Greta Thunberg detained at German coal protest

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Please, we do know how to read. You attacked her based on her weight.

Of course he did and of course he's now trying to walk back history

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Rubbish. Completely bias attack with ignorance of Greta and her personal lifestyle choices:

 

Greta has been a vegan for many years. Vegans have the smallest carbon footprint, generating a 41.7 percent smaller volume of greenhouse gases than meat-eaters do.

Vegans still need to have food grown, transported, processed, wrapped etc.

 

There was no attack. You made that up for dramatic effect ????.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

No I didn't. I said being overweight is not good for the climate. Here is a link to prove it. Read it.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440046/

 

You said "She should eat less if she is serious about climate change".

 

It's plain as day that's a personal attack. You don't even have the wherewithal to admit when you are wrong which is why I have had you on ignore for a long time.

 

[JonnyF]

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

Of course he did and of course he's now trying to walk back history

There was no "attack" as you well know.????

 

I stated facts about the link between obesity and climate change. I can post more links if you like? 

[Bert got kinky]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

You said "She should eat less if she is serious about climate change".

 

It's plain as day that's a personal attack. You don't even have the wherewithal to admit when you are wrong which is why I have had you on ignore for a long time.

 

How was you able to read his post if you had him on ignore?

 

[JonnyF]

Just now, ozimoron said:

You said "She should eat less if she is serious about climate change".

 

It's plain as day that's a personal attack. You don't even have the wherewithal to admit when you are wrong which is why I have had you on ignore for a long time.

 

Yes she should. Given the link between excess food consumption and climate change she should. That is a fact. Not an attack. You just don't like the facts so you resort to lame accusations. Pathetic diversionary tactics. 

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Vegans still need to have food grown, transported, processed, wrapped etc.

 

There was no attack. You made that up for dramatic effect ????.

Yet it has a 41% smaller footprint. Before making unsubstantiated attacks on her again do some research. L

[ozimoron]

Just now, Bert got kinky said:

How was you able to read his post if you had him on ignore?

I predicted he was about to quote me so I revealed his post. It's an option on every ignored post.

[Bert got kinky]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I predicted he was about to quote me so I revealed his post. It's an option on every ignored post.

So you ignore him but then can't resist peeking?

Why bother putting him on ignore in the first place, it means that you suffer not knowing what is said but he carries on as normal, oblivious to your silent protest.

Not a wise move really.

 

Edited January 19, 2023 by Bert got kinky

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yet it has a 41% smaller footprint. Before making unsubstantiated attacks on her again do some research. L

Eating a lot of Vegan food is worse for the environment than eating a small amount of Vegan food. Same as driving a fuel efficient, low emissions car 1000 kms is worse for the environment than driving it 500 kms.

 

That's a fact. It is substantiated. It is not an attack and you know it perfectly well. Stop with the lame accusations, it does you a disservice.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I predicted he was about to quote me so I revealed his post. It's an option on every ignored post.

I'm guess I'm hard to resist.????

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

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/

Let’s separate two things shall we.

 

1. Carbon offsetting.

 

and 

 

2. Reducing the use of fossil fuels.

 

They are not the same thing, an Greenpeace very rightly criticize carbon offsetting.

 

 

[ozimoron]

Just now, Bert got kinky said:

So you ignore him but then can't resist peeking?

Why bother putting him on ignore in the first place, it means that you suffer not knowing what is said but he carries on as normal oblivious to your silent protest.

Not a wise move really.

 

For the most part it gives me peace and lower blood pressure. Now and again I do respond when I feel its warranted to counter an exceptionally egregious post. Anyway, stop criticising my posting policies, it's off topic.

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

There was no "attack" as you well know.????

 

I stated facts about the link between obesity and climate change. I can post more links if you like? 

I suspect you can’t provide a verifiable scientific basis for the claim.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Eating a lot of Vegan food is worse for the environment than eating a small amount of Vegan food. Same as driving a fuel efficient, low emissions car 1000 kms is worse for the environment than driving it 500 kms.

 

That's a fact. It is substantiated. It is not an attack and you know it perfectly well. Stop with the lame accusations, it does you a disservice.

I predicted if you wanted to carry on you'd be like Chinese state media fat shaming her. Low and behold................

 

Now provide links to your claim she eats too much? What is her body type? 

 

How much can you eat before you can be a climate activist without being attacked?

[Bert got kinky]

Just now, ozimoron said:

For the most part it gives me peace and lower blood pressure. Now and again I do respond when I feel its warranted to counter an exceptionally egregious post. Anyway, stop criticising my posting policies, it's off topic.

it's off topic.

Why, because you said so?

 

I was only pointing out a flaw in the 'ignore' function, it was not a personal attack on you.

 

 

[ozimoron]

Just now, Bert got kinky said:

it's off topic.

Why, because you said so?

 

I was only pointing out a flaw in the 'ignore' function, it was not a personal attack on you.

You said "It's not a wise move really". Isn't that up to me? And why isn't it blindingly obvious that we are now off topic?

[Bert got kinky]

Just now, ozimoron said:

You said "It's not a wise move really". Isn't that up to me? And why isn't it blindingly obvious that we are now off topic?

Careful of that blood pressure problem, you're winding yourself us again.

 

[Hanaguma]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s separate two things shall we.

 

1. Carbon offsetting.

 

and 

 

2. Reducing the use of fossil fuels.

 

They are not the same thing, an Greenpeace very rightly criticize carbon offsetting.

