Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 18:55:12 GMT
She was trying to say we would have now just passed the point of no return yes. Far from all the scientists yet agree with her on that. But no sensible person thinks further efforts are futile. Because clearly the warmer it gets the more potential damage to our ecosystem. And the more greenhouse gasses we keep pumping out the warmer it will get. I think the chances of us becoming extinct any time soon are minimal. But global agricultural collapse is likely to happen at some point if we keep on going, which will cause global famine on an unprecedented scale. Billions would die. Billions more will be on the move, a refugee crisis the like of which we have never seen before. Even rich countries like us who already cannot produce enough food to feed themselves and rely on imports will see starvation and massive increases in food prices - or severe rationing. It will be a global catastrophe the like of which we have never seen before. No one is certain when this will be but if we keep pumping out greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere almost all climate scientists agree that at some point this is likely to occur. There is also a time lag of two or three decades before the full effects of what we are pumping out take effect. This is what Thunberg as talking about. She was saying that by now we would have pumped enough CO2 into the atmosphere to make this outcome inevitable. This was likely scaremongering in an attempt to make old fools listen, which is clearly a lost cause. I think there is probably still time to avert this. But such civilisational collapse will occur when and if global food production collapses, and the more shit we keep pumping out, the more likely it is that we will reach that point. Do you think it might help if they understood what the tipping points are? They seem to think they're rising sea levels. No. The inherent problem is that they don't want to believe the scientists because it turns so many of the assumptions they have bought into all their lives upside down. They are ignoring what they are being told because they simply don't want to believe it, and - if pushed - will go trawling the internet in search of anything that they think can support them, however dubious. Most of the real scientists do not widely publicise their findings there but in learned journals. As ever it is the fake ones and the conspiracy theorists that are all over the place there. As for the vast majority of scientists now accepting the reality of man made warming, those refusing to believe them are showing breath-taking ignorance and arrogance assuming that they themselves know better, often with little more than a physics O level between them, and an ability to use google. When asked to explain why they are right and the vast majority of the world's scientists are wrong, they are immediately forced onto conspiracy theory territory, suggesting that the worlds scientists are somehow lying in pursuit of grants, for which of course there is not a shred of evidence even on the internet. They are in fact the antithesis of science and have more in common with flat earthers. Refusing to believe the facts scientists are presenting them with and instead desperately seeking out something, anything, that they can cite to support their own refusal to believe in facts they dont like. Any true scientist would be contemptuous of them. But there have always been people like this. Mostly older people who struggle with new knowledge and new ideas and emotionally having vested a lifetime in knowing the world as they think it to be. Gradually with the passage of time they die out and the new knowledge becomes accepted facts amongst succeeding generations. This is an aspect of humanity that has existed since we first walked out of Africa, and tends to prove that when it comes to old knowledge or unchanged knowledge the older generations will often have much wisdom and experience, but when it comes to new knowledge, for temperamental reasons many of them are the most unwise bunch around. Which is not helped at all by the fact that so many of them choose to believe everything they read in the Daily Mail or any similarly expensive toilet paper. As for tipping points, I doubt most of them know much about this at all. Because it would involve educating themselves about processes they have already decided in advance that they are not going to believe in. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 23, 2023 19:06:37 GMT
And? Does that mean we've got it all wrong on climate change and its not happening? Does it mean any prediction is a waste of time and we can do nothing? Does it mean climate change is all made up? And? Let’s get a climate scientist or perhaps a team of climate Scientists to tell us , not children . Lets ditch the cult of apocalypse approach and use real scientists. You did make an effort to read the post you replied to? Would you apply this to other protesters? That unless you are an expert you should keep quiet? Lest you get it wrong. I'll re read your post apologies for missing something. Re read. Nothing to answer apart from your play that Greta is some sort of vulnerable person. Which frankly is an insult to anyone with autism. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 19:08:06 GMT
