You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Greta Thunberg
- Thread starter allblackcitizen
- Start date
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
The latter.Are they basing that on current levels of consumption and C02 generation or are they adjusting it to allow for the exponential rises we're now looking at?
There would be no harm if the preventative measures we might adopt were not in themselves harmful, but that's not the case. Apart from the enormous cost, and therefore comparative lack of funds to plow into other valuable activities such as healthcare, the slowing of industrialisation in countries like Africa will in itself result in countless millions of premature deaths over the coming decades. These are just two examples. And if we were to scale back on CO2 output to the extent the dungaree-wearers would have you believe are essential, the effects of doing that could be devastating in themselves.Whilst this may well be true, from my perspective, i don't see the harm in assuming the worst might happen and adjusting our habits accordingly.
Sensationalist nonsense. From their own headline grabbing article:
"Aggregating the responses revealed a one in twenty chance that seas could rise by more than 2 metres by 2100 if unchecked carbon emissions lead to average global warming of 5°C, about 2°C more than the temperature rises current government pledges would lead to."
i.e. We're not expecting rises of more than 2C (estimates range between 1.5C and 2C at the moment) but if it went as bad as 5C (i.e. completely off the scale) then there's a 95% chance that even then, sea levels would not rise by as much as 2m.
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 14,499
Even 10,000 years ago!I'm by no means an expert on this at all, but it goes without saying that the planet was a very different place 100's of millions of years ago, and not needing to sustain the population and infrastructures we've put in place. I'd make a reasonable guess that whilst undoubtedly using emotive language to land their point, scientists are describing the problem as it faces us now. I bow to their expertise on the matter, and whilst some may well have ulterior motives, I'm gonna take the expert view rather than someone like trump who thinks a cold breeze is evidence they're lying.
blueish swede
Well-Known Member
Would you like to challenge any of that or did you just fancy being a twat?
Is there anything in that post that is untrue? Genuine question as I would like it to be bollocks but the poster tends not to be factually incorrect from what I've seen. Like I said earlier I would prefer the message to not be muddied and used by others to sidetrack a pretty important issue.
Well there is truth and there are lies and inbetween there is a wide ocean of spin. Is Dampcles post the truth - no not if you wre to apply Grice's four maxims. It it downright lies, no. What is different about Greta is that she is a teenager talking directly to other teenagers.
I doubt very much Kristina Persson is a billionaire. Her dad ran a chain of Volvo service centres in Sweden and her and her two brothers inherited it. They bought her out years ago. She's wealthy, absolutely, but probably more at the level of "Dragons den" than Warren Buffett.
The Swedish economy is about 45% larger thatn the Norwegian economy. They are not neck and neck, vying for supremacy. It's about the same ratio as Germany to the UK.
It reads as though the whole scenario was manufactured. It is a common error to look at things in reverse chronoligical order and claim there is cause and therofre a conspiracy, when in reality it is merely opportunism. Changing the cover of a book to sell more. Wow. How scurrilous.
Her mum is an opera singer. Her dad is an actor. Her granddad is very famous for childrens television. She's basically like Johnnuy Ball or John Noakes granddaghter. But it is an irrelivance.
The whole thing with Greta exploded because of an off the cuff remartk by a bureaucrat to a local paper. When a general election was called, Greta decided she would bunk off school every Friday and stand outside the Swedish Parliament with a sign. No one took much notice until a local papaer asked the Director of Schools (for the whole of Sweden) what he thought about it. He said that Sweden had a law requiring all children to attend school and that she should do her protesting at the weekends, totally missing the point. The tabloids smelt blood and a subsequent interview with the Schools Director turned into a car crash. And that was news. That exposure allowed Greta to get more exposure for her message. A message from one teenager to other teenagers which was:
"The adults aren't goingto do enough to save the planet we are going to have to live in. If you want to do something about it do what I do - bunk off school every Friday and join a protest."