 

 

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.

[JTXR]

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yet it has a 41% smaller footprint. Before making unsubstantiated attacks on her again do some research. L

What's the source of that 41% number?

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, JTXR said:

What's the source of that 41% number?

Actually 41.7 to be precise, I rounded it up. Link already supplied 

Loma Linda University in California found that vegans have the smallest carbon footprint, generating a 41.7 percent smaller volume of greenhouse gases than meat-eaters do.

[JonnyF]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I suspect you can’t provide a verifiable scientific basis for the claim.

 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440046/

 

[transam]

34 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

For the most part it gives me peace and lower blood pressure. Now and again I do respond when I feel its warranted to counter an exceptionally egregious post. Anyway, stop criticising my posting policies, it's off topic.

Pot/kettle.....

[JonnyF]

35 minutes ago, Bert got kinky said:

So you ignore him but then can't resist peeking?

Why bother putting him on ignore in the first place, it means that you suffer not knowing what is said but he carries on as normal, oblivious to your silent protest.

Not a wise move really.

 

It's the forum equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and repeating loudly "I can't hear you". ????

[transam]

53 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Another person who feels competent enough to comment on Thunberg without knowing even basic details about her.

So you don't know.......

[JTXR]

3 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Raising public awareness of the problem is necessary work. Funny how the 1st amendment fans want to shut her down.

True, raising public awareness is necessary, and there are many, many people doing it better than Thundberg in ways that count.  When you actually listen to Thundberg, it's surprisingly clear she really doesn't understand much about the science behind global warming or even the actual probabilities of the consequences.  She basically only knows "the house is on fire" and adults stole her childhood. 

I understand the science, being a scientist and having read most of most IPCC reports, and yes, it would be very good indeed if emissions were reduced and global warming slowed, then reversed.  But nothing of what I know about the subject did I learn from Thundberg.  Again, I have nothing against her personally and would never want to "shut her down."  I just feel no need to pay attention to her.  More power to her for becoming famous.  God knows that's what is really important in today's celebrity worshiping culture.

But on the other hand I've got no particular respect for self-promoting creatures of the media who are famous for being famous in whatever sphere.

Edited January 19, 2023 by JTXR

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440046/

 

Correlation is not causation.

 

That article notes correlation but provides zero evidence of causation.

 

Yes we know there are more obese people in the developed west than there are in Asia, there are also more cars per capita, flights pre capita, more home heating per capita.

More energy used per capita in the west and more obese people per capita in the west.

 

There are also more bald men per capita in the west, perhaps baldness in men is the cause of global warming.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

8 minutes ago, JTXR said:

True, raising public awareness is necessary, and there are many, many people doing it better than Thundberg in ways that count.  When you actually listen to Thundberg, it's surprisingly clear she really doesn't understand much about the science behind global warming or even the actual probabilities of the consequences.  She basically only knows "the house is on fire" and adults stole her childhood. 

I understand the science, being a scientist and having read most of most IPCC reports, and yes, it would be very good indeed if emissions were reduced and global warming slowed, then reversed.  But nothing of what I know about the subject did I learn from Thundberg.  Again, I have nothing against her personally and would never want to "shut her down."  I just feel no need to pay attention to her.  More power to her for becoming famous.  God knows that's what is really important in today's celebrity worshiping culture.

But on the other hand I've got no particular respect for self-promoting creatures of the media who are famous for being famous in whatever sphere.

"it's surprisingly clear she really doesn't understand much about the science behind global warming or even the actual probabilities of the consequences.  She basically only knows "the house is on fire" and adults stole her childhood."

 

I think she knows more than most: The Climate Book

 

An essential guide to a better world – created by Greta Thunberg

The book is divided into five parts: how climate works, how our planet is changing, how it affects us, what we have done about it, and what we must do now. Each section is introduced and rounded off by an essay from Thunberg. What I like about this approach is that it forces each author to distil their expertise into a few pages. Thunberg still gets a pulpit, but the book is a curated, portable library of knowledge, full of classics.

https://www.energy.ox.ac.uk/news_items/the-climate-book-review-an-essential-guide-to-a-better-world-created-by-greta-thunberg/

[JTXR]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

I think she knows more than most: The Climate Book

 

An essential guide to a better world – created by Greta Thunberg

 

Ha ha.  Greta Thundberg "enticed" 100 experts to write...... etc. ??  She "enticed" them?

Thundberg "introducing" and "rounding off" each chapter is essentially no different from Kim Kardashian introducing and rounding off each chapter.  Very nice that 100 experts contributed to the book.  No doubt they've written much else too.  Great.  If they're experts, they're worth reading.  But if they are the experts, where are their names in the blurb?  After all, they are the ones worth reading and listening to.

 

This thing "created" by Greta Thundberg is just more self-promotion.  "Icon" my tush.

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

There was no "attack" as you well know.????

 

I stated facts about the link between obesity and climate change. I can post more links if you like? 

Of course, you have no way of knowing if her weight condition is due to diet or medication. So, yes, you did engage in a personal attack.  In fact, if you had any real knowledge of the relationship between diet and obesity, you would know that scientists now know that other factors than calories consumed can account for obesity. 

https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?contenttypeid=56&contentid=DM300#:~:text=Some medicines might affect your,t put on extra fat.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075333222200066X