Science Greta Thunberg Megathread - Dax Herrera says he wouldn't have a day ago (I somewhat doubt that)

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
1609745385800.png

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering? How can a 16-year-old girl in plaits, who has dedicated herself to the not-exactly sinister, authoritarian plot of trying to save the planet from extinction, inspire such incandescent rage?

Last week, she tweeted that she had arrived into New York after her two week transatlantic voyage: “Finally here. Thank you everyone who came to see me off in Plymouth, and everyone who welcomed me in New York! Now I’m going to rest for a few days, and on Friday I’m going to participate in the strike outside the UN”, before promptly giving a press conference in English. Yes, her second language.

Her remarks were immediately greeted with a barrage of jibes about virtue signalling, and snide remarks about the three crew members who will have to fly out to take the yacht home.

This shouldn’t need to be spelled out, but as some people don’t seem to have grasped it yet, we’ll give it a lash: Thunberg’s trip was an act of protest, not a sacred commandment or an instruction manual for the rest of us. Like all acts of protest, it was designed to be symbolic and provocative. For those who missed the point – and oh, how they missed the point – she retweeted someone else’s “friendly reminder” that: “You don’t need to spend two weeks on a boat to do your part to avert our climate emergency. You just need to do everything you can, with everyone you can, to change everything you can.”

Part of the reason she inspires such rage, of course, is blindingly obvious. Climate change is terrifying. The Amazon is burning. So too is the Savannah. Parts of the Arctic are on fire. Sea levels are rising. There are more vicious storms and wildfires and droughts and floods. Denial is easier than confronting the terrifying truth.

Then there’s the fact that we don’t like being made to feel bad about our life choices. That’s human nature. It’s why we sneer at vegans. It’s why we’re suspicious of sober people at parties. And if anything is likely to make you feel bad about your life choices -- as you jet back home after your third Ryanair European minibreak this season – it’ll be the sight of small-boned child subjecting herself to a fortnight being tossed about on the Atlantic, with only a bucket bearing a “Poo Only Please” sign by way of luxury, in order to make a point about climate change.

But that’s not virtue signalling, which anyone can indulge in. As Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and their-four-private-jets-in-11-days found recently, virtue practising is a lot harder.

Even for someone who spends a lot of time on Twitter, some of the criticism levelled at Thunberg is astonishing. It is, simultaneously, the most vicious and the most fatuous kind of playground bullying. The Australian conservative climate change denier Andrew Bolt called her “deeply disturbed” and “freakishly influential” (the use of “freakish”, we can assume, was not incidental.) The former UKIP funder, Arron Banks, tweeted “Freaking yacht accidents do happen in August” (as above.) Brendan O’Neill of Spiked called her a “millenarian weirdo” (nope, still not incidental) in a piece that referred nastily to her “monotone voice” and “the look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes”.

But who’s the real freak – the activist whose determination has single-handedly started a powerful global movement for change, or the middle-aged man taunting a child with Asperger syndrome from behind the safety of their computer screens?

And that, of course, is the real reason why Greta Thunberg is so triggering. They can’t admit it even to themselves, so they ridicule her instead. But the truth is that they’re afraid of her. The poor dears are terrified of her as an individual, and of what she stands for – youth, determination, change.

She is part of a generation who won’t be cowed. She isn’t about to be shamed into submission by trolls. That’s not actually a look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes. It’s a look that says “you’re not relevant”.

The reason they taunt her with childish insults is because that’s all they’ve got. They’re out of ideas. They can’t dismantle her arguments, because she has science – and David Attenborough – on her side. They can’t win the debate with the persuasive force of their arguments, because these bargain bin cranks trade in jaded cynicism, not youthful passion. They can harangue her with snide tweets and hot take blogposts, but they won’t get a reaction because, frankly, she has bigger worries on her mind.

That’s not to say that we should accept everything Thunberg says without question. She is an idealist who is young enough to see the world in black and white. We need voices like hers. We should listen to what she has to say, without tuning the more moderate voices of dissent out.

