• 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

oagboghi2

Member
Apr 15, 2018
4,534
5,748
420
Yeah social media is making people into contant "fighters" where they just want to argue with everything and everyone. Social media has made people very mean in general. Speaking with someone online and an actual person in real life is very different. There seems to be a huge disconnect in people generally to be honest. The internet has brought people so close together yet we are further apart than ever. We are made for real human interaction, physical contact etc. And I fear that is all disappearing.

Reminds me of Asimov's Novel "Naked Sun". Where people on a planet called Solaria never make real contact with each other. They are mere projections when they meet each other and they have grown up in such a way and so disconnected where have to make contact with someone "real" can actually cause death, panic etc.
How old are some of you? 13? The country has always been liked this. Their was no "good old days" where everyone got along

This isn't even the first time environmentalists used kids at the U.N. to peddle their politics.
 
Last edited:
  • Triggered
Reactions: V4skunk

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
25,683
28,027
1,095
How old are some of you? 13? The country has always been liked this. Their was no "good old days" where everyone got along

This isn't even the first environmentalists used kids at the U.N. to peddle their politics.
I think the “good ole days” were before the smartphone internet where we didn’t have to read everybody’s goofy ass shit.

I agree with you, where not everybody always got along, it’s just more amplified now that everything is on the connected world stage.

Before, we focused more on our local communities, with mere murmurs of worldly things. Now those are ignored by all this worldly distraction vying for that attention.
 
Last edited:

Chiggs

Member
Jan 20, 2005
12,765
768
1,515
39
El Segundo, California
Hey, look. A decent article on Greta. One that’s not a complete puff piece:


Sorry, but the fawning attitude towards Thunberg is not going to extend to me. If you are going to be given an international stage to call for a general strike, as Thunberg has done, you deserve to be challenged – whether you are 16 and wear pigtails or not. If the BBC, or anyone else, is going to offer a platform to Thunberg, these are the questions she needs to be asked:

1. Do you really think it is possible to eliminate carbon emissions by 2025 – the target of Extinction Rebellion, whose aims you have endorsed – without crashing the global economy? That wouldn’t just mean the end of air travel, which you personally shun, it would mean the end of your favoured high speed rail travel, too. While great efforts have been made to switch to renewables, we do not yet even nearly have the technology to turn to a fully fossil-free world and to pretend that we do so is fanciful.

2. If governments are supposedly ignoring the science, how do you explain, then, that those same governments set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) more than 30 years ago specifically to advise them on climate change – and have continued to seek its advice ever since, most recently asking it what would need to be done to limit global temperature rises to 1.5 celsius?

3. You want a general strike, but why do you think workers will want to join one when your demands would mean an end to many of their jobs? It is one thing for schoolchildren to go on strike – taking a day off is always very exciting for them. You might have a harder job convincing industrial workers whose jobs and living standards ultimately depend on the cheap source of energy which you want to take away. I know campaigners keep going on about ‘green jobs’ but it is no consolation creating 1,000 jobs in green energy, or whatever, if your unrealistic carbon reduction targets are going to destroy 100,000 jobs in heavy industry. How are you going to convince those employed in the latter to join your strike?

4. You have said that you think you can see the issues more clearly because you see things in black and white. But isn’t that the problem? There are great complexities in how to balance economic and environmental needs. The idea that the issue of climate change can be reduced to two choices – environmental destruction or purity – is nonsense. What we need to solve climate change is people who can see the issue in a rich spectrum of colours, not black and white, wouldn’t you say?
 

Chiggs

Member
Jan 20, 2005
12,765
768
1,515
39
El Segundo, California
This one might be better:


‘You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words’ is perhaps the whitest thing anyone has ever said at the UN. What is the correct answer? Is it (a) Go to your room? Or is it (b) Forgive me, to make it up to you, Daddy and I are going to set the entire course of human civilisation on a new track?
:messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:
Apr 18, 2014
2,874
1,912
770
P-Town
People think she is acting. Why are you lying to yourself?
Oops, I didn’t mean to quote you, I was going to reply earlier but got sidetracked and forgot (but GAF ‘membas).

