Why right-wing men are so pissed off by the likes of Greta and AOC

by Ben Reilly Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:36 pm

The TL/DR is that it all ends up symbolizing a threat to their balls. But it's worth a look:

While these examples might feel like mere coincidence to some, the idea that white men would lead the attacks on Greta Thunberg is consistent with a growing body of research linking gender reactionaries to climate-denialism—some of the research coming from Thunberg’s own country. Researchers at Sweden’s Chalmers University of Technology, which recently launched the world’s first academic research center to study climate denialism, have for years been examining a link between climate deniers and the anti-feminist far-right.

In 2014, Jonas Anshelm and Martin Hultman of Chalmers published a paper analyzing the language of a focus group of climate skeptics. The common themes in the group, they said, were striking: “for climate skeptics … it was not the environment that was threatened, it was a certain kind of modern industrial society built and dominated by their form of masculinity.”

The connection has to do with a sense of group identity under threat, Hultman told me—an identity they perceive to be under threat from all sides. Besieged, as they see it, both by developing gender equality—Hultman pointed specifically to the shock some men felt at the #MeToo movement—and now climate activism’s challenge to their way of life, male reactionaries motivated by right-wing nationalism, anti-feminism, and climate denialism increasingly overlap, the three reactions feeding off of one another.

Climate science, for skeptics, becomes feminized—or viewed as “oppositional to assumed entitlements of masculine primacy.”
“There is a package of values and behaviors connected to a form of masculinity that I call ‘industrial breadwinner masculinity.’ They see the world as separated between humans and nature. They believe humans are obliged to use nature and its resources to make products out of them. And they have a risk perception that nature will tolerate all types of waste. It’s a risk perception that doesn’t think of nature as vulnerable and as something that is possible to be destroyed. For them, economic growth is more important than the environment” Hultman told Deutsche Welle last year.

The corollary to this is that climate science, for skeptics, becomes feminized—or viewed as “oppositional to assumed entitlements of masculine primacy,” Hultman and fellow researcher Paul Pulé wrote in another paper.

https://newrepublic.com/article/154879/misogyny-climate-deniers?fbclid=IwAR2lyhMw3npMJi2luwJTvmQqa1IKESOmRFJZEFbRVTzyV1BOQhHI66wwWXs

by Maddog Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:40 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:The TL/DR is that it all ends up symbolizing a threat to their balls. But it's worth a look:

While these examples might feel like mere coincidence to some, the idea that white men would lead the attacks on Greta Thunberg is consistent with a growing body of research linking gender reactionaries to climate-denialism—some of the research coming from Thunberg’s own country. Researchers at Sweden’s Chalmers University of Technology, which recently launched the world’s first academic research center to study climate denialism, have for years been examining a link between climate deniers and the anti-feminist far-right.

In 2014, Jonas Anshelm and Martin Hultman of Chalmers published a paper analyzing the language of a focus group of climate skeptics. The common themes in the group, they said, were striking: “for climate skeptics … it was not the environment that was threatened, it was a certain kind of modern industrial society built and dominated by their form of masculinity.”

The connection has to do with a sense of group identity under threat, Hultman told me—an identity they perceive to be under threat from all sides. Besieged, as they see it, both by developing gender equality—Hultman pointed specifically to the shock some men felt at the #MeToo movement—and now climate activism’s challenge to their way of life, male reactionaries motivated by right-wing nationalism, anti-feminism, and climate denialism increasingly overlap, the three reactions feeding off of one another.

Climate science, for skeptics, becomes feminized—or viewed as “oppositional to assumed entitlements of masculine primacy.”
“There is a package of values and behaviors connected to a form of masculinity that I call ‘industrial breadwinner masculinity.’ They see the world as separated between humans and nature. They believe humans are obliged to use nature and its resources to make products out of them. And they have a risk perception that nature will tolerate all types of waste. It’s a risk perception that doesn’t think of nature as vulnerable and as something that is possible to be destroyed. For them, economic growth is more important than the environment” Hultman told Deutsche Welle last year.