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering? Because of what she represents. In an age when democracy is under assault, she hints at the emergency of new kind of power, a convergence of youth, popular protest and irrefutable science. And for her loudest detractors, she also represents something else: the sight of their impending obsolescence hurtling towards them.

joconnell@irishtimes.com
https://twitter.com/jenoconnell
https://web.archive.org/web/2019090...certain-men-1.4002264?localLinksEnabled=false
Found this thought-provoking indeed.
1658867339488.png
 

Attachments

  • 1567905639950.png
    1567905639950.png
    201.7 KB · Views: 1,172
  • 1569527044335.png
    1569527044335.png
    450.1 KB · Views: 709
  • 1571204359689.png
    1571204359689.png
    2.7 MB · Views: 542
  • 1572839098505.png
    1572839098505.png
    2 MB · Views: 270
  • greta_108356458_gretaday5.jpg
    greta_108356458_gretaday5.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 1,079
  • 1580368884936.png
    1580368884936.png
    270.8 KB · Views: 318
  • 1582430340019.png
    1582430340019.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 1,085
  • 1609745217700.png
    1609745217700.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 638
  • 1616904732000.png
    1616904732000.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 1,306
  • 1658867385840.png
    1658867385840.png
    1 MB · Views: 75
Last edited:
Putting aside the effectiveness of Guerrilla warfare against a technologically superior force, and the fact that as soon as China threatens one or more African nation with force of arms and all of the other ones will immediately get very suspicious of the Chinese "aid" they are receiving.

China has been setting this up for a few decades now, and they are being very careful in keeping up friendly appearances in the region. China is Africas largest trading partner, and they would be utter fools to try and ruin this by using violent methods. The days of taking resources by direct force are gone since it's far more profitable to do what China is trying to do.

Now lets say some African nations do nationalize their resources and stop trading with China....well that nations economy will probably start tanking again and that would give a incentive to its neighbors to not follow in it's footsteps. Which would mean only one or two nations break away trade treaties with China in the first place.

Now to answer the question of "what could Africa do to stop it if China changes their mind?". I'm not so sure to tell you the truth. What I am sure of that this will probably not happen in the first place since it would ruin Chinese investments in the region, and they would have to occupy nations on another continent while still dick-waving with the West.

China will keep up what it's doing and expand it's sphere of influence by deploying military assets to Africa. If they can do this with the support of the locals then they will be in a very advantageous position. Compare this to western colonialism where they just forced the locals to accept it.
Yeah it wouldn't be until they could go through and Tienanmen the entire continent, but that's basically the endgame I see. Literally wipe out every living thing and use the new real estate.
 
Yeah it wouldn't be until they could go through and Tienanmen the entire continent, but that's basically the endgame I see. Literally wipe out every living thing and use the new real estate.

At that point in time we are talking at least until the mid-last quarter of the century, and making future predictions more than a few years into the future isn't......well accurate.

Most likely at worst China will make direct puppet states of the majority of Africa (if they haven't already)
 
At that point in time we are talking at least until the mid-last quarter of the century, and making future predictions more than a few years into the future isn't......well accurate.

Most likely at worst China will make direct puppet states of the majority of Africa (if they haven't already)
Maybe I'm just optimistic and want to see Nollywood propaganda films
 
Wow, intriguing take on the Greta phenomenon from a former tertiary lecturer in the UK.
1570085180191.png

Justin Murphy, formerly “a respectable member of the organized left,” has provided the internet with a prime example of what not to tweet.

Hoping to piggyback on the dialogue inspired by Greta Thunberg’s impassioned speech at the United Nations yesterday, Murphy tweeted, “Not even being provocative but if you think Greta Thunberg has the maturity to guide global policy-making then you cannot object to Jeffrey Epstein paying 16-year-olds for sex.”

Not even being provocative but if you think Greta Thunberg has the maturity to guide global policy-making then you cannot object to Jeffrey Epstein paying 16-year-olds for sex.
— Justin Murphy (@jmrphy) September 25, 2019

Murphy’s argument—that prostituting minors should be legal if people also listen to their opinions— was of the rarest quality: It brought together people from left, right and center. As one, united voice, they annihilated him. This will be a familiar experience for the former University of Southampton professor who once opined that people who are pro-choice should also support necrophilia.

“Definitely not being provocative, but Justin Murphy has never once registered in broader consciousness except by comparing things to paedophilia, necrophilia, eugenics, and so on. It’s like clockwork. Just when you think he’ll never be mentioned again, this schtick reappears,” said one presumably horrified person. “This dude has the tremor from Tremors plus Kevin Bacon in his brain,” another quipped.

“Not even being provocative but if you think teenagers get to have political opinions then maybe child rape is also fine? Like and subscribe for more libertarian takes using epic logic,” @classiclib3ral responded.