I can’t speak for anyone else but I could see from the clips I’ve seen of her angry speech compared to her less prepared moments that it could be believed she was acting. We really know nothing about this girl but what we’ve been fed from the media and I don’t believe most of what they say so we have to draw our own conclusions. I got acting vibes from her speech because she kept pausing to look at her sheet and then had to get indignant again before she could start talking. I didn’t think she was actually as worked up as she wanted to appear. I’m no behavioral scientist though.

If this girl is truly autistic as portrayed than it is really sad and I consider this child abuse. To feed into an autistic persons obsessive, irrational phobias is only going to make things for them much worse. I’d like to see some medical professionals speak up about this because it’s just wrong.

I think the “good all days” were before the smartphone internet where we didn’t have to read everybody’s goofy ass shit.

I agree with you, where not everybody always got along, it’s just more amplified now that everything is on the connected world stage.

Before, we focused more on our local communities, with mere murmurs of worldly things. Now those are ignored by all this worldly distraction vying for that attention.
This is spot on. Before the internet I just avoided shit/people/attitudes/whatever that was toxic for my well being. The internet has made some of those things impossible to avoid. Anywhere you go on the internet there’s someone trying to tell you how you should live/behave/talk/breath and I’m kind of starting to hate the internet because of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DeepEnigma
Oct 26, 2018
5,290
4,555
460
Hey, look. A decent article on Greta. One that’s not a complete puff piece:

To be fair, Greta is a pawn, has Aspergers, and frankly has idea what she is saying. It doesn't take a lot on intellect to tell people to smarten up and improve, and then bolt out the door with zero follow up actions, detailed advice, or even having smarter adult scientists help her out to add to the conversation with more meaty solutions.

It's like an adult trying to logically debate a teenager who already freeloads off their parents for food, housing, clothes and weekly allowance, and claims the parents are too cheap and should double their allowance.

The teenager has no basis for it or any offer to prove they deserve it, but simply wants it.

Parents can have all the answers in the world why they won't or can't do it like: they need to pay bills, the kid is lazy and isn't helping more, or that the kid will likely blow it buying McDonald's.

But the kid doesn't care about any logical obstacles why money can't be doubled.

What's happened is all the grown up climate supporters are being ignored, so their newest tactic is put an autistic teenager as climate posterboy. Roll the dice and see if this works.
 

waxer

Member
Aug 24, 2006
855
87
1,155
Did someone post this already?
If she has aspergers what type of reply are people expecting. Most my dealing with people with it was that they come off well but you soon realise they just repeating learned steps and can't handle situations they haven't got a system in place for.
 
Aug 28, 2019
777
750
395
The "how dare you" moral haranguing approach doesn't work on me no matter who delivers it, it just pisses me off. Having a 16 year old sperg doing it is just a way to deflect from criticism because you're being "too mean" lemme tell you I remember being 16 and the shit us 16 year olds said to each other is way meaner than anything my much tamer adult self is going to come up with. I've got really edgy shit like "shut up, kid, you aren't important and don't know what you're on about" now.
 

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
15,171
25,107
1,400
Australia
Not sure what you mean. Is the climate changing and is it having an effect on various species or not.
I’ve asked these questions multiple times before and they have always gone unanswered. Perhaps you can help me. There is more to it than just whether the climate is changing. Are you aware of the El Niño-La Niña cycle? We are currently in El Niño, which means higher temperatures, lower humidity and greater fire risk, amongst other things. Some other questions I would like answered include:

- Why have climate change advocates never revisited Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth? He had several major cities underwater years ago. The activist foot stamping back then was similar to today. They were wrong. They’ve never admitted it. Why should I take the current foot stamping seriously?

- When you say “is the climate changing and is it having an effect on various species or not?”, you need to be more specific. Is the climate changing? Yes, of course. I mentioned above that we are in an El Niño cycle, so temperatures are higher than normal. Do you mean to ask whether the climate is changing as a result of human activity? Seems likely to me. I don’t see how we can burn mass amounts of energy that have been sequestered since the Permian age and not have an effect. The question for me is how much of an effect humans are having. I don’t buy the 12 year doomsday theory. I think there are political incentives driving the hysteria. I think China, as a net fossil fuel importer, stands to supplant the US as the dominant global superpower if we phase fossil fuels out too quickly. I think China has the potential to be worse than Nazi Germany because of their sheer size, economic power, and lack of respect for human rights. Just look at what they’re doing to the Uyghur Muslims. My understanding is that it will take 50+ years before we reach any kind of ‘point of no return’. Even then, I’m optimistic that we have enough time to develop technological solutions, primarily sequestration and alternative energy generation methods (e.g. nuclear). No amount of foot stamping and autistic screeching will convince me that the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t revert to the Stone Age tomorrow. Even if we do, China won’t, and China is asshole.

