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

Greta Thunberg hype, why?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
Just now, hasanhh said:

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.

 

What does 2.3kg of CO2 look like? Can't possibly be kg. A liter of petrol doesn't weigh that much. How they measure is beyond me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There is absolutely nothing wrong in working against climate change. It is a problem that affects everybody on the planet in including Muslims. A problem that is basically caused by the greed and vani

This girl from sweden who has gained lots of publicity all around the world, what is up with all the hype. Would a person who school strike for people under oppression gain the same publicity. Ro

There are going to be two groups of countries going forward. Those who develop the technology for renewable energy and those who buy that technology. Who do you think will be creating the va

Posted Images

  • Veteran Member
12 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

What does 2.3kg of CO2 look like? Can't possibly be kg. A liter of petrol doesn't weigh that much. How they measure is beyond me.

That is explained in the Canadian gov't paper. hydrocarbon + O2 --> H2O + CO2 + other. The oxygen added makes it heavy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

That is explained in the Canadian gov't paper. hydrocarbon + O2 --> H2O + CO2 + other. The oxygen added makes it heavy.

So it's CO2 plus additives. Not an actual pure CO2 weight. Like buying a bag of potatoes with rocks in the bottom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

So it's CO2 plus additives. Not an actual pure CO2 weight. Like buying a bag of potatoes with rocks in the bottom.

No. Your exhaust is not "pure" anything, but it does produce 2.3kg/L of CO2.

You had the by products of burning in elementary school and chemistry, correct?

lf you really want to read really skewed up stuff, try researching volcanic emissions. The comments and all contradict the Kyoto Treaty and so proclaim false conclusions --so they can say human activity is the real threat.

Remember what l wrote a while back about the 11 TTTRillion tons of ice from Greenland? l wrote out the calculations on  how that would cover my home county with 1.3 inches of rain.

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

No. Your exhaust is not "pure" anything, but it does produce 2.3kg/L of CO2.

You had the by products of burning in elementary school and chemistry, correct?

lf you really want to read really skewed up stuff, try researching volcanic emissions. The comments and all contradict the Kyoto Treaty and so proclaim false conclusions --so they can say human activity is the real threat.

Remember what l wrote a while back about the 11 TTTRillion tons of ice from Greenland? l wrote out the calculations on  how that would cover my home county with 1.3 inches of rain.

No, exhaust is not pure CO2. Exhaust is "cleaner" than it used to be. Leaded gas was supposed to be a major pollutant. On the other hand, it was a buffer. An engine could last forever. Really hard on repeat business. Unleaded was better for... the environment?, but still needed to be cleaned, so catalytic converters helped, but at the same time created more back pressure, less power, less efficient.

Show me a new car that gets 30 mpg at 80mph.  They are just tooting them now with their 1.8L engines and nowhere for groceries.

I had a 75 Camaro, 350 ci, straight pipes, turbo mufflers, 2.73 diff. made 30 mpg at 80 mph. I could do 140 mph, which meant I had more power than a vehicle needed, but why can't half the vehicle make twice the mileage?

We traded efficiency for 2.3kg/L of CO2.

I blame the gas gods and auto manufactures. They hid every measure to reduce consumption. Regardless fuel injection, only vapour explodes. Any gas in liquid state at the time becomes carbon, is useless to the cause, and is expelled as such. There have been many ways to reduce consumption over the last 50 years, none have been implemented. One guy made an engine ran on water separated into it's elements. Swore to reveal it all to the world free of charge, died a strange death before he could, no idea where his notes went. Money is worth more than life.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

Leaded gas was supposed to be a major pollutant.

lt was. The reason it was used starting in the 30s was it is a cheap way to boost the octane rating. The big, humane advantage in eliminating tetraethallead was the mental retardation rate collapsed in congested urban areas. Especially the inner cities.

Back in the 70s l had a 1964 Galaxy 500 with a 240 straight six with an oil circulation problem so even after repaired a couple of times, l had 5 cylinders for power and one dragged along. Once l moved someone, and with a heavily loaded car, drove 1201 miles in 24 hours and one minute at 75mph (the other guy kept stopping) and l got 26+ mpg. On the way back, l got 28 mpg and ran 80mph for a few hours (a lot of semis were passing me still).