We do not know for certain if it is too late to prevent serious problems because there is a time lag between when all the stuff is pumped out and when it takes full impact. I personally think and hope it is not too late but if we dont make meaningful progress towards net zero at some point it will become too late. No one is certain when that point will be reached if it has not already been but all serious climate scientists believes there is a point where coming disaster will be baked in. Fair comment but let the serious climate scientists make the case . Not vulnerable children . She is not a child anymore but is still a very young adult. Most adults her age are more interested in partying and getting laid. However, she clearly keeps up with the science and is often very well respected amongst her peer group in terms of age. Older people tend not to want to listen to people so young, which is of course pretty standard. I myself an 58 years old today (happy birthday to me) and whilst I will watch any documentary about her if there is nothing better on, I see her only as a voice drawing our attention to what the scientists are saying. I don't think she even claims to be a scientist. But she does tend to typify the strength of feeling which many young people have on this issue. After all they are going to be left holding the baby and having to survive in the world we leave them long after we are gone. But when it comes to scientific facts it is what the scientists themselves have to say based on the evidence they have found and measured which I most listen to. Those most hostile to Thunberg are often failing to recognise that she is a campaigner and not a scientist. And should be understood in that light. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 19:11:41 GMT
And? Let’s get a climate scientist or perhaps a team of climate Scientists to tell us , not children . Lets ditch the cult of apocalypse approach and use real scientists. You did make an effort to read the post you replied to? Would you apply this to other protesters? That unless you are an expert you should keep quiet? Now you know I never said that don’t you ? Why front a campaign to promote net zero on the basis of catastrophic climate change with a vulnerable teen age girl and not with climate scientists ? Yiu need to stop the strops and address the points made . |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 19:16:30 GMT
Fair comment but let the serious climate scientists make the case . Not vulnerable children . She is not a child anymore but is still a very young adult. Most adults her age are more interested in partying and getting laid. However, she clearly keeps up with the science and is often very well respected amongst her peer group in terms of age. Older people tend not to want to listen to people so young, which is of course pretty standard. I myself an 58 years old today (happy birthday to me) and whilst I will watch any documentary about her if there is nothing better on, I see her only as a voice drawing our attention to what the scientists are saying. I don't think she even claims to be a scientist. But she does tend to typify the strength of feeling which many young people have on this issue. After all they are going to be left holding the baby and having to survive in the world we leave them long after we are gone. But when it comes to scientific facts it is what the scientists themselves have to say based on the evidence they have found and measured which I most listen to. Those most hostile to Thunberg are often failing to recognise that she is a campaigner and not a scientist. And should be understood in that light. That doesn’t answer the question. An oncologist wouldn’t roll out a vulnerable teenager to tell you that you have cancer on the basis that she is going to grow up be a doctor . We don’t want teenagers that keep up with the science to advise us on climate change , we want eminent scientists who can argue a compelling case . She is not a campaigner, she is the face of AGW . |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 23, 2023 19:38:14 GMT
Would you apply this to other protesters? That unless you are an expert you should keep quiet? Now you know I never said that don’t you ? Why front a campaign to promote net zero on the basis of catastrophic climate change with a vulnerable teen age girl and not with climate scientists ? Yiu need to stop the strops and address the points made . Again with the vulnerable girl thing. Greta is not a vulnerable girl. She has travelled the world giving speeches to the G8 among others. Stop saying that autism makes her a vulnerable girl, she is a bright young women with a keen interest in climate change. Now to my question. Would you apply this to other protesters? That unless you are an expert you should keep quiet? I didn't say you'd already said that, if I thought you had I wouldn't ask the question. You say Greta should leave climate change to the experts and keep her mouth shut. Would you apply that same thing to other protesters? Lest they get it wrong |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 19:49:27 GMT