- I note that you propose no solutions; you just seem to want to wag your finger at me as an apparent “climate change denier”. If you want to accuse me of what is tantamount to heresy in current_year, at least show me the courtesy of telling me what you think we should do about it. Stop emitting all carbon tomorrow? Congratulations, you just caused billions of people to starve to death. Mao would be proud. So we have just established that there must be a transition period. How long should that be and what should we do in the interim? For me, this is the crux of the argument. I’ve already said I think the 12 year doomsday theory is absurd and is driven by politics. I’ve already given my solutions above (focus research on sequestration and alternative energy). Your turn.
 

DeliciousDoc

Member
Sep 6, 2010
1,032
177
705
Canada
I’ve asked these questions multiple times before and they have always gone unanswered. Perhaps you can help me. There is more to it than just whether the climate is changing. Are you aware of the El Niño-La Niña cycle? We are currently in El Niño, which means higher temperatures, lower humidity and greater fire risk, amongst other things. Some other questions I would like answered include:

- Why have climate change advocates never revisited Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth? He had several major cities underwater years ago. The activist foot stamping back then was similar to today. They were wrong. They’ve never admitted it. Why should I take the current foot stamping seriously?

- When you say “is the climate changing and is it having an effect on various species or not?”, you need to be more specific. Is the climate changing? Yes, of course. I mentioned above that we are in an El Niño cycle, so temperatures are higher than normal. Do you mean to ask whether the climate is changing as a result of human activity? Seems likely to me. I don’t see how we can burn mass amounts of energy that have been sequestered since the Permian age and not have an effect. The question for me is how much of an effect humans are having. I don’t buy the 12 year doomsday theory. I think there are political incentives driving the hysteria. I think China, as a net fossil fuel importer, stands to supplant the US as the dominant global superpower if we phase fossil fuels out too quickly. I think China has the potential to be worse than Nazi Germany because of their sheer size, economic power, and lack of respect for human rights. Just look at what they’re doing to the Uyghur Muslims. My understanding is that it will take 50+ years before we reach any kind of ‘point of no return’. Even then, I’m optimistic that we have enough time to develop technological solutions, primarily sequestration and alternative energy generation methods (e.g. nuclear). No amount of foot stamping and autistic screeching will convince me that the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t revert to the Stone Age tomorrow. Even if we do, China won’t, and China is asshole.

- I note that you propose no solutions; you just seem to want to wag your finger at me as an apparent “climate change denier”. If you want to accuse me of what is tantamount to heresy in current_year, at least show me the courtesy of telling me what you think we should do about it. Stop emitting all carbon tomorrow? Congratulations, you just caused billions of people to starve to death. Mao would be proud. So we have just established that there must be a transition period. How long should that be and what should we do in the interim? For me, this is the crux of the argument. I’ve already said I think the 12 year doomsday theory is absurd and is driven by politics. I’ve already given my solutions above (focus research on sequestration and alternative energy). Your turn.
Unfortunately for you, I didn't accuse you of anything. OP says he recognizes that it's an issue and that he doesn't like Greta Thunberg. He says the thread is about her and you decide to bring up climate change for debate.

I didn't offer any solutions because I am not an expert. You claim to be but claim everything is fine because the predicted model didn't happen. I know about el nino cycles. My understanding of them is that they don't last that long or cause mass extinction of insects, micro plastics everywhere but maybe you can fill us in on that.

You go on ahead and go against the scientific consensus that the climate change is man made though. I'm sure you will prove them wrong in the end since california didn't sink yet based on a proposed theoritical model.

How do you react to weather forecasts when they are wrong? It's bad science except when it is accurate?

