Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Wymsey

Extinction Rebellion

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, boots60 said:

Seems to be plenty in plaggy tents, drinking out of plaggy bottles.

 

That's well Lesta!

Share this post


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

 

 

agree completely.  but my point remains- if you want to engage this group then you have to reach them from less of a confrontational “ i’m right look how wrong and bad you are” angle . Telling people just how bad and evil they are rarely works in getting them on your side..

 

Also just some of the rhetoric in general is what  puts people off. 

 

“You’ve stolen my childhood!” Really Greta?

 

 

921D7367-4758-4865-A21D-FB18239A72CA.jpeg

Ah the old "but you have it so much better than person I momentarily care about for as long as I can use them to make my bad point".

Edited by Mike the Metal Ed
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Mike the Metal Ed said:

Ah the old "but you have it so much better than person I momentarily care about for as long as I can use them to make my bad point".

 

 

try again.

Share this post


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

Go on then...what is the point here?

"But you have it so much better than this person that I don't even care about now I just want to make my bad point"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why haven't the water cannons been used on these smelly twats yet? 

 

They've shut down the biggest meat market in the UK over night. Why shut down independent retailers? If you're going to do something like that at least target the big companies ffs. 

 

So much hypocrisy going on with these people its unbelievable. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mike the Metal Ed said:

Ah the old "but you have it so much better than person I momentarily care about for as long as I can use them to make my bad point".

What's the point in a 16-year old blaming the world for having stolen her "childhood"? What's the argument here?

 

What was her life in between let's say five and 15 - her childhood - really like? What was she robbed of?

Did she have a hard time? Did she suffer greatly? Did she grew up poor? Was she abused physically and emotionally? Couldn't she go to school? Didn't she have any friends? Are her parents poor?

I think it's safe to say none of these scenarios apply.

 

Hers was a nonsensical argument, purposefully portrayed in a theatrical, overly emotional manner in order to brush over its inherent nothingness.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Why haven't the water cannons been used on these smelly twats yet? 

 

They've shut down the biggest meat market in the UK over night. Why shut down independent retailers? If you're going to do something like that at least target the big companies ffs. 

 

So much hypocrisy going on with these people its unbelievable. 

It's been said already here.

 

Accusations of hypocrisy are probably accurate. They are also irrelevant to the scientific reality of the situation, apart from a.) being a convenient argument to dismiss the whole thing entirely and b.) action to counter or at least prepare for that scientific reality will probably need to consent of people in a democratic populace, which is a problem but only because people get their feelings about the messengers confused with the facts of the message.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

What's the point in a 16-year old blaming the world for having stolen her "childhood"? What's the argument here?

 

What was her life in between let's say five and 15 - her childhood - really like? What was she robbed of?

Did she have a hard time? Did she suffer greatly? Did she grew up poor? Was she abused physically and emotionally? Couldn't she go to school? Didn't she have any friends? Are her parents poor?

I think it's safe to say none of these scenarios apply.

 

Hers was a nonsensical argument, purposefully portrayed in a theatrical, overly emotional manner in order to brush over its inherent nothingness.

Why do you, and so many others care so much about what a teenager said in a speech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

Why do you, and so many others care so much about what a teenager said in a speech

Why not actually try and answer some of the points he's made rather than just come back to this tired old line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 1900's the Suffragettes literally bombed places to protest.  "“If the government must have damage as a token that women want the vote, damage they shall have.”

 

If not for Poll Tax protests/riots, you would be paying the corrupt governments even more -   "Often attack is the only effective form of defence and, as a movement, we should not be ashamed or defensive about these actions, we should be proud of those who did fight back"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's pretty simple - a lot of young people, Greta included, feel that the governments of the day, Western and otherwise, are failing them on the topic of the future. By "stolen her childhood", she is expressing frustration at the fact that she and others are having to do the work of lobbying governments to apply necessary and gradual changes to the way our society generates energy, uses transportation and processes resources when it really, really should be older people doing the damn work - but it's clear from the current state of play that they cannot be trusted to (in the opinion of the younger folks doing all this).

