Climate activist Greta Thunberg

Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
2,922
Likes
3,892
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/after-her-american-tour-how-is-greta-thunberg-getting-home

After her American tour, how is Greta Thunberg getting home?
The 60-foot yacht she chartered to get her to New York has returned to Europe, and Thunberg says she does not know how she will return to Sweden

Greta Thunberg arrives in New York after her 15 day boat trip across the Atlantic Ocean.

October 18, 2019
8:15 PM EDT

Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish climate activist, has been making waves the world over with powerful speeches and appearances in climate strikes.

Since late August, she’s been on a tour of North America, attending rallies, meeting with world leaders, and speaking at the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York City. She’s set to march in a climate strike in Edmonton on Friday, Oct. 18.

Thunberg has said she received many requests to speak at events internationally, but declined due to the extensive travel it would require. But she decided to make an exception to attend the UN climate summit as well as a major UN climate change conference in Santiago, Chile, where her trip is scheduled to end.

I don't know yet how I will get home​

Her trip to North America is well-documented — she sailed for 15 days from England to New York on a carbon-neutral racing yacht to avoid the huge impact air travel has on carbon emissions.

But now that she’s finally here, some have begun to wonder: how is she getting back home to Sweden?

Before she left England in August, she said “I don’t know yet how I will get home,” according to the Daily Mail.

For starters, the boat she took to get to New York, the Malizia II, has returned to Europe. Despite trying to avoid carbon emissions, her organization has seen some criticism because the crew returned by plane — her team said the emissions were offset.

Which means that Thunberg is left with either chartering a plane, which she refuses to do, hopping on a commercial cruise line, which she’s also spoken out against because of the emissions, or chartering another carbon neutral boat to come pick her up.

“Greta doesn’t take airplanes so she’ll have to get to both Chile and back to Sweden using other modes of transportation,” a spokesperson for Thunberg’s team told Vox.

“The details are not confirmed yet.”
Maybe uhm...You know, she could..like stay? We reeeeally would rather see her stay in your country than ours. /Love, Sweden
 





Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
5
Likes
21
She's simply a mascot for this climate change agenda. Does anyone really think that if any of us started a protest about human rights, the effects of poaching, river pollution or whatever that within a year we'd be getting to give speeches to the UN and EU, be the darling of the international media and have world leaders fawning over us? Of course not, never in a million years, we'd get on the back page of a local paper if we were lucky.

It's pretty obvious that she's just a puppet on a string, hurts my head how more people can't work this out. Who her benefactors are and what their agenda is is the question that should really be getting asked. Instead the few media outlets who're critical of her just focus on her tone and the way she says things, never actually trying to get to the bottom of who's putting her up. The agenda behind her and this whole 'climate change' thing is very sinister in any case.
 





Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
1,027
Likes
1,763
Could see this coming.
'This is oil country': Newly painted Greta Thunberg mural gets defaced, covered in slurs

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/greta-mural-pro-oil-graffiti-edmonton-1.5328348

A newly painted portrait of Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg was quickly defaced — first with a pro-oil message, and later with a slur against the teen.

The mural was painted on a section of a downtown "free wall" along a bike path that runs parallel to 109 Street near the Alberta Legislature. Local artist AJA Louden has confirmed he painted Thunberg Friday.

A CBC journalist was shooting footage of the mural on Sunday morning when James Bagnell walked up with spray paint and began painting "Stop the Lies. This is Oil Country!!!" over the teen's face.

This is Alberta. This is oil country. My father has worked in the oil industry. We don't need foreigners coming in and telling us how to run our business, support our families, put food on our tables," he said.
 





saki

Veteran
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
540
Likes
957
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50182815

Greta Thunberg: New beetle named after climate activist

Image copyrightMICHAEL DARBYImage captionN. gretae doesn't bear much resemblance to climate activist Greta Thunberg
A newly discovered species of beetle has been named after young climate activist Greta Thunberg.

Nelloptodes gretae bears little resemblance to its namesake - it is less than 1mm long, and has no wings or eyes.

The insect does, however, have two long pigtail-like antennae.

Scientist Dr Michael Darby said he chose the name because he was "immensely impressed" by the Swedish teenager's environmental campaigning.

N. gretae was first found in Kenya in the 1960s by William Block, who donated his samples to the Natural History Museum in London in 1978. It has been held in one of the museum's collections since.

Dr Darby was studying this collection when he came across the then-nameless species.

Greta Thunberg has led a global climate protest movement, Fridays For Future

By naming the beetle after Ms Thunberg, he said, he "wanted to acknowledge her outstanding contribution in raising awareness of environmental issues".

