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

[Craig4]

About what I expected.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by qayak

Counter argument to what?

I don't know..

dudalb Says deniers have taken over the thread.

It would seem to be a claim that bears supporting..

Originally Posted by qayak

I don't know if Canada is one of the countries that matter but when Thunberg spoke at various rallies during the recent election campaign, deniers (Conservatives) called for her to be arrested, and deported, for tampering with our election.

Anything to deflect from the issue of climate change.

lomiller Says Greta's success is measured by " The number of people demanding their political leaders take action. " ..

You seem to have countered that argument, which was my point.

P.S.

You may have missed it, but the subject of this thread is not about the " issue " of climate change.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by Steve

Step one: Convince politicians to take serious action on climate change and include their position in their election platform.
Step two: Vote for those politicians.

I can't wait for it to happen, but meanwhile it doesn't meet lomiller's measurement of Greta's success. Well it does, in that it shows she is not very successful so far.

Quote:

Which countries do not matter? And what is it called there?

The ones where people do not have a voice in their governments.

Unfortunately, those are the countries where people are less likely to be able to adjust to the effects of climate change as it happens.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

I therefore dismiss your claim that there were "lies".

I didn't express myself very well. Making baseless accusations like this is dishonest. Trebuchet knows it's dishonest. So do you. When challenged on this dishonesty, you and others respond with more of it.

Why?

Why is dissent from Greta's activism so bothersome that you and others must resort to repeated dishonesty to oppose it? Why do you have to make up accusations you cannot support? Why is it so hard for you to simply disagree with my stated position as such?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Steve

Which countries do not matter?

China.

Quote:

And what is it called there?

Tiananmen Square.

[qayak]

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

lomiller Says Greta's success is measured by " The number of people demanding their political leaders take action. " ..

You seem to have countered that argument, which was my point.

How so? The Conservatives (climate deniers) lost the election.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I like this one better:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...282d95aea1.jpg

Seriously

Here we call photos like that creepy

Who is the dude supposed to be btw?

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by cullennz

Seriously

Here we call photos like that creepy

Who is the dude supposed to be btw?

Former American Vice President Joe Biden. He got run through the mill for being a little too touchy with women?

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Former American Vice President Joe Biden. He got run through the mill for being a little too touchy with women?

All cool....Weird.....But all cool

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by cullennz

All cool....Weird.....But all cool

It's a meme.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by theprestige

What gets me is how consistently the Greta fanclub keeps lying about the nature of the dissent. Orphia Nay lies about it. Lionking lies about it. Varwoche and lomiller keep lying about it.

I'd take their anger over my dissent a lot more seriously if they showed any understanding of what they were angry about.

Speaking of liars Other than pointing out that the objections being made by those whining about Greta are the same combination of irrationality, pseudo-science and incoherent nonsense we always get from the climate science deniers. I’m not even sure how to spell her last name properly. Some “fan” I am lol.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

I don't know..

dudalb Says deniers have taken over the thread.

It would seem to be a claim that bears supporting..



lomiller Says Greta's success is measured by " The number of people demanding their political leaders take action. " ..

You seem to have countered that argument, which was my point.

Perfect example of the typical nonsense being spouted by the people complaining about her.

How is that in any way a counter argument to my suggestion that Greta success be measured is motivating people to become more politically engaged in fighting climate change? The very thing these idiots are whining about is that she is motivating people to support political parties committed to taking action on climate change.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

The Trump War Room photoshops Trump's head onto Thunberg's body so he can have the Time cover after all:

https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/sta...69926256816128

Twitter responds as you'd expect.

Trump demanded to be 'on a teen girl's body by tonight!' and without Epstein this is the best they could do.

[Matthew Best]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I didn't express myself very well. Making baseless accusations like this is dishonest. Trebuchet knows it's dishonest. So do you. When challenged on this dishonesty, you and others respond with more of it.

Why?

Trebuchet's "baseless accusation" was this:

For some, the problem they have is actually with the last word of your sentence. They'd have a lot less problem if it was "him".

I can see no reason to doubt that this is true, for some, as he said.

Quote:

Why is dissent from Greta's activism so bothersome that you and others must resort to repeated dishonesty to oppose it? Why do you have to make up accusations you cannot support? Why is it so hard for you to simply disagree with my stated position as such?