 

I'm sure that Greta's upbringing was considerably more comfortable than that of many other children her age, but that has pretty much the square sum of naff all relevance to the point she's trying to make and most folks who use that "argument" know that too - it is, once again, a convenient obfuscation to dismiss what she is saying. I think there's something of a pattern there.

But this logic doesn't really hold much ground when you look at the facts.  If it's because she needs to tell governments to do something about climate change then why is she only going around shouting at Western ones?

 

The first and third biggest producers of emissions are China and India and Greta hasn't gone there - she's chosen to come to places like the UK - responsible for just 1% of it, instead. Why would you do that?

 

That's why many (correctly imo) believe there are groups with sinister motives behind her, probably also why they are using a child to push the message, it'd harder for people to fight back on it.

 

If a 16 year old supports Trump he obviously deserves a "smack in the face" (see the Washington protest I'm sure you are familiar with ) but get a autistic 16 year girl on climate change and we all have to show devotion, respect and not dare ask a question - sorry but we aren't all falling for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Politics thread....Britain are a small pawn in the world, our voice is pretty much irrelevant. We will get dicked in trade talks.

This thread....They aren’t lobbying China because countries like Britain must lead the way. :dunno:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MattP said:

But this logic doesn't really hold much ground when you look at the facts.  If it's because she needs to tell governments to do something about climate change then why is she only going around shouting at Western ones?

 

The first and third biggest producers of emissions are China and India and Greta hasn't gone there - she's chosen to come to places like the UK - responsible for just 1% of it, instead. Why would you do that?

 

That's why many (correctly imo) believe there are groups with sinister motives behind her, probably also why they are using a child to push the message, it'd harder for people to fight back on it.

 

If a 16 year old supports Trump he obviously deserves a "smack in the face" (see the Washington protest I'm sure you are familiar with ) but get a autistic 16 year girl on climate change and we all have to show devotion, respect and not dare ask a question - sorry but we aren't all falling for it.

Matt, this has been talked about too - if not in this very thread then on previous threads on the topic, I know I've talked about it.

 

She's lobbying Western governments because she knows she and hers won't be able to do much by lobbying the Chinese and other governments directly, but by asking Western governments (not just the UK, @Strokes) to help out there might be success - and, again, the people who use the "why doesn't she go to China?" argument again, know this. And so it is another convenient rationalisation that deliberately overlooks obvious intent to dismiss the entire argument...again.

 

There really is a pattern. And it's tedious to have to shoot down the same old baseless arguments time after time.

 

Of course her methods can be questioned - but I don't get why her motives are being questioned in this conspirational fashion when it's pretty clear what it is she's looking for.

 

NB. Put the Nicholas Sandmann-related strawman away, he deserved a bollocking and being shouted down for being a smug entitled ****, but he certainly didn't deserve getting hit.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's pretty simple - a lot of young people, Greta included, feel that the governments of the day, Western and otherwise, are failing them on the topic of the future. By "stolen her childhood", she is expressing frustration at the fact that she and others are having to do the work of lobbying governments to apply necessary and gradual changes to the way our society generates energy, uses transportation and processes resources when it really, really should be older people doing the damn work - but it's clear from the current state of play that they cannot be trusted to (in the opinion of the younger folks doing all this).

 

I'm sure that Greta's upbringing was considerably more comfortable than that of many other children her age, but that has pretty much the square sum of naff all relevance to the point she's trying to make and most folks who use that "argument" know that too - it is, once again, a convenient obfuscation to dismiss what she is saying. I think there's something of a pattern there.

Congratulations for bringing "feelings" into a debate about politics and the environment. They both don't care about your feelings, they want either facts, action or your factual opinion.

 

Besides, everything that follows afterwards what you're saying - none of that part of her rant. "My message is that we'll be watching you" - great. Nothing new there. I dissected her "speech" in the other thread, pointing at numerous holes in her narrative.

