Greta

hoppy

Anarchist
567
155
Sorry, you were right.

Greta's mummy is a "famous" Swedish opera singer (also did Eurovision) and daddy an author/actor. I believe the grand daddy was famous as well. When you compare Greta to her parents its clear something is not right. Clearly it's FASD and not genetics that gave her looks.

Mummy and daddy are using Greta to rekindle their fame in Sweden and probably to give her a career because mummy's drinking ensured Greta can't follow the family into the arts.

Totally used

svante-thunberg-wife-malena-ernman-daughter-greta-thunberg-beata-thunberg.jpg


Fucking irresponsible parents.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

3to1

Super Anarchist
Sorry, you were right.

Greta's mummy is a "famous" Swedish opera singer (also did Eurovision) and daddy an author/actor. I believe the grand daddy was famous as well. When you compare Greta to her parents its clear something is not right. Clearly it's FASD and not genetics that gave her looks.

Mummy and daddy are using Greta to rekindle their fame in Sweden and probably to give her a career because mummy's drinking ensured Greta can't follow the family into the arts.

Totally used

svante-thunberg-wife-malena-ernman-daughter-greta-thunberg-beata-thunberg.jpg


Fucking irresponsible parents.
you're a fucking dipshit, you should stop speaking.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

hoppy

Anarchist
567
155
It seems that her younger sister has ADHD, Aspergers & misoponia. Probably FASD as well. 

The mother seems fucked in the head, so no wonder 

8aef49d1-f347-4e8d-a691-59800486df27


Greta is it seems marketing the family book to earn money


Our House is on Fire


Scenes of a Family and a Planet in Crisis




The internationally-bestselling, uplifting story of a family who embrace their daughter's differences and help her change the world.

Every parent says that they would jump in front of a train to save their child. It's an instinct that no one denies. But when that 'train' finally arrives, it is very seldom a real, speeding locomotive . . .

This is the story of a family led to confront a crisis they had never foreseen. Aged eleven, their eldest daughter has stopped eating and speaking. Alongside diagnoses of autism and selective mutism, her parents slowly become aware of another source for her distress: her imperilled future on a rapidly heating planet.

Steered by her determination to understand the truth, the family begins to see the deep connections between their own and the planet's suffering. Against forces that try to silence them, disparaging them for being different, they discover ways to strengthen, heal, and act in the world. And then one day, fifteen-year-old Greta decides to go on strike.

 

bacq2bacq

Anarchist
603
254
Ottawa
It's much simpler than that. We (humans) are merely deer in a park with no wolves.
And what happens in a park when there are no wolves?  We have examples.  Please read what Michael Crichton had to say about deer, wolves, parks, and climate change.  Uh-Oh.  Original link is now broken!  It looks like someone has tried to silence Michael's voice posthumously.  This is one of the big problems with the climate "scientific debate", the manipulation and/or suppression of information.  I very much doubt Michael's wish was to be silenced, and his voice and message replaced by an uneducated child's.

Fortunately, the Internet can "route around" this kind of human failing, thinking it a good idea to gag an author.  Here is a link to the Internet Archive's capture of Michael's speech, from 2005: 
[SIZE=10pt]Fear, Complexity, & Environmental Management in the 21st Century[/SIZE]

Just above this is a link to the Internet Archive.  It doesn't take long to read.  Please read it, everyone.  We *must* embrace complexity, else we fail as a species.
 

In the speech linked below, Michael rails against the bastardization and politicization of "science", and fallback to "consensus" with respect to climate. 

http://s8int.com/crichton.html

Even if one is the most ardent Greta-fan, or her greatest detractor, these two speeches are IMHO mandatory reading.  Know thine self, know thine enemy.

Randumb, I have you on igg now, but I know you care about messengers.  You would do well to read what Crichton writes, and see if you can wrap your head around what he says, and why he says it.  He was a very bright guy: a scientist, a medical doctor, and someone who cared a great deal about us and our world, perhaps as much or more than little Greta.

(Edit: PS those first few pics from the first link above should look familiar to LB15, Random, Hoppy, and others... :)

 
Last edited by a moderator:

bacq2bacq

Anarchist
603
254
Ottawa
This here is worth a quotation, from the second link, above:

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world.

