• 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 The Overwhelming Favorite To Win The Nobel Peace Prize (maybe next year, sport)

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
25,682
28,026
1,095
Greta Thunberg Is Bookies' Favourite To Win The Nobel Peace Prize

Greta Thunberg is being hotly tipped to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

The young environmental campaigner is now the bookies' favourite to pick up the prestigious award next week, with Ladbrokes citing odds of 4/6 for her to win - ahead of national treasure David Attenborough and Pope Francis.

According to the bookmaker, the 16-year-old is ahead of the rest of the pack after her rousing speech at the UN conference last month which led to her being praised by many.

During the emotional address, Thunberg condemned world leaders for not doing enough to combat climate change and protect the planet.

She said: "This is all wrong. I shouldn't be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you?



"You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words, yet I'm one of the lucky ones. People are suffering, people are dying, entire ecosystems are collapsing.

"And if you choose to fail us, I say, we will never forgive you."

Over the past year, Thunberg has become an iconic figure of the fight against climate change, with millions inspired by her weekly protests outside the Swedish parliament a year ago.

Her message encouraged millions of people around the world to march on the streets last month and demand that governments take action before it is too late.

However, not everyone took her message or speech as well as others, with some of the world's most powerful leaders hitting out at the campaigner for not understanding how 'complex' the world really is.

Only yesterday, Russian president Vladimir Putin said she was being 'used'.



Chairing a session called Energy Partnership for Sustainable Growth, he said: "I may disappoint you but I don't share the common excitement about the speech by Greta Thunberg.

"No one has explained to Greta that the modern world is complex and different and... people in Africa or in many Asian countries want to live at the same wealth level as in Sweden.

"Go and explain to developing countries why they should continue living in poverty and not be like Sweden."

He added: "But when someone is using children and teenagers in personal interests, it only deserves to be condemned.



"I'm sure that Greta is a kind and very sincere girl. But adults must do everything not to bring teenagers and children into some extreme situations."

Putin isn't the first world leader to slate the young campaigner for her words. Donald Trump mocked her while Canadian Member of Parliament Maxime Bernier claimed she was alarmist and mentally unstable.

But Thunberg hasn't taken the criticism lying down and has said she believes the fact leaders are making light of the situation, adding that politicians poking fun at children showed that her message had become 'too loud to handle'.

The full list of Ladbrokes' runners and rider are as follows - Greta Thunberg (4/6), Abiy Ahmed (4/1), Raoni Metuktire (6/1), Jacinda Ardern (8/1), Reporters Without Borders (12/1), UNHCR (12/1), Control Arms Coalition (20/1), David Attenborough (20/1), Edward Snowden (20/1), Pope Francis (20/1), International Rescue Committee (20/1).

The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is announced on 11 October.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
7,066
8,221
880
Why is the UNHCR being considered? Has anyone seen the membership on that comitte? Is it because they bash Israel more than any other nation in the world?
 

Dev1lXYZ

Member
Sep 1, 2017
788
536
380
The Nobel Prize unfortunately is about as relevant as winning an Oscar award. Nobody cares except the circles that surround them.

She may have a good career ahead in Hollywood because she's already met the criteria.
 
Last edited:
Dec 15, 2011
4,909
11,261
980
Makes sense, but this will trigger a lot of
the folks on here (somehow) . She is backed by the entire scientific community, please recognize that before you attack her.
You speak for the entire scientific community?




What was that you were saying about recognizing things...?
 
Last edited:

TrainedRage

Gold Member
Feb 3, 2018
5,382
6,261
740
33
USA
What has she done? Give some speeches spouting doom and gloom about something something?

Mr beast actually planted thousands of trees and raised millions for charities.

It's all a joke for the woke entitled to get something to pat themselves on the back over.

See WE gave her the prize, we are the solution not the problem.... See?!?!?!
 

12Goblins

Member
Mar 1, 2017
1,501
1,768
445
You speak for the entire scientific community?




What was that you were saying about recognizing things...?
I'll let those links speak for themselves.
 

12Goblins

Member
Mar 1, 2017
1,501
1,768
445
What has she done? Give some speeches spouting doom and gloom about something something?

Mr beast actually planted thousands of trees and raised millions for charities.

It's all a joke for the woke entitled to get something to pat themselves on the back over.

See WE gave her the prize, we are the solution not the problem.... See?!?!?!
Inspired a movement? Her cause is to reduce carbon emissions. There is nothing controversial about this and says a lot about the folks attacking her.
 

