Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed? Part II.
 

Thank you for your comments..

I understand I may be hard to read, but in this thread, I am mostly coming from the hyperbole surrounding Greta.. On both sides..

She has a message we should be listening to, not because she is the messenger, but because it is a worthwhile message..

At 70, people way older that 15 seem to be babies to me, and for me, babies are mostly entertaining, and not where I get my values and life strategies from..

Well I am only 4 years younger. But I have an 18 yo daughter still at home so teenage views are front and centre every day. It has taught me to take serious teenage views seriously, even if they are not necessarily my own views. Sometimes she provides a viewpoint that I had not considered.

Looks like I was correct. Our views on climate change and on Greta and her actual message are not too different.

Cheers.

Brasil has all to do with the Amazon jungle and it's use or preservation. At least it isn't really that great lung of the world it's hyped up for. Oceans make 90% of oxygen, not plants.
Somebody who makes save the rainforest propaganda isn't listening to the scientific stuff.

Used to work with a woman whose husband does/did the Antarctic core sample drilling.

Cool bloke.

Interesting job.

Got paid a shed load

They broke up in the end cos he was away so much, but that is off topic

It's not that hard to understand. As you say, it unambiguously shows climate change, one that can be personally experienced.

Clearly, the climate has been changing for some time now..

Let's try to stay on topic..

That's a lot of the issue with the problems in the world. Old people have the power, think they know best, and the status quo, good or bad, is maintained.

I called you a climate science denier, not a climate change denier. If you don’t like being called a climate science don’t repeat pseudoscience from the climate denier playbook.
Moving goalposts noted. Greta has explicitly referenced changes being locked in in the next 30 years, she has not suggested the actual changes will occur in that timeframe.

It’s more then a decade old at this point but Mark Lynas’ “6 degrees: Our future on a warmer planet.” Should still be considered a must read. It explains the situation nicely, but one of the main takeaways is that once we exceed the Eemian maximum of (2 deg) we are at very high risk of a tipping point where 4+ degrees becomes inevitable. In a the 4 degree world there is no more agricultural in Australian, the Indian sub-continent is arid, The Amazon rainforest is dead, the Mediterranean and great plains of North America are deserts. Society and the global economy collapse as food production plummets and billions of people are migrating away from the tropics and costal economic centers are crippled by flooding.

Some links summarizing the degree by degree changes from the book.

https://owlcation.com/stem/Mark-Lyna...Summary-Review
https://www.sustainablewoodstock.co....%20summary.pdf
http://globalwarming.berrens.nl/globalwarming.htm

A better question: “What periods in the earths history has climate changed this rapidly?”
Answer = The only period were where comparable rates of change have been documented occurred 65 million when the dinosaurs went extinct. There are also similarities to the P-T extinction 250 million years ago (AKA “The Great Dying”) but those changes may have played out over a longer period of time.

Ocean oxygen production is under threat from rapidly warming waters and rapid changes in acidity do the Carbon the oceans are currently absorbing.

Greta writes:

Day 18. We’re speeding towards Europe! Estimated time of arrival right now is Tuesday morning. We’ll be arriving at Doca de Alcantara, Lisbon. We are all looking forward to see you there!

Looks like she will be in time for COP25 after all.

Careful! Someone on that yacht might fly somewhere, someday. That will be her fault and it will negate the entire trip.

There are 29,000 delegates at COP25. I'm pretty sure it's Thunberg's fault that some (or probably almost all) of them flew there.

Your analysis is out of date. We've already determined that this is a working vessel, at work on this run.

Greta-ists continue to misunderstand the nature of the critique of Greta-ism.

---

Is there anyone going to COP25 that you are especially hopeful will meet personally with Greta and get the full force of her insight?

Quite the contrary. The primary nature of the critique is pettiness.

I expect that the main consequence of Ms. Thunberg's attendance is the she will obtain more detailed evidence from the experts. I further expect that she will put this evidence to good use when she speaks with young people in the future. We all need reliable information. Ms. Thunberg is providing it.

ETA: I did not "analyze" anything in my previous post. If you wish to label it call it a prediction.

Personally?

Like, subject matter experts are going to sit down with Thunberg and explain stuff to her in more detail than the rest of us are getting from the IPCC? Is that what you're expecting?

And then you're expecting her to present this additional detail to young people?

Okay, sure.

Do you have examples of her in this dynamic already? Excerpts of her addresses to young people where she goes into scientific detail?

Personally what?

The experts may but I do not expect that. It may be that you have never attended a conference and do not understand how they work. There are formal presentations where new information is presented. There are informal presentation/discussion sessions where new and existing information is discussed in more detail, and there are casual discussions outside of the organized schedule of the conference. Each of these circumstances can provide new information. It is exceedingly rare that any participant would "sit someone down" and talk at them. Delegates tend to have more respect for their fellow participants.

Yes, I do expect her to present information that is new to her to anyone who cares to listen to her. It may not be new information to everyone who listens to her, but it will be to some.

Re the hilite. Exactly who are "the rest of us"? Do you imagine that most of the world regularly goes to the IPCC website for updates? If so, you are seriously deluded. Many posters in this forum, and particularly in the climate change threads here, are vastly more knowledgeable re climate change than the world at large. Never make the mistake of assuming everybody else has the same interest and knowledge in a subject that you do. Really, the baseline of Ms. Thunberg's success is that more people, especially younger people, are becoming aware of the implications of climate change and are looking at many sources and making an effort to gain the knowledge that you claim to already have. That is a thing to be encouraged, not disparaged.