It has now been formally named in the Entomologist's Monthly Magazine.

Dr Max Barclay, the museum's senior curator in charge of beetles, said the name was apt because "it is likely that undiscovered species are being lost all the time, before scientists have even named them, because of biodiversity loss".

"So it is appropriate to name one of the newest discoveries after someone who has worked so hard to champion the natural world and protect vulnerable species," he added.

Who else has an animal named after them?

For scientists, naming a newly discovered species after themselves is simply not done - which means they need to be a bit more creative.

This is how we now have a parasite named after Bob Marley (Gnathia marleyi), a genus of fish called after Richard Dawkins (Dawkinsia), and a small park's worth of species - both alive and extinct - named after Sir David Attenborough.

Sometimes animals are named after celebrities the scientists admire, as with the N. gretae beetle, or a spider called Spintharus leonardodicaprioi.

Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionJohn Cleese is a big fan of lemurs - although this particular species isn't named after him
Other times, it's because the celebrity is known to have a particular fondness for that animal - as with the lemur named after John Cleese, Avahi cleesei.

And sometimes the animals bear some resemblance to the celebrity they're named after.

For example, there is a golden-haired fly named after Beyonce - Scaptia beyonceae. There is also a moth called Neopalpa donaldtrumpi which, biologist Vazrick Nazari said in 2017, is known for its distinctive blonde head and "comparatively small" genitals.
And just last year, Donald Trump had another animal named after him - an amphibian that buries its head in the sand. The Dermophis donaldtrumpi was so named because of the US president's comments about climate change.

Unlike when you name a pet, however, scientific names last forever.

There is perhaps no starker warning of the dangers of this than the Anophthalmus hitleri, a blind cave beetle doomed to forever be named after Adolf Hitler by a German admirer in 1933.
 





saki

Veteran
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
540
Likes
957
https://reason.com/2019/10/25/environmentalists-torment-rather-than-convince-california/

Why Do Environmentalists Seem Determined To Torment, Rather Than Convince?
From plastic bag bans to plastic straw bans to bans on shampoo bottles in hotels, California is adopting supposedly environmental policies that won't save the environment but will piss off residents.
STEVEN GREENHUT | 10.25.2019 8:00 AM



Grocery shopping had never been one of my favorite activities, but it never used to be as cumbersome as it is now. I'd fill up the cart with food, wait in line at the check-out counter and kibitz with the cashier as the bagger loaded up—and double-bagged—my groceries. Now, the lines are much slower because bagging has become an ordeal thanks to the "Earth-protecting" plastic-bag ban the state had passed a few years ago.

Consider what happens now. Store employees can't simply place your food in the needed bags. They have to ask how many bags shoppers want to buy. "As many as needed," I always say, given that I don't really care if the $150 transaction costs another buck. It's basically just another tax we pay to live in a former paradise. But that's not how it works now. The employees dispense bags parsimoniously. Who can blame cashiers given the guff they might get if they sell someone an unnecessary bag?

Bagging used to be an artform, where baggers carefully separated, say, the eggs from the bottle of Chivas Regal. Now they cram as much stuff as possible in a single bag. Heaven forbid you get stuck behind someone who pulls out a trove of bacteria-laden, reusable sacks. I put the new thick bags they sell right into the garbage, whereas I used to reuse the lightweight "single use" bags to pick up dog poo and line the bathroom waste baskets. Now I have to order those thinner ones online.

This has not improved the environment one iota, even though it has added to our daily annoyance. There always was plenty of evidence to debunk the push for the bag ban. Those bags comprised an infinitesimal portion of the waste stream.

But grocery stores supported it because, well, they can now charge for something they previously gave away. You can always count on a coalition of true believers and profit-seekers—the "Baptists and bootleggers" from Prohibition lore—to unite behind such edicts. And voters, who are easily swayed by uplifting ballot nonsense, rejected a referendum that would have overturned the ban. Those who promote these laws don't view shoppers' inconvenience as a downside. They often view it as a self-healing and education process.

"If we live in an environment that's wounded … it hurts us, chipping away at our health and creating injuries at a physical, psychological, and spiritual level," wrote Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Wangari Maathai in a 2011 Huffington Post column. "(I)f we help reclaim or save what is lost…the planet will help us in our self-healing and indeed survival."

I'm not suggesting that California's progressive lawmakers sit around the campfire, venerating crystals and reading poetry about the wounded Earth. But they aren't doing much research before proposing an endless stream of these "let's annoy the public" proposals. They certainly aren't looking at cost-benefit analyses, either. For instance, Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed Assembly Bill 1162, which bans larger hotel operators from giving out those little, convenient bottles of shampoo, conditioner and hand lotion.