"You have stolen my childhood with your empty words" - and there she is, stealing everybody's time with her own empty words. Talk about "Extinction", "Crisis", citing dubious IPCC records - no 16-year old has the right to speak for all of us, or even just all children ("us"). That is presumptuous and arrogant.

By her same logic, you cannot be trusted either - because you're old.

 

No one can predict what the future brings, so we're dealing with uncertainty regardless of where you stand (talking of a "risk of irreversible chain reactions"). Instead of making practical suggestions, bringing up options to pursue at present, her backers pulled a stunt in front of a global audience with her, desperately trying to appeal to emotions by the use of a plethora of buzzwords.

 

She was talking alright, but not saying much at all. "Climate Justice" - my gawd, climate has never been just!

People don't attack her, most feel pity for her - it's the people behind her and her god-awful message putting off the rest.

Edited by MC Prussian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christ, how many plastic straws were the dinosaurs using? 

 

Our problem as a species has been refusing to learn the lessons of all preceding species/lifeforms which failed to prevent natural climate change. Intelligent life? Pah. 

 

Might take some acid and set up a tent down here on my most local busy road because I'm fed up with the fact we orbit the sun, or that its only 2 short months until Alfie Boe and Michael Buble emerge from their cave to torment us for a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Politics thread....Britain are a small pawn in the world, our voice is pretty much irrelevant. We will get dicked in trade talks.

This thread....They aren’t lobbying China because countries like Britain must lead the way. :dunno:

The empire reborn! :englandsmile4wf:

 

lol

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to do a protest and make a stand about leaves falling off trees at this time of year. My garden is an absolute state. 

 

I thought trees were supposed to be our friends?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Matt, this has been talked about too - if not in this very thread then on previous threads on the topic, I know I've talked about it.

 

She's lobbying Western governments because she knows she and hers won't be able to do much by lobbying the Chinese and other governments directly, but by asking Western governments (not just the UK, @Strokes) to help out there might be success - and, again, the people who use the "why doesn't she go to China?" argument again, know this. And so it is another convenient rationalisation that deliberately overlooks obvious intent to dismiss the entire argument...again.

 

There really is a pattern. And it's tedious to have to shoot down the same old baseless arguments time after time.

 

Of course her methods can be questioned - but I don't get why her motives are being questioned in this conspirational fashion when it's pretty clear what it is she's looking for.

 

NB. Put the Nicholas Sandmann-related strawman away, he deserved a bollocking and being shouted down for being a smug entitled ****, but he certainly didn't deserve getting hit.

Well, why do we need a 16-year old to lobby Western Governments then? She isn't allowed to vote, she is still at school (well, she isn't but ought to be), has no expertise in the field(s) and does not act on her own behalf (she's a tool).

 

What's next - can I send my neighbor's five-year old to lobby at the UN? I mean, his future is even more bleak than Greta's.

 

You're effectively dancing around the fact that his was one big show set up in order to appeal to emotions instead of conscience or intelligence.

Greta herself is looking for nothing, the people behind her, however, have other intentions...

 

And yes - why doesn't she go to China? India? Nigeria? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Why no balls to speak with Trump directly? I'd applaud her if she managed to do just that.

If it's worth sailing across the Atlantic to the US, surely it isn't much of an ask to do a similar PR stunt trip to Africa or Asia for that matter?

 

As for the Sandmann incident - I'm sorry, but he was the victim of a pretty nasty media campaign, exposing most of the US media for what they are. Hacks. All he did was stand his ground and smile awkwardly, because he didn't know better how to handle the situation.

Edited by MC Prussian
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Politics thread....Britain are a small pawn in the world, our voice is pretty much irrelevant. We will get dicked in trade talks.

This thread....They aren’t lobbying China because countries like Britain must lead the way. :dunno:

 

UK is a medium-sized player (not a pawn) so in a comparatively weak negotiating position vis-à-vis giants like USA, China or EU, but not vis-à-vis others necessarily.