I also don't give a shit who "wins" the economy war as I'm not American and my country will kiss the ass of whoever is in charge. My native language isn't English either so I'm not scared of having to speak another language. I don't care who is spying on me or trying to influence my countries politics as history enthusiast because it's gonna happen either way, as it has for thousands of years.

Hope that satisfies you and you can go back of getting triggered by "wrong think" by an autistic child.
 
Last edited:

moka

Member
Jan 24, 2013
861
14
435
My unorganised thoughts on this whole thing:
  • She is genuinely angry about climate change and how global heating is almost irreparably changing the face the planet - she has a right to be
  • The world is currently not doing enough to reverse these changes quick enough
  • There are many in this world that are apathetic about climate change and do not see it as a problem that will affect their lives
  • There are many in this world that are apathetic about climate change because they are profiting off it
  • There are many that do not believe climate change is real - people with authority, governments, etc
  • The zeitgeist needs to change and needs to change quickly - everyone needs to be more concerned about climate change. Awareness is the first step
  • Greta's actions and speeches are raising awareness and raising awareness quickly
  • Hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, are marching in cities around the world
  • Many of these people may not have if it wasn't for her
  • I agree her speeches may be engineered
  • I agree the emotions she showed may be exaggerated and potentially even in some cases, disingenuous
  • But the very fact that people are talking about her now shows that she has been successful
  • I don't believe expectations for her to bring solutions of her own to the table are reasonable in any way whatsoever - in almost all of her arguments she says "listen to the scientists", she defers to the experts - what's wrong with that? She's a fucking teenager for Christ's sake.
  • If she can change hearts and minds of people with power, then people may feel more compelled to do something (if they are not already), and step up their efforts
  • Becoming almost irrationally angry because some people perhaps coached her (again, she's 16, she's not a trained or practiced orator or politician) is, frankly, laughable - you should re-evaluate where your anger is stemming from.
  • I personally do not believe that she is incorrect in saying that the rich and the powerful have ignored climate change for the sake of limitless growth and expansion - capitalism makes us but left unchecked, will kill us.
  • Criticising her for using plastic and generating carbon emissions is also harmful. Participating in a system does not automatically invalidate criticism of it. Please grow up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • LOL
Reactions: V4skunk and eot

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
15,171
25,107
1,400
Australia
Unfortunately for you, I didn't accuse you of anything. OP says he recognizes that it's an issue and that he doesn't like Greta Thunberg. He says the thread is about her and you decide to bring up climate change for debate.

I didn't offer any solutions because I am not an expert. You claim to be but claim everything is fine because the predicted model didn't happen. I know about el nino cycles. My understanding of them is that they don't last that long or cause mass extinction of insects, micro plastics everywhere but maybe you can fill us in on that.

You go on ahead and go against the scientific consensus that the climate change is man made though. I'm sure you will prove them wrong in the end since california didn't sink yet based on a proposed theoritical model.
“Unfortunately for you, I didn't accuse you of anything.”

Followed by

“You go on ahead and go against the scientific consensus that the climate change is man made though.”

These are contradictory statements. I also didn’t reject that humans are contributing to climate change. Did you even read what I said or did you just slap on your emotional beer goggles and go full retard? Why are you thinking in black and white? Either all climate change is caused by humans or none of it is? Greta, is that you?

You’re reverting back to the basic binary argument that I’m criticising: either I accept every aspect of climate change ideology to be unequivocally true or I’m a heathen. You’ve eliminated any nuance from the discussion and didn’t address any of my questions. You don’t get to assume the moral high ground if that’s how you’re going to behave. How can you say that the thread is about Greta then try to take the climate change debate off the table? That’s the entire reason anyone is talking about her, dumb cunt.

I already said in the post you quoted that I believe that human-induced climate change is real and is a problem that needs to be addressed. You’ve just ignored that and carried on wagging your finger. Don’t appeal to the authority of a scientific consensus you can’t/won’t demonstrate. That is not how science is supposed to be used. It’s not the word of god for amoebas like you to deploy as an I Win button whenever you can’t support your arguments. “Scientific consensus says this so I win!” No, fuck off. You don’t know anything about the science. Here’s a letter from 500 scientists rejecting the doomsday theory. Care to address this or are you just going to dishonestly handwave it again like this post?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MORGION

Contica

Member
Feb 1, 2016
898
419
335
Maybe you'd like to spell it out for us, becuse I'm sure you think it's clever in your head.
Sure, no problem. You talk sarcastically about originality while using terms such as reetard and soy boy.