In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

 

fastyacht

Super Anarchist
12,847
2,548
And what happens in a park when there are no wolves?  We have examples.  Please read what Michael Crichton had to say about deer, wolves, parks, and climate change.  Uh-Oh.  Original link is now broken!  It looks like someone has tried to silence Michael's voice posthumously.  This is one of the big problems with the climate "scientific debate", the manipulation and/or suppression of information.  I very much doubt Michael's wish was to be silenced, and his voice and message replaced by an uneducated child's.

Fortunately, the Internet can "route around" this kind of human failing, thinking it a good idea to gag an author.  Here is a link to the Internet Archive's capture of Michaels speech, from 2005: 
[SIZE=10pt]Fear, Complexity, & Environmental Management in the 21st Century[/SIZE]

That just above is a link to the Internet Archive.  It doesn't take long to read.  Please read it, everyone.
 

In the speech linked below, Michael rails against the bastardization and politicization of "science", and fallback to "consensus" with respect to climate. 

http://s8int.com/crichton.html

Randumb, I have you on igg now, but you would do well to read what Crichton writes, and see if you can wrap you head around what he says.  He was a very bright guy: a scientist, a medical doctor, and someone who cared a great deal about us and our world, perhaps as much or more than little Greta.

Even if you are the most ardent Greta-fan, or her greatest detractor, these two speeches are mandatory reading.  Know thine self, know thine enemy.
Only one excerpt worth mentioning in the present context:

"[SIZE=10pt]One complex system that most people have dealt with is a child.  [/SIZE]If so, you've probably experienced that when you give the child an instruction, you can never be certain what response you will get. Especially if the child is a teenager. And similarly, you can’t be certain that an identical interaction on another day won’t lead to spectacularly different results. "

[SIZE=10pt]AMEN.[/SIZE]

 

fastyacht

Super Anarchist
12,847
2,548
Michael was doing pretty well until he made the fatal eerror of conflating number of parts with complexity. Oh well so much for analogs.

 

hoppy

Anarchist
567
155
Geeze hoppy, you are  a one  misogynistic , bullying CUNT 
So you like to stick your head up your arse rather than realise that there is more than just an innocent story behind it all. 

FWIW my partner, the mother of my daughter was reading through Swedish news and blog sites to supply me with the information I am providing.

 

hoppy

Anarchist
567
155
Geeze hoppy, you are  a one  misogynistic , bullying CUNT .

Not funny.

Not clever.

Just a CUNT
Just facts....

Although the FASD is an observation base on an analysis of behaviour and appearance, which is how it is diagnosed 

 
"If we want to manage complexity, we must eliminate fear.  Fear may draw a television audience. It may generate cash for an advocacy group. It may support the legal profession.  But fear paralyzes us.  It freezes us.  And we need to be flexible in our responses, as we move into a new era of managing complexity. So we have to stop responding to fear" Michael Chrichton

Well fuck me dead. Chricton was saying precisely how I feel back two decades ago. 

Lower pollution, work on new energy sources, but the sky isn't falling. "Is this the end of the world?  No: this is the world." -MC

 

lasal

Super Anarchist
2,558
172
Denver
Nope. That's not it. I don't "fear" my shitty little car. I just don't see where you are going to make all these changes economically. I mean, let's see. The politicians in my state are pushing "renewables" while they are also in a budget disaster, can't pay for the road repairs, school stuff, tolls proposed, all sorts of dumbfuckery. But yeah, let's legislate that instead of 20c per kWH it should be 30. And what else, are we going to legislate some kind of insulation? And who will pay? I will. Or some special assessment tax. OK so I pay.

Or we just float along.

For years I've found it absolutely absurd that 99.44% of all new houses are not passive solar. That tech worked great in 1975. We added what? 60 million? I dunno. My house is 60 years old. It will be here a long time. Oh, do you want me to tear it down and build a superefficient one? OK. Give me some money....