Now you know I never said that don’t you ? Why front a campaign to promote net zero on the basis of catastrophic climate change with a vulnerable teen age girl and not with climate scientists ? Yiu need to stop the strops and address the points made . Again with the vulnerable girl thing. Greta is not a vulnerable girl. She has travelled the world giving speeches to the G8 among others. Stop saying that autism makes her a vulnerable girl, she is a bright young women with a keen interest in climate change. Now to my question. Would you apply this to other protesters? That unless you are an expert you should keep quiet? I didn't say you'd already said that, if I thought you had I wouldn't ask the question. You say Greta should leave climate change to the experts and keep her mouth shut. Would you apply that same thing to other protesters? Lest they get it wrong Greta was a vulnerable teenager . Why are you asking a question that has nothing to do with my point? Where did I say that a Thunberg should keep her mouth shut ? For someone who whines about trolling you are doing a good job of it yourself. Now stop the false claims and straw men . Why front a campaign for net zero on the the grounds of catastrophic climate change with a vulnerable teenager and not with an eminent scientist who can argue a compelling case based in his and others research ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 19:55:41 GMT
She is not a child anymore but is still a very young adult. Most adults her age are more interested in partying and getting laid. However, she clearly keeps up with the science and is often very well respected amongst her peer group in terms of age. Older people tend not to want to listen to people so young, which is of course pretty standard. I myself an 58 years old today (happy birthday to me) and whilst I will watch any documentary about her if there is nothing better on, I see her only as a voice drawing our attention to what the scientists are saying. I don't think she even claims to be a scientist. But she does tend to typify the strength of feeling which many young people have on this issue. After all they are going to be left holding the baby and having to survive in the world we leave them long after we are gone. But when it comes to scientific facts it is what the scientists themselves have to say based on the evidence they have found and measured which I most listen to. Those most hostile to Thunberg are often failing to recognise that she is a campaigner and not a scientist. And should be understood in that light. That doesn’t answer the question. An oncologist wouldn’t roll out a vulnerable teenager to tell you that you have cancer on the basis that she is going to grow up be a doctor . We don’t want teenagers that keep up with the science to advise us on climate change , we want eminent scientists who can argue a compelling case . She is not a campaigner, she is the face of AGW . She doesn't claim to be a scientist, but is a campaigner. You may choose to hold her in contempt and ignore anything she says because of her youth - a lot of older people do that in regards to young people - but like any adult of any age she has a right to campaign for what she believes in. And is at least prepared to get up off her arse and fight for it. I find that more worthy of admiration than contempt, regardless of what she is campaigning for. And she is self-evidently a campaigner and not a scientist. Though like most campaigners she does try and keep up to speed with what she is campaigning about. Like many a campaigner who believes in something, she might exaggerate from time to time. But we need only look at both sides in the Brexit campaign to see that this is typical when campaigning. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 23, 2023 19:56:39 GMT
Again with the vulnerable girl thing. Greta is not a vulnerable girl. She has travelled the world giving speeches to the G8 among others. Stop saying that autism makes her a vulnerable girl, she is a bright young women with a keen interest in climate change. Now to my question. Would you apply this to other protesters? That unless you are an expert you should keep quiet? I didn't say you'd already said that, if I thought you had I wouldn't ask the question. You say Greta should leave climate change to the experts and keep her mouth shut. Would you apply that same thing to other protesters? Lest they get it wrong Greta was a vulnerable teenager . Why are you asking a question that has nothing to do with my point? Where did I say that a Thunberg should keep her mouth shut ? For someone who whines about trolling you are doing a good job of it yourself. Now stop the false claims and straw men . Why front a campaign for net zero on the the grounds of catastrophic climate change with a vulnerable teenager and not with an eminent scientist who can argue a compelling case based in his and others research ? Why was she vulnerable? So you are saying that Greta should be allowed to speak but that the media should ignore her? Not sure what you are after? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 20:03:11 GMT
That doesn’t answer the question. An oncologist wouldn’t roll out a vulnerable teenager to tell you that you have cancer on the basis that she is going to grow up be a doctor . We don’t want teenagers that keep up with the science to advise us on climate change , we want eminent scientists who can argue a compelling case . She is not a campaigner, she is the face of AGW . She doesn't claim to be a scientist, but is a campaigner. You may choose to hold her in contempt and ignore anything she says because of her youth - a lot of older people do that in regards to young people - but like any adult of any age she has a right to campaign for what she believes in. And is at least prepared to get up off her arse and fight for it. I find that more worthy of admiration than contempt, regardless of what she is campaigning for. And she is self-evidently a campaigner and not a scientist. Though like most campaigners she does try and keep up to speed with what she is campaigning about. Like many a campaigner who believes in something, she might exaggerate from time to time. But we need only look at both sides in the Brexit campaign to see that this is typical when campaigning. She isn’t a campaigner, she is the face of the campaign . How worthy you think she is has nothing to do with it . If you want more people to be persuaded by a compelling argument that net zero is needed fast to stop catastrophic climate change then roll out an eminent scientist ( or a team ) to provide a compelling case ..not a teenager, vulnerable or not . Until then stop claiming that people who are not persuaded by a campaign that is more like a cult than objective and persuasive premise . |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 20:05:15 GMT
