Greta Thunberg day in NYC

Status
Not open for further replies.
and if the temperature was spiking so high before CO2 concentration could have done it, why isn't NASA even talking about that 100 year record high temperature? Highest in their century graph and no mention at all about the high temp record for the century. Both in those vertical lines and in the main averaged temperature line. Century high records just ignored.

think about why.
 
and if the temperature was spiking so high before CO2 concentration could have done it, why isn't NASA even talking about that 100 year record high temperature? Highest in their century graph and no mention at all about the high temp record for the century. Both in those vertical lines and in the main averaged temperature line. Century high records just ignored.

think about why.
ok first of all, I can tell that you're much more knowledgeable than I am, in terms of science and evidence based analytics.

That said, my point was simple, can we just keep doing what we do and not worry about climate change or environmental impact?
I mean, 200 species going extinct every day, 1 football field worth of de-forestation every 1 second, etc.

Should we get rid of emission standards (Euro 5, for example) all be driving high-emission V8 mucle cars and dumping garbage and fossil fuel or whatever toxic chemical in the ocean?
Keep burning or cutting down the forest, and dump all the industrial waste, etc?

No, I'm not specifically talking about correlation between global temperature & Co2.

Sorry if I misunderstood you, but it seems like you do not believe in negative environmental impact because of human activity for the last 100 years.

Image result for industrial waste

Related image
Image result for industrial waste

Image result for deforestation

Image result for deforestation

Related image
 
ok first of all, I can tell that you're much more knowledgeable than I am, in terms of science and evidence based analytics.

That said, my point was simple, can we just keep doing what we do and not worry about climate change or environmental impact?

Let's think about that. Without industrialisation what would Earth look like supporting 7 or 10 billion people hunting fishing and burning? Worse. Industrialization is such a marvel that it ALLOWED survival of almost all human offspring...never could be, in the non-industrialized world.

People want it all. They want no baby to die. They want enough room for nature. they want standards of living that were undreamed of. They want never hunger, they want the 72 yr lifespan extended.

They want ebikes. They want bicycle lanes. Coffee stops. Beers. High tech clothes. Best grease. Japanese bearings.
I mean, 200 species going extinct every day, 1 football field worth of de-forestation every 1 second, etc.

Should we get rid of emission standards (Euro 5, for example) all be driving high-emission V8 mucle cars and dumping garbage and fossil fuel or whatever toxic chemical in the ocean?
Keep burning or cutting down the forest, and dump all the industrial waste, etc?

No, I'm not specifically talking about correlation between global temperature & Co2.

Sorry if I misunderstood you, but it seems like you do not believe in negative environmental impact because of human activity for the last 100 years.

I believe that humans are destroying the world at a fast clip. The phonies like Greta preaching to me are much more intensely using resources than I ever have...but they always have ways to justify their high consumerism.
Someone like indianajo is a real and honorable conserver of resources.

The rest are phony preachers getting over very well and comfy on spreading the fears.

Limosine life. Buy beachfront property. Vacation on coral atolls.
Her yacht ride:
"The Malizia II will be captained by renowned yachtsman Boris Herrmann and Pierre Casiraghi, grandson of Monaco’s late Prince Ranier III and actress Grace Kelly. The boat, too, was once named the Edmond de Rothschild, after the financial baron and founder of a fleet of racing yachts. Its construction cost upwards of €4 million. "


Image result for industrial waste

Related image
Image result for industrial waste

Image result for deforestation

Image result for deforestation

Related image
 
Last edited:
Hiding behind a child is what cowards who cannot support their own crap, do.
This child has been indoctrinated into a vicious and violent cult.
 
I honestly don’t understand why adults would choose to spend their time mocking and threatening teenagers and children
I hadn't heard about that. Is it even true? But what is reported now, is that teenage Antifa recruits showed up this time. That's not good. Striking people over the head with wepaons is not good. That college professor with the bike lock hit innocent people, that was not good. Splitting skulls.



for promoting science
That's exactly the reverse of the truth. By putting up a child as their leader and spokesperson, they make examination of the content of the propaganda. off-limits. That's what this is about.
These people will not ever show what the science papers actually say and how it is supported. Never.

They never show the inside, just the propaganda and the child is clueless and 16. Has never seen a scientific paper, most people haven't...


Here she is making a false statement apparently to hide the fact of what they are
Yesterday I posted a photo wearing a borrowed T-shirt that says I’m against fascism.
That isn't what the T shirt said. And who did she borrow it from? MOM?
 

Attachments

  • gteyta.jpg
    gteyta.jpg
    6 KB · Views: 353
Last edited:
Let's think about that. Without industrialisation what would Earth look like supporting 7 or 10 billion people hunting fishing and burning? Worse. Industrialization is such a marvel that it ALLOWED survival of almost all human offspring...never could be, in the non-industrialized world.

People want it all. They want no baby to die. They want enough room for nature. they want standards of living that were undreamed of. They want never hunger, they want the 72 yr lifespan extended.

They want ebikes. They want bicycle lanes. Coffee stops. Beers. High tech clothes. Best grease. Japanese bearings.


I believe that humans are destroying the world at a fast clip. The phonies like Greta preaching to me are much more intensely using resources than I ever have...but they always have ways to justify their high consumerism.
Someone like indianajo is a real and honorable conserver of resources.

The rest are phony preachers getting over very well and comfy on spreading the fears.

Limosine life. Buy beachfront property. Vacation on coral atolls.
Her yacht ride:
"The Malizia II will be captained by renowned yachtsman Boris Herrmann and Pierre Casiraghi, grandson of Monaco’s late Prince Ranier III and actress Grace Kelly. The boat, too, was once named the Edmond de Rothschild, after the financial baron and founder of a fleet of racing yachts. Its construction cost upwards of €4 million. "


Image result for industrial waste

Related image
Image result for industrial waste

Image result for deforestation

Image result for deforestation

Related image
Although I disagree a little bit with putting ebike on the list (I understand that ebikes do not necessarily "save" the planet, there's nothing natural about ebikes), I feel like ebikes could lower the emission by giving people alternative by burning fossil fuel and driving cars.

But I completely agree, people want it all.
I've seen environmental protesters showing up in a Ford V8 powered F150... talking about hypocrite.

Even normal people feel like they're entitled for vacation, which pollute earth by air travel.
People want to enjoy steak dinner, and meat production is one of the most polluting thing you can do.

I think we can lower the damage by clean alternative energy though, such as solar power.

Japan is notorious for using nuclear power plant, I was thinking Japan would come up with some kind of futuristic clean energy power source, but nope...
 
Although I disagree a little bit with putting ebike on the list (I understand that ebikes do not necessarily "save" the planet, there's nothing natural about ebikes), I feel like ebikes could lower the emission by giving people alternative by burning fossil fuel and driving cars.

But I completely agree, people want it all.
I've seen environmental protesters showing up in a Ford V8 powered F150... talking about hypocrite.

Even normal people feel like they're entitled for vacation, which pollute earth by air travel.
People want to enjoy steak dinner, and meat production is one of the most polluting thing you can do.

I think we can lower the damage by clean alternative energy though, such as solar power.

Japan is notorious for using nuclear power plant, I was thinking Japan would come up with some kind of futuristic clean energy power source, but nope...
I put ebike there specifically because it's something we think of as a saving. Even in "saving" we want stuff produced by industry. There's no way out through reduction. The CO2 problem could potentially be powered through by wealth production. But...
suppose we could stop CO2 production instantly, now. Suppose that stopped global warming.
How would that help the situation? I don't see how that would help survival of what we call "nature". Do you ?
 
Japan is notorious for using nuclear power plant, I was thinking Japan would come up with some kind of futuristic clean energy power source, but nope...
This is an interesting part of the puzzle. Modern nuclear is safe, statistically, by the usual measures. Both Chernoble and Fukishima were preventable; they had bad design.
If CO2 ends the world in 12 years, why are these very same people set against the one assured way out of CO2 production?
Granted that nuke power is worrisome, but how does the logic go, that the assured way out of supposedly assured world destruction, is simply off limits for these same people?
 
This thread is a demonstration of why one shouldn't discuss politics with friends and neighbors. Let's change the topic! Who's pro Pope Francis :oops: Should Catholics embrace their Protestant neighbors:oops:

j/k....;) This topic is akin to a cat in the kiddie's sandbox.
 
Here you can glimpse what happened to Greta at a young age. She was raised in the lap of luxury everything was hers nothing was ever taken but her sanity...what was given was rabid fear and resentment as her mothers' milk.
My daughter can see CO2 with the naked eye

 
"No one has said that I can literally see CO2… that is beyond stupid.
This should of course not be necessary to mention but since some respected newspapers have written about this without realizing that this is a fake news campaign I thought it was best to point this out.
While I am at it I also want to point out that when I say that ”our civilisation is almost like a castle built in the sand” or that ”our house on fire” these are metaphors too “

Indeed, her mother did not say she "literally" can, her mother just said that she can.
Mother's milking it.

Let's see how the handlers argue it out: " I also want to point out that when I say that ”our civilisation is almost like a castle built in the sand” or that ”our house on fire” these are metaphors too “

Yes, those are metaphors. So? Have a look in that light, right? Does it make sense in that way?

Her mother wrote that Greta "can see CO2 with the naked eye"
“Greta is able to see what other people cannot see. She can see carbon dioxide with the naked eye. She sees how it flows out of chimneys and changes the atmosphere in a landfill.”


Wait, so it's a metaphor for being aware of CO2's effects...and that's something very very special that other people cannot do? and that's why she specified "with the naked eye".
Huh?
Not adding up, G.
 
Think. Because it was overhyped beyond actual scientific support for it and now time is almost completely up for their fears to be realized.
You think, taken down because the new administration uses 2nd grade logic in sorting scientific facts. Take the sign down and it’s no longer true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back