TrainedRage

Gold Member
Feb 3, 2018
5,382
6,261
740
33
USA
Inspired a movement? Her cause is to reduce carbon emissions. There is nothing controversial about this and says a lot about the folks attacking her.
What movement? Environmental responsibility? The thing that's been around forever? She is a useful tool for the media to push what they consider to be the most important issue aside from gun violence... Scaring people into doing... Something. Like making laws? So then the world will be saved.

People have been saying this shit for years be for this little troll came around. Taking all the glory for herself.
 
Dec 15, 2011
4,909
11,261
980
I'll let those links speak for themselves.
No, actually, I asked you two direct questions about two claims you chose to make.

Odd how you make a point of not recognising that isn't it?

If you had an ounce of integrity you'd answer questions when challenged about your own claims.
If you had a shred of integrity you'd pretend to ignore the post altogether.
Instead you acknowledge and quote the post, just to evade and deflect with pompous nothingness.

I guess that shows you have less than a shred of integrity, despite your feigned authority.

And, because I'm a nice person I'll give you some advance notice:
Should you find the speck of integrity rattling around in the space between your ego and your keyboard, you should consider very carefully how you go about challenging provided evidence. You could very easily make yourself look even more foolish.
 
Last edited:

julio_grr

Member
Mar 24, 2017
361
237
300
You speak for the entire scientific community?




What was that you were saying about recognizing things...?
Funny, I only looked at the first link you shared, and the tittle is extremely misleading.
Actually if your read it all, the conclusion is that this petition of 31 000 self declared scientists is highly questionable - and not verifiable at all. Basically the opposite of Science.
Did not look at the two others but I'm with 12Goblins.
 

CDiggity

Member
Jan 3, 2014
1,195
234
415
I'm reminded of Al Gore's prize win. While it was important is raise and spread awareness of issues, the purpose of the Peace Prize is to recognize people who work to build relationships between peoples and resolving conflict, which wasn't what Al Gore's work did.
 
Dec 15, 2011
4,909
11,261
980
Funny, I only looked at the first link you shared, and the tittle is extremely misleading.
Actually if your read it all, the conclusion is that this petition of 31 000 self declared scientists is highly questionable - and not verifiable at all. Basically the opposite of Science.
Did not look at the two others but I'm with 12Goblins.
My first link was not chosen carelessly.

You and 12Goblins should consider why.
Don't forget to 'recognise'.
 
Last edited:

julio_grr

Member
Mar 24, 2017
361
237
300
My first link was not chosen carelessly.

You and 12Goblins should consider why.
Don't forget to 'recognise'.
I recognize you are right. You choose to nitpick, it's OK, it's your right. So I won't bother reading or participating in this thread anymore.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
7,066
8,221
880
So an angry petulant child who inspired other children to skip school is going to win a noble prize LOL. Just add it to her pile of privilege while she complains about her childhood being stolen while children starve to death, sold into slavery, forced into marriages or to become soldiers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,858
586
815
That is irrelevant to what I stated. There will be countless scientists and researchers in this field who get passed over if Greta wins the prize instead, yes or no?
People get passed all the time, only one person can win per category. It's highly likely a climate scientist, or a team of climate scientists, will get Nobel consideration in science. Greta doesn't take away from that, regardless whether she wins a Peace Prize or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zenspider

Virex

formerly Virex
Jan 26, 2018
2,315
4,741
750
South Africa
You speak for the entire scientific community?




What was that you were saying about recognizing things...?
You should have added this link as well to your reply

But somehow I highly doubt the person you replied to is able to read or think for himself. Seeing as the "whole" scientific community is with her.
 
Last edited:
Dec 15, 2011
4,909
11,261
980
Incidentally, aside from being a liar ('entire scientific community'), trying to shame you and therefore control your speech, being a coward and using dismissals to information that doesn't align with narrative you'll notice that 12Goblins 12Goblins is repeatedly using the term "attack" in relation to anyone critical or questioning of Greta Thunberg.

This is, of course, the appeal to emotion. When lies and exaggeration can't get your narrative the traction you want it to have, throw on that appeal to emotion and attempt to guilt others.

Here's an important notice for all the disingenuous cretins who rely on these tactics to try to control and shame others into acquiescing to their narrow views:

Everyone who is capable of critical thought can see right through this charade.
The reliance on these dishonest tactics is specifically the reason you don't get the traction and validation you feel you are owed.
When you have a reputation for using these tactics, repeated use of them demonstrates how insincere your argument is and erodes your credibility.