Greta was a vulnerable teenager . Why are you asking a question that has nothing to do with my point? Where did I say that a Thunberg should keep her mouth shut ? For someone who whines about trolling you are doing a good job of it yourself. Now stop the false claims and straw men . Why front a campaign for net zero on the the grounds of catastrophic climate change with a vulnerable teenager and not with an eminent scientist who can argue a compelling case based in his and others research ? Why was she vulnerable? So you are saying that Greta should be allowed to speak but that the media should ignore her? Not sure what you are after? So where did I say that the media should ignore her? Can you stop trolling and address the points made ? YOU ..”You say Greta should leave climate change to the experts and keep her mouth shut.” Point out where I posted that . |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 23, 2023 20:20:28 GMT
She doesn't claim to be a scientist, but is a campaigner. You may choose to hold her in contempt and ignore anything she says because of her youth - a lot of older people do that in regards to young people - but like any adult of any age she has a right to campaign for what she believes in. And is at least prepared to get up off her arse and fight for it. I find that more worthy of admiration than contempt, regardless of what she is campaigning for. And she is self-evidently a campaigner and not a scientist. Though like most campaigners she does try and keep up to speed with what she is campaigning about. Like many a campaigner who believes in something, she might exaggerate from time to time. But we need only look at both sides in the Brexit campaign to see that this is typical when campaigning. She isn’t a campaigner, she is the face of the campaign . How worthy you think she is has nothing to do with it . If you want more people to be persuaded by a compelling argument that net zero is needed fast to stop catastrophic climate change then roll out an eminent scientist ( or a team ) to provide a compelling case ..not a teenager, vulnerable or not . Until then stop claiming that people who are not persuaded by a campaign that is more like a cult than objective and persuasive premise . She's a campaigner, she's been campaigning from the start. How worthy I think she is is very important. Because I know how much she has put into this and how much she understands climate change. Have you ever listened to one of her broadcasts. There are plenty of climate change scientists backing up claims about climate change, you have never shown the slightest sign that you listen to them. You only listen to amateurs on you tube picking holes in tiny errors made in calculations, like you are now. You have no interest in the truth or the middle ground. But it doesn't matter because the world knows about climate change and the world is trying to fix it. Now its only about how fast. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2023 20:24:50 GMT
She doesn't claim to be a scientist, but is a campaigner. You may choose to hold her in contempt and ignore anything she says because of her youth - a lot of older people do that in regards to young people - but like any adult of any age she has a right to campaign for what she believes in. And is at least prepared to get up off her arse and fight for it. I find that more worthy of admiration than contempt, regardless of what she is campaigning for. And she is self-evidently a campaigner and not a scientist. Though like most campaigners she does try and keep up to speed with what she is campaigning about. Like many a campaigner who believes in something, she might exaggerate from time to time. But we need only look at both sides in the Brexit campaign to see that this is typical when campaigning. She isn’t a campaigner, she is the face of the campaign . How worthy you think she is has nothing to do with it . If you want more people to be persuaded by a compelling argument that net zero is needed fast to stop catastrophic climate change then roll out an eminent scientist ( or a team ) to provide a compelling case ..not a teenager, vulnerable or not . Until then stop claiming that people who are not persuaded by a campaign that is more like a cult than objective and persuasive premise . You think she is being "rolled out" by someone. In fact she is there largely by her own campaigning efforts. And of course she is a campaigner. What else do you think she is doing if not campaigning? She is not a scientist in a lab or out taking field measurements. These generally have more important things to do than front campaigns trying to persuade the unpersuadable. Thunberg's status as a recognised face is due to the fact that she has made a name for herself as a campaigner amongst young