get that? Cant help you Sorry.

Heres a photo of all 17 boats lined up waiting for the the main arrival

Podge_irl

gozunda wrote: »

You really are late to the party Podge. But yes just because the number 17 appears - it does not follow that there are 17 boats in the photo now does it? Maybe you should go back to school as well

The point is the photo is a good spoof on the UN feking up their figures once again. Dont get that? Cant help you Sorry.

Of course I get it. The point is that it is not a "good" anything, its incredibly stupid.

Dohnjoe

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

• The acid rain scare (popular in the 1980s before the socialist regimes collapsed)
  
• The nuclear winter scare (popular in the 1980s)
  
• The global cooling scare (popular in the 1970s)
  
• The human population scare (popular in the 1970s

Acid rain exists. Nuclear winter didn't happen thankfully (although we came very close to all out nuclear war with several incidents). Global cooling, yeah there were concerns, likewise with warming back in the 70's. Over-population is still a massive problem

So they are all real things, it's just you seem to have a problem with human overreactions to these things. Okay. An overreaction is certainly better than an under-reaction.

the ozone hole will still be there as big as ever as will the polar ice.

It would have been larger if we didn't take action, and it's reportedly starting to receed recently thanks to the fact that we took measures

gozunda

Podge_irl wrote: »

Of course I get it. The point is that it is not a "good" anything, its incredibly stupid.

Yes I quite agree - it was quite stupid stunt tbh. But ended up funny in the context of the UNs ability to spectacularly get the figures wrong on more than one occasion. But hey there we go

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Pa ElGrande

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The level of nastiness towards this girl is seriously shocking on this thread. Get a life you f*cking losers.

This is just a rehash of the "you're a rasis'" outrage name calling tactic that is used to shut down discussion it is an attempt at deflection and it is not working. I have repeatedly pointed out this young womans vulnerability is being exploited for financial gain by the adults around her, she any many others of her generation are being propagandised an we must call this out and it is possible to do this even if it means highlighting the hypocrisy in the behaviour of the adults around her.


Greta Thunberg: when discussion becomes impossible

There are lots of questions we should ask and answer if we want to understand why the world has gone this terribly wrong. First, is Greta "real" or "fake"? Well, I find it more likely that she's "fake" and was "programmed" by somebody, most likely her dad (Svante Thunberg, an actor – who just happens to be a relative of Svante Arrhenius, a great chemist who has also written an influential paper about the greenhouse effect [and a eugenicist who planned to upgrade Swedish children by electric shocks]). For a while, she seemed to support nuclear energy. German eco-activists immediately attacked her, her dad joined, and she suddenly decided that she no longer likes nuclear energy.


source

Podge_irl

gozunda wrote: »

Yes I quite agree - it was quite stupid stunt tbh. But ended up funny in the context of the UNs ability to spectacularly get the figures wrong on more than one occasion. But hey there we go

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Claiming the UN can't count because they sent 17 boats out and you can only see 5 in a picture is a pretty spectacular analogy for someone saying Global Warming can't possibly exist cause it's cold outside.

marieholmfan

gozunda wrote: »

You really are late to the party Podge. But yes just because the number 17 appears - it does not follow that there are 17 boats in the photo now does it? Maybe you should go back to school as well

The point is the photo is a good spoof on the UN feking up their figures once again. Dont get that? Cant help you Sorry.

Heres a photo of all 17 boats lined up waiting for the the main arrival

Until proven otherwise this photo is fake news. If I say 'there are twenty people here' and you tweet a picture of five people that doesn't disprove my statement.

Deniers lie.

gozunda

marieholmfan wrote: »

Until proven otherwise this photo is fake news. If I say 'there are twenty people here' and you tweet a picture of five people that doesn't disprove my statement.Deniers lie.

Lol. Its called a bit of humour Ted. Just in case you missed the OPs opening salvo about gretas voyage to the New World. Here is what one of the admins said about this thread when someone else didn't get it

Mr E wrote: »

In a thread that started with lots of tongue-in-cheek remarks, it's another tongue-in-cheek remark. ....

Thanks now

Wanderer78

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

So we are all in agreement now that it's all a publicity stunt being fronted by a mentally disabled teenager

she has autism, its a developmental disorder, shes not mentally disabled!

Stevieluvsye

Wanderer78 wrote: »

she has autism, its a developmental disorder, shes not mentally disabled!

She's a dilusional, megalomanical, hyperbolic fruitcake with fantasist idea's.

Dohnjoe

gozunda wrote: »

Dohhjoe - pointing out the flaws in something does not make anyone a 'denier' a 'doubter' or even a witch in old money - god forbid. It doesn't even make them 'pissed off' (sic)

Information/disinformation aside

Some denialists/doubters are motivated by simple base emotions toward environmentalists, the Jeremy Clarkson effect, where technically the environmentalist may be correct, but they are perceived as annoying/preachy, so a person takes the opposite position

Plenty of that goes on

Imo the real concern lies with the reality of a populist climate movement allows absolutely no questioning of anything they say, no highlighting of evident extremism and absolutely no criticism of anything and especially the use of a figurehead child prophet. This is what is trurly deeply worrying about this current wave of hysteria.

