Greta Thunberg

v0n said:
Not trying to underplay the current presumed consensus, or undermine your belief in it - but - it helps to understand that each generation has had its own environmental wickerman to burn and its own version of doomsday clock striking milliseconds to midnight. And believe me - each of our respective generations before you or Greta also had a file/folder/stone tablet of the accumulative supporting works by the world class scientists, that "accounted for a significantly high proportion of the intelligence of the human race" of their time and in absolute unison proclaimed consensus that "this **** is real", "the end is nigh" and "something must be done now".

For my generation it was the acid rains and rivers polluted by the factories built by the generation before me. The looming evil of dams and nuclear power stations built on top of idillic rivers and nature reserves. And the upper class perfumed bourgeois burning holes in ozone layer and causing global cooling with their overuse of fancy deodorants.

For Dimples (SexyGreyFox), I'm sure, it was probably steaming chimneys of coal powered factories, the looming evil of concrete jungles and council estates replacing leafy green parks and suburbs and the inevitable threat of cold war global destruction. I bet he was pleading with the warmongering generation before him to "give peace a chance".

And I suppose, at least up until this generation, there was nothing particularly wrong with cultivating such hippy attitude, generational environmental scare of an impending doom, introducing green awareness and providing common globalist/corporate enemy to fight. And just like each and every generation should always have some sort of imprisoned martyr(s) to cheer for at big, televised concerts - every generation should also have camp fire tall tales about some distant relative saving whales/dolphins/tuna/swordfish by throwing molotov cocktails against third world fishing vessels from a pontoon boat in far away parts of the world in the name of Mother Earth. Nothing particularly wrong with that. A cleaner, healthier planet is universally appealing idea regardless of a decade. Tree planting, fighting for cleaner waters and learning how to produce less rubbish is good for every generation.

But what I particularly dislike about this generation and their "global climate change" wickerman altar, is not that their version of doomsday is just a rehash of old, tiresome, mostly debunked and overplayed (come on, that hockeystick data's been in play since seventies, just that back then Hansen and his glorified weathermen climatologists were using it to prove 'global cooling' for money). And it's not that they use now manufactured, weird, "spectrum" kids like Greta for shields.

For me it's the shameless crudeness and lack of finesse employed by the current "green agenda" constructs. I hate that this time it's not "the people" demanding from billionaires to stop killing the planet for money, it's literally billionaires jetting around the world in private planes to tell YOU, that YOU have to change. This time it's not "the people" shouting at the gates of parliaments to stop grubbing up green belts for profit, it's the Eaton toffs in .gov positions creating special fines, taxes and tolls because YOU should stop stop driving across Dartford bridge, or driving at all in YOUR fuel cars by 2030, YOU meat eating, methane farting, iceberg melting, ocean polluting, arctic bear drowning, rainforest prime next day delivered microplastic spreading planet murderers.

And I hate that this time it's so crudely put together that it's practically gone "full cretin" mode. It's no longer problem->solution agendas. It's not some "two thousand trees each for 2000", or "feed them, let them know it's Xmas time". The movement is aimless. Devoid of clear demands and lofty solutions. What do we want? (shouts voice on the tannoy) "Don't know but not this" (replies the crowd). When do we want it? "Right here right now".

"You destroyed our planet. How dare you?" pouts Greta. Well, I have some terrible news for you Greta. While you continue skipping primary education, some 75% of the worlds population continue to live and breed in forgotten a-holes of this world, in complete poverty and aspire to the lofty conditions you dwell in Greta. That vast majority of the world's population, mostly in Asia and Africa, look at you The OnePercent Greta and they would also like to have more than one set of clothes, washing machine to go with it and clean water on tap. They would also like to dwell in cities, shop in shopping malls and live by an asphalt road in a brick house with insulated roof above their heads. They would also like for their dwellings to be furnished by sustainably sourced wood byproducts, burn fossil fuels to cook three meals per day and heat or cool their rooms all day. They would also like to have electric power, internet, television and playstation, so they can also be full of green ideas and skip their local centrally heated, green energy lit up schools for some great environmental reasons or ef off to yacht across seas and zoom around the world with their family to proclaim lofty ideas to world leaders and billionaires. And what's more important - they have a gawd darn right to grow up like you and live like you Greta.

