Greta Thunberg

anonymoose said:
Nothing wrong with that. Good that you didn't raise them to be perpetually depressed over weather and gender skeptical/confused..
That is good. Carbon dioxide is good for photosynthesis. Do you inject compressed CO2 in your greenhouse? That's what commercial nurseries do. Composted garbage makes great fertilizer.
Click to expand...

No Moose, I don't have a greenhouse anymore, but I am proud of you for knowing this!

Now, if we can just get you going green! Come on Moose- it's fun and rewarding to get with the green!

Just ask your grandchildren! These young ones are into it big time!
 
anonymoose said:
I listened to this poor girl on NPR this. a.m.
Sad what the climate hoaxers have done in brainwashing these kids.
They should be taken away from their parents for child abuse.
And the U.N. gives her a podium and actually listens to this crap pretending to take her seriously for the advancement of Agenda 21.



Kids in S.F. think we have only 12 yrs. left before the End of Days Apocalypse.

So glad I raised well adjusted kids.
Click to expand...
The left/climate alarmists have completely destroying critical thinking by millenials/X'rs etc.
They shove socialism and class warfare into their heads in place of economics as well
 
Democrats rely on 16 year olds to provide them leadership, because the 'adults' are hiding in their safe space and echo chambers.
 
While this kid has real fear due to the brainwashing by the AGW fear mongering cultist leaders, I do applaud that she at least calls the leaders of the cult out on their blatant hypocrisy.
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
No Moose, I don't have a greenhouse anymore, but I am proud of you for knowing this!

Now, if we can just get you going green! Come on Moose- it's fun and rewarding to get with the green!

Just ask your grandchildren! These young ones are into it big time!
Click to expand...
What are your grandchildren doing to "go green"?
How about the kids missing school at the "protest"? What's their contribution?
 
countryboy said:
Nonsense, the post was entirely accurate. Libs are all about child abuse. Convincing kids they have no future, due to "climate change". Telling small children they can change their gender through surgical genital mutilation, and harmful synthetic hormones. Yeah, clearly that's abuse. No normal person could conclude otherwise.
Click to expand...

Indeed, countryboy.
 
Hello anonymoose,

Thanks for starting this thread. I was just considering one dedicated to this amazing young woman.

She is wise beyond her years.

And I don't blame her one bit.

Who wants to be brought into a world bent on self-destruction?

anonymoose said:
I listened to this poor girl on NPR this. a.m.
Sad what the climate hoaxers have done in brainwashing these kids.
They should be taken away from their parents for child abuse.
And the U.N. gives her a podium and actually listens to this crap pretending to take her seriously for the advancement of Agenda 21.

Kids in S.F. think we have only 12 yrs. left before the End of Days Apocalypse. [no verification given for this claim]

So glad I raised well adjusted kids.
Click to expand...

Anybody who is knowledgeable understands the 12 year timeframe was not until apocalypse. That is the estimated remaining time we have to turn our emissions around. The worst effects of climate change won't happen for a long time after that, because there is a delayed reaction.

You can't post any credible sources for science saying the end of the world happens in 2030. If you had it, you would have posted it.

And there is a hidden message here.

Since you can't even correctly quote what you are in denial of, that indicates there is a BS factor in your argument.

If you really had a good argument, you would not have to make things up about the opposing view. If your position was really superior all you would have to do to win the argument would be to clearly and succinctly state your 'invincible overwhelming position.' But you're not doing that. Instead you are making things up. That says something about your position, and it ain't good.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello anonymoose,

Thanks for starting this thread. I was just considering one dedicated to this amazing young woman.

She is wise beyond her years.

And I don't blame her one bit.

Who wants to be brought into a world bent on self-destruction?



Anybody who is knowledgeable understands the 12 year timeframe was not until apocalypse. That is the estimated remaining time we have to turn our emissions around. The worst effects of climate change won't happen for a long time after that, because there is a delayed reaction.

You can't post any credible sources for science saying the end of the world happens in 2030. If you had it, you would have posted it.

And there is a hidden message here.

Since you can't even correctly quote what you are in denial of, that indicates there is a BS factor in your argument.

