Thread: Greta Thunberg ... just in-case you missed her

Nonetheless, very profitable.

Win-win for all.

Originally Posted by nidhogg

as China planning to build hundreds of the damn things in poorer countries....

power has to come from somewhere , and I understand the struggle to stop the payments to european bank accounts

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Anyway, prepare for more frothing, wailing and gnashing of teeth from the old white feebs when she gets the Nobel.

Nah, she didn't get it.

Nobel Peace Prize as the award is given to Ethiopia's prime minister Abiy Ahmed

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Nah, she didn't get it.

Awww shame. I would have loved to read the Daily Mail comments section.



Mind you, as you say, giving it to an Ethiopian will still upset the trumpanzees innit.

^
Her own comment: We don't need prices, we need action.

Originally Posted by lom

^
Her own comment: We don't need prices, we need action.

Prizes?

Damm predictive text

Originally Posted by David48atTD

Prizes?

I'm not a native English speaker so am allowed a few elling sperrors and grammatical flaws every now and then.

Originally Posted by OhOh

An article illustrating one opinion of the enormity the solution/source/actions required.

Getting Real About Green Energy

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/getting-real-about-green-energy

Snippets:

"Suppose we agree on the goal to entirely replace fossil fuel energy by 2050. (We’re going to have to do it by some point, because oil, coal and natural gas are all depleting finite resources.)

With 2050 as a starting point we can run some simple math.

We start by converting the three main fossil fuels – coal, oil and natural gas – into a common unit: the “millions of tons of oil equivalent” or Mtoe."

"In 2018 the world consumed 11,743 Mtoe in the form of coal, natural gas and petroleum. The combustion of these fossil fuels resulted in 33.7 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. In order for those emissions to reach net-zero, we will have to replace about 12,000 Mtoe of energy consumption expected for 2019."

"So, what would it take to replace those 12,000 Mtoe with alternative fuels by 2050?

Pilke answers that for us:

Another useful number to know is that there are 11,051 days left until January 1, 2050.

To achieve net-zero carbon dioxide emissions globally by 2050 thus requires the deployment of >1 Mtoe of carbon-free energy consumption (~12,000 Mtoe/11,051 days) every day, starting tomorrow and continuing for the next 30+ years.

Achieving net-zero also requires the corresponding equivalent decommissioning of more than 1 Mtoe of energy consumption from fossil fuels every single day.

So, what would it take to replace those 12,000 Mtoe with alternative fuels by 2050?

Pilke answers that for us:

Another useful number to know is that there are 11,051 days left until January 1, 2050

To achieve net-zero carbon dioxide emissions globally by 2050 thus requires the deployment of >1 Mtoe of carbon-free energy consumption (~12,000 Mtoe/11,051 days) every day, starting tomorrow and continuing for the next 30+ years.

Achieving net-zero also requires the corresponding equivalent decommissioning of more than 1 Mtoe of energy consumption from fossil fuels every single day."

"What would that take? Again from Pilke:

So the math here is simple: to achieve net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, the world would need to deploy 3 [brand new] nuclear plants worth of carbon-free energy every two days, starting tomorrow and continuing to 2050. At the same time, a nuclear plant’s worth of fossil fuels would need to be decommissioned every day, starting tomorrow and continuing to 2050.

I’ve found that some people don’t like the use of a nuclear power plant as a measuring stick. So we can substitute wind energy as a measuring stick. Net-zero carbon dioxide by 2050 would require the deployment of ~1500 wind turbines (2.5 MW) over ~300 square miles, every day starting tomorrow and continuing to 2050.

So to dismantle that 7,000 mile long conga-line of ultra massive crude carriers, we’d have to build and commission 3 new nuclear plants every 2 days. Or 1,500 very large wind towers installed across 300 square miles every day."


Unless the worlds population shrinks dramatically, the required "action" seems a little impossible.

Not buying it.
Mostly talk of a highly bullshittery speculative nature derived from the same circles that perpetuate the mess.
Acceptingly numb to the whimsical rhetoric.

Instead of dwelling into fanciful complexities [as we largely do], would be much easier on the earth if particular circles of our species cease to exist.
A decent selected cleansing extermination should be on Mother Nature's agenda.

Originally Posted by HuangLao

A decent selected cleansing extermination should be on Mother Nature's agenda.

It is. Just a matter of when and what.

Originally Posted by Norton

It is. Just a matter of when and what.

Yep....

Unless the worlds population shrinks dramatically, the required "action" seems a little impossible.

exactly.

and thats what the stupid climate change nutjobs will never ever accept because their only agenda is anarchy, veganism and the dismantling of capitalism.

Originally Posted by taxexile

exactly.

and thats what the stupid climate change nutjobs will never ever accept because their only agenda is anarchy, veganism and the dismantling of capitalism.

You're a very silly boy and you've been reading the Daily Mail again, haven't you?

^
well go on then einstein, tell us how the world can achieve its net-zero fantasy within the next 15 years without impoverishing a few billion people.

you cant can you .

Originally Posted by taxexile

^
well go on then einstein, tell us how the world can achieve its net-zero fantasy within the next 15 years without impoverishing a few billion people.

you cant can you .

A good start would be bloviating dinosaurs ceasing stealing oxygen from those more deserving and pumping out excessive carbon dioxide.

Originally Posted by taxexile

^
well go on then einstein, tell us how the world can achieve its net-zero fantasy within the next 15 years without impoverishing a few billion people.

you cant can you .

I don't have all the answers. No-one does.

Because c u n t s like you believe all the bollocks being put out by oil-funded talking heads and there is not enough serious conversation going on.

You can't begin solving a problem until you accept that you've got one.

Originally Posted by lom

I'm not a native English speaker so am allowed a few elling sperrors and grammatical flaws every now and then.

All good, I'm not crash hot (good) either

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

dinosaurs ceasing stealing oxygen from those more deserving

Try a poll to determine who they might be. Allegedly there are only 300 Thai living TD members, what's your selection?

Originally Posted by lom

I'm not a native English speaker so am allowed a few elling sperrors and grammatical flaws every now and then.

As a non-native English speaker you are not allowed here any misspelling, unlike for the native speakers, for them the sky is the limit...

The Extinction Rebellion movement have an efficient, effective social media machine

Behind science’s mask, Extinction Rebellion is a doomsday cult

dominic lawson

Politicians must stop pandering to the ‘crusties’ bringing havoc to London



When rebels try to seize control of their country, it is traditional to begin by taking over the state broadcaster. Perhaps it is in that context that we should view the siege of New Broadcasting House on Friday by the rebels of Extinction Rebellion (XR). They declared that their motive was to end the BBC’s “silence” on climate change.

Honestly, these people are hilarious. The BBC is obsessed with climate change: scarcely a day goes by when it does not have a news story linked to the issue. And its very own Gandalf, the former BBC2 controller Sir David Attenborough, has become almost a full-time campaigner on the subject.

In July, the BBC actually invited one of the founders of XR, Gail Bradbrook, to “advise” its editorial team on how to report on climate change. This is the woman who attributes her insight into the imminent end of life on the planet to the “rewiring” of her brain after the consumption of prodigious amounts of psychedelic drugs.

Sure enough, Bradbrook — complete with the inevitable nose-ring — could be seen on the BBC declaring that “97%” of the world’s species, including humans, would perish within her daughter’s lifetime unless everyone on the planet stopped producing CO2 by 2025. She didn’t divulge which would be among the lucky 3%, but then she wasn’t asked any such testing question by her interviewer.

That’s the trouble. With the exception of Andrew Neil — whose forensic questioning of an XR spokeswoman by the name of Zion Lights exposed how their prognostications of impending doom are based not on the science of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) but on a desire to infect the rest of us with their own misanthropic terror — broadcasters and politicians treat the demonstrators’ arguments as if they were above criticism.

Yes, Boris Johnson complained last week about the “uncooperative crusties” occupying Whitehall in “heaving hemp bivouacs”; but he also declared that they were “right to rebel against the extinctions that are taking place”. Note to the prime minister: the fifth assessment report of the IPCC says that its scientists had “very low confidence that observed species extinctions can be attributed to recent climate warming”. But from Labour’s leadership (in the form of John McDonnell) “solidarity” with the demonstrators was declared. The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, was of similar opinion, showing not the least concern for the traders and commuters whose livelihoods were being (once again) disrupted or damaged by the climate change cultists.

It is therefore hardly surprising that the Metropolitan police have indulged so many of those bringing havoc to the capital: one who had been locked on top of a trailer driven into Trafalgar Square behind a (gas-guzzling) Land Rover Discovery expressed his gratitude to the police for passing up blankets to keep him warm overnight. The Met have a sensitive nose for the political wind: if the leaders of all the political parties and the mayor of London think these demonstrators’ cause is above reproach, why should they take a tough line?

After all, these are the disciples of Greta Thunberg. And when the Swedish schoolgirl came to London in April, all the politicians abased themselves before her, as she laid into the UK (despite its unequalled record of reducing CO2 emissions) because of what she termed Britain’s “mind-blowing historical carbon debt”. The then environment secretary, Michael Gove, said her words made him feel a “sense of responsibility and guilt”. Should we really apologise for our role in the Industrial Revolution? This was the single event that, more than any other in global history, led to an escape for the overwhelming majority of the population from tenuous existences based on mere agricultural subsistence.

I do hope my good friend Gove was not being sincere. And I can’t believe McDonnell and his leader, Jeremy Corbyn, are when they express “solidarity” with Thunberg & Co. They are, supposedly, on the side of the workers. Yet they are endorsing what the Marxist Brendan O’Neill calls “an upper-middle-class death cult . . . the deflated, self-loathing bourgeoisie coming together to project their own psycho-social hang-ups onto society at large”.

Anyway, Thunberg has nothing but contempt for her insincere admirers in the world of grown-ups. As she told British MPs: “We have not taken to the streets for you to take selfies with us and tell us that you really admire what we do.” That, of course, is exactly what our politicians proceeded to do. At the UN last month she denounced them, from whatever country, for talking about “an opportunity to create new green jobs, new businesses or green economic growth”. She is absolutely right: net zero carbon by 2025 is achievable only by imposing austerity on a global scale: the end of business as we know it, the end of international trade, the end of freedom to increase our families’ prosperity.

Or, as Thunberg told the UN: “All you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!” The delegates applauded thunderously; she doubtless understood that they were all hypocrites, every last one of them.

In fact, she nailed the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, filing a complaint against five countries including France and Germany of failing to uphold their obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (for allegedly endangering her generation’s lives). Macron, who lectured Donald Trump last year that there is “no planet B” but then reversed his petrol tax increases after the gilet jaune protests convulsed France, was furious. “Such very radical positions are liable to antagonise our societies,” he said. Merkel kept quiet — which was just as well, since a quarter of her country’s electricity is provided by the burning of lignite, the most carbon-intensive form of mass energy production (and an industry sustaining 20,000 jobs mostly in the poorest part of Germany).

I do sympathise with Thunberg. She knows that the parliamentarians of Europe are merely condescending to her. The alternative would be to take her seriously and either reduce our populations to a state of principled poverty (and end their political careers, for starters) or debate with her as one would an adult and point out the many flaws in her arguments.

Instead our politicians want to get down wiv da kids. To adapt the observation of the historian Macaulay on the British people in one of their “periodic fits of morality”: we know no spectacle so ridiculous.

dominic.lawson@sunday-times.co.uk

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/c...cult-8pmbcktqr

Originally Posted by taxexile

Behind science’s mask, Extinction Rebellion is a doomsday cult

dominic lawson

It's not surprising that a climate denying daddys boy like Lawson would go after the easy target, because he sure as shit doesn't understand any of the science.

So now the kid that suffered depression at 11, has a mental disorder, and was put on show in front of the world, has effigies of her being hung from a bridge.




An effigy of climate activist Greta Thunberg has been found strung up and hanging from a bridge in Rome.


Dressed in a yellow poncho, the effigy had Greta's pigtail braids with a sign in English saying "Greta is your God".

https://news.sky.com/story/greta-thu...ridge-11830539


Shame on the people putting the emotionally unstable kid up in front of the world to be mocked and jeered.