The corollary to this is that climate science, for skeptics, becomes feminized—or viewed as “oppositional to assumed entitlements of masculine primacy,” Hultman and fellow researcher Paul Pulé wrote in another paper.

https://newrepublic.com/article/154879/misogyny-climate-deniers?fbclid=IwAR2lyhMw3npMJi2luwJTvmQqa1IKESOmRFJZEFbRVTzyV1BOQhHI66wwWXs

And Right Wing women?

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:21 pm

I didn't think it would be long before this fucking idiotic obeisance to the new Green Messiah would turn into yet another predictable tirade against the so-called ubiquitous Right Wing.

by Ben Reilly Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:28 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:The TL/DR is that it all ends up symbolizing a threat to their balls. But it's worth a look:

While these examples might feel like mere coincidence to some, the idea that white men would lead the attacks on Greta Thunberg is consistent with a growing body of research linking gender reactionaries to climate-denialism—some of the research coming from Thunberg’s own country. Researchers at Sweden’s Chalmers University of Technology, which recently launched the world’s first academic research center to study climate denialism, have for years been examining a link between climate deniers and the anti-feminist far-right.

In 2014, Jonas Anshelm and Martin Hultman of Chalmers published a paper analyzing the language of a focus group of climate skeptics. The common themes in the group, they said, were striking: “for climate skeptics … it was not the environment that was threatened, it was a certain kind of modern industrial society built and dominated by their form of masculinity.”

The connection has to do with a sense of group identity under threat, Hultman told me—an identity they perceive to be under threat from all sides. Besieged, as they see it, both by developing gender equality—Hultman pointed specifically to the shock some men felt at the #MeToo movement—and now climate activism’s challenge to their way of life, male reactionaries motivated by right-wing nationalism, anti-feminism, and climate denialism increasingly overlap, the three reactions feeding off of one another.

Climate science, for skeptics, becomes feminized—or viewed as “oppositional to assumed entitlements of masculine primacy.”
“There is a package of values and behaviors connected to a form of masculinity that I call ‘industrial breadwinner masculinity.’ They see the world as separated between humans and nature. They believe humans are obliged to use nature and its resources to make products out of them. And they have a risk perception that nature will tolerate all types of waste. It’s a risk perception that doesn’t think of nature as vulnerable and as something that is possible to be destroyed. For them, economic growth is more important than the environment” Hultman told Deutsche Welle last year.

The corollary to this is that climate science, for skeptics, becomes feminized—or viewed as “oppositional to assumed entitlements of masculine primacy,” Hultman and fellow researcher Paul Pulé wrote in another paper.

https://newrepublic.com/article/154879/misogyny-climate-deniers?fbclid=IwAR2lyhMw3npMJi2luwJTvmQqa1IKESOmRFJZEFbRVTzyV1BOQhHI66wwWXs

And Right Wing women?

This isn't about right-wing women, it's about right-wing men.

by Ben Reilly Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:30 pm

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I didn't think it would be long before this fucking idiotic obeisance to the new Green Messiah would turn into yet another predictable tirade against the so-called ubiquitous Right Wing.

It's a tirade how?

Seems to me to be very neutral, non-insulting language. It simply describes an observed mindset, that was recorded from the mouths of the people who have that mindset.

by eddie Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:47 pm

Neutral non-insulting language is good. I agree.
Anger means someone lost the plot. And no one listens when someone loses the plot.

by Fred Moletrousers Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:06 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:I didn't think it would be long before this fucking idiotic obeisance to the new Green Messiah would turn into yet another predictable tirade against the so-called ubiquitous Right Wing.

It's a tirade how?

Seems to me to be very neutral, non-insulting language. It simply describes an observed mindset, that was recorded from the mouths of the people who have that mindset.