But unfortunately your agenda depends on keeping them chained to the sewers of this planet, in absolute poverty because we can't allow another 4 to 5 billion people to reach the same level as us, and live, travel, work, have a carbon footprint and emit like we do. We can't allow it because you know - that's like - 3 times more "How dare you"'s than we have in the "first world" at the moment, right?

But what I hate the most about Greta's generation of their environmental boo-hoo Ouiji board - is the narration that the basic gases our bodies emit and breathe out are the pollutants that will kill the planet in the next few milliseconds and it has to be stopped right here, right now, at all cost. Now, that is some amazingly evil ****, ef me. Once we stop all the cars, and that's not enough, then we'll stop breeding animals for meat, but that's not going to be enough. Then what? Hello eight billion people, Greta would like to know what have you done today to deserve your 20,000 CO2 emitting breaths per day?

Chill the **** out. The planet will survive. There is undeniable scientific consensus that the planet, over hundreds of millions of years, survived much worse things than anything you may do to it by eating burgers, driving cars and breathing out CO2. So far all the doomsday scenarios and environmental fears of all the generations before you never materialised. Cold war didn't annihilate human race. Acid rains didn't turn Europe into deserts. Nuclear power stations are, oddly, now considered one of the cleanest energy sources. We didn't die of global cooling, global warming and we are not going to die because of any mixture or the two. But there is like - 4 to 5 billion very unhappy people living in poverty out there and it's because we are actively blocking them from reaching our level of civilisation. Now, historically, evidence is OVERWHELMINGLY clear that we and our family lines are more likely to expire from their sticks and stones if we keep ignoring their needs than from some artic melt or presumed instability of weather.
Click to expand...

I think you make some interesting points and some I agree with.... Overall however I do believe we are ruining the planet. If you don't care because it won't affect you that is up to you I suppose but burying your head in the sand and pretending it's not happening is just fooling yourself.

You are dead right however about it being a bit rich for those of us is relative luxury who's infrastructure has already done the damage judging those who haven't and just want to catch up.

Which iis why the answer surely involves the richer countries having to help out by using their skills and resources to help poorer nations to expand as cleanly as possible
Regarding acid rain and industry dumping pollutants into rivers .. you make it sound like those people complaining didn't have a point? Certainly in the UK partly thanks to public outcry industry DID have to clean up its act. When I was a kid our beaches were a disgrace. Bogroll washed up on Blackpool beach,inedible fish in some of our rivers..
Yes Greta is a bit cringing and somewhat hypocritical but OTOH if she inspires her generation to change even slightly this its surely a good thing?

It may not stop the impending doom but if it delays it by a few years it may mean my lad gets a decent life .... My lad will have to worry about his kids.

PS sure the planet will be absolutely fine. Chances are over all the human race will also probably be ok. Nature would consider 5 billion humans being wiped out and only the fittest surviving as just another day at the evolution office ..... But it doesn't mean it won't be miserable

Just look at how a disease which has "only" killed a few million world wide has affected us. Imagine if it was something which killed 5000x that number.

If Corona virus has done 1 good thing it may be that going forward we do less unnessesary travel. I hope so anyway.
 
Last edited:
v0n said:
I bet he was pleading with the warmongering generation before him to "give peace a chance".
Click to expand...

How dare you call me a hippy :)
Good speech though.

It's undeniable the Earth goes through changes on it's own with no help from us.
For example, last night I was watching my millionth documentary on Egypt where they had gone out into the desert to look for the ancestors of the Pharoahs which 10,000 years ago was green with trees, grass, water etc but because of Climate Change and zero input by humans, they moved towards the Nile and the rest is history.

However, you can't deny Attenborough going back to places he visited 50 years ago and comparing the changes.
I'm no expert but would that have happened anyway or have humans caused a large percentage of it?
Obviously the Rainforest being destroyed at an incredible rate is the fault of humans but what damage will it cause?
Experts just tell Attenborough (and Greta) that yes it is bad but is it really?
 