There is absolugely nothing clever about what I said, I'm just pointing out that you're not exactly a bastion of originality yourself.

That you then proceed to attempt to intimidate me just makes it funnier, and even less original. It's cardboard edginess.
 

Amory

Member
Jul 10, 2008
10,243
70
775
Connecticut
I don't have anything against the kid. Hey, she's frankly right to be fuckin pissed and terrified of climate change. She's been told since she was a little kid that the mass extinction of humanity is right around the corner, and the doomsday prediction keeps getting pulled in closer and closer.

Every week there's a new climate science article saying "oh shittt we underestimated again and it turns out we'll actually all be fucked in like...10 years!"

But all the adults circling around this scared little girl, holding her up like she's the one we need to listen to for answers, those people can fuck off. This kid literally doesn't know anything. She's not climate Jesus. And you're fucking her up more than she already is.
 

Birdo

Member
Jun 12, 2019
1,388
3,814
480
UK
I thought everyone was overreacting when I was reading about her. Then I saw the actual video........ Holy shit, I've worked with some bad actors in my time, but this was hilarious.

BTW, the acid rain that was supposed to kill us all within five years in 1990 still hasn't arrived.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: matt404au

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
15,171
25,107
1,400
Australia
Sure, no problem. You talk sarcastically about originality while using terms such as reetard and soy boy.

There is absolugely nothing clever about what I said, I'm just pointing out that you're not exactly a bastion of originality yourself.

That you then proceed to attempt to intimidate me just makes it funnier, and even less original. It's cardboard edginess.
Why are you defending the screecher, Ed? Are you part of our community or what? There are hundreds of these fools with dormant accounts waiting for an opportunity to wring their hands and talk down their noses to us. Sleeper agents, if you will. They view us as deplorables and only pop in to make these snide comments so they can get virtual back pats from their fellow screechers. They’re not worth any more than a dismissive, low effort joke on their way out the door. They certainly don’t need you defending them.
 

Ellis

Member
Dec 3, 2018
784
1,481
390
London, UK
I agree that she's pretty annoying, and I enjoy the memes, but I can't be harsh to a child that is on the spectrum. Not in a serious tone, anyway.
The people behind the scenes that are propping her up to be the face of all this are the real cunts.
 
  • Like
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: HarryKS and Kadayi

Contica

Member
Feb 1, 2016
898
419
335
Why are you defending the screecher, Ed? Are you part of our community or what? There are hundreds of these fools with dormant accounts waiting for an opportunity to wring their hands and talk down their noses to us. Sleeper agents, if you will. They view us as deplorables and only pop in to make these snide comments so they can get virtual back pats from their fellow screechers. They’re not worth any more than a dismissive, low effort joke on their way out the door. They certainly don’t need you defending them.
No idea what you're talking about. I'm just pointing out that going at someone for lack of originality while acting like a cliché yourself is, well, ironic.

Anyways, you can bla bla at me all you want, but I need to ask. Did you ever get the impression I seek validation from you, or care what you think either way?

I have to ask, because you're a seemingly grown ass man who make up nicknames for other grown ass men, apparently believing they give a shit what you call them.

It's.. Kinda pitiful. So naturally it makes me curious as to what exactly goes on in your head.
 

DeliciousDoc

Member
Sep 6, 2010
1,032
177
705
Canada
“Unfortunately for you, I didn't accuse you of anything.”

Followed by

“You go on ahead and go against the scientific consensus that the climate change is man made though.”

These are contradictory statements. I also didn’t reject that humans are contributing to climate change. Did you even read what I said or did you just slap on your emotional beer goggles and go full retard? Why are you thinking in black and white? Either all climate change is caused by humans or none of it is? Greta, is that you?