This was back in 76. l had to make a stop an was talking to the garage mechanic. He was telling me that he and his son (also a mechanic) rebuilt and tuned up his son's Tornado and it still only got 8.5 mpg. So yes, the accusations that the oil companies used their stock holdings to pressure the auto companies are not accusations at all, but quite accurate. [Ford went public in 1956, well before the Nat'l Defense Highway Act.]

One comparison l make/made is that an M60A3 tank gets 4mpg.

Another is a quote from an automotive engineer, who said in a TV interview, "lf you want to know how much power is in a drop of gasoline, try pushing your car up a hill."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
10 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

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

No, the overpopulation of clams was because they were an invasive species brought from Asia as food in the late 1800s. 

But that has nothing to do with sea level rise, droughts, wildfires, increasing severity of storms, and increased average temperature. 

The fact that one problem exists doesn't disprove the existence of another. 

Your truck makes such a small impact, it's nearly negligible. What needs to change is consumerism and industrial processes. If people would stop buying garbage that they don't need, a lot of the environmental damage would be eliminated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Veteran Member
On 9/24/2019 at 11:55 AM, Brained said:

Greta Thunberg seems to invoke the same sort of reaction in western countries among the right-wing crowd as Malala does in Pakistan. What's with the right-wing hating on teenage girls :confused:

Yeah because both of them seem to have the IQ of cheese spread and are nothing more than the a facade for much more sinister forces at work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Does anyone think that climate change is related to HAARP’s heating of the ionosphere? Note that HAARP-type technology has existed since at least the 1930s. Interestingly, the current global warming first commenced in the 1930s, long after the Industrial Revolution. There are also allegations that HAARP’s use of electromagnetism can be used to make people more susceptible to jinn-possession by altering atmospheric pressures, as well as be used to trigger earthquakes, thunderstorms, and volcanic eruptions. If HAARP is indeed the primary reason for global warming, then why is the entire world, including Iran, basically silent about it?

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Northwest said:

Does anyone think that climate change is related to HAARP’s heating of the ionosphere?

No.

Do a thermodynamic analysis. There is no-way it will have enough power to change temperatures more than a few meters away.

Historical example: During the lGY in 1957, the US shot nuclear devices -specifically design for maximum particle production- into these regions of the atmosphere so that monitoring stations around the World could track these particles as they moved towards the magnetic poles. Now if nuclear devices could not alter anything, then how could very, very low power electronics (comparatively) alter anything?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 12/13/2019 at 8:23 AM, notme said:

No, the overpopulation of clams was because they were an invasive species brought from Asia as food in the late 1800s. 

But that has nothing to do with sea level rise, droughts, wildfires, increasing severity of storms, and increased average temperature. 

The fact that one problem exists doesn't disprove the existence of another. 

Your truck makes such a small impact, it's nearly negligible. What needs to change is consumerism and industrial processes. If people would stop buying garbage that they don't need, a lot of the environmental damage would be eliminated. 

Many things were brought over from Europe and Asia in the 1800's and on. Dandelions were brought from Germany, crab grass was imported by the railways.

Big problem now with Prussian carp, aka goldfish. Of course the humane thing to do is let them loose in the local waters. Massive schools in Lake Superior. Fish and Wildlife are making money but destroying most lakes. Pollution of every kind. Nothing is pure anymore.

My problem with all of this is...The plastic island, supposedly twice the size of Texas now...doesn't exist. We've all seen the pictures of floating plastic of all colours, supposedly in the ocean, but nobody has actually seen it. It seems to avoid people. People who fly over the area daily. When questioned, the first response was that it's all clear plastic so not visible, as if it sorted out all the coloured plastics, second answer, it's microplastics so nobody can see it. 

 

The Arctics have reported more glaciers forming than broke off last year.

The Eskimos are complaining about the over abundance of polar bears threatening their villages.

My neighbour has 4 acres of greenhouse. He composts inside and sometimes injects CO2 to maintain 800 - 1200ppm. He shuts down Dec, Jan, Feb because it costs way to much to heat it over winter. 

Everything reported as being proof is remote or obscure, I'm still trying to figure out how to measure 2.3kg/L of CO2. How big of a bag would I need to put on my exhaust to capture it? 

As for warming...I've seen the dramatic charts that show drastic changes, oh wait a minute. A guy sent me this. It's the same chart used by the alarmists.

1684720792_averagetemp.PNG.8cf91dbd651bf661f33a1d3c68ebb6be.PNG
The "official" chart shows the same dates and temp variations but the dates are far more compressed and the temperature is expanded and only covers a few degrees. It's much more alarming than this perspective but it's the same chart. Perspective.