Some well written posts to counter my slightly incendiary comment, it was a bit personal so I apologise for that.

However most of the counter claims are that it's not that bad, the planet will survive, every generation had it's own issues to shout about, white privileged girl shouldn't be dictating to poorer nations ego just want a sniff of the luxury we in the West get etc etc.

Unfortunately it IS that bad. We are literally facing the deaths of billions of humans, never mind millions of other species, in the coming years (it may be decades, it may be centuries). That's simply not ok with me, even if I don't have to live with any of the consequences personally. Burying your head in the sand and saying it's not that bad is only adding fuel to the fire that is dangerous inaction.

For the record, I work for one of the UKs largest conservation environment charities, of which research is part of my role. So I do know what I'm talking about, I have read, and contributed to the current evidence, and when I read your vague, anecdotal (yet well written) prose, it doesn't wash against reality.
 
bigmike20vt said:
If Corona virus has done 1 good thing it may be that going forward we do less unnessesary travel. I hope so anyway.
Click to expand...

I wish - the moment we can it will be business as usual - loads of people who can do their job perfectly fine from home will be pulled back to the office, etc. etc.

Working in distribution I was still commuting to work at the peak of the first lockdown and the difference even a few short weeks of hardly any road traffic made was remarkable - the hedgerows were noticeably denser (and not due to lack of maintenance as the council was taking advantage of the situation to carry out maintenance) and wild life was everywhere - rabbits and pheasants, etc. playing in the road even.

Not just pollution in general but I think people underestimate just how much impact on the air quality tyre and brake particulate has - I'd get to work and be one of like 3 cars in the car park instead of the normal 50-100+ and you really could tell how cleaner the air felt to breath.

In a selfish way I miss those weeks - bowling along the dual-carriageway at what was normally peak time with the world basically to myself - maybe 1 car every 4-6 miles or so was like my own personal episode of The Walking Dead.
 
Arsonist said:
Unfortunately it IS that bad. We are literally facing the deaths of billions of humans, never mind millions of other species, in the coming years (it may be decades, it may be centuries).
Click to expand...

But isn't this a normal cycle of the Earth?
From the day the first amoeba formed it's been all about evolution and eventually humans will be destroyed by Covid-127 that can't be cured (or some other disaster).
No doubt we can delay the inevitable but it will still happen.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
But isn't this a normal cycle of the Earth?
From the day the first amoeba formed it's been all about evolution and eventually humans will be destroyed by Covid-127 that can't be cured (or some other disaster).
No doubt we can delay the inevitable but it will still happen.
Click to expand...
Well, ok sure if you're a nihilist who also doesn't value the unique qualities of intelligent life. I for one would prefer to see us evolve to the point we didn't reply just on the earth, but it'll be hard to do that if we extinguish ourselves before we've really started.
 
Realistically, the world won't miss 50% of us.

When the planet is inhospitable to us, out numbers will plummet and some kind of balance will emerge.

Nasher said:
We aren't going to move off Earth until we move on from war, because we can't afford that as well as the huge military budgets.
Click to expand...

Just because you spend X on one thing, doesn't mean you can afford to spend more on Y, economies don't work like that. Soldiers probably wouldn't make good physicists... And the science isn't ready for interplanetary colonisation. Besides, even if it were, it'd be a miserable and likely fatal existence in a sealed metal tube
 
d_brennen said:
Realistically, the world won't miss 50% of us.

When the planet is inhospitable to us, out numbers will plummet and some kind of balance will emerge.



Just because you spend X on one thing, doesn't mean you can afford to spend more on Y, economies don't work like that. Soldiers probably wouldn't make good physicists... And the science isn't ready for interplanetary colonisation. Besides, even if it were, it'd be a miserable and likely fatal existence in a sealed metal tube
Click to expand...

We can't explore or advance anything without big risks. Otherwise the whole human race will be health and safetied to death.

People are 100% going to get killed going to Mars but we have to do it.
 
Rroff said:
I wish - the moment we can it will be business as usual - loads of people who can do their job perfectly fine from home will be pulled back to the office, etc. etc.