If you really had a good argument, you would not have to make things up about the opposing view. If your position was really superior all you would have to do to win the argument would be to clearly and succinctly state your 'invincible overwhelming position.' But you're not doing that. Instead you are making things up. That says something about your position, and it ain't good.
Click to expand...

Anyone who is ACTUALLY knowledgeable would know that the AGW cult has issued such 'deadlines' many times over the past 30 years+. Then they keep moving the 'deadlines' back another 10 or 12 years into the future.

But you ignore that, because you are a part of the cult.
 
Hi moose,

anonymoose said:
This is obviously a very depressed child. Her "dreams and childhood have been stolen" because of climate change.
My kids are happy and normally functioning and could give a rat's ass about "climate change".
They played soccer, were on swim teams. One is 30, has a $25,000 truck paid for in full, a 401k, and a mortgage. The other has two happy kids, a good job as a health insurance claims something or other and a husband who is a mechanical engineer. Gives a fuck about "climate change", whatever that is.
This is what the climate hoaxers want - suicidal kids who believe they have no hope. This is why their kids end up on the streets of west coast cities, homeless and drug addicted, skeptical about their own sexuality and gender confused throughout life. They truly believe this is good.
Click to expand...

Personal anecdotes are not going to change the science.
 
Hi moose,

anonymoose said:
Translation: Everybody who doesn't abort their child should brainwash them to be clinically depressed .
Click to expand...

What a stupid comment.

We, the concerned, have enough work to do without footdragging. The world would be far better off if you would pitch in and do your part to help the effort to deal with this common threat.

Denial will not make it go away.
 
Last edited:
Hello dukkha,

dukkha said:
The left/climate alarmists have completely destroying critical thinking by millenials/X'rs etc.
They shove socialism and class warfare into their heads in place of economics as well
Click to expand...

Has it ever occurred to you that you might just be wrong about this whole thing?
 
Hello dukkha,

dukkha said:
of course -clearly though your socialist/alamist bent has never occurred to yourself the same enlightenment
Click to expand...

I have considered it. I always like to weigh out the arguments for each side of an issue. Then gather information. Then make up my mind. It's a logical process.

In this case I find more convincing arguments on the side of science, but the one over-riding and inescapable factor is asking what are the consequences of being wrong on this one?

Well, if we believe the majority and do everything we can to end as much CO2 emissions as possible, what's lost? What's the downside? We get some new technology which is likely to be cleaner and longer lasting, more reliable than what we had? Lots of new jobs to be had building and replacing what's required? Whether or not that would even cost any more than what we are doing is even debatable, so I don't see that as a big deterrent to going with this.

But if we do nothing we risk the habitability of the planet. That is too much to risk in any case.

We have no proof that either way is the correct choice, but we know that one way leads to dire consequences, and the problem with going the other way is some currently rich people get their gravy train cut off. There might POSSIBLY be some cost increases for certain things, but that is not proven. It could just as well lead to cost reductions, and most certainly will in at least some cases.

The smart thing to do if you don't know which way to go is to assume the worst case, prepare for that, and then hope for the best, hope that all your preparations were not needed. Of course if we do limit CO2 emissions with clean new tech, and then it turns out we didn't need to, oh darn. We got clean new energy sources. So we still got something for our effort.

If we go your way and it turns out we should have taken it seriously years back it's a dead end. We can't go back in time and have a do-over.

It is just stupid to assume the easy way out is the correct way when so much is at stake.

And if you had performed the same process in your reasoning you would reach the same conclusion.

There is no logic that says it is wise to take such a foolish risk.
 
PoliTalker said:
I have considered it. I always like to weigh out the arguments for each side of an issue. Then gather information. Then make up my mind. It's a logical process.
Click to expand...
good.glad to hear it

In this case I find more convincing arguments on the side of science, but the one over-riding and inescapable factor is asking what are the consequences of being wrong on this one?

Well, if we believe the majority and do everything we can to end as much CO2 emissions as possible, what's lost? What's the downside?
Click to expand...
energy independence,millions of jobs in the energy field, a misguided trillions of dollars spent on Green New Deal and wrecking our economy is the "loss"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top