I don't know who this is or even care. As shitty as it sounds of all the times I see her face pop up on the front page I can't help but think that she might have down syndrome. Does she? Should I really be feeling bad because of her disability?
Thoughts? Thanks.
The picture they chose to represent her on this board sucks. Try this one: https://i.imgur.com/1q9dz4H.jpg?1
She's no supermodel, just an average looking kid, but she certainly doesn't have Down's Syndrome. Haven't you seen her chewing out world leaders about their inaction on climate change? My own daughter, who's nine, thinks she's amazing. I'm inclined to agree too - despite the climate change deniers on this board being triggered by the girl big time. She smacks down the EU leadership in Brussels, then the UN delegates at the UN ... and keeps getting invited to speak. Gotta love it! Plus I think she was trying to decide whether she could get past the Secret Service and kill Donald Trump when he walked by her. If looks alone could do it he'd be dead. 😳
"EU leadership in Brussels" "then the UN delegates at the UN" ... "Donald Trump"
you do know most of the world pollution comes from the middle east and asia right?.... they let shit and toxic waste flow right into rivers, the ocean and the air.....
but Greta only travels in the western world...... yeah, she is really brave...smh
The number one polluter in the world is China. Number two is the US. Followed by India, Russia, and Japan. That's about 60% of the world's total emissions right there in the top five. Numbers nine and ten are Iran and Saudi Arabia, each of which contributes about 10% of the US total. The rest of the Middle East, Asia, and Africa contribute very little.
Note that American corporations operating abroad have a lot to do with the pollution you mention, letting ѕhit and toxic waste flow into rivers. They relocate precisely because of lax environmental regulation and corrupt local officials who can be bribed to ignore violations of the rules that do exist. Well, that and being able to pay their workers dirt and work them like slaves. We could penalize them for this behavior. Personally I think any products made under those conditions should be embargoed. That would both prevent their shipping of jobs overseas and the skirting of environmental rules.
This idea that somehow if not everybody joins in right away we should just sit on our asses and do nothing is a crock. We used to be world leaders. Before the steaming pile of dog ѕhit stinking up the White House right now. The whole world needs to get its act together but that's not going to happen without the major powers all in.
I never stop being amazed by the absurdity of the whole situation. It's a bit like knowing an asteroid is coming and having to deal with people who either refuse to believe it, and sit there spouting conspiracy shlock and junk science, or fatalistically shrug their shoulders and say there's nothing we can do so why bother? If you're not going to help, at least go sit quietly in the corner and stay out of the way. But that's just my humble opinion. 😏
only companies pollution is measured.... it's what regular citizens do that really bad for environment..... cutting down trees, throwing shit in the river and oceans.
the countries with overpopulation are the worst. and with China as no 1 POS country in the world.
go there greta, but you won't dare
No, it's not regular citizens and their habits that are the primary factor. Big industry does most of the polluting. People don't choose for their utilities to keep using coal fired power plants. It's going to take government regulation to force them onto a timetable for phasing out dirty power, and force producers of plastics to start using other materials like advanced forms of fiberglass that could replace most such products - fiberglass is just glass, one hundred percent recyclable, you melt it down and reuse it. But these changes will not happen in response to consumer demand. They have to be legislated. Corporations care only about what makes their executives and shareholders the most money right this second. Most of them wouldn't care if a million people died as long as they got rich off it. They will not do the right thing unless the law requires them to.
China is starting to come around. I've been in Beijing for a conference, and the air is absolutely foul and disgusting. One of the guys who came with me was actually looking to see if he could order a respirator online and have it delivered next day shipping. I kid you not. They've contaminated huge tracts of agricultural land and water sources with their lax environmental regulations. And their economy is suffering because of all this. That seems to be the only thing some people understand, but at least Emperor Xi and his government are finally getting the message.
"My own daughter, who's nine, thinks she's amazing."
Well, she's nine. She doesn't know jack shit.
What a great thing to say about someone's child liscarkat.
You really are something else.
He is not wrong, though.
And in the end that is what matters. Facts, not feelings.