Look at your own thread title. Your own words are clearly intended to imply that it is only "right wing men"who are "pissed off" by the misplaced heroine worship of this child. That is far from the truth; I have seen a great deal of "pissed offness" against the growing development of some sort of worldwide Thunberg cult among people from widely differing political viewpoints

The Left does not hold a monopoly of concern over climate change, yet that is what is being claimed - along with the obligatory abuse directed towards anyone who even questions the causes - in this forum. Your thread title is supportive of this, though without the abuse that is customary from others, I will admit.

by 'Wolfie Wed Dec 18, 2019 12:31 am

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I didn't think it would be long before this fucking idiotic obeisance to the new Green Messiah would turn into yet another predictable tirade against the so-called ubiquitous Right Wing.

Feeling so scared and threatened by a mere slip of a teenage girl already, Freddie ???

The shame of it all..

by Maddog Wed Dec 18, 2019 1:09 am

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

And Right Wing women?

This isn't about right-wing women, it's about right-wing men.

No it isn't.

It's the typical "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology" line of B.S..

by 'Wolfie Wed Dec 18, 2019 7:26 am

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:

This isn't about right-wing women, it's about right-wing men.

No it isn't.

It's the typical "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology" line of B.S..

Nah...

It's just you, DopeyDawg, showing how worried and offended you are by that one young girl..

You right wing "libertarian" snowflake.

by Ben Reilly Wed Dec 18, 2019 12:45 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

And Right Wing women?

This isn't about right-wing women, it's about right-wing men.

No it isn't.

It's the typical "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology" line of B.S..

Is it, though? Can you support that statement?

by Fred Moletrousers Wed Dec 18, 2019 3:45 pm

'Wolfie wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:I didn't think it would be long before this fucking idiotic obeisance to the new Green Messiah would turn into yet another predictable tirade against the so-called ubiquitous Right Wing.

Feeling so scared and threatened by a mere slip of a teenage girl already, Freddie ???

The shame of it all..

She is a child who is being controlled, manipulated and exploited by adults, but you are too stupid to realise it.

And why should she make me feel "scared" or "threatened" any more than some foul-mouthed Aussie dickhead with a self idolatry complex?

by Maddog Wed Dec 18, 2019 5:02 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

No it isn't.

It's the typical "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology" line of B.S..

Is it, though? Can you support that statement?

You want me to support the existence of SJWs and attitudes that afflict those with that malady?

by Ben Reilly Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:27 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

No it isn't.

It's the typical "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology" line of B.S..

Is it, though? Can you support that statement?

You want me to support the existence of SJWs and attitudes that afflict those with that malady?

No, I want you to show me the connection between published, peer-reviewed social science and "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology."

Because it sounds to me more like you got butthurt than that you have a leg to stand on here.

by 'Wolfie Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:36 pm

DopeyDawg and that flatulent little trolling oxygen-thief DYKhead are living proof of the premise of this article...

Haven't seen anybody on here as scared of facing up to a few home truths put before them, as we are seeing here this week..

A handful of "big" tough right-wing "men" on here, all too ready to beat up on a mere little slip of a teenage girl -- simply because they don't like the messages that have been presented over recent weeks.

Why right-wing men are so pissed off by the likes of Greta and AOC 4086978286

Why right-wing men are so pissed off by the likes of Greta and AOC 4086978286

<<<< Maddog and TD,YK trying to outdo each other in the "big tough RW men" snowflake competition..

by Maddog Wed Dec 18, 2019 10:05 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

You want me to support the existence of SJWs and attitudes that afflict those with that malady?

No, I want you to show me the connection between published, peer-reviewed social science and "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology."

Because it sounds to me more like you got butthurt than that you have a leg to stand on here.

Guess we don't get what we want, but we do usually get what we need. Cool

by Ben Reilly Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:06 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

You want me to support the existence of SJWs and attitudes that afflict those with that malady?

No, I want you to show me the connection between published, peer-reviewed social science and "look at me, I'm a more compassionate and moral person because I have a left wing ideology."

Because it sounds to me more like you got butthurt than that you have a leg to stand on here.

Guess we don't get what we want, but we do usually get what we need.

