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

  • 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: 1,167
  • 1569527044335.png
    1569527044335.png
    450.1 KB · Views: 704
  • 1571204359689.png
    1571204359689.png
    2.7 MB · Views: 539
  • 1572839098505.png
    1572839098505.png
    2 MB · Views: 267
  • greta_108356458_gretaday5.jpg
    greta_108356458_gretaday5.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 1,076
  • 1580368884936.png
    1580368884936.png
    270.8 KB · Views: 314
  • 1582430340019.png
    1582430340019.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 1,082
  • 1609745217700.png
    1609745217700.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 636
  • 1616904732000.png
    1616904732000.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 1,303
  • 1658867385840.png
    1658867385840.png
    1 MB · Views: 70
Last edited:
Women need at least some body fat in order to function normally and she doesn't have any. At 16 she should at least have begun to undergo puberty but she has no breasts, no hips, poor muscle tone and looks as she's in a daze. She doesn't look like a healthy 16 year old she has the same look as an anorexic girl. Isn't there a thread here about vegans basically starving their bodies of nutrients like choline, turning themselves into imbeciles? Well Greta's the poster child for that.
I honestly thought she 12 when I first saw her. After I found out that she is 16, her newsworthiness made even less sense than before. All most all girls of that age that I have known went trough some sort of hippy/environmentalist phase. Not necessarily anything huge just something like natural cosmetics, second hand shopping and recycling but nevertheless. Girls tend to like taking care of something and being socially responsible, environment is nice, popular and easy to get behind. Usually some of it sticks but rest fall off as enormousness of truly changing what’s wrong downs downs on them and other worldly experiences and problems take attention. Still point being 16 girl doing something towards environmental causes is super normal.
 
Because they mocked her for being a FAS face mongoloid propped up by her parents?

Because they have a weird obsession with wanting to spite some autistic vegan child. It's basically a-logging.

It must be because I can't read science good, but I must have missed the part where you can see CO2 with the naked eye, let's not kid ourselves here, this kid is knee deep in all the pseudo science that comes with watermelon politics

CO2 with the naked eye? I had to look that up and it seems like it is actually something her mum said. On top of that, it seems like she was trying to be flowery and metaphorical? If not, that doesn't reflect anything myself or most other people who fight to help the climate.

Denialfags ability to yoink shit out of context is impressive so forgive me for doubting this. I'm open to being proven wrong.
 
Because they have a weird obsession with wanting to spite some autistic vegan child. It's basically a-logging.



CO2 with the naked eye? I had to look that up and it seems like it is actually something her mum said. On top of that, it seems like she was trying to be flowery and metaphorical? If not, that doesn't reflect anything myself or most other people who fight to help the climate.

Denialfags ability to yoink shit out of context is impressive so forgive me for doubting this. I'm open to being proven wrong.
What metaphor is being used when it's claimed the wunderkind can see gas? You're being awfully obtuse about the psuedosceientific drivel coming from her handlers, and that which usually comes with climate hysteria
 
What metaphor is being used when it's claimed the wunderkind can see gas? You're being awfully obtuse about the psuedosceientific drivel coming from her handlers, and that which usually comes with climate hysteria

“She can see carbon dioxide with the naked eye. She sees how it flows out of chimneys and turns the atmosphere into a rubbish tip.” is the exact quote. Like I said it sounds awkward like attempts at flowery striking images. It's incorrect because it's not actually CO2 that is visible in pollution from chimneys, although the gas will be there alongside what actually is visible.

Good nitpicking though. I should have said non-literal instead of metaphorical.

She's still got more IQ and climate science knowledge than all deniers collectively. Just say "yeah oil's great and fuck the trees and air time to become China."
 
“She can see carbon dioxide with the naked eye. She sees how it flows out of chimneys and turns the atmosphere into a rubbish tip.” is the exact quote. Like I said it sounds awkward like attempts at flowery striking images. It's incorrect because it's not actually CO2 that is visible in pollution from chimneys, although the gas will be there alongside what actually is visible.

Good nitpicking though. I should have said non-literal instead of metaphorical.

She's still got more IQ and climate science knowledge than all deniers collectively. Just say "yeah oil's great and fuck the trees and air time to become China."
Sorry for not taking the child tool seriously. If the fear mongerer and her handlers believed or understood half of what they were saying g they would be advocating for glassing China and India and sterilising every undesirable man and woman
 
Sorry for not taking the child tool seriously. If the fear mongerer and her handlers believed or understood half of what they were saying g they would be advocating for glassing China and India and sterilising every undesirable man and woman

ngl, It's kind of funny calling out people as fearmongerers when using terms like "watermelon" (green outside, red inside; ie SECWET CAHMUNISM).

I don't think that's necessary when pacifistic ways exist to cut pollution and overpopulation.
 
ngl, It's kind of funny calling out people as fearmongerers when using terms like "watermelon" (green outside, red inside; ie SECWET CAHMUNISM).

