• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Greta Thunberg is an annoying idiot that will turn millions off to environmental preservation

Turkey Master Baster

Formerly 'StarlightLotice'
Dec 25, 2018
1,854
1,431
665
Manchester, England
Adults listen to children as they are clearly innocent and know the Earth is dying.

Students listen to her as she is the "Get out of school for free" card, all they need to do is preach.

Believe me, once she turns 21 she will be ignored like most Activists at that age.

She makes some points but she ignores the biggest polluter on earth...China. If she can get the Chinese Government to listen then she has a chance but at the cost of being spied on for the rest of her life.

Anyway, a straight white male did it first who lives in a castle and makes music that even his own country hates: his name is Bono. (Any takers that he will make a song about her and have her on tour?)
 
Last edited:

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,458
606
330
I work with engineers and geologists. Most, myself included, believe that human-induced climate change is a real phenomenon but that it's a very low baseline trend that will take much, much longer than 12 years to have any significant effect on the planet. I mean this is literally what the science I'm aware of says, so emotional appeals to "#Believe scientists!" by children and other retards who haven't even read the science have no effect on me. Even though I believe that it's a real phenomenon, I don't believe that the solution is to castrate ourselves at the Altar of Intersectionality and allow socialists, communists (what's the practical difference anyway) and China to seize control of the future. To me, that's a much worse fate than the planet heating by a couple of degrees over 50+ years. That's plenty of time to develop technological solutions without allowing Useful Idiots to implement their idiotic plans and cause mass starvation.
I don't think we can do much, as technology ain't there, and stopping economic growth would result in vast loss of jobs and starvation.
But heat records are being broken, year on year, and super storms and other once in a century climate phenomena are becoming more common. The effects of climate change are being felt right now, and it will only get worse.

You hear about schools of salmon dying from heat
dozens of horses dying from heat dehydration and starvation

57 dead and 18,000 taken to hospitals in one week amid Japan heat wave

We saw Harvey, we saw Dorian
So she either gets a photo op where she is glaring at Trump, "you stole my childhood", and nothing gets done or she gets a smiley photo op with Hillary, "young women inspired by Hillary changing the world", and nothing gets done.
About the only solution viable at the moment is nuclear, and the left opposes that.
 

lil puff

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,959
977
365
Frankly, the way we litter (in the US), have lights on buildings using up energy to keep cities pretty, AC or heat blasting so high inside stores and offices that you feel it while walking outside, etc.

I don't think anyone really cares abut it as much as people want to believe.

At the very least, start with the obvious stuff.


"About the only solution viable at the moment is nuclear, and the left opposes that."


And this. ^ The idea that this has anything to do with a political opinion further convinces me that no one cares that much.
 
Last edited:

SurprisedPikachu

Gold Member
Feb 16, 2014
410
516
730
Earth
I don't think we can do much, as technology ain't there, and stopping economic growth would result in vast loss of jobs and starvation.
But heat records are being broken, year on year, and super storms and other once in a century climate phenomena are becoming more common. The effects of climate change are being felt right now, and it will only get worse.

You hear about schools of salmon dying from heat
dozens of horses dying from heat dehydration and starvation

57 dead and 18,000 taken to hospitals in one week amid Japan heat wave

We saw Harvey, we saw Dorian

About the only solution viable at the moment is nuclear, and the left opposes that.
Oh, I am so scared. I'm shaking in my boots.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
6,919
9,017
640
Students listen to her as she is the "Get out of school for free" card, all they need to do is preach.
literally! if i was in school these days i would be "striking" all the time by walking out of classes.

nuclear is not a solution LOL. maybe if your ultimate goal is you want to fuck up the environment for hundreds of thousands of years.

it is the height of parody that people are seriously touting "nuclear" as a sensible solution to energy & climate problems. like stopping a fingercut by amputating your entire arm.
 
Last edited:

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,458
606
330
Oh, I am so scared. I'm shaking in my boots.
We're in the middle of the anthropocene, vast numbers of species are going extinct annually. The oceans are acidifying and heating up to the tune of multiple atomic bombs of energy per second.



