Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
AkhiraisReal

Greta Thunberg hype, why?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, hasanhh said:

Huh? l do not understand.

Like science induced awareness of climate change...with guilt. 

I'm sorry, I don't see the human induced. I do see changes.

John's revelation tells us there will be extreme weather conditions in the ends times. No idea how long these conditions will continue, or if you can really say it started. I've seen so many "The end is near signs" in my time I'll just let the bandwagon pass on by. To be honest, David Wilkerson told us in 1970 to get a good reliable car and take care of it, be prepared to keep it for many years. Well I just watched a 1974 Camaro sell for $27,000. I had a 75. My 1970 Javelin is around $15,000, my 68 Nova...I should have listened.

We aren't causing the 1-3 mm annual gap in the Atlantic tectonic plates. We aren't causing volcanoes, ( 2 in Indonesia, 1 in Central Mexico, 2 in Japan...today, Tokyo all week, Etna spewing for years). We haven't caused the Magnetic North to veer 1000 klms from the "True" North, nor the South to veer 2700klms. Nautical charts are now updated every 90 days. Scientists could update hourly.
I also have trouble with a global issue siting the air over China. Obama dropped 25,000 bombs per year for 8 years, yet every video I see is a clear sky, like up here next to our Boreal forest capable of absorbing more CO2 than the world can send it. Trudeau wants to add 2 billion trees, to the 80 billion trees Canada has. Russia's Boreal forest is even larger. The Amazon is not the lungs of the world.

Revelation 6:6  And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine."  Ask California what's happening to their vineyards. The fire caused by high winds, ripping old power lines, sparking up the forest...again...third time. Usually it's arson. They like to blame it on climate change, but the real reason for the rage in these fires are the tree hugger laws enforced in the 70's to protect what is now deadwood.

"Scientists" are now saying the Arctic is melting and emitting more CO2 than ever estimated, while NASA says CO2 is coming from the equator. 

The ozone layer is healing itself even though the increase use of cloro floro carbon emissions from China. NASA photos show the ozone layer thinnest or depleted at Antarctica. The thickest of the ozone is surrounding the thinnest layer surrounding Antarctica, then there's the rest of the world. One would think the thickest layer would equalize itself over Antarctica, unless it is pushed back, like a berm. 

There was an outcry of urgency to donate to the Monarch butterfly foundation up in Alberta, or buy these milkweed seeds at a donation price. Many facebook Albertans bought seeds to help with the cause. Problematic. Milkweed is an invasive species, and Monarch butterflies never migrate as far north as Alberta. Alberta has Viceroys and painted ladies, very similar but non toxic. For the sake of a butterfly sob story people put out millions, and planted invasive weeds around farmers fields.

Man is arrogant to think he can change this planet, and stupid if he thinks he can reverse it. This isn't about arrogance, it's about greed. We all know how the game of Monopoly ends. George Soros wants to rule the world before he dies, thus the panic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans have changed local climates, even before there were so many of us, long before industrialization. We are not separate from nature, we are creatures, part of the creation, but remember "the Great Oxidation Event" - creatures have died of their own success before and we should be careful of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an illustration on why l think pollution is far more a concern than some hokey climate change mantra:

https://www.rt.com/news/473752-India-pollution-oxygen-bars/ 

Currently, while Sydney is blanketed by brush-fire-smog, other cities such as Tehran have very unhealthy air, also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hasanhh said:

Here is an illustration on why l think pollution is far more a concern than some hokey climate change mantra:

Pollution is a problem, but it is one that has gotten better in most places. Flammable rivers and urban smog are much less common now than they were in the seventies and eighties. (Let's not go back to that by deregulation!)

Climate change, on the other hand, has been ignored for over a hundred years and is near the tipping point. That doesn't mean we should only worry about greenhouse gas emissions, we should continue to clean up all the types of pollution. 

Humanity isn't going to run out of resources - we will poison ourselves in waste long before then unless we charge how we consume and dispose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

But not in the sub-Continent or East Asia. lt is like a dystopia in those places.

These are mostly "developing countries". Their regulations haven't caught up with technology yet, not even close, and enforcement is spotty at best of what environmental regulations they do have. When you're starving you don't ask where the food came from, you just eat it; similarly, the people who after desperate for money don't ask what they are exchanging for it, and the billionaires and millionaire business owners don't care. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

Why wait?

Because money and bureaucracy are impediments to everything everywhere. You know this.  

Reducing the pollution would cost money - worse, it would cost millionaire and billionaire political contributors who own the polluting industries money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Climate change is real. I'm happy shes speaking about it. She's getting so much attraction here because grown adults in Congress and the House (ie Republicans) deny climate change yet we have a child waking them up to how dangerous their blindness (and greed) can be. Of course we need more people to speak about genocide but I'm happy there is more people speaking about climate change. I did see that a video about Chinese Muslim camps did go viral on tik tok though so there are young people speaking about it. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/27/tech/tiktok-xinjiang-eyelash-curling-scli-intl-hnk/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Observation: Friday the 29th, the foreign news had reports on the continuing climate change protests. BUT none n the US.