Why right-wing men are so pissed off by the likes of Greta and AOC 1177314732

by Victorismyhero Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:34 pm

'Wolfie wrote:
Fred Moletrousers wrote:I didn't think it would be long before this fucking idiotic obeisance to the new Green Messiah would turn into yet another predictable tirade against the so-called ubiquitous Right Wing.

Feeling so scared and threatened by a mere slip of a teenage girl already, Freddie ???

The shame of it all..

you know what the REAL shame is dont you

it is that you are so pussy whipped that even a 16yo spoilt precocious brat can tell you what to think
AND that you are so dumb as to think that by tis stage we can actually do anything to control whats happening. The tipping point was reached years ago...even if the WHOLE world went carbon neutral (and THAT includes natural causes as well) we are hardly likely to escape the most severe consequences.

NOW thats NOT to say we shouldnt clean up our act, but doing so needs to be done in a way that does not impact the standard of living we have or the economy, because that way lies chaos and civil war. (what would YOU do without your fossil fuel guzzling motor wolfie (hint electric ones aint up to living in your climate nor do they have the capacity and ability for long journeys and loads that you must need...NOR...could you afford one if they WERE available...how does a horse and cart sound to you?)

what we SHOULD be concentrating on is taking those worst case scenarios and putting in place the plans and means to mitigate their effects

by Ben Reilly Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:14 pm

I just find this gob-smackingly unbelievable. Who says shit like this about the majority of grown-up politicians, let alone teen girls?

It reminds me of when right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton the White House dog. Seriously???

by Maddog Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:38 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I just find this gob-smackingly unbelievable. Who says shit like this about the majority of grown-up politicians, let alone teen girls?

It reminds me of when right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton the White House dog. Seriously???

Is it OK to disagree with her and think she is being used and hidden behind?

by Ben Reilly Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:57 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I just find this gob-smackingly unbelievable. Who says shit like this about the majority of grown-up politicians, let alone teen girls?

It reminds me of when right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton the White House dog. Seriously???

Is it OK to disagree with her and think she is being used and hidden behind?

Of course it is! I just don't get the hatred and personal attacks -- they're actually reprehensible, if you think about it.

by eddie Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:01 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I just find this gob-smackingly unbelievable. Who says shit like this about the majority of grown-up politicians, let alone teen girls?

It reminds me of when right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton the White House dog. Seriously???

Is it OK to disagree with her and think she is being used and hidden behind?

Of course it is! I just don't get the hatred and personal attacks -- they're actually reprehensible, if you think about it.

I agree. You can completely disagree with someone - and that is every person’s right - but why be so nasty?
I don’t get that kind of anger.

by Maddog Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:49 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Is it OK to disagree with her and think she is being used and hidden behind?

Of course it is! I just don't get the hatred and personal attacks -- they're actually reprehensible, if you think about it.

OK, I think she's being used by adults.

To be honest, what I have seen mostly from this story is people being upset with the adults that support and hide behind her.

Then those adults pretend that people are attacking her and say folks are being reprehensible.

In a way it reminds me of child soldiers. Most sane people are not mad at the children involved in warfare, but the adults behind them.

by Victorismyhero Thu Dec 19, 2019 10:52 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I just find this gob-smackingly unbelievable. Who says shit like this about the majority of grown-up politicians, let alone teen girls?

It reminds me of when right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton the White House dog. Seriously???

is she spoilt...I'd say so
is she precocious...definitely
is she a brat definitely with her "my childhood has been ruined".... idiot...or maybe it it has but she's blaming the wrong people...try looking at her parents and the people behind her..

by Vintage Fri Dec 20, 2019 6:52 pm

I reckon the 'researchers' should have more pressing matters to look into.

by The Devil, You Know Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:26 pm

why are soy boys so enamoured by a puppet

by 'Wolfie Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:05 am

Vintage wrote:I reckon the 'researchers' should have more pressing matters to look into.

What real value is there in looking at your supposed "more pressing" matters...