"The proliferation of plastic waste is having a devastating impact on our environment and overwhelming landfills," said Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D–San Jose), the bill's author. That may be true, but it has virtually nothing to do with hotel guests. "What activists fail to mention is that approximately 60 percent of plastic trash in the ocean comes from just five countries – China, Indonesia, The Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam—which have notoriously inefficient waste management systems," explained Billy Binion in Reason. "America, meanwhile, contributes less than 1 percent."

It would be nice if, for a change, lawmakers who promote these ideas at least wrestled with such rebuttals or with the latest facts. Recycling, for instance, is a great idea—provided there's an actual market for the recyclables. But as the Orange County Register reported in May, a declining percentage of trash is recycled despite all the new recycling mandates the state keeps passing. The article's headline notes that, "Your recyclables are heading to the dump." I pondered that as I stood over a multi-bin recycling center at the airport trying to figure out which portion of my trash should go into which portion of the container.

But at least we can learn about our wastefulness in the process. Regarding shampoo bottles, Kalra argues the ban will "increase consumer awareness of our use of plastic." He essentially admits that a main reason for the law is what this skeptic argued above: to reform and educate us. The California Hotel and Lodging Association supports the measure, but that's not a surprise. Hotels will save money, while the rest of us bring along contraband bottles or use those big dispensers—and hope that no previous guest has tampered with them.

Earth to environmentalists: Improving the environment is a noble calling, but you'll have far more success incentivizing it rather than tormenting us.
 





Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
133
Likes
949
It's pretty obvious that she's just a puppet on a string, hurts my head how more people can't work this out. Who her benefactors are and what their agenda is is the question that should really be getting asked. Instead the few media outlets who're critical of her just focus on her tone and the way she says things, never actually trying to get to the bottom of who's putting her up. The agenda behind her and this whole 'climate change' thing is very sinister in any case.
It's so obvious that it's time to consider that a good portion of the population is just dumb as rocks. Others think Greta is just an idealistic and naive girl and just ignores whatever she says. As you've said, Greta is the face of a sinister agenda.
 





Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
8,474
Likes
4,065
https://reason.com/2019/10/25/environmentalists-torment-rather-than-convince-california/

Why Do Environmentalists Seem Determined To Torment, Rather Than Convince?
From plastic bag bans to plastic straw bans to bans on shampoo bottles in hotels, California is adopting supposedly environmental policies that won't save the environment but will piss off residents.
STEVEN GREENHUT | 10.25.2019 8:00 AM



Grocery shopping had never been one of my favorite activities, but it never used to be as cumbersome as it is now. I'd fill up the cart with food, wait in line at the check-out counter and kibitz with the cashier as the bagger loaded up—and double-bagged—my groceries. Now, the lines are much slower because bagging has become an ordeal thanks to the "Earth-protecting" plastic-bag ban the state had passed a few years ago.

Consider what happens now. Store employees can't simply place your food in the needed bags. They have to ask how many bags shoppers want to buy. "As many as needed," I always say, given that I don't really care if the $150 transaction costs another buck. It's basically just another tax we pay to live in a former paradise. But that's not how it works now. The employees dispense bags parsimoniously. Who can blame cashiers given the guff they might get if they sell someone an unnecessary bag?

Bagging used to be an artform, where baggers carefully separated, say, the eggs from the bottle of Chivas Regal. Now they cram as much stuff as possible in a single bag. Heaven forbid you get stuck behind someone who pulls out a trove of bacteria-laden, reusable sacks. I put the new thick bags they sell right into the garbage, whereas I used to reuse the lightweight "single use" bags to pick up dog poo and line the bathroom waste baskets. Now I have to order those thinner ones online.

This has not improved the environment one iota, even though it has added to our daily annoyance. There always was plenty of evidence to debunk the push for the bag ban. Those bags comprised an infinitesimal portion of the waste stream.

But grocery stores supported it because, well, they can now charge for something they previously gave away. You can always count on a coalition of true believers and profit-seekers—the "Baptists and bootleggers" from Prohibition lore—to unite behind such edicts. And voters, who are easily swayed by uplifting ballot nonsense, rejected a referendum that would have overturned the ban. Those who promote these laws don't view shoppers' inconvenience as a downside. They often view it as a self-healing and education process.

"If we live in an environment that's wounded … it hurts us, chipping away at our health and creating injuries at a physical, psychological, and spiritual level," wrote Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Wangari Maathai in a 2011 Huffington Post column. "(I)f we help reclaim or save what is lost…the planet will help us in our self-healing and indeed survival."