Most Canadians were looking forward to global warming. Too bad that fell through. 

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

Most Canadians were looking forward to global warming. Too bad that fell through. 

We're getting spring here for the past few weeks. Didn't really get winter this year. I don't like the cold, but I'm a little worried about the impact on hurricane season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 9/8/2019 at 4:33 AM, AkhiraisReal said:

This girl from sweden who has gained lots of publicity all around the world, what is up with all the hype.

Would a person who school strike for people under oppression gain the same publicity. Rohingya, yemen, palestine, Iraq, Syria, afghanistan, countries in Africa etc. Why don't we have people school strike for humans. All this hype around that girl yet we face serious problems involving human genocide and I don't see anyone school strike for that nor any news media covering that.

May Allah hasten the reappearance of our Imam.

Weather is not our problem. Mankind should be a trustee of his and her environment. don’t let them turn this swedish girl in a false God. 

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

We're getting spring here for the past few weeks. Didn't really get winter this year. I don't like the cold, but I'm a little worried about the impact on hurricane season. 

Hurricanes are dependent on the heat of the Sahara and the water temperature off the coast of Senegal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 2/13/2020 at 6:32 PM, hasanhh said:

No.

Do a thermodynamic analysis. There is no-way it will have enough power to change temperatures more than a few meters away.

Historical example: During the lGY in 1957, the US shot nuclear devices -specifically design for maximum particle production- into these regions of the atmosphere so that monitoring stations around the World could track these particles as they moved towards the magnetic poles. Now if nuclear devices could not alter anything, then how could very, very low power electronics (comparatively) alter anything?

@hasanhh

If I recall correctly, former President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad once claimed that Western satellites were utilising HAARP-based technology via electromagnetism as a mechanism to reduce rainfall over Iran. The late environmental minister of India, Anil Madhav Dave, also linked HAARP to climate change and fluctuations in the distribution and amount of precipitation, including over the Indian subcontinent. It is strange that most of the world, including most Iranian, Russian, and Chinese officials, are apparently covering up the role of certain states in using HAARP to induce global warming and detrimental changes in the environment.

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
18 hours ago, notme said:

We're getting spring here for the past few weeks. Didn't really get winter this year. I don't like the cold, but I'm a little worried about the impact on hurricane season. 

Well, it's 10 degrees F here this morning. That's the average this time of year. I don't much like it either. No hurricanes here, just the hail belt of Alberta. Wicked storms come over the mountains quickly. We get about 3 months of T-shirt weather, rarely makes it over 85. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • Veteran Member

For the last week, my locality has had record cold. Record Low, tied record lows, frost warnings, freeze, etc.

So l ask once again, "Where is all this global warming we have been promised?"

Heck, April-May is when l always got a break on my heat bill. BUT NOT THIS YEAR !

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)

My opinion on Greta Thunberg is that she is 100% a media creation to try and sell the "unwashed masses" on carbon taxes, which will do nothing to actually mitigate climate, but will allow US Democrats & their owners (Starbucks, Hollywood, Apple, etc) to enrich themselves further at the expense of working class Americans, who will be taxed to death for owning cars, eating meat, using electricity, et al.

And I'm going to continue to dissent & resist, because as Obama and Clinton have showed us; the US democrats are not the party of peace & justice as they like to portray themselves. I'd actually be willing to argue that they are worse than the US Republicans, because the Republicans are at least honest about their disgust toward the working class & the global south.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
12 hours ago, GD41586 said:

a media creation to try and sell the "unwashed masses"

When l was in skool, the lead word was "great" as in a large amount, thereby "the great unwashed" and the word "masses" was optional because about everyone knew what you were refering to.

l wasn't aware that this ivory-towered derision had come back into vogue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
3 hours ago, hasanhh said:

When l was in skool, the lead word was "great" as in a large amount, thereby "the great unwashed" and the word "masses" was optional because about everyone knew what you were refering to.

l wasn't aware that this ivory-towered derision had come back into vogue.

I can only speak to the situation in the US, because that is all I know but yes, the elite loathe people like me & mine. They are far more open about it now than ever before before due to the infrastructure that Clinton, W, and Obama set up over thirty or so odd years to make sure that they can maintain power & the compliance of these same "great unwashed". The usury system (finance capitalism) gives you credit, you buy shiny things, and then pay more than what those shiny things are worth in actual money that actually exists (shiny things can also be an 'education' in such valuable majors as 'art appreciation', 'womyn's studies', and 'LGBT history' which will put you in debt for the rest of your life as you will not likely find a decent career after you graduate).