I have yet to see any detailed concrete A to B of how this transformation happens. There's just a lot of hand-waving. Hell, I'm waving my hand. That's my point. Fuck, I sail. My moboat hasn't run in 6 years. Maybe 7. And I built the thing! What blood do I give? And who is going to get to do the bloodletting? Trump? Pocahantas?
I didn't think you feared your car, more that you're already naturally sacrificing to reduce expenses and therefore carbon, so what now? You point out some real issues I think, and the points you raise are the debates that need to begin in earnest. But, there are massive reductions to be had that are not going to impact individuals' incomes in a huge way and that have additional benefits of reducing smog, like tailpipe emissions standards that manufactures wanted to comply with, can comply with, and likely will continue to work toward.

 

bacq2bacq

Anarchist
603
254
Ottawa
@bodega87, I am glad that at least one person has followed my links above, read the content, understood it, and been inspired by (what remains of!) Michael's clear thinking and writing about all this.  There are too few rational and independent voices out there with fairly accurate views of what is happening who are able to share as eloquently as Crichton did. 

[Greta is quoted]: "And when I say that I want you to panic I mean that we need to treat the crisis as a crisis. When your house is on fire you don’t sit down and talk about how nice you can rebuild it once you put out the fire. If your house is on fire you run outside and make sure that everyone is out while you call the fire department. That requires some level of panic."
No, Greta, it requires calm thought and action under intense pressure, the exact opposite of panic. 

Crichton, far older and wiser than Greta, correctly points out that fear is the enemy.  Greta, far too young to have formed much independent critical thought, necessarily regurgitates what she has been told.  The very last thing we should be doing is listening to panicky, immature people who are absent the wisdom needed to overcome the politicization of science.  Michael Crichton was 16 once.  I have been 16.  Greta has not been 40, 50, 60...  wisdom and good judgement takes time to develop.  I now know that it would have been foolish to trust the 16-year-old version of me, on many issues.

Michael Crichton was doing good - exposing the lack of scientific rigour in much of the climate "science"; communicating that the classical views of How Things Work are in fact only bad approximations of the underlying complex systems in Nature; emphasizing the importance of calm, rational discussion.

Greta is doing the opposite - discouraging critical thought; embracing flawed understanding of complex systems, advocating panic.  Sorry, but what an idiot.

All: please read Crichton's links, above.  Support freedom of the Internet and web.archive.org.  Above all: THINK!

[edit to add Crichton's links again]: 
[SIZE=10pt]Fear, Complexity, & Environmental Management in the 21st Century[/SIZE]
http://s8int.com/crichton.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:

lasal

Super Anarchist
2,558
172
Denver
Okay, I'll bite. Why does the fake ferry with snow capped mountains in the background fly the Puerto Rico flag?
It's the Norled Flag, the Norwegian ferry company, not Puerto Rico. Ampere is registered Norway.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

ProaSailor

dreaming my life away...
6,015
731
Oregon
The blatant corruption of Trump and his henchmen is truly astounding on so many levels:

EPA Tells California It Has The ‘Worst Air Quality’ In America, Threatens Highway Funds  (09/24/2019)
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/epa-california-highway_n_5d89a6c1e4b0d269465370d6

Andrew Wheeler, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, said in a letter to California’s Air Resources Board this week that the state had failed to address a backlog of air pollution control plans mandated by federal law. Unless the state takes action on about 130 plans, Wheeler said the EPA would begin a “disapproval process” that could impact billions in funding for its highways.

“Since the 1970s, California has failed to carry out its most basic tasks under the Clean Air Act,” Wheeler wrote in a letter dated Sept. 24, which was first reported by The Sacramento Bee. “California has the worst air quality in the United States.”
[...]
Last week, the Trump administration said it would revoke California’s legal authority to set its own auto emissions standards, part of its effort to roll back strict emissions standards set by the Obama administration as a key part of its effort to tackle climate change.
[...]
The New York Times reported early Tuesday that Trump has been angered by California’s efforts to circumvent his administration’s rollbacks of environmental rules. The outlet said that in response, the White House has focused on efforts to punish the state.
[...]
“Our foremost concern must be ensuring clean air for all Americans,” [Wheeler] wrote. “That is our goal.”
This criminality must stop.  ALL Trump supporters have shit for brains.

Background on Andrew Wheeler:

This coal lobbyist is now running EPA  (July 5, 2018)
https://www.edf.org/blog/2018/07/05/coal-lobbyist-now-running-EPA

Here’s the bottom line: Andrew Wheeler running the EPA would go far beyond having an administrator overly influenced by lobbyists. We would have an actual energy industry lobbyist in charge.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

bacq2bacq

Anarchist
603
254
Ottawa
@huey 2, I can't force you but I am curious what I write or what Crichton writes,  and with which you disagree, to cause you to downvote a reasonable post.  "bing!" said my browser.  What a surprise to see that on post 445, above!