Comment: the American kids are on Thanksgiving break and why interfere with this. They can skip skool next week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get Greta has become a meme, but are people seriously going to bash her for atleast speaking up about climate change? And are people seriously saying its not real?

I took a break from the internet and came back and one thing I remembered when coming back here was @AkhiraisReal's posts. I've noticed that you post a lot of "tinfoil" content and as a brother to a brother of the same age, I recommend you seriously chill with these conspiracies brother...

You say climate change isn't a priority... brother do you realize how selfish that sounds? You should strive for a better future for your descendants and your future spouse. You can either stay quiet about this or contribute, but don't come here bashing her and quoting David Icke.

Salamat brother...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

How could his prioritization be in anyway "selfish"?

I apologize but that was not what I meant. I shouldn't have used the word selfish as I was rushing to write this on my way to work. 

Of course he may prioritize whatever he wishes to, but it's important that we think about our Earth and keep it clean. It's not wise to dismiss such a thing.

I'm having a hard time trying to get across what I mean but english isn't my strong suit, hope you understand brother.:hahaha:

Edited by Mohannad_Haydar_Matar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Mohannad_Haydar_Matar said:

It's not wise to dismiss such a thing.

l dismiss "climate change", but certainly not the plastic problem. Plastic pollution appears to be developing into a planetary killer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of if you believe in the science or not, which I think it's pretty ridiculous not to believe in the science, at least she's standing up for her beliefs. No one is saying climate change will abolish all human existence, but it will have consequences in terms of making organized human life more difficult and this is already happening around the equator, a lot of the border crisis is partly a product of climate change and farmers moving to the US as a result. 

What are your reasons for not believing in it? The common argument you hear is from people that say we are just in an interglacial phase and this is a product of a tilting of the Earth's position relative to the sun, which is natural and when that happens some rises in temperature are natural. While this is true, seeing such a rapid rise in sea levels and such a rapid increase in temperature is not normal. There has to be a human component to this. And even if the effects are overstated, what harm is it doing to not damage the Earth? The greed of fossil fuel companies has displaced so many native tribes in the Amazon rainforest, which is also partially contributing btw to the instability in these countries. When these people end up being pushed out of their lands, their only recourse is to resist, which fuels the sale of drugs so they can exchange it for weapons to defend themselves against the tyranny of the states that work hand in hand with these corporations.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

a lot of the border crisis is partly a product of climate change and farmers moving to the US as a result. 

According to a liberal radio program, this is from bad trade deals by their own gov't with multinationals (and payola).

33 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

There has to be a human component to this.

l'II cite two different numbers: about 1992-94 when Punatoba(sp?) erupted at the same time as another volcanoe, NOAA and other science sources said the following year that global temperatures dropped 0.1 degrees C.  When Mount St. Helens exploded, it released more sulfur (l forget the multiplier) than the largest estimate of all sulfur released by all industrial activity since ~1800 C.C.

33 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

what harm is it doing to not damage the Earth?

Completely agree.

Edited by hasanhh
spelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friday, 06Dec19

She is in Madrid during the climate conference. The Guardian is quoting her as saying "school strikes have achieved nothing"; while BBC quoting her as saying "they are trying to silence us".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, hasanhh said:

Friday, 06Dec19

She is in Madrid during the climate conference. The Guardian is quoting her as saying "school strikes have achieved nothing"; while BBC quoting her as saying "they are trying to silence us".

 

She is half way back to realizing her sponsors are the ones creating the panic.
The oceans are running out of oxygen!!!!!!! Hang on...water is H2O. Take away the O and you have H, which is a gas. That means when O leaves, H does too. Are the oceans drying up or are they raising? Which scientist to listen to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Son of Placid said:

The oceans are running out of oxygen!!!!!!! Hang on

l saw that headline but forgot to read it. Also, l think/guess the reference is to dissolved O2.

There is also renewed reporting on coral reefs, but l do not know how much of this is hype over real concern.

1 hour ago, Son of Placid said:

Which scientist to listen to.????

Alternatively, which publications to read?  Even credible institutions craft there press releases for mass consumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hasanhh said:

Alternatively, which publications to read?  Even credible institutions craft there press releases for mass consumption.

they always focus on ideas that serves to their interests not scientists & real people interest that Greta-Thunberg becomes like a dummy in  hands of Ventriloquist companies & institutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hasanhh said:

:dwarf: "NO" Time magazine just named her "Person of the Year"

"person of the year" is more publicity for the girl. It sometimes takes a young person to be bold enough to say what an older people would not want to say.

Quote

According to TIME, the Swedish teenager and climate activist has won the award "for sounding the alarm about humanity’s predatory relationship with the only home we have ... for showing us all what it might look like when a new generation leads."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hasanhh said:

:sign_no:"Temper Tantrum Truant . . . Go Back to Skool where youz belong."

As a person who was "educated" in American schools, I assume she's able to learn much more on her own than she would have while sitting in a classroom. 