 

This focus on China is intellectually dishonest. Of course, as a major source of emissions, it is important. But the West cannot just say: "We'll ignore the past 200 years when we were industrialising, urbanising, growing & pumping out  ever more emissions. We'll just focus on you lot because you're doing that now". From my limited knowledge, it seems China isn't doing that badly considering its extraordinary growth/transformation in the last 30 years.

 

Anyway, for practical reasons, most people seek to influence their own fellow citizens & national authorities (like Extinction Rebellion) or their own part of the world like Greta....

 

Or are you telling me that, as anti-Lefties, you post from downtown Caracas inbetween fighting Maduro's security forces, while @MattP is in Hong Kong with face mask & umbrella, fighting the Chinese for democracy? :D

 

Edited by Alf Bentley
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Congratulations for bringing "feelings" into a debate about politics and the environment. They both don't care about your feelings, they want either facts, action or your factual opinion.

 

Besides, everything that follows afterwards what you're saying - none of that part of her rant. "My message is that we'll be watching you" - great. Nothing new there. I dissected her "speech" in the other thread, pointing at numerous holes in her narrative.

"You have stolen my childhood with your empty words" - and there she is, stealing everybody's time with her own empty words. Talk about "Extinction", "Crisis", citing dubious IPCC records - no 16-year old has the right to speak for all of us, or even just all children ("us"). That is presumptuous and arrogant.

By her same logic, you cannot be trusted either - because you're old.

 

No one can predict what the future brings, so we're dealing with uncertainty regardless of where you stand (talking of a "risk of irreversible chain reactions"). Instead of making proactive suggestions, bringing up options to pursue at present, her backers pulled a stunt in front of a global audience with her, desperately trying to appeal to emotions by the use of a plethora of buzzwords.

 

She was talking alright, but not saying much at all. "Climate Justice" - my gawd, climate has never been just!

People don't attack her, most feel pity for her - it's the people behind her and her god-awful message putting off the rest.

This is the same rhetoric that you accuse the "other side" of engaging in, Prussian. And I that post, all of it, pretty much immediately below it ....and then we started going round and round again.

 

Yes, they will be watching...watching and hoping that world governments actually pull their collective fingers out - and encourage other governments to do so rather than engaging in petty realpolitik and merely talking about the problem (when they have the power to do something about it) while the clock ticks on - they know that they cannot do this all themselves. It's a global problem, that needs a global solution. The people who want to see these changes think that governments are failing them, not older people per se.

 

This all seems pretty obvious to me - I can't quite understand why it isn't obvious to more people.

 

3 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Well, why do we need a 16-year old to lobby Western Governments then? She isn't allowed to vote, she is still at school (well, she isn't but ought to be), has no expertise on the field and does not act on her own behalf (she's a tool).

 

What's next - can I send my neighbor's five-year old to lobby at the UN? I mean, his future is even more bleak than Greta's.

 

You're effectively dancing around the fact that his was one big show set up in order to appeal to emotions instead of conscience or intelligence.

Greta herself is looking for nothing, the people behind her, however, have other intentions...

 

And yes - why doesn't she go to China? India? Nigeria? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Why no balls to speak with Trump directly? I'd applaud her if she managed to do just that.

If it's worth sailing across the Atlantic to the US, surely it isn't much of an ask to do a similar PR stunt trip to Africa or Asia for that matter?

 

As for the Sandmann incident - I'm sorry, but he was the victim of a pretty nasty media campaign, exposing most of the US media for what they are. Hacks. All he did was stand his ground and smile awkwardly, because he didn't know better how to handle the situations.

...do I really have to keep repeating myself?

 

40 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

it really, really should be older people doing the damn work - but it's clear from the current state of play that they cannot be trusted to (in the opinion of the younger folks doing all this).

 

The older people running the show right now are not doing enough.

 

Both you and Matt have floated the "shadowy cabal" stuff with respect to this group on this page already - let's just hear that Soros is behind it all and I can tick another one off my Alex Jones-style bingo card.