If while you're looking elsewhere, your beloved corporate masters and their supplicant political puppets manage to fuck the environment over totally..

So that when you finally turn back from your distractions, you longer have a habitable planet left to live on ?

by 'Wolfie Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:10 am

The Devil, You Know wrote:why are soy boys so enamoured by a puppet

As I don't know any "soy boys" (or soy girls, either) that I can ask, I can't answer that dubious question...

However, why are corporate shills such as yourself so 'enamoured' by mining, oil & pesticide corporate propaganda ???

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 21, 2019 3:43 am

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Is it OK to disagree with her and think she is being used and hidden behind?

Of course it is! I just don't get the hatred and personal attacks -- they're actually reprehensible, if you think about it.

OK, I think she's being used by adults.

To be honest, what I have seen mostly from this story is people being upset with the adults that support and hide behind her.

Then those adults pretend that people are attacking her and say folks are being reprehensible.

In a way it reminds me of child soldiers. Most sane people are not mad at the children involved in warfare, but the adults behind them.

Didn't she start her activism on her own, even talking her parents into going vegan and giving up flying?

by nicko Sat Dec 21, 2019 4:18 am

No, her Parents are left wing activists who, with others decided to "use" her for their own beliefs , and others taken in by her childish ideas hurried to get behind her !

by Original Quill Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:57 am

Victorismyhero wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:I just find this gob-smackingly unbelievable. Who says shit like this about the majority of grown-up politicians, let alone teen girls?

It reminds me of when right-wing pundit Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton the White House dog. Seriously???
is she spoilt...I'd say so
is she precocious...definitely
is she a brat definitely with her "my childhood has been ruined".... idiot...or maybe it it has but she's blaming the wrong people...try looking at her parents and the people behind her..

It sounds like Trump...on all three points. Twisted Evil

by Victorismyhero Sat Dec 21, 2019 10:54 am

I wouldnt argue with that Quill

by Maddog Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:58 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

OK, I think she's being used by adults.

To be honest, what I have seen mostly from this story is people being upset with the adults that support and hide behind her.

Then those adults pretend that people are attacking her and say folks are being reprehensible.

In a way it reminds me of child soldiers. Most sane people are not mad at the children involved in warfare, but the adults behind them.

Didn't she start her activism on her own, even talking her parents into going vegan and giving up flying?

What's important is where she is now. She's being used by adults to provide cover for their positions.

Cant pull the "you're attacking a kid card" when a someone says a 30 year old is full of shit.

by Original Quill Sat Dec 21, 2019 4:33 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:

Didn't she start her activism on her own, even talking her parents into going vegan and giving up flying?

What's important is where she is now. She's being used by adults to provide cover for their positions.

Cant pull the "you're attacking a kid card" when a someone says a 30 year old is full of shit.

What evidence does anyone have of this? Sounds like an alt.right argument, made up as a place-holder in the absence of actual facts.

by 'Wolfie Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:26 pm

DopeyDawg and Deano are obviously the two cretinous turkeys who are clearly so "full of shit", on these anti-Greta threads...

Two grown men so desperate to push their anti-climate change/pro-corporatist barrows on here..

That they resort to attempting to "beat up" on a teenage girl on the internet -- with zero actual 'evidence' to suppprt their idiotic convictions.

by Fred Moletrousers Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:44 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

What's important is where she is now. She's being used by adults to provide cover for their positions.

Cant pull the "you're attacking a kid card" when a someone says a 30 year old is full of shit.

What evidence does anyone have of this? Sounds like an alt.right argument, made up as a place-holder in the absence of actual facts.

So far as her being precocious is concerned, parents of a an "alt.right", ultra Left, some-where-in-the-middle persuasion who have the otherwise sheer delight of having teenage daughters and grand daughters, really don't need any "evidence" other than their own experience.

With regard to her being exploited by adults, that is painfully obvious to anyone who has even the most basic knowledge and experience of the dark arts of spin-doctoring. The fact that she travels the globe in the company of "a staff" is something of a giveaway.....

by nicko Sat Dec 21, 2019 6:22 pm

To make sure she says the right thing ,and does the right thing at the right time !