Or, why is Thunberg's activism so annoying to you that you simply cannot conceive of anybody who might oppose it for bad reasons, like sexism. Are you really so naive to believe that such people don't exist?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Trump demanded to be 'on a teen girl's body by tonight!' and without Epstein this is the best they could do.

He should just invite them up on stage with him, the way Biden does.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by qayak

How so? The Conservatives (climate deniers) lost the election.

On the other hand, the Conservatives in the UK just won an election. If we're going to explain the Conservative loss in Canada as a reaction to Greta's activism, shouldn't we also explain the Conservative win in the UK as a reaction to Greta's activism?

Actually, we probably shouldn't use Greta to explain either of those events. At least not without a lot more data.

Here's an experiment we might try: There are certainly things Canada can do to make a real difference to global climate change, that can only be done by government action, not by individual action.

And there are certainly things that Canada can do that it has not yet done. Things that are practical, but politically untenable, at least up until now.

We could list some of those things, and see if the new government that has just been elected actually does any of those things. If they do, then we can probably say that Greta has had some success not only motivating voters but also through them influencing climate change policy at the government level, in a real, measurable, positive way.

On the other hand, if the newly-elected Canadian government maintains the status quo, and takes no bold new steps to fight climate change, then we can probably say that for all her celebrity and street marches and sailboat rides, Greta isn't having much of a practical effect on global climate change policy.

A lot of people were excited about the Freedom Riders. And that was successful activism.

A lot of people were excited about Occupy Wall Street. And that was failed activism.

Which is Greta? We don't know yet.

[BrooklynBaby]

The left should be proud:

"Greta Thunberg tells cheering crowd 'we will make sure we put world leaders against the wall' if they do not tackle global warming as she attends climate protest in Turin"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nstration.html

[Steve]

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby

The left should be proud:

"Greta Thunberg tells cheering crowd 'we will make sure we put world leaders against the wall' if they do not tackle global warming as she attends climate protest in Turin"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nstration.html

Why “proud”?

[Checkmite]

Next week: "Climate protesters threaten to literally bite leaders' asses on Election Day during speech!"

[Olmstead]

"I've fought very hard to keep foreigners out of our country!"

"I've fought very hard to force women to continue with a pregnancy!"

"I've fought very hard to reduce pollution and mitigate the effects of climate change!"

If you have ever complained about the last endeavour, but never complained about the first two, you are evil*.


* Poster does not believe objective evil exists. He is only calling you evil in the context of his own subjective morality because he believes you to be a prick.

[Skeptical Greg]

Who is " you " ?

[IsThisTheLife]

Originally Posted by cullennz

Seriously

Here we call photos like that creepy

Who is the dude supposed to be btw?

It's Joe Biden in the act of nuzzling a girl about the same age as GT, which he's been captured doing with similarly aged and even younger ones on numerous occasions. More than a few people do indeed find it "creepy".

[BrooklynBaby]

Originally Posted by Steve

Why “proud”?

Because the crowd is cheering her call for putting world leaders "up against the wall" if they don't embrace the climate change hoax. Was that not the goal of weaponizing her to begin with?

[cullennz]

TBF when I saw the wall comment I thought it was probably a misunderstanding more than something malicious, taken out of context and twisted.

And she has apologised, so fair play to her.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...6da_story.html

Quote:

Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg has apologized for saying politicians should be put “against the wall” after critics took it to mean that she was advocating violence.

The 16-year-old Swede made the comment in a speech to young activists in the Italian city of Turin on Friday.

Thunberg later said she was making a literal translation from Swedish, in which the expression means to put someone on the spot with tough questions.

“That’s what happens when you improvise speeches in a second language. But of course I apologise if anyone misunderstood this,” Thunberg wrote on Twitter on Saturday.

[cullennz]

Having said that, this is about the stupidest generalisation you can get

Greta:

Quote:

It is not fair that the older generation are handing over the responsibility to solve this crisis to us young people who have not started this crisis. It's not fair that we have to do all this.

'The adults are behaving as if there is no tomorrow but there is a tomorrow, it is the tomorrow where our young people will live and we have to fight for that tomorrow. 'We can no longer take that tomorrow for granted.'

[8enotto]

Well, to be fair she has been beat on for everything in her speeches so far. Overacting, translation faux pas, proposal of the impossible, exaggerated claims and her stolen childhood.
And all she has left is generalized truths that I heard when I was a teen.

And has a lot changed since then. Really a lot for the better.
Despite claims of doom and gloom to come it's true.

We made changes our parents couldn't because the more efficient cars and pollution regs came after their time.

[Giordano]

Originally Posted by cullennz

Having said that, this is about the stupidest generalisation you can get

Greta:

Frankly and honestly I think it summarizes the situation and her perspective quite accurately. Four sentences selected from all she has said.. Cannot four sentences be a generalization?

We all have filters on how we hear and see things, and when we already have concluded that someone irritates us we are likely to interpret almost all they say as stupid or annoying.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by Giordano

Frankly and honestly I think it summarizes the situation and her perspective quite accurately. Four sentences selected from all she has said.. Cannot four sentences be a generalization?

We all have filters on how we hear and see things, and when we already have concluded that someone irritates us we are likely to interpret almost all they say as stupid or annoying.

Not really

Presumably she has learnt a lot of her thing from her hippy parents, teachers and scientists, who are adults

[qayak]

Originally Posted by cullennz

Not really

Presumably she has learnt a lot of her thing from her hippy parents, teachers and scientists, who are adults

One would expect. Just as one would expect that the people who bash her learned their schtick from their ignorant parents. Most of them are uneducated though, so you can hardly blame teachers or scientists.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by qayak

One would expect. Just as one would expect that the people who bash her learned their schtick from their ignorant parents. Most of them are uneducated though, so you can hardly blame teachers or scientists.

I'm not blaming teachers or scientists.

Greta is by generalising adults

Was kind of my point

[lionking]

Originally Posted by cullennz

I'm not blaming teachers or scientists.

Greta is by generalising adults

Was kind of my point

Christ, do you even know what “generalising” means?

It is absolutely, 100% correct to blame the inaction of older generations for climate change. Not everyone, of course, but older generations in general. Nobody can argue against that. Nobody in general. Perhaps you can.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by lionking

Christ, do you even know what “generalising” means?

It is absolutely, 100% correct to blame the inaction of older generations for climate change. Not everyone, of course, but older generations in general. Nobody can argue against that. Nobody in general. Perhaps you can.

Lol

[cullennz]

Generalisation

"A general statement or concept obtained by inference from specific cases."

What happened to blaming politicians?

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by lionking

Christ, do you even know what “generalising” means?



It is absolutely, 100% correct to blame the inaction of older generations for climate change. Not everyone, of course, but older generations in general. Nobody can argue against that. Nobody in general. Perhaps you can.

You got him there.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by cullennz

Lol

Yes, you really don’t know what generalising means. Precious.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

You got him there.

He obviously has got me there, as I seem to be thick.

Thought generalisation was accusing an entire group of a thing for doing only what a few of that group did.

Do you mind pointing out where I am wrong?

As I am open to education

Edit: Sorry "some" is probably more what I thought than "a few"

[qayak]

Originally Posted by cullennz

Lol

By your reasoning men are not generally larger than women because every man is larger than every woman. The real joke here is the apparent state of the New Zealand education system.

[qayak]

Originally Posted by cullennz

I'm not blaming teachers or scientists.

Greta is by generalising adults

Was kind of my point

No, she isn't. She is blaming previous generations who had the information and did not fix the problem. That's you and me. The difference is that I joined her, while you doubled down on the denialism.

[cullennz]

Originally Posted by qayak

No, she isn't. She is blaming previous generations who had the information and did not fix the problem. That's you and me. The difference is that I joined her, while you doubled down on the denialism.

I am amazed all the climate scientists and her parents can look at her in the eye

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by lionking

Christ, do you even know what “generalising” means?

It is absolutely, 100% correct to blame the inaction of older generations for climate change. Not everyone, of course, but older generations in general. Nobody can argue against that. Nobody in general. Perhaps you can.

Greta is not chastising older generations; she lays blame squarely on the people in front of her. The people in front of her did not create electrical generation, or airline travel, or meat eating. They did not increase world population to the point where these things now generate too many emissions for the planet to handle. And the generation she is browbeating has made leaps and bounds in cleaner technologies, and higher standards than the previous ones.She said:

Quote:

It is not fair that the older generation are handing over the responsibility to solve this crisis to us young people who have not started this crisis.

We didn't start the fire. A lot of us have been working for years to put it out. Perhaps Greta scolds her parents for contributing to the population growth that causes such massive emissions to overcome the climate?