 

And I repeat myself again:

 

20 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

She's lobbying Western governments because she knows she and hers won't be able to do much by lobbying the Chinese and other governments directly, but by asking Western governments (not just the UK) to help out there might be success - and, again, the people who use the "why doesn't she go to China?" argument again, know this. And so it is another convenient rationalisation that deliberately overlooks obvious intent to dismiss the entire argument...again.

 

This is obvious.

 

NB. The idea that Sandmann is a victim at all is entirely subjective and down to one's own feelings/politics on the topic. Feelings, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

This is the same rhetoric that you accuse the "other side" of engaging in, Prussian. And I that post, all of it, pretty much immediately below it ....and then we started going round and round again.

 

Yes, they will be watching...watching and hoping that world governments actually pull their collective fingers out - and encourage other governments to do so rather than engaging in petty realpolitik and merely talking about the problem (when they have the power to do something about it) while the clock ticks on - they know that they cannot do this all themselves. It's a global problem, that needs a global solution. The people who want to see these changes think that governments are failing them, not older people per se.

 

This all seems pretty obvious to me - I can't quite understand why it isn't obvious to more people.

 

...do I really have to keep repeating myself?

 

The older people running the show right now are not doing enough.

 

Both you and Matt have floated the "shadowy cabal" stuff with respect to this group on this page already - let's just hear that Soros is behind it all and I can tick another one off my Alex Jones-style bingo card.

 

And I repeat myself again:

 

This is obvious.

 

NB. The idea that Sandmann is a victim at all is entirely subjective and down to one's own feelings/politics on the topic. Feelings, huh?

For most part, you're dancing around the subject one more and then attack me on a rather personal level.

Then proceed by making lengthy statements about how "tiring" it is to regurgitate the same argument over and over again. Well, why bother in the first place?

Then proceed by labeling me and @MattP for example as people pushing some sort of "conspiracy theory". This is getting ridiculous.

If you have no other argument than badmouthing the opposing side, you have no argument at all. This is petty.

 

Quote

The people who want to see these changes think that governments are failing them,

Or rather, they think they need a different type of government altogether? Compare that to Hallam's interview with the BBC, where he points at a bloody revolution and anarchism.

 

Quote

I can't quite understand why it isn't obvious to more people.

Because not everybody blindly accepts the words of a 16-year old, ten-year old "facts" on John Cook's blog or dubious IPCC reports as gospel. Many see behind the scheme, fortunately.

 

Quote

The older people running the show right now are not doing enough.

What kind of ageism is that? Old people are certainly more competent than children in many aspects, not at least due to experience and expertise.

Governments have been working together for a while now and they don't just consist of "old people" (where does "old" start for you? At 30? 40? 50?), and just because progress that we're making isn't the progress activists circles want, doesn't mean there is no progress.

It's a bit like a spoiled child at home, demanding instant gratification. These changes don't happen overnight and won't happen in eight, eleven or twenty, thirty years - maybe partially, but not fully. We still don't understand many factors in climate at all, it's as if you were predicting the lottery at times.

 

As for Sandmann, nothing to do with feelings - but facts. Video evidence. Watch it in full again.

Edited by MC Prussian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

UK is a medium-sized player (not a pawn) so in a comparatively weak negotiating position vis-à-vis giants like USA, China or EU, but not vis-à-vis others necessarily.

 

This focus on China is intellectually dishonest. Of course, as a major source of emissions, it is important. But the West cannot just say: "We'll ignore the past 200 years when we were industrialising, urbanising, growing & pumping out  ever more emissions. We'll just focus on you lot because you're doing that now". From my limited knowledge, it seems China isn't doing that badly considering its extraordinary growth/transformation in the last 30 years.

 

Anyway, for practical reasons, most people seek to influence their own fellow citizens & national authorities (like Extinction Rebellion) or their own part of the world like Greta....

 

Or are you telling me that, as anti-Lefties, you post from downtown Caracas inbetween fighting Maduro's security forces, while @MattP is in Hong Kong with face mask & umbrella, fighting the Chinese for democracy? :D

 

I’m just pointing out the protest is pointless and won’t save the planet, in the same way you point out brexit is doomed to fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. 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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...