Current Events > Imagine hating Greta Thunberg

(+) Yeah! (+)

Literally putting herself and her family out there, way out of the comfort zone, to speak about the single most important issue of our generation and the next several generations.

And she's doing so much to move the cause forward.

https://tinyurl.com/y452tqjg

She's a fucking badass and a wonderful human being. Literally pulling herself up by the bootstraps to spread a message worth spreading, and to bring more attention to the one thing we should unite against as a species.
---

assuming the world doesn't end, I predict she grows up to become some kind of leader. Prime Minister of Sweden or maybe head of the UN or some group that replaces the UN

I bet Trump hates her
---

we could cut consumption and by extension environmentally harmful emissions by about a third by abolishing government worldwide

edit: figure could be actually greater since cronyism and large-scale infrastructure would also be drastically diminished as economies shifted in a more localist direction
---

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

That means there's a 99% chance that she's on the right side of history.
---

The latest in a trend of conservatives getting weirdly obsessive and hateful towards politically involved teenagers

---

I bet trump makes fun of her in the next day

I bet he says something like

"im gonna be dating her in 10 years"

TheMikh posted...

we could cut consumption and by extension environmentally harmful emissions by about a third by abolishing government worldwide

And what will remain in the void is that two thirds of harmful emissions that will grow unfettered by sane regulations. No thanks.

We need state-level funding into proper solutions to fix the problem once and for all. That means lots of money invested into proper infrastructure, electric vehicle subsidies, advanced agriculture, and lots of fucking trees.
---

Zikten posted...

assuming the world doesn't end

Theres no assuming. The world will not end.
---

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

A lot on the right either hate her, or are using her autism/asperger's to push the "she's being used to push an agenda!" narrative.

In short

Doom_Art posted...

The latest in a trend of conservatives getting weirdly obsessive and hateful towards politically involved teenagers

---

Doom_Art posted...

The latest in a trend of conservatives getting weirdly obsessive and hateful towards politically involved teenagers

Hey man, don't pin this on conservatives in general. Not everyone's like that, and I swear I can remember people on your side getting massively rustled by mini-AOC to the point of sending her death threats.
---

Duncanwii posted...

Zikten posted...

assuming the world doesn't end

Theres no assuming. The world will not end.

The world may not end but human civilization might not be so lucky.
---

pls posted...

And she's doing so much to move the cause forward.

Is she? Really?

Being outspoken is admirable, but unless she plants 1000 trees a year or is building low-footprint infrastructure, she's not really "doing so much."

---

pls posted...

I swear I can remember people on your side getting massively rustled by mini-AOC to the point of sending her death threats.

Got em

vigorm0rtis posted...

pls posted...

And she's doing so much to move the cause forward.

Is she? Really?

Being outspoken is admirable, but unless she plants 1000 trees a year or is building low-footprint infrastructure, she's not really "doing so much."

Motivating the population into speaking out about it is doing something. Planting a bunch of trees is good, but it's of equal or more importance to try and stem the systemic issues causing and exacerbating the problem in the first place.
---

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual


---

SiO4 posted...

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual

she's plotting

pls posted...

TheMikh posted...

we could cut consumption and by extension environmentally harmful emissions by about a third by abolishing government worldwide

And what will remain in the void is that two thirds of harmful emissions that will grow unfettered by sane regulations. No thanks.

We need state-level funding into proper solutions to fix the problem once and for all. That means lots of money invested into proper infrastructure, electric vehicle subsidies, advanced agriculture, and lots of fucking trees.

environmentally harmful mass production and mass-transportation via corporations is enabled by the global supply chains and aforementioned (post-edit) large scale infrastructure that governments facilitate

a more polycentric order would mean that communities have more regulatory control in their area rather than being whored out to cronies by central governments, while simultaneously, a more localist order would drastically diminish the amount of resources consumed for production and distribution leading to a more sustainable economic state of affairs
---

Cut fossil fuels and switch to nuclear for a short term high-efficiency and high-output energy source while we construct a massive infrastructure of wind farms, solar farms, and hydroelectric farms.

Begin funding massive electric vehicle programs and invest heavily in public transit. Make green transportation affordable and offer incentives for those who switch. (Hell, give everyone a free car and a free house while we're at it).

Have these efforts subsidized by the fossil fuel industry and those who profit off of it.

Once the renewable energy farms are in place and electric (self-driving) vehicles are the norm, decommission the nuclear plants in a safe and secure way while denuclearizing the rest of the western world.

Invest in hemp as a replacement for paper manufacturing and plant trees on a massive scale. Fine companies like Nestle billions for exploiting natural water sources, thus lowering the water table and contributing to drier regions.

Then the only problem left is international travel. Find alternative means that don't need fossil fuels.

Also: Fund Planned Parenthood as a means of population control.
---

*imagines*

Okay
---

pegusus123456 posted...