I have absolutely nothing negative to say about Miss Thunberg. I do wonder why the media chose her as their darling when there have always been so many young climate activists who have been ignored, but she has used the publicity gracefully. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2019 at 12:16 AM, hasanhh said:

Also, l think/guess the reference is to dissolved O2.

As temperature increases, capacity for dissolved oxygen decreases. Also, rotting biomass consumes oxygen. 

Back in the early 90s I did some work involving rotting overpopulated invasive clams. (Corbicula fluminea) The oxygen loss is catastrophic in systems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking, give Greta a little more time. Her speeches are changing.

"That action must be powerful and wide-ranging. After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it. We need to dismantle them all. Our political leaders can no longer shirk their responsibilities."

Wait until she figures out how involved her sponsors are and she'll be speaking out against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2019 at 10:16 PM, hasanhh said:

There is also renewed reporting on coral reefs, but l do not know how much of this is hype over real concern.

Latest I heard was the Great Barrier Reef was actually poisoned by pesticides/herbicides used by Aussie farmers, but banned in some 60 other countries.
This was the "whole ecosystem" Greta was talking about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2019 at 10:44 PM, hasanhh said:

The Guardian is quoting her as saying "school strikes have achieved nothing";

Her complaint had always been people praising the messenger while ignoring the message. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, notme said:

did some work involving rotting overpopulated invasive clams. (Corbicula fluminea) The oxygen loss is catastrophic in systems. 

l did some quick reading. Which "mat" was used to decrease DO to exterminate those bivalves?

Also, how did the "rotting" affect DO? Mostly microbes are involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, notme said:

able to learn much more on her own than she would have while sitting in a classroom.

Yeah. Now when l grew up we only had encyclopedias and maybe somebody's father might have an old college book to lend; and if you went to your local library is was the same -just maybe a different set of encyclopdeias. Then about year 2000, l read an article which said that with the rise of the internet, using this example, there were now high school students completely competent in quantum mechanics.  :furious:"l'm jealous."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

Latest I heard was the Great Barrier Reef was actually poisoned by pesticides/herbicides used by Aussie farmers, but banned in some 60 other countries.
This was the "whole ecosystem" Greta was talking about. 

As l posted over on "Plastic Pollution", those polyps injest nanoplastics (since microplastics are too large and should actually be called 'milliplastics') because "they taste good".

What you heard about the Great Barrier Reef is another example of why l never believe enivironmentalists until 'proven' otherwise: the East Australian Current which feeds and overflows/washes the Reef comes in from Vanuatu and New Caledonia. When you look at an agricultural region map -e.g. dryland farming- then how the ocean currents from these two major areas head into the lndian Ocean -then their assertion makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasanhh said:

l did some quick reading. Which "mat" was used to decrease DO to exterminate those bivalves?

Also, how did the "rotting" affect DO? Mostly microbes are involved.

I'm a biologist, not a chemist, not a microbiologist. I measured the water chemistry and I can tell you what happened and how it compares to control runs, but I don't know the mechanisms of it. 

We replicated the real-world condition of moderate temperature increase, which led to increased metabolism and decreased oxygen availability, triggering death in some organisms, which caused an increase in ammonia and sharp decrease in oxygen, triggering mass-die-off, which caused dissolved oxygen levels to drop to near zero while ammonia levels continued to increase. 

We ran these proof of concept tests in a closed system. In flowing water, the old adage is "dilution is the solution to pollution". But even in a short-term situation, lack of oxygen and increased ammonia would be toxic. 

But this was 25+ years ago. I can't give any more specifics; I don't remember. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2019 at 2:55 PM, notme said:

I'm a biologist, not a chemist, not a microbiologist. I measured the water chemistry and I can tell you what happened and how it compares to control runs, but I don't know the mechanisms of it. 

We replicated the real-world condition of moderate temperature increase, which led to increased metabolism and decreased oxygen availability, triggering death in some organisms, which caused an increase in ammonia and sharp decrease in oxygen, triggering mass-die-off, which caused dissolved oxygen levels to drop to near zero while ammonia levels continued to increase. 

We ran these proof of concept tests in a closed system. In flowing water, the old adage is "dilution is the solution to pollution". But even in a short-term situation, lack of oxygen and increased ammonia would be toxic. 

But this was 25+ years ago. I can't give any more specifics; I don't remember. 

Can you attribute any of this to human emissions, aka, my truck? 
I'm seeing two things at work here and the main, main, biggest problem is pollution and our disposable society since the 70's. The second I see is a natural shift in climate as predicded by the end times. 

Not sure what effect the magnetic poles are making by continually moving. The magnetic North pole is headed for Siberia. The magnetic South is 2700klms, 1670 some miles off True South. The equator is wobbling.  Nautical charts are updated every 90 days. Tectonic plates continue to move. I think the alarmists are looking in the wrong places. 

At least our PM comes to the rescue with a carbon tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

attribute any of this to human emissions, aka, my truck?

l began a "Pollution Numbers" on the Science forum.

Your gov't has a competent presentation. The gas you use produces a (rounded) 2.3kg CO2 per Litre used. The paper also says the avg vehice produces 4,600 kg per year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...