Remember, the question is, why is Thunberg's attendance at COP25 so important. Last week, the implication was that there might be diplomats or scientists there who need to hear from her. I find this wildly implausible. Even if there were a scientist or diplomat there who wasn't fully on board with the message from their peers, it's unlikely they'd hear it from Thunberg instead.

But this week, you're suggesting she needs to go to COP25 not to give information, but to get information. But if she's not getting information over and above what's being presented through the normal channels, then she can just go to the IPCC website. So it doesn't really answer the question of why she needs to go to COP25.

Are the French and German diplomats going to consult with Thunberg, as they try to craft the next phase of European climate change policy? Are they going to meet with her over drinks, and explain in plain but detailed language what their policy plans are, so that she can pass them along to hundreds of thousands of young people?

Is Thunberg attending COP25 so she can give us a behind-the-scenes report on what really goes on at these conferences? Is there any expectation at all that she'll see any part of what really goes on at these conferences? I suspect her access will be just as restricted as any other NGO observer in attendance, plus a few publicity photo ops with the actual movers and shakers.

Still no plausible, compelling reason for her to go to COP25 at all.

She's the halftime show.

None of this has any connection to my post that you quoted.

As viewed from under the bridge.

None of your post got us any closer to a plausible, compelling reason for Thunberg to attend COP25 in person.

But your post did suggest that Thunberg would potentially have meaningful semi-formal and informal meetings with the scientists and diplomats in attendance, where she would be given details about science and policy that she could pass on to her main audience. And I did connect directly with that part of your post. So your assessment is wrong.

As viewed from a lot of places around the world, I think. Greta-as-halftime-show is closer to a plausible, compelling reason for her to be there than the "influence the influential" suggestion from last week. It's even more plausible and compelling than the "be influenced by the influential" suggestion you've brought us this week.

I did not intend to give a plausible or compelling reason why Ms. Thunberg should attend. I can provide no plausible or compelling reason for any of the delegates to attend. Given that the conference will be proceeding, complete with attendees, I have provided some info on what she may get out of it.

What I suggested is that there are a number of different ways of communicating and obtaining information at a conference. I said nothing about scientists or diplomats. And yes, I did and do say that she is likely to glean some information from the conference that she did not previously know. And yes, I do say that she will pass this information on to other people.

"Scientists and diplomats" is my shorthand for the people who are going to COP25 to coordinate climate change policy at the international level. I can think of plausible and compelling reasons for them to attend. I'm a little surprised that you can't.

Do you think COP25 is an important event?

Do you think it's important for Greta to attend in person? If so, why?

I think that the attendance or absence of any one person will have an insignificant effect. No single attendance is important.

The conference has the potential to be an important event if positive action plans are agreed to and implemented quickly. The history of such conferences does not convince me that this will happen.

Thank you. I share this opinion.

Now that we've gotten that out of the way, do you have any serious objection to me taking the piss out of the idea Thunberg's attendance at COP25 is an important part of a brave campaign?

Other than not seeing anyone other than the disparagers in this thread offering that position, and thinking that "taking the piss" is a rather pathetic way of spending one's time, if you feel compelled to do this go ahead. You will likely keep seeing responses to your comments, though.

Hm... That's a fair point. Perhaps Greta is the only one taking her attendance at COP25 seriously.

Depends what you mean by seriously. As an invitee she is perfectly entitled to attend. I expect that whoever extended the invitation was serious. Ms. Thunberg herself no doubt takes it seriously. I equally have no doubt that some of the attendees will not take her presence seriously and will be amused by it.

How about "because she wants to"?

Mere desire is rarely a compelling reason for anything. Why is it important to anyone besides Greta? Is it important to you? Why?

Did I have a "compelling reason" to attend TAM in 2009? You attend a conference for many reasons - exchanging information, networking, to see speakers, to speak, meet up with friends, make new friends, and maybe to participate in a talent show in which you smash a cinder block with a sledgehammer on the chest of someone who's lying on a bed of nails.

I for one, am glad she's going to make it to COP 25. Maybe then she can explain this "drastic, sufficient action" she was recently on about.

You know that "drastic, sufficient action" that not even her most ardent supporters wanted to touch with a 10 foot pole.

It indicates something, I think, that the climate emergency thread is dead silent, no interest, but this one keeps cranking along. Why is G-Thun the person so much more interesting than her message?

Because jokes can me made about Ms. Thunberg, and feathers can be ruffled. Climate change itself is much too serious a topic for that.

It's because dealing with the mechanics of of what it would take "To have a 67% chance of staying below a 1.5 degrees global temperature rise – the best odds given by the [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] – the world had 420 gigatons of CO2 left to emit back on Jan. 1st, 2018. Today that figure is already down to less than 350 gigatons.

"How dare you pretend that this can be solved with just 'business as usual' and some technical solutions? With today's emissions levels, that remaining CO2 budget will be entirely gone within less than 8 1/2 years."

Is pretty freakin' scary.

Other than somebody has to do something, Thunberg doesn't have much of a message.

COP25 has begun. A lot of middle aged men and women in the photo ops at the opening.
The sound bites were very much like the Paris Climate meeting.

Now to follow up on something might be great.

By that I assume you mean actual climate scientists.

Has anyone added up how many plane trips across the atlantic it has taken to get her their "carbon free" given it was at least 5 for NY and 2 more to get her to COP25?

Geez. It's inspirational.

Brilliant.

But to be fair

I forgive them

She is currently a fashion adornment

Like being seen wearing hemp loafers,