Justin Murphy: If young girls can have opinions I can also fuck them https://t.co/H65HzyEyRF
— Rachel Kiki (@RachelKiki_) September 25, 2019
“either kids have never been right about a single god damn thing or I should get to have sex with them” -Justin Murphy
— the sixler (@Thesixler) September 25, 2019
Holy fck.

Avail yourself of the sea, and do it soon.
— ChankoBONE is Backhttps://sneed.w.org/images/core/emoji/11/svg/1f6e1.svghttps://sneed.w.org/images/core/emoji/11/svg/1f525.svghttps://sneed.w.org/images/core/emoji/11/svg/1f407.svg (@CKBNisBack) September 25, 2019

So who is Justin Murphy? The self-described political scientist and “libertarian communist Catholic” is a blogger and podcaster who really wants you to become a patron and get this cool sticker that “nobody else will ever have.”

On his blog, Murphy waxes philosophic on “the ideology of Kekistan” and super-toxic masculinity as exemplified by John McAfee who, he notes, has “hyper-masculine drive” and “gnarly tribal tattoos.”

He has also been known to analyze the number of moral words per tweet by self-identified social justice warriors for some reason. On YouTube, he opines about such subjects as “cath-pilled shoplifting theory” and “Epstein-feminism.”

The deep learning he provides doesn’t work as well on Twitter as it does with whoever’s still reading Quillette.

“Children with opinions are ok to have sex with” -Justin Murphy https://t.co/iRGaU1ydjm
— Drew (@EndSim) September 25, 2019

She isn’t guiding global policy you inbred horses twat. She’s asking leaders to lead. But keep reaching so that when it comes out you like to touch children you’ll have a semblance of a defense.
— AJ (@notnowthankyou2) September 25, 2019

If 16 year old teenagers have political opinions, it also means that adults should be able to traffic and rape 16 year olds. My name is Justin Murphy, thank you for coming to my TED talk (I'm also most certainly not a child rapist).
— San (@sansdn) September 25, 2019

Justin Murphy looks like an Onion byline. https://t.co/soarbiwaGV
— Brandon Bird (@Brandon_Bird) September 25, 2019

Justin Murphy, babysitter for hire. pic.twitter.com/CFcItCdNHI
— Corey (@wookietv) September 25, 2019

ew my brain is trying to figure out the logic and just ew stop it brain I don't want to understand it

(spoiler: there's no logic)
— Nicola Smith (@nickysmithster) September 25, 2019

#IStandWithGreta I assume that Greta has plenty of people around her to keep her safe? Sickos like #JustinMurphy could endanger her.
— Anne 'Climate Change is Real' Frandi-Coory (@afcoory) September 25, 2019

My dude, you just sent this out to thousands of people
— Trillhouse (@MaloneRainja) September 25, 2019

So perhaps the next time he wants to share a thought with the world, maybe he should do himself a favor and just not.

I'm not quite sure I follow his reasoning, but then I'm not a libertarian or a Catholic.
 
Wow, intriguing take on the Greta phenomenon from a former tertiary lecturer in the UK.
Why do these people in privileged academic positions keep feeling compelled to defend Jeffrey Epstein having sex with underage prostitutes? Also, reset that clock... (https://archive.li/JOPdd)

(By the way @3119967d0c, props for thinking up new humorous taglines for the thread every single day.
lol.png

Just wanted you to know I appreciate you. :heart-full:)
 
He makes a good point. A lot of poorer nations are rapidly starting to catch up to the west in wealth, and the quickest way to do that is through mass industrialization that produces pollution. I highly doubt these people are going to tell African nations anytime soon "Stop advancing! You're killing the Earth!" and I EXTREMELY doubt said African nations are going to give a fuck about environmentalists anyway. If Africa is going on projected population numbers they are going to EXPLODE in numbers in the coming century, and Asia is ofc going to be high as hell as well.
Africa's population growth is already cubic rather exponential, largely thanks to improvements in medicine and food security reducing the need for large families, and is expected to flatten some time around the third quarter of the century. Industrialisation won't suddenly bump it up again; if anything, it'll reduce it further.

World wide population will be at replacement rates by the middle of his century, likely below 9 billion. UN estimates over that are based on growth rates in China and the Indian subcontinent that no longer hold true.
 
Last edited:
So who is Justin Murphy? The self-described political scientist and “libertarian communist Catholic” is a blogger and podcaster who really wants you to become a patron and get this cool sticker that “nobody else will ever have.”