.
Click to expand...
You are probably right.

It has change my job however. I was told quite definitely I could not work for home on a regular basis even tho the job is perfectly suited. Now however even when things are back to normal I shall be changing my working life to 4 days a week, with Friday off and working from home Thursdays. I was thinking of pushing WFH for 2 days and going in the office for 2 but didn't want to push it.
WFH for 1 day saves.me commute time so I can be working right away and helps with the school run.

I am lucky my job is pretty much perfect for home working.

In lockdown 1 I must admit I too loved the lack of traffic. Walking around the local lake always looks great but there is a constant drone of cars. All I could hear in lockdown 1 was birds.

Clearly long term it was not sustainable but I hope there is a happy medium. Note I am not being holier than tho. Up until 2015 I had owned inefficient sports cars since 2003. Right now we have 2 diesels. One bought in ignorance because I foolishly believe "eco diesel" lies and one because it was left to me in a will. We don't do that many miles so most of the environmental damage is already done in their manufacture . We will be replacing with battery when we can however and am getting a solar system with house battery installed later this year...... Baby steps but every bit helps.

I did just buy an rtx 3090 in a moment of madness however..... Let's just say I am a work in progress ;)
 
Last edited:
Arsonist said:
Well, ok sure if you're a nihilist who also doesn't value the unique qualities of intelligent life. I for one would prefer to see us evolve to the point we didn't reply just on the earth, but it'll be hard to do that if we extinguish ourselves before we've really started.
Click to expand...

However isn't this what the Fermi Paradox is all about?
If an other intelligent life has existed somewhere in the Universe they've been and gone a long time ago, it's just the way it is.
Being intelligent we can delay our demise but at what cost? Living on another planet, living underground or even under the sea? And by the time we've delayed 5 million years we probably won't look like we do now like we don't resemble early man.
 
When it comes to the Fermi Paradox I'm broadly of the opinion we are just very early on in the timeline and any life out there is probably exceedingly rare and chances are less advanced than we are - give if a few more billion years probably some other life will have been and gone as well.

Despite the billions of years that this universe has supposedly existed for it is only a few short cycles of the mechanics of the universe so to speak when it comes to the cycle of birth and death of stars and so on.
 
Rroff said:
When it comes to the Fermi Paradox I'm broadly of the opinion we are just very early on in the timeline and any life out there is probably exceedingly rare and chances are less advanced than we are - give if a few more billion years probably some other life will have been and gone as well.
Click to expand...

Are we "early" though? We know that this very planet had at least several full life cycles before.

Our own Earth was inhabited for hundreds of millions of years by a completely different set of dominant species and going by the observable data we know those species suffered their own environmental problems multiple times and rebooted in multiple mass extinction events spaced so far away from each other, that by our own darwinian timeline there was more than ample amount of time for any of them to reach very advanced civilisation stages between reboots.

We are also very aware by now that during our amazingly short reign of dominance among species inhabiting this planet, we, homo sapiens, arguably lived in parallel with several other self aware, tool using hominids. By our own research and observable historical data we are neither particularly early, nor it would seem - special on the scale of this tiny planet alone, let alone the scale of immediately observable universe around us.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
However isn't this what the Fermi Paradox is all about?
If an other intelligent life has existed somewhere in the Universe they've been and gone a long time ago, it's just the way it is.
Being intelligent we can delay our demise but at what cost? Living on another planet, living underground or even under the sea? And by the time we've delayed 5 million years we probably won't look like we do now like we don't resemble early man.
Click to expand...
All fair points. But still no reason to cause an early extinction of humans and wider biodiversity. Can't we at least try and figure things out here, so we can beat the fermi paradox rule?
 
v0n said:
. . . Our own Earth was inhabited for hundreds of millions of years by a completely different set of dominant species and going by the observable data we know those species suffered their own environmental problems multiple times and rebooted in multiple mass extinction events . . .
Click to expand...
Did these "dominant species" of which you speak knowingly destroy their environment or were they just too selfish, stupid and ignorant to care for their environment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom