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: 1,086
  • 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:
Saw this today, thought it was mildly interesting: https://archive.li/FQm0h
View attachment 963599
Who do you think did it?

A) An angry exceptional right-winger, doing his side no favours with his tard rage.
B) An exceptional climate alarmist/ shill trying to smear people who don't like Greta
And I can't think of anyone better equipped to handle backlash this intense than a severely mentally ill autistic teenager with anxiety and a Downsy face. This, Leftists, is why you don't make children take adult roles.
 
A) An angry exceptional right-winger, doing his side no favours with his tard rage.
B) An exceptional climate alarmist/ shill trying to smear people who don't like Greta

C) A welfare parasite who was very bored and probably followed on twitter "Joker N-word countdown" with childlish glee. A gamer. A true gentleman. A "trap" connisour. A genius. A dumbass. A true hero that got pooped out of the unwashed masses. All in all, I accuse Dynastia.
 
Greta received a native name at Standing Rock today. It translates to Woman Who Came From The Heavens.

The news article says the public could attend but that is incorrect. They restricted who could attend.



Oh this planet keeps on giving out comedy.
 

Oh this planet keeps on giving out comedy.

Some news that native sources started sharing yesterday, and the news has been discussing a lot today, is how high level of uranium has been found in Navajo women and babies. [No information has been shared about the men.]

“It forces us to own up to the known detriments associated with a nuclear-forward society,” said US Rep. Deb Haaland, who is an enrolled member of Laguna Pueblo, a tribe whose jurisdiction lies west of Albuquerque.

The hearing held in Albuquerque by US Sen. Tom Udall, Haaland and US Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, all Democrats from New Mexico, sought to underscore the atomic age’s impact on Native American communities.


This, of course, means we can’t use nuclear options to solve the climate crisis.

It’s all just so convenient how that worked out. Another convenient thing is that the timing of Greta’s visits to the reservations was just perfect for people that are carpooling to anti-Trump protests in Minneapolis on Thursday.
 
Last edited:
Some news that native sources started sharing yesterday, and the news has been discussing a lot today, is how high level of uranium has been found in Navajo women and babies. [No information has been shared about the men.]

“It forces us to own up to the known detriments associated with a nuclear-forward society,” said US Rep. Deb Haaland, who is an enrolled member of Laguna Pueblo, a tribe whose jurisdiction lies west of Albuquerque.

The hearing held in Albuquerque by US Sen. Tom Udall, Haaland and US Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, all Democrats from New Mexico, sought to underscore the atomic age’s impact on Native American communities.


This, of course, means we can’t use nuclear options to solve the climate crisis.

It’s all just so convenient how that worked out. Another convenient thing is that Greta’s visits timing was just perfect for people are car
Incredible. Right in cue, they have a line of tearful women and children warning about the dangers of nuclear energy.
 
Incredible. Right in cue, they have a line of tearful women and children warning about the dangers of nuclear energy.
And I have been trying to access that “database” of murdered and missing native women, to look at the data, but still can’t see it. I’ve seen one report with an overview of the data. The report places a lot of blame on “man camps”.

What’s really incredible, or maybe not, is that the numbers are so high because they are using all murdered and missing native women from 1900 to today.

They do admit that data is hard to find until the 1960’s, and that some police departments wouldn’t give them data beyond 2000.

Anyways, this is definitely a case where the news media is willing being manipulated. I was able to find cases that their 2018 report featured that most definitely were unrelated to man camps.

Murdered and missing women report
 
Incredible. Right in cue, they have a line of tearful women and children warning about the dangers of nuclear energy.
And I have been trying to access that “database” of murdered and missing native women, to look at the data, but still can’t see it. I’ve seen one report with an overview of the data. The report places a lot of blame on “man camps”.

What’s really incredible, or maybe not, is that the numbers are so high because they are using all murdered and missing native women from 1900 to today.

They do admit that data is hard to find until the 1960’s, and that some police departments wouldn’t give them data beyond 2000.

Anyways, this is definitely a case where the news media is willing being manipulated. I was able to find cases that their 2018 report featured that most definitely were unrelated to man camps.

Murdered and missing women report
I believe there is a lot of truth to the mistreatment of the Navajo on their land because of uranium mining. But that's not the crux of the media's deception. "Some injustices happened around uranium mining = all nuclear power is now bad". But how many medical advances are now taken for granted that can clearly be traced back to truly evil human experimentation by the nazis? If there's a bolt in your leg to fix what would be a life-altering hobble that prevented you from walking, are you evil because that bolt evolved from nazi medical science? What if doctors only knew how to spot your failing organ before it killed you because their medical school training learned something from nazi science? Are you evil because you just didn't die like a good ally?

I still don't understand this anti-intellectual zealotry against nuclear power. Solar isn't nearly developed enough yet. Woke people already hate wind for other stupid reasons. Do they want us to keep relying on coal and oil, so they can keep scoring points for crying about it? I guess coal and oil aren't that big a threat then are they? If it were really going to kill us all in 12 years then you would be trying any option you had to get away from it instead of trying to snatch fame from the jaws of the beast, wouldn't you?
 