I agree, everything should be questioned, especially the veracity of any statements, reports or facts.

However, as with any serious risk situation where the stakes are pretty high, the consequences of taking action but being wrong far, far outweigh ignoring the warnings and not taking action. That's a no-brainer in any risk analysis

Perceived hysteria, alarmism, etc over such an issue is undesirable, but in itself is largely irrelevant when the issue is real - in fact it may even be instrumental into pushing wider action to resolve the issue

Dohnjoe

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

She's a dilusional, megalomanical, hyperbolic fruitcake with fantasist idea's.

That's it, let it all out

gozunda

Podge_irl wrote: »

Claiming the UN can't count because they sent 17 boats out and you can only see 5 in a picture is a pretty spectacular analogy for someone saying Global Warming can't possibly exist cause it's cold outside.

Ah Podge still spectacularly late to the party I see. Lol. Didnt read the thread no? Didnt see the posts about the UN using incorrect data which was detailed no?

Here's the link. Maybe best start from the beginning if you are going to be posting daft comments ok?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=111111597&postcount=1816

Wanderer78

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

She's a dilusional, megalomanical, hyperbolic fruitcake with fantasist idea's.

again, shes autistic, may i recommend the work of clinical psychologist tony attwood for further reading on the subject matter, it may resolve some of your ignorance's

Portsalon

So Chicken Licken has arrived safely outside the fox's lair. Yay!

What comes next? A big welcoming reception from Goosey Loosey and Cockey Lockey? Let's hope that Stumpy Trumpy doesn't crash the (vegan) picnic.

I suppose the one remaining question now is as to whether or not Foxy Loxy will manage to entice her into his den and gobble her up.

padd b1975

Wanderer78 wrote: »

she has autism, its a developmental disorder, shes not mentally disabled!

And her parents, what's their malfunction?

gozunda

Dohhjoe wrote:

I

Some denialists/doubters are motivated by simple base emotions toward environmentalists, the Jeremy Clarkson effect, where technically the environmentalist may be correct, but they are perceived as annoying/preachy, so a person takes the opposite position. Plenty of that goes in

It's an issue if they are using disinformation to make false or misleading claims

What like the UN did as pointed out here - and to which a bunch are losing their fillies over and calling posters 'deniers because of a bit of a joke about the UNs greeting party?

But yes there has been a noticable and concerted effort to shut down any and all discussion of the populist movement and absolutely any criticism of any of the current shenanigans going on.

Tbh I dont see any 'base motives' towards environmentalists here. And imo that is a misuse of the term. An environmental scientist would have some expertise in the field of climatology and science - most of the screamers do not.

Podge_irl

gozunda wrote: »

Ah Podge still spectacularly late to the party I see. Lol. Didnt read the thread no? Didnt see the posts about the UN using incorrect data which was detailed no?

Here's the link. Maybe best start from the beginning if you are going to be posting daft comments ok?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=111111597&postcount=1816

And the "joke" you have chosen to emphasis that is in fact an example of your perspective not encompassing the entire view and the actual reality from a larger perspective showing them to be completely correct? Kinda flies in the face of the point you are trying to make, but sure go for it.

Pa ElGrande

Dohnjoe wrote: »

So they are all real things, it's just you seem to have a problem with human overreactions to these things. Okay. An overreaction is certainly better than an under-reaction.

Not necessarily

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcAy4sOcS5M

227 Chimu children's skeletons found in Peru, evidence points to ritual killing

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It would have been larger if we didn't take action, and it's reportedly starting to receed recently thanks to the fact that we took measures

Or the science is wrong and time will tell.

gozunda

Podge_irl wrote: »

And the "joke" you have chosen to emphasis that is in fact an example of your perspective not encompassing the entire view and the actual reality from a larger perspective showing them to be completely correct? Kinda flies in the face of the point you are trying to make, but sure go for it.

Sorry Podge. Is that suppose to be English? - it's unreadable tbh. Sorry you still don't get it. Did you start at the first post yet - so you actually know what is going on in the thread no?

Wanderer78

padd b1975 wrote: »

And her parents, what's their malfunction?

know little or nothing about them, but autism isnt a malfunction, again, its a developmental disorder, and a relatively common one to

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

know little or nothing about them, but autism isnt a malfunction, again, its a developmental disorder, and a relatively common one to

becoming hugely common isnt it

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

becoming hugely common isnt it

my own opinion is, its always been here, we re just starting to understand it more now, and its complexities

99problems1

Can't wait for this one to turn 18. She'll be like that boy Hercules..who had the worlds attention and then when he became an adult he lost it all as he wasn't unique then.