people who very much listen to her which is the main reason why others pay heed to her. Not everyone amongst the powers that be see value in ignoring what young people think or feel concerned about. And if you see her as the face of a campaign, how do you think she became such without campaigning? What there was was serious interest in a passionate young person so committed to something other than partying or getting laid. She parlayed that into publicity for her cause. And used her public standing amongst younger demographics to champion that cause. That is a highly intelligent campaigner in action. A bunch of stodgy scientists quoting statistics and hedging their bets would never get the media attention. That cause requires a host of campaigners championing it. But because most of the others are middle aged men writing in the liberal sections of the newsprint media - people like George Monbiot or Mark Lynas - most people pay little attention to them. People take such a dislike to Thunberg because she gets heard and reaches the parts most political campaigners cannot reach, ie the young. And many older people hate her for that as much as anything, especially those who dont want to listen re climate change issues. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 20:26:42 GMT
She isn’t a campaigner, she is the face of the campaign . How worthy you think she is has nothing to do with it . If you want more people to be persuaded by a compelling argument that net zero is needed fast to stop catastrophic climate change then roll out an eminent scientist ( or a team ) to provide a compelling case ..not a teenager, vulnerable or not . Until then stop claiming that people who are not persuaded by a campaign that is more like a cult than objective and persuasive premise . She's a campaigner, she's been campaigning from the start. How worthy I think she is is very important. Because I know how much she has put into this and how much she understands climate change. Have you ever listened to one of her broadcasts. There are plenty of climate change scientists backing up claims about climate change, you have never shown the slightest sign that you listen to them. You only listen to amateurs on you tube picking holes in tiny errors made in calculations, like you are now. You have no interest in the truth or the middle ground. But it doesn't matter because the world knows about climate change and the world is trying to fix it. Now its only about how fast. There you go again making up false claims about what I listen to and using ad Homs . If you cannot accept that an eminent scientist cannot make a more compelling argument than a teenager ( vulnerable or not ) then it follows that you think they can’t . You merely want to be part of a climate cult headed by a child . You are part of the problem . Just using your debate technique. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 23, 2023 20:32:19 GMT
She isn’t a campaigner, she is the face of the campaign . How worthy you think she is has nothing to do with it . If you want more people to be persuaded by a compelling argument that net zero is needed fast to stop catastrophic climate change then roll out an eminent scientist ( or a team ) to provide a compelling case ..not a teenager, vulnerable or not . Until then stop claiming that people who are not persuaded by a campaign that is more like a cult than objective and persuasive premise . You think she is being "rolled out" by someone. In fact she is there largely by her own campaigning efforts. And of course she is a campaigner. What else do you think she is doing if not campaigning? She is not a scientist in a lab or out taking field measurements. These generally have more important things to do than front campaigns trying to persuade the unpersuadable. Thunberg's status as a recognised face is due to the fact that she has made a name for herself as a campaigner amongst young people who very much listen to her which is the main reason why others pay heed to her. Not everyone amongst the powers that be see value in ignoring what young people think or feel concerned about. And if you see her as the face of a campaign, how do you think she became such without campaigning? What there was was serious interest in a passionate young person so committed to something other than partying or getting laid. She parlayed that into publicity for her cause. And used her public standing amongst younger demographics to champion that cause. That is a highly intelligent campaigner in action. A bunch of stodgy scientists quoting statistics and hedging their bets would never get the media attention. That cause requires a host of campaigners championing it. But because most of the others are middle aged men writing in the liberal sections of the newsprint media - people like George Monbiot or Mark Lynas - most people pay little attention to them. People take such a dislike to Thunberg because she gets heard and reaches the parts most political campaigners cannot reach, ie the young. And many older people hate her for that as much as anything, especially those who dont want to listen re climate change issues. If you believe that Thunberg has achieved bring the face of climate change by herself then I’m wasting my time. When the eco worriers stop blaming others for not being suspicious of a climate cult headed by a child ….then get an eminent scientist to put a compelling argument for net zero that refutes the claims of climate sceptics then maybe they will succeed at persuading the doubters . |
|