With the U.S. budget strained, how many superstorms do you think they can provide aid for? As they become the new norm, over a 100 billion might have to go out every few years, or perhaps even several times in a single year.
literally! if i was in school these days i would be "striking" all the time by walking out of classes.

nuclear is not a solution LOL. maybe if your ultimate goal is you want to fuck up the environment for hundreds of thousands of years.

it is the height of parody that people are seriously touting "nuclear" as a sensible solution to energy & climate problems. like stopping a fingercut by amputating your entire arm.
Nuclear has the least deaths and emits the least CO2. The waste can be recycled. Also it seems that not only are batteries not ready for renewables, but it remains to be seen if physics allows for the amount of energy storage needed to ever be provided cost efficiently enough.
 
Last edited:

SurprisedPikachu

Gold Member
Feb 16, 2014
410
516
730
Earth
We're in the middle of the anthropocene, vast numbers of species are going extinct annually. The oceans are acidifying and heating up to the tune of multiple atomic bombs of energy per second.



With the U.S. budget strained, how many superstorms do you think they can provide aid for? As they become the new norm, over a 100 billion might have to go out every few years, or perhaps even several times in a single year.
Yeah, but I just don't care and still think climate change is a fraud. I'm looking at it from a historical perspective. Also - survival of the fittest. Better learn to adapt, son.
 

Ornlu

Member
Oct 31, 2018
1,076
1,223
420
We're in the middle of the anthropocene, vast numbers of species are going extinct annually. The oceans are acidifying and heating up to the tune of multiple atomic bombs of energy per second.



With the U.S. budget strained, how many superstorms do you think they can provide aid for? As they become the new norm, over a 100 billion might have to go out every few years, or perhaps even several times in a single year.

Nuclear has the least deaths and emits the least CO2. The waste can be recycled. Also it seems that not only are batteries not ready for renewables, but it remains to be seen if physics allows for the amount of energy storage needed to ever be provided cost efficiently enough.
Please supply peer reviewed data showing an actual verified historical increase in either the severity or number of occurring natural disaster. I'm not aware of anything beyond hyperbole in the media.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrJohnGalt

Dirac1992

Neo Member
Jul 12, 2015
8
1
190
literally! if i was in school these days i would be "striking" all the time by walking out of classes.

nuclear is not a solution LOL. maybe if your ultimate goal is you want to fuck up the environment for hundreds of thousands of years.

it is the height of parody that people are seriously touting "nuclear" as a sensible solution to energy & climate problems. like stopping a fingercut by amputating your entire arm.
As a physicist I firmly believe that nuclear energy is actually the solution to many of the environmental problems we face today. Unfortunately, due to strong fears ingrained into society (justified after accidents like Chernobyl) no significant advances to make fission reactors more efficient, safe and clean have been made recently. Fussion reactors have proven to be indredibly difficult to implement and many research teams at prestigious universities have abandoned this topic and even sold their prototypes due to lack of funding (I'm a condensed matter physicist and not a nuclear physicist so I could be wrong) so the options we have now are very limited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

CurryPanda

Will restrain his sexual perversions
Mar 4, 2019
10,127
15,915
1,180
She's just a really shitty puppet/actress. And, she looks very manly.
 
Mar 19, 2015
1,349
1,268
595
Why even give this girl your time of day? I barely know who this girl is and I have 0 interest in finding out more.

Oh and I love the climate and I'm all for treating it better so it can heal but thats probably never gonna happen because humans are stupid
 
  • Like
Reactions: lil puff

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,458
606
330
Please supply peer reviewed data showing an actual verified historical increase in either the severity or number of occurring natural disaster. I'm not aware of anything beyond hyperbole in the media.
year on year, heat records have been broken all over the place. Regards natural disaster, perhaps the media is using hyperbole, but when you hear of once in a century floods or once in a century disasters and a few happen within years, maybe their hyperbole is not so far off.

This is a study in north carolina
They found that six out of the seven largest hurricanes, tropical storms and floods occurred in the last 20 years. This frequency is probably caused by “increased moisture carrying capacity of tropical cyclones due to the warming climate”, the study said.
They found the probability of them occurring randomly in such a short period of time is just two per cent.

Also
The number and cost of disasters are increasing over time due to a combination of increased exposure, vulnerability, and the fact that climate change is increasing the frequency of some types of extremes that lead to billion-dollar disasters.