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:52 pm

nicko wrote: No, her Parents are left wing activists who, with others decided to "use" her for their own beliefs , and others taken in by her childish ideas hurried to get behind her !

They both gave up flying. Now, the mom, I believe, is an opera singer, and the dad is an actor -- both professions require a lot of travel. So are you saying they took that kind of hit to their own earning capacity to make their daughter a puppet?

Just doesn't sound very likely.

by eddie Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:00 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
nicko wrote: No, her Parents are left wing activists who, with others decided to "use" her for their own beliefs , and others taken in by her childish ideas hurried to get behind her !

They both gave up flying. Now, the mom, I believe, is an opera singer, and the dad is an actor -- both professions require a lot of travel. So are you saying they took that kind of hit to their own earning capacity to make their daughter a puppet?

Just doesn't sound very likely.

No, it doesn’t. Make you right on this one.

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:14 pm

Well, in two short years, she'll be all grown up and free to tell the world whether she's being managed, puppeteered, whatever. Should be interesting to see.

The argument that what she says now is wrong because it would hurt the economy isn't very logical. For one, you have to have an inhabitable planet to have any kind of economy, good or bad.

For another, going green on a global scale would provide so many economic opportunities in construction, energy, infrastructure, etc.

Finally, we don't have to do away with every single last human source of CO2, as I've said before. Think of the tremendous impact that would be made simply by converting every street car in the world to electric within five years.

Greta Thunberg can easily expect to live to the year 2083. She is convinced by the majority of the climate scientists of the world that we have to take drastic action. And she has every right to speak out about it.

by Maddog Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:28 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
nicko wrote: No, her Parents are left wing activists who, with others decided to "use" her for their own beliefs , and others taken in by her childish ideas hurried to get behind her !

They both gave up flying. Now, the mom, I believe, is an opera singer, and the dad is an actor -- both professions require a lot of travel. So are you saying they took that kind of hit to their own earning capacity to make their daughter a puppet?

Just doesn't sound very likely.

What makes you think they took an income hit?

I'm sure Greta Inc is fairly lucrative.

by Maddog Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:30 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:Well, in two short years, she'll be all grown up and free to tell the world whether she's being managed, puppeteered, whatever. Should be interesting to see.

The argument that what she says now is wrong because it would hurt the economy isn't very logical. For one, you have to have an inhabitable planet to have any kind of economy, good or bad.

For another, going green on a global scale would provide so many economic opportunities in construction, energy, infrastructure, etc.

Finally, we don't have to do away with every single last human source of CO2, as I've said before. Think of the tremendous impact that would be made simply by converting every street car in the world to electric within five years.

Greta Thunberg can easily expect to live to the year 2083. She is convinced by the majority of the climate scientists of the world that we have to take drastic action. And she has every right to speak out about it.

Do you know what the Broken Window Fallacy Is?

by nicko Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:34 pm

She has Millions going in to her/parents bank, put there by the deluded !

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:51 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:Well, in two short years, she'll be all grown up and free to tell the world whether she's being managed, puppeteered, whatever. Should be interesting to see.

The argument that what she says now is wrong because it would hurt the economy isn't very logical. For one, you have to have an inhabitable planet to have any kind of economy, good or bad.

For another, going green on a global scale would provide so many economic opportunities in construction, energy, infrastructure, etc.

Finally, we don't have to do away with every single last human source of CO2, as I've said before. Think of the tremendous impact that would be made simply by converting every street car in the world to electric within five years.

Greta Thunberg can easily expect to live to the year 2083. She is convinced by the majority of the climate scientists of the world that we have to take drastic action. And she has every right to speak out about it.

Do you know what the Broken Window Fallacy Is?

It doesn't apply here because this would not be an "on top of" investment but an "instead of" investment.