Mainstream media openly vilifies and mocks people who believe in God or moral values of any kind & believes that no one will contest it so long as they have panelists like Reza Aslan doing it on a late night show (John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, etc). The elite openly and virulently hate  90% of the people on this earth, so all we can really do is do our best to live our lives focused on the values that actually matter and await the day of judgment when they will get what they have earned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
6 minutes ago, GD41586 said:

(shiny things can also be an 'education' in such valuable majors as 'art appreciation', 'womyn's studies',

ln my generation sociology was the big fraud, then psychology (you might get a job with a Ph.D but nothing less) then English (great Ph.D for truck drivers).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
  • Veteran Member

"She's Baa-ack" -to parody the trailer from the Poltergeist movie.

After the hiatus from C0VlD-19 the brats are in the streets again.

Friday's for Future

https://www.dw.com/en/climate-change-environment-greta-thunberg-merkel-global-strike-climate-action-luisa-neubauer/a-54618006

DeutscheWelleTV also profiled a new face, an 18-year-old, award wining ornithologist standing in the Arctic, named Mya-Rose Craig, mostly on their broadcast.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

Greta is popular because she's a cute, blond, little girl who can give a talk in front of people without crying, getting scared, and / or  running off the stage, as most girls her age would do. She is also seems to be somewhat articulate and intelligent. If you look at the content of what she is saying, it is just repeating what most climate scientists have been saying for the past 50 years. 

If she was black or brown, she would have to be 3x more intelligent, articulate to get any attention from the media. I'm not quite sure why she is so popular.

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Any hype she gets is from notions of performative activism and the whole dramatics she imposes.

I am not saying she is doing anything wrong, but no climate change is going to be alleviated unless there’s is a trans-continental effort by billion dollar corporations to prevent their pollutant wastes from accumulating.

i swear the media needs to stop acting like we lay people can instigate change, no amount of veganism and solar panels is going to stop atmospheric waste and debris when factories spew out toxicity every millisecond.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Zxqn said:

no climate change is going to be alleviated unless there’s is a trans-continental effort by billion dollar corporations to prevent their pollutant wastes from accumulating.

This will only happen if we stop buying their products! We have the numbers, we just need to work together! 

The other possibility would be government regulation, but that would require governments that work to benefit their people, not their pockets. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
1 hour ago, notme said:

This will only happen if we stop buying their products! We have the numbers, we just need to work together! 

We need to buy these products, so this suggestion doesn't work. 

1 hour ago, notme said:

The other possibility would be government regulation, but that would require governments that work to benefit their people, not their pockets. 

Which is an impossibility

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

If she was black or brown, she would have to be 3x more intelligent, articulate to get any attention from the media. I'm not quite sure why she is so popular.

Quite the opposite. Obama won the white vote back in 2008. That should signal that racism is overplayed in the U.S. Plenty of whites listen to mass-marketed black hiphop, however trashy, which in turn is backed up by white- and Zionist-run corporations. The more the intelligentsia, black or white, appeal to the lowest common denominator, the more the masses lap it up, earning billions for the corporate elite. Not everything is about race or DJT, though Soros and Co. (and the DNC) like to make it so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

Greta is popular because she's a cute

She literally looks like she’s suffering from Down syndrome

16 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

She is also seems to be somewhat articulate and intelligent

She doesn’t know how to speak. Even when she wants to yell or say something loudly with confidence, she does so in a whisper. I’m guessing the typical Scandinavian style of raising children is quite restrictive and suppressive that those poor souls have become used to only speaking in their “indoor voice”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, this climate change hype just isn’t an issue for us Muslims. Firstly, we aren’t responsible for it. Any serious effort to reverse climate change will have absolutely nothing to do with ordinary people like you and me. It’s the big boys in charge of massive corporations and entire governments who could possibly reverse climate change.

Therefore, what is the need to busy ordinary people with this hype about climate change? Why should considerable energy and resources be wasted to raise awareness among people like us?

This is a cause for well to do and relatively comfortable upper middle class people – largely White – who belong to suburbia and need a cause to fill some void in their lives.

We Muslims have so many more pressing social and political causes to concentrate on than be distracted by so-called climate change.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...