 

12Goblins

Member
Mar 1, 2017
1,501
1,768
445
Nothing she says that you quoted is particularly triggering, OP. Time for some self reflection perhaps
 
Last edited:

SurprisedPikachu

Gold Member
Feb 16, 2014
410
516
730
Earth
year on year, heat records have been broken all over the place. Regards natural disaster, perhaps the media is using hyperbole, but when you hear of once in a century floods or once in a century disasters and a few happen within years, maybe their hyperbole is not so far off.

This is a study in north carolina

Also

That's weird, I read this: https://apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

We should all be dead by now.

Point is, you're being fed bullshit. They keep moving goal posts to keep you scared so you'll turn over more rights, pay more in taxes, and do the bidding of the elites. That's just one example and I'm about to go into yet another boring ass meeting for the day. I'll find you the data showing that China is fucking horrible for the environment, but America is doing AOK - unless you're in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York City, and so on.


EDIT:

Which was used as a source for this thread:
which some are trying to dispute as lacking any real credibility because it paints China in a negative light :pie_thinking:

but basically, no matter how you spin it- China is the worst offender of Co2 emissions (or in the case it has the highest concentration of Co2, but let's face it, the concentration of it is so high because they're emitting so much of it).
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
6,919
9,017
640
As a physicist I firmly believe that nuclear energy is actually the solution to many of the environmental problems we face today.
lol im sure there are tons of physicists paid off by nuclear companies to say the same thing.

Fukushima is still melting and they can't even design robots that can withstand the radiation long enough to be effective. they break down in a single day. that's how dangerous this stuff can get. we literally cannot even invent the technology to deal with it if things go wrong.

this isn't a conspiracy, this is a fact. yet this caveat gets handwaved away as "socially ingrained fears". give me a break.
 
Last edited:

Dirac1992

Neo Member
Jul 12, 2015
8
1
190
lol im sure there are tons of physicists paid off by nuclear companies to say the same thing.

Fukushima is still melting and they can't even design robots that can withstand the radiation long enough to be effective. they break down in a single day. that's how dangerous this stuff can get. we literally cannot even invent the technology to deal with it if things go wrong.

this isn't a conspiracy, this is a fact. yet this caveat gets handwaved away as "socially ingrained fears". give me a break.
As I said, nuclear physics is not a hot research topic anymore as there is not enough funding, but this might change when a major breakthrough of nuclear fusion is achieved (hopefully we get to see it in our lifetimes). China might be the first country to get there, as they are the ones buying the reactor prototypes that I mentioned in the other post I believe.
 

lil puff

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,959
977
365
By the way. If this little 16 year old turned someone off of global preservation, they never cared in the 1st place.

I am not sure what can ever be done about myopic and selfish people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Geki-D

Geki-D

Member
Dec 6, 2017
2,663
2,577
515
year on year, heat records have been broken all over the place. Regards natural disaster, perhaps the media is using hyperbole, but when you hear of once in a century floods or once in a century disasters and a few happen within years, maybe their hyperbole is not so far off.

This is a study in north carolina

Also

You're falling into the bullshit asymmetry principle, buddy, I wouldn't waste my energy if I were you.

For someone to take the solid position that climate change isn't just not happening but is actually an elaborate hoax means they're already neck deep in science denialism and conspiracy theories. Nothing you post will serve a purpose and the amount of evidence you supply will always be rejected with nothing more than a
 
  • Like
Reactions: RealGassy

Ornlu

Member
Oct 31, 2018
1,076
1,223
420
year on year, heat records have been broken all over the place. Regards natural disaster, perhaps the media is using hyperbole, but when you hear of once in a century floods or once in a century disasters and a few happen within years, maybe their hyperbole is not so far off.

This is a study in north carolina

Also

1. I didn't ask about heat records at all

2. Using the term "once in a century" is in itself hyperbole. The media uses it for a reason.

3. Measuring disasters by damage done/$$$ is very misleading. All modern disasters are going to have much higher damage totals, as there are many, many more people and much more property that can and will be affected. Basically more coast being developed now = more expensive hurricanes. This applies to all natural disasters, as well.

The reason I asked the question, is that there is no real data out there showing that the number of disasters are increasing, or that they are becoming more intense.

