Hanaguma

I was being told that offsetting was not a scam by another poster. Greta did her Atlantic sail, the yacht owners acknowledged that they had to fly crew members over to sail the yacht back, but they would "compensate" for the carbon used. Which means offsets. I agree with using less fuel. I do that myself- drive a small car, careful with the thermostat, etc. But offsets are indulgences.

Would Greenpeace be an acceptable source for you? Carbon offsetting is truly a scammer’s dream scheme. It’s a bookkeeping trick intended to obscure climate wrecking-emissions. It’s tree planting window dressing aimed at distracting from ecosystem destruction. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/50689/carbon-offsets-net-zero-greenwashing-scam/ Or this Australian professor who researched the government's offsetting schemes? Prof Andrew Macintosh, the former head of the government’s Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee, said the growing carbon market overseen by the government and the Clean Energy Regulator was “largely a sham” as most of the carbon credits approved did not represent real or new cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/23/australias-carbon-credit-scheme-largely-a-sham-says-whistleblower-who-tried-to-rein-it-in

Yeah, pretty creepy group. I remember Schwab boasting that half of Trudeau's cabinet in Canada were all members of his cult. Dude gives me the willies. None of them will ever lack a place to lay their head or a crust to nibble, as long as the Schwab and Soros types are lingering on this planet.

You are right. It IS the problem. With climate change being treated as a religion, there is incentive to vilify those who don't believe as the religious leaders do. All the Greta types and Davos people do is ignore the three elephants in the room- China, India, and Africa. Those folks aren't interested in the Davos agenda, carbon neutrality, or sustainable bug eating. They want to get rich. And to do so they will use whatever energy they can get their hands on. Until you get them on board, all the bloviating and gum flapping at Davos will have zero impact. When Klaus Schwab gives up even one of his billions to "the cause", perhaps sells his yacht or his resort property in Jackson Hole Wyoming, he might have a shred of credibility.

When I see Noah starting to build the Ark, I will believe it. In other words, when these "global leaders" do more than add to the hot air in the atmosphere, I will believe them. When they start to practice what they preach, I will believe them.

Not at all. "The climate is not changing" or "All change in climate is purely due to natural forces" is far different from "I agree that humans are a factor, but it is hard to determine exactly how much of a factor or how specifically".

They are skeptical of the "established scientific concensus". Not of climate change itself. Interesting article. It brings to light the mindset of the average climate alarmist. This was included as a definition of a "climate denier": Claiming that while humans are contributing to a changing climate, they are not the main contributors, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary

Read the article. Nothing in it about people denying that the climate changes. They DO disagree with how much human activity contributes to it, and whether humans can make a significant difference in changing the direction of change. Different things entirely.

Yes. I don't know anybody who 'denies' that human activity has an impact on the climate. Do you?

Can you tell me what a "climate change denier" is? Someone who denies that the Earth has a climate or that it changes? It has become a rather odious catchphrase with deliberate ties to the original "Holocaust denier".

Of course you have a choice. Work from home. Use technology. Eat local. Refuse to use heating and air conditioning. Grow your own cotton and sew your own shirts.

Oh well, that's OK then. They paid a sin tax into some faux scheme to justify their emissions. Sounds a lot like the "indulgences" the Catholic Church used to sell. But for the rest of us peasants who can't afford to buy off our consciences, we walk and eat bugs.

...so she posed for photos with them, walked with them for a time, then suddenly "refused to budge"? Pull the other one, mate.

Al Gore is an obvious one. The myriad Hollywood celebs who jet around to be seen as these conferences for another. The billions in government money sucked up and soon consumed- Solyndra anyone? I will take them seriously when they start living and acting like THEY take it seriously. A man who owns 4 houses telling me to turn down my heat in the winter can <deleted> right off.

OK- "detainee"? "Suspect"? "Accused"? Or were the police carrying her away just for a bit of exercise... ...so other than that one word in my post you didn't like, any other comment on the subject matter?

Nope, both can be true at the same time. Yes, the climate is changing. Yes, humans do contribute to it. And also yes, there are a great number of rentseekers and charlatans who are taking advantage of the situation to line their pockets.

As for the "police detention" video, I do understand that there can be a certain communication between the police and the criminals. BUT...going from joking around and literally posing for pictures for the media, to physically carrying Greta away? Sorry, a little too much. She was walking fine for a time, what happened- did she get a cramp? Didn't want to get her expensive shoes dirty? Managing media and stagecraft are crucial components of any good protest- just ask the Palestinians.

The great danger when being a scold (and Greta is by no means the only one guilty of this) is that it leaves you wide open to justified accusations of hypocrisy. "Do as I say, not as I do" is a huge problem, especially in the climate crisis industry. There is lots of money to be made and spent by whipping up fear.

I was wondering that as well- what next? In the States, she would be off for a gig at MSNBC or CNN as a very well paid commentator. Not sure if the media in NZ could offer her much like that. Perhaps a good paying gig at a think tank or working under Al Gore... God forbid she would have to get a real job for the first time in her life.

I don't understand what that means. Encourage people to drive less BUT spend more money to maintain roads? Seems at cross purposes to me. If you want to discourage driving, let the roads break up and become bumpy.

"we suspect..." Kind of says it all, doesn't it? About this article plus about climate alarmism in general. The article DID also add a couple of other, less than environmentally friendly, tidbits about our Greta's voyage. It generated a LOT of plastic waste from the estimated 200 prepackaged meals the crew of the yacht ate. Plus the carbon footprint of Ahnold's Tesla, which he generously lent her. All in all, quite a climate catastrophe. And it could simply have been avoided by staying home and doing the whole thing on Zoom.

Is that the same boat that had to have 5 crewmembers FLOWN in to take it back to Europe? So, 5 people flew on carbon burning airplanes instead of 1 Greta. Guess math isnt her strong point.

Also, with no big stetsons you couldn't use the fabulous phrase "all hat and no cattle" to describe someone with no testicular fortitude.

This may be as close to the truth as we get. It is hard for them to go anywhere or do anything without running a constant commentary and/or chewing over the most mundane and trivial things with their friends. In Japan it is called being "KY"- the first letters of the words "kuuki yomenai", which means they can't read the air. Meaning they can't take notice of the situation they are in or read the social cues of people around them and behave accordingly. I had a similar experience in a small massage shop in Udon Thani. You know, the cheap ones beside the lake where it is basically one big room. But only 180 baht for an hour. About 10 minutes into my session, a couple young ladies (obviously my dear neighbours to the south) came in and wouldn't shut up. Plus the added bonus of doing Face Time with their friends during their massage. Similar to Rudi, I asked them politely to keep it down, that the Thai people around them were probably too polite to complain, but that they were disturbing everyone in the shop. To their credit, they apologized and piped down.

You sure about that? I visit the National Parks regularly and pay the same as everyone else (not American). Got a yearly pass to ALL NPS locations for just $80- a real bargain. If you are a senior then residency matters- the price drops to $20 a year or $80 for a lifetime pass.