I'm not suggesting that California's progressive lawmakers sit around the campfire, venerating crystals and reading poetry about the wounded Earth. But they aren't doing much research before proposing an endless stream of these "let's annoy the public" proposals. They certainly aren't looking at cost-benefit analyses, either. For instance, Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed Assembly Bill 1162, which bans larger hotel operators from giving out those little, convenient bottles of shampoo, conditioner and hand lotion.

"The proliferation of plastic waste is having a devastating impact on our environment and overwhelming landfills," said Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D–San Jose), the bill's author. That may be true, but it has virtually nothing to do with hotel guests. "What activists fail to mention is that approximately 60 percent of plastic trash in the ocean comes from just five countries – China, Indonesia, The Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam—which have notoriously inefficient waste management systems," explained Billy Binion in Reason. "America, meanwhile, contributes less than 1 percent."

It would be nice if, for a change, lawmakers who promote these ideas at least wrestled with such rebuttals or with the latest facts. Recycling, for instance, is a great idea—provided there's an actual market for the recyclables. But as the Orange County Register reported in May, a declining percentage of trash is recycled despite all the new recycling mandates the state keeps passing. The article's headline notes that, "Your recyclables are heading to the dump." I pondered that as I stood over a multi-bin recycling center at the airport trying to figure out which portion of my trash should go into which portion of the container.

But at least we can learn about our wastefulness in the process. Regarding shampoo bottles, Kalra argues the ban will "increase consumer awareness of our use of plastic." He essentially admits that a main reason for the law is what this skeptic argued above: to reform and educate us. The California Hotel and Lodging Association supports the measure, but that's not a surprise. Hotels will save money, while the rest of us bring along contraband bottles or use those big dispensers—and hope that no previous guest has tampered with them.

Earth to environmentalists: Improving the environment is a noble calling, but you'll have far more success incentivizing it rather than tormenting us.
They seem to have succeeded in winning over people to their cause..

 





Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
10
Likes
13
Frontpage of Expresso (major Portuguese newspaper of record) this week, describing her as Joan of Arc of climate change.
View attachment 27057
She was recently here in my city and when she left her hotel room still had all their lights on not to mention the gigantic diesel generator they used for her speech.

she’s definitely a brainwashed child and in that way she is in fact a victim and that’s scary because when your brains rewired what you think you know you believe as fact so she is gonna grow up into a little monster... unfortunate..

The day she left a mural was painted of her on a wall here that same day it was vandalized over lol
 





saki

Veteran
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
540
Likes
957
...now THIS is funny!

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/31/americas/chile-climate-voyage-canceled-scli-intl/index.html
Activists sail four weeks across Atlantic for climate change summit -- then learn it is canceled
By Jack Guy, CNN
Updated 1:35 PM ET, Thu October 31, 2019

The activists set off from Amsterdam on October 2.

(CNN)A group of climate activists crossing the Atlantic by sailboat to a UN summit in Chile were shocked to learn the event was canceled -- four weeks into their grueling voyage.

The 36 young environmentalists set off from Amsterdam on October 2, using a sailboat in order to highlight the impact of flying on greenhouse gas emissions.

They had completed more than half of their seven-week journey to the UN Climate Conference (COP25) in Santiago, Chile, which was scheduled to take place in early December.

However Chile's President Sebastián Piñera announced Wednesday that the country would no longer host the summit, amid protests that have left at least 20 people dead and led to the resignation of eight cabinet ministers.

Instead of turning back, the Sail to the COP group, as the activists are known, have now decided to sail on to Belém, Brazil.

"After the initial shock and sadness the news brought, everyone came together determined to continue what we started: putting the climate impact of aviation on the international agenda," read a statement from the group.

With Costa Rica and the city of Bonn, Germany, floated as potential alternative sites for COP25, the activists say that sailing to Brazil means they will be able to attend the eventual summit.

"If the COP would be in Bonn in early 2020 we can still be on time and meanwhile learn from sustainable travel ideas in South America," the group said.

If it takes place in Costa Rica they could change course and head to Central America, added the statement.

The group had initially planned to sail to Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, where they were scheduled to arrive around November 20, and complete the trip to Santiago overland. <<<on foot?>>> They had just passed the islands of Cape Verde, off the coast of West Africa, when they received the news of the cancellation.

Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish activist who has become a figurehead of the climate movement, tweeted her support for Sail to the COP in early October.

Thunberg undertook her own 15-day transatlantic voyage from the UK to New York City in August, traveling in the hi-tech zero emissions sailboat Malizia II to attend the UN Climate Action Summit.