If you have a point to make, if you are earnest, if you value engagement and the position of others, neither you nor your argument will require these tactics.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
15,194
29,102
1,260
USA
dunpachi.com
People get passed all the time, only one person can win per category. It's highly likely a climate scientist, or a team of climate scientists, will get Nobel consideration in science. Greta doesn't take away from that, regardless whether she wins a Peace Prize or not.
So Greta is the most notable climate change activist (separate from the science category).

Heh heh, okay.
 

Virex

formerly Virex
Jan 26, 2018
2,315
4,741
750
South Africa
Makes sense, but this will trigger a lot of
the folks on here (somehow) . She is backed by the entire scientific community, please recognize that before you attack her.
Lost amid the coverage of Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg at last week’s U.N. Global Climate Summit were the 500 international scientists, engineers and other stakeholders sounding a very different message: “There is no climate emergency.”

The European Climate Declaration, spearheaded by the Amsterdam-based Climate Intelligence Foundation [CLINTEL], described the leading climate models as “unfit” and urged UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to pursue a climate policy based on “sound science.”

“Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy,” said the Sept. 23 letter signed by professionals from 23 countries.

Most of the signers hailed from Europe, but there were also scientists from the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South America.

“We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation,” the letter said.



The signers asked Mr. Guterres to place the declaration on the UN’s agenda for the meeting ending Monday—which hasn’t happened—and organize a meeting of scientists “on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020.”

Letter to UN SecGen @antonioguterres António Guterres from 500 scientists warns “current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy.” https://t.co/INTsVOIlGu
— Dr. Waheed Uddin (@drwaheeduddin) September 28, 2019

The declaration was dismissed by Penn State climatologist Michael E. Mann, who called it “craven and stupid,” as well as the left-of-center [U.K.] Guardian, which said the document “repeats well-worn and long-debunked talking points on climate change that are contradicted by scientific institutions and academies around the world.”

Have to admit I did a double take when I first glanced at this. Was sure that last signature was “He Who Must Not be Named”.
Then I reflected on the matter and realized how unlikely that is.
Not even Valdemort would sign his name to something so craven and stupid… pic.twitter.com/PPkkwVzNUI
— Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) September 24, 2019

At the same time, the sheer number of prominent signers with scientific and engineering credentials belied the contention that only a handful of fringe researchers and fossil-fuel shills oppose the climate-catastrophe “consensus.”

The U.S. contingent was made up of 45 U.S. professors, engineers and scientists, including MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen; Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom, as well as several signers formerly affiliated with NASA.

The declaration made six points:

· “Nature as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming”

· “Warming is far slower than predicted”

· “Climate policy relies on inadequate models”

· Carbon dioxide is “plant food, the basis of all life on Earth”

· “Global warming has not increased natural disasters”

· “Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities”

Convincing climate-focused institutions like the UN to engage on such topics has been a struggle, said Guus Berkhout, professor emeritus of geophysics at Delft University of Technology and a CLINTEL co-founder.

“We promote a scientific discussion at the highest level between both sides of the climate debate, but the mainstream refuses so far,” said Mr. Berkhout in an email. “They always come with the same arguments: they are right and we are wrong. Period!”

Indeed, the UN discussion is moving full speed ahead on carbon neutrality, with policymakers, researchers and media outlets calling for increasingly urgent measures to combat the “climate crisis” and “climate emergency.”

“We need more concrete plans, more ambition from more countries and more businesses,” said Mr. Guterres in a Sept. 23 statement. “We need all financial institutions, public and private, to choose, once and for all, the green economy.”

UN spokesman Dan Shepard said the body is guided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, adding that any “compelling evidence to the contrary” should be “brought to the attention of IPCC working groups.”

In their letter, the CLINTEL network called it “cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models.”

“The science is far from settled,” said Mr. Berkhout.


CLINTEL was founded this year by Mr. Berkhout and journalist Marcel Crok with a grant from Dutch real-estate developer Niek Sandmann.

Here is some further reading for you. But I highly doubt you are capable of doing it. Given that it was written by actual scientists
 

Ownage

Member
Nov 5, 2018
532
513
315
www.zombo.com
The Nobel Prize unfortunately is about as relevant as winning an Oscar award. Nobody cares except the circles that surround them.

She may have a good career ahead in Hollywood because she's already met the criteria.
Best performance in a dramatic feature.
 
Jan 7, 2018
855
564
335
"Real" scientists make YouTube videos rather than publish papers.
How many 'average joe's' go looking for science papers do you think ? It's all about reaching those poor brainwashed joe's and trying to wake them up.

Just look at 12goblins poor feller don't even know he's being lied to.
 
Last edited: