Greta!

[DeYaKen]

I have read a few scientific opinions on the effects of carbon dioxide on global warming. The effects of CO2 is still being investigated, they’re finding flaws in the current data sets and the accuracy of how data was obtained. Also in question is the placement of instruments and baseline temperatures and location of data sets. The data seems to indicate that gloom and doom is a little over blown.

Sort of reminds you of all the efforts the tobacco industry made to rubbish the evidence that smoking was bad for you.

 

[icanhelp1]

Sort of reminds you of all the efforts the tobacco industry made to rubbish the evidence that smoking was bad for you.

No doubt the tobacco Co.'s lobbied hard but you're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[bellisarius]

I have read a few scientific opinions on the effects of carbon dioxide on global warming. The effects of CO2 is still being investigated, they’re finding flaws in the current data sets and the accuracy of how data was obtained. Also in question is the placement of instruments and baseline temperatures and location of data sets. The data seems to indicate that gloom and doom is a little over blown.

Location, location, location. Besides the placement of recording sites, which has been a bone of contention for years now, many sites in remote areas have been closed down. Primarily in the Ande's region and Siberia. Large chunks of the planet have been removed from the data sets.

That being said we are now in an inter-glacial period and that, by definition, means that temperatures increase. The paleo record shows that Earth and its inhabitants have not only survived but thrived in much higher temperatures and much higher CO2 concentrations.

Considering that all life on this planet is dependent on plant life and that plant life is dependent on CO2, it just might be that higher CO2 concentrations is the salvation of everyone.

 

[SpeareChucker]

I'm thriving.

 

[icanhelp1]

She doesn't believe the earth is doomed. She believes that we are doomed. The earth will still be there long after we have made in uninhabitable. She dared to expose the myth of perpetual economic growth and for that she must be ridiculed.

Why is perpetual economic growth a myth. If we can use science to enlighten human kind of global warming and climate change then we can also do a course correction using science. There is science out there that climate lunes refuse to consider. The problem with Greta and her kind is that the only way to solve the problem is eliminate the human race.

 

[icanhelp1]

Location, location, location. Besides the placement of recording sites, which has been a bone of contention for years now, many sites in remote areas have been closed down. Primarily in the Ande's region and Siberia. Large chunks of the planet have been removed from the data sets.

That being said we are now in an inter-glacial period and that, by definition, means that temperatures increase. The paleo record shows that Earth and its inhabitants have not only survived but thrived in much higher temperatures and much higher CO2 concentrations.

Considering that all life on this planet is dependent on plant life and that plant life is dependent on CO2, it just might be that higher CO2 concentrations is the salvation of everyone.

Satellite imagery has discovered certain areas of the planet are getting greener. Does that bring on a cooling effect, who knows? That data has no baseline.

 

[Conager]

This whole thing is just the advanced version of the standard Democrat Playbook favorite "But whaddabout the CHILDREN?!??"

If you don't join Frodo's religion you hate children.

Never mind that fossil fuel enabling prosperity and distribution of resources has been the single most important factor in having lifted more children out of poverty than any other single thing.

 

[trysail]

NPR Climate Propaganda Bullshit:
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/25/7558...tting-hotter-and-higher-and-it-s-accelerating



The report is prima facie evidence of highly biased, partisan reporting along with more inaccurate assertions and outright lies from Rebecca Hersher and NPR.

When did "reliable measurements" of ocean surface temperatures begin?

We know that the majority of ocean surface temperatures were compiled using canvas bags and vessel engine cooling water intakes all the way until the late '70s.

We also know that there was extremely limited coverage of the oceans until the deployment of satellites and Argos buoys which only occurred recently.

Why did Hersher fail to mention these facts? Why is NPR continuously lying about climate?



​

 

[Conager]

She doesn't believe the earth is doomed. She believes that we are doomed. The earth will still be there long after we have made in uninhabitable. She dared to expose the myth of perpetual economic growth and for that she must be ridiculed.

The alternative to perpetual economic growth is mass starvation and war.

You're parroting the words of a young, indoctrinated neophyte that has less knowledge of climate theory than Frodo, and zero understanding of economics.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Why is it that the Left,
who lectures us on
education and "Science,"
has resorted to hiding behind
an uneducated child?

Is that the best defense
of a losing proposition?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Why is it that the Left,
who lectures us on
education and "Science,"
has resorted to hiding behind
an uneducated child?

Is that the best defense
of a losing proposition?

Greta Thunberg - speaks clearly and eloquently in English as her second language and is fluent in the latest science

Donald Trump - thinks "Hamburgers" is spelled "Hamberders" and that windmills cause cancer.

And you think Greta Thunberg is an "uneducated child"?

What did your "daughter" score on her SATs?

 

[coati]

She doesn't believe the earth is doomed. She believes that we are doomed. The earth will still be there long after we have made in uninhabitable. She dared to expose the myth of perpetual economic growth and for that she must be ridiculed.

Truly, she was the babe who exposed, in front of a world audience, what has become an article of faith that pervades almost all major political parties, the doctrine that the human species must have perpetual economic growth on a planet with finite resources and with finite capacity for absorbing the impacts of the human species.

Just look at the knee-jerk responses you received on a porn board for daring to challenge this article of faith. Think about the response she will receive for daring to say this on the world stage.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Eco-communist are mad that everyone is laughing at them LOL

Their faith that individuals will at some point no longer need to exchange goods and services is super strong!!

I bet faithful lefties who know such things are just a myth will be able to tell us exactly when people will no longer need to exchange goods and services.

Do tell us Greta fans....at what point do you see individual humans no longer needing to exchange labor/resources with one another??

 

[trysail]

Truly, she was the babe who exposed, in front of a world audience, what has become an article of faith that pervades almost all major political parties, the doctrine that the human species must have perpetual economic growth on a planet with finite resources and with finite capacity for absorbing the impacts of the human species.

Just look at the knee-jerk responses you received on a porn board for daring to challenge this article of faith. Think about the response she will receive for daring to say this on the world stage.

Thank you for confirming your economic illiteracy.

Come back when you can explain why humans no longer have a life expectancy of 35 years and why we aren't living in cold, dark caves.​

______________________________________

"...This is why Rocket's moment in history is unique. That soot-blackened locomotive sits squarely at the deflection point where a line describing human productivity (and therefore human welfare) that had been as flat as Kansas for a hundred centuries made a turn like the business end of a hockey stick. Rocket is when humanity finally learned to run twice as fast.

It's still running today. If you examined the years since 1800 in twenty year-increments, and charted every way that human welfare can be expressed in numbers— not just annual per capita GDP, which climbed to more than $6,000 by 2000, but mortality at birth (in fact, mortality at any age); calories consumed; prevalence of disease; average height of adults; percentage of lifetime spent disabled; percentage of population enrolled in primary, secondary, and postsecondary education; illiteracy; and annual hours of leisure time— the chart will show every measure better at the end of the period than it was at the beginning. And the phenomenon isn't restricted to Europe and North America; the same improvements have occurred in every region of the world. A baby born in France in 1800 could expect to live thirty years— twenty-five years less than a baby born in the Republic of the Congo in 2000. The nineteenth century French infant would be at a significant risk of starvation, infectious disease, and violence, and even if he or she were to survive into adulthood, would be far less likely to learn how to read..."
​

-William Rosen
The Most Powerful Idea in the World: A Story of Steam, Industry, and Invention
New York, New York 2010.​

​

 

[moonflasher]

Did she take a plane here or a boat ?

 

[beezzz]

Greta Thunberg - speaks clearly and eloquently in English as her second language and is fluent in the latest science

Donald Trump - thinks "Hamburgers" is spelled "Hamberders" and that windmills cause cancer.

And you think Greta Thunberg is an "uneducated child"?

What did your "daughter" score on her SATs?

how many TIDE PODS did you eat?

 

[coati]

Eco-communist are mad that everyone is laughing at them LOL

Their faith that individuals will at some point no longer need to exchange goods and services is super strong!!

I bet faithful lefties who know such things are just a myth will be able to tell us exactly when people will no longer need to exchange goods and services.

Do tell us Greta fans....at what point do you see individual humans no longer needing to exchange labor/resources with one another??

Now, now. Calm down, ProudBoy, and think about the concept of reading comprehension.

Nobody is talking about stopping the exchange of goods and services. This is about whether the economy can sustainably expand or GROW like a pyramid scheme in perpetuity, especially in the context of fueling this perpetual growth primarily on fossil fuels.

 

[coati]

Did she take a plane here or a boat ?

She took a boat.

 

[icanhelp1]

Eco-communist are mad that everyone is laughing at them LOL

Their faith that individuals will at some point no longer need to exchange goods and services is super strong!!

I bet faithful lefties who know such things are just a myth will be able to tell us exactly when people will no longer need to exchange goods and services.

Do tell us Greta fans....at what point do you see individual humans no longer needing to exchange labor/resources with one another??

Well; the only recourse we have is to self exterminate by 2031! YEAH THAT'S THE TICKET!!

 

[BotanyBoy]

Now, now. Calm down, ProudBoy, and think about the concept of reading comprehension.

Nobody is talking about stopping the exchange of goods and services.

You mean other than the 'progressive', socialist and communist left.

This is about whether the economy can expand or GROW like a pyramid scheme in perpetuity,

It will continue to grow and evolve as long as there are people around free to engage in the exchange of goods and services with one another.

especially in the context of fueling this perpetual growth primarily on fossil fuels.

And that's the arbitrary lie/ascription from the eco-communist left.

The idea of perpetual economic growth is not based on fossil fuels, but the needs and desires of individuals.

Fossil fuels are just the cheapest most efficient methods to exchange those goods and services and in some cases the only way to produce quite a number of goods.