Last edited:
Do they want us to keep relying on coal and oil, so they can keep scoring points for crying about it?

It's so that they have a vehicle for socialism to enter the public sphere. Look at the GND, and the idiot staffer AOC had that openly admitted they drafted it to fuck the economy.

Which is why environmentalists make my piss boil. They don't give a rat's ass about the planet, just their politics.
 
Greta received a native name at Standing Rock today. It translates to Woman Who Came From The Heavens.
If they're working this hard on making her the new Jeanne d'Arc, who will they set up to be her Gilles de Rais to support her until he (allegedly) snaps once she's no longer relevant?
 
I still don't understand this anti-intellectual zealotry against nuclear power. Solar isn't nearly developed enough yet. Woke people already hate wind for other stupid reasons. Do they want us to keep relying on coal and oil, so they can keep scoring points for crying about it? I guess coal and oil aren't that big a threat then are they? If it were really going to kill us all in 12 years then you would be trying any option you had to get away from it instead of trying to snatch fame from the jaws of the beast, wouldn't you?
War on results. Revolutions don't take when things are going well. The nuclear tech we have now (known as gen IV, everyone should really read up on it if you haven't already) is basically meltdown proof and even recycles its own waste into new fuel. It is the cleanest, safest, most efficient energy production method we have as of yet discovered and would solve most of the world's energy problems virtually overnight. But these people do not want that. What they want is to use climate to scare people into ceding more and more power and authority to government. They want to stuff their pockets with the billions of dollars thrown at the 'square peg in a round hole' that is renewable/alternative energy. Mansions on Martha's Vineyard aren't getting any cheaper after all. And thankfully for Obama (who owns a property there), the island is still miraculously above water despite what his buddies have been telling us for the past 30 years.

Trump would be an idiot not to respond to this new nuclear panic by having Perry pursue nuclear aggressively and use it against the Democrats next year.
 
Trump would be an idiot not to respond to this new nuclear panic by having Perry pursue nuclear aggressively and use it against the Democrats next year.

Trump pushing nuclear hard, and bringing it to light as a topic of national discussion would be a godsend. Hell, a lot of the stuff I know about nuclear I read off of the farms, the average joe (me before I read about it here months ago) still thinks nuclear reactors are at around where they were at in the 70's.

It really is just a lack of public awareness about how much better the tech has gotten.
 
Trump pushing nuclear hard, and bringing it to light as a topic of national discussion would be a godsend. Hell, a lot of the stuff I know about nuclear I read off of the farms, the average joe (me before I read about it here months ago) still thinks nuclear reactors are at around where they were at in the 70's.

It really is just a lack of public awareness about how much better the tech has gotten.

As well as a refusal to see how it can lead to tech getting even better.

Divvies still think fusion power will come out of nowhere somehow from solar and wind power.
 
As well as a refusal to see how it can lead to tech getting even better.

Divvies still think fusion power will come out of nowhere somehow from solar and wind power.

I still don't understand why no rich person's thought to both invest in it and a public-awareness campaign. It's what I plan on doing if I win the lottery tbh.
 
Trump pushing nuclear hard, and bringing it to light as a topic of national discussion would be a godsend. Hell, a lot of the stuff I know about nuclear I read off of the farms, the average joe (me before I read about it here months ago) still thinks nuclear reactors are at around where they were at in the 70's.

It really is just a lack of public awareness about how much better the tech has gotten.
When people think nuclear they think of three things.

Three Mile Island, which released as much radiation as a chest xray.
Chernobyl, which was Soviet Union incompetence.
Fukushima, which was an act of God nobody could've predicted.

A little PR and some publicized research would go a long way to convince people of nuclear.
 
When people think nuclear they think of three things.

Three Mile Island, which released as much radiation as a chest xray.
Chernobyl, which was Soviet Union incompetence.
Fukushima, which was an act of God nobody could've predicted.

A little PR and some publicized research would go a long way to convince people of nuclear.

You forgot The Simpsons, which didn't help the perception much either.
 
There is something really weird about this girl. Where the fuck did she come from and why should anyone care? This whole thing is starting to just scream of "Failed child actor being used by politicians." What is up with the horrible faces also? I thought this creature was supposed to be sympathetic but she just looks like a trainwreck and looks strangely young for a 16 year old she actually looks like a fucking 12 year old. Does she have more disorders that we aren't privy to? Now they are giving her these bullshit names like "Woman who came from the heavens" really? This entire thing just screams STAGED.
 
I thought this creature was supposed to be sympathetic but she just looks like a trainwreck and looks strangely young for a 16 year old she actually looks like a fucking 12 year old.
That's deliberate marketing. Her handlers dressed her down to look younger than she is to maximize the "from the mouth of babes" aww-shucks sympathy.

On the Dick Show recently they said a term for cynically using children in a "think of the children" methodology to sell a narrative, called "peder-phrasty" or something. I think they just made that up for fun but I'm sure there's a real word for the concept.
 
Back
Top Bottom