Looking historically, the intensity is neutral. For example, with Atlantic hurricanes, in three different measurements, you would have to stretch to find even one storm in the 2000's that is even in the top 3 as far as the most powerful storms. That is Wilma, from 2005. Everything else is from pre-2000.

I would, however be willing to buy into the argument that a warming planet would theoretically have wetter storms. That, coupled with reduced desertification, an increase in global fresh water supplies, the greening of arid regions, etc that comes with that theory.

We can go into it further, but the promoted idea that "it's getting worse!" is hype. There have been some massive disasters in the past. The Great Hurricane of 1780 is a great example:

 

Ornlu

Member
Oct 31, 2018
1,076
1,223
420
You're falling into the bullshit asymmetry principle, buddy, I wouldn't waste my energy if I were you.

For someone to take the solid position that climate change isn't just not happening but is actually an elaborate hoax means they're already neck deep in science denialism and conspiracy theories. Nothing you post will serve a purpose and the amount of evidence you supply will always be rejected with nothing more than a
Hi friend, I don't know you, and don't assume to know your viewpoints. You apparently don't know mine either. I think I've been pretty fair with my climate science here on the forum. Please don't cast aspersions on me that aren't fair.
 

SLoWMoTIoN

Milk Connoisseur
Feb 2, 2018
8,660
7,549
815
I don't think we can do much, as technology ain't there, and stopping economic growth would result in vast loss of jobs and starvation.
But heat records are being broken, year on year, and super storms and other once in a century climate phenomena are becoming more common. The effects of climate change are being felt right now, and it will only get worse.

You hear about schools of salmon dying from heat
dozens of horses dying from heat dehydration and starvation

57 dead and 18,000 taken to hospitals in one week amid Japan heat wave

We saw Harvey, we saw Dorian

About the only solution viable at the moment is nuclear, and the left opposes that.
Those silly Japanese really need to have better insulated houses or central ac.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CurryPanda

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,458
606
330
The reason I asked the question, is that there is no real data out there showing that the number of disasters are increasing, or that they are becoming more intense.
2017 broke all time records in costs and number of disasters
In the wake of these three particularly devastating disasters, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) dealt with the uniquely challenging feat of funding and planning disaster relief for all of them at the same time. “I’m not aware of any time in FEMA’s history where they’ve had to handle three major disasters at once,” said Jeff Schlegelmilch, deputy director for the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University, Emily Atkin writes for the New Republic.
The number of natural disasters plaguing the world has risen significantly in the past 40 years, and the cost to rebuild and recover after the disasters has increased as well, according to a study by World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group.
Fewer than 100 natural disasters occurred in 1975, and more than 400 occurred in 2005.
 
Last edited:

Fox Mulder

Member
Jul 1, 2009
17,802
1,154
970
Greensboro, NC
She is 16.

In two years she will no longer be the cute child of propaganda
She will dye her hair pink, blue or green and fade into mocking irrelevancy as just another crying adult on social media.

I wonder how she will deal with the fact that her life peaked at 16.
She’ll probably win a Nobel Prize and do expensive speaking tours for decades about how the world is ending.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Weilthain

Makariel

Gold Member
Jan 14, 2018
1,778
1,524
535
About the only solution viable at the moment is nuclear, and the left opposes that.
Every time someone tells you there is only one viable solution it's because they try to sell you something. Nuclear is not the golden ticket, it's one technology available that can help us replacing coal and oil for the time being. It's better than it's reputation, but it's not a quick and easy fix. The few companies that are still able to build nuclear power plants are having trouble getting them done in any reasonable time frame and most recent developments have run way over the projected budget.
 

Ornlu

Member
Oct 31, 2018
1,076
1,223
420
2017 broke all time records in costs and number of disasters


As I said before, cost is a terrible way to measure. There are more people. There is more property. Of course the cost will be increased. The same event in 1900 versus 2019 is going to be exponentially more expensive.

Responding to the bolded:

Per the study cited in the article posted here, even in their own reasoning they state 3 reasons for the 4X increase in the number of natural disasters in this order:

1. Reporting is encouraged by increased international monetary assistance
2. Increase in the number and size of agencies tracking these events
3. Sea temperature rise

So to attribute a 4X increase in natural disasters 100% to global temperature rise isn't accurate.
 
Last edited:

KingMoron

Member
Dec 10, 2018
773
2,117
455
Every time someone tells you there is only one viable solution it's because they try to sell you something. Nuclear is not the golden ticket, it's one technology available that can help us replacing coal and oil for the time being. It's better than it's reputation, but it's not a quick and easy fix. The few companies that are still able to build nuclear power plants are having trouble getting them done in any reasonable time frame and most recent developments have run way over the projected budget.
Well, until we can develop the technology that can harness the energy from the sunshine and warmth generated by Emma Roberts smile.....coal and nuclear power it is.




 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Tesseract

jts

...hate me...
Apr 29, 2007
16,907
181
1,230
35
PT
Oh god I'm only seeing her talk now and it's very cringy. Then again, it's just a kid possibly with some learning disability. Don't be mad at her and don't say you're gonna pollute on purpose because of her ffs.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Weilthain

Vicetrailia

Member
Mar 12, 2019
620
276
335
Or as you said in the other thread, for all the angry eco-warriors, why moan and complain for others to do it?

Where's all the nature lovers getting science, engineering and geology degrees where they can put their mind and career interest into real life environmental improvements for society?

Technology is always improving. As so is science knowledge. So hit the books and graduate. And instead of sitting there on Twitter nagging, work at a 9-5 job helping develop new materials or get a mechanical engineering degree and figure out how to build high quality machinery that uses little energy and pollution.

Quality gear seems to use less power over time, so some smart people are doing their part. So join in and help out more.

And if cow and pig farts are so bad for the environment. Figure out a way so animal farts aren't so toxic for the environment. Be a biologist or chemist and do your part.

Let's see how easy it is to actually make that happen in real life, as compared to someone on their tablet tweeting while watching Netflix.
We need action now as well, we need better policy. Right now we don't have that.

It's nice that people get these degrees and invent these technologies, but that stuff is still years off, and may or may not alone be able to solve our problems. We are trying very hard tech wise, but we need policy to help boost tech, and policy on reductions.
 
Last edited:

Vicetrailia

Member
Mar 12, 2019
620
276
335
I work with engineers and geologists. Most, myself included, believe that human-induced climate change is a real phenomenon but that it's a very low baseline trend that will take much, much longer than 12 years to have any significant effect on the planet. I mean this is literally what the science I'm aware of says, so emotional appeals to "#Believe scientists!" by children and other retards who haven't even read the science have no effect on me. Even though I believe that it's a real phenomenon, I don't believe that the solution is to castrate ourselves at the Altar of Intersectionality and allow socialists, communists (what's the practical difference anyway) and China to seize control of the future. To me, that's a much worse fate than the planet heating by a couple of degrees over 50+ years. That's plenty of time to develop technological solutions without allowing Useful Idiots to implement their idiotic plans and cause mass starvation.
Time to prevent what exactly? 7 degree apocalypse? There's plenty of consequences long before that including mass immigration.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
15,194
29,102
1,260
USA
dunpachi.com

Fun fact: one of Greta's handlers, Luisa Marie Neubauer, is a Youth Ambassador for the ONE Foundation, born from the DATA anti-poverty organization and other orgs. DATA was originally created by Bill & Melinda Gates, Bono, and the illustrious George Soros, among others.

C.R.E.A.M.
"I'm afraid to go out into the sun now"

Oh laudy



I'm laughing so hard. This whole ideology needs to be fieldgoal-kicked into the Clown World thread and we never speak of it again. Pinky promise?
 

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
15,171
25,107
1,400
Australia
Thank God I don't believe in climate change, or global warming, or global cooling (which is what they claimed before that). It's all an attempt at fear mongering the people in giving up their rights so the government can control more of their lives. Should we clean up after ourselves? Absolutely. Should we do more to ensure we have clean air (unlike China)? Absolutely. Should we clean up that pile of garbage in the middle of the fucking ocean? YES.

But none of this is making the earth any hotter or colder. Pick up a history book and read the description of seasons from the medieval times, they explicity state that many of the castles were built drafty because it was so fucking hot outside. Then we went through a period where it was cold and winters were brutal - look at the descriptions of the weather during the Colonial times in America. The fucking east coast would be blanketed in snow, several inches deep!
Which history book?