 

[trysail]

She took a boat.

ROTFLMFAO


Yeah, a sailboat made entirely of petrochemical products with an auxiliary diesel engine. The boat required lots of fossil fuels to construct and transport. The vessel was sailed across the Atlantic by a professional crew who had to fly over the Atlantic in order to meet the vessel.


The whole farce was a laughably transparent publicity stunt that reeked of hypocrisy. Naturally, a preposterously gullible and complicit media regurgitated the sailboat bullshit and the simpletons were (once again) bamboozled.




​

 

[coati]

It will continue to grow and evolve as long as there are people around free to engage in the exchange of goods and services with one another.

The idea of perpetual economic growth is not based on fossil fuels, but the needs and desires of individuals.

Fossil fuels are just the cheapest most efficient methods to exchange those goods and services and in some cases the only way to produce quite a number of goods.

Again, let's focus on this concept of reading comprehension.

The scientific community is talking about significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, not eliminating all uses of fossil fuels. This is why I used the term "primarily" when talking about the fossil fuel energy source.

It's easy to make extreme statements and call names like "eco-communist" (which I eliminated from your quotes above). It becomes a little more complicated and requires greater maturity to start moving in a direction that is based on science rather than ideology.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Again, let's focus on this concept of reading comprehension.

Immediately abandons the concept, wonder why that is?

Must have something something to do with it being a totally irrelevant childish jab??

Yea...you can stop now, it's ok to act like an adult on occasion.

The scientific community is talking about significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, not eliminating all uses of fossil fuels. This is why I used the term "primarily" when talking about the fossil fuel energy source.

The scientific community isn't being discussed or criticized, the political community is. About that reading comprehension....

It's easy to make extreme statements and call names like "eco-communist"

The left is regularly advocating government control over the economy and the distribution of goods and services to obtain that egalitarian utopia in the name of the environment. Sometimes, as in the case of AOC, with an intersectional spin on it.

How is eco-communist extreme??

(which I eliminated from your quotes above).

Doesn't make it go away or not what it is

It becomes a little more complicated and requires greater maturity to start moving in a direction that is based on science rather than ideology.

Those things are not tied to each other, in fact the most beautiful thing about science is that it's not tied to any ideology in any way.

That's why any political ideology can say "XYZ-ism because environment!!" . You can do an ideological 180 and be an eco-fascist, ready to crush any polluters under the jackbooted heel of authority with extreme prejudice!! Just like the 'progressives' who ALSO claim to need all that power and control because the environment!! Protecting and controlling the environment is totally justification for the totalitarian god state having absolute control over every aspect of everyone's lives....right???

Remember.... if you don't agree you're a science denying dummy!!

It's not more complicated nor does it require much maturity to see the left is doing the same thing, trying to use science to push it's political ideology.

 

[icanhelp1]

Truly, she was the babe who exposed, in front of a world audience, what has become an article of faith that pervades almost all major political parties, the doctrine that the human species must have perpetual economic growth on a planet with finite resources and with finite capacity for absorbing the impacts of the human species.

Just look at the knee-jerk responses you received on a porn board for daring to challenge this article of faith. Think about the response she will receive for daring to say this on the world stage.

Specifically what doctrine of perpetual economic growth are you referring to? Man has been using the barter system since the beginning of the human race. Multiple transactions= economy. More people, more growth, just an inevitable but normal progression of the human species. I think to conflate doctrine with economic evolution is quite a stretch. Value and resources have changed all the way through human progression. Right now, because of the lack of technology, fossil fuels are on the top of the list as the most valuable energy resource. As science evolves and energy resources become more advanced and efficient fossil fuels will become a thing of the past through natural progression and by process of elimination. Necessity is the mother of invention. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed but can be transformed. Resources can be reconstituted and in some cases transformed. Science is progressing exponentially, to completely abandon or destroy economies of scale based on incomplete and partial data sets is an overreaction. We need to use all the sciences available.

 

[coati]

Specifically what doctrine of perpetual economic growth are you referring to? Man has been using the barter system since the beginning of the human race. Multiple transactions= economy. More people, more growth, just an inevitable but normal progression of the human species. I think to conflate doctrine with economic evolution is quite a stretch. Value and resources have changed all the way through human progression. Right now, because of the lack of technology, fossil fuels are on the top of the list as the most valuable energy resource. As science evolves and energy resources become more advanced and efficient fossil fuels will become a thing of the past through natural progression and by process of elimination. Necessity is the mother of invention. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed but can be transformed. Resources can be reconstituted and in some cases transformed. Science is progressing exponentially, to completely abandon or destroy economies of scale based on incomplete and partial data sets is an overreaction. We need to use all the sciences available.

Actually, the earth does have a carrying capacity for the human species, and it is largely based upon total number of humans and average consumption of non-sustainable resources per human.

And then the earth has a sanity or quality-of-life capacity that is largely based on whether we destroy most other species in our cancer-like expansion of human "development" sprawl.