- do you think we should have the power to remove someone's writings from the internet, so the Archive is in fact a Bad Thing?
- did you read Crichton's two speeches to which I posted links and disagree with him?
- do you think it is possible for 16-year-olds to possess wisdom beyond their years?
- is it that panic is superior to calm, reasoned thought and action?

What an odd post to downvote!

@ProaSailor, @Left Shift, @hoppy, @lasal, @MRS OCTOPUS, you all should have had time to see the links to Michael Crichton's thoughts.  No comment?

 

frostbit

Anarchist
Dear God this thread is a complete shit show. 

For shits and giggles, let's just take this entire issue on a risk management basis.  

Climate change, even viewed through an econometric lens, is going to (already is starting to) wreck havoc on society, governments, health, infrastructure, cities, and nationstate stability. Short term and barely existent gains in petrochemical, fossil fuels, and other industries accelerating the green housing of the Earth are not in any way shape or form worth the long-term impact of increased disease vectors, flooded coastal cities, destroyed housing, and consistently accelerating emergency expenditures and activities. In my humble opinion, it's time to stop toeing whatever party line each of us subscribes to and find a way to cooperate to lead the  the world to a sustainable future.  

There are a few scientists who think humans are not responsible and are unable to alter the vector we are on. The overwhelming majority believe climate change, as we are experiencing it now and the trajectory we are on, is a by-product of human use of hydrocarbon fuels. You can disagree with the majority, but let me ask this, what if the over-whelming majority is right and we do nothing? And alternatively, what if they are wrong, but we act by reducing fossil fuel dependencies and we aggressively embrace renewable energy sources and reduce carbon emissions globally? In a risk based assessment, acting, even if you disagree with the central premise, creates significantly less catastrophic risk potential and results in economic growth and an accelerated state of innovation. If the overwhelming majority of scientists are right, and we do nothing, the impact is catastrophic, expensive, and difficult, if not impossible, to recover from. So, which do you choose?

Regarding Greta, she is on the spectrum and speaks what she thinks. If you know any 16 year olds on the spectrum, then you know they are not easily manipulated into anything. What she said yesterday was purely her reasoned opinion of truth. 

 

Left Shift

Super Anarchist
10,355
3,160
Seattle
@huey 2, I can't force you but I am curious what I write or what Crichton writes,  and with which you disagree, to cause you to downvote a reasonable post.  "bing!" said my browser.  What a surprise to see that on post 445, above!

- do you think we should have the power to remove someone's writings from the internet, so the Archive is in fact a Bad Thing?
- did you read Crichton's two speeches to which I posted links and disagree with him?
- do you think it is possible for 16-year-olds to possess wisdom beyond their years?
- is it that panic is superior to calm, reasoned thought and action?

What an odd post to downvote!

@ProaSailor, @Left Shift, @hoppy, @lasal, @MRS OCTOPUS, you all should have had time to see the links to Michael Crichton's thoughts.  No comment?
Comments?  OK.

Michael Crichton has cobbled together a collection of anecdotes to support his predetermined thesis.  He made a living putting together scientifically dubious novels designed to instill the human fear response as an amusement.   Why do you put so much weight on the writings of a fabulist?   His reference to Ehrlich's "The Population Bomb" is classic misdirection.  The book was "wrong" because it was written after certain pattern changes began?  Is Crichton's point that world didn't need to be nudged into further understanding of what continued population growth might mean?  Is global population is no longer a problem?   Are there a couple of billion people more on earth now than when Ehrlich wrote that book?  Is India running out of fresh water?

I love this one liner from Imdb:  Michael Crichton was born in Chicago, Illinois, but grew up in Roslyn, New York. His father was a journalist and encouraged him to write and to type.

And for the record:

Greta Thunberg has never claimed wisdom, she has claimed, rightly, that the "adults" in the room are ignoring warnings.  As always, is it better to prepare for the unknown or to assume it won't happen and blithely proceed?

 
Top