You’re reverting back to the basic binary argument that I’m criticising: either I accept every aspect of climate change ideology to be unequivocally true or I’m a heathen. You’ve eliminated any nuance from the discussion and didn’t address any of my questions. You don’t get to assume the moral high ground if that’s how you’re going to behave. How can you say that the thread is about Greta then try to take the climate change debate off the table? That’s the entire reason anyone is talking about her, dumb cunt.

I already said in the post you quoted that I believe that human-induced climate change is real and is a problem that needs to be addressed. You’ve just ignored that and carried on wagging your finger. Don’t appeal to the authority of a scientific consensus you can’t/won’t demonstrate. That is not how science is supposed to be used. It’s not the word of god for amoebas like you to deploy as an I Win button whenever you can’t support your arguments. “Scientific consensus says this so I win!” No, fuck off. You don’t know anything about the science. Here’s a letter from 500 scientists rejecting the doomsday theory. Care to address this or are you just going to dishonestly handwave it again like this post?
Ad homimem more.
 

Super Mario

Member
Nov 12, 2016
1,317
1,513
415
Day by day, I'm more convinced that the media's job is to actively search for cringe-worthy content to keep up the divide. This one takes the cake as a smug child reads a script for the world to change. So it angers anyone with common sense and the left can say "Look! Climate deniers! Disability shamers! Out of touch Boomers! Think (D)ifferent"
 

Sycomunkee

Member
Jan 21, 2019
1,833
1,627
390
At least she has the balls to do something important at the age of 16. Her message is pretty good even if it is extreme. She’s definitely not wrong though, we should be taking better care of earth considering how badly we keep fucking it up.
 
Last edited:

Dane

Member
Jul 16, 2019
275
176
210
Enviromentalism has been sequestered by numbnuts who just want to spread "the apocalypse is near" messaging and actually harming the enviroment they say to be protecting. And that's not something new, it has been like 20+ years.

I laugh how they accuse X people that they are not doing their part, when in fact, they do, but they don't give a word for the third world countries that pollute like hell, especially the oceans.
 

Contica

Member
Feb 1, 2016
898
419
335
Enviromentalism has been sequestered by numbnuts who just want to spread "the apocalypse is near" messaging and actually harming the enviroment they say to be protecting. And that's not something new, it has been like 20+ years.

I laugh how they accuse X people that they are not doing their part, when in fact, they do, but they don't give a word for the third world countries that pollute like hell, especially the oceans.
This would be improved if we, the first world countries stopped sending them our plastic waste. What we're doikg is basically wiping it under the rug while calling it recycling.
 
Last edited:

LordPezix

Member
Feb 7, 2017
916
594
365
What do you mean by turned off? That you think we don’t believe climate change exists? That it’s not a problem? That we disagree with her proposed solutions? You need to be more specific.
Well I didn't say it, it is only in the title of this thread. I don't think the specificity lies with me.
 

Max_Po

Member
Mar 1, 2015
1,354
68
320
My unorganised thoughts on this whole thing:
  • She is genuinely angry about climate change and how global heating is almost irreparably changing the face the planet - she has a right to be
  • The world is currently not doing enough to reverse these changes quick enough
  • There are many in this world that are apathetic about climate change and do not see it as a problem that will affect their lives
  • There are many in this world that are apathetic about climate change because they are profiting off it
  • There are many that do not believe climate change is real - people with authority, governments, etc
  • The zeitgeist needs to change and needs to change quickly - everyone needs to be more concerned about climate change. Awareness is the first step
  • Greta's actions and speeches are raising awareness and raising awareness quickly
  • Hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, are marching in cities around the world
  • Many of these people may not have if it wasn't for her
  • I agree her speeches may be engineered
  • I agree the emotions she showed may be exaggerated and potentially even in some cases, disingenuous
  • But the very fact that people are talking about her now shows that she has been successful
  • I don't believe expectations for her to bring solutions of her own to the table are reasonable in any way whatsoever - in almost all of her arguments she says "listen to the scientists", she defers to the experts - what's wrong with that? She's a fucking teenager for Christ's sake.
  • If she can change hearts and minds of people with power, then people may feel more compelled to do something (if they are not already), and step up their efforts
  • Becoming almost irrationally angry because some people perhaps coached her (again, she's 16, she's not a trained or practiced orator or politician) is, frankly, laughable - you should re-evaluate where your anger is stemming from.
  • I personally do not believe that she is incorrect in saying that the rich and the powerful have ignored climate change for the sake of limitless growth and expansion - capitalism makes us but left unchecked, will kill us.
  • Criticising her for using plastic and generating carbon emissions is also harmful. Participating in a system does not automatically invalidate criticism of it. Please grow up.
Just because you can go on March/gathering does not mean you are doing anything major.... Oh yea don't forget to take a selfie so you can show on twitter and Instagram that you care. make sure to get the latest child-labor manufactured iPhone 15 or Galaxy 30 or what ever the latest tech is...

 
Oct 26, 2018
5,290
4,555
460
At least she has the balls to do something important at the age of 16. Her message is pretty good even if it is extreme. She left not wrong though, we should be taking better care of earth considering how badly we keep fucking it up.
I had this discussion with Yoshi in another Greta thread.

In principal, it sounds great to be more environmentally friendly. But where's all the climate control experts promoting better ecosystems and climate if none of them have any solutions that will make people move?

Even the government does basic things like promoting Energy Star appliances, making people have garbage and recycling bins, ensuring cars meet gas emission standards and things like that.

Where's all the climate people chiming in with ideas?
 

Elcid

Member
Jul 27, 2018
1,140
1,214
520
My unorganised thoughts on this whole thing:
  • She is genuinely angry about climate change and how global heating is almost irreparably changing the face the planet - she has a right to be
  • The world is currently not doing enough to reverse these changes quick enough
  • There are many in this world that are apathetic about climate change and do not see it as a problem that will affect their lives
  • There are many in this world that are apathetic about climate change because they are profiting off it
  • There are many that do not believe climate change is real - people with authority, governments, etc
  • The zeitgeist needs to change and needs to change quickly - everyone needs to be more concerned about climate change. Awareness is the first step
  • Greta's actions and speeches are raising awareness and raising awareness quickly
  • Hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, are marching in cities around the world
  • Many of these people may not have if it wasn't for her
  • I agree her speeches may be engineered
  • I agree the emotions she showed may be exaggerated and potentially even in some cases, disingenuous
  • But the very fact that people are talking about her now shows that she has been successful
  • I don't believe expectations for her to bring solutions of her own to the table are reasonable in any way whatsoever - in almost all of her arguments she says "listen to the scientists", she defers to the experts - what's wrong with that? She's a fucking teenager for Christ's sake.
  • If she can change hearts and minds of people with power, then people may feel more compelled to do something (if they are not already), and step up their efforts
  • Becoming almost irrationally angry because some people perhaps coached her (again, she's 16, she's not a trained or practiced orator or politician) is, frankly, laughable - you should re-evaluate where your anger is stemming from.
  • I personally do not believe that she is incorrect in saying that the rich and the powerful have ignored climate change for the sake of limitless growth and expansion - capitalism makes us but left unchecked, will kill us.
  • Criticising her for using plastic and generating carbon emissions is also harmful. Participating in a system does not automatically invalidate criticism of it. Please grow up.
How come she doesn't take her shit to China?
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Kadayi

DeliciousDoc

Member
Sep 6, 2010
1,032
177
705
Canada
Engage honestly and you won’t get insulted. Don’t play the victim now, you pathetic little cretin.
I told you I'm not interested in your theory about how all of this is smoke and mirrors and a cover for the chinese government to take over the world. thats your argument isnt it? I said I don't give a shit about China. Now what?

Use oil or china takes over. Greta is a front for anti american points of view by the deep state.
climate change is a combination of man made elements and natural ones but let's ignore the man made ones. Calling people names is a great way to prove your point though. If I shout enough the other party with shut up. You argue about points I didn't even make and present your ironclad truthfact.

My position remains that you attack an autistic child because you are mad no one sees the light. You can argue all you want that its the idea you are targetting and not a person but you the only thing you can do is hurl insults because thats all you have. I'm looking forward to your next tantrum. I think I can see sone foam from your mouth from here.
 