On his blog, Murphy waxes philosophic on “the ideology of Kekistan” and super-toxic masculinity as exemplified by John McAfee who, he notes, has “hyper-masculine drive” and “gnarly tribal tattoos.”

He has also been known to analyze the number of moral words per tweet by self-identified social justice warriors for some reason. On YouTube, he opines about such subjects as “cath-pilled shoplifting theory” and “Epstein-feminism.”
Is this guy a skinny Mundane Matt?
 
Africa's population growth is already cubic rather exponential, largely thanks to improvements in medicine and food security reducing the need for large families, and is expected to flatten some time around the third quarter of the century. Industrialisation won't suddenly bump it up again; if anything, it'll reduce it further.

Could be possible then future epidemics like ebola might play a role as well? I saw this article posted last week about ebola cases in Tanzania.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-49786823 ( http://archive.is/LkFY5 )

The World Health Organization (WHO) has rebuked Tanzania for failing to provide information about possible Ebola virus infections.
The WHO said it had learned of one suspected fatal case in Dar es Salaam and two others but, despite repeated requests, was given no information.
Tanzania has said it has no suspected or confirmed cases.
The latest outbreak has killed more than 2,000 in eastern DR Congo, with Uganda battling to stop any spread.
 
Wow, intriguing take on the Greta phenomenon from a former tertiary lecturer in the UK.
View attachment 957456


I'm not quite sure I follow his reasoning, but then I'm not a libertarian or a Catholic.
lol ... what a fucking dipshit.

There's a nugget of a good thought in that jumbled mess of a tweet, which naturally gets lost in the outrage because he just also essentially argued that kids should be prostitutes. Great job, champ!

I imagine what he was trying to drive at is that because children are ill-equipped to make important decisions about their own well-being, they're also ill-equipped to reach useful conclusions about the environment. i.e. "we shouldn't be listening to goddamn kids to make big policy decisions." Of course, that's far less "catchy" without the sex hook in the quote.

What I do find interesting about this is he's now been dismissed as "formerly 'a respectable member of the organized left'". They're actually canceling someone for (accidentally?) supporting pedophilia. This is a rare turn for the left. Usually they circle the wagons and defend their own when they go pro-kiddie-diddling. It must be because he's also a Catholic. Insert priests-fuck-kids joke here.
 
I think his reasoning is that any time anyone underage is mentioned, he wants to fuck them.
His reasoning is as follows

IF a child is able to a full part of the Polis as a fukk political actor then they should be given all the political rights and benefits (like consent)
 
Most likely at worst China will make direct puppet states of the majority of Africa (if they haven't already)

why bother? china doesn't want to build an empire with pictures of dead blackskins, they just want the resources. why come in guns blazing when you don't need to and it would be bad for optics, not to mention would most likely trigger a reaction? just put money into the right hands and even if they won't budge just give it to the "rebels" or whatever they call themselves as excuse to rape and shit and let them handle it. also goes along much more with the chinese mentality.

even in the worst case when bribes/sabotage/extortion etc won't work you can have those same rebels just drive up to the mine and shoot everyone. who's gonna complain? US won't intervene, maybe send a glowie down there to interfere, but that's it. let's face it, no one gives a shit about africa outside corporate/national interests.
 
why bother? china doesn't want to build an empire with pictures of dead blackskins, they just want the resources. why come in guns blazing when you don't need to and it would be bad for optics, not to mention would most likely trigger a reaction? just put money into the right hands and even if they won't budge just give it to the "rebels" or whatever they call themselves as excuse to rape and shit and let them handle it. also goes along much more with the chinese mentality.

even in the worst case when bribes/sabotage/extortion etc won't work you can have those same rebels just drive up to the mine and shoot everyone. who's gonna complain? US won't intervene, maybe send a glowie down there to interfere, but that's it. let's face it, no one gives a shit about africa outside corporate/national interests.

This is basically what I was saying, and besides you don't need to use violence in order to install a puppet government, especially in Africa. You just need the corrupt leaders in your backpocket.
 
Wow, intriguing take on the Greta phenomenon from a former tertiary lecturer in the UK.
View attachment 957456


I'm not quite sure I follow his reasoning, but then I'm not a libertarian or a Catholic.

I THINK he means that if you're going to use kids to back your political talking points and your want to change civilization on a global scale, you may as well place them in a brothel, too, because their innocence is way past dead, buried and rotten that far into the game.

...At least, that's how I would go about explaining what I meant.
...While not using prostitution as an example.

He could've went with "If we're letting kids dictate societal changes, then we should be fine with letting them drive or vote now, right?" and nailed the point more accurately. But now he not only looks exceptional for posting that, but shady as fuck, too - hope he enjoys being called a child predator, because that's exactly what he sounded like.
 
This is basically what I was saying, and besides you don't need to use violence in order to install a puppet government, especially in Africa. You just need the corrupt leaders in your backpocket.

You may not need actual violence but you need the power to inflict violence otherwise your puppet government is just going to end up in a mass grave.
 
Lol china can barely throw it's weight around in it's own region, nevermind another continent. China might enslave Africa economically, but for them to start being that oppressive they would need military power there as well. The only way I could see that happening is if Chinks start going en masse to live in Africa.

I suspect they'll do so, in order to solidify their control over the region.
I THINK he means that if you're going to use kids to back your political talking points and your want to change civilization on a global scale, you may as well place them in a brothel, too, because their innocence is way past dead, buried and rotten that far into the game.

...At least, that's how I would go about explaining what I meant.
...While not using prostitution as an example.

He could've went with "If we're letting kids dictate societal changes, then we should be fine with letting them drive or vote now, right?" and nailed the point more accurately. But now he not only looks exceptional for posting that, but shady as fuck, too - hope he enjoys being called a child predator, because that's exactly what he sounded like.

But 16 year olds can drive

And the left has started pushing to get 16 year olds the ability to vote (because only literal children are stupid enough to support them, and thanks to Gen Z that might not even be the case anymore).
 
I suspect they'll do so, in order to solidify their control over the region.


But 16 year olds can drive

And the left has started pushing to get 16 year olds the ability to vote (because only literal children are stupid enough to support them, and thanks to Gen Z that might not even be the case anymore).

They're able to start learning/practicing how to drive at 16. That's the case in the States, at least. Where I live, I was able to get a learner's permit at 16, which places a lot of restrictions on the driver and you have to pay out of pocket for driver's ed and get a certain amount of hours behind the wheel before you take your driving test.
Even after passing, you're placed on a ~2 year provisional license that still doesn't net you the freedom a real driver's license does (that 2 year timeframe would land you at 18/19 and you didn't get in trouble with the cops when you were able to register for a real license, though)

Sixteen year olds can drive, just with a lot of restrictions and adult supervision - is what I meant in my last post.
 
"Greta Thunberg turns Putin's words against him"

"After the Russian president said Thunberg doesn't understand the complexities of the modern world, the 16-year-old responded by changing her Twitter bio."

"Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday dismissed Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg as “a kind and very sincere girl” who doesn’t understand the complexities of “the modern world.”
As she did after President Trump appeared to mock her last month, the 16-year-old responded by changing her Twitter bio to mock Putin’s dismissive words.
“A kind but poorly informed teenager,” Thunberg’s Twitter bio now reads.
Thunberg, who has been nominated for a Nobel Prize for her work raising awareness about climate change, has become an inspirational figure for fellow teens. Last month she sailed from Europe to the United States on a zero-emission yacht.
At an energy forum in Moscow Wednesday, Putin discussed Thunberg’s recent speech at the United Nations, where she denounced world leaders for failing to combat climate change.
“I may disappoint you, but I don’t share the common excitement about the speech by Greta Thunberg,” Putin said, according to Reuters’s translation of his remarks.
“No one has explained to Greta that the modern world is complex and different,” Putin continued. “People in Africa or in many Asian countries want to live at the same wealth level as in Sweden.”
Putin said children who are passionate about environmental issues, like Thunberg, should be supported. But he also accused her parents of exploiting that passion.
“When someone is using children and teenagers in personal interests, it only deserves to be condemned,” Putin said. “I’m sure that Greta is a kind and very sincere girl. But adults must do everything not to bring teenagers and children into some extreme situations.”


Fuck, I'm SURE an omnicrat like Putin is totally ASSBLASTED AND EPIC TROLLED by Greta because she CHANGED HER TWITTER BIO.
 
Guys, imagine if Hillary Clinton had won the election and a couple of years later Greta came sailing across the Atlantic on her yacht.

Was that the plan? From the sounds of it, Hillary Clinton feels responsible for the deaths of several environmentalists during a coup that she orchestrated.

I hate to say it but I think it was Hillary's plan to shove everyone into UN housing and to force us to eat bugs.
 
Back
Top Bottom