I would say that responding like that to an EMOTIONAL REACTION from a child is indeed wrong. And unnecessary. And nasty. But that seems to be this person’s MO so good for them I guess.
Maybe we can learn something from a nine year old’s optimism and positivity. At the very least we could be courteous enough not to pick on other people’s children. It’s a dog act.
That girl saying "Greta is amazing" has already proven liscarkat's point perfectly.
No. There is absolutely no need to pretend that a 9 year olds "optimism and positivity" is something we so desperately need to listen to while reason and sense for reality go out the window, as we have seen when Greta's hive-like cult formed itself.
And again.
He was not wrong.
He was direct, maybe a bit abrasive - but not wrong.
He also didn't "pick" on that girl, he stated a fact. A 9 year old doesn't know jack-shit - and that's fine, it's normal, because they're children. That doesn't mean he despises the kid or thinks ill of her, anything like that.
Just because what people say may hurt your feel-feels doesn't suddenly make it "wrong".
I think we're losing sight of the real issues. Global warming is not some hoax - the genuine debate on the topic ended many years ago under a crush of data, since then it's been all about having to patronize the ignorant and those with agendas who know the truth but don't care. We've already waited longer than we should have to act. We simply can't afford to indulge the climate deniers any more.
And my daughter (who's 10 now) looks up to Greta because of her determination to take action and speak truth to world leaders right to their faces. You don't have to be a scientist to admire that. My kid, good at math and science though she is, wouldn't know how to use a supercomputer to run climate simulations. She can certainly choose a role model that suits her though.
It's a complete disservice to call Greta's young audience a cult. Donald Trump's supporters resemble a cult, deifying one man and going along with whatever he says. Hers are simply passionate about the issues she's speaking out on. It's not about Thunberg herself. We absolutely need a younger generation less willing to sit on their asses while politicians and crooked billionaires wreck the planet. Unlike the old men who run oil companies, children my daughter's age will live to see the worst of the consequences - and raise their own families right in the middle of it. Are you surprised so many of them are angry over the current lack of action? They should be.
Trump supporters who believe everything Trump says and blindly follow him are "cultists".
Greta followers who believe everything she says and blindly follow her are just "passionate".
I love the hypocrisy of the left.
And no one is denying "climate".
Not even that the climate is changing.
What some people dispute are the exact reasons for it and to what degree these really matter.
And before you say "but science!", perhaps realize that "science" is no hive-mind and that expecially climate change is a HEAVILY disputed topic among scientists with a plethora of THEORIES and MODELS about climate change.
Infant ideologues roaming the streets, parroting stuff they got indoctrinated with and don't understand themselves isn't helping anyone.
You were right about one thing though: The genuine debate about climate change ended many years ago.
Go do some research on the actual impact it would have if the US would get rid of every single car, for example.
Do it... then come back and tell me these brainwashed cultists are doing anything useful.
So instead of just parroting the mainstream garbage, do some independent research and have your own "aha" moments.
As for Greta's "truths"... the girl claims she can see CO² in the air, not in a symbolic way, in the literal way.
She also complained "the leaders" have "destroyed her dreams and stolen her childhood with their lies!".
Oh Really?
A young, healthy, Swedish girl, grown up in complete safety and protection in the Swedish upper middle class, daughter to famous and influential parents, with unlimited access to perfect drinking water, healthy food, education, doctors and medicine with the perspective to do and become everything she could ever want in life....... is complaining about her stolen childhood.
https://i.imgur.com/1rg9en3.jpg
Fuck off Greta!
And if phony marionettes like Greta are who your daughter looks up to, perhaps introduce her to people like Ellen MacArthur instead.
Young people who "follow" Greta are nothing like the Trumpies. It's not her that they follow. They simply share her priorities, and if she suddenly started spouting some other crap one day she'd be abandoned. Those who follow right wing demagogues like Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Recep Erdogan, etc., are uniquely sheeplike and dangerous because they follow one man and whatever he says, no matter what that is. Insanity and extremism, even rhetoric that changes from one day to the next, doesn't result in their supporters abandoning them. That's the difference ... and it's a huge one.
Human activity is the cause of the current climate change. I'm not a climate scientist myself, but being a physicist I do understand how the science is done and am familiar with the methods and data used to reach the conclusions that virtually the entire scientific community agrees on. The rise in CO₂ levels that's occurred since the 19th century is consistent with the amount we have released through industrial activity, primarily the burning of fossil fuels, minus what's been absorbed by the ecosystem (the Earth does have the capacity to absorb a certain amount per year). There's no room for other mysterious sources of greenhouse gas. What we have added to the atmosphere, minus what the ecosystem has absorbed, is what we observe as the increase. The warming we've seen is consistent with that amount of increase.
Climate simulation is a complex undertaking. However the basic physics of the greenhouse effect have been known since ancient times and codified in thermodynamic laws since the Renaissance. It's not new knowledge. The disruptive effect on weather and rainfall patterns, etc., elucidating that required the use of computers. If all a 2 degree temperature increase meant was 2 degree higher temperatures everywhere on the planet and nothing else, it wouldn't be such a big deal. But things aren't that simple. Just 2 more degrees would be a disaster unlike anything we've experienced in our history. The coronavirus pandemic is a momentary nuisance by comparison.
I have mentioned before in previous posts an era called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). Look it up. A time when the polar icecaps melted completely and hot, humid tropical conditions prevailed nearly pole to pole. Only the immediate vicinity of the poles themselves had what we'd recognize as normal seasons. Sea levels were about 300 feet higher than they are today. Check out the map of how much coastal land, including the entire state of Florida and the site of virtually every coastal city around the world, was part of the ocean. Large swaths of territory surrounding the equator would've been too hot for human habitation - had humans existed at the time. Well that era started with an abrupt (geologically, we're talking about 3,000 years here) rise in CO₂ concentrations. A rise we have managed to equal in only a century.
Civilization would not collapse completely in the event of a return to those conditions. But read up on it. How easy do you think life would be? How many people do you think would die? How many wars would break out as resources became scarce and those die-offs began? Several billion people would be forced to migrate out of areas which were flooding or becoming too hot to live in. The Pentagon takes all of these threats quite seriously by the way. They're already putting together detailed plans for how the nation will deal with them.
I've had enough of the deniers. Most people have, scientists and non-scientists alike. I'm sorry if you want to delude yourself but the rest of us can't afford the luxury of your delusion. There seems to be the crazy idea these days that everyone is entitled to be right if they believe they are. But reality is very much like a math or science class in school. There's a right answer and a whole bunch of wrong ones. You either have the right answer or you get a big red X and points taken off. That's it. Your personal feelings don't factor into it. Rarely is so much solid evidence available to support a prediction. The only way you reach a conclusion other than climate change being man-made, essentially a terraforming process, is being so dead set against the idea you refuse to see it.
"Young people who "follow" Greta are nothing like the Trumpies. It's not her that they follow. They simply share her priorities, and if she suddenly started spouting some other crap one day she'd be abandoned."
People who "follow" Trump are nothing like the Gretins. It's not him that they follow. They simply share his priorities, and if he suddenly started spouting some other crap one day he'd be abandoned.
See? Works both ways!
The difference between you and me is that I am objective enough to understand this, while you are completely delusional by now and obviously live in some sort of filter bubble.
"Human activity is the cause of the current climate change. I'm not a climate scientist myself"
And it shows...
"that virtually the entire scientific community agrees on."
Mhyes, "they all agree", that is why the reasons and their actual impacts are heavily debated in the scientific community and why more and more scientists finally dare to speak up despite the massive peer-pressure and risk of losing their job.
That is probably also why there are multiple different theories and a plethora of models in regards to climate change - because the scientific community virtually agrees.
Turns out being a physicist did not help you much...
Honestly I just stop here, it's a complete waste of time considering your black and white view of these things.
Trump does spout different crap every day, sometimes several contradictory loads of crap a day, and his sheeple never waver. That was my point. He finally got a dose of karma today though, didn't he?
And the issues surrounding climate change ARE black and white. It's as close to settled as science ever gets. Instead of responding to my rather detailed breakdown of the reasons why, you chose to call names so ... troll. That being the case I'm done engaging with you. I have no doubt you'll get the last word in. Trolls always do. I won't be checking back to read your reply, but knock yourself out. Vaya con dios! 🤪
Wow, that's low.
Announcing I will answer, in advance, and declaring it a troll move, trying to bully me into silence because if I answer = I'm a troll. Oof, you got me, I guess!
I also didn't "call you names".
The assessment that you are delusional hardly counts as name-calling considering it seems to be true, which you have just chosen again when you tried to differentiate your Trump vs. Greta followers example, failing to realize that the example again fits both sides.
Just because you happen to agree with one side doesn't make them right.
Again: You are not objective at all.
I am... I detest both of them for their nonsense.
As for your black and white science and me not responding to what you call "a detailed breakdown", well I can say the same. You completely ignored my point that science is NOT unified when it comes to climate change (or rather the exact causes and to what degree) and just continue to play your song.
You are NOT in the position to complain about lacking answers here!
I also made an example earlier, hinting at the unrealistic demands and ideas from climate-leftists who think bullying SUV drivers or getting rid of every automobile in the US would "save the world", when in reality it would basically make ZERO difference.
What was it, .3%? You must know, since you are so very well educated when it comes to this topic - you are a physicist after all! ;D
At least that is what you try to bring across, unfortunately so far there was nothing to support this.
All Greta does is, literally, bitching about the "failure of the leaders", but she has absolutely no sensible suggestions herself. Why would anyone listen to this brat? It's absurd!
I care about the environment. That is why I want to go full nuclear power. The only realistic way to *really* make a difference (if the whole planet goes along with it, that is). But the Eco-leftists freak out completely when you just mention nuclear power.
There is no way to talk with these cultists.
lol
shareShe has Asperger's Syndrome, that's why her parents found it so easy to manipulate her. It's part of the reason she did so well pretending to be angry at the UN.
shareAsperger's Syndrome has nothing to do with learning or intelligence. My sister-in-law has it too. She's quite smart, and personable one on one or in small groups, but awkward in a room full of people. Easy to manipulate? No way. Manipulative and controlling people make her furious, she'll tell you exactly where to stick it. Greta has the same kind of intensity about her. But if she's uncomfortable in public settings or talking to interviewers on camera she hides it well.
shareShe looks very Northern European to me
shareYep
share[deleted]
Down's Syndrome
shareThere's something to her and her entire fanbase and those who promote her are creepy and questionable motives. You may want to investigate Agenda 21 in order to find out what is behind all of this green activitism. It isn't about the environment, but something else. Read and find out. These people also support unlimited/mass immigration to dilute your vote - making you just a faceless number and easier to control.
shareThe left is all about exploiting people or crisis (or perceived crisis) to further their goals. There's no doubt they have hidden motives with the environment.
shareAgreed! Now, we must DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! GET THE INFORMATION OUT THERE!
shareKeep typing to nobody on an movie forum then, that should do the trick.
The planet is dying. Wake up you ignorant chump.
The threat is being greatly exaggerated. The real danger is the economic harm the policies the alarmists want to impose on us will do. We are being lied to by people who will give themselves a pass. The rich just want their dictatorship.
shareI think the threat might be greater than anyone here is willing to acknowledge. Does that mean I'm hysterical or an alarmist because I hear what scientists are saying and can reconcile that with the changes in the weather and increase in natural disasters that I have witnessed myself?
Not everyone who knows there's an issue to address does so with an activists armband on, you know?
Your intellect is overwhelming. Where did you learn to have a conversation? Preschool? I mean, using insults when someone says something they don't like. Got a long ways to go in life.
shareIf she were from a continental European country then I might think down's syndrome... but she's from a nordic country and if you look at some of the characteristics of some nordic people like Finns or people from Iceland (Bjork is a good example) you'll notice that some of them just look fucking ugly like a cross between a human and a troll. So while she is dumb as shit I don't think she has down's syndrome I think she is just fucking ugly.
share