Last edited:

Cleared_Hot

Member
Feb 25, 2018
387
228
240
That absolute worst part of this is the handful of total deadbeat going nowhere in life "friends" on social media who are sharing this girl on their stories ... Fuck. Unfollowed/unfriended immediately. That ridiculous performance was hands down the most overdramatic cringefest ever. And tell me how she goes on TV talking a bunch nonsensical horseshit ("HOW DARE YOU!!!") and gets a novel prize but Trump being the first US president to step foot into NK and begin face to peace talks doesn't earn him one?!?!?!


Also, the how dare you shit immediately reminded me of Ben Shapiro ripping Pierce Morgan on gun control to which Pierce so bravely responded "HOW DARE YOU!" LIKE OMFG STFU YOU PUSSY
 
Last edited:

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
809
642
315
How old are some of you? 13? The country has always been liked this. Their was no "good old days" where everyone got along

This isn't even the first time environmentalists used kids at the U.N. to peddle their politics.
The 80's up until the early / mid 2000's was sweet.
None of this race or gender confusion bull shit.
Try harder comrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stilton Disco

gatti-man

Member
Aug 30, 2010
8,097
183
795
40
I’ve asked these questions multiple times before and they have always gone unanswered. Perhaps you can help me. There is more to it than just whether the climate is changing. Are you aware of the El Niño-La Niña cycle? We are currently in El Niño, which means higher temperatures, lower humidity and greater fire risk, amongst other things. Some other questions I would like answered include:

- Why have climate change advocates never revisited Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth? He had several major cities underwater years ago. The activist foot stamping back then was similar to today. They were wrong. They’ve never admitted it. Why should I take the current foot stamping seriously?

- When you say “is the climate changing and is it having an effect on various species or not?”, you need to be more specific. Is the climate changing? Yes, of course. I mentioned above that we are in an El Niño cycle, so temperatures are higher than normal. Do you mean to ask whether the climate is changing as a result of human activity? Seems likely to me. I don’t see how we can burn mass amounts of energy that have been sequestered since the Permian age and not have an effect. The question for me is how much of an effect humans are having. I don’t buy the 12 year doomsday theory. I think there are political incentives driving the hysteria. I think China, as a net fossil fuel importer, stands to supplant the US as the dominant global superpower if we phase fossil fuels out too quickly. I think China has the potential to be worse than Nazi Germany because of their sheer size, economic power, and lack of respect for human rights. Just look at what they’re doing to the Uyghur Muslims. My understanding is that it will take 50+ years before we reach any kind of ‘point of no return’. Even then, I’m optimistic that we have enough time to develop technological solutions, primarily sequestration and alternative energy generation methods (e.g. nuclear). No amount of foot stamping and autistic screeching will convince me that the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t revert to the Stone Age tomorrow. Even if we do, China won’t, and China is asshole.

- I note that you propose no solutions; you just seem to want to wag your finger at me as an apparent “climate change denier”. If you want to accuse me of what is tantamount to heresy in current_year, at least show me the courtesy of telling me what you think we should do about it. Stop emitting all carbon tomorrow? Congratulations, you just caused billions of people to starve to death. Mao would be proud. So we have just established that there must be a transition period. How long should that be and what should we do in the interim? For me, this is the crux of the argument. I’ve already said I think the 12 year doomsday theory is absurd and is driven by politics. I’ve already given my solutions above (focus research on sequestration and alternative energy). Your turn.
Your 50 years before point of no return is kind of flawed. According to most scientific articles I’ve read gases emitted today don’t even reach the ozone layer to where they cause the green house effect for years and the effect is layered and lasting. Meaning that we very well could already be past the point of no return when you factor that in barring some huge scientific breakthrough of air scrubbing the ozone and greenhouse gas removal.

Also Al Gore is a hack and not a scientist. He’s a parrot just copying junk he’s been told but most climate scientists are saying we are essentially totally fucked within the next 100 years.

The 80's up until the early / mid 2000's was sweet.
None of this race or gender confusion bull shit.
Try harder comrade.
Yes before the 2000s oppression especially of minority voices was definitely stronger than it is today. Probably because the internet gives the minorities a bigger voice than the silent majority. The alt right kkk antifa lgbtq and also racism is front and center all thanks to the internet. One bad cop video spreads like wild fire and makes people feel like it happened in their back yard.
 
Last edited: