It just possibly might be because she chose to start her campaign by spewing vicious anger and accusatory judgement on everybody she addressed.
Think that might have something to do with it, hmm?
Well anyone who spews vicious anger and accusatory judgement on everybody can't be all bad.
It's not like Greta doesn't have anger issues herself.
shareI suspect there are two reasons. First, she is guilty of being female and having an opinion. Second, she represent an opinion that many, especially those climate change deniers and most especially those idiots who believe the whole thing as an anti-american conspiracy, resent. So they attack her, often in a stupid, unpleasant and abusive way. Hard to understand why they think this approach will influence anyone else's opinion - I can only assume they get pleasure from it.
shareFirst, she is guilty of being female and having an opinion.
^^^^^^^^^ My sentiments exactly, Sut!
shareYes, it is the attention.
share
Posts like this is why we need a "like" or "thumbs up" button. Mods??
Its been said before, but you nailed it here.
shareE X A C T L Y.... sut.
I can't stand that automatically, any criticism directed at any "minority" group is immediately labeled as racist, sexist, etc.
It is so unfair, and so inaccurate.
It's the reason why Obama was the Teflon president. Nobody dared criticize Him for fear of being labeled RACIST.
Hillary Clinton did not then lose because the US is a SEXIST country. Maybe enough people just didn't like the candidate. Nothing at all to do with said candidate being female.
> she is guilty of being female and having an opinion
that's always scary.
true, they cannot compile actual scientific arguments so the Extreme Right has developed this kind of anti-society where all that matters are their pouty rages to cover up lack of intellectual force.
But, I have to say in order to attempt to be objective that the Left, and it doesn't even have to be the extreme Left is likewise as lacking in objectivity about nuclear power and how if we are serious are de-carbonizing it is the only real carbon free method of power generations that can power the planet cleanly.
Nuclear power - personally I've moved away from it because I think they've lied about the cost. Just building new plants needs to be supported my higher electricity prices. When you add in the decommissioning and long term storage costs it's even more expensive. Also a while back there was a story that the accessible and cheap uranium resources were getting exhausted and that in the future it would be both expensive and carbon intensive. Counter intuitive perhaps but I'd rather see carbon capture technology for gas and coal whilst we wait for fusion power to arrive.
shareThe cost like everything technological is a temporary thing. Look at the cost of everything technological and how they go down with mass production - nuclear would be no different. One thing that adds to the cost is the ability of protesting crowds and fear mongering to increase the cost of regulation.
I am very skeptical of nuclear, but we have to look at the last 50 years say and the harm that has been done to people and the environment by oil and coal which is never mentioned. The two real disasters of nuclear Chernobyl and Fukushima never materialized to be the planetary catastrophes they were called out to be by the environmentalists ... of which I am an environmentalist.
If we want to save the environment, think about this. I was just reading how they are going to allow the pebble mines in Alaska to move forward - which affects salmon fisheries and creates a lot of pollution. If we want to really re-cycle metals and material we will need lots and lots of power, and to desalinate seawater as well - way more power than solar or wind can provide, and not to mention that solar and wind without batteries is a non starter.
The only reason they are decommissioning nuclear plants is that they are being forced closed. In CA here we have closed two nuclear plants - and now we raised our carbon output because we have to replace completely clean and carbon free plants with natural gas and other carbon intensive generation.
There is plenty of uranium - is it a major component of the Earth's crust. Go out to your backyard and there is uranium in your soil. Besides, the amazing thing about nuclear is that there is this thing called the breeder reactor that can make its own fuel ... more fuel than you start out with.
Carbon generation is also not just the only problem with coal - there is mountain top removal, and the billions of tons of fly ash which is toxic and there is no place to put so much waste - and it releases far more radioactivity than nucle
Yep.
Nuclear power plants are several generations more advanced than Fukushima and light years more advanced than that Chernobyl abomination. Next Gen nuke plants are safe, they're clean, and if the greenies would stay the hell out of the courtrooms, would make cheaper electricity.
The world will be moving away from fossil fueled cars very soon, and a plug in electric that gets its power from a coal or gas plant is more carbon loaded than a gasoline car.
I guess I'm slightly more skeptical of nuclear - to the point where I now consider it a move in the wrong direction - though I admit I wasn't always against it. Here in the UK, and in many other places, they are decommissioning nuclear plants because they are too old - it takes years and is costing billions.
Yes there is probably uranium in the soil where I live. Also precious metals, rare earths and quite possibly microscopically small precious gems - but none of it is usable. The point I heard was that economic sources of radioactive isotopes are running down. Breeder reactors apparently work by making none fissile uranium fissile. You still have to start with more uranium. It's not like you can pack the reactor with cheese and make that a usable power source - which would be a terrible waste of cheese anyway.
And yes burning, and mining coal - though it's not done in the way it is in the USA, is a dirty process. But in the short to medium term I see it as a better option - though admittedly not a desirable one.
> Also precious metals, rare earths and quite possibly microscopically small precious gems - but none of it is usable.
Mostly because of energy costs.
You also have to realize that nuclear power is the overall cleanest source of energy. The mining in hydrocarbon energy is expensive and toxic to people and the environment.
There is plenty of uranium.
Also - nuclear plants do not need a lot of people to run. They do not need and endless supply of trucks or pipelines in, and do not put out tons and tons of waste.
They have almost 100% uptime ... check some stats on this. They rarely go down or have to go down for maintenance.
When I really read the facts about power generation nuclear is on tops by a long shot.
That said, the endless ability of humans to screw things up is always present. That is my main issue, and the profit motive. i think the next step in human economic evolution is to change or radically modify the laissez-faire capitalism we have today to tame the profit motive because it is ruining almost every aspect of live on the planet.
We can easily tame the profit motive with exponential taxation. But conservative idiots think that the only incentive to work is the fear of being homeless and hungry. That's why they insist on keeping the world a shitty place full of poor people who will make huge profits for them while being given starvation wages.
shareAgree on all of this brux, Finally another rational voice.
And i support nuclear power.
[deleted]
–] huwdj (1072) 13 days ago
I suspect there are two reasons. First, she is guilty of being female and having an opinion. Second, she represent an opinion that many, especially those climate change deniers and most especially those idiots who believe the whole thing as an anti-american conspiracy, resent. So they attack her, often in a stupid, unpleasant and abusive way. Hard to understand why they think this approach will influence anyone else's opinion - I can only assume they get pleasure from it.
This isn't really a left/right thing. How many of the sad little perverts do you think would be willing to stand to stand up in front of colleagues or classmates and own the comments they post?
sharePlaying the gender card is cowardly
shareI not who you're accusing of being cowardly here. Me? Or the morons who take such exception to her being young and female and focus their insults and threats on those attributes?
shareNo one is attacking her for being female and yes you are a coward for playing the gender card. It’s what people do as a last resort when they can’t defend their position
shareI think you need check that on twitter and on these boards. Many people are attacking and dismissing her in exactly those terms. I am not saying people have to accept what she says because of what she is. I am saying people should argue against her without personally attacking her.
shareWell so far I’ve seen no evidence of that and making the assumption that it’s just because of her gender is cowardly.
shareOK. I can only refer you to the wise words of Ermentrude in that great British classic, Dougal and the Blue Cat. (And yes, some will claim this is in fact a French film but the great Eric Thompson made it forever British and that's all I have to say on the matter.) I will not tell you what the wisdom was - I can only recommend you seek out the film.
shareWell I’m dismissing your case since you can’t seem to be able to demonstrate it, better luck next time
share"First, she is guilty of being female and having an opinion."
Wow, what a weak card to play. Yes, the Evil Patriarchy is at it again! Actually, I prefer women with opinions. However, this is not a woman, and her childlike opinions are idiotic. If the climate change cult had chosen a boy as their puppet, I would dislike him just as much as I dislike her.
I'm not playing a card - I'm making an observation that many people have attacked and dismissed her along those lines. I am not saying everyone does so and I'm not saying you would. But some people do - especially some politicians and several of the threads on these boards.
shareyes well summarized.
also frustrated people who failed their miserable unhappy lives love to criticize young people who have some kind of dream, goal or ideology and have the energy and guts to try realizing it.
yeah that is true. i dont agree with her but i dont hate her like a lot of people out there. i wish her well and hope she has a good life. kinda feel bad for her really being used as a spokesman at such a young age. she cant be a proper kid and have a normal childhood. hope she has success tho
shareRight?! It’s just so absurd that people hate her so much. I want her to be a kid too, I think that she’s been indoctrinated and used but the hatred she gets is just silly.
shareI believe it is actually directed at her manipulators - though both of her parents are trained actors and she is obviously ACTING as well.
shareConservatives ... so called ... have to be up in arms about everything because if they ever calmed down and thought about anything objectively they would realize their lives are empty and their souls are toxic. ( that is, the ones who have to rant and rave about Greta )
shareIt's an ideology of selfishness - 'I've got mine, screw everyone and everything else'. Their rage and lies are driven by denial and projection. Science and truth are usually on the other side of the argument.
Now that the 'intellectual' underpinnings of conservative thought as espoused by Hayek, Friedman, Scruton, Locke and Rand have become irrelevant, proved wrong by economists or exposed as bigotry, the right and social conservatives have lurched into populism. Ideas only exist for them now as weapons in a culture war.
In their own minds, conservatives are fearless warriors for liberation through individualism and self-reliance, whereas in reality they are self-interested ideologues who corrupt society purely because they don't want to pay tax. It's easy to be right wing because you simply need to appeal to the baser human instincts like greed, envy and mistrust. Building a healthier, happier and more equal society is much, much harder.
Ever seen this ... Economics https://evonomics.com
Are you sure you aren't referring to the current circus known as the democrats? Because what you said certainly describes what I've seen over the last two years: The rioting, the burning, praising a violent criminal, censorship, calling people 'racist' who disagree with them. Toxic? Yeah, that is a word I would use to describe the democrats. LOL.
shareI wonder if she thinks about the time she was with DiCaprio?
shareThe most recent article on global warming, climate change, etc stated that it probably won't be as bad as all of the "doomsayers" predicted. LOL.
They're Bull Shit didn't work and they're backing down.