Imagine the energy coming into homes and businesses as running water. If the water company has nearly drained its primary water source, it's going to find a new source, hook its pipes up to that, and one day consumers will be getting their water from a different lake or aquifer. Chances are, they won't even notice.

You wouldn't notice if the power to run your computer one day shifted from being generated by coal to being generated by solar. It's just electricity.

It's up to the people who make the things that pollute -- mainly, vehicles and power plants -- to earmark future investments they've already planned to make toward clean rather than dirty energy and transportation. It's that simple.

by Maddog Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:56 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Do you know what the Broken Window Fallacy Is?

It doesn't apply here because this would not be an "on top of" investment but an "instead of" investment.

Imagine the energy coming into homes and businesses as running water. If the water company has nearly drained its primary water source, it's going to find a new source, hook its pipes up to that, and one day consumers will be getting their water from a different lake or aquifer. Chances are, they won't even notice.

You wouldn't notice if the power to run your computer one day shifted from being generated by coal to being generated by solar. It's just electricity.

It's up to the people who make the things that pollute -- mainly, vehicles and power plants -- to earmark future investments they've already planned to make toward clean rather than dirty energy and transportation. It's that simple.

It wouldn't apply to energy per se, but it would apply to any machines and vehicles that became obsolete or banned.

by Tommy Monk Sat Dec 21, 2019 10:59 pm

Why right-wing men are so pissed off by the likes of Greta and AOC Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRR8U7UN_sJjZcv8_d8JgpTIOeGvhfkiXUNYqCM26AS1CXM-Q

As you can see from graph above... most of the last 10000 years has been warmer/as warm as today... while CO2 levels were slightly lower than today...

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:34 pm

Maddog wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Do you know what the Broken Window Fallacy Is?

It doesn't apply here because this would not be an "on top of" investment but an "instead of" investment.

Imagine the energy coming into homes and businesses as running water. If the water company has nearly drained its primary water source, it's going to find a new source, hook its pipes up to that, and one day consumers will be getting their water from a different lake or aquifer. Chances are, they won't even notice.

You wouldn't notice if the power to run your computer one day shifted from being generated by coal to being generated by solar. It's just electricity.

It's up to the people who make the things that pollute -- mainly, vehicles and power plants -- to earmark future investments they've already planned to make toward clean rather than dirty energy and transportation. It's that simple.

It wouldn't apply to energy per se, but it would apply to any machines and vehicles that became obsolete or banned.

Of course. It would have been better if we'd started trying to fix this back in the 80s and 90s, when we wouldn't have had to ban any machinery and could simply have allowed it to become obsolete.

by eddie Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:55 pm

Okay, this is my take on all of this.

I have one question, firstly.

WHAT has her age got to do with her opinion? Are we to believe that we only know our own minds when we hit the age of 20? 33? 45?

At what age would she have to be, that we would find her views as “acceptable”?

Someone tell me, please.

by Ben Reilly Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:57 pm

eddie wrote:Okay, this is my take on all of this.

I have one question, firstly.

WHAT has her age got to do with her opinion? Are we to believe that we only know our own minds when we hit the age of 20? 33? 45?

At what age would she have to be, that we would find her views as “acceptable”?

Someone tell me, please.

Absolutely. Climate change is not so complicated that someone as young as her can't understand it, or the urgency of it.

by 'Wolfie Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:25 am

eddie wrote:Okay, this is my take on all of this.

I have one question, firstly.

WHAT has her age got to do with her opinion? Are we to believe that we only know our own minds when we hit the age of 20? 33? 45?

At what age would she have to be, that we would find her views as “acceptable”?

Someone tell me, please.

Hear, hear !!!

DYKnose and DeputyDopeyDawg, and company, apparently don't believe anybody should have an opinion until they reach the grand old age of 30...
Or 50, if they're female..
Never, if they're anywhere to the left of Attila the Hun.

If they had their way, Greta Thunberg would be bound and gagged, and shipped off to Guantanamo..
Or sold into slavery, if Donnie Dumpster paid them enough...

by Sponsored content