Motivating the population into speaking out about it is doing something. Planting a bunch of trees is good, but it's of equal or more importance to try and stem the systemic issues causing and exacerbating the problem in the first place.

Most people are only motivated to make symbolic gestures. Real activism is generally only carried out by lawyers, scientists or criminals.

---

Zikten posted...

SiO4 posted...

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual

she's plotting

For real though. I guaranty there is a dossier on her somewhere.
---

She seems obnoxious
---

SiO4 posted...

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual

She has more self-control than me.

I'd get a vice grip on his balls and make him squeal.
---

konokonohamaru posted...

She seems obnoxious

She's autistic. She doesn't have the grasp on social cues that most people do.
---

ZMythos posted...

SiO4 posted...

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual

She has more self-control than me.

I'd get a vice grip on his balls and make him squeal.

So you want to show him a good time?
---

Zodd3224 posted...

So you want to show him a good time?

No I mean a vice grip.
---

ZMythos posted...

SiO4 posted...

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual

She has more self-control than me.

I'd get a vice grip on his balls and make him squeal.

Thats a good way to get shot by the secret service.
---

Duncanwii posted...

Thats a good way to get shot by the secret service.

Again, she has more self control than me.

And a quick death for me would be worth the pain and humiliation I'd inflict on him.
---

Duncanwii posted...

Zikten posted...

assuming the world doesn't end

Theres no assuming. The world will not end.

naive. how do you know?
---

Duncanwii posted...

ZMythos posted...

SiO4 posted...

Zodd3224 posted...

I bet Trump hates her

Pretty sure the feeling in mutual

She has more self-control than me.

I'd get a vice grip on his balls and make him squeal.

Thats a good way to get shot by the secret service.

Imagine the headline over that one.
---

They're either threatened by her intelligence or jealous that she's become so noteworthy at such a young age and they're not doing shit with their lives. Or both.
---

apolloooo posted...

Duncanwii posted...

Zikten posted...

assuming the world doesn't end

Theres no assuming. The world will not end.

naive. how do you know?

The world will get tougher to live in but society will keep going like it always has. It would take something sudden and overwhelming like a nuclear war to take out humanity altogether.
---

Doom_Art posted...

The latest in a trend of conservatives getting weirdly obsessive and hateful towards politically involved teenagers

only if they say liberal stuff. they worship any teenager who says conservative stuff.
---

ZMythos posted...

She has more self-control than me.

I'd get a vice grip on his balls and make him squeal.

One of my favorite scenes from Frost/Nixon is how some journalist is talking s*** about Nixon and then Nixon walks in the room and he ends up shaking Nixon's hand with a dumb smile on his face anyway

Everyone talks tough until the real alphas walk into the room
---

The problem I have is a lot of these people who are telling us we need to cut emissions or tax us with carbon taxes are either of the rich (taxes don't affect them as much) or they use and abuse taxpayer dollars to 'spread' the message of carbon reduction.

Is there a need for every individual world leader to travel to one location to discuss carbon emissions on their private jets? Why can this not be done remotely via teleconference, etc?

Average American: 19 tons of carbon per year.
(average European: 10 tons)
Average coast to coast flight on a commercial flight: 1-3 tons per passenger.
Average coast to coast flight on a private jet: 21 tons.

A Boeing 747 uses 7840kg of aviation fuel for the take-off, climb and descent portions of the flight and these account for about 250km. For journeys longer than that, the plane will use 10.1kg for each additional kilometre under typical cruising conditions. So to fly from Heathrow to Edinburgh (530km) uses 10,668kg of fuel, which releases a little over 33 tonnes of CO2.

Whereas a Ford Mondeo 1.8 TDCi emits 151g of CO2 per km and covers 650km to reach Edinburgh. That works out to be 98kg for a single passenger, compared to 79kg per person for the Jumbo, assuming it carries its full complement of 416 passengers. But you could drive 336 cars to Edinburgh for the same CO2 as one plane.

http://www.bitsofscience.org/plane-or-train-planes-20x-as-bad-climate-per-km-6835/
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

only if they say liberal stuff. they worship any teenager who says conservative stuff.

true. fox news paraded this like 8 year old that was pretending to be AOC in "funny" videos for weeks

Duncanwii posted...

apolloooo posted...

Duncanwii posted...

Zikten posted...

assuming the world doesn't end

Theres no assuming. The world will not end.

naive. how do you know?

The world will get tougher to live in but society will keep going like it always has. It would take something sudden and overwhelming like a nuclear war to take out humanity altogether.

The world is going to end eventually
---

Zikten posted...

Phantom_Nook posted...

only if they say liberal stuff. they worship any teenager who says conservative stuff.

true. fox news paraded this like 8 year old that was pretending to be AOC in "funny" videos for weeks

And then she received death threats for it.