The seeds of that argument fell on fertile gound among the teenagers of Sweden (shocking, huh) and more started protesting. It snowballed from there.
I posted earlier in the thread that she has Autism. She actually has Aspergers which is viewed as a form of autism. Just to be factually correct.
hilts
Well-Known Member
Well there is truth and there are lies and inbetween there is a wide ocean of spin. Is Dampcles post the truth - no not if you wre to apply Grice's four maxims. It it downright lies, no. What is different about Greta is that she is a teenager talking directly to other teenagers.
I doubt very much Kristina Persson is a billionaire. Her dad ran a chain of Volvo service centres in Sweden and her and her two brothers inherited it. They bought her out years ago. She's wealthy, absolutely, but probably more at the level of "Dragons den" than Warren Buffett.
The Swedish economy is about 45% larger thatn the Norwegian economy. They are not neck and neck, vying for supremacy. It's about the same ratio as Germany to the UK.
It reads as though the whole scenario was manufactured. It is a common error to look at things in reverse chronoligical order and claim there is cause and therofre a conspiracy, when in reality it is merely opportunism. Changing the cover of a book to sell more. Wow. How scurrilous.
Her mum is an opera singer. Her dad is an actor. Her granddad is very famous for childrens television. She's basically like Johnnuy Ball or John Noakes granddaghter. But it is an irrelivance.
The whole thing with Greta exploded because of an off the cuff remartk by a bureaucrat to a local paper. When a general election was called, Greta decided she would bunk off school every Friday and stand outside the Swedish Parliament with a sign. No one took much notice until a local papaer asked the Director of Schools (for the whole of Sweden) what he thought about it. He said that Sweden had a law requiring all children to attend school and that she should do her protesting at the weekends, totally missing the point. The tabloids smelt blood and a subsequent interview with the Schools Director turned into a car crash. And that was news. That exposure allowed Greta to get more exposure for her message. A message from one teenager to other teenagers which was:
"The adults aren't goingto do enough to save the planet we are going to have to live in. If you want to do something about it do what I do - bunk off school every Friday and join a protest."
The seeds of that argument fell on fertile gound among the teenagers of Sweden (shocking, huh) and more started protesting. It snowballed from there.
I posted earlier in the thread that she has Autism. She actually has Aspergers which is viewed as a form of autism. Just to be factually correct.
Thanks for the reply fella interesting read.
Well there is truth and there are lies and inbetween there is a wide ocean of spin. Is Dampcles post the truth - no not if you wre to apply Grice's four maxims. It it downright lies, no.
So no, then. Ok cheers.
I posted earlier in the thread that she has Autism. She actually has Aspergers which is viewed as a form of autism. Just to be factually correct.
Aspergers doesn't exist any more, only autism. Aspergers was basically a discriminatory judgement system so they got rid of it
FantasyIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 64,697
And it made your piss stink.Aspergers doesn't exist any more, only autism. Aspergers was basically a discriminatory judgement system so they got rid of it
mancity2012_eamo
Well-Known Member
You’re right but I’d call that apathy rather than a sense of proportion.Well the above is clearly nonsense. You can barely have a conversation without someone mentioning it. We don't care enough to do *more* about it (than is already being done), because most people have a sense of proportion about the likely risks and scale of the problem.
Most people agree governments should do more but know they won’t.
We should all do more individually but know others won’t so what’s the point.
It’s only heading one way unfortunately. We won’t act until it affects the Western world.
We’re a virus and like any other virus we will burn ourselves out or kill the host first.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
You’re right but I’d call that apathy rather than a sense of proportion.
Most people agree governments should do more but know they won’t.
We should all do more individually but know others won’t so what’s the point.
It’s only heading one way unfortunately. We won’t act until it affects the Western world.
We’re a virus and like any other virus we will burn ourselves out or kill the host first.
The problem is those people who want governments to do more will not elect a government that promises to spend money doing more...............