I don't think that's necessary when pacifistic ways exist to cut pollution and overpopulation.
There's an ocean between saying you live in fear because you think doomsday is near and you want others to share that fear, and calling green politics out for what it is. Free money from the US to China is just wealth redistribution

And according to the doomsday sayers we're already over consuming, so it's a little late to claim there are peaceful population controls when China, India, and Africa is barreling full steam ahead
 
I like being an out of touch, curmudgeon because I have no idea who this young woman is and no idea how or why I should be upset by whatever nonsense this is.
 
I'm confused, why is she even known? Are her parents really rich? Did she survive a mass shooting? Is she a 16 year old Nobel laureate? Was she in a hurricane or something and a tree fell near her? All of a sudden she explodes and I have literally no idea why.

Why is she special out of the probably thousands of other teenage activists on the planet?
 
So, is the author willing to apply the same grandeur to Soph? Because she also is a snotty teenager on the internet who pointed out uncomfortable problems that certain people didn't want to think about.
 
They're probably sunken in.

Edit: Nevermind, mommy drank when she had her.
Her face has all the hallmarks of FAS that not even her supporters can deny it, from the smooth philtrum, to the thin lips and the mongoloid eyes.
Also I'm disappointed that our self professed leftie moderator decides to hand out pissy neg ratings rather than elaborate further on how he thinks I'm fear mongering by calling green politics what it is
 
Are her parents really rich?

Yes. Her mother is Malena Ernman, some chanteuse who also represented Sweden at the Eurovision and her old man is Svante Thunberg, who's also quite well off.

Basically, she's the tool of the greenie lobby because Wednesday Addams is better optics than some crusty old soap-dodger.

EDIT: Can we also add that Greta Thunberg is against nuclear power for no good reason and won't even talk to nuclear physicists about it. Even though it is the answer to global warming. Rather we had a future powered by Solar And Wind! and indulgences for the rich.
 
Last edited:
ngl, It's kind of funny calling out people as fearmongerers when using terms like "watermelon" (green outside, red inside; ie SECWET CAHMUNISM).

I don't think that's necessary when pacifistic ways exist to cut pollution and overpopulation.
Are you sure you're not autistic as well, because there's an awful lot of handwaving coming off your posts.
 
Greta Thunberg is a dumb kid who appears to have some developmental issues. Green stuff is largely really dumb aside from some of the pollution and conservation stuff. Her brand is particularly bad.

That being said, she is a 16 year old who managed to find a way to skip school for a significant amount of time and have it not negatively affect her career trajectory. Hopefully this is really what it was all about.

I don't think that's necessary when pacifistic ways exist to cut pollution and overpopulation.
Neither of which are problems in western countries. Pollution could and should be worked on I guess, but that's still irrelevant when you have India, China, and Africa cranking out babies and toxic sludge.
 
What parents allow their kids to run around the world doing this sort of activism? Or allow their kid to go on a fucking sailboat for 10 days to cross an ocean to own the climate deniers? You are beyond rich, send that kid to a top school or do something to set her up to be a success. This girl, assuming she's not being passed around paedophile politicians, is going to be yesterdays news in another year or two, a literal "who?" in another 3. Then what?

It's negligence on behalf of the parents of the highest order at best.

How exactly do you think parents are going to make her do anything against her own will? In scandinavian countries, 16 year olds are of the age of consent, liable in regards to criminal laws and quite often are already living in their own apartments, especially if they study in a different city than where their parents live.
 
The issue is that not her views or those of FFF are attacked but most 'critique' I've read is argumentum ad hominem. If you can't beat the arguments of a 16 year old girl but have to rely on personal attacks or degenerate sexual fantasies, well, I guess you are a fucking retard and, in addition, a fucking pedo.
 
How exactly do you think parents are going to make her do anything against her own will? In scandinavian countries, 16 year olds are of the age of consent, liable in regards to criminal laws and quite often are already living in their own apartments, especially if they study in a different city than where their parents live.
Age of consent does not equal age where they are considered legally adults. That's still 18 and her parents are still legally responsible for her wellbeing. It's very easy if the parents wanted to stop her, just stop funding her. They won't because they themselves are eco-loons and d-list celebrities with fading careers, so they are quite happy to have their daughter with Aspergers, OCD and Selective mutism take a 15 day sailboat trip across the Atlantic, possibly putting her it terrible danger should something go wrong, because muh climate change.
 
The issue is that not her views or those of FFF are attacked but most 'critique' I've read is argumentum ad hominem. If you can't beat the arguments of a 16 year old girl but have to rely on personal attacks or degenerate sexual fantasies, well, I guess you are a fucking exceptional individual and, in addition, a fucking pedo.
Plenty of genuine critique presented unless you want to be purposefully obtuse about it. But I guess a big reason why people don't bother is that this is the same shit sandwich served by Al Gore just with the dates changed.

First her statements almost universally appeal to emotion. In her own words she wants people to share her fear.

Like most green crusaders she's completely blind to the largest polluters because they're not western nazis.

All her solutions are sub par bandaids that has been shilled by the elite for the last half a century so we can all start paying climate sin taxes to feel good. Meanwhile nothing is proposed to solve a future where Africa will number in the billions while still being the same people that dump plastic straight into the ocean.
 
Back
Top Bottom