MaverickXeo posted...

Is there a need for every individual world leader to travel to one location to discuss carbon emissions on their private jets? Why can this not be done remotely via teleconference, etc?

It is literally a drop in the carbon bucket. It would make no fucking difference in terms of carbon load if they stopped using planes. Let's be serious. You're just looking for a "gotcha" instead of the correct perspective on this opinion.
---

TheMikh posted...

pls posted...

TheMikh posted...

we could cut consumption and by extension environmentally harmful emissions by about a third by abolishing government worldwide

And what will remain in the void is that two thirds of harmful emissions that will grow unfettered by sane regulations. No thanks.

We need state-level funding into proper solutions to fix the problem once and for all. That means lots of money invested into proper infrastructure, electric vehicle subsidies, advanced agriculture, and lots of fucking trees.

environmentally harmful mass production and mass-transportation via corporations is enabled by the global supply chains and aforementioned (post-edit) large scale infrastructure that governments facilitate

a more polycentric order would mean that communities have more regulatory control in their area rather than being whored out to cronies by central governments, while simultaneously, a more localist order would drastically diminish the amount of resources consumed for production and distribution leading to a more sustainable economic state of affairs

I mean you're not wrong, but society already developed how it developed. Systems need to be turned green via massive investments of capital. That's why I'm voting Bernie.

There's literally no way Bernie's $16 trillion invested into the climate change fight won't tip the scales in our favor. That giant infusion of cash into every kind of infrastructure and grid project, including world-wide replanting and planting of trees, is what we need right now.
---

Duncanwii posted...

The world will get tougher to live in but society will keep going like it always has

lmao no. everything is collapsing. i am reading this book called the 6th extinction and everything is literally turning over to oblivion. rainforest ecosystem, ocean acidification, extreme weather, loss of diversity, etc/ and this is written in 2015 when the forecast are still more optimistic than what it is today. society is too fragile and too dependent on and global trade system that put most emission on the air.

we're fucked. all to do is just wait and die
---

apolloooo posted...

Duncanwii posted...

The world will get tougher to live in but society will keep going like it always has

lmao no. everything is collapsing. i am reading this book called the 6th extinction and everything is literally turning over to oblivion. rainforest ecosystem, ocean acidification, extreme weather, loss of diversity, etc/ and this is written in 2015 when the forecast are still more optimistic than what it is today. society is too fragile and too dependent on and global trade system that put most emission on the air.

we're fucked. all to do is just wait and die

Yeah ok.
---

apolloooo posted...

Duncanwii posted...

The world will get tougher to live in but society will keep going like it always has

lmao no. everything is collapsing. i am reading this book called the 6th extinction and everything is literally turning over to oblivion. rainforest ecosystem, ocean acidification, extreme weather, loss of diversity, etc/ and this is written in 2015 when the forecast are still more optimistic than what it is today. society is too fragile and too dependent on and global trade system that put most emission on the air.

we're fucked. all to do is just wait and die

Uh did you bother to click on the first link I provided? It's definitely not that dire. Nothing has happened that cannot be fixed. We just need the will to act. Next election matters more than any other election. Vote Bernie.
---

I wonder what all your excuses will be when 20 years later we're still around and the earth's still kicking
---

imagine thinking climate change is the number 1 issue of all time instead of war and m.a.d.

pls posted...

MaverickXeo posted...

Is there a need for every individual world leader to travel to one location to discuss carbon emissions on their private jets? Why can this not be done remotely via teleconference, etc?

It is literally a drop in the carbon bucket. It would make no fucking difference in terms of carbon load if they stopped using planes. Let's be serious. You're just looking for a "gotcha" instead of the correct perspective on this opinion.

A drop in the carbon bucket? Maybe, but we need our leaders to lead by example. That said, it is still a LOT of emissions. Look at Trump or Trudeau, for example. How many private flights have they been on?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_international_presidential_trips_made_by_Donald_Trump

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_international_prime_ministerial_trips_made_by_Justin_Trudeau

Each 'trip' is equal or close to equal that of a typical citizen's yearly carbon emissions. Basically, Trudeau, for example, in 4 years has emitted the same carbon amount that a person would over the course of most of their working life.
---

pls posted...

Nothing has happened that cannot be fixed.

hahahahahahahaha
---

konokonohamaru posted...

I wonder what all your excuses will be when 20 years later we're still around and the earth's still kicking

It's not our generation I'm worried about, even though some of us will certainly live long enough to see shit hit the fan if we don't un-fuck the planet.

Wewillrocku posted...

imagine thinking climate change is the number 1 issue of all time instead of war and m.a.d.

The one thing in my mind that virtually guarantees nukes start flying is the climate degrading to the point where nukes are the only way to stop tens of millions of climate refugees from just invading your shit.
---